A Homeric Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus

Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists 51 (2014) 35-39

Simone Oppen Columbia University

Abstract Edition of a third century CE papyrus (P.Oxy. 3.535 descr.) from Oxy- rhynchus with Homer, Iliad 1.43-59.

papyri.info/apis/columbia.apis.p363 H h. x W. = 13.0 x 5.7 cm P.Oxy. 3.535 descr.; MP3 570; West 114 Oxyrhynchus, III CE This fragment of a book-roll on medium brown papyrus contains portions of the middle of lines from Iliad 1.43-59. An average of eight letters per line are written along the fibers. The back is blank. As the papyrus is broken on all sides, the original margins cannot be estimated, but the average width of each letter (0.45 cm) suggests that column width would have been approximately 16 cm, if each line were preserved to its full extent.1 There are four vertical cracks on the left side of the papyrus. The text offers no new readings. The hand is roughly bilinear, exhibiting many characteristics of the “for- mal mixed” or “severe” style.2 Bilinearity is interrupted below the line by the letters ρ, υ, and φ (e.g., in lines 45, 49, and 53) and more subtly by the letters α and χ (e.g., in lines 45 and 46). The vertical descenders in the letters ρ and υ occasionally curve to the left (e.g., in line 49). Overall characteristics of the

1 The average width of letters and column width are derived according to W.A. John- son’s formulae in the introduction to his Bookrolls and Scribes in Oxyrhynchus (Toronto 2004) 10-12. The average width of each letter is calculated by dividing the total width of the extant lines (63.2 cm) by the total number of extant and partial characters (142), or 63.2/142 = 0.45 cm. To find the original width of the column, one needs to multiply the average width of each letter by the average number of characters per line. For these particular lines that average is 35.7, which is very close to Johnson’s suggested average of 35.5 for Homeric verse without iota adscript (p. 12). The resulting column width of approximately 16 cm (35.7 x 0.45 = 16.1 cm) is slightly higher than Johnson’s normal range of 11-14 cm for hexameter verse in book-rolls from Oxyrhynchus (p. 116). 2 E.G. Turner, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World, 2nd ed. P.J. Parsons (BICS Suppl. 46; London 1987) 22, hereafter abbreviated as GMAW2; cf. G. Cavallo,“Greek and Latin Writing in the Papyri,” in R.S. Bagnall (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Papyrology (Oxford 2009) 131-134. 36 Simone Oppen hand are a slight slant to the right, a tendency to run together the crossbar of ε, θ, and τ with the letters that follow (e.g., in lines 48 and 55), occasional ligatures, a contrast between broad (μ, ν, τ, ω) and narrow (ε, θ, ο, ϲ) letters, and a flat-bottomed ω (e.g., in line 44). Similar hands may be found in P.Oxy. 67.4635 (scholia minora, Il. 2; late II-early III CE), PSI 10.1169 (Il. 14; III CE), and PSI inv. 576 + PSI 11.1190 (Od. 5; late II-early III CE).3 Thesecomparanda suggest a date range from the late second to mid-third century CE.4 Various lectional signs have been added to the text throughout. Acute and grave accents (e.g., in lines 45, 46, 48, 51), a high dot (line 48), a rough breathing (line 56), and a correction (line 57) all appear to be written by a second hand, as these marks are above the line and the ink often appears either to be slightly darker than that of the original hand (e.g., in lines 46 and 51) or slightly lighter (e.g., in line 45).5 The style of the letter ε, which corrects the erroneous reading in line 57, is similar to that found in cursive hands. An organic diaeresis (line 47), however, appears to be written by the original hand as it is nearly level with the top of the line and contains no discernible difference in ink shade from the original hand. Iota adscript is not written. There are also some evident spaces between words that coincide with caesurae in the third (lines 55, 56) and fourth feet (line 47) of the hexameter.6 The use of accents seen here is typical for the period in that they serve to resolve potential syntactical or metrical ambiguities in the text for the reader. That is, they are used on the syllable or syllables preceding an oxytone in order to prepare the reader for the rise in pitch at the end of a word (e.g. ὲχεπευε̣[ in line 51).7 In a different but related situation, the combination of the high dot following νεω]ν· and the grave accent on the first syllable of μὲτα (line 48) prevents the reader from misconstruing what is in reality an adverb in tmesis

3 P.Oxy. 67.4635 in J. Spooner, Nine Homeric Papyri from Oxyrhynchos (Florence 2002) pl. 6; PSI 10.1169 in Cavallo (n. 2) pl. 5.28, 134; PSI inv. 576 + PSI 11.1190 in M. Manfredi (ed.), Papiri dell’Odissea. Seminario Papirologico 1977-78 (Florence 1979) pl. 7. 4 For a recent edition of other Homeric fragments from Oxyrhynchus of the same time period (II-III CE), see BASP 48 (2011) 7-26. 5 The shape of the rough breathing in line 56 appears to be a rounded form of the second type described by Turner (GMAW2 [n. 2] 11). 6 Turner notes that spaces can mark the close of a period, but the spaces here do not coincide with this use (GMAW2 [n. 2] 8). 7 J. Moore-Blunt, “Problems of Accentuation in Greek Papyri,”Quaderni Urbinati di Cultura Classica 29 (1978) 140; C.M. Mazzucchi, “Sul sistema di accentazione dei testi greci in età romana e bizantina,” Aegyptus 59 (1979) 146; R. Cribiore, Writing, Teachers, and Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt (Atlanta, GA 1996) 85. A Homeric Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus 37

(μετα) for a preposition in anastrophe (μέτα) modifying νεω]ν.8 The rarity of a given word, as suggested, for example, by its appearance in the scholia minora, seems to increase the likelihood that it will have a lectional sign or an accent in this text.9 This papyrus contains a number of features that suggest the original and second hand could be that of an advanced student or teacher (e.g., spaces between words, organic diaeresis, high dot, rough breathing).10 Texts used by advanced students or teachers, however, are very difficult to distinguish from those of educated individuals and, for this reason, an educational context is only one of many possible contexts for this fragment.11 These same lines are also attested by the following papyri:12

P. Yal e 2.90 (MP3 561.1, West 453a; mid II CE); 1.1-94 PSI Il. 2 (MP3 564.01; II/III CE); 1.30-45 P.Mich. inv. 13 (MP3 565, West 374; II/III CE); 1.32-57 P.Oxy. 15.1815 (MP3 566, West 111; III CE); 1.33-50, 59-75 P.Oxy. inv. 27 3B 39/G(1-3)d (MP3 565.001; II/III CE); 1.33-48 P. L ond .Lit. 1 (MP3 567, West 112; II CE); 1.37-54 P. Hamb . 2.155 (MP3 560, West 373; I CE); 1.37-51, 55-67 P.Mich. inv. 1576(v) (MP3 566.1, West 519; III CE); 1.37-47 P.Oxy. inv. 85/18(a) (MP3 566.002; ined.); 1.37-46 P.Mil.Vogl. 1.1 (MP3 569, West 321; II/III CE); 1.39-55 P.Oxy. inv. 97/41(a) (MP3 569.031; ined.); 1.41-56 PSI Il. 4 (MP3 569.03; II/III CE); 1.41-52 PSI Il. 3 (MP3 569.02; II CE); 1.41-48 P.Medin.Madi 1 (MP3 569.1, West 521; II/III CE); 1.42-49 P.Gen. inv. 95 + BKT 5.1.3 + BKT 9.61 + P.Aberd. 134 + P.Louvre inv. AF 12809 (MP3 571, West 116; I/II CE); 1.44-60, 54-64 P.Bodm. inv. 48 (MP3 571.01, West 115; III CE); 1.45-58

8 Moore-Blunt offers a similar example of a grave accent in the word πὲριδρυοϲ help- ing to prevent a misreading in scriptio continua for the preposition in anastrophe πέρι (Moore-Blunt [n. 7] 153). 9 J. Lundon includes ἤι’ and ἐπῴχετο, the former of which bears a diaeresis and the latter of which bears an accent in this fragment (lines 47, 50), in his most recent edition of Scholia Minora in Homerum: An Alphabetical List (Trismegistos Online Publications 7; Köln-Leuven 2012). 10 Cribiore (n. 7) 83-86 characterizes the latter three features as the work of intermedi- ate to advanced students or teachers. 11 Cribiore points out this general difficulty in her Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Princeton 2001) 138. 12 More than half of the Iliad papyri that have come to light contain passages from the first six books (Cribiore [n. 11] 194). 38 Simone Oppen

– – – – – – – – – – ε]κ̣λυ̣[ε καρ]ηνων [ 45 αμφ]η̣ρεφέα τ[ε ] ώ̣μων χω̣[ομενοιο ] ηϊε νυκτ[ι νεω]ν· μὲτα δ̣[ γεν]ε̣τ αργυρεοιο β[ιοιο 50 ] επώχετο και [ ] β̣ελοϲ ὲχεπευε̣[ ] νεκύων καιοντο̣ [ αν]α ϲτρατον ώχ̣[ετο αγορ]η̣ν̣δε καλέϲϲατ[ο 55 ] θηκε θεα λευ[κωλενοϲ Δα]ν̣αων ὅτι ρα θν̣[ηϲκονταϲ ηγερ]θ[[ο]]\ε/ν ομηγερε[εϲ ανιϲταμ]ενοϲ μ̣[ετε]φ̣[η αμ]με̣ [ – – – – – – – – – –

49 γεν]ε̣τ: The letter π in the subsequent line shows that the gap visible in the digital image is illusory. The descender visible on the left side of the gap in this line belongs to the letter τ. There are faint traces of ink to both the left and the right of this descender that are barely visible in the digital image. The curved traces of ink on the left side of the descender suggest the letter ε. Identi- fication of the ink on the right side of the descender is difficult, because the ink at the top of the descender appears to be broken and, even if the gap is closed, there is a small wedge missing from the papyrus here. These ink traces may be part of the crossbar of the letter τ or they may be the right edge of a ligature of the letters τ and ο. If one accepts the first possibility, the apparent elision of the letter ο before the next word (αργυρεοιο) suggests that this papyrus was not consistently written in scriptio plena, though there is no other place where elision would be expected in this fragment with which to compare.13 – αργυρεοιο: There is what appears to be a grave accent over εο. How- ever, a close examination of the ink on the crossbar of the letter ε reveals that it has been broken and that the papyrus fiber containing the rest of the lengthened crossbar of the letter ε has been lifted above the line. When one

13 Turner notes that individual scribes did not consistently write in scriptio plena (GMAW2 [n. 2] 8). A Homeric Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus 39

(mentally) replaces the crossbar of the letter ε, a ligature of the letters ε and ο appears, consistent with that of the letters τ and ο in line 50 below. 51 ὲχεπευε̣[: The lunate curve at the right edge suggests the letter ε, as does the slight thickening near the middle of the curve where one would expect the crossbar of the letter ε to join it. Although the vulgate has the letter κ here (ἐχεπευκές), an upturned end on the vertical stroke of the letter κ would be unparalleled in this fragment, suggesting that the scribe may have skipped the letter κ and written the letter ε by mistake in anticipation of the letter ε in the final syllable of this adjective. 54 αγορ]η̣ν̣δε: A misaligned fiber at the left edge of the papyrus contains ink that appears to belong to the letter η and that may obscure the left vertical of the letter ν. A hook-shaped stroke at the top of the right vertical of what appears to be the letter ν could be a serif (though one unparalleled for the letter ν in this fragment) or an apostrophe separating the word αγορ]η̣ν̣ from the word δε.14 The ink mark above the letter δ in this line could be a stray ink mark or the termination of a long acute accent beginning over the letter η (cf., e.g. καλέϲϲατ[ο), which was broken off in connection with the long crack visible between the letters ν and δ. 56 ὅτι: A rough breathing is marked only here, along with an acute accent. Similar examples of a round rough breathing combined with an acute accent may be found in PSI 10.1169, col. 1, 246, 250. 57 ηγερ]θ[[ο]] \ε/ν: The correction above this line uses an ε similar to what one would expect from an informal hand. This correction may have aris- en from the scribe’s anticipation of the letter ο beginning the next word in the line (ομηγερε[εϲ). For a parallel, see the cursive interlinear correction above Il. 2.481 in Turner, GMAW2 (n. 2) pl. 14.

14 Turner points out this use of the apostrophe (GMAW2 [n. 2] 11).