The Hibeh Papyri 1 PDF

i>9)
THE HIBEH PAPYRI

PART I
GRENFELL AND HUNT

EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND
GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH
THE HIBEH PAPYRI

PART 1
EDITED WITH TRANSLATIONS AND NOTES
BERNARD P. GRENFELL, M.A., D.Litt, F.B.A.

HON. LITT.D. DUBLIN; HON. TH.D. KOEMGSBERG ; FELLOW OF QUEEN'S COLLEGE, OXFORD
ARTHUR S. HUNT, MA., D.Litt.

HON. PH.D. KOENIGSBERG; FELLOW OF QUEEN's C0LI?EGE, OXFORD
LATE FELLOW OF LINCOLN COLLEGE
WITH TEN PLATES
^ff
LONDON I
' / /
SOLD AT .
The Offices of the EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND, 37 GkEAX Russell St., W.C.
AND Pierce Building, Copley Square, Boston, Mass., U.S.A.
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., Paternoster House, Charing Cross Road, W.C.
BERNARD QUARITCH, 15 Piccadilly, W.; ASHER & CO., 13 Bedford St., Covent Garden, W.C.
AND HENRY FROWDE, Amen Corner, E.C.
1906
\
OXFORD
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
PREFACE
The papyri which form the subject of the present volume were
obtained in the spring of from the Ptolemaic necropolis of
1902
El-Hibeh, partly by purchase, partly from our first excavations at
that site, as is recorded in the Introduction. On p. 5 will be found
an explanation of the remarkable fact that some of the literary papyri
here edited belong to MSS. of which fragments were published by
us in 1897. The papyri were, with one exception (no. 23), derived
from mummy-cartonnage, and all belong to the third century b. c.
In editing the classical fragments we have continued to avail

ourselves very largely of the most generous assistance of Professor
F. Blass, whose weighty judgement we have followed in the authorship
suggested for most of the new pieces (nos. i-is), and to whom is
due much of their reconstruction and interpretation, besides many

suggestions on difficulties arising in the fragments of extant authors
(nos. 19-26). With regard to the non-literary texts we have received
much help from Professor J. G. Smyly, who has not only placed at our
service his intimate acquaintance with the contemporary Petrie papyri,
but has in many cases revised our decipherments of the texts and
made suggestions for their interpretation. His knowledge of ancient
mathematics has materially assisted in the elucidation of the astro-
nomical calendar (no. 27), and without his aid we should certainly not
have ventured, as we have done in Appendix I, upon the difficult,
perhaps even hopeless, task of attempting to solve the perplexing
problems connected with the Macedonian calendar. Our proof-
sheets have also had the advantage of having been read through by
Dr. J. P. Mahaffy, to whose liberality we owe the insertion of
a facsimile of the calendar (Plate VIII). Some assistance which we
have received from other scholars on special points is acknowledged
in connexion with the individual papyri.
For the interpretation of several demotic dockets appended to the
Greek texts we are indebted to Mr. F. LI. Griffith, who has generously
allowed us to utilize his forthcoming edition of demotic papyri in the
John Rylands Library.
VI PREFACE
A few words of explanation are due concerning the alternative
years v,.c. on the Julian calendar into which for the convenience of
our readers the dates by the king's reign are converted. Apart from
the difficulties caused by the frequent employment of the Macedonian
in preference to the Egyptian months for dating purposes, an element
of uncertainty is introduced into the conversion of practically all early
Ptolemaic dates into their ecjuivalents on the Julian calendar owing to
the fact that at least two systems of reckoning the king's years were
in common use, while papyri rarely provide any indication which
method is being employed in a particular case. The nature of these

different systems is discussed in Appendix II, but the evidence
isunfortunately at present insufficient for a satisfactory explanation.
Accordingly we have converted the dates by the king's years into
what (granting the correctness of the Canon of Ptolemaic kings) are
their ccjuivalents on the Julian calendar, firstly on the conventional
assumption that the king's years wêre reckoned from Thoth i of the
annus z'aiûs, the balance of days between his accession and the next
Thoth I being counted as his ist year, and secondly on the assumption
(which is likely to be correct in many cases) that another system of
reckoning the king's years was employed, according to which the dates
when expressed by the Julian calendar may be a year later than they
would have been if the first system had been employed. The dates
B. c. which result or may result from the use of the second
system are
enclosed in brackets.
In conclusion we have tobeg the indulgence of subscribers to the

Graeco-Roman Branch for presenting them with a memoir which on
account of its count as a double volume.
length is to The next
memoir of the Branch, Part V of the OxyrhyncJms Papyri, in w^hich
we shall begin the publication of the very important literary texts

discovered in 1905-6 (cf The Times, May 14, 1906), is already in hand,
and we hope to issue it in June, 1907.
BERNARD P. GRENFELL.
ARTHUR S. HUNT.
Oxford, .lAy, 1906.
CONTENTS
PAGE
Preface
List of Plates
Table of Papyri
,.... V
viii
ix
Note on the IMethod of Publication and List of Abbreviations xiii
I
Introduction
TEXTS
L New Classical Fragments (1-18) .... 13
IL Fragments of Ext.vnt Cl.a.ssical Authors (19-28) 67

in.
IV.
V.
Calendar (27) .
Royal Ordinances (28-29)

Legal Documents (30-82)

....

....

138
157
165
VI. Declarations and Petitions (33-38) 172
VII. Official and Private Correspondence (39-83) 181
VIII. Contracts (84a-96) 242

IX. Receipts (97-109) 269
Accounts (110-121) 286
X.
XI. Descriptions of Documents (122-171) . 324
APPENDICES
I. The Macedonian and Egyptian Calendars . 332
II. The Systems of Dating by the Years of the King 358
III. The Eponymous Priesthoods from b. c. 301-221 367
INDICES
I. New Classical Fragment 377
II. Kings 383
III. Months .
384
IV. Personal Names 385
V. Geographical .
391
VI. Religion .
393
VII. Official and INIilitary Titles 394
Vlll CONTENTS
PAGE
VIII. Weights, Measures, Coins 395
IX. Taxes 396
X. General Index of Greek Words 397
XI. Index of Passages discussed .
408
LIST OF PLATES
I. 1, 4
II. 3, 14, 15 .
III. 5, 26
IV. 6 . . .
V. 9, 10. 13 .
ai the end.
VI. 19, 20, 21, 23, 24
VII. 7, 84 {b) .
VIII. 27 .
IX. 84. {a)
X. 88, 97. 99, 100 {rccio)

TABLE OF PAPYRI
B.C. PAGE
-Epicharmus, YvS^nai (Plate I) c. 280-240

1.
c. 280-240 15
2. '
Epicharmus (?), rw/iot
3. -Sophocles, Tyro (?) (Plate

II) c. 280-240 n
c. 300280 21
4. ^ Euripides, Oeneus (?) (Plate I)
c. 280-240 24
5. Philemon (?) (Plate III) .
c. 300-280 29
6. Comedy (Plate IV) .
Anthology (Plate VII) c. 250-210 35

7. .
c. 280-240 39
8. /Epic Fragment
300-280 40
0. /Epic Fragment (Plate V) .
c.
(Plate ^') c. 280-240 40

10. Tragic Fragment
c. 280-240 40
11. /Tragic Fragment
c. 380-240 41
12. Comic Fragment
- Hippias Discourse on Music (Plate V) c. 280-240 45
13. (?),
14. ' Lysias, In Theozoiidem (Plate II) c. 280-240 49
15. -Rhetorical Exercise (Plate II) .

c. 280-240 55
c. 280-240 62
16. 'Theophrastus(?)
c. 280-240 64
17. /Sayings of Simonides
c. 280-240 66
18. Literary Fragment .
Homer, Iliad ii and iii (Plate VI) c. 285-250 67

19.
Homer, Iliad iii-v (Plate VI) c. 280-240 84
20. .
290-260 88
21. Homer, Iliad viii (Plate VI) .
c.
22. Homer, Iliad xxi-xxiii c. 280-240 96

285-250 106
23. Homer, Odyssey xx (Plate VI) .
c.
280-240 108
24. " Euripides, Iphigenia in Tatiris (Plate VI) c.
25. -Euripides c. 280-240 "3

26. Anaximenes npbs 'AXiâvSpov (Plate III) c. 285-250 114
-
(?), '?r]TopiKr)
27. Calendar for the Saite Nome (Plate VIII) 301-240 138
28. Constitutional Regulations c. 265 157

265 161
29. Finance Laws ,
c.
30. Judicial Summons 300-271 165

Abstract of a Case for Trial c. 270 168
31.
32. Sequestration of Property 246 170
33. Property-Return of Sheep 245 172
TABLE OF PAPYRI
. c.
34. Petition to the King 243-2

35. Petition of Hieioduli c. 250
36. Notice of Loss 229
37. Notice of Loss 235
38. Declaration on Oath 252-1
39. Letter of Xanthus to Euphranor 265
40. Letter of Polemon to Harimouthes 261
41. Letter of Polemon to Harimouthes c. 261
42. Letter of Callicles to Harimouthes 262
43. Letter of Callicles to Harimouthes 261
44. Letter of Dinon to Harimouthes 253
45. Letter of Leodamas to Lysimachus 257
49. Letter of Leodamas to Laomedon c- 257
50. Letter of Leodamas to Theodorus c. 257
51. Letter of Demophon to Ptolemaeus 245
52. Letter of Demophon to Ptolemaeus c. 245
53. Letter of Demophon to Ptolemaeus 246
54.. Letter of Demophon to Ptolemaeus c. 245
55. Letter of Scythes to Ptolemaeus 250
56. Letter of Patron to Ptolemaeus 249
57. Letter of Dionysodorus (?) to Ptolemaeus 247
58. Letter of Dionysodorus to Ptolemaeus 245-4
59. Letter of Zenodorus to Ptolemaeus . c. 245
60. Letter of Zenodorus to Ptolemaeus . c. 245
61. Letter to Ptolemaeus 245
62. Letter of Philippus to Ptolemaeus 245
63. Letter of Criton to Plutarchus .

c. 265
64. Letter of Paris to Plutarchus 264
65. Letter concerning Paris c. 265
66. Letter of Protarchus to Clitarchus 228
67. Letter concerning Payment of Cloth-workers 228
68. Letter (.oncerning Payment of Cloth-workers c. 228
69. T-etter of Apclepiades to Clitarchus . 230
70 (^7). Letter of Zoilus to Clitarchus . 229-8
70 {b). Letter to Clitarchus c.228
71. Correspondence concerning a Strike .
245
72. Correspondence concerning a Temple Seal 241
TABLE OF PAPYRI XI
B.C.
73. Letter of Antigonus to Dorion

74. Order for Payment .
75. Letter of Theodorus to the Phylacitae
76. Order for Payment

77. Letter concerning the Priestly Revenues
78. Letter of Nicias to Argaeus
79. Letter of Ptolernaeus to HeracHdes
80. Export of Wine
81. Official Correspondence concerning Cleruch
82. Official Correspondence
83. Letter concerning aPayment of Corn
84(a). Sale of Wheat IX)
(Plate .
84(/>). Date by a Ptolemaic Era (?) (Plate VII)

85. Loan of Seed-Corn .
86. Loan of Corn .
87. Advance of Seed-Corn

88. Loan of Money (Plate X)
89. Loan of INIoney
90. Lease of Land
91. Lease of Land
92. Contract of Surety
96. Renunciation of Claims
97. Receipt (Plate X) .
98. Receipt of a Captain

99. Receipt for Rent (Plate X)
100. Account. Receipt for Rent (Plate X)
101. Receipt for Rent
102. Payment of Physician-Tax
103. Receipt for Physician-Tax and Police-Tax

104. Receipt for Various Taxes
105. Receipt for Police-Tax
106. Receipt for Beer-Tax
107. Receipt for Beer-Tax
108. Receipt for Bath- Tax
109. Receipt for a-nofioipa
110. Accounts. Postal Register

111. List of Cases and Fines .
xu TABLE OF PAPYRI
B.C.
112. Taxing-List
113. Banker's Account .
114. Official Account

115. Account of Taxes on Sacrifices and Wool
116. Account of Bath-Tax
117. Return of Corn Revenue .
118. Account of Olyra

119. Account of Rent
120. Account of Goats
121. Private Account
122-171. Miscellaneous Documents
NOTE ON THE METHOD OF PUBLICATION AND
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
The general system followed in this volume is that of its predecessors.

Literary texts are printed as they appear in the originals, except for division of
words, capital initials in proper names, and reconstruction, where practicable, of
lacunae. Additions or corrections by the same hand as the body of the texts
are in small thin type, those by a different hand in thick type. Non-literary
documents are printed in modern style with accentuation and punctuation:
abbreviations and symbols are resolved, while additions and corrections are
usually incorporated in the text, their occurrence being recorded in the
critical notesbut where special considerations make this method inconvenient,
;
alterations in the original have been reproduced, later hands being distinguished,
as in the literary texts, by thick type. Faults of orthography, &c., are corrected
in the critical apparatus wherever they seemed likely to cause any difficulty.
Iota adscript is printed when so written, otherwise iota subscript is used.
Square brackets [ ] indicate a lacuna, round brackets ( ) the resolution of
a symbol or abbreviation, angular brackets < ) a mistaken omission in the
original, braces ( } a superfluous letter or letters, double square brackets
[[ ]]
a deletion in the original. 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 considered doubtful. Heavy Arabic numerals refer to the texts of the
present volume, ordinary numerals to lines, small Roman numerals to columns.
On the numeration of the different mummies from which the papyri were
obtained see pp. 11-12 and on the alternative years B.C. in expressing dates
;
according to the Julian calendar see the Preface.

XIV LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
used referring to papyrological publications are
The abbreviations in
practically the same as those adopted by Wilcken in Archiv filr PapynisforscJning,

I, PP- 25-^"^' viz. :
Amh. =: The Amherst Papyri (Greek), Vols. I and II, by B. P. Grenfell and
P.
A. S. Plunt.
Archiv fur Papyrusforschung.
Archiv
B. G. U. = Aeg. Urkunden aus den Konigl. Rluseen /.u Berlin, Griech. Urkunden.
P. Brit. Mus. = 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
= Wessely. C
P. Cairo =
Catalogue of Greek Papyri in the Cairo Museum, by B. P. Grenfell
and A. S. Hunt,
p Y?iy. = Fayum Towns and their Papyri, by B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and
D. G. Hogarth.
P. Gen. = Les Papyrus dc Geneve, by J. Nicole.
P. Grenf. = Greek Papyri, Series I, by B. P.
Grenfell, and Series II, by
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt.

P. Leyden = Papyri Graeci Musei antiquarii Lugduni-Batavi, by C. Leemans.
P. Magd. = Papyrus de Magdola, Bulletin- de Corr. hell, xxvi, pp. 95-128,
xxvii, pp. 174-205, by P. Jouguet and G. Lefebvre.

P. Oxy. = The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts I-IV, by B. P. Grenfell and
A. S. Hunt.
Par. = Les Papyrus Grecs du Musee du Louvre, Notices ct Extraits.t.
xviii, 2,
P.
by W. Brunct de Presle and E. Egger.
P. Petrie = The Flinders Petrie Papyri, Parts I and II by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy,
Part III by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy and J. G. Smyly. Our references are
to Part III wherever texts previousl>' published are reprinted there.
Rev. Laws
Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus, by B. P. Grenfell, with
an Introduction by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy.

P. Tebt. = The Tebtunis Papyri, Part I by B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and
(Part II by B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and P:. Goodspecd,
J. G. Smyly J.
in the press).
P. Tor. =
Papyri Graeci Regii Taurinensis Musei Aegyptii, by A. Peyron.
Wilcken, Ost. = Gricchischc Ostraka, by U. Wilcken.
P. Zois = Papiri Grcco-Egizi di Zoidc dell' Imp. R. Museo di
Vienna, by
A. Peyron, re-edited in xi. Jaiircsb. lib. d. k. k. Fra}i--JoscpJi-Gymnasitiin
i)iWicn by C. Wessely.
INTRODUCTION
In February and March, 1902, while we were excavating in the Fayum,
a dealerwho had been travelling in Upper Egypt brought us a large quantity
of broken papyrus-cartonnage, amongst which we noticed the presence of
numerous literary fragments of the third century B.C. Our work in the
FayQm was at that time drawing to an end, the available sites for the discovery
of Ptolemaic papyri being exhausted, and we were naturally anxious to take
at once the opportunity of finding Ptolemaic papyrus-cartonnage in a different
district. With some difficulty we ascertained that the provenance of the papyri
brought to us was Hibeh, on the east bank of the Nile between Benisuef and
Shekh Fadl (Cynopolis) and as the Director-general of Antiquities most
;
obligingly gave us permission to proceed thither at once, we were able to start

work on March 24. The excavations were carried on until April 11 [Arch.
Report^ 1 901-2, pp. 4-5), and resumed in January, 1903, for nearly a month
{Arch. Report, 1902-3, pp. 1-3). In February, 1903, after examining several
sites between Hibeh and Shekh Fadl, we returned to Behnesa, which has
occupied us for the last three and a half seasons.
The ruins of the ancient town of Hibeh are situated on the river bank
facing the villages of Feshn and P'ent. The high desert at this point approaches
the river edge, leaving only a narrow strip a few yards in width available for
cultivation, and providing suitable places for quarrying limestone. The town
was built on rising ground, which reaches its highest point at the north-west
corner of the site. The most conspicuous feature is the massive wall of crude
brick, some metres thick, which protects it from attack on the north and east sides,
the east wall running in a south-westerly direction to meet the river, so that
Stamped
the area enclosed forms with the river a kind of acute-angled triangle.
bricks with the names of the princess Estemkheb, her husband Menkheperre or
their son Pinotem II, show that the walls were built under the XX 1st Dynasty.
Near the south end of the site stood a small temple (36 x i6i metres), built by
Shishanq and Osorkon of the XXIInd Dynasty, the picturesque ruins being
now overgrown with palms. The principal entrance to the town was through
the north wall, near its east corner ; west of the entrance the wall becomes more
than usually strong as the ground rises toa peak, and it is probable that here
was the citadel. The west face of this peak has been cut away for stone ;
and
B
2 HIBEH PAPYRI
it is not clear whether the wall was ever continued down to the river, w'hich,
moreover, has apparently encroached slightly upon the south end of the site,
washing away the original south corner of the wall. Opposite the ruins, and
separated only by a channel which becomes dry in the summer, is an island
about 2 miles long, which was already there in early times, for it is mentioned
in the demotic papyri from Hibeh of Darius' reign (cf. p. 7). The modern
village of El-Hibeh is a poor hamlet a few hundred yards to the south of the
ruins, and is combined for administrative purposes with another village on the
island which contains a few hundred feddans of cultivated ground, while on the
main land there is practically none. The extensive necropolis of Hibeh lies round
the ancient city to the north, east, and south of the walls, and dates from New
Empire to Roman times. By far the greater part of it had been dug out
before our arrival, principally in 895-6, when, as report states, an Arab dealer
]
from the Pyramids, know^n as Shekh Hassan, excavated the cemetery on a large
scale. From the assertions of an inhabitant of Hibeh who was then employed
as a rets, it appears that the dealer met with much success, especially in the
discovery of scarabs, amulets, ushabtis, statuettes, faience and alabaster vases,
and other objects such as would be found in the later tombs of the New Empire.
Quantities of mummies of the Ptolemaic period with papyrus-cartonnage were
also unearthed, but thrown away as worthless. This is the usual fate of
cartonnage found in the Nile valley proper, where, except at one or two places,
native tomb-diggers until quite recently attached no value to papyrus apart
from large rolls. A handful of small fragments, however, found their way to
Cairo, where they were bought by us in 1896; cf p. 5. During the next few
years much plundering continued at Hibeh, among the chief finds being a
number of large demotic papyrus rolls, which were discovered together in a pot
inside the town close to the east wall in the southern portion of the site. These
were bought in Cairo by Lord Crawford, and having passed with the rest of his
papyri into the possession Rylands Library are now being edited
of the
by Mr. F. LI. Griffith in the Demotic Papyri of the
John Rylauds Library,
pp. 38 sqq. The site, especially the necropolis, had thus been thoroughly
ransacked before Ahmed Bey Kamal in the year preceding our excavations was
sent by the authorities of the Cairo Museum to investigate the place. His
excavations, which lasted only a short time, produced no results of importance
cf. his report in Aiiiiales dii Service des Autiquitcs, ii. pp. 84-91.
Wehad taken the precaution of bringing thirty workmen with us from the
F'ayOm, and our anticipations that the local inhabitants would not be satisfactory
were fully justified. The villagers of Hibeh, having hardly any land to cultivate,
earn their living by antiquity-plundering or salt-digging in the neighbouring
INTRODUCTION 3
desert ; for regular work at the normal rate of wages they were not in the
least disposed, while the inhabitants of the village on the island were not
sufficiently intelligent to be of much use in the rather difficult task of clearing
out the remains of a much plundered cemetery. We
had no hesitation in deciding
at which part of the necropolis to begin operations. The tomb which had
produced the papyri brought to us in the Fayiim was about 150 yards outside
the town, in a rocky ridge which faced the north wall and ran from almost
the river bank towards a square brick-walled enclosure near the north-east
corner of the town and the report of Shekh Hassan's ex-reis that wushdsh
;
zvaraq ('faces of paper,' the Arabic term for papyrus-cartonnage) were to be

found in this quarter was confirmed by the presence of many broken Ptolemaic
mummies and limestone sarcophagi strewn about in the vicinity. The area
bounded on the south by the town wall, on the north and north-east by the
rocky ridge just mentioned, forms a triangular depression, of which the base is
the margin of cultivation on the west, and the apex the brick enclosure on the
east. The surface of the desert, which rises in an easterly direction, was to
a large extent covered with loose debris, consisting partly of rubbish thrown out
from the town between the time of its foundation in the 1st Dynasty and XX
the Ptolemaic period, with occasional accumulations of later date above the
earlier mounds, partly of bricks which had fallen down from the wall or belonged
to the buildings that had stood there before the Ptolemaic period, partly of
limestone chips from the rock-tombs scooped out in the ridge to the north and
underneath the wall itself, of which we shall speak presently. Throughout this
debris at intervals were Ptolemaic burials, mostly in plain limestone sarcophagi,

sometimes rudely painted or plain wooden ones, rarely in pottery coffins, and
in
occasionally without any sarcophagus at all. The bodies were mummified and
generally ornamented with detachable cartonnage, either of cloth or papyrus,
very similar in the style of decoration to the Fayum cartonnage. In many
cases the Hibeh are externally indistinguishable from those from
mummies
the Fayum but in the Hibeh cartonnage the lower border of the head-pieces
;
more commonly has a white band with a red check-pattern, and in the breast-
pieces,though these are sometimes very large, the interstices between the figures
or other objects painted have not infrequently been cut out, while foot-pieces
are generally absent, but where found are of the larger kind and do not
degenerate into the two small pieces of cartonnage attached to the soles which
are so common in the Fayfim. The burials in the debris were very shallow,
usually not more than two or three feet from the surface, occasionally only a few
inches below it, though in some parts it was necessary to dig through six or
seven feet of Roman rubbish to reach the Ptolemaic level. In the lower ground,
B 2
4 HI BE 1 1 PAPYRI
which had been much dug by scbakJi'in, near the river bank damp had proved
fatal to the cartonnage, and even higher up the rise was often insufficient to
protect the mummies from the moisture soaking through the soil from below,
particularly when they had not been buried in the stone chips. In the process of
digging through the rubbish of the late New Empire period to find the Ptolemaic
sarcophagi, a few antiquities, such as scarabs and amulets, were found, and in
the accumulations of the Roman period some small pieces of papyrus, none
of which is later than the third century. In the Roman rubbish mounds and
in some places in the earlier debris we also discovered a number of plain
mummies very heavily draped, especially round the face, and tied with red
bands. From the which these were lying and the occurrence of
levels at
similarly draped mummies
the neighbouring cemetery of Maghagha {Arch.
in
Report, 1902-3, p. 3), it appears that this style of burial continued down to
the sixth century, but most of the Hibeh examples were probably earlier for ;
in one spot near the west end of the rocky ridge, where a large number of these
later burials had been made, we also found, not far from each other, two
admirably preserved portrait-mummies similar to those discovered at Hawara
and Rubayyat in the Fayum. One of these (a woman) is now in the Cairo
Museum, the other (a man) in the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge. plain A
mummy found in the same group was inscribed EvSa? Ilrecôpwros (erous) i<7
Tpaiavov T(f)Ti(TKKvi.s (a place-name ?), and the portraits too no doubt belong to
the second century cf. the authoritative discussion of the dating of the Fayum
;
portraits by C. C. Edgar in Jonrn. Hell. Stud. xxv. pp. 225-33. -^^ inscription
rudely carved on a block of limestone measuring 50 x 30 cm. records the death
of ] '0/;[o- ei'e</)ota)ros" 'A77ta>zôv tCov citto k'w/x>;s ÎhXovlkov (erojj') y.
The Ptolemaic burials in the depression between the rocky ridge and the
north wall of the town were mainly those of the poorer classes ; wealthier
persons were buried in rock-tombs. Of these the south side of the rocky
ridge contained a double row, one at the foot, the other a little higher up.
They more low chambers scooped out of the rock where
consisted of one or
a convenient ledge projected, and generally had plain doors. The upper row
of tombs had in places been altogether destroyed owing to stone-quarrying
and nearly all the rest, as would be expected, had been plundered anciently,
while many of them had been reopened in modern times, principally by Shckh
Hassan, so that such cartonnage as we obtained from them was for the most
part very fragmentary. A few untouched tombs, however, were discovered.
One was in the west face of the corner of the ridge facing the
of these
and contained four very large limestone sarcophagi with painted
cultivation,
wooden coffins inside, containing early Ptolemaic munmiics. The head-piece
INTRODUCTION 5
(of cloth) was detachable, but the other decorations were in accordance with
the pre-Ptolcmaic practice painted on the mummy. Another tomb had escaped
the plunderer through being covered up by the debris of a house which had been
built, probably at the same date as the town walls, on a depression between two
peaks of the ridge. This contained eight painted wooden coffins and two of
limestone, and in the debris itself numerous other mummies had been buried
either with or without sarcophagi ; many of these contained papyrus-cartonnage,
except one room of the house, which was filled up with mummies mostly
in
ornamented with cloth head-pieces alone.
The tomb which produced the papyri bought by us in the Fayum was one
of the lower row of this group of rock-tombs. It had five chambers, of which
four were said to have been opened by Shekh Hassan, while the fifth, which
had been walled up, escaped detection until the beginning of 1902. This
information very well with the remarkable coincidence that some of the
fits in
literary fragments from this tomb are actually parts of the same papyri as
certain literary fragments bought by us in Cairo in 1896, and published in
P. Grenf. II. the papyri in the present volume 4 belongs to P. Grenf. II. i,
Of
5 to 8 {b), 11 to 6 {c), 20 to 3. 21 to 2, 22 to 4^ and there are numerous
;
additional fragments of P. Grenf. II. 7 {b), which remain unpublished. It is
clear that the these literary fragments were derived had

mummies from which
been originally discovered in 1896 in Shekh Hassan's excavations, but that his
workmen only took the trouble to remove a few small pieces, the remainder
being left behind in the tomb until attention was redirected to it in 1902. The
much damaged character of the cartonnage containing these literary fragments
indicates that the mummies to which they belonged had been broken up
anciently, probably in Roman times, while the comparatively well-preserved
pieces of cartonnage bought with them no doubt came for the most part from
the chamber which remained intact until 1902.
Opposite these two lines of rock-tombs were two other similar rows,
excavated underneath the foundations of the city wall between the entrance and
the north-west corner. These were also Ptolemaic, and had contained mummies
with the usual cloth or papyrus cartonnage. The lower line of tombs at the
foot of the rock on which the wall stands had been thoroughly plundered in
Shekh Hassan's time, but the upper line, placed in the ledge of desert on which
the lower tier of the wall rested, had escaped notice because the entrances
were covered over with the debris of bricks which had fallen down from above.
These tombs had in every case been opened and sometimes re-used anciently,
'
We are informed by M. S. de Ricci that in 1S99 he identified a few additional fragments belonging to
P. Grenf. II. 4 in the Heidelberg collection. It is to be hoped that these will soon be published.
6 HIBEH PAPYRI
for not only wcic the mummies more or less broken up, but some scraps of
Roman papyri were found in one tomb, and an inscription rudely scratched
above the door of another, Ta(/)09 'A<t<J)o UeTix.oo{vTos) Ki'Lb{[ov ?) a
. also . . . .,
probably dates from the Roman period. Some fairly well preserved pieces of
cartonnage were nevertheless obtained and in one spot we found in a recess
;
under the wall a group of twenty mummies, nineteen buried in stone sarco-
phagi, one in a wooden one, of which fourteen contained papyrus-cartonnage.
A passage led from this recess to a subterranean chamber filled with thin
painted wooden sarcophagi, but the cartonnage of the mummies inside these
was uniformly cloth.
This series of rock-tombs came to an end at the town gate ; underneath the
remaining piece of the north wall and the outside of the whole of the east wall
there were no suitable ledges under which to excavate chambers. few A
isolated stone or wooden sarcophagi had been
and there against the wall,
laid here
and there were numerous burials of the Roman period, but no papyrus-car-
tonnage was found. The most important discovery here was an untouched
tomb beneath a small brick building adjoining the east wall near its north
corner. In the debris of this building were many inscribed bases of funerary
statuettes and a wooden figure of Isis, probably of the Persian period. Below
the floor of one of the rooms was a square shaft eight feet deep, leading to three
rudely cut chambers in the rock, the chamber on the north being divided by
a wall from one beyond. Here were found several sarcophagi, some of plain
limestone shaped like a mummy, others of wood. The painting on the outside
of the latter approximated in style to that on Ptolemaic cofifins, but some
of the sarcophagi were also painted inside, a rare phenomenon in the Ptolemaic
period. Two well-preserved specimens of these were brought away one, ;
belonging to Khonsu-tef-Nekt, is now at Brussels, the other at Cairo. The

mummies had no cartonnage and were bound in thick white wrappings. Some-
times a network of small blue beads had been placed on the breast, but often
the beads were merely painted on the cloth. The tomb also contained a set
of four Canopic vases, a good-sized bronze statuette of Osiris, and numerous
very coarse ushabtis. P'rom the style of the sarcophagi and other objects it
is clear that this burial belonged to one of the last two or three centuries
before the Ptolemies.
Near the north-east corner of the wall is, as has been said, a brick-walled
enclosure measuring about y^y x 65 metres, of which a photograph is given in
Petrie's AFct/iods and Jljiiis of Archaeology^ fig. 6. Report states that antiquities
were found underneath the walls, a rumour which gains some confirmation from
the circumstance that they have been extensively dug about in recent times.
INTRODUCTION 7
Within the enclosure is a natural hillock with several convenient ledges for
placing rock-tombs, which have all been plundered. Ahmed Bey Kamal
{Ajinales, ii. p. 90) states that crocodile-mummies were found in them but ;
some at any rate of the burials were human. The tombs, like the sur-
rounding wall, are no doubt anterior to the Ptolemaic period and we con- ;
jecture that they formed a private cemetery belonging to one of the chief
families of Hibeh in its early days, being walled off for greater protection,
like the enclosures to be found in many modern Egyptian cemeteries in the
desert.
In the ground to the east of the town, along the path which leads to the
modern village of Hibeh, are numerous rock-tombs under low ridges or shallow
shafts leading to subterranean chambers. Previous diggings show that dogs
and cats were buried in this part as well as human mummies, generally with-
out sarcophagi, and rumour is probably correct in stating that no antiquities
of value have been found there. Probably the tombs belong to the later
Ptolemaic period. They are now being again used for burial purposes by the
Copts. Further south beyond the town walls are more rock-tombs, chiefly in
low hillocks along the margin of cultivation. Papyrus-cartonnage is reported
to have been found here, but spoiled by damp and other burials in stone
;
sarcophagi laid only a few inches under the surface are also frequent in this
quarter. No part of the south-eastern necropolis seemed promising for our
purposes, and the only find of any interest was an elaborately decorated Ptolemaic
mummy (now at Cairo) in a painted wooden sarcophagus inside another of heavy
limestone.
Afew days were devoted to the investigation of the town ruins, where,
except for the group of demotic papyri found in a pot (cf. p. 2), not much
seems ever to have been discovered either by antiquity-seekers or by scbak/dn,
who visitHibeh in large numbers during the summer. As we had expected,
the mounds were not at all productive of papyri. In the northern part near
the wall the houses were filled up with debris of bricks and contained no afsh^
and the mounds further south near the river were far too much affected by damp
to yield papyrus, even in the upper strata. A few houses on higher ground
in the south-east quarter of the town had some afsh, but had already been
much dug, and we found little save some second or third century fragments.
Underneath the east wall on the inside was a series of funerary chambers cut
which had been plundered long ago. These were probably used
in the rock,
by the pre-Ptolemaic inhabitants.
That the old Egyptian name of Hibeh was Teuzoi in the Heracleopolite
nome is known from the demotic papyri found there and now being edited by
8 IIIBEH PAPYRI
Mr. Griffith {Dnii. Pap. of ihc John Rylands Library, p. 40) but its name in ;
Gracco-Roman times, durin^r which it undoubtedly continued to be inhabited,

remains undiscovered. Papyri from mummy-cartonnage fjive little help
towards the identification of the which they happen to be found, since
site at
mummies were often carried a lon^r distance to be buried in a particular place.

Very few of the pieces of cartonnagc found in the Hibch cemetery are likely
to have been manufactured at Mibeh itself, and from internal evidence it is clear
that many of the on the west bank in the

mummies came from villages
Oxyrhynchite nome. It is, therefore, neccs.sary to depend mainly on the
evidence provided by the scanty papyri of the Roman period found in the town
and by the statements of ancient geographers the funerary inscription men- ;
tioning the village îXovUov (cf. p. 4), which in Arch. Report, 1901-3, p. 5, we
provisionally identified with Hibeh, may, like the cartonnage, have been brought
from elsewhere, and is therefore not a sound basis for argument.
The evidence of the Roman papyri is as follows. One petition was written
by a person aTro kwjutj? ^'u'xeo)? rov Karcot Kwirou ; a receipt mentions the KOiixapxai
'AyKVfxovoiv, and another document 'Aaava tov Kou'tou rod v-nep MeV*^'^ ['Hpa-
kX(otioXCtov (probably, cf. C. P. R. 6. 4, &c. ; but rod virtp MeV(|)ii; might agree
with KwiTov; cf. 95. 5 er 'O^vpvyx'MV 770'Aei tj\l vTêpOe Mip.[(p](m). A taxing
list of payments arranged according to villages mentions 'AyKvpwvm; flnkoveUov
(cf. the funerary inscription, p. 4), Ufpoii, 'l-mrrn'oiv, Taapopov, Movx^m, ToAtj,
'Ao-o-va?, Movxi-vd(v]{ ), Ke/Ke(T7;(/)ewy, K6j3a, and +e/30(U'eV^:i(>;) (cf. 33. 7). Probably
all these villages were in the KwiV/s ru-os ; cf. 117, where Tdki] and 'Ao-rrva occur
in an account concerning villages in the KtotD/s, and 112. On the verso of this
j>apyrus is a long list of Heracleopolite villages including 'AAiXaew^^:, KoXaa-ovxi ),
Ueraxi ), ^(^l39{eo)s), neera/xecofs), T(pTovtx{ ), Movx(oo[i>), Toaaxi ), Tepov>[>9,
Tdaecos, (r)^\liio{vO(m), ToKweco?,-, No?/joe(os', 0/xotrw(^(ea>s), f^l'e/3te(os

<l>f/:JcLiJx[fw]s,
(corr. from <l>e/3eixf'^0' XoViewv, Ua'VLfi{eo)s), Kopa, Kpi]Kai, Bova[eip](,)s,
TepTovaXi ), Te'x^coi, 0/xo;i>ax(r/), NtVec-jj, Stmpv. Several of these villages are

already known from published papyri, e. g. :S,S,,30Li, Ueevdp.19, No7//ns, ep.oivaxv,
GpolvmOls, &Xi^Mi'eis, ToKwts- from C.P.R., 'heîlxis from P. Amh. I47- 2, P. Gen.
10. 2, and P. Brit. Mus. 171 /k 7, 8, where 1. (v ^hifiixei tov KwiVor (Kwi'rou has
already been suggested byWilcken it can also be recognized in C. P. R. 82 (i).4.
;
where 1. KcotVov koto) [tov vtt. M/x<^- 'Hpa/cA.] for Kwt tov Karuj^pov vtt. Mip-cf).
'lI/>aK\.]) but most of the names are new.
;
Combining the evidence of these Roman papyri with the frequent references
to several of the same villages (e.g. 'I'e/%is, lle/wrj, Koâ, 'Acrava) in the early
Ptolemaic pap}ri of the present volume, it is certain that Hibeh was situated in
the KwiD/v To'-os of the Heracleopolite nome. This toparchy must therefore
INTRODUCTION 9
have comprised the south-east portion of the nome, where it adjoined the
Cynopolite, the cemetery of Cynopolis itself being only twenty-five miles south
of Hibeh. That the KcoiVt/s, which was subdivided like many toparchies into
a lower and upper division, included the whole of that part of the Heracleopolite
nome which lay on the east bank is very likely, and it may even have extended to
the southern portion of the Heracleopolite nome on the west bank. The references
to it in the present volume, especially 78. 12-4, indicate that for some adminis-
trative purposes it from the rest of the Heracleopolite nome and
was distinct
almost treated as a nome itself, though owing to the absence of the Kwin/s from
the two lists of nomes in Rev. Laws, it cannot have ranked officially as such.
The name of the district Kwirrj? suggests that there was a town called Kw or
Kts which was its capital, and in fact the existence in this part of Egypt of a town
called Kw or Kw? is attested in the second century by Ptolemy, and in the fifth by
Stephanus of Byzantium cf. maps iv. and viii. of Parthey's Ztir Erdkimde des
;
alien Aegyptcns {Abh. d. k. Akad. in BcrL, 1858). Both these authorities place
K(S close to Cynopolis and on the west bank Ptolemy's statement {Geogr. ;
iv. 5) is ara 6/uoi&)S vo\xbs KvvoT:oKCri]s koI \xy]Tp6T:oKfi atro hvajxQiV tov TTOTaixov Koi . . .
f,
avTUenai h tj] vri<T(o (sc. the island which was formed by the division of the Nile
and contained the Heracleopolite nome) Kvrwi; ttoAis. Miiller, however, suggests in
his note ad loc. that Ptolemy has created two. separate towns out of the two
ancient names of the capital of the Cynopolite nome, Pi-amip (' city of Anubis,'
i.e. Kwwy ttoAij) and Ka-sa (Coptic Kais, the modern Kes near
Benimazar).
That Ptolemy's Kw, if it was the metropolis of the Cynopolite nome, is really
Cynopolis under a different name is fairly certain but in view of the new ;
evidence for the existence of a toparchy called Kwtrr/? in the vicinity of the
Cynopolite nome, it is possible that there was a town called Kw or Kws in the
south-eastern part of the Heracleopolite nome, and this Kw may have been
confused by Ptolemy with Kais-Cynopolis. Papyri, however, provide no evidence
for the existence of Kw, and there are in any case no grounds for identifying it
with Hibeh.
other towns mentioned by ancient geographers have a claim to be
Two
considered as perhaps identical with Hibeh, 'AyKvpwy 770X1? and 'iTTTrcorwy.
'Ay/cupwy TToAts, which referred to in 67. 4, 112. 74, and 117. 15, as well as in
is
two of the Roman papyri under the form 'AyKvpwrwz; (cf. p. 8), is placed by
Ptolemy about midway between Aphroditopolis and Cynopolis, while Hibeh is
only about 12 miles north of the point half-way between Atfih and Kes (Cyno-
polis). Stephanus of Byzantium, on the other hand, places the town much
further north in the same latitude as the Fayum but the quarries at Hibeh ;
(cf. p. i) would well accord with his explanation of the name 'AyKvpwz/ ttoAis
lo HIBEH PAPYRI
(cf. Ptol. Gcogr. iv, 5, ed. Miiller) 'AyK. tto'A. w? 'Akiâvbpos (v y AlyvnTiaKcav'
oivonaarat be ovVco? cTretS?) XiOivas ireixvov ayKvpa^ K ttjs TrapaKLfjiVi]9 Aaro/itas. The
position assigned by the Ithicrariiini Aiitonini to Hipponon, midway between
AphroditopoHs and Speos Artemidos, corresponds very well with the relation of
Hibeh to Atfih and Benihasan, and the identification of Hibeh with Hipponon
(which has already been proposed, mainly on account of the similarity of the
names) would suit the fact that Hipponon was a military post of some impor-
tance cf. the Notitia Digiiitatum, which shows that the ala Apriana was
;
stationed there, and P. Amh. 142. 16, where 1. t]w TrpaiTToa-LTio t[o)]v Kaa-Tpoiv 'iTnrwvcav.
The chief objection to this identification is the silence with regard to Hipponon
not only of Ptolemy, but of the Ptolemaic papyri in the present volume, although
so many villages of the KcoiTrji are mentioned. If the existence of 'I-ttwvmv as
a place of some importance in the Ptolemaic period is ever proved by new
evidence, the probability of the identification with Hibeh would be greatly
increased ; must be regarded as very doubtful, and the
but in the meantime it
grounds for identifying Hibeh with

'AyKvpu>v ttoAi? are quite as strong. So far
as can be judged from the Ptolemaic papyri in this volume, the most important
village of the KwiV)?? was 4>eîxt?, which seems to have been a kind of adminis-
trative centre cf 106. 3 to e/x e/3txt KoyevTi]piov tov KojtVoi;.
; But the fact that
/itXts is so often mentioned in the Hibeh papyri may well be due to a mere
accident and in any case there is little justification for identif}'ing it rather than
;
any other village of the Kcom;? with Hibeh, especially as the principal deity of
e/36xts appears from 72. 2 to have been Heracles, i.e. Hershef, the ram-headed
god of Heracleopolis, while the principal deity worshipped at Hibeh in, at any
rate, ancient Egyptian times was Amnion, as is shown both by the sculptures
in the temple there and by the demotic papyri from Hibeh which Mr. Grififith
is editing.
The papyri published in the present volume consist partly of Hibeh
papyri bought by us in the P'ayum, partly of the papyri discovered in our
first season's excavations in March-April, 1902. These came either from
the central depression or from the rock-tombs in the ridge to the north of it
(cf pp. 3 -.S)- The cartonnage found in the second season's excavations in
January-Pêbruary, 1903, which approximately equals in bulk that found in the
preceding year, and was obtained either from other parts of the central depres-
sion or from the rock-tombs under the town wall, has not yet been examined.
The present volume
by no means exhausts the first season's results, though all
the larger literary fragments and most of the better preserved documents have
been included. There still remain numerous small literary fragments, some
of which, if they can be fitted together, may turn out to be of value, and a
INTRODUCTION ii
certain quantity of non-literary documents, the publication of which

is postponed
for various reasons. Another selection, together with the Ptolemaic papyri
found in the second excavations and the Roman papyri, will form the subject
of a future volume.
was to be expected that cartonnage from an ordinary Graeco-Egyptian
It
site in the Nile valley would prove to consist more largely of
demotic papyri
than cartonnage from the Fayum, where the Greek element in the population
was particularly strong. And though the papyri of the present volume show
the presence of numerous Greek settlers in Middle Egypt outside the Fayum,
smaller
the proportion of Greek to demotic in the Hibeh cartonnage is distinctly
than in that discovered by Flinders Petrie at Gurob and Hawara, and apparently
smaller than in that found by Jouguet and Lefebvre at Magdola, though it

is
larger than in the cartonnage found by us at Tebtunis, the demotic papyri

from
which outnumber the Greek by two to one. In point of date the bulk of the
Hibeh papyri cover the same period (from the middle of Philadelphus' reign to
Petrie
the end of that of Euergetes I) as the bulk of the Petrie papyri but the :
documents belonging to the reigns of

papyri contain a certain admixture of
Philopator, Epiphanes and even Philometor, and the oldest document in that
collection is i6th year of Philadelphus (P. Petrie I. 24 (2) =

dated in the
III. 52 {b)), whereas the latest certain date yet discovered in the
Hibeh papyri
is the 25th year of Euergetes I (90; 7, 91, and 117 for palaeographical
reasons may perhaps belong to the reign of Philopator) and there are not
only
;
several documents dated in the earlier part of Philadelphus' reign (30, 97, 99,
and 100), but a unique specimen of a Greek document dated in the reign of
Soter (84 a).
To know which papyri belonged to which mummy is often a matter of

importance in determining the place where they were written, the identity of
individuals with the same names, and the range of undated pieces, since the
papyri from a particular tend to form a group written in the same
mummy
district, often concerning the same persons, and as a rule not widely
separated
in date and in the case of a number of mummies found

;
together, parts of the
same papyrus are sometimes obtained from more than one of them. We there-
fore append a classification of the papyri in the present volume arranged according
to the mummies in the cartonnage of which they were found. The bought papyri,
which all or nearly all came from a single tomb (cf. p. o)> are distinguished
from the others by having A prefixed to their numbers, or, in the case of smaller
fragments of cartonnage by being called simply Mummy A. These numbers
,
accompanying refer not to the collective cartonnage of one mummy (as the
A
numbers elsewhere of course do), since the different parts were not kept together
12 IIIBEH PAPYRI
by the native finders, but to the separate pieces from which several documents
have been extracted. It may therefore occasionally happen that though two
'
A papyri have different numbers, the same mummy was actually their source.
'
Like the great majority of the papyri discovered in the excavations, the bought
papyri were partly written in the KcotV?/? t^-o's of the Heracleopolite nome,
partly in the Oxyrhynchite nome. From the presence of such a large quantity
of literary fragments, it is clear that the papyrus used in making up the car-
tonnage of several of the mummies (unfortunately those which have suffered

most at the hands of plunderers, both ancient and modern) was obtained from
a library of classical literature. It is not unlikely that this had belonged to one
of the Greek settlers at Oxyrhynchus, a town at which, as its papyri of the

Roman period show, Greek literature was particularly widely studied. The
mummies fromthe first season's excavations are distinguished by numbers only.
Nos 62, 64-5, 67, 73-8, 101,1 16, and 1 27 were found together, as were Nos. 79-100.
Smaller groups of mummies from the same tomb are [a) Nos. 109-12 and 121 ;
(/;) Nos. 6K-72 {c) Nos. 118-20.

;
23, which was discovered in the debris outside
the north wall, stands apart from the following list.
A. 2. 131. No. '). 31, 39, 84 0/)-(/^\ 07, 100-1,
A. 4. 121, 134, 135. 147 8.
A. 5. 133. No. 6. 30.
A. 6. 95. No. 10. 66 70 (/;), 90, 103-4, 160 5.
A. 7. 72. No. 12. 116.
A. 8. 57. No. 13. 40-4, 85, 150 1.
A. 9. 51 3, 56, 58 62, 93, 119, 124, No. 18. 9, 63, 65, 94, 110, 157 9.
166-8, and probably 37, 54 5, 125 No. 25. 114.
7, 130. Xo. 46. 113.

A. 10. 6. No. 63. 83.
A. 11. 71. Xo. 68. 27 (part).
A. 13. 78. No. 69. 13 (part), 17, 27 (part) 34
A. 14. 32. (part), 73 (part), 111.
A. 15. 36, 75, 105 7, 136 44. No. 70. 13 (part), 34 (part), 73 (part).
A. 16. 45 50, 108. No. 83. 89, 109.
A. 17. 88, 96, 99, 128. No. 84. 115.

A. 1-5, 7, 8. 10-2, 14-6, 18 22, 24 6, No. 87. 79.
33, 35, 38,74,76 7, 86, 91, 102, 112, No. 97. 28-9, 64, 92, 149,
117 8, 120, 122 3, 129, 132, 145, 149, No. 98. 81 2, 152.
171. No. I 17. 80, 08, 153 G.
No. 126. 87.

I. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
EpiCHARMUS, Fycofial.
Mummy A. 16.9 x 14 cm. Circa b.c. 280-240, Plate I.
This is an introduction in trochaic tetrameters to a gnomic poem (1. 11),

for which the authorship of Epicharmus is expressly claimed in 1. 13. The
Tj/oJ/xai of Epicharmus were popular at an early period, and quotations from these
gnomic verses are found in Xenophon {Afeju. ii. i. 20) and Aristotle (R/iet. ii. 21.
1394 d, 13). But there were doubts even in ancient times regarding their
authenticity, and according to Philochorus the collection was the work of
a certain Axiopistus ; cf. Apollodorus, ap. Athen. xiv. 648 d L\6xopos 5' V rots
riept fJ.airLii7Js 'AftoTnoroi' rbv ihe AoKpov y^vos etre ^lkvuh'lov top Kavova kol rai Tvcifxai
Tj-eTTotTj/ceVat </)Tj(nV. Following this criticism recent editors (Kaibel, Com. Gr. Fr.
sqq., Diels, Vorsokratiker, pp. 91 sqq.) class this section of the
i-
PP- ^?>'i
fragments among the acknowledged to include

\/êv5e7rixapMeta. although it is
some genuine elements. What Axiopistus seems to have done is to have edited
in the poet's name a number of floating extracts from the comedies of Epicharmus,
with additions from other sources and the contents of our papyrus may be
;
recognized as part of his preface to the work. Diels supposes that Axiopistus
lived in the fourth century, perhaps in the circle of Heraclides Ponticus ; the
papyrus (provided that Philochorus was correct, and that Axiopistus was the
author) shows that he must have lived at least as early as B.C. 300, since its own date
cannot be later than about B. C. 250, and should probably be placed earlier in the
reign of Philadelphus. It is written in finely formed upright uncials, and shows
to the best advantage a common literary hand of this period. The r with its
broad and carefully finished crossbar is a noticeable feature.

14 HIBEH PAPYRI
In this, as in the other new classical fragments, many of the restorations of
lacunae and sujTo-cstions
'&& in the commentary arc due to Professor Blass.
Tii8 cfeaTi TToXXa Kac nav\r\oicL roLS xprjaaio Ka
TTOTL (piXov TTOT i^Bpov ev 8iKaL Xejcov v aXiai

TTOTL TTOvripOV TTOTL KaXoV TC KayaOoV TTOTL ^^vov
TTOTL 8var]pLV TTOTL TTapOLVOV TTOTL âvavaOV LT( TL9
5 aXX exî kukop tl KaL tovtolctl KevTpa tlS evo
(V 8e KaL yycofiai ao(f)aL t^lSc aL(nv e[i] TreiOoLTO Ti9
Seiia)Tp09 76 K Li] /SeXxicov T 9 Tra[v]T avTjp
[ko]u tl TToXXa SeL Xey[e]/i' aXX e/x /xovoi' [tjovtccv ctto?
TTOTTO TTpayfxa TTOTLcpepovTa TOouS a[L] TO avjicpepov
aLTLav yap (cs aXXcos p.iv eirju [5]eîO?

lo tix'^v
fiaKpoXoyo9 S ou Ka SvvaLjiav e/i i3[/t)]axft yvo)lia[9 Xey>ii^
TavTtt 8t] ycav (.LaaKovcra^ o-wtlOtjixl Tav Tdyi'av

tl ETTLxapjio^ tls eyej'ero
TavS o\Tr](09 eiTTT/i ao(l)09
î\tt aaT^La KaL TTavTOLCt KaO ev [ctto?] Xeywi'

[ttoAX OS [
ir [TTLpav] avTavTOV 8l8ovs ? KaL ^[po-X
[
je fxaOcov aTras avr]p (pay[
r . rj(TL TTOT Ov8l^ TT0S a7T[

]
[
]0VTa XvTTTjaCL TL TCOl^S'l
[
. .]Tp[. .]a 8pa)VTa T0La8[
20 [ ]?/?!?^^ TToXvfiadr][
](oi'[. .]pT[. .](p(o Se KaL t[

[
I?
]iTe TOVTo ya KaKa[. .

.]X^'K
[
[aXXos a]XXm yap [y^yrjOe kov tl Tav[T
r
y TTavTa 8eL Ta8 coy ([
25 [
ejiraTa 8 ev KULpm X[y
r
]^[H-'^ ^p(^X^î[
1-13 'Here are phrases many and various for you to use on fncnd or foe, when
on a gentleman, on a stranger, a bully,
sneakinf- in court or in the assembly, on a rascal,
other bad qualities for these too here are goads ;
a drunkard, or a boor, or if any one has
here also are wise maxims, obedience to which will make a man cleverer and better_ m
all things. man A
has no need for many words, but only just one of these verses, bnngmg
2. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 15
to bear upon the matter in hand that verse which meets the case. For the reproach was
made against me that, though I was clever in other ways, I was prolix and could not utter
maxims tersely so on hearing that I composed this work of art in order that men may say
;
"Epicharmus was a wise man who put many witty sayings of every kind into single verses,
."
giving proof of his talent for terse . .
4. eiTf : aire is the Correct dialectical form.

5. fVo was a Doric and Aeolic form of eWo-rt; cf Attecd. Ox. i. 160. 26 e|o prjîa napa
AwpieOcrtx' diri toC e^frmv, 1 76. 12 (eV) jrapa rfjv Alo\i8a Koi A(opi8a 8uiK(ktov eVo ylveTai, onuTap
Kai dvu. pT]fiaTos.
II. p.aKp6\oyos 8 : SC. i>v.
13. 1. Tis for Ti. Cf. Epich. Fr. 254 (Kaibel) rav f^S)v pvufxa ttok ifra-fiTni 'Koywv
TOVTCiV (Tl.
20. There would be room for a quite narrow letter like t between ]op and x].
22. An been made in this line, possibly by a second hand; the letters
alteration has
ya are much smaller than usual and is of rovroty are added above them. There are also
traces of ink below vr which may represent part of the original writing, and perhaps all the
letters between ]ir and KKa[ are in an erasure.
23. [y]fyr]6e: the dialect requires yeyaQf.
2. Epicharmus (?), Fi^co/xai.
Mummy A. Fr. {a) gxg-2 cm. Circa b.c. 280-240.
Four fragments from a trochaic poem, apparently of a gnomic character,

and quite possibly coming from a later part of the work of which 1 is the
preface. The MS. however is certainly not the same the calligraphic hand ;
is similar in some respects to that of 1, but the letters are larger and more
widely spaced, and in some cases the formation is different. In the second
column of Fr. (c), where the beginnings of a few lines are preserved, the verses
are divided off by paragraph!, indicating that they were ixovoartxoi, each
complete in itself. The only alternative would be to suppose that those lines
were part of a dialogue, which is here much less probable. curious A
approximation occurs in 1. 6 to a verse attributed to Epicharmus by Stobaeus
(Kaibel, Fr. 258) 6 rpoTros itvOpca-noLo-L hatfxoyv ayado'i, oh 8e Kai kukos. The papyrus
has (VTpoTTos avOpcDTtoiai. haifxiov, apparently in the same position of the verse
(cf. note ad loc), but the letter following haijxoav is not a ;
probably, therefore,
(vTpoTtoi is not a mistake and the line ended quite differently. This verbal
coincidence is therefore an insufficient argument for assigning the fragments to
the Fv&ixaL of Epicharmus ; it is moreover to be observed that they fail to show
the Doric dialect appropriate to that work (cf. 1. 5 ay]br]s, 1. 8 e^TrarrjKer). The
t6 II IDE H PAPYRI
objection, however, is inconclusive, for dialect is frequently obscured (cf. notes on
1. 4 and 23) and, apart from Epicharmus, we are at a loss for an author of yv5>\xai
;
fxovocTTixoi in trochaic tetrameters. On the verso are the remains of a cursive

document.
Fr. (a). Fr. {/>).
](TTl TTpOS To\ ]i'Xa[
\c>8vaTH[. .
.][[
io-TL 6epaTT[
] xpriarl.] . \. .](.y[ ]
(I'lKaXvirreTai to (âvXau 15 '\vo<TT^v[

] [
5 1 eiy TO avvTV-îiv arjSrj^ crTivo[
1 evrpoTTO? av6pco7roi(Ti Saificov ir[ ] , e? aTi[
....]. 01 Kai op6<o9 ^paPevaai 5mre[

.]vov9 e^rjiraTTjKeu aSiK09 oi[
....].. eo-t? TTOvrjpa TTipi TTOvrip(o[v
10 !..[..].. [.Vff eTi v[. . .]iTr
] . Tj[o]yqp ayB[
Fr.
3. NEIV CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 17
3. Sophocles, Tyro (?).
jMummy A. Fr. {c) 9.9 x 11-4 rw. Circa b.c. 280-240. Plate II (Frs. b and/).
A number of fragments containing tragic iambics, but in very bad condition.

This is largely due to the fact that the breast-piece from which they are derived,
instead of being left in a solid sheet, was, according to a not uncommon fashion,
cut into an open-work pattern, causing large gaps, and rendering the remainder
much more fragile than it would otherwise have been. The pattern has assisted
us in assigning their position to a few of the pieces, but the others remain
unplaced and the total result is disappointing. This is the more regrettable
since appears not improbable that, as Prof, Blass has suggested, the play in
it
question is the Tyro of Sophocles. Tyro was the mother of twin sons, Pelias
and Neleus, by Poseidon, and was persecuted by her step- mother Sidero, who
was eventually killed by Pelias. In 1. 39 of the new fragments there is
a mention of the river Alpheus, which is in keeping with the fact that the
adoptive country of Tyro's father, Salmoneus, was Elis. Indeed, Elis may well
have been the scene of one of the two dramas written by Sophocles on the
subject of Tyro. The extant fragments from the two plays amount only to
twenty-seven lines, so that the absence of a verbal coincidence with our bare
sixty is not at all remarkable. But allusions to the same circumstances are
perhaps to be recognized. There is more than one reference in the papyrus
to bad dreams, e.g. 37 1.ns avr-qv 6et/xa r evwxôfx irXavai cf. 1. 9. It is
[<ô\ôs ;
remarkable that in the extant fragments similar references are found Fr. 580 :

Tpoa-Tîvai }xi(Tr]v TpaiidCav aij.(p\ crlra koL Kapxwi-a, where the subject (according
to Athenaeus) was tovs bpaKovras, and a dream is apparently meant cf. Fr. 581 ;
TToAA' iv KQKolaL OvpLos evvrjdeh opS, and Fr. 584 tUtovo-l yap roi Kal voaovs hvcrOvixLai.
A still stronger argument for the identification proposed is supplied by 11. S^-?>
... as (?) apcoyov irarepa Xia(To\ia[i p.o\eiv ? av^xiKTa ttovtov /xrjrpt. This prayer
is entirely appropriate in the mouth of one of the sons of Tyro, and, if avaKva
must be addressed to Poseidon. Moreover it is just possible, though very
is right,
hazardous (see note ad loc), to read the mutilated word before apoiyov as [rieAîas,
which would of course be decisive. But even if that supplement be not adopted,
the case for the Tyro may be considered fairly strong. A consideration of the
style and diction does not materially assist in forming a conclusion, but they
are at least consistent with a Sophoclean authorship.
The text written in a small and not very clear hand, the decipherment of
is
which is rendered difficult by a coat of plaster and brown stains. peculiar A

c
i8 HIBEH PAPYRI
feature is the occasional indentation of the lines, apparently to indicate alterna-
tions in the dialogue (cf. 1. 23, note). This expedient is sometimes employed
in papyri to distinguish quotations (c. g. P. Oxy. 200) or fresh sections (P. Oxy.
665), but we arc not aware of another instance of its use for dramatic purposes.
Frs. (rt), {b), and {c).
Col. i.
Fr. {a). L(T]TopeLS
]e
XP^f^ anav
']
about 4 lines lost.
Fr. (d).
]C<(joaav,
]/xev ov8 ai> ei^ eXdoi neXas

] . varov 6'e//a?
. V TTOTfiOS
Fr. (c) iTTCOl'
15 ] naOos
'\filievov
n[o]p~avv(o
Frs. {a} and {c).
Col. ii.
[ 14 letters ]tov xapw (poôvfi[e]i' .

[
\
\X019 ous ei'[. .] Tray//[ji'a
20 niToiv tafj. pi] (3pa ] . nef Xoyoi9

opaLS y apa co BiaiTo[iva ] . para
aruxîv OTpvvi[ 15 letters ]
. .]êf Ovpcovo^ J
^'\.-]t[ 7 )> ]
ap(f)OLv aKOvaai Ta[ J^'^l
25 T7]l' 6J'T09 OIKCOV r .V/<[
evi'ovs Si Kai raaS tiaopais 7rv[6T]Tpi as

op(o r ]8a .... //??re 7rr]fj.aTi
MJ ]v(Tov(Tav aXyeiPcou 7ra[
[ 18 letters ]i^ afi iiovov \e[
30 [ 17 ]y T KUL KaKOL[
xaiu 1 . ovens Toaou \
ei KaL 6ai'iv )(pt] TrpcoTou KTTpa[^
[.] . aoLT[. .Vr avTov ev (pepou]
[
]^f^ M Kî'ov
X
Fr. (4 Col. i.
35 [. .J^
. uS[
[. .] . m xapiCu rris tt[ ] . .

[
[<Po\ôs TLS avj-qv Sîfia r eppvxo/J. trXavai
[ ]
i^?" ^Y T-coiê Koiv<cviL TaS^
[
Ka\]\ipovu eTT A\(peiov iropov
40 [ 24 letters ] . . yavos
Col. ii.
Xiay yap rja .

[
/ aXX (K KaKcnv ev[
aXX 00 TiKvoy []/;.[
K0V(f)CD9 (f)ipeLV iycoiS r[
45 [ ] V 5ea-7ro[
Fr. (.).
]
/4
] KUKai (TV yi'l](Ti[
] ayav oSup/j.a[
]6coi' Tpvxî t[
50 ] . ot[. .]...[
C 2
20 HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. (/)
[ ] . . ooaiv ai lJ-^TOi[
[...]. a? apcayou vaTepa Xiacrofxa l noXeLu

[av]aKTa ttovtov firjrpL rris Tet.\[
[. .] . vra naiSa? îrref) [.]x[
Fr.C^).
55 .
[
jai'erop ovk eJêcTj
Ti Sea[.]yua . er euSei ere Kvpi .
\lKro[.] .
]
TpV)(OS
jêa rrpod .
[
6T . . . [
sqq. The position of P^rs. {a) and (^), which contain 11. 1-2 and 8-12, is suggested
I
by appearance of the papyrus, but is not at all secure. Fr. [a) also contains the first
the
five letters of 1. 20, which do not fit the context there particularly well neither is it certain ;
that 1. I is the first of the column. In Fr. {b) (11. 8-12) there is a juncdon of two sheets
of papyrus. Hence, if this fragment is rightly placed here, the first column of Fr. {d) and
Frs. {/) and {g), which show no similar junction, cannot be referred to the same column.
A junction occurs in the second column of Fr. {<!) just before it breaks off, but this comes
earlier in the verse dian is the case in 11. 8-12.
20. Cf. the previous note.
23. This be metrical if it is supposed to have projected slightly to the left, as
line will
is the case with 26 and 41.
11. The purpose was probably lo indicate a change of speaker;
cf. 11. 2 6-7, Avhich are evidently a question and answer. The syllable ev in 1. 26 is indeed
written rather below the level of the rest of the line, and may have been added later but ;
since the hand is identical, and other lengthened lines occur, it is unlikely that this is merely
a case of accidental omission.
26. TTiuOriTpias (cf. Furip. Htppol. 805) refers to the Chorus ; the supplement is a trifle
long for the space, but is just possible.

33. There is a gap in the papyrus before this line, which may therefore have had two
or three more letters at the beginning than we have supposed cf. ; 23, note.
1.
44. The
of (yaib is very doubtful
t there may ; and S, For be nothing between the 
Koi(j)ws e.g. Furip. J/<v/. 1018 Koixfxoi (f)(p(iv ^^^prj 6i/i]tov oi'ra av^t(pOj)di.
(f)fi)(iv cf.
48. Perhaps tmv or rots ayav o8vpmi Tuv or -aiv. This fragment probably gives the
latter halves of the lines.
52. Apart from any context the traces on the papyrus before apuyov would most suitably
represent a rather wide w. But w is excessively awkward at this point, and we accordingly
prefer the possible lliough not very satisfactory alternative m, preceded by a letter which
conceivably might be an i, though if so the three letters were crowded together in an unusual
manner. Blass's ingenious suggestion rifX'tas may, therefore, just be read, and it admirably
fits both lacuna and context. The palaeographical difllculiy, however, has made us
hesitate to introduce it in the text.
54. The first word

probably a participle.
is
56. The the lacuna is really more like w than v, but if these verses are
first letter after
iambics the second foot of 1. 56 must be a tribrach.

57. The e at the beginning of the verse projects slightly beyond the lines above and
below, and a narrow letter might be lost in a hole in the papyrus before f. So perhaps
this line should be classed with 1. 23, &c. (cf. notea^/ loc). Jl eXim does not seem a possible
reading.
4. Euripides, Oeneus (?).
Mummy A. Fr. {a) 6 x n-n c7n. Circa b.c. 300-280. Plate I (Frs. a and r).
The very archaic and delicate handwriting of these fragments of tragedy is
obviously the same as that of the three small pieces previously published by us
in P. Grenf. II. i (cf. the facsimiles), and there can be no doubt that they are
all derived from a single MS. ; cf. p. 5. Concerning the identity of the
author there was previously no evidence, but a clue is now provided by the
occurrence at 1. 5 of the words a5êA0'co\ MeAê'aypcot, which suggest that
the drama may be the Melcager or the Ociicus of Euripides. The context makes
the latter the more probable. The verses in Fr. [a), Col. (11. 1-9 cf. Blass's i. ;
reconstruction in the note ad loc.) would suitably form part of a speech by

Diomedes, who after the successful expedition of the Epigoni against Thebes
went to Aetolia to avenge Oeneus, his grandfather. Oeneus was the king of
Calydon, and had been dispossessed by his nephews, the sons of Agrius
Diomedes killed the usurpers and restored Oeneus (cf. the vtt66(.(ti^ in Schol.
ad Aristoph. AcJiarn. 418). IMeleager, the uncle of Diomedes, is assumed by
the speaker in 11. 5 sqq. to be dead, but his grave is to be honoured by some
of the spoils from Thebes. A certain similarity in sense may further be
detected, as Blass suggests, between 22 sqq. and Oenetis Fr. 569 (Nauck),
11.
quoted in the note ad he. The suggestion of O. Rossbach {Bcrl. PJiil. WocJi.
1899, p. 1630) that the fragments published in 1897 came from the CJiryses
of Sophocles is not to be reconciled with the new evidence.
This papyrus along with 6 and 9, the Petrie fragment of the Adventures
of Heracles (P. Petrie II. 49 (/) cf. I. p. ()^), and the Timotheus papyrus are the
;
oldest specimens of Greek literary writing that have been recovered. There
seem to be no sufficient grounds for assigning the Timotheus to an appreciably
more remote period than the rest. The archaeological evidence is inconclusive,
and if the archaic appearance of the letters is more striking than in other cases,
that is to no small extent due to their size and comparative coarseness. The
argument from single characters is no doubt precarious but the forms of I ;
22 HIBEH PAPYRI
in 4 and il in 6 and 9 arc more distinctly cpigraphic than in the Timotheus
papyrus. We should therefore include it in the group named, and refer all five
papyri approximately to the reign of Soter (B. C. 305-284). The other literary
pieces in this volume most probably belong, like the dated documents found
with them, to the reign of Philadelphus (B. C. 284-246), or to the earlier years of
the reign of Euergetes I (B. C. 246-221), mainly to the former.
For convenience of reference we add a revised text of the fragments
published in 1897.
Fr. {a). Col. i. Col. ii.
ai\8r]pov /^
[ lê? (poi'coL TL TTOT ap aKovaai 7rpo[
]j/ avôi'[ ] . [. .]h 009 eKTre7rXr][y/x
]y yap rcov .[n]cov \oyo>v ^X^'^ lU Tiu[
jet TTpa^Lv [o\pnr]aoi noSi oaov Ta)(^09 k[
aS]eX^[o)]i M(X[e]aypcoL S[(op]7]iJLara
]ai Kai airoTrXrjpcjoOTjL raô^ ir.
\v(iiv Tcoy KeKa\\i(TTevp.[ei'(o]v TLva . \
]ii'0i9 avBpaaiv [
a6ocil09 (OV JTTi
ov liavOavo) aov t[o y Xoyov

aXX (jos (Tvvrjcriis paiSia>9 iyco (f)
paaco
;o 67rei yap rjX^. 10^
Fr. (r).
8x)](nr paîas oVcoy [y^,VT]T aL
]v rXrjuoi'Cov (3poTco[i' TV^rji 8 ay(ov[
V T(^Bvr]Ko[r a iO(TiT(p Tvp a]vv\

2.") <t>v ^(avrodv (f)iXo:v yopov p\La
oaov rapayp.[o\v [
]
p-[oi nX7]pj]9 (5e oral' y^vâiaLV e/i[
err . . ye .
[
jSAfTTCi 40 TLS ((TTl 6[

30 (f>a\os
joy
[. '.]oa6v[
Fr. Fr. (/).

(^).
Im[.]a7r .
[
'
50 ]r]a(rT] .
xpovoi^ P]ovXofi[
45 J^"^"'
]y yeycoy
]ra_frf'ou[
Fr. (^) = P. Grenf. II. i (a), i. Fr. (/^) = P. Grenf. II. i (^7). 2.
]ayovTa yap 60 ]/ieTXT;/i[

\_
]y\[.] . IV ae fiavT[
a]v8pe9 CO (ppeuofSXaêii
55
(p6]ipov(Tiy CO? /ca/fo/x /ue^ya
] iinoXa)(Tiv rjSovq?
]l irpos ere Seîa? X^P^
.].[
Fr. (z) = P. Grenf. II. i (d).
Col. i.
Col. ii.
Jcre . . . .
]t kXvcou
65 A'ejya (rOeiet
Ka\
\Xf
24 HIDEH PAPYRI
]AeTai 75 Ti[
t
)
7o ava]Kropov ^
[
1-2. The reference is probably to the capture of Thebes.

3-8. Blass proposes the following restoration of these lines
\vvv ovv, TeXols -yap Ttor e/icoj/ \6yaiv xftf,
[e^' riv npoa-fjK'ei npaîv op/iijo-o) ttoS/,
[wy 7rarpaS]eX(ô) MfXtaypw 8[(op\f]fiaTn
\(p6iT(o TT/joôJ/i 'at, KarTOTT\r]p(od;i rdcfyos
InavTCiv (KiCycou to>u K(KaWi(TTtvp.(V(i>v

\a To'iai k\Ivo'is dv8pd(nv 'vupai irptird.
For b^wp'iipaTa cf. Onsl. 123 vtpTtpwv hu>pi]naTa, and for KiKa\\i(jT(vpivu>v in the middle voice
see Swp' KaXXto-revfrtu Ttoi/ i^w eV a/'^pa)7ro((Tii'. ubt\(pov MeXfaypov occurs in the same
I\re(I. 947
position of the verse in SuppL 904.
10. Perhaps with (KTren\j{ypf6' in the next line.
Trpo^crBexcafieO',
15. The marks margin, two horizontal strokes and a comma-shaped sign below,
in the
perhaps indicate the close of a scene cf. 1. 35. ;
16. This line is on a small detached strip; its position here is only suggested
by the
appearance of the papyrus and is not at all certain.
21. This line was the last of the column.
22 sqq. The speaker is probably Oeneus and the sense of the passage seems to have
been similar to that in Otfuus Fr. 569 (Nauck) :
AI. (TV 8' wS' (prjpos ^vpfnix^î' cinoXXvaai ;
01. ot /itV yap ovKfT flaiv, ol 8 IjvTfS kukoi.
1. 22 is perhaps the first of a column 11. i, lo, 32, and 60 certainly are so.
;
35. The letters of this heading, no doubt a stage-direction, are

rather spaced out. If
pui is right the play had a female Chorus.
5. PlIII.KMON (?).
Mummy A. Fr, (,?) 10-4 x 24-.-) rw. Circa n,r. 280-240, Pi atf III (Fr. o, Cols, ii-iii).
has been Ihc subject of nuich speculation upon what Greek original the
It
Aululai-ia of Plautus was based. Plays of Po,seidippus and, of course, Menander

havê been suggested, but with little plausibility, and the general verdict has been
that of not proven. Happily a small portion of the original comedy now appears
to have come to light in the fragments below, which belong to the same
MS. as P. Grenf. II. 8 [b), and the author of which Blass has identified with
great probability as Philemon. This identification rests upon the occurrence
at 1. 28 of the name KpotVooi in the same position of the verse as in a quotation
from Philemon in Eustath. ad Horn. p. 1701. 6 raTavraXov rdXavra, eTrei TtXovarios
TTore 7/^, wy brjXol, âcrt, <Pi,Xi]ixo)v eiTrwy' Kpotcrw AaAw aoL koI Miha koi Tavrdkco
(Kock, Fr. 189). This argument is really stronger than it may seem
at first sight to be : for there is apparently no other reference to Croesus
in the extant remains of Attic comedy. Moreover the line fits in well with
the supposed situation, the key to which is provided by the name Strobilus
in 11. 20-1. In the Anlnlaria Strobilus is the slave who discovers and carries off
the treasure concealed by the old miser Euclio, and so brings about the desired
union of his master Lyconides with Euclio's daughter. We suppose that the
discovery has just preceded the scene disclosed in 11. 13 sqq. of the papyrus.
The slave Strobilus (1. 21 -nai . . . Sr(p)oî\e) is almost beside himself with delight
(11. 15-19, 22), and is anxious to get away with the utmost speed (11. 13-14) ; while
the interlocutor, who
on the scene and is presumably his master, is
arrives
astonished at Strobilus' behaviour (1. 15), and thinks that he must have gone mad
(1. 21 TTot bv(TTvxi). This interpretation is strengthened by some other coinci-
dences. An echo of the line KpoiVw XaAw aot k.t.K. may be recognized, as Blass
points out, in A^/l. 702-4 2sfos reges cetevos Mevwyare nolo, Jioviinuni mcndicalnila.
Ego sum ille rex Philippiis. L. 58 e<ûs- -Ko^jrip (?) suggests AjiL 781 filiavi ex te
tu habes. Further, the fragments published in our Greek Papyri II. 8 {b), of
which we append a revised text, undoubtedly belong to the same MS., and there
too, in spite of much obscurity, are phrases which harmonize with the plot of the
Auhdaria. The anxiety of Lyconides to marry Euclio's daughter is aptly expressed
in 1. 77 et hvvarov co-rt tvjj Koprjs avrwt Tv\i.iv, and reK^Lv two lines above is quite
in keeping with the situation in the Plautine play (cf. A/d. 691 sqq., &c.). Lines
79-80 evpov oiKtav abwaror i]v (to enter?) may well refer to the house of the miser
Euclio, which he kept carefully shut up ; cf. Aid. 98-9 Profeeto in acdis meas
me absente neminevi Volo introviitti, and 274 aedis occlude. The mention of
a nomarch (1. 81), who was an Egyptian but not an Athenian official, suggests
that the scene was laid at Alexandria, where Philemon is thought to have spent
some time on the invitation of Ptolemy Soter ; cf. Alciphr. Epist. ii. 3-4. If so,
Plautus did not here follow his original, for the scene of the Auhdaria is certainly
Athens ; cf. 1. 810.
The text is written in a good-sized cursive hand which is not easy to read
where the letters are incomplete ; it may date from the reign of either Phil-
adelphus or Euergetes. Alternations of the dialogue are marked by paragraph!,
and where a line is divided between two speakers the point of division is marked
26 HIBEH PAPYRI
by a short blank space. On the verso of Fr. {a) arc three lines in a different
hand giving explanation of words :
OCOS A/>7?05 [.]..[...]. O- .. [
Xajxirpos ra 7roXf/f|^t]/<[a Tie
C^veL ftaivei.
distance to the right of this are the beginnings of lines of another

At some
column in the same hand, and perhaps of the same character.
Fr. {a). Col. i.

Col. ii.
jreo- e5 . ro[/xi]^f aXi Tp^\av OXvfnrca

]Sa)aa> au <5m0i;y[r;]9 VTV^r]9 avOpconos (l
I
. yixiv . . . . ei 15 ft) HpaKX^lS Tl TTOT [a]TL TO yy (.VqfliVOV
. Ti ra\a VVV 018 aKpi^COS SlOTL TT]9 OLKOVjXfÛr]^

J
upa aa(pcos uvttj (ttlv tj \oipa fiour]
jXe/'ai TLva KavOaSe KaT[o]iKr](ra(n Trairey ot 6(01
Kai VVV T L(rL Kai y^yovaaiv ivOade

]
] rrjv oSov CO ^TpoîXe AnoXXov Kat OeoL rov TrvevfiaTos
]fxai yaipav (Soaf rrai Sv(TTV)(ê9 ^TOîXe ri^ KeK[Xr]]K /^[e
O fXOl TTOLL
KpaTL(TT TCOV ^[cCoV
]
tryco CrU S 1 TL CO
0)9 (19 KaX[ov] a (opa[K]a tl9 [.]
]lT0\.]v . . 9
(TdXTc
ov8[
hi
Col. iii.
Kpoia[m XaXco aoi Kai MiSai Kai TavTaXoi
30 avT[
tot[
Tr(paLv[(
Fr. (d). Col. 1. Col. ii.
[. .] . fia>iô[

[']f^^X^[
40 CO (f)iXTa[T
TTOf^y SlK . . [
ov$eu toiov\t
. . vy Se T19 /x[
[K]ayT09 . . /3e .
45 [. .]8 ([a-yiu . e .
Fr. (.). Col. i. Col. ii.
] . . TTiaa 55 eyo) yaf) [
e](rTi fxoL ano[
]09 KayOO Tl (TOL crvv .

[
] . (ova TT/ooy [6]eoi>v (f)V9 7ra[
50 ]/^/fft' auOpcoTTcou aira

[.'. .
] ' f[']o- . . .
f'^ .
] Tf>0(pi/xa)y [. . .
. a.i' .joou
Fr. {d). Fr. (e). Fr. (/).
60 ]t(o[ 66 ](ova .
[
]aiva\[ ]ce.Ta)[
]\i<rT[ ]l Tl? rjficoi> 8[ ]y 7ray[. .]S[
]aa-aaa[ ]ov r]fia9 nXa . 7ri]Te6vfxr]Kv ea)[
65 y]viivov
28 HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. (^^) = P. Grcnf. II. 8 {b).
Col. i. Col. ii.
75 [^XaTT]'} fi . .
[.] iravTa //ere TiKny
(TKOTTeiv TTpoauyai iracn ne . Xrj e . , 85 avT[
1 SvPCCTOU (TTL T1]? K0pJ]9 aUTMl TV)(^ll' npocTT [
OTi TTj^ avoia^ fiea-TO^ i]u ttj r
TroLT](ra a fioi irpoaeTaTTd' vpoi> OLKiav
8o aBvvarov i]v [
avTTjv po/xapxl
iv ^r]XoTV7ri[at
TR [
Fr. (//) = ?. Grcnf. II. .S (/;).
]v6v9 (TvX\al3r]S pLa? Ti nvp

1 . Ol'OpaTl TOVTO TTvp aK1]K0a
90 JTre I'lKais ayaOos î[s\ r7]u EXXaSa

JvXoyr](raL ira . . avaeSer . .
[
] . 9 piKpovs <po . .
p e(poSi[
VaAXe5 . aov . Troreiî
13-23. Slrobilus. Imagine that you are running ... at Olympia

' If you make your !
escape you are a lucky fellow Lycollides. O Heracles, what ever can have happened !
.'
Stroh. Now I know certainly that of all the world this spot alone is clearly sacred, and
here all the gods have made their home and still are, and here have they been born. Lye.
Strobilus Stroh. Apollo and the gotls, what breath
!
Lye. You miserable slave, Strobilus ! !
Strob. Who called me? Lye. I. Stroh. And who are you, most mighty of the Gods?
Lye. How fortunately I have seen you.'
13-4. u\l . . . suggests X(6)7rrot', which is palaeographically possible, but would occupy
all the space before rpix'î.vxndi so leave a syllable missing. Perhaps <Sj) has dropped
out ; but with the reading so uncertain this can hardly be considered a satisfactory
hypothesis. Strobilus is apostrophizing himself
18. KaroiKqaaai without rots is unsatisfactory. 1. KaTO)l.Kr]Kiiai.
20. TivfvfxdTOi may Lyconides shout, or, as Dr. Mahafty

refer either to the loudness of '
suggests, to the supposed effluence of an api^roaching god; cf e.g. Eur, Hippol. 1392 w
^f (01/ oS/^f/y nvfifia,
2 1.1. SrpoîXf.
2 2. Tco./ e'ecov : Strobilus keeps up the idea of 11. 16 sqq., and affects to think that his
master is a divine apparition.
23. The restoration is due to Prof. Leo,

who does not accept the attribution of these
fragments to Philemon or their supposed connexion with the Aidularia.
50. The second a of aira is below the e of e^w in 1, 58, and it is doubtful to which
column the letter belongs. There would be room for a very small o between the tt and a,
so that the line might be made to end with ano. But since the tt is of the usual size, it is
more probable that the a belongs to an (e.g. airav or ana^), and that the corresponding line
in the next column was begun further to the right.
59. The doubtful a at the end of 1. 55 may belong to this line cf. the previous note. ;
65. This was the last line of a column.

68-9. There are about i^ cm. of papyrus to the left of "i Tts and ]ov, but the surface,
though stained, appears to have been never written upon. Probably, therefore, it was
covered by another sheet which was joined on at this point.
75 sqq. The identity of the speakers here is not very clear. Strobilus is probably one
of them, and npoa-eTaTTtv in 1. 79 indicates that the speaker there at least is a slave; but
11. 75-8 would also be appropriate to Strobilus. With aKondv cf. Aul. 605 Is speculatum hue
misii me. The first two letters of 1. 75 are very doubtful; KaK or TaisTr)^ is not impossible.
In 1. 76 the word after 77ao-i(?) may perhaps be TrenXTjpcoTai.
78. The V appears to be the end of the line, but this is hardly certain.
79. of ^01 has been rewritten.
88-9. There are short spaces between fxias, n, and nvp in 1. 88 and ovopan, tqvtq, nvp,
and aKTjKoa in 1. 89, like those which in 11. 20-3 indicate a change of speaker.
90. There is a hole in the papyrus as well as a space between h and Tr]i>, so as] may
well be read ; but cf. the previous note.
93. The first a has been corrected from e or vice versa. The reading EXXaS'. given in "
P. Grenf. is unsatisfactorv, the letter before 8 being more like f than a.
6. Comedy.
Mummy A. 10. Height 12-7 cw. Circa b.c. 300-280. Plate IV (Fr. (/, Cols, i-iii).
The style of these mutilated remains of a comedy suggests Menander or

some contemporary dramatist, but in spite of their considerable extent both
author and play remain unidentified. Apparently no coincidence with extant
fragments occurs, and other clues are not forthcoming. The proper names
Nou/^7/Vf09 (1. 7) and '2(aaTpaTos (?,1. 122) give no assistance ;
A>;/xe'af (1. 40) was one
of the characters of Menander's Ah eâTrarwj; (Kock, Fr. i 23), but that play is
supposed to have been the original of Plautus' Bacc/iides (Ritschl, Parerg. 405)5
with which, so far as can be seen, these fragments have nothing in common.
A more positive idea of the plot is however difificult to obtain. Apart from the
characters mentioned above there are a master and a slave (11. 5-8). the former
of whom seems to take part in the dialogue throughout Fr. {a), Cols, ii-iii he ;
had a wdfe (1. 32), and was about to dispatch some friends on a journey, for
30 HIBEH PAPYRI
which preparations were to be made (11. ^^ sqq.). A child and an old woman,
perhaps a nurse, figure rather prominently (11. 20, 43, 46, 52, 59).
The principal fragment, {a), contains parts of four consecutive columns, but
the first of these contains mere vestiges and of the last only the beginnings
of the lines are preserved. There is no indication of the relation of this piece
to Fr. {b), comprising two very imperfect columns ;

and a large number of
smaller pieces have repeated attempts at combination. The text is
resisted
written in short columns in a medium-sized, rather heavy uncial hand of a most
archaic type. The regular capital shape of 12 and the square E are especially
noticeable; and though these forms are here accompanied by a round sigma
this papyrus must claim to be ranked among the earliest specimens of the Greek
Hterary script ; cf. introd. to 4. Alternations of the dialogue are marked by
paragraphi, and double dots are also inserted when a line is divided between
two speakers. One or two corrections have been made by the original
scribe.
Fr. {a).
Col. i. Col. ii.
TL yap ttXôv to[8 i]yÔ(prjKiv ?; Ovpa
5 iêpyj^Tai TLS TT]u [cr]nvpL8a TavTrjV eu [rjc]
evTavOa tovs aprovs eKOfiiaa? anocpepe

[anoS]o9 re tcol )(pr]aavTi tool Nov/iTjPLCo[i]
.1 5e Ta . . (oi Sevp aiaaTp^y^ras naXiu
.] TL Xeyere \ tl 8 av ^yoip.(^v aWo 7rXr]u
. .]e7r . . ['^ficv anoTpe^êii' TavTa9 p 5ei
.]aTa .
[ JH-^t^ h^^ ovOey KcoXveL
ov To[i] 8 er o[L]8a Troops'] Svi'VjaeT airuvaL
7ra>f [] a[7r]r]X6U : ?;[....> 7rL(T\T
(0 Tav [. .].[...]. vu) Xa . eiu [Ta]vTy]v eyco
15 7rpcoT[ou ] K TToXefiioop (f)ivy^Te
]R
TO 8rf ]a : TavTa irpajQ aj . 8e[.] .
ovK e[cr7i ^X&)9 : aTa ttw'S civ[.'\ . . . [.]at
.3
jat TVô[v ly 8 ovTL Xr]ylrofJi av . [. .]fiL
[ 15 letters ]o 8[evp avTrjv a[. . .]
20 [ 14 ,. J

[] yP.^^^ ' "^1^ T1]fJ.p0U
[ 14 , ] fyê . [. .]ki[.] rjficpau

' '
[ II,! 1
.'7 . y 770' ojyyuej/ af

?[ 12 ] . _z/ . . a TT]? 77] fiepou
Col. ill.
etj avpiou S t]St] noXepto? yivopaL

I'Tj
25 [yYvoLTO S ciprj TTor CO Zev S^crnoTa

[8i]a Xvais [[][ TTpayfxaTcou
.]f
_V_yap : vofiiêLS [. . . .]XLa[. . . .]yXai

TTpâ-(3is [. . .]a-a[. .]Xov[ 7rfi7ro/Xv
]
Ta rpi/ie .[.].... tjae . . .

\ ]
30 TO xpuaiov 8e [X]afx(3av : ov r .
[ ]
^êfwt ye : apiOrjaov v Toa-ovfm 8 eio-lico//
7r/3oy TTjy yvvaiKa ôvXofi enrai [f-qv fir]u
LS T-qv 080U y er avra ravayKai oircos
Vfii/i Trap[ovT]<j)V ev8o6iv avyaK[^âar]i
35 ^X^ p-^v airavTa \ AttoXXov coy aypoiKos ei
av(TKva[(T]aTco nepaiue navopat Xeycou

VTj Tr]v A6r]v[rf\y Kai Oiovs aymvLoo
ovK oi[8 oJTra)? [vv]y avTos CTTi Tm irpaypaTi
'E,XXr]\y . .]ê . [. .] (f)aLViTaL T19 rov9 Tponovs
40 Ar]pea[s a]v[6p(o]'Tro9 aXXa ttji rv^Vt'
ovO ^v 8ia[(pptp] (paiueld] op. 7r[o]et /ca^coy
yvvai Ti l3ovX[L . . .]e/z/3[ ]rjTa ye

yyp 7rpa)To[v ]oik[ 7r]aiSiou
KXaH9 TTp[. ]X[.]ya{.]T[ 7r]poi(rai
45 eô) 0e/3er[e] avro 8v[po pot ttl] ray dvpa^

Toy T]pTe[pop] pep ttcc . ]ov ypavs eêi
[
Col. iv.
K(ik [ (Treira Tijp pev [
/^V T(^ ' Tj ypavs 8 eKopi[(e

[
180V <rKo[.] .
[ 60 KUL Tvpos creavT[
5 )<.Pll <rT^^ V[ eyo) (ppaaco aoi .
[
32
HIBEH PAPYRI
(T[(t)]Tr]piau [
T19 ^J;^j/^ [. . .]4
.[.]. I fir] Tt .
[
TO 7rai8[Lov S]r] :
[
COflOL 0[.]i. ^
65 v[
OVK OlS . [. .
.]f>[
T\
55 ^t XPV ^^^'.^ "

avT09 S yn ov6e[vos
r[
\a^r]LS 7rpoX6a)[i^
Col. ii.
Fr. {b). Col. i.
rjiJLa{v . .] . . i.jof
]/x/5oAas
0) Hf}[aKX^ fo -Z eu
f9
TOT[e a]fx(f)Lfi[
85 eXeyoi/i' iraXa l
KUL Tjyy '^51t/<:7;9 r .

[
]!'
ai^Toy ya/3 T^/z/i' . ei-- .
[
]
75 >^^:^
roi;r (.(t[tl . . . .^ft)i TTa\[
yo ... eo-/z[. . . .]i.\(ovra\

]
TOVT cr[Tt . ]l^ îttov [
]t Ti (TV
BaKVOvf. . .] . . KCL .[
]Ke fie[.]
Kai Tcc .[ ]iXovTa[

80 1
OVT09 (ra . cocre .

[
arparoneS . V[
95 e-TTL
o-vvapirlaWo/il^ . ]
9
[
Tt Xy[oi']rey ou". . . ,7r[
TO Tr[pay]fJia t[
100 ouk[. .] . 9
[
co^H[paK]\i^ .
[
TT/ . aTa[
Fr. (V).
Vr. (c).
106 ].0..
1(i)TeX[
105 ] . ] <7vyK\ri[
... ].yi[
]0LCr[ X^(0(TTpa7C0[L
[ ]
]8 V y^K^/
]
] OLKLU? [
[
115 ] . .
[
. 125 ]to ye 7r[
]XX[ ]rr]9 \[
]o[.] .
[ .
]rva8e[
CO
1
[ ]h'
130 ] . . v[
Fr.{g). . . .
Fr.i/i).
a\jiaprt(ic)\v
]y aiJ.apT[i 140
] (TTL ii-qy[avr} a]iJ.apTT]a-co[
]6ooiy oX[/3lm ] : 0ff[p]?[
'35 ]Xr]yfjLeuo9 7raX[ W^yV TV

[
] . ov reKi'ou Va nau ro npayfxa [
] . av[i(popav 145 ""57 yap rj\6e T-qv rai'[r
1 . f ] . . IV a7roTV)(\
Fr. (/).
]...[
Fr. {k). ....
1 .
] .'^f9[- L
If'^/S' TTJ? (7
]<?.T' [
150 1 . ecr . . Trpayfj.a 7roL7](r[ û pLy\rov avTUi? [
] Si ôvXofiaL Ka.[ ]
//?/ rapa^rjL? 0L[KLay
160 ]ou^ ]
?[
D
34 HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. (/). . . . ]^'f<?'L
] T?;? Trapofl ] . 9 ya) [
]yi<a yap T[ ]ep.(pa[
]v8r]\ 1 no\\oi[
55 ]yv[
Fr. (w). . . . Fr. (;/). Fr. {o). -

165 ]e . [
\Tr]' 171 If . T .
[
]r]av .
[ o-oyTr[ "_e[. .] .
[
]aa(TV(x[ ' 170 ]KV(ro .

[ ] .
[
Fr. (/). ... Fr. (q).
'
]
[ ]n
175 ]aX[ ]rr}y .
[
]ot/il ]avTT]U [
] . CO
[
185 a
Fr. (r). . . ^ Fr.(s). . Fr. 17).
186 1 . i/oL ]7ro[
1 . .r| ...
1-3. these Hnes and the beginnings of II. 2-23 are contained on a separate
The ends of i
fragment, which only conjecturally placed in this position.

is
4. Cf. the line quoted by Suidas and Schol. ad Arisioph. Aûd. 132 lo
illustrate the
distinction between kuttthv, applied to a person entering a house, and \//o(/;6lf to a person
coming out (Menander, Fr. 86 1, Kock) dXX' (yj/ocfxjKef t) Ovpa- tU ovîuv (so Cobet ; (^6'pti kqI
Tis Ti]v 6vpav ($iwv, Suid. ; \//rk/)r;Kf Tr)v Ovpav ($iu,v, Schol.). The papvrus supports Cobet's
emendation of the verse as against Kuster's aXX' f\//-o0j;(ce ti)p 6vpai> ns f$i(i)v. Cf. also Plautus,
Batch. 234 Sid /oris comrepuit nostra: quimwi exit foras, which exactly corresponds to
Cobet's version and would almost justif\- its attribution to the A)? f'ârrdTwi', the supposed
original of the Bacchides.
The o which is written rather large and some little way above this line is possibly a numeral
referring to the number of the column. The margin above the other columns is imperfectly
preserved.
8. TO . . cot : perhaps another proper name, e. g. Tavpwi but the letters between a and
;
CD are so blurred and rubbed that they can no longer be identified.

9. [. . . .] Ti Xeyfre is apparently addressed to the new^ arrivals referred to in 11. 4-5 ;
? e/iot ' Ti,

I
12-23. Cf. note on 11. 1-3.

12. o\i\ha 7ra)[rl: the Supposed n may be fx, but there is not room for ov Sa/iwr.
14. Either \ad(i.v or XajSeii/ might be read.
15. Blass suggests fiev axnrep for the lacuna.
16. If TTparO is riglit a is very likely the relative a. y might be read in place of r, but
the 6 seems certain. The letter following a must apparently be t, v, or ^, and the doubtful
S is possibly X.
17. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish a from S in this IMS., but even if 8v were
read after ttcoj the other vestiges do not suit Svi^jo-oâj.
27. The lower of the two dots after yap though very indistinct is fairly secure. There
is no example papyrus of the use of a single point.
in the
31. 1. apidfiTjaov. Possibly the missing p. was inserted above the line (cf. 1. 25); the
papyrus is much rubbed at this point, and if a correction had been made it would hardly
be visible.
33* y{^)'- or perhaps T{e), the sentence being interrupted by 1. 35.
34. napôi^]cov, from her stores cf. the Homeric phrase xaptfoM''"? Traptovrcop.
'
'
;
39. pa might be read in place of ,Sf, but û seems impossible, otherwise ê âi'ai\ as
Blass suggests, would be attractive. For E\\r]'i> cf. P. O.xy. 21X. 33 (INIenander, UfpLKupapfvrj)
TfKprjpiov TovT ('ariv ''EXXr;i'o? Tponov.
44-6. A small fragment, which we have after some hesitation assigned to the bottom
of this column, is not shown in the facsimile. Both the contents of the fragment and the
appearance of the papyrus suit this position, though the broken edges do not join
particularly well.
51. There may be nothing between rt and X, but there is a space sufficient for
a narrow letter, and also a faint trace of ink which is consistent with s.
89-90. A paragraphus may be lost between these two lines.
7. Anthology.
Mummy A. Fr. {l>) 15-6 x ig-2 cm. Circa b.c. 250-210. Plate VII (Frs. d and /).
The verso of the papyrus containing the speech of Lysias against Theozotides
(14) was used for writing a series of extracts from different authors, such as are
not uncommonly found in papyri of the Ptolemaic period, e.g. ?. Petrie I.
3 (i),
P.Tebt. I and 2. Among them are (11. 10-22) a passage of thirteen iambic lines from
the Electra of Euripides, and (11. 91-4) an extract of four iambic lines, including
the well-known verse, Evil communications corrupt good manners,' quoted by
'
St. Paul. These are also probably Euripidean ; but the other pieces cited are
D 2
36 HIBEH PAPYRI
not iambics, and seem to be chiefly of a lyrical character, if we may Judge by the
occurrence of such collocations as (ipojj.tooL koixttois (1. 8), ox^roiv ovraêi (1. 47).
They are however very badly preserved and in places seem to be corrupt, so
that they remain quite unintelligible.
Twohands are found, the first being more cursive than the second, and
approximating more towards the late third and early second century B. C.
scripts than is the case with any of the other literary fragments in this volume.
The anthology is therefore not likely to have been written as early as the reign
of Philadelphus but, especially since the Lysias text has no appearance of
;
being later than the other classical fragments from Mummy A (cf p. 22), which
belong to the middle or early part of the third century B. c., there is no reason
for assigning 7 to a later date than Philopator's reign and in view of the fact ;
that the 25th year of Euergetes (90) is Hibeh

the latest certain date in the
papyri, it is more probable that these extracts were written before that year
than after it.
The text of the Elccira passage presents some variations from the later
MSS.. of which there are but two for this play. In the most important place
(1. 14 = El. 371), where the MSS. are probably corrupt, the surface of the papyrus
is unfortunately much damaged and the reading uncertain.
Fr. (/;).
Col. i. Col. ii. Plate VIL
[30 letters ]
[17 ]
0[ 10 letters J^f
5 [10 fi.]ridei9 IJ.01 <p6ovQV a . . . eA . . [. .
[li fi^ncpofxai OL a-Lyyji .

)5 ] "^^P. ^f^^^ . . [.
[11 ,, ]i^ (ppei' iirav kul ayav raiuea . K^
[11 ]8eL ^pOjXLCOL KOIXTTOiS St ^tti
[10 ]$ EvpLVlSoV
10 [ovK ear aKpi^^s d^vOî' eiy f^vavSpiav El. 367
[eyovGL yap Tapâyfiov ai (pvaeii fiporoov
\rj8rj yap (:l8ov ai'Spa yî'vaiov irarpo^
\to] fijjSdv oj'Jra \pi)aTa r cat KaKcou r^Kva 370
SrjfJ-oy T e[u a]v8poi irXovaiov nuijfictTi

15 yvcofirjv T[e )UjeyaX7?[t' e]i^ nevrjTL aco/iaTi
TTcoy o[i'i'] rty avTa Siopiaas opdcos Kpivei
ttXovtcoi 7r[o]y7]p(oi rapa ^^prjcreTaL Kpirrji
r} T019 e)(0U(7[t] fxr)dei/ aXX )(l voaov 375

TTivia Si8a[a-]KL 8 [a]vSpa rrji ^petat KaKolu
20 aXX [ei? OTTJXa fX^co [ri?] S^ Trpoy Xoy)(r]i' [^Xencou
fx[apTv]f [yevo]ir av [o(xti^ e<T\Tiv ayaOos

]..a. K[p]aTl(7T[0l' IK]t][i TaVT Cttr] a(f)L[fXl']a
8. I of Set corr. 14. 1/ of i/r^/uart corr. from o. 18. First e of xf' corr, from a.
Fr. {c).
Col. i. Col. ii.
37 .[
]aiy 40 9 . . . . [. .]y[.]re[
âi/..[. .]'.
^7;[.].[
25 ] . XeiyffOi 07rj;(rr[.]a/Da5 . . 7ri[
npos av6p<x)TToc)V -rrpiv r [

]?/![
] . [.jycro/xai Kaipov LoycofxrjTa .[...].[ ] r . .

[
45 yXcocra-a ap . a av6p<oiT(cv [ ] . . ji . . . .
] . acra /jiop(f)ais ovK enaueifii irvOeaOaL ^[. . .

.jy . rjfi . TTefio[
30 ]5aj/ Of^ 0-t 0)(êT<op ovTaêi ?"''[] t .... a TOV[
ji* <pv<Tiy ^77 Xoyoty iva rj . . v . . . a[, . . .] îri rots ery[/zo]f? .
]/XODt TTOTepOV : <rai // . . fia^ Ka . [.]/c[. . .] . [.]y v^r]\oL Sofj.01 itov
] . . [.]a . . ot 50 TTapa [][] f

[ ] y^^vfuv avi[i(i>v . .
.[
3 lines lost. ['] r] .

[
]a[ ] . . . lat S opvidcs ay .
[][ ] [ Y^^^ Vl^^? i
[ 18 letters ct]KoiTis Oavovri . voLa[
Fr. (.). Fr. (k).
]i<ro7rr[
55 ](Teyay .
[ 56 ] . . a-ay[
] . . . iaiT[
38
8-12. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 39
13 = 370. r so MSS.
: S" Stob. Flor. 87. 10 and Orion, Anth. 8. 7, M., W.
14 = 371. The MSS. have Xt/jo/zr' eVafSpoy TrXovcr/ot; (^pofij/Lian. For Xt/iw, Xot/xdv^Scaliger),
pvTTov (Nauck), \ripov (Rauchenstein), Sfipo'i/ (Keene), and irivov (W.) have been suggested.
The papyrus certainly did not have Xipov, for the first letter must be S or f, and the second,
if not Tj, must be read to- or va, while the third is certainly p or v, and the vestiges of the last
two letters suit ov. Srjpov, if really the reading, must be wrong, and is much nearer to Keene's
deipSv than to any other of the conjectures, dfifxov, however, is not at all satisfactory. The
last word of the line seems to have been originally irorjfxaTi (possibly noir^yniTi), which has
been altered to (fypovrjuari by inserting <^po over the line and apparently correcting o to v, but
whether the n was erased is uncertain.
16-22 =
373-9. These lines are bracketed by W. following Wilamowitz, who con-
siders that they were introduced from another play.
16 =373. 8iopi(ras 8uiXaj3Mv MSS.
: 8iopiaas, being the commoner word in this sense,
is more likely to be a gloss on SmXaôop than vice versa.
17 =374. Tapa: y' apa MSS., y apa W.

19. 8: SO L(W.,M.), y P.
20 = 377. eXOco 'tis] SO INISS., jM. eXOwv Tis W. following Heath. There is just room
: :
for V in the lacuna, but it is more likely that the papyrus read fX6(o.
22 =379. This line is quoted as from the Auore by Diog. Laert. ii. 33.
32-3. For the two dots placed at the ends of these lines in order to divide them from
the writing of the next column cf 9. i and 27. 34.
65. e is very likely the beginning of the nam's of the author of the following extract ;
cf. 1. 9. Similar headings probably occurred in 11. 75 and 80.
91-4. The well-known line which apparently occurred in 1. 94 is quoted by St. Paul
(i Cor. XV. 33) and many other Christian writers. Socrates {H/sL Feci. 3. 16) assigns the
authorship to Euripides, Photius 151) and Jerome (vol. iii. p. 148,
{Quaest. Amphil.
ed. Basil.) to Menander; cf Nauck's Eurip. The remains of 11. 91-3 certainly
Fr. 1013.
suggest tragedy rather than comedy, and since another extract from Euripides occurs in
this anthology, it is probable that he was the author of 11. 91-4. But ^Qilpovaiv ^6rj k.tX
may, of course, have been found in Menander as well.
95. wot: cos y cannot be read. The Doric form ipiv and the apparent character of the
metre suggest that this may be an extract from Epicharmus.
8-12. Poetical Fragments.
Some small unidentified fragments of poetry may here be conveniently

grouped together ; is from a comedy.
two are Epic, two Tragic, and the last
8 (Mummy A) contains the beginnings and ends of lines from the upper
parts of two columns of hexameters, written in a sloping cursive hand having

a general similarity to that of the epic fragment P. Grenf. II. 5, especially in
Col. ii, where the lines are much closer together than in Col. i. But there are
some points of contrast the letters in P. Grenf. II. 5 are less sloping, and some
:
of them are rather differently formed ; the papyrus is also of a lighter colour
than 8. We therefore hesitate to assign them to a single MS. ;
if they
belong to the same work they must at any rate come from different parts of it.
40 HIBEH PAPYRI
On the verso of 8 is some much effaced small cursive writing ;
the verso of
P. Grenf. II. 5 as now mounted is invisible. In Col. i a combat is described,
while Col. ii contains a dialogue ; 'Axatot and 'Apyetoi are mentioned (11. 9 and
24). The occurrence of the new compound a/x'/>0TeprjK7?s (= a/^(/;K7]5r) may be

noted in 1. 8.
9 (Mummy iH) consists of seven small fragments, also in the Epic style.
Phegeus, whose death at the hands of Diomedes is sqq., described in Iliad E 1 1
occurs here in connexion with Ajax in 1. 2. Phegeus was one of the sons of
Dares, the priest of Hephaestus (E 9-10), and the mention of this name suggests
the possibility of a relation between these fragments and the Iliad attributed in
antiquity to Dares, which according to Aelian was extant in his day ( Var. Hist.
xi. 2 ov ^pvyiav 'lAiaSa hi koI vvv (r<xiCo\xiin]v olha), and upon which the Latin
prose work bearing the name The careful rather
of Dares professes to be based.
small hand is of an extremely archaic character E and 2 are square, and
;
11 has the capital shape as in 6. The only example of H (1. 3) is imperfectly

preserved, but probably had only a dot between the two horizontal strokes, not
a vertical connecting line as in 4. We should assign the fragments to the reign
of Soter cf. 4, introd.
;
The dated documents found with 9 in Mummy 18 range
from about the 14th year of Philadelphus (llO recto) to the 28th (94). Two
corrections occur, one of which at least (1. 14) is due to a different scribe.
10 (Mummy A). Four fragments of Tragic iambics, apparently all from the
same text there is little doubt of this except in the case of r. (d), which
;
though very similar (cf. Plate V) is so small that it affords but slight material
for comparison. The hand, which is of a somewhat common early third century
B.C. type (cf. e.g. 12), is much like that of the longer pieces published in P. Grenf,
II. 6 rt (cf. the frontispiece of that volume ; Fr. c. 2 may belong to a). But the
evident resemblance hardly strong enough to justify us in referring those
is
fragments to the same MS. as 10. Moreover, as Blass has shown {Rhein. Alnscam,
Iv. pp. 96 sqq.), they are probably to be referred to the Niobe of Sophocles,
whereas the subject of 10 is apparently different there is a mention of Achilles ;
in 1. 5. The metre indicates that Fr. {a) comes from the right side of a column
while P"r. (/') occupied a more central position.
11 (Mummy on the other hand closer
A). The script of this fragment is
to that of P. Grenf. II. 6 r than to that of 10. The M and T have the deep
depression which is absent in 10, and the head of the is bent over towards the
cross stroke in the same way as in P. Grenf. II. 6 c. 11 is therefore, we think, to be
connected with that group of fragments, which, if Blass is right (cf. introd. to 10),
belong to Sophocles' Niobe; J. Sitzler [Ncuc Phil. Rundsch. 1897, p. 386) would
refer them to some play of Euripides. The contents of the fragment, so far as
8-12. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 41
they go, suit the attribution to the Niobe (I. 4 T\vnu(ra, 1. 7 at/xa[, 1. 9 ? (rT]i]dos
irapdei'l). The metre is perhaps partly or entirely lyrical ; and the fragment is
from the bottom of a column.

12 (Mummy A) comedy, written in medium-
consists of four small pieces of a
and 11. The character of
sized upright uncials similar in type to those of 10
the fragments is quite doubtful a slave is addressing his master at 1. 5, and
;
Antiphon is mentioned in 1. 6 but that is too common a name to be of much

;
assistance towards identification. A

point in the middle position is used, but
whether for purposes of punctuation or to mark a change of speaker is
not clear.
8.
42 HIBEH PAPYRI
9. Fr. (rt) 4-8 X 8-6 cm. Circa b.c. 300-280. Plate V (Fr. b).
Fr. {a). Col. i. Col. ii.
]//acoj/ : 2 ^Tjyevs Aiavros [. .]:Ta[
5 a . [. . .>ror[
Fr. (d). Fr. (^). Fr. {d).
] . a .[ 12 ]j/ .
[ 15 ]icr[
jcrar epivvs ]tv (pLXa[ ](JLa[
i'(p\r]y]f)[eT]a Zvs ^'^C ]r[
] . acr/ce
]S^K0[
10 1 . [. .1?
Fr. (r). Fr. (/). Fr. (g).
hvcrc 22 Jrî^ro l'*'/^'?
]f ]ACfOa)fO-[ 25 ]llfOL
20 J
. 7;ra
. . (01
]fj.
I. The two dots at the end of the Hnc arc to separate it from the first verse of the
next cokimn (1. 2), to which itnearly reaches ;
cf. 7. 32 and 27. 34.
7. Perhaps aprja-ar; cf. Homer, Od. (i 135 M'?'"'?/'
""Tvyepns api)(TiT tpivvs.
Frs. (^)-(^). These three fragments may succeed each other immediately, 'rjvro in
1. 22 seems to be the end of the verse. In 1. 23 the reading is apparently not o-jKiowvto.
10. Fr. (a) 15-5 X 4-2 cm. Circa b.c 280-240. Plate V (Frs. a and d).
] .
^Lfiov
[.]oi
Fr.
a>pLaa\s]
Si T0V9 avdaipT[ov9
{a).
TTqv[
30
.....
JffT.'
[
Fr. {b).
8-12. NEPF CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 43
]$e KLv8vvov^ a pa [
]y rjOXrjrai fiarrju [
po Leo's 0)9 ep\
JTTay Se t[. .] -4;(iXXeco y ] . aay ei Tra[. . .1
jraroou Xy)(^Tai [
]ai ra^ fy"?L^ ]
'''^^f
35 1 TOL^ aiTcoOev avTeLTr[

] e\lrev(TTa\i,
]a(ri 7rep[
lO ] KTjSeveis a[ ]avTa Tas Se 8aLpova)[v

]r/cr5e e7rt[
]LirLS (TVp(f)OpaLS 8[
]a avyyafio[ yaiv e(T7Lv
] . COL TTeirp'
] ov^ arrXoyl 40 ] . . )(i Trepyapcou Kajl

]uov9 VTre'p ]v KpV7rT09 a . T
. . .
[
15 jcw^rayecTi
]ve^XacrTu [
JToy oi/fTi(r[
jra/i(T^ V7r[
]i fiaX aifj.[
]s S a(pLSpv[
](tvTa 7rpovX\
T]a7riTVfi(3i[
JTTay SeKa ^'\
jcopa TovSe[
\Kiarau'\
25
] yap o[
] . roi/y r[
]t(oi/ ey .
[
1 . eiXiararcoi
Fr. (c).
45 ] V'lP^lî
Fr. (d).
]f XPV[
55 ]T(y[ ]re 07r[
5 ](rTLi/a[
44 HIBEH PAPYRI
]a\\[ 'Ml
60 ]aT[
34. The below the superscribed o was perhaps deleted cf. 1. 36.
letter ;
36. which is unmelrical, seems to have been the original reading, though the
(vaifiioii,
second i is further away from the jn than would be expected. oyLa'niios is found in Pindar,
Nem. 6. 29, but efalfiios is apparently new.
37. Cf. Eurip. Aeol. Fr. 17 ras 8e daifiovcov Tvx^m ooTiy (êpet kuWio-t' dvi]p ovTos ao(j)6s.
11. 6-2 X 2-8 cm. Circa b.c. 280-240.
a]\yo9 aSeK .
[
]t]T Ka\XL[
T]virt(ra (3a(T[
5 ]o)i' e[[_i/]]7rreA:[
ji/oy crv Tov[
]SaLS as ai/jLa[
]6oiJ.at aaT[
]r]6os TrapOevl
10 ] aiOepos .
[
]vaa .
[
2. If the lines are lyrical, oSf may be Sf or aSf.

5. The letter apparently deleted between and n may be v or /i.
8. The first letter is possibly p, but 6 is more probable.
12. Fr. (a) 4-1 X 5'9 cm, Circa B.C. 280-240.
Fr. (a).
. . . .] T[0]epa7r6U(r^[e
.jcjoa naura- TrapaS^Sooxl
. .]Ae fia-XV^ ^^ Trpop ce 56<r7r[oTa

[cTre/z'v/fei'] Ai'Ticpcofx fi 7rep(oTr]aouT[a ae
[
JAcei T?;y Kop-qs- aKi]Koa[
[ o]0fAco// fioi 80KU Kafx[
Fr.(^). . . .
46 HIBEH PAPYRI
of comparison is therefore available ; but the contents of this papyrus, if they
be not by Hippias, represent what he might well have written.
The substance of the two cohmins is an attack upon certain musical
theorists, who attributed to different harmonies and rhythms different moral
effects. This is the view maintained by Plato in the well-known passage of the
Republic 39(S-40o, where some kinds of music are characterized as having
a voluptuous or depressing tendency, and -are therefore to be excluded from the
ideal state. Hippias will have none of this theory, though it cannot be said
that the arguments with which he opposes it are very convincing. He also
ridicules the more extreme lengths to which it was carried by partisans who
professed to express in music the attributes of natural objects, and whose
perceptions would seem to have been even finer than any possessed by the writers
of some of our modern programmes. Perhaps the person principally aimed at
in this diatribe was Damon, the famous Athenian musician and contemporary
of Hippias. Damon seems
have given more attention to the theory than to
to
the practice of music and he was a believer in the effects

(cf. II. 7 sqq. below) ;
of music upon character (Athen. xiv. 62 C, Aristid. Quint, ii. 14), and probably
<S
the views of Plato on this subject were to a large extent influenced by his
teaching; cf. Rep. 400 B, and especially 424 C ovha}xov yap Kivovvrat fxovaLKys
TpoTTOL I'lViv ttoXltlkmv voixodv tcov }xtyi(TT(x>v, COS (l)t](Ti re Adijuov Koi eyw TidOofxai. There
isindeed some evidence for the existence of a work on music by Damon in the
form of a speech to the Areopagus {RJicin. Mns. xl. pp. 309 sqq.). The
llcrculaneum fragments of the treatise of Philodemus De Musica, as Dr. Mahafify
reminds us, take the same side in the controversy as Hippias.
The short, broad columns of the text are carefully written in good-sized
uncials of an ordinary type ; the lines show a noticeable irregularity of length.
Punctuation is effected by means of two (in 1. 9 three) dots, which are sometimes
combined with marks resembling a small coronis, e.g. in 1. 13. On the verso
is a good deal of badly damaged cursive writing, probably by more than one
hand and running in contrary directions.
Col. i.
[TToXXla/ci? 7n]X0e fxoi Oavfiaaat 00 ai'Sp9 [EWrji'e^
[ei a]\XoTpia9 Tir[ey] ray eniSeiêi^ tcop o[iK^Laii' re
[)(^]<w 7roou/xer[oi] XavOavovaiv vjxas Veyorre? yap

[o\rL apfiOVLKOL 1(71 Kai TTpoyêipiaafxevoL a)[/5a? riva^
5 ravTas crvyKpLvovcnv Tcofi fiev o)? eTV)(êi>
Kar-qyopovvTfi'i ray 5e ^lki-jl iyKOi[pLa^ ovt9

13. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
47
Kai Xeyovat fx^v (wy ov Set. avrovs ov[t >//-]aAray
ovT C01S0V9 6(opety nepi fiey yap T[avT]a
Tpot9
(jiaa-Lv 7rapax<op[]ii^ avTcoy Se l8lov [eL]vaL
] to 6e
10 wprjTLKov fxepo? (paiiôi^rai Si nepi fieu ravTa
(ou TpoL9 7rapax(opov(Tiy ov fi^TpKo? eanovSaKo
re? ei/ ojy (5e (f)a(TLv laxveiu ev rovroi? a-xleSta]
(ovTes ) : Xeyovat Se coy tcoi' /xeXcou T[a] fiev
yKpaTi9 ra Se ^povLjxov^ ra Se SiKawvs
15 ra Se auSpeiov? ra Se ShXov^ ttoul ) KaKm : (i8ot9 on

ovre XP^l^^ SeiXovs : ovt apfxovia av aySpnovs
TTOiyjaeiei^ tov9 avrrji xp<o/^î'ov? ]; rty yap ovk olS^v
Col. ii.
[Alt]<cXov^ Kat AoXonas : Kai navTas rovs @^[p

[fiOTrvX]rj(TL Siarovm pev ri]t povaiKrji xP^[H-^vov^ pa
20 [XXov] Se 70)1/ Tpaym8(i)v ovra^ av8pLo[v^ tcoi/ Si
[a 7ra]yT0S eicodoToop e0 apfiovias aiSeiv ) ; [ooo-tc
[ovTe] XP<y/â SeiXov? ovre appovia av[8paov^ ttol
[ei ety r'^fivro Se epxovraL roXp-q^ coa-re [oXou rov (3io]y Ka[Ta
[rpil3]eiy ev rais xopSat? faXXoi^re? peu [noXv
xhlp^^'
:
r(o]u
25 [i/raAJrcoi/ : aiSovres Se rcav ooiScov avpKpivovTe^ Se :
[tov T]yxovros prjTopof navTa TravTa>[v X^']poi' Troiovure^

[Kai 7r]epi p.ev rcov app.[o]vLKaiv KaXovp[evai]u ev o/y St]
(f>[a<TL]v SiaKeiaOai nm : ov6 rjvTLva (pcoylvi'] exovres Xeyew :
eu[eo]va-i(oyTe9 Se : Kai napa rov pvdp[ou Se] naiovTes

.30 TO vnoKeipevov aavLSiov avToi? [apa roiy] aTr\o] tov
f[aX]TT]piov \lro(poi9 : Kai ovSe aiaxvv[opevo]i eênT[eiu
^_T(^v] peX(cv Ta pep 8a(f>vris eêiv [iSiov] tl Ta Se klt[tov
(T[t Se ep(o]TcovTe9 ei ov (patveTai [ ] iSia e7riT7][.
^[ ]yio-6ai : Kai 01 craTvpoi irpo^ [avXo]v xop^vop[Te9
A fragment, possibly belonging to this papyrus : .

48 HIBEH PAPYRI
\(li>V
m
'
has often been an occasion of surprise to me, men of Hellas, that certain persons,
It
who make displays foreign to their own arts, should pass unobserved. They claim to be
musical, and select and compare different tunes, bestowing indiscriminate blame upon some
and praise upon others. They assert that they ought not to be regarded as harpers and
singers, for these subjects, they say, they concede to others, while their own special province
is They appear, however, to take no small interest in what they concede
the theoretical part.
to others, at random in what they say are their own strong subjects.
and to speak They
assert that some tunes make us temperate, others wise, others just, others brave, others
cowardly, being unaware that enharmonic melody would no more make its votaries brave
than chromatic will make them cowards. Who is there who does not know that the
Aetolians and Dolopes, and all ihe folk round Thermopylae use a diatonic system of music,
and yet are braver than the tragedians who are regularly accustomed to use the enharmonic
scale Therefore enharmonic melody makes men brave no more than chromatic makes them
.?
cowardly. To such lengths of confidence do they go that they waste all their life over strings,
harping far worse than the harpers, singing worse than the singers, making comparisons
worse than the common rhetorician,
doing everything worse than any one else. With
regard to the so-called harmonics, in which, so they say, they have a certain state of
mind, they can give this no articulate expression but go into ecstasies, and keeping time ;
to the rhythm strike the board beneath them in accompaniment to the sounds of the harp.
They are not even ashamed to declare that some tunes will have properties of laurel, and
others of ivy, and also to ask whether . .
.'
2. o[iKeia>v is may be f or o- or possibly r or v.

very doubtful ; the first letter
1 8. i8 was remarkably short; but the letter before

If Qe\piioTrvK]r](n is right, 1. in i
1. 19 is almost certainly o-, and the preceding vestiges suit >;. ol QfpnonxiKrâi would include
e. g. the Aenianes and Oetaeans, the eastern neighbours of the Dolopes and Aetolians.
The mention of the Aetolians here, as Blass remarks, is appropriate in the mouth of Hippias
of Klis, the Eleans and Aetolians being closely related.
1
9-20. The division n(i\\\ov is not usual, but \ôv seems insufficient for the lacuna at
the beginning of 1. 20, while paWov is loo long.
28. Of the supposed dots after Xeyeic only the upper one is preserved, and that not very
clearly.
29. TTd/xi might also mean 'in defiance of.'
30. TT of OTTO is v would in some respects be more suitable.

not quite satisfactory, and
31-4. There can be little doubt that the small detached fragment Ji eêtrr[ ac.t.A. con-
tains the concluding portions of these lines, but its exact position is uncertain and the restora-
tion proposed is highly conjectural, [ihiov] n in 1. 32 is suggested by i8ia in the next line ;
but the supi)Osed a before i8ui is quite doubtful, and may be e.g. X. t of n is represented I
only by the lip of the crossbar, which would also suit y or v, but these letters are far less
likely here. Compared with [o/xfi/oji in 1. 3 r the supplement tfimi/] ti is somewhat long, but
1
with three iotas may perhaps l)e admitted. [(U'Xoji/ in I. 34 corresponds well with [ofxtvo'i.
Of the letter before (urdm all that is left is part of a vertical stroke, which would be consistent
also with II.
14. Lysias, /;/ Thcozotidem.
Mummy A. Fr. (Jj)

15-6 x 19-2 cm. Circa b.c. 280-240. Plate II (Fr. c, Cols, ii-iii).
The recto of this papyrus, of which there are twenty fragments, contains
a speech of an Attic orator directed against a certain Theozotides. This, as was
observed by Blass, must be the oration of Lysias Kara eoConSou mentioned by
Pollux 8. 46; cf.Sauppe, Fr. Orat. Att. p. 189. The script is a good-sized
uncial, a thick pen being used and the lines written close together. On the
verso are a series of poetical extracts (7) in two hands, of which one is a some-
what later type of cursive than most of those found in this volume. But,
though the writing on the verso may perhaps belong to the reign of Philopator,
the oration does not present any appearance of being appreciably later than the
other literary fragments found with it, which probably belong for the most part
to the reign of Philadelphus, or at latest to the early part of the reign of
Euergetes. No stops are used; but the paragraphus is found, and a blank-
space is sometimes left at the beginning of a new sentence.
The three principal fragments, [a), [b], and (c), contain the lower portions of
columns and clearly do not admit of any combination. The order of the three
is uncertain, but Fr. {a) more probably precedes (or follows) the other two than
comes between them, because the writing on the verso is different from that on
the verso of Frs. (/;) and {c). Of the small pieces, Frs. {e\ (/i), (w), and (/>), on
account of the writing on the verso, may be connected with Frs. (d) and (c), while
Frs. (/), (g), and (n), of which the writing on the verso is in another hand,
cannot be combined with Frs. (d) and (c), but may be connected with Fr. (a). Frs.
(d), (/), (k), (/), (0), (q)-(x) have no writing on the verso, and to which part of
the roll they belong is quite obscure.
It is difficult to glean much information about the nature of the speech from
these scattered fragments, connected sense being onlj- obtainable in a few passages.
That the accusation against Theozotides was a ypa(f)i] Trapavoixcav is however clear.
From Frs. (a) and (d) it appears that he had proposed to exclude illegitimate
and adopted sons of citizens fallen in war from the benefits which the State
conferred upon orphans, while Frs. (V) and ((/) are concerned with a proposal,
which was apparently carried by Theozotides, to reduce the pay of the U-inh
from 1 drachma to 4 obols per diem, while raising that of the iTnroToôTai, an
inferior class of soldiers, from 2 obols a day to 8. The description of this measure,
which was obviously directed against the richer classes in the interests of the
poorer, supplies some interesting information on the pay of the Athenian cavalry ;
cf. note on 11. 72-81. How the two seemingly distinct questions of legitimate
E
50 HIBEH PAPYRI
ancestry and pay of cavalry soldiers were connected is not evident. The text
is not very accurate, several corrections being necessary; cf. notes on 11. 29, 41,
and 85.
Fr. {a). Col. 1. Col. ii.
1.5 letters .
[
J. .J.
.
[ ]
[ irot'[. . . '\voji\.
[ ] . . Tovy fiaXiara Se . . .
5 [
14 letters (vttjs /xlct pofio[
[....] T[o]y9 VoOoV9 T KUl T0V9 1 5 ôaKrj[
[7rotJ7]Toi;y ovre vofxifico^ ov rd.]oX[
[6 vyt(o9 fioi yap Sokl tccv op kcol to[
[(pavcou ...].... T(cv Tovs vodov9 pr]aev[ ov

10 [
"^
Vf^ ttoXlv rj 'TOVS K ecrT[
[noir]TOv? TOfy] yap yvqcnovi 20 7raT[
[ 15 letters KâraXî aiov t[
[ 13 Tov^s I'oOovs I' . T(o[
Fr. (d). Col. i. Col. ii.
[7raT]p<oicov [
[. . T|j/? iJiLa6o(J)o[pia9] .[...] .
25 [. .] . e[. .loy KareXineu avroi^ [
[. . .] TTUVTOiV SeiVOTUTOl' L
[to KaX]XiaTOj' rcoi' e/' 7019
[I'o/xo /? KT]pvyfia Oôô

[tiS]7]9 Sia(3aXXL kui i^/'ct'ôy
30 [Kayaa-TTjaei Aioi'VO'lol? yap

OTa^v KTjpv^ avayopeinjL tov9
[op^(f)ai'ov9 TvarpoOev vnenrcoi'

[otC TCOj'Se Tcou viaviaKcov 01
Trare/Je? aTreOavov ei' tcoi no

35 Xcficoi p-aôp-ivoL virep r?;?
14. NEJJ^ CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 51
naTpiBo^ av8p9 out9 ayaOoL

[km] TOVTOVS rj TToAi? Tp(p fl
[Xpi] rjjSr]^ VTav6a TroT(pa ^copi?

nepi Tcov TToirjToou Kai tcov vo 50 Toy A[
40 [6](X)V avcpeis Xeycov otl TovaSe 7r[.] .
[
Sea QeoôTiSrjv ovk erpecpov
7] rrauTas ccûayop]ucov opoioo^

. [ II letters rcou] noLr)T(iov 7(CV 61a
Kai Tcoy [vo'',dooy lyjreva-e 5,"
45 TUL TTcpi TT]^ rpo(f)r]^ yTToai[co7raii'

L
Tavra ov)(^ v^pi^ Kai [/ijeyaXr; Siaô ... CO. ..[....]... [
[X]tj [ 14 letters eVfi^r? ê KXe yap Ta (Xey\.] .[....].[

[op.VT]9 CO ai']8p9 SiKaarai [X'lalSouv [.] ....[.]. T .
[
TT]!/ aKpoTr\o\iv KareXaê 60 . [.1 . . aXXr]i S[
Fr. (c). Col. i. Col. ii. Plate II.
70 .
[
II letters ] . ovto? ei npca
.
[
II ] irepi (pvXaKTjs
[12 ] . ['](Tafj. nepi TTO
[A]e//[ou io^6\TiBr)s ovToa
61 I Tr][y yvco prjv ayopevci

Jl/TCO 75 Tovs pev imreas avTi Spa
] ano XPV^ T(T(Tapay oP]oXov9 picr
]v vaT 6o(pOpLl' Toys S L7T]7rOTOÔ
65 p ]tool k[.] ray oktco o[ôXovs] apTt Syoiy

\aL Kai [o':o]X[o IP Kai T[av]Tr]P Tr\y
] . . aiTo 80 yvoopriV e .
[ '\yaKyp[.
T]r]p pia viKrj(re[p p tcol S.rjpcoi S[i
6o(f)opiav ov Kai j/ yp'^coprjp
Col. iii. Plate II.
airacav tovs nnre[as rj vrrep vrrapxpvTccv aXXa 7rpo(f)[vXaT
TOV TTapOVTOS Kai TOV p[XXoi' Teip OTTO)? TrXeico tcou ov[tcop
E 3
52 IIIBEH PAPYRI
85 70<} avvTeweii' Trjfx fiia6[o(po 90 7] /i-qSep eXaTTco tcov v[Trap
piau eyo) Se to iropiêiv oy[K a ôvToov earai toiouto . [. . .
rroarepeii' coLfirju aval toou [

[tJovtov ov\ okv^lv y^py-j [. . . .
[. .]v aXXa ..[..]..[
Fr. (./). Fr. C^. Fr. (/).
Col. i. Col. ii.
]e7re/o-6j/ I'/zay 7r[ o(f)eiXo[ loi 1/^^^ ^'^ T[
95 ]'<'? iîivat fj.[

100 KaiTOL y[ jra t[
]?;? SiccfSeXLa^ [
... ](rdai H lines lost.
]a \-)(\prinaTa [
jcocreo- 121 i) .
[
] . [
105 ]
. cire OL V .
[
au]SpS t[
Fr. (o). ] .
X^ ....
.... ].[.].
125 [, .}fiy . .
[
1 10 .jX . [. .] .
77 . . cor . ai'atcr[
Xooi/ crvyKcc^
1 or 2 lines lost.
Fr. (//). Fr. (/). Fr. (/').
128 ]y<xav . .
[
142 %fir] 152 ]p[.]x .
\
ijTTTreu? [
]Ta to Seivov ]acraTO t[
130 o]p(pay . [. . . .~'a7][

]
.
Jlf^V^V ]
P^^T
i
noX . . .
p[ 14.-) ] . (SovXiv 155 jecoj' . lyay
]
. u (TVinil ] .
[.] (3ovXva>]i ] . lai r][
]iTot . . . aiTOjl "Ifucref

[ ]
] . ov TTjp jxiaO[o(popiai' jaXcycov ]

i8[
135 ]a(Tai' eyTeXr] [

ko ]
[
liy TO 7TepiT[ i;"o TT apai'opa 160 lo/z[
1 piaOocpopial ]..[..]. 01 ....

1 T. A . . r
14. NEIP" CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 53
(ou 7r[ Fr. (w). Fr. (;/). . . .
140 ay .
[.] . va7r[ [69 ][
poy[. .]. .[ 164 [ ],x[ 170 [ ]
165 Kai TOVS .

[
]aT[
Fr. (/).
r]y(ovi(TTa[i ] . eu7r[. . . .]vKe[
i6i I'TITCOL .
[
fieU 7] Sik[7] ]^rii' aval ttjs e .
[
TraTco[ [o]vSy air[ ]vyKaTaOi[
Fr. (.).
Col. i. Col. ii. Fr. (/). (Fr. (<?).
176 [
175 ].
Fr. (;-). Fr. [s).

54 HIBEH PAPYRI
7. 'noufTovi:
1. 39. This restoration is the basis of our calculation of the size
cf.
of the lacunae beginnings of lines in this column, and, if it is correct, the supplements
at the
/iicr[ô(ô/itas] in 11. 5-6 and Qv\re biKaia^î in 11. 7-8 are both too long. The addition of three
or four more letters to the initial lacunae throughout this column \\ould render the restoration
of 1. 7 \Q.vy difficult and make the lines longer than in the other columns.
26-47. '^lost monstrous of all is it that Tlieozotides should misrepresent the most
splendid proclamation that is enjoined by law and establish a falsehood. At the Dionysiac
festival when
the herald proclaims the orphans with their fathers' names, and adds that the
fathers of these youths died in war fighting for their country as brave men, and these
youths were brought up by the State until manhood, is he then to make a separate
announcement concerning the adopted and illegitimate sons, saying that owing to
Theozotides these were not brought up, or is he to proclaim them all alike and speak . . .
folsely by passing over in silence their bringing up Would not this be an insult and the .?
height of misrepresentation ?
Cf. Aesch. In C/CS. 154 rai^rr/ Trore ti] v/xe'pu /xfXXoi'rcoi' uxTTTtp vvv\ tuiv rpnycoîuiv yiyp(a0(U
. , , 7TpuiK6u)v 6 KTJpv^ Koi 7T(ipH(TTi]adnfi>os Toiis vp(f)avovs (ov 01 nnrepis rjaav iv ru> naiXepco TT(y^(VTr]-
KUTfs vfaVKTKOvs tvcivottXio. KfKO(Tfitjp.(vuvs fKrjpvTTe Tu KoXXiaTOv Ktjpvypa Kal wpoTpfTTTiKijOTaTOv npos
apfTTjV oTt Tovade tovs peaviaKovi <ov 01 narfpfs (T(\(vTr](Tav iv tw noXtpa (w8p(s (iya6o\ yfvoptpoi pfXP'-
p.iv r]^T]i 6 Bijpos fTpf<Pfj vvvl Be KadonXiu-as r/yfif rf] navoTrXta d(j)ir](np ayaOrj Ti'xi] Tpenfadai en\ ra
tdVTap, Koi KaXel ets npotbpiap. Other references to this ceremony are Isocr. viii. 82, Aristotle,
Po/. ii. 1268 B 8.
p.
25-6. Perhaps [(\ti 8f] navTodP.
29. Stu/3aXXf t : 1. 5ta/3nXei.
40. 1. avepu. Cf. Aesch. In C/es. 155 rl ttot' dpepe'i.
4 1 (TptÔV
. 1. fTp((f)(P, : SC. t] TToXty.
46. Blass suggests Kara Tr]s rroXecos for thc laCUUa, and in 1.
49 [t>)p vperepap aKpon]o\iv.
47-9- The reference seems to be, as Blass remarks, to the expulsion of Isagoras in
B.C. 508.
72-81. with regard to war Theozotides here advocates the motion that the
'
. . .
knights should be paid four obols instead of a drachma, but the mounted archers eight obols
instead of two, and this motion ... he carried in the assembly of the people . .
.'
The iTTTreh, who in the Peloponnesian war numbered 1000, received from the State (i)
on enrolment a Karao-raa-is, i. e. a sum of money for equipment, which, as some think, had
to be restored when their liability for service ended, and (2) a yearly purSos for the
maintenance of their horses (Schol. ad Dcm. /;/ Timocr. p. 732. 6); but they probably
received no personal pay, at any rate in times of peace (Ar. Eq, 577 irpolKa yewaiW dpvviip\,
cf. Bocckh, Slaatshanshaltung (3rd ed.), i. p.
317, and Gilbert, Staatsalt. p. 362, note 2. i.
The sum of about 40 talents, which according to Xen. Hipp. i. 19 thc State paid annually
tif TO minKov, is identified by Boeckh and Gilbert with thc allowance for the horses. It is
tempting at first sight to connect this payment of 40 talents, which makes 4 obols a day for
each tirntvs, with the 4 obols a day which Theozotides' scheme substituted for the previous
drachma but Xenophon was speaking of times of peace, while it is fairly certain that the
;
payments in the Lysias passage refer to time of war. For the payments to the knights
during war the only piece of evidence is Dem. i P/ii7. 28, from which it appears that they
received 30 drachmae a month, i.e. i drachma a day, so that in the interval between the
speech against Tlieozotides and thc first Philijipic the rate which prevailed before Theozotides'
law seems to have been restored. The scale of payments to the linTOToôTai. ^vas previously
unknown if our reading of 11. 78-9 is correct (neither bibpax^^-ov nor bvoiv Bpaxnaiv can be
;
read), Theozotides raised their daily pay from 2 obols to 8. They were a body of 200 men,
of inferior rank to the imrds and probably drawn, like the Toûrai, from the lower classes of
citizens, since it may be inferred from Lysias xv. 6 that service as a mnoToôTT^s was
despised cf. Gilbert, op. cit. p. 363.
; The proposal to pay them twice as much as the
t7r7j-6ts was evidently a democratic measure. The fnadocpoina of which the papyrus speaks
must have been independent of the allowance for keeping a horse, since 2 obols would be
ludicrously insufficient for that purpose.
85. awTfivfiv seems to be an error hv a-vuTtfiVdv : cf. Thuc. viii. 45 rfju re fiiadocpopav
92. 1. OVK.
93-6. Cf. Ar. A/h. Pol. 28. 3.

151. This line was very likely the last of a column.
15. Rhetorical Exercise.
Mummy A. 19-2 x 38-3 cm. Circa b.c 280-240. Plate II (Part of Cols, i-iii).
Though in point of size the second of the literary papyri from Hibeh, this
piece proves to be disappointing. It contains six consecutive columns, some in
excellent preservation, from an oration which in Blass's judgement and his
opinion on such a point is not likely to be challenged was never really delivered,
but is only a rhetorical composition. The supposed occasion is considered by
Blass to be the situation resulting from the death of Alexander the Great, and
the speaker, who is addressing an Athenian audience and advocating a forward
policy, to be Leosthenes. That orator and soldier was with Hyperides the most
active opponent at Athens of the Macedonian dominion, and played the principal
part in the movement which resulted in the defeat of the Macedonian general
Antipater in Thessaly. Antipater threw himself into Lamia, and there Leo-
sthenes, who commanded the Greek allies, met his death. The phraseology of
the papyrus is somewhat colourless, but references occur which suit this inter-
pretation, e.g. the mention of a sudden change in the position of affairs (1. 43),
the allusion to the speaker's office as general and his personal risk in (1. 116),
the cause he championed (1. 61) (a danger which as events were to prove he did
not over-estimate), the possible reference to Taenarum (1. 58), and the exhorta-
tions to make a bold bid not only for freedom but for the leading position
which freedom, if gained, might bring (11. 73 sqq., 106 sqq., &c.). The composition
is a favourable specimen of and the early date gives it a certain interest.
its class,
In spite of frequent confusion between and ei and other misspellings, there is

t
no doubt that this text, which is carefully written in a handsome hand of medium
size, is of approximately the same date as the bulk of the literary papyri in this
56 HIBEH PAPYRI
volume, and it is most unlikely to be later than the reign of Philadelphus. The
formation of omega, in which the second curve is unfinished and an intermediate
stage between il and CO is shown, should be noticed cf. 26, which illustrates an ;
earlier stage in the transition. Punctuation is effected by a paragraphus, which,

when the pause comes within the line, is accompanied by a horizontal dash
marking the exact point. The text has been corrected with some care,
apparently by the original scribe. There is some illegible writing on parts of
the verso ; cf. note on Fr. [a).
Col. i. Plate II. Col. ii, Plate II.
pi(jTOTipovs (TViijxayovs
]
] . . apoy ^re Kai âvepov anaai

KaTa(rTT](TeT SioTt to r?/?
30 TToXecoy r]6os ovtco fiaKpau

[a]7r)(i Tov KaKCo^ Tiva tronv
Toav firjOcy aSiKovuTCov
]
EXXi]v(op coore kul tovs
JTCt (pavpa)9 ^T]ijLapTT]KOTa^
35 adooiovs a(pL7]aii^ Sea ti)v
lo ]ov wcpôXr]!/ TT]9 îXavdpco

]'
TTiay fxaXL(TTa Se Xoyi
] êo-ê TTpoy tccv $ecov co av
] y^p Sp9 AOrjvaioL [8]lotl to Ppa

40 Svi/iv TOi? vvv KaBeaTco
15 ]<jc>TLav (TLV i]KLcrTa ovfjicpepou iaTiv

]yoiva[.\ oêii yap ci/coy eivat tovs e
K Tcoif ficTaôXcov Kaipovs

'\v Tcav \a0((T
(av fTi[rX?;\/Aecr"j]ê Kai nava-aa-
]Tr]v
45 [[<^]]^f 7rpo(rexouTS tol^ ttjv
20].[. .]r4.]l
paOvfjiiav aacpaXiiau
Cvi^ô.v
]
\pOL jJ.OL
airoKaXovcTLv KaL pi) (pofirj
OcuTe? t[ j^re
]Ta .
T7]v (KjoTTjpiav aX\Xa] Kai 6ap

]f[*]
50 (rr]aavT9 TOiavra ôvX[]v

aaaOt Sl ecu fn^ScrroTi fi[r]]dev
Col. ill. Plate II.
qX\[a] rjS.] . . [.]r]a-6e tcou [. .
TT . []oi'O0U t[oi]9 fiU ttX
55 Xois 7r .
[ ^yoy vfiii^
K[a]L Xoyiêa-da.[i /xe rj^KiaT av

61/ Taiy[apoi)L KaBrjîiivov
Kai ^rjQivo^ v(rT[epovu ra

60 TCOV iV TTjL TToXiL 0" . [.1 . VOiV
OUrCD? a/i (f)L\0Kl[v]8vVQ)S 7rL
CTTTjuaL To[i]9 Tr[pa]y[ia(rLu h /xt]
ra Tctiv Katpcoi/ rjirKTrafiriv
KaTiTnLyovT[a] Kai KptaLu eco
65 poou ovaau ti)^ rjfi^repas
(rcoTT]pia9 Kai t[ ]
TCOU i(pO^[o]vfJ.T]U [ ]
Ka6<TTT]K0TC0U [ ]
1/ i//i[[e]]ii/ avToi^ [ ]
70 Kat TUTTHVOS VTT[o\]r](p$ir)U

0)9 pL-qOiV TCdV (XVpL(f)ipOVT(OV
TrpoiSiLv av SvuTjdcis
aWa Kat vvv 7rpo[o\p(o ra fxeX
XovTa Kat TTapaKoXco wpos ra
75 irpayfiara vfias Kai ^napa
KaXo)]] TrjV TVyjqv 7]U
Col. iv.
[ M Ka]
T]a,XHnHu Kat Seo/xai
V
fj.aXi(TTa Tcou iccTcpoav

I
80 70)1/ -nap u/x[[e]]i/ ck naSo? ra

58 HIBEH PAPYRI
TTfpi TOU TToXefJ.Ol' LKaVOu^
TraL8ivBiVTa>v aKfJLaaai
7T0T rais Siai'0ia9 Kai ^pr;

aaadat tol? OL[K\ioii crcaixacnv
S5 evKaipco^ T7]i' anoSeiîr

7roiri(Tajjii>ovs rrj^ avTcou
apcTTj^ Li/[a] voîi((ovraL
Kai Tov aWov ^povov

T]av)(âîy p.7] 8l avavSpLav
90 aWa Sl (vXaêiau Kai fxt]
6ei9 00 avBpe^ Adrjimiot

)(copi9 Tr]S Vfi^Tepas Bvva.
fX(o9 eiri Ta TTpayfiara

KUTaSeeaTcpou âSi^cofiiu
95 firjO v/jlîs apayKaîjaOe

SvOW OaTipOV 7] TTOTjT^ 676/? 0^t[s']
TO KiXVO/XlÔU 7] /JLeT (XaT

s
Tovo arpaTOTreSov klvSv

v^viLv 7]ficou aXXcos ttcdj
Col. V.
100 a[
Kai raiS /i[
a7ro)(pj]aaa6( Kat t7]u v

TOH TTparreLv opOcos aacpa
Xeiai' eXecrê fxera nXnoi^coi'
105 T7;r aoiT7]pLav vpî^Lv avTois

TTupaaK^vaôvTiS co?
ava^Lov tarw co auSpes

AOrjvaioL rcov e/i MapaOcovt
Kai "âXapiv klvSvvoov Sia

110 reXftj/ ijpa^ to avi-oXov
aTToyLvaxTKOvTa'i Tr]v rj
yefiovLav rj pofiiôuras
ravT-qv (aecrOai nore vfiiv
aiTO TavTofiarov /xrjS on
115 OVl/ aVTOl? TTOVOVa-LV
V
eyco jxe ovv 7rL crTpaTijyov
r]v fxr] T^{^ iSlus acr0aAe/[a]y Kai

)(etpororm[y] ^povTL(iL[v ]
aWa T-qs vii[i\Tipa[s aooTrj]
120 pia^ TovTO TrpaTTcou [rrpoa-e]
\rj\v6a 7rpoTaâ9 e/J.[avTou
virep TTjs KOLvrjS iXevOep[Las
Col. vi.
125 Af . [
T01T . [
Kaipos [.]aL .
[
iXOiLV 7n T .
[
pia>u Kai TT]v [
130 Vfxas KKrjp[v .
rrji/ re r;y TToXeooy oi-PXV
y^Tiv \p\ KaL Tovs aXXovs [ey
Xcopiovs 6[ovs ]9V[- ]

^'f'
((TeaOaL e^[
135 TaLs eXTTi? (5[
fJLvrjfirjs Xa[
SovXeia^ <p^ .
[
^Xevdepias .
[
pou ip . . ,
[
A67]
140 vaiov9 t'7rep[
6ov9 cpiaaL fj.[

6o HIBEH PAPYRI
ya . (ivy]t[. . . . .
VTrrjKoovs ofr[as'
êrai fieyaJ. . . .
145 [ -if
Fragments.
ib)
Jarai tolas' >c[ ]fJ.(VOU
. aXX[o]u fic\
]
]a/3a9 TT .
[
]jpOl^ fiU [ 155 ]? Se I'/zeiy eay

]tou Ka[ ](i' vvi' Se vfx.a9
]..[ a]\X ei TTf30Tf) . [
[ ]
] . eia .
[d) . . . .
^
160 ]Tai[ 162 ] aXXr]^ . . ^63 1
[
(/)
16.=;
15. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 6i
44. !Tav(Ta\<T6e has been altered to Trauo-no-lê ; with combinations of <j both methods of
division are frequent.
54. The first word does not seem to be n\(iQvu>v, though touv may be the last word in
1. 53. yi may be read in place of jt, but yirovav is unsuitable.
55-66. '
to imitate
. . . and reflect that although I am inferior to
you ought . . . ,
no ... should not have stationed myself at Taenarum and courted danger so
in the city, I
freely in my conduct of affairs, if I did not know that the occasion was pressing, and that
the turning-point of our salvation was at hand.'
58. For ev Tniv apcoi Ka6i] îfvou cf. Diod. xviii. 9 iJ.ia6o(fi6povs, ovras piv oKTaKia-îXiois, 8ici-
Tpiôvras 8e irepl Taivapov t^s TlfXaTrovvrja-ov. The

however very uncertain. reading Taivâpaoi is
60. Cf. 11. 116 sqq. At the end of the line the vestiges of the letter before vwv would
suit and EXXtjvwv is a possible reading; but this is not satisfactory in itself, and moreover
1],
the initial letter is much more like a than f. o-rparryycoi/ is inadmissible.
73-99. 'But now and urge you to take action and not to neglect
I foresee the future,
the Especially the younger men, who have had among you a sufficient
good fortune which . . .
military training from their youth, I entreat to exert all their powers of mind and to employ
their bodies in a timely display of their prowess, in order that their tranquillity in the past
may be ascribed not to unmanliness but to prudence ; and that we, men of Athens, may not
proceed to action with inadequate numbers and without the aid of your power, nor your-
selves be forced to the alternatives of either obeying the orders of others, or wiih an inferior
force risking an engagement .'
. .
78. ra o^ KaToKfiTTdv was at first omitted owing to homoioteleuton, but was added before
the insertion of the paragraphus.
90. 1. pT]6 (ijp)eis (sc. the mercenary troops), balancing p>]d vpns in 1. 95.
96. 1. TTOeiV for TTOT]T.
IOI-I2 2.
I\Iake use of and choose the safety which lies in right conduct, working
'
. . .
out your own

preservation in larger force. For it is unworthy of the daring deeds at
Marathon and Salamis, men of Athens, that you should persevere in the complete renuncia-
tion of the hegemony, or in the idea that it will ever come to you of its own accord without
a single effort on your part. I therefore, since it was the duty of a general not to consider
his own safety or chances of election but your preservation, have come forward with that
object in view in championship of general liberty .'
. .
107 sqq. Cf. Diod. xviii. 10 Kcii nporfpov p.iv 6 drjpos . . . tovs eVl dovXfla (JTpaTfvaa-
^tvov: âp^dpovs rjpvvaTO Kara ddXarTav, kuI vvv ourat 8(iv vnfp ttjs Koivris roiv 'EXXi'jviov acoTtjpiut
. . . 7rpoKiv8wveiv,
Athena ; cf. C. I. G. 476 'Adrjva dpxrjyfTiSi Ka\ 6jo'i<!, &C.
131. TToXeas apxriytTiv: i.e.
Fr. (a). The shape
of this fragment suggests that it should be placed at the top of
Col. vi, so that 1. 124 combines with 1. 148, but to this there are two objections, apart from
the difficulty of finding suitable readings: (i) the column would then be higher by a line
than the others; (2) on the verso of this column there is some half-effaced writing, while
the verso of Fr. (a) seems to have been left blank. The verso of Frs. (d) and {c) on the
other hand has been used, and they may well belong to Col. vi, though we liave not
succeeded in placing them. Fr. (e), judging from its colour, is likely to belong to Col. i.
62 HIBEH PAPYRI
16. TlIEOPIIRASTUS(?).
j\Iummy A. 13-3 X 19-5 'W. Circa b.c. 280-240.
One nearly complete column of twenty-two lines, and parts of two other
columns, from a philosophical work, the subject of the fragmeht being a discussion
of Democritus' atomic theory, particularly in relation to the composition of the
sea. The author is, as Blass suggests, very likely Theophrastus, a passage in
whose works affords a close parallel to part of the papyrus cf. note on 1. 41. The
;
treatise to which the papyrus belongs may have been that 7;epl {/5aros (Diog.
Latirt. V. 45) or one of his other numerous works on Natural Philosophy.
The text is written in a thick inelegant hand of a somewhat cursive character.

It formed part of the same piece of cartonnage as Cols, ix-xi of 26, and belongs
more probably to the reign of Philadelphus than to that of Euergetes. The

paragraphus is employed, and a blank space is left before the beginning of a new
section in the middle of a line.
We are indebted to Prof. H. Diels for some suggestions in the interpretation
of this papyrus.
Col. i.
IG. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 63
5 lines lost. Oav/xaara Kai ra TrapaXoycoTara

TT]^ (pvaco9 (canep ov noXXa^ ovcras
40 ey TTjL yqi Sta(popa9 enet. ttolovvti
[ye] TOv[s\ yyXov^ Sia ra a^-qjiaTa Kai

[to\ a[X]fivpou ey fxeyaXcoi^ kul yai/io
[(i]S(>)j' ovK [ajXoyou ttco? ir^pi rrjy
30. 6 of 6(iov com 34. V ft of Trpo)(ftpov ft corr.
Col. iii.
KT . [ Aey . . coi ect .

[
45 [. > .
[ 55 9 y [']o^f^ ' ' '
re 7r/3o[
roiovT[. .laA[
KaXX .[..]. o)[ ôoia>v ano . .

[
ft 5e[. . .] . TT . KKpia-dai 7r[
50 aXAa K . . .
[
60 7re/3 ^yaip .
[
TT . . . ra . [ Kai TT . . . . r
OVT , . U .
[ 7re(r7r[.
.J
.
(TOV TO ... .
23-43. ... he says that in a wet substance like is (drawn) to like as in the whole
'
creation, and thus the sea was created and all else that is ... through the combination of ,
homogeneous atoms and that the sea is composed of homogeneous atoms is also evident in
;
another way for neither frankincense nor sulphur nor siiphium nor nilre nor alum nor
;
bitumen nor any other important and wonderful things occur in many places in the earth.
In this way, therefore, it is easy to perceive this at any rate, that by making the sea
a part of the world he maintains that it is produced in the same manner as the wonderful and
most unexpected things in nature, on the view that there are not many differences in
the earth for to one at any rate who considers that flavours originated by reason of
;
atom-forms, and saltness out of large and angular particles, it is not unreasonable .'
. .
22, Probably (Tri\n(ôvos, as Diels suggests. Sf noWrji (Troptvr^g ayiXaKea-dai caunot

be read.
26. a[..]..ra: aXfivpa is inadmissible. Diels' suggestion n[XX]oKora (cf. 11. 32 and
38) is possible, but the vestiges before r (which is nearly certain) do not suit oko at all well.
41. Blass well compares the discussion of Democritus' theories in Theophr. De St'fis.
66 (Diels, FragJU. d. Vorsokr. p. 393) aXpvpov fie top ik iitydXcou Kai ov TTfpicPfpcov K.T.\.
64 HIBEIJ PAPYRI
17. Sayings of Simonides.
Mummy 69. 27-7 x 'i:')('m. Circa b.c. 280-240.
A single column, written in cursive, containing a series of wise sayings,

which according to the heading at the top were by Simonides, on the subject
of expense. This heading suggests that the collection is a fragment of an
anthology, but whether the papyrus itself formed part of an extensive work is
doubtful ; cm. of margin on one side of the column and 2\ on the

for there are 3
other, without any signs of adjacent columns on the left side however there is
;
the junction of another sheet. The hand is a clear cursive which grows smaller
in the last few lines ; on the verso are parts of two columns of an account, which
may be by the same writer. The date of the papyrus is about B.C. 250.
This Simonides, as the reference to the wife of Hiero (1. 4) at once shows,
isSimonides of Ceos, who enjojêd a great reputation as a practical philosopher,

and is ranked by Plato with Bias and Pittacus {Rep. i. ^^:) E). One of the
sayings here recorded, which alludes to the poet's well-known miserly tendencies,
explains a reference in the RJicioric of Aristotle (cf note on 11. 10-13). The
others we have not though some
traced, illustrations will be found in the
commentary. A Vienna papyrus (Wcssely, FcstscJir. f. TJt. (jonipci-z, pp. 67-74)
contains part of a similar collection of anecdotes about Diogenes.
ai'TjXcofxaTcoi'
SlfiCOl'lSoV
evSoKin^L S avTOv rrpo^ aXT]Oe[i

ay Kai to TTpos rrjv I^pcovo? yi'
yap ci TTavra yi]paaKi vaL

(pi] nXijy ye KepSov? Ta\Lcr ra
Se at (vepyeaiai Kai ro 7rpo]y
Tov TTVpOai'opei'ot' Sia tl (l
10 ?/ 0e/(5a)Aoy e07; Sia rovT (ivai
(paScoXo^ O'Tji fxaXXor ayOoL
TO T019 ain]Xo)pi'oi9 7] 70i?
nepiovaLu T[o]vT(oy S( eKa

Tepo}' i]6o9 fiev îi' (pav
15 Xov napa 5e ray opyas Kai

Ta^ a ] T(ov a'v
OpCHTTCO U XeiV SlOTTep
ovT 7r[ ] ovre airX C09
(iTTeii/ [e^ avTco^v co<peXeLa6[a]i
J -âX^TTOV [8 ^Lvai] to /ut] y^pr]
a6ai Toi? av[Tov .] . . . tKot^ aX

Xa foL^ aXXoTpioi?
TO 8 au7]X(od(u oXLyov fiev
eiXrjTTTai TrpoaafaXio-KeTaL Sc
TO SLTrXacTiov Sio Set eXKeiu Tas v/a>;0oi;?
KUL TO Trap avTov davei^âBai

OTav TrjL avayKaiai Kai (pv<JiKrji.
Tpocprji -^pTqarj-aL cocnrep tu ^coia
anX-qi
'
Expenses
Simonides.: Esteemed also for its truth is his remark to the wife of
Hiero being asked whether everything grows old, he replied, " Yes, everything except love
:
of gain, and benefits quickest of all " and his answer to the question w hy he was frugal,
;
which was that he was frugal because he disliked expenses more than savings. Each of
these habits had a bad side, but was owing to the pass-ions and ... of men. Therefore
. . .
one was neither (harmed) nor strictly speaking benefited by them. But it was irksome to
use other people's property and not one's own. Expenditure is reckoned of slight account,
and twice as much is spent again so one should draw back the counters (?). A man
;
borrowed his own money when he used only necessary and natural food, as the animals do.'
4-5. About the last ten years of Simonides' life were spent at Hiero's court in
Syracuse. Another reply made to Hiero's wife is recounted by Aristotle, Rhet. ii. 16.
67. Cf. Plut. A71 Seni, p. 786 B îfiwvlbrjs cAtye rrpos tovs ('yKuXovvras aurw (})iKapyvj)iai',
on Tojr uk\<t)i> nn((TT(pr]p.(i/ns 8iii to yrjpas T]8ova)V, iino fxtds ert yrjpo(3o(TK'iTut rrji dno rov K(p8(nvei.v.
10-13. This is evidently the saying of Simonides referred to in Arist. H/n/. iv. i
fvKoivoyvTjTos tariv 6 (Têvdtpios (h ^pfj/iara' hivarai yap d8iK(7adai /xiy TifiS)v ye to. xpripara, kuX
fxdWov d)(66pfvos, fX Ti. beov p.r) dvoKaxTfv, fj Xvnovpfvos, fl pfj hiov ti drnXaae, Kin to) îpatvidj] oi k
dptaKopfvos. Love of money was a favourite reproach against Simonides; cf. e.g. Aristoph.
Pax 697-9.
17. Perhaps tt or o- may be read in place of X.
\v(TiTf]X(iv.
i8. An having the sense of injured is lost in the lacuna ; the first letter may
infinitive '
'
also be y or p., or perhaps a or X.

20-2. The unpleasantness of dependence upon others is apparently here the point.
Cf. Stob, JE^c/. X. 61 îpwvi^T]! . . . flnev, l3ov\oipi]v av dnodavcov rols (X^pois pdWov uTToXnTUP 1/
fcoj/ bflcrOai Tcov <pi\uii>.
25. (Xkhp ras i/'r/iôvf is perhaps a technical phrase derived from account-keeping, but
we have found no other examj)le of it. According to Hdt. ii. 36 the Greeks in counting
with yl^r,(f)oi moved the hand from left to right, so drawing in the yl'^(f)oi might mean keep '
'
'
F
66 HIBEH PAPYRI
on Prof. Smyly makes an alternative suggestion that the
the credit side of the account.'
phrase may
be equivalent to tlie Latin calcitlum reducere, to take back a move (at draughts),
to retire from a position, the meaning practically being 8i6 S \xr] dmXio-at. But the expres-
sion would be extraordinarily fanciful and obscure if that is the sense, toj \j/fi(})ovs A(ci/o-[<ir
occurs in P. Pctrie II. 13 (6). 15, but since that papyrus relates to quarrying the meaning
there is probably quite different.
26. It is not very clear whether davtiCea-dai also is governed by 8(t or whether Km to
begins a new sentence, the inf. davdCf (rdai reverting to the oblique construction of 11. 13-
22 on the whole the latter view seems to give the better sense. Cf. Seneca, De Be7ief. v. 7
;
M. Cato ait, quod tibi dcen'l, a te ipso imituare ', Ep. Mor. 119, 2 and 12 (Smyly).
'
29. The short oblique stroke after aTrXijt apparently represents a stop.
18. Literary Fragment.
Mummy A. Frs. (") + (/'') 9-2 x 5-9. Circa b.c. 280-240.
The work of uncertain character remain

following small pieces of a literary
unidentified. both come from the top of a column, but their
Frs. {a) and {b)
relation is doubtful the combination suggested in our text seems likely, but
;
is far from certain. The resulting lines, so far as they go, will scan as the latter
parts of iambic verses, and Blass seems to be right in regarding the fragments as
derived from a comedy. The hand is slightly larger than that of 10-12, but is
of a similar appearance, and probably dates from about the middle of the third
century B. C.
I""rs. {a) and {b).
] . pcoSe^ KaOi. . . .]i]Kvaar[
e^jiTrecpuKii/ [apfx]oiîa Tpo[
]t]9 Kai o-/f . . [. .1 , a Kai /3a[
o]fxoiay Tai'y[. .\ . root yr[
5 ]^L TTauTa [ra] cro(pa yii^([Tai

Ka]Tepyaô/ji[ei']a Kai e7ri6[ !->, (A^ ...
]va(i fiiKpo[v a]y^r](rai /x[ 16 ] 7rapa[
] yjrevSfi t[. . . .] . ai 5ta7r[ ] ovi/ 7r[
]ifJ.oi9 TiO . [. .\ .
y . a 7jtt[ ! . a0[
10 ]i'ai qu)( .[... Tp]oncov [ ]a[
]vTa9 5f[ ]iJLa(To[

19. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 67
"
]aTO^ o8[ ]Kpov [ .

"
] . CO? yiv[iTâi a/JiaO'l
JTCoy [a-o<p^<oTaTa[
5 ]
'-r^xi
I. The letter before p has a high projecting tip, which would suit e.g. y, t, or v.
3. Probably (TKia[ or (tkv6[.
II. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL

AUTHORS
19. Homer, I/iad II and III.
Mummy A. Fr. (/) i i-i x 1 1 cvi. Circa b.c. 285-250. Plate VI (Fr. ?).
Twenty-three fragments, of which nine very small ones remain unidentified,

containing parts of 05 lines from Books ii and iii of the Iliad.
1 The writing is
a handsome uncial, 12 still retaining a tendency to approximate to the epigraphic
form, e and O being written very small, M and IT very large. It represents one
of the earlier types of literary hands in the present volume and, like 26, much
more probably belongs to the reign of Philadelphus than to that of Euergetes.
In common with 21 and 22, both of which are fragments of MSS. already
in part known from other pieces published in P. Grenf. II (cf. p. 5), 19, of which
no published fragments exist, is remarkable for its variations from the ordinary
text of the Iliad^ especially in the insertion of additional lines, of which there are
at least 12 or 13. Four of these expand a line describing the impartiality of
Zeus (P 302), and three the description of Menelaus arming himself (P 339).
As is the case with most of the additions in early Ptolemaic Homer fragments,
where the new lines in 19 are sufficiently well preserved to be intelligible, they
' '
are generally found to have been derived with little or no alteration from other
passages in Homer and many of the variants are also due to the influence of
;
parallels, one conventional phrase being substituted for another, e.g. in P 361.
Of the readings peculiar to 19 some are probably errors, e.g. the nominative
F 1
68 HIBEH PAPYRI
iipi^vi] inB 797, the amusing variant eLcropouiv for a\}r upoojv In F ^2^, and
r]Ke for 7/Aê inT 3^7; but others are quite defensible, e.g. B 826 [tcov av]d
>]ylxoviv[e for Tpwes rwr avr' T/px^) ^^'id F 304 AapSarot ?j8 [(]7HK[ovpoL for eiJKMJfxtSes
'Axaiot ;and though none of the new readings can quite definitely be called an
improvement, one of the additional lines inserted after F 302 (302 d) tends to
support a conjecture of Nauck in B 39, from which F 302 d is derived.
Comparing the text of the papyrus with what is known about the readings of
. the Alexandrian critics, 19 has three lines (B 673-^5) of which two were athetized
'
and one omitted by Zenodotus, and two other lines (B 724-5) which he athetized,
but agrees with him in reading p-aprvpes (F 280), where Aristarchus had paprvpot,
while in F 295 19 agrees with Aristarchus in reading afpvaaopevoL, not a({)vaadp.evoi,
but contains five lines (B 791-5) obdized by him and no particular connexion
;
is traceable between this text and that of the chief Alexandrian grarrimarians.
Nor does 19 exhibit any marked affinity to the text of other and later Homeric
papyri which partly cover the same ground, the most important being the
Bodleian Homer discovered in the Fayum, P. Brit. Mus. 126 and P. Oxy. 20. It is
specially noteworthy that the new line inserted in Oxy. 20 after B 798 is
P.
absent in 19, which also differs from P. Oxy. 20 in B 795 and 797. Among
other peculiarities of the papyrus arc its preferences for augmented forms, e, g.
, F 296 )]vxoiTo, F 370 fL\K, F 371 7/yx6, and for <// in place of (F ^j^ and 369).
?]
The supplements of lacunae in 19-21 and 23 follow the text of Ludwich

in 22 that of La Roche.
In P. Grcnf. H. pp. 12-13 we gave, in connexion with those fragments

belonging to 20,21, and 22 which were published in 1897, our views upon some
of the problems arising from the great variations in early Ptolemaic texts of
Homer. Our contentions, in common with the much more far-reaching claims
advanced by some critics upon the earlier discovery of the Petrie and Geneva
fragments, were subjected to a searching examination by Prof. A. Ludwich in his
exhaustive discussion of the subject, D/c' Homcrviilgata als voralexandrinisch
crivicsen.The main objects of that work were (1) to dispose of the idea that
I
the texts of the early Homeric papyri represented the pre-AIexandrian condition
of the poems, out of which the vulgate was produced by the labours of the
Alexandrian critics (2) to show from a detailed investigation of the Homeric
;
quotations in writers of the fifth and fourth centuries 1>. C. that the texts used by
I them substantially agreed with the vulgate; and (3) to deny practically any
y critical value to the early papyrus fragments, which exhibit neither the vulgate
nor the critical texts, but an erwcitcrtc oder wildc
'
category of Ptolemaic
'
MSS. (p. 66). W'e take the present opportunity therefore of restating our views
in the light of Ludwich's criticisms and the new evidence.
The present volume supplies additional fragments (20-22) of P. Grenf. II. 2-4,
and pieces of two previously unknown Homeric papyri, 19 and 23. In the case
of 21 and 22 the published fragments had already proved with sufficient clearness
the existence of great divergences from the vulgate, and the newly discovered pieces
merely provide further illustrations of the same tendency, which is particularly
marked in the case of 21. 20, however, of which there are now extant parts
of 71 lines in all, enables us to form a fairer estimate of the real nature of the
MS. hitherto represented only by P, Grenf. 11. 3. parts of A 109-13 containing
no variations from the vulgate. So far as the insertion of new lines is con-
cerned, 20 still seems to be more free frorn expansions than 19, 21, and 22, since
the insertion of a line after A 69 is more than balanced by the omission of
three lines which are found in the ordinary texts. The total number of lines is
thus two less than in the corresponding portions of the vulgate, but on the
other hand the existence in this MS. of numerous variations similar in character
to those found in 19, 21, and 22 is now clear for although the fragments of 20 are
;
very small and most of the lines are represented by a few letters only, there
are several noteworthy variants. Considering that additional lines tend to
be very unevenly distributed, especially in 19 and 21, the circumstance that only
one happens to occur in the extant pieces of 20 is quite compatible with the
possibility that this text presented the same characteristics as those found with
it ; but the prima facie evidence is in favour of drawing a marked distinction
between 20 and its companions, and probably that papyrus represents either
a text which has been subjected to critical revision, especially by the omission
of many superfluous lines, or else a tradition which from its originwas relatively
free from interpolations, being in this respect perhaps superior even to the
vulgate. In any case 20 certainly cannot be claimed to represent the
vulgate. Both the two new papyri, 19, with 12 or 13 new lines out of 105, and
23, with 3 out of 30, exhibit the same degree of divergence from the vulgate as
21 and 22, 23 being of particular importance because it is the only early Ptolemaic
fragment of the Odyssey, the text of which seems to have been in as fluctuating
a condition as that of the Iliad. With regard to the later Ptolemaic period there
is now a little more evidence for determining the date at which the vulgate
superseded other texts. P. P'ay. 4 (0 332-6 and 362-8) and P. Tebt. 4
(B 95-210, whh Aristarchean signs) both belong to the latter part of the
second century B. c, and agree fairly closely with the vulgate, at any rate
as to the number numerous Homeric fragments of the Roman
of lines, whereas the
period published in recent years very rarely containnew verses, and serve to
illustrate only too well the overwhelming predominance of the vulgate. Since
the Geneva fragment, which is a MS. of the same type as the third century B. c.
70 HIBEH PAPYRI
fragments, belongs to the second century W.C, probably the earlier half of it,
the dividing which the tendency for Homeric papyri to vary from the
line, after
vulgate rapidly diminishes, would seem to be best placed about B. C. 150 or even
earlier, rather than at the end of the Ptolemaic period.
Briefly, therefore, the situation is as follows. There are extant fragments
of six different papyri earlier than B. C. 200, most of them certainly, and perhaps
all, earlier than B.C. 240 (the doubts expressed by Ludwich, op. cit., pp. 9-10, as
to the early date of the Petrie fragment, though justified by some remarks of the
first editor, have become, through the advance in knowledge of the palaeography
of early Greek papyri, quite baseless). Of these six, one comes from the Fayum,
four from either the Hcracleopolite or Oxyrhynchite nome, not improbably
Oxyrhynchus itself, one (23) from the Hcracleopolite nome. Five of them belong
to the Iliad^ one to the Odyssey and all six exhibit very marked divergences from
;
the text of the vulgate, particularly in the insertion of new lines. These are
distributed through five of the papyri unevenly, in proportions ranging from one
new line out of four in 21 to one line out of about twelve in 22, but are much
less conspicuous in the sixth (20), which, so far as it goes, exhibits a shorter text
than the vulgate. In the fragments of the second century B.C. there is only one
which shows similar characteristics to the same extent; and by the end of that
century the vulgate, so far as can be judged, seems to have almost attained to
that pre-eminence which is attested by plentiful evidence in the Roman period
From these facts we should draw the following conclusions :
(i)The effect of the new evidence afforded by the present volume is to

confirm and amplify the evidence regarding the characteristics already known
to exist in early Ptolemaic Homeric fragments, and to reduce still further the
/ probability that the prevalence of these divergences is due to chance. It could
fS formerly be maintained that, side by side with the '
eccentric ' traditions re-
presented by the papyri, there were circulating in the Pâyum (the supposed
provenance of all the previtjusly known fragments) as many or even more texts
representing the vulgate, and that, taking the Homeric papyri earlier than
I B.C. ijC, the majority of 4 to 1 in favour of the eccentric traditions gave quite
' '
1 an unfair idea of their preponderance. The majority in favour of the 'eccentric'

traditions has now become 6 to while even the one exception (20) is not the
i,
vulgate text ; and the area in which there is evidence for their currency has been
extended, so that the probability that the extant fragments illustrate not unfairly
the prevailing texts in Upper Fgypt is greatly strengthened. Whoever and
wherever the readers of the vulgate in the third century B. C. may have been,
they certainly do not seem to have included more than the any at all,
nn"nority, if
of the Greek settlers in Upper Egypt. Accordingly we adhere more strongly

19. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS -ji
than ever, in spite of Ludwich's objections (op. cit., p. i(S8), to the view (P. Grenf. i
II. p. 12) that if there was any one tradition generally accepted in Egypt in the
'
y
third century B. aTTf was at any rate not our vuIgate. ... It is clear that the|
"^
rise of the vulgate into general acceptance took place in the interval (between}
B. C.150 and 30).' The point of view implied by that sentence is rather seriously
misunderstood by Ludwich. He supposes [ibid.) that we wished to maintain
*dass unsere Homervulgata erst in der zweiten Halfte der Alexandrinerzeit
. . .
entstanden ist,' a hypothesis which runs counter to the main argument of his |,
book, that the vulgate was in existence long before the third century B. c. But
though his presentation of the case against the position that the vulgate was not
yet in existence when the early papyri were written leaves nothing to be
desired in thoroughness, it does not affect our contention which was something
quite different. What we meant and what in fact we said in the passage quoted ji
above, though perhaps with insufficient clearness, was not that the rise of the 1/
vulgate took place aft er B. C JL.50, but that its rise into general acceptance occurred '
after that date, i.e. that it did not supersede the 'eccentric' traditions until then,!''
the evidence indicating that the text generally accepted in Egypt in the early
Ptolemaic period was not the vulgate. And this we believe more firmly than
before. The question how and when the vulgate, whether identical or not with the
text called by Didymus and Aristonicus the Koivr\, took its origin is another
point and even granting Ludwich's contention that the vulgate is substantially
;
1
the text quoted by the fifth and fourth century Greek authors (which is by no
means certain), so far from there being any evidence that in the earlier Ptolemaic
period the vulgate was the normal text in circulation through Egypt apart from j
/
Alexandria, there is now fresh proof to the contrary.
(2) A more comparison of the 'eccentric' texts with those of

satisfactory
the chief critical editions is now possible, because among the Homeric fragments
contained in the present volume, unlike those in P. Grenf. II, there are several
passages in which the readings of the Alexandrian critics are known. On the
whole the new evidence does not suggest any particular connexion between the
'critical and the 'eccentric' texts, and supports our previously expressed view
'
that, beside theenormous differences between the vulgate and these papyri, its
disagreements with the text of Zenodotus and Aristarchus appear comparatively
insignificant. Through the publication of Ludwich's most valuable collection of
Homeric citations in fifth and fourth century B.C. authors, the position which
these occupy in relation to the vulgate and the '
eccentric '
texts can now be
estimated. Ludwich's 140-1) show that out of 480 verses
statistics {op, cit., pp.
quoted by various authors before B. c. 300 only 9-1 1 are not found in the vulgate ;
from which he concluded (i) that the text used by the pre-Alexandrian writers
72 HIBEH PAPYRI
was much nearer to the vulgate than were the 'eccentric' traditions, and (2) that
so far from the Homeric tradition being in a chaotic condition before the time
of the Alexandrian grammarians, most of the pre-Alexandrian writers (24
or 25 out of 29) ah-eady used the vulgate, not the eccentric texts. Without '
'
advocating the extreme position maintained on the appearance of the Petrie

Homer fragment by some critics who denied the existence of the vulgate text
at all before the Alexandrian period, and admitting that the fifth and fourth
century B.C. quotations are on the whole slightly nearer the vulgate than are the
'eccentric' texts, we have less confidence than Ludwich in the inferences which
he bases upon his figures. It is quite true that the average of new lines in the
'eccentric' texts (about 70 in 547 lines \ i.e. i in every 8 approximately)
is in the quotations (about i in 48), and if the new lines in the
higher than that
'
eccentric text had
' been at all evenly distributed the argument from the
difference in the averages would have considerable weight. But, -as we pointed
out in r. Grenf. II. p. 13, and as is again clearly illustrated by 19 and 21,
:the additional lines are distributed very unevenly. They tend to come at points
where the thread of the narrative is loose, and to occur in batches ; and between
the premiss that there are few of them to be found in the pre-Alcxandrian
quotations and the conclusion that the texts from which those quotations are
derived were free from extensive insertions of new lines, there is a broad gap,
over which Ludwich's bridge is very insecure, as will appear more clearly from an
instance. In 19 there are 12 additional lines out of 105, but of the 13 fragments
(treating Frs. (;;/) and {z) as one) 7 have no additional lines at all, and 8 out of the
12 additional lines occur on 2 fragments. Similarly in 21 (0) there are (including
P. Grenf. II. 2) at least 26 new lines out of 105, a proportion of i in 4 ; but 9
of these occur after 1. 6$, 4 before and 4 after 1. ^^S, and 4 after 1. 52 : throughout
the other passages additional lines are scarce. It is obvious that several citations
might be made from the extant fragments of 19 and 21, particularly quotations
of 2 or 3 lines such as figure hirgely in Ludwich's list, without in the least
betraying the fact that the average proportion of new lines in 19 is 1 in 8 or 9 and
in 21 is actually i in 4, and that if only one or two short quotations were made
from 19 or 21 the chances against the true average being indicated are very
considerable, especially as the additional lines are seldom very striking. More-
over, of the 29 authors who api)ear in Ludwich's list, and 25 of whom he claims
as supporting the vulgate, those who are represented by more than 3 quotations
and 10 lines in all (when the evidence is less than that it is really too slight to
be of much value) number only 7, and 2 of these 7 (Aeschines and Aristotle),
'
In this calculation \vc omit 20 for tlic reasons explained on ji. 69, but include the Geneva fragment,
which contains 9-13 new lines out of 77.
and possibly a third (Diogenes of Sinope), make quotations containing

extra lines, indicating that if they sometimes quoted from the vulgate
they also at other times quoted from the 'eccentric' texts. The question
of the relation of the quotations in fifth or fourth century B.C. authors to
the vulgate can only be decided satisfactorily if a sufficient amount of the
'eccentric ' traditions is recovered to make possible a direct comparison between
it and the quotations. Passages in which the pre-Alexandrian quotations
happen to coincide with the extant fragments of the eccentric texts are '
'
naturally very rare, but one occurs in 20-2, where Aristotle (tt. ^wwr kiv. 4.
p. 699 B, 35) transposes 11. 20 and 22 of the vulgate, whereas 21 agrees with the
vulgate with regard to the order. There is however a quotation in Plutarch
{Consol. ad Apoll. 30) of a passage which is partly preserved in P. Grenf. II.
4 (* 323), and in this it is curiously significant that Plutarch's text had an

additional line which is also found in the papyrus. And if a writer as late as
Plutarch was using a text which apparently resembled the eccentric class long *
'
after the pre-eminence of the vulgate was unquestioned, have we the right to believe
in the widespread circulation of the vulgate any earlier than the date attested by
strong and direct evidence? The papyri, as we have shown, lend no support to
the vulgate until the second century B. C. and the quotations from fifth and
;
fourth century B. C. authors are for the most part so small and so easily
reconcilable with an inference exactly opposite to that drawn from them by
Ludwich, as to be quite inconclusive. To maintain, therefore, as Ludwich pro-
poses, in the face of the four additional lines added to in the Pseudo-
Platonic Alcibiadcs II and the quite different version of 4^ 77-91 in Aeschines'
speech against Timarchus, in spite of the consensus of the early Ptolemaic
papyri and notwithstanding the obviously hazardous character of an argument
from averages based on comparatively few instances, the thesis dass as ganz '
unmoglich ist, die Existenz und die uberwiegende Herrschaft dieses Vulgartextes
fijr die voralexandrinische Zeit zu leugnen,' seems to us a considerable exaggeration.
In this, as in several other respects, the truth would seem to lie between the two
extremes represented by Ludwich and the critics whom he was chiefly opposing.
However unwelcome it may be, the fact remains that the history of the Homeric
vulgate prior to B.C. 150 is still involved in very great obscurity, and dogmatism
of any kind is to be deprecated. Before B. c. 200 we can distinguish a certain
number of texts, represented either by papyri or by quotations, which certainly ;
were not the vulgate, and a much larger number of texts, represented however
only by quotations, which may or may not have been the vulgate. Until
we know what were the readings of the 'eccentric' texts in the passages
corresponding to these quotations, and whether they coincided or not with the
74 IIIBEH PAPYRI
vulgate, the agreement between the quotations and the vulgate do not prove
much, since the eccentric texts often agree with the vulgate in the matter of
'
'
lines throughout quite long passages. The extreme view that the vulgate was
the creation of Alexandria is rightly rejected by Ludwich for there is evidence ;
to show that much of the Alexandrian criticism failed to influence the vulgate,
and it is on general grounds unlikely that the vulgate could have attained its pre-
eminence by B.C. 150 if it had only come into existence in the previous century.
That some of the texts represented by the fifthand fourth century B. C. quotations
were of the same character as the vulgate is likely enough.But that it had any
right to the title of the *
common '
text before the second century B.C. is extremely
disputable. So far as the evidence goes at present, the use of the vulgate text
seems to have been rather the exception than the rule down to B. C. 200.
(3) This brings us to another point. What were the causes of the rise
of the vulgate into pre-eminence? For Ludwich, who regards the vulgate as
already firmly established when the text of Homer first emerges from the
mists of antiquity in the fifth century, the answer is easy. But if we are right
in thinking that in the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. the text which became
the vulgate was fiercely competing with other texts which tended to be much
longer, and that it only achieved the victory about B.C. 200, something more than
its intrinsic merits would seem to be required to account for its success. If the
'
eccentric texts, which are, we think, as old as the vulgate, were good enough
'
not only for Aeschines and the author of Alcihiadcs II, but for the first three
generations of Greek settlers in Upper Egypt, why were they abandoned by
the succeeding generations ? It is very difficult to acquit the Alexandrian
Museum of having had some part in the matter, at an\' rate in Egypt itself, and
to disconnect entirely, as Ludwich wishes, the foundation of the chief University
of antiquity from the great changes wrought during the next century and a half
in the ordinary copies of the te.xt who was more studied than any
of that author
other. Of the general teaching received by students of Homer at the Museum
very little is known except the views of particular grammarians on particular
points ; and the fact that very few of the readings preferred b}' the great critics
seem to have aftected the text of the vulgate by no means inconsistent with
is
the hypothesis that the influence of the Museum, as a whole, in some way
'
tended to foster the reproduction of the vulgate in preference to the *

eccentric
editions. Here too, as we have stated, we have endeavoured to strike a mean
between the position of those who contended that the Alexandrians created the
vulgate and that of Ludwich, who denies that they were in any way responsible
for its general currency.
(4) With regard to the value of the variants in the early pap)-ri, the new
lines are in many cases no doubt interpolated from other portions of the poems,
and the other differences are often due to the unconscious influence of parallel
passages. Some of the new readings, however, especially the omissions in 20,
are at least defensible, and in themselves as good as those of the vulgate, though
none of those found in 19 and 21-3 has so strong a claim to be considered
superior as that much-discussed variant coK-a 8e Ipt? (^ 198), found in P. Grenf. II.
4, in place of w/ce'a 8' *lpts. That Ludvvich rejects this is not surprising in view
of his threefold classification of Ptolemaic Homeric MSS. (cf. p. 6(S) and his
anxiety to deny any critical value to the '
erweiterte oder wilde '
category. But
in his continued preference for co/ce'a 8"Ipts in the face of the other reading Ludwich
has not commanded general support {Z)Ka 8e 'Ipts is accepted, e. g. by Monro and
Allen, though not by Leaf) and the attempt to limit the knowledge of the truth
;
to particular families of MSS. to the exclusion of the rest is not likely to be more
successful in the case of Homer than in that of other authors. One of the most
valuable results of recent discoveries
is the proof of the fallacy of pinning one's faith
to one tradition. A
comparison of the papyri of extant Greek authors with the
corresponding portions of the mediaeval MSS. shows that the early texts (cf. e. g.
26 introd.) hardly ever favour in a marked degree any one of the later MSS. or
families of MSS., while in the case of some authors, e.g. Xenophon (cf. P. Oxy.
III. pp. 119-20), the papyri show that modern
have often gone too far critics
in preferring one family of 1\ISS to another, and prove clearly, what is apt to
be sometimes forgotten, that the proper guiding principle in the reconstruction of

the text of any ancient author is a judicious eclecticism. And though from the
point of view of Homeric criticism of the twentieth century it may be convenient
to label the texts of the early papyri as 'eccentric' or 'wilde,' it should be re-
membered that there was a long period during which this class probably formed
the majority of texts in circulation, and that the similar variants existing in
several of the quotations of Homer in the fifth and fourth century B. c. writers
are now freed by the evidence of papyri from much of the suspicion of error
which formerly attached to them. As was pointed out by Mr. Allen (Class. Rev.
1899, p. 41), it is now known that Aeschines and the author of Alcibiadcs II
neither were the victims of imperfect recollection nor adapted passages to their
own ends, but were quoting copies more or less resembling the texts of the
early papyri.
Fr.(4 ....
B 174 [ôfTOo <5?y OLKOv 5e (piXrji/ ey iraTpiSa yai\av
175 [0ct;|e(r^ tv vrjiaai. noXuKXijia-c Trea-otTJef .
76 HIBEH PAPYRI
176 [KaS Se Kev (^vycoX-qv Upiaficot Kai] Tpcocn X^lttolt^
177 [Apy^L-qv EX^VTjv r]9 (iveKa ttoXXol] A)(â[i<oi^
178 [U TpoL-qi anoXovTO ^LXrjS ano rrar^pLSos '^[y

179 [aXX i6t vvv Kara Xaov Ayaioov fiqS^] J [epcoet
179. For /ij/5e T fpQ}fi the first hand in P. Brit. Mus. 126 has ;((iXco;(tra)-coi/, which is
possible here.
Fr. (/;).
JB 204 OVK ayaOt] Tr[oXvKoipavLrj ei? KOipavos ecrro)
205 eij (3aaiXevi cot ([8<x>K Kpovov irais ayKvXop-qrcco
204. aynQi) '.

ayaBov ]\ISS.
205. ([hioKt: SO most MSS. Sajê Arislarchus and a few I\ISS.
Fr. (. I).
.B 621 \yL(:S p^v KreaTov S ap EvpvTOV AKT]npia}po?

622 [roor S ApapvyKîSt]^ Aicaprj^ VPX^^' o-\f{-^h^v
623 [roii' Se TfTaprcou qpx^ TloXvêiifo^ Oeoe]iSris
The position assigned fragment, which was suggested by Blass, is ahiiost

to this
certain. The remains of the third lines suit B 621 and 623, and though a]nvfioi>u
first and
in 1. 2 conflicts with the termination of B 622 in the MSS., the variant presents no difficulty.
afivfiuv occurs at the end of a line in B 876, but the ends of the other two lines are there
dilTerent.
621. AKT^npKDvos the 1\ISS. are divided between 'AKTopl(ovf (Aristarchus) and 'AcT-o/>/a)i'oy.
:
622. Aioprjs v/'X^" " /ii'/^" ']px^ (cpnre/)()f A(a)/)r;y MSS.

: The reading of the papyrus
avoids the spondaic ending of the verse.
Fr. (c 2).
B C73 [Ntpivs 09 KaXXiaros ci.vf]p] VTr[o IXiov 7]X6i
674 [t(oi' aXXcoi' Aavawv /ieV apv[poia TlqXiiaiva
^'75 \OlXX aXaTTaSi'Oi c/;r rrajvpos Sc 01 6cr7r[ero Aaoy

676 [oL S apa NLavpo]u r ^l-ôv [Kpajnadou [re Kaaov re

677 [Kai K(jciv Evp]v7rv\oio ttoXlv [vrjaovs re KaXvSvas
678 [rcoj/ av êiSjimro? re Kai Ai'T[t]<p[o9 rj-yTjaaaOrji/
679 [OeaaaXov vi Sv]a> [Hpa]KXLSao [auaKTOs
673. This line and 675 were athetized by Zenodotus, who omitted 674.
675. eo-7i[ero uneTo MSS. (except one which has n-ero).
:
Fr. (d).
B 715 [AXkt](tti9 riiXiao dvy]aTpa)U [i8os apia-yj]

716 [ot 8 apa Mr]6(ouT]y Ka]i OavfiaKirjy paTiPT)[v
717 [KaL M^XiôLav eôj/ KaL OXCôova rprjêiav
718 [rcoy Se îXoktt]tt]^ VPX^^ To^co]i' ev [e]i5co[sl
719 [eTrra iêcor ep^rai S ev eKaarrji Treji/frji/zcorra
720 [epêâaai^ to^cov eu etôrey L(pL /xaxYada'c

721 [aXX fieu 1/ i'T](TQ)L KiTO KpuTep aXyea 7raa])([coi/
722 [Arjfii'coi ev TjyaOerjL oOl jiiv Xlttov mey A-âiaiv [
723 [eX/cei iio')(6tôvTa KaKcoi oXoocfypovos] vSpou

724 [(I'd ye KeiT aêcov Ta-)(a Se fii'r]](7t:[<T6ai e/xeXXoi'
716. (paTtiVJ]^v eVe/ioi'TO ÎSS.

:
718. Zenodotus read here rav av f/ytfioffve î\o<TfjTr]s dyot tlvSpcoi'.

722. The reading aiap is very doubtful, especially the a, and 31 letters are rather long
for the lacuna ; inl, 723, which has 31 letters in the corresponding space, there are 7 omicrons,
and in 1. 724 only 21 or 22 letters are lost in the corresponding space.
724. This line and 725 were athetized by Zenodotus.
Fr. (e).
B 794 [(Jey/iet'oy 07r7ro]re va v<piv a(popp.r]6eui/ Aâioi

794 a 19 ir^Siov Tpcoâai cpovoy KaL Ktjpa cpepovTe?
795 [tcoc] fiiy ap dSopiur] irpo[ai]<p[i] noSa? coKa IpLS

796 [(c yepou] ac tol pvOoi (piX[o]L a[KpiT0L naiv
797 [coy re xrojre iiprjvr] TroX/x[o9 S aXiaaTO^ opcopef
798 [iiSt] /zej/j fiaXa noXXa /âp([ay narjXvOoi' avSpoov
78 HIBEH PAPYRI
799 [aXX ov voo] roiouSe Tocroi/Se [re Xaoi' oircona
800 VKnrjv yap (f)v\\o'.(nv^ 6[ot]/cor[es' rj yâiiaOoKnv
794. For the new line inserted after this cf. B 352 'A/jyf joi T/jcosfro-t (l)6vov ku\ K?]pn
(f)pOVT(i.
795. fjLiv ap fibofxevT] : îv (L<Ta^l(vr} the Bodlcian papyrus discovered at Hawara (collated
in Leaf's edition), a (l>iv eacrapfvq P. Oxy. 20, fj.iv other
ifimifxivr) MSS. Cf. \ 241, where apn
(lôtieuos is found in a Vienna MS. in place of np' ifia-apavos or iipa ehrdiKvos. Lines 79 ''"S
were obelized by Aristarchus.
796. iKi.: so X; met other MSS. Cf. r 296.
797. [wf T( tto]t dprjvT]: the restoration of the lacuna is uncertain. The beginning of
this line seems to have given much trouble in early times. P. Oxy, 20 has ws re ttot en [aprjprjs
which will construe but not scan, the Bodleian papyrus <ur re ttot (iprjvqs which will scan
and is defensible. The vellum MSS. mostly have Us ttot <V tlprjviji, with the unmetrical
variant w? t eV in three instances, and wanep V in one. 19 is unique in having the
nominative dprj'^, which can hardly be justified and may represent a corruption of the
reading ws t( ttot dprjvTji.
79S. After this verse P. Oxy. 20 inserts from r 185 a new line fiOu rî/ nJieiaTovi ^pvyas
a vfpui (uo- XuTTcoXovs,
im-. { n.
JB 813 T[r)i^ 7] TOL audpi.^ Bariday KiKXijcrKovaw

814 a6av[aT0L Se re 0-7]
fia iTo\vaKap6p.oLo Mvpiv7)^
8i-^ (v6a [jore Tpco9 re SieKpiOeu 7/5 e-rrLKovpoL
816 Tpa>(r[i fiy Tj-yefJ-oyeve fxeya? KopvOaioXos EKTcop
817 [n]p[i]afi[iSij9 apta ran ye ttoXv TrXeicrToi Kai apicxTOi
Fr. (g)
B 826 [roiv av 7]ypL0i'ev[ AvKaovoi ayXao9 V109
827 [navS]apo9 0)1 Kai TO^[oi' AiroXXan^ avT09 eScoKeu

828 [01 S] ap [A]Spr]aTeiav vaiov Kai Srjpov Anaiaou
8 '9 \^KaL TIiT]viai' e;)(oy Ka[i Tripiirjs opo^ airrv
830 [tcou tjp^X^ ASp7]aro9 re [Kai Ap(pio9 Xii'odcop7]^
826. Tcof iw6 r^yepuufv ( thc (loubtful^ might be f, but there is not room for [rcouavry.
:
INIost MSS. (including the Bodleian papyrus) road Tpcots twi' uvt' jjpxe, a few having the
variants t aZr or t aZ, The papyrus version can be defended against that of the vulgate
for oi 8e ziXfiav emiov in 824 are in any case contrasted with Tpwal fxev f]y(^6v(vf in 816 and
AapSafioji/ avT npxf in 8 1 9. But Tpwff is, as Blass observes, in accordance with E 200 and
211, where Pandarus calls his people T/jwey.
828. ap: so A and some other MSS. the Bodleian papyrus and the rest omit it. ;
laiov: T fixop IVISS. The papyrus avoids the repetition f'x"" ^X^" in 828-9.
Frs. (//) and (/). PLATE VI.
r 277 [HeXio? 6 0? Tra]vr ((ôpai Ka[L nai'T enaKovei

278 [kul TTOTafxoi] KaL yaca Kjxi ci vrnvepOe KafiovTai
279 ? [ 24 letters Ji^rai'
280 [vjj.i9 napT]up9 crT ^vXaaaeTi 8 opKia 7r[i(TTa
281 [ei fJ.V Ky] MeveXaoy A\eâu8po9 KaTajTe^vT}L

282 [avT09 7rid EXevTjv \T(o Kai KTr]//aTa iraura
283 [^/^fiS" S ef vrfîcraL vôofxiBa Kovpoi A>iâLQ)^v
283 a [Apyos 9 iTTTToôTov K]aL AâiSa KaWiyvujxiKa

284 [iL Se Ke TOL MeueXaos AJXeâySpou KaT[aTre(pvT}i
285 [Tpa)a9 7ri6 EX^vrjv K'ai KT7]/j.aT[a iravr anoSovuai
277. ((popai . . . '(TraKovfi: SO P. Brit, IMus. 126 {-pn cofr. from -pas) and Sch. ApoU.
ecfiopqi . . . eiraKovds Other MSS. Cf. X I09, /x 323 'HeXiov 6? TTavr ('(f>opa Kai navr inaKoiid.
279. Lines 277-8 are on a separate fragment, the position of which in relation to the
following one is not certain. The vestiges of the line preceding 280 are not reconcilable with
any letters from the middle of 1. 279 as given in our texts avOpionovi tIwo-Bov oris k enlopKov
0/^00-07;, but whether the papyrus merely differed from the vulgate in that line or contained it and
inserted one or more new lines afterwards cannot be decided. The combination yaia K'm 01
vTTfvfpde Kupo vTa\s is not admissible.
280. papTvpts: so Zenodoius and a few MSS. pdprvpoi Aristarchus and the majority ;
of MSS.
283. Kovpoi Axaioiu: TTovTOTTopoim most 1\ISS. The line is not infrequently omitted.
The new line inserted after 283 comes from r 258.
284. The MSS. have fl Se k 'A\e$ai/8poi> KTdvt] âvQos Mfi/sXaof. The papyrus reading
simply repeats 1. 281 with the fewest necessary changes.
Yv.{k).
T 295 [oivov S K K]pr]TT]po[? a](pva-ao[fJ.i'OL SeTraiacriv
296 [cAfêoj/ rf\8 rivyovTO deoLS aei[y(y(Ti]i(nu

8o HIBEH PAPYRI
297 [a)5e 5e ris (i7r]acrK(v A-âicou re Tpoocov r[e
295. (i](pvaiTu[iJ.ev(n : SO Aiistarchus, A (second hand) and other ]\ISS. ; ucpiKjadfMei'ni

P, Brit. Mus. 126, A (fust hand) and others.
296. T]vxr>i'To : fvôvTo JNISS. Cf. p. 68.
(i(i\y(v(TT]iai.v'. ÎSS. Cf. B 796.
aifiy(i>fT>]aii>
297. {nr]a<TK(v: (he doubtful might be 8 or X, but there is hardly room for even
a narrow letter such as between it and aKei'. untuKiv is uniformly found in the INISS.
t
Fr. (/). Col. i.
r 302 [cos (.(pau ^]y\yô\jievoL jx^ya S eKTvira fxrjTieTa ZV9

302 a [(^ ISi]^ Ppou]TO)i' eiri S^ aTepoTT-t]v ((peijKleju
302 ^ [Orjaei-iii'ai y]ap e/zeXXei^ er aXyea re arovaâ^ re

302 c [Tpcocn re kul] Aai>aoL\cn] Sia Kparepa^ va[p.]tiâ9
302 d [avTap end p o]p.oa-(iV re Te\evTi](T(v [re] tov opK[ov
303 [roiai 8e AapSai'L]S7]^\ TlpLa[j.o^ vpo's ^vOov eei7r[et'
304 [/ce/cAure fxev T^pcoes kul AapSavoi rjS [(]TnK[ovpoi
304 a [o(pp eiTTft)] ra /x[e 6v]/io9 evi arrjOeaaiv av(o]ye[L
305 [rjTOL e\y(iiv Lfii TTpoJTL iXioi' rjvep.oe(jaav
306 [6\v yap Kv rXairju [ttot ev o(f)6a]XpoLan' opa<j6[aL
307 IfiapvapJê^vov (f)LXo[v viov Ap-qiîXoot MeveXacot

308 [Z(v^ pLiv TTov] t[o\ y[e oiSe. Kai aOavaroL $eoL aXXot
309 [oTTTTOTepooL 6a]i'aTOio reA[o9 Tr7rp(i)fJ.(i'oy eariu
310 [7] pa Kai e? Suf^po^y ap\va^ Oero laoOeo^ 0ctjy
Col. ii.
325 i(ropo[Q)i' TIapLOS 5e Oooos e/c KXrjpo^ opovaev
326 OL p.ev [exret^ iôvro Kara crriâ? 7;î eKaar ov

327 [i]TnT[oi aepaiTToSts Kai noiKiXa revê (Kito
302. For this the I\ISS. have wy i<liav ov ' itpn ttw acjnv i-n(KjKuaive Kpovluiv, which
is expanded in the jjapyrus into five lines. The papyrus version of 302 comes from 1.
O 377 ^^ ((jiaT (vx('ifxfi'os /^'fyii S tKTvnf }ir}TitTa Ztvs,

302 a-d. For the restoration \t^ l8i]s /Spoi/jrcoi/ cf O 170 rph (V a// dn 'iSdiwi' UfHtav Krvne
fitirUra Zfvs and 6 75 avTvi 6' f^ "idijs fxfydX' iKTvixf. The supposed r might be combined
19. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 8i
with the supposed tail of the v of (]v[xo]nevoi in the hne preceding so as to read ]4><av, but
this arrangement is less satisfactory, fm followed by per]Kev is awkward, but the reading is
almost certain en is inadmissible.
; The next two Hnes, [drjdffjLevai y]ap v(T'fi.]ivas, are . . .
derived from B 39-40 Sija-etv yap er fj.eX\v iii uXyea k.t.\., where Naucic had conjectured 6q-
ae'fifvai yap epfWev er, which seems to have been found in the papyrus. For the stock line
[avTap inei p o^poafv k.t.\. cf. S 280, &C.
303. irpos'. perd MSS.
304. Aapbavoi r]8 [(]niK[ovpoi: evVi/ij/iiSej 'Aôtot MSS. For the papyrus reading, which
is as appropriate as that of the vulgate, cf. r 456, &c. The line which follows, ocpp' e'l-noi k.tX.,
occurs (with -ai KiKdei. for -aiv avcoyn) in H 68, 349, 369, and 6 6, being omitted in the
last two instances by the better INISS. For the variant di'coyet cf. I 703 6vpos Vj ar^Beaaiv
aviiyt].
306. [oju yap Ku rXairjv [ttot : o\|/-, fnel ov na T\r\(Top MSS. J

cf. l 565 0x1 yap Ke
rKair] j^poros.
310. 8i(ppo]v ap[uat : the reading is very uncertain. Perhaps the papyrus had a new
line here.
325. fi(Topo[a)v 3\//- Spoau MSS.
: The variant, which makes Hector behave in a very
unheroic manner, is probably a mere error.
Frs. (7;/) and {2).
^ 337 [ 13 letters ]Tr;i/[
338 ? eiXelro S aXKi/xa] Sovpe Sy[(o KKopvdfXva )(a\K<ot
339 <^^ ^ a[vTa)9 Mu]Xao^ Aprjia [reuê eSvi'ev
339 a ccaniSa Ka[i nrjXrjJKa (f>aeLvrj[v koI Suo Soupe
339 ^ Kai KaXa[s KVT]]piSas ^7na(f)[vpioi? apapuias

339 c ap.(f)L S a[p <JOfioi(n]v âX^ro ii[<po9 apyvporjXov
337 a. The remains of this line are inconsistent with 1. 337 Imrovpiv bdvw hi \6(pos
Ka6vnfpdfi> fi>fvv. Perhaps the papyrus elaborated the description of the helmet in one or
more new lines.
338. Here the MSS. have (tXero 8' iiXKipov

eyxos 6 ol naXaprjcfiip dpfipft, with an ancient
variant oKaxpevov dêi xa^fw (cf. K 35) attested by Schol. A, and perhaps f(Xe[To 8 a\Kip.a]
1
K.T.X. is a new line altogether, 1, 338 occurring previously. Zenodotus athetized 11. 334-5
and inserted after 338 dp(p\ S* ap' (opoia-iv âker dcnrlda Tfpcravoeaaav. For KfKopvdpeva xa^Kcot
of.r 18, A 43 8oip( 8va) KfKopvdpiva ;âXAcc5.
339. hpr]ia \Tivxe e8vvfv MSS. For the papyrus reading cf. z 340
: 'Aprj'ios eVre' e8vv(v
'Apjjia T(vx(a 6va). The new
expand the description of Menelaus arming
three lines
himself. For acrmSa Ka[i K.T.X. cf. a 256 e'xuv nrjXriKa KOi d(Tni8a Ka\ 8vo 8ovpe. 339 ^ xai
Kd\a[s Kvr]]pi8as firia(p[vpiois apapvias=^2 459 (cf. T 33 1), and 339 C ap(()i 8 a[p K.r.X. repeats
' 334.
G
82 HIBEH PAPYRI
Frs. {j) and (//).
r Zi[v ava dos TL](Taa6a[i /ze 7rpoW[p09 KaK eopye

351
Sioy Al'Se'jâvSpov Ka[L\ e[/i]7?f? u[7ro Safxaaaop
352 X^/''^'
353 o0[Pj'=^ "'"^y ppiyr]i<n Kai o[-fi.]yoya>v [ai'OpQinoiv
354 [êt^'o'J5oA:[o> KUKa peâi ny ^[tXoTrjTa irapaaxn'-
355 0^ /^^ '^l']

aH^TTCiraXooy vpoui 8[o\l-)(0(tklov iyxos
356 Kai ^[a]Xe [n]pLafiL8ao kut aa7n8[a nauroa- L(rr]u
357 S[ia fiey a<T7n8o9 r]Ke (paLpr]9 [o^pip-ov tyx^y
358 [Kai Bia] 0(opr]KO9 7roXv8aiSa[Xov ripr]pu(xro
[a]vTLKpv Se napai Xanap-qv 8ia[fir]ar yj.Ta)va

359
360 [ejyxos" 8 iKXivBr) Kai aXevuTO K[r]pa fi^Xaivav
361 Arpii8r]s 8 aop o^v epvaajxevos [rrapa fx-qpov
362 nX-qêp enaiâs K[opv]do9 (paXlof nrno8a(reir]9
362 a x^'<'f*^y 8eu'ou [8e Kopv9 XaKiv afxcpi 8 ap avrqi
363 [T]pi.x6a re Kai T[eTpay6a Biarpvcpî' eKneae x^^P^^
364 Arpei[87]S 8 coipLcoêu i8o)y eis ovpavov evpvy
365 Ziu narep [ov T19 (Xdo Oecou oXocorepo^ aXXo?
366 T] re (paixr][v ruaaaBai AX^âv8pov KaKorqro? ?
366 a 8ioy AXiâ[v8pov EXevq^ noaiv rjVKO/xoio
367 I'vv 8e fi[oi eu x^'-P^^^'^^' "'Z'/ ^'^^^ ^'^ ^^ P^^ eyxo?
368 'ÔL'S:âixq(piv ercoaiou ov8 iâXov piv

?'Xl^'/]
369 07? Kai e7ra:^[ay Kopvdo? Xa(3(u nnro8acreiq?
370 iXk 8 e7r(i[yoixi'0? jxer iVKvrjjiiBas Ax^-ôv^

TToAi/Kecrroy ipa^ aivaXqv vivo Seipqv
371 "qyx^ 8 [piu
352. This line was athetized by Aristarchus.

354. TIS K(V MSS.
'.
355. (}>rj MSS. Cf. 1. 369.

: 7,
357. r/Kf ^X<9e MSS.

: The use of !?</ in such a context is not Homeric.
361. For this line the MSS. have 'Atp'S;9 8 f'livadixfpos $l(f)os dpyvp6f]\ou. The papyrus
reading corresponds to * 173, with the substitution of 'Arpti'Sr;? for nf;Xft5r;r.
362. 67!<|ay: (ivaax6p(vw MSS. Cf. 1. 369. After (l)d\oi> the MSS. have dpcf)\ 8' Up
avT(a {avT;] Aristarchus and al x'V'<'a-Tf/j(u) wliich probably came at the end of 1. 362 a.
For xn^"; as an epithet of ic,'>pvs cf. M 184, Y 398, and for innobdaua r 369, A 459, &c.
For 8(ivov |8 Kopvi 'KaKfv (suggested by Biass) cf. A 420 Stiuup S' e^pax* xoXkos, and S 25 Aa
fie o-<î TTf/Ji xpot xa^""^-
363. After this line there is a break in the papyrus, and Fr. (), containing 11. 364-
71, does not quite join Fr. {J), but improbable that any line is lost in the interval.
it is
366 a. This new line comes from r 329. Whether the papyrus had AXtâvbiiov kuko-
TtjTos in 1. 366 is very doubtful.
369. (fir,: 7, MSS, Cf. 1. 355.
370. X: so P. Brit. Mus. 126 and Eustathius. eXfCf MSS.
tntiyyoyievoi ',
enia-Tpfyj/as INISS.
371. r]yxe : rjy^êv Eust., ay^f MSS.
Fr. (o). Fr. (/). Fr. (g).
JTL . VKcou^ ]paToya[

J
]a-auTO Se Xa[ ] nepi n .

[
]fôiqiP e<[
j
. [. .] Se 7tXo[i/ ....
Fr. (r). Fr. (s). Fr. (/). Fr. ().
].[
84 HIBEH PAPYRI
20. Homer, Iliad III~V.
Mummy A. Fr. (a) 8 x 4 rw. Circa b.c. 280-240. Plate VI (Frs. a',/^ >^).
Twelve small fragments containing parts of 66 lines from Books iii-v

of the Iliad, forming part of the same MS, as P. Grenf, II. 3, a small
fragment containing parts of 5 lines with no variants. 20 is much less remark-
able than 19 and 21-3 for the presence of additional lines only one is found ;
(after A 69), and this is more than balanced by the omission of T 389, A 89,
where the papyrus exhibits a striking agreement with Zenodotus, and E ^2^].
The total number of lines is thus two less than in the corresponding portions of
the vulgate, and, though most of the 71 lines are represented by only a few
letters, there are several marked divergences from the ordinary text, e. g.
in r 388, A 57, E 530 and 797. Owing to the rarity of additional lines 20 can
hardly be placed in the same class as the other Homeric papyri in this volume
(cf. p. 69) ; but it is clear that it differed widely from the vulgate.
The papyrus was probably written during the reign of Philadelphus.
Fr. {a). Col. i.
P 347 [KaL âX^v ArpeiSao Kar aaniSa navroa- eicrJT/i/
348 [ov 8 ^ppr]êv )(aXK09 aveyvaiicpOr] Se 01 ai^jirj
349 [aa-mS em k pare pi] i Se SevTepo^ copvvro \a\]Ka)i

350 [ATpeiSrjs MiviXaos eTnei/â/zet'o? Acl na?Tpi
351 [Z(v ava So? Tiaaadat /xe irporepo? kuk eopyje
Two lines lost.
354 [ieiiôSoKov KaKa peâi k^v cpiXoTijra 7rapa(Tx]rii
355 [v P"- Kf^'- cLjiTTenaXoov Trpotei SoXlôo-klo}^

^y]X^^
356 [kul /3aAe IlpiafxiSao kut aaniSa iravToo- eiJo-T/j/
354-6. not absolutely certain that the ends of these three lines, which were
It is
originally on a separate fragment, are to be placed here. But jrî followed after an interval
of one line by \cTr)v only suits this passage in Books iii-v. The difficulty lies in 1. 355,
(y'xo^, for the traces of the x are very faint and the supposed o is not joined at the top. But
as no other letter is more suitable tlian oand the surface of diis fragment has suffered a good
deal <y'x"^ is probably right.
Col. ii.
T 383 [a]vT[q 8 av6 EXei/rjv KaXeouar t Trjv Se Ki)(âu
384 nypy[coL e0 vyjrrjXcoL Tvept Se Tpooat aAi? T](rau
385 x^'P' [^^ vcKTapcov avov envaê Xaôvaa

386 yp[r]]t [S jxiv eiKvia iraXaiy^v^L 7rpo(Tnru
387 LpoK[ofjLooL Tj 01 AaKeSaifxovi vauTaooa-qi

388 ipi[a ^=^^ ^ jxaXiaTa Se fxiv (piX^^crKe
390 Biy[p 16 AXeâvSpos ce KaXn oikov 8e v^daOai
391 Kiiv[o^ y (u OaXaficoi Kai Stvcoroiai Xeêacn
392 KaX[XeL T o-TcXfSoDU Kai eip.aaLv ovSe k (pair]<f
393 av8[pi ixa^rja-afxevou tov y eXdetv aXXa ôpov
394 epxeÔ"^ 7^6 yopoLO vOv XijyoPTa KaOi^di'
388. The MSS. have rja-Kdv (or ijaKei) f'lpia Koka, fMaXiara Se fiiv (f)i\(f<TK with tj] fiiu
ffKTafifVT) 7rpoa((f)CL>vef fit' 389, which is omitted by the papyrus and is quite
'A(f)po8iTt] in 1.
unnecessary since Aphrodite is the subject throughout 11. 380 sqq. If the papyrus had
Trpoaffinev in 1. 386, it probably had paXiara 8e piu cpiXefaKs in I. 388, in which case the
beginning of 1. 388 may have been dpi a rjo-Kei KoXa or ipia Ka\ jjo-Kfo-Ke or eipi cn-fiKev Ka}<a
(cf. (T 316 ("pia TTiK(Tf), though none of these suggestions is satisfactory. An alternative
to this arrangement is to read (ipia koX rja-Kfi TrpQ(Te(pa>vff 81 AcppobiTT] in 1. 388 with another word
instead of npocr^mnv at the end of 1. 386.
Fr. {b).
A ig [avTLS S Apyeirjv EX^vqv Mev^Xaos a\y ol[to

20 [coy eâO ai S ene/ivâv Adrjuatr] re Kai] Hprj
21 [nX-qcTiaL ai y rja-Orju kuku Se Tpcoeacri /r]5eo-^?;[i^
22 [77 TOL AOrjvair] aKecou r]v ov8e tl ]i7Ti
22. f]nT : the vestiges do not suit n very well, especially as the space is rather
narrow for this usually broad letter.
86 HIBEH PAPYRI
Frs. {c\ (d), and (/), Col. i. Plate VI (Fr. d).
A 55 [ct Trep yap (^Qov^cxi re Kâi \o'vk [eico Biaix^pcraL
56 [ofK ar'vco 0^01'eoL'cr] 67rt r] \tio\v (pepTfpo? eaai
57 [aXXa ^prj Kai efiov K\pr]vaL \ttovov ovk anX^CTTOv ?
58 [kul yap eyco 0eoy i/zi] yivos S^ fioi] evOeu odei^ aoi
59 [Kat // 7rp<T^VTaTr]u] Jk^to [Kpovo^] ayKvXofirfjT]^

60 [afi(j)OTpov y^ve-qi re ifat ofiêica] o"/; TrapaK0LT[L9
61 [KiKX-qpai (TV Se iraai /xer aOavaTôiaiv aiâo-a[e]t9
55-6. These lines were athetized by Aristarchus.

57- < p^vai orl (prjvac
; dWa xpi) Koi (fiw Bfjxfvai vovov ovk drt'KfaTov jNISS. How the
line should be restored is quite uncertain, novov ovk drfXtarov may, as Blass observes, come
from A 26 TTws f6f\(is dXiou Gdvai novov rjS" drtXtaTov.
Frs. (r) and (/). PLATE VI (Fr./).
A 67 [ap^cocri 7rpoT(po]i. y[7T(p opKia SrjXrjcraaOaL

68 [co9 (paT ovS a7ri]6i](r[e naj-qp avSpcov T Oân- re
69 [avTiK A6r]vai\rji' e7r[6a Trrjepfojei^ra TTp[o(Tr]v8a
69 rt [opae AO-qvaiT) K\v8L[(JTr) TpiT^jOyefeia
70 [a(\|/-a //aX ey o-r]pa[rof eXê] //era Tpcoay /cat

4[x]?.'l^^
7 [Trefpai^ S coy <e Tpuxs vmpK\v8avTas AyaL[ov^
72 [ap^coo-t rrpoTcpov virep opKia 8]r]Xr}aa(T0a[i
6gn. For K^n^ffTrj Tpir]oyei/ta cf. A 515 wpfff akW dvyaTtjp kuSioti; TptroyfVfia. Considera-
tions of space are against the restoration [opao Atos Bvyartp k'jjSio-tt), and it is not satisfactory
to make Ztus address his daugliter as Aioy dvyarep.
A 80 [Tpcoay ^J i[Tr]7r[oSapov^ Kai evKvrjpiSa? Aâiov^

81 [coSe Se] rty et7r[eo"Kej/ /^coi' ey TrXrjcnov aXXov
82 [7; p aurty] 7roXe[//oy re /fa;coy Kat (pvXoiTL^ aivrj
83 [ecrcrerat rj] (l)[L\\o[T7^Ta per apcponpoia-i TiOr]ai

Fr. (/-). Plate VI.
J 86 t] S afSpi LKeXrj TpaKoju KanSvcred ofJulXoi'
87 AaoSoKcoi AuTrji'opiS]T]i KparepooL ai)(îJ.[T]Tr]L
88 TlavSapov avTideou 8i]^r}pVT] rjvpe ^[e] T[ov8i
90 (araoT a/ji(pt. Se fxiv Kparepai (r]Ti)(ey aa-Tn[aTa(or
91 Xaoou OL 01 ^TTovTO air AL<jr]Tr\oLO poaoov
88. Tjvpf b[i\ T[ovhe : so Zenodotus, omitting 1. 89 like the papyrus ; ei' nov (})fVf)oi |
tvpt
AvKiiovos viov dfivfiovd re Kpartpov re (=E l68 9) Aristarchus, P. Blit. Mus. 126, MSS.
Frs. (/}, Col. ii, and {k).
A 98 [at K^v iSr]i Meu^jXaou Apri[Lov Arpeo^ viou
roo aX[A ay oi(TT]Vcrov M^ye[Xaov KvSaXipoio

loi 6yfx^ ^ ATTO^^XcofL Xv[Kr]yeueL kXvtoto^col
102 a[pva}v npcoToyovcov p^^îv kX^lt-))v iKarofi^rji/
Fr. (/) = P. Grenf. II. 3.
A 109 [tov Kepa] K K(paXt]^ eKKai[SeKa8(i)pa necpuKei

110 [KttL ra pYv aaKT](ra9 Kepaoôo? [rjpape TeKT(oi'
111 [irav S v X]iri[va9 )(]pv(TT]i/ ([niOrjKe Kopwvrjv

112 [Kai TO fxep v KaTe6rjK] Tavva[aafXivos nori yairji
113 [ayKXiiâs npoaOei/ Si (raj/cea a-)(ê[doy (crdXoi eraipoL
Fr. (;//).
^ 525 [â^peicoi' avfiO)u at re j'eêa cKioî^jra
526 [irvoirjLo-LU Xiyvprjia-i 8iaaKi8va(rLv aei'jrey
528 [ÂrpeiSr)^ 8 av o/xiXoi' ecpoira noXXa KeXev'oDu
529 [ft) ^lXoi avip^s io-T Kai aXKifioi/ ijTop eX]ade
530 [aXXrjXovs T aiStadi Ki8a(r6iiar]^P\ vaixcyr]?

88 HIBEH PAPYRI
531 [aiSoiicvcov av8p(i>p TrAeore? (tool rje 7re(f)a]v[Tai
532 [0eyyo^'rco^' S ovt ap kX09 opvvTai ovre rlf? [aXKr]
526. After this line the MSS. have cb? Anunfu Tpwas ^tvov tfjiiredov ov8 îôvTo, which is
not necessary and may have come from O 622.
530. Kfdaa-deia-rjs v(XfjLi\vr]9 : Kara KpaTepai vapivav MSS. For KetcKrdeta-rjs cf. O 328,
n 306 (vda 8' dv>)p (Xeu av8pa Ktâaffeiar^s vap-ivi]^. An alternative restoration is Kara KpuTfpr^s
vapi'vrjs ; cf. Schoi. T on N 383 [Kara Kpartpijv va-pivrjp^ Tivh Kara Kparfprjs vaixivrji,
Fr. (;/).
E 796 [iSpco^ yap ixiv i:TiLpi\v y[TTO TrAareoy reXa/Jicoiô?

'jg'j [aairiSo^ ajj.(pi(3poT]r]? [rcoi reipeTO Kapue <5e xîpct
798 [av 8 i(T\(ov Te\a\p(o[v]a [Ke\au'((f)(s aip airopopyvv
799 [imreiov Se 6ea ^vyo]y j][\l/aTO cpcovrjaei^ re
800 [7; oXiyoi^ OL naiSja OLKo[Ta yuvaro TvSevs

801 [TvSev^ TOi pLKpo9 p]v r][i/ Sepa^ aXXa pa^-qTrj^
802 [kui p ore nep pii/] eyco [iroXepLêiv ovk eiaaKou
803 [ovS K7rai(pa(raiv] ot[ t r]Xv6e vo<T(f)LV AyaLcav
797. ap(f)il3poT^^rjs (vkvkKov I\ISS.

: ; (vkvkXov fj dfi(ptf3p6Tt]s EustalhiuS. doTr/Sos ayi<\>i^p6Tr)S
occurs in B 389, M 402, and Y 281.
21. HuMER, I/iad VIII.
Mummy A. Height 22-7 cm. Circa b.c. 290-260. Plate VI (Frs. and m).
A single fragment of this MS. also (cf. 20) was published in P. Grenf.
II. 2, and was remarkable for several new lines. We are now able to add
a number of other pieces, all from the earlier part of the book, and one of them
actually joining the fragment which appeared in 1897 (cf. note on I. 216 ).
That fragment proves to have been a very fair sample of the MS., for the
newly recovered pieces differ widely from the accepted text, which is frequently
expanded. As many as 21 new lines are inserted at intervals between 52 1.
and 1. 66, one of the additions consisting of 9 verses. This extraordinary rate
of augmentation is not maintained, but it remains high throughout. The average
for the surviving fragments is about one new line in every four verses ; for
indications concerning some of the lost columns see note on 180. There 1. are
also a certain number of otherwise unrecorded variants, some of which are
unobjectionable in themselves, though none is a definite improvement, unless
wtyoiTo in 1.58 may be so considered. The scribe as usual makes occasional
mistakes ; he wrote a small and rather curious sloping uncial hand, in which
the archaic i2 is conspicuous. A specimen is given in Plate VI, in addition
to the piece figured on the frontispiece of P. Grenf. II. We should assign the
papyrus to the earlier part of the reign of Philadelphus.
Fr. {a).
6 17 [yvco<TT iTTiiO oaov eifjLL Oe]a)[u KapriaTos anavTcot^

18 [ei 8 aye Treiprjaaade Ocoi] 7ra(ra[i re Oeaiuai
19 [creiprjv ^pvaeLrju ^ ovpa]vodeu [KpifiacravTes

20 [Trafxey 8 eâTrreo-ê 6o]i na(r[ai re Oeaivai
21 [a\\ ovK av epvaaiT e^ ovp]apo6[ei' mScoy Sc
22 [Zrjva vrrarov fxrjcrTOopa] ov8 [ef fxaXa noWa KafiOLTe
Fr. (d).
24 [avTTjL Ku yaiTji epvaaip. avTrit] re 6aX[a<rar]i (Col. ii)
25 [a-eiprjv p.eu Kiv enetTa rrepL piov Ov]XvfjL7r[oLO

26 [8r]aaifiT]u ra 8( k avT perrjopa] 7rauT[a yevoiTo
27 [ 19 letters
ap6p(OTr]coi' re [6<ou re
28 [coy (pa$ 01 8 apa Trarrey uKrjv eye]i'ou[TO cricoTrr/t
Fr. (.).
29 [fjLvOov ayacra-afxevoi fxaXa yap Kpa]Tep[cos ayop^vcnv

30 [o\|ê 5e 8rj jxcTeenre 6ea yXavKa)Tr]is AOtjut)
31 [a> Trarep T^/êrepe Kpovi8-q vTrarJe Kpio[pTcoy
32 [eu vv Kai Tjfxî^ 18/jLii' toi adevo? o]vk [enuiKTOv

90 HIBEH PAPYRI
Frs. {d\ {), if), and {g). ' Col. i.
38 [cor (f)aTO fXdSrjaeu 8e 7ra]T[7]^p ai'S[p]coy re Oecoi/ re (Col. ill)
3^^[Xîpi Tf fill/ KaTe]peêu CTToy r e0ar ck t [oi/]o/f[a]ê
39 [Oapaî Tpiroyeueia (îKov t^kos ov pv tl 6vij.\(jt>\L
40 [npocjipovL fMvdeo/xâi eOeXco Se roi rjiriof ei[i/ât
41 [coy eiTTcoj' i;]7r ox^crî TTv[aK]TO \aXK[o7ro]S [tJTTTTCo
42 [coKVTT^ra] xP^(^^(^ô-iv $e[ipy]iari]u Kop[o]coi'T
43 [xPôrou S aujrfoj? e^fjê Tre/Ji [xpof yet^jro 5 [i]fj.a(r6\r]i^
44 [xpva^LTjv v]rvKrou eof ^ [em^TjaiTo Si^]pov
45 [//ao-Tfêj/ 5 elAaaj/ rco 5 oi;[if aKot/T Trejracr^T/j/
46 [//0-cr?;yi;y ya/T/jj- T[e KJaf ovpa[i/ov a(TTepoev]TO^
47 [I^T/i/ ê iKavi\fi noXy7riS[aKa /xr]Tpa 6]r]p(i)V
48 [Tapyapov v6]a Se 01 [rejûeifoy ^(o/xo9 re 6vr]]i9
49 [ei/0 iTTTTOv? earrjcre Kpovov nai^ ayKvXoprjTeco

50 [Xvaa9 (^ oêoop, Kara S rjepa novXvv e^cflei/
51 [avros S u Kopv(f)rji(TL Ka6(êT0 KvSeL yaioop]

52 [eiaopocop Tpoooop re ttoXlv Kai vrâs ^^ârcor
4 lines lost.
53 [oL 8 apa SeLTTvov eXovro Kuprj Kopocoi'res Axaio]i
54 Ipipâ Kara KXiaias airo 8 avTOv $(t)pT]craoi']ro
r)4 (^ [ 28 letters Jf^f?" [

-J'
b4 d [ 16 letters pera Se Kpeicov Aya\p\epv(i)u
54^ [oppara Kat Ke(f)aXiiv iKeXo^ All Tep]inKep[av]v(joL

^^^ci[Apei] 8e C'coviiv (XTepvov 8e Tloaei8a(i)\vL
55 Tpooe? 8 [av6 erepcoOev ava TTroXi\> o)7rA/[ô]j/ro
r)5n EKTopa r [apcpi peyav Kai apvpova nov[Xv]8apaPTa

55 /; Au'eia[v 6 0? Tpcoai 6eo^ co? riero SijpcoL
55 c rpCL? r A[pTT]i'opi8a? UoXvôu Kai Ayqvopa Slop
Frs. ((f), (c), and (//). Col. if.
55d[v]i^,9y 'f AKa[pavT eiTLeiKeXov adauaroicrLu (Col, iv)

56 navporepoi pep[a(Tai' 8e Kai toy vapivi pax^rOai
57 XPVî- cciâyKa[ir]i npo re naiScop Kai npo yvvaiKcoy

58 naaat Se coiyovTo rrvXai e/c S eaavro Ago?
59 776^0 i 6 i\mrT][S re ttoAi'? S opvfiaySo? opcopei

60 OL S ore [Srj] p [9] Xi'^pov era ^vvlovt^s lkovto
61 avp p (3'a]Xoi' p[ipov9 aw 8 cyêa Kai /ieiê ai'Spcou
62 \a\K[eod]a>pT}tiâ)V arap aaniSe^ o^âXoeaaai

63 ^Tr\r][vT aWrfXrîcTL iroXvi 8 opvpaySo? opcopet
64 v$a 8 [afi] ocfjico[yr] re kul ^vy^coXr] TreAej^ avSpcov
65 oXXvvTOiv T[e Kai oXXvpevoiv pee 8 aipari yaia

6â (V 8 Epis [ey 8e K\y8oLp.os ojiiXeou (.v 8 oXorj Krjp
65 d aXXou C[^]ioi' ^^[ovaa veovrarou aXXou aovTov
6qC aXXoy T[0]i^[T]Q)Ta Kara /xodou cAacc tto8ouv
4 (?) lines lost
65 ^ . .
[
66 o(f)p[a] n^[v 7/o)j? i]v [Kai aeêTo upov rjpap

67 To(ppa /ia[X a]fX(poT[epa)i^ /3eAe rjirrero ttlttt^ 8e Xaos
68 T]fjL09 8 T]e[Xio]9 fi(r[oy ovpavov a/xcpiê^rjK^L
69 Kai Tore 8 rj
)(^pv[cria Trarrjp eTL-aife raXavra
70 ev 8 eri^[ei] 8vo [ktjp^ TavrjXeyôs 6avaroLO
71 [TpoiPmy 6 i[TT]iTo8[ap(Xiv kul Aâioou )(aXKoviTcoucop
72 [eA/ce 8e p.ea]aa A[a]/3a)i/ peTre 8 aiaipof rjpap A^^âicoy
73 [ai /iv A)(ai]cou [/cr;pe? (ttl yÔoi^t nooXvÔTeiprji
Fr. (t).
180 [aAA 0T Kiv 8t} vrivaiv em yXacpvptjiêi yeiyco[p]ai. (Col. ix)
181 [pvrjpocrvvri tis iir^LTa nvpo? 8riLoio] yerecrco
182 [co? TTVpi vr]a9 eunrprjaco KTCifco <5e KJai avTov[s]

183 [Apyiov9 napa vrjvcrii/ aTvôfiei'ovs] vrro Ka7rv[ov]
184 [coy einoou nriroLa-LV iK^KXero (pai8ifios] EKTCop
Fr. (k).
187 [Ai/8pQpayr) 6vyaTt]p fXiyaXjrjTopo? H[ikrmuos

92 HIBEH PAPYRI
1 88 [vfiLV yap irpojepoicn /j.eXt](f)[p]oua 7rvpo[v cOrjKiu
i8y [oLuoi^ T eyKepaaaaa ttuiv or^\ Ovp.o[s avcoyot
190 [7/ ifJLOL 0? 77-e/) OL OaX^pos TToais] vxofJ.a[L îvai
Fr. (/).
Plate VI.
203 [ol] <5e (TOL eis E\iK[rju t kul Aiyas Scop avayovai (Col. x)
204 TToXXa T K[aL yapuvTa av $ aîcn ôvXeo vlktjv
204 rt [. ] Kai p.[
205 [f Tre]/) ya/) k ed[iXoiixep ocroi AavaoKXiv apcoyoL

206 [T]pa)a^ an[(iO(yaaBaL kul epuKCfxei/ dvpvona Ziqv
206^ [. . .]yu_4
Fr. (;//) with P. Grenf. II. 2. Col. i. Plate VI.
216 rt \^vBa Ke Aoiyo? erjv Kat a/XT])(âp]a (py ey[e]roi/70

217 [kul vv k eyeiTpr]aei' TVVpL ktjXccol y]r]9 A)([at](ou
218 [ei fir] CTTL (ppeai 6i]K AyafxefiU0}']L 7roTp[i]a Hprj
219 [avTcoL TTonrvva-avTL 0oco]y orpvva eraipovs
220 [(3r] 8 levai napa re KXiat]a? kul vrje^ f'0-[as
221 [nopcpvpeou fxeya câpos e]x^^ ^7 X[^'^^.' ?'l"X^^''*
Col. ii.
249 Trap 5e Zli[oy ^coficiii nepiKaXXei /ca/S/SaXe v^fipov (Col. xi)
250 ei'â 7ravofJL(pai(OL ZrjvL pi([eaKov Aâioi
251 oi 5 coy our eiSovTO J109 Tepa9 [aiyio)(oio
253 fiaXXop em Tpcoeacri Oopofi fj.v[r](TavTO 8e yappLr]^
252 rt Zivs Se na-Tjp corpvve (p[aXayyas KvSei yaicor'?
252 Z* C(Tai' Se T/ocoey tvtOov 6a[
253 evB ov T19 [npoT(po9 AavauiV ttoXXcov irep (ovtcov

21. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS
93
Fr. (n).
255 rt? [ 21 letters ] . Keiv[

256 [aWa TToXv npcoTos Tpcooyv eXejj/ ay[8pa Kopucrrrju
257 [^paSfioiîSTju AyeXaou fx]fx (fivya[8 eTpanev imrov^
258 [rm 8i fxeTua-TpecpdûTc nYracppev'coL eu Sopv nrjêi^
Fr.{o).
]ei/ oX$po[
] ; 6 . . .
[
]
S-J
iH
18. The line should end 7m ("lS.tc navres, in place of which the papyrus evidently
repeats naam T e.mvat from 1. 20. This is no doubt to be regarded as a mere blunder.
22. Even if the final a
of Zi^va /xô-rcopa be left and unelided (cf. e.g. 1. 58) the supple-
ment beginning of this line is shorter by two or three letters than in
at the
the foregoin-
verses. 1 he difference, however, is not sufficiently marked to necessitate
the inference that
there was avanant here. Plutarch, De Is. et Os.^î B,
has .a) y.^^ru>pn, which is unmetrical
In a quotation in Arist. n.pi Cô^v kiv.
4, p. 699 B 35 1. 20 is placed after 1. 22.
25-6. These lines were athetized by Zenodotus.
27 The ordinary version of this line is T6a<Tov iyi. nepi r' ,Jp\ Br^v nepi r' el>' d,dpcijr<ou
_
but m the papyrus the letter after ]. is clearly r not rr, and,
moreover, roaaou . . . eJ,,
would not hll the lacuna, which is of the same length as preceding
in the lines. The verse
therefore probably ended with audp<o7r<cv re Becou re, and n^pl r' elfii was replaced by some
synonymous phrase, e.g. roaaov ,poi Kpetaaou aB^vo, ; cf. 4> 190 t Kp.la^c^v uiv Ziii
28. Aristarchus athetized 11. 28-40.
30. The V of ABy^vrj has been corrected ; the scribe apparently began to
write a r.
38-9. The Vulgate here has ri^v 8' emfiuSâa^ Trpoal^r, Pe(p,\r,y,peTa Zeis' 0dp(ru ktX
In
the papyrus 1. 38 apparently =
E 426, O47, and it is followed by the verse found also in
A 361, E 372, Z 485, Q 127. These two verses are not combined
el-sewhere in Homer. The
margin IS lost above both 1. 38 and the corresponding 1.
55 d, but if, as is practically certain,
1.55 ^directly succeeded I. 55 r, 11. 38 and 55^ were the first of their
respective columns.
1 his conclusion, however, produces a complication with regard
to the first column of the
roll, which il It agreed with the ordinary
text would have contained 37 lines, or
7 more than
the column following it. Col. ii of Frs. {d)-{/i) also apparently contained 30 lines, 1. 73 beino-
opposite 1. 55 a and though a certain
; variation
admissible, this will hardly account for a is
ditterence of 7 verses. Perhaps, therefore, there was an omission of three or four lines
or
11. 1-37 of the book may have been divided between two columns of which the first
was
a very short one, and the second contained
several new lines, though none occur in
what remains of it or, again, the roll may have
; originally included Book vii. At the
94 HIBEH PAPYRI
end of 1. 38^, near the boltom of the final t, is a short diagonal stroke, which maybe
accidental.
39. The supposed 6 of 6v[ji\(M\ has perhaps been corrected. The vestiges remaining
of the ends of this and the next line are very slight.
41. 1. TlTVCTKfTO.
42. \^)vaiaicTiv\ xpvrriridiv vulg., as is normal.

45. nt\TaaQr]v\ this form is not found elsewliere, the aorist being always of the synco-
pated type fTTTdfjLtji' &C. TrTea6r]v ]\ISS.
47-8. The
p of 6r]p(,}v is not very satisfactory, but as the v is nearly certain, and the
traces of the other letters suit well enough, we hesitate to suppose a variation from the
accepted text here. Similarly with regard to repfvoi in I. 48, the vestiges hardly suggest fjif,
but they are too slight to be conclusive.
49. According to the ordinary version this line ends Trarrjp Mpiou re êd)/ re, in place of
which the papyrus gives the sjnonymous stock phrase Kpovov ttois ayKv\opr]T(oi (a 75 &c.) ;
cf. 11. 38-9.

52. There is a break in the papyrus below 1. 50, and one line at least is lost between
1. 50 and the vestiges which we have attributed to Axai]o3v in 1. 52. Between these vestiges
and 1. 53 there were four more lines, as is shown by the height of the margin. It is thus
necessary to suppose the insertion of at least 4 new lines at some point between 11. 50
and 53. If Axei'wp is right, they occurred between 11. 52 and 53 but that reading is quite ;
uncertain, and they may equally well have been inserted e.g. betw-een 11. 50 and 51. Their
source is in any case obscure, for the passage would admit of many forms of expansion
perhaps one of the additional lines was e i, which was added before 1. 53 by Zenodotus. It
is possible that the loss between 11. 50 and 52 {?) is larger than we have supposed. But the
column is already rather tall, and it is safer not to assinne the insertion between 11. 50 and
53 to be longer than necessary. The corresponding passage in Col. ii gives no assistance,
for the break there occurs in the middle of a series of additional lines, the precise number
of which is uncertain; cf. note on 11. 65 a sqq.
54 <?-</. 54(5' pfTti 8f...54</ correspond to B 477-9. These lines are preceded in
0(4767) by wy Tovi Tjyffxuves ^miKoafxeov ev6a kul '4i'6a v(Tp.ivr]V 8' u'vai, and it is of COUrSe
possible that vupivrfv b' Uvai stood at the beginning of 1. 54 b; but (vda kih tvOa cannot be read
at the end of 1. 54 a, nor w-ould the commencement of B 476 be suitable to the present
passage without some alteration. The connecting link between 11. 54 and 54 b must
therefore be sought elsewhere. Unfortunately the remains of 54 a offer a very slender 1.
clue ; the final letter is possibly v.
55. uiTT\i Co^vTo: so most MSS. ottX. Aristarchus.

;
55 a-d =^ A 57-60, where the beginning of the preceding line Tpu>es 8' o^^' erfpuSfu inl
Opatapo) TTffiioto coincides with that "of 1. 55 in this book. There is not much doubt about
tile identity of 1. 55^', although none of tlie letters except the r is perfect; cf. note on
" 38--9.
57.
xp'?'?' XP*'"' most INISS., but there is considerable authority for ;^pftj;, for which

xprint would be an easy clerical error. xPVIh however, is itself defensible, since x^v'a is
attested by Hesychius as an Ionic form of xp*'"-
58. (oiy<{vT(> uiyvvvTo MSS., but a)(<)tyoj/ro is preferable as the older form
: cf. the ;
Lesbian infin. udyr^v.

61. The first p, if it be p, has been corrected vrw cannot be read. Such an ;
attraction of v to p, though natural, is unusual.

65 a sqq. The identification of II. 65 a-c, w^hich are found in 2 535-7 (cf. Hesiod,
Scti/nm, 156-8), is due to Blass. The scanty remains of 1. 65 d do not suit 2 538, nor would
that verse be likely to appear in the present passage. The extent of the lacuna between
11. 65 d and depends on that at the corresponding point in Col. between 1. 50 and the
;'
i
supposed vestiges of 1. 52. If only one line is there lost, not more than 4 lines are
missing here, but the lacuna may be larger in both cases cf. note on 1. 52, ;
73. This line and 74 were athetized by Aristarchus. There would be room for two
more lines in this column, 1. 73 being opposite 1. 55 a.
180. This line is to all appearances the first of a column. Since the last line of the
preceding column was probably 1. 75 (cf. the previous note), there are 104 lines to be
accounted for in the uncertain number of columns intervening between Frs. (d)-[h) and
(/). If the average length of a column is taken as 30 lines (cf. note on 11. 38-9), three
columns would contain 90 lines, four columns 120. That the papyrus version was
shorter than the vulgate is highly improbable, its tendency being decidedly in the opposite
direction. There were therefore four columns between 11. 75 and 180, containing additions
which amounted to approximately 16 lines. Similarly there must have been an addition
of about 7 lines between 1. 184 and 1. 203, which is again the top of a column.
183. The majority of the i\ISS. omit this line, which is printed in small type by Ludwich.
184. <ât5i/LtosJ E/cTcop <pwvr)(T(v re INISS., a variant fioKpov dvaas being recorded by U.
:
The new reading of the papyrus is in itself as good as either of these.

189. This line was rejected by Aristophanes and Aristarchus; cf. 1. 73, note.
203. This line is the first of a column; cf. note on 1. 180.
Be croi ; hi Toi (pi ri, S' ert, 8e r ) IVISS.
204. All that remains of the k of /cat is the vertical stroke, which could be read
as an i ; but the second half of the k may be supposed to have disappeared, as the papyrus
is evidently rubbed.
204 a. Another new line, of which the remains are hardly suflJicient for identification.
There may, of course, have also been a variation in the termination of 1. 204.
206 a. The vestiges of this line are inconsistent with 1. 207 avroii < fvff okuxoito
Ka6r)n(vos oios cV'lS);. The doubtful fi is possibly an a, in which case k or p might be read in
place of t.
216 a sqq. The discovery of a new fragment which joins on to the first column of the
piece published in 1897 in P. Grenf. II. 2 confirms the restoration there proposed. For
the line fv6a k.tX which precedes 1. 217 cf. e 130 and A 310, where it occurs in a precisely
similar context, epya ytvovTo is the common reading, but iyivovro, as in the papyrus, is
found in two MSS. at the latter passage.
2 1 7. vr]es \x[ai\a)v \i fvenprjaev wâs written in 1. 2 1 7 i/rjff is a mistake for vr)a^ as in 1. 220
:
;
but it is possible, as Blass suggests, that fviirpTiaOtv was substituted, ilvas vulg. for Kxai^<s)v,
with 'Axm&Ji' at the end of 1. 220. The papyrus transposes the epithets.
219. \. OTpvvai, (Taipovi 'A;âtoiIy MSS.
:
220. vr]{s fia[as: cf. note on 1. 217. etaas is found also in Vrat. b.
251. ei5oi/To K.T.X. cf. E 741-2 Topyfit] KefpaKrj
: Aios Tfpas aly. The Ordinary reading
. , .
IS tdov6 o T ap e'/c Atos rj\v6ev opvis.
252 a-d. These two lines are not found elsewhere in Homer. The supplement in
252 a is that proposed by Ludwich, Homervulgata, p. 58 ; for <^[dkayyw cf. A 254 and N 90,
where the word follows &Tpvve. But the verse may be completed in various other ways, e.g.
(fioôp Tpwtacriv ivopaas, as suggested by van Leeuwen. In 1. 252 b the papyrus has (lanv,
not fiâv as printed in P. Grenf. II. 2. dcrav tvtBov, however, makes a very unsatis-
. . .
factory combination, and eiaav may well be a mistake for tiâv. In that case the line may
be completed i:â\vaoicnv onKraw (Ludwich) or A(i[vaa)v ano racjipov (van Leeuwen).
256. (\f]v av8pa: or perhaps av8\pa K[opvaTr]v, though this does not suit the spacing so
well. The remains of the previous line do not agree at all with 1. 255 in the vulgate,
Ta<Ppov T e^(\dcrai Koi ivavriîov fi(ixiaaa6ai.
96 HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. {o). This fragment from the bottom of a column remauis unidentified. oXedpos,
which is is found nowhere in the eighth book
the only certain word, either ]ev or ; ]ov may
precede. In the second line either fvarrov or (verov may be read.
I . The first j
. letter is
very indistinct, but does not seem to be C-
22. Homer, I/iad XXI-XXIII.
Mummy A. Fr. (r) 13-3 x 11 cm. Circa b.c. 280-240,
This series of fragments of the Iliad, Books xxi-xxiii, as in the case of
20-1, belongs to a MS. of which other pieces have previously been published in
P. Grenf. II. (no. 4) \ In all there are parts of about 190 lines, a number which
affords a sufficiently accurate estimate of the general character of the text.
New verses appear sporadically, though never more than two are found together,
and the proportion of them
at least 11 lines, perhaps 9 or 10 more, out of the
190, or about 13 probably
i in is much smaller than in 21.
Other variations
from the accepted text are not infrequent, the more remarkable being those at
4> 426,X 102, no, 393, 442, 462, 4* 129. Cf. introd. to 19.
The three books were written in the same hand, an upright rather large
uncial, of which facsimiles are given in P. Grenf. II, Plates II and III, and which
is probably of the reign of Philadelphus. The scribe was somewhat careless,
and is guilty of several obvious slips. correction by a second hand occurs A
in at least one passage (^ i-i9)-
Frs. {a) and {b). Book xxi.
^421 Kai [8y] avO rj Kvi'Ufxvia ayei fiporoXoiyou ApTja
422 8rjiov K 7ro[\]e/xoio Ka[Ta kXovou aXXa /zereXê
423 CO? câT A[6rjv]air] $ fi[TaaVTO X^^P^ ^^ Ovfxcoi
424 Kai pa [. .
.] . oaafx^vrj 7rp[o9 arrjOea Xîpi Tra^êa/i
425 r]Xaa( xr/'y] 8 avrov Xvro yovvara Kai (piXou rjTop
426 [tco //]e j^] ap ap.(pco Oeive ttotl \6o[vl novXvlSoTeipyji
427 [7; 8e ap] eTTevxofiUT] e7r[ea TTTepoeuT ayopeue
428 [tolovtoi I'vu 7r]ai'T6? ocroi TpcoeaaLv apcoyoi
'
There arc also a few small iiicces at llcidclbeig; cf. footnote on p. 5.
429 [uv or Apyioiac fia^yoiaTO Kv8a[\iii0Lcnv

430 [(i)(Se re Bap<Ta\eoL\ km rXrjfxovfS [coy AcppoSirr]
* 422. There are horizontal marks like paragraph! below this line and 424, but there
is other superfluous ink on this fragment, and a paragraphus below 1. 424 would be out of
place. Moreover, there are no other cases of its use in this MS.
p fTTLeicranevr] MSS., but ihis is Certainly not to be read in the papyrus.
424. Kai The
supposed o before aafievrj cannot be correct, and was perhaps deleted or it might be ;
explained as a blotted a-, which would be more intelligible. Possibly eTnetacrafxfvr]was

written and the first a afterwards cancelled fTnuaaaafxevr] ; is unsuitable. There are ink
marks above the line here, but they are more probably to be regarded as accidental
than as an interlinear correction cf, note on 1. 422. ;
426, dfive TTOTt: Kt'ivTo (ni MSS., though some read ttoti for (iri. For 6(ue (sc. 'Afirjvali])
cf. 459 Beivofxivov TTpus ovdei.
I
429. Kv8lvXljJ.CillTLV : 6uiprjKT'[l(TlV OY 6(xipV^KT<n(TlV j\ISS.
Frs. {c) and {d). Book xxii.
Col. i.
X ? J

77 \f] p y^pociv TTo\ias S ap ava rpi'âs (Xkcto -^^paLv
Col. ii.
X 96 [ctijEktcop a(TâTo]v fxl*^^ //eroy ov-^ vne^copeL
97 [rrvpycoy em npovôfrli (f)aivr]P aa-mS ipucras
98 [o]x[îf?o"ay 5 apa nre 7rp[o? 01/ p^yaXrjTopa dvfiou
99 oip.01 eyclov rj pe[v k Tri/Xay Kai rei'êa Svco
99 a \a)^r)T09 Kiv i.o[tp-i ?
100 IlovXvSapas fi[oi irpo^ros ^Xiy^^îriv avaOrjaret
10 r 09 /z KXvev Tp[(caL ttoti tttoXlv -qyrjaaaOai
102 vvKra TTOTI Bvo(f)[epr,v oTe r copeTO S109 AîXX^vs

103 aXX eyco ov TTidoprju i] r av ttoX[v KepSiov 7]ey
104 vvu S 7rei (oXecra Xao[v aTaa]6aXir]i(riy (p.r]ia[Lv
105 [a]i8(o/jiaL Tpa)ia9 Ka[i] T[pa)iaSa]s eXKccriTTeTrXov?

H
98 HIBEH PAPYRI
io6 i^ji\ 7roT Tis ei7rr]iai KaKcoT[epos aX\o9 cfii]o
107 Ekt[(op 7;]0^t i3i]770 7ri[6T]aas (oXeae Xaov

108 0)9 [lepeovaLv ]fJ.oc Se . . S a.[u ttoXu KepSioi^ r]]i^
109 [ai^TTji^ 7] A^]i[X]r)a [KaTUKT^LvavTa uiâOat
no Tj [av\T(i>L Tr[po 7roX]T]o^ VKXi(t)[9 anoXia-Oai

II r [et Se K]y aa[nt]S[a] fiev [KaraOeiofxai oficpaXoeaaav
1 1 [/cat Kop]v6a ^piapr]if 8[opv Se irpo^ reixoy epeiaa^

113 [(^^jjo? ['jaj[' -4]^tA7;o[$' aixvpovo^ avrio^ eXOco
Col. iii.
X 137 avOi piv(.iv 0Tna['i3 8e irvXas Xnre (Srj Se (po^7)6i9
138 IlrjXcLSrji 8 7ropov[ae iroai Kpanrvoiai 7r7roi6(o^
139 r]VT KipK09 opeaîv [eXacpporaros 7rTT]i/(oi/
140 K a pTraX I p[(os^] copiJ.ri[(Te pera Tprjpcoiâ neXeiav

141 7) 8e T y7rai[6]a (poPe[iTat o 8 eyyvdeu o^v XeX-qKco^
142 Ta[p^]a iTTaiaau y[
143 [co9 ap y pp]epa(o\9 i6u9 Trfxero rpeae 8 EKrcop
Fr. (.).
X 197 [roaaaKi piv TrpoTrapoiOev aTro(TTp]e'âaK(ii/ AîXXeivs

198 [npo? 7r8iov avT09 8e rroTi nroXio? TrereT a]i(i
Fr. (/).
X 232 ? jyfî' 8 avre Trpoaeenre /xeyay Kopu6aioXo9 EKTOop
233 ? Arpcpo^ [t] pev poL TO irapos ttoXv îXtutos rjaOa
Fr. (^).
X 247 [coy (papevr) Kai KepSoavyqt rjyrâa]T A[B\r}v\r}

248 [oL 8 0T St] crêSoi' rjaav fTT aXXrfôLcnv lovres
249 [tov npoTcpo? Trpoaeeine fieyas Ko]pv6aio\os Ektcop
250 [01; o- en IlrjXco? vie (po^rjaoiiaL coy to] napos nep
251 [r/)iy mpL aarv [leya Upiapov Sie? o]vS ttot erX7/y
252 [peiuai encpxo/J.evoi' vvv avre fie] 6v/xos avcoyei
253 [o-Tr]p.i>ai avTia aeio eXoipc ku rj Kev aX]oir]p

254 [aXX aye Sevpo deov? eniScofieOa roi] yap apiaT[oi
255 [p-aprvpoL eaarovTaL Kai 7ri(TKono]L eppov[ia(av
256 [ov yap eyca o- eKirayXov aeiKico ai K]v epoi Z[ev]<i
Fr. (//).
X 326 r-q pa eiri [01 pepacoT eXaa eyx^t Sios A^tXXev^

327 [aujriKpv S aiTaX[oio Si av)(evos rjXvd aKcoKT]
328 [ovS ap an aa](f)[apayov peXirj rape âXKoâpeia
Fr. {i). Col. i.
X 392 a [Kai T]e6vr]0Ta nep roaa yap KaK epr][(raT] Axaiov9
393 [ ]cv peya kvSos enecpvopev EK[T]opa Siov
Col. ii.
426 Ekt[opos cos 0(f)eXev Oaveeiv ev \epcnv eprjicri
Fr. (/).
X 441 [SiTTJXaKa 7Top(j)[vper}v ev 8e 6pova noiKiX erracrae
442 [aij^jra 8 ap ap(f)i[7roXoiaiv eKeKXer evrrXoKapoLaiv
443 [a/^0t ir]vpL <rrr)[aaL rpinoSa peyav o(f)pa neXoiTO

444 [EKTop]i Oeppa X[oeTpa p.a)(^T]s eK voaT-qaavTi
445 [^l]Tf\_i-'n o]i^^ ivor][<Tev piv paXa rrjXe XoeTpoov
446 [x^p(T] vn A[yî]Xrjo[s Sapaae yXavKconis AdrjuTj

447 [Ka)KVTo]ys 8 7}K[ova Kai oipoyyqv ano nvpyov
448 [ttjs 8 eX]eXix6v yv[ia x<^pai 8e 01 eKireae KepKi9
H Q,
loo HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. (/).
X 458 [>/ fiLv )(aK errei ov ttot vl ttXtjBvl n\i[vYv [avSpcov
459 [aWa TToXu rrpoOeeo-Ke to ov yuefos] oySeui eiK[Q)v
4fio ? [ 29 letters ]
[
Frs. (/), (w), and (;/).
X 462 [avrap enei SKata<^ t6 rrvXla^ Kai] irvpyov LKav^v
463 [eoTj; TraTrrrj]vaa e-rri Tetx\ei] rov 8e vorjaeu

464 [eXKOfiGuou rrpocrdey 7roXe[(w? rjaêey Se fiLv nnT[oL
46;-) [eXKov aKrj8e(TT\m KoiXas [eTrt] v[-q\a^ Ayâiwv
Fr. [o).
514 [aXAa 77^0? T/9a)[i/ Kai Tpooia8<JOu kXcos eivai
515 [(JO'S apa. ^]<pri KX[aiov(T ^ttl Se arevayovTO yvvaLKe^

W I [ft)? 01 fi^y (TT(v\ayôvTo Kara tttoXiv avrap A-âLOL
X 77. Wliclhcr the two preceding lines are to be identifictl as 11. 75-6 is doubtful.
The traces at the end of the former of them are not inconsistent with a f, but the conclusion
of the second diverges from 1. 76, which is tovto Sj) o'Lktkttuv TreXfrm SfiKmai ^porolaiv.
Before \.]vnj) is what appears to be the top of a tall vertical stroke, like that of k, (j) or ^//.
Perhaps Ke]v(J) tirj is only a variant for ntXerai, and the line, according to this version,
may have run tovto 8t) <n<ri(TTnu fieiXoln-i lipoTolai Kev eu]. The construction would be
irregular after ore alcrxvvaat, but cf. e.g. Y 250 6nnoi6v < ('iTrrja-Ba erros toIov k e7TaKov<Tais.
. . .
But it is remarkable that 1. 73 ends with (fyavdrj (so C, &c. (fiavfjtji other I\ISS., Aristarchus) ;
;
and since in the papyrus (pa veiri is so suitable a reading and ;^n\'ca)î in the preceding line is
quite possible, there is a considerable probability that 11. 74-6 were omitted. The three
verses are not essential here; but they do not occur elsewhere in Homer. For another
instance of omission in this MS. cf. note on ^ 129.
99. oifini : u> fxoi i^mLfioi, (afxoij IMSS. 1. ft for 7.
gga. A new verse, not found elsewhere in Homer. The adjective XcoS^ro? only occurs
in fi 531 Xw/3rjroi' edrjKe. Any round letter, e.g. 6 or a-, may be read after the i.
loi. (Kt\(v(v though the final letters are broken, there is not much doubt as to the
:
reading. eVe'Xeue MSS.

102. PVKTn TTori 8vo(j)[f prjv : vvx^ viTO Ti'jvb' o/\or;i/ MSS., vjto Xvyaliju Et. Mag. 57 I. 22.
For the temporal use of ttoti cf. p 191 Trorl ((r-mpa, Hcs. Op. 550 ttotI eantpov.
22. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS loi
105. Tpoaias: SO L; Tpwas most MSS.

106. There is some ink above KaKU)r\ipos which might represent a correction, but is
more probably accidental.
108. The
remains of the middle of this line are very difficult to decipher. e]pioi. 6e may
just be read, but apparently not tot,which would be expected to follow. Possibly to8 was
written but the papyrus may have been quite different from the
; common te.xt here. The
doubtful 8 before a\v could be e.
no. The ordinary reading here is ?; Kev avra oKiaBiu ivKkeiw npo niiXrps. The arrange-
ment in the papyrus avoids the long syllables shortened in hiatus. anoXtadai seems
preferable to k^v oKe(r6aL ; superfluous here and hardly parallel to the other uses of
k^v is
ij Kev. avTu, which is found in most I\ISS, (v. 1. avrov), was read by Aristarchus.
113. ]tos is on a small fragment originally adhering, but of which the correct position
is doubtful ; the reading is very uncertain.
140. /capTTaXt^/iws] (opprja-f prjibiuis o'lprjcre {rjpicre C) JMSS.

:
141. T vTrai[d'fi 1. 6 VTT.;

: but all the letters except the two alphas are very doubtful.
142. inaiaaei, iXeeiv re e 6vp6s dvayei vulg., but the letter after fnuiaad in the papyrus is
certainly either v or p. Perhaps there was a variant paneew or pap-nrdv, as Blass suggests
or enaiaudv may have been written owing to a confusion with eXfeiu.
143. The letters preserved are on a small detached fragment, which seems to be
rightly placed here.
197-8. The identification of these two lines seems tolerably certain, notwithstanding
the discrepancy from the vulgate, which has airoaTpiâaKi TTapa(j)6ui or TrapaaTds.
232-3. On it is more probable that the remains of these two lines are to be
the whole
referred to 226-7. The slight vestiges indicate that the letter above A had
232-3 than to
a vertical stroke, the position of which suits an initial t rather better than an jj.
251. 1. frXrjv. The error is easily intelligible, as Mr. T. W. Allen remarks, if the
papyrus had 8ifs, the reading of al xapto'i"epat (Didymus) and Vat. 10, in place of the
vulgate 8iov.
252. avayet.: ai/^Ke MSS. Cf. * 396 (P. Grenf II. p. 6), where the papyrus has avmyas
for the vulgate reading dftjKas.
2 55- ! appoviaoov.
327. The
scribe seems to have miswritten the tt of ana\[oio, which has a vertical stroke
too much ; otherwise the letters must be read ano aX[ or antXa, but both of these
readings are difficult to deal with, and the n would still be not quite satisfactory.
392 a. This additional line probably followed directly upon 392. TJeî-Tôra seems to
be required, but can only be read by ignoring a tiny fragment loosely adhering to the
papyrus and having a vertical stroke which gives the supposed the appearance of a p it ;
may, however, be misplaced. Cf. Q 20, where Kal Ti6vT]6ra irep occurs in the same position
of the verse. The latter part of the line is found in K 52.
393. The letter before peya is certainly a p, and is preceded apparently by an t, or
at any rate not by an e; perhaps 7?/i]tj/. r]pdpf6a I\ISS. Aristarchus athetized 11. 393-4.
442. Here again, though the sense of the line is the same, there is a marked divergence
from the vulgate, which has Kt'/cXero 6' dp<pnr6\oiai.v fynXoKupois Kara Scopa. The verse
may, of course, be completed in many other ways than that suggested in the text, e. g.
(vuXoKapois (KeXtvaeii.
446, x^P'^'"' 'AîXXôy MSS. ; but Imo xfpo"*" is the regular Homeric phrase, and may
well be right here. For x^p<^' ^tô in the same position cf. IT * 208.
420, 452, AxiXXrjos;
1.
the same error occurs in CD.

447. [KiOKVTo^vi k(okvtov
: . . . olpoiyjjs MSS. The letter before the 8 can hardly be read
otherwise than as s, and there is a spot of ink low down before it which suits the tail
102 HIBEH PAPYRI
of a V. The accusative is quite unobjectionable (cf. e.g. * 575 v\ayn6u d<ov(T;i), but
the plural is somewhat suspicious, and it may be doubted whether this is a genuine
variant, and not rather a mistake on the part of the scribe. An alternative would be to
suppose that the line began with some feminine synonym of KcoKVTOi.
448. Though the margin below this line is incomplete, it has quite the appearance of
being the last of a column but if so the column must have contained an unusually large
;
proportion of new lines. L. 448 is only the twenty-second line, according to the vulgate,
from the end of the preceding column, whereas the average length of other columns is about
30 lines. A column which covers only 25 lines of the vulgate is, however, shown by a
comparison of Fr. (/) 1. 168, which is probably the last of a column, with P. Grenf. II.
4 (c). Fr. 2, where 1. 195 is column; and the more lengthy columns may
the second of a
to some extent be due to notes on X 77 and * 129.
omissions; cf.
458-60. This identification is doubtful 1. 459 is fairly satisfactory, but the scanty
;
vestiges of the preceding and following lines give small support. Those below ovBfPi might
be read as ]va[, i. e. /uatjfafSt, but something nearer the end of the line would be expected.
462. The ordinary version of this line is avrap (tt\ nvpyov re koi dvbpau l^tv SfiiKov.
Blass is probably right in suggesting the restoration of 2/catns re nvXas km from z 237, I 354
2icaids T( TTvXas koi (})r]y6i> Uavev, though the reading must be admitted to be very doubtful, tc
is satisfactory, but of the other letters as far as -ov only the merest vestiges remain. They
seem, however, to support irvpyov as against (t>T)yov.
463. Tix[*'] 'f'x[^H would suit the space better.
:
464. Tro\[o)s: noKios MSS., though TToXtds is well supported in other passages, e.g.
A 168.
513 sqq. That these lines are rightly identified hardly admits of doubt. The variant
in 515 causes no difficulty, and the absence of any division between the end of one book
1.
and the beginning of the next has a parallel in the Geneva papyrus (Nicole, Hev. de Phil.,
1894), A848-M I.
513. If the indistinct vestiges are correctly read as o^f[Xof, the y, which precedes in
the common text, was probably omitted, since ovhtv aoi amply fills the lacuna, y is
absent also in D.
515. &i f(âTo vulg. It suits the space better to suppose that the final a of apa was
unelidcd.
* I. Cf. note on X 513 sqq. The space between this line and the preceding one is of
the usual width, but there may, of course, have been a coronis or marginal note indicating
the commencement of a new book.
Fr. (/). Col. i.
^129? 1; 28 letters ]as KX[*tâ
132 [av S e/Jar v Sicppoicrt TrapaiâraL rivC\q')(ÔL re
"33 [iTpoaOe fx^v Lmrrjes p.i.Ta Se v(.(f)os ejiTrero Trf^cof
134 [fivpioL ev Se fi(TOiai (êpov JJaTpoKXov T]aipoL
"35 [^P'î'- ^^ navra v^kw Karaîvva-av a]? ^mâWov

136 [Keipop.f.voi OTTiO^v Si KapT] eê S109 A)(î]\\vs
136 rt [aii(f)OTepr]i<Ti Se x^P^' KOfirjv r]i(T)(yp] Sai^cou
137 [aîûfiyo9 iTapov yap a/xvfiova 7rep.1T -4]i(5o? ê
138 [oL 8 ore yaypov iKavov o6l (KJnaL Tr(f)pa8 iivtXXjefy
139 [KarOidav aLy\ra <5e ol peuoeiKea vrjeop] yX[rjv
140 [v9 avT aXX euorjac rroSapKrjs S109 A)(^cX]X[]v[s
141 [crray anai>v$e Trvprjs âv6r]v aTrK]eipaTo xa[iT]r]i/
Col. ii. (with P. Grenf. II. 4 (c), Fr. i).
^ 165 ? [....]. f[']Ra^v[. .] peKpg[
165 a liyp[L ovL]aTa yipaiv aprja-a[pevoi

166 TToXXa Se L(f)La. [. .] /fJ7[X]a [Kai etXinoSa^ eXiKas ôvs
167 npocrOe Tjvprjs [eSepoi^ re KaL apcfienoi' k 8 apa iravTcav
168 8r)nov (.Xcov [iKaXv-^ê v^kvv peyaOvpos AîXXevs
Fr. iq).
IP" 265 [T(i)L TTpOOTCOl UTUp UV TOn] 8v[Tepa}l tjlTTTOf i[6r]KU
266 [e^cre a8prj]TT]v /3/3e0[oy] tjpLovov Kveov(Ta[v
267 [ayrap Tcot rpirjarcoi anvpoy KariOr]Ke Xe(3[r}Ta
268 [KaXov Taaapa perpa Ke)(â]u8[oT]a XevKov er aurfo)]?
Fr. {r).
W 276 [t(r]Te yap [o]<Tq-ou [cpoi ap^Ttji TrepiâXXdrou innot
277 aOavaTOL re [ya/3 cicri noaetSacou 8^ nop avT0V9

278 narpi cpcoi IIr]Xr][i 8 avr epoi eyyvaXiêu
278^ G)y TO) y aOavaroL K[aL ay rjpaoi ov8e OiK
278 ^ 6uT}T0vs aOavaToicTL [8pa^ Kai iSo9 epiêiu
279 aXX t) TOL p(u eyo) p[(P((o Kai poi)vvy(jes nrnoi
280 TOioy yap crOevos eaOXop aTTcoXeaau 7]yLO)(o[io
IP
281 rjinov acpcoiu paXa noXXaKLS vypov eXaiop
* 129 ?. It is clear that the papyrus diflfered considerably here from the ordinary text.
I04 HIBEH PAPYRI
~\as which apparently corresponds to the end of 1. 1 29 auTUa MvpfiiSovtaai ^/Xonro-
iKik\evai (?),
'Kfixoia-i has been inserted close above 1. 131 (?) by a different hand, and seems to
Kekfvae,
have been originally omitted altogether, jas suggests Mvpfxi8ov]ns, with a lengthened , or
some variant for (fiLKoTTToKiiKua-i, e.g. ava /c\to-i]as cf. n 155-6 MvpfiiSovas 6copr]îv
; . . .
A)(iWevs TTuvras ava kKkt'lus. If this be SO, 130 I, )(a\Kov â>i>vva6ai, êvâc 8' inr' o;(ecr0ii/
tKaa-Tov innovs' 01 8' copvvvTo Ka\ eV T(vx_f(T(TLv i'dwov, would seem to have been reduced to
a single verse, tirf at the end (the r is quite doubtful) suggests a termination parallel to
r 339 fvTf' t8vi'v, preceded possibly by re Kai, though there is barely room for koi. The
letter before f, if not t, must be a y. But in the absence of the line above us K\[ivat these
suggestions must be regarded as merely tentative.
136 a. The proposed restoration, which is due to Blass, is based on 2 23 uficportpTjai. Se
)(pa\u iXwv Koviv aWakoecraav and 227 (f>0<i]cn 8e X^P"^' Kaprjv jja^vve 8aLâ>v.
139. The vestiges of the supposed v suggest rather t or 77, but this may be due
to smearing.
165
?. We
give a revised text of this line, which is found in P. Grenf. II. 4 [c), Fr. i.
The doubtful p might be r or v.
165 a, 166. These two lines combine with the last two of P. Grenf. II. 4(c), Fr. i.
For the restoration nvp[i oveiâra (Blass) cf. k 9 and o 316 ovelnra p.vpla. In 1. 166
a short space remains unaccounted for between ifpia on the new fragment and the nn of
fij/^n on P. Grenf. II. 4 (r), Fr. i. The reading of these two words is not very certain,
but we can find no other epithet which suits the vestiges, and m'?[^j" seems right. In
the facsimile in P. Grenf. II, Plate II, htjVo. K[a\ [ looks possible, but the original shows
this to be a less likely alternative.
168. This line was probably the last of the column, though it is slightly higher than
1. 141. Cf. note on X 448.
278 a, d. These two additional lines have been restored by Blass from e 212-3 ^^^
OiKf Bpr^Tcii u6avuTi]cTi 8epas Kal fidos ipi^dv.
2<So. roioy yap crOfvos : but adfpos occurs in DGLS Syr., and
roiov yap K\eos most ]\ISS.,
is recorded as a variant in AE. towv, which is new,
be defended, but is unconvincing. may
281. I'his line is the last of the column. The final s o^ noWaKis is very close to the i,
and was perhaps originally omitted 77 was also first written in place of yp and subsequently
;
altered, another yp being added for the sake of clearness above the line. These corrections
may be by the first hand.
For o most IMSS. have Ss, but 6' is attested by Didymus, who refers to A 73, where o
acfnv was read by Aristarchus. o is adopted by 1^^ Roche and Leaf, os by Monro and
Allen.
Unidentified fragments.
Fr- {4 . . . Vr. (/). .
J
. aai /xera 7r[ ] a[i<pi\[
]vonT[ ] . riKToy .
[
] . . yoyjoT .
[ ] . eAco .
[
5
]^^PV7
1

r\
[
... ] .
vd
Fr. {u). Fr. {V). Fr. (..).
](Ta[
[ ]
M
]r}^
[
5 ]^
[ 5 V."[
]T'[
Fr. (x). Fr. (j). Fr. (.^).
ovrai afjicpin . cr7r[.]Ta . .

[
Fr. [aa). Fr. {bb). Fr. (<rr).
yrr] IX . . a)[
Fr. (dd). Fr. (^d:"). Fr. (#).
vvoa .
[
fCCOCTT
Fr. (^^). ... Fr. {M). . . . Fr. (//). . . .
r '
-
' [
]' ' rm ]rv^
[
. aiofJiyo[ ... ...
Fr. (/). The most is perhaps X 117-20, biit though in 1. i ancpn

suitable place for this
is possible, 1. 2 is 118, and if eXw in 1. 3 were fXiofiai it should come
irreconcilable ^vith X
further out to the right. In 1. 2 k is possibly la, with which reading the preceding rj would
be n, and o may also be e ; in 1. 3 ev or ov may be read for a.
Fr. (y). This may well be a/x<î7i{oXoi in X 461, but Fr. {y) does not actually join
Fr. {m).
Fr. (dd). Not ^ 584-6.
Fr. (gg)- 1. 2 seems to be the beginning of a verse, but this is not certain. Kaiofj.vo[s
might be read, but the fragment cannot be identified with * 360-1 or 375-6-
io6 HIBEH PAPYRI
23. Homer, Odyssey XX.

i9x6-2<r;. Circa B.C. 285-250. Plate VI.
This fragment, containing parts of 11. 41-68 of Book xx of the Odyssey^ was
found not in mummy-cartonnage but loose in the debris outside the north wall
of the town, where so many sarcophagi were buried ; cf p. 3. The writing
is a delicate uncial of the early or middle part of the third century B.C., Z and 12
in particular preserving a decidedly archaic appearance.

Unusual interest attaches to this papyrus, which is the first early Ptolemaic
fragment of the Odyssey to be discovered, and exhibits much the same scale
of divergence from the vulgate as that with which the fragments of the Iliad have
made us familiar. This passage in the ordinary text contains 28 lines, but in the
papyrus 30, three new lines being inserted (after 51, 55, and 58) and one line
of the vulgate omitted {^0^ while in several other places also the papyrus presents
;
hitherto unknown readings, the list of which would no doubt be increased if the
lines had been completely preserved. As it is, all of them are represented by
less than half of the total number of letters, and some by 5 or 6 letters
only. Hence the restoration of the new lines is very difficult, especially as they
differfrom most of the additional lines in the Iliad fragments in being not at all
obviously derived from other passages in Homer. We are indebted to Mr. T. W.
Allen for some suggestions. On the chief problems raised by these early Ptolemaic
papyri see pp. 68 sqq.
V 4 r TTpo^ 8 TL KaL ToSe /i]e/ôf //f (ppeai fi[pfir]'\f)[i]â>
42 1 Trep yap Knivaipi Alo]^ t ae6eu re KT]ti
43 TvrjL Kiu VTrK7rpo(pvyo]ip.L Ta [ere] (ppaêaOat avoi\ya
44 rov 8 avT TrpocreeiTre djea yXavKconi? AOrjvrj
45 cr\TXu Kai pev] T19 T[e] êpiiovi Oapau eTaipcoi
46 09 Trep 6pt]to9 t <t]ti KaL [6]v Toaa pr]8a ([18 . .
47 avTap eyo) Oeos (i]fjii 8ia[p]7repes t] ere [(f)]vXa[<ra(o
48 13 letters ]7ro)v epeco 5e croi â[vaâv8ov

49 ei TTfp 7rei'TrjKoy]Ta XoyÔL pep[o]7rcoy a[vOpa>Tra>u
50 ycoL TTfpLaTaieu KJreivai pe[pacoTe9 aprji
51 Kai KV TCdv tXao-ja/o ôa^ Ka[f . ]ja.[
r;i a 13 letters ](.ias an-[

52 [aXX eXero) ere kul v]Trvos e . [.\v ^ttik[ ,
54 [co? cpa.TO KUL pa oi v\nvov erri ^X(papo[L<Tiv )(êvv
55 [avTT] 8 ayjf ey OXf/fJTroi' anea-Tixe Sia [deacou
55 ^ [ 14 letters Ipoy ;i[ 20 letters

56 [VT Tov VTTi'o^ (^/xapTTTe [Xvcou jiiX^BrjfxaTa OvfiOV
57 [XvcnfjLeXr]s aXo)(ôs S] ap ineyp^ro K\_iBu ciSvia
58 [KXaie S ap eu XKTpo]icn KaOeôfievrj [[xaXaKOLaLv
58 ^ [ 15 letters ]<t6v aKrjv ^^(ov 01 .

[
59 [avTap 7ri KXaLov(r]a KopeacraTo oy Koija Ov/xou
60 [ApTfJ.lSL 7rpQ)]Tl(TT0U (TT^VâTO [SlU yVVULKCCV

61 [ApreixL TTOTva 6ia] Ovyarep Aios ai6[e jiol tjSt]
62 [loi^ vi aTrjOiaa-L (3]aXova-a e/c 6vjxoy [eXoio
63 [avTiKa vvv 77 eTrjftra //e avapira^yaa-a 6veXXa
64 [oL)(ôiTO 7rpo(f)povcr]a Kar ijepoevra K[Xev6a

65 [e/i 7rpo)(07]L^ ^]aXoi ay\ropp[o\ov {iKeo/^voLo
66 [coy 8 ore IIav8ape\ov Koi;pa[y] avXo[vTo BveXXai
67 [rriLo-L roKTja^ /xel/x (pdeiaay Oeoc ai Se Xi[7roj/To

68 [op<pavai e/z jiy]apoi<Ti KOfiLê 8e 8c A(p[po8LTr]
45- fx^T^'f '^'- M*'" ''f '^ xfpflovi 17(16(6' eraipco INISS. x^P*^*""' is fairly certain, though 10
is crampedinto a very narrow space, and at the end of the line the tops of the six letters
after c suit rmpai. The difficulty is the intervening word 6ap(T(i, suggested by Blass.
The second much more like a than X or a, which are the only possible alternatives,
letter is
and the must have been a rather narrow one. All that remains of it is a speck
first letter
of ink near the bottom of the line. The third letter can be either or p, and suits the t i
vestiges at the end of the word much better than o-t or ^ but the supposed o- is more like ;
o, and 6ap(Tfi is not very satisfactory, especially as this use of dapauv with a dative is not
found in Homer.
46. e[tS . MSS. 6 could be read instead of e, but not 0. It is difficult to
. : ol8(v
account for the except by the hypothesis that the scribe wrote eiSwy or (i8ev by mistake.

48. ûv eV navTe(7(Ti. novon (or Trovoiai) epea k.t.X. MSS.

:
51. ^6as Kol t(})ia prjXa j\ISS. Ka[t after ôns is very doubtful. The second letter
might be e.g. t. i(}}]ia is inadmissible, the letter after the lacuna being either r, tt or y.
The supposed a which follows is quite uncertain, but the vestiges do not suit e, so that
a(r]7re[Ta is not Satisfactory. The new line 51 a may have expanded the description of the
prospective plunder a7r[ may be, as INIr. Allen suggests, aTT[aya>u, but to read Xjetar would
;
introduce a word not found in Homer. Blass proposes [avrovs re Kreivîas, comparing S 47
7rp]v nvpi injas eVtTrp^crai KTfluai Se Kai avrovs.
52. vTTVOs' Trdvvvxov eyp-qcrcTovTa KOKoyu 8' vno8vafai fj8r] IMSS.
dviT] Koi TO (f)v\dcraeiv |
The
papyrus, instead of this, has only half a line, but soon makes up for the omission of I. 53
by inserting a line after 55. The word following v]nvos was perhaps tav, though the space
between e and v is rather broad for only one letter.
io8 HIBEH PAPYRI
55. nTi-ffTTt^f : dcj)iK(To ]\1SS. except the Monacensis (of the fourteenth century), which
has uTreaTix^ corrected to (IffiiKero. unea-Tixf Stii 6idaip is the vulgate reading in fx 143,
55 a. Mr. Allen suggests [/coi/Ltfjcroo- 0(5uo-); Tr(i\fws n(\fxau>Ta lavdv: cf. w 487 irapos fxffxaviav.
58 a. The subject of probably, as Mr. Allen remarks, the hfiaai of Penelope.

ex<^v is
The phrase aKrjv ex"^ does not occur in Ilumer, 'ia-uv, eaav, k'fievai or fjivovro being the only
verbs found with aKtjv. ovfijf, followed by n unov (cf A 22, ^ toi 'A6r]paiT) uKtav riv ov8f Ti (h(),
does not suit the vestiges after fx"''-
67. (p6fi(Tav: on the spelling of this word with ft or t MSS. and grammarians differ.
68. Kofxiê KofjLiaae (v. 1. /(d/xia-f) MSS.
: The imperfect is quite in place.
24 Euripides, Iphigaiia in Tanris.
Mummy A. Height i6-8 cm. Circa b.c. 2S0-240. Plate VI (Frs. k and m).
These small and scattered fragments of the IpJiigcuia in Tanris are written
in a medium-sized flowing and slightly sloping hand, which is the precursor of
the oval style of the second and third centuries after Christ. Though showing
none of the markedly archaic characteristics displayed by some of the other
literary papyri in this volume, the MS. belongs to the same find as most of
the oldest pieces, and is very unlikely to be later in date than the reign of
Philadelphus. The only letter calling for any comment is the Cl), the second
loop of which is not raised to the same height as the first, but is left very
shallow and has sometimes hardly any curve at all. The lines of one column
are partially preserved throughout the 29 verses of which it is composed.
In spite of its fragmentary condition the text is decidedly interesting, and
its nearness to the age of the poet gives it additional weight. In 11. 252 and 618
conjectures of Reiske and Bothe are confirmed and in 11. 5H7 and 621 valuable ;
readings occur, one of them unanticipated, the other nearly coinciding with an
emendation of Machly. But the papyrus is as usual not impeccable, and one
or two small errors are found, while some other variants are more questionable.
The division of the lines for the chorus (11. 173-91) follows a new method. In
the collation below we have made use of the editions of Prinz-Wecklein and of
G. Murray, but in filling up lacunae have followed the text of the two MSS.,
except when obviously wrong.
Fr. {a).
174 ]a .
[
175 ti]K6\Ql yap^
176 ^]h-^^[
109
177 (r(f>axOei]aa a TX[afxcou
'79 vixv]ov T A[cnr]rav
'^ ^8r a-)(\av S[cnroi]/a
'^2 6pr]j/oi]9 iiov[a-av
'84 fio]X7rai9 A[iSa9
' ^7 0j&)y <TKrjn[Tp(ov

189 v]oXôoi/
[
191 Mox6(o]u Se y /z[oxôy a/o-o-e^
Frs. (^) and (^).
245 [oi;: aj/ (f)6avoLs] av ^vTp[eTTr] noiovix^vrj

[TToSanoL Tivo]<i yr]9 oi'o/x [exovcriu 01 ^voi
[E\Xr]v9 (u To]vO oiSa k[ou Tr^paiTepco
[ov8 oiôp.] aK[o]v(ra9 [oLa6a roov êucou ^paaat
[IlvXaSr}? K]Xr]ê[e arepo? irpo?
Oarepov
250 [tov iv^vyo]y Se [tov ^^vov tl rovvofx 7)v
[ov8ii9 ToS oiS^y ov y]ap [^la-qKova-apev
[ttcos- 8 ei8T avTov]^ Kai/'jvxouTe^ (iXere
[aKpais 7rc py]y]pt(ny Ev^^[ivov nopov
[Kai Tis OaXaaar]]^ /3ovkoXo[i? Koivo^via
255 [ôvs r]X6opu VL]y\rovTe9 ^v[aXLaL Spoacoi
Fr. (d).
[eiT] oy[i/] 6[7r a/craiy Oaaa^rov JtocrKopco

rj Nr]p(ti9 a[yaXpad 09 Toy evyepr]
eriKTe ire[vTriKovra Nrjprji8cov
x^pov
275 aXXo9 8 [tl9 puTaios avopiai dpaavs
eyeA[ao-e]v (y[xais vavTiXovs 8 ecpdapfxeuovs
6[a<7(Tuv (f)apayy e(f)a<TK tov vopov (poôoi
[kXvoutu^ coy Ovoip^v u6a8e êvovs]
(8[oê 8 rjpcoy ev Xeyeiv tols nXeioat
280 e[r]pau re Ttji 6im a(})ayia Tanixcopia
no HIBEH PAPYRI
Ka[v TCoiSe nerpav arcpo^ Xincou îvoiv
i(T[rr] Kapa re SieTiva^ ai'oo Karco
[KaireaTivaêi/ coXeuas Tpejicov aKpas]
fi[aviai9 aXaLvcav Kai ôai Kvvayo'i coy
285 TllvXaSr) SiSopKas TT]v8e rrji/Se S ov\ opai9
A[i8ov BpaKaLvav coy /xe (SovXeTai KTaueiv
Frs. (.'), (/), (g), and (//).
[et iT]a(r[i tuvtou irpayp. apeaKovroa^ 6êi

[êAo]iy ay [ei croxraLfjLL a ayyeiXai ti p.01
[7r/3o]y A[pyos eXdcov roiy e//oiy eifci (piXoi9
[SeX]To[v T ye[yK\u rj[v riy oiKTeipa^ e/xe
585 [eypaj^l^f aL]xiâX(OT[o? ov)(i ttjv efxtji/
[(f)Ouea vofit](Q)[v] X^^P^ 'l^^ vofiov 8 vtto

[6vr)aK(iLv] ra t[o\v Oôv r[a8e 8iKai rjyovfXd'ov
[ov8iPa yccp] eiôu 00-719 [ayyuXai iioXcov
[ey Apyo9 av]6i? ray ([fxa? ^TTicrToXas
f)90 [7re/z-v/ê]ie [aa>6(.i9 Toav cpoou (f>iX(ov tlvl
[(t\v 8 [eji yap [coy eoi/f]ay ovT[i 8vayV7]9
[kui] ray M[vKT]va]9 oia[da ôvs Kay<o 6eXa)

acodrjTL Ka[L ov pLar\6[ov ovK aiaxpou Xa^(ov
kov(P[ol)\v ^[KaTL ypanparcjov (rcoTrjpiap
595 [o]?^7'oy 8 [(TTfLTrep TroXty avayKaêi Ta8e
Frs. (/), (/.), (/), and (m).
Col. i. Col. ii. Plate VI (Frs. k and m).
600 ov\to9 (5e avfivXei tcov ipcov /io^j^cor X^Pi'-^

ovk\ovv 8iKaLou (IT oXedpooL t]col tov8 /i[]
Xa[/Dii/ TiBâOai Kavrov] iKBvvaL KaKcov
\y aX\X coy yeyea6(o T(oi.8e fiev] BeXroy 8l8ou
]y 7re[^\//-ei yap Apyos (nan aoi K]a[Xco]y ^xeiu
605 r][pas 8 XPT^C^^ KTLi>(Ta) T]a rcop. 0tXcoj'

24. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS iii
[aL(T')(^L(TTov oa-Tt9 KaTaâKoav] is av^[(fiopas:]
\avTO^ aca-axTTai TvyyaviL 8 o]5 co/i 0[tXoy]
[ov ov8ev -qaaov rj fi (fxos opav B]eX(o
[oo \r]ii apiaTOV cos air eyye]i'oi;[y] tiv\os
6io \pi^r]s nec^vKas tols (piXois t opdcos] 0[Xoy

[tolovtos ir] Tcou ifX(o\v Ofioairopcov
[o(nrp XeXciTTTai Ka]L yap ovS eyco êvoi
[avaSeXcpos i[xi] nXrjv ocra ov\ [oj/jcotra vlv
[7ri (5e ôvXet Ta,]vTa t[ouS 7riii\y\rop.iv
615 [BeXrov (f>pou]Ta arv 8e Oauelt ttojXXt; Se t[i9
[rrpoOv/xia ae] tov8 ^yovcra Tvyâvei

[6vaeL 8 Tis fJ.] Kat ra 8eiva TXr]<TT[at
[eyo) 6ea9 yap] rr}v8e (rvfi[(f>o]pav e[)((o
[a^rjXa y co] PavL K[aL ovk] v8[aip.oua

620 [aXX is avayK]r]y Ket[/xe^ t]V (pvXaKTeov
[avTT] ^t<p]c KTeivovaa Bvi\Xvs apcnvas

[ovk aXXa] xaniju afiî (Tr][v yipvL-ôfiai
[o 8 a-âyivs t]i? u T[a8] ia-To[p]e[iv fie XP^

[eo-o) BopLoav tq)v8 eiaL\v [oi?] /zeXfei Ta8e
625 [Ta(pos 8e TToios 5eêr]a[i] fxe OTav [6ava>

[trvp lepov v8ov \a(r\p.aTa vpoi>['ir ^
627 [(pev TTOjy af fie a]SX^r]9 X'^'-P
'^(p'[<J'TiXLev av
629 [. . . . fiaKpav y\o^p\ âpâpov vau[i x^^^^^
A fragment perhaps belonging to this papyrus.
]paT[
174-91. This fragment is too small to indicate clearly the point of division in
the lines or the principle upon which that division was based. The lines were longer than
they are according to the arrangement of either the older or the more modern editions to
which we owe the highly inconvenient system of numbering four lines as if they were five.
Perhaps the lyrics were written continuously like prose in lines of approximately equal
length, as in 25. That hypothesis would at any rate account fairly well for the sizes of the
various lacunae.
112 HIBEII PAPYRI
174. The vcslige after a would suit v, i, or k, and so the two letters may belong equally
well to âvddv, xniTciv, or BaKpv.
175. The reading is very doubtful; rrjXoa-f ydp MSS.
177. (T(f)nxdii a-a a is not a very satisfactory reading, since it does not account for
a speck of ink between the cr and the top of the supposed first a, which is moreover itself
quite dubious. (T(pax6fL(Ta, however, is not a better alternative, for the i would be too far
from the a, and again a speck of ink in the intervening space would remain unexplained.
The traces before rX[ would perhaps best suit an o- followed by a broad n or, possibly,
/x but they are too slight to necessitate the supposition of a departure here from the MSS.
;
tradition
which, however, is corrupt in this passage.
179. The papyrus supports the traditional reading, for which Bothe's conjecture vii"cx)v
T ÂaiijTi'w is adopted by M(urray).
182. 6f)r]i'oi's so a corrector of P; Bpipoiai LP, 6pf]voi'Tiv INIarkland, on metrical
:
grounds. The vestige in the papyrus is not indeed inconsistent with v, but is more
suggestive of !?.
189. It is impossible to judge whether 1. 188 Trarpwcoi' olVwr, which is bracketed by

\V(ecklein), following Hartung, stood in the papyrus or not. If, however, it be assumed that
these lines were more or less equal in length (cf. note on 11. 174-91) it will be necessary
to suppose an omission of some kind between 1. 187 and 1. 189.
191. The first letter is most probably i/; os cannot be read. The line is metrical
if Cu(T(TfL be written as a trisyllable, as it is in LP, which have iioxBos K eV fiox^wi'.
246. ovoî\a the papyrus upholds the MSS. tradition ; (rxw' ^lonk, whose conjecture
:
is accepted by W. and M.
247. TO^vd I. TOUT.
:
252. Reiske's conjecture Kuurvxi'ivres (so W. and M.) for the INISS. reading Kn\ Tvxdvrfs
is confirmed by the papyrus.
253. Ei^^ffifou: so Plul. Pc exil. p. 602; aîvov MSS. Cf. 1. 125, where LP have
ftiêiVou and Markland conjectures a^dvov (so M.), and 1. 395, where W. and INI. read
fiîvw (with IMarkland) for fv^nvov (LP) or ivîvov (1). dîvov is probably right here.
587. The I\ISS. here have BvijaKfiv ye, rr;s 6fov ravrn fiiKdi' rjyovfxevrjs \V. and M. print;
6v)'j(TK(Lv a(f), rrjs 6(ov ruê, adopting coiijcctures of Markland and Pierson. The papyrus
substitutes t\o]v 6fov for r^y 6(ov, and before tov has a clear preceded by a letter of which
all that remains is a projecting tip on the level of the top of the a, which would suit y, <r, or
T. Llencc, since 6vr)(TK(iv sufTiciently fills the remaining space, the word before t[o]v is most
likely r, which implies a quite different construction from that found in the ]\ISS. We
venture to suggest that the true reading is tov v6p.ov 8' vn<> dv/jo-Kav, t tJ}? 6(ov raSe SiVai'
|
t'lyovpevov.This is more logical than the accepted text, for the will of the goddess would
have been ineffectual unless enforced by the law ; cf. 1. 38 oVror tov vdiiov koX np\v noXti, and
1. 595 fn(iTT(p noXis (ivciyKa^fi rdbf. The substitution of i]ynvpivi)'i for r'jyovpevov WOUld be
a particularly easy confusion (the papyrus shows the converse error of tov for rr/r), and the
alteration of rd would inevitably follow. It would also be possible, as Mr. Murray remarks,
to keep rjyovptvrii and connect ra r^s 6(oi in the sense of the victims of the goddess' with
'
6tnj<TK(iv instead of with Tubt. probably had no iota adscript

6vr]aK(iv cf. 1. 249 (K^Xrj(f\d, ;
588-90. These lines are rejected l)y Dindorf and Monk.

589. Tns: so the MSS,; rds (/) I\I. following Elmsley.
593. Though the letters of (T(o6r]Ti are broken, they arc all quite consistent with the
ordinary reading except the t, which is unusually cramped perhaps au>6ii6i was written (cf.
;
1. 247 To^yff). In any case the papyrus lends no supjôrt to the conjecture (rvfirjTi Kt'iae,
though it may of course have had Reiske's more probable emendation a-ov for a-v.
Fr. (/). Col. i. The final \v and ]? which alone survive here, may belong either
to II. 573-4 iiovo\v and Xoyot]y or 11. 575~6 fiSoo-t]v and yewjjropejr. The V is opposite
1. 603, which is the 26th line from the bottom of the column; 11. 573 and 575 would
be respectively the 27th and 25th from the bottom.
600. ixox]Baiv or -6o>y, but the former is more probable.
:
606. (IS cvfj}<l)opas '.

(s ^vfi(f)opds I\ISS.
614. Perhaps Tre fnrofiev was first written and then altered to ntfiylfofifv. The upper
part of the vertical stroke of is clear, but in place of the tip of the crossbar there
\//-
is another short vertical stroke which would suit e.g. p. or 77.
615. eav([i: eavfi MSS.

618. TJâSf MSS., rrjvhe Pap., Confirming Bothe's conjecture, which is accepted by
W. and M. avfjicpopav, which is an unknown variant, is intelligible in itself, but does
not well accord with the following line. npoaTponTjv (MSS.) is more likely to be genuine.
619. The space indicates that the crasis of kovk here was neglected; of. the absence
of elision in 11. 613, 625, &c.
621. The new reading of the papyrus Kreivova-a is preferable to the traditional dvovaa.
The first two letters are much damaged, but the vertical stroke of the t is plain. Maehly's
acute conjecture Otivovaa, though not actually confirmed, is thus shown to have been on the
right track.
622. The supposed i of ^t0e]t is above x of x'"'"'?'' which would approximately
correspond with s of a-cpaytvs. There is, therefore, scarcely room in the initial lacuna
for ovKovv, the unmetrical reading of the MSS., corrected in L to ovk.
626. xao-JM" is probably only a clerical error for xa(Tpa T(e). It is, however, noticeable
that with Diodorus' variant (xx. 14) xôw's for nerpas, the plural form x^crp-ar eipcond wôuld
at least scan. But there is no ground for suspecting xao-M^ t fvpoonov mrpas, the version of
the MSS.
629. LP here read pdraiov dxriv, rdXas, oiTTis TTOT ei, T]vôi' paKpau yap k.t.\. There
seems to have been an accidental omission in the papyrus, though without knowing how
the critical first foot of the line was filled up a definite decision on the point is difficult.
25. Euripides.
Mummy A. 8 x 5-7 cm. Circa b.c. 280-240.
On this fragment is written in a large cursive hand of the middle of the

third century B.C. the favourite chorus of Euripides which closes the Alccstis
(1159-63), Andromache (1284-8), Bacchae (1388-92), and Helena (1688-92), and,
with a difference in the first line, the Medea (1415-9). Whether anything
preceded the chorus here is is probably
uncertain ; in any case the fragment
a school exercise, not part of a literary manuscript. The division of the lines
is determined apparently by their length, and in no way corresponds to the
metre or to the division found in the MSS. of Euripides. At least two. new
variants occur. The colon-shaped stop is found in 1. 4.
[TToXXa/, /io]p0[ai Tdnv

114 HIBEII PAPYRI
âni\ovi\(iiv 7roX[Aa
T afXTrrcoy Kpa\iuQV
at Ocoi '.
Kai ra Sokj]
5 (To.i^T ovK ereXeo-^f?;
TCOl> 8 aSoKTjTQ^l'
TTopov efpeUî']] Oeo^

roiouS arre^rj to
(5e TTpayjia
I. The of this line is very doubtful: if the vestiges really belong to

restoration
ô]p^[at, Tcoc to the right beyond the following lines.
would project [\ai /iop0a]t t[wi'
can equally well be read ; but ttoX must in that case be transferred to a line above, which
would involve the inference that the extract contained more than the final chorus.
3. T aeXnrois B' d/\7rTcos MSS. in all five places, but S cannot possibly be read here,
:
and at^TTTat does not accord with the vestiges very well. The traces before ras suit ae
better than Xtt.
4. 8oKr]6(VT* MSS.
8oKr)(TavT: The active is preferred by Blass on the ground that
apart from this chorus of Euripides, is a late form.
fduKrjdrjv,
7. eup([[i/]] the V is much fainter than the surrounding letters and seems to have been
:
intentionally smeared out. (vpe is generally found in the MSS., but fvpef occurs as
a variant in I/e/. 1691.
26. AnaXIMRNES (?), 'PriTopiKi] npo? 'AXeâpSpoi'.
Mummy A. Height i2-8rw. Circa B.C. 285-250. Pl.\te III (Cols, ix-xi).
This, the longest of theHibeh literary papyri, consists of seventeen fragments

from the so-called 'Pjjro^tK?/ tt/jos *A\4$avhpov, a treatise on rhetoric which already
in the time of Athenaeus and perhaps even as early as the end of the third
century B.C. passed as the work of Aristotle. The traditional view of its
composition was decisively rejected in i(S4o by Spengel, who endeavoured to
substitute Anaximenes of Lampsacus, an older contemporary of Aristotle, as the

author and with so much success that for half a century his conclusions with
;
regard to theAnaximenean authorship were hardly disputed. In 1892, however,

Suscmihl [Gesch. d. Alex. Lift. ii. pp. 451-7) re-examined the whole subject, and
in opposition to the generally received view argued for a third century B.C.
date for the treatise. Hammer, who re-edited the text after Spengel in 1894,
leaves the question of authorship undecided. The new discovery, as we shall
presently show, goes far to overthrow Susemihl's position and weaken his
objections to the previously accepted conclusions of Spengel.
Parts of eighteen columns are extant, but of these only one (Col. x) is quite
complete, and Cols, iii, iv, vi, viii, xii, xv, and xviii are represented by the merest
fragments, while the rest are all much disfigured by lacunae. The MS.
falls main divisions, (A) Cols, i-viii, which are continuous, then after
into three
a gap of several columns (B), comprising Cols, ix-xi, followed after a loss of one
column by (C), Cols, xii-xviii. In (B), which originally formed part of a small
breast-piece together with 16, the surface of the papyrus is clean and the ink
perfectly clear (see Plate III); but in the other two sections the writing had
mostly been covered with plaster and is in parts much obliterated. The columns
contain from 20 to 23 lines, which are decidedly irregular in length, varying
from 20 to 30 letters with an average of 26. Since the columns lean over some-
what towards the right, the lines near the top tend to project at the ends, those
near the bottom at the beginnings. Paragraph! mark the commencements of new
sections, and where these begin in the middle of a line a blank space is left
three or four letters in width.
The handwriting is an unusually small uncial with a tendency to cursive forms
in certain letters, particularly N, the last stroke of which projects far above the
line ; X2 retains much of its epigraphic character. A later date than the reign
of Philadelphus is extremely improbable. On the verso is some third century
B.C. cursive writing, too much damaged for continuous decipherment. Since
this MS. of the 'Pr^ropiK?; itself thus belongs to the first half of the third century,
the treatise can hardly have been composed later than B.C. 300, and a fourth
century date for it may now be regarded as established. This does not of course
prove that its author preceded Aristotle, as has been generally maintained by
those who support the idea of the Anaximenean authorship ; the contemporary
papyrus 16 is probably the work of Theophrastus who was Aristotle's disciple.
But now that the antiquity of the treatise is shown to have been somewhat
underestimated by Susemihl, and the tenniims ante qiiem can be fixed at B.C. 300
instead of 200, the older theory that the *P?yropt/c^ tt/sos ' AKeâibpov was the work
of Anaximenes regains much of the ground which it has lost in the last fifteen
years.
The extant MSS. of the treatise, which all belong to the fifteenth or
sixteenth centuries, are divided by Spengel and Hammer into two classes, the
better one composed of the MSS. called CFM, to which Hammer added OP,
and the worse comprising ABDEGV. The existence of considerable inter-
polations in the treatise is generally suspected, in particular the introductory letter
from Aristotle to Alexander, which has been long regarded as a later addition,
and several passages chiefly towards the end, the true character of which was
detected by Ipfelkopfer. On these the papyrus (henceforth called n), since it
I a
ii6 HIDEH PAPYRI
only covers the latter part of chapter i and most of chapters 2 and 3 (about
I of the whole work), does not throw any direct light, but it shows clearly that
interpolations do not extend in any serious degree to those chapters for, apart ;
from an apparent omission in Col. xv probably due to homoiotcleuton, there

is only one considerable collocation of words found in the MSS. which is wanting
in n (1. 296, note), whereas in several passages FT supplies words or clauses which
are omitted by the MSS. As would be expected with texts removed from each
other by no less than seventeen centuries, the number of divergences in FT from
the extant MSS.
in fact two or three consecutive lines, where
is very large ;
n is seldom pass without a new variant. Upon the merits

at all well preserved,
of these it is sometimes difficult to decide owing to the incompleteness of the
context, but in many cases IT unquestionably supplies the right reading. In
particular several conjectures of the earlier editors are now confirmed, e.g.
1.3 ?; vt: avOiiMTTMi' (1] VTT evbo^coi') for ?) avOjxaTTiov (fz^So^coi^) (Spengel) ; 17 tovtov
Tov r/ioTTor for TOP rpoTTov tovtov (Spengel) ; 117 tiuttms for Treptrrw? (Bekker)
121 the substitution of a phrase like ftet ixeOio-TavaL (fx^Taa-TaTeov U) for ttos
(Spengel) ; 293 buXdcoixev for SteAco/xer- (Spengel) ; 313 vofxo'i for ro'/xo? (Spengel);
317 TLncoo-LP for laaa-iv or eibctiaw (Spengel) ; cf. also notes on 11. 23 and 27. Other
improvements in the text introduced by n occur in 11. 30-1 avTov re tov bia-
yopevovra vofxov Xay^fiaveiv for avrov re tov ayopevovTa koI tov vopov \aixj3aveLv ;
67-H
AaKebaiixovLOLS avp-ixaîav TTOiija-ajjievovs for to AaKebaiixoruws (TviJ.jxd-)(ôvs 'noLi](Ta\J.vovs ',
116 Tois Xoyois \pJ](TOaL for xpi'iaaadciL or Ao'yw \i)i](Ta(yOai ; 140-I bairavav (f)i\oTipiiav
for tKovcri'iv airaa-av (fytXoTLiJLUiv ; 2 19 ot8e for avTai Set (8e) ; 220 Kaipov iTapaTTTiTo}-
KOT09 for KatpGiv TTapaTTeiTTwKOTcov ; 233 the insertion of TroXepiovvTei ; 299 ^7]yr](ns
for edyyeA(7f? ;
302 vrtOTTTivOevTcov for KaOvTTOTTTevOevToov ;
3I1 'qp.apTi]\j.ivo)v for
ahiKi]p.aT(av ; cf. also notes on 11. '^^, 142, 148-9, 164, 197, 231, 2,")0, 271-6, and
especially 316-8, where a whole clause is inserted. The numerous other variants
in n largely consist of minor alterations which hardly affect the sense
and though a text of this antiquity, written within a century of the com-
position of the work in question, naturally outweighs in most cases the evidence
of MSS. which are so much later, confidence in II is somewhat shaken by its
inaccuracies. Not only are there several serious scribe's errors, 1. 146 yero/xercoz' for
Titvop-ivutv ; 160 eis misplaced ; 162 Katrot iiacnv for naX rois Traicrlv ; 175 vjipiôvcnv for
v[3piCîv ; 265 eotKos for tiKoj, and ov for avrov or by a dittography ; 280 Ka for KaKo. ;
281 KapL fxev for (apparently) ws (or w) elp-qKapev ; 294 o/xorpoTrco? for 6p.oLOTpoTToos ;
296 (Tvv((TT-)]Ki]v for (TvvuTTijKev 304 e)(ôrTs for e\6vTcov or exo'''''os but, to say
; 5
nothing of the probable omission of several lines through homoiotcleuton in

Col. XV (cf. 11. 246-50, note), there are several places where n's reading, if not
absolutely wrong, is distinctly inferior to that of the MSS., e.g. 1. 72 ourco for wSe ;
1 1 8-9 avayKaiQv . . . 8ta0uAarrety for bia(pvXaKToi' ; 137 the transference of ij.v ;
170 the omission o( ixev ; 269 the insertion of /xei/.
Compared with n
from both groups of MSS., the differences
the divergence of
between the latter appear trivial and since the variations between the two families
;
do not happen to be very strongly marked in the passages where fl's readings
are preserved with complete or tolerable certainty, the evidence of the new
find does not greatly assist towards deciding the merits of the MSS. As
commonly occurs with papyri, the text of FI is of an eclectic character. In
seven cases it agrees with the so-called 'better' codices, CFMOP (or most of
them) against ABDEGV (or most of them) which Spengel and Hammer call
the 'worse'; 1. 108 ras aXXas against ciAAas ; 115 -rrept tovtojv erbexêrai. against
eySe'xerat Trept tovt(s)v ; 178 areponei/ov against a-repovixevov ',
probably 223 avTcov
against kavrSiv; 279 rot? Aoyot? against roi- Xoyov; 304 ravras against ras avTc'is
315 oTTMs against otto)? av. Where the MSS. of that group are divided IT tends
to favour CF (especially F) against MOP whether these are supported by the
'
deteriores ' cf. the notes on 11. 11, c^^, 82, 86, 147, 191, 229, 244, and
or not;
266, and the numerous slips in M, O, and P, e.g. in 11. 93, 102, 114, 145, 162,
191, 318, 237, 276, and 306. On the other hand IT supports the so-called
'deteriores against the other group in 1. 127 (apparently) Stort against ort, 234-5
'
iVTvyj.av against iv^vyj,av, and 254 irporepos against TrpoTepov and in three ;
instances the 'deteriores' or some of them alone preserve Fl's reading in a coiTupt
form, 1. 116 Aoyw \pr\(Tacrdai against xpr\(Taa6at (rots Aoyots xpi]cr6at, FT), 231 on
TrXelara tovtcov against otl to, TrAetcrra tovtmv [tovtoov otl TrAetora, n), and 241
TOLovT(i>v op.oLOTpoTTCti'i agaiust ToiovTcov {tovtols opLotoTpoTTODv, FT). On the whole the
new evidence indicates that Spengel and Hammer were right in thinking F
to be the best MS,, but that Hammer, who pays less attention than Spengel to
the 'deteriores,' somewhat underestimates their relative importance, since the
preference of IT, so far as it goes, for the reading of the CFMOP group is very
slight, and some of the apparent errors of the '
deteriores ' seem to be due to
their partial preservation of genuine readings,which by a process of correction
have disappeared from the other family. Our restorations of the lacunae are
taken, when IT provides no definite indications to the contrary, from the text
of Hammer, to whose edition the pages and lines mentioned at the head of each
column refer.
Frs. (a), {b), and {c). Col. i, p. 15, 3-17.
\a)\v avTOL^ Ka[i tociv i]8]rj /c[e]/fp[t]/i
[v](i)v 77 VTTO 6[e<jiv [t/j vtv audp[<o]7T[cou

i8 HIBEH PAPYRI
[SiKaior oiov eari TVponpov rjfxiv]
[S8T]\cOTaL TO <5e O/JiOLOV TCOl Si]
[kukol TOLOpSe (T riv (oav^p ya[p
[SiKaiou voixiiofie]v to tols yo[vyv
lo [(TL TreiOâdai rov av]Tov TpoTTov
[npoa-rjKei to[v]9 y[Lii ixineiadai
[rajy top 7r[a]Tp[(ov 7r]p[a]êi? Ka[L
[Ka6a7T]p t[ov^ ji; iron^cravTas av
[Tivep]yT^Ly [S\iKaiov eaTLv ovTOi
15 [rov]9 At[^]î^ KUKOP ^pyaaan^povs
[r]n]as 8[iKaL0P (TTl\ fxrj ^XairTetp
[to fie]p [ovp onoiop T]a)L [8L]KaL0)î t]ov
[to]p top jpoTTOP Sii XafiâpeiP
[eK S]( t[cop ipaPTioop xprj KaTa

20 [(fyap^s TTOUip TO avTO TrapaSayfia]
[/caâTrejp yap tov9 Ka[KOP tl ttoii]
[aaPTas 8 ikulop (.aTi T[i]ii({pYio-6[ai ov
[tm K]ai Tovs euepyTr](raPT[a]9 . . .
Frs. [d), {d), and (q). Col. ii, p. 15, 2016, 7.
4 lines lost.
A[6^pai0L Kai AaK8aifi0VL0i
25 [SiKaiop KpiPo]y[a]i Tq[vs iÔpovs

tl
[fji(op(i(xdaL TO fi](V S'v SiK aiop oy[T
IfiiTioop no\X]ax[<^]f ^^VfV- Tl ^^
pofiifiop a]vT0 pep e(TTL[p (opiaTai
-pjiip [npoT]pop 8eL 8 OTTOTap [\p-ii
30 <nô[p r)i avTo]p re t[o]p 8Layopeyo[v
Ta po' pop Xa]pâpeLP eiTa to [opoi

'op TOJi yeypappepcoL popcei eir] 8e
[ap Totop8i cocnrep yap popo6eTr)^
r[a(9 îyiarais (ripiais tovs

35 KX^nrovTa'S KoXaêt ovtoo Sa /ca[i
T0V9 eârraToovTas {JLaXia-ra
T[i\fj.cop[ia6](f i] K[a]i yap ovr'oi K\e

TTTOVai TTjv Siavoiav Kai K[a6aTrep
u[6]/j.odeT[T]9] i<:X[r]po]yo[fiov9 (ttol
40 r](r To[v9 yyvTaTQ> yevov9 ov
ray tol^ a7r[ai(nv aiToBv\q(TKov(nv

ovTco T(ov t[ov a7rXe]udpov XPVi
Frs. (d) and (e). Col. iii, p. 16, 13-22.
[i/ovs avra navras aSiKîv voô

[O^TT}^ iKpivev L yap Ti/xa](T[Oai
45 [oL uo/xoi irpocTTaTTOvcrL To]y[^] Ka[Xa)^
[Kai SiKaiccs Toau KOivcav iTTL(TTaTrja\av[
[ra^ SrjXoy coy Kai tovs tol 87]fjLoai]a[
[8ia(f>dipavTa9 Tificopias] a^[i
ov? VOfJLlÔV<TlV '^]^f\
50 TCOV iVaVTLCdV TO voixL\fi[ov K\aTa
[0ar6y ovtco yiverai . . . . e< 5J6 rcor
[KeKpifjLfi'ODU coSe Kai ov /lovov] eyco

[tOV VOjJLOV TOVTOV VKa TOVt]cOU
[^rjjxi TOV vo/xoderrju Buvai aXXa] Kai
55 [irpoT^pov 01 SiKaarai TrapaJTrXrj
Fr. (e). Col. iv, p. 17, lo-ii.
K[ai rais iroXeaiv op-ovoovaais
57 ij[po<TK07riu /XT] (TTaaiaacoai
'
Fr. (/). Col. V, p. 17, 11-25.
Ta p.i.[v ovv ofjioia rooi a-vficpepovTi rov

TOV TOV [TpOTTOV /JiTl]a>V [TToXXa
60 7rolT][<T]lS fK S( TCOV (.]vaVTL[(i)^V CW(5[ei

120 HIBEH PAPYRI
[to (TuîJi(f)po[v] (^[rai] Karaâv^s
ei yap \vaLr[e\i\ roys emuKeiS TLp.av
TOiv Tro\ir[(i>\v [(r]y[//]06/3OJ^ av eir] kul
Tov[^] novr]p[o]v? KoXaêiu ei yap oiea
65 6e [o]v [av^p(f)pou eivai t[o] povovs ripa<s
irpos 0r]^[aLovs:] noXepeLi/ avp(l)e
[p]ov a[i/ e]iTj A[aKe]Saip[o]viOL9 avppa

[v]ia[i/ TTOirjo-a/iej/ou?] ovTOi Qr)âLOis
7roX[e/i]eii/ [e/c] p.ev 8r] roav evav
70 rL(o[v ovTOi TO a-v]pîpov /cara
[(p]avi[s:] iTo[LT)ae]L^ to Se KKpip
[V0]u VTTO [evSoÔOV K]ptTCOU 0VT(O
[^pr] Xapâv^Lv AaJKeSaipoinoL

[re yap Adr]paL0V9 K]aTa7ro\e
avToi'S
75 [pT]crai'Tes crvp^Ypeiv
[a)Lr)6r]<jav prj ti]u tto\\lv avrcav
[eâvBpaTro8L\(Ta[a]6aL Kai
[TTaXiv A6r]vaiOL peTa] rjâKOV
[eôu avoLKLcraL rrju S\TrapTT]u
Frs. (/) and U^).

Col. vi, p. 17, 2518, 14.
80 [avp(f)piLU crcpiarLU mr]Br]crav nepi.]
TT[o]L\rjaaL AaKeSaipoviovs ire pi
Kai
p[]p [tov SiKaLov Kai Tov vopipov
Tov [avp(f)epoyTO? ovtco peTLccv evno
p-qaleL? to 8e KaXov Kai to paiSiov Kai
85 t[o r]8v Kai TO 8vvaT0i' Kai to avayKai
o\v OpOlOTpOTTCO? T0VT019 pTldl Kai
7i[epi /xer tovtcov i'Tv6eu evno
p\r)aop(iV TTaXiv 8e 8iopio-(ope6a Kai
\7repi TToacDV Kai ttoicou Kai Tiucou eu re]
90 t[oi9 ôvX^vT-qpioi? Kai Tai9 (kkXt]
cr[iai9 crvpôvX^vopiv av yap tov
T[(i>v KaaTa aafîa eTrLaTcop]6a

t[ov^ /xU i]Siovs Xoyov9 avra ra

7r[payfiara] KaO Ka(XTT]u "qfxiv
95 "^"Hfiy
(TV/xôvjXiai^ TrapaScoaei T[as
Se [Koiuas iSija.9 e/c noXXou npoeiSo

[T]e[s' eTTiêpeti/] e0 iKaara^ rcor
TT pa\^(.<t)v paiSiciiS Sw]T]ao/jLe6a tov
Ta)[v ovv e^'e/fa Siaipenou r]p.Cy
100 7T^[pi COP KOLvrjL ôvXevoPTai Tvav

T9 [^p K(paXai<oi fjLiv ovv ^meLv
Frs. {g) and {h). Col. vii, p. 18, 14 19, 4.
[(^KTLv iTTTa tov] apiOpov 7rpo6e(Tets
[nepc cov SrjfijrjyoprjTeov avayKai

\ov yap i(TTL\ /^^[Ajeueo-âi Kai Xe
105 \y(.iv r]/jLas er ôjyXrjL rj ev SrnicoL
[mpL tepcov T] vojxoov rf] nepi TJ/y TroAi
[tikt]9 KaTa(TKvr]9 t]] 7re[pL t](cv 7r/Do[S']
[ra? aXXa9 ttoXcls a]vfifj.a)(La)[v] kui

[avjxôXaicov rj nepi 7roX]fi[(ov rj
no [ipr]Vr]S 77 TTCyOt TTOpOV )(P^]f^^'T^^] ^t
[fjLv OVV 7rpo6(Tts avT]ai Tvy[)(âvov

[at Trepi cov ôv]XvaoiJ.i[0]a [kui Stj/mt]
[yopr]cro1fiv eKaarrjv Se npodiaiv

8iXcofie6a Kai ctkottooihv v oiy
115 TpoTTOLS rrepi tovtcov (vS^yj^Tai
Tois XoyoLS )(pr](r6ai nepi fiev [ovv
Lcpcov TptTTQ)S [a]vayKa[iov Ae
yeiv T] yap epovfiev coy avayK[a]iov

ra KaOccTTCoTa S[ia](f)vXaTT(iv
120 J] coy nt TO /iyaXo7rp7re(TT
pov fiTaa-TaTov t] coy ein to rajrai

ireivoTcpov oTa/x jxiv ovv Aeyco
fiiv 0)9 S^L Ta KaOâ-TooTa Stacpv

122 HIBEH PAPYRI
xs. {g) and (//). Col. viii, p. 19, 5-10.
\aT[r(iiv evp-qaofxii^ acpopfxa^ e< lêi^
125 Tov [SiKaiov SioTi irapa iraai ra na

rpta \e6y] napaâivciv aSiKoi^ ecTTt
Kai 8[lotl ra fxavTCia Travra rois

ai'0[pcoTroi9 vpoaTamL Kara ra
7raT[pia iroiaaOaL ra? Bvaias
130 Kai t[cdj' npcoTCou olklôvtccv
Ta[s TToXeiy Kai T019 BiOLS iSpv
10 lines lost.
?[
135 r\
Frs. {t) and (k). Col. ix, p. 22, 3-17. PLATE III.
[eiT] (rv\Xr]^ST]]u 5e Set napa(pv\ar

\t(.iv ottcos ol p.ev] iôfioi to ttXtjOo^
[airoTpeylrovai roijy Ta9 ovaia? ^ôvaw

[^TTLôvXeveii/ ro]Li 8e ttXovtovo-lv
1 40 [eiy ray Koivas XfiJTOvpyia^ Sanavau

[(piXoTifiLau fnro]iriaovau^ tovto
[8e ovTcos av tc? 7T]apaaKvaaeLei' (i
[tols p^v ra^ oucrtjay iyovaiv avTL
[tcoj/ iy TO KOLVOV Sjanavcopei'col' Ti
145 [pai Tildes ano t]coi^ vopcov acpcopi
[<Tp](v[ai Tv]'Y)(a[vou\ roav 8e ycmpe

[I'coy ro[v9 r]T]p xi^P"-^ ep]yaôpvovs
[t] Kai TOfy [vavTiKo]ys paXXov

[toov] ay\opai^fio[u 7rp0Ti\pau ovTCo yap
150 [01 piv nXovTovvTi'i e]/coj/rey rrji
[ttoXî X(iTOvpyT]crova]iP to Se nXt]
[00? 01; avKoâvria^ aX]X ^pyaaias ^ni

[dvprjaii ]u Kai irtpi Toy
26. FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAE AUTHORS 1^2,
[fiT]Te \ODpav ava8a(TT]qv ttoiîu
[ 15 letters a]avTm' i<T\[v
[pov^ K(i(r6ai V0/10V9 K]ai [/xejyaAay
Fr. (t). Col. X, p. 22, 1723, 4. Plate III.
eniKeiaOai ri/xcopias rois irapa

âivovaiv ravra y^prj Kai T019 eu
160 Tcoi TroXeficoi TeXevTrjaacri Ta<brjv
SrjfxocrLov -^(opiov ey KaXooi irpo ttjs
TToXecoy acpcopiadat kuitol Traaiv av

TCoi/ 0)9 rj^Tjacoai ei? Tpo(p-qv SiSovai
Tcop. fiu ovv ev TaLS 8r]/ioKpaTiai9
165 VOfiCOV TOiaVTT]V Sil TTjV OiaLV
7roLL(r6aL irepi 5e ras oAiya/D^tay
ray //r apyas Sei tov? vojiov^
Karafefieiu e| larov iraai tois tt]?
TToAiremy inT^ypvaiv tovtcop
1 70 8 iivai Ta9 irXiKTTas KXrjpooras

Ta^ Se fiyi(TTas Kpv(paiaL ^jjcfxot
fiiO opKcav Kai 7rXei(rTi]9 uKpi^ci
ay 8Lay\rr](f)i<jTas 8(i 5e Kai ra^ ^rj
fiias iv Tai9 oXiyap)(îaL9] jm^jl
175 o-ray emKeiadaL toi? v^piôvaiv

Tivas rcou ttoXltcov 7n)(êipovaii'
[tOj yap nX-qBos ov)(^ ovtco toou ap
ycou ayavaKTU aTepojx^vov coy
r.{i). Col. xi, p. 23, 4-17. Plate III.
e\iL âp(os v[^piô/Xvou -ypr) 8e.
180 [T\as 8ia(f)opa9 t[coi/ ttoXitcou oti
[T]a)(iaTa 8iaXv[ii/
Kat fit) [&\vvay[(eiv K tt]9 x<opa9

Tov o\X\ov i]y T -qv ttoXlv k yap toov
124 HIBEH PAPYRI
TOiovTO)[v <Tv'\vd[8(ov av(rTpe(peTaL
185 Ta 7T\r]6[q K\aL [KaraXvei ras oXi

yap\ias KaO]oXo[v Se aimv Set
e/i /xeu ra i^ SrnioKpariaLS KcoXviy
Tovs noX[\ovs TULS Tcou nXovaicoi'

ovaiais e7r]L(3ovXVLu er Se tuls
190 oXiyap)( iai9 anorpeTreLu tovs

TTjS noXiTeia? ^lereyovTas
v^piîiv t\ov^ acrOevecTTipov^
Kat avKoâ VT^LV tov? TToXira? coi'
jxv ovv ope'yeaOai Set tovs vojxovs
195 KaL Trj[v] 7r[oXiTLK7]i' KaraaKev

rjv K To[vTa)u ovK ayfOTjaeL^
Set 8e (yvv[ayopfiVovTa fiev vojxcol
8eiKvvv\aL TOVTov icrou ovra rois

TToXiTaL^ ofioXoyovfiei'ov re
Fr. (/). Col. xii, p. 24, 14-19.
200 [KaL TrX-qaiov tol^ toit'oi9] KaT[oL
[kovptus L 8e fiT]] TOVTCov anep \av v

\'jTap)(7]L (Tvvayiii\v \oTa\v 8\(i\ SiaKcoXv
\7]i9 TTjv avp.ixa\Lav ]fj.(f)ai'iêiv
\ev8)(êTaL 7Tpci)To]fj. iiev 0)9 ov
205 \k avayK-q TTOULaOai vvv avrrju
[fTrL$ coy ov Slkuioi. Tvy)(]avov(TLi^ oyjl^?]
Frs. {/), (in), (u), and (0). Col. xiii, p. 24, 1925, >S.
[l6 cos 7r[poTepov Jjfxas kukq)? iTOLrj
\(Ta]vTe^ I 14 letters f^ 8e /x?/
[coy fj.aKp[au T019 tottois aireôvres
2IO KCLL a 8vi'arot ovT(9 Kara tovs npocrr]
\ko I' ra'i napayeveaOaL Kaipovs raty

[/u]ej/ o[vu 18 letters ô-w
Taf[s' TTepL TQ>U <7VfX/J.a)(]c0U K TOVTCOU

[K]ai t[(01^ TOVTOLS OlXOLolrpOTVCOV eVTTO
215 [p]r]a-on[ev XprjadaL w^pi 7ro\ep.ov
[8] Kai ([i]pr)[vr]^ roi'j avTOv Tponov

7a[s ixey\L[aTa^] i5eay (yXa^co/xei/
[Trp]o(pao-a[? //e^] ovp ei(Ttu tov noXepov
[(K(pepiu irpo^ TL]va^ atSe npore
220 [poy aSii<ri[0^vTa9] vvv Kaipov napa
TreTrT[(OK0T09 apvvacrOaL tov9
[aS]iK[ovyT[a? 7] vvv aSiKovpevov9 VTrep
avTCOv 7ro[Xepiv -q vnep avyyevcov rj
[v]7rp [vepyeToov rj avppaôi?

225 a8[iK]ovpe[vois ôj]6iv tj tov ttji
7ro[X]ei (Tvp[(f)povTos ^veKCi' rj cty
r'r. ((?). Col. xiv, p. 25, 10-18.
2 lines lost.
[cTTi, TO TToXepeiv napaKuXcopev tov

[tcov] re t[co]v irpocpaaecdv otl Tr^Xe^crray
[(rvv]aKTov Kai peTa Tavra SeiKTov

230 [(09] ^ cov ecTTiv nepLyvecrO[ai tool
TToXepcoi TOVTcov otl irXi[iaTa tols
7rapaKaXovpvoi9 (rTi y7r[a]p[)(ôvTa
TrepiytvovTai Se navT^s 7roX[^povv

rey 77 Sia ttjv toov deoov ^vvoiav [rjv ev
235 rvxiav T^ê^y] K[a]X[o]y[p]v \rj Sia (rcopa
TO)v TrXrjBo^ Kai pcopijv rj Sia ^PV
paTCCv [evTTopiav rj Sia aTpaTt]
yov ^[povr}(TLv rj Sia (Tvppa)(a)V
apT[r]v T] Sia tottcov
240 v^v[Lav tovtcov ovv Kai tcov

tovt[oi9 opoLOTpoTToav Ta Tots irpa
ypaa[iv oiKeioTaTa Xapfia
126 HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. [p). Col. XV, p. 29, 15 3O' ^
[(paiuoyrat [leiôvi o\rav npo [^]fâ)([v
[repov^ Trapaarcocriu e <TTai Se Ka[L
245 [coSe auêw t KeKpi]ra[i /^[eya
[aya$o}/ l^([ya
1 18 letters ^
"
.[..;.
[24 I . .
250 [ 2.-, ]a
K SiavoLa^ aipj3i(3a\ôov ,009]
[K noXXou TTpoei'Oijaeu coy 7ro\X\cou
eneâX^TO coy ttoXvv y^povov ^]'n'poc
[rref cos ouSei9 aXXo9 7r]poTpos

255 \tovtoi9 iVi')(êipr](Tev coy l^^'o-
'\TOVTOiv 7rpa^ peO coi' ouSeis a X

Xoy Cty (TTi TOVTOLS pÔ 0V9 OUj
Seis erepo? co? e/ccor o)9 e]< 7r/3o
rota? CO? et Tratrey .... 7^00l]/xe^'
260 (.vSaipovoip^v av i] Tvparroip ey
jTa (Jvp^Lâ(^Lv KUL noiKoSopovyra\

[to (Tepoy a>9 ^TTi TO eTtpou avêi]u
[TpoTTCoi TOicoiSe oaTi? (5e rcoj^ îXcoj^j kj]
Fr. (/). Col. xvi, p. 30, <S 21.
265 SeTai eoLKOi Kat tovs yorefi?] Tipav ov

o[a]TL9 8e [rjoffy] y[o]i'6i? ripai] 0VT09
Kai TTjv nalTpiSa Tpy [eavTJov ^[o]v

Xrj[a\TaL tv noieiv (rvXXT]PSr]u S] eai'
piv TroXXoi[v aLTiov airotpaLvrîs e
270 av T a[y]a[6'\a>[v eav re kukcoi/ pêyaXa

(pavdTai cr[K07rii' $ . . .
]y[-]f^^y
127
TTOTepov liiLôv (pai[veTaL to irp\a
yfia Kara fieprj Siaipovfi[euoi^ rj K]a

do[\o]v X^yofiivov o[Tr]ofipm av 6\vv
275 l^î-Cov rjL TovTov Tov T p]onov av
o-ci? ovrco9 [iiTLcov TrXeiaras Kai

fiey ia-ras notrja-^LS T[a]7re/rcyo-ei?
Se T019 Xoyoi9 Kai Taya[$a Kai ra
280 Ka TOf ivavTLOv rpoTTov p^rioof
vpr](ri9 Kap. [lev em roop peya
X<cu Kai paXi[(TTa pev ptjSevo?
aiTioi/ (Tn8ei.KvvLv L (5e pT] coy eAa
X^crrcoi/ Kai piKporarcou co y //e
285 i/ ovy eyKcop[ia]ôyTes Ka[i \lr]eyoi'Te9
''
^)- Col. xvii, p. 30, 2131, (S.
avîja-opeu K[aL] janeivcocropev aiiip

^v ^Kcp^poopiv e/c TovTcav lapev
XP^W]iH-^!: L^fJ "^(^^ av^riaecou eiaiu at
[a]<p'oppai Kai ei/] to[i]? aXXois eiSâ-w aX
290 Xa [77 nXdo-TT]] Svvapis ev toi? ey
Ka)p[ioi^ Kai To]i9 yj/oyoi^ <ttiv avT[ai9
ir[e]pi pev ow tovtcov euT^vOev
ivrr oprjaopev SieXdcopei^ <5[e
naXii/ TOVTO19 opoT[p]o7rco9 to [t
295 KaTrjyopiKoj/ Kai a7roX[oyiKo]u eiS[o\

e^ cyj/ crvuecTTTjKrji/ Kai [co]y avToi9
Set xPW[0]ai ea-Ti Sc to pey KaTTjyo
piKOv avXXr]^Br]v inreLv aSiKr]
_jmT(ov Kai apapTripaT[(i)v] e^-qyrjais
300 TO 8 anoXoyiKov aSiK-qpaToov
Kai apapTTjpaTCov KaTrj[y]op7]
OiVTOiv 7] viroirTivB^vTcop Sia
Xv(Ti9 (KaTcpcof Sc t[oo]i^ lSm'
128 HIBEH PAPYRI
Ta[y B]yyaiJieL<i javras fxMf'^^^ 7^
305 Ka[rriyopowTa] j[o]vt . . [. . ai'a]'/
Ka[iou Aeyeti' orai^] /xeu [ciy TTOvqpCav
Fr. (/). Col. xviii, p, 31, 14-20.
T[o TTapaTr]piLV T0V9 KaTriyo]
pOVVTU? ilTL TTOLOIS [TCCf KUTT]
yop-qfiaTCOf 01 {vo/jloi ras ti/xco
310 pias TaTTo[vaiu Kai nepi a

Tccv ri/xapT[y]/j.i'0)i/ 01 SiKaarai
ra^ (rjHLa\y opiôvaiv orav /xe
V ovv fofios 8[i\a)p[iKC0S r]L rovTO

SeL fiopou (TKOTTîv [tov KaTTjyo
315 pIp^v oTTcoy iTvi8ii^\r]L to Trpayfia

yiy evrjiievlp]}/ [oTav 8 01 BiKaarai
Tiixooaiv Trp(c\T0v /Xv avayKTj
[îT]i8eiâi ra Kar[r)yopovix^va
Fr. (r). Fr. {s). Fr. (/).
y6rjl[ ]KaTTa[ ]yT . .

[
1-5. (o/ioi)ci)]i> (c.T.X. : the ^vhole sentence in the MSS. runs (vnopi}(TOfifv te ntp) tovtuv
\(y(iv f^ avTO)V rt to)V npodprjp.fvcoi' koi rtov opoitov tovtois koi tuiv tvavrioiv avrols Koi riov rj^rj
KfKpipfvoiv vno OfSiu 1) (iv6pu>7Tuiv (vbo^cov 7] vno KpiTuiv fj vTTo Tuiv uvTayu)Vi(TTa>v Tjp'iv. The papyrus
(n) exhibits several variations. Xeydv is placed later in the sentence, after ofioioo]v [a]vTois,
which, owing to considerations of space, is more likely to have stood in the text than
opoicL>\v [to]vtois. Possibly KaK should be restored in place of koi in 1. i, but the supplement
is already rather long for the lacuna. Before vtto Otav n inserts ;, and before avdpoTrav
adds vn, while fi^So^wj/ is transferred from av0pa>Tr<ov to Kpiroov, whether vn t[vhn^û)v [kpi]t[<ov]
is read, as we propose, or vno \KpiT\av \fv8o^]<iiv, which is also possible if the supposed
T is regarded as ink that has come oflf from a different layer in the cartonnage. The
transfer of the epithet is an improvement; cf. 1. 72, where n has vtto [fvSoûr k]pito)p in
place of vrr' tVSo^coj/ of the MSS. in a passage which develops in detail the general statement
in I. 4. dv6pu>nu)v by itself makes a belter antithesis to 6((ov than uvfipunwv fVfio|o>f, and
Spengel (p. 1 1 1 ) had already remarked that ^ i/ro dtiov ^ vn6 dvfipunav would be expected
which is what n actually has.
9. TO : om. INISS.
II. To[v\i i|iety fiifificrOai : SO Hammer with CFM and llie deteriores ;
nifiua-Sm tuIs
vloCi OP Aid.
15. KUKOV epyaaafj.d'ovi [r]^âi'. I'jptii kukov fpyacrafxiiOVi IMSS. except V which haS kcikuu
iipas ep-yacrajievovi-.
17. t]'>i/[to]v tov 'jpQTTov: Tov TpoTToi' ToiTov MSS. Spcngel Hid alrcadv proposed to
place TovTov first.
22. K(i]i: so Hammer following Spengcl; the MSS. place ovtco after (vepyeTi)-
ovT<>i
a-ai/rar. The
reading of the papyrus is not quite certain. Lines 21, 22, and 23 as far as
(ravT[ are on a separate fragment (c), and the exact position of the two parts of 1. 23
cannot be determined by external evidence. Adopting the arrangement in the text,

according to which only a is supposed to be lost between (TavT[ and ]o- ., it is necessary . .
to supply ovToi between T\i'jjLu>\p'^fi(T6[ai and K]ai, as fvepy(TT]aavT[a\s ovra cannot be read.
But a difficulty is caused by the last three letters of the line the surface of the papyrus :
is much damaged at this point, and it is hard to distinguish what. is the original ink from
what has come off from a different layer. The vestiges following the a, which is clear,
do not suit the beginnings of either irpocrqKei or avnvepyiTeiv, the two last words of the
sentence in the MSS., for though po is possible there is not space for tv between that
and the o-.
25. [StKoioi/ kpivo\v\(t\l MSS., which is too long for the lacuna.
: biKaiov ehai Kplvovai
26. fi]fv 8[r]: but n's reading is very uncertain.
fxiv ovv IVISS. ; The letter before
V could equally well be v, i. e. o]vv, but then it is very difficult to account for the following
S (or a), unless the beginning of Bikoiov was written twice by mistake. There are some very
faint traces of the penultimate letter before jev or w, but not sufficient to help in deciding
between to p-êv or pfv o^w.
27. 7roXX]a;([a)]y SO Spengel
: ; TToXXiiKis JMSS., Hammer. But n"s reading is very
uncertain.
28. o : olop ÎSS.
29. oTTOTav oTTov tw : MSS., but the letter preceding av is more like t than v. ottcoj av
might also be read.
2930. xp^j'^'M^" *?' avTo\v: fj xfW'-iôv
avTov INISS., avoiding the hiatus. It is not
certain that the order was different in the papyrus, but the lacuna in 1. 30 corresponds
to vnpoTfp in 1. 29 and op.ovKap. in 1. 31, so that \yavTo''\ is rather short for it, while ['J^XP'?]
would make 1. 29 rather long.
301. avTo\v Tf \t\ov 8iay\oipfvo\v\Ta v(iip,ov \a\p,âvfiv '. avTW re tov aynpevovra kol tou
uopov 'XapLâvav MSS., which will hardly construe, and is probably a conuption of the true
reading found in n.
34. T[mi: om. INISS.
35. KkiTiTovTas Ko'hu^ti: AcXeVro? (K6Xa(Tev MSS. KXeTrTovrai makes a better contrast than
/cXtTrras with eârrnT copras in 1. 36.
6ft : so Hammer with CF and the deteriores ; S7 INIOP Aid.

39. fTTorrjcre ; TTfjioirjKe INISS.
42. TCOP : Koi TU)V INISS.
t\ov : so Hammer with CFM and the deteriores ; om. OP.
43-7. The vestiges of these lines are very slight and the reconstruction very uncertain.
48-9. ovs vopiC[ with a paragraphus below is on the fragment (</) containing most
of Col. ii, but the position of those letters in relation to Fr. {e) containing Cols, iii and iv
is rendered certain by the writing on the verso, although Col. iii proves to be shorter
by 3 lines than Col. ii. After vopiCova-iv there may have been a blank space of 3 or
4 letters, so that the lacuna before \a< may be reduced from 10 letters to 6. The MSS.
K
130 II IB EH PAPYRI
proceed tmv ivavriav, and ovv would be expected at the end of the line, but
eV îv oZv
the two remain are almost certainly .
letters that Since fK must have occurred
somewhere in 1. 49, we propose kuk, i.e. /cat eV, though this goes far to necessitate the
alteration of ntv ow, which would almost fill up the lacuna between voyî^C^)va^v and k}ik.
It is just possible that (k fifv ow kû t[wj/ tvuuTioni' should be read, but the vestiges suit
|
K much better than tr.
CO I. The order of words in the MSS. is ivavriav Karacjiavis ourco ytvTai TO vofLifiov, from
which the papyrus must have varied, since only 20 letters are available in 1. 51 between
cl(ira and the end of the sentence. The vestiges before [, Acjara suit /x and are not .
easily reconcilable with the of d'avncov or yiveTm.

termination There is room for 3
or 4 letters more than our supplement of the lacuna in 1. 51, but there may well have
been a blank space left between yu'emi and .
54. The supplement, 26 letters, is rather long for the lacuna ; in the corresponding
space in the other lines the letters lost do not exceed 23.
Cf^. TTapa^-rr'SrjUa-ia): Skîovtos Avcridiôv iTap(nTkf}(ria MSS. 11 either omitted buîouToi
.\vai6i8ov or, more probably, placed the words later in the sentence.
^6-^. Working back from ra nf[v in 1. 58, the tt in 1. 57 seems to be the initial
letter of n[po(TKOTTfiv which is found in ABDV
in place of (TKOTrtlv (CEFGINIOP, Hammer),
and K in 1. 56 must belong to k["- There is not room in 1. 56 for the reading of the MSS.
K(u T<ui TToXfinf ofMovoovaaii avp(f)pov eVrt, and probably avpcpepov io-Ti was Omitted or placed
before Kai or a shorter phrase, e.g. M, substituted.
60. co8[el wSe aot 1\ISS.
:
61. [to (Tv]p(pepo\v]: SO Hammer with CFMP and the detcriores ; om. O.
62. Tipav TU>v ttoXltIu^v '.
tuiv ttoXitcov Tipav MSS.
64. Tov[i\: so Hammer with CFMO and the deteriores; om. P.
65. \o\v \av\ui<l>(pov (ivai: aijvp(f>(>pov JMSS. Cf. 1. 2IO, note.
6>7_3. A[aK(\8aip\o]vi.ois a-vppalxyi'lv TTuirjCTapfvovsy. to AciKfdainomovs (Tvppuxovs nonjaapevovs
fjpui MSS. TO is not essential, and in other respects the new reading, which avoids the
ambiguity of subject and object in that of the IMSS., is preferable.
70. <Tv]fj.(f)pov: so Hammer with CFMP and the deteriores; om. O.

72. vno Itvtnôiv K^piTMu: vn evdo^wv (Tvp(f>epov INISS. ; cf. note on 11. 15'
ovTco coSf MSS., which is better,
:
ovrco has just occurred twice previously, in 11. 68
and 70.
77. [($av^panobi](Ta[a\diu : uv8p(nToî(Tn(T0ai, the reading of the INISS., is too short for the
initial lacuna, which requires 11-13 letters.
78. piTa] erjlâioiv: om. INISS., which insert aurols after (ôV in the next line. For the
occasion referred to in 78-81 cf. Dem. Be Cor. pp. 258-9.
11.
cf p(v ovv Toi) Hammer with the other MSS. The insertion o{ ow
82. p[(]v [tov. so ;
would make a of 32 letters, which is unlikely

line possibly ri had km nfpi p[f v [tov. ; \
86. TovToii is omitted by INIOP, but probably stood in n. The restorations of 11. 82,
85, and 86 involve lines of 29 letters, that of 1. 84 a line of 30 letters, which is 2 or
3 letters more than the average length of 11. 87-101 but it is fairly certain that 1. 83 ;
had 28 letters, and it is better to suppose that the lines at the top of this column
were slightly longer than those below in spite of the fact that the beginnings of lines
tend to slope away to the left, than to suppose that n differed extensively from the MSS.
in 11. 80-86.
88. If there was no space before ttiAiv there is just room for the reading of the MSS.
TTciKiv be But elsewhere, when the writer inserts
^lopiaojpfda (or -aupeda) Kai in this line.
a paragraphus and tiie new sentence had begun in the line above, a space of from
2-4 letters is left. Hence it is not unlikely that 11 had opiawpfdu (as conjectured by
Spengel) or omitted Km at the end of 1. 88. Line 89, as restored, is already quite long
eaougli, so that km cannot be transferred to it without omitting some other word.
93. r[ovs y-ev i'fiinvs SO Hammer with and the deteriores; om. roui O.
: CFMP
95. Tr}\v: om. MSS.
napadcoafi : SO Hammer with CFMO and the deteriores ; TrapaSt'Swcri P,
97. (Kaa-Tas : (KuaTdii ]\ISS. 11 "s reading may be right.

102. Tou] apidnov : SO H. with CFAI and the deteriores; riov dpiSfiuii' P; om. O.
103. 8rjn'qyopr]Tfov hrjprjyoprjaopev ]\1SS. :
avayKaiov dvdyKrj INISS. :
104. ôv[X\vea-dm Kai ôvXeveaBat IMSS., : but there is not room for both Km and
{(TTi in the lacuna. reading The i3ov'X]eve(T6ai is very uncertain. The traces following the
supposed /3 (which might be read o) would suit t better than ov.
105. J? f Srjpooi \-rrfpi lepcov rj vupcav'. Ka\ Srjpu) rj nepi Upcov fj TTfp\ yopoiu INISS. Possiblv
^r} jrepi should be read in 1. io6, but the supplement is already quite long enough, and for
TTfpi before fo^wi' there is certainly no room ; cf. 109-10, note.
108. Iras aXXnv : SO Hammer with CFINI (and OP ?); om. rds the deteriores. The size
of the lacuna makes it practically certain that n had ras.
10910. CFOP
and the deteriores have 17 nepl elprjvrjs fj nepl -nopov, which is 4 or
5 letters too long for the lacuna here, while INI omits t) irepl flplivr]s, with which reading
n cannot be brought into agreement. The simplest course is to suppose the omission
of TTfpi before either eiprji'rjs or nopov, preferably the former; cf. 1. 105. note.
III. The supplement is rather long for the lacuna, and pav or ow may have been
omitted ; cf. 1. 82, note.
Tvy\)(âvova I MSS. It WOuld be jUSt possible tO restore Tvy xnVJVCTiv
: Tvyxdvovaiv ovaai I
[ovo-ai Trept but this would make 1. iii unusually long, and the lacuna at the
wi/ /3ou, ;
beginning of 1. 112 suits 11 or 12 letters better than 14. oucrat is quite unnecessary.
114. 8ie\copeda SO H. with CFiNIP and the deteriores; ^LaXva-opfda O.
:
115. nepi T0VT03V i'd)(^{Tm so H. with eVS/x*^"' ^fp' TovToiv the rest of the
: CDFMOP ;
deteriores.
116. Tois XoyoLs xPV'^^^'-'-'- xph'^"'^^^'- H. with CF (first hand) MP; Xdyw xPW'^^^^'^ F
(second hand) O
and the deteriores. n's reading is the best cf. 1. 279. ;
117. TpiTTcos: so H. from a conjecture of Bekker; nepiTTO}! (jrepiTTo'is C) INISS.

[a]vayKa ioi> Xejyeiv SO H. with CFjNIP and the deteriores :
Xeyeif dvayKmov O. ;
118 9. avayK\a\oi/ ra KadeaTwra d.ia^xpvXaTTfiv ra Ka6(aTcoTa 8ia(}n'XaKTeov INISS., except '.
O which adds Upd after 8ia(p. The repetition of nvayKuiov which has occurred in the
previous line is inelegant, and 8i(icf)vXaKT(ov is preferable, though this sentence has become
corrupt in the INISS. cf. the next note. ;
121. pfTaarareov ttcos MSS. (except ovtcos V, wros D), a reading which makes no sense
:
and is justly bracketed by H. following Spengel. The insertion of pfTaaraTeou is a great

improvement. With the MSS. reading a verb like peTacTraTeov had to be supplied out
of its opposite Sja'ûXaKTcor, making a very harsh construction. Spengel (p. 121) had
proposed the insertion of 8ei pfdia-Tavai.
1256. After 81KC1I0V the MSS. have Xeyovre^' ra ndrpia fdrj irapa ndcri Tvapuâivfiv abiKov
(an Kai, thus having 48 letters corresponding to what should occupy (allowing 28
letters for a line) not more than 46 letters in n, and clearly placing ra irarpia tdtj earlier
in the sentence than n. Trapa tjco-i, which is constructed with a8iKov, is awkwardly situated
in the MSS. reading between edrj and Trapaâlveiv, and the simplest restoration of 11. 125-6
is to keep all the words found in the MSS. and transpose to ndrpin edrj and irupa naa-i. This
results, however, in giving 30 letters to 1. 125, which is unlikely; and since out of the
three illustrations the INISS. introduce the second and third by on on (v. 1. 6tdn on), . . . . . .
K 2
132 HIBEH PAPYRI
omitting ort before the first, n
has hion (apparently) in the second case but omits
while
it before the third, n had hon in place of \(y>wris to introduce the
we suggest that
first. The ediiio Basil, of 1.539, based on an unknown I\IS., inserted on after Xiyovrti.
If -napa ncun is not placed before t narpia edr] then (5i)ort [XeyovTfs is much too long)
Tvapaûivfiv t(i nnVpia \(6r] rrapa naaiv abiKov evri is preferable tO hion adiKov tort ra Tra^Tpia [fdr}
napa uaai irnpafiaiviiv. BlaSS prefers tO restore 1. 125 tov \biKaiov XeynvTes 810TI Ta na, omitting
TTdpa TTciai on the ground that nnpa iraaiv liîKov ((tti is not satisfactory in the sense of Trnpu
naaiv abiKov vopi^frai.
127. S'tort: the traces of the letter after k suit 5 and are irreconcilable with o or t.
f)MTi C and the dcteriores ort II. with FMOP. ;
TJo)!/: Koi (in t[o}v MSS.

130. Kai Cf note on 11. 125-6.
137. VI p(p] vopoi TO nXrjdos 01 vopoi to pfv iT\tjdoi WSS., which IS the better reading.
:
138. \anoTp(\l/-i)V(Ti: aTTorpey^(0(Ti {airo(TTpi<^<,i(Ti OV) IMSS., but cf. 1. I4I fpno\i.ri(TOv<Tiv
where they have (pnoirjiTacn.
140 I. dairavav \(pi\oTipuiv (pivo mcrovcnv : (Kovalav airacrav (f)i\oTipiav ('pTroirjcraai JNISS. 11
probably represents the true reading, being a corruption o^ Sarravav and iKovaiav a gloss.
arTaaai'
142. Tis TTâpaaKfuaa-fiev'. KaTucrKevacrfuv IMSS. KaTaaKevucraitv (sc. ol vopoi^ H., adoplmg
',
a conjecture of Spengel. In the reading of the MSS. Karaa-Kfuaa-fifu had no subject to refer
to but their error is now shown to have consisted not in the use of the singular but in
;
tlie omission of the subject, which is probably tis, since there is room for 3 or 4 letters
between av and Tr'apuaKfvaadfv.

145. OTTO t'^cov vopcov SO H. wiih
'. CFOP and the deteriores ; om. M.
146. yfvopeuwv: Trei-o/ifVcof MSS. Tlie reading of 11 is probably a mere error ; cf. note
on 11. 148-9.
147. (p]yaCopfvovs SO li. with CFO and the deteriores
: epyaCoptvoyv IMP. ;
1489. \T(\ Kai Tovs [vavTiKo\s paWov '^Toii'^ iiyôpni^wv TrpoTijpnu Koi vavK\>]poiiiTas to)v :
ayopn[u>v pdWoi^ npoTip^fu MSS. The letter before s in 1. 148 was certainly not a and the
vestiges suit v. It is clear that ll varied considerably from the IMSS. in this sentence, and
the difficulty of restoring 11. 147-9 is increased by the fact that there is an error in 1. 146
and probably another in 1. 149. The reading of the IMSS. is thus translated by Bekker
sicqiie el agricolas paupcribus et naviiim gtiheniatores vcctoribiis antepomvit, which is correct
but yields no satisfactory sense for how would the poor be prevented from plotting against
;
the rich by the laws fiwouring cultivators at the expense of the poor and shipowners at
the expense of merchants? A meaning more relevant to the context is that suggested by
St. Ililaire, 'dans les rangs des pauvres ceux qui cultivent la terre ou qui montent les
navires soicnt entoures de plus d'estime que les marchands de la place publique.' This
construction of tu>v ntvopfvcov as dependent on tovs ('pyaôpevovt is in any case preferable to
Bekker's view that it depends on pdXXov, but qui montent les navires is an impossible '
'
translation of vavK'Ktjpovvrui
wliich apparently no one lias proposed to emend to vaiJs
TtXrjpovpTiis. n did not have vavKKrjpowTai, anil though [i'avK\T]po\vi would fit the lacima,
[vavTiKo'vt, suggested by Blass, is much more likely. The earlier parts of 11. 146-9
are on a separate fragment, the position of which is fairly certain since there is no other
place among the extant columns to which it can be assigneti. There remains the difiiculty
of the infinitive npoTi]jj.av in 1. 149. There is no room to insert in 11. 148-9 a verb in
the optative which would govern it, and the choice seems to lie between supplying a verb
or, better, altering irpuTipav to TTpoTipamv (sc. ol vopoi) or npoTipioi (sc. tis or whatever
was the suliject o[ nj-ipafrKfvaadd' in 1. 142). The frequency of infinitives after fi<t and xi"l
througliout this chapter may account for the error.
14951. (lira) yap .... XiiTovpyijcrova lu oTrcoy Xfirovpyr^crcocri IMSS. : . . .
152-3. (niSvptjad (TTiBvpi'nTji MSS. cf. the previous note.

: ;
153 ]" Sfl Se TTpos TovTots ]\ISS. Perhaps 8u roivvv should be restored,
but the construction of 11. 153-9 is not clear. i(Tx[vpovs KuaOai. vofxovs in 1. 156 may depend
on xp^ in 1. 159 (cf. note ad loc).
154- avahaaT\>v noifiv rroiuv dmBaarov MSS.
:
155-6. Tu)v [15 letters ajavrcov: Tav reXfvTmvTcov MSS., which will not do. Usener
had suggested rS>u IdioiTwv, Wilamowitz rav nXovroCvTav ; and n now shows that some word
has dropped out in the MSS., and an aorist, not a present, participle is the correct
reading.
[t8i(0Twv Tf\fVTT](T]avTa3v IS possible, but TtXfVTî^Twv may come from
the next clause (cf I. 160,
note). BlaSS proposes tcou ttjv noXiv prj a8iK7]a]avT cov.
159- XP1 xa^'- XPh S ÎSS. n thus makes (mKiiaBai in 1. 158 and perhaps Kuaem in
1. 157 (cf. 1. 153, note) depend on
XPV, as well as the two verbs that follow, a(pcopiadm and
Sidovai, whereas in the MSS. the words preceding
xpn depend on at the beginning of the
sentence, and XPV is connected only with what follows. The position given to XPI in n
is not very satisfactory, but without knowing what stood
in the lacuna in 1. 153 it is
impossible to say whether the omission of Se is intentional or a slip.
160. rwf. om. MSS. ran may be right; cf. e.g. 14. 34 and the passage of Aeschines
quoted ad loc.
T(\(VTr](Ta(Ti : Te\(VTci}(nv MSS. ; cf. note on 1. 156.
Ta4>r]u: ets racp^v MSS. The scribe has placed before rpo^prjv in 1. 163 the eis which
ought to have come before Ta(pi]u here.
161. br}pocnov x^piov ri x^^Pôv bt]p6cnov MSS.
:
162. a(}iu)piadai SO H. with Aid.; dcpcopiapfvov MSS. (Hammer's apparatus assigns

:
(](P(opla0ai to a, his sign for the family CFMOP, but cf. Spengel's
notes ad loc. d<pa,pLrrpei>ov] '
adde fliat, editi ex Vencla dûiplaBai' and '

dcprnpLo-pfvov] sic libri omnes ').
KaiToi iraaiv a Corruption of koI roty naiaiv (MSS.).

'.
avTa>v : so H. with CFM

and the deteriores ; om. OP.
163. ecoy T]^T](Tcoai (is rpocptjv 8i8ovai fws Ij^qs hrjpoaiav Tpo(f)fji) Sidoadai I\ISS.
:
n is
corrupt, the scribe having inserted before TpccpT^f the fu which ought to have
come before
Ta4>r)v in 1. 160 (cf. note ad loc). But ewy rj^rjacoai may be right, for tm with the genitive is
a late use, while ewy with the subjunctive without nV is parallel to the similar construction
occasionally found with nplv and pc'xpt. in Attic prose; and though -axii may have its
origin
in the omitted ^poaiav, the insertion of that word is not necessary,
especially as drjpoawu
Xcopiov occurs in 1. 161.
164. rais SrjpoKpaTuns : Tjj SrjpoKparla IMSS.; cf. 1. I 74, note, n's reading is the better;
cf. eV pei> ra'is BtjfioKpaTiais in p. 23. ID (= 1. 187).
165. ToiavrT}v 6ft rrjv 6i(jiv TruuiaBai : ti]v 6i<Tiv ToiavTt]v Bel noiflixdai MSS. The Order in
n is preferable.
168. Karavepetv: dnovepfw MSS. EG omit ttckti.
TTjs:so H. with CFMO and most of the deteriores; om. P; t^/ followed by
170. Tag n\(i(TTns: ras piu nXdarai MSS., which is preferable.

171. Kpv(f)aiai: (fpvTTTiy MSS.
172. fieO: so H. with CFMP and the deteriores ; kqi piff O.
173. Km: om. MSS.
174. Tais o\iyapxi.a[ii\\ ti] oKiyapxla MSS.; cf. note On 1. 164.
175. v^piCovaiv. v^plCdv MSS. n's reading is a blunder.
178. (TTfpopfvov. so H. with CFGMOP;
(rrepovpfvov the rest of the deteriores.
179- XP1 ^f]: XPh Se *<"' MSS., but a supplement of i8 letters is rather long for the
lacuna, not more than 15 being lost in the corresponding space in this column, so that Km,
which n inserts in I. 173 where the 1\ISS. omit it, was probably omitted here.
134 HIBEH PAPYRI
l8l 2. huikv fiv Kai fxT) YiAvvayâv : hiaKvew K.i). fxtj ;^,K)ii^^f(T^(U /J'jSe avrdydv
IMSS. n probably bub&tiuitLcl a phrase meaning '
without delay '
for the second
infinilive.
183. mv OX^\oV (l\i T\riV TToXll/ : (7t\ TI]V TToXlV ToV OxKoV iMSS.
186. K\ad\o\o\v Sf etTTfii/ 6fi : Ka6c>\ov ê elne'tv 8ft rot;? vofxovi MSS. There Is not rOOm
for both (iniv and tovs vnfiovs in 1. i86, but n may equally well have omitted (nreiv and
kept TOVS vofinvi.
191.TT]s no\i[T(ias SO H. widi CFO and the deteriores
: yroXiras IMP. ;
194. nvi>: so H. wiih CFMP

and the deteriores; om. O.
197. (rvvlayoiKvovTa fiiv vofiMi'. tov avvayopevfiv (dfXovrn I'Ofxwi IMSS. For OUr restoration
cf. the antithesis duTiKeynvra 8e (TKimnv (p. 23. 22), where 8e has been corrupted in most
MSS. to 8ft. [ayopfvovra t/o/xcoi by itself is too short for the lacuna, and the insertion of
fifu is an improvement. The omission of top in n may be an error, but t6v is not
necessary.
198. 8(iKvvi' ai : SeiKVLfiv IMSS.
201. antf} âv arrfp av vmijixU raira H. with CF and the deterioreS
i;|7ra/)Y);i : anep ;
vndpxei raiira MOP; but airep [v\7TapxeL is also possible, though for ravrn in any case there is
no room. If n had read vTrap\xei we should have to suppose a lacuna of lo letters instead
of 13 before the first v of 1. 202, and hence diminish by 3 the size of the initial
lacuna throughout. This would cause no trouble in 11. 2001, where KnToiKovv\Ta<i would
suit equally well, but would lead to difficulties in 1. 205, where the lacuna could not be
restored without cutting down the text of the MSS. (cf. note cjd loc). Line 206 is hard
to reconcile with the ordinary reading, even with the longer lacuna ; with the shorter some
alteration would be imperative. The only serious objection to the view of the size of the
initial lacunae in diis column upon which we have based our restorations occurs in 1. 204,
where 18 letters would be expected instead of 14 before the p of Trpwro])^. The supplement
[ei/SexfTot rr/jcoTo', however, contains several broad letters, and it is not, we think, necessary
to insert anything.
204-5. Â.'^
avnyKt] : SO FMOP and the deteriores; ovk (ivayKcunu H. with C, and there
would be room for avayKawv in the lacuna, but cf. 1. 204. If the lacuna were supposed to
be smaller note on 1. 201), xpn or deov would have to be substituted for k avayKj].
(cf.
206. The MSS. reading (20 letters) is rather long for the lacuna, for which ry letters
are sufficient, and the line as restored contains 32 letters, which is a quite exceptional
length, though in any case 1. 206 projects considerably into the right-hand margin. Perhaps
et^ should be read in place of fn-fi^. With a smaller lacuna at the beginning ^^fTrfi^ ws- ov
Tvyx]nvov(Ttv nvT[(i biKaioi would be ucccssarv cf note on 1. 20 r. ;
2078. 7rouja-a]vT(s ttttoii]k(')t(s IMSS., which proceed ft Sf pt) k.t.X.

: I'hcre is no clue
to what the lacuna of i 4 letters in n contained.
210. (I'^vvaToi ovTfs ovx vndpx'^v'fi ^vvnrnl MSS.
: Cf. 1. 65, note.
2 12. \f(Tiv'. MSS. have tois (ivTi\(,yuui kcu toIs awrjynplais, for which
after ptv oSv the
n substitutedsomething much shorter (22 letters instead of 33), the second substantive
(if there were two) being a word ending in -an.
213. ri[s so IMSS. : The reading is very doubtful n-f/Zt would suit the traces better, ;
but would leave only 10 letters for the lacuna, which requires 14-16.
2156. 7rf/)i TToXf/iou fSjf Kdi f[i]pT]\^Tr]s nep\ flprjvtjs 8e TniXii' k<ii uDXf'pov MSS.
: The Order
in n is supported by that in 11. 109-10.
217. ey\a!3uipfi> has been corrected from ey[:ia'\(i)fifu by writing X above the which I'i,
is crossed out, and /3 through the X.
218. noXepov. so II. with CFMP and the deteriores nnXtnov by a slip O. :
219. otSf : ourat ^fi 6f CFMOP; avTcu 8ft II. with the deteriores. aiSf is better than
flUT-ni, and fiei is quite unnecessary ;

n probably preserves the original reading, of which
those of the MSS. are corruptions.
2201. Kaipov napaneTTTôiKOTos : Kaipcov TrctpciTTfnTO)K('>T(ov ]\ISS. The singular is better.
2 2 2, The MSS.
vary between dSiKovpevovs (the deteriores) and ddiKr^divras (CFMOP),
but whichever tense be adopted the supplement is rather long, being 21 or 22 letters
instead of 18 or 19 as would be expected perhaps wi/ was omitted. ;
223. avTcov aircbv : FMOP

avTwv C; envTmi' H, with the deteriorcs. ,"
It is highly
improbable that n had {\(ivrMu, which would make an unlikely division at the end of
a line of more than average length (cf. the preceding note).
229. [(TvvjaKTfov : the is corrected from o(.?). GV read avvTciKTiuu, which is out of the
question here.
fMfra : so H. with CF and the deteriores ; Kara ]\IOP.
230. [cos]: om. JNISS. Cf. note on I. 231.
Itcoi] TToXf/ioi : so H. with ABCEF (first hand) MOP; toO no^tpov F (second hand)
and DV.
231. TOVTOov oTi AB ; otl tci TrXeifrra tovtuiv H. with the Other
nXeUaTa : ort TrXftora tovtcdv
MSS., thus making while n clearly connects it with TrXftora, on
ort dependent on bfiKveov,
nXeiara being parallel in 1. 228. to on TrXfio-ras
conjunction is then required, and A
accordingly we have inserted co? in 1. 230. Of the two rival readings either miglit easily be
corrupted into the other, but that of n makes the sense clearer, and seems preferable.
232. eari vn[a]p\xf>vTa vnapxovTa iari MSS. The reading of II is no improvement,
:
especially as fo-rt has no v icfxXKVGTiKov, but the vestiges, though slight, do not suggest any
alternative to vn[a\p[xovTa.
233. TToK[(povv\T(i: om. MSS., probably through an error.
2345' eVjTi^;Y"' '?A'f4^] 'c[ajX[()]i;[fifli' evTVxiav npoaayoptvopfv : H. with moSt of the
deteriores ; fv-^vîau iTpoa-ayopevoipep CDFMOP.
237. a-TpaTTj^yov : SO H. with CFMO
and the deteriores; arpamv P.
239. Tona>v ] fv(f)VLav H. with CFOP and the deteriores;
ev(j)v[iav : tottcoi/
Tonav evnoiiav M. The lacuna may have contained an adjective for roncov or a substantive
coupled by 7 or Kai to (v(f)viav.
241. Tovr^ûis opoioTponav. toiovtcov MSS. add opoiorponcos, apparently intending DV
TovTois opoioTponav, which was probably n's reading; cf. 1. 214.
243. The scanty remains of Col. xv are so much obliterated that only a few letters
can be deciphered with certainty, and the restorations are very doubtful in many cases.
It is clear that 245 and 252 n varied extensively from the MSS. in being con-
between 11.
siderably shorter. Very

were some omissions due to homoioteleuton, for the
likely there
passage is a particularly confusing one for a scribe. In 1. 243 o is the only certain letter,
but the vestiges of the two preceding letters suit irp. ^pa.]xvTfpo[v]s is inadmissible and ;
npos seems to be the word meant, though if the next word was intended to be jSpaxvTepovs
either npnapux or npo^pax must have been written, for the space between o and the supposed
P is barely sufficient for even one narrow letter, npo ^paxvTfpwv is not satisfactory, and
since the reading pax is extremely doubtful n may have had something quite new here.
244. Ka[i so II. with A (second hand) BFG om. other INISS.
: ;
245. The IVISS. have wSt TruvToas (tvuvtos DV) avêiv el KfKpirai, with which the reading
of n cannot be reconciled. The vestiges of this line will not suit any part of tiKtKp, and
there is not room for 22 letters in the lacuna, which, taking the tolerably certain supple-
ments of 11. 254-6 as the standard and allowing for the slope of the column to the left,
should contain 16 or 17 letters. The omission of 7ri/rw9, which is not necessary, leaves
16 letters.
24650. L he IVlSS. have dyaduv tovto tovto) Ti iiavTiov iav Xf'y;s p(yn KaKov (pnvuTCt.
136 HIBEH PAPYRI
oiO-avTwt 8e d roî^fTai \iiya KaKov eav tuvt(o ivavriov Xtyrji fi(ya dyaBoi' (JMwdTai. eaTi fie kui code
fxeyaXa noiflv to dyada rj to. kukq ('av diroâivrfs avTov tK 78 letters where 11,
diavoias k.t.\., 1
allowing even 28 letters for a line, has but 140. Probably there were some omissions
owing to homoioteleuton, as in P, which omits /i/ya k(ikoi> (fxivdrai ivavTuw Xeyrjs. fê[y(t, . . .
which is fairly certain in 1. 246, comes too soon. The vestiges preceding it are recon-
cilable with Xfyjt/, but do not suggest s. The in 1. 247 perhaps belongs to voixiêrai, and /
that in 1. 248 to ivavnov, but the traces of other letters lend no assistance.
250. \a: working back from C'^v in 1. 251, the MSS. reading iav d7To(pmi>>]s avrov ix.
btnvoiai (TvulSL^dCav does not produce an n at the right place. Perhaps e'au dno^paivrjs
cwTov was omitted and the a belongs to ayaOa or KaKa, or we might change the order and
restorer St]a|:j/oia!r avTov. But the MSS. reading is very unsatisfactory (Usener proposes
aiTiov for avrov), and ]a may represent a participle such as npaâvT\a, the insertion of which
would be a great improvement.
252. The supplement (22 letters) is a little long, when judged by the standard of
11. 254 and 256, which have 19 in the corresponding space; but cf. 1. 253 and 1. 255,
which apparently has 2 i
TTO AXcoy : TToAXfi TTpaTTilV jMSS.
253. The supplement {23 letters) is again rather long, and not more than 19 would
be expected 252, note.
; cf. 1.
254. Trlporspoj-: so nporfpov H. with ABEG ;

CDFMOPV.
257-8.' The supplements of these lines are rather short. Possibly n inserted crrpa^fv
again after tin tovtois.
259 TToioi pev : TovTO) lo-cor noio'ifxiu MSS., which is too long if l/xfj/ is correctly read.
Those letters, however, are very uncertain, and Trot is possible, in which case tovtox. to-w?
could be retained in 1. 259. But difficulties would then arise in the restoration of 1. 260,
which seems to end in ev, the vestiges being inconsistent with Trpjar, (f)]av, or (f}nv\]o>s. On
the whole, therefore, it seems preferable to suppose that n had some variant (om, toCtco .?)
for TOVToy I'crcos.
260-1. 7rpaTToip\if [(fyavXcos (jicwXai irpaTToip.fv MSS., which cannot be reconciled with
:
II; the preceding note.

cf. If our restoration of 1. 261 is correct, there must have been
a blank space before xpf?-
264. The supplement is rather long perhaps Se was omitted. But the supposed v in ;
1. 263 is very doubtful, and if there was an omission

in n it may have occurred in 11. 262 or
263, where ws is really superfluous.

265. foi/coj TovTov (Ikos MSS. :foiKoy must be wrong.
y()Vf[is\ Tip.av ov avrov -yoi/ef? ripav MSS. (c.XCept P, which haS nvrovs by mistake).
:
01',
which makes no sense, may be a survival of avrod, but is more likely to have been caused by
the occurrence of npai nvros immediately afterwards.
266. o[<T\rii: so H. with F (and OP?); oj CM (so Spengel; from II. it would be
inferred that they read uans) and the deteriores.
y\o]vfis : yovf'as MSS., though reading yovfU in 1. 265.
267. /3[o]vX7j[a-Jerat f[v iroieiv : ev noidv [:inv\T](Tfrni JNISS.
269. rightly.
fi(u: Whether n had e at the end of the line is very doubtful.
om. MSS.,
271-6. here differs considerably from the MSS., which have a-Kondi' 8e kqI r6 npdypa
n
Snoiov âvflrai Kara pepr] diaipovpeuov Ka\ (7 the detCriores) KaSdXov \eydpevov Ka\ OTTorepcoy
(oTTOTfpoi/ FO) iiv puCov fi T-di/Se rbv rponov avrb Xtyfiv. u's version is superior in several
respects mkepov ,..}.. brings out the contrast between Kara ptpt] and kuSoXov better than
;
ono'iov . Ka\
. . and Tovrou is much preferable to rovSe. ]p(v in 1. 271 is probably the
. . . ,
termination of a verb in the future or subjunctive governing a-Kcmeiv, and the insertion of this
and of (5t in 1. 276 is an advantage, the infinitives (TKonelv and Xtynv in the MSS. reading
being dependent on xph supplied from xph 5e /cat uKaCovra, although a
different sentence
avWrj^brjv (pavfiTai has intervened.
. . .
276. nv^rjaeis: SO H. with MSS., except which has av^^dms. M

277. TrXetorar Km fieyiaras nonjcreii TrXfia-rai noiâfis Ka\ fifytaras MSS. :
279. Tois Uyois: SO H. with BCFMOPV; t6v \6you ADEG. Cf. 1. 116, note,
280. Ka is a mistake for KaKa.
^
G and E (first hand) invert dya6d and '<a<ca. D omits '
281. (vpT}o-eis Kafj. nev: wy elp^Kafieu MSS., which insert au after

fj.(v in I. 282, and in
place of (mddKuveiv in 1. 283 have imSfiKvivai (C), dniBeiKvCus (EO) or (mSeiKvCrjs
(the rest;
so H.). tvprjaus, which makes roTrfti/coo-fif a substantive instead
of a verb, as it is on the
MSS. reading, may in itself be right but koi^ pav embtiKwuv must ; . . .
be wrong, and
(vprâeii looks somewhat like a corruption of coj p7, due to a misunderstanding
of ra^^fco-
(Tfis. Whether tvpr^treis be retained or not, Kap. ptv must be altered to coy (or cot) eipr^Kafifv and
fnibuKwdv corrected, either by reading av fniddKiw^n with the majority of the MSS., or . . .
by the simpler substitution of the participle emUdKvvuu.

284. p-lKpOTOTOiV (Tp.lKpOTaTU)V MSS. :
287. fKcpfpapev fdeXapev MSS.; fK(pep(Ofji(v, 'bring forward,' is more pointed.

:
288. xpv[(^]'f^'-'- xpV'M"' ÎSS.

[8f[ To)v av^Tjaeoiv eiaw a[i ai(p[oppai: 8f al tS>v nv^â<oiv
d(f)oppal elai MSS., and it is possible
to read 5 m] tcov av^Tjaecou ucnu o| 0o]p^âe, though the Other
restoration seems more
probable.
290-1. Bvvapis (V Tois eyKOip[wis kqi tois \l/oyois eariu avT[mi : 8vmpis avTwv eVrti/ iv to'is
iyKwpioL'! /cat iv to'is ôyois MSS.
292. ow: SO H. with mo-t MSS. ; om. C (B, not C Spengel).
293. 8ie\ewfifv: SO H. adopting a conjecture of Spengel. SUXcopev MSS.
294. TOVTOlSOpo(^lo'^T\p07TCOS: OpolOTponooS TOVTOIS ISlSS.
295. KaTtjyopiKov so H. with most MSS.; KarrjyoprjriKov G^l.
:
Cf. 1. 297.
anoX oyiKov to dnoXoyr]TiK6i> H. with MSS., except O which omits TO. Cf.
:
1. 300.
296. After ei'Sos' the MSS. have 6 nepl ttjv biKaviKf]v ea-Ti TvpaynnTciav avTo. Te which is
omitted by n. The words are probably an interpolation; cf. p. ii6.
avvaTT]Kr]v : 1. (TvvidTTjKev. G has avvi(TTr](Tf, and E has K( in an erasure.
avTois Set : Set avrols MSS.
297. KaTrjyopiKOv SO H, with moSt MSS.; KaTrjyoprjriKov M. Cf. 1, 295.
:
299. f^rjyrjais: {$dyytXats ]\ISS. f^fjyrjais is the more natural word.

300. anoXoyiKov dnoXoyriTiKov MSS. Cf. 1. 295.
:
aBiKrjparcov Kai apaprrjpaTcov : apnpTrjpaToiV Kai ddiKTjpaTav MSS.

302. vnoTTTevdfvTMv KadvTTonTivSivroiv MSS., probably by an erroneous repetition of the
:
initial syllable of KaTr^yoprjOfVTwv.
303. fKaTepcov : e/care'poi; MSS.

304-5. TavTas SO
H. with the deteriores.
: CFJMOP. ray avrds
6x o]r/rey : rôi-roy H. with CFMOP. exourccv is required
e>Vrcoi/ the deteriores and Aid. ;
in n if eKaTfpcov is anything more than a mistake for (Kartpov,

and above the second e of
fx[oyr(s (which must in any case be wrong) is some ink which may represent
co. But of
the 2 or 3 letters after 6;ôi'rcy that project into the margin bevond
any other line in this
column of which the end is preserved, the first is certainly not f', and they are probably to
be connected with the following words.
TOP Ka[Tr,yopovvTa]
^
t[o]vt ..[..: KaTrjyopodvTa pei> I\ISS., except C
which has KaTrjyop^
Piv. The restoration of n is very uncertain. The insertion of tov
rather an improve- is
ment, but the reading is quite doubtful, and though KaTrjynpnwTa seems necessary, the
vestiges at the beginning of 1. 305 do not suit Ka very well. The lacuna after Ka[ is large
138 HIBEH PAPYRI
enough for 11 or even 12 letters, but hardly for [T-qyopovvra /xfcl mino] ^xl^v might be read,
but is not satislactory ; for tovt[o\ \([yeiv there is not room. In place of the second
doubtful T, TT or y can equally well be read.
306. n(v so H. with
: CFMO
and the deteriores hi P. ;
307. The vestiges of the first letter would suit n equally well (i. e. nnpaTrjpfiv), but
a line of 20 letters would be unusually short.
308. The TT of nniois seems to have been corrected.
KaTr]\yopr]fjiaTO)V : aSiKrjfidTOiv IvISS.
309. 01 [fofioi so H. with most IMSS. om. I\I.

: ;
311. i]fiapT[r]nti>(ov d8iKrip.dT(x)v MSS., probably an erroneous repetition.

: Cf. the con-
trast of adiKrjfiaTwv and afiapTrjuaTOiv in 11. 298 3OI.
313. o vopns b[i]o)p[iK(jos r]i: rj vopos 8ia>piK(j}s MSS. Il's reading is better; Spengel had
already suggested the insertion of the article before w'/xoy.

314. KaTr]yo]p[n]v o does not fill the space between p and
: which would accommodate i>,
two letters, but it is difficult to see what these could have been, unless indeed the scribe
wrote Karjjyopovi ((^).
315. oTTcos: so H.with CF (first hand) MP; ottcov ilv F (second hand) O and the deteriores.
316-S. n here preserves a much better text than the I\ISS., which have orav (ore H.
with C) Se ot A (seCOnd hand) EG) nii^rjTtou eari rh
StKacTTat to Karrjynpovpevov laacriv {êlhcbaiv
dBiK^finra Kai finXiara wy tKojv k.t.X.
/xeV 8fiKT(ovFor the unsatisfactory 1(T(UTLV or el8u>aiv
Spengel had acutely conjectured Tifiwaiv, the verb found in n, and divined that t6
Karrjyopoi'ixfvov was wrong. 11 inserts, no doubt rightly, a clause contrasting the preliminary
proof of the facts with the subsequent magnifying of the crime. After KaT\t]yopovp(va it
probably continued fneiTa av^rjTtov k.t.X. F'or avayKr) in 1. 317 cf. 1. 103, note; Sfi makes the
line hartlly long enough.
III. CALENDAR
27. Calendar for the Saite Nome.
Mummies 68 and 69. Height i6-8 cm. b. r. 30T-240. Iî.ate VIII (Cols, iii and iv).
On the recto of this long papyrus, which is in 16 fragments, is a calendar for

a year, preceded by an introductory treatise in which the writer explained for
a pupil's instruction the source of his information, and gave a general sketch
of his astronomical system. Of the calendar the larger portion is preserved, but
the remains of the introduction probably represent only a small portion of it.
Two hands, both a large clear semi-uncial, arc found in the main tc xt, the first being
responsible for Cols, i-iii, the second for the rest. A few corrections in Col. iv
sqq. arc due to a third hand or, perha[)s, to the writer of Cols, i-iii. On the
verso of Fr. {a) is some dcniolic writing, on that of Vv. ((/) a biicf account, and
27. CALENDAR 139
on that of Fr. (;;/) part of a list of names, while on the verso of Fr. (c) is another
short list of names headed (erous-) rj Me(ro[p?/. The king in question is presumably
Euergetes, to the early part of whose reign we assign 34 and 73, from the same
mummies as 27; and we regard B.C. 240 as the latest possible date for the
writing on the recto. This, however, is probably a few decades older, and may even
be as ancient as B.C. 301-298, the period to which the calendar apparently refers
(v. inf.). At the conclusion of that period the dates of the recorded phenomena
would cease to apply, and
not easy to account for a copy of the calendar
it is
being made after the information contained in it had become antiquated and
useless. The handwriting, though presenting no special signs of exceptional
antiquity, is not inconsistent with the view that the calendar was written at
the very beginning of the third century B.C., and the Hibeh collection has
provided one document written in the 5th year of Ptolemy Soter I ((S4 d).
Cols, i-iii each have 18
and very narrow margins between the columns,
lines
while Cols, iv-xiv range from 13 to 15 lines in each and the margins are
sometimes narrow, sometimes (as between Cols, vi and vii) as much as 7-5 cm.
in breadth.
Fr. {a\ containing Cols, i-iii, appears to come from a point near the actual
commencement of the text, and it is possible that 'etr in 1. i is the termination
of and belongs to the opening sentence of the introduction, which is
yaip\(.iv,
in any case couched in an epistolary form. Nothing further is to be gleaned

from the scanty remains of Col. in Cols, ii and iii the compiler, who was in
i ;
the Saite nome (1. 21 ; he had been receiving instruction

cf. note), explains that
on astronomy from a certain wise man (11. 19-33), ^"^ announces his intention
of summarizing the teaching for his pupil's benefit (11. 34-41). Accordingly
in 1. 41 he begins with a description of the different years in use in Egypt this, ;
so far as it goes 54), corresponds closely to a passage in the account of the

(1.
E{8(.'ôu Tixvy] which was written by one of that astronomer's followers, and
is preserved in P. Par. i ; cf. p. 143, and 11. 41-54, note. To the interval,
extending probably to at least 6 or 7 columns, between Frs. [a] and [b) may be
assigned the small Frs. {n)-{q), which do not belong to the calendar portion
of the papyrus, and are not likely to have followed Col. xiv, since that column
may well be the last of the whole text. The subject of Frs. (;/) and (^), which
seem to be connected, though the relative position assigned to them in our
text is not certain, the seasons
that of Fr. \q) the length of the year.
is ;
Turning to the calendar, the year under discussion is an ordinary Egyptian

anmis vagus of days beginning with Thoth i. The account of the first
'^fi^
three m.onths missing; but Frs. {b)-{m), containing Cols, iv-xiv, which are
is
continuous, preserve with some lacunae the entries from Choiak i to the end
I40 IIIBEH PAPYRT
of the year, Col. xiv probably giving, as we have said, the conclusion of the
papyrus. The details recorded under the various days are (i) the changes
of the seasons indicated by the equinoxes and solstices ; (2) the passing of the
sun at its rising from one of the 1 2 great constellations to another ; (3) the risings
and settings of certain stars or constellations (4) prognostications concerning
;
the weather, such as are commonly found in ancient calendars (5) stages in the ;
rising of the Nile (11. 126, 168, and 174) ; (6) certain festivals, which in two
instances 76 and 165) took place at Sais; (7) the length of the night and day.
(11.
For *the following remarks on the place of observation and date of the
calendar, and its connexion with Eudoxus, to which we have already alluded,
we are indebted to Prof. J. G. Smyly, who has greatly assisted us in the
elucidation of this text.
'Place of observation. The length of the longest day is given by the
papyrus (1. 1 15) as 14 hours, and that of the shortest night as 10 hours if then we ;
take the inclination of the ecliptic to have been 24 and / denote the latitude,
we can determine / from the equation cos 75 = tan 24" tan /, from which we
obtain /= 30 10': cf. Ptolemy, Syii. Math. ii. (ed. Heiberg, p. 108) haros eort
7iapdXki]\o9 Kad' ov av yerotro 7/ fxeyiCTTi] 7/ju.epa wp&v l(Tr]ixipivS>v ib. aTTi\(i b ovro?
Tov ifTTjjue/Hrou jj-oipa^ A Kjd Kat ypoêrat bia Trjs kcltco x<^/J? '"'/!> A(!yi;77rou. This
agrees very well with the statement of the papyrus (1. 21 ; cf. 11. 76 and 165)
that the calendar was drawn up in the Saite nome. probably at Sais itself.
'Pate. Since the calendar is constructed according to the vague year of the
Egyptians, would have been possible to determine its date within four years
it
from the dates assigned to the equinoxes and solstices, had these been correctly
given. In the following table the Julian dates for the early part of the third
century u.C. are taken from Unger (I. Muller's Haudb. P, p. H23) :
Spring equinox 20 Tubi (1. 62) 25 March.

Summer solstice 24 Pharmouthi (1. 120) 27 June.
Autumn equinox 23 Epeiph (I. 170) 27 September.
'
The date of the calendar deduced from the equations Tubi 20 = March 25
and Pharmouthi 24 = June 27 would be B.C. 301-298; that given by the
equation Epeiph 23 = September 27 is li.c. 313-310. These results do not
agree (see below), and certain of the accuracy of the observations
we cannot be ;
but we may 300 as an approximate date.

safely deduce 1!.C.
Connexion ivitJi Piidoxns.

'
1. The interval between the spring equinox and
summer solstice is correctly given by the i)apyrus as 94 days, that between the
summer solstice and autumn equinox as 89 days the whole interval between ;
the spring and autumn equinoxes is thus 183 days, which is about 3 days too
27. CALENDAR T41
^&\v. The writer of the papyrus evidently belonged to a school of astronomers

who supposed that the equinoxes divided the year into approximately equal
parts; cf. G. V. Schiaparelli, Memorie del Real. Inst. Loinb. xiii, p. 129, Nov.,
1874. If we may trust P. Par. i. 535 sqq., the interval between the autumn
equinox and the spring equinox according to Eudoxus was 92 + 91 = i(S3 days,
while according to Democritus it was 91+91 = 182 days, thus leaving for the
period of 183 days given by the papyrus 182 days according to Eudoxus, and
183 according to Democritus. So far this would point to Democritus rather than
Eudoxus but there are other striking resemblances to the theories of Eudoxus.
;
'
2. According to the papyrus the spring equinox took place on Tubi 20
and the sun entered Taurus on Mecheir 6, so that the equinox took place when
the sun was in the middle or at the 15th degree of Aries. Now according
to Hipparchus the placing of the equinoxes and solstices at the middle of
the
signs was peculiar to Eudoxus; e.g. Hipp. i. 6. 4 ravrr]^ (rijs McKpa^ "ApKTov)
yap 6 eVxaros kqI XapirpoTaTos a(TTi]p Ketrat Kara ti]V ii] \xoipav TUiv 'IxOvoiv, wy 8e Evhoô^
bLaipd Tov C(i>bLaKdv kvkXov, Kara ti]v y [xoipav rov KptoO. Thus the 1st degree of Aries
according to Eudoxus' division of the Zodiac coincided with the 15th degree of
Pisces according to Hipparchus, and the equinox, which according to Hipparchus
was at the ist point of Aries, would according to Eudoxus occur at the 15th
degree of Aries. Again Hipp. ii. i. 15 says 7T/)o8tet/\j/</)â> h\ irpoiTov on. rrjv btaLpâiif
TOV ((^btaKov KVKôv 6 fx^v "ApuTos TreTTOLTjTaL a-no tQv TpoiriKcov re Kal iaiifiepivow
(Tr]ij.(L(av &pxofJ.evos wore ravra to. a-qjxda apxas dvat C^biiov, 6 bk Evboôs ovto) bu'ipyjTai,
ojare ra dpi]p.iva (y>)p.da p.((ra elvai, to. jxkv tov KapKtrov Kal tov AlyoKepca to. 8e tov
KpLov Kal tS>v Xr]\S)v ;
cf. ii. l. 19 Kal vno tmv apxauMV be ixa6i]p.aTiKS)v TravTcov (rêbdv
1] tG)V TtXdcTTMV TOVTOV TOV TpOTTOV (l. C. 38 by AratUs) O ((^biaKOi KVkXoS bUipi]TO. OTL
b( Evboôs TO. TpoTTLKo. ar]Hta kuto. p-laa Ta (ifbta Tidrjai brjKov TTotet but tovtmv k.t.X.
As is clear from these quotations,
Hipparchus considered that Eudoxus stood
almost alone among
ancient astronomers in putting the equinoctial and solstitial
points at the middle of the signs. It was for a long time supposed that Eudoxus
had used an ancient globe, many centuries older than his own times, constructed
at a period when the spring equinox was really in the middle of the dodecatemory
called Aries by Hipparchus, and that Eudoxus himself never even looked
at
the sky. This absurd theory was controverted by Ideler in Abhaudl. der k. Ak.
dcr zu Berlin, 1830, p. 58, who gives the true explanation that the
IVt'ss.
dodecatemory called Aries by Eudoxus extended from the 15th degree of

Pisces to the 15th degree of Aries according to Hipparchus. It may be
remarked connexion that the correspondence of the signs Kara uvCvyiav
in this
described, but wholly misunderstood, by Geminus, El. Astr. ii. 27 sqq., depends
upon placing the equinoctial points in the middle of the signs.
142 IIIBEH PAPYRI
we measure 15 back from the position of the equinox at the time of
'If
Eudoxus we find that the first point of Aries according to him very nearly-
coincided with the star C Piscium. This coincidence is very remarkable, and
should prove of considerable importance in the difficult question as to the origin
of the signs of the Zodiac. E. Burgess and Prof. Whitney, Suyya-SiddJidnta,
Journal of American Oriental Society, vi. p. 158, write: "The initial point

of the fixed Hindu sphere, from which longitudes are reckoned, and at which
the planetary motions arc held by all schools of Hindu astronomy to have
commenced at the Creation, is the end of the asterism Revati, or the beginning
of A9vini. Its position is most clearly marked by that of the principal star of
Revati, which, according to the Surya-Siddhanta, is 10' to the west of it,
but according to other authorities exactly coincides with it. That star is by all
authorities identified with ^Piscium, of which the longitude at present, as reckoned

by us, from the vernal equinox, is I754^ Making due allowance for the
precession, we find that it coincided in position with the vernal equinox not far
from the middle of the sixth century or about 570 A.D. As such coincidence
was the occasion of the point being fixed upon as the beginning of the sphere,
the time of its occurrence marks approximately the era of the fixation of the
sphere, and of the commencement of the history of modern Hindu astronomy."
Now exact correspondence of the initial points of the spheres of Eudoxus
tiie
and of the Hindu astronomers cannot be an accidental coincidence, and seems

to invalidate the theory that the Hindu sphere was fixed by the position of the
spring equinox. In these circumstances we are at liberty, or rather are
compelled, to reject the deduction that " the point from which longitudes are
reckoned, and at which the planetary motions are held by all schools of Hindu
astronomy to have commenced at Creation" was first fixed at about 570 A.D.
This is not the place to discuss the question as to the relation of Eudoxus to
Indian astronomy, but my own belief was fixed at
is that the Indian sphere
a very early period and adopted from Indian astronomers by Eudoxus.
The length of time occupied by the sun in passing through tlie constellations
'
presents considerable difficult}- ; the details are as follows:
1. 62. Aries,
Tubi 5 Mecheir 6, 31 days.
1. 66. Taurus,
Mecheir 6 Phamenoth 4, 2S days.
1. 88. Gemini, Phamenoth 4 Pharmouthi 3, 29 days.
1. 107. Cancer, Pharmouthi 3 Pachon 6, 33 days.
1. 1 29. Leo,
Pachon 6 Pauni 4, 28 days.
1. 137. Virgo,
Pauni 4 Epeiph x, |
38 days.
Libra, ]'4)eiph x
Mcsore 2, j
1. 18 J. Scorpio, Mcsore 2 ?
27. CALENDAR 143
'The spring equinox
is given as 15 days in Aries, the summer
solstice as
2[ days in Cancer, and the autumn equinox 10 days only before the sun enters
Scorpio. If the signs of the papyrus are true dodecatemories, the dates
of
entering the different signs must be wrong for the spring equinox being in
;
the
middle of the sign so also should the autumn equinox be.
'3. The stars or constellations whose risings and settings according
to
Eudoxus are given in the calendar assigned to Geminus (Lydus, De Ostentis,
&c., ed. Wachsmuth, pp. 181 sqq.) are Aquila ('Aero's), Capella {Mb), Arcturus,
Delphinus, Lyra, Pleiades, Scorpio, Sirius {.v^v), Corona Borealis {^Te(pavoi),
Hyades and Orion ;
all of these, except At^ (which can be restored with certainty
in 11. 88 and 177), are mentioned in the papyrus, and the only star in it not
contained in the list of Eudoxus is rTpor/wyj/r?;/? ( =6 Virginis), the statement
about which (I. 130) is obviously erroneous.'
The agreement on this point between the papyrus and Geminus' references to
Eudoxus is very striking. The intervals between the several entries (which
in Geminus are measured by degrees, not, as in the papyrus, by
days) are
naturally different owing to the difference of latitude between Sais and the place
in Asia Minor from which Eudoxus took his observations. But the order is the
same in both, and there is only one clear instance in which the papyrus
omits
a reference to the rising or setting of a star that Geminus had inserted in his list
from the calendar of Eudoxus (1. 107, note). Hence Geminus' list provides
certain restorations for those lacunae in the papyrus which mentioned risings
or settings, while conversely two corruptions in the text of Geminus can be
restored from the papyrus cf. notes on 11. 187 and 194.
;
The papyrus is therefore to be regarded as a composition for teaching

purposes, written at Sais about B.C. 300 by a follower of Eudoxus' theory of
astronomy, and is somewhat older than the analogous treatise based on Eudoxus
in P. Par. i. In the passage common to both texts (11. 41-54) may be recognized
a more or less direct quotation from Eudoxus himself, but the presentation and
application of his system are much disfigured in both papyri by frequent blunders,
especially in regard to figures. The inconsistent dates in connexion with the
equinoxes and the passing of the sun through the constellations, and the erroneous
mention of UpoTpvyijTrip have already been mentioned. Cols, ii and iii of the
introduction are very carelessly written, though some of the slips have been
corrected by the writer himself. Mistakes in figures occur in 11. 62, 73, 91, and
several times in the fractions of hours. Words are left out in 88 and 199
11.
;
78 and 87, where an omission by the first hand is

cf. 11. supplied by the corrector.
The account of the summer solstice (11. 120-2) is very inaccurately expressed,
and other errors can be detected in 11. 79 and 83. All these mistakes are due
J ^4 HIBEH PAPYRI
to the compiler or the scribe and the compiler was, more probably than Eudoxus,
;
responsible for the system of reckonint,^ the changes in the length of

day and
difference between
night, which is only a rough approximation to the truth. The
the longest and shortest day being 14-10 = 4 hours, and five days being
deducted from the year on account of the solstices, the change in the length
of the day and night is treated as uniformly ^%^ or ^V hour, which is a
convenient
fraction for purposes of calculation, but ignores the obvious fact that the changes
are much greater at the equinoxes than at the solstices. The uniformity of
the changes, however, simplifies the restoration of many lacunae, since, where the
figures relating to the day or night are preserved, they are sufficient to
indicate
the day of the month, when lost, and vice versa.
Amongst the most valuable features of the papyrus are its references to
Gracco-Egyptian festivals observed at Sais, of which we append a list :
(r) 1. 60. Choiak 26, Eestival of Osiris.

(2) 1. 62. Tubi 20, Eestival of Phitorois.
(3) 1. 76. Mecheir 16 (19), Assembly at Sais in honour of Athena (Neith).
(4) 1. (S5. Mecheir 27, Eestival of Prometheus-Iphthimis.

(_') 1, 92. Phamenoth 9, Eestival of Edu (?).
(6) 1. 112. Pharmouthi 11, Eeast of Hera (Mut?).
(7) 1. 145. Pauni 16, Eestival of Bubastis (Bast).

(<S) 1. 165. Epeiph [13 ?], Assembly at Sais in honour of Athena (Neith).
(9) 1. 170. E!peiph 23. Eestival of Anubis.
(10) 1. ](S6. Mesore 2, P^stival of Apollo (Horus).
(1 j) 1. 205. 4th intercalary day, Birthday of Isis.
P'estivals inhonour of deities whose names are lost also occurred on a day
between Pauni 24 and I'auni 26 (1. I'p) and on Pauni 27 (1, 154). The dates of
most of these festivals, and even the names of the deities connected with nos. (2), (4),
and (5), were previously unknown and except in the case of no. (11), which was
;
universally observed, there are but few points of correspondence between the
l)apyrus and other lists of festivals preserved in the Papyrus Sallier IV of
Ramcsside times (Chabas, Le Calcndricr dcs jours fastes ct ncfastcs\ and the
Ptolemaic calendars of Edfu, Esnch, and Dendcrch (Brugsch. Dici Fcstkalemicr),
while the list of festivals observed in Roman times at the temple of Socnopaeus
in the p-ayum (Wessely, Karanis nnd Sokiiopaui iVfsos, p. 76) is altogether
different. On comparing the list in the papyrus with the statements concerning
festivals in the Canopus Inscr., the two arc consistent concerning the date of
no. (1), the voyage of Osiris, l)ut disagree in a curious manner with reference
to no. (7), the festival of liast. It is char tliat there was much local variation
27. CALENDAR 145
with regard to the dates of the same festivals and though in the above list only ;
nos. (3) and (8) are actually stated to be specially Saite feasts, and nos. (i) and
(11) are known to have been observed on the same days elsewhere, it is uncertain
how far those remaining were observed outside the Saite
nome on the days
specified. The mention
of a general illumination in connexion with no.
(8) is
particularly interesting, since this was the festival described by Herodotus ii.
62 ;
cf. 1. ']6, note.
Fr. {a), Col. i. i ]iv, 2 ]ou?, ]ot?, 6-12 14-15

3 4 ] ', 5 ]/??, lost, 13 ]a, lost,
16 ]a, 17 jtoi, 18 ]oot.
Fr. [a). Col. ii. Fr. {a). Col. iii. Plate VIII.
r . .] . ]e]i/ Xdi ndi'V dvi)p iva. 1X7) 86^(0 /j.aK[pbv
20 cro(po^ Kol -qua)]/ ^pîav Kal êvov aoL KaTa[vo1v ?
e;)(a)i/, exofi^y yap tov Ha- q Toov /xopicou 7roiK[iXLa}
irrjv vofxov 'ir-q irepTe. 40 ra? dvayKaia^ T]ix\kpa'i
nda-av ovv rrju dXrjB^L- [xepLov[Xiy. y^pS)VT[aL - =
[av] qfiLv iêridi Kai e7r[t] Tal'S KaTOL (TO\.r\vr\\y
25 [Td\v epyov kdiKvvov k- r]iikpai<i OL d(TTpoX6[yoL

[k Td\v 6X/J.0V TOV XlOivov Kai oi kpoypaiJLiiaTi.[h
[os kK\a\iLTO ÊXk-qvL(JTl 45 TTpoy Tas Soad^ Kal d[i'a-
ToAay Twu d(TTpcjo[r.
[8vo\ rds TTopda^ eluaL tov Td'5 [jlIv ovv opTa[<i

30 riXiov l^La{/j.) fxlv t^v Siopi- dyovdiv KaT li'LavT[ou
ôvcrav vvKTa Kol rj/ii- TTJL aVTTjL Tj/xepaL T[d^
pav ixLaiv) Se ttju Siopiôv- 50 TrXeiaTas ov6\u 7ra[paX-
(Tav xL[j.<ova Kol Oepo?, Xdaaoi'Te^ en dcrTp(c[L
<oy ovu rjSvi^djxrju dKpc- rj 8vvovTL rj dvaTêX-
35 (SiaTaTa kv eXaîaTot? XovTL, {y]evLa'i 8\ io[p-
(Tvvayayw Ta? dyovcrty
20, wtiv Pap. This is a very early instance of the placing of a dot both above and
below a letter m order to indicate that it was to be omitted ; cf. 15.
44, where dots are only
placed above the cancelled letters. 25. 1.,'ddKuv(p. 28. yv]o>iJL(û: Pap. 34.
oKpi Pap., the letters having been inserted later and the dots serving
:
to separate them
from the next column. 35- Final f of fXaxtTTotr inserted later. 37. I.Sdfv? 44.
01 above the line. 45. 1. 86aus.
'
48. v of (viavrov corr. from r. 51. p of

aarpm above the line.
J 46 HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. {b), 2nd hand. Col. iv. Plate VIII.
55 1^ ^^^ oipcoi' lyi^'f/e', t] 8' rj/iepa i/3'e A cj
[i]^ 'ApKTOVpOS dKpO^VV)ÔS llTLTiXXei,

(upcov i^(3\' f/e, 8' T]/xipa laO'iX
[77] i>v^ 17
\k]<^ Xrecpavo? dKpa>i'V\09 cTTfreAAei

[K]al (Bopeai irvdovaLv opvidiai, r) vv^
60 [Q)p]a)i^ L^Lk' , 1]
8' 7)fj.ipa layiX. '0(Tipi9
[nypinXel Kal -^pvaovu ttXo'iov eâ-
fyejrai. Tv^l (e) kv tool KpLm. k laijfx^pia
[ea]piyij, 77 vv^ oopcou i(3 Kal rj/xepa l(3,
[K]al iop[r]r] îT(opcoio^. K^ TlX^tdSes

65 [uK pu>yv)(ÔL] Swov[(r]iy, >] yi>^ copcoi^ ca(3eô^,
[rj] S' fj/xepa [t]/3/A'//e'. Meêip 9 eu tool
\T]avpcoi. 'Taê? dKpm>v)(OL 8vvovaiv,

\ij] vv^ oipoov laLL X e ,
55. 1, if for t'/f. 57. if corr. from f. 65. 5-' corr. 68. 1. X'q' for \'f'
Fr. {c). Col. V.
17
8' 7)fxepa i^y lie , Kal 'Hpa
70 Kaei . Kal TT[i](TT]naiiîL Kal
voTos tt\v^7, lav 8e ttoXvs

yivrjTai ra e/c tt)? 7779
KaraKaei. l6 Avpa a/cpc6-
i'V)(09 e7r[i\TeXXei, 77 uv^
75 oopcor iayL /jl e , 1) 8 ijf^^pa i(3lio,
Kal iTavr\yvpLS kv Xdi riji^
'Adi]i'ds, Kal v6to[^ TTvel,
lav 8^ TToXvs Ytv[T]Tai] rd K rrji
yrj9 KaraKdiL. k[ aKpco-
80 iw^09 cTTtreAAet, 77 vv^ oopoiyp la . .

,
17 5' r)/j.ipa t/?^''
dyovaiv Ka
73. 1. f for 16. 75. 1. (^' for o. 78. 7v[T)Tai above the line.
27, CALENDAR HI
Fr. (d). Col. VI.
K^ Avpa dKp(i)i/v)(ô? Sviêc,
rj vv^ aipa>v ia^-c(, rj 8' rjfxipa il3^\L\')f/

85 npofir)$ia>^ iopTT] w KaXovaiv
'I(f>6ip.iv, Kal voTos TTvd, kav Sk
TTOXVS yivr\Ta\. TO. iK Trj^ yfj^ KaTaKOLH.
â/xPODT 8 Iv Tois Ai8vfioi9. {At^ ima)
[[.J
aiâreXXei, rj vv^ a>pa>y lac /i
90 77 ^ rjfiipa l^^'8'kq^. ^Koprrto? imo^

[dp)(\Tat 8vviLv, T] vv^ oapoiv ly
[r] 8* r]fii]pa ly. 6 irapa toTs Ai-
[yvTTTioL^] eSu iopTrj. t^ XKopnios
[iooio^ oAoy] Svviif rj vv^ Spcoy t/^V^Qj
95 [^7 ^ rj/xepa i]yi'X' {X } f/e. ly IlXud8^<i

[imai kTnTeXXov(Tiv.
87. YVT,Tai above the line. 89. 1. /I'e' for eV. 90. S' corn 91. 1. la for ly.
95. The scribe apparently began to correct the superfluous A' into ^.
Frs. {e) and (/). Col. vii.
4 lines lost.
101 [ 23 letters jou
[ " ] .
X^
[ 5. ]va
105
ajuL a[. . . .] .
[ y^ 'i-ôuTa.
âppov[6L i\v TOOL K[a'pKU'(oi y. Aero?

dKp(ji>vvyo^ kiTLTeXXiL, rj vi)^
oDpcoy lyXo^, 17
8' Tjpepa cyLafie'.
109. 1. ifi'f for (j'lJLf.
L a
148 HIBEH PAPYRI
Col. viii.
Frs. {e), {g), {h).
no la AeX(f)l9 dK[pa>i']vxo9 eTTireAXet,
1^ vv^ aip5>v [u, 7) 8'] rjfxepa iy/3V{a'jA',
[K]ai Tij9 "Hpa^ L . . .]jXî-a.
\l]C 'flpLcov ia)[i09 CTriTejXXet, 77 pvi
5'
115 K y) vv^ ^poiv I, T] Tjfxepa iS,
Kal eK Tov avTOv dvaTeWei

6 rjXL09 f]fXpa? y. (ko) 17 vv^ (i)p(ou i,
7)
8' Tjjxepa 18. k(3 7] yi'^ Mpcoy l,
7]
8' rjfxepa l8. Ky i] vv^ (hpcou l,
120 7;
8' Tjfiepa iS. k8 rjXiov Tpoiral
eh Oepo^ Kal ?; vi'i //tVa)(y) yiverai
T^S Tjixepa^ copas 8oo8KaTi]ix6pou //e'.
Fr. (/).
Col. ix.
Kal yu'CTat 7) vii^ oipcoy Li p. ,
17
8' Tjptpa iy^'8'Ko^. K
125 hrjaiac apyovTai Trveiv

Kal 6 TTorapos apx'^T[a\L
dvaâu'eiv, 7) vv^ a>pu)U iX q ,
T/
5' 7)pipa Ly^'8 Xpir .
IIa\covs 9 J/ rSai AiouTi.
130 UporpvyrjTi]^ di'anXXei^

7] vi)^ 6ip\S)\v 18 X pn ,
7)
8' r)p(pa ;iy/3'A']cj'. 6 'flpLOiv (Imo^)
oXos dvaT[iXXL,] 7] i^v^
wp(ov lyfi,^', V <^'j

VH'^P"' ly^tX'^.
135 17] Kvcou (t'coios) dv[aTi]XX(i, 1) vv^
oopcoy îL-X p ,
123. 1. fi'f for ( /i'.

27. CALENDAR 149
Frs. (i), ik), (/). Col. X.
[57
<5' -qjxepa Lyy]^'. Ilavi'L [8 [^ 8'] ijfxipa i^^'iXil^'
[kv rfji IIap6]v(io[i. 'AyTo^ ?7coio[y 145 B[ou'âo-7ioy io^pTrj.
140 [1^ ^ ^fiepa i]yiefi[lj[.

.J 8wl, T) I'V^
[i<T ^r^(f)avos] ea)io[y] wpcou lay . . .

,
[8vvî, rj y v^ 17
8" i)p.ipa i(3i.[. . .,
137. 1. ff for 8'.
Fr. (in), Col. XI. Fr. (m). Col. xii.
150 [ ]opTi]. ?7 [56j i/t*! copcot/ i[a/3'' . .

,
[k^ Avpa idoia] 8vv(.l, 7) ^ i^yuepa t^[. . .

,
[?) i/f (opcovj lay t yu e , 165 Kal kv Sal 7ravrjy[vpis

AOrjvd^ Kal Xv-^vov^
[ 's loprrj. Kaova-i Kard t^v )(^d)pau,
155 [^ ] fi^ydXa Kat 6 irorafxh^ kirKT-qfiaivn

[. . . eTTKTT) /laiiêi, Trpo9 Tr]v dvdâaiv.
[rj vi)^ a)p5)\v LayiK[ii\ 170 Ky laTjfiepia ÔivoircopivTj^
[17 ^ rjfjiepa i(3]Lo^. T) vi>^ wpoou t)3,
['E-Trelif) . 1' T]ars' 17

5* rjfiipa f/3,
160 [^TjXars ToO H]K0p7rL0V, Tov 'Ayov(3ios iopTT],
[. . 'ApKTovpos iio]iQS Kal 6 TTOTafxhs iwi-

[iTTlTiXXci, ] 175 a-t]fj.aivi TTpbs TT}i/
dvdâaiv.
152. 1. < f'fi (' for ifMf'f', 158. 9 corn
Fr. (;). Col. xiii. Fr. {in). Col. xiv.
[/f^ .4?! UKpOiWÔS ]

[dp-)(jiTai 8vvHv,]
[eVireXAet, [17 vv^ wpSiv i^yf/e',]
]
[17 vv^ cdpmv iîe/Ie',] [77

8* T}fXpa laLiKc^,]
180 17 ^ Tjfiipa la^'eXa. 18 ^KOpTTLOS 0X0^ 8vViL,
Mio-opd ^ kv tS>l 195 77 vv^ Q)pd)V i^yiX,
HKopniai. n\eid8S T) ^ Tj/iipa LaL}<,
I50 HIBEH PAPYRI
eTTiTeXXovaw, l( 'TdS(^ dKpa>i'V\[o]L
a.Kpa>pv\oi
tTTiTeXXovcriv,
8' la^'iX', T] vv^ a>pa>u i^lX .
185 77 r]fji(pa
'AttoXXcouo? lopT-fj. 200 kv rah e rjixepais
Tai? (kiT)ayopikvaL<i,
8 ^Ti(pavos ecoio? kirt-
iêX'(^', 8 'ApKTOVpOS CCKpOOVVÔ?

reXXei, 17 vvi topcoj/
SvufL, T] yvi oopoov L^^ ^.^^y

rj 8' rjpepa lafi'i e // e .
8* i)p(:pa laL e (
190 6 XKOpTTlOS aKpCOWXOS
T] fj. ,
205 Kal T^y "laio? yiviBXia
Col. ii.
Frs. (n) and (o). Col. i.
] . KaOa (o . [. .]8iov
Tv]î K i<rr]H[pia k]apLvrj
210 Tpo]na>u $epiu[a)U . . .y<ou
] Ky Toy[. . . .] . a-iy
215 A7r .
[
Sih. TO npoa-
Fr. Fr. (p).

(g).
225
r)ppu>u
neuTe T[a)v kn]ayofxeu[(ov
220 ev Tcoi kvLavTUiL iv ai9 .
rov TjXiov dvarkXXiiv

kv TTJi nopeiai ttji Siopi-
(ova7]i
27. CALENDAR iî
19-54. '
... at Sais a wise man and a friend of mine, for I have been in the Saite
nome for five years. He expounded to me the whole truth, and illustrated it in practice
from the stone dial which is called in Greek a " gnomon." He said that the courses of the
sun were two, one dividing night and day and one dividing winter and summer. Accordingly,
to summarize his information as accurately as I could in the shortest space, in order that
the intricacy of the fractions may not appear to you a long and unfamiliar thing to under-
stand (?), I will divide the necessary days. The astronomers and sacred scribes use the
lunar days for the settings and risings of the stars. They therefore keep most of the
festivals annually on the same day, without alterations owing to the setting or rising of
a star ; but some festivals they keep .'
. .
19. avrip: a disciple of Eudoxus is probably meant; cf. introd.

2833. Cf. P. Par. I. 488491 TTOpf'iai [8i Tov] fjXlov 8Co' fxia fitv rj Stopiffouo-al to Btpoi
Ka\ TOV ^(ftFf/wi'la, fxia 8e fj vvKTa Kol r]\jiep\av.
34-41. The construcdon

of this passage, which seems to be all one sentence and
to require some correcdon,
obscure. The popia apparently refer to the fractions of the
is
hours of the nights and days, and the general purport of the sentence seems to be that the
writer, in order to avoid prolixity and a multitude of complicated fractions, would mention
in his calendar only the more important days. This is in actual agreement with the
calendar, which rarely notices days on which there was nothing more remarkable
to record than the length of the night and day. The supplements proposed for 11. 38-
40 willmake lines 37-9 longer by two or three letters than II. 41 sqq. Perhaps some letters
at the end of those three lines were first omitted and then supplied in the margin, as
has happened in 11. 34-5. The future tense iiepioipiv in the apodosis after the imperfect
rjbvvaprjv is awkward, but the alteration of a-vvayayfiv to (Tvvt}ynyov would make the connexion
of iiipiovp.(v with the preceding lines still more difficult.

41 54' Cf. P. Par. I. 7180 ol 8e d(r[Tpo]X[djyot Koi 01 Upoypatifjârui^ )^pccv\Tai Tois kuto.
(rfXfi[v''\r)[v^ fjp.[f\pais koi ayiwai 7rav8r]p[i]Kas e[o/jjras' Tivas pev cos evopC^(r6y] to. hi KaruxvTrjpia ku\
Kvvos avaro'S.fjt' Kai (Te\T]vaia koto. 6(lov (1. dtov, Blass) uva\(y6pevoi
twv Alyvnriav, Tcts fjpepas (k
a passage which agrees closely with our papyrus and clearly indicates their common
source. Combining the information from both, the meaning is that the days on which the
risings or settings of stars took place were designated by the ordinary months, and were
therefore continually changing. Most of the annual festivals in Egypt were kept according
to the amms vagus of 365 days without reference to the stars, the movements of which took
place a day later on the calendar every four years. Certain festivals, however, were
observed according to the sidereal year of 365;! days. The Paris papyrus specifies three
of these, the fetes at the Nile rising, the rising of Sirius, and some festival connected with
the moon and 27 may have done the same in the next column, which may also well
;
have contained a passage corresponding to P. Par. r. 80-85, concerning the day to be

intercalated once in every four years. The use of the adjective nrXdnras for the festivals
observed on the annus vagus confirms the view that the employment of the year of 3651
days Egypt, however ancient, remained quite exceptional, in spite of the efforts of Euer-
in
getes, down
to the reform of the calendar by Augustus; cf. Dittenberger's note Orientis
Gr. Inscr. I. p. 102. The phrase raly *raru ai\r]vr]v 7]p(pais is rather difficult. The extract
from the Paris papyrus quoted above, in which it also occurs, immediately follows a passage
describing the difference between the lunar year of 354 days and the solar year of 365.
But if the days according to the moon are connected with the lunar 3'ear, the statement
'
'
concerning the astronomers and sacred scribes is not only obviously incorrect but has no
reladon to what follows. It is therefore preferable to suppose that the phrase al koto (T(\i]vr)v
152 HIBEH PAPYRI
yjlJLipai is in both passages used loosely for '
the days of the month '
without any real reference
to the moon.
in this volume of y inserted between vowels cf.
53. \y\(mas: for another example
62. 8 apx^yepd. The practice is common in the Tebtunis papyri of the second century b. c.
55-205. ' is 13/5 hours, the day lofi
(Choiak ist:) . . i6th, Arcturus
. The night
rises in the evening. i2ff hours, the day iiî. 26th, Corona rises in
The night is
the evening, and the north winds blow which bring the birds.
The night is i2j;\ hours
and the day 11^5- Osiris circumnavigates, and the golden boat is brought out.
'Tubi 5th, the sun enters Aries. 20lh, spring equinox. The night is 12 hours and
the day 12 hours. Feast of Phitorois. 27th, Pleiades set in the evening. The night is
1 1
If hours, the day 12/5.
Mecheir 6th, the sun enters Taurus. Plyades set in the evening. The night is i iff
'
the south wind

hours, the day i2^f ; and Hera burns (.?), and there are indications, and
blows'. If it it burns up the fruits of the earth.
becomes violent 19th (i6th .?), Lyra rises
in the' evening. iiif hours, the day i2||; and there is an assembly at Sais
The night is
in honour of Athena, and the south wind blows. If it becomes violent it burns up the
fruitsof the earth. 2;.]th, Orion (?) rises (sets?) in the evening. The night is ii[ ]
hours, the day i2f ] hours, 27th, Lyra (Canis. ?).sets.in the evening. The night is 1 1^
hours' the day I2|f. Feast of Prometheus whom they call Iphtliimis, and the south wind
blows. If it becomes violent it burns up the fruits of the earth.
'Phamenoth 4lh, the sun enters Gemini. Capella rises in the morning. The night is
ii-i- hours, the day I2|f. Scorpio begins to set in the morning.
5th, The night is 11
hours, the 'day 13. 9th, feast of Edu (?) among the Egyptians. 12th, Scorpio sets
completely in the morning. The night is io|| hours, the day 13^^. 13th, Pleiades rise
in the morning. (The night is io||- hours, the day 13^^) ...
Pharmouthi 3rd, the sun enters Cancer. Aquila rises in the evening. The night is
'
loi-T. hours, the day isff. nth, Delphinus rises in the evening. The night is loi hours,
the'^day 13!, and there is the of Hera. 17th, Orion rises in the morning.
. . .
The night
loJ- hours, the day 20th, the night is 10 hours, the day 14, and the sun rises
is isff.
in the same place for 3 days. 21st, the night is 10 hours, the day 14. 22nd, the night is
10 hours, the day 14. 23rd, the night is 10 hours, the day 14. 24th, summer solstice,
Jj of an (equinoctial) day
and the night gains upon the day by 4^5 of an hour which is :
and the night is 10-4V hours, the day i3ff. 25th, the ctesian winds begin to blow, and
the river begins to rise. The night is 104^- hours, the day I3*|.
Pachon 6th, the sun enters Leo. Vindemitor rises (?). The night is loif hours, the
'
day isll- 9lh> Orion rises completely in the morning. The night is io^-| hours, the
day isll- ^^^K Canis rises in the morning. The night is io| hours, the day isf.
Pauni 4th, the sun enters Virgo. Aquila sets in the morning. The night is io|i
'
hours, the day 134V i6lh, Corona sets in the morning. The night is iig"^ hours, the
day 12^^. Feast of Bubastis. 2[. th, Delphinus sets in the morning. The night is iif ]
hours, the day 12; Feast of ... i.
27lh, Lyra sets in the morning. The night is iiif '
hours, the day i2^|. Feast of 30th, great ., there are indications. The night is
. . . . .
1 1 -2 1 hours, the day I2|f.
'Epeiph [.], the sun enters the claws of Scorpio. fi3th?], Arcturus rises in the
morning. The night is 1 1[ j hours, the day I2[ ]; and there is an assembly at Sais in
honour of Athena, and they burn lamps throughout the country, and the river gives
indications of rising. 23rd, autumnal equinox. The night is 12 hours, the day 12 hours.
Feast of Anubis, and the river gives indications of rising. 2 7lh, Capella rises in the
evening. The night is 12/5, the day ii^|.

27. CALENDAR 153
Mesore 2nd, the sun enters Scorpio.

*
Pleiades rise in the evening. The night
is I2i hours, the day iif. Feast of Apollo. 4th, Corona rises in the morning. The
night is i2ii hours, the day iiff. 9th, Scorpio begins to set in the evening. The night
is 12^ hours, the day iiff. 14th, Scorpio sets completely. The night is i2|i hours,
the day iif^. 17th, Hyades rise in the evening. The night is i2|^ hours, (the
day 1 1 11).
'In the 5 intercalary days: 4th, Arcturus sets in the evening. The night is 12^
hours, the day 11^; and the birthday festival of Isis takes place.'
55. The length of the night and day shows that the day in question must be Choiak i,
since the compiler of the calendar treats the difference in length between two successive
nights or days as uniformly ^^ hour; cf. 1. 122 and p. 144.
56. Cf. GeminUS C\\6ves 5.) EiiSo^m fie 'ApKTOvpos dKp6vv)(os eViTeXXfi Koi VfTOi yivfrai Kal
;^XtScbi/ (âtVerat kol rjfxfpai X ôpeai TTViovdt. Kol fiakicrTa al npoopvidiai Ka\ovp.evai.
rai eVo/xeVay
aKpmvi'xos eVtreXXft whatever the technical meaning of uKpofvxos (as it is generally
:
spelled) in later Greek astronomers may have been, there is no doubt that Eudoxus, as
both the papyrus and Geminus bear witness, used it as equivalent to ea-nepios, and that
the risings and settings recorded in the papyrus mean the apparent or heliacal ones, not the
true. No technical distinction is intended by the compiler of the calendar between eVtreXXeti/
and di/areXXfti/, which occurs in 11. 89, 116, 130, &c.
58. Cf. Gem. ('l;^^*;^^) ft> 8e TTJ Ka Evdoâ 2T((pavos uKpovvôs (nirtWd. apxavTai opvidlai
jvviovm,
60. On the ntpiTvXovs of Osiris see Plut. De hide el Osin'de, 13. The eâyoiyij of
the sacred boat took place according to the papyrus on Choiak 26, while according
to the Canopus Inscr. 1. 51 the duaycoyr] tov Upov ttXoiov tou 'Oaetpioi occurred on
Choiak 29. The two statements are perfectly consistent on the view that the festival
lasted 4 days the papyrus refers to the beginning of the voyage, the Canopus Inscr. to
;
the return of the sacred boat at the end of the festival. Plutarch, oj). cit. 39, states that the
mourning for Osiris occupied four days, but refers the production of the sacred boat to
the third day. His date for the festival, Athur 17-20, nominally differs widely from the
Ptolem.aic evidence owing to his employment of the Julian calendar (a fact which
Wiedemann seems to leave out of account in his discussion of the date of the Osiris
festival, Herodots zweites Biich, pp. 261-2) but the divergence is really slight, for Athur 17
;
on the Julian calendar coincided with Choiak 26 of the vague year in a. d. 128, which is
not long after Plutarch. At Esneh the feast of Sokar, the Memphite god of the dead,
identified with Osiris in later times, also took place on Ciioiak 26.
62. 'I'v/Si (e) it is clear from the parallel passages (11. 66, 88, 129, 181) that a number
:
has dropped out after T0/3t, and e, which would easily have been omitted owing to the
iv following, can be restored with practical certainty because, firstly, the sun entered
Taurus on Mecheir 6 (1. 66), and it must therefore have entered Aries about 30 days
(possibly 29 or 31) previously, and, secondly, the equinox, which took place on Tubi 20
(1. 62), was placed by Eudoxus in the middle of Aries (15; cf. introd.), so that the sun
must have entered Aries about 15 days before the 20th. In 1. 107 we read <âpij.ov[6i fy
TQii K[a^pKiv<oi y. 'Afros x.r.X., and suppose that y is misplaced and ought to have preceded
fv T<oi KapKivwi. The size of the lacuna after âpôv suits 3 letters much better than 4, and
if âpp.ov[di. .e'y or âpp.ov[6i (.) (]v (the figure would have to be a or /3) be read, the
already considerable disparity between the times during which the sun was in Gemini and
Cancer respectively would be still further increased cf. p. 142. ;
64. *tT<optoios the name of this deity is new.

: There is very likely a connexion
between this festival and the festival of the child at the town of Sais which took place on
'
'
154 HIBEH PAPYRI
Tubi 20 according to the Esneh calendar. Was Phitorois the son of Neith, the principal
deity of Sais ?
k(, nXftdSff K.T.\. : cf. Gem. (K/>ioj) ly. nXf/afiey aKp6vv)(ôi dvi'ova-i kcu 'Qpiav apxtrai Bvvfiv.
67. Cf. Gem. (Kpidy) Ka. 'Yuiâ dKpovvxoi ^vvovaiv.

69. "Hpa
/cn'fi Ka\ iiTKTrjpalvn
. after Kdfi is a smudge, and the letter between it and koI
:
may have been intended to be erased but the ink has run in several places in this
;
column, 1. 112 TTjs"lipas seems to refer to the goddess, but "Hpa is here more probably
the planet Venus or a constellation cf. Arist. de Mundo p. 392 A 27 6 toG ^(joacpopov bv
;
'A(f)po8iTr]s 01 de "Hpns npoauyopfvovaiv, P. Oxv. 7 3 1. 6 roii aa-rpoi^ "Hpay. For the archaic
form of Kati cf. KOTOKaft in 11. 73 and 79, and kuovo-i 1. 167. enKnjfxaivfiv, which occurs
in 11. 168 and 174 6 norafios fTTiarjfiaivfi npos ttju dpaâcriv, not in connexion with an
astronomical phenomenon, means here probably, as often in the calendars of Ptolemy and
Geminus, an indication with regard to the weather (sc. wind, thunder, rain, &c.). The
word in this sense seems always to be used absolutely, without a subject.
73. td: this conflicts with the numbers in 1. 75, which indicate the i6th; probably
therefore if should be read here.
AvpH cf. Gem. (Kptoy) k(.
: Avpa aKpovyxfî eVireXXei.
76. Athena at Sais was the goddess Neith (cf. Wiedemann, op. cit., p. 259), also
identified in Roman times with Isis; cf. ^\w\.. De hide et Osiride, 9. The papyrus mentions
another assembly in her honour in Epeiph (11. 165-6), when there was a general Xn/t7ra5?j-
<\)opia ; and no doubt which Herodotus was referring in his
that was the festival to
description of the is to be connected closely with his
'\(ifMTTa8>](f)op'ia at Sais in ii. 62, which
general statement in ii. 59 es 2div noXiv rfi ^\6r)vair] iravriyvpiôvm rather than, as has been
done by Wiedemann and others, with the illuminations at the festival of Osiris in Choiak.
The day of general illumination, as now appears clearly from the papyrus, was in honour
of Neith, not of Osiris.
The festival of Neith on Mecheir r6 was not known previously, but the Esneh
calendar mentions one on INIecheir 8. That found in 1. 165 is to be connected with
another feast of Neith on Epeiph 13, also mentioned in the Esneh calendar; ly may even
be the number lost in 1. 161.
79. k[ refers to the date, which may
be any day between the 20th and 26th; cf.
1. 83. Geminus does not quote from Eudoxus at this point any star rising in the evening
soon after Lyra, but 'Sipiav aKpowxos Svvei, Kt'coi/ uKpowxos Sii/et and A*^ ewa fTTiTcWei occur
between the evening rising of Lyra (cf. 1. 73) and the morning setting of Scorpio (cf.
1. 90). The setting of Canis and rising of Capella are probably referred to in 11. 83 and
89, where in both cases the papyrus is corrupt and here too, probably, there is an error ;
and 'flpt'cof dKp<l>i>xixoi tvvei, not eVtTeXXfi, was meant.

82. Perliaps Kajra Tr)p x^P"^ cf 1- 1 67. A festival is probably referred to, possibly
')
that of the strong one ; cf. note on 1. 85.

'
'
83. Avpa aKpuvvxos bvvfi: this Statement cannot be correct in view of the fact that
the evening rising of Lyra had taken place only 8 days previously (1. 73). Probably Kucoi*
should be substituted for Avpa, and the papyrus brought into conformity with Geminus'
statements about the sequence of the risings and settings on Eudoxus' calendar at this
point; 79 and 89, notes.
cf. 11.
85. identification of Prometheus with an Egyptian deity and the name of

The
the latter, Iphthimis, are both new. Mr. F. LI. Griffith would explain 'l(f)0tfjtii as a
Graecized form of Nefertem, son of Ptah, whose name occurs as -(v-njuis at the end of
compound names he supposes that Nefer- was cut down to Ef- and the name pronounced
;
Efteme, giving rise to two slightly different transliterations into Greek, as e. g. in the
parallel forms \vapc05 and -avapnvi. The calendars of Esneh, Edfu, and Dendereh mention
27. CALENDAR 155
no festivalon Mecheir 2 7 but the Papyrus Sallier IV mentions a festival of Sokar on

;
that day, and the Edfu calendar a festival of Ptah on Mecheir 28 and 29, while all three
Ptolemaic calendars refer to a festival of the strong one (the translation is doubtful
' '
according to Griffith; the word might mean 'victory' or 'battle') on Mecheir 21, the
Edfu calendar adding that it was observed throughout Egypt, It is possible that there
is some connexion between the festival of the strong one and the ceremony referred to
' '
in 1. 82, but the feast of Iphthimis is in any case probably different.

89. The name of the star rising has been omitted before avareWfi. We restore
A*| foDia from Geminus cf. 1. 79, note.
; avaTiWeiv and emrfWeiv are sometimes distinguished
by later astronomers, and referred respectively to the true and apparent risings, but it
is clear that the jiapyrus uses the two terms indiscriminately, meaning the apparent rising
in both cases ; cf. 1. 2, note.

90. Cf. Gem. (Tavpos) la. ^Koprrios e'ojor dvvtiv apteral. In the case of constellations
with several very large stars, it was necessary to distinguish the beginning from the end of
the rising or setting; cf. 1. 93.
92-3. 'e5u or .]e8v seems to be the name of a unknown Egyptian deity. [yvnTwis] is
quite sufficient for the lacuna, but it is possible that one more letter is lost.
934. Cf Gem. (Taipos) Ka. 2Kop7rios eaos oXos Bvvei, and note on 1. 90.
956. Cf. Gem. (Tavpos) KJi. nXeidSes (TTiTeWoviTi Ka\ iinarnialvei. The length of the
night and day can be restored : 17 vv^ wpu,v if-i^t'X'n'f, 17
6' r)p.fpa tyg-'q.
107. Cf. note on I. 62 and Gem. (A/Sv/xot) dKpowxos fTrireXXft. Between f. 'Aero?
this and the entry corresponding to that in I. no
from Eudoxus {AiBvfioi) Geminus inserts
ly. 'ApKTovpos fcpos tvvfi, the only certain reference to the stars on Eudoxus' calendar which
is omitted in the papyrus.
1 10. Cf. Gem. (A('Si'/nf.'i) irj, AeXcfns d<p6vvxos eTrireWei.

112. In place of
before -x^'") or w or possibly
i can be read. The word seems to
' rj
refer to a festival in honour of Hera, who at Thebes was identified with Mut. The birth
of that goddess was apparently celebrated in Pharmouthi (cf Brugsch, Thesaurus, p. 523),
and may be referred to here, though yivi6\ia is the word used for the birthday of Isis
in 1. 205.
113. Cf. Gem. (AiSr/xoi) k5, 'Qpi'wi' apîrai fTriTeXXeii'.
116-22. Cf introd. and the account of the rjXiov iropda in P. Par. i. 8-51. Lines
1 2 1-2 are very inaccurately expressed. What the writer meant was that from the 24th of
Pharmouthi the nights begin to lengthen and the days to diminish by 4^. hour per diem, but
his actual statement vv^ (which on the 23rd is 10 hours long) p.fi^wv yiVercu rJis fjpepas (which
f)
on the 23rd is 14 hours long) is highly ambiguous. Nor does he seem to be justified in
his use of diobeKarrifiopov apas. An hour might be Y2: of the period of light irrespective of
its length or ^^ of the average, i.e. equinoctial, day, and it is of course -^-^ hour in the latter
sense w^hich throughout the calendar the writer actually adds to or sublracis from the
length of days, though this system is inaccurate cf. p. 144. But then larjfzepivov would be
;
the right word to use here, not twSfKarrjpopov, especially as the day in 1. 122 contains 14, ' '
not 12, hours.

124-7. O" the view that the papyrus dates refer to the years 301-298 b.c, Phar-
mouthi 25, on which day the river is stated to have begun to rise, is June 28. The attain-
ment of its greatest height nearly two months later is apparently referred to in 11. 168-76.
The Canopus Inscr. 11. 37-8 makes the rise begin on Pauni i, i.e. July 19.
130. npoTpvyrjTTjs dvaTeXXd-. Geminus has no entry concerning the stars on Eudoxus'
calendar between the beginning and completion of the rising of Orion (cf. 11. 113 and 132),
and nowhere mentions the star Uporpvy-qTr^p (the more usual form) in connexion with
Eudoxus. From Smyly's calculations (cf. p. 143) it appears that this statement of the
J 56 HIBEH PAPYRI
papyrus must be erroneous, whether eCows or aKf)covvxos be supplied. Pliny, Ht'sl. NaL xviii
310 (Wachsmuth, Lydus, &c., p. 328), says
correctly that in Egypt Vindemitor rose on
Sept. 5, or two months later than the date found in the papyrus.
1323. Cf. Gem. {KapKivos) la. ^Slpiwv ewoy oXoy (niTeXXfi,
135. Cf. Gem. (K(IpK(Vos^ K^, KlicOf fU>OS fTTlTfWd.
138. Cf. Gem. (Afci)!') f. 'A(tos ecaos Svufi.
141. Cf. Gem.
(Aewf) I. 2Ti(f)avos 8vvei.
145, Pauni 16 wMs also the day of a festival of Bast at Esneh the statement that the ;
P^sneh calendar mentions a second festival in her honour on Pauni 30 (Dittenberger, Orients
Gr. Inscr, I, p. 103) is erroneous. The Canopus Inscr., which in 1. 37 mentions
a piKpa and /ifydXa Bou/3daTta, gives a different date, Pauni i, for both, which is remarkable
seeing that Pauni 16 is attested both before and after the date of the inscription.
1 46. k[.] the earliest day in Pauni on which A appears as a fraction of the night is
:
the 23rd, the earliest on which disappears as a fraction of the day is the 24th. The date
in question therefore must be the 24th, 25th, or 26th.
AfXt/)/? : cf. Gem. (Aewi') ir). AcXcîj twos 8vv(i.
150. Cf. note on 1. 154.
151. Cf. Gem. (Aewi') k/3. Avjxi eoJoy Bvvei Ka\ eTncrrjfiaivd.
154. This festival is to be assigned to Pauni 27 rather than to Pauni 30, the day to
which the figures in 11. 157-8 refer, for throughout the papyrus the mentions of festivals
follow the details about the length of night and day. The Dendereh calendar mentions
a great feast of Hathor and Ilorus on the last four days of Pauni, and 'A(f)po8iTT]]s or
may have occurred here or in 1. 1 50. The Esneh calendar mentions a festival
'A7rdXX<i)i/o]s
of Sochet on Pauni 30, there having been already a festival of that goddess on Pauni 16.
156. For eTri(Ti]\naLi'(i ; cf. Gem. (Afwi/) kO. fniaTjpaLvei, and note on 1. 69.
159. The number lost is /3, y, or 8 ; cf. 11. 137 and 181, and p. 142. The claws ot '
Scorpio take the place of Libra ; cf. Gem. (Zuyds) t^.

'
KaXiVn-M ^j/Xal upxovTai avaTiWovaai.
161. Perhaps ('ETreli/)) ly should be restored at the beginning of the line, there being
a festival of Neith at Esneh on that day ;cf. 1. 76, note.
161 2. Cf. Gem. (Ae'coi') id. 'ApKTovpos iaos fniTfWfi.

Xil;(i'ovs Kaovai: cf. Hdt. ii. 62, and note on 1. 76.
166.
168-9. This entry the river gives indication of rising,' which is repeated in 11. 174-6,
'
refers apparently to the flood reaching its full height, which it usually does early in
October. Epeiph 23, the date to which 11. 174-6 belong, being the day of the autumn
equinox, was probably Sept. 27.
173. This date of the Anubis festival, Epeiph 23, was previously unknown.
1778. Cf. Gem. (Ziryds^ S. Ai^ (iKpouvxos cVtreXXet.
1823. Cf. Gem. (Znydf) r;. UXeuiSes cttitiWovcti.
186. 'AttoXXcoio? eopTTj: this dale, Mesore 2, for the Horus festival is new.
187. Cf. Gem. (Zuydf) eV 8e rrj i Ki'Sdô) twoy eVirAXfj. The entry clearly corresponds to
that in the paj)yrus, and the omitted name of the constellation is to be restored ^rtcfyavos,
as Ponledera had already proposed.
190-1. Cf. 1. 90, note, and Gem. (Zuydy) i^. 2Knpnios aKpowxos apxfTni hvvfiv.
194. Cf. Gem. (Ziydr) iC- ^Kopnlos (iKpdvvxoi At| o\os 8vv(i, which requires correction.
The papyrus confirms Wachsmuth's view that Ai^ is to be omitted.
197. Cf. Gem. (Zuydy) K/3. 'Y(jSfs aKpovvxoi (TnTeWovdii'.
1 99. The length of the day has been omitted insert (>; ; S' rjpepa my'i'X').
202. Cf. Gem. (SKoprriof) 'ApKTovpos (iKpovvxos bvvd.

t],
205. The birthday of Isis on the 4th intercalary day is mentioned in the Papyrus
Sallier IV, the Esneh, Edfu, and Dendereh calendars, and by Plutarch, Be hide et Osiride, 1 2.
28. ROYAL ORDINANCES 157
209. Tu]/3i k: cf. 1. 62.

211. 'ETTfi(f) is a probable restoration before Ky or after tov, since the autumn equinox
took place on Epeiph 23 ; cf 1. 170.
212. The traces of a letter would suit y with a stroke over it, i. e. the figure 3.
217-23. This fragment at first sight seems to be concerned with the five intercalary
days at the end of Mesore, but it is difficult to connect these with the Tropeia of the sun,
which divides either summer and winter or day and night (cf. 11. 29-33). Hence we are
more disposed to regard the five days as the three days at the summer solstice (cf 11. 116-
20) and the two at the winter solstice, upon which the sun rises eV tov avrov (1. 116); these
have to be added to the 360 days upon which the day or night increased by 4^5 hour (cf. 11.
1 2 1-2 and introd.) in order to make up the full year of 365 days. But if a figure followed
7]lJiepcov in 1. 218 the meaning would be something quite different. It is not certain that any
letter was written after ah in 1. 220, though <p[r](n is possible.
IV. ROYAL ORDINANCES

28. Constitutional Regulations.
Mummy 97. Breadth 6-7 rw. About B.C. 265.
Notwithstanding its unfortunate condition this papyrus, which refers to the

tribal organization of some is of no small interest.
civic polity, The style is that
of an ordinance (11. 7-H)and the natural inference is that these fragments
;
belong to a royal edict regulating the constitution of one of the Greek cities of
Egypt. The alternative is to suppose that they come from some literary work
in which a municipal law was quoted at length. Palaeographical considerations
do not materially assist a decision between these two possibilities. The sloping
handwriting, which is of a good size and, hke other papyri from Mummy 97, of an
early period (cf. 64 and 92), is clear and careful but not more regular than that of
;
many other non-literary papyri, and certainly not of a marked literary character.
The feature which is least suggestive of an edict is the narrowness of the column,
which is not usual in non-literary documents of any length. But that is a quite
inconclusive argument ; while in favour of the more obvious hypothesis it is
worth noting that a fragment of another series of ordinances (29) was obtained
from the same mummy as this. Assuming then that we have here part of an
ordinance promulgated in Egypt, the question remains to what city did it refer.
The choice lies between Alexandria and the still more recent foundation
158 HIBEH PAPYRI
Ptolemais, and, so far as existing evidence goes, turns largely upon the inter-
pretation of a fragment of Satyrus, Ylepi hrnioiv 'Ak(ârbpecov, quoted by Theophilus,
Ad Aiitolyc. II. p. 94 (Muller, Hist. Gr. Frag. III. p. 164). In the constitution
described by the papyrus the tribes were five in number, each tribe containing
twelve demes, and each deme twelve phratries (11. lo sqq.). The number of
tribes at Alexandria and Ptolemais is unknown
Kenyon, Archiv, II. pp. 70 (cf.
sqq.) ^ but Satyrus in the passage cited enumerates eight demes of the Alexandrian
;
tribe Atoruo-ta, and if his meaning be that it contained only eight then our
papyrus cannot refer to Alexandria. But this is not a necessary inference from
Satyrus' words. His point is that Ptolemy Philopator, claiming descent from
Dionysus, gave precedence to the Dionysian tribe, and that the eight deme-names
mentioned were all connected with the god. But it is not stated that all the
demes of the tribe were so connected, and had others existed in which the
connexion could not be traced, there would have been no occasion to refer to
them. The excerpt from Satyrus therefore hardly does more than create a slight
presumption in favour of Ptolemais as the subject of these ordinances, though
the presumption is somewhat strengthened by the consideration of a priori
probability for Soter's creation was still so young that regulations like the
;
present concerning it might be expected to occur. The apparent allusion in

11. 1-3 to previous ordinances forbids us to regard 28 as forming part of Soter's
original legislation. On the other hand in favour cf Alexandria can be adduced

the fact that the city is known from Ps. Callisthenes i. 33 to have been divided
into five regions numbered A, B, F, A, E, with which the five tribes mentioned
in the papyrus may have been connected.
Frs. (rt), (/>), and (r).
ayvocitcnv rd re yu[6fxe-
va avTO?^ T Kal
ypa(f)ki'Ta
. e
f,
Tat (h Ta? (Pr4tr[^]^ '^ '^'
yv(i>pi(i]Tai viro rcou
^paropcov OveTCocrau Ka I
avvia-Tocxrav ro[.]7re . . .
\. . . . a Trh (pvXfji eKacTT 779
' To the three there mentioned, Aiovvaios, TlpowawwoaePdcrTfios, and UToXtfiaitvi, with perhaps a fourth
^v\aî8a\da(T(ios, may now be added MovaoTraTtpttoi, which occurs in P. Tebt. II. 316.
ro '))fxp]a9 (ppdrpaL Svo. e7r[ei-
Sr] yap v\TTdp')(ovcnv (pv\\al
fxkv 7rivT TOVToav h\
kv kKa.\<j\Trii <^vKr\L br]\jioL
jxev Su)]SKa (ppdrpa^L Se
15 S(o]8eKa T<5[ij Si]fj.Q)[t [[efa-
(To-Ta)^]] coare yivâOai p[\v

Srjfiovs i^rjKOVTa (f>[po--
Tpa9 Sh InTaKoaias i[KO(n,
vTrap')(OVGOov Se et]? top

'
20 ip[i]avTOP -qj/xe pa)[i/ rpia-
Kocricop k^-qKovra, ay[fx(3i]-
(TiTai rS)v eTTTaKo[aL(ov
uko[(tl\ (f)paTpia)U e[
(TidOai Trjv ri(ikpa\y ....

8vo T0T9
'
2^ [' '\ '
i/oty k[ 15 letters
Fr. (d). Fr. (e). Fr. (/).
30 i(T/jia v(ra\
Fr(^). Col. i. Col. ii. Fr. (k).
40 ]fjLaT0[
35 [ âxrav 01 .
[
] . pvTa[
]. a-iP [
i6o HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. (/). Fr. (/).
45 ]oK ]??[
'
(in order that) they may not be ignorant of what has been done and written
. . .
afTecting them ... to the phratries and be recognized by the members of the phratries, let
them sacrifice, and let 2 phratries from a tribe associate each day. For since there are
5 tribes, and in each tribe 1 2 denies, and in the deme 1 2 phratries, it follows that there will
be 60 denies and 720 phratries; and as the year consists of 360 days it will result that 2 of
the 720 phratries will each day .' . . .
. .
I . Ivn /iry] may be supplied before ayvounnv.

4. There is a break below this line, and the extent of the gap, if any, is not ascertain-
able. It is 1-4 belong to the same column as 11. 5 sqq.
not even certain that 11.
5. Ts (^parpfalf (cf. 11. 1 4 and 17) is very insecure. rp may be ott or art, and the
letters preceding and following are rather cramped. The phratry as a subdivision of the
Graeco-Egyptian tribe is a novelty, and it must have been relatively unimportant. There is
no mention of phratries in the description in P. Tebt. II. 316 of the formalities attending the
incorporation of ephcbi in the denies. The occurrence of the form (ppdrpa (cf. Homer and
Herodotus (ppi^Tpr]), which is also found in Dion. Hal. A.H. 2. 7, 4. 12, is interesting; in
1. 23 the Atiic (^parpia is used.
8-9. Another break occurs between these two lines, but the edges of the papyrus join
satisfactorily, and the connexion of (rvvfo-Tcjo-nv with (ppaTpai dvo suits the sense. The
doubtful n may be p, and ro[G] pi\v ivi\avTov is a possible reading but avrov is somewhat
;
long for the lacuna in 1. 9, and p(v is not wanted.

16. The letters at the beginning of the line are blotted and seem to have been inten-
tionally deleted.
20-1. The
statement dial the year consisted of 360 days is curious. The Macedonian
year, like other years, probably contained 354 days apart from intercalations, and
Greek
there is some evidence that half the months contained only 29 days; cf. p. 334. Perhaps,
however, an average of 30 daj's was reckoned here for the sake of symmetry. The length
of the Egyptian amms vagus was 365 days, and if that be the year meant, the 5 intercalary
days were left out of account. Possibly on each of them there was a general festival of
a whole tribe. As Smyly remarks, the organization revealed by the papyrus seems to rest
on an astronomical basis.
Ers. id) and {e). These two small fragments are each from the top of a column.
40-3. There is a space after <nv in 1. 43, which suggests that this fragment contains
the ends of lines. The letter bef(^re aw has been corrected and deleted, and there is an
ink spot above it which may belong to an over-written letter. Line 40 was possibly the first
of a column.
29. ROYAL ORDINANCES i6i
29. Finance Laws.
Mummy 97. i2-6x2^cm. About b.c. 265.
Both sides of this papyrus are inscribed with royal ordinances, but they are
too fragmentary to be of very much vakie. The subject of the recto, which
is fairly preserved so far as it goes, is the farming of a tax upon slaves ; these
were to be registered by their owners at the offices of the agoranomi, and
penalties are provided for any attempt at evasion or concealment. Of a general
slave-tax at this period nothing is at present known P. Petrie II. 39 {b) and {c), ;
to which Wilcken refers {Ost. I. p. 304), are shown by the republication

of them in III. 107 {a) and {b) to have no bearing upon the question. It is notice-
able that the word here used for slave is not hovko^ or aGiixa but avhpaTtohov, which
strictly signifies a captive or enslaved prisoner. Perhaps this ordinance was called
forth by some considerable increase in that class as a result of one of the wars

of Philadelphus, to whose reign rather than that of Euergetes the papyrus
is to be assigned. The prisoners (ai'xfidAcorot) brought from Asia by the latter
monarch are expressly alluded to in P. Petrie III. 104. 2 cf. II. 29 [e). 2. The ;
papyrus apparently indicates that the captives were disposed of by the govern-
ment to private persons, who, besides no doubt having to pay for such
appropriation, were subject to a special tax.
The verso is in a much worse case. It is unfortunately divided between two
columns, and the amount lost at the beginnings and ends of the lines cannot be
precisely fixed. In the text given below the numbers of letters assigned to the
lacunae are based upon 11. 22-3 and 36-7. But these numbers are chiefly designed
to show the relation of the lines to each other, and the loss may easily be greater
than we have supposed. In parts of Col. restoration seems very difficult with
i
a gap at the beginning of only about a dozen letters. The hand is smaller and
more cursive than that of the recto, but the writer may well have been the same
person he was not over-accurate, and several corrections occur. The subject
;
is again tax-fanning, but to the nature of the tax there is no clear clue. There
is a question of registration (1. 17), but that by itself is of course insufficient to
establish a definite connexion with the recto. The most significant word is
KTTJixa (I. 20), which is often used technically of a vineyard (cf. e. g. and
113. 30},
suggests a possible reference to the aT:6\xoipa (cf. 109 introd.) ; but there is
nothing in the context to confirm this.
The papyrus probably dates from about the middle of the reign of
Philadelphus ; cf. 64 and 92, which came from the same mummy.
M
i62 HIBEH PAPYRI
Fr. {a), Recto.
776/) Kol T . . . .\r] . orav 8\ K .

[
]to di'8[p\diro8ov Koi 8L\Tr\ov\y
dno-
TiPeT(o. kav (5e Ti? dWa . [ ] .
y[. . . .] . v rj fir] dTroypdy\rr}Ta[i
Slo. TOdV
dyopavojiiodv [rj T]a. TeXrj [Sia^vycoi^ tlv]l KaracpavrjL kn). ^Xd^rji] tov
TX[(ioiôv crT-
pea-Oco TOV d[t/S]pa7r6S[ov, kav Be dvyiXeyrji KpL6rjT(i)(Ta[v e]7r[i] tov d[TTo8e-
5 Seiyfiiuov K[pL]Tr}piov, t5>l [8\ nrj\vyaavTi io-Tco to TpiTOu )u[epoy] Trpa6e[vT0^
TOV dv8paTT68ov' kdv 8e 6 V7r[oTe]deh [i-qvvdrjL iXevdepos eaTco KaTaâX[Qiy

TO, yc-
vofiiva TeXrj. ypacjieadcoaav [8] Kol TavTa^ Ta9 vTroOeaeis o re ypaix/ji[aTv^
Toi)v dv8pa[TT68]ci)v KOL 6 dvTiypa(j)ivs KOL 6 TeX<ii[v]ri^, 6 8k TiXoiVqS T0[VT0 TO
y pa^liaTl^Tov] ypdyjras e/y XevKCOfia fx[]ydXois ypdfj.fJ.a<Tip iKTi6iT[(o irpb
lo TOV dyopav[ojxi]ov eKacrTri^ 7)[fi]pa9, rJL

8' di^ T]fi[ep]ai 77 K6[ats fi^ yivqTai
[aTTOTiviToo [8pa)(^fxd9) . eTTiTi/ji[o]i', TT poaaTTOTive[T(o 8e Ka[l
Fr. (/;). Fr. (c).
12 ]Xofxe[ 7} . ft)[
Fr. (n), Verso. Col. i.
\KaT T .
[
fwr 16 letters $ kXdacrovo^ dnoypay\ra<j-
[6 ana[. .][] ...[.. .]tov[. . . .^cavTaL kv rj/xepai^ 16
[
8iKip[a]a-Tal 7rap(vpea[i rji^Tii'iovu ^napevpeaei tjltiiîovi''^
20 [ ]
. fxeX . . T^y dp)(rJ9 o[. .]f o-Tepiado) tov KTT/]pLaT09
[ ]Koa[.\ .....]. . TlfiTjTas. KrjpvKas 8k Kal t'7r7/[/o]era[y
Kadicrrco 6 Ti[Xa)]i'rj^
Kijpvaarji
. Scou v7rr]p[eT]fji rj vTrrjpeTrjL /xr; Arara to. irpoâ-

[
[TTayp.i.va diro^TUcyeL [Spaîids) p TcpoaKaTa^dXXeiv 8\ TTavTaa\. . . .]

[ 8oKL]ixaaTiK(ov iyb? tovtov t[o]v riXov^ rm \ . . .]
-5 [ Te]Xa>i^T)s T<oL iSaa-iXci Trgaa-a-i[T](o e^ ov au r . [. . .â

[ jop fipos fiTjOeiâ v7r6X[o]You 7roovfi(i^[o]9^ [iay Se
[ ]
di^riypa(pV9 tcol TiXdivqi firj e|'eo-ra>
[ 'fajf aKvpos avTcoL <r[T]co 17 arvvra^L^, ka[v 8\ . .
[ Tr]pda(T(t)v TTpd^rji '
19. 1. 8oKtfia<TTaL 21. KrjpvKas vnr,[p\Tas added above the

. . .
line.
Col. ii.
30 T]pTai t\]u t . .
rf
ODcrra/fT.[ . . .]a)a-aua7r'
6 8h dyTiypa(p]evs K[al 6] rlcXd^vrj^ 17 letters ypa-

ov
(P^^'^raxxav koI rijc va[T]paiai 7rp[b] t[ov dyopauofitov

eKTcOeToxrav ?
Kad' Tjfiipaf [(t]vhôXov SnrXovv (T(f)pa[yL(rdp.evoL
35 Trf.] {Spaxfi . ?) i, kav 8e /xri (rviâ(ppayiC(oyTa[i Kara

TO, yeypafi/xha d(nrp[a]x6riTco Ud[Tpo9 avrcov {Spaxfâ^) . Kal e|-
[o]v(rca eoTG) rm reXdovrji dvTemdv [ 17 letters d- .-
-
ua(ppiT(o Sk Kal TO, XiXoyevp-^va ]8 -'

[
K . . Oil kiTi TT}v âa-LXiKrjv r]pdni(ai' . 18 letters

[
40 e[. .]..[. ^]aaiXLKfjs [Tpan^^r]]^ Xoyov t[
[ ]<? f^'y TO XoyicTTripLov ypdcpcou [iroaa re rjSrj Tr(7rTC0KU

ivl rrjv [rpdj-rreâu Kal tl otpiiXerai ai^ . 18 letters
[
Fr.(^). Fr. (4
. . . . . Pr. (^
Ta>i t]X(i
[ ] j^^^ ^|-
]^f'K 46 ]aa' ]e[
45 ](Tai To[ ...

32. 1. ypa](p6vTa)v? 36. of (iairp[a]x0TiTa added abovc the
;t line.
i-i I. and when ... the slave, he shall forfeit double. If any one (alienate
'
.
?) or
. .
failto register (a slave) through the agoranomus-offices or be discovered

evading the taxes
to the detriment of the tax-farmer, he shall be deprived
of the slave. If he dispute the
decision they, shall be tried before the appointed tribunal, and the third
part of the value of
M Z
i64 HIBEH PAPYRI
the slave when sold shall go to the informer. If the slave (assigned?) give information,
he shall be free on payment of the usual taxes. The scribe of the slaves and the anti-
grapheus and the tax-farmer shall write out these assignments (?), and the tax-farmer shall
write this document upon a notice board in large letters and expose it in front of the
agoranomus-office every day, and for every day that this exposure does not take place
he shall pay a fine of . drachmae, and shall further pay. . .
.
1. Probably and perhaps rffv

Ka6d\Kfp, Xr;j/ after Kai The X may be n, but there is
. .
not room for Tifirjv. cannot be read. rtXrj
2. If aWa is a verb, it can only be some part of aXKda-aeiv, and dWd^rjTai gives an
.
[
appropriate sense but the $ is not very satisfactory. A more definite expression than
;
oXXa {noiâj]i) is, however, expected dWaxîj is not impossible.

; The problem of the
supplement is complicated by the doubt whether Fr. (c) should not be assigned to 11. 1-2.
If so, ]aiT[ must be inserted about midway between aXXa and ].y[. This position is .
[
suggested by the verso, which contains the last two letters of a line and might be placed
at the end of 1. 28, and, adopting that arrangement, we might read uXXa^jjrjat r[. .] v[Tro- . .
Te6]ev {-/ôvTo t]6 V' tt. is rather long) cf. the next note. ;
6. vtt[. .] is must be an aorist participle passive, and the faint trace before us would
. .
suit*^ or perhaps (f). inr\0Te]6(is is suggested by vn-oêo-fis in the next line but the technical ;
meaning of those words here is uncertain. For vnoTiQivai in the sense of make subject to '
cf. Plato, Polit. p. 308 A

ap ovx vnnx^fipiovs ro'ts exdpo'is vn(6Tav ras avTov naTpihas ]
7. The Tf\r] are the taxes on emancipation rather than those which the owner was
attempting to escape, and for which he would naturally remain responsible. For the taxes
on emancipation in the Roman period cf. P. Oxy. 722. 19, note.
16-21. The first letters of these lines, ]fa{, ]aiva[, ]hiKip[, erfX[ and ]KOi[, are on a .
detached fragment, the position of which is not certain. The recto is blank, as it should
be if i)laced here; but the necessity of supposing a misspelling in SiK(/i|'a|crrai' is not quite
satisfactory, though \îKi.p.[ is diilicult to interpret in any case. A suitable reading of 1. 20
is also not easy to obtain the third letter is more like r than ^, but
;
fie TtXn is as little ]
convincing as 5]e iîXOrji. For the 8oKip.aaTr)i and 8oKip.aaTiK6i/ (1. 24) cf. 106, introd. and
110. 31, note.
22. Kijpiaarji seems intended to replace vTrT]p\TTji,but that word was apparently not
deleted in any way; cf. 11. 32-4, note. If v7rt]p[fT]uv were read, as is just possible, KijpCa-a-tji
would then have to be inserted before it ; but this is an awkward collocation, and the final
letter of V7rr;p[fr] . . is hardly high enough for a f.
23. The infinitive npocTKnTalSaWftv is unexpected and

is perhaps an error for npoaKaTaSaXu.
24. fvos TovTov can hardly be right might be read for the first to.
; out
26. iim>X\o'yov in this phrase is a masculine substantive; cf. 85. 24, note.
28. Perhaps a\v di rjas; cf. notes on 11. 2 and 46.
30. Perhaps inlrjpfTai, though this division is unusual.
31. The top of a letter after k suits r better than a ; possibly KTri[paT]a (cf. 1. 20).
32-4. Cf. 11. 810. The scribe apparently intended to alter {?)ypa\(j)(Ta3(Tap to ypacfiovri^v,
but he neglected to delete aa; cf. note on 1. 22.
37 sqq. The general sense clearly is that the tax-farmer was to produce the amount
he hacl collected, while the banker was to make a statement of accounts, 6 TpaneCiTr]s is
probably to be supplied at the end of 1. 39, but (k tov t^s is too long for the lacuna at the
beginning of 1. 40.
46. These two letters should perhaps be placed at the end of 1. 28 cf. note on 1. 2. ;
47-8. The iccto of this fiagnient is blank.

30. LEGAL DOCUMENTS 165
V. LEGAL DOCUMENTS
30. Judicial Summons.
Mummy 6. Fr. {d) 9-4 x io-6 cm. b. c. 300-271.
This papyrus affords a specimen of a formal summons [iyKXîixa) served by

a plaintiff in a civil process upon his adversary. A longer but less well preserved
example has lately been published in P. Petrie III. 21 {g). 12-35, where
the same characteristic formulae appear ; and the two documents well illustrate
the procedure of the time in the preliminary stages of an action at law.
The papyrus is in four fragments more than one suit. The
which refer to
summons contained on Fr. [d) is and lacks only a few letters
complete in itself,
at the beginnings of the lines. The three smaller pieces are however certainly
in the same hand, and probably came from the upper part of the same sheet.
The document is therefore a copy of the original summonses actually presented,
though the claimant, whose name is lost, may have been the same person in
both cases. Both were actions for recovery of a debt, and in both the plaintiff
and defendant belonged to the same military troop. In Fr. {a) the debt was
330 drachmae, in {d), the more complete specimen, principal and interest
amounted to 1050 drachmae. A
declaration is first given of the fact of the
debt, and that applications for payment had been fruitless then comes a formal ;
announcement of the institution of judicial proceedings (8t6 6tKaôjuat aoi, cf.
P. Petrie, ibid., 1. 27), and a statement of the sums involved, followed by the
names of the witnesses to the summons (/cA?/Tope9) who are two in , number
according to the usual Attic practice. At the end is the date and a notification
concerning the court at which proceedings were to be instituted. Precisely the
same scheme, except that the witnesses are placed last, is followed in the Petrie
papyrus, where the point at issue was not a debt, but, apparently, an assault.
The constitution of the court was in that instance a board of nine dicasts under
a president, and may have been the same here. The papyrus is written in
a small neat hand of a decidedly early type. The fact that the gods Adelphi
were not yet associated with Alexander shows that the year is prior to the 15th
of Philadelphus (cf. 99, introd., and p. 368) and the reign may even have been
;
that of Soter.
Fr. [a). ^
,
] MaK\^6o)^v Twv 'AXi:^[di>8pov

i66 HIBEH PAPYRI
Tcor 'AXje^duSpov yj,\idpyoo[L
5 OTL 6(f)(i\Xcot/ {Spa)^fxa9) tA Ka[Ta <Tvyypa<pt]V
Fr. (^). ...

] ' . [. ']?[' '
Fr. (.).
]
.
]to cni[. , ] . Tpoav
]ia'oi' ofio
] , y , , povs
\o \ , ou
v.{d). . . . . , . , . .
[....., 70)1/ AXe^^di'Spov] SeKa-

[vLKo^ IIe]p8iKKat MaKS6[v]i Tcou 'A\e^duSp'o]v.
15 [SrjXo) (to]l OTL 6(p(iX(ov poL Kara avvypa^r]v
[[Spa)(fi^f) . . a)]u eyyuoy eariv 'AvTiyovo'i Aipva'iov

[ravTa^] dnaiTovpûo^ vtto pov TToXXdKi? ouk d-
[TToSlSlm^ OVT rSiL vpdKTOpL 7]ÔVXov ^ÔpO-

[Xoyr](T]aa6ai, 810 SiKdôpai aoi tov dp^â'iov
20 [koI tSkov [8paxpa)i>) 'Av. ripfjpa Tfj9 8iKr]s {8pay^paT) 'Au.
\KXT]Tope9 . Ka(f)V(Tios Kmo^ Ta>v AX^di'8pov ISicO'
[rq? ]Aao? Ma'(oi'09 Opdi^ ri]? (irLyorrj?.
\ ]
^
[eTOVi . . tcj) U]p(cos îXiaKOv tov SnovSaiov pj]t'oi
\
]ov 18. 7) 81K1] aoi di>aypa(f)r]aeT[a]i kv
25 [tU)L Iv 'Hp aKXioV9 TToXfL 8lKaaTT]pfo)L [^yMTTiou
[
]K7rXcoi. (2nd hand) 8c 'Empivovs.
13 sqq. decurion of the troop of Alexander to Perdiccas, Macedonian of the

'
. . .
troop of Alexander. I give you notice that yon owe me by a contract drachmae, for . .
which Antigonus son of Limnaeus is surety, and that nolwidistanding frequent demands
from me you do not repay diis sum nor were Avilling to acknowledge the debt to the
collector ;I therefore am taking legal proceedings against you for principal and interest
amounting to 1050 drachmae; the assessment of damages is 1050 drachmae. Witnesses

30. LEGAL DOCUMENTS iS-j
of the summons [.]caphusius, Coan, private of the troop of Alexander, and

:
. . . laus son
of Menon, Thracian of the Epigone.
'The . . th year, in the priesthood of Philiscus son of Spoudaeus, the 14th of the
month . . . The case will be drawn up against you in the court at Heracleopolis
in
the presence of . . . (Signed) Through Epimenes.'
I. There are traces of ink near the edge of the papyrus; but the document really
begins with 1. 2.
5. K<i[ra avyypacpû : cf. 1. 1 5. Smyly is, we think, wrong in interpreting Kara avyypacfifiv
6fio\oyias in p. Petrie III. 21 ()-(/) as an agreement of the parties ratified by the court
(p. 43). Kara cvyypacp^v there, as here, probably refers to the contract out of
which the case
arose. There is nothing to show that 21 {b) concerns an action for assault aawnas
(?) in ;
1. II, if /xerfa Kvp]iov is right, must be a feminine proper

name.
13. biKa[viK6s: cf. 96. 2 1, &c. This military title has not previously been found
written out in full, though it can now be recognized in P. Petrie III.
54 a. (4) 5 and 114. i,
where 1. bf{KaviK6i), btKavoi (fyvlaKiTonv occur in the second century in P. Tebt.
27. 31, and
a b^Kavos in P. Tebt. 251. Other military titles mentioned in this volume in
connexion with
the Greek settlers are \oxay6, (81. 7, 15), ?Xdpx'?f (105.
3), ljy,pu>v (44. 2), all of which are
familiar from the Petrie papyri, tStwrv? (30. 21, 89.
7, &c.), which is not used elsewhere in
papyri to denote a military rank, and a new (.?) title of which the plural ends
in ]ovtoi
(96. 13). raiz/ (in 110. 72 t5>v Trpwratv), followed by the name
of the captain of the particular
troop, is added in many instances, sometimes preceding the word denoting rank,
sometimes
following it, as is more usually the case in the Petrie papyri. The absence of the title
K\,jpoixos in the Heracleopolite and Oxyrhynchite papyri from Hibeh (the
K\rjpoixot in 83.
16 were in the Fayum), and the* comparative rarity of the titles fKarovT^povpos, oydorjKov-
Tiipovpos,&c., afford another point of contrast with the Metric papyri. i8(wr;s serves to
distinguish the lowest rank of military settlers from that of decurion ' '
{BfKavixSs) and of
higher officers such as the \oxay6s, l^dpxrjs, and x'^'opx"?- This use of the term anticipates
our technical military sense of private'; cf. Xen. AnaL '
3. ii, where tStwr/yj is contrasted
i.
with (TTpaTrjyos. XfiTovpyos in 96. 1 4 and 31 probably "has no military signification; cf.
note ad he.
15. The title of Perdiccas, e.g. 'Ibi^rni, may have stood in the lacuna, but the syntax is
improved by supplying some verb like SrjXw.
19-20. apxaiov [kui t6ko]v \ cf. 92. 15-16. The
r'lpr^pa demanded seems to be additional
to the sum due on account of the actual loan, and represents the penalty which was no
doubt provided by the contract in case of non-payment. To suppose that this penalty was
equal to the amount of the debt accords with other evidence for this early period; cf. 84(rt).
9 and note on 88. 13.
21. [jcXijT-opes : cf. P. Petrie III. 21 {g). 34.
22. The
space below this line is slightly wider than elsewhere, but there was probably
nothing between tmyovî and the date.
24-5. The publication of the details of the charge at the court before which it came
was part of the normal procedure at Athens. For [eji-wmoj/ cf. P. Petrie III. 21
{g). 34,
where (vwma (or e'vamiov ?) is to be read.
26. e WXtot :
cf. P. Petrie III. 21 (c). 5, where, however, the reference is equally
obscure.
i68 HIBEH PAPYRI
31. Abstract of a Case for Trial.
Mummy 5. Breadth I'j-'j cm. About B.C. 270.
contents of this papyrus are a short summary of the details of a judicial

The
suit,but owing to lacunae and the involved construction the situation is not easy
to grasp. The text, according to a common custom at this period (cf. 36, &c.),
is given in duplicate, and nothing is lost above 1. i or below 1. 23 but there ;
is a gap in the middle, and unfortunately the commencement is defective in
both copies. Thrason and Pasis, the parties in the case, seem each to have
accused the other of having lost 7 jars of wine from a store-place which had
been leased by the owner Pasis. Afifidavits were entered on both sides, and
evidence was given that the store had been opened. The nature of the judgement,
if indeed a judgement is recorded by the papyrus at all, depends upon the view
taken of a mutilated passage, but there is reason to think that Pasis was
condemned to pay compensation to Thrason to the extent of 56 drachmae ;
cf. note on 11. 6-7.

The papyrus is written in a rather large clear cursive, and is unlikely to be
later than the first half of the reign of Philadelphus. The mummy from which
it came produced also 84 {a) and 97, the earliest dated documents in this volume.
Fr. (a).
[ 23 letters ] Ri['A^^'- "^P^V
[22 ]. OU aVTCdV [. .
SLaKov[a ....... .^ ... , [o\fiivov Q pdcroov[os

Tov 6pKo\v\ Kol TI[d(TL\ro'i BovTos dvofi6<rrifj\Qv
5 G pd[a]a{y\{a) dnoXcoX^KCuai tK tov Tap.u[iov

o'lvov Kfpdfiia ^ d[7roSovi'ai
crivoo Tcop iuTa Kpap[icoi^ ti/xtjv coy (^ t] {Spay^p-Oiv),
/ [8pa)(fiai) vq, a tv^KdXâiv d[no\ot>\\eKiv\ai

tK TOV Tapieiov ov ^^pi[a&\(oaiv Hdai^ ^npoa-
10 p. a pTvprjcravTos Aioi'vaiou A<rK\r)TridS[ov
[Niy^dp^]ov dXXov 'AaKXr]TridSov yey([i'7](rdat.
[ttjv kirdvoiîv] t[oi) Td\ii[L\(.i[o\v.

31. LEGAL DOCUMENTS i6g
T ,
. a . r
fiivov Opdacouos tou opKov Koi UdcTLTO^
15 SovTO^ dvofioya-qôv Qpdaoova dnoXccX^Ki-

vai e/c Tov Ta[ntLov olvov K[pdjjLia (
d\n6\8ov'\yaL . . .'\<JLv[ ]i rociv kTrra
Kcpafiicou tl/jltjIu CO? ^1 77 {ppa-^p-Siv), y/ (Spa-^fJLai) v^,
a kv^KdXeav diroXcoXcKeiâi e< tov Ta-
20 /xiiiov ov e'ê/iiVôocrei/ Tldais TrpoafJ-ap-
TvpriaavTos 'AcrKXrjTrtdSov NiKdp'ôv

dXXov A(TKXr]7ndSov yey^vrjaOat tijv
kndvoLîv TOV Ta/iieiov.
Fr. (4 .^
.' .
d]7reKpiva.[T0
25 !?/?[
5. 1. diro\<i}\eKfvai. 9. a o[ naan corr. fiom t. 12. (i of ra/ifftou added above

the line.
11. 2-12. having heard (?)

'
. . . after Thrason had made an oath, and after Pasis
. . .,
had given a contradictory declaration that Thrason had lost from the store-place 7 jars
of wine, gave judgement that Pasis should pay to Thrason (?) the price of the 7 jars
at the rate of 8 drachmae per jar, making 56 drachmae, which jars he accused Pasis
of having lost from the store-place leased by Pasis, further testimony that the store had
been opened having been given by Dionysius, Asclepiades, Nicarchus, and another
Asclepiades,'
12. ? rrpofj ! Ilaniv.

4. 86vTos sc. opKov, dvofioarjfios IS a new compound.
dvojjLoa-rjfilov',
6-7. For a^nodovvai cf. 1. 1 7, where a!^jro bov[i>ai, seems almost inevitable. If nnoôvvai
be granted, it must depend on a finite verb which we think is to be found in d^rn-fKpiva[To in
Fr. {c). The first question is where this fragment is to be placed. It does not suit the
end of 1. 6, for it would quite fill up the line, and a-iva in 1. 7 would be left suspended
moreover a discrepancy would result in 1, 17 where the o- before iv[ is quite certain. Fr.
(c) thereforebelongs to the beginning of the document, and may be placed either in 11. 1-3
or in the corresponding place of the second copy. It remains to find a suitable restoration
of the words between dnoBoi/vai and rmv, upon which the interpretation of the document
largely depends, a-tva at the beginning of 1. 7, if right, can hardly be anything but
a place-name in 1. 17, however, the letter before tcov is not w but almost certainly t. This
;
might no doubt be explained as an iota adscript which in 1. 7 was omitted but in viev/ ;
of the other inaccuracies on the part of this scribe we are disposed to expect a more
I70 HIBEH PAPYRI
serious error, and suggest that aivat is a slip of tlie pen for (ravi, i.e. QpcKTODvi. ](tii[ in 1. 17
will then of course be Ua <tiv and Ua(nv QpaaciyvL just fits the length of the lacunae in both
copies. If this rather bold solution is correct, a\n(Kpiva[To (or -vavro ?) anohovvai will be the
verdict and not a statement by one of the parties, a view which is supported by biaKov^fra^ (?)
in 1. 3-
8. If the proposed in the previous note be on the right lines, the
interpretation
subject of should be Thrason
fVffcaXfo-fi/ for it would be hardly reasonable to make Pasis
;
pay Thrason if Pasis had himself incurred the loss. The rate here fixed, 8 drachmae for
a Kfpdfiiw, is just equivalent to the highest price found for a Kepapiov in the Tebtunis papyri
(4000 dr., P. Tebt. 253) if the ratio of the values of silver and copper drachmae be taken
as I 500.
: But prices o( Kfptlpia are deceptive; cf. P. Tebt. 113. 36, note.
10. Atowo-iou is omitted in the second copy, 1. 21.
32. Sequestration of Property.
Mummy A 14. 34*5 x 12 cm. b.c. 246 (245).
The purport of this document, which concerns the sequestration of sheep

belonging to a military settler, is somewhat obscure owing to the mutilation
of the chief verb in 1. 4. If our interpretation is correct, thepapyrus records the
sequestration by Heraclitus, an Alexandrian citizen, of 38 sheep, the property
of Neoptolemus, a Macedonian settler, who had been condemned by default to
pay a fine for an act of committed against Heraclitus. The relation of the
{;/3/jts
last four lines, which are dated a week later, to the main text is uncertain.
The writing is a large, handsome cursive the second year no doubt refers
;
to Eucrgetes.
fid-ôv. 'HpaKXeiTo^ 'Hp[aKXi-

Tov KaaTopdo^ tu>v ovnco
[tJTTT/y/iefcoi^ Trap^S'ieâro ?
5 virdpyOvTa NconToXifiov
MaK(86uoS i$i[a>]TOV T[a)U
'Autl6\ov 7rpo9 KaraSi-

KTjV (prjpou {>(3peQ)S
Trpoy [Spa\fia.?) a Kai tov iiriSe-
10 KOLTOv [Spa^pas:) < irpoâTa Xtj,
VTToSicpOipa rjpiKuvpia l^
3:2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS 171
cov XiVKOipaiov ylriXoi^ eV,
[Al]yviTTia rinLKOvpa y,
15 yjnXa u6$a i, r^fiLKovpov
eV, AlyvTTTia îKa /3 /^ Xt],
'AmXXaiov ^, eôo/x6[aa-
TO MiviTTTTos Mivefidyov
Mvaos TYjS kiriyovris . . .
20 (^dfiivos avT ^ .
[
On the verso
(Vi^vpaaia.
'The 2nd year, Dius 25, through Telemachus. Heraclitus son of Heraclitus, of the
Ca^torian deme but not yet enrolled, has taken over(?) property of Neoptolemus, Mace-
donian, a private in Antiochus' troop, who had been condemned by default for violence
to a fine of 200 drachmae and the extra tenth, 20 drachmae, namely 38 sheep, of which
8 are rams, 13 lambs, 17 covered with skins and half-shorn, of which (17) 1 is whitish
grey and shorn, 3 are of Egypdan breed and half-shorn, 10 are shorn and half-bred, i is
half-shorn, 2 are of Egyptian breed and shorn, total 38. Apellaeus 2. INIenippus son
of Menemachus, Mysian of the Epigone, excused himself on oath (?), saying that he .'
. .
(Title) Pledge.'
I. Aiov kc this day probably corresponded to some date in Choiak at this period;
of. App. i.
3. Kaa-Topfios r.T.X. : the formula in the Petrie papyri is fuller, e. g. III. 11. 27 '.Wtâv
bpfiis T^y eTriyov^s Tutv ovtrca enrjyixfvmv fir drjfiov KacrTopunv.
4. If 7rap(8[(iaTo is right, there is hardly room for rd after it.
9. eViSerarov : of the use of that term, which occurs also in

this is a clear instance
D2. 19, for an 'extra tenth,' not i^^.' Probably there is a connexion between these
'
(nihiKara and the ini^fKuTov which, according to an ordinance of (probably) Philadelphus

preserved in P. Amh. 33. 28-37, was to be levied twice over from advocates who had
pleaded in irpoaoBiKal xpiads to the detriment of the State revenues. The fine there levied
upon the advocates would seem to be twice the emdeKaTov levied upon their clients. But
the interpretation of the embtKarou in P. Amh. 33 is still very obscure.
12. {jno8L(pdfpa: cf. P. Petrie III. 109 (3). 12 and the editor's note.
14. 'Al}yvTrTia: cf. 36. 6 'Apdîov. v66a in 1. 1 5 probably means a mixture of the two
breeds.
17. (â}fJ.6[(Ta^JTn : OV, pOSsibly, (^cop.n\oyt]iTa \to: cf. 30. 1 8.
19. Probably nothing is lost after (TTtyovrjs.

172 HIBEH PAPYRI
t
VI. DECLARATIONS AND PETITIONS

33. Property-Return of Sheep.
INIiimmy A. ii'6x8-2(rw. 8.0.245(244).
An aTToypa(f)i] of sheep, drawn up by a military settler ;

cf. P. Petrie III.
72 (/?). Like the property- return in P. Petrie II. p. S3' 33 omits any mention
of the official addressed, and the formula begins with airoypacp/i instead of
aTToypaffioixat. P. Petrie III. 72 (/;) is addressed in duplicate to the oeconomus
and topogrammateus, and 33 is also apparently in duplicate but it is unlikely ;
that the two copies were intended for different officials, since the practice of
writing documents twice over on the same papyrus is common at this period,
e. g. 36-7.
The papyrus was written in a cursive hand ; the second year might refer to
Philadelphus' reign, though more probably that of Euergetes is meant.
["Etov? jS Uajxevcor.] dno-
[. . . e/? TO rpiTOv e-
Toy 7r[]/?' [A]r[o\I:[m\4>'^^^
5 SpaiKos ISicoTov r&v Ai-

Tov. vTTap^fL poL np6(3[a-
ra 18 La kv KU)pr]i We-
nOouep^y] tov KooiT[o'u
oySorjKOvra.
10 [(lTovs;) /3 TlapevcoT. dnoypa-

(f)rj \eia9 (I? To TpiT ov e-
To^ Trap 'Apoipr]a>Tov Gpai-

K09 ISlMTOV TU)l' A^TOV.
inrdp\L pot 7rp6(3aTa I'Sia
15 [kv \Ka)pT]'i WinBovip^r}

[TOV Ka)eirov oyBorjKov Ta.
6. 1' of -Tor corr. fioni v.

34. DECLARATIONS AND PETITIONS 173
'
The 2nd year, Phamenoth. Return of a flock (?) for the third year from Aroimeotes,
Thracian, a private of Aetus' troop. I own eighty sheep as my private property at the
village of Psepthonembe in the Koite district.'
2. The sense of Xe/a here is obscure. For the word at this period in reference to
sheep cf. P. Petrie III. iii. 8 (PvXaKiTiKov Xdas npo^draiu, and 112 (a). ii,&c., where the 4>^X.
Xeiai is (ûX. Upfiav, i.e. animals destined for sacrifice.
contrasted with the In those
instances, as here, the of sheep occurs in connexion with military settlers, and it would
Xft'a
be possible to suppose that they had received from the state a grant of sheep either taken
as plunder or in lieu of plunder. But Xtia occurs in Frs. (i), (3), and (6) of Rev. Laws in
connexion with the twoiiiov, or tax for the use of the royal pastures (cf, 52, introd.) and it ;
seems probable that in reference to sheep the word had lost the connotation of plunder,
though is noticeable that Xe/a has its ordinary sense in 62. 4, and P. Petrie III. 28 {e).
it
verso and (apparently, though the context is not quite clear) 64 (c). 1-2.
3, 1
The vestiges at the end of the line do not suit any part of npoâroiv, and the word,
whatever it was, did not recur in 1. 11. Perhaps there was a dittography or some other
mistake.
34. Petition to the King.
Mummies 69 and 70. Breadth ^2 cm. b.c. 243-2,
A petition to Ptolemy (Euergetes) from Antigonus, probably a phylacites,

complaining that the archiphylacites of the lower toparchy of the
Patron,
Oxyrhynchite nome, had prevented him from carrying out his duties, and asking
for redress. 73 is a letter from Antigonus on the same subject to Dorion, the
epistates. Both documents are mutilated but they supplement each other, and ;
the sequence of events is clear. Callidromus, a Cyrenean settler, had obtained

unlawful possession of a donkey belonging to a certain Dorion, and Antigonus
has been directed by Dorion the epistates to compel Callidromus either to restore
the animal to its owner or to pay its value. Antigonus accordingly arrested
Callidromus and lodged him in a prison at the village of Sinaru. Patron then
intervened, and not only released Callidromus from prison but himself took
possession of the donkey (73, 13-4).
The most interesting feature of these two documents is their illustration of
the practice of personal execution, and their references to the edict (5idypo/x/xa)
authorizing it. According to Diod, Sic. 79, execution on the person of a debtor
i.
was abolished in Egypt by Bocchoris in the eighth century but it was re- ;
introduced under the Ptolemies and, as we now know, quite early in their regime ;
cf. P. Petrie II. 21 (d). 15. Wenger's inference from P. Amh. 43. 12 sqq.
(B.C. 173)? V TTpaiis eoToj . . . Ttpda-crovrt Kara to hiaypa[x\xa koI tovs voixov^, that the
date of the hLaypa\x}xa was probably not far removed from that of the Amherst
174 HIBEH PAPYRI
papyrus [Arckiv, II. î^), thus proves to be mistaken. Personal execution being
a common institution in tlie Greek world (Mitteis, RcicJisrccJit u. Volksrecht^
p. 446), its reappearance in Egypt is likely enough to have followed close upon
the establishment of the Ptolemaic dynasty.
The papyrus is a good deal broken, and the ink in the lower lines of the
first fragment is very faint and blurred. The frequent corrections show that this
document, like 73, is only a rough draft. The writing (which is across the fibres)
gradually becomes more cursive as it proceeds.
Frs. {a) and {h).
1 \â(JiKfA. IlTo\]ixai(tiL )(âipîi', Avrtyovo'S dSiKovjiai vno TldTpccvos tov

[(pv\a\KLT\y]ovTOS Ty}v Kara) Tonapîav. fiov yap dnaya-
T[o]y S (iTOVi) nr)V<î
2 [yarroy KaXXiSpoj/xoi^ KaWiKparovs Kvp-qvaiov rfjs kmyovfis [/? to\ kv
Xivd[p]v Sea/icoTijpiou Kara Trpocrrayfia Acopicavo^ tov kiria-
3 [tutov ] fV col iyeypaTTTO InavayKdaaL Toy KaXXiSpofiOu rj to

v[7r]o^vyL[o]v dnoBovvai tooi Kvpiwi rj Tifirji' tov ovov ((Jpa^âs") k
4 [ TIdTpa>v\ ovOiua Xoyov noiTjadpei'OS T[o]y re KaXX[i]Spofioy
flivy^y^^ CK TOV ]y Siydplv] Srjx(OT[r]]piov (wore . . 5[. .] . .
dWd abiKov (itav e , v . npor ... f ... [ ]
5 [ KaX\X[i]Sp6fioy .[. . . .]pa . Ae[. ... t ..%.]. [ 20 letters ]
. . enavayKaaat to vno^vyiov t
. VCOL VireuSiOV TOVT . . T . . T . lA
6 Vov Kal TO Siacr a . ^ noao ...... rj irpoa
7 TTpoaTaâi yp]dylfaL SeuoKpaTrji tcol npaKTopi toou ISicotikcoi/ iTreiSr] IldTpcop

Trapd TO. Siaypd[ppaTa
awTfXta-
8 f^rjyaye Tb]i^ di'BpooTTov Ik tov S(rpcoT7]piov 'iva \ii] ^ rrpdî^ ^yeyrjOrji
efjt
(K TOV crcoâroyTl npdâi a[vToi^

] I'vv uTToSoCcai i'l'a fi^
9 I
,
TovTO TO dpyx'piov t[p'\î\tt\Xovv Kara to
ar
Sidypajifxa [TaAXa 5fa . .
[
10 ] iôi fTacct'T] dVef ijpcov tov UdTpoiva

iâyqyoôTa tov [dvOpcorrov
TO dp\yvpLOv Kara to Sidypanjia lua ^8ia

ae Paa-iXev^ Sia ere âaiXev tov S[iKaiov TV)(ôi.
J
ypd'âvTos dXkrjv kmaToX^v tov S
(eTovs) âpfjLovdi i/3 (tt[
traces of i line.
(4
176 HIBEH PAPYRI
2, Sir^/jju the reference to 'WiKwa in 73. 14 as well as to the lower toparchy (of. e.g.
:
52. 4) proves that this is the Oxyrhynchite Sinaru (P. Oxy. 373, &c.) rather than the
Heracleopolite (p. 8).
4. i\^riyayiv is supplied from 1. 10 and 73. 11. If wcrre is right the line may have
continued /xi) hvva(y\dni, as in 73. 12.
5. The latter part of this line is puzzling ; 'Aanevbiov does not seem admissible. The
interlinear insertion may have been something like aSiKov fiiav atnov dvai rov nrj TrpoTtpov fxe
hvvavdai avTov fnavayKiiaai to vnoCvyiov dnobovvai (cf. 73. 1 8-9); but the papyrus is here SO
much damaged that verification of the reading is hardly possible.
6 sqq. The position of this fragment in relation to that preceding is unknown, but
the gap between them is unlikely to be large. If the fragment be so placed that the lacuna
at the beginning of 11. 6-9 coincides with that in 11. 1-4, the loss at the ends would amount
to about 20 letters.
7. npuKTopi. Toiv IbiQiTLKMv I this Is thc first occurrcnce of this title which is a natural
antithesis to the Trpaxrcop 6 eVi tojj/ /3ao-iXi<[coy] TTpoa-oboiv T(Tayp.vos in P. Pelrie II. 2
2. 15.
The relation of the iTpnKToop IdtuiTiKuiv to the npaKrap êviKuv, who is also found in the third
century B.C. {êmuus irpuKToyp, P. Magd.remains doubtful.
41. 5), The irpaKTcop ^(vik<Lv
certainly collected private debts, but he may
have been distinguished from the npiiKTUip
lhu)TiKcov by dealing with a special class of debtors; cf. P. Tebt. 5. 221, note. His peculiar
functions, however, have not yet been clearly ascertained.
Above T of Twt is what appears to be a large y, to which we can attach no meaning.
8-10. This passage apparently implies that according to the provisions of the
bu'iypappa a person who prevented or obstructed an execution was liable for three times
the amount of the debt. At the beginning of 10 d7ro6J('â) might possibly be read.
1.
9. The letters added above aWa are coarsely written and imperfectly preserved.
They are not more intelligible than the y above 1. 7.
12 sqq. There are clear indications of another line where the papyrus breaks off
below 1. 12, and the similarity of handwriting and pliraseology {JnavayKua cf. 1. 3) ;
strongly suggests that Frs. {c) and {e) belong to the lower part of the petition. But Fr. {c)
must be placed below 1. 12, for there is a sells between 11. 15 and 16, which does not occur
in Frs. {a) and {b). Whether Fr. (//), containing 11. 17-9, also belongs to 34 is more
doubtful. pa<})dvia Seems irrelevant, but we are ignorant of the context and the hand is
extremely similar. Line 19 was the last of the document.
35. Petition of Hierouuli.
Mummy A. ii-5x8-6fw. About B.C. 250.
This papyrus contains on the recto the beginning of a petition addressed to

Sonnophris, no doubt an official, by the UpobovXoL of a temple of Thoeris,
reminding him of the protection which he had previously afforded them in

connexion with the collection of the temple revenues, and apparently complaining
of the conduct of a comarch but the papyrus breaks off before the point of the
;
letter is reached. On the verso is a partly effaced document in 7 lines

written in a large, thick cursive hand of an early type. The petition is to be

assigned to the latter part of the reign of Philadelphus.
l!ovua>(f)pi âtp[eiu.]
UeToaipis IIoKcovTos kuI 'Oui-co-
<f)piS Uerrjario^ UpoSovXoi Ovi^-

pio? jJLiydXrjs Kol ol Xoirrol
5 Up68ov\oi 8LaTi\o\y\n^v
ToiiS <p6pOVS eVTUKTOVl'Te?
1? TO Upov Sia TTjv nap' vfxoyy
aKe[Tr]T]u, Kal vvv kol kv Tols

(fXTrpocrOe \p6voL^ vtto v-
10 ^/ia>]u (rKna^6fjLeS]a.
inil n^Toaipis Ka>jj.ap)(û)y
{ 1 T letters av nduTa?
'
To Sonnophris, greeting. We, Petosiris son of Pokoiis, Onnophris son of Petesis,
hieroduli of the great Thoeris, and the rest of the hieroduli, have long administered with
regularity the revenues of the temple on account of your protection, and now as in
former times we are protected by you. Whereas Petosiris the comarch . .
,'
1-2. For the punctuation adopted cf 34, i, note. We have found no other instance
of the occurrence of the name ôviS)(t)pi.s, and the initial letter is not quite certain,
the middle part having disappeared. The ink representing the two ends of the supposed
2 might perhaps be regarded as accidental, but if so 1. i was begun further to the right
than the lines following.
3. evT]pioi perhaps the temple of Thoeris at Oxyrhynchus, known from P. Oxy. 43,
:
verso iv. 13, is meant.

5-6. That the Up68ovXoi were particularly concerned with collecting the revenues of
the temples is a new fact. Very little is known about their position ; the title ifp68ov'kos
is applied to the Twins at the Serapeum, and in P. Tebt. 6. 25 the lfp68ov\oi are dis-
tinguished from the Kara ptpos f6vr] of the regular priests, from which passage Otto {Fn'es/er
and Tevipel, i. p. 118 ^) infers that the word was applied to the lower branches in general of
the priesthood.
36. Notice of Loss.

Mummy A 15. 14 X 10-2 cvi. b.c. 229 (228).
A notice of the loss of a sheep, addressed in duplicate to Harmiusis

the 0uXaKiT77s of Talae in the 19th year of, probably, Euergetes. C{. 144,
a fragment of another notice addressed to Harmiusis, 37, which is also
N
178 HIBEH PAPYRI
in duplicate, and P. Pctric II. p. 33 {= III. p. x). Tlie text, written in a large
rude semi-uncial, is on the verso ; the recto has a ic\w traces of obhterated
writing.
["Etovs) 16 covT (3. TTpocrayyeX'
Xet 'ApfiLvcri (pvXaKLTrjL
Ta\eov9 XoiTOKo^ dno-

XcoXeKei'ai e/c rt]9 avXij^
5 vvKTos irpoârov OfjXv

Saav 'Apd(3L0u d^LOv {8pay^p.u)i>) tj.
('iTov?) id OoovT /3. TTpoaayyeXXii

'AppivcTL (fivXaKLTyjL TdXj]
XdroKos aTToXcoXeKeimi
10 /c TT/y avXfjs }'VKT09
7rp6(3aT0i' 6f]Xv 'Apd^Lov
Saav d^Lov [8pay^pm') rj.
'The iQlh year, Thoth 2. Satokos announces to Harmiusis, the guard of Talae,
that he has lo^t from the pen at night an unshorn ewe of Arabian breed, worth 8
drachmae.'
3. TdXfouff : form of the genitive cf 37. 4. The genitive TaXdovs occurs in 157
for this
and Tu\r] in \. 144, and again in Roman times (p. 8), and the dative TaA^t {?) in 117.
8,
8, wliile Ta\di] is the form used in the more correctly written papyri 106-7 and 133-142,
The accusative TcAdrjv and dative TaXtiî are found in 75. i and 5. This village, which
was in the K6)iV;s TOTToy, is to be distinguished from TaXau> (55. 2) in the Oxyrhynchite nome.
6. 6(1(71': cf. \}/i\6u and t'niiKovpov in 32. 12-6.
37. Notice of Loss.
INTummy A (probably A 9). 1 1-6 x 10 rw. b.c. 235 (234).
Notification to the Î'AaKtV?;? of Talae of the loss of two goats ;

cf. the
preceding papyrus. The hand is of a similar type to that of 36, and is
probably to be referred to the reign of Euergetes, but the year is very uncertain.
{' Etov9) 'l](3 'fn]vos âpiJLo]v6\_L 77.
vpo(ya[y]yiXXiL ^Tpdrios XTpdrco-

vo^ 0pdi^ Trj? kinyovrjXKdi/aL PVKT09 Iv r<oc
'HpaK[X]iTov KXi'-jpcoi alya^ Saau-

9 Svo (paeia Kal diXeap cov rei-
firj 8p[a])(fxai TiTTape?.
(eTOfs-) i^ yu[?;j/oy âppovQi rj. vpoa-

10 ayye'iAAeli STpdrio^ STpaTCoi'o^
QpoLL^ rfj9 linyovf]^ IlToXepaL-
(CL (p[v]XaKLTr]L Kcofxr]^ TaXe-
[ovs aTToXooXeKeuaL vvktIs
kv TccT ' H]paKXiTov KXrjpcoi
15 [aiyai Saael? Svo epcreiâ
Kal di]Xeay S)v rijxr] Spa-^fial
rerrape?.
5. 1. dno\co\{Kipat, 7- ! ^'jXf'fl".
'The 1 2th year, the 8th of the month Pharmouihi. Stratius son of Straton, Thracian
of the Epigone, announces to Ptolemaeus, guard of tlie village of Talae, that he has lost
at night-time in the holding of Heraclitus two thick-haired goats, a male and a female,
worth 4 drachmae.'
'
4. TaX(ov[s: cf. 36. 3, note. .
38. Declaration on Oath.
Mummy A. 25-6 x 21-6 c?;/. B.C. 252-1 (251-0).
A declaration on oath concerning a shipwreck, probably made by the

captain of one of the government transports ; cf. P. Magd. 11 (ofwhich P. Magd. ;^'j
IS the beginning), a petition to the king by a vavKX-)]pos of one of these boats,
who had been delayed by a storm off AphroditoiDolis (Atfih), near the scene of
the disaster which is the subject of 38.
Below the oath are
5 more lines, and 9 or 10 narrow lines have been added in
the right-hand margin, which arc too incomplete for continuous decipherment,
N 2
i8o HIBEH PAPYRI
but conclude with the date, the 34th year (of Philadelphus). The writing is
extremely cursive.
I 15 letters ] a7ro5a)[
Ty]piov . J . [.] ^ . . . . . ivriv rjîcoa- , .
avTOv avy(y)pd-âL ai;r[.l . iviT[.\ . /lat . . a

dviXaîv fj.
Kal avpKaTanXia) tovtols
5 [ejo)? Tov TTopov rov Kara tov opfioy Toy

'AcppoSiTOTToXirrju, duefiov Sh yeyofiiuov
Kal Toov avptodv vnep Tr]v (TKr}vrj\y ovcroov
avui^j] KXdvaL rov Se^tbv Tolyov tov

ttXoiov Kal KaTaSvyai to irXohu Sia
10 [t]ovto.
opvvco B\ (SaaiXia IlToXefJiaTou Kal
\'Ap](jip6t]u 4>[LX]dSX(poy 6[e]ov9 'AScXcpov?
Kal 6eov9 ScoTTJpas tov9 tovt[<o]v

yoi'[]ry fluai to. Trpoyiypap/xiva
15 dXrjdfj.
'
. I sailed down with them as far as the channel by the harbour of Aphro-
. and
ditopolis but a wind having arisen and the Syrian cloths being above the cabin, it came
;
about that the right side of the ship listed and the ship thereby sank. And I swear by king
Ptolemy and Arsinoc Philadelphus, gods Adelphi, and by the gods Soteres their parents,
that the aforesaid statements are correct.'
5. Ti)u oi)nv rov 'A4>po8iTono\iTr]v site of Aphroditopolis is only i-| miles from the
: the
Nile, and its port does not seem borne a separate name of its own.
to have P. Magd. 37.
T has yfvofitvov x(ifX(i)voi [? ''^(fn\l^ 'AffipodiTtjs 7roX[fa)9. The opyLOi tov ApcripoiTov mentioned in '
1. 4 of that papyrus is probably, as the editors remark, Ptolcmais opuov.

7. avpioiV. cf. 51. 3, note. Apparently they were piled up on deck above the level of
the cabin.
13. The gods Soteres are also mentioned in another [iinriXiKoi opsoy written in the 34th
year (unpublished), of which only the ends of lines are preserved but they are omitted ;
(apparently) in P. Petrie 111. 56 {a). 4 (i6th-2 7th years) and -)6 (/;). 7 (after the 26th year).
In 56 (a). 3, where the editor restores ijinvvii) fiacrCkta UTohtpîaov koL tov vlbv Uto \(fxal.ov,
we should prefer iiavikta UToXfpâiov preceded either by a title of the person taking the
oath or by a name in the dative; cf 56 {b). 5. The deification of Soter and Berenice took
j)lace in the earlier part of Pliiladelphus' reign, but the year is not known. Otto {Pn'ester
unci Tempel, i. pp. 143-6) places it between the 7th and 15th years.
Sy. OFFICIAL AND PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE i8i
VII. OFFICIAL AND PRIVATE

CORRESPONDENCE
39. Letter of Xanthus to Eupiiranor.
Mummy 5. iT-SxSfw. 8.0.265(264).
A letter authorizing the embarkation upon a government transport of

a quantity of corn, which was due from certain Kkiipoi. Xanthus and Euphranor,
the two principals here concerned, recur in 100 and the latter also in 101, and on
the analogy of those two documents the corn which is the subject of the present
order no doubt to be explained as rent. It is evident that the government
is
frequently resumed possession of land which had been granted to military

settlers, after whose names it nevertheless continued to be called cf. 81 and ;
52. 26, note. The official status of Xanthus and Euphranor is not given, but they
must both have been connected with the State granaries. The corn was apparently
delivered in the first instance to Euphranor and was forwarded by him to
Xanthus, who was of superior rank and probably occupied a position similar to
that of Semnus in 101. As that document is the latest of the series it is even
possible that Semnus was Xanthus' successor. The mention of the village
of Peroe in 84 {a). 7 indicates that the district both here and in 100-1, which came
from the same mummy as 84 [a), was the Kcoittj?.
s,dv6os Eixppdfopc Kal N LKocrrpaTov Kal

Xa'^p^Lv. avvTaôv Tlavaaviov, (Tv/xl3o\or
fi^Tprjaai Sia KiXXi- [S]e v/xTu ypa^daQca
;
ojyy " flpoiL eh kovtco- [K]L\\rj^ ^ 6 vavKXrjpos
5 rojj/ âa-iXiKov i<p' ov vavKXrjpos 15 >]ai Selyjxa crcfypayiada--
Kol Kv(3ipp7]TT]9 av- [0](ti, Kal y)iM[l]v dyeiêyKUTe.
Toy 'Ûpo? Toy ktriTe- eppcoao. {hovs) Ka
Taypihov (tItov GcovO i.
[T]a>L 'AXe^dvSpov On the verso

10 Kal Bpofjiivov KXripoH Ev<ppdvopL.
5. âcrCKiKov above the line.

102 HIBEH PAPYRI
'
Xanthus to Enphranor, greeting. Give orders for the delivery through Killes to
Horus on the Slate barge, of which the master and pilot is the said Horus, of the corn
levied upon the holding of Alexander and Bromenus
and Nicostratus and Pausanias and ;
ship-master write you a receipt and seal a sample, and bring them to me.
let Killes or the
Good-bye. The 21st year, Thoih i. (Addressed) To Euphranor.'
c!. Killes was perhaps Trapa tu>v liarrCKiKoiv ypap-naT foil', like Ncchthcmbes in 98. 10.
4. KOVTWTO V Cf. Diod. Xix. I 2 irKoioV KOVTOiTOV.

:
i". Cf. 98. 12. The object was of course to prevent the corn from being tampered
with during its transit.
40. Letter of Pulemon to Harimoutiies.
Mummy 13. 32-7 X i ^ '"''' "-C- 261 (260).
This one of a group (40-4) addressed to Harimouthes, who in 44.

letter i.s
9-10 is called the toparch of the lower toparchy (i.e. of the Oxyrhynchite nome),
while in 85. 10, written like 40-3 several years earlier than 44, he is described as
nomarch. Unless we are to assume that one of these descriptions is incorrect,
or that the Harimouthes in 85 is a different person, it must be concluded either
that Harimouthes combined the two offices of nomarch and toparch. or, what
is the more natural inference, that he was first one
and then the other, which
suggests that the office of toparch was the superior. In Rev. Laws, however,
the nomarch is regularly given precedence (cf. e. g. xxxvii. 3), though the passage
16-7 TOOL 7r/)oe(rr>;K-('rt tov j-ofxav z'o/âpx'/'' roTTapx'i]'- suggests that their '*/
in xli.
functions differed little. Cf. note on P. Tebt. 61 (/;). 46. The present letter and
41 are both from Polemon, whose position is not stated but was apparently
above that of Harimouthes. He here writes somewhat obscurely about the sale
of some barley.
The correspondence of Harimouthes, as is shown by 44. 9 and 85. 3, belongs
to the latter part of the reign of Philadelphus.
noXe/icov 'Api/jiov6r]i 8pa)(^p7]i' piav ov$L?
vaipii\ nepl t5)v (TOL fxf] 7TXT]p(a)<T)r]r Kal yap

(TVfMôXcoi' y(ypd(pafiU 01 napa KepKio)i'09
KpiTCOi'i Kal KaXXiKXel eôvcriu ijSr] kp napa-
5 iVa yfiVrjTai coy cttc- 15 ypa<pfii Ik tov Xoyi-
(TTaXKa^. kntaraao aTl-jpLOV.
fiiVTOV UKpif^COS eppcoao. [eTous) kS 'E7r7j(f) Ka.

41. OFFICIAL AND PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE 183
OTl rrjS KpLBfjS On the verso

^y (jvyyiypa-âi 'Api/xovOrji.
10 rififjs S(JoaLy
7. 1. fliVTOl,
' Polemon
to Haiimouthes, greeting. I have written to Criton and Callicles about the
receipts, to have your requests carried out. But you must clearly understand that for the
barley no one will pay so much as i drachma, at which price you have agreed to supply
it; for the agents of Kerkion have now obtained (a lower price?) in a memorandum from
the audit office. Good-bye. The 24th year, Epeiph 21. (Addressed) To Harimouthes.'
4. KaWiKkd : probably the writer of 42-3.

12. fov (xfj TrXrjpwaTji is a doubtful and not very satisfactory reading; but fi^
nr) n}<r]pr]i
is confirmed by the subjunctival termination of the verb, and fxtPTov in 1. 7 shows that the
writer wâs capable of mistakes, fifrptji cannot be read.
14-5. Harimouthes had been forestalled in some way by Kerkion's agents, but what
exactly is implied by e'xova-iv eV napaypa4)î is not clear. For napnypacpi] cf. P. Tebt. 188 Kdl
npoaydveijai) 'ATToXXcortwi . . . ano
napaypa^cprji) tov âpn{ov6ij (^raXavTov) a. napaypacpfiv
is similarly used of entries in a or account, e.g. P. Tebt. 5. 189, where twv TTapaypa(po-
list
/u/i/wi/ probably means simply the sums 'entered against' the cûXa/ciroi, without any reference,
as we formerly supposed, to false returns on their part.
41. Letter of Polemon to Harimouthes.
Mummy 13. 31-7 X IO-8 rw. About B.C. 261.
Another letter to Harimouthes from Polemon, notifying him of the arrival

of Mnason, a SoKt/xaor?]?, who was to collect certain arrears and sell some oil.
Harimouthes is directed to obtain security for Mnason to the value of 1000
drachmae, and to assist him in the performance of his duties. The nature of the
arrears in question is not stated, but very likely they too were connected with
the oil-monopoly, and it is evident that Mnason was personally responsible. In
other papyri in this volume the goKi/xaor?/? is closely associated with the TpaTrcCtV*/?
(cf 106, introd.), but he appears here in a somewhat different capacity, though
still in connexion with the royal bank (1. 25).
UoXeficcv A[piiio\v6riL yat- 15 HcraÔrjvaL TrduTa, /cat
peLi/. dTr(rT[d\K]a/xi' irpos TJlxTu kTTL(TTu\0V OTL
(7e Mvdacova [to\i^ SoKifiacr- 7rapiXr](pas avrov napa

TTjv pcToc (pv[\a]KrJ9. Siey- rSiv Trap' rj/xaii^ [layjiicou
5 yfTyo-as ov[i/ ayrov irapa- Kou OTl SieyyvrjcreLS avTov

i84 HIBEH PAPYRI
fioi^fjs {Spaxfiî^'?) '4 0[e]? ai'TOf 20 rcSr 'A {Spaxf^î'), k-miiiXaav 81
da-ay ay ilv ra ocfxiXi]- woirja-aL ottm? Kal to iirdp-
fxara Ka[d]a avyKurai X^^ iXaiov St avTov rjSr]
TTpoy r}fxd[?,] TO irpocTTLixov 7rpa6i]t Kal r) Tifxr] dva-
10 avTa>L (xyii^qXcdv napa (xav- KOfiLadiLaa niarji kirl tt]p

^
Tov o<Tqy
.... a-e[.
.
diTO^LdêaOai avTov Kal

fi
.]/z
.
.
kTrnpifiL
. , Kal avviTri' On
.....
25 \â(n\iKr)u] Tpdneâv.
the verso
Xap^dvov avTMi Trpoy to 'A]piixovdr]L.
'Polemon to Harimouthes, greeting. I have sent to you Mnason the controller under
o-uard. Obtain security of 1000 drachmae for his remaining,
and allow him to collect the arrears
as agreed upon between us and contribute the penalty out of your own funds.
;
Assist . . .
him also so that everything be collected, and send me word that you have received him
from my soldiers and that you will obtain the security of 1000 drachmae for him; and be
careful to see that the existing store of oil be now sold by him, and the price be
collected
and paid into the royal bank. . . (Addressed) To Harimouthes.'
4-5. ?>uyyvâas rrnpnôi/^s

. .cf. 92-3, which are specimens of contracts made with
. :
sureties for the appearance of accused persons. For nerh ûXok^? cf. e.g. 59. 4.
6. a(f>f]s is somewhat short for the space.
9-10. The arrears apparently involved a penalty upon Mnason himself; the precautions
taken against his absconding show that he was in difficulties.
II. The traces suggest oaov^ firj or oaovSrjw, the apparent u prevents us from reading
oTTcos fi>], with which iitiTpi^d would have to be a
middle future.
1 3, ijâs f[ might be
read at the beginning of the line.
18. For â'xt/aoi in attendance upon officials cf. P. Tebt. 113. 81, &c.
2 1 sqq. The Kai perhaps indicates that the offyfiX^fiara had arisen in connexion
with
ihe oil-industry. According to the provisions of Rev. Laws xlviii, the manufactured oil
was sold to the retail traders by the olKovofios and dfTiypa<pfvi, while the SoKiiiaarî plays no
part. But that ordinance had probably not yet been issued ; and in any case the appearance
of the 8o/iaoT>)s here may be due to some special circumstances.
42. Letter of Callicles to Harimouthes.
Mummy 13. 19-8 x8-i^;;/. B.C. 262 (261).
This letterand 43 were written to Harimouthes by Callicles, an official

superior whose nowhere stated. The subject of the present, rather obscure,
title is
note is the delivery of some corn which was due from Harimouthes.
KaWiKXfjs 'Apipov0T]L
Xaipeiy. tov (tItov hv

T019 Trapa tS>v a-iroXo^
g ya)v oaofi fikv dviviji/6-
X^^^^ ^^y
$aco0i X napa-
Sc^S/xcOa, TOV Sk XOITTOV
kafi fiTj /jLTa^dXr]t9
ecoy 'A6vp rj Saxroji^v
10 AevKicoi kv oêiX'q/xaTi.
'ippoacro. (erovy) k8
'A6i,p 8.
On the verso
2nd hand 'AOvp S, trapa KaXXi- ist hand Apifxovdrji.
KXeovs TTfpl Tov ariTOV.
5. t of affvtjvoxacrt corr. froni a. 7. V of TOV above the line.
'CalHcles to Harimouthes, greeting. With regard to the corn which you said you
would transfer to the agents of the sitologi, the amount which they have paid (?) up
to Phaophi 30 we will accept; but the rest, if you do not transfer it before Athur 8, we
shall give to Leucius as a debt. Good-bye. The 24th year, Athur 4. (Addressed) To
Harimouthes. (Endorsed) Athur 4, from Callicrates concerning the corn.'
3. For fi(Tal3a\\(iv in connexion with corn cf. 45. 6.
43. Letter of Callicles to Harimouthes.
Mummy 13. iS-^j xS>6cm. 8.0.261(260).
A second letter from Callicles (cf. 42) to Harimouthes, asking for some
sesame to be delivered at Pela for the manufacture of oil. As the Revenue
Papyrus show^s, the nomarchs and toparchs were among the ofificials responsible
for the management of that industry, so that it is natural to find Harimouthes
acting in this connexion; cf. 40, introd.
KaXXiKXfJ9 Apifio{>6r)L
\aLpiiv, (T^VTaôv pTpfja'[aL

TO (rrjcrapou ro ifi IliXai
npoiTOjidy^coi- Kal Tcoi cnToX6y[(oi,] ov yap kcTiu
5 er TVjL noXii (T^crapov, iva ovv
i86 HIBEH PAPYRI
'
fXTjOh' vareprji ra l[\\aiovpy'ia

(ppouTicrou I'va {j.t] alria^ '^X^^
Kai TOv[?] [X]aioypyov9 ocTroa-
TîXov not.
lo eppxiao. {Tov?) k8 Etto.^ k.
On the verso
2nd hand (irovs:) k8 'Eirelcp k, irapa,
KaWiKXeov^ nepl en)- jst hand 'ApL/j.ovOi]i.
ad/xov co<7T UpcaroixdyaiL.
4. KM rcoi (jtroXoy col added above die line.
'
CalliclesHaiimoudies, greeting.
to Give orders for the sesame at Pela to be
measured out Protomachus and the sitologus, for there is no sesame at the city. Take
to
care then that the oil-presses do not fall short, lest you bq, blamed and send me the oil- ;
makers. Gooddiye. The 24th year, Epeiph 20. (Addressed) To Harimouthes. (Endorsed)
The 24th year, Epeiph 20, from Callicles about sesame for Protomachus.'
5. Ti]i TToXfi : sc. Oxyrhynchus.
6-8. Cf. Rev. Laws xlv, 13 sqq. and, for the strictness of the rules regulating the
movements of fXaiovpyoi, ibid. xliv. 8 sqq.
44. Letter of Dinon to Harimouthes.
Mummy 13. 12-4 x 33-3 ^"w. n.c. 253 (252).
A letter to Harimouthes from an official named Dinon, giving urgent orders

for the native soldiers in Harimoutlics' district to be sent up under a captain, and
also for the dispatch ofsome labourers for harvesting purposes. No reason is
assigned for the movement of the soldiers, and its object cannot be guessed.
The document is written in a fine hand across the fibres of the papyrus.
zJea'Cor 'Apip.ovd7]i âipiiv. lypdy\rapi(iV aoi -rrpoTipoi' nkpl Tu>i' fia-îpcof
rS)v oi'Tooi' kv Toh vno ere tottols ottcos dnoaTaXwaii' perd BLU^Xpîi'ios
rod riy^-
povos KaOort ypdcpa 'ATTo\\d)VLOs 6 SioLKi]ri]<i, ooaavrcDS B\ Kal rovs fTTi-
yeypap-
p.ei'0vs Otpiards Kara ti]v SoOi.'iadv aoi ypa(p^r, opcovJ^s Si tre KarapaOv-
povura
5 d>ipi]i' Self Kal vvv tiTiaTdXai aoi. co? dv ouf Xdfirp^ Trjv ivriaToXiji^
ndvra ndp^pya
7roLy]<TdfiH'09 dTrSareiXoi^ npos i]fids rovs fjLa)(ifiovs ijSr], tol-? Sh Oeptard^

cyy du
Toifxovs TTonjarjLs eV/oreiXor j)ix?u' ov yap coy eruyîi^ nepl tovtcov ttju
aTTOvSrjv
7roL?Tai 6 SioiKT]TTj9. eppcoao. (erovs) X^ M^êlp ly.
On the verso
Tondpxvi- (in demotic) 'Api/xovOrjt
10 Trj9 /car ft) MccJicir 14
In the reverse direction, above \\pi\x.ovQ\]i,
2nd hand Miîp iS,
Kat Bipiardov.
I. V of Twr corr. from n. a of coir, fiom rj.

2. iSi^fX^Liai'/os- 3. at was inserted
above km and again crossed out. 4. ae added above the line. 9. i of roTra^^'?'
corr. from r.
' Dinon
_
to Harimouthes, greeting, I have written to you before concerning the native
soldiers in the district under you, that they be sent with Bithelminis the captain in
com-
pliance with the letter of Apollonius the dioecetes, and similarly that the harvesters be
sent who have been levied in accordance with the list given to you ; but seeing that
you
are negligent I thought it my duty to send to you instructions again now. Therefore
as soon as you receive this letter put everything else aside and send me the
soldiers
at once, and so soon as you can get the harvesters ready let me know for the dioecetes
;
is showing no ordinary anxiety with regard to this. Good-bye. The 32nd year, .Mecheir
13. (Addressed) To Harimouthes, toparch of the lower toparchy. (Endorsed) Mecheir 14,
concerning soldiers and harvesters.'
3. This is the same Apollonius who is mentioned in 95. 10, 110.

43 al., P. Petrie II.
4 (3)- i <^c. The earliest date at which he is known to have held the office of dioecetes is
the 27th year of Philadelphus (Rev. Laws xxxviii.
3 ; cf. P. Amh. II. 33! 28 and 37); the
latest is supplied by the present document (32nd year, Mecheir
13).
<7rtyeypn/i/[uVovy indicates compulsory labour ; cf. 47. 12.
45. Letter of Leodamas to Lysimaciius.
]\IummyAi6. 13.. ^ -.- ^^^^^

6.0.257(256).
This and the following five documents (46-50) are all letters written by
Leodamas, an ofificial connected with the corn-revenues, probably in the
Oxyrhynchite nome since the Oxyrhynchite village Scphtha is mentioned in
i88 HIBEH PAPYRI
46. 5. Four of the letters (45-8) are addressed to a subordinate called
Lysimachus, who seems to have been specially concerned with the collection and
transport of grain and the correspondence, which covers the 28th to the 30th
;
years of Philadelphus, consists chiefly of instructions on official matters. Leo-

damas was a careless writer, and mistakes are more frequent than usual at this
period of comparatively correct Greek.
In 45 on reaching the bottom of the papyrus Leodamas turned it over and
finished his letter on the verso ; cf. 48.
Ae<o[8dii\a[s:] A[v\(Tiix[d-)(a)L 15 aiTov oTTOoy fir]6eu
vrroXii-êaO^ kv av-
0)9 oi[i/] Xd^rjre Tr]v [7ri- t5)L dXXa ndifTa irapa-

[<TTo\r]'\v rrapayLi^ccrOe fiTprjcra<Td. Kal otto)?
5 [iv]a [T]bv kv X((f>Oai (tItov firj Xoyv<TT 7rapet'/3ecr[e]i
fiTa^dX[r]cr]6 npb tov On the verso

TO ... TO ifi(3aXiv, 20 iirjBijiiaL TO ap . [. l\kov
Kal 1 TL KipfldTLOU Kal IninaTpiKov, [a]\\' it

XeXoyei'/care 0epe- TL XiXoyevKaTe Kaja-
10 re v6eo)9. Kal to. )(copiaaT ety to XÎ^^'
Xonra Treipdade TIKOV. \<ep'\p(i)(TO.
(Tvvdyuv Kal fif] 25 iiTOvi) KTf Xoi[a]x.

VTToXifiTrdi/eaOf:,
Kal Tw irapa îXoavo^ Ay[(Ti{idx\oii'
6. o\i of TOV corr. from (s>v ?
Leodamas to Lysimachus, greeting. As soon as you receive this letter, come here in
'
order to transfer the corn at Sephtha before lading and if you have collected any money
. .
.
,
bring it at once, and try to levy the rest, and do not leave any arrears and take care that ;
you do not leave the corn from Philon still owing from him, but secure payment of
everything, and take care that on no pretext whatever you collect the and horse-doctors- . . .
tax but if you have collected anything credit it to the embankments-tax.

; Good-bye. The
28th year, Choiak. (Addressed) To Lysimachus.'
is also mentioned in 47. 6 and 40. 10.

14. ^lAwi/os: he
21. A
tax for doctors at this period, called larpiKov, is known, e.g. from 102 but an ;
impost for maintaining veterinary surgeons is new. The reading InmaTpiKov is nearly
certain, but that of the first three letters of the tax which is coupled with it is very doubtful,
t or </> can be read in place of />.
23. xwâriKoi': cf 112. 13, note.

46. Letter of Leodamas to Lysimachus.
Mummy A 16. 1 3' I X 6-2 c?n. B.C. 258 (257).
Another letter from Leodamas to Lysimachus on official matters; cf.
45, introd.
A(t)Sd/xa9 Av(t[i~ TTpdaau^ dXXa /Ja-
fjid)(^coi yatp^Lv. 6v/xdiT. (8(1 8e

6 TL av rrpcoTou Ao- ndXai TO, kviyv-
y^varj^ 809 Kparrj- 15 pa avTS>v a)8 efvai
5 TL TO XOLTTOV TOV v[av- Kal TreTTpdaOai. eTi ovu
Xov {8pa)(^fxa9) oe vTroXoyq- Kal vvv rj TO dpyvpiou
aas (5/3a;(/zay) 8, koI crvfiô- iadyT ^ TO, kv^-yv-
Xov TTOirjaai ccTri- pa avTUiv d'KOQTkX-

yovTa avTov Ta<s 20 Acre oTrcoy rrpad^.
10 06 TrXrjpiis. Kal ippaxTO. {T0V9) KTj Ilaanri at.
Toi)y Xonrov9 ovk dcr- A line erased.
On the verso
Auai/id^coi.
II. at of eto-TT/jao-fff tf COrr. from fo". 12. 1. pa6i

paavfidTf.
' Leodamas to Lysimachus, greeting. As soon as ever you collect anything, pay
Crates the rest of the freight charges, 75 drachmae, subtracting 4 drachmae; and get
a receipt stating that he has received the 75 drachmae in full. You do not exact payment
from the others, but are neglectful. Their securities ought to have been here long ago and
sold; now therefore at length either collect the money or send their securities to be sold.
Good-bye. The 28th year, Phaophi 20. (Addressed) To Lysimachus.'
Mummy A i6. 22-6 x 7-3 fw. B.C. 256 (255).
Another letter to Lysimachus from Leodamas, giving him various directions

concerning his official duties. The letter is written with more than usual
carelessness, syllables and even whole words being sometimes omitted, and the
TQO HIBEH PAPYRI
damaged surface of the papyrus renders several passages very difficult to
decipher.
AectiSd/ia^ Auaifxa- 20 5e XoLTTcov p. .\ . axpov,

y^coc -yaipHV. Ar]ixiirpL- ^peta yap kaTiv pa . . iKoy.
ov rod Tov napfxeuicO" Kal oXvpav S\ K[al Kp'\i6iiv
V09 v'lov avvTaôv rov[<i lToipa(e 'Iva TrapapêTprj-
5 Kapnovs TTcivTas avve- accpeu e/? to (SacriXiKoi'.
êy, cixrauTCoy 5e Kal rôiv 25 Kal TOj)? p6a\ovs tov9 ira-
dXXcou TOty []7"[-jf'<''[- 5

pa 'PlXcouos TOV Avaaviiov^ Kal
aui'TeraKTaL yap ijSrj TOV Tvapd îXcovo9 Kal Xtto-
eo)? TOV JJai'yjpou pi-jvo[s, Keovs ei plv d7Tea(TaX)Ka^ e/?
lo coaavroi^ Se Kal tmi' Xol- AiKOipiav, 6i 5e p^] dTroa-
itS>p eo)? TOV dpiOpov, 30 TeiXov T . . . V j]Sr] 'iva
Oepiêiu Si Kal dpdv dTToSoOSiaiv AvKopTJSij,
Kal XeiTTayiois vvTaa . . ovTO) yap (7VVTiTa)(êv.
. ^ .^âv oh KaOrjKa?. el Se Kal T7jV (.TTiaToXlJV UTTO-
15 TiS" TTvpos 7ra[p'e(TTriKy Ka- aTeiXov AriprjTptcc^L
Oapos Trap q)l]tii'Iovi' diro- 3,-) kv Tayjei 'iva pi] irah
\8'\0V 'iva TLp[l]V .\ . p . .^ . dnoaTaXf]. eppocao.
(Tcopei' Ta)i' yiuoiJ.(v[co\y [iTOVs) k6 Afe>(e//3 K.
TOii' iTTai'dyKcoi', tcov
On the verso
A v<JLpayoi[i.
12. ^ of 6(pi((Lv corr. I;-,, r of nil' p i(TT7]Kev above 6 (?) erased. CO of

AoiTTO)!/ corr. from t or p.
Leodamas to Lysimachus, grcctinp:. Give instructions to (collect?) the crops of the

'
son of Parmenion unremittingly, and likewise those of the others since instructions . . .
have already been given to do so by the month of Panemus, and likewise those of the
rest up to the full number, and to mow and reap them and ... If there is any sifted wheat to
hand with any one, sell it in order that we may pay over the value of the necessary dues,
but .tiie rest, for it is wanted
. , and prepare both olyia and barley in order that we
. . . ;
may measure it to the State. With regard to tlie calves from Philon son of Lysanias and
tlie calf from Philon and Spokes, if you have sent them to Dicomia (it is well) but if not ;
send them at once that they may be delivered to Lycomedes, for those are his instructions.
And send the letter to Demetrius immediately in order that a slave may not be sent. Good-
bye. The 29th year, Mecheir 20. (Addressed) To Lysimachus.'
4. It is not clear whether (rivmôv governs Kapnovs or an infinitive is to be supplied.

On the former hypothesis avvraôv might mean assess,' a sense which would suit this '
context but is rare, and, in view of both the other instances of a-vvTaaadv in 11. 8 and 32,
where the ordinary meaning instruct is appropriate, and the frequency of a-vi^Taôv followed
'
'
by an infinitive (e.g. 39. 2), decidedly difiicult, especially as the infinitives in 1. 12 seem to
depend on avvTaôi: It seems preferable, therefore, to supply an infinitive meaning '
collect
or '
assess '
; cf. the omission in 1. 29.
9. Panemus corresponded approximately to Pauni at this period ; cf. App. i. The
action which Lysimachus was told to perform had to be carried out before the end of
the harvest.
13. 'S.fTTTayiois secms to be equivalent to Xen-Toye/ot?, meaning 'barren land.' The
beginning of the next word suggests only vvn, plough-share,' but the third letter is '
certainly r, and probably a- has been omitted and the word is some form of a-vprdcrafcv. ]au
in 1. 14 is the termination of an infinitive, perhaps dfiav (cf. 1. 12), but the first letter could
be almost anything.
17. The verb following rifxijv very likely began with uapa, possibly n apaa-T7j\irapiv.
20.
axpov ]. is probably the termination of an imperative following/z 77: but the form seems
to be erroneous.
23. ljTapaix^fTprj(T(onfv : cf. 45. 1 7 T^(tpctufTpi](Taadf..
29. AiKcufjiiaf : this village (cf. TpiKwfjiia in the not otherwise known. Arsinoite nome) is
Leodamas has omitted the apodosis to d

must be meant for
p.(u . . . î.Kup.iav. ano(j\T . . .
cit6<tt(i\ov, but it is difficult to reconcile the vestiges of the termination with tiKov. Perhaps
Leodamas made a mistake and wrote airociT .... retXov.
35. Tra'n: or Udis; cf. 112. 57, P. Petrie III. 65(^7). i.
36. Possibly dno(iTaX^[i but Leodamas generally omits i adscript with subjunctives,
,
e.g. 40. 4 and 20. . . . .
Mummy A (probably 16). ii-5X 7-1 cm. B.C. 255 (254).
Another from Leodamas to Lysimachus, asking for information with

letter
regard to advances of seed-corn.After concluding the letter with the customary-
salutation and date, Leodamas changed his mind and erased them, continuing
the letter on the verso ; cf. 45. The writing on the recto is across the fibres.
'
ACo6dfia[s Avai[/j.]d)(^ccL
^(âcpeii/. TO. airep/J-a-
Ta Toiv Siriyyvr]fX-
voiv KXrjpccv TU'L ypd-

5 >/'[ s iSwKa^: ov yap ; ..
ivpiaKco lu rol^ û- . ,

/SAi'oty. irdXiv ovv ypd-

192 HIBEH PAPYRI
yjra^ avrcou tcov airep-
fia.Tcoi' airoarîXov
lO jXOL rjSr], Kal Sbs r<oi
nap jii^Tindrpov, kav

S\ fxrj KaTaXafjLfidyrjs
dWcoi Sos 'iva fxri em-

KcoXvco/xai Toi' \6yov
15 (TvvOilvai. [[f/jpoxro [(Tovi) A]]
^Me<Top{r]) ktjI
On the verso
Kot oicravTOiS /jL^rpr]-
4 obliterated lines.
22 ippoicro.] {irov^) X Me<ro/)(r;) kt].
8. 1. Ta aneffidTd. 12. 1. KnTa\n^î'ivi]<:.
*
Leodamas to Lysimachus, greeting. To whom did you give in writing the seed
for the holdings which have been taken in pledge ? I cannot find the entry in the books.
Write another list, therefore, of the seed issued for them and send it to me at once ; and
give it to the agent of Antipater or, if you cannot catch him, to some one else, that I may
not be prevented from making up my account. Likewise measure Good-bye. The . . .
30th year, IMesore 28.'
3. 8ir]yyvT)fjiivoiu Kktjpuyf : for an example of a deed placing a (cXf'J/jos in pledge cf.
Wilckt-n, AktenstUcke, no. 11.
49. Letter of Leodamas to Laomedon.
Mummy A 16. 11-2 x 8-6 rw. About b.c. 257.
A short letter from Leodamas to Laomedon, another of his subordinates,

giving him directions about the transport of corn and olives. The reference
to the latter is interesting, since olives arc not mentioned cither in Rev. Laws
or in the Petric papyri,
AecoSd/ia? AaofieSouTi X^ti-
peiv. TTop^vOrjTi ov di^ dK0v[aT]i9
Avatpa'ôv koI (TriaTTovSaaot' ottoo?

av 6 airo9 ^fi^XrjOrJL otl raîilo-^'a
5 Kccl (rvi^KaTciyaye fied' avTOv.
e[i7r]ov Se uutcol Kaddirep eypa-

yjra [a]vra)i oVcoy ai^ efj,(3d\rirai
ras k\aLa<i els îKovs rj els f^coia,
Koi neipdaOe coy dKOTrcordras
10 Karayayeiv, koX napa îXcopos

Tov Avaaviov vnofivqaov ottcos dp
\d^r]L rd<i eXaias rds KaXas
KaOdnep avrdu eypayjra.
eppoxTO.
On the verso
15 /[?] T r]}y TToXiv

AaofxeSoyj I
na ...[.. .
5, 1. fifT. 8. CO of /^cota above the line.
Leodamas to Laomedon, greeting. Go to whatever place you hear that Lysimachus

*
is at,and take care that the corn is embarked as quickly as possible, and bring it down
with him. Tell him that, as I wrote to him, he is to put the olives into jars or îma for
embarkation, and try to bring them as unbroken as possible. Remind him that he is to
receive from Philon son of Lysanias the fine olives, as I wrote to him. Good-bye.
(Addressed) To Laomedon . .
.
, at the city.'
2. TTopfvdrjTi : the reading of the penultimate letter is very doubtful, but it is as much
like T as 6, which is the only likely alternative.
8. tima are receptacles of some kind, either boxes or jars; cf. P. Petrie III. 65 (Z'). 6
and P. Grenf. 13-16, ^?koi occurring both times in the same context, as here. From
L 14.
P. Grenf. I. 14 it appears that a small fxioiov could contain 6 nvîva, and that 2 (xwia of Parian
marble could be inside a lamp-stand, fxixnia, which are mentioned in P. Grenf. I. 14. 5
immediately after a ^'kos, seem to be allied to ficoia, which are also found in ostraca (e.g.
Sayce, Proc. Soc. Bill. Arch., xxiii, p. 214) as a measure of axvpov cf. the /Ltovet(oj) in P. ;
Oxy. 146. 3.
15. The TToAt? is probably Oxyrhynchus; cf. 45, introd.
50. Letter of Leodamas to Theodorus.
]\Iummy A 16. 8-8 x 8 rw. About n. c. 257.
A short letter from Leodamas (cf. 45, introd.) to Theodorus, another official,
giving him instructions about the deHvery of olyra to Lysimachus. The date is
probably the 28th or 29th year of Philadelphus.

O
194 HIBEH PAPYRI
'A(](o[8]dna9 QeoScopcoL
[âip]eiu. duevr}u6)(âfXv ej'y rb
(3a(ri\iKou oXvpfcof) (apra/Sa?) 'A(oXS(3\
av vv inToXiTTOfieuos aavTcoi
5 TavTtjv TTju oXvpav rrju
XoiTTTju dno/j-erprjcrou Avcrind-

)(a)i 'iva . . . J}Ta[
eppcocro. i^rov?) K[.
On the verso
GeoSwpcoi.
2. ve of avvr]vnxafx(v above the line. 6. CO of "Kva-ifxaxoii corr. from ov.
'
Leodamas to Theodorus, greeting. I have paid over(.?) to the State
1834I artabae of
olyra. Do you therefore leave this olyra for yourself and measure out the rest to
Lysimachus, thai it may be . . . Good-Me. The 2 .;th year (Addressed) To
. . .
'J'heodorus.'
51. Letter of Demopiion to Ptolemaeu.^;.
Mummy A 9. 9-9 x 35 <"/ b. c. 245 (244).
The following twelve documents (51-62 ; cf. 167-8), which are dated in the
closing years of the reign of Philadelphus or the first few years of his successor, are
all addressed to Ptolemaeus, the holder of some minor post in the Oxyrhynchite
nome. His title is not mentioned, but his sphere was a village (59. 11), where
he apparently exercised the functions of an officer of police (59-62), and had also
financial duties (51. 2-4, 58. 7). He was probably subordinate to the archi-
phylacites (56, introd.), and may have been a phylacites. Whatever his position,
he did not always fill it to the satisfaction of his superiors, and on more than one
occasion he received a reprimand (56. y-H, 59. 9-12).
In the present letter, as also in 52-3, the correspondent of Ptolemaeus is
Dcmophon, who here sends instructions for the collection of dues upon green
crops and for the purchase of Syrian cloths (cf. note on 1. 3), in accordance
'
'
with an order, a copy of which is enclosed, from Apollodotus, a higher official.
Arjuocpodv IlToXfpaicoi )(âipii'. VTroyiyp[a7rTa'i rfj? nap' 'AttoXXoSotov

^X6o[v]aT}9 poL iTTiaroXfj^
vip\ TT]9 Xoyemy tcou )(Xcdpa)i' rdvrLypa(f)\ov. nipccTTe ovv rov^ ^. .]] irpo'S
apyvpLo[v r]yr]paKora^
T]Sr] KaOdnep y[k]ypaTrTai, Ta<i S\ avpia^ ay ^]di^ ctol napaOcpyrai TTpi\d-
fx^vos Xdjxâv^ dpeara^

r[C[xS)v rcou vvoycypapiixii^coi^. eppcoao. (erouy) fS Me^lp i^.
5 'AttoWoSoto^ ArjfiocpcovTi. â/pea'. TT/ooy rrji rcov ^Xcopooy Xoyeiat yiypv

T]Sr] Kal (TvpLa9 Xd/iâue
i^[aSp]d^/xou9 Kal erraXXayrj^ rod 7]fii(70V9 rwu S [Spa^fioiv) {6(3oXov) {tj/iLco-
jSiXiov), roaovTO yap 'iKKeirai iy âcriXiKov. eppooao. ('irovs) /3
Mi^Lp 1(3.
On the verso
TlToXefiaicoi.
2. 1. TjyopaKoTns.
'
Demophon to Ptolemaeus, greeting. Appended is a copy of the letter which has
come to from Apollodotus about the collection of green-stuffs. Do you therefore exact
me
payment now from the purchasers on the silver standard, in accordance with his instruc-
tions ; and any Syrian cloths that may be deposited with you accept, if satisfactory, and buy
at the prices below written. Good-bye. The 2nd year, Mecheir 12.
'
Apollodotus to Demophon, greeting. Take in hand now the collection of the green-
stuffs, and accept Syrian cloths at 6 drachmae with an agio on half the sum at the rate of
li obols in 4 drachmae, for that is the rate published by the government. Good-bye. The
2nd year, IMecheir 12.
'
(Addressed) To Ptolemaeus.'
2. By the ôyfla riou ;^Xo)/)wi', as the following sentence shows, is meant the collection of
the value of the green crops, not the crops themselves. What these particular x^^pa were
and who are signified by tovs npos apyvpiov fj-yopaKoras is, however, obscure. The latter
phrase rather suggests the farming of a tax, and seeing that 52-3, which are also letters
from Demophon to Ptolemaeus, not improbably refer to the ewomov, that impost might be
supposed to be also the subject here. Or the x^<^P" ^^Y '^^'^11 he the produce of royal
domains sown with this class of crops, the share of which accruing to the government as
rent had been sold cf. P. Tebt. 27. 54 sqq. prjdiva rav yeojpyovvTcov ttjv âcrt\iKTjv Ka\ n]V iv
;
d(f)fafi I
yrjv^ e(f>ai^(adat twv )(\(opcov TrXfjv . . . tS)V iybioiKri6rj(Top evcov \
q)v al reifMai Koi TovTotv al
a(r(âKi^ lai bo Bflaai KaTaTtBTjcrovTai eVi Ito)!/ rpane^co v' Trpbs to. KaBfjKovra els to jSa^^crtXtKoj/J. If
(y8ioiKTi6r]aop.f'v<ov there means '
to be collected ' as the analogy of other passages suggests,
the expression would be very similar to Ao-yei'o tcov x^'^P'^^ iî 51.
3. avplas Hesych. avpUr
: cf. naxfô. x\iHva, rjroi inro tov (Ti(Tvpvj]s.
17 on iv KmriraboKia rj
yivfTai, ovToi 8e l,vpoi, and Pollux 7- 6 1 î' Se (Tvpiav 01 ttoXXoi', raxjTrjv oItottokov Ip-ariov ol KapiKoi.
Besides 38. 7 irvplm are mentioned in a mutilated papyrus of about this period belonging to
Dr. Mahaffy, ÂKecrrup 8( 6 oiKovopos vn dpxfiv avpias TTpobo6r)vai (Kuarai els
[
V (Spa;(/x ) i. [
The (Tvplai were apparently included among the fabrics monopolized by the government,
the producers of such fabrics, as is shown by 67-8, being paid on a scale similar to that
O 2
196 HIBEH PAPYRI
fixed in the present passage. The mention of an innWayi] in 1. 6 is another point of con-
nexion between the three documents. In 67 and 68 the rate of the uXKayf) or enaWayf] is
I obol to the stater, while here it is i^ obols to the stater, reckoned upon half the amount,
which comes to the same thing.
TTapaOcavTM cf. Rev. Laws xhv. 5, &c.
:
52. Letter of DemophOxN to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A (probably A 9). Fr. {a) 1 1-7 x 25, Fr. [b) 10-2 x 9-8 cm. About b. c. 245.
Another letter from Demophon to Ptolemaeus (cf. 51, introd.), enclosing a

list of persons who are generally assessed at the rate of 1 drachma 4 obols per
aroura (a lower rate occurring in 1. 23). Owing to the incompleteness of the
introductory letter the purport of the whole document is somewhat obscure;
but apparently the amounts payable by certain inhabitants of

list refers to the
Tholthis, a village of the Oxyrhynchite nome, who had pastured their flocks
upon Crown lands in various parts of the lower toparchy. Whether the impost
in question is connected with the koytia x^wpcSf in 51. 2, or is identical with
the tax called kvv6}xiov (132 ; cf. P. Pctrie III. 109 {a)) or tv ras voixds, levied
for use of the royal pastures (Wilcken, Osf. I. pp. 191 and 265), is not clear. From
references in receipts for ivvoixiov to the number of the sheep Wilcken (/. c.) infers
that that impost was proportionate to the number of sheep turned out to graze,
whereas in 52 the tax is clearly proportionate to the area of the pasturage. The
terms of the introductory letter in 52, especially the references to the '
using up
of the pastures and the securities to be obtained in consequence, suggest
that the proceedings of the persons mentioned in the list had been irregular
(cf. P. Tcbt. 66. 75 sqq.) ; but this hypothesis does not accord very well with 53,
another letter from Demophon to Ptolemaeus enclosing a precisely similar list
of persons who are mostly assessed atdrachma 4 obols on the aroura (cf. 130,
i
a fragment of a third document of the same character). The phrase -porrdyyeA/xa

T//S' TrpwTjj? hex^lh'-^pov applied to the list in 53. 2 recalls the terminology employed
in regard to the collection of ordinary taxes, and on the whole it seems
preferable to identify the payments in 52 and 53 with the hu-oixLov.

In 11. 24-33, which arc on a separate fragment, Demophon's handwriting
is smaller, and perhaps this piece, which in any case is not i)art of Cols, or ii, i
belongs to 130 or another similar list, though not to 53.
Fr. {a). Col. i.
A^rjuocpcoi' UroXfiiaiooL -âipiLv.

v7r]oyypa(pd croi to)v oltto coAêcoy
[ot Ka]TavUfii]Ka(nv Ik rfj? âcri-

[\lKrj9] yfJ9 Trjs iu TTJL Karco to-
5 TTCLpyiai TO, ov'ôjiara kccI to,
ttXtjOt] kol co^vTivoiv kXtjpmv

d7roKi)(prjuTai rah voiiah. av
ovv Treipoo co? da(pa\(TTaTa
Suyyvrjaai ottcos fi-qOlv 5i[a-
10 iTT(a[ia e^ vcTTepou yiurj'rai,
oifiaL yap ae , . , . v . '.l(5ia[. . .
Col. ii.
[. . .]ocr(i)y BapKalo? ISi[cott]9) waavTCo^ {Spa^fxal) i^ (jeTpcoôXop) (rj/xico-
êXiou),
n[. . .]ia9 Kvprjuaios ttjs (Triyoprj^ (Spa^fxal) 6 (SvoôXoi),

jd[rj]ixiqTpL09 ^lX(ouo9 Kvp-qvam Trjs
15 [i7n]you^9 {Spa)(jj,al) rj {rriVTcofioXov) (riTapTOu),
[.] . y . . T[elcSTos' noifiTjp kol IJerep-

fiov6i9 KofxodTTio? iSpayîiai) 6 {Thaprov),
'flpos IIvdTOS iepev? y6r]T0S iC {pôXos) {rj/xi(oîXiov\
aXXas 6 avTo? {dpovpai) (3 iSpa)(_fjial) y (SvoôXol),
20 IlT0(T?pi9 âvrJTOS KOI HiTOaHpi^

TlacnycavLos kol 'IttttoXvo-os (dpovpas) /85' {8pa\p.aL) y {neuTcoôXov),
dX\a9 neToaitpis AvcpixcovTO? dpuKov
[ d]povpas e (Spa-îial) (Tpia>(3oXoi'),
19. This line was inserted later. 22. apis of nfroadpis above the line.
Fr. (d).
[
77)9 e]nLyov[rJ9
25 [dpuKOV (dpovpas) ie {Spaxiial) k[. .
[K Tov IlToX'eiiaLov Ilpaîas KaXXiSplofiov
[
TTJs iniyovfj^ dpdK{ov) (dpovpas:) q du{a) a {tiTpcoôXou) {Spa-^pial) i,
T98 HIBEH PAPYRI
\
]o[. .Is dpd{Kov) i8 dv[d) a {riTpu)ôXov) {Spa)(fj.al) Ky (8v6(3oXol),
[
'{tos Kal 'Apfiivai? noinii/es
30 ;
dpd{Kov) {dpovpas) l {Spay^fxal) l<t {nrpdoôXou),
[
]p)^(iovaios dpd{Kov) {apovpav) a {8pa\p.r]) a {TTpco(3o\oi'),
[ I
IJaovTOS yecopybs
'
]a . {nvpov) (Sl.
[
'
have written below the names of the inhabitants
Demophon to PtolemaeuS; greeting. I
of Tholthis who have used pasturage in Crown land in the lower toparchy, and the the
amounts, and the holdings in which they have used up the pastures. Do you therefore
try to obtain as good security as possible, in order thai there may be no subsequent loss, for
1 think that you . . .
... OS, Earcean, private, likewise 1 7 dr. 4^ ob. ; P

' ias, Cyrenean of the Epigone, . . .
9 dr. 2 ob. Demetrius son of Philon, Cyrenean of the Epigone, 8 dr. ^^ ob. ;
; son of . . .
Teos, shepherd, and Petermoulhis son of Komoapis, 9 dr. A ob. Horus son of Pnas, ;
priest ... 17 dr. iôb., and on 2 more arourae the same Horus 3 dr. 2 ob. ; Petosiris son
of Phaues and Petosiris son of Pasigonis and Hippolysus on 2^- arourae 3 dr. 5 ob. ; on
5 more arourae of aracus Petosiris son of Auphmoiis 5 dr. 3 ob., ... In the holding of
Ptolemaeus Praxias son of Callidromos, ... of the Epigone, on 6 arourae of aracus at
:
1 dr. ID dr. ... on 14 arourae of aracus at i dr. 4 ob. 23 dr. 2 ob. ;

4 ob. ; and . , .
Harmiusis, shepherds, on 10 arourae of aracus 16 dr. 4 ob. son of rchonsis on ; . . . . . .
I aroura of aracus i dr. 4 ob. son of Paous, cultivator, 2^ artabae of wheat.' ; . . . . - .
3. Kii TavevfUTjKacriv : cf. the KUTavfvffirjixevT] in P. Tebt. 6 I [a). 188, &c.

6. Possibly koI S}\vtivcov, but v does not suit the vestiges after the lacuna very well. Cf.
note on 1. 26.
9. îfyyviiam the object understood is probably tovs anb eaXBeas (cf. 41. 5 and 53. 3),
:
not the Kkij[)oi, though Sirjyyvrjfj.^voi (cX^/joi occur in 48. 3. aatpaXfiai in connexion with the
revenues derived from x^^p" also occur in an obscure passage in P. Tebt. 27. 55-9; cf.
51. 2, note.
13. {8v6j3o\oi) this, the early Ptolemaic expression for 2 obols, is written out in
:
P. Petrie II. 44. 25 and the London Bilingual papyrus of Philopator's reign {Pa/. Soc.
11. M3)-
18. yotiTos: if this is a genitive, we must suppose the existence of a deity called 'the
Wizard' ; if a nominative (of an unknown form), it is a very curious epithet to apply to
a priest.
26. c(. 53. 14 and i8, and 117. 8, note.
fV Tov liroX ffjLaiov: It is probable
sc. (cXi/pon ;
that this (cX^poy those called liaaiXiKOL in 85. 13 and 101. 5, and really
was fiaa-iXiKos like
formed part of the (âaiXiKfj yij (cf. 1. 3 above), having returned to the possession of the
State either at the death of the original holder (cf. 81, introd.) or for some other reason.
The name of the original holder continued, however, to be attached to it, as was still the
case even in Roman times cf. P. Oxy. 483. 5, note, and 118. 2, note. This view of the
;
AcX^pot fimnXiKoi also suils 39, 100, and 119, where the State apparently receives a rent
upon such holdings, and is confirmed by 75, which refers to the sale by government
officialsof part of the <t>iXo^fvov (cX^pos, though a difliculty arises in connexion with 99 ;
cf. 99. 8, note. In 112. 9, however, where an impost upon ;^Xo)/7(i is apparently found, the
land seems to be really cleruthic, and the same may be true of the KXf)poi in 52, though
the âaiKiKoL KXrjpoi are in any case to be explained as land which had reverted to State
ownership.
33. The sign for ^, here applied to an artaba, instead of being angular is semicircular
and identical with that employed at this period for ôbol; cf. notes on 53. 20 and 119. 17.
53. Letter of Demopiion to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A 9. Breadth 11 cm. b.c 246.
Another letter from Demophon to Ptolemaeus, dated in the last year of

the reign of Philadelphus, and enclosing a list of persons at Tholthis and
Mouchinaruo (in the Oxyrhynchite nome), who are for the most part rated at
1 drachma 4 obols on an aroura cf. introd. to 52 and 130. ;
[Ar]fio(f)a>]y IlToXi/xaiooi â[C]peiu. diriaTaX-

Ka (Tor TO TrpoadyyeXfia rfj^ TrpcoTrjs S^rj/j.pov
Tov 'AOvp- Treipo) ovv cto-âAcoy Buyyvdv co? irpos ere
Tov \6[y}ov la-ofievov. eppoocro. {^rov^) Xd 'ABvp i^.
5 &a)\\6L^'] 0e68copo9 KaWiKparovs e/f r^? napeijxivrjs {dpovpas) erj' {Spa\-

/xaT) 77 {rpicoôXov) {r^raprov),
IlTf](Ti9 7roi/j.j]y Koi Tlavrjs iXai07ra>\r]9 {dpovpas) yLrj (Spa'^pal) 9

{TerapTOu),
'Ap/xivcris HavrjaLos koI Fldais Tecoros (dpovpas) y {Spa\fJ.al) e,
Tlavfjs ^L^Los (5' (jpmôXov), Tlacriai/xovs S'rj' (SvoôXot),
^flpos OlfxaTOS (dpovpas) S [ppay^pa)) 8, y^ (dpovpai) i<TS'r]' (Spa-^fxal) kS
(SvoôXoi) {fj/j,icoîXiov).
10 CK TOV .
I
Me[v]a>u[
,''/(
12 p . [.1 . roo-i
e/c TOV KvSpiovs .

[
15 .... picou Op . .
i\
Ilevvifja-LS (pv(XaKiTr]s) dpaKôv) S' [(TpLco(3oXou ?) .]ap . . . e . \.yXaa-[
dpaKipv) 5' (rptco/SoXoi/), y' dpdK{ov) aS' (Spaxpal ?) [/? (TpidoôXov) x]?PT(^)
L. {Spa)(iJ.r)) a, y^ {Spa)(fJ,al) y [(TpiwôXoi^).
eK TOV 'ArroXXmuLov 'Oi/dp^rjs [.,..]. [. .]r[.l . apay . . Kal

20O HIBEH PAPYRI
Evvofios e/c Mov)(ii'apvw dpdK(ov) y] (8pa\fj.aL) e.
20 Iliaots 'ApeuScoTOu l8' {SpaxM) \^\ {oôXos ?) '(77//tco/3eAior), 'fl]pos "flpov
(pv{XaKLTri^)
Movyîvapvo) l {tt^vi(X)ô\ov), Il(:TO\wyj.o<i IleTOcreipio?
[Mov]xt[v]apvcb dpdK{ov) lS' [Spaxf^rj) {oôXos ?) (/y/zicoêAfoi-),
y^ dpdK(ov) (dpovpai) e (Spaxiâi) V {Sv6(3oXol}. /^ rrj^ kcoiit]^ dpdK{pv)
(Spax/J-cd) Xe {oôXos) {f]fjLicoêXLOu), x^pTOV /3z. {Spaxpôu) {i]p.i(oîXi.ov),
/ (5pax/âi) p. (8v6(3oXol).
5. KaWtKpaTovs added above the line. 24. The sign for Bpaxfiai was inserted
after //x was written.
Demop)hon to Ptolemaeus, greeting. I have sent you the report of the first ten days
'
of Athur. Do you therefore endeavour to obtain good security, knowing that you will be
held accountable. Good-bye. The 39th year, Athur 16. At Tholthis Theodorus son of :
Callicrates on 5I arourae of the concessional (?) land 8 drachmae 3^ obols,' &c.
3. Cf. 52. 9, note.

4. year being the 39th must be the 'revenue not the regnal year (cf. App. ii).
The '
'
'
Athur 6 of Philadelphus' 39th regnal year would almost certainly fall within his 40th revenue
1
year, which he did not live to enter ; cf. p. 245.

5. TTjS napdixevT]! cf P. Oxy. 7 1 3. 25 7r/)/ 8e Ilefvvo) (< t^s Qpaavpu)(ov napdfieprji.
: As
53 also refers to the Oxyrhynchite nome the same land is probably meant, and napnpetn] in
P. Oxy. 7 1 3 is then a survival from Ptolemaic times like the names of the KKrjpoi ; but the
precise sense of the term is obscure.
10. Perhaps ck toC liToXfpmov cf. 130, where UToXifialov precedes HvSpeovs (1. 14).
;
17. The from the total in 1. 24 cf. note ad loc.

figures are restored ;
19. apa.K{ov) y is restored from the number of drachmae, on the assumption that the
'
rate is the usual one of i dr. 4 ob. on the aroura. But if 3 arourae is correct here, the items
making up the number 5 in 1. 23 will be complete, and therefore 'Oi'dpx'jf and Ei/Vo/ior must
be partners.
20. The symbol for \ aroura here and elsewhere in this papyrus is a half-circle like
that representing \ obol cf. notes on 52. 33 and 119. 17.
;
23-4. The amounts of land given in 11. 9, 17, and 23 add up correctly to the total of
2 2| arourae. A half-aroura of x'JpToy also occurs in 1. 17, leaving only 2 arourae of x^?'^^
to be accounted for between 11. 9 and 14. This indicates that the loss between 11. 9 and 10,
if any, is very small.
54. Letter of Demopiion to Ptolemaeus.
IMumniy A (probably A 9). 25x7-2 cm. About b.c 245.
An undated letter from Dcmophon to Ptolemaeus (cf. 51, introd.) on private

matters. The first part of it gives some interesting instructions about the
provision f musicians for a festival at Dcmophon's house then follow ;
messages about a kid (U. 17-9), a fugitive slave (11. 20-3), and various articles
wanted by the writer (11. 23-8), with a postscript concerning the mode of
sending them (11. 30-2).
Arjfiocpcoy IlroXe- Tiiorarov. Ko/xiaai 8h
fiaicoL yaip^LV. a7r6[o'- Kal TOV 'kpi(j)Ov napd 'Apia-
TîXov rjixLv kK TTav- Ticovos Kal nkiMylrov i^[xiv.
TOS rpoTTOV rov av- 20 Kal TO acofxa 8e el avvu-
5 Xr]Tf]u neTCOVV '^\0VT[a Xrj(pa9 napdSo? [TafroT]
Tovs re ^pvyiovs av- He/xcpOeT OTrooy avTo 81-
X[o]vS Kal TOVS XOITTOVS, K[al aKOfjLiarjL rjulv. drroa-
kdv Ti Sir}L dvrjXaxrai TeiXov 8\ r]/xlt/ Kal tv-
86?, rrapd 8\ r]^\(x>]v kojil- 25 povs oaovs dv SvurjL Kal

10 Ty. dTToarîXov Bl ^[l^^^v Kkpajiov Ka[L\vov Kal Xd-
Kal Zr]v6fiiov Tov fxaXa- Xjava -iT[avT]ô8aiTd Kal

Kov 'iyovra rvnTravov kol kdv oyjrov tl e'x.'^.'i.f-j
KV/xâXa Kal KpoTaXa, XP^^' pp[a)ao. I
a yap kart. rats yvvai^lv irpos 30 k/xâXov 8e ayjd Kal (f)V-
15 Tf]u Ovaiav kykroo 8k XaKLTa<i ot avvSiaKOfXiov-
Kal IfxaTicrnop coy da- ULV [[aT] TO 7tXoIo[v.\
On the verso
IlToXefiaicot.
10. X of anoarfiXov corr. from V.
'
Demophon Make every effort to send me the flute-player
to Ptolemaeus, greeting.
Petoiis with both the Phrygian flutes and the rest and if any expense is necessary, pay it,
;
and you shall recover it from me. Send me also Zenobius the effeminate with a drum and
cymbals and castanets, for he is wanted by the women for the sacrifice and let him wear ;
as fine clothes as possible. Get the kid also from Aristion and send it to me and if you ;
have arrested the slave, deliver him to Semphtheus to bring to me. Send me as many
cheeses as you can, a new jar, vegetables of all kinds, and some delicacies if you have any.
Good-bye. Put them on board with the guards who will assist in bringing the boat.
(Addressed) To Ptolemaeus.'
II. fiaXaKds may be merely a nickname, but probably refers to the style of Zenobius'
dancing. Smyly well compares Plautus, Jlfi'l. 668 Turn ad saltandutn non cinaedus tnalacus
aequest atque ego.
26. Ka[t]j'di' : or perhaps Kiv6v. Kf pafiov can also have a collective sense, '
earthenware.'
202 HIBEH PAPYRI
55. Letter of Scythes to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A (probably A 9). 9-3x12 cm. h.c. 2.-,o (249).
A short letter from Scythes, a superior official, to Ptolemaeus (cf. 51, introd.),
ordering him to come to Talao, a village in the Oxyrhynchitc nome (cf. P. Oxy.
26$. J 5), with a shepherd who was to give evidence. The writing is across the
fibres.
^Kv6r)9 nToXefiatooi yâlpiLV.

Trapayevov eh TaXaoov r]8r]
aycoi/ Kol Tov TTOLfxiua rou k\iy-
ôvTa nepl oi)u fioL d-rras. eaj/ (5e
5 ^paSvTepov TTOirjis aavrov (3Xd-

ylrfi9, [o]v yap <xyo\d((i) fxiveiu irXeiova
\p\ovov.^ eppcocro. {erovs) Ae Xoia\ q.
On the verso
IlToXcfiaiooi.
Scythes to Ptolemaeus, greeting.

'
Come to Talao at once, and bring with you the
shepherd in order that he may give evidence in the matter about which you told me. If
you are remiss you will injure yourself, for I have no leisure to remain longer. Good-
bye. The 35th year, Choiak 6. (Addressed) To Ptolemaeus.'
56. Letter of Patron to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A 9. 12-1 x 46 cm. 15. c. 249 (248).
A peremptory note to Ptolemaeus from Patron, perhaps the apxi.(pvXaKm]s

mentioned in 34. i and 73. 9-10, ordering him not to molest a certain Nicostratus ;
cf. 59. 9-12 and introd. to 51.
Tldrpcov FlroXe-
[fjLa]ia)L âipeiv. irapa-
yeuSp.ei'O? irpos
Tjijids "iXcor (pri eia-
5 TTpda(Tf.Lv crt NlKO-

crrpaTov e/c Koâ

{Spa^fia?) /?. av ov^> fir] cvo-
\Xi [avTou. [[01;]]
7 lines erased.
eppcoao. {^Tovs) XC
10 'Paaxpi i^.
On the verso
UToXefiaicoi.
'Patron to Ptolemaeus, greeting. Hon has come to me and said that you were
exacting 2 drachmae from Nicostratus of Koba. Do not molest him. Good-bye. The
37th year, Phaophi 17. (Addressed) To Ptolemaeus.'
6. Ko/3a was in the Kw/tt;? tottos (cf. p. 8) but Nicostratus must have been for the
;
time being in the Oxyrhynchite nome, since he had come within reach of Ptolemaeus.
Whether this Ko'â is identical with the village called Ko/xa in the Roman and Byzantine
periods (p. 8, P. Oxy. 142 and 150) is doubtful.
9-10. These two lines are over the erasure.
57. Letter of Dionysodorus (.^) to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A 8. 7.7 x 32-2 cw. b.c. 247.
A letter to Ptolemaeus ordering a person who had brought the writer a

petition to be sent to him. The writer's name is doubtful, but is perhaps
Dionysodorus, as in 58. The writing is across the fibres.
Ai[o]yv[(T6S(opos n]T[o]\fiaim x^'^Pî-^- ^^ au Xd^rji? rf^v ^m(7T[oX'r)]u

avd'n[iixy\rov
npos fjfxds [Ar]nri]Tpiov tov Ko/xiaauO' rjfiii^ kut Evayopov 'ivrw^Lv etV
'AX[eâv-
Speias 7rape[. . . .]i/.
eppcoao, (eVou?) Xrj Ilai/rj/jiov [.]

~"~^
On the verso
5 nT[o]Xfx.aiQ)i.
Dionysodorus to Ptolemaeus, greeting. As soon as you receive this letter send to me

'
Demetrms who brought me a petition against Evagoras to the of Alexandria. Good- . . .
bye. The 38th year, Panemus (Addressed) To Ptolemaeus.'

. .
204 HIBEH PAPYRI
There is not room for nnpe'ulBoXr] p.
3.
Panenius at this period probably coincided approximately with Epeiph (cf. App. i),
4.
in which month the numbers of Philadelphus' regnal years were still one in arrear of those
of the revenue years; cf. 80. 13-4, note. Since 57 is dated by the Macedonian calendar,
Pancmus-Epeij)h would be expected to fall within the 38ih regnal rather than the 38th
revenue year; cf. p. 367. But it is difficult to refer Panemus-Epeiph to the 39th revenue
year, for Philadelphus was almost certainly dead before that date cf. p. 364. ;
58. Letter of Dionysodorus to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A 9. 19.5 X 7-5 c;n. b.c 245-4 (244-3).
A letter to Ptolemaeus from Dionysodorus, asking for an advance of

8 drachmae. If this Dionysodorus was also the writer of 57, he was the official
superior of Ptolemaeus.
/Jioiî'(7[o5a)]po? JTroXe-
/j.ai'icoL yaipiîv. o)? av
T\r]\v 67r[i(j]roXr;i' Xd^y]i^
80s Te[X]ecrrct)j root Trapa
5 AioSoTOV rod . .\kX . .
ScoTov a(f) ov AeXo-
ycvKas dpyvpcov (Spa^^fias) r], Tov-
To Se aoL TTpoaS^ôjxai.
dva8(.8iKTai yap
1 o i)inv OLTTOêTprja^Lv
crirou. p.1] ovi^ dWcos

TTOLrjarjL s.
'
'eppo)a[o. (eTovs)] y
7. apyvpiov added above the line.
'
Dionysodorus to As soon as you receive this letter give Telestus
Ptolemaeus, greeting.
the agent of Diodotus son of ... 8 drachmae of silver out of what you have collected, and
for this sum I will be responsible (?) to you for he has undertaken to measure us out
;
some corn. So do not neglect this. Good-bye. The 3rd year

'
. . .
8. npoaStôfiai. : cf P. Petrie III. 64 {/>). 6 (f|e6<|aro) and 81 {/>). i.

59. Letter of Zenodorus to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A 9. 17.2 x 8-8 cw. About b.c. 245.
A letter from Zenodorus to Ptolemaeus, directing him to send up a woman

who had been found in the illicit possession of a quantity of and adding
oil,
a sharp warning to Ptolemaeus himself. A Zenodorus is known from an un-

published Hibeh papyrus to have been oeconomus of one of the toparchies of
the Oxyrhynchite nome at this period, and he is probably to be identified with
the writer of this and the following letter ; cf. also 60 and 124-7.
Zr]v68a)po^ UToXe/iaiooi
âip^Lv. o)? av Xd^T]i9

Trju IttkttoXtjp drrocr-
reiXov TTyOoy 17/iay fieToc
5 (pvXaKf}[9 TTjp TrapaSo-
Biladv croL 'i-)(OV(Tav to

KXinifiou (Xaiou
Kal Tor napaSoura aoi
dTT6cmLXo[v K\al el fx^
10 rravaei kIol^kottoociv
tV rfii Ka>jxrj[i\ perape-

XT][(T]eL croi.
'ippodcro. (erovs) [. '

'Ewuip t.
On the verso
n]T[o]Xpaioi)i.
Zenodorus to Ptolemaeus, greeting. As soon as you receive this letter, send to us

'
under guard the woman who was delivered to you with the contraband oil in her possession,
and send also the person who delivered her to you and if you do not stop your malpractices ;
in the village you will repent it. Good-bye. The year, Epeiph 10, (Addressed) To . .
Ptolemaeus.'
7. KXiniiJLov : this adjective is unknown, but is a much more satisfactory reading here
than (cXoVt/ioi/. The same word is no doubt to be recognized in Rev. Laws Iv. 20 (av
8 . . . /3o[vX wt'Tot C^Tf7v (jidfjLe'voi fXaiov napd t laiv vnapxfiv k\ en tfiov, which SuitS the sense
far better than Kdpm'jxov. On the smuggling of oil cf. also P. Tebt. 38 and 39.
2o6 HIBEH PAPYRI
60. Letter of Zenodorus to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A 9. 12-8x7 cm. About b.c. 245.
Another order from Zenodorus to Ptolemaeus (cf. 59) for the arrest of a
man named Ctcsicles if he failed to make a payment within a certain period.
Zr]v6So)po9 UroXe/xaiooi
')(âipHv. ia/j. /XT) drroa-
thXtji KTr](riKXfJ9
i? ^Lvdpvu irpo '^KT1]9
5 copa? rfji 16 {8pa)(fxa9) k
aTTOcrraXov avrov irpo?
i)fxds fxerd 0[u]Xa-
KfJ9 T]Sr], KOi OTTCO^
fir] aXXcoy TTon/o-ety.
ro 'ep[pcoao. (eVou?) . .
On the verso
JTroXe/iatcot.
6. iwTou added above the line.
Zenodorus to Ptolemaeus, greeting.

' If Ctesicles does not send 20 drachmae to
Sinaru before the sixth hour on \he 19th, send him to me under guard at once, without
fail. Good-bye. The year .(Addressed) To Ptolemaeus.'
. . . .
61. Letter to Ptolemaei'.s.
Mummy A 9. 13-1 X9-7 ^w- ^-^^ -45 (244)-
An order to Ptolemaeus to iM-oduce a number of persons before Ammonius,

a superior official. The name of the writer is lost, but was perhaps Zenodorus ;
the hand is similar to that of 59. but not certainly identical with it.
r n\To]Xfiaico[i
[âipeiv. 0)9 dv Xd(3iji^ ri]!'
[tTnaTo\T)i' Kardari]aoi'
!
TTpO? A/XIXCOl/lOl/
5 [ ] . .
x^. TLeroalpiv
êyvîo^ Kal Tleroa'ipiv Haai-
Tr5>ros, Apvov(f)Lv IlavrJTo?,
'Apv(o[Tr]i/i Tov Xaôv.

'i[p]p(oao. (eVoyy) /? TTa^cbi^y t<7.
*
... to Ptolemaeus, greeting. As soon as you receive this letter produce before . . .
Ammonius .son of
. . ., Petosiris son of Senuchis, Petosiris
. . son of Pasipos, Harnouphis
son of Panes, and Haruotes the stonemason. Good-bye. The 2nd year, Pachon 16.'
4. A place-name may have stood in the lacuna either here or in 1.

5 ; cf. 62. 13-5.
62. Letter of Philippus to Ptolemaeus.
Mummy A 9. i8-4x8<r/. ^ 3.0.245(244).
A letter from Philippus, whose ofificial status does not appear, to Ptolemaeus,
directing him to bring before Philippus the accuser in a case of robbery.
^/XiTTTToy JTroXe-
jxamL yaipeiv. [
KaKovpyov rov t[i]v
Xeiay irotrjcravra
5 (ttikuXh Tvd'i
ApVOV(f)lOS, 01' (TVI'-
rkjaya rcoi
dpîyepei tcoi iv
QcoXrei 7rapa8[o]v-
10 I'ai aoi. coy ai' XajSTji^
TO. ypd/j./j.ara
Xa^cbu auTov to
rd-ô^ dnoKard-
[(TT Tjaoi^ 7rpo9 r]fJ.d9
15 [eu] 'O^vpvy^coi' 7r[6]X[e]i,
[kuI oJ7r6o[y] /xrj dXXo)? earai.

eppcocro. (eroi'y) (3 Tlavi'i k.
2o8 HIBEH PAPYRI
On the verso
TTToXe/zatcoi.
'
The criminal who did the pillage is accused
Philippus 10 Ptolemaeus, greeting.
by Tnas son Harnouphis, whom I have instructed the chief priest at Tholthis to hand
of
over to you. As soon as you receive this letter take him at once and produce him before
me at the city of Oxyrhynchus and be careful to carry out these directions. Good-bye.
;
The 2nd year, Pauni 20. (Addressed) To Ptolemaeus.'

2. There would be room for [r6v after xa'pf'") but it is unnecessary.
apxiyfpd: another instance of the insertion of y in this
8. word perhaps occurs in
P. Petrie III. 53 (/>). 2. Cf. 27. 33 and P. Tebt. 63. 7, note.
63. Letter of Criton to Plutarchus.
Mummy 18. 17-8 x 8 rw. About B.C. 265.
A letter from Criton asking Plutarchus to settle accounts, in order that

Criton might meet a demand to pay for some seed which had been sown upon
a cleruchic holding. It is same person as
probable that this Plutarchus is the
the Plutarchus addressed by Paris in 64, although the two documents were
obtained from different mummies for another connecting link is provided by 65,
;
which comes from the same mummy (18) as 63, and is also concerned with
a Paris. Moreover, the three letters deal with similar topics and are undoubtedly
close together in date. 64 belongs to the 2ist year of Philadelphus,
while the dates in the papyri from Mummy 18 range from about the 15th to
the 28th year of that and Plutarchus recur
reign. Criton in 110. 13 and
17 (cf. 159), and seem to have been minor revenue-officials at or near 'lepa
N//cro?, a village in the division of Polemon in the Arsinoite nome ;

cf. 63. 19^
110. 21, 80. 3-4, 81. t6. The position of Paris was probably similar.
On the verso are parts of 7 much effaced lines, but no signs of an

address.
KpiTcop nXovTdp)(co[L
âipeiv. 'napayei'\o\ixev[os
TTp[o]s fJ-e NlKttlOS aTTTJlTei
Trju rifirji' Tov antpfia-
5 ',ro]i ov 60?; enêfSXrjKe-
r a]f e/y Tor 11 pcorayopov

K[X]rjpoi^ {Irm') y (apTdfBa'i) Ay,
TOU \6pT0V fJLOV TOV kv

10 Ta>L tt^Slcol. el ovv ou-
T(o^ noXiTevaSixeOa
dXXiqXoL9 /caXcos" av
'ixoi. (TV ovv SiopOcoaai
avToh TO X[o\litov irpoa-
15 ocpaXeLS fxoi. rjaav Se
{8pa)(fjLa}) o/3- TOVTCou acpeXe
{dpra^cou ?) fi Tififju Kq- {reTpcoôXov)
Koi [. . .]y o YiX'\aôv tto-
pa (TOV coare evScopcoi k ....[...]. 9 e0' 'lepds N-qcrov [{8pa)(/xa9) 8,
20 y (Spa)(fjLai) X (rerpce)/3oXor), (Xoinov) jxa {8u6ôXoi),
Xa^cbu rrapd TLp-dpyov
1 9. tocTTf .,.].? added above the line.
*
Criton to Plutarchus, greeting. Nicaeus has come to me demanding the price of the
seed which he said he had ordered for the holding of Protagoras during three years, namely
33 artabae, otherwise he said he should lay claim to my hay in the fields. If we are going to
hold such relations it will indeed be well. Do you therefore settle with them the remainder
owing from you to me. The sum was 72 drachmae; deduct from this the price of 40
artabae, 26 drachmae 4 obols, and for which I received from you for Theodorus ... at
. . .
Hiera Nesus, 4 drachmae, total 30 drachmae 4 obols, remainder 41 drachmae 2 obols.

'
Take from Timarchus . . .
5-7. The meaning of ffiê^'KrjKfvm here is not quite clear. If it be * imposed upon,' as
e.g. in P. Tebt. 37. 7 f'n^f^Xrja-dai {ipya) fh TTjv yrjv, Nicaeus must be supposed to be an
official who first ordered the loan of seed and then himself advanced it on behalf of Criton,
This seems more likely than that (fi^dWuv is used literally of sowing, for which a-nfipdv
would be the word expected. The land in question may have been one of the âaCkiKoi
Kkripoi, as in 85. 12-3; but loans or presents of seeds were also made to cleruchs,
e.g. 87.
10-3. We suppose dXXijXoiy to refer to Criton and Nicaeus, and koKoh av exP'- to be
ironical. The construction of ndXiTevfaOai with a dative is unusual.
17. The lowness of the price (4 obols per artaba) shows that the grain was of some
inferior kind, very likely olyra. An artaba of olyra was worth f artaba of wheat (85. 14-
of which the normal value was 2 drachmae (84 a. 8-9, note).
5, note),
Perhaps [{apTnâv)] y, but o is then unsatisfactory; a neuter antecedent would
18.
be more appropriate. The stroke which we have considered to be the top of a -y may be
a mark of abbreviation. The following letter is rather more like a- than o, but as- cannot
be read.
2IO HIBEH PAPYRI
21. There are some blurred ink marks immediately in front of \aûiv, but they are
outside the line and probably accidental. They might, however, be taken to represent an
inserted nai.
64. Letter of Paius to Plutarchus.
INIummy 97. Breadth 7-3 cfn. B.C. 264 (263).
A letter from Paris asking for an advance of 60 drachmae on account of

a large amount of olyra which was due to him from Plutarchus. The mutilation
of the latter part of the letter has obscured some of the details of the proposed
transaction. The writer is probably identical with the Paris mentioned in 65,
and his correspondent with the Plutarchus to whom 63 is addressed ;
cf. 63,
introd.
Ildpis UXovTap-^wL Xov poL rd9 [I {Spaxpd^)

yâipeLv. ylypacpa' croi 15 Ka[l] Tfji ^ \
'Ai'TLTrarpo^ /xeTpi]- 7r]v dôo .......

[a]ai p. OL oXvpwv {dpTdâs) Aw 09 KaraâXel to .... [.
T ....[.. . .]r]VO . k[.] . [.
TO Sk XOLTTOV Ipol p- . ay iTOiri[(Tei.] xpi] 81 Kol
rprjcrai. ^peiav ovv 20 [ypd](p.LV poL 7r[6p] S>v dv XP^^~

t\a) [Spa^poiv) ^, KaX(o9 av ex.^y. ['ippcoao.
uv ovu TTOirjcrais Sov^ {^Tovs) Ko. n[a

10 WepopovTL rcoL dnoSi-
[Soi'TL aoi 7i]P enicTTo- A frasrment
[X7]V
]7ro<r .
[
Tuv aiTov drroaTl^L-
On the verso
nXovTap-
Xcoi.
13. T of (jiTov corr. ? 22. Ka corr. from k/3 or vice versa.
'
Paris to riularchus, greeting. Antipater has written to you to measure out to me
1450 artabac of olyra, of which you ought to take 250 arlabae and to measure out the rest
to me. Now 1 am in want of 60 drachmae you will therefore do well to give Psenomous,
;
the earner of this letter, . . . Send me the 60 drachmae and on the 2nd I will bring
. . . tes . . . who will pay . . . And you must write to me about anything which you
require. Good-bye. The 21st year, Pauni (Addressed) To Plutarchus.''
(.?).
10. There is a break in the papyrus below 10, and several lines may be
1.
lost between
II. 12 and 13. Perhaps 11. 23-5 come in here.
_
13. The r of a'lTov is very doubtful the letters tov aiTo and \ov with part of the
;
/x of
iioi m the next line are on a separate fragment, and its position is not quite certain.
16. Trjv is the termination of a personal name, e.g. 'Kpvu>Tr]v.
65. Letter concerning Paris.
Mummy 18. 34-2 X5-8 cm. About B.C. 26!^.
The purpose of this letter, the commencement of which is lost, was to

secure the immediate delivery to Paris (cf. 64) of o artabae of aracus, in
part-
payment of a debt of 100 artabae of wheat. The writer proposed to obtain
the remainder by purchase from the State. His correspondent, who is
desired
to pay over the aracus, was perhaps Plutarchus, the recipient of 63-4
cf. introd. ;
to 63.
OLTreaTeiXa npb^ ere [. . .] rfjL e /Va

0770)9 au napayevo- \lJ.eTpi^](Tr)i9 TOV
fxivos crvvara- [dpd]Koy rds ir (dprd/Sa? ?)
BfJLS ndpiTi 20 IId]piTL, d 8e fxrj
5 [i]ua IXTpi](TT]lS [fi]Tprj(TTai /x[e
avTcoL Tas TT {dpTd(3a9) [T<o]t opKcoL 'ivoyov

TOV dpaKov, eyoti [eu'jai Koi elcTTrpdo--
yap opKou avyyk- [aa]dat rij^ {dprd^rj^) (SpaxpLccs) S.
ypaiijxai {i^rpri- 25 [6eX]o/xu ovv ey 8rj-
10 [(T\aL TTJi rcTpd- [HO^^(^Loy TOV Xonrbv

[S]i TTvpoiv [dprdâs) p. [avv]ayopda-at al-
[eTTJei ovv ovK eê- [to]v 'iva iJi'i}\Q\'\v
[crrajt (tol (Trinep[ov [e/y e]//e vaTeprja-rji.
[H^r]piLv KaXm 30 eppoocro.
15 [di/] 7roii]aai9 7ra[pa- [{^Tov?) 'A6bp

. .] 8.
[ye]i^6fXP09 eh a[. .
II. The numeral /3 corr. 18. V of TOV corr. from v.
P 3
212 HIBEH PAPYRI
I have sent lo you so that you may go and meet Paris in order to measure out to him
'
the 80 artabae of aracus for I have engaged under oath to measure out on the 4th 100
;
arlabae of wheat. So since you will not be able to measure it to-day, you will do well to
go to on the 5lh to measure out to Paris the 80 artabae of aracus. If this is not done
. . .
I shall be liable to the consecjuences of my oath and shall be mulcted of 4 drachmae per
artaba. I wish to purchase the remainder of the corn from the State, in order that there
may be no arrears against me. Good-b}'e. The th year, Athur 4.' . .
8. A fragmentary specimen of such an oath is P. Petrie III. 56 {a).
10. T^t TfTpddi : i. e. the day on which this letter was written; cf. 1. 31.
2 1 sqq. The
oblique construction is probably a reminiscence of the actual contract,
from which this sentence is a more or less exact quotation. Above the first few letters of
1. 22 are some thin strokes which resemble ]ort and may represent an insertion.
66. Letter of Protarchus to Clitarchus.
Mummy 10. 11 x 22-8 a?i. B.C. 228 (227).
The following documents (66-70 {I?)), with 160-3, belong to the corre-
spondence of Clitarchus, who, as is shown by their contents as well as by the
endorsement on 66, was a government banker, his district being the KcotVrjs to'tto?.
They belong to the reign of Euergetes and are close together in date, the only
years mentioned being the i(Sth and 19th.
The present text consists of a letter from Protarchus informing Clitarchus
that he had undertaken the collection of the tax of 1*0 and -^Jo, an impost
probably connected with the iyKVKXuw or tax on sales and mortgages of real
estate (cf. note on 1. i), and requesting Clitarchus to collect the dues on his
account. The writing is across the fibres of the papyrus.
TIpu)Tap)(^09 KXeLToip^ccL âipew. (^[iX]'q(l>a{xei' tijv p Kol o- irapa T(ii>v
Ti]v Boipâv
TrpayfiaT^vofiit'co}'. errel ovv ninrei [aoi] iy ro'19 Kara ere tottoi^ ^Koarrj,
KaXm ecu ttoi-
rjaai^ avuTciâs Tols napa aov 7rpoaXo[y]Viv Kadori v[xlv Kai AaKXt]-
7TidST]9 yiypacp^f,
co[y S" ai' irapayivoopai dno r//? 7ra[.^ .

[
Tov âX/coO awXaXTâ-Q)
croi co(TT (je
5 fii) Sid /ctJ'T/y ev)(âpicrTfj(rai yp[n^. ]
eppoocro. {erov?) 16 JJayoov^ iS.

On the verso
and hand TpaTrcîTrji Kcoi-
Tov (ist hand) KXLTdpx(t>i'
Protarchus to Clitarchus, greeting.

'
I have contracted for the one per cent, and half
per cent, with the managers of the Scoped. Since therefore the 5 per cent, tax is paid to you
in your district, you would do well to order your agents to collect the other taxes too,
as Asclepiades also has written to you and so soon as 1 arrive from the delivery (?) of the
;
copper I will have a conversation with you, so that you shall not oblige me to no purpose.
Good-bye. The 19th year, Pachon 14, (Addressed) To Clitarchus, banker of the Koite
district.'
1-2. The character of this tax of i^ per cent, and its relation to the 8a>p(d and the
(tKoa-TTj are not quite clear, rfju dtopfdu here might be interpreted as rrjv ev Scopea yrjv, as
e.g. in P. Petrie II. 39 (^g). 14 vnapx^t <V ttJi 8oi)peat xopôs iKavoi, P. Magd. 28 t^s Xpvaepfiov
Sapfas. As Rev. Laws show (xxxvi. 15, 11, xliv. 3), large tracts of land were held
xliii.
f'v buipeS, chiefly perhaps by court and the holders seem to have had special
favourites,
treatment in respect of taxation. The eiKoa-TT] in 2 might then be compared with that in
1.
P. Petrie II. n
(2). 4, a 5 per cent, tax on the rent of an oiKOTrfdov, while the i^ per cent,
would be some similar impost of which the present is the first mention.
But Scoped may have another sense which is more suitable to the context in 66. In
the first place irpayparfvea-dai is the word commonly used at this period for the farmers of
a tax. Sefondly, in the London Bilingual papyrus of the 13th year of Philopator {Proceed.
Soc. Bibl. Arch, xxiii. p. 301, Pal. Soc. II. 143), appended to a demotic contract of sale is
a banker's receipt in Greek, in which there appears, coupled with 8 drachmae 2^- obols for
('yKvKXiov, a payment of 3 obols for 8copfd. Now the commonest form of dKoa-TTj was the
(yKVKXcov (cf. 70 a) and if this be the (iKoarfi in 66. 2 there will be here the same collocation
;
of Scoped and tyKVKXiov as in the London text. Moreover, the i^ per cent, of 1. i recalls the
f$T]Ko<TTT] and iKaToa-TT] of the Zois papyrus which were paid on the occasion of a sale through
the government of land given in security for a tax ; cf the extra charges amounting to
^X 2 {ra Kad^Kovrn TfXt] StTrXa), added to the TrpoVrt/xoi' in P. Amh. 3 1, of B.C. 112. It thus seems
possible to find a link between the i-| per cent., the Scoped, and the 5 per cent, by means of
the supposition that they were all three connected with sales. Another passage in which
Scoped probably signifies a tax is P. Petrie III. 53 [s) dcpeiKapev 8e koI t6 ypacpelov tcov Alyvmlcov
trvyypacpwv^ to Se dno \t]ovtcov nporepov TremTov SiSovai nap' airov roiy eôvcn ttjv Scopedv. The
ypa(f)eiov, a tax paid for drawing up contracts (?), is here remitted, and the proceeds previously
derived from it are transferred to the holders of the Scoped.'
'
exovcn at first sight suggests
land-holders rather than tax-farmers; but it is very difficult to see what the former could
have to do with the ypacpelov, and the view that exovres rfjv Scopedv here means much the same
as npaynaTev6p.evoi TTjv Scopedv in 66 is Supported by p. Oxy. 44. 22, where the impost ypacpelov
is coupled with eyKvKXiov, with which, as we have seen above, the Scoped was closely
connected. We should therefore explain the p koL ct' as a percentage upon sales, being an
addition to the ordinary elKocrTi) and resembling the Scoped, within which it may even have been
included.
With regard to the li per cent, and the analogous percentages of the P. Zois, it is
singular that in P. Petrie III, 57 {b), where some land is sold by the government under
conditions similar to those in P. Zois, the tax paid is the ordinary eyKVKKiov of 5 per cent.
J. C. Naber, Archivy I. p. 90, explains the difference in the rate as a remission. That is no
214 HIBEH PAPYRI
doubt possible, and in the absence of further evidence it is difficult to find a better theory.
But the idea of hghtening the burden of taxation does not seem to have played much
part in the policy of the Ptolemies ; it is possible that, so far from representing a remission,
the percentages in the Zois papyrus may mark an augmentation, the y^-g and 2^ rising
to -^ and j^, and perhaps subsequently to the 4% of P. Amh. 31. An analogy for such
an increase is provided by the history of the iyKVKkiov, the rate of which was doubled
towards the end of the second century b. c. But the absence of the iyKVK\iov in P. Zois
then remains unexplained.
3. Asclepiades is probably identical with the writer of 67-9.
4. Perhaps 7ra[p]a[6oo-f&>s] or inij)\(>\poxris\ but the reference is obscure. The fourth
letter, if not a, might be e. g. y, n, or r. a-vvAaXijo-w k.t.X. means that Protarchus was prepared
to give a (juid pro quo.
67. Letter concerning Payment of Cloth-workers.
Mummy 10. 32-8 x 8-6 r;;/. b.c. 228 (227).
This papyrus and 67 are letters to the banker Clitarchus (cf. 66, introd.), offi-
cially authorizing him to pay different sums to certain weavers and
at 'AyK-wpwi^ -noXis
Xot/ii'wT/xt? in the Heracleopolite nome for a variety of fabrics manufactured on
behalf of the government. As Rev. Laws Ixxxvii sqq. (cf. Wilcken, Ost. L
pp. 267-9) and P. Tebt. 5. 63-4, 238 sqq. combine to show, the weaving industry
was, at any rate in more important branches, a government monopoly. The
its
persons actually employed in it had of course to be paid for their work, and the scale
of prices found here may be compared with those fixed in Rev. Laws xlvi. 18-20
for the production of the various kinds of oil ; cf. the regulation of the price
of avp'mi in 51. ^-6 (note on 1.
3), and where it is forbidden
P. Tebt. 5. 248 sqq.,
to make the cloth-weavers, byssus-workers, and robe-weavers work bcapeav /xjjSe
IxurOGiv v(l)eLix6i-o)v. The finer processes of manufacture seem to have been
centred in the temples but it is not at all likely that the whole weaving
;
industry was under their control (P. Tebt. 5. 6^, note), and there is no hint
either in 67-8 or 51 that priests were in any way concerned. The formula of
the two authorizations closely resembles that found in P. Petrie III. 87 (a) verso,
(l;), and 89. Asclepiades, the official by whom they were sent and who appends
his signature in 67. 28, was probably the local oIkov6[xo9, the principal revenue
official of the nome, or his avnypailyevs; cf. the frequent mentions of the oIkovo[xos
in the section of the Rev. Laws which concerns the <jOovii]pd, Ixxxvii. sqq.
Asclepiades' order to Clitarchus in 69 to bring an account is quite in keeping
with such a position.
The names of the various fabrics are usually abbreviated both in 67 and 68,
and are difficult to identify. They are all classed as odovia, and are also in-
eluded under an abbreviation which may be either tn-( ) or (n( ). On the

whole we think ta-(rot) webs more probable than (n[vh6vis),
' since '
Icttoi also occur
in Rev. Laws xciv. 2 and 5, where a laT6î is rated at 25 drachmae, though that
passage is too mutilated to be conclusive cf. also Ps. Aristeas ed. Schmidt, ;
p. 69. 16 ^v(r(TLv(s>v odovLMv IcTTovs l/caToV. Other abbreviations are fj.i]{ ), 77p( ),
fivo{ ), and lna{TLa ?), but it is doubtful, except in the case of 77p( ), what is
the correct order of the letters, aopdna (67. 14, in other places abbreviated o-opcot)
may be connected with aopos and denote a kind of cloth used for burials.
Â(TK\[r]\'nLdBr]S KXeirdpyoiL
y\^(i\ipîv. [5o?l OLTTo t5>v ttl-
TTTOVTCC^V ei]? TO id {TOS)

Toh eu 'AyKvprny Tr6\i
5 [v]Troyypafi/j.euoi9 v(pdi^rais
Sia . . ecoy tov Trap' 'AnoXXcoiîov

[KuI nT]lflOvOoV TOV Te-
[
T]o7roy pafxpaTeoo9
[kcu . . . .] Kcofioy papfxaTiw^
10 [e/y Tifia\9 odovioov tcou

[avuT\]oviJLii'(i)u e/y to (Sa-
(t[iXik]6v ht]{ ) Ku np[ ) ^, /^ l(j{to\ ?) kt],
(Spayîxa?) TK^ (rerpoo/SoAoi/), (3vo{ ) C i^ (SvoôXovs),

(TopcoLcou ( V(^, /^ loiroi) /i/?
15 {Spaxp-ai) vfirj, Kol dXXa{yr]?) lS, /^ f|/3, . .
'
KCU (TV\l^0X0V TTOLTjaai TT/ooy
avT0V9. eppcoao. {^tovs:) l6 'A6vp /c/3.
TOVTOdU eKdaTooi Ta>v vno~
y^ypapp.ivcov' QoTOfiovTL
20 UeToa-ipLo^ p.ri[ ) y iTp{ )
a, /^ 8,
{Spaxpa.9) Htf {TiTpd)ôXov), ^vo{ ) a 6 {Svo^SXovs:), (rop<oi(ov) a rj,
/ ia{Toi) 9 {Spaxpal) ^S, aAX[a(y^y)] /?, / i^.

ApiirjViL XiaoiTos cucravrcoy,
IJiTevovnei TldaiTos,
25 TecSi AOepfieco^, UeToaipei
Apxfi^Los, ApeuuH
NexOoaipio?, Teaoo/xei [....,
2i6 HIBEH PAPYRI
2nd hand 'AaKXrjTndSril^ KXeirdp-
30 Tiaov )(aX*:io]i) rerlpa-
Koaias e^yJKouTa Sv[o

KaOoTL y[<e\yp[a\iTTaL '.
. .
35 yiidrcou C [-
'Asclepiades to Clilarchus, greeting. Give out ot the sums paid in for the 19th year
to the weavers at Ancyronpolis below written, Uirough ., agent of ApoUonius, and . .
Petimouthes son of Te topogrammateus,

. . and
. ,
komogrammateus, for the prices . . .
of cloths supplied to the Treasury, namely for 21 me ... 7 pr ... total 28 webs, ,
326 drachmae 4 obols, for 7 buo 65 drachmae 2 obols, for 7 soroia 56 drachmae,
. . .
total 42 webs 448 drachmae, and for agio 14 drachmae, total 462
drachmae; and
make out a receipt with them. Good-bye. The 19th year, Alhur 22. To each of the
following to Thotomous son of Petosiris for 3 me ... and i pr ... total 4, 46 drachmae
:
,
4 obols, for I buo ... 9 drachmae 2 obols, for i soroion 8

drachmae, total 6 webs 64 drachmae,
and for agio 2 drachmae, total 66. To Harmenis son of Sisois similarly, and to Petenoupis
son of Pasis, Teos son of Athemmeus, Petosiris son of Ilarchebis, Amenneus son of
Nechthosiris, Tesomis son of ... .
_ ^
'
Asclepiades to Clitarchus, greeting. Pay 462 drachmae of copper, as above written . .
4. 'AyKvpuv noXts: a town on the east bank of the Nile in the Heracleopolite nome,
possibly Ilibeh pp. 9-10.
itself; cf.
In 68. 5 the topogrammateus is Petimouthes son of Thotortaeus but the ;

7.
patronymic here is certainly different, and since the villages are not the same in the two
papyri and Petimouthes is not an uncommon name, it is unlikely that a single person is
meant.
9. Perhaps rov] Kco/ioypo/i/xtir/cos cf. 68. 5-6, note. But there would be room for a
;
short name like "fi/jov.

papyrus belonging to Prof. Gradenwitz, containing a receipt issued by the
lo-i. A
TrapaXyjixTTTiu iâriwi^ for difTereuUy coloured cloths, indicates that the government
Srifxovioiv
control of the supply of such materials continued into the Roman period.
1 2-4. The abbreviation m'/( ) consists of a /x with an
tj written above (the n being
square in 1. 12 and rounded in 1. 20), np{ ) of a tt with a p drawn through it; the
former possibly stands for mwW (cf. note on 11. 34-5). ^^^'^ ^'^^^^r might be connected
with the npo(TKe(f)uXaia which occur in Rev. Laws cii. 7. The a of 'icr{Toi ?) is written in the
form of a capital as in the symbol for 200, the t being a long stroke drawn through it.
In the case of ^vo{ ) the three letters are written one above the other, the v being a
good-sized curve immediately over the /3, and the third letter a small thick mark which
at 1.21 is slightly elongated, suggesting a /3 or an t rather than an
o in 68. 7 it is ;
a mere dot. In 1. 2 1 the curve is slightly turned over and thickened at the left end and
might be interpreted as ov; but this feature is not noticeable in 1. 13 or 68. 7. /Svo-,
i. e. l3va{(Ttv(ov), can certainly not be read. The prices of the difTerent fabrics work out as
follows .pr]{ ) and np{ ) cost 11 dr. 4 ob. each, /3uo( ) 9 dr. 2 ob., and aopma 8 dr. ; in
68 the scale is the same and lfjui{Tia ?) also appear, costing 7 dr. apiece.
15. aKkn{y^s): the rate is f obol on the stater, which is identical with that in 68.
9
and 61. 6, where the word iwaXKayr) is used. The prices are calculated on a silver basis
{npbs dpyvpiov), and in making payment in copper (cf. 1. 30) the government allowed a
small agio. The usual rate of the agio on payments in copper at this period was about 2A
obols on the stater; cf. P. Petrie III. p. 86, where the data are collected (add P. Petrie III.
67 {a), 2, {l>). 14, 117 (e). 12, 15). The difference is probably to be accounted for by the
fact that in the present case the government was not receiving, but paying.
34-5. The numbers suggest that the reference is again to different sorts of cloth and
that -jSuv and -yfidTcov may be the termination of two
of the words abbreviated in 11. 1 2 sqq.
The figures, however, do not help to identify them, since the number 2 does not occur in
the foregoing list, and so 11. 33-5 cannot be a repetition of it. -yndrcov might possibly be
fiTipvyndrcov, though- that term means the thread rather than the material woven from it ; cf.
Hesych. firjpvypa, anfipafia and pfjpva-pa, Karayp-a
fj fKT(iv6p.fvov, (nrda[ia tpiov. As for -âv, fj
there is one /3 if not two (cf. note on 11. 12-4) in /3vo( ), but we can find no likely word.
Line 35 is probably, though not certainly, the conclusion of the document.
68. Letter concerning Payment of Cloth-workers.
Mummy 10. Breadth ii cm. About b.c. 228.
A letter, similar to 67, from Asclepiades to Clitarchus, authorizing payment

to be made to a number of weavers for cloths of various kinds manufactured by
them ; cf. 67, introd. The writing is across the fibres of the papyrus.
\*A(TK\rjTr]taSr)^ KXi[Td]fi)(m Xî^P^'-^'

[ôjy diro tcov TrnrTovTcav e/y t\o . . {etos)
A6vp T0T9 eV XoijBvcorfid vTroyeylpafxiievoif
ixpdvTais Sia Alovv(tlov tov rrap !47ro[XXa)]i//'o[t>
5 Kou. H^TUjiovBov TOV QotopTaiov TOTToyp(âix/xaTeco^) K[at
Ka)iioyp{afifiaTeco9) e/? Ti/zay oBovlcou r5)v avvTe\ovp.ev[aPf

HS TO âaiXiKov fir]( ) 08 co^y (SvojBoXov^), ^vo{ ) Ka poff,
cropm{m') p.^ rX^-, ipa{TiQ>y) Ka pfi(^ ^ iuiroi) pvi] {^pa-yjiaX) 'A<pp^ [(Svo^
ôXoi),
7raX(XayT)y) prj (6^0X09) {TirapTov), y^ ^0q {rpicoôXou) (ritaprou), cru/X'
ôXou Sk 7ro(r](ra[i
10 rrpo^ avTov9. dnb Sk tovtcou vTroXo[yov) Tr\oir](TaL
dv6 ov ypdîL AttoXXwpio? e^d^ Ev(hpa\yopa

napa tcoi/ a . . eycop naiu ... <t . crf ...[,... .
Tiu nacr<oT[ .] . T . . r.
.]0 , . . r,
, , . , ,
2i8 HIBEH PAPYRI
[ih TO âai\iK[ou 21 letters -
-
15 TifM . [.](t)a- .[.,
[..].[ 30
f
firj{ ) K a]Xy \{Svo^6\ov9),^ [^K )j Uv {TerpcojSoXou),
aopmicof) [8 A/3,] l[na{TLwv) /3 l8, y/ 1(t{toT)] Krj ac^q, e7raX{XayfJ9)

{6^0X01^) (rjixiooîXiov) {jtrapTov) yâXKOvv), / t^ {6^0X0^) {rjfjLLCdîXLOv ?)
[{r^Taprov) \{aXKovs!).
'
flpcoL neT[o]a-[p[io9 /j.tj[
) /3 k]-/ (SvoôXovi), ^vo{ ) a 6 {SvoôXovs)
aopooi(Q)y) (3 L<^,
20 lâiriov) a ^, y/ laijol) <^ ue {Terpco(3oXoi'), 7raX{XayrJ9) a (rerpooôXov ?)
XiaXKovs) y/-, /" v( (SvoôXoi) ^{aXKo'i) yL.
^fj.6ei TLaacdTos . . . .
p . \os TOVTona . [. .
[ ]
OoTevTos [. .] . .
poxl- '] J0VT0Tr[. ...
[ ]..[....]..[..]. neToa-fp ...
[ 25 letters ]0[
3. Xoil3va)Tîn: cf. 112. 26.

5-6. The offices of topogrammateus and komogrammatcus here seem to have been
combined in a single person, as at a later period in P. Oxy. 251 and 252. There is
hardly room at the end of 5 for tov, still less for a proper name.
1. Perhaps, however,
Tov was abbreviated or it noticeable that in the corresponding
Avritten very small
is ;
passage 67. 9 there is only a very short space between Kai and KmfxoypaufxaTtas.
in
9. 7rnX(An'y^s): cf 67. 15, note.
losqq. This passage, ordering a deduction to be made for reasons which are obscured
by the mutilation of the papyrus, has nothing corresponding to it in 67.
16. There is a break below this line, and it is quite uncertain how many lines are
missing.
17-8. The total number of yiroi) and their value being preserved in 1. 18, and the
prices of the diflerent units being known (cf. 67. 12-4), a calculation shows that the items
here must be either {a) 20 /ij( ) at 11 dr. 4 ob. 233 dr. 2 ob., 2 ^vo{ ) at 9 dr. 2 ob. = =
18 dr. 4 ob., 4 (rnpoiia at 8 dr. 32 dr., 2 'nid{Tia) at 7 dr. =
14 dr., total 298 dr. ; or [h) =
jcf Ht]{ ) = 221 dr. 4 ob., 4 /3uo( ) = 37 dr. 2 ob., 4 aopwin = 32 dr., i Ifialnov) = 7 dr.,
total 298 dr. The first set of figures suits the vestiges of 1. 17 the better.
21-2. The second halves of these two lines seem to be identical, tov Tomtf{xov might
possibly be read, but it is see why the toparch should be introduced in this context.
difficult to
70 (a). OFFICIAL AND PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE 219
69. Letter of Asclepiades to Clitarchus.
Mummy 10. i^-Gx'jon, 6.0.230(229).
A short letter from Asclepiades (cf. 67-8), directing Clitarchus (cf. 66, introd.)
to come to him bringing an account and the balance of some money. The
^yriting is across the fibres of the papyrus.
KXuTd.p)(a)i )(âipeiy.
TTapayivov TrJL
r) Tov 'A6vp KOfiiôdU
5 Toi/ T \6yov rod
âaxpL Kol TO, Trepioi/'
TO. yjpri[iara,
\Ka\\ /XTj aXXcBS' noi-q'
[<Tr]i9.]
10 eppcoa-o, (erovs) ij] '4-^pf^ f
3. ov of napayivov COVT. from <r0e.
Asclepiades to Clitarchus, greeting.

'
Come up on the 8th of Athur bringing both the
account of Phaophi and the balance of the money, without fail. Good-bye. The 18th
year, Athur 5.' ....
70 (a). Letter of Zoilus to Clitarchus.
Mummy 10. 15-4 X 7-6 cw. 8.0.229-8(228-7).
A from Zoilus telling the banker Clitarchus (cf. Qd^ introd.) that a
letter
payment drachmae was due from another Zoilus for the 5 per cent.
of 10
{(/kvkXlov) tax on a purchase of land. 70 {d) and 163 are similar notifications of
payments due to the bank for the kyKVKKiov. The writer was most probably the
farmer of the tax, and these documents represent the biaypacpai which figure in
the common formula of iyKVKXiov receipts,VeraKrat cttI ttjv TpdireCc-v iyKVKktov Kara
biaypa(fir]v nXoovoiv ; cf. e. g. P. Amh. ^2.
The view of Revillout {Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch. xiv. p. 120 sqq.) that the rate
of the eyKVKKiov tax, which according to him was fixed by Psammetichus at xV>
220 HIBEH PAPYRI
was reduced in the 9th year of Epiphanes to 2^0, has already been refuted, as
Wilcken points out {Ost. I. p. 1H3), by P. Petrie III. ^J {b), which proves that
the rate of 2V existed in the 4th year of that king. The Hibeh papyri now
carry this rate back to the reign of Euergetes I, and we suspect that Revillout's
account of the early history of the tax is altogether erroneous. It is very un-
likely that the Ptolemies lowered a rate which they found already established ;
the tendency of their finance was rather in the opposite direction.
Z(jOiXo9 KX^LTcipyjxil
)(aipLu. Siâi TTapa

ZoolXov tov TlToXe-
fiaiov ^/fcoTreo)?
5 apoivpodv) K avKap-ivoa-
KavOlVOV XlTOV
a? lirpLaTo napa
Blcoi'09 tov 'PiXrJixo-
1^09 'EpeTpiicos X^^'

10 Kov irpos dpyvpLov
[(Spaxftooi^) o-j K {SpaxfJ-a.9) SeKa.
'ippoaao. (iTOvs) 16
[ 1
'Zoilus to Clitarchus, greeting. Receive from Zoilus son of Ptolemaeus, of Sinope, on

account of 20 arourae of smooth (?) mulberry-acanthus land, which he has bought from
Bion son of Philemon, Eretrian, for 200 drachmae of copper on the silver standard, the
twentieth, namely lo drachmae. Good-bye. The 19th year . . .
'
5. The letters at the beginning of this line are broken, but it is clear that the
abbreviation for (i/wupwi/, if that be the word meant, is written in an abnormal manner,
the usual stroke above the line being replaced by a small o the supposed and p are also
;
very doubtful. But both the tenor of the document and the analogy of 70 (/>) and 163
make dpovpwv here almost indispensable. Xltov in 1. 6 is also a difficulty ; we can find no
parallel for the application of the adjective Xiro? to land. There is, however, hardly any
doubt about the reading ; the only possible substitutes for the first two letters are a and p,
but these are much less satisfactory.
9. ;j^(iAkoO tt/joj i.e. coppcr at a discount.
(ipyvpiov : An agio of about 10 per cent, was
usually charged for payments in copper which ought to have been in silver; cf. 67. 15,
note, and 109. 6.
70 (5). Letter to Clitarchus.
Mummy 10. 7.5 x 7-1 cm. About b.c. 228.
Conclusion of another notification, no doubt addressed like 70 [a) to

Clitarchus, that 2 drachmae were due to the bank for the kyKVKkiov tax on a
purchase of land. The vendor is described as a Perso-Egyptian (riepo-aiyvTrrtoj),
i.e., presumably, the son of a mixed marriage.
OTToXlrrj^ d/j.7ri-
Xov [dpovpas) a8' [[^y]] û

kirptaro Kar [Al-
5 yvnTias crvyypa-
(pas irapa 'Aa(pea
'
flpov Hipa-aiyviTTL-
OV TT^pl KCO/XT]J/ T/XOi-
veOvjXLv (Spayîxoiv) fx k /3.
10 [
eppcocro. (eroi;?)
]
(Payment is due from)

'
native soldier, of Heracleopolis, on account of li arourae
. . . ,
of vine-land bought by him in accordance with Egyptian contracts from Aspheas son of
Horus, Perso-Egyptian, near the village of Tmoinethumis for 40 drachmae, the twentieth,
'
namely 2 drachmae. Good-bye. The . . th year . . .
I. The formula must have differed slightly from that in 70 (a). Probably o0ftXet took
the place of Seât napd.
8. Tfioiv(6viJ.iv : cf. 163 ; in 80. 7 the name is spelled with an initial e.
71. Correspondence concerning a Strike.
MummyAii. 8-5xii-7m. b.c 245 (244).
A fragment of a series of official letters concerning a strike of slaves

employed in a stone-quarry. Lines 4-1 1 contain a copy of a letter from
Antiochus to Dorion forwarding a letter from Aenesidemus, of which only the
beginning is preserved (11. 12-4), and ordering the immediate arrest of the
offenders. Lines 1-3 are the conclusion of a letter which may be from Dorion
222 HIBEH PAPYRI
to the (\)vXaKiTai. which Antiochus and Dorion recur, it appears that
From 72, in
the latter was an epistates probably at Phebichis, and the quarry
(sc. i\>v\aKnCov)
in question was most likely on the east bank in the neighbourhood of that village,
possibly at Hibeh itself cf. pp. 9-10. The third year, in which the correspondence
;
took place, no doubt refers to the reign of Euergetes.
[ 19 letters eTrjio-roX^jy [
[ 13 di']rLypa(p[. .1 yivâOco .
[
ava(f)(fi[. . .] eppwaOe. {erov^) y Qcoi/O k .
'AuTio)(ô9 AccpioiVL ya'ipHv. rrj^ e7naTo[\f]?
5 ^y yeypaêv r'jfjciu ALurjaiS-qfxo^ nepl t[(oi'
dvaK^^wpi^KOTcov (Kofxarcav e'/c r^y ^[y
KecpaXah Xarofxta? dTrkaraXKo, (t[6\i rd[v-
Tiypaâ. coy dp ovv Xd(3r]is rd ypdfifi[aTa

TT}u irdaav crnovSi]!' noiTjcrac 07r[co9 dva-
ô Ci)Tri6VTi^ dTToaTokaxji irpos [vfJ-d^f
/leToc (pvXaKTJ?. 'ippcoao. {trovs:) y S[a)\v6 [.]
Aan](TiS7]fji09 AuTio^coL âipeiu. A . S [. .
UdcTLTO'i 'A(f)po8iroTToXLri)'i koi ...... . .
. . /roy 'HpaKX07roXiTi]9 .
[
4-1 'Antiochus to Doiion, greeting. I have

1. sent you a copy of the letter which
Aenesidemus has written to me about the slaves who have deserted from the stone-quarry
at Cephalae. As soon as you receive this letter use every effort to search for them, and
send them to me under guard. Good-bye. The 3rd year, Thoth.'
6. (ra>/xT&)i' : slaves were also employed in the quarries in the FayQm near Lake Moeris
(cf P. Petrie II. 4 (2). 5 and 4 (9). 4), but there the XiiTofxoi proper were free wage-
earners; cf P. Petrie II. 13 (l). I f\ev6(p oXarufiMV. For ilvaKfxtoprjKOTCov cf P. Tebt. 26.
18 and 41. 14, where strikes of ^(ktiXikiu ytuipyoi are referred to.
72. Correspondence concerning a Temple Seal.
INIummy A 7. 17x35^^. B. c 241 (240).
The subject of this lengthy text is the disappearance of the official seal
belonging to the temple of Heracles at Phebichis. A large piece is unfortunately
missing from the upper part of the papj-rus, but the sense except in one or two
passages is nevertheless clear. The body of the document is occupied by a copy

of a petition from Petosiris, high-priest of the temple, addressed to Dorion the
epistates. The seal, it appears, had been missing for five months and Petosiris ;
had written previously to Dorion accusing a certain Chesmenis, a priest, and his
son Semtheus of having stolen it. Information had also been given to the
basilicogrammateus, but inquiries had led to no result. Dorion was therefore
requested to take further steps. An official was accordingly sent, and the
petition is succeeded by a copy of his report. Chesmenis on being questioned
denied that he had the seal, but the next day four other priests volunteered the
information that it was all the while in the sanctuary of which Chesmenis

seems to have been in charge but said that they were afraid that if they gave
jt to the high-priest, he would use it for a common indictment against them. These
two documents are inclosed in a short covering note from Dorion to Antiochus,
who also appear in conjunction in 71. 4. It is noticeable that there Antiochus*
name precedes that of Dorion, while here the positions are reversed. Since the
papyri are practically contemporary and belong to the same find (cf. p. 11), there
is good reason assuming the identity of the persons. It will follow that the
for
position of the names of writer and addressee is no surer guide to their relative
dignity in the third century B. C. than in the second cf. P. Tebt. i^. 2, note, and ;
22, introd. Except in formal petitions, the writer of a letter seems to have
usually placed his own name first.
It is remarkable that 6-y the high-priest accuses Chesmenis of having

in 11.
abstracted the seal in order to use it for letters to Manetho. The manner in
which this name is introduced indicates that its bearer was a well-known man,
and seeing that the persons concerned are priests, it is not impossible that
we here have a reference to the famous writer on Egyptian history and religion,
who was himself a priest, probably of Sebennytus. If that be so he lived later
than has been generally supposed. Hardly any details concerning Manetho's
life are known, but according to Plutarch (De Is. et Osir. 28) he was consulted
by Ptolemy Soter. That he should be still alive and active in the 6th year of
Euergetes is surprising, but not absolutely inconsistent with Plutarch's state-
ment, if Manetho lived to a great age.
Awpmv 'AvTLoxcdi- xatpeiv. tov Trpoy [/xe 15 letters VTTOiivrj\jxaTo^ napa

IIeT0aLpL09 TOV
dp)(^tpe(09 TOV fx ê/5()(ei 'HpaK\eov9 Ev$e .
'
lepov, kuI tcov
i^^L\8[o^6^vTa>v napa tcov lepecou
VTroyiypacpd aoi ra di^Tiypacpa- dîco ae tp .

'^
22 letters ] 'ippaxro.
224 HIBEH PAPYRI
vTTOfivrjfxa. AtiyptcovL kiriaTdrriL rrapa [IleToaipLos dp-îepco9. 7rp6T](p6u
aoi eu(^dvL(7a kv tool Xo[a)(^
5 /xr]vt Trepl ttj^ (T({)payi8o9 rov Upov Siori [

avTrjv XeafjiTjvt^]
Kol ê/J.6ev9 6 vlb^ kv tool 'A6vp fir]ul
dnb kvdrris, tovto 8\ 77-[p]aêi/ -rrpos to <t[ 22 letters ] oov [a\v (3ov-
XooPTUi ypd(f)Lv Map'e-
OcoL Koi oh dv ôvXcouTai. npoaayyeXXoi ov[i/ i8 letters cTrel] o[v]
SwdfJ-eOa '^prjcraa-QaL dXXrji

[(r(p]payiSL, eScoKafx^y 8e kv tool Xoia)( fJ.i][i^l 2i letters ] . [. .] jm napa
ÂpvdoTov (SaaiXiKcoi
[yp]afifiaTT nepl rovrcop V7r6fiv[r]]fia [dîooy 19 letters ]

[]i"0'
i"f-
araXKora Trpoy
10 [Apvooyqv Nexd^/xfiioos rov 7rp6Tep[o]y [iv rm dSvTQU. ovTa kol top vvv
vndpôvTa Xea/xfjuiv
[....]..[..] TTvOeadat nepl ttjs acppaylSos [ 24 letters 'ay napd ê/z-
êo)? Tov Xeap.rj-

[vl]o[s . ]ir .
[.]_/[
]yr^ axnrp .
f. .] .
y[ ] .
[ 14 letters d-
X]r](phaL /caXco? ovu TroLrjcr^LS
[ef] cr[o]t 80KU fi[. . . .] diroarelXai TLva 7r[pos\ avToy[<s ]e [.]
. [.]foy rod JJaovTos koi 'Apvcorov

TOV Ne)(6jxpe(os TTepl Tovrov kol ypdy\ra[L] r)p?i^ Trlpo? ]o^ T?y 0"7"/>a-
\T7]]y[6]l'. VTV)(ei.
15 (irovi) T âpeycoO 9. dnoaraXe}? 'ApiaToiuKo? npb? tov [kv tool] dSvTcoL
X['e\<Tp.r]\y'\iv kTrrjp^Ta l virdpyei Iv tool
Upm [[r .
]] 17 (Tcppayh rji xpcovTai oi [%p[e]ry npos rd^ ypa^[6ri(ro]p.ha^ km-
(TToXd?, Xeapijin^ 8h ovk ecfir] 'k\^Lv.
TrjL 8[\] ^ -napay^vop^voL oropTulo^ 'A[p]pax6pov 'Ap/xdxopo? IVe^ê/i/ie-
[o]v[s:] 'IfiOv6T]9 J7fa(rio[?] ApvcoTT]^ iVe-
\6e/JLp.kov9 TJ]fi pikv a(j)payl8a oopoXoyovu virdpx^'-v kv tool d8vT(oL, Tco[i 5e]
apxi-^pî^ ov[k\ ecpacray TTLaTevîv
'iva p.7] KVpieuaas kolvi]v kTTLCTToXjjv Kara ndpTcov ypdâ? a-(f)payi<Tr)[Tai
av]TfJL Tr]L acppaylSL.
On the verso
20 'AvTioxfoi [ ]
2. Second f of ^f,3txf t inserted after i was written. 8. 1. liaaiKiKov ypafifxaTtas ?

'
Dorion to Antiochus, greeting. I have written below for you copies of the
memorandum addressed to me by Petosiris the high-priest of the temple of Heracles
Eu ... at Phebichis and the declaration presented by the priests. I beg you to (take
cognizance of the matter?). Good-bye. The 6th year, Phamenoth 7.
'
IMemorandum. To Dorion the epistates from Petosiris, high-priest. I made
a previous statement to you in the month of Choiak about the seal of the temple, that it was
abstracted by Chesmenis and his son Semtheus on the ninth of the month Athur, which he
did in order to (seal ?) anything they may wish to write to Manetho and any other persons
they please. I therefore report the matter to you, since we cannot use any other seal
and in the month of Choiak I presented a memorandum on the subject to agent of . . .
Haruotes the basilico-grammateus (?), requesting him to send ... to Haruotes son of
Nechthemmeus, who was formerly in the sanctuary, and Chesmenis, who is now there, to
inquire about the seal and he (reported, having learnt ?) from Semtheus son of Chesmenis,
;
that . had (not ?) taken it. You will therefore do well, if it please you, to send some one
. .
to them . son of Paous, and Haruotes son of Nechthemmeus concerning this matter,
. .
and write me to . the strategus. Farewell.

for . .
'
The
6th year, Phamenoth 6. Aristonicus having been sent to Chesmenis who is in
the sanctuary asked him if the seal which the priests used for the letters that they had to
write was in the temple ; and Chesmenis denied that he had it. On the 7th, however,
Thotortaeus son of Harmachorus, Harmachorus son of Nechthemmeus, Imouthes son of
Pnasis, and Haruotes son of Nechthemmeus came and confessed that the seal was in the
sanctuary ; but they said they did not trust it to the high-priest, lest when he obtained
possession of it he should write a letter accusing them all and seal it with the actual seal.
(Addressed) To Antiochus.'
1. is also mentioned in 131.

Petosiris the high-priest
2. seems to be an unknown epithet of Heracles; the third letter looks like
Ev^ . . .
6 but this may be due to some ink having come off from another papyrus, in which case o-
might be read. Perhaps, however, Upov did not follow, and iv6f need not then refer to .
[
'UpaKXfovi at all. For the cult of Heracles, i.e. Hershef, cf. the mention of a 'UpoKXelop in 110. 5.
3. a^tco af ep ov perhaps aîaa-as v [.
. The doubt is caused by some extraneous ink ;
: .
cf. note on 1. 2.
6. a\<^payi(Ta(T6ai is the natural word, but the genitive wv is not easy to account for.
9. There remains only the tip of the letter before pov, but it is sufficient to exclude
p-a^tliov.
10. The supplement after TTp6T(p[o]v is suggested by 1. 15.

1 1-2. This passage is too much damaged for complete reconstruction. Something
like 6 8e avToii anr]yyeiK(v aKovcr^xis napa êpdeois . . . tovtovs pr] fl\\r](f)fvai, (SC. Trjv acppaylSa) or
TOP 8flva (l\\r](pfvai may have been written.
13. After Tripoy] some such supplement
as neva-opfvov napd suggests itself, but
a^Toi[?
the traces of letters are so scanty that they can hardly be identified.
14. n[p6s r]oj/ aTpa[TTj]y[6]v is not very satisfactory, but a-rpa cannot be avoided, and
. . .
the other letters, though not certain, suit the vestiges.

1 6. ypa(p[6rjao\}i(vas i the future is not wanted, but ypa(fi[o]pfvas does not fill the space.
Possibly, however, there was a flaw in the papyrus, which the writer left blank.
226 HIBEH PAPYRI
73. Letter of Antigonus to Dorion.
Mummies 69 and 70. 23-5 x 12-^ cm. b. c. 243-2.
A letter from Antigonus to the epistates Dorion (who is different from the
Dorion in 72) recounting the same events which are the subject of 34, a petition
of Antigonus to the king cf. introd. to that papyrus.
; This document, hke 34,
is only a draft, and is full of additions and corrections it is written on the verso, ;
the recto being blank.
'AvrLy[ovo<i A(opi\(on âipeii^. 'i\ypay\fa^ Trepl KaWLSpo-

t[_ov KaWticpa^Tvv
jiov co^crre e'jri kol vvv lTTai\ayKdaaL avrov rov oi'ov

[ TWl KVpi]ajL
diroBovv[aL rj ri\jj.riv avrm \^- -

[ 17 letters
6 KaXXiSpo[ixo? J 8e tov Aatpicovljx 16
5 [[/cai aj/ ... .jpj;]]^ . I'a d7roXv[ 17 ,,
TTpdâL B\\ av\rov rifiiji' tov o^vov [Spa^/xd^) k. tyo) ovv i]<jv-
yjjL [jl\v Ka[Td T7)]i/ [[TrT] ypa(pe?adu pu[L vrro aov IttkjtoXi^v
d-nr]yayov \tov\ Ka[XXtS]pofioi' [/? to kv Xtvdpv Seapco-
TrjpLov Lva Tô VTTo(\vyLov dTr[o85)i. Acopicovi, UdTpcou Se
dp\i '^[j /fdro)] Tonapxtns
10 6 (pvXaKLTi-jS iTap[aye\v6pivo[s e[/9 to SecrpcoTTjpioi^
Tu iv 'Sivapv
l^rjyayiv tov KaXXiSpofxov Jk tov SâpcoTtjpiov
^fj.ai HaTO. Tu
cocTTd pj] Svi'aadai Tip' Trpd^n> TT\OLrjaa(T0aL {Te/c tov

Stdypapina
^(TCopaTos^ TOV Td ovov dvayay[(i)v e/y ttjv oiKiav
iv Taicui'at
Kal '^y^cov nap avTm t'y piaov d^îi]ip7]Kev avTov.
15 d ovv pi] i)ppa)(jTriaapdv iTr[

'
16 letters
'
C""3 , ,
fTot^Tl iX7](p(iv uv nap avTov Sid twos paâipocpo-

pov. 'iypayâ ovv aoL nepl tovtcov ottcos" etSijis fivai
aiTiov TOV pij yeveadaL tcol Aco^picuvL dnoSoaiv ti]v
UaTpcovo? (Slav, of dneiOcov 8ia[TeTeXKe Toh na-

20 pd aov npoaTdypacrw. t[ppcoao. [^tovs) S
I 7. /)oi'- Pap.
Antigonus to Dorion, greeting.
'
You wrote to me about Callidromus, now at last to
compel him either to give up the donkey to its master or to pay him its value. But
Callidromus ... to e.xact from him the value of the donkey, 20 drachmae. I therefore in
accordance with the letter which you wrote to me removed Callidromus quietly to the
prison at Sinaru in order that he might restore the animal to Dorion. But Patron the
archiphylacites of the lower toparchy came to the prison at Sinaru and released Callidromus
from the prison, so that I was not able to carry out the execution according to the edict;
and he took away the donkey to his house and has removed it from my reach by keeping
it with him at Takona. If I were not unwell I should have taken it from him through one
of the sword-bearers. So I write to you about it in order that you may know that the
reason why restitution has not been made to Dorion is the violence of Patron, who has
continued to disobey your orders. Good-bye. The 4th year . .
.'
2. The insertion above the line suggests a patronymic, and cf 34. 2 KaXX/SpoJôv KaXXi-
Kpirovs; but t[oj'! KnXXifpa]rou (cf. e.g. HI. 32 [Qri\pafifvov) is rather long for the lacuna.
3. Twi cf. 34. 3.
Kvpi\^'j>i :
4-5- The
construction and sense of these two lines is obscure. With regard to the
insertion above 1. 5, there is a space both after onm and before iuiyKrji. It is doubtful
whether the erasure below extends beyond prj ; at any rate va was left untouched, though
perhaps if ii-a was written the interlinear oTrwswas intended to replace it. Above the end of
1. 4 there are slight traces of ink which may represent another insertion.
6. (^paxpas) K : cf. 34. 3. ijcri'X']' is written with an iota adscript also in P. Petrle
I. 19. 5 and III. 8. 5.
7. VTTo (Tov eTTKTToXrjv : cf. 34. 2 Kara npoaTaypa Acopiavos.
9-10. Cf. note on 34. i.
12. [[ tov] o-w/xaTorj] : cf. 34. 8.

16. paxnipo({)6]pov: paxaipo(f)6poi, are frequently met with in the second century b. c. (cf.
P. Tebt. 35. 13, note), but there seems to be no other mention of them in the third, pov
might also be the termination of a proper name but the supplement we have suggested is
;
more suitable to the context.
74. Order for Payment.

Mummy A. 8x24-2 cm. About b. c. 250.
A letter from one official to another, authorizing a payment of olyra (durra)

to three persons who are probably minor officials.
of the document, The conclusion
which belongs to the reign of Philadelphus or Euergetes, is lost. An interesting
conversion of artabae on the boxixov measure into artabae on the avijXoiTLKov
measure occurs in 11. 2-3, but the proportion of 40 38 which is found here brings :
the evidence of this papyrus into conflict with that from other sources ; cf. note
on 1. 2. The writing is across the fibres.
1 [] L 12 letters J
xa[i]pen'. liiTpi-jo-ov No^(ou)(î X^P^^'î^]^ '^^'^
"S2/3COI
228 HIBEH PAPYRI
2 ê/JiOecoi Kal 'Ap(Tii(f)$i[i rm irapa Te[co]ro[y] 6\vp{5>v) {apTdâ<i) 'Bt^tj
lS' flirpCOL So\LK(Ol,
3 [co](TTe y\Lvâ]6aL di^T]XooTLK(oL 'B(f), avfJ.(3o\a Se iroL-qaaL 7r/)[oj? avTO\ps] P,
TO fiu eu iy TO KXeop-dyov 6vo}J.a

yiveTai [{dpTaâL) 'Ay^nd, to 5'
4 [dpTa^cov) 'A^ durjXcoTiKcoi 'iTepov e/?
Tolfiov ouojxa {dpTa^ctiu) yjr^rjjLS ,
5 coaTe ytviaOai di'riX[(OTLKa)L (dpTdâs) o)i<^, to, ê (ri'///3[o]Xa iroiriaai npos

avTovs KaOd viroye-
6 ypa[7rr a* aoi. fiefXTp[r] i6 letters yp]afJ.fia.Tai9 Trj^ ZQ)[tXo]u 'voii\apyJa'i
1 [-M- - '
-Y
^TL 28 letters J5e[- ']'['- ]V
On the verso
Ke.
3. 1^0) oTf added in the margin. apr]\oiTiKoii above the line. 4. 1. tovixov.
'
. . . Nobonchis the agent, and Horus son of Semthcus, and
greeting. Measure to
TIarsemi)hthcus the subordinate of Teos 2368I artabae of olyra on the receiving measure,
wliich are on the spending measure 2500, and make two receipts with them, one in the
name of Cleomachus for 1600 artabae, equivalent to 1684 on the spending measure,
the other in my name for 768| artabae, equivalent to 816 on the spending measure, and
make the receipts with them as herein instructed . .
.'
2.
2368I artabae on the ôx'kov measure were equivalent to 2500 on the di>r]\u>TiKov
measure, being subdivided in 11. 4-5 into 1600 ô^. (which 1684 ai'r;X.)+ 768I Sox- (which =
= 816 (IvTjX.); the missing figures are supplied by the arithmetic. As often happens in
conversions from one standard to another, the ratios implied are not quite consistent,
being appro.ximately 71 75, 400: 421, and 161 171 in the three cases respectively.
: :
A proportion of about 20 21 seems to be that aimed at, i.e. i art. So;^. i-^^ durjX. The
: =
sizes and names of the different kinds of artabae mentioned in papyri give rise to many
problems for the most recent discussions of them cf. P. Tebt. 1. pp. 232-3, and Ilultsch,
;
Archiv, III. pp. 426-9. On the one hand there is a series of artabae ranging from 40 (or
42) to 24 chocnices, and on the other a series of artabae on measures which bear the names
8p6fJiov, dvrj'KoTiKov, FtiXXoi), tXi'777roii, 'E/)y:xou, x^'<"i^*', opiK<'>v, 0rj<jai^nK6v, and ôxikov, tO whicll
may now' be added the arlaba fitrpui rcbi x"'- ^'^' ^(ktiXikoh (84 [a). 6, 90. 11), and the art.
fjLtTpMi a
{ ) of apparently 40 choenices in 119. 18.
.
The main difficulty lies in the
fact that although the relative sizes of the first six of the artabae in the second series are
known from P. Brit. Mus. 265, in no case hitherto has there been direct evidence to
connect any of these six with an artaba of the first series. In order therefore to determine
the number of choenices in the artabae of the second series it is necessary to start from
an assumption that one particular artaba in it is identical with an arlaba in the first,
or at any rate has a definite number of choenices. In P. Tebt. /. c. we took as our
starting-point the supposed identity of the arlaba dnxiKa, which was known to be
an official measure and was shown by P. Tebt. 61 (6). 390 to be f of an artaba ^po^co, with
the artaba of 36 choenices often found in official corn-accounts in P. Tebt. I. From that
primary assumption we concluded that the art. hpoixa in P. Tebt. 61 {h) and P. Brit. Mus.
265 contained 42 choen., the art. ai/r^XwriKw 31-^ choen., and the art. ô^-^w SSyf choen.
Hultsch on the other hand, starting from the assumption that the art. 8po>a) contained 40
choen. attributes 31^ choen. to the art. xn^'f? and 29I choen. to the art. avr^XariKa.
The art. Soxikm, which in P. Tebt. 61 (b). 390 stood at a ratio of 6 7 to the art. 8p6fiu>, :
is not taken into consideration by Hultsch; it would on his view of the size of the
art. Spo/io) Applying these rival thecwies to the present passage,

contain 34f choen.
which gives the art. Sojîkm and avrjXcoTiKco, the ratio of 21
relative sizes of the 20 there :
indicated is equally inconsistent with our proposed ratio of 36 3ii and Hultsch's ratio
:
of 34f 29! and it is clear that whatever view be taken of the number of choenices
: ;
in the artabae Spdpw and toxixS in P. Tebt. 61 (5). 383, it is impossible to combine the
evidence of that passage with 74. 2 and P. Brit. Mus. 265 except by supposing either
that there are one or more errors in the arithmetic of the conversions, or, what is more
likely, that one at least of the three artabae 8oxiKm, Bp6fi<o, and avrj^coriKa, was capable of
variation in size. The inconsistency between the ratio of the art. 8oxiK(a and ihrjXoiTiKco
found in 74 and the ratio of them found by combining P. Tebt. 61 {l>). 383 with P. Brit.
Mus. 265 is easily intelligible, if e.g. the art. Sojîkw in 74 is not the same as the art.
8oxiKu> in P. Tebt. 61 (d). 390, or if the art. 8p6fia> in P. Tebt. 61 {i/). 390 is different
from'the art. 8p6fia> in P. Brit. INIus. 265, or if the art. di/rjXwTjKw in 74 is different from the
art. dvr]\oiTiK(a in P. Brit. Mus. 265. But without further evidence it is impossible to detect
by which of these three possible entrances the inconsistency has crept in. The ratio of
21 20 between the art. SoxtKa and ai/r^XwriKw found in 74 is thus irreconcilable for the
:
present with the other evidence for the relation of those two measures, but does it
correspond to the ratio of the art. dvriXcoTiKa to any other known artaba ? The answer to
that question is The ratio of the art. x^^^V to the art. durjXcoriKca in
in the affirmative.
P. Brit. Mus. 265 20; and from this correspondence it follows that, provided
is also 21 :
that the art. dvtjXooriKa is the same in both papyri, the art. Soxikw in 74 is approximately
identical with the art. x"î<w. Cf. also P. Petrie III. 129 {a). 4 8id(j)opov dvtjXcoriKa {nvpov)
p\e dv{a) e p / a^, where 5' per cent on 135 art.' seems to correspond, as Smyly remarks,
'
to the ratio of 21 20 between the art. xo^^V an<^ dvrjXuTiKa in P. Brit. JMus. 265, though
:
how the total of if artabae was reached is quite obscure. The present volume supplies
some important evidence as to the size of the art. x^^x^^ cf. 85. 18 perpwi rwt {(weaKam-'-
Kocn)x{oiviKcoi) Twt npos to xny^K^^vf. The phrase rail npos to x^^'ôvt', which is also found
e.g. in P. Amh. 43. 10 and P. Cairo 10250 {Arc/iiv, II. p. 80) without any previous
specification of the number of choenices, suggests that this art. of 29 choen. is the art.
xa\K(3 of P. Brit. Mus. 265. This inference is, however, far from certain, because the standard
measures, whatever their size, were probably all made in bronze (cf. P. Tebt. 5. 85 to
fv{(TTa6pa) iv Udarai vopici. dizohfhetypiva xn(X/ca), SC. P^Tpa), and the art. x"^'^^ "^^7 ^^'^H have
varied in size, as we have found reason to believe was the case with one at any rate of
the art. Spopw, 8oxi-kw, and aw^XcortKw. But assuming that the art. x"-^'^f in P. Brit. INIus. 265
contained 29 choenices we can deduce the approximate sizes of the other artabae in that
papyrus as follows :
XoKkm '.
230 HIBEH PAPYRI
those of the art.
I\Ius. 125, the ratios of which to each other correspond ahiiost exactly to
bpoixw, xnXKw, and'Ep/ioO in P. Brit. Mus. 265, we should obtain 372^ choen. for the art.
(ô/nKw, 29 for the art. BrjaavfUK^, and for the unnamed art. ; and with regard to 74. 2
30^
choen., and if
the art. ôxikw, being apparently identical with that x"Xkw, would contain 29
the art. So^t^ i" P- êbt. 61 {6). 390 also has 29 choen. the art. SpoVw there
contains 34^
art. There 'is a considerable element of uncertainty in these figures owing to the doubt
attaching to the fundamental assumption that the art. of 29 choen. Trpo? t6 xakKodv in 85. 13
is identical with the art. xa^^w in P.Brit. INIus. 265 but there seems to be as much evidence
;
for that hypothesis as for either the assumption that the art. boxiKc^ in P. Tebt. 61 (3). 390
contains 36 choen., which was the basis of our previous calculations, or the assumption that
the art. tpofico contains 40 choen., whi'ch is the basis of Hultsch's scheme. The phrase used
and 109. 20 eâxoivUwi dpopov Toil iv TJi TrpoyfypapfXivr] Kaprj [sC.
in P. Tebt. 105. 40 fiirpooi
KfpKfoaipft) 2ovxielov distinctly indicates that the piTpov 8p6pov of other temples might be
different, so that the phpov 8p6pov is a singularly unstable foundation upon which to build.
The peTpa TTapaboxiKa in 87- 12 are probably identical with the ptrpov fiox^w of 74,
and for another example of the pirpov avrjXoiTiKov cf. 101. 8.
6. Z(v\j\o]v [vop'apxias: cf. e.g. NiVcofos vopapx'ias in P. Petrie III. 37 {a), i. 4. If Zoilus
here is so often mentioned in these papyri (e.g. 96. 30), apx'ay may
the captain who is
be the termination of a military term ; but iKapxla does not occur in the Petrie papyri, and
the tTnrapxuu there are distinguished by numbers or by nationalities, not by the names of
their commanders.
75. Letter oi^- Theodurus to the Piivlacitae.
Mummy A 15. 10-5 x 10-3 cm. R.c. 232 (231).
A from Theodorus, probably an apxi-(Pi'^cLKLTi]'i or en-io-rarjj? (pvXaKLTOiv

letter
(though cf. 1 note), to the ûAoKirai of Talae in the KojtVrj^ totto^ (cf. 36. 3, note),
105. ,
ordering them to survey and deliver to the purchaser part of a kA?]/309, which had
reverted to the ownership of the State and was now being sold ;
cf. 52. 26, note.
Amongst other fragments from the same piece of cartonnage is part of a letter
from Theodorus to llarmiusis, who is probably identical with the Harmiusis in
36. 2 the 15th year in 1. 10 is therefore more likely to refer to Kuergetes than
:
to rhiladelphus ; cf. also 1. 3, note.
GeoScopo? Tols Iv Ta\dr]L (f)V[XaKirai9] \ai-

peif. yiypacp^v rjplu IJ^roaipLS to-
TTdp^ri/jioyp[afip.aTa) Trepip^rpijaare

avTcoi, TrXeof 8e /xt] TtpoUaOe coy
npos [v^fxd9 ToD [X]6yov icro/xii/ov.
10 eppcoao. (îrous) ie Tv^l (3.
3. // of nere i^fiov6r]i COIT. ?

-
'Theodorus to the guards at Talae, greeting. Petosiris the toparch and Peti-
mouthes tlie topogrammateus have written to me that they have sold to Philammon
out of the holding of Philoxenus at Take sf arourae of grass-aracus land. I'ake the
komogrammateus therefore with you, and measure the area to him, but do not part with
any more, knowing that you will be held responsible. Good-bye. The 15th year, Tubi 2.'
3. This Petimoulhes is probably identical with one or other of the topogrammateis

mentioned in 67. 7 and 68. 5 in the 1 9th year of Euergetes.
5. î\o$(vov KX{>)pov) a ^tXoîvov kXj'J/joj in the Oxyrhynchite nome is mentioned in 85.
:
13,where it is called âa-iXiKos, implying that it had reverted to the Crown like the 'l?i\o$fi>ov
K^pos in 75 of. 52. 26, note. Hence in spi:e of the difference of situation Philoxenus
;
may be the same person in both cases.

6. xoprapuKr] is a new compound, for which cf. 130 x^pfôpuKov.
76. Order for Payment.

Mummy A. 9.8 x 10 rw. b.c. 248 (247).
Aletter to Docimus, who is probably identical with the Docimus in 86

and was most likely a sitologus or other official connected with the State
granaries, from EupoHs, probably a higher official, authorizing a payment of
durra to be made to the lessee of a kXtjôs. is stated to be in This proceeding
accordance with the terms of the lease, and the durra was perhaps required
as an instalment of rent due to the landlord, but the mutilation of the important
word in 1. 8 leaves the object of the payment uncertain. The writing, which is
very ill-formed, is across the fibres, and apparently on the verso,
EvtToXl? Z(i>TTVp((iv(0S!) AoKlfiCiOL
âipeii'. TTpoov Tei/xoKpd-

rr]i Kara ttju auyypa(f)r]i'
rod KXrjpov ov e/iLcrdcoaaTiO
5 napa Kpeoi/ros rod Avt[ov6-

(xov TvvpS)v dpraôou r[pL-
aKocTLooi/ Trvri]Kovra [. .
ei[s'j 7r]v i . a . acpopiau [6\\v

232 IIIBEH PAPYRI
p\(ji>\v dprdâs d'Koai 7ret/[re.
lo ep[p]a)ao. (eroi/?) At;
On the recto
AoKlflOo'L
Eupolis son of Zopyrion to Docimus, greeting.

' Pay to Timocrates, in accordance
with contract concerning the holding which he has leased from Creon son of
the
Autonomus for 350 artabae of wheat, for the ... 25 artabae of olyra. Good-bye. The
38th year, Thoth 25. (Addressed) To Docimus.'
4-5. fiiia-SoxTaTo is doubtful, but is preferable to inladoâev, although the middle

and active forms of hi(t6ovv are occasionally confused in later papyri, e.g. P. Gen. 69 and
70. It would no doubt also be possible to translate (niaduaev in the normal way by
connecting napa Kpfdj/ror with TTpoov and^ making wvpajv . TrevrfiKovra a partitive genitive;
. .
and would of course account for the payment to Timocrates.

this Put the general
structure of the sentence and the absence of cmo before nvpuv are in favour of the other
interpretation.
7. Possibly but more probably the line ended
7r(VTi]KovTn [(^, with n(VTi]KovTa.
8. None of the known words ending in -acpopia suits the context, and there is no
sufficient justification for altering -a(})opiav to -ocpopiav, or -u(popav, though it is possible that
the word is e.g. ava(f)opiav, having the same meaning as ai'a(popuv. There might then be
some connexion between it and the /3 dvacpopd found in P. Tebt. 100. ai/(i(/)opia:/, however,
does not fill the space required here, and there is no stroke above the first letter to indicate
that it is a figure. The mention of the 350 artabae of wheat for rent in 1. 6 shows that
the 25 artabae of olyra were in some way connected with that amount, perhaps forming
part of it.
77. Letter concerning the Priestly Revenues.
Mummy A. i5-2X2i-8fw. 8.0.249(248).
Conclusion of a circular addressed vêry likely by the dioecctes or some

other high personage to officials in, probably, the Heracleopolitc nomc (cf. 1. 1 and
more temples the due payment of their revenues cf.
110. 5), securing to one or ;
the similar decreeby Euergetes II in P. Tebt. 6. A double date of particular

importance occurs in I. 8 cf. App. i. p. 341. ;
[ 30 letters le.i jcoi 'HpaK\d(io[i
[ 30 J,
pov TracrTO<p6poL?
[ ] Toov \oyiV(jpvT(i)V Lva avvnXrjTaL to, I'Ofxiôp.eya

[to'ls ^leor? Kaddirep 6 âaiXev^ cnrovSdêi. Aoyeuot-rey Se
5 [Trapa] coy Kal rrpoTepov elcoOei to irpoSiBopievov aTroKaOicTTare

'
,] crvvTirdyiieQa yap irepl tS)U t^Xoovlkcov k(f) Sn
[tols êlo?? [to.] kpa crco6^(Ta6ai KaOa Kal npoTepoi'.
(erouy) X^ 'ApTfjt.L(TLOv Ky Ilayoov k(3.
3. 1. XoyfvovTiov.
'
... in order that the customary payments may be made to the gods in accordance with
the king's desire. So from the same persons as before and restore (to the priests)
collect
the amounts previously paid to them, for we have received instructions with regard to the
collection of taxes that the sacred revenues (?) are to be preserved for the gods as in former
times. The 36th year, Artemisius 23, Pachon 22.'
78. Letter of Nicias to Argaeus.
Mummy A 13. 21-8 x 9-4 c'î- b. c. 244-3 (243-2)-
A letter to Argaeus from Nicias requesting that two persons should be

released from some public service, the nature of which is not specified. As the
scene was Alabastropolis, it was probably connected with quarrying. The writer
and addressee no doubt occupied official positions, but there is no indication
of their rank. The 4th year (1. 24) refers no doubt to the reign of Euergetes.
NtKia? 'Apyatcoi yâipuv. nXeo-

vaKi'i p-ov yeypacpTj KOTOS croL Trep[l
ZcotXov Kal npaîpd)(ov oTav

XcLTOvpyia Trpocnricrrjt aTroXy-
5 eiu avTOVs Kal ovSeTTOTe v[7ra-

K-qKOaS Tjpcot/. TL OVV Kal VVV
eiripeXis <toi 'iaTco dnoXv-

Li/ avTOvs TTjs VVV ds AXa-
^doTTpoov TToXiv XuTOvpyias
10 Slo. to prj eKTre(T[L]v avTois to
VVV XeiTovpyrjaai, Kal kav

(K Tov '0^vpvy[x]iTou iniXi-
ycovTat ZmXov dnoXvaas

kav Sk K TOV KcotTov npa-
15 îpayov kav 5e pr] Svva-
234 HIBEH PAPYRI
ros rjaOa dnoXvaai ypd-ôiji)
jjiOL Kal O7rco9 dTr6\\rjii-\û
rrji' ypa<priv Tvapa. Acopiooi'o? dvev

epov 'iva Si kpov to napdy-
20 yfXpa ToTs di/6pco7roi9
Sodfji.
tppccao. ^
{iTOVS ?) [S J
On tlic verso
2nd hand {erov?) 8, 7rp[i Zm-
25 Xov.
10. ea o[ (KTT(n- tLv above the hne. 18. ypii(j)i]v above the Hue.
Nicias to Aigaeus, greeting.

'
Though I have often written to you about Zoilus and
Praximachus, to release them when they are called upon to serve, you have never listened
to me. So now at last be careful to release them from their present service at Alabastro-
polis because it is not at present their turn to serve and if people are being chosen from ;
the Oxyrhynchite nome release Zoilus, if from the Koite toparchy, Praximachus. If,
however, you are unable to release them, write to me and get the document from Dorion
without me, so that I may be the means of giving the men the order. Good-bye. The 4th
year . (Endorsed) The 4th year, concerning Zoilus.'
. .
Cf. P. Petrie II. 47. 378 'KdT ovpydv iv AXaf^daTpuiv TToXet.

8. .\\a;3(i(rTpoop ttoXis ' '
is presumably identical with the village in the Hermopolite nome which in Roman times
was called "AXofdaa-TinfT] cf. B. G. U. 553. B, iii. i. Alabastropolis is placed by Ptolemy
;
at some distance from the river, to the south-east of Cynopolis and immediately opposite
Plermopolis. XdTovpyos as a title occurs in 96. 14.
10. iKTrea[(7v, if right, must have much the same sense as Tzpoantorî in 1. 4. The word
has ap{)arently been corrected ; cf. critical note.
16. rj<j6a for )}$ is a grammatical curiosity, perhaps due to a confusion caused by
the use of ^y for rjaOa.
Two persons called Dorion held the oflice of fVarruTr;? (jnâKnoiv in the Oxyrhyn-
]8.
and Ilcracleopolite nomes respectively at this time (cf. 34. 2, 72. 4), and the Dorion in
chite
78 may be identical with one of them or widi die Dorion at Phcbichis (if he be a distinct
person) who occurs in 106. 9. &c.
79. Lkttkr uf Ptoi.ioiaki's to IIi;ra(L1i)Es.
iNIunun} 87. 10-2 x 8-5 rw. About n. c. 260.
This fragment of a letter is noticeable for its elaborate introductory formula,

which resembles, though it does not c]uite coincide with, that in P. Petrie III. ^^ {o)\
cf. II. ]3 (6). 1-3. The date is probably within the reign of Philadelphus.
nTo\fiato9 'HpaKXeiSei
yâLp^w. el eppooaai Ko.l
Zv TTpOVOLaV TTOiel KOL

TclXXa aoL Kara Xoyov karh'
5 etirj) av 0)9 eyo) deXoo Kal
To?9 Oeoh ttoXXt] ^d[pL^s,
vytaivov 8e Kal aivTO?.

'
?/5.-[ ]
ev)(apicrTT]ae[LS fi]oL
On the verso
'HpaKXeiSei.
'
Ptolemaeus to Heraclides, greeting. If you are well, and if the objects of your care
and other concerns are to your mind I should be glad, and much gratitude would be due
to the gods I myself am also in good

; health. You will oblige me . .
.'
8. The letters above the line are very blurred and may have been cancelled, i^fê'co? is
unsatisfactory.
80. Export of Wine.
Mummy 117. 17-3 X 12-1 r///. B.C. 250.
A notice from Epichares to Chaeremon that Horus and another person

(cf. note on 11. 2-3) were each exporting two jars of wine from villages in
the Heracleopolite nome to Hiera Nesus, and that the tax of 2V h^î not been
paid. no doubt the village of that name in the south of
This Hiera Nesus is
the Fayum (cf. where Chaeremon presumably held an official post

e.g. 81. 16),
and the tax of -^^ is probably to be regarded as an export duty analogous to
those known in the Roman period. It may be conjectured that these tickets
were given to the persons exporting the commodity, and that they had to produce
them on reaching their destination. At the end i^ a signature in demotic,
having an important date by two different systems of reckoning the king s years ;
cf. note ad loc. 154-5 are similar notices passing between the same officials.
The writing is across the fibres of the papyrus.
'ETTL^dprj^ Xai'p'^rjlfxoui â'ipe[iv.
[ejâyf.i
236 HIBEH PAPYRI
'lepau Nrjaov o'lvov K[epdfj.ia) ^ cov K B oy TT[7rpd])(a-
5 }xei'. eppcoao. [erovs) Xe [[iTaf]] Enelcp \
2nd hand 'Emxapf]^ Xaiprjfxoi'i 'âipeiv.
^^dy^[L\ ^flpos TecoTo? e>c &ix[oi-
veOvfxeco^ rod 'H]pa[KXo-

7r[o]Xir[ov] yolfio]!) ([is 'lp]a[i/
10 Nrjaou oLvov K[epdfiia) /3 coi/ k S'
ov 7re7r[p]aâ/êr. 'ippcoao. (j^tovs) Xe

'Eirel^ 8.
On the verso
15 ^flpo<i TecoTos.
6-14. 'Epicharcs to Chaeremon, greeting. Horus son of Teos is exporting from

Thmoinethumis in the Heracleopolite nome to Hicra Nesus 2 jars of Mine, on which
we
have not exacted a 24th. Good-bye. The 35th year, Epeiph 4.
(vîgned in demotic)
'
Written by Haruotes, 2 measures of wine Written in year . . .
34 which makes year 35, Epeiph 4.'
2_o. We
aic unable to reconcile the vestiges at the beginning of 1. 3 with enoiv(6vn(us,
neither indistinct letters in 1. 2 well suit ^Cipos Te^To?, and a longer name seems
do the very
to be recjuired. It is therefore preferable to suppose that this is not a single notice
in duplicate, but two distinct notices written on the same sheet. Perhaps Ilorus and the
other person were going in company. 154-5 also are not in duplicate.
13-4. For the transcription and translation of the demotic signature of the scribe wc
are indebted to Mr. Grifliih. It contains the earliest extant mention of the two different
methods of counting Uic king's years, which is found also in P. Petrie III. 58 {d) and
P. IMagd. 35 ; Smyly, Ilcnnathina, X. No. xxv, p. 432, and our discussion in App. ii.
cf.
pp. 358-367. The 'revenue' year, wl)ich in those two papyri is explicitly called the year wcnl
TT/jo'o-oaot, "began, we think, on Thoth i and the figures denoting it were sometimes one
,
unit
in advance of those of the regnal year. '

In the present case the 35th is the revenue year,
'
the 34th the regnal and the jiapyrus shows that the 35th regnal year of Philadelphus must
;
have begun later than Epeiph 4, i. e. more than 10 months after the beginning of the 35th
revenue year.
81. Official Correspondence concerning Cleruchs.
Mummy 98. 28-8 x 25-8 cm. b.c 238 (237).
This papyrus and the next both belong to the correspondence of Asclepiades,
an officialof some importance in the Arsinoite nome in the 9th year (of
Euergetes). 81 contains a series of letters from Artemidorus. giving information
of the death of certain cavalry soldiers, and directing that possession of their
holdings should be resumed by the government. The language of Artemidorus
plainly implies that the reversion of such KAf/pot to the State at their owner's
death was the usual course at this period. That fact was not before definitely
ascertained, though it had been inferred from the apparent inability of cleruchs to
dispose of their holdings by will. In the second century B. C. it became customary
for the cleruchic holding to pass from father to son, and it is possible that at the date
of our papyrus also sons of cleruchs commonly received their fathers' holdings
by a fresh grant from the State ; but this practice has yet to be proved. Even
in the later period a cleruch's rights of ownership were by no means complete ;
cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 555-6.

Besides the column printed there are the ends of lines of the preceding
column, which, as the words \xepihos and K-Ai/jpouj indicate,

]
was of a like character.
Adhering on the right is part of a new sheet containing the beginnings of lines
of another letter from Artemidorus, with an enclosure addressed to Nicanor
similar to that in 5-10 one of the holdings referred to was h apâiOoi^, i.e.
11. ;
the Arsinoite village. There is also a separate strip having the first letters of
lines preceded by a rather broad margin, which may have been the commence-
ment of the roll possibly it belongs to Col. of the main fragment. Q^{}xiaTov)
;
i
occurs in the margin ; cf. 1. 15 below. On the verso are parts of three much
effaced columns in a small hand.
Col. ii.
yipTeiJii8a)po9' V7rcyypa(p[d a]oL rrj9 npo? NtKavopa ctti-
aroXfJ9 TO avTiypaôv o\7ra)S e/j^Tjiy.
[{tTOVs) 6] âaxpi k'6.]
5 NiKOLVopli.] ol VTroyeypaiiix[i]voL Itttt^'ls reT[e]XeuTr]Ka(nu,
dvaXaê ovv avTcov [toj)]? K\rjpov{aKXu ov)
[
Mcna, kv &e[oyôl'lSL rcoi' AaKm'os Ao(xayos)
^ '
lxavo9 ^Ka .[..., iv TefSeTVOL rcov ZcoanroAio9
10 [ y 'AfXfxcoinos Att' 01'. (irovi) âaxpi k6.
I
Xo\La)(_ S.
'Apre}xiScop[o]y 'Ao-KXijTridSei \aip^LV. ol VTroy^ypanpAiOL
LTTTTUS TeT\evTrJKaau\ dvdXaê oi'v avrccv
"ouy KXijpous e/y to (SacnXiKoi'- eV 'HpaKXefac

0i{fiiaTov)
15 rfj9 Qefxiarov fiepiSos rcov Adfxcopos Xo{xa-yos) Aiaypos

Aiofvaocpdi'ov?, Tcoi' avTU)V Se^Kai'iKO'i) îXooviSrjs
'AprefiiSd)pov, kv 'lepaL Nt^ctcol ttjs TloXeficovo^
Tu>v Aixa Se^Kai'LKos) 'ElSpvêfXLS Zioxopov. {erov9) 'Advp Ki].
id.
20 AprefxiScopo? A(TKXi]Tnd8ei x^îpeLP. vnoyeypacpd aoL

Tfj9 irpos NiKdvopa 7rio-roA^? rdvTLypaôv ovoiS e/5î[?.
itrovs) 6 XoLax irj.
'
Artemidoius: I have written below for your information a copy of my letter to
Nicanor. The
9th year, Phaophi 29.
, 1 1
To Nicanor. The cavalry soldiers below-written have died therefore take back their
'
;
holdings for the State. At Bubastus of the troop of Epimenes, Sitalces son of ... captain ; ,
machus son of Sea captain at Tebetnu of

at Thcogonis of the troop of Lacon, . . . . . . , ;
the troop of Sosipolis, Ammonius son of The 9th year, Phaophi 29. A . . .
'Choiak 4. Artemidorus to Asclepiades, greeting. The cavalry soldiers below-

written have died therefore take back their holdings for the State.
;
At Ileraclia in the
division of Themistes, of the troop of Damon, Lcagrus son of Dionysophanes, captain, of
the same troop Philonidcs son of Artemidorus, decurion at Iliera Nesus in the division of ;
Polemon, of the troop of Lichas, Ebruzemis son of Ziochorus, decurion. The 9th year,
Athur 28.'
1. The day of tlie month, referring to the dale on which the letter was received, was
no doubt prefixed as in 11. 1 1 and 19.
7. cf. P. Petrie III. 4 (2). 29 twv A'o/icov]of Xnxay6i

Xo(xayos) :
The Damon mentioned .
there and elsewhere in the Petrie papyri was doubtless identical with the Damon in 1. 15 below.
The marginal entries below this and the next line give the iifpides of the villages, Bubastus
being in that of Ilcraclides, and Theogonis and Tebetnu in that of Polemon ; cf. 1. 15.
10. The first word of this line should be a title, perhaps [liyefiMy.
16. The abbreviation of 6f koi'ikw (cf. note on 30. 13), recurs in 103. 7, and consists of /
a A with the right side omitted, followed by an f. /
18. The troop of Lichas, like that of Damon (1. i", ; cf. note on 1. 7), also occurs in
the Petrie papyri, e.g. I. 16 (i). 12.

82. Official Correspondence.
Mummy 98. 33 X 38-4 an. b.c 239-8 (238-7).
This papyrus, like 81, contains copies of a series of letters addressed to

Asclepiades, but though written in the same hand it is part of a different roll.
In this case the letters are copied on the verso of a demotic document, and there
are other points of difference. The dates in 81 are on the Egyptian calendar and
in chronological order 82 the calendar used is the Macedonian, and the
; in
chronological order is reversed. There the letters were from a single person and
dealt with one subject here the writers, in at least two cases out of the three,
;
are different, and their subjects miscellaneous. The first correspondent, whose
name is lost, writes commending to the care of Asclepiades a letter which was
to be delivered in the Heracleopolite nome. The second letter, which is sent
by Aphrus, announces the appointment of a scribe of those cleruchs who had
been sent to the Arsinoite nome in the 6th and 7th years (of Euergetes).
Those two years were therefore marked by new settlements in the Fayum on
a considerable scale. The subject of the third letter is some timber, which the
writer, Sopater, wished to be sold for the benefit of the Treasury.
Col. i.
f, J
. , . , ,
^ ,
[ 'A(TK\r] rndSei y^âcpiiy. îfx-qy^L to)L
\arro86vri rrfv Trapa aov ypacpeiaav rjfiLu
[eTTicroX^t'] nepl rod di'TLXeyofxevov afrov
5 'ou aTricTTaXKa? 7rpo9 r]fid9 eV re rcoc
K, epKOvpcoL Kal kv dWcoL KepKovpcoi
[Kai Tj/xeh S eScoKa/xeu einaToXr]!/
/j.iTaKo^fii(Tai Trpoy Nvaiof rov criToXoyov

rod ' HpaKXeoTToXiTov. /caX^y ovu TTOirjaei^
10 ^povTLcras OTTCti? eTTi/ieXco? aTToSodfji,
'iarLv yap dvayKaiorepa nepl d)U yeypdâfiei/ avrdn.
(erofy) 6 'TneplSepiTaiov k(.
"A(ppos 'AaKXrjTndSei yâLpew. KaOearrJKafiei^
15 ypa/jL/xarea 'laoKpdri-jV rcou dnearaXfj.ira)]u

240 HIBEH PAPYRI
e/9 Tov 'Apat]uoiri]i' kXi) pov^cov kv root t (eVet)
Kal T(io,}> Iv TcoL ^ {^~î-) 7ro Aaiatov. /caAco? ovv Vlo/jycreiy

avimi>\rC\K\a'\iJLâv6jx^vo^ 7Tpo6vnco9 nepl tcov
e/y ravra crvyKvpovToav tva Kara tottov

20 . (^dyrjTaL to, Kara ti]v ypamiardav
Kal /j.7]deu Trapa\i7ry]TaL Tm> tool âcriX^L
^pr](Tijxa>y. (îrovs) Top-maiov u.
Col. ii.
r
1
^coTrarpo^ 'AcrKX[ri7rLa.8L yaipav.
25 KaXco^ TTOLTjaîs jT\a[pa Xa^\oiv j

[
TOV Trap Tjficou ypafi/xarea Kal

Toiis elOiafJ.ii'ov^ diroSov^ T[a\
virdpyovra ^vXa XPV^ji^l ^/?

a kcTTLV iv Tai[i 1
30 [oJTro)? 7] Tifir} TrearjL 'rcoji (3acnXei.
(eVoyy) 6 Acoioy kS.
... to Asclepiades, greeting.

'
Phimenis, the bearer of the letter written from you to
me about the disputed corn which you sent to us in the boat of and another boat, . . ,
has been given a letter by me to be forwarded to Nysius, the sitologus of the Heracleopolite
nome. Kindly see that it is carefully delivered, for the matter on which I have written to
him is rather urgent. The 9th year, Hyperberetaeus 27.
17th.
'
Aphrus to Asclepiades, greeting. I have appointed Isocrates as scribe of the
cleruchs sent to the Arsinoite nome in the 6th and 7 th years from Daisius. Please
therefore to give your zealous co-operation in all that concerns this, in order that the duties
of the scribe's ofiice may be performed in the district and none of the king's interests may
be neglected. The 9th year, Gorpiaeus 15.
'
th.
. Sopater to Asclepiades, greeting.
. Kindly take our scribe and the other . . .
accustomed persons, and deliver the 32 good logs which arc in the ., in order that their . .
value may be paid to the king. The 9th year, Loius 24.'
6, K[ep\Kovpo}i: cf.P. IMagd. 37. 2, &c.

8. Cf. 83. 2-3 Tui aiTo'Koy[o]vvTi ruv 'o^vpvyxiTi]v. It is doubtful whether in these cases
stress is to be laid upon tlie article or not, i.e. whether the person named was the sitologus
in chief or only one of a number of subordinates.
12. In the 9th year of Euergetes Ilyp-erberetaeus approximately coincided with Athur,
Gorpiaeus (1. 22) with Phaophi, and Loius (1. 31) with Thoth cf. App. i. ;
15. ypnixfinTia . . , KKrjpov\cov: cf. the (nicmiTtji Ka\ ypnpp.aT(vs ruv kotoIkuv Imrfuv in P.
Tebt. 32. 15, &c.
if right, was perhaps followed by the name of the ypafxy-aTevs.

25. [7r]a[pa]\o^[a)I',
27. cannot be read but a-nohovs is suitable enough in the sense of delivering
aTToSo/ifi/oy :
'
for the purpose of the sale implied by 1. 30,

28. The doubtful X might be the a of xPW^^ but it is written quite close to the ^, and
)
two logs only would hardly have formed the subject of a letter.
83. Letter concerning a Payment of Corn.
Mummy 63. ii-iixS-Srw. About b.c. 258-7.
Conclusion of a letter in which the addressee, probably an official connected

with the royal granaries, is urged to lose no time in making a considerable
payment in kind. The payment is described as a crtro/xerp/a, a term not

infrequent at this period in the sense of allowances or salaries from either the
State or private persons; cf. 118. 37, P. Petrie III. 87 [a). 17, 141. 15. The
27th and 38th years (of Philadelphus) are referred to in 11. 5-6.
[. . .] .[.].R.[
[..].. KpdrH ra>L ctlto-
Xoy[o]vuTL Tov O^vpvy-

yir-qv ncrpTJcraL rrji/
5 (TirofxeTpiai' rod k^
Kal KT] (erouy) {irvpciov) [aprdâs:) iryy
Kol KpiOctiv [dpTd(3as) nyy.

el ovv /XT] /xe(jie)Tpr]Ka9 vvv fx^rprjaov avrcoi,
Kal rovTO /XT} iXKva-rjt^,
10 ov yap eniT-qSeio^ ecrriy.
eppcocro.
[(eroi^y)
8. This line inserted later. 9. tjh of eXKV(7r;tj written above BfTa (which is not
crossed through), and the first <r corr. from 6. 10. 1. emTi'idfiov?
'
. to
. . crates the sitologus of the Oxyrhynchite nome to measure out the allowance
. . .
of corn for the 27th and 28th years, 83-1 artabae of wheat and 83^ artabae of barley. If,
therefore, you have not yet measured it to him do so now, and do not let this be delayed,
for it (?) is inconvenient. Good-bye.'
R
242 HIBEH PAPYRI
2-3. Twt a-troXoy[o]Oi/rt : cf. note Oil 82. 8, and for the phrase cf. e.g. P. Oxy. 246. 4
Tois ypucpovcn rbv vi^fxov.
8. avT(ot ; i.e. the person who was to receive the a-iTOfieTpia, not the sitologus.
10. If eVtrijSaor is right, it must refer to avToti, '
he is a disagreeable person '
; but the
correction to fmrri^dov gives a more natural sense.
Vlir. CONTRACTS
84 {a). Sale of Wheat.
Mummy 5. 22-5 x 17-5 <;v//. b.c. 301-0. Plate IX.
The following contract between two Greek settlers at Perce in the Koite
toparchy for the sale of 30 artabae of wheat claims the honour of being the first
dated Greek papyrus of the reign of Soter. All the documents derived from
Mummy 5 are remarkably early (cf. 97, 100-1) but the present ; is by far the
most ancient of them, being actually dated in the 5th year of '
the reign of
Ptolemy,' by whom only Ptolemy Soter can be meant. As the contract is
fortunately in duplicate the possibility of a mistake on the part of the scribe,

such as the omission of the son of Ptolemy,' is very remote.
'
The cursive
handwriting however, though obviously of the earliest type, gives little indication
of its extreme antiquity, and without the date could not have been judged to
be appreciably older than other examples in this volume, e. g. 97. Curiously

enough, demotic papyri of Soter's reign are almost equally rare not more than ;
two are known to Mr. Griffith {Demotic Papyri in the John Ry lands Library,
P- 123).
The assumed kingly power is not certain. The
precise year in which Soter
Canon Ptolemy assigns 20 years to his reign, and it has been generally
of
supposed (cf Strack, Dynastic dcr Ptolcmder, pp. 1 89-9 ) that he became king 1
in B. C. 304 before Nov. 7, and abdicated in the course of his 21st (revenue) year,
i.e. between Nov. 2, B.C. 28-3 and Nov. i, B.C. 2(S4. The Rylands demotic
contract to be published by Mr. Griffith was written in Phamenoth of his
2ist year, and can easily be reconciled with the received chronology if the year
in question was a revenue year for the month in which Phiiadelphus' accession
;
took place is unknown, and there is no difficulty in placing that event later than
Phamenoth (May) B.C. 284, provided that it be not later than Nov. i. But
there is good reason to believe that in dating ordinary contracts the revenue
84 (a). CONTRACTS 243
year was not employed (cf. App. ii. p. 362), and if the 21st year in the demotic
papyrus is a regnal year, various difficulties arise. From other instances in the
reigns of Philadelphus, Euergetes, and Philopator it appears that the regnal
years of the sovereign were sometimes, perhaps always, one in arrear of the
revenue years and if the 21st regnal year of Soter corresponded in whole or
;
part to his 22nd revenue year, the Canon of Ptolemy seems to be wrong in
assigning him only 20 years, and his assumption of kingly power must, unless
the date of Philadelphus' accession be altered, be put back a year or more,
i.e. to B.C. 305 or earlier cf. Mahaffy, T/ie Ptolemaic Dynasty, p. 44.
; In 84 {a), in
which the months are Macedonian, the }êar, whether calculated by a Macedonian
or Egyptian system, is not the least likely to be a revenue year (cf. p. 365) and ;
owing to the prevailing uncertainty as to the methods of reckoning non-revenue

years in the 3rd century B.C., the 5th year of Soter may fall within B.C. 301-0,
300-299, or even earlier than B. C. 301,
The most interesting point in the papyrus is the occurrence of k<^ lepecoy
K.T.A. in the date-formula. This disposes of a much disputed question, for the '
priest' here can be no other than the priest of Alexander, and therefore the
official cult of Alexander was already established in Egypt at this early period
cf. App. iii. p. 368. The delivery of the wheat sold by the contract was postponed
until after the harvest (1. 5), so that many of the provisions of the document
follow the formula of loans.
\'Ba<TCkwovTO<i nTo\^jxaLo\v 0' ipeo)9 MeveXaov tov Aa/xaxov e (erof9) /xj]-
[j'oy Alo]v. d7riSoT[o] ' E-n-iniur]^ 'AOrjvalo^ Ti/xoKXd XaXKiSd ttv-
[pcou d]pTdâ9 TpiaKovra, koI ttji' Ti/irji^ ctTrex^' 'Eiri/xiur^^ ira-
[pa Ti]fjLOKXiov9 d/xa ttji crvfypacpfji. diroSSTO) Se 'E-m/xei/rj^ t6[i^
5 [crrjrot' TifioKXei eylv} ^j^y t^v iTnovroov dir dXco (v fxrjvl Ila-
viqficoi alrov KaOapov diro iravrcDV fLerpan tcol -vol tcol /3[a]criAi<[(i
iv KcofiTjL nep6i]i, lav 81 jjli] dnoScoL aTToretoraro) 'Eirilfxi-

VT]^ TifiOKXeT TifXTju TTJs dprd^r]^ iKacTTr)^ Spa^/xd^
[reo-jcrapay, kuI 77 npaî^ eVro) Tt/xoKXei (k{k\ rcov virapy(6v-
10 [T(xiv t5)v E-mfxevojif^ irpdaaovTi Tpoircoi col du ôvXrjrat.
Tj o[k avvypa(f)i] rjSe K]vpia eoTO) orai/ e7n(pep7]i Ti/xokXtjs
r) [aXXo? Ti? VTrep Tifx.OKX]ioyy irpdcrcroov Kara Tavra.
fxdprvp^^ I[ J]i[o]yy<Tios \Â]pi(TT6/j.axo9 MeA[f .
-
yoc^ ^Tda-LTTTTos K[ ]oy, awypacpocpvXa^ Aiou[v(tios

15 ['ilJjoa/cAeouy.
R 2
244 HIBEH PAPYRI
[^\a(TL\\yvovTO^ nToX[efi]aiov kcj) Upeoo9 MeiêXdov tov Aafid-
[)(o]i; 6 i^^TOVs) iir]v\o'S Aiov.] direSoTO ' E7ri/xei^r]9 'A6r]i'a7o9 Tijjlo-
[/cXe]r XaXKiSei iTvp[(ii>]v dpTd(3a^ rpidKovra Kai ri^v Ti/J.r)v
[dTri\]i 'EnL[p.k\vr)S napd TLpoKXeo[v9] ajia rfJL aui^ypa^fji.
20 [d7roS6T]co $e 'Em/xii'ij^ rov alrou TipoKXî [ey ue]a)[y ro>v
[lTT]ioi'TOi)v d\Tr dXoo ejt/ fxrjul TIavrjp.(iiL alrov KaOapov [aJTro
7ra[j/]Tcoi' [/zjerfpwjt rcoi \ôl rm âaiX[LK]a)C kv K[d)]fxrjL [Uj^porji,
kctv (5[e] /zr; diroSm diror^LadrM 'E[7rt]fxiuT]^ Ti/xoKXei
[rifxr]^ Tr]9] dpT[d](3r)^ iKda-rr]^ 8pa\ixds riacrapa^, Kal 17
25 [Trpaîjy 'iaT[Q) TijijoKXei e/c rooi^ V7Tap')(6vTOiv rwv Ettl-
[/levov^ Trpd(J(TOv\TL rpoTrcoi S)L di^ (3ovXr]Tai. 17 Sk crfi'ypa[077
[r]8e KVpia eVro) ojraj' [k-mêjpj] Ti/jlokXtj^ rj dXXo9 t[i9
[virep Tf/zo/cXeouy Trpdaaoov Ka\Td r[a\vTa. ndp[TV-

[pey
On the verso
30 MeXi 'E7rtiJievo[v9
Aioi'y[aio\u T[ifio]i<X^[ov9
5 and 21. 1. (((/)' "Xw. 14. Above ](> a second s?
In the reign of Plolemy, in the priesthood of Menelaus son of Lamachus, the 5th
'
year, the month Dius.

in Epimenes, Athenian, has sold to Timoclcs, Chalcidian, 30
arlabae of wheat, and Epimenes has received the price from Timocles concurrently with
this contract. Epimenes shall deliver the corn to Timocles out of the coming new crops
from the threshing-floor in the month Panemus free from all adulteration by royal . . .
measure at the village of Peroe and he fails to deliver it Epimenes shall forfeit to
; if
Timoclcs as the value of each artaba 4 drachmae, and Timocles shall have the right of
execution uj)on the property of E[)imencs and may enforce it in any manner he chooses.
This contract shall be valid whenever produced by Timocles or any other person on
Timocles' behalf, executing it as aforesaid. The witnesses are Dionysius, Arislomachus, . .
.
,
Mcli Stasippus, C
. . . , us. The keeper of the contract is Dion^'sius son of Heracles.'
. . .
2. Ai'ou is restored here and in 1. i 7 as best suited to the space.

4. iIttoî'itu) here refers to the delivery of the corn. The use of the same verb in two
difl'erent senses within tliree lines is somewhat awkward.
5. Since the month Panemus coincided with the period of harvest, it must have
partially or completely corresponded with one of the Egyptian months Pharmouthi, Pachon,
or Pauni. Eor the significance of this equation cf. Ajip. i. p. 339.
6. x<" cf. 90. I r, where this obscure measure ai:)parently occurs again, fitrpui ô"

Tcoi ... In the present passage x"'-'^"^ or X"^'^"^ might be read and explained as a mis-
84 {p). CONTRACTS 245
spelling for Kco/rou, but 90 shows that this is inadmissible. The form suggests a connexion
wiih x^î but since the ôOy was a liquid measure, that explanation also is unsuitable.
8-9. 4 drachmae (cf. 65. 24) represent twice the normal value of an artaba of wheat
in Middle Egypt; cf. 100. 6, 110. 6, P. Petrie III. 80. 16, &c. In 99. 14 the price is
2 dr. I obol, and in 90. 15 the penalty value is fixed at 5 dr. For corn transported to
and sold at Alexandria the high price of 4 dr. 5 ob. is found in 110. 1 1.
12. Tavra: OV Taird ?
14. The avyy pa(})o(f)v\a^ (cf. P. Tebt. 105. 53, note) here occupies the second position
in the list of witnesses, as in 96. 12. He is sometimes placed first, e.g. P. Tebt. 104. 34,
105- 53, but there was no regular order in P. Petrie II. 47, 30-3 the avyypa(f)o(jj{,\ii^ comes
;
fourth or fifth. The name MeX[i vois (?) probably recurs on the verso 1. 30, but the
.
termination is not decipherable.

30-31. If 'ETTififvo vs and T[i/jo^KX([ovy are rightly read, a fourth pair of names is lost at
the beginning of these lines.
84 {5). Date by a Ptolemaic Era (?).
Mummy 5. 2-4 x 6-4 <r;;/. b.c. 272-1 (?). Plate VII.
From the same cartonnage as 84 (a) comes a fragment bearing the following
remarkable date from the commencement of a document.
{"Erov9) fi fMr]uo[9
Thewriting is large and clear, and there is not the faintest doubt about the
figure. But according to the accepted chronology, Philadelphus, to whom
the Canon of Ptolemy assigns 38 years, died in his 39th year (cf. p. 364) ;
and the only Ptolemy who reached his 40th year, Euergetes II, is of course
quite out of the question here. Hence without disturbing to an unjustifiable
extent the ordinary view of the length of Philadelphus^ reign 84 {d) cannot be
referred to the 40th year,whether revenue or regnal (cf. App. ii), of the second
Ptolemy, so that apparently this date refers to some era. An era Kara Aiovvaiov
which started from the ist year of Philadelphus is cited by Ptolemy (cf. Bouch6-
Leclercq, JTzs^. des Lagides,
I. p. 99) but from the company in which the
;
fragment was found and the character of the hand a date in the first half of
the reign of Philadelphus would be much more suitable. Such a date may
perhaps be obtained by identifying this era with that found on a large series of
coins struck in years ranging from the 42nd to the 1 1 7th. Svoronos {Lcs Monnaies
de Ptolthnce II qui portoit dates, pp. 52 sqq., Ta ro/^to-juara rSiv IlroAe/Aatcdz^,
pp. 193 sqq.) supposes that the starting-point is the year B.C. 311-10, in which
246 HIBEH PAPYRI
the death of Alexander IV left Soter practically the monarch of Egypt, and that
the coins come from Cyprus or Palestine. Svoronos' classification of Ptolemaic
coins marks a great advance upon that of Poole, but many of his proposed dates
for different series are very uncertain (cf. G. Macdonald's criticisms in the
footnotes to the section concerning Ptolemaic coins in Catal. of the Greek Coins
in the Hnnterian Collection, vol. iii, and A. Willers' review of Svoronos in Liter.
Zentralbl. 1905, nos. 1
7-8 and 19); and with regard to this series in particular
several of the arguments which originally led Svoronos to fix upon B.C. 311 as
the starting-point [Les Mommies, I. c.) are tacitly (and quite rightly) abandoned
in Ta voixicTixaTa, I. c. But an era starting from B.C. 311 is also attested by two
inscriptions, one from Cyprus, the other from Tyre (C. I. Sem. I. 109, no. 93;
37, no. 7 cf. Strack, RJiein. Mnscuui, liii, p. 417), and the commencement of the
;
rule of Soter in Pares is dated in the year 31J-10 in the recently discovered
fragment of the Parian Chronicle {Ath. Mittheil xxii. p. 188). The 40th year
of this era brings us to the year B. c. 272-1, which is a thoroughly suitable date
for the fragment though the appearance in an Egyptian papyrus of a system of
;
dating of which the other examples are all external to Egypt itself is certainly
remarkable.
85. Loan of Seed-corn.
Mummy 13. 26-1 X9 cm. b.c. 261 (260).
Contract for the loan of seed of different kinds from the government, as
represented by the nomarch Harimouthes (cf. 40, introd.), to the lessee of a
KXripos /3ao-iAiKo'j, i.e. land which had been cleruchic but had reverted to the State,
upon which see introd. to 39 and 52. The loan was to be repaid after
26, note.
the next harvest before the rent ; cf. where an advance of seed is made
87,
without any such provision. The lacunae are supplied from 160, a duplicate
copy of the contract.
BacriXevoi'To? llroXefiaiov Tov
TlToX^fxaiov Kal tov v'lov TIro\X\.-
fiaiou {(Tovs) kS 0' /epeo)? 'ApiarovL-
Kov TOV TlfpiXdov 'AXe^dySpov
5 Kal 6^5)1/ ASeXcpcov Kav[r]\(p6pov Apai-
VOT)^ 4>iXa8eX(pov Xa^pias] Trj^ Ani-
ov fx-qvos Mâoprj. f^^'ei n\d(jLS T . .

85. CONTRACTS 247
dirio? Upevs [
wapa Hdpiros
Xicrvpaiov rod TTap\a\ ÂpiiJLOv6\6\v rov
10 vop.dp-)(ov K 777? Karco roTTap')(t-
[ay] TO y/?[a]0[e^' ''^]^/^/^[] xal dvd[X\(ii-
fia (TTripfxa e/y to K (eroy) e/y tou

îXo^^vov KXrjpov âaiXiKov
Toiv TeXeaTov {nvpoov) /j., KptOioiv) X-qy
15 at (iTvpccv) Kj, oXvpiwv) ^( (rjfjLKTv) at (nvpcoi^) k(, rov na[i^ros

e/y TTvpoov [dprdâs] 0,, (xlrov KaOapov
dSoXov ctTTO Trdvroav fjLcrprjcrei
SiKaiai /lirpcoL t&l {kvveaKaLeiKocn)^{pLv(K(iOL) rcoi
rrpos rb \aXKovu. aTTOfierprja-d-
20 TO) Se nda-is e/y rd (SacriXi-
Ka d7ro86)(îa rod K (erofy) rd ^kcô-

pia TfJ9 yfj9 e/y rju eiXrjcpeu to
anep/ia Kara rrji^ jxtcrBcoaLV
K wXripovs fj.i]6ei'a viroXoyov
25 TTOLOVfiivo^ d^poôv, Kal rb (nrip-

fia l'Xr](pei> irporepov roiv K(f)0p[-
001^ ey pecoi^.
2 lines of demotic.
1 8. Kd above x P^P-
'In the reign of Ptolemy the son of Ptolemy, and his son Ptolemy, the 24th year, the
priest of Alexander and the gods Adelphi being Aristonicus son of Perilaus, the canephorus
of Arsinoe Philadelphus being Charea daughter of Apius, in the month of IMesore. Pasis,
son of . .
,, priest, has received from Paris son of Sisybaeus, agent of Harimouthes the
nomarch from the lower toparchy, as seed for the 25th year, being included in the lists of
receipts and expenditure, for the royal holding of Philoxenus in the (troop ?) of Telestes
40 artabae of wheat, 38!^ of barley which are equivalent to 23 of wheat, and 67^ of olyra
which are equivalent to 27 of wheat, making a total of 90 artabae of wheat, in grain pure
and unadulterated in any way, according to just measurement by the 29-choenix measure
on the bronze standard. Pasis shall deliver at the royal granaries in the 25th year the rent
of the land for which he has received the seed, in accordance with the terms of the lease, in
full, making no deduction for unwatered land ; and he shall return the seed, which he has
received, before the rent, from the new crops.

'
(Signed in demotic) I, P . . . son of ... , have received the stock above written.'
2, Tov v'lov liTo'K'ffiatov the question who was this

: son of Ptolemy,' associated with '
Philadelphus from the 19th (cf 100, introd.) to the 27th years of his reign, has been much
248 HIBEH PAPYRI
disputed ; cf. Bouche-Lecleicq, Hisf. des Laguh's, I. p. 183. We prefer the view of Wiedemann
and Wahaffy that he was Ptolemy Euergetes I.
7. Tov "Attjos is misadsfactory, especially as there is a lacuna after UpcC's, which may have
contained the name of the god. . mnos is more probably the name of the father of Ua<ns,
. .
but it is apparently not 'A^nfin-ior or Ko/ioaTrioj.

8. na/uros: this is unlikely to be the Paris in 64-5, which refer to the Arsinoite nome.
II. TO yp[a\j)\iv K.T.'X.: the reading is assured by 150. The meaning of the phrase seems
to be that this loan of seed duly appeared in the official statement of accounts cf. 48. 4. ;
13. îKoêvov cf 75. 5, note.

:
14. TMv TfXtarov if these words apply to îXnâov (i.e.

: of Telestes' troop ') they are
'
out of place, though cf 109. 4-5, note. It is probable that they here qualify KXi-jpov âa-ikiKov
and serve to indicate the locality in some way, though Telestes was in any case probably
a military officer of high rank cf. 99. 7-8 o]iV[o]r/o/io$' TeXeo-rou and note ad he.
; We refer
TfXtTTov to the common nominative TfAeW^r, though the dative TeX/o-rcot apparently occurs
in 58. 4.
14-5. The ratio of the value of wheat to barley is the usual one of 5 3, to that of :
olyra 5 2, as in P. Tebt. 246 and 261, and approximately also in 119. 16

: cf. 102. 2, note. ;
18. An artaba of 29 choenices occurs also in P. Grenf. I. 18. 20. The mention of
7r/)6s TO xn^'(ovi' in the present passage suggests that this artaba may be identical with the
artaba xa^^*? in P. Brit. Mus. 265 cf. 74. 2, note.

;
24. vTvoXoyos here is clearly a masculine substantive, as in 29. 26; in the Tebtunis
papyri of the next century the substantival form, wherever its gender can be distinguished, is
TO vTToXoyov. In P. Petrie II. 30 {a). 5 and 18 tls tovs vTTo\6yovs the substantive vnoXoyos may
also be meant.
28-9. The demotic signature has been translated for us by INIr. Griffith. P can . . .
hardly be other than Pasis, though that name is apparently not recognizable.
86. Loan of Corn.
Mummy A. Fr. [a) 13-5 X 7-4, (/-') 48 X4-6 cm. b.c. 248 (247).
Two acknowledgements with the same formula (or very likely one
acknowledgement in duplicate) of loans of 15 artabae of olyra, another specimen
belonging to the series being 129, where the borrower is a Mysian of the
Epigone cf. also 124-6.
; The lender in each case, Docimus, occupied an
official position in connexion with the corn-revenue (cf. 76) and it is not ;
unlikely that the loans are for seed, though this is not stated as in 85 and 87.
Since repayment was to take place after the harvest of the 3cSth year (of
Philadelphus), the papyrus was no doubt written in the 37th year or early in
the 3<>th. Lines 14-26 arc perhaps in a different hand.
Fr. {<^)
[dprdfia^ 5e/ca7r]erre, JJaTrfi 'Ap/xiovTO^ Zl[o]^t'-
[ravra? Se a]oi d7ro8co(T(o 15 ficoi âipeii^. e^co irapa

86. CONTRACTS 249
e/i ixrjvl Aaicricoi tool eV tcol (Tov oXvpoof dprdâs S(-
oySScoi Kal rpiaKoarooL Ka-rrevTi, ravra^ Si aoi
5 '4tL crlrov KaOapov Kal dTToScoaco e/x [x-qvl Aataicoi
dSoXov fierpcot (SaaiXi- rwL i^v rm oySocot Kal rpia-
Kcot Kal dTroKaraarrjaco 20 Ko[crTa)]i erei crdTov Ka6a-
im (JKr]vr]v T019 ISioLS d- [pov iiirpcoL âaiXiKooi e .
[.
fTjXco/xacnu. kav Se [xr}
10 diroSoci dTTOTCiaco aoL [T.]] Fr. (d). 'ippooao. {^rov?) X[

Tt/xr]i/ iKd(TTT]9 dprd- Arj/xrjrpLO^ n[ Kv-
/?7/y Spa)(/xa9 Svo. pr]i/ai09 rfj^ eV[iyoi/^y,
eppooao. 25 iKeXevaifx /u[e 6 IlaTrj^
ypdyj/ai tj/j/ e[
1-13. ( ... to Docimus, greeting.

I have received from you) 15 artabae of
olyra
and 1 you in the month Daisius of the 38th year in grain that is pure and
will return it to
unadulterated, measured by the royal measure, and I will restore
it at the cabin at my own
expense. If I fail to repay it, I will forfeit to you the value
of each artaba, 2 drachmae.
Good-bye.
3._ AataLi in the 38th year of Philadelphus this month

:
probably corresponded
approxnnately to Pauni, since in the 36th year it began on or
about Pachon 20J cf
App. 1.
>
rau roO could equally well be read both here and

:
in 1. 19, but would have no construc-
tion. 70)1 is omitted in 129.
8. <rKr,v{,p: cf. a second century

b. c. papyrus in the Louvre published by
Revillout
Me/afiês, p. 335, which
a receipt for 2 talents 2500 drachmae of copper paid
is
by
a banker ds rifxfjv o'lmv 7r[aX]atoG &<TTe vno (TKr)in)v o'ivov Kepafiicov (1ko(ti nivTe.
Revillout translates
(TKrjv^ there tent,' and supposes that the wine was destined for
'
soldiers, whose pay is the
subject of another receipt made out to the same bankers.
This interpretation however is
very doubtful, and m
any case there is no indication that the olyra in 86 was required
for
military purposes. Judging by the use of aKr^vrf in 38. 7, we prefer to translate it here also
cabin, and to suppose the phrase in\ aKrivn^ to indicate that
the grain was to be repaid on
board a government corn-transport.
12 Two drachmae are the penalty value of an artaba of olyra also
in 102. 4 and
124 ;
cf. 80. 15, where seems
be 4 drachmae, and 102. 2, note.
it to
21. The letters following â<n\iKioL are certainly not Kai (cf. 1.
yj. Perhaps idv sc
hi fxT) ^nobwi K.rX, should be read, but 13a,
sc. a repetition of âcnXiKm, is possible.
25-6. This sentence differs from the usual formula fypai/â (rvprdâi^Tos
(nar^roy) found
at this period, e.g. in 124. The word following r,)u is apparently not ^'vyypUhv or
2^0 HIBEH PAPYRI
87. Advance of Seed-corn.
Mummy 126. 17 xp-S cm. b.c. 256 (255).
An acknowledgement by several cleruchs, each of whose holdings contained

25 aroLirae, to a sitologus, of the receipt of 79I artabae of wheat and '^'^^ artabae
of barley for seed ; cf. Nothing is said about repayment (cf. 85. 25 and
85-6.
86. 2), and probably the seed was in this case a present rather than a loan from
the government cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 226-7.
; Since it was required for the sowing
of the 30th year (of Philadelphus), the papyrus was no doubt written late in the
29th or early in the 30th year.
[...].[ 'Hpa^
kX^lSov Kol Hp[
MiVLCTKOV KOL Zt][
pLov [(.iKoaLTT^vrdpovpoi) f^X^îv 7Ta\pa , . k
5 Tov (TiToXoyov its o[vs ]x[o-
fiiv TTipl TTjv ra>i' IIa[aTO-
(pSpcoi^ KXTqpov9 (nTepfjL[a
e/y TO X {iTos) 7rvp[o]v i(38o-
fii^K[ou]Ta kvvia ij/xvav
10 Teraprov Kul KpiOrj^ rpid-

KovTa Tpds TerapTou,
[(t]ltov Kada[po]u /lerpoi^
7rapaS[o]\iKOLS, Kal o[v6]ki/
tVKOkOVfliV,
4. ((iKO(nn(vTafWVpoi) COrr. from (X-
*
son of Heraclides and Her
. . . son of Meniscus and Ze . .son of ... ,
. . . .
holders of 25 arourac, acknowledge that we have received from sitologus, for the . . . ,
holdings which we possess at the village of the Pastophori, as seed for the 30th year
79I artabae of wheat and 33-J artabae of barley, in pure corn measured by the receiving
measures, and we make no complaint.'
4. uKOirnrfvTapovpoi are not mentioned elsewhere except in the name of the Arsinoite
village 'l^lcov EiKoairrfvrapovpuv.
6. TTjv rwv sc. Kosprjv, does not occur apart from this passage (except
Tld[(rTn\(âp(ov,
perhaps in 118. 6 ; cf note ad he), and it is uncertain to which nome it belonged.

12. fiirpois napa^n\iKoii morc usually called boxi^n cf 74. 2, note.
: ;
\
2^2 HIBEH PAPYRI
extremely small addition to the rate of
24 obols for a stater found in the
case
w ith
^^ r ''T "
th the evidence "fp'
p^' ^'''^''^
of P. Par. 62. v. 19, that in the
was an .vr, :r,o. xAko. U6voôv.
r """'"'
^PP^^ ^^ P- ^^
second century B. c. the C.r.pci
- dance
The extra \ obol per stater or approximately
I per cent which is levied in the Hibeh texts, probably
corresponds to the extra
charges of i per cent, for k^.a.,v^ and
2 per cent, for transport
which are
mentioned in connexion with the Cvrr/pa in
the Paris papyrus. Above each
receipt is a brief summary, and at
the end of each are a few words of
demotic
1 he writing is in most cases, including 106,
across the fibres.
(Etovs) ^ 'Ae{)[p X, {Spaxfial)] k.
(hovs) /? 'A6vp A. 7reVra)KJ/

7rt TO efi ^^ptXL XoyivrrjpLov
Tov KcoiTov Ilda-ccvL Tpam-
5 C^TTjl Kol StoTOtJtL SoKi-
fiaa-rfji irapa 'Apei^S<oTov ro{v) wapa Taefxêov^
K TaXdr] ^VTTjpds e/y rbi^
2nd hand
'AOt'p x<i{\KOv)
{Tra\povr\6\^
L9
Acopicovo^.
kS [rhapropl] {Spaxfia?) d'Koai,
/ k.
I line of demotic.
6. aptvha)Tov To{y) Ttapa above the line.
'The 2nd year, Athur 30: 20 dr. The 2nd year.

Athur 30. Harendotes a-ent of
Taembes from Talae has paid into the collecting office
of the Koite toparchv at Phe%Tchis
'"^
Lrh^"' of?"^'''
drachmae ^T''''^
copper at 24^
?"^^"^^' ^"^^ ^he beer-tax on account ofÂthur twenty
obols (for a scater), total 20. ^
In the presence of Dorion.'
^ -'^^
^^^'' ^"^ '^^ ''^''' ^'^ inconsistent with
'''''
and cf to7"T"V '^'l ^Jf . or 5-,
remains s
is_ IZT ''.'"'T'stroke
a piece of a horizontal
, J^'^'-
'' "^'"" ^"^' ^'^^"^ ^ê fraction
joining the sign for drachmae.
all tha
If it represents
;
^ obol which is usually written H, the writer must

on reaching the end of the horizontal
^'"''
'^''^' ^'^^^^ "^^^'"^ '^' ^^^^''^
'''^^'' i"^^ ^^ he usually
does in writln?'" ^^r"^^T^ f '' ' '^"^ (^M-/3A,o.), but we hesitate to introduce
^
and If,
If as 7. n
a ra e which wnnM K necessarily
.
is hkely, the rate is
1
^^''TJ'''
different from those found in 107.
the same in all three cases,
7 (cf note) and 138;
24^ is the only suitable number.
252 HIBEH PAPYRI
4. Awi'ou: the day of the month was very hkcly not given (cf. e.g. 84 {a) and 85),
in which case there was probably a blank space before ibAvnuiv. Loius probably
corresponded approximately to Pauni in the 23rd year ; cf. App. i.
6. jfxi'cot probably Kvprjvmoii (cf. 89. 6, &c.) or perhaps 'louS a/cot (cf. 96. 4).
:
7. For n/xa T>]i (Tvyyp<t(})î. cf. 84 (rt). 4.

Kai oTrf'xe' probably occurred earlier in the line.
9. This line refers to the interest, and tokov is to be

restored somewhere in the lacuna.
Kara finvn (<a<T\Tov in 1. lo also secms to refer to interest, and on the analogy of e.g.
P. Grenf. 11. i8. i6 we might restore kuI toO vnep-rvtaovTOi xpovw at tlie beginning of 1. lo
(cf. P. Petrie III. 55 () 13-4); but a mention of the
contingency of failure to repay the
loan before Vav] be fifj dnotm in 1. 12 would be a curious inversion.
II. eV T] iJ.paii K.T.X.: cf. 89. 14.
13. IjpioXiov after anoTfiaaTco on the analogy of later loans, e.g.
might be restored
P. Grenf. 18 but in the third century b.c. the penalties for failure to repay a loan were
I. ;
often on a higher scale; cf. 84 ((?). 9 and 90. 15, where the penalty value of wheat is twice
its ordinary price, and 30. 19-20, note. Hence both here and in P. Petrie III. 55 {a). 13,
where the editors supply fj^nuXiov, binXovv is more likely.
89. Loan of Money.
Mummy 83. Height 17-5 f;. 6.0.239(238).
A contract for the loan of 500 drachmae of silver from a woman, Thcodote,
to Zenion cf. 88. The loan was without
;
probably on account of the interest,
special conditions attached, which the mutilation of the papyrus renders obscure.
Several insertions have been made in the text, and a blank space has been left
in 1. 17.
The restoration of 11. 2-5 is based on two other fragmentary contracts not
yet published. The only name concerning which there is any doubt is
'OvoixaaToi. confirmed by one of the other contracts, but 'Oro/xaKptroj

'0;-o/xa[ is
is a possible alternative. The traces in 1. 2 would suit k rather better than 0-, but
there seems to be insufficient space for pt.
Ba<nXevouT[o9 nTo\îi\aiov tov TlToXefxaiov

Kal 'Apau'OT]? 6[wu 'A8e\(f)S>v\ (eVoi/?) t) e0' k]pkm 'Ovo[ix]aa-
Tov rod nvpy[(ovo9 'AXe^duSpov Kal Oecou 'A8eX(f)(oi^ Kal de-
a>v EvepyeT[cov Kat^r](p6pov 'Apaiujorj? OiXa8iX(pov 'Apx^-
O-TyOCtTJT/S TJjy KTr](TlKXioV9 pr]V09 TI^pLTLOV Iv &(oX-

5
6e[L To[u '0^vpv]yXiT[ov. eSduia eoSorr] yleorro? Kvprjvaia
Twjf ZaiiKov Idid/Tov
perd Kvpiov Aiovro<s '

]ov tov avTfjS irarpos Zip'icovi
AeLvio[v] Toov A . .j .... iSid>T]y^L aTOKOv dpyvpiov ocpOaXpo-
I
89. CONTRACTS 253
(f)a[vo\v9 kvavT\Lov rcov viroye ypafx/iii^coi^ fxaprvpcov (^pa^/zay) 0,

10 [
(tivoov Tov kTn^\i]6(ivros av-
[rrjL 20 letters ] ronov durl raiu mi/TaKO-
[cricov Spa)(fxoiU ay e'lXrjê napa GeoSorr]^ knl tov
[kv 21 letters lov rj knl tov ki'{ev] 'O^vpvy-
QeoSoT^r] Zrjviojvi
\\(ov TToXei a0 ov au] Trpoetnr) eV rj/xipai^ SeKa,
15 [eav Sh /XT) fXTa rjay Trpoyeypafx/xiuas rj/xepas

[dTToreiadTco Zt]vio)u oS6]tt]i to Sdueiou tccs {Spa)(fid9)
[SinXovv Koi 77 7rpdî9 eoro) Trapd Zrji'tcoi'os
[npaa-ao . . . Kara to Sidypa]/x/xa. ?'/ $e crvyypa(f>r] rjde
[Kvpia eVro) ov dv inKpiprjTai. pdpTvpe? EvpyiJ.e[8]coi' ....
On the verso
20 (Tvyypa(f)r] . . Stj
. . oyyicoi^
3. The second mv added above the line. 4. v of fi'f/^frôi/ corr. from t ?
'
In the reign of Ptolemy ihe son of Ptolemy and Arsinoe, gods Adelphi, the 8th year,
Onomastus son of Pyrgon being priest of Alexander and the gods Adelphi and the gods
Euergetae, Archestrate daughter of Ctesicles being canephorus of Arsinoe Philadelphus, in
the month Peritius, at Thoiihis in the Oxyrhynchite nome. Theodote, Cyrenean, daughter
of Leon, with her guardian her father Leon son of ., private of Zoilus' troop, has lent to . .
Zenion son of Dinias, private of A

.'s troop, 500 drachmae of silver produced to view in
. .
the presence of the witnesses below written, without interest. In lieu of the 500 drachmae
which he has received from Theodote (Zenion shall pay on account) of the sum imposed
upon her ., either at the (collecting office?) at ... or at Oxyrhynchus within 10 days
. .
from the date on which Theodote gives Zenion notice to do so. If he does not (pay) after
the period aforesaid, Zenion shall forfeit to Theodote twice the amount of the loan of
500 drachmae, and shall have the right of execution upon Zenion in accordance
with the edict. This contract shall be valid wheresoever produced. The witnesses are
Eurymedon . .
.'
5. ne/jtT4ou : this month probably corresponded in the Sth year of Euergetes to parts of
Mecheir and Phamenoth cf. App.
; i.
8. nroKa is the usual adverb in the later contracts. It is not possible to have a v before
which therefore cannot be used adjectivally here.
aroKov,
102. f'niSXrjdevTos ai[TTji (?) and dvrl riiv irevTuKoaluiv ^âxôif appear to indicate that
Zenion was undertaking to perform some service for Theodote in consideration of the loan,
and this would well account for the al.isence not only of interest, but of a provision for
repayment ; cf. the next note.
254 HIBEH PAPYRI
1 2-4. These lines do not seem to contain provisions for the repayment of the loan
(cf. 88. 11), for it is very difficult to see where dn-ofiorcu k.t.X. can be brought in. Probably,
therefore, the word lost in 1. 15 after /xi} is not anob(iii but the verb which occurred in 1. 10.
Perhaps Xoy? ur7p\'ov cf. 106, introd.
13. :
17. For hinXovv cf. 30. 19-20 and 88. 13, notes. A space is left for the name of the
person to whom right of execution was reserved. Perhaps there was some doubt as to
whether it should be Theodote herself or her Kvpios.
18. Kara to diaypajîfia cf 90. i6, 91. 13, and 34, introd.
:
19. For the supplement cf. 90. 20, &c.

20- r. This endorsement looks like the title of the document, but we have failed to
find a suitable reading of the latter part of it. It would perhaps be just possible to read
(rvyypa(f)o((f)v\a^) 'HpcoSrjs with âpanlaii> bclow, and suppose that these are the names of two of
the witnesses, but such an abbreviation of (Tvyypacl)o^v\a^ is not satisfactory, nor is the word
itself likely in this position. On the back of the fragment which contains the beginnings of
11. i-io there are also traces of ink, which may represent names.
90. Lease of Land.
Mummy 10. i i-i X i6-6 r//;. B.C. 222 (221).
A contract for the lease for one year of an island, which formed part of
a cleruchic holding in the Oxyrhynchite nome. The rent is fixed at 4 artabae of
olyra in addition, apparently, to a quarter of the wheat grown but whether ;
wheat constituted the whole or only a portion of the crop is not stated, neither
is the acreage of the land specified. The lease was drawn up in the 25th year
of Euergetes, the latest certain date in this volume cf. note on 1. 2. The ;
papyrus is in parts much discoloured and worn, and the small cursive hand
is in consequence sometimes very difficult to read. The verso is covered with
plaster, which, owing to the extremely brittle condition of the document, we have
not ventured to remove.
\BaaL\(voi'T09 IlTo]Xe/jLaiov [t]ov UroXefiaiov K[ai Apaii'orj^ 6ea)v 'A8^\(f)u>v
\{i.Tovs) Tr^l/JiTrrov Kal] eiKoaTov (p' /epecoy AcoaiOiov rod ApifivXov 'AX^-
^dv8pov
KOI Oeaii' A[SX(pa)]y Kai Oeoov Evepy^Tooi' Kavrjcpdpov [Apan'orj? îXa]-
SeX(pov Bepan-
Kr]9 Trjy nv6[ayye]Xov fxrjvos TopTTialov Iv coXOi t[ov 0^vpvyî]TOV,
5 eh kvLavTov [era crJTropor [ffi'aTj kol O^piajiuv eVa diro tov (r[n6pov tov
90. CONTRACTS 255
KO(rTa>L erei A[i6Sa)po]9 MaKe[SQ}]i^ r[a>]i^ îXcoyo^ SiKaviKo^ EvK[pdTi

.0)1 Tr;y kniyovrj^
Ik rov ISiov KXrjpov rrjv vr)(Tov rrfv e/x Meya tou ,

0^vpvy)(iTOV uo]fj.ov
TToia-av
Tr\r]v TTjS x^paou oacou ap [^]p)(cocn.v ey y((o/j.[T]pLa9 kK<p[optov '
oXvpcov
dpTaôov Te(T(ja.p[(o\v, [to. Sh kK\(p6pLa ra (Tvyyypappiv[a dnoScoaei Ev]-

Kpdrrjs AloSco-
10 pcoi ep pi)v\ aav[8\iK(jiiL rod e^Sopov Kal hko<ttov tov[s ct^tov Ka6apo\v
Kccl aSoXof
Tojt aa . . Tiov [ ]
Tov yevopevov [l'\y rrji y[fj]i pirpcot )(0i SiKatcoi pflTprjcrei SiJKaLui, irapa-
(TTTjald-
rco (Se) eh to. Ai[o8co]pov iS{(o[i] dvaXcdparL, B6t(d 8e kol tov irvpov to
TirapTop
pipo9 K[al TOVTO 7rap]a<TTr](rdTQi el? rd AioSwpov iSlco[i dpaXd>pa]Ti. tav
8k pr) d-
TToBm 'KaTU rd ye\y[pa\ppeva dTTortadTCo EvKpdT[T}9 A]io[8d>]p[<o]t Tipi)V
TTJs dprd-
15 ^V^ iKd(T[Tr]9 Tcoy o^Xvpcoi^ 8pa\pd? recra-apes tov Se irvpov 8pa[)(p]ds
rreyT[e,] Kal
rj Trpd^[i9 ecrlro) ALoSdopcot irapd EvKpdTovs Trpda{a)ovTi Kara to ^L\d-
y pap pa.
7] Se KaXdpt] ecTToo Aio8(opov. êâiovrco 8e AL6{i]Scopo9 Kal tov9
KaT
Kapnovs Kal a pepicr$coKeu, edv 8e prj êâicoarji Kara rd ycypappeva
dn[oreiadT(o
AioScopo? EvKpdTe[i enL]TLpov dpyvpiov 8pay^pds irevTaKoaia?, edp prj [ti fia-
20 aiXiKou KcoXvpa y[evT]Tai. ?; 8e avyypacpf} ijSe Kvpia ecrrco ov dv eiri-
(piprjjaL.
pdprvpe? EvTra[ '

K]al KoXXa? Kvp-qvahi 01 8[vo] ISicorai Hap .
XaXKj.[8]ev9 Xi TlejpaT]? t(ov ^tXcavos KTi]<Ti7nros KaXXiKpdToy?

256 HIBEH PAPYRI
f:,'^ ray XT[pa\T(ov [ ]9 Opdi^ EvKXdoiv Aixfj-coin'ov Kyprjyalo^
In the reign of Ptolemy son of Ptolemy and Arsinoe, gods Adelphi, the 25th year, the
'
priest of Alexander and the gods Adelphi and the gods Euergetae being Dosillieus son of
Drimylus, the canej^horus of Arsinoe Philadelphus being Berenice daughter of Pylhangelus,
in the month Gorpiacus, at Thollhis in the Oxyrhynchite nome. Diodorus, Macedonian and
decurion of the troop of Philon, has leased for one year, for one seed-time and harvest, from
the seed-time in the 26th year to Eucrates, ... of the Epigone, out of his own holding the
island at Mena in the Oxyrhynchite nome all except any parts of the dry land which may
be irrigated according to the survey, at a rent ... of 4 artabae of olyra. The rent
agreed upon Eucrates shall pay to Diodorus in the month Xandicus of the 27th year in pure
and unadulterated grain grown upon the land by true measure according to just measure-
. . .
ment, and shall deliver it at the house of Diodorus at his own expense. He shall further
give the fourth part of the wheat, which he shall also deliver at Diodorus' house at his own
expense. If he do not pay as aforesaid Eucrates shall forfeit to Diodorus for the value
of each artaba of olyra 4 drachmae, and for the wheat 5 drachmae, and Diodorus shall
have the right of execution upon Eucrates in accordance with the edict. The straw shall
belong to Diodorus. Diodorus shall guarantee the crops and what he has leased, or if
. . .
he do so Diodorus shall forfeit to Eucrates a penalty of 500 drachmae of silver, if

fail to
there be no obstacle on the part of the State. This contract is valid wherever produced.
The witnesses are Eupa and Collas, Cyreneans, both privates, Pam
. . . Chalcidian, . . . ,
Chi .Persian of Philon's troop, Ctesippus son of Callicrates

. . ,
Straton son of ... . . . , ,
Thracian, Euclion son of Ammonius, Cyrenean of the Epigone.'
2. The names of the priest and canephorus coincide with those of the 25th year, as
known from an unpublished Tebtunis papyrus and a demotic contract; cf. p. 376. The
period of the lease commenced from the sowing of the 26th year (1. 5), e. the autumn so i. ;
the present document being dated in Gorpiaeus which jM-obably Choiak-Tubi (cf. App. i), =
i.e. about Pêbruary, of the 25lh year, must have been drawn at some time in advance. If,
as seems to be not improbable, the 25th and the other years mentioned by the papyrus are
IMacedonian years beginning on Dius i, which at this period fell near the end of PÎecheir,
Gorjjiaeus fell near the end of the 25th year, and the interval between the date of 90 and the
sowing of the 26lh year was at least 7 months. On the analogy of P. Tebt. 71, which
shows that the sowing of crops in the Fayfim had just commenced on Nov. 9, b.c 114, the
(jTTo/jov in 1. 5 probably means November, which at the end of Euergetes' reign began on
Thoth 15 and approximately coincided with Daisius. On this view the interval between
the date of 90 and the sowing of the 26th year is 9 months, and the harvest would be
completed by Xandicus (equivalent to Epeii)h-Mesore, i.e. about September) of the 27th
year (1. 10). We
forbear to enter on a discussion of the complications which would ensue
if the 25th in 90 do not begin on Dius i, or if (ktov be read in place of
and other years
nfjinTov in 1. 2. The very slight traces at the beginning of the line can be reconciled with
either and if 90 be assigned to the 26th year instead of the 25th, Dositheus and
;
Berenice may be supposed to have held oflTice in both these years. There is a parallel
for this in the case of the priests of the 9th and loth years, but to ,3, which would then be
expected after Uv6[(iyy(]\(>v in 1. 4, is absent; cf. p. 374. It is, moreover, very doubtful
whether I'".uergetes actually reached a 26th year exce])t on the revenue system of calculating
which is not at all
the king's years, likely to have been employed in a contract mentioning
only IMacedonian months; cf. App. ii.
OO. CONTRACTS 257
In the Tebtunis papyrus the name of Dositheus' father may be read as either ApifxvXov
or ApiTTvXov. According to Spiegelberg's decipherment the demotic has Tripirus, which is
in favour of ApiTruXou. On the other hand that name is unknown, whereas ApinvXos is
attested (Luc. Ga//. 14).
7. 1810s as an epithet of KX^pos does not imply full proprietary rights, as Meyer,
I/eerwesen, p. 42, assumes. All that need be meant here is that Diodorus was letting his
own land, not sub-letting some one else's. Other instances, e. g. 105. 5, are capable of
a similar explanation.
8. Above fK(p[oplov an insertion has been made, but the letters are too indistinct to
be read.
1 1, fiirpai xoei: cf. 84. 6, note. The letters after twl are very small and illegible, but
do not suit âai\iKa>i (84. 6) or Brjaavpov. An erasure below is not likely, though the writing
is somewhat blurred. p.e[Tpr](Tei 8i]Kaiat is not very satisfactory, for the supplement hardly
fills the lacuna, and a conjunction is missing. The final at of 8i\Kaim is more like a tt, but
to read as] Kal and suppose that the n of 7rpao-T7;(r[a]r&) was written twice is not an attractive
solution, although the scribe makes other mistakes, e.g. Trpavovn in 1. i6.
15. o]Xvpa)c: cf. 1. 8, though there too the reading is doubtful, -nvpoiv is possible in
both places, but would be very unsuitable in 1. 15 with tov Se nvpov immediately following.
4 drachmae an artaba is twice the ordinary penalty price of olyra; cf. 102. 2, note.
17. Kar may be a participle like Karayivopivovs or some adjectival phrase with Kara.
. . .
The remains of the letters are too faint for recognition.

19. dpaxpas TrevTaKoa-'ias cf. P. Petrie III. 74 (<?). 14-5, which is to be restored on the
:
analogy of the present passage. The 500 drachmae for failure in the ^tâicoa-is was no
doubt a conventional penalty, and this suggests a new explanation of P. Amh. 43. 12, where
it is stipulated that if the borrower did not repay a loan of 10 artabae of wheat he should
forfeit Tip.Tjv dpaxfias TTfvraKoaias. The largeness of the sum is no longer a valid reason
for supposing that the drachmae are not silver, but copper, and represent the price of
a single artaba. On the other hand, if the 500 drachmae in P. Amh. 43. 12 is a
conventional penalty, it is somewhat remarkable that they are not stated to be silver and
that rifxrjv, not iniripov, is used.
For the clause iap. p.!] [n k.t.X. cf. 91. 5 sqq., where the same phrase occurs, also in
reference to an eniTipov. Similarly in P. Petrie II. 44, which is rather a contract of
partnership than an ordinary lease, 11. 13 sqq. may now be restored eau Se prj 'jSf/Satwo-coo-t
Kara ra ycypappfva I dnoTei(TdTcciaa\p M;;lrpoScopcot /cai 'ETTiKovpoii \ 8paxpds nevraKoaias Kal earco rj
Ka^TOxr] Mr]Tpo8ui\p(oi Kali ^'EniKovpcoiKoAvpa yevTjTai,] rSav 8e Kapn[o>v

eap. pt] t\i\ âcriXuKov
Kvpieveraicrav ... In 91. 8-IO a further provision is made in ease the KwXv/xa did occur;
according to 90 and P. Petrie II. 44, if the /Se/Sa/wo-ty was prevented by any action of the
government, the penalty was simply foregone.
22. If Xi [ is a proper name, the number of witnesses is seven, as in 96. 12 sqq.
. But
since llejpo-?;? is uncertain, it is possible that x'[ ^^^^^s is all part of the description of
Pam . . . the Chalcidian ;
might be read. A less probable method of
jprj??, e. g. Terajprr/r
reducing the number from seven to six would be to treat Trap ... in 1. 2 1 as part of the
description of the two preceding witnesses and XaXK;t]Sei;'j as a personal name.
23-4. Kvprpô'ios and [(ni]yovTjs are both very doubtful. There would be room for about
six letters at the end of the line after Kvprivahs.
258 HIBEH PAPYRI
91. Lease of Land.
Mummy A. ii-2Xi4-5- n.c. 244-3 (243-2) or 219-8 (218-7).
Conclusion of a contract for a lease of land from Eupolis to Cleopatra at

a rent of 30 artabac of corn, with the names of the witnesses, who were six or
seven
in number, and part of the protocol of what was probably a duplicate copy
on
the same papyrus cf. 90. The handwriting,
;
which is extremely cursive,
resembles that of P. Petrie I. 18(1), and the 4th year in 1. 19 no doubt refers
to either Eucrgetes or Philopator, more probably the former.
34 letters ] . [. Euir]o\ii.
18 aB]o\ov nerpfjaei SiKa[iai] k[. .
16 d7roS]a)aL K[\eo7r]dTpa Eu7r6[Xe]i [. .] .
II ]..[..]. ^ ...]. [.^ . Cray Kapirovs e/y ro . [.
jyLio . [.] . r . [.]e . . . r Kccl a /xe/xiadoiKeu. kdv 5[e //?/
îâioc)ar]i KJara [to,] y^ypappkva ccTroTeLadTOi KX[eo-
TrdTp]a Ev[n6]\eL iirLTipov dpyvpiov Spaxpd^ iKaTov

kdv] fii] TL âcnXiKov Kd)Xvp.a ykvqrai. kdv Si tl âaiXiKou
Kd>'Xvp.a yeuj]Tac aTroSoro) KX({oTrd]rpa EviroXei rds rpid-
Ko]ura dprdâs tS>v irvpcov, lav Se pi] diroSwL diroTeiadroy
Tip\i]v rrjs dpTd^r]9 iKdarrj^ rSyu rrvpcov dpy[vpiov 8paxpd9 . ,
Ka]L 7/ 7rpdî9 eoTco EurroXeL Trapd KXôndrpa^ [irpdacrovTL
Kara to Sidypappa. 17 Se avyypacpi] ijSe KvpL[a ov dv ktrKpipr}-
r\aL. pdpjvp^s JJoXvaivos Kvprjvam ISidirr]^, @[ 18 letters
SYKaviKo^, ol Svo tS)v ZcocXou, AiOKXfj^ 'iTnroXva-oy 18 letters

15 [
'An]oXX(oviov 'EancpiTri^, NiKdvcop Euayopov Ba[pKaio? 12 letters

-l^r []? ."? ['". V^^^ ^P.
[
^^ letters
âaiXevovTO'i nToXepaio]u rov nroX[epaiov Kal 'ApaLvo-
7]^ 6ca)u 'ASeX(f)cov (?) hov9 rcrdpTov t[(f) Upem?
1 5. (5(0 of 8ioK\T]i corr.
'. If she fail to guarantee the lease in accordance with the aforesaid
provisions,
. .
Cleopatra shall forfeit to Eupolis a fine of 100 drachmae of silver, unless some
hindrance
92. CONTRACTS 259
occur on the part of the State. If any hindrance occur on the
part of the State
Cleopatra shall pay Eupolis the 30 artabae of wheat, or if she fail
to pay she shall
forfeit as the value of each artaba of the wheat drachmae and Eupolis shall have a right
.
;
of execution against Cleopalra, exercising it in accordance with the

edict. This contract
is valid wheresoever it be produced. The witnesses are Polyaenus, Cyrenean, private,
and Th . . decurion, both members of Zoilus' troop, Diodes son of Hippoly'sus
. . ,
.
.... son of Apollonius from Hesperis, Nicanor son of Evagoras from Barca, . .
.
2. Perhaps îKo[lai\ K[ai \

aKvru'hrji; cf. 98. 19 and note.
8. Cf. 90. 19, note.
II. Probably dpaxf^cn 8, i.e. double the ordinary price (cf. notes on 84(a). 9 and 88.
13); or perhaps dpaxfias e; cf. 90. 15.
13. ov av fTn(lipr]]T(u : cf. 90. 20, &C.
16. 'Ea-ntpiTTjs : i.e. from 'Ea-nepls (= BepmV/;) in the Cyrenaica.
92. Contract of Surety.

^^^^y 91- ii-3X9-3cm. 8.0.263(262).
Both and the following papyrus are contracts of surety for the
this
appearance of a person in court, and are of much interest as being by far the
oldest examples of such agreements yet recovered so far as we are aware, ;
the only other specimen anterior to the Roman period is P. Brit. Mus. 220. ii,
of
the reign of Euergetes II, which is misunderstood by the editor. In their
general purport and
even in phraseology 92 and 93 show striking points
of agreement with the later specimens, which have been discussed at
length
by L. Wenger in his Rechtshistorische Papyriisstndien. His view that the cases
concerned are civil rather than criminal is supported by 92, where the suit
is an action for debt. The sum involved was altogether 400 drachmae and the ;
two sureties bound themselves either to produce the defendant Timocles for trial
before the strategus, or to pay the plaintiff Apollonius the amount of his claim.
The agreement is made directly with the plaintiff, contrasting in this respect with
the later examples in which an executive official is addressed.
BacriXevouros IlToXe/xaLov rod UroXe-

jxaiov Koi Tov vlov IlToXefxatov erov^
Sevripov kol elKoarov i(f) Upeoo? iJeAoTro? tov
AXe^di/Spov 'AX[^]di/Spov kol Oecoi/ 'ASeXûiv
5 Kau[r]](p6pov 'Apaiporjs ^LXaS([X](pov M[i^]r](n<TTpd-
TT]9 Tfj9 TeLo-dpxou privo^ Hai^îK[o]i5 AiyvnrC-
0)1/ li-'0[vo]s MfXl'P] Tea-aapecTKaioeKdTrjL [[at]]
S 2
26o HIBEH PAPYRI
kii Mov)(n>apo(o rod '0^vpvy\iTov. eyyvoi
TifiOKXiou? Tov Hifiov paiKO'S r^y i-myoi^rj?
lo Mvdacdv 'Xiii[ov'\ pdi^ r^y 7nyoyr]9 'Hye-

[/zcoj/ . . .]ifJ-ov Kp[T]]^ TT]s kiriyovrj^ 0 ooi na-
[pa8Y)(j[ovTaL av]Tov ey ['HpuKJXeovs noXei inl
TOV [o']T[p]aTT]y[o]v eW yrcocrecoy nepl r^y

8iKr]9 ^y {eyÛyvr]cru avTov AttoXXcouio^
15 Kara o-yyypa[(f)Tj]u npbs to dp-)(ouov Spa-
X/ây TpiaKoaias Kal tokov Spa^/xd^

Ikutov. kdv 8e firj napaScoi^Tat kutu
Ta yeypa/x/iiva aTroTeiadTcocrai^ Tas t
Tpi[a]K0(T i]a9 Spa^fid^ Kal Ta imSeKccTa K[a]l
20 T[d] yLvofxevai Kal 17 Trpdîs e[cr]ra) ['ATro]XX(t)i'[i(oi.
fj
dXXcoi Tooi^ [Kp]iaiTr7roy [q to]v irpaKTO-
[pjoy vTT-qpeTcoi' KaTa to [Sidypa/x]iia.
14. (T of tvfyvrjaev inserted later.
'In the 22nd year of the reign of Ptolemy son of Ptolemy and his son Ptolemy, the priest of
Alexander and the gods Adelphi being Pelops son of Alexander, the canephorus of ArsinoS
Pliiladclphus being Mnesistrate daughter of Tisarchus, on the i4lh of the month Xandicus
which is Mecheir of the Egyptians, at Mouchinaroo in the Oxyrhynchite nome. Mnason son
of Simiis Thracian of the Epigone and Hegemon son of imus, Cretan of the Epigone, are . . .
sureties for Timocles son of Simus, Thracian of the Epigone, on the condition that they
shall deliver him up at Heracleopolis before Crisippus the strategus until the decision of the
suit in which Apollonius placed him on bail according to the contract for a principal of
300 drachmae and interest of 100 drachmae and if they do not deliver him up as above
;
written, they shall forfeit the 300 drachmae and the extra tenths and other charges, and
Apollonius or any one besides of the attendants of Crisi})pus or of the collector shall have
the right of execution in accordance with the decree.'
3-6. Cf. P. Petrie III. 52 {a), where the names of the priest and canephorus can now
be correctly restored.
7. Unfortunately at this critical point the papyrus is much rubbed and stained, and
the correctness of the reading Mfx['V] is open to grave doubts, for the vestiges of the
fxi][v6]i
supposed n of fit X, which is the clearest of the letters, suggest rather rj or k. The traces of
the other letters are very slight, and palaeographically M([(To]fjri T[î] would be possible,
though T is than tx; but ti]i is not necessary (though cf. 93. 6), and, since the
less suitable
equation of Gorpiaeus to Mesore only five years later is certain from Rev. Laws Ivii. 4-5,
to read Mta-opi] here would produce a most serious inconsistency cf. App. i. pp. 339-40. ;
For the spelling Mtxlp at this period cf. 34. 2, 51. 6, &c.
8. The name of this village is sjêlled Muvxivupvo) in 53. The Mouxtvwp of P. Oxy.
491. 3 may be identical.
93. CONTRACTS 261
10. Mnason was most probably the brother of Timocles.

12. It is noteworthy that although the agreement was drawn up in a village of the
Oxyrhynchite nome, the case was to be tried at Heracleopolis, as also in 30. 14 and 93.
3.
The two latter papyri are not known to be Oxyrhynchite, but 93 was probably written in
that nome like the other documents from Mummy A 9. The fact that in all three instances
Heracleopolis is specified as the scene of the trial may be a mere chance, but it suggests
the possibility that for judicial purposes the two nomes were combined under a sfngle
administration. There is evidence that in the time of Psammetichus Heracleopolis was the
centre of government for Upper and Middle Egypt (Griffith, Demotic Papyri
of the John
Rylands Library, pp. 75 sqq.); and the city may well have still retained some of its pre-
eminence in the early Ptolemaic period.
13. Kpia-[Wou :
cf 1. 21, where it seems more natural that the name of the strategus
should be given than that of a npdKTwp, and something more than [Kpâ-innov [ro'^y is necessary
to fill the space. Moreover, there are very few possible names ending in -laiTrnoi, and that
the first letters of one of them should occur in the name added above 1. 13 seems to be
more than a mere coincidence. In 93 also the judge was to be the strategus, and it is to
that official that the earlier Roman examples of similar undertakings are addressed.
14. For the active iveyvrjafv cf the use of Sieyyv^v in 41. 4, &c. The superfluous ey is
apparently due to a confusion on the part of the scribe, who also originally omitted the o-.
i^(veyii)(Tiv can hardly be read, and besides gives a wrong sense.
15. The meaning probably is that the debt was Kara (jvyypa(i>i]v (cf 30. 5, 15). Clearness
has been rather sacrificed to compression.
19. (TTibUara'. cf. 32. 9, note. For rh yiv6pL(va cf. HI. 33-4, where they amount to
30 drachmae i^ obols on a principal sum of 50 dr.
21. Cf. note on 1. 13. aK\m, of course, does not imply that ApoUonius was himself
a vnT)pf'TT]s, but is an example of a common idiom,

Mummy A 9. 9-5x11 ci. About b.c. 250.
Conclusion of a contract of surety similar in character to 92, but following

a different formula. By its terms Diodorus, the surety, undertook to produce
his friend on a given date before the strategus, but the nature of the case at
issue is not stated as in 92. Some kind of inquiry was evidently to be held ;
but that any civil action had been instituted is doubtful, and the agreement is
perhaps more likely to have been made with an official than with the plaintiff in
a suit. The person for whom security is given may have been in a similar
situation to that of the 8oKt//aoT?ys in 41, or of the prisoner released on bail in
P.Oxy. 359. The papyrus most probably belongs to the reign of Philadelphus,
and is likely to have been written in the Oxyrhynchite nome cf. 92. 12, note.
;
262 HIBEH PAPYRI
l-myovfjs eyyi'coi iiovrjs ((p cli rrape-
êrai avrov kv 'HpaKXeov^ 7r6X[ii iv

T(OL e/xcpavel e^Q) kpov Ka[l irdar^s
5 (r/ccTTT/y im rod arpaT[r]yov p.r]vo9
âpfJ-ovOi rfjL ly rov o[vrov erovs

kav B\ dTroKaTa(TTr}[(TrjL
Alovvctlov aKvpo[s '^(TTCO
Xcoi, e[a]y 8e fj.fi

[diroKara<TTr\(Trji ds eK-
10 TiKTLv T] 8idy[vco(n^ nepl avrov ka-
Tco TTpo? (3aa[iXiKd.
... to Diodorus son of Straton, Persian of the Epigone, who is surety for appearance
*
on condition that he shall produce him at Heracleopolis openly, outside of a temple or any
other shelter, before the strategus on the 13th of the month Pharmouthi of the same year.
If he cause Dionysius to appear (?), proceedings against him shall be invalid
but if he ;
fail to cause him to appear for payment, decision about his case
shall be made with
reference to the royal decrees.'
1. The first letters of the line suggest only a proper name. How the dative AioSapai
was governed is doubtful perhaps (vtyv-qaiv or 77apfbu>K(v preceded.
;
2. iyyimi 41. 5 difyyvrjcras

fiovrjs: cf. napnfioviii. . . .
3-5. Cf. P. Tebt. 210, which may now be read e^w Upov âpov repevovs aKenrjs ndarji
(with probably e[Tr\ twv T6]rTav preceding), and P. Oxy. 785 irapi^npm tu>i f'ncpavu tKToi h
Upoi /3a)jLiou k.tX These instances offer a good example of the persistence of such formulae.
The elaborate explanation of uKivSwov Travris KivbCvov in B. G. U. 1053. ii. 4 sqq. is couched
in somewhat similar language.
7-9. The restoration of these lines depends upon the identity of Dionysius, who may
have been either the person admitted to bail or the person permitting bail to be given.
In the former case AtoSw/ws or tU i'KTfiaiv (cf. 1. 9), in the latter niVoi^ np(k may be read.
((fiobos or some equivalent word is required with ("iKvpo[s eo-Tw, but this cannot be
T]
put into
1. 7, since nphi Ai68copov not Awvvo-lou would be expected. The syllable at the beginning of
1.9 may be the termination of a name in the dative, but it does not seem to be the same
as that in1. i. For dnoKaTa(TTf][ar]i cf. P. Oxy. 259. 7.
lo-i. Cf. the common phrase 6 âaiXivs rrfp\ avrov (&c.) Siayvasatrai, e.g. p. Amh.
29. 18. npos âatXtm, which is found also in 94. 3 and 15, 95. 14, and 124-6 in connexion
with npdîs or npd(T(TiLv, is apparently only a rather more general equivalent of Kara to
bidypappa.
Mummy 18. 19 x8 m. n.c. 258-7 (257-6).
The two following texts arc also contracts of surety, but of a kind of which
examples belonging to this period are extant. The persons for whom surety-
is here given were contractors for the collection of taxes, as in P. Petrie III. sy
94 CONTRACTS 26-:
(^)> (^) 58 {c), (d).The name of the tax in the present instance is unfortunately
lost. The contractor was Semphtheus, a brewer, but since the amount involved
is only 10 drachmae for a whole year, the tax is not likely to have been the
CvT-qpd at a considerable village

such as Tholthis, unless Semphtheus was one
of a large company, of which there is no indication. In P. Petrie III. 58 {d) the
sum is also small, 20 drachmae. The sureties, two in number, were military
settlers. Prefixed to the agreement is what appears to be an abstract of the
contents, as in some other early Ptolemaic papyri (cf. 98, P. Petrie III. 58 {d),
&.C.), and in many of the later period.
] {Spa^fxcou ?) I dylai'T'liXieKToou knl irdcn

T0T9 VTrdp])(ov(TLv avTcoi, Ka\l rj irpdî^
TTpos Pa<n\i\Kd.
â<n\ivovT]os FlToXefiaLov [rov Uro-

Xe/xaiov l!(o]Ti]po9 {erov?) ktj k(f> /e[p]e[cBS'
TJoO AvKLvov 'AXe^duS[pov

Kal 6S>u 'AjSeXcpcou Kaurj(p[6]pov 'Ap<t[lv6-
r]9 îXaSijXôv Nvfi(f)rj^ rfJ9 Mdyovos
] K^ ey QdoXOei. 'iyyvos e[fy
leKTeKTiv] ScfiÔioos "flpov ^vtottolov

KcofiT]^ d)]X6a)9 Ka6a eê[A]a/5ej/ ira-
pa ]$ OLKOPOfiov ioiS[.] . . [.]o . \ . .
] ih TO KT] (eros) no[X]vKXfjs @pdi^

Tcou ZmXo]v [{Spaxfiwu)] SiKa dvay[riXi]KTa>y, Kal
15 rj Trpdîs TT/Dojy â(nXiKa iirl Trd(T[i\ roh v-rrdp-^ôv-
o^ (2nd hand) Kvpr]\vaLos ISicort]? rcoy Z[co]lXov a-vvi-

yyvrnjiai. noX]vKXfJ9 0pdi^ iSicorrjs rcJov ZcolXov X^'po-
ypa(f>(a vrrep avjrov on kyyvdrai eh (.kt^lo-lv êp-di-
a flpov K jooXr/oy Spa\nS>v SeKa Kara to av^-
20 ôXov TOVTO. ]
4-20. 'In the 28th year of the reign of Ptolemy the son of Ptolemy Soter, the priest
of Alexander and the gods Adelphi being ... son of Lucinus, the canephorus of Arsinoe
Philadelphus being Nymphe daughter of Magon, ... 27th, at Tholthis. Polycles, Thracian
of the troop of Zoilus, is surety on behalf of Semphtheus son of Horus, brewer of the village
of Tholthis, in accordance with his contract made with oeconomus, for the . in , . . , . .
264 HIBEH PAPYRI
the 28lh year, forpayment of 10 drachmae, about which there is no dispute; and execution
shall be with reference to the royal decrees, at the risk of all his property.
made (Signed)
I . .Cyrenean, private of the troop of Zoilus, am surety together with him. I,
. ,
Polycles,
Thracian, private of the troop of Zoilus, attest on his behalf that he is surety for Sem-
phtheus son of Horus, of Tholthis, for payment of 10 drachmae, in accordance with this
deed.'
I. and 95. 13.

di/[ avr]iX[f KTcoi^ : cf. 1. 1 4
3. [irpus â<TiKi\Ka: and note on 93. lo-i.
cf. 1. 1 5
4 g. nro^ffialov \tov IlToXe/iaioi; Sw V^/joy this formula replaced IlTokfiMuov Tov llToXefinlov
:
Km TOV vlov IlToXefiaLov (cf. e.g. 85) in the 27th year (Rev. Laws i and introd. pp. xi.x sqq.) i.
llie formula in the early part of the reign was TlroXefjiaiov tov nToXf/xulov simply (cf. 97 and
99), and of this the latest extant example is of 100. 8, written in the 19th year, in which the
change to the second formula took place cf. 100, introd. ;
12. The word following olKouufxov might be a place-name, but the name of the tax
would be expected. Neither Cvrrjims nor 'O^vpvyx'iTov can be read.
19. eJtoXrtos cf. 62. 9 ewXrft.
: Elsewhere (e. g. 55. 2) this village is spelled ewXdis.
20. Below this line are some marks in fainter ink which could be read ]/a//c;
but they are more likely to be either part of a Hue in demotic or blottings from another
document.
Mummy A 6. Breadth i i-i cw. B.C. 256(255).
An agreement of surety for a tax-farmer similar to 94 (cf. introd.), but with

some peculiar features. The person for whom security was given was not
himself the principal contractor, but apparently occupied a secondary position by
an arrangement with the principal. The tax was the 24th upon four-footed *
animals at Oxyrhynchus,' which is not known from other sources. Perhaps this
was an export duty, which in the case of wine at any rate, as is shown by 80,
was at the rate of
-^^ of the value. But the name is hardly a natural one
for a customs duty, although such duties, in the Roman period at least, are now
shown by P. Brit. Mus. 939 and 1107 to have been computed upon the number
of laden animals, not the c|uantity which each carried. An alternative is to
make this 24th a general impost on propert}'' in four-footed animals, the (fyopos
irpoâTon', which is known from an unpublished Tebtunis papyrus to have existed
in the third century I'., c, being perhaps a branch of it. A tax of 2^1: without
further qualification occurs in 112 and 132 ; cf. 112. 3(S, note.
The papyrus is broken into two pieces, and two or three lines are missing
in the middle, besides minor defects.
BaaiK(.vj)\vro<i TI[ToXe/j.]aiov r[ov YlroXîxaiov ^corfjpo^
'tT[o]v^ k6 1(f)
UpioiS 'Ai'Ti6)(oy [rov .] . e . . . 'AXc^dy-
95. CONTRACTS 265
B[p6\v /c[af] Bicov 'ASeXc^cou Kavr]<p6pov 'Apcnvor)^
5 TIavv[L\ k8 kv '0^vpvy)(cou noXei TrJL vrrepOe
Me/J.[(p]e(09. 'iyyvos e[/y eKTeiaiu
O^vpvyyjrov T^rapTOveLKoa-rrj^
TiTpairoScov Ô^vpvy^cov TToXecoy a)(T7r[ep
[[eêXa/?i']] avvirdâro npos a-Keirrju
10 Tov rrjv kS' [ey]Xa/36^'ros Trap 'ArroWctiVLov

''??
TOV Siockt)[to]v e/y to k6 (eTos) IJaa . . . coyio?
Xeo ...[.. .]e[.] ....[,.] CTTt Trdcn tol9 vndp-
[)(ôv]crLi^ dvavTLKeKToov 8[p]â.y^fxa)v .
[>ca] 77 TTpdîs irpos âaiXiKa.
'In the 29th year of the reign of Ptolemy the son of Ptolemy Soter, the priest of
Alexander and the gods Adelphi being Antiochus son of ... the canephorus of Arsinoe ,
Philadelphus being Demonice daughter of Philon, on the 24th of the month Pauni, at
Oxyrhynchus above Memphis. Pas son of onis ... is surety on behalf of of
. . . . . . . . .
the Oxyrhynchite nome, for the 24th upon four-footed animals at the city of Oxyrhynchus,
in accordance \vith 's agreement for the security of the person who contracted for the
. . .
24th in the 29th year with Apollonius the dioecetes, at the risk of all his property,
for the payment of drachmae about which there is no dispute, and the execution
. . .
shall be made with reference to the royal decrees.'
2. The name of the priest in dem. P. Ley den 379 is read by Revillout as Antimachus '
son of Cebes,' which our papyrus shows to be inaccurate. The first name is 'Avrioxos, and
we cannot reconcile the vestiges of the second with Kf(3rjTos. The last letter is, however,
probably y rather than v, and the termination may be -t[o]s or -([o]s.
5. vnepde Me'fji[(f)]<;as the Heracleopolite nome is similarly described as being vntp
:
Mffx<f)iv in papyri of the Roman period, e. g. C. P. R. 6. 4 ; cf. p. 8.
7. TfTapToveiKoa-TTjs TfTpaKaieiKoa-r^s would be the normal form at this period

I cf. e. g. ;
P. Petrie I. 25 (2) 2.
9. The fact that f'êXadû was first written (cf. 94. 11) shows that the subject of
(TvvfTaâTo is the person whose name is lost between 11. 6 and 7, and for whom security was
given. (TK(7rr]v at the end of the line is extremely doubtful ; or may be a/x, and three letters
instead of two may precede.
10. 'AnoXXwviov: cf. 44. 3, note.
1 1-2. Uaa may be either the name of the surety, whose description is then
. . .
continued in the next line, or the name of the eyXajSoWor, in which case that of the
surety would come in 1. 12, Ae The addition above 1. 1 1 looks more like an
. , .
intentional insertion than ink which has blotted off from another papyrus. If it were
ignored nat/il? Qoihvios would be a possible reading.
14. Cf. note on 93. lo-i.
266 HIBEH PAPYRI
96. Renunciation of Claims.
Mummy A 17. Vr.{a) lox ii-1 oih b.c. 259 {258).
All agreement in duplicate between two military settlers at Phebichis,
one of whom at least was a Jew, between them,

for the settlement of a dispute
the nature of which is not specified. Each of the two parties withdraws his
claims against the other and the bulk of the
; contract is the earliest Greek
example of the stereotyped formula found in P. Tor. 4, an agreement of

a similar character (6/xoAoyet avvX^Xvadai), and in cessions of land and repayments
of loans, e.g. P. Grenf. II. 35, 26, 28, 30. The title of the agreement is
(TvyYpa(f)i] aTToa-TafTLov, which throws some light on the meaning of the

latter term ;
cf. 1. 3, note. At the end are the signatures of the witnesses, whose names are also
given on the verso and who seem to have been seven in number cf. note on 1. 13. ;
The papyrus is in three fragments which do not join, and both copies of the
contract are very imperfectly preserved but by combining them the body of the
;
document emerges nearly complete. The writing is across the fibres.
[BaaiXevouTO^ IlroXf/xaiov rou UroXeixaiov K]al rov vlov nToXefj.ai[ov] (T0V9

fKTOV KOL lKOaTOV
[e(f Upem 22 letters 'AXe^d]uSpov kol O^cav 'A8eX(p[a)y Kavr](p6pov 'ApaLv6r]s

îXa-
[5eX0oi; 22 letters fxrjubs A\v(jrpov kp. î^{i\\i rod Ka)iT[ov.] avyypa(pr]
aTTOCTTacnov
[AySpoviKov ToO 15 letters rfj? Imyoyrj]'} kol 'AXeâi^Spov tov AvSpovUov

'lovSaiov pera
5 [
20 letters tcou ZcoiXov 8eKaut]K0V. opoXoyovaiv SiaXeXvaOaL irpos aX-
XrjXovi TTciv-
\Ta ra kyKX-qpara nepl wu (ueKaXeaau dXXrjXoi]^ tu>v knavo) y^povcov, pf]
[ê](7[ra)] Se AvSpovUcoi
[iTTfXOe'iv kn 'AXeâi'Spor pr]8' 'AXe^ccfSpML e]7r' AvSpoiuKOv p7]8' dXX<oi
v['7r]p avTwv knL(l)k[p]ovTds [tl 'iyyXrjpa nap^v-
[pead prjSepidL nepl prjOd'o? Tcou 7rpoyyo]i'6Tcoy avroi? npos dXXrjXovs

l[y]KXripdTa)V ecoy
[eVofy '4ktov kol hkoo-tov kol pip'os Avarpov.] ta[r] Sk kniXOrji 07rp[r]fpos
[. .] .
[.]f/3[.]
knl TOV tVe-
96. CONTRACTS 267
10 [pov rj T '4(f)oSos rm ^TnTTopevofxevcoi uKvpo^ . .]t . eaT[a), e]KTei(rdTOi [S 6
iiri]Tropv6fiu[o]^ S)L kav

[kTr^XO-qi 2,3 letters 77 av\y[yp]a^r] ijSe Ky[pia (.(ttco ira\vTaôv ov av Ittl-
[(piprjTai. 24 letters ij.d]pTyp[es] Nik6îo[^ Xa\Ki8ev9, Jiov]va6Scopos
Kpa)p.vL-
[ttjs ? 32 letters ] . ovtol Ta>v Z[m\ov, XTpaTccv . . . .j^Xeoi/y 'Epv-
[OpiTTjs ? 28 letters (o]Trj9 rij? 7nyoi'[fJ9 XeiTovpyos, ]Kp[. .] . [.]ys
15 [ ^^ letters ] AiooâvSpou BoLa)T[i09 rfjs eiriyovfjs X]ei[Tovp]y69.
[ 10 ,, (rvyypa(po(pvXa^ ALouvcroScopo^.]
[j3a<Ti\vovTo9 IlToXffiaiov Tov IlToXefiaiov Kal tov vlov TlToXefxaiolv eroi'[y
]ktov Kal LKoar-
[tov 60' lepico9 22 letters 'AXe^duSpov Kal O^Siiv !4]5eX0(Sr Kai'r)(f)6pov 'Apat-
[voTjs ^LXaSiX(pov 22 letters fiT]uo9 Avarpov fj/z îî^î tov K[(o\irov.
20 [avyypa<pr} diroa-TaaLov 'AvBpovUov tov 15 letters tj?]? kuLyovfi^ Kal 'AX(^-
dvSpov
TOV 'Av8pou[iKov 'I]ov8aiov /x[Ta 20 letters tcou] ZcoiXov ScKaviKov. ofioXo-
yovatv SiaXeXvadai Trpoy dX[XrjXov9 irdi/Ta to, eyKXrjfiaTa 7re]/p[i] mv cVe-
KdXicrav dXXriXoi^
TOiV 7raj/ft) xpoi'cwj/, jxr] k^\^(TTOi> 81 'Av8pov]LK(OL ineXldeii/ kir AXk\âv\8po\>
^rj8' 'AXi^dv-
8pa>i 7r' ['AySpoiîKOv fx-qS' dXX[coL virep avT&y] iTn(p(po[vTds tl 'iyKXr}]fia
7rapev[pe(T(L nr]Sfi]i[dL] mpl fnqBevos
25 Twv n[poyey]ou6TQii' avT[o1s npos dXXrjXovs] eyK[Xr]fidTCov eW eTovs kJKTOv
Kal dKoaTov
Ka\l fj.T]po9 A]v(TTpov. kav 8\\ kireXdrji onoTepo^ . . . .] kirl Tou kTipov rj
T e(po8o9 TWi
k[7n7ropvofj.]evQ)i aKvpos [. . . . ecrrcwj kKTeiadTOi ^ 6 k]7rnropv6/jLevo9 cot kay

kirkX-
[$7]i 33 letters 17 a-vyypa^r] ^5e] Kvpia eorco navTayov ov av kTri-
[(f)4pT]Tai. 24 letters [xdpTvpes Ni]K6(3to9 XaXKi8V9, A Lovvcr68oopo9

30 [Kp<t)fxviTrj9 34 letters ]ovtol tcov ZcoiXov, IlTpaTa^y
[. . . . kX0V9 'EpvdpLTt^s 28 letters ]corr]^ Tfj9 kniyovrj^ XnTOvpyo?,
[
48 letters ] Am^dv8pov Boid)Tio9 Trjs kmyovrj?
[XeiTovpyos. 30 letters crvyypa](po(f)vXa^ Aiovv(r68copo9.

268 IIIBEII PAPYRI
On the verso
'Av8pOvUov] .... 7/ ... [

A]lOVy(TLOV
35 'A\^dv8pov] ^lXwvos [Nikoîov]

Aiovv(To8o)pov] ^rparcoroy \Ti\ôqTpdTov
j. fxi]^ . . . avTcopabove the line. lo. tot eav corr. 24. fxr^b . . . avrov above the
Hnc. 27. 0)1 above ai/ erased,
'In the 26th year of the reign of Ptolemy the son of Ptolemy and his son Ptolemy,
. being priest of Alexander and the gods Adelphi, the canephorus of Arsinoe Philadelphus
. .
being in the month Dystrus, at Phebichis in the Koite district.

. . . ,
Contract of renunciation
between Andronicus ... of the Epigone, and Alexander son of Andronicus, Jew, with . . .
of Zoilus' troop, decurion. They agree that they have settled all the claims which they
made against each other in former times and Andronicus has no right to proceed against ;
Alexander nor Alexander against Andronicus, nor may any other party on their behalf
bring any claim on any pretext with respect to any of the claims which they made against
each other up to the 26th year and the month Dystrus. If either of the two parties proceed
against the other, both the act of aggression shall be invalid for the person making it, and
the aggressor shall forfeit to the injured party a fine of drachmae. This contract is . . .
valid wheresoever it be produced The witnesses are Nicobius, Chalcidian, Dionysodorus,

. . ,
Cromnian, all three ... of Zoilus' troop, Straton son of

. . . , cles, Erythrian (?), . . .
of the Epigone, on special duty, son of Dioxander, Boeotian of the Epigone, on special
. . .
duty. The keeper of the contract is Dionysodorus.'
3. (rvyypa(})rj dnoa-Tacriov this expression has hitherto always been found in connexion
:
with the translations of demotic deeds concerning the renunciation of rights of ownership,
the {(rvyypa(f)r]) (mocrraaiov being contrasted with the npaais, the contract concerning the
receipt of the purchase-price; cf. Wilcken, Archiv, II. p. 143 and pp. 388-9. The close
similarity between the formula of 96 and that of cessions of land (e.g. P. Grenf. II. 25)
fully supports Wilcken's explanation of the distinction.
3. b.v(npov this month corresponded approximately to INIecheir in the year after that
:
in which 96 was written ; cf. App. i.
4. Probably 'lovbalov t^s eVi-yoi'^ls, even if this Andronicus is not identical with the
father of Alexander.
9. The word following 6n6[T](pos is not avrSiv, and in 1. 26 there is certainly not room
for 8 letters between omWepos and eVi, the restoration being in fact there sufficient without
supposing the loss of any word after onorf pos. It is quite possible that in 1. 9 onoKpos was
written twice over by mistake. P. Tor. 4 has frtpos ns vntp avrov at this point.
10. tiKvposi'a-TM would be expected on the analogy of e.g. P. Grenf. II. 25. 20; but the
traces at the beginning of the line are inconsistent with or, and the initial lacuna should
contain about 40 letters. Either, therefore, a word was inserted between aKvpos and eorw, or
a longer verb than fo-rto was emjjloyed. The supposed e of ear a is not very satisfactory.
1 1-2. <7ri[0prjT(u would be expected to end the body of the contract; cf. 90. 20, 91. 13.
Perhaps a blank sjiace was left after it both here and in 1. 29 or possibly Ka\ 7TavT\ tcoi ;
(7n(f)povTi was added, as in papyri of a later period, e.g. P. Oxy. 269. 13. The reading
fia]/)rvp[fr] is, howcver, very doubtful, and it is not quite certain that Nio3f)[f i^ nominative.
In two instances at least (11. 13 and 15) the fathers' names are given; but on the other
hand K^w^w' suggests an adjective meaning from Kromna (in Paphlagonia) rather than '
'
97. RECEIPTS 269
a personal name, and of. 91. 14-6, where the father's name is omitted in the case of the
first witness, but not in that of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th.
13. j.ovToi is the termination of some military title not found elsewhere in these
papyri, ol rpth probably preceded, if the name of a third witness occurred in the lacuna,
as its length suggests. That the witnesses to this contract were seven not, as usual,
six in number, is by the
further indicated of them on the verso, where the <Tvyypa-
list
cf)o(}){\a^ Dionysodorus does not occur among the six mentioned. Probably his name
followed next after that of the two principals of the contract, as is the case with the
(TvyypacjiocpvXa^ in the lists of names on the verso of P. Tebt. 104 and 105. Seven witnesses
are apparently found in GO also; cf. 90. 22, note.
'Epv[epLTi]i!, if correct, probably means a settler from 'EpvOpa ciKpa in the Cyrenaica.
14. \eiTovpy6t, which at this period can mean simply a 'workman' (e. g. P. Petrie
III. 46 novel title of a military settler.
(3). 5), is a Probably Xeirovpyos has no definitely
military but this settler had some special duties assigned to him.
significance, The
tax called XfirovpyiKou which was paid by Ptolemaic cleruchs (P. Petrie III. no, P. Tebt.
102. 3) may have been in lieu of performing these duties ; cf. Wilcken, Os/. I. p. 382. For
XeiTovpyiai imposed on Greek settlers cf. 78.
16. There was very likely a blank space before (rvyypaô^vKa^ both here and in I. 33.
IX. RECEIPTS
97. Receipt.
Mummy 5. 8x7-8m. B.C. 279-8 (278-7) or 282-1 (281-0). Plate X.
Commencement of an acknowledgement of
receipt, dated either in the 4th
or the 7th year (cf. note on 1. 3) of Philadelphus.
In either case this is the earliest
date in that reign yet found in a Greek papyrus, and ranks next in antiquity to
that of 84 {a), which came from the same mummy. There is much similarity
in the handwriting of the two documents. On the verso is an impression of
Aaio-ioy from another papyrus.
Baa-LXivovTO^ n[ToXfia]iov
Tov nTo[\e/xaC]ov {erovs') ^ i<p' U-
pico9 A[ifjL]vac o]v TOV 'ATr[o]\-
Xft) fiT]i/[b]9 'Ajr^Waiov k<^.
5 [6]/xo\oyu dire-îiv K . .
[.
[' . . .]oy t[S>p 'A-

270 HIBEH PAPYRI
[ ] t[o]u Mvaaiov [. .
2. The is broken and may be read either as S or (, according as some traces

figure
of ink to the of the diagonal stroke are regarded as accidental or not.
left
3. A[nx\vaio\: cf 30. 16, P. Petrie III. 14. 9, &c. But the initial letter may equally
well be A, e. g. *A[^?]yai'[o]ii.
4. Apellaeus probably corresponded approximately to Mesore or Thoth at this period

cf. App. i. p. 339.
6. A blank space is left for K ... 's nationality.
98. Receipt of a Captain.
Mummy 117. 22-3 x 9-8 cf)i. b.c. 251 (250).
Acknowledgement by a captain of a transport that he had received

4800 artabae of barley to be delivered at Alexandria cf 39, 100, 156 (which ;
was found with 98), and P. Petrie II. 48. The contract is preceded by a short
abstract of its contents, as in 94.
[ (eVous)] A5 Meaopr] [kS. ofioXo-
ya [Aiouva-io?] p[av]KXr]pos e//[/3]e/3[X77o--
[6aL Sia iVe)(]ê[/z]/360fy tov irapx tcou /3a[o-tXi-
[KMf ypafi]iJ.[a]Ti<Jou e/y Kp{Kovpov) 'B,.vo86kov [kui
5 *A\\i^dv8pov\ Kpi6\(i>\v [dpTdâs) 'Aw.
\â(Ti\KivovTO^ IlToXefxaiov tov nroXfxai[ov
[â)]r7jpo9 (eVou?) X8 k^ Upt(09 NeoTTToXifiOv

TOV ^pL^LOv 'AXi^dvSpov Kal Oiwv
\A8(.\\(f}U>u Kavrj(p6pov 'Apaivorj^ îXaSiX-
10 '(f)o]v 'Apaivorj^ TrJ9 NiKoXdov fir^vos
Meaopi] kS. [d]fj.oXoyT /iiopva[io9
vavKXrjpo? fiP(^Xfjada[c e/?] K(p{Kovpov)
a^voSoKov Kal 'AXi^dv8pov ((f)

[ov\ K[v\fipvrjTr]^)
'EKT^vpt^ TldaLTOS MîxîTri<i Sid

15 Ne\0/x(3(ovs TOV irapd tcov âcnXiKutv
ypan/xaTicou coare eh 'AX[^]di'8piai'
ti'y TO âaiXiKou crvu SeiyfiaTi [KpiOcou
99. RECEIPTS 271
dprdâ^ TTpaKia)(i\ia^ 6KT[aKoaia9

aiTou Ka[6apov a](S[ojXoi^ KKoo-Ka[ey/iei/orj fiirpcoi [kuI aKvrd-
20 XrjL 019 a[vTbs r)]uiyKaTO e^ 'AXe^lauSpeias
/xeTprja^lL SiKaiai,] kccI ovOleu eyKaXco.
14. KtKocTKLv ivnevov addccl above the line.
'The 34ih year, INIesore 24. Dionysius, captain, acknowledges that he has embarked
through Nechthembes the agent of the basilicogrammateis on the boat of Xenodocus and
Alexander 4800 artabae of barley.
'In the 34ih year of the reign of Ptolemy the son of Ptolemy Soter, the priest of
Alexander and the gods Adelphi being Neoptolemus son of Phrixius, the canephorus of
Arsinoe Philadelphus being Arsinoe daughter of Nicolaus, the 24th of the month Mesore.
Dionysius, captain, acknowledges that he has embarked upon the boat of Xenodocus and
Alexander, the pilot on which is Ecteuris son of Pasis, of Memphis, through Nechthembes
the agent of the basilicogrammateis, for transport to the royal granary at Alexandria, with
a sample, 4800 artabae of barley, being pure, unadulterated and sifted grain, by the
measure and smoothing-rod which he himself brought from Alexandria, with just measure-
ment, and I make no complaint.'
I. Even if (eVoi;?) out, the space at the beginning of the line would not be
was written
filled. Perhaps preceded.
dvTiypncfiov
4. For K(p{Kovpop) cf. 82. 6. The abbreviation consists of a tall stroke slightly
thickened at the top and joined to an e, and might be read te( ) ; but this suggests
nothing, and the first stroke is really too large for an t. Moreover, the abbreviation
ff/>( ), more plainly written, occurs in some unpublished similar documents from Tebtunis.
The same compendium is apparently repeated in 1. 12 below, with a larger curve for the o.
13. 0' [ov\ K[v(l3fpvT]rr]s) the reading of the last word is very doubtful, but cf. 39. 5-6,
i
P. Petrie III. 107 (r). 4, &c. Xenodocus and Alexander were the owners of the boat, and
Dionysius the acting principal. A similar distinction between vavKXrjpns and owner occurs in
the Tebtunis papyri referred to in the note on 1. 4, and P. INIagd. 37. 1-2.
16. P. Petrie II. 48. 4-5 may now be restored on this analogy acrTt [ds'AXf^dpdptiav
tls TO having preceded at the end of the previous line.
jSacrijXtKoi/, fp.l3el3\jja6ai
17. ai/v bdypari 39. 1 5-6.

: cf.
19-20. Cf. 156 and P. Cairo 10250. 10 sqq. {Archi'v, I. p. 80) perpcoi S}i alT[6s] eKop-ia-a
| 'AXfâvSptins. Probably something similar is to be restored in P. Petrie II. 48. 9. For
the aKvTokT] cf. P. Cairo 10250. 13 and P. Amh. 43. 10.
21. ov6[ev f'yKaXS} cf. 87. 1 3-4 and P. Petrie II. 48. 10.
: The same phrase also occurs
at the end of some of the Tebtunis receipts referred to above.
99. Reckipt for Rent.
Mummy A17. i4-^xgcm. 8.0.270(269). Plate X.
An
acknowledgement of the payment of rent, partly in olyra partly in
a money equivalent of wheat, by two y(s)pyoL ; cf. 100. The land in question
seems to have belonged to one of the /Sao-tAiKoi KXijpot (85. 13 ; cf. 52. 26, note),
272 HIDEH PAPYRI
i. e. to be really (3a(nXtKi) yij cf. note on 1. 8. The protocol contains the earliest
;
extant mention of the association of the gods Adelphi with Alexander in the
Alexandrian and the latest instance of the absence of the canephorus of
cult,
Arsinoe. A
comparison of this passage with 110. 40 and 44 shows that the
association of the gods Adelphi took place between the 13th and 15th years
of Philadelphus ; cf. App, iii. p. 368. The canephorus first appears in a papyrus
of the 19th year ; cf. App. iii. p. 369. 128 is perhaps part of a duplicate of 99.
B aaiXevoi'TO^ IlToXc/jiaL-
ov Tov TlTo\^jxai\o\v [erovi) i
eS[pov
5 Kai 6ea>v 'ASeXcpcov fxrjvb^
Aaiaiov k. 6fx[oXo]yei
IIapap.vr]u) dpriaâ?) v

KOI rrapa KaXXiadipov
6Xvp[a)i') (apTaâs;) pv Kol Tifxr]p
TTvpoou {apTa^S>v) Ik /? {6(3oXov) ttjl
15 {dpTa^rji) {8pa)(/xds) pva (TeTpu>(3oXoi^).
13. This line inserted kUer.
'In the reign of Ptolemy the son of Ptolemy, the 15th year, Patroclus son of Patron
being priest of Alexander and the gods Adelphi, the 20th of the month Daisius. Paramenes,
Cyrenean, oeconomus of Telestes, agrees that he has received from Dionysia on behalf of
. drus, for the rent of Prologenes' holding, 400 artabae of olyra, and from Callisthenes
.
1 20 artabae of olyra and the value of 70 artabae of wheat at 2 drachmae i obol for the artaba,
151 drachmae 4 obols.'
6. this month probably corresponded in the

Anto-i'ou : 1 5th year of Philadelphus to
parts of Phamenoth and Pharmouthi cf. App. i. p. 339. ;
8. TfXto-rou cf. 85. 13-4 *iXo|(Vov KXrjpov jSaaiXiKuv toiv TfXtcTTov, and note.
: Telestes
was probably captain of a troop, but what position this okouonoi TeXeorou occupied is not
clear. If he was an ordinary oiVowJôy, TtXtarov would on the analogy of e. g. 169 be
expected to refer to the district under his control, and it is possible that TtXecxTov here and
Twv TfXearov in 85. 14 nicans the district M'hich was or had been governed by a military
oflicial called Telestes ; cf. the use of the military term (lytjua as the name of a toparchy in
100. RECEIPTS 273
101. 3. On the other hand, the mention of Paramenes' nationality suggests that he was
not an ordinary oiKovuôi, but a military settler acting as agent for his captain, Telestes.
If so, however, the rent of Protogenes' Kkripos would seem to be paid not to the State,
but to the leader of a troop of military settlers, whereas it is more satisfactory to regard
Protogenes' kXtjpos as one of the KXrjpoi, âa-iXiKoi which are so often met with in the volume
(cf. 52. 26, note). We
prefer, therefore, to suppose that Paramenes was a government
official.
10. The supposed o offipou is very doubtful, and bpv (or opv) can equally well be
read, and might be combined with the following ts as one name but cf. 100. 1 1 fls ra
;
fK(f>6pia.
14. 2 drachmae i obol for an artaba of wheat is slightly higher than the ordinary
rate (2 dr.) found at this period; cf 84(a). 8-9, note.
100. Account. Receipt for Rent.
Mummy 5.

i4X'j-gcm. 8.0.267(266). Plate X (recto).
On one side of this papyrus is a short account in drachmae, on the other

an acknowledgement by an agent of Xanthus that he had received from
Euphranor some barley which was the rent of a kA^/jo?, and was being forwarded
by river cf. introd. to 39, where the same persons are also concerned, and 98.
;
It is not quite certain which side is recto and which verso but the smoother ;
side seems to be that occupied by the account, which will then be earlier than
13. C. 267 (366). In any case, however, the interval between the two documents
is small, since they were almost certainly written by the same person, whose
hand a characteristic example of the more cursive writing of this period (see
is
Plate X). The receipt on the verso was not completed^, and blank spaces were
left for some of the details. The writing on both sides is across the fibres.
The most interesting point in the papyrus 11. 8-9, where the is the date in
absence of shows that Euergetes (if he is meant by roiS vlov
kqI tov viov rTroAe/iatou
in that formula) was still not generally known to have been associated in the
sovereignty on Phaophi 11 of the 19th year (Dec. 6, B.C. 267 if it was a revenue
year, probably B. c. 266 if it was regnal cf. p. 367). On the other hand, ac-
;
cording to a Louvre demotic papyrus (Revillout, Chrest. dem. pp. 231-40), the
association had taken place before Athur 30 (Jan. 24) in the 19th year (B.C. 266
or 265). Hence, assuming that our papyrus may be trusted and in the absence
of other evidence there is no ground for doubting its accuracy the date of the
association can now be more narrowly determined than If the 19th
previously.
year in 100 and the demotic papyrus is in both cases a revenue year, the limits
are Dec. 6, 267, and Jan. 24. 266 ; if it is in both cases a regnal year, they are
T
274 HIBEH PAPYRI
Dec. 266, and Jan. 24, 265
6, if the 19th year in 100 is a revenue year and that
;
in the demotic a regnal (which is the most Hkely hypothesis), the limits are
Dec. 6, 267, and Jan. 24, 365 the converse hypothesis would produce an incon-
;
sistency between the two papyri and need not be considered. Bouche-Leclercq
{Hist, des Lagidcs, I. p. 1H4) rather arbitrarily adopts the year B.C. 268 as
the termimis ante qucm for the date of the association, a view which is no
longer tenable.
Recto.
[e/y] rovTo KOfii^^L

[7ra]pa TOiv ra dcoiXia e,
'K]ai napa ttju KaraX-

5 [Xa]yi]v y,
[Tt\iir]i' [dpTa(3a>i') 9- ijS,
I / ]
K, \(oi7rai) 7].
Verso.
BaaiXevoi'TOS UroXefiaiov rov n.ToXep.aL[ov

{irovs) lO jii-jvo^ Uaaxpi la. e>(6t IlaovTr]?
10 cnTo/J.eTfji]9 'EdvOov nap Ev<ppd vopo'i
Si AfTLTrdrpov e/? to, ^Kcfyopta tou 'AXe-

^dv8pov KXrjpov e/? to l0 (eroy) e^ 'Ai'arieii
KpL6co[v) idprdfSas ?) X TTp[ )

e/y ^dpw e(p' rj^ kv-
êpi/rjrrjs vavKXr-jpos
I. ro vTrfpav{r]\ana) occurs ill the account OH the verso of 112.

,vir]fpaufi\QiKas :
3. An shown by Smyly in P. Potrie III. pp. 345 sqq. to have been a volume
ttcoi'Xtoi/ is
equal to the cube of which the side was a royal double cubit. Following the letter ( at the
end of the line is a circular mark resembling that used as an abbreviation of n, and it would
be possible to re.Q;ard e7r( ) as a participle governing tu dooiXia. But a 5 is much wanted
here for the arithmetic, and the mark in question is somewhat indistinct and may be
accidental. With the reading adopted in the te.xt a participle must be supplied.
4. KaraWayq seenis here to have much the same sense as fVaWayij, a use of the
word found also in classical writers.
6. [apraQcJu) : sc. nvpov probably, 2 drachmae being the normal jirice of an artaba of
wheat at this period ; cf. note on 84 (<?). 8-9.
8-14. 'In the 19th year of the reign of Ptolemy son of Ptolemy, the nth of the
month Phao[)hi, Paoutes the corn-measurer of Xanihus has received from Euphranor
101. RECEIPTS 275
through Antipater for the rent of the holding of Alexander for the 19th year, from
Anatieu (?), 30 artabae of barley, which have been embarked (?) upon the boat
whose pilot is and whose captain is
10. The space before a-iro/ieVpjjr was intended for a further specification of Paoutes,
e. g. fv with a place-name.
1 1-2. The 'Wf^dvhpov /cXTjpoy recurs in 39. 9. 'hvaTuv is apparently the name of
a place, probably in the Kailri]i toVos ; cf. 39, introd.
The meaning of the abbreviation is obscure;
13. the p (or i) is written through the tt,
which may also be read as A participle would suit

/i. the sense.
14. This line was probably the last, but the margin below is not broad enough to
be quite decisive.
101. Receipt for Rent.
Mummy 5. 13-7 X 9*9 rw. b. c.26i(26).
A receipt, similar to 100, for a large quantity of barley delivered by

Euphranor to a superior official as rent of cleruchic land ; cf. introd. to 39.
"Etovs kS fjLTjvbs Tvî. e^
Aifiavos 6 Trapa. Sefûov airo-

X6yo9 Tov 'AyrjiiaTO'S Trapa
Evcppdvopos vnlp II\dT(avo[9
5 e/? ovs yeoipyel K\r]pov9 â.(r[iX(iK0V9)
'A[p]i'[Sa)]TT]9 kv Xi.o'ivriL vn\[p
[ jou e/y roi)? ap.aa[. .
fiirpcot dvq\()TiK(OL Kpidooi^ dprajSa? iiTTaKoaia^

oySorJKOVTa rirrapas
10 rjjxvav TirapTov oySooy.
8. pfTjxoi iipr)\oi)TiKo>i above the line.
The 24th year, in the month of Tubi. Libanus, agent of Semnus and sitologus of the
'
Agema, has received from Euphranor on behalf of Platon for the royal holdings cultivated
by Harendotes, at Sisine on account of for the 784I artabae of barley by the
. . . . . .
spending measure.'
2-3. aiTokoyot TOV 'AyrjfjiaTos apart from the present passage ayrjpa only occurs among
'.
papyri of this period in P. Petrie III. 11 and 12 in personal descriptions, e.g. 12. 16
M]af8a)i/ Twf ElaTpaji/of avvrayfia tov dyfijiaTos. On that analogy tov dyi]fiaTos here might bc
dissociated from aiToXoyos and explained as a description of Libanus. But this seems
a strange addition after the specification of his office, and another explanation is suggested
by a passage in C. P. R. 6. 3-4 81' fTTiTri'i prjTwv] clyopavoiJilai p.(pu)v Tonapxias 'hyi]p\aTQi tov inrip
T 2
276 HIBEIl PAPYRI
Mencpiv 'UpaK\fOTro\iTov. there clearly designates a locality ; and it is significant
'Ayrjiiaros
that the nome is, most probably, the same as
in our receipt (cf. 39, introd.). are We
accordingly disposed to regard rod 'Ayrjumos as a geographical term (with tottos understood)
defining the sphere of Libanus, which would be a perfectly natural addition. The origin of
the term remains obscure perhaps a large grant had been made in this neighbourhood to
;
members of the bodyguard.

5. 85. 1 3 and 52. 26, note.
kXj'jpovs l3na\iX{iKovs) : cf.
7. The word beginning of the line is most probably the name of the place
lost at the
near which the KXrjpoi were situated, and at which the payment would be expected, whereas
it was actually made at Sisine cf. P. Petrie III. 78. 2 eV 'Ani'aSi vntp Av(nfj.axi8os, &c.
;
afiaa\ after rovs is puzzling. The last is the only doubtful letter, and not more than two
or three more are lost after it, if indeed there is anything missing at all. There may,
however, have been an abbreviation, as in 1. 5. A break occurs in the papyrus below this
line, and it is possible that we are wrong in supposing the second fragment to join it
directly, in which case 1. 7 might end with a/xa| but there is a stroke in the lower fragment
;
which just suits the tail of the v before ds. Perhaps ds tovs 'Aiidaios (sc. KXr^povi) should be
read ; cf. 117. 8 and 118. 2.
8. jxfTpai avrjKoaTiK&ii. ; cf. 74. 2, notc.
102. Payment of Piiysician-T.vx.
I\Iummy A, i2-3Xi6-5^w. 1^.0.248(247).
An undertaking, addressed in duplicate to a physician by a military settler,

to pay 10 artabae of olyra or 4 drachmae for the larpiKov of the 3^th year of
Philadelphus. This impost for the maintenance of public physicians occurs
amongst other taxes levied by the State upon military settlers in P. Petrie III.
110 and III, where 2 artabae of wheat are paid for it, and in 103. 9, where the
charge is 5 artabae of olyra but 102 is the only instance of the larptKov being
;
paid direct to the physician, though payments to larpoi occur in private accounts
of the Ptolemaic period, e.g. P. Tebt. 112. The note on the verso probably
refers to the same transaction, in which a loan of some kind seems to have been
involved. The writing is across the fibres.
[ 7if/j7/]j'[a]?oy rS)v ZcoiXov ISicoTr]? EuKdp[TT]coL larpcoL âipHv.

[TiTaKTaLf?) o-jof aTroSaxrHV 6Xvp{a)u) {apTaâs!) t ^ Spaxfia^ Tiaaapas to
iarpi-
\kov rov Xt] (erou?),' ravra^ Si aoi d(Tro8a)aQ)) Ip. p'qul Aaicrtoii- edu Se
cro]i pr] d'
[ttoSo) diroTuaoi] a[o]i ripi]u Tfjf dpTdfSi]^ iKdanjs {8paxp.d9) ^. eppooao.
5 [
(eVoi'9) X1/ JJavi'L '7.
103. RECEIPTS 277
1^
Kvpr]valo\^ TOiv ZcoiXov iSlcott]^ EvKapncoL larpcot
[\aipîv. TiTa\KTaL aol d-rroScoaeiv oXvpcop dprdâ^ SeKa rj Spa-
\XH-^^ Teacrapa]? to laTpiKov rov Xrj [eTovs), Tavra^ Se aoi dno-

[Scjoaoi efj. firjul A]ai(ri(OL' kdv Se croL /j.rj diroBS) dnoTeiaco a'o]i
10 [ri/XTju Trfs dprdj^T]? iKda{rrjs;) {Spaxp-cc?) /?. eppcoao. (erovs) X^ TJavvL -j".
On the verso
expTJcraTo napa . anavTos.
. Cyrenean, of Zoilus' troop, private, to Eucarpus, physician, greeting.

'
. . It has been
ordered that I shall pay you ro artabae of olyra or 4 drachmae as the physician-tax for
the 38th year. These I will pay you in the month Daisius and iT I fail to pay you, I will ;
forfeit to you as the value of each artaba 2 drachmae. Good-bye. The 37th year,
Pauni 6.'
2. That 4 drachmae should be the alternative (and therefore presumably the equivalent)
of 10 artabae of olyra gives rise to some difficulty. In 85. 15 and 119. 16 olyra is
converted into wheat at the ratio of about 2^:1; but 4 drachmae would be expected to be
equivalent at this period to 2 artabae of wheat (cf. 84 {a). 8-9, note), especially as 2 artabae
of wheat are the charge for larpiKov in P. Petrie III. no and in and this makes the ratio ;
of olyra to wheat indicated by 102 not 2i i but 5 r. 103. 9, on the other hand, where
: :
5 artabae of olyra are paid for larpiKov, will be in agreement with P. Petrie III. 1 10 if the
ratio between olyra and wheat was 2^ i as found in 85 and 119: and since the same ;
ratio is also found in P. Tebt. 246 and 261 the circumstances in which 10 artabae of
olyra were in 102 equivalent to only 4 drachmae were no doubt exceptional. That an
artaba of olyra was really worth much more than f drachma is also indicated by the fact
that its penalty value (1. 4) is 2 drachmae an artaba. This, which agrees with the penalty
value of an artaba of olyra in 86. 12, 124, and P. Tor. 13 (second century b. c), would, if
olyra was norm.ally worth nearly a drachma per artaba, not be exceptionally high, since
the penalty value of grain is in the third century b. c. often twice its normal price cf. 88. ;
13, note. In 90. 15 the penalty value of olyra is apparently as high as 4 drachmae the
artaba.
3. AaiaicDi this month probably corresponded in the main to Pauni at this period ; cf.
:
App. i. Since the document was written in Pauni of the 37th year, Daisius no doubt refers
to the 38th.
103. Receipt for Physician-Tax and Police-Tax.
Mummy 10. I2-4X "j-san. b.c. 231 (230).
Receipt for the payment, on behalf of a military settler, probably in the

of 5 artabae of olyra for the tarpuor, or tax for the maintenance
Kcoirrj? TOTTos,
of physicians, and 9 artabae for ûAaKtrtKoV, the police-tax cf. introd. to 102 ;
278 HIBEH PAPYRI
and 105, and 165, a similar receipt issued to the same person. The reign is no
doubt that of Euergetes of. 66-70 (/;), which came from the same mummy.
;
["Etovs) i^ âco^L /3, 6\(vpcoi') l8.
'AnoWocpdi'T]^ -
ocpfXcoi âipiw. fi-
fierpi^fiÔa napa
5 XrpaTLOV vTrep
/iioS(i)pov KecpdXXco-
V09 Se^KUVLKOv) JU)V ZcoiXov
Sia K(Ofio{ypafi/xaTico9) EvTToXeco^
(roi/r) i( larpLKov 6X{vpol)v) e,
10 <l)v{XaKiTiKov) oXvpcov ^vvea, / 6X(vp(Joi^) iS.
eppcocro. (erov^) i^
^[a]a>(pi /?.
'The 17th year, Phaophi 2: 14 artabae of olyra.

Apollophanes to Theophilus, greeting. We have had measured out to us by Siratius on
'
behalf of Diodorus son of Cephallon, decurion of Zoilus' troop, through the comogrammateus
Eupolis for the 17th year, 5 artabae of olyra as the physician-tax and 9 artabae of olyra as
the police-tax; total 14 artabae of olyra. Good-bye. The 17th year, Phaophi 2.'
I. The abbreviation of oA(upa);/) here and in 11. 9-10 is a rounded X surmounted by
a small o.
6-8. Diodorus and Eupolis reappear in 104 and 165. For the abbreviation of
tfKoviKot of. 81. 16, note.
104. Rkckipt for various T.ixiis.
Mummy 10. 8-gx 'j-;^ cf'i. B.C. 225 (224).
A receipt in duplicate issued by Eupolis the comogrammateus to Diodorus

(cf. 103) for the imposts called Tpir]papxrjpa and Siaxoj/jia, the police-tax (on which
sec 105, introd.), and the tax on horses. These four taxes are found together
with some others in P. Petrie II. 39 (r). The horse-tax is there mentioned but
once under the name (/)opos ittttco;', the amount paid being lost. Here it is
simply called X-n-nm', and i drachma 5 obols are entered under that head. It
belonged to the category of taxes on property, and was no doubt paid by
105. RECEIPTS 279
Diodorus on the horse which his miUtary duties obHged him to keep. The
meaning of TpLr]papxn\ia and hiaxoiiJâ is unknown. Smyly is probably right
(P. Petrie III. p. 377) in doubting whether the former has any naval significa-
tion, and in connecting it rather with the use o( rpL-i^papxas in e. g. P. Petrie III.
43 (3). where the word apparently means an overseer of workmen.

21, In
P. Petrie II. 39 (e) the sums paid for these two taxes are 5 drachmae and
4 drachmae i obol respectively. The corresponding amounts in 104 are
6 drachmae 4^ obols and 6 drachmae.
{Êtovs) j8/c IlavuL A. e'xei Ev-

7r[oXi9 napa A]io8a)pov
ei'y TO /?K {Tos) TpiTjpdpxvi^'^
[{SpaxfJâ?)] q- {TTpcoôXou) {rjuLcoîXioy), Sidx<ofJLcc (5paX^^^) '5"
5 (pv[XaKiTLKOv) {SpaxfJ-cc9) <T, iTnrcou {8pax(ir]v) a (niVTceôXov),
(eTovs) /c/3 riavi'L X. e^fi Ev-

TToXiy Trap^ [ALoSjcopov
Ke^dXXcovo[9 els] to k [{(tos)
TpLri[p]dpy[r]iia {Spaxfâs) T (jeTpcolSoXou) {rjixicoêXiov),
10 [5ia]x[a)/za (Spaxfâs) <r, (pv{XaKiTLKoy) {SpaxP-as) T,
[tTTTTcop (^Spaxp^^) a [nei'TooôXoi').]
The 22nd year, Pauni 30. Eupolis has received from Diodorus for the 22nd year for
'
Tpir]papxwa 6 drachmae 4^ obols, for Smx^/ia 6 drachmae, for police-tax 6 drachmae, for
horse-tax i drachma 5 obols.'
1. /3k: other examples of this order are found e.g. in 110. 37, P. Petrie II. 13 (17)- 3.
P. Magd. 3. 3.
2. The omission of Kf0dXXwi/of (cf 1. 8) was an oversight.
105. Receipt for Police-Tax.
Mummy A 15. 7-1 x'lcm. B.C. 228 (227).
A wheat paid by a military settler belonging to the

receipt for 2 artabae of
troop of Zoilus, probably at Phebichis, for the maintenance of the police. This
impost is frequently mentioned in the Petrie papyri, where, besides the tax on
land called (pvXaKtriKdv y?/? (III. 112 (//). 3-8) or simply (pvXaKiTiKov which
28o HIBEI-I PAPYRI
corresponds to the c/>vA. tov Ihiuv KXijpov here, we hear of a (pvkaKtTLKov levied
upon sheep (Acta? TTpo[3dT(ov, III. iii. 8), animals for sacrifice {lepeim>, III. 109 (a).
iv. 13), associations and workshops {(Ovdv kol kpya(TTr]pmv, III. 32 (/). 2), and
geese {\r\vu)v, III. 112 [a), ii. 5). When levied upon land it was sometimes paid
in money, i drachma per aroura being the rate found in III. 70 {a), i. 4, but more
often in corn, as here, the annual amounts ranging from if artabae of wheat
(III. 54 (/;). d, verso 3) to 3 artabae (II. 39 [c). 2). Cf. 143, another receipt with
the same formula, 103. 10, where the charge is 9 artabae of olyra (equivalent to
nearly 4 artabae of wheat ; cf. 85. 15), and 104, where 6 drachmae are paid for
(fwXaKiTLKov. The 19th year in 1. i refers more probably to Euergetes than to
Philadelphus.
{"Etovs) lB UavvL KTj. o/JLoXoyel eo-

Scopo^ He/xerprjadai napa
'EpKdfxio9 TOV X . piov l\[dpyov) toov
ZcoiXou TO yLv6p.ivov 0i;Xa-
5 KLTLKov TOV ISinv KX(i]pov) nvp(coi') Svo.
'The 19th Theodorus agrees that he has had measured to him by

year, Pauni 28.
Herkamis son of Ch captain of Zoilus' troop, the due amount of the police-tax upon
. . . ,
his own holding, two artabae of wheat.'
I. e(()8(opos is perhaps identical with the Theodorus in 75. i, though the Theodorus
here would be expected to be an official of the 6r](ravp6s, a position which does not suit the
Theodorus in 75.
3. l\{dpxov) this abbreviadon consists of a large X with a small t underneath, and
:
recurs in 143 cf. P. Petrie III. 54 {a). (4) ii. 5, where it appears to mean lX{apxni)-
;
The
circumstance that in 103. 7 the payer of larpiKou and (pvXaKiriKov is a df^KaviKos) makes
i\[apxov) much more probable here than e. g. Al{f^vos).
5. l8iov: cf 90. 7, note.
106. RixEiPT FOR Beer-Tax.
Mummy A 15. 10-2x7 <"' RC 246 (245).
This and the following papyrus together witii 136-142 form a series of
receipts for the payment of C^njpa in the second and third years of a king who
is no doubt Euergetes. The payments arc made into the XoyevTi'ipiov at
Phebichis, which village seems to have been a kind of centre of the finance
administration of the Kojid;?. The Aoyeurj/Vtoj-. a term hitherto known only from
106. RECEIPTS 281
Rev. Laws xi. 13, in these receipts (of. 108. 2, 114. 7) occupies the place of the
royal bank, and seems to be hardly distinguishable from it, since the recipient
of the tax is the rpaTreîrT/?, with whom is coupled the SoKt/zao-r?/?. The close
association of these two officials (cf. 108. 4, where the boKLfxaa-Trii is apparently
found acting for the TpaTTeCm]^, and 41, a letter concerning a SoKt/xao-r?]?) casts
a new light on the functions of the boKLfxacTTris, who up to now has only been
mentioned in P. Leyden O and P. Petrie III. 50. 2. From the Leyden papyrus,
a receipt for 20 drachmae on account of oTropiotpa (cf. 109) paid over by
a boKLfxaa-Trii to a irpaKTOip in circumstances which are rather obscure, it
has been supposed that the SoKtfxaorTjs wâs particularly concerned with the
aTTOfMOLpa, especially with conversions of payments in kind into money (Wilcken,
Ost. I. pp. 361-2). The Hibeh texts, however, indicate that his functions were
much wider, and that he acted as a check on the rpa7re(,'(.'rr;j in the same way
as the ai'TLypa(pvs controlled the oIkovoixos, thus affording another illustration
of a favourite Ptolemaic practice. In 41 the collection of arrears of taxation
and the selling of oil manufactured by the government appear among the duties
of a SoKtjuao-T?/?, and hoKiixaarai are mentioned in 29. 19 in an obscure context.
An impost called boKiixaa-riKov, apparently a charge for the maintenance of
boKi\ia(TTai, occurs in 110. 44 and perhaps in 29. 24.
Besides the TpaireCLTtjs and boKip-aa-T/js who issue this series of receipts, other
officialswere generally present in one instance (107. 5) the oIkovoixos, but in

;
most cases Dorion, whose title where it occurred in 107. 4 is lost (but may have
been eTTto-rar?j9 if he is identical with the Dorion in 72. 4), and whose signature
has usually been appended at the end of the receipts. The payments are made
by different persons who are all agents of an inhabitant of Talae called Taembes.
Whether he was the tax-collector or the tax-payer is not clear but from 108, ;
in which the general formula is similar and the person in 1. 5 corresponding

to the agents of Taembes here is the tax-payer's representative, not the tax-
collector, we Taembes is the person upon whom the
prefer to suppose that
Cvrripd is and to make these payments parallel to those mentioned in
levied,
P. Petrie III, 37 (d). verso iv. 15 sqq., where kcu irapa tG>v C^'ottolmv TT^TTTOiKêv']
irapa ria/Aartos X'^H'ôv) pv k.t.X. is found in an account of, probably, a royal
, . .
bank. This interpretation will fit in very well with the generally-received view
of the (vTripa (cf. Wilcken, Osf. I. pp. 369-73), that it was a tax on the profits
of beer-manufacture, but a good many points connected with the taxes upon
that important industry are still in doubt. The sums paid by Taembes'
agents consist of monthly instalments ranging from 8 drachmae (138) to 20
(106. 8) in copper, the rate of which is three times (106. 8, 107. 7, and 138 in ;
137 the figures are obliterated) given as apparently 24^ obols for a stater. This
282 HIBEH PAPYRI
extremely small addition to the rate of 24 obols for a stater found in the case
of those taxes in which the government accepted copper at par is in accordance
with the evidence of P. Par. 61. v. 19, that in the second century B. C. the Cvr-qpa
was an oivr] irpds xoAKOi' laovofxov. The extra ^ obol per stater or approximately
I per cent, which is levied in the Hibeh texts, probably corresponds to the extra
charges of i per cent, for kincrK^vr} and 2 per cent, for transport which are
mentioned in connexion with the C'*^Tr]pd in the Paris papyrus. Above each
receipt is a brief summary, and at the end of each are a few words of demotic.
The writing is in most cases, including 106, across the fibres.
('Etov9) /? 'AOv[p X, {Spaxiâ})] k.
(hovs) /? 'A$Vp A. TTiTTTCOKeU
kirl TO e/x êîyjL Xoyevrijpiop
Tov KooiTov TLdacovL rpane-
5 îTTji Kal UrororJTi Soki-
fiaaTTJi Trapa ApcvScorov to{v) napa TafJ.îov^

K TaXdi] ^VT-qpds iV tov
'Advp y(_a{XKOv) (h kS {jiTapTov ?) [ppa^fxas) tiKoat, y^ k.
2nd hand [7ra]p6rr[o]y Acopioivos.
I line of demotic.
6. apevhmTov ro(i') napa above the line.
'The 2nd year, Athur 30: 20 dr. The 2nd year, Athur 30. Ilarendotes, agent of
Taembes from Talae, has paid into the collecting office of the Koite toparchy at Phebichis,
to Pason, banker,and Slotoetis, controller, for the beer-tax on account of Athur twenty
drachmae of copper at 2^\ obols (for a siater), total 20. In the presence ofDorion.'
8. (c8 {rtTaprov) : very little of the 5 is left ; but the traces are inconsistent with e or $,
and of. 107- 7, where ^ is certain. There is more doubt about the fraction ; all that
remains is a piece of a horizontal stroke joining the sign for drachmae. If it represents
^ obol, which is usually written ~|, the writer must on reaching the end of the horizontal
stroke have pen back a little way before making the down stroke, just as he usually
drawn his
does in writing r. Tlie only alternative is to read (7;/;ita)/3eXioi'), but we hesitate to introduce
a rate which would be necessarily diderent from those found in 107. 7 (cf. note) and 138 ;
and if, as is likely, the rate is the same in all three cases, 24 J is the only suitable number.
107. RECEIPTS 283
107 Receipt for Beer-Tax.
Mummy A 15. 6-5 x 7-2 cm. b. c 244 (243).
Another receipt for beer-tax similar to 103, but mentioning in 11, 3-4 the
presence of two officials ; cf. 100, introd. The writing is across the fibres.
\('Erovs) y TJavpi X, {Spaxfâl-) ]
{erovs) y Uavvi X. ttIttt (wV[r irrl to eV

ê(3Lî Xo{yevT7]pior) NiKoXdcoi Tp{a7rîTr]i) [kuI StototJt^l
So(Ki/xaaTTJi) irapovTos Awpioovo^ [
Kal
5 Zrji'oSoypov oIkovojigv 7ra\ pa
aTLo? Toiv) TTapa Taefiêov? e/c [TaXdrj ûrripas

e/y Tov Ilavvi e/y k8 (rerapTov) (Spa^pa?) e
and hand (eVofy) y JJavuL X, irapovro^ J[copicoi'o?.
I line of demotic.
4. The missing tide is perhaps eVto-rfirou ; of. 106, introd. In 108. 3 the âaiXiK,)s
ypafifinrds is associated with the oIkovo/xos in a similar context^ but is named second.
7. The supposed sign for A obol has the horizontal portion longer and more curved
than usual ;
but it is certainly not the symbol for -i obol, nor can it be satisfactorily regarded
as a combination of the two, especially since i is certainly the only fraction found in 138
where the preceding 8 is doubtful, and in 106. 8 the doubtful symbol may represent
^ or i
obol, but not both ; cf. note ad loc.
108. Receipt for Batii-Tax.
Mummy A 16. 8-2 x 6-3 m. b.c. 258 (257) or 248 (247).
A receipt with a formula very similar to that of 106-7, issued by a Aoyeu-

TT/ptoy forthe payment of 10 drachmae on account of the bath-tax, probably
a general impost levied for the construction and maintenance of public baths
;
cf. note on 1. 7. The papyrus comes from the same piece of cartonnage as the
correspondence of Leodamas (45-50), and the date is probably the ajth or 37th
year of Philadelphus.
284 IIIBEH PAPYRI
(EtOVS) [.\( âpn[ov6t . . TTfiTTTCOKiV TTL TO
Iv ^VS XoyiVTTJpLOV 81 0LK0v[6lX0V
AioScopov Kal fiaaiXiKov y/)(a///xaTea)S) [. . . .
[0e]o(5ct)pcoi Tpani(L[rrjL] Sia [Sokl-
5 [fjL\aaTov "flpov napa IIy[
vnep A-qfiOcfioiiVTOS [
âXavetov to{v) 7revreK[ai {krovs)
[{8pa)(^fias) 8]Ka.
';.'7lh year, Pharmouthi P has paid on behalf of Demophon into the collecting
. . . . .
office at Phus through Diodorus, oeconomus, and basilicogrammateus, to Theodorus,

. . . ,
banker, through Horus, controller, for the bath-tax of the ^.jsth year 10 drachmae.'
2. *Ds :a village of the Heracleopoliie nome, probably in the Kalrrji cf. C. P. R. 64. 1 2. ;
4. \8oKiixâaTov cf. 106, introd.

:
/3aXm'ou cf. 112. 96 and â\avdo)v as the title of a tax in P. Petrie III. 37 (/;).
verso
7. :
7, 1 19 (a). 2, and 121 {a). 14. On the bath-tax, which was in Roman times called âXaviKov,
see Wilcken, OsL I. pp. 165-70. His argument from the silence of the ostraca, that this
impost was introduced by Augustus, is now shown to be incorrect. Wilcken hesitates
between two interpretations, (i) a general tax for the maintenance by the State of public
baths, (2) a charge for the use of public baths levied in the form of a tax
upon only those
persons who used them. The former view seems to us much more likely, especially as
small charges for the use of baths (generally
A obol) are common in private accounts of the
distinct from the tax
earlier Ptolemaic period, e.g. P. Petrie 111. 132-42, and are clearly
called f3n\avna>v. That public baths were not in all cases owned by the government appears
from 116, where the tax TpiTrj /SaXai/et'wj/ occurs. Tiiis, on the analogy of e. g. rplrr,
n(pi(TTfpwvu>v, seems to be an impost of

i upon the profits of privately owned baths. The
supply of bathing-establishments in Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt must have been surprisingly
large.
109. Receipt for anofxoLpa.
:\Iummy 83. 4.5 x 10-9 rw. B.C. 247-6.
Two receipts for payments of 10 and 5 drachmae respectively on account

of the tax of | on the produce of vineyards and gardens, otherwise called the
aiioixoipa. For the history of this impost, the benefit of which was transferred
in the 23rd year of Philadelphus from the temples to the deified Arsinoc (whence
the name tKir/ ÎnKahiX^ton, e.g. in 132), cf. Rev. Laws pp. 119 sqq., Wilcken,
Ost. I. pp. T;-,; sqq. and 615, P. Tebt. 5. 51, note, and Otto, Pricster imd Tempd,
I. pp. 340-56. In the present case the tax was levied upon a palm-garden,
and therefore in money, and the two payments were for a single year.
109. RECEIPTS 285
Col. i.
[. . olKov6\fiov 'ApL(TToyiy[ris:] K[al
[
to] Trap avT(ov /ca[f rjcof
[;xt6^cw]i/ etV Tr]V "f tov Teicrdu-

[Spou 0ot]t'i/fa)j'oy TOV 7rpo9 ttjl
5 [8L0LKi]a-ei] els to X9 (eVoy) ûXkov

[rrpos dpy]vpiou {8pa\ixd9) BeKa, /^ {8pa)(jLa)) i.
Col. ii.
TpaTT[eîTr]i Koi 8okl-
lJ.a\cr]TriL 'ApL(TTOykvq[s Kal
to Trap' avToiiV Kal Toi)V /j,t[6'^cou
10 19 Trju <f TOV TnaoivSpov (poiiîK[oo-
vo? TOV 7r[po]? [ttji Sio]iKrj<TL e/y to Xd [(eTO?)
X^Xkov irpbs dpyvpiov ((5/)a^/za?) nivTe, /^ (Spaxf^ctl) e.
11. 7-12. 'Aristogenes and (have paid to) banker and

. . . ., controller, the . . . , . .
amount due from them and their partners for the tax of i upon the palm-garden of
Teisander, the finance official, for the 39th year, in copper on the silver standard five
drachmae, total 5 drachmae.'
I. Either 8ia .. olKov6]fiov or napovros

. olKov6]fiov may be restored . . cf. 107. 5~6, 108. 2. ;
4-5. TOV irpos TT]i \8ioiKfj(T(i may refer to (poiviKcbvos, but is more easily explained if
connected with TeiadvSpov this use of np6s in describing officials is extremely common ; cf.
:
e.g. P. Tebt. 30. 18 Tav fie np6s Tois ypapfiaTfiais. 6 irpos ttji StotKijcrft may well be, like 6 (ttI
rqs 8ioiKT](rea)s in Rev. Laws, a periphrasis for 8ioik7]t^s. Aristogenes and his partners were
probably lessees of Tisander.
5. X^ (eros): the last (revenue) year of Philadelphus ; cf. 53. 4, note and App. ii.
p. 364.
[Trpos d/j-yjVptoi' cf. 70(a). 9, note. Down to the reign of Epiphanes the money
5-6. x"^KoO :
payments for dnopoipa had to be made either in silver or in copper at a discount. Later in
the second century b. c, as is shown by Wilcken, OsL no. 1.5 18, copper was accepted at par.
7-8. On the association of TpanfiiTTj^ and SoKtpaaTfjs cf. 106, introd.
286 HIBEH PAPYRI
X. ACCOUNTS
110. Accounts : Postal Register.
Mummy iS, 1 9-4 x 30-5 rw. Recto about b. c. 270; Verso about b. c. 255.
The recto of this papyrus contains a long account apparently of a private

or semi-private character, but kept by some person in the government service,
since the document on the verso is clearly official. The account is in three
columns ; but of the first only ends of lines remain, and these are almost all
occupied with a list of <rco/jiaTa which are reckoned at sums varying from i obol
to 2\ obols, e. g. arîiaTa i] av{a) {hvoôXovs) / (bpaxiJ-al) y (Suo/ioAot), oXka 8 (hpaxixi])
a \
. . .V109 (TcoiMTa Ki] ai^{a) (hvnfioXovs) (///ztco/Se'Atoz') / (Spaxfâi) la (rerpw/ioAoi'),
no doubt a wages account. Near the top of the column occurs ]opov nXripaji,
and at the bottom a mention of tTT-n-cor (hpaxp-al) k and (fyoLviKojv.
. . . Col. ii and
the upper part of Col. iii are occupied with an account of corn, some of which
was transported to Alexandria, and interesting details are given of expenses
ni route. The lower portion of the third column contains a few short money
accounts, and concludes with three lines which belong to the document on
the verso.
This is more novel and important character. It is a record of the
of a
arrival at and departure from some intermediate station of letters and other
documents sent to or from the king or high officials, and affords a most
interesting glimpse into the management and nature of the State postal-service.
Careful note is made of the day and hour of the arrival of each messenger,
his name and that of the clerk who received and issued letters at the office,
the number and addresses of the packets, and the names of the messengers
to they were handed on. The day-book in the registered letter depart-
whom
ment of a modern post-office can hardly be more methodical and precise. The
documents forwarded are mostly described as Kt-Ato-rot (usually abbreviated
K, but written out in 11. 51, ']% and no), i.e. 'rolls,' which are apparently
(11. 57,9'^. 1/); but the difference was
distinguished from eTrioroAai, 'letters'
perhaps one of than of contents.
size rather That the register on the verso
was not separated by any wide interval of time from the account on the recto,
which was drawn up soon after the 14th year, is shown by the mention of
no. ACCOUNTS 287
Apollonius, the well-known dioecetes in the 27th-32nd years; cf. 44.3, note.
The locality of the postal bureau The writer of the recto
is not clearly defined.
had business concerns at Hiera Nesus in the south of the Fayum, and Plutarchus
and Criton, who are mentioned in Col. ii, are known from other papyri to have
been connected with that neighbourhood cf. introd. to 63. But Phebichis in ;
the KcotTTjff To-nos is and that is a much more suitable scene

referred to in 1. '^6 ;
for the composition of the official register, which points decidedly to some town
in the Nile valley as its provenance. Preceding the two columns of the verso
which we print there remain the ends of a icw lines of another much effaced
column, but they add no information.
Recto. Col. ii.
1^0) Tzapa IloXeficoiô? (jrvpcov) (dprd/Sas) a,
Kal Trap' 'Ayddcovos [pW(5,]
irapa. Xip-ov k^,
Kal vTTep EvôvXov k,
5 /^ TXa. I e/y ro 'Hpai<:[\y?ou a,

Kal e/y to vavXov c [Spa-^poiv) k[
]
TlXovTdp-)(WL k, XolIttoI t.
TOVTcov kyevovro 5 ..[..]. [ ôiv
kyôXrjv [.]ov^ . ^coi/oy . [. . .]l'[.] . . ioy a,

10 ^tXoKXe? e/y to. e7rLTrjS[e''ia [,] /^ (jo^.
e-n-pdOrjaau dv^d) (SpaxP-di) S {TrevrcoPoXov), y/ {Spa)(pal) 'AuKa.
'iXafiov Se Kal Kpidrji' Trap' 'Ay[d]6(ovo^ pi-
TOVTCOV IIX0VTdp)((0l K, XoLTTal Q.
TOVTCOV Std/jLTpa aL (JLTOp-^TpiKOV [Z.,]
15 XoiTTal TTT], iTTpdOrjaav dv{a) [[Spa)(fxr)v)] a {rpLdiôXov) {i]pi(o-
(SiXiov),
Z' {Spa^pal) pX$ (SvoôXoi).

eLXpv B\ Kal KpiTcovL Tcou K [dpTa^wv) Tcov {TTvpcov) {Spaxpd?) p,
Kai vavXov ôiv^ tcou Trvpcoi/ Kal KpLdcoi/ e;(cu (5pa;(/zay) i(.
e/y TavTa e;(ei KpiTcou ^pvaLov rpf,

20 dpyvpiov (Spa)(pd9) vprj.
dyrjX(op.a tov aiT[o]v i(p' 'I^pdi Nrjacoi aaKKov? ^ (TeTpcoôXov),

(pvXaKLTtKa d(p' 'I(pdi Nrjcrov ecoy 'AX^âvSpita's {Spaxfial) 18,
288 HIBEH PAPYRI
km (f)vXaKrJ9 yp[d\jifiaTLKov {8pa\ixai) S, rm Trapep . . r]pio[.] [8pa)(fxr] ?) a,
kfi MH(f)(i ypa/jL/iaTiKoy {8pax/^7]) a . , eirl rfj^

^j-T^ 0K^'^]'^(^y)
25 [eV] ^xeSiai {Spaxfial) S, [. .]Aa . [. .]y (SpaxfJ-ai) t, kv 'A[\^]ay[8piLai]
T(iaa[p)(\m (Spa^fxal) e, ypajxixaTLKov {Spaîxai) [ ]
{jTvpcou)
TTjv {dprdPrjv) {rj/xLcoîXiou ?),

y' {8pa)(/j.al) k8 {rpidoôXov), [.] . ver . . a
Kp{j.6rjs) {8pay^jj.ai) ( [{8v6(3oXol),
1 4. 8iiifji(Tpa : Pap.
Col. iii.
reXo9 {8pa)(ixal) 09, vavXov {8pa\fxaî) . . , uitl-
ypacfxt Tov 4>iXoKXeov[^
30 rpaTre^LTrjL 8oKifj.aariKo[v
aTTo ^ê(5/ay vavXov e/9 ttoXiv [[8pa\p.aL) . .

,
diâ-rrXeovTes vavXov {8pa)(^fiaT) (3[
e/y rovTo ei)(ov napa KpcTco[vo9 [8pa\na9) . .
(eVofs) 18 'EnelTT (3.
35 Xoyov yevofxivov IlXovTdp)([o)t

ejx îîyjL. 7rpoaco(pLXr]cra avv [dvqXcopa-
aiv Kai (pvXaKiTLKOt? tov yi [[eTOVs) ....
Kal 'Aptardpôv to ttolv {8pa)(jp.ai) A[. . koX
Kpidcov {apTaâs) le.
40 (eroi;?) f/? 0' /tpeco? [[e^ iepeco'y]] tov KaX-

XLprjSovs pi]vos AvaTpo\y e^fi
rrapa nXovTdp-)([o^y /ca[Te/3aXe
Kal MvrjcnaTpdrooi {8pa)(/xa9) ^ T9f[]V r[y" f^Vâ {8paxf^(ou) .
aXXa9 e'xf' {Tov9) ly e0' hpiai^ JVea[. . . . tov . . .
45 OKXeovs /JiTj(ybs) Acoiov a? i8a)Kv 'AnloXXcovicoi
{8paxfia9) ^ TOKOv Top. prjva (^pa^/icoj/) 8.

[
aAAay tov avTov (eVoyy) fn]voi 'T7re[pê-
peTaiov [îx]^^ i'^P'^XH-^^) i ^^ KUTeâXev {ÂnoX-

[X]covicoL Tm (f)vXaKLTi]L TOKOV t[oii
prfva {8pa\pm') e.
110. ACCOUNTS 289
2nd hand kv\l(ttoI <^, / âcnXl y ku^l ima-
ToX-qv, QeyyevL )(^priiJiaTayaiy[oi)L .
,
'ATro\\()VLCo[L\ [5j/0_i[/f]?7[T^]i [
48. {bpaxiias) ^ above the line.
Verso. Col. ii.
[']f' [;
]
K ].[...]...[ ] .
[.
55 [A\]^dv8pa>L ^, t[o]vt(oy [/JaaijAei
ITro[X]e/iaiW kv{\l(xtos) a, ^7roA[X]<wi/[i'Jft)f 8[lol-
[Kr]l]TfJL kv(\l(ttos) a, imaroXal 860 vpbs rm

[Kv\]iaTa>L 7Tpo(x8e8iyii{hai\ 'Avnoxm EpjjTi Ky{Xi(TT09) a, M7]u[o- X
[a>pco]i Kv{XiaTb9) a, XX[.]co . [. .]ai h dXXm KviXiaTo?) a,
60 'A[X]iapSpo9 Se 7rapiSa}K[eu N]LKoST]fim.
i^. &pa9 iioOiPTJs irapiScioKej/ ôlvi^ 'Hpa-
kXcitov 6 picoTepo? MaKeSoou
(iKaTOVTdpOVpOs) 'Aii[v{ov)l KV{XI(7T0V) a Kal TO d^LOV âvLa[L,]

'Alx[L]v[(i)]v
Se TrapiScoKcu &vxpwTcoi.
65 LTj. a>pa9 7rpd)TT]9 vapeScoKeu Q vxp[r)]cr-
T09 dvoOev Aivtai kv{Xi(ttovs:)
y, I âaiXl
IlToXe/xaiccL KviXia-Tol) ^, 'AnoXXcovlm
SioiKTjTTJL KviXiaTos) a, Aivtai Se napi-
8<oKu 'IttuoXvo-coi.
70 IT). Trapi8(0Ku (opas 9 ôIvl^ 'HpaKXeiroy

6 Trpea^vTepo? MaKe8^v {eKaropTapovpo^)
HpaKXeoTToXiTOv tcov npcoTMy Ea-07r[.] . [. .
kvXkttov a âviac, 'A/xivcou [5]e 7rapi[8](0K{)

TlfJLOKpdTtJl.
75 t$. &pa9 La 7ra[p]e5[co]/c[e Ni]K68r]fi09

KUToOiv 'AXe^dv8pm kv^Xlo-tov^) . , 7rap[a
fiacnXidos nToXe{jiaL)ov 'Autcoxcol e/y n
'HpaKXeoTToXiTT]]/ Kv{Xi(rToi^) a, Ar]fjLr]TpLco[i]
U
290 HIBEH PAPYRI
TOOL 7rpo9 TTJL ôprjyia[L T]a)i^ k\i(pdvT(o\y
80 e/y Tr]v G7](3ai8a KviXiaToi') a, 'ImTOTi\[r]]i

Tcoc Trap AvTLoyov Kara 'Av8 povyL\Kov '
>
kv 'AnoXXoouo? noXi rrji /J.yd\r]L
Kv(\L(Trov) a,
J irapa /JacriAecu? nToXefjLaio[v
Qevykvr)L )(pr]iJLaTa[yoo]ym Kv(XLaTou) a,
8^ 'HpaKXôSdopcoL ei'y Tf][u] QrjâiSa [Kv(Xt(TToi') a,]
ZcolXcol TpaneîrrjL '

E p/xo7roXiT[ov] Ky{Xi(TToi') [a,
AioPvami olKou{6fi)coL e/y toi/ 'Ap(nvoLT-q[v kv{Xi(ttov)] a,
58. 7r/5oo-8f8ey/i(i'at) added above the line. 60. This line inserted later. 61, tr of
r]pnK\fiTov corr. 66. 1. avwBev. SO in 11. 107, 109. 71. K of Ma8ci)i/ corr. from 8.
75. wpa over an erasure. 76. 1. Kdrwdtv, so in 1. 98,
Col. ill.
Vestiges of three lines.
91 K. copas [.] TTap^[8(o]K[iv A]vKOKXfi^ Aijl[lvovl
Kv{Xi(7Tovs) y, t [/3]a[(ri]Ar [iTro]X6//[af']<wi [. . .] rcoz/ eAe0a[i^TCi)j/
T(av /ca[T]a 0a[. .] . (jcrov Kv{XiaTo?) a, 'A7roXXoo[uL(OL
Si[o]tKT]TfJL Kv{XicrTo?) a, * E[p^p.i7nrco[L] tool dn[b tov
95 nXTjpcofxaTo^ kv{Xl(tto9) a, 'Afiiviou Si n apiSco-
Kev 'ImroXvcrcdL.
Ka. copas 9- napiScoKeu [.jejâAe .
[
KaToOiv âvtai e7ricrro[Aa]y 8vo [ ,
'
flpos 8\ Trapi8(0Ki' Aiop[v]cria)i . .
[
100 K. (opas npcoTT]? 7ra[p]e8(OKeu A[. .](ou [ALviai

KviXKTTOvs) iq, I âaiXei nToX(p.aL[o)]L k[v{Xi(ttoI) .
napa Tcoy (Xe(pduT(t)v ru>v Kara 0a[. . . crcrov,
'AtToXXooVLCOL 8L0LKr]Tf]i Kv(XLaTol) 8 .

[ ,
Autl6)^(oi KprjTl KDiXiaToi) 8, Aivias 8\ [napiSo)- \

105 KV NikoStJ/XCOL.
K^. copas i/3 TrapeSooKei^ Aôov 'A[pu'oi't
di'oOw âaLX? TlToXifxaLCoi [Kv{XiaTovs) .

,
Aiiivoov 8\ TTapi8(0Kv ['I]7r7r[oXvacoL.

no. ACCOUNTS 291
Ky. icoOiurj^ dvoOev iTa[pi]8a)[Kiu
110 Ti/xoKpccTT]? KvXi<TTov[9 . 'AXe^dvSpcoi,

I âaiXl UToXe/iaccot k[v(Xl(ttoI) . , 'AnoXXoipiooi
SioiKTjTTJt KviXiarbs) a, JTi xPVH-'^t<^-
yaoym Kv{Xt<rT09) a, UapiKl Kv{Xi<rTb9) .
,
'AXeâvSpos Sh 7ra[piS(x>Ku
9 "J. K of TTopfSwKfv above a d.
1-50. I have received from Polemon 90 artabae of wheat,

'
and from Agathon 194
from Simus 27, and on behalf of Eubulus 20, total of which i was paid to the
331 ;
temple of Heracles, 10 for freightage at 20 drachmae, and 20 to Plutarchus,

remainder 300.
Of these were expended for i, to Philocles for necessaries
5, total 294.
. .
They were
.
sold at 4 dr. 5 ob., making 142 1 dr. I also received barley from Agathon to the amount
of no
artabae, of which Plutarchus had 20, remainder 90. Out of these were expended
for difference on measure li measuring fee
^, remainder 88. They were sold at i dr.
3^ ob., total 139 dr. 2 ob. I also had for Criton, for the 20 artabae of wheat, 40 dr., and
I have as freightage of the wheat and barley
15 dr. For this Criton has 950 dr. in gold
and 448 dr. silver. m
Expense of the corn at Hiera Nesus, 2 sacks 4 ob., guards' fees
from Hiera Nesus to Alexandria 14 dr., at the guard-house for scribes' fees 4 dr., to . . .
I dr., at Memphis scribes' fees i dr. r.l

lower guard-house at Schedia 4 dr., ob., at the . . .
10 dr., at Alexandria to Tisarchus 5 dr., scribes' fees dr., ... on the wheat at i ob. . .
the artaba 24 dr. 3 ob., ... on the barley 7 dr. 2 ob., tax
76 dr., freightage dr., to the . .
antigrapheus of Philocles to the banker for controller's fees

. . . ,
freightage from Schedia . . ,
.
to the city drachmae, sailing up, freightage 2 dr. for this I had from Criton
. .
dr. ; . .
The 14th year, Epeiph 2. Account taken with Plutarchus at Phebichis. I owed an
'
additional sum, with expenses and guards' fees for the 13th
year ... and Aristarchus, of
altogether 3^ drachmae and 15 artabae of barley.
'The 1 2th year, in the priesthood of .'son of Callimedes, in the month Dystrus. . .
... has from Plutarchus 60 drachmae at the interest of '.^ dr. a month, which sum he paid
to and IMnesistratus. He also has in the 13th year in the priesthood of Nea
. . .
. son of . .
ocles, in the month Loius, 60 dr. more, at the interest of

. . .
4 dr. a month, which he gave
to Apollonius. He also had in the same year in the month Plyperberetaeus 60 drachmae
more, which he paid to Apollonius the guard, at the interest of
5 dr. a month.'
6. If there is nothing lost after k the price will be the common one of 2 dr. the artaba
cf. 1. 17.
9. Perhaps JT>C xî^^vos, but the
is not satisfactory and the meaning quite obscure.
t
II. The high price, more than

double the usual rate (cf. note on 1. 6), is presumably
due to the fact that the sale took place in Alexandria. The price
of the barley in 1. 15 is
also rather higher than usual (it is normally about i dr. i
ob., i. e. | of 2 dr. cf. notes on ;
84 [a). 8-9, 85. 14-5). but the difference is not nearly so marked as in the case of the
wheat.
14. biafierpov is uscd of soldiers' allowances, rations' in Plut. 17/. Dem.
40, and some
'
such sense would not be inappropriate here. But hLay.,Tpa may well
be equivalent to hia<ôpa
/xerpov; cf. e.g. P. Petrie HI. 129.
3 bâ<\>opov avriK,s>riKî. The mjopirpiKov was no doubt
a payment for the services of the o-.rop.Vpr;^, and thus
analogous to the <^vXaTAca and
U 2
292 HIBEH PAPYRI
which foUow cf. P. Tcbt. 11. 520, where 3 art. of wheat are paid (nrankpov,
ypafifiaTiKov J
and Oxy. 740. 25.

P.
17-20. The meaning of the dative KpiVcoi/i and the connexion of these entries with
what precedes are not clear. If xpvo-j'ou 950 means the value in gold of 950 dr. of silver, the
two sums named in 11. 19-20 together go far to make up the total price of the wheat and
barley in 11. 11 and 16. They may therefore perhaps represent the balance left after
deducting the expenses enumerated in the next section, 11. 21 sqq. but as the items are ;
imperfectly preserved verification is not possible.

21. cruKKovs 13: these may be either empty sacks which were bought for 4 obols, or full
sacks which together with the 4 ob. had to be expended. 4 ob. could not represent the
price of two full sacks.
22. The cjivXaKLTiKtl here do not mean the tax so-called (cf. 105,
context shows that
introd.), but payments for the services of 0vXaKlrt in charge of the boat cf. 54. 30. ;
23. ypafiiiariKov this impost is found in a variety of contexts, and is to be explained as

:
a charge for the benefit of the numerous ypapnaTf'is cf. P. Tebt. I. 61 {5). 342-5) note, and
;
97, introd. The word before {^paxH-f]) may be a proper name preceded by Trap or Trapi.
25. Sxffiia was a place of some importance on the canal connecting
Alexandria with
cf. Strabo,
the Canopic branch of the Nile, and had a custom-station in Strabo's time ;
xvii. 800. In P. Fay. 104. 21, an account somewhat similar to this, 1,x^8ias should also
be read. The word before (SpaxM') ' is possibly vai}[XoV, but if so the space after the
preceding numeral is broader than usual.
26. Tuijapx]<ot : a proper name seems likely, but the reading is doubtful. The first
letter if not r may be tt or a-, and the termination may be at.

27. charge of ^ ob. on the artaba reckoned on 294 art. (I. 10) and 88 art. (1. 15)
A
produces 24 dr. 3 ob. and 7 dr. 2 ob. The name of this impost was given in the lacuna
before {nvpSiv) in I. 26, and probably coincided with the mutilated word before
Kp{i6i]s) in
1. 27. The abbreviation for cp(t(9^s) is written as a k with a loop at the top of the vertical
stroke.
30. 8oKina(rTiKo[v : a charge for the SoKi/xao-Tijs, on whom cf. 106, introd. The 8oKip.a<T-
tik6v is also found in 29. 24 and P. Leyden Q. 12 ; cf. Wilcken, Os/. I. pp. 361-2.
36.
dvTj'Kufia^cTiP cf. 1. 21. '.
37. yi [{fTovi): cf. for the order of the numerals 104. i,

note.
42. For Ka[Ti3aXe cf. 1. 48, but o is awkward with (dpaxi^ds) following.
44. Nta'pxov rod Ne]o/cX/ovs would be about the right length, y in the nuinber of the
year is rather tall, but to suppose that some other figure, e. g. a, was written with a stroke
above it, is less satisfactory.
45. *A7r[oXXcoi'('a)i : cf. 1. 48.
51-3. These lines form part of the register on the verso, but there is no date or other
indication of their intended position. We restore (cn,! emaVo^v on the analogy of 1. 57, but
the construction requires cTrto-i-oXr;. Qevyti'T]^ the xpV/îTaycoyos recurs in 1. 84 the title ;
appears to be new.
55-114. delivered to Alexander 6 rolls; of these 1 roll was for king Ptolemy,
'
. . .
1 rollVor ApoUonius the dioecetes and two letters which were received in addition to the
roll, I roll for Antiochus the Cretan, i roll for Menodorus, i roll
contained in another (?)
for Chel ., and Alexander delivered them to Nicodcmus.
. .
The 17th, mornuig hour,
Phoenix the younger, son of Heraclitus, Macedonian owning 100 arourae, delivered to
Aminon i roll and the price for Phanias and Aminon delivered it to Theochrestus. The
;
of which
18th, I St hour, Theochrestus delivered to Dinias 3 rolls from the upper country,
2 rolls were for king Ptolemy and i for ApoUonius the dioecetes, and
Dinias deUvered them
no. ACCOUNTS 293
to Hippolysus. The 18th, 6th hour, Phoenix the elder, son of Heraclitus, Macedonian
owning 100 arourae in the Heracleopolite nome, one of the first company of E ., delivered . .
I roll forand Aminon delivered

Phanias, it to Timocrates. The 19th, nth hour,
Nicodemus delivered from the lower country to Alexander [.] rolls, from king Ptolemy
for Antiochus in the Heracleopolite nome i Demetrius, the officer in charge
roll, for
of supplies for the elephants, in the Thebaid for Hippoteles the agent of
i roll,
Antiochus accusing Andronicus (?) at Apollonopolis the Great i roll, from king Ptolemy to
Theogenes the money-carrier i roll, for Heracleodorus in the Thebaid i roll, for Zoilus,
banker of the Hermopolite nome, i roll, for Dionysius, oeconomus in the Arsinoite nome,
I roll. The 20th, hour, Lycocles delivered to Aminon 3 rolls, of which i roll was for
. .
king Ptolemy from the elephant-country below Th ., i roll for Apollonius the dioecetes, . .
I roll for Hermippus, member of the staff of workmen (?), and Aminon delivered them to
Hippolysus. The 2 ist, 6th hour, delivered two letters from the lower country for Phanias,
. . .
and Horus delivered them to Dionysius .... The 22nd, ist hour, A delivered . . .
to Dinias 1 6 rolls, of which [.] rolls were for king Ptolemy from the elephant-country below
Th ., 4 rolls for Apollonius the dioecetes, 4 rolls for Antiochus the Cretan, and Dinias
. .
delivered them to Nicodemus. The 22nd, 12th hour, Leon delivered to Aminon from the
upper country [.] rolls for king Ptolemy, and Aminon delivered them to Hippolysus. The
23rd, morning hour, Timocrates delivered to Alexander \.] rolls, of which [.] rolls were for
king Ptolemy, i roll for Apollonius the dioecetes, i roll for P the money-carrier, [.] roll . . .
for Par and Alexander delivered them to

. . . ,
.'
. .
54. The traces at the beginning of the line do not suit wpas or irapibaKev. avw6(v
probably occurred somewhere in the line, since one of the letters was for the king ; cf.
IL 66 and 107.
55. Possibly Kv(Xto-Tovy) stood as usual before the numeral, but there is no trace of it and
the space is somewhat narrow. Alexander, Aminon, Dinias, and Horus occupy an inter-
mediate position in the transmission of letters, as contrasted e.g. with Hippolysus and
Nicodemus, who only bring in letters or take them away. Probably the former were
officials at the postal-station.
59. ev nXXcot appears to mean contained in a second roll,' and if this packet is counted
'
as 2 rolls the number 6 in 1. 55 is correct.

63. TO aîov apparently means the sum paid by Phoenix at the office for postage.
Such payments do not occur elsewhere in the document, and high officials would naturally
have had the services of State messengers gratis. The sender of this particular letter
may therefore be supposed to have been some unauthorized person, who would have to
pay for the privilege of utilizing the messenger's services. There is, however, no mention
of a payment in connexion with a letter sent by the brother of Phoenix (11. 70-4).
72. Twv nparwp Eaon a similar military title is found in an unpublished Tebtunis
. . . :
papyrus of the third century B. C. rav MereXdou npcaraiv fK Tov 'EpnonoXiTOv KOI (îKarov-
Tapovpos).
79. Cf. 11. 91-2 and 102, P. Petrie
II. 20. iv. 8 eV Mepcpn fXtcpaa-iv, 40 (^7). 22 ^
f\tcf)avTr]y6 s] fj 6 Tr]i 6^[pas) tuiv i\((âvTu>v.
iv BeptviKrî, III. 1 1 4. An inscription found at
1
Edfu is dedicated to Philopator by the a-Tparirybs dnoaTaXas eVl rfju drjpav T(bv lKe(pdvru>v ; cf.
Dittenberger, Or. Gr. Inscr. I, 82, with his note ad loc, and I. 86.
81. Kvbpoi^î\Kov is doubtful, especially the termination,
' bp may be at and the second v
could well be p,
83. Between a and napa is a diagonal stroke with a rounded top, the meaning of which
is obscure.
84. xp'?/"a''a[7]7t : cf. 11. 51-3, note.
294 HIBEH PAPYRI
92-3. [irapa] tS>p (\((f)dvT<ov WOUld be expected ; 102 and napa paaLXeos in 1. 83.
Cf. 1.
But there is not room for irapd in the lacuna, the size of which requires 7ra(pa) or dno.
ea\. .] . aaov, which recurs in 1. 102, seems to be a geographical name; the second letter
may be v- . ^ r ^
95. TrXijpo^pa used in several of the Petrie papyri for a company of workmen,
is
e. g.
III. 43 (3). 12; but whether the term has a similar sense here is doubtful.
97. The K of nape8u)Kfv is a correction possibly the syllable k(p was written twice and
;
the name of the messenger was 'AXf^âvbpos. He would, however, be different from the
'P.pcoi may have
'AXâvbpos in 11. 55 and 114, who was one of the clerks at the office.
occurred at the end of the line; cf. 1. 99. To read eV 'AXf^[ai/Sp/ai, which
at first
sight looks attractive, is inadmissible on several grounds: (i)

it would imply that this
register was kept in the immediate neighbourhood of that city,
which is a most unlikely
KaTwOep (1. 98)
hypothesis ; (2) there is no part of Egypt which could be described as
relatively to Alexandria (3) irapihuxev requires
;
a subject.
A[\a>v might be read after 7ra[p]eSa)r, but Leon could hardly have
arrived from
1 GO.
the south twice on the same day (cf. 1. 106).
111. List of Cases and Fines.
Mummy 69. Breadth 15-3 cm. About b.c. 250.
This is a record, kept by some official connected with the judicial administra-
tion, of cases which had come up for decision, with the addition in some cases of
particulars concerning amounts due to or from the different parties. These

sums are sometimes followed by the word Trpaât, signifying that they were
still and it is likely that the keeper of the account was the irpaKTOip
to be paid ;
who had to collect them. The items are arranged under the three villages of
Takona, Tholthis, and Sephtha, all in the Oxyrhynchite nome. The document
appears not to have extended beyond the two columns of which parts are
preserved it belongs to the close of Philadelphus' reign or the first few years
;
of his successor.
Col. i. Col. ii.
'Ev TaKovar eSiXBLS'
ra irph MeXavBiov to. irpos ZrivoSorov kol
nepl Tfj9 ^(as errt 3 KappedSyju.
Arjfir^TpLav ^ (SvoôXoi) {rjfjLloo- 'AptaTcovqs jxopf]9 KaXXi-

îXiov), ^poôy [0Tj]paixvov S.
5 Kal 'Bvo{KpdTT]i) r, AriiirirpLov {SpaxP-al) v Kal to,
'Av8po[id{x(0i) 0. yivoixiva X {6^0X09) {^fiicoê-
'SiVOKpdTijL TO, Trpos Xiop)-

111. ACCOUNTS 295
n-foXcfiaiov (TTt . . . 35 AoKi/ios npb? MvfjTovi'
\IK
10 Kov oi[kovo{ji ),] Trpdâli. Arju^Tpiou 7r[epl
TJoXidvBrjv TO, Trpb? TIo- oiôv (^Spa)(/jial) 9.
Xcova {Spa)(ixai) /3, npciâi. AeOVTci TTCpl TOV iJV)(ê-

TlaTpcovi 7rpo9 roi/s 40 vL^LOs TTpo^drov {Spa)(fxr}) a
Xoinovs /iTaypd\lrai
Trpoy IloXvapyôv Kal On the verso
Hco(n(pdvT]v Ik tov dpiOfiov, ] . S<opqv ovov.
'AiroXXcovicoL irpb? 'Att[o]X-
Xd>viov [Spa)(fial) k, irpdâi.
Kovvdpov (Spay^naC) ^, npaâi,
20 TO, 7rpb9 NiKoXaou Kal

'AjxîXoôv oIkovo{ijl ).
ra npbs Tiixaiov (Spaxixal) k.
"Attu ds tt[6Xlv Kal
25 TTcpl OeocpiXov Kal Me-

Xau$Lov îX(0P09 y {rpicoôXov ?) (jhapTov ?)
êcoX[e]isJ
II. TT (or /i?) of TToXwra corr. from X,
At Takona the case against INIelanthius for violence to Demetria, 7 drachmae 2^

*
:
obols, and to Xenocrates 16 dr., to Andromachus 9 dr. To Xenocrates in the case against
Ptolemaeus ... to the oeconomus (?), to be collected. Polianthes in the case against
Polon 2 dr., to be collected. To Patron against the rest, to be transferred to Polyarchus
and Sosiphanes out of the number. To Apollonius against ApoUonius 20 drachmae, to be
collected. Connarus 2 drachmae, to be collected. In the case against Nicolaus and
Amphilochus, to the oeconomus (?). At Sephtha the case against Timaeus, 20 drachmae. :
For Apis to the city and concerning Theophilus and Melanthius son of Philon 3 dr. 3^ ob.
At Tholthis the case against Zenodotus and Carneades. Ariston for the appearance of
:
Callidromus son of Theramenes 4 dr. Demetrius 50 dr. and costs 30 dr. i| ob. Docimus
against INIyrtous daughter of Demetrius concerning the donkey of ... 6 dr. Leontas
. . .
concerning the sheep of Nechthenibis, i dr.'
5. Sfvo[KpdTT]i) : the first name may be

either in the nom., ace, gen., or dat. case,
but probably these varieties do not imply a corresponding distinction of meaning.
all
Where the dative occurs, payment was presumably to be made to the person ; the ace. and
296 HIBEH PAPYRI
gen. on the other hand might both be used of the persons who paid. The nom. is also
more hkely to represent the payer than the recipient,
10. ol'Kovo{fi )]: cf. 1. 21. The meaning possibly is that the fine was to be paid to the
oeconomus. In both cases there is a short space before olkovo{h ).
3-6. The sense seems to be improved by connecting 11. 1 5-6 with the two preceding
1
lines, notwithstanding the fact that Trpdy projects somewhat to the left like the other lines
which commence a new sentence. None of the other entries begins with np6s, and tov
dpiGfjiov is more intelligible if constructed with neraypd'^m than if 1. 15 begins a new entry,
in which case a verb has to be supplied.

21. Cf. note on 1. 10.
24. \7r\6\iv: SC. Ô^vpvy)(U)v,
27. The name es^Xdis, which is repeated at the top of the next column, is faint, and
was probably partly erased.
34. yivopfva: cf. 92. 20. The large amount of these 'costs' as compared with the
first sum is remarkable ; the eVtS/Kara were perhaps included.
41. This line, which is written in large letters across the fibres, looks like a regular
endorsement, but its relation to the contents of the recto is not clear. An oms is mentioned
in I. 38.
112. Taxing-List.
Mummy A. Fr. (c?) 22-2 x 19, Fr. {/>) 9-2 x i4"i ^7- About b. c. 260.
Three fragments of a long taxing-list, perhaps written at the koyivrripLov

of Phebichis (cf. 106, introd.), recording money payments for various taxes at
different villages of the KcoLrrj? by individuals who are in most if not all cases
the tax-payers, not the tax-collectors. Among the imposts are (i) a tax on
pigeon-houses (I. i, by the government (1. 2,
note); (2) payments for oil sold
note) (3) a new tax called 8ai8e/<axaAKta,

;
which was apparently a charge of
12 chalci per aroura on cleruchic and temple land (1. 8, note) (4) a tax upon :
green-stuffs (1. 9, note); (5) the beer-tax (11. 11, 25, &c. ; cf. 106, introd.);
(6) the e7ro/)ovpto;', a charge on certain kinds of land, with which is coupled (7) the
tax on embankments, amounting to about | of it (1. 13, note) ; (8) the tax on
sales (1. 22, note) (9) a tax of ^^4, which can be explained
;
in several ways
(1. 38, note); (10) a tax of ^, probably that levied upon the salting and milling
industries (1. 45, note); (11) a new tax connected with carpet-weaving (1. 76,
note); (12) a new tax called (frnKiy (1. 77), the nature of which is obscure;
(13) a tax on gardens, perhaps the airoixoLpa (1. 92, note) ; (14) the bath-tax
(1. 96 ; cf 108. 7, note). The villages mentioned (in several instances for the
first time) arc generally in the nominative, but sometimes in the accusative
or genitive; they include KepK((T7]s, ^f3txi9,*Aa(Tva, "i/vxi-s, Uepoi], êf3dov{efJ.I3ii?)
(1. 25, note), XoLfSvQrpiLs, MoCxts (1. 27, note), 4'eAe/xaxt?, QixoltoOls, Towiyovs
112. ACCOUNTS 297
(? cf. 1. 43, note), Ilepxv(l>i's, 0[xolov6l9

; and 'AyKvpcav ttoAis. The papyrus
probably belongs to the latter part of Philadelphus' reign. In some places the
ink of another document to which it had been gummed has come off, and
occasionally there is a difficulty in distinguishing this from the writing of 112.
On the verso are parts of another account, mentioning large sums of money
but without indicating the nature of the payments. We omit Fr. [c], which
contains only the beginnings of lines, and Col. i of Fr. (a), of which only a few
figures from the ends of lines are preserved.
Fr. (a). Col. ii.
[. . .]av[. . .] TTCpKTTepZjyos rj.
[Ke'lpKecTTjs OToplraio]? kXaL{ov) A,

6 avTo^ dXiKTJs ^.
^^L)(îS ALoyivr]9 [ ] iq:
5 ['A](r<rvas neToaipi[9 ] A.
KepKiarj? ^HpaKX^ytSrf^ [] [(<5co]5e/<:a)[x(aA/cm^)
Tov UoXiiJidpôv [i, xa(X'foi^)] /
AiokXti^ {Sa)SeKa))((aXKiav) t[ov] 'HpoSoTOV {Tpia>(3oXoi'), )(â[XKOv) {rpLUiôXov).
S(oai7raTpo[9 ^X](opa)V tov Uo-

10 XfjLdp)(ôv rj.
Wv)^L9 'Afivvv9 ^vTTjpds q (reTpcoôXov).
Aaava^ 6 avros k<^ (TeTpcofioXou).
$e/39(iy AicpiXos kTrapov[pLov) 8 [TCTpcofioXov) (rjfj.ia>l3iXL0p), xco^fiaTLKbu)
[TpidoôXou) {r]lilCiiîXLOv).
Ilp6r]v Oayon^rj^ (SvoôXov^) (reTaprop), )(co(jJ.aTiKou) [riTapTOv),
15 [. .]\(ovaL9 OoTopTULov a [rpmôXov), ^(coijiaTLKov) [rj/iioolSiXiov) [rirapTov),
[@OTop'\TaLos Koi A 7)1x6(77 par OS a, )(_co(jxaTiKbu) [rjixLco/SiXioy) {riTapTov),
[
]/o[.] .... (TTpco(3oXov) (jjfj.iooîXioP'), \ai[pLaTiKov) {7]p.ia>êXioi^),
[
]Tpios . . {SvoôXovs) {rirapTou), â^fMaTtKov) (riTapToy),
[ ] Miv[aio]s (rerpo'/SoAov) {rjfjLKoêXtov), [\(f){jiaTiKov) {r][xi(ii^^Xiov).
2 lines lost.
22 [ 18 letters ]? ôh
Tafidyios rjs kirptaTO irapd
Eiprjvqs 8 [6(3oX6y).
igS HIBEH PAPYRI
25 We^dop(iiJ.(3r] ?) Tlivovins Ayy^^s Cyirrjpd^) la (TeTpcoôXov).
Xoi(3v(orni? TlT(ovs ^y(Ti]pds) |y {SvoôXov?).
Mov)(îy Tldais TiTo^dari? ena-

povpiou {SvoôXov?) {reraprou), )((ioiia{TLKov) {jiraprov),
Kal Tem [rpKaôkov) (jjfjLKoêXLOi') {rhapTOv), ')((i){ixaTLKOv) {rj/j.iQ)êXiov).
30 ê^rîs Te<S[p (Sa)8Ka))({ccXKiap) tov J]r]fMr)TpLOV {r(Tp(o(3oXov) (r^rapTOv),
Xcc{Xkov) (TTpa>ôXou) (rirapTOj/).
[.] . Xyi9 'Ûpo? [ ]ef K^ (oftoXou),
My[. ..]?.' ]vov^L09 (SvoôXovs) {riTapTov),
[ 18 letters ]o-iy {8a)SeKa)x{aXKiav) tov
[20 ] la, )(a{XKov) La.
16. Tos of hrniocTTpaTos above the line.
Col. ill".
35 KXrjpcoi jSaaiXiKooc nepl k(!o/j.t]\i'
WiXe[xd\Lv eh TTju KaOrJKovaau

avTcoc dva<popdv ecoy tov UavûiL ?) kt].
êî)(i9 Aioyev-q^ K S' u {pôXov).
0/xoit6Oi9 d(Tis eXaiov i^.

40 ê/Srîy AvTiyevrfS Tleparj^ vnlp
noaeiScoi'iov SoiSeKayaXKiav ov yecopye? KXrjpov
rS)V -rrpos dpyvpiov Ly, ')â(XK0v) (?) ly.
Toeviyov^ GoTopTaTo'? , . . .
,
r]d)? enapovpiou S [TpioofBoXov), [^co(/xaT/Kov) .
45 Mov-)(^LV 'Efiyfj^ 'ApvcoTr]^ 8' [. .
riep^vcpi? KoXXovdr]^ k 8'

[.
Koi TCTapTTj^ /? {rpLdofSoXov) [
ê/Sr^fy ^y)(^couaL9 {8(o8eKa))((âXKtai^) tov K6p.co[-
V09 Kal a^fo^dvTOv 6, )(â{XKOv) ,
f,o Xei'i'pty i-rrapovpiou (TeTpco(3oXou) [i)/xico(3(XiO}'), ^(d^paT iKov) {rjpKoêXiou). [
EtcP^v^ ElaLyrjOv (reTpcoôXoy) (r)/j.L(o(3iXiou), \(o{fjLaTiKby) [{fjp.LcoîXioi').

113. ACCOUNTS 299
Acrava^ ALoyevrj^ to napa 7r[. . . .
'ApTT(oTi^L09 (5ci)5e/ca)x(aA/ciai/) rov KXioovos y, [)(a{\Kov) y.

^î-)(C9 TleTO^daTLS KXrjpoyv T[a>v
55 irpos dpyvpiov rod îXrja-iov [. . .
@/XOLOvdl^ .
[.] . oaipL9 rf
"^v^LS IIdL9 e/9 rrjv ALOv'va-iov ky- ?
yvr\v KO . .
TI^ToaTpis 5' [. .
60 ^^1-^19 XTOTorJTis Xev[

iwapovpiov ôLviKcov .
[. .
AnoWm'ios xcolîiarLKov) rod a[

^TOTofJTi? (5ct)(5eKa);((aX/ciaj/) to[v
KXrjpov [
65 .
[
Kal TOV . . .
[
^flpos Mlv(tio? tt} .

[
41. 8(o8eKaxa\Kiav above the line. 60. (ttototjtis above neToaipis erased,
Fr. (d). Col. i.
Parts of four lines.
73 [ j/y 'AyaTiTiTo? e.
['AyK]ypa>y tt'6X]l9 'Î2po9 iXatôv) p^.
75 [. .]KXrj9 >afii]9 k8' u,
Kal TamSvcpavTociv e,
Kol (paKTJ^ S,
Kat o avT09 I.
^^1X19 @avm â . [.^cckovtov
80 eh Wlvtutji/ /?.
KepKi(rr][? S]Te(pavo9 HaroKOv
[]?"[]/??"[ 'AnpXXoSdypov k8,

.[.]..[ SaJTOKOV kS.
300 HIBEH PAPYRI
$[el/3rxiy n'ro\/x]a?o9 {8coSeKa)x'a\Kiav) toD 0e-
85 [
T
a {olSoXoy) (77
/xtco)3eXior), x('^'ô^) {oôXbu) {r)/j,L(oîXiov).
Col. ii.
Toou 7rp[o9 dpyvpiov

fxoiov[$i?
l!roTOT]Tio9 {ScoSKa)x{aXKLap) iep'ds yrj9 ?
90 Tou "A/xfj.<J0P09 [. , xa{XKOv) .
ê/Srîy 'ATToXXdoylio^
TO Trapa Wyx<^va[io^ '^kttjS ?
Tov avTov napaSe'icrov npo-

repov ovTos AicpiXov (nei/TooôXov) [
95 Kal a[. .]Ta\ov [
(SaXaveiov . .lo? îXcovo^ [
'
. . . At Kerkeses, Thotortaeus for oil 30 dr., the same for
a pigeon-house 8 dr.
salt-tax At Phebichis, Diogenes for
60 dr. 16 dr. At Assua, Petosiris for
. . 30 dr.
. . . .
At Kerkeses, Heraclides for the (12 chalci-tax ?) on Polemarchus' holding io(.?) dr., 10 (?)
dr. of copper. Diodes for the 12 chalci-tax on Herodotus' holding 3 obols, 3 obols of
copper; Sosipatcr for the green-stuffs (?) of Polemarchus' holding 8 dr. At Psuchis,
Amenneus for beer-tax 6 dr. 4 ob. At Assua, the same (Amenneus) 26 dr. 4 ob. At
Phebichis, Diphilus for land-tax 4 dr. 4^ ob,, for embankments-tax 3^ ob. At Peroe,
Thagombes 2^ ob., for embankments-tax i ob. chonsis son of Thotortaeus i dr. ; . . .
3 ob., for embankments-tax | ob. Thotortaeus and Demostratus i dr., for embankments-
;
tax I ob. ... 4-1 ob., for embankments-tax A ob. ... trius
;
2^ ob., for embankments- ; . . .
tax :^ ob. ... son of Miusis 4^ ob., for embankments-tax i ob, ... on the cow of Tamanis
;
which he bought from Eirene 4 dr. i ob. At Psebthonembe (?), Pcnoupis son of (?) Aunchis
for beer-tax 11 dr. 4 ob. At Choibnotmis, Petous for beer-tax 63 dr. 2 ob. At Wouchis
Pasis son of (?) Tetobastis for land-tax 2 A ob., for embankments-tax ^ ob., and Teos 3I ob.,
for embankments-tax ^ ob. At Phebichis, Teos for the 12 chalci-tax upon the holding of
Demetrius 4^ ob., 4^ ob. of copper. At is, Horus ... 27 dr. i ob.; ... son of
. . .
. . nubis 2i ob. ... for the 1 2 chalci-tax on the holding of

.
11 dr., 1 1 dr. of copper. . . . . . .
the royal holding near the village of Pselemachis for the instahnent due from him up to
Pauni(?) 28 dr. At Phebichis, Diogenes for the lax of -^-^ 15 dr, i ob. At Thmoitothis,
Thasis for oil 12 dr. At Phebichis, Antigenes, Persian, on behalf of Posidonius for the 12
chalci-tax upon the holding which he cultivates among those which are valued in silver
112. ACCOUNTS 301
13 13 dr. of copper. At Toenegous (?), Thotortaeus

dr., Theos for land-tax 4 dr. 3 ob., . . . ;
for embankments-tax ... At Mouchis, Emges(.?) son of (?) Haruotes for the tax of ^ . . .
At Perchuphis, Kollouthes for the tax of 27 and for the tax of ^ 2 dr. 3 ob. At Phebichis, .
Psenchonsis for the 12 chalci-tax upon the holdings of Comon and Xenophantus 5 dr.,
5 dr. of copper Senuris for land-tax 4^ ob., for embankments-tax | ob.
; Etpheus son of ;
Isigeiis (?) 4^ ob., for embankments-tax ^ ob. At Assua, Diogenes the sum due from . . .
son of (?) Harpotnis for the 1 2 chalci-tax upon the holding of Cleon 3 dr., 3 dr. of copper.
At Phebichis, Petobastis for the (12 chalci-tax upon) holdings valued in silver, upon the
holding of Philesius ... At Thmoiouthis ... At Psuchis, Pais for surety of Dionysius on
account of the tax of -^ Petosiris for the tax of :|
. . At Phebichis, Stotoetis son of
. ; . . .
Sen ... for land-tax (?) upon palms Apollonius for embankments-tax upon . . ; . . .
Stotoetis for the 1 2 chalci-tax upon the holding of ... Horus son of Miusis ; . .
.'
Fr. {b). son of Agatitis 5 dr. At Ancyronpolis, Horus for oil 160 dr. At (?)
'
. . . cle . .
Phames for the tax of -^ 50 dr., and for carpet-weavers 5 dr., and for lentil-cake 4 dr., and
the same for the tax ol ^ 10 dr. At Phebichis, Thanos son of Pha akoutes to the credit . .
of Psintaes 2 dr. At Kerkeses, Stephanus son of Satokus for of Apollodorus 24 dr. ... . . . ;
son of Satokus 24 dr. At Phebichis, Ptolemaeus for the 12 chalci-tax upon the holding of
The ... I dr. li ob., i dr. iôb. of copper At Choibnotmis, .upon holdings valued . . . . .
in silver ... At Thmoiouthis ... of Stotoetis for the 1 2 chalci-tax on the sacred land of
Ammon ... At Phebichis, Apollonius ... the sum due from Psenchonsis on account of
the sixth (?) upon his garden which formerly belonged to Diphilus 9 dr. 5 ob., and for . . . ;
bath-tax . . . son of Philon . .

.'
1. irepiaTflfiavo^2^ rplrq ntpiarfpavaiv, i.e. a tax of on

'. the profits of pigeon-houses,
is known Ptolemaic times from Wilcken, OsL II. no. 1228 (cf. I. p. 279), P. Petrie
in
III. 119 recto, and P. Tebt. 84. 9 (cf. note ad loc); but the impost here may be different.
The preceding words may be [6 av[r6i cf. 1. 3. ;
2. e'Xat(ov) cf. 11. 39, 74, and 113. 12-4.

: Thotortaeus was probably an iXaioKanrjXos
cf. Rev. Laws xlviii. 3-12.
3. aXiKrjs: cf. P. Petrie III. pp. 273-4 and Wilcken, Os/. I. pp. 141-4. That the salt
industry was a government monopoly is practically certain, but the principles upon which it
was managed are not clear.
6. Near the end of the line is an t somewhat above the level of the other letters,
probably part of the abbreviation for 8(o8eKaxa\Kiap ; cf. the next note. With rov before
TloXepdpxov in 1. 7, as in 1. 9, supply kXtjpov; cf. 1. 41 and notes on 52. 26 and 117. 8.
8, {B(o8fKa.)x{aXKiav) this new word, which usually in 112 is abbreviated in the form il^
:
over x> is written out in 1. 41. The name indicates a tax of 12 chalci (i^ obols) upon,
probably, the aroura and it generally occurs in connexion with cleruchic land, being paid
;
by the yeapyol on behalf of the cleruchs (cf. 11. 30, 33, 41, &c.), but in one case (1. 89) the
land in question is Upd. Payment is made in copper, except perhaps in 11. 42 and 55
(cf. 1. 87), where the K\ripoi are said to be Tavnpos dpyvpiov, sc. SioiKovpevcov or some such word
(cf. e.g. P. Tebt. 60. 41). A peculiarity of the entries concerning this tax is the fact that
the amount is stated twice, xK^foO) being prefixed in the second instance. If the unit of
taxation was the aroura, as would be expected, this impost of i-^ obols, which about =
f artaba of wheat (cf. 84 (a). 8-9, note), may well correspond to the imposts ranging
from i artaba to i artaba upon cleruchic and sacred land found in the Tebtunis papyri
of the next century; cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 430-1. Whether npos dpyvpiou in 11. 42 and 55 is
contrasted with payments in copper or with payments in kind is not clear.
9. For [xXJwpoii' cf. the Xoyeia x^wp"" in 51. 2, and the payments for x^wpwf in 119. 17
and for xKaipuv tls a-ntppa in 117. 4.
302 HIBEH PAPYRI
1 3. inapovi^piov) this is the first occasion on which the name of this impost upon the
:
aroura of, probably, palm-, vine-, and fruit-bearing land (cf. 1. 61 eVap. cf)oiviK(ov) has been
found in the third century h. c. but cf. P. Petrie III. 70 {a), i where the tax of 8 drachmae
;
per aroura on, apparently, vine-land may well be the inapovpiov. In the second century b.c.
it is mentioned in several ostraca (Wilcken, Ost. I. p. 193) and in P. Tebt. 209, and
frequently in the Roman period, payments being, as here, uniformly in money. In 112
the xw/ô''"^'^'' or tax on embankments is regularly associated with the f'napovpiov, and in the
present instance is about i of it. In 1. 15 the x^^HâriKov is only of the iirapovpiov, but in ^
the other cases (11. 14, 16-9, 28-9, 50) the proportion of the amounts paid for the two
taxes is nearly the same as in 1. 13. Since the xM""'o'' at this period was often i obol
per aroura (P. Petrie III. 108. 2, &c., and p. 273), the {'napovpiov in 112 was very likely
about 8 obols per aroura.
14-9. The first of the two payments in each of these entries refers to the iirapovpiov,
cf. the preceding note.
19. Perhaps [''fipoy] Mt^crios cf. 1. 67. For the supplement of the final lacuna
;
cf. 1. 17.
22. Perhaps riXo^î ^069; cf. P. Fay. 62. 3 reXos (ioos . . . rjs icovT]Tai. The impost in
question the iyKVKKwv of 5 per cent.,
is on which cf. 70 {a), introd. The value of this cow
was therefore 83 dr. 2 ob.
25. 'Vfl3dov{eii^r]) : cf. 33. 7 and p. 8. The names of the villages are, however, not
abbreviated elsewhere in this papyrus and it is quite possible that "^f^dovnepovms should be
;
read, especially as this combination would avoid the difliculty with regard to Avyxis, which
if is the tax-payer has to be treated as a genitive, i. e. for Avyxios.
Ufvovnts The fathers'
names of the tax-payers are sometimes found in 112, e.g. in 1. 8i ; but it is not very
satisfactory to suppose the omission of o in the termination -los in a papyrus so early and
in other respects so well written as 112. A precisely similar difficulty arises in 11. 2 7 and
45, and on the whole it seems best to suppose that in all these cases two nominatives are
found together, the second being a mistake for the genitive or Kai being omitted.
27. Movxtv: cf. p. 8, and for the accusative 1. 14 llfpvr^v. But if Movxiv Uaais be two
words Tero/Scjo-rtj must be corrected (cf. 1. 25, note), and perhaps the name of the village was
Movx'vnaais cf. the form Movxiv6a7]{
; ) on p. 8,
and 1. 45, note.
29. The 3f obols are for iirapovpiov cf. I. 27 and note on 1. 13. ;
30. For the supplement {p<i)h(Ka)x{a'>^Kiav) cf. 1. 8, note.

35. KK{)pai âcTiXiKwi cf. 52. 26, note. What this payment of 28 dr. was for does not
:
appear.
37. There is hardly room for na\x<ii]v, unless axw was very cramped.
38. K(Y several imposts called J^ are known in the Ptolemaic period ; cf. 80. 4, k'S'
:
on goods exported from the Heraclcopolite to the Arsinoite nome, 95. 7 TfrapTovfiKoaTi) [su)
TfrpanoBaiv, P. Petrie I. 25 (2). 2 TCTpaKaieiKoaTi) irvpwv, 115 introd. /c'5' ipicov, and the TfTpa-
KiiKiKodTTj paid in kind by (:in(Ti\iKo\ yeupyol at Kerkeosiris (P. Tebt. I. 93, introd.). Which
of these taxes is meant here is uncertain.
41-2. Cf. note on 1. 8.
43. Tofviyovs seems to be a village rather than a personal name.
45. Movxiv 'Epyi]s cf. 11. 25 and 27, notes.
: If 'K/xy'> is a proper name 'Apvcor;;? must
be altered to 'Apv'l)Tov or Koi 'ApvoiTTjs but perhaps Movxivipyrjs should be read.
;
8' cf. 1. 47 and Teraprrj as the heading of a taxing-list in P. Petrie III. 1 1 7 {/i). ii. i, where
:
it means the reTiipTT] Tapixnpoiv and (TiToiôiiliv. That is very likely to be the impost meant in
112, though a rfTupri] iWiiojv is also known, on which cf. Wilcken, Os/. I. pp. 137-41, and
P. Tebt. I. pp. 49-50. For the TtTilpTt]Tapixnp^" and airoTroiwv cf. P. Fay. 15. 3 (where 1. rfju
fi' (so Wilcken) ribv auTimoiwp koi [tmu] Tapixi]po)v), and P. Petrie III. introd., p. 8 and 58 (<?). 2.
113. ACCOUNTS 303
It seems to have been a tax of \ on the profits of the salting and milHng (or perhaps
baking) industries.
50. êvvpii may be a village-name, in which case -êyxoivcns must be supplied from 1. 48.
51. EiVtyijou: though the y may well be superfluous (cf. 27. 53, note), this word
would seem to be the name of the father of *Er<êvs rather than of a place (sc. 'lo-ieiov ; of.
167).
52. TO irapa : cf, 1. 92 and 109. 9.
54. 8Q)8(K(ixa\Kiav isprobably to be supplied before Kkrjpcov from 1.
53 ; cf. 11. 41-2 and
1. 8, note.
57. For fy]yv7]i/ cf. the payments for Steyyur/o-t? in 114-5.
61. Cf. note on 1. 13. The xo^fâriKov was in the present case paid by a different person
(I.62).
74. [ AyKJupcoi' oXjtf
TTJ cf. pp. 9-10.
:
75. [. .]k\7]s, if not a place-name, affords another example of two nominatives together
cf. 25, note.
1.
76. Tam8v(f)avTS)v the name of this impost for carpet- weavers is new.
:
'
Wilcken {OsL '
1. p. 177) resolves the abbreviation 8an{ ), which occurs in one of his ostraca as the name
of a tax, as 8an{i.8v(l)coi'), i.e. Tawi8v(f)aiv, and regards it as a branch of the x^'-P'^"'^^'''^^ oi' tax
on trades ; but this explanation of 8an{ ) is not very likely. Whether ramBvcpavTiou
here means merely a tax on that trade, or is connected with the 6dovn]pa monopoly (on
which cf. 67, introd., and Wilcken, OsL I. pp. 266-9) 'S uncertain.
77. (paKij^: this too is a new name of a tax; but cf. fnavluiv (puKe-âv as the description
of an impost in P. Par. 67. 16. cpaKfyf/av is also to be read above [ioKaviMv in P. Petrie
III. 37 {b). verso 6, but seems to have been intentionally rubbed out. The nature of this
impost connected with lentil cake is quite obscure.
80. îvTaj]v seems to be a man rather than a place.
86-7. Cf. 11. 41-2 and note on 1. 13.
89-90. Cf. 1. 8, note.
For the supplement eKTr^r (i.e. the airopoLpa) cf. 109. 10. But the tnapovpiop may
92.
be meant; cf. 1. 13, note.
93. For Tov avTov Trapa8e[icrov meaning 'his garden' instead of 'the same garden' cf.
e.g. P. Petrie III. 117 {g). 38 and 40.
113. Banker's Account.
Mummy 46. 14-7x25 cm. About b. c. 260.
Two incomplete columns of anaccount of sums paid or owing,

official
resembling P. Petrie Judging by the miscellaneous character

III. 93, verso.
of the entries, which refer amongst other things to deficiencies in connexion with
the revenues from the oil and beer industries (11. 12-5), and a present from the
State to distressed cultivators (11. 18-20), it is probable that the writer was
connected with a royal bank or \oyevTi]piov (cf. 106, introd.). The handwriting
is a small, very flowing cursive of a distinctly early type, and the papyrus is
304 HIBEH PAPYRI
certainly not later than the end of Philadelphus' reign. We omit the second
column which is much obliterated.
xW^] [][
oy alTovfjiPo[s '^-
(?)
Sarcoid [
Kal kv ABfxix[eT
5 Kal TO iiriypacpeu To[Ts . . . .' . . .

[
TOh TO ^VT09 fXr] (lX7][<p6(n
kv Trji Toov Kcoficou I
]
)(a{\KOv) câ {7)nL(oê\lou).
Kal TO kv TldaLTi .
[
y
XoyevTTJi TOOL 7rap[a tl
lO BoTpCOL TOOL (f)v\aKiT[r]L Kal ?]
dvayoiprjaavTi (vTrj[pd^'\ )(a[XKOv) \S [rjixicoêXiou) (reTapToy),

Kal eXai/c^y )(a(\K0v) p^^ (6/3oXoy) {rjfjLiooîXiov).
Kal u ToTy dvTiXeyovanu /xtj cIXt]-
<P^vaL kXaiov âiXKov) <^.
15 et- ToTorjL TIdcnTO's XoyevTrji
wL fxr}6ku VTTapyeL ^9 {rpiooôXov) {jiTapTov).
Kal TO 8o6\v Toh daOivovaiv

TQ>p yecapycov e/y to. epya tq>v
KTrijiaTCcv dpy(ypiov) K.
2. s of OS above the line. 5. em of emypacfxv above ava erased. 6. o of rois
corr. from a.
8-19. Item, owed by Pasis son of ... tax-collector, who

'
Botrus the guard and , , . .
disappeared, for the beer-tax 34 dr. ^ ob. in copper, and for the oil-tax 167 dr. li ob. in
copper. Item, o^ved by the persons who deny that they have received it, for oil 6 dr. in
copper. Owed by Totoes son of Pasis, tax-collector, who has no property, 66 dr. 3^ ob.
Item, given to the distressed cultivators for operations in their vineyards, 20 dr. in silver.'
5. The
persons meant are probably the beer-sellers, though CvTonoiXais is too long cf. ;
11. 13-4 which seem to refer to the eXmonaXai.

7. If Kcofiau is right a word meaning or distribution would be expected after it ' * '
list '
but the initial k is doubtful, and or y might be read. fj.
9. Perhaps rrapa crnii'^Ti. It is not clear whether iwaxioprja-avn refers to UdcriTi or to

Borpwt.
1 1-2. aivrjs is to be Supplied with both CvrrjpCis and fXaiKrjs. The sum owed by Pasis
under the latter heading probably refers to the payments by fXaioKdnrjXoi to the government
114. ACCOUNTS 305
officials for oil cf. Rev. Lawsxlviii. 3-12 and the next note.
supplied ; The (vTr^pa probably
means the tax leviedon the beer-manufacturers cf. 106, introd. ;
134. Tois dm-iXeyovai fifi flXrjipevai is ambiguous. If the object to be supplied for
(t\rjc})fvai is the 6 drachmae, the dvnXeyovTfs are Xoyevral like nao-tr in 1. 8. But on the
analogy of 1. 6 the object of el\r](f)evai is more likely to be eXaiov, in which case the
tXaioKdTrrjXoi are most probably meant cf. the preceding note.
;
19. For KT^fjLa in the sense of a 'vineyard' cf. P. Petrie III. 28 {e). 4, 67 (d). 10, &c.
The abbreviation of upyvplov forms a symbol resembling that for dpTdiSr] (which is of course
nothing but a combination of /jr), as in P. Petrie III. 114. 9.
114. Official Account.
Mummy 25. 23-5 x 19-8 fw. b. c. 244 (243).
An account of payments made at Cynopolis by Apollonius and Onnophris,

contractors for the ttXvios nal (tt[I3o^ (or -ov ; the gender is in both cases doubtful),
in the 3rd year of a king who is probably Euergetcs. The precise meaning of
these two words, upon which the interpretation of the papyrus turns, is not easy
to determine. two Ptolemaic ostraca published by Wilcken,
ttXvvos occurs in
Ost. II. 329 (third century B. C.) and 1497 (second century B. c), which are receipts
for 60 drachmae and 500 drachmae for z'tr/jiK?/? ttXvvov, and also on the recto
of 116 in proximity to an account concerning virpov. There was therefore a close
connexion between virpov and -nkvvos, and the question arises whether ttAwoj and
o-Ti/3os could signify some preparation of virpov. The production of natron was
most probably a government monopoly, and the market may have been supplied
through contractors, in the same way as in the case of oil. But there is no other
trace of any such sense for -nkyvos or (rrt/3oj. -nXwos should mean either a place for
washing or the articles washed cf. Suid. ttAwos d^vroVcos to ayyixov avro, irapoûroVo)!?
;
8e TO T:\vv6p.vov. It is in the latter sense that Wilcken understands the word

'
in the combination viTpiKris ttXvvov [Ost. I. p. 264}. arises ordinarily means path '
or *
footstep,' but in this context is obviously to be connected with the sense of
'
washing,' which the same root has in (mijiîv and areLfiivi. On the whole we
are inclined to think that Apollonius and Onnophris wêre contractors for washing
and fulling carried out in a place or places under State control, though whether
the words ttXvvos and cniôs have themselves a local signification
which is not
really incompatible with the ostraca or are equivalent to to. TrXwopava koI
crTt/3o/iei.'a, has
to be determined.
still Another possible alternative would be
to suppose that ttAwo? and ort'/ôs are loosely used, and that the subject of the
contract was not the industry itself but the tax upon it. The tax upon the
fuller's trade (yrcxpiKi'i) is well known in the Roman period, but there is as yet
X
3o6 HIBEH PAPYRI
no evidence concerning it in Ptolemaic times. Between the several alternative
explanations a decision is hardly attainable without further evidence. The
document is written in a large calligraphic hand. The order of the months in
which the instalments are paid gives rise to a difficult chronological problem ; cf.
note on 11. 3 -,5.
Col. i.
[IJapa 'Atto^XXcoi'iov kol 'Oi'v\mpp^(o^
[tS>v e^ eiXrjCpoTMl' roi' ttXvvov
[/cttji (TTLôi' e/? TO y [T09) {dpa)(fia)i') B . .

[.]
I'ea-TLi' (5e ?) dra(popa dno Mi)(êlp
5 [eco 9 âco(f)t iJ.r]vS)v 6 (Spa)(ixai) 'Bi^ (SuoôXoi) {t'ifiL(ol3iXiO}').
[els TOVTO TTfTTTCoKei' eiTi TO ki' Kvivoctv) 7ro[Xt)
\X]oyevTi]pLoi'
\M\êip ttXvvov \Spa)(^jxai) pfJ-S,
[or TlÔU A^,
10 \yi I'tTai [Spayîxal] pira.
['Pa/xefoiO] nXvi'ov \
laTiôu .
I
115. ACCOUNTS 307
Phaophi is 2017 drachmae 2^ obols: to meet this there has been paid into the collecting-
office at Cynopolis, in Mecheir for washing 144 dr., for fulling 37 dr., total 181 dr. . . .
Thoth 238 dr., and as surety-money 5 dr., total 243 dr. For washing 177 dr., for fulling
66 dr., making 243 dr. Phaophi for washing 156 dr., for fulling 66 dr., making 232 dr.
Total 1898 dr.; remainder 119 dr. 2| ob.'
3-5. If the amounts due eachmonth were equal, the monthly instalment would amount
to 224 dr. i| ob., and the
2689 dr. 5! ob. but those figures cannot be read in
total to ;
1. 3. The instalments may therefore be assumed to have differed cf. 116. 3-4. That the ;
series begins with Mecheir is worth noting

connexion with 115. 5 and 116. 3 cf. notes
in ;
ad he. It is impossible to be certain in the present case. whether the fourth quarter of the
year was reckoned as preceding Mecheir or following after Phaophi. But whether Athur
or, as is more likely, ^lecheir is here the beginning of the financial year, this does not
coincide with the ordinary revenue year starting in Thoth, in spite of the lact that in 1. 3
the two taxes are stated to be farmed for the 3rd year of a king. We defer to App. ii.
'
'
p. 361 a discussion of the possible solutions of this complicated problem.

7. ^\oyivri]piov cf. 106, introd.
:
12. The lower half of the column which contained details for the
five months from
Pharmouthi to Mesore is lost.
14. The meaning of this item is that the payments being in arrear one of the sureties
for the contractors had to make up the deficiency. At the end of the nine months there was
still a considerable sum owing. Similar entries occur in 115, 15 and 34.
16-7. These are the details for Thoth, the 5 dr. mtli Sieyyvi'jaeuis being included in one
of the items; the total given in 1. 15 is repeated in 1. 18.
1]5. Account of Taxes on Sacrifices and Wool.
Mummy 84. , Fr. (a) 24-7x11 ^v;/. About b.c. 250.
Some fragmentary taxing accounts, of which the two columns given below
are in a fair state of preservation. The first of these relates to the ixuaxojv 8eKdrr;,
or 10 per cent, duty upon sacrificial calves, which is here first met with in the
Ptolemaic period. The fragment from which
published in P. Petrie II. p. 37,
Wilcken (Osi. I. p. 377) infers the existence in the third century B.C. of a tax
on sacrifices, is shown by the republication in P. Petrie III. 112 (a) not to
justify that conclusion. The tax is also called a beKarrj in P. Tebt. II. 307 and
605-7, of about the year a. d. 200, where the amount is 20 drachmae, paid in
two cases at least by priests. The impost was probably levied by the State
upon the profits which the priests derived upon the sacrifices offered by private
persons ; cf. Wilcken, Ost. I. pp. 3H4-5.
The subject of the next column is a tax of 5 per cent, on wool, apparently
a property-tax, of which the present is the first mention. tax of -^^ on A
wool (k'8' epicoi') is found in another (unpublished) Hibeh papyrus ; but whether
X 2
3o8 HIBEII PAPYRI
that represents the same impost at a lower rate or is something distinct, e.g.
an export duty Concerning the wool-tax in Roman times
(cf. 80), is not clear.
information is even scantier^ though F. Cairo 1C449 (Wilcken, Archiv, I. p. 552),
in which kpi-qpa occurs, proves that it continued to exist.
Both accounts are arranged on the same plan. At the head of the column
are the names of the tax and the tax-farmers, which are followed by estimates
of the amounts expected in different months and statements of the sums actually
paid ; cf. 116.
The papyrus belongs to about the middle of the third century, but no date
occurs. Col. iii is written over some earlier writing which has been washed out.
Col. ii.
lx6cr)(<or 8eKdT7]9 I J
Kal
NiKciixop [
V
(:7rt(3dX\L TOOL IMrjul... J
ei'y Tovro ypdcpovai y[LiêaOat ]
f,
Mi)/ip (rp too (3 0X0 1'),
âfj.ud)d {rpicoôXoy) (î)fiiu>(3(Xioi')^
âpfjLovdi. ovOer,
Ha-ôiv^ {ppa-îxas;) ^8 [(SvoûXovs),
/ {Spa)(jxal) ê (SvoôXol) (?)/iia)/3eAior).
10 niTTTCoKe M)(ip ovOiy,
4'afjL(VQ)d (5pa^/i7/) a [>]fii(oPeXLoy),
âpfj.ov[6i\ ovOiv,
Tlayjiov^ {Spaîxat) vq {TrevTooôXov) \
Uavin dno {Spa>(^p.cou) |<7 [Spa^/ial) y {rpid)ôXoi') (^7)pi(o(3iXioy) (reTap-
Tov ?), [Xo{LTral)\ [Spa)(fxal) ^/3 [Sv6(3oXoi) {jiTaprov).
15 Kal SieyyvijaL? vn ApfJi' 1

[Spa)(pal) /ce,
Kal 7rpoaKaracrTT](T[ovcri ...,]. pcov [8pa)(_pds) f,
Tlavi'L yîvijai
e^ .1 . r\
115. ACCOUNTS 309
Col. iii.
20 eiKoaTrjs kpe5)V Tfi[.]v .

\
kol
'luapcov? 'AjXjxcoviov [
eTTi^dWei TTJL (reTp)r]/ji(^p(i)i) [][

els Se TOVTO ypd(f)0vcrc yewe[(r6ai
Meîp [Spa)(^fxds ?) Xy {rpiwôXov }),
25 âfiei'cbB [Spaxi^cc? ?) jX^ [oôXov) (riraproi' ?),
âpfiovSi [(Spa)(^fjids) . .]a {rpmôXov) {fifiLW^^Xiov),
Tla')(^<i)vs\ [{ppa-^fias .]va [oôXov ?j {rj/xicoîXLOv) {jeTapTOu ?),
/[
TreTTTOiKev M'yiylp
30 ^[aiie\v(iiB [
âp/xovOi \
Ila-)(0ivs {Spa)(^/xai ?) [
. . . cria (Spa-^fiai) pia [
[/cat] 8uyyvrj(TLS x/jro
35 KOL vnlp 'Ivap(cvT[os

[
36 TIavvL yeivyerai
37 [...]. 8a VL .[
'
For the tenth uponcalves, I and Nicanor . The instalment due for the
. . . . .
month is .; they write that there is (or was?) paid, in Mecheir 3 obols, in
. . for this
Phamenoth 3^ ob., in Pharmouthi nothing, in Pachon 64 dr. 2 ob., total 65 dr. 2^ ob.
Receipts in Mecheir nothing, in Phamenoth i dr. ^ ob., in Pharmouthi nothing, in Pachon
:
58 dr. 5 ob., in Pauni, out of 66 dr., 3 dr. sf ob., leaving 62 dr. 2^ ob. Also as surety-
money from Arm ... 25 dr., and they will in addition provide ... 5 dr., total 30 dr. In
Pauni is paid . . .
The twentieth on wool, Tr

'
and Inaroiis son of Ammonius. The instalment due
. . .
every four days is ... ; for this they write that there is (?) paid, in Mecheir 33 dr. 3 ob., in
Phamenoth 332 dr. li ob., in Pharmouthi ^ .1 dr. 3^ ob., in Pachon [.]5i dr. if ob., total
. .. Receipts : in Mecheir, &c.'
1-2. The ends of these two lines and of 11. 14-6 are upon the piece of papyrus
3IO HIBE 11 PAPYRI
containing Col. iii, and are conil)ined with Col. ii on the basis of the arithmetic in 11. 15-7 ;
but there is nothing to determine the precise length of the lacunae. The names here and
in 11. 20-1 are those of the tax-farmers.
3. Cf. 1. 22, where Tî{TeTp)r]n{epb3i) takes the ])lace
of t:)i pTjvl (.?). The reading there
t)Ut the former
is not very certain, and the letters might be read pn, i-*^- (Tfi"/'nV'l('"0 !
alternative is confirmed by the occurrence of the same abbreviation in the remains of the
first column, and there the last letter is plainly /x (or n), not
rj. Apparently 11. 3 and 22 give
purely hypothetical estimates, gained by a simple process of arithmetical division, of the
amount falling due within the period named cf. 116. 5, where after a statement of amounts
;
payable in the two halves of the year the papyrus proceeds ovv aiiruv Taâadm ttjs M
(r(Tp)r]^l{fpov) The estimates which follow in 11. 4-9 and 23-8, on the other hand,
. . .
though also hypothetical, have obviously a closer relation to facts, and may be conjectured
to be the amounts paid in the corresponding periods of the preceding year. This point
would be clearer if the word after ypdcpnva-i in 11. 4 and 23 were definitely ascertainable. An
expected, and on the whole ytivtadm or ytveadai seem most suitable ; if the latter
infinitive is
were adopted the reference to a previous occasion would be more necessary.
5. Mfx'p : this month perhaps began the financial year cf. notes on 114. 3-5 and ;
116. 3-4, and pp. 360-1.

14. This mention of Pauni, which month does not occur in the list of estimates in
11. 5-8 and apparently belongs to the next group of
entries (I. 18), is curious. Perhaps these
3 dr. 3 3- obols paid in Pauni were reckoned with the account of Mecheir Pachon in order
to diminish the difference between 65 dr. 2^ obols, the total of the estimate (1. 9), and 59 dr.
r,i (or
5|) ob., the sum of the actual receipts in 11. 10-3. A somewhat similar difficulty
arises in the corresponding passage of the other account at 1. 33, where there is an
additional entry of an obscure character after the sums relating to the 4 months but naOi-t ;
cannot be read tHere.

Some of the figures in 1. 14 are by no means certain. The first number is probably
^c or ^C and the
',
question arises whether the figures at the end of the line represent the
difference between these 66 or 67 drachmae and the 3 dr. 3I ob. actually paid, or the sum
of the 3 dr. 3^ ob. and the preceding items in 11. 10-3. \Ve have been led to adopt the
former supposition owing to the circumstance that the obols and fractions in 1. 14 add up
to a drachma, as apparently they should do if Xo^mai) is supplied in the lacuna, whereas the
sums in 11. 10-3, which amount to at least 59 dr. 5I obols, added to 3 dr. 3I ob. make 63 dr.
3^ ob., and the number at the end of 1. 14 is not 3 J but 2^ obols. But the blurred vestiges
at the end of the line do not suggest ^y or ^/3.
15. Perhaps Âpp.\avvios(J), a name which occurs in the first column. For difyyvtjan cf.
114. 14, note. The size of the lacunae in the middle of 11. 15-6 is uncertain; cf. note on
11. 1-2.
16. The vestige of the letter before pcov would suit a or w.

22 sqq. Cf. note on 1. 3.
33. The supposed might be p and the preceding letter
i t or rj. Neither yetVemi nor
Xo(7ra can be read; cf. 1. 14, note.
37. There are traces of five lines between this and 1. 36, but they apparently all belong
to the erased document cf. introd. ;
116. ACCOUNTS 311
116. Account of Batii-Tax.

Mummy 12. i6-8x i6-^cm. About b.c. 245.
Part of an account dealing with the tax of a third upon baths, for the
collectionof which at Busiris (the modern Abusir) the large sum of 1320
drachmae was paid by Aristander. This impost, which is to be distinguished
from the ordinary tax âXavaoov, was apparently a percentage of ^ levied upon
the profits of privately owned baths ; cf. note on 108. 7. An estimate is first
given (cf. amounts (which are not equal) accredited to the two halves
115) of the
of the year, and of the sum falling due every four days and an account of the ;
actual payments follows. It is remarkable that the half years commenced with
Mecheir and Mesore cf. note on 1. 3. ;
The column printed is preceded by the ends of lines from another

column, which contained a similar account relating probably to a dififerent tax ;
cf.115. These two columns are written on the verso of the papyrus. On the
recto are two more columns of official accounts, unfortunately both fragmentary,
written in a dififerent hand and referring to virpov and ttAwos (cf. 114). Col. i
shows that was priced at 4 drachmae the talent, e. g. 11. lo-i

vCrpov virpov ]
(rdXavTa) pXyy' ai'(a) 5 (Spox/Moi) 0Ay (8t'o/3oAot), vCrpov] (TaXavTa) 'ArXyy' av(a) 8 {bpax- |
fxai) 'ErXy (8uo/3oAot). In P. Tebt. I. 120 3 minae of virpov are valued at 90 copper
drachmae, which on a ratio of silver to copper of i : 450 exactly corresponds
with the price here. The three preceding lines contain the entry vCrpov ?] (rdXavTa)
V, eiVo'Seia ttjs
|
[14 letters ?] ck tov (TnâXXovTos \
[avroU (?) Kara to hL]dypap.ixa 6.v{d) k.
Col. ii, in which ttXvvov [ occurs, mentions biyyvT]ai^ [

(cf. 114. 14, 115. 15), and tcol
Tiapa TOV oIkovoôv [eyXaôvTt . . |

iyyvovs ei's eKTiaiv (cf. 94-5).
The papyrus may belong to the latter part of the reign of Philadelphus
or the earlier years of Euergetes ; it was the only Greek document from
Mummy 12.
Col. ii.
â\avii(ov y
Bova-eipecos 'ApiarauSpo? i^pcovos (Spa-îiai) 'At[k.
Siaipâi^ Me)(tp ecoy Ênei(p di'{a) câ (reTpcolBoXoi/) (Spa^fial) 0;/,
Meaopf) ecoy Tvî di'{a) pKrj (SvoôXovs) {Spaxfâi) y\rq, 7r\{rjpi9 ?) [
5 Sil ovv avTov TctâaOac Trj^ {TTp)T)fi(pov) c[y {TeTpco/SoXoi').
TT^TTTOdKiV
312 HIBEII PAPYRI
Mexip ^ /5 (TeTpcoôXov) (Thaproi^), y (3 {reTp(^l3o\ou), rj

^ [SvoôXol],
I 6 (SvoISoXol) irhapToy), la /3 {TrevrcoôXov ?) \[^nuo^k\iov),
i8 (3 (rpLOiôXov), L^ S, IT] q {SvoôXoi), K^ /fe,

/ ^^ (TrerrcoôAoj/).
<5- a {6^0X09) {-q/xLcolSeXioy), i l[3, i[. .]y, i^ . . {rerpo^ôXov) {qfiLcoîXiov),
10 kS S, K^ 8 (Trp(ol3oXoi'), kC iC {rpicoôXou ?), / oâ {TpicoôXou) {ijfuco-
îXiov) [ ]
âpfx[ovei . k(3,
L i(3, L-q L,
/ fiS. UaxUv
/ <tX {rifiKoêXLOu), X{oLTral) pX<r {rpLcoôXou) {,)ixi(oîXLOv). kclI t'ov
UavuL cja {TerpdoôXov),
/ GKf] {olSoXo?) {1)111(0^ eXiov). 7re{nTC0K) IlavvL [ / /^T,
XiomaX) pTr(3 {6^0X09) {^fiicoîXLOv). [e^/i y t]ovt[o 7ri{irTa)Ke) ?
The third upon baths. At Busiris Aristander son of Thibron 1320 drachmae. The
'
:
period from Mecheir to Epeiph at 91 drachmae 4 obols, 550 dr.; from Mesore to Tubi at
128 dr. 2 ob., 770 dr. He ought therefore to pay for every four days 13 dr. 4 ob.
'
Paid : on Mecheir 2nd, 2 dr. 4| ob. ;
3rd, 2 dr. 4 ob. (fee'
3-4, Since the two half-yearly periods commenced with Mecheir and Mesore the
year
must have been reckoned from one of those two months. Mecheir being put first would
be more naturally regarded as the starting-point, and that view is to some extent corroborated
by 114. 4, 115. 5, 24 cf. 114. 3-5. note. On the other hand INIesore as the beginning of
;
a financial year is supported by the evidence of 133 and Rev. Laws Ivi. 5.
In any
strange that in matters directly relating to taxation the regnal or at any rate some
case it is
year which differed from the revenue year beginning on Thoth i was so often employed
cf. pp. 360-1.
4. For 7rX(;5pfy) after a figure to indicate that
nothing is wanting cf. e. g. P. Petrie 111.
109 (r). 6. But 7rX( ). if that be the right reading,
may also stand for nXdco, and a figure
would then have followed, perhaps (tk, i. e. the difference between the two totals.
5. {T(Tp)rjti{(pov) or {T(Tpn)fi;j{i>ov), but the former seems preferable on the analogy of
:
115. 3 ;note ad loc.

cf.
6. (rpia)/3oXoi/) or (TfrpwôXoi/) may be read at the end of the line in place

of {ix^vTioôKov),
in which case another entry would follow for the 12th or 13th of
the month.
12. from which o-X {r'jpioof3eXiov), the sum of the actual receipts from Mecheir
The fio-ure
to Pachon, subtracted is the total due for those four months calculated on the scale
is
given in 1. 3 91 dr. 4 ob. x 4

:
=
366 dr. 4 ob. 230 dr. ^ ob. subtracted from this leaves
136 dr. 3I ob., which were still owing. To this deficiency is added the estimated total for
Pauni in accordance with the scale in 1. 3, making 228 dr. i| obols, from which are
deducted the actual receipts for Pauni, 46 dr., leaving 182 dr. i^ ob. still owing at the end
of that month. How this deficiency was met was being explained when the papyrus
breaks off.
lir. ACCOUNTS 313
117. Return of Corn Revenue.
Mummy A. 24 x 15-2 r;;;. b. c. 239 (238) or 214 {213).
An account of corn received during Epeiph, rendered by an official in charge

of the State granaries of the KwiVt;? ; cf. the monthly returns of sitologi to the
strategus inRoman times, e. g. B. G. U. 835. The total is curiously small, only
138^ artabae of olyra and 12 of wheat, the olyra being apparently the repayments
of loans of seed for green crops, while the wheat was for the crown-tax, an
impost levied on special occasions cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 223-4. The papyrus is
;
dated in the 8th year of a king who

is certainly not earlier than Euergetes, for
the handwriting, which extremely cursive, approximates more than that of

is
most documents in this volume to the second century B.C. style; the reign may
be that of Philopator, though the latest certain date found in these papyri
is the 25th year of Euergetes (90). On the right are the beginnings of lines
of another document in a different hand, and on the verso is part of another
account.
["Etov^ t], irapa 'Apovpaxppios

[To]y irpos T019 6r){(javpoh) tov Kcoltov.
aiTOv TOV ixfiTpr]p.evov

[e]// Tcoi 'Erreicp- yXcopoiv els a-rrepfia
5 [6]Xvpa)i/ pXijS', (jTecpdvov

rj (erovs) Trvp{5>v) 5, ( {erovs) 7rvp[a>u) t], y^ irvp{S}v) i/?,
[o]Xi;/)a)r pXrjS^, / to KaO' eV*
iv Td\r}L els Tovs irepl Wv)(Lv
[. .]x<^P^y To^ KaXXia-TpccTov nepl

10 Wv)(îu )(Xa)pa>i/ (nr{epfia) 6X{ypwv) //^Z.,
[6] avTos TOV JJapfievCcjDvos )(X{(opSiv) <nr[epp.a) 6X(ypa>u) p^L ,
['X]jpdTOiiv TOV îXiTTTTOv nepl 'Aaavav
[
\]X{copa>v) (jTrieppa) 6X{vpa)v) /J.y8'
[els Tav]To ^^{copcov) <T7rep(pa) 6X(vpa>u) pXrjS'.
15 [ev ê^LJx^c OeoScopos Tcou e^ 'Ay-

[Kvp&u noXeoys] . a aTecpdvov iTyp{S)v)
[rj [eTovs) Trvp{5>v) 8, ^] {eTovs) 7rup(cov) tj,
Traces of 3 more lines.
8. This line inserted later.

314- HIBEH PAPYRI
The 8lh year, from Haronnophris, suj)erinlendent of granaries of the Koi'te district.
'
Account of corn measured in Epeiph for green-stuffs for seed 138I artabae of olyra, for
:
the crown-tax of the 8ih year 4 artabae of wheat, for that of the 7ih year 8 arlabae of wheat.
Total 12 artabae of wheat, 138^ artabae of olyra. Of this the details are paid at Talae :
on account of holdings Psuchis chares on account of the holding of Callistratus at

at . . .
Psuchis for green-stufs for seed 47-I artabae of olyra the same on account of the holding ;
of Parmenion for green-stuffs for seed 47^ artabae of olyra Slraton on account of the holding ;
of Philippus at Assua for green-stuffs for seed 43^ artabae of olyra total for green-stuffs for ;
seed 138A artabae of olyra. At Phebichis, Theodorus from Ancyronpolis for the crown-tax
paid in wheat of the 8ih year 4 artabae of wheat, for that of the 7th year 8 artabae of
wheat . .
.'
x^w/jo);/ (Is (Tnipfxa cf. 119. 1 7, where 40^ artabae of wheat are ])aid for
4. :
x^^P^"
among various items of receipts from a KXrjpos, and the payments for x^^p<^ in 51. 2 and
112. 9.
8. T('i\T]t : cf. 36. 3, note.
eis rods: sc. icX^pouf ; cf. rov KaAXiarpcirou (sc. K\i]pov) in 1. 9, and notes on 52. 26, 112.
6, and 118. 2. Whether these fcX^poi were really owned by cleruchs or had reverted to the
Crown is not clear.
15-6. 'A-^Kvpoiv TToXfcos : cf. pp. 9-10, 67. 4, and 112. 74. Very likely one or both
words were abbreviated, unless the word before fjTfcjxivov (of which the last letter may be X
instead of a) was an abbreviation. 7n)/i(eor) after arecfxivov seems superfluous ; cf. 11. 5-6.
118. Account of Olyra.
Mummy A. Fr. (<?) 17-8 x 26, Fr. {/>) 26-2 x 20-8 cw. About b.c. 250.
Two fragments of an account of olyra, written probably by a sitologus or

other official of the Oiâavpo'i, in a large and clear hand over an obliterated
document. Lines 1-15, which begin a new section headed airepp-a and may be the
actual commencement of the account, give a list of seed issued to or repaid by

cultivators of crown or cleruchic land (cf. 1. 2, note). Lines 17-3'^ give various
details of expenditure for horses and other purposes; and in 1. 37 begins a list
of (apparently) payments to various persons from Pharmouthi to Mesore, the
names of women being placed after those of men.
Fr. (a). Col. i. Col. ii.
Ilaueyis eh Tou 'Idaovo^ 6\{ypa}v) \(l, iTnroi? 6\(ypa)v) ^,
Jlo\ifiU)\v ih Tov SfoScopov po<^, rj ittttois 6X(vp5)v) 13,
AvTLKpdTi]S ff? TOV TloXvaivov i"^, zo iS LTTTTOis 6X(vpaiv) /3.
5 rioK(iOV<i (IS TOV TipoKpaTov pKi,

118. ACCOUNTS 315
TIoK(ov9 eiV Tiji' Qôy^prjCTTov durjXcofia-
Siwpvya ir]S\ 'Oi^vaxppi tUtoi{i .

,
f/[y] T}y 'Idaovos oXivpm') o^(l, vavKXrjpcoL y,

IlaovTT]? fi, Svi^jev? dp)(û pev9 .
,
10 Nx6a>v9 iyl., 25 Xvvr^vs ntroâarLO^ .

,
XovTivs e/y rov eoK , Evayopai <r,
HiaoL^ e/y tou Ilapa , T0T9 Acapian'o^ '.
Kai rjv ecnreipau
[. . . . Tov Sicopvya [ . . Kal eSciOKa avTco i
15 [/j 6X(yp(oy) covrjS'. (ci (Xuttco ivpk6[r}

[. . . .\(f>op(i)V [
30 TO irdv TO dvrfXoc)^ jia
: -.['][
Fr. {b). Col. 1. Col. ii.
Uaxioi'? iTTTTO^s olX(f/>(Sr) a, 60 [Endfp-]

I 6X(ypcov) /?, 19 a^, Ky aL, 6py(i)[v y,
k( aL, y/ 6X{vp(,v) ^L. KXIto[s y,
35 Havvi /3 6X{vp5)v) aL, r aL, Ke(f)dX(ov [8,
V aL, i L, [y/ oX{ypa>v) e. SoTopTaT\o\^ y,

âpfjLovOi aiTOfieTpia- 65 Tlo5>vs y,
M[ai]0(ovTr]s 6X(vp6ou) y, y' 6X(ypmA Lq.
KpaTlvo^ 6X(vpa)i') y, [/ 6X{up(ct/) q: MeaopTj-
40 Uavvi (TiTOfiiTpia' MaiOcov'iTrj's 6X(ypcoi^) y,
, KX1T09 y, KpaTU'd y,
\'I aj ifjos y, 70 MiXdvOios] 8,
rio a>V9 y,' KecpdXcou 8,
[MeXdvOio? 8,] 0oTopTaio9 y,
45 [Ke0aAft)i/ 8,] KXdSos y,
[0OTopTaio9 y,] KX1T09 y,
^ndai9 y,] 75 NiKias y,
Sopyav y,l
IIdai9 y,
ATToXXdii'ios y,] Sopycov y,
3i6 IIIBEH PAPYRI
50 [Kp\aTivo<i y, 'A-TToWoiVLdyS, y,
\Ni]Kia9 y, 'la-Tirjos y,
[nXa^rcof y, So TlXaTcov y,
[Ma]iO(ovTrjs y, Apfiivais y,
[K\]dSo9 y, IIocoi's y,
55 ['A]pfiiv(n9 y, Aio[uv]cria ^,
Aiovvaia ^, Mvppiut] /3j
Myppivrj /3, 85 Bov^dXiov /3,
[Bov^d\io]v /3, X'ilJiOV ^,
[ / oK{ypS>v) v\rj. / 6\{vpwi') ^.
Fr. (0.
[Xoi]7ral dpyvpiov
yo TTvpov l[
36. e of (c coir, from y, and f at tlic end of the line corn from c,
2. f(\ TOP "lacTovn'i : ^c, K\?]pov, as we think, thougli in P. Petrie III. 100, an account
resembUng the earHer part of 118, the editors supply \6ynv with (h t6v. But Kk^pnv is more
easily coupled with (5tco/juya (11. 7 and 14) than Xoyof and cf. 117. 8, where with fU tovs wfju ;
'irvx'-v probably KXrjpnvs is to be supplied, and P. Petrie II. 39 (<?). 10, where seed is ordered
to be issued ds rhv Avcr'nrwnv Kkirfpnii) (cf. 11. I 3 4 f[t/ rw' AaKkdnoiVcis Ka\ ^wnnrpov 7rptcr(3vT(pu>v
(cXi7poi;s). It is not clear whether the account in 11. 2-15 refers to repayments of loans or to
the actual advances of seed-corn, like P. Petrie III. 90. The 'idaovos KXijpos must have been
very large, since besides the 37^ artabae issued to Paneuis, 97 A artabae are advanced to
another of its yeapyoi (1. 8), and probably the entries in 11. 9-10 also refer to it. The
advances of seed altogether in this section seem larger than would be expected in the case
of regular cleruchic holdings which rarely exceeded 100 arourae, and the KXijpoi here are
probably in reality l3aai\iKi; cf. 52. 26, note. It is not certain whether 118 concerns
an Oxyrhynchite or a KoVte village, but if the village is Oxyrhynchite the 'idcrovns KKijpos
here may be identical with the 'lao-[oji/os KXrjpns in P. Oxy. 265. 4.
6. The issue of seed for a canal is curious cf. 11. 13-4. It must have been a deep ;
cutting with sloping sides. Thcochrestus is more likely to have been the constructor (cf.
the KXfcovos 8iMpv$ in P. Petrie II. 6. 5), or some person after whom it was called, than the
owner.
12. Ilnpu' is very likely napu'jifvov ; cf. 99. 7.
13. Perhaps 0[(o\xpr}'^]Tov ; cf. 1. 6. Put there was plenty of room for Qeoxprja-Tov
in 1- 13- .
,
16. This line is probably a heading like 1. i. [nn<TTo](p6pu)v, sc. k^p-t] (cf. 87. 6), is
possible. fK(f)()piov is unlikely, for the letter after (Pop resembles w more than to. and a heading
would be expected to project 10 the left.
37. (TtrnpfTpia this word, which in itself might mean simply a measuring out of corn,
:
is the technical term used for official payments from the State granaries to individuals for
119. ACCOUNTS 317
salaries,&c. (cf. 83. 5, introd.) and it is probable that the persons in the following lists
;
were recipients, not payers. The grants may have been for Karepyov (wages) cf. 119. 4, ;
where narepyov is coupled with K(p6piov and (mepua in connexion with a KXrjpos.
42-9. These names are restored from the list in 11. 68-86, which apparently agreed
with that in 11. 41-58 with the addition of one more woman {2~ipov ^, 1. 86).
88-90. These lines are probably from the bottom of Fr. {a), Col, i or ii.
119. Account of Rknt.
Mummy A 9. 26-4 x io-4<rw. About b. c. 260.
A
statement of the rents due from a cleruchic holding, with an account of
the amounts paid. It is not clear whether the land was really in the occupation
of a cleruch or belonged to the category of jBaaikiKol Kkijpoi, on which see introd.

to 39 and 52. 26, note. The latter is perhaps the more likely alternative, for
the style is rather that of an official than a private document. The rent is
classified under three heads grain, which is reckoned in wheat and paid in olyra
: ;
green-stuffs, reckoned in wheat and sesame, reckoned in sesame with its

;
equivalent in wheat. The sesame was measured by an artaba of 40 choenices

(cf. 74. 2, note) and the ratios of the values of wheat and olyra and wheat and
;
sesame were given as approximately 2| : i and i : 3|. 166, a more imperfect

duplicate of this papyrus, supplies the figures in 11. 6-8. Both copies were
probably written in the latter part of the reign of Philadelphus.
"EaTlV TO K(p6pL0l^ TOV 'A7roX[X(Ol'lOV

KXrjpoV (TTVpCOu) TV, [
anep/jia t,
KaTe[p^yoy i,
/ \to, I
5 fifjiiTpr)Tai
âfievcoT Ky oXx/poov) p[7rri,
âpixovOi 8 6Xv[pS)v) pX[<î] ,
la 6Xv[pcoi') p^âL,
K oXvifiUiv) a,
10 K^ 6Xv[puiv) pi,
Haôci's K 6Xv[p5)v) KL
Ilaui'i t/3 6Xv[p(ov) []^.]]
t
'ETTeiTT a:<7 6Xv{p(ou) [. .J
Kal oXv'pcoi')
31 HIBEH PAPYRI
15 Koia-^ la oXv^pcor) ^ .|
/ 6\v[pS)v) n~'AyZ.5', y {irvpcuv) royLo .
Kal '^Xoopcou {jTVpcov) jXL.
Koi ar]adfôv fiirpcoi a .

( ) C'^ , /
Kccdapcri? /lS',
20 (jTTipjxa L ô'.{yiKf.<i) S,
X{oL7rai) T X^'t'^'^^S') ^) ^
at {TTVpOOl') l^L, / \{TTVpU)V) Vt].
y eh ravTo {nvpcoiy) vXulS'.
25 KTjS .
'The rent of the holding of Apollonius is 350 artabae of wheat, for seed 10 art., for
wages 10 art., total 370 art.; of which there has been measured: on Phamenoth 23rd
188 art. of olyra, on Pharmouthi 4th i36|- art., on the nth 161^, on the 20th 200, on the
27th no, on Pachon 20th 251, on Pauni i2lh 10, on Epeiph 26th and on Choiak . . . . ,
nth .total 933-4 art. of olyra, which are 373! art. of wheat.
. ,
On account of green-stuffs
40^ art. of wheat; and of sesame by the measure 7^ art., from which deduct f art. for
. . .
cleaning and ^ art. 4 choenices for seed. Remainder 6 art. 6 choen., of which the
embankments-tax is ^ art., remainder 5-| art. 6 choen. total 5^ art. 6 choen., which are i 7^ ;
art. of wheat, total f,8 art. of wheat making altogether 43 if art. of wheat.'
;
4. KaTe'p yiw as the 10 artabae reckoned under this head are evidently additional, they
:
must have been due to the owner, whether the State or a cleruch (cf. introd.), for labour
suj)plied. For Kareityou in the sense of wages cf. e.g. P. Petrie III. 39. ii. 5, 63. 3. 166 has
/r^ at the end of this line in defiance of the arithmetic tv in 1. 2 is there quite certain. ;
6. In the abbreviation of 6Xv{p^v) here and in 166 the three letters are written one
above the other, X below, then o, and last v, which consists of a shallow curve.
12. It is doubtful what was written between 6\v{i)u)v) and t, and whether there was any
erasure. In the corresponding place in 166 6\i{pcov) seems to have been written twice, i
and uXv{pu>v) may have been similarly repeated here.

16. Tliis ratio of the value of olyra and wheat, appro.ximalely i 2-^, agrees with that :
given in 85. 14-;") ef. note ad /or.

;
17. 'I'he absence of any dates of payments in the following section suggests that ii is
only an estimate like that in 11. 2-4. 13ut the deductions on account of KdOapais, &c., and
the improbability that the whole of the rent in grain would have been paid before any of
that on other crops, are in favour of supposing that these items had also been paid. The
figure after ^l in 1. 17 is uncertain for A artaba is elsewhere in this papyrus and 166 written
;
as a half-circle, like the symbol for ^ obol (cf. also notes on 52. 33 and 53. 20), while in
this place it is square and might be taken for f with the upper stroke rubbed off. Put to
read ^g- here causes diniculties in 1. 23.
xXupwv : for x^f^/"' ^'f- notes on 51. 2, 52. 26, ami 112. 9.
payments on account of
18. abbreviation of the name of the measure consists of an a, immediately above
The
which is a horizontal stroke with a shoit vertical one depending fiom it to the right of the
120. ACCOUNTS 319
apex of the a. The general effect is very Hke the common sign for u^jradi] but aT{ ) may ;
be meant. Whatever the name, the arithmetic of the following lines shows that this measure
contained 40 choenices 7^ art. i^ art. 4 choen. = 6 art. 6 choen., .*. 6^ art. 4 choen.
:
=1 6 art. 6 choen., .*. ^ art. 4 choen. = 6

^ art. = 10 choen.
choen., .-.
19. Kddapa-is : cf. 9-1 1, &c.

P. Peirie III. 129, P. Tebt. 92.
20. The abbreviation of ;(0((i/iKes) is written as a ^ having an o above and an below. i
22. This deduction for x'^M'TKoy, if the land was a 3ao-tXtKof AcX^poj, is rather strange but ;
the meaning may be that a special allowance equivalent to the value of ^ artaba of sesame was
made to the lessee in connexion with the tax on dykes. In any case ^ art. of sesame cannot
represent the amount of the tax on the whole KXrjpos, which may be guessed from the amount
of the rent to have been nearly 80 or even loo arourae. The rate of the x^/iuriKoV was
often I obol per aroura (P. Petrie III. 108. 2, &c., and 112. 13, note), whereas the value of
i art. of sesame according to the ratio given in 1. 23 would be about if art. of wheat, or
slightly over 3 drachmae, which at tlie rate of r obol per aroura represents a t.ixing-area of
about 20 arourae.
23. The conversion of 51 art. 6 choen. of sesame into 17^ art. of wheat implies a
proportion in values of about 3^: i. The value of sesame is here lower than that in Rev.
Laws xxxix. 3, liii. 16, where an artaba of sesame is priced at 8 dr., ordinarily equivalent to
4 art, of wheat. Moreover, the artaba of sesame in Rev. Laws contained only 30 choenices,
that in 119 40 choen.; cf. 1. 18, note.
25. The meaning of this number, which is written at the bottom of the papyrus some
distance below 1. 24, is not clear.
120. Account of Goats.
Mummy A. Height 15 cm. b. c. 250-49 (249-8).
An account rendered to Hipponicus, probably by his steward, of the changes

that had taken place in a herd of goats during a period of several months in
the 36th year of Philadelphus. The papyrus is broken into numerous fragments
of which we print three, the rest providing no new information of interest. The
goats are classified by colours as white, black, brown, streaked, grey, and mole-
coloured (1. 15, note) ; cf. the list of horses in P. Petrie IL 35. At the beginning
the herd numbered 80, and it increased partly through the birth of kids, partl\'
through presents to the owner cf. 123. Lines 30-33, which perhaps end the
;
document, state that Botrys (the goat-herd ?) had reported three deaths.
Fr. (a). Fr. (/;). Col. i.
('Etovs) \<t, \6yos 'IiTTToviKOii L-^

6vp
tS)v virap-ôvaoov irpoaeyii'Oi'TO
aiyan' kul rpdyooi'- aiye^ dnu êt'tcoj''
XiUKai 1^.
. Trapa Zi~juoBd>pov
320 HIBEH PAPYRI
fieXaii'ai '.
15 (rndXaKa a,
TTvppal [. XevKT] a.
TTOlKlXai ^ Kul dirb 7779
.... Kai ( (.nLyoi/rj^
(nroSiai [. fjLeXaii'ai [.
/ -n. [rrotKi]Xai '.
r.
\. . :ai
TTvppd a.
dnb îi'icoi' X(VKii a,
/ ^
Fr. (/;) Col. ii. Fr. (c).
30 diî]i'eyKei' Se
irpoaeyivovyTO B6rpv9 rereAff-

dnb êuicou irapd rrjKvia? ar/a<i
KpiTCoiô^ (paev e? rp^h.

X^VKol ;.
13. ^(v'lav. for the burdens entailed by the custom of giving presents to ofiicials
cf. P. Petrie II. 10 (i) and P. Tebt. 5. 184, note.
15. aniikaKu: this form, which should be nominative sing, fern., is probably an error
for aTvtiKaKT]', cf. P. Petrie II. 35 (<?). iii. 2, where Wilcken reads amiXnK . V 7ra)X(<ii') ; in
{d) 5, where ontlXuKos context
occurs, the is obscure. Ilesychius sa)s iliat amiXuKes,
properly '
moles,' was used for dSos 'imruv.
121. Private Account.
Mummy A 4. Fr. ((?) 30-5 X 8-5, Fr. (/>) io-8 x 9 rw. u. c. 251-0 (250-49).
An account, probably rendered by a servant to his master, of expenditure

for various purposes. The two groups of entries on the recto arc separated by
a long space left blank. On the verso is a detailed account of miscellaneous
household expenses from the 14th to the 19th days of a month, like P. Petrie
in. 137-40. The handwriting
is a large irregular cursive, probably of the
though the reading of the date in 1, 1 is not quite certain.

reign of Philadclphus,
Whether the writing on r. {h) is i)art of the same column as that on Fr. {a)
121. ACCOUNTS 321
or of a second column isnot clear but the interval between ;
11. 45 and 46 is in
any case trifling, since both refer to the same day.
Fr. {a). Recto.
[(Etov^)] Ae, napa 'Ayxaxpio? {irvpcov ?) v

{Spaxfxal ?) p, Siu 'iypa.yâ's
^Jj]p aXvcTLov {8paxfJ-a9) /x,
no . pt'o]y [Spaxfia's) XfB,
5 AXe^di/Spcoj] (Spaxfio,^) r],
Kal ifxol Sia Il'oXXri^ {Spaxfâ^) S,
Ky TTapa TicoT[o]^ {Spaxfâs) S,
KT dXXas [.]
e'Aaêy (Spaxfia?) ^, I ifiol [[e]]i6,
10 'laiScopcoL i/S, ALOvvaoiL 77,
^ttI tov KavvaKrjv (Spaxfâs) S^
[Z(o]iXm {8pax/Jid9) 8, Al81 {8paxfid9) 77,
[" '] .' {Spax/xds ?) 8. '
Verso. Col. i.
7ra[ 15 letters [.
]y ,
IS nTicrr]{ ) {T^TapTOv), eXaiou xo< [ ,

)
Kal e/y rbi' (nv8ov.LTr}v [. ,
Oipjiov {TerapTov), k[i]ki {TirapTOp), ?;..[.]..,

oh[o]9 (oôXhs) {TeTapTov),
/ i^P'^XM) a (jeTpcoôXoi/) {TeTaprov).

20 i. ^Xaiotf 7rai{Sioi9) {rj/xicoîXiop), Kal naifSioi^) {r)fiia>l3iXLor),
'HpaKXd{8r]L) Sxjrov (o/JoAoy), klkl {riTapTov),
Bipiiov {riTapTov), ^vXa {rhapTOv),
iXacov xo< )
{rhapTov), 6vvx,l]v{ ) re . . [(o^SoAoy),
oho7 {ofSoXos) {reTapTov),
25 y {TrevTa>ôXov) (riTaproy).
^T. eXaioi^ 7ra{i8ioi9) {rj/xiooîXtou), Kal TTai8i{ois;) {riUKoP^XLov),

Y
322 HIBEH PAPYRI
BepfLoi' {rkrapTOv), 'IXatov \ol[ )
{r^raprov),
'HpaKXd[8r]i) (rjfiicolSiXLoy), \6pTOS {riraprov),

KLKL {r^Taprov), oipos aoi (o;3oAo9) {iip.LCi)î\iov),
30 ipyaTrji (r}fj.i(o(3Xiov), KpapL^r] [rirapTov),
Koi 'iXaiov (TirapTou), dpros /J-ol (rerapToy),
^vXa (jfiTapTov),
/ (nei^TcoôXou) [r]fXL(oêXiov).
i^. fpiOoL9 kpiodv {T(Tpa>(3oXou) {T]fiLco^XLOi/), ^vXu [. ,
35 e[XaCou 7rai{8ioLS:) (-quicoêXiou), Kal naiSioi? (r]nmîXiov)^

k\lki\ {r^raprov), 6epiJ.[o\v [riTapTov), Xl- ]
? {rirapTOv ?),
[. . .] .
X9RT?f (TiTapTou), [.] . a[.] ...[..
[. .] . . a[. . .] iXaiov oyjrcoi {j^TapTov),
[ofj'oy] aol {oôXo^ ?) (jjjjLicoîXiou) (reTaprou), (pSpedpa (SvolSoXoi),
40 pa(pd[vLa) \. ,] 'iXaiov e/y ( )

{rerapTov),
Kal e/y rd opviBia (riraproy),

/ {hpayjiaC) /3 {r]/xicol3iXiov).
[i]t]. eX\a]ioi/ 7rai{S[oi9) (f]/jLtcoîXLOp), naiSLOC^ [{rj/iicoêXiov),
.[....]. {rirapTOv), pa(f)dvL{a) (rirapTOi^), kik[i .

,
45 [ II letters ] . [.]/?r?7'
Fr. {b). .
'HpaKXiS7]t
.........
(r]picoêXioi'), oiu[o]9 aoi (SvoôXoi),
oôv {T}pL(o(3eXL0i'), dXcpira [rjpiMlSeXiou)^ 'iXaiov aol [rirapTov),
[e'lAttior 6y\r(jL)i (r)jjLi<j)(3eXLou), -rraiSioi? Kva6o{s) (reraprou),
/^ (Spa\/J.rj) a {jpLwôXov) {i]pL<o^^XLOv) (reraproi^).
50 16. pdvrjTiS (oôXos) {T]fiia>^XLOu), Kpafi^T] {rirapTov),
Koi (tXaiov {TerapTOv), ^vXa (^r]p.i(ol3eXLOi/) (TirapTov),
olyos (Tol [6ôXb<i) (hfiKo^^Xiov), piaai {6^0X69), a . . [. . ,
^Xaiov 6pvi{6ioi9) (jiTapTou), Kal e/y âXa{vdou) {jiTaprov),

KpiOal [riTaprov), /xiXi (o/3oAoy) {T^Taprov), Xil3a[v(o(Tb9) .
,
55 yi^yyiÂt? [
Tvt[Xoi/
potd {TeTaproi'), [
121. ACCOUNTS 323
48. (l7/it(B^X^0l') COIT. from {rtTaprov). 55, 1. yoyyv\U. 57. o of poia above the
line.
'
The 35th Anchophis for 50 artabae 100 drachmae, of which you wrote off
year, from
on account of Athur 40 dr., for a cup (?) 2 dr., to Alexander 8 dr., to me
for a ring
through Polle 4 dr.; 23rd, from Teos 4 dr.; 26th, in addition [.] dr.
'You received 60 dr., of which 15 were given to me, to Isidorus 12, to Dionysus 8,
for the cloak 4 dr., to Zoilus 4 dr., to Didis 8 dr., to ... 4 dr.
'(14th) ... to Peteise ... and for the linen garment
. . . ^ hot water
ob., oil , . . . ,
i ob., castor oil i ob., wine i^ ob. Total i dr. 4^ ob.

. . . 15th, oil for the children
i ob. and to the children i ob., to Heracleides for sauce i ob., castor oil i ob., hot water i ob.,
wood i ob., oil ... i ob., ... of onyx (.?) i ob., wine i| ob. Total 5^ ob. i6th, oil for the
children i ob. and to the children i ob., hot water i ob., oil ... i ob., to Heraclides
i ob., grass i ob., castor oil ^
wine for yourself i^ ob., to a labourer iob., cabbage
ob.,
i ob., and oil i ob., bread for myself i ob., wood i ob. Total 5^ ob. 17th, to the
wool-weavers 4^ ob., wood ... oil for the children i ob. and to the children \ ob.,
castor oil i ob., hot water \ ob., grass ^ ob., ... oil for a sauce \ ob., wine for
. . .
yourself i| ob., transport 2 ob., radishes [.] ob., oil for ... i ob. and for (cooking) the
birds iob. Total 2 dr. ^ ob. i8th, oil for the children iob., to the children -i ob.,
.
i ob., radishes i ob., castor oil
. . to Heraclides \ ob., wine for yourself 2 ob., . . . ,
sauce -lob., meal i ob., oil for yourself i ob., oil for a sauce \ ob., a cup for the children
i i
\ ob. Total I dr. 3I ob. 19th, bowls (?) li ob., cabbage ob., and oil ob., wood | ob.,
wine for yourself i-| ob., roots (?) i ob., ... oil for the birds i ob., and for a bath ^ôb.,
pomegranate i ob.
'
barley i ob., honey i^ ob., frankincense turnip beet . . . . . . . . . . .

.
4. Perhaps 7roTept[o]i', i. e. norriptov.

very doubtful whether a figure was ever inserted after nXXar.
8. It is
15- X'( ) is more probably a substantive in the dative than an adjective agreeing with
fKaiov. Perhaps x^îp'^'-), i- e- o'l ôt" (cooking) the pig'; cf. 1. 53 (\aiov 6pvi{diois). The
'
sign for i obol in this papyrus is the same as the writer's t, the right-hand portion of the
cross-bar being omitted.
probably cf. P. Petrie III. 140 (c). 6 vdmp 6epp[6v. It might also
17. 6fpp6u: sc. v8cop ;
mean a lupine. At the end of the line 'Hipja^XlnXSvO (jirapTov) is a possible, but not very
satisfactory, reading.
23. The doubtful r may be the sign for i obol (cf. note on 1. 15), in which case 6wx[i.v\
is probably for 6vvxiov, and e [{i]pi(oî\iov) ireTapTov) must follow. With the reading
. .
adopted om^îy is more likely to be an abbreviation of the adjective ovvxivoi.

in the text,
36. Possibly ^vT]pa {TeTapTov); cf. P. Petrie III. 140(a). 5 x^'^P'^ xi^^'ô^^)-
40. Cf. P. Petrie III. 140 (d). 2 pacpdvta wore e^r](Tai. After etV a word has been omitted
which was contrasted with to. opvidia in 1. 41.
50. pdvTjTts appears to be a plural of pdvrjs (or pav?is), meaning an earthenware vessel
(cf. 11. 4 and 48), a sense found in a passage quoted from Nicon by Athenaeus, p. 487 c
The existence of the genitive in -t]tos from this word has been a matter of doubt, which the
present passage will remove.
52. picrai is an unknown word possibly plCî was meant. ;
56. Tfi5T[Xoi' : o-evrXoi/ and o-fvrXioj/ are the forms used in the Petrie papyri.
Y 3
324 HIBEH PAPYRI
XI. DESCRIPTIONS OF DOCUMENTS
122. Mummy A. 7 x 14-7 cm. Beginning of an account of corn. Lines

1-5 AtctAoyos 6 TTpos '
ilpov Sia KCaaov Kp(t0rjs) (aprdjiai) [3, YloacLbuyvCoii
6k(vpCiv) (apTcilSas) e, KiaacoL oX^vpoiv) (aprdfias) y, aAAas KtVcrwt d\(vpS)v) y,

Kparr^L (iTvpm') (dpTul3as) y, 'ATroAAoSajpcot (-TTvpoii') {dprd/3os) . . The writing
is across the fibres. About B. C. 25a 8 Hnes.
123. Mummy A. 8-3 x S-6 cm. A
short account of sheep received by the
writer from different persons, some being bought. The text is Tlap' &v
i.\<X) TTpojiara' ÂttoXXmvlov a, ^(OTrdrpov a, 'Ake^dvhpov a, Kai Trapd tov vl[o]v
t[o]v Aeirtou rijnj'i a, uapd î-iiMi]TpLov in Kujia (cf. 56. 6) a, z,v6boTOS n/xjys' a,
'NiKavopos a. Writtai probably between B.C. 265 and 245. Complete.

10 lines.
124. Mummy A 9. 14x9-7 cm. Conclusion of a contract for the loan of
i8| artabae of olyra from Zenodorus (cf. 59) to Menonides ; cf. 86.
The text is ] . app-apn ..[11 letters -nldi'Toov p-irpMi, y3[a<rtAiKjWi, (dv [oe fxjj]
diiubcaL d7ro7io"aT[co T]tpi.-i]V [rys] dpTd^ri'i eKdariis bpa^pids [b]vo (cf. 86. 13,
note), KOI 7/ TTpdâ ea-ru) Zi][vo]bu>p<x>L koI dWoot. virep Zy]vob(o[pov] irapa
Mevcovlbov TT/ws- l3aaL\i[K]d (cf. 93. II). (2nd hand) "ApxnriTos <^lAofeVo^;
(cf. 130) Kvpi]vaLos tt/s (TTiyovijs ^ypa\}/a (TvvTdâ[vTo^] MevcavCbov. (3rd hand)
Mevctivibi]^ Yl^pcnjs t8tcor7/? tmv ZcotAou [j_e ..[.]... .1] dirobcoao) dkvpSiv dprdjias
beKaoKTio i]p.L(TV TirapTOV Kara to (xvp-iioXov tovto{v}. On the verso a partly

obliterated line and below Written about
it Merojz^toou (dpTd[3ai) n]L.b'.
Oxyrhynchite nome. 19 lines.

B.C. 250 in the
125. Mummy A (probably A 9). 12-9 x 8 cm. Conclusion of another similar
loan from Zenodorus to Menonides (cf. 124) for 31 J artabae of olyra with
signatures of Archippus and Menonides. On the verso (bpaxiJ-al) ju8 and
below Mevoiribov (d/jra/3at) \a[b'. Written across the fibres about B. C. 250
in the Oxyrhynchite nome. 17 lines.
126. Mummy A
(probably A 9). 4-5 x 9-2 cm. Fragment of another similar
loan from Zenodorus to Menonides (cf. 124), beginning Zi]vob(a]pm kol
d\\(i)L v\'7T'kp] Zyvobcopov irapd Mercufos 77[pacr]croi>n irpos jSacnXiKa. [MeVcojyos
also occurs in the signature of Archippus, but [Me]^'aJ^'l8?/s^ in that of
Menonides himself. On the verso M^vwvCbov a-vp-fioXa {dprdjiaL ?) (Spaxât)
I'd (0 corn). Written about B. C. 250 in the Oxyrhynchite nome.
9 lines.
DESCRIPTIONS OF DOCUMENTS 325
127. Mummy A (probably 9). 9-5 x 10-3 cm. A
Beginnings of lines of
a from Zenodorus (of. 59) to Cresilaus, ordering him to send certain
letter
persons under arrest; cf. 59-62. The text is (i) ZTjw'Stopôs] K/j?/(nAucot
XaCpeLV. [
TTeipevyaa-iv et? 'Oû-] (2) pvyxirov Kc6ixr]v 0a)A6)tr. /caAcoj
a[v ovv TTou/o-ats ] (3) avrovs TTefiyj/a^ irpos rjixas p.Ta (f)v[\aKi]g iird ovk
dXi-] {4) yov apyvpiov acprjpTâKOTiS et . .
[ (5) av uepl u)v av ?//xty ypd(t)r]i. . . . .
[
On the verso Kpr][(nXda}t. Written across the about B.C. 250

fibres in
the Oxyrhynchite nome. 6 lines, of which probably only about | is
preserved.
128. A
Mummy 17. 4x8-5 cm. Beginning of a contract dated in the 15th
year of Philadelphus (B.C. 271-0 or 270-69), corresponding to 99. 1-4
and probably written by the same person, perhaps a duplicate of 99.
4 lines.
129. Mummy A (found with 86). 9-3 x 7-4 cm. An acknowledgement by

a military settler of a loan of 15 artabae of olyra from Docimus cf. 86. ;
The text is 'A[7roAA]wwo? St/xou Mu(r6[s] rijs iiTLyovrjs AoK[il/xa)[t] \aipt.(i>\

e^ft) TTapa (tov oKvpGiv dprdfSas SeKaTrerre, tovtov be (rot tov (tItov aTToboKroi)
fx iJ.t]vl AaifTtcoi v TcSi ivcLTcoi, Ka[l] TpiaKoa-TGn r[i] (tItov Ka[6apov\ ju,er[p'cut
/3a(TLkiK&L bv d-noKaTaarr](T(a cto[i . . . Written in B c. 247 (246). Incomplete,

the end being lost. 10 lines.
130. Mummy A (probably A

9). 22-4x7 cm. Beginnings of lines of a letter
from Demophon to Ptolemaeus similar to 53, commencing [Ai]fj?,o(j)0}v
rTroAê/xaicoi âipeiv. dTria-TaXKO. aot to TrjpocrayyeÂjua ttjs TTpcarrii (?) b\i]piepov]
TOV 'A6vp TMV KalTaveveixrjKOTcov ? ] iv Tols kutci o-e [tottols. Treipw

ovv buyyvav] aa(f)akQs. wA^ts ck ttJ? [tj ape L[xivT]s . .
.] x^P'^^pdKOv [. .,
followed by a list of names arranged under kAt/poi (ex tov 'Hpa/cAetSou, e/c
TOV nroAe/jiat[ou, e/c tov Kvbpeovs, e/c tov ÂttoXXcovlov). Amongst the names
occurring are "Apxt-mros 4>tAoêV[ou (cf. 124), NeVrcop ' Ae7]va[Lov, rTcjui-ey?,
Maxdras and UaKajjus. Written about B. C. 247. 27 lines.

131. Mummy A 2. 18-5 x 10-9 cm. Part of a letter to an official mentioning
the chief-priest at Phebichis (cf 72. 1-2). The text is n>r oViptos tov
'Api'[wr]on apxicpdoos x [ -] ^^' 'I'e/Stxet. KaXm av Troa/crafi?] et aot
<t)aiVTaL (TVVTdâs 'lpL0v6i]t [j ^ letters] ixeTpijaat [ll letters] eXaiov hi h fl>u6}(f)i.
ixr]vl [10 letters] oIkovoixos [. Written about B. C. 245. 8 lines.

132. Mummy
A. Fr. (a) 8.5 x 15-5 cm. Two fragments containing parts
of two columns of a list of payments for various taxes, including the
ivvup-Lov (cf. 52, introd.), the tax of -^^ (/<'' ; cf. 80, 95, and 112. 38, note), and
the <r' (i. e. exr?/) <^lAa8eA<^(col) (cf. 109) for which 3 obols are paid at TaAaw
by nroAe/xnios koI Âvhpoixaxos, and 1 dr. 3 ob. at ^wdpv by êp.(p6ivs,
326 HIBEH PAPYRI
besides oXvov nixriv (i.e. the value of wine paid for the e'/cT)]), for which
4 drachmae are paid at îvapv by ' and another person

ApcpLKonTris
respectively. The village of Movxtvapv^, the proper name ^^coô'i?, and

the 30th year (of Philadelphus) are also mentioned. Written about
B. c. 255.
133. Mummy A 5. 10-9 xy-2 cm. Beginnings of lines of part of a petition

to Eutychus, dioecetes (?), from a farmer of the beer-tax (cf. 106, introd.).
The text is Evtvx^ml 8t[oiK7;r?/t \aLp(Lv.] ÔKorwTrt? Fla^w^ . . . airo kco/xjjs ?]
^J3ivvvT0v ab[LKov[xaL itt' 'A77oAAoj]rtou Tov OLKOvoiJ.[ovvTO'i Ti]v 'IIpaKXeijSov
fxepiba Kal Ato[l4 letters] î\af3ov ti]v (yjiTpav tov . . (hovs) a-nb] Mecropr} eco?
[17 letters] . vos (8pax/xw;') coA[ 15 letters /<a]r<Tr7;[. On the verso Evrv'xwt]
TTapa I,oKov(aTno9 '7r/-(6s) 'AttoAAwz'ioz'. For Mesore as the beginning of
a financial year cf. note on 116. 3-4, and pp. 360-1. Written about
B. c. 250.
134. Mummy A 4. 7-5 x 4-4 cm. Fragment of the beginning of a contract

written between the 19th and 27th year of Philadelphus; cf. 94. 4-5,
note. The text is BaaiKevovlros TlToXeixaiov tov YlToK^fxaCov koI tov vlov]
nTo\eixaio[v hovs . . i(p' Upio)s 21 letters] 'AXe^dvbp[ov kol dewv 'Ab^XcfySiv
Kai'i](f)6pov 'Apcrti'o//? 4>tXa]8eAôu ^tXoj^jtpas rijs 30 letters] ev 'A0/)o8tV)j[s Tro'Aei
31 letters] 'Ap/xatos Ap[.

135. Mummy A 4. x 4-4 cm. Two fragments of an account,
Fr. (a) 9-5
containing a list of names and sums of money, each entry in Fr. {a)
beginning with kc, i. e. the 25th of the month. The names Tepavs (v corr.
from s?) and riereap/xws occur. Written about B.C. 250. On the verso
part of another account.
136. Mummy A 15. 10-5 x 8-8 same formula as
cm. Receipt, having the
106, for 20 drachmae paid by and 141), agent of
Petosiris (cf 137, 139,
Tacmbes, for CvTi]pd, 11 drachmae (heKaixiau) being on account of
Pharmouthi, and 9 on account of Pachon, to NtKo'Aao? rp(a7reCtVj/s) and
I,T0T07JTis 8o(Ki]ua(r7-^s) at Phcbichis cf. 106, introd. At the end are the
;
signature of Dorion {napovTos Acoptco^'os to avTo (bpax[xa\) t\-o(Tt), and a line

of demotic. Dated Pachon 13 of the 3rd year (of Euergetes), i.e.
B. c. 244 (243). The writing is across the fibres. Practically complete.
9 lines.
137. Mummy A 15. 10-3x7 cm. A similar receipt for 18 drachmae

Xa{KKov) ei? k . . (the figures are hopelessly effaced but were probably
k8 (TtTapTov) ; cf. 106. 8) paid by Petosiris, agent of Tacmbes, for C^^rjpa
on account of Pachon to Nicolaus and Stotoctis ; cf 106, introd. At

the end are the signature of Dorion and a line of demotic. Dated
Pachon 30 of the 3rd year (of Euergetes),

i.e. B.C. 244 (243). The
writing is across the fibres. Nearly complete, but much obliterated.
9 lines.
138. Mummy A 15. 97 x 7-5 cm. A similar receipt for 8 drachmae
Xo{Kkov) ets Kh (riTapTov) paid by 'Apvb(oTT]s, agent of Taembes, for {brr/pa
on account of Athur to Uda-oiv Tpa-neîrris and 2roro^ri? 8oKt/xao-r^9 at
Phebichis ; cf. 106, introd. At the end are the signature of Dorion and
a line of demotic. Dated on Athur 24 of the 2nd year (of Euergetes),
i. e. B. C. 246 (245). Practically complete. 9 lines.
139. Mummy A 15. 9.5 x 6-2, cm. Another similar receipt for 9 drachmae
of copper for Cvrnpa on account of Phaophi paid 'HpaKAetcjt [TpaTTi(\irr]L koI
Ni/(o[Aaa)t hoK]iixa(TTrii at Phebichis by Petosiris, agent of Taembes, from

Talae ; cf. 108, introd. At the end are the signature of Dorion and
a line of demotic. Written across the fibres about B.C. 247. Incomplete,
the beginnings of the first 5 lines being lost. 1 1 lines.
140. Mummy A 15-7x8 cm.

15. Another similar receipt for 19 dr.
5^ obols on account of Phaophi paid to Pason and Stotoetis
for (vT-qpa
by Ai(3vs, agent of Taembes cf. 106, introd. At the end are the signa-
;
ture of Dorion and a line of demotic, and on the verso is a line of demotic.
Dated on Athur 16 of the 2nd year (of Euergetes), i.e. B.C. 246 (245).
Written across the fibres. Practically complete. 14 lines.
141. Mummy A 15. 11 x6-y cm. Another similar receipt for 15 dr. 3 ob.
paid for C^Tijpa on account of Pachon by Petosiris, agent of Taembes,
to Nicolaus and Stotoetis cf. 106, introd. At the end are the signature
;
of Dorion and a line of demotic. Dated on Pachon 22 of the 3rd year

(of Euergetes), i. e. B. C. 244 (243). Written across the fibres. Complete.
10 lines.
142. Mummy A 15. ii-ix6-7 cm. Another similar receipt for 12 dr. for
CvTrjpd paid ['Hp]aKAetcoi Tpaire(LTrjL kol [NjtKoAacoi boKiixaarrji ; cf. 139 and
106, introd. At the end is the signature of Dorion and a line of demotic.
Written across the fibres about B.C. 247. Nearly complete, but much
obliterated. 10 lines.
143. Mummy A 15. 4-7 x 6-^ cm. Receipt for (pvXaKLTiKov paid by a military
settler probably at Phebichis, similar to 105. The text is ("Etovs) i^
Meaop^ Ky. 6//oAoyet 'HpaKAei^rjs fKn^Tprja-Oai Tiapd MeveKparovs 'Ap-qov
l\{dpxov) (cf. 105. 3, note) to (f)v\aKiTt[Kdv . . . The i6th year probably
refers to Euergetes (B.C. 232-1 or 231-0). Incomplete, the end being
lost. 5 lines.
144. Mummy A 15. 4*3 x 7-9 cm. Beginning of a notice of loss, similar to
328 HIBEH PAPYRI
36 and 37. Lines 1-4 ("Erous) it? riax[wr? . .] 7Tpocr'ayye]A//a Tiapa 'A/;eyi;co[s]
*kpii.iv(Ti (l>vXaKiT-qi KC0/1JJ9 TciXt] (cf. 36. 3, note) aTroAcoAfeVamt (1. -Kevai ;
cf.
37. 5). The iHth year probably refers to Euergetes (13. C. 230-29 or
229 -<S). 5 lines.
145. Mummy A. Fr. (a) 4-8 x 9-3 cm. Seven fragments of a contract, of
which one contains part of the protocol, [Bao-tAevorro? rTroAejjutatou tov
nroAe/xat[ou Kal ' Ps.p(Tiv6r]s 'Oeoiv 'ASeAf/joH' tov^] TpiTOV (e0') iepea>9 'Ap^ffAaou
TOV Ariixov ? 'AXe^dvbpov koI 6co]i- 'Abe\(f'^v Kavqcôpov 'Ap[(nrojs <^tAa8eA(/)ou
'Apo-12'oTjs ?] T7/S Uo\ixoKpuTov{s) /x7?i{o'5 'A/p[re/:xt(n'ou . . . ,

i. e. B. C. 245-4
(244-3). The restorations of the priests' names are taken from Revillout's
dem. P. Louvre 2431 {C/irrsL dcui, pp. 265 sqq., Rev. ^gypt.
edition of
I. p. 7), where they are assigned to the 4th year; cf. p. 373. On the
absence of the mention of the QôX Evepyirai here cf. 171, which was
written in the 5th year and mentions them, and p. 369.
146. Mummy 97. 11x9-4 cm. much mutilated letter from Tt}x.avhpo<i, A
dated (tVovs) Ae 'TneplSep^TaLov kO, U[a](om k0, i.e. B.C. 250 (249). On this
double date cf. App. i. p. 341. 14 lines.
147. Mummy 5, 12-7x6 cm. Conclusion of a letter, of which the text is
X(Lpoyp[a](j)i]a(t>, ov yap hiaT:iaTe^^^')\ovcnv i]\j1v. Atorvo-oocopos 8e ovk tcTTiv
a8tKo[9, aA]Aa awTao-o-e [roi^s] -napa aoX <^\v]\aKa<; (fwXdrra^LV Kal Trpofo-je'xety tva
lj.[i} (Tvn]i3iiL i]fxXv TTfi . [. . .]0?]vai. On the verso are the beginnings of
3 lines, and on a detached fragment parts of 3 more. Early third
century B. C.
148. Mummy 5. 5-3 X 24 cm. Fragment of a contract of apprenticeship.

Lines 3-6 e]dy 8e rt kX^tttmv .
[ ]ix(vos aKL(TKr\Tai 7rpo(ra7roret<ra[rco to
bL]TT\ovv, kôvcria 6' ecrrco Wopooi ixi'jTe diToK[o]n[i]v pn'jTe d(pr]ixp[vLV

(ikcifSos 1X1]
avfv T^s 'E-nilfx^vovs yvu)p.T]S, ei h\ ixij d-noTeiadToy r?/? ix[h> ?/]juepas (TpicofSoXov)
Tijs 8e 2{vKro9 . ,] eôuiria 8' earoi 'ETTi/xeVet iafx fxi] dp(f^K . . Early third
century B.C. 6 lines.
149. Mummy 14X10-H cm.

A. Two fragments of an account,
Fr. (î)
consisting of a series of names grouped under different days, with a few

lines of another account in a different hand. The names I,ovTcoT\dya,
AaAiiTKo?, 'Oppoju/3T^9 and 'O-iet's occur. Written about B. C. 250. On the
verso parts of two much obliterated columns of a document.
150. Mummy 13. 15-1x9-5 cm. Duplicate of 85. written in a different
hand, in B.C. 261 (260). Practically complete (but without the demotic
note). 21 lines.
151. Mummy 13. 7-5 x 10-5 cm. Fragment of a letter, of which the text is
jxi] irapayiveaOat o(/r. . . .Jko 'A7r[o]AAu)ri8T/r Tpvyi'iaovra tov a/x7reAcora. ei ovv

riv kiTL\diprjcnv Trotet evTVê e/cetVcot KaTa\d\i](Tov, a-vvTeTdxâjxer yap . . . Written

about E. C. 25c. 6 lines.
152. Mummy 98. 8-8 x 9-2 cm. Beginning of a letter, of which the text is
XaptKkrjs Mlvo-cl xaipeiv. (p(3aXov et? to ttXoIov dXas kol Xmtov ottcos ^xuxtlv
[ol] vavTn]yoL, Kal 7re[pt] roiv ^vXcav u)V i>[. On the verso Mi.v(Tl. Written
about B. c. 250. 6 lines.
153. Mummy 117. 10-7 x io-2 cm. Account of sums collected by an
agent of two government officials, beginning ("Erovs) ft 4>a&)0t kO, Ao'yo?
apyvpfô]v Tov [XeXo^yevixivov bta 'AperScorrji; (1. -Swrov) rod TTap[a 'Ay]x(a(f)L09
ohovopLOV KOL YlaTftcvv [tov ft]aa[i]XLKdv ypap.p[aTia (1. TlaTftevros tov ftaaiXiKOV
ypapLp-uTecas), followed by a list of six persons who pay i dr. or 3 obols.
The 2nd year no doubt refers to Euergetes (b. C. 246 or 245). Written
on the verso, the recto being blank. Nearly complete. 10 lines.
154. Mummy 117. 7-8x8.6 cm. notice from Epichares to Chaeremon A
similar to 80, but with Uaai]s Ap in the place of ^Xlpo? Tewro?. . . . .
Written probably in the 35th (revenue) year of Philadelphus (cf. 80. 5

and 13-4, note), i. e. B.C. 251-0. Nearly complete. 9 lines, of which the
last two are demotic.
155. Mummy 117. 8.2 x9 cm. Another similar notice from Epichares to
Chaeremon, much mutilated. Dated in the 35th (revenue) year (of
Philadelphus), Athur (b. C. 251). 7 lines, the demotic note being
omitted.
156. Mummy 117. Fr. {a) 4-1 x 8-6 cm. Two fragments of an acknowledge-
ment by a ravKXripos similar to 98. The text is Fr. (a) tov irapd
TOV ftatriXiKov] ypaiX}xaTi(as wore eis ^ AX^^d[vppî\p.v\ et? to ftamXtKov K[pi.d(av]
(dpTafta^) e7rraKt(r;(iAta9 TrVTaKo[(Tias] ctItov Kadapov Ka[i dbo\Xov K^KOCTKivevp-ivov

(cf. 98. 1 1-4), Fr. {b) ] . a-<TKîxi . [. .] ia(})payL(TpL[ev . . .
,
juerjpojt koi o-KvrdArjt
olf [avTos riviyKaTO . . . (cf. 98. 2o). Written about the 34th year of
Philadelphus (B.C. 252-1 or 251-0).
157. Mummy 18. 4-7xj6-t cm. Parts of two columns of an account, of
which the text is (Col. i) ("Etou?) k/3. ela-^vipoxa [ejt? tov kv ttjl avXf]L [o-jtroy
ex TOV Ihiov (TTTopov 6Xv[pQ)v) {dpTaftas) oh, [koX ?] e/c tov Upov a (rvvrjyaysv . . .
(Col. ii) {(Tovi) Kft. 77a[pa . ^/r . . . dcrevt^'oxa (irvpov) irapd (with ](/)tAoi)[. .
above the line) UoXipcovos tov ex [Ta]Xdovs (cf. 36. 3, note) . . . The 22nd
year refers to Philadelphus (B.C. 264-3 or 263-2). On the verso two
lines of another account.
158. Mummy 18. 8-5x19 cm. Fragment of a letter or memorandum
concerning wheat and olyra of the 32nd, 33rd, and 34th years (of
Philadelphus). Written about B.C. 251. 10 lines, of which the last
330 HIBEH PAPYRI
four are complete. In the right-hand margin and on the verso is some
effaced writing.
159. Mummy 18. Breadth 7-2cm. Three fragments of a letter from Zoilus
to Plutarchus (cf. 63, introd.). Lines 6-10 o-Trep/â?] airav (TriKeKoixixevov koI
h)(^pa.ov, davfj-dCoi ovv ei Titrrreiêts. r/ftets yap eSwKa/xey Addressed on the
. . .
verso n\o]vTdpxM('. Written in the reign of Philadelphus, probably about

B.C. 265.
160. Mummy 10. 11x6-9 cm. Receipt issued to Clitarchus (cf 66, introd.)
for a money payment, of which the text is 'HpaKXeobcopos KAeirapx^^t
\aipiiv. ^x^ TTapa UroXeixaiov tov NtKoAaou x^^'^^^ (V^XM0 TpiaKocrla^
T(T(rapd[Koi'Ta. Addressed on the verso KAeirapxcot. Written about B.C.

230. Apparently nearly complete. 8 lines.
161. Mummy 10. 7-2x7 cm. Fragment of a letter to Clitarchus similar
to 69. The text is ] KAeirapx'^t xaipeiv. irapayivov tt/i k9 tov âiîv^d . . .
Written about B. C. 230. 4 lines.
162. Mummy 10. Fr. (a) 24-5 x 8-7 cm. Two fragments of another letter
to Clitarchus, concluding rj]s a-Trox?!? tG>v 'A (bpaxpiwv) wv aj-aêpei? 8e8a)Kws
19 (7Tt(TK(V}]v t^7ôrpo^tc^)^', kol p-i] aAAws ttoii/o-jjis. eppcoao. (hovs) id Ylavvh.
(b. C. 228 or 227.)

163. Mummy 10. 8-2 x 7-9 cm. Conclusion of a letter to Clitarchus similar
to 70 (a) and (d), ending Trepi Kwpjy TpoireOvp-Lv tov 'IIpaKAeoTroAiVou
(Spaxiuwr) k k (i. e. eiKoo-rrj!-) [hpaxP-nv) a. ippioao. (hovs) 11/ 'Advp k (B. C.
230 or 229). Cf 70 (<^), introd. 6 lines.
164. Mummy 10. 16-3x8 cm. A demotic document of 9 lines, below

which is KofSas ^'tn-eo-coCro? [hpaxp-ol?) p . ,
rieroo-tpet (et corr. from 109) Kal
oropraictit. Written about B. C. 230.

165. Mummy 10. x 7-7 cm. Receipt, similar to 103, from Apollonfdcs
13-3
to EiiTToAe/xos', acknowledging the payment of ii| artabac of wheat
(probably for 4>v\aKLTiK6v and iarpiKo'2;) from I,Ti)aTioi on behalf of
Diodorus, paid through Fupolis Kc,)pLn{ypafxixaTevs). Dated Phaophi ii
of the i6th year (of Eucrgetes), i.e. B.C. 232 (231). Nearly complete.
8 lines.
166. Mummy A 9. 19x10-2 cm. Duplicate of 119, written about B. c. 260.
Nearly complete. 23 lines. On the verso part of another account.

167. Mummy A 9. 4 x 7-6 cm. Beginning of a letter from Demophon to
Ptolcmacus (cf. 51, introd.), of which the text is A?j/:xo0(Sy riroAeâtcot
Xaipetv. avdyaye puTO. 'App.iV(Tios tov otto [t]ov 'I(Tieiov cfw{XaKiT0v) kol [xera
' AXe^dvbpov TOV U TaAao) to. Upo)Toy^vovs kol TaaTpMvos Trpo'/iara iidvTa cis. . .
Written about B. C. 245. 7 lines.

168. Mummy A 9. 6 x 28 cm. Another letter from Demophon to Ptole-

maeus ordering him to send a herdsman cf. 50. The text is Ar^/xoc^wy
;
riToAe/xatcot xaipuv. '' Ap\xiva[iv about 20 letters vi^jxovTa ra Kapv^dhov tov

XoyevTov Trp6(3aTa ws av dray/{a)ts ti]v e7TtoToA7/y aTrocrretAoz'] els 'O^fpvyx'^y
TToAty ixTa (pvkaKTJs. crvvTlTayjiv yap 'Aju/xwrio? 6 olKOv6fx[os] 8ia to [ ]
Tiva avTm ^^ effaced letters [ J

koX tovto ottcos pj] Ttapepycos ea-raL,
aWa ap.a rip.4pai -ndpex^ [avrov.] ^pp(oa[o. Written across the fibres about
B. c. 245. Incomplete. 6 lines.
169. Mummy A 9. 6x14-2 cm. Part of a letter to some officials with

regard to the collection of money-taxes, mentioning oUovop-ovvTos ti]v kcltm
Toirapxiav (sc. of the Oxyrhynchite nome). Dated Thoth 8 of the 31st (?)
year (of Philadelphus) (B.C. 255 or 254). The writing is across the fibres.
5 lines, of which about half is preserved.
170. Mummy A 9. 15 x ii'8 cm. Conclusion of a letter, ending (ppovna-ov
be OTTCOS pLrjKiTt OTTO TovToov TTapaK0v<7(i T]p.5)vlvap.i] dvTi (f)L\[as e^dpov [7T0U)]p.eda.
TOVTov yap ovieKev irpo ttoWov (Toi ypdcfyoo. eppaao. (erovs) \9 Q(x)vd trj
(B.C. 247). 12 lines.

171. Mummy 6-txi2-5 cm. Beginning of a contract written in B.C.
A.
2432 (242-1), of which the text is Baaikivovros IlroAe/jiatou rod nroAejuatou
Kal 'Ap(Ttô'?JS Oewv Âb(\cf)(av (eVov?) e (/)' lepe'co? 'ApLarajSovkov tov AtoSoVou
'Akf^dvbpov Kal 6eS>v 'Abek(f)0)v Kal Oeiov EvepyeTwv Kavqcôpov ^ Ap(nv6r]['i
îkahik(f)]ov ^lapLvias ttjs 'Ttto . .

[ ]
p.r]i'bs A(aLo[v] v 'HpaK^kiovs Tro'Aei.
This is the earliest instance of the association of the 6eol EvepyeTac with
Alexander and the deol 'Abekcpoi cf. 145, where the deal Evepyhai are not
;
yet mentioned in a papyrus of the 3rd year, and p. 369. The writing
is across the fibres.
APPENDIX I
The Macedonian and Egyptian Calendars.

Of all the problems connected with Ptolemaic Egypt few are more obscure
than the relation of the Macedonian to the Egyptian calendar before the reign
of Eiiergetes when the Macedonian year starting from Dius was finally
II,
equated to Egyptian annus vagus of 365 days.

the So perplexing and
apparently contradictory were the items of information gained from double
dates on both calendars in papyri and inscriptions, that in ICS98 Strack {RJiein.
Mus. liii. pp. 399-431), when trying to introduce order into the chaos, took
refuge in the extremely complicated hypothesis that two different sets of both
I'vgyptianand Macedonian months with the same names were in current use.
The evidence available to Strack was however very imperfect, since out of
14 double dates within the period under review only 6 could be certainly
assigned to particular years, and even in these 6 there were several doubtful
readings of the figures. In 1903 J. Krall {FcstscJir. f. O. Hirschfeld, pp.
113-122) was able to show from some fresh double dates in the Amherst papyri
and a Berlin papyrus that an attempt was made during the early part of
Philometor's reign to equate the Macedonian to the ICgyptian months but ;
though justly rejecting the views of Strack, he could make nothing of the
relations of the Egyptian and Macedonian calendars before the time of
riiilometor. Now, however, with the large additional material provided by
the Magdola, the new Petrie and the present Ilibeh papyri together with
unpublished Tebtunis papyri deciphered by Professor Smyly, who will col-
laborate with us in the publication of them, the conditions of the problem
are quite altered. Professor Smjdy [Hcrniathcna,
1905, pp. 393-8) has recently
discussed the double dates in the reigns of Iq:)i[)hanes and Philometor, and
proved that for a period of at least 16 years (from the 24th year of Epiphanes
to the 5,th year of the joint reign of Philometor, Euergetes II, and
Cleopatra, which = the 16th of Philometor) the Macedonian months starting
APPENDIX I 333
from Dystrus were assimilated to the Egyptian months of the vague year
starting from Thoth. Our object in the present appendix, in which we have
had the benefit of Professor Smyly's assistance, is to collect the evidence for the
whole period from Alexander to Euergetes II, and to show that (i) it is
unnecessary to suppose the existence of more than one Egyptian and, until
the reign of Epiphanes, one Macedonian set of months in order to explain the
double dates (2) the general tendency of the movements of the Macedonian year
;
was to lose in relation to the Egyptian, i. e. to revolve more slowly, though some
exceptions occur owing to the irregularity of intercalations (3) the character
;
and limits of the variations in the Macedonian year are now so far determined
that from about the middle of Philadelphus' reign to the 4th year of Philopator
Macedonian months can, if the year of the reign is known, henceforth in most
cases be converted into their approximate equivalents on the Egyptian calendar.
While the truth of any general hypothesis with regard to the relations of
the iMacedonian and Egyptian calendars can only be thoroughly established
by verification through new evidence, the first test which must be applied to
it is its ability to form the extant double dates into an intelligible and more
or less consistent series. To attempt to prove uniformity of relation between

the two calendars would be of course out of the question our aim is to show that,
;
in spite of the irregularities which must be conceded in any case, the trend of
their relations to each other can now to a large extent be determined. Accord-
ingly, in opposition to Strack's hypothesis that there were throughout two sets of
both Egyptian and Macedonian months, we start from the far more probable and
simpler assumption that there was originally but one set of each. This beino-
granted, the Egyptian calendar year of 12 months can be no other than the
ordinary vague year of î^^ days beginning with Thoth i. Though the
knowledge of the true solar year of 2,^^^ days was of extreme antiquity in
Egypt, and an attempt was made in the reign of Euergetes I, as is shown by
the Canopus Inscr., 11. 40 sqq., to substitute it for the vague year, there is
no evidence that it ever penetrated, as Strack supposes, from the field of
astronomy and religion into common use under the Ptolemies and it is now
;
almost universally admitted that the vague year continued its course uninter-
rupted until the introduction of the Julian calendar into Egypt by Augustus
in B.C. 23. With regard to the length of the Macedonian year nothing is
definitelyknown. Following the ordinary view, which has much probability,
that was like other Greek calendar years lunar, we suppose it to have
it
contained apart from intercalations 12 months of alternately 29 and 30 days,

making 354 days in all. Recently some confirmation of this view has been
obtained from its suitability to the double dates grouped together as no. (16)
334 HIBEH PAPYRI
on our Table cf, p. 345. In these Tubi j2 corresponds to Gorpiaeus 2<S, but
;
Tubi 13 of the same year to Gorpiaeus 30. As Dittenberger has pointed out
{Orient. Gr. Iuser. I. p. 650), it is probable that there is here no inconsistency,
and that the last day of a month containing only 29 days was called the
30th. Since Gorpiaeus is the nth month of the Macedonian year, it is most
likely that the months with 29 days were the ist, 3rd, 5th, &c., rather than,
as Strack supposes, the 2nd, 4th, 6th, &c. If the 29th day was omitted in
months with 29 days, the mention of Peritius 29 in P. Petrie III. 21 {b). 8 and of
Hyperberetaeus 29 in 146 indicates that these months (the 4th and 12th) had
30 days. A year of 360 days seems to be implied by 28. 20-1 ; but this
is not likely to be connected with the Macedonian year.
Assuming therefore an Egyptian year of 365 days and a Macedonian year
of 354, we have, at Professor Smyly's suggestion, constructed a chronological
table of correspondences, which shows the days of the Egyptian months on
which the each Macedonian month would, apart from intercalations, fall
ist of
in every instance of a double date by both calendars. This Table much
more clearly than a mere list of the double dates exhibits the variations which
took place between any two points, and illustrates at a glance both the general
tendency of the Macedonian months to lose, i. e. fall later in the Egyptian year,
and the occasional instances in which this tendency is reversed, and the Mace-
donian year moves from one point to another more rapidly than the Egyptian.
Since the Macedonian year was apart from intercalations 1 1 days shorter than
the Egyptian, it would, if left to itself, gain this amount each year. The fact
that on the contrary tended to lose shows that intercalations were so frequent
it
and so far in excess of the 1 1 days required to restore the balance between
it and the Egyptian year, that the average length of the Macedonian year
was more than 365 days. How the number of days to be intercalated was
determined, and at what point or points they were inserted in the Macedonian
year is involved in much obscurity. Papyri give surprisingly little help on
the subject, the only reference to intercalation in the Macedonian calendar being
in P. Petrie III. 22 (/). 2, where /x)/r6]s fju/3oAi/xou apparently indicates that
a whole month had been But that intercalation of a whole month
inserted.
in the Macedonian calendar was not uncommon
is shown by the story (Plutarch,
Vit. Alex. 16) concerning Alexander who, in order to satisfy the religious
objections of some of his soldiers to fighting in Daisius, inserted a second
Artemisius. This, as Smyly remarks, seems to imply not only that the
Macedonians inserted a whole month at a time, but that they called the
intercalated month by the name of the preceding month ; for unless such
intercalation had been customary, Alexander could hardly have quieted the
APPENDIX 1 335
superstition of his followers. Unfortunately, however, the hypothesis of inter-

calations of months of 29 or 30 days even at irregular intervals is not sufficient
by itself to account for all the relations between the Egyptian and Macedonian
months established by the evidence, and it is necessary to postulate the existence
of other, at present unknown, disturbing elements which caused the Macedonian
years to vary in length.
The Macedonian year being so uncertain, it must be remembered that
in each column of our Table the correspondences for which there is no direct
evidence are only meant to be approximate, and that the chances of
error owing to the presence of intercalations increase the further the supposed
correspondences in the year move away from the known correspondence. The
months in which the correspondence is directly attested are in each column of the
Table distinguished from the others by being printed in italics. Where the reign is
not actually given and cannot be inferred with complete certainty, it is enclosed
in brackets. The queries after some of the months in italics mean either that
the reading of the month is not certain, or that there are special grounds for
suspecting an error in the correspondence. That errors have crept into the
extant double dates is, considering the complicated system of two independent
calendars, unfortunately only too likely ; but the hypothesis of a mistake is,
as a rule, only to be resorted to in the last In the case of no. (23},

extremity.
however, which almost certainly falls within the period of the first assimilation
of the two calendars, a correction of the reading or interpretation of a group
of hieroglyphic signs is necessary, and we have placed the wrong series of
correspondences in Where, as in nos. (2), (20), (30),
brackets after the right ones.
and perhaps (4), double dates mention two months but only one day, which
uniformly follows the Egyptian month, we have not assumed that the writer
intended to imply that the number of the day of the Macedonian month was
the same cf. the discussion of no. (2).
;
Still less is there any justification for
supposing in the correspondences of Egyptian and Macedonian months in which

no days are mentioned at all, nos. (3), (11), (12), and (15), that these months
exactly coincided. That such correspondences were not intended to be more
than approximate is in itself far more likely, and is indicated not only by the
evidence of nos. (12) and (15) but still more clearly by P. Magd. 32, where
Aato-iou AtyuTTTicoi; h\ ' kQvp occurs in 1. 4 of the petition, while in the docket
on the verso Daisius 27 = Athur 29. Hence in the Table the figures of the days
are purposely omitted in connexion with those two classes of double dates.
From the Egyptian calendar year of 12 months and ofi^ days beginning on
Thoth and the Macedonian year of 12 months and 354 days (with an
I
uncertain number of intercalary days in addition) beginning on Dius i, must

336 HIDEH PAPYRI
No. (0 (2) (3)

Reign Alex. Philad.
Year (B.C. 323)
I Dius . . 14 INIeso. Thot.

I Apellaeus <S Thot. Phao.
I Audnaeus 8 Phao. Athu.
I Perilius . 7 Alhu. Choi.
I D}sli"us . 7 Choi. Tubi

I Xandicus 6 Tubi Mtxh\})
I Arlemisius 6 Mech. Pham.
I Daisius . 5 Pham. Phar.
I Pancmus 5 Phar{l) Pach.

I Loius 4 Pach. Paun.
I Gorpiacus 4 Paun. Epei.
I Hyperberetaeus 3 Epei. INIeso.

APPENDIX I
337
(8)
(Euerg.)
?
338 HIBEH PAPYRI
be carefully distinguished the years of the king's reign, which were with the
apparent exception of the rare use of eras (cf. 84 {b)) the only kind of years
employed for dating purposes. It has been shown by Professor Smyly {Her-
maiJicna, X. xxv. p. 432) from two Petric papyri of Euergetcs I's reign dated
(hovs) La &)? 6' at -npoaohoL (/3 (cf. p. 359) that at any rate in the earlier
(erovi)
Ptolemaic period two different systems of reckoning the king's years were in
vogue. All that is quite certain about them is that one was employed for
revenue purposes (wj at 7rpoVo8ot), and that when the two sj'stems occur together
the figure of the revenue year was sometimes larger by one than the figure
of the other, which we may call the regnal,' year. Smyly is, w'e think, right
'
in identifying the revenue *

year with
'
the P^gyptian vague year of 365 days
beginning with Thoth the balance of days between the king's accession and the
i ,
following Thoth i being reckoned, in accordance with ancient custom, as his 1st
year. The and length of the regnal year are still quite uncertain,
starting-point '
'
and in addition to the revenue and regnal years found in connexion with the
Egyptian months there may have been yet another system of reckoning the
king's years employed in connexion with the Macedonian months. These
intricate questions are discussed in App. ii.
How far the revenue year penetrated into common use in the third and
second centuries B. c. is a question which at present cannot be decided. It is
noteworthy that even in papyri concerning the revenue administration the revenue
year is by no means always found (cf. pp. 360-1) and it is probable that,
;
down to the reign of Epiphanes at any rate, the regnal year was more often
employed in dating ordinary documents than the revenue year. There is not
a single instance among the dates in our Table in which the king's year is known
for certain to be a revenue year and, since only nos. (3), (4), (6) and (9) occur
;
in documents concerned with the revenues, the presumption with regard to the
third century B. C. instances is that in most or possibly even all of them either
the regnal or some kind of Macedonian year is meant by the year of the reigning
soN'creign. This distinction of the regnal from the revenue year, however, does
not greatly affect our Table except in the case of dates such as (5) and (6).
(13), (14) and (16), (17). and (i^), which arc close together; but owing to
the inevitable complications which surround the conversion of Ptolemaic dates
into dates on the Julian calendar (cf. p. 367), we have generally avoided converting
the dates in our Table into years r.. c. except where the question is of particular
importance.
APPENDIX I 339
Notes oil the Table of Correspondences. -

. ..
(i) The day of Alexander's death, which took place in B.C. 323, is given
by Aristobulus ap. Plutarch, Vita Alex. 75 as Daisius 30, by the royal icprjuepibei
(Plutarch, op. cit. 76) as Daisius 28 {TpiTij (fyOCvovTos), and by Cod. A of Pseudo-
CalHsthenes (MnWer, A ;i/iang- zu Arrian, 151) as Pharmouthi 4; cf. Strack's note
{Rhein. Mus. liii. pp. 416-7). Apart from the questions whether these dates
are to be trusted, and how the two conflicting statements found in Plutarch are
to be reconciled, it is quite possible that on the establishment of the Ptolemaic
regime some modifications were introduced into the Macedonian calendar, and
since B. C. 323 falls outside the period with which we are immediately concerned,
there is no need to bring this double date into line with those following. But
it is worth noting that the correspondence of the two calendars in B.C. 323, which
resultsfrom the equation of Daisius 30 to Pharmouthi 4, is only different by

two months from their correspondence 6^ years later found in (3) and the ;
hypothesis that the Macedonian year had in the interval moved the whole way
round the Egyptian year (as it nearly does between the 27th year of Philadelphus
and the 9th of Epiphanes) is vetoed by 84 {a). Line 6 of that papyrus, written
about B.C. 300, indicates that Panemus, the month in which a payment is to
be made from the new corn-harvest, then corresponded to Pharmouthi, Pachon
or Pauni, an equation which agrees remarkably closely with the correspondences
of Panemus with Pharmouthi in B. C. 323, and with Pauni and Epeiph in the latter
part of Philadelphus' reign, as shown by nos. (3), and (4) cf. 86. 3, note. ;
between B. C. 300 and the middle of Philadelphus' reign

It is fairly certain that
the general tendency of the Macedonian months to fall later in the Egyptian
year was less marked than in the rest of the third century B. c, and that Soter
was more successful than the next three Ptolemies in making the Macedonian
year approximately keep pace with the Egyptian. Hence it is not unreasonable
to suppose that between B. c. 323 and 300 the average length of the Macedonian
year was also maintained at approximately 365 days, though for the reasons
stated above we do not wish to lay any stress on the double dates of Alexander's
death.
(2) 92. 6 //>jr6s "EavhiKô'v Alyvirrioiv ixr][vo\s Mex[tpj Tea-aapeamibeKaTtji in the
22nd year of Philadelphus. The decipherment of the Egyptian month is very
doubtful (cf. note ad loc), but in view of the correspondence of Xandicus with
Phamenoth only 5 years later Mecheir would be expected, and no satisfactor}-
alternative reading suggests itself. Me[o-o]pi/ tJ]i] in place of /x)j[i'o]s MeXi'^P] would
necessitate the inference that in these 5 years the Macedonian year gained or lost as
z 2
340 HIBEH PAPYRI
much as 6 months in relation to the Egyptian, a change far more rapid than even
that which took place in the reign of Philopator cf. nos. (iH) and (21). ;But not
much upon this double date until fresh evidence is
reliance can be placed
discovered for the relation of the two calendars about the 32nd year. The
omission of the number of the day of the Macedonian month probably does not
indicate that it was the same as that of the Egyptian month, e. the 14th. The i.
day of the month is often omitted in the dates of early Ptolemaic contracts,
e. g. 84 {a) and 85 and in most of the instances in which the day is only given
;
once, nos. (2) and perhaps (4), and the undeciphered protocol of the papyrus
discussed in connexion with nos. (11) and (15), there is no independent reason
for thinking the days of the two months coincided. It is also significant that
in nos. (24)-(28), when the two calendars were temporarily assimilated and the
days of the Macedonian and Egyptian months coincided throughout the year,
the day of the Macedonian month as well as that of the Egyptian is given in
each of those five instances. Even after the final assimilation of the two
calendars in the reign of Euergetes II there is as yet no example earlier
than the reign of Ptolemy Alexander (P. Leyden O) of a single mention of the
day doing duty for both the Macedonian and Egyptian months. With regard
to (30) there is some reason for supposing that the day applies to both months,
though the inference is far from certain. The only case in which there are
really strong grounds for thinking that the number of the day of the Macedonian
month, though not stated, coincided with that of the Egyptian month is
no. (20), which is almost certainly a remarkably early instance of the use
of the assimilated Macedonian calendar introduced by Philopator or Epiphanes.
But it would be highly unsafe to generalize from these two examples, which
both belong to a period when as regards the Macedonian calendar the conditions
were quite different from those which prevailed, so far as is known, until after
the 4th year of Philopator.
(3) Rev. Laws Ivii. 4-5 = lix. 3-4 \}.y]vh<i TopTTudov tov .... AtjyuTrricoy
Mea-opy; d. Fr. 6 (c). 9-10, where, as Wilcken {Ost. I. p. 7<S2) suggests, ixrjvo?
Av(r[Tpovwas probably equated in the same way to /ijji'os MexCp. The year in
which Rev. Laws were written was the 27th of Philadelphus, and probably
that is the year to which these double dates refer (it was most likely stated in
the lacuna after ropiriaCov tov ; but possibly in the case of one or both of them
the 2<Sth year may be meant). P^rom the fact that Gorpiaeus and Dystrus
are equated to Mesorc and Mecheir respectively it must not be inferred that
the correspondence was exact, for nos. (12) and (15) clearly show that when the
days are omitted the equations arc only approximate, and it is very unlikely
that if the days in the two calendars at this period were the same in one month,
APPENDIX I 341
they would continue to be precisely the same several months later. To suppose
that an exact correspondence was maintained throughout a whole year before
the first assimilation of the two calendars introduced in the time of Philopator or
Epiphanes is so much at variance with the evidence as to be out of the question.
(4) P. Leyden I. 379, a docket on a demotic contract dated in Tubi of the

29th year of Philadelphus, where 1. [Irovi) k6 Fle/nrtou (eVouj) kO Tv^Sl (so Smyly
from a photograph). The date is generally quoted incorrectly as (hovs) k6
U^pltCov k6 Tvf3L (3, but the figure, if any, after T{!/3i is wholly uncertain, and
between TTeptrtoi; and k6 the sign for (eVovs) is repeated. The day of the month
was therefore not given more than once, if at all, so that the only safe inference
to be drawn is that Peritius approximately corresponded to Tubi in the 29th
year. This gives the same equation as that found in (3) for the 27th, and shows
that no considerable change in the relation of the two calendars had taken place
in the interval.
(5) 146 (eTov^-) Ae 'TTrepêperatov nd n[aa)7TL kO, the reign being certainly that
of Philadelphus. In the interval of 6 years between this and (4) the Macedonian
year had lost in reference to the Egyptian to the extent of a number of days
which not likely to exceed 30, since
is in the 29th year Hyperberetaeus probably
coincided in part with Thoth.
(6) 77. 8 (hovs) A<r 'Apre/xtcrtou Ky Uaxb)v k/3, the reign being certainly that of
Philadelphus. This date is particularly instructive, because it is the earliest
of several exceptions to the general tendency of the Macedonian year to revolve
at a slower rate than the Egyptian. In the interval between (5) and (6), which
may be either 7 months or i year and 7 months or 2 years and 7 months (the
uncertainties with regard to the use of regnal and revenue years have to be reckoned
with cf. App. ii), the Macedonian year had gained about 9 days at the expense
;
of the Egyptian. This circumstance fits in very well with the view (cf. p. 334)
that theMacedonian year, when not subjected to intercalation, was shorter

by some days than the Egyptian. If the Macedonian year when left to itself
contained 365-9 =
^^6 days, the absence of any intercalation at all between
the dates of (5) and (6) might, on the assumption that those documents were
written in successive Macedonian years, bring about the correspondence found
in (6) on the supposition, which is on general grounds more probable, that
;
it contained 354 days, there remains a difference of two days (11 9 = 2) to be
accounted for by intercalation in the Macedonian year or otherwise.

(6 a) Unpublished Tebtunis papyrus (Mummy 8) (hovs) r; FopTrtatou /3 [^]aS>(pi.
C This double date was deciphered by Smyly too late to be included in our
Table. The reign is no doubt that of Euergetes,for the correspondence implied
by (6 a) only differs by four days from that implied by (7), which was written in
342 HIBEH PAPYRI
his 9th year. In the 8th year of Euergetes therefore the approximate dates for
the beginnings of the Macedonian months are Dius i =Choiak 16 y\pellaeus 1 = ;
Tubi 15; Audnaeus i=Mecheir 15; Peritius i=Phamcnoth 14; Dystrus 1 =

Pharmouthi 14; Xandicus i=Pachon 13; Artemisius i=Pauni 13; Daisius
i = Epeiph 12; Panemus i=Mesore 12; Loius i=Thoth 6; Gorpiaeus 1 =
PhaopJii 6 Hyperberetaeus i=Athur 5. In the interval of 10 jêars between
;
(6) and (6 a) the Macedonian year had lost about 43 days,

which indicates
that the intercalations had been larger than those in the period before the
middle of Philadelphus' reign, but much smaller than those in the next 7 years
of Euergetes ; cf. (i) and (9).
(7) Canopus Inscr. 1.

3 juujro^ 'ATrcAAaiou e/38o'/x*/' klyvramv h\ TvjSi. (TTTaKcu-
btKarrji in the 9th year of Euergetes, As

the case of (5) and (6), which
in
are separated only by a short interval, the Macedonian year had gained 9 da}'s
instead of losing, so here a comparison of (7) with (6 <?) shows that the Macedonian
year had gained 4 days in the interval, which may be 3 months, i year and
3 months, or 2 years and 3 months.
(<S) P. Petrie I. 24 (i) Ajaio-tou Ky Qo)vd /3. As will be seen from the Table,
the most suitable place for this third century date is between the 10th and 15th
jears of Euergetes; but between the i6th year and the 21st the Macedonian
year regained some of the days which it had lost, and if the correspondence
implied by (11) ever took place and occurred between the i6th and 25th years,
(8) may also belong to that period. This is however less probable ; cf. our
remarks on (11).
(9) P. Petrie III. ^^ (s). 13-4 (eVofs) 19 ropTnaiov b Xoiax ta. The reign is
probably that of Euergetes. In the 7 years therefore which had elapsed between
(7) and (9) the Macedonian year had lost 66 days.
(10) P. Petrie III. 21 (). 11 (erovy) ko. AvaTp[o]v i<^ Ylavvi lO, the reign being
certainly that of Euergetes, The reading of the second figure of the year is
not certain. It is more like f^, but in 1. 11 of the fragmentary second copy
of 21 (^) Ka is clear, so that it is safer to adopt the 21st year, especially as the
figures of the reign at the beginning of the papyrus in 1. i are probably k/3, not
K, and the date in 1. ] i occurs in a quotation from an older document. In
the interval of about 5 years between (9) and (10) the Macedonian years instead
of losing had gained 1 2 days. This marked exception to their usual tendency
is more striking than the three similar instances in nos, (6), (7), and (16), which
are separated by probably less than two years from nos. (5), {6a), and (14) re-
spectively.
(11) In v. {a) of an unpublished Tcbtunis papyrus (Mummy 107), partly
deciphered by Professor Smyly, /^vaTpov MyvnTi<j)v naxoj(r)s occurs in a contract.
APPENDIX I 343
This long papyrus is in several pieces, of which the order is uncertain. On the
recto are a series of copies or abstracts of contracts, each headed by the number
of the day and in some cases by the month, but with no statement of the year.
In Fr. [b) is an agreement for a loan of wheat and money in which the sentence
as oTToSwcret kv HoyotKwt Alyvmrnv 8e Metrop?) occurs. The same correspondence
as Xandicus = Mesore is also implied by kv iii]vi Ai^LO-r'pcot AlyvTiTiwv 8e 'E-neLc})
in a contract in Fr. (c), and by ITepetriou Uavv[L found These three

in Fr. (d).
equations form our no. (12), and are different by two months from the corre-
spondence found in (11). On the verso of Fr. (r) is a lease dated in the 25th
year of Euergetes, in the protocol of which the months v/ere given in both
calendars but have not yet been deciphered, the day being TcTijabi koI fUdbi,
while one of the provisions of the contract is that the rent shall be paid h' [xipl
SarSiKwt Aly[vnTLOiv] 8e 'Eireicj) (no. (15) of the Table). Probably this clause
refers to the 26th year, not to the 25th, since in the preceding line Har6tKo9
Atyt'TTTtwy 8e 'Ettci^ tov e'/cTou koL eifcocrrou erovs occurs. The equation of Xandicus
to Epeiph in the 26th year causes no particular difficulty ; cf. our remarks on
(15). But the question of the period which the several equations on the
to
recto of the papyrus, Dystrus = Pachon, our no. (11), and Dystrus = Epeiph,
our no. (12), belong is more obscure, and is complicated by the fact that, as
in (15), the correspondences are probably anticipatory. The circumstance that
the series of contracts in which they are found dated only by days of the is
month suggests that these documents were drawn up at no distant time from
each other, and seeing that a lease written in the 25th year occurs on the verso,
the dates to which the documents on the recto refer are probably not later
than that year. There would be no difficulty in assigning no. (12) by itself
to about the 25th year, since, though Dystrus then apparently began in Pauni,
the greater part of it coincided with Epeiph, so that it might be equated to
either Pauni or Epeiph. On the other hand no. (11), in which the general
correspondence of the months in the two calendars is the same as that implied
by no. (8), is most conveniently placed, like no. (8), between the 9th and i6th
years of Euergetes; but in that case, if (12) belongs to the 25th year, there
is a difference of several years between the dates of the contracts on the recto
of the papyrus, which a satisfactory hypothesis. The inconsistency

is not at all
of 2 months between the equations in nos. (11) and (12) can however only be
explained in two other ways. One of the two correspondences may be wrong
(which would be certainly (11), an equation attested by only one instance
against three for (12)); or the interval between (11) and (12) may be quite
short, but in the course of it an intercalation of about 60 days was introduced
into the Macedonian year in addition to the number of days (11, as we suppose)
344 HIBEH PAPYRI
necessary to make up the difference between the Macedonian and Egyptian
year. Seeing that both (ii) and (12)
in are probably
the correspondences
approximate and anticipatory and need not have actually taken place, there
is more justification than usual for supposing a miscalculation in one of them.
But considering the Macedonian calendar, the possibility

irregularities of the
of a sudden large intercalation cannot be excluded and provisionally (11) and

;
(12) may be assigned to some year or years between the 9th and 25th of Euergetes.
The period from the 9th to the 21st years would not be so appropriate
as that from the 21st to the 25th, because the latter period suits (12), which
has better evidence than (11), and less disturbance is caused by placing (11)
after (10) than by placing (12) before (10). The correspondences implied by
(11) and (12) being in any case approximate are quite consistent with those
found in (10) and (13) respectively the whole difficulty is caused by the apparent
;
shortness of the interval between (11) and (12) and the uncertainty as to which
of the two is the earlier.
(la)Unpublished Tebtunis papyrus (Mummy 107), Fr. (/;) EavhiKon Atyu'iTiW
hi Meo-opr/, confirmed by two other correspondences cf. (11).
;
(13) P. Magd. 2, 4 and 6 (cf. Dcuxienic Scrie^ p. 205) (eVous) Ke Aa)(i)ou k<7
Xot'oK ty, the reign being certainly that of Euergetes, since Diophanes is
mentioned cf. (14). The Macedonian years had thus in the 4 years' interval
;
between (10) and (13) resumed their tendency to lose, the amount of the loss
being 22 days, though if (11) and (12) are rightly placed between (10) and (13)
and the correspondence implied by (11) is trustworthy (which is far from certain),
some rapid changes seem to have taken place in the interval cf. our remarks
;
on (11). The relation of the calendars is only different by the trifling amount
of one day from that found in (14). But what is the interval between (13)
and (14), and which of the two is the earlier ? Both papyri were written in the
25th year, and of course if this year was in both cases the revenue }-ear
which began on Thoth i, the answer would be easy, viz. that (13), which
was written in Choiak, was 4 months earlier than (14), which was written
in Pharmouthi. But unfortunately since neither papyrus is concerned with
revenues, the presumption is that the 25th year is in both cases regnal, or at any
rate not a revenue year. The question of the priority of (13) or (14) will then
depend upon the starting-point of the 25th regnal year. If it was Thoth i, (13)
is still 4 months earlier than (14) if it was Dius i or Dius 25, the probable date
;
of Euergetes' accession (cf. p. 364), (14) being written in Apellaeus is 8 months

older than (13) which was written in Loius. And since the starting-point of the
25th regnal year is not confined to those alternatives, it is wholly uncertain
whether (13) or (14) is the earlier.
APPENDIX I 345
(14) P. Petrie II. 2. (2) ( = 111. 28 (<5)), verso i [hovst) kc 'ATreAAatoi; la ^Papixovdc
T; cf. II. 2. (3) {= III. 28 (t-)), verso i (eVovs) /ce 'ATreAXaiou ta âpixovOi <r. The
reigning sovereign was supposed by Mahaffy to be Philadelphus, by Grenfell
(Rev. Laws, p. 162), and P. M. Meyer {Hecrivescn, p. 51) to be Euergetes I, by
Strack {Rhcin. Mus., I. c.) to be Epiphanes. The Magdola papyri frequently
mention the same strategus, Diophanes, who occurs in P. Petrie II. 2. (2) and (3),
and he appears in a papyrus {Deuxihne Scrie, no. 23, p. 174; cf. p. 205) in
which the 26th year is clearly shown to be the last of a reign, and which
therefore leaves no doubt that the 25th and 26th years in connexion with
Diophanes refer to Euergetes I and the ist and 4th years to Philopator.
than (13) see above.
It is possible that (14) is really earlier ;
(15) UnpubHshed Tebtunis papyrus (Mummy 107, Fr. (r), verso) cf. no. (11). ;
The equation HarStKwi 'E77et<^ refers to the 26th year, but the contract in
. . .
which it occurs was written in the 25th year, the day of the month in the
protocol being given only once, and the names of both months being illegible.
If the person who drew up the contract expected Xandicus to correspond
exactly with Epeiph, his anticipation was almost certainly not fulfilled, for
the dates in (13), (14), which are very close to (15), combine to indicate
and (16),
that Xandicus in both the 25th and 26th years began after Epeiph 20 it is ;
therefore probable that the equation of Xandicus to Epeiph was not intended
to be more than approximate. The equation would become more natural if
we could infer from the absence of the day of the Macedonian month in the
protocol that it was the same as that of the Egyptian. But the evidence does
not justify that inference cf. our remarks on (2).
;
(16) P. Magd. 16, 20-3, and '^2> {^tovs) a Topruaiov Kr] Ti^t t/3 and P. Magd. 14,
15, 18, 19, 25,and 34 (hovs) a FopTrtaiou A T{5/3t ly, the reign being certainly that
of Philopator; cf. nos. (13) and (14). The apparent discrepancy of a day in
these two series of double dates is probably due to the fact that Gorpiaeus
contained only 29 days and that the last day of the month was called the 30th ;
cf. p. 334. Comparing (16) with (13) and (14) the Macedonian year has, instead
of losing, gained 2 or 3 days upon the Egyptian, a phenomenon which con-
sidering that the interval is in any case very short is not surprising cf. the ;
9 days' difference in the calendars implied by (5) and (6). The question of
the interval between (14) and (16) is embarrassed, as usual, by complications
caused by the two systems of reckoning the king's years cf App. ii. Jouguet ;
and Lefebvre (P. Magd. Deuxihne S^rie, p. 205) follow the ordinary practice
of editors in regarding [hovs) a as the balance between Philopator's accession
and the following Thoth i, and hence naturally infer that Philopator came to
the throne before Tubi 12, i.e. Feb, 26, b. c. 221. But, as in the case of (13) and
346 HIBEH PAPYRI
(14), the presumption is rather that the regnal not the revenue year is meant
by and if so we cannot, owing to the uncertainty concerning the
(erous) a,
starting-point and length of Philopator's ist regnal year, attribute Tu/St t/3 to B. c.
221 rather than to i;. C. 220. Some stronger evidence for determining the date
of Philopator's accession would now seem to be available in P. Petrie III. I4r,
which indicates that this event took place after Choiak of Euergetes' 25th
regnal year and not later than the following Pauni ; cf. p. 363. The interval
between and (16) may be i month or 13 months or even 2 years and

(13)
1 month; that between (14) and (16) 9 months or i year and 9 months or
even 2 years and 9 months.

(17) P. Magd. 7, S, 13, and 26-32 [hovs) h Acaa-iov kC 'A6vp k6, the reign
being certainly Philopator's cf. (14). In the interval of about 3 years
;
between (16) and (17) the Macedonian year had apparently lost 47 days.
There is, however, a notable inconsistency between the double dates in (17)
and (18) which both belong to the 4th year, and the correctness of the figures
k6 in (17) is open to doubt cf. (18).
;
(18) P. Magd. 12. 14 and verso i, and 39. verso 1, where in all three cases 1.
(eVoDs) Aiou y a/aera)^ k8 (8 corr. from ??), the originals having been revised by
Smyly and Grcnfcll. As in the case of (13) and (14), so with regard to (17) and
(18) it is uncertain not only what is the interval between the pair but which of
the two dates is the earlier. Assuming that the 4th year is the same in both
'
'
instances, which is probableany case, since the double dates in the Magdola
in
papyri were written in the same office, (18) may be cither about 4 months later
than (17) or about 8 months earlier, according to the day on which the 4th year
is supposed to have begun. If (17) comes before (18) the Macedonian year
would seem to have gained 20 days in about 4 months if (18) precedes (17) it
;
would seem to have lost 20 days in about 8 months. To account for so large a
discrepancy between the relations of the two calendars in what is, apparently,
so short an interval is very difficult and it is therefore tempting, as Smyly
;
suggests, to make (17) consistent with (18) by supposing that kOvp k6 '
in (17) is an error for WOvp 6, due perhaps to the presence of a in the number
of the Macedonian month, or else to suppose an error in (18) where the figures
of the P^gyptian month have certainly been altered. But there are no less than
ten instances of 'A6vp kO, and though they are all written by the same
person, the repetition of the date goes some way to confirm its correctness.
Moreover, although with so complicated a system of reckoning as that
which prevailed before the assimilation of the Macedonian to the Egyptian
year the extant double dates are unlikely to be free from errors, the evidence
is still too imperfect and the irregularities of the Macedonian calendar too
APPENDIX I 347
numerous to make the supposition of error a satisfactory explanation of in-

consistencies.
(19) Inscr. on a vase found at Alexandria, Ncrutsos, Rev. ArcJi. iHtS;, p. 62,
(eVous^) 'TTTpf3p(Taiov a apixov6L (. The day of the Macedonian month has

been read as both a and A ; we adopt a, which Strack prefers. The reignintj
sovereign was considered to be Euergetes by Nerutsos, Philadelphus by
Merriam [Avier. Jcnirn. of Arc/i, p. 22), Wilcken {Gdtt, gel. Anz. 1(^95,
i.
p. 142), and Strack, partly on the ground that the Delphic Soteria mentioned
in another inscription of the same year found with this one were instituted
shortly before the 9th year of Philadelphus, partly because that festival took
place in every 4th year of anOlympiad (Dittenberger, Sylloge 149 and 150), ^
and the 9th years of Euergetes and Philopator were considered not to be the
4th years of an Olympiad, while in the 9th year of Epiphanes, which was, the
relation of the two calendars was shown by the Rosetta Inscr. to be different.
The reign of Euergetes may now be dismissed as quite unsuitable, but there
are good reasons for attributing the inscription to Philopator or Epiphanes
rather than to Philadelphus. The second argument in favour of Philadelphus
proceeds on the assumption, which until recently was unquestioned, that this
9th year began on Thoth i, and was what is now known as a revenue year.
It is true that the 9th revenue year of Philopator, i. e. according to the ordinary
reckoning B. c. 214-3, was not the 4th of an Olympiad, but his 9th regnal year,
which probably corresponded in the main to his 10th revenue year, i. e. B. c.
213-2 (cf. p. 367), fulfils, as Smyly remarks, the required condition. The other
argument for attributing the inscription to Philadelphus' reign, the circumstance
that the Soteria at Delphi were instituted shortly before the 9th year of Phila-
delphus, is not at all conclusive, and the choice between the reigns of Philadelphus
and Philopator must be decided mainly by the double date. In the absence of
any direct and certain evidence of the relation of the calendars before the 27th
year of Philadelphus, any correspondence is possible in his 9th year but if (19) is ;
placed in that reign it is necessary to infer that the Macedonian year lost over
4 months in the 18 years' interval between it and (3). This would imply more
extensive intercalation than is attested for any other period of 1 8 years before the
reign of Philopator, and moreover such evidence as we possess with regard to the
movement of the Macedonian year before the 27th year of Philadelphus indicates
that its changes in regard to the Egyptian were gradual and comparatively
slow; cf. nos. (i) and (2). On the other hand a comparison of (17) or (18) with
(21) suggests that in Philopator's reign the Macedonian year changed very quickly
its relation to the Egyptian, and that the relation of the two calendars found
in (19), when Dius i fell in the middle of Pachon^ is one which is extremely
348 HIBEH PAPYRI
suitable as an intervening stage between the 4th }'ear of Philopator when
Dius 1 fell in Phamenoth or Pharmouthi and the 9th of Epiphanes when it
fell in Thoth, Hence, if the choice lies between Philadelphus and Philopator,
we prefer to regard (19) as written in the 9th regnal year of Philopator on
May Ill, and to suppose that in the 5 years' interval between (19)
19, B.C.
and (1 the Macedonian
(S) year lost 56 days, or, comparing (17) with (19), 36 days,
lût the great divergence in the relation of the two calendars indicated by (19)
and the Rosetta Inscr., our no. (21), respectively is no longer a sufficient reason
for refusing to attribute (19) to the 9th year of Epiphanes, since the discovery of
(20) ; double date of the 4th year of Epiphanes the relation
for in that surprising
of the Egyptian to the Macedonian calendar is nearly identical with that shown
by (19). (20) is best explained (see below) on the view that the first attempt
to reform the Macedonian calendar in Egypt by equating Dystrus to Thoth
and the other months to correspond had then already been made, although
the omission of the number of the day in the case of the Macedonian month
prevents us from being absolutely certain that (20) is an example of the
assimilated Macedonian calendar. From the 4th to the 9th years of Epiphanes,
therefore, the reformed and unreformed Macedonian years seem to have been
running side by side and if in (19) the days of the Macedonian and Egyptian
;
months were the same there would be no difficulty in assigning it to the 9th
year of Epiphanes, and treating it as an example of the reformed calendar, while
in the Rosetta Inscr. the Macedonian month is given on the unreformed
calendar. There is, as stated above, a doubt about the reading of the figure of
the Macedonian month in (19), but it seems unlikely to be the same as the
figure of the Egyptian month; and since to attribute (19) to the reign of
Epiphanes without at the same time supposing that the Macedonian month is on
the reformed calendar would produce much complication, the reign of Philopator
is on the whole the most suitable.
(20) Unpublished Tebtunis papyrus (Mummy 6) âaiXtvovTos flroAe/xaiov rov
rTroXe/xat'oD koli 'Apmi;o'j;s Otiav <ÎnAo77aro'p(t)r erot's T^Taprov . . . jxi-jvos AvbvaLOV
AlyvTTTLODv he 'Endff) [77c]zTeKai8eKaTTji. It is unfortunate that in this very remark-
able double date the omission of the number of the day in connexion with the
Macedonian month introduces a element of uncertainty into the precise
slight
relation of the calendars implied. But in view of the complete coincidence of
Audnaeus with Epeiph on the assimilated Macedonian calendar, which had
certainly been introduced by the 24th year of Epiphanes (cf (24)), and probably
by the i8th year (cf (22)), there not nmch doubt
that in (20) [-n-ejireKatSeKanyt
is
applies to both months, not merely to the Egyptian, in spite of the fact that in
the earlier instances where the figure of the day is only stated once a similar
APPENDIX I 349
inference is unjustifiable ; cf. our remarks on (2). This being granted, two
conclusions are almost inevitable : firstly, the date at which the Macedonian
calendar was first assimilated to the Egyptian by equating Dystrus to Thoth and
the other months to correspond must now be put back into the period preceding
the 4th year of Epiphanes, which is the date of (20) secondly, on account of the
;
wholly different relation of the Macedonian and Egyptian months found in the
Rosetta Inscr., which is 5 years later than (20), the reformed and unreformed
Macedonian calendars must for some years, perhaps throughout the whole period
of the first assimilation, have run on concurrently. These conclusions present no
special difficulty, for the fact that the earlier identification of the
two calendars
ultimately failed and irregularities again occur in the reign of Philometor shows
that the obstacles to a reform of the Macedonian calendar were very serious
;
and the new system according to which the Macedonian months from Dystrus to
Peritius became mere equivalents of the Egyptian months from Thoth to Mesore
may well have failed to command universal acceptance, and to deprive even
temporarily the old Macedonian year of independent existence. In any case this
explanation of (20) as an example of the assimilated calendar, a view which is
based on the assumption that [-n^vT^naih^Kdii^ applies to both months, is more
satisfactory than the rival hypothesis that the figures were really different or,
if Audnaeus-Epeiph, were yet different in the other months. If that were
identical in
the case, not only must the nearness of the relation of the two months in (20) to
their relation under the assimilated calendar be regarded as a mere accident, but
since there would no longer be any reason for supposing that the earlier reform
of the calendar was introduced before the date of the Rosetta Inscr., it would
be necessary to maintain that in the intervaj of about 5 years between (20)
and (21) Dius i moved on from some date in Pachon to the middle of Thoth,
i.e. that the Macedonian year had lost more than 100 days. That in the
interval of about 21 years between the 4th year of Philopator, as illustrated by
(18), and the 9th year of Epiphanes, to which (21) belongs, the Macedonian year
shifted its position in relation to the Egyptian to an extraordinary extent must
be admitted on any theory for the difference between the approximate dates of
;
Dius I at the beginning and end of that period amounts to no less than 181 days,
of which 125 have to be accounted for in the last 16 years of it, if
(19) is
correctly dated by us; cf. our remarks on (21). But to suppose a difference
exceeding 100 days in the relation of the two calendars within about
5 years
would imply a far graver disturbance than can be traced in the same length of
time at any other point during the third and second centuries B.C. The choice
of a month in the middle of the old Macedonian year instead of Dius to serve as
the equivalent of Thoth is remarkable. Perhaps when the two calendars were
350 HIBEH PAPYRI
identified Dystrus nearly or quite coincided with Tlioth. If so, the change
would seem to have been introduced not long after the 4th year of Philopator,
when, as is shown by ([7) and (18), Dystrus fell near the end of the Egyptian
year. In the 9th year of Philopator, if (19) is to be attributed to his reign,
Dystrus began about Thoth 11. It is possible, though not at all likely, that (23),
which is an example of the assimilated calendar, belongs to the i(Sth year of
Philopator. But the earlier limit of the period within which the assimilation
took place cannot at present be fixed more definitely than Philopator's 4th year,
before which there is no evidence of any attempt to equate the Macedonian to the
Egyptian months. The later limit of the period is, we think, fixed by (20) at the
4th year of Epiphanes.
(21) Rosetta Inscr. 11. 4-6 trov^ (varov (of Epiphanes) jutjz-o? BavbtKov rtrpaSt
Alyi'TTTLcov he Mexdf) oKrcoKatSeKanjt. This double date shows that, despite the
efforts of the government to reform the calendar by equating the Macedonian
months to the Egyptian, the old Macedonian year continued, at first at any
rate, to have a separate existence cf. (20). The changes of the Macedonian
;
year in the two preceding decades had been extraordinarily rapid, for it had
lost about 4 months in the 16 years' interval between (19) and (21), and even
if (19) is wrongly dated by us, about 6 months in the 21 years' interval between
(i<S) and (21), unless indeed it had gained 6 months. The latter hypothesis is
by no means out of the question for since the reign in the case of (19) is
;
uncertain and in (20), as we have shown, the reformed Macedonian calendar was
probably employed, the movements of the Macedonian year in those two decades
arc extremely obscure and though from its previous tendency it would be
;
expected to continue to lose ground, absence of intercalations would, on the

assumption that it contained 354 days (cf. p. 334), more than account for a gain
of 6 months in 21 years. Whether the 6 months were lost or gained, it is
clear that some abnormal causes were at work to cause so great a change in
the relation of the two calendars in a comparative!}' short period. That the
government had already several j'cars before the date of (21) undertaken the
reform of the Macedonian calendar is now made probable by the discovery of
(20), and the relationship of the Macedonian and Egyptian calendars in (21) may
well be due less to a gradual process of divergence than to a sudden arbitrary
alteration in the Macedonian year.
(22) Inscr. of Thcra (Dittcnberger, Or. Gr. Inscr. I. 59) erovs trj kvhvaiov te
This much discussed date has been assigned to the reign of Pûergetes
'E7ret(|)i le.
on palaeographical grounds by Pliller von Gartringcn, who is followed by Strack

and Dittcnberger, and to that of Soter I by Mahaffy and formerly Smyl}', who
rcccntl)- in Ilcrvmthoia, 1905,, pp. 393-8, showed good reasons for attributing
APPENDIX I 351
it to the reign of Epiphanes. The correspondence implied by (33) is the same

as that which is known to have existed
from the 24th year of Epiphanes to
the jth of the joint reign of Philometor, Euergetes, and Cleopatra (which = the
1 6th of Philometor); and since this can hardly be the result of accident,
and
the 1 8th year of Philometor is for various reasons unsuitable, the reign of
Epiphanes seemed to be indicated with practical certainty, for the evidence of
the Rosetta Inscr. appeared to negative the supposition that the assimilated
Macedonian calendar, with which (22) was in accordance, was introduced before
the 9th year of Epiphanes. The situation is, however, somewhat altered by the
discovery of (20), which shows that in spite of the Rosetta Inscr. the intro-
duction of the assimilated Macedonian calendar probably took place between the
4th year of Philopator and the 4th of Epiphanes and though the difficulties
;
involved in assigning (22) to the reign of any of the first three Ptolemies are still
insuperable, it is possible that (22) belongs to the i8th year of Philopator. This
monarch is generally supposed to have entered (though not completed) his
18th year reckoned on the system according to which his years were counted
from Thoth i, and the balance between his accession and the following Thoth i
was treated as his ist year. There are, however, several objections to this date
for (22). In the first place if his i8th year be reckoned from Thoth
i it is very
doubtful whether Philopator survived as late as Epeiph cf. p. 362. Secondly, ;
since the system of reckoning the king's year under which Philopator is con-
sidered to have entered his ] 8th year was, as is generally supposed, employed
principally for revenue purposes, and the Thera Inscr. is not concerned with the
revenues, the presumption that the i8th year in (22) is calculated on some
is
other system, either Egyptian or Macedonian; cf. App. ii. But if the 18th
year in (22) is a regnal year, Philopator is still more unlikely to have been
'
'
the reigning sovereign, for his i8th regnal year would almost certainly coincide
for the greater part, perhaps throughout, with his 19th revenue year, and the
received chronology of Philopator's reign is inconsistent with the hypothesis that
he entered upon his 19th revenue year at all. Hence we adhere to Smyly's
view that (22) belongs to the i8th year of Epiphanes, that being the only reign
to which it can be assigned without raising a host of difiiculties. From this
year up to the 5th year of the joint reign of Philometor, Euergetes II, and
Cleopatra, which is illustrated by (28), a period of about 22 years, all the extant
double dates are on the assimilated calendar, but irregularities again occur soon
after Philometor's return from exile cf. (29), (30), and (31).
;
(23) Hieroglyphic stele of Damanhur (Bouriant, i^m/r//rt'^' Travaux, 1885,

p. I) 'Year 23 (of Epiphanes) Gorpiaeus 24 = Pharmouthi 24.' This date, if
correct, conflicts with (22) and (24) to the extent of i month, but, as Smyly
352 HIBEH PAPYRI
(/. c.) has shown, probably either the hieroglyphic symbols which are supposed
to mean 'the fourth month' of its season, i.e. Pharmouthi, ought to be inter-
preted as 'the third,' i.e. Phamenoth, or the stone-cutter has repeated a sign
once too often, and has carved 'the fourth' in place of 'the third.' (23) then
falls into line with (22) and (24)- (28).
(24) Unpublished Tebtunis papyrus Vods rdrapTov koX dKoarov (of Epiphanes)
Hi]vos Avarpov oyborji Kal etKciSt Goivd oyhuTji. koI eiKoSt ; cf. Smyl)', /. c. This is the
earliest absolutely certain two calendars,
instance of the assimilation of the
which probably took place between the 4th year of Philopator and the 4th
of Epiphanes cf. (20). ;
(25)-(27). (25) P. Amh. 42. 21 erou? h[v^îpo[v (of Philometor) p.i]vbs Aiou
ei'ar?][il kol duabt Uax<i)i' [erarjjt KJat et/caSi, as restored b}' Krall and Smyly.
(26) Unpublished Berlin papyrus quoted by VVilcken, Ost. I. p. 7 82, Arte-
misius 7 = Athur 7 in the 5th year of Philometor. (27) P. Amh. 43. i Irous
uyooov (of Philometor) ni]vo^ AooCov T/Jt(T/<ai8Karijt Mexftp rpeto-Kat5eKdr?jt ; cf. 1. 8
07:080x0) ... 2' iJ.i]vl Avbyvaicoi A6yv7rr[iaj]/' 8e 'Ettcic^. Cf. (so).
Unpublished Tebtunis papyrus [hovs] ni^nrTov (of the reign of Philo-

(28)
metor, luiergctes II, and Cleopatra) p/ros W-neWaiov evveaKaiheKaTr]!. Uavvi
ivveaKaibiKCLTiiL cf. Smyly, /.
; r. This year, which corresponds to the i6th
of Philometor, provides the latest certain date for the continuance of the assimila-
tion introduced by Philopator or Epiphanes ; but a still later example is perhaps
found in (30).
xiii. 14 (Irous) d;
(29) P. Par. 63. UepLTiov b Miaopi] k. The reign has
o-enerally been supposed to be that of Philometor, since Cols, i-vii (which have
no connexion with Col. xiii) were written in the 6th and 7th years of the joint
rci"-n (which = the T/lh and 18th of Philometor), and it has been assumed that
Col. xiii was later than Cols, i-vii. It would in that case appear that in the
interval of little more than 2 years between (28) and (29) the Macedonian year
had broken away from the Egyptian, and that in Peritius-Mesore the Mace-
donian year was once more behind the Itgyptian to the extent of 21 days.
Smyly (/. c.) objects to this conclusion, and wishes to refer (29) to the reign
of Philopator, supposing it to be a copy of an older document. This is
a perfectly legitimate hypothesis in the case of a document like P. Par. 63. xiii
(a royal rescript) which is an>'how a cop}', not an original but it seems to us ;
unnecessary in the light of nos. (30) and particularly (31), both of which offer
prima facie corroboration of the view that disturbances recurred in the

Macedonian calendar after Philometor's return from exile. Smyly disposes
of ô) by postulating an error of the stone-cutter similar to that which creates
(
a difficulty in connexion with (23), and of (31) because 'it is assigned to

APPENDIX I 353
Philometor on conjectural grounds only.' The reasons for considerm;^ (31)

to be later than the reign of Epiphanes are nevertheless very strong. The
date occurs in a second century B. C. papyrus, which is less likely than (29) to
be a copy of a much earlier document; secondly, the mention in 1. 5 of 'the
queen in addition to the king indicates a second century B. C. date, when
'
'
'
the official status of queens was more important than in the third thirdly, ;
neither Philopator nor Epiphanes entered their 26th year, and the relation of
the calendars in the 26th years of Philadelphus and Euergetes I was, so far
as is known, different from that implied by (31). Hence the choice of reigns
with regard to (31) is practically limited to Philometor and Euergetes II and ;
if the admission, which in our opinion is absolutely necessary in the case of (31),
be once made, that the Macedonian year differed from the Egyptian in the
between the i6th year of Philometor and the final assimilation of the
interval
Macedonian months to the Egyptian, there seems to be no sufficient reason for
refusing to admit that (29) also belongs to that interval, especially since the
Macedonian calendar failed, as (21) shows, to bring
introduction of the reformed
about the complete abandonment of the unreformed system, at any rate until
after the 9th year of Epiphanes. It is quite possible that both systems con-
tinued in use until the second and final assimilation of the Macedonian to the
Egyptian calendar took place, although from the i8th year of Epiphanes to the
1 6th of Philometor the present evidence indicates the employment of only one set
of Macedonian months. We prefer therefore to adhere to the ordinary view that

(29) belongs to the reign of Philometor, and consider either that in the interval
between (28) and (29) the Macedonian year resumed its ancient tendency to
lose, or else that the unreformed calendar had never fallen into desuetude, and
reasserted itself in (29)-(3i). In the Table of correspondences we have pro-
ceeded on the hypothesis that during the second period of irregularity the
Macedonian year had reverted to its supposed former number of 354 days
supplemented by intercalations.
(30) Hieroglyphic Inscr. at Philae (Lepsius, Dcnkmdler, IV. 27 b) Year 24
'
(of Philometor) Peritius = Epeiph i '. In the absence of a distinct mention of

the day of the Macedonian month it is not clear that it coincided with the
day of the Egyptian month ; cf p. 340. however, wished to regard
Smyly (/. c),
it as the same, and brought this correspondence into conformity with those found
in the earlier period of assimilation by supposing an error of the stone-cutter

similar to that which, as there is good reason to and believe, occurs in (23),
by substituting 'the fourth month' (Mesore) formonth' (Epeiph).'the third

We, however, are less anxious to get rid of irregularities in the Macedonian
year at this period, and prefer to admit that in the 6 years' interval between
Aa
354
HIBEH PAPYRI
(29) and (30) the Macedonian year may have gained considerably upon the
Egyptian. The limits of this gain are if Peritius i was the day in (30), 51 days,
if Peritius 30, as is conceivable since the figure is omitted, 80 days. Less

disturbance, therefore, would be caused if the figure i refers to both Macedonian
and Egyptian months than if the days are different but on either view it would
;
seem that several years passed without intercalations, or a large deduction was
made from the Macedonian year at one or more points. If Smyly's suggestion
that Epeiph in (30) is an error for Mesore be combined with our view that the
calendar again became irregular in Philometor's reign, the first assimilated
calendar may be supposed to have continued in use until the introduction of the
second.
(31) P. Par. 60. recto 4 {hovs) K<r "EavhiKov a Q(ov9 k. The day of the
Macedonian month might be A or, less probably, 6. The view of Brunet de
Presle, the first editor, that the reign of Philometor is meant, is supported by
Strack, but has recently been called in question by Smyly (/. c). As we have
stated in (29), the objections to referring (31) to an earlier
connexion with
reign than Philometor's seem to be overwhelming, and on the other hand, since
both the 26th year of Ptolemy Alexander is palaeographically, though possible,
not a very suitable date for the papyrus, and an extant double date in that year
(P. Leydcn O) is in accordance with the later assimilation of the two calendars,
the choice really lies between the reigns of Philometor and Euergetes II.
Brunet de Presle justly prefers Philometor on the ground that the Dioscurides
and two Dorions mentioned in P. Par. 61 may well be identical with the
dioecetes Dioscurides and epimeletes Dorion who are mentioned in other
Serapeum papyri in the 24th year of Philometor, and the Dorion who is known
from P. Par. 63 as hypodioecetes in the 7th year of the joint reign of Philometor
with his brother and sister (which = the i8th of Philometor). But since the
26th year of Euergetes II only 11 years later than the 26th of Philometor
is
it is impossible to decide between the two reigns with any degree of certainty.
Contrasting (31) with (29), which is a little more than 7 or perhaps 18 years
earlier, the Macedonian year had reverted nearly to its relation towards the
P^gyptian year under the assimilated calendar.
(32) P. Tebt. 25. 7 ^Tovi vy Hai'(8iKou) i^ Mex^'v ^C- This is the earliest
instance yet found of the second and final assimilation of the two calendars,
introduced probably by liucrgctes II, who with greater success than the author
of the first Macedonian year of a separate existence by
assimilation deprived the
equating Dius to Thoth and the other months to correspond. Henceforth the
Macedonian months, though often inserted in contracts far into the Roman period,
became a useless appendage of their P^gyptian equivalents.
APPENDIX I 355
We give below in tabular form a list of the differences between the relations
of the Macedonian and Egyptian years implied by the double dates, leaving
out of account those correspondences in which the day is not given on both
calendars, and those which are on the assimilated calendar introduced in the
interval between (iS) and (20). The losses or gains of the Macedonian year
(the sign for minus means that it had lost, i. e. gone slower than the Egyptian
year, the sign for phis that it had gained, e. gone faster) are calculated on
i.
the hypothesis that it contained apart from intercalations 354 days. '
;
Gain or loss of Mace-

Interval between
donian year in days.
-93'(?)
+9
-43
+4
-66
+ 12
22
+1
+2
-47
+ 20
-125
181 or + 184
+ ii9(?)
+ 21
We conclude with a summary of the chief results of our inquiry into this
complicated subject.
(i) The irregularities of the Macedonian calendar fall into two main sections,
according as they are earlier or later than the introduction of the temporary
system by which the Macedonian months beginning with Dystrus were equated
to the Egyptian months beginning with Thoth.
(2) The earliest certain example of the use of this system is no. (24), which
belongs to the 24th year of Epiphanes, but there is good reason to believe that it
had already been introduced by the 4th year of Epiphanes cf no. (20). Since ;
there is no indication of its employment in the evidence down to the 4th year of
Philopator, the date of the first assimilation of the Macedonian to the Egyptian
months is to be attributed to the period of 18 years between the 4th year of
A a 2
356 HIBEH PAPYRI
Philopator and the 4th of Epiphanes. The latest certain example of the use
of the assimilated Macedonian calendar is provided by no. (28), written in the
5th year of the reign of Philometor, Euergetes II, and Cleopatra, which = the
1 6th year of Philometor ; which

but possibly no.
(30), is 8 years later than (29), is on
the same system, and that system may even have survived until the introduction
of the second assimilation by which the Macedonian months from Dius onwards
were equated to the Egyptian months beginning with Thoth.
(3) There is no justification for such a hypothesis as Strack's that there were
two sets of Egyptian months with the same names, making (i) the ordinary
vague year of '^6^ days which starts from Thoth i, and (2) a fixed year of
365^ days reckoned from the rising of Sirius on July 19, and two sets of
Macedonian months with the same names making years of unknown length
starting approximately from the spring and autumn equinoxes, a hypothesis which
accounts for dates on two calendars only by throwing all dates on one calendar
into chaos. The view of Krall that the Egyptian months in documents of
the Ptolemaic period are, so far as we know, all reckoned by the vague year
of '^f)^ days is sound, and there is no reason to suppose the existence of more
than one set of Macedonian months before the introduction of the first assimi-
lated Macedonian calendar between the 4th year of Philopator and the 4th year
of Epiphanes.
(4) The Macedonian year was probably a lunar one of 354 da}'s, the
12 months from Dius to Hyperberetaeus containing alternately 29 and 30 days.
Without any intercalations or deductions, it was thus 11 days shorter than the
Egyptian vague year.
{'y) In order to make up for this difference between the two calendars the
Macedonian year was subjected to frequent intercalations, the effect of which

was to make it on the average longer than the Egyptian year. Hence, before
the first period of assimilation, the general tendenc}' of Dius i is gradually to
fall later in the Egyptian year, so that at the end of the 32 years' period
between the year of Philadclphus (5) and the 4th of Philopator (17) the
3;'',th
relation of the Macedonian calendar to the P2gyptian was different by 150 days
from what it had been at the beginning.
(6) No consistent method of intercalation in the Macedonian year was
maintained through a series of years the irregularities are such that the
;
number of intercalated days seems to have varied from year to year. The
principles on which the number was fixed by the government and the place
in the year at which the days were inserted are quite uncertain
but a whole ;
month was sometimes intercalated cf. p. 334. ;
(7) In opposition to the general tendency of the Macedonian year to lose.

APPENDIX I 357
there are before the first (7), (10), and {16), and
assimilation four cases, (6),
perhaps three more, (11), (13), and which the sequence of Egyptian days
(18), in
corresponding to Dius i is broken^ and the Macedonian year has in comparison
with the immediately preceding correspondence gained instead of losing. Of
these seven apparent exceptions to the general rule nos, and (16)
(6), (7), (10),
cause no great difficulty, because the number of days gained by the Mace-
donian year is in all four instances less than the amount that it would neces-
sarily gain if there had been no intercalations in the year or, in the case of
(10), the years preceding. The exceptional character of (11) is caused by its
being placed after (9) but the correspondence is of an anticipatory character

;
which may never have actually occurred, and the position assigned to this date,
on the ground of the supposed shortness of the interval between it and (12),
which is most conveniently placed immediately before (13), is very uncertain.
The correspondence in (11), moreover, being only approximate, may be the
same as that indicated by (10), and if (10) and (11) refer to the same year, (11)
would cause no more difficulty than (10). As for (13), the break which it makes
in the sequence is more apparent than real, for since in the year to which it refers
Dius I fell near the end of Mecheir, the fact that in (12) Dius approximately
corresponded to Phamenoth is in no way inconsistent with the hypothesis
that between (12) and (13) the Macedonian year was, as usual, losing or at
least not gaining. By far the most serious exception to the rule that the
Macedonian year tends to lose would seem to arise in (18), which, if it is
4 months later than (17), indicates that in that interval the Macedonian year
had gained no less than 20 days. Whether this is due to an error in the
figures in (17) or (18) or to the sudden omission of 2G days in the Macedonian
year is doubtful.
(8) The changes in the relation of the Macedonian to the Egyptian year
are more rapid in the early parts of the reigns of Euergetes and Philopator
than in the later parts of the reigns of Philadelphus and Euergetes.
(9) After the assimilation of the Macedonian months to the Egyptian intro-
duced between the 4th year of Philopator and the 4th year of Epiphanes,
irregular correspondences, which imply the existence of a distinct Macedonian
Of these (21), of the 9th year of Epiphanes, is best
year, are occasionally found.
explained on the hypothesis that, side by side with the reformed Macedonian
calendar, the old Macedonian year was still running, its movements in relation
to the Egyptian year during the interval between (17) and (21) having been
exceptionally rapid. After (21) there follows a period of about 21 years (from
the 1 8th year of Epiphanes to the 5th year of the joint reign of Philometor,
Euergetes II, and Cleopatra), during which, if Smyly's correction in no. (23) be
358 HIBEH PAPYRI
accepted, all the extant double dates, (22)-(28), exhibit the assimilated
calendar, and the old Macedonian year may have then fallen into complete
disuse. But soon after Philometor's return from exile irregular correspondences
are found once more in (29)-(3i). Whether these are to be explained on the
view that the old Macedonian year reasserted itself, or that the Macedonian year
broke away from the assimilated calendar in the interval between (2S) and (29),
is not certain.
(10) The existence of a distinct Macedonian year cannot be detected with
any degree of certainty after the 26th year of Philometor, but owing to the
doubt as to the exact date of (31) it may have continued beyond the 26th year
of Euergetes II. Between the year in which (31) was written and the 53rd of
Euergetes II the Macedonian year beginning with Dius was finally assimilated
to the Egyptian vague year beginning with Thoth.
If the general theory which by the aid of much new evidence we have
suggested is on the right lines, and in all the extant double dates there was
but one Egyptian year of 365 days and, until the introduction of the earlier
of the two assimilated calendars, only one Macedonian year which on the whole
tended to lose in relation to the Egyptian, the problems caused by the use of
the Macedonian calendar will henceforth be somewhat simplified, for it is possible
from our Table to predict within certain limits the Egyptian month with which
a Macedonian month at any period from about the middle of Philadelphus'
reign to the 4th year of Philopator corresponded. If these predictions are
fulfilled by fresh instances of double dates, the correctness of our explanation will
be verified ; while on the other hand, if e.g. in the future Dius in the 31st year
of Philadelphus is found equated to Pharmouthi, or in the i8th year of Euer-
getes to Mesore, or in the 3rd year of Philopator to Choiak, the proposed theory
and the inferences based upon it must be abandoned. The irregular corre-
spondences which occur after the first attempt to assimilate the Macedonian to the
Egyptian calendar are still too few to admit the possibility of a satisfactory
theory with regard to the movements of the unreformed Macedonian year in the
second century B.C.
APPENDIX II
The Systems of Dating i5v the Years of tih-: King.
We have had frequent occasions in the course of the present volume to

allude to the difficulties caused by the use of more than one system of calculating
the years of the reigning king. Our object in this appendix is to discuss in the
APPENDIX II 359
light of the new evidence the relationship of the king's years to the ordinary
Egyptian vague years o{ '^6^ days beginning on Thoth i. Until 1 891 it was gener-
ally supposed that the method of reckoning the years of the king in the earlier
Ptolemaic period was the same as that employed in the later Ptolemaic and the
Roman periods.According to this system the interval between a king's
accession and the next Thoth i was counted as his ist year, while his 2nd and
succeeding years began on Thoth i and in spite of the discovery of some
;
disconcerting evidence, nearly all editors and historians continue to convert early
Ptolemaic dates into the corresponding years of the Julian calendar upon the
assumption that the years of the king were reckoned on that method. In 1891,
however, it was shown by a Petrie papyrus (Part I, 28 (2) = Part III, introd. p. 8
and 58 {c)) that in Euergetes I's reign two different systems of calculating the
king's years were in vogue. The correct restoration of the mutilated date-
formula in that papyrus, which in its imperfect form was discussed by Revillout
[Melanges, p. 350), and Strack {Rhein. Mtis. liii, p. 410), was first established
from a parallel text in the Petrie papyri (Part III, 58 [d)) by Smyly [Hermaihena,
1 899, p. 432), who showed
that the formula was in both cases irovs la w? 8' ai
day being in one case Phamenoth 25, in the other case lost.
TTpodoboi Tovs i^, the
To those two instances have now to be added (3) P. Magd. 35. 2 (re-edited by
Th. Reinach in Melanges Nicole, pp. 451-9) tov yap e {^tovs) wv at irpoaohoi <^l>ap.wu{6\
the reign being that of Philopator (4) 80. 13-4, where the demotic docket to
;
a Greek receipt written on Epeiph 4 of the 35th year of Philadelphus is dated

'
year 34 which makes year ^^ (5) an unpublished Tebtunis papyrus from
;
mummy 8, containing part of a petition to the king, in which {hovs) t/3 ws a\

TTpoaoboi ly occurs ; (6) the British Museum bilingual papyrus of Philopator's
reign (Griffith, Proe. Soc. Bibl. Arch. 190 1, pp. 294-302), in which the incon-
sistency between the date of the demotic contract ( Year 1 2, Tubi ') and that
of the Greek docket ('Year 13, Tubi 4') is probably to be explained by the
hypothesis that the king's years are calculated by two different methods.
Combining the evidence for the double system of reckoning the king's
years, three inferences are certain: (i) the double system extended over the
reigns of Philadelphus, Euergetes I, and Philopator,
(2) one of the two systems
was employed for revenue purposes, (3) the figures of the revenue year '
'
were sometimes one in advance of those of the other, which we shall henceforth call
the 'regnal' year. Beyond these three inferences we enter the region of con-
jecture, though a few steps may be taken with fair security.
In the first place it may be taken for granted that one of the two different
years corresponds to the ordinary vague year, the second year of the reign
commencing with the next Thoth i after the king's accession, as in later
360 HIBEH PAPYRI
Ptolemaic times and apparently under the XXVIth Dynasty (Spiegelberg,
Dem. Pap. dcv Strasslmrger Bibliothek, p. 15 Krall, Festschr.f. O. Hirschfeld,
;
p. 115). If any proof of this assumption is required it is supplied by e. g.
r. Pctrie III. 112, a taxing-list in which the 2nd year of Philopator is treated as
the next after the 26th and last year of Euergetes, the incomplete 26th year
of Euergetes being combined with the incomplete ist year of his successor so as
to make a single year; cf. also P. Petrie 119 verso, ii. 9 1 rwt- tov k<^ {hovs) a .
(erous).
Assuming therefore that either the revenue or the regnal year is the vague
year, with which of the two is it to be identified ? Revillout, who in spite of
reading daoboi for irpoaobot had divined 28 (2) referred to

that P. Petrie I.
a financial year, identified this with the ordinary vague year and the same ;
hypothesis was maintained by Smyly (/. c.) and is accepted by Th. Reinach,
although all three hold different views as to the nature of the regnal year.
This identification is indeed a natural corollary of the preceding assumption, if it
be also admitted that a revenue year should be fairly stable for a year of ;^6^
;
days regularly beginning on Thoth i fulfils this requirement far better than
a year of which the duration and starting-point may have been irregular.
We have no wish to depart from this generally received view that the revenue
years were ordinary vague years calculated as in later Ptolemaic times. Of the
numerous papyri and ostraca concerning TrpoVoooi the great majority accord very
well with it, especially the taxing-list for the 26th year of Euergetes and 2nd
year of Philopator mentioned above, which is very difficult to reconcile with any
other view of the revenue year. But the presence of numerous exceptions to
the rule that for revenue purposes the years were reckoned from Thoth i must
be admitted. In the regulations for the payment of the airoixoLpa in Rev. Laws
xxxiv. 5 the Egyptian calendar is ignored altogether, and the year is reckoned
OTTO Aiov ecos ['TTii)fipTaLov (cf. Wilcken, Ost. I. p. 519) and in Rev. Laws Ivii.
;
4-5 the king sells the eAaiK?/ for two years reckoned from Gorpiaeus-Mesore,
not from Thoth. In 114 the persons who arc farming two taxes els to y [eros)
of a king present a list of 9 monthly instalments reckoned from Mecheir to
Phaophi, ignoring Thoth as the beginning of a new financial year.
i In 116 the
year which is the subject of the tax-farming account in question is divided into
two halves beginning at Mecheir and Mcsore respectively, and though no year
is mentioned in this case, the normal practice in farming taxes was to buy the
cf. Wilcken, /. c.
right of collection for a particular year of a reign ; financial A
year beginning inMecheir would also suit 115, another tax-farming account
dealing with the period from Mecheir to Pachon, while 133 suggests a financial
year beginning in Mcsore. Neither of the last two instances, however, is very
APPENDIX II 361
strong, and it would be possible to explain away some of the other apparent
exceptions. The case of the aTT6[xotpa might be accounted for, as Wilcken (/. c.)
suggests, by supposing that a-no Aiov eo)? ['T-neppeperaCov applied only to Alexandria,
and that in the x^P^ ^^'^ words would be understood as equivalent to aird @w6 ews
Mecropi], though this explanation is admitted by its proposer to be unconvincing,
and in the light of the frequent use of the Macedonian calendar in the Petrie,
and still more in the Hibeh, papyri Wilcken seems to us to under-estimate
largely the extent of its employment for official and ordinary purposes. The
fact that the eAau?; was sold from Gorpiaeus-Mesore may well be due to special
circumstances, or the regulations concerning the year for tax-farming purposes
may have been what they were
different in the case of the oil-monopoly from
in the case of ordinary taxes (Wilcken, any event the two years for
/.r.) ; in
which the eAatKTj was sold are not stated to have coincided with two definite
years of the king's reign. The difficulty caused by 116, in which Mecheir begins
the financial year, might also be evaded by supposing either that for some
exceptional reason the year for the collection of this particular tax was spread
over parts of two revenue years instead of the whole of one, or that the 12 months
from Mecheir to Tubi were, contrary to custom, only part of a larger period
extending originally from Thoth i, for which the tax was farmed. We do not
however wish to bring 116 into conformity with the ordinary revenue year, for
even if all the other apparent exceptions were explained away, there would still
remain where no exercise of ingenuity can make the year in which the
114,
instalments were paid (Mecheir to Tubi or, less probably, Athur to Phaophi)
coincide with an ordinary revenue year, in spite of the fact that the taxes in
question were farmed ets ro y (eVos). This papyrus indeed leads to a serious
dilemma for either to y hos is a loose expression for a period covering two
:
parts of successive revenue years, which is not at all a satisfactory hypothesis,

or else ro y ^tos began in Mecheir (or Athur). The latter inference is
undoubtedly the more natural but the adoption of it implies not merely that
;
the taxing year in this particular case failed to coincide with an ordinary revenue
year, a phenomenon for which there are other parallels, but that on the system
of reckoning the king's years employed in the case of to y has Mecheir (or

Athur) was the first month of the year a result which might have an important
bearing on the question of the starting-point of the non-revenue or regnal year.
Whichever alternative be chosen, it is clear that 114 is an exception to the rule
that in documents concerning the revenue the year is reckoned from Thoth to
Mesore. Our conclusion, therefore, with regard to the revenue year is that,
although there good ground for identifying it with the ordinary vague year,
is
and in most cases where the years of a king's reign occur in documents relating
362 IlIBEH PAPYRI
to the revenues these are to be considered revenue years, nevertheless in some
departments of finance the accounts were kept without reference to the beginning
or close of the revenue year, and when the year of a king's reign is mentioned in
a revenue document this is not in itself a sufficient guarantee that it is a revenue

rather than some other kind of year, whether Egyptian or Macedonian.
With regard to the system of calculating the regnal years the central fact is
that where the regnal and revenue years are known to differ, the figures of the
revenue year are in some cases (probably in all) one in advance. The circum-
stance that when both kinds of years are mentioned together the revenue year
stands second and all the Greek instances defined, indicates that the
is in
undefined year which mentioned first was the more important

is and it is ;
probable that down to the accession of Epiphanes at any rate the regnal year was
more often employed than the revenue year in dating documents which are not
concerned with the revenues. With regard to private contracts and wills there
are some special grounds (cf p. 374) for thinking that it was not customary to
date them by the revenue year. The identification of the revenue year with the
annus vagus (the balance of days between the king's accession and the following
Thoth I being reckoned as his ist year) necessitates the conclusion that the
regnal year was calculated differently, but a more definite view of it is very
difficult to obtain. '
Smyly {HermatJiota, 1S99,

432) proposed to regard the regnal years as
p.
Egyptian years of 365 days calculated from the king's accession and succeeding
anniversaries of it, according to which system the numbers of the regnal years
would be one behind those of the revenue years in the period between Thoth i

and the anniversary. The question then arises In what months did the accession
of the earlier Ptolemies take place? Epiphanes, if the hieroglyphic version of
the Rosctta Inscr. may be trusted (the Greek is unfortunately defective on the
point), and if TiaptXaBev tijv /Soo-tAeiai' irapa tov Ttarpos in 1. 47 refers, as is
generally supposed, to the king's accession, came to the throne on Phaophi 17,
but unfortunately no document belonging to his reign has yet been discovered in
which the revenue arc distinguished from the regnal years. With regard to the
month of Philadelphus' accession nothing is known. From 80. 13 it would be
necessary on the accession theory of regnal years to infer that he came to the
throne after Epeiph 4 and this hypothesis would accord very well with the
;
fact that a demotic papyrus now being edited by Mr. Griffith (cf. 84 {a) introd.)
is dated in Phamcnoth of the 21st year of Soter. The Canon of Ptolemy assigns
only 20 years to Soter, and if that statement is accurate and the 21st year
was not only his last year but a revenue year, the evidence would point to
Philadelphus' accession having taken place between Phamenoth and the
APPENDIX II 363
following Thoth i. If the 21st year of Soter is a regnal year, the received
chronology of Soter's reign is in danger of being upset, and amid the general
uncertainty which would result it would no longer be possible to be sure that the
aist year was his But either view is consistent with the hypothesis that
last.
Philadelphus' reign began in Epeiph or Mesore.

Next with regard to Philopator P. Magd. '^^. 2 would on the accession
theory indicate that this event took place between Phamenoth and the following
Thoth, and if Jouguet and Lefebvre are right in inferring from the Magdola
papyri written in the ist year of Philopator (P. Magd. Detixihne Se'rie, p. 205)
that he came to the throne between Thoth i and Tubi 12, it would be
impossible to harmonize these inferences. But the conclusion that Philopator's
accession took place before Tubi 12 rests on the assumption that in the Magdola
papyri written on Tubi 12 of the ist year of that reign the ist revenue year,
which ended on the 5th intercalary day, is meant. If (as is on the whole more
probable) they are dated by the regnal year, they do not, until the beginning
and end of Philopator's first regnal year have been determined by other
evidence, prove more than the fact that his ist regnal year included Tubi 12.
Though Euergetes is known from P. Petrie III. 112 to have died in his
26th revenue year, we have been unable to discover any document actually
dated in that year which would indicate how far into the 26th year his reign
lasted. Some better evidence for the month of Philopator's accession is provided
by P. Petrie III. 141, an account dated at the beginning {hovs) /ce Xo[tal/< and
ending with Thoth of the 1st year. Palaeographical considerations render it
practically certain that the reigns of Euergetes and Philopator are meant, and
the form of one of the entries, (11. 24-5) koX oxlrcoviov rod a (^tovs) cltto Wavvi eco? tov
&avT y.r]vSiv h {hpax\xa\) implies, as Smyly remarks, that the whole of this
i<j-,
period of 4 months was included in the ist year. From this it is necessary to
infer that the 1st is not a revenue year and it becomes probable that the
;
25th year mentioned in the heading is the last regnal year of Euergetes, and
that Philopator came to the throne between Choiak and Pauni. Since the
accession theory only requires that Philopator should have come to the throne
between Phamenoth and Mesore inclusive, it is perfectly in accord with the
evidence of P. Petrie III. 141. But a great objection to this theory arises
out of the data for the accession of Euergetes. The Canopus Inscr. 1. 6
TT]v TT^tiTiTriv Kol eiKoâ TOV avTov iJLi]v6s (sc. Dius) iv rji TtapiXafiev ti]v IBaa-iKciav Trapa
TOV iraTpo? hasbeen almost universally interpreted as meaning that Euergetes*

accession took place on Dius 25th. The inference is not free from doubt, for the
Rosetta Inscr. uses the phrase Trapakaêlv rrjy âcnkeiav Trapa tov iraTpos in
connexion with two different days, Mecheir 18 (11. 7-8) and Phaophi 17 (1. 47;
364 HIBEH PAPYRI
cf. p. 3'^2). The first supposed to refer to the king's coming of age, the
date is
second to his actual accession when an infant (cf. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci
Inscr. I. p. 145), and it is not quite certain that in the Canopus Inscr. the phrase
refers to the king's accession rather than e.g. to his coronation; but we are
disinchned from the ordinary interpretation of the passage. The
to depart
information, however, that Euergetes came to the throne on Dius 25 is not of
much service unless that date on the Macedonian calendar can be converted into
itsapproximate Egyptian equivalent. The general tendency of the Macedonian
months to fall later in the Egyptian year, coupled with the fact that in the 36th
year of Philadelphus Dius approximately coincided with Athur and in the 9th
year of Euergetes with Choiak-Tubi (cf. Table), requires that the accession of
Euergetes on Dius 25 should fall in the months Athur, Choiak or Tubi, or at
any rate within the period from Phaophi to Mecheir inclusive. This is in
accordance with the evidence of papyri dated near the end of Philadelphus'
reign, for the latest recorded date in his 39th year is Athur 16 (53. 4). It is
also consistent with Smyly's interpretation of the date in the heading of

P. Petrie III. 141. In itself, therefore, the hypothesis that Euergetes' accession
occurred in Athur-Tubi is quite satisfactory; but Smyly himself remarks that
it is irreconcilable with his former explanation oS. regnal years, which requires
that the revenue years should be in advance of the regnal years only in the
period from Thoth to the anniversary of the accession, whereas P. Petrie
1
III. 58 shows
{c) that the period during which the revenue years were in
advance extended as late as Phamenoth 25. To suppose, as the accession
theory requires, that Dius 25 in the 1st year of Euergetes corresponded to some
day in the period between Phamenoth 25 and the end of Mcsore would hopelessly
break the sequence which we believe to be traceable in the months of the
Egyptian year corresponding to Dius in the latter part of the third century H. C.
Another explanation of the regnal years has recently been suggested by
Th. Reinach {Mclaiigcs Nicoh\ p. 456), who proposes to regard them as ordinary
l^gyptian vague years of 365 days like the revenue years, but calculated from
Thoth I after the king's accession, the balance of days between the king's
accession and the following Thoth 1 (which constituted the 1st revenue year)
being attributed to his dead predecessor. On this theory of the regnal years,
their numbers were invariably one behind those of the revenue years, and so far
as the papyri dated by both systems are concerned (which, it may be noted,
with one exception fell in the second half of the P'gyptian vâgue year), they are
consistent with Reinach's explanation. But Reinach's view is open to grave
objections. In the first place it is a prioriimprobable that people would
continue to date documents by the reign of a king who wâs known to be
APPENDIX II 365
dead; and, not to mention 118 and the other instances quoted on pp. 360-1,
P. Petrie III. 141 seems to us in itself sufficient to remove Reinach's inabihty to
believe qu'a aucune epoque les annees regnales aient ete officiellement
(/. c.) '
comptees a partir d'une autre date que le i" Thoth,' for a year in which Thoth
comes after Mesore cannot have begun with Thoth. In order to reconcile
Reinach's explanation of regnal years with P. Petrie III. 141 it seems necessary
to suppose that the whole period from a king's accession to the end of his 2nd
revenue year was counted as his first regnal year. From
would follow
this it
that in a ist regnal year some months occurred twice over, which is a very
unsatisfactory hypothesis. Secondly, if Thoth i was New Year's day on both
the revenue and regnal systems, the only intelligible justification for having
a separate system for budget purposes is removed, and the distinction between
the two systems would seem to have been designed for the purpose of creating
confusion. If the regnal years ignored Thoth i altogether, it is perfectly
natural that the Ptolemies maintained for financial purposes the observance of
a year with a fixed number of days and a fixed starting-point which remained
unaffected by the succession of sovereigns. But if the regnal year was of the
same character as the revenue year, there seems to be no adequate reason for
having a separate year for financial purposes which only differed from the regnal
year by having its numbers one in advance.
Thirdly, if the regnal as well as the revenue year was regulated by the
Egyptian calendar, it is practically necessary to postulate the existence of
a third system of reckoning the years of a king employed in documents dated
on the Macedonian calendar for it is hardly credible that e. g. in royal edicts,
;
which usually ignore the Egyptian months altogether, the commencement and
duration of the years of the reign should be fixed with reference to an Egyptian
system cf. Strack, Rhem. Mus. liii. p. 422.
; Moreover Rev. Laws xxxiv. 5 (cf.
p. 360) shows that a Macedonian year from Dius to Hyperberetaeus was sometimes
taken into account, even in matters relating to finance and the evidence of the
;
double dates proves that the relation of Macedonian months to the Egyptian was
subject to perpetual alterations. It is of course not only a legitimate but no
doubt the safer course to leave the question of
Macedonian years on one side
in discussing the distinction of theEgyptian revenue and regnal years but to ;
suppose that in documents dated by the Macedonian calendar the years meant
are also Egyptian regnal years would greatly simplify the problem by reducing
the number of systems in common use from three to two.
The view that the Egyptian regnal years were really Macedonian years
calculated from the date of the king's accession and succeeding anniversaries of
it was suggested by Revillout {Melanges, p.
350) in connexion with P. Petrie
366 HIBEH PAPYRI
I. 28 (2) (=111. 58 [c)), but so long as the relation of the Egyptian and
Macedonian calendars was involved in complete obscurity remained incapable of
proof or disproof. Now, however, granting that Euergetes' accession took place
on DIus 25, it is worth while to inquire how far the view that his regnal years
began on Dius 25 avoids the principal difficulty {cf. p. 364) which arises if the
regnal years are supposed to have commenced on anniversaries of that day on
the Egyptian calendar with which Dius 25th corresponded at Euergetes'
accession. In order to make Phamenoth 25 of Euergetes' 12th revenue year
fall within his nth regnal year, as is by P. Petrie III. 58 [c), it is
indicated
necessary, on Revillout's theory of regnal years, to suppose that Dius 25, the
first day of the 12th regnal year, fell later than Phamenoth 25, e. that Dius
i.
I fell later than Phamenoth i. But the evidence of double dates in the 9th and
16th years of Euergetes (cf. App. i, Table) suggests that Dius i in the 12th year
fell in Choiak or Tubi, and the hypothesis that it fell later than Phamenoth i in
the 1 2th year would therefore disturb the sequence of double dates not much
less than the view that it fell later than Pham.enoth i at Euergetes' accession.
Nor is the date in P. Petrie III. 58 (r) easier to explain by supposing that the
regnal years began on Dius i, the balance of days between the king's accession
and the following Dius i being reckoned as his ist regnal year for in that case
:
Dius I of the 12th regnal year must have begun later than Phamenoth 25, a
conclusion which increases rather than diminishes the difficulty referred to above.
The theory of a Macedonian origin of the Egyptian regnal years can indeed
be reconciled with the extant evidence concerning both the divergence of the
regnal and revenue years in the reign of Euergetes and the relation of the
Macedonian and Egyptian calendars in his reign by supposing that the regnal
\cars were reckoned from Dius i, but that the ist regnal year either began
on Dius following his accession or included the period from his accession up to
1
the next but one Dius i. The former alternative is, however, open to the
objection already urged against Reinach's view (cf. p. 3(^4^ viz. the difficulty of
supposing that documents would continue to be dated by the years of a king
who is known to be dead, and the would lead to the conclusion that
latter
Euergetes' first regnal year contained two whole Macedonian years less 24 days;
while from either theory it would follow that the numbers of the regnal years were
in certain months two in arrear of those of the revenue years, which is unlikely.
We are reduced therefore to the conclusion that none of the suggested

explanations of the distinction between revenue and regnal years can be regarded
as satisfactory, and that the present evidence is inadequate to provide a solution
of the problem. In these circumstances the only course is to fall back upon the
one certain fact connected with regnal years that their numbers were sometimes
APPENDIX II 367
one in arrear of those of revenue years ; and since the distinction between
a revenue and regnal year is maintained in Philadelphus' reign as late as Epeiph
and in the reigns of Euergetes and Philopator as late as Phamenoth, for practical
purposes regnal years may beregarded as approximately a year in arrear of the
revenue years. This consideration has an important bearing on the conversion of
early Ptolemaic dates into years of the Julian calendar, since any date in which
the year of the king is regnal is likely to fall within the year B. C. following that
within which it would fall if the king's year were a revenue one ; and the con-
ventional system, which still prevails, of converting early Ptolemaic dates into
years on the assumption that the king's years are reckoned on the revenue
B. C.
system certainly in need of modification.

is With regard to the system of
calculating the king's years employed in documents which are dated by
Macedonian months, there are some reasons for thinking that the years cor-
respond with regnal rather than with revenue years
(cf. p. 374) and in the absence ;
of any direct evidence for more than two systems of reckoning the king's years
we are inclined to identify the official Macedonian years with the regnal years,
and hence to connect the difficulties concerning the latter with the use of
a Macedonian instead of an Egyptian year, although the fresh evidence adduced
in this volume with regard to the Macedonian calendar does not render that con-
nexion easier to unravel.
APPENDIX III
The Eponymous Priesthoods from b. c. 301-221.
The list of the eponymous priesthoods during the Ptolemaic period in Otto's
Priester und Tempel, pp. 175-96, can now be largely supplemented as regards
the third century B. c. from the new volume of the Petrie papyri and the present
series of texts,and a revised table of the priesthoods during the reigns of the
first may be found useful. The most striking feature of the new
three Ptolemies
evidence is that which proves the extreme antiquity of the priesthood of
Alexander at Alexandria, the origin of which cult has been in its various
bearings one of the most widely discussed problems in the history of the
Diadochi. Hitherto the earliest year to which the priesthood of Alexander
could be carried back was the i6th year of Philadelphus (b. c. 270-69 or 269-8),
to which P. Petrie I. 24, until now the oldest dated Greek papyrus, belongs
two earlier demotic contracts in the Louvre, dated in the 13th year of Soter
368 HIBEH PAPYRI
and the 8th year of Philadelphus respectively, made no mention of any priest-
hoods. Though the dangerous character of the argnviciitiiin a silentio when
based upon date-formulae of contracts is by this time generally admitted, the
evidence of these two demotic papyri that the cult of Alexander was not
instituted till some years after the accession of Philadelphus seemed to be
supported by the circumstance that, when that cult made its appearance, the
gods Adelphi were uniformly associated with Alexander and it is not surpris- ;
ing that the latest critic (Otto, op. cit. pp. 138-52) strongly supports the
view of Wilamowitz and Wilcken, who
e. g. regarded Philadelphus as the
creator of Alexander cult at Alexandria, against that of Kaerst and
tlie
Korncmann, who mainly on the evidence of Pseudo-Callisthenes (III. y^)

wished to credit the foundation of the cult to Soter. Kaerst and Kornemann
nevertheless were right, and one more proof is given of the historical elements
interwoven into the romance of Alexander. Though we need not accept its
statement that the priesthood of Alexander was instituted by the will of
Alexander himself, that assertion was not very wide of the mark. The Hibeh
papyri fortunately include several date-formulae earlier than P. Petrie I. 24 ;
and not only in 110. 40 and 44 dated in the 12th and 13th years of Philadelphus,
and 97. 3 dated in the 7th (or 4th) year of the same reign, but even in 84
{a) which was actually written in the 5th year of Soter, i.e. about B.C. 300,
is the mention of the year of the reigning monarch followed by the entry
e(// Upeojb- A roD B. It is true that this priest is in no instance stated to be

the priest of Alexander but even if it were not known independently that
;
the cult of Ptolemy Soter at Alexandria was first introduced in the reign of
Philopator (cf. Otto, op. cit. p. 180), no official cult but that of Alexander could
have obtained such importance in Egypt by l>. C. 300 that it was unnecessary
to specify the deity to which the priest was attached.
'
' It was only when, in
some period between the 13th year and Uaisius(i.e. Phamenoth or Pharmouthi
probably) of the 15th year of Philadelphus (cf 110. 44 and 99. 3), that sovereign
associated the cult of his sister and himself with the worship of Alexander, that
a more precise description of the greatest official priesthood was ordained, and
the brief formula of the early documents took the first step in the direction
of those interminable lists of priesthoods of deified Ptolemies which finally
exhausted the patience of the later Ptolemaic scribes. Since Arsinoe Phila-
delphus died in the 15th year of her brother's reign before the month of Pachon
(cf. the date of the Mendes stele quoted by Bouche-Leclercq, Histoire des
Lagides, I. p. 180), the association of the gods Adelphi with the cult of
Alexander may well have been one of the many divine honours paid to her
by Philadelphus after her death, although the evidence does not exclude the
APPENDIX III 369
possibility that the association took place one or two years previously. To the
interval Daisius of the 15th year, and dem. P. Louvre 2424,
between 99, written in
written in Athur of the 19th (if Revillout's decipherment of it is to be trusted),

is to be assigned the creation of the canephorate of Arsinoe and the institution
;
of this priesthood at any rate no doubt closely connected with her death.
is
Besides their new evidence for the existence of the priesthood of Alexander
in B.C. 300, the date of the association of the gods Adelphi with Alexander,
and the date of the institution of the canephorate of Arsinoe Philadelphus,
the Hibeh papyri also serve to limit the date at which the association of the
gods Euergetae in the Alexander cult took place to the 3rd, 4th, or 5th years of
Euergetes cf. 145 with 171 and our remarks on no. (21).
;
In the following Table the names of the priests and priestesses are given
in Greek (in the genitive case) when the evidence for them is in that language,
but in Roman characters when the evidence is derived from demotic documents.
It is often difficult to recognize a Greek name in its demotic form, even when
that is correctly deciphered ; few, therefore, of the names which rest on the
evidence of demotic are likely to be quite correct, while many of them are
obviously wrong. Where, as in all the demotic and some of the Greek papyri
which mention the priests, the months are given on the Egyptian calendar, the
king's years may be either revenue '
or regnal' years (cf. App. ii.)
'
' since ;
most of the names of priests are derived from private documents, it is probable
that the regnal years largely predominate, but only in one case, no. (27),
'
'
can it be determined with certainty which of the two years is meant. Where,
as in most of the Greek evidence, the months are given on the Macedonian
calendar, the presumption is that the king's years are calculated on a Macedonian
system, which we are disposed to regard as identical with or approximating to
the system employed in reckoning regnal years; cf our remarks on (27).
In converting the dates into years on the Julian calendar, the date B.C. which
is probably implied if the year in question is regnal is placed in brackets after
the date implied if the year is a revenue one. The priesthoods were annual
offices, though sometimes renewable for a second term, e. g. nos. (25) and
(26). Probably the year in question was the official Macedonian year, whatever
that may have been. It is noticeable that inconsistencies with regard to the
dates of particular priests are rare (cf nos. (21) and (32)), and the evidence forms
several consistent series covering a number of consecutive years, e. g. from the x
8th to the 13th years of Euergetes. This strongly indicates that the priest's year
of office coincided with the year (Macedonian or regnal, rather than revenue, as
we think) employed in dating the great majority of the documents from which
the list of priests is drawn up.
Bb
370 HIBEH PAPYRI
No.
APPENDIX III 371
Year of
B.C.
reign.
253-2
(252-1)
34 252-1
(251-0)
36 250-49
(249-8)
27-39 259-46
31-39 255-46
2 246-5
(245-4)
3 245-4
(244-3)
4(?) 244-3
(243-2)
5
372 HIBEH PAPYRI
No.
APPENDIX III 373
canephorus correctly, and call the priest of Alexander Antimachus son
of Cebes. Ke/3?jro? does not, however, suit the traces of letters in 95. 2,
though -Tos is possible ; cf. note ad loc.
(15) Dem. P. Louvre 2433 (Revillout, Chrest. dem. pp. 241 sqq., Rev. ^gypt.
I. p. 6). In P. Petrie III. 42 F {a), written probably in this year, occurs
the earliest extant example of rov 6vro% and rj/y ovo-t/s in place of the
names of the priest and canephorus.
(16) 98. 7.
(17) The name of the canephorus is preserved in P. Petrie I. 22 (i). 2 and dem.
P. Louvre 2443, that of the priest of Alexander only in the latter
(Revillout, direst, dhn. pp. 246 sqq., Rev. Agypt. Apinatus is I. p. 6).
not likely to be right. Revillout deciphered the canephorus as Atis
daughter of Mennas.
(18) P. Petrie III. 56 (^) (= Rev. Laws p. 187). The year is lost (Otto wrongly
assigns it to the 27th), but is not earlier than the 27th, in which the
formula rTroAe/xatou rov riroXe/xatou ^wrT/pos was introduced (Rev. Laws
i. i). The papyrus therefore belongs to the 27th, 30th, 31st, 32nd, 35th,
37th, 38th, or 39th years.
(19) P. Petrie III. 54 {a). 2. The papyrus is later than the 30th year and
probably belongs to the 31st, 35th, 38th, or 39th years rather than to
the 32nd or 37th ; cf. Smyly's note.
(20) P. Petrie III. 43 (2). Louvre 2438 (Revillout,
ii. i et saep. ; cf. dem. P.
Chrest. dtfin. 7), where the names were
pp. 257 sqq., Rev. Agypt. I. p.
deciphered as Tlepolemos or Triporimos son of Altibios, and Ptolemaea
daughter of Theon or Thian.
(ai) 145 preserves the names 'A/>)(e[Aaou and noAe/xoKpaTov(s) cf. for the rest the ;
names of the priests in the 4th year in dem. P. Louvre 2431 (Revillout,
Chrest. dem. pp. 265 sqq.. Rev. Egypt. I. p. 7), where they have been
deciphered as Archelaos or Alecros son of Demos and Arsinoe daughter
of Polemocrates. 145 was written probably in Artemisius, which then
corresponded approximately to Pauni the demotic papyrus (cf. App. i) ;
is dated in Mecheir. two dates to the same

It is possible to refer the
year of office on the hypothesis that the Greek papyrus is dated by
the regnal, the demotic by the revenue year cf. App ii. Or, if the 3rd ;
and 4th years are really distinct, and there is no error in the demotic,
Archelaus and Arsinoe may have remained in office for two years, like
the priests of the 9th and loth years.
(22) Dem. P. Louvre 2431 cf. note on (21). ;
(23) 171.
374 HIBEH PAPYRI
(24) 80. 2 and Hibeh unpubl. pap. ÔvofxaKptTov is a possible alternative for
'OroixdaTov ; cf. 89, introcl.
(25) Inscr. Canop. i. Cf. the next note.

(26) P. Pctrie III. 5 (a). 2,it is uniformly stated in these documents
6(a). 17, &c. ;
that Apollonides and Mcnccratia held office for the second year.
(27) P. Petrie III. 58 (c). 7 (introd. p. 8) and ^H [d). 7. These two papyri are
dated in the Jith regnal and 12th revenue year (cf p. 359), and are
therefore free from the uncertainty attaching to dates in which the two
sy.stems of dating are not distinguished. Since regnal years so far as
can be judged (cf p. 367) begin or may begin about a year later than
revenue years having the same numbers, and the conventional system of
converting early Ptolemaic dates into years of the Julian calendar
probably applies only to the revenue years, we assign these two papyri
to B. c. 236-5. not to B. C. 2'^']-6, comparison of the evidence con- A
cerning Seleucus and Aspasia, who are known to have held office in the
iith regnal and 12th revenue years, with that concerning Eucles and
Stratonice, no (28), is instructive. There are no less than six instances
in which the latter are mentioned in wills of the 12th year (excluding
those cases in which the figure is lost), and seeing that different priests
were during part at any rate of the 12th revenue year, it is very
in office
unlikely that the 12th year in connexion with Eucles and Stratonice was
a revenue year, especially as none of these six papyri
is concerned with
revenues and the months, where their names arc preserved, are given
on the Macedonian, not the Egyptian, calendar. Whether the king's
years reckoned on the Macedonian system are distinct from the Egyptian
regnal years is uncertain (cf p. 2)^6) '> but even if the two systems are
independent and the 12th year those six instances
is not identical with
in
. the twelfth regnal year, the circumstance that the priests mentioned in
them are different from those who arc known to have held office in the
nth regnal year and 12th revenue year suggests that the r2th Macedonian
year corresponded much more closely to the 1 2th regnal year than to the
1 2th revenue }-ear.
(28) P. Petrie III. n. 10, 37, 13 (<^). 21, 14. 12, 15. 2, 16. 18, &c.
(29) P. Petrie III. 18. i and ,35. 1 ; cf. dcm. P. Marseille correctly deciphered by
Revillout, Rev. llgypt. I. p. 134. Since the 12th year in (28) is probably
a regnal, not a revenue year, the fact that the priests in (29) are different
from those in (28) indicates that the 13th year in (29) also is a regnal
year; cf.our remarks on (27).
(30) Dcm. P. Louvre 2429 (Revillout, Chiest. dcm. pp. 273 sqq., Rev. ^gypt.
APPENDIX III 375
I. p. 8). The grandfather's name of the priest of Alexander (' Euphra-

toros,' Revillout) seems to be given, but we suspect an error either in
the text or the decipherment. Otto {op. cit. p. 177) proposes 'EAAowkos
'EWavLKov Tov Ev(f)pdvopoi. The year is not quite certain, being lost in
the demotic contract and restored from the Greek docket. Otto prefers
(hovs) tq- to (hovs) le, but in the facsimile te is more suitable. Neither
'
Socia Licotas can be right.
' nor ' '
(31) Cf. three demotic papyri in the British Museum (Revillout, Chrest. dent.
p. cxxxvi, and Rev. Egypt. I. pp. 15, 119, and 135), and dem. P. Berl.
3089 (Spiegelberg, dem. P. Berl. p. 6). Revillout gives the forms Mennas,
son of Menetios, and Berenice (twice elsewhere Cleonica and Cerdica)
;
daughter of Atis (or Adaeus), Spiegelberg Mnas son of Mntias (the last s
being doubtful) and Brniga (i. e. Berenice) daughter of ,'Atis (Actios ?).
(32) In dem. Louvre 2425 {Chrest. dim. pp. 278 sqq.. Rev. Egypt. I. p. 8),
P.
dated in Mesore of the 20th year, Revillout gives the priests' names
as Calistos son of Philistion and Berenice daughter of Sosipatros. These
persons are obviously the same as the priests of the 21st year, known
from P. Petrie III. 21. {a). 1, 5, {b). i, 6, {g). 29, as was pointed out by
Wilcken {Gdtt.gcl.An2. 1895, p. 143), who in P. Petrie I. 27 (=111. 21 {b))
proposed to insert to /3 (eVos) after îXiaTicjivos, but wrongly cf. Smyly's ;
note on III. 21 {b). The Greek documents therefore, unlike those

mentioned in connexion with (26), give no indication that the 2i.st was
the second year in which Galestes and Berenice held office, and another
demotic papyrus (dem. P. Lond., Chrest. dem. p. 131, and Rev. Egypt.
I. p. 118), which mentions them, is dated in Epeiph of the 2Tst year.
Hence we think the attribution of a second year of office to Galestes and

Berenice is erroneous. The conflict of evidence with regard to them can
be reconciled by the hypothesis that the 20th is a regnal, the 21st a revenue
year ; cf. But we are more inclined to suspect an error in the
no. (21).
text or decipherment of dem. P. Louvre 2425, especially as Revillout from
another demotic papyrus in London {Aegypt. Zeitschr. 1880, p. iii) gives
Actitos and a daughter of Alexilaos as priests in the 20th year.
(33) Cf. note on (32).
(34) P. Petrie III. 19, {c). i, 9, (/). 9, &c. and several demotic papyri.
P. Petrie IIL 21 {g). 1-3, where the priests' names are omitted, also
belongs to this year cf. note on no. (36).
; The demotic names were
deciphered by Revillout as Alexicrates son of Diogenes or Theogenes and
Berenike daughter of Cleonicus, and by Spiegelberg as jAlgsigrts son of
Thugns and Berenike daughter of Griangs.
376 HIBEH PAPYRI
{^$) Dcm. P. Lond. (Rcvillout, Aegypt. Zcitschr. 1880, p. 112), where the father's
name of the priest of Alexander is given as lasou.

{'^6) 90. 3 and an unpublished Tebtunis papyrus; cf. note on 90. 2. The
names occur in dem. P. Berl. 3096, where they were deciphered by
Revillout {Rev. l^gypt.IV. p. 152) as Dositheos son of Dositheos and
Berenike daughter of Ph tim krs, by Spiegelberg (dem. P. Berl. p. 6)
. . . .
as Tusitus (Dosithoos) son of Tripirus (Tryphilos) and Berenike daughter

of Phitimigrs (or Khitimigrs). In P. Petrie III. 21 {g), where the editors
read in 11. 1-3 {^tovs) k [e^' Upe'cos] TlToXilfxatov tov jou AXe^dvbpov'
Kol 6eS)v 'A8eA. koI di&v Evepy. Kavr](f). Âpcr. 4>tX. Tt/x t?)? ' AX^^dvbpov
. . 5 we read {(tovs) k^ [e(/)' leptcos] tov 6vt{os\ kv 'A[Xeai'8/3ei]ai ÂXe^dvbpov
K.T.X. K.ain](}). 'Apa. *i.A. Trjs ovotjs h 'AXeâvbpeCai. This protocol therefore
provides another early example of the omission of the priests' names ; cf.
no. (15).
(37) P. Petrie II. 25 (z). 5.

INDICES
I. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS.
dyados 1. 3 ; 5. 90 ; 14. 36. aWoi 1. 5, 23 ; 6. 9 ; 14. 60 ; dvTi 14. 75, 78.
ayav 3. 48 ; 7. 7" 15. 54,88, 132, 147, 162; auTtXnp,^dv(tv 15. 44.
"V'" 4. 33 (?)' 53- 10. 26. oXXo)? 1. 10 15. ;

dvTi\eyiv 10. 35.
dyopevtiv 14. 74. 99; 16. 29, 35. 'AvTi(pa)v 12. 6.
aypoiKos Q. 35. ahXoTpioi 13. 2; 17. 2 2. dn-aj 1. 16; 3. 2; 5. 84 ; 6.
dywi/iai' 6. 37- akikvpos 16. 42.
^
35; 14.83; 15. 28.
dycDft'^fcrât 14. 1 66. nXoyos 16. 43. dnep^fcrBai 6. 1 3.
a8j/ 13. 21, 25. 'AX^ftdy 3. 39. dnUvai 6. 12.
dfitKeli' 15. 32. afiapTaveiv 6. I4I. dTrXoGjlO. 13; 17. 29. dTrXws
aSiKos 2. 8. CLfiapTia 6. 131, 132. 7. 96; 17. 18.
dfivj/OToy 5. 80. d/i0t' 8. 6. dt:613. 30; 15. 114.
dfi'l. 9; 8. 7. ^ dij.<piyvos, 8. 16. duoyiyvaa-KHV 15. III.
dr;6)7y 2. 5- dpcftoTfpTjKr]': 8. 8. aTToSft^ty 15. 85.
'A^Tjj/aloy 15. 39, 91, 108, 139. aUfpai 3. 24. a7roSt8oi/at Q. 7.
'Adrjvr] 6. 37. ai/ 3. 10, 29; 6. 9, 22 ; 13. dnoBtrqcrKeiv 14. 34.

dêti/ 10. 4. 16; 15. 57, 61, 72. aiTOiva 3. 20.
d^wor 4. 17 ; 15. 35. di/ayKd^fif 15. 95. dTTOKaXfli/ 15. 4, 7-
Aias 9. 2. dvayopevtiv 14. 3 1, 42. 'AttoXXwi' 5. 20; 6. 35.
at^jjp 11. 10. dx/ayAcatoj 6. 33; 17. 27. dnoTvK'qpovv 4. 6.
aipflp 15. 104. dvoKTOpov 4. 70. dno(TTep(lv 14. 86.
al(T\vv(LV 13. 31. dvoKicrKfiv 17. 12, 23. dTCOTp\fiv 6. 10.
airt'a 1. lO. di/dXa>/xa 17. I. drrocPfpeiv 6. 6.
AirwXof 13. 18. dvauSpia 15. 89. diToxpfia-dai 15. 102.
aKpA^dv 15. 82. o""^ 3. 53. anwdeu 10. 35.
oKotrts 7. 53 (?). dm^tos 15. 107. d'pa 3. 21 ; 4. 10; 10. 3.
aKovfiv Q. 24; 4. 10; 5. 89; dva(TTpf(f)(LV 6. 8. 'Apyftor 8. 24.
12. 7, 16. di'6pf?oj 13. 15, 16, 20, 22. dperrj 15. 87.
aKpi^ws 5. 16. dvfineiu (dvepeti') 14. 40. "Ap^s 5. verso i.
aKpoffoXif 14. 49. avffxos 7. 5^* dpidptlv 6. 31.

dXyfivos 3. 28. dvixîv 4. 2 (?); 15. 31. ipp-ovla 13. 16, 21, 22; 18. 2.
dKrjdfia 17. 3. dinipl. 7, 16; 4. 8,
55; 13. app-oviKos 13. 4, 27.
dXi'a 1. 2. I ; 14. 36, 48, 106 15. ; apTos 6. 6,
dXXd 1. 8 ; 3. 42, 43 ; 4. 19 ; 38, 91, 107. dpx^ytTis 15. 131.
6. 40; 7.96; 14. 88,93; av6po)iTos 2. 6 ; 5. 14, 5 5
dpcoydf 3. 52.
15. 49 e/ saep. ; 16. 50 ;
6. 40; 7. 43, 45; 17. 16. dareior 1. 14.
17. 21. auoia 5. 78, do-0dXea 15. 46, 103, Il7-
378 INDICES
acr(j)aKTns 16. 32. yi 16. 33, 40. îa(Popd 16. 40.
a^ 6. 88. yrjde'iv 1. 23. î?>(wni 1. 15
5. 2.
avdaiperos 10. 2. yrjpdcTKeiv 17. 6. f>iK[ 5. 41.
avXoi 13. 34 (?). yiyveaBai 1. I3; 4. 32, 46; 8iKd(fii> 6. 88.
18. 7-
aii^dvdi' 5. 15, 19; 6. 24, 25; 16. diKalos 13. 14.
avptov 6. 24.
f5,
33. 37; 18. 5, 13. 8iKa(TTrjs 14. 48.
avravTov 1. 15. yXoxTcra 7. 45- atVr, 1. 2; 6. 86; 14. 167.
ni'rojuoroj 15. 114- yvJ](Tios 3. 47 ; 14. I I. 816 17. 25.
avroy 1. 23 37
; 2. 26 ; 3. ;
yvu>p.rj 1. 6, 11; 14. 74, 80, Atoi'vcrin 14. 30.
6. 77, 81, 85; 6. 19 <V 82. HioTvep 17. I 7-
saep.; 8. 18; 12. 12; 13. ypavs 6. 20, 46, 59. 610s 8. 2 I.
17, 30; 14. 25; 15. 69, yvfjivni 5. 65. (^toVi 5. 16 ; 15. 29, 39 ; 16.
86, 105, 115; 16. 36; yui/i] 6. 32, 42, 123 ; 17. 4. 35-
17.3- ycoi'tofiSi}? 16. 42. BinXdaios 17. 25.
oi'T-oi; 13. 7, 9 ; 17. 2 1, 26. Sta>/3eXia 14. 96.
afpi^pi'ifiv 10. 19. Sai>wi/ 2. 6 ; 10. 37. SoKfJi' 7. 92, 95; 12. 8;
ncpifvai 15. 35. âfcffif 6.92. 14. 8.
'A;^fiifif 8. 9. bavd^fiv 17. 26. AdXoTTfs 13. 18.

'AxtXXfi^s 10. 5. fi(I</)i'7; 15. 32. Sd^xos 7. 49.
("xOiTdai 17. II. SeiXos 13. 15, 16, 2 2. SovXft'a 15. 137*
5ijurt 3. 9, 37. Spai/ 1. 19 ; 12. 14.
âhi(uv 12. 2 ; 15. 04- hdv 1. 8, 24; 6. 10 ; 7. 61 ; 8paxpn 14. 75.
âiveiv 5. 7'fr,f(? 3 ; 7. 77. 13. 7; 17. 25. ?)('i(j6ai. Biivafiis 15. 92.
^(luavaos 1. 4. 15. 78. ^vvaadai 1. I I ; 6. 12; 15.
(ifXrtoiv 1. 7- Sftrof 14. 26, 143. 72.
/3iW13. 23(.?). 5/<a 10. 2 2. Awards 5. 77-
/^XnoTfii/ftf 10. 42. Sf/iay 3. I I. 8io 14. 78; 15. 96.
fi\(TXfi.v 4. 30. Sf^tfiy 1. 10; 4. 58. Sflico- 8var]pii 1. 4.
i3oav 5. 9. repoi 1. 7- dvcriTpaîa 4. 2 2.
(3()(TKflV 14. I5' êîrepos 9. 3* fiucr Tvxrjpa 5. I I.
ôvX(u6ai 4. 51 ; 6. 32, 42, (^((TTTO' 3. 45' 8v(TTVX']i 5. 2 I.

151. ^('(TTTOlva 3. 2 I duiprjpa 4. 5-
ôvXtvfiv 14. 145, 146; 15. fiftrTTo'rr;? 6. 25 ; 12. 5.
50.^ fieC'/K) 6. 8, 19, 45. aV 3. 20 ; 5. 14 ; 15. 155.
^fidfifvdv 2. 7- ^ 1. 12 ; 6. 52; 9. 4 ; 13. eyyoi/oi 10. 36.
^pnhvvfLV 15. 39. 27. syxaXi'Trrfti' (êVtK.^ 2. 4.
^paxvs 1. II, 15, 26. AT]fj.((is 6. 40. ('yKpdTijS 13. 14.

^pofiios 7. 8. AtJpoKplTOi 16. 14. tyKwpu'i^fiv 13. 6.
^pOTOS 4. 23. Brjpoi 14. 8 I y;â)/^)ior 15. I 32.
^m 14. 51, 81 15. 35, 51, : (yo) 1. 12 (fycoj/) 3. 44
; 4. ;
yai'DS 3. 40. 89, 90 ; 16. 41 ; 17. 9, 10. 19, 26, 27, 38 5. 10 e/

;
y<ip 1. 10, 23; 3. 41 ; 4. 3, diai'-iuWfLV 14. 29. saep.; 6. 10 et saep.; 7.

20, 53; 6. 4, 27,87, 145, 5t(./3..Xv 14. 46. 5, 6, 95 (f>.V); 10. 34;
153; 7. 69; 10. 25; 13. !)L(iKe'ia6iu 13. 28. 12. 4, 6, 8 13. ; I ; 14. 8,
8. 17 ; 14. 8, II, 30, 58, SiciXiiinr 6. 26. 86 15. 22, 57,
; 1 16.
178; 15. 13, 42 16. II, ; 8(U'0Ki 15. 83. tOeiv 13. 2 1.
29; 17. 16. diiaT(\('iv 15. 109. ell. 6; 5. 77; 13. 33; 14.
yf 1. 22 (ya) ; 3. 2 I ; 6. 31, fiidroj/or 13. I 9. 26, 70; 15. 62, 157 ; 16.
3.3. 42, 125 ; 17. 7. ?în(pfpfiv 6. 4 !
49 17. 6.
;
(I Kai 3. 32 ;
ytvtiTii 16. 10. 8ta<f)(vy(iv 5. I 4. 16. 34.

NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 379
(Ibival 3.44; 5. 16; 6. 12, i'ubodev 6. 34. EvpiTri8r]s 7. g.

fvf'ivai 1. 5 {^"o)'
I, evpi<TKfiv 5. 79-
38, 54; 7. 93; 13. 15,
17- (v6ahe 5. 18, 19. evrponoi 2. 6.
tlvai 1. 7, 10; 2. 3, 5; 4. (vBovcnav 13. 29. eirvxT]! 5. I 4.
12 {(lev), 17, 40; 5. 14 <^/ evvvxos 3. 37- ei'X'7 4. 2 I.
j^f/.; 6. 17, 35, 89, 91, (VTaida 6. 6 ; 14. 38. e(f)iaTavai 15. 6 I.
133; 7. 30; 8. 19 {(TKf); eVreXijr 14. 1 35. f([)68iov 5. 92.

10. 39; 13. 4, 9, 20; 14. ivTos 3. 25. ^X"" 1-55 10 (^^01-) ; 4. 3 ;
19 f/ saep.; 15. 41 ^/ iâpapraveiv 15. 34. 6. 9, 35, 46; 7. 79; 13.
jrt-r/. 16. 28, 29, 39; 17.
;
eânuTav 2. 8. 28, 32; 15. 28; 17. 14.
9, 10. eê'ivai14. 95. fX^pos 1. 2.
fiKrf 13. 6. eêinelv 13. 3 1.

fiKOi 15. 42. e$epxf(T6ni 6. 5- Zevf 6. 25, 83; 8. 32; 9.8.
flWfp 3. 43. e|co 6. 45. (rjXoTvnia 5. 82.
(iprjvt] 6. 25. fTTuvuvai 7. 46. tw' 15. 2 1.
fij 7; 2. 5; 5. 23, 90;
(9)1. eVfi 4. 20; 15. 116; 16. 40. CnfS. 8; 4. 25; 7. 31.
6. 24, 33 11. 7. ;
eVft8i7 6. 1 10 14. 47. ; Côv 16. 58 17. 28. ;
thl. 8, 14; 3. 10; 4. 35. 7r6tTa 1. 25; 6. 58 7. 91. ;
(laaKoveiv 1. 12. iirepxeo'dai 13. I. V 14. 42, 90; 15. 96, 97,
(Icrifvai 6. 31. eneparav 12. 6, 112 ; 17. 12.
(laropav 3. 26. inexdv 6. 13. 7 6. 27.
fira 6. 17. eVr;!' 7. 7- 14. 38.
fn
fire 1. 4. eVj7/jedf6tf 14. 177' fiytpovia 15. III.
, e| 3. 42; 6. 15; 10. 34; eVt 3. 39; 6. 38,95; 7.48; 6. 24
^'5t; 8. 32. ;
15. 42, 80 ; 16. 28, 29, 42. 13. 21 ; 15. 93, 128. ^8ov^ 4. 57.
fKarepos 17. I 3. (TTLêi^lS 13. 2. ^(9of 7. 94 ; 15. 30; 17. i[4.
iKKrjpv(T(T(lv 15. 130. fTTidvpe'iv 5.

73- TjKdV 6. 120.
eKTrXijcrcren' 4. II. enicTTaadai 15. 63. fJKiCTTa 15. 41, 57.
fKTTodfV 8. 33. eniTvpîos 10. 2 I Tipeli 5. 68, 69; 6. 82, 87 ;
fKTvpaa-aeiv 3. 32. 'Errixnppos 1. 1 3. 15. 91 (1. pfjB' Tjiie'is),

99,
fXaaaoiv 14. 90 ; 15. 97. 7ros 1. 8, 17. no.
i\iy)(i{.v 10. 6. epeadai 8. 30. fjpfpa Q. 21.
(Xfvdepia 15. 12 2, 1 38. epi(eiv 15. 141. TjpeTfpos 6. 46 J

15. 65.
fXi/croy 3. 57- eptvvs 9. 7- 'UpaK\i]s 5. 15; 6. 83, lOI.
(Xiacrtiv (f'X.) 10. 28. fpXf<T6ai 3. 10; 8. 145; 13. rjo-aov 6. 91.
eAACfii' 17. 25. 25 ; 15. 128. qavxa^fiv 15. 89.
'EXXas 5. 90. epcoraf 12. 2 ; 13. 33 ; 17. 5.
''EXX7J'6. 39; 15. 33. (Tepos 13. 8, n ; 15. 96. ddXaa-aa 16. 25, 28, 36.
eXTTif15. 135. en 2. 10; 5. 19; 6. 12, 33 ;
QapfTflv 15. 49.
ffxavTov 15. 121. 13- 33- Oavpaêiv 13. I

,
epos 4:. 3; 6. 32, 53. ervpos 7. 48. davpaa-Tos 16. 32, 38.
(pT7e8oi 8. 7- e5 3. 33. ^fW 16. 30.
fpTTdXav 4. 57* evapearos 15. 26 (?). de'ios 8. 31.
(p(f)vfiv 18. 2 (?). eiidoKipf^v 17. 3. eeoôribrji 14. 28, 4 1, 73.
eV 1. 2, 6, II, 25 3. 38; 5. ; evepyea-la 17. 8. 6(6s 5. 18, 20, 2 2, 49; 6. 37;
82; 6. 31 13. 12 ; 14.

;
fv$vs 5. 88. 15. 38, I33> 141.
27, 34; 15. 58, 60, 102, evKaipoi 15. 85. Bepan 2. 1 4.
108 ; 16. 24, 40. evXaêia 15. 90. dfpanfveiv 12. I.
(vaipios{?) 10. 36. fvXoyfty 5. 9 I. QepponvXr)(Ti 13. I 8.
evStiv 3. 56. ewous 3. 26 ; 4. 26. dfwpe'iv 13. 8.

38o INDICES
BfoptjTiKos 13. 9. Kvpi'^ 14. 31. /Lteyas 4. 56, 65 14. 46 ; ; 15.
erf}<jK(iu 3. 32 ; 4. 24; 7. 53. KH'SuVfl'dl' 15. 98. 144; 16. 32, 42.
fivpa 6. 4, KivhvvoslO. 3; 15. 109. MfX/aypos 4. 5-
45.
6vpo)v 3. 23. Kicrcroi 13. 32- peWfip 14. 84 15. 73. ;
(cXdifii' 6. 44. fifXos 13. 13, 32.

I'cWy 13. 9, 33; 15. 117. AcXftfor 4. 8 (.'). ptptPfadai 7. 6.
i^nv 6. 49. 14. 47-
KXeo/ii6i'7;s peV 1. 10 ; 6. II, 46, 58 ;
(Vwu 8. 23. kKvuv 4. 64. 13. 5 ei saep.; 14. 75,
ifpui 5. 17- KOIVOS 15. 12 2. 167, 178; 15. 54, 149;
Koivaviiv 3. 38. 16. II ; 17. 23. p-kv ovv
17. 4-
'lep(i)v
jKfiwr 15. 8 1 Kop'i^fiv 6. 6, 59- 15. 116 ; 16. 9, 34.

Im 7. 4H ; 15. 87. KOpTTOS 7. 8. pipo 13. 10; 16. 35.
Innevi 14. 75, 83, I 29. copr;5. 77; 12. 7. pecTTus 5. 78'
InnoTOôTqi 14. 77* Klio-pOJ 16. 36. ptrd 15. 97, 104.
la-oi 10. 31. iVwf 16. 63. K(tv(P(os 3. 44' pfTajSoXi] 15. 43.
ItTTOpflJ' 3. I. KpartCTToj 5. 2 2. perpicoy 13. 1 1
l<j)(y(iv 13. I 2. Kpivfiv 16. 59- îe'xpt 14. 37.

KpliTlS 15. 64. /x^ 3. 20, 34; 6. 48, 63,
Kal. I, II, 17. Kpoioros 5. 28. 159; 15. 47>62, 89, 117;
(caâTTfp 16. 24. KpVTTTOS 10. 4!' 17. 20.
Ka6i]K(iv 15. 56- KVpi09 3. 56- pr]8f 15. 114.
Kae'riaBai 15. 58 (?). KtoXuet:/ 6. I I. prjbfls 14. 90.
Ktiîorai/at 14. 30 ; 15. 29, prjdfTTore 15. S^-
40, 68. \apâviiv 6. 18, 30, 51, 57 ;
p7,^6iy 7. 5; 15. 32, 51, 59,
Kcnpoi 1. 25 ; 7. 44; 15. 43, 14. 59, 198; 17. 24. 71 ; 16. 34.
63- 127- XapTT/jos-5. verso 2. pi^re 3. 27, 28; 15. 90, 95.
Kn'iToi 14. 100. X(ii'^(ifi' 13. 3- P^TTjp 3. 53.
KUKos 1. 5, 22 ; 3. 30, 42, 47 ;

\iy(iv 1, 2 d'/ ja^y!). ; 6, 9, 32, pjJXavu 6- 133-
4. 29, 56. KOKws 6. 41 ; 36, 85, 97 ; 7. 76 ; 13. 3, ptfcpo'f 5. 92 ; 15. 9 ; 18. 7.
13. 15; 15. 31. 7, 13, 28; 14. 40, 148 ;

pipdirdai 15. 56-
KoKfiv 5. 21 13. 27. ; 17. 5- 19- pi(T0o(j)op(lv 14. 76.
KiiWipovs 3. 39' Xi'iTifiv7. 25. piadocjiopui 14. 24 t'/ Jflif/'.
KciKkuTTfVflV 4. 7- \iav 3. 41. pi/;7P? 15. 136.

KaXoy 1. 3 5. 5> ; 23. Ka\- XifidfcoToj 16. 30. po'ros 1. 8 ; 3. 29 ; 5. 17-
XioTor 14. 27. \i<.Taf<T6ai 3. 52- pop(f)i] 7. 29.

Kara 1. I 4. Xoyt'CffTâi 15. 37, 57. povaiKT] 13. 19.
K(tTU^(((TT(pOV 15. 94- Xoyos 3. 20 ; 4. 3, 18 ; 7. 48.
KaTaXapliavdv 14. 49. XlTTflf 1. lb. wu' 17. 6.
(caraX fiTrftf 14. 25 15. 77* !

VfUl'UTKOi 14. 33*
KaTdTpi^dv 13. 23 (?). ptiKpav 15. 30. J'e'oy 3. 58. KWTfpos 15. 79-
KaTdTilyav 15. 64. paKpo\oyni 1. II. P((f)\rjyfpfTa 9. 8.
Karcp-yafftr^Jat 18. 6. ptiXa 10. 18. paWov 17. II. "; 6. 37.
Karqyopnv 13. 6. pdXuTTa 14. 4 ; 15. 37, 79 ;
viKiiv 5. 90 ; 14. 81.
KaroiKdi/ 5. 18. 16. 9. virpov 16. 31.
KfXei'fii' 15. 97. pavOuvfii' \. 16; 4. 18. roôv 14. 6, 9, 13, 39, 44.
Kfvos 3. 34. parrtj 4. 54- vopdpxr)^ 5. 81.
KtVTpOV 1. 5. Mapd^cor 15. 108. vopiûv 5. 13 6. 27 ; ; 10.
Kfpôi 17. 7- piiT>]u 10. 4. 3i(?); 15.87, 112.
(Cr/Sfl'fif 10. 10. pfi;(f T^'at 14. 25. vopipoii 14. 7-
Krfpvypa 14. 28. pdX'] 12. 5. foôs 14. 14, 28.
/. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 381
Nov/iiji'tor 6. Y- orai^4. 27 ; 14. 31 17. 27. ;

TTuj 1. 7, 24; 5. 18, 75, 76;
vvKTepos 3. 9. 5rt5. 78; 13.4; 14.33,40; 6. 144; 12. 3; 13. 18,
viv 5. 16, 19; 6. 38, 43 ;
16. 27; 17. II. 21, 26 14. 26, 42
; 16. ;
9. 4; 15. 40, 73. 156- oTpvvfiv 3. 2 2. 24, 26; 17. 6; 18. 5.

ov, ovK 1. 8, 23 ; 3. 55; 4. 7raT)7p 3. 52; 14. 34.
^fvos 1. 3. 18 ; 6. 12 et saep.; 7. 46 ;
7Tarpd8t\(pos 4. 5 (?).
10. 13; 13. 7, 11,17,33; irarpii 14. 36.
o/3oXdj 14. 76, 78, 79. 14. i8^/.rrtt^.; 16. 39,43; TroTpd^ff 14. 32.
oSe 1. 9 ei saep.; 3. 26, 38; 18. 10. narpcdos 14. 23.

6. 4 ; 14. 33, 40. ovbi 3. 10; 7. 30; 13. 31. navfo-Bai 6. 36 ; 15. 44.
oSds 5. 8 ; 6. 33. ovSfi'f 1. 17 ; 14. 168. r:(((i(iv 5. r^rJO 2.
oBvpfxa 3. 48. ov6(ii 5. 42 ; 6. II, 41, 56. TTfidfiv 1. 6 ; 14. 94.

oôs 5. wrjtf I. OVKOVV 12. 4- TTfXas 3. 10.
66ovveKa 7. 93. olv 15. 116 ; 16. 9, 34 ; 18. TTfXf (rdai 8. 1 1
oiecrâi 14. 87. TrepTTdv 6. 28.

^?'
,
oIkc'iv, olKovfJifVT] 5. 16. ovrd^du 7. 47" TTevdrjrpia 3. 26.
oiKflos 13. 2 ; 15. 84. ovT( 13. 7, 8, 16, 22 14. 7

; ;
TTtpaiviLV 5. 34 ; 6. 36.
oi/ci'a 5. 79; 6. 124, 159. 16. 29-32, 52 ; 17. 18. nepyafxa 10. 40.
OIKO? 3. 25. OVTIS 6. 18. TTfpt 2. 9; 13. 8, 10, 27 ; 14.
olKTiêiv 10. 16. ouTos 1. 5, 8, 12, 22 ; 5. 17, 39, 45, 71, 72; 15. 81 ;
OKmi/ 14. 92. 89; 6. êtsaep.; 8. 25; 16. 10, 43.

OKTO) 14. 78. 12. 2; 13. 5, 8, 10, 12, irepifivai 17. I 3.
oKîos 6. 134. 23 ; 14. 37 et saep.; 15. ttjjXt/^ 8. 6.

oXi-yos 17. 23. 113, 120; 16. 33; 17.10, TTTJpa 3. 27.
'OKvunia 5. 13- 13. ovToal 14. 73- TrXai/ai/ 3. 37>
oixoyevrjs 16. 28. ovTo), ovTuis 15. 30, 61 ; 16. 7rXei'(i)i/14. 89; 15. 104. nXe'ov
o/iioXoyetf 6. 98. 25. 6.4.

ofiuios 16. 23, 24 ; 18. 4. 6(})flX(iv 12. 8 ; 14. 99. jrXfjv 6. 9 ; 17. 7.
6/iiotcoj 10. 32 ; 14. 42, oxeros 7. 47* nXrjprjs 4. 27.
6ijl6(J)v\os 16. 27. o;(Xfti/ 4. 41. TTvfvpa 5. 20.
oj/o/za 5. 89. TTOietv 5. 10, 41, 79; 6. 22,

d|i' 15. 42. irddos 3. 15. 41, 55, 150; 13. 3, 15,
OTTCosr 1. 13; 4. 32; 6. 33, TraiSeuetj' 15. 82. 17, 26; 15. 31, 86, 96;
38 ; 14. 89. Traidiov 6. 43, 52. 16. 15. 35, 40.
opav 3. 21, 27 5. 23 15. naif IP 13. 29. TTotr/rds 14. 7, 39, 43.
; ;
5. 21 15. 80. TToKfpiKOS 5. Z'cTJ<? 2.
W 64. Trals 3. 54 ; ;
IV. 15- TrdXai 6. 85. TToXipioi 6. 15, 24.
opdas 2. 7 ; 15. 103. naXiu 6. 8 ; 12. 4. ndXefios 14. 34, 72 ; 15. 81,
opi^fiv 10. I. navToios 1. I, 14. TrdXtf 14. 10, 37 ; 15. 30, 60,
opjxav 4. 4- rrapd 7. 6; 13. 29 ; 15. 80; 131-
opvis 7. S^' 17. 15, 26, JToWaKii 13. I.
opâfdf 14. 8, 32, 130. TrapaStSdvat 12. 3- TToXKaxov 16. 33.

Of 1. I, 6 ; 3. 19 ; 5. 79 ; irapaKoKflv 15. 74* TToXvpaOrjs 1. 20.
6. 5, 41; 10.39; 12. 14; TrapaXoycbraros 16. 38. TToXus 1. I, 8; 6. 164 ; 16.
13. II, 12, 27; 14. 82 ; napdvofjios 14.150. 39-
15. 51, 76. napacTKevd^dV 15. I06. TToveiv 15. 115-
5(ro 4. 36; 7. 92 16. 13. 9, II.
7rapa;(a)pfti' novTjpos 1. 3 2. 9, II.
13, ;
;
32. TTapfivai 6. 34 ; 14. 84. Trdros 10. I.
OOTty 13. 28. OdTKTOVV 15. napdeVf 11. 9. TTOirrOS 3. 53-
114. ndpoivos 1. 4. TTOpi^dV 14. 86.

382 INDICES
nopoi 3. 39. SHXa/^tV 15. 109. Taivapov 15, 58 (.'').
TTopavvdv 3. I 7- cravihiov 13. 30. rdi/, ^ T. 6. 14.

TiroTe 4. 10; 5. 15; 6. 25; (TUTl^pOf 13. 34. Tanfipos 15. 70.
15. S3, 113. aa(f)oi>s 5. 17. rapaypus 4. 36.
TTurepa 14. 38. norfpov 7- 32. cTfauroO 6. 60. Tiipdaanv 6. 159'
noTi 1. 2, 3, 17- TTorro 1. 9. (Trjpipov {rrjp.^ 6. 20, 23. TCKTCTfLv 3. 19.
7T(>Ti(f)epfiv 1. 9. (Trinf!iu>v 16. 2 2 (?). rdcpos 4. 6.
noTpos 3. I 2. aOfveiv 4. 65. Ttix" 5. 4.
TTOV 8. 34. o-tyr; 7. 6. Ta;(t(r ra 17. 7-
jrofi' 4. 4. (rih]po<; 4. I. Tuxos 4. 13.
TTpaypa 1. 9 ; 6. 26, 38, 99, <TLk(j)iov 16. 30. re 1. 3, 7 3. 30, 37 ; ; 6. 7,
144, 150; 15. 62, 75, SipcoviSris 17. 2. 88; 14. 6; 15. 131.
93- (TKfWTfa-dai 16. 35. Tt8f 1. I, 5, 6.
TTpaîS 4. 4- CTKOTreii' 5. 76. TKvov 3. 43 ; 6. 136, 180.
7r/>do-(reii/ 6. I f) ) 15. IO3, cro(f)os 1. 13
6, 18. ; 5- cro(p(o- T((7craps 14. 76.
120. TOTOS 18. 14. Tex^n 1- 12 13. ;
2.
irpia^vs 6. 2H. CTTTOuSafeti/ 13. II. Ti/creiv 5. 75*

TrptV 7.43- anvpis 6. 5. riy 3. 56 ; 4. 10, 12, 16, 40;
npotp)^(u6ai 6. 57- (TTtixfiv 3. 2 2. 5. iêt saep.; Q. i^ et saep.;
TTpoitvui 6. 44. a-Tpnrrjyos 15. 1 1 6. 13. 1 7 ; 17. 9-

TVpoopav 15. 72. 73- (TrparoVtSoi/ 6. 95 J
15. 98. Tiy 1. 4 ^/ 3. 37 5. 6,
i-a^/>. ; ;
TT/jos 2. I ; 4. 58 ; 5. 49 ; 6. SrpoyStXoy 5. 20, 2 1. 48; 6. 5, 39, 63, 78; 13.

32, 60; 7. 43 ; 12. 5; 13. iTTVTfTtjpia 16. 31. 2, 32; 15. 31.
34 ; 15- 38, 74; 16. 24; (7u 3. 47, 56; 4. 18, 54, T\i]pa>v 4. 23.
17. 3, 4, 8. Cf. TTori. 58; 5. 22, 23; 6. 61, rXrjvai 8. 27.
ivpo(Tavu\'i(TK(iv 17. 24. 78; 7. 61 ; 11. 6; 12. rot 6. 12 ; 9. 4.
npo(Tip\((T6ai 15. 120. 5- TotouTos 5. 42 ; 14. 91 ; 15.
irpo<T(X(i-v 15. 45. o-i;yy(ipo9 10. I 2. 50; 16- 57-
np6ad( 8. 26 (?). a-uyKXf/[ 6. Io8. ToXpr] 13. 23.
npocruvai 5. 76. crvyKpivav 13. 5) 25. Toa-os 3. 31 (?).
npocrracrcrav 5. 79- (TvXXa/iij 5. 88. ToaovTos 6. 3 I.
TT/jorucrcreii' 15. 121. (Tvppaxos 15. 27. TOTf 6. 84.

TvpoTfpos 15. 157. (Tvppiyvvviu 7. 28. TpnycpSof 13. 20.
TTpOTU(l>ai 8. I 2 (?). (Tvpcpfpfiv 1. 9; 15. 41, 71 Tpf(f)eiv 14. 37, 41-
TTp()({)vXd(TCr(lV 14. 88. 16. 26. TpiXdV 5. I 3.
npoxd-plCîV 13. 4. (TvpcPopii 6. 137; 10. 38. rpoTTOf 6. 39; 16. 37; 18.
7rpo;(fipos 16. 34. cru>'ap7r(i^fl^' 6. 96. 10.
npcoToi 3. 32 ;
6. Ig. npCJToi) (Tvi/ie'i/ai 4. I 9. Tpoi] 14. 45 ; 17. 28.
6. 43. (TuroXo? 15. I I O. rpocpipos 5. 52.
7ri'i'^(ivff7^(i( 7. 46 ; 8. 29 J
(TVVTfivflV (\. <TVVT(pVClv\ 14. Tpvx"s 3. 49, 57.
17. 9. 85.^ ruyxai'eii' 4. 33, 47 ; 5. 77 ;
TTtlp 5. 88, 89. avvTiOtvai 1. 12. 6. 18; 13. 5, 26.

ncoi 6. 12, 13, I 7. (rvi'rvy;âi'ci' 2. 5- TirJTTtlV 11. 4.
noii 13. 28; 15. 99 ; 16. 43. (ruo-Kfvnffti/ 6. 34, 36. Tvpavvos 4. 34.
(r\(^M^(iv 13. I 2. Ti;;^?; 6. 40 15. 76. ;
paSiws 4. I 9. (TXTipa 16. 4 I.
padvpid 15. 46. (Tutpa 15. 84. u/^p(y 14. 46.

pf]Tu>p 13. 26. 2a)0TpaT0S 6. 12 2. vypiiy 16. 23.
pimfiv 6. 158. (Tunrjpia 6. 62 ; 15. 49, 66, uyporrjs 16. I 2.
pvdpos 13. 29. 105, 119. (Scop 16. 13.
/. NEIV CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 383
v'toi 8. 15- rfuXoKivSvvcos 15. 6 1. xpdvoi 4. 45 15. 88. ;
v^l('ii 5. 3 ; 6.
34 ; 13. 3 ;
(/)iXoy 1. 2; 4. 25; 6. 121; Xpva-iof 6. 30.
14. 94 ; 15. 55 et saep. 9. 4, 13. (piXraTos 5. 40. Xpcopa 3. 2 ; 13. 16, 2 2.
VflTfpOS 15. 92, 119. (f)o^'i(Tdai 3. 18; 15. 47, 67. ;(vXd? 16. 41.
vTnipxfif 14. 88, 90- <jf>d/3os 3. 37. Xapa 5. 17.
iiTTfinfiv 14. 32. (pnvos 4. I Xcopt'y 14. 38; 15. 92 .
vn-fp 14. 35; 15. 122; 16. (fypdCftv 4. 19 : 6. 61.
59- (ppfVo^Xa^rjs 4. 55. ^//aXXetf 13. 24.

vjTfpôKTj 15.36. (ppnv 7. 7. ylfokTTJpLOV 13. 3 I .
vnTjKoos 15. 143. (Ppovipos 13. 14. \l/d\TT]i 13. 7, 25.

vTTo 6. 56 ; 16. II. (ppovri^dv 15. 118. ylrtv8((r0ai 10. 8, 36; 14.
VTV0Kf'ia6ai 13. 30. (f)Vfii> 5. 58' 44(?)-
viroXafjL^dvfiu 15. Ô- (pxiXdKr) 14. 7 I ^/re08oy 14. 29 ; 18. 8.
vnoa-KoiTau 14. 45. (pvcTiKOi 17. 27. yf/^(pos 17. 25.
u(TT[p . . . 14. 64. (j&io-ty 7. 31; 12. 13; 16. 39. ô(f>(iu 6. 4.
voTcpf'iv 15. 59- 60. y^ôcpos 13. 31.
v\JAT]X6s 7. 49. cfxavT] 13. 28. \//vx; 4. 37.
(fiaivfO-Bai 6. 39, 4 1, 1 43 J
13. \aipeiv 5. 9. S 3. 21, 43 ; 4. 55; 5. 15,
10, 33- ;âXf7ro$- 17. 20. 22, 40; 6. 83, 14. 25,
(pdvai 8. 28 ; 13. 9, 12, 28 ;
XapiêaOat. 3. 36. loi ; 14. 48 15. 38, 91, ;
16. 23, 37; 17. 7, 10. XO'Pi-v 3. 18. 107. w poi 6. 64.
(pavepos 6. 142; 15. 28; 16. Xe<p 4. 58. <odr] 13. 4.
29. (pavfpas 15. 34. X^tpoi' 13. 24, 26. oJSdf 13. 8, 25.
(paos 4. 30. ;(eiporoi'i'a 15. 1 1 8. (OS 8. 28.

(jbavXos 2. 4, 17. 14. 27 ; XopSi] 13. 24. ws Rel. 1. 10, 15, 24 4. 1 1, ;
(pfiBcoXos 17. 10, II. )(op(viv 13. 34. 56; 6. 23; 6. 35; 10.
c}),'puv 3. 33, 44; 6. 45; 8. Xopos 4. 35. 32; 13. 5; 15. 71. Conj.
10. Xpau 6. 7. xPl^^^*' ! ^ 5 7.91; 4. 19; 13. 7, 13; 15.
(ptvyav 6. I 5- 13. 17, 19; 15. 83 ; 17. 106.
^Tjyevs 9. 2. 20, 28. SxTTTfp 4. 34; 16. 39; 17.
(pOfipeiv 4. 56 ; 7. 94. Xph 3. 32; 6. 55; 14. 92. 28.
(f)66vos 7. 5. xpny-a 14. 97. w(TT( 7. 95 ; 15. 33.
(piKavdpcoTria 15. 36. Xpi?crrds 2. 3 ; 6. 50. ctXêXeii/ 17. 19.
II. KINGS.
Alexander.
'AXeâvbpos 85. 4 88. 3 ; ; 89. 3 ; 90. 2 ; 92. 4 ; 94. 6 ; 95. 2 ; 96. 2, 18 ; 98. 8 ;
99. 4; 134; 145; 171.
Ptolemy I.
âaiXfvovros UroXffjiaiov (t. f 84 (a). I, 1 6.

d(o\ "^txiTrjpfs 38. 13.
384
INDICES
Ptolemy II.
liaaiXfvovToi UroKfîaiov tov UroXtfiatov (t. t (^ ?) 97. I. r. te 99. i; 128. er. id
100. 8.
liaaiXevovTos IlroX. tov IItoX. kciI tov vlov IlToXf/xniou er. k^ 92. I. er. xy 88. I. er, k8.
85. I. er. K^ 96. 1,17. Year lost 134.

âcn\(vovTOi IItoX. tov IlroX. Scor^poj tr. ktj 94. 4. er. k^ 95. I. er. XS 98. 6.
âaiXfis IlToXfâ'ios Koi 'Apvivor] 4>iXdS6X(ôs 6eoL 'ASeX<ôi 38. II.
/Sao-tXevf nroX. 110. 55 ^/ .T^?^/*.
6 fiacriXeur 77. 4. âaikfvs 110. 5 I.
<9eot 'ASeX(/)oi 85. 5 ; 88. 3 ; 89. 3 ; 90. 3 ; 92. 4 ; 94. 7 ; 95. 3 ; 96. 2,18; 98. 8 ;
99. 5 ; 134 ; 145 ; 171.

'Apacuor, <PLXcl3(\(poi 85. 5 88. 3 89. 4 90. 3 92. 5
;
94. 7 ; 95. 3 96. 2, 18
; ; ; ; ;
98. 9; 134; 145; 171. <l>iX<ISX(J)or 132.

Years to be referred to this reign 110. 40. ly 110. 44 yi 110. 37. 18 110. 34.
: t/:i
;
i^ 110. 12. /c[. 50. 8. xa 39. 17; 64. 22. k13 157. k8 40. 17 ; 42. 11 43. 10, ;
11 101. I.
;
Ke 85. 21; 108. 7 (?). K^ 96. 9, 25. /cC 83. 5 108. i (?). k?45. 25; ;
46. 21; 83. 6; 94. 13. kO 47. 37; 95. 11. X 48. 22; 87. 8; 132. Xa 169.
X^ 44. 8; 158. Xy 158. XS 98. i 158. Year 34 year 35 80. 14. Xe 55. 7; ;
=
80. 5, II 108. 7 (?); 121. I (?); 146; 154-5. Xc 120. r. Xf 56. 9
;
102. 5, 10; ;
108. I (?). X,, 57. 4; 76. 10; 86. 4. 19; 102. 3, 8. X^ 53. 4 109. 5, 1 1 129 ; ; ;
170.
Year of a Ptolemaic era(?) e'r. p. 84 {l>). i.
Ptolemy III.
PaaiKfvovTos IlroXe/naiou tov ITroXe/iatov Ka\ ^paivSrjs Btwv 'Abe\(f>cov er. y 145. er. S 91.
1 8 (?). er. e 171. tr. r? 89. I. er. /ce 90. I.
(inaiXfvs nroXf/iotos 34. I.
6 îKTiktvi 82. 2 1, 30.

89. 3 90. 3 171.
êoi Eue/iyeVat ; ;
Yearsbe referred to this reign: /3 32. i 33. 10; 51. 4, 6 61. 9 62. 17 106.
to ; ; ; ;
I, 2; 138; 140. y 58. 13; 71. 3. 107. 2, 8; 114. 3; 136-7; 141; 153. " ;
S34. 2, 12; 78. 24. 9 72. 3, 15; 82. 16. C 82. 17 117 (?) 6, 17. p. 139 117 (?) ; 7, ;
I, 6, 17. 6 81. 4. 10, 18, 22; 82. 12, 22, 31. 37. i, 9. if 75. 10. i^ 143; il-i
165. tf 103. I, 9, II. tr; 69. 10; 144; 163. t^ 36. i, 7 66. 6 67. 3 70 (a). ; ; ;
12 105. I ; 162. /c/3 104. 6

;
/3k 104. i, 3, 8. kC 90. 10. ;
III. MONTHS.
{a) Macedonian and Egyptian.
SiH'îKov Mexi/'(?) 'S (22nd year of Philadelphus) 92. 6,
'YTrep/yeperni'ou k6 Tlauym kO (35th year of Philadelphus) 146.
'Apre/xio-uju ry iiax^v K^ (36th year of Philadelphus) 77. 8.
///. MONTHS 385
(d) Macedonian.
Ator 32. I ; 84 {a). 2, 17. Auia-ios 82. 17; 86. 3. 18; 97, introd.
'ATTfXXaios 32. I
7 ; 97. 4. 99. 6; 102. 3, 9; 129.
nfpiVto? 89. 5. ndvijiJLos 47. 9 57. 4 84 (a). ; ; 5, 21.
^varpoi 96. 3, 9, 19, 26; 110. 41. Acoiof 82. 31 88. 4; 110. 45 ; ; 171.
Sni'StKos 90. 10 ; 92. 6, Topnicuoi 82. 22; 90. 4.
'ApTeiiiaios 77. 8 ; 145. Y7rep/3fp6T-moj 82. 12 ; 110. 47 ; 146.
(c) Egyptian.
ecoC6 39. 18; 71. 3, II ; 169-70. Gcoi'r 36. 1, 7 ; 76. 11 ; 114. 13.
âwcpi 42. 6; 56. 10; 69. 6; 81. 10; 103. i, 12 114. 5, 19; 131 139-40 153; 165.
4, ; ; ;
Hacocpi 100. I. nacoTTi 46. 2 1 146. ;
Aî'p42. 9, 13; 53. 3, 4; 65. 31 68. 3 69. 4, xo; 73. 5; 81. 19; 106. i, 2, 8; 120.
; ;
1 1 121. 3
; 130 138 140 155 163.
; ; ; ; ;
Xolax 45. 25; 55. 7 73. 4, 8 81. 11, 22 118. 17; 119. 15
;
120. 25. ; ; ;
Tf^t 27. 62, 209; 75. 10; 101. I 116. 4. ;
Mfxf'p 27. 66 44. 8 47. 37

; 114. 4, 8. Mexv 34. 2 44. 1 1 51. 4, 6 92. 7 ; 115. 5,
; ; ; ; ;
24. 29 ; 116. 3, 6.
âii(v<ê 73. 3, 15; 114. 11; 115. 6, 25, 30; 116. 8; 161. <i'apfv,^T 27. 88; 119. 6.
Ila/Liei'cor 33. lO.
27. 107
âpfjLoiei 34. 12 37. 1,9; 93. 6 115. 7, 26, 31
;
116. 10 118. 37
;
119. 7 ; ; ; ; ;
136.
na^divs 27. 129; 61. 9; 66. 6; 115. 8, 27, 32; 118. 32: 119. ir; 136-7; 141; 144.
nax'^v 77. 8 116. 11. ;
Uudvi 27. 137; 62. 17 95. 5; 102. 5, 10; 104. i, 6 105. i 107. 2. 7, 8 112. 37(.?) ;
; ; ; ;
115. 14, 18, 36; 116. 12, 13; 118. 35, 40; 119. 12 162. ;
'Enelcj) 43. 10, II ; 59. 13 80. 5, 12 116. 3 117. 4 118. 60. 'ETn'jp 40. 17.
;
'Erreln ; ; ;
110.34; 119. 13.

Meaopn p. 139; 48. 22; 85. 7; 98. I, II 116. 4; 118. 67; 133; 143. ;
trrayopevai Tjpepai 27. 20I, 2 1 9.
IV. PERSONAL NAMES.

'Ayd6u>v 110. 2, 12. 'AX(|ni/Spoj 30. 2 e/ saep. ; 39. 9 ; 92. 4 ;
'Ayarlris 112. 73- 96.4,20; 97.6; 98. 5, 13 ; 100. 11;

"AyxSi(}>is 121. I ; 153. 110. 55 etsaep.; 121. 5; 123; 167.
'Afros 33. 5, 13. 'AX/cfVay 88. 3.
A(9f/x/xfi's67. 25 ; 113. 4. "Apaaii 101. 7 (?).
'A6r]ud 27. 77, 166. 'Afxilvaiv 110. 63 f/ saep.
'Aerjuaios 130. 'AfievveCs 67. 26; 112. II ; 144.

Ali'rj(Ti8t]poi 71. 5' 12. "AfipMU 112. 90.
c c
386 INDICES
'A/i/xcijwos 61. 4; 81. 10; 90. 23; 115. 21 ;
'Apaivui] 98. TO.
j
'ApT(pi^(opoi 81. 2. 12, 17, 20.

168.
'Apv<l)Trjs 61. 8 72. 8, 10, 13, 17 ;
112. 45 ;
'AficpiXoôi 111. 2 1. ;
' Av^p6iJia\os 111. 6 ;

132. 131.
'Af>8iwvLxos 96. 4 (/ sc7(p. ; 110. Si (?).

'
132.
Ap(})t.<mTTis
'Avoijiis 27. I73- 145.

Ap;^X(ioy
112. 40. 'ApXffTTpdTt] 89. 4'

"AuTiytfTiS
'Avriyovos 30. 16; 34 I ; 73. I. 'Apx^/^'J 67. 26.
\\vTiKpciTrii 118. 4- "Ap.YtTrrrosr 124-6 ; 130.

71.4,12; 72.1,20; 95.2; 'AaK\7jnui8>]i 31. 10. II, 21, 22; 66. 3; 67.
a,/Woxos 32. 7 ;
I. 28 68. I 69. I 81. 1 2, 2I 82. 2,

110. 5.S, 77, 81, 104. ;
; ; ;
'ArnVarpoj 48. 1 1 ; 64. 3 ; 100. II. 14 24.
"ATTtoy 85. 6. 'Ao-êuy (?) 70 (Z-). 6.
'ATTty HI. 2 1. "Ao-(/)os (.?) p. 6.
Anicou p. 4- Auyxt? 112. 25!.?).

'attoXXoSotos 51. I. AvTovopos 76. 5 (O*
ri-
'A7roXXo5a)/>os 112. 82 ;
122. Av(j)pcovi- 52. 2 2.
' AnoWnâvqi 103. 2. "Ac^/joy 82. 14.

'A7r(5XXa)i/ 27. 186.
151 165.
'ATToXXcort'Sr/i ; Bf/jfw'/cr; 90. 3.
'AnoW^vios 44. 3; 53.18; 67. 6; 68. 4, lUêX/Ltfii'iy 44. 2.
11; 91. 16; 92. 14, 20; 95. 10 110. ;
15(0)1/ 70 (a). 8.
r/ ,w/).
4-, 111. 17; 112. 62, 91
;
114. ;
Iio'r/)()y 113. 10.
118. 49, 78; 119. I
i'; 123; 129; 133. ;
l?(;r/)iy 120. 31.
\\TT0\\c0i 97. 3. ]}oviia\ioi^ 118. 58, ^^y.
'Apydtoy 78. I. BovjduiTTii27. 145.
Apeubi^Ttji 53. 20; 101. 6; 106. 6; 138; Bpo/i'oy 39. 10.
153.
"A/n/of 143.
Tiiarpun' 167.
'A/u;inv^7;s 40. T, i8; 41. I, 26; 42. I, 13;
43. 1,12; 44. 1,9; 85. 9.
' Apurrav^fMs 116. 2. AdXicTKoy 149.
'Apiartipx"^ 110. 38. Ad/iO)!/ 81. I ;).
Aamiy 89. 8; 110. 66, 68, 100, 104 123.

'A/uaTt'o)!/ 54. 18. ;
ÂfucrToiiovXis 171. Aeu/ojr 44. I.
'A/}urro-y<Vr;y 109. I, 8. SijpijTpia 111. 4.
\\pl(TTitp.(l\(>S 84 (1/). 13- Ar]p>]Tpios47. 2, 34; 52. 14; 57. 2; 88.

'ApKTTOl/KCOi 72. 15; 85. 3. 23; 110. 78; 111. 33> 37; 112.30; 123.
'ApiaTojii 111. 3 I. SlJpOviKT] 95. 4-
'A/j/iidioy 134. Al]p6(TTptlT()i 112. 16.

Appi'txopoi 72. I
Af//n()(/)wi' 51. I. .-) 52. i; 53. i; 54. i;
' 7"
'Apfitjfis 67. 23. 108. 6 : 130 ;
167-8.
'Ap/iK)Ls 86. 14. Ai5;y 121. I 2.
'Appiiaii 36. 2, 8 52. 29 53. 118. 55 Sioyfvrji 112. 4, 38, 52.

; ;
7 ;
81 144; 167-8.
;
58. f, 171.
Aiofioroy ;
'.\pi'orc/>iy 61. 7 62. 6. AtdSwpoy 90. 6 t/ j^/d/-. 93. ; I ; 103. 6 ;

104.
;
't\p<np)]u>Ti](; 33. 4, 12. 2, 7 108. 3 165.

; ;
'Apoi'i'a)f^/)(i.- 117. I. 91. 1 5

Aio/cX^'Jy 112. 8. ;
'ApnwTi/ii 112. ,",3.

Aifmo-ui 99. 9; 118. o^, 83.
'Ap(T(pcj>0(ii'i 74. 2. Siovvaioi 31. 10; 68. 4; 84(<?). 13, 14. 31;
IV. PERSONAL NAMES 387
93. 8; 96. 34; 98. 2, 11; 110. 87, 105. 4; 110. 86; 121. 12 (.'); 124;
99(.?); 112.57- 159.
^lovvaoboipoi 57. I ; 58. 2 ; G6. i 2 et saep. ;
Zutnvp'uxiv 76. I.
147.
Aio'i/U(ros 121. 10. 'Hyepwv 92. 10.
Aioi/V(TO(f)avT)i 81. 16, "H/ja 27. 69, 112.
At0tXos 112. 13, 94. 'H^rnKXii^s 79. I, 9 84 {a). 15 (?); 87. ; i
Aia)âi/5/ios 96. 15, 32. 112. 6; 121. 21, 28, 46; 143.
A6Ktfxns76. I, 12; 86. 14; 111. 35; 129. 'HpIxAftij 139; 142.
ApifxiXos 90. 2. 'H/juKXetror 32. 2 37. 6, 14; 110. 61, 70.
;
AwpiW 34. 2 ; 71. 4 ; 72. I, 4 ; 73. i, 4, 'Hpa*rXf()5a)pof 110. 85 ; 160.

18; 78. 18; 106. 9; 107. 4, 8; 118. 'Hpn^XT;? 72. 2.
27; 136-42. 'UpohoTOi 112. 8.
Awo-jêoy 90. 2.
Qayop^r)i 112. I 4.
*E;3/ji'ff/iS 81. 18, 112. 79.
Qtiviiii
Eî;(?) 27. 93. Gao-tf 112. 39.

'Eiprji'T] 112. 24. eli3pcov 116. 2.
EiViyfJo? (rrEiVtrôs ?) 112. 5 I. eeoSoVf; 89. 6, 12, I4, 1 6.
*EiCT(vois 98. 14. eeoduipoi 50. I, 9 53. 5 75. i ; ; ; 105. i ;
'E^y^f (.?) 112. 45. 108. 4; 117. 15; 118. 3. Qfvdojpoi

'E7rt/xe'i/7?f 30. 2 6 ; 81. 7 ; 84 [a). 2 e/ saep. ;
63. 19.
148. eeoK[ 118. II.
'ETTixop'jf 80. 1,6; 154-5. efo'îXof 103. 2 ; 111. 25.
'Ep(c5yLiij (?) 105. 3. Oe6)(pT]aTus 118. 6. Qevxprjaroi 110. 64, 65.
EpniTTTTOS 110 94. 0fvyeVr/j 110. 52, 84.
Er0y 112. 51. Qrjpapevrjs 111. 32 (?).
Evayopas 57. 2 91. ; I 6 ; 118. 26. e^ws- 112. 44.
Ev3ovXoj 110. 4. Go^ywi- 118. 48, 61, 77.
Evây p. 4. QoTevi 68. 2 2.
KvKnpnos 102. I, 6. Q0T01J.01S 67. 19.
EiiicXft'cd!' 90. 23. Goroprmos 68. 5 72 17 112.
; ; 2, 15, l6(.?),
Ei'icpfiTj;? 90. 6 ^/ saep. 43; 118. 46. 64, 72; 164.
Evvopos 53. I 9. Qpda (ou 31. I et saep.
EiiTToXepos 165. Qvrjpis 35. 3.
Ei/VoXif 76. I 91. ; I (/ saep. ; 103. 8 ; 104.
1, 6 165.
; lapve'a 171.
Evpvpe'dojv 89. 19. 118.
Îda-oiv 2, 7.
Ei'Tu_:ôs- 133. "iXav 56. 4.
Ev(ppdvu)p38. I, 19; 68. II ; 100. 10; 101. 4. 'Ifin6drjs 72. 17; 131.
'ifopwry 115. 2 1, 36.
Zrivicov 89. 7, 14, 15, 16. 'iTrnoXvcros 52. 21 ; 91. 15; 110. 69, 96,
Zr]p6[îOi 54. I I. Io8(?).
ZrjVobuTos 111. 29. 'innouiKos 121. I (?).
Zrjv6?iupni 59. 1 ; 60. I ; 107. 5 ; 120. 14; 'imroTfXTjs 110. 80 (?).
124-7. Icr/Scopof 121. 10.
Ztoxopos (?) 81. 18. Î(7ts'27. 205.
70 ((?). I, 3; 74. 6 78. 3,
Zcoi'Ao? ; 13, 24; I<rocprf;y 82. 15.
88.6; 89.7; 91.15; 94. 14,' 16, 17 ;
'IcTTirjoi 118. 42, 79.
96. 5, 13, 21, 30; 102. I, 6; 103. 7; 'l(f)flpis 27. 86.

C C
388 INDICES
52. 26 ; 73. I, 4, 8, Ai'xas 81. 18.
AvKiiôs 94. 6.
II ; 111. 31.
42. I. 13 43. 1,12. AuKoicXr;? 110. 9I.
Kf.XAt<.X>> 40. .} ; ;
53. 5 73. 2 90. AuKO/XTjSf/V 47. 3 ^
KdXXi/c/xiT/;? 34. 2 ; ; ;
Avaavius 47. 26 49. I I. ;

K(iXXi/iij3)y 110. 40.
Awi>axoj 45. I, 26 46. ;
I, 22 : 47. 1, 38 ;
K(iXXu7^tw;y 99. 12.
48. I 49. 3 50. 6.
; ;
KdXXifj-rpdTo? 117. 9-
K(ti>vei'i^t]i 111. 30 ;
168.
KepKioiu 40. 13.
Maym> 94. 8.
7'-
118. 38, 53, 68.
Mat^coiVrj?
Kfr/xiXcoi/ 113. 4."). <^3-
104. S. Mavedus 72. 6.
Kef/j<:XXo)r 103. 6 ;
Ma;âraf 130.
K(XXi> 39. 3, 14-
Kti'f'os 88. 2.
MfXai'îoj 111. 2, 25; 118. 44. 70.
KtWo? 122. MeXi . vois {}) 84 {a). 13, 30.
Me!/6Kparr;j 143.
KX(i8<.s 118. 54, 73-
KXftVfl/)x"s 66. I, S : 67. T, 28 : 68. i 69 Mi'f Xaoy 84 ((?). I, 16.
160-3. Mfve'fjLa)(os 32. I 8.

2 ; 70 (<7). I ;
M/wTTTroj 32. 18.

KXa'inaxoi 74. 3.
MfviaKos 87. 3-
KXamdrpa 91. 3, 6, 9. 12.
MfVwK 30. 22 ; 53. II ; 126.
KXe'cor 112. .-3.
Mei'coi'iS';? 124-6.
KXhos 118. 41. 62, 74.
Mr;i'()S(opr'S 110. 5"-
K<;3"s 164.
MiOo-ir 112. 19, 67 ; 152.
K(5XXor 90. 21.
Mi/ao-f'ay 97. 8.
KoWrvdlJS 112. 46.
Mmacov 41. 3 ; 92. lO.
KofxoaTTii 52. I 7-
Mvri(Ti<TTpiiTri92. 5.
KoVoji/ 112. 48.
Ml/fJO-ZoT/HITOf 110. 43-
Kofuapoi 111. I 9-
122. Mi'/)/)ii'7 118. 57- ^4-
K.Hlrrjs 48. 4 :
Mi)/>rovj 111. 33.

K/)(irii'os: 118. 39. ')0, 69.
Kpeaiv 76. fi-
Kjirjcr/Auoj 127. Nfn 110. 4 4-

lipiaiirnos 92. 13. 21. N( okX}$ 110. 4r)(?)-
K,nTov 40. 4 63. i; : 110. 17, 19, .13

NfOTTTfiXfp')? 98. 7-
Nf'fTTWp 130.
120. 28.
89. Nf;(^(p,3/> 98. 3. 15-
KTrjrriKXrjS 60. 3 ;
;",.
Kr/yo-irrTToy 90 2 2.
NfX^fMpei'S- 72. 10. 14. 17.
1-^0. NfX^fiT|3(S 111. 39.

K.8,..> 53. 14 ;
T>if xOoa'ipis 67. 27.
AuKcov 81. 8. S(x0<^vs 118. 10.

NiVaioy 63. 3.
Ai'i^xnxoi 84 (.7). I, iC).
îKiiv^poi 123.
AuoHtSwv 49. 1 , 1 6.
NtKcu'w/j 30. 3 ;
81. I. 5i 21 91. 16; 115. 2.
Afiiyi'os 81. I 5-
NlK(ipx"f 31. II, 21.
AfoiTdy 111. 39.
NtKi'dj 78. I 118. 51, 7rv
AfVKios 42. 10. ;
46. 47. 48. 49. NiKOfiios 96. 12, 29, 35.

Af wfiaîof 45. I ;
I ;
I ; I :
KiK6di]fxoi 110. 60, 75' lO.")-

I 50. I.
;
N.K.iXnos 98. 10 107. 3 HI- 20 136-9

A/ior 89. (), 7 ; 110. io6. ; ;
Al(-i(iVoi 101. 2.
141-2; 160.
NiKOtrr/JriTos 39. l I ', 56. 5-
A.'3i y140.
.\./rm(.s 30, 16 97. 3(.').
No,3(I)ix<v 71. I.
; I
IF. PERSONAL .\AMES 389
sCfji(pT} 94. 8. riere^cris 53. 6.
KCctios 82. 8. nfT(ipoiJ6r]s 67. 7 ; 68. 5 ; 75. 3.

n6rfia-j;( ) 121 1 5.
iofôs 30. 1 ; 100. 10. n(Tfi>oinis 67. 24.
Av6doKos 98. 4, 13. rifTeppovdis 52. 16.
SfUoSoTOS 123. nerf;^coi' p. 6.
AfvoKpaTT]s 34. 7 111. 5, 7. ;
Iler^tJts 35. 3.
AtVOCpdPTqs 112. 49. ncro^do-Tif 112. 54 ; 118. 25.
nroû;îs (?) 53. 2 1.
OtV5s (.=) 53. 9. Ilerofnpiy 35. 2, II j 52. 20, 22; 53. 2 1 ;
'Ofap;^r;y 53. I 8. 61. 5, 6 ; 67. 20, 25 ; 68. 19, 23 72. ; i,
'OvvtacPfHs 35. 2 ; 114. I ; 118. 22. 4; 75. 2; 112. 5,

59; 131; 136-7;
'OvonacTTOi 89. 2. 139 141 164.
; ;
'OTTiets 149. nerwOs- 54. 5 112. 26. ;
OpafVfCpoiais p. 4. UfVferjaLS 53. I 6.

'OppoplBrji 149. nXurwi/lOl. 4 118. 52, 80. ;
'Otrt^ts 27. 60. nXovTapxoi 63. i; 64. i, 26; HO. 7, 13,

35, 42 159. ;
133.
nal9a>: nvCis 52. 18.
ndis 112. 57. Tlvaais 72. I 7.
naKafjiis 130. nuf(f)opci}s p. 4.
ITaveCty 118. 2. noKwCy 35. 2 ; 118. 5, 6.

navô-ty 53. 7. YloXeiJiapxos 112. 7, 9.
r.aovs 52. 32 ; 72. 13. noXfpoKpcirrjs 88. 4 ; 145.
naovrf;y 100. 9; 118. 9. noXeVcui/ 40. I ; 41. I ; 110. i ; 118. 3 ; 157.
Uapapivii% 90. 7 118. 12 ; (?). IlaXuii'drji 111. I I.
no>s 64. I 65. 4. 20

; ; 85. 8. lldAX,; 121. 6 (.').
Uappfi'iKov 47. 3 ; 117. 1 1 YloXvaiuus 91. 14 ; 118. 4.

DacrJJy 154. noXvapxos 111 15.
Tlaacaipois 53. 8. rioXvKXijs 94. 13, 17.
IlaCTtycoj'ts 52. 2 1. noKoov 111. 1 1.
Unainioi 61. 6. nd/jof 148.

nao-iy 31. 4, 9, 14, 20; 53. 7 67. 24 71. ; ;
noo-ftSojwos 112. 41 ; 122.
13; 85. 7, 20; 98. 14; 112. 27; 113. 8, llocovi118. 43, 65, 83.
15; 118. 47, 76. Tlpaîas 52. 26.
106. 4 ; 138
nao-o))^ ; 140. npnîpuxos 78. 3, 14.
Uaawi 68. 13, 21. npopTj6e{,s 27. 85.
UaTJSeis 153. Ilpcoruydpay 63. 6.
noT^r 86. 14. 25. npa)rap;(oy 66. I.
ndrpoKXoj 99. 3. Upu>Tnyevr]S 90. lO; 167.
ndTpcoj/ 34. I, 7, 10 ; 56. I ; 73. 9, 19 ; 99. UpcoTopaxos 43. 4, 13.
4; 111. 13. IlToKfpa'ios 37. 3, 11; 51. I, 7; 52. I, 26 ;
nav^s 53. 6, 8 ; 61. 7. 53. I ; 54. I, 33 55. i, 8 56. ; ;

i, 11 ;
natitraftay 39. 12. 57. I, 5 58. I 50. I, 14

; 60. ; ; I, II ;
neAoi|r 92. 3. 61. I 62. I, 17

; 70 (,7). 3 ; 70. ; i ; 111.
Ilc/zi/evs 130. 8 ; 112. 84 ; 130 ; 132 ; 160 ; 167-8.
Ilei'ovTrts 112. 25. UvddyyfXi^s 00. 4.
IlepStK/cas 30. 14. livpyoiv 80. 3.
IlepiXnos 85. 4.
IltTfappws 135. l.dTOKQs 36. 3, 9 ; 112. 81, 83,
39 INDICES
'S.eiiCfm 68. 21 ; 72. 5, II ; 74. 94. 18. Tlaapx's 92. 6; no. 2 6(?).
Se/Ji"'? 101. 2. Trrij 62. 5.
2(fji())6f{js 54:. 2 2 ; 94. 10 ;

132. 'Ya(Viy()is(J) 112. 43.
Sfj/v/jty 112. 50. Torof;? 113. I 5-
'Sevix'^ 61. 6. T . . (mis 85. 7.
2?/jos 92. 9, 10 ; no. 3 ;

129.
27^01; 118. 60. ^n/îir 112. 7;).
Siffois 53. 20; 67. 23; 118. 12. al'(09 110. 63, 73, 98.
Sttri/Jdioy 85. 9. 4>ai;f)? 52. 20.
SiriiXKrjf 81. 7- <l>a . . (tKOVTtJI 112. 79-
2/cvî;s: 55. I. ^'iîs 53. 8.
2oKOVU>TTlS 133. <l>i\iip.fi(jL>v 75. 4.
2oi'i'u>(t>pis (?) 35. I <l>iX/;/Lia)v 70 ((?). 8.
Sol'TtVS 118. I I. 112. 55.

î\t](Tt(is
'2oi'T(x)T\('iya 149. i>i\nnTos 62. I 117. ; 1 2.
^noxrjs47. 27. (PiXicTKos 30. 23.

STTouSmos 30. 23. iXoicXr]9 no. 10, 29.
2Td(r(7r7roj 84 ((?). I 4. <l>tXo^TOs: 75. 5 ; 124 ; 130.
^Tfcfxiuos 112. 81. îXcov 47. 26, 27 ; 49. 10 ; 52. 14 90. 6.
;
2roTor;rif 106. f) 107. 3 112. 60, 63, 89;

1
22 ; 95. 4 ; 96. 35 ; 111. 26 ; 112. 96.
136-8; 140-1. îXuivi8r]s 81. 16.
2T/j>mos- 37. 2, lo 103. 5 165. ; ;
(Xcorfpa 134.
2r/wT-a)i/ 37. 2, lo; 90. 23; 93. i 96. 13, ;
il>ifir]vts 82. 2.
'I'lra)/)^!? (.?) 27. 64.

30, 36; 117. 12 {?).
^vireis 118. 24, 25. iôhn^ no. 61, 70.
2u>TTaTpcs 82. 24 ;
123. <t'iH$tos {?) 98. 8.
2u)crnraTj)os 112. 9.
2(oCTt7roXiy 81. 9. 80. I, 6; 154-5.
Xaifii'ifioi'
2()o-tf/)Hi'f;$' 111. 16. Xapta 85. 6.

2cooTpaTos' 88. 5; 1012. XapiKXrjs 152.
XeX 6) ... as no. 59.
.
Tuffxlirjs 106. 6 ; 107. 6 ; 136-41. Xfo-zx^fty 72. 5 ^'^ .?(?'/>.
Taiiai'ti 112. 23. X . /Jtoy 105. 3.

TfXeaTVj 85. 14 ; 99. 8,
TeXftrrof 58. 4. 'i'cyXî'CTiS 112. 48, 92.
Tfâfs 135. '^fi'opovs 64. 10.
Tff7t:.Mtf (.') 67. 27. îfrdr/y 112. 80.
112. 27.
Teroi-idaTti ^'lI'TfO-QJl'f 164.
Teif 52. 16 ; 53. 7 67. 25 ; ; 74. 2 ; 80. 7, ^w0<5s 132.
15; 112. 29, 30; 121. 7.
Tr]\(fia)(OS 32. I. ^Qpoi 39. 4, 7 52. 18
; 53. 9, 20 63. 19 ; ; ;
T(Via(oi- 111. 23. 70 (/>). 7 ; 74. I 80. 7, 15 94. 10, 19

; ; ;
Tifi(if)T((>s 63. 2 I. 108. 5 ; no. 99 112. 31, 67, 74 ; 122.

;
'I'lpoKXij^- 84 ((/). 2 92. 9.

<-/ ,V(7,/'.
;
TifxoKpdrijs 76. 2 ; 110. 74, I 10; 118. 5. UTTin'S 102. I I.
Ti/ioirr/KiToy 96. 36 (?). . \a(jwaii 30. 2 1.
'ri(ra)/6/)09 108. 3, 10. IpXuii'O'ti 52. 3 I. Cf. 112. I,

V. GEOGRAPHICAL 391
V. GEOGRAPHICAL.
(a) Countries, Nomes, Toparchies, Cities.
'Af^tpmns 84 (a). 2, 1 7. 6; 80. 21, 23; 91. 14; 94. i6(.'); 99.
At-yu77Ttoy 27. 92; 32. 14, 16; 70 (/^). 4 ; 7 102. I, 6{?); 124.
;
93. 6. KcotV)7s-33. 8, i6; 66.7; 78.14; 88.5; 93.

'AXfâciSpeia 57. 2; 98. 16, 20 ; 110. 22, 3, 19 106. 4
; 117. 2. /cdrw KcoiV'/j p. 8.
;
25 ; 158. fj TToXis 110. 31. Kaos 30. 2 I
An6W(j}vi s 7t6\is rj /uf-ydX;; 110. 82.
'ApdiBios 36. 6, 1 1. MaKfSwr/ 30. 2, 3, 1 4 ; 32. 6; 90. 6; 110.

Apa-ivoLTTjs 82. 16 110. 87. ; 62, 71.
A(PpndlTris TToXis 134, MifjLcfjis p. 8 95. 6; ; 110. 24.
'AcppobLTOTToXlrrjs 38. 6 ; 71. 1 3. M(p(f}iTns 98. 14.
MufTo'y 32. 19 129. ;
BapKa7os 52. 12; 91. 16.

BotcoTto? 96. 15, 32. vopap^la 74. 6.
(?)
'EptrpifCs 70 ((7). 9.
'O^vpuyxtVr/s 78. 12; 83. 3 89, 6; 90. 4, ;
'EppoTToXiTrjs 110. 86.
'Epv6pLTTjs{?) 96. 13, 31. 7 ; 92. 895 7 127. ; ;
'EanfpiTrjs 91. 16.

'0|i'pt7X"' TToXts 62. 15 89. 13 95. 5, 8 ; ; ;
168. (7) TToXts 43. 5 ; 49. 15 111. 24. ;
'H/jofcXfi'Sou (/ifp/s) 81. 7 ; 133.

'Hpa<Xfono\iTj]s p. 8 (?) ; 70 {i). I ; 71. 1 4 ;
IlepamyviTTins 70 {d). 7-
80. 82. 9 ; 110. 72, 78

3, 8 ; 163. ;
nf'parjs 90. 22 (.?); 93. I ; 112. 40; 124.
'HpaK\fov5 TToXts 30. 25; 92. 12; 93. Il6\(fJL(LiVos (/:xfp/y)81. 8, I 7.
3;
171. noXis^ 'AXe^dvSpeia 110. 3 1. =: Ô^vpvy\a>v
noXts 43. 5 ; 49. 15 ; 111. 24.
Ga . .(Tcro? 110. 93, I02.
.
Of pi(TTov {nfpls) 81, introd., 15. 2dis 27. 19, 76, 165.
e;?/3atV 110. 80, 85. I.alTi]S 27. 2 1.
epa$ 30. 22; 33. 5, 12; 37. 3, 11; 90. SlfCOTTfl'? 70 (rt). 4.
23; 92. 9, 10; 94. 13, 17. S^ffita 110. 25, 31.
'lovbalns 96. 4, 2 1. TOTrapx^la,''Ayijpa(?) (Heiacleopolite) 101. 3.

ij (Oxyrhynchite) 34. i
xdrcd TOTT. 52. 4 :
KW8ioy (.?) p. 6.
73. 10; 85. 10; 169. Kur o) 44. 10. r)
Kpr']s92. II (.?); 110. 58, 104.
Kpoopvirr]! 96. 12, 30. ^pvyios 54. 6.
KvuoiV TToXij 114. 6.
Kvpr]vaios 34. 2; 52. 13, 14; 86. 23; 89. XaXKiSei's 84((2). 2, 18; 90. 22 ; 96. 12, 29.
(/^) Villages.
T. Arsinoite.
Bou/3oo-Toj 81. 7. '2((Bivi'vTos 133.

'HpaxXfta 81. 14.
Tf/3'rj/u 81. 9.
Otoyopis 81. 8.
'IfpaNâoy 63. 19; 80.4,9; 81-^7; 110.21,22. âpâWa 81, introd.

392 INDICES
2. Ilcraclcopolitc. (Villages in the Kwtr>;s tot.os arc marked by an asterisk.)
*\\yKv,av TToXis- 67. 4; 112. 74; 117. 15. * H' i)xvr{)i.s 112. 46.
*AyKi'|)a)j/coi' p. 8. nf"x( ) P- ^
'AXtXfu? p. 8.
*'t\v(niivi^t) 100. 12. Sii'tipu p. 8.
*'Aa-(Twip. 8; 112. 5, 12, 52; 117. 12. *-2i(Tivr) 101. 6.

2(I./35is p. 8.
Bou(T6(/ny p. 8 ; 116. 2.
^TaayLopov p. 8.
Qi\l-iwv6Li p. 8. *TaX? (TaX^) p. 8; 36. 3, 8; 37. 4, 12 ;
G/ioti'rj;^?; p. 8. 75. I, 5 ; 103. 7 ; 107. 6 ; 117. 8 ; 139 ;
QlMivfdvyiis 80. 7. T/ioii/. 163. 144; 157.

QfioivuSis p. 8. Tacriy p. 8.
112. 56, 88.

*Bôi()i}îs' TepoiKpis p. 8.
*efiOLT60is 112. 39. Tf^jrowjX^ ) p. 8.
TfpTopix(^ ) p. 8.
^'Ittttuivcop p. 8. Texdoji p. 8.
*Tofv(yovs (?) 112. 43.
*KfpV;;f 112. 2. 6, 81. ToKwi? p. 8.
*KfpK(tTTl(pti p. 8. To(rflx( ) p. 8.
*Ke(})n\ui 71. 7.
*K<;/ia p. 8; 56. 6 ; 123. *<i?f3'ix's p. 8; 72. 2; 88. 5; 96. 3, 19 ;
KoXa(7oii;^f ) p. 8. 106. 3 107. 3 110. 36

; 112. 4 c/satp. ; ; ;
K<I//iKoPLKov pp. 4, 8.
^vefi'tts p. 8.
*Movxtv0ar](^ ) p. 8. *<^^s 102. 2.
*Moi>. p. 8; 112. 2 7(.?), 45(?)-
*Xoi^vwTp.is 68. 3 ; 112. 26, 86.
Ni"f7ty p. 8. XoJ'i'JS' p. 8.
So^jjiii p. 8.
*^(^0ou(p(3i] {<^(TTe.) p. 8; 33. 7, 15; 112.

IJfei'("i/i(y p. 8. 25 (0-
llffv'ti^ti p. 8. *^(\(pdxis 112. 36.
*Il,)(;7 p. 8; 84 {a). 7, 22 ; 112. 14. p. 8; 112. II,
^SkC-Xts- 57; 117. 8, 10.
3. Hcrniopolitc?
'WaliaaTpoiV TTuXii 78. 8.
4. Ox)'rh}'nchitc.
AtKoifiia 47. 29. Meva 90. 7.

Movxivapvoj (-oci)) 53. 19, 21,22; 92. 8 ; 132.
OJ,X^,y 52. 2 ; 53. 5 ', 62. 9 ; 89. ,-) ; 90. 4 ;
94. 9, II, 19 ; 111. 27, 28 ; 127 ; 130. Ik'Xa 43. 3.

VL RELIGION 393
20â45. 5 ; 111. 2 2. Ta(oi/a 73. 14 111. T.
;
l.ivapv 34. 2,4; 60. 4 ; 73. 8, 11; 132. TaXacij 55. 2 ; 132 ; 167.
5. Indeterminate
VfpTiaKiKvi^ (.') p. 4. na(TTo(p6poov 87. 6; 118. 16
I (?).
(c) Miscellaneous.
'HpaKXftoi/ 77. r 110. 5. TrapdfifVT] 53. 5
;
; 130.
'Icrttloj/ 167. Cf. 112. 51. TTorapos 27. 126, 168, 174.
(</) K\ijpnL
'AXflaj^Spou, 39. 9 ; 100. II 'SlKOdTpa.TOV 39. I I.

'AttoXAcoi/iou 53. 18 ; 119. I ;
130.
Tlapapivov? 118. 12.
Bpofievov 39. 10.
Ilapiifvioivns 117. II.
'HpaK^ft'ôu 130, ITanffai'/oD 39. 12.
'HpaKXfiTov 37. 6, 14. UnXvaivov 118. 4.

npwTaydpou 63. 6 110, introd. ;
(?).
O(o8a)pov 118. 3.
npcoToytvovs 99. 10.
eeoK[ 118. II.
riroXf /xat'ou 52. 26; 130.
fo;^pâTov 118. 6.
'incTovos 118. 2, 7.
Ttfxofparou 118. 5.
KoXXtorpdroi; 117. 9.
îXiTTTTov 117. 12.
KuSpeW 53. 1 4 ; 130. <J>iXoî/ou 75. 5 ; 85. 13.
(e) Deme.
Kaa-Topfios 32. 3.
VI. RELIGION.
{a} Gods.
'aV 27. 77, 166. ^fo'^f 77. 4, 79. 6. Cf. Inde.x II.
7 ;
Appwv 112. 90.
Qviipis 35. 3.
'Apov/Sfs 27. 173.
'AjtoXXw:/ 27. 186.
^lo-tr 27. 205.
BovlBdaris 27. 1 45. "Irpeipis 27. 86.
(bv? 27. 93.

Upop.T}6(vs 27. 85.
^Hpa 27. 112; cf. 27. 69.
'HpaKAî Evdf . 72. 2.
I
tT(i>pa)ty 27. 64,
394 INDICES
{[)) Priests and Priestesses

o/jXif/jei'sr 62. 8 ;
72. 2, 18; 118. 24; 131. 'Oi/d/xoo-TOf Tlvpycovos (8th Eucrg.) 89. 2.
Aaa-ldfos ApipuXov (25th Euerg.) 90. 2.
j/)fuy 52. 18; 72. 2, 16; 85. 8. (fpfi'f (sc. ifpoypapfxarevs 27. 44.
ÂXeâvhpov), Mfi-eAoof Aaîa^ôu (51I1 Sotcr) tVpo'SoiiXos 35. 3, 5.
84 ((^7). 1, 16. Ai/iralos (?) 'An-oXAo) (ylh or
4Lh riiilad.) 97. 2. ... KaXjX./xijSovs
KaPT)(p6pos 'Apaivorjs <tiXf((5fX(/)ov, Mf7;o-tO"Tp(iTT;
(i2ih Philad.) 110. 40. Nfa[
]
Tfifrdpôu (22nd Philad.)
92. 5. . . .
ok\(ovs (i3lh Philad.) 110. 44. 'JhXktkos

noXfpo/cpdrour(2 3rd Philad.) 88. 4. Xapea
^nov8a'iov (b.C. 3OO-271) 30. 23. {f/Ki/s
'AttIov (24th Philad.) 85. 5 150. Name ;
'AXf^dfSpov KOI 6(U)V AdeXffiioi', ndr/joxXoj
lost (26th Philad.) 96. 2, 17. ^t\(o[Tepa. .
ndrpcoi/oy (15th Philad.) 99. 3; 128.

(l6th-27th Philad.) 134. Sipcprj Muyovns
UfXayj/ 'A\(^(iu8pov (22nd Philad.) 92. 22.
(28th Philad.) 94. 7. AtjôvIkt] <1hXu)vos
Kcveas *AX(cVod (23rd Philad.) 88. 2. 'Ap
(29th Philad.) 95. 3. 'ApmpuT) 'îKoXdov
frT(5wK09 (24lh Philad.) 85. 3
ITf/nXdou
(34lh Philad.) 98. 9. |'Ap(rii'or;j rioXfpo-
150. Name
(26ih Philad.) 96. 2, 17. lost
<fpdroi)(s) (3rd Euerg.) 145. 'lapvea
. .AuKiVou {28th Philad.) 94. 5.
. *Ajt-(o;ôs
'Yno .. (5lh Euerg.) 171.
. 'Apxearpdrr)
. e. (29th Philad.) 95. 2.
. . . Neo7n-dXf/uo?
KTrj(TiK\e'ovs (8lh Euerg.) 89. 4. Bepen'/c?;
*/u|tou(?) (34lh Philad.) 98. 7. 'Ap^f-
IlvdiyyeXov (2 5lh Euerg.) 90. 3.
[Xor Aij/xou ?j (3rd Eucrg.) 145. Upevs
'AXe^. Kfil ^fwr 'ASfX. Kdl 6(cov KvfpyfTuiv,
*A/n(7Td,:ioL'Xos AioSdrou (5th Eucrg.) 171. naaTo(p6poi 77. 2 ; cf. 87. 6.
(() Miscellaneous.
('i8vT()v 72. 10, 15, 18. 'HpaKXf'iov 77. I ; 110. 5.
if pa (yr] ?) 112. 89.

yfi'ed'Xia
'
Itrtov 27. 205.
Upov 35. 7; 72. 5, 16; 93. 4; 157. to.
lepd n. -J,
foprr) 27. 47> 33' 64, 85, 93, 145, 150, 154,
173, 186. TTUVTjyvpis 27. 76, 165.
VII. OI'FICIAL AND MILITARY TITLP:S.

('ii'Tiyp(t(f)fii 29. 8, 27, 32 ; 110. 28. dlolKT](Tli, 6 TTpOS rf}t HiniK., '['(LlTllV^pOS 109. 4,11.
dpxKJn'XdKiTiii 73. 10. 8ioiKr]TrjSj ATToXXwi'tos 44. 3, 8 ; 95. 1 1 110.;
53, 56, 68, 94, 103, 112. KiTUjôy 133 (.').

lia(Ti\iKo9 ypnuptnevs 72. S; 98. 3, 15; 108. SoKtuiuTTr'ji 29. 19; 41. 3 106. 5 107. 6 ; ;
3 ; 153 ; 156. 108. 4 109. 7 136-42.

; ;
ypfi/ipfiTfi's 74. 6 ; 82.26. i:iaaiXtK<ii yp. See cV(fTTVr;s 34. 2 ; 72. 4.

fincTiXiKni. yp. dv8pan68o)V 29. 7. yp.
KXrjp'iv^cov 82. I 5.
rjyepcuv 44. 2.
SfxnviKik30. 13 81. 16, ; 18; 90. 6; 91.

15; 96. 5; 103. 7. Oijaavpvi, 6 75-pos Tim $r). 117. 2.
nil. WEIGHTS, MEASURES, COINS 395
(8tcoT;?s 30. 21 ; 32. 6 ; 33. 5, 13 52. 12 ; ;

TTpaKTCap 30. 18 ; 92. 2 1. TTpUK. l8l(i)TlKUIl>
89.7,8; 90. 21; 91. 14; 94. 16, 17; 34. 7.

97. 7; 102. I, 6; 124.
105. 3 143. o-tToXoyos- 42. 4 ; 43. 4 ; 82. 8 ; 87. 5 ;
WiiiiXi^ ;
iTtnvs 81. 5, 13. 101. 2.

o'troXoycoi' 83. 2.
KTJpV^ 29. 2 1. (TiTopirpris 100. 10.

Kcofinp^wu 35. II. o-T-pfirr/yos- 72. 14; 93. 5. Kpianvn^-s (?) 92.
Kconoypanparevs C7. 9 ; 68. 6 ; 75. 7 ; 103. 13-
8; 165. 75. 2.
TOTTapxrjS 4A. 9 ;
TOTToypafipaTfvs 67. 8; 68. 5) 75. 3.

XoyfVT^s 113. 9, 15 168. ;
Tpami'LTiji 66. 7 106. 4 107. 3 108. 4
; ; ; ;
Xoxayos 81. 7) 8, 15- 109. 110. 30, 86 136-42.

7 ; ;
fia\mpo(p6pos 73. i6(?). {mrjpeTTjs 29. 21, 30 (.?) ; 92. 22.

/udxt/ios 41. 18 ; 44. 1,6, 12 ; 70 (Zl). 1.
(f}u\aKiT(V<ov 34. I.
(f)vKaKiTT]s 36. 2, 8 ; 37. 4, 12; 53. 16, 20;

vop.upxT)s, 'Apipov6i]s 85. 10. 110. 49 ; 113. 10; 144;
54. 30; 75. I ;
vojiapxia. 74. 6 (?).

167.
otVoi/o'/xof 94. 12; 99. 7; 107.5; 108. 2 ;

Xeipi-(TTrjs 74. I.
109. I ; 110. 87 ; 116, intiod.; 131; 153; XiXiapX^^ 30. 4'

168. ^ôpj^yta, 6 Trpo? rî x^P- ''"'î' eXee^rifrcoi' 110. 79-
oiKovvfjioov 133 ; 169. Xprip-arayayos 110. 52, 84, 112.
VIII. WEIGHTS, MEASURES, COINS.

{a) Weights and Measures.
apovpa 52. 19 ^/ Jrt^/'. ; 53. 5 et saep. ; 70 (<?). Iitrpov dvTjXoiTiKov 74. 3, 4, 5 101. ! 8. p.
a 119. 18. âaiXiKov 86. 6, 21
70 3; 75.6.
/i. ;
)
5; (^). .
(
d/jTfl^r; 50. 3; 63. 7, 17; 64. 4, 5; 65- 6, 124; 129. /x/rptat Twt ;(0i TOJi/SacrtX. 84 ((/).
II, 19,24; 74. 2 el saep.; IQ. 6, 9; 83. 6, 22. ptrpcoi xoei Tcoi . . . 90. II. p.
6, 7 84 (rt). 3, 8, 18, 24 86. i, 1 1, 16 ; ;

doxiKou 14:. 2. p. (eVi'faKa<fi<o(T();^(oiVi(co!')
;
Trpor TO ;^nXKoCv 85. 8. 7rapaSo;îKoi/ 87.

90.9, 14; 91. 10, 11; 98. 5> 18; 99. I /t.
II, 13, 14, 15; 100.6,13; 101. 8; 102. 12. p. o avTos r]ViyKaTO i^ Wiâv^pdas 98.
2, 4, 7, 10 ; 110. I el saep. ; 122; 124-6 ; 19; cf. 156.
129; 156-7.
ToKavTov 116, inirod.
dwiXiof 100. 3.
Kepapiov 31. 6, 7, 16, 18; 80. 4, 10. Xom^ 119. 20, 21, 2 2.
{b) Coins.
dpyvptov 34. 11; 46. 17; 51. 2; 58. 7;
9, 8paxpn 29. 23, 3.5-6; 30. 5, 16, 20;
II,
70 (a). 10; 89. 8; 90. 19; 91. 7, 1 1 ;

31. 7, 8,18; 32. 9, 10; 34. 3; 36. 6,
12; 37. 8, 16; 40. II 41. 6, 20; 46.
109. 6, 12; 110. 20; 112. 42, 55; 113. ;
52. 2 el saep. 53. 5 el saep.

19; 118. 89; 127. 4; 153. 6,7; 51. 6 ;
1 ;
396 INDICES
53.7; 58. 7; 60. .- 63. 16, 19, ; 20; {u,io\ik-) 51. 6; 52. 12; 53. 20, 22, 24; 68.
64. 8, 14; 65. 24 67. 13 d scuf. ; ;
68. 0. i8 ; 99. 14 111. 34 112. 38 el saep. ; ; ;
116. 121. 8 e/ saep.

8 70 {a). 1 1 70 (//). 9 84 {n). 8,
; ; ; 24 ;
113. 1 2 ; 1 4 ; 1
86. 12 88. 8 89. 9, 16 90. 1.5, 19 ;

; ; ;
{nfvToiôXov) 52. 15, 21; 53. 21 104. 5, ;
91.7; 92. 15. 19; 94. I, 14, 19; 95.

11; 110. 11; 112 94; 115. 13; 116. 6
13 ; 99. 15; 102. 2, 4, 7; 10; 104. 4, 5,
e/ saep. 121. 25 </ saep.
;
9-1 1 ; 106. 1,8; 107. 7; 110, inirod. I.
el sai'/>. ; 111. i 2 ef smp. 114. 3 / sacp. ; <

(jiTapTov), i.e. ^ obol, 52. 15, 17; 53. 5
115. 8 e/s,!f/>. ; 116, inirod., 2 ,/sii,-/>. 121. ;
ct saep.; 68. 9 ct saep.; 111. 26; 112. 14
2tsaep.; 124-6; 136-42; 160; 162-4. et saep.; 113. iC; 115. 14 et sacp.; 11.
(SwiôXo.) 52. 13, 19, 28; 53. 8, 9, 23, 24; 113. 6 f/ 121. 15 et sacp.
.s-^t'/'. ;
63. 20; 67. 13, 21 68. 7 et saep.\ 110, ; (rfrptojSoXoi') 52. 12 et saep.; 63. 17, 20; 67.
introd. cl sacp. ; 111. 4 ; 112. i 4 cl saep. \
13, 21; 68. 20; 99. 15; 104. 4, 9;
114. 5. 23 : 115. 8 (/ Siiip.; 116, inirod., 110, introd. ct sacp. ; 112. 1 1 et saep. ;
4 ct sacp. ; 121, 39, 46- 116. 3 ct sacp. 121. 1 9 f/ i-^^/. ;
(rpii/ioXoi') 52. 23; 53. 5, 8, 17; 68. 9;

f^dSpaxôi 51. 6. 110. 15 et sacp. 111. 26 112. 8 et saep. ; ;
113. 16 ; 115. 5 ('/ sacp. ; 116. 7 ^/ .ra^/. ;
(^;ji;^nX(C()i')68. 20. 121. 49 ; 148.

{!jfiia)l:ie\M,) 51. 6; 52. 12, 18; 53. 9, 22,
112. 34. 42, 05
24; 68. 18; 104. 4, 9; no, introd. 7, 8, 30, 49. 53'
113 II, 12, 14 160. X- 'J <S (rtTap-
e/ saep. ; 111. 4, 34 112. 13 ;
li satp. ;
113. 7,
106. 8 107. 7 138. X- npos
7 ^/ jf7d'/>. ; 114. 5, 23 115. 6 : r/ ,>(?(/'. ; 116. : ;
6 el saep. ; 121. 20 </ .vi?!/-. iipyvpMv 70 \ay 10 109.

;
12. .^.,
;^(nXi<oi"?) 68. 18, 20.

pra 88. 9.
;^'pu(n'oi' 110. I 9-
IX. TAXES.
112. 3.
tiXiKr} dKoarn 66. 2 ; 70 Or). 1 1 ; 70 (b). 9 ;
163.
aXXayi) 67. 15, 2 2. UK. fpeav 115. 20.
op . [.]iKoj/ 45. 20. KaTOaTI] (j/ K(l( (>"') 66. I.
tKTT; 109. ^, 10. e<T7; <I'iXn6A0aJi 132.
l3n\avf[ov 108. 112. 96. ("KniKT] 113. 12.

7 ;
(SdXavdwv TpiTi] 116. I. AniW 112. 2, 39, 74; 113. 14.

(I'vofiiov 132.
yii'fi/iei'fi, Ta y. 92. 2 ; 111. 34. fnnWayl] 51. 6 ; 68. 9, 18, 20.
ypapfxaTiKof 110. 23, 24, 26. (TTapovpiov 112. 13, 27, 44, 50, 61.
fTTidiKarov 32. 9 ; 92. 19.
(^fK(irr; pocTxcop 115. I.

8iaKocno(TT>] (/)' K(u <r 66. I. Cvrqpd 106. 7; 107. 6: 112. ii, 25, 26;
j
8i(ip.(Tpa 110. 1 4 113. 1 1 ; 133 ; 136-42.

104. 4,10.
8i<j;(o)/ia
SoKifiaariKoi/ 29- 24 ; 110. 3^- iaTpiK6p 102. 2, 8 ; 103. 9.
fio>8<fa;âXcta 112. 6 ct sacp. 'nrniaTpiKnii 45. 2 I

Sa)pf(i 66. I inrTwv 104. 5, 1 1.
A'. GENERAL INDEX OE GREEK FORDS J
397
J . (I . (fiopia 76. 8. TaiTd)v'f>avTa)v 112, 76.
t4\os 29. 24, 43
3, 7, 110. 28, ;
Xoyet'a ;^Xa)pcoi/ 51. 2, 5. Cf. 112. 9, TiKoiVlKll 77. 6,

Tert'ipTT] 112. 45, 47, 59. 78.
fiocTxâv deKuTi] 115. I. TfTpaKaieiKoaTT] (k'6') 80. 4, lO ; 112. 38, 46,
58, 7.T ! 132. TfTapTO"eiKO(TTT] (slc) TtTpU-
raOXo!/ 46. 5; 110. 6, 18, 28, 31, 32. 7i68(iiv 95. 7, 10, /c'8' e'ptcoj' 115, introd.
TptT]papxr)pn 104. 3, 9.
oti'oi; Ti/i/; 132. Tp'iTTj fia\av(i(ov 116. I-
(paK^S 112. 77,

irfpicrrepcbvos (SC. rpirr; ?) 112. r.
(popos 35. 6,
n\vvos 114. 2, 8, II, 16, 19; 116, intiod.
(pvXdKiTiKov 103. 10; 104. 5; 105. 4; 143.
({)vXaKiTiKd 110. 2 2, 37,
criTOfxtTpiKov 110. 14.
ari(f)avos117. 5, 1 6. ;^Xa)pcoi/ 112, 9. Xoyei'a ;(X. 51. 2, 5.
arlôs 114. 3, 9, 17, 20. XoipariKov 45. 23 ; 112. 13 et saep.\ 119. 22.
X. GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK WORDS.

ill^poxos 85. 25. /iWos 31. II, 22 34. 12 48. 13; ; ; 52. 19 ;
ayeti/ 27. 48, 54, 82 ; 55. 3 ; 64. 16. 72. 7; 79. 4; 82. 6; 84 (a). 12, 27;
ayripa 101. 3. 92. 21 96. 7, 24 110. 44, 47,
; ; 59; 121.
dyvoe'iv 28. I 8; 122; 124; 126. nXXcos 58. 11; 60.
ayopa^'eti' 51. 2. 9; 62. 16; 69. 8; 162.
dynpai'O/iioi' 29. 3, lO, aXy, oKfs 152.
ubiKt'ii^34. I ; 133. aXvaiov 121. 3.
nStKos 34. 5 147. ; dXcpiTa 121. 47.
/I'SoXoj 85. 17; 86. 6; 90. lo; 91. 2 ; 98. ciXms 84 ((?). 5, 2 1.
19; 156. dpn 84 (c?). 4, 19 ; 88. 7 : 168.
llbvTOV 72. 10, 15, 18. dpdv 47. 12.
'Aeros 27. 107. 1 38. ("ip.TTfXos 70 {i). 2,
cu^ 37. 6, 15 120. 3, 13, 32.
;
Al'| 27. 88, apTrfXcov 151.
civaâiviiv27. 127.
oireii/ 113. 2. 27. 169, 176.
nwI/Sao-i?
aiV/a 43. 8. Civdydv 73. 13 167. ;
aiTtoj 73. 18. dvnyiyviocrKfiv 168.

UKO1T<J0TaTOS 49. 9. dvnyKciios 27. 40. diayKaioTepos 82. I I.
nKoueii/49. 2. nvnypdcfxiv 30. 24.

OKpi^Los 40. 7. UKpiêaraTa 27. 34. avadexfcdi'i 58. 9.
dKpcoKi;;(oy 27. 56 t"/ Jflf/). di/a^r/reif 71- 9.
QKvpoy 29. 28; 93. 8; 96. lo, 27. avuKopi^dv 41. 23.
akri6(i.a 27. 23. dvaXaplidvfiv 38. 4; 81. 6, 13.
d\r^6r']S 38. 15. avaXlcTKeiv 54 8.
aXiKi'j 112. 3. dwiXwpa 85. 11; 86. 8; 90. 12, 13; 110.
aXicTKeadai 148. 21, 36 118. 21, 30.
;
dXXayr; 67. 1 5, 2 2. dpaXuniKus 74. 3, 4, 5 101. 8. !
aXXijXoov 63. 12; 96. 5, 6, 8, 22, 25. dfai'TiXe/cTOf 94. I, I4; 95. 13.
398 INDICES
avaninTTdv 57- T 90. 14, 18; 91. 6; 92. 18; 102. 4, 9;
ava'n\('iv 110. "J--
124; 148.
uviireWfiv 2.1 . 52, 89, 116, T30, 135, 221. drroxr] 162.
avaroKi] 27. 45' dTTOXfi'ÎC'OlU 52. 7-
dvn(j)ii}(iv 29. 37; 39. 16; 42. 5; 50. 2; ("iKiKos 52. 22 t/ sai'p.; 53. 16 cl saep.; 65.
71. 3; 120. 30; 162. 7. 19-
dvacfyoiyu 112. 37 114. 4. ;
dpyvpuv. See Index VIII (Z').
dvo)(wpf'ii' 71. (i ', 113. 1 r. dpi(TK(lV 148 (.'j.
dvlîninoôv 29. I, 4) ^) "^' rl/)e(TTos 51. 3"

avfôi 38. 6. dpidiitk 47. 1 1 111. 16. ;
wu 34. 10 ; 78. 18. 'ApKTOipOi 27. 56, 161, 202.

(Jw//) 27. dpi'ik 32. T I
I 9.
iwSpoTTOi 34. 8, 10 ; 78. 20. i'lpovpa. See Index VIII ((z).
dvofiaar]fiOi 31- 4i ^5- dppuXTTUV 73. 15-
i/rtypfl0ei'$'. vSee IlltlcX \ II. dpTulSr]. See Index VIII (<?).
dvrlyi)a(l)ov 51. 2 ;
71. 2, 7 ; 72. 3 ; 81. 3, <'i/>rof 121. 31.
21. <//jX'w 30. 19; 92. 15.
arriXeVii' 29. 4, 37 82. 4 ; ;
113. 13. apXfadai 27. 9I, 125, I26, 191.
"ivw6(v 110. 66, 107, 109. dpx'j 29. 20.
I'i^wi 36. 6, 12. TO <';f 110. 63. ,);^(fpfrs'. See Index VI (/>).
dîovv 33. 2 ; 72. 3.

dp)(i(pvXaKtTrjs 73. 10.
dndyciv 34. 1 ; 73. 8. ay^fi'fii/ 113. 17.
dnaiTuv 30. I 7 63. 3- >
(irrr<t(>r(iTu? 54. 16.
d-ntiOt'iv 73. 19. (itTTpoXoyos 27. 43.
<;7r>ii/46. 8 ; 84(</). 3, 19 ; 97. 5. I'uTTpOV 27. 46, 51.
diTo',-iui((a6ui 41. 12. d(7({)aXccs 53. 3 ; 130. da(f)(i\e(rTnTa 52. S.
dnoyi)d(})((T6(u 29. 2, 17- (iroK '$ 89. 8.

dni)ypn(pi] 33. I, lO. at'Xi; 36. 4, 10 ; 157.
aTroSftKu'wu 29. .J^.
avXrjTi'iS 54. 4.
aTTofiiSdmt 30. 17; 31. 6, r7 34. 3. 9 47. ; ;

(ii'Xof 54. 6.
16, 31 64. 10; 73. 3, 9; 82. 10, 27;
;
(If/xifpfZ)' 63. 16; 73. 14.
84(</). 2, 4, 7, 17, 20, 23; 86. 2 10, d(j)apn('i((iv 127. 4.
18; 88. 12 90. 9, 13; 91. 3, 9, 10; ;

d(})i]ppev(iv 148.
102. 2, 3, 7, 8, 9; 124; 129. d(t)tfi'm 41. 6.
(inod('i)(t<)i> 85. 2 1. (iX/'<''JS' 159.
dTT<>K<t6i<TTiivat 62. I 3 77. 5 86. 7 93. 7 ; ; ; ;
(lax'Xiov 100. 3.
129.
anoKoiTfiP 148. /âXnffloi/ 108. 7 112. 96 116. i ; 121. 53.
; ;
dTroKjHi'eaihit 31. 24. ^(taiXfvfiv, See Index II.

(i77oX(I/J,'^(ll'ftl' 78. I 7- f:i<i<Ti\tvs. See Index II.
(iTToXXiwit 31. 5, 8, If,, 19 36. 3. 9 37. ;
:
j:iiiai\iKi'>i, (to) j3aa. 47. 24; 50. 3; 51. 6;
1 3144.
; 67. 11; 68. 7, 14; 81. 6, 14; 98.17;
dnoXiifiu 78. 4, 7, 13, 16. 156. TTpii jSacrtXiKa 93. II ; 94. 3, If,;
dnofifTpdv 50. 6 58. 10 85. 19. ; ;

95. 14; 124; 126. fSna. dno86xia 85.
aTToardatov 96. 3, 20. 20. |3<ia. yr; 52, 3. /Sao-. ypapip.aTfvs. See
ciTroiTTeAXfiv 41. 2 43. 8 44. 2.6; 46. 1 9 ; ; ;
Index VII. /:i(Kr. xXT^poy 85. 13; 101. 5;
47. 28, 29, 33. 36 48. 9 53. 54.2, ; ; i ;
112. 35. îi(T. KovTwTuv 39. 5. â(T. KuiXvpa
10, 23 59. 3. 9; 60. 2, 6 64 13; 65. ; ;
90. 1 9 91. 8. ;
/lioo-. ptrpov 84 {a). 6,
I 71. 7, 10
; 72. 9. 13, 15 82. ; ;
22 86. 6, 21
; 124; 129. /Sa.r. r^jdTTfCa
;
dTToTirui' 29. 1, 23 84:[(i 7, 23; 86. lo; ; . 29. 39, 40; 41. 2f,(.?).
X. GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 399
/Sapis-100. 13. Mypa 39. 15 ; 98. 17.
fifâtovf 90. 17. 18; 91. 6. bfiKVvvai 27. 25.
^t'a34. 5; 73. 19; 111. 3. Sflv 44. 5 46. 13 ; ; 54. 8 ; 64. 5 ; 116. 5.
î^Xiou 48. 6. 8fKaus 136.
/STkoj 49. 8. beKdvLKo^. See Index VII.
^\d^n 29. 3. bfKarrj 115. I.
^XaTTTdV 55. 5- AfX(pii 27. no, 146.
/Sop/ns 27. 59. 8fî6s 38. 8.
ôi'S 112. 2 2. 8((Tpo3T^pinv 34. 2 4, 8, 2 1 ; 73. 8.
(io<j\e<j6ai30. 18; 72. 6, 7 84 ; {a). 10, 26. 8exe(Tecu 70 (a). 2.
BpabvTffjoi' 55. 5. 8f)(T]ppos 53. 2. _
jSpexf" 90. 8. S^M"? 28. 13, 15, 17.

A;vo( ) 67. 13 68. 7, 17, 19. ; 8r]p6crLov 65. 25.
Stayfaxris- 93. lO.
y(V(6Xia 27. 205, Stoypa/xpa 34. 7, 9, II ; 73. 13; 88. 14;
y(o}fjLfTpia 90. 8. 89. 18; 90. 16; 91. 13; 92 22; 116,
yfcopyfif 101. 5 112. 41. ; introd.
yewpyds 52. 32 113. 18. ; 8iaipe(Tis 116. 3.
y?l 27. 72, 79, 87 ; 52. 4; 85. 22 90. 11. ;
8iaKopi^fLu 54. 2 2.
ylyveaSai 27. 72, 78, 87, 121, I23; 28. I, 8iaK0(TL0tTTr] {cr'\ 63. I.
16; 29. 6 ; 31. II, 22; 38. 6; 40. 5; 8i,nKoieiv 31. 3.

47. 18; 51 5; 52. 10; 71. 2; 73. 18; StciXoyof 122.
74. 3, 4, 5 ; 90. 1 1, 20 91. 8, 9
; 92. ; 8iaik{j(iv 96. 5, 2 2.
20 105. 4
; no. 8, 35 111. 34 ; ; ; 114. 8tdfj.eTpa 110. 14.
10, 18, 22; 115. 4, 18, 23, 36. Sta77io"rei;e(i/ 147.
yv('opT] 148. ou'iTTTapa 52. 9.
yvdofimv 27. 28. StareXfij/ 35. 5 ; 73. I 9.
yvojpiêiv 28. 6. fito;((Bpa 104. 4, 10.
yvobats 92. 13. 8L8i'mn 31.4, 15; 40. 10; 42. 9; 44 4;
yoyyvXls 121. 55. 46. 4; 48. 5, 10, 13; 54. 9; 58. 4;
yorjTos (.?) 52. 18. 64. 9; 67. 2; 68. 2; 72. 8; 78. 21 ;
yoveis 38. 14. 82. 7 90. 12;

; 110. 45 113. 17 ; 118. ;
yp<ipfia 29. 9 62. 11; 71. 8. ; 28; 159 162. ;
ypa/jLuartin 82. 2 0. AiBvfxoi 27. 88.

ypappnTf'tov 29. 9. fiifyyi^j/ 41. 4, 19 48. 3 52. 9
; 53. 3. ; ;
ypappciTfvs. See Index VII. Sifyyi'Tjais 114,. 14; 115. 15, 34; 116, introd.
ypappaTLKov 110. 23, 24, 26. 8iK(iâCai 30. 19.
ypa^fti. 28. 3 29. 7, 9, 32, 36, 41
; 34. 3, ;
8Uaios 34. II 85. 18 90. 11
; ; 91. 2.
;
7, 12; 39. 13; 40. 3; 44. I, 3; 48. 4, 8iKaaTrjpiov 30. 25.
7 49. 6, 13 51. 3 64. 2, 20 ; 68. 3

; ; ;
;
8Ut] 30. 20, 24 92. 14. ;
67. 32; 68. 11; 71. 5; 72. 6, 14, i6, 816 30. 19.
19; 73. 7, 17; 75. 2 78. 2, 16; 82. 3, ; Sio//cf)o-if 109. 5, II.
II 85. II
; 86. 26; 90. 14, 18; 91. 6;
; hotKTjTTjt. See Index VII.
92. 18; 115. 4, 23; 121. 2; 124; 127. Siopfovif 63. 13.
5 170.
; 8iopi((Lv 27. 30, 32, 222.
yparpi] 44. 4 78. 18. 81671 72.
; 5-
yvvrj 54. 14. 8nT\oii 29. I, 148.
34 ;
bavdêiv 88. 5. Si%n^ 118. 7, 14.

huvdov 89. I 6. SoÎi' 27. 72. 13.
37 ;
Sao-i'? 36. 6, 12 ; S7. 6, 15. 8oKip(i(XTi]9. See Index VII.

400 INDICES
hoKniacTTLKuv 29. 24 ; 110. .]0.
("XuLKl'l 113. I 2.
6'Xuioi/ 41. 22 59. 7 112. 2, 39, 74 ;

113.
hi,xiKos 74, 2. ; ;
See Index VIII (/'). 1 4 121. I

;
,-) ''/ saip. ; 131.
bpaxiifi.
34. ly; 54. 25; 72. 7; 'Xt07ra>X?;f 53. 6.
dCmadm 27. 34;
73. 12. (XaiiivpyeliiV 43. 7-
fXaiovpyi'is 43. 8.
SlII'dTOJ 78. I ;").
fiwfii/ 27. 52 ,i sacp. fXdacrwv 29. 17 118. 29. ;
f)v(ni 27. 45. (XaxKTTOS 27. 35-

8(o?>fKaT,'itxopos 27. 122. eXeyxd^^ 55. 3.
b(jo8(Kax<'f^K'ui 112. 6 (7 .V(/^/). (X(v6fpoi 29. 6.
<;W/)<i 66. I. X0ay 110. 79, 92. 102.

eXfCfn/ 83. 9.
'EXXtpia-Ti 27. 27.

enpmk 2,1 . 63, 209.
92. 14 94. 18. fV/aaxXa./ 45. 7 49.
; 4, 7 ; 54. 30'; 63. 5;
771-51/ :
'77u,, 112. 57 (?)

98. 2. 12 ; 152.
e77uos 30. 16 ; 92. 8 ; 93. 2 ; 94. 9 ;
95. 6 ;
ip.Tipo(j6( 35. 9-
p. 311. epclxiut'is 93. 4.
87. 14 96. 6, 22. efji(f}ai>iêiv 72. 4.
ijKa'Ki'iv 31. 8, 19 :

(yK\i)fmQQ. 24. 25. ivavTiov 89. 9.

6, 7, 8. 2 2,
82. 27. (Vf)(vpa(Tia 32. 2 1.
e(^f' 77. 5 ;
(lh(VM 81 3, 2 1, fveX^po" 46. 14, 18.

(ftVofrt7rfi'r(ifjoi7)'!j) 87. 4- eVtnurds 27. 48, 2 2o; 28. 20 ;
90. 5.
66. 2
fiV(HJTi'/ ; 70 {a\ 11; 70 (//). 9 ;
115. eVtoi- 27. 53.
20; 163. (i'j'((KuieiKo(T);^(^(H'wKosj 85. 18.
(laayuv 41. 7, If, ; 46. 18. ivvofxinv 132.

eaniSftn 116, ilUrcvJ. 56. 7-
ei/o^^Xeii/
tlanpuaadi' 29. 36 ; 46. II : 56. 4 ; 65. 23. Vox'>S65. 2 2,

flaclyepdv157. errfuîs 57. 2.
28. 9. 13 29. 10; 67 18

f/c.io-ros ; ; 84 {a). fVrv7;(i/fii' 151.
8, 24; 86. II 88. 9. 10: 90. ; 15; 91. f 1/0)77101/ 30. 25.
II 102. 4. 10; 124.
;
hipTX] 27. 47 (7 saep.
fKUTfpOi 29. 3^). iî'tyuv 27. 61 34. 4. 10; 73. ;
1 1 ; 80. 2, 7;
((KClTOl'TUpOVpiii,^ 110. '')3, 7'" 82. 20.
(K(lTO(TTtj (/)') 66. I. i^dBpaxiJ'OS 51. 6.
(Kl-ioXl) 110. 9. (^('ivac 29. 27 65. 12; 96. 6, 23. ;
eKf'ivos 151. fôfii'vdv 32. I 7-

(Kfieais 29. 10. fôpoXoydv 30. 18.
(KKflafai 51. (k fôvo-m 29. 36 148. ;
fK^dfiûvdv 66. I 94. I I 95. <j, 10 : 114, eô) 34. 10 93. 4- ;

; ;
133. (ndyfiv 32. 4. fTiaynpiivrj t'lfxtpa 27. 20I, 2 1 9.

2 ; 116, inlrod. ;
fKpiaBwv 31. emiXXity,) 51. 6; 68. 9, 18, 20.

9, 20.
fKirinrdv 78. 1 O. (Tr(iv(iyKu(( IV 34. 3, 5, 14 73. 2. ;
(ktt\i,v( 30. 26. ('7701/07x01' 47. 19.

fr7; 109. 3, 10; 132. fVdi'oi^tf 31. 12. 23.
(KTifiti'iti 27. 24 29. 9. ;
endvco 96. 6, 23.
fKTivdv 96. 10, 27. erraporptoi/ 112. 13, 27, 44, 50, 61.
93. 9
*Acri(r(i- 94. 18 116, introd. ; ;
fTTfl 35. II 65. 12; 66.
;
2.
(K(p6i)iov 85. 21, 26 90. 8, 9 99. 10 ; ; ; 100 (nei^ 28. 10 34. 7. ;
II 119. I.;
tTTipxtcrBai 96. 7 <"/ Ji^Zf'/).
Adi'ii 49. 8, I 2. (TTfp^TUl) 72. 15-

(TTi^dXXeiv 89. 10; 115. 3, 22; 116, introd. (vraKTilv 35. 6.

itTiyovT] 30. 22 32. 19 ;34. 2 37. 3, ; ; n ;
ev7-ii;(eiv 72. 1 4.
52. 13, 15, 24, 27; 86. 24; 90. 6, 24; vxapi(jT(lv 66. 5 79. 8.
92. 9, 10, 11; 93. 2 96. 4, 14, 15, 20, ; eôSos 96. id, 26.
31, 32; 120. 18; 124; 129. exf'i'27. 21, 106, 206 ; 40. 14 ; 43. 8; 54. 5,
f7nypd(f){tv 44. 3 113. 5. ; 12,15,28; 59.6; 63.13; 64. 8, 21 ;
(TTtBeKaTOP 32. 9 92. 9. ; 68.11; 72.16; 73.14; 85.7; 86.15;

eVtStSoi-'ai 72. 2. 87. 4, 5; 99. 8; 100. 9; 101. i 104. ;
iirUvai 84 (<?). 5, 2 1. I,6; 110. I e/ saep.; 123; 129; 152;

e'TrtKaXeii' 62. 5- 160.
ewiKonreiv 159. exOpa 170.
fTTiKcoXvfiv 48. 13. ewdivf] copa 110. 61, IO9.
fiTiXeydv 78. 12. a>os 27. 88 et saep.
(TTififXda 41. 20. ea)s- 38. 5: 42. 6. 9; 47. 9, 11 92. 13; ;
eVtyneXijs 78. 7- eVijtteXcoy 82. lO. 96.8, 25; 112.37; 114. 5; 116. 3.
(TTiTTOpevfcrBaL 96. lO, 27.
27. "JO et saep.
iiricrr]fiaiv(iv Cvrrjpd. See Index IX.
fTTia-KevT] 162. ^VTOTVOUIS 94. 10.
(TvuxTvovhaêiv 49. 3. CdTos 113. 6.
fTtidraaOaL 40. 6.
(TTLardTrjs 34. 2 ; 72. 4. 44.
rjyepoii' 2.
eVto-TeXXeii'40. 5; 41. 16; 44. 05 / 7]8r]40. 14 ; 41. 22 ; 44. 6 ; 47. 8, 30 ;
48.
inia-ToXr] 34. 12 44. 5 45. 3 47. 23; 51.
; ; 10; 51. 5 ; 55. 2 ; 60. 8.
3.
1; 57. i; 58.3; 59.3; 61 3; 71. 1,4; rfKios 27. 30, 117, 120, 2 21.
72. 16, 19; 81. 2, 21 ; 82. 7; 110. 51 T]ppa27. 31 e/ saep.; 28. 10, 20, 24; 29.
10, 18, 34; 88. 11; 89. 14, 15; 148;
(TTiTdcraeiv 34. 7* 168.
(mTeK\fii> 27. 56 ^/ J^ t!". TJpLKOVpOS 32. 12, 14, 15.
fTriTTjdeios 83. lo; IIC 10. (^TjpixaXKOv) 68. 20.
eTTtVi/ioi/ 29. 11; 90. ij; 91. 7. (T]pio)êXiov). See Index VIII (<^).
eVirpcTreii^ 41. II. "Upa (star?) 27. 69.

enKpepetp 84 (a). II, 27; 90. 20 ; 91. 13; fiavxv 73. 6 (?).
96. 7, II, 24, 28. rjaoi 27. 138.
fT7lxd}pJ]aiS 151.
fpydrrjs 121. 30. davpd^fiv 159.
epyoj/ 27. 25; 113. 18. deX(iv65. 25 ; 79. 5.
e'pea 115. 2 0. Beds. See Indices II and VI [a).
epT] pos 32. 8. deplêiv 47. 12.
fpiôs 121. 34. BepLvo^ 27. 210.
epioi/ 121. 34. Oepicrpos 90. 5-
pL(j)os 54. 18. dfpiarrjs 4:4:. 4, 6, 1 3.
e/)o-jv 32. II 37.
; 7, 15 ; 120. 28. ê'poj27. 33, 12 1.
ep)(((r6ai 51. I. Oeppov 121. I 7 f/ Jrt'f/'.
erepos 74. 4; 96. 9, 26. ^^Xw 36. 5, II ; 37. 7, 16.
27. I 25.
eTtjaiai. 6t](Tavp6s 117. 2.
eVt 46. 16; 73. 2; 78. 6; 131. îêtr 28. 7.
eroipd^dv 47. 23. 6vaui 54. 15. -
eroipos 44. 7-
evdfcos 45. 10. larpiKov 102. 2, 8 : 103. 9.
fvpia-Keiv 48. 6; 118. 29. ?(ir/3of 102. I, 6.
D d
402 INDICES
i'Stof 33. 7, 14; 86. <S; 90. 7, 12, 13; 105. KfiTaWayr'] 100. 4.
KaravepiLv 52. 3 130.
5; 157. ;
i6ta)Tf;s. Sec Index VII. Karavoiiv 2t'] 38 ('')
IblOiTLKQS 34. 7- KaTapaOvpelv 44. 4.

Upa (SC. yr;) 112. 89 (.?). Kara<âiveiv 29. 3.
iepeus-. See Index \l {d). Korop^cop/ffti' 45. 2 2.
Upoypa/jLiiaTevs 27. 44- (cdre/jyov 119. 4.
i(p68ov\os 35. 3, ) Kine-îiv63. 8.
tfpoi'35. 7; 72. r^, i^J ; 77. 7 ; 93. 4 ;

157. Kara) 34. I 44. 10 ;
52. 4 ; 85. 10; 110.
IXcipx^s 105. 3 143. ;
24; 169.
lpa{Tiov) 68. 8, 18, 20. KaToXêJ/ 100. 76, 98.
ipaTicrnos 54. I 6. KavvuKrjs 121. 1 1.
tTTTrei'? 81. 5 1 13- Kf\fveiv 86. 25.

ITTTTiaTplKO!' 45. 2 I . Kewj 66. 5-
7777or 104. 5, II : 110, introd. ; 118. 18, 19, Kepapiov 31. 6, 7, 16, 18 80. 4, 10.
20, 32. K(papos 54. 26.

'nrnoTpocpia 162. KepKovpos 82. 6 ; 98. 4.
lar^pfpla 27. 63, I 70, 209. KfppClTlOV 45. 8.
(o-(tos) 67. 12, 14, 22; 68. 8, 17, 18, 20. Kr;pi.'^ 29. 21.
KT]pV(T(TeiV 29. 2 2.
KaOa 27. 208; 41. 8 74. 5 77. 7. ; ;

KtKi 121. 1 7 ^/ .yi^^y^.
Kaed-mp A.Q. 6, 13; 51. 3; 77. 4. KXenipos 59. 7-
Ka^<i/jos 47. 15; 84 (rt). 6, 21 85. 16; 86. ;

KkeTTTdV 148.
5, 20; 87. 12; 90. 10: 98. 19; 129; KXrjpos 37.
6, 14 39. 10; 48. 4 52. 6 ; ; ;
156. 63. 7; 75. 5; 76. 4 81, introd., 6, 14; ;
Ka6(ip(ni 119. 19. 85. 13 87. 7 90. 7; 99. II

;
100. 12; ; ;
Kudi'jKfiv 112. 36. 101.5; 105. 110, introd. 112. 35, 41,,-, ;
KuOiivai 47. 14 (.'*). 54, 64; 119. 2.

Ka6i(TTuvaL 2.9. 2 1 ; 61. 3 82. 14
; ; 133. Kkrjpovxôs 82. I 6.
KiiOoTi 44. 66. 3

3 ; ; 67. 32. KXi;ra)/j 30. 2 1 (.?).
KuUiv 27. 70. 167. /cXt'i/fti/ 38. 8.

(Cfiifoy 54. 26. KOii/ds- 72. 19.
KdKoTnueli/ 59. 10. KopiCeiv 34. 16; 54. 9, 17; 57. 2; 69. 4;
KaKovpyos 62. 3. 100. 2.
KtiKi'iprj 90. 1 7. KOVTOiTOU 39. 4.

fcaXeli/ 27. 27, 85. Koa-KLveveLv 98. 19; 156.
K-nXoj 49. 12. K.-jX(2)i- 63. 12; 64. 8; 65. KpdpIBi] 121. 30, 50.
14 66.
; 2 ; 72. 12 ; 82. 9. 17, 25; 127. KpiO,'] 8; 47. 22; 83. 7; 85. 14; 87.
4:0.
2; 131. 10; 98. 5, 17; 100- 13; 101 ^> 110-
Kai'r](f)6poi. Sec Index VI (/i).
[
12. 18, 27. 39; 121. 54; 122; 156.
KupKlVOi 27. 107. Kp'ivfiv 29. 4.
Kfipn-dy 47. 5 ; 90. 18 ; 91. 4. K/jidy 27. 62.

Kara, kgO' ec 117. 7. I
KplT1]plOV 29. 5-
K<iTo/3<iXXf(i' 29. 6; 64. 17; 110. 42, 48. K'/joroXoi' 54. I 3-
KUTiiydii 49. 1 O. KTi]pa 29. 20 113. 19. ;
kutuBIk}] 32. 7. Kvadoi 121. 48.

KfiToSi'fii' y8. 9. Kvfipvi]Tt]s 39. 6; 98. 13 100. 13.
Kariiicaidv 27. 73, 79, 87. KvXiaros 110. 5 1 <7 ,f(/(y>.
KOTaXaXuv 151. KvpâXov 54. 13.
ACiiTaXo/ij'iidi'fti' 48. 12. Kvpievdv 72. I 9.
Kvpios (adj.) 84 {a). 11, 27; 90. 20; 91. 13 ;
(laKpos27. 37.
96. II, 28. paXaKOi 54. 1 1.
KCpios (subst.) 34. 3 ; 73. 3 ; 89.7. pdv7]s 121. 50.
Kvav 27. 135. 84 {a). 13, 28; 89. 9, 19; 90. 21
/:idpri's'
;
KaXvfia 90. 20 ; 91. 8, 9. 91. 14 96. 12, 29. ;
fcco/xap;^^!/ 35. II. paxaipocpopos 73. 1 6 (?).

Ko>fiT] 33. 15 37. 4, 12
7, 53. 23; 59. 1 1
; ; ;
pdxipos 41. 1 8 ; 44. i 6, , 1 2 ; 70 (d). i
70 8; 84 (a). 7, 22; 112. 35; 113.

(d). Piyas 27. 155; 29. 9; 35. 4; 110. 82.
7 ; 127. 2 163. Cf. Index V {d).
; pei^cdv 27. 12 1.
KtofwypaixixaTfvs. See Index VII. pfXas 120. 5, 19.

peXi 121. 54.
Xap^dvfiv 44. 5; 45. 3; 49. 12; 51. 3, 5 ;
piu ovv 27. 47.
57. I ; 58. 3; 59. 2; 61. 2 ; 62. 10, 12; peveiv 55. 6.
63. 18, 21 ; 64. 5 71. 8 72. 12 ; 73. ; ; pevTOi 40. 7-
16; 85. 22, 26; 110, 12; 113. 6, 13; pepiCfiv 27. 41.
121. 9. êpt'y SI, introd., 15 133. ;
Xaôs 61. 8. pspos 29. 5. 26 90. 13. ;
Xaropia 71. 7. /xeo-oj 73, 14.

Xaxdvop 54. 26. peraâXXdv 42. 3, 8 45. 6. ;

Xeynv 27- 28; 49. 6; 55. 4. fj.eTaypd(f}fiv 111, 1 4.

Xeia 33. 2, II 62. 4. ; piTUKOpi^dV 82. 8.
XiiTovpyelv 78. II. perapeXeiv 59, II.
XdTovpyia 78. 4, 9. peroxoi 109. 3, 9.
XetTovpyo'y 96. 14, 15, 31, 33. /[ierpjrr 39.
3 ; 43. 264. 3, 6 65. 5, 9, 14. ; ;
Xenrayios [:=XfnT6yfios?) 4:'J. I 3. 18, 21 6; 83. 4, 8

; 74.
103. 3 I, ; ;
Xfv/cdy 120. 4, 16, 23, 29. 105. 2 117. 3 119. 5 131; 143.
; ; ;
XfVKocpaLos 32. 13. pfTprjo-is 85. 17 90. 11 91. 2 98. 21. ; ; ;
XevKcopa 29. 9. perpov. See Index VIII ((/).

Aecoi' 27. 129. pr)KTI, 170.
Xrjppa 85. I I. prif 30. 23 ; 34. 2 ; 47. 9 ; 72. 5, 8 ; 84 {a).
XiâvcoTOs 121. 54. I, 5, 17, 21 ; 84 (/y;. i ; 85. 7; 83. 3.
XiOivos 27. 26. 18 88. 4, 9, 10
; ; 89. 5 ; 90. 4, 10 92. ;
Xirds 70 (a). 6 (.?). 6; 95. 4 97. 4 ; ; 98. 10 ; 99. 5; 100.

Xoyei'a 51. 2, 5.
9; 101. i; 102. 3, 9; 110. 41, 43, 45,
Xoyeifiv 29. 45. 9, 19, 22
38 46. 3 ; 58. ; :
46, 50 ; 114. 5 ; 115. 3 129 ; 131 145
: ; ;
6 ; 77. 3, 4 153. ; 171.

XoyevT^piovlOQ. 3; 107. 3; 108. 2; 114. 7. fxrjvijfiv 29. 5) 6.
XoyfvT^j 113. 9, 15 168. ; pl){pvypa?) 67. 12, 20, 35(.?); 68. 7, 17, 19.
Xoyi(TTTjpiov 29. 41 40. 15. ; piadoiv 76. 4 90. 4, 18; 91. 5. ;
X6yo9 29. 40; 34.4; 48.14; 53.4; 69.5; piaBaais 85. 23.
75. 9 110. 35; 120. I
; 153. ; pva 88. 9.
Xomos 35. 4; 42. 7; 45. 11 ; 46. 5, 11 ; povrj 93. 2 ; 111. 31.
47. 10, 20; 50. 6; 54. 7; 63. 14, 20; popiov 27. 39.
64. 6 ; 65. 26 ; 100. 7 110. 7 t'/ ja^/>. ; poaxos 4J1. 25 ; 115. I.
111. 14 114. 23; 115. 14

; ; 116. 12, 14 ;
pu)iov 49. 8.
118. 89; 119. 21, 22.
Xoxayos 81. 7, 8, 1 5. vnvKXrjpoi 39. 5, 14; 98. 2, 12; 100. 14;
Avpa 27. 73> 83> 151- 118. 23.
Xvxvos 27. 160. vavXui' 46. 5 ; 110. 6, i8, 28, 31, 32.
XcdTos 152. I
vavm]y6s 152.
D d
404 INDICES
52. 6. iHTTtaoi'v 29. 19; 47. 16.
vi^fiv 168 (:)
uixTis
vtos 84 (rt). 5, 2o: 85. 27. I'fcorfpoj 110. 62. ora./27. 225; 29. i; 78.3: 84(^7). II, 27.
vrjaos 90. 7-
ovSenoTe 78. y*
viVpoi/ 116, introd. OWfKfl' 170.
wjiôs 32. 15. ovttcl)32. 3.
vofuipx.La 74. 6 (?). oi;7o(y) 47. 32 ; 63. TO.
vofxdpx'}^ 85. 10. u(f)elXeiv 29. 42 ; 30. 5, 15.
I'o^t'} 52. 7> dcfxiXrjfxn 41. 7 ; 42. 10,
vopi^dv 77- ."J.
d(p6a\po(f)avrjs 89. 8.
27. 22
w-/i<;s- 80. 3, 9. Cr. Index V {a).
;
o\//oi/ 54. 28; 121. 2 1, 38, 47, 48.
voTO'i 27. 71, 77, 86.
'"
^^127. 31 elsaip.; 86.5, 10; 37. 5, 13; 148. 7T(U<^L0V 121. 20, 26, 35, 43, 48.
Tva'is47. 35 (?).
^/wa 120. 13, 23, 27. TraXat 46. 1 4.
î'Oi- 27. 38. TTuXlV 48. 7-
ivXov 82. 28 ; 121. 22, 32, 34, 51 ;

152. TTCtvijyvpis27. 76^ ^*^.5*
n-ai^ra^ôD 96. II, 28.
o/JoX<n-. See Inde.x VIII (/') TravToSanoi 54. 27.

d6wu)v 67. 10 ; 68. 6. ndvv 27. 19.
o'UaOai 44. 5 52. I ; I. 78. 19'
TrapayyfX/Lia
oiKovoyiMv 133 169. ;

45. 4
TTapaylyvecrdai 55. 56. 2 63. 2 ; ; ; ;
oiKovoiioi. See Index \ II. 65. 2, 15; 66. 4 69. 3; 72. 17; 73. ;
oiKoi'o/x( ) 111. 10, 21. 10; 151; 161.

own 31. 6, 16 ; 80. 4, 10 ; 121. 18 tV .ft?^/'. TrapaypiKpij 4.0. 14-
132. 7rap(i$ei(ros- 112. 93.

oAi'yos- 127. 3. TTnpaîX^'^Sm 32. 4 ;
42. 6.
oA;uos 27. 36. irapahihuvai. 54. 2 1 59. 5, 8 ; 62. 9 ; 92.

oAos-27. 94. 133. 194- II, 17 ; 110. 60 (7 .r(?f/>
oXvpa 47. 22; 50. 3, 5 ; 64. 4; 74. 2 ; 76. TTdpdSnxiKus 87. 13'
8; 85. If, ; 86.16; 90.8,15; 99. 11, TTUpdKOVelV 170.

13; 102. TrapHXa/x/idrfif 41. 75. 6; 82. 25.
2, 7; 103. I, 9, 10; 117. 5 I
7
cl SiVp. ; 118. 2 ct saep. ; 119. 6 ^7 sa(p. ;
TrupaXfiTTdv 82. 2 1.
122; 124; 125; 129; 157. 7rp(iAX(i(70"r 27. S"-"-
upvviiv .SS. I I. Trapaperpelv 45. I 7 5 47. :3-
vixoXoytlv 72. 18; 96. 5> 21 97. 98. i, TTapapovl] 41. 5.

; f, ;
II 99. 6; 105. i
; ; 143. 7rapaTi6(V(u 51. 3.
uvofiii 52. 5 74. 3,4. ;

106. 9
7ra/)lwu 107. 4.8; 138. ;
oi'os 34. 3 73. 6," 13 ; ; 111. 38, 41. ndptpyos 44. 5- rrapfpyai 168.
ofi';^ti/(oi-?) 121. 23. irapfvpfaii 29. 19; 45. 19; 96. 7, 24
imt'tTfjWi 96. 9, 26. irapfx^'-v 93. 2 168. ;
oTTcos 41. 21 ; 44. 2; 45. 18; 46. 20; 49. UapdifOi 27. 138.
3, 7, I I
; 52. 9 54. 22 60. 8 62. 16
; ; ; ;
TTCipitfui, TTUpeipfpr] 53. 5 130. j
65. 2 71. 9 73. 5

; V8. 17 ; : ; 81. 3, 21 ;
TTd/KfrTUftU 47. 15: 90. II, 13.
82. 10,30: 152; 168 170. TT(i(TT(>(j)6pos 77. 2. C'f. 87. 6.

;
(ipav 44. 4 TTari'jp 89. 7-
o/jKof 31. 4, 14 65. 8, 22. ;

iravurOuL 59. lO.
opjjios 38. 5. TTfSi'oi' 63. 10.
vpviQ'uxi 27. 59. TVfipiKrdai 45. I 49. 9; 52. 8; 53.

I 3.
Cipvidiov 121. 4 I, f,3.
TtipTTdv 54. 1 9 ; 127. 3.
0(70$- 42. 5 ; 54. 2.-, ; 90. 8. Tr(VTu>l3oXov. See Index \'III (/>).
X GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 405
Trfpifii/at 69. 6. TTpfo-fSvTepos 110. 7 I .
TTepififTpe^v75. 7- irplacreai 51. 3 ; 70 {a). 7 ; 70 {Ij). 4 ; 112.

irepiiiKflv 27. 6 1. 23-
TTfpKTTepciv 112. I. irpoâTov 32. 10; 33. 6, 14; 36. 5, n ; 111.
inwpddKfiv 29. 5; 41. 23; 46. 16, 20; 75. 40; 123; 167; 168.
4; 110. II, 15. TTpoylyvfo-dai 96. 8, 25.
TriuTfip 41. 24; 66. 2; 67. 2; 68. 2; 82. 7Tpoypd(peiv 38. 1 4 89. 15. ;
30 ; 106. 2 ; 107. 2 ; 108. i 114. 6 ; ;

TTpoSiSovai 77. 5.
115. 10, 29; 116. 5, 13, 14. npodvpois 82. 18.
TTUTTeveiv 72. 18 ; 159. TvpoUvai 76. 2.
nXfidSes 27. 64, 95, 182. TTpoXeydP 89. 14.
TrXeitrTof 27. 50. Trpovoia 79. 3.
nXeovaKis 78. I. TrpocrnyyeXXeti/ 36. I, 7 37. 2, 9; 72. ; 7.
TrXeiav 55. 6 ; 75. 8. npoa-dyyeXpn 53. 2 ; 130 144. ;
jrX^dos 52. 6. TtpocrmroTivfiu 29. 1 1 ; 148.

77X171/ 90. 8. TTpoaylyveadai 120. 12, 26.
TTkrjprjs 46. 10; 85. 24 ; 116. 4 (.?). TTpoadexfo-dcu 58. 8 110. 58.
;
TrXripovv 40. I 2. npoaexî-^' 147.

nXrjpwpa 110. 95' iTpo(TKadi(TTduai 115. I 6,
TrXoIoi/ 27. 61 ; 38. 9 ; 54. 32 ; 152. TTpoa-KaTajiaXXeLv 29. 23.
ttXwoj 114. 2, 8, II, 16, 19 116, introd. ; TTp(ôn-Ke(f)dXaiov?) 67. 12, 20.
TTvelv 27.
59, 71, 77, 86, 125. TrpocrXo-yeiiei!/ 66. 3.
TTOiflv 29. 26 34. 4 ; 41. 21 ; 44. 6, 7, 8 ; ; TvpuupapTvpiiv 31. 9, 20.
46.8; 55. 5; 58. 12 ; 60. 9 62. 4 64.9, ; ; Tvpoa-ofpeiXftv 63. 1 4 ; 110. 36.
19; 65. 15 66.2; 67. 16; 68. 9, 10; 69.
; JTpocrninTdv 78. 4.
8; 71. 9; 72. 12; 73. 12 74. 3,5 79. ; ;
Trpoaraypa 34. 2 ; 73. 2 0.
3; 82. 9, 17, 25; 85. 25; 131; 151; TTpncrTdaaeiv 29. 2 2.
162; 170. npocTTipov 41. 9.
TTOiKiXla 27. 39 (?). Tvporepov 44. I ; 72. 4, 10; 77. 5, 7; 85.
iroiKiXos 120. 7, 20. 26 112. 93.
;
TToipfiv 52. 16, 29; 53. 6 55. 3. npoTpvyrjTTjs 27.

; I 30,
noXis 30. 25 ; 43. 5 49. 15 110. 31 ; ; ; 111. irpuiTOi^ Tcou TrpoiTQ)!/ 'Ecron 110. 72,
24. Cf. Index V {a). TTwddvearOm 72. II.
TroXiT(V(T0ai 63. II. TTvpcJy47. 15 65. 1 1 76. 6
; 83. 6 ; 84 (</). ; ;
noXXciKis 30. I7- 2, 18; 85. 14, 15, 16; 87. 8; 90. 15;
Tj-oXi^s 27. 71, 78, 87 ; 79. 6 ; 170. 91. 10, II 99. 14; 105. 5; 110. r, 17,
;
TTopeia 27. 29, 2 2 2. 18, 26; 117. 6, 16, 17; 118. 90; 119.
TTOpevfddai 49. 2. 16, 17, 23, 24 121. I 122 157. ; ; ;
TTopos 38. 5. TTvppds 120. 6, 22.

irorapos 27- 1 26, 1 68, I 74.
no . fpiov ( = 7rori7poi/ .?) 121. 4. padvpilp 46. I 2.
TrpaypaTfvea-diu 66. 2. pa(f)dviov 34. 18 ; 121. 40, 44.

irpaKTcop.See Index VII. picra { = p[(a?) 121. 52.
npuîs 34. 8; 73. 12; 84 {a). 9, 25; 90. pom 121. 57.
16; 91.12; 92.20; 94.3,15; 95.14; pmvvvvai,i'ppcocro, -ade, 39. I
7 40. I 7 42. ; ;
124. 11; 43. 10; 44. 8; 45. 24; 46. 21;

Trpdaafiu 29. 25, 29 34. 8 51. 2 72. 6 ; ; ; ; 47. 36 ; 48. 22 ; 49. 14 50. 8 51. 4, ; ;
73. 6 80. 4, 1 1
; 84 (<?). 10, i 2, 26, 28 ; ;
6 ;53. 4 54. 29
; 55. 7 56. 9 ; 57. 4 ; ; ;
88. 14 90. 16 91. 12 ; 111. 10 cf sacp.

; ; ; 58. 13; 59. 13 60. 10; 61. 9 62. 17 ; ;
;
126. 65. 30; 66. 6; 67. 17; 69. 10; 70 ((/).

4o6 INDICES
1 2 71. .V 1 1
; 72. 3 73. 20 75. 10 ; ; ; ;
(TvyKdadai 41. 8.
76. 10 78. 22 79. 2 80. 5, 1 1 ; 83.
; ; ;
(TvyKvpdv 82. 19.
it; 86. 13, 22; 102. 4, 10; 103. 11; o-i;Ka/.t'oo(C(i(^^jô? 70 ((?). 5-
162 163 168 170.; ; ;

(rvXXHXeif 66. 4.
(TuXXa^/'iiiii'fty 54. 20.
(TiivTov 41. 10 ; 50. 4 : 55. 5. (TvpiSaivfiv 28. 21 38. 8 ; ; 147.
(TUKKOi 110. 2 I .
(TvplSaWdv 4:1. 10.
af'Krjvrj 27. 42. (TVfiôXov 29. 34 39. 12 40. 3 46. 7 ; ; ; ;
(Trifiepov 65. I 3- 67. 16 68. 9

;
74. 3, r, 94. 19 124; ; ; ;
af]crafM()v 4:3. 3, 5, 12 ; 119. 18. 126.

(Tiv8ni'tTr]i 121. 16. a-vvdyfiv 27. 36 45. 12 157. ; ;
o-iroXoyor. See Index VII. avvayopnêii' 65. 27.
(TiToXoywr 83. 2. crvvavTiXapûvdv 82. 1 8.

fUTo/u/rpr;? 100. I O. crvvbuiKcipiêiv 54. 3 I
(TiroptTpia 83. 5 118. 37- 4*^- (TVVfyyvdrrdat 94. I 6.

j
atro/xT/)iKoi' 110. 14. (TVi'eri'ai 28. 8.
ahoi 39. 8 42. 2, 14 45. 5, 15 49. 4

; ; ; ;
(Tiii'(7riXo/x/3ai'eii' 41. I3'
58. 64. 13 165. 27
r ;
82. 4 84 {a). ; ; ;
(TvvexfS 47. 5.
85. 16; 86. 5, 20; 87. 12 criii'icrrui'at 65. 3'
5, 6, 20, 21 ; ;
98. 19; 110. 21; 117. 3; 129; 156; crui'ra^ts- 29. 28.
157. (Tui'TdcrfTfdJ 39. 2 43 47. 4, 8, i3(.?),

;
(TKeTvtt^dV 35. 10. 32; 62. 6 66. 3 77. 6; 95. 9; 124;

; ;
(TK(Trt) 35. 8 ; 93. f, ; 95. 9. 131; 147; 151; 168.

iTKr]v{)38. 7 86. 8. ;
a-vvTf'Kf'ii' 34. 8 67. 11; 68. 6 77. 3.
; ;
2KnpTTl()S 27. 90, 93, 160, 182, 190, 194. (TWTidei'ai 4:8. 15-
a-KVTiiXt; 98. 19; 156. (Tvpta 38. 7 : 51. 3, 5.
(Topojtov 67. 14, 21 68. 8, 18, 19. ;
avcrcjypnyiCfcrdai 29. 35-
(To(/)oy 27. 20. (T(})payiCeiv 29. 34; 39. 15; 72. 19; 156.
ff77fiX((or 120. 15. (X(PpayU 72. 5 r/ s(7e/>.
crTTfipeiv 118. I 3.
(T)(oXd^lV 55. ().
(TTTfppici 48. 2, 8 ; 63. 4 ; 85. 12, 23, 25; 77. 7.

o-coêii/
87.7; 117. 4. 10, II, 13, 14; 118. i; awpn34:. 8; 54. 20; 71. 6; 73. r3 ; 110
119. 3, 20. in trod.
anobioi 120. q.
fTTTopof 90. ") ; 157. Tnp.ieiov 31. 5 f/ sat p.
(TTTOV^d^HV 77. 4. TaTri8vcj)('wTi]<; 112. 7^'-
(TTTovbi] 44 71. 9- rdaa-dv 102. 2, 7 {?) ; 116. 5.

7 ;
<TTfpf<T6ai 29. 3, 20. Tnvpof 27. <')7-

(TTtfjiavoi 117. ",, 16. 2re'(/)(ii'or 27. "iS, 141, r(i;(toT(i 49. 4.
187. T('ix"i 47. 35 62. 13. ;
(TTilSoi114. 17. 20. T(KTa)V 118. 2 2.

3, 9,
orparr^yof. See Illde.X VII. TfXfi'T(li' 81. ;;, 13 : 120. 31.
38. 3
(Tx>yyp(i(p(iv 40. 9 65. 8 ; ; ; 90. 9. reXof 29. 3, 7, 24, 43 ;
110. 28.
uvyypaff),] 30. f,, If); 70 (/'). r->
76. 3: TfXa)i7;f 29. 3 f/ saep.
84 (<;). 4, M, 19, 26 88. : 7 : 89. is, 7f\mviKi'i'i 77. 6.

20 90. 20
; 91. i 3 92. 5 ; ; i ;
96. 3, 11. TfTcxprri 112. 45, 47, 59, 78.
20, 28. (jeTapTov). See Index \'III ((^).
(Tvyypa(f)o(f)v\n^ 84 ((?). I 4 : 96. iC). 33. TfTpaKauiKofTTrj. Sce Index IX.
rrvyKaruyfiv 49. r6Tpa77ofin 95. 8.
."J.
(Ti'ycaTa7rXfri/ 33 4. [T(Tpaâ\ot). See Index VIII {!>).

jfTpcti 65. 10. VTroBeais 29. 7.
Terprjfxfpns 115. 2 2 ; 116. 5. viroKeiTTeiv 45. 16; 50. 4.
reirXov 121. 56. iinoXip-naveiv 4i5. I 3.
Tif,^ 31. 7 34. 3 37. 7, i6
; 40. lo 41. ; ; ; i^TToXoyfii' 46. 6.
23 47. 17; 51. 4; 63. 4, 17
; 67. 10 : ;
iiTrdXoyo? 29. 26 ; 68. 10 ; 85. 24.
68. 6; 73. 3, 6; 82. 30; 84 (<z). 3,8, i'TTofj.LpvtjcrKeii' 4^9. 11.
18, 24; 86. 11: 90. 14; 91. 11; 99. VTiopvrjfxa 72. I, 4, 9.
13; 100. 6; 102. 4, 10; 123; 124; VTTOTiOei'ai29. 6.

132. varepaia 29. 33.
Ti/irjfia30. 20. va-Tepelv 43. 7 65. 29. ;
TifirjTOS29. 21 {?). varepos 52. lO.

To'txos 38. 8. v(pdvTr]s 67. 5 ; 68. 4.
TOKOS 30. 20; 92. 16 110. 43, 46, 49. ;
T07Tap)(rjs 44. 9 75. 2. ; ÔK^ 112. 77.

7-o7rap;^ta 34. I 52. 4; 73. lo; 85. 10; 169.
; 131.
<j)aiveadcH
TOTToypafM/xarevs 67- 8 68. 5 75. 3. ; ; (^0^^.32. 20 ; 42. 3 ; 56. 4 ; 63. 5, 8 ; 72.
TOTTos 44. 2 ; 66. 2 82. 19 89. 11. ; ; 16, 18.
TO(TOVTOS 51. 6. (^fpfif 45. 9 ; 73. 5 ; 98. 20.
rpayoy 120. 3. (pdiPOTToipivos 21 170. .
TpaneCa 29. 39, 40, 42 ; 41. 25. (jfatXia 170.

TpaTTe^lTi]s. See Index VII. (ôtMKcoi/ 109. 4, 10.
rptrjpapxTjpa 104. 3, 9. ôZw^ 110, introd. ; 112. 6.
TpirrXovs 34. 9. (poperpou 121. 39.
TptTTJ 116. I. (popoi 35. 6.
{rpia>l3oXov). See Index VIII (^). (fjpdrpa 28. 5, 10. 14, 17.
TpoTTij27. 120, 210. (fiparpia 28. 23.
Tpoiros 34. 19 54. 4 ; ; 84 (a). 10, 26. (ppdrcop 28. 7.
rpvyav 151. ippovTiCfw 43. 8 82. 10; 170. ;
Tvy;âi'eii' 44. 7- 0i;XaKr} 41. 4 59. 5 60. 7 71.; ; ; 1 1 ; 110.

TVflTVaVOV 54. 12. 23, 24; 127. 3; 168.
TU^df 64. 24. (pv\aKI,TfV(01> 34. I.
(f)v\aKiTr)i. See Index VII.

'YdSey 27. 67, 197. (pvXaKiTiKdv. See Index IX.
v^pis 32. 8. (pvXa^ 147.
vyiaivfiv 79. 7- (^vKdacreiv 147.
vScop 113. 2 (?). 0i/X;j 28. 9, 1 1, 13.
v'los 47. 4 72. 5 85. 2
; 88. i 92. 2 ;
; ;
;
96. I, 17 123. ; X'lipiiv 34. I ; 35. i ; 39. 2 ; 40. 2 ; 41. i ;
vnaKoveiv 78. 5. 42. 2 ; 43. 2 ; 44. i 45. 2 46. 2 47.

; ; ;
vndpxeiv 28. II, 19; 32. 5 33. 6, 14; 41. 2 48. 2 49. I 50. 2 51. i, 52.
; :
; ; ; 5 ;
2 1 ; 72. 10. 15, 18 82. 28; 84 (a). 9, ; I ; 53. I ; 54. 2 ; 55. i ; 56. 2 ; 57. i ;
25 94. 2, 15; 95. 1 2

; 113. 1 6 120. 2. ; ; 58. 2 ; 59.62. 2 63. 2 ; 64.
2 ; 60. 2 ; ;
vTrepavaXiaKeiu 100. I. 2; 66. I ; 67. 2, 29; 68. i ; 69. 2;

VTTep6e 95. 5- 70 {a). 2 71. 4, 12 ; 72. i ; 73. i ; 74.
:
inripeTilv 29. 2 2. i; 75. i; 76. 2; 78. i 79. 2; 80. i, :
VTT-qpfT-qs 29. 2 1, 30(?); 92. 22. 6; 81. 12, 20; 82. 2, 14; 86. 15; 102.
vnoypd<piu 51. I, 4 52. 2
; 67. ; 5. iS ; 68. 1,7; 103. 3 127. I ; 129 152 160 ; ; : ;
3 ; 72. 3 74. 5
; ; 81. 2, 5, 12, 20 ; 89. 9. 161; 167; 168.
VTro8i(f)depos 32. 12. XoKkos. See Index ^'III {b).
v7rofi)ytoi/ 34. 3, 5 : 73. 9. x{n\Kovs) 68. 18. 20.
4o8 INDICES
X''/'is 79. 6. Xprip.aTiêiv67. 29.
Xeitiu>v 27. 33. xpwdai 27. 41 ; 72. 7, 16 ; 102. II.
X(lpi^<TT7]S 74. I. Xpr](Tipns 82. 2 2.
Xetpoypaffie'iv 94. 1 7 j 147. XprjO-Toi 82. 28.
XfpcrdpaKos 130. xpovoi 35. 9 ; 55. 7 ; 96. 6, 23.
Xepo-ns 90. 8. Xpvaiov 110. 19-

X'Aat 27. I 60. Xpv(Tovs 27. 61.
Xi^lapxos 30. 4. XoypariKov. See Indc.x IX.
;tAwpoy 51. 2, 5; 112. 9; 117 4, 10, II, 13, Xcopa 27. 167.
14; 119. 17.
Xo{f)i (dat.) 84 (a). 6, 22 90. II. a/îAo? 32. 13, 15, 16.
Xo'ivi^ 119. 20, 21, 22.
XoI(/Joy.?) 121. 23, 27. wSe 46. I 5.
XopT]yin 110. 79- wpa 27. 55 el sacp. ; 60. 5 ; 110. 611?/ saep.
XopTdpaKt] 75. 6. 'Sipiccv 27. 113, 132.
X<i/J'""y 53. 17, 24 ; 63. 9
. 121. 28, 37.
,
aaavTus 44. 3 ; 47. 6, 10; 48. 16 ; 52. 12 ;
Xpfi'd 27. 20 47. ; 2 1 54.

5; 13 64. 7, 20. ;
67. 23.
XP'] 64. 1 9. uiVirep 95. 8.
XP'lpa 69. 7.
wore 28. 16; 34. 4; 43. 13; 63. 19; 66.
;^'pr;/xaraycoy(5j 110. 52, 84, II 4 73. 2, 12 ; 74. 3, 5
;
98. 16 ; 156. ;
XI. INDEX OF PASSAGES DISCUSSED ^

{a) Authors.
P.\GE PAGE
Aristotle, R/ie/. iv, i 65 Plutarch, De Is.cl Osir. 28 223
Athcnaeus, p. 487 C. 323 37 153
Demosthenes, i. Phil. 28 .
54 Vtl. Alex. 16 334
Epicharmus, Fr. 2,18 (Kaibel) . 15 75-6 339
Geminus (Lydus, J)c Osltul.) Zuyo? , f 156 Ps. Callisthcnes, Cod. A .
339
Herodotus, ii. 59, 62 . . . 154 Ptolemy, Geogr. iv. 5 9
Menander, 861 (Kock) Fr. . . 34 Satyrus, Ad Aulolyc. II. p. 94 164
Philemon, Fr. 189 (Kock) . . 25 Xenophon, Hipp. i. 19 54
(b) Inscriptions.
Alcxandrian vase, ap. Nerutsos, Re- Philae (Ilierogl.) ap Lcpsius, Dcnk-
Arch. 1 88 7, ]). 62 347 vhilcr IV. 27 {!)) 353-4
Canopus, 1. 3 .
342 Rosetta, 11. 4-6 348-50
1. 6 .
363 11. 7-8 363
1. 37 156 1.47 362-4
\. 51 .
153 Thera, ap. Dittenberger, I'cnlis
Damanhur ."^telc (Ilierogl.) ap. Bou- Gracci hiscr. I. 59 350-1

riant, Rccncil dc Travanx, 1885,
P-
-'
351-3
'
This index doe.-; not iiichulc the p.iss.igcs of extant authors covered by the literary fragments 19-26.
XI. INDEX OF PASSAGES DISCUSSED 409
{c) Papyri and Ostraca.
PAGE
P. Amh. 31 213
33- 28-37 171
42. 21 352
43- i> 8 352
43. 12 173> 257

P. Brit. Mus. 265 228-9
171 [b). 7-8 8
C. P. R. 6. 3-4 275-6
82 (i). 4
P. Fay. 15. 3 .
302
104. 21 292
P. Grenf. I. 14 .
193
P. Leyden, No. 379 341
Q . 281
London Bilingual {Proc. Soc. Bibl.
Arch, xxiii. 301) 21 3, 359
P. Louvre (Revillout, Melanges 249
35)
P. Magd. 2, &c. 344
7, &c. 346
12. 14, &c. 346
14, &c. 345
23
345
32 .
335
35 236, 359.
363
Deuxieme Serie p. 205 363
P. Oxy. 713. 25 200
P. Par. I. 71-80 . 151
24(1) .
342
60. recto 4 354
63. xiii. 14 352-3
P. Petrie I. 24 367
28(2) 359, 366
n. 2 (2), (3) 345
30(4 5, 18 . 248
44- 13 sqq. . 257
48. 4-5, 9 . 271
49(/) . 21
in. 21 ()-(/) . 167
21 (a). I, 6 375
21 {h) . . 167
21 {b). I, 6
375
21 (3). 8 334
21 (^)- 1-3 375-6
21 (^). II 342
4IO INDICES
Plate I
'
i : ^ - .
No.
No. 4. Fr. (ri

Plate II
'\
. r
I- ^^\j- V
' ' ' V
.^ /-
^''^-
J
^
?vr ^\$ ^4- Fi-. (f). Cols, iiîii
î
No. 3. Fr. ib) -i;^*^- ^-^'/-i

No. 3, Fr. (/)
;'ni^^
*^. -.^ .. ;
;- o i
Plate III
:^'''"
ii^ \
No. 26. IX-XI
o
2 -^ t '
J' A
W
.
''^:^ h
'*'-
m^'\
.
.^'f*-,'..
1/
<*
V ^

I 1 V f
o
%>
>, 7 y -
Plate VI
fc
-,
^^(^-*kMt ^.if-
i^k"'îi>si'=-.- -..r^Vr-
'^^^^ ^^1
.v.-.^.v^;-;'^"- .
-î .;-
rf^|'<^'=^''"-
.''>^ -5=^%)^.' -jn^ No. 20.

Fr. id)
,''
No. 20. Fr. (h) 1^:0 20. Fr. (/)
^-'^(^ No. 21. Fr (;;/)
' / '
- *,
KJ f
r
i No. 24. Fr. (;;/)
No. 23 No. 24. Fr. (/&)

.'^^^
-^:
^1
M pi' r*^
ir-
^ ? i* J - s:^-^
4:-
fl
-^^
^-g^-^^^X-^^-V
\ - '^ 'E ^ <^ t ^
' J .
-^
, <t<^
i
'H
i'
\,
*
w f t ^ ";t ^ T r^ ^ -d t r- ^
4
^ H.
1?
T V ^ ^ ^c ^
^
lî^-
/
&
v^-.i* ..
?-
A*^- L-'
^
w.
^
'*^- - X ' ''-.
V 4 '
- - *
V r^
Z^^-.J-lJt;
^^^
S
V*- -v.
^
^^
^.-
CI
tfi JT ^
7 -b -4
? < ?
1? rt
r'
>^-:yVi/^-?|o'^^
V
i'Oi'^^'^^'-
-^/', ^
.1* '((^rr-r'-î^l ^
^''-r^/î'T-'^.r-
'^J^
'IT- *-.
î^
.ir'o -..i.
^;*''
/r-^-. -iX^ f-
>^< :r>^. iv'^-'f-^. -- - --^
'^^::
-r
No. 84 (a)
Plate X
-î^.fiif
'>. f^^^r^rr
..^
.r>r.^/-^^^>i:^^"^
\"
v^^
No. 97
'f/K.-7 _^/ *'>'..
A-^^* '*^, -.^ -V,
:? -^ ^ 7'
No. 88
vî
'[\jsK^^'y.
1
1^
1
*^r>^^
:v- .^.^<-Tr-(?f^** A'
.^ . -.^ *yi:/T
ifî ^v^-'?^
/:_
No 99
I GO {recto)
\
EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND.
GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH.
^pHE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND, lohich has cojiducled Archaeological research
in Egypt conliniiously since 1882, in 1897 started a special department, called the Graeco-
Roman Branch, for the discovery and publication of remains of classical antiquity and early
Christianity in Egypt. It is hoped to co??iplete ?iext year the systematic excavation of the site of
Oxyrhynchus.
The Graeco- Roman Branch issues annual volumes, each of about 250 quarto pages, with
facsimile plates of the more i?nportant papyri, under the editorship ^Drs. B. P. Grenfell and
A. S. Hunt.
A of One Guinea to the Branch entitles subscribers to the annual volume, and
subscription
also to the amiual Archaeological Report. A donation ^
25 constitutes life membership.
Subscriptions may be sent to the Honorary Treasurersfor England, Mr. H. A. Grueber,
British Museum ; and for America, Mr. Gardiner M. Lane, Pierce Building, Copley Square,
Boston.
PUBLICATIONS OF
THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND.

MEMOIRS OF THE FUND.
I. THE STORE CITY OF PITHOM AND THE ROUTE OF THE EXODUS.
For 1883-4. I^y Edouard Naville. Thirteen Plates and Plans. (^Fourth and Revised
Edition.) 255.
II. TANIS, Part I. For 1884-5. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Eighteen Plates and
Plans. {Second Edition.) 2^s.
III. NAUKRATIS, Part I. For 1885-6. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. With Chapters

by Cecil Smith, Ernest A. Gardner, and Iârclay V. Head. Forty-four Plates and
Plans. {Second Edition.) 255.
IV. GOSHEN AND THE SHRINE OF SAFT-EL-HENNEH. For 1886-7. By

Edouard Naville. Eleven Plates and Plans. {Second Edition.) 2i^s.
V. TANIS, Part II; including TELL DEFENNEH (The Biblical 'Tahpanhes') and
TELL NEPESIIEH. For 1S87-8. By W. M. Flinders Petrie, F, Ll. Griffith, and
A. S. Murray. Fifty-one Plates and Plans. 25J-.
VI. NAUKRATIS, Part II. For 1888-9. By Ernest A. Gardner and F. Ll. Griffith,
Twenty-four Plates and Plans. 25^.
VII. THE CITY OF ONIAS AND THE MOUND OF THE JEW. The Antiquities
of Tell-el-Yahudiych. An Extra Volume, By Ed. Naville and F. Ll. Griffith. Twenty-
six Plates and Plans. 25^.
VIII. BUBASTIS. For 1889-90. By Edouard Naville. Fifty-four Plates and Plans. 25.?.
IX. TWO HIEROGLYPHIC PAPYRI FROIM TANIS. An Extra Volitme.

Containing
I. THE SIGN PAPYRUS (a Syllabary^ By F. Ll. Grh-fith.
II. THE GEOGRAPHICAL PAPYRUS (an Almanack). By \V. M. Flinders Petrie.
With Remarks by Professor Heinrich Brugsch. {Out of print.)
X. THE FESTIVAL HALL OF OSORKON II (BUBASTIS). For 1890-1. By

]u)OUARD Naville. Thirty-nine Plates. 255.
XI. AHNAS EL INIEDINEH. For 1891-2. By Edouard Naville. Eighteen Plates.

And THE TOMB OF PAHERI AT EL KAB.' By J. J. Tylor and F. Ll. Griffith.
Ten Plates. 25^'.
XII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Inlroductory. For 1892-3. By Edouard Naville. Fifteen

Plates and Plans. 25^-.
XIII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part I. For 1893-4. By Edouard Naville. Plates I-

XXIY (three coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30J.
XIV. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part II. For 1894-5. By Edouard Naville. Plates XXV-
L\' (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 305.
XV. DESIIASIIiai. For 1895-6. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Photogravure and

other Plates. 255.
X\l. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part III. For 1896-7. By Edouard Naville. Plates
LVI-LXXXVI (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30J.
XMl. DENDEREH. For 1897-8. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Thirty-eight Plates.

2s.f. (Extra Plates of Inscriptions. Forty Plates, lo.f.)
XVIII. ROYAL TOMBS OF THE FIRST DYNASTY. For 189S-9. By W. IM.

Flinders Petrie. Sixty-eight Plates. 255.
XIX. DEIR FX BAHARI, Part IV. For 1 899-1 900. By Edouard Naville. Plates
LXXXVII-CXVIII (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30J.
XX. DIOSPOLIS PARVA. An Extra Volume. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Forty-

nine Plates. {Out ofprint.)
XXL THE ROYAL TOMBS OF THE EARLIEST DYNASTIES, Part IL For
1900-1. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Sixty-three Plates. 25^. (Thirty-five extra Plates, loj.)
XXII. ABYDOS, Part I. For 1 901-2. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Eighty-one

Plates. 25J.
XXIII. EL AMRAH AND ABYDOS. A71 Extra Volume. By D. Randall-MacIver,

A. C. Mace, and F. Ll. Griffith. Sixty Plates. 25^-.
XXIV. ABYDOS, Part II. For 1902-3. By W. ]\I. Fllxders Petrie. Sixty-four
Plates. 255.
XXV. ABYDOS, Part III. A71 Extra Volume. By C. T. Currelly, E. R. Ayrton, and
A. E. P. Weigall, &c. Sixty-one Plates. 255^.
XXVL EHNASYA. For 1903-4. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Pôrty-three Plates. 25^.
(ROMAN EHNASYA. Thirty-two extra Plates. 105.)
XXVII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part V. For 1904-5. By Edouard Naville. Plates

CXIX-CL with Description. Royal folio. }fis.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY.
Edited by F. Ll. Griffith.
I. BENI HASAN, Part I. For 1 890-1. By Percy E. Newberry With Plans by

G. W. Eraser. Forty-nine Plates Jour coloured). 255-.
II. BENI HASAN, Part II. For 1891-2. By Percy E. Newberry. With Appendix,
Plans, and Measurements by G. \Y. Fraser. Thirty-seven Plates (two coloured). 25^.
III. EL BERSHEH, Part I. For 1892-3 By Percy E. Newberry. Thirty-four

Plates (two coloured). 255.
IV. EL BERSHEH, Part II. For 1893-4. By F. Ll. Griffith and Percy E. New-
berry. With Appendix by G. W. Eraser. Twenty-three Plates (two coloured). 255^.
V. BENI HASAN, Part IIL For 1894-5 By F. Ll. Griffith. (Hieroglyphs, and
manufacture, &c., of Flint Knives.) Ten coloured i*lates. 25^.
VI. HIEROGLYPHS FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE EGYPT EX-

PLORATION FUND. For 1895-6. By F. Ll. Griffith. Nine coloured Plates. 25J.
VII. BENI HASAN, Part IV. For 1896-7. By F-. Ll. Griffith. (Illustrating beasts
and birds, arts, crafts, &c.) Twenty-seven Plates (twenty-one coloured). 25J-.
VIII. THE MASTABA OF PTAHHETEP AND AKHETHETEP AT SAQQAREH,

Part I. For 1897-8. By N. de G. Davies and F. Ll. Griffith. Thirty-one Plates (three
coloured). 2^s.
IX. THE IMASTABA OF PTAHHETEP AND AKHETHETEP AT SAQQAREH,

Part IL For 189S-9. By N. de G. Davies and F. Ll. Griffith. Thirty-five Plates. 251.
X. THE ROCK TOMBS OF SHEIKH SAID. For 1 899-1 900. By N. de G. Davies.

Thirty-five Plates. 25J.
XI. THE ROCK TOMBS OF DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part I. For 1900-1. By

N. de G. Davies. Twenty-seven Plates (two coloured). 25J.
XIL DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part II. For 1901-2. Thirty Plates (two coloured). 25^.
XIII. THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part I. For 1902-3. Forty-one
Plates. 2^s.
XIV. THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part II. For 1903-4. Forty-seven
Plates. 255'.
XV. THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AIMARNA, Part III. For 1904-5, Thirty-nine
Plates. 255.
GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH,
I. THK OXYRIIYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part I. For 1897-8. By B. P. Grenfell and
A. S. Hunt. Eight Collotype Plates. 255.
II. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part II. ForiSQS-Q. Eight Collotype Plates. 25^.
III. EAYUM TOWNS AND THEIR PAPYRI. For 1899-1900. By B. P. Grenfell,
A. S. Hunt, and D. G. Hogarth. Eighteen Plates. 2~iS.
IV. THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI. Double Volume for 1900-1 and 1901-2. By B. P.
Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. Smyly. Nine Collotype Plates. {Not for sale.)
V. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part III. For 1902-3. Six Collotype Plates. 25^.
VI. THE OXYRIIYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part IV. For 1903-4. Eight Collotype
Plates. 255.
VII. THE HIBEH PAPYRI. Part I. Double Volume for 1904-5 and 1905-6. By
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Ten Collotype Plates. 45^-.
VIII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part V. For 1906-7. By B. P. Grenfell and
A. S. Hunt. {In preparation.)
ANNUAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORTS.

(Yearly Summaries by V. G. Kenyijn, W. E. Crum, and the Officers of the Society, with Maps.)
Edited by F. Ll. Griffith.
ITIE SEASON'S WORK. For 1 890-1. By Ed. Naville, Percy E. Newberry, and G. W.
Eraser. 2s. Gd.
For 1892-3 and 1893-4. 2s. Gd. each.

,, 1894-5. y. 6d. Containing Report (with Plans) of D. G. Hogarth's Excavations in Alexandria.
1895-6. 3^. With Illustrated Article on the Transport of Obelisks by Ed. Naville.
,, 1896-7. 2s. 6(t. With Articles on Oxyrhynchus and its Papyri by B. P. Grenfell, and a Thucy-
dides Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus by A. S. Hunt.
,, 1897-8. 2s. 6d. With Illustrated Article on Excavations at Hierakonpolis by W. M. Flinders
Petkie.
,, 1898-9. 2s. 6d. With Article on the Position of Lake Moeris by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt.
1899-1900. 6d.
2J. With Article on Knossos in its Egyptian Relations by A. J. Evans.
And five successive years, 2^. 6d. each.
SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS.
AOITA IIi:iOY: Sayings of our Led,' from an Early Greek Papyrus.
'
By B. P. Grenfell
and A. S. Hunt. 2s. (with Collotypes) and 6d. net.
NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS AND FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL. By B. P.
Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. is. net.
ATLAS OF ANCIENT EGYPT. With Letterpress and Inde.x. {Saomf Edition ) {Under
revision.)
GUIDE TO TEMPLE OF DEIR EL BAHARI. With Plan. {Out ofprint.)

COPTIC OSTRACA. By W. E. Cru.m. io.y. 6d. net.
Slides fr 0711 Fund Photographs may be obtained through Jl/essrs. Aêivton Sf- Co., 3 Fleet Street, E.C,
and Prin)sfrom Mr. R. C. Murray, 37 Dartmouth Park Hill N.W.
Offices of the Egypt Exploration Fund:

37 GREAT RUSSELL STREET, LONDON, W.C. and ;
PIERCE BUILDING, COPLEY SQUARE, BOSTON, MASS., U..S..A.

Agents:
BERNARD QUARITCH, 15 PICCADILLY, W.
REGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., DRYDEN HOUSE, GERRARD STREET, W.
ASHER & CO., 13 BEDFORD STREET, COVENT (JARDEN, W.C.
IIIARV IROWDE, ANn::X CORNER, EC.
mmimsEcr. jANHigTS^
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE

CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY
PA The Hibeh papyri

3315
H5G7
pt.l

The Hibeh Papyri 1 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Hibeh Papyri 1 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Hibeh Papyri 1 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the subject matter of the document?

What is the subject matter of the document?

What information is provided in the preface?

What information is provided in the preface?

i>9)

THE HIBEH PAPYRI

GRENFELL AND HUNT

THE HIBEH PAPYRI

EDITED WITH TRANSLATIONS AND NOTES

BERNARD P. GRENFELL, M.A., D.Litt, F.B.A.

ARTHUR S. HUNT, MA., D.Litt.

WITH TEN PLATES

In editing the classical fragments we have continued to avail

due much of their reconstruction and interpretation, besides many

method is being employed in a particular case. The nature of these

In conclusion we have tobeg the indulgence of subscribers to the

we shall begin the publication of the very important literary texts

Note on the IMethod of Publication and List of Abbreviations xiii

IL Fragments of Ext.vnt Cl.a.ssical Authors (19-28) 67

Royal Ordinances (28-29)

VII. Official and Private Correspondence (39-83) 181

VIII. Contracts (84a-96) 242

IX. 84. {a)

X. 88, 97. 99, 100 {rccio)

-Epicharmus, YvS^nai (Plate I) c. 280-240

3. -Sophocles, Tyro (?) (Plate

Anthology (Plate VII) c. 250-210 35

(Plate ^') c. 280-240 40

14. ' Lysias, In Theozoiidem (Plate II) c. 280-240 49

15. -Rhetorical Exercise (Plate II) .

Homer, Iliad ii and iii (Plate VI) c. 285-250 67

22. Homer, Iliad xxi-xxiii c. 280-240 96

25. -Euripides c. 280-240 "3

28. Constitutional Regulations c. 265 157

30. Judicial Summons 300-271 165

34. Petition to the King 243-2

73. Letter of Antigonus to Dorion

75. Letter of Theodorus to the Phylacitae

76. Order for Payment

84(/>). Date by a Ptolemaic Era (?) (Plate VII)

86. Loan of Corn .

87. Advance of Seed-Corn

98. Receipt of a Captain

103. Receipt for Physician-Tax and Police-Tax

110. Accounts. Postal Register

114. Official Account

118. Account of Olyra

The general system followed in this volume is that of its predecessors.

according to the Julian calendar see the Preface.

practically the same as those adopted by Wilcken in Archiv filr PapynisforscJning,

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

xxvii, pp. 174-205, by P. Jouguet and G. Lefebvre.

an Introduction by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy.

obligingly gave us permission to proceed thither at once, we were able to start

zvaraq ('faces of paper,' the Arabic term for papyrus-cartonnage) were to be

debris at intervals were Ptolemaic burials, mostly in plain limestone sarcophagi,

additional fragments of P. Grenf. II. 7 {b), which remain unpublished. It is

clear that the these literary fragments were derived had

belonging to Khonsu-tef-Nekt, is now at Brussels, the other at Cairo. The