5 τὰ 3 See csnee i Fit tere 
 a. Se eet Στ πας ἢ ne eee δ Ga! man Lig Seton 
 Tae ee 2 πασον, 
 
 Seach νος Pelt a Pw eBoy i nF etn terns oe A tage 7 feet δι αι - ᾿ ἐνῷ Ἐ ᾽ » - ἣν Έ ΩΣ 
 
 fala 3 eRe όταν, το ἢ 
 lia 2 Rogie Wie τ, δ 5 ᾿ς ν ὸ τὴ eat: Ἐς πο : ε: : ges st : τ 
 Rasa ‘ * % - é = ? . ν epres " ; 3 fe Nello tetra 
 " 2 - a rae “2. εν 4 Σ ᾿ : ; : : Ξ 2 | : zs 
 ee ae : ς ΝΣ : ere < PRY ᾿ κἄν ΌΣΟ - 4 Ν a ΕΣ x : δ ε 
 Hsp ἦν. 2 Techs. Ξ 4 - τρόμος AGES Fi : re > 
 
 rk: Aiea parsteriieatie & eZ 2 Scr ἘΣΟῪ : oy 
 
 Petes ta Ga te ten δ ‘ δες Hey *. de. β 
 Cre οὐ, τ “ τς, δ οἱ = ig 
 
 A ξεν ὡς 5, 
 oe - ει δωδολῥ δε, βαῦ αράς, uth ι, 
 σα ρον, 
 
 Be ὥς δ να, Ἐλφοῦε, ἔνε δῦ τς εν τος 
 ae SE AN aici ΤΡ ats. Pigeiige ide , . " 
 ante SR a eateries ee itn cect amiga OR chon Pata san ΡΤ 
 isle ote Tia pte set lt FEM Matec oe ΣῊ se as “ dee = Spas τς Pai “τος 3 , 
 τῆς tA σας πριρακαῦς Fe Pame SRI Rell, : Aichi tintt Hate SS, . = es ape ; ᾿ " γές, πν  Ὲ 
 ΡΣ tS Sy as ἣ κΞ ; - s ee aed - Ses ,, Ὺ «7 wa δ, : δι ; SEP ar, Pre 
 Soh a © ἐν Ἄγ a 5 x re ae a 2 e x, Ξ ἂν δ nf ‘ eters, Meth 
 
 tl Fig Σ΄ τος Swe Η ΓΝ ip “ * 4 ‘ δ: itt oe ee 
 7 : : aE : ‘ Gets ehh τ ἐξὸν Lt Rows i - : apatiage. Kattan Ned 2, 
 GeNCRER Zu Bot σα. ns Pas =e Psa “ μ = = e Ξ κοι a GIES Sar hr oe - Sait, che ἘΞ Ha δ atte. 
 Wee Re ee Nee = τὴ 7 A ORKE ~ “3 ς: - - ᾿ ‘ wen am " τ ohne “ir Mikes wake . CP ee ae Σ 
 yy" Be ΗΝ ρα ui 2 ishing Mal 5 es δ᾽ ps Py RTE, Ὁ 5 > - Η τ ν 2 fh nad Ξ 5 Ρ "- “8.5. 4 - 4 
 Ror Amt ts Beh ark RE poche ST Σ f Ἂ 4 heyy 2 3 : 3 A “ ~ < - - 3 ὃ » ri Mak OG oF NIA he Keli 
 : ς: ~ 3 Seas Boe nln Hate. Fg χουν», 4... 3 
 aes betande hats 3 aa Ag mah Kg 8, nes 
 - : ae ie ees ἀρ : , hata 
 Seetatte Mas Rs Fa in Re es En te! ee ore Ses eee 
 as 
 
 Tee” 
 SEH aetna te 
 ie oF cepts eh tet 
 μον ie ε 5 - ? ‘ ; 
 nga Ξ ὃ a Ἦν 2 x es tw The Se Nn al ~ Ἶ άρυρεανονου τῳ ¢ a = τ ea a - ἡ idee Drie fie 
 erly atte CSE Te - i cae : : ναι acpi cg te τς = Ξ a Ξ fu : 2 oe > Pete ae Poe RT A 
 ; SS ig Bie Sates ᾿ ἐξτονῆν $ treba μας, πῶς Sta gt or At igh 
 
 ee Pears “eR ὁ - Ν + »- Α ᾿ ἴων phat ὁ 
 a ear. Bef ee ie . at Ξ 
 
 “ Relin? sheaths cof 
 - eur Ξ a χρντορὴν τὰν, ie aos : ς 4 ᾿ 5 5 Se eae CE Ie 
 ω a - ᾿ τορι 3 - - - 2 - at : ᾿ - eet γι; - Fadia = < “ Fe Bahe dntatiints Se ions 
 Poet he he ΠΥ ἈΕῚ. 5 ‘ τῷ 5 ἢ is a Sey Ps: γε re Ἶ Peart a at ¢ Spb 3 Ma ὅς - ele det ΡΝ 
 eT RE Το ΝΑ, ν ὰ “ii . - . ᾽ ier er ANiatanoans Satay eee τ τὸς ‘ oa x: aes τ ‘ ᾿ Mee i : ᾿ < bPi-teeet ck 
 eee ee : : “ ᾿ ᾿ : ῥέῃ *. Α ‘ee ΤΣ ees = - ee - 
 μόνε: ἀν τὴ AS = i Ἀ ν leicht, 
 
 P 5 πξοξσδίτε 
 
 Pigg igi, 
 
 eal Pe Ὁ 
 
 ng: 
 
 δε, 
 
 Reno: 2, 
 eta The 
 
 Paps! 
 
LIBRARY OF THE 
 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 
 AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 
 
 481. [Ὁ 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2023 with funding from 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates 
 
 https://archive.org/details/oxyrhynchuspapyr6190unse 
 
ris 
 SeoviviiyNCHUS "PAPYRI 
 PART IV 
 
 GRENFELL AND HUNT 
 
Y ff 
 
 TN 
 
 (0) 
 
EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND 
 GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH 
 
 THE 
 PeerektiYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 ENE eV 
 
 EDITED WITH TRANSLATIONS AND NOTES 
 
 BY 
 
 ΕΝ AK DEP GRENEELL}Dlirr, M.A. 
 
 HON, LITT.D. DUBLIN ; HON. PH.D. KOENIGSBERG ; FELLOW OF QUEEN’S COLLEGE, OXFORD 
 
 AND 
 
 ἈΠ yan CW Nib 1 ΕΛ", Mi A: 
 
 HON, PH.D. KOENIGSBERG ; FELLOW OF LINCOLN COLLEGE, OXFORD 
 WITH EIGHT PLATES 
 
 LONDON 
 SOLD AT 
 THE OFFICES oF THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND, 37 Great Russet Srt., W.C. 
 AND 8 BEACON STREET, BOSTON, Mass., U.S.A. 
 KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., PATERNOSTER HousE, CHARING Cross Roan, W.C. 
 BERNARD QUARITCH, 15 PiccapILLy, W.; ASHER & CO., 13 BEDFoRD ST., COVENT GARDEN, W.C. 
 AND HENRY FROWDE, AMEN Corner, E.C. 
 
 1904 
 
OXFORD eee 
 HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY 
 
μων: 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 ALL the theological and most of the classical and the non-literary 
 
 papyri in this volume were discovered in our second excavations at 
 Oxyrhynchus in 1903, described in the Archaeological Report of the 
 Lgypt Exploration Fund, 1902-3, pp. 5-9, and more briefly in the 
 Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung, 111. pp. 139-40. The rest came from 
 the original Oxyrhynchus find of 1897. Owing to the comparatively 
 small space here available for non-literary documents and the discovery 
 in 1903 of a group of papyri, mostly of the early Augustan period, 
 which is rarely represented, we have published all these together with 
 a selection of documents belonging to the next three centuries, instead 
 of limiting the documents to the third century, as foreshadowed in the 
 preface to Part III. 
 ῤ In editing the classical pieces, we have, as usual, availed ourselves 
 largely of the most generous and valuable assistance of Professor Blass, 
 to whom is due much of the reconstruction and interpretation of the 
 new classical fragments and the identification of several of those from 
 extant authors. The help which we have received on particular points 
 from other scholars is acknowledged in connexion with the individual 
 papyri. 
 
 In the Appendices we give a list of addenda and corrigenda to 
 the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part I], and Fayim Towns and their 
 Papyrt, a revised text of Part III, no. 405, which has been identified 
 as a fragment of Irenaeus, and a list of all the Oxyrhynchus and 
 Fayim papyri which have already been distributed among different 
 museums and libraries. 
 
 BERNARD P. GRENFELL. 
 FoR EU) Reso EEGUIN Ts 
 
 OxrorD, 
 APRIL, 1904. 
 
 a3 
 
 92095 
 
ΟΡ ΡΣ 
 
 PREFACE : 
 
 List oF PLATES . A 
 
 TABLE oF Papyri . ‘ ; ‘ , 
 Note on THE METHOD OF Pint eee AND List ΟΕ ABBREVIATIONS . 
 
 yl, 
 
 TEXTS 
 
 THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS (654-658) . 
 
 New CrassicaL FRAGMENTS (659-684) 
 
 FRAGMENTS OF ExtTanT CrassicaL AUTHORS (685-704) 
 
 DocuMENTS ; CHIEFLY OF THE Roman PEriop: 
 (2) Orriciat (705-712) 
 (4) APPLICATIONS TO OFFICIALS (718-716) : ᾿ ᾿ ‘ 
 (c) PEtitions (717-720) : : ; , 
 (4) Contracts (721-7381) : ‘ : : : : 
 (6) Recerpts (782--784) : : : : ; : : 
 (7) Accounts (785-741) 
 (g) PRIVATE CoRRESPONDENCE (742- 747) 
 
 CoLiaTions ΟΕ Homeric FracMEnTs (748-788) . 
 
 Descriptions OF Miscettangous Documents (784-889) 
 
 APPENDICES 
 
 ADDENDA AND CorRIGENDA TO Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part I], anp Paydm 
 Towns and thetr Papyrt 
 
 A Revisep Text oF Part III, no. 405 Gremaars Che Haran iii. ἢ 
 
 List oF OxyRHYNCHUS AND ΕΑλυῦμ Papyri DISTRIBUTED 
 
 INDICES 
 
 New Literary FRAGMENTS ; ! : ‘ ἔξ . 
 KINGS AND EMPERORS . 
 
 MontuHs and Days. : i 4 : ; : ; A 
 PrrsonaL Names 
 
 GEOGRAPHICAL 
 
 264 
 
 272 
 289 Ὁ 
 283 
 284 
 288 
 
VIII. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 RELIGION . : : > : : 
 OFFICIAL AND hieeyee wits : : : ᾿ 
 Weicuts, Measures, AND Corns : : : 
 TAXES : - : 
 
 GENERAL Tee OF Gren AND te Wain 
 
 ΤΙΣ MONT ΡΙΞΑΡΡΕΘ 
 
 654, 668 ς δ - . ἢ 
 
 655, 656 (c) verso . : ; : : 
 659 (Cols. i-ii and Frs. (a)- (ἢ) : : ἢ 
 659 (Cols. iii-v and Frs. oe ”) 
 
 661, 735 . 
 
 668 (Col. viii) 
 
 686, 687, 638, 720 
 
 737 (Col. i) 
 
 at the end. 
 
654. 
 655. 
 656. 
 657. 
 658. 
 
 659. 
 660. 
 
 661. 
 662. 
 663. 
 664. 
 665. 
 666. 
 667. 
 668. 
 
 669. 
 
 TAB UE ιν 
 
 New Sayings of Jesus (Plate I) . 
 Fragment of a Lost Gospel (Plate II) . 
 
 Genesis (Plate IT) 
 Epistle to the Hebrews 
 
 Certificate of Pagan Sacrifice. 
 Pindar Παρθένειον and Ode (Plates III ἘΠ ΙΝ) 
 
 Paean 
 Epodes (Plate v) 
 Epigrams . 
 
 Argument of Crating Ree ΤΡ: 
 
 Philosophical Dialogue 
 
 History of Sicily (Plate I) . 
 
 Aristotle, Προτρεπτικός 
 Aristoxenus ? 
 
 Epitome of Livy xxxvii-xl ἘΠῚ ἜΣ (Latin) 
 
 (Plate Vie: 
 Metrological Work 
 
 670-678. Poetical Fragments 
 679-684. Prose Fragments 
 
 685. 
 
 689. Heer Scutum . 
 
 690-691. Apollonius Rhodius ce onaaticas lil 
 692. Apollonius Rhodius Argonautica iv 
 693. Sophocles Lvectra 
 
 694. Theocritus /dyl xiii 
 
 695. Herodotus v 
 
 696. Thucydides iv 
 
 697. Xenophon Cyropaedia i 
 
 698. Xenophon Cyropaedia i 
 
 699. Theophrastus Characters 
 
 ee) Lhiad xvii 
 
 AnD 
 3rd cent. 
 3rd cent. 
 
 Late 2nd or early 3rd cent. 
 
 Early 4th cent. 
 
 250 : 
 
 Late rst cént, aide. 
 
 Late rst or early 2nd cent. 
 Late 2nd cent. 
 
 About A.D. I 
 
 Late 2nd or early 3rd cent. 
 
 3rd cent. 
 2nd cent. 
 2nd cent. 
 3rd cent. 
 
 3rd cent. 
 
 Early 4th cent. 
 
 1st-3rd cent. : 
 1st cent. B.c.-3rd cent. . 
 2nd cent. 
 
 About a.D. I 
 
 Late 2nd cent. 
 
 3rd—2nd cent. 
 
 2nd cent. 
 
 Early 3rd cent. 
 
 2nd cent. 
 
 3rd cent. 
 
 Ist cent. 
 
 Early 3rd cent. 
 
 Early 3rd cent. 
 
 Early 3rd cent. 
 
 155 
 
ΤΕ OFVPARYRE ix 
 
 A.D. PAGE 
 700. Demosthenes De Corona . : me 2nd.centa. : : ers 
 701. Demosthenes Contra Timocratem : . Late 2nd or early 9τὰ cent. . 158 
 702. Demosthenes Contra Boeotum . = 2ndicent, = = ; ae L5O 
 703. <Aeschines 72 Cresiphoniem . ees Fe τε SECC N tame e . 160 
 704. Isocrates Contra Sophistas . ς τὸ glu Cent amp: : Meer or 
 705. ‘Two Petitions to the Emperors with Reni » 200-2 . ὃ : : Selo 
 706. Report of Legal Proceedings . : Ὁ ADOU Ins a, mat oS 
 707. Report of Legal Proceedings . ; = AbouG 136). 7 109 
 708. ‘Two Letters to a Strategus ; : et Oost an ane era 
 709. Tour of Inspection . : : eA DOUL Rome. : . ane) 
 710. Order for Payment . ; . ἘΠ CELE ; : : Ὁ E75 
 711. Census-List . : Wir. : . About B.c. 14 το 
 712. Collection of a Debt . we Late 2nd cent... 47 ao 1η7 
 713. Claim of Ownership . : : 204 ; 180 
 714. Selection of Boys (ἐπίκρισις) : eg ae : : : eel Os 
 715. Registration of Property. ἶ Ferre e\ 184 
 716. Auction ofa Slave. : : δός : : : . 186 
 717 Petition -. ᾿ς Late 1sticent. -B.c- LOG 
 718. Petition to the ἘΣ ΚΥΘ ΤΙΣ : ; . 180-192 : -- 190 
 719. Registration of a Deed ‘ τῦσο- ; : : ΤΌΣ 
 720. Request for a Guardian (Latin) (Pat vip PIG Rok ᾿ . 196 
 721. Sale of Crown Land . 13-14 . : : : 107 
 722. Emancipation of a Slave. , ee Ol OL O72. : msLOg 
 | Papyrus Edmondstone : : put Ὁ ᾿ : : i 202 
 723. Emancipation of ἃ Slave . ὃ . 138-161 : : : om 208 
 724. Apprenticeship to a Shorthand- rem ον τὰ ᾿ : »~ 7204 
 725. Apprenticeship to a Weaver ; ease e+ 206 
 726. Appointment of a Representative cae G : ; : 700 
 727. Delegation of the Duties of a Guardian 5 Αἰεὶ ; : : ΤῸ 
 728. Sale of a Crop . : : ; : yy ba oe rare 
 729. Lease of a Vineyard . ; : : ak} 7 aA 
 730. Lease of Domain Land , : ᾿ τς FRO Bums : a 22 
 731. Engagement of Services. . . 8g. ; : ieee 
 732. Receipt for the Tax on Ferry-boats. τ ρον et : : ἘΠ 5.2 
 788. Tax-Receipt . ' ς : : ἜΣ Τ᾿ : : ΣΕ 
 734. Tax-Receipt. mn LOS eee : ἢ ἘΣΎ νὴ 
 735. Graeco-Latin Military έτος (Pte ν) my 205 : : ᾿ τιν 
 736. Private Account : PUAUGUUAaDe TL perz26 
 737. Latin Account (Plate VII) “Ὁ ADOUtASD. -F : : wee ee 
 
 738. Account of Food ' . About ape 1 : ᾿ τ 234 
 
747. 
 
 TABLE <OF PAP YR 
 
 Private Account 
 
 Account of Corn 
 
 ‘List of Articles . 
 
 Letter of Antas . 
 
 Letter to a Friend 
 
 Letter of Ilarion 
 
 Letter to Gaius Rustius 
 Letter of Recommendation 
 Invitation to a Feast . 
 
 748-783. Homeric Fragments . 
 
 784-839. Miscellaneous Documents . 
 
 A.D. 
 
 About a.p. 1 
 
 About a.p. 200 
 
 2nd cent. 
 
 Β.6. 2 
 
 B.C. 2 
 
 BGT f 
 
 About A.D. I. 
 
 16 ; 
 Late 2nd or 3rd cent. 
 1st cent. B.c.-4th cent. 
 
 2nd cent. B.c.—2nd cent. 
 
Nome ΟΝ ΠΕ METHOD -OF PUBLICATION AND 
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 
 
 THE same general method is followed in the following pages as in preceding 
 volumes. As before, a few of the new literary texts are printed in a dual form, 
 a reconstruction in modern style accompanying a literal transcript. In other cases, 
 and in the fragments of extant authors, the originals are reproduced except for 
 division of words, addition of capital initials to proper names, expansion of 
 abbreviations, and supplements, so far as possible, of lacunae. In 669, how- 
 ever, which is on a rather different level from the other literary pieces, accentua- 
 tion and punctuation have been introduced as well as in 658, which strictly does 
 not belong to the literary section at all. Additions or corrections by the same 
 hand as the body of the text are in small thin type, those by a different hand 
 in thick type. Non-literary documents are given in modern style only. Abbre- 
 viations and symbols are resolved; additions and corrections are usually incor- 
 porated in the text and their occurrence is recorded in the critical notes, where 
 also faults of orthography, &c., are corrected wherever any difficulty could arise. 
 Iota adscript is printed when so written, otherwise iota subscript is used. Square 
 brackets | ] indicate a lacuna, round brackets ( ) the resolution of a symbol or 
 abbreviation, angular brackets { δ a mistaken omission in the original ; 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 underneath them are to be con- 
 sidered doubtful. Heavy Arabic numerals refer to the texts of the Oxyrhynchus 
 papyri published in this volume and in Parts I-III; ordinary numerals to lines ; 
 small Roman numerals to columns. 
 
Xil LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 
 
 The abbreviations used in referring to papyrological publications are prac- 
 tically the same as those adopted by Wilcken in Archiv I. i. pp. 25-28, viz.:— 
 
 P. Amh. I and II1=The Amherst Papyri (Greek), Vols. I and II, by B. P. 
 Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 
 
 Archiv = Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung. 
 
 B. G. U. = Aeg. Urkunden aus den Konigl. Museen zu Berlin, Griech. Urkunden. 
 
 P. Brit. Mus. I and II = Catalogue of Greek Papyri in the British Museum, 
 Vols. I and II, by F. G. Kenyon. 
 
 C. P. R. = Corpus Papyrorum Raineri, Vol. I, by C. Wessely. 
 
 P. Cairo = Greek Papyri in the Cairo Museum, Catalogue by B. P. Grenfell and 
 Aso: Eunt 
 
 P. Catt. = Papyrus Cattaoui (Archiv iii. 55 sqq.). 
 
 P. Fay. Towns = Fayim Towns and their Papyri, by B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, 
 and D. G. Hogarth. 
 
 P. Gen. = Les Papyrus de Genéve, by J. Nicole. 
 
 P. Goodsp. = Greek Papyri, by E. J. Goodspeed (Decennial Publications of the 
 University of Chicago, Vol. V). 
 
 P. Grenf. I and II = Greek Papyri, Series I, by B. P. Grénfell; ΘΕ" 
 ΒΡ (Grentell anda; so. cunt, 
 
 P. Oxy. I, I] and III = The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts I, 1] πα ΠΕ σὺ 
 Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 
 
 P. Par. = Les Papyrus Grecs du Musée du Louvre (Notices et Extraits, t. xviii. 
 2), by W. Brunet de Presle et E. Egger. 
 
 P. Petrie = The Flinders Petrie Papyri, by the Rev.J. FP. Mahaty, 
 
 Rev. Laws = Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus, by B. P. Grenfell, with 
 Introduction by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy. 
 
 Pp. Tebt. I = The Tebtunis Papyri, Part I, by B. P. Grenfell, A. 5. εἴπ ane 
 J. G. Smyly. 
 
 Wilcken, Ost. = Griechische Ostraka, by U. Wilcken. 
 
I. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 654. New Savinocs ΟΕ JESsus. 
 
 24:4X 7-8 cm. Prats I, 
 
 By a curious stroke of good fortune our second excavations at Oxyrhynchus 
 were, like the first, signalized by the discovery of a fragment of a collection of 
 Sayings of Jesus. This consists of forty-two incomplete lines on the verso of 
 a survey-list of various pieces of land, thus affording another example of the not 
 uncommon practice of using the back of ephemeral documents for literary texts. 
 The survey-list, which is in a cursive hand of the end of the second or early 
 part of the third century, provides a terminus a quo for the writing on the other 
 side. This, which is an upright informal uncial of medium size, we should assign 
 to the middle or end of the third century ; a later date than A.D. 300 is most 
 unlikely. The present text is therefore nearly contemporary with the ‘ Logia’ 
 papyrus discovered in 1897, which also belongs to the third century, though 
 probably to an earlier decade. In its general style and arrangement the present 
 series of Sayings offers great resemblance to its predecessor. Here, as in the 
 earlier ‘ Logia, the individual Sayings are introduced by the formula ‘ Jesus saith,’ 
 and there is the same mingling of new and familiar elements; but the second 
 series of Sayings is remarkable for the presence of the introduction to the whole 
 collection (ll. 1-5), and another novelty is the fact that one of the Sayings 
 (ll. 36 sqq.) is an answer to a question, the substance of which is reported 
 (ll. 32-6). It is also noticeable that while in the first series the Sayings had little 
 if any connexion of thought with each other, in the second series the first four 
 at any rate are all concerned with the Kingdom of Heaven. That the present 
 
 B 
 
ei THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 text represents the beginning of a collection which later on included the original 
 ‘Logia’ is very probable; this and the other general questions concerning the 
 papyrus are discussed on pp. 10-22. 
 
 Excluding the introduction, there are parts of five separate Sayings, marked 
 off from each other by paragraphi. In three cases (Il. 5, 9, and 36) a coronis 
 indicates the end of a sentence, which in the two first cases is also the end of 
 the Saying, but in the third is the end of the question to which the Saying is 
 the answer. In all three instances the words λέγει ᾿Ιησοῦς followed immediately 
 after the coronis. In 1]. 27, however, there is no coronis at the end of the Saying, 
 but there is one after the succeeding λέγει ᾿Ιησοῦς. The scribe is thus inconsistent 
 in his employment of this sign, and would seem to have misplaced it in 1. 27, 
 unless, indeed, his normal practice was to place a coronis both before and after 
 λέγει ᾿Ιησοῦς, and the absence of a coronis after ow in 1. 27 is a mere omission. 
 It is noteworthy that in 1. 27 a blank space is left where the coronis was to be 
 expected. The single column of writing is complete at the top, but broken at 
 the bottom and also vertically, causing the loss of the ends of lines throughout. 
 From 1]. 7-8, 15, 25, and 30, which can be restored with certainty from extant 
 parallel passages, it appears that the lacunae at the ends of lines range from 
 twelve to sixteen or at most eighteen letters, so that of each line, as far as 1. 33, 
 approximately only half is preserved. The introduction and the first and fourth 
 Sayings admit of an almost complete reconstruction which is nearly or quite 
 conclusive, but in the second, third, and fifth, which are for the most part entirely 
 new, even the general sense is often obscure, and restorations are, except in a 
 few lines, rather hazardous. The difficulties caused by the lacunae are enhanced 
 by the carelessness of the scribe himself. The opening words οἱ τοῖοι ot λόγοι are 
 intolerable, even in third century Greek, and γνωσθε in 1. 20 and αποκαλυφησετΐαι 
 in 1. 29 are forms that require correction ; while several instances of the inter- 
 change of letters occur, e.g. εἰ and 7 in 1. ὃ BactAevon, at and ε in 1. 23 emepwrnee, 
 and probably in 1. 18 γνωσεσθαι (cf. note ad Joc.), τ and @ in 1. 31 θεθαμμενον, 
 and perhaps v and ἡ in I. 10 (cf. note ad loc.). In two cases (Il. 19 and 25) 
 words which the scribe had at first omitted are added by him over the line. 
 The only contraction which appears is Ins for Ἰησοῦς ; πατήρ in 1]. 19 and οὐρανός 
 in 11. 11-2 are written out, as usually happens in the earliest theological papyri. 
 
 We proceed now to the text; in the accompanying translation supplements 
 which are not practically certain are enclosed in round brackets. 
 
 For valuable assistance in connexion with the reconstruction, interpreta- 
 tion, and illustration of 654, we are indebted to Profs. Blass and Harnack, 
 Dr. Bartlet, and Mr. F. P. Badham, but for the general remarks on pp. 10-22 
 we are. alone responsible. 
 
654. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 3 
 
 Of TOIO! ΟἹ ΛΟΓΟΙ ΟἹ [ ΟΥ̓Κ ATTOKNHCE! ANO[ 
 AHCEN IHC O ZOON ΚΙ POON €ETTEP@THCE TIAL 
 ΚΑΙ OGOMA KAI ΕΙΠΕΝ [ PWN TTEP! TOY TOTIOY THI 
 
 AN TWN AOFWN TOYTL 
 5 OY MH FEYCHTAI N— [ 
 MH TIAYCACOW O ZH[ 
 €YPH ΚΑΙ OTAN €YPH [ 
 BHOEIC BACIAEYCH ΚΑΙ 
 HCETAI N— ΛΕΓΕΙ IT 
 10 ΟἹ EAKONTEC HMAC [ 
 H BACIAEIA ΕΝ OYPAT 
 
 25 cere ΠΌΛΛΟΙ ECONTAI TI 
 Οἱ ECXATOI ΠΡΩΤΟΙ KAl [ 
 CIN ΛΕΓΕΙ 1HC N—. [ 
 ΘΕΝ THC OYEWC COY KAI [ 
 ATTO COY ATIOKAAY?HCETI 
 
 30 TIN KPYTITON O OY ΦΑΝΕΙ͂ 
 ΚΑΙ OEOAMMENON O Of 
 
 TA TIETEINA TOY OYP[ [. JETAZOYCIN AYTON Of 
 ΤΙ ὕπο THN THN €CT[ [. .JTOYCIN TIWC NHCTEY{ 
 ΟΙ IXOYEC THC OAAAT beter JMEOA ΚΑΊ Πως [ 
 
 15 TEC YMAC KAI H BAC[ cra Pace toe JAl Ti TIAPATHPHCY 
 ENTOC YMON [.]CTI [ ΠΝ NChGlalitcs | 
 -FNW TAYTHN €YPH[ ΚΕ): ἸΕΙ ΤΑΙ MH ΠΟΙΕΙΤΙ 
 EAYTOYC FNWCECOA! [ Bie JHC AAHOEIAC AN[ 
 
 YMEIC Bed by ΤῸ JN AL.JOKEKP[ 
 ECTE TOY TIATPOC TOY TI AGi ΕΣ JKAPI[. .] ECTIN [ 
 20 TNWCOE EAYTOYC ΕΝ [oe ee crit ss en ]@) €CTI 
 __KAI YMEIC ECTE HITTOL AL ee ie ΤΙΝΙ 
 
 Introduction. Il. 1-5. 
 
 {oi} rotor of λόγοι of [.....4.+.4. οὺς ἐλά- 
 λησεν ᾿Ιη(σοῦ)ς ὁ ζῶν K[Upios?.......-.. 
 καὶ Θωμᾷ καὶ εἶπεν [αὐτοῖς: πᾶς ὅστις 
 ἂν τῶν λόγων τούτων ἀκούσῃ θανάτου 
 
 5 οὐ μὴ γεύσηται. 
 
 ‘These are the (wonderful?) words which Jesus the living (lord) spake ἴο.. .. δπᾶ 
 Thomas, and he said unto (them), Every one that hearkens to these words shall never taste 
 of death.’ 
 
 The general sense of the introduction is clear, and most of the restorations are fairly 
 certain. In 1. 1 an adjective such as θαυμάσιοι is necessary after of [. For ἀκούειν with the 
 genitive in the sense of ‘hearken to’ as distinguished from merely hearing cf. e.g. Luke 
 vi. 47 πᾶς ὁ... ἀκούων pou τῶν λόγων καὶ ποιῶν αὐτούς. For θανάτου] οὐ μὴ γεύσηται, cf. 
 Matt. xvi. 28, Mark ix. 1, Luke ix. 27, and especially John viii. 52 ἐάν τις τὸν λόγον μου 
 τηρήσῃ, ov μὴ γεύσηται θανάτου εἰς τὸν αἰῶνας In these passages of the Synoptists θανάτου 
 γεύεσθαι simply means ‘die’ in the literal sense; but here no doubt, as in the passage in 
 
 B 2 
 
4 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 St: John, the phrase has the deeper and metaphorical meaning that those who obey Christ’s 
 words and attain to the kingdom, reach a state unaffected by the death of the body. The 
 beginning of 1. 1 requires some correction, of τοῖοι of λόγοι of being extremely ugly. 
 The corruption of οὗτοι into of τοῖοι is not very likely, though cf. Luke xxiv. 44 εἶπεν δὲ πρὸς 
 αὐτούς, οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι μου ots ἐλάλησα πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἔτι Sv σὺν ὑμῖν. But since τοῖος is found in 
 late prose writers for τοιόσδε, the simplest course is to omit the initial of. The « of this 
 oi being in a crack is not clear in the photograph, but is quite certain. The restoration of 
 ]. 2 presents the chief difficulty. κζύριος is very doubtful; «{ai followed by e.g. ἀποθανών 
 is equally likely, and several of the possible supplements at the end of the line require 
 a longer word than κύριος to precede. <A dative before καὶ Θωμᾷ is necessary, and three 
 alternatives suggest themselves :—(1) a proper name, in which case Φιλίππῳ or Maria (or 
 Mar@aiw) are most likely in the light of the following words καὶ wpa. Apocryphal Gospels 
 assigned to Thomas, Philip, and Matthias are known, and in Pzstzs Sophia 7o-1 Philip, 
 Thomas, and Matthias (so Zahn with much probability in place of Matthew found in 
 the text) are associated as the recipients of a special revelation ; cf. Harnack, Alchrast. 
 Litterat.1. p. 14; (2) a phrase such as τοῖς τε ἄλλοις or τοῖς (t’) μαθηταῖς (so Bartlet, cf 1. 32 and 
 John xx. 26 καὶ... ἦσαν ἔσω of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ Θωμᾶς μετ᾽ αὐτῶν) ; (3) ᾿Ιούδᾳ τῷ] καὶ Oona, 
 suggested by Prof. Lake, who compares the frequent occurrence of the double name Ἰούδας 
 ὁ καὶ Θωμᾶς in the Acts of Thomas. ‘The uncertainty attaching to the restoration is the more 
 unfortunate, since much depends on it. If we adopt the first hypothesis, ‘Thomas has only 
 a secondary place ; but on either of the other two he occupies the chief position, and this 
 fact would obviously be of great importance in deciding the origin of the Sayings; 
 cf. pp. 18 sqq. On the question whether the introduction implies a post-resurrectional 
 point of view see pp. 13-4. 
 
 There is a considerable resemblance between the scheme of Il. 1-3, of Adyou. . . ods 
 ἐλάλησεν ᾿Ιησοῦς. . . καὶ εἶπεν, and the formulae employed in introducing several of the 
 earliest citations of our Lord’s Sayings, especially I Clem. 13 μάλιστα μεμνημένοι τῶν λόγων 
 τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ ots ἐλάλησεν διδάσκων... οὕτως yap εἶπεν, ACtS XX. 35 μνημονεύειν τε τῶν 
 λόγων τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ ὅτι αὐτὸς εἶπεν. Rendel Harris had already (Conlemp. Rev. 1897, 
 pp. 346--8) suggested that those formulae were derived from the introduction of a primitive 
 collection of Sayings known to St. Paul, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp, and this theory 
 gains some support from the parallel afforded by the introduction in 654. 
 
 First Saying. 1]. 5-9. 
 
 5 [ λέγει 'In(cod)s- 
 μὴ παυσάσθω ὁ (n[T@v........ ἕως ἂν 
 εὕρῃ καὶ ὅταν εὕρῃ [θαμβηθήσεται καὶ θαμ- 
 βηθεὶς βασιλεύσει Kali βασιλεύσας ἀναπα- 
 
 ήσεται. 
 
 ‘Jesus saith, Let not him who seeks ...cease until he finds, and when he finds 
 he shall be astonished ; astonished he shall reach the kingdom, and having reached the 
 kingdom he shall rest.’ 
 
 The conclusion of this Saying is quoted from the Gospel according to the Hebrews by 
 Clement of Alexandria (Sérom. ii. 9. 45) 9 κἂν τῷ xa’ Ἑβραίους εὐαγγελίῳ ὁ θαυμάσας 
 
654, THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 5 
 
 βασιλεύσει γέγραπται καὶ ὁ βασιλεύσας ἀναπαήσεται. In Strom. v. 14. 96 (a passage to which 
 Zahn first called attention, Gesch. d. NZ. Kan. ii. p. 657) he quotes the Saying in 
 a fuller and obviously more accurate form which agrees almost exactly with the papyrus, 
 but without stating his source :—ov παύσεται ὁ ζητῶν ἕως ἂν εὕρῃ, εὕρων δὲ θαμβηθήσεται, θαμβηθεὶς 
 δὲ βασιλεύσει, βασιλεύσας δὲ ἐπαναπαήσετα. The word after ζητῶν in 1. 6 is very likely 
 the object of ζητῶν (τὴν Conv? ; τὴν βασιλείαν is too long), but it may be another participle 
 depending on παυσάσθω or an adverb. This part of the saying is parallel to Matt. vii. 7 
 (=Luke xi. 9) ζητεῖτε καὶ εὑρήσετε. The supplements in ll. 7-8 are already rather long 
 in comparison with the length of lines required in ll. 15, 25, and 30, so that it is improbable 
 that ἐπαναπαήσεται is to be supplied or that ὁ occurred in the papyrus before θαμβηθείς 
 and βασιλεύσας (cf. the first quotation from Clement). ὁ δέ in place of καί is of course 
 possible in 1. 7, but since the papyrus has καί and not δέ in 1. 8 καί is more likely also 
 in 1. 7. The occurrence of θαμβηθείς, not θαυμάσας, in ll. 7-8, confirms Zahn’s acute 
 suggestion (Gesch. d. NT. Kan. ii. p. 657) that θαμβηθείς was the original word; but we 
 should not accept his ingenious explanation of it as a mistranslation of a Hebrew or 
 Aramaic verb which could also mean θορυβηθεΐς, and his view that συντετριμμένος (cf. 
 Luke iv. 18) would have been the right term. The attractiveness of this kind of conjecture 
 is, as we have recently had occasion to remark (408 introd.), only equalled by its uncer- 
 tainty. Now that the Saying is known in its completer form, and if we disregard the particular 
 object (to show that the beginning of philosophy is wonder) to which Clement in the 
 first of his two quotations turns it, this description of the successive stages in the attainment 
 of the kingdom of Heaven seems to us decidedly striking, and by no means so far removed 
 from the ‘Anschauungen des echten Urchristenthums’ as Resch (Agrapha, pp. 378-9) 
 considers. To the probable reference to it in II Clem. v. 5 (cf. the next note) ἡ δὲ 
 ἐπαγγελία τοῦ Χριστοῦ μεγάλη καὶ θαυμαστή ἐστιν καὶ ἀνάπαυσις τῆς μελλούσης βασιλείας καὶ ζωῆς 
 αἰωνίου, quoted by Resch (ὦ. 4.), Mr. Badham adds ἃ remarkable one in the “εἰς of Thomas 
 (ed. Bonnet, p. 243) of ἀξίως μεταλαμβάνοντες τῶν ἐκεῖ ἀγαθῶν ἀναπαύονται καὶ ἀναπαυόμενοι 
 βασιλεύσουσιν |. 
 
 As Dr. Bartlet aptly remarks, the idea of the necessity for strenuous effort in order 
 to attain to the kingdom has much in common, not only with the 3rd Saying οὐκ ἀποκνήσει 
 ἄνθρωπος x.r.d., but with the 5th Logion (‘Raise the stone and there thou shalt find me’); 
 
 cf. pp. 12-3. 
 Second Saying. Il. 9-21. 
 
 λέγει ᾿Ι[Πη(σοῦς" ...... τίνες 
 10 οἱ ἕλκοντες ἡμᾶς [εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν εἰ 
 ἡ βασιλεία ἐν οὐρανῷ ἐστιν; ..........- 
 
 \ Q “» ϑ A ‘ A ᾿ς ef 
 τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ Kai τῶν θηρίων ὅ- 
 
 1 Since this volume was put into type, Harnack has expressed his views of this Agraphon in 
 Sitzungsber. d. Berl. Akad. 1904, pp. 175-9. He there shows in opposition to Zahn that astonishment 
 is to be interpreted here as a sign of joy, not of fear, and strongly repels the unfavourable criticisms of 
 Resch upon the Saying, of which Harnack in fact maintains the substantial genuineness. Incidentally, 
 as he also remarks, the close parallelism between the language of the papyrus and Clement is important, 
 for from whatever source this Saying found its way into the present collection, it cannot have come through 
 Clement. There is, therefore, good reason to think that the Gospel according to the Hebrews (or at 
 least a part of it) was known in Egypt in a Greek version at an early period, a view which has been 
 disputed by Zahn, 
 
6 ΠΕ OXYRAYNCHOUS PARTY RE 
 
 τι ὑπὸ THY γῆν ἐστίιν ἢ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς Kal 
 
 οἱ ἰχθύες τῆς θαλάϊσσης οὗτοι οἱ ἕλκον- 
 15 τες ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν 
 
 ἐντὸς ὑμῶν [ἐστι [καὶ ὅστις ἂν ἑαυτὸν 
 
 γνῶ ταύτην εὑρήσει έν eevee 
 
 ἑαυτοὺς γνώσεσθε [καὶ εἰδήσετε ὅτι υἱοὶ 
 
 ἔστε ὑμέϊς «τοῦ ἀτατρὸς Τοῦ 11. Ὁ. ciske oie se eee 
 20 γνώσ(εσνθε ἑαυτοὺς ἐνΐ. . ee eee rece 
 
 Ἁ € A 3 Ἁ 
 καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ ηπτοΐ. . .. 
 
 ‘ Jesus saith, (Ye ask? who are those) that draw us (to the kingdom, if) the kingdom 
 is in Heaven? ... the fowls of the air, and all beasts that are under the earth or upon the 
 earth, and the fishes of the sea, (these are they which draw) you, and the kingdom of Heaven 
 is within you; and whoever shall know himself shall find it. (Strive therefore?) to know 
 yourselves, and ye shall be aware that ye are the sons of the ... Father; (and?) ye shall 
 know yourselves... and ye are...’ 
 
 The reconstruction of this, the longest and most important of the Sayings, is extremely 
 difficult. Beyond the supplements in ]. 15 which are based on the parallel in Luke xvii. 21 
 with the substitution of τῶν οὐρανῶν, St. Matthew’s phrase, for St. Luke’s τοῦ θεοῦ which 
 is too short for the lacuna, and those in ll. 12-3, 16, and 18, the general accuracy of 
 which is guaranteed by the context, it is impossible to proceed without venturing into 
 the region of pure conjecture. There seems to be no direct parallel to or trace of this 
 Saying among the other non-canonical Sayings ascribed to our Lord, and the materials 
 provided by ll. 10-12—-oi ἕλκοντες, the kingdom of Heaven and the fowls of the air—are 
 at first sight so disparate that the recovery of the connexion between them may seem 
 a hopeless task. But though no restoration of ll. 9-14 can hope to be very convincing, and 
 by adopting different supplements from those which we have suggested, quite another 
 meaning can no doubt be obtained (see below), we think that a fairly good case can 
 be made out in favour of our general interpretation. The basis of it is the close parallelism 
 which we have supposed to exist between 1. 15 res ὑμᾶς καὶ ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν and, 
 on the other hand, 1. το of ἕλκοντες ἡμᾶς followed in |. 11 by ἡ βασιλεία ἐν οὐραϊνῷ, whereby we 
 restore of ἕλκον] at the end of 1. 14. If this be granted Il. g-16 divide themselves naturally 
 into two parallel halves at the lacuna in |. 11, ll. g-10 corresponding to ll. 12-5, and 1. 11 
 to ll. 15-6. How is this correspondence to be explained? The simplest solution is to 
 suppose that ll. 9-11 are a question to which Il. 12-6 form the answer ; hence we supply 
 τίνες inl. g; cf. the 5th Saying, which is an answer to a question. A difficulty then arises 
 that we have ἕλκοντες ἡμᾶς in 1. 10 but ἕλκον) τες ὑμᾶς in Il. 14-5. This may be a mere 
 accident due to the common confusion of ὑμεῖς and ἡμεῖς in papyri of this period, and 
 perhaps ὑμᾶς should be read in both cases. But ἡμᾶς inl. 10 can be defended in two ways, 
 by supposing either that Jesus here lays stress rather on His human than on His divine 
 nature, and associates Himself with the disciples, or that the question is put into the mouth 
 of the disciples, 1.6. the word before τίνες was ἐρωτᾶτε or the like. There remains, however, 
 the greatest crux of all, the meaning of ἕλκοντες. In the two passages in which this word 
 
654. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 7 
 
 occurs in the New Testament it has an unfavourable sense; but here a favourable meaning 
 is much more likely, as with ἑλκύειν in John vi. 44 ἐὰν μὴ ὁ πατὴρ... ἑλκύσῃ αὐτόν and xii. 32 
 πάντας ἕλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν : Mr. Badham compares Clem. Alex. Strom. vi. 6 τοὺς μὲν yap (i.e. 
 wild beasts of sinners) προτρέπει ὁ Κύριος τοῖς δὲ ἤδη ἐγχειρήσασι καὶ χεῖρα dpéyet καὶ ἀνέλκει, and 
 7077. ν. 12 ἡ ἰσχὺς τοῦ Λόγου... πάντα τὸν καταδεξάμενον καὶ ἐντὸς ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς ἑαυτὴν ἕλκει. 
 A phrase such as εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν is required to explain ἕλκοντες, though even with this 
 addition the use of that word in such a context must be admitted to be difficult. The idea 
 in 11. 12-6 seems to be that the divine element in the world begins in the lower stages 
 of animal creation, and rises to a higher stage in man, who has within him the kingdom of 
 Heaven ; cf. Clement’s discussion (S#rom. v. 13) of Xenocrates’ view that even ἄλογα ζῶα 
 possibly had some τοῦ θείου ἔννοια, and the curious sanctity of certain animals in the various 
 Apocryphal Acts, e.g. Thecla’s baptized lioness, Thomas’s ass, Philip’s leopard and kid 
 buried at the door of the church, It is possible that there is some connexion between this 
 Saying and the use of Luke xvii. 21 by the Naassenes; cf. p. 18. The transition from 
 the inward character of the kingdom to the necessity for self-knowledge (Il. 16-21) is 
 natural. Since the kingdom is not an external manifestation but an inward principle, 
 men must know themselves in order to attain to its realization. ‘The old Greek proverb 
 γνῶθι σεαυτόν is thus given a fresh significance. Mr. Badham well compares Clem. Paedag. 
 lil, I ἦν ἄρα ὡς ἔοικε πάντων μέγιστον μαθημάτων τὸ γνῶναι αὑτόν' ἑαυτὸν yap Tis ἐὰν γνῴη 
 θεὸν εἴσετα. For the restoration of |. 16, cf. 1. 18. ταύτην in ]. 17 is the βασιλεία. 
 This line may have ended with something like ὅπως οὖν, if we are right in correcting 
 γνώσεσθαι to γνώσεσθε (cf. the similar confusion in 1. 23). For υἱοί, which is required 
 by the context in ]. 18, cf. e.g. Luke xx. 36. τί in 1. 19 (π| is equally possible) is perhaps 
 the beginning of an adjective, but τούτου χάριν, e.g., might also be read. How γνωσθε 
 in ], 20 is to be emended is uncertain; we suggest yvoo(ec)be, but the corruption may 
 go deeper. is perhaps ἐντὸς τῆς βασιλείας. ηπτοῖ in |. 21 is very obscure; the letter 
 following r may be «, o or #; but neither if 7 is the article, nor if ἡπτοί is one word, does any 
 suitable restoration suggest itself. ἡπτοί can hardly be a participle, for if λέγει Ἰη(σοῦ)ς 
 occurred, as would be expected, at the end of the line, there is room for only about four 
 more letters in the lacuna. It is tempting to read ἡ πτ)όλις, with ἐν [τῇ πόλει τοῦ θεοῦ in |. 20, 
 as Blass suggests, comparing for the omission of ὄντας Mark vi. 20 εἰδὼς αὐτὸν ἄνδρα δίκαιον. 
 
 Another and quite different restoration of the early part of this Saying is suggested by 
 Dr. Bartlet, who would read λέγει ᾿Πη(σοῦ)ς" μὴ poBeirwaar| οἱ ἕλκοντες ὑμᾶς [ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ὑμῶν 
 γὰρ] ἡ βασιλεία ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ὑφ᾽ ὑμῖν ἔσται] τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ πᾶν ζῶον δ) τι ὑπὸ τὴν γῆν 
 ἽΝ τά τε ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ] οἱ ἰχθύες τῆς θαλάϊσσης . . ., comparing the idea in Lpzséle of Barnabas, 
 vi. 12 and 18 τίς οὖν ὁ δυνάμενος νῦν ἄρχειν θηρίων ἢ ἰχθύων ἢ πετεινῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ; αἰσθάνεσθαι 
 γὰρ ὀφείλομεν ὅτι τὸ ἄρχειν ἐξουσίας ἐστίν, ἵνα τις ἐπιτάξας κυριεύσῃ. εἰ οὖν οὐ γίνεται τοῦτο 
 νῦν, ἄρα ἡμῖν εἴρηκεν πότε" ὅταν καὶ αὐτοὶ τελειωθῶμεν, κληρονόμοι τῆς διαθήκης κυρίου γενέσθαι, 
 and II Clem. v. 4 εἶπεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς τῷ Πέτρῳ μὴ φοβείσθωσαν τὰ ἀρνία τοὺς λύκους. .. 
 καὶ γινώσκετε, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι ἡ ἐπιδημία ἡ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ τούτῳ τῆς σαρκὸς ταύτης μικρά ἐστι καὶ 
 ὀλιγοχρόνιος, ἣ δὲ ἐπαγγελία τοῦ Χριστοῦ κιτιλ. (a passage resembling the 1st Saying; οἵ, 
 note, ad loc.). The parallels from Barnabas and Clement perhaps give this restoration 
 some advantage over ours, but ἕλκοντες alone without an explanatory phrase is not 
 a satisfactory word for ‘ persecute,’ and the transition from the promise of the kingdom 
 of Heaven to the fowls of the air is very abrupt and almost inconsequent, while it is difficult 
 to find the connexion between the fowls of the air and the second mention of the kingdom 
 of Heaven. This, the chief problem in the 2nd Saying, seems more easily explained by 
 the hypothesis of a repetition of ἕλκοντες and the resulting parallelism between the two 
 halves of ll. 9-16 which we have suggested. 
 
8 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 Third Saying. Il, 21-7. 
 [ | λέγει ’Ιη(σοῦ)ς" 
 οὐκ ἀποκνήσει ἄνθίρωπος . . .. «. ..- 
 pov ἐπερωτησαὶ Πα τον νι τι πο πὰ ΠΡ 
 pov πεῤὶ Tod τύπον THIS... τ τες: seas 
 25 σετε ὅτι πολλοὶ ἔσονται m[paToL ἔσχατοι καὶ 
 οἱ ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι καὶ {ν... 2 ee ee ees 
 
 σιν. 
 
 ‘Jesus saith, A man. shall not hesitate...to αϑίς.. .. concerning his place (in the 
 kingdom. Ye shall know) that many that are first shall be last and the last first and 
 (they shall have eternal life ?).’ 
 
 Line 24 may well have continued τῆϊς βασιλείας followed by a word meaning ‘ know’ 
 (? εἰδήσετε, OF γνώσετε OF ἀκούσετε, for γνώσεται ΟΥ ἀκούσεται), but the double -ρων in 
 ll. 23 and 24 is very puzzling, and in the absence of a clear parallel we forbear to restore 
 the earlier part of the Saying. Dr. Bartlet suggests a connexion with the Apocalypse 
 of Peter, e.g. ὃ 4 κἀγὼ ἔφην aire’ καὶ ποῦ εἶσι πάντες of δίκαιοι ἢ ποῖός ἐστιν ὁ αἰὼν ἐν ᾧ εἰσι 
 ταύτην ἔχοντες τὴν δόξαν, ὃ 5 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τόπος τῶν ἀρχέρων (]. ἀρχαίων, Bartlet) ὑμῶν τῶν δικαίων 
 ἀνθρώπων, taking ἀρχαίων to be equivalent to πρεσβυτέρων in Heb. xi. 2, or to πατέρων ; 
 cf. Matt. v. 21, 33 ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις and Luke ix. 8, 19. But the problem was an old one. 
 Lines 25-6 moddol ... πρῶτοι follow Mark x. 31 (= Matt. xix. 30) πολλοὶ δὲ ἔσονται πρῶτοι 
 ἔσχατοι καὶ of ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι. In the insertion of of before ἔσχατοι the papyrus agrees with 
 BC and many MSS. in Mark x. 31; SD and other MSS. omit of there, and in 
 Matt. xix. 30 of is generally omitted, though found in C and some others. Luke xiii. 30 
 is rather longer, καὶ ἰδοὺ εἰσὶν ἔσχατοι οἱ ἔσονται πρῶτοι καὶ εἰσὶν πρῶτοι ot ἔσονται ἔσχατοι. 
 σιν in |. 27 is no doubt the termination of a verb: ζωὴν (αἰώνιον) κληρονομήσουσιν (Matt. 
 xix. 29) and per’ ἐμοῦ βασιλεύσου]σιν are too long, but ζωὴν αἰώνιον é£ovlow (cf. John iii. 16, 36, 
 v. 24, &c.) is possible. 
 
 Fourth Saying. 1], 27-31. 
 λέγει ᾿Ιη(σοῦ)ς" [πᾶν τὸ μὴ ἔμπροσ- 
 θεν τῆς ὄψεως σου καὶ [τὸ κεκρυμμένον 
 ἀπὸ σοῦ ἀποκαλυφ(θγήσετ[αί σοι. οὐ γάρ ἐσ- 
 A 
 
 30 TW Κρυπτὸν ὃ ov dhavepoy γενήσεται 
 
 A 
 
 καὶ τεθαμμένον ὃ οὐκ ἐγερθήσεται... 
 
 ‘ Jesus saith, Everything that is not before thy face and that which is hidden from thee 
 shall be revealed to thee. For there is nothing hidden which shall not be made manifest, 
 nor buried which shall not be raised.’ 
 
 The sense of this Saying is clear, and the supplements are fairly certain. Lines 29-30 
 
654, THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 9 
 
 are parallel to Matt. x. 26 οὐδὲν γάρ ἐστιν κεκαλυμμένον ὃ οὐκ ἀποκαλυφθήσεται καὶ κρυπτὸν ὃ οὐ 
 γνωσθήσεται, Luke xii. 2 οὐδὲν δὲ συγκεκαλυμμένον ἐστὶν ὃ οὐκ ἀποκαλυφθήσεται καὶ κρυπτὸν ὃ οὐ 
 γνωσθήσεται: Cf. Mark iv, 22 οὐ γάρ ἐστιν κρυπτὸν ἐὰν μὴ ἵνα φανερωθῇ οὐδὲ ἐγένετο ἀπόκρυφον ἀλλ᾽ 
 ἵνα ἔλθῃ εἰς φανερόν. In general arrangement the papyrus agrees with Matthew and Luke 
 perhaps more than with Mark; but the language of the first half of the sentence is 
 much closer to that of Mark (whose expression ἐὰν μὴ ἵνα φανερωθῇ instead of the more 
 pointed ὃ od φανερώθησεται suggests the hand of an editor), while that of the second half 
 diverges from all three. τεθαμμένον makes a more forcible contrast to κρυπτόν than 
 the corresponding word in the Synoptists, which is merely a synonym. Instead of 
 ἐγερθήσεται a more general word such as γνωσθήσεται can be supplied; but this detracts from 
 the picturesqueness of what is in any case a striking variation of a well-known Saying. 
 
 Fifth Saying. 11. 32-42. 
 
 λέ]γουσιν: πῶς νηστεύϊσομεν Kal TOS... 
 
 [ἐξἸετάζουσιν αὐτὸν off μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ 
 πε καὶ πῶ πον aces 
 
 ΠΡ καὶ τῷ παρατηρήσίομεικι . 1... 
 
 ΠΕΣ τ ΤΡ τς 
 
 SPAT CELA RUM Ge  τ τ Maes 
 
 [ 
 
 τ Πα IOKEK τ πὴ gles Snes 
 
 ΡΥ RTE ἢ ΠΔΙΕΙΤΙ € uh a's) a τιον Ὁ ese 
 
 pice ae μαϊκάρι[δ5] ἐστίν 1:2 ciel τυ τὺ. 
 
 40 
 πον OREO TL. ΤΡῪ Ὁ τ fe0 sie 
 
 [ 
 [ 
 [ 
 [ 
 ἰ 
 | 
 
 ‘His disciples question him and say, How shall we fast and how shall we (pray?)... 
 and what (commandment) shall we keep... Jesus saith,...do not... blessed is he...’ 
 
 Though this Saying is broken beyond.hope of recovery, its general drift may be 
 caught. It clearly differed from the other Sayings, both in this papyrus and the first 
 series of Logia, in having a preliminary paragraph giving the occasion, which seems 
 to be a question put by the disciples; cf. p. 15. For ἐξετάζειν in reference to them 
 cf. John xxi. 12 οὐδεὶς δὲ ἐτόλμα τῶν μαθητῶν ἐξετάσαι αὐτόν' σὺ τίς εἶ; εἰδότες ὅτι ὁ κύριός ἐστιν. 
 αὐτοῦ in |. 1 is not very satisfactory, but something more than μαθηταί is required, and 
 cf, 655. 17-8. Φαρισαῖοι is not likely in the light of what follows. The question clearly 
 consisted of a number of short sentences, each beginning with πῶς or ri, and so far 
 as can be judged, they were concerned with the outward forms of religion, fasting, 
 prayer (mpocevéd|ueba?), and almsgiving. How far, it is probably asked, are existing Jewish 
 ordinances to be kept? The answer of Jesus appears to have been a series of short 
 commandments insisting on the inner side of religion as the pursuit of virtue and truth, and 
 very likely concluding in 1. 40 with the promise ‘ Blessed is he who doeth these things.’ If 
 this explanation is on the right lines, there is a general parallelism between this Saying and 
 
10 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 Matt. xix. 16-22 and Luke xviii. 18-22, but the occurrence of ἀλήθεια and ἀΐπ]οκεκρ[υμμένον (?) 
 suggests that the language was more Johannine in character. Line 39, as Prof. Lake 
 remarks, could be restored on the basis of Rev. ii, 17 τὸ pdvlva [τ]ὸ κεκρυμμένον. The 
 reference to fasting in 1. 33 suggests a connexion with the znd Logion (‘ Except ye fast to the 
 world’), which may well have been an answer to a similar question by the disciples. 
 
 We do not propose to enter upon a detailed examination of the numerous and compli- 
 cated problems involving the Canonical and Apocryphal Gospels and the ‘ Logia’ of 1897, 
 which are. reopened by the discovery of the new Sayings. But we may be permitted to 
 indicate the broader issues at stake, and in the light of the wide discussion of the Logia of 
 1897 to point out some effects of the new elements now introduced into the controversy. 
 
 We start therefore with a comparison of the two series of Sayings (which we shall 
 henceforth call 1 and 654). Both were found on the same site and the papyri are of 
 approximately the same date, which is not later than about the middle of the third 
 century, so that both collections must go back at least to the second century. The outward 
 appearance of the two papyri is indeed different, 1 being a leaf from a handsomely-written 
 book, which may well have been a valuable trade-copy, while 654 is in roll form and was 
 written on the verso of a comparatively trivial document. The practice of writing impor- 
 tant literary texts on such material was, however, extremely common, and the form of 654 
 lends no support to the hypothesis that the papyrus is a collection of notes made by the 
 writer himself. In the uncial character of the handwriting, the absence of abbreviations 
 and contractions other than those usually found in early theological MSS., and the careful 
 punctuation by the use of the paragraphus and coronis, 654 shares the characteristics of an 
 ordinary literary text such as 1. Since 1 is the 11th page of a book, it must have formed 
 part of a large collection of Sayings, while 654 comes from the beginning of a manuscript 
 and provides no direct evidence of the length of the roll. But the document on the recto 
 is not a letter or contract which would be likely to be short, but an official land-survey 
 list, and these tend to be of very great length, e.g. P. Brit. Mus. 267, P. Tebt. 1. 84-5. The 
 recently published Leipzig papyrus of the Psalms (Heinrici, Ber. 2. Gesch. d. NT. iv), 
 though incomplete at the beginning and end, contains as many as thirty-six columns written 
 in cursive on the verso. So far therefore as can be judged from externals, 654 like 1 
 probably belongs to an extensive collection of Sayings which may well have numbered 
 several hundreds. 
 
 Turning next to the contents of the two papyri, no one can fail to be struck with their 
 formal resemblance. Postponing for the moment the introduction of 654 (ll. 1-5), which, 
 since it necessarily presupposes the existence of the Sayings introduced and may have been 
 added later, stands on a different footing from the Sayings and requires separate treatment, 
 the five Sayings partly recorded in 654 begin like those in 1 with the simple formula λέγει 
 ᾿Ιησοῦς ; and both fragments contain Sayings which to a greater or less degree have parallel 
 passages in the Synoptic Gospels side by side with Sayings which are new. In 1 the style 
 was simple and direct, and the setting, with the constant balancing of the words and sentences 
 and the absence of connecting particles, highly archaic; the same features, though obscured 
 unfortunately by the incompleteness of the papyrus, are also distinctly traceable in 654. 
 There is, however, one difference in the two papyri in point of form. To the 5th Saying 
 in 654 (Il. 36 544.) is prefixed (ll. 32-6) a brief account of the question to which it was the 
 answer. This may prove to be of great importance in deciding the origin of these Sayings, 
 but for our present purpose it is sufficient to point out that even in 654 the occurrence of 
 the context is the exception, not the rule, and the fact that the Sayings in 1 agree with the 
 
654. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 1 
 
 first four Sayings in 654 in omitting the context rather than with the 5th obviously produces 
 no serious conflict between the two documents. . 
 
 We proceed to a closer examination of the two series. In 1 the 7th Logion (‘A city 
 built on a hill’) is connected with St. Matthew’s Gospel alone; the 6th (‘A prophet is not 
 acceptable’) has a noticeable point of contact with St. Luke in the use of the word δεκτός, 
 and the 1st also agrees with St. Luke. The 5th (‘Wherever there are’) starts with a parallel 
 to St. Matthew, but extends into a region far beyond. Nowhere in 1 can the influence of 
 St. Mark be traced, nor was there any direct parallel with St. John’s Gospel; but the new 
 Sayings, both in thought and expression, tended to have a mystical and Johannine character. 
 In 654 we have one Saying (the 2nd) of which the central idea is parallel to a passage 
 found in St. Luke alone, but of which the developments are new; the conclusion of the 3rd 
 Saying connects with St. Matthew and St. Mark rather than with St. Luke, while the 4th is 
 a different version of a Saying found in all three Synoptists, and is on the whole nearer to 
 St. Mark than to the other two Evangelists. The 1st Saying and, so far as we can judge, 
 the 5th have little, if any, point of contact with the Canonical Gospels. As in 1, so in 654 
 the new elements tend to have a Johannine colouring, especially in the 2nd Saying; but 
 some caution must be observed in tracing connexions with St. John’s theology. The 1st 
 Saying, if the papyrus had been the sole authority for it, might well have seemed nearer in 
 style to St. John than to the Synoptists; yet as a matter of fact it occurred in the Gospel 
 according to the Hebrews, a very early work which is generally admitted to have been 
 originally written in Hebrew and to have been independent of the Canonical Gospels, most 
 of all St. John’s. On the other hand, while the Sayings in 654 contain nothing so markedly 
 Johannine in style as e.g. “1 stood in the midst of the world...’ in 1.11 sqq., the introduction 
 contains a clear parallel to John viii. 52. This at first sight may perhaps seem to imply 
 a knowledge of St. John’s Gospel on the part of the author of the introduction, but it must 
 be remembered (1) that St. John may well not have been the sole authority for the attribu- 
 tion of that Saying to our Lord, and if so, that the author of the introduction may have 
 obtained it from another source, (2) that a knowledge of St. John’s Gospel on the part of 
 the author of the introduction does not necessarily imply a corresponding debt to that 
 Gospel in the following Sayings, which, as we have said, stand on a somewhat different 
 footing from the introduction. 
 
 In our original edition of 1 we maintained (a) that the Sayings had no traceable thread 
 of connexion with each other beyond the fact of their being ascribed to the same speaker, 
 (ὁ) that none of them implied a post-resurrectional point of view, (c) that they were not in 
 themselves heretical, and that though the asceticism of Log. 2 and the mystic character of 
 Log. 5 were obviously capable of development in Encratite and Gnostic directions, the 
 Sayings as a whole were much nearer in style to the New Testament than to the apocryphal 
 literature of the middle and end of the second century. If these positions have been 
 vigorously assailed, they have also been stoutly defended, and about the second and third no 
 general agreement has been reached; with regard to the first the balance of opinion has 
 been in favour of our view, and the various attempts to trace a connexion of ideas running 
 through the Sayings have met with little acceptance. What answer is to be returned to 
 the corresponding problems in 654? 
 
 We will take the third question first. Is there anything in 654 to show that the 
 Sayings originated in or circulated among a particular sect? We should answer this in 
 the negative. There is nothing heretical in the introduction, the rst, 3rd, and 4th Sayings, 
 or, so far as can be judged, the 5th. The Encratite leanings which have been ascribed to 
 the 2nd Logion are conspicuously absent in 654; the remains of the 5th Saying in fact 
 rather suggest an anti-Jewish point of view, from which however the 2nd Logion itself 
 
12 THE OXVRAYNCHUS CARVED 
 
 was not widely distant, if, as we strongly hold, νηστεύσητε and σαββατίζητε are to be taken 
 metaphorically. The absence of any Jewish-Christian element in 654 is the more ~ 
 remarkable seeing that the rst Saying also occurs in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. 
 The only Saying that is at all suspicious is the 2nd, which like Log. 5 is sure to be called 
 in some quarters ‘Gnostic.’ That the profoundly mystical but, as it seems to us, obviously 
 genuine Saying of our Lord recorded in Luke xvii. 21 ‘The kingdom of God is within you’ 
 should have given rise to much speculation was to be expected, and from Hippolytus 
 Refut. v. 7 it is known that this Saying occupied an important place in the doctrines of the 
 Naassenes, one of the most pronounced Gnostic sects of the second or early third century. 
 That there is a connexion between the Sayings and the Naassenes through the Gospel of 
 Thomas is quite possible and this point will be discussed later (pp. 18-9); but to import 
 Naassene tenets into the 2nd Saying in 654 is not only gratuitous but a ὕστερον πρότερον, 
 Moreover, though the other ideas in the Saying connected with the parallel from St. Luke, 
 the development of the kingdom of Heaven through brute creation up to man (if that be 
 the meaning of ll. 9-16), and the Christian turn given to the proverbial γνῶθι σεαυτόν 
 (11. 16-21), may point to a later stage of thought than that found in the Canonical Gospels, 
 the 2nd Saying as a whole, if ‘Gnostic,’ presents a very primitive kind of Gnosticism, and 
 is widely separated from the fully-developed theosophy of e.g. the Pests Sophia. In any 
 case the ‘Gnosticism’ of 654 is on much the same level as that of 1. 
 
 Do any of the Sayings (apart from the introduction) imply a post-resurrectional point 
 of view? ‘This too we should answer in the negative. There is not only nothing in them 
 to indicate that they were spoken after the resurrection, but substantial evidence for the 
 opposite view. The familiar Sayings in the Canonical Gospels which are parallel to those 
 found in 654 are there assigned to our Lord’s lifetime, including even John viii. 52. The 
 Gospel according to the Hebrews with which the rst Saying is connected covered the same 
 ground as the Synoptists, and there is no reason to suppose that this Saying occurred 
 there as a post-resurrectional utterance. But the best argument is provided by the 5th 
 Saying, especially its context which is fortunately given. The questions there addressed to 
 Jesus clearly belong to a class of problems which are known to have been raised by our 
 Lord’s disciples and others in his lifetime, and, if ἐξετάζουσιν is in any case a somewhat 
 stronger term than would be expected, seeing that the disciples seem to be the subject 
 (though cf. John xxi. 12), it is most unlikely that this word would have been used with 
 reference to the risen Christ. In fact none of the five Sayings in 654 suggests a post- 
 resutrectional point of view so much as the 3rd Logion (‘I stood in the midst of the 
 world’); cf. pp. 13-4. 
 
 Can a definite principle or train of ideas be traced through the Sayings? The first 
 four are certainly linked together by the connecting idea of the kingdom of Heaven, which 
 is the subject to a greater or less degree of all of them. But between the 4th and 5th 
 Sayings the chain is certainly much weaker and threatens to snap altogether. It is very 
 difficult to believe that if 654 was part of a large collection of similar Sayings a connexion 
 of thought could have been maintained throughout, and the Sayings in the later columns of 
 654 may well have been as disconnected as those in 1. Even in the five which are partly 
 preserved in 654 there is a constant change in the persons addressed, the rst and 3rd being 
 couched in the third singular, the 2nd and almost certainly the 5th in the second plural, and 
 the 4th in the second singular. Moreover the real link is, we think, supplied by the intro- 
 duction, the consideration of which can no longer be delayed. Only before proceeding 
 further we would state our conviction that in all essential points, the date of the papyrus, 
 the form of the Sayings, their relation to the Canonical Gospels, and the general character 
 of the new elements in them, to say nothing of the parallelism of thought between the 1st and 
 
654. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 13 
 
 3rd Sayings and the 5th Logion (cf. p. 5), the resemblances between 654 and 1 so far 
 outweigh the differences that for practical purposes they may be treated as parts of the 
 same collection. Even if it ever should be proved that the first page of 1 did not coincide 
 with 654, the two fragments so clearly reflect the same surroundings and mental conditions 
 that we cannot regard as satisfactory any explanation of the one which is incompatible with 
 the other. 
 
 ‘ These are the... words which Jesus the living ... spake to... and Thomas, and he said 
 unto them “ Every one that hearkens to these words shall never taste of death.”’ Such is the 
 remarkable opening prefixed to the collection of Sayings in 654 by its unknown editor. 
 The first point to be noticed is that the name given to the collection is, as was acutely 
 divined by Dr. Lock (Zwo Lectures on the Sayings of Jesus, p. 16), λόγοι not λόγια, and all 
 questions concerning the meaning of the latter term may therefore be left out of account in 
 dealing with the present series of Sayings. The converse of this, however, in our opinion 
 by no means holds good, and as we have pointed out (p. 4), the analogy of the present 
 document has a considerable bearing upon the problems concerning an early collection of 
 λόγια. Secondly, the collection is represented as being spoken either to St. Thomas alone 
 or to St. Thomas and another disciple or, less probably, other disciples. Does the compiler 
 mean that the Sayings were the subject of a special revelation to St. Thomas and perhaps 
 another disciple, from which the rest were excluded? In other words is this introduction 
 parallel to that passage in the Pzs/7s Sophia 7o-1 in which mention is made of a special 
 revelation to SS. Philip, Thomas, and Matthias (or Matthew; cf.p. 4)? The case in favour 
 of an affirmative answer to this query would be greatly strengthened if the introduction pro- 
 vided any indication that the editor assigned his collection of Sayings to the period after 
 the Resurrection. But no such evidence is forthcoming. We do not wish to lay stress on 
 ὁ ζῶν in |. 2 owing to the uncertainty attaching to the word that follows; but the phrase 
 ὁ ζῶν certainly does not point to the post-resurrection period. In the Canonical Gospels 
 St. Thomas is made prominent only in connexion with that period (John xx. 24 sqq.), but 
 this circumstance, which is probably the strongest argument in favour of a post-resurrectional 
 point of view, is discounted by the fact that the Gospel of Thomas, so far as can be 
 judged, was not of the nature of a post-resurrectional Gospel but rather a Gospel of the 
 childhood (cf. pp. 18-9), and, secondly, seems to be outweighed by the indications in 
 the Sayings themselves (cf. p. 12) that some of them at any rate were assigned to Jesus’ 
 lifetime. The force of the second argument can indeed be turned by supposing, as 
 Dr. Bartlet suggests, that the standpoint of the collection, both in 1 and 654, is that 
 of a post-resurrection interview in which the old teaching of Christ’s lifetime is declared 
 again in relation to the larger needs of Christian experience. But such a view necessarily 
 implies that ll. 1-3 define a particular occasion (e. g. that contemplated in John xx. 26) on 
 which the Sayings were spoken in their present order, and to this hypothesis there are grave 
 objections. The use of the aorists ἐλάλησεν and εἶπεν in 654. 2-3 does not prove that one 
 occasion only was meant. The repetition of λέγει Ἰησοῦς before each of the Sayings seems 
 very unnecessary if they are part of a continuous discourse. The difficulty of tracing 
 a connexion of ideas throughout 654, and still more throughout 1, and the frequent 
 changes in the persons addressed provide fresh obstacles to such an interpretation; and the 
 inappropriateness of the word ἐξετάζουσι in connexion with the risen Christ has already been 
 alluded to (p. 12). To suppose that 654. 3-31 is a speech in itself, that ll. 32-6 revert 
 to the original narrative broken off at ]. 3 and that 1 is part of a later discourse appears to 
 us a very strained interpretation. 
 
 We are not therefore disposed to consider that the introduction to the Sayings, any 
 more than the Sayings by themselves, implies a post-resurrectional point of view on the part 
 
14 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 of the compiler, still less that the background of the Sayings is at all the same as that con- 
 templated in the P7st’s Sophia, which belongs to a later stage of thought than the Sayings. 
 Hence we are not prepared to accept an analogy derived from that or any other similar 
 treatise as an argument for thinking that the editor by his introduction meant to imply 
 that St. Thomas or St. Thomas and some one else were the sole hearers of the Sayings. 
 What we think he did mean to imply was that the ultimate authority for the record of 
 these Sayings was in his opinion St. Thomas or St. Thomas and another disciple. This 
 hypothesis provides a satisfactory, in fact we think the only satisfactory, explanation of the 
 frequent changes of persons and abrupt transitions of subject which characterize the Sayings 
 as a whole. 
 
 Thirdly, the editor enforces the momentous claim which he has made for the authori- 
 tative character of the Sayings by quoting a sentence which, with several variations of 
 language, but not of thought, occurs in John viii. 52, and which in the present context 
 forms a highly appropriate prelude. Does this imply that the editor adapted the verse in 
 St. John to his own purposes? On this point, since we are not prepared to maintain that that 
 passage in St. John is essentially unhistorical, we cannot give a decided opinion; and in 
 any case the probable relation of 654 to St. John’s Gospel must be considered from the 
 point of view of the collection of Sayings as a whole and of the conclusions adopted as to 
 the editor’s claim, rather than made a starting-point for an investigation of that claim and 
 the source of the Sayings. For as we have said (p. 10), the introduction necessarily stands. 
 on a somewhat different footing from the Sayings, and even if knowledge and use of the 
 Canonical Gospels by the author of the introduction was certain, this would not prove 
 a corresponding dependence of the Sayings themselves upon the Canonical Gospels. All 
 that can at present safely be inferred from the parallelism between the introduction and 
 St. John is that the editor of the collection lived in an atmosphere of thought influenced by 
 those speculative ideas in early Christianity which found their highest expression in the 
 Fourth Gospel. 
 
 What value, if any, is to be attached to this far-reaching claim—that the collection of 
 Sayings derives its authority, not from the traditional sources of any of the four Canonical 
 Gospels, but from St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple? The custom of invoking the 
 authority of a great and familiar name for an anonymous and later work is so common in 
 early Christian, as in other, writings, that the mere statement of the editor carries no weight 
 by itself, and is not worth considering unless the internal evidence of the Sayings themselves 
 can be shown to point in the same direction or at any rate to be not inconsistent with his 
 claim. We pass therefore to the problem of the general nature and origin of the Sayings 
 in 654 and 1, and as a convenient method of inquiry start from an examination of the 
 various theories already put forward in explanation of 1. Not that we wish to hold any of 
 our critics to their previous opinions on the subject. The discovery of 654, with the intro- 
 duction containing the mention of Thomas and a close parallel to St. John’s Gospel, with 
 one Saying coinciding with a Citation from the Gospel to the Hebrews and another having 
 the context prefixed to it, introduces several novel and highly important factors into the 
 controversy; and, being convinced of the close connexion between 1 and 654, we consider 
 that all questions concerning 1 must be studied de move. But since most of the chief New 
 Testament scholars have expressed their views on 1, and an immense variety of opinion is 
 represented, it is not likely that we shall require to go far outside the range of solutions 
 which have already been suggested. A convenient bibliography and resumé of the contro- 
 versy will be found in Profs. Lock and Sanday’s Ziwo Lectures on the Sayings of Jesus. 
 
 In our original edition of 1 we proposed a.p. 140 as the latest date to which the 
 composition of the Sayings could be referred. This zerminus ad quem has generally been 
 
654. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 15 
 
 accepted, even by Dr. Sanday, who is amongst the most conservative of our critics; and 
 the only notable exception is, so far as we know, Zahn, who would make the Sayings as 
 late as 160-70. But his explanation of 1 has met with little favour, and, as we shall show, 
 is now rendered still less probable. Accordingly, we should propose a.p. 140 for the 
 terminus ad quem in reference to 654 with greater confidence than we felt about 1 in 1897. 
 The chief dividing line in the controversy lies between those who agreed with our 
 suggestion that 1 belonged to a collection of Sayings as such, and those who considered 
 1 to be a series of extracts from one or more of the numerous extra-canonical gospels 
 which are known to have circulated in Egypt in the second century. Does 654 help 
 to decide the question in either direction? One argument which has been widely used 
 in support of the view that 1 was really a series of extracts, viz. that the Sayings had 
 no contexts, is somewhat damaged by the appearance of a Saying which has a context. 
 But we are not disposed to lay stress on this contradictory instance, which is clearly 
 exceptional, though we may be pardoned for deprecating beforehand the use of the 
 converse argument that the occurrence of a context proves the Sayings to be extracts. 
 This argument may seem to gain some support from the use of αὐτόν (and probably αὐτοῦ) 
 in 654. 32; and it will very likely be pointed out that such a passage as 655. 17-23 would 
 by the insertion of Ἰησοῦς after λέγει make a context and Saying in form exactly resembling 
 654. 32 sqq. But the use of αὐτόν causes no ambiguity where it is found in one of a series 
 of Sayings each beginning λέγει ᾿Ιησοῦς, a formula which itself recurs later on in the same 
 context; and the argument from the analogy of 655. 17-23 is open to the obvious retort 
 that such a passage may equally well have been transferred from a collection of Sayings 
 with occasional contexts, like 654. The fact is that the formal presence or absence 
 of contexts in a series of Sayings can be employed with equal plausibility to prove or 
 disprove the view that the series consisted of extracts, and would therefore seem a very 
 unsound argument to introduce into the discussion. The matter of the context of the 
 5th Saying, however, has perhaps a more important bearing than the form upon the 
 question of extracts. The phrase λέγει Ἰησοῦς there follows two historic presents, ἐξετάζουσιν 
 and λέγουσιν, and is therefore presumably itself a historic present; and if λέγει Ἰησοῦς 
 is a historic present in one case, it should be so throughout 654 and 1. This context 
 therefore confirms the explanation of λέγει Ἰησοῦς in 1 suggested by Zahn. Are we to 
 follow him in his next inference that the formula λέγει ᾿Ιησοῦς has been taken over without 
 alteration by the editor from his source, which was therefore presumably a Gospel narrative? 
 To this we should answer by a decided negative. As Dr. Lock remarks (Zwo Lectures, 
 p- 18), ‘it is not likely that λέγει should have occurred wnzformly in a narrative,’ a criticism 
 which is strengthened by the recurrence in 654 of at least three more instances of λέγει ᾿Ιησοῦς 
 (11. 9, 27, and 36), and by the comparison of 654. 32 sqq. and 655. 17-23, which suggests 
 that if the former had been taken directly from a Gospel like that to which the latter belonged, 
 Ἰησοῦς would have been omitted. It is, we think, much more probable that the formula λέγει 
 Ἰησοῦς is due to the editor of the collection than to his sources, whatever they were. And 
 though there is now no longer any particular reason for interpreting the tense of λέγει as 
 more than a historic present, a secondary meaning is not excluded, and may be present in 
 ]. 36 just as much as in the other instances where there is no context. We should be inclined 
 to paraphrase λέγει ᾿Ιησοῦς as ‘ This is one of those λόγοι of Jesus to which I referred in the 
 introduction,’ and to explain the uniform repetition of it as marking off the several λόγοι 
 from each other, and giving greater impressiveness to the whole. The fact that the editor 
 used the aorist and not the historic present in his introduction suggests that by his 
 employment of the present tense λέγει throughout the Sayings he intended to produce 
 a slightly different effect from that which would have been caused by ἔλεγεν or εἶπεν, But 
 
16 TES OX VRYN Ch Cae RAT ya 
 
 this new light shed upon the formula λέγει Ἰησοῦς does not bring with it any new reason for 
 regarding the Sayings as extracts from a narrative Gospel. ; 
 
 A much more important factor in deciding whether the Sayings are extracts or not is 
 the introduction, which though it may be a later addition, and though the reference to 
 St. Thomas may be merely a bold invention of the editor, is there, and its presence has 
 to be accounted for. So far from stating that the Sayings are extracts from any work, the 
 editor asserts that they are a collection of λόγοι, a circumstance which seems to provide an 
 adequate explanation not only of the disconnected character of the Sayings in part of 
 the collection, but of the repetition of the formula λέγει Ἰησοῦς before each one. It is now 
 clear that 654 was meant by the editor to be regarded as an independent literary work, 
 complete in itself; and though it is not necessary to accept it as such, those who wish 
 to maintain that the collection is something quite different from what it purports to be must 
 be prepared to explain how the introduction comes to be there. Hence we think that 
 no theory of the origin of the Sayings as a whole is to be considered satisfactory unless 
 it at the same time provides a reasonable explanation of the fact that some one not later 
 than the middle of the second century published the Sayings as specially connected 
 with St. Thomas (and perhaps another disciple), and that the collection attained sufficient 
 importance for it to be read, and presumably accepted as genuine, in the chief towns of 
 Upper Egypt in the century following. This contention, if it be generally acknowledged, 
 will be an important criterion in discussing the merits of the different theories. 
 
 We begin therefore with a brief enumeration of the different Gospels to which 1 has 
 been referred, premising that all theories in favour of extracts have now to face at the outset 
 a difficult, and to some of them, we think, an insurmountable obstacle in the shape of the 
 introduction in 654. Of these the most generally accepted is probably that maintained 
 with all his usual brilliant powers of analysis by Harnack (Dvze jingst entdeckten Spriiche 
 Jesu), that 1 consisted of extracts from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. The 
 question was, however, complicated by the extremely divergent views held concerning that 
 Gospel, to which only one passage of any length can be assigned with certainty. At 
 one extreme stands Harnack’s view that this with the Gospel according to the Hebrews was 
 the Gospel first used in Egypt, that it was not really heretical, and that it is the source 
 of the non-canonical Sayings found in the Second Epistle of Clement. At the other 
 extreme is the view of Resch (Agrapha, pp. 316-9), that the Gospel according to the 
 Egyptians was not used by the author of the Second Epistle of Clement, and that it 
 was thoroughly Gnostic and Encratite, as Origen and Epiphanius declared; the view 
 of Zahn (Gesch. d. NTI. Kan. ii. pp. 628 sqq.), which seems to us the most reasonable, 
 stands midway between, assigning to this Gospel neither the importance given to it by 
 Harnack nor the heretical character ascribed to it by Resch, with whom, however, Zahn 
 is in accord in considering that it was not used by the author of II Clem. Disagreeing 
 as we do with Harnack’s view of the Gospel according to the Egyptians, we have never been 
 able to regard his explanation of 1 as satisfactory, and the insecurity of his hypothesis 
 is illustrated by the attempt of Mr. Badham (A¢henaeum, Aug. 7, 1897), from a point of view 
 not far from that of Resch, to reach the same conclusion. ‘The evidence of 654 provides 
 fresh objections to the theory. There is no direct point of contact between 654 and 
 the Gospel according to the Egyptians, and where one of the uncanonical Sayings happens 
 to be known, it occurs not in this Gospel but in that according to the Hebrews. There is, 
 indeed, more to be said for regarding 654 as extracts from the latter Gospel, as was 
 suggested in the case of 1 by Batiffol (Revue Brblique, 1897, p. 515) and Davidson 
 (Lniernat. Journ. of Ethics, Oct. 1897), than from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. 
 In their divergence from the Canonical Gospels, the striking character of much of the 
 
654. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 17 
 
 new matter, the Hebraic parallelisms of expression, the Sayings are quite in keeping with 
 the style of the most venerable and important of all the uncanonical Gospels, which 
 is known to have been written originally in Hebrew, and which is now generally 
 regarded as independent of the four Canonical Gospels. To these points of connexion 
 has now to be added the far more solid piece of evidence afforded by the rst Saying 
 in 654. There remain indeed the objections (cf. Sayings of our Lord, p. 17) that the 
 Gospel according to the Hebrews would be expected to show greater resemblance to 
 St. Matthew than we find in 1 and 654, which is even further away from St. Matthew’s 
 Gospel than 1, and secondly that the Johannine colouring traceable in the new Sayings 
 is foreign to the extant fragments of the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which seems 
 to have been quite parallel to the Synoptists. But on the other hand, if Harnack is right 
 (Gesch. d. Altchrist. Lit, ii. pp. 646-8) in supposing that the resemblance of this Gospel 
 to St. Luke’s was not much less marked than its resemblance to St. Matthew’s, the points 
 of contact between the Sayings and St. Luke, which are at least as strong as these with 
 St. Matthew, constitute no great difficulty. And it is quite possible that the Gospel 
 according to the Hebrews had a mystical side which is revealed to us occasionally (as 
 e.g. in the curious passage in which Jesus speaks of his ‘ mother, the Holy Ghost,’ and in 
 the Saying found also in 654), but which owing to the paucity of references has hitherto 
 been underestimated. A far graver and in fact almost fatal objection, however, to regarding 
 the Sayings as extracts culled from either the Gospel according to the Hebrews or the 
 Gospel according to the Egyptians is the irreconcilability of such a view with the introduc- 
 tion of 654. It is very difficult-to believe that an editor would have had the boldness to 
 issue extracts from such widely known works as an independent collection of Sayings 
 claiming the authority of Thomas and perhaps another disciple. Even if we supply 
 Maréaim at the end of 654. 2 and suppose that the mention of Thomas is of quite 
 secondary importance, it is very hard to supply a reasonable motive for issuing a series 
 of extracts from the Gospel according to the Hebrews with such a preface as we find 
 in 654, and to account for the popularity of these supposed extracts in the century 
 following their publication. We are therefore on the whole opposed to. the view, 
 attractive though it undoubtedly is, that the Sayings are all directly derived from the Gospel 
 according to the Hebrews. But that there is a connexion between them is certain, 
 and it is significant that the S¢romazezs of Clement of Alexandria, in which work Mayor 
 (ap. Rendel Harris, Contemp. Rev. 1897, pp. 344-5) has with much probability detected 
 references to the 2nd Logion (cf. the parallels adduced on p. 7), are also the source 
 of the quotation from the Gospel according to the Hebrews which is closely parallel to the 
 1st Saying. It is not at all unlikely that the 2nd Logion (‘ Except ye fast’) also presented 
 a strong similarity to a passage in the same Gospel. 
 
 The obstacle which prevents us from accepting the Gospel according to the Hebrews 
 as the source of all the Sayings, in spite of the evidence in favour of such a view, applies 
 with equal force to Zahn’s hypothesis that they were derived from the Gospel of the 
 Ebionites or Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, which is open to grave objections on other 
 grounds. The instances adduced by Zahn to show the use of collections of extracts 
 in the second century, (1) a series of ἐκλογαί from the Old Testament composed by Melito 
 of Sardis, and (2) a list of heretical passages from the Gospel of Peter appended to a letter 
 by Serapion, were singularly inapt even as regards 1 (cf. Sanday, Zio Lectures, p. 45, 
 note), and still less bear any relation to 654, Even admitting for the sake of argument 
 Zahn’s theory of the relation of the Gospel of the Ebionites to the Gospel according to the 
 Hebrews (on which Harnack throws doubts, of. «71. ii. p. 626),and his proposed date for 
 1, about a.p. 170 (which has generally been regarded as too late), and for the Gospel 
 
 C 
 
18 til DAYRAYNCA OS hae eid 
 
 of the Ebionites (which if we follow Harnack, of. cz. ii. p. 631, is too early), the character 
 of the extant fragments of this thoroughly Gnostic Jewish-Christian Gospel is very different 
 from that of 1 and 654, to say nothing of the other arguments against Zahn’s theory 
 brought by Dr. Sanday in Zwo Lectures, p. 46. 
 
 The views which we have discussed so far have, whether satisfactory or not on other 
 grounds, all been confronted by the initial difficulty of the introduction. Let us now 
 examine those Gospels ascribed to disciples whose names either occur or may with reasonable 
 probability be supposed to have occurred in ll. 2-3. It is obvious that the introduction 
 would suit a series of extracts from e.g. the Gospel of Thomas much better than one 
 from the Gospel according to the Hebrews. The Gospel of Thomas is known to have 
 existed in more than one form, namely as an account of Jesus’ childhood which is extant 
 in several late recensions of varying length, and as an earlier Gospel condemned by 
 Hippolytus in the following passage (Refut. v. 7) οὐ μόνον. δ᾽ αὐτῶν ἐπιμαρτυρεῖν φασὶ (sc. the 
 Naassenes) τῷ λόγῳ τὰ ᾿Ασσυρίων μυστήρια ἀλλὰ Kal Φρυγῶν περὶ τὴν τῶν γεγονότων καὶ γινομένων 
 καὶ ἐσομένων ἔτι μακαρίαν κρυβομένην ὁμοῦ καὶ φανερουμένην φύσιν ἥνπερ φησὶ τὴν ἐντὸς ἀνθρώπου 
 βασιλείαν οὐρανῶν ζητουμένην, περὶ ἧς διαρρήδην ἐν τῷ κατὰ Θωμᾶν ἐπιγραφομένῳ εὐαγγελίῳ 
 παραδιδόασι λέγοντες οὕτως" ἐμὲ ὁ ζητῶν εὑρήσει ἐν παιδίοις ἀπὸ ἐτῶν ἑπτά ἐκεῖ γὰρ ἐν τῷ 
 τεσσαρεσκαιδεκάτῳ αἰῶνι κρυβόμενος φανεροῦμαι. Here we have two remarkable points of 
 contact with 654, the mention of Thomas coupled with the ἐντὸς ἀνθρώπου βασιλεία 
 (cf. the 2nd Saying). 
 
 The parallels between 1 and one of the later forms of the Thomas Gospel have been 
 worked out with great ingenuity and elaboration by Dr. Taylor on pp. go-8 of Zhe 
 Oxyrhynchus Logia and the Apocryphal Gospels. ‘There is much to be said for his view 
 that the extant Gospel of Thomas contains some traces of 1, and the probability would 
 be increased if 1, which Dr. Taylor was inclined to regard as extracts from the Gospel 
 according to the Egyptians, be supposed to be derived from the earlier Gospel of Thomas. 
 654 does not seem to contain any clear points of connexion with the later Gospel of 
 Thomas, but this is compensated for by the remarkable parallel from Hippolytus quoted 
 above. It is moreover noteworthy, as Mr. Badham remarks, that the Acts of Thomas, which 
 may well have been partly built upon the Gospel, exhibit a knowledge of that Saying which 
 occurs both in the Gospel according to the Hebrews and in 654, and that, as Prof. Lake 
 informs us, an Athos MS. (Studia Biblica, v. 2, p. 173) asserts that the περικοπή of Christ 
 and the woman taken in adultery (which has found its way from the Gospel according 
 to the Hebrews into St. John’s Gospel) occurred in the Gospel of Thomas. But there 
 are serious objections to regarding 1 and 654 as extracts from that Gospel. In the 
 first place though it is possible that Thomas is the only disciple mentioned in the 
 introduction, it is equally possible that he stood second, and in that case the Gospel 
 from which the Sayings may have been extracted is more likely to have been one 
 which went under the name of the person who stood first; though indeed, if there were 
 two disciples mentioned in the introduction, it is not very satisfactory to derive the Sayings 
 from any Gospel which went under the name of only one. A much greater difficulty 
 arises from the divergence of the Sayings from what little is known about the earlier 
 Gospel of Thomas. The saying quoted by Hippolytus is widely removed in character 
 from those in 1 and 654, and it is significant that, though the doctrine of aeons 
 seems to be known to the author of the Gospel of Thomas, 654 employs in 1. 24 
 the neutral word τόπος in a passage in which αἰών, as is shown by the parallel from the 
 Apocalypse of Peter, would have been highly appropriate, if the composer of the Sayings 
 had known of or been influenced by that doctrine. The Gospel of Thomas, which 
 Harnack thinks was known to Irenaeus, is indeed placed before a.p. 180, but from 
 
654. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 19 
 
 the quotation in Hippolytus, coupled with the form of the Gospel in later times and the 
 scanty evidence from other sources, it has been considered to have been mainly at any 
 rate a Gospel of the childhood and of an advanced Gnostic character. If the Sayings 
 are to be derived from it, the current view of the Gospel of Thomas must be entirely 
 changed; and it is very doubtful whether this can be done except by postulating the 
 existence of an original Thomas Gospel behind that condemned by Hippolytus. This 
 would lead us into a region of pure conjecture into which we are unwilling to enter, 
 at any rate until other less hazardous roads to a solution are closed. That there is 
 a connexion between the earlier Gospel of Thomas and the Sayings is extremely likely, 
 but this can be better explained by supposing that the Sayings influenced the Gospel 
 than by the hypothesis that the Gospel is the source of the Sayings. 
 
 The Gospel of Philip, which is assigned by Zahn to the beginning of the second 
 century, by Harnack to the second century or first half of the third, would, even if it 
 were certain that Φιλίππῳ occurred in 654. 2, be an unsuitable source for the Sayings. 
 The extract quoted from it by Epiphanius shows much more highly developed ascetic and 
 Gnostic tendencies than can be found in 1 and 654. 
 
 The only other Apocryphal Gospels which seem to be worth consideration are the 
 works connected with Matthias, of which there are three; (1) the παραδόσεις of Matthias, 
 a few extracts from which are cited by Clement of Alexandria, (2) a Gospel according 
 to Matthias mentioned by Origen, and (3) certain λόγοι ἀπόκρυφοι in use among the 
 Basilidians which are thus described by Hippolytus (Refut. vii. 20) Βασιλείδης τοίνυν 
 καὶ ᾿Ισίδωρος ... φασὶν εἰρηκέναι Ματθίαν αὐτοῖς λόγους ἀποκρύφους, ods ἤκουσε παρὰ TOU σωτῆρος 
 κατ᾽ ἰδίαν διδαχθείς. ‘The nature of these three works and their relation to each other 
 are very uncertain. Zahn considers all three to be identical; Harnack, who at first 
 (op. «71. i. p. 18) was disposed to accept the identity of (1) and (2), subsequently (op. c7v. 
 il. p. 597) reverts to the view that these two at any rate were distinct. The suggestion 
 that the παραδόσεις of Matthias might be the source of 1 was thrown out by Dr. James 
 (Contemp. Rev. Aug. 1897), only to be immediately rejected on the ground of the 
 dissimilarity of form between 1 and the extant fragments of the παραδόσεις, which seem 
 to have been a work of a mainly homiletic character. ‘The παραδόσεις are now altogether 
 excluded from the likely sources of the Sayings owing to the fact that Clement quotes 
 an extract from them, θαύμασον τὰ παρόντα, side by side with the very citation from the Gospel 
 according to the- Hebrews which is parallel to the 1st Saying. Of the Gospel according 
 to Matthias practically nothing is known except its name; the hypothesis that it is the 
 source of the Sayings is therefore incapable of proof or disproof, but being based on pure 
 conjecture has nothing to oppose to the antecedent improbability (cf. p. 16) that the 
 Sayings are something quite different from what they profess to be. There remain 
 the λόγοι ἀπόκρυφοι mentioned by Hippolytus. The occurrence of the word λόγοι suggests 
 a connexion with the Sayings, but this cannot easily be carried much further. The λόγοι 
 ἀπόκρυφοι were, according to Hippolytus, revealed to Matthias κατ᾽ ἰδίαν, whereas if Matthias 
 occurred at all in the introduction, it was in conjunction with Thomas. The particular 
 Gnostic ontological speculations which according to Hippolytus were found in these λόγοι 
 ἀπόκρυφοι belong to another plane of thought from that found in the Sayings; but the 
 question is complicated by the confused and untrustworthy character of Hippolytus’ 
 discussion of the Basilidians, vii. 20 being among the most suspicious passages. And even 
 if there were a connexion between these λόγοι ἀπόκρυφοι of Matthias and the Sayings, 
 this would bring us no nearer to a proof that the Sayings were extracts from a narrative 
 Gospel rather than a collection of Sayings as such. There is moreover another objection 
 to connecting the Sayings with any work professedly under the name of Matthias, because 
 
 ΕΙΣ 
 
20 THE OXAYRAYNCH USAT RI 
 
 such a view would necessarily entail the supposition that the Sayings are post-resurrec- 
 tional; and this for the reasons given on pp. 12-3 we do not think justifiable. 
 
 Our conclusion, therefore, is that no one of the known uncanonical Gospels is 
 a suitable source for the Sayings as a whole. Shall we regard them as a series of extracts 
 from several of these Gospels, as was suggested with respect to1 by Dr. James? So long 
 as the discussion was confined to 1, such an explanation from its vagueness was almost 
 beyond the reach of criticism. The recovery of 654 alters the situation. On the one 
 hand the occurrence of a Saying, which is known to have been also found in the Gospel 
 according to the Hebrews, side by side with other Sayings which it is difficult to ascribe 
 to the same source, rather favours the theory of an eclectic series derived from different 
 Gospels. But the introduction connecting the Sayings with particular disciples is not 
 very suitable for such a collection which ex hypothest is of an altogether miscellaneous 
 character; and it would be difficult for any one to maintain that the Sayings are derived 
 from several Apocryphal Gospels and at the same time in face of the mention of Thomas 
 to deny that one of the chief elements was the Gospel of Thomas. But the inclusion 
 of the Gospel of Thomas among the sources of the Sayings to a large extent involves 
 the hypothesis of extracts from several Gospels in the difficulties which are discussed 
 on pp. 18-9. 
 
 The result of an examination in the light of 654 of the various theories that the 
 immediate source of 1 was one or more of the known non-canonical Gospels confirms 
 us in the view that the solution does not lie in that direction, and that the Sayings 
 are much more likely to be a source utilized in one or more of the uncanonical Gospels, 
 than vice versa. The probability of the general explanation of 1 which we suggested in 
 18947 and which has been supported, amongst others, by Drs. Swete, Rendel Harris, Sanday, 
 Lock, and Heinrici, that it was part of a collection of Sayings as such, is largely increased 
 by the discovery of 654, with its introduction to the whole collection stating that it 
 was a collection of λόγοι, which was obviously intended to stand as an independent literary 
 work. In fact we doubt if theories of extracts are any longer justifiable; and in any 
 case such explanations will henceforth be placed at the initial disadvantage of starting 
 with an assumption which is distinctly contradicted by the introduction of 654. It is 
 of course possible to explain away this introduction, but unless very strong reasons can 
 be adduced for doing so, the simpler and far safer course is to accept the editor’s statement 
 that 654, to which, as we have said, 1 is closely allied, is a collection of λόγοι ᾿Ιησοῦ. 
 
 The opinions of those critics who agreed with our general explanation of 1 as against 
 the various theories of extracts may be divided into two classes: (1) those who regarded 
 1 as a collection of Sayings independent of the Gospels and belonging to the first century, 
 and who therefore were disposed to admit to a greater or less extent and with much 
 varying degrees of confidence the presence of genuine elements in the new matter 
 (Drs. Swete, Rendel Harris, Lock, and Heinrici) ; (2) those who, like Dr. Sanday, regarded 
 the new Sayings in 1 as the product of the early second century, not directly dependent 
 on the Canonical Gospels, but having ‘their origin under conditions of thought which 
 these Gospels had created’ (Sanday, of. εξ. p. 41), a view which necessarily carries with it 
 the rejection of the new matter. It remains to ask how far 654 helps to decide the points 
 at issue in favour of either side. 
 
 With regard to the relation of 654 to the Canonical Gospels, the proportion of new 
 and old matter is about the same as in 1, and the parallels to the Canonical Gospels 
 in 654 exhibit the same freedom of treatment, which can be explained either as implying 
 independence of the Canonical Gospels, or as the liberties taken by an early redactor. 
 The introduction in 654 contains a clearer parallel to St. John’s Gospel than anything 
 
654. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 21 
 
 to be found in 1; but even if it be conceded (and there is good reason for not con- 
 ceding it; cf. p. 11) that the introduction implied a knowledge of St. John’s Gospel, 
 and was therefore probably composed in the second century, the Sayings themselves 
 can (and, as we shall show, do) contain at any rate some elements which are not derived 
 from the Canonical Gospels, and go back to the first century. So far as the evidence of 
 654 goes, there is nothing to cause any one to renounce opinions which he may have formed 
 concerning the relation of 1 to the Canonical Gospels. No one who feels certain on 
 this point with regard to the one, is likely to be convinced of the incorrectness of his 
 view by the other. 
 
 Secondly, with regard to the new matter in 654, the uncertainties attaching to the 
 restoration and meaning of most of the 2nd, the earlier part of the 3rd, and all the 
 5th Saying, unfortunately prevent them from being of much use for purposes of critical 
 analysis. Unless by the aid of new parallels the satisfactory restoration of these three 
 Sayings can be carried beyond the point which we have been able to reach, their 
 remains hardly provide a firm basis for estimating their individual value, still less that 
 of the collection as a whole, each Saying of which has a right to consideration on its 
 own merits. Only with regard to the 1st Saying are we on sure ground. Concerning 
 this striking Agraphon the most diverse opinions have been held. Resch, a usually 
 indulgent critic of the uncanonical Sayings ascribed to our Lord, rejects it as spurious; 
 Ropes on the other hand, though far more exacting, is inclined to accept it as genuine, 
 but on account of the absence of widely attested authority for it does not put it in his 
 highest class of genuine Sayings which includes ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ 
 The judgement of Ropes upon Agrapha has generally been regarded as far sounder 
 than that of Resch; and much of Resch’s unfavourable criticism of this Saying is beside 
 the mark (Harnack now regards it as primary ; cf. p. 5), while the occurrence of the Saying 
 in 654 is a new argument for its authority. But whatever view be taken of its authenticity, 
 and however the connexion between 654 and the Gospel according to the Hebrews is 
 to be explained, the 1st Saying in 654 establishes one important fact. Dr. Sanday may be 
 right in regarding a.p. 100 as the /ermznus a quo for the composition of 1, and the 
 same /erminus a quo can of course be assigned to 654 in the sense that the Sayings were 
 not put together and the introduction not written before that date. But, if we may accept 
 the agreement of the leading theologians that the Gospel of the Hebrews was written in 
 the first century, it is impossible any longer to deny that 654 and therefore, as we maintain, 
 1, contain some non-canonical elements which directly or indirectly go back to the first 
 century; and the existence of first century elements in one case certainly increases the 
 probability of their presence in others. In this respect, therefore, 654 provides a remark- 
 able confirmation of the views of those critics who were prepared to allow a first century 
 date for 1. 
 
 Are we then, adapting to 654 Dr. Sanday’s view of 1 with the fewest possible modifi- 
 cations, to regard the whole collection as a free compilation in the early part of the second 
 century, by an Alexandrian Jewish-Christian, of Sayings ultimately derived from the 
 Canonical Gospels, and very likely the Gospels according to the Hebrews and Thomas, 
 and perhaps others as well; and shall we dismiss the new elements, except the rst Saying in 
 654, as the spurious accretions of an age of philosophic speculation, and surroundings 
 of dubious orthodoxy? Even so the two papyri are of great interest as revealing a 
 hitherto unknown development of primitive belief upon the nature of Christ’s teaching, and 
 supplying new and valuable evidence for determining the relationship of the uncanonical 
 Gospels to the main current of orthodox Christianity. Or are we rather to consider 1 
 and 654 to be fragments of an early collection of our Lord’s Sayings in a form which has 
 
22 THE OXYRAYNCHUS .PAPYRI 
 
 been influenced to some extent by the thought and literature of the apostolic and post- 
 apostolic age, and which may well itself have influenced the Gospel of Thomas and perhaps 
 others of the heretical Gospels, but which is ultimately connected in a large measure with 
 a first-hand source other than that of any of the Canonical Gospels? Some such view has 
 been maintained by scholars of eminence, e.g. Heinrici and Rendel Harris, with regard to 1; 
 and if the claim made by the editor of the collection in his introduction, that his source was 
 St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple, amounts to but little more, the internal evidence of 
 654 provides no obvious reason why we should concede him much less; while the occurrence 
 of one uncanonical Saying, which is already known to be of extreme antiquity and 
 has been accepted as substantially genuine by several critics, lends considerable support to 
 the others which rest on the evidence of 654 and 1 alone. 
 
 That is as far as we are prepared to go; for a really weighty and perfectly unbiassed 
 estimate of the ultimate value of any new discovery, resort must be made to some other 
 quarter than the discoverers. We conclude by pointing out that, if the view with regard 
 to 1 and 654 which we have just indicated is on the right lines, the analogy of this 
 collection has an obvious bearing on the question of the sources of the Synoptic Gospels, 
 and that the mystical and speculative element in the early records of Christ’s Sayings which 
 found its highest and most widely accepted expression in St. John’s Gospel, may well have 
 been much more general and less peculiarly Johannine than has hitherto been taken 
 for granted. 
 
 655. FRAGMENT OF A Lost GOSPEL. 
 Fr. (2) 8:2 x 8-3 cm. Prate II. 
 
 Eight fragments of a papyrus in roll form containing an uncanonical Gospel, 
 the largest (6) comprising parts of the middles of two narrow columns. None 
 of the other fragments actually joins (4), but it is practically certain that the 
 relation to it of Frs. (2) and (c), which come from the tops of columns, is as 
 indicated in the Plate. Irs. (4) and (e), both of which have a margin below the 
 writing, probably belong to the bottom of the same two columns which are 
 partly preserved in (6) ; but how much is lost in the interval is uncertain. Since 
 the upper portion of Col. i admits of a sure restoration of the majority of the 
 lacunae, the first 23 lines are nearly complete; but the remains of the second 
 column are for the most part too slight for the sense to be recovered. The 
 handwriting is a small uncial of the common sloping oval type, which in most 
 cases belongs to the third century, among securely dated examples being 28 
 (P. Oxy. I. Plate vi), 223 (P. Oxy. II. Plate i), 420 (P. Oxy. III. Plate vi), 
 P. Amh. 11. 12 (Plate iii). But this kind of hand is found in the second century, 
 e.g. 26 (P. Oxy. I. Plate vii), 447 (P. Oxy. III. Plate vi), and continued in the 
 fourth ; for late third or fourth century examples see P. Amh. I. 3 (4) (Part II. 
 Plate xxv) and 404 (P. Oxy. III. Plate iv). 655 is a well-written specimen, 
 
655. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 20 
 
 suggesting, on the whole, the earlier rather than the later period during which 
 this hand was in vogue, and though we should not assign it to the second century, 
 it is not likely to have been written later than A.D. 250. Lines 1-16 ὑμῶν give 
 the conclusion of a speech of Jesus which is parallel to several sentences in the 
 Sermon on the Mount. Then follows (Il. 17-23) an account of a question put to 
 Him by the disciples and of the answer. This, the most important part of the 
 papyrus, is new, but bears an interesting resemblance to a known quotation from 
 the Gospel according to the Egyptians; cf. note ad Joc. A passage in Col. ii 
 seems to be parallel to Luke xi. 52. On the general questions concerning the 
 nature and origin of the Gospel to which the fragment belonged see pp. 27-8. 
 In 1]. 7-11 of the text the division between Frs. (4) and (4) is indicated by double 
 vertical lines ||. No stops, breathings, or accents are used, but a wedge-shaped 
 sign for filling up short lines occurs in 1. 27 and a correction in a cursive hand in 
 Ἰ. 25. An interchange of εἰ and 7 causes the form εἰλικιαν in 1. 14, and 1. 13 
 requires some correction. 
 
 The key to the general restoration of Il. 1-3 was supplied by Mr. Badham, 
 that to ll. 41-6 by Dr. Bartlet. 
 
 Coli: Colt 
 Peele Ost PCOGl,:.%. 2. (ch 20 
 kd LON Bec 30 AE[ 
 fea. |IROKMHTE[..... O[ 
 ΠΡ ΤΣ MOON ΤΙ PAT TAL 
 Ci eae ἘΠ ΗΣΟΤΙΙ rY[ 
 ΠΣ τι 1 ΤΙ ENAY[. ΚΑΙ 
 (6) [. .JCQEl|[. . JAG) ΚΡΕΙΙ. 35Ν .[ 
 πο ΤΟΝ: ΚΑΙ 
 NOON ATII|[. . .JY=AL. HM 
 το NEI OYAE NiI[. .JE! . [. Cl 
 EN EXONT|I[. . -JNAL. L 
 MA TI! €N[... .] KAI 4o [ 
 YMEIC TIC AN TIPOCOH (2) ἘΛῚ: 
 ΕΠῚ ΤΗΝ ΕΙΛΙΚΙΑΝ THC [ 
 15 YMWN AYTO[. .JWCE! KPYY[ 
 YMEIN TO ENAYMA Y EICHAT 
 MON ΛΕΓΟΥΟΙΝ AY 4% CICEP| 
 TQ) ΟἹ MAOHTAI AYTOY KAN[ 
 ΠΟΤΕ HMEIN EMA ΔΕ Fell 
 20 NHC €CEl KAI ΠΟΤΕ MOILOO 
 
 CE OVOMEOA AETE! KEPAIL 
 
24 
 
 OTAN EKAYCHCOE KAI 
 MH AICXYNOHTE 
 
 (2) 
 
 TIN 
 € 
 Ἰωτινὼ 
 JOCMW 
 ]H 
 JCTIN 
 
 (7) 
 
 HAI 
 
 [.. ald πρωὶ ἕως ὀψὲ 
 
 [μήτ]ε ἀφ᾽ ἑσπίέρας 
 
 [ἕως π]ρωὶ μήτε [τῇ 
 τροφῇ ὑἹμῶν τί φά- 
 
 5 [γητε μήτε] τῇ στίο- 
 [Aq ὑμῶν) τί ἐνδύ- 
 
 [ση]σθε. 
 
 [σον]ές [ἐστε] τῶν [κρί- 
 
 [πολ]λῷ κρεῖϊ!σ- 
 
 νων ἅτιϊνα αἸὐξά- 
 10 ver οὐδὲ ν[ήθ]ει. [. 
 ἕν ἔχοντες ἔ]νδ[υ- 
 pea Τί ev[....] καὶ 
 
 41 
 
 (2) 
 
 20 
 
 τῆς [γνώσεως ἐ- 
 
 THE OXYRAYNCH OSG ARY ER 
 
 50 PAT 
 
 ΚΟΙ 
 
 (1) 
 JE[ 
 
 ὑμεῖς ; τίς ἂν προσθζ(εῖγη 
 ἐπὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν 
 
 ὑμῶν ; αὐτὸς δ]ώσει 
 ὑμῖν τὸ ἔνδυμα ὑ- 
 
 “Ἠ - > 
 μῶν. λέγουσιν av- 
 τῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ' 
 πότε ἡμῖν ἐμφα- 
 
 ‘ » \ V4 
 νὴς ἔσει καὶ πότε 
 σε ὀψόμεθα; λέγει' 
 e bd UA Α 
 ὅταν ἐκδύσησθε καὶ 
 
 μὴ αἰσχυνθῆτε, 
 
 e 
 
 ἔλεγε: τὴν κλεῖδα 
 
 κρύψίατε: αὐτοὶ οὐκ 
 
 εἰσήλ[θατε, καὶ τοῖς 
 
 45 εἰσερ[χομένοις οὐ- 
 
 κ ἀνϊεῴξατε.... 
 
655. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 25 
 
 1-23. ‘(Take no thought) from morning until even nor from evening until morning, 
 either for your food what ye shall eat or for your raiment what ye shall put on. Ye are far 
 better than the lilies which grow but spin not. Having one garment, what do ye (lack?) 
 .-. Who could add to your stature? He himself will give you your garment. His 
 disciples say unto him, When wilt thou be manifest to us, and when shall we see thee? 
 He saith, When ye shall be stripped and not be ashamed...’ 
 
 41-6. ‘... He said, The key of knowledge ye hid; ye entered not in yourselves and 
 to them that were entering in ye opened not.’ 
 
 1-7. Cf. Matt. vi. 25 μὴ μεριμνᾶτε τῇ ψυχῇ ὑμῶν τί φάγητε μηδὲ τῷ σώματι ὑμῶν τί ἐνδύσησθε. 
 οὐχὶ ἡ Ψυχὴ πλεῖόν ἐστι τῆς τροφῆς καὶ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ἐνδύματος :, Luke xii. 22-3 μὴ μεριμνᾶτε τῇ 
 ψυχῇ τί φάγητε μηδὲ τῷ σώματι τί ἐνδύσησθε. ἡ γὰρ Ψυχὴ πλεῖόν ἐστιν τῆς τροφῆς καὶ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ 
 ἐνδύματος. ‘The papyrus probably had μὴ μεριμνᾶτε at the beginning of the sentence but 
 differs (1) by the addition of ἀπὸ mpwi... ἕως πρωί, (2) by the use of a different word for σῶμα 
 and probably for ψυχή, though it is possible that τῷ σώματι or τῇ ψυχῇ preceded ἀπὸ πρωί in 
 ], 1, (3) by the omission of the second half of the Saying as recorded in the Gospels. In 
 ll. 1-2 there is not room for ἕ σπέϊρας μήτ]ε. στίολῇ in Il. 5-6 is not quite the word that 
 would be expected, being used in the New Testament for grand ‘robes’ rather than a plain 
 garment, but if the division ry στί is correct στολή cannot be avoided, and with the reading 
 της τί it is difficult to find any suitable word; cf. also e.g. 889 ἦλθέ μοι γυμνὸς... Hydpaca 
 αὐτῶι στολήν. 
 
 7-13. Cf. Matt. vi. 28 καὶ περὶ ἐνδύματος τί μεριμνᾶτε; καταμάθετε τὰ κρίνα τοῦ ἀγροῦ πῶς 
 avédvovow* οὐ κοπιῶσιν οὐδὲ νήθουσιν' λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐδὲ Σολομὼν ἐν πάσῃ τῇ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ περιε- 
 βάλετο ὡς ἕν τούτων, Luke xii, 27 κατανοήσατε τὰ κρίνα πῶς αὐξάνει: ov κοπιᾷ οὐδὲ νήθει' λέγω δὲ 
 ὑμῖν οὐδὲ κιτιλ, and Matt. vi. 26 οὐχ ὑμεῖς μᾶλλον διαφέρετε αὐτῶν (Sc. τῶν πετεινῶν) ; Luke xii. 24 
 πόσῳ μᾶλλον ὑμεῖς διαφέρετε τῶν πετεινῶν. The corresponding passage in the papyrus is not 
 only much shorter, but varies considerably, though to what extent is not quite clear owing 
 to the uncertainty attaching to the restoration of ll. ro—-2. Our reasons for placing Fr. (a) 
 in the particular relation to Fr. (6) indicated on Plate II are the facts (1) that Fr. (a) is from 
 the top of a column which is presumably, judging by the general appearance and lacunae 
 in Fr. (a), Col. i of Fr. (4); (2) that though there is nothing in the external appearance of 
 Fr. (z) to show that it contains any actual ends of lines, the connexion of ll. 8—g and 9-10 
 which results from our proposed combination of the two fragments, τῶν [κρίνων and alvédlver, 
 is so suitable to the context that it is unlikely to be fortuitous. ‘The connexion of ll. 10--1 
 and 11-2 is, however, more difficult. With the readings and punctuation which we have 
 adopted ev in 1. 12 suggests nothing but ἐν[δεῖτε], which does not suit ri, and there are many 
 points of uncertainty. At the end of |. τὸ the letter before | is more like Γ, C, or T than 
 Ε, so that οὐδὲ ν[ήθ]ει (cf. Luke xii. 27) is not very satisfactory. MATION can be read in]. 12, 
 and would in the context be expected to be the termination of a word meaning ‘ garment’ ; 
 but with the reading [ἱμάτιον it is hard to explain the vestiges of the two letters on 1. 11 of 
 Fr. (a), which suit respectively a straight letter such as H, 1, M or N and Δ or, less probably, 
 A or Λ. ἐνδυμάτιον, a rare word not found in the N. T., but not inappropriate here, is 
 possible ; but ἐν ἔχοντες élv8[u|uaridy [ἐστε] is unlikely. It is also possible to connect καὶ ὑμεῖς 
 with ris instead of with the preceding words, but this does not help towards making the 
 restoration of ll. 10-2 easier. These difficulties could be avoided by supposing that Fr. (a) is 
 to be placed much higher up in relation to Fr. (6), but this involves the sacrifice of any 
 direct connexion between Frs. (a) and (4), and Il. 8-9 and g—10 afford very strong grounds 
 for our proposed combination of the two fragments. 
 
 13-5. Cf. Matt. vi. 27 ris δὲ ἐξ ὑμῶν μεριμνῶν δύναται προσθεῖναι ἐπὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν αὐτοῦ πῆχυν 
 
26 THE -OXVYRAYNCHUSSPALYERE 
 
 éva;, and Luke xii. 28 τίς δὲ ἐξ ὑμῶν μεριμνῶν δύναται ἐπὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν αὐτοῦ προσθεῖναι πῆχυν ; ; 
 The papyrus version is somewhat shorter, omitting μεριμνῶν and πῆχυν. The position in 
 which this Saying is found in the papyrus is also slightly different from that in the Gospels, 
 where it immediately precedes instead of following the verse about the κρίνα. In 1. 13 προσ- 
 Gen) could be read in place of προσθζεινη : there does not seem to be room for προσθείη |. 
 
 15-6. Cf. Matt. vi. 31-3. μὴ οὖν μεριμνήσητε λέγοντες, τί ΤΥ ΠΩΣ ἢ τί πίωμεν ἢ τί ΠΡΟ. 
 βαλώμεθα. .. οἶδεν γὰρ 6 πατὴρ ὑμῶν 6 οὐράνιος ὅτι χρήζετε τούτων ἁπάντων. ζητεῖτε δὲ πρῶτον τὴν 
 βασιλείαν καὶ τὴν δικαιοσύνην αὐτοῦ καὶ ταῦτα πάντα προστεθήσεται ὑμῖν, and Luke xii. 29--21, which 
 is nearly identical and proceeds μὴ φοβοῦ τὸ μικρὸν ποίμνιον ὅτι εὐδόκησεν ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν δοῦναι 
 ὑμῖν τὴν βασιλείαν. The papyrus has the corresponding idea but expressed with extreme 
 conciseness. aird|s δ᾽ώσει, unless δώσει is an error for δώσω, raises a difficulty, for we should 
 expect ὁ πατήρ or ὁ θεός. Apparently αὐτός refers back to πατήρ or θεός in the column pre- 
 ceding, or the author of the Gospel may have here incorporated from some source a eee 
 without its context which would have explained αὐτός (cf. 654. 32): 
 
 17-23. For the question ch John XIV. 19 ede ἔτι μικρὸν καὶ ὁ κόσμος τε οὐκέτι θεωρεῖ: ὑμεῖς 
 δὲ θεωρεῖτέ pe’ ὅτι ἐγὼ ζῶ καὶ ὑμεῖς ζήσετε... .. λέγει αὐτῷ ᾿Ιοὔδας.... κύριε, τί γέγονεν ὅτι ἡμῖν μέλλεις 
 ἐμφανίζειν σεαυτὸν καὶ οὐχὶ τῷ κόσμῳ ; ΠΕΣ ... ἐάν τις ἀγαπᾷ pe τὸν λόγον μου τηρήσει καὶ 6 
 πατήρ μου ἀγαπήσει αὐτόν, καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐλευσόμεθα. ‘The answer ascribed in the papyrus to 
 Jesus bears a striking resemblance to the answer made to a similar question in a passage of 
 the Gospel according to the Egyptians which is referred to several times by Clement of 
 Alexandria, and which is reconstructed by Harnack (Chronol. i. p. 13) thus :--τῇ Σαλώμῃ 
 πυνθανομένῃ μέχρι πότε θάνατος ἰσχύσει εἶπεν ὁ κύριος" μέχρις ἂν ὑμεῖς αἱ γυναῖκες τίκτετε. ἦλθον yap 
 καταλῦσαι τὰ ἔργα τῆς θηλείας. καὶ ἡ Σαλώμη ἔφη αὐτῷ" καλῶς οὖν ἐποίησα μὴ τεκοῦσα ; ὁ δὲ κύριος 
 ἠμείψατο λέγων: πᾶσαν φάγε βοτάνην, τὴν δὲ πικρίαν ἔχουσαν μὴ φάγῃς. πυνθανομένης δὲ τῆς Σαλώμης 
 πότε γνωσθήσεται τὰ περὶ ὧν ἤρετο ἔφη ὁ κύριος" ὅταν οὖν τὸ τῆς αἰσχύνης ἔνδυμα πατήσητε καὶ ὅταν 
 γένηται τὰ δύο ἕν, καὶ τὸ ἄρρεν μετὰ τῆς θηλείας οὔτε ἄρρεν οὔτε θῆλυ. Cf. 11 Clem. 12. 2 
 ἐπερωτηθεὶς γὰρ αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος ὑπό τινος πότε ἥξει αὐτοῦ ἡ βασιλεία εἶπεν ὅταν ἔσται τὰ δύο ἕν, καὶ τὸ 
 ἔξω ὡς τὸ ἔσω, καὶ τὸ ἄρσεν μετὰ τῆς θηλείας οὔτε ἄρσεν οὔτε θῆλυ, Both ὅταν ἐκδύσησθε καὶ μὴ 
 αἰσχυνθῆτε and ὅταν τὸ τῆς αἰσχύνης ἔνδυμα πατήσητε express the same idea, a mystical reference 
 to Gen. iii. 7, ‘And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and they were not 
 ashamed,’ the meaning in either case being that Christ’s kingdom on earth would not be 
 manifested until man had returned to the state of innocence which existed before the Fall, 
 and in which sexual ideas and relations had no place. The chief differences between 
 the two passages are (1) the setting, the questioner being in the Gospel according to 
 the Egyptians Salome, and in the papyrus the disciples, (2) the simpler language of the 
 papyrus as contrasted with the more literary and elaborated phrase τὸ τῆς αἰσχύνης ἔνδυμα 
 πατήσητε, (3) the absence in the papyrus of the Encratite tendency found in the earlier part 
 of the quotation from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. On the relation between 
 the two see p. 27. Whether the papyrus continued after αἰσχυνθῆτε with something 
 like καὶ ὅταν γένηται τὰ δύο ἕν, κιτιλ., iS Of Course uncertain, but Fr. (4), which probably 
 belongs to the bottom of this column, is concerned with something different. 
 
 25. φ])ωτεινῷ : the corrector’s spelling φωτεινός is commoner than φωτινός. Perhaps 
 this passage was parallel to Matt. vi. 22-3 (Sermon on the Mount) ἐὰν ἢ ὁ ὀφθαλμός cov 
 ἁπλοῦς, ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου φωτεινὸν ἐ ἔσται, κιτιλ.; οἵ, Luke xi. 34-6. But the papyrus must 
 in any case have differed largely in its language, and x|dcpe at ἴῃ], 26 suggests a Johannine 
 colouring. 
 
 30. “The A of ΛΕΙ projects somewhat, but since the whole column trends to the 
 left, probably no importance is to be attached to the circumstance; cf. the initial ὃ in 1. 47. 
 
 42-6, With the remains of these lines Bartlet well compares Luke xi. 52 οὐαὶ 
 
655. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 27 
 
 ὑμῖν τοῖς νομικοῖς ὅτι ἤρατε (D and some MSS. ἐκρύψατε) τὴν κλεῖδα (Ὁ κλεῖν) τῆς γνώσεως" 
 αὐτοὶ (D and some MSS. καὶ αὐτοί) οὐκ εἰσήλθατε καὶ τοὺς εἰσερχομένους (1) εἰσπορευομένουςῚ) 
 ἐκωλύσατε, ON which our restorations are based. If they are in the right direction, the 
 papyrus agreed with D in having ἐκρύψατε in place of ἤρατε, but with the other uncials 
 against D in having a participle of εἰσέρχεσθαι not of εἰσπορεύεσθαι, while D’s reading 
 καὶ αὐτοί is too long for 1. 43. But the papyrus certainly differed from all the MSS. 
 in 1. 46 and probably in 1. 42, where τῆς γνώσεως ε makes a line of only r1 letters, which is 
 a little too short, so that perhaps either a different word from γνώσεως (ἀληθείας ἢ) or 
 a compound of ἐκρύψατε is to be supplied. 
 
 51. Below KO| is what seems to be an accidental spot of ink rather than part of 
 a letter. 
 
 655 seems to belong to a Gospel which was closely similar in point of form to the 
 Synoptists. The narrator speaks in the third person, not in the first, and the portion preserved 
 consists mainly of discourses which are to a large extent parallel to passages in Matthew 
 and Luke, especially the latter Gospel, which alone seems to be connected with ll. 41 sqq. 
 The papyrus version is, as a rule, shorter than the corresponding passages in the Gospels ; 
 where it is longer (ll. 1-3) the expansion does not alter the meaning in any way. The 
 chief interest lies in the question of the disciples and its answer, both of which so closely 
 correspond to a passage in the Gospel according to the Egyptians and the uncanonical 
 Gospel or collection of Sayings used by the author of the Second Epistle of Clement, that 
 the Gospel of which 655 is a fragment clearly belongs to the same sphere of thought. 
 Does it actually belong to either of those works, which, though Harnack regards them 
 as one and the same, are, we think, more probably to be considered distinct? In the 
 Gospel according to the Egyptians Salome was the questioner who occasioned the 
 remarkable Saying beginning ὅταν τὸ τῆς αἰσχύνης ἔνδυμα πατήσητε, and it is much more 
 likely that 655 presents a different version of the same incident in another Gospel, than 
 a repetition of the Salome question in a slightly different form in another part of the 
 Gospel according to the Egyptians. Nor is 655 likely to be the actual Gospel which 
 the author of II Clem. was quoting. It is unfortunate that owing to the papyrus breaking 
 off at αἰσχυνθῆτε there is no security that ὅταν γένηται τὰ δύο ἕν, or at any rate something very 
 similar, did not follow, and the omission in the Clement passage of a phrase corresponding 
 to ll. 22-3 may be a mere accident. But the fact that the question in II Clem. is worded 
 somewhat differently (πότε ἥξει ἡ βασιλεία), and is put into the mouth of ms instead of 
 the disciples, as in 655, is a good reason for rejecting the hypothesis that the two works 
 were identical. 
 
 The evidence of 655 as to its origin being thus largely of a negative character, we do 
 not propose to discuss in detail whether it is likely to belong to any of the other known 
 Apocryphal Gospels. There are several to which it might be assigned, but direct evidence 
 is wanting. If the Gospel according to the Hebrews were thought of, it would be necessary 
 to suppose that the resemblances in 655 to Matthew and Luke did not imply dependence 
 upon them. In its relation to the Canonical Gospels 655 somewhat resembles 654, and 
 the view that 655 was, though no doubt at least secondary, dependent not on Matthew 
 and Luke, but upon some other document, whether behind the Synoptists or merely parallel 
 to them, is tenable, but is less likely to commend itself to the majority of critics than the 
 opposite hypothesis that 655. 1-16 is ultimately an abridgement of Matthew and Luke 
 with considerable alterations. In either case the freedom with which the author of this 
 Gospel handles the material grouped by St. Matthew and St. Luke under the Sermon 
 
28 THE OXNVRAYNOB OSAP AL id 
 
 on the Mount is remarkable. The Gospel from which 655 comes is likely to have been 
 composed in Egypt before a.p. 150, and to have stood in intimate relation to the Gospel 
 according to the Egyptians and the uncanonical source used by the author of II Clem. 
 Whether it was earlier or later than these is not clear. The answer to the question 
 put by the disciples in 655 is couched in much simpler and clearer language than that 
 of the corresponding sentence in the answer to Salome recorded in the Gospel according 
 to the Egyptians, the point of which is liable to be missed, while the meaning of 
 655. 22-3 is unmistakable. But the greater directness of the allusion to Gen. iii. 7 
 in 655 can be explained either by supposing that the version in the Gospel according 
 to the Egyptians is an Encratite amplification of that in 655, or, almost but not quite as 
 well, in our opinion, by the view that the expression in 6565 is a toning down of the more 
 striking phrase ὅταν τὸ τῆς αἰσχύνης ἔνδυμα πατήσητε. As for the priority of 655 to the 
 source of the uncanonical quotations in II Clem., the evidence is not sufficient to form any 
 conclusion. 
 
 There remains the question of the likelihood of a genuine element in the story 
 of which we now have three versions, though how far these are independent of each 
 other is uncertain. As is usual with Agrapha (cf. p. 21), the most diverse opinions have 
 been held about the two previously known passages. Zahn (Gesch. d. NZ. Kan. ii. 
 Ρ. 635) defends the version in the Gospel according to the Egyptians from the charge 
 of Encratitism, and is inclined to admit its genuineness. Resch on the other hand 
 (Agrapha, p. 386), while accepting the version of Clement, vehemently attacks the other. 
 Ropes again takes a different view, and though he thinks (Dze Spriiche Jesu, p. 131) 
 that ὅταν... πατήσητε is too ascetic for Jesus, is disposed to believe in a kernel of 
 genuineness in the story. The criticisms of both Zahn and Ropes, however, are now 
 somewhat discounted by the circumstance that they took the phrase corresponding to 
 655. 22-3 to mean ‘when you put off the body,’ i.e. ‘die,’ whereas the evidence of the 
 parallel in the papyrus gives the words a slightly different turn, and brings them more nearly 
 into line with the following sentences ὅταν γένηται τὰ δύο ἕν, xrA. But Zahn would, 
 nevertheless, seem in the light of the new parallel to be right in maintaining that the 
 passage in the Gospel according to the Egyptians does not go much further in an Encratite 
 direction than, e.g. Matt. xxii. 30 and Luke xx. 34-6. The occurrence of another 
 version of the story is an important additional piece of evidence in defence of the view that 
 it contains at least some elements of genuineness, and a special interest attaches both 
 to the form of the Saying in 655. 22-3 on account of the clearness of its language, 
 and to its context, in which other matter closely related to the Canonical Gospels is found 
 in immediate proximity. All this lends fresh value to what is, on account of the far- 
 reaching problems connected with it, one of the most important and remarkable, and, since 
 the discovery of 655, one of the better attested, of the early Agrapha. 
 
 656. GENESIS. 
 Height 24-4 cm. PraTE 11 (¢ verso). 
 
 Parts of four leaves from a papyrus codex of the book of Genesis in the 
 Septuagint version. The MS. was carefully written in round upright uncials 
 of good size and decidedly early appearance, having in some respects more 
 
656. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 29 
 
 affinity with types of the second century than of the third. To the latter, 
 however, the hand is in all probability to be assigned, though we should be 
 inclined to place it in the earlier rather than the later part of the century; in 
 any case this may rank with the original Oxyrhynchus Logia (1) and the frag- 
 ments of St. Matthew’s and St. John’s Gospels (2, 208) as one of the most 
 ancient Greek theological books so far known, and it has some claim to be 
 considered the oldest of the group. Another mark of age is perhaps to be 
 recognized in the absence of the usual contractions for θεός, κύριος, &c., but this 
 may of course be no more than an individual peculiarity. The only abbreviation 
 that occurs is the horizontal stroke instead of v, employed to save space at 
 the end of along line. Both high and middle (Il. 13, 19) stops are found, but 
 are sparingly used: more often a pause is marked by a slight blank space. 
 A few alterations and additions have been made by a second hand, which seems 
 also to be responsible for the numeration in the centre of the upper margin of 
 each page. 
 
 The evidence of so early a text is of particular value for the book of Genesis, 
 where the uncial MSS. are most weakly represented. The only first-class 
 MS. available for comparison practically throughout the parts covered by the 
 papyrus, namely, xiv. 21-3, xv. 5-9, xix. 32-xx. II, xxiv. 28-47, xxvii. 32-3, 
 40-1, is the Codex Alexandrinus (A). The Vatican and Ambrosian codices do 
 not begin till later in the book, the Sinaiticus (&) is defective except for occa- 
 sional verses in the twenty-fourth chapter, the readings of D, the Cottonian MS., 
 which for the most part survives only in a collation (=J), are unascertainable in 
 XX. 4-II and xxiv. 28-30, and the Bodleian Genesis (E) fails us in xxiv. The 
 result of a collation, where possible, with these MSS., is to show that the 
 papyrus, while seldom supporting E, does not side continuously with either δ, A, 
 or D, though, of course, too little of δὲ remains for a satisfactory comparison. As 
 a general rule the readings favoured by.the new witness are the shorter ones ; 
 cf. e.g. notes on Il. 16, 27, 47-8, 53, 62, 67, 74, 129, 138-9, 154, 183, 185, 188, as 
 against ll. 42, 81,144,163. Not infrequently variants occur otherwise attested only 
 by cursive MSS., though here too no consistent agreement can be traced, and the 
 mixed character of the cursive texts is further emphasized. The papyrus is 
 certainly pre-Lucianic, but it has two readings characteristic of Lagarde’s Luci- 
 anic group (=Holmes Ig, 108, 118), γένους for rod γένους in xix. 38 and the 
 omission of ἐκεῖθεν (with the Hebrew) in xxiv. 38. Readings common to this 
 group and other cursives are ἐκείνῃ for ταύτῃ in xix. 33, and ἄνδρες for ἄνθρωποι in 
 xx. 8. On the other hand, the papyrus opposes the Lucianic group in the 
 addition of τὴν νύκτα ἐκείνην in xix. 35, and the omission of ἐφοβήθην... αὐτήν in 
 xx. 2, in the one case against, in the other with, the Hebrew. The number of 
 
30 LAE OXVRAYNCHUS PALEY RE 
 
 variants which are altogether new, considering the scope of the fragments, is con- 
 siderable ; see ll. 48, 55, 56, 81, 114, 154, 155, 160,163,181. A peculiar feature is 
 the tendency to omit the word κύριος when applied to the Deity; this occurs in 
 no fewer than four passages (ll. 17, 122, 155, 166), in three of which (Il. 17, 122, 
 166) the omission has been made good by the second hand. A blank space was 
 originally left where the word occurred in 1.17. In the version of Aquila the 
 Tetragrammaton was written in Hebrew letters, and this peculiarity reappears in 
 a few Hexaplaric MSS. of the Septuagint. The papyrus offers the first example 
 of a similar tendency to avoid the sacred name in a text otherwise independent 
 of the Aquila tradition. 
 
 The collation with the chief uncial codices given below is based on the 
 edition of Swete, while the occasional references to the cursives are derived from 
 Holmes ; for some additional information we are indebted to Mr. N. M°Lean. 
 
 (a) Verso xiv. 21-3. Recto xv. 5-9. 
 [ABpap dos] μοι rovs avdpals 10 [σπ͵]ερμα aloly [και ἐπιστευσεν 
 την δὲ ἱιπποὶν λαβε σεαύυτω [4Ἰβραμ τω θεω [kat ελογισθη 
 [εἶπεν de ABpalu προς βασιλεα αὐτὼ εἰς δικαιοσίυνην εἰπεν 
 [Σοδομων εκ]τε {}|νὼ τὴν χει] δὲ προς avrov. εγίω o θεος o εξα 
 
 5 [pa μου προς tlov θεον τον U yayov σε εκ χώρίας Χαλδαιὼων woo 
 ἱψιστον os εκτισεν Tov ovpa 15 TE dovvat co. τηῖν ynv TavTnv 
 [vov kat τὴν y|nv εἰ ἀπὸ σπαρ [κἸληρονομῆσαι" [ειπεν de δεσπο 
 ἱτιου ews σφ)]αιρωτηρος ὃ Τὰ κυριε KATA TL γ[νωῶσομαι OTL 
 [ποδηματος] λημψομαι [κ]ληρονομησω αἰυτὴν εἰπεν 
 
 [δε αἸυτω. λαβε plot δαμαλιν τριε 
 
 20 ἰτιἸζουσαν και αἰγα [τριετιζουσαν 
 
 (ὁ) Verso xix. 32-Xx. 2. Recto xx. 2-II. 
 μίε μ]: ἊΝ 
 μετ αὐτου και εξαναστησω [de ἀμειβελεχ βἸ]ασιλευς Γερα 
 
 μὲν εκ Tov ἱπατρος ἡμῶν σπερ ᾿ ὃ z ¥ 
 μα εποτισαῖν δε τον πατερα 5 [pov και ἐλαβεν τῇην Σαρρα Kat 
 
 25 αὐτῶν οἰνοῖν εν TY) VUKTL EKEL 
 
 [εἰσηλθεν ὁ θεος] προς ApiBe 
 vn Ka{t] εἰσελίθουσα ἡ πρεσβυτε AEX Baie 4 προ. ΠΡῸΣ 
 [πεν ἰδου ov απ]οθνησκεις πίε 
 
30 
 
 40 
 
 48 
 
 5O 
 
 55 
 
 656. 
 
 pa εκοιμηθὴη [μετὰ Tov πατρος 
 τὴν νυκτὰ εκεινην καὶ οὐκ εἰ 
 
 δὴ εν τω κοιμηΐθηναι αὐτὴν Kal 
 ανασ[τ]ηναι εγίενετο δὲ τὴ emrav 
 [ρ]ιον Kat εἰπεν [n πρεσβυτερα 
 
 ™ νεωτερα ἴδίου εκοιμηἼθην εχθες 
 μετα Tov πατρίος ἡμων] πίο]τι 
 σωμεν αὑτον οἷινον Καὶ τὴ]ν vu 
 KTa@ [τ]αζυτην] Kale εἰσελθουσ]α κοίι 
 μηθητι μετ αἰυτου και e€ava 
 στησωμεν εκ [TOV πατρὸς ἡμῶν 
 ἰσίπερμα ἐποτισΐαν de καὶ εν TH 
 νυκτι εκεινη τίον πατερα] alu 
 
 τῶν olvoy καὶ εἰισελθου]σα ἡ [ve 
 ὠτερα εκοιμηίθηὴ μετα του πα 
 Tpos αὑτῆς τηῖν vuKTa εκἸ]εϊινην 
 Kat οὐκ εἰδὴ εἶν τω Κοιμη 
 [Oln[vale καὶ αναστηναι καὶ συν 
 [eA]aBov αἱ d[vo θυγατερες Λωτ 
 εκ τίο]ν matpos αἰυτων καὶ ετεκεν 
 n πίρεϊσβυτερα υἱιον και εκα 
 λείσε] ονομα αὐτου ωαβ εκ του 
 πατίρ]ος μου ουτίος πατηρ Μωαβι 
 τῶν ews TNS σΐημερον ἡμερας 
 ετεκεν δὲ και ἡ νεωτερὰ VLOV 
 
 και [εἸκαλεσεν [TO ονομα αὐτοῦ 
 Aplplayv υἵος γίενους μου ov 
 
 τος πατὴρ Applavitov ews 
 
 Τὴ» ἡμέρας ταυτὴς 
 
 [εκινη]σεν δὲ εκειθεν [A]Bpaalu 
 [ers] γην προς λιβα και] ὠκη[σε]ν 
 [αἸνα μεσον Καδίη)ς καί] ava pe 
 ἰσο]ν Soup και παρ[ωκ]ησεῖν ev Ie 
 ο [papot]s εἰπεν δὲ [A]Bpalap] περι 
 
 THEOLOGICAL 
 
 ο 
 
 75 
 
 80 
 
 85 
 
 go 
 
 95 
 
 FRAGMENTS 31 
 
 pl της ‘yuvatkos| ns edaPes av Ϊ 
 
 ApiBerex de] οὐχ ἡψατο avtnr[s 
 
 [ 
 [τη δὲ ἐστιν συν]ωκηκυϊα ανδρίι 
 ἱ 
 [ εθνος αγνοουν 
 
 και εἰπεν κυριε]" 
 και διίκαιον απΊολεις οὐκ avTos 
 μοι εἶπεν αδεϊλφη μου εστιν 
 
 Kat αὐτίη μοι εἰπὶεν ἀδελῴος μου 
 ἐστιν εν καθαρ]α καρδια καὶ εἶν δικαι 
 [οσἸυνίη χειρῶν εἸποιησα τοῦτο 
 
 [εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῶ] ο θεος καθ υπι7ο] 
 [καγω εγνων οἦτι εν καθαρα καὶρ 
 ἰ 
 
 δια [ἐποιησας TlovTo Kat εφισα 
 αν 
 
 μην κίαγω σοὺ τοὴν pn αμαρτειν σε 
 
 etls ἐμ[ε evexev] τουτου οὐκ adn 
 
 [ 
 1 
 
 [κ]α σε [αἁψασθαι avjrns νυν de απο 
 [ 
 
 do|s τίην γυναικα τ]ω avOpwre o 
 [τι] πρί[οφητης eor|w Kat πίρ)]οσευζξε 
 [ται περι σου Kat ζη]σὴ et δὲ μὴ a 
 ποδιδως γνωθι οἦτι ἀποθανὴη 
 
 συ και παντα Ta ola και wpO[pic lev 
 Αμιβελεχ το] πρωΐ κα[ι] εκα[λε]σεῖν 
 πανταὰς τοὺς malas αὐτου] Kale 
 
 ἐλάλησεν παντ]α TH ρηματα Tav 
 
 σαν δὲ παντες οἱ αἹνδρες o[piodpa 
 και ekadeoev Αμ]ειβελεχ τον 
 
 [4 βρααμ] και εἰπεν avTw τι Tov 
 Το] ἐποιησας ἡμίι)ν μὴ τι ἡμὰρ 
 Toluev εἰς σε οτι emnyayes| em ε 
 με και ert την βασιλείαν μου αἷμαρ 
 
 ἰ 
 [ 
 ἱ 
 [ 
 [ 
 [τα εἰς τα ὠτὰ avTwoly εφοβηθη 
 [ 
 | 
 L 
 [ 
 [ 
 
 [Tlav μεγαλην epyor o ovdelt]s πίοι 
 
 100 [noe πεποιηκας μοι εἰπεν dle 
 
 [A]uetBerex τω ABpaap τι ενιΐδων 
 
32 
 
 (c) 
 
 110 Κα 
 
 115 
 
 120 
 
 130 
 
 THE OXYRAYNCHUS “PAPYRE 
 
 [Salppas της γυνα[ζικοὶς αὐτου 
 [ade]Apn μου εσ[τι]ν αἰπε]στειλεν 
 
 Recto. xxiv. 28-37; 
 νθ 
 δραμουσα n παις απηγγειλεῖν 
 
 εἰς TOV OLKOY TNS μῆτρος αὑτῆς 
 τα 
 κατα ρήματα ταυτα τη δε PeBex 
 
 [α]δελίφ]ος nv ὦ ovopa Λαβαν 
 kat εδραμεν AaBav προς τον αν 
 θρωπον εξω emt της πηγῆς Και 
 εγενετ[ο] ἡνικα εἰδὲν τα ενωτιὰ 
 και Ta Wedla περι Tas χειρας TNS 
 αδελῴφης avrou και ofrle ἡκου 
 σεν Ta ρηματα Ρεβεΐκ]κας της 
 αδίεήλφης [avtjov λεγουσὴης ov 
 τως λελαίλη]κεν μοι ο ανθρωποῖς 
 και ndOev [πρ]ος τον ἀνθρωπον ε 
 στηκοτος αὑτοῦ ETL τῶν Καμὴ 
 λων emt της THYNS Και εἰπεῖν αὖ 
 τῶ [δΊευρο εἰσελθε ευλογητος κ[υριος 
 ἵνα τι εστηκας εξω εγὼ δε ητῖοι 
 Haka τὴν οἰκιαν Kat τοπον ταις 
 καμ[ηλΊοις εἰσηλθεν de ο ἀνθρω 
 πΊος εἰς Tiny οἰικια]ν και ἀαπεσαξεν 
 
 Tas καμήλους και] εδωκεν αχυΐρα 
 
 [7 
 | 
 [Kat χορτ]ασματα ταις Καμηλοιΐς 
 [και υδ)ωρ τοις ποσιν αὐτου και τοις 
 [ἰποσι] των ανΐδρων τω]ν με[τ] afv 
 [του και πα]ρεθΐηκεν 
 
 3 lines lost 
 
 105 
 
 150 
 
 T55 
 
 t60 
 
 165 
 
 [pte 
 
 AyD 
 
 [εἸποιησας τοῦτο εἰπεν δὲ ABplaap 
 [εἰπα yap [αἹ]ρα οὐκ εστιν θεοσεβεια 
 
 [εἰν τω Tomw τούτω EME τίε ἀπὸ 
 ἐγοίυ]σι 
 [κτεινΊουσιν ενεκεν τῆς γίυναι 
 
 Verso xxiv. 28--47. 
 ξ 
 
 [πο]ρευση Kat εἰς τὴν φυϊλη]ν μου 
 κα]. λημψη γυϊν]αικα τω viw μου 
 elma δὲ τω κυΐρι]ω μου μὴ ποτε 
 ov πορευθησεται [γ]υνὴ μετ εμου 
 καὶ εἰπεν μοι o θεος wm ευηρεστη 
 σα εναντίον αὐτου AUTOS απὸ 
 στελει τον ἀγγελον AUTOU με 
 τία] σου και [ ε]] εὐοδωσει την odov 
 σ[ζο]ν και [λημψη γυναίι]κα τω υἵω 
 μίο]υ εκ της φυλὴης μου ἡ εκ του 
 οἰκου του πατρος μου τοτε αθω 
 oS ἐσὴ απὸ TNS ἀρᾶς μου ἡνικὰα 
 γα[ρ] εαν εἰσελθης εἰς THY ἐμὴν 
 φυΐλ]ην kat μη σοι δωσιν και eon αθω 
 o[s] απο του ορκου pov και ελ[θ]ων 
 ἰσηἹμερον emit τὴην πηγὴν εἰιΐπα κυ 
 o Ojeos του κυριου μου Α,βρ[αα)μ ει συ 
 [ευο]δο[ε]ς τὴν οδον μου ἡ νυν] εγίω 
 
 olpevopalt] ἐπ αὐτὴν id jou ε[γ]ω εφ[ε 
 στΊηκα emt της [π]ηγης του [υδατος 
 
 [70 
 
 [αι dle Ovyarepes των avOplworov 
 [Tn |s mroAews εξελευσοντίαι αντλη 
 [ 
 
 σαι] vdwp Kal εσται ἡ παρθὔενος ἡ 
 eyo 
 [εα]ν εἰπὼ ποτισον με pelLKpov Vv 
 
 [δωρ] εκ] τίης υδριας] σου [και evry 
 [Hol πιε συ και ταις καμήλοις Gov υἹ 
 
656. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 33 
 
 135 [macs ABpaap] eywelpr..... [δρευσομαι avt|n [ἡ γυνὴ nv ητοι 
 hoa eye ae τον] κυριον μου σφοδρα [Macey κυριος τω θεραποντι αὐτου 
 και υψωθη [και] εδίωκεν αυὐτω [Ἰσαὰκ και] ev τουτζω γνώσομαι o 
 προβατα καϊι μοσχοὺυς και 180 [τι πεποιη]κας ελεζος τω [κυρίω 
 > ἀργύριον και πίαιδισκας και [μου Αβρααμ] και eyeveTo εν TH 
 140 [κ]αμη[λο]υς kat ovlous Καὶ ETEKE [συντελεσαι pe] λαλουντὰ εν TNH 
 
 [Σ᾿ αρ]ρα [ἡ γυνη Tov κυριου pov vioy [διανοια] ευ[θυς] Ple|Bexxa εξεπο 
 [eva τω κυριω μου μ]είτ]α το [γηρα [pevero] εχ[ουσ]α την υδίρι]αν επι 
 
 [cat αυτον Kat εδωκ]εν αὐτω παν 185 [Tor ὠμΊων και KjalreBy επ]ι τίην 
 [τα οσα ny avTw Kat ωἹρκισεῖν με ὁ [πηγη]ν και v[dpevoaro ειἰπα de αὖ 
 145 ἰκυριος μου λεγὼν ov] λημψὴη [yu ἰτη πο]τισον [με και σπευσασα κα 
 
 [varka Tw viw μου απο των] Ovyalre [ 
 
 2 lines lost 190 [colv ποτίιω Kal ἐπιον Kal Tas Kan 
 
 θειλεὴν την [vdptav ad εαυτης Kat 
 [ρων τῶν Xavavatwy ev] ots [ε εἶπεν mele σν και τας Καμηλους 
 [λου]ς μου [ἐποτισεν Και ηρωτησα 
 
 [αυτην] και 
 
 (4) Recto xxvil. 32-3. Verso xxvii. 40-1. 
 υ]ιο[ς ] εκλυΐσεις 
 εξ]εστη ἴδε τρα]χηλ[ου 
 195 μεγαλη]ν σφίοδρα 200 τῇω ἴακίωβ 
 θηρἸ]ευσίας ευἸλογίησεν 
 εἰσενεγκας [μοι auTo|v εἶιπεν 
 
 1. [ABpap δος] is somewhat short for the lacuna, but to add προς would make the 
 supplement rather long. 
 
 4. The deletion of « may be due to either the first or second hand; exrevo AD, 
 
 13. προς avrov: 80 most cursives; avr» AD, The ε of εγίω seems to have been 
 altered from some other letter. 
 
 16. [κ]ληρονομησαι: so A; KA, aurny 7). 
 
 17. A blank space, sufficient for four letters, was left by the original scribe between ra 
 and κατα, and in this κυριε was inserted by the second hand; cf. ll. 122, 155, and 166. 
 
 25. εκεινη : So a number of cursives, including the ‘ Lucianic’ group ; ravry7 ADE. 
 
 24%. αὐτῆς which is read after marpos by ADE seems to have been omitted by the 
 
 D 
 
34 THEVOXYRAYNCHUS *PALRTRE 
 
 papyrus, the line being quite long enough without it. On the other hand τὴν νυκτα εκεινὴν 
 is omitted in D. 
 
 28. edn: the same spelling for ne recurs in 1. 43; eyyw D in both places. 
 
 32. τὴ vewrepa: SO the Codex Caesareus and several cursives; πρὸς την vewrepav ADE. 
 
 eyes has been added at the end of the line by the second hand. 
 
 36. μ of per has been altered from a. 
 
 37-8. ex... [σπερμα: so AD; on. εκ του π. nuov E. 
 
 39-43. The position of the small fragment at the ends of these lines is made 
 practically certain by the recto (cf. note on |. 81); but the scanty vestiges in 1. 42 do 
 not suit particularly well and the reading adopted is very problematical. Moreover above 
 the line between the supposed a and ἡ is a curved mark which does not suggest any 
 likely letter and remains unexplained. One cursive (108) has καὶ ἡ vewrepa, but there 
 is no ground for attributing this to the papyrus. ; 
 
 42. τηῖν νυκτα εκ] ινην: om. ADE. The papyrus reading is found in the cursives 
 56 (margin), 74, 106, 130, 134, 135. 
 
 43. «067: cf. 1. 28, note. 
 
 47. There would be room for two or three more letters in this line. 
 
 47-8. exane| oe] ovowa: εκαλεσεν to ονομα ADE. ‘There is not sufficient room in the 
 lacuna for the usual ν ἐφελκυστικόν, still less for ro. 
 
 48. Aeyovoa which is read after Μωαβ by ADE was certainly omitted by the papyrus 
 (so Jerome), the passage being thus quite parallel with the explanation of the name Appav 
 in the following verse. 
 
 53. νιὸς γίενους: so the ‘ Lucianic’ cursives ; Oo vlos TOU γένους A; vLos TOU γ. 7 viov του 
 γ. 
 
 55. τῆς ἡμέρας ταυτης: τῆς σήμερον ἡμέρας ADE. The rest of the line was left blank, 
 a new chapter commencing at I. 56. 
 
 56. [εκινη͵σεν de: και εκινησεν ADE. 
 
 57. προς Ba: SO AD; ews λιβα E. 
 
 62. A has ore before αδελῴη, but or: is omitted, as in the papyrus, by Dand E. After 
 ἐστιν the papyrus omits the second half of the verse εφοβηθη yap eurew (ore) γυνὴ pov: εστιν 
 μὴ ποτε αποκτεινῶσιν αὐτὸν οἱ avdpes τῆς πολεως δι αὑτὴν (ADE), as do the cursives 15 (first 
 hand), 82, 106, 107, 135. 
 
 th Ἀβειβελεν or Αμιβελεχ is the regular spelling of the name in this text. Αβιμελεχ 
 ADE. 
 
 67. There is evidently not room in the lacuna for A’s reading εἰπεν αὐτω wdov ov 
 αποθνησκεις, and the omission of avrw is more probable (so DE and many cursives) than that 
 of ov (om. E). 
 
 74. E inserts ors before αδελῴη here and αδελῴος in 1]. 75. 
 
 79. καθαρα xa pais so A; καρδια καθαρα E. 
 
 80. εφισαμ Inv : εφείσαμην A, εφησαμην E. 
 
 81. Kayo (eyo AE) may have been merely repeated here Fath ]. 79, but, as Mr. McLean 
 points out, it is supported by the Hebrew and may well be a genuine reading. The other 
 letters on this fragment (ll. 80-5) suit so exactly that there can be no reasonable doubt 
 that it is rightly placed here, although there is also a slight difficulty with regard to 
 the verso. 
 
 auaprev, the reading of the first hand, is that of AE. 
 
 86. (rion: SOA; Qyow E. 
 
 93- a\ySpes: so a number of cursives; ἀνθρωποι AE. 
 
 104. τίε: SOA; δε E. 
 
656. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 35 
 
 105. The reading of the interlinear insertion is very uncertain, but the alteration 
 apparently concerns the termination of the verb, and it seems more probable that 
 αποκτεινουσι Was corrected to amoxrevovor than vice versa. amoxrevovot AE; αποκτεινουσι Occurs 
 in the cursive 72; cf. ]. 165, note. 
 
 10g. The reading of A here is exactly parallel to that of the papyrus, ra after 
 κατα having been originally omitted and supplied by an early corrector. WDE are 
 deficient. 
 
 112. τῆς πηγῆς: τὴν πηγη A. The genitive seems to have come in from the 
 next verse. 
 
 113. evdev: wev A. 
 
 114. περι: emu A, ἐν ταῖς χερσί a number of the cursives. 
 
 122. x\vpios has been added at the end of the line by the second hand: xs AND. 
 
 123. ητ[οιμακα: so ND; nromaca A. 
 
 126. anecaglev: SOND; ἐπεσαξεν A. 
 
 129. The papyrus agrees with A in omitting νέψασθαι which ND add after vdwp. 
 
 135-6. The reading of the papyrus here cannot be determined; NA have κυριος 
 δε ευὐλογησεν, D [ks clvodwoer, κυριος δὲ ev|Aoynoev or εὐοδωσεν τὸν makes the end of |. 135 
 a little long, but a blank space may have been originally left for κυριος as in ll. 122 and 
 126 or δὲ may have been omitted. 
 
 138-9. The papyrus here omits several words and its exact reading is not quite clear. 
 A has προβατα και μοσχοὺυς Kat apyupiov Kat χρύσιον maidas Kat παιίδισκας καμήλους Kat ovous, 
 D leaves out the καὶ after μοσχους, transposes apyvpiov and χρυσιον and inserts καὶ before 
 maidas. It is just possible that the papyrus agreed with D in reading μοσχους χρυσιον 
 και, but πίαιδας και παιδισκας καὶ can evidently not be got into 1. 139, and more probably 
 both χρυσιον and καὶ wadas were omitted and καὶ was written with each substantive. The 
 words originally missing were probably supplied by the second hand at the bottom of 
 the page, for opposite ]. 139 is the semicircular sign commonly used to mark an omission ; 
 ὉΓ ΕἸ LO. 5: 
 
 141--2. It is quite possible that the lines were divided υἱ]ον and that eva was omitted, 
 as in D, 
 
 143. autov: OF αὐτὴν (D). 
 
 144. The length of the lacuna indicates that the text agreed with D and the second 
 corrector of δὴ in adding zavra before the simple ova of NA. 
 
 152. After pou SAD add exesev. ‘The papyrus here supports the ‘ Lucianic’ cursives 
 19 and 108, 
 
 154. πορευθησεται: SO a number of cursives; πορευθη A, πορευσεται ND. 
 
 [γίυνη: ἢ γυνὴ AND. 
 
 155. 0 θεος : kuptos o Geos A, OM. ο Geos ND. 
 
 156. evayttoyv: SO AD and the second corrector of 83 ενωπιον ὃν. 
 
 αποστελει: SOND; εξαποστελει A. 
 
 160. n: και MSS. 
 
 162. απο: SOND; εκ A. 
 
 163. εἰσελθης : ελθης AD. 
 
 την ἐμὴν φυΐλ]ην: so .7); τὴν φυλην μου A. 
 
 164. ov δωσιν: this is the order in many of the cursives; δωσιν σοι AD. και before 
 eon is omitted by D. 
 
 165. opxov: so the cursive 72 (cf. note on ]. 105); ορκισμου NAD. 
 
 166. κιίριε (so NAD) is again due to the second hand; cf. I. 17, note. 
 
 168. ἡ νυν]: there is not room in the lacuna for more than two letters, so qv [νυν] 
 (SAD) is inadmissible. ἢ is found also in the cursives 75 and 106. 
 
 D 2 
 
49 RHE OAV RHYNCH ΟΞ ΕΣ 
 
 169. εφ[εστ]ηκα : cornea SAD; there is an erasure before eornxa in A, and apparently 
 εφεστηκα (which also occurs in several cursives) was the original reading. 
 
 170. της [π͵ηγης : SOND; την πηγην A. 
 
 171. [a dle: 50 .7) ; και αἱ NA. 
 
 172. εξελευσοντΐαι : so AD; exmopevovrat Borne papyrus seems to have had αντλησαι, 
 which is found in some of the cursives; vdpevoacOa, the better supported reading, is 
 too long. 
 
 As [ealy: the papyrus follows the vulgar spelling. ey was originally omitted, and 
 was added by the second hand. 
 
 μεικρον is also the spelling of δ᾿. 
 
 175-6. The reading printed is that of A, which on the whole seems to suit the space 
 best ; but μοι may have been written at the end of |. 175, and the variant of δὴ me καὶ ov ΟΥ̓ 
 of D και ov me is quite possible. 
 
 178. θἤεραποντι αὐτου (SN) seems more likely than εαυτου θεραποντι (AD), for though the 
 supposed 6 may equally well be « the line is already rather long and the lacuna in |. 179 is 
 sufficiently filled with [Ioaax kat}, 
 
 181. ev τω: προ του NA, πριν ἡ D. 
 
 183. [διανοια] : so δὴ ; διάνοια pou AD. 
 
 ev us|: SO NA: καὶ ov .7), 
 
 185. Though the « of «a is not quite certain and still less the a of κ]αίτεβη, the 
 papyrus clearly agreed with AD in omitting aurns which is read after oper by &. 
 
 188. A here has τὴν vdpsav emt τον βραχίονα αὐτῆς ap εαυτὴης και εἰπεν, while 8D omit em 
 τον Bpayiova. The papyrus reading was still shorter, since not more than about 15 letters 
 should stand in the lacuna, and there can be little doubt that avrys was left out, as in some 
 of the cursives. 
 
 189. πέϊιε: 1]. mre. 
 
 192. This line may have been the last of the column, but the recto has one line more. 
 
 657. EPpisTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 
 Height 26-3 cm. 
 
 This considerable fragment of the Epistle to the Hebrews is written on the 
 back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy (668). The text is in 
 broad columns, of which eleven are represented, corresponding to Ch. ii. 14-v. 5, 
 x. 8-xi. 13, and xi. 28-xii. 17, or about one-third of the whole. The columns 
 are numbered at the top, those preserved being according to this numeration 
 47-50, 63-5, 67-9; it is thus evident that the Epistle to the Hebrews was 
 preceded in this MS. by something else, probably some other part of the 
 New Testament. The hand is a sloping uncial of the oval type, but somewhat 
 coarse and irregular, and apparently in the transitional stage between the 
 Roman and Byzantine variety. It is very similar in appearance to the hand 
 of 404, a fragment of the Shepherd of Hermes, of which a facsimile is given in 
 
657. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 37 
 
 P. Oxy. III, Plate iv; and we should attribute it to the first half of the fourth 
 century, while it may well go back to the first quarter. As stated in the introd. 
 to 668, the papyri with which this was found were predominantly of the third 
 century, and it is not likely to have been separated from them by any wide 
 interval. The fact that the strips of cursive documents which were used to 
 patch and strengthen the papyrus before the verso was used are of the third 
 and not the fourth century points to the same conclusion. There is no sign 
 anywhere of a second hand, and such corrections as occur are due to the original 
 scribe, who is responsible for occasional lection signs and the punctuation by 
 means of a double point inserted somewhat freely and not always accurately 
 (cf. e.g. 1. 19); a single point is occasionally substituted. This system of 
 punctuation is remarkable, for it seems to correspond to an earlier division 
 into στίχοι longer than those in extant MSS. and frequently coinciding with 
 the arrangement in the edition of Blass (Halle, 1903). The contractions 
 usual in theological MSS. are found, IC being written for Ἰησοῦς. Orthography 
 is not a strong point, instances of the confusion common at this period between 
 tc and εἰ, ε and a, v and οι, being especially frequent; but apart from minor 
 inaccuracies the text is a good and interesting one. Its chief characteristic 
 is a tendency in Chs. ii-v to agree with B, the Codex Vaticanus, in the omission 
 of unessential words or phrases ; cf. notes on Il. 15, 24, and 60. This gives the 
 papyrus a peculiar value in the later chapters, where B is deficient ; for here too 
 similar omissions are not infrequent (cf. notes on Il. 118, 125, 151, 152, 161, 224), 
 and it is highly probable that they were also found in B, particularly when, as 
 is sometimes the case, D (the Claromontanus, of the sixth century) is on the 
 same side. Of the other MSS. the papyrus is nearest to D (cf. notes on ll. 60, 
 125, 145, 152, 154, 178, 222, 224-6), but the two sometimes part company (cf. 
 notes on ll. 139, 163, 180); only in one doubtful case (note on 1. 168) does it 
 support N against the consensus of the other MSS. Variants peculiar to the 
 papyrus, apart from the omissions already referred to, are noted at ll. 32, 37, 
 106, 115, 156, 162, 227, 229. We give a collation with the Textus Receptus 
 and the text of Westcott and Hort, adding particulars concerning the readings 
 of the principal authorities. 
 
 Colmer 
 μά 
 [καταργησὴ Tov] Το Κρατος €xovTa τοῦ θανατου li. 14 
 [τουτεστι Toly διαβολον : και απαλλαξη Tov 
 [τους οσοι φοβω θ]ανατου δια πανίΐτον τος του (ην 
 
 5 [evoxot noav δου]λειας : ov yap δηπου ayyedov 
 
38 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 [ertAapBaverat] αλλα σπερματος Αβρααμ em 
 [λαμβανεται οθ]εν ὠφιλεν κατα παντὰ τοις ἃ 
 [δελῴοις ομοιωθῆηναι : ἵνα ελεημὼων γενηται 
 [Kat πιστος apxle|pevs Ta προς τον Ov εἰς το ειἰλασ 
 10 [κεσθαι τας apap|tias Tov λαου : εν ὦ yap πέπον 
 [θεν αὐτος πιρασήθεις : δυναται τοῖς πιραΐζομε 
 [νοις βοηθησαι οἾθεν ἀδελῴοι αγιοι κλησεως ε 
 [πουρανιου μετοχἾοι : κατανοήσατε Tov ἀποστολῦ 
 [Kal ἀρχίερεα της οἸμολογιας ἡμῶν Iv πιστον ovra 
 15 [τω ποιησαντι] αὑτον : ws Ke Mavons ev Tw otkw 
 [avrov πλειοῖνος yap δοξης ovros mapa Μωῦσην 
 [ηξιωται καθ oloov πλειονα τιμη(νὴ exet Tou [ο]ικου : ὁ 
 [κατασκευαΐσας auTov : Tas yap οἰκος κατασκεὺ 
 [agerat ὑπο] τινος : ὁ δὲ παντα κατασκευασας : Os 
 20 [και Mavon]s μεν micros εν ολω τῶ οἰκὼ αὑτοῦ 
 [ως θεραπω]ὴν εἰς μαρτύριον : τῶν λαληθησομε 
 [νων Xs de] ὡς vuos ἐπὶ Tov οἰκον αὑτοῦ οὗ οἰκος 
 [eopev ἡμει]ς : €av THY παρρησιαν καὶ τὸ Kavyn 
 μα της ελπ͵]ιδος κατασχωμεν : dto καθως λεγει 
 25 [To mva To αἸγιον onpepov εαν τὴς φωνὴης avTov 
 
 [axovonte] μὴ σκληρυνητε Tas Kapdlas ὕμων 
 [ws εν τω πα]ραπικράσμὼω κατὰ τὴν ἡμέραν Tov 
 [ 
 
 πιρασμου] εν τὴ ερήμω οὗ επιρί(α)σαν οἱ πατερες υμῶ 
 
 Col. ii. 
 μη 
 30 ev δίοκιίμασια Kat εἰδον Ta εργα pou τεσσερακονῖτα 
 eTn [δι]ο προσωκθεισα τὴ yevea TavTn Kat ειπίον 
 ae. [πλ]ανίωϊνται ev Tn Kapdia αὐτῶν διο οὐκ εγναῖσαν 
 ταῖς οδους poly ὡς ὠμοσα εν τὴ opyn prov εἰ εἰσῖε 
 λευίσοντ]αι εἰι9] THY καταπαύσιν μου : βλεπεται alder 
 35 polt py] ποτε ἐστε εν τινι ὕμων καρδια πονηρία 
 [απι]σίτια)ς : εν τω αποστηναι amo θυ ἕωντος : ad [ 
 
 [λα] πα[ραϊκαλεσατε εαὐτους καθ εκαστην ημῖε 
 
 iii. 9 
 
40 
 
 50 
 
 58 
 
 60 
 
 65 
 
 657. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 [paly αἰχ]ρι ov το onpepov Kadelt]rar : ἵνα pln σκλη 
 [ρυν]θη τις ej υμων amarn τίη]ς ἀρματιας [pero 
 [χοι] yap του X'v yeyovapev : ἐανπερ τὴν alpynv 
 [7lns ὑυποστασεως pexpt τελοὺυς βεβαιαν [kara 
 [σχωμεν ev τω λεγεσθαὶ onpepov εαν τῆς φίω 
 
 νὴς αὐτοῦ aKovonTe : μὴ σκληρυνὴτε Tas Klap 
 δειας ὕμων ὡς EV τω παραπικρασμω : τινες 
 
 yap ακουσαντες παρεπικραναν αλλ ov παΐΪντες 
 
 οἱ εξελθοῖντες εξ] Αιγυπτου δια Moiicews τισῖιν 
 
 de προσωχ[θεισεν) τεσσεράκοντα ETN οὐχί τίοις 
 αμαρτησασιν ὧν Ta κωλα εἐπεσεν εν TN εἰρη 
 
 po : τισίν de ὠμοσεν pn εἰσελευσεσθαι eis 
 
 τίηϊν καταπαυσιν αὐτου εἰ μὴ τοις απιθησασέζιν 
 κ[α]ι βλέπομεν ort [ο]υκ ηδυνασθησαν εισεῖλ 
 
 θειν δι αἰπιστ]ειαν : φοβηθωμεν ουν py πῖο 
 
 τε κατα[ἰλιπομενης επαγγελιας εἰσελθέιν 
 
 [ε]τῖς την καταπαύσιν αὐτου δοκὴ τις εξ υμίων 
 ὕστερ[ηϊκεναι : Kal yap ἐσμεν ευηγγελισμενΐοι 
 
 Col. iii 
 
 μθ 
 [καθαπερ κΊ]ακεινοι αλλ οὐκ ὠφελησεν ο λογος 
 [της axons] εκεινους μὴ συνκεκερασμενους 
 [τη πίστι Tolls ακουσασιν : εἰσερχομεθα yap εἰς 
 [καταπα͵]υσιν οἱ πιστευσαντες : ΚκΚαθως εἰρηκεν 
 [ως wpoloa ev τὴ opyn pov ει ελεύυσοντε εἰς την Κα 
 [ταπαυ]σιν pov : καίτοι τίωϊν εργων ἀπὸ καταβο 
 [Ans κοσμου γενηθεντων εἰρηκεν ποὺ περι τῆς 
 [εβδομ]ης ουτως : Kat κατεπαυσες ο Os ev τη ἡμε 
 [pa τὴ εβἸ]δομὴ amo παντίων)] τῶν εργων αὑτοῦ : Kat 
 εν τουτ]ω παίλ]ιν εἰσελευίΐσο]νται εἰς τὴν καταπαυσῖ 
 
 [wou ἐπ]. ουν ἀπολιπετε τινας εἰσελθειν εἰς αὐτῇ 
 [kat ot mplorepoy ευαγγελισθεντες οὐκ εἰση[λθ]δ 
 
 δι απιθι]αν παλιν τινα οριζει ἡμεραν σημερό 
 
 ἵν. 
 
 39 
 
40 
 
 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 vo [ev Aavled λεγων μετὰ τοσουτον xpovoy [Ka}O[w|s 
 [προειρη]ται : ἰσημερον εαν της φωνὴης αὐτίου a 
 [κουσητ]ε μ[η] σκληρυνητε Tas καρδιας vplov 
 [εἰ yap αἸυτους Is κατεπαυσεν οὐκ av mlept aA 
 [Ans εἐλα]λι μετα TavTa ἡμερας : apa απίολι 
 
 75 [πεται σ]αββατισμος τω Aaw Tov θυ o yap [eo 
 [ελθων] εἰς την] καταπαυσιν avt[ov] : Kat αἰυ)τος 
 [κατεπ͵)αυσίεν)] amo τῶν epywv av{rov| wolmep| a 
 [πο τῶν ιἸδιων o 6s: σπουδασωμεν [ο]υ[ν] εἰσελ 
 [θειν εἰἧς ἐκείνην τὴν Kararavolly wia μὴ εν 
 
 80 [τω αὐτΊ]ω τις ὑποδιγματι eon της amtO[tlas : (ὦ 
 [yap ο λοῖγος του θυ και ενεργης : Και [τ]Ἰομ[ωτεροὶ)ς vu 
 
 Col. iv. 
 ν 
 περ πασαν paxalipay διστομον και διικνουμε 
 νος ἄχρει μερισμίου ψυχῆς Kal TVS appov τε 
 85 Kat μυελων Kat κίριτικος ἐενθυμησεὼν και εν 
 νυων καρδειας : [και οὐκ εστιν κτίσις αφανὴης 
 evemlov αὑτοῦ : [mavTa de γυμνα και τετραχήη 
 λισμενα τοις οφίθαλμοις αὐτοῦ προς ον ἡμιν 
 o λογος : εχοντεῖς οὐν apxlepen μεγαν διε 
 90 ληλυθοτα τουΐς ovpavous Iv τὸν υἱον του θυ 
 κρατωῶμεν τῆς [ομολογιας ov yap εχομεν αἀρχι 
 pea pn δυναμζενον συνπαθησαι ταις ασθε 
 vetalt|s nuwv [πεπιράσμενον δὲ κατα παντα 
 καθ ομοιοτητα [χωρὶς ἀμαρτιας προσερχωμε 
 95 θα ουν μετα ἱπαρρησιας τω θρονω της χαριτος 
 [wwja λαβωμεῖν ἐλεος Kat χαριν ευρωμεν εἰς εὖ 
 [kat]pov βοηθίειαν mas yap αἀρχιερευς εὖ ανθρω 
 [πωὴν λαμβαίνομενος ὑπερ ανθρωπων κα 
 [θησταταίε ta προς τον Ov wa προσφερη δωρα 
 100 [kat θυ]σιας υἷἱπερ apaptioy μετριοπαθειν du 
 vapevos Tos alyvoovot και πλανωμενοις επει 
 
 iv. 12 
 
105 
 
 15 
 
 120 
 
 125 
 
 130 
 
 657. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 Kal avTos περίικειται ἀσθενειαν Kat δι αὐτὴν 
 οφιλει καθωΐς περι του Aaov ovTwS καὶ περι εαὺ 
 του προσφερίειν περι ἁμαρτιὼν Kal οὐχ ε 
 
 αὐτῶ τις λαμβανει τὴν τιμὴν αλλα καλοῦμε 
 vos ὕπο του [θυ ουτως και ο Ἃς ovy εαὐτον do 
 
 ἕασεν γενηζθηναι ἀρχιερεα αλλ ὁ λαλησας 
 12 columns lost. 
 
 Coley 
 gB 
 [προσφερονταῖ τοΊ]τε εἰρηκεν t]dov ηκω Tov ποιῆσαι TO 
 [θελημα σου] : αἀναιρει το [πρωτ]ον ἵνα [το δευτερον στη 
 [on ev w θεϊληματι ηγιασμενο]ι ecplev δια της προσ 
 [popas του cwluaros Iv ΧΙ[υ] εφαπαξ : [και mwas μεν ce 
 
 ε 
 [pevs ἐστηκεν καθ ἡμεραν λιτουίΐργων καὶ Tas auTas 
 ἰ 
 
 πολλακις)] προσφερω[ν] θυσιας αἰτινες ουΐδεποτε 
 [δυνανται] περιελειν apaptiay : οὑτος δε [μιαν ν 
 [περ αἁμαρτιων] προσενενκας θυσιαν εἰς To διηΐνεκες 
 [εκαθισεν ev Seta] του θυ το λοιπὸν εκδεχοίμενος 
 [ews τεθωσιν] οἱ εχθροι ὕποποδιον των ποδίι} ων αὐτου 
 [μια yap προσήφορα τετελειωκεν εἰς TO διηνεκεῖς τους 
 [αγιαζομενῆους : μαρτυρει δὲ nye καὶ τίο πνὰα 
 
 [το αγιον μετ]α yap To εἰρήηκεναι αὐτὴ δε ἡ δια[θηκη 
 [nv διαθησοῖμαι προς avrovs pera Tas ἡμερίας eke 
 [vas Aeyer κἸς διδους νομους μου emt Kapdials αὐτῶ 
 [και ἐπὶ Tn διανοιαν αὐτων |lal| εἐπιγραψω αὐΐτους 
 [kat τῶν αμ]αρτιων και [των avopimy αὐτων ov μι 
 [μνησθησο͵μαι ετι : οπου δε αφεσις τουΐϊτ]ων οὐκ 
 
 [ere προσφο]ρα περι αμαρτιαις : εἐχοντες οὐν αδελ 
 [φοι mapp\notav εἰς τὴν εἰσοδον των αγίων EV TH 
 [αἱματι ἣν nv ενεκενισεν ἡμῖν odov προσ 
 
 [φατοὴν kat ζωσαν δια του καταπετάσματος 
 
 ἰτουτ] ἐστιν της σάρκος αὐτου : και ἵερεα μεγαν 
 
 [ 
 
 ἐπι] Tov οἰκον Tov θυ προσερχωμεθα μετὰ 
 
 x. ὃ 
 
 41 
 
135 
 
 140 
 
 145 
 
 155 
 
 160 
 
 THE VOXVRAYNGHUS*PARY ih? 
 
 CokAvi 
 
 ποίσω δοκειτε χειρονος αξιωθησεται τιμωριας oO TOV x. 29 
 v[tov] τ[ο]ν [θυ καταπατησας καὶ To αἰμα τῆς διαθηκης 
 
 κοινον ἡϊγήσομενος ev ὦ ἡγιασθὴη και τὸ πνᾶ τῆς χα 
 
 pitos ενυΐϊβρισας οἰδαμεν yap τον εἰποντὰ εμοῖ εκ 
 
 δικησις εγίω ανταποδωσω Kat παλιν κρίνει KS τον 
 
 λαον αὐὑτοῖυ φοβερον το εμπεσειν εἰς χείρας θυ 
 
 ζωντος : [αναμιμνησκεσθε δὲ τας προτερον ne 
 
 pas εν α[ις φωτισθεντες πολλην αθλησιν υὑπεμεινατε 
 
 παθημζατων TovTo μεν ονειδισμοις τε Kat θλιψεσιν 
 
 Col. vii. 
 ἐδ 
 
 [θεα]τριζομενοι : τοῦτο de κοινων[ο]ι των ovTws Χ, 
 [ανα]στρεφομενων γενηθεντες : Kat yap τοις deo 
 
 [μιοι]ῖς συνεπαθησατε : Kal τὴν ἁρπαγὴν τῶν ὑπαρ 
 
 [χοντων ὑμων peta χαρας προσεδεξασ]ε) : γινωσ 
 
 [κοῖντες εχιν εαὐτους κρισσωνα ὕπαρξιν καὶ μεν οὴν 
 
 σαν] : pn amoBadnTe ovy τὴν παρρησίαν ὕμων 
 
 ητΊις exer μεγαλην μισθαποδοσιαν ὕπομονης 
 
 yap] €xeTat χρειαν ἵνα το θελημα Tov [Olu ποιησαντες 
 κοἹμιίσησθε την επαγγελειαν : ετ[] μικρὸν οσον : 
 
 [ 
 
 [ 
 
 | 
 
 [ocoly ο epxopevos ἡξει Kat ov xpovicet o δε δικαιος 
 
 [ex] mloTews ζησεται : Kal εαν υποστειληται ; [οὔκ εὖ 
 [Soxlec μου ἡ ψυχή εν avtw : nuts δὲ οὐκ ἐσμεν [υἱποστο 
 [An]s εἰς ἀαπωλειαν : αλλα TloTEws εἰς περιποι[η]σιν ψυ 
 [Χη]ς : ἐστι δὲ πιστις ελπιζομέενων πραγματίω)ν αἀποστα 
 [ors] eA{A}evyos ov βλεπομένων : εν αὑτὴ yap εμαρτυρὴη 
 [θησ]αν οἱ πρεσβυτεροι : πιστι νοουμεν κατηρτεισθαι 
 
 ἘΞ αι 
 ἱτουὶς αἰωνας ρήματι θυ εἰς το μὴ εκ φ} εἸίνομενων To 
 [βλἸεπομενον γεγονέναι : πειστει πλείονα θυσιαν Αβεΐλ 
 
165 
 
 170 
 
 175 
 
 180 
 
 185 
 
 657. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 mapa Kaew mpoonvey κεν δι ns εμαρτυρηθὴ εἰναι de 
 
 [k]alos μαρτυρουντος emt τοῖς Owpols avT@ τοῦ θυ Kat δῖε av 
 τῆς αποθανων ετι λαλει : πίστει Evwy’ μετετεθη) του [μη 
 ἴδειν θανατον καὶ οὐχ εὑρισκετο διοτι μετεθηκεν aluTov 
 
 o és : προ yap τῆς μεταθεσεως μεμαρτυρηται ευηρεστηκε 
 
 Col. viii. 
 
 [ἔς 
 vat τω Ow [xwpis δὲ πιστεως ἀδυνατὸν ευαρεστησαι 
 πιστευσαι γίαρ Set τον προσερχομενον Ow ort εστιν 
 καὶ τοις ζηίτουσιν avrov μισθαποδοτης γινεται πίστει 
 χρηματιίσθεις Nwe περι των μηδέπω βλεπομενων 
 ευλαβηθείις κατεσκευασεν κιβωτὸν εἰς σωτηριαν τοῦ 
 οἰκου αὑτοῦ [δι nS κατεκρινεν TOY κοσμον καὶ TNS Κατα 
 πισΐτην δικαζιοσυνης eyeveTo κληρονομος πίστει Kadov 
 μενος Αβρααμ υπηκουσεν εξελθειν εἰς ToTov ον ἡμεὰλ 
 λεν λαμβανίζειν εἰς κληρονομίαν καὶ e€ndOev μὴ επι 
 OTAMEVOS πίου EPXETAL πιστει παρωκῆσεν εἰς γὴν τῆς 
 ἐπαγγελιας [ws αλλοτριαν εν σκηναῖς κατοικηῆσας μετὰ 
 ἴσακ και ἴακίωβ των συνκληρονομων της επαγγελιας τῆς 
 avrns : εξ[εδεχετο yap τὴν τοὺς θεμελίους ἐχουσαν πο 
 Aw : ἧς τεχυίίτης Kat δημιουργος o Os πιστει Kat αὑτῆς 
 appa dvvapliv εἰς καταβολην σπερματος ελαβεν Kat πὰ 
 ρα Καιρον ηλίικιας ἐπεὶ πιστον ἡγήσατο τον εἐπαγγειλαμε 
 νον" διο καὶ [ad evos εἐγεννηθησαν Kat TavTa νενεκρὼω 
 μένου : Kal€ws τα αστρα Tov ovpavov τὼ πλήθει και 
 ὡς ἢ appos ἡ [παρὰ το χειλος τῆς θαλασσὴης ἡ αναριθμητος 
 κατα πιστιν αἰπεθανον ovTol παντες μὴ κομισαμενοι Tas 
 [εἰπαγγελειαϊς ἀλλα πορρωθεν avras ἰδοντες και ac 
 [π]ασαμενοι και ομολογησαντες οτι ἕενοι Kat παρεπιδημοι 
 [eleoey ἐπι τῆς [γῆς 
 
 1 column lost. 
 
 ΧΙ. 
 
 43 
 
44 
 
 [090 
 
 195 
 
 200 
 
 205 
 
 210 
 
 215 
 
 THE OXYRAYNCHUS *PAPYRI 
 
 Col. 4x, 
 
 &¢ 
 
 [πρωτοτοκὰ Oryn αἹντων : moter διεβησαν τὴν EpvOpay xi. 28 
 [θαλασσαν ws δια Enplas yns : nls] πειραν AaBovtes ot Αιγυ 
 [πτιοι κατεποθησαν) πιστει Ta TLXN Ϊεριχω emecay κυκλω 
 
 [Oevra emt emta npepals : πίστει PaaB ἡ πορνὴ ov συναπω 
 [Aero τοις απιθησασιν) δεξαμενη Tovs κατασκοποὺυς μετ᾽ 
 
 [εἰρηνης Kat τι ETL λεγω επιλιψει yap pe διηγουμενον o χρο 
 νος περι Γεδεων Baplax’ Σαμψω ἴεφθαε Aaved τε καὶ Σαμουηλ 
 Kal τῶν προφητων] ot δια πίστεως KaTnywvicavTo βασιλειας 
 ἠργάσαντο δικαιοσυνην : ἐπετυχον ἐπαγγελιων [:] εῴρα 
 
 Eav στοματα λεοντων : εἐσβεσαν δυναμιν πυρος [:] edu 
 
 γον στοματα μαχ]αιρῆης : εδυναμωθησαν amo acbeve 
 
 as εγενηθησαν ισχυροι εμ πολεμὼω παρεμβολας εκλει 
 
 | 
 Ι 
 | 
 [vay αλλοτριων ελ]αβον yuvexal. .] εξ αναστασεως Tous 
 [vexpovs αὐτῶν αλλοι δε ετοιμ[πα]Ἱνίσθησαν ov προσδεξα 
 ἵμενοε τὴν απολυτ]ρωσιν ἵνα Κρειττονος αναστασεως 
 [τυχωσιν ετεροι δὲ] εἐμπεγμων και μαστειγὼν πειραν 
 [eAaBov ert δὲ δεσμίων και φυλακῆς : ελιθασθησαν 
 [ἐπρισθησαν εἸπι[ρα]σθησαν : εν φονω μαχαιρας a 
 [πεθανον περ)ιη[λ]θον ev μηλωταῖις εν eylois δερμα 
 
 [σιν υστερουμενοι] θλειβομενοι : κακουχουμενοι 
 
 [ων οὐκ nv αἀξιος] ο [κοῖσμος : ἐπι Epnpetats πλανωμε 
 
 [vot και opeot και σ]πηλεοις Kat Tals oats της γῆς : Και 
 [ουτοι παντες μαρτυρηθεῖντες δια της πιστεως οὐκ εκομι 
 [σαντο την επ)]αγγείλ]ειαν Tou θυ περι ἡμῶν Κριττον 
 
 [τι προβλεψαμενου ἵνα μη xwpis ἡμῶν τελειωθωσί!) 
 [ 
 
 τοιγαρουν και] ἡμεῖις τοσουτον EXOVTES περικιμενον 
 
 Cotas 
 En 
 
 nplw ν]εῴφος μαρ[τ]υρων ογκον : αποὔθΐεμενοι] mavTa Kat xii. I 
 τηῖν εὐπ]ερίστατον αμαρτειαν δι ὑπομονης τρεχῶμεν Τὸ 
 
657. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 220 πίροκειμ]ενον ney aywova αφορωντες εἰς Tov THS πίστεως 
 apxnyov Kat τελειωτὴν Iv os ἀντι της προκειμενης αὐτῶ χα 
 pas ὕπεμεινεν τον σταυρον αἰσχυνης καταφρονησας εν 
 δεξια τε [του θρονου του θυ κεκαθι[κ]εν : αναλογισασθαι yap 
 τοιαυτὴν ὕπομεμενηκοτα ὕπο τῶν ἀαμαρτῶωλων. εἰς αὖ 
 
 225 τοὺς avTidoylay ἵνα μὴ καμητε Tals ψυχαις εκλελυμε 
 VOL : οὕπω μεχρι αἰματος αντικατεστητε προς τὴν a 
 μαρτιαν αγων[ι]ζομενοι και ἐεκλελησθαι της παρακλήσεως 
 ητις ὕμειν ὡς ὕιοις διαλεγεται Vie μου μὴ ολιγωρει παίδει 
 ας KU και μὴ εγλυου Um αὐτου ελεγχομενος : ον yap a 
 
 230 γαπα KS πεδευει μαστειγοι de mavTa ὕιον ον παραδεχεταίι 
 εἰς παίδειαν υπομί[ε]νεται ws ὕι]οις ὕμειν προσφερεται 
 ο Os τις yap ὕιος ον ov πεδευει πατὴρ εἰ δὲ χωρις [εστ]αι 
 παιδειας NS μέτοχοι γεγονασι παντες : apa νοῖθοι και] ovK 
 ὕιοι ἐστε : ELTA TOUS μεν τῆς σαρκος ἡμῶν TlaTlepals εἾιχο 
 
 235 μὲν παιδευτας καὶ ενετρεπομεθα : ov πολυ δὲ par 
 λον ὑποταγησομεθα τω πατρὶ των πνευματων καὶ (ὴη 
 σομεν : οἱ μεν yap προς ολιγας ἡμερας κατα TO δοκοῦ 
 αυτοις επαιδευον : 0 δὲ ἐπι TO συμῴφερον εἰς TO μετὰ 
 λαβειν της αγιοτατης αὐτου : maca δε παίδεια mpo(s) μεν TO 
 
 240 Tapov ov δοκει χαρας εἰναι ἀλλα λυπὴς ὕστερον δὲ Kap 
 Tov εἰρηνίκον τοις δι αὐτῆς γεγυμνασμενοις αποδιδωσὶ 
 
 Col. xi. 
 
 [ge 
 
 45 
 
 δικ[αιοσυνης διο τας παρειμενας χείρας Kal Ta παραλελυμε ΧΙΙ. II 
 
 va [yovata ἀνορθωσατε και τροχίας ορθας ποίειτε τοις 
 
 245 ποῖσιν ὑμων wa μὴ TO χωλον εκτραπὴη ιαθη δὲ μαλλον 
 εἰρίηνην διώκετε μετα παντῶν καὶ TOV aylacpov οὐ χωρίς 
 ουΐδεις οψεται Toy KV επισκοπουντες μὴ τις VOTEPwY ἀπὸ τῆς 
 χα[ριτος Tou θυ μὴ τις ριζα πικριας avw φνυουσὰ evoxAn 
 kale δι avtns μιανθωσιν οἱ πολλοι μὴ τις πορνος ἡ βεβηλος 
 
 250 ὡς [Hoav os ἀντι βρωσεως pias ἀπεδοτο Ta πρωτοτοκια avTouv Lo 
 
46 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 τε [yap ort και μετεπειτα θελων κληρονομῆσαι τὴν EVvAoYL 
 
 av [ 
 
 14. I(noov)v: so SABCD, &c., W-H.; Χριστὸν Ἰησουν EKL, &c., T-R. 
 
 I5. εν τω OLK@ : SO be ev oAw τω οἰκω NACDE, ὅζοι, TR, W-H. odo may have come 
 in from verse 5. 
 
 16. δοξης ovros: so KLM, &c., T-R. ; ovros δοξης NABCDE, &c., W-H 
 
 19. mavra: SO NABCDKM, &c., W-H.; ram. EL, &c., T-R. 
 
 23. eav: SO NBDE, &c., W-H.; ἐανπερ AC, &c., T-R. κ of καυχημα has been altered 
 apparently from x. 
 
 24. ελπίιδος κατασχωμεν : SO B; ελπ. μεχρι τέλους βεβαιαν κατασχ. SACDE, &c., T-R., 
 W-H. The phrase μεχρι τέλους βεβαιαν κατασχωμεν recurs in verse 14 and may have come 
 in here from that passage. 
 
 31. προσωκθεισα: 1. προσώχθισα ; the 6 has been altered from τ. 
 
 32. ev τὴ Kapdia avtwy dio: τὴ καρδια avrot δε MSS. 
 
 36-40. The position of the narrow strip placed near the beginning of these lines is 
 uncertain, but it suits very well here. The recto being blank does not help to decide the 
 question. ! 
 
 37. παϊραϊκαλεσατε is another otherwise unattested reading: παρακαλειτε MSS. 
 
 38. αἰχἼρι ; so M; ἀχρις other MSS., T-R., W-H. 
 
 39. τις εἰξ υμων : SO NAC, &c., T-R., W-H.; εξ vpov ms BDE, &c. 1. ἁμαρτίας. 
 
 42. A double point may be lost after σχωμεν. 
 
 Ri. ἡδυνασθησαν : ηδυνηθησαν MSS. The form ἠδυνάσθην occurs e.g. in Matt. xvii. 16 
 (B), Mark vii. 24 (NB). 
 
 The first ε of εἰσεΐλ]θειν is written over a double point. 
 
 58. συνκεκερασμενου : SO ABCD, &c., W-H. in text; συνκεκερασμενος δὰ, W-H. mg., 
 συγκεκραμένος T-R. 
 
 59. yap: so BDE, &c.; ovy NAC, 
 
 60. την was certainly omitted before καταπαΐυσιν as in BD; την is found in other MSS. 
 and is read by W-H. and T-R. 
 
 63. mov: γάρ που T-R., W-H. with all MSS. except 109!@t- which agrees with the 
 papyrus in omitting yap. 
 
 64.. καϊτεπαυσες is a mistake for kalrelraveer. 
 
 66. εισελευΐσοῖνται : so D and some cursives; εἰ εἰσελευσονται other MSS., T-R., W-H. 
 
 70-1. The vestiges of [κα θω)ς are very slight, but are a sufficient indication that the 
 papyrus read προείρηται with NACDE, &c., W-H., rather than epyra (correctors of DE, 
 KL, T-R.), since the division καίθως does not account for the traces of ink at the end 
 of |. yo, 
 
 80. o of πεση was converted from τ. 
 
 SI. evepyns: SO NACDE, &c., T- R., W-H. ; evapyns B. 
 
 85. εν Ἵνυων is for εν]νοιων. 
 
 96. It is almost certain that the papyrus read evpoper, since without this word the line 
 would be unaccountably short ; B stands alone in omitting it. 
 
 99. The line is sufficiently long without re after δωρα (om. B and an early corrector of 
 D), and in view of the Tendency of the papyrus the omission is probable. 
 
 106. ours, x.r.d.: the MSS. here have καθωσπερ (RABD) or καθαπερ και (om. και CD) 
 Ααρων οὔτως, κιτιλ., but there is evidently not room for all this in the papyrus. The only 
 
657. THEOLOGICAL. FRAGMENTS 47 
 
 other authority for any omission here is K, which leaves out ovrws καὶ o Χριστος ; but even 
 without these words the line would remain rather too long. To omit καθωσπερ καὶ Ααρων 
 suits the space better and does not damage the sense. 
 
 112. The papyrus may of course have read αἰΐματος (DE) for σωΐματος and αἀρχίερευς 
 (AC) for tepevs (RDEKL). 
 
 110. αμαρτιαν : ayaprias MSS. 
 
 116. The second », if it be ν, in προσενενκας was converted from:orv. The previous 
 ν also seems to have been altered. 
 
 118. exOpor: εχθροι αὐτοῦ MSS. The superfluous « in ποδιωῖν was a slip due to the 
 preceding ὑποποδιον. 
 
 124. The scribe apparently began to write αὐτοὺς before emtypayw, but that the a was 
 meant to be deleted is not certain and its partial effacement may be accidental. 
 
 125. αμ]αρτιων : so D and some cursives; ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν T-R., W-H., with other MSS. 
 
 125-6. μι[μνησθησοἾμαι : 1]. μὴ [μνησθήσο]μαι. 
 
 127. apaptias: ἀμαρτιας MSS, The second ε of eyovres has been altered from a. 
 
 139. Tas mporepov npe|pas : so T-R., W-H., with most MSS.; ras mp. apaprias &, ταις 
 mpotepats ἡμεραις 1). 
 
 144. δεσίμιοι]ς : so AD, W-H.; δεσμοις μου NEHKL, &c., T-R. We cannot of course 
 be sure that the papyrus did not have δεσμοις, but the absence of pov is the important thing 
 and is much in favour of δεσμιοις, 
 
 147. eavrouvs: 80 NA, W-H.; eavros DE, &c., ἐν ἑαυτοῖς T-R. with a few minuscules. 
 
 κρισσωνα = κρείσσονα : SO NA, W-H.;3 κρειττονα DE, &c., T-R. 
 
 υπαρξιν : SO NAD, W-H.; vz. ev ουρανοις E; &c., T-R. 
 
 151. There is an apparently accidental diagonal dash passing from the top of the 
 supposed μ through the «. 
 
 ert] > €TL yap MSS. 
 
 152. xpouoe: SOND, W-H.; ypowe AE, &c., T-R. 
 
 152-3. The papyrus certainly agreed with DE, &c., in omitting μου, which is found in 
 SA after δίκαιος, δίκαιός [μου] W-H., δίκαιος T-R. 
 
 153. πίστεως : πιστεως μου 1). 
 
 154. μου ἡ ψυχη: so DE; ἡ ψ. pou T-R., W-H., with other MSS. 
 
 156. mpaypat|o|y αποσταϊσις] (1. ὑπόστα σις]) is the reverse order to that of all the MSS. ; 
 πριγματων is usually connected with βλεπομενων. 
 
 157. αὐτὴ : SO two cursives (47, 115); ἐν ravrn other MSS., T-H., W-H. 
 
 159-60. το [βλ]επομενον : So SADE, W-H.; τὰ βλεπομενα KL, &c., T-R. 
 
 161. προσηνενκεν : mpoonveyxev τω θεω MSS. 
 
 162. avtw του θ(εο)υ : αὐτου was originally written but was altered to avtw. αὐτου τω 
 θεω SAD, αὐτου του θεου EKL, &c., T-R., W-H. 
 
 163. λαλει: SO NA, W-H., T-R.; λαλειται DE, &c. 
 
 164. evpicxero: 80 KL, &c., T-R.; ηυρισκετο SADE, W-H. 
 
 165. eunp_eornke var : SONDE; evap. AKL, W-H., T-R. If evnpeornxevat was correctly 
 written this line was somewhat longer than those preceding. 
 
 168. O(c)»: so δὲ; the papyrus may of course have had τω O(e)w like ADE, &c. (so 
 T-R., W-H.), but in view of its tendency to shortness this is less probable. 
 
 169. ᾧγτουσιν : so P only; εκζητουσιν other MSS., T-R., W-H. 
 
 15. λαμβανειν εἰς kA, : the usual reading ; KA. λαμβανειν δ᾿, 
 
 178. Icax is also the spelling of D; Ισαακ other MSS., T-R., W-H. 
 
 180-1. αὐτῆς | appa is for αὐτῇ Σαρρα. The papyrus agreed with SAE, &c., in omitting 
 στειρα OF στειρα ovea which is found after Σαρρα (or after Suvayw or ελαβεν)ὴ in D and 
 other MSS. 
 
48 THE -OXYRA YNCHUSSPARI KI 
 
 182. It is practically certain that the papyrus did not read erexev after ἡλικίας with EKL 
 and other MSS. (so T-R.). It is omitted in RAD, W-H. 
 
 185. ὡς ἡ: 80 all the best MSS.; woe T-R. with a few minuscules, 
 
 186. Considerations of space make κομίσαμενοι (δ, &c., W-H.) preferable to AaBovres 
 (DE, &c., T-R.). 
 
 187. The papyrus evidently omitted καὶ πεισθεντες which is found in some minuscules 
 and read in the T-R. 
 
 188. This line is rather long, and the papyrus may have had παροικοι for mapemdnpor, 
 as P. 
 
 192. Enplas γης : SO NADE, W-H.; om. γης KL, &c., T-R. 
 
 103. ἐπεσαν : SO SAD, W-H; ETTETE EKL, T-R. 
 
 194. πορνὴ : επιλεγομενὴ tropyn &. 
 
 196. yap pe: SOEKL, &c., T-R.; pe yap SAD, W-H. 
 
 197. The papyrus agrees with 8A (so W-H.) in the omission of conjunctions between 
 the names as far as Aaved. Β, re καὶ 3. καὶ Ἰ. T-R. with other MSS. The spelling Sapo 
 is attested as a variant by Ὁ. The ε of Aaved was originally omitted ; Δαυειδ &D, W-H.., 
 Δαυιδ, Aad, and Δαβιδ (T-R.) other MSS. 
 
 201. pax |acpns : so NAD, W-H.; paxapas other MSS., T-R. But the papyrus is 
 inconsistent and has μαχαιρας in 1. 208. 
 
 εδυναμωθησαν : NAD, W-H.; ενεδυναμωθησαν EKL, &e:, T-R. 
 
 203. Lhe size οἵ the lacuna is inconclusive as to whether the papyrus read yuverals| 
 (SAD) or yuvexalis|, ie. Ὑγηα ξες (EKL, &c., T-R., W-H.). 
 
 208. [επρισθησαν elm pa\cOnoav: this is "also the order of AE, &c., and T-R.; emeip. emp. 
 ND, &c., W-H. 
 
 paxatpas: cf. ]. 201, note. 
 
 211. emt: SONA, W-H.; ἐν DE, &c., T-R. 
 
 216. τοσουτον: ὃ τηλικουτον. 
 
 222. τον oravpov: 50 D; om. τον other MSS., T-R., W-H. 
 
 223. κεκαθι[κ]εν : so the uncials, W-H.; ἐκάθισεν T-R. with some minuscules. 
 
 224. The papyrus agrees with D in omitting τὸν which is read before rovavrny in other 
 MSS. and by T-R., W-H. 
 
 avrous: so a corrector of 8; eavrovs NDE, W-H., εαυτον A, avrov KL, T-R. 
 
 225. εκλελυμενοι: SOD; εκλυομενοι Other MSS., T-R., W-H. 
 
 226. pexpt: SOD; μεχρις other MSS., T-R., W-H. 
 
 227. ayar\Copevor: ανταγωνιζομενοι MSS. 
 
 220. Και pn: μηδε 
 
 231. εἰς : 80 τηοϑί MSS., W-H.; εἰ T-R. with a few minuscules. 
 
 232. τις yap: SO NA, W-H.; τις yap ἐστιν DE, &c., T-R. 
 
 233-4. Kat οὐχ wor ἐστε is also the order of NAD, W-H.; eore x. o. w. KL, &c., T-R. 
 
 235. πολυ de: de is also attested as a varjant by D and was added by the third 
 corrector of δὴ ; πολυ NAD, W-H., πολλω KL, &c., T-R. 
 
 239. aylorarns is a graphical error for ayiorntos. πασα δε is the reading of AKL, &c., 
 T-R ; πασα μεν &, &c., W-H. 
 
 241. ΕἼΤ δε of eypnuixov has apparently been corrected and the ἡ of avrns was altered 
 from o or οἱ, which perhaps reflects the variant δὲ avros recorded in D; but it may well 
 have been a mere slip. 
 
658. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 49 
 
 658. CERTIFICATE OF PAGAN SACRIFICE. 
 155 xX 7 CM. 
 
 An interesting survival of the Decian persecution of the Christians in 
 A.D. 250 is preserved in this papyrus, which is an example of the /zdellz or 
 declarations which suspects were compelled to make that they had sacrificed 
 to the pagan gods. Two only of these /de//i have hitherto been published, one 
 at Berlin (B. G. U. 287: Krebs, Sztzungsb. Berl. Akad. 1893; Harnack, Theol. 
 Literaturgz. 1894, p. 38), the other at Vienna (Wessely, Sz/zungsb. Wien. Akad. 
 1894; Harnack, Theol. Literaturz. 1894, p.162). Both of those documents were 
 from the Fayim; the present specimen, though from another nome, has the 
 same characteristic phrases, which were evidently a stereotyped formula, and 
 confirms in all respects the emendations and deductions proposed by Harnack 
 in connexion with the Berlin papyrus. Like them also it is addressed to a 
 commission which was specially appointed to conduct the inquisition against 
 the Christians. 
 
 Τοῖς ἐπὶ τῶν ἱερῶν [καὶ ἅμα τῷ υἱῷ μου Αὐρη- 
 θυσιῶν πόλεως 7 Alo Διοσκόρῳ καὶ τῇ 
 
 map Αὐρηλίου Λ|..... 15 θυγατρί μου Αὐρηλίᾳ 
 
 θίωνος Θεοδώρου μητρὸς Aaidi. ἀξιῶ ὑμᾶς ὑπο- 
 5 Ilavrwvvpidos ἀπὸ τῆς σημιώσασθαι μοι. 
 
 αὐτῆς πόλεως. ἀεὶ μὲν (ἔτους) α Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος 
 
 θύων καὶ σπένδων [τοῖ]ς Γαίου Μεσσίου Kvivrov 
 
 θεοῖς [δ]ιετέλ[εσα ἔϊτι δὲ 20 Τραιανοῦ Δεκίου 
 
 καὶ νῦν ἐνώπιον ὑμῶν Εὐσεβοῦϊς Εὐ]τυχοῦς 
 το κατὰ τὰ κελευσέ]ν τα [Σεβασ]τοῦ [Παῦ]νι x. 
 
 ἔσπεισα καὶ ἔθυσα καϊὶ ea: Gara 
 
 τῶν ἱερῶν éyevodunv 
 
 I. ἵερων Pap.; so inl. 12. 12. eyevoauy Pap. 16. Aaid& Pap. o of υπο above 
 the line. 19. yaiov Pap. 20. τραΐανου Pap. 
 
 ‘To the superintendents of offerings and sacrifices at the city from Aurelius... - 
 thion son of Theodorus and Pantonymis, of the said city. It has ever been my custom 
 to make sacrifices and libations to the gods, and now also I have in your presence in 
 accordance with the command poured libations and sacrificed and tasted the offerings 
 together with my son Aurelius Dioscorus and my daughter Aurelia Lais. I therefore 
 
 E 
 
50 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI © 
 
 request you to certify my statement. The rst year of the Emperor Caesar Gaius Messius 
 Quintus Trajanus Decius Pius Felix Augustus, Pauni 20.’ 
 
 1-2. The Berlin and Vienna de//7 are addressed τοῖς ἐπὶ τῶν θυσιῶν ἡρημένοις, omitting 
 ἐερων. 
 
 6. ἀεὶ μέν is written in the original rather below the line and there are traces of ink 
 Over dei, so there seems to have been some correction. 
 
 13-4. τῇ θυγατρί: women were clearly included in the Decian Edict ; cf. the Vienna 
 iibellus, which is from two men with their wives, and the 5th Edict of Maximin (Euseb. 
 de Mart. Pol. ix. 2), quoted by Harnack, πανδημεὶ πάντας ἄνδρας ἅμα γυναιξὶ καὶ οἰκέταις 
 καὶ αὐτοῖς ὑπομαζίοις παισὶ θύειν καὶ σπένδειν, κιτ.λ. 
 
 23. A signature begins at this line, though whether it is that of the sender of the 
 declaration or of an official is doubtful. ‘The stroke above the supposed » which we have 
 taken to represent an abbreviation may be only part of a long paragraphus below 
 the date. 
 
 ll. NEW (CLASSICAL ERAGE 
 
 659. Pinpar, Παρθένειον AND ODE. 
 12:38 Χ 40 cm. Prates III, IV. 
 
 Fragments of a roll containing parts of at least five columns of lyric poetry — 
 in Pindaric dialect, written in good-sized round uncials, which we assign to the 
 latter half of the first century B.c. Occasional accents, breathings, and stops 
 (high and middle point) have been added by the original scribe, who has also 
 made a few corrections of his work ; the text, however, was not left in a very 
 perfect condition, and several alterations are necessary on metrical and other 
 grounds. The first three columns, but for the loss of a few lines at the beginning 
 of each, are in good condition; the fourth becomes more fragmentary, while 
 Col. v, which probably succeeded immediately and to which the majority of the 
 small unplaced pieces appear to belong, is hopelessly broken. The position of 
 these is to some extent fixed by the fact that the verso of Cols. i-iii was utilized 
 for a collection of epigrams (662); for since the verso of most of the scraps 
 is blank, they must be placed later than the upper half of the third column. _ 
 
 Although the Pindaric authorship of these new poems is’ not definitely 
 established by the coincidence of any part of them with already extant frag- 
 ments, their style and diction leave little room for doubt as to the identity 
 of the poet. It is therefore a piece of great good fortune that the second at 
 
659. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 51 
 
 any rate of the two odes comprised by the papyrus (Il. 21 544.) belongs to 
 a class hitherto practically unrepresented in what survives of Pindar’s works. 
 This poem was composed in honour of Aeoladas (1. 29) the father of the 
 Pagondas (1. 30) who commanded the Thebans at the battle of Delium 
 (Thucyd. iv. 91-6), and his praises are put in the mouth of a maiden (ll. 26, 
 46, &c.)—a circumstance which at first led us to suppose that the writer was 
 a woman. But Blass, to whom we are especially indebted in connexion with 
 this papyrus, is clearly right in regarding the piece as one of the Παρθένεια, or 
 choruses for girls, which figure in the lists of Pindar’s works, and are exemplified 
 in a few meagre quotations (among which is perhaps to be reckoned 221. vii. 
 6-12). Can the poem be characterized still more closely? In near relation to 
 the Παρθένεια there stood a series known as Aadyndopixd, so called because the 
 singers bore branches of laurel. The catalogue of Pindar’s works as given 
 by Suidas distinguishes the Παρθένεια from the Δαφνηφορικά, while the list given 
 in the Codex Ambrosianus, which is usually recognized as the superior authority, 
 does not mention the latter class, and apparently includes it in the Παρθένεια ; 
 ef. Proclus, Chrest. ap. Phot., Bzb/. 239 Παρθ. οἷς καὶ τὰ δαφνηφορικὰ ὡς εἰς γένος 
 πίπτει. Τί is then quite possible that in the present poem the rather prominent 
 allusions to δάφνη (Il. 27-8, 73), in one of which the speaker actually describes 
 herself as carrying a laurel branch, may possess a special significance. . On the 
 other hand there is here no sign of the religious character which seems to have 
 belonged to the Δαφνηφορικά (cf. Proclus, 216.) ; Pindar is indeed said in the 
 Vita Ambrosiana to have dedicated one of these poems to his son Daiphantus, 
 but the circumstances are unknown. For the present, therefore, it is sufficient 
 to call attention to these references, and to assign the ode provisionally to the 
 more comprehensive class of the Παρθένεια, or possibly to the κεχωρισμένα τῶν 
 Παρθενείων mentioned in the Ambrosian list and elsewhere. The obscurity of 
 the latter category might have the advantage of covering the other poem 
 partially preserved in the papyrus, which was also in honour of Aeoladas (I. 12), 
 but, as is shown by the occurrence of a masculine participle (I. 11), was not 
 designed for a female chorus. No doubt if both pieces were Δαφνηφορικά, the 
 difference of sex would cause no difficulty; but in the absence of further 
 allusions to δάφνη such an assumption has little to commend it. Perhaps this 
 ode was an ἐγκώμιον or simply Epinician in character, and the juxtaposition of 
 the two pieces was merely due to their identity of subject. 
 
 The metre of the Παρθένειον is distinguished, like its language, by an ease 
 and simplicity which fully bear out the reputation of this class of Pindar’s 
 odes; cf. Dionys. Halicarn. Demosth. 39, where after citing the poetry of 
 Aeschylus and Pindar as an example of want of connexion, abruptness, and 
 
 E 2 
 
52 THE OAVYRAYNCAUS PAPI 
 
 unexpected changes of construction, the critic proceeds χωρὶς ὅτι μὴ τὰ Παρθένεια 
 καὶ εἴ τινα τούτοις ὁμοίας ἀπαιτεῖ κατασκευάς" διαφαίνεται δέ τις ὁμοία κὰν τούτοις 
 εὐγένεια καὶ σεμνότης ἁρμονίας τὸν ἀρχαῖον φυλάττουσα πίνον. Strophes and epodes 
 consist alike of five verses having a prevailing choriambic element. The 
 scheme is as follows :— 
 
 Strophes. Epodes. 
 ae 
 —¥—-—vv-v-, YY -V = -,Ξ --οὧυ--  - 
 —-—--—-vVvV-—- Vv -, ee - “.΄ - υυυὐ-υ-- 
 “-.πιωυωπ-πυ -- -- πυυ-- - 
 -Ξ-- υυ-υ-] —— — VUK-U 
 -͵ᾷΞ(Ὡπωυυ “-- --: πυυ -- -- 
 
 Lines I and 4 in the strophe, 1, (2) and 4 in the epode stand in synaphia with 
 the lines succeeding; and a single long syllable before or after a choriambus 
 is probably to be regarded as lengthened by ‘syncope’ to the extent of an 
 additional short syllable, e.g. --uwu -- = L-vvu-d, or -Yv-vuu-vu-. 
 The commencement of each new strophe is marked in the original by an 
 elaborate coronis, and the antistrophes and epodes are commonly denoted in 
 the same way by paragraphi, which are, however, sometimes omitted. The 
 metrical scheme shows that the number of lines missing at the tops of Cols. 
 iii and iv must be either 8 or 23—a larger figure is out of the question. 
 A loss of 8 lines would give a roll of the likely enough height of about 
 20 cm., and is a satisfactory supposition in other respects. Each column 
 would accordingly consist of from 28-29 lines, and a lacuna of about ὃ or 9 
 lines may therefore be postulated at the beginning of the first two columns, 
 On this view the remains of the second poem extend to the second verse of 
 the eighth strophe, or the 107th line from the commencement ; the numeration 
 given in the text below refers only to the lines actually preserved in the papyrus. 
 
 The length of the strophe of the first poem (Col. i and the lost portion 
 of Col. ii) is also five verses; the epode was longer, how much longer depends 
 upon the number of lines lost at the top of Col. ii. If it be assumed that no 
 space was left between the end of this ode and the commencement of the next, 
 as the analogy of the Bacchylides papyrus and 408 would indicate, the epode 
 extended to the rather unexpected length of 14 verses; if on the other hand 
 the division was marked by a blank space, this number would be lowered by 
 two or three lines. A different figure would of course result from the adoption 
 of the hypothesis that the loss in Cols. iii-iv amounts to 23 verses, which would 
 bring down the epode of the previous poem to a maximum of 9 lines. 
 
659. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 53 
 
 We append the scheme of the metre :— 
 
 Strophes. 
 υυ-πω “-- -- - 
 υωπυ-πιυυ - 
 -..͵οὨ͵ὸου-τ υυ-τ-ῦυ - - 
 VU UU - υὖὁὅᾶυᾶ -.υὺυ - 
 --υ-π- ποπυ -“-- ΝΜ 
 
 Epodes 
 ene a Sf τις Ἐν Φ αν 
 “τ -ς-- a |) = 
 Oe 
 i om Neat Nd aD NS mmm ἐν οὶ 
 eh at ee 
 ee ABE Ge AW le oe ree) 
 
 Lines 4-5 in the strophe and 1-3 and 4-5 in the epode are connected by 
 
 synaphia. 
 Col. i. 
 [ 21 fete . ΙΓ] 
 ! ] 
 JOC[. . . .JOEIAICEP 
 a ἸΔΙΑΙ 
 
 5 Lb MANTIC@CTEAEL.]CW 
 ΟΠ I€PATIOAOC’ TIMAI 
 AEBPOTOICIKEKPIMENAI: 
 TIANTIAETIIP>OONOCANAPIKEITAI 
  APETAC* OAEMHAENEXWNYTIOCI 
 2 TAIMEAAINAIKAPAKEKPYTITAI 
 bIAEW NAANEYXOIMAN 
 KPONIAAICETTAIOAAAATI 
 KAITENEIEY TYXIANTETAXOAI 
 OMAAONXPONON* A@ANATAIAEBPOTOIC 
 ; AMEPAICWMAAECTIONATON = 
 AMAWITINIMHAITIOTE 
 > KNOCC&AAHITTAMTTANOIKOCBIAI 
  AIAAMEICANATKAI 
 ZWEIKAMATONTIPObYTO)NANIA 
 ΡΟΝΤΟΓΙΊΡΠΡΙΝΓΕΝΕ 
 
 ΙΟ 
 
 15 
 
 20 
 
 ἍΝ 
 00... = . Geiats ep- 
 . διᾳ 
 é 
 - id - 
 μάντις ὡς τελέσ]σω 
 ἱεραπόλος" τιμαὶ 
 δὲ βροτοῖσι κεκριμέναι" 
 παντὶ δ᾽ ἐπὶ φθόνος ἀνδρὶ κεῖται 
 ἀρετᾶς, ὁ δὲ μηδὲν ἔχων ὑπὸ σι- 
 γᾷ μελαίνᾳ κάρα κέκρυπται. 
 ᾽ , 
 φιλέων δ᾽ ἂν εὐχοίμαν 
 > 
 Kpovidais ἐπ᾽ Αἰολάδᾳ 
 >! 7 δ] 2 lA 
 καὶ γένει εὐτυχίαν τετάχθαι 
 ὁμαλὸν χρόνον: ἀθάναται δὲ βροτοῖς 
 ς 2 A ᾽ > \ Va 
 ἁμέραι, σῶμα δ᾽ ἐστὶ θνατόν. 
 ( 
 ἀλλ᾽ ᾧτινι μὴ λιπότε- 
 [ 
 κνος σφαλῇ πάμπαν οἶκος βιαΐ. 
 ᾳ δαμεὶς ἀνάγκᾳ 
 a δαμεὶς ἀνάγκᾳ, 
 ? » x 9 
 ζώει κάματον προφυγὼν avia- 
 
 pov, τὸ γ[ὰ]ρ πρὶν γενέσθαι 
 
 στρ. 
 
 ἀντ. 
 
25 
 
 30 
 
 Sh) 
 
 40 
 
 45 
 
 54 
 Col. ii. 
 . ΓΗ ee ἸΧΡΥΦΟΠΙ 
 i 
 | [:. JAM. .JAECHCTE so ΕΓ ἢ 
 [. . .JIFAPOL. . .JIAC 
 
 [.]P[.]@PW[.]AOANATANXAPIN 
 OHBAICETTIMIZQN : 
 
 ANAAZO) CAMENATETIETIAON KEW C 
 XEPCINTENMAAAKAICINOPTTAKAPAAON 
 AAbNACOXEOICATIAN 
 AO=ONAIOAAAACTAOMON 
 YIOYTETTATWNAATI] 
 YMNHCWCTEPANOICIOAA 
 AOICATTAPOENIONKAPA ° 
 CEIPHNAAEKOMITON 
 AAICKWNYTIOAWTINGN 
 
 Ψ MIMHCOMAOIAAIC * 
 
 - KEINONOCZEPY POY TECIFAZEITINOAC 
 AIYHPAC* OTTOTANTEXEIMW@NOCCOENEI 
 bPICCWNBOPEACETII 
 CTTEPXHCWKYAAONTETTONTOY 
 [.] TTANETAPAZEKAI 
 
 Col. 11]. 
 fe a ἼΦΕΝ [ 
 Eee. JACIKME.JZ@NNAT 
 
 [. . . .JAAMEN[.JATIAPOIOT 
 [.JAIMAAAOICETIECINTAAA 
 
 ZEY COIAEMEAETIPETIE! 
 TIAPOENHIAMENSPONEIN 
 ΓΛΩΟΟΑΙΤΕΛΕΓΕΟΘΑΙ " 
 ΑΝΔΡΟΟΔΟΥΤΕΓΥΝΑΙΚΟΟΝΘΑΛΕΟΘΟΙΝΕΝ 
 
 25 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
 45 
 
 LHE (OXYRAYNCHUS {PALE 
 
 —“%— uw xXpvoonleTA S— GC = 
 — Ow = Κ λέσῃς το τ eae 
 [_ ει γὰρ ὁ [Ao€jias 
 [π]Ἰρ[ὀϊ]φρω[ν] ἀθανάταν χάριν 
 Θήβαις ἐπιμίξων. 
 ἀλλὰ τς τε πέπλον ὠκέως 
 χερσίν T ἐν μαλακαῖσιν ὅρπακ᾽ ἀγλαὸν 
 δάφνας ὀχέοισα πάν- 
 δοξον Αἰολάδα σταθμὸν 
 υἱοῦ τε Παγώνδα 
 ὑμνήσω στεφάνοισι θάλ- 
 λοισα παρθένιον κάρα, 
 σειρῆνα δὲ κόμπον 
 αὐλίσκων ὑπὸ λωτίνων 
 τς ᾽ 3 a 
 μιμήσομ᾽ ἀοιδαῖς, 
 κεῖνον ὃς Ζεφύρου τε σιγάζει πνοὰς 
 ) 4 Cee, ~ Va 
 αἰψηράς, ὁπόταν τε χειμῶνος σθένει 
 ’ 2 3 
 φρίσσων Βορέας ἐπι- 
 “4 ’ 3 3 lA 
 σπέρχῃ πόντου τ΄ ὠκύαλον 
 [διιπὰν ἐμάλαξεν | καὶ 
 
 τα με he φεν εὐ ον eres 
 [πολ]λὰ μὲν [τ]ὰ πάροιθ ., --ὄ « --ὦ -- 
 [διαιδάλλοις ἔπεσιν: τὰ O ἃ - ὦ -- 
 Ζεὺς οἶδ᾽, ἐμὲ δὲ πρέπει 
 
 foe 4 rt ww 
 παρθενήϊα μὲν φρονεῖν 
 γλώσσᾳ τε λέγεσθαι. 
 
 ἀνδρὸς δ᾽ οὔτε γυναικὸς ὧν θάλεσσιν ἔγ- 
 
659. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 55 
 
 KEIMAIXPHM[.]JAAQOEINAOIAANTTPOCPOPON : κειμαι χρή ple] λαθεῖν ἀοιδὰν πρόσφορον. 
 
 ο ΠΙΟΤΑΔΑΓΑΟΙΚΛΕΙ 50 πιστὰ δ᾽ ᾿4γασικλ(ῶει 
 MAPTYCHAYOONECXOPON μάρτυς ἤλυθον ἐς χορὸν 
 ΕΟΛΟΙΟΤΕΓΟΝΕΥΟΙΝ ἐσλοῖς τε γονεῦσιν 
 ΑΛΛΦΙΠΡΟΞΕΝΙΑΙΟΙΤΙΛΛΑΘΕΝΤΑΟ ἀμφὶ προξενίαισι τι- ἐπ. γ΄ 
 TATIAAAITANYN μαθεῖσιν τὰ πάλαι τὰ νῦν 
 
 5 ΤΑΝΦΙΚΤΙΟΝΕΟΟΙΝ 55 τ᾽ ἀμφικτιόνεσσν ὁ 
 
 — INMMONTWKYTOAWNTIOL. .] ἵππων T ὠκυπόδων ποϊλυ-] 
 
 wb CNW TOICETTINIKAIC* γνώτοις ἐπὶ νίκαις, 
 
 | AICENAIONECCINOFXH[........ 71. ΑὉ αἷς ἐν ἀϊόνεσσιν ᾿Ογχηϊστοῦ κλυ]τᾶξς στρ. δ΄ 
 ΤΑΙΟΔΕΝΑΟΤΙΤΩΝΙΑΟ.. [....... JA ταῖς δὲ ναὸν ᾿Ιτωνίας ἀΐμφ εὐκλε]ᾶ 
 
 ο Χάιτανοτεφανοισὲκόο 60 χαίταν στεφάνοις ἐκόσ- 
 
 MHOEN* ΕΝΤΕΠΙΟΑΙΠΕΡΙΠῚ 1] μηθεν, ἔν τε Πίσᾳ περι- 
 Col. iv. 
 
 PIZAITE[ ρίζα τε GS) oe 
 
 [. .JMNONAN[ [celuvoy ay GU -— Ὁ -- 
 
 Ψ ΕἸΤΑΠΎΛΟΙΟ . [ — ἑπταπύλοισι[ν. 
 
 T ENHKENKAIETIEIT[.......... JAoc 65 ἐνῆκεν καὶ ἔπειτα δυσμενὴς χόΪλος στρ. € 
 
 ΝΣ NOANAPOONENET. -INMEPIMNAC τῶνδ᾽ ἀνδρῶν ἕνε[κε]ν μερίμνας σώφρονος 
 
 Γ CO)PPONOCEXOPANEP!NOYTIAAIT ἐχθρὰν ἔριν οὐ παλίγ- 
 
 TAQ) CCONAMAAAIKAC[.]!A0YC γλωσσον ἀλλὰ δίκας [δ]ιδοὺς 
 T[.] . ACEPIAH[. «Ν᾿ π[ισ]τὰς (Ὁ) ἐφίλησε]ν. 
 
 ο ΔΑΛΙΑΙΝΑΟΙ͂ΤΑ[.] .. « [- « JOINYNMOITOAL 40 Δαμαίνας παῖίϊ,) ὦ -- ὦ @ νῦν μοι ποδὶ ἀντ. ε΄ 
 CTEIXGNALEQ[.JINFAPE[.JPPWNEVETAI στείχων ἁγέο' [Tliv γὰρ εὔφρων ἕψεται 
 ΠΡΩΤΑΘΥΓΑΤΗΡΓΔΟΥ πρώτα θυγάτηρ [Ἰδοῦ 
 ΔΑΦΝΑΓΕΥΠΕΤΑΛΟΥΟΧΕΔΙΙ͂Ν δάφνας εὐπετάλου σχεδὸὴ]ν 
 BAINOICATTEAIAQIC® βαίνοισα πεδίλοις 
 
 5 ἈΝΔΑΙΟΙΟΤΡΟΤΑΑΝΕΤΑΙ 1] 75 ἃν Δαισιστρότα, av ἐπά- ἐπ. ε΄ 
 CKHCEMHAEC[. .] .. - ΛΑΙ. 1} σκησε μήδεσ]ι --υ -- 
 
 BRGPISIACAL 2. ence.» 1 uct ca eres 
 
 ΝΕ ty ocala ieee « NC μυρίων ἕω — vis 
 
56 JHE -OXVYRAVNCHOS REAL Re 
 
 b ZG Vie Ales arco a a, Ge ] ζεύξαϊσα erent ἘΣ στ͵ 
 So PMUNVNNEGK DAL si τ ΝΕ JNACEMAC 80 μὴ viv véxtalp idévt ἀπὸ Kpdlvas ἐμᾶς 
 ΔΙ Ν ΓΕΡᾺ oe Fake JTTAPAAMYPON διψῶντ᾽ ἃ οὐ -- υ-- παρ ἁλμυρὸν 
 Θ oS 4 
 GIXECKON? Cle. eee 1 οἴχεσθον: ἕ --Ἴ — 
 Col. v 
 JCMY[ 
 ] 
 85 ] 
 ] 
 NT .[ ———vuv --»Τυ — é 
 JAQAN πῶ σον 
 ] Sac Ones 
 go ] . INAP 909 — — — vu — Wy ap- 
 ] — — VU - 
 JNOCTIEECTIAN τον τὺ vos Tl ἔστ στ 
 ἸΓΛΑΙΖΕΤΑΙ πον uy τὺ αἀἸγλαιζετος 
 Fragments. 
 (2) (2) (c) (d) 
 ἹΡΗΙ 1.01 [Δ Τ᾽. 
 95 JAITIL ]CAAT ACTEI[ ]CTATIANT 
 ἸΑΕΙΔΙ 100 JEOMOC[ 105 NAIO[ 1. ΑἸΚΟ ΖΓ} 
 Ιῷῶ . JENAIK[ PAL 
 ἜΣ TIC, 
 () () (g) (Z) (ἢ 
 Ito JANTIL 1. NAL 115 JATI[ ] 1207 oe 
 JNATL . ]. 1Π| ΙΝ ΗΙ 
 
 iP 1H 10} 
 
659. MEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 57 
 (4) (ἢ (γ") (7) (0) 
 
 I JAIAL 125 [.]OIAL ] JOMA!” [ 
 ΤΙ π΄ LAOAL 1 ] 
 ae Φ' WTEL JANAH[ ] 
 CHPA[ JNA. [ ] 
 AY=E! . [ - 
 130 T[.].[L 
 
 (2) (9) (7) 
 
 1 Wh |WKPEO ‘ [ : Oi 
 ΚΡ. [ 1. AANNAC . [ ]40=[ 
 
 135 JMO[ ] 140 JN: [ 
 ΕΠ τὸ ως ] Lae 
 
 1-4. At the top of this column considerable difficulties arise with regard to the place 
 of the two fragments (4) and (4), which appear in this position in Plate III. Fr. (6) 
 especially looks as if it should be put here, for the tops of the letters TIC in the fifth line 
 exactly suit μάντις. But the letters on the verso cannot be made to fit in as they should 
 with the last lines of the extant epigram of Antipater; cf. note on 662. 18-20. The two 
 fragments cannot well be placed higher up, since the column on the verso appears to 
 be complete. We are therefore reduced to the alternatives either of supposing that the 
 papyrus had new readings in the last three lines of the epigram or that the fragments come 
 from a previous column; they do not belong to a later column because the colour of the 
 papyrus and the size of the letters on the verso is inconsistent with Col. ii, and the verso 
 of the rest is blank at the top. Neither of these alternatives is satisfactory, but the latter 
 is the safer. The question, however, is not of great importance, for the first few lines 
 of the column would in any case hardly be capable of restoration without the assistance of 
 the metre. 
 
 ll. 5-20. ‘...I will fulfil like a prophet-priest. The honours of mortals are diverse, 
 but every man has to bear envy of excellence, while the head of him who has nought 
 is hidden in black silence. And in friendly mood would I pray to the children of Cronus 
 that prosperity of unbroken duration be decreed for Aeoladas and his race; the days 
 of mortals are deathless, but the body dies. But he whose house is not reft of offspring 
 and utterly overthrown, stricken by a violent fate, lives escaping sad distress ; for before...’ 
 
 4. κεκριμέναι: cf. Lem. vi. 3 διείργει δὲ πᾶσα κεκριμένα δύναμις. 
 
 12. At the end of this line is a TT with a dot or small o between the two upright 
 strokes, like the abbreviation of πολύς or πόλις. The surface of the papyrus is damaged 
 immediately after the TT and one or two more letters may have followed. It is difficult 
 
58 THE OXYRHYNCAHUS PAPYRI 
 
 to see what can have been meant, for neither sense nor metre requires any word between 
 Aloddda and καί ; cf. 1, 61, note. 
 
 ' 13. The diple-shaped marginal sign which appears in the facsimile opposite this line 
 really belongs to 1. 17; the small fragment containing it was wrongly placed when the 
 photograph was taken. For another case of the use of an Aristarchean symbol in 
 a non-Homeric papyrus cf. 442. 52. 
 
 14-5. The meaning is that, though the individual dies, the race is perpetuated. 
 
 17. There are spots of superfluous ink about the letters OIKO, creating rather the 
 appearance of an interlinear insertion in a smaller hand ; Καὶ was perhaps corrected. Another 
 blot occurs above KAMATON in I. 19. 
 
 21-4. A fresh ode begins at 1. 21, the change being marked in the margin by 
 a symbol of which vestiges appear opposite this line and the next. The name of the 
 person to whom the poem was dedicated and its occasion may have been added, 
 as in the Bacchylides papyrus. The small fragment placed at the top of this column 
 and containing parts of 1]. 22-4 is suitable both with regard to the recto and the verso 
 (cf. 662. 39-40, note), but its position can hardly be accepted as certain. None of 
 the remaining fragments can be inserted here, their verso being blank. For [π|ρ[6]φραἝν], 
 a favourite word of Pindar, cf. e.g. Pyth. v. 117 θεὸς δέ of τὸ viv τε πρόφρων τελεῖ δύνασιν. 
 
 ll. 23-40. ‘For Loxias .. . of his favour pouring upon Thebes everlasting glory. 
 But quickly girding up my robe and bearing in my soft hands a splendid Jaurel-branch 
 I will celebrate the all-glorious dwelling of Aeoladas and his son Pagondas, my maidenly 
 head bright with garlands, and to the tune of lotus pipe will imitate in song a siren 
 sound of praise, such as hushes the sudden blasts of Zephyrus and, when chilling Boreas 
 speeds on in stormy might, calms the ocean’s swift rush...’ 
 
 30. After TTATW@NAA an | seems to have been smeared out, but the appearance of | 
 may be merely due to a blot; cf. note onl. 17. 
 
 33. σειρῆνα δὲ xdprov... ὃς Ζεφύρου, κιτιὰλ. : cf. Schol. on Homer, Od. p. 168-9 (γαλήνη 
 ἔπλετο νηνεμίη κοίμησε δὲ κύματα δαίμων) ἐντεῦθεν Ἡσίοδος καὶ τοὺς ἀνέμους θέλγειν αὐτὰς (SC. τὰς 
 Σειρῆνας) ἔφη. 
 
 34. AAICKOON is apparently a mistake for αὐλίσκων ; cf. Οἱ, iv. 2 ὧραι ὑπὸ ποικιλοφόρμιγγος 
 ἀοιδᾶς ἑλισσόμεναι, The initial A could equally well be A but hardly N, nor does ναΐσκων 
 give so good a sense. 
 
 37. M of XEIMGNOC has been altered from N. 
 
 38-9. φρίσσων Βορέας : cf. Pyth. iv. 81 φρίσσοντας ὄμβρους which a scholiast explains 
 φρίσσειν ποιοῦντας. EMICTIEPXHC is a mistake for ETICTIEPXHI; cf. for the word Od. ε. 304 
 ἐτάραξε δὲ πόντον, ἐπισπέρχουσι δ᾽ ἄελλαι. We transpose ὠκύαλον and πόντου on account 
 of the metre though this change does not effect an absolute correspondence, ————— νυ -- 
 taking the place of ---UU—U-—. ὠκύαλος ῥιπή occurs in Opp. Hal. 2. 535. 
 
 40. The sense seems to require the substitution of ἐμάλαξεν for the ETAPA=E of the 
 papyrus; cf. Fr. 133 (probably Pindar) of the Adespo/a in Bergk, Poet. Lyr. ἐπερχόμενόν 
 τε μαλάξοντας βίαιον πόντον ὠκείας τ᾽ ἀνέμων ῥιπάςς The displacement of ἐμάλαξεν by ἐτάραξεν 
 would be easy in such a context; cf. the passage from Od. ε quoted in the note on 
 ll. 38-9. KAI belongs to the next line. 
 
 42. The reading of this line is difficult. There is a stroke passing through the 
 middle of K to | and another above the K, and perhaps this letter or both | and K were 
 to be cancelled. The facsimile rather suggests that 0 was first written in place of IK, 
 but that is deceptive. The doubtful Z may be =. The dot which appears above the 
 first N is very likely the tip of a letter like P or Φ from the line above. Ἢ 
 
659... NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 59 
 
 43-61. ‘Many are the deeds of old that might be adorned with verse, but the 
 knowledge of them is with Zeus; and for me maidenly thoughts and choice of speech 
 are meet. Yet for no man nor woman to whose offspring I am devoted must I forget 
 a fitting song, and as a faithful witness have I come to the dance in honour of Agasicles 
 and his noble parents, who for their public friendships were held in honour in time past, 
 as now, by their neighbours, and for the renowned victories of swift-footed steeds, victories 
 which decked their locks with crowns at the banks of famed Onchestus or by Itonia’s 
 glorious shrine and at Pisa... 
 
 44. Cf. Pindar, Wem. xi. 18 μελιγδούποισι δαιδαλθέντα μελιζέμεν ἀοιδαῖς. The A of TA was 
 altered apparently from O. 
 
 46-7. pev...te: οἵ. 6. 5. OL. vi. 88-9 πρῶτον μέν... γνῶναί τ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽. 
 
 49. ἀοιδὰν πρόσφορον : the phrase recurs in /Vem. ix. 7. 
 
 50. The alteration of ATACIKAEI to ᾿Αγασικλέει is necessary for the metre. Who this 
 Agasicles was is obscure; perhaps he was the παῖς ἀμφιθαλής who ἄρχει τῆς δαφνηφορίας 
 according to the account of Proclus af, Photius 2221. 239, or he may merely have been 
 some member of the family of Aeoladas, The rather abrupt way in which his name is 
 introduced and the context in which it occurs might suggest that a third poem commenced 
 in Col. iii, a supposition which would be strengthened if the loss at the tops of the columns 
 were extended by another fifteen lines (cf. introd.). But the hypothesis of two consecutive 
 odes in the same metre would require to be justified by stronger evidence than that 
 supplied by the passage before us. For mora μάρτυς cf. Pyth. i. 88, and xii. 27 πιστοὶ 
 χορευτᾶν μάρτυρες. 
 
 53. τιμαθεῖσιν : ΤΙΛΑΘΕΝΤΑΟ the papyrus, and the accusative may possibly have been 
 justified by the sequel; but as the passage stands τιμαθεῖσιν τὰ πάλαι Or τιμαθέντεσσι πάλαι 
 seems an improvement, though the accumulation of datives is not elegant. In any case the 
 division of the lines is wrong, as in ll. 4o—1 and 66-7. For the language cf. Js¢h. iii. 
 25-6 τιμάεντες ἀρχᾶθεν λέγονται πρόξενοί τ᾿ ἀμφικτιόνων. It is noticeable that the papyrus 
 has the spelling ἀμφικτίονες which was restored to the text of Pindar by Boeckh in 
 place of the MSS. reading ἀμφικτύονες. 
 
 58. κλυ͵τᾶς is by no means certain. The letter before AC is possibly T, but more 
 of the crossbar should be visible. 
 
 59. ναόν is a necessary correction of the papyrus reading NAOT. 
 
 61. The metre is complete at περι-, and probably the lines were wrongly divided again 
 -—unless indeed the same addition was made as at the end of |. 12. 
 
 64-76. ‘. . . to [Thebes] of the seven gates. Then jealous wrath at so just an 
 ambition of these men provoked a bitter unrelenting strife, but making full amends 
 was changed to friendship. Son of Damaena, come, lead on now with [propitious ἢ] foot ; 
 gladly upon thy way she first shall follow thee stepping with her sandals nigh upon the 
 thick-leaved laurel, the daughter whom Daesistrota and... perfected with counsel .. .’ 
 
 64. Another disturbance in the metre has occurred in this line, which will not scan 
 With ἑπταπύλοις as the first word. The vestiges before the lacuna suggest a round letter 
 like € or 0, and ETTTATTYAOICOHBAIC, 6. g. may have been written for Θήβαις ἑπταπύλοισιν. 
 But it is just possible to read EMTATTYAOICI[N, and to suppose that the missing syllable 
 at the beginning of the line was transposed to 1. 63. 
 
 65. The first N of ENHKEN is rather cramped; but the writing becomes smaller and 
 more compressed in this column. 
 
 66. The transference of σώφρονος to this line is necessary mefr? gratia. For μέριμνα in 
 
60 THE OXVRAYNCHUS AL YRS 
 
 the sense of ambition for distinction in the games cf. e.g. Ol. i. 10g—I1 θεὸς ἐπίτροπος ἐὼν 
 τεαῖσι μήδεται... Ἱέρων pepipvarow. 
 
 67. Γ opposite this line marks the 3ooth verse; cf. 448. 302 and other Homeric 
 papyri. With an average column of 28-9 lines (cf. introd.) this would be the eleventh 
 column of the roll. 
 
 The reading ἐχθρὰν ἔριν is fairly satisfactory, though ΝΕ hardly fills the space between 
 the A and P. 
 
 69. With πἰισ͵γάς the letters ICT must be supposed to have been very close together ; 
 cf. note on 1. 65. 
 
 yo. Here again is a difficulty. There is no sign of the second leg of Π in TIAJ.] and 
 a T would in some respects be more satisfactory, but on the other hand the space between 
 this letter and A is more consistent with a Tl. The name Adyawa has no authority, but 
 is in itself unobjectionable, standing in the same relation to Δάμων as Aéawa to Λέων ΟΥ̓ 
 Tpipawa to Τρύφων. The person addressed may be Aeoladas or Pagondas, but his identity 
 is of course quite obscure. With regard to the mutilated adjective agreeing with ποδί, 
 immediately following the first lacuna is a vertical stroke (not very clear in the facsimile) 
 with an angular base, which might be the second half of a Ν or the lower half of a letter 
 like | or T; in the latter case two letters might be lost in the lacuna. The vertical 
 stroke is not long enough for p,so πάΪτε]ρ is excluded. The next letter could be an A or A, 
 but the traces on the papyrus are very indistinct, and there may have been a correction. 
 If walt] is right the succeeding word must begin with a short vowel, unless indeed πά[ι] 
 is read as a disyllable ; macs has been conjectured in Οἱ ii. 84. ἐλευθέρῳ is unsuitable ; 
 ἐναισίμῳ might do. 
 
 73. CXEA[.JN: the facsimile is again deceptive, transforming the X into € and € 
 into C. There might be room for two narrow letters between A and N, but oxed/6]p is 
 hardly to be avoided, though δάφνας εὐπετάλου σχεδὶ ὸ]ν βαίνοισα is not very satisfactory. 
 
 75. Δαισιστρότα is another name for which no authority can be cited, but it is quite 
 a possible form, στροτός being the Boeotian for στρατός. Whether the reference is to 
 a goddess or a woman is doubtful. A second name must have followed in |. 76; 
 cf. Il. 80-2, note. For the anaphora of the relative cf. the reading of some MSS. in 
 Pindar, Fr. 75. 10 ὃν (v. 4 τὸν) Βρόμιον ὃν (v. 2. τὸν) ᾽᾿Εριβόαν τε βροτοὶ καλέομεν. The A of the 
 second AN is more like ΔΛ, ἐπασκεῖν is a Pindaric word; cf. Vem. ix. 10 ἐπασκήσω κλυταῖς 
 ἥρωα τιμαῖς, and Fr. 194. 4. 
 
 80-2. ‘Do not when in sight of the nectar from my spring go thirsty away to 
 a salt stream,’ νέκταϊρ seems right, though the T is not very satisfactory, the length of the 
 vertical stroke rather suggesting P; Τί however, is an irregular letter. Cf. for the metaphor 
 Ol. vii. πὸ καὶ ἐγὼ νέκταρ χυτόν, Μοισᾶν δόσιν, ἀεθλοφόροις ἀνδράσιν πέμπων, γλυκὺν καρπὸν 
 φρενός, ἱλάσκομα. The persons addressed are presumably the two named in ll. 75-6, 
 the masculine form of the dual being used of a feminine subject as 6. g.in Soph. O. C. 
 1113, 1676. In 1, 81 the original reading διψῶντ(ε) seems preferable to the correction 
 or variant διψῶντ(ι) since there is no certain instance in Pindar of the latter elision; but 
 of course the question cannot be decided without the following words: Supavr(c) ἁδύ, 
 e.g., would give a good sense. It is noticeable that in the next line, though the substitution 
 of © for the second X is necessary, the X has not been crossed out. 
 
 Frs. (a) and (4). On the position of these two fragments see note on Il. 1-4. 
 
 Fr. (7) 128. CHPAl is very intractable, leading only to Σήρ or σῆραγξ in some form; 
 but the first letter is plainly C and not 0. 
 
 Fr, (7) 140. Above N to the right is a mark like a grave accent. 
 
660. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 61 
 
 660. PakAN. 
 Fr. (αὐ 13-1 XQ cm. 
 
 Two fragments, each from the top of a column, which is probably though 
 not certainly one and the same, containing part of what is evidently a Paean. 
 The lines seem to be rather long, and it is hardly possible to make out the 
 sense or to discern in whose honour the paean was composed. Neither is there 
 much clue to the identity of the author ; but Blass points out that, while ἀΐοισα 
 (1. 8) indicates a lyric poet, the form νέας for vaas is decisive against Pindar 
 or Bacchylides. Perhaps the piece may be attributed to Simonides, but a 
 later date is not impossible. 
 
 The text is written in a good-sized, but not very regular, round uncial hand, 
 which we should place near the end of the first or early in the second century. 
 A high stop is used, and breathings, accents, and marks of quantity are added 
 not infrequently, all being due to the original scribe. 
 
 Fr. (a) [. -].[. . «Ἰχεοδῖ. .]ν απείρατί Jov εσσεσθῖαι Fr. (ὁ) 
 Eas* ιεπαίηον αναρσιωὼν τὶ ] άμμορον [ 
 οἰστων δούρων τε σιδαροΐ Ἰμων dal 
 βρῖσει νξὶς αἴθεων μάλιστ 1. χοων of 
 5 ἢ πολεμονδὲε κορυσσομεῖν Ἰωμενοί 
 θεσπεσιας ὃ dro κνισας pf Ἰομενοί 
 ΚΙ, ] πολλακις Πυθοι πὶ 
 
 ἃ μεν TavT αἴοισα γναμψείι 
 
 εσσομ[ε]νου δ᾽ veos ov μελλε.[ 
 10 [ιεἸπαιασίι]ν: σὺν αλιοι τριταί 
 ιεπαίασιν a. xev.. ovda. [ 
 
 .joss aurika δε σκοπιᾶς οἱ [ 
 
 .\vovTt . yav eparav [ 
 
 15 [ιεπαΐίαν ὃ apa vuKra kl 
 
 [ 
 
 [- 
 
 [. .]vTo μεταχρονιαι.Ϊ 
 [- 
 
 [ 
 
 [μα]ρτυραμεναι O.]x[ 
 [. Jas: ἱἵεπα[ιηο]ν" . | 
 [. 
 
 Jo πραΐ. . .]έ 
 
62 THE: OXYRHYNCHUS PARYRI 
 
 . jos ζε[παιηον 
 
 1-6. The small fragment does not seem to join on directly to the larger, for though 
 that position works well in the first three lines—arretpar|oy, τ (τ᾿ |appopor, σιδαροϊτομων---- 
 difficulties arise in the remainder. In 1. 4 χεων is possible, but not, we think, χορον ; the 
 letter before x is probably ἡ, «, or vy, but not a. In]. 5 the doubtful » might possibly be », 
 but κορυσσομεϊνω)ν could not be got into the space if there was no gap in 1]. 1-2, nor could 
 μίελδ]ομενοί (cf. Homer, //. xxi, 363) be read in ]. 6. On the other hand it is not easy to. 
 reconstruct 1]. 1-2 on the hypothesis of a loss between the two fragments of only one or two 
 letters. In]. 2 there appears to be something above the a of appopoy besides the accent and 
 it is perhaps intended for a smooth breathing, but the effect is rather that of a sign of. short 
 quantity. μί in 1. 6 may be af or Al. 
 
 7. Πυθοι πἰ : or πυθοιτ. Ὁ 
 
 11 sqq. There is some uncertainty with regard to the number of letters lost at the 
 beginnings of the lines. In 1. 10 two letters are required before παιασ[εἦν, and since there 
 are three other instances of temavavy or teramov in the fragment [tesracaow can hardly be 
 avoided. In]. 11 there is rather less room, but something must have stood before παιασιν, 
 and if the column leaned slightly to the right there would not be much difficulty in getting 
 [| into the space. [ualprupapeva in 1. 16 also looks very probable; and if that be 
 right, there must be two letters missing at the commencement of the preceding and 
 following lines. ) 
 
 11. Possibly avyev . ov or avxeval, lov. 
 
 13. peraxpoua: cf. Hesiod, Theog. 269 μεταχρόνιαι yap ἴαλλον (of the Harpies), where 
 μεταχρόνιαι is explained as equivalent to μετέωροι. 
 
 661. Epopes. 
 141 X 16-4 cm. | Pirate V. 
 
 This fragment contains the beginnings and ends of lines from two_ 
 columns of Epodes in the Doric dialect. Iambic trimeters alternate with 
 trochaic verses of half their own length. Archilochus, the father of this style 
 of poetry, cannot of course be the author on account of the dialect; and Blass 
 considers that the piece may be attributed to Callimachus, who appears to have 
 
660 NEW. CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 63 
 
 tried almost every variety of poetic composition and employed different dialects. 
 Unfortunately the longer lines are so incomplete that to make out the general 
 drift is impossible. 
 
 Palaeographically this fragment is of considerable interest. It is written 
 in handsome round uncials, of a type not infrequent in papyri (cf. 25, 224, 678, 
 686, 701), and also exemplified in the great Biblical codices. On the verso of 
 the papyrus are parts of two columns in a cursive hand which is not later than 
 the beginning of the third century, and is quite as likely to fall within the 
 second. The text on the recto then can be assigned with little chance of error 
 to the latter half of the second century. Accents, &c., have been added by two 
 different hands, some being very small and neat, others larger and in lighter ink. 
 To the smaller hand may be attributed also the occasional corrections and the 
 punctuation, but whether this hand can be identified with that of the body 
 of the text is doubtful. The document in cursive seems to be a series of medical 
 prescriptions or directions ; it is too fragmentary to give any connected sense, 
 but the occurrence of the words τρείβανον, συκάμεινος and apparently χιραλέος 
 may be noted. 
 
 Coln ΜῈ (ole it: 
 
 pS moras tepas BAL 
 Jpos ἄριω μένος. και τύχ αμπυριξ . [ 
 
 ἔληγ᾽ ο μυθος: kale 
 5 ly καταρροον πυρδάνωι πυλεπί 
 
 ] 20 Ky yo π᾿ εκέιναν [ 
 
 4 ? 
 κά]. pe δικτύοις ἷ 
 
 ] ταις ἐμαῖς emwdalis 
 ]ον ὦ Παλαιμονες οἱ ὃ εἴπαν [. «Ἰνεῖ 
 One τον τον 
 ύ 7 
 |ro θηριον' SN eo Bao ais “ΔΙ ice 
 ] n κάι pe mler]lol[u|roy [ 
 
 Jov ὦώ Παλάιμονες 25. ἢνθ] χ]ε σαυνιασταῖς 
 
 ] 
 
 ρ 
 15 | amwde τον φθόρον εριψαν αὖθι ὃ ἐξ adols 
 
 β 
 7. Jp κ]]αλον κατάγρϊί 
 εἰκ] τας θαλάσσας τί 
 
64 LHESOXY RAYNCHOUSSLARYER 
 
 3. The corrector apparently wished to alter api μενος to aypia μενος, but the ὠ is not 
 crossed through. Blass suggests 6y|pos ἀγριω μενος, and notes that in Amth. Pal. xii. 162. 1 
 οὔπω τοξοφορῶν οὐδ᾽ ἄριος the same corruption or the same word occurs. 
 
 9. The plural Παλαιμονες means sea-gods. 
 
 16. moras is for ποττάς, 1. €. ποτὶ τάς. 
 
 17. ἢ αμπυριξαΐς, but the vestiges of the letter following € do not suggest a, though that 
 letter cannot be said to be impossible. τυχαμ mupé . . gives no sense. 
 
 19. πυλεπί is a vox nihil’: the letters are all quite clear. 
 
 24. ἡ =, as the punctuation shows; but the apparent use of the singular form with 
 a plural subject is peculiar. ‘The deleted letters are crossed through and besides have dots 
 over them. ν above v might be read as λι, but that is less likely. 
 
 26. Above the ε of αὖθι is a small circular mark which seems to be accidental. A high 
 point might be recognized after ερριψαν. 
 
 27. κατάγρ[ may be κατάγρ[η = καθήρει, but then the preceding word should be a noun, 
 and it is difficult to find anything suitable. The 8 above the deleted « is almost certain, and 
 the vestiges of the first letter of the line strongly suggest 7, which leaves us with m[alpBadov 
 or m|v|p βαλον. 
 
 662. EPIGRAMS. 
 12:8 X 49 cm. 
 
 These epigrams, some of which are extant, others new, are written in three 
 columns on the verso of the papyrus containing the new Pindar fragments, 659. 
 The first column, of which only the ends of lines are preserved, comprises two 
 epitaphs of Leonidas (of Tarentum) and Antipater of Sidon, which already 
 exist in the Anthology (=Anth. Pal. vii. 163, 164). These are succeeded in 
 Col. ii by two poems ascribed to Amyntas, one upon the same Samian woman 
 Prexo who is the subject of the first two epigrams and of another in the same 
 style by Antipater or Archias (Azzh. Pal. vii. 165), the second upon the capture 
 of Sparta by Philopoemen in B.c. 188. Of Amyntas nothing whatever is known 
 apart from this papyrus; the historical allusions of the second poem and the 
 identity in subject of the first with the similar epitaphs of Leonidas and 
 Antipater warrant the conclusion that he also flourished in the second century 
 B.C. The third column contains two new dedicatory epigrams composed for 
 a certain Glenis by Leonidas and Antipater respectively, with the first two 
 words of another which was left unfinished, apparently again by Leonidas. 
 
 The copyist, who wrote an irregular uncial hand, was a careless and 
 unintelligent person, and there are frequent mistakes and corruptions, while 
 a dislocation of the lines has apparently occurred at the top of Col. ii. The 
 date of this text seems to be not much later than that on the recto, and probably 
 it falls within the reign of Augustus like the majority of the papyri with which 
 
662. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 65 
 
 it was found. Accents and stops are of rare occurrence ; a double point is once 
 used in a dialogue (1. 11). The negligence of the writer and the discolouration 
 of the papyrus render decipherment a matter of some difficulty. 
 
 Cols 1 
 Δεωνιδου) 
 
 L 
 
 [τις τινος evoa γυναι Παριὴν ὑπο κἸέιονα κ[ι]σαι 
 [Πρηξω Καλλιτελεὺυς καὶ ποδ]απη Σαμιη 
 
 [τις δὲ σε καὶ κτερειξε ΘεοκρΊιτος ὦ pe yeywves 
 εξεδοσαν θνησκεις ὃ εκ τινος] εκ τίο͵κετου 
 
 €voa ποσων ετεων δυο κεικοσιν ἡ pa γὙ aTEKVOS 
 οὐκ αλλα τριετὴ Καλλιτελην ελιΊπον 
 
 [ 
 
 [ 
 
 [ 
 
 [ζωοι σοι κεινος γε Kat es Babu] ynpas ικοιτο 
 [και σοι ξεινε ποροι παντα Τυχ]γη ta καλα 
 
 το Ϊ Αντιπατρου) 
 
 [φραζε γυναι γενεὴν ονο]μα χθονα : Καλλιτελης μεν 
 
 [ο σπειρας Πραξω ὃ ovvopla yn de Sapos 
 
 σαμα de τις T0d exwoe Θεοΐκριτος o πριν αθικτὰ 
 
 15 
 
 [ 
 
 [aperepas λυσας αμματα παρθ)]ενιαν 
 
 [πως δὲ θανες λοχιοισιν εν] adyeow εἰπε δὲ ποιαν 
 [ 3 
 
 nd\Oes es ηλικιην δισσακι)ς evdekeris 
 5 
 ἡ και amrats οὐ ἕεινε λελΊοιπα γαι εν νεοτατί 
 
 [ 
 
 ΓΗ ΟΑΛΙΤΕλη ee tone tgs πεῖς 1. Tee νη[πιαχον 
 [ελθοι ες ολβιστην πολιην)] τριχία Kat σον οδ[ιτα 
 [ 
 
 20 [ovploy ἰθυνοι παντα Tvyxn βιοτον) 
 
 (οὶ. 11. 
 A puvrov 
 avxpadeas von[.]. ov um o¢pvos ανθεσι δακρυ 
 y[.Aov ενβα[.Ἰσεις Wi.] . pol-Jamns σπιλαδι 
 ppage γυναι τις εουσα xlale εκ Tivos εἰπε TE TATPHV 
 
 τ 
 25. μη] .Ποἱας εθανες νουσου ὑπ apyadens 
 ουνομα κεν Πραξω Sapin ξενε εκ δὲ yovnos 
 Ε 
 
66 
 
 30 
 
 35 
 
 40 
 
 45 
 
 ΡΟ 
 
 88 
 
 THE OAYRAYNCHUS PAT Vid, 
 
 Καλλιτελεὺυς γενομαν add εθανον τοκετω" 
 τις de ταφον στάλωσε Θεουκριτος ἡ με συνευνον 
 ανδρι δοσαν troiny ὃ ηλθες ες ἡλικιην 
 ἐπταετις τρις EVOS γενομαν ETL ἢ pa Y ατεκνος 
 ov Καλλιτελης τριετῆ παιδα δομω λιπομαν 
 
 A puvtov 
 
 / 
 
 Tas mecapos ατρεστον Aaxedatmova Tas Kepa povvas 
 νυν um avikatot Φιλοποιμενι δουρι τ Ay[altov 
 πρηνὴς εκ τρισσᾶν ηριπε μυριαδαν 
 
 ἄἀσκεπος οἰωνοί δὲ περιζμυχηρον ἰδοντες 
 
 μυρονται πεδιον δου. εἶ. .Ἰφεσιπος 
 
 [κ]απνον ὃ εκθρωσίκοντα Jepen[.] . [.10 Aoerpors 
 
 [. δας depkopeval....... alkpomo[A . .] 
 Col. iii. 
 Acwrvidou 
 Axpwpitat Tau και eval. .... ] νυμφαις 
 
 [ΓΊλημις ο συνγειτων dwpa Kk vynyect|ns 
 T 
 ταυταν TE MpoTopav καὶ O..+.+.- Jno. [oe 
 
 βυρσαν και ροθιους τουσὶδ aveOnke] ποδας 
 
 ITav ὦ και vupoa τονδῖ. ..... αγ]ρευτηρα 
 Γληνιν acEnoad aedj.......-. ls 
 Avrimatpolv 
 
 σιλαινων adoxols ἀαντρηισιν noe κερασται 
 τασὃ Akpwpitat Ilavt και ἡγεμονι 
 Καὶ προτομαν ἀκμητα Και αὐτο veov τοδὲε καπρου 
 δερμα To μηδ avTw ρηγνυμενον yadvot 
 ληνις ἀνηερτησε καλας χαριτησίιον aypas 
 δεικνυς ἰφθιμον Kovpos Ovadaye.]s 
 Alew|y:[SJou 
 δρυμνονομου 
 
662. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 67 
 
 Fragments. 
 
 ΄ 
 
 4. γεγωνες (Or teywves) is for γονῆες. 
 
 12. Πραξω: sol. 26; Πρηξώ MSS. But the spelling of the papyrus is too inconsistent 
 to merit much attention. Thus we have in a single epigram avypadeas and apyadens 
 (Il. 22, 25), ποιας and ποιην (Il. 25, 29); ἡ however tends to predominate after a vowel or p in 
 the epigrams of Amyntas, a elsewhere. 
 
 14. παρθἼ]ενιαν : |. παρθενίας or της. 
 
 17. The s above the line is clear enough, and the letter below is apparently « and not 
 ρ. γάρ is of course the right reading. 
 
 18-20. The question of the position of the two fragments (a) and (4) at the bottom of 
 this column has already had to be considered in connexion with the text on the recto; cf. 
 note on 659. 1-4. They might well be put here so far as the appearance of the papyrus 
 and of the writing is concerned ; but the letters will certainly not coincide with any known 
 version of 1]. 18-20. The scribe is far from being reliable no doubt, and something has 
 evidently gone wrong in 1. 18, which should be Καλλιτέλη τριετῆ παῖδ᾽ ἔτι νηπίαχον. Before 
 νηπιαχον] however there is a clear e; perhaps ere ε or ewe for ere was written. τριχα and 
 odira being in their right places it is scarcely admissible to postulate a divergence from the 
 ordinary reading in the intervening words. Combining the two fragments, καὶ σύ γ᾽ 6[Sitra 
 [οὔριον ἰθύνοις ---- ὦ ὦ — Biorlov would give an intelligible variant ; but apart from the difficulty 
 of reading ov and Ἶον this also upsets νηπίαχον, with which the first line of Fr. (6) is incon- 
 sistent, and does not account for the space between τριχία] and καὶ ; moreover on turning to 
 the recto the resulting readings airi[.|oad[, αειδεομοσί, [.jo . εναικί (cf. 659 Frs. (a), (4)) are, 
 to say the least, unattractive. We therefore prefer to suppose that these fragments came 
 earlier in the papyrus; they do not seem to belong to the lost half of this column. 
 
 22-3. These two very puzzling lines.do not combine at all easily with what follows and 
 may be displaced; perhaps, as Blass suggests, they belong to the next epigram, which is 
 apparently defective at the beginning; cf. note on Il. 33-4. The construction would 
 indeed be improved by a verb for εουσα in ]. 24 to depend upon (as in the first line of 
 Leonidas’ epigram τίς τίνος εὖσα .... κεῖσαι), but the word φράζε is the natural commence- 
 ment (cf. |. 11 and “πηι. Pal. vii. 165. 1 εἰπέ, γύναι, τίς ἔφυς), and the participle is not 
 unintelligible. With regard to the reading, in 1. 22 the letter after vo may be y, and there 
 are traces of ink above o which may indicate a correction ; before ον is the end of a high 
 cross stroke which would suit y, o or τ. νοτίε]ρον is just possible though not satisfactory, 
 and would of course leave the line a syllable short. In 1. 23 ενβλί could be read for eval 
 and the following word is perhaps some form of ψυχρός ; but there is hardly space for 
 a letter between the (very doubtful) o and the a (which may be another 0), The Ψ might 
 be d. Blass suggests λείβων ἐμβλέψεις ..., and this may well be right, but was certainly 
 not written. 
 
 24-31. ‘Say, lady, who you are and who your father, and tell your country and of 
 what grievous sickness you died.” ‘My name, sir, is Praxo of Samos, and I was the 
 
 F 2 
 
68 RE OX YRAYNCH OS ΕΠ Δ id, 
 
 daughter of Calliteles, but I died in childbirth.” ‘‘ Who set up the tomb?” “ My husband, 
 Theocritus, to whom they gave me to wife.” “And what age did you reach?” “ Thrice 
 seven and one year old was I.” ‘And were you childless?” ‘I left in my home a boy 
 of three years, Calliteles,”’’ 
 
 24. ε Of εκ was converted from z and the letters wo have also been corrected. 
 
 25. 1. καὶ ποίας @6aves. νηπιας seems to have been originally written, the m being 
 subsequently converted into o and another π added above the line. Whether the initial », 
 of which only a slight vestige remains, was at the same time altered is doubtful owing to 
 a hole in the papyrus. 
 
 26. κεν is a mistake for μέν. 
 
 28. 1. Θεόκριτος @ Cf. Il. 15-6 above and Anth. Pal. vii. 165. 3-4 Θεόκριτος ὅς pe 
 σύνευνον ἤγετο. 
 
 31. The superfluous ov at the beginning of the line is due to the analogy of the two 
 previous epigrams: cf. ll. 7 and 17. 1. Καλλιτέλην. 
 
 33-8 ‘... Sparta, of old the dauntless, at whose single-handed might Ares in war 
 was many a time and oft terror-struck, is now cast headlong and defenceless by thrice ten 
 thousand foes, beneath unconquered Philopoemen and the spears of the Achaeans; and 
 the birds looking upon the smoking plain mourn ., «ἢ 
 
 33-4. 1. τὰν πάρος... τᾶς χέρα... πολλάκις ἐν πολέσιν.. The last word is however very 
 doubtful; πὸ may be τω and o may be ε, while of the supposed ε only a slight vestige of the 
 base is left. Blass would retain ἄν and read πόλεων or πολέων. A couplet has fallen out either 
 before or after ll. 33-4, since there is nothing to govern Λακεδαίμονα. Perhaps, as suggested 
 above, 1]. 22-3 should come in here, though they do not seem particularly appropriate. 
 
 35. δ᾽ should perhaps be inserted after νυν. 
 
 36. 1]. μυριάδων. 
 
 37. ζ of περιζμυχηρον (= περισμυχηρόν) has been corrected. ) 
 
 38. The letters in the latter part of the line are much damaged; the ¢ could equally 
 well be Ψ, ἐσ may be ar or .e, and for the supposed a, which is not satisfactory, .« should 
 perhaps be substituted. 
 
 39-40. The letters |epen| and Ἰκροποῖ are on a detached fragment, the appearance of 
 which decidedly points to the position here assigned to it. The contents of the recto 
 create no difficulty (cf. 659. 21-4 note) and ἀκρόπολις in some form fits the context in 1. 40 
 very well; moreover above p of ]ερεηΐ is the end of a long stroke descending from the line 
 above, which just suits the @ or Ψ after the lacuna in 1. 38. ‘The cumulative effect of these 
 considerations is undeniably strong. 
 
 42-7. ‘To Pan of Acroria and the... nymphs were dedicated as hunting-spoils by 
 neighbour Glenis this head and... hide and these swift feet. O Pan and ye Nymphs, 
 prosper the doughty hunter Glenis .. .’ 
 
 42. ᾿Ακρώρεια was the name of a mountain peak in Sicyon, and ’Axpapeirns is given by 
 Steph. Byz. as a local epithet of Dionysus. The mutilated word before νυμῴαις was 
 probably some adjective ending in -ἰσὲ (cf. 1. 49), but the space is very short for vy —UvU 
 as required by the metre, and a corruption may be suspected. 
 
 43. 1. TAqus as in Il. 47 and 53. For κ[υνηγεσιΐης οἵ, Anth. Pal. vi. 183. 23 o[vaypect|ns 
 (vi. 34. 4) could also be read. 
 
 44. The first a of ravravy has been corrected, and to make the result clearer another τ 
 was added above the line. 
 
6638. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 69 
 
 45. Cf. Anth. Pal. vi. 34. 2 καὶ κάπρου τούσδε καθᾶψε πόδας. καθαψε might of course be 
 read for ἀνεθηκε here, but the meaning would not be affected. 
 
 46. 1. νύμφαι. |pevrnpa must be θηρευτῆρα or dypevtipa; perhaps τόνδ᾽ [ἄλκιμον ἀγ)ρευτῆρα. 
 
 47. 1. ἀεξήσαιτ᾽ followed by something like αἰὲν ἄγραισι καλαῖς ; but the remains of the 
 letter after ae suggest 6, ¢, or ξ. Cf. Anth. Pal. vi. 158. 3-4 αὔξετε δ᾽ αἰεὶ Πὰν ἀγέλην Νύμφαι 
 
 πίδακα, and vi. 34. 5-6 ἀλλ᾽ ὦ Πὰν σκοπιῆτα καὶ εἰς ὀπίσω Πολύαινον evaypov πέμποις viea Σιμύλεω. 
 
 49-54. “Τὸ the cave-dwelling mates of the Sileni and to horned Pan of Acroria their 
 chief these trophies, a scathless head and new boar’s hide, that not even steel may rend, 
 were hung up to view as a thank offering for a goodly quarry by Glenis the son of noble 
 Onasiphanes.’ 
 
 49. 1. Σιληνῶν. 
 
 50. |. ταῦτ᾽ for τασὸὃ. 
 
 51. axunra may be interpreted in the sense of ‘uninjured’ or ‘permanent’ on the 
 analogy of πυλαὶ ἀκμῆτες in Anth. Pal. ix. 526 or may be regarded as an epithet which 
 strictly applies only to the living animal (cf. Soph. Antig. 353 οὔρειόν τ᾽ ἀκμῆτα ταῦρον). 
 
 52. χαλυοι is for χάλυβι ; cf. νυμοαι for νύμφαι in ]. 46. The top of the o is missing, 
 but 8 seems excluded. 
 
 54. 1. Ovalor\paveluls ? 
 
 56. 1. δρυμονόμου or δρυμὸν ὁμοῦ. The rest of the epigram was never added. 
 
 663. ARGUMENT OF CRATINUS AIONYCAAE=ANAPOS. 
 19°8 X 12-3 cm. 
 
 Of all the lost Greek classics there are few of which the recovery would be 
 of greater importance than the plays of Cratinus or Eupolis, and though the 
 present fragment does not give any actual portion of Cratinus’ works it never- 
 theless throws some interesting and much wished for light upon the plots of his 
 comedies, about which almost nothing was known previously. It consists of 
 the argument of the Διονυσαλέξανδρος, one of Cratinus’ most famous plays, 
 written in a small uncial hand in the late second century or the first half of the 
 third. The title Διονυσαλέξανδρος ἢ (i.e. the 8th drama) Κρατείνου occurs, not 
 where it would be expected at the end, but at the top of the last column, and 
 is written in much larger uncials. What is meant by this comedy being called 
 the ‘ 8th’ is uncertain. Similar numbers are assigned to extant Greek plays in 
 their arguments, e.g. the Axtigone of Sophocles is the ‘32nd,’ the Alcestis of 
 Euripides the ‘17th,’ the Szrds of Aristophanes the ‘35th.’ That the numbers 
 refer to the chronological order is barely possible in the first two of these 
 instances and impossible in the third; and in the case of the Dronysalexandrus 
 also it is very improbable that the arrangement according to which that play was 
 
70 THE -OXYRAYNCH US: PAP VR, 
 
 the 8th was chronological. Korte would make it an alphabetical arrangement. 
 As frequently happens in scholia, there are numerous abbreviations in the text 
 of the argument. In most cases the last letter written of an abbreviated word 
 is above the line ; ‘Epp(fs) in 1. 5 and παραδοθησόμενο(ν) in 1. 40 are written epy’ 
 and παραδοθησομενο΄. καί takes various forms, «’ in 1. 6, x$ in Il. 9, 17, 33, and 43, 
 sin 11. 11 and 21. μ' for μέν occurs in ll. 7 and 38, and & for δέ in Il. 23 and 40. 
 The high stop is occasionally employed. The MS. is not very accurate, cor- 
 ruptions occurring in two lines ; cf. notes on 11]. 8 and12. The extant fragments 
 of the Διονυσαλέξανδρος, apart from single words, number nine, and how little 
 these and the title of the play served to indicate its contents may be judged 
 from the fact that Meineke considered ᾿Αλέξανδρος to be Alexander the Great, 
 and therefore wished to assign the play to the younger Cratinus. Kock on the 
 other hand inferred from the common occurrence of well-known mythical 
 personages in the titles of comedies that Alexander was the Trojan Paris, and 
 favoured the authorship of Cratinus the elder. The acute hypothesis of Kock 
 is now verified by the papyrus, which shows that ᾿Αλέξανδρος in the title is indeed 
 the Trojan, and that the plot turned upon an amusing perversion of the story 
 of the Trojan war, in which Dionysus played the part assigned in the legend 
 to Paris. That the play was the work of the elder Cratinus is moreover 
 proved by the note appended at the end, stating that Pericles was attacked 
 for having been the cause of the war. The date of its performance is thus 
 fixed to the year B.C. 430 or 429. 
 
 The earlier part of the argument, contained in the upper portion of Col. i 
 and probably in a preceding column, is lost, and where the papyrus becomes 
 intelligible it is describing the παράβασις (ll. 6-9). The chorus apparently 
 consisted of satyrs in attendance upon Dionysus (cf. 1. 42 and 1. 6, note), and 
 the action took place for the most part on Mount Ida. The παράβασις is 
 followed (Il. 9-12) by a scene between the chorus and Dionysus, in which they 
 mock at him, very likely on account of the guise in which he presents himself. 
 Possibly Cratin. 7. ivc. 281 ποιμὴν καθέστηκ᾽ αἰπόλος καὶ βουκόλος refers to this 
 incident. Then comes (Il. 12-9) a parody of the judgement of Paris. Aphrodite, 
 who promises to Dionysus that he shall be the most beautiful and most beloved 
 person in the world, naturally is victorious. Dionysus next goes to Sparta and 
 brings back Helen to Mount Ida (Il. 20-3). Upon the approach of the Achaeans 
 they both take refuge in the house of the real Alexander, Dionysus turning 
 himself into a ram and hiding Helen in a basket (II. 23-33). It is easy to 
 understand the boisterous fun to which this scene must have given rise. A 
 glimpse of it is afforded by the familiar quotation from the Dionysalexandrus 6 8 
 ἠλίθιος ὥσπερ πρόβατον βῆ βῆ λέγων βαδίζει, which no doubt refers to Dionysus’ 
 
663. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 7 
 
 appearance in the character of a sheep. Alexander himself now comes on the 
 stage, and detects the lovers ; the denouement is that Helen remains with him 
 as his wife, while Dionysus is sent off in disgrace to be delivered to the Achaeans, 
 but accompanied by the faithful satyrs (]]. 33-44). 
 
 The papyrus concludes with the scholiast’s remark already mentioned, 
 showing that the play was directed against Pericles, who may well have been 
 satirized in the principal character as Dionysus. Imperfect as it is, the argu- 
 ment well illustrates the perversion of familiar legends which seems to have 
 been a favourite resource of the older comic poets, and of Cratinus in particular. 
 
 We are indebted to Prof. A. Korte for several suggestions on this 
 
 papyrus. 
 
 olen. | ΠΟ 
 ; ξ : - ᾿ Διονυσ[αλεξανδρος 
 ΠΕ δος ie ! Vela! 
 Soon Bier ee ree Ἰζητί Ὁὺ) Κρατίεινου 
 Ἐπ τερον παν by: 
 δ΄. ] avrov pn τον Αλεξαν δίρον) κ(αι) την plev) EXevn(v) 
 he Ἰρ[."Ἰισὶν o Epp(ns) 30 εἰς τάλαρον ὠσπῖερ τύυρον ? 
 ie he aake Ἰεται k(at) ουὅτοι κρυψας εαυτον ὃ εἰς Κριο(ν) 
 μ(εν) mp(os) τους θεατας μ(ε)γτ(α)σκευασας ὕπομενει 
 τινα πυὼν ποιηί ) TO μελλον' παραγενο 
 διαλεγονταῖι κ(αι) μενος ὃ Ade€avd(pos) K(at) φωρα 
 10 παραφανεντὰ τον 35 σας εκατερο(ν)Ὶ αγειν ἐπι Tas 
 Ζ4ιονυσον επισκα(πτουσι) (Και) vaus πρ(οσγταττει ὡς παραδωσων 
 χλευαζουσίιν) ο d€) πα τοις Ayatoi(s) οκνουσης δὲ τῆς 
 ραγενομενὼν AUTOL Endevn(s) ταυτὴην p(ev) οἰκτειρας 
 παρα μεν [Hpas] τυραννιδο(ς) ὡς γυναιχ εἕων επικατεχί(ει) 
 15 ακινητου παΐρ]α ὃ Αθηνας 49 Tov Oe) Atovu(cov) ws παραδοθη 
 evTvxi(as) K(a)7(a) πολεμοί(ν) της σομενο(ν) αποστελλει συν 
 δ Αφροδι(της) καλλιστο(ν) τε k(at) ακολουθ(ουσι) δ᾽ οἱ σατυ(ροι) παρακαλουν 
 EMEPATTOY aUTOV vTap TES TE K(al) οὐκ av προδώσειν 
 Xelv Kplvel ταυτὴν νικαν αὐτὸν φασκοντες κωμω 
 20 μ(ε)τ(α) δε ταυ(τα)ὴ πλευσας εἰς 48 δειται ὃ ev Tw δραματι Ile 
 
 Aaxedaipo(va) (και) τὴν Ελενην ρικλης pada πιθανως δι 
 
72 THE OXYRAYNGHUS PAI Vid 
 
 eLayayov επανερχετίαι) εμφασεως WS ETTAYELOXOS 
 εἰς τὴν δὴν ακου(σας) Se) pe τοις Αθηναιοις τον πόλεμον 
 T ολιγον τοὺς ἄχαιους πὺυρ ak, 
 
 25 [πολ]ειν τὴν χω(ραν) φ[ευγίει) προς 
 
 6 sqq. ‘ These (the satyrs) address the spectators on behalf of (?) the poet, and when 
 Dionysus appears mock and jeer at him. Dionysus, being offered by Hera indestructible 
 power, by Athena success in war, and by Aphrodite the prospect of becoming the most 
 beautiful and most beloved of all, adjudges the victory to Aphrodite. Afterwards he sails 
 to Lacedaemon, carries away Helen, and returns to Ida. Hearing soon after that the 
 Achaeans are ravaging the country, he takes refuge with Alexander, and hiding Helen in 
 a basket like a (cheese?) and turning himself into a ram awaits the event. Alexander 
 appears and detects them both, and orders them to be led away to the ships intending to 
 hand them over to the Achaeans; but when Helen objects he takes pity on her and keeps 
 her to be his wife, but sends off Dionysus to be handed over. Dionysus is accompanied 
 by the satyrs who encourage him and declare that they will not desert him. In the 
 play Pericles is satirized with great plausibility by innuendo for having brought the war 
 upon the Athenians.’ 
 
 6. Perhaps amepylera, as Korte suggests. οὔτοι: sc. the satyrs (cf. 1. 42), as Blass 
 thinks. Though of course this is not a satyric play, there seems no reason why a chorus 
 should not be composed of satyrs, especially in a comedy in which Dionysus is the chief 
 character. ‘The verbs in ll. 11-2 are very appropriate too to the satyrs, who occur in]. 42 
 as if they had been mentioned before. 
 
 8. πυὼν ποιηί ) is corrupt. Blass suggests ὑπερ του ποιη(του), which makes good sense 
 but is a rather drastic change; cf. however the next note. K6rte prefers πίερι) των 
 ποιη(των), which is nearer to the text of the papyrus. 
 
 12. παραγενομενων seems to be a mistake for some word like προτεινομένων. Korte 
 suggests παραγγελλομενων. 
 
 30. Perhaps wonlep tupov or rapty(os) ; cf. Ar. Ran. 558-60 τὸ πολὺ τάριχος οὐκ εἴρηκά 
 πω. pa Al, οὐδὲ τὸν τυρόν ye τὸν χλωρόν, τάλαν, ὃν οὗτος αὐτοῖς τοῖς ταλάροις κατήσθιεν. γαρον iS 
 also possible; cf. Crat. 277. zc. 280 ὁ τάλαρος ὑμῖν διάπλεως ἔσται γάρου. Korte prefers ορνιν 
 or xnva, τάλαρον being the technical word in Athenaeus p. 122 for a bird-basket. 
 
 664. PuHILosopHIcAL DIALOGUE. 
 Height 29 cm. 
 
 Part of a philosophical dialogue on the subject, apparently, of government, 
 one of the characters in which is no less a person than Pisistratus the tyrant of 
 Athens. There remain in all portions of four columns, contained in two main 
 fragments which do not join and of which the relative position has to be 
 determined by internal evidence. In Fr. (a), the first column of which is 
 complete, some one who speaks in the first person gives an account of his 
 
664. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS γ 
 
 movements at the time οἵ. the usurpation of Pisistratus. He had left Athens 
 after that event took place and joined Solon in Ionia; subsequently at the 
 instance of his friends, including Pisistratus himself, and on the advice of Solon, 
 he returned to Athens and was there invited to the house of Hagnotheus, a 
 relative of his own and grandfather of Thrasybulus son of Philomelus, a young 
 man whose guardian he himself was. Of the second column we have no more 
 than the first few letters of the lines ; but in the lower part of it other speakers © 
 evidently intervened (1. 68 ἔϊφη ὦ [, 1. 81 troAaBe[v). Fr. (6), containing another 
 nearly complete column, is also in dialogue form. Here the persons are, 
 besides the narrator (ἔφην, 1]. 7, 12), Pisistratus, Ariphron, and Adimantus, and the 
 principal subject of conversation is the career of the tyrant Periander of Corinth, 
 in whose company Ariphron professes that he and Adimantus had recently 
 been, and whose misfortunes he proceeds to describe. Most probably Fr. (a) 
 comes from near the beginning of the work, and the narrative portion of Col. i 
 is introductory to the whole dialogue. How much, if anything, is lost between 
 Col. ii and Col. iii (Fr. (4)) is of course quite uncertain, but it is improbable 
 that there is any considerable gap. The anonymous narrator in Col. i will 
 accordingly be the same person as the speaker in Col. iii. ll. g2-102 ; but the 
 identity of this intimate friend (1. 13) of Pisistratus and sharer in the exile 
 of Solon remains a puzzle. Ariphron is perhaps to be recognized as the grand- 
 father of Pericles; and Thrasybulus, son of Philomelus, of whom it is here 
 remarked (1. 29) that he was popularly supposed to be in love with the tyrant’s 
 younger daughter, is evidently the Thrasybulus of whom Plutarch tells the story 
 (Apophth. Reg. et Imp., p. 189 c, de Ira Cohib., p. 457 f, cf. Val. Max. v. 1. 2) 
 that he kissed the daughter of Pisistratus at a chance meeting, and that the 
 latter instead of being angry gave him her hand in marriage. Polyaenus, who 
 adds an episode of the abduction of the girl by her lover (Strategem. 5. 14), 
 substitutes Thrasymedes for Thrasybulus, but agrees with our author as to the 
 name of his father, Philomelus. 
 
 But who was the author of this dialogue? It is written in remarkably good 
 Attic (except εἰς οἶκον for εἰς (τὴν) οἰκίαν in |. 40), and so far as the style is concerned 
 it may be a product of the Aristotelian age. Blass, indeed, suggests that it might 
 actually be attributed to Aristotle, with whom Pisistratus was a favourite 
 figure. In support of such a view appeal could be made to certain resemblances 
 in language between this fragment and the ᾿Αθηναίων [loAiteta—assuming the 
 authenticity of that work :—compare e.g. ll. 3-6 (Σόλων) προλέγων ᾿Αθηναίοις ὅτι 
 Πεισίστρατος ἐπιβουλεύει τυραννίδι πείθειν αὐτοὺς οὐκ ἦν δυνατός with Ath. Pol. 14. 2 
 ὅσοι μὲν γὰρ ἀγνοοῦσι Πεισίστρατον ἐπιτιθέμενον τυραν]νίδι] ... ἐπεὶ δὲ λέγων [οὐκ 
 ἔπει θεν, ll. 8—Q ἀποδημίαν ἐντεῦθεν ποιησάμενος with Ath. Pol. 11. 1, 13.1 ἀποδημίαν 
 
74 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 ἐποιήσατο, ll. 23-4 διὰ τὴν TOY πραγμάτων κατάστασιν with Azh. Pol. 42. 1 ἡ νῦν 
 κατάστασις τῆς πολιτεΐας, ll. 25-6 οὐδεὶς ἐπεδεδώκει πρὸς μεγαλοφύειαν with “4111. Pol. 
 427. 2 πολὺ πρὸς ὠμότητα (cf. 1. 112) καὶ πονηρίαν ἐπέδοσαν ; cf. also 1. 115 τίνι ταύτῃ 
 ἔφ[η] and Arist. Fr. 44 τί τοῦτ᾽ ἔφη. But such coincidences are not very con- 
 clusive; and on the other hand these fragments do not conform to the normal 
 type of Aristotelian dialogue, in which, as we know both from the allusions of 
 Cicero (ad Ait. iv. τό, xiii. 19) and his imitations, the leading part was taken by 
 the philosopher himself. It will be safer then to leave the writer anonymous, 
 though he may well be as early as the third or even fourth century B.C. 
 
 As will have been observed, this papyrus reopens some important questions 
 of history and chronology, upon which some remarks are made in the commentary 
 (notes on Il. I-10, 106-9). If Solon went to Asia when Pisistratus became 
 tyrant, his famous meeting with Croesus may have occurred then, and the 
 ‘beautiful myth’ be after all a sober fact. The synchronism of the tyrannies 
 of Pisistratus and Periander is another very interesting point, which with the 
 testimony of Herodotus partly on the same side should not be dismissed too 
 lightly. It is no doubt a question how far the setting of an imaginary dialogue 
 can supply a basis for historical conclusions; but a comparison with such a 
 work as Plutarch’s Symposium is hardly fair to the present fragments, which 
 may probably be regarded as an index to the average opinion of the day, and 
 as such deserving of consideration, in spite of the conflict with the ‘so-called 
 systems of chronology, the contradictions of which a thousand correctors have 
 not yet succeeded in harmonizing.’ 
 
 The papyrus is written in tall columns measuring 22 x 7 cm., in a round 
 uncial hand rather resembling that of 412 (P. Oxy. III, Plate v), which dates 
 approximately from the year 245 A.D.; the present example is more regular 
 and graceful, but no doubt belongs to about the same period. A second hand 
 has made one or two small corrections, and seems also to have added some 
 at least of the paragraphi and stops. Of the latter all three kinds are found 
 (middle at ll. 26, 38, 105, 153; low at 1. 18); but they are not used with much 
 discrimination. The double points, which as usual mark a change of speaker, 
 also look more like the second hand than the first. The occasional diaereses, 
 however, and marks of elision, as well as the angular signs sometimes employed 
 for filling up a short line, are with little doubt by the original scribe. 
 
 (2) Gok: att Col. ii. 
 mpotepoy ἡ Πισιστρατον λαβειν [θεωι 
 τὴν ἀρχὴν απεδημησεν' επει [ 
 
664. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 δὴ προλεγων AOnvatos ort 
 Πισιστρατος επιβουλευει Tv 
 5 ραννιδι πιθειν αὐτους οὐκ ny 
 
 δυνατος" eyw δε καταμεινας 
 
 Σ 
 non Πισιστρατου τυραννουν 
 Tos αποδημιαν εντευθεν 
 ποιησαμενος ev ἴωνιαι pera 
 
 10 Σόλωνος διετριβον' χρονῶι 
 
 de tov φιλων σπουδαζον 
 TOV NKELV με" και μαλιστα 
 Πισιστρατου δια τὴν οἰκειο 
 τῆτα' Σόλωνος κελεύοντος 
 
 15 ἐπανηλθον AOnvace κατε 
 
 λιπον μὲν ovy εἐνταυθα παι 
 
 δα Θρασυβουλον tov Piro 
 
 μηλου. κατειληφειν δε pe 
 
 ρακίιον non pada καλον kaya 
 20 θον καὶ τὴν οψιν Kat Tov Tpo 
 
 Tov πολυ διαφεροντα τῶν 
 
 NALKLOTOV τεταπεινωμε 
 
 γων yap τῶν αλλων δια τὴν 
 Tov πραγματῶν καταστασιν" 
 25 ovders ἐπεδεδωκει προς με 
 
 ει 
 γαλοφυαν. παντας δε ὕπερε 
 
 βαλεν immorpodtats Kat κυ 
 νηγίαις και ταις αλλαις δαπα 
 vias] δίιεἰβεβλητο δ ev tHe πὸ 
 
 30 Alelt TNS νεωτερας τῶν ToU 
 του Πισιστρατου θυγατερων 
 εραν ἴδων ἀρρηφορουσαν" 
 
 Αγνοθεος ovy ο παππος αὖ 
 του Tap ὧι και τρεῴφομενος 
 
 55 ουδῖ 
 
 του πατΐἧρος 
 
 συν] 
 
 με 
 
 παρηνΐ 
 γυνΐ 
 τουΐ 
 
 60 θησί 
 δια 
 
 αυὅτωΐ 
 
 petal 
 τολμί 
 65° Tno . | 
 του af 
 ξεικῖ 
 φη ὦ! 
 δρειανΐΪ 
 79 χρονΐ 
 νειχετί 
 ταγει 
 εμί 
 
 μηΐ 
 15. pay| 
 κεματί 
 
 κακεινηΐ 
 
 παινενΐ 
 
 νησυμῖ 
 
 80 ποδημία 
 
 75 
 
76 
 
 35 
 
 THE OL YRAVNCHUS PARR? 
 
 eTvyxavev 0 Θρασυβουλος" 
 δια To TOV πατρος Kat τῆς 
 
 μῆτρος ορῴφανον καταλει 
 
 φθηναι: τραχυνθεις τι μοι 
 
 40 
 
 δοκεῖ] πρὸς αὐτον καλει pe 
 εἰς οἰκον' συγγενὴ TE αὕτοις 
 OvTa και καταλελειμμένον 
 ἐπίτροπον ὑπὸ του Φιλομη 
 dou: καγω pada προθυμως 
 
 45 
 
 (6) 
 
 εβαδιζον και yap nv εν ηδὸ 
 yn μοι το συνδιατριβειν Ayvo 
 
 (οἱ. 1]. 
 
 μεν ουτως πίθανωι εοικεν 
 
 95 
 
 10o 
 
 105 
 
 110 
 
 εἰ τοινυν εφὴην adnOn ταῦτ [e 
 στιν ovr αν Περιανδρωι λυ 
 σιτελοιη μαλλον apxely ἡ U 
 
 φΦ ετερου αἰρχ)]εσθαι: ovr’ αλλωι 
 ουθενι των] φαυλως ἀρχοντων" 
 δοκω yap αἰυτ]ον εφὴηὴν ev τοις 
 φιλτατοις [κομι]εισθαι τας apap 
 Tlas* τι yap [φιλΊτερον ανδρι 
 νουν ἐχοίντι)] πατριδος. και 
 κ]ατα φυσιν [οἰκείων avOpo 
 πων : ὑποϊἰλαβων ovv o Apt 
 dlpov αλη[θη ν]ὴ A edn Ae 
 yletss Kat βουϊλ]ομεθα cor pap 
 
 | 
 
 [ 
 
 [τυρησαι eyw καὶ Αδειμαντος 
 [οὐυτοσΐὶ παραγενομενοι νυνι 
 [Πε]ριανδρωι dia τὴν wporn 
 [T]a μεγαλη πανυ συμῴφοραι 
 [π]ερίπεσοντι : καὶ ο Πισιστρα 
 | 
 
 T\os τινι ταυτηι εφίη :) eyo εἰ 
 
 ὕπολαβαϊίν 
 vo, 
 yap nl 
 pov. | 
 
 85 μη γί 
 ταισαΐ 
 
 γουν [ 
 ied 
 
 90 avuTof 
 
 Col. iv. 
 
 αὖΐ 
 σθ] 
 dev 
 δετί 
 140 εφαΐ 
 νανΐ 
 
664, NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 [wlev dpacw προ τίου yap| Ku auTn{ 
 [ψεῖλον τον Περιανδρίου mare απο 
 [ρα] λαβειν την αρχηΐν εκ]ρα τααϊ 
 [το]υν της pe: οι καλου 145 τωνΐΪ 
 115 [μενοι ise ΕΙΣ συϊγγενεια) ΕΠ 
 [με]γαλη: λαβονἾ)τος [de av] ἘΝ 
 [το]ν τὴν ἀρχὴν τοζυτων το] ἘΠῚ 
 [μεν] πληθος εφυγε τί. ... .. ] See 
 [ers eMeOALYO|t| Ce Kail... τῳ. ] 
 120 [....Jecm[oly ovy vies [..... ] 
 ΕΠ EV ele ore COP eel ors ene, τ. ] 
 [- Ὁ .|pxor[. . -Jueparl......- ] 
 [=< -Jevnt Ol... .|vres col... .. ] 
 ΠΣ οἷν ETT). | ὡς δέος « | 
 125 [.. προς τοῖν Π]εριανδίρον . .| 
 [. . .Joe μοι [πλ]ησιαζέίιν .. . 
 [- 9... ἡνποτί. .] ὕπερ τοῖν Ile 
 [ρια]νδρου. κ[αι] τις εἰσαΐ. .. 
 πΓ Ἰκελεῦσα - |. ο]στινοῖ. .. . 
 130 [. 3 .|verv of. . .\AcTat’ . [. . 2s 
 [. - Jn eee af. . .|rpomd.... 
 [oe AozaL Ki. . ἡ) Bovdl.... 
 Geol: Earenoee Ga cae 
 ΠΥ} τεζούτίς . τος: πὸ 20s = 
 ΠΡ «| ten €VTOl. oh 50s ΟΣ ον Ὁ οἷ: 
 (ἢ το Μ Yue aon 
 Ἰουτί ] και mrad 
 Ἰειναΐ | Ἰεφυΐ 
 Ἰρηνΐ 160 Jos εαἰ 
 Ἰανελί Ἰνον] 
 166 Ἰνμοφί ] ευρονΐ 
 
 Ἰνδεβί ] - σασί 
 
 7/ 
 
78 THE OXYRAHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 ‘(Solon) before Pisistratus seized the government went abroad; for his warnings to the 
 Athenians that Pisistratus was aiming at a tyranny failed to convince them. I however 
 stayed on; but when the tyranny of Pisistratus was already established I left the country 
 and lived in Ionia with Solon. After some time my friends were anxious for my return, and 
 particularly Pisistratus, on account of our intimacy; so as Solon urged it I went back to 
 Athens. Now I had left there a boy named Thrasybulus, the son of Philomelus. I found 
 him grown into a very handsome and virtuous young man, far superior in looks and 
 manners to the others of his age; for in the general debasement due to the political situa- 
 tion no one had advanced to any nobility of character. He surpassed them all in horse- 
 breeding and the chase and other such expensive pursuits ; and it was said against him in 
 the city that he was in love with the younger daughter of Pisistratus, whom he had seen 
 carrying the vessels of Athene. His grandfather Hagnotheus in whose house it happened 
 that Thrasybulus, who had been bereft of both father and mother, was being brought up, 
 being, I think, a little annoyed with him, invited me to his house as I was their kinsman 
 and had been left guardian by Philomelus. I was very ready to go, for Hagnotheus’ 
 company was a pleasure to me... 
 
 1-10. This statement that just before the establishment of the tyranny of Pisistratus 
 Solon left Athens and went to Ionia is not only new but conflicts with the account of 
 Plutarch (Sol. 30-1), who represents Solon as refusing to fly and as living on at Athens in 
 friendly relations with the usurper. The ᾿Αθηναίων Πολιτεία (14. 2) does not suggest that 
 Solon retired from Athens, though on the other hand there is nothing there inconsistent 
 with such a view; it is simply stated that Solon’s warnings and opposition proved fruitless. 
 Diogenes Laertius indeed asserts (i. 51, 62) that Solon died in Cyprus, and this statement 
 may now have to be treated with more respect than heretofore. A new light is thus turned 
 upon the much discussed question of the meeting between Solon and Croesus as king of 
 Lydia. The usurpation of Pisistratus and the accession of Croesus to sole sovereignty are 
 placed in the same year, B.c. 560, and there will be no chronological objection to the 
 interview described by Herodotus, if it is transferred to this period. With regard to the 
 date of Solon’s death, χρόνωι in 1. 10 here is too vague to build any argument upon; 
 according to Heraclides Ponticus he survived the overthrow of the constitution συχνὸν χρόνον, 
 according to Phanias of Ephesus less than two years (both af. Plutarch, So/. 32). 
 
 5. 1. πείθειν. 
 
 11. This construction οἵ σπουδάζειν with the infinitive is common in Aristotle, e. g. Ath. 
 Pol, 38. 4 ods αὐτὸς ἐσπούδασεν ἐλθεῖν. 
 
 15. κατελιπον is probably for κατέλειπον. 
 
 26. 1. ὑπερέβαλῴ(λγεν. 
 
 29-32. This is the first mention of a second daughter of Pisistratus. With ἀρρη- 
 φορουσαν cf. Polyaenus, Strategem. 5. 14 Θρασυμήδης Φιλομήλου τῆς Πεισιστράτου θυγατρὸς 
 ἐρασθεὶς πομπεύουσαν αὐτὴν προσδραμὼν ἐφίλησεν. Apparently the author of our dialogue 
 either did not know of or did not accept this more romantic version, for ἀρρηφορουσαν 
 and πομπεύουσαν can hardly refer to different occasions. For διαβάλλεσθαι with the 
 infin. cf. Hdn. 2. 6. 10 ἀλλ᾽ ὅπερ ἔφην διεβλήθης μισοβασιλεὺς εἶναι, but the construction is 
 unusual. 
 
 37. ορφανον: 1. ὀρφανός. 
 
 82. All that remains of the supposed r over the line is a rather coarse horizontal 
 stroke, immediately above a break in the papyrus. 
 
 88. The letters oor have each had a short horizontal stroke drawn through them, 
 probably by the first hand; the doubtful « was perhaps also deleted. 
 
664. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 79 
 
 091-114. ‘“ This accordingly seems probable. If then,” said I, “this be true, it would 
 be of no more advantage to Periander to rule than be ruled by another nor to any other 
 bad ruler. For I suppose,” I said, “that he will reap the reward of his misdeeds among 
 those dearest to him. For what is dearer to a sensible man than his country and his 
 blood-relations?” “Yes, by Zeus,” struck in Ariphron, “you speak truly, and I and 
 Adimantus here wish to bear you out, having just been with Periander when his cruelty 
 plunged him into a terrible disaster.” ‘‘ What disaster?” said Pisistratus. “I will tell 
 you,” he said. ‘“ Before Cypselus, the father of Periander, obtained the supremacy, the 
 great clan of the Bacchiadae, as they are called, ruled the city. When he became supreme 
 the majority of them fled ...a few however remained... .”’ 
 
 98. [kop lero Oat Tas apaptias in the sense of κομιεῖσθαι τὰ ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν is a curious 
 expression, though cf. Arist. Z7h. Wc. ix. 7 κομιουμένους τὰς χάριτας. 
 
 106-9. Unless the present conversation is to be supposed to have occurred eile 
 Pisistratus was still a private person, which is eminently improbable, this passage plainly 
 implies that Periander of Corinth was not yet dead when the tyranny of Pisistratus was 
 established at Athens. The ordinary chronology places the accession of Periander in 
 B.c. 625 and his death in 585, thus leaving a very considerable interval before the first 
 tyranny of Pisistratus, which no one desires to put earlier than B.c. 560. According to one 
 passage of Herodotus, however, Periander and Pisistratus were contemporaries; for he 
 makes the former arbiter in a war between Athens and Mytilene which followed upon the 
 capture of Sigeum by Pisistratus (v. 94-5). The usual method of avoiding this difficulty is 
 to suppose that there were two wars with Mytilene, and that the arbitration of Periander 
 occurred in the first. But for this there is no kind of evidence, and, as Beloch has pointed 
 out ( Rhernisches Museum, vol. xlv. p. 466 sqq.), the difficulties involved in this explanation 
 are hardly less than those which it attempts to solve. He himself suggests that the mistake 
 of Herodotus consists in referring an arbitration by Periander in a dispute between Tenedos 
 and Sigeum (Arist. Aes. i. 15. 13) to the period of the war against Mytilene; at the same 
 time Beloch considers that the chronology of Periander is quite insecure, and that he 
 might with advantage be put several decades later. But other references in Herodotus 
 clearly point to the earlier date, for the tyranny of Periander at Corinth synchronized with 
 that of Thrasybulus at Miletus (Hdt. i. 20, v. 92), which was established at the beginning 
 of the reign of Alyattes king of Lydia (i. 18-22) ; while the eclipse of the sun which ended 
 the war between Alyattes and Cyaxares of Media (i. 74) provides a securely fixed point of 
 departure (approximately B.c. 585). Herodotus’ chronology is probably past mending. 
 
 108, peyadn πανυ cupdopa: to what this refers is not clear. As the Bacchiadae were 
 in some way involved, the misfortune is apparently not one of those ordinarily ascribed by 
 tradition to the private life of Periander. 
 
 115. Cf. Hdt. v. 92 ἦν ὀλιγαρχίη, καὶ οὗτοι Βακχιάδαι καλεόμενοι ἔνεμον τὴν πόλιν" ἐδίδοσαν δὲ 
 καὶ ἤγοντο ἐξ ἀλλήλων. It is doubtful whether the mistake of the original hand in the 
 spelling of the name was anything more than v for ¢; but there is barely room in the 
 lacuna for [αδαι]. 
 
 119. xa: the third letter is quite uncertain; perhaps κατίεμειναν | ameAlerm[oly ovr. The 
 question of the reading here is complicated by the doubt concerning the position of the frag- 
 ment containing the first part of 1]. 120 5464. Lines 125-6 and 127-8 will suit the arrangement 
 adopted in the text, which moreover brings out a column of exactly the required length. 
 In 1. 120 this fragment contains the doubtful « and part of the ; the rest of the m (which 
 apart from the fragment could be read as r) is on the upper piece. Another break 
 occurs between ll. 133-4, but here the junction is almost certain. The latter parts of 
 
80 THE OXYRHYNCHUS® LAPYRI 
 
 ll. 128 ] 1s eal... 132 7 βουλί are also on a detached fragment the position of which, though 
 
 probable from the appearance of the papyrus, is by no means secure. 
 150-63. This fragment from the bottom of a column very likely belongs to Col. iv ; 
 
 it does not appear possible to find a place for it in Col. iii. 
 
 665. HustTory oF SICILY. 
 Fr. (a) 10-5 x 4:6, Fr.(4) 10-3 x 4:6 cm. Prate I. 
 
 These fragments, which belong evidently to the same column, of which 
 they formed the upper and lower portions respectively, are notwithstanding 
 their small size of no slight interest and importance. They contain an abstract 
 or summary of events in Sicily, the different items, which are stated in the 
 concisest manner, being marked off by paragraphi and further distinguished 
 from each other by the protrusion of the first lines into the left margin. The 
 papyrus was a regular literary roll, written in a fine uncial hand, which bears 
 a very strong resemblance to that of the Oxyrhynchus papyrus of the Προοίμια 
 Δημηγορικά (facsimile in P. Oxy. I, p. 54), and also to that of the Bacchylides 
 papyrus, to which it presents a still closer parallel than was provided by the 
 Demosthenes MS. We should assign it, like the Demosthenes, to the second 
 century A.D.; an earlier date is not at all likely. Probably this is part 
 of an epitome of a continuous history of Sicily, and it may well be that, as 
 Blass thinks, the work epitomized was the lost History of Timaeus. 
 
 The period to which the fragments refer seems to be that immediately 
 following the general overthrow of the tyrannies in the Sicilian cities which 
 took place about the year 465 B.C. (Diod. xi. 68. 5). This period is indicated 
 by the frequent mentions of conflicts with the ξένοι, by whom are meant the 
 mercenaries settled in the cities by the tyrants as a support of their rule. 
 Diodorus, who is the sole authority for the history of this time, narrates the 
 course of the hostilities at Syracuse between these new comers and the older 
 citizens (xi. 72, 76); and implies that Syracuse was not peculiar in this respect :— 
 ‘Almost all the cities, he says (76. 5), ‘... with one consent came to terms with 
 the strangers (ξένοι) settled there.’ The papyrus fills in some of the intermediate 
 details passed over by the historian. We hear of an expedition of ξένοι from 
 Enna and Cacyrum against Gela, which received aid from Syracuse. This was 
 apparently followed by overtures from the ξένοι to the Syracusans (cf. note on 
 1. 5), which, however, proved ineffectual, for the next event is a battle between 
 them. Shortly afterwards the mercenaries settled at Minoa were defeated 
 
665. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS ΘΙ 
 
 by the combined forces of Syracuse and Agrigentum. The activity displayed 
 by Syracuse warrants the inference that she had herself already got the upper 
 hand of her own ξένοι, who, as Diodorus relates, were finally defeated in a 
 pitched battle. The campaign of the Syracusans against Catana mentioned at 
 this time by Diodorus (76. 3) is part of the same anti-foreign movement. But 
 hostilities seem to have extended beyond the opposing sections of the various 
 city states. The fragments also supply information of an expedition of 
 Agrigentum against Crastus, and an engagement subsequently occurred at the 
 latter place between the Agrigentines and forces from Himera and Gela, which 
 may be supposed to have come to the assistance of Crastus. These new 
 facts may not be very weighty, but they convey a more adequate idea than 
 was before possible of the period of unrest, the στάσεις and ταραχαί, which 
 intervened between the overthrow of the tyrannies and the establishment of 
 general peace. 
 
 [τω]ν ev Ομφαίλωι Kat Kpaotov στρίατεια 
 Κακυρωι ξενίων em ἡ γενομενίη περι 
 ἘἘΕΊελαν στραϊτεια 15 Kpaorov Ipepal{tov 
 βοη[θ]εια Zupalk]olorwy και Γελωιων προς Alkpa 
 Phe HeCIA@ OLS καὶ 7. Το ςς γαντινους μαχίη 
 τῶν ξενὼν προς [Συρα ὡς οἱ τὴν Μινωιαν 
 me ious Tov fevov οἰκί 
 μαχη Συρακοσίιων και 20 ᾧοντες Ur Axpa 
 tov ξενίω]ν [..... γαντινων Kat Σΐυρα 
 ΕΟ LAGUKOY. πε... -. κοσίιων ηιρεθηΐσαν 
 ΓΤ AGT ee [- Axplayar[rw... 
 
 Axpalyav|rivey emt 
 
 I. Ομφαΐλωι : cf. Cic. Verr. 4. 48 Hennensium nemore, qui locus... umbilicus Sicthae 
 nominatur, and the spurious line in Callim, HZ. 27 Cer. 6.15 τρὶς δ᾽ ἐπὶ καλλίστης νήσου δράμες 
 ὀμφαλὸν Ἔνναν. 
 
 2. Κακυρωι: the site of this town, which is mentioned by Ptolemy, has been placed 
 at the modern village of Cassaro, near Palazzolo; the present passage seems to indicate that 
 it should be looked for further west; and the position given in Kiepert’s Zofogr. His/. Atlas 
 is probably not far from the truth. 
 
 5. All that remains of the letter at the end of the line is a straight stroke which 
 
 G 
 
82 PHESOXNVYRAVYNCH US APAPYRI 
 
 suggests ε, 7, ors. p is not impossible, but there is no trace of the tail, and we therefore 
 hesitate to introduce πρίεσβεια, which is otherwise attractive, into the text. 
 
 10. Γλαυκων is evidently a personal name, but nothing is known of this bearer of it. 
 
 11. The gap between the two fragments probably extends to about ro lines, but | 
 it may be larger. 
 
 13. Crastus is described by Steph. Byz. as πόλις Σικελίας τῶν Σικανῶν, citing the Σικελικά 
 of Philistus. Its position is unknown; no doubt it was in the neighbourhood of Agri- 
 gentum. : 
 
 22. The vestiges of the letter after mpe do not suggest 6, but can hardly be said to Ὁ 
 inconsistent with that letter, since there is no other example of a @ in the text. If the shape 
 of the @ was tall and narrow, as in the Bacchylides papyrus, the effect of mutilation 
 might be that actually presented in the fragment. Of the supposed ἡ only a small speck 
 remains. 
 
 23. A fresh entry probably commences at this line, and in that case there would 
 be one or even two letters before Axp|ayar[rw . ., e.g. ἡ OF τὸ ’Axp|ayar[river. 
 
 666. ARISTOTLE, Προτρεπτικός. 
 27°2XQ:8 cm. 
 
 A sheet containing two practically entire columns, preceded by the ends of 
 lines from a third, the text of which includes a-lengthy passage quoted by 
 Stobaeus (Flor. 3. 54) from Aristotle, and now generally assigned to the 
 Aristotelian dialogue Προτρεπτικός or Exhortation to Philosophy (Rose, 277. 57). 
 Besides additions at the beginning and end of the excerpt the papyrus supplies 
 a sentence omitted by Stobaeus in the middle of his quotation. The evidence 
 of these supplementary passages, though bringing no direct proof of the identity 
 of the treatise of which they formed part, tend to support the attribution to the 
 Προτρεπτικός, in particular Il. 161 sqq., where the foregoing argument on the 
 worthlessness of external goods as such results in a recommendation of philo- 
 sophy (cf. note on 1. 170). , 
 
 The text is written in narrow columns (width 4 cm.), placed very close 
 together, in rather small informal uncials, which we should date about the 
 middle or latter part of the second century. No breathings or accents occur, 
 and stops are also absent, the sentences being divided off by paragraphi only. 
 The common angular sign is used to fill up short lines. Parts of the initial 
 letters of the first few lines of a fourth column remain, but all that is recog- 
 nizable is a doubtful ε opposite 1. 118 and an w opposite 1.120. The papyrus 
 is dirty and rubbed in places. | 
 
 The appended collation is derived from Hense’s edition of Stobaeus, iii. 
 
666. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 83 
 
 3. 25. The MSS. referred to are the Escurialensis Mendozae (M), Parisinus (A), 
 and Marcianus as embodied in the edition of Trincavelli (Tr.). Other authorities 
 are Maximus Monachus, Guomologium, c. 17 (= Max.), where the earlier part 
 of the quotation in Stobaeus is given with some slight textual variations, and the 
 Florilegium Laurentianum (Laur.), where the extract of Maximus reappears 
 (Meineke, Stobaeus, iv. 225, 25). The papyrus sometimes supports one, some- 
 times another, of these witnesses, and occasionally corrects them all. It is, 
 however, itself far from being impeccable, and in one or two places where it 
 is the sole authority emendation is necessary. 
 
 Cole Golvi: Col. iii. 
 xn τε πράττειν TOV 15 δια της ψυχης aya 
 vee δεοντων TL προ θων πλεονασασα 
 [τε 60 αιρουμενοὺς εἰ αὑτῶν ειναι 
 Ἰνδου κωλυηι dio det TQ κτηματα παν 
 5 [και την τουτῶν TOV αἰσχιστον 
 Ἰατη!.} θεωρουσαν atu 120 ὥσπερ yap εἰ TIS 
 Ἰφιαν χιαν φευγειν τῶν OLKETOV 
 Ἰτὼν 65 και νομίζειν τῶν αὑτοῦ χει 
 Ἰλασ την ευδαιμονιαν pov eln KaTaye 
 a πλε οὐκ εν τῶι πολ λαστος αν γένοιτο 
 Ἰαν λα κεκτησθαι γι 125 τον αὑτὸν τροπον 
 Ἰων νεσθαι μαλλον ols πλεονος agtay 
 Ἱμιᾳ 70 ἢ εν τωι πως τὴν κτησιν εἰναΐι 
 δὲν την ψυχην δια συμβεβηκεν τῆς 
 15 Ἰτιθεσ κεισθαι καὶ yap dias φυσεως αὔθΐλι 
 nw copa ov τὸ λαμ 130 ous TouTous eLvale 
 ie mpat εσθητι κε Ger νομίζειν 
 κου 
 ᾿ 75 κοσμημενον Και τουτο KaT α 
 ὙΠ ΡΑ ἠδ gain τις av εἶ! [λ]ηθειαν ουτως 
 ie Ἰαφισ ναι pakaptoy [e]yxee τίκτει yalp 
 Ἱνισ αλίλα] το τὴν υἷγει 135 ὡς φησιν ἢ παρ 
 ἊΞ eort av €xov καὶ ao[mou οιμια Kopos μεῖν 
 Ἴημμι 80 δαιως διακέ[ιμ)]ε υβριν απαιδεῖυ 
 ) ee. νον Kav pnoev aia δὲ μετ εξου 
 
 G 2 
 
84 
 
 αἰσχυνο 
 ]. vt παρ 
 50 Ἰἰαυτων 
 Jon yap 
 Ἰ. κυων 
 φα͵τνηι 
 |v οταν 
 δ jroo 
 ] 
 
 μη] 
 
 ΠΕ ΟΧΥΚΗΥΝΟΝΌΞ TAPS 
 
 85 
 
 gO 
 
 95 
 
 | 919) 
 
 105 
 
 TOV ITpOELpH[LE 
 νων αὐτῶι παρῆι 
 Tov αὐτὸν ole] τρο 
 πον καὶ ψυχὴν 
 εαν ne πεπαίιδευ 
 μενη την τοιαῦ 
 τὴν καὶ τον τοιου 
 τον ανθρωπον 
 ευδαιμονα προσ' 
 αγορευτεον εστιν 
 οὐκ αν τοις EKTOS 
 nt AapTpos KE 
 Χορηγήμενος 
 
 αὐτὸς μηδενος 
 aflos ὧν οὐδὲ yap 
 [ἧππον εαν Ψψαλια 
 χρυσα και σκεὺυ 
 nv €XnL ToAUTE 
 An φαυλος wv 
 
 τον τοίουτον 
 
 αξιον τινος νομι 
 (oper {τινος vo 
 μιζομεν] εἰναι 
 αλλ εαν διακειμε 
 vos (nt) σπουδαίως 
 TovTov μαλλον 
 
 ET ALVOU[LEV 
 
 {Io 
 
 xopis de τῶν εἰ 
 ρημενὼων συμ 
 
 βαινει τοις μηδε 
 γος a€lols ουσιν 
 οταν τυχῶσι xO 
 [ρηγι]ας Kat των 
 
 140 
 
 145 
 
 150 
 
 155 
 
 160 
 
 clas avolav Tolls 
 yap διακειμεῖνοις 
 Ta περι THY ψυ 
 χὴν Kakws ov 
 
 τε πλουτος OUT t 
 σχὺυς ovTe καλλος 
 των ἀγαθων εστίιν 
 αλλ οσῶι περ av aly 
 ται μαλλον αἱ δια 
 θεσεις καθ υπῖερ 
 βολην υπαρξ[ωσι 
 TOTOUTW μειζίω 
 
 και TAEL@ τον 
 κεκτημενον | 
 βλαπτουσι (ear) ανίεν 
 φρονησεως [πα 
 ραγενωνταῖίι To 
 
 yap μη παιδϊι pa 
 χαιραν τοῦτ [εστι 
 TO μη τοις φίαυ 
 λοις τὴν εξουΐσι 
 
 αν εγχειριζεῖιν 
 
 τόρ 
 
 τὴν δὲ φρονΐζησιν 
 απαντες av οἶμολο 
 γήσειαν εἰς TO [pay 
 θανειν γιγνεσθίαι (Kat) 
 ᾧητειν ov Tas [du 
 vapels φιλοσοῴφίια 
 περιειληῴφεν oo 
 
 170 
 
 TE πὼς οὐκ απῖρο 
 φασιστως φιλοῖσο 
 ῴφητεον εστι και 
 
666. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 85 
 
 58-170. ‘...nor prevent them when purposing to do a right action. We ought to 
 be warned by the spectacle of their plight to avoid it ourselves(?), and should regard 
 happiness not as dependent upon the acquisition of wealth rather than upon a particular 
 state of the soul. Bodily blessings would not be held to consist in adornment with 
 magnificent apparel, but in the possession of health and in sound condition, even in the 
 absence of the other advantages which I have mentioned. In the same way happiness 
 is to be attributed to the disciplined soul and to a man of such a character, not to the man 
 who is magnificently supplied with externals and is in himself worthless. We do not 
 consider a bad horse to be of any value if it has gold chains and costly trappings; we 
 rather give our praise to one that is in sound condition, Besides what we have said, too, 
 worthless persons, when they obtain wealth and value their possessions more than the 
 goods of the soul, are in the worst case of all. For just as a man who was inferior to his 
 own domestics would be ridiculous, so those who come to find their property of more value 
 than their own nature ought to be held miserable. And this is the truth of the matter, 
 for ‘satiety breeds insolence” as the proverb says, and want of discipline combined with 
 power breeds folly. In a bad state of the soul neither wealth nor strength nor beauty 
 are good things, but the greater the abundance of these qualities, the more do they injure 
 their possessor, if they are unaccompanied by reason. ‘Do not give a child a knife,” 
 is as much as to say, ‘Do not entrust bad men with power.” Now reason, as all would 
 admit, exists for the acquisition of knowledge, and seeks ends the means to which are 
 contained in philosophy; why then should philosophy not be pursued without hesitation 
 ΩΤ 
 
 61-4. This sentence might be correct if, as Diels suggests, θεωρουσαν referred to some 
 preceding substantive such as ἡ τῶν σπουδαίων αἵρεσις. But more probably some correction 
 is required; the simplest perhaps is to emend θεωρουσαν to θεωρουντα Or θεωρουντας, with the 
 sense given in our translation. Other expedients would be to read τοῦτ᾽ οὐ for τούτων, 
 ‘the wretched state of mind which neglects this,’ or to insert τὶ after rovrwy, ‘which pays 
 great consideration to any of these external things,’ but the latter interpretation of θεωρουσαν 
 is hardly so natural. 
 
 65. The extracts of Stobaeus and Maximus Mon. begin after και. νομίζει δέ M, νόμιζε 
 A, νομίζειν Tr., νομίζομεν δέ Max., νομίζειν δεῖ Laur. 
 
 68. γινεσθαι: so Max., Laur. ; γίγνεσθαι MA, Tr. 
 
 69. μαλλον 1: μᾶλλον δ(έ) MA, Max., Laur., ἀλλ᾽ ἐν Tr. 
 
 40-2. mos τὴν ψυχην: τὴν Ψ. εὖ MA?, τῇ ψυχῆ εὖ A’, Tr., Max., Laur. Above the o of 
 mos there are in the papyrus some faint vestiges, which if not accidental might perhaps 
 represent a cursively written ev; but we have considered this too doubtful for insertion in 
 the text. In any case πως has not been cancelled, and if the intention was to indicate 
 a reading εὖ πως the εὐ should have been written further to the left. 
 
 73. copa ov to: SOMA, Max., Laur.; οὐδὲ τὸ σῶμα αὐτό Tr. 
 
 76. tts αν: SO MA’, Max., Laur.; τις ed A}, τις Tr. 
 
 78. Considerations of space made it more probable that vyay or vyeay (A, Tr., Max., 
 Laur.) was written than υγιειαν (Μὴ. 
 
 82. προειρήμενων : SO MSS. except Max., where παρακειμένων is found. 
 
 85. ψυχην: so M, Tr., Max., Laur.; ψυχή A. 
 
 86. eav ηι πεπ.: 80 M, Tr., Max., Laur. ; ἔνεστιν ἰδεῖν wer. Tr. 
 
 88. καὶ: Laur. substitutes εἰς, τοιοῦτον is omitted in Max. 
 
 92. rows: so MA, Laur.; τις Tr., Max. 
 
 exros: SO MA, Max., Laur.; ἐκ τούτων Tr. 
 
86 
 
 (THE OXYRAYNCHUS. PAPYRI 
 
 93. λαμπρως : so MA, Max., Laur.; λαμπρός Al, Tr. 
 
 κεχορηγήμενος : κεκοσμημένος “MSS. (ωκοσμένος Laur., putting λαμπρῶς after κεκοσμ.). 
 95. avros: Max. and Laur. add δέ. 
 96. ovde: so A? (and conjecturally Meineke) ; ; οὔτε A’ and the other MSS. 
 91. cay Wadia: ἐὰν ψέλλια MA, Max., Laur. ; κἂν ψέλλια Tr. 
 98-9. A places ἔχῃ before χρυσᾶ. 
 100. The papyrus does not support Meineke’s insertion of αὐτός before φαῦλος which 
 
 is adopted by Rose. 
 
 105. eav: ὃς ἄν MSS. except Laur., which has ὡς ἄν and adds ὁ before σπουδαῖος. 
 106. The insertion of ηι (so MSS. ) i is necessary. 
 109-19. The excerpts of Stobaeus and Maximus omit this passage, and unfortunately 
 
 its meaning and construction are obscured by a corruption. Apparently πλεονασασαει con- 
 ceals something like πλέονος ἄξια, and we may either add συμβῇ (cf. ll. 125-7) and place 
 a comma after κτήματα, when the sense will be as in the translation above, or connecting 
 των δια τῆς ψυχης ἀγαθων with τυχωσι insert 6 or ὅπερ (so Diels) before πάντων αἰσχιστον. “Τί 
 sometimes happens that worthless persons have both external and mental gifts, and value 
 the former above the latter, which is the most disgraceful thing of all.’ Corruptio optimi 
 pesstma. The latter remedy produces an easier construction and a more pointed sentence. 
 
 122. τῶν is omitted in the MSS. 
 
 126. πλεονος : πλείονος MSS. 
 
 128. συμβεβηκεν : συμβέβηκε MSS. 
 
 130. τουτους ειναῖι: So MSS. except A, which transposes the words. 
 
 131. The excerpt of Maximus ends here. 
 
 T50—-I. μειζίω] και πλείω : καὶ πλείω καὶ μείζω Tr., πλείω καὶ μείζω MA. 
 
 153--5. Stobaeus here has χωρὶς φρονήσεως παραγενόμεναι, which is the conclusion of his 
 
 quotation. In ]. 153 we have supposed that the repetition of av led to the loss of ea» 
 To read (e)av [ywpes would make the line too long. 
 
 155-60. Cf. Iamblichus, Profrepiicus, 2 βλαβερὰ μάλιστα τροφῆς μὲν ἀφθονία τῷ τὸ 
 
 σῶμα, κτήσεως δὲ τῷ τὴν Ψυχὴν διακειμένῳ κακῶς. καὶ ἐπισφαλὲς καὶ ὅμοιον μαινομένῳ δοῦναι μάχαιραν 
 καὶ μοχθηρῷ δύναμιν, which looks like an imitation of the passage before us. On the close 
 connexion of part of the treatise of Iamblichus with the Aristotelian dialogue cf. Bywater in 
 Journal of Philology, ii. 55 546. 
 
 164. There would hardly be room for the necessary καὶ after γιγνεσθΐαι, but the 
 
 homoioteleuton may easily have caused its omission; cf. note on 153-5. 
 
 169. φιλοσοφητέον was the key-note of the Προτρεπτικός, as of the similarly named work 
 
 of Iamblichus: cf. Bywater, 7dzd., pp. 68-9. 
 
 667. ARISTOXENUS ? 
 18x8 cm. 
 
 Parts of two columns, the former of which comprises thirty complete lines, 
 
 containing an analysis of certain musical scales. To the authorship of the 
 fragment we have no real clue. It is natural in such a case to think first of 
 
667. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 87 
 
 Aristoxenus, the greatest name among the ancient writers upon musical theory ; 
 and there is no reason why the piece should not come from his ‘Appovixa Στοιχεῖα 
 or some similar work. But on the other hand there is no particular reason why 
 it should, for any treatise on the same subject might include some such dis- 
 cussion as that found here. The papyrus probably falls within the third century. 
 It is written in a clear semi-uncial hand, without stops or other lection marks ; 
 a short space, which is indicated in the transcript below, is used to divide the 
 several sentences. 
 
 The highly technical language employed in the fragment can hardly be 
 understood or discussed without some preliminary explanation of the composi- 
 tion of the Greek scale. We must here acknowledge our great indebtedness 
 to Mr. H. 5. Macran, to whose excellent edition of the Warmonics of Aristoxenus 
 the reader is referred for further information. 
 
 The fundamental unit which was the basis’of the Greek scale in all its 
 later developments was the tetrachord, typically consisting of two dieses, i.e. 
 semitones or smaller intervals, and a complement, or the interval remaining 
 when the dzeses were subtracted from the concord of the fourth. The magnitude 
 of the three intervals determined the genus of the tetrachord as enharmonic or 
 chromatic, the enharmonic variety containing two quarter-tones and a ditone, 
 and the chromatic other divisions, e.g. two semitones and a tone and a half. 
 The more familiar diatonic tetrachord, composed of a semitone and two tones, 
 was distinguished by having only one dzeszs. Larger scales were effected by 
 the arrangement or combination (ἁρμονία) of such tetrachords in two ways, (a) 
 by conjunction (συναφή), when the last note of one tetrachord coincided with 
 the first note of the next; or (4) by disjunction (d:a¢evéis), when the tetrachords 
 were separated from each other by a tone. The combination of a pair of 
 tetrachords in these two methods produced respectively the heptachord and 
 octachord scales of the seven-stringed and eight-stringed lyres. Further 
 additions resulted in what was known as the perfect scale, which took the 
 following form (¢ = tone, d = desis, and c = complement) :— 
 
 νητῶν (συνημμένων) 
 
 ὑπατῶν 
 
 νητῶν (διεζευγμένων) ὑπερβολαίων 
 
 ---------------------ὦ 
 ΑΝ ΤΑ Soe = 
 
eats THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 or in modern notation :— 
 
 μεσῶν συναφή νητῶν (συνημμένων) ὑπερβολαίων 
 εις 
 ΤΣ -- — ie ees 
 a BIE prea oe ΞΕ Pane eae 
 ὑπατῶν διάζευξις νητῶν (διεζευγμένων) 
 
 It will be observed that this system diverges at a certain point into a 
 conjunct and a disjunct scheme, the heptachord scale being the basis of the 
 one (the ‘lesser complete system’) and the octachord that of the other (the 
 ‘greater complete system’). The additional note at the bottom was technically 
 known as the προσλαμβανόμενος. | 
 
 To come now to the passage before us. The writer is examining and 
 locating different scales, and has proposed for consideration a heptachord 
 
 Vc SARS OE OL τω, Tee Lara oe ἜΣ: 
 scale of the form Ea Ly Eee, Gaye 
 would be enharmonic or chromatic (Il. 1-2) and also a conjunctive arrangement 
 (11. 2 sqq.). Such conjunction would occur in three places in the perfect scale 
 (11, 10 sqq.; see the scheme above), i.e. in the tetrachords ὑπατῶν and μεσῶν, 
 μεσῶν and νητῷν (συνημμένων), νητῶν (διεζευγμένων) and ὑπερβολαίων. Disjunction, 
 on the other hand, is only found in the case of the tetrachords μεσῶν and νητῶν 
 (διεζευγμένων). To the given scheme is then (ll. 19 544.) added at the lower 
 extremity a tone, corresponding to the προσλαμβανόμενος (see above), and the 
 resulting eight-note system is said to occur in the same three combinations as 
 before (ll. 22 sqq.). Here, however, a difficulty arises, for as will be seen on 
 reference to the perfect scale such a scheme occurs in it not thrice but twice 
 only, i.e. in the two halves of the ‘greater complete system.’ The simplest 
 remedy is to suppose a defect in the text; cf. note ad Joc. 
 
 —>. A scale of this type 
 
 Cola: Cola 
 μεν evappoviov ἢ χρω εἰ 
 ματικον ETELTA εν τί 
 συναφηὴ κειμενον εἰ Al 
 TE OAH ELITE καὶ EV με | A 
 
 | 
 5 pel και ete Ola Tov ε 35 Τί 
 
667, NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 89 
 
 Ens μελωδοιτο Ta πολ of 
 Aa ειἰθ υπερβατως ἢ εἶ 
 pev yap διαζευξις αει ΠῚ 
 νητας Kal μεσας εφαι μὶ 
 10 veTo ποίειν τὴν δε 40 Of 
 συναφην συνεβαινε μ 
 κοινωνειν τριων εἰ 
 συστημάτων WOTE δ᾽ 
 σημαινειν εξαυτης Ll 
 I5 εν τοπῶι τινὶ ποτε 45 PB 
 pov dvvarat υπατας ΑΥ] 
 kat μεσας [lel] η ν[ αἴήητας ταὶ 
 και pecas ἡ ὑπερβο πὶ 
 λαιας καὶ νητας εστω εἰἰ 
 20 δε και τονιαιῖον emt δὸ δι! 
 To βαρυ προσκειμενον αὐ 
 επί TOUTOLS κοινον αισὶ 
 yap εἐσται τὸ σχημα TOV καὶ 
 
 τς ΤῸ Tov οκταχορδου δει 
 25 τῶν εἰρημενὼν TPL 55 Kae Ϊ 
 
 ὧν συστηματῶν κα δεῖ 
 [Olamep ἐγενετὸ γνω λαιμί 
 ριμον Kat εν τοις a τουΐ 
 νώτερον OTTOTE προ νησὶ 
 
 30 φερομενον συστημα 60 νονΐ 
 κει Ϊ 
 
 1-30. “[ϑοἢ a scale is in the first place] enharmonic or chromatic, in the second 
 place it is a conjunctive system, whether its melodic succession be complete or partial, and 
 mainly consecutive or broken. For disjunction was shown always to occur in the “lower” 
 and “middle” tetrachords, while conjunction was found to enter into three scales, so that 
 it did (not) immediately signify the region in which it lay, i.e. whether it applied to the 
 “upper” and “middle” tetrachords or the “lower” and “middle” or the ‘ lower” 
 and “extreme.” Now let a note be added to these at the bass extremity; then this 
 scheme of the octachord will be common to (two of) the three scales already mentioned, 
 as was proved in the foregoing argument when a scale was propounded ...’ 
 
 2-7. μελωδοιτο is to be taken with oAy and ev pepet as well as with δια τῶν εξης and 
 
go THER OXRYRAYINCHOS «EAR IC. 
 
 umepBaros. Scales might be curtailed either by diminishing their compass, i.e. dropping 
 notes at the extremities (ev pepe), or by omitting inner notes (υπερβατως) ; cf. Aristox. Harm. 
 Ρ- τὴ 90 (Meibom), and Aristid. Quint. PP. 15-6 τὰ μὲν αὐτῶν ἐστι συνεχῆ, ws τὰ διὰ τῶν ἑξῆς 
 φθόγγων, τὰ δ᾽ ὑπερβατά, ὡς τὰ διὰ τῶν μὴ ἐφεξῆς μελῳδούμενα. For συναφή and διάζευξις 
 ἐς cf. Aristox. Harm. p. 58. 15 5464. τα πολλα in |. 6 seems otiose. . 
 3.844. The construction and sense of this passage are not very clear. If the words 
 
 are to be left as they stand, something like δεῖν ἡμᾶς must be understood with σημαίνειν ; but 
 the change of subject is very awkward, and we prefer to suppose with Mr. Macran that μη 
 was dropped out before σημαινειν. The similarity of the following syllable on would help to 
 account for the loss. 
 
 I5. εν τόπωι τινι: SC. κεῖται ἡ συναφή or κεῖσθαι τὴν συναφήν, according as τινι is accented 
 τίνι or τινί. τόπος means technically region or direction of the scale. 
 
 22sqq. This sentence is the crux of the fragment, for, as already explained in the 
 introduction, the series of notes apparently indicated only occurs twice in the perfect scale, 
 not three times as here stated by the author. The-easiest way out of the difficulty is 
 to adopt Mr. Macran’s suggestion that dvow has fallen out of the text before των εἰρημένων. 
 
 668. Epitome or Livy, XXXV//-XLZ ann XLVIII-LV. 
 Height 26 cm. Pirate VI (Col. viii). 
 
 Literary papyri from Egypt which are now numbered by hundreds have 
 hitherto, with a few trifling exceptions, been Greek; and Latin literature has 
 been represented only by a small piece of Vergil and a few unimportant 
 historical or juristic fragments. The discovery of an important literary text in 
 Latin is therefore a welcome novelty. This consists of parts of eight columns 
 of an epitome of a history of Rome, the events being grouped together in strict 
 chronological order under the different consular years, and the division of the 
 several books being noted. That the author of the history in question was 
 Livy, though not stated, is obvious from a comparison of the arrangement of 
 the books as numbered in the τας with that of the δ τον books in 
 Livy’s work. 
 
 The epitome is written on the recto ; on the verso is the text of part of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews (657). The seaches of the latter enables us to decide 
 the relative position of the different fragments of the Livy with the exception 
 of a few small pieces, two of which had been gummed over places of the 
 recto in order to strengthen the roll, and one of which seems to have been cut 
 off from a much later portion of it (ll. 218-25). The handwriting is a medium- 
 sized upright uncial, with some admixture of minuscule forms (0, d), and 
 belongs to the same class as the Vergil fragment (P. Oxy. I, Plate viii) and 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS ΟΙ 
 
 the Bodleian Chronicles of Eusebius (Palaeographical Soc. ii. Plate 130), but 
 is an earlier example of the mixed style than has hitherto been known. The 
 papyrus was found with cursive documents varying from the second to the 
 fourth century (chiefly third), and the text of the Epistle to the Hebrews is 
 certainly not later than the fourth century (cf. introd. to 657). The Livy 
 epitome must therefore have been written not later than the beginning of the 
 fourth century, and it more probably belongs to the third. Abbreviations are 
 commonly employed in praenomina, in official titles such as cos., 27., trib. pl, 
 and 2097 in the headings is written ἠδ, Other abbreviations are rare; but 
 cf. ll. 15 pass(a), 122 Masiniss(ae), 207 omnib(us). A middle point is placed 
 after abbreviations, but there are no stops. Each column consists of 27-28 
 lines which are broad and contain on an average 37 letters, but the ends 
 are very uneven although the scribe has no objection to dividing a word 
 between two lines. The lines which mention the consuls for the year project 
 by about three letters into the left margin. In spite of the handsome appearance 
 of the MS., which has a broad margin above and below the calligraphic writing 
 and is certainly not the work of a schoolboy, the text is extraordinarily corrupt. 
 Mistakes in proper names, the occasional omissions of letters, and easy palaeo- 
 graphical errors such as the confusion of ¢ and g (e.g. 1. 27 27ι167,ρ6 5511) are not 
 surprising ; but forms such as conzurium for connubium (1.17), fictie grimonibus 
 for fictis criminibus (1. 72), planus for primus (1. 217), and still more pug- 
 namentasi (Ὁ Pergamenos missi, 1. 111), trigem reddeterbuit (Ὁ... ens deterrutt, 
 ]..184), show that the scribe understood little of what he was writing. It is 
 strange that having swallowed such monstrosities he should have in a few 
 places taken the trouble to make minor corrections, Chartaginientium e.g. being 
 altered to Chartaginiensium in 1. 22, fodem to fidem in 1. 95, and the super- 
 fluous s of Lusszttanorum in 1. 187 being erased. The epitome briefly chronicles 
 events one after the other in the barest manner with no attempt at connexion 
 or literary style, thereby presenting a marked contrast to the extant epitome of 
 Livy; but this bald, strictly chronological arrangement hardly excuses the 
 grammatical errors both of accidence and syntax which are scattered through- 
 out the text. The lack of confidence which the scribe’s Latin necessarily 
 inspires, coupled with the length of the lines, renders the task of restoring the 
 lacunae, which occur in nearly every line, exceptionally difficult, and we have 
 generally abstained from conjectures which did not seem fairly certain. Yet in 
 spite of all these drawbacks, and though it is just when it reaches a new and 
 therefore specially interesting fact that the papyrus is apt to present unusual 
 obstacles to interpretation, the historical value of the new epitome is considerable, 
 as will presently be shown. | | 
 
92 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 The papyrus falls into two main divisions, the first (Cols. i-iii) covering 
 Books 37-40, where Livy’s history is extant, the second (Cols, iv-viii) covering 
 Books 48-55, of which only an epitome constructed on quite other lines has 
 been preserved. The first section, which deals with events between B.C. 190 
 and 179 and necessarily contains no new information, is chiefly interesting 
 because it enables us to see the principles on which the epitome was composed, 
 and hence to form a better estimate of the value of the second section, where 
 no comparison with the actual work of Livy is possible. When allowances are 
 made for the point of view of the compiler, the impression which he leaves is by 
 no means unfavourable. Being limited to the barest catalogue of actual events, | 
 he naturally ignores Livy’s discussions of origins and causes as well as speeches, 
 but he does not omit any of the more important occurrences. With regard to 
 the less striking incidents his choice is capricious ; he tends to insert notices of 
 picturesque stories, e.g. that of Ortiagon’s wife (ll. 14-7), the tents in the forum 
 (11. 60-3), Theoxena (ll. 70-1), even when rather trivial; and the amount of 
 space which he devotes to an event is often in inverse proportion to its im- 
 portance. The account of the war in Ambracia, to which Livy gives nine 
 chapters, is for instance dismissed in two words (I. 12). It is noticeable that he 
 is more interested in home affairs than the author of the extant epitome, who in 
 Books 37-40 mentions fewer events though entering into more details about 
 them. The language of the papyrus is in the main borrowed from Livy, from 
 whom whole phrases and even clauses are reproduced (e. g. in ll. 78-80), but the 
 epitomizer frequently summarizes Livy in his own words (e.g. ll. 8-10)—~a 
 process which sometimes leads to apparent errors (cf. 1. 3, note). Twice he 
 seems to have distorted Livy’s chronology through combining two separate 
 notices (cf. notes on ll. 7 and 17), but in other respects the chronology of the 
 papyrus faithfully represents that of Livy. 
 
 After Col. iii a good many columns are lost which contained the epitome 
 of Books 41-7. With Col. iv begins the second and important section of the 
 epitome, giving a few lines from the end of Book 48 and most of Books 49-55, 
 Col. iv-vi and vii-viii are continuous, but between Cols. vi and vii one column 
 is lost, as is proved by the lacuna in the Epistle to the Hebrews at the corre- 
 sponding point. Books 50, 54, and 55 are the best preserved, then come 49 and 
 51. Of Book 52 we have only the beginnings of lines, and Book 53, which was 
 treated at exceptional length, is spoilt by the loss of a whole column. The 
 period with which the papyrus deals, B.C. 150-137, is one of great interest. 
 Abroad there were the Third Punic, Fourth Macedonian (against Pseudophilippus), 
 Achaean, and Spanish Wars, and at home events were leading up to the 
 Gracchan revolution. The existing authorities are far from satisfactory. For 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 93 
 
 foreign affairs the only sources of the first rank are the fragments of Polybius 
 and the extant epitome of Livy. Where these fail we are dependent mainly 
 upon Appian, supplemented occasionally by such writers as Valerius Maximus, 
 Florus, Eutropius, and Orosius. Of the internal history almost nothing is known 
 except what is to be gleaned from the epitome of Livy and some references in 
 Cicero. Thus wherever the papyrus supplements the existing epitome, the 
 information is extremely welcome, and fortunately they differ from each other 
 in two important respects. The extant epitome (henceforth called Epit.) is 
 a connected narrative, and though the sequence of events is chronological to 
 the same extent as the original history, the epitomizer has not thought it worth 
 while to make clear to which year every event recorded belongs. The papyrus 
 on the other hand being arranged on strict chronological principles, not only 
 do we learn the precise year to which each event mentioned in it was assigned 
 by Livy, but the dates for the parallel portions of Epit. can now be exactly 
 determined, a proceeding which entails several changes in the chronology 
 which Epit. has hitherto been supposed to prove. Secondly, though Epit. 
 is as a rule much longer than the papyrus because it often describes events in 
 greater detail, the brief summary in the latter frequently includes events which 
 are passed over in Epit. Some of these are naturally trivial (e.g. 11. 84-5, 
 111-5, and 164-6), but others are quite important. The proportion allotted 
 to the different books in Epit. is very uneven. Thus Book 49 in Epit. 
 occupies a good deal of space, the epitomizer entering into some detail both 
 with regard to the Third Punic War and the rise of the pretender in Macedonia. 
 Beside this the account of Book 49 in the papyrus (Il. 87-105) is very meagre, 
 though even so it mentions at least one event which does not occur in Epit. 
 On the other hand Book 53 of Epit. is dismissed in a few lines, the author 
 apparently attaching little importance to the events of B.C. 143-1, and Book 54 
 (Β. C. 141-139) does not occupy much space. Here the papyrus is considerably 
 fuller than Epit., the proportion assigned to each book being more equal. Which 
 of the two epitomes was constructed first is uncertain. The extant one is now 
 generally considered to have been composed not earlier than the second century, 
 and Zangemeister (Festschr. d. xxxvi philol. Versamml. 1882, pp. 86 544.) would 
 assign it to the fourth, while the author of the compilation in the papyrus no 
 doubt lived in the second or third century, when chronological epitomes were 
 much in vogue in Egypt; cf. 12, 665, and the Strassburg fragment edited by 
 Keil. The numerous errors in the text show that we have to deal with a copy 
 some degrees removed from the original composition ; but the interval of time 
 need not be long, as is shown by the Oxyrhynchus fragment of Julius Africanus’ 
 Κεστοί (412), which though written within about fifty years of the composition of 
 
94 THE OXYRHYNCHUS  ΡΑΡΥΝΙ 
 
 that work is already quite corrupt. The discovery of an epitome of Livy in 
 which the names of the consuls in the ablative case are prefixed to the events 
 of each year goes far to confirm an acute conjecture of Mommsen (Adz. d. k. 
 Sachs. Ges. viii. p. 552), who inferred from the internal evidence of Cassiodorus 
 and Orosius that an epitome of such a character, rather than Livy’s complete 
 work, lay at the basis of those authors’ compilations; the papyrus is, however, 
 much less elaborate than the epitome of which the existence was postulated 
 by Mommsen, and which Zangemeister (zbzd.) even regards as the basis of the 
 extant epitome of Livy. | | 
 
 We append a brief summary of the chief historical results to be gained from 
 the new find. In foreign affairs the papyrus gives no new information about 
 the Third Punic and Achaean Wars and confirms the generally received view. 
 The chronology of the Macedonian war against Pseudophilippus, which was 
 previously somewhat uncertain, is now fixed more precisely ; cf. Il. 101, 106, and 
 126-7, note. The names of the ambassadors to Bithynia in B. C. 149, which are 
 given in ll. 112-3, enable us to emend a corruption in the name of one of them 
 as found in Polybius ; and a hitherto unknown defeat of the Romans in B.C. 141 
 in Illyria is recorded in 1.175. But much more valuable are the references to 
 the Spanish war, especially the campaigns against Viriathus. Not only does the 
 papyrus supply new facts of importance, a victory (apparently) in B.C. 147 
 (1. 136), the defeat of L. Metellus in B. c. 142 (1.167), and the delay of Ὁ. Caepio 
 (ll. 182-4); but it is now for the first time possible to construct the right 
 chronology of the governors of Southern Spain in B.C. 145-39, and the chief 
 events connected with them. Hitherto the few references to the Spanish war 
 in Epit. were insufficient to correct the unsatisfactory account in Appian, whose 
 text is in parts defective. A detailed examination of the changes introduced 
 into the received chronology of this war and of the new light thrown upon 
 Appian is given in the note on 1.167. More interesting, however, than defeats 
 and victories are the references in the papyrus to home affairs. With regard to 
 events. previously known the most striking novelty is the date of the famous 
 accusation of L. Aurelius Cotta by Scipio Africanus, which is placed by the 
 papyrus in B.C. 138 in place of B.C. 133-29, a change which brings about 
 a conflict between Livy and Cicero. Lines 115-6 probably fix the hitherto 
 uncertain date of the Ler Scantinia. Among details which are new are the 
 important military reform introduced by Appius Claudius in B.C. 140 (Il. 177-8), 
 the dispute between the consul and the tribunes in the same year (Il. 182-4), 
 and the statement about the ancestry of A. Gabinius, author of the Lex Gabinia 
 (l. 193). It is also a matter of interest that we can now connect with Livy 
 several statements of later writers, e.g. Dio Cassius (ll. 195-6, note), Valerius 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 95 
 
 Maximus (notes on Il. 161-3, 164-6, and 192), Frontinus (ll. 188-go, note), and 
 Obsequens (ll. 127-9, note). Though the sadly imperfect condition of the text 
 prevents this list from being much longer, and the numerous fragmentary 
 references to hitherto unknown events serve only to accentuate the sense of loss, 
 the papyrus is nevertheless a very serviceable addition to the authorities for the 
 period from B.C. 150-139, and is a welcome violation of the monopoly hitherto 
 enjoyed by Greek philology in the recovery of classical literature from Egypt. 
 
 For many suggestions and references in the commentary on this papyrus 
 we are indebted to Mr. W. Warde Fowler. The first proofs of our publication 
 were submitted to Profs. Kornemann, Reid, and Wissowa, who have also 
 contributed much to the elucidation of several problems. 
 
 (Sonat. 
 [2 Hispa\nia Romani caest. Book 37 (B.C. 190). 
 [17. Fulvio| Cn. Manlio cos. B.C. 189. 
 ΡΈΜΑ ls pax tterum data est. P. Lepidinus {maximus} 
 
 | pontif \ex maximus QO. Fabium pr(aetorem) quod flamen 
 (Oucrinjalem erat proficisct in Sardiniam 
 ΠΕ ς lant. Antt\ocho regi pax data. Lusttant 
 [vastatt.| Rhodonia desoli deducta. 
 [Glabrio clensuram petens minantes 
 [accusa\tionem compellitoribus composito 
 10 |destite|t. 
 libler) xaxviit Book 38. 
 [Ambra\cia capta. 
 [Gallog\raecis in Pamphylia proelio vastatis 
 ΑΟΥΤΟΣ αὶ la liberata. Origtacontis captian nobilis 
 [centurijonem cuius vim pass(a) erat aurum admit 
 ΡΣ | poscentem occidit caputque eius ad virum 
 [secum ? tulit.| Campanis coniurium datum. | | 
 [exter Achaelos et Lacedaemontos cruenta | pr\oelia. 
 (7. Valerio L)ulio Calinatore cos. BaGaioo- 
 rss BR pwaeda ex Gallograecia per Cra.[.... 
 [ducta. L. M\nucius Myrtilus et L. Man{i}liu‘s 
 
 τ 
 ο 
 ia 
 
 [per legatios Chartaginien| t]um qui 
 [pulst eran\t (avecti ?). 
 [M. Aemilio C. Fl\aminio cos. B. C. 187. 
 
Sap e THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 25 [P. Scipio) Africanus a Quintis Metellis die{s}| 
 [dicta in Liltratum abi{i)t, qui ne revocaretur 
 (Gracchus tyib(unus) pl{ebis) intergessit. L. Cornelius 
 
 3. 1. Lecincus for Lepidinus. 5. 1. [gedrenjalis. 4. 1. Bononia for Rhodonia; cf. 
 p. 102. 8. 1. minantibus. 9. |. competitoribus proposito. 14. 1. Ortagontis captiva. 
 17. 1, connubium for coniurium. 19. 1. Lievio Salinatore. 20. 1. per Thrajctam. 25. 
 
 ]. οί μῆς for Metellis. 26. 1. Le\terninum. 24. 1. entercessit. 
 
 pL th 
 Scipio damnatus....|. ent. 
 [26(67) xxxvzii2 Book 39. 
 
 30 per C. Flamilnium et M. Aemiliulm cos. Ligures 
 perdomitt. viae Flaminia et Aemiliana munitae. 
 ΤΠ ΜΟΡΝΗΣΙ AE ee ee num coacta 
 ab Roma reldire. Manlius . .jm de Gallo- 
 graccis in tlriumpho....... lan|. pelcunta 
 35 guae trans\lata erat..... lees plelr|sloluta. 
 Sp. Postum{t)o |Q. Marcio cols. B,C. 100% 
 flispala Falcenia meretri'ce et pupillo 
 ~Aebutio quem T. Sempronius) Rutilius - 
 tutor et malter Duronia cilrcumscribserant 
 40 tudicium rel ferentibus Balccha- 
 (walla ‘SHOLATA™ fuses τον τ: 1715] pan\t| 
 subactt. at\hletarum cer\tamina 
 primum a Fullvio Nobilior|e edita. 
 Galli{s) in Italiam transgressis Ma'rcellum 
 45 [plersuasit {ut trans Alpes redire'nt. L. Cornelius 
 Scipio post bellum Antiochi| ludos voti- 
 vos con|lata pecunia feci\t. 
 
 4221}. Clau\dio M. Semproni'o cos. B.C. 185. 
 ΤΙΣ FU\ SO as, ee lis accepta 
 50 P. Claudio Pulchrio L. Porcio Lilcinio cos. B. G.ctGas 
 
 homini ccd οοἷα Naevio pr(aetore) veniefici(t) damnati. 
 L. Quintius Flalmininus ....| Gallia 
 
 quod Philippo |Poeno scorto| suo deside- 
 
 rante gladiatorium specta\culum 
 
 34. 1 Fecenia. 39. 1. cz\rcumscripserani. 40. 1. zndictum. 44. 1. Malrcellus. 
 51. 1. hominum circa duo) (millia)? 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 97 
 
 Col. iii. 
 ΕΒ sua manu Bonuim nobilem occiderat 
 a lanatone cen\sore senatu motus est. 
 vastaita Porcia | facta. 
 M. Claudio Marcello {|Q. Fabio Labeone cos. B.c. 183. 
 P. Licinit Crassi pontificis maximi 
 60 LUAISS LUNECOYFLOUS Varo si on ss «os an foro 
 tabernaculis polsitis evenit id quod 
 nate|s clecinle'vat |tabernacula..... 
 in foro futura. 2 τό letters 
 dim\...|..m. Hannibal 12 letters 
 1 3,2 whe, τῷ letters 
 Lib(er) xxxx Book 40. 
 L. Alemilio (Ομ. Berio {cos. Bsc, 182. 
 ΒΕ ἄν πδη, | bellum 2] 16 letters 
 oe Terenas lellitesin| LO mae, 
 0 fret cee τεσ, 
 in mare m|.\ugien|........ Demetrius 
 ficite grimonibus \accusatus....... 
 per patrem coactuls 14 letters 
 P. Lentulo M. Paebio {cos. BeGulol: 
 75 nm agro L. Nerylli scribae lbri Numae 77,0 6727. 
 A. Postumio C. (Calpurnio) |cos. B.C. 180. 
 cum Liguribus Flispiant subaciz. 
 1. Livius trib(unus) pl(ebts) quod \annos nati quemque 
 magistratum peterent rogatio lata 
 
 80 Est. 
 QO. Fulvio M. Manlio cos. ΒΊΟΥ dey 
 M. Lepidi et Fulvit Nobilioris....... 
 55. 1. Bovum. 56. 1. AZ. Catone for lanatone. 54. 1. daszlica for vastatta. 
 62. 1. vadels| for nate\s}. 67. 1. Baebio for Berio. 42. 1. fictis crimintbus. 74. 
 
 1, Cornelio (or Cethego) for Lentulo and Baebio for Paebio. 75. 1. Petiliit for Nerylli. 78. 
 l.aZ. Villio for L. Livius and quot for quod. 
 
 Col. iv. 
 
 adversus Chalr\taginienses. Lusitani valstati. Book 48 (B.C. 150). 
 C. Corneliuls....lecus quod P. Decim sul..... 
 H 
 
go 
 
 95 
 
 Ioo 
 
 105 
 
 IIo 
 
 115 
 
 ΠΕΠΟΛ ΚΗΥΝΟ ΠΟΘΙ yan 
 
 a.ictam ingenulalm stupraverat DCU ae hs 
 damnatus. 
 Lild(er)| χαυχυ eid 
 2. Marcio Censorino M. Mant)lio cos. 
 bellum Punicum tertium exortum. Utic\enses 
 [dlenigne locant auxiliate. Chartaginitle|nses 
 [cye |dledictonem venerunt, tusst omnia |sua 
 in alium locum tramsferr|e mol........56. 
 vedierunt. Romanios..... [Sp ao keg eee 
 pepulerunt. Scipio, 21 letters 
 
 Ζ 
 Aemiliani fllolldem ph... .«.. νον ον ν νος Aemi- 
 liant virtute exer\citus qui obsessus 
 a Poenis erat liber|atus. 16 letters 
 
 h 
 per Caridemum poel..... Ser. Galbaa Lusi- 
 tanis reus product, 20 letters 
 fili quos fens com| plexus est. Andrisco... 
 721 se Philippi philium ferente Macedonia 
 per arma occupata. { 20 letters 
 Mantt)lio et Marc{t)o cos. quarti ludi saecula- 
 rels) factos quos oportuit Diti ex Sibyllinis 
 carminibus [Terlen'ti facti sunt. 
 
 [ Zb(er) ὦ 
 per socios populi Romani Pseudophilippus 
 in ultimam εἷ 24 letters 
 
 ἐπ ΤΟΝ Prusias? 
 
 go. 1. auxiliat’; cf. p. 104. τοι. 1. filium. 
 Cole, v: 
 [vex Bithylniae positus est. ad Attalum regem 
 ΡΣ: | 21 pugnamentasi sunt legati Marco 
 [...podalgricus A. Hlostilius Mancinus capite 
 a oe la guondam L. Manilius Volso stolidus 
 ΕΟ ΠΥ ΕΞ | ἀραϊοηοης dixerunt M. Cato respondit 
 
 Book 49. 
 B.C. 149. 
 
 Book 50. 
 
 [xec caput] mec pedes nec cor habere{nt}. M. Scale |ti{ni pus 
 
 Ee leree, «Jam tulit (de) in stupro deprehensi(s). 
 [Sp. Albino L. Piso|ne cos. 
 
 B.C. 148, 
 
125 
 
 130 
 
 135 
 
 668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 [Masinis(sa) ult\imae senectutis liberos It 
 
 RS one ls veliquit decedens, cuius re- 
 
 [guum natu maxiimes filis per miliaannum distributum. 
 [Marcellus leg\atus ad Masinissam missus 
 
 [obrutus. Ha\sdrubal quod adfinis Masiniss(ae) erat 
 
 OEE ΉΤΑΝ τ ΗΝ \ta subselli soctus est. Scipio Aemilianus 
 [consul creat\us. 
 
 [17᾿. Manilius) in Africafm) priolspere dimicatus \es|t. 
 [Luventit pr(aetoris) t\z Thessalia exercitus caesus. 
 [Philippus αἹ Metello captus. sacrarium 
 
 [....e¢ laurjus soct maximo incendio 
 [exviolata. | 
 [ lib(er) 12) 
 
 [P. Cornelio C. Livio] cos. 
 
 [..:.. (παγίδα) ginein Appius crudelissime 
 Losier eee trae πο obsidentits Romanos non 
 (eee. Carthag\inem crebris proeli{is). 
 
 [per Achacorlum praetorem) Corinthi legati Romano 
 [pulsatz. Lulsttant subalte. 
 
 Se 
 
 Book 51. 
 B.C. 147. 
 
 111, 1. ἡ Pergamenos(?) misst for pugnamentas? (cf. p. 105) and AM(arcus).... for 
 
 Marco. 
 
 for soctus. 
 
 110 
 
 145 
 
 114. 1. legationem. 120. 1. Aemzlianum for miliaannum. 
 
 123. 1. occesus 
 
 125. 1. dimicavet for dimicatus (est. 133. ]. obszdentes. 135. 1. Romant. 
 136. 1, subact!; cf. p. 107. 
 
 Col. vi. 
 
 Cn. Cornelio L. Mummio cos. 
 [pler Scipion.em Carthago 
 [a \erepla. qu) 
 visset uxolrem 
 duobus fillzs 
 potestate Ϊ 
 Aemilia φῆ 
 [ lb(er) hi 
 
 L. Mumanus Clorinthum dirutt. 
 
 uxore οἷ 
 peruriam| a Lusitants clades 
 
 accepta. [ 
 H 2 
 
 B.C. 146, 
 
 Book 52. 
 
I0O 
 
 150 
 
 155 
 
 160 
 
 165 
 
 170 
 
 175 
 
 180 
 
 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 QO. Fabio Maximo L. Hostilio cos. 
 
 M. Petrows 
 adversuls Viriathum 
 
 Ser. Galba L. [Cotta cos. 
 
 L. Metellius con- 
 sulatum | 
 
 gui invisius plebi 
 
 petitur οἱ 
 Syria valstata 
 clon|tent; 
 [ libler) lite 
 
 Q. Metello |Appio Claudio cos. 
 
 Rethog\en 
 liberos ἃ. 
 proposito al 
 
 145. 1. Mummius. 
 
 One column lost. 
 
 Col. vii. 
 
 occidit, a Tyresio quem devici\t gladiu\m 
 
 dono accepit saguloque remilsso am\ict- 
 
 [t2lae dextram dedtt. 
 
 [AZ\etellus cos. a Lusttants vex\atus. | 
 
 [skgna statu{a)s tabulas Corinthas L. M\ummius 
 
 distributt circa oppida et Romj...... ἸυΐΖ. 
 
 [(γι. Caepione Q. Pompeio cos. 
 
 Q. Fabius Maximus Lusitanis caesis | 
 Viriathum fugavit. 
 
 , lib(er) {1212 
 Pompeius cos. ain} Nu{a}mantinis devictuls. in 
 Scordiscis cladis accepta. 
 
 [(Q. Cae|pione [(] Laelio Salasso cos. 
 
 Appius Claudius evicit ne duos \delectus?| annus 
 haberet. Uemilius Torquatus D. Slila\num 
 filium suulm) de Macedonia damniavit, f \uneri 
 non tnterfuit, eademque die {in dolmo| sua 
 consultantibus respondit. 
 
 B.C. 7 
 
 B.C. 144. 
 
 Book 53. 
 B. Cota 
 
 B.C. 141. 
 Book 54. 
 
 B.C. 140. 
 
185 
 
 190 
 
 668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 [Claepio cos. indelegem Ti. Claudiam Assilium 
 ir(z)b(unum) pl(ebis) interpellantem profectionem 
 [slam Llz\ctores trigem reddeterbuit. 
 
 Q.| Fabius Maximus a Viriath{t}o devictus de- 
 FT \ormem cum hostibus pacem fecit. Q. Occius 
 
 pugnavit. ..\inae devota est aqua An{n}to. aqua 
 Marcia in Capi\tolium contra Sibyllae carmina 
 [ perducta. ] 
 
 ει: tye insidiis Lul|s||sitanorum fortissime 
 
 176. 1. Sapzente for Salasso. 178. 1. 7. Manlius for UVemilius. 
 
 Asellum. 
 
 195 
 
 200 
 
 205 
 
 210 
 
 18 ΗΠ CS ΠΙΣΤΉ; Οἵ 0. ΤῈ: 
 
 Col. viii. 
 
 Cn. Pisone C. Pollilo cos. 
 
 Chaldaei urbe til| 20 letters 
 
 A. Cabinius verndée..... rogationem tulit 
 suffragium per talbellam Jerri. .......«ς 
 Servilius Caepio ab equitibus quos periculo 
 oliecerat clavo |tctus 15 letters 
 Audax Minurus (D)itallco 17 ,, 
 Viriathum iugula\verunt. 
 
 libler) [ἐν 
 
 P. Sclz|pione D. Luntio {cos. 
 
 77:2 Ὁ) LA OCH AR praecmium 
 negatum. cum Sciptloulem Nasicam et 
 decemvirulm cols. Licinius et Curtatius 
 
 trib(unt) pl(ebis) 171. carcier\em {clollocarent,....... 
 
 precibus populi mulltia remissa. .....000. 
 
 trib(unus) pl(ebis) pro commodis poptuli....vevees 
 omnib(us) lucti expiravit. col. Wwnl........ de- 
 sertores in comitio virgis cast sestertits 
 
 singulis venierunt. 
 
 P. Africanus cum L. Cottam laccu'sar\et........+ 
 
 magnitudinem nontlinis..|. CAE... eee ee 
 
 Lusitant vastati. a{n} Niuman)tin\is clades accepta. 
 
 Diodotus Tryphon Anltiochum |regem occt- 
 dit Suriague potitus est. | 
 
 ΤΟΙ 
 
 182. |. Claudium 
 
 B.C. 139. 
 
 Book 55. 
 B.C, 138. 
 
102 | JHE OAVYRAYNCH OS GARVRE 
 
 215. MM. Aemilio C. Hostilio Mia\nucino {cos. B,C) 14% 
 Decimus Brutus in Flispania re bene gesta 
 Oblivionis flumen planus transiivit. 
 
 191. 1. AL Popilli{o for C. Pollijo. 192. 1. urbe οἱ [taliia; cf. p. 113. 193. 
 l. Gabinzus. 201. 1. suterfectoribus. 203. |. Dectmum Brutum for decemviru|m. 
 204. 1]. (ab) omnib(us) luctus. 214. 1. Syrdaque. 217. 1. Oblivionem and primus for 
 planus. 
 Fr. (a). Fr. (0). Ετ. (ὦ. Fr. (ὦ). 
 | Sallanis | J \amili| 235 Ἰζ17 zal 
 weum 1 Pe - | 
 220 |e non rel ] [ ye 
 ] | lyzom| 
 co's. 230 Wad) 
 |. samin| es me .[ 
 javit 21 cu'stodia| 
 
 225 ..1 lee ven 
 Seen ea 
 
 ΟἹ Livy 37,46. 
 δι ΚΘ. 7.54 7 
 
 3. |s is probably Ae/olt's, for it is difficult to see what chapter can be referred to if not 51; 
 but pax tferum data est somewhat perverts the truth, since the embassy of the Aetolians 
 was summarily ordered to depart under threats of punishment and no terms were offered 
 by the Senate. A negative would seem to have been omitted. 
 
 P. Lepidinus: his correct name was P. Licinius (37. 51). maximus is a repetition of 
 part of his title. 
 
 6. [..... jaz¢; this word must be corrupt; /enuct or retinuct (cf. 37. 51) would be 
 expected. 
 
 Anktlocho regt pax data: cf. 37. 55. 
 
 Lusttant |vastat’|: cf. 37. 57 and for vas/att ll. 13, 83, and 212. 
 
 7. Two events seem to be confused here, the Rhodian embassy about Soli (ch. 56 
 ad fin.) and the foundation of Bononia (ch. 57), the latter being what is really meant, 
 as shown by the intervening mention of the Lusitanians. de Soli(s), if more than a mere 
 interpolation from ch. 56, probably represents colonia or de Gallis. 
 
 8-10. Cf. 37. 573 destitt is the word used by Livy. 
 
 12. Οἵ, ,88.1:--0. | 
 
 13. Cf. 38. 12 sqq. 1% Pamphylia, as Prof. Kornemann remarks, is not strictly 
 accurate, the Gallograeci being defeated in Galatia. 
 
 14. Probably |P&rygzla or |Asza totla. 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 103) 
 
 14-17. For the story of Ortiagon’s wife see 38. 24. cap/an must be captiva, but 
 uxor is much wanted and ηοδι is probably corrupt. Possibly az nodclis is due to 
 a reminiscence of the words Azcyram nobilem which occur at the beginning of the chapter. 
 
 admit. . . also seems to be a corruption of a word meaning ‘ promised,’ while 
 poscentem is for pensantem, the word used by Livy. 
 
 17. On the right of intermarriage granted to the Campanians see Livy 38. 36, where 
 the event is placed in Β.6. 188, and is the consequence of the census ordered to be taken 
 in B.c. 189 which is mentioned in ch. 28. The papyrus records the event mentioned in 
 ch. 36, but puts it in the place corresponding to ch. 28. Cf. note on Il. 44-5. 
 
 Tomi) 38.90, 
 
 τ {19 58; 
 
 20. Cf. 48, 40-1. 
 
 21-3. Cf. 38. 42. 
 
 24. Cf. 38. 42. 
 
 25-7. Cf. 38. 50-3. Though dze dic/a or dicto is necessary for the construction, it is 
 very likely that the scribe wrote des dicfa or dictus. 
 
 27-8. Cf. 38. 55, 58-60. 
 
 30-1. Cf. 39. 2. 
 
 32-3. Cf. 39. 3. 
 
 33-5. Cf. 39. 6-7. 
 
 36. Cf. 39. 6. 
 
 37-41. Cf. 39. 9-19. 
 
 41-2. His\pan\z| subact’: cf. 39. 21, referring to the victory of C. Atinius. 
 
 Ae Ba OLY 30:02 26 
 
 44-5. Cf. 39. 22, where the incursion of the Gauls is described. But the apparent 
 mention of Marcellus refers to ch. 54, where it is stated that in B.c. 183 they retired to 
 their own country, Marcellus being then consul (cf. also ch. 45). The epitomizer seems 
 therefore to have made the same kind of mistake as in connexion with the concession to 
 the Campanians ; cf. 1. 17, note. 
 
 45-7. Cf. 39. 22 L. Sctpz0 HOME . guos bello Antiocht vovisse sese dicebat ex collata 
 ad id pecunia... fecit. 
 
 48. Cf. 39. 23. 
 
 49. The defeat of the Ligurians by the two consuls occurs in 39. 32, and the next 
 event related is the elections. What ΜΠ» accepfa refers to is not clear. Possibly mud/a 
 milla capfa was meant (cf. 39. 32 multa millia hominum tn ws cepit); or Δ] may represent 
 part of cladzs, and 7m or a Hispanzs may be supplied (cf. ll. 174-5 and 212), the reference 
 being to the defeat mentioned in ch. 30. This however was soon remedied, and a 
 mention of this campaign would have been expected to precede instead of following 
 the allusion to the Ligurian war. 
 
 (ten GR 30..3. 
 
 hime 30. 41. 
 52-6. Cf. 39. 42. If....| Gallra is not corrupt it is out of place, and ought to follow 
 
 quod. 
 
 57. Cf 39. 44. 
 
 58. Cf. 39. 45. 
 
 59-63. Cf. 39. 46. 
 
 63-4. A reference to the capture and death of Philopoemen at the hands of the 
 Messenians probably occurred here; cf. 39. 49-50. 
 
 64. Han|nibal: a reference to his death; cf. 39. 51. 
 
104. THE OXVYRAYNCH OS PARYI 
 
 6, CL 390, RO: 
 
 68. Perhaps | zspanz’] should be restored before del/um; cf. 40. 1. 
 
 yo-1. Cf. 40. 4. Prof. Reid suggests 7 mare{m} [flugzen|s se dedit (or 1611). 
 Livy’s phrase is 2% mare sese detect. 
 
 72. Cf. 40. 6-16. It is not clear whether per patrem coactul in |. 73 also refers to the 
 accusation against Demetrius or to his death by poisoning, which is described in 40. 24. 
 coactu\s does not seem to be right on either hypothesis. 
 
 Ban Clan το: 
 
 75. Cf. 40. 29. The restoration is however rather long for the lacuna. 
 
 πὸ, Ch, 40.03 be. 
 
 "7. Cf. 40. 39-41. 
 
 78-80. Cf. 40. 44 40 anno rogatio primum lata est ab L. Villio tribuno plebis quot 
 annos nati quemque magistratum pelerent caperenique. 
 
 ST ΘΕ 9:78: 
 
 82. Cf. 40. 45-6. composita inimicitia may be supplied. After this several columns 
 are lost, corresponding to the break between 657. iv and v. 
 
 83. adversus Cha\r\taginienses: i.e. the war with Masinissa; cf. Epit. 48 ad fin. 
 Carthaginienses cum adversus foedus bellum Mastnissae tntulissent... 
 
 Lusttant va|stati; οἵ. 1. 212. The reference is to the treacherous attack of Sulpicius 
 Galba (cf. 1. 98), on which see Appian, /éer. 59-60, Orosius, iv. 21. 10, Val. Max. ix. 62, 
 and Sueton. Gala 3. Epit. 48 has Ser. Sulpicius Galba praetor male adversus Lusttanos 
 pugnavit, which has generally been interpreted as implying a defeat of the Romans. But, 
 as Kornemann remarks, it is now clear that ma/e means not ‘unsuccessfully’ but 
 ‘ dishonourably.’ 
 
 84. Probably Cethlecus, i.e. Cethegus; cf. 1. 14 Origtacont’s for Ortagontis. The 
 incident is not recorded elsewhere, nor is any C. Cornelius Cethegus known at this period. 
 L. Cornelius Cethegus was one of the accusers of Galba (Epit. 49) and M. Cornelius 
 Cethegus was consul in B.c. 160. 
 
 Decim seems to be corrupt for Decem7 or Deczz, and su is very likely the beginning of 
 a cognomen. What a. icfam (or auctam) in 1. 85 means is obscure; Reid suggests 
 ancillam. Kornemann prefers Decz(u)m ... ingenujujm, comparing Val. Max. vi. 1. 1ὸ 
 guod cum ingenuo adulescentulo stupri commercitum habuisset. ‘The doubtful zw, after d ¢ 
 can be 2. 
 
 87-93. ‘Book 49. Consulship of L. Marcius Censorinus and M’. Manilius. The 
 Third Punic War began. The inhabitants of Utica willingly assisted (the Romans). The 
 Carthaginians surrendered; being ordered to transfer all their possessions to another site 
 they returned...’ 
 
 90. auxiliate is for auxiliati (sc. sunt), and locant perhaps conceals the object 
 (? Romants). locant auxilium, though in itself a possible phrase, is unlikely, for the verbs 
 in the papyrus are uniformly in the perfect tense and generally come at the end of the 
 sentence. 
 
 gi-3. Cf. Epit. 49 func cum ex aucloritate patrum tuberent (sc. consules) ut in alium 
 locum dum a mart decem milia passuum ne minus remotum oppidum facerent, tndignitate ret ad 
 rebellandum Carthaginienses compulerunt. For facerent Gronovius had conjectured /rans- 
 Jerrent, which seems to have been the verb employed in |. 92. The embassy of the 
 Carthaginians mentioned in ll. go-1 came to Rome (cf. Epit. legat’ triginta Romam 
 venerunt per quos se Carthaginienses dederunt); but the demand to evacuate Carthage was 
 made by the consuls after reaching Africa, and if redzerunt refers to the return of the 
 ambassadors to Carthage, the statement of the papyrus is inaccurate. It is more likely that 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 105 
 
 redierunt refers to the renewal of the war. m after ¢rajnsferr'e may well be a mistake for 
 zz. The whole phrase would then be an antithesis to 2% dedicionem venerunt in 1. gt. 
 
 93-5. The subject of pepulerunt must be the Carthaginians, since the siege began 
 with the repulse of the Romans. Lines 94-5 refer to the distinction gained by Scipio 
 Aemilianus in the early engagements; cf. Epit. 49 and Appian, Pun. 98-9. 
 
 95-7. This refers to the occasion on which Scipio saved the Roman army at Nepheris; 
 οἵ, Epit. and Appian, Pun. 102-3. 
 
 97-8. Who this Charidemus was is unknown. oe| is possibly poe tam. 
 
 98-100. Cf, Epit., where the prosecution of Galba is described more fully. In]. 99 
 either productius agreeing with Galba, or product\z agreeing with Αἰ may be read. 
 
 ror. Unless PAzippr is an error for Persez, Reid is probably right in correcting Δ 
 se Philipp? to Per|set se Philippum; cf. Epit. Persed se filium ferens et mutato nomine Philippus 
 vocatus .... totam Macedoniam aut voluntate incolentium aut armts occupavit. 
 
 103-5. The Epitome of Book 49 ends with the description of the revolt of Macedonia, 
 but carmznibus in |. 105 strongly suggests that this passage refers to the celebration of 
 the games of Dis at Terentum in accordance with the Sibylline books, a fact which is 
 mentioned near the beginning of Epit. 49 Det patrt ludt ad Terentum ex praecepto 
 librorum Stbyllinorum fact, gut anle annum centesimum primo Punico bello quingentesimo ef 
 altero anno ab urbe condita fact erant. This is confirmed by a passage in Censorinus, 
 De die natali τὴ. 8, to which our attention was called by Kornemann and Wissowa, de 
 qguartorum ludorum anno triplex sententia est. Antias enim et Varro et Livius relatos 
 esse prodiderunt L. Marcio Censorino, M. Manilio consulibus post Romam conditam anno 
 sexcentesimo quinto. at Piso Censorius ef Cn. Gellius sed et Cassius Hemina qut illo tempore 
 vivebat post annum factos tertium affirmant Cn. Cornelio Lentulo, L. Mummio Achaico 
 consulibus, td est anno sexcentesimo octavo. in quindecim virorum autem commentariis 
 notantur sub anno sexcentesimo vicestmo octavo Mam. Aemilio Lepido, L. Aurelio Oreste 
 consulibus. The restorations of ll. 103-4 are due to Wissowa, who (Religion und Kultus 
 der Réimer, Ὁ. 364) considers that Livy’s date for the games (B.c. 149) is wrong, and that 
 Cassius Hemina was right in assigning them to B.c. 146. 
 
 107-8. Cf. Epit. 50 Thessalia cum et tllam tnvadere armis atque occupare Pseudo- 
 philippus vellet per legatos Romanorum auxilits Achaeorum defensa est. 
 
 109. Possibly the death of Cato was referred to here, this being the only place in the 
 papyrus where a mention of it can be inserted. That event is referred to this year by 
 Cicero (Bru/. 15), and cf. 1. 56 where Cafone is corrupted into Jana/one. 
 
 110. The death of Prusias is noticed in Epit. If Pruszas in 1. 109 is right, poszfus is 
 probably corrupt for some word meaning ‘killed’ (? occdsus, cf. 1. 123); but (de\posztus is 
 just possible, for Prusias seems to have been first abandoned by his subjects (Justin 
 34. 4). depono in the sense of ‘depose’ is however not classical. Kornemann would 
 . retain poszéus and supply Vecomedes in 1. 109. 
 
 110-5. The embassy which gave rise to the jest of Cato is also mentioned in the 
 Epitome immediately after the death of Prusias, though the incident took place in 
 Prusias’ lifetime. 
 
 Line 111 is very corrupt. sz before samt must be the termination of a participle 
 such as mzss¢; but what is pugnamenta? Pergamenos is not very satisfactory since the 
 mention of Pergamus seems unnecessary after ad A/talum regem. ‘The names of the 
 ambassadors are given only by Polybius (37. 18) as Marcus Licinius (gouty), Aulus 
 Mancinus (broken head), and Lucius Malleolon (the fool). The last name can now be 
 corrected to Manlius, which is meant by JZanzlius in the papyrus as is shown by the 
 cognomen Vo/so (Vulso). The Manlii Vulsones were a distinguished patrician family in 
 
106 PAE AONMY RE VCH OS ALY iP 
 
 the earlier part of the republic, and members of it were consuls as late as Β. 6. 189 and 178. 
 Marco ἴῃ 1. 111 is probably Af(arcus) followed by the first part of another name which was 
 more probably a cognomen (ἢ Archzas) than Licenzus. 
 
 The first half of ]. 113 seems to be corrupt. la may be the termination of ées/la (cf. 
 Polybius, 1. c. κεραμῖδος εἰς τὴν κεφαλὴν ἐμπεσούσης) ; but a participle is also required, and even 
 if there were space for it before /estla the order of cape... . guondam would be awkward. 
 
 115-6. This event is omitted in the Epitome. Should deprehensz be corrected to 
 deprehensus, and some word like repuls'am be supplied? A certain tribune C. Scantinius 
 Capitolinus was accused of s/uprum by M. Claudius Marcellus, as aedile, in B.c. 222 
 (Val. Max. vi. 1. 73 cf. Plutarch, Vit. Marc. 2), but the Marcus Scantinius here must 
 be different. As Warde Fowler remarks, it seems very unlikely that there were two 
 Scantinii condemned for s/uprum, one in B.c. 208, the other in B.c. 149, and that there 
 should also be a Lex Scantinia on the same offence, of which the date is unknown 
 (Mommsen, Strafrechi, p. 703). He therefore thinks that the present passage refers to 
 the passing of the Lex Scaninia, and that \am is corrupt for the termination of pledzscztum, 
 while 2” stupro deprehenst is for de in stupro deprehensts. 
 
 118-21. ‘ Masinissa dying in extreme old age left four children, and his kingdom was 
 divided by Aemilianus among the elder sons.’ Cf. Epit. Masinissa Numtidiae rex maior 
 nonaginia annis decesstt ... adeo etiam 171 senectam vigutl ut post sexium et oclogesimum annum 
 filium genuerit. inter tres liberos etus, maximum nalu Micipsam, Gulussam, Mastanabalem ... 
 P. Scipio Aemilianus ... partes administrandi regni divisit. The fourth legitimate son who 
 received no share of the kingdom was no doubt the one born when his father was 86; 
 but other writers differ from Livy regarding the number of Masinissa’s children. The 
 death of Masinissa is placed by Mommsen at the end of B.c. 149, but according to the 
 papyrus it took place early in B.c. 148. 
 
 121-2. Cf. Epit. ex tridus legatis qui ad Masinissam misst fuerant, Claudius Marcellus 
 coorta tempestate obrutus est. 
 
 122-3. Cf. Epit. Carthaginienses Hasdrubalem Masinissae nepotem .. . proditionrs 
 suspecium tn curta occiderunt. Appian (Pun. 111) in describing the death of Hasdrubal 
 uses the equivalent of sudbseliium οἱ δὲ τύπτοντες αὐτὸν τοῖς ὑποβάθροις κατέβαλον. γα 15 very 
 likely /ragmentum in some form. Kornemann aptly compares Orosius, iv. 22.8 Asdrubal... 
 subselliorum fragmentis ... occtsus est. 
 
 123-4. Cf. Epit. P. Sctpio Aemilianus cum aedilitatem peteret... legibus solutus et consul 
 creatus est. 
 
 125. The Epitome is more explicit: 12’. Manzlius aliquot urbes circumpositas Carthagint 
 expugnavtt, 
 
 126-7. Cf. Epit. Pseudophilippus in Macedonia caeso cum exercitu P. Iuventio praetore 
 a Q. Caectlio victus captusque est οἱ recepta Macedonia. Mommsen places the defeat of 
 Juventius doubtfully in B.c. 149, and the victory of Metellus in 8.0. 148. It now appears 
 that both events took place in B.c. 148. 
 
 127-9. The burning of the sacrarzum is not mentioned in Epit., but is explained, 
 as Kornemann and Wissowa point out, by Obsequens 19 (78) vasto incendio Romae cum 
 regia quogue ureretur, sacrarium et ex duabus altera laurus ex medits tgnibus tnviolata 
 exstiterunt, upon which passage the restorations of 1]. 128-9 are based. soc? is corrupt, 
 possibly for Ofzs. 
 
 130. The blank space between ll. 128 and 131 is barely sufficient for two intervening 
 lines, and there is the further difficulty that the letters of the books are elsewhere placed 
 near the middle of the line, so that the termination of the title ought to have been visible 
 here. But since verbs are generally placed at the end of the sentence in the papyrus 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 107 
 
 inviolafa or an equivalent is required for ]. 129, and to suppose the omission of the title 
 ‘liber k’ and to assign Il. 131-143 to the 50th Book would introduce a serious conflict 
 between the papyrus and the extant Epitome with regard to the arrangement of Books 50-53. 
 If the title therefore of Book 51 was omitted, this was probably a mere accident. 
 
 132-4. This passage is very corrupt. No Appius is known in connexion with the 
 operations at Carthage at this period. crudelissime suggests that Appzus is a mistake for 
 Flasdrubal, and that .ll. 132-3 refer to the cruelty of Hasdrubal towards the Roman 
 prisoners described by Appian (Pun. 118). 
 
 135-6. Cf. Epit. quod legat populi Romani ab Achaets pulsatt sint Corinthi. The 
 Achaean praetor referred to was Critolaus. 
 
 136. The simplest correction for szbalt’ is σας, but no victory over the Lusitanians 
 at this period is known. Appian (/éer. 60-1) passes straight from the treachery of Galba 
 (cf. Il. 83 and 98) to the defeats of Vetilius and Plautius (cf. ll. 146-8, note). The Epitome 
 does not mention Spanish affairs in this book, but gives an account of Viriathus’ earlier 
 successes in Book 52. If however there was really a victory over the Lusitanians in 
 B.c. 147 the explanation may be as follows. The reverse sustained by Vetilius recorded 
 by Appian (/éer. 61) is represented as the direct and immediate result of a preliminary 
 success obtained by the Romans, but it is not unlikely that Appian has combined the 
 events of two separate campaigns by Vetilius into one and that Zusz/and subactt here refers 
 to his success, while his reverse took place in the next year, B.c. 146; cf. ll. 146-8, note. 
 The papyrus mentions only one defeat by the Lusitanians. 
 
 138. The destruction of Carthage is mentioned in the Epitome before the attack upon 
 the embassy at Corinth, but owing to the strictly chronological system adopted by the 
 author of the papyrus it is here correctly placed in B.c. 146. 
 
 139-43. These lines, as Kornemann and Reid suggest, probably refer to the story of 
 the death of Hasdrubal’s wife, who first threw her two children into the flames; cf. Epit. 51. 
 
 145. Cf. Epit. Corinthon ex senatus consulto diruit. 
 
 146. uxore: probably, as Kornemann remarks, this entry refers to the death of Diaeus 
 by poison after killing his wife; cf. Pausan. vil. 16. 2-4, Zonaras ix. 86, Aucfor de vir. il. 60. 
 
 147-8. a Lusttants clades\ accepta (cf. 1. 175) may refer to the defeats of Vetilius 
 and C. Plautius mentioned in Epit., or to one of them; cf. note on 1. 136. 
 
 150. A certain C. Petronius who was an ambassador to Attalus and Prusias in 
 B.C. 156 is mentioned in Polyb. 32. 26, but no M. Petronius is known at this period. 
 
 151. adversuls: this probably refers to the dispatch of the consul Q. Fabius Maximus 
 Aemilianus against Viriathus; cf. Epit. 52 ¢antumgue ferroris ts hostis intulit ul adversus 
 eum consulart opus esset οἱ duce et exercitu, and note on |. 167. If the reverse mentioned 
 in 1. 148 (cf. 1]. 147-8, note) refers to Vetilius, possibly the defeat of Plautius occurred in 
 B. C. 145, instead of 146, as has been generally supposed. 
 
 153. L. Metellus is perhaps the brother of Quintus and the consul in B.c. 142; 
 cf. 1. 167, note. But the mention of consulatum suggests a reference to the two failures 
 of Q. Metellus’ candidature for the consulship before he obtained it for B.c. 143, and 
 Kornemann is probably right in regarding Z. as a mistake for Q. On the confusion of 
 the two brothers cf. notes on ll. 164-6 and 167. For znvzslus plebi cf. Auct. de viris 
 tllust. 61 tnvisus plebi 0b nimiam severitatem et ideo post duas repulsas consul aegre factus. 
 
 161-3. Reid is no doubt right in connecting this passage with the story told by 
 Valerius Maximus (v. 1. 5) of Rhoetogenes’ children, to save-whom Q. Metellus abandoned 
 the siege of a town in Spain. 
 
 164-6. This passage, elucidated by Reid and Wissowa, clearly refers to the two 
 exploits of Ὁ. Occius (cf. 1. 186) in Spain recorded by Val. Max. (iii. 2. 21), whose account 
 
108 THE OXAVYREYNCA US Par Yh 
 
 of the second is zdem Pyressum (v.\. Pyresum) nobilitate ac virtute Celtiberos omnes 
 praestantem ... succumbere stbt coegit ; nec erubuit flagrantissimt pectoris tuvents gladium 
 et suum et sagulum...tradere. tlle vero etiam petit ut hospitit ture inter se tunctt essent... 
 This corresponds to a Zyresto, &c.; occidit in 1. 164 belongs to the story of the first 
 exploit (the killing of a Celtiberian warrior) described in the lost column. In Val. Max. 
 sagulum is coupled with gladium, but the order of words in ll. 164-5 indicates that 
 sagulogue remi|sso is an ablative absolute and sagulogue is not to be altered to sagulumque. 
 With regard to the name of the Celtiberian, the form Zyreszus found in |. 164 is supported 
 by Orosius v. 8. 1 (a reference which we owe to Dr. Greenidge), where a Celticus princeps 
 called Zhyresus is mentioned in connexion with the pacification of Spain after the fall 
 of Numantia. Clearly the same name, and very likely the same person are meant, so that 
 the MSS. of Val. Max. are probably wrong in giving the forms Pyressus or Pyresus. 
 There is also a slight divergence between the papyrus and Val. Max. concerning the 
 date of Q. Occius’ achievements, which the former assigns to B.c. 142 while Val. Max. 
 represents Ὁ. Occius as Q. Jetello consult legatus, thus indicating the year B.c. 143. Since 
 Q. Occius in any case remained in Spain until p.c. 140 (1. 186) and Q. Metellus was there 
 in both s.c. 143 and 142 (1. 167, note) the inconsistency is trifling, but Q. Metello consult 
 may easily be a mistake for Z. Metello consult or Q. Metello proconsult; cf. notes on 
 ll. 153-6 and 167. 
 
 167. This fact that L. Metellus, consul in B.c. 142, went to Spain and was there 
 defeated by the Lusitanians is new, and is the first of a series of references to the war 
 against Viriathus which throw much light on its history. Owing to the extreme brevity 
 of the extant Epitome of Books 53 and 54 the principal authority has hitherto been Appian, 
 whose account of the Spanish war is preserved in a single very corrupt codex. The 
 generally received chronology from B.c. 143-37, 6. g. that of Mommsen, is as follows :— 
 
 B.C. 143. Ὁ. Caecilius Metellus, governor of Northern Spain, is successful, but the 
 praetor Quinctius, governor of Southern Spain, is defeated by Viriathus. 
 
 Β. 6. 142. Q. Metellus as proconsul continues to be successful. Q. Fabius Maximus 
 Servilianus, consul, who succeeded Quinctius in Southern Spain according to Appian 
 (Jéer. 67), invades Lusitania, but is compelled to retreat. 
 
 B.c. 141. Q. Fabius Maximus as proconsul is at first victorious, but is afterwards 
 defeated and compelled to conclude a disgraceful peace. Q. Pompeius, consul, the new 
 governor of Northern Spain, is also defeated. 
 
 B.C. 140. Ὁ. Caepio, consul, the new governor of Southern Spain, invades Lusitania. 
 (The death of Viriathus is placed in this year by e.g. Peter, Zect/afeln, p. 69.) Q.Pompeius 
 remains as proconsul in Northern Spain. 
 
 B.C. 139. Viriathus is killed at the instigation of Q. Caepio, who remains in Southern 
 Spain as proconsul. M. Popillius, consul, became governor of Northern Spain. 
 
 B.C. 138. M. Popillius, proconsul, is defeated by the Numantines. D. Junius Brutus, 
 consul, becomes governor of Southern Spain, and in this year and B.c. 137-6 subdues the 
 country, and is the first Roman to cross the river Oblivio. 
 
 From this chronology the papyrus has important variations after B.c. 143, of which 
 year the account is unfortunately lost. 
 
 B.C. 142. Victory of the Lusitanians over the consul L. Metellus, who must therefore 
 have been governor of the Southern province. The success of his brother, Q. Metellus, 
 in the Northern province, which is mentioned in Epit. 53, was no doubt referred to in 
 the lost portion of the account of B.c. 142. 
 
 B.c. 141. Victory of Ὁ. Fabius Maximus over Viriathus (ll. 171-2). Defeat of 
 
 Q. Pompeius (1. 174). 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 109 
 
 B.C. 140. Ὁ. Caepio delayed in starting for his province (ll. 182-4). Q. Fabius 
 is defeated, and concludes a disgraceful peace with Viriathus (ll. 185-6). Q. Occius 
 distinguishes himself in an engagement with the Lusitanians, in which the Romans fell 
 into an ambush (Il. 186-8). 
 
 B.c. 139. Death of Viriathus (ll. 197-8). 
 
 B.c. 138. Refusal of a reward to the murderers of Viriathus (ll. 201-2). Victory over 
 the Lusitanians, and defeat by the Numantines (1. 212). 
 
 B.c. 137. D. Brutus crosses the river Oblivio (ll. 216-7). 
 
 Comparing the two arrangements, we may note that no conflict arises in connexion 
 with events in Northern Spain, nor in Β. 6. 138-7 with those in Southern Spain. The 
 death of Viriathus is assigned by the papyrus to B.c. 139, not 140, thus confirming 
 the opinion of Mommsen; and if our conjecture in 1]. 147 is correct, the papyrus perhaps 
 supports the date assigned to the defeat of Plautius. But in the years Β. 6. 142-0 there 
 are marked differences between the new evidence and the received chronology. Beginning 
 at the end, only one campaign (B.c. 139) is obtainable for the governorship of Q. Caepio 
 instead of two (B.c. 140-39). The governorship of Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus is 
 assigned to the years B.c. 141-0 instead of B.c. 142-1 ; and while the papyrus agrees with the 
 ordinary chronology in placing his victory in B.c. 141, his defeat and the peace are assigned 
 not to B.c. 141 but to B.c. 140. Lastly in B.c. 142 the papyrus tells us of a hitherto 
 unknown governor of Southern Spain, the consul L. Metellus. 
 
 It will hardly be disputed that Livy’s chronology of the war against Viriathus, now 
 that more detailed information on it is obtained, carries much more weight than that of 
 Appian or the other still inferior authorities. It remains to investigate how far in the 
 light of the new evidence there is a real inconsistency between Livy and the other 
 authorities, and to explain, if possible, the origin of the divergences. As to the governorship 
 of Caepio there is no great difficulty. The events related by Appian (/der. 70-1) need 
 occupy no more than one year. The fact that Valerius Maximus (ix. 6. 4) and Eutropius 
 (iv. 16) speak of Caepio as consul when Viriathus was assassinated, and therefore assign his 
 principal campaign in Spain to B.c. 140 instead of B.c. 139, is of trifling importance in the 
 face of the explanation afforded by the papyrus (Il. 182-4) of his delay in starting. More- 
 over, although the campaign in the summer of B.c. 140 was conducted by Fabius Maximus 
 Servilianus, Caepio may well have arrived in Spain before the end of the year. The 
 reason why two years have hitherto been assigned to his governorship was that he had 
 to occupy the interval between Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus and D. Brutus, and that the 
 former of these had been assigned to B,c. 142-1. 
 
 Nor does the transference of Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus’ governorship to B.c. 141-0 
 produce any serious conflict with other statements. That Livy assigned these two years 
 to him rather than B.c. 142-1 might have been guessed from the extant Epitome, for 
 he was consul in B.c. 142, yet Epit. 53 mentions his successes as proconsul, and Epit. 54 
 (ad fin.) his defeat. But these indications that Fabius was already proconsul when he 
 became governor of Southern Spain—a fact which is made quite clear by the papyrus— 
 were disregarded, partly owing to the statement of Orosius (v. 4) that Fabius in his consul- 
 ship (i.e. in B.c. 142) fought against Viriathus, partly owing to an inference from Appian, 
 Lber. 67, where the opening words τοῦ δ᾽ ἐπιόντος ἔτους Κοΐντῳ μὲν ὁ ἀδελφὸς Αἰμιλιανοῦ Φάβιος 
 Μάξιμος Σερουιλιανὸς (Αἰμιλιανὸς MS.) ἦλθεν ἐπὶ τὴν στρατηγίαν διάδοχος have in connexion with 
 - the preceding events been supposed to refer to B.c. 142. ΤῸ leave for the moment the 
 question which year Appian meant by rod ἐπιόντος ἔτους, his account of Fabius Servilianus’ 
 achievements accords well enough with that of Livy. It is true that the successes of Fabius 
 in Appian’s account seem to belong to the later rather than to the earlier part of his 
 
110 f TEP OXYRAVNCHOS 2h Abaya) 
 
 governorship, but it is not difficult to suppose that Appian omitted to record some trifling 
 successes such as the capture of Baccia mentioned by Orosius (4. ¢.), probably one of 
 the wrbes which were expugnafae according to Epit. 53; cf. ll. 171-2. Two campaigns 
 are implied by Appian, as is more clearly stated by Livy; but Appian does not call 
 Servilianus consul. Where the facts known from Livy conflict seriously with at any rate 
 the present text of Appian is in the events which took place between the departure of 
 Fabius Maximus Aemilianus and the arrival of Fabius Maximus Servilianus. The 
 governorship of Aemilianus is expressly stated by Appian to have lasted two years (der. 65). 
 Aemilianus was consul in B.c. 145, and that the years of his governorship were B.c. 145-4 
 is unquestionable; cf. Epit. 52 sanlumgue timoris ts hostis intulit ut adversus eum consulart 
 opus esset et duce οἱ exercitu. The disaster to Plautius which led to sending an experienced 
 general is, as we have said, very likely alluded to in 1. 147 of the papyrus, and |. 151 may 
 well refer to the dispatch of Aemilianus. So far as is known, Aemilianus had both Spains 
 under his command; but who succeeded him on his departure in B.c. 143? Northern 
 Spain at any rate seems to have fallen to the consul for B.c. 143 Ὁ. Caecilius Metellus 
 (cf. Val. Max. ili. 2. 21, ix. 3. 7; Appian, J/éer. 76), and that he remained as proconsul 
 in B.c. 142 is attested by Epit. 53; but the question who obtained Southern Spain is very 
 complicated. From Val. Max. ix. 3. 7, where Q. JZe/ellus utramque Hispaniam consul prius, 
 deinde proconsul . .. subegisset is the reading of the MSS., it would be inferred that Metellus 
 was governor of both Spains; but w/ramque has been altered by some editors to provinciam 
 on the ground that Metellus was only governor of Northern Spain, the governorship of 
 Southern Spain in B.c. 143 being generally assigned to Quinctius, who is supposed to have 
 been a praetor and to have been the immediate predecessor of Fabius Servilianus on the 
 evidence of Appian, /der. 65-7. ‘This passage, which is very corrupt, now requires a fresh 
 examination in the light of the new evidence. After recounting the achievements of Fabius 
 Aemilianus in B.c. 145 and B.c. 144, Appian proceeds (ed. Mendelssohn): καὶ rade μὲν 6 
 Αἰμιλιανὸς (Σερουιλιανὸς MS.) ἐργασάμενος ἐς Ρώμην ἀπῇρε διαδεξαμένου τὴν ἀρχὴν Κοΐντου Πομπηίου 
 (τοῦ Αὔλου. (ὁ δὲ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ Μάξιμος Αἰμιλιανὸς MS., omitted by editors). ἐφ᾽ οἷς ὁ 
 Οὐρίατθος οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔτι καταφρονῶν ᾿Αρουακοὺς καὶ Τίτθους καὶ Βέλλους . . . ἀπέστησεν ἀπὸ Ρωμαίων. 
 καὶ πολεμὸν ἄλλον οἵδε ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτῶν ἐπολέμουν ὃν ἐκ πόλεως αὐτῶν μιᾶς Νομαντῖνον ἡγοῦνται... καὶ 
 συνάξω καὶ τόνδε ἐς ἕν per’ Οὐρίατθον. Οὐρίατθος μὲν ἐπὶ θάτερα τῆς ᾿Ιβηρίας ἑτέρῳ στρατηγῷ 
 “Ῥωμαίων Κοϊντίῳ (Q. Pompeio ἴῃ a 16th century translation of Appian made from another 
 MS., now lost) συνεπλέκετο, kal... ἔκτεινε τῶν Koivriov és (robs Κοϊντιείους MS.) χιλίους καὶ 
 σημεῖα τινα ἥρπασε... .. Koivriov (Κιντίου MS.) διὰ δειλίαν καὶ ἀπειρίαν οὐκ ἐπιβοηθοῦντος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν 
 Κορδύβῃ χειμάζοντος ἐκ μέσου μετοπώρου .... τοῦ δ᾽ ἐπιόντος ἔτους Κοΐντῳ (Κοϊντίῳ other editors) 
 μὲν ὁ ἀδελφὸς Αἰμιλιανοῦ Φάβιος Μάξιμος Σερουιλιανὸς (Αἰμιλιανὸς MS.) ἦλθεν ἐπὶ τὴν στρατηγίαν 
 διάδοχος. From this confused and corrupt account it has been generally inferred that 
 a praetor Quinctius succeeded Fabius Aemilianus in Southern Spain in B.c. 143, was 
 defeated in that year and was succeeded in B.c. 142 by Ὁ. Fabius Servilianus. We now 
 know that in Livy’s account the governor in B.c. 142 was the consul for that year, 
 L. Metellus, and that Fabius Servilianus became governor in B.c. 141. Assuming that 
 Livy is right, the discrepancy may be explained in two ways: either Appian has made 
 several mistakes in his facts or the MS. is still more deeply corrupt than it has appeared to 
 be. On the first hypothesis Quinctius or Quintus, the supposed praetor; may he retained, 
 for owing to the loss of a column between Cols. vi and vii of the papyrus it is uncertain 
 who in Livy’s history was the governor of Southern Spain in Β. 6. 143. We must however 
 assume that Appian omitted L. Metellus altogether, thus setting the chronology wrong by 
 a year. But considering the corruptions in the proper names in Appian, Jder. 65-7, it is, 
 we think, far more likely that the story of the defeat of the supposed Quinctius, who appears 
 
668) NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS ΤῊ 
 
 nowhere else in history, is a distortion of the defeat of L. Metellus mentioned by Livy. 
 With two brothers, Ὁ. Metellus and L. Metellus, governing the two Spains in 142 B.c. it is 
 not at all surprising that mistakes should arise, and if Koivrios in der, 66-7 is a corruption 
 Of Δούκιος Or Καικίλιος, there will be no conflict between Livy and Appian as to the pre- 
 decessor of Fabius Servilianus. Dismissing therefore the supposed Quinctius, there still 
 remains the governorship of Southern Spain for B.c. 143 to be accounted for. The 
 passage in Appian referring to Aemilianus’ successor Koivrov Πομπηίου Αὔλου is obviously 
 quite corrupt. ‘The insertion of rod before Αὔλου (Schweighauser, followed by Mendelssohn) 
 does little to mend matters. There is no point in the mention of the father’s praenomen and 
 there is clearly a confusion in the text between this person and the Κοίντῳ Πομπηίῳ Αὔλῳ 
 mentioned in /der. 76. That Q. Pompeius was consul in B.c. 141 and succeeded Q. Metellus 
 as governor of Northern Spain in the same year (cf. 1.174). His cognomen was Rufus, so 
 that editors bracket Αὔλῳ in ch. 76. In any case this Quintus Pompeius cannot be the 
 successor of Aemilianus in B.c. 143, and the best course seems to be to fall back on the 
 statement of Valerius Maximus (ix. 3. 7, Ὁ. sup.) that Q. Metellus governed uwtramque 
 Lispaniam. Seeing that Aemilianus governed both provinces for two years, there is not the 
 least difficulty in supposing that his successor did the same for one, but that in the second 
 year a separate governor was sent to the Southern province. On this hypothesis we would 
 suggest that Koivrov Πομπηίου Αὔλου in 1027. 65 is corrupt for Kotvrov Καικιλίου Μετέλλου, and 
 that the following words ὁ δὲ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ Μάξιμος Αἰμιλιανός, which are simply omitted by 
 editors, really contained a reference to the brother of Ὁ. Metellus, L. Metellus. The 
 sentence is in that case incomplete and the lacuna may well have supplied some details 
 about the events of B.c. 143-2 which would have made ch. 66 much more intelligible. 
 Our conclusion therefore is that the divergence between Livy and Appian’s account of the 
 war against Viriathus is due less to mistakes on the part of Appian than to the extra- 
 ordinary perversions of the proper names in the MS. of the Jderzca, and that Appian’s 
 chronology of this war can without much difficulty be made consistent with the newly found 
 material. 
 
 For the sake of clearness we append in parallel columns a list of the governors of 
 Southern Spain from B.c. 145-37 as they are known from the two epitomes of Livy, 
 compared with the list given by Mommsen. Concerning the governors of Northern Spain 
 there is no dispute, Ὁ. Fabius Maximus Aemilianus holding office in B.c. 145-4, Ὁ. Caecilius 
 Metellus in B.c. 143-2, Q. Pompeius Rufus in B.c. 141-0, and M. Popillius Laenas in 
 B.C. 139-8 :— 
 
 B.C. Livy. Mommsen, 
 145-4 Q. Fabius Maximus Aemilianus. Q. Fab. Max. Aemilianus. 
 143 (Q. Caecilius Metellus cons. ?) Quinctius praetor. 
 142 L. Caecilius Metellus cons. Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus cons. 
 141 Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus proc. Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus proc. 
 140 Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus proc. Q. Servilius Caepio cons. 
 (Later Q. Servilius Caepio cons.) 
 139 Q. Servilius Caepio proc. Q. Servilius Caepio proc. 
 138 1), Iunius Brutus cons. D. Iunius Brutus cons. 
 
 168-9. Epit. mentions the triumph of Mummius at the end of Book 52, LZ. AZummius 
 de Achaets triumphavit, signa aerea marmoreaque et tabulas pictas in triumpho tulit. Epit. 53 
 begins with a mention of Appius Claudius, consul in B.c. 143; hence the triumph of 
 Mummius has naturally been assigned to B.c. 145, the year after the destruction of Corinth. 
 
112 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 The distribution of the works of art mentioned by the papyrus is to be connected, as 
 Kornemann remarks, not with Mummius’ triumph, which can hardly have taken place so 
 late as B.c. 142, but with his censorship which occurred in that year. By ofpzda are meant 
 the country towns of Italy, and perhaps of the provinces as well. 
 
 171-2. On the victory of Q. Fabius (Maximus Servilianus) cf. Epit. 53 a Q. Fado 
 proconsule pars magna Lusitaniae expugnatis aliquot urbibus recepta est, and, for the 
 chronology, |. 167, note. 
 
 174. This defeat of Q. Pompeius by the Numantines agrees with the received 
 chronology; cf. Epit. 54 ad ct. and 1. 167, note. For dievictuls cf. 1. 185. 
 
 175. The defeat of the Romans by the Scordisci, a Pannonian tribe, is a new fact. 
 The Roman commander may have been the other consul, Gn. Caepio. 
 
 176. The corruption of Sapzen/e into Salasso seems to be due to a reminiscence of the 
 campaign of Appius Claudius against the Salassfin B.c. 143; cf. Epit. 53. 
 
 177-8. What was this obviously important measure due to Appius Claudius, one of the 
 most striking figures at this period? The papyrus fails us at the most critical point, and 
 in the absence of any other reference to this reform, we are reduced to conjectures. We 
 have adopted in 1. 177 duos |delectus|, a suggestion of Mr. Warde Fowler based on 
 duo s|tipendia| proposed by Dr. Greenidge. ‘The old Roman system of a single annual 
 levy in which the soldiers swore allegiance to a general for a single campaign could not 
 survive the growth of Rome as a world-city, and though the successive modifications which 
 were introduced in the later period of the Republic cannot be clearly traced, it is in itself 
 likely enough that the wars of the third and second centuries s.c. had led to the occasional 
 or frequent holding of levies twice instead of once in the year. Such an attempt to 
 frustrate the constant demands of the generals as we have attributed to Appius Claudius does 
 not seem improbable, and may even be connected with the refusal of the senate a few years 
 later to send Scipio the reinforcements which he asked for at Numantia. 
 
 178-81. Cf. Epit. 54, where the incident of the condemnation of Silanus by his father 
 is related more fully. 
 
 182-4. These lines are very corrupt, and in the absence of any parallel account of the 
 incident it is difficult to restore them in entirety. So much is clear that the consul 
 Q. Caepio’s departure for Spain was delayed by the interpellation of a tribune, but that 
 Caepio successfully overcame the obstacle. It was doubtless owing to this episode that 
 Caepio arrived in Spain late in the year after the defeat of Fabius Maximus (ll. 185-6); cf. 
 ]. 167, note. Assilium is for Asellum; cf. Gell. 3. 4, where a tribune called Claudius 
 Asellus is mentioned as having accused the younger Scipio Africanus pos/guam de Poents 
 triumphaverat censorque fuerat. Since Scipio was censor in B.c. 142 (Fas/. Capitol.), B.c. 140 
 is very suitable as the year of Asellus’ tribunate. reddeterbutt is probably for delerruzt, and 
 if Jjt\cfores is right ‘r¢gem probably represents a participle ending in ems, e.g. adhibens. 
 Omitting zdelegem, which is hopeless, the passage may be restored thus: Qucnlus Caepro 
 consul... Tiberium Claudium Asellum tribunum plebts interpellantem profectionem suam 
 lictores ... ens deterrutt. What form the interpellation took is not clear. Did the tribune 
 veto the Lex Curiata conferring imperium upon the consul? Possibly, as Greenidge 
 suggests, he tried to prevent the consul from taking out his troops, as in Sall. Jug. 39 
 consul impeditus a tribunis plebis ne quas paraverat copias secum portaret, From the mention 
 of the lictors it seems that Caepio actually ventured to retaliate by using force of some kind.- 
 
 185-6. On the date of Fabius’ defeat see 1. 167, note. 
 
 186-7. Valerius Maximus (iii. 2. 21) relates two exploits of Q. Occius; cf. Il. 164-6, 
 note. The present incident is one of the relgua ezus opera which Valerius Maximus 
 passes over. | 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 113 
 
 188-90. A verb such as pugnavit is wanted at the beginning of 1. 188, and there is 
 then not room for more than two or three letters before |¢zae. Probably devosa est 
 is to be connected with agua Anzio (cf. ll. 111 and 116, where the verb does not come 
 at the end of the sentence), and agua Marcia begins a fresh sentence. On the repair 
 of the agua Anzo and the construction of the agua Marcia see Frontinus, De Aguaeductibus 
 i. 7. He there states that in Β. 6. 144 the praetor Marcius Rex was commissioned to 
 repair the Appian and Aniensian aqueducts and to construct a new one, his praetorship 
 being extended for a year on that account. Then follows a passage which is much 
 corrupted in the editions of Frontinus, and which we quote from the reproduction of 
 the best MS. in Ὁ, Herschell’s edition: eo sempore decemvirt dum alis ex causts libros 
 Szbyllinos inspictunt invenisse dicuntur (space in MS.; supply fas) aguam Martiam 
 seu potius Anzenem, de hoc enim constantius traditur, in Capitolium perduct, deque ea re 
 in senatu 77. Lepido pro collegio verba faciente actum Appio Claudio Q. Caecitlio consulibus 
 (B.c. 143); eandemque post annum tertium a Lucio Lentulo retractatam C. Laelio Q. Ser- 
 velto consulibus (B.C. 140), sed utroque tempore victsse gratiam Marcit Regis aique ita in 
 Capitolium esse aquam perductam. Frontinus’ statements about the construction of the 
 aqua Marcia are thus in complete accord with Livy, from whose history they were no 
 doubt derived. But what is the meaning of seu potius Anienem, de hoc enim constanttus 
 traditur, and has this anything to do with the mention of the agua Anzo in 1.188? That 
 passage in the papyrus is unfortunately extremely obscure. If devofa est is correct, it 
 must mean that the Anio aqueduct was consecrated to some deity; but devo/a does not 
 seem the right word, and it is more likely to be corrupt, possibly for some word like renovata 
 or refecta. The agua Marcia began not far from Tibur, the water being apparently 
 taken from a tributary of the river Anio from which the agua Anzio was also derived. 
 But the two aqueducts were quite distinct, and seu potius Anienem, de hoc enim constantius 
 iraditur seems, as Reid remarks, to indicate that there were two interpretations of the 
 oracle, one permitting the agua Anzio to be brought to the Capitol, the other the agua 
 Marcia, but the general opinion was in favour of the former interpretation; cf. the 
 statement in 1. 189 that the construction of the agua Marcia was contra Sibyllae carmina. 
 Since Frontinus implies that the agua Anio was not carried up to the Capitol, to read 
 in ll. 189-90 agua Anio (el) agua Marcia in Capitolium ... perductae is unsatisfactory, 
 apart from the difficulty of placing a stop after devo/a est. ὃ 
 
 192. Probably the scribe wrote μγόο τα meaning urbe et [talia; cf. Val. Max. i. 3. 2 
 C. Cornelius Hispallus praetor peregrinus M. Popilio Laenate Cn. Calpurnio coss. edicto 
 Chaldaeos intra decimum diem abire ex urbe atque Italia tussit,a passage no doubt based 
 upon Livy. 
 
 193-4. On the Lex Gadinia fabellaria see Cic. Legg. iii. 35. Cicero says that it was 
 lata ab homine tgnoto οἱ sordido, which confirms the present reference to Gabinius’ base 
 ancestry. What degree of relationship to the verna was alleged by Livy is uncertain. 
 vernale filius is unlikely, for the son of a slave could not be made tribune, and though two 
 cases at least of the son of a freedman becoming tribune are known (Mommsen, S/aa/s- 
 recht,i. p. 460), the phrase vernae filius does not suggest the meaning ‘son of freedman’ or 
 ‘of a freedwoman,’ though perhaps not incompatible with it. vernale nepos is better, but 
 of course some more indefinite word may have been employed. It has been generally 
 supposed that A. Gabinius the tribune was the son of the Gabinius who held a command in 
 Illyria under L. Anicius in B.c. 167 (Livy 45. 26); but this is quite uncertain. 
 
 195-6. As Warde Fowler suggests, it is probable that these two lines refer to the 
 mutiny of Caepio’s cavalry mentioned by Dio (Fr. 78 Boissevain), in consequence of his 
 apportioning to them a specially dangerous operation. Caepio had to take refuge from 
 
 I 
 
114 THE OXYRAYNCHUS ΡΑΡΥᾺΚΙ 
 
 their violence in flight, and with this clue the passage may be restored on the lines which 
 we have suggested. Since a nail is not a very effective weapon of attack, clavo may be 
 altered to clava, a ‘cudgel’ or ‘ foil.’ Reid well compares Oros. v. 9 clavae τοί (of Tiberius - 
 Gracchus’ death). 
 
 197-8. The names of the murderers of Viriathus are not given in Epit., but occur in 
 Appian, Zéer. 74, where they agree with the papyrus, and in Diodorus exc. c. 24, where 
 Nikorones is found instead of Minurus. 
 
 201—2. For the refusal of a reward to Viriathus’ murderers cf. Dio, Fr. 80, and Eutro- 
 pius, iv. 16. Appian (/éer. 74) mentions the bribe, but not the refusal, διαφθαρέντες ὑπὸ τοῦ 
 Καιπίωνος δώροις τε μεγάλοις καὶ ὑποσχέσεσι πολλαῖς. The Epitome does not mention either, 
 but has Κχγίαΐδμς a proditoribus consilio Servilit Caepionis tnterfectus est. From the fact 
 that the refusal took place in the year after Viriathus’ death it clearly came from the senate; 
 and if there is any truth in the story of Dio and Eutropius about the answer given to the 
 murderers that the Romans did not approve of a general being killed by his own soldiers, 
 this must have been made by the senate, not, as they state, by Caepio. 
 
 202-5. Cf. Epit. 55 P. Maszca, cut cognomen Serapion fuit ab irridente Curtato tribuno 
 plebis imposttum, οἱ D. Lunto Bruto consulibus delectum habentibus in conspectu tironum res 
 saluberrimt exempli facta est: nam C. Maitenus accusatus est apud tribunos plebts quod exer- 
 cttum in Hispania deserursset, damnatusque sub furca diu virgis caesus est, et sestertio nummo 
 ventit. tribunt plebts quia non impetrarent ut sibt denos quos vellent milites eximere liceret, 
 consules in carcerem duct tusserunt, The papyrus presents several new details. In the first 
 place the condemnation of deserters (Il. 207-9) comes after the dispute with the tribunes, 
 not before it. Besides the probable mention of Curiatius, to whom Cicero (Legg. iii. 9) 
 assigns the responsibility for throwing the consuls into prison, the papyrus names another 
 tribune, Licinius, thus justifying the plural /rzdunz in Epit. From 1. 205 it appears that the 
 imprisonment was unpopular and that the tribunes had to yield. For the use of mudlfa 
 by Livy in the general sense of ‘ penalty’ cf. 24. 16. In 1. 202 Sczpz'jon|em is very doubtful. 
 There may have been some corruption as in the case of Decimum Brutum in 1. 203. 
 
 205-7. (ab) omnibus luctus seems a better correction of omnid. lucid than omnibus 
 luctut, though whether Livy would have used Zwcfus is doubtful; cf. note on]. 110. ‘These 
 lines refer to the death in B.c. 138 of a popular tribune who ‘having done much for the 
 good of the people expired amid universal regret. His name was given at the end of 
 ]. 205. It would be expected that this individual was important enough to be known to 
 history, and, as Warde Fowler and Reid suggest, there may well be a connexion between 
 ll. 205-7 and a passage in Pliny (7. WV. xxi. 10) florum quidem populus Romanus honorem 
 Scipiont tantum habuit. Serapio cognominabatur propter similitudinem suariz cuiusdam 
 negotiatoris. obierat in tribunatu plebet admodum gratus dignusque Africanorum familia, nec 
 erat tn bonis funeris impensa. asses ergo contulit populus ac funus elocavit guaque praeterfere- 
 batur flores e prospectu omni sparsit. Whether by Serapio Pliny meant Scipio Nasica 
 Corculum, the consul of B.c. 162 and 155, or his son, the consul of s.c. 138, in either case 
 the statement that he died as tribune is an extraordinary error. It is very significant that 
 the papyrus also mentions the death of a popular tribune immediately after a mention 
 of Scipio Nasica the younger, and, as Warde Fowler remarks, if something like MVaszcae 
 filtus or rater be restored at the end of |. 205 and Pliny’s Serapzo be the same person, the 
 difficulties in the Pliny passage would be largely reduced. 
 
 207-9. co|.|n| may be the beginning of a short sentence complete in itself. If it i 
 connected with 1]. 208-9, it probably refers to the part taken by the consuls in the punish- | 
 ment of the deserters. On this cf. the passage from Epit. 55 quoted in ll. 202-5, note, 
 where only one individual, C. Matienus, is mentioned. Frontinus, however (Sérateg. 
 
668. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS irae 
 
 iv. I. 20), agrees with the papyrus, gue exercttum deseruerant damnatt, virgts caest publice 
 venterunt, 565 167 1115 singults is equivalent to 565 10.7.10 nummo singult. 
 
 210-1. It is probable that these lines refer to the famous accusation of L. Aurelius 
 Cotta by Scipio Aemilianus. This resulted in the acquittal of the accused because the 
 judges did not wish the influence of Scipio to appear too overwhelming, if we may believe 
 Cicero, Pro Murena 58 saepe hoc matores natu dicere audivt hance accusatorts extmiam 
 dignitatem plurimum L. Cottae profuisse. noluerunt saptentissimt homines quit tum rem illam 
 tudicabant tla quemquam cadere tn tudicio ut nimis adversarit viribus abtectus videretur (cf. 
 
 Divin. in Caec. 21), though Appian (Bell. Civ. i. 22) is probably right in saying that 
 _ bribery was employed. (propier) magnitudinem nom\inis would accord very well with the 
 eximia dignitas of Cicero. The objection to this interpretation is that Cicero (Pro Mur. 
 and Divin. in Caectl. loce. citt.) says that Aemilianus had been twice consul when he 
 brought the accusation, and the second consulship of Aemilianus was in B.c. 134 while the 
 event recorded in the papyrus took place in B.c. 138. Against the evidence of Cicero, 
 however, must be set the circumstance that in the earliest editions (based on the Codex 
 Sangallensis, now lost) of the commentary of Pseudo-Asconius upon that passage in the 
 Divin. ad Caecil. occurs the remark LZ. Cottam P. Africanus ante secundum consulaium et 
 censuram dicttur accusasse. Other MSS. of Pseudo-Asconius have 2051 instead of anée, and 
 post has generally been regarded as correct, though the remark is then rather pointless 
 since it simply repeats the statement of Cicero. But the agreement between the papyrus 
 and one version of Pseudo-Asconius is remarkable, though it is difficult to believe that 
 Pseudo-Asconius can be right in placing the trial before Scipio’s censorship, which took 
 place in B.c. 142. The question is further complicated by the uncertainty regarding the 
 nature of the accusations made against Cotta and the official standing in which he had 
 rendered himself liable to them. Was he the consul of s.c. 144 or the consul of B.c. 119 
 (so Jahn in his note on Cic. Brut. 81)? If the former, the date which the papyrus suggests 
 for the trial, B.c. 138, is more suitable than Cicero’s. If the latter, then Cicero’s date is the 
 more probable, for the younger Cotta might well have been praetor about B.c. 133-29, and 
 his insignificance would suit the peculiar feature of the case which seems to have impressed 
 itself upon the popular imagination. 
 
 On the whole, in spite of the evidence of Appian who connects the acquittal of Cotta 
 with C. Gracchus’ law de zudiczzs, and the circumstance that Cicero mentions it (Drv. 171 
 Caec. /. c.) together with the trial of Aquillius which certainly seems to have taken place 
 after Scipio’s return from Numantia, we incline to the view not only that Livy placed the 
 trial of Cotta in p.c. 138 but that he was right in so doing. Cicero, in the Pro Murena 
 passage at any rate, had a point to make which would be helped by assigning the trial to 
 the period after Scipio’s second consulship, and it is not difficult to suppose him guilty of 
 a chronological error in a speech. Moreover, the commentary of Pseudo-Asconius seems 
 to indicate that there were ancient doubts as to Cicero’s correctness on this matter ; and if 
 Livy was right with regard to the date of the trial, L. Cotta was probably the consul of 
 B.C. 144, who, as Valerius Maximus states (vi. 4. 2), was in that year prevented by Scipio 
 from going to Lusitania,.and against whom Scipio may well have continued to bear 
 a grudge. 
 
 212. Lustfant vastati: the proceedings of D. Junius Brutus in Southern Spain are 
 meant; cf. Epit. 55 Junius Brutus consul in Hispania ws qui sub Viriatho militaverant 
 agros et oppidum dedtt, quod Valentia vocatum est, Appian, Jber. 71, and notes on ll. 167 
 and 216-7. 
 
 a Niuman'tin{is clades accepta: for the restoration cf. 1,175. The allusion is to the 
 defeat of M. Popilius; cf. Epit., which is more detailed, and 1. 167, note. 
 
 "Ὁ. 
 
116 THE OX YRAVYNCHUS -PAPYRI 
 
 213-4. Cf. Epit. which is longer in its account of Antiochus’ death but mentions it at 
 the end of the book after the successes of Brutus, and omits the detail that Diodotus took 
 possession of Syria. The year to which Antiochus’ death is referred by the papyrus 
 (B.c. 138) conflicts with the date (B.c. 143-2) recently proposed by Niese (Gesc&. d. gr. u. 
 mak, St. iii. p. 283), chiefly on the evidence of coins. 
 
 216-7. Cf. Epit. D. Lunius Lusitaniam triginta urbtum expugnationibus usque ad occa- 
 sum et Oceanum perdomutt ; et cum fluvium Oblivionem transire nollent milites ereplum signt- 
 
 Sero signum tpse transtultt, et sic ut transgrederentur persuasit, ‘The account of Book 55 in 
 the papyrus probably ended here. 
 
 218-25. This fragment which was gummed on to Col. iv probably, if Szdlanis is 
 correct, belonged to a much later book. 
 
 226-32. This fragment was gummed on to Col. v. 
 
 669. MEeETROLOGICAL WorK. 
 
 17.5 X 15-3 cm. 
 
 On the recto of this papyrus are parts of two columns of an account of 
 corn, mentioning the second = first and third = second years, i.e. of Diocletian 
 and Maximian (A.D. 285-6 and 286-7). On the verso, written in a cursive 
 hand not more than a few years later than the writing on the recto, are parts 
 of two columns of a series of metrological tables concerning measures of length 
 and area. As in the contemporary metrological fragment from Oxyrhynchus 
 (9 verso) the spelling is bad, and from the unsystematic way in which the 
 details are arranged they seem to be private memoranda compiled from a larger 
 treatise. Lines 1-4 deal with the σχοινίον, the measure of length usually 
 employed in land-surveys, of which the square was the aroura. In Il. 5-8 we 
 have a general description of cubits arranged according to the three dimensions 
 of space; ll. g-10 treat of the οἰκοπεδικὸς πῆχυς, a peculiar kind of cubit which 
 differed from the three previously mentioned, and ll. 11-24 of the measurements 
 and uses of the ξύλον. Col. ii begins with a list of measures of length in which 
 Graeco-Egyptian and Roman names are, as would be expected at this period, 
 mixed (ll. 26-30). There follows (Il. 30-42) a table of the sizes of these from 
 the δάκτυλος or παλαιστής to the ἄκαινα or perhaps ἄμμα. Then begins another 
 section describing the δάκτυλος, in the middle of which the papyrus breaks off. 
 In both columns the lines are incomplete, and it is impossible in some cases to 
 fill up the lacunae; but the papyrus usefully supplements the existing evidence 
 
 concerning the σχοινίον and οἰκοπεδικὸς πῆχυς, and provides some interesting new ἢ 
 
 information about the names and length of different kinds of πήχεις used in 
 Egypt. The section dealing with the ξύλον, most of which can be restored with 
 
669. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 117 
 
 certainty, not only shows that there were two kinds of ξύλα which stood to each 
 other in the ratio of 9 : 8, but provides an important indication of the size of 
 that much discussed measure, the ναύβιον, which was probably a cubic ξύλον ; cf. 
 note on 1]. 11-20. 
 
 It is to be hoped that the whole subject of Graeco-Egyptian metrology 
 will soon be rehandled by a new writer. The Metrologie of Hultsch is now 
 antiquated, and the recent articles of the veteran metrologist in the Archiv fiir 
 Papyrusforschung and Abhand. d. kin. Sachs. Ges. d. Wiss. 1903: Die Ptole- 
 matschen Miinz- und Rechnungswerte, show an inability to appreciate the new 
 evidence of papyri. 
 
 (οὶ. 1. 
 
 [ἔχει τὸ σχοινίον] τὸ γεωμετρικὸν ὥγδοα ἢ, 
 [τὸ δὲ ὄγδοον ἔχει] πήχις ιβ, ὥστε ἔχειν τὸ 
 [σχοινίον τὸ γεωμετρ[ικ]ὸν πηχῶν 95° 
 [τ πε cae om eve sat cre Ἰκόν ἐστιν πηχῶν p. 
 mae εὐθυμετριϊκὸς πῆχείς ἐστιν ὁ κατὰ 
 [μῆκος μόνον) μετρούμενος, ἐμβαδικὸς 
 [δὲ ὁ κατὰ μῆκο])ς καὶ πλάτος, στερεὸς δὲ ὁ κα- 
 [τὰ μῆκος καὶ πλ]άτος καὶ βάθος frat ὕψος. 
 
 ΠΡ ΉΤΟ Ἰ. 5 (οδἰκοπεδικὸς πῆχις ἔ- 
 
 10 χει ἐμβαδικοὺς πήΪχις ps 
 [τῷ δὲ ξύλῳ kaTaplerpi[rale τὰ ναύβια' τὸ μὲν Ba- 
 [σιλικόν ἐστι π]ηχῶν γ; 
 [παλαιστῶν ] tn, 
 [δακτύλων ] of. 
 
 15 [rd 6&.........] ἐστὶ» mnxav BB, 
 ees ] ie’, 
 [δακτύλων ] £6. 
 
 [ὥστ᾽ ἔχειν τὸ σχοινίον] τὸ γεωμετρικὸν 
 [ξύλα βασιλικὰ ] AB, 
 COED AQ ie ste τ αν tie ] Aes 
 po | 
 
 een eee ie ] a, 
 
118 THE OXVRHYNCHUS. -PAPYRI 
 
 Beh sab ees δημόσιον vav- 
 ἀπὸ [ἢ 
 1. 1. ὄγδοα. 3. 1]. πήχεις. 5. 1], πῆχυς. 8. Ὁ. prow. . 9. ἵκοπεδικος Pap. 
 1. πῆχυς. 19. A of AB corr. from ο, 
 Col, au 
 
 μέτρων ἴδη ἐστὶν τάδε: δάκτυλος 
 παλεστὴς λιχίν)ὰς σπίιθαμὴ ποὺς πυγὼν 
 πῆχυς βῆμα ξύλον [ὀργυιὰ κάλαμος 
 ἄκενα ἄμμα πλέθρον [ἰούγερον στάδι- 
 
 δο. Ὃν COLQUNOY μίλιον» Olean 6 en keene 
 
 of B παλεσταὶ λιχίν)άϊς, of y παλεσταὶ 
 σπιθαμῆ; “Ol WO. TOUS apy ao ee 5 20! ne 
 πῆχυς λινοὐφικὸς [kal....... ἤτοι 
 
 πυγών, οἱ ¢ παλεσταὶ [πῆχυς δημό- 
 
 35 alos κὲ τεκτονικός, οἱ [ᾧ παλεσταὶ πῆχυς 
 ἸΝυλομεῖρικὸς; οἱ ἢ ΠΉΧιυΣ «4 6. as see 
 of ι βῆμα, βῆμα δέ ἐστιν ἡ διάστασις 
 
 τῶν ποδῶν. οἱ y πήχ[εις ξύλον δη- 
 μόσιζο!ν, of ὃ ὀργυιά, ὀργυιὰ δέ ἐστιν 
 
 40 ἡ διάστασις τῶν χιρῶϊν, οἱ . πήχεις 
 
 κάλαμος: ol ΕΒ ἀκένα ol Ase eee “Ὁ 
 οἱ εἰσὶ πήχιξ. [ 
 δάκτυλος ᾧ. πάντα Kati... τλον εξ τού- 
 του μίζονα καὶ σύνμετρα [καὶ τὰ ἐλάσ- 
 
 45 σονὰ τούτου μεσειτεύεται Ϊ. . .. .«...«...Ὁ 
 0... [.]. Aexyf.] το pons 
 
 2. 1. madkaorns: so in Il. 31, 34, 33. Awovduxos Pap. 35. I. Καὶ; 37. ot 
 Pap. 39. opyvia Pap. 42. πηχις᾽ Pap. 
 
 1-20. ‘ The schoenium used in land-survey has 8 eighths, and the eighth has 12 cubits, 
 so that the schoenium used in land-survey has 96 cubits, while the ... schoenium has 
 
 Η 
 
 τῇ 
 
669. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 119 
 
 100 cubits. The linear cubit is that which is measured by length alone, the plane 
 cubit is that which is measured by length and breadth; the solid cubit is that which 
 is measured by length and breadth and depth or height. chee building cubit contains 
 100 plane cubits. Ναύβια are measured by the ae the royal ξύλον contains 3 cubits, 
 18 παλαισταί, 72 δάκτυλοι, while the .. . ξύλον contains 22 cubits, 16 παλαισταί and 
 64 ΞΕ ; so that the schoenium used in land-survey contains 32 royal ξύλα and 36 
 τ ξύλα. 
 
 31-41. “2 παλαισταί make a λιχάς, 3 παλαισταί a σπιθαμή, 4 παλαισταί an (Egyptian ἢ) 
 foot, 5 a cloth-weaver’s cubit ..., 6 παλαισταί a public and a carpenter’s cubit, 7 παλαισταί 
 a Nilometric cubit, 8 eer ae δ .. . cubit, 10 παλαισταί a βῆμα, which is the distance 
 of the outstretched feet. 3 cubits make a public ξύλον, 4 cubits an ὀργυιά, which is the 
 distance of the outstretched hands. .. cubits make a κάλαμος, 62 an ἄκαινα. 
 
 1-4. On this σχοινίον, which was unknown when Hultsch wrote his A/efrologte, see 
 Kenyon, P. Brit. Mus. II. p. 130, and P. Tebt. I. p. 386. The details of the papyrus 
 exactly fit the previous evidence, which was that the σχοινίον corresponded to the ancient 
 Egyptian measure ’hef or khet n nuh of 100 royal cubits, but nevertheless was divided 
 into the series 4, 4, -ἶς, 5 and so on like the aroura. The papyrus now shows that 
 in surveying land the σχοινίον was sometimes treated as having 96 cubits, probably for 
 the sake of convenient fractions, but that there was also a σχοινίον of 100 cubits. The 
 name of the latter in ]. 4 may be οἰκοπεδιϊκόν. The ratio of these two σχοινία of 96 and 
 100 cubits corresponds, as Mr. Smyly remarks, to the ratio of 24:25 between two kinds 
 of cubits in Roman times; cf. note on ll. 34-5. 
 
 9-10. The οἰκοπεδικὸς πῆχυς was supposed by A. Peyron ‘Ge Taur. I. pp. 133-6) 
 to be a parallelogram measuring 100 cubits by 1 cubit. His explanation, which has 
 been accepted by all editors, is now confirmed by the papyrus, which states that an 
 οἰκοπεδικὸς πῆχυς CONtained 100 square cubits. The adjective lost in the lacuna is very 
 likely περιστί ) which is found in P. Brit. Mus. 119 and Wilcken, Οδλ II. 1301 before 
 πήχεις aS a measure of area. But how the abbreviation is to be resolved is uncertain. 
 Wilcken (Os/. I. p. 780) suggests περισταλτικός : περιστατικός seems to us more likely. 
 
 11-20. The restoration of this important passage, though at first sight it may seem 
 rather hazardous, is really practically certain. It is clear from τὸ μέν in |. 11 that the 
 figures in Il. 12-4 are contrasted with those in 1]. 15-7, and since those in ll. 12 and 15 
 refer to πήχεις, those in ll. 13 and 16 must refer to παλαισταί, of which there were 6 in 
 an ordinary πῆχυς (cf. ll. 34-5), and those in ll. 14 and 17 to δάκτυλοι of which 4 make 
 a παλαιστής. ‘This being granted, the figures in ll. 12-7 refer to a measure of length, 
 and the substantive to be supplied with τὸ μέν cannot be ναύβιον, which is known to 
 be a measure of cubic capacity. There is only one measure of length known to have 
 contained 3 πήχεις, and that is the ξύλον (1. 38), and though no ξύλον of 22 πήχεις was 
 known previously, the fact that in ll. 38-9 the ξύλον of 3 πήχεις is called δημόσιον indicates 
 that, as would be expected, more than one kind was in use. If then τὸ μέν in ]. 11 
 means a particular kind of ξύλον, some such restoration as [r@ δὲ ξύλῳ καταμετρῖ tale 
 becomes necessary, and the correctness of this hypothesis is confirmed by ll. 18-20. 
 The figure in 1. 20 stands to that in 1. 19 in the same proportion (9 : 8) as those in 
 ll, 12-4 to those in Il. 15-7. τὸ γεωμετρικόν (1. 18) has already (1. 1) been applied to 
 the σχοινίον, and 1. 19 with the restoration suggested will be the corollary of 1.3. The 
 only difficulty that arises is that the ξύλον of 3 πήχεις is in 1. 11 called βαϊσιλικόν while 
 in ]. 38 it is said to be δηϊμόσι[ο᾽ν ; but in view of the extent to which δημόσιος in Roman 
 
120 THE OXYRHYNCHOCS PAY RI 
 
 times supplanted the Ptolemaic term βασιλικός (e. g. in connexion with τράπεζα and γεωργός ; 
 cf. 500. 13, note), this objection is not serious. The chief interest of this section about 
 the ξύλον lies in the light which it throws upon the size of the ναύβιον ([. 11). On 
 that obscure cubic measure used in digging operations see P. Tebt. 5. 15, note, and 
 P. Petrie III. From the fact that the ξύλον was the particular measure used for calculating 
 ναύβια, it is difficult to avoid the inference that a ναύβιον was a ξύλον in length, and 
 since there is every reason to think that its dimensions were equal, most probably 
 a vavBuov was a cubic ξύλον, and as there were two sizes of ξύλα so there were also 
 two kinds of ναύβια. 
 
 21-5. The subject of these lines is obscure; but from the occurrence of τετράγωνον 
 in ]. 21 it appears that some area was under discussion. It is not unlikely that τὸ μὲν 
 μῆκος is to be supplied at the beginning of 1. 21 and [τὸ δὲ πλάτος ξύλον] in 1. 22, and 
 that the four-sided figure in question was the square face of a ναύβιον or cube measuring 
 3 πήχεις each way. ναύβια are probably still under discussion in 1. 24. 
 
 26-30. For this list of measures of length cf. the Zadulae Heronianae, especially 
 I (Hultsch, Scrzpt. Metrol. i. pp. 182 sqq.). 
 
 29. ἄκενα : both forms ἄκενα and ἄκαινα are commonly found, but the latter is the more 
 correct ; cf. Hultsch, of. τ, p. 29. 
 
 30. It is probable that the list ended with μίλιον like those in Zabulae Heronianae 
 III and VII. The only larger measures of length were the σχοῖνος and παρασάγγης. 
 δῖ may be the beginning of δάκτυλοι, since the following details proceed in an ascending 
 scale, and ought to have begun with the smallest measure. But we should expect 
 οἱ ὃ δάκτυλοι παλαιστής, which is much too long, and the δάκτυλος has a section devoted 
 to it in ll. 43 sqq. 
 
 31. The size ascribed in the papyrus to the λιχάς, σπιθαμή (1. 32), πυγών (1. 34), 
 βῆμα (1. 37), ὀργυιά (1. 39), and ἄκαινα (1. 41), agree with the statements of the Zadulae 
 Heronianae and add no new facts. 
 
 32. The names given by the ancient metrologists to the ordinary foot of 4 madaorat 
 to distinguish it from the ‘Popackds or ᾿ἸΙταλικὸς πούς Of 34 παλαισταί are βασιλικός, Πτολεμαικός, 
 and Φιλεταιρικός ; but none of these will suit. Αἰγύπτιος is not unlikely ; the first letter 
 is certainly a or A, δ or » being excluded. 
 
 33. καί might be supplied in 1. 32 instead of of e, which would then follow λινοῦφικός ; 
 but no cubit smaller than the normal one of 6 madaorai was known previously, and it is 
 therefore much more probable that the ‘cloth-weaver’s cubit’ contained 5 παλαισταί 
 than 4. 
 
 34-5. This cubit of 6 παλαισταί is the common πῆχυς, found in the Zadulae 
 FLeronianae, but is there also called λιθικός and ξυλοπριστικός, A πῆχυς τέλειος ξυλικὸς τεκτονικός 
 occurs in P. Brit. Mus. 154. 73 for δημόϊσιος cf. 1. 38 ξύλον δη)μόσι[οἹν and 1]. 11-20, note. 
 There was another cubit introduced into Egypt in Roman times which stood to the 
 cubit of 6 παλαισταί in the ratio of 25:24 (Hultsch, af. Wilcken, Ost. I. p. 753), but 
 this does not seem to be mentioned here by the papyrus, though it is perhaps, as 
 Mr. Smyly suggests, implied by the number, 96, of cubits in a σχοινίον in |. 3. 
 
 35-6. The title Νιλομετρικὸς πῆχυς is new, but that the cubit used in measuring 
 the rise and fall of the Nile contained 7 παλαισταί instead of 6 was known from the 
 inscriptions on the subject at Elephantine; οἵ. Ὁ. I. G. 4863. This cubit of 7 madacrat - 
 is that normally used in official measurements upon ancient Egyptian monuments, and 
 Mr. Smyly thinks that it was also employed in measuring the mysterious ἀωίλια which 
 occur in the Petrie papyri. Its usual title (not found here) was the ‘royal’ cubit 
 (Hultsch, Introd. to Script. Mfetrol. p. 25, &c., is wrong on this point). 
 
670-678. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 121 
 
 36. This cubit of 8 παλαισταί or 2 feet is frequently mentioned in the Zadulae 
 FHT[eronianae, but without any special designation. Since it was apparently introduced 
 into Egypt by the Romans (Hultsch, Script. Metrol. p. 42, Metrol. p. 618), ‘Poparkds 
 or Ἰταλικός is very likely to be supplied in the lacuna. 
 
 37. The βῆμα of 10 παλαισταί is the ordinary one, but βήματα of 8 and 12 παλαισταί 
 also occur; cf. Hultsch, Scrzp¢. Metrol. pp. 194. 3 and 197. 23. 
 
 38-9. No ξύλον except that of 3 cubits was known previously; on the δημόσιον 
 and the other ξύλον with which it was contrasted see ll. 11-20, note. 
 
 40. The κάλαμος, which was according to Zadbulae Heronianae I an ancient Egyptian 
 land-measure, is stated in the same table (Hultsch, Script. Metrol. Ὁ. 183. 3) to contain 
 62 cubits or 10 feet of 4 madaorai. This is also the size assigned in the Zadulae 
 fHerontanae to the ἄκαινα or dkeva; cf. 1. 41. Hence Hultsch supposed that κάλαμος 
 and ἄκαινα were convertible terms. But from the position occupied by the κάλαμος here 
 between the épyud of 4 πήχεις and the ἄκαινα of 62, its size should be not 62 but 
 something between 4 and 62 cubits. A μέτρον τοῦ καλάμου which differs apparently from 
 the ordinary κάλαμος occurs in a passage quoted by Hultsch, of. εἴ. p. 153, but the 
 language seems to be corrupt, and if Hultsch is right in inferring from it a κάλαμος 
 of 14 cubits in length, that cannot be the κάλαμος meant here. There is more reason 
 to connect the κάλαμος of the papyrus with the κάλαμος of 273 παλαισταί mentioned by 
 Pediasmus, a Byzantine writer of the fourteenth century (Hultsch, of. cz#.i. Ὁ. 58 and il. p. 147). 
 This κάλαμος would contain 48 cubits of 6 παλαισταί, and 48 would satisfy the conditions 
 which, as we have said, the number found in ]. 40 would be expected to fulfil. Assuming 
 that this is correct, the κάλαμος of 43 cubits is much older than has been supposed ; 
 but there is no particular objection to this, for the information provided by ancient 
 metrologists is extremely defective. 
 
 41-2. After the ἄκαινα, which has the customary 62 cubits, came no doubt a higher 
 unit of measurement, very likely the ἄμμα (40 cubits), which follows the ἄκαινα in ]. 29. 
 ot εἰσι πήχεις May be corrupt for of (a figure) πήχεις, followed by another unit of measurement 
 omitted. But it is more likely to be something like τοῖ]]!οί εἰσι πήχεις (cf. 654. 1), ‘so 
 much for cubits.’ 
 
 43-5- The meaning is that the δάκτυλος being the smallest measure of length 
 with a name, all other measures of length are referred to it as the unit; cf. Zadulae 
 Flerontanae I and II ἐλάχιστον δὲ τούτων ἐστὶ δάκτυλος καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐλάττονα μόρια καλεῖται, 
 and III δάκτυλος πρῶτός ἐστιν ὥσπερ καὶ μονάς, Line 43 is probably to be restored 
 κατ[αμετρεῖται τὰ τούΪτου, with [καὶ ᾧ in 1. 443 cf. 1. 1, 
 
 670-678. PorticAL FRAGMENTS. 
 
 These nine miscellaneous pieces in verse do not appear to be extant, but are 
 too fragmentary to call for detailed treatment. 
 
 670 is a strip from a short column of hexameters, written in a small sloping 
 uncial hand of the third century. The metre proves that the part preserved is 
 near the beginnings of the lines, but the remains are too scanty to show the 
 subject or the quality of the poem. There is a mention of Dionysus in 1. 22, 
 
122 71} ΟΧΥΚΗΥΝΟΠῸΟΒ PARY RIL 
 
 and apparently a reference to Hephaestus in 1. 11. Some corrections have been 
 _made by a second hand, which also inserted the diaeresis in |. 26. 
 
 671 is from a series of epideictic epigrams, as is made clear by the heading 
 inl. 1 τίνας dv εἴποι [Adyous..., a formula frequent in the Anthology (cf. e.g. 
 Anth. Pal. ix. 126, 449, &c.). λοις 1. 3, where the epigram commences, is 
 the abbreviation νι(. )—or w( )—which may give the name of the poet, e.g. 
 Nicarchus, or of the speaker. The handwriting is an irregular uncial, dating 
 probably from the latter half of the third century. 
 
 672. A small fragment from the bottom of a column, containing the latter 
 parts of nine lines, written in a rather irregular uncial hand of, probably, the 
 first century. Lines 4-8 may be hexameters, but the metre of 1. 9 seems to be 
 different. There is no clue to the subject. 
 
 673 contains parts of eleven lines from the top of a column, written in well- 
 formed sloping uncials of the common oval type, and dating most probably 
 from the third century. In the margin at the top are the beginnings of three 
 blurred lines of cursive, apparently mere scribblings ; the writer was perhaps the 
 person responsible for some corrections and accents in the text below. This 
 seems to be of a lyrical character, though the majority of the verses might 
 also be hexameters. 
 
 674, written in careful round uncials of about the latter part of the first or 
 the beginning of the second century, is a fragment of a lyric poem, which may 
 be by Pindar. The form iapds (1. 6) is indeed not found in the traditional 
 Pindaric dialect, but it has a parallel in σκιαρός (O71. iii. 14, 18). The high stops 
 and the accents which have been occasionally added may be by the original 
 scribe, but there is a question of a second hand in ll. I and 7 ; cf. note ad Joc. 
 
 675. The upper parts of two columns of a lyrical poem written in rather 
 short lines, and evidently to be classed as a paean (cf. ll. 1 and 12). The mention 
 of Alexandria in 1. 4 is an indication of a comparatively late date, but Blass 
 thinks that the piece may be by Callimachus, who is known to have composed 
 μέλη of this description. The paragraphus below |. 2 may mark the commence- 
 ment of a fresh strophe, but no metrical correspondence can be followed out 
 between the two columns. The MS. is in a large uncial hand of an early type, 
 and seems to date from about the middle of the first century. 
 
 676. This small fragment contains the ends and beginnings of lines from 
 two columns of a tragedy, written in a sloping uncial hand of the third century. 
 High stops occur at ll. 2,6 and 7, and a middle stop apparently at 1. 3. The 
 correction in 1. 9 and the rough breathing in 1. 14 are no doubt original, and the 
 accents may be so; but the pan of the iota pines in 1.15 seems to be 
 subsequent. - 
 
670-678. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 123 
 
 677 and 678 are fragments of comedies. 677, containing the latter parts of 
 nine lines from the bottom of a column, is written in neat round uncials which 
 may be assigned to the latter part of the first century. 678, from the top of 
 a column, is in an upright and rather heavy calligraphic hand similar to 661, and 
 probably, like that papyrus, of the latter part of the second century. The 
 accents seem to have been added later. 
 
 670. 15:6 X 3:7 cm. 
 JAets τι ὃ αν addo 7. [ Jupnf[....lov oe τέος . | 
 Ἰν δε και αὐτὸς απὶ Ι5 jo kat Ϊ. - ]Ἰεουσα φιλοῖ 
 ]- [...] avroparos λιπεν [ Joe χωομεῖν ..}. Kae μ.Ϊ 
 jos [. .|Kagovow ae ye v ap εἰσωμεσθα σιδηρί 
 5 Ae Taprapinow αλυκτίοπεδησι ὃ : 
 
 | yap mapatact Teos .Ϊ 
 
 ] ἡμετεροι π᾿. « πυτοφ] 
 
 290 ν eyxos .. εσχε ταί 
 Inv toe .[. .] και marl 
 
 παντοθεν [αμ]φιβεβηκε τί 
 
 Ἂ 
 Je φιλη λουσειεν επιζωΐ 
 Ι 
 ως a| 
 
 p edn [....'vns pepy[ 
 
 vy αστυ[φελιΐκτον εωσί 1 Kat Διονυσος ε.Ϊ 
 } 
 
 Ἰεμοι μη δηριν eyerlp 
 τεχΊνηεις es X@Aos cor . [ lv ay NPETEPOLS TrE| 
 ] 
 
 ο 
 
 10 vader’... .] τεκες tif 
 
 I 
 προῖσθε πίοδων ayabl eae γλυκερων en| 
 
 pevol. . «Ἰτεεισκοτε . [ εως Tals ouvTos εμοΐ 
 
 6. v of λουσ is corrected apparently by the second hand from ε. 
 18. The mistake corrected was the common one of writing a for εἰ; the same thing 
 has happened in 1. 25. 
 
 671. | Fr. (a) 9:6 Χ 7°3, Fr. (Ὁ) 15°5 x 8-1 cm. 
 τινας αν εἰποὶ [Noyous προς ΣᾺ Ἰ. ς και νυν εἶ 
 τον υ͵ι]ον του Ae 35 ΣΕ tases μην 
 IN arpexes avyAneooa| i Rete ais merrey ] - βασιλί 
 κἰ. .« «νει βασιλεὺς | : 
 5 af... .]Ἰασδυσιασπί 15 [σκη]πτρον exee . [ 
 Lopes Ἰ. ἐκλειτὴν [ χρύσεον αθρησανΐ 
 
 ΑΞ stat wn εξησιΐ αλλ[α)] κλυοις Epos οσὶ 
 
124 ΤΗΣ OXYRAYNCHUS PARRY RI 
 
 [ss een OTE aT τ kat Koupfols . [ 
 
 Brees le. τὸν περεῖ ~oum@ πορφύυρεης πί 
 10 [.]ν. [.] θεσπεσιον e€. [ 20 οὕπω σκηπτρί| 
 
 Pacey Ἰενησετεκί δηθυνεις Bacirev κΙ[ 
 
 ἱμειρω σεο Tralda pal 
 
 1-2. A name, possibly Ni) (cf. introd.), is to be supplied after λογους, Δοί may 
 be read in place of Δεί in 1. 2. This may be the top of the column. 
 
 14. There is a break in the papyrus at this point, and four or five lines at least 
 are lost. 
 
 672. 8X 5:5 cm. 673. ΙΟΧ 4:7 cm. 
 dav Oepal 
 
 νον dof Ἱμοπατρασΐ 
 Ἰφαι ληϊ μενα γλυκί 
 Ἰαμηϊ Ἰ. επποβοτοΪ 
 ἰισιν eripnoar Ϊ 5. |vopots ολυ.[ 
 
 5 le Νηρηιδες Ἰντος υὑποπί 
 Ἰπου εδιδαχθη |p αἵονων ¢ 
 Joes tagov avtiace π)οντιάδεσσιΪ 
 Ju» O@np οσον εξεδιδαξεῖ πἸλοκαμοις θεαῖς [ 
 Ἰων’ διχα εἰς πολυποικιλί το Ἰεν[ δ] ανιοκουρί 
 
 Ἰφνετοξί 
 
 672. 9. The high point is really over the ν and is possibly to be connected with 
 the point between v and θ in the line before. The double point usually indicates a change 
 of speaker, but is also found as a mark of punctuation, e. g. in 657. 
 
 678. 1-2. Perhaps ΠιερἼδων θεραΐπων and οβριμοπατρα, as Blass suggests. 
 
 4. The letter before ἱπποβοτοί has been corrected. 
 
 5. Ihe mutilated letter before the lacuna might be e.g. » or v3 ὃ Ολυμίπον,. 
 
 g. πἼλοκαμοις is no doubt part of a compound adjective like εὐπλόκαμος Or KadAumAdKapos. 
 
 10. The doubtful » has been converted from wo by a second hand, which also crossed 
 out the 6. 
 
670-678. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 125 
 
 674. BI X 5:2 cm. 
 Jarrard 
 Ἰωνευαΐ. . .] . «1 
 
 Ἰλοινον" εμμενΐ 
 Ἰένοι ΖΔελῴοι vadi 
 5 je Παρνασσου θέμεθλα 
 lous τερῴθεν ιαροις Ϊ 
 Ἰάματ ἀγλαοις. ιδιοις [ 
 
 Ἰναπολλοι ἼΗΙ 
 Jas: τοι ὃ αὐτί 
 
 το Ἰορφί. - ἐκ 
 
 Jrov| 
 
 1. The letters of this first line are smaller than those in the lines below and differently 
 formed, and they might be by another hand; but there is no trace of an erasure, nor can 
 the words be an interlinear addition. | 
 
 4. ve or τσ might be read in place of a between ν and ὃ. 
 
 5. Oéue[Ora: cf. Pindar, Pyth. iv. 180 Παγγαίου θεμέθλοι.. Perhaps τρέμε δὶὲ «.7.A,, 
 as Blass suggests. 
 
 7. The letters of cdtors are smaller than usual and have a slight slope, while elsewhere 
 the hand is upright; they seem to have been written by the original scribe, but may 
 be a marginal note or gloss. 
 
 8. Something like an o enclosed between two dots (cf. e.g. 16. ii. 4) has been 
 written above the letter after woAA, which is probably ὦ. ‘The words may be divided |wa 
 mo\A.... OF |v Amo... 
 
 675. 11-8 X14+5 cm. 
 
 Colma: Col. ii. 
 παιανι φιλοστεφαϊνω) Κεῖ .]| peAWo...... 
 μελπίονἾτες @...-- | κελαδου maay[..... 
 ἱεραν κίαἼγεχων [..... ] μέλεσι στεψα!... .. 
 ΑλεξανδρἸ]ειαν.. [... .. ] evtepav πελαίνων.. 
 
 ΠΕ ΤΟΛΙΝ [1 «| KGL: Pal... 8 ] 15 θυμα δεδωκατίε. .. 
 
126 THE OXYRAYNCHUS FARYRI 
 
 ομου ml. .Jomer[..... ] σταις ev ωὡδα[ιῆς [..... 
 ταις de. [ πολνυωνυμοι ιλί. . . .. 
 σπονδαϊ A θεὸν ἢ Ἰσὰν δὲ. Gls. τ: 
 δοισυμ.Ϊ Bee eco Ἰοῦτον τος 1, 
 
 10 σεβιαΪ 
 
 I. παιανι: the vestiges of the last two letters are very slight, but « is much more 
 probable than a. 
 
 2. There is a short blank space between μελπίονἾγες and the letter following. 
 
 3. kalrexov is very uncertain ; the letter after ν could be almost anything. alojr exo 
 is quite possible. 
 
 9. Probably -δοις υμνΐ. 
 
 676. 5X 7°4 cm. 
 
 Cols (οἱ. ἢ. 
 jor | per| 
 |nv: σ ᾿ 
 Ἰθετωι. lolly μέν raf 
 : το sKevTpols | 
 
 oy av]. |jovpe[ 
 he εκ TNS πὶ 
 icp ὃς νιν a 
 
 σπασας πὶ 
 
 t 
 15 €xOpw παΪ 
 σφάλος δ 
 παλαι τετὶ 
 
 I. Ἶων, if right, no doubt ended the line, but there would be room for two 
 letters more. 
 
 8. There is a blank space before μεν, which is possibly the name of the speaker, - 
 6. δ. Mevjekaos. Apparently there was also a slight space between this and the preceding 
 line. 
 
 16. ofddos is a word of the use of which there is no other example. The root 
 is that of σφάλλεσθαι and ἀσφαλής. : 
 
679-684. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 127 
 
 677. 8.6 X 3-9 cm. 678. IIX4 cm. 
 Lf otter 15 ἢ τι: ] ταῦϊε εαν κελευηΪ] 
 Ἰγρεχειν εκ γειτίον οὐκ ἔστιν" Ϊ 
 
 τι λυπησας τυχωΐ τριωβολοῖ 
 
 τα πειθαρχουντα Ϊ σου : κακον Ϊ 
 
 | 
 | 
 5 | Tpomov προσιοῖντ 
 ] 
 ] 
 
 ] ὦ προστατί 
 
 τινι λαλεις [( ] apay δυναῖ 
 ιαν Νουμηνιε [ y]Alory pol 
 Epos’ εἰνεγμαι pl irn[ 
 μα tlovs dwdexa θείους ]rof 
 
 677. 6. There is a blank space in the papyrus on either side of τινι Aakers. Probably 
 two feet are to be supplied at the end of the line. 
 
 8. εἰνεγμαι is apparently for ἐνήνεγμαι or nivypar. The doubtful y might be ε, but 
 that gives no word. 
 
 9. Cf 409. 86, &c. 
 
 678. 1-7. It appears on the whole probable that the fragment preserves the 
 beginnings of the lines and that there is no loss on the left side till 1. 7, which must 
 have projected somewhat, owing to the column having, as often happens, a slight slope. 
 But this is not at all certain, and what we have taken to be a paragraphus between Il. 4-5 
 may be a rough breathing over ὦ, 
 
 8. The syllable preceding rn had an acute accent. 
 
 679-684. ProszE FRAGMENTS. 
 
 The following group of unidentified prose fragments corresponds to the 
 foregoing collection of minor poetical pieces. The first, 679, is historical, and 
 consists of the upper parts of two columns, both unfortunately fragmentary, 
 written in neat upright uncials of the first century B.c. Military operations are 
 being described, and there is a mention in ll. 2-4 of some one dispatched by an 
 Alexander in Cilicia, and of a king or kingdom in 1. 42. Perhaps, then, this is 
 a fragment from a history of the campaigns of Alexander the Great, and it may 
 even belong to the lost work on that subject by the first Ptolemy. 
 
128 : ΤΕ OX VRAYNCHUS dear viel 
 
 680 seems also to come from some historical work, but its sense is not 
 easy to follow. Parts of 15 lines from the top of a column are preserved, con- 
 taining mentions of Cilicians, Attica and the Athenians, and Soli in Cyprus. 
 The hand is a sloping uncial of the middle or latter part of the third century. 
 A low stop apparently occurs in |. 3. 
 
 681 is a piece from the top of acolumn containing the latter parts of 
 15 lines from a geographical or historical treatise. A description of some 
 Thracian tribes, among which are the Triballi and Paeonians, is given, but the 
 passage is too mutilated for satisfactory restoration. The fragment is written in 
 rather irregular, but not ill-formed, uncials, which may date from the second 
 century ; a high stop is used. 
 
 682. Two fragments, both probably from the same column, of which one 
 of them forms the top. The graceful upright hand seems, like that of 699, to be 
 a rather early example of the oval type, and it may go back to the latter part 
 of the second or the beginning of the third century. The common angular sign 
 is used for filling up a short line (1. 12). The pieces are part of an oration, 
 perhaps a lost speech of Hyperides. 
 
 683 contains the ends of lines of part of a column, with some traces of the 
 column following, τί and τί, opposite Il. 16 and 19, being all that is legible. 
 The fragment is not easy to classify ; citations of previous writers are made in 
 Il. 4 and 12-3, and a Dionysius is mentioned in |. 9. The piece is written in 
 rather small round uncials, which may be assigned to the latter half of the 
 second century. An angular sign is used at the end of short lines. On the 
 verso are parts of two lines in cursive of about the time of Septimius Severus. 
 
 684, containing 23 nearly complete lines from the bottom of a column, is 
 much more intelligible. The fragment comes from some ethical treatise, the 
 comparatively late date of which is indicated by the occurrence of the form 
 προσελεύσομαι (1]. 6 and 22) as well as by the subject, the characteristics of 
 sovereigns and advice for intercourse with them. The piece is written on the 
 verso of the papyrus—the recto being blank—in sloping oval uncials, probably 
 of the middle or latter half of the third century. 
 
 679. 12-5 X 6-1 cm. 
 (ΟΣ τ (οὐ τς 
 Pe ee Jovy Ελληνικὼν Te 
 ede Su Eo Ἰν τὸν ey Κιλικι 
 
 at απεστ]αλμενον ur Ade 
 
679-684. NEW CLASSICAL 
 
 ξανδρου valrepoy . [.].. av 
 Go gas ]. του παραδοθηναι 
 τ ΤΩΣ Το, ἐς ]ην επιμελειαν 
 . «]. ἂς adda Tw pn ελ 
 Seer ] τὴν ησυχιαν e. [. 
 .+.+. AaluBavovres μὴ εἰσ 
 LO το δ Jrovs τωγ καθεστω 
 τῶν . .. .]ν δὲ διαμερισθω 
 Cg fee orale oe jou στρατοπε 
 el Ae τὸ 9 ay ae ]- τῶν pepe 
 15 letters Ἰνται 
 ἔτ νον" Ἰτινᾳ δεσιν 
 γον π΄, 1 δοξαντων 
 ἘΣΤΕ ore lav αποστει 
 ἘΝ ΥΧΨΈΧΟ στ 3 fe | umnpetas ε[ι]ς 
 Seared ct tee iets Ἰην τῶν προ 
 20 ...,-... ἠππεέὼν al.lexa 
 fomletters) τερον] 
 
 38-45. These lines are written smaller and closer together than the rest. 
 
 680. 6-5X% 4 cm. 
 [... ων Κιλίκων [ de εἰς Σόλους τουΐ 
 [. ληστο οἱ de ολί 10 ves τοὺς εν Κυπίρω 
 [- Ja. μεγα τι... [Jac τους de e£o[ 
 
 [εἸξελθειν Gf [ 
 5 Artikns μετί [ 
 τους Αθηναι[οἱυς [ [ 
 π᾿ αὐτου τεθεισιν | 15 | 
 
 Tous αναστρεψή 
 
 FRAGMENTS 
 
 25 
 
 30 
 
 35 ov 
 
 ᾳ.. [1 
 ὠνιῃ 
 
 40 διοί 
 εἰς, ἢν κί 
 βασιλειαΐ 
 
 δεικνυ] 
 τοῖ.Ἰανδῖ 
 45 0.[ 
 
 jo σνποστρεψαι [ 
 |. ας επιτετριμῖ 
 .JexTov ὑπὸ Tov Ϊ 
 
 129 
 
130 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 3. τι 15 very doubtful; the vestiges representing r might be taken for a double point. 
 
 14. Or πυπογω. 
 681. 11 Χ 7-1 cm, 
 ἼΤαρο τ ces 77 pore ] yeyovact τοις M..a.4 
 les Sayre Ῥια ee ier ] wAetorot τίω)]ν προσπε 
 Ἰ τοῖν [] ΦΉΣ St OT cet eo Ἰντων Τριβαλλί[ω)ν και 
 Ἰκρουσυμ .. το. Τί. .] ] προτερον μεν. .Τ 
 5 ] Kat Sone oly τῶν ] μονην τὴν προς Tov 
 Τριβαλίλων oft] μὲν αἰλ]λοι κατα κἸ]αθηκουσαν: vuv δε 
 res εἰλον τε Of. .]εἰὶ των Παιονων τῶν a 
 
 15 | καλουμενων' Kat 
 
 6. If Τριβαλίλων is right not more than six letters are missing at the beginnings 
 of ll. 1-9 or from seven to eight in the remainder. 
 
 8. The letter between a and « is very likely σι Above the o of ros is a spot of ink 
 which seems to be accidental. 
 
 682. Fr, (a) 8 x 2-8, Fr. (b) 5-1 Χ 4°] cm. 
 Fr. (a) [rats δημοκρίατιαις οι Bee εἰσ]αγγελιαί 
 νομοι παντίων εἰσι τῶν [ 12 letters Ἰγιγνεῖ 
 [εἰν τὴ. πολέίε κυριοι Kat 10.4 IO“ τ ΕΤΟΥΣ as 
 [ROY SERA Tashan ce pe ΝΣ avrTos νομὸν θησειν 
 δ᾽ μοὺς πεν ἢ.) 7. cpaeee ee και παύσειν Tous εν 
 [.]s οὐδὲ 12 letters τοις δικαστηριοίς plat 
 
 διως αποφευγονΐτας 
 Fr. (δ) 
 
 1 [ 12 letters 1] δημί. [αἸνδρες Α[θηναιοι 
 
 I. [rlats was probably preceded by εν. Mr, Smyly aptly quotes Hyperides, Luxemp. 
 ΧΧΙ, ἐν δημοκρατίᾳ κύριοι οἱ νόμοι ἔσονται καὶ al εἰσαγγελίαι καὶ αἱ ἄλλαι κρίσεις κατὰ τοὺς νόμους 
 εἰσίασιν εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον. 
 
 8-10. Nothing need be missing at the end of these lines. 
 15. [o] Se δημοῖς or Δημοίσθενης or [η] δε δημοίκρατια are possible supplements. 
 
679-684. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 
 
 683. 
 
 ]ra xupitjov 
 jaBaons av 
 ονομαστον 
 le φησι τας 
 
 5 | πολειτείαις 
 Ἰσγασαν es ta 
 Jovian διαπρα 
 Ἰασιν ot Ta πε 
 ]res Atovuce 
 
 10 Ϊπλε. σαν 
 
 9:3 Χ 4.4 cm. 
 Jets ev Tne 
 τῶ]ν ἱστοριῶν 
 πο de τους 
 15 Ἰακατον λα 
 Ἱντα πρεσβευ 
 Ἰσεν © κοι 
 Ja κερνᾳ δι 
 Ἰντων κομι 
 20 ]είινων eto 
 πα]ραλαβειν 
 
 Jev 
 
 I3I 
 
 |rns .[.].. κε 
 
 15. axarov may be a complete word; cf. |. 18 κερνα. 
 
 684. 12 X 6°5 cm. 
 . JreSogers 0. f-Udg{......-. μαἾλα εικοτ[ω]ς akpat μεν yap εἰσίι... 
 εν ἐργων evos εἰσιν .[......... εὐ .Javpatov θαλασσίων... [.... 
 .Ἰσων βουλονται πραγματί.... 15. .]. Tov καὶ πυρος [olvdev de ουτω [.... 
 
 . €jt και κυμαινει Kat ἀαναζέίι ὡς 
 
 θυ]μος βασ[ἡλεω[5] ατε yap peyas ον και 
 αυἹτοκρατωρ Kale madn τη εξουΐσια 
 Xplopevos οξυς ἐστιν Kat axataloyxe 
 
 20 TOS] Kal προς TE Tas τείμας προχίειρος 
 προ]ς TE TAS KOAATELS AKWAUTOS [χρη 
 οὐ») Tov προσελεύυσομενον τῶ τοίίω 
 δε κ͵]αι τηλικωδε χίρ]ησθαι μεν [ 
 
 εν νειν exet δε τινα και αὖυΐ.... 
 5 . εἸνεργεστερα[»ν] ἡ τροπο... τι δε 
 ΧΡΉ] μαλίλ]ον παιδευειν του[9] προίσελευ 
 σομενους βασιλεῖ ἡ Tov αξιωμ[ατος 
 τα] δίια]φορα τι μεν ταρασσει [.... 
 ..]. βουσινου τι δε] εὐυνηται [τι δὲ 
 10 . τη oer υπί.]. ον τι δε τη af.... 
 ἐστιν erepov το[ουτους ατ΄...[.... 
 det] γιγνεσίθ]αι προς τους βασιλεαῖς και 
 5. eepyeorepaly]: the final ν scarcely fills the available space, and another letter 
 may be lost. 
 6. The second λ of μαλίλ]ον if written would be very cramped and may have been 
 
 omitted. 
 9. The traces of the supposed o after 7.β are rather closer than they should be 
 
 K 2 
 
132 THE“ OXYRAYNCHOS LAPYRI 
 
 both to the 6 and to the following v and perhaps do not represent a letter, and on the 
 other hand a narrow letter may be lost between the doubtful o and «. βυσίσΊινου ate. 
 evyntov might be read, but would make no sense here. Perhaps there is some corruption. 
 
 14. κυματων would be expected and should no doubt be restored (cf. 1. 16 κυμαινει) ; 
 perhaps καυματων was written by mistake. 
 
 18. παλη: 1. πάλαι or πολλῆ᾽ There is room for a letter between a and a, but 
 the a seems clear. 
 
 23. The final » of μὲν is rather spread out and was possibly the last letter of 
 the line. 
 
 Il]. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT ΟΙἌΒΘΕ 
 AUTHORS 
 
 685. Homer, lad X Κ777. 
 
 12:5 X 105 cm. 
 
 This fragment, containing the ends of ll. 725-32 of the //ad, from the top 
 of a column, is of interest owing to the presence of some marginal scholia, one 
 of which, that on 1. 728 mentioning a reading of the Κοινή, is with little doubt 
 by the original scribe, while those below were added subsequently in cursive. 
 The MS. was a fine specimen of Greek calligraphy, being written with great 
 care in a large, round uncial hand, very similar to that of 661 (Plate v). It 
 is probably to be assigned, like 661, to the latter half of the second century, 
 a date to which the cursive adscripts opposite Il. 730-1 also point. High and 
 middle stops (11. 728-9) occur, and accents and breathings are used in the first 
 scholium. There is a broad margin at the top of the column. 
 
 725 εἾπι καπρωι 
 θη)ρητηρων'" 
 μ]εμαωτες" 
 πεποιθΊως. n & αλλ’ ὅτε δή p’ 
 ] αλλος. 
 
686-688. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 133 
 
 730 ἐπο]ντο 
 : εξ αμίφοτερων 
 αμφιηγυοισιν pepwv [.... ..9 
 avu|rous 
 
 Ἰλοει avre [ 
 
 728. The marginal note evidently refers to the Aristarchean method of writing ὅτε δή, 
 namely ὁτεδή, and implies that the word had the Aristarchean accent in the text. Cf. 
 Schol. A on A 493 ᾿Αρίσταρχος ὁτεδή ws δηλαδή παραλόγως ἀνεγίνωσκε, and the discussion of the 
 question in the scholia of Ammonius, 221. i. 1-8, where the ordinary accentuation is 
 upheld. For the reference to the Κοινή cf. 445. 
 
 731. The scholium appears to be an explanation of the word ἀμφιγύοισιν which it 
 interprets in the sense of ‘pointed at both ends’; cf. Apollonius’ Lexicon, s.v. τοῖς ἐξ 
 ἑκατέρου μέρους γνῶσαι δυναμένους. After μερων something like ἄκρον ἔχουσιν must be supplied ; 
 cf. Schol. A on N 147 οἱ δὲ μεταφορικῶς ἀπὸ τῶν γυίων, ὅτι ἑκατέρωθεν ἄκρον ἔχει. The note 
 may have been continued in ἃ third shorter line, and there is a faint mark below the ν of 
 pepov which (if it be ink) would suit an e. 
 
 732. The marginal note below this line, which should refer to 1. 733 σταίησαν τῶν δὲ 
 τράπετο χρώς, οὐδέ τις ἔτλη, is Obscure. The only word here of which an explanation seems 
 at all likely to have been given is τράπετο, which in the Schol. Didymi is glossed ἠλλάσσετο 
 ἡ ἰδέα τοῦ προσώπου ; but the present note was phrased differently. ‘The doubtful A may be 
 p and four or five letters may be lost in front of it since 1. 733 is not a long one, Acar . [ 
 cannot be read. 
 
 686-688. Homer, 7 αά 775, 717, ann XJ. 
 
 The three following Homeric fragments of which the text is printed below 
 are reproduced in facsimile on Plate vii, and have a palaeographical value as 
 practically contemporary specimens of the literary hand of the early Augustan 
 period. 686 and 688, from the bottom and top of a column respectively, are 
 very similar in type, 686 being the more regular and ornamental of the two, 
 and both have a decided resemblance to the hand of the new Pindar fragments 
 (659), which is perhaps slightly older. 687, which is also of some interest 
 on account of the presence of two critical signs in the margin of Col. ii, shows 
 a stiffer and more angular style of writing. No stops or other lection signs 
 occur in any of the three pieces. We give a collation with Ludwich’s text. 
 
 686. 7-3X Bel cm, Brare ΝΠ]. 
 
 Φ 9 [ ® 
 
 ii. 50 [avrap ο κηρυΐκεσσι λι[γυφθογγοισι 
 
134 JHE OXYRAYNGHUS* PAPA RY 
 
 [κηρυσσειν aylopny δε καϊρηκομοωντας 
 [οἱ μεν εκηρυΐσσον τοι ὃ ηϊγειροντο 
 βουλην δὲ πρΊωτον μεγαθυμίων 
 [Neoropen παρ]α νηι Πυλοιγενίεος 
 
 55 [Tovs o γε συνκ͵αλεσας πυκινηῖν 
 
 [ 
 [ 
 [ 
 [κλυτε φιλοι Olecos μοι ενυπνίΐον 
 [αμβροσιην dija vuKTa μαλιστα [ 
 [ 
 
 εἰδος τε μεγΊεθος τε φυὴν τ αγίχιστα 
 
 53. Lhe papyrus probably read βουλην, as do the great majority of the MSS.; but the 
 lacuna is too large to give a real clue. βουλή Ludwich, with Aristoph. and Aristarch. 
 
 54. Πυλοιγειζεος : 50 Lud. with AB, &c.; Πυληγ. SM, &c. 
 
 56. θΊειος : so MSS. and Aristarch.; θεῖον Zenod. 
 
 687. ΠΧ 4:5 CM. Prate VII. 
 Col. 1. Col, iii: 
 
 > τουΐς ὃ eyo 
 
 αμφίοτερων 
 αλλ οἷτε 
 ili, 185 atoAom λους oT ay TOV 210 
 | > apdio 
 Σ᾿ αγγαρι]οιο αλλ οἶτε 
 €lAex Onv ητῖοι 
 αντιανειΐραι παυρ[α 
 
 ovd αἰφαμαρτοεπης 215 
 αλλ οτίε 
 
 207. There is a diple against this line in Ven. A with the note ὅτε παραλλήλως ἐξείνισα 
 καὶ ἐφίλησα" τὸ yap φιλεῖν ἐνίοτε ἀντὶ τοῦ ξενίζειν τίθησιν. 
 211. Ven. A has ἃ diple periestigmene opposite this line. 
 
 688. 8-1 X 4:8 cm. Prate VIL: 
 οἱ ὃ eTt Kap μεσοῖν [α]ιεν αποκτεινίων 
 as τε λεὼν εφοϊβὴσε πολλοι δὲ πρηΐνεις 
 
689. FRAGMENTS. OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 135 
 
 πάσας τὴ δε τ tn ανίαφαινεται [4τ]ρειδεω ὑπο [ 180 
 xi. 175 τῆς ὃ e€ avyxev eagle [αλλ] ore On ταῖχ 
 πρωτον ETELTA OLE [ι(ξε]σθαι tore [dy 
 
 ws tous Ατρειδίης [Idn]s ev [κορυφηισι 
 
 179-80. These two lines were athetized by Aristarchus and omitted by Zenodotus ; 
 Ludwich prints them in small type. 
 
 689. Hesiop, Scutum. 
 Fr. (4) 9-2 x 3:6 cm. 
 
 Three fragments from the top of a column, containing the concluding 
 fifteen lines of the Scutumof Hesiod. The text is written in round, rather heavy 
 uncials of medium size, which appear to date from about the end of the second 
 century. The occasional accents, &c., and the punctuation are probably due 
 to the original scribe, as well as the corrections in ll. 475 and 480. In the 
 collation we have made use of the edition of Rzach (1g02) ; a couple of other- 
 wise unrecorded variants occur. 
 
 ἰπποὺυς μαστιετὴν ikovto dle μακλίον Ολυμπον 
 [veos δ Adkpny|ns και κυ[δαλιμος 1Ιολ[αος 
 Κυκνον σκυλε])υσαν[τ]εῖς alr ὠμων [revjyea καλα 
 νισοντ αἰψα) ὃ επειτα πίολιν Τρηχιίνος t\kovto 
 470 [lmmots ὠκυπο]δεσσιν' aralp γ]λαυκωπίις] 4θηνη 
 
 [ 
 [ 
 [ 
 [e€cxer Ουλυμπον τε μεγία]ν καὶ dwplalra πατρος. 
 [Κυκνον ὃ av Κ]ηυξ θαπτεν [κ]αι λαος αἰπει]ρων 
 ἴοι p eyyus ναιοὶν πόλιας κλείήτου βασιλ[η)ος 
 
 [ 
 
 ἄνθην Μυρμιδονων τε ποίλι]ν κλειτη[»ν] 7 ΙΪαωλκον 
 
 t 
 475 [Apynv τ ηδ Ελ)ικην' πολλος [ὃ elre{ebyepiero Aalos 
 [τιμωντες Κηυκ]α φιλον μ[αἸκαρείσσι θεοισι)ν 
 [του δὲ ταφον και o]np ἀϊΐδεῖς ποιησεν Avav]pos 
 ίομβρωι χειμεριίωι πληθων [τως yap μιν Απ͵ολλων 
 
136 THE  ONVAAYNCHC.s PA Tai. 
 
 [Anrowdns ηνωξ ort pa κλειίτας εκατομβα)ὶς 
 
 > 
 
 t 
 480 [os tis ayou Πυθοιδε) Bin σὔλ[ασκε δοκευων 
 
 466. μακλον is for μακρον, a case of the common confusion of A and ρ. 
 
 473. πόλιας : πόλιος Rzach with E, πόληας other MSS.; the papyrus reading will at 
 least scan. 
 
 474-5. Rzach follows Goettling in regarding these two lines as a later addition. The 
 papyrus shows that they belong to an ancient tradition. επεγειρίετο in 1. 475 is a new 
 variant ; ἠγείρετο, ἐγείρετο or nyeiparo MSS. 
 
 480. Bin σύλασκε is the ordinary reading. ‘The scribe seems to have imagined that the 
 verb was vAacce; what he supposed the o meant or why he made a mark like a sign of 
 elision after the overwritten « we are unable to conjecture. There is a break in the papyrus 
 immediately below this line; the title of the book presumably followed as usual. 
 
 690, 691. ApotLonius Ruopius, Argonautica 777. 
 690 13x 5:2 cm., B91 3-3 Χ 3:3 cm. 
 
 We here group together a couple of fragments from the third book of the 
 Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius, but derived from two distinct MSS. The 
 larger fragment, 690, which is from the bottom of a column and comprises 
 ll. 727-45, is in a third century semi-uncial hand. A variety of lection signs 
 occur, of which the marks of elision are certainly due to the original scribe; 
 the breathings and accents have rather the appearance of being a later addition. 
 691, containing parts of ll. 908-14, is earlier in date, being written in rather 
 heavy, but not very regular, round uncials, which may be attributed to the 
 second century. The texts are remarkable for the confirmation of two con- 
 jectures, Porson’s ναυτίλοι for ναῦται appearing in 1. 745, and Stephanus’ 
 correction of μετά for κατά in 1. 909. Our references to the two chief codices, 
 the Laurentianus and the Guelferbytanus, are taken from the edition of 
 R. Merkel (1854). 
 
 690. 
 [Χαλκιοπὴ ws] ὕμί[μι 
 [ws ἐρξω μη ylap μίοι 
 
692. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 137 
 
 [nos pnde με] δηρῖον 691. 
 730 [εἰ ετι ons Ψψυΐχης πίροφερεστερον : : 
 [σων θ]ειην [ole dn μοι Ϊ εἸταρωῖν 
 [κη]δεμονες τε φιλοι kale δασομεσθα μίετα 
 [φημι κασιγνητὴην τε [ gio τωι ὃ avTe κακίωτερον 
 [σον] emet κεινοὶς με τίεω αἸπονοσῴφι πίελεσθε 
 735 [νη]πυτιην" ὡς aev [ magne ὃ επικλίοπος 
 [αλλ] ἴθι κευθε δ᾽ ἐμη[ν Αισονι)δίη]ν [ 
 [λησο͵μαι εντύνουσία : 
 
 738 [οιἰσϊομαι εἰς Exarns θίελκτηρια 
 [ 
 
 740 [ὡς] ἡ γ᾽ εκ θαλαμοιο Ϊ 
 
 5 
 
 [αυ]τοκασιγνητης Ϊ 
 [αιἰδίως τε στυγερον [τε 
 [τοια] παρεξ οὔ πὰτρίος 
 [νυξ] μεν emer επί. yaav 
 
 745 [ναυ]τίλοι εἰς "Ελίκην | 
 
 690. 730. εἰ ετι; the papyrus probably had the ordinary reading, which would quite 
 fill the lacuna; εἰ ye τι Merkel, εἰ κε re Wellauer. 
 
 733. κασιγνήτην: 50 L; 1. κασειγνητὴ with G, Merkel. 
 
 735. os: so L (és): ὡς G, Merkel. 
 
 738. The papyrus agrees with the other MSS. in omitting the line (739) cited in the 
 scholia of L οἰσομένη ξείνῳ ὑπὲρ οὗ τόδε νεῖκος ὄρωρε, With εἴσομαι for οἴσομαι in ]. 738. 
 
 745. ἱναυτίλοι : ναῦται MSS., ναυτίλοι Porson, which restores the metre and is adopted 
 by Merkel. ναῦται should disappear from future editions. 
 
 691. 909. μίετα: so Stephanus, a correction which has generally been accepted in 
 place of the MSS. reading κατά, 
 
 692. Apvottonius Ruopius, Argonautica LV, 
 11-5 Χ 8-7 cm. 
 
 Two fragments from the bottom of a column, containing parts of Il. 77-go 
 of Apollonius Rhodius’ Argonautica, Book iv. The handwriting, a neat upright 
 uncial, has a certain resemblance to that of the Thucydides papyrus (16, 696), 
 and is apparently a rather later specimen of the same type; we should assign 
 it to the second century. Occasional accents and stops (high usually, but 
 
138 THE OXYRHAYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 a middle point apparently occurs in |. 89) are used, and may be due, like the 
 insertion of an iota adscript in 1. go, to the original scribe. 
 
 Ae μεῖτα [τηνγε θοοις ἐλαασκον ερετμοις 
 [ovrm πε]ισματὰα vyos εἶπ ἠπείροιο mEpalns 
 [βαλλον οἹ δὲ κραιπνοὺυς [xepow ποδας ἧκεν Ιησων 
 80 [υἹψου em ικριόφιν' peta [δε Dpovtis τε και Apyos 
 [υ]ε dvw Φριξ[ου] χαμαδίις θορον ἡ ὃ apa τουσγε 
 [γουϊνων [αμφο]τερηίσι πὶερισχοΐμενη προσεειπεν 
 [ex] με φ[ιλοι ρυσασθε δυσαμμορον' ὡς [de Kat αὐτοὺς 
 [υμε]ας Α(ηταοὸ προ yap τ a ἰτετυκται 
 85 [wlavra par οὐδὲ τίι μηχΊ)ος ἱκανετίαι αλλ emt νῆηι 
 [φε]υγωμεν πριν τόν yl] θοων επιβίημεναι ἵππων 
 [Solow δὲ χρυσειον eyw δέρος ευνηΐσασα 
 [ppolvpov οφιν' tuvn δὲ θεοὺς [εν]. σοισίιν εταιροις 
 [ξειῖνε. τεων μυθων επι[Πστορας] ovis μοι υὑπεστης 
 
 t 
 
 90 [mo]noa μηδ ἔνθεν exlactep|w ορμ[ηθεισαν 
 
 80. er: so L; ἀπ᾽ G, Merkel. 
 
 86. τον yle|: τόνδε G (Merkel), τῶνδε L; the letter before the lacuna is certainly not 6. 
 
 go. The size of the lacuna makes it pretty certain that the papyrus had the right 
 reading ἑκαστέρῳ ; ἑκατέρῳ GL. ‘The iota adscript was probably added by the person who 
 put in the accents, but whether he is to be identified with the original scribe is doubtful. 
 
 698. SopHocies, /lectra. 
 8-6 x 3-6 cm. 
 
 A narrow strip from the top of a column, containing ll. 993-1007 of 
 Sophocles’ Electra. The MS., which is a good specimen of the oval type 
 of uncials, was probably written in the first half of the third century. The 
 correction in 1. 1002 and the occasional lection signs, with the exception of the 
 mark of elision in 1. 993, are probably all by the original scribe. A rare variant 
 occurs in 1. 995. Our collation is derived from the Jahn-Michaelis -edition 
 of 1882. 
 
694. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 139 
 
 [ετυγχ αν αὐτὴ μὴ [κακων εἐσωζετ αν 
 την εἸυλαβειαν [ωσπερ ουχι σωζεται 
 
 995 [mol] yap ποτε βλείψασα τοιουτον θρασος 
 [αὐτὴ 60] οπλιζη Kale υπηρετειν καλεις 
 [ουκ εἸισορας" γυνὴ [μεν ovd avnp εφυς 
 σθε͵νεις ὃ ἐλασσον [των evavTiov χέρι 
 
 [ 
 [δαιμίων de τοῖς plev ευτυχης καθ ἡμεραν 
 1000 [ἡμι]ν ὃ ἀπορρεῖ κίαπι μηδεν ερχεται 
 
 [ 
 
 τις οἱυν τοίουτον αἰνδρα βουλευων ελειν 
 
 $ 
 [αλυπο atns εξαπαϊλλαχθησεται 
 opa κ]ακως πρασσοῖντε μὴ μειζω Kaka 
 κτησ)ωμεθ᾽ εἰ τις τοϊυσὃ ἀκουσεται Aoyous 
 
 βαξιν] Kadnv λίαβοντε δυσκλεως θανειν 
 
 [ 
 
 [ 
 
 1005 ἰλυει ylap ἡμὰς οἴυδεν ovd ἐπωφελει 
 
 [ 
 [ov yap θ]αΐν]ειν [ἐεχθιστον 
 
 995. more βλείψασα: so the Cod. Monacensis (Herwerden, Anal. Cri. p. 12): ποτ᾽ 
 ἐμβλέψασα L, &c. and vulg. 
 
 996. οπλιζη : so all the chief MSS. (ὁπλίζηιν); ὁπλίζει editors. 
 
 998. ἐλασσον : so Brunck and vulg.; ἔλαττον MSS. 
 
 1002. Perhaps αλλ ὑπὸ was originally written. 
 
 694. Tueocritus, /dyl .Χ 777. 
 14:2 8-4 cm. 
 
 A small fragment from the thirteenth /dy/ of Theocritus, written in a good- 
 sized upright round uncial hand of the second century, probably the earlier 
 half of it. Numerous stops (high point), breathings, accents, &c. occur, all of 
 which, as well as a few corrections or variants inserted above the line, seem to 
 be due to the first hand. The text has a new variant in 1]. 34, and an error in 
 I, 30, but elsewhere agrees with the MSS. Our collation is with the edition 
 of Ziegler. 
 
140 ld EE ΟΧΥΚΗΥΝΟΠ ΒΒ (RAR YI 
 
 ἵκετο K® Tadaeplyos 
 20 Adkpnvas vios | 
 
 [1 
 συν δ᾽ αἰυΐτω κατεβῖαινεν 
 
 ατις κυανεᾶν οὐχ 
 
 é 
 ara Oije~aéioe βαίθυν 
 αἰετο[ς] ols] μέγα AGliTpa 
 
 “7° 
 25 a@pos ὃ αντελλονΐίτι 
 ἄρνα νέον βοσκοῖντι 
 τία]μος ναυτιλι[α}}}}ς [ 
 ἡρώων: κοζιλ]αν δε Ϊ 
 Ἐλί[λ]άσποντον ἵκοῖντο 
 30 εἰσω ὃ ὅρμον ἵκοντο 
 avrakas ευρύνοντίι 
 εκβαντες ὃ emt θεῖϊνα 
 [Gecle[A}ivo[c]’ πολλοι δῖε 
 [λειμΊων [σ]φ[ι]ν παίρεκειτο 
 19. Ko: xo MSS. 
 20. Αλκμηνας : so most MSS. ᾿Αλκμήνης Ziegler) following the Ambrosianus. 
 21. Against this line are two dashes, of which the meaning, if any, is obscure. 
 22-4 were rejected by Ahrens. In]. 23 S[eleEaewe is corr. to δ[ ι)]εξαϊξε. 
 25. It is not certain what was written above the initial a. ‘The supposed 7 between 
 two points (i.e. nuos for aos) is possibly an accent and breathing. 
 
 30. txor[ro: ἔθεντο MSS., Z. ἵκοντο is a repetition from the previous line. 
 34. [σἸφ[ ἣν παΐρεκειτο ; γάρ σφιν ἔκειτο MSS., Ζ, 
 
 695. Ηξκοροτυ V. 
 24:3X 7:6 cm, 
 
 Part of chapters 104—5 of Herodotus, Book V, written in a good-sized third 
 century uncial hand of the broad oval type. Two corrections and a breathing 
 have been inserted by a second hand. The text offers no variants from that 
 of Stein. On the verso, in a late third or early fourth century cursive hand, 
 is part of a list of names of persons, with sometimes a statement of the villages 
 to which they belonged, e.g... . ἀπὸ Θώλθ(εως), Ψεναμοῦν(ι5) ἀπὸ Tadao, 
 
CUP aAGUEN ES OPGEXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 141 
 
 [ras Kujmpiou[s συναπι va γενεσθαι της συΐλλο 
 στασθαι τους μεν On [ar 15 [yn|s wore TavTa συΐνυ 
 λους averrerce Apa Gov φανθηναι tov Μιλίησι 
 σιους de ov βουλ[ο]μείνους ον Apiotalylopny πίρωτα 
 5 [{ε]]σἱ πειθεσθαι ἐπολ[ιορ μεν] Alelyerae [αἸυτον [ws 
 KEE προσκατημεῖἾος επυθετ[ο] ταυτα ἴωνίων 
 Ονησιλος μεν νὺν εἶπο 20 ovdeva λοίγ]ον ποιησζα 
 λιορκεε Apabovyt[a μενον ev εἰδοτα ως ov 
 
 βασιλει de Δαρει[ω)] ὦ 
 
 το εἰξα]γγ[εἸ]λ[ θ]η [Σ᾿ apo i a 
 
 [T]oe ye ov al] Jam potg{or 
 [ 
 λίωσας εἸμπεπρησθαζι [ 
 | 
 
 ται] amooravTes εἰρε 
 σθ]α[] οἰτινες εἰεν οἱ A [ 
 
 um[o τε] AO[n|vatwy [και an 
 
 4 θην])αιοῖι pera] de [πυθο 
 I[olvor τὸν de nyeplo 
 
 22. The second a of xara has been corrected from o; i.e. the first hand wrote 
 OUK arom potéovrat, which was altered to ov καταπροιξονται. 
 23. Final ς of ἀποσταντες was put in (by the first hand) later. 
 
 696. Tuucypipes IV. 
 Fr. (c) 15 X19 cm. 
 
 In view of the peculiar excellence of the Oxyrhynchus Thucydides papyrus 
 originally published in the Egypt Exploration Fund’s Archaeological Report 
 for 1896-7, and reprinted as P. Oxy. 16, the discovery of some more frag- 
 ments of the same MS. was a welcome surprise. The new pieces comprise 
 portions of six more columns, covering, with considerable lacunae, chapters 
 28 to 35 of the fourth book; and at the same time supply some of the missing 
 beginnings of lines in the first column of the fragment originally found, which 
 succeeded immediately. 
 
 The present part of the MS. possesses the same features which distinguished 
 that published previously, and readers are referred to the description given in 
 P. Oxy. I. p. 40. We see no reason for altering the date (first century A.D.) 
 there proposed for the papyrus. We are, however, inclined to doubt whether 
 the final v which has been inserted occasionally in the text is after all by a hand 
 different from that to which the other numerous corrections and variae lectiones 
 
142 ΤΗΕ OXYRAYNCHOS PAPYRI 
 
 are apparently due, and which is not to be distinguished from that of the original 
 
 scribe. 
 As before, the papyrus shows a number of small differences from the 
 
 ordinary text, the most noteworthy being those in Il. 4, 13, 16, 38, 62-3 and 87. 
 Our collation is with the text of Hude. 
 
 Fr. (a) GOP it 20. δὲ Col. ti οι ἢ 
 
 ἀμαρτημίατα woTe προσπει 
 
 πτειν aly avrous ἀπροσδοκη 
 
 ot 
 5 T:@:s ἡ BovdlowTo em εκει 
 
 κ]αι vols yap εἰνίαι αν τὴν επίιχει 
 [IuBpiovs τους παροντας Kat] mer [ρη]σιν | 
 1 column lost. 
 
 Fr. (ὁ) Col, iva: Sane. 
 
 π]ρωτους 15 [apa de εωι γιγνοίμενηι καὶ o 
 [φυλακας ols emedpaluov evOus [αλλος στρατος] απεβαινεν 
 10 [διαφθειρουσιν εν τε] Tals εὐναῖς ετῖϊ [ex μεν νεων εἸβδομηκοντα 
 
 [αναλαμβανοντ]ας -eTl. Ta οπλα [και ολιγωι πλειΐονων παν 
 [και λαθοντες T]nv αποβασιν οι [τες πλην θαλαμιῆΐων ws εκα 
 one ary eae ΤΕΣ 20 [στοι εσκευασμεῖνοι τοξοται 
 
 [ 
 
 δὲ οκτακοσιοι Kat πελτασται 
 θος ες εφορμον rns] νυκτὸς πλειν 
 
 Fr, (ὁ) Col hv son. de Cally wih e453: 
 ; : : [εσ]τίω)τος και οὐκ εχίοντε)ς eX 
 χωρησΊ]ειαν οἱ πίολ]ε mia καθ οτι χ[ρ]η αἰ[μυνομε 
 [μιοι ἐσεσθαι ψειλοῖι καὶ οἱ απὸ vous σωθηναι τελ[ος] de τραν 
 [ρωτατοι] τοξ[ευμα͵σι Kat a ματιζομενων nin mod 
 25 [κο]ντιοῖ 5] Kat AcOfolis Kar σφεν ἘΠ 
 
 εἰ 
 [Soars εκ] πολλοῦ [εἴχοντες αλ 69 λων δια TO εν τῶι AUTML ava 
 
696. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 
 
 30 
 
 35 
 
 40 
 
 45 
 
 50 
 
 55 
 
 [kn|y ois] μηδὲ ἐπελθεῖν οἱον 
 
 [r nv] ᾧφευγονἶτες] τε yap ε 
 [κρατουν] καίι avayw'pova.” επε 
 
 Col. vi. 
 
 χωρίων τε 1] 
 [πο͵τητίι καὶ] vio τηΐς πριν ε 
 
 33. 2. 
 
 [ρηἱμιας τραχεὼν [οντων ev 
 [or]s οἱ Aaxedatpovior [οἹυΐκ εδὴυ 
 ναντο] διωκειν οπλα exo 
 
 [τες Χροῖνον μεν ουὔἷν τ]ινα 
 [ολιγον οὕτω προς αλληλους 
 [ηκρο]βολισαντὸο τῶν δε 
 [Aakledatpoviwy οὐκετι 0 
 [ews] ἐπέχειν ne προσπειπτοι 
 
 : 
 ev duv|vapevov γίνο)ντες αὖ 
 
 τους oft] ψειλοι βρ[α]δυΐτερους dn ἢ 
 
 ᾶ 
 ovTas τωι ἀμυνεσθαίι και 
 Gt 
 auToL τηι TE οψει T-0V- θαρρίει)ν 
 
 To πίλ]ειστον εἰληφ[οἾτες πολ 
 λαπλασίιοι φαινομενοῖ Kat 
 
 CI 
 ξυν.εἰςθισμενοι μαλλον μὴ 
 
 KeTt δεινους αὐτοὺς ομοιως 
 σφισι" φαινεσθῖαι) οτίι] οὐκ εὐθὺς 
 αξια τῆς πρί[ο]σ' δἸοκιας εἾπε 
 ἰπονθεσαν walrep οτε πρίω 
 
 [τον απεβαινον) rye γ[ν)ωμηι 
 [δεδουλωμενοι] ὡς επί(] Aaxe 
 [δαιμονιους] καταφρονη 
 
 [σαντες και εμ]βοηϊσαϊντεῖς 
 [αθροοι ὡρμησαν elm αὑυτουΐς 
 
 [και εβαλλον λιήθο[ις 
 
 - 
 
 στρεφεσθαι συγκλησαντες 
 
 ἀνεχωρησαν ες TO εσχατον ερυ 
 
 / 
 
 μα TNS vnoov ov πολυ amrexov 
 
 Και TOUS εαυτῶν φυλακας ως 
 
 65. 
 
 δὲ evedocav evtav0a δὴ πολ 
 
 ὅλωι eTt πλείονι Bont τεθαρ 
 
 pnkoTes οἱ Ψειλοι επεκειντο. 
 
 70 
 
 75 
 
 και Tov Λακεδαιμονίων 
 
 οσοι μεν ὑποχώρουντες εν 
 κατ[ελαμβανοντο ἀπεθνη 
 
 σκον oft δὲ πολΊλοι διαφευγον 
 Τες m[pos] To ερίυἱμα μετα τῶν 
 ταυτίηι] φυλακων εταξαν 
 
 To παρία πα)ν ὡς αμυνουμε 
 (vole [ηιπ]ερ nv επιμαχον [ 
 [οἱ ὃ Α4θη]ναιοι επισποίμενοι 
 πε]ρίιοδον μὴεν αὐτωΐν Kat 
 κυκλίωσιν χωρ͵]ιου ἰἰσχυι 
 
 80 
 
 85 
 
 οὐκ εἰχον προσιοΐντες 
 δέ εξ evavtias ὡσασθϊαι επει 
 [ρωνἾτο “καὶ χρίονον μεν 
 
 [πολυν Kat της ἡμερᾶας TO πλει) 
 
 ἰ 
 
 ίτεροι vio] τε της μαχῆς Και 
 [δίψης Kat] η[λιο]ν ἀντί ειχίον 
 [πειρωμενοὴι oft μεν 
 
 στον ταλαι]π[ω]ρ[ουμε͵νοι ἀμί po 
 
 143 
 
144 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 Cole νη (16. Col aii 36,21 
 
 2 lines lost. % Alor 
 y[t]|oe of toll 
 ονἶτες 
 
 ν]οι 
 πως [ 
 
 go εξαπινης 
 
 [ 
 ἽἹ a 
 
 ξ!υμπτωματι 
 
 μ|εγαλαίι] 
 100 μ[οπυλαῖις 
 
 τίηι 
 τίων 
 
 οι 
 
 4. απροσδοκητως : for the variant απροσδοκητοις, which is not otherwise recorded, cf. 
 6. 5. li. 93. 4 ἀπροσδοκήτοις ἐπιπεσόντες. It may be doubted whether αὐτούς was retained with 
 this reading or was replaced by αὑτοῖς. 
 
 5. n: the omission of iota adscript is unusual in this papyrus. 
 
 6. ela ay: this is the order of CEGMf,; ἂν εἶναι ABF. 
 
 IO-I. ava\auBavovras ert was the original order, but ers was subsequently inserted 
 at the end of ]. 10 and cancelled in ]. 11, ἔτι ἀναλαμβάνοντας is the reading of all MSS. 
 Hude prints κἀναλαμβάνοντας, a modification of Abresch’s conjecture καὶ ἀναλαμβ. 
 
 12. It is unfortunate that the beginning of this line is lost since editors have suspected 
 a corruption in λαθόντες τὴν ἀπόβασι. ‘The ordinary reading suits the size of the lacuna 
 well enough. 
 
 13. ras vavs, which is added above the line, is found in all MSS. It is not absolutely 
 essential, and may be an explanatory adscript which has become incorporated into 
 the text. 
 
 ειωῖθος : ἔθος MSS. The new variant is supported by other examples in Thucydides 
 of κατὰ or παρὰ τὸ εἰωθός, 6. g. in this book 17. 2, 55. 2, 67. 4. 
 
 14. θος es εφορμον της] is rather long for the lacuna, and possibly rns was omitted. 
 
 16. απεβαινεν : ἐπέβαινον, the reading of the MSS., has been commonly changed by 
 editors to ἀπέβαινον, an alteration which is now sanctioned by the papyrus. The singular 
 απεβαινεν May also well be right. 
 
 22. Eleven lines are lost at the top of this column. 
 
 23. Ψειλο]ι καὶ ov: so the MSS. The papyrus gives no support to the suggested 
 emendations (ψιλοὶ καὶ οἷοι Cobet, of ψιλοὶ καί Madvig). 
 
 28. εἶκρατουν)]: there would not be room for Hude’s conjecture ἐκρατοῦντο. 
 
 29. Similar insertions of v ἐφελκυστικόν occur in |, 47, 16. ii, 9, &c. 
 
 30. The original omission of χωριων re may have been caused by the homoioarchon 
 of χαλεπότητι, but it is noticeable that the words have not been supplied in quite their right - 
 position. 
 
 35. The addition of the s of ovres is parallel to the insertions of final v; cf. note 
 on |, 29. οὕτω MSS. Hude. 
 
 38. ἐπέχειν : ἐπεκθεῖν MSS. emexew here might be supported by such a use as τὰς 
 
696. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 145 
 
 ἐπὶ σφίσι vais ἐπεχούσας (Vili. 105. 3), but it may be a mere graphical error; ewexOew would 
 be more likely to become ἐπέχειν than vice versa. The has been rewritten. 
 
 41. The superscribed reading, αμυνασθαι, is that of the MSS., but ἀμυνεσθαι is far 
 preferable. It is noticeable that the interlinear a has a stroke above it instead of, as 
 usual, the letter which was to be replaced. 
 
 42-3. The MSS. reading in this passage is τοῦ θαρσεῖν τὸ πλεῖστον, Dobree’s 
 conjecture πιστόν for πλεῖστον having been generally adopted by subsequent editors. 
 It is nearly certain that the papyrus agreed with the MSS. in having πλειστον, for though 
 there is a hole at the crucial point, the distance between the letters πὶ and ε strongly 
 suggests that another letter had intervened. There is no trace of any correction, It 
 may then be assumed with little chance of error that the tradition of rod θαρρεῖν or θαρσεῖν 
 τὸ πλεῖστον goes back at least to the first century a.p.; and this reading is no doubt 
 intelligible, if not very satisfactory. ‘The interlinear variant tae @appew, so far from helping 
 matters, only creates fresh difficulties, and seems indeed quite impossible. It may be 
 noted that the top of the υ of του has been rewritten (by the first hand), but no importance 
 should be attached to this circumstance; the same thing has been done again in the case 
 of υ of πολυ in I. 63. 
 
 45. The written above εἰ of ξυνειθισμενοι has been again cancelled. 
 
 475 adios MSS.; H.; cf. |. 20. 
 
 59. The blank space at the end of this line has been filled up by two angular marks ; 
 elsewhere one only is usually employed for this purpose. 
 
 60. διὰ τὸ αἰεί is the MSS. reading. The o of ro has been corrected from ε (?). 
 
 61. συγκλησαντες : elsewhere in the papyrus ξυν is written. 
 
 62. aveywpynoay: the first syllable was added afterwards, most probably by the first 
 hand; ἐχώρησαν MSS. 
 
 63. ov πολυ amexov: ὃ ov πολὺ ἀπεῖχε MSS. 
 
 65. For the insertion of an elided ε in de cf. 1. 80, and 16. iii. 8; δέ MSS. 
 
 8n: ἤδη MSS. 
 
 66. The alternative spelling πλεονι is that of the MSS. 
 
 τεθαρρηκοτες: SO ABFG; τεθαρσηκότες H. with the other MSS. 
 
 71. διαφευγοντες : 1. διαφυγόντες, with the MSS. 
 
 72. πίρος]: ἐς MSS. The π is quite certain. 
 
 76. [οι ὃ A@nlvaor: καὶ of ’AO MSS. It is just possible, though unlikely, that the 
 papyrus had xa at the end of the previous line; there is not room in 1. 76 for kas 
 before οι. 
 
 80. For the inserted ε cf. 1. 65, note. 
 
 86. [metpwpevol scarcely fills the lacuna, in which three or four more letters would be 
 expected. 
 
 87-102. The papyrus here supplies some of the letters missing at the beginnings 
 of lines at the top of the first column of 16. The vertical strokes in the text show the 
 line of fracture. 
 
 847-8. morevovtes: πιστεύσαντες MSS. The reading of the papyrus may be right. 
 
146 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 697. ΧΈΝΟΡΗΟΝ, Cyropaedia 7. 
 24:4 X 12:5 cm. 
 
 A leaf from a codex of Xenophon’s Cyropaedia, containing most of i. 6. 
 3-11, and a small piece of another leaf containing a few letters from ii. 1. 30, 
 written in a neat uncial hand which is probably not much later than A. D. 200. 
 Several corrections or variants have been added above the line, chiefly by 
 a second and more cursive hand. The numerous stops (high, middle and low 
 point) are for the most part due to the original scribe. 
 
 The condition in which the text of the Cyropaedia still remains after 
 centuries of use as a schoolbook is deplorable. Dindorf’s Oxford edition, which 
 alone gives a serious critical apparatus, omits several of the most important 
 MSS., and the accuracy of the collations is not to be depended on. Hug’s 
 Teubner edition is mainly based on C,a Paris MS., which is one of the best, 
 but since Hug’s apparatus is not sufficiently detailed for his silence about the 
 readings of C to be a trustworthy argument, we are unable to infer what they 
 are except where he actually records them. Mr. E. C. Marchant, however, 
 whose forthcoming edition of the Cyropaedia may be expected to reduce the 
 existing chaos to order, has very kindly placed at our disposal for the passage 
 covered by the papyrus his unpublished collations of two of the chief MSS., 
 the Bodleianus (Bib. Canon. 39, which in the Axadasis is generally called D, 
 though different from Dindorf’s D), and the Etonensis, which is closely 
 related ἰο (Ὁ. 
 
 The MSS. of the Cyropaedia divide into two main families; one group 
 consists of AG, which are the basis of Dindorf’s edition, C, which in the early 
 part of the Cyropaedia supports AG and is the basis of Hug’s edition, and the 
 
 Etonensis (Et.) ; while the other group consists of Dindorf’s D and the Bod-’ 
 
 leianus (Bod.), and is supported through a large portion of the passage covered 
 by the papyrus by Stobaeus. The character of Dindorf’s R and the relation 
 of it to the two main groups is uncertain. The papyrus on the whole supports 
 the group represented by D, Bod. and Stobaeus, with which its readings agree 
 against the AGC, Et., group about twice as often as vice versa, and adds a 
 number of variants peculiar to itself’ Though not of equal importance to that 
 of the Oxyrhynchus fragment of the Axadasis (468), the text of which seems 
 to represent the archetype from which the existing MSS. of that work are 
 descended in two main traditions, the papyrus is of considerable interest. 
 
 Our collation is with the edition of Dindorf, supplemented occasionally by 
 that of Hug. But the only MSS. of which the accurate collation is guaranteed 
 
697. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 147 
 
 are the two for information about which we are indebted to Mr. Marchant. 
 Fortunately these are typical and important representatives of the two main 
 groups. 
 
 Verso. 
 
 ιξ 
 yap efn ακουσας ποτε σοὺ o7t etkoTws αν Kalt] mapa Oe I. 6. $3 
 
 ὧν πρακτικωτερος εἰη. ὠσπερ καὶ Tap ανθραϊπΊων. οστις 
 μὴ οἶπ]οτε εν ἀποροις ein. τοτε κολακεύυοι" αλλ [ο᾽τε αριστα 
 
 πραττίοι] τοτε μαλιστα τῶν θεων μεμνΐ οἰἧτο' [κα]. τῶν ge 
 5 λων ὃ εφησθα χρηναι woavtws επιμελεισθα[ι] ovKovy vu δ 4 
 
 epn ὦ malt] δι εκεινας τας επιμελειὰς ηδειον μὲν ερχή 
 πίρ]ος τους θεους δεησομενος ελπίζεις δὲ μίαϊλλον τευξε 
 σθαι wy εαν den ore συνείδεναι σαυτωι δοκειῖς ov] πώποτε 
 
 ἀμελησας αὐτων' tmavu μεν οὐν edn ὦ πατίε]ρ ws προς 
 
 ειϑ 
 10 gtAous μοι τοὺς θεους οντας ovTw διακειμία)ι [lw]; τι yap ε §5 
 
 on ὦ παι εκεινα μεμνησαι a ποτε εδοκει ηἡμ[ιν)]" οποσὰ yap 
 δηπου δεδωκασιν ot θεῖοι] μαθοντας ανθρωϊπ]ους βελτει 
 [oly πραττειν. ἡ ανεπιστημονας αὐτῶν οντίας)]- καὶ epyago 
 μενους μαλλον ανύτειν ἡ ἀργουντας καὶ εἰπιμελομε 
 
 15 ν[ο]υς ασφαλεστεΐριον αν diayery ἡ αφυλακτοίυ)ντας τουτῶ. 
 [π]α[ρίεχοντας αὑτοὺς οἰους det. ovTws nui εδοίκ)ει dev Kat 
 [αιτ]ε]σθαι τὰ ayaba παρὰ Tov θεων" var pa At [dln o Kupos § 6 
 
 cov oy 
 
 μεμνημαι μεντοι ἴσου]! τίαυ]τα axovoas και ap αἰνα͵γκη nv 
 πίειίθεσθαι τωι λογωι TovTw καὶ οἱδα σε επιτιθεντα αὖ 
 
 20 τίωι] ὡς οὐδὲ θεμις ein αἰτεισθαι παρα τῶν θεων οὔτε 
 im[mjevery pin μαθοντας ἱππομαχουντας νικαν" οὔτε 
 μίη εἸπισταμενοὺυς τοξευειν τοξευοντας Κρατεὶν τῶν ε 
 [πιστ]αμενων τοξεύειν" οὐτε μη επισταμ[είνους κυβερ 
 
 να[ν] σωζειν εὐχίε]σθαι vavy κυβερνωντας" [οἷυτε μη σπει 
 σιτον 
 25. [ρον]τα[ς] ye σιτον [εἸυχεσθαι καλον avros φυεσθαι' οὐτε μὴ 
 
 φί[υλα]τ τ]ομενουϊ9] ye εν πολεμωι σωτηριαν αἰτεισθαι" πα 
 pla yap] τους τωῖν θεων θε]σμους ταυτα και Ta τοιαυτὰ πᾶ 
 
 i 2 
 
148 THE - OXVYRAYNCAUSE EARLS 
 
 τία εἰναι] τουΐς dle [αἸθεμιστα evyopevous. ομο[ιως εφησθα 
 etkols εἶναι mapa θεων ατυχειν. womep καὶ Tap ανθρωπῶ 
 
 : 
 L 
 30 [απρ]ακίτ]ειν τους παρανομα δεομένους" εκεινων δὲ ε 
 [gn] ὦ παι ἐπελαθου a ποτε eyo καὶ σὺ ελογ[ἠζομεθα. ὡς 
 [ 
 
 ikalvolv] av en καὶ Kadov ανδὴρι ερίγ)]ον εἰ τις δυναιτὸ επιμε 
 
 λη]θηίναι omjws avros καλοῖς] τε καγαθος δοκ[μως γενοιτ[ο] 
 kat] Ta εἶπιτη]δεια [οἸπὼως αὐτίο]ς τε καὶ οἱ οἰκεται ἰκΚανως 
 
 35 
 
 anavTa Ta επιτηδ]εια εκ[πλ]εω καὶ omws εἰσοῖνται αἷπαν 
 τες οἰους δεῖ τουτ]ο θαυμ[ασΊτον δίηπου) neler] Tore [ε 
 φαινετο ναι pa Alt edn [w π͵ατεῖρ μεμνημαι] Kale Tov 
 
 | 
 [σθαι ανθρωπΊωϊν αἸλλωΐν π]ροσ[τ]ατευΐε)ιν ofmrjws εξουσίιν 
 [ 
 [ 
 ἱ 
 [ro σου λεγοντος σ᾽)υνεδίοκ]ει Kale εμϑι υπερμε]γεῖθες εἰ 
 
 40 
 [ναι epyov το καλως αρίχει[ν κα]. νυΐν y εφη ταυτα] plo. do 
 [κει οταν προς αὐἾτο to [αρχ͵]ειν [σκοπων λογιζω)μίαι o 
 [ταν μεντοι προς αλ͵]λουϊς ανθρωπους ἰδων κατανο 
 [now οιοι τε οντες δι]αγιίγνονται ἀρχοντες καὶ οἱοι οντες 
 
 45 [ανταγωνισται nu εἴσονται πανυ μοι δοκει αἰσχρον εἰ 
 ] οντας 
 [ναι τοιουτους υποπΊτηξαι 
 
 14 lines lost 
 
 Recto. 
 ty 
 
 61 epxn τοις παρα Κυαξαρε  χρημασιν' eywye εφη ὁ Kupos: 
 
 οἰσθα de εφὴηὴ οποσα αὑτῶι εστιν. μα tov At edn o Kupos: 
 ομως δε 
 ov pev On ομως δη" τουτοις πίστευεις τοις ἀδηλοις" οτι 
 
 δὲ πολλων μὲν ov δεησει πολλα δὲ Kat αλλα vuv ἀναγ 
 65 κηι δαπαναν avrov γινώσκεις γινώσκω edn o Kupos: 
 
 K 
 εαν ovy edn avtov επιλιπη ἡ δαπανη και εἴ ξΐων yevdy 
 Tal mos σοι εξει Ta της στρατιὰς δηλον οτι οὐ καλως" 
 
 aTap «pn ὦ πατερ σὺ εἰ ενοραῖς τινα πορον Καὶ am εμοῦ 
 
 exoley To δε) τουΐϊτοὴν μεγ[αλ]ου ερ[γο]ν ουΐτ]ως [ο]ντος υφ[ιΠστία 
 
 $7 
 
 § 8 
 
 §9 
 
697. 
 
 γε vo 
 αν προσ γιγνοΐμενον ews eve ev φιλιαι ἐσμεν λεγε ε 
 
 0 
 
 75 
 
 80 
 
 85 
 
 go 
 
 95 
 
 potas edn ὦ mat τοῦτο et τις [aly amo σοῦ πορος προσγε 
 volTo* amo τινος δὲ μαλλον [et]kos mopov γενεσθαι ἡ a 
 mo] του δυναμιν exovt[os|; σὺ δὲ πεζην μεν δυναμιν ε 
 χων ενθενδε ε[ρχ]η. ανθ ns od οτι πολλαπλασιαν αλλῆ 
 οὐκ av δεξαιο' [|ππικον δὲ σοι οπερ κρατιστον [το] Μηδῶ 
 συμμαχον εσται: ποῖον ovy εθνος τῶν περιξ ov δοκεις Kat 
 χαριζεσθαι βουλομενον υὑμιν υπ[ηἹρετησειν. και φοβου 
 μενον μὴ τι παθὴ a χρὴ σε συν Κυαξαρει κοίνηι σκοπει 
 
 τι 
 σθαι μηποτ επιλιπη {{τ|} ὑμας wy dec ὑπαρχειν: καὶ εθους 
 
 eveKa μί[ηχανωμενον προσόδου πορον" το[ζδὴε δὲ παν 
 
 [των μαλιστὰα μοι μεμνησο μηδεποτε avapevev To] 
 ποριζεσίθα)ι τα επιτη[δε]ια [εἐσ]τ αν ἡ χρεία σε alvayKaon αλλ 
 οταν μαλιστὰ evTopns Τοτε προ Τῆς απορίας μίαλλον μὴ 
 χάνω καὶ yap τεύξει μαλλον map ὧν ἂν den μὴ αἴπορειν 
 δοκων' καὶ avaitios oe] mlalpa τοις [σ]εαυτου στρίατιωταις 
 εκ τουτου δὲ μαλλον [k]a[t] ὑπο αλλω[ν] αἰιδους τευξη καὶ ἣν 
 τινας βουλὴ εὖ ποιησαΐι Tye δυναμεῖι ἡ KaKws μαλλον 
 
 ews av exns Ta δεοντὰα οἱ στρατιωται υὑπηρετησουσι σοι 
 
 kat πιστικωτατους δὲ λογους cad ισθι τοτε δυνησει rE 
 
 γειν. oTavmep και ενδεικνυσῖθαι μαἸλιστα δίυνη mole ι 
 Kavos ὧν Kat ev Kat καΐκως αλλ] edn ὦ πία͵τερ αἰλίλωϊς τε 
 
 α 
 μοι δοκεις TavTa παντα καλως λεγειν Και OTL [ων] [μεν 
 
 νυν λημψονται οἱ στρατίιωται ουἱ δΊει[ς αὐτῶν εμοι χαριν 
 εἰσεται' ἰσᾶσι yap ed ols avrovs Kvagapns αγίεται συμμαχοὺυς 
 
 u 
 οτι ὃ αν προς τοῖς εἰρη[μ]εν[ο]ις λαμβανὴ τίις TavTa καὶ TL 
 μηΐν ν]ομ[ιο]υϊσι] Kale χαριν τουτὼων εἰκὸς eldevat Tw διδὸν 
 Tu τὸ δ᾽ εἐχοντὰ δυΐναμιν ni ἐστὶ μὲν φιλοὺυς ev ποιουντὰς αντ' 
 
 [ω]φ[ ελ]ε[σθα[ι] ἐστι δῖε exOpous exlovra [πε]ιρίασθαι τισασθαι ε 
 7ιν 
 [π]ειτα ἀμελεῖιν] τίοἱν πορίζεσθαι οιει τι [εφη ηττον τι τοῦτο at 
 
 [σχρον εἰναι ἡ εἰ τις ἐχὼν [μεν αἸγροίΐυς exov δὲ epyaras 
 
 FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 
 
 149 
 
 § 10 
 
 § II 
 
150 THEVONTRAYNGHU S EAT RI 
 
 100 [ols av epyagoito ἐπεῖῖτᾳ [ewn Oln τηῖν γην apyovoay ava 
 
 [peAnTov evar ws y ἐμοῦ efn μηδέποτε ἀμελησοντος Tov] 
 [τα επιτηδεια Tors στρ)]ατιιω͵ταιῖῖς συμμηχανασθαι 
 [ 
 
 Jou 
 
 105 ]-[ 
 
 ολον Kat ταξιν foAnv εκαλει δὲ Kal ετιμα οποτε τινας dor II. 1. ὃ 30 
 
 109 Και TovTo | 
 
 1. ἐφη so AGR, Et., Dind.; om. D, Bod., Stob. Flor. 48. 68. 
 
 θεων : so AG (first hand) R, Dind.; τῶν θεῶν DG (corr.), Bod., Et., Stob. 
 
 2. πρακτικωτέρος : SO ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind, πραγματικώτερος Ἐπ 
 
 3. κολακευοι : SO ADG, Bod., Et., Dind.; κολακεύειν R first hand. 
 
 αριστα: τὰ ἄριστα CDGR, Bod., Et., Dind.; ἄριστα A, Stob.. 
 
 4. μεμνῶτο: so AG (first hand, with ἢ above the line in a later hand), Et., Dind.; 
 μέμνῃτο L; μεμνοῖτο corrected by the first hand to μεμνῆτο Bod.; μεμνοίῳτο D; μέμνηται 
 Stob. : 
 5. ὠὡσαυτως: SO DR, Bod.; ὡσαύτως οὕτως AG (with dots over οὕτως), Et., Stob., Dind. 
 επιμελεισθα[ι] : so Μ,95. ; ἐπιμέλεσθαι Dind. 
 
 6. δι: so 1), Bod., Stob.; διά γ᾽ AG, Dind.; διά Et. 
 
 epxn: SO MSS.; ἔρχει Dind. 
 
 7. θεους δεησομενος: so ADG (first hand) R, Et., Dind.; θεοὺς ὄντας οὕτω διακειμένους 
 G marg. in later hand, and with οὕτως Bod. which adds ἐλπίζεις δὲ οὐ πώποτ᾽, 
 
 τευξεσθαι : 50 AGR, Bod., Et., Dind.; τεύξασθαι 1). 
 
 8. eav: so ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; a Et. 
 
 συνειδεναι σαυτωι : SO MSS., Dind.; ξυνειδέναι ἑαυτῷ Stob. 
 
 9. προς φίλους, the original reading of the papyrus, agrees with AGR, Et., Dind. ; 
 προσφιλεις, the correction, with D, Bod., Stob. 
 
 10. τοὺς θεους ovras: 50 D, Bod., Stob. ; ὄντας τοὺς θεοὺς AGR, Et., Dind. 
 
 11. ὦ παι: 580 DR, Bod., Stob.; ὁ πατήρ AG, Dind.; ὦ παῖ ὁ πατήρ C, Et., which has 
 6 above ὦ. 
 
 εκεινα μεμνησαι : SO D, Bod.; μέμνησαι ἐκεῖνα AGR, Et., Stob., Dind. 
 
 ὁπόσα yap δηπου: so Bod., Stob.; ὁπόσαπερ δήπου 1), with dots over πὸ by a later 
 hand; ὡς ὅπερ R; ὡς ἅπερ AG, Et., Dind. 
 
 12. δεδωκασιν : so MSS., Dind.; δεδώκασιν ἡμῖν Stob. 
 
 14. avurev: so AG (second hand), Dind. ; avvew 1), Stob.; ἀνύττειν G (first hand) R 
 in an erasure, Et. 
 
 εἶπι |ueoper[olus : so DR, Stob., Dind.; ἐπιμελουμένους AG, Et. For βελτει[οἦν, K.TeA., 
 Bod. has καὶ ἐργαζομένους μᾶλλον ἀνύειν ἢ ἀργοὺς ὄντας καὶ ἐπιμελουμένους ἀσφαλέστερον γ᾽ ἂν 
 διάγειν. 
 
 15. av: 80 MSS. and Stob.; om. Dind. following Stephanus. 
 
Seed Mee met AD ANI CLASSICAL AUTHORS τοι 
 
 τουτων: 80 MSS., Dind.; om. Stob. ; τούτων (περὶ Madvig followed by Hug. 
 
 16. avrovs (i.e. αὑτούς) : ἑαυτούς 1), Bod., Stob.; οὖν τοιούτους ἑαυτούς AGR, Dind. ; 
 δ᾽ οὖν τοιούτους ἑαυτούς Et. 
 
 17. τα αγαθα: so D; τἀγαθά AGR, Et., Stob., Dind.; τὰ ἀγαθὰ τά Bod. 
 
 18. zlavjra: so D, Bod.; τοιούτων G3; τοιαῦτα AR, Et., Dind. There is certainly 
 not room for τίοιαυΐτα. 
 
 mvs sor), Bod:, Stob.; pe AGR, Et., Dind: 
 
 Ig. rovrwt: so D, Bod., Stob.; om. AGR, Et., Dind. 
 
 και oda σε επιτιθεντα αὐτίωι]: so D, Bod.; καὶ οἶδα προστιθέντα αὐτῷ Stob.; ἐπιτιθέντα 
 αὐτῷ G (second hand in marg.); καὶ γὰρ οἶδά σε λέγοντα ἀεί AG (first hand) R, Et., Dind. 
 
 20. ovre: οὕτως corr. to οὔτε by second hand Bod.; οὔτε other MSS., Dind. Similarly 
 with ovre in 1. 21. 
 
 23. togevew: 50 D, Bod., Stob.; om. AGR, Et., Dind. 
 
 24. εὐυχίεἾἶσθαι : so DGR, Bod., Et., Stob., Dind.; ἔχεσθαι A. 
 
 vavy: SO Stob.; vais MSS., Dind. 
 
 [ojvre: so Stob.; οὐδέ MSS., Dind. 
 
 ome povlrals}: so MSS., Dind. ; σπείραντας (Stob.) is equally possible. 
 
 25. avros atrov: So DG (second hand), Bod., Stob. AG (first hand) R, Et. agree 
 with the original reading of the papyrus in omitting σιτον (so Dind.). 
 
 ouvte: οὐδέ MSS., Stob., Dind.’ 
 
 26 παρα: so ADR, Bod., Et., Stob., Dind.; περί G. 
 
 27. TavTa Kat Ta τοιαυτα παντΐα: 50 Bod., Stob., and (with the omission of πάντα) Des 
 πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα AGR, Et., Dind. 
 
 28. [αἸθεμιστα: so AG (corrected) LM, Bod., Stob.; ἀθέμιτα DEHRG (first hand), 
 Et., Dind. 
 
 29. θεων : so ADG, Stob., Dind.; τῶν θεῶν R, Et. 
 
 παρ : SO Stob.; παρά MSS., Dind. 
 
 30. mapavona: SO ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; τὰ παράνομα Et. 
 
 de ἐἶφη : so G (second hand in marg.), Bod.; δ᾽ ἔφη D; δέ AG (first hand) R, Et., Dind. 
 
 31. a more: SO ADG, Bod., Et., Dind.; ὅποτε R 
 
 32. av: om. MSS., Dind. After δύναιτο Bod. has ἀνδρί (sic). 
 
 33. οπίως: so D, Bod.; ὅπως ἄν AGR, Et., Dind. 
 
 kado|s| τε: τε καλός MSS., Dind. 
 
 Sox{eluws: so ADG, Bod., Et., Dind.; om. R. 
 
 34. τα €|mitn|deca: So MSS. here and in ]. 37 ; τἀπιτήδεια Dind. 
 
 [οπως : so D, Bod.; om. AGR, Et., Dind. 
 
 οι: so AD, Bod., Et., Dind.; om. G.; above the line in R. 
 
 35. ουτίως [οἶντος : so D, Bod.; ὄντος οὕτως AGR, Dind.; ἀγαθοῦ ὄντος οὕτως Et. 
 
 υφ[ιηστίιασθαι: so DR, Bod.; ἐπίστασθαι AG, Et., Dind.; ἐφι with dots underneath 
 before ἐπίστασθαι L. 
 
 36. εξουσΐιν ἀπαντα: so D, Bod.; ἕξουσι πάντα AGR, Et., Dind. What reading the 
 papyrus had is uncertain. 
 
 37. almavres: πάντες MSS., Dind. | 
 
 38. rore [epawero: ἐφαίνετο εἶναι MSS., Dind. 
 
 40. gov: 580 AGR, Bod., Et., Dind.; ὅτε σου D, It is unlikely that the papyrus 
 had D’s reading for |« rovro is rather long for the end of |. 39. 
 
 σ]υνεδίοκ]ει : so D, Bod., Stob. ; συνεδόκει οὖν AGR, Et., Dind. 
 
 41. vulyy: γ᾽ is omitted by R, Et., and Stob., inserted in ADG, Bod. (so Dind.). 
 Considerations of space make it probable that the papyrus read y. 
 
 ταυτα] plot δοκέι : the restoration of this is uncertain. We have followed the reading 
 
152 POE ΟΧΥΚΗΥΝΟΙΌΘ, fed v ind 
 
 of Stobaeus ταῦτά μοι δοκεῖ, which suits the lacuna best. ταῦτά μοι τὰ αὐτά AG, and, with 
 the addition of δοκεῖ, CR, Et.; ταὐτά μοι δοκεῖ ταῦτα D. 
 
 43. μεντοι] : so Ὁ, Stob.; μέντοιγε AGR, Et., Dind. Which reading the papyrus had 
 is uncertain. 
 
 44. [ovr τε]: SO D3 om. τε RG (second hand in marg.), Dind.; οἷοί τε ὄντες δια- 
 γίγνονται ἄρχοντες καί is omitted by AG (first hand), Et., owing to homoioteleuton. 
 
 46. The restoration is uncertain. CR, Et. have εἶναι τὸ τοιούτους αὐτοὺς ὄντας ὑποπτῆξαι, 
 and so D with the omission of τό; εἶναι τὸ τοιούτοις ὑποπτ. A (so Dind.) ; εἶναι τὸ τοιούτους 
 (apparently) ὕποπτ. G, αὐτοὺς ὄντας being added over the line by a later hand. Probably 
 the papyrus originally had εἰναι rovovrovs ὑποπτηξαι, ovras and perhaps avrovs being added 
 over the line by the corrector. 
 
 61. epyn: so MSS.; ἔρχει Dind. 
 
 Κυαξαρει, the corrected reading of the papyrus, agrees with Ὁ, CAGR agree with the 
 reading of the first hand Κυαξαρεω. Κυαξάρῃ Bod., Dind. 
 
 eywye: ἔγωγ᾽ Dind. 
 
 61—2. ο Kupos οισθα Se edn: ὁ Κῦρος ri δὲ ἔφη οἶσθα CDR, Bod., Et., and in marg. 
 by a later hand G, Dind.; om. AG (first hand). 
 
 62. ἐστιν: ἐστι MSS., Dind. 
 
 63. ομως dn, the reading of the first hand, is clearly an error, and ought to have been 
 erased by the corrector when he inserted ops δε. οὐ μὲν δὴ οἶσθα ὅμως δέ D; οὐ μὲν δὴ 
 ὅμως δέ AGR, Βοά,, Et., Dind. 
 
 πιστευεις : SO most MSS., Dind.; πιστεύειν Bod. 
 
 64. ov δεησει : σοι δεήσῃ 1), Bod.; σοι δεήσει CR; δεήσει AG, Dind.; σοι δεήσοι Et. 
 
 πολλα δε kat adda νυν ἀναγκηι δαπαναν αὐτὸν : om. αὐτόν AGR, Et., Dind.; πολλὰ δὲ ἀνάγκη 
 αὐτὸν νῦν δαπανᾶν 1), Bod. 
 
 65. γινωσκεις : om. Bod.; ἐκεῖνο οὐ γιγνώσκεις AGR, Et., Dind.; ἐκεῖνο οὗ γιγνώσκεις 
 D in marg. by later hand; δαπανᾶν ἐκεῖνον οὐ γιγνώσκεις Hug following Madvig. 
 
 66. eav ovy edn avtov επιλιπὴ ἡ Samavn και : ἐὰν οὖν ἔφη αὐτὸν ἡ δαπάνη ὑπολείπῃ ἣ καί D, 
 and with ἀπολείπῃ for ὑπολείπῃ Bod. ἢν οὖν ἔφη ἐπιλίπῃ αὐτὸν ἡ δαπάνη ἢ καί A, Et., Dind., 
 R (with ἐπιλείπῃ by the first hand) and (with ἤ added by a later hand) Ὁ. 
 
 ψεύδηται: SOD; ψευδῆ A; ψεύσεται G, Bod.; ψεύσηται CR, Et., Dind, 
 
 67. πως σοι εξει: SO CDR, Bod., Et.; ὦ παῖ πῶς dp’ ἕξει (or perhaps dp’) G, Dind. ; 
 ὦ παῖ πῶς ὀρέξη A, 
 
 δηλον ort ov καλως : SO AGR, Et., Dind. ; οὐ καλῶς δῆλον ὅτι D and (reading δηλόνοτι) Bod. 
 
 68. εφη w πατερ: SO AGR, Et., Dind.; ὦ πάτερ ἔφη D, Bod. 
 
 69. προσγενομενον: SO DR, Bod., Dind. AG, Et. agree with the reading of the first 
 hand προσγι(γ)νομενον. 
 
 70. ὦ παι τουτο: SO AG (first hand) R, Dind.; τοῦτο ὦ παῖ DG (in marg. second hand), 
 Bod., Stob. /lor. 48. 70; ὦ wai Et. 
 
 et τις [αἷν: so DG (second hand in marg.), Bod.; εἴ τις Stob.; πῶς ἄν R; ποῦ ἄν AG 
 (first hand), Dind.; ris ἄν Et. 
 
 προσγένοιτο : SO 1), Βοά,, Stob., Dind. ; γένοιτο AG (first hand, TAKTLKOV being added in 
 in the margin) R, Et. 
 
 71. δε: so ADGR, Et., Stob., Dind.; δεῖ Bod. 
 
 [εὐκος : So D, Stob.; εἰκός ἐστι CAGR, Et., Dind.; om. Bod., which also omits πόρον. 
 
 γένεσθαι: so D, Bod., Et., Stob. (Hug) ; προσγένεσθαι AGR, Dind. 
 
 72. μεν: SOAGR, Bod., Dind.; om. D. Et. places μέν after δύναμιν. 
 
 ἐχων evOevde: so 1), Bod., Et.; ἐνθένδε ἔχων AGR, Dind. 
 
 73. εἶρχίη : so MSS.; ἔρχει Dind. 
 
 οιδ : so AG (first hand) R, Et., Dind.; εὖ οἶδ᾽ DG (second hand), Bod. 
 
697. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS» 153)», 
 
 74. Mndov: so ADGR, Dind.; τῶν Μήδων Bod., Et. 
 
 75. συμμαχον : 80 ADG, Bod., Dind.; om. R; δοκεῖ εἶναι σύμμαχον ἔσται Et. 
 
 δοκεις : SO Bod.; δοκεῖ re (apparently) D; δοκεῖ σοι AGR, Et., Dind. 
 
 77. maby: so ADGR, Bod., Dind.; πάθοι Et. 
 
 Κυαξαρει : so ADL and (in an erasure) R, Et. ; Κυαξάρῃ G, Bod., Dind. 
 
 xownt: this word is placed before συν by the MSS. and Dind. 
 
 78. επιλιπη : so AGR, Et., Dind. ; ὑπολείπῃ D, Bod. 
 
 vpas: SO ADGR, Bod., Dind. ; ἡμᾶς Et. 
 
 εθους : ἔθους δέ Dind. with all MSS. except Et., which has καὶ ἔθους μοι μέμνησο added 
 by a second hand in the margin against ἕνεκα μηχανᾶσθαι προσόδου πόρον τόδε δὲ πάντων μάλιστα. 
 
 79. Pn |xaveopevoy : so D, Bod. ; μηχανᾶσθαι AGR, LG, Dind. 
 
 ΤᾺ so CDR, Bod., Et., Stob. Flor. 48. 71, Dind.; ré AG. 
 
 81. ra επιτηδε͵ια : cf. note on |. 34. 
 
 [eo|r: so ADG, Bod., Et., Stob., Anon. ap. Boisson, Amecd. i. p. 113, Dind.; ἕως R. 
 
 82. orav ... εὐπορης : So AGR (second hand), Et., Stob., Anon., Dind.; ὅτε... εὐπορεῖς 
 1); ὅτε μὲν... εὐπορεῖς Bod.; ὅταν... εὐπορεῖς R (first hand). 
 
 μίαλλον μηΐχανω : so DG (in marg. by second hand), Stob.; om. μᾶλλον AG (first hand) 
 R, Et., Anon., Dind. 
 
 83. τευξει: so D, Anon. (?), Et., Dind.; τοξεύῃ A; τεύξῃ GR, Bod., Stob. 
 
 al rropew| δοκων : so D, Bod., Stob. ; ἄπορος δοκῶν εἶναι A, Et., Anon., ἃ (omitting δοκῶν), 
 and (ἄπορος being added in marg. by a later hand) L, Dind. αἰπορος ewa is too long 
 for the lacuna. 
 
 84. kav: so D, Stob.; καὶ ἔτι GR, Bod., Et., Dind.; καὶ αἴτι A. 
 
 [cleavrov: so perhaps R (first hand, o being over an erasure); αὐτοῦ AL (first hand) ; 
 ἑαυτόῦ D; σαυτοῦ G, Et., Stob., Dind. ; σαυτοῦ (σ corr. from €) Bod. 
 
 85. tovrov: so ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; τούτων Et. 
 
 de: so ADR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; δὴ G. 7 
 
 αλλα[ν]: so AGR, Et., Dind.; τῶν ἄλλων D, Bod., Stob. 
 
 86. twas: so AG (second hand) R, Bod., Dind.; τινα DG (first hand ὃ), Et., Stob. 
 
 βουλη : 380 ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; βούλει Et. 
 
 ev: so D, Bod., Et.; # εὖ AGR, Stob., Dind. 
 
 mouoalt: So ADG, Bod., Et., Stob., Dind.; ποιεῖσθαι R (first hand apparently). 
 
 [rye δυναμε)ι : so here AGR, Et., Dind.; D, Bod., and Stob. place it after βούλῃ. 
 
 87. ews αν exns τα Seovra οἱ στρατίιωται υπηρετήσουσι σοι! SO, With the exception of ἔχωσι 
 for ἔχῃς, AGR, Et., Dind.; ἕως ἂν ἔχωσιν ὑπ. σοι of στρ. ἔχοντες τὰ δέοντα 1), Bod.; ὑπηρετήσουσιν 
 οἱ στρατιῶται ἔχοντες τὰ δέοντα Stob. 
 
 88. πιστικωτατους δὲ λογους σαφ ισθι τοτε δυνησει λεγειν : SO, With δυνήσῃ corrected from 
 δυνήσει by second hand, 1), and, with δυνήσῃ, Stob.; πιστικώτερον τοὺς δὲ λόγους κιτιλ, COT. 
 to καὶ πιστικωτάτους τοὺς λόγους κιτιλ, Bod.; καὶ πιστοτέρους σάφα ἴσθι δυνήσῃ λόγους τότε 
 λέγειν ἘΠ. ; πιστικωτέρους σάφ᾽ ἴσθι λόγους δυνήσῃ τότε λέγειν AG and, with δυνήσῃ λόγους, R ; 
 πειστικωτέρους σάφ᾽ ἴσθι λόγους δυνήσει τότε λέγειν Dind. It is tolerably certain that the 
 papyrus had δυνησει not δυνηση. 
 
 89. oravmep: 50 CDR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; ὅθενπερ A; ὅσαπερ G3 ὅσονπερ Et. 
 
 move t|kavos wy καὶ ev: SOD, Stob.; καὶ εὖ ποιεῖν ἱκανὸς dv AGR, Et., Dind.; εὖ ποιεῖν 
 ἱκανὸς ὧν καὶ κακῶς (καὶ κακῶς 72 rasura) Bod. 
 
 QI. Soxets ταυτα mavta καλως λεγειν : SO D3 καλῶς δοκεῖς ταῦτα λέγειν πάντα AGR and 
 (with λέγεις) Et., Dind., and (omitting πάντα and with καλῶς... ταῦτα i” rasura) Bod. 
 
 a μεν] νυν λημψονται : 830 DR; ἃ μὲν ad viv λήμψ. Bod.; 4 μὲν ὧν viv λήμψ. G (first hand), 
 with μὲν αὖ νῦν added in marg. by a later hand ; ὧν μὲν νῦν λέγονται λήψεσθαι A, Et., Dind., 
 with which the reading of the first hand in the papyrus so far agrees in having ὧν, 
 
Se Saga OE | THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 92. τούτων χάριν MSS. (except Et. χάριν rovrwy) Dind.; but there is not room for 
 τούτων in the lacuna. . 
 
 93. avrovs: so ADGR, Bod., Dind.; αὐτός Et. 
 
 Κυαξαρης αγίεται: so AGR, Et., Dind.; ἄγεται Κυαξάρης D, Bod.; ἐπάγεται Cobet, 
 followed by Hug. 
 
 95. For eos D and Bod. have πλείστην εἰκός, and πλείστην is added in the margin of 
 G by a later hand. ‘There is not room for πλείστην in the lacuna, so the papyrus probably 
 agreed in omitting it with AG (first hand) R, Et., Dind. 
 
 96. ro: so AG, Dind.; τόν 1), Bod.; τῶ Et. 
 
 exovTa: SO ADG (second hand) R, Bod., Dind.; ἔχοντι ἃ (first hand) ; ἔχοντι (with a 
 above +) μέν Et., omitting μέν after ἐστι. The supplement at the end of the line is longer 
 than it should be by three or four letters, but the only variant is ποιοῦντα (R) for ποιοῦντας 
 ADG (corrected), Dind. 
 
 97. ἐστι : SO DGR, Bod., Et., Dind.; ἔτι A. 
 
 ἔχοντα is bracketed by Hug, following Madvig. 
 
 εἰπ]ειτα: so AG, Et., Dind. (ἔπειτ᾽) ; ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν DR, Bod., which has τικτᾶσθαι for 
 τίσασθαι. 
 
 98. πορίζεσθαι: so ADG, Dind., agreeing with the first hand; πορίζειν R, Bod., 
 agreeing with the corrector. 
 
 τι 50 ADG, Dind. Σ το Ry Et. 
 
 nTTov τι TovTO αισἶχρον εἰναι : τοῦτο αἰσχρὸν ἧττον εἶναι D ; τοῦτο αἰσχρὸν ἧττον εἶναι δ᾽ (αι δ᾽ 
 in an erasure) Bod. ; ἧττον τοῦτο εἶναι αἰσχρόν AG, Dind., and (with ro for τι in an erasure) R ; 
 ἧσσόν τι τοῦτο εἶναι αἰσχρόν Et. 
 
 99. ἐχὼν μεν: So ADGR, Bod., Dind. ; μὲν ἔχων Et. 
 
 roo. δ]η: so G in marg.; om. ADR, Et., Dind. The reading of the papyrus is 
 uncertain. 
 
 109. καὶ τουτο: τοιοῦτο AD ; τοιοῦτον G, Dind. 
 
 698. ΧΈΝΟΡΗΟΝ, Cyropaedia 7. 6. 45. «( 
 23°5X 7:0 cm. 
 
 Two fragments from the conclusion of the first book of Xenophon’s 
 Cyropaedia, with the title, which is written, as usual, below the final column. 
 We assign the small detached piece from § 45 to the previous column owing 
 to the height of the papyrus. It is remarkable that what according to the 
 accepted division are the opening words of Book il, τοιαῦτα wey... Περσίδος, are 
 here made the last sentence of Book i. The text does not otherwise differ from 
 that of Dindorf. 
 
 On the verso of the papyrus are parts of two columns of a money-account 
 in a cursive hand, which apparently is not later than about the middle of the 
 third century. The text on the recto, therefore, which is written in sloping 
 
699. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS τες 
 
 oval uncials of the common type, is to be assigned to the earlier part of the 
 century. 
 
 ol: 
 ut auvTwv τουτων διΐκην Ϊ μίεϊχρι των ορί ων τίης Ilep 
 εδοσαν πολλοις ὃ οἱυκ np Ϊ = σιδος" 
 Abe CPU el 
 [κεσεν τις Ψ 
 ro Ξενοφωνΐτος 
 Κυρου 
 Col. 11. eae beer 
 παιδεια 
 [α 
 
 ἰουδεὶν θαυμαστίον ov 
 γαΐρ αν]αγκη αυτοῖις εστιν 
 5 ωὧἷν aly pln] εθελωσιν [ἐπι 
 μίελε]σθαι τοιαυτα [μεν δὴ 
 αφ[ικοντο δίιαἸλεγοΐμενοι 
 
 5. The vestiges are rather in favour of εθελωσιν (R), but θελωσιν (ADG) is not 
 
 impossible. 
 6. τοιαυτα: so AD; ravra G corr. marg. 
 As already observed in the introduction, this sentence commences the next Book 
 
 according to the ordinary division. 
 
 699. THEOPHRASTUS, Characters. 
 7X 4°2 CM. 
 
 The text of the Characters of Theophrastus is notoriously insecure, and 
 offers a problem upon which an early papyrus of any part of the book might 
 be expected to throw some light. The present fragment, which contains the 
 end of ch. 25 and the beginning of ch. 26, is however disappointing in this 
 respect, giving a version which seems to be not less of the nature of a com- 
 pendium than that of the Codex Monacensis. Unfortunately that MS. includes 
 only the first twenty-one chapters so that an actual comparison is not possible. 
 The interest of the papyrus, therefore, chiefly lies in showing the antiquity 
 of such compendia of the Characters. It is written in rather small oval uncials, 
 which probably date from the earlier part of the third century. 
 
150 THE“ OY RAYNCGUS PAY 
 
 ee ἢ 13 letters [klos τοιοῦτος iialt..... 
 [x]ae λεγεῖν m[......... μεν λεγων οὐκ [ayaboy 
 [ασυτον σωσίας emt σκὴη 10 [πο]λυκοιρανιη εἰς Kolpa 
 [ν]ὴν [ vos €oTw εἶ.9] βασιλίευς 
 
 5 [n ολι͵γίαρχ)α εστίιν φιλαρχι kat Tov δημου χέ[ιροτο 
 fad TIS WONVOS HT aera νουϊν]τος moAXous [Aeyer ma 
 [γ]λιχομενὴ [ο de ολιγαρχι [ρελθίων apkeoe(iy eva 
 
 1-4. The conclusion of ch. 25 (περὶ δειλίας) in the ordinary version is καὶ διηγεῖσθαι ὡς 
 κινδυνεύσας ἕνα σέσωκα τῶν φίλων᾽ Kal εἰσάγειν πρὸς τὸν κατακείμενον σκεψομένους τοὺς δημότας καὶ 
 τοὺς φυλέτας, καὶ τούτων ἅμα ἑκάστῳ διηγεῖσθαι ὡς αὐτὸς αὐτὸν ταῖς ἑαυτοῦ χερσὶν ἐπὶ σκηνὴν ἐκόμισεν. 
 If deyew in 1.2 is right there is no room for εκομισεν. λιτὴν (not φυλετην), which is an 
 alternative, suggests nothing. In|. 4 after [ν]ην is a broad blank space marking the end of 
 the chapter. 
 
 5. Ch. 26 (περὶ ὀλιγαρχίας) begins δόξειεν (δ᾽) ἂν εἶναι ἡ ὀλιγαρχία φιλαρχία τις ἰσχυρῶς 
 κέρδους γλιχομένη. ὁ δὲ ὀλιγαρχικὸς τοιοῦτος οἷος τοῦ δήμου βουλευομένου (βουλομ. MSS.) τίνας τῷ 
 ἄρχοντι προσαιρήσονται (προαιρ. MSS.) τῆς πομπῆς τοὺς συνεπιμελησομένους παρελθὼν ἀποφήνασθαι 
 (ἀποφήνας ἔχει MSS.) ὡς δεῖ αὐτοκράτορας τούτους εἶναι' κἂν ἄλλοι προβάλλωνται δέκα λέγειν ἱκανὸς 
 εἷς ἐστιν, τοῦτον δὲ ὅτι δεῖ ἄνδρα εἶναι. καὶ τῶν ‘Opnpov ἐπῶν τοῦτο ἕν μόνον κατέχειν, ὅτι οὐκ ἀγαθόν, 
 κιτιλ. (omitting εἷς βασιλεύς). The definition of ὀλιγαρχία has generally been recognized as 
 unsatisfactory and the MSS. disagree, Pal.-Vat. omitting φιλαρχία and the others reading 
 ἰσχυροῦ for ἰσχυρῶς. The papyrus variant wyvos, which gives the sense aimed at by 
 Fischer’s emendation of κέρδους to κράτους, is very likely right, though the word at the end 
 of ]. 6 remains doubtful. The first letter, if not 4, seems to be y, ἢ, or m Besides being 
 much more compressed the text of the papyrus shows a different order, Il. 12-4 correspond- 
 ing to what in the MSS. precedes the Homeric quotation. In ll. 9 544. it is not certain 
 that μεν, vos, x.7.A. are the beginnings of the lines since the papyrus is broken immediately 
 before those letters; but the arrangement proposed is the most probable. 
 
 700. DeEmosTHENES, Ye Corona. 
 
 14:5 X 4:4 CM. 
 
 This fragment is a strip from the bottom of a column containing parts of 
 pp. 230-1 of the De Corona. ‘The lines being incomplete both at beginning 
 and end, it is doubtful how they should be divided; the arrangement given 
 below is therefore hypothetical. The hand is a rather irregular upright uncial 
 of medium size, and more probably of the second century than the third. A 
 high point is occasionally used, this and the diaeresis being the only lection 
 
700. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS ~ 157 
 
 marks that occur. 
 
 Our collations in this and the other oratorical fragments 
 
 (701-4) are with the Teubner edition of Blass. 
 
 σι 
 
 sme) 
 
 me 
 Ou 
 
 20 
 
 25 
 
 AOn|vato Kat πρίοσηκον tows 
 ὡς Κατ €|Kelvous τοὺς χρονΐζους εἰχε 
 τα πραγματα αναμνησῖαι wa 
 προς τον] ||mapovra]| ὕπαρχοϊντα και 
 
 pov ekalora ὙΠ ΠΠ ἢ Toy yap Φωκι 
 κου συνίσταντος πολεμίου ov δι ε 
 pe ov yap] eywye επολιτευζομην πὼ 
 ΤΟΤΕ πρώτον μεν υμΊ]εις οἷυτω διε 
 [κεισθε wore Φωκεας μεν βουλε] 
 σθαι σωἼθηναι καΐιπερ ov δικαια ποι 
 ovvTa|s ορωντες [Θηβαιοις de ο 
 τιουν αν] εφησθηναι πα[ίθουσιν 
 ovk αλογω)ς [o]ud adixws αἰυτοις opyt 
 ομενοι olts yap ευὐτυχηκεῖσαν ev 
 Aevxtpolis [olu μετριως εκείχρηντο ε 
 πειτὰ ἡ ΠεἸλ[οἸποννησος απίασα δι 
 εἰστηκει] και ουθ oft] μισουΐντες 
 Aaxkedaltpoviovs ἴσχυον [ουτως 
 wore αἸνελειν αὐτοὺς ουθ οἱ προ 
 τερον Olt εκεινων ἀρχονΐτες κυ 
 ρίοι των] πολεων ἡσαν" αἶλλα τις 
 nv ἀκριΊτος Και παρα τουτοΐις.... 
 . εριῖς και Tapaxne ταυΐτα de ο 
 pov o ΦιλΊ)ιππος ov yap nv αἰφανὴη 
 τοις map] εκαστοις mpodoralis χρὴ 
 ματα αν]αλισκων παντας Ϊ 
 
 @ 
 Ἑήλλησι av 
 
 3. ὑμᾶς, which Bl(ass) omits after ἀναμνῆσαι with SL, may have stood in the papyrus, 
 4. mapovra Which was first written was a mere slip. 
 5. The correction is probably by a second hand. 
 
158 THE OAYRAYNCHUS GAPS RI 
 
 8. The papyrus most likely had either τότε or wore, like the other Μ 55, [τότε] BI. 
 
 14. ευτυχηκεῖσαν : ηὐτυχήκεσαν Bl. 
 
 18. ἰσχυον [ovrws: οὕτως ἴσχυον MSS. 
 
 22-. The usual reading here is καὶ παρὰ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασιν ἔρις, but some MSS. 
 (including FYQO) omit παρά, O adding Ἕλλησιν after ἅπασιν, which is noticed as a variant 
 also in FQ. It is manifest that none of these readings suits the papyrus, for only six or 
 seven letters are required between rovro{is and epu|s. καὶ alow or analow might be read, 
 or we may suppose that the scribe was led by the homoioteleuton of τούτοις and ἄλλοις to 
 write simply rovrows απα]σιν. The entry at the bottom of the column (probably by a second 
 hand), where O’s variant E]AAno is followed by ave (cf. e.g. 228. 126), evidently refers to 
 this passage; but how much, if anything, stood before E|AAnot cannot of course be 
 determined. In ]. 23 1. ταραχή. 
 
 701. DEMOSTHENES, Contra Timocratem. 
 15: X 14:6 cm. 
 
 Parts of three rather short and narrow columns (about 16 x 5 cm.), covering 
 pp. 720-1 of Demosthenes’ speech against Timocrates. Of the first and third 
 columns only a few letters remain, but the lower portion of the intervening one 
 is complete. The text, which is written in handsome round uncials (cf. 661, 
 Plate v), probably of the end of the second century or of the first half of the 
 third, seems, so far as can be judged, to be a fairly good one. 
 
 Col. i. 
 Tolus εν [ριον τριακον)θ ἢ 
 [δεκα εἰς το δ)ικαστη [uepov ad ns αἷν 
 Col. ii. 
 5 ἢ amoreloale cay 15 ἐαν δε apyuplov τι 
 Se apyuptoly τιμὴ μηθηι δεδεσθω 
 θηι δεδεσθω τε Teas av εκτῇ εἤ]ισηι' 
 ὡς αν εκτισῆι ὁ TL ΄πεπαυσο εστιν 
 
 αν avTov καταγνω 
 ουν οπῶὼς εναν 
 
(02, BRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS. 159 
 
 10 Ont ακουετε ὦ 20 TlwTepa TLS δυο 
 
 ΄ avdpes δικασται λε θειη του δεδεσθαι 
 
 TEMS QV εκτί ello 
 γε auTols auto Tov 
 σιν τους αλοντας 
 
 To παλιν 
 νομος 
 Col. iti. 
 
 εἰναντια avTos τίος δοκει παν 
 
 25 αἰυτω νομοθετειν αἷν ετοιμὼς Ep 
 ηἰξιωσεν οὐδε τοις γίον ποιησαι ὠσπερ 
 αἷλλοις των vo τοίΐινυν ὦ ανδρες 
 μίων εωντων εμοι 35 AlO@nvaio των πε 
 μίεν yap εινεκα αν pt ἰταλλα 
 
 [ 
 30 αἰιδειας ο τοίου 
 
 3. The length of the line indicates that evros was omitted before τριακον θ, as in A; so 
 Bl(ass). 
 
 7. tews: SO Bl. with B; re ἕως SA. Cf. Il. 17 and 22, where S has reas, A re ἕως as 
 before. 
 
 5. For the deletion of the ε of αποτεισαίι cf, ll. 17 and 22, and 1. 8, where exrione is 
 written. -τεισ- Bl. in all these passages. 
 
 Ig. av is similarly omitted before evaytiwrepa in A. ἐναντιώτερ᾽ ἄν BI., following a con- 
 jecture of Weil. 
 
 24-33. Ihe vestiges of the initial letters here are with two or three exceptions too 
 slight for certain recognition, and the arrangement of the lines is therefore insecure. αἱ and 
 μί in 11. 27-8 are not very satisfactory, more especially the latter, in place of which a or A 
 would be more suitable. A greater difficulty however arises in ]. 32, where the traces 
 would suit »{ much better than al. But the division aly is extremely improbable, especially 
 as ]. 31 is a short one; moreover the papyrus is rather rubbed, and a can therefore hardly 
 be absolutely excluded, though very doubtful. 
 
 702. DemostHENEs, Contra LBoeotum. 
 13°5 X 6°5 cm. 
 
 A small fragment from Demosthenes’ oration against Boeotus, pp. 1023-4, 
 written in good-sized uncials which on the whole approximate to the square 
 
160 THE COXYRAYNCH US Parry 
 
 type, though € and C have a tendency to become narrow, and which we should 
 ascribe to the second century, and Peers the earlier part of it. The text has 
 no variants of importance. 
 
 θη και [τ]αυτὰα λεγίω δεινοπαθων την 
 εκ τουτων τῶν pap IO προικὰ pov της ply 
 τυριων) εἰσεσθε τρος αποστερησεΪι 
 μαίρ]τυριαι αλλ vets ὦ ανδρες Ρ. 1024 
 5 TooavTa τοινυν Ϊε δικασΐτα). προῖς Atos 
 μου ελ[αἸττουμενΐίου καὶ. θεωὴν μη κίατα 
 φανερως ουτοσι | 15 [πλαγητε)] uo tins 
 
 νυν σχ[εἸτλιαζων [Kat 
 
 7. ουτοσι: SO MSS.; οὗτος Bl(ass). 
 
 8. νυν: so Bl. with 5, &c.; νυνί FQ. 
 
 9. την: SO FQ; καὶ τήν Bl. with S, ἄς. 
 Io. pov: sor; pe Bl. with S, &c. 
 
 703. AxscHINES, /z Ctesiphontem. 
 9 ΧΟ cm. 
 
 This small fragment, containing parts of δὲ 94 and 96 of Aeschines’ speech 
 against Ctesiphon, belongs to what must have been an exceptionally interesting 
 text, for in spite of its insignificant size it has three new readings, all of which 
 are or may be improvements. ‘The handwriting is in oval sloping uncial of the 
 usual third century type. High stops and a paragraphus occur. 
 
 Col. 4. Col. ti 
 ο [αλλο]υ[9] τίω]ν [ΕἸλληνίων 
 ους βουλεσθαι [κἸοινωνίειν 
 \v TNS συνταξεως" WOT/E 
 OUTE χρηματων ουΐτε 
 στρατιωτίω)ν αποριαν 
 15 ἐσεσθαι' Kat TavTa μεν 
 
 ey πο et 
 
 δὴ ta ghavepa εφη dle 
 
704. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 161 
 
 Qpeoly [ovr] Kat mlpagers πραττειν 
 [rages Kat τας] εξ Ἐρετρι eTepals δι απορρητων 
 [as τα δεκα ταλ]αντα (ov και τοῖυτων εἰναι τινας 
 των ] 20 μαρτίυρας 
 
 2 lines lost 
 ρεΐκαλει 
 
 8. ζωνίτων: the MSS. have ὁρώντων φρονούντων βλεπόντων. Whether the papyrus 
 inserted ζώντων before ὁρώντων or had ζώντων in place of one of the other three verbs 
 (probably ὁρώντων) cannot be determined. ζώντων makes a more forcible prelude than 
 ὁρώντων to φρονούντων βλεπόντων. 
 
 14-5. amopialy] ἐσεσθαι: ἔσεσθαι ἀπορίαν Bl. with MSS. The papyrus reading avoids 
 a hiatus. 
 
 16. 6,7: om. MSS., Bl. The insertion of δή is an improvement. 
 
 704. IsocraTes, Contra Sophistas. 
 7:9 X 10+3 cm. 
 Parts of two columns containing portions of δὲ 16-18 of Isocrates’ oration 
 
 (xiii) against the sophists, written in sloping oval uncials of the usual third 
 century type. The text contains no striking variants. 
 
 (οΙ Ἢ Col. ii. 
 
 [προελεσθ]αι Kat § 16 
 [μιξασθαι προς ad] 
 ἰληλας] και ταξα : 
 
 [σθ]αι κατα τροπον των δίιδακτων 
 5 eTt δε των Kalpwy παραλίιπειν περι 
 
 μη διαμαρτειν ad de τῶν λίοιπων 
 
 [Aa] και τοις ενθυμίη τοιουτοῖν αὐτον 
 
 μασίι π]ρεποντως 20 Tapadellypa παρα 
 
 ολο[»ἢ Tov λογον κα σχεῖν ὠστίε Tous § 18 
 10 τα[π]ο κείλαι kale εκτυπωθίεντας Kat 
 
 τοις ονομασιν εὖ μιμησεῖσθαι dv 
 
162 THE OXYRAYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 ρυθμως κίαι μΊουσι νηθενταῖς ευθυς 
 [κἸως εἰπειν TavTa § 17 25 avOnplorepov τι ἢ 
 de moAAns επιμε τ καὶ χ[αριεστερον 
 15 [λεια]ς [δεισῖθαι και τωῖν adrdov φαι 
 
 2. [μιξασθαι : so TA (first hand) Ee; Bl. follows Plan. and A (corr.) in reading μῖξαι, 
 which is too short to suit the papyrus. Cf, the next note. 
 
 3-4. ταξαϊσθἾαι : so TAEO ; τάξαι Bl. ; 
 
 23. μιμησεσθαι : μιμήσασθαι Bl. with TAEO ; μιμεῖσθαι vulgo. The papyrus reading is 
 an error for μιμήσασθαι. 
 
 δυ]νηθενταῖς : so in the Antidosis of E and vulgo; δυναμένους Bl. with all the best MSS. 
 
 25. avOnporepoy by itself is not sufficient to fill up this line; τε or τι, which is not found 
 in the MSS., may be inserted. 
 
 IV.. DOCUMENTS, CHIEFLY OF THE ΟΝ 
 ere hs iby 
 
 (2) OFFICIAL. 
 
 705. Two PETITIONS TO THE EMPERORS WITH REPLIES. 
 21°2 X 46 cm. A.D. 200-2, 
 
 A generous effort to lighten some of the burdens which weighed upon the 
 unfortunate Egyptians in the Roman period is recorded in these copies of two 
 petitions to Septimius Severus and Caracalla, to which the Emperors’ replies 
 are, as usual, prefixed instead of being appended. The document, which is 
 written in a rude uncial hand on the verso of 740, contained four columns, but 
 of these the first and last are too incomplete to have any value. A mention οὗ 
 the praefect Laetus in 1. 40 fixes the date within the years 200-2. 
 
 The writer of both petitions is Aurelius Horion, who had held high offices 
 at Alexandria and was a rich landowner in the Oxyrhynchite nome; his object 
 
705. OFFICIAL 163 
 
 in both cases was to secure the Imperial guarantee that certain benefactions 
 which he proposed to found in that district would be permanently maintained. 
 In the first petition (ll. 15-53) it is Oxyrhynchus itself which is to be the 
 recipient of his favour, and the earlier part of the letter, as far as 1. 42, is 
 devoted to an interesting sketch of the claims which that city possessed upon 
 the Imperial consideration. After the lengthy introduction (ll. 15-21), which 
 can be restored on the analogy of Il. 65-8, and nine mutilated lines, Aurelius 
 Horion reminds the Emperors (Il. 31-5) of ‘the loyalty, fidelity, and friendship 
 towards the Romans which the Oxyrhynchites had displayed both by helping 
 them in the war against the Jews, and continuing up to the present to celebrate 
 the day of victory by an annual festival” This war refers to some Jewish 
 rising in Egypt which perhaps took place not long before the date of the 
 letter, like the Jewish rebellion in the reign of Hadrian mentioned in B. G. U. 
 889; but it would seem from the use of the word πόλεμος to have been on 
 a larger scale than the revolt in Hadrian’s time. Aurelius Horion’s next 
 argument (ll. 36-9) is ‘Moreover, you yourselves honoured the Oxyrhynchites 
 when you visited the country, by allowing them to enter your judgement-seat 
 first after the Pelusiots.’ This well illustrates the importance which Oxyrhynchus 
 had attained by A.D. 200, when it was one of the chief towns in Egypt, and 
 already ranked above Memphis. Thirdly (ll. 39-42), Aurelius Horion appeals 
 to the opinion of the city held by the praefect, Laetus, who will, he says, bear 
 evidence in its favour. After these preliminaries the writer comes to his scheme 
 (ll. 42-51). Owing to the imperfect condition of ll. 42-6 the details are not 
 quite clear, but apparently Aurelius Horion proposed to devote, nominally in 
 the form of a loan, a large sum of money which was to be invested, and of 
 which the interest was to be expended upon maintaining the annual contests 
 of ephebi at Oxyrhynchus upon the same scale of splendour as that of similar 
 contests elsewhere, perhaps at Antinoé (cf. 1. 50, note). The petition concludes 
 (ll. 51-3) with the request that the Emperors will give orders forbidding the 
 diversion of the benefaction to any other purpose than that intended by its 
 founder. The answer of the Emperors (ll. 1-14) is for the most part lost, but 
 that it was of a favourable character is made certain by direct references to 
 it in their answer to the second petition (cf. 1. 59 καὶ ταύτης, 61 τὸ] ὅμοιον δὴ Kal 
 ἐ[π)]ὶ τούτου φυλαχθήσεται). It is pleasing to know that Oxyrhynchus enjoyed the 
 fruits of Aurelius Horion’s generosity for more than a century; for in 6Q, 
 written in A.D. 323, we find the logistes, unmindful of the clash of empires, 
 quietly issuing a notice that the gymnastic display by the ephebi will take 
 place on the following day. 
 
 The second petition (ll. 65-90) is practically complete, so far as it goes, and 
 
 M 2 
 
 Nth 
 
164 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 deals with a plan for benefiting certain villages in the Oxyrhynchite nome, the 
 inhabitants of which had been so exhausted by the annual λειτουργίαι in the form 
 of contributions to the State and compulsory obligations to act as guards that 
 there was a prospect of the land being deserted. Aurelius Horion therefore 
 proposed to present each village with a sum of money to be invested in hay, 
 the yearly revenue being devoted to the assistance of the inhabitants on whom 
 the λειτουργίαι fell. To this the Emperors reply (Il. 54-63), signifying their 
 approval of this scheme as of the former one, and guaranteeing the continuance 
 of the benefaction. 
 
 Col. a: 
 [Αὐτοκράτωρ Καῖσαρ Λούκιος Σ)επτίμ[ι]ο ς 
 [Σεουῆρος Εὐσεβὴς Περτίναξ ΣἸεβαστὸς 
 [Δραβικὸς ᾿Αδιαβηνικὸς Πα)]ρ[θικ)ὸς 
 Μέγιστος καὶ Αὐτ]οκράτωρ ΚΙαϊ͵σαρ 
 
 — 
 
 Μάρκος Αὐρήλιος ᾿Αν]τωνῖνος Εὐϊ[σ]εβὴς 
 Σεβαστὸς | 
 
 Αὐρηλίῳ ‘Qpeiwlt χαίρειν. 
 
 τ letters wel Ὁ αΙ eee ] ἐπεδο- 
 
 σι 
 SSS a ἘΞΝ 
 
 13.» TY ᾿Οξυρυγχειτῶν [.Joo- 
 10 ih 6 Mae Javripa... ay. [|v 
 16 Ag. [sea Bale Py mmn oe EA, 
 ree [as els oT) πον. eee ly 
 eee WO Lee ee cee lu 
 
 € 
 
 aaah ]- ἔστιν [δὲ ἡ ἀϊξί[ωσις" 
 
 κισσισσι σι σι σι. 
 
 ; 
 
 18 τοῖς εὐμενεστάτοις Αὐτ)]οκράτορσιν [Σ)]Ἰεοϊνή)ρῳ 
 
 καὶ ᾿ἀντωνίνῳ τοῖς] πάντ]ων [ἀνθρώπων 
 
 Sr & 
 
 σωτῆρσι Kal εὐερ]γέταις Αὐρήλιος 
 
 rc 
 
 ‘Qpelwv yevope|vos στρατηγὸς καὶ ἀρχι- 
 
 ea 
 
 δικαστὴς THs λαμ]προτάτης WoAlelws τῶν 
 20 
 
 co 
 
 Ἀλεξανδρέων) χαίρειν. 
 
 κοτε ay ὦ φιλανθρωπΊ)ότατοι Αὐτοκράτορες 
 14 letters ]-4 τίῇ πόϊλει μεγάλῃ 
 
 Ἰενει καὶ ἔτι [σἸωζούσῃ 
 
 τον νη |. []νεαν κατίο]ικισεν .. ν 
 
 Dee Ἰτιτί Ἰστιτί. . . .. lg 
 
 (ena > Wace ας γα el mean 
 Ἐπεὶ 
 ᾿ 
 -»: 
 ~~ 
 
 25 
 
320 
 
 35 
 
 40 
 
 48 
 
 50 
 
 705. OFFICIAL 
 
 15 letters Τ᾽. ενωτεΐ. . . .. lve 
 [ ἜΣ ἸΡδελ "2. [. ee ee] Ὁ 
 [ TA. fOOMo | eal late eh «na 
 
 Col. ii. 
 Gees ses sv Kal adrl. Joop. . λῶν: {τὰ 
 εν. [ πίλ]είω ὧν ὁ [Aléyos ἐμὲ τί. .. AlavOd[ver,| 
 πρίὀσε]στ[.] δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ ἡ πρὸς “Ῥωμαίους εὔνἰοι- 
 dé τε καὶ πίστις καὶ φιλία ἣν ἐνεδείξαντο καἰὶ 
 κατὰ τὸν πρὸς Εἰουδαίους πόλεμον συμμαχή- 
 σαντες καὶ ἔτι καὶ νῦν τὴν τῶν ἐπινεικίων 
 ἡμέραν ἑκάστου ἔτους πανηγυρίζοντας. 
 ἐτειμήσατε μὲν οὖν καὶ ὑμεῖς αὐτοὺς ἐπιδη- 
 μήσ[αν)τες τῷ ἔθνει πρώτοις μετὰ Πηλου- 
 σιώτας μεταδόντας τῆς εἰς τὸ δίικ]αστήριοίν ὑμῶ]ν 
 εἰσόδου, γνωρίζει δὲ τὴν πόλ[ιν] καὶ ὁ λαμπίρότα- 
 τος Λαῖτος ἐπί τε τοῖς καλλίσϊίτο)ις καὶ ἐλεζυθερω- 
 τάτους ἔχουσαν τοὺς ἐνοικο[ῦν]τ[ας κα]ὶ πὶ... .. 
 μειοῖί.] ἐπιεικεστάτους. διαδῖ 13 letters 
 τὴν πόλιν ἠθέλησα μηδεῖ 12 
 τῶ[ν] ἡμετέρων καταλιπεῖ 12 
 τρη[Ἰάμην καὶ τοὺς ὑπυσί 13, 
 οὐκ [ἔϊλζα]ττον ᾿ἀττικῶν pupil... .7 Tor[..... 
 τας δανείξεσθαί τε καὶ φυλ[άσσε]σθαι καθὰ ἐπίὶ 
 τῶν προτέρων ὥρισται, Tov δὲ] σ[ζυ]ναγόμενον 
 τ[όϊκον χωρεῖν εἰς ἔπαθλα ἐφήβων τῶν παρ᾽ αὐ- 
 το] 9] κατ᾽’ ἔτος ἀγωνιουμένων ἐφ᾽ οἷς Kall] οἱ ᾿4ν- 
 τί ἡν[οἷς 2] νῦν dywvigovre. καὶ ἀξιῶ κελεῦϊσαι ὑμᾶς 
 kali τ]αῦτ α] τὰ χρήματα μηδενὶ efeiviale εἰς ἄλ- 
 λίο μηδὲν] πε[ρ]ισπᾶν. 
 
 32. mor Of πιστις corr. 35. 1. πανηγυρίζοντες. 38. 1. μεταδόντες. 
 
 Cepw|rarots. 
 
 165 
 
 40. 1]. ἐλέυ- 
 
 41. υσαν of ἐχουσαν above vras erased. 45. Un Pap. 51. ], ἀγωνίζονται. 
 
166 THE OXYRAYNCHUS: PAPYRI 
 Col. iti , 
 Αὐτοκράτωρ Καῖσαρ Afo\ixtos [ Σ]επτίμ[ιος ΣἸε[ου]ῆρος 
 
 55 Εὐσεβ[ὴ)ς Περτίναξ Σεβαστὸς ApaBixod ᾿Αδιαβηνικὸς 
 Παρθικοῦ Μεγίσϊτο]υ [κ]αὶ Αὐτοκράτωρ Καῖσαρ 
 Μάρκο[ς] Αὐρήλιος ᾿ἀντωνῖνος Εὐσεβὴς Σεβαστὸς 
 
 Aivpnrjio “Ὠρείωνι χαίρειν. 
 ἀποδεχόμεθα σε καὶ ταύτης τῆς ἐπιδόσεως ἣν 
 
 όο ἀξιοῖς ἐπιδοῦναι ταῖς κώμαις τῶν ᾿Οξυρυγχειτῶν 
 ἀποδιδοὺς ἀμοιβὴν ἐνκτήσεως. τ[ὸ] ὅμοιον δὴ καὶ 
 ἐϊπ]Σ τούτου φυλαχθήσεται καὶ καθότι ἠ]θέλησας ἀμε- 
 τάστρεπτον εἰς ἕτερόν τι δαπανήσϊίεσ]θαι τὴν χάριν. 
 
 ἔστιν δὲ ἡ ἀξίωσις" 
 
 65 τοῖς εὐμενεστάτοις Αὐτοκράτίο]ρσι Σ᾽ εἐζουήρ)ῳ καὶ Avtwvivw 
 
 τοῖς πάντων ἀνθρώπων σωτῆρσιν [κ]αὶ εὐεργέταις 
 Αὐρήλιος ‘Qpeiwy γενόμενος στρατηΪγ])ὸς καὶ ἀρχιδικασ- 
 
 τὴς τῆς λαμ[π]ροτάτης πόλεως τῶν Ade~avdpéwy χαίρειν. 
 
 κῶμαί τινες τοῦ ᾿Οξυρυγχείτου νομοῦ, ὦ φιλανθρωπότα- 
 
 70 τοι Αὐτοκράτορες, ἐν ais ἐγώ τε (kal) of υἱοί pou χωρία κεκτήμε- 
 θα σφίό]δρα ἐξησθένησαν ἐνοχλούμεναι ὑπὸ τῶν KaT ἔτος 
 λειτουργιῶν τοῦ τε ταμείου καὶ τῆς παρα[φ)υ λ]ακῆς τῶν 
 τόπων, κινδυνεύουσί τε τῷ μὲν ταμείῳ παραπολέ- 
 σθαι τὴν δὲ ὑμετέραν γῆν ἀγεώργητον καταλιπεῖν. 
 
 "5 ἐγὼ [οἱὖν καὶ τοῦ φιλανθρώπου καὶ τοῦ χρησίμου στοχα- 
 ([6με] 
 τίινα] βραχεῖαν ἑκάστῃ ποιήσασθαι εἰς συνωνὴν 
 χίόρτ]ου οὗ ἡ 
 δαπάνας τῶν κατ᾽ ἔτος λειτουργησόντων ἐπὶ τῷ 
 
 ’ > ᾽ ’ > “ > A 4 
 vos βούλομαι εἰς ἀνάκτησιν αὐτῶν ἐπίδοσίν 
 
 πρόσοδος κατατεθήσεται εἰς τροφὰς καὶ 
 
 55- € σεβαστος inserted later, ros being above the line. 1. ᾿Αραβικός,. ς of αδιαβηνικος 
 corr. from v. 56. 1, Παρθικὸς Méyto| ros. 57. Final s of evoeBns inserted above the - 
 
 line. 70. ὕιοι Pap. 74. 1. ἡμετέραν(). 
 Col ἵν. 
 
 (80) lost, (81). [, (82) A[, (83) τί, (84) ταί, (85) Bo. [, (86) επί; (87) ee 
 (88) μητί, (89) Tox[, (9°) φ . | 
 
705. OFFICIAL 167 
 
 8. The first word probably was or corresponded to ἀποδεχόμεθα ; cf. 1. 59. 
 
 20. The position of χαίρειν after, instead of before, the nominative (cf. 1. 68), is 
 unusual. 
 
 42. Perhaps διὰ δ[ ταῦτα. 
 
 46. οὐκ ἔλαττον ᾿Αττικῶν μυρίων would refer to the sum which Aurelius Horion proposed 
 to spend, but if ταλάντων is supplied at the end of |. 45 (it cannot come in ]. 46) the amount 
 seems enormous. Possibly ᾿Αττικῶν is masculine and should be separated from pup. 
 
 47. δανείζεσθαι : the benefaction apparently took the form of a loan to the city, but 
 since the interest was devoted to public purposes, it was to all intents a gift; cf. the similar 
 case in ll. 76-8. 
 
 50. ᾿Αντ[ι]ν οἷς] νῦν is very doubtful, though a proper name would be expected. The 
 ν at the end of 1. 50 is fairly certain, the only alternative being yo, but the second » could 
 equally well be «. For νυν, ewy can be read. 
 
 54-79. ‘The Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus 
 Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus and the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius 
 Antoninus Pius Augustus to Aurelius Horion, greeting. We approve of this benefaction 
 also which you request leave to confer upon the villages of the Oxyrhynchite nome, giving 
 (to different persons) a succession in the enjoyment of it(?). The same rule shall be 
 observed in this case also, and, as you wish, no change shall be introduced which would 
 divert the gift to any other purpose. 
 
 ‘The request is as follows :-— 
 
 ‘To the most gracious Emperors, Severus and Antoninus, the saviours and benefactors 
 of the world, Aurelius Horion, formerly strategus and archidicastes of the most illustrious 
 city of Alexandria, greeting. Certain villages in the Oxyrhynchite nome, most humane 
 Emperors, in which both I and my sons own estates, are utterly exhausted by the burden-- 
 some demands of the annual λειτουργίαι required both for the Treasury and the protection 
 of the districts, and there is a danger of their being ruined as far as the Treasury is 
 concerned and leaving our(?) land uncultivated. Accordingly having before me a both 
 humane and useful object I wish, in order that they may recover, to make a trifling 
 benefaction to each one for the purchase of hay, the revenue of which shall be devoted to 
 the maintenance and support of those who are annually subject to the λειτουργίαι on condition 
 {ΠΕΡ τ᾿ 
 
 61. ἀμοιβὴν ἐνκτήσεως NO doubt refers to something which was explained more fully in 
 ll. 80 sqq., and owing to the loss of these the meaning is uncertain. We have supposed 
 the sense to be that the inhabitants would enjoy the fruit of the benefaction successively as 
 they were called upon to undertake the λειτουργίαι. 
 
 62-3. ἀμετάστρεπτον eis ἕτερον κιτιλ. : two ideas seem to be confused, (1) the gift is to 
 be ἀμετάστρεπτον, (2) it is forbidden (sc. μὴ ἔξεσται) to spend it on other purposes. 
 
 74. ὑμετέραν may be right, referring to βασιλική or οὐσιακὴ γῆ; but since the scribe is 
 not very accurate, and Aurelius Horion has mentioned his own land in 1. 70, the correction 
 ἡμετέραν is more probable. 
 
 77. εἰς συνωνὴν χίόρτ]ου: cf. 507. 24. The details of the scheme are somewhat 
 obscure, but it is clear that the benefaction would extend over a series of years, and unless 
 the ἐπίδοσις was an annual present (in which case the necessity for having an Imperial 
 guarantee for its continuance seems pointless), it must have been a capital sum of money 
 which produced a yearly revenue; cf. the first petition, especially ll. 48-9. Apparently 
 the revenue of the ἐπίδοσις was to be assigned to the different villages, i.e. placed in charge 
 
168 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 of the chief men, and invested in hay, the profits from the sale of which were to be assigned 
 to the persons who in any year were burdened with λειτουργία. Why Aurelius Horion 
 selected this particular form for his benefaction we cannot say; but 507 suggests that 
 good profits were to be made out of hay, presumably by buying it cheap and selling it dear. 
 
 706. Report ΟΕ LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. 
 16-6 X 10-8 cm. About A.D. 115. 
 
 Conclusion of a report of a case tried before M. Rutilius Lupus, praefect 
 in A.D. 114-7. The litigants were Damarion, apparently a freedman, and his 
 patron Heraclides; but owing to the mutilation of the papyrus the precise 
 nature of the question at issue is not clear. Damarion asserted that Heraclides 
 had accepted from him a sum of money in settlement of all claims, but the 
 praefect nevertheless gave an entirely adverse judgement, and threatened to 
 have him beaten if further complaints were made. The most interesting point 
 is the opposition between the native Egyptian law and the ἀστικοὶ νόμοι, i. 6. 
 the law of Alexandria, which conferred certain powers upon the patrons of 
 liberated slaves in relation to the slaves so liberated, and upon which the 
 decision of the praefect is based. No doubt Heraclides was an Alexandrian 
 citizen. 
 
 11 letters ] wap Αἰγυπτίοις 18 letters 
 τοὺς ἀπελευθ)έρους τοῖς πάτρωσι, τὸν δὲ ᾿ΗραζκἸ]λείδην 
 
 φέναι χειρόγρ]αφον περὶ τοῦ μηδὲν ἕξειν πρᾶγμα 
 ἱπρὸς αὐτόν, Kali ἀναγνόντος τὸ χειρόγραφον Δοῦπος 
 
 in 
 [ 
 Sas ἀπειληφέναι map αὐτοῦ ἀργύριον Kal yeypa- 
 [ 
 5 
 
 βουλευσάμενο)ς μετὰ τῶν φίλων ἀπεφήνατο οὕτως" 
 «ἐν μὲν τοῖς τῶν] Αἰγυπτίων νόμοις οὐδὲν περὶ τῆς 
 14 letters ns ἐξουσίας τῶν ἀπελευθερωσάντων 
 
 Tore | ἀϊκοϊλούθως τοῖς ἀστικοῖς νόμοις 
 
 ΤΟ ᾿ς κατὰ τὸν νόμον. καὶ τῷ Δαμαρίωνι εἶπεν" 
 
 [ 
 [ 
 [ | 
 
 TOA a tare Aapapt\wva Ἡρακλείδῃ τῷ πάτρωνι 
 | 
 ESS ci ahaees Jou Kat προστίθημι ἐάν σε μέμψηται 
 | 
 
 9 4 ξυϊλοκοπηθῆναί σε κελεύσω. 
 
707. OFFICIAL 169 
 
 6. βουλευσάμενοἸς κιτιλ.: cf. e.g. P. Catt. iv. 12, 19, and P. Goodsp. 29. iii. 1, where 
 read Λιβερᾶλ[ις (Ὁ) λαλήσας. 
 
 9. τοῖς ἀστικοῖς νόμοις : cf. the common use of ἀστός and ἀστή to designate citizens of 
 Alexandria, e.g. 271. 3, 477. 14. That Alexandrians enjoyed certain privileges, especially 
 with regard to taxation, is well-known, but the present seems to be the first direct reference 
 to a peculiar code of law. Lumbroso had indeed already inferred (7 Egz#o, p. 65) from the 
 distinction drawn between citizens of Alexandria and others in the matter of corporal 
 punishment (Philo, 2 Fac. c. 10) that there were also differences of law and procedure ; 
 and this view now finds ample confirmation. Cf. the contrast in the Ptolemaic period 
 between the πολιτικοὶ νόμοι (i.e. laws particularly affecting the Greeks, P. Tebt. I. p. 58) and 
 the τῆς χώρας νόμος in P. Taur. 1. iv. 17 and vii. 9. 
 
 13. ξυλοκοπηθῆναι : cf. 653 ἐὰν μὴ ποιήσῃς οὐ μόνον κατακριθήσει ἀλλὰ καὶ δαρήσ᾽ει. Perhaps 
 Ἡρακλείδης is to be supplied at the beginning of the line, though this would place Damarion 
 entirely at his opponent’s mercy. 
 
 707. ReEpoRT ΟΕ LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. 
 26 Χ 31°5 cm. About a.p. 136. 
 
 What remains of this account of a trial before some magistrate—the 
 particular court is not specified—consists chiefly of the opening speech of the 
 counsel for the plaintiff Plutarchus. The prime cause of the dispute was the 
 failure of one of the defendants, Philinus, to fulfil the terms of a contract, a copy 
 οἵ which is prefixed (Col. i), made by him with a woman named Demetria for 
 the lease of a vineyard and orchard. Philinus had undertaken to carry out 
 certain improvements, in consideration of which he had received from Demetria 
 a sum of 2000 drachmae. The promised improvements, however, were not 
 effected ; and the obligations of Philinus were subsequently taken over by his 
 brother Antistius. At the expiration of the term of the lease the land seems 
 to have been let to a new tenant, the plaintiff Plutarchus (cf. note on 1]. 15-7) ; 
 but the ‘papyrus breaks off before the relation of the latter to the two brothers 
 or the occasion of the present dispute are elucidated. 
 
 This document is on the verso of the papyrus. The recto is occupied with 
 ‘three columns of a survey of different pieces of land, written probably early in 
 the second century. Mention is made of ψιλ(οὶ) τόπ(οι) ἐν of[s] κέλλαι ἐμπί(οιού- 
 μεναι ?) ὑπὸ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων and of τόπ(οι) ἱερατικοί. 
 
 Coles, 
 
 eval. - 
 Ἰν δημοσίων καὶ 
 
170 THE ONVYRAYNCHUS PARR 
 
 dob es Ujrép φόρου οἴνου 
 ἑἸξαετίας ἔκτακτα 
 
 5 Ἰων ἐπὶ τὴν αἰὐ)τὴν ἑξαετίαν δημο- 
 σίων Ἰς τῇ αὐτῇ ἑξαετίᾳ ἐπάναγκον δὲ ἕως 
 οἰκοδομήσω τροχὸν ἐκ καινῆς τῶν ἐπάνω με- 
 ρῶν Ἰη παρὰ τῆς Anpntpias (δραχμὰς) ᾽Β ἀφ᾽ ὧν εἰσιν 
 | Δημητρίας ζευίγ ) B βοῶν (δραχμ ) υξ καὶ καταθη- 
 10 Ἰν πάντα σύμφυτα καὶ ἔμφορα καὶ ἀκολ(ουθ ) 
 
 Ἰκ « [...«ἦισαν καὶ εὐδοκῶ: χρίό(νος)] ὁ αὐτός). 
 
 Col. il. 
 
 Πλούταρχος... . . . mpdjs Φιλῖν[οἹν καὶ ᾿Ανθέστιον apdorépor[s 
 oe Be ee ἀπὸ ᾿Οξυρύγχων π]όλ[εω]ς. Yapariov ῥήτωρ ὑπὲρ 
 
 « 
 
 Πλουτάρχου εἶπεν: ὁ συνηγορούμ]ενος Πλούταρχος ἐμισθώ- 
 
 21 letters ln Δημητρία προπεποίηται τοῖς 
 
 ς 
 
 | 
 [ 
 15 [caTo παρὰ Anpntplas τινὰ πἸερὶ τὸν ᾿Οξυρυγχείτην ὕπαρξιν 
 [ 
 [ TO eis μισθ)ώσεωϊ 5] ὁ vedrepos τῶν ἀντιτετ[α)γμέ- 
 [νων Φιλεῖνο]ς μισθωσάμενος παρὰ αὐτῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ ιὃδ (ἔτους 
 Ἁδρια[ζνοῦ Καίσ]αρος τοῦ κυρίου εἰς ἔτη ἐξ ἀμπελῶνα καὶ πω- 
 20 pdpliov περὶ κώμην Σ᾽ ερῦφιν κατ᾽ ἔνγραπτον μίσθωσιν δι’ ἧς 
 δεδήλω[τ]αι ἐν μὲν τῇ πρώτῃ τετραετίᾳ μηδὲν ὑπὲρ φόρου 
 τελέσαι ἀλλὰ μόνα [τ]ὰ δημόσια διαγράψαι ἐπὶ τῷ πᾶσαν 
 τὴν ἐν τῷ κτί[ή)ματι διάψειλον γῆν ἀνάξαι ἀμπέλῳ τῇ 
 
 , 
 
 δὲ λοιπῇ διετίᾳ τελέσαι τὰ διὰ τῆς μισθώσεως ὑπὲρ φό- 
 
 é 
 te 3 
 
 25 ρου ἀνειλημμένα ἀνασ[τῆ)σαί τε τὰς τοῦ κτήματος 
 Ν ’ - 3. EN ra Ν ’ 
 
 καὶ πωμαρίου πλάτας ἐπὶ μέτροις καὶ λαμβάνοντα 
 
 παρὰ τῆς Anuntpias (δραχμὰς) ᾿᾽Β ἀνοικοδομῆσαι τροχὸν ἐκ και- 
 
 “" > 3 “.Ῥ v4 3 \. 2 ε lA e 
 
 νῆς ἐξ ὀϊπτῆς)] πλίνθου ἐπὶ μέτροις ὡρισμένοις. ὅν- 
 
 περ λαβόντα τὰς (δραχμὰς) ᾽Β τὸν μὲν τροχὸν μὴ πεποιηκέναι 
 30 ἐπὶ τοῖς δίηλωθεῖσι μέτροις ἀλλὰ ἀσυντέλεστον κατα- 
 
 λελοιπέναι τοῦ τε κ[τ]ήματος τέλειον ἠμεληκέναι 
 
 καὶ μηδὲ τὰς πλάτας περιβεβληκέναι. τούτων οὕτως 
 
 ἐχόντων τῷ 10 (ἔτει) Ἁδριανοῦ Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου ἐνγυητὴς 
 
707. OFFICIAL 171 
 γείνεται τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ Φιλείνου [4Ἱνθέστιος πάντων τῶν 
 35 διὰ τῆς μ[ἡσθώσεως] ἀνειλημ[μέϊνων καὶ ἔσχε αὐτὸς τὰ συν- 
 
 γεγραμμένα αἰ" . . .]... ν΄. αλί. . .] γῆ μὴ ἀναχθεῖσα ἀμπέλῳ 
 
 ἄχρι τούτου δὶ 13 letters |nw..as δὲ ἐκ τοῦ ἐποικίου 
 καὶ ἑτεῖρ 16) τ ὁ] ἀντιτεταγμένος καὶ... [.. 
 οὐκολ] Τοῦ Jaros καὶ δραχμὰᾶϊς . - - -. 
 
 40 κοσίαϊς ΤΟ μ]ενας ὑπό τινος γεῖ. - « «..- 
 Δημηϊτρία 1a Se eto Poca eae ΩΣ Cae 
 αὐτὸν τί 1 ia oe ]. dn 
 dos . | 
 
 τῷ K (ἔτει) [ 
 
 g. κα Of κατα written above πα. 17. 1. νεώτερος. ge Of αντιτετίαἷγμε corr. from A? 
 22. at Of reXeoa written above 7. 247. In the left margin against this line is an oblique 
 dash. 36. a of ad{ corr. and A above the line over a deleted letter. 
 
 Col. ii. ‘Plutarchus son of ... against Philinus and Antistius, both sons of .. ., of 
 
 Oxyrhynchus. Sarapion, advocate for Plutarchus, said :—My client Plutarchus leased from 
 Demetria a property in the Oxyrhynchite nome following upon (?) a lease previously made 
 with Demetria by Philinus, the younger of our opponents, who rented from her for 6 years 
 from the 14th year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord a vineyard and orchard at the village of 
 Seruphis in accordance with a written agreement, in which it was stated that in the first 
 four years he should be charged no rent but only pay the taxes on condition of his planting 
 vines over the whole of the open space in the vineyard, that for the remaining two years he 
 should pay the rent set forth in the lease, that he should restore on a certain scale the 
 walls (?) of the vineyard and orchard, and on receiving from Demetria 2000 drachmae should 
 build on a fixed scale a new wheel of baked brick. It appears that having taken the 2000 
 drachmae he did not make the wheel according to the stated scale, but left it uncompleted 
 and entirely neglected the vineyard, not even putting up the walls round it. In these 
 circumstances in the 1gth year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord Antistius became surety on 
 behalf of his brother Philinus for all the obligations of the lease and himself took over...’ 
 
 4. ἔκτακτα : Cf. 646 ἃ ἔσται καὶ ἔκτακτον τοῦ... ἀφήλικος. 
 
 8-9. The value of the two pairs οἵ βόες, 460 drachmae, was apparently included 
 in the 2000 drachmae received by Philinus from Demetria (cf. Il. 26-9), and 1. 9g is 
 probably to be restored τιμὴ ὧν ἔχω παρὰ τῆς] Δημητρίας ζευ(γῶν) β βοῶν (δραχμαὶ) vé. Cf. 
 729. 39 sqq., where βόες are a good deal more expensive. καταθη might perhaps be read 
 τὰ kaOn||xovra(?), the κα being above the line. 
 
 10. σύμφυτα: cf, 729. 22. ἔμφορος is otherwise known only from Hesychius, ἔμφορα" 
 προβεβλημένα' ἀγέλη προβάτων, where commentators have supposed some corruption. 
 
 15-7. The restoration of these lines, which involve the relations of Plutarchus to 
 Demetria and the brothers, is a doubtful matter. If Δημητρία is made the subject of 
 προπεποίηται, the nominatives ὁ vedrepos . . . μισθωσάμενος, are left suspended. We are 
 
172 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 therefore inclined to read Anpntpia, connecting 6 νεώτερος with προπεποίηται, and suggest 
 ὕπαρξιν [dpovpov ..... ἐξ fis τῇ αὐτῇ (or σὺν τ᾽) Anuntpig προπεποίηται τοῖς ἰἔμπροσθεν χρόνοις 
 μισθ]ώσεωϊ ςἾ, κιτιλ, π]ερὶ τὸν ᾿Οξυρυγχείτην is unusual ; ἐν τῷ ᾽Ο. would be expected. 
 
 23. διάψειλον γῆν: this phrase, which here occurs for the first time, throws light 
 upon two passages in the B. G. U. which have hitherto remained unexplained (cf. Wilcken, 
 Ost. I. p. 404). These are entries in two very closely related taxing-lists from Socnopaei 
 Nesus, B. G. U. το. 8 ψυγμοῦ καὶ διαψείλ(ου or -wv) (ἀρουρῶν) v8 and 277. ii. 5 διαψυγμάτων 
 καὶ διαψείλων πρὸς ἐλαιῶ(νι) (dpovpdv) vd, the heading in each case being followed by two 
 or three names. The 54 arourae are evidently the same in both documents, and consisted 
 of a ψυγμός or διαψύγματα (cf. P. Tebt. 86. 45 and 522. 4) and διάψειλα or διάψειλος γῆ, 
 upon which certain payments had to be made by the persons named. How διάψιλος 
 differed from ψιλὴ γῆ, if at all, does not appear. The word is found in Hesychius, ψηνός" 
 Wedves, διάψιλος. 
 
 25. ἀνειλημμένα: the verb recurs in the same unusual sense in 1. 35. Β. Ὁ. ὕ. 277. 
 li. 10 of φό(ροι) ἐν οὐσιακῷ λόγῳ ἀναλαμβάνονται is hardly parallel. 
 
 26. πωμαρίου is of course the Latin pomartum. The use of madras here is strange. 
 The word πλάτας or πλάτης occurs in several inscriptions from Aphrodisias (e. g. C.1.G. 
 2824; cf. Boeckh’s remarks ad Joc.) meaning apparently the substructure of a funerary 
 monument. Here the πλάται seem to be surrounding walls; cf. ]. 32 τὰς mAdras περιβε- 
 βληκέναι. 
 
 37. Apparently not |nuevas. The supposed ὃ of δέ is more like a. 
 
 708. Two LETTERS To A STRATEGUS. 
 10:2 Χο: cm. A.D. 188, 
 
 The recto of this papyrus contains part of an account of corn, very large 
 amounts in artabae (e.g. 168, 486 4 #4.) being mentioned, as well as the κ]ατασπ(ορὰ) 
 κθ (ἔτους), which refers to the reign of Commodus more probably than to that 
 of Caracalla. On the verso are copies of two letters from Antonius Aelianus, 
 a high official whose rank is not stated, but who was probably epistrategus 
 or dioecetes, to the strategus of the Diospolite nome in the Thebaid, stating 
 that two ship-loads of wheat from that nome had on examination proved to 
 be adulterated with barley and earth, and ordering the strategus to exact the 
 deficiency from the sitologi responsible for it. From a mention of a chiliarch in 
 1. 12 it appears that the corn was required for military purposes. The first 
 letter, which is practically complete, is dated in the 29th year, probably of the 
 reign of Commodus. The second follows the same formula, so far as it goes. 
 
 [ x 
 [Avri@vios Αἰλιανὸς στρα(τηγῷ) 4ιοπ(ολίτου) OnB(aisos) χαί(ίρειν). 
 [τοῦ] καταχθέντος γόμου ἐκ τοῦ ὑπὸ σοὶ νομοῦ 
 
CUS Ou elie Ee 173 
 δι 
 
 ν τῇ] τίῶ)ν δειγμάτων ἄρσει οὐ καθαροῦ φανέντος 
 
 ῷ» 
 
 "Ἰαύσιος Σιπῶτος καὶ τῶν σὺν αὐτῷ ἐν (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβαις) ’B 
 
 — 
 
 Neo 
 
 σι 
 No 
 
 κ]έλευσα ἡμιαρτάβιον κριθολογηθῆναι 
 καὶ βωλολογηθῆναι, καὶ ἐξέβη ἔλασσον 
 
 = 
 
 κριθῆς μὲν [(ἀρτάβαι)}] ἑκατοσταὶ δύο βώλου δὲ ὁμοί- 
 
 — 
 
 ws ἑκατοστῆς ἥμισυ. τοὺς [οὖν τὸν πυρὸν [ἐϊμβα- 
 10 ἰλοἸμένους σιτολόγους πρᾶξον τῷ σῷ κινδύνῳ 
 
 τὰ)ς συναγο(μένου) σίτο(υ) διαφόρῳ (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβας) ν (ἥμισυ) δ΄ Kali] τὰ 
 προ]σμ(ετρούμενα) καὶ τὰς ἄλλας δαπάνας, καὶ προσθέμε- 
 
 vos] τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ χι(λιάρχου) δήλωσόν μοι. (ἔτους) KO Φαώ(φὴ λ. 
 
 ] ἐκο(μισάμην ?) δύο, / β. 
 
 Ce ee cece Il τι τοι 
 
 1g [ἄλλ]ης. ‘Avrdvios Αἰλιανὸς στρα(τηγῷ) 4ιοπ(ολίτου) OnB(aidos) ya(fpetr). 
 
 τοῦ] καταχθέντος γόμου ἐκ τοῦ ὑπὸ σοὶ νομ(οῦ) διὰ 
 
 [ 
 [ 
 [- . νυχου [ΠἸανγορσαούιος ἐν (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβαις) ov 
 [ev τ]ἢ τῶν δίειγγμίάτων ἄρσει οὐ καθαροῦ φανέν- 
 [ 
 
 τοῖς ἐκέλευσα (ἥμισυ) (ἀρτάβης) κριθο(λογη θῆναι) καὶ βωλοϊλ]ογηθ(ῆναι) 
 [καὶ ἐξέβ(η) 
 20 [ἔλασ]σον κριθῆς μὲν ἑκατοστὴ ad [βώλου δὲ ὁμ(οίως). 
 [τοὺς] οὖν τὸν [π]υρὸν ἐμβαλομένους [σιτολ(όγους) πρᾶξον 
 ἰτῷ σῷ] κινδύ(νῳ) [τ]Ἰὰς συναγο(μένου) σ(ίτου) δ ιαἸφ(όρῳ) (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβας) 
 
 ig pleted s τὰ 
 
 2-13. ‘Antonius Aelianus to the strategus of the Diospolite nome in the Thebaid, 
 greeting. Since the cargo dispatched from the nome under you in charge of |.|ausis son of 
 Sipos and his companions, amounting to 2000 artabae of wheat, appeared at the weighing 
 of the samples to have been adulterated, I ordered that the amount of barley and earth in 
 half an artaba of it should be ascertained, and it proved to be under measure by 2 per cent. 
 of barley and likewise 4 percent. of earth. Accordingly exact at your own risk from the 
 sitologi who shipped the wheat the difference on the whole amount of the corn, 50% artabae 
 of wheat, and the extra payments and other expenses, and when you have added this total 
 to the account of the chiliarch let me know. The zgth year, Phaophi 30.’ 
 
 11. ν (ἥμισυ) δ΄ : 24 per cent. on 2000 artabae (I. 4) is 50 artabae, so Antonius Aelianus 
 has added on 3 art. 
 
 13. χι(λιάρχου) : or perhaps (dexada)p(xov). Thee is drawn through the y. 
 
 14. The meaning of this line is obscure. For ἐκοζμισάμην) cf. P. Petrie II. 12 (1) verso. 
 8 might be read instead of «, and there is a horizontal stroke above 0. ἑκα(τοσταί) cannot be 
 read. ἐπιστολάς is apparently to be supplied after δύο. 
 
174 THE OXNRAY NCH US PARPYRI 
 
 709. Tour oF INSPECTION. 
 14:7 XII+5 cM. About A.D. 50. 
 
 This fragment of a letter gives some important geographical information 
 about Egypt in the first century. It describes a tour of inspection throughout 
 the country about to be taken by a high official, probably the praefect or 
 δικαιοδότης. Starting from a place which is not mentioned (Alexandria ἢ), he 
 was to go first to Pelusium, thence through the nomes situated along the eastern 
 side of the Delta, the Tanite and Sethroite, Arabia, and another nome, not 
 previously found in Greek (l. 6, note), to Memphis. Next he was to travel 
 direct to the Thebaid, and come back through the Heptanomis, the Arsinoite 
 nome, and the other nomes in the Delta which he had not visited on his upward 
 journey, finally reaching Alexandria. The chief point of interest is the mention 
 of the Heptanomis and Arsinoite nome. Wilcken (Os¢. I. pp. 423-7) attributes 
 the creation of the Heptanomis to the period between A.D. 68, when the edict 
 of Tiberius Alexander seems to be ignorant of its existence, and 130, and 
 adopts the view of Schwarz (Kein. Mus. 1896, p. 637) that the Arsinoite nome 
 originally belonged to the Heptanomis, but was separated from it by Hadrian 
 to make room for the newly-founded Antinoite nome. The papyrus, however, 
 which quite certainly belongs to the first century and yet mentions the Arsinoite 
 nome as distinct from the Heptanomis, disposes of Schwarz’s hypothesis 
 altogether, and pushes back the latest possible date of the creation of the 
 Heptanomis far into the first century. The handwriting of the papyrus is by 
 no means of a late first century type, and we should assign it to the reign of 
 Claudius or Nero rather than to that of one of the Flavian emperors. In any 
 case it is now clear, on the one hand, that the Arsinoite nome was on account 
 of its isolated position never reckoned in the Heptanomis, and on the other, 
 that some hitherto unsuspected nome belonged to the Heptanomis before the 
 creation of the ’Avrivoitns. The most probable explanation is that Antinoite was 
 a new name given to a previously existing nome, and that Hadrian only did 
 what Ptolemy Philadelphus had done in the case of the λιμνή (Rev. Laws, 
 p. xlix). Strabo, who is a little earlier than the papyrus, does not help; but 
 his list of nomes has not so far accorded very well with the evidence of Ptolemaic 
 and Roman papyri. ; 
 
 eaareers Jovov .[.] TO AoytoTHpilov..... 
 
ΧΟ LG Ie 175 
 
 [διαλο]γισμοῦ ἐστάθηι ἵνα τῇ [.. ...... 
 Kao tae Ἰων τὸν ἀνάπλουν ποιήσηται Kal 
 kak ee | εἰς Πηλούσιον ἀπελθὼν διαλο- 
 
 5 [γίσητ]αι Τανίτην Σ᾿ εθροίτην ApaBiav 
 [4ὐἸίαν, ἐν Μένφει γενόμενος ὁμοίως 
 Θηβαίδαν ἑπτὰ νομοὺς ᾿Αρσινοίτην, 
 
 τοὺς δὲ λοιποὺς τῆς κάτωι χώρας ν]ομοὺς 
 
 εἰς ἀλεξάνδρειαν. ταῦτα δὲ αἱ... .. 
 
 10 ἐστάθηι εἰς δὲ τὰ λογιστήριά τινα 
 kat ἄνόρα πάντων τῶν an[........ 
 αἰτοῦ μέθας, Δλοϊπὸν οὖν Ee... ιν ee ee 
 γραμματεῖς CON Die a eevee coe ie 
 eee | ἄσποροι τῆς Ot. or..... asad 
 
 seen tee er σ]ταλείσας . [ 
 Reelin sta ute \rada . [ 
 ἘΌΝ Wises « |e 
 
 On the verso Θέωνι δὶ 
 3. Second ἡ of ποιησηται corr. from a. 6. μ of μενφει corr. from ¢. 
 
 6. [Αὐ]ίαν (or possibly [Ajiav) was suggested by Mr. Griffith. It refers to the district 
 called in hieroglyphics ‘Az situated on the Eastern side of the Delta (Brugsch, Dict. Geogr. 
 p. 119), and known to Pliny (12. WV. vi. 29) @ sznu Laeanttico (1. Aelanttico) aller sinus quem 
 Arabes Aean vocant tn quo Heroon oppidum est. Brugsch considers it to have been part of 
 the Memphite nome. 
 
 710. ORDER FOR PAYMENT. 
 Fr. (2) 7X 13°5 cm. BCurt rs 
 
 This papyrus, which is one of the few Ptolemaic documents found at 
 Oxyrhynchus, contained an order, probably addressed to a royal bank by an 
 official, to pay various sums of money to 47 persons. Of these 44 were carrying 
 documents, and they were accompanied by a ὡρογράφος, i.e. a precis-writer, 
 a title not hitherto found on a papyrus, an ἔφοδος who acted as escort, and 
 
176 THE OXYRAYNCAHOS«PARY RI 
 
 a ‘camel-man, this being one of the rare references to the use of camels in 
 the Ptolemaic period. The 7th year mentioned in 1. 5 must on palaeo- 
 graphical grounds belong to the reign of Ptolemy Soter II. In Fr. (δ) ὡρογράφω", 
 ἐφόδωι Or καμηλίτηι is probably to be supplied at the beginnings of ll. 7 and 8. 
 
 (2) | (4) 
 [Srepeseoaieewes 1 χρημίά]τισΐον το]ῖϊς Ἰ (ταλαντ at 
 ἐν τῶι ᾽Οξυρυγχίτηι βυβλιαφόροις Ἰ α (τάλαντον) a | 
 ἀνδράσι pd ὡρογράφωι a | @ (τάλαντον) a [ 
 
 ἐφόδωι a καμηλίτηι a, / μέ, 
 
 5 τοῦ Θωὺθ τοῦ ¢ (ἔτους) κατὰ 
 
 711. Crnsus—List. 
 7X 18-5 cm. About B.c. 14. 
 
 A fragment from an official statement or list connected with the census and 
 poll-tax. There are parts of two columns, but the first has only the ends of 
 lines (not printed), and the second is, unfortunately, disfigured by lacunae which 
 deprive it of much of its value, though any fresh items of information may be 
 welcomed on the interesting question of the Egyptian census in the early years 
 of Augustus. The existing evidence on the subject was collected in P. Oxy. II. 
 pp. 207-14, where it was shown that the fourteen years’ census-cycle could be 
 traced back with security to A.D. 19-20, and with probability to A.D. 5-6 and 
 B.C. 10-9, but no further, although censuses and poll-tax are attested still 
 earlier in Augustus’ reign, and now appear from the Tebtunis papyri (103, 
 introd.) to go far back into the first century B.c. The present document 
 mentions certain ‘ youths (épnBevxdres) registered (or ‘entered’) on a poll-tax list 
 by us (the λαογράφοι ἢ) in the 15th year of Caesar,’ ἐφηβευκότες in this context 
 probably meaning boys above the age of fourteen, when they became liable to 
 the tax in question. Reference is also made to a wrong entry in a previous list 
 of some persons ‘as having... before the 6th year.’ This is too vague to be . 
 of much use; but the 6th year (B.C. 25-4) would seem to be a recognized 
 landmark in the history of the census or the poll-tax, and some important step 
 in the reorganization of the system may possibly have then been made. The 
 
12. (OFFICIAL 177 
 
 6th year, however, does not fall in with the fourteen years’ cycle, being one 
 year too early. | 
 
 On the verso of the papyrus are parts of two columns, written not much 
 later than the recto, of a series of names with some figures opposite, no doubt 
 a taxing-list of some kind, and not improbably also concerned with the poll-tax. 
 
 EXO ται Mie Ve eet. LOL 
 TAS μος κατὰ TO Tapoy,..|.’.|ueva .[.. .lo]... τα: 
 καὶ ἄλλων τῶν ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἐπὶ τοῦ Le (ἔτους) Καίσαρος λελα- 
 ου 
 ογραφημένων en. . .ἸΦ[. (ων ἐφηβευκόϊτω]ν ὡς 
 5 καὶ ἐκ παραλογισμ[οῦ εν. μενος ws πρὸ τ]οῦ 
 ς' (ἔτους) Καίσαροϊς . .|f[... των π[ιἼρων εἶ. . .... yl | 
 
 ὁμοῖ 
 
 2. ras may be the article and connected with the participle following παρόν, or the 
 
 termination of a word in the previous line like τελοῦντας. Cf. P. Tebt. 103. 1-3 λαογρ(αφία) 
 . Tehov[yt lov σύνταξιν, and τελῶν (so Wilcken) σύνταξιν in P. Grenf. I. 45. 8. 
 
 4. \f| is quite doubtful, since all that remains of the letter is part of a long vertical 
 stroke projecting above the lacuna, which might equally well represent e.g. the sign for 
 ἔτος. But it does not seem possible to get either another year or a conjunction into the 
 short space available, and we therefore conclude that λελαογραφημένων and ἐφηβευκότων are 
 to be taken together, with some qualifying term between them; ἐπ᾽ [ἀμ] φ  ὁδων might suit. 
 At the end of the line ὡς with ov written above the o is difficult; if οὖς was intended the 
 accusative may be governed by | . μενος in ]. 5. 
 
 5-6. ὡς πρὸ tod ς (ἔτους) : cf. similar instances of the use of πρό in 257. 25, 481. 15. 
 
 712. COLLECTION oF A DEBT. 
 II+5 X 10-3 cm. Late second century. 
 
 The imperfect condition of this papyrus is much to be deplored, for if more 
 complete it would probably have gone far to solve the uncertainties attaching 
 to the functions of that much discussed official, the ξενικῶν mpaxtwp. As it is, 
 the lines being throughout incomplete both at the beginnings and ends, and the 
 amount lost being shown by Il. 12-3 to exceed 40 letters between each line, 
 the papyrus whets our curiosity without satisfying it. There are two documents, 
 
 N 
 
178 THE OXYRAYNGCH US: LAr YR, 
 
 the first written (Il. 9 544.) being an application to the overseers of the ξενικῶν 
 
 πρακτορία of the Athribite nome from a member of the Sosicosmian tribe, stating 
 
 that he had in A.D. 146-7 lent 300 drachmae at interest to two brothers, called 
 
 Potamon and Pathermouthis, upon the security of some house-property at 
 
 Monthmereu. Repayment not having been made at the proper time, a writ 
 
 was served upon the brothers (Il. 16-7), but since this had no effect, the applicant 
 requests the overseers to foreclose upon the house and exact payment (Il. 18-21). 
 
 In the margin above this application is (ll. 1-7) a letter from the overseers to 
 the keepers of the record office, apparently requesting them to take possession 
 of the property and collect the debt and interest, as well as the miscellaneous 
 _ charges for collection made by the State. The title, ἐπιτηρηταὶ ξενικῶν πρακτορίας, 
 is new, and, since ἐπιτηρηταί are generally connected with ovat, suggests that the 
 profits made by the State from collecting debts were farmed out, like most 
 other revenues. That this was actually the case is proved by 825, an account 
 rendered to the μισθωταὶ ξενικῶν πρακτορίας by one of their πραγματευταί, By 
 the second century therefore, at any rate, the functions which in the Ptolemaic 
 period and perhaps still in the first century A.D. seem to have been combined 
 in the person of the ξενικῶν πράκτωρ (cf. P. Tebt. 5. 221, note, and 286), were 
 divided, and we find side by side the parallel bodies of official ἐπιτηρηταί and 
 private μισθωταί with subordinate πραγματευταί, But while 712 and 825 are 
 
 a valuable illustration of the second term in the phrase ξενικῶν πρακτορία, they 
 throw little light upon the first, in which the main difficulty lies. The explana- 
 
 tion of ξενικῶν which we offered (/. cc.) that it means debts contracted by ξένοι, 
 
 i.e. persons living at places outside the district to which they properly belonged, 
 still remains the only one which rests on the evidence of parallels from the use 
 of ξένος in papyri, though it is not clear why 6. g.in P. Tebt. 5. 221 debts of 
 ξένοι should be a subject of legislation and not debts in general. Our hypothesis 
 gains some support from the circumstance—which may be a mere accident, but 
 if so is a very remarkable coincidence—that both 712 and 825 have to do with 
 debts from persons who were not living in the Oxyrhynchite nome. In 712 the 
 
 ἐπιτηρηταί belong to the Athribite nome, but about the property distrained upon the 
 
 only fact that is certain is that it was not in the Oxyrhynchite nome (Μωνθμερεύ 
 and its toparchy, Nopaceirns, in 1. 20, are both unknown), while the nome to 
 which the officials addressed by the émrnpnrat belonged, as well as that of the 
 writer of the application, is doubtful; cf. notes on ll.1 and 13. In 825 the 
 πραγματευτής was concerned with the Memphite nome, but that the picbwrat 
 belonged to the Oxyrhynchite nome has only a general probability resting on 
 the provenance of the document. 
 
 The date of the papyrus is lost, but it was certainly posterior to the 10th 
 
Vee Or hiGiAL 179 
 
 year of Antoninus mentioned in 1. 13 (cf. 1]. 16-8), and may be as late as the 
 beginning of Commodus’ reign; cf. note on 1. 7. 
 
 καὶ ὧν ἐπιτη(ρηταὶ ἕενικ(ῶν) πραϊκτ(ορείας) ᾿Αθρε[ιβ(ίτου)) 
 βι[βλ)ιοφύλ(αξιν) ἐϊγκ]τ(ήσεων) [.Ἰατοΐ. .]. [ 
 Ἰομὼς παραδείξεως ὑφ᾽ ἣν ἔστιν ε.Ϊ 
 
 1 κατάσχετε οὖν πρὸς ἐνεχυρασίᾳν ἣν παρεδὶ 
 Παθερμοῦθις καὶ ὁ ἀδελφὸς] αὐτοῦ Ποτάμων Θανώχιος τοῦ [.12 . ἡτιος ἀπὸ .Ϊ 
 5 τὴν ὑπ]άρχουσαν αὐτῶι Kal TOL ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ Παθερ- 
 (μ)ούθι οἰκίαν καὶ αὐλὴν 
 1 ἀργυ(ρίου) (δραχμὰς) τ καὶ τόκους καὶ τέλη 
 καὶ dan(dvas), πρω(τοπραξίας) oton(s) τῷ δη(μοσίῳ) Kal? 
 
 (ἔτους). 1 // Iai x. 
 
 and hand καὶ ὠἸνι ἐπιτηρηταῖς ξενικῶν πρακτορίας ᾿Αθρε[ϊίβιτου 
 παρὰ Ἰωνος τοῦ Νεοπτολέμου Σωσικοσμείου τοῦ καὶ Ηλι 
 10 Ἰν χρηϊμ]ατισμὸν ἐνεχυρασίας ὧν τὸ ἕτερον ἀνΐ 
 
 ἐπὶ πράξεως τῶν ὀφειλομένων pole ὑπὸ Ποτά- 
 μωνος [Θανώχιος Too... ητιος, 
 καὶ τοῦ Ποτάμωνος ἀδελφοῦ Παθερμούθιος ἐξ ἀλληλεγγύης κατὰ 
 δημόσίιον χρηματισμὸν γεγονότα 
 
 διὰ τοῦ ἐν πόλει ἀρ]χείου τῷ δεκάτῳ ἔτει ᾿Αν]τωνείνου Καίσαρος 
 τοῦ κυρίου 
 wou τοῦ Ποτί[ἀμ)ωῖνος δραχμῶν ἑκατὸν τόκων 
 δραχμι[αίων 
 15 Ἰ.. φ.1.ερῖ.1. ἐξ ἀλληλ[εγγύ]ης ἀργυρίου dpaxpldv 
 διακοσίων 
 τῆς ἀποδόσεως μὴ γεγονυείης μείτα]δοθέντος τε τοῦ τῆς 
 ἐνεχυϊρασίας ἀντιγράφου 
 Παθερμούθι καὶ τῷ ἀδελφῷ] αὐτοῦ Ποίτ]άμωνι διὰ Εἰρ[ηἹνίωνος ὑπηρέτου 
 , τῇ in τίοῦ 
 καὶ διελ)θόντοϊς] πλείονος χρόνου ἀντὶ τῶν διὰ τοῦ προστί 
 
 κατασχεῖν πρὸς ἐν)εχ[υρ]ασίαν τῷ ἰδίῳ μου κινδύνῳ τοῦ Ποτάμωνος κατατί 
 :9 τὴν ὑπάρχουσαν) αὐτῷ ἐν κώμῃ Μωνθμερεὺ τοῦ Νορασείτου ἄνω οἰκίαν 
 καὶ αὐλὴν 
 
 N 2 
 
τὸς THE OXYRHYNCHUS ΡΑΡΥΚΙ 
 
 ἀργυρίου δραχμὰς τ]ριακοσίας καὶ τόκους κ[α]ὶ τέϊλ]η καὶ πρακτορικὰς Kal 
 τὰς ἄλλας δαπάνας 
 Ἰ Τοῦτος tee | SovaAmckiou Σ᾿ιμζλἼεως δι 
 
 1, [ΛΔ] ατο[πολίτου is possible at the end of the line. 
 
 7. The occurrence of two dashes after the number of the regnal year and the omission 
 of the Emperor’s name point to a date in Commodus’ reign, when both these practices 
 became common. The difficulty is that the debt was contracted in a.p, 146-7; cf. 1. 13. 
 The mention of Sulpicius Similis in 1. 22 recalls the praefect of that name in 287. viii. 27, 
 whose date is not certain; cf. p. 262. 
 
 13. dplyeiov: the use of this term suggests that Oxyrhynchus was not meant, since 
 
 there ἀγορανομεῖον Or μνημονεῖον are the more usual terms, though an ἀρχεῖον probably at 
 Oxyrhynchus is found in 509. 3. 
 
 (ὁ). APPLICATIONS LO OPT ie 
 713. CLAIM OF OWNERSHIP. 
 
 38:5 Χο cm. A.D. 97: 
 
 A declaration addressed to the keepers of the record office by a certain 
 Leonides, requesting the formal registration (παράθεσις) of his prospective right 
 to some property at present in the ownership of his mother. The claim to the 
 property in question depended upon the marriage contract of the writer's 
 parents, in which their joint possessions were secured (κατέσχον) on their demise 
 to their children. The father had died, and his property had been duly divided 
 between Leonides and his brother and sister. The mother was still living, and 
 had already made over two-thirds of her real estate to this brother and sister — 
 upon the marriage of the pair. Leonides, who was probably the younger son, 
 therefore wished that note should be taken of this division, and that his own 
 title to the remaining third of the property should be placed on record. 
 
 The document is dated in Phamenoth of the 1st year of Nerva, i.e. A.D. 97. 
 It is not known that a general ἀπογραφή of real property occurred in that year, 
 while 481 shows that such a registration took place in A.D. 99. There is 
 evidence that general ἀπογραφαί, separated only by a two years’ interval, were 
 held in A.D. 129 and 131 (75, 715, B.G. U. 420, &c.), but that these both 
 
(lone 4? ELICATIONS:LO (OF RICTALS 181 
 
 affected the same nome is not yet ascertained. Pending further data it will 
 therefore be best to suppose that the present was a special declaration called 
 forth by the peculiar circumstances of the case. 
 
 Ist hand παρετέθ(η). 
 Δημητρίωι καὶ ᾿ἀπολλα[ν]ίωι καὶ 
 Διογένει βιβλιοφύ(λαξι) 
 and hand παρὰ Aewvidov Διοδώρου τοῦ 
 5 Διοδώρου μητρὸς Σ᾿ αραεῦτος Acw- 
 νίδου ἀπὸ ᾿Οξυρύγχων πόλεως. 
 καθ᾽ ἣν οἱ γονεῖς μου Διόδωρος Ado- 
 δώρου τοῦ ᾿4γαθείνου καὶ Σ᾽ αραεῦς 
 Δεωνίδου τοῦ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου μη- 
 10 τρὸς ᾿Ισιδώρας Κάλα ἀπ[ὸ] τῆς αὐτῆς 
 [4 Cg Q 3 
 πόλεως πεποίηνται πρὸς ἀλ- 
 λήλους τοῦ γάμου συγγραφὴν διὰ 
 a ᾽ ’ i ) 
 τοῦ ἐν Οξυρύγχων πόλει ἀγορανο- 
 ΄ “ ’,’ ΕΝ “ 
 μίου τῷ δωδεκάτῳ ἔτει θεοῦ 
 15 Κλαυδίου μηνὶ Σ᾽ εβαστῷ κατέοσ- 
 χον τῇ ἐξ ἀλλήλων γενεᾷ τὰ 
 ἑαυτῶν πάντα πρὸς τὸ μετὰ τὴν 
 τελευτὴν αὐτῶν βεβαίως καὶ 
 ἀναφαιρέτως εἶναι τῶν τέκνων, 
 > δ \ ε Ἁ 3 72 35.5.2 ? 
 20 ἐπεὶ δὲ ὁ πατὴρ ἐτελεύτησεν ἐπ ἐ- 
 μοὶ καὶ ἀδελφοῖς μου 4ιοδώρῳ 
 καὶ Θαίδι καὶ τὰ αὐτοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς 
 κατήντησε, ἡ δὲ μήτηρ ap ὧν 
 δ ἃ \ 7 3 “A 
 ἔχει περὶ μὲν Νέσλα ἀρουρῶν 
 25 ἐννέα ἡμίσους περὶ δὲ {rept de} 
 Πεεννὼ ἐκ τῆς Θρασυμάχου παρ- 
 εἰμένης ἀρουρῶν δύο ἡμίσους 
 “ δ, ‘ Ν bes > ΄“ iA 
 τῶν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ἀρουρῶν δεκά- 
 δυο ἐμέρισε τοῖς προγεγραμμέ- 
 30 vols μου adeAdo[i|s ἀπὸ τῶν πε- 
 
 XN 7 ¢ ’ 3 4 - 
 pi Νέσλα ἑκατέρῳ ἀρούρας τέσσα- 
 
182 THE OMYRAYNCHOS) £ Arvid 
 
 pas διὰ τῆς περὶ γάμου αὐτοῦ ovyypa- 
 [φῆς] αἵ εἰσι τὸ τρίτον τῶν προκειμέ- 
 νων ἀρουρῶν δεκάδυο, ἀπογρά- 
 
 35 φομαι καὶ αὐτὸς πρὸς παράθεσιν 
 κατοχὴν τῶν λοιπῶν τῆς μη- 
 τρὸς ἀρουρῶν τεσσάρων. ἡ δὲ προ- 
 κειμένη τῶν γονέων μου συγγρα- 
 φή ἐστιν ἔνθεσμος καὶ ἀπερί- 
 
 40 λυτος εἰς τὴν ἐνεστῶσαν ἡμέραν. 
 (ἔτους) a «Αὐτοκράϊτ]ορος Νερ[ούϊα [Καίσαρος 
 Σεβαστοῦ (ist hand) Φαμενὼθ ιθ. 
 
 3rd hand Δημήτριος σεση(μείωμαι). ἔτους πρώτου 
 Αὐτοκράτορος Νερούα Καίσαρος 
 45 Σεβαστοῦ Φαμενὼθ ιθ. 
 
 8. Second a οἵ σαρᾶευς corr. 
 
 ‘Inserted on the register. 
 
 To Demetrius and Apollonius and Diogenes, keepers of the records, from Leonides 
 son of Diodorus son of Diodorus, his mother being Saraeus daughter of Leonides, of 
 Oxyrhynchus. My parents, Diodorus son of Diodorus son of Agathinus, and Saraeus 
 daughter of Leonides son of Alexander, her mother being Isidora daughter of Calas, of the 
 said city, in accordance with the contract of marriage made between them through the 
 record office of the said city in the month Sebastus of the 12th year of the deified Claudius 
 settled upon their joint issue the whole of their property, in order that after their death it 
 might be the secure and inalienable possession of their children; and whereas my father 
 died leaving me and my brother and sister, Diodorus and Thais, his heirs, and his property 
 devolved upon us, and whereas our mother possesses at Nesla 94 arourae and at Peénno 
 24 arourae of the concessional (?) land of Thrasymachus, together making 12 arourae, and 
 bestowed upon my brother and sister aforesaid through their marriage contract 4 each of 
 the arourae at Nesla, that is one-third of the aforesaid 12 arourae: I too declare for 
 registration my right to the remaining 4 arourae of my mother; and the aforesaid contract 
 of my parents remains in force and uncancelled to the present day. The 1st year of the 
 Emperor Nerva Caesar Augustus, Pharmenoth 1g.’ Signature of Demetrius and date. 
 
 I. παρατιθέναι and παράθεσις (cf. 1. 35 below) are specially used of the declaration and 
 registration through the βιβλιοφύλακες of claims to property. The verb has this technical 
 sense e.g. in 287. iv. 38 παρατίθεσθαι διὰ τοῦ βιβλιοφυλακίου and Vili. 34 παρατιθέτωσαν δὲ καὶ ai 
 γυναῖκες ταῖς ὑποστάσεσι τῶν ἀνδρῶν. Cf. also B. G. U. 73. 10 sqq. ἐπιστείλας τοῖς... [β]ιβλιο- 
 φύλαξιν... πἰοιήσασθἾαι τὰ τῆς παραθέσεως, and 243. 9 ἐπιδίδωμι εἰς τὸ τὴν παράθεσιν γενέσθαι, 
 and 14 προπαρακεί(μενον) διὰ τοῦ βιβλ(ιοφυλακίουλ) 1. 
 
 1 The editor reads κωλ(ύειν), but this makes no sense, and the correction proposed, which is palaeo- 
 
 graphically very close, seems in the light of the passages quoted above practically secure. The context in 
 the Berlin papyrus further requires a negative like μηδέν in place of καὶ τῷ before ἔσεσθαι ἐμπόδιον: 
 
Gor. 
 
 ΠΡ ICALTIONS TO (OFFICIALS 
 
 12. The marriage contract referred to contained also testamentary dispositions ; cf. 
 
 R. 28. 8 sqq. 
 
 20. ἐπ᾽ ἐμοὶ καὶ ἀδελφοῖς : 
 26. τῆς Θρασυμάχου παρειμένης : 
 
 ‘abandoned.’ 
 
 80. κληρονόμοις ; cf. 481. 17-8, &c, 
 παριέναι aS a technical term applied to land seems to be 
 new, and the present posse gives no clue to the meaning; perhaps ‘conceded to’ or 
 
 714. SELEcTION oF Boys (έἐπίκρισις). 
 
 An application addressed to a variety of officials by an Oxyrhynchite who 
 enjoyed the privilege of paying a reduced poll-tax of 12 drachmae, requesting 
 that a slave who had been born in his house and had reached the age of 
 thirteen might be placed on the same privileged list. 
 confirms the evidence of 478 and B.G. U. 324, that the liability of slaves in 
 respect of poll-tax was determined by that of their owners. 
 
 Fr. (a) 4:2 x5, Fr. (6) 29x 5 cm. 
 
 the general question of ἐπίκρισις is given in P. Oxy. II. pp. 217 sqq. 
 
 This papyrus is interesting palaeographically, being carefully written in 
 a semi-uncial hand approximating to the sloping oval type, examples of which 
 
 are often too indiscriminately assigned to the third century. 
 
 10 
 
 Φιλονείκωι [τῶι 
 
 kat “Ἑρμοδώρῳ βα[σ(ιλικῷ) 
 γρα(μματεῖ) καὶ Διονυσίῳ καὶ 
 
 ΕΟ ’ 
 ἑτέρῳ Διονυσίῳ 
 
 βιβλ(ιοφύλαξι) καὶ ἐπικριταῖς 
 
 VF ? δ 4 ’ 
 καὶ Απολλωνίῳ ἐξηγη(τεύσαντι) 
 
 γρα(μματεῖ) πόλ(εως) 
 παϊρὰ] ᾿ἀπολ[λωνίου 
 
 ee Ee ἀπ᾽ ᾽Οξυρύγ-] 
 [χων πόλεως ἐπ᾽ ἀμ- 
 
 [φόδου Νότου Kpn-| 
 
 MEELOOS ἐξ φννεν, 
 ρος δοῦϊλός μου 
 
 20 
 
 28 
 
 30 
 
 Καίσαρος τοῦ 
 κυρίου, ὅθεν ὅ[η- 
 
 λῶ εἶναί με (δωδεκάδραχμον) 
 
 διὰ λαογραφίϊας 
 
 β (ἔτους) «Ἁδριανοῦ 
 Καίσαρος τοῦ κ[υρίο(υ) 
 ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ [ἀμ- 
 φόδου καὶ ὀμν[ύω 
 Αὐτοκράτίο]ρα 
 Καίσαρα Τραιανὸν 
 Ἁδριανὸν Σεβαστὸν 
 μὴ ἔψευσθαι. (ἔτους) > 
 «Αὐτοκράτορος 
 Καίσαρος Τραια- 
 
 νοῦ Ἁδριανοῦ 
 
 This papyrus thus 
 
 A discussion of 
 
184 THE OAVYRAY NCE USIP APY RI 
 
 οἰκογεϊνὴς ἐκ 35 Σεβαστοῦ Me- 
 τη SCOUAMIS Ee sae tn χεὶρ κ. 
 τρῖ!. ἣν - [. . . προσ- and hand κατεχ(ωρίσθη) 
 
 βέβηκεϊν els (τρισκαιδεκαέτεις) 
 τῷ διελθόντι 
 
 ε (ἔτει) Ἁδριανοῦ 
 
 ἐπικ(ρίταις), χρύ(νος) ὁ αὐ(τός). 
 
 ‘To Philonicus also called Hermodorus, basilico-grammateus, and Dionysius and 
 a second Dionysius, keepers of the archives and officers in charge of the selection, and to 
 Apollonius, ex-exegetes and scribe of the city, from Apollonius ... of the city of 
 Oxyrhynchus, living in the West Quay quarter. My slave..., born in the house to my 
 female slave ..., has reached the age of 13 years in the past 5th year of Hadrianus Caesar 
 the lord. I therefore declare that I am rated at 12 drachmae by a poll-tax list of the 2nd 
 year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord at the said quarter, and I swear by the Emperor Caesar 
 Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus that I have made no false statement.’ Date and docket of 
 registration. 
 
 1-7. The papyrus is incomplete at the top and there are traces of ink above the first 
 line, so no doubt the strategus (cf. 257. 14) preceded the βασιλικὸς γραμματεύς. It is 
 noteworthy that only two persons in this long list of officials, namely the βιβλιοφύλακες, are 
 called ἐπικρίται (cf. P. Fay. Towns 27. 3, and B. G, U. 562. 15, where ἐπικ(ρίτου) should be 
 read); while 478 is addressed to the βιβλιοφύλακες alone. The βασιλικὸς γραμματεύς recurs 
 in this connexion in 257.15 and B. 6. U. 562. 17. Applications of this class from the 
 Fayfim are usually sent to ex-gymnasiarchs ὄντες πρὸς τῇ ἐπικρίσει. 
 
 13-4. The supplements hardly fill the available space, but the lines vary a good deal 
 in length. 
 
 23. διὰ Aaoypadilas: cf. 478. 22-3 (SwdexdSpaxpov) δι’ ὁμολόγου Aaoypadias. 
 
 37-8. A similar docket occurs in 478, and ἐπικρίταις may now be supplied there at the 
 end of 1. 49 on the analogy of the present papyrus; cf. also 786. 
 
 715. REGISTRATION OF PROPERTY. 
 30-7 ΧΊΤ'Ρ cm. A.D. 131. 
 
 A return of house-property in the Heracleopolite nome, addressed, as usual, 
 to the keepers of the archives, in A.D. 131, when a general ἀπογραφή of real . 
 property took place; cf. B.G.U. 420 and 459, and 287. viii. 31, note. The 
 formula is practically the same as that found in the Oxyrhynchus returns, 
 e.g. 75 and 481. At the end is a docket of the βιβλιοφύλαξ. 
 
σι 
 
 ΙοΟ 
 
 15 
 
 20 
 
 25 
 
 30 
 
 and 
 
 iipee Arr ICALTIONS. £0. OFFICIALS 
 
 185 
 
 ‘Hpat καὶ ᾿Ὠριγένει yeyup(vaciapynkéct) βιβλιοφύλακι ἐνκτή(σεων) ‘Hpa- 
 
 κλεοπί(ολίτου) 
 παρὰ Τοργίου καὶ Γαλέστου ἀμφοτέρων 
 Πολέμωνος τοῦ Γοργίου μητρὸς Διονυσιά- 
 δος τῆς Γαλέστου τῶν ἀπὸ κώμης 
 Τοεμίσεως. ἀπογραφόμεθα ἰδίωι 
 κινδύνωι κοινῶς ἐξ ἴσου εἰς τὸ ἐνεῖσ- 
 τὸς te (ἔτος) Ἁδριανοῦ Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου 
 κατὰ τὰ κελευσθέντα τὰ ἐληλυθότ(α) 
 εἰς ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ ὀνόματος τοῦ μετηλ- 
 λαχότος ἡμῶν πατρὸς Πολέμωνος 
 Γοργίου μητρὸς Ταποντῶτος ἀπὸ 
 τῆς αὐτῆς Τοεμίσεως, τὸ ἐπιβάλλον 
 αὐτῶι ἐν τῆι αὐτῇ Τοεμίσει τρίτον 
 μέρος οἰκίας καὶ τὸ ἐπιβάχλον αὐτῶι 
 μέρος ψιλοῦ τόπου, καὶ πρότερον 
 τῆς ἀδελφῆς αὐτοῦ ᾿Ελένης Γοργίου 
 μητρὸς τῆς αὐτῆς Ταποντῶτος 
 κατὰ διαθήκην τὴν καὶ λυθεῖσαν 
 τῶι ιβ (ἔτει) Ἁδριανοῦ Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου 
 περὶ κώμην ᾿Ιβίωνα Παχνοῦβιν ἐκ τοῦ 
 Ζωίλου καὶ Νουμηνίου κλήρου γῆς 
 κατοικικῆς ἥμισυ τέταρτον 
 ὄγδουν καὶ περὶ Ψελεμαχί ) ἐκ τοῦ Μενίπ- 
 που καὶ ᾿ἀρτεμιδώρου κλ(ήρου) γῆς κατοικ[ι]κῆϊς 
 ἀρούρης τέταρτον. καὶ ὀμνύομεν 
 τὴν Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Τραιανοῦ 
 Ἁδριανοῦ Σεβαστοῦ τύὐχ(ην) καὶ τοὺ(ς) marp@o(us) 
 θεοὺς ἐξ ὑγ(είας) καὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας) ἐπιδεδωκ(έναι) τὴν 
 προκιμένη(ν) ἀπογραφὴ(ν) καὶ μηδὲν διεψεῦσθαι) 
 ἢ ἔνοχοι εἴημεν τῶι ὅρκωι. (ἔτους) te 
 «Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Τραιανοῦ 
 Ἁδριανοῦ Σεβαστοῦ μηνὸς Καισαρείου ἐπ[αγο(μένων) ε. 
 
 « 
 
 hand Topyias ὁ προγεγραμμένος ἐπιδὶ ἔδω- 
 
186 FHE OXYRAYNCHOUS VEAP YAR] 
 
 35 ka. (3rd hand) Ἡρᾶς yeyu(pvaciapynkas) διὰ “Immo5( ) ypapp(aréas) 
 συσταθίέντος) 
 κ[αἸτακεχώ(ρικα) ἀδιακ(ρίτως ?) κινδ(ίύνῳ) τῶν ἀπογρα(φομένων) μηδενὸς 
 [δημοσίου ἢ ἰδιωτικο(ῦ) καταβλαπί(τομένου.. ἐπαγο(μένων) ε. 
 
 1. 1]. βιβλιοφύλαξι. 12. pn Of μητρος corr. from του. 14. ὦ Of avrw corr. from 7. 
 18. ns of της corr. from απ. 24. 1. ὄγδοον. 
 
 ‘To Heras and Origenes, ex-gymnasiarchs, keepers of the records of real property in 
 the Heracleopolite nome, from Gorgias and Galestus both sons of Polemon son of Gorgias, 
 their mother being Dionysias daughter of Galestus, from the village of Toémisis. We 
 register at our own risk jointly and equally for the present 15th year of Hadrianus Caesar 
 the lord in accordance with the command the property which has devolved upon us from 
 our deceased father Polemon son of Gorgias and Tapontos, from the said Toémisis, viz. 
 the third share which fell to him of a house at the said Toémisis and his share of a piece 
 of open ground, and what previously belonged to his sister Helene daughter of Gorgias and 
 the said Tapontos, in accordance with a will which was opened in the 12th year of Hadrianus 
 Caesar the lord, near the village of Ibion Pachnoubis in the holding of Zoilus and Numenius 
 1% arourae of catoecic land, and near Pselemach( ) in the holding of Menippus and 
 Artemidorus + aroura of catoecic land. And we swear by the Fortune of the Emperor 
 Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus and by our ancestral gods that we have honestly and 
 truly presented the foregoing declaration and that we have made no false statement, or 
 may we be liable to the penalties of the oath. The 15th year of the Emperor Caesar 
 ‘Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus, 5th intercalary day of the month Caesareus. I, Gorgias the 
 aforesaid, have presented the declaration. I, Heras ex-gymnasiarch, through Hippod( ).) 
 scribe, my representative, have entered it on the register jointly at the risk of the declaring 
 parties, no public or private interests being injured. 5th intercalary day.’ 
 
 το. Above the o of ἀπό the scribe has written μη, which makes no sense and seems to 
 be a mere error. 
 36. ἀδιακ(ρίτως) apparently corresponds to κοινῶς ἐξ ἴσου in |. 7. 
 
 716. AUCTION OF A SLAVE. 
 18-8 x 11-8 cm. A.D. 186. 
 
 An application to a gymnasiarch from the guardians of three minors for 
 a public auction of their wards’ respective shares, amounting to two-thirds in 
 all, of a male slave. The remaining third part of the slave was the property 
 of the minors’ half-brother, but had been emancipated by him; and this com- . 
 bination of circumstances led to the present request for an auction (ὅθεν ἐπιδίδομεν, 
 ], 18), though the legal point involved is not very clear. It is however certain, 
 as Professor Mitteis remarks, that neither this papyrus nor 722, where a partial 
 
Mowe ArRPLIGALTIONS * TO*sOrricClaLs 187 
 
 Manumission is also concerned, can be brought under Roman law, according 
 to which, at this period, in the case of a joint ownership of a slave, a manu- 
 mitted share simply passed to the other owners (Ulpian, Fr. i. 18). There can 
 therefore be only a question of Greek or Egyptian Jaw; and in the absence 
 of parallels recourse must be had to more or less probable hypotheses. At the 
 outset a doubt arises whether or not the partial manumission was the direct 
 cause of the public auction. It is quite possible that the parties concerned 
 merely wished to wind up their joint ownership, and that the details respecting 
 the liberated share are accidental. If, however, the manumission was an 
 essential factor, as ὅθεν in 1. 18 would rather indicate, the course here followed 
 may be supposed to have been prescribed either in the interest of the slave 
 or of the owners. In a sale by public auction the rights of a partially freed 
 slave could be safeguarded in a manner which would not be practicable in 
 a private treaty; and this consideration supplies a very likely explanation 
 of the present proceedings. Or, on the other hand, as Mitteis suggests, a sale 
 by auction would protect an owner who wished to retain his share of a slave 
 against a partner or partners who desired manumission. A sale of this kind 
 would place the larger owner at an advantage against the smaller, since the 
 former, if successful, would pay the latter only a fraction of the purchase-money, 
 while the higher the bid of the small owner the greater the sum due from him 
 to the predominant partner. 
 
 3 ? A \ Ἂς ts 
 Δσκληπιάδῃ τῷ καὶ Σ᾽ αραπίωϊνι γυμν)]ασιάρχῳ 
 [χαίρε]ιν 
 παρὰ “Ὠρίωνος Πανεχώτου τοῦ Awparos μη- 
 τρὸς Ταοῦτος καὶ ᾿ἀπολλωνίου Awpiwvos 
 5 τοῦ Ἡρᾶτος μητρὸς Θαήσιος καὶ ᾿Αβασκάντου 
 ἀπελεύθερου Σάμου ᾿Ηρακλείδου τῶν τριῶν 
 ἀπὸ ᾿Οξυρύγχων πόλεως ἐπιτρόπων ἀφηλί- 
 ’ » aA \ Ἵ 4 
 κων τέκνων Θέωνος τοῦ Kal Δι[ον)υσίου 
 Εὐδαιμονίδος μητρὸς Σ᾿ινθεῦτος καὶ 4ι- 
 το ονυσίου καὶ Θαήσιος ἀμφοτέρων μητρὸς 
 Ταύριος τῶν τριῶν ἀπὸ τίῆ)ς αὐτῆς πόλεως. 
 ὑπάρχει τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἀφ[ήλ]ιξι τῇ μὲν Εὐδαι- 
 ’ uA - ~ Ἂ fog ᾿ 
 μονίδι ἕκτον μέρος τῷ δὲ Διονυσίῳ καὶ 
 Θαήσει ἥμισυ μέρος τὸ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ δίμοι[ρ]ον 
 15 μέρος πατρικοῦ αὐτῶν δούλου Σ᾽ αραπίωϊνος 
 
188 THE VOX YRAYNCHUS PAPY RE 
 
 ὡς (ἐτῶν) A οὗ τὸ λοιπὸν τρίτον dv τοῦ ὁμοπα- 
 τρίου αὐτῶν ἀδελφοῦ Διογένο[υ]ς ἠλευθέ- 
 ρωται ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ. ὅθεν ἐπιδίδομεν τὸ βιβλί- 
 διον ἀξιοῦντες κατὰ τὸ δηλούμενον 
 ~ 5) 2 on ? XN 
 20 τῶν ἀφηλίκων δίμοιρον μέρος τὴν προ- 
 ’ 2 \ 3 2 
 κήρυξιν γενέσθαι καὶ τὴν ἀμείνονα 
 ᾿ αἵρεσιν διδόντι παραδοθῆναι. (ἔτους) K¢ 
 Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Μάρκου Αὐρηλίου 
 Κομμόδου ‘Avrwvivov Εὐσεβοῦς Εὐτυχοῦς 
 25. Σεβαστοῦ ᾿Δρμενιακοῦ Μηδικοῦ Παρθικοῦ 
 Σαρματικοῦ Γερμανικοῦ Μεγίστου 
 Βρετανν[κοῦ Θώθ. (2nd hand) ἱὩρίων Πανεχώτου 
 
 ἐπιδέδωκα. (3rd hand) [4ποἸλλώνιο[ς Awlpiwvos συΐν- 
 
 επιδέδωκα. (4th hand) ᾿4βάσκαντο[ς] ἀπελεύθερος 
 
 80 Σάμου Ἡρακλείδου συνεπι[ δέδωκα. Διογένης 
 Θέωνος τοῦ] καὶ Διονυσίου ἔγραψα ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ 
 μὴ εἰδότος γράμματα. 
 
 ‘To Asclepiades also called Sarapion, gymnasiarch, greeting, from Horion son of 
 Panechotes son of Doras, his mother being Taous, and from Apollonius son of Dorion 
 son of Heras, his mother being Thaésis, and from Abascantus, freedman of Samus son 
 of Heraclides, all three of Oxyrhynchus and guardians of the children of Theon also 
 called Dionysius, namely Eudaemonis, whose mother is Sintheus, and Dionysius and 
 Thaésis, whose mother is Tauris, being minors and all three of the said city. The 
 said minors own, Eudaemonis one-sixth and Dionysius and Thaésis a half, together two- 
 thirds, of a slave of their father’s named Sarapion, aged about 30 years, the remaining 
 third share of whom, belonging to Diogenes their brother on the father’s side, has been 
 set free by him. We therefore present this memorandum requesting that in respect 
 of (?) the aforesaid two-thirds a public auction should be held, and that the property should 
 be handed over to the highest bidder. The 27th year of the Emperor Caesar Marcus 
 Aurelius Commodus Antoninus Pius Felix Augustus Armeniacus Medicus Parthicus 
 Sarmaticus Germanicus Maximus Britannicus, Thoth.’ Signatures of Horion, Apollonius 
 and Abascantus, that of the last-named being written for him by Diogenes son of Theon. 
 
 19-20. The exact meaning of this passage is uncertain owing to the ambiguity of 
 κατά, Which may be connected with either ἀξιοῦντες or τὴν προκήρυξιν γενέσθαι. In the former 
 case κατά means ‘because of,’ and the request would be for the sale of the whole. slave ; 
 in the latter κατά signifies ‘in respect of’ (cf. 722. 14), and no more than the two-thirds | 
 would be involved,—a sense which would have been more clearly expressed by the simple 
 genitive τοῦ... μέρους. 
 
 22. αἵρεσιν διδόντι : cf. Β. G. U. 656, an advertisement of property to let, οἱ βουλόμενοι 
 μισθώσασθαι... προσερχέστωσαν τοῖς πρὸς τούτοις ἕρεσειν (1. αἵρεσιν) διδόντες. 
 
717. PETITIONS 189 
 
 (Ὁ) PETITIONS. 
 
 717. PETITION. 
 17:5 X 20-8 cm. Late rst century B.c. 
 
 Part of a complaint addressed, no doubt, to some official, with reference to 
 a dispute about the fairness of a measure between the writer, who seems to have 
 been responsible for a cargo of corn, and another person. Owing to the im- 
 perfect condition of the papyrus, of which a preceding column or columns are 
 lost, and of which only the first line is complete, the details are obscure. A 
 curious new word, διίλετον, occurs in 11. 5 and probably 12, apparently denoting 
 some kind of measure. The writer’s style suggests that he was still labouring 
 under much excitement. : 
 
 μέτρωι ἐνβαλοῦμαι. ἐκβοῶντος δέ μου καὶ κράζοντος τὰ τοσαῦτα 
 tA ef ἴῃ ? 5) 4 3 ? > 
 [.....-» ἥψατο pe λέγων ὅτι τοῖς μέτροις σου οὐ θέλωι ἰσχρήσασθαι, ἠ- 
 [νάγκασμα]. δὲ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ [ἄϊλλο μέτρον ἀγοράσαι. ἀγοράσαντος δέ μου 
 [αὐτὸ malpéxar ἔχων τὸν κυβερνήτην καὶ συνβάλλο αὐτὸ κατε- 
 5 [.-+-..-.] εὑρίσκωι αὐτὸ πρὸς τὸ δίλετον, εἰσπορεύομαι εἰς τὴν αὐ- 
 [- -. ἔχων αἸὐτὸ καὶ παραλαμβάνωι ‘Acinv τὸν ἀδελφὸν ᾿Ερασίππου 
 [- νον νον ν ἢ. οὖν εἰσπορεύομαι πρὸς τὸν στρατηγὸν ἔχων αὐτὸ καὶ 
 ᾽ A 2? e »’ 
 [συμβάλλω] αὐτὸ πρὸς τὸ χαλκοῦν μέτρον ἐν τῶι συνεδρείωι, εὑρίσ- 
 > Ἂν ἣν ᾽ fe Ἄν ΔΚ 
 κω αὐτὸ. .... .] μείζωι δύο ταῖς ἑκατόν. ἐγὼ οὖν ἐβόων καὶ ἔκραζον 
 Ν ~ » la ᾽ bs | > Μ ’ 
 TO [.........-Jepov τὸ χαλκοῦν ἀδικόν ἐστι καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν δίκαιον 
 12 letters ἐν τῶι συν)εδρείωι σὺν τῶι στρατηγῶι ἐκ(ργ)άζοσαν 
 > A 
 ρας β]οώντων δ᾽ αὐτῶν εἰσφέρω τὸ δίλε- 
 
 26 letters ἠν]άγκασμαι βοᾶν αὐτῶι ὅτι 
 
 δὲ 
 
 15 Dota 
 
 [ 
 
 [ 
 
 [ 
 
 [ 
 
 [τον 21 letters ] βοῶν καὶ κράζων ὅτι τοῦτο ἔστι 
 [ 
 
 [ δὲ οὐκ ἐνβάλλομαι ὧδε 
 
 [ 
 
 | 
 
 px, oie 1. ἐντυγχάνωντος πυκνὰ 
 51 τι τ]οῦ δρόμου τί 
 
 4. |. συμβάλλω. 16. 1]. ἐντυγχάνοντος. 
 
190 THE OXYRLY NCH ΣΕ SIG 
 
 Saab . ἠμεΐψατο OF [ἀντημείψατο would suit the context. For ἠ[ϊ νάγκασμα]ι cf. 1. 14. 
 
 5. The meaning and even the construction of πρὸς τὸ δίλετον (the reading of which 
 is quite certain) is very obscure. From ]. 12 it appears that the δίλετον was portable, 
 and perhaps it was a species of measure, though whether it was that to which the writer's 
 opponent objected (I. 2) or an official measure of some kind is not clear. Assuming 
 this to be the meaning of δίλετον, it is tempting to connect πρὸς τὸ δίλ. with συμβάλλω 
 αὐτό in 1. 4; but the intervening words εὑρίσκω αὐτό are then very difficult. Possibly 
 πρὸς τὸ δίλ. is parallel to μείζω δύο ταῖς ἑκατόν in ]. 9, since the general construction of 
 ll. 4-5 and 8-0 seems to be the same; but πρὸς τὸ did. can by itself hardly mean ‘ equal 
 to the δίλετον᾽ and ἴσον would have to be supplied. 
 ol| : probably εἰς τὴν αὐ τοῦ, i.e. the person referred to in 1. 2, or τὴν Ad|| . 
 
 8. For the use of bronze in official measures cf. P. Tebt. 5. 85-92, and P. Amh. 
 
 43. Q-IO. 
 
 718. PETITION TO THE EPISTRATEGUS. 
 25-3 Χ 175 cm. A.D. 180-192. 
 
 A petition from Antistius Primus, who had held the chief priesthood and 
 other offices at Oxyrhynchus, complaining that a payment due to the govern- 
 ment upon 4 arourae of Crown land had been demanded from him, although 
 his property included no land of that character. The land in question had 
 perhaps been the subject of a perpetual lease, and owing to lapse of time and 
 deficiencies in the survey-lists its identity had become doubtful ; cf. a similar 
 case in P. Amh. 68. 52 sqq. 
 
 From the character of the handwriting the papyrus must belong to the 
 latter half of the second century, and there can be little doubt that the Xenophon 
 here addressed, who was evidently a high official, was T. Claudius Xenophon, 
 known to have been epistrategus in the reign of Commodus (C. I. L. III. 6575, 
 8042). 
 
 Τίτῳ Κλαυδίῳ Blevoporvte [τῷ κρατίστῳ ἐπιστρατήγῳ 
 
 > Ἐ] 
 
 ..] AvOeoriov Πρείμίου τοῦ καὶ Δολλιανοῦ 
 [5 2 ceo poe καὶ ἀρχιερ[ατεύσαντος 
 
 ΡΠ ΟΎὝΡΗΣ ῆς] ᾿Οξυρυγχειτῶν [πόλεως 
 
 ΕἼ] τς pe ν μὶὲν παρὰ Διονυσίου 
 
 [ 12 letters οἷν σὺν τῷ ἀλεξάνίδρῳ τὰς περὶ Σέννιν 
 
 Ἐπ Ε πν ὑπαρχούσας αὐτῷ ἐκ διαιρζίέσεως γενομένης πρὸς 
 
 ees καὶ τὸν ἀδελ]φὸν ᾿ἀπολλώνιον νεώτερον ἀρούρας [σει]τικὰς πεντήκον- 
 
 as 
 
718. PETITIONS 1gt 
 
 ΝΥ » 
 
 [τα δύο ἥμισ]υ καὶ ἐν οἰ κοπέδο]ις ἀρούρης ἥμισυ καθαρὰς ἀπὸ βασιλικῆς καὶ 
 10 [οὐσιακῆς καὶ ἱερᾶ)ς ἀκολούθως 7 πεποίημαι πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς διαιρέσει 
 [τελοῦντός μου τὰ] τῆς ἰδιωτικῆς μόνης δημόσια. χρόνῳ δὲ παμπόλλῳ ὕστε- 
 BS) ? 4 5) 50) ὦ “ iA 2 5 Ψ 
 [pov μετὰ τ]εσσεράκοντα ἔτη οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως τοῦ πράτου Διονυσίου ἀποθανόν- 
 [τος ὁ τῆς .. .1. α κωμογραμματεὺς περὶ ὅν ἐστιν καὶ ἡ Σέννις ὡς ἐξ ἐπερω- 
 , » ἐδ ον αν 4 δ 3 7 2 , 
 [ἰτήσεως κτήτ]ορος παρ᾽ οὗ δεήσει τὴν ἀπαίτησιν ποιήσα[σ͵]θαι δημοσίων 
 > A ? “Ὁ > A , ’ ῥς 4 
 15 [ἀρουρῶν τεσ]σάρων βασιλικῆς ἐν πυροῦ ἀρτάβαις δεκάπεντε προσεφώνησεν 
 [τὰς τέσσαρας ταύτας ἀρούρας τῆς βασιλικῆς συναναμίγους εἶναι τῇ ὑπαρ- 
 [χούσῃ μοι γῇ τῶ]ν πεντήκοντα τριῶν ἃς ἐπριάμην παρὰ τοῦ Διονυσίου καὶ 
 [ 13 letters ov, ὡς ἐκ τούτου δεῖν τὰ δημόσια ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἀποδοθῆναι 
 tee: Sey ]1ν μήτε βασιλικὴν συνανάμιγον ἐσχηκότος μηδ᾽ αὖ γεωρ- 
 20 [γοῦντος μηδ᾽ ὅλω]ς γνωρίζοντός τι τῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ κωμογραμματέως 
 [προσφωνηθέντων] ἔτι δὲ ἄνωθε]ν τῶν δημοσίων ἀποδιδομένων 
 ὑπὲρ τῶν αὐτῶν] ἀρουρῶν τεσσάρων ws εἰκὸς ὑπὸ ἑτέρων. ἐπεὶ οὖν 
 βλάβη ἔπαθον οὐκ ὀλίγα, ἄδικον δὲ μὴ γεωργοῦντα ἀπαιτεῖσθαί με δημό- 
 ola ὑπὲρ ἀλλοτρία)ς γῆς, δέομαι, ἐάν σοι δόξῃ, γράψαι τῷ τοῦ νομοῦ στρατηγῷ 
 oS o 4 & 
 7 Φ (ep 4 3 a ᾽ 7 A A ’ 
 ἵνα ᾧ προσῆκόν) ἐστιν τοῦτο πραξη ἐπιστείλῃ κατὰ τὰ διατεταγμένα ενιεὺυ 
 13 letters τ]ὰ[ς9] ὑπὸ τοῦ κωμογραμματέως προσφωνηθείσας 
 
 ᾿ ? Q δ A > “Ὁ N I 7? e 
 KQlL....+... πρ]οσφωνήσῃ Tov ἐπικρατοῦντα Tap οὗ Kal εὐλόγως ἡ 
 
 80 [σίων μενεῖ μοι ὁ λόγος πρ)]ὸς τὸν φ[α]Ἰνησόμενον ἀντιποιούμενον, iv ὦ 
 [βεβοηθημένος. διε]υτίύχει. 
 
 and hand [........ AvOéorios Πρεῖμος ὁ καὶ Δολλιανὸς διὰ ᾿πολλωνίου 
 [ ἐπιδέδωκα] 
 
 [ 
 ἰ 
 [ 
 [ἀρούρας τέσσαρας βα]σιλικῆς συ[ν]αναμίγους εἶναι τῇ ἰδιωτικῇ μου 
 [ 
 [ 
 [ 
 
 25. 1. πρᾶξαι. 26. π of umo corr.? 
 
 ‘To his highness the epistrategus Titus Claudius Xenophon from . . . Antistius 
 Primus also called Lollianus, . . ., ex-chief-priest . . . of the city of Oxyrhynchus ... 
 I bought from Dionysius ... with Alexander the land at Sennis... belonging to him 
 in consequence of the division made with . . . and his brother Apollonius the younger, 
 namely 524 arourae of corn-land and % aroura of building-land, free from obligations in 
 respect of Crown land or Imperial estates or temple land, in accordance with the division 
 made by me with the (my ?) brothers, the taxes upon the private land only being paid by me. 
 A very long while afterwards, forty years having elapsed, it somehow happened after 
 the death of the seller Dionysius that the komogrammateus of ..., to whose district 
 Sennis also belongs, in answer to an inquiry concerning the landlord from whom the 
 
192 THE OXYRHYNCAHUS PAPYRI 
 
 demand should be made of the imposts for 4 arourae of Crown land amounting to 
 15 artabae of wheat, stated that these 4 arourae of Crown land were included in the 
 53 arourae belonging to me which I bought from Dionysius and..., and that therefore 
 the imposts ought to be paid by me..., although I have never had Crown land included 
 in mine nor cultivate any and am altogether ignorant of the statements of the komo- 
 grammateus, and although the imposts for the said 4 arourae have for years been paid 
 in the regular course by others. ‘Therefore since I have incurred no small loss and it is 
 unjust that I should be asked to pay the imposts on land which does not belong to me 
 and which I do not cultivate, I beg you, if you think fit, to write to the strategus of the 
 nome, in order that in accordance with the decrees he may direct the officials whose 
 duty it is to... the 4 arourae of Crown land declared by the komogrammateus to be 
 included in my private land, and may state the owner from whom the demand for the 
 imposts may reasonably be made; for I shall retain a claim for the sums with which I was 
 wrongfully charged against the person proved to be responsible for the payment, that 
 so I may obtain relief. Farewell. (Signed) Presented by me, ... Antistius Primus 
 also called Lollianus, through Apollonius...’ 
 
 3. Probably dyopavoyjc|avros, the municipal titles being usually arranged on an 
 ascending scale; cf. Preisigke, S/édtisches Beamtenwesen in rom. Aeg. Ὁ. 31. 
 
 8. [σειϊτικάς : or possibly [ἰδιω]τικάς (cf. I]. τι and 27), but [cetlruxds makes a better 
 contrast to ἐν οἰϊκοπέδο]ις, if that be right. 
 
 9. καθαρὰς ἀπὸ βασιλικῆς κιτιλι: cf. 506. 37 note, and 633. 
 
 13. ...|.ais the name of a village or ἐποίκιον. 
 
 14. xrntlopos, if right, is an objective genitive depending upon émepo|rncews ; cf. |. 28. 
 An alternative supplement is πράκτ]ορος constructed subjectively, but the relative map’ οὗ 
 is then awkward. 
 
 δημοσίων: i.e. the rent, the rate of which upon βασιλικὴ γῇ was usually about 
 4 artabae the aroura; in the present case it was 33 artabae. In 1.11 on the other hand 
 δημόσια has its ordinary meaning of taxes. ; 
 
 16. συνανάμιγος appears to be a new compound. 
 
 18. Perhaps [rod ᾿Αλεξάνδρ)ου or [τοῦ ᾿Απολλωνί)ζου. But it would appear from 1. 12 
 that there was only one πράτης. 
 
 25. ewev at the end of the line is clearly written, but suggests nothing ; some word like 
 ἐπισκέψασθαι is wanted. 
 
 719. REGISTRATION OF A DEED. 
 19-8 x 16-6 cm. Ἀ.Ὦ 193: 
 
 A notice addressed to the strategus by a certain Didymus of an authoriza- 
 tion received by him from the archidicastes in answer to an application which 
 he had made for the registration of a purchase of some house property. A copy - 
 of the application, itself enclosing a copy of the agreement of sale, is appended, 
 and gives some interesting information concerning the formalities attending this 
 process of registration, which we think has not hitherto been understood. Texts 
 
AIMEE LT LEION SL. ἢ 193 
 
 of the same class already published are B. G. U. 455, 578 and 717, to which an 
 important Leipzig papyrus will shortly be added (cf. P. Grenf. II. 71. 6, B. G. U. 
 970. 20-2, 983. 10). The object in all these cases is to effect the ‘ publication’ 
 (δημοσίωσις) of private agreements made by note of hand (χειρόγραφα), and the 
 publication consisted in the registration of the agreements at the Library of 
 Hadrian and the Nanaeum at Alexandria (cf. 1. 35 below, B. G. U. 578. 19, and 
 34). For such registration of a copy of an agreement the fixed charge of 
 12 drachmae was payable (Il. 30-1), to which is added in the Leipzig papyrus 
 a tax proportionate to the value involved; a declaration had to be made 
 that the document registered was really written by the person by whom it 
 purported to have been issued (Il. 33-4, B. G. U. 717. 26, &c.); and a notice of 
 the transaction was served in the ordinary way through the strategus upon the 
 other contracting party, who would of course raise objections if any irregularity 
 had occurred (ll. 3-4). Weare unable to find here, with Gradenwitz (Zinfiihr- 
 ung, pp. 36-7), any question of a comparison of deeds or handwriting. The 
 purpose was rather to obtain for the agreement concerned a validity which, as 
 a mere χειρόγραφον, it did not previously possess, notwithstanding the formula 
 ὡς ἐν δημοσίῳ κατακεχωρισμένη (1. 28, &c.). In B.G.U. 578 the δημοσίωσις was 
 preparatory to an action at law arising out of the non-fulfilment of the terms of 
 the χειρόγραφον. In the other cases no such purpose is specified, and the step 
 taken is only precautionary. This δημοσίωσις of χειρόγραφα is to be distinguished 
 from the simple notification to the archidicastes of contracts without any 
 reference to καταχωρισμός at the two libraries (cf. 727, introd.). 
 
 The papyrus bears the date Phaophi of the 2nd year of Pescennius 
 Niger ; other documents dated shortly before the collapse of his power are 801 
 and P. Grenf. II. 60. 
 
 Αχιλλῖ τῷ καὶ Κασίῳ στρα(τηγῷ) 
 and hand παρὰ 4Διδύμου Appoviov μητρὸς “Edévns ἀπίοίϊκου ᾿Ηλίου πόϊλεω)ς. 
 οὗ ἐπό)ρ[ισ]α 
 ἐκ τοῦ καταλογείου χρηματισμοῦ ἐστιν ἀντίγρα(φον): Οὐιτάλιος [ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ 
 [ἀρχιδ]ικαστὴς ᾿Ο[ξ]υρυγχείτου στρα(τηγῷ) xa(fpev). τοῦ δεδομένου ὑπο- 
 μίνήματος) ἀντί[γρα(φον}ὴ] μεταδο(θήτω) ὡς 
 5 [ὑπόκ(ειται. ἔϊρρωσο. (ἔτους) B Γαίου Πεσκεννίου Νίγερος ᾿Ιούστου 
 Σεβαστίο]ῦ Φαῶφι xn. 
 [τ ++. Ἰ. ἡρῇ . ( ) ἰσ]εσημ(είωμαιλ 1Πολέμ[ω]ν Ia. . [. . -] yeexpar(eds) 
 καταλογείου .|. ποί ) ἔγραψα. 
 O 
 
194 
 
 Io 
 
 18 
 
 20 
 
 28 
 
 30 
 
 35 
 
 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 καὶ τῶν ἄλλων Kpitnpiov παρὰ 4ιἰδύμου Apluolvijou μη[τ]ρὸς [ EAévns 
 
 ἀποίίκου Ἡλίου πόλεως. τοῦ προημένου μοι ἁπλοῦ χειρογράφ[ου] ἀντέ- 
 [yp(agor)] ὑπόκ(ειται). 
 
 Παποντῶς Βίθυος μητρὸς Τσενπαχοῦτος ἀπὸ τοῦ Τρύφωνος [Εἰσείο]υ [τοῦ 
 
 ᾿Οξυρυγχείτον νομοῦ Διδύμῳ ‘AroddAwviov μητρὸς ᾿ Ελένης ἀπίοί]κου 
 
 Ἡλίου πόλεως χαίρειν. ὁμολογῶ πεπρακέναι καὶ παρακεχω[ρ]ηἰκέν]αι 
 
 σοι ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν εἰς τὸν ἀεὶ χρόνον ἀπὸ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων μοι ἐν τῷ [αὐτῷ 
 
 Τρύφωνος Εἰσείῳ ἐν τοῖς ἀπὸ νότου μέρεσι τῆς κώμης ἡμῖσ]ους [μέ]ρος 
 
 οἰκιῶν δύο διστέγου καὶ αἰθρίου κοινῶν πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν μου Παοῦν, 
 
 ὧν γείτονες τῆς μὲν μιᾶς τοῦ αἰθρίου νότον εἴσοδος καὶ ἔξοδος βορρᾶ [κλΊη- 
 
 ρονόμων Διογᾶτος ἀπηλιώτου κληρονόμων “Ὥρου λιβὸς δημοσίί]α ῥύ- 
 
 μη, τῆς (de) δευτέρας νότου Παποντῶτος Μούθιος βορρᾶ ᾿ Ἡρακλείδου 
 
 ‘Dpetwvos ἀπηλιώτου δημοσία ῥύμη λιβὸς Μιύσιος Μέλανος, 
 
 τιμῆς τῆς συμπεφωνημένης πρὸς ἀλλήλους ὑπὲρ παραχωρητι- 
 
 κοῦ ἀργυρίου Σεβαστοῦ νομίσματος δ]ραχμῶν δισχειλίω[ν,] ἃς 
 
 αὐτόθι ἀπέσχον παρὰ σοῦ διὰ [χειρὸς . . . . . ἡἸδραση γεινόμενος 
 
 βεβαιοῦν δέ με αὐτὰς τὰς οἰκίας καθαρὰς] ἀπό τε δημοσίας 
 
 κα[ὶ ἰδιωτικῆ)ῆς ὀφιλῆς καὶ ἀπὸ ἀπογραφῆς ἀνδρῶν κ[α]ὲὶ [εἸΐδους 
 
 οὑτινοσοῦν ἄλλου καὶ ἐξουσίας σοι οὔσης ἑτέροις παραχωρεῖν καὶ 
 
 διοικε[]ν Kall] ἐπιτελεῖν περὶ αὐτῶν ὡς ἐὰν αἱρῇ. κυρία [ἡ ὁμολογία 
 
 γραφεῖσα ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ τοῦ Παποντῶτος ἰδ᾽ Ἰόγραφος μου xalpis ἀλείφατος 
 
 καὶ ἐπιγραφῆς ὡς ἐν δημοσίῳ κατακεχωρισμέν[η. (ἔτους) a Γαίου 
 
 Πεσκεννίου Νίγ]ερος ᾿Ιούστου Σεβαστοῦ Παῦνι x. βουϊλόμενος οὖν 
 
 ἐν δημοσίῳ γενέσθαι τὸ αὐθεντικὸν χειρόγραφον διδοὺϊς τὰς 
 
 ὁρισθείσας (δραχμὰς) ιβ ἕνεκα τοῦ μὴ περιέχειν με τὰς περὶ [δημοσιώ- 
 
 σεὼς διαστολὰς καὶ μοναχὸν δημοσιοῦσθαι ἀξιῶ ἀναλαβόντα 
 
 τὸ αὐθεντικὸν χειρόγραφον ἔχειν μου χειρογραφίαν [περὶ τοῦ 
 
 εἶναι αὐτὸ ἰδιόγραφον τοῦ Παποντῶτος συνκαταχωρίίσαι τῷδε τῷ 
 
 ὑπομνήματι] εἰς τὴν Ἁδριανὴν βι]β[λι]οθήκην εἰς [ 
 
 Φ Φ Φ ΓΙ © ° Φ e ΓΙ Φ Φ ® e 
 
 2. Second ὃ of διδυμου corr. from first half of a p. 5. φαωφι apparently over an 
 
 erasure. ἡ. tept Pap. 9. 1. προειμένου. 10. x Of τσενπαχουτος corr. from y by 
 another hand. II. απολλωνιίου corr. from ἀμμωνιου by another hand. 14. 1. ἥμισυ. 
 31. A correction after pe; cf. note below. 33. 1. ἔχον. 
 
719. PETITIONS 195: 
 
 “To Achilles also called Casius, strategus, from Didymus son of Ammonius and 
 Helene, a settler from Heliopolis. Appended is a copy of the official response received 
 by me from the record office. “ Vitalius, priest and archidicastes, to the strategus of the 
 Oxyrhynchite nome, greeting. Let a copy of the petition which has been presented 
 be served as follows. Good-bye. The 2nd year of Gaius Pescennius Niger Justus 
 Augustus, Phaophi 28. Signed by me... Written by me, Polemon son of ... scribe 
 of the record office. . . . To Vitalius, priest, archidicastes and superintendent of the 
 chrematistae and other courts, from Didymus son of Ammonius and Helene, a settler 
 from Heliopolis. Appended is a copy of the bond issued singly to me. Papontos son 
 of Bithys and Tsenpachous, of Ision Tryphonis in the Oxyrhynchite nome, to Didymus 
 son of Apollonius and Helene, a settler from Heliopolis, greeting. I acknowledge that 
 I have sold and ceded to you from henceforth for ever of my property in the said Ision 
 Tryphonis in the southern part of the village a half share of two houses, one having two 
 storeys, the other a yard, owned jointly by me and my brother Paous, the boundaries of which 
 are, of the one with the yard, on the south an entrance and exit, on the north the property 
 of the heirs of Diogas, on the east that of the heirs of Horus, on the west a public road, 
 and of the other, on the south the property of Papontos son of Mouthis, on the north 
 that of Heraclides son of Horion, on the east a public road, on the west the property 
 of Miusis son of Melas, at the price agreed upon between us for the cession namely 
 2000 drachmae of the Imperial silver coinage, which sum I have received immediately 
 from hand to hand...; and I guarantee the houses free from public and private debts 
 and unaffected by persons’ property-returns or any other claims, the right resting with 
 you to cede to others and to manage and dispose of them as you choose. ‘This contract, 
 written by me, Papontos, in my own hand without erasure or insertion, is valid as though 
 publicly registered. ‘The rst year of Gaius Pescennius Niger Justus Augustus, Pauni 20. 
 Being therefore desirous that the authentic bond should be publicly registered I offer 
 the prescribed 12 drachmae, in order that the regulations concerning publication may 
 not apply to me (Ὁ), and that a single copy may be published, and request you to take this 
 authentic bond bearing my attestation that it is the autograph of Papontos and register 
 it together with this petition at the Library of Hadrian ...”’ 
 
 3. ἐκ rov: in 485. 3 ἐκ should also be read instead of a(pa). 
 
 6. ypappar(eds) karadoyleiov: this no doubt was also the position of Hephaestion 
 in 485. 8 and Flavius Aurelius in B. G. U. 578. 8. The xaradoyeiov was presumably at 
 Alexandria. 
 
 22. Ἰδραση looks like the termination of a place name. 
 
 23-4. καθαρὰς)... ἀπὸ ἀπογραφῆς : Cf. 577 καθαρὸν (a share of a house) ἀπὸ ἀπογραφῆς 
 πάσης καὶ ἀπὸ yewpy(ias) βασιλικῆς καὶ οὐσιακῆς καὶ παντὸς εἴδους. 
 
 27--ὃ8. χω[ρὶς ἀλείφατος] καὶ ἐπιγραφῆς : cf. Β. α. U. 666. 31, 717. 24; &c. 
 
 31-2. This is an obscure passage, the difficulties being increased by a slight un- 
 certainty concerning the reading of pe, which is followed in the original by something 
 having the appearance of a tall v. To read pov is unsatisfactory because the « does 
 not seem to have been touched, and we prefer to suppose that the tail of the φ of 
 χειρόγραφον in 1. 30, which is immediately above, descended into the line below and 
 was cut off by a curved cross-stroke, so producing the effect of a v. With pov, supposing 
 that were intended, the meaning would be ‘because it (the χειρόγραφον) does not comprise 
 my dvacrodai’; and the words may be construed in a somewhat similar sense with the 
 more probable reading pe ‘because I do not possess the orders for publication,’ the 
 reference to the dcacrodai being in either case quite unexplained. On the view adopted 
 
 O 2 
 
196 LAE COSY RAYVNCHUSERALD YES 
 
 in our translation the διαστολαὶ περὶ δημοσιώσεως may be supposed to have prescribed certain 
 penalties or disabilities if the form of procedure followed by the petitioner was neglected. 
 
 720. REQUEST FOR A GUARDIAN. 
 21:5 Χ 9:8 cm. A.D. 241. PLATER EL 
 
 A petition in Latin addressed to the praefect, Claudius Valerius Firmus, 
 by a woman named Aurelia Ammonarion, that he would appoint a particular 
 person as her guardian in accordance with the /ex Julia et Titta. This measure, 
 which is supposed to have been passed in B.C. 31, empowered the praefects 
 of provinces to assign guardians to women and minors who were without them. 
 Appended to the document, which is signed in Greek by the petitioner and her 
 proposed guardian, is the reply of the praefect making the appointment as 
 desired. The rarity of accurately-dated specimens of Latin cursive gives the 
 papyrus a considerable palaeographical interest. 
 
 [C\audio) Valerio Firmio praef(ecto) Aeg(ypit) 
 ab Aureha{e} Ammo|nario, 
 rogo domine des mihi 
 auctorem AureKium) Pilutammonem 
 Be deere Julia Titia 2 4 oa sae 
 datum) do(minis) no(stris) Philippo Aug(usto) i et 
 Philippo Caesaris c\o(n)s(ulibus). 
 
 and hand [4]ὐρηλία Appovdpioy [ἐπιδέδωκα. 
 3rd hand [4]ὐρηλία Πλουτάμμ[ων εὐδοκῶ τῇ 
 10 [δε]ήσι. 
 4th hand (ἔτους) ὃ Τῦβι ι. [ 
 Sth Nand. 4 Yue Wem wes et we ae 
 abeat Plhutammonem 
 ὁ leg(e) Iulia) et [Titia auctorem 
 15 do. (6th hand?) cepi. 
 
 6. d°d°. n°n® Pap. ἡ. 1. Caesare. 9. 1. Αὐρήλιος. 
 ‘To Claudius Valerius Firmus, praefect of Egypt, from Aurelia Ammonarion. 
 
 I beg, my lord, that you will grant me as my guardian Aurelius Plutammon in accordance 
 with the lex Julia Titia ... Dated in the consulship of our lords Philippus Augustus 
 
721. CONTRACTS 197 
 
 for the 2nd time and Philippus Caesar. (Signed) I, Aurelia Ammonarion, have presented 
 the petition. 1, Aurelius Plutammon, assent to the request. The 4th year, Tubi το. 
 (Endorsed) In order that... may not be absent, I appoint Plutammon as guardian in 
 accordance with the /ex Lulva οἱ Titia. Received by me.’ 
 
 1. Valerius Firmus is already known as praefect at this time from P. Amh. 72 
 (A.D. 246) and 81 (a.p. 247). With regard to the date of P. Amh. 72 Wilcken considers 
 (Archiv, 11. p. 127) that the regnal year should be read as ¢ instead of y, as in our text ; 
 but we still hold that y is right and that the facsimile, so far from throwing any doubt 
 upon our reading, thoroughly confirms it. 
 
 5. lege Iulia Titia: cf. Gaius, Znst. i. ὃ 185 st cud nullus omnino tutor stt, οἱ datur 
 in urbe Roma ex lege Atilia ... in provinciis vero a praesidibus provinciarum ex lege 
 Lulia et Titia. In the official signature below (1. 14) the more usual and probably more 
 correct form Julia e¢ Titta is used. The ef has sometimes been regarded as a reason 
 for supposing that there were two leges, a Julia and a Titia, but the conclusion is by no 
 means necessary. 
 
 Of the mutilated word at the end of the line the first letter may be a, ὁ, 7, 5, or 4 
 and the second a, 7, m, m, or x. 
 
 (¢@) CONTRACTS. 
 
 721. Save oF Crown LAND. 
 15 X 16:5 cm. A.D. 13-14. 
 
 An offer addressed by two persons to Gaius Seppius Rufus, perhaps 
 idiologus, for the purchase of Ig arourae of land which had reverted to the 
 State and was at the time uncultivated, at the price of 12 drachmae per aroura. 
 The document follows, so far as it goes, the same formula as P. Amh. 68. 17-24, 
 which Mitteis is no doubt right in explaining, not asa sale in the strict sense, 
 but as an example of emphyteusis or hereditary lease (Zeztschr. Savigny-St. 
 I9O1, pp. 151 sqq.)—a custom for which we now have evidence in Egypt as early 
 as the second century B.c. (cf. P. Tebt. I. 5.12). That this is the true nature of 
 the transaction, in spite of the use of the term ὠνήσασθαι, is shown both by the 
 lowness of the price—in P. Amh. 68. 21, 20 drachmae, here only 12—and by 
 the provision in the Amherst papyrus for an annual rent. Cf. 835, which is 
 a similar offer for the ‘ purchase’ of land addressed to the same official as 721, 
 and P. Amh. 97. The document was never completed, blank spaces being left 
 for some of the dates. - 
 
198 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 ~ Taio. Serio “Ῥούφωι 
 παρὰ Πολέμωνος τοῦ Τρύφωνος καὶ [Apyeddov........4. 
 βουλόμεθα ὠνήσασθαι ἐν τῶι Ogupvyyfetrni........6- ἀπὸ 
 ὑπολόγου βασιλικῆς ἕως τοῦ (ἔτους) Kaio[alp[os κλήρων ἐ- 
 5 πὶ τοῦ (ἔτους) Καίσαρος ἀνειλλημένων καὶ ἀφόρ[ω]ν 
 3 Q UA A ¢ lo 3 2 Ἢ 
 γεγονότων καὶ κλήρων τῶν ἕως τοῦ ἀνειλλημένων 
 καὶ αὐτοῦ (ἔτους) Καίσαρος ἀνειλλημένων πλὴν ἱερᾶς εἰς καϊρποὺς (Ὁ) 
 τοῦ ἰσιόντος τετάρτου καὶ τεσσαρακόστου ἔτους Καίσαρος, [ὁ μὲν 
 Πολέμων περὶ Θῶσβιν καὶ Τεποῦιν τῆς] ἄνω τοπί αἸρχ[ίας 
 10 dpovp(as) δεκάπεντε, “΄ ἄρουρ(αι) te, ὁ δὲ ᾿Αρχέλαος wepl....... τῆς 
 Θμοισεφὼ τοπαρχίίας) ἀρούρ(αΞ) τέσσαρες, A ἄρουρ(αι!) [δ,͵,,χ, ἄρουρ(αι) ιθ, 
 3.9. Ὁ ᾿ς ’, A 9 δ 5 | an 2 
 ἐφ ᾧ παραδειχθέντες ταύτας διαγράψομ[εν εἰς THY ἐπὶ τῶν τό- 
 ’ , XN 2? \ € , 
 πων [δημοσίαν τράπεζαν τὴν κεκεϊλευσμένην τιμὴν ἑκάστης 
 ἀρούρί(ας) [ἀργυ(ρίου) (δραχμὰς)) dexddvo, ἕξομεν δὲ εἰς τὴν τούϊτων ava- 
 γωγὴν καὶ κα- 
 15 [τεργασίαν ἀτέλειαν ἔ͵τηι τρία ἀπὸ τοῦ [εἰσιόντος pO (ἔτους) Καίσαρος 
 
 5. 1. ἀνειλημμένων ; so in|. ἡ. 
 
 “Τὸ Gaius Seppius Rufus from Polemon son of Tryphon and Archelaus son of... 
 We wish to purchase in the Oxyrhynchite nome of the Crown land returned as unpro- 
 ductive up to the... year of Caesar, from the holdings which were confiscated in the .. . 
 year of Caesar and became unfruitful and the holdings confiscated up to and including the 
 ... year of Caesar, exclusive of temple land, for cultivation in the coming 44th year of 
 Caesar—namely Polemon at Thosbis and Tepouis in the upper toparchy fifteen arourae, 
 total 15 arourae, and Archelaus at... in the toparchy of Thmoisepho, four arourae, total 
 4 arourae, total 19 arourae, with the understanding that on these being assigned to us we 
 shall pay into the local State-bank the price ordered for each aroura, 12 drachmae of silver, 
 and shall have for their reclamation and cultivation immunity from taxation for three years 
 from the coming 44th year of Caesar...’ 
 
 1. For Seppius Rufus cf, Wessely, Pap. Script. Graec. Specim. no. 8, and P. Brit. Mus. 
 2476, which shows that he was of higher rank than strategus. 
 
 4. ὑπολόγου βασιλικῆς: ὑπόλογος and τὸ ὑπόλογον are terms frequently used in the 
 Tebtunis papyri to describe Crown land out of cultivation; cf. P. Tebt. I. p. 540. The 
 only other example of this use of the word in the Roman period is P. Amh. 68. 
 
 4-5. [κλήρων] ... ἀνειλλημένων : cf. P. Tebt. I. 61 (4). 74 &c. and P. Amh. 68. 18, which 
 can now be restored on the analogy of the present passage κλήρων... ἀνε]ιλημμένων xalt 
 ἀφόρων xai(?)..|... tov (perhaps ἀχρήστων) γεγονότων. 
 
 7. πλὴν ἱεοᾶς is apparently to be connected with ὠνήσασθαι rather than ἀνειλημμένων. 
 
722. CONTRACTS 199 
 
 The saleable land ὑπολόγου βασιλικῆς is regarded as including both the confiscated κλῆροι 
 and certain ἱερὰ γῆ which must.also have reverted to the government. 
 
 12. παραδειχθέντες ταύτας : cf. P. Amh. 68. 20, where παραδειχθεὶς [ταύΪτας is no doubt 
 to be read, P. Tebt. 79. 16, &c. 
 
 13. τὴν κεκελευσμένην τιμήν : cf. P. Amh, 68. 20 τὴν κἰελευσθεῖσα)ν τιμὴν ὑπὸ Aovkiov 
 Ἰουλίου [ΟἸ]ὐησί τείνου το]ῦ ἡγεμόνος. 
 
 14-5. The supplements are taken from P. Amh. 68. 21. Other conditions on the 
 lines of P. Amh. 68 presumably followed. 835 concludes ἀξίω ἐπιστεῖλαι ἢ. . .| καὶ τοῖς 
 γραμματεῦσι ἐκδόσθαι μοι τοὺϊς ... περὶ ταύτας χρηματισμούς, and something of this kind 
 apparently underlies P. Amh. 68. 23-4. 
 
 722. EMANCIPATION OF A SLAVE. 
 24:3 X10 cM, A.D. OI OF 107. 
 
 This document, which contains a formal emancipation of a female slave, 
 drawn up before the agoranomi and concluding with an acknowledgement of 
 the ransom, is of great interest as being the first specimen of its class from 
 Egypt which is prior to, the introduction of the comstitutio Antonina, and 
 illustrating the differences between Graeco-Egyptian and Roman law on the 
 subject of manumission. Of the two previously known parallels, B.G. U. 96, 
 which is a mere fragment, belongs to the third century and the Papyrus 
 Edmondstone (facsimile in Young’s //zeroglyphics, ii, Plate 46; text in Curtius, 
 Anec. Delph. App. 1, Wessely, Fahresber. des k. k. Staatsgym. in Hernals, xiii, 
 pp. 47-8) to A.D. 354. Since the publications of the latter papyrus are some- 
 what inaccessible, we append the text of it on p. 202. Other papyri concerning 
 the emancipation of slaves are 716, 723, a similar but much shorter example 
 of a second century manumission, 48-9 and 3849, which are letters to the 
 agoranomi authorizing them to liberate slaves. The ends of lines are lost 
 throughout 722, but can in part be restored either from the context or from 
 a comparison with another and quite complete specimen of an emancipation, 
 written in the reign of Commodus, which we opportunely found in January, 1904. 
 The most striking feature of 722 is the circumstance that it is concerned, not 
 with the emancipation of an individual whose status was entirely that of a slave, 
 but with a joint manumission by two brothers of the third part of a slave who 
 as regards the other two-thirds had already been made free; cf. the parallel case 
 in 716 and, as it now appears, in P. Edmondstone 6. That the previous owner 
 of the 2 was a different person from the two owners of the 4 is not stated 
 directly but is in the light of 716 likely enough. It is also noticeable that the 
 
200 THE OXYRAYNCHUS fALYRI 
 
 ransom is paid, not by the slave herself or by a banker, but by a private 
 individual, perhaps her prospective husband, and that a distinction is drawn 
 between the λύτρα paid to the owner and a small sum in silver which probably 
 went to the State ; cf. note on ]. Ig. 
 
 “Erouvs δεκάτου Avtroxpdroplos Καίσαρος Δομιτιανοῦ 
 
 Σεβαστοῦ Γερμανικοῦ Ὑπερβερεταίου 
 
 ἐπαγο(μένων) (2nd hand) ¢ Σεβα(στῇ) (ist hand) μη(νὸς) Καισαρείου 
 ἐϊπαγο(μένων) (2nd hand) ¢ Σ᾿ εβα(στῇ) (ist hand) ἐν ’O- 
 
 ξυρύγχων πόλει τῆς OnBaidlos ἐπ᾽ ἀγορανό- 
 
 5 pov Ψαμμίων τριῶν [ 
 
 ἀφεῖκαν é{u}revdépav ὑπὸ Aia Γῆν Ἥλιον ᾿ἀχιλλεὺς 
 ὡς (ἐτῶν) κ μέσος μελίχρως μ[ακροπρόσωπος 
 [οὐλὴ) μ]ετώπῳ μέσῳ καὶ Σ᾽αραπᾶς ὡς (ἐτῶν). μέσος 
 [μ]ελϊίχρως μακροπρόσωπος οὐ(λὴ).... ... .. 
 
 το [0 @IplOTEpl ἀμφότεροι a sas aa a TOU 
 
 πὸ πον μητρὸς Σιαραποῦτον |... «i. sare ae 
 
 [τῶ]ν ἀπ’ ᾿Οξυρύγχων πόλεως [ἐν ἀγυιᾷ τὸ ὑ- 
 
 [πάρ]χον αὐτοῖς ἐξ ἴσου τρίτον pélpos τῆς ἐξαπη- 
 
 [λευ]θερωμένης κατὰ τὸ ἄλλο δίίμοιρον δού- 
 
 15 Ans AmoAdwvodros ὡς (ἐτῶν) κς péo[ns μελίχρωτος 
 [μα]κροπροσώπου οὐλὴ ποδὶ δεξιῷ .. .. ... 
 ἐξαπηλευθερωμένης (ταλάντων) Oe... eee eee 
 [. lv τῶν τοῦ ἀπελευθερουμέϊνου, . .. τρίτου 
 [μέρου]ς ἀργυρίου ἐπισήμου dpalyuav....... 
 
 20 [τ]ετ]ρωβόλου καὶ ὧν τέτακται [.... 'ἀχιλλεῖ 
 καὶ Σαραπᾷ “Hpaxdds Τρύφωνοϊς τοῦ... ...... 
 μητρὸς Ταοννώφριος Ilaveci..... ἀπὸ τῆς 
 [αἸἰὐτῆς πόλεως ws (ἐτῶν) λα μέσοϊς μελίχρως 
 μακροπρόσωπος οὐ(λὴ) ὑπὲρ γό(νυ) δεξ[ιὸν λύτρων 
 
 25. ἀργυρίου Σεβαστοῦ νομίσμαϊτος δραχμῶν 
 διακοσίων χαλκοῦ ταλάνταϊν ......... jf 
 χιλίων, οὐκ ἐξόντος τῷ Ax [tree οὐδ᾽ ἄλλῳ 
 [ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ ἀπαίτησιν ποιεζίσθαι παρὰ τῆς ᾿4πολ- 
 
 [λ]ωνοῦτος οὐδὲ τῶ ᾿ αὐτῆς τῶ 
 i ς οὐδὲ τῶν πίαρ αὐτῆς τῶν προκει- 
 
(Pee OONVNIRACLS 201 
 
 30 [μ]ένων λύτρων οὐδ᾽ Emi... . 1... 00s Ὰ: 
 γνωστὴρ τῆς ἐλευθεράσεως. .. .... ἌΡΑΣ: 
 τοῦ Πετεήσιος μητρὸς [......- ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆς 
 πόλεως ὡς (ἐτῶν) μ plécos μελίχρως μακρο- 
 πρόσωπος οὐ(λὴ) ἀντικ[νημίῳ...... ἐν ἀγυιᾷ 
 
 35 TH αὐτὴν (and hand) ‘Ayiadfeds....... 
 
 πεπύημε σὺν τῷ ἀδελφῷ 
 Σεραπᾶτι τὴν ἐλευθέρωσιν 
 τοῦ τρίτου [μέρους δούλης 
 ᾿Απολονοῦτίος καὶ ἀπέχω 
 
 40 τὰ λύτρα ἀργυρίου δραχ(μὰΞ) 
 διακοσίας χαλκοῦ 
 
 [Jul 
 
 On the verso 
 ἐπαγο(μένων) ς΄ [ 
 
 16. π of mod corr. from δ, 36. 1. πεποίημαι. 39. 1, ᾿Απολλωνοῦτίος, 
 
 ‘The roth year of the Emperor Caesar Domitianus Augustus Germanicus, on the 6th 
 intercalary day of Hyperberetaeus, dies Augustus, which is the 6th intercalary day of the 
 month Caesarius, dies Augustus, at Oxyrhynchus in the Thebaid, before three agoranomi 
 called Psammis, Achilleus, aged about 20 years, of middle height, fair, having a long face 
 and a scar on the middle of his forehead, and Sarapas, aged about... years, of middle 
 height, fair, having a long face and a scar on his left ..., both sons of ... son of 
 Ammonius, their mother being Sarapous daughter of..., all of Oxyrhynchus, have set 
 free under sanction of Zeus, Earth, and Sun (the deed being drawn up in the street) the 
 third part which they jointly own of the slave who has been freed as regards the other two- 
 thirds, Apollonous, aged about 26, of middle height, fair, having a long face and a scar 
 on the right foot,...for...drachmae 4 obols of coined silver and the ransom paid to 
 Achilleus and Sarapas by Heraclas son of Tryphon son of ..., his mother being Taonnophris 
 daughter of ... of the said city, aged about 31, of middle height, fair, having a long face 
 and a scar above his right knee, namely 200 drachmae of Imperial silver coin and... 
 talents 1000 drachmae of copper; Achilleus or any one else on his behalf being forbidden 
 to make any demand of the aforesaid ransom from Apollonous or her assigns, or to .. 
 The certifier of the manumission is... son of Peteésis, his mother being... , of the said 
 city, aged about 40, of middle height, fair, having a long face and a scar upon his... shin, 
 in the same street. 
 
 ‘I, Achilleus, have with my brother Sarapas effected the emancipation of the third 
 part of the slave Apollonous, and I have received the ransom, two hundred drachmae of 
 SILVER a. 
 
202 THE OXYRHAYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 1. Since the papyrus must on palaeographical grounds be assigned to the end of the 
 first or the early part of the second century, the coincidence of a 6th intercalary day with 
 the roth year of an emperor called Germanicus fixes the reign as that of either Domitian 
 or Trajan. The supplement at the end of 1. 1 is in any case long compared with the 
 10 letters which are missing in ], 2, and Domitian is therefore preferable. 
 
 6. Cf. the similar beginning of P. Edmondst. 6 sqq. For Ata Inv Ἥλιον, cf. 48. 6, &c. 
 
 12. ἐν dywa is supplied from the newly found emancipation (cf. introd.); cf. ἐν ἀγυιᾷ] 
 τῇ αὐτῆι in 11, 34-5. We are inclined to think that this formula, which so far is only known 
 at Oxyrhynchus, regularly implies the execution of the document before the agoranomi, 
 who are mentioned much less frequently in Oxyrhynchus contracts than elsewhere. 
 
 16~9. The newly found emancipation proceeds straight from the description of the 
 slave to the mention of the ἀργύριον ἐπίσημον corresponding to |. 19, and owing to the 
 lacunae it is not clear whether the sum mentioned in 1. 17 is the ransom of the whole 
 slave or of the 2 previously set free. On the whole we think the latter hypothesis is more 
 likely. ‘The talents are in either case probably copper. 
 
 19. ἀργυρίου ἐπισήμου : the newly found emancipation has dpy. ἐπισ. δραχμῶν δέκα καὶ ὧν 
 τέτακται ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ (sc. the slave) τῷ Θέωνι (the Owner)... λύτρων dpy. δραχ. πεντακοσίων, ON 
 the analogy of which we have supplied λύτρων in ]. 24. It is clear from that papyrus that 
 a distinction was drawn between the payment in ἀργύριον ἐπίσημον and the ransom paid to 
 the owner, and from 48 and 49 in which the same amount of ἀργύριον ἐπίσημον, 10 
 drachmae, is coupled with different sums expressed in copper, there would seem to have 
 been a normal charge of ro drachmae in addition to the ransom, in spite of 722. 19-20, 
 where the amount of dpy. émo. cannot be τὸ drachmae. ‘The divergence of 722 at this 
 point may be due to the fact that it is concerned with the emancipation of only part 
 of a slave. ‘To whom these ro drachmae were paid is not made clear, but it is probable 
 that the State in some form was the recipient. Nowhere in connexion with these 
 emancipations under Graeco-Egyptian law is there a mention of the vzcesema Libertatis 
 levied under Roman law, which appears in B.G. U. 96. 8 (τὴν [εἰω]θυεῖαν εἰκοστήν) ; but if, 
 as we are now disposed to think, the status of the persons who wrote 48-9 was that of 
 farmers of the ἐγκύκλιον and 48-9 stand towards such documents as 722 in the same kind 
 of relation as 241-8 towards contracts for sale or mortgage, there must have been a tax 
 upon the emancipation of slaves apart from the ro drachmae ἀργυρίου ἐπισήμου. 
 
 Papyrus EpMONDSTONE. A.D. 354. 
 
 ειποωί ἣ imare|ials τῶν δεσποτῶν ἡμῶν Κωνσταντίου Αὐγούστου τὸ ᾧ καὶ Κωνσταντίου τοῦ 
 ἐπιφανεστάτου Καίσαρος τὸ γ 
 Τῦβι ιζ τῆς cy ἰνδικτίονος, ἐν ᾿Ελεφαντίνηϊ -] πόλει τῆς ἄνω Θηβαίδος. 
 Αὐρηλία Τηρουτήρου Πασμῆτος μητρὸς Ἰσενπαχνούμεως ἀπὸ ᾿Ἐλεφαντίνης πόλεως μετὰ 
 συνεστῶτ᾽ οἷς 
 ἰτ]οῦ κυρίου αὐτῆς ἀνδρὸς Αὐρηλίου Δωροθέου Σερήνου ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆς thee Αὐρηλίῳ 
 Σαραπάμμωνι 
 
 5 μητρὸς Ταπαμῶνος καὶ Τκαλῇτι ἐκ μητρὸς Θαήσιος καὶ (τ) ταύτη(ς θυγατρὶ Αὐρηλίᾳ Λουσίᾳ. 
 
 γενομένοι(εν 
 μοι δούλοι(ς) ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἐπιβάλλοντος μέρους χαίρειν. ὁμολογῶ ἑκουσίως καὶ αὐθαιρέτως καὶ. 
 ἀμετανοήτως ἀφικέναι ὑμᾶς ἐλευθέρους τοῦ ἐπιβάλλοντος μοι μέρους ὑπὸ Τῆν καὶ Οὐρανὸν κατ᾽ 
 εὐσεβίαν 
 τί ο]0 πανελεήμονος Θεοῦ ἐλθόντος εἰς ἐμὲ ἀπὸ κληρονομίας τῆς μητρός μου ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν ἐπὶ 
 ‘ ef , 
 τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον 
 
723. CONTRACTS 203 
 
 καὶ ἀνθ᾽ ὧν ἐνεδείξωσθέ μοι κατὰ χρόνον εὐνοίας καὶ στοργῆς ἔτι τε καὶ ὑπηρεσίας. ρεπεσθε 
 οὖν ὑμᾶς 
 10 κατὰ τὸ] προκείμενόν μου μέρος καθὼς προεῖπον καὶ νέμεσθε εἰς ods ἐὰν βούλητε τόπους 
 ἀκωλύτως 
 καὶ ἀνεπιλήμπτως, εὐδοκεῖν γὰρ καὶ πείθεσθαι ἐμὲ τὴν ἐλευθεροῦντα τοῖς ἐλευθερουμένοις εἰς 
 τήνδε [τ]ὴν ἐλευθέρωσιν ἥκειν τοῖς ἐλευθερουμένοις καθὼς. προδεδήλουται καὶ τοῖς ἐξ αὐτῶν 
 ἐσομένο olis εἴτε ἐπὶ θηλείοις τέκνοις εἴτε ἐπὶ ἑτέροις ἐκγόνοις" μήτε μὴν οἷς ἐὰν κτήσησθε τρό(πῳ) 
 μηϊδενὴ) παρευρέσει μηδεμιᾷ ἐντεῦθεν ἀκώλυτον ἔσται τῆς δουλείας, καὶ μὴ ἔξεσται δὲ μηδενὶ τῶν 
 15 ἐμῶν κληρονόμων ἁπαξαπλῶς ἀντιλέγειν μου ταύτῃ τῇ εὐσεβείᾳ περὶ μηδενὸς κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον 
 ἐκ μηδεμιᾶς ἀφορμῆς τῷ καθόλου δὲ ἣν καὶ αὐτοὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐνέδειξών μοι εὔνοιαν καὶ 
 φιλοστοργείαν, 
 kali] αὐτὴ ἀμοιβόμενος τὰς ἀμοιβὰς ἑκὼν καὶ πεπισμένη ἧκον εἰς τήνδε τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἥνπερ 
 ἐθέμην κυρίαν καὶ βεβαίαν ἁπλῆν γραφεῖσαν πανταχοῦ ἐπιφερομένην ἐφ᾽ ὑπογραφῆς ἐμοῦ Δωρο- 
 θέου τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς πρὸς αἰωνίαν ὑμῶν ἀσφάλειαν, καὶ ἐπερωτηθεῖσα ὡμολόγησα. 
 20 (2nd hand) Αὐρηλία Τηρουτήρου Πασμῆτος ἡ προκειμένη ἐθέμην τὴν ἐλευθερίαν καὶ εὐδοκῶ 
 πᾶσι τοῖς ἐνγεγραμμένοις 
 ὡς πρόκειται. Αὐρήλιος Δωρόθεος Σερήνου ὁ προγεγραμμένος ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς συνέστην τῇ γυναικί 
 μου καὶ ἔγραψα 
 ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς γράμματα μὴ εἰδηείης. (3rd hand) meas Τινισαεῖς ᾿Αμμωνᾶτος μαρτυρῶ, 
 (4th hand) Αὐρήλιος ᾿Αμμωνίου 
 Σωκράτους μαρτυρῶῷς (5th hand) Αὐρήλιος Φιτουσίας Eo amlel μαρτυρῶ. (6th hand) Αὐ- 
 ρήλιος Κύριλλος Παησίου μαρτυρῶ. 
 (7th hand) Αὐρήλιος Τιμόθεος ᾿Απολλωνίου ἀπὸ προεστώτων ᾿Ελεφαντίνης μαρτυρῶ. 
 
 5. Τκαλῆτι : Or perhaps Τηαλήψι. 6. ]. μου for μοι. 9. 1. ἐνεδείξασθες. Final ε of 
 pereoOe corr. from a; ]. (τ)ρέπεσθαι ἡ 10. ]. νέμεσθαι... βούλησθε. 11. 1. ἐλευθεροῦσαν. 
 .12. 1. προδεδήλωται. τό. 1]. ἐνέδειξαν. 17. 1. ἀμειβομένη. 22. |, eidvias ... ᾿Αμμώνιος. 
 
 Τινισθεῖς can be read for Τινισαεῖς. 
 
 723. EMANCIPATION OF A SLAVE. 
 17°39 21°2 cM. A.D. 138-161. 
 
 This document, recording the formal emancipation of a female slave, follows 
 the same formula as 722, but is simpler and more compressed. A good deal 
 is lost at the beginnings of the lines, including, unfortunately, the details con- 
 cerning the λύτρα; but a comparison with 722 renders the general sense clear 
 enough. Cf. the introd. to that papyrus. 
 
 [Ἔτους Avroxpatépos Καίσαρος Τίτου Αἰλίου Ἁδριανοῦ ᾿Αντωνίνου Σ εἸ- 
 βαστοῦ Εὐσεβοῦς (and hand) Ζύστρου a Τῦβι a (ist hand) ἐν 
 ᾿Οξυρύγχων πόλει τῆς OnBaidos 
 
204 HE COXVYRAVNCAUS ΣΙ ΘΒ ΥΤΥ 
 
 2 ἐπ᾿ ἀγορανόμων ἀφεῖκεν ἐλευθέραν ὑπὸ Δία Τῆν “Ηλιον | Διο- 
 δώρου τοῦ ᾿4γαθείνου μητρὸς Τσεεὶ Θέωνος ᾿Ηρακλείδου 
 
 3 80 letters ἀπ᾽ ᾿Οξυρύγχων πόλεως ἐν ἀγυιᾷ τὴ]ν ὑπάρχ[ου)σαν αὐτῷ 
 οἰκογενῆ ἐκ δούλης Anpnrpodros 
 
 4 δούλην 50 letters Oe. . [. γν]ωστὴρ τῆς ἐλευθερώσεως Σ᾽ αραπίων 
 ᾿Ασκληπιάδου 
 
 5 55 letters (2nd hand) ὧς] (ἐτῶν) ν οὐλὴ] wod(t) ἀριστί(ερῷ) (Ist hand) 
 ἐν ἀγυιᾷ τῇ αὐτῇ (and hand) διὰ Χαιρήμ(ονος) τοῦ σὺν a&X(Aats) 
 
 6-50. letters] 
 
 1. OnBaidos Pap. 3. ὕπαρχουσαν Pap. 5. ayvia Pap. 
 
 2. τοῦ seems to have been omitted before “Ἡρακλείδου. The name Τσεεί occurs also in 
 76. 5 μητρὸς Toeet Καλλίου. 
 
 4. The vestiges following |8e possibly represent the γν of γνωστήρ, the intervening space 
 being accounted for by the junction at this point of two selides. Shorter blank spaces 
 have been left in the corresponding part of the two preceding lines. In that case ἔστιν] de 
 γνωστήρ Should be read; but the traces do not suit y particularly well, and there is no ἔστιν 
 δέ in 496. 16 where a γνωστήρ is mentioned at the end of a contract. A description of the 
 slave and perhaps the amount of the λύτρα were given at the beginning of this line (cf. 722. 
 15 sqq.); but | δέκα is not a possible reading. 
 
 5. After σὺν ἄλ(λοις) the papyrus not improbably proceeded ἐπὶ τῆς ἐγκυκλίου ; cf. 96. 2 
 (corr. by Wilcken) ὁ σὺν ἄλ(λοις) ἐπὶ τῆ(ς) ἐνκυκλ[ίου] This restoration would accord very 
 well with our present explanation of the position occupied by the writers of 48 and 49 
 (cf. 722. 19, note); but what exactly διά implies here is uncertain. 
 
 724. -APPRENTICESHIP TO A SHORTHAND-WRITER. 
 18-3 Χ 21:3 cm. A.D. 155. 
 
 Contract whereby an ex-cosmetes of Oxyrhynchus apprenticed his slave 
 to a shorthand-writer for two years to be taught to read and write shorthand, 
 the teacher receiving 120 drachmae in all. The contract was drawn up by an 
 unprofessional scribe, and the language is often confused. ) 
 
 Παϊ[ν]εχώτης ὁ καὶ Πανάρης τῶν κεκοσμητευκότων τῆς ᾿Οξυρυγχειτῶν 
 πόλεως διὰ Γεμέλλου φίλου ᾿ἀπολλωνίῳ σημιογράφῳ χαίρειν. συνέστησά σοι 
 
 Χαιράμμωνα δοῦλον πρὸς μάθησιν σημείων ὧν ἐπίσταται ὁ υἱός σου 
 
 Διονύσιος ἐπὶ χρόνον ἔτη δύο ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος μηνὸς Φαμενὼθ τοῦ 
 
 i 
 
724. CONTRACTS 205 
 
 5 ὀκτωκαιδεκάτου ἔτους ᾿Αντωνίνου Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου μισθοῦ τοῦ συμπεφω 
 νημένου πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀργυρίου δραχμῶν ἑκατὸν εἴκοσι χωρὶς ἑορτι- 
 κῶν, ἐξ ὧν ἔσχες τὴν πρώτην δόσιν ἐν δραχμαῖς τεσσαράκοντα, τὴν δὲ 
 δευτέραν λήψῃ τοῦ παιδὸς ἀνειληφότος τὸ κομεντάρι}ον ὅλον ἐν δρα- 
 χ᾽ μ]αῖς τἰεσσ᾿αράκοντα, τὴν δὲ τρίτην λήψομαι ἐπὶ τέλει τοῦ χρόνου τοῦ 
 10 παιδὸς ἐκ παντὸς λόγου πεζοῦ γράφοντος καὶ ἀναγεινώσζκονἾτος ἀμέμπτως 
 τὰς {δὲ} λοιπὰς δραχμὰς τεσσαράκοντα. ἐὰν δὲ ἐντὸς τοῦ χ[ρ]όνου αὐτὸν 
 ἀπαρτίσῃς οὐκ ἐκδέξομαι τὴν προκειμένην προθεσμ[ί]αν, οὐκ ἐξόντος 
 μοι ἐντὸς τοῦ χρόνου τὸν παῖδα ἀποσπᾶν, παραμενεῖ δέ σοι μετὰ [τὸ]ν χρόϊνον 
 ὅσας 
 ἐὰν ἀργήσῃ ἡμέρας ἢ μῆνας. (ἔτους) in Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Τίτου 
 Αἰλίου ᾿Αδριανοῦ 
 15 Αντωνείνου Σεβαστοῦ Εὐσεβοῦς Φαμενὼθ ε. 
 
 3. σ οὗ σου corr. from μ. 7. x οἵ δραχμαις corr. from y. 9. 1. λήψει. 12: 
 & οἵ εἐκδεξομαι corr. from x. 14. ἡ Of nuepas rewritten. 
 
 ‘Panechotes also called Panares, ex-cosmetes of Oxyrhynchus, through his friend 
 Gemellus, to Apollonius, writer of shorthand, greeting. I have placed with you my slave 
 Chaerammon to be taught the signs which your son Dionysius knows, for a period of two 
 _years dating from the present month Phamenoth of the 18th year of Antoninus Caesar the 
 lord at the salary agreed upon between us, 120 silver drachmae, not including feast-days ; 
 of which sum you have received the first instalment amounting to 40 drachmae, and 
 you will receive the second instalment consisting of 40 drachmae when the boy has learnt 
 the whole system, and the third you will receive at the end of the period when the boy 
 writes fluently in every respect and reads faultlessly, viz. the remaining 40 drachmae. 
 If you make him perfect within the period, I will not wait for the aforesaid limit; but it is 
 not lawful for me to take the boy away before the end of the period, and he shall remain 
 with you after the expiration of it for as many days or months as he may have done 
 no work. Ther8th year of the Emperor Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus 
 Pius, Phamenoth 5.’ 
 
 6. χωρὶς ἑορτικῶν : sc. ἡμερῶν (cf. 725. 36-7), though the phrase is out of place. 
 
 8. κομεντάρι]ον : a Graecized form of commentarium seems to be intended, though the 
 doubtful » is more like Xo, 
 
 11-3. The clause οὐκ ἐξόντος κιτιλ., which is regularly found in contracts of apprentice- 
 ship (cf. e. g. 725. 53-6), comes in somewhat awkwardly here after the clause ἐὰν δὲ ἐντὸς κιτιλ, 
 The meaning is that if the boy was perfect in less than two years, his owner would not 
 insist on his staying with the teacher unless the teacher wished to keep him, but the boy’s 
 owner was prevented from taking him away before the boy was perfect and so evading the 
 payment of the second and third instalments. 
 
206 
 
 A contract between Ischyrion and Heraclas, in which the former apprentices 
 to the latter a boy called Thonis, probably the ward of Ischyrion, for five years, 
 to be taught the trade of weaving. Arrangements are made for the provision 
 of wages (after two years and seven months) and clothes for Thonis by Heraclas 
 on an ascending scale, and for the case of Thonis’ absence from his work for 
 more than the 20 days allowed for holidays. 
 a weaver written 120 years previously, upon which the supplements in ll. 1-5 
 
 are based. 
 
 Io 
 
 15 
 
 20 
 
 THE OXYRAYNCHUS. PAPYRI 
 
 725. APPRENTICESHIP TO A WEAVER. 
 
 30-7 XII cm. 
 
 [Ομολογοῦσιν ἀλλήλοις ᾿Ισ]χυρίων “Hpadiwvos 
 (Hn POS «ssi oe eee ἀπ᾽ ᾿Θειήρυγχον πόλεως καὶ 
 [Ἡρακλᾶς Sapamiwvos το]ῦ καὶ Λέοντος ‘Hpaxnei- 
 Col WAT POs τὶ ἀρ ἣν ἀπὸ] τῆς αὐτῆς πόλεως 
 [γέρ]διοῖς ὁ μὲν ᾿Ισχυρίων ἐγ]δεδόσθαι τῷ ᾿Ηρα- 
 [RNG STOVE το stash 4 be es }--[...] ἀδελφοῦ 
 . [1. ov Θῶν[ιν ἀ]φήλίικα m]pos [μ]άθησιν τῆς δη- 
 λ[οἸυμένης [τέχνης ἀπὸ νεομηϊνίας τοῦ] ἑξῆς 
 μίηϊνὸς Φαῶφ[ι] ἐπὶ χρόνον ἔτη πέϊντε, κ]αὶ παρ- 
 ἕει αὐτὸν προσεδρεύοντα τῷ διδασκάλῳ 
 
 πὶ τὸν δηλοζύμε]νον χρ[όϊνον καθ᾽ ἑκάστην 
 
 Me Mm 
 
 ἡμέραν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς] ἡϊλίου] μέχρι δύσεως, 
 ποιοῦντα πάντα τὰ ἐπιταχθ]ησόμενα [αἸὐτῷ 
 ὑπὸ τοῦ αὐτοῦ δίιδασκάλ]ου ὡς ἐπὶ τῶν ὁμοί- 
 ov μαθητῶν, [τρεφόμ]ενον ὑπὸ τοῦ ᾿Ισχυ- 
 [ρίίωνος. κ[αὶ τὰ μὲν] πρῶτα ἔτη δύο 
 
 καὶ μῆνας ἑπτὰ τοῦ τρίτου ἐνιαυτοῦ 
 
 οὐδὲν δώσει ὑπὲρ μισθοῦ τοῦ παιδὸς 6 ‘Hpa- 
 κλᾶς, τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς μησὶ πέντε τοῦ αὐ- 
 τοῦ τρίτου ἐνιαυτοῦ χορηγήσει ὁ ‘Hpa- 
 
 κλᾶς ὑπὲρ μισθῶν τοῦ αὐτοῦ μαθητοῦ 
 
 κατὰ μῆνα δραχμὰς δεκάδυο κ[α]ὶ τῷ τε- 
 
 Cf. 275, a similar contract with 
 
25 
 
 30 
 
 38 
 
 40 
 
 48 
 
 50 
 
 55 
 
 725. CONTRACTS 
 
 ’ ᾽ “a e ’ὔ A ~ 
 τάρτῳ ἐνιαυτῷ ὁμοίως κατὰ μῆνα 
 
 e \ τς \ 4 \ “ 
 ὑπὲρ μισθῶν δραχμὰς δεκάεξ καὶ TO 
 πέμπτῳ ἐνιαυτῷ ὁμοίως κατὰ μῆ- 
 va δραχμὰς εἴκοσι τέσσαρας, καὶ κατασκευ- 
 Pe e ¢ ~ “" 5. aA A A 
 ἄσει ὁ Hpakdds τῷ αὐτῷ μαθητῇ τῷ μὲν 
 ἐνεστῶτι τετάρτῳ καὶ εἰκοστῷ ἔτει 
 χίτῶνα ἄξιον δραχμῶν δεκάεξ, τῷ [δὲ 
 
 bd , » [4 “᾿ » 
 ἰσιόντι κε (ἔτει) ἕτερον χιτῶνα ἄξιον d[pa- 
 χμῶν εἴκοσι, καὶ [τ]ῷ κς (ἔτει) ὁμοίως ἄλλοϊν 
 
 ἌΡ Ἢ BY ~ Sr 2 
 
 χιτῶϊν]α ἄξιον δραχμῶν εἴϊκ]οσι τεσσάρων, 
 κ[α]ὶ τῷ κί (ἔτει) ἄλλον χιτῶνα [ἄξιον δραχμῶν 
 εἴκοσι ὀκτώ, καὶ τῷ KN (ἔτει) ὁμοίως ἄλλ[ον] χιτῶ- 
 va ἄξιον δραχμῶν τριάκοντα δύο. ἀρ- 
 
 tA Die Os a > ᾽ ε “A ΝΜ 
 γήσει δὲ ὁ παῖς εἰς λόγον ἑορτῶν κατ ἔτος 
 ἡμέρας εἴκοσι, οὐδενὸς ἐκκρουομένου 
 
 A “ ? 39. ,3 ce 2? IN 
 7[@]v μισθῶν τούτων ad. οὗ χρόνου ἐὰν 
 χορηγηθῇ μισθός, ἐὰν δὲ πλείονας τού- 
 τῶν ἀργήσῃ [ἢ ἀσἸθενήσῃ ἢ ἀτακτήσῃ ἢ 
 
 4 € 
 
 dt ἄλλην τινὰ αἰτίαν ἡμέρας ἐπὶ τὰς 
 [ic]as ἐπάναγκε[ς] παρέξει αὐτὸν ὁ ᾿Ισχυρί 
 
 “A 4 q ’ 2 
 ὧν τῷ διδασκάϊλ]ῳ ἡμέρας παραμένον- 
 τα καὶ ποιοῦντα] πάντα καθὼς πρόκειται 
 χωρὶς μισθοῦ, τρεφόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ αὐτοῦ 
 
 1 ἃ τὸ ἐπὶ τού ἑστάσθαι. 
 ᾿Ισχυρίωνος, διὰ τὸ τούτοις ἑστάσθαι 
 
 € ~ A A 
 ὁ [δὴὲ “Ηρακλᾶς εὐδοκῶν τούτοις πᾶσι καὶ ἐκ 
 δειδάξειν τὸν μαθητὴν τὴν δηλουμέ- 
 νην τέχνην ἐν τῷ πενταετῖ χρόνῳ 
 καθὼς καὶ αὐτὸς ἐπίσταται καὶ χορηγήσειν 
 τοὺς μηνιαίους μισθοὺς καθὼς πρόκει- 
 
 3 4 ~ 3 v4 μὴ “ ’ 3 
 ταί] ἀπὸ τοῦ ὀγδόου μηνὸς τοῦ τρίτου ἐνιαυ- 
 τοῦ. καὶ μὴ ἐξεῖναι μηδενὶ αὐτῶν παρα- 
 βαίνειν τι τῶν προκειμένων ἢ ὁ παραβὰς 
 ἐκτείσι τῷ ἐνμένοντι ἐπιτείμου δραχμὰς 
 ¢ A 4 ᾽ i's Ἁ a4 iA 
 ἑκατὸν καὶ εἰς τὸ δημόσιον Tas ἴσας. κύριον 
 τὸ ὁμολόγημα. (ἔτους) Kd Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος 
 
 207 
 
208 THE OXYRAYNGCHUSSPAPYRI 
 
 Μάρκου Αὐρηλίου Koppddov ‘Avravivov 
 Σεβαστοῦ ‘Appeviaxod Μηδικοῦ Παρθικοῦ 
 60 Σ᾿ αρματικοῦ Τερμανικοῦ Μεγίστου Θὼθ κε. 
 
 and hand ‘Hpaxdrads SYapam(iwvos) τοῦ κ(αὴὶ Aéovros τέθειμαι τὸ 
 ὁμολόγημα Kat εὐδοκῶ πᾶσι τοῖς προκ(ειμένοις). 
 Θῶνις ὁ κ(αὴ Mapots Ἁρθώνιος ἔγραψα 
 ὑπὲρ αὐ(τοῦ) μὴ εἰδίότος) γράμμ(ατα). 
 
 16. τ Of ery corr. from &. 30. tovovre Pap. 34. addlov above the line. 35. 
 & of αξιον corr. from 80. 52. oySoov corr 56. ἴσας Pap. 63. ς Of μωρους 
 rewritten (0). 
 
 ‘Ischyrion son of Heradion and ..., of Oxyrhynchus, and Heraclas son of Sarapion 
 also called Leon, son of Heraclides, his mother being ..., of the said city, weaver, agree 
 with each other as follows:—lIschyrion on the one part that he has apprenticed to 
 Heraclas ...Thonis, a minor, to be taught the art of weaving for a period of five years 
 starting from the rst of next month, Phaophi, and will produce him to attend the teacher 
 for the stipulated period every day from sunrise to sunset, performing all the orders that 
 may be given to him by the said teacher on the same terms as the other apprentices, 
 and being fed by Ischyrion. For the first 2 years and 7 months of the 3rd year Heraclas 
 shall pay nothing for the boy’s wages, but in the remaining 5 months of the said 3rd year 
 Heraclas shall pay for the wages of the said apprentice 12 drachmae a month, and in 
 the 4th year likewise for wages 16 drachmae a month, and in the 5th year likewise 
 24 drachmae a month; and Heraclas shall furnish for the said apprentice in the present 
 24th year a tunic worth 16 drachmae, and in the coming 25th year a second tunic worth 
 20 drachmae, and likewise in the 26th year another tunic worth 24 drachmae, and in 
 the 27th year another tunic worth 28 drachmae, and likewise in the 28th year another tunic 
 worth 32 drachmae. The boy shall have 20 holidays in the year on account of festivals 
 without any deduction from his wages after the payment of wages begins; but if he exceeds 
 this number of days from idleness or ill-health or disobedience or any other reason, 
 Ischyrion must produce him for the teacher during an equivalent number of days, during 
 which he shall remain and perform all his duties, as aforesaid, without wages, being fed by 
 the said Ischyrion, because the contract has been made on these terms. Heraclas on the 
 other part consents to all these provisions, and agrees to instruct the apprentice in the 
 aforesaid art within the period of 5 years as thoroughly as he knows it himself, and to pay 
 the monthly wages as above, beginning with the 8th month of the 3rd year. Neither party 
 is permitted to violate any of the aforesaid provisions, the penalty for such violation being 
 a fine of roo drachmae to the party abiding by the contract and to the Treasury an equal 
 sum. ‘This agreement is valid. The 24th year of the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius 
 Commodus Antoninus Augustus Armeniacus Medicus Parthicus Sarmaticus Germanicus 
 Maximus, Thoth 25. I, Heraclas son of Sarapion also called Leon, have made this 
 contract and consent to all the aforesaid provisions. I, Thonis also called Morous, son ~ 
 of Harthonis, wrote for him as he was illiterate.’ 
 
726. CONTRACTS 209 
 
 726. APPOINTMENT OF A REPRESENTATIVE. 
 20 X 9:2 cM. A.D. 135. 
 
 This is an agreement by which Apollonius authorizes another person to 
 appear for him in some legal proceedings in which he was concerned, being 
 prevented by illness from attending in person; cf. 97 and 261, which are 
 contracts of the same kind. The document is incomplete, the name of the 
 representative and the date not having been filled in. 
 
 Ἔτους ἐννεακαιδεκάτον Αὐτοκράτορος diadroyicp[d|y, αὐτόθεν συν- 
 
 Καίσαρος Τρα[ι]ανοῦ “Ἁδριανοῦ εστακέναι τὸν 
 Σεβαστοῦ ΤΌβ[ι] ἐν ᾽Ο ξυρύγ- τὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ λόγον ποιησό- 
 χων πόλει τῆς Θηβαίδος. ὁμο- 15 μένον περὶ τῶν πρὸς αὐτὸν 
 5 λογεῖ ᾿ἀπολλώνιος ἀπολλων[ί)ου ζητηθησομέϊν)ων ἐπί τε τοῦ 
 lo! ? ἧς ? «ς » ’ 
 τοῦ Δι([οἹγένους μητρὸς Τανεχω- κρατίστου ἡγεμ[ζό νος ΠΠετρωνίου 
 ταρίου τῆς [καὶ] Εὐτέρπης Διογέ- [Maplepreivou καὶ τοῦ ἐπιστρατή- 
 vous ἀπ᾿ ᾿Οξυρύγχων πόλεως [γον Γελλίου Βάϊσ]σου ἢ κα]ὶ ἐφ᾽ ἑτέ- 
 20 ρὼν Κριτῶν κ[αὶ] πάντα ἐπιτελέ- 
 ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆς πόλεως, ἐν ἀγυιᾷ, σονταὰ περὶ τῶν [κ]ατὰ τὴν σύστασιν, 
 10 οὐ δυνάμενος δι᾽ ἀϊσἸθένειαν εὐδοκεῖ γὰρ ἐπὶ τούτοις. 
 lo ᾽ 4 4 ~ “. ’ tq ¢ ἊΝ 
 πλεῦσαι ἐπὶ [τ]ὸν τοῦ νομοῦ [κυρία ἡ ὁμολο]γέα. 
 
 ‘The roth year of the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus, Tubi_, at 
 Oxyrhynchus in the Thebaid. Apollonius son of Apollonius son of Diogenes, his 
 mother being Tanechotarion also called Euterpe, daughter of Diogenes, of Oxyrhynchus, 
 
 acknowledges to , of the said city (the contract taking place in the street), since 
 he is unable through sickness to make the voyage to the assize of the nome, that he 
 has forthwith appointed to represent him in the inquiry to be held against him 
 
 before his highness the praefect Petronius Mamertinus or the epistrategus Gellius Bassus 
 or other judges, and to carry out everything concerned with the trial; for he gives his 
 consent on these terms. ‘The agreement is valid.’ 
 
 10. δὲ ἀϊσἸθένειαν : cf. 261. 12 διὰ γυναικείαν ἀσθένειαν. 
 
 14. τὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ: so no doubt in 97. 3; the word after Νικάνορα there is perhaps 
 a patronymic. 
 
 Ig. Γελλίου Βάϊσσου: Bassus is mentioned as epistrategus seven years earlier in 
 237. vii. 22. 
 
210 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 72°7. DELEGATION OF THE DuTIES OF A GUARDIAN. 
 
 33°3 X15 (722. A.D. 154. 
 
 This is a deed drawn up by two brothers, who were Roman citizens and 
 owned property at Oxyrhynchus, authorizing an agent to act in their absence 
 from Egypt for a nephew and niece whose guardians they were. The document, 
 which is called a συγχώρησις, is addressed to the archidicastes, whose official 
 cognizance of the transaction was desired. Other instances of private contracts 
 being sent to the archidicastes are 268, B.G.U. 729 and 741, the juristic 
 significance of which is discussed by Gradenwitz, Linfiihrung, pp. 91-2, and 
 Mitteis, Archiv, I. p. 350. It is noticeable that, with the exception of 268, the 
 persons concerned in all these cases are Roman citizens, and that the documents 
 usually take the form of a συγχώρησις. The procedure here is apparently to be 
 distinguished from that exemplified in 719 ; cf. introd. to that papyrus. | 
 
 ᾽ » la 3 ~ cn 
 1|.7ρ[.1μ[. Jee ΙσιδἸώρου γενομένου ἐξηγητοῦ υἱῷ 
 γενομένῳ στρατηγῷ τῆς πόλεως ἱερεῖ ἀρχιδικαστῇ 
 Α Q aA 4) , nw “-ς 4 ~ » 
 καὶ πρὸς TH ἐπιμ[εἡλίᾳ τῶν χρηματιστῶν Kal τῶν ἄλλων 
 κριτηρ[ί]ων διὰ [4]ημητρίου ᾿Ηρακλείδου γενομένου 
 5 ἐξηγη[τ]οῦ υἱῷ διέπίοντ]ι τὰ κατὰ τὴν ἀρχιδικαστείαν 
 παρὰ Ταίων Μαρκίων ‘Amiwvos τοῦ καὶ Ato- 
 γένϊο]υς καὶ ᾿πολιναρίου τοῦ καὶ ᾿Ιουλιανοῦ καὶ ὡς 
 χρηματίζομεν καὶ παρὰ ᾿Ὠφελᾶ τοῦ ᾿Ωφελᾶτος τῶν 
 > an 
 an’ [ΟἸξ[υἱρύνχων πόλεως. συνχωροῦσι of Γάιοι Μάρκι- 
 > 
 10 ot Arriwy ὁ καὶ Διογένης καὶ ᾿ἀπολινάριος ὁ καὶ ᾿Ιουλιανὸς 
 οὐ δυν[ά]μενοι κατὰ τὸ παρὸν τὸν is Αἴγυπτον πλοῦν ποι- 
 ἤσασθα). συνεστακέναι τὸν προγεγραμμένον ᾿Ὠφελᾶν 
 BG \ can ς a 9 A 3 Sep ind 4 
 ὄντα Kal τῶν ὑπαρχόντων αὐτοῖς ἐν τῷ Ofupuryei- 
 Τῇ νομῷ φροντιστὴν καὶ κατὰ τήνδε τὴν συνχώρησιν 
 “- ΝΟΣ la -“ Ν ᾽ Δ 
 18 φροντιοῦντα καὶ ἐπιμελησόμενον ὧν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐπι- 
 ᾿ τροπεύουσιν ἀφηλίκων ἑαυτῶν ἀδελφιδῶν Οὐαλερί- 
 wv Θεοδότου τοῦ καὶ Πωλίωνος καὶ πολλωναρίου 
 ~ Q 3, 
 τῆς καὶ Νεικαρέτης ἔτι δὲ καὶ ἀπαιτήσοντα. φόρους 
 
 καὶ ἐγμ[ἡσθώσοντα ἃ ἐὰν [δ]έον ἣν καὶ καταστησόμενον 
 
797, CONTRACTS Ἐς 
 
 20 πρὸς ods ἐὰν δέῃ καὶ γένη διαπωλήσοντα ἃ ἐὰν δέον 
 ἢ τῇ αὐτοῦ πίστει, διὸ τοὺς πρὸς τούτοις ὄντας συνχρημα- 
 ~ ) ~ ~ 
 τίζειν τῷ ᾿Ωφελᾷ ἕκαστα [τ]ῶν προκειμένων ἐπιτελοῦν- 
 [ 
 XN la ὑπ᾿ pS ᾽ ᾿ς QA ~ 7 
 τι, Kal λ[όγογυς ὧν ἐὰν ἐπιτελέσῃ κατὰ μῆνα ἕκαστον 
 διαπεϊμ͵ψόμενον [αὐτοῖῆς πάντα δὲ ἐπιτελέσοντα κα- 
 XN \ 3 A ~ Ian 3 Ν Ν [ 16 
 25 θὰ καὶ αὐτοῖς παροῦσι ἐξῆν, ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ συνιστανόμενος 
 > “ a a lal 
 Nerds εὐδοκεῖ τῇδε TH συνχωρήσει, κυρίων ὄντων 
 ‘Om > 3 
 ὧν ἔχουσι 6 τε Amiwy ὁ καὶ Διογένης καὶ ᾿Απολινάριος 
 ᾽ 
 ὁ καὶ ᾿Ιουλιανὸς ἀλλήλων γραμμάτων παντοίων πάν- 
 των. ἀξ[ι]οῦ(μεν). ἔτους ἑπτακα[δεκάτου Αὐτοκράτορος Kaicapo(s) 
 « ~~ ~ ~ 
 30 Αἰλίου Adpiavod ᾿Αν[τ]ωνείνου Σεβαστοῦ Εὐσεβοῦς 
 
 Μεχεὶρ β. 
 and hand Ἀμμώνιος... .. αἰ ) 
 5. ]. υἱοῦ διέπἰοντΊος. 6. ο of διο corr. from a? 8, 1]. ᾽Ωφελᾶτος τοῦ ’O, or ’APedGros 
 Oc? 10. ἴουλιανος Pap. 24. 1. διαπε μ᾽ ψομένῳ.. . . ἐπιτελέσοντι. 
 ΤΟ. . ., son of Isidorus the ex-exegetes, late strategus of the city, priest, archi- 
 
 dicastes and superintendent of the chrematistae and the other courts, through the deputy 
 archidicastes Demetrius son of Heraclides the ex-exegetes, from Gaius Marcius Apion also 
 called Diogenes and Gaius Marcius Apolinarius also called Julianus and however we are 
 styled, and from Ophelas son of Ophelas, of Oxyrhynchus. Gaius Marcius Apion also 
 called Diogenes and Gaius Marcius Apolinarius also called Julianus, being at present unable 
 to make the voyage to Egypt, agree that they have appointed the aforesaid Ophelas, 
 who is the agent for their property in the Oxyrhynchite nome, by the terms of the present 
 authorization to act for and take charge of their brother’s children Valerius Theodotus 
 also called Polion and Valeria Apollonarion also called Nicarete, who are minors and their 
 wards, and further to collect rents and to make such leases as may be necessary, and 
 to appear against persons and to sell off produce as may be needful on his own authority. 
 Accordingly let those concerned do business with Ophelas in the discharge of all the 
 aforesaid duties; and he shall forward to the said parties accounts of all his acts every 
 month, and shall have power to act in all things no less than they themselves would 
 have if present. Ophelas the appointed representative assents to this authorization ; 
 and all bonds of every kind which Apion also called Diogenes and Apolinarius also called 
 Julianus hold of each other remains in force. We request (your concurrence). The 
 17th year of the Emperor Caesar Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Mecheir 2.’ 
 
 19. καταστησόμενον : for καθίστασθαι in the sense of appearing at legal proceedings 
 cf. e.g. B. G. U. 613. 14 κατέστημεν ἐπὶ Θεοδώρου, and the frequent instances of κατάστασις. 
 21. The construction is here somewhat awkward, the series of future participles which 
 depend upon συνεστακέναι in], 12 being interrupted by the parenthetical sentence διὸ rods... 
 συγχρηματίζειν.. .. ἐπιτελοῦντι, Which would better have been kept till the end. 
 29. ἀξ[ι]οῦ(μεν) : cf. 268. 19 ἀξιοῦμεν ὡς καθήκ[ ε]ι, and B. G. U. 729. 19 where ἀξιοῦ(μεν) 
 P 2 
 
212 THE OXYRAYNCHUS -PALYRI 
 
 stands by itself, as here. Wilcken (Archiv, I. p. 176) and Mitteis (2214. p. 350) both 
 consider that the object to be supplied after ἀξιοῦμεν is σωματισμόν, on the strength of 268, 
 where the preceding sentence is ἐν δὲ τοῖς προκειμένοις οὐκ ἔνεστι σωματ(ισμός). This was also 
 our own view when editing that papyrus; but in consideration of the uncertainty concerning 
 the meaning of the word σωματισμός, and the fact that here as well as in Β, G. U. 729 
 ἀξιοῦ(μεν) is found by itself, we retain the doubts expressed in the note upon P. Fay. Towns 
 33. 18-9 as to whether in 268 ἀξιοῦμεν is to be connected with the clause immediately 
 preceding. We should therefore prefer to understand some more general term. 
 
 728. SALE oF A Crop. 
 
 27 ΧΙ109 Cm. A.D. 142. 
 
 A contract of a somewhat novel character, called a καρπωνεία, by which two 
 tenants sell part of their crops standing, the money to be paid by the purchaser 
 within a given time direct to the landlord, who has the same rights of execution 
 as in the case of a loan. At the end is an acknowledgement from the landlord 
 of the receipt of the money. 
 
 [Exap|révnoav Παθώτης καὶ A[i]Bios ἀμφότεροι χρη- 
 [ματίζον]τί εἰς ey μητρὸς Ἁρσεῖτοϊς] ἀπὸ κώμης Θώ- 
 [σβεως Διογένει Apditos μητρὸς Αβεῖτος ἀπὸ 
 τῆς αὐτῆς Θώσβεως ἀφ᾽ ὧν κ[αὶ] αὐτοὶ γεωργοῦ- 
 5 σίι] Amiwvos “Ὠρίωνος ἀπ᾽ ᾽Οξυ[ρύγ]χων πόλεως 
 περὶ τὴν αὐτὴν Θῶσβιν ἐκ τοῦ Χαριξείνου 
 κλ[ή]ρου ἀπὸ ἀρουρῶν εἴκ[οσ]. ἐκ τοῦ ἀπὸ ἀπη- 
 ἰλιώ]του μέρους χόρτου ἀρούρας τρεῖς ἐκ 
 γεωμετρίας ἀργυρίου δρ[αἸχμῶν διακοσίων 
 βδ]ομήκοντα ἕξ, ἐπὶ [τ]ῷ τὸν (κε)καρπωνη- 
 
 Ἰένον ἑαυτῷ κόψαι καὶ μετενέγκαι ὅ- 
 ἢ μ γΎ 
 
 Io 
 
 te) ὅπ 
 
 4 
 
 lov ἐὰν αἱρῇται καὶ τὰς τοῦ ἀργυρίου δρα- 
 μὰς] διακοσίας ἑβδομήκοντα e& μετα- 
 αλέσ]θαι τῷ προγεγραμμένῳ ᾿Απίωνι ὄν- 
 τῆι κυρίῳ τοῦ ἐδάφους ἐντὸς ᾿Επεὶφ δεκά- 
 
 ns| τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος πέμπτου ἔτους 
 
 μ- 
 Ou 
 Besa essa, eam Weegee πα beeen) 
 DR 
 
 - 
 
 Ἂν 
 
 ms 
 
 7 7 ~ 4 oN 
 vtjoveivou Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου. ἐὰν ὃ 
 
728. “CONTRACTS 213 
 
 Ἁ δ) “ a ξ Ra > 7? 
 μὴ ἀποδοῖ TH ὡρισμένῃ προθεσμίᾳ 
 ἐκτίσει τὰς τοῦ ἀργυρίου δραχμὰς διακο- 
 7 « , ἃ \ ¢ 4 ‘ 2 
 20 σίας ἑβδομήκοντα ef σὺν ἡμιωλίᾳ καὶ τό- 
 κον δραχμιαῖον ἑκάστης μνᾶς κατὰ μῆνα 
 uA a 2 54 a ) ? 
 ἕκαστον, τῆς πράξεως οὔσης τῷ Απίωνι 
 ἣ, “ κα Δ “ ἐ [4 
 Ex τε τοῦ Διογένους καὶ ἐκ τῶν ὑπαρχόν- 
 A Nae Co od - 3 Va 
 [Tlov αὐτῷ πάντων καθάπερ ἐγ δίκης. 
 25. [κ]υρία ἡ καρπωνεία. ἔτους πέμπτου Αὐτοκράτορος 
 [Καίσ]αρος Τίτου Αἰλίου Adpiavod ᾿Αντωνείνου 
 [Σε]βαστοῦ Εὐσεβοῦς Φαρμοῦθι κγ. (and hand) Παθώ- 
 
 [τ]ης καὶ Λίβιος ἀμφότεροι ἐκ μητρὸς 
 Apceitos (κγδεκαρπονήκαμεν τῷ Διόγενει 
 30 τὰς τοῦ χόρτου ἀρούρας τρεῖς ἐκ γεωμε- 
 τρίας φόρου ἀργυρίου δραχμῶν δια- 
 κοσίων ὁδομήκοντα ἕξ ὡς πρόκει- 
 ται. Διονύσιος Διονύσιος ἔγραψα 
 ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν μὴ εἰτότων γράμῴ(μγατα. 
 35 Χρόνος ὁ αὐτός. 
 
 3rd hand πίων ‘Npetwvos Διογένει ‘Apéiros 
 χαίρειν. ἔσχον παρὰ σοῦ τὰς συνπε- 
 φωνημένας ὑπὲρ τιμῆς χόρτου apyupi- 
 [οἱν δραχμὰς διακοσίας ἑβδομήκοντα 
 
 A 3 e ἊΨ “A € v4 
 
 ο [ἕξ κ]αὶ οὐδέν σοι ἐνκαλῶ ὡς πρόκειται. 
 [(ἔτους) ε ᾿ΑἹντωνείνου Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου 
 [Επε]ὶφ β. 
 
 20. |. ἡμιολίᾳ. 32. 1. ἑβδομήκοντα. 33. 1]. Διονύσιος Διονυσίου, 34. 1. εἰδότων. 
 
 ‘Pathotes and Livius, both styled as having Harseis for their mother, from the village 
 of Thosbis, have sold to Diogenes son of Amois and Abeis, from the said Thosbis, out of 
 the land belonging to Apion son of Horion, of Oxyrhynchus, which they cultivate at 
 Thosbis in the holding of Charixinus, consisting of 20 arourae, the crop of hay upon three 
 arourae as fixed by a survey in the eastern part for 276 drachmae of silver, on condition 
 that Diogenes may cut the crop bought by him and transport it to any place that he may 
 choose, and shall hand over to the aforesaid Apion who is the owner of the land the 276 
 drachmae of silver before Epeiph το of the present 5th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord. 
 If he fails to pay it within the stipulated date he shall forfeit the 276 drachmae of silver 
 increased by one half, with interest at the rate of a drachma a month for each mina, Apion 
 
214 THE (OXYRAYNCHUS EAP RY 
 
 having the right of execution upon both Diogenes and all his property as if in accordance 
 with a legal decision. This sale of a crop is valid. The 5th year of the Emperor Caesar 
 Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Pharmouthi 23. We, Pathotes and 
 Livius, our mother being Harseis, have sold to Diogenes the crop of 3 arourae of hay as 
 fixed by a survey for the payment of 276 drachmae of silver, as aforesaid. 1, Dionysius 
 son of Dionysius, wrote for them as they were illiterate. The same date. | 
 
 Apion son of Horion to Diogenes son of Amois, greeting. I have received from you 
 the 276 drachmae which were agreed upon for the price of the hay and I make no complaint 
 against you, as aforesaid. The 5th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, Epeiph 2.’ 
 
 729. LEASE OF A VINEYARD. 
 VB Greek 20 7 Bhat, | ΑΟἿ ΤῊΝ 
 
 A contract for the sub-lease of a vineyard for four years from Sarapion, 
 who was himself a lessee (cf. 1. 14), to Ammonius and Ptollas. The body of 
 the document (ll. 1-35) is written in a very small hand in lines of exceptional 
 length, of which the first 35-40 letters on the average are lost, while a few 
 lines at the beginning are also wanting, being represented only by a detached 
 fragment which is illegible and half decayed. 
 
 No extant lease of the Roman period has been drawn up with such 
 elaboration of detail as the present document, and though P. Tebt. I. 105, of 
 the second century B.C., is equally long its formula is quite different. Of the 
 known leases of vineyards C. P.R. 244 is a mere fragment, and P. Brit. Mus. 163 
 is incomplete in the most important part. Hence the restoration of the lacunae 
 in 729, which was moreover written by a somewhat careless scribe, is far from 
 easy, and the sense of some of the provisions is obscure, though the general 
 construction and meaning are usually intelligible. 
 
 The rent paid for the ἀμπελών, the extent of which does not appear, was 
 (ll. 36-7) half the vine produce in addition to 50 jars of wine and perhaps 
 a sum of money or corn; but that does not seem to include the rent of a piece 
 of dry land which had once been a vineyard (χερσάμπελος, |. 30). This is leased 
 (11. 30-32) for three years, starting from a year after the date of the contract 
 itself, and was to be cultivated as the lessees chose with the usual exceptions 
 of the more exhausting crops, the rent being 60 drachmae and perhaps half 
 the produce. The ἀμπελών is subdivided in 1. 22 into a κτῆμα and a καλαμεία.. 
 The former term refers mainly to the vines (though including a rose garden, 
 v. inf.), the latter apparently to a crop of some kind of reeds; but the passages 
 dealing with the καλαμεία (Il. 3-4 and 25-7) are unfortunately very imperfect, 
 
729. CONTRACTS 215 
 
 and the connexion between the vines and the κάλαμος is not made clear ; cf. 1. 3, 
 note. Lines 5-10 deal with the embankments (χωματισμός), Il. To-11 with the 
 manuring (κοπρισμός), 1. τι with the watching of the fruit (ὀπωροφυλακία), 1]. 12-8 
 with the irrigation, for which the lessees were to receive a loan of both money 
 and cattle, Il. 18-22 with the payment of the rent and penalties for failure 
 to carry out the terms of the contract. Lines 22-7 regulate the condition 
 in which the vineyard was to be delivered up at the end of the lease, while 
 11. 27-30 are concerned with the apportionment of the various ἔργα. After a 
 section dealing with the lease of the χερσάμπελος (1]. 30-2) follows one concerning 
 a rose garden in the κτῆμα (Il. 32-3), and the lease concludes with the usual 
 clause assigning the taxes to the lessor (Il. 33-4), and another by which two 
 rooms in a farmhouse are secured to the lessees (I. 34). Lines 35-8 contain the 
 signature of the lessees, written for them in a large uncultivated hand by 
 Ptolemaeus, while in Il. 38-46 is a supplementary agreement in a third hand, 
 drawn up a year after the original contract, and acknowledging firstly (Il. 38-44) 
 the loan of the cattle mentioned in 1. 16, and secondly (Il. 44-5) another loan 
 of which the previous mention is lost. 
 
 τ Ὁ. etters | πο Κα Uy icttersy 1» εἰ. es « idge ns Be Ὁ Ἢ lavade 
 PRL OmlCLLer Searles i( 
 
 2[ 40 letters ]. ἀρταβεῖ τι letters τοῦ εἰσι]όντος érous...... 
 ry PEt ee OJLEV τον κατὰ «.. ἥμισυ ple... ον ὁ. . ἀπεϊργασίας 
 καί A ore Star ]- pl. -]- ovrat to. sv. [.. sees, | 
 
 3 [ 39 letters Jey ἔτι wal 15 letters 1. ν evypy..ovto of μεμισθωμένοι 
 τὸ ἥμ[συ Kal ὁ μεμισθωκὼς τὸ [E]repov ἥμισυ τὴν δὲ κ[οπὴν τί.] 
 πρὸς] καλαμείαν οἱ αὐτοὶ μεμίι- 
 
 4 [σθωμένοι 32 letters Ἰινικων ἀπίὸ τοῦ εἰσιόντος] ἔτους ἐπὶ τὴν λοιπὴν 
 τριετέαν ἐάνπερ χρεία [ἣν εἰς τὴν καλαμουργίαν ἑτέρου καλάμου 
 παρέξονται ἑαυτοῖς οἱ μεμισθωμένοι τὸν δέοντ[α 
 
 5 [ 37 letters Jeree ὑπὸ τοῦ μ[εμ]ισθωκόϊτος] Yapamiwvos εἰσάξουσι εἰς τ 
 [κτ]ῆμα ὅ τε {ot μεμισθωκὼς καὶ οἱ μεμισθωμένοι κοιν[ῶϊς κατὰ τ 
 ἥμισυ τῷ δέοντι καιρῷ καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν λοιπὴν τριετί- 
 
 6 [αν 29 letters οἵ τε με]μισθωμένοι καὶ ὁ μεμισθωϊκ]ὼς κοινῶς κατὰ τὸ 
 ἥμισυ ἀργυρῖο]ν δραχμὰς τριακοσίας, ὅνπερ χοῦν εἰσοίσουσι εἰς τὸ 
 
 ΄- A - ἴω 
 “κτῆμα κατ᾽ ἔτος κοινῶς, ὑπολείψουσι δὲ τὸν ἀναβεβλημένον χοῦν 
 
216 
 
 ay 
 
 (eve) 
 
 Φ 
 
 THE OXYRHYNCAUS “PAPYRI 
 
 [ 36 letters δ᾽]ραχμῶν τριακοσίων, τὴν δὲ ἀν[α]βολὴν ποιήσονται ἀπὸ 
 
 τῶν ἐθίμων ἀναβολῶν. τὴν δὲ τοῦ ἀπὸ βορρᾶ τοῦ ἀρχαίου κτήματος 
 ? € 4 3 ~ ΓΝ 
 χώματος ὑδροφυλακίαν μέχρι τοῦ ὄρους 
 
 [ 37 letters 1 τῷ τοῦ ἀρχαίου κτήματος μισθωτῇ, τῆς κατ᾽ ἔτος 
 
 ~ “- ὁ} Ss 4 
 amepyacias τοῦ αὐτοῦ χώματος ἐάνπερ χρεία ἣν ἔσται πρὸς μόνον 
 
 τὸν μεμισθωκότα, τῶν τοῦ αὐτοῦ νεωφύτου χω- 
 
 ἱμάτων 32 letters 1] πρὸΐς}ς μόνους τοὺς μεμισθωμένους, ὁμοίως καὶ τοῦ 
 
 νοτίνου χώματος μέχρι τοῦ ὄρους, τοῦ μεμισθωκότος apamiwvos 
 
 Va ) “ 3. 3 \ yf 4 
 παρέχοντος αὐτοῖς κατ᾽ ἔτος ἀμισθεὶ ὄνους δεκάπεντε 
 
 ΦΞΩΝ \ ~ , Va 7 ἃ 9 ~a .4 “ΡΝ XQ 
 IO [cee eeeeeeey ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ εἰσιόντος τρίτου καὶ] εἰκοστοῦ ἔτους ἐπὶ THY 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 an) 9 
 λοιπὴν τριετίαν δώσουσι τῷ μεμισθωκότι κατ᾽ ἔτος τυροὺς ὀβολιαίους 
 ἑκατόν. τὴν δὲ αὐταρκίαν κόπρον περιστερῶν πρὸς κοπρισμὸν 
 
 τοῦ κτή- 
 
 ’ € ? \ Q e/ \ ς AN Ἁ 
 ματος δώσουσιν οἱ μεμισθωμένοι κατὰ τὸ ἥμισυ] καὶ ὁ μεμισθωκὼς κατὰ 
 
 τὸ ἕτ[ερο]ν ἥμισυις͵ ὃν δὲ ἐὰν βούληται ὁ Σ᾽ αραπίων ὀπωροφύλακα 
 φυλάσσι(ν) τῷ τῆς ὀπώρας καιρῷ φύλακα πέμψει, τοῦ ὀψωνίου ὄντος 
 
 Ἂς 3.5 ἃ 
 πρὸς αὐτὸν 
 
 [ 37 letters ] μηχανῆς καὶ τῆς ταύτης κί... .ας ἔσται τὰ μὲν ξύλα 
 
 7 € iy Ν Ν S € ~ 2 
 πρὸς τὸν Σαραπίωνα, of δὲ τεκτονικοὶ μισθοὶ καὶ ἡ τοῦ τέκτονος 
 
 ? + Ν ἊΝ 2 IAN Ν A 
 σύνταξις ἔσται πρὸς τοὺς μεμισθωμένους. ἐὰν δὲ καινοῦ 
 
 [τροχοῦ 31 letters ] καὶ δώσει τοῖς αὐτοῖς μεμισθωμέν[ο]ις εἰς λόγον 
 
 τοῦ 
 
 > ᾽ὔ A , > ce [ 2 
 προχρείας ἀργυρίου δραχμὰς τρισχειλίας, ἐξ ὧν ὑπολογι(σ)θήσονται 
 αἱ διδόμεναι τοῖς ὑδροπαρόχοις ὑπὲρ ποτισμῶν τοῦ αὐ- 
 
 - ᾽ A ~ > »Ἥ8 A ᾽ “ς ἊΝ Q 3 “ 
 κτήματος ἀπὸ Φαῶφι εἰκάδος τοῦ ἐνεστῶ]τος δευτέρου καὶ εἰκοστοῦ 
 y+ ef “- > ὕ “- 5] , » Α > “ 37 
 ἔτους ἕως Φαῶφι εἰκάδος τοῦ εἰσιόντος τρίτου καὶ εἰκοστοῦ ἔτους 
 ἀκολούθως ἡ ἔχει ὁ Σαραπίων μισθώσει ἣν καὶ εἶναι κυρίαν δραχμὰς 
 
 δισχειλίας 
 
 [ 36 letters ἃς ἀποδώσει αὐτοῖς τῷ μὲν ᾿Αθὺρ μηνὶ S[plaxpas διακοσίας 
 
 [Ta 
 
 Τῦβι (Staxocias) καὶ Μεχεὶρ τὰς λοιπὰς δραχμὰς ἑξακοσίας, τὰς δὲ 
 > Ἂς οὗ 2. Ἂς \ rae 3 4 5] ? 
 
 ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ δραχμὰς τρισχειλίας ἀποδώσουσι ἐξενίαυ- 
 
 35 letters Ἰγουσι οἶνον ἀτόκους. τὰ (δὲν [δέοντα κτήνη παρὰ τῷ 
 ¢€ fe Va Ρ» \ ie ~ 2 e ᾽ ΝῚ 
 ὑδροπαρόχῳ βόας πέντε καὶ μόσχους τρεῖς παραλήμψονται οἱ αὐτοὶ 
 
 2 2 ὔ aA 3 ’ A 
 μεμισθωμένοι ἐν συντιμήσει TH εἰκάδι τοῦ 
 
 17 [Φαῶφι τοῦ τρίτου καὶ εἰκοστοῦ ἔτους, καὶ συἸνγράψονται τῆς συντιμ[ήσ]εως 
 
729. CONTRACTS 217 
 
 ἀπόδοσιν τοῦ λήγοντος χρόνου. ἐὰν δὲ χρεία γένητε ἑτέρας προ- 
 
 χρήσεος δώσει αὐτοῖς ὁ μεμισθωκώς, λαβόντες καὶ τάξονται δρα- 
 
 18 [yu 31 letters ἐπάν]αγκον οὖν οἱ αὐτοὶ μεμ[Πσθωμένοι ἕκαστα ἐπιτελεί- 
 
 19 [ 
 
 τωσαν ὡς πρόκιται ἀμέμπτως μηδὲν ἔκκαιρον ἐῶντος γείνεσθαι πρὸς 
 τὸ μὴ καταβλάπτεσθαι τὴν ἄμπελον μηδὲ 
 δ Ψ “~ Γ ᾽’ Ν 4 ἫΡ ps! XN 
 35 letters ἀπ]οδότωσαν τῷ μεμισθίωἸκότι τὸν μὲν οἶνον παρὰ ληνὸν 
 ? > ¢ 7 ’ 4 με ἊΣ Ν ᾽ ta 
 νέον ἄδολον ἑκατέρου μέρους παρέχοντος παρὰ ληνὸν τὸν αὐτάρκη 
 κέραμον, οὗ δὲ ἐὰν μὴ κατὰ καιρὸν ἐρ- 
 
 20 [γάζωνται 29 letters Ἰομένον φυτοῦ τὸ βλάβος διπλοῦν, τοῦ δὲ κατα- 
 
 ” ΝΥ 7 > Ν ~ > ’ ᾽ ’ a 
 λιπεῖν τὴν μίσθωσιν ἐντὸς τοῦ χρόνου ἐπιτίμονυ ἀργυρίου δραχμὰς 
 
 ? Np ets N ᾽ ΝΠ ἢ 5 
 πεντακοσίας KQAL ELS TO δημόσιον Tas toas χώριϑ 
 
 aA 4 ? , ? Ἁ ς A 37 A 
 21 [τοῦ τὴν μίσθωσιν μένειν Kupiav.........|v, Kal ἡ πρᾶξις ἔστω [ro 
 > 
 
 μίεμισθωκότι ἔκ τε τῶν μεμισθωμένων ἀλληλεγγύων ὄντων εἰς 
 ἴω [ὦ ~ 
 
 ἔκτισιν καὶ ἐξ οὗ ἐὰν αὐτῶν αἱρῆται Kal ἐκ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων 
 
 αὐτοῖς πάν- 
 
 22 [tov καθάπερ ἐγ δίκης. καὶ μετὰ τὸν χρόνον παραδότ]ωσαν οἱ μεμισθω- 
 
 23 | 
 
 25 [ 
 
 26 [ 
 
 27 [ 
 
 7 4 “" Ἃ \ ee δ. x ) ᾽ὔ 
 μένοι τίὸ κτ]ῆμα καὶ τὴν καλαμείαν σύνφυτα καὶ ἐπιμεμελημένα 
 δ \ abate , \ ΄ \ 7 ἐκ Ν 5) 
 kat καθαρὰ ἀπό τε θρύου καὶ βοτάνης καὶ δείσης πάσης καὶ τὰ 
 Ν ᾽ lo Ἂς 
 φυτὰ εὐθαλοῦντα καὶ 
 37 letters [τὶ κεχαρακωμένας καὶ τὰ [το]ῦ κτήματος χώματα ἐστε- 
 2 \ ¢ , Ἀγ ἃ Ἃ , , Ἃ 
 γασμένα καὶ ὑδροπεφυλακημένα καὶ ἃς ἂν παραλάβωσι θύρας καὶ 
 κλεῖς καὶ τὴν μηχανὴν ὑ(γ)ιῆ πλὴν 
 34 letters ποι]ήσονται τοὺς ποτισμοὺς τοῦ [κτή]ματος καὶ τῆς καλα- 
 Hlefas] πεμπταίους πρὸς ἀρεσκέϊαν] τοῦ Σ᾽ αραπίωνος καὶ τὴν τοῦ 
 - ἊΝ ,’ 4 A 3 Ἁ ~ 
 κατὰ Tov Σ᾽ αραπίωνα οἴνου μεταφορὰν ἀπὸ τῆς 
 40 letters Ἰεινησὶν kl.......+-.+-] ἐφ: σὸν Evnv.e..[...++.|yra, 
 ἔτι δὲ καὶ of αὐτοὶ pleptloOwpévor ὑπολείψουσι μ[ετῚὰ τὸν χρόνον 
 τὸν τότε τῆς καλαμείας κάλαμον 
 HOmettelS ay |e TO ἐξ η  ρΠοροὁΕΨΨιὁὥ0ὕ.0ττἀιιἥετὸ διὰ τού καὶ [νυν le es να 
 ἄγαν, > ’ ~ ’ 4 
 ἑτέρῳ pla{O.. 1.222...) εἰ ἐπικείμενον τῆς κ[α]λαμείας κάλαμον 
 ὃν πί|.]ρ[.]ης τοῦ διελθόντος ἔτους 
 38 letters Σα]ραπιων . [ 16 letters Ἰοκειμ[ εἶν. 14 letters |οὸν 
 oivoy{ 15 letters Jovy ὦ τ τ) ς μετρῷ TI). Jie ἔων ον τος coun ον OLVLKOY 
 τοῦ Σ᾽ αραπίωνος 
 
218 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 ot 
 
 99 
 
 39 
 
 THE OXYRHYNCHUS .PAPYRI 
 
 [ 36 letters τῷ μέσῳ rod κίτήματος τὴν δὲ μηϊχανὴν ἀναβαλεῖ ὁ 
 μεϊμσθωκὼς ἰδίαις δαπάναις ἀπὸ μηνὸς Παχών, τὴν δὲ σκαφὴν τῆς 
 πλακάδος τοῦ ὑποδοχίου ἔσται ὑπό 
 “ 2 \ Q 6 " ¢ X\ lo) ? b Ν 
 
 [τε τῶν μεμισθωμένων κατὰ τὸ ἥμισυ καὶ] ὑπὸ τοῦ μεμισθωκότος κατὰ τὸ 
 ee oe Ν X DW, ? \ eo a Q 
 ἕτερον ἥμισυ᾿ τὴν δὲ Kat ἔτος ξυλοτομίαν Kal ἕκαστον τῶν κατὰ 
 
 Ἂς ὟΝ is e θ ,’ ᾽ a 
 και[ρ]ὴὸν ἔργων ποιήσουσι of μεμισθωμένοι ἐπακολουθοῦν- 
 
 τος τοῦ Sapamiwvos 20 letters ως αὐτῷ πάντα γενέσθαι. μισθώσει 
 δὲ ὁ μεμισθωκὼς τοῖς μεμισθωμένοις ἀπὸ τοῦ εἰσιόντος τρίτου καὶ 
 
 εἰκ[οἸστοῦ ἔτους ἐπὶ χρόνον ἔτη τρία τὴν ἐντὸς πλαστῶν χερσάμπε- 
 
 “-- 3 a ~ 
 [Aov 33 letters ἀϊ]ρουρηδοῦ ὥστε Kar ἔτος σπεῖραι καὶ ξυλαμῆσαι οἷς 
 ἐὰν αἱρῶνται γένεσι χωρὶς εἰσάτεος καὶ ἐχομενίου φόρου ἀποτάκτου 
 ᾽ “ A 
 kat ἔτος δραχμῶν ἑξήκοντα Kal ἥμισυ μέρος τῶν 
 Ὡ Le ᾽ ᾽ν ς IX aN, f 2 
 [ 37 letters ] . ἐν αἷς ἐστιν τροχὺς ὡς ἐὰν κατ᾽ ἔτος κοινότερον συν- 
 , δ ὕ ἈΝ δὲ 2 can , ς δῶ 2, Bg 
 φωνήσωσι Tov popov. Tov ὃὲ ἐν τῷ KTHMATL poomva KAT ἔτος ὄντος 
 τοῦ καρποῦ τοῦ Σ᾽ αραπίωνος τῶν μεμι- 
 ~ ἴω 3 
 
 [ἰσθωμένων 29 letters 7τα[.1] παρὲξ τῆς ξυλολογείας, τῶν κατ᾽ Eros 
 
 πάντων τῶν αὐτῶν ἀρουρῶν καὶ τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος ὄντων πρὸς τὸν 
 ? , A {oct ε ΓΑ ΞΕ ΝΣ 
 Σαραπίωνα δημοσίων, ὃς καὶ ἕξει ὁ αὐτὸς Σ᾽ αραπίων 
 
 « De® 
 
 [ 28 letters καὶ παρέξει] ὁ αὐτὸς Σ᾽ αραπίων τοῖς μεμισθωμένοις πρὸς 
 ἐνοίκησιν χωρὶς ἐνοικίου ἐν τῷ ἐποικίῳ καμάρας δύο. κυρία ἡ 
 μίσθωσις. (ἔτους) δευτέρου καὶ εἰκοστοῦ Αὐτοκράτορος 
 
 [Καίσαρος Τραιανοῦ Ἁδριανοῦ Σεβαστοῦ Φαῶϊφι ve. (2nd hand) Δμμώνις 
 AmoAdwvidov καὶ Πτολλᾶς Aovkiov μεμισθώμετα τὸν ἀνπελονα ἐπὶ 
 τὰ τέσσαρα ἔτη 
 
 [φόρου τῆς ἡμισείας τοῦ ἐκ]βησομένου οἰνικοῦ γενήματος καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς 
 ἡ μῶ(ν) ἡμησίας ἄλλα οἴνου κεράμια πεντήκον- 
 
 [ra 20 letters Ja καὶ ἕκα(σδοτα ποιήσομεν 6s πρόκειτε. Πτολεμαῖς 
 Ζωίλου ἔγραψα ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν μὴ εἰδότον 
 
 ἰγράμματα. ἔτους δευτ]έρου καὶ εἰκοστοῦ Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Τραει- 
 ανοῦ Ἁδριανοῦ Σεβαστοῦ Φαοφι te. (3rd hand) Appous 
 
 [AmoAAwvidov καὶ Πτολλᾶς Aovkiov ἔσ]χομεν παρὰ τοῦ αὐ(τοῦ) Sapa- 
 
 Sf n hg δν A wn 
 miw(vos) καὶ τῇ κ τοῦ Φαῶφι τοῦ δευτέρου ἔτους Τίτου Αἰλίου 
 
 « “΄“-- “΄᾿ 
 Αδριανοῦ ‘Avrwveivov Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου βοεικὰ κτήνη μόσχους 
 μὲν τελείους 
 
Ὁ} OUNLTRACTS 219 
 
 40 [ 22 letters βόας de τε]λείας τρεῖς πάντα ἐν συντειμήσει ἀργυρίου 
 δραχμῶν δισχειλίων πεντακοσίων, ἅπερ κτήνη ἐπάναγκον θρέψομεν 
 τῆς κατ᾽ ἔτος γο- 
 
 41 [νῆς 27 letters ων, μετὰ δὲ τὸν χρόνον τῆς μισθώσεως αἱρέσεως καὶ 
 ἐγλογῆς οὔσης σοι τῷ Σαραπίωνι ἐὰν μὲν αἱρῇ τὴν συντείμησιν τῶν 
 κτηνῶν λαβεῖν 
 
 42 [ 31 letters Ju τῆς τότε ἐσομένης αἰὐ]τῶν συντειμήσεως, κἂν μὲν ἐλάσ- 
 σονες συντειμηθῇ ἀποδώσομεν τὸν ἰς συνπλήρωσιν τῆς προκει- 
 
 43 [μένης συντειμήσεως, ἐὰν δὲ καὶ μείζο]νος ἀποδώσεις ἡμεῖν afd ὁ] Sapa- 
 πίων τὸ Tov... [ἴϊσον, ἐὰν δὲ αἱρώμεθα ἀλλάσσειν κτήνη ἢ πωλεῖν 
 ἔξεσται ἡμεῖν μετὰ γνώμης 
 
 44 [ 80 letters τὰ ἴσα. ἔτι dle καὶ ἔσχ[ομεν ἐν]εχυρούμ[ε]να ἀλί........««Ἵμενα 
 ἑκατ[ὸν ... ([Ἰκοντα ἃ μετὰ τὸν χρόϊνον παραδόσωμεν τὰ ἴσα σει- 
 τίνου av.. 
 
 PMNS a ChCCI See ir7) cn. ec ὁ τ te eve teas os or aceas ΣΉ CTOU|S 
 
 δευτέρίον Αὐτοκράτ]ορος Καίσίαρος Τίτου Aijdiov Ἁδριανοῦ [᾿(ἀντΊ]ω- 
 
 νείνου Σ᾿ ἐἰβαστοῦ 
 
 46 [Εὐσεβοῦς Φαῶφι κ. ] 
 
 8. 1. οὔσης for ἔσται. 9. s povovs above the line. vs of τοὺς corr. from v. μεν of 
 μεμισθωμενους corr. from κοτα. 10, 1. κόπρου. 13. a Of διδομεναι corr. from o. π of 
 vdporapoyos corr. from o. 14. First τ of τριτου corr. from 8. μ of Spayyas corr. from o. 
 1. δραχμαὶ διαχίλιαι. 16. πα Of υδροπαροχω corr. from φυ. 17. y of γενητε corr. 
 from ν. 1. γένηται. 1. mpoypnoews. ε Of δωσει corr. from o. 18. 1, ἐῶντες. 22. α και 
 before καθαρα corr. 23. και before vdpor. corr. 24. αλαμΐ οἵ xadap{ corr. 28. 1. ἡ 
 δὲ σκαφή. τῆς COrT. 30. εἰ Of μισθωσει corr. from εαν. 31. 1]. ἰσάτεως καὶ ὀχομενίου. 
 25. ]. μεμισθώμεθα τὸν ἀμπελῶνα. 36. 1. ἡμισείας. 37. κει Of προκειτε corr. 1. ὡς πρό- 
 κειται. . . εἰδότων. 38. |, Φαῶφι. 39. mapa του avt(ov) σαραπιω(νος) above the line. 
 42. 1. ἐλάσσονος. 44. 1. παραδώσομεν. ἴσα Pap. 
 
 3. καλαμείαν : that a special connexion exists between the cultivation of κάλαμος and 
 vine-growing is apparent not only from the present document (cf. especially Il. 22 and 24, 
 where the κτῆμα is coupled with the cadapeia), but from other leases of ἀμπελῶνες; cf. C. P.R, 
 224. 11-2 Ἰων καλαμουργίαν ἐκ καινῆς ... τ]ὸν αὐτάρκη κάλαμον καὶ σχοινία, P. Brit. Mus. 163. 
 22--5, where read καὶ τὴν οὖσαν καλαμίαν ἀναχώσομεν κατ᾽ ἔτος ἕκαστον καὶ τὸν ἀμπίε]λῶνα τῆι 
 kafAlauoupyia.....+...+.oluey κατ᾽ ἔτος. .., and Ρ, Tebt. 120. 141 καὶ καλαμουργή(σει) 
 bese εν. ἕκαστος καὶ ἀντλήσε. On the other hand κάλαμος was sometimes cultivated by 
 itself, as is shown by B. G. U. 558. 13, where a καλαμία corresponds to an ἐλαιών ; cf. 
 P. Brit. Mus. 195 (ὁ). 11 and B. 6. U. 619. ii. 19 and 776. το, which mention κάλαμος 
 Ἑ λληνικός, contrasted apparently with κάλαμος Ἰνδικός (P. Brit. Mus. 191. 11; cf. Wilcken, 
 Archiv, I. p. 150). In P. Tebt. 5. 199 καλαμεία is mentioned as being required for 
 
220 THE -VOXYRANNGHOUS SPAR YR 
 
 embankments (cf. note ad Joc.); but though this section dealing with κάλαμος in 729 is 
 immediately followed by one dealing with embankments (cf. P. Brit. Mus. 163. 22) the 
 καλαμεία in an ἀμπελών would seem to be a crop of reeds planted between or under the vines. 
 According to |. 22 the καλαμεία equally with the κτῆμα had to be handed over σύνφυτα καὶ 
 ἐπιμεμελημένα K.T.A. 
 
 5. χοῦν is to be supplied as the object of εἰσάξουσι; cf. 1. 6. In the first year of the 
 lease the responsibility for the χωματισμός was shared equally by the lessor and lessees. In 
 the succeeding three years (ll. 6-7) the responsibility continues to be equally divided, but 
 a payment of 300 drachmae comes in, the nature of which is obscure. 
 
 7-9. Apparently the contract is concerned with the lease of the newly reclaimed κτῆμα, 
 and the adjoining ἀρχαῖον κτῆμα was leased to some one else, the μισθωτής of 1. 8. The 
 embankment which is the subject of ll. 7-8 probably divided the two κτήματα, and the 
 arrangement is that for the ὑδροφυλακία Sarapion and the other μισθωτής are jointly re- 
 sponsible, but for the dwepyacia Sarapion alone. For certain embankments of the νεόφυτον 
 κτῆμα on the other hand the lessees were responsible, as well as for the ‘southern embank- 
 ment’ (11. 8-9), Sarapion supplying them with 15 donkeys annually, in return for which 
 they were to pay him in each of the last three years of the lease 100 cheeses worth an 
 obol apiece (Il. 9-10). 
 
 10-11. ‘ The necessary amount of pigeon’s dung for manuring the vineyard shall be 
 provided half by the lessees and the other half by the lessor. Sarapion shall send any 
 guard whom he chooses in order to protect the fruit at the time of bearing, being himself 
 responsible for the payment of him.’ 
 
 12. A new waterwheel (sakzyeh) was required, Sarapion paying for the wood, the 
 lessees for the construction. 
 
 13-6. A loan of 3000 drachmae is to be advanced by Sarapion to the lessees, but 
 from this is to be deducted 2000 dr. paid to the persons who supplied the water for the 
 current year in accordance with Sarapion’s lease of the land from them. The remaining 
 1000 dr. were to be paid in three instalments in the earlier half of the year. In 1. 15 only 
 Soo dr. are accounted for, but it is more likely that διακοσίας has been omitted after Τῦβι 
 than that it is to be supplied at the beginning of |. 15. The whole 3000 dr. were to be 
 repaid to Sarapion without interest at the time of the vintage towards the end of the first 
 year of the lease. ‘The large amount paid for water makes it probable that this came not 
 from a well but from a newly-made channel. For ἐξενίαυϊτα in 1. 15 cf. P. Amh. 85. 14, 
 86. r1, and P. Par. 25. 12. The second of these instances, in which efeviavra follows kar’ 
 éros, Shows that it must have meant something different; and the sense ‘annually’ would 
 not suit the present passage, for it is clear that the loan which is the subject of ll. 13-6 
 refers to a single occasion; cf. 1.17, where it is contrasted with the ἑτέρα πρόχρησις. ‘The 
 most suitable meaning for ἐξενίαυτα in all these contexts is ‘within (or ‘for’) the whole year.’ 
 In B. G. U. 920, 18 the editor reads ἑνενίαυτα κατ᾽ ἔτος, where too ἐξενίαυτα was probably 
 intended if not the actual reading. 
 
 16—7. With this passage cf. II. 39-44, which refer to the carrying out of this stipulation. 
 The oxen were required for working the waterwheel, and according to 1. 39 were actually 
 supplied a year after the date of the lease by Sarapion, but from the present passage they 
 would seem to have been deposited with the persons who supplied the water. ‘They were 
 to be received ‘ at a valuation’ and an agreement was at the same time to be made about 
 the return of this valuation at the expiration of the lease. The details of the repayment are 
 specified in ll. 41-4. 
 
 17-8. The 2000 drachmae for water (1. 14) were probably an annual charge, and 
 hence a second loan from the lessor might be required. For this the lessees paid interest, 
 if we restore Spal xpuaiov τόκον. 
 
700, CONTRACTS 221 
 
 18-24. ‘The said lessees are therefore required to perform all the aforesaid duties 
 blamelessly, leaving nothing undone at the right season, so that no damage may accrue to 
 the vineyard .. . and they shall pay to the lessor the wine at the vat, new and unadulterated, 
 each party providing at the vat a sufficient number of jars, and for every failure to perform 
 work at the proper time...twice the amount of the damage, and for giving up the lease before 
 the end of the period a fine of 500 silver drachmae and to the Treasury an equal sum 
 without affecting the validity of the lease, and the lessor shall have the right of execution 
 both upon the lessees who are each other’s sureties for payment, and upon whichever of 
 them he chooses and upon all their property, as if in accordance with a legal decision. And 
 at the end of the period the lessees shall deliver the vine-land and reed-land planted, well 
 cared for, free from rushes, grass and weeds of all kinds, and the plants healthy... , and 
 the ... palisaded, the embankments of the vineyard firm and watertight, and also any doors 
 and keys they may have received, and the waterwheel in good repair except...; and they 
 shall irrigate the vine-land and reed-land every fifth day to the satisfaction of Sarapion, and 
 shall transfer Sarapion’s share of the wine from the....’ 
 
 28. The μηχανή is presumably that mentioned in 1. 12, but the technical meaning of 
 ἀναβάλλειν here is obscure. πλακάς is a new word meaning the lower part of the wine 
 receptacle, which was below the ground level. 
 
 30. The lacuna at the beginning may be filled up ὥστε πάντα ἀρεσκόντ]ως 3 cf. 1. 24. 
 
 30-2. This χερσάμπελος is distinct from the ἀμπελών which is the subject of the main 
 contract; cf. introd. ἐντὸς πλαστῶν in |. 30 seems to mean ‘enclosed by a mud wall.’ 
 
 32. ῥοδῶνα: this is the first mention in a papyrus of the cultivation of roses. In 
 P. Brit. Mus. 163. 17, where for the editor's ἀφρ[ο]δι[σίων Wilcken (Archiv, I. p. 150) 
 suggested ἀργ(ῶν) ῥ[ οἰδίων, the correct reading is dyp|o|Spvar, i.e. ἀκροδρύων. 
 
 40-4. The total number of calves to be provided according to ]. 16 was 3, and of 
 βόες 5. Here however the calves were probably 5, for the βόες are 3. The cattle were 
 valued at 2500 dr. altogether, and at the end of the lease Sarapion had the choice of 
 receiving this sum or the animals at a new valuation. If this was less than the former one, 
 the lessees had to make up the difference to Sarapion. If the fresh valuation was higher, 
 apparently Sarapion paid them the difference. If the lessees wished to change or sell the 
 cattle, they might do so with Sarapion’s consent. 
 
 44-5. These lines clearly refer to something contained in the main contract, but 
 though we should expect a mention here of the χερσάμπελος (Il. 30-2) which was to be 
 leased after one year, the remains of |. 44 suggest something quite different, which must have 
 occurred in one of the lost provisions. 
 
 730. Lease or Domain Lanp. 
 19-5 X 7+3 CM. Α.}. 130. 
 
 A sub-lease of 5 arourae of domain land at Senepta for one year, at the 
 rent of 24 drachmae per aroura, with an extra payment of 4 drachmae. The 
 crop specified is grass, while the other provisions follow the usual formulae ; cf, 
 e.g. 499, 
 
222 THE, OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 ᾿Εμίσθωσεν Σ᾽ αραπίων ‘Hpédov 20 ἕως ἂν τὸν φόρον κομίση- 
 ἀπ᾽ ᾽Ο ξυϊρ]ύγχων πόλεως Οὐαλέρις Tal. τῆς δὲ μισθώσεως βε- 
 Ἀπολλωνίου ἀπὸ κώμης Σενέπτα ᾿ βαιουμένης ἀποδότω ὁ με- 
 Πέρσῃ [τ]ῆς ἐπιγονῆς εἰς τὸ ἐνεσ- μισθωμένϊος] τὸν φόρον τῷ 
 
 5 τὸς πεντεκαιδέκατον ἔτος Παῦνι μηνὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἔτους, 
 Ἁδριανοῦ Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου 25. ὃ δ᾽ ἂν προσοφειλέσῃ ὁ με- 
 ἀπὸ τῆς ἀναγρ(αφ)γομένης εἰς av- μισθωμένος ἀποτεισάτω 
 τὸν βασιλικῆς γῆς ἀρούρας πἴέν- μεθ᾽ ἡμιολίας, καὶ ἡ πρᾶ- 
 τε ἐκ τοῦ Δάμωνος κλήρου, ξις ἔστω τῷ μεμισθωκότι 
 
 10 ὥστε] ταύτας ξυλαμῆσαι χόρ- ἔκ τε τοῦ μεμισθωμένου 
 τῳ ells κοπὴν καὶὶ ἐπ[ινο]μήν, 30 καὶ ἐκ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων 
 φόρο[υ] ἀποτάκτου ἀργυρίου δρα- αὐτῷ πάντων. κυρία ἡ μί- 
 χμῶν ἑκατὸν εἴκοσι καὶ σπον- σθωσις. (ἔτους) ιε Αὐτοκράτορος 
 δῆς τῶν ὅλων παιδαρίοις δρα- Καίσαρος Τραιανοῦ Ἁδριανοῦ 
 
 15 Χχμὰς τέσσαρας ἀκινδύνου Σεβαστοῦ ᾿Αθὺρ ιθ. (and hand) 
 παντὸς κινδύνου, τῶν ὑπὲρ Οὐαλέρις 
 τῆς γῆς δημοσίων ὄντων 35 Απολλωνίου μεμίσθ]ω- 
 
 πρὸς τὸν μεμισθωκότα, ὃν καὶ [μαι τὴ]ν yay [..J.-[..].-- 
 κυριεύειν τῶν καρπῶν Tse ἀρ]γυ[ρίου δραχμῶν éxa- 
 [ BA 
 
 TOV εἴκοσι... 
 
 On the verso 
 
 Le (ἔτους) μί(σθωσις) ἀρουρίῶ]ν ε [..].... Σενέπί(ταλ. 
 2. 1. Οὐαλερίῳ. 20. o of roy corr, from a. 21. ε Of de corr. from «(?). 39. 
 oeven (Ta) above ᾿ ‘ cee 
 
 ‘Sarapion son of Herodes, of Oxyrhynchus, has leased to Valerius son of Apollonius, 
 of the village of Senepta, a Persian of the Epigone, for the current 15th year of Hadrianus 
 Caesar the lord, out of the domain land standing in his name 5 arourae in the holding 
 of Damon, to be cultivated with grass for cutting and grazing at a fixed rent of 120 silver 
 drachmae and 4 drachmae for the slaves for a libation on account of all the land, the 
 rent being secured against every risk, and the taxes on the land being paid by the lessor, 
 who shall also be the owner of the crop until he receives the rent. If this lease is 
 guaranteed, the lessee shall pay the rent in the month Pauni of the said year, and the 
 lessee shall forfeit any arrears increased by one half; and the lessor shall have the right 
 of execution upon the lessee and upon all his property. This lease is valid. ‘The 15th 
 
731. CONTRACTS 223 
 
 year of the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus, Athur 10. ene) I, Valerius 
 son of Apollonius, have leased the land at a rent of 120 silver drachmae . 
 
 8-9. βασιλικῆς... ἐκ τοῦ Δάμωνος κλήρου: i.e. the land was part of a confiscated 
 κλῆρος ; cf. 721. 4-6. 
 
 10. ξυλαμῆσαι χόρτῳ: cf, 101. 11, 280. 12, 15, and 409. 15 where χόρτῳ is to be 
 read for χόρτον. τὰ ἢ 
 
 13. σπονδῆς... παιδαρίοις : for the payment on account of σπονδή in leases cf. 101. 19 
 and 610, and note on 525.7. In the present case it was for the benefit of the slaves 
 employed in the cultivation of the land. 
 
 35. Ihe paragraphus below this line marks the conclusion of the lease, and the 
 signature was intended to begin below it. 
 
 36-7. [φόρου [amord{x|rov] is perhaps to be read, but does not very well suit the 
 remaining vestiges of letters. 
 
 731. ENGAGEMENT OF SERVICES. 
 T1°7 X 13°4. A.D. 8-9. 
 
 A contract for services to be rendered on certain specified occasions, among 
 which are the festivals of Isis and Hera, at a salary of 40 drachmae a year, 
 besides an ὀψώνιον of 13 drachmae 2 obols. The commencement of the contract 
 is lost, and the nature of the services to be performed is uncertain; but it may 
 be conjectured on the analogy of e.g. 475, P. Grenf. II. 67, and P. Brit. Mus. 331 
 (cf. Archiv, I. p. 153), that the person engaged was an artiste of some kind, 
 though to judge from the scale of remuneration, not of a very high class. The 
 document was drawn up by a careless scribe, who makes a number of mistakes. 
 
 Dum zOvlettersnas Kt Ole ας cns are 
 σιοις [τ]οῦ ἐνάτου Kal τριακοσίτο]ῦ ἔτο[υ]». Kai- 
 σαρος μέχρι Θωὺθ τοῦ τρι[αἸκοστοῦ ἔτους 
 ? ΧΦ a ¢ ~ Ἃ “ 
 Καίσαρος ἐφ ᾧ λιτουργήσω ὑμεῖν κατὰ μῆ- 
 5 va ἐνάτῃ καὶ δεκάτῃ καὶ Εἰσίοις ἡμέρας 
 , \ “ » d a ΝΥ ΣΧ 1.7.9 
 δύο καὶ τοῖς ἄστροις “Hpas τρῖς, καὶ ἐφ ᾧ ἐάν 
 μου χρήαν ἔχητε παρ᾽ ἡμέραν δώσε- 
 τέ μοι ἀργυ(ρίου) (δραχμὴν) μίαν ὀβολοὺς δύο, μισθοῦ τοῦ 
 € 7 \ w+ 3 ’ Ν lA 
 ἑσταμέϊν aie τὸ ἔτος apyu(piov) (δραχμὰς) τεσσαράκον- 
 10 Ta, ἐφ ᾧ [διώσετέ μοι κατ᾽ ὀψώνιον ἀργυί(ρίου) 
 
224 THE OXYRAYNCHUS=PAPY RI 
 
 δραχμ[ὰς δεκ]ατρῖς δύο ὀβολούς. ἧς ἡ- 
 μέρας af... .(1ε ἀργ[ή]σω ἐϊκτ]ίσω ἀργυ(ρίου) δραχμὴν pi- 
 αν δύο ὀβ[ολού)ς. ἡ. ὁμίομ)ολογία τῆς {a}ma- 
 ραμονῆς ἥδε κυρία EoTw ὡς κατακεχωρισ- 
 
 18 μένη. (ἔτους) An [Kaicapos........ 
 
 3. 1. τεσσαρακοστοῦ for τρι[α'κοστοῦ, 
 
 ‘.. of the 39th year of Caesar to Thoth of the 4oth year of Caesar, on condition 
 that I give you my services on the gth and roth of each month and for two days at the 
 festival of Isis and three days at the time of the stars of Hera; and if you require me 
 you shall pay me 1 drachma 2 obols of silver daily, or a fixed yearly salary of 40 
 drachmae of silver, and a present of 13 drachmae 2 obols of silver; and for every day 
 that I am unemployed I will forfeit 1 drachma 2 obols of silver. This contract of 
 engagement shall be valid as if publicly registered. The 38th year of Caesar...’ 
 
 5-6. For the feast of Isis cf. P. Fay. Towns 118. 12. The star of Hera was another 
 name for the planet Venus (cf. Arist. de Mundo, p. 392 ἃ 27 ὁ τοῦ Φωσφόρου ὃν ᾿Αφροδίτης 
 οἱ δὲ Ἥρας προσαγορεύουσιν, Pliny, H. JV. 2. 8, &c.); but why the plural ἄστροις is here 
 used is not clear. References to the cult of Hera in Egypt are rare; cf. 488. 3, note. 
 
 8-9. The 29 days in the year specified in ll. 4-6 seem to be treated as 30, which 
 at 1 dr. 2 obols a day make the 40 dr. | 
 
 11--2. ἧς ἡμέρας δὲ ἐάν would be expected, but this was certainly not written. ‘The 
 ε after the lacuna is nearly sure and this may represent δέ; but the letter after ἡμέρας 
 if not ἡ must be v and is certainly neither 6 nor ε. 
 
 14. There is not room for ἐν δημοσίῳ. 
 
 (ὁ) RECEIPTS. 
 
 732. RECEIPT FOR THE TAX ON FERRY-BoatTs. 
 18-2 X 23 cm. A.D. 150. 
 
 A receipt issued by two farmers of the ὠνὴ πορθμίδων at Oxyrhynchus and 
 certain villages to two persons who apparently were ferrymen at one of these 
 villages, acknowledging the payment first of 200 and subsequently of 100 
 drachmae for φόρος πόρθμειος, the total, 300 drachmae, being probably the whole 
 sum due from them for a year. This impost, the title of which is new, seems 
 
Lao C ELE RS 225 
 
 to be a tax upon the profits of privately owned ferry-boats rather than a revenue 
 derived from a State monopoly, though the latter interpretation is also possible. 
 
 ᾿Ηλιόδωρος ᾿Ηλιοδώρου καὶ Acov7[as Π]εκύρ[ιο9] ἀπ᾽ ’Oguptyy[oly πόλεως 
 τελῶναι ὠνῆς προθμίδων πόλεως καὶ ᾿Ισίου ‘A. [.. κ]αὶ ἄλλων 7[d] ἐνεστὸς 
 ty (ἔτος) | 
 Ἀντωνίνου Καίσαρος τοῦ κυρίου ᾿ἀΑχιλλᾶτι Θοώνιος [kali ᾿ἀπῖτ[ι] Ἀπίτίο]ς 
 ἀπὸ τῆς αὐ(τῆς) 
 πόλεως χαίρειν. ἔσχομεν Trap ὑμῶν ἀφ᾽ ὧν [ὀἸφίλετε ἡμῖν ὑπίὲ]ρ φόρου προ- 
 5 θμείου Πανκύλεως ἐπὶ λόγου δραχμὰς διακ[οσῆας, γίν(ονται) (δραχμαὶ) σ. 
 (ἔτους) vy 
 Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Τίτου Αἰλίου Ἁδριανοῦ ᾿Αντωνίνου Σεβαστοῦ Εὐσεβοῦς 
 Τῦβι κῷ (2nd hand) ᾿Ηλιόδωρος 6 προγεγραμμένες ἔσ- 
 xov σὺν τῷ Μεωντᾶτι τὰς προΐ γεὶκιμένας 
 δραχμὰς διακωσίας, yi(vovtat) (δραχμαὴ σ. (3rd hand) Δεοντᾶς Πεκύριος 
 Io ὁ προγεγραμμένος ἔσχον σὺν τῷ ᾿ Ηλιοδώρῳ 
 [τ]ὰΐς π]ροκιμένας δραχμὰς δι[αἸκοσίας. χρόνος 
 ὁ αὐτός. (2nd hand) ᾿Ηλιόδωρος ἔσχον σ[ὺ]ν τῷ Δεον[τᾶ]τι 
 τὰς λυπὰ(ς) δραχμὰς ἑκα[ζτόϊν. (3rd hand) “εοντᾶς ἔσχον σὺν 
 τῷ ᾿Ηλιοδώ(ζρῳ) ὡς πρ[όκι]ται. 
 
 2. 1. πορθμίδων. ἴσιου Pap. 4. 1. mopOpeiov. ἢ. 1, mpoyeypappevos. 8. κ Of κιμενας 
 corr. from y. 9. 1. διακοσίας. 13. 1. Aoura(s). 
 
 ‘Heliodorus son of Heliodorus and Leontas son of Pekuris, of Oxyrhynchus, farmers 
 of the contract for the tax on ferry-boats at the city, Ision A..., and other (villages) 
 for the present 13th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, to Achillas son of Thodnis and 
 Apeis son of Apeis, of the said city, greeting. We have received from you on account 
 out of the sum which you owe us for the revenue from ferry-boats at Pankulis two hundred 
 drachmae, total 200 dr.’ Date and signatures of Heliodorus and Leontas, followed by 
 their further acknowledgements of the remaining hundred drachmae. 
 
 733. Tax-RECEIPT. 
 
 12 Χ 0:7 cm. ἈΠῸ: ἘΠ: 
 
 A receipt for the tax on pigs (cf. 288, introd.) and poll-tax paid by an 
 inhabitant of Oxyrhynchus and his son. The payments are no doubt instalments 
 of the whole amount due for a year. 
 
 Q 
 
226 ‘THE OXYRHYNCAHUS PAPYRI 
 
 I (ἔτους) ‘Avrwveilvov] Katcapos τοῦ κυρίου 
 Παχὼν δ. [δ)]ιέγρα(ψε) Atoy(Ever) πρά(κτορι) ἀργυ(ρικῶν) 
 M .{....] πλατ(είας) Apdis ὁ K(at) Παπο(ντῶς) 4ιοδώ(ρου) 
 ὑικ(ῆς) [τοῦ] αὐ(τοῦ) « (ἔτους) (δραχμὴν) μίαν (πεντώβολον) (ἡμιωβέλιον), 7 
 (δραχμὴ) a (πεντώβολον) (ἡμιωβέλιον). 
 5 Τ΄ pf. .]. of. .ς vids) μη(τρὸς) Ταπο(ντῶτος) λαογρα(φίας) 
 τοῦ αὐ(τοῦ) ι (ἔτους) (δραχμὰς) τέσσαρας; ὑικ(ῆς) a (πεντώβολον) (ἡμιωβέλιονλ). 
 
 2. π᾿ Of παχων corr. from 6. The following ὃ is corrected. 
 
 ‘The roth year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, Pachon 4. Amois also called Papontos, 
 son of Diodorus, has paid to Diogenes, collector of money taxes of M... street, for the 
 pig-tax of the said roth year 1 drachma 534 obols, total 1 dr. 54 ob. T..., his son, 
 his mother being Tapontos, has paid for the poll-tax of the said roth year 4 drachmae, © 
 for the pig-tax 1 drachma 5% obols,’ 
 
 734. Tax-REcEIPT. 
 10-4 XQ-7 cm. A.D. 165. 
 
 A receipt for the payment of 1 drachma 4 obols by Cleon to an agent 
 of the tax-collectors of a subdivision of the middle toparchy. The names of 
 the taxes, which are abbreviated yA- and σ΄, are uncertain, being probably 
 both new. 
 
 E (ἔτους) Αὐρηλίων ‘Avrwvivov καὶ Οὐήρου τῶν 
 κυρίων Σεβαστῶν Φαμε(νὼθ) Ki. διέγρα(ψε) Κλάρῳ 
 χι(ριστῇ) πρα(κτόρων) ἀργυ(ρικῶν) μέ(σης) τοπ(αρχίας) Πέτνη Τακολί ) 
 τόπ(ων) δι(ὰ) 
 Appo(viov) βοη(θοῦ) γλυί )) καὶ oul ) ε (ἔτους) Κλέων 
 5 [...Jrov Τακολί ) δραχ(μὴν) μία(ν) rerpdBor(or), 
 J (δραχμὴ) a (τετρώβολονν). 
 
 _ _ 3: The Πέτνη τόποι are known from 595, but the addition of Taxod( }, which recurs 
 in 1. 5, is new. 
 
735. ACCOUNTS 227 
 
 (Pye CEO LINES: 
 735. Grarco-Latin MiLitary ACCOUNT. 
 
 12-5 X 16:4 cm. Ape ΟΕ PLATE .V. 
 
 This is a fragment of a Graéco-Latin register or account, concerning a 
 detachment of troops (cf. 48 recto), Lines 5-11 contain a copy of a receipt 
 in Greek from an oftio, or adjutant, to an imperial deputy-procurator for 
 50 artabae of wheat paid to a number of cavalrymen, whose names in Latin 
 precede. A list of six footsoldiers follows, which was presumably succeeded 
 by another receipt in Greek recording a payment to them. There are a few 
 Latin letters (apparently belonging to names) from the ends of lines of the 
 previous column, and what remains of Col. iii is occupied with more names 
 in Latin. One or two of these soldiers’ names indicate Hebrew extraction. 
 
 The receipt is dated in the 14th year of a joint reign, which on palaeo- 
 graphical grounds is probably that of Septimius Severus and Caracalla. 
 
 Col. ii. Col. iii. 
 G|. 
 Sadus | 
 
 Marrius Comar| 
 Valerius TIsidori 
 
 5 Μαλωχῶς MI. .vaviolu ὀπτίων Οὐίκτω- Tebael Ϊ 
 pt Kewpapive Καισάρων οἰκονόμου. γ26ζ Larichius Ϊ 
 οὐικαρίου χαίρειν. ἐμετρήθησαν 20 Sadus Ϊ 
 of προκίμενοι ἱππεῖς πραίτων ἀριθμῶν Themes [ 
 ὑπὲρ μηνὸς Θὼθ πυροῦ aprdBas πεν- Salmes | 
 10 τήκοντα. (ἔτους) ιδ τῶν κυρίων Σ᾿ εβαστῶν Zebidius {| 
 O00 ¢. Malichis Sal 
 item pedites vi Belet 25 Psenosirius | 
 Beleus Zabdius Roman(us?) Af 
 ad cognlega Claudius Sabinus Cumestuls| et Trufon FT| 
 15 Terracus  Macchana Lulius .{ 
 Gradius  <Avidus Etiopius Chi .[ 
 Themes  Malichi 30 Pacebius P{ 
 
 Q 2 
 
228 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 6-7. 1. Κωμαρίνου . . . οἰκονόμῳ οὐικαρίῳ. 4. First ε of ἐμετρηθησαν corr. from o(?). 
 8. 1. πρώτων. 
 
 3-4. The pairs of names here and in 1]. 13-7 are placed rather far apart and look 
 at first sight as if they were independent; but with one exception either the second name 
 has a genitive termination or the first may be a gentile name, while unless the names 
 are connected the number v7 in |. ro is wrong. The only case in which any difficulty 
 arises is inl. 13, where Belews and Zabdius certainly seem to be separate names; but the 
 distance between them is greater than in any of the other cases. Possibly Gradius and 
 Avidus in 1. 16, where again the space is very wide, should also be separated, thus making 
 the number 6. In 1. 3 the second'name is perhaps Comar|inz’; cf. 1. 6. 
 
 5. Madoyas: hardly Μαλωχᾶς, though that name occurs in a Palmyra inscription, 
 
 Coli Geagors : 
 6. Καισάρων οἰκονόμου οὐικαρίου : cf. B. ἃ. U. 156. 3 and 102. 1, where οἰκονόμος is 
 
 probably to be read between Καίσαρος and οὐικάριος. 
 14. The marginal additions here and in ]. 19 are obscure; cognlega is perhaps collega, 
 but what is rzex? The first letter may be a but the second does not at all resemble 2, nor 
 
 would apex be a very likely word here. 
 
 736. PRIVATE ACCOUNT. 
 
 17:2 ΧΡ4.3 cm. About a.p. 1. 
 
 Of this lengthy account of private expenses parts of seven columns in all 
 remain, five on the recto and two on the verso; the first column of the recto, 
 however, which is separated from those following by a broad blank space, is too 
 fragmentary to be worth reproducing, and the same may be said of a narrow 
 half-effaced column corresponding to this one but written in the reverse direction 
 on the back. The remainder is in fairly good condition, but the papyrus is 
 broken at the top and bottom, and the short column on the verso is sometimes 
 difficult to decipher owing to discolouration. The various payments are 
 arranged according to the days of the month, and some interesting items and 
 prices occur. 
 
 Col. ii. 
 κα. pal ] 
 εἰς [ 15 letters ].. (dpaypail) 6, 
 βα.1 4 6} terres ade | οἷα 
 
 Ζμ[.] .. ς φαινόλ[οἱν Κοράξου (δραχμαὴ t, 
 5 ᾿ γοϊγ)γυλίδος εἰς ταριχείαν (δραχμὴ) a (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 
10 
 
 15 
 
 25 
 
 230 
 
 35 
 
 736... ACCOUNTS 
 
 χαλκίου μισθοῦ εἰς βάψαι (ὀβολοὶ δύο ?) 
 ἁλός τ΄ (ὀβολός ὃ), 
 ἄλεστρα (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβης) a ἐπὶ τῆς in (τριώβολον ?), 
 θρύων εἰς τοὺς ἄρτους (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 ἤπητρα εἰς φαινόλ(ην) οράξου (ὀβολὸς) (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 εἰς κατανθρωπισμὸν γυναικ(ὸς) 
 Γεμέλλου (τετρώβολον ?), 
 μύρου εἰς ἀποστολὴν ταφῆς 
 Ovyarpis Φνᾶς (τετρώβολον). 
 KB. ἐλαίου yxo(ds) a (δραχμαὴ ὃ (τετρώβολονν), 
 κηροῦ καὶ γραφείου παιδ(ῶν) (ὀβολός), 
 ἄρτου καθαροῦ II pipals] (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 εἰς κ[ζα]τανθρωπισμὸν Τύχης (τριώβολον). 
 Μεχ(εὶρ) θ. [ 20 letters 1] (δραχμὴ) a (τριώβολον) 
 
 3. Φ of |ad| rewritten (?). 
 Goi it 
 
 Ends of 3 lines. 
 
 t. oA[.. .Jko.[.] ἀρίσίτῳ ylepdi(ov) (ὀβολός), 
 ΚΡ ΠΡ τ: (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 εἰς τὸ Σαραπιῖον (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 ἄρτου καθαροῦ παιδίῶν) (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 
 ὥτου γ[ε]ρδίζ(ου) (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 πράσων ἀρίστῳ yepdi(ov) (ὀβολός), 
 περιστερᾶς (ὀβολός), 
 ‘Avrare (paypal) B (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 
 ἄνω ἐν τῇ model) ἄλεστρα ἄρτων 
 (πυροῦ) (ἀρταβῶν) β διὰ [ΠΠσᾶτος (δραχμὴ) a (ὀβολοὶ δύο). 
 ia. ἐν παρεμβοϊλ]ῇ διὰ Θεοδώρου 
 ἄλεσίτρα)] ἄρ[τ]ω(ν) (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβης) a (τετρώβολον), 
 ἀρίστῳ [γε]ρί δί(ου) (ὀβολός), 
 
 220 
 
230 
 
 THE OXYRAYNCHOUS PAPYRI 
 
 domapdyav) [δίπνῳ ᾿Αντ(ᾶτος) ὅτ᾽ εἰς 
 
 τὸ περίδ᾽ ]πνο(ν) ‘AOn( ) yvadéa(s) (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 καὶ παιδαρί[οι]ς δίπνῳ κράμβη(ς) (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 Hs. |.) 3 COLD (ἡμιωβέλιον) 
 
 Parts of 
 
 25. Second ε of capamuoy corr. from o (?). 
 
 46 
 
 50 
 
 55 
 
 60 
 
 . Kad. 
 
 kB. 
 
 Col. 
 
 2 lines. 
 
 36. First a of aomapayo(v) corr. from ὃ. 
 
 iv. 
 
 Parts of 4 lines. 
 προ[σφαγ)]ίου (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 θρύϊων εἸἶς] ἄρτους (ὀβολοὶ δύο) (ἡμιωβέλιονν). 
 γάλακτος παιδίῶν)͵ (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 
 ἄρτου καθαροῦ (ἡμιωβέλιον). 
 Σεκούντα παιδίῶν) itplov (ἡμιωβέλιον). 
 τισάνης ὁμ(οίως) (ἡμιωβέλιον). 
 ὀψαρίου (ὀβολός), 
 
 ἄρτου καθαροῦ (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 
 εἰς κατανθρωπίισμὸν) Avto(vias ?) (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 
 καὶ εἰς Ταπτολλοῦτος KatktX(iov P) (τριώβολον), 
 
 γενεσίοις Τρυφᾶτος στεφά(νων) (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 ye(vejotors [.].[.].. @( ) στεφά(νων) (ὀβολοὶ δύο). 
 
 ῥόας παιδίῶν) [ ] (ὀβολός), 
 
 παιγνίω(ν) καὶ επουριω(ν) παιδ(ῶν) (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 
 ζύτου (τριώβολον), 
 ὄψου (ὀβολός). 
 ὀψαρί[ο᾽ν (ὀβολός). 
 
 Part of 1 line. 
 
 50. 1. Σεκούντῳ (cf. 1. 81). 
 
 54. avr of αντωῳί γ rewritten. 
 
7° 
 
 15 
 
 80 
 
 85 
 
 go 
 
 KO. 
 
 736. ACCOUNTS 
 
 Col. v. 
 
 Parts of 4 lines. 
 
 Θαῆσις [... ἡἸμε(ρῶν) B [(arevtdBodrov), 
 μήτηρ [᾿Δμ]μωνᾶτο(9) ἡμε(ρῶν) [ 
 Taaprajots ἡμε(ρῶν) [8] πεντώβολον, 
 Bepots ὁμ(οίως) ἡ με(ρῶν) « (Spaxpat) ὃ (ὀβολόξ). 
 ἄλεστρα (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβης) a (τετρώβολον), 
 ἁλμυρίδος pal ) β (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 ἁλὸς (ὀβολός), 
 λίνου καὶ ῥαφίδος (ὀβολός), 
 ἄλεστρα (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβης) a διὰ Θεοδώ(ρου) (τετρώβολονν), 
 κέρκισ[τ]ρα φα[ι]νόλ(ου) (δραχμὴ) a (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 ἄρτω(ν) καθαρῶ(ν) Φᾳ. . τω ) (δραχμὴ) a, 
 περιστερᾶς [πα]ιδ(ῶν) (ὀβολός), 
 ἄρτου κ[αθαροῦ ὁἹμ(οίως) (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 Σ᾽ εκούντῳ παιδ(ῶν) ἰτρ[ίου] (ἡμιωβέλιον) 
 
 καὶ σεμιδάρεως ξηρᾶς (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 
 γάλακτος (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 μύρου εἰς ταφῆς θυγατρὸς 
 [ΠἸάςιτ[οὴς (δραχμὴ) α. 
 
 82. |, σεμιδάλεως. 
 
 On the verso opposite Col. v. 
 
 Parts of 2 lines. 
 
 .« ἀμ. «γί ) γυϊν]αιξὶ ovval....] (δραχμαὶ) β (τριώβολον), 
 
 πρίο]Ἰσφαγίζων) ταῖς γυναιξὶ 
 
 ἡμε(ρῶν) β (ὀβολοὶ δύο) (ἡ μιωβέλιον)ὶ, 
 κόλλητρα λυχνίας (ὀβολοὶ δύο) (ἡ μιιωβέλιον)ὶ, 
 ἐρεβίνθων [ὅτε ὧδε 
 
 ἐδείπνει. [. .. .]. {ο]ς (ὀβολὸς) (ἡμιωβέλιον), 
 
 231 
 
232 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 els κατανθρωπισμὸν 
 
 95 Δα[ο]δίκης (ὀβολοὶ δύο ?), 
 Βιετο  ν-- (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 Στράτου εἰς τὴν .1ε. απ. ς εἰσβολ(ὴν) (δραχμαὶ ?) δ, 
 [one oto] δάπαμηί Ὁ) foc  ἰνοίθος $ [ 
 "Holo: εἰς T... pp... κιθῶ(να 9) (δραχμ ?) |. .]» 
 100 κόλλητρα χαλκίίο]υ (ἡμιωβέλιον). 
 ‘Wl. τῶρρ. The φιβὲ: ... through Zm... for the cloak of Coraxus, 10 drachmae ; 
 
 turnips for pickling 1 dr. 2 obols ; for the kettle, payment for enamelling 2 ob. ; salt 1 ob. ; 
 cost of grinding 1 artaba of wheat on the 18th 3 ob.; omelette for the bread 2 ob. ; cost 
 of mending the cloak of Coraxus 14 ob.; for treating (?) the wife of Gemellus 4 ob. ; 
 perfume for the dispatch of the mummy of the daughter of Phna 4 ob. The 22nd: 
 a chous of oil 4 dr. 4 ob.; wax and stilus for the children 1 ob.; pure bread for Prima 
 
 4 ob.; for treating Tyche 3 ob. oth Mecheir... the roth: ... for the weaver's breakfast 
 τ ob.; ... for the Sarapeum 2 ob.; pure bread for the children 4 ob.; beer for the 
 
 weaver 1 ob.; leeks for the weaver’s breakfast 1 ob.; a pigeon 1 ob.; to Antas 2 dr. 
 2 ob.; up at the city for the bread, cost of grinding 2 artabae of wheat, through Isas, 
 1 dr.2 ob. The 11th: at the camp, through Theodorus, for the bread, cost of grinding 
 1 artaba of wheat 4 ob.; for the weaver’s breakfast 1 ob.; asparagus for the dinner 
 
 of Antas when (he went) to the funeral feast of Athe... the fuller 4 ob.; and to the 
 
 slaves (?), for a cabbage for dinner $ ob.; to the child 4 ob.; ... The 16th: a relish 
 4 ob.; omelettes for the bread 24 ob. The 17th: milk for the children ἃ ob.; pure 
 
 bread 4 ob. The 18th: to Secundas, a cake for the children $ ob. The roth: barley 
 water for the same 4 ob. The 20th: sauce 1 ob.; pure bread 4 ob.; for treating Antonia 
 2 ob.; and for Taptollous daughter of Caecilius 3 ob.; on the birthday of Tryphas, for 
 garlands 2 ob.; on the birthday of . . . for garlands 2 ob. The 21st: pomegranates 
 for the children 1 ob.; playthings and... for the children 1 ob.; beer 3 ob.; sauce 1 ob. 
 The 22nd: sauce 1 ob.; Thaésis... for 2 days 5 ob.; the mother of Ammonas for 
 .days...; Taarpaésis for 2 days 5 ob.; Berous similarly for 10 days 4 dr.1 ob, The 
 24th: cost of grinding 1 artaba of wheat 4 ob.; 2... of pickle 2 ob.; salt 1 ob.; 
 a needle and thread 1 ob.; cost of grinding 1 artaba of wheat, through Theodorus, 4 ob. ; 
 cost of weaving a cloak 1 dr. 2 ob.; pure bread for Ph... 1 dr.; a pigeon for the 
 children 1 ob.; pure bread for the same 4 ob.; to Secundus for a cake for the children 
 4 ob., and for dry meal 4 ob.; milk 4 ob.; perfume for the mummy of the daughter 
 of Pasis 1 dr. ... The roth: ... for the women 2 dr. ‘3 ob.; relishes. for the τ τη 
 on 2 days 24 ob.; cost of tinkering a lamp 24 ob.; pulse when .. . was dining here 
 14 ob.; for treating Laodice 23 ob.’ 
 
 4. ἄλεστρα : Cf. 1. 10 ἤπητρα, 1. 77 Képxia[r|pa, 1. 91 κόλλητρα, 789. 4 σιτοπόητρα. 
 ἤπητρα had already occurred in P. Tebt. 120 introd., where it should be regarded as 
 a neuter plural, as should also ὕφαντρα in P. Tebt. 117. 37, &c. 
 
 11. εἰς κατανθρωπισμόν : cf. Il. 17, 53, and 92, where the expression recurs, the object 
 being apparently always a woman. Neither κατανθρωπισμός nor κατανθρωπίζειν appears to 
 be otherwise attested. 
 
 28. The » of ἀρίστῳ here and elsewhere is written above the line (so too δίπνῳ in 
 
Zoi ACCOUNTS 233 
 
 1. 38), but probably the dative singular and not the genitive plural was intended; a final 
 letter is similarly overwritten e.g. in 1. 10 Kopdéov, 1. 56 Tpudaros. 
 
 36. ὅτ᾽ εἰς : Sc. ἦλθε. 
 
 55. Ψαπτολλοῦτος : Sc. κατανθρωπισμόν. This is preferable to reading τὰ Πτολλοῦτος. 
 
 59. exoupto(v): the word is unknown and the reading quite doubtful. ἐπὶ may be 
 om OF εἰσ. 
 
 84. «ils ταφῆς : sc. ἀποστολήν ; cf. 1. 13. 
 
 96. The marks at the beginning of the line look more like a deleted letter than an 
 abbreviation. ‘The day of the month should have been further away to the left. 
 
 99. Possibly εἰς τὸν. .., but there is hardly space for [ὁ]. 
 
 737. Latin Account. 
 Height:2293°cm, About A.D. reo Puate ΠῚ, Col. 1. 
 
 An account of wages paid on different days to ‘ weavers,’ ‘ hired persons,’ 
 and a ‘master’ or ‘foreman.’ The wages, which are reckoned in asses, are at 
 the rate of οἱ for a weaver, 4 for a ‘hired man, and 6 for the foreman. We 
 sive the text of two columns, which are contained on separate pieces of papyrus 
 but seem to be consecutive; there is a large blank space after Col. ii, which was 
 the end of the roll. A few small fragments of some other columns also remain. 
 The account is written in a clear cursive hand which is probably of the reign of 
 Augustus, the papyrus being one of a large find belonging practically entirely 
 to that period. Points are commonly used after abbreviations (but not with 
 a for asses) and the numerals of the days of the month, and are not infrequently 
 added after words which are not abbreviated. 
 
 Col. i. 
 
 [a(zte) d(zem) . Nonas LIullias 
 (condulctet ἦν a(sses) τυ 
 lez textor(es) 12 [a(sses)| vee 
 conductet 12 [a(sses)] vide 
 5 tx Ldus textor(es) 12 alsses) vit 
 conductet 11 a(sses) vide 
 vit Idus textor(es) 11 a(sses) vit 
 conductet 12 a(sses) οἹτὲ 
 vt] [dus textor(es) 17 a(sses) vit 
 
 το coln\ductet 12 a(sses) vite 
 
Presumably the money though reckoned in asses was paid in obols, three of which would 
 
 be the equivalent of 2 asses. 
 
 5. zx: cf. 1. 21, where xz?x is written for xv727; for the sums of asses, on the other 
 
 hand, vzzz is regularly used. 
 
 17-9. If this column immediately follows Col. i, which from the dates seems most 
 probable, there is nothing lost at the beginnings of these lines and 7 in 1. 19 stands for 
 
 pridte. 
 
 . 234 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 uv Idus textor(es) 112 a(sses) 4: s(emis) 
 magister a(sses) οἱ 
 iv Idus textor(es) 712 asses) x s(emts) 
 magister a(sses) vi 
 15 711 L\dus|textor(es) 112 a(sses) x s(emis) 
 [mlagester a(sses) we 
 Col. ii. 
 1112 Ldus textor(es) 112 a(sses) x s(emis) 
 magister asses) οἱ 
 ἸΣ Ldus textor(es) 112 a(sses) x s(emis) 
 20 magister a(sses) ve 
 a(ute) a\iem) xiix K(alendas) Sextilias 
 textor (es) 711 a(sses) x s(emis) 
 magister Asses) οἱ 
 21. a of sextilzas corr. from Z(?). 
 2. a(sses): this abbreviation is common in the Pompeian inscriptions; cf. C. 1. L. IV, 
 index. The occurrence of asses in an account of this kind is however very singular. 
 
 21. Sextilias is a curious form; the a has been corrected, but was apparently altered 
 from another letter, not itself deleted. For the numeral x77x cf. note on 1. 5. 
 
 738. 
 
 Account oF Foobp. 
 
 13°5 X 10°3 cm. 
 
 About A.D. I. 
 
 A fragment of an account of articles of food consumed on different days ; 
 
 cf. 108. 
 
 δίπνωι € 
 
 The ends of lines of a preceding column are preserved. 
 
 δίπνωι ἢ 
 
769: ACCOUNTS 235 
 ανωπικὸν ἀρτίδια β, 
 ἧπαρ. ὄρνις σιδυτὴ ἐξ ὕδα(τος) a, 
 δίπνῳ 5° 10 πτέρυγες β. 
 
 5 ὄστρεα ι, 
 
 θρίδαξ α. 
 
 ‘For dinner on the 5th ἃ Canopic liver; for dinner on the 6th ro oysters, 1 lettuce ; 
 for dinner on the 7th 2 small loaves, 1 bird. . . from the water, 2 snipe (?).’ 
 
 9. σιδυτή is anew word. The πτέρυγες were probably smaller than the ὄρνις. 
 
 739. PRIVATE ACCOUNT. 
 
 32X10 cm. About a.p. 1. 
 
 _ A private account for a month, reckoned in silver drachmae and copper 
 obols. Lines 1-2 mention a receipt, ll. 3-22 give an account of expenditure 
 for various purposes. The account is written on the verso, the recto being blank. 
 
 "Ἔχει “Iods παρὰ Amoddoviolv 
 (δραχμὰς) pe. [ 
 L δα(πάνης)" τι(μῆς) xe ) [Ν]εχθεῦτι (paypal) xn, 
 
 ἀπὸ Κύνου 
 
 σειτοποήτρων (δραχμὴ) a (τετρώβολονν), 
 5 [{[ἐλαίου (δραχμαὴ ὃ (ὀβολοὶ dvo).|| 
 ὃ ἄλεστρα (πεντώβολον), 
 
 κονίου εἰς πρ[ο]σφαγίου (ὀβολός). 
 
 (τετρώβολον) (ἡμιωβέλιον). 
 ς. βατανίων (ὀβολοὶ δύο), 
 
 10 προσφαγίου οἰκοδίόμου) (ὀβολός), 
 
 (δραχμαὴ) ὃ (ὀβολοὶ δύο). 
 
 7 
 ε. κοφίνων vy 
 
 ἐλαίου χοῦς J. μ (τριώβολον) (ἡμιωβέλιον). 
 
 ᾧ προσφαγίου οἰκοδ(όμου) (ὀβολός). 
 θ. ἐργάτου (τετρώβολον ?), 
 οἰκοδ(όμου) πρ(οσφαγίου) (ὀβολός), 
 15 TEKTOV[ OS ] 
 
 ty. τι(μῆς) ἐλα[ίου] (δραχμαὶ) ὃ (τριώβολον ?), 
 
236 THE OXYRAYNCHUS (PAPYRI 
 
 πορφύρας (δραχμαὴ κ, 
 στήμονος εἰς γυναιΠκ[εἴ]ον 
 ἱμάτειϊον | 
 20 διλοσταριῷ late. ees en ae ee 
 kB. τι(μῆς) ἐλαίου [(dpaxpat) δ] (ὀβολοὶ δύο). 
 Yates 
 5. This line enclosed in round brackets... 7. 1. πρ[ο]σφάγιον.. 
 
 ‘Isas has received from Apollonius, an inhabitant of Cynus, 4!.| drachmae. Deduct 
 on account of expenses: price of ... paid to Nechtheus 28 dr., for making bread 
 1 dr. 4 ob., (for oil 4 dr. 2 ob., erased). On the 4th, for grinding 5 ob., powder (?) 
 for a relish 1 ob. 5th, 3 baskets 44 ob. 6th, plates 2 ob., a relish for the builder 
 1 ob., a chous of oil 4 dr. 2 ob. Total 40 dr. 34 ob. 7th, a relish for the builder 1 ob. 
 oth, for the workman 4 ob., a relish for the builder 1 ob., the carpenter... 13th, price of 
 oil 4 dr. 3 ob., purple 20 dr., thread for a woman’s robe..., to Philoutarion... 22nd, 
 price of oil 4 dr. 2 ob. Total...’ 
 
 2. Κύνου, if correct, is the name of a village, but the writer is careless about his cases 
 (cf. 1. 7), and he may mean Κυνῶν, 1. 6. Cynopolis. 
 4. σειτοποήτρων : cf. the similar forms ἄλεστρα (1. 6), ἤπητρα, &c. (786. 10 and note 
 
 on 7386. 7). 
 5. The amount of oil which is not stated here and in |. 21 was no doubt 1 χοῦς: 
 
 Cll at. 
 
 740. AccoUNT oF CorN. 
 21:2 Χ 46 cm. About a.D. 200. 
 
 An account of corn, arranged according to different villages, apparently: 
 from the day-book of a private individual rather than an official. Of Col. i 
 only the ends of lines are preserved, but Col. ii is practically complete, and 
 Col. iii has lost only a few letters at the ends of lines. There is also a detached 
 fragment (not printed) belonging to another column. 
 
 Cols. i and ii are apparently concerned with corn paid out, and the sum 
 given in ll. 28-9, added to the 30 artabae accounted for in 1]. 30-1, is subtracted 
 from a previously mentioned total, leaving the remainder stated in 1. 32. The 
 rest of Col. iii deals with receipts from rents. The papyrus provides some 
 interesting new information about the names and character of different measures 
 of corn, and a curious conversion occurs in 1.29. On the verso are copies of 
 
740. ACCOUNTS 257 
 
 petitions to Septimius Severus and Caracalla (705), and the oth year men- 
 tioned in 1. 36 of the recto no doubt refers to these emperors. 
 
 33 
 34 
 
 Col. i. 
 Ends of 13 lines. 
 [MeppépOwr- γ]νησίων δη- 
 [μοσίων Jos διδομε- 
 [ν διὰ γεϊωργ(οῦ) Μερμίέρθων) 
 ΟἹ 
 
 μιᾶς ἀντὶ μιᾶς μέτρῳ σιτολ(ογικῷ ?) ‘Hpwr|...]. υ (ἀρτάβαμ [.. 
 Σ ερύφεως" μέτ(ρῳ) δί(ημοσίῳ) μιᾶς] ἀντὶ μιᾶς ἐμβί γ(ἀρτάβαι) xB y‘otvixes) ¢, 
 καὶ ἐδόθησαν ὑπὲρ φορέτρου ὀνηλ(ατῶν) (ἀρτάβαι) . χ(οίνικες) y. 
 Πέλα: ἰδιωτικῶς μέτίρῳ) δη(μοσίῳφ) διὰ Πασαλύμιοϊς 
 γεωργ(οῦ) Πέλα θέμ(ατος) ἀπὸ (ἀρταβῶν) Kz τὸ γ΄ (ἀρτάβαι!) ἡ (ἥμισυ) 
 χ(οίνικες) ¢, 
 καὶ ἐδόθ(η) ὑπὲρ φορέτ(ρου) ὀνηλ(ατῶν) καὶ σιτολο[γικο]ῦ καὶ 
 σιτομετρικοῦ τῶν προκ(ειμένων) (ἀρταβῶν) ἡ (ἡμίσους) χ(οινίκων) ¢ 
 (ἀρτάβης) (ἥμισυ τέταρτον) y(oivixes) β. 
 ΠΙαώμεως: ἐμετρήθ(ησαν) σιτολ(όγοις) Beek 1. (ἀρτάβαι) te, 
 καὶ ἐδόθ(ησαν) ὑπ(ὲρ) φορέτ(ρου)͵ ὀνηλ(ατῶν) καὶ σιτομίετί(ρικοῦ) τῶν 
 προκ(ειμένων) (ἀρταβῶν) te (ἀρταβ ). x(olvixes)] γ. 
 Σ ενεκελεύ' ἐμετρήθ(ησαν) σιτολ(όγοις) Oéualros...... (ἀρτάβαι) ., 
 καὶ ἐδόθ(ησαν) ὑπί(ὲρ) σιτολογ(ικοῦ) καὶ φορέτ(ρου) χ(οίνικες) [.] 
 J, ἀναλώμ(ατο») ἰδιωτ(ικῶς) (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβαι) vB δ΄ χ(οίνικες) β, 
 αἱ θέματος δημοσίου καθαροῦ (ἀρτάβαι) pO (ἥμισυ τέταρτον) χ(οίνικες) θ. 
 καὶ ἐπράθησαν ὡς ἐπάνω [διὰ τοῦ] γ λογοῦ δεδήλωται 
 ἐπὶ μηνὸς Μεσορὴ [(ἀρτάβαι) λ]] (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβαι) A. 
 
 Col. iii. 
 . λοιπαὶ [ἰδιωτικῶς πυροῦ ἀρτάβαι.. 
 καὶ ἐν θέματι ὁμοίως διδομένου ὑπὸ ylewpy(@v)....- 
 
 κατὰ μίσθωσιν [(ἀρτάβαι).. 
 
238 THE OXYRAYNCAUS PAPYAL 
 
 33 Θώλθεως' ἐμετ(ρήθησαν) διὰ ‘Hparos yewpy(od) Θεωΐ. . . (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβαμ).. 
 86 ὁ avrds) ἀπὸ σπερμ(άτων) θ (ἔτους) (πυροῦ) (ἀρτάβαι) y, / [(πυροῦὴ 
 (apraBat) . 
 
 37 Πέλα' ἐν πεδίοις Σ᾿ ενοκωμ[.]. . παρὰ [....... age 
 38 Διογένους τοῦ Σ᾽ αραπ(ίωνος) yea! py(odvros)]...( ) περὶ Πέλα [......... 
 32 σας Σενοκωμί ) . . ἀπὸ (ἀρταβῶν). λ' τὸ [... τοῦ 
 
 40 Κεσμούχεως: παρὰ Παθώτου Μοιμεσί.Ἶχί ) γε[ωργ(οῦντος) ... .. 
 41 (ἀρούρας) n (ἥμισυ τέταρτον) ἀπὸ (ἀρταβῶν) κη τὸ γ΄ [(ἀρτάβαι) θ. .. 
 
 42 παρὰ Ἡρακλείδου ἐπιτρόπου “Ηρ αἸκλ[εΐας ..[... 2+. ἣ ἡ- 
 
 43 σπόρησεν ἐπὶ Μαγδώλ(ων) κοι(νὴ) πρὸς ᾿ΗΙρακλεί(δην) κατ[ὰ τὸ (ἥμισυ) γ΄ 
 44 καὶ πρὸς τὴν μήτ(ερα) τῶν ἀφηλ(ίκων) κ[α]τὰ τὸ 4 Kall πρὸς τοὺς 
 45 ἀφήλ(ικας) κατὰ τὸ κδ΄, ἀβρόχ(ου) (ἄρουραι) kd.[..].Al....-- Sage 
 
 46 ἐγ péplol(s) (apovp@v) is, χέρσου καὶ χω(μάτων ?) Kal ἁλμίυρίδος) 
 47 τοῦ αὐτοῦ) [μ]έρο(υς) τῶν ἀφηλ(ίκων) (ἄρουρα) a (ἥμισυ). [. .]. ἐπηί )¥ 
 
 48. [..]..11.( ) fle. οἱ ) ὅλων γ᾽ εἰ... ..}1..( ) (ἀρτάβα τ 
 ᾿ / θέματος (ἀρτάβαι) [Jy (ἥμισυ). 
 
 14. Μερμέρθων (cf. 823) is restored from ]. 16; cf. the position of Πέλα in Il. 20-1. 
 The genitive Μερμέρθων occurs in a papyrus found last winter. 
 
 γ)]νησίων δημοσίων : cf. P. Amh. 86. 10 and note. ἀρταβιεία and ναύβιον are meant, 
 though perhaps not exclusively. | 
 
 17. μιᾶς ἀντὶ μιᾶς : cf. 1. 18, and P. Amh. 87. 21-2, note. The meaning here is that 
 half the artabae were paid on one measure (the name of which is lost in ll. 14-6), half on 
 the measure otrod( ), which is new and which we have supposed to be σιτολ(ογικῷ) on the 
 analogy of μέτρῳ ἀγορανὸμικῷ in 886. 
 
 18. ἐμβί ): this measure is also new. Perhaps ἐμβ(ολικῴ), i.e. the measure generally 
 used in corn sent by boat to Alexandria. It was no doubt smaller than the δημόσιον 
 μέτρον ; cf. 1, 21, note. 
 
 20. ἰδιωτικῶς: the point of this remark (cf. ll. 28 and 32) is not quite clear. We 
 might suppose that the writer was contrasting the present private payment with other 
 official ones in the same account, but from |. 28 it appears that all the items in Col. ii 
 concern his private account, and to assume that he failed to keep official and private 
 accounts distinct is not satisfactory. An alternative explanation is to suppose that ἰδιωτικῶς 
 refers not to the nature of the account but to the character of the corn; cf. Il. 28-9, where 
 an amount of corn which is apparently ἰδιωτικῶς is converted into a slightly smaller sum: 
 θέματος δημοσίου καθαροῦ, and note ad Joc. But since the payment in 1. 19, although 
 ἰδιωτικῶς, is μέτ(ρῳ) δη(μοσίῳ), ἰδιωτικῶς cannot refer to a private measure, and would be 
 a curious expression to imply that the corn in question was not καθαρός. 
 
 21. 4 of 26 artabae is 84 art., a sum which the writer expresses by 8% art. 7 choenices. 
 
741. ACCOUNTS 239 
 
 This implies, if his arithmetic is correct, the artaba of 42 choenices, the largest of the 
 different artabae in use in Egypt, and in the fourth century called the artaba φορικῷ 
 (uérp) (P. Brit. Mus. 125; cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 232-3). The fact that it is the artaba 
 of 42 choenices which is here μέτρῳ δημοσίῳ is important, for the official artaba in Roman 
 times has been often supposed to be much smaller, though, as we pointed out (P. Tebt. 
 zb¢d.), on insufficient grounds. But it would not be safe to infer from the present passage 
 alone that the mention of μέτρῳ δημοσίῳ in Roman times always implied an artaba 
 of 42 choenices. 
 
 22-3. These charges for donkey transport, with the σιτολογικόν (a new term, probably 
 meaning a bakhshish for the otroddyos) and σιτομετρικόν (also new as an impost for 
 measuring the corn), all of which are supplementary of the main payment (cf. Il. 19, 25, 
 and 27), are probably included in the προσμετρούμενα which occur in the official receipts 
 of this period; cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 411-2. 
 
 24. owrod(dyos): this does not necessarily imply that the payment was for taxation 
 Durposes= cial. Oxy, lil. τ δι: 
 
 28-9. The sum of the foregoing items, 521 artabae 2 choenices, is here converted 
 into 493 art. 8 choen. θέματος δημοσίου καθαροῦ, whatever that precisely means. The 
 reduction is probably due to two causes at least, (1) the fact that in the preceding items 
 artabae of different sizes were employed, and that some of them were smaller than the 
 artaba meant in |. 29, which very likely contained 42 choenices (cf. 1. 21, note); (2) the 
 fact that these artabae ἰδιωτ(ικῶς) were partially or even wholly not καθαραί ; cf. P. Tebt. I. 
 92. Q-II. 
 
 30. The doubtful y has a horizontal stroke over it and seems to mean ‘3rd’. αὐ(τοῦ) 
 cannot be read. 
 
 35. Geol: Θώλθεως (cf. 1. 14, note) or at least a place name would be expected. 
 
 41. Since we do not know which artaba was being employed, it is uncertain how the 
 writer expressed # art. at the end of the line. 
 
 44. The μήτηρ τῶν ἀφηλίκων, if Ἡρακλεί(δην) is right in ]. 43, is the “Ηρακλεία mentioned 
 in ]. 42. 
 
 741. List or ARTICLES. 
 16-5 XQ9°5 cm. Second century. 
 
 A list of miscellaneous articles, containing, as such lists commonly do, 
 a number of rare or unknown words. 
 
 Aby(os) ἐντολικῶν Ἐὐγενέτο- ἱππικὸν α, 
 
 [po]s ἐν δισακιδίῳ" κελλάριον τριλάγυνον α, 
 
 σφυρὶς διπλῆ καρύων α, βι. [ὧν ἀναβολὴ α; 
 
 ἄλλα μεικρὰ ε, προχείρια β, 
 5 γεργαθὸς a, 15 ἐν οἷς ὑελα(ῖ) ἡμισυν- 
 
 3 Ἁ ? 
 ἀρνακὶς α; θέσεις γ᾽; 
 
240 PELE OXY NY CEO S ele ier. 
 
 ψήκτρα α, ποτηρίων δεκατί ) ὃ mor ) ἃ, 
 
 σόλια ἀρσενικὰ Cevy(n) η, βάτελλαι ὃ, 
 
 [γυἹναικεῖα Cevy(n) τὸ σκουτλία B, 
 
 το σανδάλια ὀνικ(ὰ) Β, 20 ὀξύβαφον [1] α. 
 ἡ. τ Of ψηκτρα above the line. 11. ἵππικον Pap. 15. veda Pap. 
 
 ‘Account of articles at order of Eugenetor in a double sack:—1 double basket of 
 nuts, 5 other small ones, 1 wicker crate, 1 sheepskin, 1 scraper, 8 pairs of men’s..., 
 6 pairs of women’s ditto, 2 donkey straps (?), 1 horse’s ditto, 1 three-flagon jar, 1 bag (?) 
 of ..., 2 hold-alls containing 3 half-sets of glass, 4... cups and 1..., 4 plates, 
 2 bowls, 1 saucer.’ 
 
 4. G@dalc) pexpa(i) should perhaps be read, as the writer seems to have a tendency 
 to omit final « (cf. 1. 15) and five baskets must be meant; but the neuter may refer to 
 Kapvua. 
 
 5. γεργαθός is probably for γυργαθός, meaning a wicker basket. 
 
 8. σόλια: or perhaps σέλια, which however is still more difficult. σόλιον might be 
 a diminutive of oddos or an adjective from Σόλοι, but neither is very suitable. It is hardly 
 likely that the word is connected with στολή, for which cody was a late Attic form (cf. 
 Du Cange s.v.), though some article of attire is evidently meant. Mr. Smyly suggests 
 a connexion with the Latin sofar. 
 
 10. σανδάλια may mean ‘bands’ of some kind, the word being used for a medical 
 bandage by Oribasius. But the reading is extremely doubtful; the second letter could 
 be ε and of the first only the smallest vestiges remain. 
 
 12. For κελλάριον cf. P. Brit. Mus. 191. 9. 
 
 13. dvaBoAn, Since it governs a genitive plural, looks like a receptacle of some kind, 
 a sense in which ἀναβολίδιον is found in Macarius, Apophth. Patr. 33 ἀναβολίδιον μεστὸν 
 Wopiov. In the preceding word the vestiges before the lacuna suit only a round letter 
 such as 8, 6, 0, or «; possibly βίβλων. There are two dots like a diaeresis above the ε, 
 but they are perhaps accidental. 
 
 14. mpoxeipra are cases or boxes, since they contained glass; but the word is 
 apparently new. 
 
 15. Mr. Smyly compares Martial iv. 46. 15 sep/enarza synthesis. 
 
 17. The cups are divided into two kinds, but what these are is obscure. 
 
 18. βάτελλαι : probably the Latin padella. 
 
 19. σκουτλία : cf. P. Brit. Mus. 191. 10 and a gloss cited by Du Cange from Cod. 
 Reg. 2062 τρύβλιον σκοῦτλον. 
 
742. PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE 241 
 
 (g) PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE. 
 
 742. LETTER oF ANTAS. 
 26:5 X 13°7 cm. ΠΟ. 2: 
 
 A letter from Antas to Faustus, chiefly concerning reeds (κάλαμος), written 
 like many other letters of this period in vulgar Greek. 
 
 ᾿Αντᾶς Φ[αύσ]τωι πλεῖστα χαίρειν. 
 παράλαβε παρὰ Πόθου τὸν κάλα- 
 μίο]ν πανα[ρ]θμῶι καὶ ἀπόστειλόν 
 μίο]ι πόσας δέσμας παρείληφες 
 
 5 καὶ Ofels αὐτὰς εἰς τόπον ἀσ- 
 φαλῶς ἵνα τῇ ἀναβάσει αὐτὰς 
 ἀξωμεν. παράδος δέ τινι 
 τῶν φίλων ἀριθμῷ αὐτὰς ἵνα 
 πάλιν φ[ΐ)λος ἡμεῖν παραδοῖ 
 
 ΙΟ ἀσφ[αλῶς, καὶ ἐάν τι δύνῃ 
 σὺ ἔϊ. . . ναί μοι δὸς epyact- 
 απο; Joa ἐμὲ ἠγορακέναι 
 παρίὰ ... ον τὴν χιλίαν δέσμην 
 (δραχμῶν) δ εκάπ]εντε. μὴ ἀμελήσῃς. 
 
 15 ἔρρωσο. 
 (ἔτους) kn [Καίσαρος Παῦνι a. 
 
 On the verso 
 PavoT@ [...... Ἰετενν. ( ) εἰς Νέκλη. 
 
 ‘Antas to Faustus, many greetings. Take over from Pothus the reeds all together, 
 and send me word how many bundles you have received, and put them in a safe place 
 in order that we may take them on the journey up. Deliver a certain number of them 
 to one of our friends in order that a friend may deliver them to me safely, and if you can 
 ... give your attention to it... I have bought from (Pothus?) the 1ooo bundles for 
 15 drachmae. Don’t forget. Good-bye. The 28th year of Caesar, Pauni τ. (Addressed) 
 To Faustus... at Nekle.’ 
 
242 
 
 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 748. LETTER TO A FRIEND. 
 
 21:5 Χ 17°] CM. 
 
 A letter in two columns, of which the first is much broken. 
 part is concerned with the explanation of the writer’s reasons for sending 
 Damas, whom he recommends to his friend’s good offices. 
 
 17 
 
 20 
 
 25 
 
 30 
 
 35 
 
 Col. 1. 
 
 Parts of 16 lines, 
 1 θέλω δέ ce καὶ τὸν Καίσαρος 
 
 ] ἀναγνοῦναι, δεῖ γάρ σε 
 
 Coban 
 εἰ καὶ π[ρ]ὸς ἄλλους εἶχον πρᾶγμα 
 βοηθὸν αὐτοῦ γ[ε]νέσθαι διὰ ἣν 
 ἔχομε(ν) πρὸς ἑατοὺς φιλίαν. καὶ 
 γὰρ ἐγὼ ὅλος διαπονἰ οἱῦμαι εἰ “Ελε- 
 νος χαλκοὺς ἀπόλεϊσ]εν, παραγενομίένου) 
 γὰρ Aaparos εἰς ᾿ἀλεξάνδρειαν ἤλ- 
 θαμεν ἐπὶ ᾿Επαφρόδειτον καὶ εὑρέ- 
 θη μήτε εἰληφὼς μήτε δεδωκά(9). 
 ὥστ᾽ ἂν τοῦτό σε θέλω γεινώσκειν 
 ὅτι ἐγὼ αὐτῷ διαστολὰς δεδώκειν  , 
 τὸ βαδίσαι εἰς Τακόνα χάριν τῶν ἐκ- 
 φορίων καὶ τὰ νῦν ἐπειπέπομφα 
 αὐτὸν πάντα συνλέξαι καὶ περὶ πάν- 
 Tov αὐτῷ τὴν ἐπιτροπὴν δέδωκα. 
 ἐν οἷς ἐὰν σοῦ προσδεῆται συνπροσ- 
 γενέσθαι αὐτῶι ὡς ἀνθομολογη(σομένῳ) 
 ὑπέρ σου οὕτως ὡς ὑπί(έρ) μου. ἐν τῷ δέ 
 με περισπᾶσθαι οὐκ ἠδυνάσθην 
 συντυχεῖν ᾿ἡπολλα(νίῳ) τῷ Διβικῷ ἵνα 
 
 αὐτῷ αὐτὰ ταῦτα ὑποδίξω. καὶ σὺ 
 
 BuGe bate 
 
 The greater 
 
744, PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE 243 
 
 δὲ ὑπὲρ ὧν ἐὰν θέλῃς γράφε μοι Kal ἀνό- 
 7 ~ 7 , v4 
 40 κνως ποήσω, Aapds γάρ μοι ἀνθωμολ(ογήσατο) 
 4 “ XN 2 Ν Ν 
 πάντα. καλῶς δὲ γέγονεν τὸ ταχὺ 
 ες b] δεν ς 7 - 
 αὐτὸν ἐλθεῖν, ὑφηγήσεται γάρ σοι. 
 [clearo(d) ἐπιμε(λοῦ) ἵν᾿ ὑγι(αίνῃς). ἐπισκοπί(οῦ) τοὺς σοὺς πάντε(ς). 
 ἔρρωσο. (ἔτους) KO Καίσαρος Paar) ς. 
 
 20. ν Οἱ nv corr. 22. 1. ὅλως. 23. 1. dadeloler. 43. 1. mdvra(s). 
 
 ‘,..I wish you and the... of Caesar to read this (?), for although I (Ὁ) have had trouble 
 with others you must assist him for the sake of our friendship. I am quite upset at 
 Helenos’ loss of the money; for when Damas arrived at Alexandria we came to 
 Epaphroditus, and it was discovered that he had neither received nor paid anything. 
 I wish you therefore to know this that I had given him orders to go to Takona for 
 the rents, and now I have dispatched him to collect them all and have entrusted to him 
 the care of the whole matter. Whatever service he may require from you, stand by him, 
 as he will agree in everything for you just as for me. Owing to my worries I was unable 
 to meet Apollonius the Libyan in order to inform him of this. Write to me yourself about 
 anything you want, and I will do it without hesitation; for Damas has agreed in everything 
 with me. It is well for him to come quickly, for he will instruct you. Take care of 
 yourself so that you may remain in good health. Look after all your household. 
 Good-bye. The 29th year of Caesar, Phaophi 6.’ 
 
 18. Some word like οἰκονόμον is probably to be supplied at the beginning. 
 1g. εἶχον whether first singular or third plural is difficult ; εἶχες would be expected. 
 34. ἀνθομολογη(σομένῳ) : cf. P. Tebt. 21. 6, P. Par. 42. 7. 
 
 744. LETTER OF ILARION. 
 25X14°7 cm. B.C. 1. 
 
 A letter from a man who had gone to Alexandria, addressed to his sister 
 (who was no doubt his wife), and to two other women, regarding certain domestic 
 matters. A curious injunction occurs in 1]. g-1o. 
 
 "Trapioviat “Adis τῆι ἀδελφῆι πλεῖστα χαΐ- 
 ρειν καὶ Βεροῦτι τῇ κυρίᾳ μου καὶ Amoddo- 
 νάριν. γίνωσκε ὡς ἔτι καὶ νῦν ἐν ᾿Αλεξαν- 
 dpe(ia (ὄσμεν: μὴ ἀγωνιᾷς ἐὰν ὅλως εἰσ- 
 5 πορεύονται, ἐγὼ ἐν Are~avdpe(i\a μένω. 
 R23 
 
244 THE /OXVYRHYNCHUS PAPYRL 
 
 ἐρωτῶ σε Kal παρακαλῷ σε ἐπιμελή- 
 
 Ont) τῷ παιδίῳ καὶ ἐὰν εὐθὺς ὀψώνι 
 ον λάβωμεν ἀποστελῶ σε ἄνω. ἐὰν 
 
 πολλαπολλων τέκῃς ἐὰν ἦν ἄρσε- 
 
 10 vov ἄφες, ἐὰν ἦν θήλεα ἔκβαλε. 
 εἴρηκας δὲ ᾿Αφροδισιᾶτι ὅτι μή με 
 ἐπιλάθης: πῶς δύναμαΐ σε ἐπι- 
 λαθεῖν; ἐρωτῶ σε οὖν ἵνα μὴ ἀγω- 
 νιάσῃς. 
 
 15 (ἔτους) KO Καίσαρος Παῦνι xy. 
 
 On the verso 
 
 ᾿Ιλαρίων Ἄλιτι ἀπόδος. 
 
 2. 1. ᾿Απολλωναρίῳ. 8. 1. σοι. 11. δὲ above the line. 
 
 ‘Tlarion to Alis his sister, many greetings, and to my dear Berous and Apollonarion. 
 Know that I am still even now at Alexandria; and do not worry if they come back 
 altogether (?), but I remain at Alexandria, 1 urge and entreat you to be careful of the 
 child, and if I receive a present soon I will send it up to you. If (Apollonarion?) bears 
 offspring, if it is a male let it be, if a female expose it. You told Aphrodisias ‘ Don’t 
 forget me.” How can I forget you? I urge you therefore not to worry. The 29th year 
 of Caesar, Pauni 23. (Addressed.) Deliver from Ilarion to Alis.’ 
 
 8-10. ἐὰν πολλαπολλων τέκῃς is very obscure. If the second person τέκῃς is right, this 
 passage must refer to the exposure of a female infant. But πολλά would be most extra- 
 ordinary, apart from the difficulty of constructing πολλῶν, If τέκῃς is altered to τέκῃ we 
 might suppose that an animal was the subject and divide πολλ(ὰ) ᾿Απόλλων ; but ᾿Απόλλων 
 is not a likely name for an animal. Perhaps πολλαπολλων conceals ᾿Απολλωνάριον (cf. 1. 2) ; 
 for the use of the second person cf. e.g. 295. 7. 
 
 745. Letrer to Gaius RustIus. 
 ΠῚ X 18-8 cm. About A.D. I. 
 
 Conclusion of a letter, chiefly concerned with money matters. The writer. 
 had evidently been in financial difficulties, and was afraid of their recurrence ; 
 but the loss of the beginning of the letter makes the transactions under discussion 
 rather obscure. The addressee has a Roman name, 
 
745. PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE 245 
 
 ἀδελφῆς plov olivov κεράμια ἑξήϊκοντ]α [πέϊντε καὶ δραχ[μὰς δέϊκα τ[ὸ]ν 
 δὲ οἶνον ἠγόρασας ἐκ (δραχμῶν) ἕξ, ὑπὲρ ὧν καὶ ἔθου χειρόγραφον [διὰ 
 ᾿4ρ]τεμᾶτός 
 
 ‘pot wept τοῦ αὐτὸν Τὸν ΑΥ̓Τὰν ἀποστήσειν διὰ τὸ Καὶ [. 1. eee eee Ἰκέναι 
 
 ὡς καὶ ὑπέσχου διὰ τοῦ πολειτάρχου Θεοφίλου, μ[ὴ . .Ἱνε[.] . η[. .Jva ἄνω- 
 5 θεν γείνηται πάντα καὶ πάλιν ἑατοὺς ἀνασκευάζωμεϊν] μὴ οὔσης 
 
 χρήας. οὐκ οἶδας γὰρ πῶς μοι ἐχρήσατο ἐν ᾽Οξυρύγχοις οὐχ ὡς λύσαζφνγτι 
 
 GAN ὥς τινί ποτε ἀποστερητῆι μὴ ἀποδεδωκότι. ἐρωτῶ οὖν σε 
 
 μὴ ἄλλως ποῆσαι, οἶδα δὲ ὅτι πάντα καλῶς ποήσεις" οὐ θέλω 
 
 γὰρ ἀμφισβήτησιν πρὸς σὲ ἔχειν φίλον pov ὄϊν]τα: ἀϊσπάζου πάντας 
 
 Ν Ἁ \ “΄“ ) ? ae e », w 
 10 τοὺς σοὺς καὶ σεαυτοῦ ἐπιμέλου LY ὑγιαίνῃς. ἐρρῶώσο. 
 
 On the verso 
 Taio. “ Ῥουστίωι Ϊ 
 
 6. υ of οὐκ corr. from «. 
 
 ‘,.. from my sister 65 jars of wine and ro drachmae, and you bought the wine at 
 6 drachmae, for which you drew me up a bond through Artemas that the said Antas 
 would make the repayment because you had...as you promised through the politarch 
 Theophilus, in order that everything may not be completely ... and we go bankrupt again . 
 without any necessity. You don’t know how he treated me at Oxyrhynchus(?), not like 
 a man who had paid but like a defrauder and a debtor. I ask you therefore not to do 
 otherwise ; but I know that you will do everything well. I do not want to have any 
 dispute with you, as you are my friend. Salute all your household, and take care of your 
 health. Good-bye. (Addressed) To Gaius Rustius...’ 
 
 4. πολειτάρχου : πολειτάρχαι are known at Thessalonica from Acts xvii. 6 and C.I.G. 
 1967, but the title is new in Egyptian papyri. 
 
 The mutilated word before ἄνωθεν is most likely a perfect participle; the letter before 
 ἡ seems to be A, a, or τ. 
 
 6. ἐν ᾿Οξυρύγχοις: a village ᾿Οξύρυγχα is known in the Faytm but not in the 
 Oxyrhynchite nome, and it is difficult to believe that the metropolis is not here meant, 
 though ᾿Οξυρύγχων or ’Ogupuyxirév πόλις is the normal form, The sentence οὐκ ofdas .,. 
 ἀποδεδωκότι may be interrogative. 
 
246 THE OXYRHYNCHUS. PAPYRI 
 
 746. LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION. 
 Vie a Ris ee Soke Α.Ὁ. £6; 
 
 A letter from Theon to his brother Heraclides, a basilicogrammateus, 
 introducing the bearer, Hermophilus. Theon is perhaps the same as the writer 
 of 292, a similar letter of recommendation addressed to the dioecetes on behalf 
 of a brother named Heraclides. Cf. also 787. 
 
 Θέων ‘“Hpakreidne τῶι ἀδελφῶι 
 πλεῖστα χαίρειν καὶ ὑγιαίνειν. 
 ‘“Eppopiros (6) ἀποδ[ι]δούς σοι τὴν 
 ἐπιστολήν [ἐ]στίι .. [. .] . κί. Jue. φί:Ἰηρι 
 5 [Ἰερίου, καὶ ἠρώτησέν με γράψαι σοι. 
 [πἸ]ροφέρεται ἔχειν πραγμάτιον 
 [ἐν τῇ] Κερκεμούνι. τοῦτο οὖν ἐάν 
 σοι φα[ΐνηται σπουδάσεις κατὰ τὸ 
 δίκαιον. τὰ δ᾽ ἄλλα σεαυτοῦ ἐπιμελοῦ 
 10 iy ὑγιαίνῃς. 
 ἔρρωσο. 
 (ἔτους) γ Τιβερίου Καίσαρος Σεβαστοῦ Φαῶφι y. 
 On the verso 
 ᾿ἩἩρακλείδηι Ba(oiixd:) γρ(αμματεῖ) ᾽Ο ξυ(ρυγχίτου) υνοπί(ολίτου). 
 
 ‘Theon to Heraclides his brother, many greetings and wishes for good health. 
 Hermophilus the bearer of this letter is (the friend or relative) of . . erius, and asked me 
 to write to you. Hermophilus declares that he has business at Kerkemounis. Please 
 therefore further him in this matter, as is just. For the rest take care of yourself that you 
 may remain in good health. Good-bye. The 3rd year of Tiberius Caesar Augustus, 
 Phaophi 3. (Addressed) To Heraclides, basilicogrammateus of the Oxyrhynchite and 
 Cynopolite nomes.’ 
 
 4. The letters Ἰστί are on a separate fragment, the position of which is doubtful. 
 
 13. There seems to be an ellipse of καί after ’O&v(pvyxirov), though the fact that Ὁ 
 a basilicogrammateus should have more than one nome under his jurisdiction is 
 remarkable. 
 
747. PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE 247 
 
 747. INVITATION TO A FEAST. 
 51 X 7:3 cm. Late second or third century. 
 An invitation to a feast given by a cavalry officer ; cf. 110 and 528. 
 
 Καλεῖ σε ὁ (Sexddap)x(os) εἰς τὴν ἕενί- 
 αν ἑαυτοῦ τῇ ς Καλάν- 
 
 dats ἀπὸ ὥρ(ας) η. 
 
 2. UT of εαυτου COrr. from Vv. 
 
 ‘The decurion invites you to his party on the sixth day before the Calends at eight 
 o'clock.’ 
 
V. COLLATIONS OF HOMERIC BPRAGMENTS 
 
 (The collations of 71. i-xii and the Odyssey are with the text of Ludwich, those 
 of //. xiii-xxiv with that of La Roche.) 
 
 (a) Lhad. 
 
 748. 16:1x6.6 cm. Ends of i. 107-116, with occasional stops and elision- 
 marks. τοῦ οἸυδίε] τελεσσας. 113 Κἰίλυταιϊμηστρηςς Third century, written 
 in sloping oval uncials of good size. , 
 
 749. I03x1ocm. Ends of i. 160-176 from the bottom of a column. Second 
 century, written in heavy round uncials. 
 
 750. 8x63 cm. Parts of ii. 57-73. 62 τ]οσσσία. 63 εμεθ]ες. 65 elkeAeve. 
 Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. 
 
 751. 19:6x9:2cm. Part of a column containing iil. 30-55, with numerous stops 
 and accents, and several corrections (probably by a second hand). 37 wos. 
 40 οφε͵λος. First o of ἄγονος above an a crossed out. 47 ayeupals corrected 
 from eyeipeifs. 48 y of avnyes above the line. 50 ποληϊ corr. from πολιη. 
 51 κατηφείη. 53 ]}..Πφωτος. ς of exes above the line. 54 ov of χράισμοι 
 above ῃ crossed out. Late second or third century, written in a neat 
 uncial hand of the oval type. 
 
 752. 11x8cm. Beginnings of iv. 87-96, with numerous stops, breathings and 
 accents. 93 The first hand had 7 p aly μοι; a second hand seems to have 
 corrected v and has added δε above μοι. Third century, written in sloping 
 oval uncials, 
 
 753. 19:2x6-4cm. On the recto part of a second or third century account. 
 On the verso parts of iv. 364-398, with numerous stops, breathings and 
 accents. 369 is omitted, as in A. 378 eotparowr||].]]@[. 381 πὰρ aifova. 
 382 ὥὦχοντο ιδε Corr. to wxovr ηδῖε (Ὁ). 387 € of ewy above the line. Third 
 century, written in sloping oval uncials. 
 
 754. 55x25 cm. On the recto ends of 7 lines of a document mentioning 
 a Cyuoupy(ds). First century. On the verso a few letters from iv. 532-5309. 
 535 πεδεϊμιχθη. First century, written in a good-sized irregular uncial hand. 
 
 755. 19x6cm. On the recto part of a document in a cursive hand of the 
 early part of the third century. On the verso a few letters from the ends 
 
V, COLLATIONS OF HOMERIC FRAGMENTS 249 
 
 of v. 130-173, forming a complete column, with numerous stops, accents, 
 breathings, and marks of elision and quantity (all probably added later). 
 134 εἰμ ε]͵ίχθη. 151 e€evalpigev. 153 τ of λυγρωι added by a second hand. 
 Third century, written in an upright hand of the oval type. 
 
 756. 68x 82cm. Fragment of the bottom of a leaf from a book, containing 
 on the recto the ends of v. 324-334, and on the verso parts of 379-390, 
 with elision-marks. 332 kvpaveovoat. 382 rerlAart. 384 Ay of adyel corr. 
 388 θ of ενθ added above the line(?). απολυτο. 390 η of eEnyyetAey above a, 
 which is crossed through, € having been also corrected. Late third or 
 fourth century, written in a semi-uncial hand. 
 
 757. 4:2x3 cm. Parts of v. 578-586. 582 ey ὃ. First century, written in 
 
 round uncials. 
 
 758. 9:6x11-4cm. v. 583-596, the lines being nearly complete, from the top 
 of a column, with stops, breathings, accents and elision-marks. 583 ededfavra. 
 586 δε και. 587 εἰστῆκει. 588 ἱππων... πεσὸν ev. Late second or third 
 century, written in a neat uncial hand of the oval type. 
 
 759. 12:7x2-9 cm. A few letters from the ends of v. 662-682, from the end 
 of a column, with stops (high and low point) and accents. 667 apldis 
 ἐποντίες, confirming the conjecture of Brandreth. Third century, written in 
 a neat upright uncial hand of the oval type. 
 
 760. Fr. (4) 7:3x 4:9 cm. Two fragments, the first containing a few letters 
 from the beginnings of v. 715-718, the second parts of 720-729. 724 ε of 
 χρυσεη above the line. First century, written in round upright uncials. 
 
 761. 21x11cm. On the recto part of an effaced document. On the verso 
 vi. 147 and 148, and, after a lacuna which may have contained 2 lines, 
 parts of ll. 147 and 149 and another line, the whole being a writing 
 exercise. 148 τηλεθωσα. Late first century B.C., written in a large semi- 
 uncial hand. 
 
 762. 19:8x8-5 cm. On the recto ends of lines of a list of persons, written 
 in a cursive hand in the late second or early third century. On the verso 
 the latter parts of vii. 1-35, forming a complete column. 5 edarnow. τό 
 δυντο. 30 μαχησίομεθ. 31 omitted. Third century, written in small upright 
 uncials. 
 
 763. 24:4x10cm. Part of a leaf from a book, containing on the recto the 
 latter portions of vii. 68-101, and on the verso the earlier portions of bQ-1 34, 
 with stops, breathings and accents. 72 v of ποντοποροισιν added by a second 
 hand. 73 Ππαναχαιων. 77 « of έληι added above the line by a second hand. 
 112 Final « of Πριαμιδηι added above the line by a second hand. τὸν τε 
 τρομίεουσι (a new reading; cf. ὑποτρομέουσι in Vindob. 61). 113 Αχιλλεὺυς. 
 
 \o ok: ιν: Wary 
 
250 THE OXVYRHYNCHUS FPARYVIT 
 
 133 t of wxvpowt added above the line Be a second hand. Third century, 
 written in good-sized oval uncials. | : 
 
 164. 9:6x2-8 cm. A few letters from the beginnings of viii. 109-122, with 
 stops, breathings and accents. Third century, written in oval uncials. 
 
 765. 81x54 cm. Ends of ix. 320-333, with stops, breathings and accents 
 (oxytones having a grave accent on the final syllable). 323 First u of 
 προφερηισι added above the line. 324 δέ τέ. 325 v Of ιαυον above AA crossed 
 out. Third century, written in oval uncials. 
 
 766. 5:8x58cm. A few letters from the ends of x. 542-547, from the bottom 
 of a column, with occasional accents. Third century, written in eee 
 oval uncials. 
 
 767. 66x43 cm. A few letters from the ends of xi. 555-561, with stops. 
 Second century, written in good-sized round uncials. 
 
 768. 14X12:9 cm. Fragment from the top of a column, containing parts of 
 xi. 736-764. 739 Αυϊγ)ειδαο. 740 ξ]ανθίη)ν [Ἰναϊμη δίη)ν. 750 amadaga. 755 
 [aluros. 756 Βουβρ[ασ)ου. 757 Adeorov]. 758 Παλλας Αθηνη. 760 Βουβρασιου. 
 Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. 
 
 769. Fr. (a) 4.5x31 cm. Two fragments containing a few letters from 
 xiii. 308-317 and 342-347, with accents. 316 omitted. 344 γηθησΊίειε A.[ 
 with ν id| above A. Late second or third century, written in a neat uncial 
 hand of the oval type. 
 
 770. 47x79 cm. A few letters from the ends of xiii. 372-377 and the 
 beginnings of 405-413, with stops, breathings and accents. 372 πηϊξεν. 
 374 In the margin’ erawi{ecowat and below it αἰνιξομζαι, referring to the 
 variants aivigoua and αἰνίξομαι ; cf. Schol. A αἰνίζομ᾽ " φέρεται καὶ διὰ τοῦ € 
 αἰνίξομαι ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐπαινέσομαι. Ζηνόδοτος αἰνίσσομαι. 410 In the margin 
 between this and 1. 411 is a critical sign shaped like ὃ. Second century, 
 written in round upright uncials. 
 
 771. 14x7-8 cm. On the recto beginnings of xv. 736-746, with occasional 
 breathings and accents. 740 καικλιμίενοι. 742 at and first of μαιμωων 
 above ε and o. 744 ι of κηλειω added later (by a second hand?). At 
 the end a.coronis and the title in large letters IAvad[os 0. Late second or 
 early third century, written in handsome good-sized uncials of the oval 
 type. On the verso 12 nearly complete lines of a money-account in 
 third century cursive. 
 
 772. 102x59cm. Ends of xvii. 353-373, with stops, breathings and accents. 
 361 αγ]χηστινίοι. 363 av αἰμωτιι 369 Final « of Μενοιτιαδηι added above 
 the line. 371 α of aOep corr. from ε. Second or third century, written 
 in a rather small uncial hand. 
 
V. COLLATIONS OF HOMERIC FRAGMENTS 251 
 
 (ὦ) Odyssey. 
 
 773. Height of roll 24-4 cm. Seven fragments from four columns of a MS. 
 of ii, containing a few letters from 304-312, 339-357 (top of a column), 
 ends of 362-374 (top of a column), and parts of 386-410 (a whole column), 
 with stops (high and middle point) and occasional accents. 341 above 
 exovres is \Ou[...]o. 368 δασίωνται. 369 v of οὐδε corr. 372 (end of the line) 
 Ἰπὴ or 7. τη. 401 [ει]δομενη[ ν]ἢ. 407 omitted. 408 ε of θεινι added above 
 the line by a second hand. ἀΑχ]αιοΐυς. Second century, written in very 
 large heavy uncials (cf. 661), the letters measuring 5 mm. in height. 
 
 774. 45x7-5 cm. Parts of iii. 226-231. 227 eimles, the ε being added by 
 a second hand above a crossed through. 228 eos εἶ, the s being corrected 
 from .(?). Third century, written in good-sized sloping oval uncials. 
 
 775. 8:4x41 cm. Parts of iv. 388-400 from the bottom of a column, with 
 occasional breathings and accents. 396 a of αλεηΐται above ἡ crossed 
 through. 399 omitted. Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. 
 
 776. 6:2x2-4 cm. A few letters from iv. 520-529 from the bottom of a 
 column, with occasional accents. First or early second century, written 
 in round uncials. 
 
 777. 12:-2x8-8cm. Part of the lower portion of a leaf of a book, containing 
 on the recto the beginnings of v. 7-17 and on the verso the ends of 34-44, 
 with stops, breathings and accents. Fourth century, written in good-sized 
 sloping oval uncials, in brown ink. 
 
 778. 20:6x17-2 cm. On the recto a nearly complete column containing 
 x. 26-50, with stops (high, middle and low point). 27 Second ι of 
 αφραδιηισιν added above the line; similarly final ὁ of δεκατηι in 29, τωι and 
 αλλωι in 32. 31 emeAAaBe. 34 επεσσι. 38 εσσι. 42 νεισομεθα. 46 Bovdn 
 te. Late second or third century, written in handsome round upright 
 uncials. On the verso parts of the last 7 lines of a letter in a cursive hand 
 of the late third century. 
 
 7179. 62x96cm. x. 124-130 from the top of a column, the lines being nearly 
 complete, with breathings and accents. Late second or third century, 
 written in a clear cursive hand. 
 
 780. 17:7x85 cm. A few letters from the ends of xi. 471-493, and the 
 earlier portions of 523-545, from the bottoms of columns, with stops and 
 occasional accents. 533 δη Τρώεσσι with wy (in a second hand) above εσσι. 
 539 βιβῶσα. 544 φΦ of νοσφιν above τ crossed out. αφειστηκει. 545 μιν 
 with ε above . added by a second hand. Second century (?), written in 
 an uncial hand of the oval type and archaic appearance, = being formed =. 
 
252 IEE LORY Ri VNC US VAL ie, 
 
 781. 6x38 cm. Fragment of a leaf from a book, containing on the recto 
 parts of xvi. 243-256, and on the verso the ends of 288-301, with stops, 
 breathings and accents (in lighter ink). 293 δὲ daira. 295 ὃ of δουρε corr. 
 Third century, written in rather small sloping oval uncials. 
 
 782. 7-3x5-3cm. Fragment of the bottom of a leaf of a book containing 
 on the verso parts of xvii. 137-148, and on the recto ends of 182-193, with 
 stops and accents (in lighter ink). 187 γενέσθαι. Third century, written in 
 rather small sloping oval uncials. 
 
 783. I1-7x4-4cm. Ends of xvii: 410-428, with stops. 417 aAAw. Late first 
 century B.C., written in good-sized irregular uncials. 
 
VI. DESCRIPTIONS OF MISCELLANEOUS 
 DOCUMENTS 
 
 784, Fourteen fragments of a document containing on both sides several 
 columns, the recto consisting for the most part of lists of persons, the verso 
 of a private account (continued on the recto), which mentions καὶ προσ΄ (i. 6. 
 προσγίνονται) τιμῆ(ς) (πυροῦ) (ἡμίσους) τοῦ πεπραμένου Ardvp Ap (1.6. 1100 copper 
 drachmae), [λ]ύτρα ἱερῶν ἐγ Μούχεω(ς) φ, ἰχθυδίου x, ζύτους ι, φῶν β κε, ἐλαίου 
 κο(τύλης) a ρπ, οἴνου κ(εραμίων) β (τάλαντον) a, and payments for Ἑλληνικῶν. 
 A conversion of silver into copper drachmae occurs, τιμῆ(ς) ἀργυ(ρίου) (dpax- 
 μῶν) ἡ ὑπ(ὲρ) τοῦ Tarpd(s) By (a ratio of 3375: 1, which is unusually low; 
 ΠῚ hevtsl..p..500,), 7 Hirst century B: Ὁ. 
 
 785. 14:7 ΧῸ cm. An undertaking by a surety to produce a certain individual 
 who had been committed to his charge; cf. 259. After the first 5 lines, 
 which seem to have contained the address but are much broken, the 
 papyrus concludes ὁμολο(γῶ) παρε[ιληφέναι Ξένωνα “Hpaxdéovs παρὰ σοῦ ov 
 καὶ παρέξομαι ἐν τῶι ἐμφανεῖ ἐκτὸς ἱεροῦ βωμοῦ τεμένους πάσης σκέπης. About 
 ΕΠ. 12 lines in all, 
 
 786. 14:3x8-4cm. Conclusion of a census-return on oath, written by Aristion 
 and Didymus on Tubi 30 of the third year of Hadrian (A.D. 119), the 
 portion preserved corresponding to 480. 7 544. προγεγραμμένων (cf. 480. 15) 
 is apparently written dyey. Below the signatures in two different hands 
 are official dockets κατεχ(ωρίσθη) λαογρ(άφοις) Nd(rov) Apd(uov) xpd(vos) ὁ 
 αὐ(τός), and κατεχω(ρίσθη) λαογρ(άφοις) “[π(πέων) Παρε(μβολῆς) xpd(vos) ὁ αὐ(τός). 
 20 lines, which are complete except the first. 
 
 787. 19:9x13-3cm. Concluding part of a letter of recommendation (cf. 746), 
 The first 5 lines are ὡς ἔστιν ἡμέτερος. ἐρωτῶ σε οὖν ἔχειν αὐτὸν συνεσταμένον 
 καὶ ἐν οἷς ἐάν σοι προσέρχηται [ποι] ἐκ δικαίου εἰς τὴν ἐϊμ]ὴν καταλογὴν ποιήσεις 
 αὐτῶι. [oly δὲ ὑπὲρ ὧν ἐὰν αἱρῇ γράφε. Dated in the second year of Tiberius, 
 Pharmouthi 11 (A.D. 16). 9 lines. 
 
 1 The problems of Ptolemaic copper coinage have recently been discussed by Hultsch in Adbhand, οἷ, 
 
 Konigl, Sachs. Ges. d. Wiss.,1903. We regret to be compelled to observe that owing to the adoption 
 
 of Revillout’s long exploded theories based on demotic, and the failure to appreciate the evidence of the 
 
 Tebtunis papyri with the arguments brought against the 120: 1 ratio in our App, ii to that volume, the 
 article seems to us a step backwards rather than forwards. 
 
254 THE OXY RAYVYNGHOS ΥΤΟΣ 
 
 788. 11-7x10cm. On both recto and verso parts of two columns of a private 
 account in copper drachmae. A conversion of silver into copper (δραχμαὶ) ὃ 
 "ATyp (a ratio of 485 : 1) occurs ; among the other items are ἀρταβῶν παρηί ) 
 ᾽Α, αἰτητῆι p, τέλος οἴνου Bu, μεμβράδος (‘anchovy’)|[. Early first century B.C. 
 In Col. i of the recto the first 8 lines are complete, the rest being imperfect 
 throughout. 7 
 
 789. 97x13 cm. Part of a letter. Lines 2-9 ἔδωκά σοι ἐν Ὀ ξυρ[ὐ(γχω»)) 
 Διονυσίον Paviov ἐπιστολείδιον κεχαραγμέ(νον) εἰς 16 pyvd(s) Καισαρείου τοῦ 
 διελθόντος ι (ἔτους) περὶ τοῦ σε δοῦναί μοι ἴσας ὧν καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ Διονύ(σιος) ἔσχεν 
 παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ (πυροῦ) (ἀρταβῶν) 68’ χ(οινίκων) >. The tenth year probably refers 
 to Tiberius or Claudius. 11 lines. 
 
 790. 8-7x12:8cm. Beginnings of ὃ lines of an official letter from Dionysius 
 to Ptolemaeus enclosing a copy of another letter. ἐπιστάται τῶν ἱππάρχων 
 are mentioned. Late second century B.C. Written across the fibres. On 
 the verso beginnings of 6 more lines in a different hand. 
 
 791. 14:7x6cm. Letter from Didymus to his brother Apollonius, beginning 
 ἐπιμέμνησμαι ᾿Αμμωνίῳ τῶι ἀδελφῷ περὶ ἀργυ(ρίου) (δραχμῶν) τεσσαράκοντα ὀκτὼ 
 εἰς συναγορασμ(ὸν) ἐρίων... Addressed on the verso ᾿Απολλωνίωι. About 
 A.D. 1. Incomplete, the end being lost. 12 lines. 
 
 792. 8-4x27-2.cm. On the recto an incomplete account of payments of wheat 
 to various persons, containing 19 lines. On the verso another practically 
 complete account of receipts and payments, mentioning λιτο[υἹργο(ῖς) pp, 
 Φωσφόρῳ καὶ τῷ ἄλλῳ 2 k, vat(Aov) πορε(ίων) ὃ Z n, Φωσφόρῳ καὶ αὖ... υζί ) εἰς 
 ἐφόδ(ια ) Φ μι 4 perhaps means δραχμαί. 13 lines. The writing on the 
 recto is across the fibres, that on the verso along them. First century B.C. 
 
 798. 24x 11-5cm. Acknowledgement of payments of wheat εἰς τὸ δημόσιον by 
 various persons ἀπὸ διαστολ(ῆς) of other persons. Dated in the seventh 
 year of Domitian, Caesarius 16 (A.D. 88). Nearly complete. 18 lines. 
 
 794. 21-2x156cm. Conclusion of a contract for the sale of If, arourae of 
 catoecic land, with the signatures, which are nearly complete, and following 
 the same formula as 504. The seller was Asclepiades, the buyer a woman 
 called Σιντότις (Ὁ) or Σιντότον, and the price 500 drachmae of silver. The 
 land was περὶ ©. θῶθιν ἐκ τοῦ Εὔφρωνος ada κλήρου (sic). Written in the fifth 
 year of Domitian (A.D. 85-6). 46 lines. 
 
 795. Fr. (4) 4-5x13-3cm. Two fragments of a marriage-contract dated in 
 the reign of Domitian (A. Ὁ. 81-96). The husband is called Heraclides, the 
 wife (?) Sarapous. Line 4 γ]αμετὴν φερνὴν προσφερομένην δαἰκτύλιον)] χρυσοῦν 
 τεταρτῶϊν (cf. 496. 6, note), and lower down Ἰτευμένην κατὰ τοὺς τῆς χώραϊς 
 νόμους occurs. Written across the fibres. Parts of 12 lines in all. — 
 
Bie DESCRIBE TIONS OF MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS 255 
 
 796. 3x83 cm. Parts of 7 lines from the beginning of a marriage-contract 
 written in the reign of Trajan (A.D. 98-117), mentioning ἐν παραφέρνοις 
 κλαλίων ἀργυρῶν ζεῦγος (?). For κλαλίον = κλανίον (‘bracelet’) cf. 114. 11. 
 Written across the fibres. 
 
 797. 55x10cm. On the recto an entry concerning the measurement of the 
 land of Thotsutaios, διάφορον σχοι(νισμοῦ) Θοτσυταῖος τοῦ “Qpov τῶν ἐν τῆι 
 ov( ν τῶν παί 1) ἀπὸ τοῦ Le τοῦ καὶ ιβ (ἔτους) περὶ κώ(μην) ... For διάφορον 
 σχοινισμοῦ cf. Ῥ. Tebt. I. p. 229. The reign is that of Cleopatra III and 
 Ptolemy Alexander (B.C. 103-2). 4 lines. On the verso 2 lines from the 
 beginning of a document mentioning Νεμέρα κω(μο)γγρ(αμματεύς). 
 
 798. 7-8x9-2cm. Conclusion of a letter, ending ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ ἀγοραστοῦ 
 πρὸς ταῦτα ἀποδοῦναι, ὡς δ᾽ ἂν παραγένωνται οἱ σιτολόγοι ἐπὶ THY παράληψιν τῶν 
 σιτικῶν ἀπομετρήσομεν ἅμα καὶ ταῦτα. ἔρρωσο. (ἔτους) ky Φαῶφι. The twenty- 
 third year probably refers to Epiphanes (B.c. 183). 8 lines. 
 
 799. 30:5x25 cm. One complete and one incomplete column of an account 
 of sums owed and interest upon them, beginning τῶν ἐν ᾿Αλεξανδρήᾳ ασσχηκε 
 (? 1. ἃ ἔσχηκε) χειρο O€wvo(s) ἐν πλοίῳ. Then follows a list of names and 
 amounts, e.g. Ταυρείνου καὶ Σενείθου (δραχμαὶ) τ τόκ(ου) ἕως Μεσορὴ (δραχμαὶ) of. 
 The second column is also concerned with loans; εἰς δανισμόν occurs. 
 About A.D. 1. 34 lines. 
 
 800. 18-7x12-5cm. Beginnings of 19 lines of an official document enclosing 
 
 a letter of Valerius Athenodorus. Lines 4-10 (which begin a new section, 
 as is indicated by the size of the initial letter) Καὶ διὰ Adyo(v) (δωδεκα)μήνου |, 
 ἐδηλώθη διαγεγράφθαι [, νομοῦ τούτου τὸν τρόπον τοῦτον |, ποταμοῦ τῷ ts (ἔτει) 
 ᾿Αντωνίνου Καίσαρος tod κυρίου, Φήλικος τοῦ ἡγεμονεύσαντος ἐργατεία ἐκ τῷϊν, 
 αἱρεθέντων ἐξ εὐσχημόνων ὑπὸ “HpaxiA..., προχρείας ἐκ τοῦ κυριακοῦ λόγου εἰς τὴν [. 
 Written about A. Ὁ. 153. 
 
 801]. 19:2x12-3cm. Fragment of a notification addressed to Euangelius also 
 called Sarapion, strategus, by Diogenes, enclosing an authorization to the 
 strategus from the archidicastes in answer to a petition by Diogenes. 
 Cf. 485 and 719. In the upper margin is a short note from the strategus 
 (cf. B. G. U. 578. 1) dated in the second year of Gaius Pescennius Niger 
 (A.D. 193). The letter of the archidicastes to the strategus is dated 
 Thoth 18 (probably of the same year). 35 lines, of which the ends are lost. 
 
 802. 7x7cm. Parts of 11 lines from the beginning of a contract, one of the 
 parties being called Σιμάριστος. Dated in the 1[.Jth year of Ptolemy 
 (Alexander the god) Philometor and Berenice, i.e. B.C. 101-95. On the 
 verso a docket. 
 
 809. 15x5cm. Fragment of an official letter or petition, containing 3 com- 
 
256 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
 
 plete and 3 incomplete lines, with traces of a preceding column. Lines 2-5 
 καὶ ἀπὸ ἐπιστατείας φ[υἹἱλακιτῶν ἀντὶ τῶν κατ᾽ ἔτος εἰς τὸ δημόσιον ὁμολογουμένων 
 διαγράφεσθαι (δραχμῶν) Τ᾿ ἀπῃτῆσθαι βιαιόϊτ]ερον τοὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ νομοῦ φύλακας 
 ὙΠΟ ΤΕ TOU |. μον .. καὶ] Πτολεμαίου τοῦ στρατηγοῦ... Late first century 
 B.C. On the verso parts of two columns of an account. 
 
 804. Width 9-9 cm. Horoscope dated in the twenty-seventh year of Au- 
 gustus, Phaophi 5 περὶ ὥρα(ν) γ τῆς ἡμέρα(ς) (Oct. 2(?) A.D. 4). The sun was 
 in Libra, the moon in Pisces, Saturn in Taurus, Jupiter in Cancer, Mars in 
 Virgo. Taurus was setting, and Aquarius at the nadir. After the astro- 
 nomical details the papyrus concludes ἔχει κινδύνους" φυλάσσου ἕως ἡμερῶ(ν) 
 μ χάριν τοῦ "Apews. Incomplete, being broken in the middle. 15 lines in all, 
 
 805. 6-6x7-6 cm. Conclusion of a letter written on Epeiph 20 of the fifth 
 year of Augustus (B.C. 25). Lines 2 sqq. ζητῶ γὰρ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους. ἐν δὲ 
 τοῖς ἐρχομένοις πλ[ο]οις καλαὶ φάσεις ἐλεύσονται παρ᾽ [ἐϊμοῦ, ἀξιῶ δὲ ἀντιφωνεῖν 
 [μ]οι πυκνότερον. ἀσπάζου πάντας τοὺς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν καὶ σεαυτῆς ἐπιμελοῦ ty’ ὑγιαίνῃς 
 εὐτυ(χοῦσα). ἔρρω(σο). ο lines. 
 
 806. 15:9*35:-4 cm. Account, in two columns, of expenditure of copper 
 money for various purposes in the tenth year (of Augustus, i. e. B,C. 21-0). 
 Among the items are ἱερεῦσι Oonpios A, Κεφαλᾷ χρυσοχόῳ To, Σαραπίωνι εἰς 
 πραγματήαν ’Ad, διὰ τῆς ᾿Ασκληπιάδου τραπέζης λάξοις (τάλαντον) a. Complete. 
 21 lines. 
 
 807. 16:8x21-I1cm. Fragment of an official list of sheep and goats belonging 
 to different persons at a village. Col. 1 contains the ends of 5 lines. 
 Col. ii has ὧν αὐτοῦ ἴδια π, aly(es) ὃ, καὶ ᾿Αρσινόης φορικὰ με, ᾿Αχορίνιος ἴδια μ 
 αἶγες y. / p&e αἶγες ζ. γίνεται τῆς κώμης πρό(βατα) 'Δσμα αἶγες τὰς, ὧν ᾿Αρσινόης 
 φορικ(ὰ) on. The sheep which were ᾿Αρσινόης φορικά as contrasted with 
 those that were private property seem to have been subject to a special 
 impost (φόρος), payable nominally to Arsinoé (i.e. Arsinoé Philadelphus 
 probably), but really of course to the State; cf. the ἀπόμοιρα in the Revenue 
 Papyrus. About A.D.1. On the verso part of an account. 
 
 808. Height 36 cm. A list of abstracts (διαστρώματα) of contracts for loan ; 
 cf, 274 and P. Oxy. 11. p. 176. One column, numbered at the top ρμε, is 
 practically complete, and there are parts of another in three separate 
 fragments. The first entry is [ἐν Παλώσει: ὁμολ(ογεῖ) ἽΔρπαλος “Ἕρμωνος 
 τοῦς Klee Cae ovs an’ ᾿Οξυ(ρύγχων) πόλεως Παυσίρει Πετσίριος ἀπὸ τῆ(ς) αὐ(τῆς). 
 κώμης Παλώσεως Θμο(ισεφὼ) τοπ(αρχίας) ἀπέχ(ειν) παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἀργυ(ρίου) (δραχμὰς) 
 σι κεφαλ(αίου) ἃς ἐδά(νεισεν) αὐτῶι διὰ τοῦ ἐν τῇ αὐ(τῇ) κώμῃ γραφίου τῷ ἐνεσ(τῶτι) 
 (ἔτει) μηνὶ Νερωνείωι Σεβαστῶι. (Second hand) ἠθέ(τισται) μη(νὶ) Νερωνείωι 
 Σεβαστῶι ιδ, ἀπόδ(οσις) A [μ]η(νὸς) Νερωνείου τοῦ ta (ἔτους), ενχί )) λελυ(μένη ?). 
 
VI, DESCRIPTIONS OF MISCELEANEOUS DOCUMENTS “257 
 
 A marginal note (probably by the second hand) has ]. ποχί ) ἐν ἀπο(γραφῇ) 
 u(érovs). The other entries refer to loans ἐν Σεφώι, ἐν Κεσμούχ(ει) or ἐν Τήει, 
 and follow the same formula with similar later additions. The month 
 after ἠθέ(τισται), (which is once written ἠθέτισ(ται)), is uniformly that in 
 which the contract was drawn up. θεὸς Κλαύδιος is mentioned, and the 
 papyrus was probably written in the reign of Nero (A.D. 54-68). 43 lines 
 in Col. i, besides the marginal notes. 
 
 809. 16-7x6-4cm. Ends of 22 lines from the beginning of a contract drawn 
 up before the agoranomi for the sale(?) of a female slave called Τεχωσοῦς. 
 Dated in the reign of Trajan (A.D. 98-117). , 
 
 810. 14:6x10 cm. Proposal (ἐπιδέχομαι μισθώσασθαι) addressed to Claudia 
 
 -  Ptolema by Dioscorus for the lease of 3 arourae of βασιλικὴ γῆ near Sinaru 
 in the κλῆρος of Xenon for the nineteenth year of Hadrian (A.D. 134-5). 
 The land, being ἐκ μέρους ἐν ἀβρόχου (1. -x@), was to be irrigated by the lessee 
 at his own expense and cultivated χόρτῳ εἰς κοπὴν καὶ θερινὴν ἐπινομήν 
 at the total rent of 120 drachmae, the δημόσια being paid by the lessor. 
 Cf. 780, the formula of which is almost identical. Nearly complete, but 
 broken at the bottom. Title on the verso. 27 lines. 
 
 811. 7:7x9-4 cm. 8 lines from the beginning of a letter from Πέλλις to 
 Ant/as ἢ] beginning καὶ τὸ πρῶτον éyplawa colt εὐχαριστῶν ᾿Ἑρμίππου (1. -πῳ) ὅτι 
 πάντα μοι ποεῖ εἰς τὴν σὴν καταλογήν (cf. 787), καὶ τὰ νῦν εἴ σοι φαίνεται γράψον 
 αὐτῷ... Address on the verso. About A.D. 1. 
 
 812. 10.2x8-3cm. Fragment of a letter containing in a postscript (l. 5) πεπί- 
 ασται Λοκρίων [, (1. 6) ρικαρις ὑπὸ Λουκίου (ὑπ. A. above the line) ἤκουσα yap 
 ὅϊτ]ι [, (1. 7) τὴν λωρῖκαν αὐτοῦ [. Dated in the twenty-fifth year of Augustus, 
 Athur (B.C. 5). ὃ lines. 
 
 818. 15x11-7 cm. Conclusion of a letter in which the writer requests that 
 a cargo of barley may be sent to him. About A.D. 1. 7 lines. 
 
 814. 21-5x11-6cm. Fragment of an account in two columns. Among the 
 entries are πακτωνίταις ... ἀπὸ OerABau..., Κῦνος Πτολεμαίου τῶν ἀπὸ Evepye- 
 tos... Written in the fourth year (probably of Tiberius, i.e. A.D. 17--8). 
 15 incomplete lines in Col. ii. 
 
 815. 27:-9x11-3cm. Fragment of an account containing names and sums of 
 money arranged under different dates, the beginnings of lines being lost. 
 The proper name Ὀνθονόβει (dative) occurs. About A.D. 1. το lines. 
 
 816. Fr. (az) 14:3x13:1 cm. Three fragments of an account containing names 
 and sums of money. ἧς ᾿Ισιδώρου καὶ ᾿Ιησοῦς occurs. 10 incomplete lines 
 in Fr. (2), On the verso part of another account mentioning the twenty- 
 fifth year (of Augustus, i.e. B.C. 6-5). 
 
 5 
 
258 THE OXYRAYNCHUS, PAPYART 
 
 817. 9:7x 20cm. 5 nearly complete lines from the top of a column containing 
 a list of names and sums of money, a larger and a smaller, the second being 
 probably interest, e.g. ].6( ) διὰ "Avrépwros Aoxpytiov Παχὼν β (δραχμαὶ) 
 pv (δραχμαὶ) η. The twenty-first year (of Augustus, i.e. B.C. 10-9) is men- 
 tioned. On the verso part of another account. 
 
 818. 68xg9cm. Ends of the first 7 lines of a contract dated in the thirty- 
 fourth year of Augustus (A.D. 4-5), written in a semi-uncial hand, 
 
 819. 8.6x10-6cm. Conclusion of a letter concerning the sale of wine or oil, 
 ending τὰ δὲ προκείμενα x(das) ὃ πεπρᾶσίσ θαι δι’ ἐμοῦ ἀνὰ δραχ(μὰς) πέντε, τὰ 
 κόρι(α ἢ) ἐκ δραχ(μῶν) ἐξ (τριωβόλου). About A.D. I, 6 lines. 
 
 820. 102x17-9cm. End ofa letter containing the date (twenty-seventh year 
 of Augustus, Tubi I[.|, i.e. B.C. 3) and a postscript of 7 lines, giving various 
 directions. 
 
 821. 11-562 cm. Ends of the first 9 lines of a letter to a daughter. About 
 AVDA 1: 
 
 822. 54x13 cm. Beginning of a letter from Lysimachus to his brother. 
 εὖ πράσσειν takes the place of χαίρειν. About A.D. I. 4 lines. 
 
 823. 24x10-2 cm. Fragment of the conclusion of a lease of land near 
 Μερμέρθ]αν Cf. 277. Dated in the twenty-fifth year of Augustus, Phaophi 
 (B.C. 6). Written on the verso, the recto being blank. 13 incomplete lines. 
 
 824. 4:8x2-5cm. Fragment containing parts of the first 10 lines of a contract 
 dated in the sole reign of Ptolemy (Alexander the god) Philometor 
 (B.C. 101-88). 
 
 825. 7: ‘8X 15-9 cm. Beginning of an account of which the headtogs is Ate 
 Kal ᾿Αμμωνίῳ καὶ τοῖς σὺν αὐτοῖς μισθωταῖς ξενικῆς πρακτορείας παρὰ Σ Σαραπίωνοϊς] 
 πραγματευτοῦ Μέμφεως M[eludlelirov. λόγος λήμματος καὶ ἀναλώμίαϊτος μηνῶν 
 τριῶν ἀπ[ὸ] Φαρμοῦθι ἕως Παῦνι τοῦ ε [(ἔτους)... The beginnings of lines of 
 a second column are preserved, containing a list of entries each commencing 
 with w(apa). On the importance of this papyrus for the ξενικὴ πρακτορεία 
 see 712. introd. Second century. On the verso in a different hand (9) 
 parts of the first 6 lines of a document mentioning the ἐγκτήσεων βιβλιο- 
 φυλάκιον, perhaps the draft of a declaration. 
 
 826. 9:5x11-9 cm. Fragment of the conclusion of a notice sent to some. 
 official, apparently an announcement of a death. Lines 1 sqq. Δίδυμ[ος] 
 Xapir.( ) γέρδιος [μετήλλαξε ὃ τὸν] βίον τῶι ἐνεστῶτι μηνὶ Τύβι τοῦ devrépo(v) 
 (καὶ) τριακο[σ]τοῦ ἔτους Καίσαρος. διὸ ἀξιῶν ἐὰν φαίνηται καταχωρισθῆναι τοῦτο 
 ΠΣ Ν, ἐν] τοῖς παρὰ σοὶ βιβλίοις... A.D. 4. 9 lines. On the verso the 
 beginning of an account. 
 
 827. 13-5x68cm. Part of a list of names. About A.D. 1. 18 lines. 
 
VI. DESCRIPTIONS OF MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS  -259 
 
 828. 5:3xiocm. Parts of 6 lines of a petition concerning the measurements 
 of a piece of land. Early first century B.c. On the verso parts of 6 much 
 effaced lines of another document. 
 
 829. 12:3x93cm. Part ofa letter from Σωγένης to his sister. About A.D. 1. 
 13 lines. 
 
 830. 15:3x5-6 cm. End of 17 lines of an official letter, enclosing other 
 documents. Phaophi 28 of the twenty-first year (of Philometor probably, 
 i.e. B.C. 155) is mentioned. Written across the fibres. On the verso part of 
 a line. 
 
 891. Fr.(a) 6:1x9-2 cm. Two fragments of a contract beginning ἔτους 
 [.... ἐν] Ὀξ(υρύγχων) πό(λει) τῆς OnBlald(os). ὁμολογεῖ Λεπτίνης . μώνακτος 
 Μακεδὼν τῶν Σωγγιψάριος πεζῶν Ἡρακλείδηϊι .... The sovereign is Ptolemy 
 Soter II, and the date therefore B.C. 111-0. ὃ lines. 
 
 832. 14x21-3 cm. Parts of two columns of a taxing-list of some kind. 
 Col. ii begins γίνεται τὸ π(ᾶν ὃ) ἐπικεφαλαίου, Τεῶτος ἀρσενικὰ py, θηλυκὰ prt, 
 / |ovg.] Bnoaro(s).. The fifteenth year of Augustus (B.C. 16-5) is mentioned 
 in Col. i. In the blank space between the columns a second hand has 
 written Zed μάκαρ ἀθανάτων, and a third the beginning of an acknowledge- 
 ment of a payment at the Serapeum of Oxyrhynchus. On the verso traces 
 of two other documents. 
 
 833. 11-8x16 cm. Beginning of an official report concerning ἡμιολίαι 
 σπερμάτων. Lines 1-7 συνάγονται ἀπὸ ἡμιολίας σπερμίάτων] ᾿Οξυρυγχί(ίτου)" 
 τῶν ὑπὸ τῶν κατὰ τόπον σιτολ[όγων] ὡμολο(γημένων) κεχορη(γῆσθαι) εἰς κλη- 
 ρουχί )) αἵ γ..Ϊ}- . .] ave) (πυροῦ) σοεδ΄, δι(αφόρου) μηδ΄, λίο(ζιπαὶ)] σκῴζς ) 2. 
 ἄλλης ἡμιολίας: τῶν σημαινομένων ὑϊπὸ] τῶν τοῦ νομοῦ τοπογραμμα(τέων) πλείωι 
 kexopniynobar... Cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 226-7. About A.D. τ. 8 lines. 
 
 834. 4:5x98cm. Conclusion of a letter dated in the twenty-sixth year of 
 Augustus, Mesore (B.C. 4), mentioning a voyage eis Ὄμβους. 6 lines. 
 
 835. 19:8x12-8cm. An offer to purchase confiscated land at Pela, addressed 
 to Gaius Sep[plius Rufus; cf. 721, which has the same formula. The 
 purchase price, which was to be paid ἐπὶ τὴν ἐν τῷ Σ[α]ρ[απείῳ δημοσίαν 
 ἰτραπέζαν, was not less than 100 drachmae. The earlier portion is much 
 mutilated. For the conclusion see 721. 14-5, note. About A.D. 13. 
 14 lines. 
 
 836. 13-5x12-8cm. Loan of 32 artabae πυροῦ στερεοῦ from Theoxenus to two 
 Πέρσαι ἰτῆς ἐπιγον]ῆς and a third person. Lines 6 sqq. ἀποδότωσαν δὲ οἱ 
 δεδανεισμένοι Θεοξένῳ τὰς τριάκοντα δύο ἀρτάβας τῶν πυρῶν ἐν μηνὶ Παῦνι τοῦ 
 ἑκκαιδεκάτου ἔτους ἐν Ὀξυρύγχων πόλει πυρὸν στερεὸν νέον καθαρὸν ἄδολον μέτρῳ 
 τετραχοινίκῳ ἀγζο)ρανομικῷ καταστήσαντες τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀϊν]ηλώμασι x.7.A. For 
 
 5 2 
 
260 abl EO SOX VRIP YN Cid US Ay aks 
 
 μέτρον ἀγορανομικόν cf. 740. 17, note, and for the formula cf. the late 
 Ptolemaic loans from Gebelén, e.g. P. Grenf. I. 23. First century B.C.; the 
 sixteenth year refers to Neos Dionysus (B.C. 66-5) or Augustus (B.C. 15-4). 
 Nearly complete, but broken at the beginning. go lines. The papyrus 
 has been gummed on to two similar documents, of which parts of a few 
 lines are preserved. 
 
 837. 18-6x155 cm. Will of Apollos daughter of Paésis, leaving her property 
 at Kerkemounis jointly to Didymus son of Diojgenes], probably a son 
 by her first marriage, and to the offspring of her present marriage with 
 Apollos son of Ophelas, with provisions for the φερνή and παράφερνα of 
 a daughter and for the guardianship of the children. Dated in the second 
 year of Hadrian (A.D. 117-8). Cf. 489-95. Written across the fibres. 30 
 lines, of which only the beginnings are preserved. 
 
 838. 30°5x95 cm. Lease of land at the Ἡρακλείδου ἐποίκιον from Diogenes 
 to two persons, with the signature of the lessor. The formula follows that 
 of e.g. 499. The conclusion is τῆς ἐπινομῆς οὔσης τοῦ Διογένους. κυρία ἡ 
 μίσθωσις. Dated in the twenty-first year of Hadrian, Thoth (A.D. 136). 
 Incomplete. 52 lines. 
 
 839. 27:5 Χ171 cm. Letter from Eutychides to his mother, the earlier part 
 describing an accident to a boat. Lines 6 sqq. ὡς ἐναυάγησεν κατὰ Πτολεμαίδα 
 καὶ ἦλθέ μοι γυμνὸς κεκινδυνευκώς. εὐθέως ἠγόρασα αὐτῶι στολήν. A μαχαιροφόρος 
 is mentioned, apparently as the bearer of the letter. Early first century A.D. 
 Incomplete. 26 lines. 
 
 APPENDIX=] 
 
 Addenda and Corrigenda to Oxyrhynchus Papyr?t Part I 
 and Fayim Towns and their Papyrt. 
 
 For the literature connected with these volumes see the successive bibliographies of 
 papyri by Wilcken in the Archiv, and by de Ricci in the Revue des études grecques. 
 After an examination of the articles in question and a comparison with the papyri, we give 
 here a list of those suggestions which both affect our transcriptions of the texts and 
 are satisfactory. Proposed alterations which are unsuitable, or are based upon alternatives 
 mentioned in our notes, or in the case of literary texts are confined to the supplements 
 of lacunae, are generally ignored. Where the source of the correction is not indicated, 
 it 1S Our OWN. 
 
FAI EN Ad OVID Dora 261 
 
 Part. II. 211. 34. S[payw|y for af..... lv (Weil) is possible. 
 
 214. Recto 7. The vestige of a letter before αἱ is too slight to afford any clue. The 
 same remark applies to the two letters after με in ]. 15. 
 
 18. Possibly vo |yrov EXEL (Ludwich). 
 
 Verso 11. Possibly οἷς wleAaylo|s (Platt), but it is not certain that a letter is lost after eda, 
 and the following vestiges suit « better than o, Perhaps z|eAaye| efor (Bolling). 
 
 12. 7.,.Je.|. os: the doubtful τ may be =, but neither a/emt|o[pe|vos (Platt) nor π[επο] Ojos 
 (Bolling) seem to suit. 
 
 13. μ. «λον: the first letter is more like » than p. 
 
 Τά}: Ὁ ΡΉΝ (Ludwich) at the end of the line. 
 
 215. i. 28. wow should very likely be read in place of θοσιν, but there is not room for 
 
 ᾿ {aya|@o[y volwor (Fraccaroli). 
 
 216. i. 2. Any is a misprint for Ans. 
 
 218. The position in Col. ii conjecturally assigned by us to Fr. (c) may be considered 
 certain. Line 26 is ραν o|vpplepe| (or, as Crénert suggests, emup|eper), 27 ὑπερ τίηςΪ] 
 oAns |, 28 Apxed|ao|s Kau Ζηνοδοτος (of: our note ad loc.), 29 perhaps lev Tots | περι ταῴφου (εν 
 τοις Crénert). Fragment (Ὁ) probably joins Fr. (α) so that Fr. (a) i. τ8 and Fr. (Ὁ) 1 
 form one line, i.e. \{oyra to. Fr. (6) probably belongs to the bottom of Fr. (a) ii. 
 
 219. 11. λιθοίις κιῖσαι (i.e. κεισαι) (Platt) i is possible. 
 
 17. For ερνιοίν] τροφην Wilamowitz suggests ορνιθ᾽ οἸτροφιν. 6 in place of ο is possible, but 
 the first letter is more like ε than o. ‘The ἡ of τροφην is certain. 
 
 220. A newly-found fragment, apparently from the top of a column, contains the 
 beginnings of two lines τυγχαῖν and pa’ γί. Cf. 221 ad fin. 
 
 x. 16. The penultimate letter before aval is 8 or «. 
 xi. 20. ene o|rexov (Leo) is possible, but d]e πίω ς for the preceding letters is unsuitable. 
 
 221. i. 1. 1. ore for re (Ludwich) 
 
 2. ta βαρυτονία (Ludwich) is not very suitable. 
 17. τοῖν before διαρρουν (Ludwich) is possible. 
 21. Possibly απο pevyer (Ludwich), but the doubtful letter is more like ἢ or « 
 i. 3. 1. ve|kpors (Allen). 
 9. l. τελευτανΪ (Wilamowitz). 
 iii. 2. The traces of a letter before ceAay suit ὦ or « better than v. The papyrus has 
 
 διελ᾿ οἱν, i.e. the first hand wrote διελὸν which was corrected to deedov (Diels). 
 
 3. 1. Tuapes for y Mapes (Diels). 
 
 6. 1. πλειο for exdeco (Diels). 
 
 23-4. 1. κε κ᾿ | [noo εἰλα͵ντο (Ludwich). 
 
 25. [πτ]ωτην (Ludwich) is possible. 
 
 26-7. Ik yey ove vat (Ludwich). 
 
 iv. 18. The vestiges before a are too faint to afford a clue. 
 
 Wee is φαινηται 0 yovos (Ludwich) i is possible. 
 
 vii. 5. ral p| Avak| peovtt (Platt, Ludwich) cannot be read, but ourws δὲ και Ανακίρεων is 
 possible. 
 
 15. 1. ταυτην for take .. ν. 
 
 eg ΤΙ cavras| , . isk Ἰνασί for σαν ταί. δ | δ καί. .| : πασΐ. 
 
 9. δε περ[ησης for δ ἐπορ εὐθὴς (Ludwich) is just possible, but the letter following a is 
 more like o than e. 
 
 15. 1. κρανα MeAlavols for κραναν eX\txo|s (Wilamowitz). 
 
 xii. 10. The vestiges on either side of v are too slight to give a clue. 
 
 26. πον might be read instead of των. 
 
262 THE OX VRAVYNCHUS PARRY 
 
 xiv. 25. at the end of the line is extremely doubtful. There are more probably two 
 
 letters. 
 26. eas ite yns (Ludwich) is possible. 
 XVi. 20-1. εἶπι νεων (Ludwich) i is possible, but the π is extremely doubtful. 
 
 γι» τῶ; εἶν an (Ludwich) is possible. 
 
 Fr. (a) 5. AOnv|oxAns (Crénert) is possible. 
 
 The beginnings of 12 lines are contained on a new fragment which the recto (cf. 220) 
 seems to show is from near the bottom of a column, while 1. 9 um aovos (cf. 74. xxi. 318-21) 
 indicates that it belongs to the column lost before Col. xvi. 
 
 {|Ὸ ἘΠΕ} | Ta TroTapl 
 G2 00a ea τοναπτὶ 
 οντωΐ] υπ ἀσιος Ϊ 
 
 τον δεσῖ IO pas εκ Τὶ 
 
 5 [π]εριοντὶ 
 [- -JeAag] 
 
 αβασταί 
 
 [] πεντί 
 
 222. 17. ου(τως) Κρατης (Diels) can be read. 
 230. 32. en|rouuny is a misprint for εζη]τουμην. 
 282. 2. Insert ἡ after εδικασόἤη. 
 237. iv. 8. 1. ἐκλεγομένην (Gradenwitz). 
 17. 1. τῷ ᾿Ασκληπιάδῃ [ἀπ᾽ δεδωκέναι (Grad.). 
 21. 1. τοῦ γὰρ Ἀσκληϊπιάδ]ου τῷ κὃ (ἔτει) [ἀἸπαιτοῦ ν᾽τος (Grad.). 
 26. 1, δ᾽ μολογήματαᾳ γεγενῆσθαί ‘ple | ἮΝ μ[οι) (Grad.). 
 30. 1]. τῆς δὲ pnt] peas οὐσίας] (Grad 
 33. émorapévolv| (Grad.) is possible. 
 v. 7. {ov} is a mistake for ὅς (Grad.). 
 7-8. 1. καταλάβῃς ἄξιον ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ ἀνάπεμψον. 
 τό. 1. ἀναποϊμπῆς ἄξιον (Blass). 
 34. 1. διά before χρηματισμῶν (Grad.). 
 38. 1. δύνασ { O} αι (Grad.). 
 42. ]. μὴ [a ἰϊμεληθῆναι. 
 vi. 18. 1. οὗτινος (Blass). 
 21. 1. ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ for ἁπλῶς. 
 24. 1. ἐπὶ τῆς pln Ἰγρῴας οὐσίας βουληθείσῃ συνευδ. (Grad. 7 
 2 τ 1. ἀπαλλίαττ᾽.. . (Grad.). 
 στὸ ἡ ν Ὁ . raga εἰ οὐκ ἐξόν. 
 Ἢ 22. |. ὑπὸ λοίπης (i.e. λύπης) for ὑπολοίπης (Wilamowitz). 
 23. ]. ἦνυκέναι for 7 ἠκουκέναι (Wilam. ). 
 26-7. ἐνέγκαντος is a mistake for ἐνέγκαντα (Wilam.). 
 40. ]. per’ ἄλλα for μετάλλα (Grad.). 
 Vill. 24-5. ]. ταῖς yapouper| acs | διὰ τὸ καὶ (Grad., G-H.). 
 27. 1. ὑπὸ for rod. vy (referring to Trajan’s reign) can be read, as Stein ἘΠῚ τὰ for 
 xy, but cf. 712. 7, where a Sulpicius Similis is mentioned certainly long after Trajan’s 
 time and perhaps in the reign of Commodus. 
 
APPENDIX I 263 
 
 255. 16. 1. [ἐξ [ὑγιοῦς for |. . . .|reas. 
 
 265. 39. |. ὑδρευμάτων. 
 
 269. 11. 2. |. ft Ἰακρῷ for [Μ]άκρῳ (Wilam.). 
 
 270. 25. A line has dropped out of the text. 1. καὶ ὠνημένης ἀρούραις ἕξ ἡμίσει ταῖς ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ 
 κατοι κικῆς καὶ ὠνημένης εἰς κατοικίαν κιτιλ, (Goodspeed). 
 
 273. 5. 1. κατὰ [Ῥωμαίων ἔ θη ὑπὸ κιτιλ. 
 
 8. The letters following ov might be read as του. 
 
 274. 22. |. ἐπικαταβολ(ῆς) for ἐπικατακολ(ουθοῦν) (Wessely). 
 
 24-5. [ἐμβαδεύ σεως (Wessely) i is possible. 
 
 277. 9-13. 1. Διονυ[σίου Tl nls γῆς Ray Aaa αὐτου] πὶ Ϊκ - []ν τς | OVKL@L ἥμισυ, 
 ᾿βεβα)ιούτωι δὲ Διονύσιος τὴν μίσθωσιν | πάσηι [β]εβαιώσει, βεβαιου)μένης δὲ αἰ ὐτῆς κομιζέτωσαν || 
 κοινῶς Ta | yelynpa(ra) ἐπὶ] τὰς περὶ apy ὑἸπαϊρχούσας] | ἅλωι (1. ἅλως) κιτ.λ. 
 
 286. το. 1. ἀποδῶσειν (i.e. ἀποδῶσιν) for ἀποδώσειν (Wilam.). 
 
 287. 7. 1. πάντα for πάντ(α). 
 
 289. 3. The abbreviation beginning with o which recurs in this papyrus is probably 
 σύ(μ)πα(ν) ; cf. 574. 
 
 298. 42. Υ is a misprint for ». 
 
 Faytim Towns and their Papyrt. 
 
 2. iii. 16. ὃ Axov [τ]ρ[εἾἶχα for σε... pr..].[.].a (Weil) is possible. 
 5.1: forlad for [.|.. αθ (Weil) i is possible. 
 32. |. arydov for αἰγδην (Weil). 
 
 8. ro. [ε] isa misprint for [τε]. 
 
 10. This fragment has been identified by Plasberg and Ferrini as coming from Ulpian, 7,16. 
 xlv. (Dog. xxix. 1.1). 3.1. proferrt for professt. 6.1. er,ga for esse. 10. 1. melites 
 festamenta, τι. 1. facta\nt for ental. 
 
 11. 22. 1. 7/6] κ[αλ]ῶς ἔχον (Wilcken). 
 
 20. introd. p. 117. 1. 5. ὕπατος (de Ricci) for |raros is possible. The edict is assigned by 
 Dessau to Julian instead of Severus Alexander. 
 
 6. εἰ τι (Wilamowitz) can be read in place of em. 
 
 8. etn before καὶ ravra is corrected by Wilamowitz to ἔτι. 
 
 15. ἐξ ἁπάντων κρατεῖν | χρημάτων (Wilamowitz) is better than our ἐξ ἁπάντωϊΪν | χρημα- 
 τίζεσθαι. 
 
 23. introd. 1. Ταμαύεω(ς) for Tapavow( ) (Smyly); cf. the modern Zamia. 
 
 23 (a). 5-6. 1. KaBaceirov... Μετηλίτ]ου]. 
 
 27. 32.1. γνωρίζω for . τειριζω (Wessely). 
 
 42 (a). 15. |. ppapier oko for ypappar(éws); cf. P. Tebt. I. p. 28. 
 
 46. 3. 1. apo? for . 
 
 cep ake ial B aha) ἜΝ ’ (Wilcken). 
 
 BO. Bek: δρόμ(ου) for Awp(aros) (W ilcken). 
 
 67-76. 1. τετελ(ὠνηται) for τετέλ(εσται) (Wilcken). 
 
 73. 1. 1. ἀντεσυμβόλ(ησε) Παῆσις τελ(ωνησάμενος) (Wilcken), Similarly in 74. 1. 1 ἀντε- 
 συμβόλ(ησε). 
 
 96. 11 a.D. 143 for A.D. 122. 
 
 110. 1. 1. Βελλιῆνος (Wilamowitz). 
 
 15. 1. ποτ᾽ ισἸάτωσαν for dov|o|\drwoav (Wilamowitz). 
 
264. THE AOXYREAYNCHUS SPAPY RI 
 
 112. 4. 1. διβολήτί ρ) ους ; cf. P. Amh. II. 91. 11 note. 
 
 116. 3-4. 1. φάϊ γήρους for φάϊρους (Wilamowitz). 
 
 138. 1. κρείνεται = κρίνετε (Wilamowitz). 
 
 244 is probably written across the fibres of the recto, not on the verso, 
 284 is dated in the roth year of Antoninus (A. Ὁ. 146). 
 
 APPENDIX Ii 
 
 A revised text of Part III, no. 405 (Irenaeus, Contra Haereses, iii. 9). 
 
 The seven fragments of an early Christian work published as 405 were identified 
 by Dr. J. Armitage Robinson as belonging to the lost Greek original of Irenaeus’ treatise 
 Contra Haereses, which is extant only in a Latin translation, and when fitted together 
 correspond to part of ili. 9. A provisional reconstruction was given by him in Atheneum, 
 Oct. 24, 1903; cf. our note, zdzd., Nov. 7, and that of Dr. Rendel Harris, zdzd., Nov. 14. 
 We now print a revised text of the whole. ‘The chief interest of the discovery lies in the 
 resulting correspondence between the readings of Irenacus’ quotation from Matt. iii. 16-7 - 
 in ll. 23-9 and those of the Codex Bezae. The Latin translation there has the ordinary 
 reading fic est ( filius meus), whereas the original agrees with D in having (I. 28) od εἶἶ in 
 place of οὗτός ἐστιν, and a variant peculiar to 1) (ὡς for ὡσεί before περιστέραν) occurs in |, 25 
 (Lat. guasz). ‘These two unsuspected coincidences between Irenaeus and 1), of which the 
 one is misrepresented, the other inevitably obscured by the Latin translator, indicate that 
 the extent of the agreement between Irenaeus’ quotations and the text of the Codex Bezae 
 is even larger than what the imperfect evidence of the Latin translation has led critics to 
 suppose’ (A¢hen., Nov. 7). 
 
 Soke Col. ii. 
 
 ᾿ξ ν coil. e tel τ pe ae See ee χρι [..... λιβ]ανίον de ort Os ο 
 [στοῦ] cov [ωμοσεν ks Tlw Alav [kat γνωστος [ev τη LIovdata 
 [evd alAnOeal Kale οἷν μη abe 20 [yevlopevos κίαι ἐμφανης τοις 
 [τ]η[σ ει [αυτον εκ κίαρίπου τῆς μὴ ζητουσιν [ἰαυτον και επι 
 
 5 Κοιλιας σου θησίομ])]αι ἐπι Opo του βαπτίισμου φησι Ματθαι 
 [vou σου Kale πίαλιν)]- γνωστος > os: ανεω[χθησαν ot ovpavor 
 [ev tn Tovdata o Os κ͵]αι eyevn > καὶ edev τίο mva Tov θυ κατα 
 
 [On ev εἰρηνὴ ὁ τοῖπος αὐτοῦ 25 > βαινον ὡς πίεριστεραν και 
 
APPENDIX III 265 
 
 [και TO Κατοικητηρίιον αὐτου > ερχομενὸν εἦἶις avrToy Kat 
 
 10 [ev Siwy εἰς ovjy Kat o av > wWov φωνὴ εκ τῶν ουρανωὼν 
 [ros Os 0 ὑπὸ των] προφηϊτ]ω > λεγοῦσα σὺ εἶι oO VS μου Oo aya 
 [knpvocopevo|s καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ > mntos [ely ὦ [εὐδοκησα ov 
 [ευαγγελιου .|rayyed(A joe 30 yap Tote o Xs [κατεβὴη els 
 [vos Kat o US 3 παρθενΪου] τον Iv ουδ > αἷλλος μεν ὁ xs. 
 
 7 7  } Πλὴν ote ...] ov Kat To [ao αλλος Se ‘Ils adda ο Aoyos Tov 
 the Ἡσαιας μεν ovjros [e θυ 0 σωτίηρ παντων καὶ KU 
 ἱπροφητευσεν ανατελζει ριευωῖν ουρανου καὶ yns 
 
 13. ἐπαγγελλόμενος would be expected (annuntiatus Lat.), but the letter before ayy is 
 more like τ or y than π. 
 
 14-5. The Latin has εὐ hucus filius qui ex fructu ventris David, td est ex David 
 virgine et Emmanuel, cucus et stellam &c. ‘The papyrus version is much shorter. 
 
 16. For Hoaias instead of Βαλααμ cf, Rendel Harris, Athen., Nov. 14. 
 
 31. The Latin has zz Lesum, neque alius quidem Christus. The supposed ν of I» is 
 more like 7, but it is impossible to read Inv, and for the omission of ἡ in the earliest con- 
 tractions of ᾿Ιησοῦς cf. e.g. 1. 
 
 aNier em eid DLC 8 BI 
 
 List of Oxyrhynchus and Fayim Papyri distributed. 
 
 We give here a list of the papyri published in Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts I-III, and 
 Faytim Towns and their Papyrt, which have been presented to different museums and 
 libraries. ‘Those papyri which do not appear have for various reasons not yet been dis- 
 tributed and are still at Queen’s College, Oxford. Where ascertainable, we have added the 
 present reference numbers in the catalogues of the several institutions to which the papyri 
 now belong. ‘The following abbreviations are employed :— 
 
 Am, = America. The papyri under this heading have only recently been sent to America, 
 and details of the distribution are not yet forthcoming. 
 
 B. M. = British Museum. ‘The numbers refer to the catalogue of papyri. 
 
 Belfast = Belfast Museum. 
 
 Bod. = Bodleian Library, Oxford, The references are to the hand-list of MSS. 
 
 Bolton = Chadwick Museum, Bolton, Lancs. 
 
 Bradfield = Library of Bradfield College, Berks, 
 
 Bristol = Bristol Museum. 
 
266 THE OXYRAHYNCHUS “PAPYRI 
 
 Brussels = Musées Royaux, Brussels, Belgium. _ . 
 
 Cairo = Museum of Antiquities, Cairo. . The numbers are those of the inventory ; cf. our 
 Catalogue of Greek Papyri in the Cairo Museum. 
 
 Camb. = Cambridge University Library. The numbers refer to the ‘ Additions.’ 
 
 Chicago = Haskell Museum, University of Chicago, U.S.A. The papyri are all numbered 
 ‘Accession 33.’ 
 
 Clifton = Library of Clifton College, Bristol. 
 
 Columbia = Library of Columbia University, New York, U.S.A. 
 
 Dublin = Library of Trinity College, Dublin. 
 
 Dundee = Library of University College, Dundee. 
 
 Edinburgh = Library of Edinburgh University. 
 
 Eton = Library of Eton College, Windsor. 
 
 Glasgow = Library of Glasgow University. 
 
 Graz = Library of Graz University, Austria. 
 
 Haileybury = Library of Haileybury College, Hertford. 
 
 Hamilton = Hamilton College, U.S.A. 
 
 Harrow = Library of Harrow School. 
 
 Harvard = Semitic Museum of Harvard University, Mass., U.S.A. 
 
 Holloway = Library of Holloway College, Egham. 
 
 Johns Hopkins = Library of Johns Hopkins University, Maryland, U.S.A. 
 
 Liverpool = Liverpool Free Public Museum. 
 
 Melbourne = Library of Melbourne University, Victoria. 
 
 Owen’s Coll. = Museum of Owen’s College, Manchester. 
 
 Pennsyl. = Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. 
 
 Princeton = Library of Princeton University, N.J., U.S.A. 
 
 Repton = Library of Repton School, Burton-on-Trent. 
 
 Rugby = Library of Rugby School. 
 
 Smiths. = Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., U.S.A. 
 
 St. Andrews = Library of St. Andrews University, 
 
 Toronto = Toronto University, Canada. 
 
 Vassar = Library of Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, U.S.A. 
 
 Vict. = Museum of Victoria University, Toronto, Canada. 
 
 Winchester = Library of Winchester College. 
 
 Yale = Library of Yale University, U.S.A. 
 
 Oxyrhynchus Papyri. 
 
 1. Bod. ὅτ. th. 4..7γ 10. Yale; 20; B. M. 442; 31. Camb. 4031. 
 (P). 11: B.-M. 440. 21. Chicago. 32. Bod. Lat. class. 
 2. Pennsyl. 2746. 12. Camb. 4029. 22. B. M. 743. C3 
 3. Chicago. 13. Columbia. 23. Camb. 4030. 35. Pennsyl. 2749. 
 4. Camb. 4027. 14. Edinburgh. 24. Yale. 36. Bod. Gr. class. 
 5. Bod. Gr. th. f 9 | 15. Glasgow. 25. Johns Hopkins. d. 60 (P). 
 ΡῚ 16., Pennsyl. 2747.7 1 26. ΒΝ 744, 37. BoM 7 a0; 
 6. Camb. 4028. 17. Johns Hopkins. | 27. Chicago. 38. Cairo 10002. 
 7 ΡΣ ΝΠ Ὁ: 18. B. M. 741. 28. St. Andrews. 39. Cairo 10001. 
 8. Harvard 2211. 19. Princeton 0132. | 29. Pennsyl. 2748. 40. Camb. 4032. 
 9. Dublin Pap. B. 1. 692. 19. 90, 8. Ms yas: 41. Cairo 10073. 
 
42. Β. Μ. 747. 
 
 48. B. M. 4748. 
 
 44, B. M. 749. 
 
 45. Pennsyl. 2750. 
 
 . Harvard 2212. 
 
 . B. M. 450. 
 
 . Harrow. 
 
 . Dublin Pap. E. 1. 
 
 . Dublin Pap. F. 1. 
 
 51. Edinburgh. 
 
 . Glasgow. 
 
 mB ΜΙ eT 
 
 δά. Chicago. 
 
 55 (3 copies). Camb. 
 4033-5- 
 
 56. Camb. 4036. 
 
 57. Johns Hopkins. 
 
 68 Bem. 75a. 
 
 59. Be Μ΄. 753. 
 
 60. Dublin Pap. Ὁ. 1. 
 
 61. Camb. 4037. 
 
 62. Bod. Gr. class. 
 G62 (PB), 
 
 63. Cairo 10007. 
 
 64. Princeton o132. 
 
 692. 64. 
 65. Pennsy]. 2751. 
 66. Camb. 4038. 
 67 (2 copies). B. M. 
 
 754: 
 68. Owen’s Coll. 
 69. Chicago. 
 70. Vassar. 
 71... Moog e. 
 72. Glasgow. 
 72 (a). Chicago. 
 . Owen’s Coll. 
 . Hamilton. 
 75. Chicago. 
 76. Camb. 4039. 
 77. Dublin Pap. D. 2. 
 79. B. M. 456. 
 . Winchester. 
 ΠῚ ἘΝ a a 
 Ὁ δὲς IN) Se FE 
 83. Rugby. 
 83 (a). Repton. 
 84. B. M. 759. 
 85. B. M. 760. 
 86. Camb. 4040. 
 
 APPENDIX III 
 
 . Pennsyl. 2752. 
 . Cairo 10008. 
 ΤΙ δα: 
 
 . Holloway. 
 
 . Harvard 2213. 
 2B: Mi 462: 
 ise) eu Core 
 
 . Holloway. 
 
 . Camb. 4041. 
 
 . Edinburgh. 
 
 . B. M. 764. 
 
 . B. M. 4765. 
 
 . Edinburgh. 
 
 . Chicago. 
 
 . Bs M. 766. 
 
 . DB. Μ. 764%. 
 
 . Camb. 4042. 
 
 . Dublin Pap.C.1. 
 . Chicago. 
 
 . Cairo 10006. 
 
 . Pennsyl. 2763. 
 . Harvard 2214. 
 . Eton. 
 
 . Clifton. 
 
 . Harrow. 
 
 . Cairo 1oorl. 
 
 . Eton. 
 
 . Yale. 
 
 . Clifton. 
 
 . Chicago. 
 
 . Camb. 4043. 
 
 . Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 f 66 (P). 
 
 . Haileybury. 
 
 . Chicago. 
 
 . B. M. 768. 
 
 . Cairo 1oor4. 
 . Winchester. 
 
 . Cairo 
 . Cairo 
 Se OEY ce) 
 ΔΤ 
 - αἰτὸ 
 . Cairo 
 . Cairo 
 . Cairo 
 Oaito 
 . Cairo 10053. 
 . Cairo 
 Cairo 
 
 10062. 
 IOO85. 
 10084. 
 ΙΟΙ2Ι1. 
 10082. 
 10072. 
 10063. 
 
 TOR Za: 
 10056. 
 
 Ioors. 
 10103. 
 
 137. Cairo 10034. 
 138. Cairo Iotoo. 
 139. Cairo 10049. 
 140. Cairo 10057. 
 141. Cairo 10096. 
 142. B. M. 769. 
 
 143. B. M. 770. 
 
 144. Cairo 10071. 
 145. Cairo 10066. 
 146. Cairo 10076. 
 147. Cairo 10074. 
 148. Cairo 10075. 
 149. Cairo 10045. 
 150. Cairo 10051. 
 151. Cairo 10094. 
 152. Cairo 10048. 
 153. Cairo 10044. 
 154. Cairo 1oro2. 
 155. Cairo 10020, 
 156. Cairo 10035. 
 157. Cairo 10042. 
 158. Cairo 10043. 
 159-63. Chicago. 
 164. B. M. 771. 
 
 165. Camb. 4044. 
 
 166. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 c. 47 (P). 
 
 167. Bod. Gr..class. 
 
 J. 67 (P). 
 168. Pennsyl. 2754. 
 169. Vassar. 
 170. Harvard 2215. 
 171. Camb. 4045. 
 172. 
 ΤᾺ 
 173. St. Andrews. 
 174. 
 . Bristol. 
 . Brussels. 
 
 d. 62 (P). 
 
 . Hamilton. 
 
 » B. M. 742. 
 
 . Harvard 2216. 
 . Pennsyl. 2755. 
 
 f. 68 (P). 
 
 185. Glasgow. 
 
 Melbourne Pap. 
 
 Johns Hopkins. 
 
 Bod. Gre class. 
 
 . Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 . Dublin Pap. F. 2. 
 . Dublin Pap. E.2. 
 
 267 
 
 186. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 J. 69 (P). 
 187. Melbourne Pap. 
 
 of 
 188. Bod. Gr. class. 
 σ. 88 {8}: 
 189. BEM: 992. 
 192. Camb. 4046. 
 193. By Me gy. 
 194. Pennsyl. 2756. 
 195. .B. M: 445. 
 197. B. M. 776. 
 198. B. M. 777. 
 199. B. M. 778. 
 200. Harvard 2217. 
 201. B..M. 759. 
 202. Camb. 4047. 
 204. Edinburgh. 
 205. B. M. 780. 
 206. Yale. 
 207. B. M. 48x. 
 208. B. M. 782. 
 209. Harvard 2218. 
 210. Camb. 4048. 
 21 eam: 
 212 eR MOTTO. 
 213. Am. 
 PABA ALIS 1: 
 ΟῚ ΠΕ dey mit) oe Okey 
 216. Yale. 
 217. Camb. 4049. 
 2182 5.;M i113: 
 
 ΡΟ ΠΣ ΝΥ ΗΕ, 
 223. Bod. Gr. class. 
 αι 3 Uh). 
 224, B. M. 783. 
 225. B. M. 784. 
 226. Columbia. 
 227. Bo M..78s5. 
 228. Bod. Gr. class. 
 d. 64 (P). 
 229, B. M. 786. 
 230. Johns Hopkins. 
 231. Camb. 4050. 
 232. B. M. 787. 
 233. Pennsyl. 2757. 
 234. St. Andrews. 
 235. Camb. 4051. 
 
268 
 
 236, B. M. 488. 
 
 237. Bod. Gr, “class. 
 
 a. 8 (P). 
 
 238. Dublin Pap.E.3. 
 
 239. Pennsyl. 2758. 
 240. B. M. 789. 
 
 241. Princeton 0132. 
 
 692. 241. 
 242. Graz. 
 243. B. M. 790. 
 244, B. M. vor. 
 245. Pennsyl. 2759. 
 246. Camb. 4052. 
 247. Glasgow. 
 248. Camb. 4053. 
 249. Yale. 
 250. Am. 
 251, 3; 17186, 
 252. Liverpool. 
 253. Graz. 
 254-7. Am. 
 258. Brussels, 
 259. A 
 
 m. 
 260. Dublin Pap. D. 
 
 2. 
 261. B. M. 792. 
 262. Columbia. 
 
 263, Melbourne Pap. 
 
 8: 
 264. Camb. 4054. 
 265; Vict. 
 
 266. B. M. 1187. 
 267. Am, 
 
 269. Pennsyl. 2760. 
 210, ΒΓ 93: 
 272. Am. 
 
 273. Brussels, 
 
 274. 
 275. 
 276. 
 Pa ie 
 278. B, M. 795. 
 270. Camb, ΒΒ, 
 280. Camb. 4056. 
 281. Holloway. 
 202, Yale. 
 
 283. Bristol, 
 
 284, Harvard 2219. 
 285. B. M. 796. 
 286, B. M. 797. 
 
 THE OXYRAYNCHOUS APY 
 
 287. Am. 
 
 288. B. M. 798. 
 289, B. M. 499. 
 290. Pennsyl. 2761. 
 291, BM eo, 
 292. Camb. 4057. 
 293-5. Am. 
 
 296. Johns Hopkins, 
 297-8. Am. 
 
 299. Bradfield. 
 300. Bradfield. 
 ΟΡ Messor 
 
 302. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 5. 47 (P). 
 
 303. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 g. 48 (P). 
 304. Camb. 4058. 
 
 305. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 C48 (Ὁ. 
 306. Cairo 10003. 
 307. Cairo 1oor2. 
 
 308. Dublin Pap.B.2. 
 
 309. Edinburgh. 
 310. Glasgow. 
 
 311. St. Andrews, 
 312. Owen’s Coll, 
 313. Camb, 40509. 
 314. Harvard 2220. 
 
 315. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 ὦ. 65 (P) 
 
 316. Bod. Gr class. 
 
 aie a F 
 317. Columbia. 
 318. B. M. 802. 
 
 319. Johns Hopkins. 
 320. Princeton 0132. 
 
 692, 320. 
 
 921. bod. sr "class: 
 
 d. 66 (P). 
 
 322. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 c. 49 (P). 
 323. Pennsylh 2762. 
 
 324. Bod, Gr. class. 
 
 e. 80 (P). 
 
 325. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 CERT NE): 
 
 326. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 6. 19 (P). 
 327. Pennsyl. 2763. 
 328. Harvard 2221. 
 
 340, 
 
 329. Yale, 
 
 330, Columbia. 
 
 331. Johns Hopkins. 
 
 332. Princeton 0132. 
 692. 332. 
 
 333, Princeton 0132. 
 602,333. 
 
 34, Johns Hopkins. 
 335, Camb. 4060. 
 336. Dublin Pap.F. 3. 
 337. Edinburgh. 
 338, Glasgow. 
 890. 5, ME. 86. 
 St. Andrews. 
 Owen’s Coll. 
 Camb. 4οότ. 
 Dublin Pap. E.4. 
 Pennsyl. 2764. 
 Columbia. 
 Melbourne Pap. 
 
 341, 
 342, 
 343, 
 344. 
 345. 
 346. 
 4. 
 347. 
 848. 
 349, 
 350. 
 351, 
 352. 
 353. 
 354, 
 355. 
 356. 
 357. 
 692. 357: 
 358. Columbia. 
 359. Glasgow. 
 360. Bod. Gr. class. 
 COL Ὁ. 
 
 Camb. 4062. 
 Pennsyl. 2765. 
 Pennsyl, 2766. 
 Camb. 4063. 
 Yale. 
 Columbia, 
 
 B. M. 804. 
 Camb. 4064. 
 Dublin Pap. E.5. 
 
 361. Bod. Gr. class. 
 
 é, bane). 
 
 . Harvard 2222, 
 . Camb. 4065. 
 
 . Dublin Pap.F. 4. 
 . Dublin Pap.E.6, 
 }. Dublin Pap. E.7. 
 . B. M. 805. 
 
 . Graz, 
 
 . Hamilton. 
 
 . Ba Micso6. 
 
 . Brussels, 
 
 , eV ICE. 
 
 Johns Hopkins. 
 
 Princeton 0132. 
 
 373. Bod. Gr. class: 
 J. 79 (P). 
 374. B. M. 804. 
 375. Camb. 4066. 
 376. Edinburgh. 
 377. BONE Bes, 
 378, B. M. 809. 
 379. Bod. Gr. class. 
 6. 83 CEI 
 380. Camb. 4067.. 
 8581. ΒΝ]. Θ τ: 
 382. Β. M. 811. 
 383. Camb. 4068. 
 384. B. M. 812. 
 
 .| 885. Dublin Pap. F.5. 
 
 386. Bod. Gr, class. 
 2 τι (P). 
 
 387. Bod. ὍΤΙ οἴ555: 
 6. 84 (Ρ.. 
 
 388. Dublin Pap.F.6. 
 
 389. Bod. Gr. class. 
 δι 85 (P). 
 
 . Body Grclass, 
 
 d. 68 (P). 
 
 ΒΜ 5:0: 
 
 . Am. 
 
 . Yale. 
 
 Camb. 4069. 
 
 395, Am. 
 
 . Β, Mosie 
 
 . Bod. Gr. class, 
 d. 69 (P). 
 
 398. Bod, Gr. class. 
 c. 50 (P). 
 
 399. Columbia. 
 
 400. Bod. Gr. class, 
 d. 70 (P). 
 
 401-2. Am. 
 
 407. B. M. 1189. 
 
 445, B. M, 1190. 
 
 446-8. Am. 
 
 449. Brussels, 
 
 450. Graz. 
 
 451. Vict. 
 
 452-3. Am. " 
 
 454. Bod, Gr. class, 
 
463. Bod. Gr. class. 
 0 {8} 
 469. Am. 
 476. Am. 
 479-80. Am. 
 482. Am. 
 484. Brussels. 
 487. Am. 
 499. Vict. 
 502-3. Am. 
 505. Am. 
 508. Am. 
 510. Am. 
 512. Am. 
 516-8. Am. 
 
 . Camb. 4070. 
 . B. M. 1192. 
 o ball, Sig. 
 . B. M. 816. 
 . Dr. W. C. Win- 
 slow. 
 6. Cairo 10764. 
 ie Be NG Sie 
 8. Toronto. 
 9. Am. 
 10. Bod. Lat. class. ¢. 
 5 (P). 
 11. Cairo 10765. 
 12, B: M. 818. 
 13. Smiths. 217860. 
 14. Am. 
 15. Grazi 
 16. B. M. 8109. 
 17. ΒΒ: +Gr, 
 ἐδ §2.(P). 
 18. Β. Μ. 1193. 
 18 (a). B. M. 1194. 
 18 (4). Brussels. 
 19-20. Am. 
 21. Cairo 10766. 
 22-3. Am. 
 23 (a). Bod.Gr. class. 
 c. 53 (P). 
 24. Cairo 10869. 
 
 orwhd- 
 
 class. 
 
 APPENDIX III 
 
 522-3. Am. 
 526-7. Am. 
 
 529. Am. 
 531-2. Am. 
 534-41. Am. 
 542. Owen’s Coll. 
 543-9. Am. 
 τρί, 48. Vie EEO. 
 551-3. Am. 
 
 554. Graz. 
 555-7. Am. 
 
 558. Belfast. 
 559. Am. 
 
 560. Vict: 
 561-72. Am. 
 
 573. Brussels. 
 575. Am. 
 576. Brussels. 
 577-8. Am. 
 
 -| 580. Am. 
 
 581. Dundee. 
 582-8. Am. 
 589. Graz. 
 590-8. Am. 
 603. Graz. 
 604. Bolton. 
 605-7. Am. 
 608. Vict. 
 609-10. Am. 
 612-3. Am. 
 
 Faytim Papyrt. 
 
 25, wale. 
 
 26. Cairo 10767. 
 
 27. Brussels. 
 
 28. Vassar. 
 
 29. Pennsyl. 2767. 
 
 30-1. Toronto. 
 
 32. Princeton 0132. 
 5.16. 22: 
 
 33. Johns Hopkins. 
 
 34. Cairo 10768. 
 
 85. Cairo 10760. 
 
 36. Cairo 10770. 
 
 37. Cairo 10235. 
 
 38. B. M. 820. 
 
 50. 0 AION O77 T, 
 
 40. Brussels. 
 
 41. Smiths. 217853. 
 
 42. Columbia. 
 
 42 (a). B. M. 1195. 
 43. B. M. 821. 
 
 44. B. M. 822. 
 
 45. B. M. 823. 
 
 46. Owen’s Coll. 
 47. Cairo 10772. 
 
 47 (a). Cairo 10773. 
 
 48. Cairo 10774. 
 49, Cairo 10775. 
 50. Cairo 10776. 
 51, Cairo 107977, 
 
 52. Cairo 10778. 
 
 52 (a). Cairo 10779. 
 
 ΤῊΣ Veeiny 
 
 54. Cairo 10780. 
 
 55. Vict. 
 
 56. Cairo 10781. 
 
 57. Cairo 102268. 
 
 58-60.. Am, 
 
 61. Cairo 10782, 
 
 62. Cairo 10221. 
 
 63-5. Am. 
 
 66. Cairo 10231. 
 
 67. Vict. 
 
 68. B. M. 824 (a). 
 
 69. Cairo 10239. 
 
 70. Cairo 10240. 
 
 71. Pennsyl. 2768. 
 
 72. Graz. 
 
 73. Cairo 10236. 
 
 ΤᾺΣ Cairo 10237. 
 
 75. Johns Hopkins. 
 
 76. Princeton 0132. 
 s400.7 0. 
 
 76(a). B. M. 824 (4). 
 
 77. Am. 
 
 78. Smiths. 217856. 
 
 79. Cairo 10241. 
 
 80-1. Am. 
 82. Cairo 10783. 
 
 269 
 
 614. Owen’s Coll. 
 
 615-33. Am. 
 
 634. Bod. Gr. class. 
 d. 73 (P). 
 
 635. Bod. Gr. class, 
 ε. 86 (P). 
 
 636. Graz. 
 
 637. Vict. 
 
 633-43. Am. 
 
 644. Graz. 
 
 645. Am. 
 
 647. Graz. 
 
 648-50. Am. 
 
 651. Belfast. 
 
 652. Am. 
 
 83. Cairo 10784. 
 84. Cairo 10224. 
 85. Cairo 10785. 
 86, 86 (a). Am. 
 87. B. M. 825. 
 88. Pennsyl. 2769. 
 892 Bay 820: 
 90. Cairo 10786. 
 91. Cairo 10787. 
 92. Harvard 2223. 
 93. Brussels. 
 
 94. Am. 
 
 95. Cairo 10788. 
 96. Cairo 10789. 
 97. Cairo 10790. 
 98. Cairo 10791. 
 99. Cairo 10792. 
 ΠΟΤ £07 03: 
 . Smiths. 217851. 
 . Cairo 10794. 
 neath, 
 
 . Cairo 10795. 
 a aie LITO: 
 Am. 
 
 107. Cairo 10796. 
 Cairo 10797. 
 Cairo 10798. 
 AI. 
 
 Vict. 
 
270 
 
 112. Smiths. 217852. 
 113.2: 
 114. Cairo 10799. 
 115. Am. 
 116. Graz. 
 117, Am, 
 118. Bristol. 
 119-20. Am. 
 121. Cairo 10800. 
 122. Cairo 10801. 
 123. Cairo 10802. 
 124. Cairo 10803. 
 125. Cairo 10804. 
 126. Cairo 10805. 
 127. Cairo 10243. 
 128. Cairo 10806. 
 129, Cairo 10807. 
 130. Cairo 10808. 
 131. Cairo 10809. 
 132. Rugby. 
 133. Cairo 10795. 
 134. Cairo ro8to. 
 135. Columbia. 
 136. Cairo 1o8rr. 
 137-8. Am. 
 139. Cairo 10812. 
 140. B. M. 
 141. Cairo 10217. 
 142. Cairo 10247. 
 143. Cairo 10242. 
 144, Cairo 10219. 
 145, Am. 
 146. Bolton. 
 147-50. Am. 
 151. B. M. 827. 
 152. Cairo 10220. 
 158. 4GYaZ, 
 154. Am. 
 16, ΥἹΕΙ͂, 
 156. Am. 
 157. Harvard 2224. 
 158-9. Am. 
 160. Cairo 10218. 
 161. Cairo 10234. 
 162. Cairo 10232. 
 163. Cairo 10233. 
 164. Columbia. 
 165. Johns Hopkins. 
 166. Princeton 0132. 
 340. 166. 
 
 THE ΟΧΥ̓ΔΗΥΝΟΗ ΒΒ PARYRI 
 
 167. B. M. 828 (2). 
 168. Harvard 2225. 
 169. B. M. 828 (6). 
 170. Toronto. 
 
 171. Glasgow. 
 
 172. B. M. 828(c). 
 173. B. M. 828 (ὦ). 
 174. Pennsyl. 2770. 
 175. Edinburgh. 
 176. Vassar. 
 
 177. Camb. 4071. 
 178. Camb. 4072. 
 179. B. M. 828 (e). 
 180. Yale. 
 
 181. B. M. 828(/). 
 182. Owen’s Coll. 
 183. Hamilton. 
 184. B. M. 828(g). 
 185. B. M. 828 (A). 
 186. Melbourne Pap. 
 
 6. 
 187. B. M. 828 (2). 
 188. B. M. 828 (2). 
 189. St. Andrews. 
 190-5. Am. 
 196. Pennsyl. 2771. 
 197. Harvard 2226. 
 198. Cairo 10230. 
 199, Cairo 10227. 
 200. Cairo 10228. 
 201. Cairo 10245. 
 202. Cairo 10246. 
 203. Cairo 10226. 
 204. Cairo 10244. 
 205. Cairo 10222. 
 206. Cairo 10223. 
 207. Cairo 10229. 
 208. Brussels. 
 209. Cairo 10813. 
 210. Cairo 10814. 
 211; Yale. 
 212, Cairo. 1085s. 
 213. Cairo 10816. 
 214. Columbia. 
 215. Cairo 10814. 
 216. Princeton 0132. 
 
 240. 2τό. 
 217. Brussels. 
 218-9. Am. 
 220. Cairo 10818. 
 
 221. Cairo 10819. 
 222. Am. 
 223. Cairo 10820. 
 224. Cairo 10821. 
 225. Am 
 
 226. Smiths. 21 7859. 
 
 227. Am, 
 228. Brussels. 
 229. Graz. 
 230. 
 2851. 
 232. 
 
 10822. 
 829. 
 3030. 
 51: 
 ek eo 
 833. 
 10823. 
 10824. 
 
 10825. 
 
 10826. 
 . Am. 
 
 244. Cairo 10827. 
 245-7. Am. 
 
 248. Liverpool. 
 249. Brussels. 
 250-1. Am. 
 
 262; Vict 
 
 253. Am. 
 
 254. B. M. 1197. 
 255-8. Am. 
 
 259. 
 260. 
 261. Ἷ 
 262. Brussels. 
 
 267-8. Am. 
 
 269. Brussels. 
 270. Graz. 
 271-7. Am. 
 
 278. Cairo 10828. 
 279. Cairo 10829. 
 280. Cairo 10830. 
 281. Cairo 10831. 
 282. Cairo 10832. 
 283. Cairo 10833. 
 
 284. Cairo 10834. 
 
 285. B. M. 1199. 
 
 286. Cairo 10835. 
 
 287. Cairo 10836. 
 
 288. Cairo 10837. 
 
 289. Cairo 10838. 
 
 290. Cairo 10839. 
 
 291-3. Am. . 
 
 294. Cairo 10840. 
 
 295. Smiths, 217855. 
 
 . Am. 
 
 297. Brussels. 
 
 298. Smiths.217857. 
 
 299. Am. 
 
 300. Cairo 10841. 
 
 301. Cairo 10842. 
 
 302. Cairo 10843. 
 
 303. Cairo 10844. 
 
 304. Am. 
 
 305. Cairo 10845. 
 
 306. Am. 
 
 307. Vict. 
 
 308. B. M. 834. 
 
 309. Cairo 10846. 
 
 310. Pennsyl. 2772. 
 
 311. Cairo 10847. 
 
 312. Cairo 10848. 
 
 313. Bod. Gr. class. 
 a. YI, 
 
 314-7. Am. 
 
 318. Cairo 10849. 
 
 319. Cairo 10850. 
 
 320-1. Am. 
 
 322. Graz. 
 
 323. Cairo 10851. 
 
 324. Bod. Gr. class. 
 c. 51 (PB). 
 
 325. Bod. Gr. class. 
 ὦ. ΣΦ (P), 
 
 326. Cairo 10852. 
 
 327. Cairo 10853. 
 
 328. Cairo 10854. 
 
 329. Brussels. 
 
 330. Cairo 10855. 
 
 331. Am: . 
 
 332. Cairo 10856. 
 
 333. Am. 
 
 334. Cairo 10857. 
 
 335. Am. 
 
 336. Smiths. 217854. 
 
. Cairo 10858. 
 
 Am 
 
 . Cairo 10859. 
 . Cairo 10860. 
 , Graz. 
 
 . Cairo 10861. 
 wea, 
 
 . Cairo 10862. 
 
 APPENDIX III 
 
 345. Cairo 10863. 
 346, Cairo 10864. 
 347-8. Am. 
 
 349. Pennsyl. 2773. 
 350. Harvard 2227. 
 851. Yale, 
 
 352. Columbia. 
 353. Johns Hopkins. 
 
 354. Princeton 0132. 
 340. 354. 
 
 355. Hamilton. 
 
 356. Princeton 0132. 
 340. 356. 
 
 357. Columbia. 
 
 358. Johns Hopkins. 
 
 359. Pennsyl. 2774. 
 
 271 
 
 360. Harvard 2228. 
 
 861. Yale: 
 
 362. Harvard 2229. 
 
 363. Johns Hopkins, 
 
 364. Princeton 0132. 
 340. 364. 
 
 365. Columbia. 
 
 366. Yale. 
 
LNSDD BCS os 
 
 I NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS1. 
 
 ἀβάστακτος p. 262. 
 
 ἀγαθός 664. 19; 666. 115; 
 670. 12. 
 
 ᾿Αγασικλῆς 659. 5O. 
 
 ἄγειν 663. 35. 
 
 ἀγλαΐζεσθαι 659. 93. 
 
 ἀγλαός 659. 27; 674. 1. 
 
 ᾿Αγνόθεος B64. 33, 45. 
 
 ἄγρα 662. 53. 
 
 ἀγρευτήρ 662. 46 (?). 
 
 ἄγριος 661. 3 (0). 
 
 ᾿Αδείμαντος 664. 105. 
 
 ἀεί 667. 8; 670. 4. 
 
 ἀέξειν 662. 47. 
 
 ἀθάνατος 659. 14, 24. 
 
 ᾿Αθηνᾶ 663. 15. 
 
 ᾿Αθήναζε 664. 15. 
 
 ᾿Αθηναῖος 668. 48; 664. 3; 
 680. 6; 682. 16. 
 
 ἀθρεῖν 671. τό. 
 
 ἄϊγδον p. 263. 
 
 αἰγλήεις 671. 3. 
 
 ἀΐειν 660. 8. 
 
 Αἰολάδας 659. 12, 29. 
 
 αἱρεῖν 665. 22; 681. 7. 
 
 αἰσχρός, αἴσχιστος 666. 119. 
 
 αἰσχύνειν 655. 23; 666. 48. 
 
 αἰψηρός 659. 37. 
 
 ἀκατάσχετος 684. 19. 
 
 ἄκατος 688. 15. 
 
 ἀκίνητος 668. 15. 
 
 ἀκμή 684. 13. 
 
 ἀκμής 662. 51. 
 
 (a) Greek. 
 
 ἀκούειν 663. 23. 
 
 ᾿Ακραγαντῖνοι 665. 12, 16, 20, 
 23. 
 
 ἀκρόπολις 662. 40 (?). 
 
 ᾿Ακρωρίτης 662. 42, 50. 
 
 ἀκώλυτος 684. 21. 
 
 ᾿Αλεξάνδρεια 678. 4. 
 
 ᾿Αλέξανδρος 663. 20, 
 679. 3. 
 
 ἀλήθεια 654. 38. 
 
 ἀληθής 664. 92, 103. 
 
 ἅλιος 660. το. 
 
 ἀλλά 659. 26, 68; 662. 27; 
 ΘΙ: 14:5 879.7, 
 
 ἄλλος 664. 23, 28, 953 670. 
 12.651. 6. 
 
 ἁλμυρός 659. 81. 
 
 ἄλοχος 662. 49. 
 
 ἅλς 661. 26. 
 
 ἀλυκτοπέδαι 670. 5 (?). 
 
 ἁμαρτία 664. 98. 
 
 ἄμμορος 660. 2. 
 
 ἀμπυρίζειν 661. 17. 
 
 ᾿Αμύντας 662. 21, 32. 
 
 ἀμφί 659. 53> 59. 
 
 ἀμφιβαίνειν 670. ἡ. 
 
 ἀμφικτίονες 659. 55. 
 
 ἄν 654. 4: 659. τι; 662. 
 34 (?); 668. 43; 664. 93; 
 666. 162; 670.1; 671.1. 
 
 ἀνάγκη 659. 18. 
 
 avaeptav 662. 53. 
 
 ἀναζεῖν 684, τό. 
 
 343 
 
 ἀναπαύεσθαι 654, 8. 
 
 ἀνάρσιος 660. 2. 
 
 ἀναστρέφειν 680. 8. 
 
 ἄνευ 666. 153 (?). 
 
 ἀνήρ 659. 8, 48, 66; 662. 
 29; 664. 99; 682. 16. 
 
 ἄνθος 662. 22. 
 
 ἄνθρωπος 654. 22; 664. τοι. 
 
 ἀνιαρός 659. 19. 
 
 ἀνίκητος 662. 35. 
 
 ἀνοιγνύναι 6585. 46. 
 
 ἀντιάζειν 672. 7. 
 
 ᾿Αντίπατρος 662. 48. 
 
 ἀντρηΐς 662. 49. 
 
 ἀνώτερον 667. 28, 
 
 ἄξιος 662. 112, 116 (?). 
 
 ἀξίωμα 684. 7. 
 
 ἀοιδῆ 659. 35, 49; 
 25 (ἢ); 
 
 ἅπας 666, 162. 
 
 ἀπείρατος 660. 1. 
 
 ἀπό 654. 29; 
 660. 6. 
 
 ἀποδημεῖν 664. 2. 
 
 ἀποδημία 664. ὃ, 8ο. 
 
 ἀποκαλύπτειν 654. 29. 
 
 ἀποκνεῖν 654. 22. 
 
 ἀποκρύπτειν 654. 39. 
 
 ᾿Απόλλων 674. ὃ (0). 
 
 ἀποστέλλειν 663. 41; 679. 3, 
 17. 
 
 ἀποφεύγειν 682. 14. 
 
 ἀπροφασίστως 666. 168, 
 
 660. 
 
 655. I, 2; 
 
 1 Excluding 658 and 669, which are classed with the non-literary documents. 
 
πὸ Δ IVI LISERARYS FRAGMENTS 
 
 ἄπωθε 661. 15. 
 
 apa 660. 15; 670. 8, I’. 
 
 apa 678. 6 (?). 
 
 ἀργαλέος 662. 25. 
 
 ἀρετή 659. 9. 
 
 "Apns 662. 34. 
 
 ἄριος (?) B61. 3. 
 
 ᾿Αρίφρων 664. 102, 
 
 ἀρρηφορεῖν B64, 32. 
 
 ἄρχειν 664. 94, 95, 96. 
 
 ᾿Αρχέλαος p. 261. 
 
 ἀρχή 664. 2, 113, 11ῆ. 
 
 dows p. 262. 
 
 ἄσκεπος 662. 37. 
 
 ἀστυφέλικτος 670. 9; p. 261. 
 
 dre 684. 17. 
 
 ἄτεκνος 662. 30. 
 
 ἀτρεκές 671. 3. 
 
 ἄτρεστος 662. 33. 
 
 ᾿Αττική 680. 5. 
 
 ἀτυχία 666. 63. 
 
 αὖθι 661. 26. 
 
 αὖθις (αὖτις) 661]. 23. 
 
 αὐλίσκος 659. 34. 
 
 αὐξάνειν 655. 9. 
 
 αὔξειν 659. 120. 
 
 αὐτίκα 660. 12. 
 
 αὐτοκράτωρ 684. 18, 
 
 αὐτόματος 670. 3. 
 
 αὐτός 654. 32; 655. 15, 17, 
 18; 662. 51, 52; 663. 4, 
 13, 18, 44; 664. 5 ef saep.; 
 6665501), τῇ; 670.2 ; 
 ΘΕΟΣ ΟΒΙΣ 2: 682. τῇ. 
 
 αὐχμαλέος 662. 22. 
 
 ᾿Αφροδίτη 668. 17. 
 
 ᾿Αχαιός 662. 35 ; 668. 24, 37. 
 
 βαδίζειν 664. 44. 
 
 βαίνειν 659. 74. 
 
 Βακχιάδαι 664, 115. 
 
 βαρύς 667. 21. 
 
 βασιλεία 654. τι, 15; 679. 
 42. 
 
 βασιλεύειν 654. 8. 
 
 βασιλεύς B71. 4, 14(?), 21; 
 684. 7, 12, 17. 
 
 βίαιος 659. 17. 
 
 βοήθεια 665. 4. 
 
 βουλί 664. 132. 
 
 βούλεσθαι 664. 104; 684. 3. 
 Βορέας 659. 38. 
 
 βρίθειν 660. 4. 
 
 βροτός 659. 7,14; 660. 21(?). 
 βύρσα 662. 45. 
 
 yap 659. 20, 23, 71; 664. 
 23, 44, 83, 99; 666. 51, 
 150% 66752237, 670. τὸς 
 684. 13, 17. | 
 
 ye 661. 23; 662. 30. 
 
 γείτων 677. 2. 
 
 Γέλα 665. 3. 
 
 Γελῷοι 665. 5, 10. 
 
 γένος 659. 13. 
 
 γεύεσθαι B54. 5. 
 
 γῆ 654. 13; 660. 14. 
 
 γίγνεσθαι 659. 20; 662. 27, 
 30; 665.14; 666. 164; 
 667: 27; 681]. ὃ; 682. 9; 
 684. 12; p. 261. 
 
 γιγνώσκειν 654. 17, 18, 20. 
 
 Γλαύκων 665. το. 
 
 Γλῆνις 662. 43, 47, 53. 
 
 γλίσχρος 678. 7. 
 
 γλυκί 678. 3. 
 
 γλυκερός 670. 25. 
 
 γλῶσσα B59. 47. 
 
 γνάμπτειν 660. ὃ. 
 
 γνώριμος 667. 27. 
 
 γονεύς 659. 52; 662. 26. 
 
 γοῦν 664, 87. 
 
 γυνή 659. 48; 662.24; 663. 
 39; 664. 58. 
 
 δαιδάλλειν 659. 44. 
 Δαισιστρότα 659. 75. 
 
 δάκρυ 662. 22. 
 
 δαμάζειν 659. 18. 
 
 Δάμαινα 659. 70. 
 
 δαπάνη 664. 28. 
 
 δάφνη 659. 28, 73. 
 
 Ae| 671. 2. 
 
 δεικνύναι 662. 54; 679. 43. 
 δεῖν 666. 61. τὰ δέοντα 666. 
 
 89. 
 
 Δελφοί 674. 4. 
 δέρκεσθαι 662. 40. 
 δέρμα 662. 52. 
 dors 679, 15 (?). 
 
 1 
 
 ὌΠ 
 
 δηθύνειν B71. 21. 
 
 δῆρις B62. 34: 670. 23. 
 
 δημοκρατία 682. 1, 15 (9). 
 
 διά 668. 46; 664. 13, 23, 
 36, 107; 666. 115; 667. 
 
 5, 
 
 διαβάλλειν 664. 29. 
 
 διάζευξις 667. 8. 
 
 διαλέγεσθαι 663. ο. 
 
 διαμερίζειν 679. τι. 
 
 διατρίβειν 664. το. 
 
 διαφέρειν 664. 21. 
 
 διάφορος 684. 8. 
 
 διδάσκειν 672. 6. 
 
 διδόναι 655. 15; 659. 68; 
 662. 29; 675. 15. 
 
 δικαστήριον 682. 13. 
 
 δίκη 659. 68. 
 
 δίκτυον B61. 7. 
 
 διό 666. 61. 
 
 ΔιονυσιΪ 689. 9. 
 
 Διονυσαλέξανδρος 663. 26. 
 
 Διόνυσος 668. 11, 40; 670. 
 22. 
 
 δίχα 672. 9. 
 
 διψὴν 659. 81. 
 
 δοκεῖν 664. 39, 97; 679. τό. 
 
 δόμος 662. 31. 
 
 δόρυ 660. 3; 662. 35. 
 
 δρᾶμα 663. 45. 
 
 Spupovopos 662. 56 (?). 
 
 δύναμις 666. 165. 
 
 δύνασθαι 667. τό ; 678. 6(?). 
 
 δυνατός 664. 6. 
 
 δώδεκα 677. 9. 
 
 δῶρον 662. 43. 
 
 ἐάν 666. τορ ; 678. 1. 
 
 ἑαυτοῦ 654. 18, 20; 663. 31. 
 
 ἐγείρειν Θ70. 23. 
 
 ἐγκεῖσθαι 659. 48. 
 
 ἐγχειρίζειν 666. 160. 
 
 ἔγχος 670. 20. 
 
 ἐγώ 659. 45, 49, 70; 661. 7, 
 20, 24; 662. 28; 664. 6 
 et saep.; 670. 23. 
 
 εἰ 664. 92. 
 
 εἰδέναι 659. 45; 670. 17. 
 
 εἰκότως 684. 13. 
 
 εἶναι 654. 13 εἰ sacp.; 655. 
 
274 
 
 8, 20,28; 659.15; 660. 
 2,9; 662. 24; 664. 5, 
 41, 44,92; 666. 112, 117, 
 170; 667. 19, 23; 670. 
 ἘΠ G74, Or); 678.22 ; 
 684.2041 τ Τ ΤΟΙ 
 εἰς B63. 20, 23, 30, 31; 664. 
 40; 666. 163; 672. 9; 
 679. 18, 41; 680. 9; 
 
 683. 6. ἐς 659. 51; 662. 
 
 29. 
 
 cis 655. 11; 662. 30; 684. 2. 
 
 εἰσαγγελία 682. 8. 
 
 εἰσέρχεσθαι 658. 44, 45. 
 
 ire 667. 3, 4, 5, 7- " 
 
 ex 661. 28 ; 662. 24, 26, 36; 
 676. 12; 677. 2, 
 
 ἕκαστος 682. 4. 
 
 ἑκάτερος 668. 35. 
 
 ἐκδιδάσκειν 672. 8. 
 
 ἐκδύεσθαι 655. 22. 
 
 ἐκεῖνος 661. 20; 664. 77. 
 
 ἐκθρώσκειν 662. 39. 
 
 Ἑλένη 663. 21, 38. 
 
 ἕλκειν 654. το. 
 
 “Ἑλληνικός 679. τ. 
 
 ἐμός 659. 80; 661. 21; 671. 
 τῇ. 
 
 ἔμπροσθεν 654. 27. 
 
 ἐμφανής 655. 19. 
 
 ἔμφασις 663. 47. 
 
 ἐν 654. 11; 659. 27, 58, 61; 
 663. 45; 664. 9, 29, 44, 
 073 6G5: τῷ ΟΣ 
 15,203, 676.16 25010225 
 680) το 8:2: 2. 15. 
 689. 12. 
 
 ἐναρμόνιος 667. I. 
 
 ἐνδύεσθαι 655. 6. 
 
 ἔνδυμα 655. τι, τό. 
 
 ἕνεκεν 659. 66. 
 
 ἐνεργέστερος 684. 5. 
 
 ἐνιέναι 659. 65. 
 
 ἐνταῦθα 664. τ6. 
 
 ἐντεῦθεν 664. 8. 
 
 ἐντός 654. τό. 
 
 εξ 661. 26. 
 
 ἐξάγειν 668. .22. 
 
 ἐξαυτῆς 667. 14. 
 
 ἐξέρχεσθαι 680. 4. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 ἐξετάζειν 654. 32. 
 
 ἑξῆς 667. 5. 
 
 ἕξις 664. 131 (?). 
 
 ἐξουσία 666. 159; 684. 18. 
 
 ἐοικέναι 664. QT. 
 
 ἐπάγειν 663. 47. 
 
 ἐπανέρχεσθαι 663. 22; 664. 
 ae 
 
 ἐπασκεῖν 659. 75. 
 
 ἐπειδή 664. 2. 
 
 ἔπειτα 659. 65; 667. 2. 
 
 ἐπέραστος 668. 18. 
 
 ἐπερωτᾶν 654. 23. 
 
 ἕπεσθαι 659. 71. 
 
 ἐπί 655.14; 659. 8, 12, 57; 
 661. 20; 668. 35; 668. 
 τ} ΘΟ: 29; 22. 
 
 ἐπιβουλεύειν 664. 4. 
 
 ἐπιδιδόναι Θ64. 25. 
 
 ἐπικατέχειν 663. 39. 
 
 ἐπιμέλεια 679. 6. 
 
 ἐπιμιγνύναι BBY. 25. 
 
 ἐπισκώπτειν 668. 11. 
 
 ἐπισπέρχειν B59. 38. 
 
 ἐπιτρίβειν 680. 13. 
 
 ἐπίτροπος 664. 42. 
 
 ἔπος 659. 44. 
 
 ἑπταέτις 662. 30. 
 
 ἑπτάπυλος 659. 64. 
 
 ἐπῳδή 661. 21. 
 
 ἐρᾶν 664. 32. 
 
 eparos 660. 14. 
 
 ἔργον 684. 2. 
 
 ἐρείπειν 662. 36. 
 
 ἔρις 659. 67. 
 
 “Ἑρμῆς 668. 5. 
 
 ἔρχεσθαι 659. 51; 661. 23, 
 25 (ἔνθῃς, ἦνθε) ; 662. 29. 
 
 ἐς 659. 51; 662. 20. 
 
 ἐσθίειν 658. 4. 
 
 ἐσλός 659. 52. 
 
 ἑσπέρα B55. 2. 
 
 ἑστία 659. 92. 
 
 ἔσχατος 654. 26. 
 
 ἔτι 662. 30. 
 
 ἕτερος 664. 95; 684. τι. 
 
 eviepos 675. 14. 
 
 εὐκλεής 659. 59. 
 
 eviay 684. 9. 
 
 εὐπέταλος 659. 73. . 
 
 εὑρίσκειν 654. 7, 17; 664. 
 162. 
 
 εὐτυχία 659. 13; 663. τό. 
 
 εὔφρων 659. 1. 
 
 εὔχεσθαι 659. τι. 
 
 ἔχειν 655.11; 659.9; 663. 
 39; 664. 100; 670. 20; 
 671. 15; 684. 4. 
 
 ἐχθρός 659. 67; 676. 1B. 
 
 ἕως 655. 1; 670. 9(?). 
 
 Cevyviva 659. 79. 
 
 Ζεύς 659. 453; 664. 103. 
 
 Ζέφυρος 659. 36. 
 
 (nv B54. 2. 
 
 Ζηνόδοτος p. 261. 
 
 Cyrew 654. 6; 663. 2 (?) 
 666. 165. 
 
 ζώειν 659. 19. 
 
 ζωννύναι 659. 26. 
 
 ῃ 663. 27. 4 
 7 660. 5; 664. I, 94; 667. 
 Ι, 17, 18; 684. 5(?), 7. 
 
 7 662. 30. 
 
 ἡγεῖσθαι 659. 71. 
 
 ἡγεμών 662. 50. 
 
 ἠδέ 662. 40. 
 
 ἤδη 664. 7, 19. 
 
 ἡδονή 664. 44. 
 
 nideos 660. 4. 
 
 ἠϊών 659. 58; 678. 7. 
 ἥκειν 664. 12. 
 
 ἡλικία 655. 14; 662. 29. 
 ἡλικιώτης 664, 22. 
 
 ἡμεῖς 654. το; 655. 19. 
 ἡμέρα 659. 15. 
 
 ἡμέτερος 670. 19, 24. 
 ἡμί 661. 24. 
 
 ἡσυχία 679: 8. 
 
 θάλασσα 654.14; 661]. 28. 
 θαλάσσιος 684. 14. 
 
 θάλλειν 659. 31. 
 
 θάλος 659. 48. 
 
 θαμβεῖν 6654. 7. 
 
 θάπτειν 654. 31. 
 
 θεά 673. 9. 
 
 θεατὴς 6698. 7. 
 
 θεῖος 659. 3. 
 
IL. NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS 
 
 θέμεθλα B74. 5. 
 
 Θεόκριτος 662. 28. 
 
 θεός 677. 9. 
 
 θεράπων 673. I (0). 
 θεσπέσιος 660. 6; 671. το. 
 θεωρεῖν Θ66. 63. 
 
 Θηβαι 659. 25. 
 
 θηρ 672. 8. 
 
 θηρίον 661. 11. 
 
 θνήσκειν 662. 25, 27. 
 θνητός 659. I5. 
 Θρασύβουλος 664. 17, 35. 
 θυγάτηρ 659. 72; 664. 31. 
 θῦμα 675. 15. 
 
 θυμός 684. 17. 
 
 Θωμᾶς 654. 3. 
 
 Ἴδη 663. 23. 
 
 ἴδιος 674. 7. 
 
 ἰεπαιάν OY ἰεπαιήων GEO. 2 e/ 
 Saep. 
 
 ἱεραπόλος 659. 6. 
 
 ἱερός 661. 16; 674. 6 (iapés); 
 675. 3. 
 
 Ἰησοῦς 654. 2 ef saep. 
 
 ἱμείρειν 671. 22. 
 
 Ἱμεραῖοι 6685. 15. 
 
 ἱππεύς 679. 20. 
 
 ἱππόβοτος 673. 4. 
 
 ἵππος 659. 56. 
 
 ἱπποτροφία 664. 27. 
 
 ἱστορία 683. 13. 
 
 Ἰτωνία 659. 59. 
 
 ἴφθιμος 662. 54. 
 
 ἰχθύς 654. 14. 
 
 ᾿Ιωνία 664. 9. 
 
 καθάπερ 667. 26. 
 
 καθήκειν B81. 13. 
 
 καθιστάναι 679. 10. 
 
 κακός 678. 4. 
 
 Κάκυρον 665. 2. 
 
 καλεῖν 664. 114; 691. 15. 
 
 Καλλιτέλης 662. 27, 31. 
 
 καλός B62. 53. καλὸς κἀγαθός 
 664. 19. κάλλιστος 069. 
 17. 
 
 κάματος 659. 10. 
 
 καπνός 662. 39. 
 
 κάπρος 662. 51. 
 
 κάρα 659. 10, 32. 
 
 κατά 668. 16; 664. IOI. 
 καταγρᾶν B61. 27 (9). 
 καταλαμβάνειν’ 664. 18. 
 καταλείπειν 664. 15, 37, 41. 
 καταμένειν 664. 6. 
 
 katappoos 6861. 5. 
 κατάστασις 6B4. 24. 
 κατέχειν 675. 3. 
 
 κεῖνος B59. 50. 
 
 κεῖσθαι 659. 8; 667. 3. 
 κέλαδος 675, 12. 
 
 κελεύειν 664. 14,120; 678. 1. 
 κέντρον 676. 1ο. 
 
 κεραία (OF ἀκέραιος ?) 655. 49. 
 κεράστης 662. 49. 
 
 κέρνος 688. 18. 
 
 Κίλικες 680. 1. 
 
 Κιλικία 679. 2. 
 
 κλειτός 671. 6 (0). 
 
 κλύειν 671. 17. 
 
 κλυτός 659. 58. 
 
 kvica 660. 6. 
 
 κοινός 667, 22. 
 
 κοινωνεῖν 667, 12. 
 
 κόλασις 684. 21. 
 
 κομίζειν 664, 98 ; 6838. 10. 
 κόμπος 659. 33. 
 
 κορύσσειν 660. 5. 
 
 κοσμεῖν 659. 60. 
 
 κόσμος 6585. 26. 
 
 κοῦρος 662. 543; 671. 18. 
 Kpaoros 665. 13, I5. 
 κρατεῖν 664. 1133; 681. 5. 
 Kparivos 663. 28. 
 
 κρείσσων 655. 7. 
 
 κρήνη 659. 8ο. 
 
 κρίνειν 659. 7; 663. 19. 
 κρίνον 655. 8. 
 
 | Κριός 668. 31. 
 
 Κρονίδαι 659. 12. 
 
 κρύπτειν 655. 43; 659. το; 
 663. 31. 
 
 κρυπτός 654, 30. 
 
 κτῆμα 666. 118. 
 
 κῦμα 684. 14(?). 
 
 κυμαίνειν 684. τό. 
 
 κυνηγεσία 662. 43 (2). 
 
 κυνηγία 664. 27. 
 
 Κύπρος 8680. το. 
 
 ἼΕΣ 
 
 275 
 
 κύριος 664. 2 (3); 638. 1. 
 Κύψελος 664. 111. 
 
 κύων 666. 52 (9). 
 
 κωλύειν 666. 61. 
 
 κωμῳδεῖν 668. 44. 
 
 Λακεδαίμων 662. 33 ; 668. 21. 
 
 λαλεῖν 664. 1; 677. 6. 
 
 λαμβάνειν 664. 1, 113, 116; 
 679. 9. 
 
 λανθάνειν 659. 49. 
 
 λέγειν 654. 3 ef saep.; 655. 
 τ 2 ΟΡ... 47 ΟΘῚΞ 
 22; 662. 24; 664. 103, 
 110; 666. 109; 667. 25; 
 671. I. 
 
 λείπειν BBZ. 31; 670. 3. 
 
 Λεωνίδης 662. 41, 55. 
 
 λήγειν 661. 18. 
 
 λιπύότεκνος 659. τό. 
 
 λόγος 654. I, 4. 
 
 λοετρόν 6B2. 30. 
 
 Λοξίας 659. 23. 
 
 λούειν 670. 6. 
 
 λυπεῖν 677. 3. 
 
 λυσιτελεῖν 664. 93. 
 
 λώτινος 659. 34. 
 
 μαθητής 655. 18. 
 
 μακάριος 654. 40. 
 
 μάλα 663. 46; 664. 19, 43; 
 684.13. μᾶλλον B64. 94; 
 684. 6. μάλιστα 660. 4; 
 664. 12. 
 
 μαλακός 659. 27. 
 
 μαλάσσειν 659. 40 (ταράσσειν 
 Pap.). 
 
 μανθάνειν 666. 163. 
 
 μάντις 659. 5. 
 
 μαρτυρεῖν B64. 104. 
 
 μαρτύρεσθαι 660. τό. 
 
 μάρτυς 659. 51. 
 
 μάχαιρα 666. 156. 
 
 μάχη 665. 8, 17. 
 
 μεγαλοφυΐα 664. 25. 
 
 μέγας 664. 108, 116; 680. 
 3; 684. 17. 
 
 μειράκιον 664. 18. 
 
 μέλας 659.10. Μέλας p. 261. 
 
 μέλλειν 660. ο (?); 683. 33. 
 
276 
 
 μέλος B75. 13. 
 
 μέλπειν 675. 2, ΤΙ. 
 
 μελῳδεῖν 667. 6. 
 
 μέν 659. 43, 46; 660. 8; 
 662. 26; 663. 7, 14, 38; 
 664. 91; 667. 1,8; 676. 
 9; 681. 6, 11; 684. 8, 
 13, 23. μὲν οὖν 664. τό. 
 
 pevos 661. 3. 
 
 μέριμνα 659. 66. 
 
 μερίς 679. 13 (?). 
 
 μέρος 667. 4. 
 
 μέση 667. 9, 17, 18. 
 
 μετά 663. 20, 23; 664. 9. 
 
 μετασκευάζειν 668. 32. 
 
 μεταχρόνιος 660. 13. 
 
 μή 654. 6, 37; 655. 23; 
 659. τό, 8ὃο; 661. 22; 
 663. 4; 664. 85; 666. 
 156,158; 670. 23; 679. 
 7,9. ov py 654. 5. 
 
 μηδέ 662. 52. 
 μηδείς 659. ο; 666. 111. 
 μῆδος 659. 76. 
 μήτε 655. 2, 3; 666. 57. 
 μήτηρ 664. 37. 
 μιμνήσκεν 659. 35; 
 
 8 (?). 
 Μινῴα 665. 18. 
 μόνος 662. 33; 681. 12. 
 μῦθος B61. 18. 
 μύρεσθαι B62. 38. 
 puptas 662. 36. 
 μυρίος 659. 78. 
 
 670. 
 
 ναίειν 659. 105 (?). 
 ναός 659. 59. 
 ναῦς 660. 4; 663. 36. 
 νεκρός Ὁ. 261. 
 νέκταρ 659. 8o. 
 νέος 662. 51. 
 30. 
 νή 664. 103. 
 νήθειν 655. το. 
 Νηρηίς 672. 5. 
 νηστεύειν 654. 33. 
 νήτη 667. 9, 17, 19. 
 Νιί ) (2) G71. 3. 
 νικᾶν 663. 19. 
 νίκη 659. 577. 
 
 νεώτερος 664. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 νιν 676. 13. 
 
 νόμος 682. 2, ΤΙ. 
 
 vopos 673. 5. 
 
 νόσος 662. 25. 
 
 Νουμήνιος 677. 7. 
 
 νοῦς 664. τοο. 
 
 νύμφη 662. 42, 46. 
 
 νῦν 659. 54, 70, 80; 662. 
 35; 671. 12... 681} 515. 
 νυνί 664. 106. 
 
 νύξ 660. I5. 
 
 ξένος 662. 26; 665. 2, 6, 9, 
 10. 
 
 ὀβριμοπάτρη 678. 2 (). 
 
 ᾽᾿Ογχηστός 659. 58. 
 
 ὅδε 659. 66; 662. 45, 46(?), 
 BiG (eas 
 
 ὁδός 659. 72. 
 
 οἰκεῖος 664, TOT. 
 
 οἰκειότης 664. 13. 
 
 οἰκίζειν 665. 19. 
 
 οἶκος 659. 17; 684. 4ο. 
 
 οἰκτείρειν 668. 58, 
 
 ὀϊστός 660. 3. 
 
 οἴχεσθαι 659. 82. 
 
 οἰωνός 662. 57. 
 
 ὀκνεῖν 668. 377. 
 
 ὀκτάχορδος 667. 24. 
 
 ὀλίγος 668. 24; 664. 119. 
 
 ὅλος 667. 4. 
 
 Ὄλυμπος 678. 5 (0). 
 
 ὁμαλός 659. 14. 
 
 ὁμολογεῖν BBG. 162. 
 
 ὁμοῦ 662. 56(?); 675. 6. 
 
 "Oupadrds 6685. 1. 
 
 ᾿Ονη(σι)φάνης 662. 54. 
 
 ὄνομα 662. 26. 
 
 ὀνομαστός 688. 3. 
 
 ὀξύς 684. το. 
 
 ὁπόταν 659. 37. 
 
 ὁπότε 667. 29. 
 
 ὁρᾶν 655. 21; 662. 37; 664. 
 5.2. ».6 70. το (ΣΝ 
 
 ὅρπαξ 659. 27. 
 
 ὀρφανός B64. 37. 
 
 ὅς 654. 30, 31; 659. 36, 
 48, 58,75; 662. 28; 664. 
 
 34; 666. 165; 676. 13; 
 678. 5 (?). 
 
 ὅσος 664. 89. 
 
 ὅστις 654.12; 655.9; 659. 
 16. 
 
 ὅταν 654. 7; 655. 22; 666. 
 54, 113. 
 
 ὅτι 654. 25; 664. 3; 671.8. 
 
 οὐδέ 655. το. 
 
 οὐδείς 664. 25; 684. 1ρ. 
 
 οὐθείς 664. 96. 
 
 οὐ μή 654. 5. 
 
 οὖν 664. 16, 33, 102, 120. 
 
 οὕπω 671. Ig, 20. 
 
 οὐρανός 654, ΤΊ, 12. 
 
 οὔτε 659. 48; 664. 93, 95. 
 
 οὗτος 654. 4; 660. 8; 662. 
 44, 50; 663. 6, 19, 20, 
 38; 664. 92, 11Οο, 117; 
 666. 62, 1575, 667,222) 
 23; 670. 26; 682) τῷ 
 οὑτοσί 664. τού. 
 
 οὕτω 684. 15. οὕτως 664. 91. 
 
 ὀχεῖν 659. 28. 
 
 ὄψις 654. 28; 
 684. Io. 
 
 664. 20; 
 
 Παγώνδας 659. 30. 
 
 παιάν 675. 1, 12. 
 
 παιδεύειν 684. 6. 
 
 Παίονες 681. 14. 
 
 mais 659. 70; 662. 31; 664. 
 16; 666. 156; 670. 26; 
 671. 22. 
 
 mad, 670. 21. 
 
 πάλαι 659. 54; 
 684. 18 (?). 
 
 Παλαίμονες 661. 9, 13. 
 
 παλίγγλωσσος 659. 67. 
 
 πάμπαν 659. 17. 
 
 Πάν 662. 42, 46, 50. 
 
 πάνδοξος 659. 28. 
 
 πάντοθεν 670. 7. 
 
 πάνυ 664. 108. 
 
 πάππος 664. 33. 
 
 mapa 659. 81; 663. 14, 15; 
 664. 34. 
 
 παραγίγνεσθαι 663. 12, 33; 
 664. 106. 
 
 676. 17; 
 
I, NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS 
 
 mapadiddvat 663. 36, 40; 679. 
 
 5. 
 
 παρακαλεῖν 668. 42. 
 
 παραλαμβάνειν 638. 21 (?). 
 
 παρατηρεῖν 654. 35. 
 
 παραφαίνειν 663. το. 
 
 παρεῖναι 670, 18. 
 
 παρθενήϊος 659. 46. 
 
 παρθένιος B59. 32. 
 
 Παρνασσός 674. 5. 
 
 πάροιθε 659. 43. 
 
 πάρος 662. 33. 
 
 πᾶς 659. 8; 668. 4(?); 664. 
 26; 666. 118; 682. 2. 
 
 πατήρ 654. 19; 664. 36, 56, 
 112. 
 
 πάτρα 662. 24. 
 
 πατρίς 664. 100. 
 
 παύειν 682.12, παύεσθαι 654. 
 6. 
 
 πέδιλον B59. 74. 
 
 πεδίον 662. 38. 
 
 πειθαρχεῖν 677. 4. 
 
 πείθειν 664. 5. 
 
 Πεισίστρατος 664. 1 ef saep. 
 
 mehavos 675. 14. 
 
 πέπλος 659. 26. 
 
 περί 654, 24. 
 
 Περίανδρος 664. 93 ef Sacp. 
 
 περιεῖναι p. 262. 
 
 περιζμύχηρος 662. 37. 
 
 Περικλῆς 663. 45. 
 
 περιλαμβάνειν 666. 167. 
 
 περιπίπτειν 664. 109. 
 
 πετεινόν 654. 12. 
 
 Πιερίδες 678. 1 (0). 
 
 πιθανός 668. 46; 664. 91. 
 
 Πῖσα 659. 61. 
 
 πιστός B59. 50, 69. 
 
 πλεῖν 663. 20. 
 
 πλείων 6B. 116 (?). 
 681. 9. 
 
 πλῆθος B64. 118. 
 
 πλησιάζειν 664. 126. 
 
 Ἰπλόκαμος 678. 9. 
 
 πνοή 659. 56. 
 
 ποιεῖν 654. 37 ; 664. 9 ; 667. 
 Io, 
 
 ποιητής 663. 8 (?). 
 
 ποῖος B62. 25, 29. 
 
 πλεῖστος 
 
 πόλεμος 668. 16, 48. πόλε- 
 μόνδε BGO. 5. 
 
 πόλις 664. 29, 114; 675. 5; 
 682. 3. 
 
 πολιτεία 683. 5. 
 
 πολλάκις 660, 7; 662. 34. 
 
 πολύγνωτος 659. ρ6. 
 
 πολυποίκιλος 672. 0. 
 
 πολύς 654. 25; 655.7; 659. 
 43; 662. 34 (?); 664. 21; 
 667.6; 674. 8(?). 
 
 πολυώνυμος 675. 17. 
 
 ποντιάς 673. ὃ. 
 
 πόντος 659. 39; 66]. 24. 
 
 πορφύρεος B71. 19. 
 
 ποταμός Ὁ. 262. 
 
 πότε 655. 10, 20. 
 
 πότερον 667. 15. 
 
 moti, ποττάς 661. 16. 
 
 πούς 659. 70; 662. 45; 670. 
 12. 
 
 πρᾶγμα 664, 24: 684. 3. 
 
 Πραξώ 662. 26. 
 
 πράσσειν 666. 58. 
 
 7. |pBadoy (?) 661. 27. 
 
 πρέπειν 659. 45. 
 
 πρεσβευ 683. 16. 
 
 πρηνής 662. 36. 
 
 πρίν 659. 20. 
 
 πρό 664, 111. 
 
 προαιρεῖν 666. 59. 
 
 προδιδόναι 6695. 43. 
 
 προθύμως 664. 43. 
 
 προλέγειν BBA. 3. 
 
 mpo€evia 659. 53. 
 
 πρός 663. 7; 664. 25, 39, 
 125; 6θθ8ὅ. τ6; 68ι1. 12; 
 684. 12, 20, 21. 
 
 προσέρχεσθαι 684. 6, 22. 
 
 πρόσθε 670. 12. 
 
 προσιέναι 677. 5. 
 
 προσκεῖσθαι 667. 21. 
 
 προστάσσειν 663, 36. 
 
 προστάτης 678. 5. 
 
 προστιθέναι 655. 13. 
 
 πρόσφορος B59. 49. 
 
 πρότερον 664, 1; 681. 1 (?), 
 If. 
 
 προτομή 662. 44, 51. 
 
 προφέρειν Θ67. 29. 
 
 alt 
 
 mpopevyew 659. 19. 
 
 πρόφρων 659. 24. 
 
 πρόχειρος 684, 20, 
 
 πρωί 655. 1, 3. 
 
 πρῶτος 654. 25, 26; 659. 72. 
 Πυθώ 660. 7 (?). 
 
 murer| 661. 19, 
 
 πυνθάνεσθαι 660. ἡ (?). 
 
 πῦρ 684, 15. 
 
 πύρδανον 661]. 109. 
 
 πυρπολεῖν 668. 24. 
 
 πῶς B54. 33, 34; 666. 168. 
 πως B66, 70. 
 
 pa 662. 30. 
 ῥᾳδίως 682. 13. 
 pnyvova 662. 52. 
 ῥίζα B59. 62. 
 ῥιπή 659. 40. 
 ῥίπτειν 661. 20. 
 ῥύθιος.662. 45. 
 
 Σάμιος Θθ62. 26. 
 Σάτυρος 663. 42. 
 σαυνιαστῆς 661]. 25. 
 σειρήν B59. 33. 
 σεμνός 659. 63. 
 σημαίνειν 667. 14. 
 σηρα 659. 128. 
 σθένος 659. 37. 
 σιγάζειν 659. 36. 
 σιγή 659. 9. 
 
 σιδηρί 670. 17. σιδηροί 660, 3. 
 Σιληνός 662. 49. 
 σκῆπτρον 671. 15, 20. 
 σκοπιά 660. 12. 
 Σόλοι 680. 9. 
 
 Σόλων 664. 10, 14. 
 σπᾶν 676. 14. 
 
 σπιλάς 662. 23. 
 σπονδή 675. 8. 
 σπουδάζειν 664. 11. 
 σταθμός 659. 20. 
 στείχειν 659. 71. 
 στέφανος 659. 31, 60. 
 στέφειν 675. 13. 
 στηλοῦν 662. 28. 
 στολ[ 660. 19. 
 
 στολή 6585. 5. 
 στρατεία 665. 3, 123. 
 
278 
 
 στρατόπεδον 679. 12. 
 
 σύ 654. 28, 29; 655. 21; 
 659. 41 (riv); 661. 23 
 (rd); 664. 104; 671. 22; 
 676. 9; 678. 4. 
 
 συγγείτων 662. 43. 
 
 συγγένεια 664. 115. 
 
 συγγενής 664. 40. 
 
 συμβαίνειν 666. 110; 667. 
 BM Be 
 
 συμφορά 664. 108. 
 
 σύν 660. Io. 
 
 συνακολουθεῖν 668. 41. 
 συναφή 667. 3, 11. 
 συνδιατρίβειν 664. 45. 
 σύνευνος Θ62. 28. 
 Συρακόσιοι 6B5. 4, 6, 8, 21. 
 σύστημα 667. 13, 26, 30. 
 σφάλλειν 659. 17. 
 σφάλος 676. τό. 
 
 σχεδόν 659. 73. 
 
 σχῆμα 667. 23. 
 
 σῶμα 659. 15. 
 
 σώφρων 659. 66. 
 
 τάλαρος 663. 30. 
 
 ταπεινοῦν 664. 22. 
 
 ταράσσειν 659. 40 (I. μαλάσ- 
 cew?); 684. 8. 
 
 Ταρτάριος 670. 5. 
 
 τάσσειν 659. 13. 
 
 τάφος 662, 28; 672. 7. 
 
 τελεῖν 659. 5. 
 
 τελευτᾶν p. 261. 
 
 reds 670. 14, 18. 
 
 τέρπειν B74. 6. 
 
 τεχνήεις 670. τι (0). 
 
 τηλικόσδε 684. 22. 
 
 τίειν 659. 92. 
 
 τιθέναι 666. 15 (Ὁ); 680. 7; 
 682. τι. 
 
 τίκτειν 670. το. 
 
 τιμᾶν 659. 53; 672. 4. 
 
 τιμή 659. 6; 884. 20. 
 
 τις 668. 8; 664. 38, 128; 
 666. 590; 667.15; 684. 4. 
 
 tis 654, 35; 655. 4, 6, 12, 
 13; 662. 24, 28; 664. 
 99, 110; 670.1; 671.1; 
 677.6; 684. 8, 9, Io. 
 
 tN DIGES 
 
 Tuapes p. 261. 
 
 τοίνυν 664. 92. 
 
 τοῖος 654. 1. 
 
 τοιόσδε 684, 22. 
 
 τοιοῦτος 684. 11. 
 
 τοκετός 662. 27. 
 
 τολμ] 664. 64. 
 
 τονιαῖος 667. 20. 
 
 τόπος 654. 24; 667. 15. 
 
 tpaxuvew 664. 38. 
 
 τρεῖς Θ67. 12, 25. 
 
 τρέφειν B64. 34. 
 
 τρέχειν 677. 2. 
 
 Τριβαλλοί B81. 6, το. 
 
 τριέτης 662. 31. 
 
 τρίς 662. 30. 
 
 τρισσός 662. 36. 
 
 τριταΐ 660. το. 
 
 τριώβολον 678. 3. 
 
 τρόπος B64. 20; 
 684. 5. 
 
 τυγχάνειν 66]. 17; 664. 35; 
 666.113; 677.3; p. 261. 
 
 τυραννεῖν BB4. 7. 
 
 τυραννίς 668. 143; 664. 4. 
 
 ΘΖ ΕΣ 
 
 υἱός 659. 30; 660. 9; 664. 
 120 5-670; 103 871-2. 
 ὑμεῖς 654. 15 ef Saep.; B55. 
 4. δέ Saep.; B82. 4, 
 
 ὑμνεῖν 659. 31. 
 
 ὕμνος B75. ο (9). 
 
 ὑπάρχειν 668. 18. 
 
 ὑπάτη 667. τό. 
 
 ὑπέρ 664. 127. 
 
 ὑπερβάλλειν B64. 26. 
 
 ὑπερβατῶς 667. 7. 
 
 ὑπερβολαία 667. 18. 
 
 ὑπηρέτης B79. 18. 
 
 ὑπό 654. 13; 659. 9, 34; 
 662. 22, 25, 35; 664. 42, 
 94; 665. 20; 670. 24; 
 679. 3; 680. 14. 
 
 ὑπολαμβάνειν 664. 81, 102. 
 
 ὑπομένειν 668. 32. 
 
 ὑποστρέφειν 680. 12. 
 
 ὕστερον 679. 4 (?). 
 
 φαίνεσθαι 667. 9. 
 
 φάναι 664, 92,97, 103, 110; 
 670. 8; 683. 4. 
 
 φανερός 654. 30. 
 
 φάσκειν 668. 44.. 
 
 φάτνη 666. 53(?). 
 
 φαῦλος 664. 96; 666. 158. 
 
 φέρειν 677. ὃ (?). 
 
 φεύγειν 663. 25; 664. 118; 
 666. 64. 
 
 φθόνος B59. 8. 
 
 φθόρος 661]. 15. 
 
 φιλεῖν 659. 11, 69. 
 
 Φιλόμηλος 664. 17, 42. 
 
 Φιλοποίμην Θ62. 35. 
 
 φίλος 664. 11; 670. 6, 1ρ. 
 φίλτερος 664. 99. φίλτατος 
 664. 98. 
 
 φιλοσοφεῖν 666. 169. 
 
 φιλοσοφία 666. 166. 
 
 φιλοστέφανος 678. I. 
 
 φράζειν 662. 24; 664. 111. 
 
 φρίσσειν 659. 38; 662. 34. 
 
 φρονεῖν 659. 46. 
 
 φρόνησις 666. τότ. 
 
 φύσις 664. τοι. 
 
 φωρᾶν 663. 34. 
 
 φωτεινός 655. 25. 
 
 χαίτη 659. 60. 
 
 χαλεπαίνειν 664, 78 (?). 
 
 χάλυψ 662. 52. 
 
 χάρις 659. 24. 
 
 χαριτήσιον 662. 53. 
 
 χειμών B59. 37. 
 
 χείρ 659. 27; 662. 33. 
 
 χλευάζειν 668. 12. 
 
 χόλος 659. 65. 
 
 |xoos 660. 4. 
 
 χορηγεῖν 666. 93. 
 
 χορηγία 666. 113. 
 
 χορός B59. 51. 
 
 χρῆναι 659. 49. 
 
 χρῆσθαι 684. 19, 23. 
 
 χρόνος 659. 14; 664. το, 
 70 (?). 
 
 xpua| B60. 22. 
 
 χρύσεος B71. τό. 
 
 χρυσόπεπλος 659. 21. 
 
 χρωματικός 667. 1. 
 
 χώεσθαι 670. τό. 
 
IL NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS 
 
 χωλός 670. 11. 
 χώρα 663. 25. 
 χωρίς 666. Tog. 
 
 ψυχή 665. 115. 
 
 a 25, 43, 56, 97, 164, 167, 
 ce Ud God Soa) 
 
 ab 33. 
 
 abire 26. 
 
 accipere 49, 148, 165, 175. 
 
 accusatio 9. 
 
 ad 16, 110, 121. 
 
 admittere 15. 
 
 adversus 83, 151. 
 
 Aebutius 38. 
 
 Aemilia 143. 
 
 Aemiliana via 31. 
 
 Aemilianus 95, 120, 123, avd 
 see Scipio. 
 
 Aemilius, L. Aem. 67. M. 
 
 PAC, 21h, 
 
 affinis 122. 
 
 Africa 125. 
 
 Africanus, P. Cornelius Sci- 
 pio A. (the elder) 25, (the 
 younger) 210, and see 
 Scipio. 
 
 ager 75. 
 
 alius 92. 
 
 Ambracia 12. 
 
 amicitia 165. 
 
 Anio 188. 
 
 annus 177. 
 
 Antiochus 6, 213. 
 
 Appius (= Hasdrubal ?) 132. 
 Appius Claudius (a) 48, 
 (6) 177. 
 
 aqua 188. 
 
 arma 102. 
 
 Asellus 182. 
 
 athleta 42. 
 
 Attalus 110. 
 
 Audax 197. 
 
 ὦ 661. 9, 13; 662. 46. 
 oon 675. τό. 
 
 ὠκέως 659. 26. 
 
 ὠκύαλος 659. 39. 
 ὠκύπους 659. 56. 
 
 (6) Latin -(668). 
 
 Aulus 76, 112, 193. 
 aurum 15. 
 auxiliari go. 
 
 Bacchanalia 40. 
 
 Baebius, Cn. Baeb. 67. M. 
 Baeb. 74. 
 
 basilica 57. 
 
 bellum 68, 89. 
 
 benigne go. 
 
 Bithynia 110. 
 
 Boii 55. 
 
 Bononia ¥. 
 
 Brutus 203, 216. 
 
 caedere 1, 126, 171, 208. 
 
 Caepio, Cn. Caepio 170. 
 Q. Servilius Caep. 176, 
 182, 195. 
 
 Carts300 76, S41 012d 6: 
 
 Campani 17. 
 
 canere 62. 
 
 capere 12, 127. 
 
 Capitolium 189. 
 
 captiva 14. 
 
 caput 16, I12. 
 
 carcer 204. 
 
 carmen 105, 189. 
 
 Carthaginienses 22, 83, go. 
 
 Carthago 132, 134. 
 
 Cata Βό. 14: 
 
 censor 56. 
 
 Censorinus 88. 
 
 censura 8, 
 
 centurio 15. 
 
 certamen 42. 
 
 Chaldaei 192. 
 
 Charidemus 98. 
 
 eile 
 
 ὠμότης 664, 107. 
 
 ὡς 659. 5; 663. 36, 39, 40, 
 47; 665. 18. 
 
 ὥσπερ 668. 30. 
 
 ὥστε 666. 167; 667. 13. 
 
 | circa 51 (?), 169. 
 
 circumscribere 39. 
 
 clades 175. 
 
 Claudius, Appius Claudius 
 (a2) 48, (6) 177. M. Claud. 
 Marcellus 58. Ti. Claud. 
 ASCHUS 8. ΠῚ Clatid, 
 Pulcher 50. 
 
 clavus (clava?) 196. 
 
 Cnaeus 2, 66, 137, 170, 191. 
 
 cogere 32, 73: 
 
 comitium 208. 
 
 commodum 206. 
 
 competitor 9. 
 
 compositum (1. propositum ?) 
 
 conferre 47. 
 
 coniurium. See connubium, 
 
 connubium 17. 
 
 consul passzm. 
 
 consulatus 153. 
 
 consultare 181. 
 
 contra 189. 
 
 cor II5. 
 
 Corinthius 168. 
 
 Corinthus 135, 145. 
 
 Cornelius, C. Corn. 84. Cn. 
 Corn.137. L.Corn.Scipio 
 27, 46. P. Corn. Scipio 
 see Scipio. 
 
 Cotta 210. 
 
 Crassus 59. 
 
 creber 134. 
 
 crimen 72. 
 
 crudelissime 132. 
 
 cruentus 18. 
 
 cum (conjunction) 210. 
 
 cum (preposition) 77, 186. 
 
280 
 
 a (==do02) τ: 
 damnare 28, 51, 86, 179. 
 dare 3, 6, 17, 166. 
 de 33, 179. 
 decedere 110. 
 Decimus 178, 200, 203, 216. 
 Decius (?) 89. 
 deditio 91. 
 
 deducere ἡ: 
 deformis 185. 
 deprehendere 116. 
 desertor 207. 
 desiderare 53. 
 deterrere (?) 184. 
 devincere 164, 185. 
 devovere 188. 
 dextra 166. 
 
 dicere 114. 
 
 dies 25, 180. 
 dimicare 125. 
 Diodotus 213. 
 diripere 138. 
 distribuere 120, 169. 
 Ditalco 197. 
 
 domus 180. 
 
 donum 165. 
 
 duo 141, 177. 
 
 edere 43. 
 
 esse 5; 059; 122. 
 
 ET 858; ABT Aas G0 ees On, 
 169. 
 
 evincere 177. 
 
 ἘΣ ΘΟ: 
 
 exercitus 96, 126. 
 
 exoriri 89. 
 
 exspirare 207. 
 
 Fabius, Q. Fabius 4. Q. Fa- 
 bius Maximus 149, 171, 
 185. 
 
 facere 104, 186. 
 
 Fecenia 37. 
 
 ferre 116. 
 
 fides 95. 
 
 hlits =100;, (101; 120. 149, 
 179. 
 
 fingere 72. 
 
 flamen 4. 
 
 Flaminia via 30. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 Flamininus 52. 
 
 Flaminius 24. 
 
 flere 100. 
 
 flumen 217. 
 
 fortissime 187. 
 
 forum 63. 
 
 fugare 49, 172. 
 
 Fulvius, Q. Fulv. 81. 
 Nobilior 43, 82. 
 
 funebris 60. 
 
 Gabinius 193. 
 Galba 152. 
 
 Gallia 52. 
 Gallograecia 20. 
 Gallograeci 13, 33. 
 Gallus 44. 
 gladiatorius 54. 
 
 habere 115, 178. 
 
 Hannibal 64. 
 
 Hasdrubal 122. 
 
 Hispala 37. 
 
 Hispani 41, 77. 
 
 Hispania 1, 216. 
 
 homo 51. 
 
 Hostilius, A. Host. Mancinus 
 112. C. Host. Mancinus 
 215. 
 
 hostis 186. 
 
 idem 180. 
 
 in 5, 34, 63, 71, 75, 91, 92, 
 Τοῦ; 213, τὸ το, ΤΣ, 
 174, 180, 187, (204, 208, 
 216. 
 
 incendium 128. 
 
 indicium 40 (?). 
 
 ingenuus 85. 
 
 insidiae 187. 
 
 intercedere 27. 
 
 interesse 180. 
 
 interfector 201. 
 
 interpellare 183. 
 
 InvisuS 155. 
 
 Italia 44. 
 
 iterum 3. 
 
 lubere 91. 
 
 iudicium. See indicium. 
 
 Fulv.. 
 
 iugulare 198. 
 Iunius Brutus 200, 203, 216. 
 
 Lacedaemonii 18, 
 
 Laelius 176. 
 
 Latini 32. 
 
 legatio 114. 
 
 legatus 111, 121, 135. 
 
 Lentulus. See P. Cornelius 
 Scipio. 
 
 liber 11, 66, 87, 173, 100. 
 
 liberare 14, 97. 
 
 liberi 118, 162. 
 
 Licinius 203. P. Licin. Cras- 
 
 sus 59. P. Lich ana 
 Porcius Licin. 50. 
 lictor 184. 
 
 Ligures 30, 49, 77: 
 
 Literninum 26. 
 
 Livius 19, and see Villius. 
 
 locus 92. 
 
 Lucius 21, 27,45, 52, 67, 75, 
 78, 88, 113, 145, 152, 153; 
 210. 
 
 ludus 46, 60. 
 
 lugere (?) 207. 
 
 Lusitani 6, 83, 98, 136, 167, 
 ΤῊ, 187, 21 2: 
 
 Macedonia 179. 
 
 magistratus 79. 
 
 magnitudo 211. 
 
 Mancinus 112, 215. 
 
 Manilius, M’. Manil. 88, 103. 
 L. Manil. Vulso 113. 
 
 Manius 88. 
 Manlius, Cn; Manly 2. 1 
 Manl. 21. M. Manl. 81. 
 
 T. Manl. Torquatus 178. 
 manus 55. 
 Marcellus 44. 
 
 Marcell. 58. 
 Marcius Censorinus 88, 103. 
 Marcus 58,74, ΘΙ, Σ᾿ ππτπ|ι: 
 
 114, 115, 1θο 1 
 mare 71. 
 
 Masinissa 121, 122. 
 mater 38. 
 
 maximus 3, 4, 120, 128, 
 Maximus 149, 171, 185. 
 
 M. Claudius 
 
I, NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS 
 
 Metellus, L. Metell. 167. Q. 
 Metelli127, 153 (Ὁ), 160. 
 
 millia (siglum) 51. 
 
 minari 8. 
 
 Minucius 21. 
 
 Minurus 197. 
 
 mittere 121. 
 
 multa 205. 
 
 Mummius 145, 168. 
 
 munire 31. 
 
 Myrtilus 21. 
 
 Ne-26 5177. 
 
 nec II. 
 
 negare 202. 
 Nobilior 82. 
 
 nobilis 14. 
 
 nomen 211. 
 
 non 133, 180, 220. 
 Numantini 174, 212. 
 
 obicere 196. 
 
 Oblivio 217. 
 
 obsidere 133. 
 
 occidere 16, 123 (ἢ), 164. 
 Occius 186. 
 
 occupare 102. 
 
 omnis ΟΙ, 207. 
 
 oppidum 169. 
 
 Ortiagon 14. 
 
 Pamphylia 13. 
 
 pater 73. 
 
 pati 15. 
 
 pax 3, 6, 186. 
 
 pecunia 34. 
 
 pellere 94. 
 
 pensare (?) 16. 
 
 per-20,.40; 73,95, 102; 107, 
 120, 1398, 194: 
 
 perdomare 21. 
 
 Pergameni (?) 111. 
 
 persolvere 35. 
 
 persuadere 45. 
 
 pes I15. 
 
 petere 8, 79, 156. 
 
 Pentinis,s Petill. 75. 00. 
 Petill. 25. 
 
 Petronius 150. 
 
 Philippus ror. Phil. Poenus 
 53: 
 
 Piso 101. 
 
 planus. See primus. 
 
 plebs 27, 78, 183, 204, 206. 
 
 podagricus 112. 
 
 Poenus 97. 
 
 Pompeius 170, 174. 
 
 pontifex 4. 
 
 Popilius 101. 
 
 populus 107, 205, 206. 
 
 Porcia basilica 57. 
 
 poscere. See pensare. 
 
 post 46. 
 
 Postumius, A. Post. 76. Sp. 
 Ost: 30; 
 
 potestas 142. 
 
 potiri 214. 
 
 praeda 20. 
 
 praetor 4, 135. 
 
 prex 205. 
 
 primum 43. 
 
 primus 217. 
 
 pro 206. 
 
 producere 99. 
 
 proelium 13, 18, 134. 
 
 profectio 183. 
 
 proficisci 5. 
 
 propositum 9 (?), 163. 
 
 prospere 125. 
 
 Publius 3, 50, 59, 74, 84, 
 200, 219. 
 
 Pulcher 50. 
 
 pupillus 37. 
 
 Punicus 89. 
 
 -que 16, 165, 180, 214. 
 
 qui 5, 22, 26, 35, 38, 100, 
 104, 119, 155, 164. 
 
 Quirinalis 5. 
 
 Quintius 52. 
 
 Quintus 4, 25, 81, 149, 160, 
 170, 171, 186. 
 
 quod 4, 53, 84, 122. 
 
 quondam 113. 
 
 quot 78. 
 
 redire 93. 
 referre 40. 
 
 281 
 
 regnum 110. 
 relinquere 110. 
 
 remittere 165. 
 
 res 216. 
 
 respondere 114, 181. 
 Rethogenes 161. 
 
 reus 99. 
 
 revocare 26. 
 
 rex 6, IIO. 
 
 Roma 33, 169. 
 
 Romanus I, 93, 133, 135- 
 Rutilius 38. 
 
 sacrarilum 127. 
 
 sagulum 165. 
 
 Salassus. Sze Sapiens. 
 
 Salinator 10. 
 
 Sapiens 176. 
 
 Sardinia 5. 
 
 Scantinius 115. 
 
 Scipio, L. Cornelius Scipio 
 24, 45. .P: Corn. Scipio 
 Airicanus#a5.ene le eOrne 
 Scip. Aemilianus 74, 94, 
 L205 257 190. ΤΟΣ ὙΕΙ͂ 
 Corn. Scip. Nasica 200, 
 202. 
 
 Scordisci 175. 
 
 scriba 75. 
 
 se 101. 
 
 senectus 118. 
 
 Sergius 152. 
 
 Servilius Caepio 176, 182, 
 105. 
 
 Sibylla 180. 
 
 signum 168. 
 
 Silanus 178. 
 
 singuli 209. 
 
 socius 107, and see occidere. 
 
 spectaculum 54. 
 
 Spurius 36. 
 
 statua 168. 
 
 stolidus 113. 
 
 stuprare 85. 
 
 stuprum 116. 
 
 subigere 42, 136. 
 
 subsellium 123. 
 
 suffragium 194. 
 
 Sullani 218. 
 
282 
 
 suuSs 53, 55, 179, 180, 184. 
 
 ΡΒ 157, 214. 
 
 tabella 194. 
 tabernaculum 61. 
 tabula 168, 
 tertius 89. 
 Tiberius 182. 
 Titus 178. 
 Theoxena 70. 
 Thessalia 126. 
 tollere 41. 
 Torquatus 178. 
 transferre 35. 
 
 ᾿Αρσινόη (Philadelphus?) 807. 
 
 ProLEMy ALEXANDER I. 
 
 Πτολ. [ὁ καὶ ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεὸς] Φιλομήτωρ καὶ Βερενίκη 802. 
 
 AUGUSTUS. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 transire 217, 
 
 fribunus 27, 795. 1189, 204, 
 206. 
 
 Tryphon 213. 
 
 tutor 38. 
 
 Tyresius 164. 
 
 ullimus 108, 118. 
 urbs 192. 
 Uticenses 89. 
 uxOFr 140, 146. 
 
 vastarels3,°89,°457;, 212. 
 vates 62. 
 
 veneficium 51. 
 venire (veneo) 209. 
 venire (venio) 91. 
 verna 193. 
 vexare 167. 
 Villius 78. 
 vir 16. 
 virga 208. 
 Viriathus 
 201. 
 virtus 96. 
 viS 15. 
 votivus 46, 
 Vulso 113. 
 
 172, 185, 198, 
 
 KINGS AND EMPERORS. 
 
 om. Βερενίκη 824. 
 
 Καῖσαρ 711. 3, 6; 721. 4 ef sacp.; 781. 2, 4, 15; 742. 16; 743. 14, 44; 744. 
 
 15; 826. 
 
 TIBERIUS. 
 
 Τιβέριος Καῖσαρ Σεβαστός 746, 12. 
 
 CLAUDIUS. 
 
 Θεὸς Κλαύδιος 718. 15; 8038. 
 
 ΤΟΟΜΊΤΙΑΝ. 
 
 Αὐτοκρ. Kato. Δομιτιανὸς Σεβαστὸς Τερμανικός 722. 2. 
 
 NERVA. 
 
 Αὐτοκρ. Népovas Καῖσ. Σεβαστός 718. 41, 44. 
 
 HADRIAN. 
 
 Avroxp. Καῖσ. Τραιανὸς ᾿Αδριανὸς Σεβ. 714. 28, 32; 715. 27, 32; 726. 2; 729. 34, 38; 
 
 780. 32. 
 
 ᾿Αδριανὸς Kato. ὁ κύριος 707. 19, 33; 714. 19, 24; 715. 8, 20; 780. 6. 
 
 ANTONINUS Pius. 
 
 Αὐτοκρ. Kaic. Tiros Αἴλιος “Αδριανὸς ᾿Αντωνῖνος Σεβ, Ἐὐσεβής 723.1; 724.14; 728. 25; 
 
 729. 45; 732. 6. 
 
 om. Titos 727. 20. 
 
 Tiros Αἴλιος “Αδριανὸς ᾿Αντωνῖνος Καῖσ. ὁ κύριος 729. 39. 
 ᾿Αντωνῖνος Καῖσ. ὁ κύριος 712. 13; 724.5; 728.17, 41; 782. 3; 7338.1; 800. 
 
Pe we VON Dit wry LD) DAYS 283 
 
 Marcus AURELIUS AND VERUS. . 
 Αὐρήλιοι ᾿Αντωνῖνος καὶ Οὐῆρος of κύριοι Σεβ, 784. 1. 
 Commonvs. 
 
 Αὐτοκρ. Kato. Μάρκος Αὐρήλιος Κόμμοδος ᾿Αντωνῖνος Εὐσεβὴς Εὐτυχὴς 8. “Ap. Μηδ. Παρθ. 
 Zapp. Τερμ. Μέγιστος Boer. 716. 23. 
 
 Αὐτοκρ. Καῖσ. Μάρκος Αὐρήλιος Κόμμοδος ᾿Αντωνῖνος Σεβ. ᾽Αρμ. Μηδ. Παρθ. Sapp. Tepp. 
 Μέγιστος 725. 57. 
 
 PEscEennius NIGER. 
 Γάιος Πεσκέννιος Νίγερ ἸΙοῦστος Σεβ. 719. 5, 28. Cf. 801. 
 SEpTIMIuS SEVERUS AND: CARACALLA. 
 
 Αὐτοκρ. Kato. Λούκιος Σεπτίμιος Σεουῆρος Εὐσεβὴς Περτίναξ Σεβ. "ApaB. ᾿Αδιαβην. Παρθ. 
 Μέγιστος καὶ Αὐτοκρ. Καῖσ. Μάρκος Αὐρήλιος ᾿Αντωνῖνος Εὐσεβὴς Σεβ. 705. 1, 54. 
 
 Αὐτοκρ. Σεουῆρος καὶ ᾿Αντωνῖνος 705. 15, 65. 
 
 οἱ κύριοι Σεβ, 7885. το. 
 
 Αὐτοκράτορες 705. 19, 70. 
 
 PHILIPPI. 
 
 Philippus Augustus ii et Philippus Caesar cos. 720, 6. 
 
 DEcIvs. 
 
 Αὐτοκρ. Kaito. Γάιος Μέσσιος Kuwros Τραιανὸς Δέκιος Εὐσεβ. Evtvy. 2¢3. 658. 18. 
 
 Ill. MONTHS AND DAYS. 
 
 (2) Montus. 
 
 Avorpos (Τῦβι) 723. 1. Νερώνειος Σεβαστός (Xoiax) 808. 
 Iulius 737. 1. S<Baords (O08) 713. 15. 
 Καισάρειος (Μεσορή) 715. 33; 722. 3; 789; | Sextilis 737. 21. 
 
 95..." Ὑπερβερέταιος (Μεσορή) 722. 2. 
 
 Νερώνειος (Χοίακ) 808. 
 
 (ὁ) Days. 
 
 ἐπαγόμεναι ἡμέραι, ε 715. 33, 373 ς 722. | Kalendae Sextiliae 787. 21. 
 
 an 43 Nonae luliae 787. 1. 
 Idus 787. 5 ef sacp. Σεβαστή (Caesarius, 6th intercalary day) 
 Kaddvda 74:7. 2. 722. 3. 
 
284 
 
 INDICES 
 
 IV. PERSONAL NAMES. 
 
 ᾿Αβάσκαντος 716. 5, 29. 
 
 ᾿Αβεῖς 728. 3. 
 
 ᾿Αγαθῖνος father of Diodorus 718. 8; 728. 2. 
 
 "AOn( ) 786. 37. 
 
 ᾿Αθηνόδωρος, Οὐαλέριος ᾿Αθ. 800. 
 
 Αἰλιανός, ᾿Αντώνιος Αἰλ, 708. 2, 15. 
 
 ᾿Αλέξανδρος 718. 6. 
 
 ᾿Αλέξανδρος father of Leonides 718. 9. 
 
 ἤἾαλις 744. 1, τό. 
 
 ᾿Αμμωνᾶς 736. 69. 
 
 ᾿Αμμώνιος 84. 4; 791; 825. 
 
 ᾿Αμμώνιος father of Achilleus 722. 11. 
 
 ᾿Αμμώνιος son of Apollonides 729. 35, 38. 
 
 ᾿Αμμώνιος (Or ᾿Απολλώνιος) father of Didymus 
 719. 2, 8, II. 
 
 ᾿Αμόις father of Diogenes 728. 3, 36. 
 
 "Audis also called Papontos, son of Diodorus 
 733. 3. 
 
 ᾿Ανθέστιος 707. 12, 34. 
 
 ᾿Ανθέστιος Πρεῖμος also called Lollianus 718. 
 2, 22. 
 
 "Avras 736. 30, 36; 742. 1; 745.3; 811 (?). 
 
 ᾿Αντέρως son of Lucretius 817. 
 
 ᾿Αντωνία 786. 54. 
 
 ᾿Αντώνιος Αἰλιανός 708. 2, 15. 
 
 ᾿Απεῖς son of Apeis 782. 3. 
 
 ᾿Απίων, Τάιος Μάρκιος Am. also called Diogenes 
 Lees τὸ 7: 
 
 ᾿Απίων son of Horion 728. 5, 14, 22, 36. 
 
 ᾿Απολινάριος, Τάιος Μάρκιος ᾿Απ. also called 
 Julianus 727. 7, 10, 21. 
 
 ᾿Απολλωνάριον 744, 2. 
 
 ᾿Απολλωνάριον, Ovadrepia ᾽Απ. also called Nica- 
 rete 77. 1: 
 
 ᾿Απολλωνίδης father of Ammonius 729. 35. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος 714. 8; 718.8, 32; 739.1; 791. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος son Of Apollonius 726. 5. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος βιβλιοφύλαξ 718. 2. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος (Or ᾿Αμμώνιος) father of Didymus 
 719: 2:18. ΤΥ: 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος son Οἱ Diogenes 726. 5. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος father of Dionysius 724. 2. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος Son Of Dorion 716. 4, 28. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος Libyan 748. 37. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος scribe of the city 714. 6. 
 
 ᾿Απολλώνιος father of Valerius 780. 2, 35. 
 
 ᾿Απολλωνοῦς 722. 15, 28, 30. 
 
 ᾿Απολλῶς Son Of Ophelas 887. 
 
 ᾿Απολλῶς daughter of Paésis 887. 
 
 ”Apns planet 804. 
 
 “Αρθῶνις father of Thonis also called Morous 
 725. 63. 
 
 ᾿Αριστίων 786, 
 
 Δρπαλος son of Hermon 808. 
 
 “Apoeis 728. 2, 29. 
 
 ᾿Αρτεμᾶς 745. 2. 
 
 ᾿Αρτεμίδωρος 715. 24. 
 
 ᾿Αρχέλαος 721. 10. 
 
 ᾿Ασίης 717. 6. 
 
 ᾿Ασκληπιάδης 794; 806. 
 
 ᾿Ασκληπιάδης also called Sarapion, gym- 
 nasiarch 716. 1. 
 
 ᾿Ασκληπιάδης father of Sarapion 728. 4. 
 
 Αὐρηλία ᾿Αμμωνάριον 720.8, Aurelia Ammo- 
 narion 720. 2. 
 
 Αὐρηλία Aais daughter of AureliusL..... thion 
 658. 15. 
 
 Αὐρήλιος Διόσκορος son Of Aurelius L..... thion 
 658. 13. 
 
 Αὐρήλιος A...e. θίων son of ‘Theodorus 658. 3. 
 
 Αὐρήλιος Πλουτάμμων 720. 9, 13. Aurelius 
 Plutammon 720. 4. 
 
 Αὐρήλιος ‘Qpiwy ex-archidicastes 705. 7, 18,58, 
 67. 
 
 [.|avovs son of Sipos 708. 4. 
 
 Avidus, Gradius Av. 735. 16. 
 
 ᾿Αχιλλᾶς son of Thonis 782. 3. 
 
 ᾿Αχιλλεύς son of Ammonius 722. 27, 35. 
 
 ᾿Αχιλλεύς also called Casius, strategus 719. 1. 
 
 ᾿Αχορῖνις 807. 
 
 ᾿Αφροδισιᾶς 744. 11. 
 
 Barichius 735. 19. 
 
 Βάσσος, Τέλλιος B. epistrategus 726. 19. 
 Beleus 735. 12, 13. 
 
 Bepovs 736. 71; 744. 2. 
 
 Βησᾶς 832. 
 
 Biéus father of Papontos 719. 10. 
 
 Chul 785. 29. 
 
 Claudius Valerius Firmus praefect 720, 1. 
 Claudius Sabinus 785. 14. 
 
 Comarjinus (?) father of Marrius 735. 3. 
 Cumesius (?) 735. 27. 
 
IV. PERSONAL. NAMES 
 
 Τάιος Μάρκιος ᾿Απίων also called Diogenes 
 727. 6, 9, 27. 
 
 Τάιος Μάρκιος ᾿Απολινάριος also called Julianus 
 dat. ΟἹ Ὁ; 27: 
 
 Τάιος Ῥούστιος 745. IT. 
 
 Τάιος Σέππιος Ῥοῦφος 721.1; 885. 
 
 Γαλέστος 715. 5. 
 
 Tadéoros son of Polemon 715. 2. 
 
 Γέλλιος Βάσσος epistrategus 726. 19. 
 
 Γέμελλος 724. 2; 736. 12. 
 
 τῇ 722. 6. 
 
 Topyias father of Polemon 715. 3, 12, 17. 
 
 Topytas son of Polemon 715. 2, 34. 
 
 Gradius Avidus 735. 16. 
 
 Δαμαρίων 706. 10, IT. 
 
 Δαμᾶς 743, 24, 40. 
 
 Δάμων 730. 9. 
 
 Δημητρία 707. ὃ ε΄ sacp. 
 
 Δημήτριος 825. 
 
 Δημήτριος βιβλιοφύλαξ 718. 2, 43. 
 
 Δημήτριος deputy archidicastes, son of Hera- 
 clides 727. 4. 
 
 Anpntpovs 723. 3. 
 
 Δίδυμος 784; 786; 791. 
 
 Δίδυμος son of Ammonius or Apollonius 719. 
 bt Rae 6 
 
 Δίδυμος son of Charit... 826. 
 
 Δίδυμος son of Diogenes (?) 837. 
 
 Avoyas 719. 17. 
 
 Διογένης 726. 7; 801; 838. 
 
 Διογένης son of Amois 728. 3, 23, 29, 36. 
 
 Διογένης father of Apollonius 726. 6. 
 
 Διογένης βιβλιοφύλαξ 718. 3. 
 
 Διογένης, Γάιος Μάρκιος ᾿Απίων also called Diog. 
 ἢ το 27: 
 
 Διογένης father of Didymus 887. 
 
 Διογένης πράκτωρ 733. 2. 
 
 Διογένης son of Sarapion 740. 38. 
 
 Διογένης son of Theon also called Dionysius 
 716. 17, 30. 
 
 Διόδωρος father of Amois also called Papontos 
 733. 3. 
 
 Διόδωρος father of Agathinus 713. 5, 7; 
 723, 2. 
 
 Διόδωρος son of Diodorus 713. 4, 21. 
 
 Διονυσιάς daughter of Galestus 715. 5. 
 
 Διονύσιος 718. 5, 12, 17; 790. 
 
 Διονύσιος son of Apollonius 724. 4. 
 
 Διονύσιος βιβλιοφύλαξ 714. 3, 4. 
 
 285 
 
 Διονύσιος father of Dionysius 728. 33. 
 
 Διονύσιος son of Dionysius 728. 33. 
 
 Διονύσιος son of Phanias 789. 
 
 Διονύσιος also called Theon 716. 8, 31. 
 
 Διονύσιος son of Theon also called Dionysius 
 7165 0.01 31 
 
 Διόσκορος 810. 
 
 Διόσκορος, Αὐρήλιος A, 
 ἘΣ ΠΟ 655: 13. 
 
 Δωρᾶς father of Panechotes 716. 3. 
 
 Δωρίων son of Heras 716. 4, 28. 
 
 son of Aurelius 
 
 Eipnviov 712. 17. 
 
 Ἑλένη 719. 2, 11. 
 
 ‘Edévn daughter of Gorgias 715. 17. 
 
 Ἕλενος 748. 22. 
 
 ᾿ἘἘπαφρόδειτος 748. 25. 
 
 ᾿Εράσιππος 717, 6. 
 
 Ἕρμιππος 811. 
 
 ἝἙρμόδωρος also called Philonicus, basilico- 
 grammateus 714. 2. 
 
 ἝἙρμόφιλος 746. 3. 
 
 Ἕρμων father of Harpalus 808. 
 
 Etiopius (?) 735. 29. 
 
 Εὐαγγέλιος also called Sarapion, strategus 
 801. 
 
 Εὐγενέτωρ 141. 1. 
 
 Εὐδαιμονίς daughter of Theon also called 
 Dionysius 716. 9, 12. 
 
 Εὐτέρπη also called ‘Tanechotarion, daughter 
 of Diogenes 726. 7. 
 
 Εὐτυχίδης 839. 
 
 Εὔφρων 794. 
 
 Firmus, Claudius Valerius F. praefect 720. 1. 
 
 Zabdius 735. 13. 
 
 Zebidius 735. 23. 
 
 Zevs 722. 6. 
 
 Zp... 736. 4. 
 
 Ζώιλος 715. 22. 
 
 Ζώιλος father of Ptolemaeus 729. 37. 
 
 Ἡλιόδωρος father of Heliodorus 782. 1. 
 Ἡλιόδωρος son of Heliodorus 782. 1 ef saep. 
 Ἥλιος 722. 6. 
 
 Ἥρα goddess 781. 6. 
 
 “Hpadiov 725, 1. 
 
 ‘Hpaxd| 800. 
 
286 
 
 Ἡρακλᾶς son of Sarapion also called Leon 
 725. 3 ef saep. 
 
 Ἡρακλᾶς son of Tryphon 722. 21. 
 
 Ἡρακλεία 740. 42. 
 
 Ἡρακλείδης 706. 2, το; 740. 42, 43; 795; 
 891. 
 
 Ἡρακλείδης basilicogrammateus 746. 1, 13. 
 
 Ἡρακλείδης ex-exegetes, father of Demetrius 
 741. 4. 
 
 Ἡρακλείδης son of Horion 719. 18. 
 
 Ἡρακλείδης father of Samus 716. 6, 30. 
 
 Ἡρακλείδης father of Sarapion also called Leon 
 725. 3. 
 
 Ἡρακλείδης father of Theon 728. 2. 
 
 Ἡρακλῆς father of Xenon 785. 
 
 Ἡρᾶς 740. 35. 
 
 Ἡρᾶς βιβλιοφύλαξ 715. 1, 35. 
 
 Ἡρᾶς father of Dorion 716. 5. 
 
 Ἡρώδης father of Sarapion 780. 1. 
 
 Ἥρων 736. 99; 740. 17 (?). 
 
 Θαῆσις 716. 5; 736. 68. 
 
 Θαῆσις daughter of Theon also called Diony- 
 sius 716. 10, 14. 
 
 Θαίς daughter of Diodorus 718. 22. 
 
 Θανῶχις son οἷ... etis and father of Pather- 
 mouthis 712. 4. 
 
 Θεόδοτος, Οὐαλέριος ©. also called Polion 727. 
 17. 
 
 Θεόδωρος 786. 33, 76. 
 
 Θεόδωρος father of Aurelius L..... thion 658. 4. 
 
 Θεόξενος 836. 
 
 Θεόφιλος politarch 745. 4. 
 
 Θέων 740. 35 (0); 746.1; 799. 
 
 Θέων also called Dionysius 716. 8, 31. 
 
 Θέων son of Heraclides 728. 2. 
 
 Θοῆρις god 806. 
 
 Θοτσυταῖος son of Horus 797. 
 
 Θοῶνις father of Achillas 782. 3. 
 
 Θρασύμαχος 718. 26. 
 
 Θῶνις 725. 7. 
 
 Θῶνις also called Morous, son of Harthonis 
 725. 63. 
 
 Iebael 785. 18. 
 
 Ierraeus son of Macchana 785. 15. 
 
 ᾿Ιησοῦς 816. 
 
 Ἰλαρίων 744. 1, 16. 
 
 ᾿Ιουλιανός, Τάιος Μάρκιος ᾿Απολινάριος also called 
 ΤΠ 727... 10} 28: 
 
 INDICES 
 
 ‘Immod( ) 715. 35. 
 
 I.p.p..archidicastes, son of Isidorus 727. 1. 
 
 ‘loads 186. 323 789. 1. 
 
 ᾿Ἰσιδώρα daughter of Calas 718. 10. 
 
 Ἰσίδωρος 816. 
 
 Ἰσίδωρος ex-exegetes, father of I.r.m.. 
 Meike As 
 
 ᾿Ισίδωρος father of Valerius 785. 4. 
 
 ᾿Ισχυρίων son of Heradion 725. 1, 15, 46. 
 
 Iulia Titia lex 720. 5, 14. 
 
 Iulius 735. 28. 
 
 Καικίλιος 736. 55. 
 
 Κάλας 718. το. 
 
 Κάσιος, ᾿Αχιλλεύς also called C. 719. τ. 
 
 Κεφαλᾶς 806. 
 
 Κλᾶρος 784. 2. 
 
 Κλαυδία Πτολεμᾶ 810. 
 
 Κλαύδιος, Τίτος K, Ξενοφῶν epistrategus 718. τ. 
 
 Κλέων 784. 4. 
 
 Κόραξος 736. 4, 10. 
 
 Κῦνος son of Ptolemaeus 814. 
 
 Kepapivos father of Victor imperial steward 
 735. 6. 
 
 Aais, Αὐρηλία Δ, daughter of Aurelius 
 | CB eh, thion 658. 15. 
 
 Aairos praefect '705. 40. 
 
 Λαοδίκη 786. 95. 
 
 Aeovras son of Pekuris 782. 1 ef saep. 
 
 Λεπτίνης son of ..monax 8381. 
 
 Λέων, Σαραπίων also called L., son of Hera- 
 clides 725. 3, 61. 
 
 Λεωνίδης son of Alexander 718. 5, 9. 
 
 Λεωνίδης son of Diodorus 718. 4. 
 
 A atte θίων, Αὐρήλιος A. son of Theodorus 
 658. 3. 
 
 Λίβιος 728. 1, 28, 
 
 Λοκρήτιος father of Anteros 817. 
 
 Λοκρίων 812. 
 
 Λολλιανός, ᾿Ανθέστιος Πρεῖμος also called L. 
 718. 2: 32. 
 
 Λούκιος 812. 
 
 Δούκιος father of Ptollas 729. 35. 
 
 Δοῦπος praefect 706. 5. 
 
 Λυσίμαχος 822. 
 
 Macchana father of Ierraeus 785. 15. 
 Malichus son of Sal 785. 24. 
 Malichus father of Themes 785. 17. 
 
IV. PERSONAL NAMES 
 
 Μαλωχῶς opiio 735. 5. 
 
 Μαμερτεῖνος, Πετρώνιος M. praefect 726. 17. 
 
 Μάρκιος, Tacos M, ᾿Απίων also called Diogenes 
 726. 6, 9, 27. 
 
 Μάρκιος, Γάιος M. ᾿Απολινάριος also called 
 Julianus 727. 6, 9, 27. 
 
 Marrius son of Comarinus (?) 7385. 3. 
 
 Μέλας father of Miusis 719. 10. 
 
 Μένιππος 715. 24. 
 
 Μιῦσις son of Melas 719. 19. 
 
 Μοιμεσ .χί ) father of Pathotes 740. 40. 
 
 Μοῦθις father of Papontos 719. 18. 
 
 Mepois also called Thonis, son of Harthonis 
 725. 63. 
 
 . . μῶναξ father of Leptines 831. 
 
 Νεοπτόλεμος father οὗ... on 712. 9. 
 
 Νεχθεῦς 739. 3. 
 
 Νικαρέτη, Ovadepia ᾿Απολλωνάριον also called N. 
 727. 18. 
 
 Νουμήνιος 715. 22. 
 
 Ξενοφῶν, Tiros Κλαύδιος Z. epistrategus 718 τ. 
 Ξένων 810. 
 Ξένων son of Heracles 785. 
 
 ᾽Ονθονόβις 815. 
 
 Οὐαλερία ᾿Απολλωνάριον also called Nicarete 
 727. 16. 
 
 Οὐαλέριος ᾿Αθηνόδωρος 800. 
 
 Οὐαλέριος son of Apollonius 780. 2, 34. 
 
 Οὐαλέριος Θεόδοτος also called Polion 727. τό. 
 
 Οὐίκτωρ imperial steward, son of Comarinus 
 735. 5. 
 
 Οὐιτάλιος archidicastes 719. 3, 7. 
 
 Pacebius 735. 30. 
 
 Παῆσις 837. 
 
 Παθερμοῦθις son of Thanochis 712. 6, 12. 
 
 Παθώτης 728. 1, 27. 
 
 Παθώτης son of Moimes. ch... 740. 40. 
 
 Πανάρης also called Panechotes, ex-cosmetes 
 724. τ. 
 
 Πανγορσαοῦις father of... nychus 708. 17. 
 
 Laveot. . +, 72a. 22. 
 
 Πανεχώτης son of Doras 716. 3, 27. 
 
 Πανεχώτης also called Panares, ex-cosmetes 
 724, I. 
 
 Ilavrwvupis 658. 5. 
 
 Παοῦς son of Bithys 719. 15. 
 
 287 
 
 Παποντῶς also called Amois, son of Diodorus 
 733. 3. 
 
 Παποντῶς son of Bithys 719. 10, 27, 34. 
 
 Παποντῶς son of Mouthis 719. 18. 
 
 Πασαλῦμις 74.0. 20. 
 
 Πᾶσις 736. 85 (?). 
 
 Παυσῖρις son of Petsiris 808. 
 
 Πεκῦρις father of Leontas 732. 1, 9. 
 
 Πέλλις 811. 
 
 Πετεῆσις 722. 32. 
 
 Πετσῖρις father of Pausiris 808. 
 
 Πετρώνιος Μαμερτεῖνος praefect 726. 17. 
 
 Πλούταρχος 707. 14. 
 
 Πόθος 742. 2. 
 
 Πολέμων 719. 6. 
 
 Πολέμων son of Gorgias 715. 4, 11. 
 
 Πολέμων son of Tryphon 721. 2, 9. 
 
 Ποτάμων son of Thanochis 712. 4 ef saep. 
 
 Πρεῖμος, ᾿Ανθέστιος II. also called Lollianus 
 RIS 222 2: 
 
 Πρῖμα 736. 17. 
 
 Psenosirius 735. 25. 
 
 Πτολεμᾷ, Κλαυδία Tr. 810. 
 
 Πτολεμαῖος 790. 
 
 Πτολεμαῖος father of Kunos 814. 
 
 Πτολεμαῖος strategus 808. 
 
 Πτολεμαῖος son of Zoilus 729. 37. 
 
 Πτολλᾶς son of Lucius 729. 35. 
 
 Πωλίων, Οὐαλέριος Θεόδοτος also called P. 727. 
 
 ΤῊ: 
 
 Romanus 7385. 26. 
 “Ῥούστιος, Γάιος Ῥ, 745. 11. 
 Ῥοῦφος, Γάιος Σέππιος Ῥ, 721. τ; 885. 
 
 Sabinus, Claudius 5. 785. 14. 
 
 Sadus 735. 2, 20. 
 
 Salmes 725. 32. 
 
 Σάμος son of Heraclides 716. 6, 30. 
 
 Σαραεῦς daughter of Leonides 718. 5, 8. 
 
 Sapanas son of Ammonius 722. 8, 21, 37. 
 
 Σαραπίων 7O7.13; 716. 15; 729. 5 ef saep.; 
 806; 825. 
 
 Σαραπίων also called Asclepiades, gymnasiarch 
 716. τ. 
 
 Σαραπίων father of Diogenes 740. 38. 
 
 Σαραπίων also called Euangelius, strategus 
 801. 
 
 Σαραπίων son of Heraclides 723. 4. 
 
288 
 
 Σαραπίων son of Herodes 780. 1. 
 
 Σαραπίων also called Leon, son of Heraclides 
 725. 35, 61. 
 
 Σαραποῦς 722. 11; 795. 
 
 Sexouvras 736. 50. 
 
 Σεκοῦντος 736. 81. 
 
 Σενεῖθος 799. 
 
 Σέππιος, Τάιος Σ. Ῥοῦφος 721. 1; 8885. 
 
 Σιμάριστος 802. 
 
 Σίμιλις, Σουλπίκιος S. praefect (?) 712. 22. 
 
 Σινθεῦς 716. 9. 
 
 Σιντότις (or -τονὴ 794. 
 
 Σιπῶς father of |.|ausis 708. 4. 
 
 Σουλπίκιος Σίμιλις praefect (Ὁ) 712. 22. 
 
 Στράτος 786. 97. 
 
 Σωγγινᾶρις 881. 
 
 Σωγένης 829. 
 
 Τααρπαῆσις 86. 70. 
 
 Τανεχωτάριον also called Euterpe, daughter of 
 Diogenes 726. 6. 
 
 Ταοννῶφρις daughter of Panesi. . . 722. 22. 
 
 Taovs 716. 4. 
 
 Ταποντῶς 715. 12, 18; 733. 5. 
 
 Ταπτολλοῦς daughter of Caecilius 736. 55. 
 
 Tavpeivos 799. 
 
 Tavpis 716. τι. 
 
 Τεχωσοῦς 809. 
 
 Τεῶς 892. 
 
 Themes 785, 21. 
 
 Themes son of Malichus 735. 17. 
 
 Titia, lex Iulia et Titia 720. 5, 14. 
 
 Τίτος Κλαύδιος Ξενοφῶν epistrategus 718. 1. 
 
 Τρυφᾶς 736. 56. 
 
 Τρύφων father of Heraclas 722. 21. 
 
 Τρύφων father of Polemon 721. 2. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 Truphon 785, 27. 
 
 Toeet daughter of Theon 728. 2. 
 Τσενπαχοῦς 719. το. 
 
 Τύχη 736. 18. 
 
 Valerius, Claudius V. Firmus praefect 720. 1. 
 Valerius son of Isidorus 785. 4. 
 
 Φανίας father of Dionysius 789. 
 
 Φαῦστος 742. 1, 17. 
 
 Φηλιξ praefect 800. 
 
 Φιλεῖνος 707. 12, 18, 24. 
 
 Φιλόνεικος also called Hermodorus, basilico- 
 grammateus 714. 1. 
 
 Φιλουτάριον 789. 20. 
 
 dva 736. 14. 
 
 Φωσφόρος 792. 
 
 Χαιράμμων 724. 3. 
 
 Χαιρήμων 723. 5. 
 
 Χαρίξεινος 728. 6. 
 
 Χαριτ. ( ) father of Didymus 826. 
 
 Ψάμμις agoranomus 722. 5. 
 Ψεναμοῦνις 695. introd. 
 
 ’Opryevns βιβλιοφύλαξ 715. 1. 
 
 ‘Qpiov father of Apion 728. 5, 36. 
 
 ‘Opiov father of Heraclides 719. Ig. 
 
 ‘Qpiev son of Panechotes 716. 3, 27. 
 
 “Qpos 719. 17. 
 
 ὯΩρος father of Thotsutaius 797. 
 
 "Operas father of Apollos 837. 
 
 ᾿Ωφελᾶς father of Ophelas 727. ὃ. 
 
 ᾿Ωφελᾶς son Of Ophelas 727. 8, 12, 22, 26. 
 
 V. GEOGRAPHICAL. 
 
 (a2) COUNTRIES, NOMES, TOPARCHIES, CITIES. 
 
 Aegyptus 720. 1. 
 ᾿Αθριβίτης 712. τ, 8. 
 Αἰγύπτιοι 706. I, 7. 
 Αἴγυπτος 727. τι. 
 
 ᾿Αλεξάνδρεια 709. 9; 748. 24; 744. 3, 5; 
 799. ᾿Αλεξανδρέων πόλις 705. 20, 68. 
 ἡ πόλις 7217. 2. 
 
 ᾿Αντινοεῖς 705. 50 (?). 
 
Pee GLOGRARHICAL 289 
 
 ᾿Αραβία 709. 5. Μετηλίτης p. 263. 
 ᾿Αρσινοίτης 709. 7. 
 ᾿Αττικός 705. 46. Ὄμβοι 884. 
 [Av|ia 709. 6. ᾿Οξυρυγχῖται 7085. 9, 60. 
 ᾿Οξυρυγχίτης (νομός) 705. 69; 707. 153; 710. 
 Διοπολίτης 708. 2, 15. 2 llr Ah Lolel 5. lads Ly (40. 13, 
 833. 
 “λληνικός 784. ᾿Οξυρυγχιτῶν πόλις 718. 4; 724. τ. 
 Ἑπτὰ νομοί 709. 7. ᾿Οξυρύγχων πόλις 707. 13; 718. 6, 13; 716. 
 Te Lom ase Sd Oboe 1. 20 2.126: 
 Ἡλίου πόλις 719. 2, 9, 12. ΟΡ, 190. 2: 19 2: 
 Ἡρακλεοπολίτης 715. 1. 789; 808; 891: 836. 
 
 ᾿Οξύρυγχοι (?) 745. 6. 
 Onfais 708. 2,15; 709.7; 722.4; 723.1; 
 
 726. 4; 881. Πέρσης τῆς ἐπιγονῆς 780. 43 836. 
 | Πηλούσιον 709. 4. 
 Ἰουδαῖοι 705. 33 ; 707. introd. Πηλουσιῶται 708. 37. 
 
 Πτολεμαίς 889. 
 Καβασίτης Ὁ. 263. 
 
 Κανωπικός 788. 2. Ῥωμαῖοι 705. 31 ; p. 263. 
 κάτω χώρα 709. 8. , 
 eee Teno Σεθροίτης 709. 5. 
 Κύνου (for Κυνῶν ὃ) 789. 2. Τανίτης 709. 5. 
 
 τοπαρχία, ἄνω 721. 9. 
 Λιβικός 748. 37. Θμοισεφώ 721. 11; 808. 
 
 μέση 784. 3. 
 
 Μακεδὼν τῶν Σωγγινάριος πεζῶν 881. Νορασείτης (not Oxyrh.) 712. 20. 
 Μέμφις 709. 6; 825. 
 Μεμφίτης 825. χώρα, ἡ κάτω x. 709. 8. 
 
 (6) VILLAGES, ἐποίκια, τύποι. 
 
 Εὐεργέτίις 814. Μαγδῶλα 740. 43. 
 
 MeppepO(a?) 740. τό ; 828. 
 “Ἡρακλείδου ἐποίκιον 888. Μοῦχις 784. 
 
 Μωνθμερεύ (not Oxyrh.) 712. 20. 
 Θελβώ 814. 
 Θεωί 740. 35. Νέκλη 742. τῇ. 
 Θ. θῶθις 794. Νεμέρα 797. 
 Θῶλθις 695. introd.; 740. 35. Νέσλα 718. 24, 31. 
 
 Θῶσβις 721. 9; 728. 2, 4, 6." 
 ᾿Οξυρύγχοις (Dat. ?=’0€. πόλις) 745. 6. 
 
 Ἰβίων Παχνοῦβις (Heracleop.) 715. 21. 
 
 *Iovoy “A... 732. 2. ᾿ Παγκῦλις 732. 5. 
 Ἴσιον Τρύφωνος 719. 10, 14. Παλῶσις 808. 
 Παῶμις 740. 24. 
 Κερκεμοῦνις 746. 7; 837. Πεεννώ 713. 26. 
 Κεσμοῦχις 740. 40; 808. Πέλα 740. 20, 21, 37, 38; 835. 
 Κύνου (ΞΞ Κυνῶν ?) 789. 2. Πέτνη Τακολί ) τόποι 734. 3. 
 
290 
 
 Σενεκελεύ 740. 26. 
 Σενέπτα 730. 3, 39. 
 Σέννις 718. 13. 
 Sevoxop| 740. 37, 38. 
 
 Σερῦφις 707. 20; 740. 18. 
 
 Σεφώ 808. 
 Σιναρύ 810. 
 
 Τακολί ) 784. 3, 5. 
 
 Δάμωνος 730. 9. 
 
 Ἐὔφρονος ata 794. 
 
 Ζωίλου καὶ Νουμηνίου 715. 22. 
 
 Θρασυμάχου παρειμένη 718. 26. 
 
 Ἱππέων Παρεμβολῆς 786. 
 
 ᾿Αδριανὴ βιβλιοθήκη 719. 35. 
 
 ΞΣωσικόσμιος 6 καὶ Hrd (?) 712. 9. 
 
 Γὴ 722. 6. 
 Zevs 722. 6. 
 
 Ἥλιος 722. 6. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 Τακόνα 743. 29. 
 
 Ταλαώ 695. introd. 
 
 Ταμαῦις (Fayfim) p. 263. 
 
 Terous 721. 9. 
 
 Ths 808. 
 
 Τοεμῖσις (Heracleop.) 715. 6, 13, 14. 
 Τρύφωνος Ἴσιον 719. 10, 14. 
 
 Ψελεμαχί | (Heracleop.) 715. 24. 
 
 c) κλῆροι. 
 (c) κλῆρ 
 
 Μενίππου καὶ ᾿Αρτεμίδωρου 715. 24. 
 Ξένωνος 810. 
 
 Χαριξείνου 728. 6. 
 
 (4) ἄμφοδα. 
 
 Νότου Δρόμου 786. 
 Νότου Κρηπῖδος 714. 11. 
 
 (6) BUILDINGS, &c. 
 | Σαραπιεῖον 736. 25; 882; 835. 
 
 (7) DEME AND TRIBE. 
 
 VI. RELIGION. 
 (a) GODs. 
 Ἥρα 781. 6. 
 
 θεός 658. 8; 715. 28. Cf. Index ii. 
 Sonpis 806. 
 
VII. 
 
 OFFICIAL AND MILITARY TERMS 
 
 201 
 
 ; (ὁ) PRIESTS. 
 
 ἀρχιερατεύσας 718. 3. 
 
 ἱερεὺς Θοήριος 806. ἱερ. καὶ ἀρχιδικαστής 719. 
 
 ae ey Δ 2: 
 
 (c) MISCELLANEOUS. 
 
 ἄστρα Ἥρας 781. 6. 
 θυσία 658. 2. 
 ἱερά SC. γῆ 721. 7. 
 
 ΔΉ 
 
 ἀγορανόμος 722. 4. 
 
 αἰτητήῆς 88. 
 
 ἀριθμός, πρώτων ἀριθμῶν ἱππεύς 735. 8, 
 
 ἀρχιδικαστής, 1. .. Ἰσιδώρου ἱερεὺς καὶ ἀρχιδ. 
 (A.D. 154) 727. 2. Οὐιτάλιος ἱερ. καὶ ἀρχιδ, 
 (A.D. 193) 719. 3, 7. Δημήτριος Ἡρακλείδου 
 ᾿διέπων τὰ κατὰ τὴν ἀρχιδικαστείαν (A.D. 154) 
 
 727. 4. 
 
 βασιλικὸς γραμματεύς, Ἡρακλείδης (A.D. 16) 746. 
 1,13. Φιλόνεικος ὁ καὶ ΕἙρμόδωρος (A.D. 122) 
 714. τ. 
 
 βιβλιοφύλαξ 712. 1; 718.3; 714.5; 715.1. 
 
 βοηθός 184. 4. 
 
 γεγυμνασιαρχηκὼς 715. 1, 35. 
 
 γραμματεύς 709.13; 715. 35; 835. βασιλικὸς 
 yp. See βασιλικός. yp. xataduvyelov 719. 6. 
 yp. πόλεως 714. ἡ. 
 
 γυμνασίαρχος 716. 1. 
 
 δεκάδαρχος “47. τ. 
 
 ἐξηγητεύσας 714. 6. 
 
 ἐξηγητής (of Alexandria) 727. 1, 5. 
 
 émixpitns 714. 5, 38. 
 
 ἐπιστατεία φυλακιτῶν 808. 
 
 ἐπιστάτης τῶν ἱππάρχων 790. 
 
 ἐπιστράτηγος, Τέλλιος Βάσσος (A.D. 135) 726. 
 18. Ξενοφῶν (A.D. 180-92) 718. 1. 
 
 OFFICIAL AND 
 
 ἱερατικοὶ τόποι 707. introd. 
 
 ἱερόν (‘offering’) 658. 1, 12; 784. 
 ἱερόν (‘temple’) 785. 
 
 “Ioeva 731. 5. 
 
 MILITARY TERMS. 
 
 ἐπιτηρητὴς ξενικῶν πρακτορείας 712. τ, 8. 
 ἔφοδος 710. 4. 
 
 ἡγεμονεύσας, Φῆλιξ (Cc. A.D. 153) 800. 
 
 ἡγεμών, Λοῦπος (Cc. 115) 706. 5. Πετρώνιος 
 Μαμερτεῖνος (A.D. 135) 726. 17. Σουλπίκιος 
 Σίμιλις 712. 22. Λαῖτος (A.D. 200-2) 705. 
 39. Claudius Valerius Firmus (a. Ὁ. 247) 
 720. I. 
 
 ἱερῶν, of ἐπὶ τῶν ἱερῶν καὶ θυσιῶν 658. 1. 
 ἵππαρχος 790. 
 ἱππεὺς πρώτων ἀριθμῶν 735. 8. 
 
 κεκοσμητευκώς 124. 1. 
 κριτής 726. 20. 
 κωμογραμματεύς 718. 13, 20, 26. 
 
 _haoypdados 786. 
 
 μαχαιροφόρος 839. 
 
 οἰκονόμος οὐικάριος 788. 6. 
 ὀπτίων 735. 5. 
 
 οὐικάριος, οἰκονόμος οὐικ, 735. 6. 
 
 ᾽ 
 
 pedes 785. 12. 
 
 πεζός, οἱ Σωγγινάριος πεζοί 891. 
 πολιτάρχης 748. 4. 
 πραγματευτής 828. 
 
 U 2 
 
292 
 
 mpaxtopela ξενικῶν 712. τ, 8; 825. 
 πράκτωρ ἀργυρικῶν 733. 2; 734. 3. 
 
 σιτολόγος 708. 10, 21; 740. 24, 26; 798; 
 833. 
 
 στρατηγός 708. 2, 105 717. 7, τι: 718. 24. 
 (Of Alexandria) ‘I... . Ἰσιδώρου γενόμενος 
 στρ. (A.D. 154) 727. 2. Αὐρήλιος ‘Qpiov 
 γενόμ. στρ. (A.D. 200-2) 705. 18,67. (OF 
 Oxyrhynchus) Πτολεμαῖος (late rst cent. 
 B.C.) 808. ᾿Αχιλλεὺς ὁ kal Κάσιος (A.D. 193) 
 719. 1, 4. 
 
 ΝΠΙ. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 τοπογραμματεύς 838. 
 ὑπηρέτης 712. 17. 
 
 φυλακίτης 808. 
 φύλαξ 808, 
 
 χειριστήῆς 734. 2. 
 χιλίαρχος 708. 13. 
 χρηματιστήῆς 719. 7; 727. 3. 
 
 apoypados 710. 3. 
 
 WEIGHTS, MEASURES, AND COINS. 
 
 (2) WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. 
 
 ἄκαινα 669. 29, 41. 
 
 dupa 669. 29. 
 
 ἄρουρα 7118, 24 ef saep.; 715. 26; 718. 8 ef 
 τ ΜΟΙ ΠΟ Ls idl od Oe 5.30]: 
 729. 33; 730. 8, 39; 740. 41 67 saep. 
 
 ἀρτάβη 708. 4, 11, 17, 19; 718. 15; 785. 
 9; 786. 8 et sacp.; 788; 789; 836. 
 
 βῆμα 669. 28, 37. 
 
 δάκτυλος 669. 14, 17, 26, 43. 
 δέσμη 742. 4, 13. 
 δίαυλον 669. 30. 
 
 ἑκατοστή 708. 8, 9, 20. 
 
 κάλαμος 669. 28, 41. 
 κεράμιον 729. 36; 745.1; 784. 
 κοτύλη 784. 
 
 λιχάς 669. 2}, 31. 
 
 μετρὸν 669. 26; 707. 26, 28. 30; 717. 1,2; 
 729. 27. μ. ἀγορανομικόν 886. μ. δημόσιον 
 740. 18, 20. μ. ἐμβ(ολικόν ἢ) 740. 18, 
 μ. σιτολογικόν 740. 17. μ. τετραχοίνικον 
 ἀγορανομικόν 886. μ. χαλκοῦν 717. 8. 
 
 μίλιον 669. 30. 
 
 ναύβιον 669. II, 24. 
 
 ξύλον BBY. II, 20, 21, 28. & βασιλικόν 669. 
 II, 19. ἔξ. δημόσιον 669. 38. 
 
 ὄγδοον 669. 1, 2. 
 ὀργυιά 689. 28, 39. 
 
 παλαιστής B69. 13, 16, 27, 31, 34. 
 
 πῆχυς B69. 2 ef saep. π. δημόσιος 669, 34. 
 π. ἐμβαδικός 669. 6, το. π. εὐθυμετρικός 
 669. 5. π. λινοῦφικός 669. 33. π. Νειλο- 
 μετρικός 669. 35. π. οἰκοπεδικός 669. 9. 
 π΄. στερεός B69. 7. π. τεκτονικός 669. 35. 
 
 πλέθρον 669. 29. 
 
 πούς 669. 27, 32. 
 
 πυγών 669. 27, 34. 
 
 σπιθαμή 669. 27, 32. 
 στάδιον 669. 29. 
 σχοινίον 669. 1, 3, 18. 
 
 τετάρτη 795. 
 
 χοῖνιξ 740. 18 ef sacp.; 789. 
 χοῦς 7386. 153; 739. 11; 819. 
 
IX, TAXES 
 
 295 
 
 (2) COoINs. 
 
 ἀργύριον 706. 3; 712. 6,15; 724.6; 728. 
 Ὁ ταῦ 7120: 0; ΤῊ, 20, 40; 7890: 12, 
 ΠΣ ol, 8. Ὁ. 10, 12: 184: 788..7191 
 808. apy. ἐπίσημον 722. το. ἀργ. Σε- 
 βαστοῦ νομίσματος 719. 21; 722. 25. 
 
 as 737. 2 e¢ sacp. 
 
 Spayyn 707. 8 ef saep.; 712. 6, 14, 15, 215 
 719. 21,31; 722.19, 25; 724. 6 ef saep.; 
 ΠΡ Ὁ Ὁ τορι: 7ASe 0. ef Saep.; 449. 6 
 ef saep.; 780. 12, 14, 37; 781. 8, 9, 11, 
 12; 782. 5 2) saed.; 733. 4, 6; 786. 2 
 et saecp.; 789. 2 εἰ saep. ; 742.14; 745.1; 
 784; 788; 791-2; 799; 803; 808; 
 817; 819. 
 
 δραχμιαῖος τόκος 712. τ4; 728. 20. 
 
 ἡμιωβέλιον 788. 4, 6; 786. 12 ef sacp.; 739. 
 Sahl 
 
 pra 728. 21. 
 
 ὀβολιαῖος 729. το. 
 ὀβολός 781. 8, 11,13 ; 736. 5 ef saep.; 739. 
 7 et saep. 
 
 πεντώβολον 733. 4, 6; 
 739. 6. 
 
 736. 68 ef saep.; 
 
 semis (4 as) 737. 11 ef saep. 
 
 τάλαντον 710. 6-8; 722.17, 26; 784; 806. 
 
 τετρώβολον 722. 20; 734. 5, 6; 736. 12 
 et saep.; '139. 4, 13. 
 
 τριώβολον 736. ὃ ef saep.; 
 819. 
 
 ΠΘΘ τὰ τὸ; 
 
 χαλκός 722. 26. χαλκοί 748. 23. 
 
 τὰ ΤΆΧΡΗΣ: 
 
 ἀργυρικά 733, 2; 184. 3. 
 
 γλυί ) 784. 4. 
 γραμματικόν p. 263. 
 
 ἐπικεφάλαιον 832. 
 
 Aaoypapia 714. 23; 733. 5. 
 ναῦλον πορείων 792. 
 
 ξενικά 712. 1, 8; 825. 
 
 οἴνου τέλος 788. 
 
 πρακτορικαὶ δαπάναι 712. 21. 
 προσμετρούμενα 708. 12. 
 
 σιτικά 98. 
 
 σιτολογικόν 740. 22, 27. 
 σιτομετρικόν 740, 23, 25. 
 σπονδή 730. 13. 
 
 συί( ) 784. 4. 
 
 τέλος 712. 6; 788. 
 vikn 788. 4, 6. 
 
 φορικά, ᾿Δρσινόης pop. 807. 
 φόρος πόρθμειος 732. 4. 
 
204 
 
 INDICES 
 
 X. GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS. 
 
 abire 720. 13. 
 
 aBpoxos 740. 45; 810. 
 
 ἄγειν 742, 7. 
 
 ἀγεώργητος 705. 74. 
 
 ἀγοράζειν 717. 3; 742.12; 745. 2; 889. 
 
 dyopavopetov 713. 13. 
 
 ἀγορανομικός 836. 
 
 ἀγορανόμος 722. 4. 
 
 ἀγοραστός 798. 
 
 dyud 722. 12, 34; 728.5; 726. 9. 
 
 ἀγωνιᾶν 744, 4, 13. 
 
 ἀγωνίζεσθαι 705. 50, 51. 
 
 ἀδελφή 715.17; 744.1; 745. τ. 
 
 ἀδελφιδοῦς 727. τό. 
 
 ἀδελφός 707. 34; 712. 5, 12; 718. 21, 30; 
 MAG. 17 Add 0 18 toss chon 
 725. 6; 746.1; 791. 
 
 ἀδιακρίτως 715. 36. 
 
 ἄδικος 717. 10; 718. 23. 
 
 ἄδολος 729. 19; 886. 
 
 ἀεί 658. 6 ; 719. 13. 
 
 ἀθετίζειν 808. 
 
 αἴθριον 719. 15, τό. 
 
 αἴξ 807. 
 
 aipey 719. 26; 728. 12; 729. 21, 31, 41, 
 43; 787; 800. 
 
 αἵρεσις 716. 22; 729. 41. 
 
 αἰτεῖν 709. 12. 
 
 αἰτητής 188. 
 
 αἰτία 725. 41. 
 
 ἄκαινα 669. 29, 41. 
 
 ἀκίνδυνος 780. 15. 
 
 ἀκολούθως 706. ο; 718. το; 729. 14. 
 
 ἀκούειν 812, 
 
 ada (sic) 794. 
 
 ἄλεστρα 736. 8, 31, 34, 72, 76; 789. 6. 
 
 ἀλήθεια 715. 29. 
 
 ἀλλάσσειν 729. 43. 
 
 ἀλληλεγγύη 712. 12, 15. 
 
 ἀλληλέγγυος 729. 21. 
 
 ἀλλήλους 718. 11, 16; 719. 20; 
 727. 28. 
 
 adpupis 786. 73; 740. 46. 
 
 ἅλς 786. 7, 74. 
 
 dua 658. 13; 798. 
 
 ἀμείνων 716. 21. 
 
 724. 6: 
 
 ἀμελεῖν 707. 31; 742. τ4. 
 
 ἀμέμπτως 724. 10; 729. 18. 
 
 ἀμετάστρεπτος 705. 62. 
 
 ἀμισθί 729. 9. 
 
 dupa 669. 29. 
 
 ἀμοιβή '705. 61. 
 
 ἄμπελος 707. 23, 36; 729. 18. 
 
 ἀμπελών 707. 19; 729. 33, 35. 
 
 ἀμφισβήτησις 7485. 9. 
 
 ἄμφοδον 714. 26. Cf. Index V (d). 
 
 ἀμφότερος 707. 12; 715. 2; 716. 
 I, 28. 
 
 ἀναβάλλειν 729. 6, 28. 
 
 ἀνάβασις 742. 6. 
 
 avaBohn 729. 7; 141. 13. 
 
 ἀνάγειν 707. 23, 36. 
 
 ἀναγιγνώσκειν 706. 5; 724. το; 748, 18. 
 
 ἀναγκάζειν '71'7. 2, 14. 
 
 ἀναγράφειν 780. 7. 
 
 ἀνάκτησις 705. 76. 
 
 ἀναλαμβάνειν 707. 25, 35; 719. 32; 721. 5, 
 6,7; 724.8. - 
 
 ἀνάλωμα 740. 28; 825; 836. 
 
 ἀνάπλους 709. 3. 
 
 ἀναπομπή Ὁ. 262. 
 
 ἀνασκευάζειν 745. 5. 
 
 ἀναφαιρέτως 718. 10. 
 
 ἀνατολή 725. 12. 
 
 10; 728. 
 
 aveu( ) 833. 
 ἀνήρ 710. 3; 719. 24. κατ᾽ ἄνδρα 709. 
 11; 
 
 ἀνθομολογεῖν 748. 34, 40. 
 ἄνθρωπος 705. τό, 66; 8085. 
 ἀνιστάναι 707. 25. 
 ἀνοικοδομεῖν 707. 27. 
 
 ἀνόκνως 748. 30. 
 
 ἀντίγραφον 719. 3, 4, 9. 
 ἀντικνήμιον 722. 54. 
 ἀντιποιεῖν 718, 30. 
 ἀντισυμβολεῖν p. 263. 
 ἀντιτάσσειν 707. 17, 38. 
 ἀντιφωνεῖν 805. 
 
 ἀνύειν ΡῬ. 262. 
 
 ἄνω 712. 20; 721. 19; 786. 31; 744. 8. 
 ἄνωθεν 718. 21; 745. 4. 
 ἄξιος 725. 29-35. 
 
X. GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS 295 
 
 ἀξιοῦν 658. 16; 705. 51, 60; 716,19; 719. 
 
 32; 727. 29; 805; 826. 
 ἀξίωσις 705. 14, 64. 
 ἀπαιτεῖν 718. 23, 29; 727. 18; 809. 
 ἀπαίτησις 718. 14; 722. 28. 
 ἀπαρτίζειν 724, 12. 
 ἀπελεύθερος 706. 2; 716. 6, 29. 
 ἀπελευθεροῦν 706. 8; 722. 18. 
 ἀπεργασία 729, 2, 8. 
 ἀπερίλυτος 7138. 39. 
 ἀπέρχεσθαι 09. 4. 
 ἀπέχειν 719. 22; 808. 
 ἀπηλιώτης 719. 17, 19; 728. 7. 
 ἁπλοῦς 719. 9. 
 ἀπογράφειν 713. 34: 715. 6, 36. 
 ἀπογραφή 715. 30; 719. 24; 808. 
 ἀποδέχεσθαι 708. 59. 
 ἀποδιδόναι 705. 61; 718. 18, 21; 
 wath, ΤῸ; 42. 45; 790. 22: 
 745. 7; 746. 3; 798; 836. 
 ἀπόδοσις 712. 16; 729.17; 808. 
 ἀποθνήσκειν 718. 12. 
 ἄποικος 719. 2, 9, 11. 
 ἀπολαμβάνειν 706. 3. 
 ἀπολλύναι 748. 23. 
 ἀπομετρεῖν 798. 
 ἀποσπᾶν 124. 13. 
 ἀποστέλλειν 742. 3; 744. 8. 
 ἀποστερητής 7485. 7. 
 ἀποστολή 786. 13. 
 ἀπότακτος 729. 31 ; 
 ἀποτίνειν 730. 26. 
 ἀποφαίνειν 706. 6. 
 ἀργεῖν 724. 14; 725. 35, 40; 791. 12. 
 ἀργυρικά 788. 2; 784. 3 
 ἀργύριον. See Index Vill (ὁ). 
 ἀργυροῦς 796. 
 ἀρεσκία 729. 24. 
 ἀριθμός 1885. 8; 742. 8. 
 ἀριστερός 722. 10; 723. 5. 
 ἄριστον 736. 23, 20: 35- 
 ἀρνακίς 41. 6. 
 ἄρουρα. See Index VIII (a). 
 ἀρουρηδόν 729. 31. 
 ἀρσενικός 741. 8; 832. 
 ἄρσενος (?) 744. 9. 
 ἄρσις 708. 5, 18. 
 ἀρτάβη. See Index VII (a). 
 ἀρτίδιον 738. 8. 
 ἄρτος 786. 9 ef Saep. 
 
 730. 12. 
 
 728. 18; 
 744. 16; 
 
 ἀρχαῖος 729. 7, 8 
 
 ἀρχεῖον 712. 13. 
 
 ἀρχιδικαστής. See Index VII. 
 
 ἀρχιερατεύειν 718. 3. 
 
 as 737. 2 ef saep. 
 
 ἀσθένεια 726. το. 
 
 ἀσθενεῖν 725. 40. 
 
 ἀσπάζεσθαι 745. 9; 805. 
 
 ἀσπάραγος 736. 36. 
 
 ἀσπορεῖν 740. 42. 
 
 ἄσπορος 09. 14. 
 
 ἀστικός 706. 9. 
 
 ἄστρον 731. 6. 
 
 ἀσυντέλεστος 707. 30. 
 
 ἀσφαλῶς 742. 5, 10. 
 
 ἀτακτεῖν 725. 40. 
 
 ἄτοκος 729. τό. 
 
 αὖ 718. το. 
 
 auctor 720. 4. 
 
 αὐθεντικός 719. 30, 33. 
 
 αὐτάρκης 729. 19. 
 
 avrapkia 729. το. 
 
 αὐτόθεν 726. 12. 
 
 αὐτόθι 719. 22. 
 
 ἀφῆλιξ 716. 7, 12, 
 740. 44, 45, 47. 
 
 ἀφιέναι 722. 6; '744. το. 
 
 ἀφιστάναι 745. 3 
 
 ἄφορος 721. 5. 
 
 ἄχρι ΠΟ. 37. 
 
 205° 725. 75 2120. Τὸ] 
 
 βαδίζειν 743. 29. 
 
 βάθος 669. 8. 
 
 βάπτειν 736. 6. 
 
 βασιλικός, Bao. (γῆ) 718. 9, 15, 16, 19, 27; 
 721. 4; 780. 8; 810. 8B. ypappartets. 
 See Index VII. β. ξύλον 669. 11, 19. 
 
 Baranov 739. 9. 
 
 βάτελλα 741. 18. 
 
 βεβαιοῦν 719. 23; 730. 21. 
 
 βεβαίως 118. 18. 
 
 βῆμα 6689. 28, 37. 
 
 βίαιος 808. 
 
 βιβλίδιον 716. 18. 
 
 βιβλιοθήκη 119. 35. 
 
 βιβλίον 826. 
 
 βιβλιοφόρος 710. 2. 
 
 βιβλιοφυλάκιον 828. 
 
 βιβλιοφύλαξ. See Index VIL. 
 
 Bios 826. 
 
295 
 
 βλάβος 729. 20. 
 
 βοᾶν 7117. 9, 12, 13, 14. 
 
 βοηθός 734. 4 ; 748. 20. 
 
 βοικός 729. 39. 
 
 βούλεσθαι 705. 76; 719. 29; 721. 3; 729. 
 11. 
 
 βουλεύειν 106. 6. 
 
 βορρᾶς 719. 16, 18; 729. 7. 
 
 βοτάνη 729. 22. 
 
 βοῦς 707. 9; 729. 16. 
 
 βραχύς 705. 77. 
 
 βωλολογεῖν 708. 7, 19. 
 
 βῶλος 708. 8, 20. 
 
 βωμός '785. 
 
 capere 720. 15. 
 
 collega (?) 785. 14. 
 conducere 737. 2 εἰ saep. 
 consul 720. 7. 
 
 γάλα 736. 48, 83. 
 
 yapetos 795. 
 
 γάμος 718. 12, 32. 
 
 γείτων 719. τό. 
 
 γενεά 718. τό. 
 
 γενέσια 736. 56, 57. 
 
 γένημα 729. 36. 
 
 γένος 727. 20; 729. 51. 
 
 γέρδιος 725. 5; 786. 23,27, 28, 35; 826. 
 
 γεύεσθαι 658. 12. 
 
 γεωμετρία 728. 9, 30. 
 
 γεωμετρικός BBY. 1, 3, 18. 
 
 γεωργεῖν 718. 19, 23; 728. 4; 740. 38, 40. 
 
 γεωργός 740. 16, 21, 33, 35. 
 
 47 705.743 707. 23,303 215. 22, 26. 2718. 
 24; 780. 8,17, 36; 810. Cf. βασιλικός 
 and ἱερός. Γῆ 722. 6. 
 
 γίγνεσθαι 705. 18, 67; 707. 34; 709. 6; 
 712.°163 916: 21; 718.309, “/10. 22, 30; 
 fp AES eb Pe ee er PR etre 50: 292: 
 5, 93; 748. 20, 41; 745.5; 807; 832. 
 
 γιγνώσκειν 743. 27; 744. 3. 
 
 γλυί ) 784. 4. 
 
 γναφεύς 736. 37. 
 
 γνήσιος 740. 14. 
 
 γνώμη 729. 43. 
 
 γνωρίζειν 705. 39; 718. 20; p. 263. 
 
 yrootnp 722. 31; 728. 4. 
 
 γογγυλίς 786. 5. 
 
 γόμος 708. 3, 16. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 vyovers 718. 7, 38. 
 
 youn 729. 40. 
 γόνυ 722. 24. 
 
 | ypdupa 716. 32; 725. 64; 727. 28; 728. 
 
 34: 
 
 γραμματεύς. See Index VII. 
 
 γραμματικόν Ὁ. 263. 
 
 γράφειν 706. 3; 716. 31; 718. 24; 719. 6, 
 27; 724.10; 725.63; 728. 33; 729. 
 37; 748. 39; 746.5; 787; S811. 
 
 γραφεῖον 736. 16; 808. 
 
 γυμνασιαρχεῖν 715. 1. 
 
 γυμνασίαρχος 716. 1, 
 
 γυμνός 889. 
 
 γυναικεῖος 739. 18; TAL. g. 
 
 γυνή 736. τι, 88, 89. 
 
 γυργαθός (γεργαθός) 141. 5. 
 
 δακτύλιον 798. 
 
 δάκτυλος 669. 14, 17, 26, 43. 
 
 δανείζειν 705. 47; 808; 886. 
 
 δανεισμός 799. 
 
 δαπανᾶν 705. 63. 
 
 δαπάνη 705.79; 708.12; 712.6; 729. 28; 
 736. 98; 739. 3. 
 
 dare 720. 3, 6, 15. 
 
 δέησις 720. I0. 
 
 δεῖγμα 708. 5, 18. 
 
 δεῖν 718. 14, 18, 29; 727. 19, 205 72064, 
 5, 16; 743. 8. δεῖσθαι 718. 24. 
 
 δειπνεῖν 786. 93. 
 
 δεῖπνον 786. 36; 738. 1, 4, 7. 
 
 δείση 729. 22. ᾿ 
 
 δεκάδαρχος 747. τ. 
 
 δεκατί |) 741. 17. 
 
 δεξιός 722. 24. 
 
 δέσμη 742. 4, 13. 
 
 δὴ 705. 61. 
 
 δηλοῦν 707. 21, 30; 708. τ; 711 ὁ: 
 716. 19; 725. 7, 11, 48; 740. 30; 800. 
 
 δημόσιος 669. 24; 707. 2, 15; 715. 37. 
 (τὸ) δημ. 712. 6; '719. 28, 30; 725. 56; 
 729. 20; 793; 803. (ra) δημ. 707. 22; 
 718. 11 et saep.; 729.33; 7380.17; 740. 
 14; 810. δημ. Oeua(?) 740. 29. dnp. 
 μέτρον 740. 18, 20. δημ. ξύλον 669. 38. 
 δημ. ὀφειλή 719. 23. δημ. πῆχυς 669. 34. 
 δημ. ῥύμη 719. 17, 19. δημ. τράπεζα 721. 
 13; 835. δημ. χρηματισμός 712. 12. 
 
 δημοσιοῦν 719. 32. τ 
 
ΠΟ INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS 2097 
 
 δημοσίωσις 719. 31. 
 
 διαγράφειν 707. 22; 721.12; 733. 2; 734. 
 2; 800; 8038. 
 
 διαθήκη 715. 19. 
 
 διαίρεσις 718. 7, 10. 
 
 διαλογίζεσθαι 709. 4. 
 
 διαλογισμός 709. 2; 726. 12. 
 
 διαπέμπειν 727. 24. 
 
 διαπονεῖν 748. 22. 
 
 διαπωλεῖν 72'7. 20. 
 
 διάστασις 669. 37, 40. 
 
 διαστολή 719. 32; 748. 28; 793. 
 
 διατάσσειν 718. 25. 
 
 διατελεῖν 658. ὃ. 
 
 δίαυλον 669. 30. 
 
 διάφορον 708. 11, 22; 797; 833. 
 
 διαψεύδεσθαι 715. 30. 
 
 διάψιλος 707. 23. 
 
 διδάσκαλος 725, 10, 14, 43. 
 
 d:ddvac 716. 22; 719. 4, 30; 725.18; 729. 
 ΤΟΙ 17. 191 ἡΓ1ὸ; 40: 15 ef seeps; 
 742. 11; 748. 26, 28, 32; 789. 
 
 διέπειν 72:7. 5. 
 
 διέρχεσθαι 12. 
 789. 
 
 διετία 707. 24. 
 
 διευτυχεῖν 718. 31. 
 
 δίκαιος 717. 10; 746. 9; 787. 
 
 δικαστήριον 705. 38. 
 
 δίκη 728. 24. 
 
 δίλετον 717. 5, 12. 
 
 δίμοιρος 716. 14, 20. 
 
 διό 727. 21; 826. 
 
 διοικεῖν 719. 26. 
 
 διπλοῦς 729. 20; 741. 3. 
 
 δισακκίδιον 741. 2. 
 
 δίστεγος 719. 15. 
 
 δοκεῖν 718. 24. 
 
 dominus 720. 3, 6. 
 
 δόσις 724. ἡ. 
 
 δούλη 714. 15; 722. τ4; 728. 3. 
 
 δοῦλος 714. 13; 716.15; 724. 3. 
 
 δραχμή. See Index VIII (0). 
 
 δραχμιαῖος 712. 14; 728. 21. 
 
 dpdyos 717. 17; Ὁ. 263. 
 
 δύνασθαι 726. το; 727. 11; 742. το; 7438. 
 36; 744. 12. 
 
 δύσις 725. 12. 
 
 δωδεκάδραχμος 714, 22. 
 
 δωδεκάμηνον 800. 
 
 18, 1714: 185. 729: 26; 
 
 e 720. 5, 14. 
 
 ἐᾶν 729. 18. 
 
 ἐάνπερ 729. 4, 8. 
 
 eyypantos 707. 20. 
 
 ἐγγυητῆς 707. 33. 
 
 ἐγκαλεῖν 728. 40. 
 
 eyxtnots 705. 61; 712.1; 715.1; 825. 
 
 ἔδαφος 728. 15. 
 
 ἐθέλειν 705. 43, 62. 
 
 ἔθιμος 729. ἡ. 
 
 ἔθνος 705. 37. 
 
 ἔθος Ὁ. 263. 
 
 εἰδέναι 716. 32; 18. 12; 725. 64; 728. 
 34; 729. 37; 745. 6, 8. 
 
 εἶδος B69. 26; 719. 24. 
 
 εἰκός 718. 22. 
 
 εἷς, μιᾶς ἀντὶ μιᾶς 740. 17, 18. 
 
 εἰσάγειν 729. 5, 6. 
 
 εἰσβολή 736. 97. 
 
 εἰσιέναι 721. 8; 725. 30; 729. 2, 14, 30. 
 
 εἴσοδος 705. 39; 719. τό. 
 
 εἰσπορεύεσθαι 717. 5, 7; 744. 4. 
 
 εἰσφέρειν 717. 12. 
 
 εἰσχρῆσθαι 717. 2. 
 
 éxaotos 705. 35,77; 711.1; 725.11; 727. 
 ΣΡ LAG mele ,aOreLo. 20007. 
 
 ἑκάτερος 713. 31 ; 729. 19. 
 
 ἑκατοστή 708. 8, 9, 20. 
 
 ἐκβαίνειν 708. 7, 19; 729. 30. 
 
 ἐκβάλλειν 744. το. 
 
 exBoav 717. I. 
 
 ἐκδέχεσθαι 724. 12. 
 
 ἐκδιδάσκειν 725. 47. 
 
 ἐκδιδόναι 725. 5; 835. 
 
 ἔκκαιρος 729. 18. 
 
 ἐκκρούειν 725. 37. 
 
 ἐκλογή 729. 41. 
 
 ἐκμισθοῦν 727. 10. 
 
 ἔκτακτος 707. 4. 
 
 ἐκτίνειν 725. 55; 728.19; 791. 12. 
 
 ἔκτισις 729. 21. 
 
 ἐκφόριον 743. 29. 
 
 ἔλαιον 736. 15; 7389. 5, 11, 16, 21; 784. 
 
 ἐλάσσων 669. 44; 705. 46; 708. 7, 20; 
 729. 42. 
 
 ἐλεύθερος 705. 40; 722. 6. 
 
 ἐλευθεροῦν 716. 11. 
 
 ἐλευθέρωσις 722, 51; 723. 4. 
 
 ἐμβ(ολικός ?) 740. 18. 
 
 ἐμβάδευσις p. 263. 
 
298 
 
 ἐμβάλλειν 7O8. 9, 21; 717. 1, 15. 
 
 ἐμμένειν 725. 55. 
 
 ἐμποιεῖν (ἢ) 707. introd. 
 
 ἔμφορος 707. 1ο. 
 
 ἐνδεικνύναι 705. 32. 
 
 ἕνεκα 719. 31. 
 
 ἐνεχυρασία 712. 3, 10, 16, 19. 
 
 ἐνεχυροῦν 729. 44. 
 
 ἔνθεσμος 718. 30. 
 
 ἐνιαυτός 725. 17, 20, 23, 25, 52. 
 
 ἐνιστάναι 718. 40; 715.7; 724.4; 725. 28; 
 728.16; 729.14; 730. 4; 732.2; 808; 
 826. 
 
 ἐνοικεῖν 705. 41. 
 
 ἐνοίκησις 729. 34. 
 
 ἐνοίκιον 729. 34. 
 
 ἐνοχλεῖν 705. 71. 
 
 ἔνοχος 715. 31. 
 
 ἐντολικός 741. I. 
 
 evrés 724. 11, 13; 728. 153 729. 20, 30. 
 
 ἐντυγχάνειν 717. τό. 
 
 ἐνώπιον 658. 9. 
 
 ἐξαπελευθεροῦν 722. 13, 1. 
 
 ἑξαετία 707. 4, 5. 
 
 ἐξασθενεῖν 705. 71. 
 
 ἐξεῖναι 705. 52; 722. 27; 724. 12; 725. 
 
 53; 727. 253: 729. 43. 
 ἐξενίαυτα 729, 15. 
 ἐξηγητεύειν 714. 6. 
 ἐξηγητής 727. I, 5. 
 ἑξῆς 725. 8; 729. 26. 
 ἔξοδος 719. τό. 
 ἐξουσία 708. 8; 719. 25. 
 ἑορτή 725. 36. 
 ἑορτικός 724. 6. 
 ἐπάγειν, ἐπαγόμεναι ἡμέραι. 
 ἔπαθλον 705. 40. 
 ἐπακολουθεῖν 729. 20. 
 ἐπανάγκης 25. 42. 
 ἐπάναγκος 707. 6; 729. 18, 40. 
 ἐπάνω ‘707. 7; 740. 30. 
 ἐπεί 713. 20; 718. 22; 727. 25. 
 ἐπερώτησις 718. 13. 
 ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό 713. 28; 716.14; 729. 15. 
 ἐπιβάλλειν 715. 13, 15. 
 ἐπιγονή 730. 4. 
 ἐπιγραφή 719. 28. 
 ἐπιδέχεσθαι 810. 
 ἐπιδημεῖν 705. 36. 
 ἐπιδιδόναι 705. 60; 715. 29,34; 716. 18, 28. 
 
 See Index III (2). 
 
 LNDTCES 
 
 ἐπίδοσις 705. 59, 76. 
 
 ἐπιεικῆς 705. 42. 
 
 ἐπικαταβολή Ὁ. 263. 
 
 ἐπικεῖσθαι 729. 26. 
 
 ἐπικεφάλαιον 832. 
 
 ἐπικρατεῖν 718. 28. 
 
 ἐπικριτής 714. 5, 38. 
 
 ἐπιλανθάνειν 744, 12. 
 
 ἐπιμέλεια 719. 7; 7271. 3. 
 
 ἐπιμελεῖσθαι 727. 15; 29. 22; 748. 43; 
 744.6; 745. το; 746.9; 806. 
 
 ἐπιμιμνήσκειν 791. 
 
 ἐπινίκια 705. 34. 
 
 ἐπινομή 80. 11; 810; 888. 
 
 ἐπιπέμπειν 748. 30. 
 
 ἐπίσημος 722. 19. 
 
 ἐπισκοπεῖν 748. 43. 
 
 ἐπίστασθαι 724. 3; 725. 50. 
 
 ἐπιστατεία 803. 
 
 ἐπιστάτης 790. 
 
 ἐπιστέλλειν 718. 25. 
 
 ἐπιστολή 746. 4. 
 
 ἐπιστολίδιον 789. 
 
 ἐπιστράτηγος. See Index VII. 
 
 ἐπιτάσσειν 725. 13. 
 
 ἐπιτελεῖν 719.26; 726.20; 727. 22-4; 729.18. 
 
 ἐπιτηρητῆς 712. τ, ὃ. 
 
 ᾿ ἐπίτιμον 725. 55; 729. 20. 
 
 ἐπιτροπεύειν 7.27. 15. 
 
 ἐπιτροπή 743. 32. 
 
 ἐπίτροπος 716. 7 ; 740. 42. 
 
 ἐποίκιον 707. 37; 729. 34; 838. 
 
 Ἑπτὰ νομοί 709. 7. 
 
 ἐργάζεσθαι 729. 19. 
 
 ἐργασία 742, 11. 
 
 epyareia 800. 
 
 ἐργάτης 739. 13. 
 
 ἔργον 729. 29. 
 
 ἐρέβινθος 86. 92. 
 
 ἔριον 791. 
 
 ἔρχεσθαι 715.9; 748. 24, 42; 805; 889. 
 
 ἐρωτᾶν 744. 6,13; 745. 7; 146. 5; 787. 
 
 ἕτερος 705. 63; 712. το; 714. 4; 718. 22; 
 719. 25; 725. 30; 726. το; 729. 3, 4, 
 11, 26, 20. : 
 
 ἐτι 658. 8; 705. 23, 34; 718, 21, 727.18; 
 729. 3, 25, 44; 744. 3. 
 
 εὖ πράσσειν 822. 
 
 εὐδοκεῖν 707. 11; 725. 47, 62; 726. 22; 
 ΠῚ]. 50: 
 
X. GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS 299 
 
 εὐεργέτης 705. 17, 66. 
 εὐθαλεῖν 729. 22. 
 
 εὐθέως 889. εὐθύς 744. 7. 
 εὐθυμετρικός 669. 5. 
 εὐλόγως 718. 28. 
 
 εὐμενής 705. 15, 65. 
 
 εὔνοια 705. 31. 
 
 εὑρίσκειν 717. 5, 8; 748. 25. 
 εὐσχήμων 800. 
 
 εὐτυχεῖν 805. 
 
 εὐχαριστεῖν 811. 
 
 ἐφηβεύειν 711. 4. 
 
 ἔφηβος 705. 49. 
 
 ἐφόδιον 792. 
 
 ἔφοδος 710. 4. 
 
 ζεῦγος 707. 9; 741. 8, 9. 
 ζητεῖν 726. 16; 805. 
 ζυμουργός 754. 
 
 ζυτὸς 736. 27, 60; 784. 
 
 ἡγεμονεύειν 800. 
 
 ἡγεμών. See Index VII. 
 
 ἥλιος 725. 12. Ἥλιος 722. 6. 
 
 ἡμέρα 705. 35; 718. 40; 724.14; 725. 12, 
 37, 41, 43; 781. 7, 11; 736. 68-71, 90; 
 804. ἐπαγόμεναι jp. See Index II (Z). 
 
 ἡμέτερος 787. al. 
 
 ἡμιαρτάβιον 708. 6. 
 
 ἡμιολία 728. 20; 780. 27; 833. 
 
 ἡμίσεια 729. 36. 
 
 ἡμισύνθεσις 741. 15. 
 
 ἡμιωβέλιον. See Index VIII (6). 
 
 ἧπαρ 88. 3. 
 
 ἤπητρα 786. 10. 
 
 ἤτοι 669. 8. 
 
 θέλειν 717. 2; 748. 17, 27, 39; 745. 8. 
 θέμα 740. 21, 26, 29, 33, 49. 
 θεός. See Index VI(a). 
 θερινός 810. 
 
 θηλυκός 882. 
 
 θῆλυς 744. το. 
 
 θρίδαξ 738. 6. 
 
 θρῖον (θρῦον) 786. 9, 47. 
 
 θρύον 729. 22. 
 
 θυγάτηρ 658. 15 ; 796. 14, 84. 
 θύειν 658. 7, 11. 
 
 θύρα 729. 23. 
 
 θυσία 658. 2. 
 
 ἰδιόγραφος 719. 27, 34. 
 
 ἴδιος 712. 19; 715.6; 729.28; 807; 836. 
 
 ἰδιωτικός 715. 373; 718. 11, 273; 719. 24. 
 ἰδιωτικῶς 740. 20, 28, 32. 
 
 ἱερατικός 707. introd. 
 
 ἱερεύς. See Index VI (0). 
 
 ἱερόν 658. I, 22; 784; 785. 
 
 ἱερός, ἱερὰ (γῆ) ΔΙ ἢ: 
 
 ἱμάτιον 739. 1ο. 
 
 ἵνα 709. 2; 718. 30; 742. 6, 8; 748. 37, 
 43; 744.13; 745. το; 746. 10; 805. 
 
 immapyos 790. 
 
 ἱππεύς 785. 8. 
 
 ἱππικός 41. τι. 
 
 ἰσάτις 729. 31. 
 
 Ἴσεια 751]. 5. 
 
 ἴσος 118. 750720013; 16. 45.,50} 101 20. 
 43, 44; 789. 
 
 ἱστάναι 709. 2, 10; 725. 46; 781. ο. 
 
 item 735. 12. 
 
 ἴτριον 786. 50, 81. 
 
 kaa 705. 47; 727. 24. 
 
 καθάπερ 728. 24. 
 
 καθαρός 708. 5,18; 718.9; 729. 22; 736. 
 17, 26, 49, 53, 78, 80; 740. 29; 836. 
 
 καθιστάναι 727. 19; 8386. 
 
 καθότι 705. 62. 
 
 καθώς 725. 44, 50, 5I. 
 
 καινός 707. ἢ, 273 729. 12. 
 
 καιρός 729. 5, 11, 19, 29. 
 
 καλαμεία 729. 3, 22, 24-6. 
 
 κάλαμος 669. 28, 41; 729. 4, 25, 26; 742. 2. 
 
 καλαμουργία 729. 4. 
 
 Καλάνδαι 747. 2. Kalendae 737. 21. 
 
 καλεῖν 747, τ. 
 
 καλός 705. 40; 805. 
 
 καμάρα 729. 34. 
 
 καμηλίτης 710. 4. 
 
 καρπός. 721. 7; 729. 32; 730. 19. 
 
 καρπωνεία 728. 25. 
 
 καρπωνεῖν 728. 1, 10, 29. 
 
 κάρυον 741. 3. 
 
 καταβλάπτειν 715. 37; 729. 18. 
 
 κατάγειν 708. 3, 16. 
 
 καταλείπειν 705. 44,74; 707. 30; 729. 20. 
 
 καταλογεῖον 719. 3, 6 
 
 καταλογή 787; 811. 
 
 καταμετρεῖν 669. 11, 
 
 κατανθρωπισμός 786. 11, 18, 54, 94. 
 
 καλῶς 745. ὃ. 
 
300 
 
 καταντᾶν 713. 23. 
 
 κατασκευάζειν 725. 26. 
 
 κατασπορά 708. introd. 
 
 κατατιθέναι 705. 78; 707. 9. 
 
 καταχωρίζειν 714. 37; 715. 36; 719. 38; 731. 
 14; 786; 826. 
 
 κατέχειν 712. 3; 718. 15. 
 
 κατοικίζειν 705. 24. 
 
 κατοικικός 715, 23, 25. 
 
 κατοχή 713. 36. 
 
 κάτω 709. 8. 
 
 κελεύειν 658. 10; 705. 51; 706. 13; 708. 
 ὁ; τὸ} 215.505 coke ae. 
 
 κέλλα 707. introd. 
 
 κελλάριον 741. 12. 
 
 κεράμιον 729. 36; 748. 1; 784. 
 
 κέραμος 729. το. 
 
 κέρκιστρα 736. 77. 
 
 κεφάλαιον 808. 
 
 κηρός 736. τό. 
 
 κιθών (Ξε χιτών) 786. 99. 
 
 κινδυνεύειν 705. 73; 839. 
 
 xivduvos 7O8. 10, 22; 712.19; 716. 7, 36; 
 730. 16; 804. 
 
 κλαλίον 796. 
 
 κλείς 729. 23. 
 
 κληρονόμος 719. 16, 17. 
 
 κλῆρος 716. 22, 25; 721.6; 728.7; 780.9; 
 794; 810. Cf. Index V (c). 
 
 κληρουχί ) 888. 
 
 κοινός 719. 15; 729. 32; 740. 43. 
 715: 73 BAO. 250. 
 
 κόλλητρα 736. QI, LOO. 
 
 κομεντάριον 724. 8. 
 
 κομίζειν 708. 143 730. 20. 
 
 κόνιον 739. 7. 
 
 κοπή 729. 3; 810. 
 
 κοπρισμός 729. 10. 
 
 κόπρος 729. IO. 
 
 κόπτειν 728. ΤΙ. 
 
 κόριον 819. 
 
 κοσμητεύειν 724. 1. 
 
 κοτύλη 784. 
 
 κόφινος 739. 8. 
 
 κράζειν 717. 1, 9, 11, 13. 
 
 κράτιστος 726. 17. 
 
 κριθή 708. 8, 20. 
 
 κριθολογεῖν 708. 6, 19. 
 
 κριτήριον 719. 8; 727. 4. 
 
 κριτής 726. 20. 
 
 κοινῶς 
 
 FIVDICE S: 
 
 κτᾶσθαι 705. 70. 
 
 κτῆμα 707. 23, 25, 31.3 729. 5 ef saep. 
 
 κτῆνος 729. 16, 39-41, 43. 
 
 κτήτωρ 718. 14. 
 
 κυβερνήτης 717. 4. 
 
 κυριακὸς λόγος 800. 
 
 κυριεύειν 80. 19. 
 
 κύριος (‘lord’)728. 15; 744. 2. Cf. Index II. 
 
 κύριος (‘valid’) 719. 26; 725. 56; 727. 26; 
 728. 25; 729.14, 34; 7380.31; 731. 14; 
 838. 
 
 κώμη 105. 60, 69; and see Index V (6). 
 
 κωμογραμματεύς 718. 13, 20, 26. 
 
 λαμβάνειν 707. 26, 29; 724. 8,9; 729. 17, 
 41; 748. 26; 744. 8. 
 
 λαμπρός 705. 19, 39, 68. 
 
 λανθάνειν 705. 30. 
 
 λάξος 806. 
 
 λαογραφεῖν 711, 2. 
 
 λαογραφία 714. 23; 733. 5. 
 
 λαογράφος 786. 
 
 λέγειν 706. 11; 707.14; 717. 2; 744. 11. 
 
 λειτουργεῖν 705. 79; 781. 4. 
 
 λειτουργία 705. 72. 
 
 λειτουργός 792. 
 
 lex dulia.et Tita 20.5, εν 
 
 λήγειν 729. 17. 
 
 λῆμμα 825. 
 
 Anvos 729. 10. 
 
 λίνον 786. 75. 
 
 λινοῦφικός 669. 32. 
 
 λιχάς B69. 27, 31. 
 
 λίψ 719. 17, 19. 
 
 λογιστήριον 709. 1, 10. 
 
 λόγος 705. 30; 708.13; 724.10; 725.56; 
 7120. 14; 727.23 5 (720. Τα ee 
 740. 30; 741. 1; 800; 825. 
 
 λοιπός 707. 24; 709. 8, 12; 718. 36; 716. 
 16; 724,11; 725.19; 729. 4 ef saep. ; 
 732. 13; 740. 32. 
 
 λύειν 715. 19; 745.6; 808. 
 
 λύτρον '722. 30, 40; 784. 
 
 λυχνία 786. I. 
 
 λωρῖκα 812. 
 
 μαί : ) 736. 73. 
 
 magister 737. 12 εἰ saep. 
 μάθησις 724. 3; 725. ἡ. 
 μαθητῆς 725. 15, 21, 27, 48. 
 
A. GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS 301 | 
 
 μακροπρόσωπος 722. 7, 16, 24, 33. 
 
 μαχαιροφόρος 839. 
 
 μέγας LODE 22. 
 
 μείζων 669. 44; 717.9; 729. 43. 
 
 μελίχρως 722. 7, 9. 
 
 peuBpas 788. 
 
 μέμφεσθαι 706. 12. 
 
 μὲν οὖν 705. 36. 
 
 μένειν 744. 5. 
 
 μερίζειν 18. 29. 
 
 péepos 707. 7; 715. 15, 16; 716. 13-5, 20; 
 Meath £aa. 13.5728. δ: 729) τὸ, 31) 
 740. 46, 47; 810. 
 
 μεσιτεύειν 669. 45. 
 
 μέσος 722. 7 ef sacp.; 729. 28; 784. 3. 
 
 μεταβάλλειν 728. 13. 
 
 μεταδιδόναι 705. 38; 712. 16; 719. 4. 
 
 μεταλλάσσειν 715, 10. 
 
 μεταφέρειν 728. τι. 
 
 μεταφορά 729. 34. 
 
 μετρεῖν 669. 6; 735. 7; 740. 24, 26, 35. 
 
 μέτρον, See Index VIII (a). 
 
 μέτωπον 722. 8. 
 
 μέχρι 725. 12; 729. 7, 9; 781. 3. 
 
 μῆκος 669. 6, 7. 
 
 μηνιαῖος 725, 51. 
 
 pytnp 658. 4; '718. 5, 9, 23, 36; 715. 3, 12, 
 Hoe 10. 9 hy 0; 105.719. 2; τὸς 11: 
 Tf Aemtt » 225/20, 2} face 63 728; 
 2, 3, 28; 738.5; 7386. 69; 740. 44. 
 
 μηχανὴ 729. 12, 23, 28. 
 
 μικρός 741. 4. 
 
 μίλιον 669. 30. 
 
 pices 724.5; 725. 18 ef saep.; 729. 12; 
 731. 8; 736. 6. 
 
 μισθοῦν 707. 14,18; 729. 3 ef saep.; 730.1 
 et sacp.; 810. 
 
 picdwors 707. 17, 20, 24, 35; 729. 14, 20, 
 34, 41; 7380. 21, 31, 39; 740.34; 838. 
 
 μισθωτῆς 729.8; 825. 
 
 μνᾶ 728. 21. 
 
 povaxos 719. 32. 
 
 μόνος 707. 22; 718. 11 ; 729. 8, 9. 
 
 μόσχος 729. 16, 39. 
 
 μύρον 736. 13, 84. 
 
 ναυαγεῖν 839. 
 ναΐβιον 669. II, 24. 
 ναῦλον 792. 
 
 ne 720. 12. 
 
 Νειλομετρικός 669. 36. 
 
 veounvia 725. ὃ. 
 
 νέος 707. 17; 718.8; 729. 19; 886. 
 
 νεόφυτος 729, 8. 
 
 νόμισμα 19. 21; 722. 25. 
 
 νόμος, τῶν Αἰγυπτίων v. 706. 7. 
 9. τῆς χώρας ν. 795. 
 
 νομός, Ἑπτὰ νομοί 709. 7. 
 
 νότινος 729. 9. 
 
 νότος 719. 14, τό, 18. 
 
 νῦν, τὰ νῦν 811. 
 
 ἀστικοὶ ν. 706. 
 
 ξενία 747. τ. 
 
 ξενικός 712. 1, 8; 825. 
 
 ξηρός 736. 82. 
 
 ξυλαμᾶν 729. 31; 730. 10; 
 ξυλοκοπεῖν 706. 13. 
 
 ξυλολογεία 729. 33. 
 
 ξύλον 729. 12. Cf. Index VIII (a). 
 ξυλοτομία 729. 20. 
 
 ὀβολιαῖος 739. το. 
 
 ὀβολός. See Index VIII (2). 
 
 ὄγδοον 669. 1, 2. 
 
 ὅθεν 714. 21; 716. 18. 
 
 Uikign 1) ΔΘ, Loess LO ΎΡ.: 
 
 οἰκογενήῆς 714. 14; 723. 3. 
 
 οἰκοδομεῖν 707. 1. 
 
 οἰκοδόμος 789. 10, 12, 14. 
 
 οἰκονόμος 7885. 6. 
 
 οἰκοπεδικός 669, ο. 
 
 οἰκόπεδον 718. 9. 
 
 οἰνικός 729. 56. 
 
 owas TOTES. 729. Loni 0-24.02 70 145. 
 2; 784; 788. 
 
 ὀλίγος 718. 23. 
 
 ὅλος 724. 8; 730.14; 740. 18. 
 22; 744. 4. 
 
 ὀμνύειν 714, 273; 715. 26. 
 
 ὅμοιος 705. 61; 725. 14. ὁμοίως 708. 8; 
 POO Grae Dlle 725. 25, 28) oe ae 
 729.9; 736. 51, 71, 80; 740. 33. 
 
 ὁμολογεῖν 719. 12; 725.1; 726.4; 785; 
 803; 808; 831; 833. 
 
 ὁμολόγημα 725. 57, 62. 
 
 ὁμολογία 726. 23; 73l. 13. 
 
 ὁμοπάτριος 716. τό. 
 
 ὀνηλάτης 740. 10, 22, 25. 
 
 ὀνικός 741. LO. 
 
 ὄνομα 715. 10. 
 
 ὅλως 743. 
 
302 
 
 ὄνος 729. 9. 
 
 ὀξύβαφον 741, 20. 
 
 ὅπου 728. 11. 
 
 ὀπτίων 7885. 5. 
 
 ὀπτός ΠΟἿ. 28. 
 
 ὀπώρα 729. 11. 
 
 ὀπωροφύλαξ 729. 11. 
 
 ὅπως 718. 12. 
 
 ὀργυιά 669. 28, 39. 
 
 ὁρίζειν 705. 48; 707. 28; 719. 31; 728. 
 18, 36. 
 
 ὅρκος 715. 31. 
 
 ὄρνις 738. 9. 
 
 ὄρος 729. 7, 9. 
 
 ὅσος 724. 13 . 729. 25. 
 
 ὅσπερ 729. 6, 40. 
 
 ὁστισοῦν 719. 25. 
 
 ὄστρεον 738. 5. 
 
 ὅτε 736. 36, 92. 
 
 ὅτι ΤΠ], τὰ V4. 28% 744. 21 94608: 
 811; 812. | 
 
 οὐικάριος 735. 6. 
 
 οὐλή 722. 8, τό, 24, 34; 728. 5. 
 
 οὕτως 706. 6; 707. 32; 743. 35. 
 
 ὀφείλειν 712, τι; 782. 4. 
 
 ὀφειλή 719. 24. 
 
 ὀχομένιον 729. 31. 
 
 ὀψάριον 786. 52, 62. 
 
 ὄψον 736. 61. 
 
 ὀψώνιον 729. 11; 781. 10; 744. 7. 
 
 παί ) 797. 
 
 παίγνιον 786. 59. 
 
 παιδάριον 780. 14; 736. 38. 
 
 παιδίον 736. 39; 744. 7. 
 
 mats 724. 8, 10, 13; 725. 18, 36; 736. 16 
 
 et Saep. 
 πακτωνίτης 814. 
 παλαιστής. See Index VIII (a). 
 
 πάλιν 742.9; 745. 5. 
 πάμπολυς 718, τι. 
 
 παναριθμός 742. 3. 
 πανηγυρίζειν 705. 35. 
 παντοῖος 727. 28. 
 
 παραβαίνειν 725. 53, 54. 
 παραγίγνεσθαι 743. 23; 798. 
 παραδεικνύναι 721. 12. 
 παράδειξις 712. 2. 
 
 mapadidova 716. 22; 729.22, 44; 742. 7, 9. 
 παράθεσις 718. 35. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 παρακαλεῖν 744. 6. 
 
 παραλαμβάνειν 717. 6; 729. τό, 23; 742. 2, 
 4; 785. 
 
 παράληψις 798. 
 
 παραλογισμός 711. 5. 
 
 παραμένειν 724. 13: 725. 43. 
 
 παραμονή 731. 13. 
 
 παραπολλύναι 705. 73. 
 
 παρατιθέναι 718. 1. 
 
 παράφερνα 796; 887. 
 
 παραφυλακή 708. 72. 
 
 παραχωρεῖν 719. 12, 25. 
 
 παραχωρητικόν 719. 20. 
 
 παρεῖναι 711. 2; 727. 11, 25. 
 
 παρεμβολή 736. 33. 
 
 mapeE 729. 33. 
 
 παρέχειν 717. 4; 725. 9, 42; 729. 4, 9, 19; 
 785. 
 
 παρηί ) 788. 
 
 παριέναι, παρειμένη 713. 26. 
 
 πατήρ 118. 20; 715. 11; 784. 
 
 πατρικός 716. 15. 
 
 πάτρων 706. 2, LO. 
 
 πατρῷος 715. 28. 
 
 pedes 735. 12. 
 
 πεδίον 740. 377. 
 
 πεζός 724. 10; 891. 
 
 πέμπειν 729. 11. 
 
 πεμπταῖος 29. 24. 
 
 πενταετής 725. 40. 
 
 πεντώβολον. See Index VIII (4). 
 
 περιβάλλειν 707. 32. 
 
 περίδειπνον 736. 37. 
 
 περιέχειν 719, 31. 
 
 περισπᾶν 705. 53 ; 743. 36. 
 
 περιστερά 729. το; 736. 29, 79. 
 
 πῆχυς. See Index VIII (a). 
 
 πιάζειν 812. 
 
 πιπράσκειν 719, 12; 740. 30; 784; 819. 
 
 πίστις 705. 32; 727. 21. 
 
 πλακάς 729. 28. 
 
 πλαστός 729. 30. 
 
 πλατεῖα 788. 3. 
 
 πλάτης 707. 26, 32. 
 
 πλάτος 669. 7, 8. 
 
 πλέθρον 669. 29. 
 
 πλεῖν 726. 11. 
 
 πλεῖστα 42. 1; 744. 1; 746. 2. 
 
 πλείων 705. 30; 712, 18; 725. 39; 888. 
 
 πλὴν 721. 7; 729. 23. 
 
X. GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS 303 
 
 πλίνθος 707. 28. 
 
 πλοῖον 799; 805. 
 
 πλοῦς 727, τι. 
 
 ποιεῖν 705. 77; 707. 29; 709. 3; 718. 11; 
 Meal τὴ: (22. 28; 36; 725. 13; 443 
 Pete tA (wis Pl. 739.. 75°24, 20; 375 
 743. 40; 745.8; 787; 811. 
 
 πόλεμος 705. 33. 
 
 mods (= Alexandria) 727. 2: (= Oxyrhyn- 
 chus) 658. 2, 6; 705. 22, 39, 43; 714.7; 
 732. 2; 786.31. Cf. Index V (a). 
 
 πολιτάρχης 745. 4. 
 
 mopetov 792. 
 
 πόρθμειος 732. 4. 
 
 πορθμίς 732, 2. 
 
 πορίζειν 719. 2. 
 
 πορφύρα 739, τό. 
 
 πόσος 742. 4. 
 
 ποταμός 800. 
 
 ποτέ 745. 1. 
 
 ποτήριον 741. 17. 
 
 ποτίζειν p. 263. 
 
 ποτισμός 729. 13, 24. 
 
 πούς 669. 27, 32, 38; 722. 16; 723. 5. 
 
 πρᾶγμα 706. 4; 743. το. 
 
 πραγματεία 806. 
 
 πραγματευτής 825. 
 
 πραγμάτιον 746. 6. 
 
 πρακτορεία 712. 1, 8; 825. 
 
 πρακτορικός 712, 21. 
 
 πράκτωρ 733. 2; 734. 3. 
 
 πρᾶξις 712.11; 728.22; 729. 21; 780. 27. 
 
 πράσον 736. 28. 
 
 πράσσειν 7O8. 10, 21; 718. 25; 822. 
 
 mpatns 718. 12. 
 
 πριάσθαι 718. 5, 17. 
 
 πρόβατον 807. 
 
 mpoypapew 713. 29; 715.34; 727.12; 728. 
 14; 732. 7, 10; 786. 
 
 προθεσμία 724, 12; 728. 18. 
 
 προιέναι 719. 0. 
 
 προκεῖσθαι 718. 33, 37; 715. 30; 724. 12; 
 420. 44, 51, 54, 62; 727. 227 728, 32, 
 ΠΟ ia Loy. 7, 42, 2192: Sorin 14 
 735. 8; 740. 23, 25; 819. 
 
 προκήρυξις 716, 20. 
 
 προποιεῖν ΠΟ. τό. 
 
 προσβαίνειν 714. τό. 
 
 προσγίγνεσθαι 84. 
 
 προσδεῖσθαι 48. 35. 
 
 προσεδρεύειν 25. το. 
 
 προσεῖναι 705. 31. 
 
 προσέρχεσθαι 787. 
 
 προσμετρεῖν 7O8. 12. 
 
 πρόσοδος 705. 78. 
 
 προσοφείλειν 80. 25. 
 
 προστιθέναι 706, 12; 708. 12. 
 
 προσφάγιον 786. 46, 89; 739. 7, 10, 12, 14. 
 
 προσφέρειν 7985. 
 
 προσφωνεῖν 718. 15, 26, 28. 
 
 πρότερος 705. 48. πρότερον 715. τό. 
 
 προφέρειν 746. 6. 
 
 προχείριον 741, 14, 
 
 mpoxpeia 729. 13; 800. 
 
 πρόχρησις 729. 17. 
 
 πρωτοπραξία 712. 6. 
 
 πρῶτος, πρῶτοι ἀριθμοί 735. 8. 
 
 πτέρυξ 788. το. 
 
 πυγών 669. 27, 34. 
 
 πυκνός 717. 16. πυκνότερον 808. 
 
 πυρός 708. 4 εἰ saep.; 718.15; 735.9; 736. 
 8 ef sacep.; 740. 28, 31, 32, 40; 784; 
 789; 833; 836. 
 
 πωλεῖν 729. 43. 
 
 πωμάριον 707. 19, 26. 
 
 πῶς 744, 12; 745. 6. 
 
 quo 720. 12. 
 
 papis 736. 75. 
 
 ῥήτωρ 707. 13. 
 
 pda 736. 58. 
 
 ῥοδών 729. 32. 
 
 rogare 720. 3. 
 
 ῥύμη 119. 17, 19. 
 
 ῥωννύναι, éppwoo 719. 5; 742.15; 748. 44; 
 745. το; 746. 11; 798; 805. 
 
 σανδάλιον 741. το. 
 
 σεμίδαλις 786. 82. 
 
 σημαίνειν 888. 
 
 σημειογράφος 724. 2. 
 
 σημεῖον 724. 5. 
 
 σημειοῦν, σεσημείωμαι 718. 43; 719. 6. 
 semis 737. 11 εἶ saep. 
 σιδυτός 738. 9. 
 
 σιτικός 718. 8; 798. 
 
 σίτινος 729. 44. 
 
 σιτολογικός 740. 17, 22, 27. 
 σιτολόγος. See Index VII. 
 
304 
 
 σιτομετρικόν 740. 23, 25. 
 σιτοπόητρα 739. 4. 
 
 σῖτος 708. I1, 22. 
 
 σκαφή 729. 28. 
 
 σκέπη 785. 
 
 σκουτλίον 741. 19. 
 
 σόλιον 741. ὃ. 
 
 σπείρειν 29. 31. 
 
 σπένδειν 658. 7, II. 
 σπέρμα 40. 36; 838. 
 σπιθαμή 669. 27, 32. 
 σπονδή 780. 12. 
 σπουδάζειν 746. 8. 
 
 στάδιον B69. 29. 
 
 στεγάζειν 729. 23. 
 
 στερεός B69. 7; 836. 
 στέφανος 736. 56, 57. 
 στήμων 739. 18. 
 
 στολή 889. 
 
 στοχάζεσθαι 705. 75. 
 στρατηγός. See Index VII. 
 ov ) 784. 4; 797. 
 συγγράφειν 707. 35; 729. 17. 
 συγγραφή 718. 12, 32, 38. 
 συγκαταχωρίζειν 719. 34. 
 συγχρηματίζειν 727, 21. 
 συγχωρεῖν 727. 9. 
 συγχώρησις 727. 14, 20. 
 συκάμινος 661. introd. 
 συλλέγειν 748. 31. 
 συμβάλλειν 717. 4. 
 συμμαχεῖν 705. 33. 
 σύμμετρος 669. 44. 
 συμπλήρωσις 729. 42. 
 συμπροσγίγνεσθαι 743. 33. 
 σύμφυτος 707. το; 729. 22. 
 
 συμφωνεῖν 719. 20; 724.5; 728. 37; 729. 
 
 2. 
 ΠΕΣ 705. 48; 708. 11, 22; 898. 
 συναγορασμός 791. 
 συνανάμιγος 118. 16, 19, 27. 
 συνεδρεύειν 717. ὃ, τι. 
 συνεπιδιδόναι 116. 28, 30. 
 συνηγορεῖν 07. 14. 
 
 συνιστάναι 715. 35; 724. 2: 726. 12; 727. 
 
 ΤΣ, ΟΡ, 48:1: 
 σύνταξις 729. 12. 
 συντιμᾶν 29. 42. 
 συντίμησις 729. 16, 17, 40-2. 
 συντυγχάνειν 743. 37. 
 
 INDICES 
 
 συνωνή 705. 77. 
 σύστασις 726. 21. 
 σφόδρα 705. 71. 
 
 ᾿σφυρίς 741. 3. 
 
 σχοινίον 669. 1, 3, 18. 
 σχοινισμός 797. 
 
 σώζειν 705. 23. 
 
 σωτήρ 705. 7, 66. 
 
 τάλαντον. See Index VIII (6). 
 
 ταμεῖον 705. 72, 73. 
 
 τὰ νῦν 811. 
 
 ταριχεία 736. 5. 
 
 τάσσειν 722. 20; 729. 17. 
 
 ταφή 736. 13, 84. 
 
 ταχύς 743. 21. 
 
 τέκνον 718. 19; 716. 8. 
 
 τεκτονικός 669. 35; 729. 12. 
 
 τέκτων 729. 12; 789. 15. 
 
 τελεῖν ΠΟ]. 22, 24. 
 
 τέλειος 707. 31; 729. 39, 40. 
 
 τελευτᾶν 713. 20. 
 
 τελευτή 718. 18. 
 
 τέλος 712. 6, 21 : 724. 9; 788. 
 
 τελωνεῖν Ὁ. 203. 
 
 τελώνης 732. 2. 
 
 τέμενος 88. 
 
 τετάρτη 798. 
 
 τετράγωνος ΘΘ9. 21. 
 
 τετραετία 707. 21. 
 
 τετραχοίνικος 886. 
 
 tetpaBoroy, See Index VIII (ὁ). 
 
 τέχνη 725. 8, 49. 
 
 textor 737. 3 ef saep. 
 
 τιθέναι 725. 61; 742. 5; 7485. 2. 
 
 τίκτειν 744. 9. 
 
 τιμᾶν 705. 36. 
 
 τιμή 1190. 20; 728..»8; 259. a ete 
 784; 798. 
 
 τισάνη 736. 51. 
 
 τόκος 705. 49; 712. 6, 14, 21: 125. 0 
 799. 
 
 τοπαρχία 784. 3; 808. 
 
 τοπογραμματεύς 833. 
 
 τόπος 705. 73; 707. introd.; 715. 16; 72L 
 12; 7384.3; 742.5; 833. 
 
 τοσοῦτος 717. 1. 
 
 τράπεζα, δημοσία tp. 721. 13; 835. 
 πιάδου tp. 806. 
 
 τρέφειν 725, 15, 45; 729. 40. 
 
 Cf. Index V (ἢ: 
 
 ᾿Ασκλη- 
 
XA. GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS 305 
 
 τρίβανον 661. introd. 
 
 τριετία 729. 4, 5, 10. 
 
 τριλάγυνος 741. 12. 
 τρισκαιδεκαετῆς 714. 17. 
 τριώβολον, See Index VIII (6). 
 τρόπος 800. 
 
 τροφή 705. 78. 
 
 τροχός 707. 7, 27, 29; 729. 32. 
 τυρός 729. Io. 
 
 τύχη 715. 27. 
 
 ὑγεία 715. 29. 
 
 ὑγιαίνειν 743. 43; 745. το; 746. 2; 805. 
 
 bys 729. 23; p. 263. 
 
 ὕδρευμα Pp. 263. 
 
 ὑδροπάροχος 729. 13, τό. 
 
 ὑδροφυλακεῖν 729. 23. 
 
 ὑδροφυλακία 729. ἡ. 
 
 ὕδωρ 788. 9. 
 
 ὑελοῦς 741. 15. 
 
 ὑική 788. 4, 6. 
 
 υἱός 658. 13; 705. 70; 724. 3; 727. 5. 
 
 ὕπαρξις 707. 15. 
 
 ὑπάρχειν 712.5; 716.12; 718.16; 719.13; 
 Poet eho. 35 fad. ΤΥ; 420s, 22; 
 729. 21; 730. 30. 
 
 ὑπηρέτης 712. Τῇ. 
 
 ὑπισχνεῖσθαι 745. 4. 
 
 ὑποδεικνύναι 748. 38. 
 
 ὑποδόχιον 729. 28. 
 
 ὑπολείπειν 729. 6, 25. 
 
 ὑπολογεῖν p. 263. 
 
 ὑπολογίζειν 729. 13. 
 
 ὑπόλογος 721. 4. 
 
 ὑπόμνημα 719. 4, 35. 
 
 ὑποσημειοῦν 658. τό. 
 
 ὕστερον 718. 11. 
 
 ὑφηγεῖσθαι 748. 42. 
 
 ὕψος 669. 8. 
 
 φάγρος p. 264. 
 
 φαίνειν 708, 5, 18; 718. 30; 746.8; 811; 
 826. 
 
 φαινόλης 736. 4, 10, 77. 
 
 φάσις 805. 
 
 φερνή 795; 887. 
 
 φιλάνθρωπος ΠΟδ. 21, 69, 75. 
 
 φιλία 705. 32; 748. 21. 
 
 φίλος 706. 6; 724. 2; 742. 8, 9; 
 
 φόρετρον 740. 19, 22, 25, 27. 
 
 745. 9. 
 
 φορικός 807. 
 
 Giopose 70 ins wale 24; allo ss {abn Shs 
 729. 31, 32; 7380. 12, 20, 23; 732. 4. 
 
 φροντίζειν 727. 15. 
 
 φροντιστῆς 7127. 14. 
 
 φυλακίτης 808. 
 
 φύλαξ 729. 11; 808. 
 
 φυλάσσειν 705. 47, 62; 729. 11; 804. 
 
 φυτόν 729. 20, 22. 
 
 χαίρειν 705. 7, 20, 58,68; 708. 2, 15; 716. 
 2; 719. 4,12; 724.2; 728.37; 7382.4; 
 735.7; 742.1; 744.1; 746. 2. 
 
 χαλκίον 736. 6, 100. 
 
 χαλκός 722. 26; 743. 23. 
 
 χαλκοῦς 717. ὃ, 10. 
 
 χάρις 705. 63. χάριν 743. 29; 804. 
 
 χείρ 669. 40. 
 
 χειριστῆς 734. 2. 
 
 χειρί =) 799. 
 
 χειρογραφία 719. 33. 
 
 χειρόγραφον 706. 4,5; 719. 9, 30, 33; 745. 2. 
 
 χερσάμπελος 729. 30. 
 
 χέρσος 740. 46. 
 
 χιί ) 739. 3. 
 
 χιλίαρχος 708. 13. 
 
 χιραλέος 661. introd. 
 
 χιτών 725. 29-343 (κιθών) 786. 99. 
 
 χοῖνιξ 740. 18 ef saep. ; 789. 
 
 χορηγεῖν 725. 20, 39, 50; 899. 
 
 χόρτος 705. 78; 728. ὃ, 38; 780. το; 
 810. 
 
 χοῦς (‘mound’) 729. 6. 
 
 χοῦς (measure). See Index VIII (a). 
 
 χρεία 729. 4, 8, 17; 731. 7; 745. 6. 
 
 χρῆμα 105. 52. 
 
 χρηματίζειν 710. 1; 727. ὃ; 728. 1. 
 
 χρηματισμός 712. 10; 719. 33; 835. 
 
 χρηματιστής 719. 7; 727. 3. 
 
 χρῆσθαι 745. 6. 
 
 χρήσιμος 705. 75. 
 
 χρόνος 707.11; 712.18; 714. 38; 718.11; 
 PLO ei Add, O LT 1 72δ.0. τ1ἰ; 
 29. 410 ΔΑΒ 15; ΘΟ. ΤῊ PI oR ya 192: 
 11; 786. 
 
 χρυσοῦς 795. 
 
 χρυσοχόος 806. 
 
 χῶμα 729. 7, 8, 9, 23; 740. 46 (?). 
 
 χώρα 709. 8; 795. 
 
 χωρεῖν 705. 40. 
 
306 
 
 © 
 
 χωρίον 705. 70. 
 
 YNDIGnS δον. 
 
 ed : ὴ t 
 
 ὧδε 736. 92. 
 
 xopis 719. 27; 724. 6; 725. ἡ: 729. 30, ὠνεῖσθαι 721, 3. 
 
 31, 34. 
 
 ψεύδεσθαι 714. 51. 
 
 ψήκτρα 141. 7. 
 oye: 707. introd. ; ; 715. 16. 
 
 aun 7382.2. | 
 φόν 784. 
 ὥρα 74.7. 3; 804. 
 ὡρογράφος 710. 2... 
 
 ὥστε 729. 31; 730. 10; 748 2 
 
 OXFORD: HORACE HART 
 PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 ἫΣ 
 
PLATE I 
 
 ἘΦ 
 
 ‘ea 
 
 ae os ὴ τ ΠΥ sf by iS v ᾷ εἴς. a στὸ ΕΣ : 
 Hist eS ι pat pei ΕἼ! 
 2 | \ ele NN Ni EHE PTAC ττι P SO, pee 
 Ἷ ' Ἧς | Pi prernureer yey tere v7} p t 4 
 ceed Mie ἡ Cet ECON TH THis, Pas 21] Me) "A pe 
 & a οἱ eecarel tee τοὶ ἘΔ ae Pepi bites : 
 ἣ ly ene Hr. eer i Ἢ sk HS! erie rds rs 
 ore We ξἠνεω eos Ke, 5 ok 
 phi ΝΑ BY Nh “NY ΚΗ OF eo ΤΡ Ὶ τι nae 
 απ τ κε ΔΝ HO ον ὦ 
 na re ΑΝ ΤΙ ΚΣ eg” 
 
 He τοι eas dt ες ΒΒ 
 
 eb ; Mt iy! : ee e ae eines 
 
 = 
 * te ee 7 | 
 τα § Wea, 
 
 ᾿ 
 
 t ν 
 1 ’ (el ' 
 " Ἷ ayn 
 
 κεν ie ΩΝ No. 665 
 oud | Raa ee 
 
 NO. 654 
 
PLATE II 
 
 ossar (9) 959 ὋΝ 
 
 Cran ς, a2 “a ‘Ea ‘ 
 SEBEL AUS «. AES 
 SIO eo 2 0 ee 
 
 ‘A 
 
 ΝΣ 
 
 Ἐ 7 ἡ 
 Φ 59 
 
 ; 
 
 \ " . » 4 ¥ Le 
 ; \ 4 & ea Ν re 
 t ν᾿ ἐν “ i tip ior ilo nw # δὲ» μὲν ὃ ΡΣ 
 ἁ rhe . ‘ ees t ae ? ale 2 = ess oe niger A τὰ Say Cy 
 | | “Δ . : - οὐδὲ. Se , i i 
 =) . 7 M ; : 7 | 
 os - a - τ ᾿ ν᾿» Ὁ 2 ; 
 . τ S 3 : 3 . 3 } 
 wee γ΄ : ps ᾿ 5 : 
 ν Σ Ὑ ᾿ πὲ - . 3 
 
 > ΕἾ ¥ K- 
 
 ἫΝ 
 εν 
 bY tid 
 τὰ 
 t 
 Α 
 > 
 
 γῇ 
 ὦν, 
 Ἢ ͵ 
 : 
 ¢ 
 τῇ 
 
 yt oa 5 
 . 4 
 
PLATE III 
 """" 
 tn Ta A 
 
 RIE Op 
 fe, ἡ κα Pet a ἀν 
 
 τς eal ἐν dl ἜΝ 
 εἰ Ὁ ΤΉΝ 
 
 Ἔν 
 ᾿. 
 
 "Saye ΕἸ ΠΝ ΤῊΝ 4 
 
 it ae ΠΡ Ως the” 
 ‘ ἘΠ ΑΝ, ‘4 tae 
 (MRO ghey hl 
 Rie Ἣν; τὴν ἢ 
 
 yak baz i 
 
 * ᾽ 
 Mites ς ᾿ 
 
 ie i 
 wai ie 
 
 pam ι } y 
 
 oat ce ὙΠῸ Ae A τι τ tia] ae #¢ HF wire ᾿ ee pote Bh (δῪ - 4 2s | is 4 
 
 is Sith iad ‘ bas ae | δὴ Ἰ ΤῸ Y ἡ ' ub hi ch Py + | ah Aik ik M 
 tne ὖὸὖΚΞ ΨΦ᾽ 
 ΒΕ ee δον 4H? sma ct Ch Han ΠΝ 
 
 + 4 ns at eer ἡ τ ἢ Ι al Nod 
 
 Toh Pelt 
 Ὁ ΑΗ ; ou 
 
 ty ub Rs oh 
 anh A 
 
 Ἢ wit th 
 
 ‘ 
 
 τ ς ᾿ 
 
 ἯΙ τον eat ae ἴ t ὃ He ay 
 
 WG uid baht δ i Md ἃ Jaa ts 4 
 ᾿ I : ν δ De 
 
 ἀπ ΗΜ; 
 JE ἀπ εν 
 
 (6) 
 
 (ἢ 
 
 (4) 
 
 eo Φ ΟὟ κν Δὲ 
 
 (f) 
 
 (¢) 
 
 re. ee ee ae ἡ ee oe 
 
 ““,ς͵“,νΥ om 
 
 7 by aeay Pe 
 
β΄ _ i 
 a 
 
 ~Tal Les 04 
 5 a eg 
 
 pe 
 
 Hit 
 
 ‘ina Ὶ | 
 
 ἬΝ Τῇ 
 vast ti “ey 
 | aU be 
 
 | MG ant a 
 ἀμ} ἽΝ Neti A 
 
 (0) 
 
 rs 
 wi 
 (72) 
 
 (7) 
 
 ἐν “ mere: τὰ pie ὴ f P at A) 
 ee Pe i : : , Ὗς ὶ ᾿ἥ ες : ᾿ 
 ) ᾿ ier : ᾿ ΤΑ δ a: ak sf . ¢ i 
 ἘΠ ἢ oon ΜῈ Hs ΠΕ γῆ δ πεν". (τ , > 
 - Ris ere Shan E, be at i bth ies ἌΡΗ 4 que ᾿ ΝΣ «3... ἐ ee : 
 berg hak iat ἴδοι ΕΝ -ἶξ i” a t . oT. ie ᾿ ᾿ - A, ν 
 ah ᾿ Υ rig § je ᾿ ὰ i ) a, +4 Σ Ὁ gs ΝΣ he % - (ἰὴ ὃς 
 tk δι . - “«ἈΒ " ᾿ ἦ f f > bet ὶ ᾿ 
 ᾿ J : 99 hts SE ν ᾿ ἷ " ΠΩ 4 δι ἢ rs rahebe αὶ] ΠΡ 
 a." Por τ dl a et aa pos ~ ἢ 
 “τὴ ἢ i χ 
 
 5 νὰν Plain 
 
ΠῚ ; a a! Wee, a}! e+ ) 
 Wey yong te ST ee Hr ax! rp δι AS 
 
 ps ae 
 
 Sas 
 ny 
 AS Shik we ao cin. 
 
 NO. 661 
 
Prare Viit 
 
 Nos. XXXAKKK 1X Kee 
 
PLATE VI 
 
 & pm 
 2 εἰ ἈΝᾺ “ 
 a Sc) ¥ 
 Pi Ἀν 
 ye 
 Ε : ; 
 ᾿ N ‘ 
 Re Ne ry = £ Fa 
 “ὩΣ δι κα ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ 
 ὶ 
 ' 
 
 ane ΠΗ ΤΙ; Fone τὰ Ἷ ny 
 ' ae Chale neu plert) 
 AN aie We  Acabt pee wep § 
 ibs ae | SRE RAS abies ἐν ikl 
 αὐ αι CAEPIG | 
 .ὉΨ το ΚΑΤ΄ ἐλακιο 
 GAN Siig hut rip aps ne 
 ay : ae tes ᾿ uparie side wut: GU LA 
 
 *, 
 
 i okay! Ὡν wait & aA 
 
 onts } 
 ῃ 
 
 sift git ya 
 ex} (pour cs γῚ 
 Serr ore HOME PLoS es CAS 
 ine Ped ὦ Χο ΔΝ ον α 
 κι ολμαι συμ Leo: page 
 ea’ Lenttpudin si pada Joa 
 oA th aaabe ASTERTEAH TF, ὙΠ ΠΝ 
 
 > r. 
 os RRS 
 ae}! i 
 Ae 4 ¥ τ Ἷ 
 ἍἹ, ig ie 4 vaya ? 
 Ὺ Ya we 
 ᾿ 1 [ἃ i »ἂν 
 : Ye ἢ 
 ᾽ ei 
 y ἡ 
 i 
 t 
 
 aii 
 ἯΙ ἡ 
 z a 
 
 τοὺ» 
 
 \ cA 
 τῳ 
 
 poder στ ΕἸ ας xy ἐν 
 
 ΠΣ ΝΗ, ἰραψοτιτὶν, € me 
 Fy ΔΝ οὐτιϊιο, if Perc 
 bpm sipihes | ea) 
 ni spi nven as STP 
 
 5 
 
 t ; ᾿ 
 ὋΣ δὲ } : ἷ ‘ 
 oa - τὴς he be ; nue : τ ἂν ἢ 
 τὰν "A % we Mo Fea er Se SE ‘ 
 cm 4 4 ox y a 4 τ Ἔ ἃ ve! - Lm + 
 : ΕΝ A ὁ υ 18 Le os t Ῥ ὰ ; 
 ΡΝ ᾿ } eet ay - ἱ & ‘ ὲ y 
 Pere ee Vion ap AN 
 4 . ine Th : ee δ > Sat 
 ι τἂν ‘a ᾿ ἿΝ 
 #3 Pah ἱ Ἵ ἐν ϊ , ᾧ ἅ wate Ἄγ. 
 t Ag ᾿ { +4 a ‘ cag 4 Lote int 
 i dicts - Bus f τὰ ὦ 
 ἌΣ δε Ὁ ait i) iT aba GS ihe ΓΑ εἶ 
 
 No. 668, COL. Vili 
 
Sf 
 
 rs 
 
 a 
 
 in 
 
PLATE VII 
 
 oh δ ς 
 
 Tht. ὁ 
 
 ‘ “2a 
 
 ΩΝ 
 
 μη, τς be: nei 
 
 πρό aie” 
 ttt 
 
 i 
 
 “Saas Bees δος 
 
 No. 686 
 
 NO. 720 
 
κῃ 1 " 
 Ὶ Ζ 
 - Ν = τι 
 3 . as ω 
 Υ 4 ὃ 
 lia rr 
 ἵ 1 “ 
 χὰ 4 4 ie \ ῳ 
 . “ Ζ ᾽ 
 . ἣν 4 
 ν - 
 - = 
 Ὁ ὟΝ - 
 ’ 
 = - 
 . 7 . "” 
 i ' 
 i 
 >A «ἃ Φ 
 ει 4 
 Ἢ : de. ἫΝ 
 - eal ° 
 x ἑ 
 . * 
 a 
 ΄ 
 . 
 , 
 .- 
 ‘ » 
 « 
 Z ~ 
 ΄ 
 ᾿ ο - 
 a 
 . 4 
 / 
 . 
 x >, 
 , A μι 
 ξ af 
 yi 
 Vin ἐν - 
 ἃ . ~ 
 ( Wea 
 : ἃ "τ 
 ¢ > > a 
 
‘ PEATE? Viti 
 
 NO. 737, COL. 1 
 
EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND. 
 
 GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH. 
 
 HE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND, which has conducted Archaeological research 
 
 in Egypt continuously since 1883, in 1894 started a special depariment, called the Graeco- 
 
 Roman Branch, for the discovery and publication of remains of classical antiquity and early 
 
 Christianity in Egypt. It ts hoped to complete in the next few years the systematic excavation 
 of the site of Oxyrhynchus under the direction of Drs. B. P. κέναι, and A. 5, Hunt. 
 
 The Graeco-Roman Branch issues annual volumes, each of about 300 quarto pages, with 
 Jacsimile plates of the more important papyrt, under: the editorship of Drs. B. P. GRENFELL 
 and A. 5. Hunt. 
 
 A subscription of One Guinea to the Branch entitles subscribers to the annual volume, and 
 also to the annual Archaeological Report. A donation of £25 constitutes life membership. 
 Subscriptions may be sent to the Honorary Treasurers—for England, Mr, H. A. GRUEBER ; 
 
 and for America, Mr. Garviner M. Lane. 
 
PUBLICATIONS OF THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND. 
 
 ἘΠΕ ee a Ca ee 
 
 MEMOIRS OF THE FUND. 
 
 . THE STORE CITY OF PITHOM AND THE ROUTE OF THE EXODUS: 
 
 For 1883-4. By EpDoUARD NAVILLE. Thirteen Plates and Plans. (Fourth and Revised 
 Edition.) 258. 
 
 . TANIS, Part 1. For 1884-5. By W. M. Frinpers Petriz. Sixteen Plates 
 
 and two Plans. (Second Edition, 1888.) 255. 
 
 . NAUKRATIS, Part 1. For 1885-6. By W. M. Frinpers Petriz. With 
 
 Chapters by Cecit SMITH, ERNEST A. GARDNER, and BARCLAY V.HEAD. Forty-four Plates 
 and Plans. (Second Edition, 1888.) 255. 
 
 . GOSHEN AND THE SHRINE OF SAFT-EL-HENNEH. For 1886-7. 
 
 By EpovarpD NaVILLE, Eleven Plates and Plans. (Second Edition, 1888.) 255. 
 
 TANIS, Part II; including TELL DEFENNEH (The Biblical ‘ Tahpanhes.’) 
 and TELL NEBESHEH. For 1887-8. By W.M. FLINDERS PETRIE, F. LL. GRIFFITH, 
 and A.S. MurRAY. Fifty-one Plates and Plans. 255. 
 
 . NAUKRATIS, Part II. For 1888-9. By Ernest A. Garpner and F. Lt. 
 
 GRIFFITH. Twenty-four Plates and Plans. 255. 
 
 . THE CITY OF ONIAS AND THE MOUND: ΟΕ THE JEW. The 
 
 Antiquities of Tell-el-Yahfidiyeh. dn Extra Volume. By EDOUARD NAVILLE and 
 F. Lt. GRIFFITH. Twenty-six Plates and Plans. 255. 
 
 . BUBASTIS. For 1889-90. By Epovarp Navitiz. Fifty-four Plates and 
 
 Plans. 255. 
 
 ; TWO. HIEFROGLYPRIC; PAPYRI- ΕΘΝ ΤΟΝ Aa Extra Volume. 
 
 Containing : 
 I, THE SIGN PAPYRUS (a Syllabary). By F. Lu. GRIFFITH. 
 1, THE GEOGRAPHICAL PAPYRUS (an Almanack). By W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE, 
 With Remarks by Professor HEINRICH BRUGSCH. (Out of print.) 
 
 THE FESTIVAL HALL OF OSORKON II (BUBASTIS). For 1890-1. 
 
 By EDOUARD NAVILLE. Thirty-nine Plates, 2655. 
 
 . AHNAS EL MEDINEH. For 1891-2. By Epovarp Navirte. Eighteen 
 
 Plates. And THE TOMB OF PAHERI AT EL ΚΑΒ. By J. J. TyLor and F. Lt. 
 GRIFFITH. Ten Plates. 255. 
 
 . DEIR EL BAHARI, Introductory. For 1892-3. By Epouvarp NaviLte. 
 
 Fifteen Plates and Plans. 255. 
 
 . DEIR EL BAHARI, Part I. For 1893-4. By Epovarp Navitte. Plates 
 
 I-XXIV (three coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30. 
 
 . DEIR EL BAHARI, Part 11. For 1894-5. By Epovarp Naviiie. Plates 
 
 XXV-LV (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30s. 
 
 . DESHASHEH. For 1895-6. By W. M. Frinpers Petrie. Photogravure and 
 
 other Plates. 255. 
 
 mle ie Nas = 
 
 ae ne ee eae 
 
XVI. 
 
 XVII. 
 
 XVIII. 
 
 XIX. 
 
 XX. 
 
 XXI. 
 XXII. 
 XXIII. 
 
 XXIV. 
 
 XIII. 
 
 DEIR EL BAHARI, Part III. For 1896-7. By Epovarp Navitie. Plates 
 LVI-LXXXVI (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30s. 
 
 DENDEREH. For 1897-8. By W. M. Frinpers Petre. Thirty-eight 
 Plates. 25s. (Extra Plates of Inscriptions. Forty Plates. 10s.) 
 
 ROYAL TOMBS OF THE FIRST DYNASTY. For 1898-9. By W. M. 
 
 FLINDERS PETRIE. Sixty-eight Plates. 255. 
 
 DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IV. For 1899-1900. By Epovarp Navitte. 
 Plates LXXXVII-CXVIII (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30s. 
 
 DIOSPOLIS PARVA. An Extra Volume. By W. M. Fuinpers PETRIE. 
 Forty-nine Plates. 255. (Ομ of print.) 
 
 THE ROYAL TOMBS OF THE EARLIEST DYNASTIES, Part II. For 
 
 Tg00-1, By W.M.FLINDERS PETRIE. Sixty-three Plates. 25s. (Thirty-five extra Plates, Ios.) 
 
 ABYDOS, Part I. For 1901-2ώ. By W. M. Fuinpers Petriz. Eighty-one 
 Plates. 255. 
 
 EL AMRAH AND ABYDOS. 45 L£xitra Volume. By D. Ranpati-Maclver, 
 A. C. MAcr, and F. Li. GriFFrirH. Sixty Plates. 255. ‘ 
 
 ABYDOS, Part Il. For 1902-3. By W. M. Fuinpers Petrie. Sixty-four 
 Plates. 255. 
 
 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY. 
 Edited by F. Lu. GRIFFITH. 
 
 BENI HASAN, Part 1. For 1890-1. By Percy E. Newserry. With Plans 
 by G. ΝΥ. FRASER. Forty-nine Plates (four coloured). 255. 
 
 . BENI HASAN, Part II. For 1891-2. By Percy E. Newserry. With Appendix, 
 
 Plans, and Measurements by G. W. FRASER. Thirty-seven Plates (two coloured). 255. 
 
 . EL BERSHEH, Part I. For 1892-3. By Percy E. Newserry. Thirty-four 
 
 Plates (two coloured). 255. 
 
 EL BERSHEH, Part II. For 1893-4. By F. Lu. Grirrirn and Percy E. 
 NEWBERRY. With Appendix by G. W. FRASER. Twenty-three Plates (two coloured), 255. 
 
 . BENI HASAN, Part III. For 1894-5. By F. Ly. Grirritn. (Hieroglyphs, 
 
 and manufacture, &c., of Flint Knives.) Ten coloured Plates. 255. 
 
 mrtueROGUYPHS] FROM THE COLLECTIONS ‘OF ΤῊΝ. EGYPT 
 
 EXPLORATION FUND. For 1895-6. By F.Lu.GriFFITH. Nine coloured Plates. 255. 
 
 . BENI HASAN, Part IV. For 1896-7. By F. Lx. Grirriru. (Illustrating 
 
 beasts and birds, arts, crafts, &c.) Twenty-seven Plates (twenty-one coloured). 255. 
 
 . THE MASTABA OF PTAHHETEP AND AKHETHETEP AT SAQQAREH, 
 
 Part I. For 1897-8. By N. bE ἃ. DAviss and F. LL. GRIFFITH. (Including over 400 
 facsimiles of hieroglyphs.) Thirty-one Plates (three coloured). 255. 
 
 . THE MASTABA OF PTAHHETEP AND AKHETHETEP AT SAQQAREH, 
 
 Part II, For 1898-9. By N. DEG. DAvigs and F. LL. GRIFFITH. Thirty-five Plates. 255, 
 
 . THE ROCK TOMBS OF SHEIKH SAID. For 1899-1900. By N. pve G. 
 
 Davigs. Thirty-five Plates. 255. 
 
 . THE ROCK TOMBS OF DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part 1. For 1g00-1, By 
 
 N. DE G. DAVIES. Twenty-seven Plates (two coloured). 255. 
 
 . THE ROCK TOMBS OF DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part II. For 1901-2. By 
 
 N. DEG. DAvirEs. Thirty Plates (two coloured). 255. 
 THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part I. For 1902-3. By N. pr G, 
 
 DAVIES. 255. 
 
GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH. 
 
 I. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part I. For 1897-8. By B. P. Grenrety 
 and Α. 5. Hunt. Eight Collotype Plates. 255. 
 II. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part II. For 1898-9. By B. P. GrenFety 
 and A.S. Hunt. Eight Collotype Plates. 255. 
 11. FAYUM TOWNS AND THEIR PAPYRI. For 1899-1900. By B. P. 
 GRENFELL, A. 5. HuNT, and Ὁ). G. HoGARTH. Eighteen Plates. 255. 
 IV. THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI. Double Volume for rg00-1 and 1901-2. By 
 B. P. GRENFELL, A. 5. HUNT, and J. G.Smyty. Nine Collotype Plates. (Vot for sale.) 
 V. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part III. For 1902-3. By B. P. Grenreiy 
 and Α. 5. Hunt. Six Collotype Plates. 255. 
 
 VI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part IV. For 1903-4. By B. P. GrenreLy ; 
 and A.S. Hunt. Eight Collotype Plates. 2655. a 
 
 ANNUAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORTS. 
 
 (Yearly Summaries by F. G. KENyon, W. E. Crum, and the Officers of the Society, with Maps.) 
 Edited by F. Li. GRIFFITH. | 
 THE SEASON’S WORK. For 1890-1. By Ep. Naviriz, Percy E. Newserry, and 
 G. W. FRASER. 25. 6a. . 
 For 1892-3. 2s. 6d, 
 93 1893-4. 2s. 6d. 
 » 1894-5. 3s. 6d. Containing Report (with Plans) of D.G. HOGARTH’s Excavations in Alexandria. 
 », 1895-6. 35. With Illustrated Article on the Transport of Obelisks by Ep. NAVILLE. 
 » 1896-7. 2s. 6d. With Articles on Oxyrhynchus and its Papyri by B. P. GRENFELL, and 
 a Thucydides Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus by A. 5. Hunt, 
 », 1897-8. 25. 6d, With Illustrated Article on Excavations at Hierakonpolis by ΝΥ, M. FLINDERS 
 
 PETRIE. 
 
 yy 1898-9. 2s. 6d. With Article on the Position of Lake Moeris by B. P. GRENFELL and 
 A. 5. Hunt. 
 
 » 1899-1900. 25. 6d. With Article on Knossos in its Egyptian Relations by A. J. EVANs. 
 
 »» 1900-1. 25. 6a. 
 
 ,».» IQOI-2. 2s. 6d. 
 
 9) 1902-3. as. 6d. 
 SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS. 
 
 AOTIA IH OY: ‘Sayings of Our Lord,’ from an Early Greek Papyrus. By B. P. GRenrexi 
 and A. 5. HunT. 2s. (with Collotypes) and 6d. nett. 
 
 NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS AND FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL, from ~ 
 Oxyrhynchus. By B. P. GRENFELL and A. S. HuNT. Is. nett. 
 
 ATLAS OF ANCIENT EGYPT. With Letterpress and Index. (Second Hdition.) 35. 6d. 
 GUIDE TO TEMPLE OF DEIR EL BAHARI. With Plan. 6d. 
 COPTIC OSTRACA. By W. E. Crum. τος. 6d. nett. 
 
 Slides from Fund Photographs 
 may be obtained through Messrs. Newton & Co., 3 Fleet Street, E.C. ; 
 and Prints from Mr. R. C. Murray, 34 Dartmouth Park Hill, N.W. 
 
 Offices of the Egypt Exploration Fund: 
 37 GREAT RUSSELL STREET, LONDON, W.C., AND 
 8 BEACON STREET, BOSTON, MASS., U.S.A. 
 Agents: 
 
 KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & Co., 
 PATERNOSTER HOUSE, CHARING CROSS ROAD, W.C. 
 
 BERNARD QUARITCH, 15 PICCADILLY, W. 
 ASHER & Co., 13 BEDFORD STREET, COVENT GARDEN, W.C. 
 HENRY FROWDE, AMEN CORNER, E.C. 
 
~*~ 
 
URBANA 
 
 c001 
 OIRS. LOND 
 
 ) 
 
 ROMAN 
 APYR 
 
 6 1904 (P 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 
 mR MEM 
 COLL 
 
 75E 
 GRAECO- 
 
 es 
 
 He Oe 
 Se ee 
 
 een eae 
 
 Lee ae ae ad 
 
 OV ie Serhan Nas 
 
 Pape ia oe 
 
 eee 
 
 Bs Z τ ita :- ἘΞΤῚΞ = 
 
 ea eee — 
 
 πὸ 
 
 Stes FE ry Se 
 
 B= 
 
 Sh tye 
 
 BA Sa Ey Hats aay 
 
 Στ 
 
 at Pewter 
 Raha POs ase = 
 ERO Ὁ © 
 
 Sam a ng 
 
 Sat 
 
 δ 
 
 a a to 
 
 aD 
 
 Sa a! ἐξ Se pe τὰ 
 ον τ 
 
 Sot avon ee 
 
 Satna oa" eae 
 Seed en Brena Oo SS TREE SY 
 
 Sohn gehede iae gros 
 
 ear ening 
 
 5S aes 
 
 eh tl ee ag ten 
 
 RSE ene HS, 
 Cela gs ee a 
 
 age 
 Spied eae 
 aeons ν᾿ 
 
 id DOE ea ore Ὰ Sean aa i ᾿ ἀπο ; > Ae i 
 B a my nes yi 5 ON Pee τὶ εν 
 ἢ Pee ἔνα cum ge τὰς ὡς aaa “aut 
 
 (μά γοῦν, let 2 
 
 Qo κ εν. 
 
 YAR tien gwen 
 
 ens 
 
 MEE? PTE 
 hie 
 
 rose, 
 SEPM Nt sles i ogee 
 
 ον PAB mre Sao sagen 
 EE NT 
 Las ne 
 Diane beget 
 
 SPOR RS Yen 
 KN hea ons cy 
 
 Ser ee eet 
 
 NS RL 
 
 Se 
 
 Pass 
 
 Pe aes ie 
 
 rey: 
 GRE. 
 
 ἘΞ a Rig fr 
 ie se Feats 
 
 Bear ae 
 
 De 
 πο 
 
 clei 
 
 sey eee ane 
 Sates notre ae ets 
 
 ase ar pene eee 
 EST RNY: 
 
 SC Ok igs 
 φως SES mea 
 de tis 
 Mae, Ξ 
 
 i a ce 
 
 SERN tetiasi 
 πὰ δ σὸς