THE

OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

VOLUME LXI

Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation

*

https://archive.org/details/oxyrhynchuspapyr0061unse

THE

OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

VOLUME LXI

EDITED WITH TRANSLATIONS AND NOTES BY

T. GAGOS M. W. HASLAM N. LEWIS

WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY

C. F. L. AUSTIN P.J. PARSONS

R. L. FOWLER P. SCHUBERT

E. W. HANDLEY A. SWIDEREK

Graeco-Roman Memoirs, No. 81

PUBLISHED FOR

THE BRITISH ACADEMY

BY THE

EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY

3 DOUGHTY MEWS, LONDON WCIN 2 P G

1 995

Thomas J. Bata Library

) ct i ii J *

0

BY

PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN

THE CHARLESWORTH GROUP, HUDDERSFIELD

AND PUBLISHED FOR

THE BRITISH ACADEMY BY THE EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY (registered charity no. 212384)

3 DOUGHTY MEWS, LONDON WCIN 2PG

ISSN 0306-9222 ISBN 0 85698 126 5

© EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY 1995

PREFACE

The literary texts in this volume fall into three groups. Of the three pieces of comedy, 4093 offers an act-end of New Comedy, no doubt Menander and possibly from Dis Exapaton\ 4094, a grand codex leaf of Aspis , reveals small but significant divergences from the text of the Bodmer manuscript. We are grateful to Professor E. W. Handley for undertaking these. 4096 (edited by Dr P. Schubert) presents scattered new fragments of the Mythographus Homericus; 4097-9 (edited by Professor R. L. Fowler) represent mythological compendia of the sort that lie behind Apollodorus and Hyginus. Finally, Professor Haslam completes his publication (begun in vol. FVII) of the unedited papyri of Thucydides in the Egypt Exploration Society’s collection: few novelties, but renewed proof that a number of ‘late’ variants were already circulating in antiquity.

Most of the documents derive from the PhD thesis of Dr Traianos Gagos, written at the Ehiiversity of Durham under the supervision of Professor J. D. Thomas, who has revised 4113-4116 tor publication here. The rest have been brought up to date by Rea. Five more documents, all relating to compulsory public service, have been contributed by Professor Naphtali Lewis (4118, 4119, 4128-30). A puzzling private letter, 4126, in which the sender says that he had been ‘dog-devoured’ (KvvofipcoToc) at the season of the rise of the Dog star and that he had sent a one-eyed astrologer to look unsuccessfully for the recipient, was studied by Professor Anna Swiderek and has been revised for publication by Rea, who also compiled the indexes.

Numbers in The Oxyrhynchus Papyri series have been allocated in advance to astro¬ nomical texts from the collection which have been edited by Professor Alexander Jones of the University of Toronto for publication elsewhere (4133-4300). Section V of this volume contains a list of these publication numbers with a short descriptive title for each item and its Oxyrhynchus inventory number.

It is a pleasure to acknowledge once again the efficiency and constant helpfulness of the staff of the Charlesworth Group in the production of this volume.

March, iggg

P.J. PARSONS J. R. REA

General Editors

*

CONTENTS

Preface

Table of Papyri ^

List of Plates x-

Numbers and Plates

Note on the Method of Pltblication and Abbreviations xii

TEXTS

I. COMEDY (4093-4095) z

II. MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS (4096-4099) i5

HI. THUCYDIDES (4100-4112) 59

IV. DOCUMENTS OF THE ROMAN AND

BYZANTINE PERIODS (4113-4132) 86

V. ASTRONOMICAL TEXTS (4133-4300) I42

INDEXES

I. Comedy I4y

II. Mythographic texts I48

III. Rulers and Regnal Years i9i

IV. Consuls

V'. Indictions l^2

VI. Months

VII. Dates x^2

VIII. Personal Names 152

IX. Geographical

(a) Countries, Nomes, Toparchies, Cities, etc. 155

( b ) Villages, etc. 155

(c) Miscellaneous 156

X. Religion 156

XI. Official and Military Terms and Titles 156

XII. Professions, Trades, and Occupations 157

XIII. Measures 157

(a) Weights and Measures 157

( b ) Money 158

XIV. Taxes 158

XV. General Index of Words 158

XVI. Corrections to Published Texts 163

TABLE OF PAPYRI

	I. COMEDY
4093 New Comedy	EWH	Later second-third	i
		century*
4094 Menander, Aspis	EWH	Sixth century	6
4095 Comedy	CFLA/PJP Third century	1 3

II. MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

4096 Mythographus Homericus	PS	Second century	15
4097 Mythological Compendium	RLF	Second century	46
4098 Mythological Compendium	RLF	Third century	54
4099 Mythological Compendium	RLF	First century bc-	55
		first century ad
III.	THUCYDIDES
4100 Thucydides i 25—6, 27-9, 31	MWH	Second-third century	60
4101 Thucydides iv 19-20	MWH	Third century	63
4102 Thucydides v 18	MWH	Second-third century	63
4103 Thucydides v 35	MWH	First-second century	65
4104 Thucydides v 50	MWH	Second-third century	66
4105 Thucydides vi 52-5, vii 2, 4	MWH	Second-third century	66
4106 Thucydides vii 9-10	MWH	Second century	72
4107 Thucydides vii 23	MWH	Second century	73
4108 Thucydides vii 62	MWH	Second-third century	74
4109 Thucydides viii 40-41 etc	MWH	Second century	76
4110 Thucydides viii 73	MWH	Second century	81
4111 Thucydides viii 87.5, 88	MWH	Second century	82
4112 Thucydides viii 98	MWH	Second century	84

*A11 dates ad unless otherwise indicated.

IV. DOCUMENTS OF THE ROMAN AND BYZANTINE PERIODS

4113 Declaration on Oath

4114 Order to Arrest

4115 Order to Arrest

4116 Order to Arrest

4117 Loan of Wheat/ Writing Practice?

4118 Memorandum to Comarchs

4119 Notice to Comarchs

4120 Application for the Registration of a Lien

4121 Undertaking to Lease Land

4122 Application for an Official Medical Examination

4123 Order to Pay

4124 Loan of Money

4125 Loan of Money

4126 Private Letter

4127 Christian Letter

4128 Nomination to Liturgies 4129-4130 Nomination to a Liturgy

4131 Receipt for a Donation to a Hospital

4132 Sale of Wine with Deferred Delivery

TG	17 December 138	86
TG	Second century	91
TG	First half of third century	92
TG	Late third/early fourth century	92
TG	4 January 240	94
NL	Third century	97
NL	c. 270	99
TG	1 January 287	102
TG	29 August 289- 10 January 290	106
TG	22 June 305	1 1 1
TG	307/8	1 14
TG	26 April-25 May 318	1 16
TG	29 March 322	n9
AS /JRR	Third/fourth century	122
TG	First half of the fourth century	124
NL	24 September 346	127
NL	1 1 May 358	130
TG	i8(?) September 600	134
TG	2 May 619	137

V. ASTRONOMICAL TEXTS

4133—4300 Descriptive List

AJ Roman and Byzantine 142

CFLA = C.F.L.Austin RLF = R.L. Fowler TG = T.Gagos EWH = E.W. Handley

MWH = M.W.Haslam AJ = A.Jones NL = N. Lewis PJP = P .J. Parsons

JRR =J.R.Rea PS = P. Schubert AS = A.Swiderek

LIST OF PLATES

I. 4094 170-188

II. 4094 184-198

III. 4094 igg-2i8

IV. 4094 214— 231

V 4093, 4095, 4096 frr. 1-4, 6-9, 12 VI. 4096 frr. 5, 10-11, 16-30

NUMBERS

VII. 4096 frr. 31-76, 4097 VIII. 4098, 4099, 4110 IX. 4103, 4104, 4106, 4111, 4112 X 4107, 4123 15 XI. 4118, 4126 XII. 4129

AND PLATES

4093		V	4103	IX
4094 170-188		I	4104	IX
4094 184-198		II	4106	IX
4094 199-218		III	4107	X
4094 214— 231		IV	4110	VIII
4095		V	4111	IX
4096 frr. 1-4, 6-9,	12-15	V	4112	IX
4096 frr. 5, 10-1 1,	O CO 1 LO	VI	4118	XI
4096 frr. 31-76		VII	4123	X
4097		VII	4126	XI
4098		VIII	4129	XII
4099		VIII

NOTE ON THE METHOD OF PUBLICATION AND ABBREVIATIONS

The basis of the method is the Leiden system of punctuation, see CE 7 (1932) 262-9. It may be summarized as follows:

afly The letters are doubtful, either because of damage or because they are

otherwise difficult to read

Approximately three letters remain unread by the editor [a fly] The letters are lost, but restored from a parallel or by conjecture

] Approximately three letters are lost ( ' Round brackets indicate the resolution of an abbreviation or a symbol,

e.g. ( aprafly] ) represents the symbol — , cTp(aTrjy6c) represents the abbreviation crp5

{afly} The letters are deleted in the papyrus

' afly ' The letters are added above the line

<(aj8y) The letters are added by the editor

{aj8y} The letters are regarded as mistaken and rejected by the editor

Heavy arabic numerals refer to papyri printed in the volumes of The Oxyrhynchus Papyri.

The abbreviations used are in the main identical with those in J. F. Oates et al., Checklist of Editions of Greek Papyri and Ostraca, 3rd edition (BASP Suppl. No. 4, 1985). It is hoped that any new ones will be self-explanatory.

I. COMEDY

4093. New Comedy

8 IB.i9g/E(i)d 7.5x10.5cm Later Second/Third century

An act ending, indicated by XOPOY , is among these remains of fifteen iambic lines from a play of New Comedy. The text is written across the vertical fibres in a neat, small, slightly sloping mixed hand which is probably to be seen as an early form of the familiar third-century type represented, among recently published papyri of comedy, by LIX 3967—8; 1 23, Plato, Laws ix, with a document dated ad 295 on the back, is put on the borderline between second and third century by Grenfell and Hunt, as is VI 852, Euripides, Hypsipyle , by Turner, GMAW2 3 1 ; V 842, the Hellenica Oxyrhynchia, is dated to the second half of the second century by Roberts, GLH 1 7b; an argument for a date no later, and perhaps even earlier than that, is that on the other side of the present piece there are remains of twelve lines of a document mentioning a transfer of land in handwriting for which Dr Coles and Dr Rea find parallels either side of the mid-first century. An interval of a hundred years or more before the document was recycled would be striking indeed; but it must in any event, one feels, have been considerable. What survives is part of the foot of a column, with up to 2 cm of lower margin. A straight break at the left has removed the line-beginnings (two, and latterly three letters, one may guess), and with them any signs of paragraphoi to indicate change of speaker, though there are double points for this in 3 and 1 6. Punctuation is by single high point; elision is unmarked in 10 and (presumably) 8, the only instances on offer; there is what seems to be a hyphen above the line in 14. Letter- forms worth noting are kappa with long diagonals at a narrow angle; the diagonals of lambda and chi and the left half of alpha and delta are similarly favoured, as is the curved middle of mu; omicron is tiny, sometimes flattened; upsilon has a long and prominent descender. Where read¬ ings are hard to obtain, or to verify, the cause is usually the stripping and abrasion of fibres towards the left side of the fragment.

From the act-ending, no complete word survives; but what does survive seems not to include an introduction of the chorus in the way known from Menander at Epitr. 33/ 169 ff. and elsewhere; it is likely for that reason to represent the end of an act other than Act I.1

The new act opens with a dialogue between a young man in love and someone who points to the conflict between the lover’s passion and his sense of shame, and argues that he should not put up with what is happening but act, and hand over his father’s gold to get the girl. So the plot, or an element of the plot, turns on the familiar

1 For some recent discussion with further references see Eric Handley — Andre Hurst, Relire Menandre (Geneva, Droz, 1990) at pp. 17 f. (H.-D. Blume) and 130 f.

2

COMEDY

motif si amas, eme\ that is, the story of a youth who needs big money either to maintain a girl-friend or to secure her from whoever else has or claims proprietory rights — or, indeed, for both of these objectives. The literary interest of this short text comes from asking how far we can extract typical or individual features from the detail, and in particular how far it matches plays already known. The reference to ‘what went wrong before’ in line 8 points to a play with a double or complex intrigue, like Dis Exapaton/ Bacchides ; it also does something to corroborate the suggestion that the piece begins at a point in the play later than the end of Act I.

No link with a known text has yet been made out. If, for the sake of argument, it were to be suggested that the piece is from Dis Exapaton , a number of conditions would need to be satisfied which the fragment does not itself satisfy; but the problems of Plautus’ adaptation of that play, on which we so largely depend, are so extensively and variously debated that I am not sure such a suggestion is ruled out:2

(i) The act-ending here would need to be that of the Act which begins at Dis Ex. 64, where Sostratos has given his father the gold, and is reconciled with his friend Moschos, but now has no money to secure his girl, who has not after all, as he thought, betrayed him;

(ii) The new act here would begin with Moschos and Sostratos, at a point corres¬ ponding to the dialogue of the two young men at Bacchides 626 ff.: that is at a point before the second deception is planned. That would favour the view (whatever other difficulties it has) that it is Act III and not Act IV that begins at Dis Ex. 64; but then the possible content of Act III as seen from Plautus is arguably rather thin;

(iii) Plautus’ major changes in his adaptation would have to include not only the reworking into lyric of the young men’s dialogue, but the contraction of the content at the point of the act-break (at any rate after it) in a way akin to his treatment of the Act that begins at 64; put otherwise, if we had any short piece of Greek which corresponded to Plautus’ text at this point, it would not be surprising to find it hard to recognize;

(iv) If the Sostratos of Dis Exapaton could even think of his girl as a -napdevoc (see on 15b below), Plautus, who is rightly thought to have enhanced her role at the end of the play (which has four speakers), must also have done something to assimilate her role to that of the established hetaira, her sister. In Dis Exapaton she is crap/i), even trap-an-ar^ (21, 101); prepared to swear falsely by all the gods (21 f.), formidably persuasive (25 ff., 93); but still, even in bitter irony, xaXrj xayaO p (91); these, however, are the words of an angry man who thinks he has been betrayed

2 I mention only two recent extensive discussions: Silvia Rizzo, Da Chrisalo a Siro: per una ricostruzione del DIS EXAPATON di Plauto, in Dicti studiosus [in honour of Scevola Mariotti], Urbino 1 990, 9-48; and Otto Zwierlein, fur Kritik und Exegese des Plautus IV-Bacchides , Mainz 1992. More recendy, R. Nunlist, pTE 99 (1992) 245-78 offers another potential accession to the play in his paper entitled ‘P. Mich. inv. 6950 (unpubliziert), P. Koln 203 und 243; Szenen aus Menanders Dis Exapaton?'.

4093. NEW COMEDY

3

( redde , putida moecha, codicillos ); they need not be more literally true than yap-ai/ribr??

is true of Chrysis in Samia when said by Demeas (348).

The piece is among those worked on by Sir Eric Turner, and as with others I am grateful for the transcript and the preliminary notes which came to me from him. The presentation here is adapted from one given by me at the 20th International Congress of Papyrologists, Copenhagen, 1992. What is said above about Dis Exapaton is left unchanged, in the hope that if it fails to provoke further discussion it may at least save a few people from temptation and wasted time; the restoration of 7-10 still presents problems for which no satisfying solutions have yet come my way.

4 COMEDY

: ]vd\

2 ].[ M..].aur[

3 I Vc [2_3] ac •• avay[

4 ]eAet§[ ] rjvyec [

5 ]AA.V[.].

6 X

7 ]ot8[ ]/cet[ ]/xet [] klov^— 4] icrco [

8 ]t6 vdpi,aveTnTOLCvporjp,ap[

9 ]av[ ] 770 ce[ ]vaya7T^c ivtt][

10 ] e • yKrjSecTLvcoceoLKe [

11 ] k tea da rovroKaiSov at[

12 ] Tpoca[ ]<i€cp,evTOvpa [

13 ]u)cyeve[ ]6ar pirjAoyovxpo [

14 ]evop.evov (f>vy€i,v8eTovTo[

15 ]av^ia>rjv [2—3] pavrr]CTrap[

16 ] tc : rtAot7r[3— 4] iacToxpv[

foot

1 Long descender and lower curve of round letter 3-5 From the beginning at least one letter is

lost (5 a]AA-); but more likely two, and two or three in line 3, if we allow for the probabilities of two- and three-letter restorations in 7-16, and note also that this piece of the fragment is slightly warped outwards 4 ] . » . [> particles of ink suit ]r and y[ respectively 5 [ ] , verticals either side of the break could

be parts of one letter, as 77; the other traces are unclear 6 The decorative horizontal lines which

accompany XOPOY are welcome here to confirm what remains of letters can be divined from scattered particles of ink 7 ] 1 is suggested by the foot of a vertical; a speck of low ink at the end 9 ] av[r] a

suits; not another vowel, unless perhaps e 10 Parts of vertical and horizontal for y make avdyicr) a

credible reading; before it ] is like the top of a triangular letter, a S A; e rather than 0; and -ew rather than -etc, for which there is too much ink; the high point may be illusory. At the end, c[ or another round letter 11 y is likely from traces of the diagonals; before it, ] i, could be ]ot, perhaps ]tj, less likely ]v 12 Parts

of upright and of horizontal touching p suggest r, before that traces suit a, further left 1 -2 letters totally abraded; end, y or t, and perhaps two specks from one more letter 14 For the hyphen as an aid to

reading above the line rather than below it, see Turner, GMAW2 11; there is another possible example in the comic fragment LIX 3972. It is not obvious what need for aid was felt; perhaps if the damaged word was written tvyevop.evov it caused a moment’s hesitation 15 [, upright with curved foot suits n 16]

the first survives as an upright, the second as ink on the line, the third like part of a high loop

4093. NEW COMEDY

5

7	(A)	X 0 P [0 Y] ljU.]ot S[o]/eei[c], ixeiffa.Ki.ov, [ ]ictco [
8		o)c]r kpvdpiav €7tl rote Trpopp.ap[T7)fi€voic
9		a77’]av[r]a Tronjce[i]v, ayaTnjceiv rf] [rvyr/
10		fie]\\eiy aydyKT) S’ kcri'v, toe eoiKe, c[o£
1 1		] KopLLcacdai. tovto Kai Souvat [A adpa
12		tov 77-]aTpo'c‘ a [17] Sec pekv to 77-pay [p,’, aAA’ aS uvarov
J3		aAAjtoc yeve [c]#ar p.rj \6yov ypov[-
H	(B)	eyyJej'op.eVotr <f>vyelv Se tovto [
15	ou/c] av /3l eppv — tt[o)c y]ap dv; — Tfjc Trap[9evov
16		ycopjt'c. (A) ti Aoi7t[oV; epja^piac, to ypu[ciov

C H O R [U S]

A. You seem to me, young man, [?? to be in a credible state] to blush at the thought of all-out action after what went wrong before, to be ready to be content with your [fortune]; but there is a need, as is plain, for [you (?? and me)] to get this and hand it over [in secret from your] father. Unpleasant, the matter is; but [it’s impossible] for it to happen otherwise]. Do not [waste] time while talk comes [into it]; to avoid this [is not an option],

B. I could [not] possibly live — [how] could I? — [without] the [girl].

A. What else is left? You blush . . . the gold . . .

1-5 No complete word can be restored without doubt, but given Menander’s habit of echoing words across act-breaks, it is just worth noting ]yd [ (or ]/>0[) in 1 with the verb kpvdpiav in 8 and 16, and nap[devov in 15; with avayKr) likely in 10, avay\j<dcei vel sim. is among possibilities for 3. On this topic see further Entretiens Hardt 16 (1970) 10-18, with Relire Menandre 140 and n. 29.

3 The line could begin with a gen. of exclamation, to which ’dvay\e ceavrov (cf. Sarnia 360) is a possible retort; but everything is ambiguous.

4 dfi]eXei, df/j] eXel. l$]eAei, etc., less likely p\ e'Act; then S[e] rrjv ye cv[yy pacfnjv or cv[p.cj>opdv or cv [vrpcxfaov or whatever.

5 ftaJAAov would do, or perhaps 7ro]AA&v; l/cetya is not to be recommended.

7 The vocative peeipaKtov is more a measure of the speaker’s admonitory tone than a clear clue to status or identity. It is used between contemporaries as well as from old to young, both when the speaker does not know the name of the person addressed and when he does, but is being formal or in some way distancing himself. Thus in Dysk. 269, Gorgias to Sostratos at their first meeting (and S. in return, 299, 31 1); 729 and 843, Knemon and Kallippides, respectively, to Gorgias, whom they know. In Dis Ex. fr. 1 trpdc twv Bedov, peeLpaKLov has been credited to a female speaker (albeit a hetaira) but with objections from Webster, Studi ... Cataudella ii (1972) 305—7.

7-10 Damage makes the structure unclear, (i) in 9, two expressions with future infinitives seem to be opposed in sense, and should be governed by different verbs, namely by kpvdpiav in 8 and a balancing word

6

COMEDY

at the beginning of io. If that word was pcXXciv (a guess), the tense of ayanijcciv is normal, and the futurity of the context may account for 7ron)c€iv with epvdpiav : Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. ii. 295 has examples of comparable futures, including Dem. 01. 3 (3). 9 avaj3dAAerai noirjceiv ra 8cov-ra, where some read aorist; (ii) it may then be that the whole complex is introduced by were, giving the main content of the sentence, with another verb at the end of 7 to be governed by 8okck: ‘You seem to me to be (x), so that you (iii) For (x), I have thought of evnicTcoc eyeiv, prompted by Ar. Thes. 105! (in lyric style) ebnicrojc 8e rovpdv 8a.ip.ovac eyei ce/9icai. In fact, since the space available might suit 8okcI[v] ‘as it seems to me’ almost as well as Iffioi 8o«-ei[c], one could have in mind cvnicrwc eyeic as an alternative. On any analysis, one can wonder why the speaker’s style is so involved: is he tied up in his words because he is embarrassed, like Gorgias at Dysk. 27 1 ff., or for some other reason? See Sandbach in Entretiens Hardt 16 (1970) at p. 1 16 f., and the discussion at p. 137.

8 npoapaprdveiv seems to make its first appearance here; it continues in use in the perfect ptep. passive. The reference, consistently with the following lines, is to something familiar to both speakers, and therefore to the audience of the play.

9 airavra Tronjceiv, like -ndvra -rroieiv at Dysk. 765, but to stop at nothing there involves hard work by the lover; here it means theft, as we soon learn, dya-nrjcciv with dat., as at LSJ III 3.

1 1 The ‘this’ that has to be got and passed on must allude to the gold mentioned in 16; it is hard to see how a noun could fit in here. The beginning can only be guessed at the cost of postulating, without warrant from the context, the situation the parties are in. Kap] oi seems possible, but involves a suggestion of partnership in the enterprise; ep]ol (too short?), or ain\f), or r/pijv; or ndXi]v or to 7 ra\v (both too long?) all offer other problems.

12 Xadpa tov Trarpoc, as roO Sccttotov ... Xadpa Dysk. 578 and XdSpq. ... tov 8cci totov Ar. Pint. 318.

12-14 The line-ends can only be supplemented exempli gratia, including 12 aAA’ aSiivarov which is none

the less here put in; 13 could be ypoVi£e vvv, or, for those who like metrical rarities, xp°vov ipiroei; 14, e.g. ovy aiperov, ovk ccti coi.

15 f- Possibly rrebe] av, with repetition. Cf. Perik. 399/ 977 £ rrciic fiiu'j [ copai | 6 TpccKaKo8aipcov yojpLC <jj[v rXvKcpac; rfjc -rrap[dcvov is hard to avoid, and with it a commitment to thinking of a play in which the girl is not a regular hetaira, but someone like the girl in Plautus, Curculio, under contract of purchase to a soldier while still a virgin in her proprietor’s brothel, and with a lover who will eventually win her.

E. W. HANDLEY

4094. Menander, Aspis (and other plays?)

62 6B.78/F(i) 15.8x31.5 cm Sixth century

Numerous broken fragments of papyrus have been reassembled by Dr W. E. H. Cockle to give the remains of a leaf from a codex with lines from Menander’s Aspis; eighteen tiny pieces remain unplaced. Enough upper and lower margin survives to suggest that the preserved height of 31.5 cm is original, or close to that; calculation from text lost gives an original breadth of some 18.5-19 cm. The first side, with hori¬ zontal fibres, is numbered 142 ( PMB ) and has 29 lines, Aspis 170-198 (it omits 189, apparently by accident, but has the remains of a line lost by damage from the Bodmer Codex, here 193a); the second side, numbered 143 ( PMT ), has 33 lines, Aspis 199-231, the written area in each case being about 16 x 25 cm. The handwriting is a large, sloping and sometimes sprawling majuscule, similar in style, as the tall and relatively narrow page is in format, to the Cairo Menander, a leading member of E. G. Turner’s Group 5 in his Typology of the Early Codex (Philadelphia, 1977) where it is no. 227. The Cairo Menander is dated as late as the second half of the fifth century by G. Cavallo and

7

4094. MENANDER, ASPIS (AND OTHER PLAYS?)

H. Maehler in their Greek Bookhands of the early Byzantine Period, ad 300-800 ( BIOS Suppl. 47 [1987]), no. 1 6b; but this codex gives the impression of being considerably later, later also than the parchment codex of Aspis, PSI 126 (Cavallo and Maehler 15b, assigned to the first half of the fifth century): a date in the sixth century, probably in the latter half, is here suggested in consultation with Professor Maehler. A further comparison can be made with an unpublished papyrus codex of the Septuagint from Oxyrhynchus, again reassembled by Dr Cockle; this has the very striking measurement °f 15-5 x 34-7 cm) and is assigned, like our present manuscript, to the sixth century.

A first presentation of this leaf was given by Sir Eric Turner in his last session in London, in 1977/8, and his transcripts and notes are used with gratitude here. In Retire Menandre (1990) 143-8, a brief description and comparison with some other copies of Menander was given by me in the context of discussing the author’s survival in late Antiquity.1 In that regard, this manuscript is a document of some interest. Though far from the elegance of a scholar’s pride and joy, it shows at least a measure of scholarly activity in the shape of corrections, of an interest in the assignment of roles, and of sporadic accentuation, much augmented after copying in a paler ink. If, as I have assumed, the volume held a collection of plays by Menander, it should have had no less than five. At a rate of between 29 and 33 lines to a page, six pages can be allowed for Aspis 1- 1 77, and then 135 pages before that would accommodate some 4000 lines of text, which seems too much for three of Menander’s comedies and too little for five before Aspis. With the rest of that play to come (if no more) the volume was indeed substantial, and one would greatly like to know what its plays were.

Unfortunately, no encouragement to guesswork on that subject is given by the company Aspis keeps elsewhere. In the Bodmer codex, assigned by Cavallo and Maehler to the first half of the fourth century rather than to any date in the third (op. cit., 5b), Aspis is third of a triad after Sarnia and Dyskolos. With PSI 126 of Aspis, mentioned above, belongs P. Berol 13932, containing lines of Misoumenos', it is to be recognized by script and format as part of the same volume, as do Cavallo and Maehler (among others), rather than as part of a hypothetical twin; but, that said, no more of the content or order is known. Similar questions are raised by LIII 3718, a codex of Euripides assigned by its editor, Michael Haslam, to the fifth century: there pages numbered 198 and 199 have parts of Bacchae at 29 lines to the page, which was therefore fourth or fifth play of the book; it was preceded, virtually certainly, by Orestes , from which it preserves some text, and by others of undetermined identity, not necessarily, as Haslam remarks, from the ‘select’ plays only.

The fragmentary state of the present leaf, and a number of doubtful readings in what does survive, combine to complicate comparison with the Bodmer copy, which will be made in some detail in what follows. Recognizable accidents apart, there is a striking variant, not the product of a misreading, namely dyrtupovetv for a^apravecv in

1 Eric Handley-Andre Hurst, Retire Menandre, Geneva, Droz, 1990. See now also LX 4018-9, 4021-3.

8

COMEDY

205; if there seems to be considerable variation overall, it is perhaps not more than one would now expect from the growing number of places where Menander survives in more than one copy; Relire Menandre (n. 1 above), at p. 128 f., recalls a very remarkable example and gives some further references.

In attempting a textual audit, one asks first, perhaps, whether the revisions made in the copy suggest that a second original was to hand. The answer is probably ‘No’, even if the change of ink and style that can be seen are attributed to a second person. Some of these revisions are simply remedies for slips of the pen: letters added, 17 1 <(a)>7rdvT<x)v, 189 final sigma, 196 eAa<(jii)/3Lavov, 218 Kvo(v}ca; deletion, 180 elided alpha; correction, 193 av&^ep'e (from what?), 202 Sia^opaV (for -av), 204 -9’ for -to, 220 toj'v (from tov or tv); more interestingly, 1718’ deleted and replaced by the nota personae for daoc; and see 194, 197, 199, 204 (ole), where the situation is (more or less) unclear. While some of the accents and other lectional signs are original (as clearly 200 ■nepiSc) it was no doubt at this stage of reading over the copy that others were added (as 219 in aAA’ oi^op,ai). It should be observed that (at any rate in the present state of the leaf) the distinction is not always clear, and that the profit of pursuing the matter in detail is limited also by the chance of losses from gaps or abrasion and the apparent lack of system in what does survive; some particular oddities of accentuation are noted on 186, 215 (231) and 21 1; accents may have diagnostic value at 176, 196 and 197. It is consistent with this impression of trivial correction that where more substantial inter¬ linear additions can be made out (173, 220, 226; note also 225), they seem to be in the nature of glosses (whether spontaneous or transferred) rather than variants; nor (though gaps may have deprived us of evidence) is there any sign of variant readings in the neighbourhood of places where the text is certainly corrupt or certainly at variance with the Bodmer codex, as at 189 (line omitted), 205 (variant) and 228 (defective in length); only at 224, where veicpdc may derive from revision, and perhaps at 199, is there anything which might betoken a second source.

The Bodmer codex is superior in that it has line 189, as already noted; and also in lesser matters such as 185 XrpjjopbaL not Xrjpup-, 192 t’ not S’, 201 yapucov not -ov, 204 ■npa-TTeO' not -er-, 21 1 tovtcov not -ov, 219 dvovc not -cl. The present copy is right against similar superficial errors in B at 175, 176, 1 8 1 , 194, 21 1 (not toiovtov]-), 215, 218, 221 and 227; it may be so at 173 (? t l), 188, and in not marking part-division after cIkotojc in 209. Usually the right correcton has been obvious, at least to some people; not, however, at 194, where there was no context to help, nor in the following two lines, where understandable editorial errors introduced complications. The new data offer a fresh challenge; here, together with the good reading ayvwfiovclv in 205, we have the main positive contributions, small but instructive, to the establishment of the text. Worrying, because harder to make out and to reckon with, are places where the text as known from the Bodmer copy will not fit (or seems not to fit) the space and the traces of ink available to accommodate it. At 228, the matter is explicable in terms of

4094. MENANDER, ASPIS (AND OTHER PLAYS?) 9

an obvious copying error; but at 179-84, 203-4 and 225 (most conspicuously at 179) there are areas of dark still to be dispelled.

ppP

170 eP°] yy£vec9ouTU)veixci)VKaTaTovc[voiJ.ovc

\ t ^ a

Kvpi] oc'aVavTa)v[[S’| ; axfreXevTiovv : riy[ap Trpcc] vraTOC€Lp.irovyev [ovc • ] aS lk [o] v [pcevoc

TrXeoveKOW ra

a€LT€]7T/\.eov€KTOVTaTdva8eX(f)6v p,[

5a

opcuv] aveyopLcu : vovveyeic- aXX,a)[ya9e *75 ov8]ep.€Tpi.dl,er vzvopuKt eirav [reXojc

ot/c] OTpi^apLrjv69ovTiv[,o ] cvvv [

] t 8tS[ouc

_ ]?<?.[

e]/x[ot ]~7] Tj [

180 ] str str ijTT str r[a]o[ ] [

o]pd>v eve iSr)8\ str ' str ' str [

7TpOC€pL 7TOLrjC(jO [ ] ta

vycKa [ Yifia>[ ] epi[r]v]8[Lap7racai JoOto [2—3] [3— 4]/<a[t]77apatroi)[ctrTtrec •85 tJ a>vyvojpip.tovpiOLXrjpi\i)Y\ opL[aLT7]V7rap9evov

yvvalKaTavTTjv ■ Kaiydpovdp,[ocp.oiSoKei ovTOjXeyeivTrojcSaeTdvr’o [ vvovTpomov 188 -n] paT p 'c Kai.ce[(f)]po[vTLi(,€LV

19° To]prjpiaTovToelvaiTipi[epi.epipivripi€vov

_ .' . . X>. [

caNoLKerr] [ 6+ Tr\ovrjp\coL

•93 avd(f)ep ’ /ca[t]r[ ]vapepi,6[vl(,r]TeiXoyov

r93a X[, .]«.<*>.[. .]ecrdA[ ] [

]? <hyS,€tp,eS[3— 4]at7ra[

•95 7r[ ] Tac9epa.Tralva [

ccop-ar] apLe9’dj eAa'///3[

Jw.[. . .] A™ _ [

198 eKelvocavoSrjpi ~ [

10

COMEDY

I PH. PH.

V °[

199 raur’ajv/ceA ^ncpeSei^coKa# [[r] [

200 TTCOCTOvjvapOVTOC - 7Tepi8eK\r]po c[pLKpLvrj

rjvrjS] ’eTnKXlrflpovyapLovTeKcuyevovlc

C

K0u]S (f)Opav[o] LK€iO rjTOC p^KCTl

[2 — 3] [ ]dy€T,€LCpl€COVTaTcbV€A€vde[p(lUV

[4-5] 7TPa[ ]T€TOLCTOTCHOV^Toj9,app.6c€[

205 SoKcoJSecoi [ ]7rpoc#ecorayrcoporei[r

]</>atV[erat ] am' [

cf)] povei[c]e[pLov

j3€\TiOVei]Ko[T]a)Cc[wVVLpiOL\8oK€LC ] [

210 Aeyeiro] poorip [7iap] eyeponr pay para

TOtODTo] Tp67TOVTLp,av9dvU)TOVTOVTlVa OTTTeovj'veiipiTpoca aveXPovTLpo [t eipL7]TLC ] €v8oy€ CTIV [o] oSeic'TUy'p 8ao[c

OLcoLpiacf)'] Lo[v8]ec7TOT [ ] nap [eyy] ay 215 peAAeic] Ticrj8bKrj a [ J + ]eyd) :

arKaiAa/3]co77OT’epyor77Te0r[p] k€tlc etr’a^orpe] yeirSelpic^drouKey orrap [e rjT€TOKeT(jo]vev8ovKvo'v cancXadpa 9 i 9] vovcie^aTTLvrjc • aAA’oiyopai

kclk pat; c / a)

220 a7TicoreycoT]7)cSoc: r ptac.'7r[ ]t v9e [

\xa/

payeLp’aveX] 9[e : r]w§eTiSoKcoco[i]7Toel[r Xa^eracpay] cup [a] C7ra [iSa] piov9arTOVTjOT [e Spaypcor] Tptdjvrj [X9ov8i ’rj] pepcorSeKa epyovXa/3 ] cor • cop, rjv [eyeir] ravracveKpoc

]ev

225 eA^comce] /cAo/aaca[ ] [ ]/3'a

5+]...

TaoracrotouToo] cop/3e [(84] koto kokou roicerSonepocu] AckA[ Joucacopcor 14 + ]eK(/> [p] eLCKGVT] [r

T-pvXrjKv9ovpep ] rp [co] xaipov [7rapa] A a/3 cor 230 ToioDTorouc7rir$] "pp’apiCTetS^rS’eyco VTnppeTr]v8LKaLovo\ipopaLC eyco

*

4094. MENANDER, ASPIS (AND OTHER PLAYS?) 1 1

170-198 horizontal fibres.

171 The nota personae for Daos was at first mistaken for S’; cf. Sam. 375, 383 in B.

x73 An °dd correction, when only -ov- for -o- is needed (cf. 218), and with a new error of its own: was -n-Ae'oi' eXovra perhaps once a gloss or a variant? Something above -ova8- looks like roira; doubtful ink above -eA-. End. r ep.ov B, variously corrected to y cp,ov, ye p.ov and rt p.ov; here r rather than r’, y or y’, and an upright for t rather than e. For B s t see Dysk. 337 {vvp.<f)’ov — vvp.<J>Cov) and Aspis 73.

175 p-cr pia(ipLC B.

176 oiKorpiSa and vodcv and rwiya^ouc B: vvv (accent by m1) for vvvOyp

1 7 9 1 82 Stripped surface and warping at the right-hand side of the column make much of what survives uncertain, but sometimes it is hard or impossible to reconcile with B.

1 79 ] . ! apparently a circumflex over a vertical; ink on line after tj; all odd, and like nothing in B.

1 80 rain-fa] is credible; I can confirm nothing before it.

1 81 The acute accents, if righdy identified, do not square with B’s line-ending; B has the trivial mis¬ spelling cttlSt].

182 ovciay is acceptable, but there is something after it (? eyw) and not enough space before it for B’s ravr’, and hardly even for rrjv.

184 Could be TovroLc in spite of the accent (see below on 186); if ott cp Srj followed it was widely spaced. But tovtov or tovtov [y’ could have been there.

1 86 The circumflex on raOr^v might derive from a hyphen written above the line to indicate -*a ravT-qv as opposed to kot’ avT-qv : for this rarity, see on 4093 14. But ravrac (sic) 224 and tovtolc (?) 184 make one wonder; rain' rjv can hardly have been meant, any more than tout’ in 187.

188 Before c , right hand side of w or 9; but opdw'c' fits the space and traces better than would opdoc, which B has wrongly.

1 89 is omitted without trace, possibly because of the likeness of its ending 8 okci to 1 88 c8ci.

191 to yvwd i cavrov is acceptable.

192 t’ B, better than S’.

!93a represents a fine lost by damage at the foot of the page in B; we now know it was one not two. The paragraphos should indicate an interruption or aside within the line by Smikrines; Aao]c appears to be marked as resuming at the beginning of 194, as suits what can be made of the sense.

] . . 1 the accent stands over a letter with high ink and follows one with a curve on the line; after the £aP> ]*yw> ] Je'rai, perhaps ]e :co. After o>, dot of high ink; end, -A[iy]c or perhaps -A77 [ with nothing lost.

For the interjection, a possible restoration is coc [vwjecTdADpJc [apa, ‘How remarkably restrained!’, which would suit both Smikrines’ tendency to interject and his dry manner (see, e.g., 33, 48, 391 ff.); but, other uncertainties apart, Daos’ immediately preceding words remain (to me at least) impenetrable.

1 94 cwy suits, the accent being clear; the diastole of S’ is not clear, nor is it in B, to judge from the plate of ed. pr., but the particle is acceptable if the interjection is aside or ignored, and B’s cov8’eip.ai8o[ (the last being left half of a round letter), which had been variously corrected, is now recognizable as a corrupt derivative of ccuv 8 cl pc So[0y]ai (less likely Se[t£]cu), perhaps with tt p'a[yparcvv next, if the interlinear loop over a represents p for n pa- not wap-. It is easy to complete the sense with something like fiovXci Ao'yov, not so easy to see how to go on.

195 7r[a]yrac looks obvious even without B; but is that wav rac or 7 ravrac, and — particularly if rrdvrac — what are the implications for 194? deparralvac replaces the 6epa[novr]ac conjectured from B, which then offers ecTi [, and suggests ‘the maidservants can tell all’ as a possible sense, with ecTiv eltrciv or the like.

196 cwp.ar]a (from B) in this context presumably means ‘slaves’; ped’ coy and the beginning of cXapf Savov make it possible to see that B has pc9[ e\]ap.fiavovr and not p.cy[, ktX. One asks how these ca>p,ara relate to the depa-nalvac was it rac dcpa-naCvac .... raXXa re \ ccopcara? The accent makes cXap,(iavov I St person singular or third plural active: perhaps then ‘with whom I got the gold’, to xpvctov — referring back to 34-6, 138-41 and 150, and looking forward, as does the whole context, to 391 ff.

197 Before ccnv, what looks like the end of a high horizontal with traces of interlinear ink above; cTjfjct’eTrccr[i B. Perhaps er- was corrected to err-, er’ ccnv, though not a reading of merit, would be consistent with the accent; but in any case there is fresh discouragement for the conjecture crcccrr]c ■ ‘crjp.cf hie de signis ad areas tabellasque obsignandas ponitur (LSJ s.v. cpp.ciov I 7)’ observes Austin ad loc. The seals on the boxes of coins and plate supposedly guarantee that the consignment is intact and according to the porters’ inventory; Daos can check with them for Smikrines; and as he suggests next, can list any deals made abroad which

12

COMEDY

might affect the totals. Somewhat grimly (as it seems to me) Smikrines is made to reflect to himself at 154 f. that ‘an exact reckoning will be possible so long as the porters are slaves’.

At the end, cuv[ is to be divined rather than read on abraded and twisted fibres; between that and the preceding -nv, traces and space suggest one letter rather than two or more; above, what may be interlinear ink rather than detached feet of letters from above. Sandbach quotes oca with approval from Del Corno, which fits with B and gives good sense: de nostro ambigitur.

199— 23 1 vertical fibres

The original page number is the left-hand one; for some reason, perhaps early superficial damage, it was done again in larger style and paler ink to the right; each time, as EGT specifically remarked, there are traces of a third character suitable to make PMF, 143.

199 Before correction, Kadevo [, can perhaps be made out; there is a stroke across the presumed v; then ]r’o[ above gives at least part of an articulated version of B’s Kadevonov: compare 173.

201 yapcov B, rightly; the singular arising by assimilation, enucXripov yapov ... ycvouc; cf. Dysk. 577 in B.

202 The interlinear sigma gives Sia^opac (rightly) with B, the nu not deleted. The blank space of two letters before p-pKen may have been due to poor surface.

203 There is too much space for Aaov, as B; tovtov would fit, but the trace of ink under 8 of 202 is uninformative.

204 If e, abnormal; but in any case the space does not suit B’s av-roicSe. A large 6 ’ (compare the style of the second page-number) is written over the -to of tolovto : -tov B, with a lighter, not necessarily preferable, rhythm; the iota of oic is cramped, perhaps added at the same time.

205 ap.apTav€ iv from B: the variant (whichever alternative one chooses) is a substitution, not a graphic mistake, of the class of ‘fresh woods/ fields and pastures new’, or pepei/yevei at Dysk. 767 as discussed in BIOS 26 (1979) at p. 84. ayvcvpovclv, used as at Samia 637 and Apollodoros 7 KA, is arguably right as the less obvious word, but the one more apt to the speaker and the situation.

209 Not cLKOTcoc : , as B. Traces after the end of the line could be the nota personae for Smikrines, but that is not verifiable: cf. 213. The change of speaker within the line may have been unmarked, or possibly marked after cv, against B but satisfactory.

210 6 ]pov (with B) is to be read, not -ai c, as Austin conjectured; at the end, npaypara with B, not “pr/ ■napcyc po 1 TTpaypar’ ” 7} as was conjectured by me.

21 1 The regular accentuation is towvtotpottov, B’s error tolovtovtpottov was corrected by Page, tovtcvv B, rightly.

213 Speaker’s name in right margin for a change within the line; but the double point to mark it is lost, if any was used.

215 eyai (sic), strangely; after it, lower dot of dicolon survives. ^Si/ra (by haplography) and -roveycv (cf. 204) B.

218 ]v, given by the vertical; tctokctlc B wrongly, from Kvovcanc following.

219 ei t’ovkctX 9v— (B) is metrically suspect {leg. ovyl ?), but the space available here suits it; for -ova. see on 173.

220 Apparendy 8vc[Tro]Topt.ac ; above the line, as one can guess, *KaKo-rrpa^tac, relating to the known KaKOTTpayia as does its opposite cvirpa^Ca to evirpayla) this would scan as a substitute for tt)c Svcnorpi'ac, and could possibly be taken as an exclamation, like the ar/SCac of Dysk. 435, if there were any good reason not to think of it as a gloss. It puts such variants as that in 205 in an interesting light. In mid-line, lower dot only of the dicolon; abrasion follows; traces, as of a speaker’s name, above the line before an oblique stroke (so in 221 following). At the end, tv dew [y or rov9ew[v before correction.

221 cot is omitted by B and was restored in this position by Gallavotti and Jacques.

224 ravrac- vacpoc B: there is support for the suspected ravrac (for its accent, see on 186), but no sign of punctuation (though the surface is rubbed). vacpoc is in a paler ink and looks like an addition made at the stage of revision; I am not sure that the handwriting is different. For the possibility of Tavrac . . . ravrac with repetition see Perik. 17 1 fi/361 f. and Sandbach ad loc.

225 High d°t °f ink for k; atjirj p-r/r ai is t0° short to fill the space before jSt'a, and a. vacpoc /3., which might be thought of, is too long: a^p^ra/har B. ]-ev above the line suggests a verb-ending, as aveiAjev, avrjpTTacev.

4094. MENANDER, ASPIS (AND OTHER PLATS?) 1 3

226 Above the line, perhaps cv(n}f}[atvov]T<x, glossing the perfect, but the last three are quite unclear.

227 Probably «A[a]- not «A[ai]-; B has /<Aai- in what looks, from the plate, like an overwriting of /cctA-' before that I'epocv \ecv, wrongly.

228 KaiKOTTTop.€vacyvvaiKac (B) is much too long; the repeated -ac probably caused the copyist’s eye to jump, with the effect of omitting the eight letters acyvvaiK.

231 The accent on eyto is unclear, but cf. 215.

E. W. HANDLEY

4095. Comedy

7 iB.3/B(b) 4 x4.8 cm Third century

A scrap, written in a decent right-sloping Severe Style; punctuation by high stop (5?) and double point (6, 8); elision unmarked 3?, scriptio plena 2 and (at change of speaker) 6, 8?. The back is blank.

I he line-ends which are certainly such can all be interpreted as iambic. The dicola suggest dialogue, tva at line end (if to be recognised) comedy; the oath vi ) rd> 9e do (7) suggests comedy, and a female speaker, who may be the person named or addressed as Hippostrate (5, 8).

We have been able to use a first transcript by Sir Eric Turner.

] .rd

]aouyeva[

] AAiva ] eyeLvercu

mrocTparr] •

] va: a oAAvc [

] rjT a>deoj

: LTTTrocTpaTr]\

]a ovy era

]e yeiVerai

T-mrocTparr]

] va: a 77 oAAuc [

] yrj rdi deu)

: 'Ittttoct paTp [

1 ] , short thick oblique at line-level; after a gap, end of high horizontal joining y at two-thirds height 3 ] , a or A, loop of a probably visible 5 ] . . > first, high ink, perhaps upper right-hand arc of circle;

second, point (top of upright?) level with tops of letters End, the stop may be a delusion 6 ] ,

upright, thin horizontal joining from left at one-third height (i.e. ai, Ai rather than y, ei?) a , upright some way to the right c [, concave trace high in line? 7 ] , upright, perhaps descending oblique joining

from left at base 8 ] , last, high loop ( p ?) 9 ]..[.],.[> above the last trace apparently ai

suprascript

i4

COMEDY

i Probably ] eye [.

3 dAA’ iva at line end Men. Epitr. 868 S. Or Kpvcr]dAAiva? (The word not apparendy in comedy, but of artifacts commonly enough elsewhere.)

5 ' ImrocrpaTri : nominative or vocative? Perhaps a stop at the end, but faint. The name sounds aristocratic (Aristoph., Nub. 64; Philemo fr. 69.2 KA). To judge from TLG, it does not appear in literary sources; but LGPN W (1994) 238 quotes nine instances from Athens in the fourth and third centuries.

6 Apparendy jaiva or JAiva (but metre seems to exclude -AJAira after 3): e.g. i-ctAJaira. The double point was added by a second hand (it straddles the tail of a). At the end, anoAAuc [ , not anoAAve [. The final trace is very uncertain. If rightly seen, it tells against d-7rdAAi;ci[ (which in any case makes difficulties with the metre), and d-n-dAAucafi (one would expect to see part of the bow of a); anoAAvco would suit, but we have not found the form attested.

C. F. L. AUSTIN- P. J. PARSONS

II. MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

4096. Mythographus Homericus

123/67 Fr. j ^.8 x 7 cm Second century

This lot consists of 77 fragments from a papyrus roll, written in a neat, round hand similar to E. G. turner’s GMAW - no. 22. The writing is strictly bilinear, except for p and i jj, no shading. 1 he paragraphus sign (> — ) separates sections; diairesis over 1 is also used. Only relatively small fragments remain, and it is therefore not possible to determine the exact height of a column. As for its width, it must have been ca. 8 cm. The back of the roll is blank.

The fragments contain mythological explanations or anecdotes to books 18 to 24 ol Homer s Iliad. It is not possible to say whether our roll covered a broader span. Many fragments remain unidentified and could (but must not necessarily) belong to stories told in the Scholia earlier. The unknown compiler of this commentary is now called the Mythographus Homericus. His work was included in the D-Scholia of the Iliad , available to us in the 1517 edition of J. Lascaris (Rome). Most of the mythological stories are to be found also in Dindorf’s edition of the A-Scholia (vol. II (Oxford 1875): books 13 to 24), in a very similar form. Extracts quoted below come from the Lascaris edition, with a few exceptions, where Prof. Montanari’s updated text is being used.

Fragments from the Mythographus Homericus are preserved on other papyri, a list of which was published last by B. Kramer in P. Hamb. Ill 199; she also provides a very useful survey of the topic, with abundant bibliographical material. See also F. Montanari, Atti del XVII congresso internazionale di papirologia (Napoli 1983), Napoli 1984, vol. II, p. 229-242 and Proceedings of the XVIIIth International Congress of Papyrology (Athens 1986), Athens 1988, vol. I, p. 337-344.

A new item should be added to Kramer’s list: LVI 3830, which covers stories on books 7 and 8 of the Iliad. It was also found that P. Lit. Lond. 142 ( = Pack2 1188), relating a story on II. 9, 447, actually belongs to the same roll as 3830. Additional remarks on this papyrus were published by M. W. Haslam in BASP 27 (1990) 31-36, and by W. Luppe in Gnomon 64 (1992) 291—293.

Mythological stories found in books 18 to 24 are listed below, with the correspond¬ ing fragment numbers:

Passage fr. contents

2

18, 319 (18, 432

1

On the word kXa prj^oXoc (‘shooting deer’).

Phocus’ birth and name: story unparalleled in the D-Scholia.)

16 Passage	fr.	MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS contents
18, 486	I +2	The Pleiades.
18, 487	—	Zeus’ love for Callisto, and her subsequent catasterism.
i9> 119	—	Zeus’ love for Alcmene; the respective births of Eurystheus and Heracles.
20, 3	—	On the place KaXXtKoXcXvr).
20, 307	—	Aphrodite’s intercourse with Anchises.
20, 403-404	3	The origin of the epithet 'EXckwvloc applied to Poseidon.
21, 194 (?)	4	Heracles’ fight with Oeneus for Deianira’s hand (?).
21, 447	5 + 6	The origin of the epithet vop.Loc applied to Apollo.
22, 29	7	Catasterism of Icarius, Erigone and her dog.
22, 126	—	The exposure of children.
23, 92	8 + 9	Story of a golden vase belonging to Achilles.
23, 141-2	10	Peleus sacrifices Achilles’ hair.
23, 346-7	10	Conception of Arion.
23, 660	—	The proud Phorbas.
23, 683 (?)	1 1	On the word £cap,a (?).
24, 24	1 1	Conception of Hermes and his relation to theft.
24, 602	12	Niobe’s pride.

Of these stories, only 20, 403-404 overlaps with a previously known fragment from the Mythographus Homericus; see below fr. 3.

Each section begins with a quotation of the Homeric text that is to be commented on. Then comes the commentary itself, followed by information on the source, in the form rj S’ IcropCa Trapa toj Seivi.

The text of the corresponding D-Scholia is given in the commentary. Passages directly paralleled by the papyrus fragments are printed in bold.

Fr. 1

] 7TOLC [

] Seareic[

JaYjjoJ avrdc e[

] v crparriyl 5 ] €V(j)VCeiXeTOTT][

]8e cj)(jOKTj y€vojjLev\j]

]ev. 17 S’ efvJ'yVuoc y€vo[p,evr] ereKe ^valSa ov Kdi St a tt)v [j uerapiop— (fxjociv <Pu)kov vpoc[r]y6pevce.

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

io i 7 S’ IcTopCa Trapa @€OTr[opLTT(p.

]IlAr]i<x8ac. [] ’ArXac [e]!c tlo[v r^yav— 18, 486 tcuv p^iyOcic IJAei6v[rj rij ’Qkc—

]avoO ecyev kma [dvyarepac ]vrjv MepOTTr][v

!5 ] TTaV77[

] 9'a'vae [

]cMT.l

]Aoyo [

] ,a°[

2 ] , low speck next to bottom of following S, perhaps part of an upright 4 ] [ , bottom part of

descender ] v, speck on loose fibre 15 ] r, flat low trace, could suit a ] , two ink traces at middle

level 1 6 ] . , top part of an upright [ , first letter, bottom horizontal, S ?; second, low flat trace

17 . [> top and bottom parts of curve, e suggested, 9 possible 18 [, ink speck on edge of break

19 ] right end of top horizontal, r or y

Fr. 2 col. i

18, 319

. ]

] cav€7r[

5 javre [ ]c7fA[ ]

] rjTOVVTO)v[

] [ ] fioAeLajv >

] Tarot' > ApTe]pu8i t a[t)]ra 10 ] v 9edv Kai

If [re] vOev ev JAatav Kai ay^at k\acf)ri]^6Xov KXrjdrjv [a] 1 ] kAd(f> u)v ctf atp[

15 rj §’ tcropta] Trapa [Cat] Kpdrei[

[

col. ii 18, 486

] .[..].*<?[

] .[.].ve[

S[ ]eray[ rrpocay [opev vocclS[ avTO) e[ eiSov a[

Vac V7TO [

TO) A u [

Zevc KaT[eXcrjcac avrac ttc—] Xeidha[c kiroC-pce Sta rrj v a[ yatv Kar\rjCTcpiccv jtttaf rd)[f ]fO/xa/< [

] aiovTrpo[

i8

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

Col. i: 3 ] 8e , a speck at mid-level next to e 4 ] , an upright, prob. 4, possibly 1, v or p. 5 . [ > top left trace, perhaps r ] , a tiny trace of ink 6 ] 17, a tall, rather narrow letter with a rounded

upper part; Kvvr^yrjTovvruiv not possible [ ] , a low speck 7 ] [, speck, upper right part of a

letter ] y3, flat low trace 9 ]p, an upright with ends thicker than middle; could be joined either at

top (e.g. p) or at bottom (e.g. v) 10 ] , a low speck 1 1 ] cv[, first letter, a descender reaching

underneath the line, (/> or </i; third, a bottom left speck

Col. ii: 1 [ , a low speck at the edge of the break ] , flat horizontal, would suit S, but hardly probable

2 [ , rounded trace at mid-level ] , low speck, perhaps 8, a or A 9 [ , half circle with open end

pointing right, c or 0 15 [, low speck joined to the low right leg of k

col. i col. ii

Phocus 18, 432

Pleiades 18, 486

Fr. 1

k\a<j>r]fi6Aoc	Pleiades
18, 319?	18, 486

Fr. 2

Fr. 1

I- 10 These lines deal with the conception and the naming of Phocus. Neither the D-Scholia nor the A-scholia preserve this story, which must have alluded to 18, 432. In this passage, Thetis complains that she is the only Nereid to have been forced to have intercourse with a mortal (i.e. Peleus, father of Achilles). The Mythographus Homericus must have told at that point the story disproving Thetis’ claim. Phocus is a son of Aeacus, and therefore a half-brother of Peleus and Telamon. According to one story, Psamathe, a Nereid, trying to escape Aeacus, took the appearance of a seal (^co/07) but was nevertheless raped by him and gave birth to a child who was named Phocus; see Schol. Eur. Andr. 687 and Apollod. Bibl. 3, 1 2, 6. Although these two accounts follow the same source, they do not correspond to the text given by the Mythographus Homericus. This episode is also briefly alluded to in a scholion to II. 16, 14; however, this seems not to be the same account either. The Mythographus Homericus quotes as the source of his own story Theop[ompus], i.e. of Chius, the historian, whom he quotes also in the narrative attached to II. 1.38 (FGrH 1 15 F 350).

I I— 19 This is the beginning of a long section on the Pleiades, the seven daughters of Atlas, one of the Giants, and Pleione, daughter of Oceanus. Of the seven Pleiades, the name of Merope and perhaps of Alcyone (1. 14) is preserved. However, Jvtjv in line 14 could be part of the word povrjv: Merope was the only daughter of Pleione to have married a mortal (Sisyphus). But the absence of this detail in the text of the scholia speaks against the idea.

D-Scholia: FlX-qlaSac (II. 18, 486). HirXac etc raiv Piy avrcov, pi fyelc (sic Lascaris; read piytic) IIX-qiovT] rfi 'Qtccavov cc\c dvyarcpac enrd a'i rr/v ira pdcvcCav dyanrjcacai cvvcKvvr/yovv rf] 'AprcpiSi. dcacdpcvoc 8c 'IXpCiov ripacdri Kal c8u vkcv avrac piyr/vac fiovXopcvoc. ai 8c ncpiKaraX^nroL yiyvopcvai dcolc rjv^avro pcrafiaXciv n)v (f>va.v. Zevc Se eAeijcac avrac ncXciaSac k-noCrjcc, Kai Si’ avrebv aerpov fcar-rjcrepicev. covop.acdricav 8c IIXT]L'd8€c and nXri'iovqc rf/c p.T)rpdc avribv. <f>aci 8c ’ HXcKrpav ov j3ovXop,cvr}v tt)v ’IXiov nop6r)ci.v dcacacdai to {to} KrCcp-a eirai rcbv anoyovwv KaraXmclv rov ronov evda Karr)CTCpicTO, 8t6ncp oucac nporepov cmd yeveeda 1 If. 4 Icropta napa role kvkXlkoic [Titanom. fr. 14 Bernabe; p. 74 fr. 2 Davies],

For another fragment possibly belonging to the passage on 18, 486, see fr. 9.

Fr. 1

5 cp,<j>vc cLycro, ‘fastened himself on her and held on? ep</>iic is used of the rapist (Apollo) at Eur., Ion 891.

7 cv begins the line, to judge from the alignment with 9-10. Presumably it forms the end of a verb meaning ‘had intercourse with’; but e.g. eTrAijciacjev, cwf)A0] cv are excluded by the rules of syllable-division.

4096. MYTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

l9

Fr. 2

Col. i. This section deals apparently with the word eXappfioXoc found in II. 18, 319. There is no parallel to be found in the scholia. The epithet eXafafloXoc is applied to the goddess Artemis; see e.g. h. Horn. XXVII 2, Plut. De sollertia animalium 966 A. Elaphebolion is also the name of an Athenian month (roughly March), named after Artemis.

12 ]A might perhaps be ]8; ayp,ai seems clear (not aKpai or aiypai.). Probably both words should be epithets of Artemis.

‘5 V S’ IcTopia] napa [Cw] KpdTet. The grammarian Socrates wrote a treatise called iniKXijceic decbv; see RE IIIA, 807 (A. Gudeman, 1927). This is the probable origin of the story told in our fragment.

Col. ii. This is another part of the story of the Pleiades (see fr. 1). As they have been turned into stars, one of them (p.iav, 1. 1 4.), Electra, leaves the group, which explains why there are either only six left, or seven, of which one is very faint.

Fr. 3

]?y .[

avrap] 6 dyfx[6v ai'c]6e [/cat 20, 403— 404

rjpvyev to]c [o]re ra[vpoc ] f/[pv]yev eA/eOjtxev] oc EXlkcov^lov ap](f)i a[va/cra.

5 iVJetAei/c 6 i£[d] Spou /card

Xprjcpidv] AttoXXcdvoc ecre[iAev a770t/cta]v ano re Adrjvcb[v Kai rf/c 'AyaiK]f)c EXCkt/c etc Me[(Xr]TOv ]acya)v ttjc e/ce[

10 lepov t8p]ucaro 77ocet8d/[voc Kai EXlkcXv\lov 7 Tpocpyopelyce.

1 [ , low speck

The text of the scholia offers quite a good parallel to this section. The Mythographus Homericus explains the use of the epithet ' EXlko>vi.oc as applied to Poseidon. Clitophon, the source of this study, is otherwise unknown.

This story is also to be found, although in a slightly different formulation, in P. Berol. 13282, discussed by F. Montanari in Atti del XVII congresso intemazionale di papirologia (Napoli 1983), Napoli 1984, vol. II, p. 229—242. With the help of the Oxyrhynchus fragment, I propose to restore lines 4-8 of P. Berol. 13282 verso in the following way:

4 NeiXeiic 6]

5 Ko{v}8pov p ia[v]reCa[v Aa/3cov anoLKiav ecreiAev &)]

6 ’Adrjvwv Kai ■/■[•»)] c [M^cu/cijc 'EX(kt)c Kai a vacyarv]

7 rf/c yf/c i'epdv II[ocei.8cbvoc iSpvcaro Kai and roO]

8 ev rfi Agai.K[fi ' EXCkt) rep-evovc 'EXi.ku)Viov 7773005]

[y 6 peace. . .

In line 6, Montanari’s exempli gratia proposal of Kai t[t)]c ['EXCk^c etc. seems unlikely, Ti)c is needed only because AgaiKT/c specifies which Helike is being dealt with (i.e. not the town of Thessaly quoted by Hesiod,

20

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

Scut. 381 and Strabo 8, 7, 2, p. 385). Otherwise, one would expect A6yvd>v Kai 'EXlktjc. Montanari must be right in saying that the text of P. Berol. 13282 was more concise than that of the scholia. The destination of the airoiKia (etc MiXyrov Kai ryv Kapiav) was probably omitted. The Oxyrhynchus fragment offers a participle ]acycuv; I doubtfully restore avacywv (or Kara- ‘landing’ or pera- ‘sharing’).

D-Scholia: ate S’ ore ravpoc | ypuyev kXKopevoc 'EXlkwvlov dp/f>i avaKTa (20, 403— 404). (...) (quoted from Montanari, A tti Congr. Napoli II, p. 241) y Se Icropia aiiry. NyXevc 6 KoSpov, ypycpov Xafiow, airoiKiav ecretAev etc MiXyrov Kai ryv Kapiav e£ Adyvdiv Kai rye Ayau.Kf/c EXiKyc. napayevopevoc Se etc ryv Kaplav, iepov 77ocetSa>voc iSpvcaro, Kai ano tov ev 'EXlk7} reptevouc 'EXlkoivlov npocyyopevce. 80/cet Se enav Ovcuci toj ded >, fior/cavTcov pev j3od)v npocSeyecdai to ddov ryv ffvdav, ciycovTcov 8i XvirovvTai Kai pyvi etv vopi^ourcc. 17 icTopla : napa KXcLTOfpdiVTi.

Fr. 4

]caurou7r[

]pov ep8[

]covvo8[

] a/xaX 9[

5 "]..[

4 ] , speck 5 ] [ , first letter, flat top; second, a mere high speck

4 The only clue to the identification of this fragment might be apaX6[. The letters suggest the name ApaXdeca, which is found in the scholia (21, 194).

The scholion tells the story of the river-god Acheloos, who fought with Heracles for Deianira’s hand. Acheloos had taken the shape of a bull, and Heracles succeeded in tearing a horn off Acheloos’ head. The river god gave in, but claimed his horn back; in return, he offered Heracles a horn from the goat Amaltheia, who had wetnursed Zeus as a child. This horn poured out flowers and fruits and was equated with the cornucopia.

D-Scholia: rtp oure (sic Lascaris; ouSe' in standard text) tcpeicov AyeXcuioc ico</>apt'£et (21, 194). 'HpanXyc etc Aidov k aTcXO (jjv em tov Kcpfiepov cvvcrvyc MtXedypcp Tip Olvetoc, ou Kai 8ey8evToc yypai tt)v a8eX(/>yv Ayiaveipav etraveA 8d)V etc <pd)c ccttcvccv etc Alt ojXCav npoc Otvea. KaraXafiibv Se pvycrcvopevyv [l.e. -vov Bekker] Tyv KOpyv AyeXipov tov nXyciov noTapov SiemaAecev [i.e. -7raAatcev] avTw ravpov pop<f>yv ZyovTL, ov Kai dnoc-ndcac TO €T€pov TU1V K€paTaiv eAa/Se ryv napdevov. (pad Se avTov tov AyeXipov nap’ ApaXdeCac tt/c ’Qk^ovov Ktpac XafdovTC t Sovvai Tip HpaKXd teat to lSlov arroXafidv. 8ok€l Se t&jv ev Ty 'EXXa8i noTapdjv pey lctoc etvat o AyeXwoc' Sio teat 7iav v8cop Ty tovtov npocyyopta KaXeirai. icTOpd Elwhapoc [fr. 249a, p. 77 SM],

Amaltheia appears also in another mythological story, on 15, 229. But all our fragments bear on books 18 to 24, and it seems therefore quite unlikely that a fragment on book 15 would have been preserved, but nothing else in the gap between books 15 and 18.

Fr.5

col. i

vdj/xiov ov[ ]a [

col. ii

V7]Vp[

9a(j)op[

rec Kai t [ 7rapet,p,e[ ]a re cv[

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

21

fie]fi\riKaci Kada ATro\\68]u)poc kvOevSe ] deopovvTec io ] tovtov Kara

] avTipvSeKa aJAoyojv l,(pu)v

(f>rjciv Kal "0p,rj—

poc 'ovprjac p,ev 7rpto] rov [e7i ]a>yero 15 /cat Kvvac apyouc”] e ctclv

”]f [

auTOu[

aneXacrj ra[e|[ 7 tclAol ttclio [ /card Trjv e [ recep.ev[

/cat [ ]t7v§[

,a^r[ _ ] . . [

. vy[ fit

Col. i: 1 ] c , first letter, a descending curve, a suggested, S also possible; third and fourth, only faint traces of ink ] /3, a low speck linked to /S 6 oy[ ] a [, some form of ovopa or ovopd^ew? 9 9eo-, 1. 6ea>-. 10 ] , speck at mid-level 1 1 ] , low speck r 3 ] , low flat end of a letter, linked

to the following <f>; a? x5 ] . first letter, a high trace; second, top of a curve open on the right, e

or c; fourth, two low specks at a rather wide interval, perhaps even two letters 16 [ , two low specks

Col. ii: 3 [ , first letter an oblique ascending stroke; second, a high rounded speck; third, horizontal

stroke at mid-level with specks of ink above (perhaps e) 6 ]a , second letter a mere low trace of ink

7 , first letter, bottom part of a descender with perhaps a horizontal linked to its left at mid level (17 ?);

second, low part of an upright from a narrow letter, probably 1; third, horizontal stroke at mid level with trace of ink above (if e, no trace of bottom part remains) 9 ot , third letter a low speck at some

distance from 1 [ , corner pointing top left, n or y 10 tt)v, of v only a tiny low speck remains

[ , three specks that could suit a curving letter, e.g. 0 1 1 [ , low speck 12 [ , low speck

13 a, high, narrow, rounded speck ] [ , first letter middle part of an upright, second top left part of a curving letter, e, 6, o, c 1 4 , trace of ink on loose fibre

Fr. 6

M(?J[

fi^ovAopie > [

] vpaypLaToc [

].PR°>\p]€va [

5 ]dedv <f>vA a—

Ka > Karecraj—

7Tpoca]yopevcavT€c [

] ojvt a/v[

1 ], remains of a roof-shaped letter, perhaps a 4 ] , a speck at mid-level, adjoining a steeply

descending curve 8 ] , high speck 9 ] [ , first letter, top of a curve; second, two ink traces at

mid-level

22

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

Fr. 6 is detached from fr. 5, but must have followed immediately. The first column explains why Apollo was called vopLoc , i.e. ‘pastoral’. This story is paralleled by one in a scholion to II. 21, 447. However, the word vopioc itself is not found in the verse. According to men of older times, plague came from Apollo. Since it came first through animals (aXoya £(pa), they called Apollo vopLoc for apotropaic purposes. The commentator bases his argument on a Homeric verse that says that ‘(Apollo) first smote the mules and the dogs’ (II. 1 , 50). The explanation comes from Apollodorus. This scholar had a keen interest in the names of deities in the Homeric texts. It seems very probable that the information found in our fragment comes from Apollodorus’ Flepi 0ewv. See R. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship (Oxford 1968), pp. 260—3.

D-Scholia: ‘f’oijSe, ci) 8’ elXCnoSac cXlkoc jSouc /S ovKoXeecKec (21, 448). pad tov AndXXcova KCKXfjcdaL vopiov 8 id TOLavTtjv alrCav. oi naXaLol toxic Xoipovc e£ AnoXXoivoc ivop u(ov vac Se Xoifj.dc and twv dXoyojv apyerai. cue prjcL Kai "Oprjpoc ' “oupfjac pev npaiTOV enwyeTo Kai Kvvac hpyovc” . fiovXopevoL ovv tov dedv Svewnelv Iva rove XoLpovc anooTpcprj. vopiov Kai pvXatca twv fiocKTjpaTWV eKaXecav, odev TjSvvaTO "Oprjpoc clnclv “e^ovKoXrjce napa AaopeSovTi Kai ASpr/TCp innopdpfirjcev” . ovtwc icTopel AnoXXoSwpoc (FGrH 244 F 95-9 p. 1057].

The second column is not yet identified.

Fr. 7

]*v[

].??".[

]..[

3 ] , roof-shaped top of letter [ , high left end of horizontal

The light decoration above and under 1. 2 indicates that the commentary has reached a new book of the Iliad. One very tempting reading would thus be rop.o]c y [> he. book 22. The first mythological story recorded in the Scholia for this book bears on v. 29; but the letters read in 1. 3 of our fragment do not concord with the beginning of the text in the Scholia.

D-Scholia: OV TC KXJV QpLWVOC (22, 29). TOV CLCT pOJOV KVVa OVTOJC €(J> Tj. CVLOL 8e pLICL TOv8e TOV KC1TTJCT C pLC pCVOV K ova OVK ’QpCwvoc aXXd ’HpLyovrje vndpycLv, ov KaTrjcTepLdfjvaL [i.e. KaTacTepicdfjvaL ] Sia Toxav-rqv aWlav. 'iKapioc [i.e. Ik-, and so throughout] ycvoc pev rjv Adrjvaloc ecye Se OvyaTcpa ’HpLyovrjv tjtlc kvvo vrjnLOv CTpepe. £evicac Se 7 rore 6 'IKapioc Alovvcov eXa\ 3e nap’ avTOV olvov re Kai apneXov KXrjpa. Kara Se rac tov 6eov vnodrjKac nepxrjei ttjv yfjv npopaivwv ttjv tov Alovvcov ydpLV eywv cvv eavTw Kai tov k vva. yevopevoc Se cktoc ttjc noXewc, fiovKoXoic oxvov napecye. oi Se adpowc eppopijcapevoL, oi pev elc jladvv vnvov eTpdnrjcav ope re eyepdevTec Kai vopicavrec nepappaydai, tov ’iKapLov aneKTCLvav. 6 Se kv tov vnocTpepac npoc ttjv ’HpLyovrjv 8l’ wpuypov eprjvvcev avTrj to. yevopeva. rj Se padovea to aXrjdec eavrTjv avrjprrjce. vocov Se ev Adrjvaic yevopevrjc, koto, yprjcpov AdrjvaloL tov re iKapcov Kai ttjv HpLydvrjv eviauciai'cuc eyepaLpov ripalc o'i Kai Kar-rjcrepLcdevrec, 'HapLoc pev Bocuttjc eKXrjd tj, HpLyovr) Se Hapdevoc. 6 Se kxjlvv ttjv avrrjv ovopaclav ecyev. icTopel ’E parocOevrjc [cf. frr. 22-7 Powell].

Fr. 8

> .[

<f)i] Ao(/>p6va>[c

]8e 7 rap’ 'Hcf> [atcrou

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

5 a/M(/>op]ea ypuco[w kv Na£]u) yevo/x[

.°p[

0er]tS[t.] fj 6 [e r<p ttouSi e]yapicar[o

lO ] (177007] [

(space)

]..[

i [ , low speck 2 ] . > tiny low trace of ink 7 ] . > high loop, p? 1 2 ] [ , two high specks

In II. 23, 92, Patroclus has asked Achilles to put their bones into the same vase, ypuceoc ap(j)i<j>opcvc. This golden vase was wrought by Hephaestus, who gave it to Dionysus during a stay in the island of Naxos; Dionysus gave it to Thetis, Achilles’ mother. She in turn gave it to her son to hold his bones after his death.

D-Scholia: oic hi icai bcria vwiv &pij copoc (23, 91). Aiovvcoc ’H^cuctov yevopevov kv Na^ip pia twv KvicXaScvv £evicac cXafic nap’ avrov Sc upov xpvceov apiftopia. hioyQcic Si vcrcpov vno AvKovpKov (sic Lascaris; read AvKovpyov) Kai Karafivycuv etc BaXaccav, <j>iXo<f>povwc avrov vno8e{;apivr)c QiriSoc, 'cScokcv avrfj rov T]<f>aicr6- tcvktov ap<f>opia. t) Si rw naiSi kyapCcaro oncuc p .era Bavarov kv avrco anorcdf) rd bend avrov. Icropel Crrjcixopoc [PMGF fr. 234].

Fr. 9

>oy[.].[ ]ot>vop.[ ]oupyo[ ]9rjd 77 [

5 ] O-CTO-t

1 ] [ , bottom part of curve 4 , high speck continued by the horizontal of the following n

3 ]ovpyo[. This line may offer a slim chance of identification. In D-Schol. 23, 92 (see fr. 8), one reads 81a tydeic Si vcrcpov vno AvKovpyov. The other remains do not allow any confirmation of this possibility. A second possibility would be 18, 486, where Lycurgus also appears.

D-Scholia: 'YaSac (18, 486). (...) Zciic k k tov p-ppov ycvvpdevra Aiovvcov. rale AaiScuvici vvp<f>aic rpc<f>civ eSa ikcv ’Apfipoda, Kopuivi Sc, EvScuprj, Aubvp, AicvXri, IIoXv^oi. avrai dpcifiacai rov Aiovvcov nepifjecav ciiv avrtp rrjv cvpcQeicav apncXov vno rov dcov role avO pojnoic yapi^opcvai. AvKovpyoc Si pcypi rrjc daXdccpc cvvcSiw^c rov Aiovvcov. CKcivac Si kXc-qcac b Zeiic Karporcpiccv. p icropia napa ‘PcptKvhp [FGrH 3 F 90b]. (...).

MTTH0GRAPH1C TEXTS

\ ov yevec iv Jojiievoi 8ia r[

] OpOCTOC7Tp\

][ . j'ca/civ[ ]e [

Aly]tAAet)c too [

Jet/^OTcoc y [

]e/c 0apcdA[o]u [ at lv[re]O0ev 6 7rora/x[oc

yet. [17] 8’ icTOpia Trapa [rote to. ]aAt/<a c\v\vypdil)aci

ov8 ’ et] /cer fieroTncOev [Xpei'ova Siov] kXavvoi XlSpr/crov T[ayvv Xtt—

7tov\ oc €K deo(f)iv yevoc r/ev

]Ilocei§cbva kpaedevra TiX\cj)co- 15 ]c[e]'cu'^c rfjc ’ Epeivvoc lttttco a,77et/c[a—

Jc^eVra puyrjvcu avrfj kv 74Aiap— r]a> T-pc BolcotCclc. tt)v S’ evKvov [ yjet'-p^eicat' hrvov yevvr/ccu a>[

]ko [ ]y tovtov 8e 81a to Kpdrt[ c— 20 To]y [etyai J4] peCova KXrjdfjvaL. rd[v 8e

Konpea MAi] apron /3aciAea

A aflciv au]roy irapa TIo\c€i8(bvoc ]Se jfCo77p[ |'e',a[

77a] pay top-pea [

25 ] €7T [

24

Fr. 10

5

23> 346-347

1 ] , two dots one above the other, right part of c? [, upright joined at top by a horizontal, -n or y 4 [ . .]> first letter a mere smudge, second letter perhaps w [, three bottom level dots at an equal

distance one from another 5 [, low left part of a curve, a? 6 [, top left part of a curve,

perhaps a 8] , right part of a descending oblique, A? 9 ] , first letter, a spot at bottom level-

second, a horizontal at bottom level (S ?); third, a high trace next to the top of the following x 1 3 [ ,

bottom left part of a loop, perhaps a 14 . . . [, first letter, bottom end of a descender; second, low

trace of a short flat stroke; third, bottom trace of a rounded letter, perhaps a 15 «■[> bottom trace of

a descender 19 [, low horizontal stroke, perhaps 8 20 ]y, oblique stroke and right vertical;

at not excluded 21 [, low flat speck 25 [, upright, 1 suggested, y, rj or n possible

4096. MYTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

25

I 10 is is a commentary on II. 23, 141-2, crdc dndvcvdc nvpqc gavd-qv dncxciparo yairqv, rqv pa Lncpyciip norapip rpc<j>c rqXcOowcav. The Mythographus Homericus refers to an old custom by which young men reaching adulthood cut their hair and offered it to rivers. Achilles sacrifices hair to the Thessalian river Sperchius because he himself comes from Pharsalus in Thessaly.

9- 10 [17] 8 icropia napa [roic rd | ]aAi/ca c[v]vy pdi/jaei. The text from the Scholia (r) IcTopCa napa rote ApyoXiKoic evyypa^cveiv, see below) suggests in our papyrus a reading f, S’ Icropia napa [role rd ’Apy]oXiKd cvyypaifiaci. But, although damaged, the letter preceding A is clearly not an omicron, but an alpha. Since the story deals with Pharsalus, a Thessalian town, one could perhaps read 0crr]aXiKd. Several authors wrote ©crraAi/ca, among them the historian Hellanicus. A confusion might have arisen from the fact that he had also written ApyoXixd (see Schol. to II. 3, 75: Icropci EXXdvixoc h> ApyoXiKolc = FGrH 4 F 36).

D-Scholia: aAAoic c oi yc narqp 17 pqearo IhqXcvc (23, 144). Woe Ijv role apyaioic perd to napaxpdcai ri )c vcorqroc rac Kopae anOKcipeiv role norapolc. rovrovc yap kvopi(,ov rdbv dvarpo(j>&v airiovc Aval. Sid ravr-qv Sc T-qv ainav /cat etc rove norapovc vSivp cKopi^ov, tckvojv re ycveccwc Kai naiSorpoifriac olwvdv ndcpcvoi. Sioncp KCU rac AyiXXcaic xopac IlqXevc rovrip Kadiepwcev. qv yap ii < (papcdXov rqc ©crraXiae. q Icropia napa role ApyoAiKolc cvyypa<f)€vcLv.

1 1^25 The story of Areion, Adrastus’ horse (see 23, 346-7), is told in this section. Demeter, trying to escape Poseidon’s love, changed herself into a mare and hid among king Oncus’ horses, in Thelpusa, a town of Arcadia. To no avail: Poseidon too turned into a horse; from their intercourse were born a daughter, whose name was unutterable, and a horse, Areion. This horse was famous for its swiftness. It was given either to Copreus, king of Haliartus (D-Schol.) or to Oncus, a king in Arcadia (Paus. 8, 25, 10), before passing to Heracles.

'5 ’Epcivvoc. Demeter was called Erinys in Thelpusa. See Paus. 8, 25, 4 ff. On the

adjective TiX</>wcaiq as applied to Demeter Erinys, see Schol. Lyc. 1225 = Call. fr. 652 Pfi: ’Oyxaiov ... rov Ti)c Ayp-qrpoc rovreen kpivvivSovc, nap’ ocov kv “ Oyxaic rqc ApxaSiac ’Epivvc Aqpqrqp npdrai, die xai KaXXipayoc- “rqv pev o y' kcncppqvcv ’Epivvi TiX<f>a)caiq” .

20 f Or ro[v | Sc rov AXi\aprov /3.

D-Scholia: oi>S‘ et kcv peromedev Apiova Slov cXavvoi (23, 346). IlocciSidv cpacdcie ’Epiwvoc, perafiaXcbv T-qv avrov <j>vciv dc Innov, kpiyq Kara Boavriav napa rfj TiX<f>ovcq Kpqvq. q Sc cyxvoc yevopevq innov cyevvqccv, oc Sta to Kpancrcvciv Apeiiov CKXqdq. Konpcvc S’ AXiaprov fiaciXevwv noXeioc Boiwriac cXafie Swpov avrov napa IloceiSwvoc. ovroc Sc avrov HpaKXcZ kyapicaro yevopevtp nap’ avrip. rovrip Sc Si ayioviedpcvoe ’ HpaxXqe npoc Kvkvov Apcoc v iov xa8’ im roSpopiav, kvixqccv kv rip rov IlayacaCou AnoXXcuvoc iepip, 0 ken npoc Tpoi^qvi. cW’ verepov avdic^o HpoxX-qc ASpdcnp rov nwXov napceycv. k<j>’ ov povoe o ’ASpacroe ck roil ©qpaiKov noXcpov Siccivdq rdiv aXXwv dnoXopcvwv. q icropia napa rote kvkXikoic [Theb. F 6C Davies, 8 Bernabe ].

Fr. 1 1

] vcltovt[

] fiaev-n [

] ^(jD/juar [

] rr/ccuode [

] €Lcrjyr]cac[

] TOUce7ra[

]S’ Icropia 7T [apa

23, 683 ?

V]

]

]/<Aei/iai S’ or[pv]v[ecKOv eucKorrov Apye\i(f)6vTr]v. ACa [epaedev—

]ra MaCac rfjc ArAa[vr( Soc

24, 24

26

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

]tc yap Kai cuxf>po[

]aSeA(/>dc puyf/[vai

]tov S’ 'Epix\r)v ev KvAXt/vt)

15 rfjc] ApKa8[i]a[c

]air ok[

]ovto [

]V PVT[P p.€rd]

rcbv] aSeA</>[d>v avTi]c Xovop.e —

20 vrf\v Xad[

2 [ , trace of a descender, perhaps p 3 [ , two low specks 4 [ , a speck at mid-level

8 ] [ , perhaps the right part of an a, prolonged by a tail-like curving stroke 17 [ , bottom part of a

vertical, prob. v

1-8 The following section (bearing on 24, 24) indicates that this one must refer to a passage near the end of book 23. The letters ioopar (1. 3) seem to point to 23, 683, (ujpa Sc ol npurrov napaKafifiaXtv, avrdp ?7 mra ktX. The word £<I >pa was not frequent in post-classical times and needed explanation. Since this section apparendy has no parallel in the scholia, it is not possible to guess more about its contents.

D-Scholia; £djpa 8e ol (23, 683). vvv nepi^ojpa. npwTov idoc f/v roic naXaiotc irtpi^copaTa <f>opflv nepi to. aiSota Kai ovtidc ayam'£ec0at. Kara. Sc tt/v A xai Set htpav oXup-mdSa, ’Opimrov r oi) AaKedaipoviou X u6ev dywmiojicvo v. to rrefnioj/ia. at tiov avTO) TjTTT/c eyevero, c£ ov vopoc c T i(hj yvpvovc rpcyctv.

9-2 1 This passage deals with II. 24, 24. A book tide was written in 1. 9, but unfortunately is not preserved. The first letter, r, suggests the word ropoc, but the letter after the gap (possibly the right part of a or S) cannot be reconciled with this reading. As for the book number itself, one should expect either u> or k8, depending on the counting system used. Neither suits the remaining part of the tide. Above and underneath the r, one can see simple hook-shaped motifs, no doubt decoration.

The commentary on 24, 24 tells us about the conception of Hermes by Zeus and Maia, and of the thievish character of Hermes, well known through the Homeric Hymn to Hermes.

D-Scholia: xAci/iat 8’ OTpvvtcKOV kvcKonov Apytujtovrqv (24, 24). Zevc kpacdeic Maiac tt)c AtXovtCSoc Xaddiv * Hpav kpCyr/. 17 8c eyxvoc yevopev-q kv KvXXqwi j ri)c ApxaSiac 'Eppqv kyewqcev, ocnc kniBopiav Icyc too kAcVtciv. ot 1 kol Zivc xXfipac T-qv ” Hpav kpiyq Maia, Kai 8 7] -wore tt)c pr/Tpoc perd Tihv a&eX<f>djv avTTje Xovopevr/c Xaddjv i’<!) e 1A c t o rac kcOijTac ‘ yvpvai Sc exeivai qndpovv ti TTpd£u>c 1, yiXoira 8c 81a tovto 'Eppqc Kunjcac ane8u)Ke a in ale rac ecdr/Tac. c/cAci/ic 8c Kai rac AnoXXotvoc |SoOc. 17 Icropia nap' 'EpaTocdevti [fr. I Powell],

Fr. 12

]a|.]..[

jLt]eTa]3aA[

] . P*XP<: [

0]pvy(a[

5 ]?°.[

lxe . [

]>.[

1 ] . . [ > two low traces 3 ] , upper part of upright 5 [ , tiny high trace 6 [ ,

high speck 7 ] , two specks one above the other, probably right ends of c [ , high trace

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS 27

This small fragment contains the remains of the story of Niobe. After Leto had sent out her children Apollo and Artemis to kill Niobe’s children, Niobe was in such sorrow that Zeus changed her into a rock which can still be seen in Sipylus, a place in Phrygia.

D-Schoha: xai ydp r’ pvxopoc Niofip kpvpcaTO cl'tov (24, 602). IVto'jS 17 BvyaTpp piv pv TavrdXov, yvvp Si A^Covoc. cvvoixovca Si avTw nalSac kcXe SvoxaiSexa, ef pi, BpXdac, f( Si appcvac knapBdcd re tw nXpBei twv naiSwv xai rf, xaXXovp <W8t£e rf, ApTol on Svo pov ovc kyivvpccv, AnoXXwva xai “Apnpiv, xai 5n cvtcxvot- epa avri,c kcnv. iyavaxr pcavrtc Se oi deoi tnepifrav role naiciv alrolc Bdvarov, xai ’AnoXXwv pi, rove &ppevac avaipci xvvpycTovvTac kv KiBaipwvi, ‘Apnpic Si rdc QpXeCac in’ olxov obcac. BppvoOcav olv rpv Niofav tydrcoc to tchovtov SvcTVXppa Zcvc kXepcac etc A CBov pcTifiaXev, oc xai piXpi vfiv kv CinuXw Tpc <PpvyCac oparai napd navrwv npyac Saxpvwv npoiipcvoc. p icTopia nap ’ Einf>optajvi [fr. 102 Powell].

None of the following fragments were identified with certainty.

Fr. 13

]/xorAoya» [ jrpajcivep [ JauTon a.7r[

) a§uc77[ ] t [

K[

1 . [ ) vertical stroke before the break; v possible 2 [ , upright joined at top by horizontal; either

y or 77 3 . > a high loop, perhaps p 4 ] . > er*d of a downwards oblique joining the following a,

perhaps another a, or S or A [, upright before the break 5 [, low speck

2 Jrpcociv. This suggests of course the word TpwcCv. One could not exclude the noun Tpwciv (accusative of rpwcic). See e.g. D-Schol. 20, 269: ppriov ovv on o Xpvcoc wv paXdaxwTcpoc XaXxov p ciSppov kviSwxc tw

50 pan xai kxo iXavdp, xai kyivero xoiXorpc, ov Tpwcic. But this passage does not occur in a mythological story; therefore, this possibility should be rejected. On the other hand, Trojans do appear in mythological stories:

D-Scholia: d Si nva <j>peci epet deonponCpv aAeet'veic (16, 36). Octic, xaravayxacdeica vno Aide FlpXd yappdpvai, ra ycwwpcva naiSia eic nvp efia AAe, vopC^ovca rac dvpTac ra nvpi capxac xara<f>Xi(;€iv, to Si adavarov SiatfjvXd^eiv. ovtwc c£ naiSac Sic<f)6cipcv. cftSopov Se yevopevov AXiXXia fjdXXei opoiwc dc nvp * Ocacdpevoc Si IJpXcvc a<j>ppnacc tov naiSa xai cvcyxwv etc to TJpXiov opoc t pe<J>eiv napiSwxe Xdpwvi. 6 Si Xcovtwv xai dpxTcov pveXolc Tpi<f>wv kxaXccev AXiXXia. 8i8a£ac Si rpv larpixpv TCXvpv xai Xvpixpv xai poveixpv aniSwxe tw narpC. ayavax-rqcaca Si 6inc xai xaTaXmovca tov IJpXia kXwpicdp dc daXaccav. CTpanvopivip Si ’AXiXXcl kni ” IXiov npocincv oti noXcpwv p ev Tpwci l^wpv bXiyoXpov iov xTpccTai, nXpcrpv [i.e. nXdcTpv ] Si rpv S ofav &ncX6p icvoc

51 Tpc pdXrjc a8o£ov piv fiiov, noXvXpoviov Si 8ia£ei. a pad cov AXiXXciic So£ av alwviov l^wrjc npocxaipov npoxpCvac kcTpaTcucev. p icTopia napa Avxo<j>povi.

Again:

D-Scholia: vvv Si Sp Aivciao flip Tpwccciv ava^ci (20, 3^7)* A(f>po&iTp, Xppcpoi) kxnccovToc oti tt/c I7piapi8wv apXpc xaTaXvBdcpc oi an AyXicou Tpwwv fiaciXevcovciv, ’AyXicp pSp nappxpaxori cvvpXdcv. Texouca S’ Aiveiav xai fiovXopivp npo<f>aciv xaracxevacai Tpc twv IJpiapiSwv xaTaXvcewc, AXetjdvSpw nodov ’EXivpc kvifiaXe, xai pcTa tt/v apnaypv tw piv Soxeiv cvvcpdXei toic Tpwct, Talc Si aXpBdaic nappyopei Tpv pTTav avTWv tva pp navTeXwc dncXnicavTec dnoSwci ttjv ’EXivpv. icTopei Axovci'Xaoc [FGrH 2 F 39].

However, in both cases, the rest of the papyrus fragment does not seem to concord with the text of the scholia in any way.

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

28

Fr. 14

] «reroe[

] . TVSeP . i

] occov [

]p€(t>pv. . [

5 ] aracKe [

] A €lp€Ke\

] CV€Kpo[ jeot K€ [

]vv. [

2 ] , low speck [ , trace of an upright 3 [ , end of a high horizontal, r or y [ , top of

upright 4 [ , first letter, vertical, perhaps part of y; second, curve pointing upward, with a branch

sticking out on left side at mid-level 5 [ , high speck on edge of break 7 ] , oblique downwards

joining following c, perhaps a 8 [ , trace of upper part of vertical 9 [ , high speck

4 <j>pv [. These letters suggest a form of the word <Ppvyia. In the span covered by our fragments, the mythological stories mention Phrygia only once, in 24, 602, which tells of Niobe and her children; but fr. 12 already covers this passage, with the word <Z>]puyia[.

6 ]Aei/ie. This suggests a form of the word k\4tttu>.

Fr. 15

]avTO>v aur[

] rjcOou cvve[

]pta vSara 8[

5 ] c XeyecdaL [

1 only bottom traces of unidentifiable letters 3 ] , curving descender linked to the following tj;

A probable, 8 also possible 5 ] , high speck on edge of break, u suggested

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

29

5

]a

]ou

J

]

]

]

A o [

(vac.)[

««.[

7Ai [

Mi

€Vt[

]5er[

m

5 .[, left part of curved letter 7 [, trace of left part of curved letter 8 [, left part of

curved letter, a or o probable

At the top ol the second column, there is a paragraphus (> — ). This indicates the beginning of a new entry. The following line should therefore in principle be a homeric verse, or part of one. There are many \ erses beginning with aAA. However, I could not find any for which there was a corresponding mythological story in the Scholia. A plausible, but not very probable, possibility would be that the first line after the paragraphus starts with aXXcoc, indicating an explanation different from one previously told.

Fr. 17

] vr/yLKCu8[

] arov cvv[

]a>CT7]V [

] a77ttjAeia[

5 ]<5pa/ttou[

]77e77Aot>[

]arpoc[

],aKPe[

] ,TVX[

3 . [ > tiny high speck 8 ] , right part of curved letter 9 ] , high speck joining the following r

Fr. 18

].[

] uv[

] cuti[

] Tpavr][

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

30

5 I /Vt[

OJTOv[

TaTTj [

] Mca[

] av.[

10 ] C(j)V [

i ] [ , tiny trace of ink 7 [ , tiny trace of ink 9 [ , left part of a curve with a horizontal

bar in the middle, 6 or e

5—6 The horizontal stroke between the two lines could be some kind of a separator. It does not look like a paragraphus.

Fr. 19

(space)

1MK1

]TOC77[

] oj u.a[

] ,vcxv[

5 ]/carar[

] AAouca[

] v8vvrj[

1 [, high speck on edge of break, another speck below, but which could belong to preceding a 3 ] ,

a tiny high trace of ink 4 ] , low end of downwards oblique

Fr. 20

]..0[..].v\

]a£er tcarar[

] ca oror[

]TT€piTTV Tl [

5 ] avro [

] ...[

1 ] , first letter, low speck; second, high horizontal ] rj, first letter, trace of ink 2 , trace

3 ] ca , first letter, end of high horizontal, low speck; fourth, low trace 4 n [ , first letter, upright;

fourth, top end of descender 5 [ , trace 6 [ , specks of tops of letters

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

3i

Fr. 21

]..[

]ck<xA[

]cicw[

] rac8[

5 ]77-orea)[

) anra[

]to>v6[

1 ] . . [ , bottom part of two vertical strokes that could belong to the same letter 4 ] , one high

and one low speck corresponding probably to the right ends of c 6 ] , mid-level speck

Fr. 22

]o»vo[

].Vv8[

][ ,J€Pov. [

] .

5 ]<?Pa.[

2 ] . , low speck, A suggested, 5 or a not excluded 3 [ J, end of a high horizontal (r, y ?) crossed

out [ , tiny low speck 4 ] > bny low speck 5 [ , trace on loose fibre

5 ]“?“.[• Possibly the remnants of the often recurring phase 17 S’ IcropCa irapd ru> Selvi.

Fr. 23

ap]/xo£o [

]vyapr)[

]vaSe[

Jf7

5 ] arac[

].[

1 [ , high speck, probably

trace of top of a letter

v

5 ] , low end of a descending curve, a, A or S

6 ] [ , small

32 MYTH OGRAPHIC TEXTS

Fr. 24

].[

rj S’ Icrjopta 7r[apa

(space)

].V[

5 ]??Ttc[

]Tvi

]..?[

i ] [ , bottom part of a curve 2 [ , upward curve continuing the tail end of preceding a, then

joining high horizontal; probably n, although oddly written 4 ] . > bottom part of curve 7 ] >

first letter, top part of curve; second, top of descender

The space following 1. 2 indicates the end of a section, which is confirmed by the words 17 S’ Icr] opla Tr[apa toi Saw. The next section should in principle begin with a quotation from the Homeric text, ranging from a word to several verses. There are two possibilities, neither of which offers a fully satisfactory solution.

First, one could consider linking frr. 24 and 61; but, on obvious grounds of space, this solution must be discarded.

Second, frr. 24 and 53 could be linked thus:

12, 132

Fr. 53

Fr. 24

]cut[

] [ AXe^a] v8[p—

7] §’ icr] opt'd 7r[apd ]ay[

]’ [ 1 ' [

ate ore r]e Spv [ec ovpeciv vipiKd]pr)y[cn

In favour of this solution, it should be noted that there is a mythographical story on II. 12, 93 about Paris, and that the name Alexandras does appear near the end of the story. On the other hand, the fact that the D-Scholia do not offer a story on 12, 132 (and there seems to be no obvious one to tell on that particular verse) speaks against this solution. Moreover, all other identified fragments cover a span from books 18 to 24. A single fragment for book 12 seems rather suspicious. Nevertheless, if one is to accept this possibility, it would mean that our roll would have covered at least half of the Iliad , or perhaps even the whole work.

D-Scholia (II. 12, 93; text from Montanari’s projected edition of the D-Scholia): Kara yacrpoc erotica rj ’EKdpV ovap kdedcaro on ere/ce SaAov, ixfi’ ov rraca KaTe^XlyOrj f] noXic. to ovv reydXv yveoprj tojv [idvretov eferc# 77, aXXa yv cdp.77 0ed>v imd tov ev povroc eTpd<f>T] fiovKoXov, oc a pKTov at na> ydXa kmcxoiicav 0eacd/xevoc avidpeifiev. kKXr\dr) ovv Ildpic, ovy die nvec <f>acLV, on ev nrjpa GTodcbrj. aXX’ on tov popov TrapjjXOov . verepov 8e AXe£av8poc, on rfj narpidt rfXi^rfcev, rotirecnv kfiorjOrjeov, TroXepLLCvv krreXBovTwv.

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

33

Fr. 25

] TOtc[

J

]eucr[

]°VV. [

5 W.[

]fce4

]..[

1 ] , low end of letter, curving upwards 2 ] , end of high horizontal, y or r

on edge of break 5 [ , trace on edge of break 7 ] [ , high traces

Fr. 26

] T COVfJL [

] OLVOJ [

]ruyx«[

]™ . [

5 ]avo[

1 ] . j high speck touching horizontal of following r 2 ] , trace of rounded letter, perhas c left part of a curve 4 [, top part of a vertical, joining at top a horizontal, yorir

Fr. 27

M

]°.[

]evA[

]e/crp[

5 ].pQv[

] aca [

2 [ , high speck next to preceding o 5 ] . » speck at mid level, on edge of break

trace of top left part of curve

[ , trace

6 .[,

34

Fr. 28

MTTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

] 77X1? [

] ovv[

]c^f[

] VTo[

5 ] ou[

].v.[

] 770 [

2 ] , end of high horizontal, y or r 5 ] . > two specks one above the other, probably c 6 ] ,

vertical on edge of break [ , bottom left part of curve

Fr. 29

] «[

] Op[

] P.[

] °0[

5 ] A[

] 4

] c[

] .[

3 [ , upright on edge of break 8 [ , tiny speck

Fr. 30

K[

] o(f>av [ ] yuv[ ] vra [ ]aSe [

]..[

1 [, left part of curve 2 [ , upright on edge of break, perhaps y (<9eo«£dvijc ?) 3 ] ,

vertical 4 [ , left part of curved letter (small trace) 5 [ , low speck 6 ] [ , three high specks

4096. MYTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

35

Fr. 31

]^a. f

] . ace . [

] VITO [

5

1 . [, bottom left end of upwards oblique 3 ] , high speck [ , low trace 4 [, trace

of rounded letter 5 ] [, first letter, descending curve; second, top end of vertical; third, a or 5

Fr. 32

]a>a[

] ep cvt[

] a»770l>[

Fr- 33

]...[

]lKClt[

]a.770§[

]A°v[

]7ra> [

1 first letter, bottom part of vertical; second and third, mere traces

Fr. 34

5 [ , tiny low speck

]....[

] 77poAei7r[

]c9cu yap [ ] €irov[

1 ]....[> specks of bottom of four letters

2 wpoAeiTr[. A form of the verb TTpoXeCna) is recognizable, but this clue does not seem to lead to any particular story in the Scholia.

36 MTTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

Fr. 35

] ra aAA [

]S aura[

]??[

i ] , trace on loose end

Fr. 36

] .[

] .[

] «[

] t[

5 ] 4

1 [ , bottom left part of curved letter 2 [ , mere speck

Fr. 37

].[

]ra. [

]....[

] ecen[

1 ] [ , bottom part of curved descender 2 [ , descender 3 ] [ , first, curved letter

(e ?); second, flat top with part of vertical coming down, perhaps it or r; third and fourth, mere traces

Fr. 38

].[

] . KV . [

] 9cu()a[

]eice ’7A[

1 ] [ , tiny speck edge of break (probably r)

2 ] , upright joined at bottom left by a low flat stroke

[ , high speck on

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

37

Fr. 39

].[

] 7TO)[

]ovo[

] vra[

5 ]a7ra[

1 ] . [ > tiny speck 2 ] , upright, with trace of letter joining at bottom left

Fr. 40

] €cdcua[

] ,e“>c[

]«?r[

1 ] . . upright 2 ] , vertical shghtly sloping to the left, bottom right ending in curve

Fr. 41

>a[

]acai[

Ja/caf

(space)

5 ]...[

5 ] [ , only tiny traces on edge of break

Fr. 42

].[

] VTOL [

].^ [ ].[

i ] [ , trace of descender, joined end of letter pointing bottom left (a, 8 of descender starting at mid-level

at top by horizontal rightwards (y or t) 2 [, corner-shaped

?) 3 ] , high horizontal joining following t (y or r) [, part

4 ] [ , mere trace

38

Fr. 43

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

]?.[ ]?f A

]voc[

]..av[

5 ].?.[

i [ , high horizontal 2 , mid-level horizontal stroke 4 ] . . > first letter, faded traces;

second, upper right part of curved letter 5 ] , upright, slighdy sloping, joining a low horizontal [ ,

mid-level trace

Fr. 44

l7™. [

]<?T€. [ ] . «*[ 5 ] ™[

].<?[

1 [ , tiny speck next to bottom of preceding 1; also high speck further right 3 [ , mid-level speck

on edge of break, continuing middle bar of preceding € 4 ] , right edge of curving letter, o or a>

5 ] , high end of loop 6 ] , high extremity of letter curving downwards

Fr. 45

].[... ].«M

] K l77t§pajtto[

]ac#a[

1 ] [, mid-level edge of downwards-pointing curve ] e, first letter, high speck

Fr. 46

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

39

]...[

]r)Trap[

] ver[

1 ]...[> first letter, traces; second, low flat stroke; third, traces 3 ] , mid-level speck

Fr. 47

]

]P€.[

] .oy[

]..X.[

1 ] , middle part of upright 2 [ , upper left comer of fx or v 3 ] , low speck next to

following o 4 ] , first letter, upper right part of curved letter; second, high speck [ , mid-level speck

Fr. 48

M

M

K[

] .“>[

5 ]?‘t[

].o.[

Ja . [

]ar[

].«[ to ]v.[

]«.[

]a[

3 [ , extremity of upwards curve starting from bottom right end of preceding 77 4 ] , high

upright 6 ] , tiny mid-level speck [ , left half of curved letter, o or c 7 [ , high speck

9 ] , low end of horizontal touching following e 1 0 [ , two specks on edge of break, one above the

other 11 [ , high speck

40

Fr. 49

MTTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

].[ M ] . a[ M 5 M ]xpj[ M

i ] [ , mere speck 3 ] . > low flat stroke joining bottom end of upright

Fr. 50

]«\[

]6a[

M

]« t

5 M ]«[ ].v.[

i [, high speck on edge of break 7 ] v [, first and third letter, mid-level specks on edges of breaks

Fr. 51

].[

] ,arl hM M

5 M

]..[

1

[ , low speck

2 ] , high right end of horizontal, y or t

6 ] [ , mere traces

4096. MYTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

41

Fr. 52

]f.[

M

]CM

]rav[

5 ]ac[

]..[

1 [ , bottom end of two uprights 6 ] . [ , first letter, right end of high horizontal; second, high

speck followed by mid-level lower part of loop

Fr. 53

] gut[

M

]ay[

(space)

5 ]pvy[

In line 3, ]a7r[ cannot be excluded. Since a space follows, one could expect to find 17 S’ iorop^a n [apd, cf fr. 24.

Fr- 54

]^c [

lvv [

]?c [

]r? [

Fr. 55

]vct[

] cda[

] ,Sa. [

2 ] , upright 3 ] , low speck [, upright

42

Fr. 56

MYTH OGRAPHIC TEXTS

]?.[

] 7T0KV [

]x«. [

i [ , bottom part of an upright 3 [ , top part of an upright, joining at right a horizontal (y or tt)

Fr. 57

]...[

]l>CT0[

] .

1 ] [ , first letter, trace of horizontal; second and third, slight traces 3 ] . > right end of a high

horizontal (y or r)

Fr. 58

]>[

].«A.[

2 ] , high speck 3 ] , tiny speck on edge of break [ , left side of rounded letter

Fr. 59

]« t ]« [

Fr. 60

]..<?[

]«x.[

].«.[

]...[

i ] , two low horizontals in the shape of an elongated co 2 [ , left part of curved letter, c or o

3 ] , mid-level speck [ , trace of upright on edge of break 4 ] [ , first letter, tiny high speck;

second, top part of curved letter (o or d); third, upper part of upright

Fr. 6 1

4096. MTTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

43

(space)

I 9ca[

2 ] , high trace

The space between the lines could indicate the end of a book and the beginning of the next one. In this case, in 1. i, one could think of] S’ [icTopia napa tco Setvt.

Fr. 62

]y.[

]vvl

]tot[

1 [ , low speck

Fr. 63

]vcup [ ].['

■ ] . . . > first letter, right end of low horizontal; second, bottom part of upright; third, bottom part of curved letter [, low thick speck 2 [, left part of curved letter (o or e) 3] [, roof-shaped

top of letter

Fr. 64

]pal

The space below this line could correspond to the bottom margin of the papyrus, but also to the end of a book. A possible reading in the latter case could be, of course, tj S’ IcropCa 7ra]/>a [tw Seivi.

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

44

Fr. 65

1 V7T[

1 ecr[

Fr. 66

]...[ ].°.[ ] . 9-rf

1 ] [ , first letter, low speck; second, traces would suit a or A; third, low speck 2 ] , right end

of low horizontal, with speck above on edge of break [ , two specks one above the other, on edge of break 3 ] . > upper right part of curved letter

Fr. 67

]°Tf[

]7te[

Fr. 68

]..[

M

]."[

]tvl

1 ] [, first letter, narrow cross-shape (too narrow for x); second, low horizontal joining at its right end

a straight stroke sloping to the right 3 ] , right end of A or a

Fr. 69

] °[

1 -.[

2 [ , low speck on edge of break

4096. MYTHOGRAPHUS HOMERICUS

45

Fr. 70

].[

]?y[

]ar[

1 ] [ , tiny trace

Fr. 71

].[

]«. [

1 ] [, low speck on edge of break 2 [, low speck joining bottom tail of preceding a

Fr. 72

].ap[

M

1 ] , upright 2 -n, possibly ri

Fr. 73

>.[

].o.[

1 [, upright 3 ] , high speck [, low speck

Fr. 74

].[

].a.[

].[

1 ] [ , bottom part of oblique stroke (sloping to the right) joining beginning of a horizontal at mid-level 2 ] , point-shaped end of letter (pointing downwards [, low roof shaped letter 3 ] . [> tiny speck

46

Fr. 75

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

3 . to . [ ].[

1 ] , trace of letter joining following r at top [ , upright

Fr. 76

2 ] [ , top part of curving letter

3 .“ft

1 ] , upright 2 [ , speck joining the bottom leg of preceding k; also speck above, slightly more

on the left

Fr. 77

].[

].[

1 bottom part of curved letter 2 tiny speck

P. SCHUBERT

4097. Mythological Compendium

14 1B.204/H (a) Fr. i(b) 4 x 9.6 cm Second century

Several scraps of what appears to be a mythological manual like that of Hyginus, combining catalogic and narrative material; in these scraps the former type is more heavily (perhaps exclusively) represented. Other examples are LIII 3702; 4098-9 below; P. Cornell 55 (iterum ed. L. S. Baldascino, Aegyptus 70 (1990) 205-9); P. Stras. WG 332, ed. J. Schwartz in Studi in onore di A. Calderini e R. Paribeni II (1956) 151—6, with further notes by S. Daris, Aegyptus 39 (1959) 20; P. Vindob. Gr. inv. 26727, edd. P. J. Sijpesteijn and K. A. Worp, CE 49 (1974) 317-24; P. Haun. I 7; P. Med. inv. 123 ed. S. Daris, Proc. XII Intern. Cong. Pap. (Toronto 1970) 97—102; P. Mil. Vogl. Ill 126, ed. L. Salvadori, RFIC 1 13 (1985) 174-181. Typically these books move abruptly from topic to topic, providing the reader at most with a heading at the start of a new section; they may not be greatly concerned with such niceties of production as the alignment of columns; and their sources usually prove impossible to trace. There are marked correspondences between the catalogue of Argonauts in fr. 1 and that of Hyginus, 7^-

4097. MYTHOLOGICAL COMPENDIUM 47

14. Iolaos, Thersanor, Priasos and Phokos are found only in these two authors, and the brothers Iphitos and Klytios only in these two and Apollonios of Rhodes. In fr. 2, this author and Hyginus share rarities at lines 4 and 6. We may be dealing with an alphabet¬ ical version of Hyginus’ Greek source (e.g., for Argonauts, Theon’s commentary on Apollonios) or something closely related to it. But there are substantial divergences as well, and these very papyri demonstrate how much mythography has vanished without trace, making source criticism futile.

The hand is a medium to small, upright rounded capital of a familiar type (see e.g. Ill 414, XVIII 2159—64, XXVI 2441, LIII 3711). This example is more informal than some and written with a thicker pen. It may be dated to the mid-second century. The scribe allows himself some extravagances, notably with k and (once) £ <j>, </r, and p may also breach the line, o is pinched, and the juncture of v is distinctively low. Ink has often flaked away, making interpretation of some traces difficult. The back is blank.

Fr. 1

(a)

] @17 cede ] Oepcavcop ] Tdccov ] 'IoXaoc ]E*(f)lKAoC ] TXevc ]E"<f)lTOC

.[

.[

rO[S]oiSo/cou A^[auj3oA] ov

]KacTa>p Kai TIoXvh^lyK-qc ] Kr)<t>€vc

| piacoc Kai && )ko[c LlrflXevc Kai A[ KXvtlo] c Kai EI<^ht\oc ]uc Kai Tva\

).c [

(b)

]t£ ’A[p]y[ovc ]e/C 0uAd/C7j[c €K AoKpdj[v €K 0OJK€ [a»V ]e/c Orapf-njc

A vertical kollesis along the right edge of (a) 1 to the right, dots of ink on two stray fibres

3 lacojv 4 ioXaoc (only one dot of the trema visible) [ , a tiny speck at mid-height 5 [ , a

low speck 6 o[, left side of a round letter 01, a minute part of a vertical or the right edge of a

round letter followed by part of a vertical in mid-line (not necessarily part of a new letter); fibres damaged and slighdy misplaced k, a vertical with high junction; faintest trace of the foot of a descender to the right 9, base of a round letter v, bottom of a vertical 7 9, a low speck v fairly clear 9 [ , a

high speck 10 ] , a speck halfway up 12 surface badly damaged, but ]c seems legible

48

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

Catalogues of Argonauts are discussed by Seeliger in Roscher’s Lexikon I 507-10; O. Jessen, Prolegomena in catalogum Argonautarum (Diss. Berlin 1889); C. Robert, Die griechische Heldensage (Berlin 1920) 770 ff, and NGG (1918) 469-500. The main lists are Ap. Rhod. 1.23-227; Apollonios’ scholia (Prolegomenon C, p. 4 Wendel, writes out Apollonios’ list with the notable addition of Theseus; the scholia proper provide further information); Hygin .fab. 14, Val. Flacc. 1.353-486, Orph. Argon. 1 19-231 (these are more or less dependent on Apollonios); and Ps.-Apollodoros 1.9.16. See also Diod. Sic. 4.40.2 ( = Dionysios Skytobrachion fr. 14 Rusten); Euphorion SH 432; and the fragment of a catalogue found on a Chian inscription (saec. v/iv?) and published by B. Haussoullier, REG 3 (1890) 206- 10.1 Earlier sources include Pindar Pyth. 4, whose scholia at verse 303 inform us that Aischylos’ Kabeiroi (fr. 97a Radt) and Sophokles’ Lemniades (fr. 385 Radt) contained catalogues. The mythographers Pherekydes ( FGrHist 3 FF 26, 107-110) and Herodoros ( FGrHist 31 FF 5, 41-46) also gave lists, of which we have scanty fragments; the implication of [Hesiod] fr. 63 M.-W. is that the Catalogue of Women also included a catalogue of sorts (see below on 5), and the implication of Antimachos fr. 56 Wyss KaraXeyei Se tovtovc [Zetes and Kalais] Kai AoTifayoc may be the same. A few variants regarding heroes’ parentage and homelands are omitted by Seeliger; some are mere mistakes in Hyginus, and need not be repeated, but note the omission of ‘Caeneus alter, Coroni filius’ in Hygin. 14.23 and Apollodoros (cf. Seeliger in Roscher II 897), Palaimon as an alternative form of Palaimonios in Apollodoros (who also gives the name of his human father differently from Apollonios), and fHvetoc son of Kaineus in Orph. Argon. 170.

In 4097 the juxtaposition of (a) and (b) is somewhat conjectural, but is supported by the clearer traces in 6-7; the fibres are of no help because of the kollesis. On the other hand, the order of the words in 1 1 makes against the join; see discussion there. The scribe evidently wanted to arrange the discrete items of each entry — Argonaut’s name, father, and homeland — to align vertically, and therefore left substantial spaces in case extra information had to be included (similarly in fr. 2). Even so, at fr. 1.1 1 it looks as though the line has been shunted to the right by material spilling over from the preceding column. The column has an ample width (just under 1 o cms).

If the join is wrong, (b) will have to go to the left of (a); the beginnings of lines 6-7 in (b) will be from a column to the left; and the traces at the ends of lines 4-7, 9 will be from a third column to the right, into which the middle column several times irrupts. The distance between (b) and (a) would be indeterminate; that there was a space is indicated by the lack of alignment of the fibres, and of the letters in fine 5, when the two fragments are so juxtaposed. Presumably fathers’ names interceded.

LIII 3702 fr. 2 is a catalogue of Argonauts much like this one; see Haslam’s commentary.

1 Theseus is excluded by Apollonios but included by many others for honorific reasons (Hyginus, Apollodoros, Diodoros, Statius Theb. 5.431). Of other names on the fist, only those mentioned in the introduc¬ tion are unusual. Of Argonauts in this range of the alphabet {6—k), omitted are (sources given only for the less commonly listed): Hippalk(i)mos son of Pelops (included only by Hyginus 14.20 and 3702); Ialmenos son of Ares from Orchomenos (probably mentioned with Askalaphos, his constant partner); Idmon son of Abas/ Apollo from Argos; Iphiklos son of Thestios from Kalydon; Iphis/Iphitos the son of Sthenelos from Argos (Dionysios Skytobrachion frr. 28-29 Rusten, Val. Flacc. 1.441, 7.423); Kaineus son of Elatos from Magnesia (mentioned by nvec according to schol. Ap. Rhod. 1.57— 64a); Kalais son of Boreas (presumably mentioned with Zetes in spite of alphabetical order, as I<d)as follows Lynkejus in line 13); Kanthos son of Kanethos from Kerinthos; Kios (Strabo 12.4.3 P- 564); Klymenos (Val. Flacc. 1.369); Koronos son of Kaineus from Gyrton; Kytisoros son of Phrixos ([Hesiod] fr. 255 MW= Akousilaos FGrHist 2 F 39 = Herodoros FGrHist 31 F 39; Ap. Rhod. 2.1 155); and Thestor, whom Chamaileon (fr. 15 Wehrli) said was identical with Idmon.

2 In Hyginus 14.20 we read ‘Thersanon Solis et Leucothoes filius ex Andro’; the papyrus confirms the correction Thersanor, made perhaps unintentionally by Schmidt in the index to his edition of Hyginus. About him nothing else is known.

1 Not reproduced by M. Zolotas, Epigraphai Chiou anekdotoi, Athena 20 (1908) 113-381, 509-26. Line 10 reads EY&H[ ]OY. Euphemos son of Poseidon has already occurred in line 7, and no other Euphemos is known from any other source. The fist seems to be arranged according to fathers: sons of Zeus in 4-5 are succeeded by four sons of Poseidon in 6-9. Therefore the father in line 10 is very likely Hermes. I suggest that Euphemos’ name was repeated here by mistake, ousting a son of Hermes. E(u)rytos is on all early fists, and the similar beginning would make the mistake easier. However, his name is too short for the space, if there are indeed eight spaces as the editor prints; but he does not say that the text is stoichedon, and has not seen the stone himself. The transcription offers several peculiarities.

49

4097. MYTHOLOGICAL COMPENDIUM

4 Hyginus and our papyrus are the only sources to say that Iolaos ‘of Argos’ was an Argonaut.

Presumably 'l[<fnK\iovc.

5 According to schol. Ap. Rhod. 1.45 Iphiklos did not sail with the Argonauts in the versions of [Hesiod] (fr. 63 M.-W.) and Pherekydes ( FGrHist 3 F 1 10); Apollonios and others include him. The itacism presumably indicates that the man who wrote this copy was not the man who alphabetized the list. On alphabetization (not often applied beyond first letters in the second century) see J. J. Keaney in GRBS 14 (1973) 415-23.

Presumably 0[i/A<xkou.

6 YAalc rather than 0]iAe* to preserve the alignment; on this form of the name cf. K. Nickau, Untersuchungen zur textkritischen Methode des Zmodotos von Ephesos (Berlin 1977) 36-42 (reference from W. J. Slater)’ Hodoidokos son ol Kynos son of Lokros is the name of Oileus’ father according to Eustathios on II. 2-531 P- 277-I7 (cf- Hyginus 14.7); there is a reasonable chance that this goes back to Hellanikos, FGrHist 4 F '3 (Jac°t>y ad loc .; W. A. Oldfather, Philologus 67 [1912] 427 n. 51).

8 Either TWSripeco or Aloc. would fit as the father’s name.

9 Presumably I4[Aeo0.

10 Phocus et Priasus Caenei filii ex Magnesia,’ Hyginus 14.19. If Phokos is the Phokian eponym, his parentage is no less mysterious than the coupling with the unknown Pnasos. That Hyginus no longer stands alone in this oddity discourages the assumption (e.g. Robert, Die griechische Heldensage 782 n. 2; Schmidt in his edition ol Hyginus; Seeliger in Roscher II 897) that his reading is corrupt. The names here disturb the alphabetical order, but one need not emend to (e.g.) KpCacoc since another P-name appears to follow in the next line, continuing the disruption.

1 1 Alphabetical order and the short list of paired Argonauts indicate that we are dealing here with Peleus and Telamon. Ik <P9iac... IJr^Xeuc Kai If A[9t]vwv TcXapuuv would be the natural order, with the father s name either before Peleus or after Telamon; but this runs counter to the reconstruction proposed above, favouring rather the alternative. Perhaps the scribe, faced with a unique set of data (a pair of sons from two different locations) abandoned his normal procedure and wrote something like FI-pXcvc Kai If Adrjvobv Te\ap.djv AiaKov, omitting as a result the homeland of Peleus. (I assume If A\ lyiurjc is out of the question since the separate locations of the brothers presume their banishment from Aigina [cf. Apollod. 1.8.2]. H[ttikt?c or even 'A[t9i8oc [Ap. Rhod. 1.93, cf. Hygin. 14.8] are, however, possible.)

1 3 The number of paired Argonauts in this range of the alphabet is strictly limited; it seems probable that the scribe wrote 'I vac for ”/Sac, with AvyKe\ vc preceding.

Fr. 2

(a)		(b)
] KCLIO [
| KfjiO>[		odoa (
\ u/coA[	] K€pKVU)VOCr]7Te[
A] evKa\[ta)v	]	Metvajoc
A]o\oifs [	]	AvKCU(f)OV
A]pvac Ka [		]c AaTTido[\
].K€vi		].. A.U

2 (init.) ] , the foot of an oblique descender ] , 17 or 77 preceded by a tiny low speck. After a, two

or three letters; the first one or two all but lost in a hole, followed by an upright curving (slightly) to lower right, then a speck at mid-height, perhaps part of a fourth letter 3 ] , 0, c 6 ] p, ] </> not excluded

7 (init.) ] , end of horizontal: y, 77, 77, t, c ] , a high blob (probably tip of <j>); then indeterminate traces;

50

MYTH OGRAPHIC TEXTS

then perhaps it or ti. The bar of 8 may be the result of accidentally dragging the pen; a similar stroke curving down through the left vertical of the V could be regarded as its beginning. [ , very faint traces, then a juncture at mid-height most consistent with rj [ , a high dot, consistent with </>

The join was first divined on the basis of line 4 and the coincidence of line 6 with Hygin. 173.3 t ^aPe^ Dryas in a list of Kalydonian boar-hunters (where Deukalion is also uniquely enumerated among that company); the fibres subsequendy confirmed it. That we are not dealing with Argonauts is further confirmed by line 7, where Lynkeus is almost certainly to be restored; he has already occurred in fr. 1. For discussion of the participants see C. Robert, Die griechische Heldensage 92 IT.; G. Daltrop, Die Kalydonische Eber/agd in der Antike (1966). In early art apart from the Fran<;ois vase (whose inscriptions have recently been re-edited by Rudolf Wachter, MH 48 (1991) 86-113), note two Attic deinoi from the first half of the sixth century (R. S. Young, Hesp. 4 (1935) 430-41; Beazley, Paralipomena p. 42) and a band cup in Munich (Museum antiker Kleinkunst 2243, ca. 540 bc: P. E. Arias, M. Hirmer, A Histoiy of 1000 Tears of Greek Vase Painting (1962) 295; L. Rebillard, BCH 1 16 (1992) 501-40; further references in M. Vojatzi, Friihe Argonautenbilder (1982) 185 n. 852).

It is just possible that (a) belongs to the right of (b) (the scribe might well have changed the order of information from list to list); the difficulties produced by such an arrangement, though not insurmountable, are more serious than those produced by the arrangement preferred here. For a discussion of this alternative see below.

1 Easily restored as A]yKaloc[, son of Lykourgos and a fixture of the catalogue from the beginning; he is the sole victim of the boar (identified as ‘Antaios’ on the Fran£ois vase and, strangely, as ‘Pegaios’ on the first of the two deinoi mentioned above).

2 The traces at the beginning suggest ’A] Xk^ui [v. A search of the TLG C-disk reveals no Alkmaion (Alkmaon, Alkmeon, Alkman) who is attested as a boar-hunter.2 Moreover, the contracted form “AXk^uiv nowhere actually appears; it is attested only as a possible contraction in Herodian 77. nadaiv fr. 371 Lentz (2.288.5). When one checks the source of the fragment, Etym. Magn. p. 66.16, one discovers that ’AXk[awv is only a variant in one manuscript over against ’AXisdcov, which Gaisford prints and Herodian’s argument demands. Hyginus has two Alkons as boar-hunters, one a son of Ares, the other a son of Hippokoon. It looks as if our scribe has made one of his many mistakes.

odoa at the end of the line is unavoidable but problematic. Some name in 'Inn- (cf. Hyginus) is probably inevitable (the alignment with the names in 4-5 will be out only slightly), but 'Imrodoac is an unattested Greek name ( 'ImrodoavToc would match the traces well enough, v filling the hole and r being represented by the slightly curving vertical; the scribe makes his tau thus). Still, it is preferable to supposing an unparalleled false resolution 'IirnododovToc from 'ImroBoaiv (poetic citations and dialect forms can occur in these papyri, cf. P. Haun. I 7, 4099 i 24). Careless misspelling is always possible.

3 Kerkyon’s son is Hippothoos (line 2), who is, moreover, said to be a boar-hunter by Hyginus 173.3 (em. Schaeffer; also Paus. 8.45.7, cf- Ov. Met. 8.307); but what he is doing at this point in the alphabet, with his name and his father’s so disposed, is inexplicable. We seem therefore to have an otherwise unattested son of Kerkyon, and indeed an alternative paternity for this hunter seems to follow, suggesting some doubt. (This reconstruction involves the perhaps unattractive suggestion that the genitive of Kerkyon’s name is misspelled; KepKvcuv is specifically attested by ‘Arcadius’ p. 15.22 [ed. E. H. Barker, Leipzig 1820] = Herodian 77. Kado- XiKfjc npocuiSiac 1.22. 25 Lentz [cf. 77. KXkecoc ovo/xarojv 2.724.10] to be oxtyone with genitive KepKvovoc as opposed to KepKv<x>v/KepKva>voc. But the error is common, and the scribe has, in fact, left a space after -oc suggesting word-division.) Either rj IJe[- or 7)7 re[p; as for the former, I have discovered no person of such a name whose relationship with Kerkyon was thus disputed; the latter will be an instance of late Greek f/nep for normal disjunctive 7) (W. Schmid, Der Atticismus in seinen Hauptvertretem III (1893) 343). The letters surviving

2 Perhaps someone put the famous Alkmaion at the hunt, but this would be very odd; Amphiaraos, rather than his son, is the right generation (and keeps the right company) for it (Apollod. 1.8.2 etc.). Alkmaion is exclusively connected with the story of the Epigonoi and his mother’s murder; his subsequent wanderings plainly belong to a post-hunt epoch. [Plut.] De fluv. 19.1 (Mueller, GGM 2.658) records an Alkmaion son of Stymphalos who at one time gave his name to the river Alpheios — right geographical area, therefore, but this is to clutch at a straw.

4097. MYTHOLOGICAL COMPENDIUM 5 1

in the sons name present a fairly rare sequence; he was probably BoukoXo c (Apollod. 3.10.5, 2.7.8) or BovkoXlojv. A Boukolion is found among the fifty sons of Lykaon at Apollod. 3.8.1, which is at least' Arkadian; more significant is the same name as a descendant of Kerkyon at Paus. 8. 5. 4-7.

5 In Hygin. 173A Dolop<i>a is said to have sent aid in the hunt. The eponym of the Dolopians (Steph. Byz. s.v. AoXonec, Etym. Magn. p. 282.25 s-v- AoXoi/j) and the Dolops whose tomb was prominent on the Magnesian coast (Ap. Rhod. 1 .585) are presumably the same person (so Hoefer, RE s.v.; contra Stoll, Roscher’s Lexikon s.v.). His father is given as Hermes in the scholia to Apollonios (1.587 p. 51 Wendel), where the source is the mysterious Kleon of Kourion in his Argonautika (cited in two other places by these scholia: see SH 339-339^).

AvKai<j>ov ( vox nihih ) seems to be an error for AvKai'dov, a name known from Ovid (Met. 5.86) and Apollod. (3. 1 0.5, Epit. 7-28), see also P. M. Fraser and E. Matthews, A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names I (Oxford 1987) s.v., who cite one example from Chios and twelve from Kos.

6 Dryas is named among the sons of Ares at Hygin. 159, and Apollodoros 1.8.2 lists this same Dryas among the boar-hunters. In the latter place, however, he is said to come from Kalydon, a fact which makes one wonder whether Aegius’ emendation of Dryas for nvfiac is correct; a son of Ares is more likely to be the Thracian father of Lykourgos: II. 6.130, Apollod. 3.5. 1, etc. The reading Iapeti Dryas in Hyginus 173 has always been assumed to be a strange mistake for Martis Dryas because of 159, but this papyrus, if we may move back in a circle, permits the correction Lapithi. A Lapith Dryas fights the Centaurs at II. 1.263 and [Hes.] Scut. 179.

Kai must follow, but I have no suggestion about the brother.

7 The only boar-hunter (or Argonaut, for that matter) whose name matches these traces is Lynkeus, though this is to leap forward somewhat in the alphabet. In the hole there is adequate space for Kai “ISac. Unfortunately the traces that follow can in no way be read as A]cf)apecoc. However, if rj is rightly recognized toward the end of the line, there is room in the hole after it for one letter, and then there is a high dot consistent with <f>; in other words, we may have an alternative parentage as in 3, with the expected Aphareus following in second spot. As for the unexpected first parent, I have no suggestions; with some generosity in interpreting the traces we may recognize a genitive ending in -tCov.

The alternative reconstruction of the fragment places the two parts so:

(b)

col. ii

col. i

] . .°0oa.{.). [

] KepKva)vocr)TTe[

Meivwoc [ XvKai<f>ov ]c Aairi0o[v ] . .7rd. . [.] . [

] kouo [

] Kp, a>[

] ukoA[

A] evKaXfcov JJdAoi/i [ A]pvac Ka [ ].KeV[

5

The first difficulty arises in line 3, where there is no longer room for the alternative to Kerkyon as the father of Boukolion or Boukolos (room for only two letters after e). One will have to suppose that Kerkyon belongs to a column to the left which has exceeded its bounds. In that case, he might come from a quite different context. If Argonauts are in question, the link is with his daughter Alope, according to Pherekydes (FGrHist 3 F 147) the eponym of the Thessalian city whence came the three sons of Hermes, Aithalides, Echion, and Eurytos. Possibly then something like this: Argonaut(s) X(YZ), son(s) of Hermes, ’AX6ttt]c TToXecuc OeccaXtac curd tt)c ]KepKvaivoc f/rrelp / vvv "Epecoc KaXeirar (this last bit from Hyginus 14.3, Eurytus et Echion. ..ex urbe Alope , quae nunc vocatur Ephesus', cf. RE s.v. Alope 5 and Stephanus of Byzantium s.v., 77.8 Meineke with his note. Rose’s comment on Hyginus is inadequate.)

52

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

Another possibility is Theseus. Hippothoon, the Athenian tribal eponym, was son of Alope, near whose spring Theseus killed Kerkyon (Theseus also took her — or at any rate the ‘daughter of Kerkyon’ — violendy as his wife according to Plutarch Thes. 29). Lines 2 and 3 could be part of an account of Theseus’ deeds or wives (with the beginning of 2 also belonging to the preceding column).

Although Alope is common to both contexts, no one puts Hippothoon among the Argonauts, so that the beginnings of lines 2 and 3 are probably only to be read together if Argonauts are not in question. Keeping Hippothoas (if that is how his name is to be restored) with Alk(m)on in line 2 presents a curious coincidence with Apollodoros 3.10.5, where three of the sons of Hippokoon are named as Hippothoos, Lykaithos, and Boukolos. Boukolos (or Boukolion) in line 3 must also be a father on this alternative reconstruc¬ tion. The resemblance to our fragment — on this reconstruction — seems too much to be coincidental. Normally the sons of Hippokoon exist only to be killed by Herakles, but it looks here as if someone picked three of them to be fathers of boar-hunters. This would be quite recherche; the ultimate source would presumably be a poet with local knowledge, or a mythographer worried about chronological consistency. In this source, Alkon was not a son of Hippokoon as in Hyginus, but a grandson.

The second difficulty occurs in line 7, where, if Lynkeus is still to be recognized, his father’s name must precede; but the preceding traces appear as in line 3 to be a continuation of the column to the left, and, as already explained, do not allow room for Aphareus.

Finally, since our author has alphabetized the principal names for ease of reference, one might expect him to put these at the head of each entry, and not to bury them in the middle.

Fr. 3

] . [

]foc [

JeiSomo

] eXovoc [

5 VPE.[

] .pyMo[

1 two rounded letters (possibly 0e) followed by traces susceptible of various interpretations 2 f ore

4 [, very faint high trace, not certainly that of another letter 5 [, o or e 6 ]a possible

More fathers. In line 6 Areithoos is all but unavoidable. He is known from II. 7.8 ffi, 136 ffi, the scholia maiora to these passages, schol. D II. 7.io = Pherekydes FGrHist 3 F 158, Paus. 8.1 1.4 (his tomb near Phoizon between Mantinea and Tegea) and schol. Ap. Rhod. 1 . 1 64 (Arkadian festival of Moleia seems to perpetuate the memory of his death). His fate was to carry a club and be killed by Lykourgos, father of Ankaios; the Iliad’s story about how this club came to be owned by Nestor is an invention which creates chronological difficulties, and the essential information relates to Areithoos’ cult site in Arkadia. His only known son, Menesthios, appears to be a Homeric invention (II. 7.9).

Pelops’ sons in our evidence had quite circumscribed careers: Atreus and Thyestes quarrel with one another; Chrysippos is the beloved of Laios, and is subsequendy murdered by the first two named; Skeiron (Apollod. Epit. 1.2 ) is killed by Theseus; Pittheus was a wise man and father of Aithra; Pleisthenes is a genealogical cipher; and most of the rest are eponyms of cities. Alkathoos the Megarian hero perhaps had a more varied career than we can tell, but the only known man of adventure is Hippalk(i)mos — unless the Argeios who competed at the games of Pelias depicted on the chest of Kypselos (Paus. 5. 17. 10) and a Korinthian column-krater of ca. 560 (M. Vojatzi, Friihe Argonautenbilder (1982) 101 f.; J. Beazley, AJA 64 (i960) 221 f.) is identical with the son of Pelops mentioned by Pherekydes FGrHist 3 F 132 and schol. Eur. Or. 4.

4097. MYTHOLOGICAL COMPENDIUM 53

He is promising from an alphabetical point of view, for Askalaphos was son of Ares, Ankaios was son of Poseidon, and Aithalides was son of Hermes, all of them Argonauts and hence good candidates for other exploits of that era (Kalydonian boar-hunt, funeral games of Pelias, etc.). If Areithoos and not his son is in question in line 6 (on the assumption that alignment has been skewed to the right by a spill-over from the preceding column) he would fit well with these names (though this is chronologically difficult since he was killed by Ankaios father Ankaios son of Lykourgos, to be sure, but the two are often confused). If this is right, the games of Pelias are not in question; there is a limit to the list of competitors set by the number of individual events and the small number of also-rans consistent with heroic decorum. No other source gives so many As among the Pelias-agonists (cf. Robert, Die gnechische Heldensage 37 ffi; add P. Stras. WG 332). Possibly, then, more Argonauts.

On the other hand, Hyginus list of competitors at the games of Pelias {Fab. 273.10-11) gives sons of Ares (Kyknos), Poseidon (Eumolpus), and Hermes (Eurytus). Hippalkmos son of Pelops wresdes Peleus on the Korinthian column-krater. In so short a list alphabetical order may have been abandoned. This is perhaps the easier assumption. Areithoos’ obscurity may make him (or rather his son) a surprising candidate for the list, but one Pisos the son of Perieres qualified for the Kypselos chest. Areithoos himself may appear again in fr. 5.

Fr. 4

top?

]TCUVTOTa>v[

| pcuTaceT€La[

] [

]ttclv

Top: not certainly a margin; the space is about the size of that between columns ii and iii in fr. 1, but such spaces could be created by the many irregular line-lengths in this book (as in line 3 of this fr.). 4 [,

tip of a horizontal

Fr. 5

]..P‘[

] . Ka . [

] . acT . [ ]AA.[

5 ]j]Ld[

2 ] , foot of an oblique descender [, e or c 3 ] , K,c,e [, v,to. ]Kdcrco[p? 4 [,

traces of a high juncture 5 ] , overhang of 17 or n\ trema dictates -q. ’Ap]r](9[ooc?

MYTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

54

Fr. 6

] &[

] [

I

acovoc[

5 ] (,)..Aax?[

3 . [.]> A, /x, to, </< ] , e,c, k; ])<Aeouc: possible 4 a low speck

If 'Idcovoc in 4, his only surviving sons are (1) Hypsipyle’s Euneos and Nebrophonos (Apollod. 1.9. 17), whose exploits are not otherwise recorded (though Euneos is known to Homer, II. 7.468, 23.747), and (2) Polyxenos, taken by Medeia to Aria (Hellanikos FGrHist 4 F 132).

Fr. 7

].*M

] . j t°P of an upright; «a]i ef A [- (cf. fr. 1 ii.i 1) or ] fj If A[ (cf. e.g. Hygin. 14.1 1 Hylas...ex Oechalia, alii aiunt ex Argis)?

R. L. FOWLER

4098. Mythological Compendium

24 3®-73^^(C<) 6.7x9.8cm Third century

A mythological compendium like 4097, where congeners are listed. The main part, beginning in line 3, lists people killed by Herakles; if the first two lines also deal with Herakles, a quotation of Eur. HF 464 may possibly be recognized in 2.

A medium to large, careful capital script. Informal features are the use of two alphas, an omega with a flattened middle junction, different sizes of omikron and a somewhat relaxed fluidity in most letters. Probably to be dated to the third century; cf. PBerol 9968 (Seider, Palaographie der griechischen Papyri II no. 32). The verso contains an as yet unidentified piece of prose; references to Osrhoe and Artaios and an occurrence of the verb TrpocKvvrjcac suggest some kind of IJepaiKd (Ktesias? Artaios in Diod. Sic. 2.34.1 =FGrThst 688 F 1). It is written in an informal Severe Style datable to the third century.

4098. MYTHOLOGICAL COMPENDIUM

55

].v[].[ ]

]7reAacyeiac[

]..[].[]

]#[ ] ac avciXev 'A [ ]jU vvTOpa tov ’ Opixevov /lev 5 ] UIOP 0OLVLKOC 8e 7 rarepa

]/CreaToy /cat £upu[TOv] rot)c MoAeivrjc Kai M[/cropt]co roc S^velc or[rac /c]at a fipicrac avdpcb [7701/0] io ] T-qAeyovov r[ov /Jpcorjea/c

i ] r, tip of low horizontal 2a ]ca[ possible 3 ]$, ]e not excluded ] , c or e, 10 yo

not particularly recommended by the traces but the fibres are damaged and misplaced.

The story of the Molionids, the Siamese twins who fought successfully against Herakles during his attack on Augeas, and were subsequently killed by him in an ambush, is familiar enough; that of Amyntor less so (he was killed either because he refused passage through Ormenium to Herakles — Apollod. 2.7.7 — or because he refused to give his daughter to him — Diod. Sic. 4.37.4). Telegonos son of Proteus (omitted by both Roscher and RE) and his brother Polygonos challenged Herakles to a wrestling match and were duly killed (Apollod. 2.5.9).

Neither ovc 'HpaxXfjc aretAev nor anything like it is to be got out of the traces in 3; it looks instead as if we have an aorist participle before the main verb, ending in -dCcac, -dacac, -et'cac, -evcac, etc. Herakles as subject has already been introduced above, then, and lines 1—2 are also about him. Arranging Herakles’ victims by the manner of death is a curiosity. A reasonable guess as to the participle in 3 has so far defeated the editor’s ingenuity; ro£evcac is not true for Telegonos, iveSpe vcac is not true for Telegonos or Amyntor, adXevcac is not true for Amyntor or the Moliones.

neXacyioc is a predominantly poetic adjective; in prose its use is confined to the feminine as the former designation of several parts of Greece (Delos, Lesbos, Thessaly, the Peloponnese, Arkadia; references mostly from the geographers) or Greece itself (Hdt. 2.56}. Of the few examples in the genitive case on the TLG C-disk one occurs at Eur. HF 464, where the general context at least is Heraklean, so we may have a citation; however, the particular line does not seem immediately likely to have furnished material for the compiler of a catalogue. (Megara addresses one of her children: cot p,ev yap “Apyoc evep.’ 6 xardav cur TTarrip, / Evpvcdecoc 8’ epeXXec ohcrjceiv 8 opovc / rf/c KaXXiKdpirov Kparoc eycov TleXacyiac.)

R. L. FOWLER

4099. Mythological Compendium

33 4B.87/J(i-2)a (b) 8 X 21.5 cm First century BC-First century ad

A mythological compendium like 4097, where congeners are listed. There is noth¬ ing very remarkable in the content. The list of the Epigoni offers points of contact with

MTTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

56

Hyginus Fab. 71, and other points of contact are observed with the latter’s preface. Catalogue apparently gives over to narrative at i 14. Poetic citations may be lurking in i 19 and 24.

The papyrus is written in a large, round, heavily decorated hand similar to XXXI 2545 (GMAW 37), which the editor dates to i BC i AD, and IV 659 (GMAW 21), i BC. The letters are wobbly, as if written by an old man.

col. i

(a) (b)

top

e7Ti'yo]voL rthv e77[rd Aiyi.a]Xevc A8pdcrov[

0ep]cav8poc IJo\XvveLKOvc A] AiepLecov Ap,(fua [ paov] CdeveAoc Ka[navea)c 0]rj^ip.eAr]c Flap Oevjorratoy Ai.[op.r)8r]c Tv8e]a>c Molpcu 5 KAto]da> Ad)(eci[c Arpovoc 'Q]pou Evvop.tr] Alkt][

Elprj]vr] Xapirec E[v(f>pocvvr] ©aAtr/] A’LyAr]{i} Nvp.<f>[ou "Epc]r] E[dv8poc\oc Ceiprjvec 0]eA£teVeta ] VLC€v<f)pa [ Topyove c] Cdevvcb Me cioucja EvpvaAr] T[LTavt8ec T\r]6vc ©epuc Mvr]\

10 pocvvrj] <P[o]tf[r, ©eta '. Peta ] Evp.evt8ec

ktu) Meyaipa Teici<f)6vr] ] Apvvi'ai AeAAu) ’ Qkv rrerr] Ec\rre pt8ec AtyArj Epv9eLa\

]a[ ] 8eAcf)OLc avS [

l.v [

15 ] yroip,a

] f3or]9ei [

] ... .Xov [

] t^r]Aov [

] . Aera [ col. ii

20 ] ta

Jet vov ] voe t ] appbore ] apecKe

25 ](j)evye

vara

4099. MYTHOLOGICAL COMPENDIUM

57

30

35

40

] cupia ] Lfxa

]....

]

].

]

]

]

1

I

]

]

1

]

]

5 8[

y[

8[

.[

.[

,0 [

x[

c.l

A

?.[

15 (j>V [

[ ]Tt.[ '

[ ]..[

[ ].[

[

Col. i 1 letters spread out in the heading. Vertical kollesis 1/ 2 cm from right edge. 2 end, to the

right of a a low, apparendy accidental trace 8 [, left part of a round letter 13 ] , a vertical

1 4 parts of 3 round letters 15 ] , a high trace y, possibly j], or 1 with a trailer from preceding

letter 1 6 part of a round letter followed by damaged surface 1 7 a round letter followed by a,

S, or A, then two more round letters 1 8 foot of oblique descender followed closely by a vertical; then

a high and low blob possibly part of the same original vertical; then a high blob £, £ not impossible 20 minute trace of an oblique descender or finial 26 low remnant of vertical or finial followed by p

or v 28 a round letter 29 a high speck followed by the apex of a, 8, or A, then two round

letters 3 1 top of stroke descending to the right.

Col. ii 1 traces very faint and perhaps accidental; the surface here and in the next three lines is badly damaged and worm-eaten, so that whether ecthesis is present is not certain 3 bottom of gently rising

stroke; £ possible 4 a blur of traces evidently damaged by water 8 a vertical g fibres

misplaced; perhaps % or A or p. 14 [, a vertical 15 perhaps r, then a vertical with a thin

horizontal extending to right half-way up; all uncertain.

i 1 b n'yo\yoi perhaps in ecthesis; u]ioi if in eisthesis.

1 ff. The scribe has omitted one of the seven. Since the names given here occur in the same order as those in Hyginus Fab. 71, the missing name may be that of Polydoros son of Euryalos, whom Hyginus lists after Thersander. But lists vary; see Robert, Die griechische Heldensage 950 ff. In 3, the son of Parthenopaios is normally Promachos. Hyginus’ MS offers Thesimenes, which editors have corrected to Tlesimenes (cf. Paus. 3.12.9: T\rjCLp.€vrjV Se napOevoiraiov rov MeXavtajvoc aSe\<f>ov, oi Se nalSa etvat Aeyovciv). On the basis of the coincidence confronting us here I should emend both Hyginus and the papyrus to Theximenes — a name which, although not attested, has a comprehensible formation and a suitable meaning for a warrior.

4 From here on we have only women; hence the supplement in 9.

6 The three Charites are named as Thal(e)ia, Euphrosyne and Aglaia by Hes. Th. 907, Pind. 01. 14.13 and most mainstream authorities. The scribe may have been distracted by AlyXrj in 13. Since, however, Aigle is the mother of the Graces in Antimachos fr. 95 Wyss, there may be a deeper confusion lying behind this reading.

58

MTTHOGRAPHIC TEXTS

6 f. ”Epc\r) is somewhat short for the space, so possibly either Nvp.<f>\[ai falsely divided, or the poetic form ’ Eepc]rj survived (cf on 4097 fr. 2.2). Herse and Pandrosos as a choice for ‘Nymphs’ from a potentially endless list is mildly curious. Scholars who regard the Arrephoria as a girls’ initiation rite may see a reflex of this notion here if they wish (‘nymphs’ as ‘brides’) though the age of the Arrhephoroi is an obstacle and other interpretations are possible (see R. L. Fowler, Phoenix 42 (1988) 1 05-11).

8 Presumably a name in -vie followed by one in Ev<f>pa- (a is certain), but these are not remotely like any known names of Sirens (see Wiecker in Roscher IV 603) and corruption may be present.

10 Room for a non-Hesiodic Titaness, or a gap left before the next group (cf. 12)?

The names of the Eumenides are first attested late: Verg. Aen. 6.571, 7.324, 12.846; Apollod. 1.1.4, etc.

11 f. The Harpies are normally a twosome; Hyginus Fab. 14.18 has a threesome Aellopoda (=Aello), Celaeno, and Ocypete (cf. praef. 35, where the names are Celaeno, Ocypete, and Podarce). The gap in 12 is too small for a discrete entry, but probably too large to serve as a separator; perhaps then Kelaino was named there (which would still leave a small space, cf. 10). Virgil {Aen. 3.21 1, cf. Val. Flacc. 4.453, 499) has simply ‘Celaeno / Harpyiaeque.’

1 2 f. Lists of Hesperides normally offer three or four names (Seeliger in Roscher I 2597-8); if four were named here, the remaining two are Arethousa and Hesperia (e.g. Apollod. 2.5.1 1, cf. Hesiod [?] fr. 360 M.-W.).

13 [e]v AeXipolc?

19 ] 'jBAeva (poetic citation)?

24 Possibly JSecc/ce; if so, unidentified poetic or dialect citation.

ii 15 Dr Coles suggests Ti</>u[c; for Argonauts cf 4097 fr. 1.

R. L. FOWLER

III. THUCYDIDES

4100-4112. Thucydides

In vol. LVII were gathered all the identified fragments of bks. i iv of the Histones that had not previously been published. Here, along with a small supplement to that batch, are the fragments of bks. v-viii.

The most notable textual features are these. 4102 presents two true readings where the main mss are faulty: A6rjvrj[t)ct{y) not 'A dijvcuc in v 18.10 (the locative is reported in one rec., Vm), kp.p.ev(b not in v 18.9; both already restored to the text, however.

4100 may have had anoiKiav not noXiv in i 25.1, but the text is in lacuna. 4105 shows an agreement (in truth) with a variant recorded in H: a vrfj not npwrrj at vi 55.2; this leading thus stands with Staroi'a at i 2.2 (/732 and H2) and with a number of readings towards the beginning of bk. vi in the freakish P. Bodmer XXVII, published by Carlini, Mus. Helv. 32 (1975) 33 ff-> and shows that at least some of the readings to which the H collator had access (the source is known as £) were in general circulation in antiquity.1 The same papyrus agrees with C against b over the spelling of a proper name at vi 55. 1 . As has long been recognized, towards the end of bk. vi the medieval tradition is signific¬ antly enlarged by B’s switching to a difference source. Papyri falling on this side of the divide — 4105B-4112, of those published here — can be expected to offer correspond¬ ingly less that is new, and the only textual novelties in evidence here are either in clear error (4110 6, 4112 1) or beyond secure recovery (4105B<-»6-8, 4109 fr. 3.1). Between B (or BH, where H still follows B) and the rest the papyri’s support is divided: 4105B and 4109, the only two of any extent (the latter is more of 2100 [77 24] + 3891), each show agreements both with and against B (4105B: with B: vii 2.3 npdc not Ic, 2.4 ?k-rvyXave not ervye, 4.4 6Travaya>yac not enaywyac] against B: vii 2.4 ? Kaipov not tov Kaipov , ib. €TT€T€Te\ecTo not an-, 4.4 om. pSr]] 4109: with B: viii 46 fin. £vveno\epiei, 92.4 6; against B: viii 85.3 cjsvyovToc not Sia (fsvyovroc): a reminder of how much is lost to the tradition in the first six books.

In passing, I should demur at attempts that have been made to press the papyri into stemmatic service by fastening on cases of agreement in error and treating them as Bindefehler, as establishing affiliation. If a papyrus agrees in error with the hypothes¬ ized ‘archetype’ 6 against the hypothesized extra-archetypal source A (by which only C is untouched), that does not justify talking in terms of an ancient ‘split’ between the

1 In this connexion note should also be made of viii 23.5 in XVII 2100 (which 4109 now joins),

where the main mss wrongly give vetbv. H is not extant after vii. 50 (it switched from collating to transcribing the £ ms at vii 5), but Awt“Xa'1' has been found entered by a second hand in Nf (Alberti, Boll. Com. n.s. 1 3 [1965] 20), and it seems probable — all the more so since Valla evidently had a text with both readings ( sociorum itemque classiarius ) — that the reading owes its presence in Nf to collation with H or a kindred ms.

6o

THUCYDIDES

two ‘traditions’, let alone postulating a ‘prearchetype’ to serve as the common ancestor of 0 and A (cf. LVII p. 47); similarly with 0 and Q. No stemmatic relationship can be affirmed on the basis of isolated or sporadic concurrence, whether in error or in truth, and the papyri give no grounds for projecting 0, or A, or Q back into antiquity as separate lines of tradition.2 I would say the same of the other hypothesized sources, E and 0 and V7. The concurrences that P. Bodmer XXVII shows with variants entered in H and other recc. certainly give impressive confirmation of access to ancient readings from which the vetustiores were cut off (especially in bks. i vi: matters would look rather different if the source available to B for the last two books had been available for the earlier books too), but the papyrus lends no substance to the notion of a discrete E tradition in antiquity.

Hude’s 1898 ‘editio maxima’ has been relied on for the readings of the ‘optimi’ (CG [ = c; for G see LVII p. 47 f. ], ABEFM [ = b up to vi 92.5], H from vi 92 to vii 50). For the recentiores, whose importance has increasingly been recognized, the 1942 OCT (revised byj. E. Powell) and the Bude edition have been used, with supplementary information drawn from G. B. Alberti’s series of articles ‘Questioni tucididee’ in Boll. Com. (1957 onwards) and the preface to vol. I of his edition (Rome 1972) and from A. Kleinlogel, Geschichte des Thukydidestextes im Mittelalter (Berlin 1965, hereafter ‘Kleinlogel’). For books iii-v I have at the last moment also been able to consult vol. II of Alberti’s edition (Rome 1992). I use B for B, but it must be remembered that from vi 92.5 (4105B-4112) it is effectively a different ms.

4100. Thucydides i 25-26, 27-29, 31

88/ 243 Fr. 15x9 cm Second-third century

Scraps from several columns of a roll of Thuc. i, written in an advanced ‘severe’ style of the later second or earlier third century. The back is blank. Column height by calculation c. 19—20 cm, occupied by c. 32 lines; width c. 6 cm. Upper margin (fr. 7) at least 2.8 cm. Apparently a three-grade punctuation system: middle stop, high stop, high stop + paragraphus. No other lectional aids in evidence.

The combined evidence of the fragments indicates that frr. 1 , 2 and 3+4 are from three successive columns, that the next two columns are unrepresented, and that frr. 5, 6 and 7 + 8 come from the next three columns respectively. One new reading is indi¬ cated, in lacuna at fr. 1.7; there may also have been some textual discrepancy in fr. 8.

2 A recent example, encountered since the above was written, will illustrate. It is argued on the basis of two agreements in supposed error between B and P. Yale I 19 in bk. vii (kreXevTijdr) not ireXevra in 34.8 and Xpijcreodai not av ... xpVaaa®a‘ in 36-5) that Q was already ‘preformed’ in the second century (G. B. Alberti, Thucydidis Historiae vol. II [Rome 1992], xii-xiii). This would be unsound even if it were certain that the readings in question are false. All the papyrus does is confirm the antiquity of these two particular readings.

4100. THUCYDIDES i 25-26. 27-29. 31

Fr. i

Ttp,a/p]iar [ouc]ar- ev a[ (i 25.

77opa»]t €lxo[vt]o decOai [ to Tr]apov Kai TT€p\rr [ ipavjrec ec SeX^ovc top [

5 deov ] €7T7]pOVTO Cl TTCL [ paSojiev k[o]plv9lolc t\t)p C.8 ] cue olklct[cuc

j/cat np.[a;p]iar nr [a ]tt€lpcuvt[o a] 77 avreuv [ io 77]ot[eic#]ai['o §] avroLc ar[et Ae] 77apa§[ou]rat /cat 77 [ yeptorac 7r]oietc0ar [eA 25.2

9ovt€c 8e ot] e77tSap.[

Vtot ec TTjV Ko]pLv9oV [

Fr. 2

i/77e]Se[^ai'ro r^r rt (25. c

jaa/]ptar rop.[t£or r]ec ovy rjccov [eavreuv et]rat ttjp a7r[o] t/c[tar r]

5 /cep/c]upat[a/r] ap,a S[e /cat p,]tcet tcuv /cep/cn[ patair o]rt aurtur 7rap[^ 25.4

p.eAo]ur orrec airoi /cot- o]pr[e yap e]r 77av7j[

10 yvpeci rate /co] irate [

StSorrec yepa T]a ro

Fr. 1

1 [orejar suits the space well enough, but does not exclude Naber’s conjectured ioiiaav.

5 kvrjpovTO with b: knrjpwTwv C ^ G j> .

7 7 roAtv codd., too short. airoLKtav (cf. napeSoaav tt)v airoudav just below) looks about right for the space. ttoXlv c<f> cuv and ETnhapvov are other possibilities.

9 The iota is a subsequent addition apparently by another hand. The righthand side of the omega is unusually thick, and it may be that that too represents an added iota. To judge from the space, it looks as if the word was written unelided (as b).

10 aiirotc with b (and G ut vid.): avTT)v C yp. G.

14 It is not quite certain that this is the last line of the column.

Fr. 2

9 Reiske’s deletion of yap is excluded.

Fr. 3		Fr. 5
]rat/n[/cor /cat ipcav	(25-4)	Se /co]pir0[ta>r prjec 77a
ovk a8w[aror rpLi)		pac] K€vaI,[oPTO rpta
peic y[ap et/coct /cat e/ca		/corjra /ca[i rptcytAtot 0
TOP [ VTTTjpXOP aVTOLC		77Atrat] • C77[et
5 ore tt][px]opt[o 77oAep,etr-		.
7Tap[rcup] ovp [	26. 1

62

THUCYDIDES

[o]lKrj[TOpa T€ TOV fiovAo

/j,ev[ov lcvcu kcAcvov

T€C * /<[ai afJLTTpaKUjOTCJOV

kcll A[evKa8ut)v kcu eav

rcov [cf>povpovc erropev 26.2

9]rjc[av

Fr. 6

7t]olclv €i [Se pa] kcll clvtol (28.3) a]vayKa[c97]cecOou e <f)ac\av [

Fr. 3

1 No telling whether in fact vavrixov (ABF C) or vavTiKa (EM G), since the latter is not significantly shorter.

5/6 A vestige of presumptive paragraphos perhaps visible.

Presumably four lines lost between fr. 3 and fr. 4.

Frr. 5, 6. The line divisions are only exempli gratia.

Fr. 5. 4 That the suspect rptcxiAioi stood in the papyrus can only be a presumption, but it is consistent with the amount of space available, and any other figure in a papyrus of this date would be a surprise.

Fr. 7 Fr. 9

^TTjV €7Ti[8apiVOV K€p (29-l) .....

]#a;patot[c tojv €v\picK€cOa\i' ol 8e 31.3

. . . . KOpl\ vdlOl 7Tvdo[pLeVOL

Fr. 8 . . . rat >]ra rjA9ov /c[ai

P l]cT€v[c O TTcAAiyOV KCLL KaA (29.2) .....

A] LKpa [rr]c o /caAAiou /cat rijita ]vc op o t[lplclv9ovc tov S]e -n e^[ou

Frr. 7-9. The line divisions are speculative.

Presumably two lines lost between fr. 7 and fr. 8.

fr. 8.1-2 As supplemented in accordance with the transmitted text (C omits the first 6) the first two lines are exceptionally long (not that there is any certainty about the line divisions); even without the two /cat's they would still be on the long side; but it would be strange if the fathers’ names were dispensed with.

M. W. HASLAM

63

4101. THUCYDIDES iv 1 9-20 4101. Thucydides iv 19-20

I03/i°i(b) 3.0 x6.2 cm Third century

A scrap broken on all sides, written in an upright version of the ‘severe’ style, executed with panache; the tails of r, v and especially p descend well below the line, a takes exaggeratedly angular form. I would assign this specimen to the third century rather than the second. On the back, documentary remains, perhaps of an account.

at] a [t

napa yvooijirjv Sia/cirS] vvev[

eiv 77p.1v 8e /caAtojc ei7rep 7ro[ iv 20. 1

re ex€L apL(f>OT€po]cc rj £uvaA[

5 Xayr] -rrpLV tl avrjK€CTo]v 81a pe[

cov yevopLevov rjp. ac] yaraAfa fie tv ev an avayKrj atStov] vpuv[ eyOpav npoc rr) l KOLvrp\ kcu t'8[i av ex€LV vp,ac 8e ere] pr]9rjva[i

I he line divisions given in the transcript are only exempli gratia. 7 r]fj.Tv (coni. Classen) is excluded. In 9 of course r^xac (Cax ) is possible.

M. W. HASLAM

4102. Thucydides v 18

1 o 1 /26(c) Fr. 2 4.6 x 8.5 cm Second-third century

Two fragments written in an undistinguished ‘severe’ style not I think to be identi¬ fied with the hand of any other of the manuscripts published here or in volume LVII, nor with that of P. Erl. 9 (Thuc. v: C. Gallazzi, 49 [1982] 39-41, with Taf. Ha), assignable to the latter half of the second century or the beginning of the third. Column width by calculation c. 5 cm. A circumflex accent at 2.3 is the only item of lectional apparatus in evidence.

That accent protects eppevoi from being taken as present, as in the medieval mss. And at 2.13 the papyrus preserves ’Adr/vp^d against the mss’ Ad-rjvouc. Given these two points of superiority, it is all the more unfortunate that its text at the juncture of the two fragments, where the transmitted text is regarded as defective, is beyond secure

THUCYDIDES

64

recovery; but the corruption there, if rightly recognized as such, is likely to have been of longer standing.

There is not quite textual overlap with XVII 2100 fr. 3 ii. The back is blank.

Fr. 1 ...

]vcuo[uc rrpoc XaKe8oupLOVL (v 18.9)

o]uc kcl[ 1 rove iv/j-i uayovc Ka ]ra 7ToX[eLC opcvvvr cop Se top e]77tya)[pior’ opKOv CKarepoi

Fr. 2 ...

t ]ov [pceyicrov e^ e/cacr-pc ]7roAe[ajc o 8 opKOC ecrco o8e • e]p.pL€vu) r[at]c tjop^dr/Kcuc /c]at Tate C77or8at[c rouc8e St 5 /ejatatc /ea[t] aSoAcu[c‘ ecrco 8e

X]aKe8cupLOVLOLc [/eat rote £v\ /Xjuay [o] tc /e[a]ra r[ aura op] /roc npoc adr]va[covc • top S]e opKov ava.P€o[vc0ou /ea 10 r] eveavrov apc\cf)OTepovc-

cjrTyAac Se errj [cat oXvpana 1 8. 10

ct] /eat ttvOol [/eat ccdpcoc /eat a0] 771/7710 e[r voXec /eat er 15 Aa] /ceSaip.[oia ev aptu/eAat

']...[

The line divisions given for both frr. are uncertain but look likely enough. The lateral relation of the two fragments is established by the fibres on the back, but the fragments are discontinuous and the distance between them is not determinable on physical grounds.

Fr. 1.4— fr. 2.1 The supplements I have given, which imply that fr. 2.1 directly succeeded fr. 1.4 (some¬ thing that cannot be physically confirmed), follow the medievally transmitted text, generally recognized as being corrupt. That yields appropriate line lengths, whereas I see no way of comfortably accommodating the generally accepted addition enra kou. Se/ra, with or without ef. cannot be excluded on external grounds, but in a text such as this numerals are invariably written out in full; if really has dropped out of the text

65

4102. THUCYDIDES v 18

or been replaced by as the emendation postulates, it must have been at a much earlier stage. Or did e-n-ra Kai Sexa diop out before ef exa by a kind of haplography? At all events, while the remains of fr. 2.1 could be otherwise assigned, it does look as if the papyrus had the same text as the medieval manuscripts.

Fr. 2.2 A paragraphus will have been lost; likewise in subsequent lines. I have supplied stops.

3 Eppevoj F. Portus: eyyeVc 0 codd. (qu.ju.evcu sine acc. E, insignificant: Kleinlogel 153). In the papyrus there is a speck ol ink above the line between the right hasta of v and the left of co; the papyrus is broken above. This is what I have taken for a remnant of a circumflex.

7 Kara c EZ: xai xara ABFM. The direction of the stroke coming in to the top of the extant alpha I think suits r not x, excluding x[at] xa-r[a. Whether ravra or ra avra was written there is no way of telling.

1 3 The papyrus d]9r)V7]ici accords with Flerwerden’s correction of A0rjvo.ic to yiOrjorjCLv. This makes it likelier that the papyrus in the previous line had not tad ju.au (all reported mss.) but icdjuoi. Adtjvrjow is not wholly without representation among the medieval manuscripts. J. E. Powell in the revised O.C.T. apparatus reported it in recc. , and Alberti reports it in Vm (Palatinus gr. 133); no mention in Kleinlogel. In view of the affiliation between Vm, Pf, and Mb (Alberti, Thucydidis Historiae vol. I, lxxvii— lxxviii, cf. lxxxv), it may be that the reading is in the latter two too, as well as in Vm’s descripti (Ms, Sb, VI: Alberti, Boll. Com. n.s. 13,

'965. 1 7 Q-

15 Indeterminate letter-top traces consistent wth ev ayuxAat | cu ei Se] ri ay [vryyovouci, as transmitted.

M. W. HASLAM

4103. Thucydides v 35

19 2B.74/F(g) 2.7 X 7.7 cm First-second century

A scrap from a column foot, written in a formal round and upright hand, strictly bilinear and lighdy decorated; a date towards the end of the first or the beginning of the second century seems indicated. The lower margin was at least 4 cm deep. Punctuation by high point. Back blank.

t]ovtojv o[uv opiovrec v 35.4

01] a9r]vaLo\i ovSev epyou yijyvo/j,€vo[y uttojttt€v ov ] rove \aKe[8aLp,ovLovc 5 fi\rj8ev Slkol[lov 81 avo

eijcdaL- ojcr[e ovre ttvAov air] cutovvt [cov

There is no certainty about the line divisions.

3 vTrwTTTevov, conjectured by Meineke and reported by Alberti in L and Q, is the accepted text: vneTonre- vov C (vtt€7T(!)7tt€vov C3), v7T€t6tt€vov b <(G )>. Cf. viii 76.2. I would suppose either virajTTTevov or vTreroTrevov for the papyrus, though no worthwhile case can I believe be made for inroroTrevco in Thucydides. His regular

66

THUCYDIDES

practice seems to have been to use vnov-Tevco, but inroTom]a- is well attested, and the extent to which that should be altered to t nronreva - is an open question.

M. W. HASLAM

4104. T HUCYDIDES V 5O

ioi/2i(d) 2.6x2.4cm Second-third century

A scrap written in an extreme ‘severe’ style of the later second or early third century; o and e are minimized. The columns must have been unusually narrow, less than 4 cm. Back blank.

e0]eo >[povv rrXrjv

Ae7 Tpea[TU)v o v 50.3

p[ot]c S[ e ol rjXeL

OL Se§[lOT€C [JL7J

fii ot[

3 /xaic (o] |/icoc) is what should have been written. Two thin converging lines have been drawn through o and 1 respectively, making a shallow v-shape; it gives no impression of u>. Perhaps the correct text was written in the margin, of which 5 mm survive at left and none to the right.

M. W. HASLAM

4105. Thucydides vi 52-55, vii 2, 4

A 101/ 1 13(d) A fr. 2 6.6 x 1 0.0 cm Second— third century

B 65 6B.3o/J(i— 2)a + 31/0(1 )a B fr. 2 4.9 x 9.5 cm

Fragments of two codex leaves, from bks. vi and vii respectively, written on papyrus in a proficient workaday ‘severe’ style of medium size attributable I would suppose to the latter part of the second century, though the third can hardly be excluded. It is not certain that the two leaves (A and B) belonged actually to the same codex; the two pairs of fragments have different inventory numbers, so were apparently not found together. But I have brought them together on the basis of their apparendy identical format. I presume a two-column page, with each pair of fragments representing the

4105. THUCYDIDES vi 52-55, vii 2, 4 67

column closer to the central fold. That enables reconstruction of a page of normal dimensions: page breadth somewhere in the region of 15 cm, height in the region of 24 cm (cf. E. G. Turner, Typology of the Early Codex , Table 1, esp. group 7). To postulate a single column to the page would give a page size of unexampled tallness and narrowness.

Column width was c. 5.5— 6.0 cm, column height (on the assumption of two cols. /page) may be calculated at c. 19 cm, occupied by about 40 lines. The upper margin seems to have been a bare 1 cm (B), but 3.5 cm was allowed for the lower (A); c. 1.5 cm or more between columns (A+-+). No page numeration is in evidence. On this format bk. vi and bk. vii would each occupy about 32 leaves. The textual distance between A and B, amounting to perhaps 18 leaves, makes it unlikely that they come from the same quire, and it must remain in doubt whether or not bks. vi and vii were bound together. 1 he situation is similar with LVII 3885 etc., another Thucydides codex ol similar format and date. It is not out of the question that these were one-volume Histones (cf. Turner, Typology, 82 f., C. H. Roberts and T. C. Skeat, The Birth of the Codex, 7 1 f.), but they would be very fat books; the papyrus is not particularly thin, and the collema-joins (one is in evidence in A, just as in XLIX 3450A) would increase both the thickness and the pressure on the binding. We could envisage two- or four-volume sets, or for that matter eight-volume, as (presumably) with rolls (cf. XVII 2100 + LVII 3891 +4109 for a set of rolls, LVII 3890 for an end-title of bk. ii).

A and B each have their recto pages (recto in the codicological sense) written on the side on which the fibres run horizontally (corresponding to the recto or inside of a roll). If the codex was made up in the normal manner (cf. W. Schubart, Das Buch, 1 18, Turner, Typology , 65-7), each will come from the latter half of its quire. Here the textual position ol B, close to the beginning of bk. vii, may be of relevance. The amount of text that precedes would occupy, pretty exactly, one page. If the quire from which B comes consisted of more than a single sheet, we may conclude that that quire contained the end of bk. vi, so that the codex comprised at least those two books (and therefore bks. v and viii as well?). The premise might seem reasonable, since single-sheet quires are exceptional (Turner, Typology, 60 f.). But in fact the possibility that B is the right- hand leaf of a unio (single-sheet quire), and that bk. vii was independent, must be seriously reckoned with. XLVII 3321 (Eur. Phoen.) offers a precise parallel. It would not have to be assumed that the entire codex was of uniones; it might even have been a practice to put a single sheet at the beginning.

A two-grade punctuation system is used: double dot (dicolon) for major stop, single (in mid-to-high position) for minor. This use of double dot, well attested in Plato manu¬ scripts (XLVII 3326 intro.), is unusual in texts of historians. Initial v or 1 is attended by trema, as conventionally, and elision is marked. Correction of a small scribal omission is made supralinearly at BJ 13, apparently by the copyist himself. Iota adscript is not written.

68

THUCYDIDES

At A| 2 1 the papyrus gives a reading otherwise found only as a variant recorded in H; such variants in H are recognized as reflecting use of a source unrepresented among the primary mss (B. Hemmerdinger, Essai sur Vhistoire du texte de Thucydide , 55—60, A. Kleinlogel, Geschichte des Thukydidestextes im Mittelalter, 1-40, Alberti, praefatio cix- cxxxix). At | 18 it accords with C’s spelling of a proper name. For bk. vii, represented by leaf B, the medieval tradition is further enriched by ms B’s utilization of a different source ( Q ). As usual, the papyrus shows no consistent agreement: with B at 25(?) and | 21, against B at +->26(?), 28 and J 26. (The primary readings of H do not become of interest until vii 5.1, from which point it largely deserts B in favour of £.) At B<->-6-8 the papyrus seems to have had a slightly longer text than transmitted.

A <->

a/cm] ayp[v ttol (vi 52.2)

r]capievoi\ /cat tojv c[upa /cocttov i7r]77ea>v fS[or]drj cavrojv] KdL TOJV lfjlA[u)V Tl 5 vac ec/ce§] acficvovc §[ta (f>dapavr\(x>v a77€/cOjat[c drjcav ec /cjarav^v: /cat 53- 1

c. 15 lines gone

] pucTT^pia (53-2)

/cat tojv Trep]t rove c[ppiac 10 SpacdevTco] v: /cat [ou 80/ci

pa^ovrec] rove pi[r]vvTac aAAa] vavra vttott[tloc an to Se^O|a]ev[o]t: 81a 7TOv[r]pojv avdp]u>7Toov 77ict[iv iravv 15 yprjCTo\vC TOJV TTo[XlTCOV

£oAA] a [ptj8a] vovrec /ca[re

Sou] y: xPrlCLlJi(jOT€Pov V yo]vpLcv(n avai ftacavi ca]t to vpaypia /cat cvpav 20 rj ] 3ta pipwTOV 7rovqpi[

a]v rtva /cat yprjCTOv S[o

*

4105. THUCYDIDES vi 52-55, vii 2, 4

69

At

5

10

15

20

7r]a7T7r[oi> eyoov TOV JyOjLia [o]c [tcov 8oo8e ]/<a decov j3[cop,ov tov ev t]t) ayopa a plyarv aveOrjKe Kai tov tov a [77oAA<woc ev ttvOlov: koll [rto pcev ev tt) ayopa TTpocoi[Ko8op,r]cac c. 17 lines gone twv yv]r][a.a>v a8eX(f>a>v yevojpbevoi. [coc o Te j 8a>p,oc C7]fxa\ivei /c[ai rj ctt] \rj r/(?) ■nepL t\t]c toj[v Tvpavvcov a St/aa]c T] ev tt] ad[r]vauov a Kpoir\o\eL cra[0]eica [ev t] 9ec caAo]u p,ev ou§’ orjArap yov ot»]S’etc ttcu c yeypa 7t[tou L7T7T to] v Se vevTe: ot ati[ra» eK pLvjppivrjc TTjc /caA[Atou tov ] virepoyiSov dvya,Tp[oc eyejvovTo: etKoc yap pv t[ov tt p] ec[3vTaTOV TrpcvTov [yr] jU,]at.‘ Kai ev ttj avTTj [ ctt]

(vi 54-6)

54-7

(55-0

55-2

A<->

8 After 17 there are residual traces on a loose fibre, unassignable.

13 The double point is not quite certain; only the upper point is clear.

1 7 Of the double point only the lower survives.

20 rj was evidendy present: om. E.

2 1 The r of ru'd has a tiny dot each side of the leg, inconspicuous but not evidendy casual. I wonder if the dots were placed before the page was written, to mark the point where the last line was to begin. I see no sign of any such pricking system on the verso, but there too the actual line beginning is lost. Cf. XLVII 3321 27, where a dot appears to mark the point where the codex’s recto column is to begin, and more generally Turner, GMAW 2, p. 4.

At

1—2 There is no way of telling whether rovvofj,a or to oro/xa was written.

1 o There is no knowing whether or not the papyrus had the second article, which is attested only as a variant in H (H2) and in Ot (Ot3) and is accordingly associated with the £ tradition (Kleinlogel, 80 fi). The papyrus has a comparable reading at 21 below.

18 'Ynepox&ov with C, correcdy as it seems (IG xii Suppl. 2.125): ’Y-n-epex&ov b G.

70

THUCYDIDES

21 avrf): the manuscripts all give TTpaiTrj, but airf/, which was conjectured by Poppo and is accepted by editors, is entered as a variant in H (man. rec. = H2) and is implied by Valla’s ipso, i.e. it belongs to the tradition highlighted by Hemmerdinger and now known as I Cf. on to above.

B>

raioc ] opp,r)9[eic npajTOC (vii 2.l)

jttev a]cf>u<v[eLTaL ec rac cvpa] /e[o] vcac [oAtyov Se jrpo yv\i\TTirov[- Kai Kara Xa 5 /So )v] avrovc [7 rept airaXXa

yr/c t]ov 7roA[ep,ou c. 4 ] ac [

c. 4 ] Si[ck coXvce re teat 77ape] 9apcu[ve Xeycov 10 ota r](pc[c

c. 6 lines gone

yvXiTTTTOO e]v[9uc ttclv (2-3)

cr] par ta c oc a7r[avTrjcopie rot] e£rjX9ov[' rjSr] yap Ka t [eyyvc ovra Tjc9avovTo\

15 [a vtov o Se terac Tore ret]

yoc] ev ttj Tjapo\h(x) tcjov cak] eAcor eXcu[v /cat £vv Ta\£ap,evoc cue [ec p^aypv acf)] iKveiTai 7T[poc rac em 20 J-toAoic Kai ava/3[ac Kara tov 2.4

e] ypvrjXov r]Tre\p Kai o 1 a9rj vaioi to TrpooTOv [eycopei piera Tcoy cvpa^Koacov em to ret^tc/xa [re ov a 25 9r)vaioov €Tvy[yave

Kara touto Kai[pov eX9cov ev oj e-uTa p,ev [17 oktco ctcaSa a>v ipSrj e77[erere Ae[c]ro [rote a9]r]va[iOiC

A collema-join runs down both fragments, fixing their relative lateral position.

4105. THUCYDIDES vi 52-55, vii 2, 4

71

Bt

ol 8 a9rj]vaiot: f[Tuyov yap 4.3

e^cu auAt] £op,e[vot cue 77c Oovto av]T€7Tr)e[cav o 8c yvovc /ea]ra rayo[c avrjyayc 5 TOVC C(J)CT]cpOVC 7r[aAlV €7T

OLKo8op,rj] cavTC [c 8e avro ol adr]vaLo]i m fjr]\\oTCpov av tol pLcv Tav\rrj e[</>uAarTOv rove 8c aAAoJuc ^v/jL^pLayovc 10 Kara to aAAo] Tc[LyLcp,a

c. 6 lines gone

Aecuc Tj-ncp] irpovyo [uca tov (4-4)

f xcyaXov ] Atjtievoc [to cto

jua CTCVo]v 7TOLCL ' KOL [ft] ' t[cL\Lc9cL 7] pacuv ajorcu e^at [vcto 4 15 €CKOpuS]ri TCOV CTr[iTrj8cL

cuv ecec#]ai: St[a]]eAaT[TO voc yap 7r]poc rcu A[t|Uevi rcu t cuv c] vpaKocuvv [e (fjOppLTjee] tv C(f>ac KaL [ou^ cue 20 7 TCp VVV €/<] pivyov TOV At[jUe

voc rac €77] avaywyac 7t[ol 7/CeC0at] TJV TL VaVTLKOJ /cetvJcuvTat: irpoccLyc tc r)8rj] /xaAAov tcu Kara 25 0aAaTra]v -noXcp.a> opcu[v

Ta ck Tyj\c yrjc ccf)LCLV 6776 [1 S77 o yu]At7777oe rjKcv a[veA

7TLCTOTc]pa ovTa: Sia/co/x[t 4.5

cac ouv] crpar[tav /eat rac 30 vauc e]^erety[tce

B- >

6—8 After tov -rroXefjLOV the transmitted text runs fj-eXXovrac €KKXr]cidceiv Sie/ccoAuce re ktA., with no variants attested. The papyrus evidently had more. Of line 7 only letter-tops are visible, the surface stripped below.

THUCYDIDES

72

ac seems recognizable: as between ^eA Xovrac and cKKX-pciaccw the latter seems better accommodated to the traces (if r before ac the top should be visible), and 7 roA[ep.ou p,eXXovTac\eKKX]ri<:ia.ce[w would make a good enough fit for the space too. In that case we must reckon with extra text between cKKXr/ciacew and SukcuXvcc. Before St[ in line 8 are traces on the line, not readily decipherable (the rightmost trace could be the lower point of a dicolon). An inversion of p-cAAovrac and eKKXrjciaccw is a possibility but would leave the latter part of line 6 unaccounted for, and on balance I think it likelier that something intervened after 7 €/c/cA]7)ciace[tv. (There is no guarantee that the textual variation did not extend further fore or aft, but there is no reason to think it did.) avrovc would hardly fill the space; ckci\vovc might.

14-15 The surface is stripped, and no text remains, so there is no telling whether icrac or the direct tradition’s yerac was written, nor whether ti was present before rctyoc, though considerations of space marginally suggest not.

17-18 Herwerden’s deletion of koI receives no support. UVTaU^€v0C AE.

19 Tj[poc with B, not cc.

25—26 Severe abrasion makes the readings uncertain and somewhat impressionistic. The paradosis is divided essentially between cnlyyave Sc /card tout 0 rod iccupov (BH) and cruyc Sc Kara tovto KOLpov. I have given crnyyarc not cruyc in the transcript purely on the basis of line-length: what is left of the ink itself is indeterminate. The line is on the short side even so: shifting cA0c ov after cruycv would take care of that, but would leave 26 short in turn (if that is righdy transcribed, no routine proviso): perhaps ervyxavev was written (with final nu), probably enough to fill the line. In 26 I am fairly certain of tovto, though the remains are scant; what follows seems to suggest xaipov rather than tov, but I could be deceived.

28 eir[: not atr- with BH.

The given line divisions cannot claim to be better than approximate. They are based on the appar- endy (but uncertainly) extant line endings in the lower part of the fragment.

2 For e£cu Vd gives not excluded; c£cu 77S77 J.

3 avreirpccav (-yecav) is in accordance with the mss’ habitual spelling; editors as habitually change to -fioav.

13 The supralineation, which appears to be by the copyist himself, is koi[, preceded by a dot. My reconstruction assumes that the scribe inadvertendy omitted Kouei after rro tct by homoeoteleuton.

1 4 I have supplied pacuv (C) rather than paov on grounds of space, but no reliance should be put on it, especially since the line divisions are uncertain.

16 a is crossed through, cancelling the scriptio plena. At the end r[ is represented by a speck on the broken edge, suitable for r but hardly for c ( kXaccovoc codd.: at least cXottovoc is not reported).

19-20 The reconstruction makes line 19 extend rather far to the right. ovx\ojc vw would make a better fit, but would be contrary to Thucydidean usage.

21 inavaywyac with BH, not knaywyac.

22 The abrasion in the latter part of the line is such that I cannot be sure that ri vovtikcu was written rather than Tiva vovtikw with BH.

26 Only the first letter of ctfucw is at all determinate, but that is enough to exclude 7)877, reported by Hude as intervening after yijc in BH (in the OCT, however, it is reported as following c^ictv; that too seems excluded for the papyrus). cr</uc« CE a.c.

27 It is not certain that the papyrus had 6 with BH. BH spell rvXXnnroc.

M. W. HAS LAM

4106. Thucydides vii 9-10

30 4B.4o/E(i-4)b 2.9x5.1cm Second century

A scrap broken on all sides written in an nondescript ‘severe’ style not I think identical with the hand of any other of the manuscripts published here or in LVII, assignable to the second half of the second century. Back blank.

4106. THUCYDIDES vii 9-1 0

73

Tpirjpci\c ck tov Tror[a fxov CTroAiopKci] oppcopc[voc €i Lipatov /cat] to dcpoc er[e Aevra tovto' tov S e]7riyryrop,[e vii io

5 vov ycipaivoc t)kov]t€c cc rac [aOrj

vac oi -napa tov v\cikiov oca tc [a no yAajccrjc etp-pj-ro avTocc cltt[ov Kai ci tic rt ppcojra aTrc[i<pivov to /cat ttjv €TriCTo]Ar]v a7r[e§o

The line divisions are purely speculative.

4 Considerations of space indicate that toOto, absent from AFM, was present.

8 Considerations of space favour ppojro. rather than kTnppujTa with B H, though perhaps not definitely so. Whether aircKpivovro (B [aireKpivov to] H C) or -avro (AEFM G) was written there is no telling.

M. W. HASLAM

4107. Thucydides vii 23

29 4B.46/K(4)a 8.7 x 13.2 cm Second century

Column foot, with vestigial remains of both adjacent columns, written in a good medium-sized bilinear upright hand attributable I suppose to the second century. Downstrokes sometimes terminate with slight hooks, p. is deep and narrow, e has high mid-stroke often making contact with the extremity of the upper arc but not extending beyond it. The script is similar to that of LVII 3901 (Thuc. iv) but shows less flair and more lateral compression; it is this latter feature, giving some impression of tallness, that chiefly distinguishes the hand from such classic round and upright scripts as P. Lit. Lond 30 (Seider, Pal. der gr. Pap. II ig); we may view it as a grander version of XV 1809 (Turner, GMAW 19, not in my opinion by the same hand as XVII 2076, GMAW 18). That this was a de luxe edition is made clear by the extremely generous lower margin, at least 8 cm deep. Column width 5 cm, height undeterminable; intercol- umnium c. 1.7 cm. Filler-signs aid in justifying the right margin. Iota adscript is written. The back is blank.

74

THUCYDIDES

col. ii col. iii

e]£ avrojv </>[eu yovrec pai]ov Trapev\ey[ car at yap r]t ov cvpaKO vii 23-3

ci]tor [at 7Tpo\ T OV CTOjUa>

5 t]oc VT^ec [va]t)|L6a^ouca[t]

jStacapevat rac tojv a> r[

#77va[i]cor vauc ovScvl r[

KOCpLtm €C€7tA€OV KaL> t[

rapaydeicai 7T€p[t] aAAi?

All that remains of col. i is ]v opposite ii 4.

M. W. HASLAM

4108. Thucydides vii 62

30 4B.4o/G(4~6)c 2.9x6.3cm Second— third century

A scrap from the foot of a column, written in a medium-sized angular ‘severe’ style attributable to the latter part of the second or the first half of the third century. Iota adscript is written. There is textual overlap with XI 1376 (/718), lines 420—27; cf. P. Berol. 1 1519, ed. W. Muller, FBSM 10 (1968) 127 f.

On the back, a text of uncertain nature, written in a large cursive hand of I would say the third century.

Front

coJetou k at o^[Aoc cot vav (vii 62.2)

pja^tar pe[r notoujite

ro]t ev neAayfei ovk av e

yp]cojite#a 8 ta [to /3Aa7rretr

av r]o TTjC enter [1711x770 ryi

fiapvT\r]Ti Toov [ vea>v

5

4108. THUCYDIDES vii 62

75

ev Se rrjL en0]aS[e r/vay Kacfi€v]r)i avo r[a>v vea>v neI,o]ix[ax\ L0LL ^p[oc

ev[

The line divisions are not certain but plausible enough.

3 Ink above a of ireAayet I take to be casual, but it could be an accent.

Lower marg. The hand does not seem to be the same as that on the back, though I cannot be quite certain. But I would guess (from its size and position) that it has no connexion with the Thucydides.

Back

]coupacau[

| VKpTjfJLVO [

]e kclioct[

] cotioovl\k[

5 ] poca»e)St[

]avdpu)TTo[

] . [

].T.[

] .Pa. [. . ,]°[

io ] TTOT [ ]/8t[

] c/cara[ ] vc[

]0aneA[]ei [

]oc cuov[

3 c in correction with v 1 3 After c an apparent interval before co, but the papyrus is intact only

at letter-top level.

2 A compound in -/rp-^/xroc ( -rroXv -, fiadv-, ev-?)? That would smell poetic.

4 An odd collocation of letters, but I see no other reading. The papyrus is undamaged except for a small break in the middle of ov.

7 710] Aeptoc a possibility. 13 could be articulated c&ov.

1 1 Kara [to] iic would fit.

M. W. HASLAM

76

THUCYDIDES

4109. Thucydides viii 40- 41, 46-7, 85, 92, 96-97, 104

87/334(3) Fr. 1 6.5 x 8.5 cm Second century

These fragments are by the same hand as XVII 2100 (/7 24j, which gives remnants of bks. iv and v as well as bk. viii,1 and LVII 3891, which has remains of bk. iii, and evidently come from the same set of rolls.

Fr. 9, though it does seem to have some connexion with the Thucydidean text, is textually anomalous. It may be a scholium that has infiltrated the main body of the text.

At fr. 2 ii 2 (viii 46 fin.) £vveTroXep.€L was evidently present, as in B; the word’s omission is an extraordinary Leitfehler of the rest of the tradition. The papyrus sides again with B at fr. 4.4, but goes against B at fr. 3.7. This inconsistency is in line with the picture presented by 2100 and other papyri of bks. vii or viii.2 An omission at fr. 8.3/ 4 coincides with an omission in C, but I do not think it is a significant conjunction.

Fr. 1

/x]ax°[uc TTpodvfJLOVC OVTCLC C Up

/x] 77 to [ec to orjdeiv ev tovt an 8e viii 4 1. 1

€K T TjC Ic[a]u[vOU TTCLpdy lyVCTCLL

ayyeXia on [ai eirra kcll clkoo.

5 vVec KaL 01 TC0[V Xa/ceScuptovi

a>v ^up,/3o[uAoi 77apetcr /cat vo pucac TTavra [vcTepa €lvcll raX Xa TTpoc to va[vc re 077 toe OaXacco KpaTOiev jU.afAAov’ rocaurac u 10 irapaKopucac [/cat tovc Aa/ceSat

p,oviovc ol tjk[ov /carac] ko [ttol avTov accf)aX to[c 7T€Lpauo\9r][vcu e]v9vc a</>et[c to ec ttjv] xlov e

7rAet ec Tiqv /c[awow] /c[at] ec /cto[v 41.2

Severely abraded; most of the ink has gone; where none remains at all, I put square brackets. There is a sheet-joint about 2.5 cm in from the line of break at the left; c. 1.5 papyrus overlap.

1 Of the unidentified scraps of 2100, fr. 15 is from v 10 ( BASP 27 [1990] 43), and it may be suspected that

fr. 16 is from iv 38.1 (xreij ae]vov cu[c redveairoc avroc rptjroc ktX).

2 The statements made about B at XLIX p. 88 are misinformed. (And it should be noted that the primary text of 3451 concurs with B in going without xraAou/xevov at viii 34: the word was added evidendy by collation against another exemplar.)

77

4109. THUCYDIDES viii 40-41, 46-7, 85, 92, 96-97, 104

col. i

Fr. 2

col. ii

Aoyo]v re £ v/jl

(f>OpU)TCLTOV KCU TO epyOV ey] 0V~

rac TTo\ep,€LV rove p,]ev yap — £uyxaTaSouAouv] av c(/>t[c]i re 5 avroLc to ttjc 9aXac]cpc prepoc Kai exeivtoi ocoi ev tt]l\ fiaciXe

(46-3)

5

10

U)CT€ Aav]0av[eiv ov npodv /43J[C] ve[7ToXep.€L • o Se aA xi/SiaSj-pjc r[aora ap,a piev tool Ti,cca(f)[epv€L Kai toil fiaaXei iov rrap exeiv[oi]c a[ptcra eivou vop, i£a>v [v]apr)v[€L apra Se ttjv eavTov xa0o§o[v ec ttjv rraTpiSa €77T#epa7r[euajv ei 8 a»c ei p.77 81 [a] cf)9e [pet avTTjv or t ecTOu 77ore a[urtot rreicav tl xa.TeA0etv 77et[cat 8 av €VO pu£ev ptaAtcra [ex tov tolov t[ou ei r] iccacfrepvr) [c <^>cuvoito aVTLO €7Tl\t7]8€LOC [cOV

47.1

Fr. 3

V7)]v <f>a[i\y[ eiv (fj9eipovTa tojv ireXo TrovvrjCLoov ra [ 77payp,ara /xer aAxpSiaSoo [xcu €7rap.(f)o Tep[i]£opra ey#p[a 8e npoc au 85.3 5 tov rjv avTun a[ei ttot€ rrepi tov pac9oV T7]C 0.770 [SoCeCOC KOI,

Ta TeXevTara (f>v[yovToc ex cv pai<[o]vcc tov too [ eppLOKpaTovc Kai eTepcov 7]xov[Ta>v

78

THUCYDIDES

Fr. 4

ot] ya[p ev (92.4)

ran Tret]paiet r[o tt^]c 7y[e]Tt[a» vetac] retyoc 07r[A]etTat ot/c[o Sop-oujvrec ev o[tc] /cat o aptc[TO 5 Kparrj]c rjv Taftapya/v /cat r [r/v

Fr. 6

Fr. 5

/cat] at V7] (96.4)

COL KOU TCL pLCypi CvfioLdC /Cat] O )C

CLireLV tj adrjvcucov apyp] ird cd ' aAA ovk ev tovtcul p,ov]an AdKe8dLpOVLOL d9r]VdlOL\c

a[i d(f) tov /cat vopoderdc /cat (97.2) Ta[AAa eLprjcfjLCdVTO ec ttjv vo AtT[etav /cat 01/y ■p/ctcra §77 tov 7rpa)[rov ypovov eTrL Y€ epov a

5 9r)VdL[oL (j)dLVOVTdL €V 7ToAl

revcdv[rec' perpLd yap 77 re ec roue [oAtyouc /cat rove ^ roA Aouc £[uv/cpactc eyevero /cat etc 7rov[^ptov tojv rrpdypd 10 tcov ye\vopevtov tovto npao tov dv[rjveyKe ttjv ttoAlv e\tfi7](f)[LCdVTo 8e /cat aA/ct/3ta 97-3 8r]v [/cat aAAoi/c per dvrov /carte [vat

Frr. 5 and 6 seem to belong to the relative positions shown. 2100 fr. 12 will come from the immediately preceding column. XLIX 3451, a different manuscript, has text from this vicinity.

Fr. 7

] dp£dp[evoi d 7 to tSa/coo] /xeypt a[ppiava>v vr/ec e £ /cat ej38op[r]KovTd'

Kepdc 8e rote pev [7reAo770V 104.3

\

79

4109. THUCYDIDES viii 40-41, 46-7, 85, 92, 96-97, 104

5 VTjdotc eixoy [to per Se|i

OV CVpa[KOCLOL TO 8 €T€pOV

atn-[oc

2100 fr. 13 will come either from the preceding column or from the upper part of

this one.

Fr. 8

] €ora[

].[

Fr. g

stripped [

Tat7]V§€TOTOto[ 0iara77pa>TaTaSe [ to iceieer [ [[eiJSeTO/xVpooT [ Sere co0iAtaj#[ Ka ptTa8tay[

5

stripped [

a T e

10

4 After dta, some ink above the line: a clumsily made high stop?, v ?, casual? co seemingly remade

from o 5 See comm. 8 After Ka, n poss., not we

indeterminate 10 See comm.

9 A few vestiges remain, wholly

Fr. 1

7-8 TaXXa B: ra aAAa cett. The papyrus writes raXXa with B at 6.4 (2100 fr. 6.3): that it does so here too cannot be confirmed. Likewise at fr. 6.2 below. B also writes daXarro-, but 2100 consistently has -cc-.

9 For ^vfjL-napaKo^CcaL Flude conjectured ^vp-rrapaKopucdfivai, excluded.

Fr. 2 col. i

1—2 Or f vp.cj>€pu)raTOV with B Ud.

6 e/ceivau: the medieval manuscripts present a wide variety of endings (see Kleinlogel p. 1 15 with n. 18): again there is no telling what the papyrus had.

THUCYDIDES

80

col. ii

2 The remains are adequate to show that ^vve-naXep.ei was present in the papyrus as in B: om. cett. Since ■n-podvpuoc has sometimes been suspected I should add that -^u«[c] looks a good reading: not |voc or |^.evoc or |/ioc.

4 run was not certainly present but suits the amount of space available, io rrore a[urojt: avT(b rrore a few xf/- recc. (Pe Ve Vd: Kleinlogel pp. 69, 73)- 12 -pu codd. (at least, -£ev not reported).

Fr. 3. There are vestigial traces of ink from preceding lines on loose fibres at the top of the fragment, quite indeterminate.

1 The paradosis is oc epieXXe rov Ticcacfrepvpv aTrorfraCveiv 1 jrdeipovTo. kt\., which I cannot readily square with the remains on the papyrus. ]y<f> is fairly clear, but expectation of \ver]v c jidapovTa is frustrated by what follows: letter-foot traces in damaged context, first suggesting a though perhaps not excluding 6, second lower right-hand part of apparent v, hardly ei. </>a[i]y[ei.v matches the traces without forcing (there are additionally a few scattered specks on a loose fibre thereafter, quite indeterminate and not represented in the transcript); but a7r]o did not precede, and confidence is further weakened by the undesirably long line that results; one could image </> deipovra before tov Ticcacfrepvrjv, but there is just too little to go on.

3 per is represented by the merest specks but I do think peer aXx- rather than pcera aXx- was written.

4, 6 Initial paragraphoi may have been lost to abrasion, very severe at the line beginnings.

7 SiatfivyovToc B, excluded for the papyrus. (I would suppose the compound to be right, however. St a would easily disappear after aia.)

7-8 cu] |pa(r[o]ucccov: the spelling with double sigma is well attested.

Fr. 4. There is textual overlap with 77 1 (ed. C. Wessely, WS 7 [1885] 1 16 ff.).

2 There appears to be a horizontal line above the surviving (left) hasta of rj. It does not look much like a breathing (whether rough or smooth) but I have no other suggestion for it.

3 onXeir-: for the spelling cf. 2100 fr. 8 ii 24, cf. i 1 1, fr. 5 ii 26.

4 6 with B: om. cett.

Fr. 5

2 Evfiocac: or BoiwrCac with B.

Fr. 6

2 ra[AAa or ra [aAAa: as at fr. 1.7—8 above.

3 No paragraphus.

6 rj re: or fj ye with B or njSe with Stahl.

7 Considerations of space suggest that the papyrus did not repeat 7c before rove voXXovc with B.

8 eyevero : or eyCyvero (or kyeivero) with B.

10 A paragraphus here, but apparently not at 1 1 (though there damage may just possibly have removed it). Perhaps it was placed one line too early: cf. 3891 ii 10, 1 1, with n. ad loc.

Fr. 7

1—3 There is apparently a lacuna in the papyrus’ text: after line 3 there should be another clause, transmitted as o! S’ av IleXcmovvricioc avd AfivSov /xcxP1- zdapSavou, vrjec oktui kcli i^r/KOVTa. Matters are complicated by (i) suspicion attaching to the figure, the conjectured e£ xa.1 oySor/Kovra being usually accepted in place of oktw kol'l k^Kovra (a postulated error of mental inversion), and (ii) a lacuna in C, identical to the papyrus’ except that C has oySorjKovTa not efiSopir/KovTa. The shorter text is indefensible, but I would suppose C’s and the papyrus’ omissions to be independent. This is necessarily the case if Andrewes is right in saying that C’s oySor/KovTa ‘has slipped in here from the next line,’ for that can’t be so unless e£ kcli oySor/Kovra rather than oktu> xai e^r/KovT a stood in c’s exemplar and the jump occurred in the course of copying the repeated vrjec e£ xai, whereas in the papyrus it evidendy didn’t occur until the following word (since ejSSo/a- belongs exclusively to the first clause); but it is conceivable that C’s oySotjKovTa is subsequent to the omission,

4109. THUCYDIDES viii 40-41, 46-7, 85, 92, 96-97, 104 8i

unthinkingly substituted for k^o^Kovra under influence from 103.1. Still, saut du mbne au mbne is all but inevitable when there is so much mbne to facilitate it (and the scribe has the end of the work in sight), and C’s different text gives no encouragement to supposing that C and the papyrus derive the error from a common source. There is no telling whether or not in the papyrus the error was caught and the omission made good (cf. 2100 fr. 2.6 marg.: here the right margin is lost). Nor does the papyrus afford any clue as to what figure stood in the exemplar in the missing clause.

Fr. 8. Unplaced. I find no match in bk. viii; this is not surprising if it is to be associated with the next fragment.

Fr. 9. Unidentified. The fragment gives no external hint that it is not on a par with the others. But is is not. The first line could be to 8 evrepov lv[>Va, a phrase which occurs in bk. iii (8.1, also Paus. 4.23.10). But the rest of the text does not coincide with any part of our Thucydides. Very strange.

It may be commentary. 1 he compendium p(ev) seems to occur in line 6, and y in 8 and et(?) in 10 similarly suggest that this may be something other than regular book-text. The best guess I can make is that h is a^note associated with the mention of Dorieus at viii 35, adducing the bk. iii reference to him (that runs Vv 8e 0\vp.-mac fj ZlcopieOc IPoSioc to Seinepov kvUa). But notes belong in the margin, whereas what we have here has every appearance of the beginning of a regular column of the Thucydidean text. But I see no reasonable way of taking it as actually I hucydidean. Thus I take it that we are confronted with a case of elevation of scholiastic material into the body of the text, the incorporation being due presumably to a copyist who mistook the marginal note for a portion of text inadvertently omitted by his predecessor. Such things do happen, though more often on a smaller scale; cf. perhaps Gic. de ojf. 3.31. 1 12 ad Jin. (though that seems to be a deliberate interpolation).

The most detailed extant sources for the athletically brilliant career of Dorieus are SIG3 82 and Paus. 6-7- 1 ~7 tch lod, CQ, 43 [ 1 949] IC>6); Pausanias cites Androtion Atthis, but only for his sticky end. The medievally transmitted Thuc. scholia have no counterpart either in bk. iii or in bk. viii to what we find in the papyrus.

3 could be Se to tcho[0tov, TotoVSe. At 3-4 TTv]\dta seems likely, cf. Paus. 6.7.4 AeyeTCu 8e Kai die llvdia aveXoiTO clkovltl, SIG 3 82.3 Tlv^dia rerpaKiC. In 5 Tcnainaic would suit the abraded traces (I do not think Stc is to be read); then perhaps el eeri. 6 apparently [etj Se to p(ev) -rrpcuTo [v. In 7 the letter-trace before 01 suggests t and I think excludes ou]|SeTepai (a long shot: ec7rer]|Se re tw i/hAioj 6\ecp). 8 could be Kai TpCra 81a y; the bar over the gamma should exclude Ai.ay\op (Diagoras Dorieus’ father, Thuc. viii 35.1). In 10, after the first indeterminate trace the best reading seems to be apei, which suggests yap eC, but fj, which I would find much more tractable than el (whether or not with reference to Dorieus’ eight Isthmian victories), is perhaps not excluded; then yeiy[ e.g. yeiV[eTcu is possible.

M. W. HASLAM

4110. Thucydides viii 73

1 12/ 23(b) 4.5 x 7.8 cm Second century

A fragment from the top of a single column, written in a neat and fluent smaller than average ‘severe’ style assignable to the second half of the second century. The back is blank. The upper margin was at least 4.8 cm. Three lightly made high stops, evidently original, are the only lectional aids in evidence. Iota adscript is written. A textual alteration in line 6 introduces a new reading, in which however I see no merit.

82

THUCYDIDES

]8r]fiov €(f>€pov Tr][v (viii 73-4)

o]AiyapxLav to p,e[ A Ao]v crjpLdLvovci' /<a[i dp] acojSouAau /cat #pa[cuA 5 A] an* ran piev Tprppafp

^o] VVTt TOOL Sc [ojTrVAeft

t€vovt]l /c[at aAJAotc [ot

5-6 How @pacu\(X)a>i. was spelled is not clear. dpa[cv- would give better uniformity of line-end than 0pa[cuA- (|A]a>i will in any event have stood at the beginning of line 5), but that is not much to go on. The medieval manuscripts are reported as all giving -A- here, but B transmits -AA- elsewhere, and Andrewes adduces inscriptional evidence to show that that is the correct form.

6 Between n and A has been inserted 0, seemingly by the first hand, and the original o in front of -n has been crossed out. The paradosis, with which the papyrus’ original text evidendy coincided (with -ei- for -r-), is onXirevovTi. It seems that here this was altered to noXei-. I take it the intention was simply TroX(e)irevovTi, but it is possible that the alteration was carried through to the next line. Variation between and noXXuiv

is reflected in the tradition at 94. 1 .

M. W. HASLAM

4111. Thucydides viii 87.5, 88

7o/6(b) 8.5x5.1cm Second century

On the front, the top of two consecutive columns of Thuc. viii, defaced by a couple of inscriptions in accomplished 3rd-cent. documentary hands. And on the back, written in an informal but practised 3rd-cent. hand quite different from that of the Thucydides, the beginning of the Iliad.

The Thucydides is written in a very plain informal round slightly backward-sloping somewhat flattened smallish well-spaced hand which may be assigned to the second century; roughly comparable hands may be seen in E. G. Turner GMAW2 nos. 17 (Sappho) and 39 (Herodas). Assuming no major textual discrepancy in col. i we may calculate a column height of c. 26 cm, occupied by c. 45 lines; column width will have been c. 6 cm; c. 2 cm between columns. The punctuation is not in evidence. Iota adscript at i 7.

The manuscript does not give the impression of being anything other than a routine copy of bk. viii, but it is odd that it should have attracted at this point not only the onomastic doodles but also the Iliad opening on the back. From that alone it might have been surmised that the main text belonged to the end of a roll: perhaps the roll had lost its latter portion.

A copying error at ii 1 , uncorrected.

4111. THUCYDIDES viii 87.5, 88

83

Front

col. i

p.aAicra /c]at rjv 6t (87-5) ccfnoi aray/ca[^oiro

776 7T pO(/)(XCL^y OV KOfXL Hapanappwv 77 pOCyO) p€LV /c[at O pi€V

cac tclc vavc ] e<f>r] yap apac cvdv tt)c (f)[acr]Ai

avrac eA arrojnc 77 ocac Soc /cat Kavvov [

(88)

5 /3actAeuc 67-]a£e £uA Xeyr/vai- o] §6 yaptv ar 8777701/ e]r tovtoji /ttet£aj 6Tt e]cy[e]v[

Marginalia. We meet the daughter of ’AnoAAo<f>dvr)c 6 ko.I Hapa-ndp.fj.cuv in P. Turner 41.2—4 (also from Oxyrhynchus, undated), where he is labelled an ex-exegete of Antinoupolis, and U. Hagedorn ad loc. made the identification with the exegete of Antinoupolis ] Hapandppw [v] in P. Lond. Ill 1164 a 22, of ad 212 (Pistorius, Indices Antinoopolitani, Diss. Leiden i939> no- 569)- Now we have a third attestation. But without a tide it does not give us a very precise chronological fix for the Thucydides. An Aur. Apollophanes is an Oxyrhynchite scribe at XIX 2232 19 (ad 316).

Another hand is responsible for Hapanapp cuv | Hap. The end of Hapanappcuv extends over ii 2 -rrpocx co¬ ol the Thucydides.

col. i

8 pel^cuL, eoxe E. col. ii

1 The first line of the column is written in somewhat larger and bolder letters than the rest. ccf>wi is evidently a miscopying of a<f>iai C E, ocjjioiv rell., edd. Cf. 4112 1.

3 AEF write cupas. evdvs M. <f>aci\i8oc, the spelling of EFM, not excluded.

Back

V.2 OvAopce] VTjV 77 f MVp[

77oAAa<\c)> 8 LcfrdeLpLOvc ifjvyac aetSt 77 poLaipc[ rjpcouiv avTOuc re cXcopca rcvyc /cw6c<(c)>t [

v-5 oicovoccL 8c 77aci 81.0c r ctcAclcto fiovAr) [ ov 8r] ra npcora 8iacnqTrjv epLcav[ ar pa8r)c re ava]£ av8pa>v /cat Sto[ rtc r a p ccfjoje dea>v eptSt] £ vverjKC p.axcc9a[

] at oc o yap fiaciArp. §[

v. 2 There are a few unassignable traces of the latter part of the line.

84

THUCYDIDES

Confusion of te and 8e (w. 4, 5 bis) is of course very common, but its concentration here is perhaps indicative of writing from memory. At the beginning of v. g At/tovc kcu A 1,0c would not fill the space: perhaps AttoXXujv was written at the beginning. After jSact Ayi in v. 9 ^oAcu^eic is expected, but it does seem to be 8 [ not y[ that is written. Below v. 9 the papyrus is blank for slightly more than the normal amount of interlinear space, so there is a chance that the writer continued no further; if v. 10 were written one might expect to see traces of the rising legs of the kappas of kokijv.

M. W. HASLAM

4112. Thucydides viii 98

9 iB.i73/B(a) 8.3x5.1cm