The Ptolemaic Papyri of Homer [1 ed.]

Citation preview

WISSENSCHAFTLICHE ABHANDLUNGEN DER ARBEITSGEMEINSCHAFT FDR FORSCHUNG DES LANDES NORDRHEIN-WESTFALEN

WISSENSCHAFTLICHE ABHANDLUNGEN DER ARBEITSGEMEINSCHAFT FOR FORSCHUNG DES LANDES NORDRHEIN-WESTFALEN

Sonderreihe

PAPYROLOGICA COLONIENSIA Vol. III

HERAUSGEGEBEN IM AUFTRAGE DES MINISTERPRASIDENTEN HEINZ KUHN VON STAATSSEKRETAR PROFESSOR Dr.h.c.Dr.E.h. LEO BRANDT

PAPYROLOGICA COLONIENSIA ·Vol. III

The Ptolemaic Papyri of Homer

Edited by

Stephanie West

Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH

Das Manuskript wurde am 21.

Juli 1965

der Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen von Professor Dr. Josef Kroll vorgelegt

ISBN 978-3-663-19996-0 ISBN 978-3-663-20347-6 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-663-20347-6

© 1967 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden Ursprünglich erschienen bei Westdeutscher Verlag, Köln und Opladen 1967.

Preface More than seventy years have passed since the first Ptolemaic papyrus of Homer was published, and the strangeness of these texts long ago ceased to cause surprise; they are conventionally designated 'wild' and 'eccentric', though whether by the standards of their day they were in any way abnormal is at least debatable. But certainly they are more than mere literary curiosities: they are the earliest Homeric MSS. known to us, and their testimony, however we interpret it, is the best evidence we have for the pre-aristarchean state of the text. The papyrological material available for the study of the history of the text in antiquity is far more abundant for Homer than for any other classical author, and our chances of assessing the effects of the work of the Alexandrian scholars on the tradition are correspondingly better: if only tentative conclusions emerge, this should at any rate deter us from greater dogmatism in cases where the evidence is more easily handled because there is less of it. The crucial period for the history of the text was obviously the century or so during which Zenodotus, Aristophanes and Aristarchus were at work; the obsolescence of the eccentric texts coincides more or less with the death of Aristarchus, c. 144 B.C. But it would be arbitrary to confine a study of this sort to papyri written before that date, since a few of the eccentric texts were certainly written subsequently. Nor is there much to be said for considering the eccentric texts as an isolated group: terms like 'eccentric' and 'wild', whatever they may have conveyed to the scholars who introduced them, lack any exact criterion for their application. I have therefore taken account of all the Ptolemaic papyri of Homer, though I have reproduced in full only those texts which offer something of interest. The textual criticism of the Homeric poems is perpetually bedevilled by the metaphysics of the Homeric question. It may be no more than wishful thinking to suppose that in any particular case we can arrive at the word or phrase chosen by the monumental composer: perhaps terms like 'original' and 'authentic' are only relative. For this reason I have often been non-

6

Preface

committal, perhaps even cursory, in discussing the variants offered by these papyri. The editiones principes of these fragments, none of which is new, are dispersed among more than twenty publications: convenience alone would justify uniting them in a single volume. Some of the texts badly needed revision : thanks to the generosity of the Craven Committee I have been able to re-examine most of the originals, and to obtain photographs of those which were inaccessible. I should like here to express my gratitude to the librarians and custodians of the collections concerned. I am particularly grateful to the authorities of the University of California Library (1) the Staats- und Universitatsbibliothek, Hamburg (2 and 5) and the Staatliche Museen, Berlin (3 and 4) for permission to reproduce photographs of papyri in their keeping. My other debts are considerable and numerous. I take this opportunity to thank in particular Professor Reinhold Merkelbach, who suggested this subject to me, Professor Hugh Lloyd-Jones, who supervised the thesis of which this book is a revised version, and Mr. C. H. Roberts: without their help, advice and encouragement I should have neither started nor finished. The generosity of the trustees of the Joanna Randall-Maclver Studentship enabled me to complete my research sooner than I could otherwise have done. I owe more than I like to think to my husband's patience and acumen: his vigilance in proof-reading has saved me from a variety of errors. Somerville College, Oxford

S.R.W.

Table of Contents Note on Abbreviations, Method of Publication, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

The Ptolemaic Papyri of the Iliad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 354: P. Rylands 539 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 53: P. Vitelli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 ~ 269: P. Tebtunis 898 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 ~ 457: P. Hamburg 136 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 ~ 40: P. Hibeh 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 P. Hamburg 137 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 ~ 391 : P. Berolinensis 17054 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 ~ 41: P. Grenfell2,3, P. Hibeh 20 (P. Lit. London 15) . . . . . . . . . . . 64 P. Michaelidae 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 ~ 410: P. Hibeh 193 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 ~ 317: P. Argentorat. 2374 verso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 ~ 7: P. Grenfell2,2, P. Hibeh 21, P. Heidelberg 1261 . . . . . . . . . . 74 ~ 432: P. Hamburg 153 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 ~ 8: P. Petrie 1,3(4) (P. Lit. London 21) ...................... 103 ~ 5: P. Genavensis 90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 ~ 121 & ~ 342: P. Lit. London 251 & P. Harris 36 .............. 118 ~ 59: P. Rylands 49 ......................................... 131 ~ 51: P. Berolinensis 9774 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 ~ 12: P. Grenfell2,4, P. Hibeh 22, P. Heidelberg 1262-66 ....... 136 P. Derveni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 ~

~

The Ptolemaic Papyri of the Odyssey ................................ 195 ~ ~

32: Berlin Ostrakon 12565 .................................. 195 22: P. Tebtunis 696 ....................................... 195

8

Table of Contents

\P 30: P. Tebtunis 697 ....................................... \P 55: P. Cairo inv. 65445 .................................... \P 110: P. Merton 1 ........................................... \P 31: P. Sorbonne inv. 2245 A ............................... \P 119: P. Berolinensis 11678 ................................... \P 120: Berlin Ostrakon 12605 .................................. \P 144: P. Ibscher 2 ........................................... \P 126: P. Hamburg 154 ....................................... \P 128: P. Hibeh 194 .......................................... \P 99: P. S.I. 979 ............................................. \P 19: P. Hibeh 23 ........................................... \P 146: P. Lefort 1 ............................................

198 217 218 223 256 260 263 263 267 270 272 277

Vulgate Ptolemaic Papyri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 Addenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 Plates ....................................................... 289 Index ....................................................... 293

Note on Abbreviations, Method of Publication, etc. In general, I have followed the conventions of Liddell and Scott, L' Annee Philologique, and, for references to papyrological publications, of R. A. Pack, The Greek and Latin literary texts from Greco-Roman Egypt, 2nd ed., Michigan, 1965. The following should also be noted: Bolling, External Evidence : G. M. Bolling, The External Evidence for Interpolation in Homer, Oxford, 1925 Chantraine, GH: P. Chantraine, Grammaire Homlrique, Paris, 1958 Del Corno, I papiri dell'Iliade: Dario del Corno, I papiri dell'Iliade anteriori a! 150 a. Cr., Rendiconti dell'Istituto Lombardo, Classe di Lettere, Scienze morali e storiche, 94, 1960, pp. 73-116 I papiri dell'Odissea : I papiri dell'Odissea anteriori a! 150 a. Cr., ibid. 95, 1961, pp. 3-54 Ebeling: Lexicon Hontericum, edidit H. Ebeling, Leipzig, 1880-1885 Jachmann, Vom friihalex. Homertext: G. Jachmann, Vom friihalexandrinischen Homertext, Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gottingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 1949, 7, Gottingen, 1949 K.-B.: R. Kuhner, Ausfiihrliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, 1. Teil (Elemental"- und Formenlehre), 3. Aufl., besorgt von F. Blass, Hannover, 1890-1892 K.-G.: R. Kuhner, Ausfiihrliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, 2. Teil (Satzlehre), 3. Aufl., besorgt von B. Gerth, Hannover, 1898-1904 Lameere, Aper;us: W. Lameere, Aperflts de paleographie homerique apropos des papyrus de !'Iliade et de l'Otfyssle des collections de Gand, de Bruxelles et de Louvain, Paris-Bruxelles, 1960 Leaf: The Iliad, edited with apparatus criticus, prolegomena, notes and appendices, by W. Leaf, 2nd ed., London, 1900-1902 L.-S.-J.: H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed., revised by Sir H. Stuart Jones, Oxford, 1940 Ludwich, AHT: A. Ludwich, Aristarchs homerische Textkritik, Leipzig, 1884

10

Note on Abbreviations, Method of Publication, etc.

Ludwich, Homervulgata: A. Ludwich, Die Homervulgata als voralexandrinisch erwiesen, Leipzig, 1898 Mayser: E. Mayser, Grammatik der griechischen Papyri aus der Ptolemaerzeit, Leipzig, 1906-1934 Mn. : Mnemosyne Monro, HG: D. B. Monro, A Grammar of the Homeric dialect, 2nd ed., Oxford, 1891 R-E: Paulys Realencyclopadie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, neue Bearbeitung von G. Wissowa [etc.], Stuttgart, 1893Roberts, GLH: C. H. Roberts, Greek literary hands, Oxford, 1955 RPh : Revue de Philologie Schwyzer, Gr. Gram.: E. Schwyzer, Griechische Grammatik, Miinchen, 1939-1953 (vol. ii ed. by A. Debrunner) van Leeuwen, Enchirid. : J. van Leeuwen, Enchiridium dictionis epicae, 2nd ed., Leiden, 1918 Wackernagel, SUH: ]. Wackernagel, Sprachliche Untersuchungen zu Homer, Gottingen, 1916 Homeric papyri are cited according to the numbers which they are given in the lists of the Oxford Classical Text of Homer, continued by P. Collart (Introduction a l'Iliade, ed. Mazon, Paris, 1959, pp. 39ff., Les papyrus de l'Oc!Jssee, RPh, N. S. 13, 1939, pp. 291ff.) and by H.]. Mette (Neue Homerpapyri RPh, N.S. 29, 1955, pp. 193ff., cf. Lustrum 1, 1956, p. 9, n. 1; 5, 1960, pp. 649ff.). Iliad papyri have been collated with the Oxford Classical Text, Odyssey papyri with the edition of Von der Miihll, though in supplementing lacunae I have occasionally diverged from the latter in favour of the MS. reading. Where no name is given, supplements are those of the editio princeps. None of the papyri here reproduced have any accents or punctuation.

Introduction The early Ptolemaic papyri of extant authors tend to differ markedly from the traditional text in a way which cannot be explained by the processes of merely mechanical corruption: this is most obvious in the case of Homeric papyri, but similar deviations are observable in the papyri of Plato!, Euripides 2, Thucydides 3 and Xenophon 4• The peculiarity of the Ptolemaic texts is obvious when we compare them with Roman papyri of the same authors, which differ little from the text of the mediaeval MSS. These papyri are usually described as "wild" or "eccentric", though this terminology is slightly unsatisfactory, since it presupposes that there already existed a standard text, an ancient Vulgate. Yet there is no evidence that at the date when they were written there was anything abnormal about these texts - indeed, the lengthier quotations in Attic writers, in particular in Plato and Aeschines, shew that they used very similar texts 5 • The term "non-vulgate" is no better: though it looks precise, the criteria for its P. Petrie 1, 5-8; 2, 50; the fragment of the Sophist (P. Hibeh 228) published by E. G. Turner in RhM 98, 1955, pp. 97f. differs little from the traditional text, but is so slight that its evidence is worth little. Cf. G. Jachmann, Der Platontext, NGG Philoi.Hist. Kl. 1941, 7. 2 Many of the Ptolemaic papyri of Euripides are so exiguous that their evidence is difficult to evaluate, or are school texts, and hence peculiarly liable to corruption. The following are interesting: P. Heidelberg 205, P. Sorbonne 2252, P. Lit. Land. 73, P. Hibeh 24, P. Columbia Inv. 517, P. Rainer 8029 (c£. Turner, Two unrecognised Ptolemaic papyri, ]HS 76, 1956, pp. 95£., G. A. Longman, The musical papyrus of Euripides, Or. 332-340, CQ N. S. 12, 1962, pp. 61ff.), P. Strasb. Inv. WG 304-7, P. Berol. 9772, P. Hibeh 7. Cf. P. Collart, Les fragments des tragique.r grecs sur papyrus, RPh 17, 1943, pp. 5ff., A. Pertusi, Selezione teatrale e sce/ta erudita nella tradizione del testo di Euripide, Dioniso 20, 1957, pp. 18ff., W. S. Barrett, Euripides, Hippolytos, Oxford, 1964, pp. 45ff., 438f. 3 P. Hamb. 163: c£. Turner, op. cit. pp. 96ff. ' P. Heidelberg 206: c£. R. Merkelbach in Studien zur Textgeschichte u. Textkritik G. ]achmanngewidmet, hrsg. von H. Dahlmann u. R. Merkelbach, Koln, 1959, pp. 157ff. 5 Cf. Ludwich, Homervulgata, pp. 71ff., Gilbert Murray, The Rise of the Greek Epic', Oxford, 1934, pp. 289ff., M. H. A. Vander Valk, Researches on the text and scholia of the Iliad, II, Leiden, 1963, pp. 264ff. 1

12

Introduction

application are extremely vague, since there is considerable variety within the post-aristarchean tradition. We cannot simply designate these papyri as "early" or "pre-aristarchean", since a few were written after· the death of Aristarchus, and it would be undesirable to introduce some such term as "early-type" or "pre-aristarchean-type". The simplest solution seems to be to retain the term "eccentric", on the understanding that this indicates no more than a tendency to deviate, to an extent which we find surprising, from the text familiar to us: admittedly, this is a subjective and unscientific usage, but it is convenient, and should not be misleading.

Additional Lines The distinctive feature of the early Homeric papyri is the high proportion of additional lines which they contain, and which do not survive in the later tradition. The text of Homer, because of its rather loose structure and natural tendency to repetition, was always peculiarly exposed to interpolation of this sort, and isolated plus-verses are to be found in Roman papyri and in the mediaeval MSS. But it is the frequency with which such interpolations occur that distinguishes the eccentric papyri6. The proportion depends partly on the context: passages containing many versus iterati, like 0 (c£. \p 7) or a summary of a typical scene described elsewhere in greater detail (e.g. A 484ff., c£. \p53, r 339ff., cf. \p40) attracted plusverses, while a passage for which there are no close parallels elsewhere in Homer was likely to remain free from them. Concordance interpolation exercised a powerful attraction: thus a line or group of lines which follow a particular formula in one place are inserted after it in another passage 6

When the first eccentric papyri were published, it was suggested that the obscure edition called the l't'OAUcr] cp&.To ll[YJAet8Yjcr, 7tO't'L 8E: crx!fj7t"t'pov ~&.Ae yr:t.LY)L [XP]ucre[oLa ~[AOLO"L 7tE7tr:t.p(l~vov, e~e"t'o 8' ocuT6cr • ['AT]pet8Y)cr 8' h[ ~pw&ev E!J.~VLE • "t'OLO"L 8E: N~cr"t'wp [~8]'!e7t~cr cX.v6p[oucre, ALyucr llu).[wv cX.yopYJ~cr, ["t'OU] Xr:t.L cX7t0 y).[ WO"O"Y)O' !l~AL"t'OO" YAUXLWV p~ev ocu8~. [ Tw ]L 8' ~[8YJ Mo !J.EV yeveoct !J.Ep67twv cX.v&pw7twv [ecp]{)-[toc&'' ot ot 7tp6a&ev OC(lr:l. "t'p&.cpev ~8' ey~VOV"t'O [EV n UAWL ~yr:t.&EYJL, (J.E"t'OC ae:] !P~'![ CXTOLO"LV ll.voccrcrev. [() O"tpLV eUcppov~wv] cX.yop~O"r:t."t'O ~r:t.~ [(J.E"t'~emev' [«w 1t61toL, ~ !l~Yr:t. 1t~]v&ocr 'Axoct~C1' y[ocf:ocv tx&.veL • [~ xev yY)&~crr:t.L llp[]qt(J.OO" llpL&.!J.oL6 [Te 7tr:t.f:8ecr [&noL Te Tpwea !l]~yoc xev xexoc[po[oc"t'o &u!J.wL, [et crcpw·r:v T&.8e 1t&.v]Toc 7tu&o[ocT[o (lr:t.pVr:t.!J.Evm·r:·J, [ot 7tept !J.EV docvocw ]v ~ouA!fjL, 1tep~ [8' ~cr"t'e !J.&.xecr&ocL. [eXAM 7tL&ecr&' • &!J.]cpcp [8]E: vewT~[pw ecr"t'OV E!J.ELO • [~8'1) y&.p 1tO"t'' eyw] );tr:t.L cX.peLOO'LV [~~ 7tep U!J.LV [cX.v8p&.crLv W!J.LAY)O'r:t.,] xoct o{$ 1tw !l' o[t y' cX.&~pL~ov.

A 96:

The line was athetised 8TL 7tepLcrcr6cr.

A 100:

ecr XpUGYJV. "t'6"t'e x~v !J.LV {).occrO'&.!J.EVOL 1tE7tL&oL!J.EV codd. (oci: pro T6Te Zenodotus) ] e&~AY)O"LV pap.

'P 354: P. Rylands 539

ILIAD

31

Oldfather (A]P 61, 1940, p. 220) noted that elsewhere in the Iliad at the end of the line occurs only in the formula aX x' €3-~A?JO"L(v); he suggested [xoc.l T6n AoLyov oc7two-e:L 'A7t6)..)..wv, oc.t x'] €3-~A?JO"Lv. There are other possibilities, e.g. [xoc.l T6T' oc1two-e:L AoLyov EXY)~6)..oo-, oc.i: x'] €3-~A?JO"LV or [€cr XpuO"YjV. T6n 8~ A~~EL x6)..ou, OC.L x'] €3-~A?JO"LV. But it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the objection which the Scholia bring against Zenodotus' reading, ye:)..oi.ov 8e 8Lo-Toc.xTLxwo- MyeLv Tov !J.OCVTLv, must have applied equally to the reading of the papyrus. €3-~A?Jo-L(v)

A 106:

&!7toc.o-, Aristarchus, pap., codd. pauci

d1te:o-, ~eL7teo- cett.

A 107: There are perhaps traces of a marginal sign prefixed to this line; the margin is not well preserved, and all that is now visible is f. oc.td "t'OL "t'OC xocx' EO""t'L cp()..oc. cppe:o-1 !J.OC.V"t'EU€0"3-0C.L codd. ~ OC. L EL "t'OL CjlLI\OV EO""t'L XOC.XOC. cppt::O"L !J.OC.V"t'EUEO"vOC.L pap.,

:u't'ap e1td p' txov't'o xoc't'a O''t'poc't'ov e:upuv 'AxocL&v, vljoc !J.eV ot ye: !LeAOCLVOCV E7t1 ~7tdpoLO ~pUO'O'OCV uljJou E1tL ljJOC!J.OC.&OLO'' U1t0 8' ~P!J.OC't'OC !J.OCXpa 't'OCVUO'O'OCV Cf. Allen and Halliday, The Homeric hymn1 2, Oxford, 1936, Introduction, pp. lxiv ff., especially lxxx. To the evidence there collected must be added P. Oxy. 2379 (III A.D.). 2 I owe this information to Mr. C. H. Roberts, who kindly examined a photograph of the papyrus; he compares the hand of Schubart, Pap. Gr. Berol., Taf. 7 A.

1

The Ptolemaic Papyri of the Iliad

34

In the papyrus we find: II>\] XotL\ ocu-ro~ Q_l e:x oe: t:JOtV't'e: [ cr e:m PYJY!L~VL vot~~.otcrCJY)cr '"''] CJ 1)7tELflOV " II>\~'[ > \ V1) ~·>I 't:' ot11.0 [ E l >IQ. \ >A > I [ lXI\/\ LvL VUV XIXTIX\ ">/\IXOV fi"J..IXLWV, !J.'YJO~· e;1l]1"l [ epweL.

P. Hamb. 137 (seep. 61) attests the presence of the plus-verse B 848a in contemporary texts of B.

ILIAD

'P 40: P. Hibeh 19

41

Frg. B B 204

' otyot'lT"Ij ' (}_\ ~[ 0/\UXOLpotVL"Ij" ELO" XOLpotVOO" EO"'t"W 1 OUX ~tcr ~otO"LAEUO", G>L e[8wxe: Kp6vou 7t&.i:cr ocyxuAO(J.~"t"E(.o) '".1.

I

'P'

I

''

Frg. C I 621

.. 0' (LEV \ [ ULEO" (

K't"Eot'' t"OU 1 0' o"' otp ,, ' E'upU"t"OU ' 'n.X't" A ] ~p~~VOO" ' OC)(J.~(J.WV

['t"WV 8e 't"E't"&.p't"WV

~p:;(E lloJ..U~e:LVOO"

.&e:oe:]~8~0"

Frg. C II 673

680

[N Lpe:ucr, 8cr x&.AALO"'t"OO" ocv~p] U7tg [''IALOV ~J...&e: ['t"WV lXJ..J..wv f:l.otvotwv (J.]e:'t"' p(J)pev. [~ !J.EV 3~] !J.&.Aot 1toJ.M tJ.&.z[ota el~J.u.&ov civ8p6lv, [ciAJ.' oiS 7t(l)] Tot6v3e Tot76v'ae [Te Aotov l>7t(l)7tot · [AL1JV ycip cpuAJ.otatv eot]x6-r[ea ~ !.Jiot!J.&.&otatv

Frg. F 813

&v3pea BotTLEtotv xtxJ.~axouaw, ci&&.v[ot't'oL 3e Te: ~!Lot 7toJ.uaxcip&!J.oto Mup(v1Ja · ~v&ot [T6Te Tp6lea n 3texpt&ev ~3' e7t(xoupot. Tp(l)a[t !J.EV ~ye:!J.6veue: ~yota xopu&ot(oJ.oa "Ex't'(l)p [ll]ptottJ.[L31JG' at!J.ot 't'6'>L ye: 7tOAU 7tAELG't'Ot xott atpLG't'OL :f~v ~'t'OL

Frg.G 826

830

[ T6lv oti5]~' ~y&!J.6ve[ue: Aux&.ovoa ciyJ.otoa ut6a, [ll&.v3]qtpoa, WL xott Tb~[ov 'A7t6AA(I)V otOToa ~3(1)xev. [ot 3']&p' ['A ]3p~GTetotv vot![ ov xott 3~!J.OV 'A7tottaou, [xott llt~]~~~otv ~zoy xot[t T1JpEL1JG l>poa otl7tU, [ T6lv] ~~~~ "A3p1Ja-r6a Te: [xott "A!J.cptoa Atvo&6>p1J~,

Frg. P 855a [K]~ux(l)v[ota 3' oti5't'' ~ye: lloJ.uxJ.eoa utoa "A!J.et~oa, 855b [ot] 7te:pt llqt[p&evLov 7tO't'ot!J.OV xAU't'cX 36>!J.ot't'' ~Vottov.

ILIAD

'P 40: P. Hibeh 19

43

Frg.H

r 277

.. I [ 'HIei'.~O(j [

\

XIX~

~ , - XIX['~ 7tiXV"t' I , e7tiXX01Je~, , I 00' 7t0CI]V"t', ecpOpiX~ ~ 7t0"t'IX!J.O~ );tot~ y~~IX, X IX~ OL 1J7tevep170: XIX!J.OV"t'IXO' (l_l

1F ,

']

\

-

[

'

t\

I

(\_

I

Frg.l c. 25 letters 280

[ U!J.eLO" !J.tXp"t']upea ~an,

] . v:~[ cpuA&aaen 8' opXLIX

~[ ~(j"t'tX.

[ d !J.EV xev] ¥~yP,.ocov 'AM~ocv8poa xoc"t'oc[ 7tecpv-1J~, [ ocu"t'oa ~1te~.&' 'E]A€v1)v ~X~TW xoct x-rlJ~J.[ IX"t'IX 7trXVTIX, [~!J.e'La 8' Ev v~]eaa~ ve~~e.&oc xoupo~ 'Axcx~w[ v 283a ["Apyoa Ea L7t7t6~oTov x]~t 'Axoct8oc xoc).).~yu[voc~xoc· [ d 8€ xe "t'O~ MeveAIXOO' 'A ]/..e~cxv8poy XOC"t'[ IX7tEcpV1j~, [Tpw1Xa ~1te~.&' 'Et-ev"lv xiX]t x-rlJ~J.ocT[ot 7t&n' &7to8ouviX~,

Frg.K 295

[otvov 8' EX x ]p1)Tijpog [&]cpuaa6[~J.evo~ 8e1t&eaa~v [~xxeov, ~]8' "l\JxovTo .&eoi:a &e~[yeve"t'1)~a~v · · [ w8e 8€ T~a e'£1t ]~O"Xev 'Axoc~fi>y n T pwwv T[e:

Frg. L Col. I 302 302 a 302b 302c 302d 303

[

wa ~cpocv eux6]~J.evo~, !J.EYot 8' ~X"t'U7te !L'YJ"t'Le"t'ot Zs~a

[c. 10 letters] cpwv

~~~

8e a"t'eporrl)v Ecpe1jxev ·

[.&1jO'E!J.eVot~ y ]~p E:!J.eAAev ~-r' oc).yeoc "t'e a"t'owr.xtka n

[Tpwa£ Te x1Xtf~otV1X?Ha~] 8~~ xpotnp~a ua[~J.t]voca. [1XU"t'~p E7teL p' O]!J.OO'EV 't'e TeAeU"t'1)0'EV [n] "t'OV opxov, [ ••..• ~cxp8ocvL]8['YJ]:;j xoct ~7toct~[ oca x6pu&oa M~ev L7t7to8ocae£1)0', 370 e!A:xe 8' ~7te~[y6!J.eVOO' !J.E't'' ~VXV~!J.L8ct0' 'A:X,ctLOUO' ( ?) ' .l ~, [ '\ , • \ • "·' • \ ~ , 'l'fXE oe !J.LV 7tC./\UXeO''t'OO' L!J.OCO' OC1tOC/\1jV U7t0 oeLp'YjV, 364

Frg.O

.

Frg.Q

] [ ]aocv'to8eAqt[ ] . [ •• ]8e7tAeo[

]!J.OLO'~~~[

Frg.R

Frg. S

] .[ ] ... [

] '!J[ ..]. [..]. [ ] ~Ley[.] . [.] . [

]~ocy.

Frg. T

]poc-rovoc[

[

Frg. U ]

.... [

] • p • . ~ •• ex7t[ )'Fe~

...... [

45

46

The Ptolemaic Papyri of the Iliad

Frg. W

Frg. X

]tJ.OL~atcr • ( ] • [ ••• ]~e:ve:?-[ •• ] • [ ]votJ. • ?-9 • • • • [

B204:

oux I •I > l [ > I (1)11 't't:L 7t0] 't'e: e:LpYJVYJ pap. Wt:r 't't:L 7t0't'l e:7t e:LpYJVYJI1 ~ 15 &cr 't'e 7to't'' e:tp~vYJcr ~ 2, P. Oxy. 1086.

Schwartz ('Av't'L8(J)pov: Festschrift Jacob Wackernagel, Gottingen, 1923, p. 62) pointed out that the variety of readings indicates that &cr 't'e 7to't'' u I owe this suggestion to Mr. Roberts. 15

Wilamowitz (1/ia.r u. Homer, p. 278, n. 1) defends the line, unconvincingly. commentary on B 751-827, of the first century B.C.

18 A

ILIAD

'P 40: P. Hibeh 19

49

etp~V'rJO' was the original form of the text: "dp~V'rJO' steht ohne Praposition, wie vuxT6a, da das Wort his zum 5. Jahrhundert den Friedenszustand bedeutet" 17 • Though the nominative is indefensible, the papyrus is nearer to the right reading than the Vulgate is 1 s.

B 826:

Tpwea, Twv otoT' ~px.e codd.

[Twv oto]f ~Y&fl6ve[ue pap.

The Vulgate Tpwea is awkward, since ot 8e Ze:Ae~otv ~vot~ov are contrasted with Tpwat !Lev ~Y&!L6veue in 816 and dotp8otv(wv oto't'' ~px.e in 819; it is however supported byE 200 and 211, where Pandarus calls his people Tpwea. The reading of the papyrus is unobjectionable in itself, but looks like an attempt to remove the difficulty. The Vulgate should therefore be retained as the lectio difficilior.

B 828: The papyrus agrees. with a large part of the tradition in reading ot 8' &p' 'A8p~a't'&~otv, not ot 8' 'A8p~O"t'&~otv; the latter is clearly superior: &p' is merely a stopgap. 'A8p~O"t'&~&.v

T' &tx.ov codd.

'A8p~a't'&~otv

voti:ov pap.

Intrinsically both readings are equally good, but voti:ov is slightly suspect, because it avoids the repetition elx.ov / ~x.ov: a tendency to eliminate repetitions is characteristic of these papyri: d. the variants at«!> 372 and 396 in~ 12.

B 855a,b: Bolling (External evidence, p. 77) identified these lines, which were known from Strabo (542)1 9 : c£. Sch. T ad Y 329'"• Bust. 1210, 46 21 • Strabo says that they were interpolated by Callisthenes, but this is very 17 a. B. Keil, Elp-ljv'l), SBLeipzig, 1916, 2, 33ff. For a rather different interpretation of rn' Elp-ljV'I)a, see P. Kretschmer, G/olla 10, 1919, pp. 238ff. 1s Cf. Pasquali, Storia della lradizione, p. 243. 19 -roua 81: KIXUxOOvotO', ·oCla la-ropouaL -rljv l:q~el;'ija olx'ijaiXL 7t1Xpetl.lotv -roia M1XpL!Xv8uvoia !J.expt -rou IIIXp&evlou 'fa'I'!X!J.OU •••• K!XI.I.La.&bnja 81: XIX! ~piXq~e -rA ~"''l 'I'IXU'I'IX eta wv 8LOCXOO'!J.OV, (Lf:-rd: -ro ((Kp(;)!J.VclV -r' Alyi.!XI.6v -re XIX! uljrtjl.oua 'Epu-IHvouan irL&la ((KIXUX(J)VIXO' 8' IX?i-r' -Jjye Ilol.uxl.£oa utoa «!LU!J.OOV, ot mpt IIIXpllivLov 'fOTIX!J.OV xl.u-rclt 8W!J.IXT' ~Lovn. ao XIX! ,.(;)a ou auyx~X~I;ev IXU-roua (-roua K1Xuxoovota) F:v T(ji K1XTIXA6y(fl; 7) o?iv l:~l.u8ea £laLv 'i) l:v 't'OLO' Ael.e:/;L mpLExOV't'!XL. -rLVI:O' 81: XIX! (j)EpOUO'L W «KIXUXOOV 07tALO"[J.ci> exe:LV. 7tp0 Tiicr OC0"7tL~OO" ycX.p ljliXV~O"E:1"1XL OCVIXAIX[J.~cXV ~vL A.e~oca-lhjv codd.

-rij> e7tLA.e~oca-lhjv pap.

The form of the gloss shews that the writer supposed emA.e~oca.&1jv to be one word. emA.exofLIXL is not elsewhere attested in classical literature; the aorist is of course indistinguishable from the aorist middle of emA.Eycu. -rij> ~m A.e~oca-lhjv would be as good as -rij> ~vL A.e~oca.&1jv.

vv. 4, 5:

The editors supply emA.e~[oca-lhjv 't'OU't'EO"'t'L E7t)exOL(.L~-Ih)aa.v. But the unknown poet may not have used the dual, but the plural. e7teXOL(.L~-Ih)aa.v, "fell asleep over, after", is not entirely appropriate here; evexOL(.L~-Ih)aa.v

80

I am most grateful to Mr. Roberts, who examined a photograph of the papyrus and suggested these parallels; the editors dated it somewhat later: 111/11 B.C.

P. Hamburg 137

61

would be better, or the simple verb may have stood here. It seems unlikely that phrases like -rou-rea·n, cX.v-rt -rou would have been inserted in private notes such as these appear to be: they are omitted in the Berlin ostrakon. Perhaps there was a synonym for (EV )e:XOL!J.~-3-l)O"otV e.g. eve:xci.&e:u8ov. After ]e:xoL!J.~-3-l)aotv a space is left, enough for one letter. On the edge of the papyrus there is a point of ink, which would suit, e.g., the left tip of the cross-stroke of -r. VV. 6, 7: m:pL8e~Loa: a rare word, which in our texts of Homer occurs only at $163. In the papyrus the latter part of the plus-verse B 848a is cited: the line is known to us from the Sch. Tad $140: xott ot (J.tv uno-rciaaouaL a-r(x.ov ev -r(il -rwv llotL6vwv xot-rot1..6y(fl «otu-rocp llupotLX.!J.l) XE CflOtLlja ''~>[' ' ·~~\ X,Opovoe: ''~> OtVo pL fLOtX,EaaOtfLEVOV 't'O'··~V "( EMTELV 1 Ot/\1\0t ,EpX,E[ av"' 1 ljE , \ X,OpOLO - VEOV ' 1\lj"(OV't'Ot ~ ' ' ) " XOtvL~oELV.))

Frg.B ~ 19

[ ocihLa 8' 'Apydl)v 'EMvllv Me:ve/.ocoa &]yoL1[ o. »

[&a ~cpoc&', oct 8' E7ttf.tu~ocv 'A&ljvat(lj n ~oct] "Hpl) • [7tA1jalocL oct y' ~a&l)v, xocxoc 8E: Tpwe:aaL !L]~~ea&lj[v. [~'t'OL 'A&'rjvat(lj ocxewv ~v ou8e 't'L e:J1~~[

Frgs. C, D & I Col. I 55

60

[ e:~ 1te:p yocp cp&ovew 't'e: x ]~~ C!~>!- [ e:£& 8Loc1tepaocL [oux OCVU(J) cp&oveoua'] ~~e:L ~ [1t0AU cpepnpoa eaaL. [c. 15 letters ]~l)VatL[ [xatL yocp eych &~:;oa d!J.L,] ytvoa 8[t !J.OL] ~v.&e:v ~~~[V ao(, [xoc( fLE 7tpe:a~u't'oc't'ljv] 1'~H9 [Kpovo]>

[&a ~cpat't''' ou8' OC1t(]&lja[e: 7tat-rljp cX.v8p&v 't'E &e:&v 't'E.

[ocu't'(x' 'A&ljvoc(]l)V 69 a [«c. 11 letters

[oc!~Ot fLOCA'

ea

~1t[e:oc

7t't']e:p[6]e:VTOt 7tp[OO'l)U8oc • x ]u8t