REVENUE LAWS

OF

PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS
EDITED FROM A GREEK PAPYRUS IN THE BODLEIAN LIBRARY, WITH
A TRANSLATION, COMMENTARY, AND APPENDICES
BY

B.

P.

GRENFELL,

M.A.

FELLOW OF QUEEN'S COLLEGE, OXFORD; CRAVEN FELLOW

AND AN INTRODUCTION

REV.

J.

P.

MAHAFFY,

D.D., HON. D.C.L.

FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN

HONORARY FELLOW OF QUEEN'S COLLEGE, OXFORD

WITH THIRTEEN PLATES

AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

1896

/_

^^^^

-^^'

pfl

Bonbon

HENRY FROWDE
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE

AMEN CORNER,

E.G.

QJew

MACMILLAN &

CO.,

66 FIFTH AVENUE

TO

W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE

PREFACE.
THE Revenue
first

Papyrus consists of two rolls, of which the

containing columns 1-72 was obtained by Prof. Flinders

Petrie in the winter of

1893-4; tne second, containing the

other columns and originally perhaps wrapped round the first
not actually forming a part of
in the winter of 1894-5.
roll, if

The

it,

was obtained by myself

measures 44 feet long; the second, of which

only fragments exist, must at one time have measured not less
than

first roll

The

height of the papyrus cannot, owing to its

fragmentary condition, be precisely determined, but was in the
case of columns 59-72 about 9^ inches, in that of the rest
1

5 feet.

3^ inches more.

The papyrus

papyrus known, and as

thus by far the largest Greek

in several places dated
in the
is

'

it

is

twenty-seventh year' of Philadelphus, or 259/8

nearly the oldest.
Both the external and the

internal

B.C.,

it

is

also

evidence point to

its

provenance having been the Fayoum, a remarkable fact, since

the countless Greek papyri which have been found in that
province have, with the exception of the Gurob papyri and
a few others, all belonged to a much later date.

The papyrus

is

written

by a number of

scribes,

but to

PREFACE.

vi

determine exactly how many

that I can distinguish twelve,

is

difficult

in addition to

I think
problem.
one or more cor-

The choice of the columns to be reproduced in facsimile

been made with the view of exhibiting both the variety of

rectors.

has

the hand-writings and those

are most important.
With regard to the text

columns of which the contents

have endeavoured

to

present

as faithful a transcription of the original as is convenient to

modern readers. I have therefore divided the words, and caused

the

initial

letters

of the

proper names and the headings of

sections written in large spaced letters to be printed in capitals.

But in other respects the text is printed just as it is in the

Blunders or mistakes

original.

criticism being reserved for the

in spelling are left uncorrected,

commentary

and

have not

worth while to disfigure the pages by the constant

insertion of sic.
Any blunder in the text which is liable to

thought

it

misconception is explained in the Commentary, as are the few

abbreviations and symbols which occur.
Nor have I inserted
stops, breathings or accents, which, in publishing a papyrus of
such antiquity, seem to me a needless anachronism.
There
is the less reason for
inserting them in the present case, since
places which are

ambiguous the reader can refer to the

translation, where he will find the construction which I propose.
The division-marks in the original between lines mark the
in

beginning of new sections, and where a new section begins in

the middle of a line, as occasionally happens, the division-mark
is

between that

line

and the one

following.

Square brackets [ ] indicate that there is a lacuna in the

papyrus, and the number of dots enclosed by the brackets
signifies the

approximate number of

letters

number of

letters

the analogy of the average

lost, judging by
which occupy the

PREFACE.

vii

same space in the preceding and following lines. Of course

certainty must decrease in proportion to the length of the
more or
lacuna, and where the ends of lines are lost, a guess
less probable, as

based on the ends of

is

it

lines

preserved

above or below, or merely on general considerations from the

requirements of the sense or the average length of lines in the
column is all that is possible.
Moreover letters, of course,
size, e. g. there is hardly any scribe in
the papyrus who does not occupy as much space with a T as
with CHS.
Nevertheless, in those cases where I have supposed

in

vary considerably

the lacuna to

be not greater than

six or

seven

letters,

not

being the end of a line, I am ready to deny the admissibility

of emendations which are clearly inconsistent with the average
number of letters of normal size being what I have suggested.
I

have ventured to

insist

somewhat strongly on

number of emendations

partly because a

this

point,

can. very easily be

made by
is

ignoring the dots, and partly because when a column

broken in two, or when fragments are detached from the

rest of a column, as

three columns,

number of
which
not

is

may

letters

all

that

When

so.

it

e. g.

at first sight

lost
I

frequently happens in the

with even

wish to claim.

a column

is

broken

first

seem impossible
the

But

twenty-

to fix the

approximate certainty
in most cases this is

in half,

the holes and breaks

which occur at regular intervals in the folds of the papyrus

enable us to calculate to TV inch, if necessary, the position of
the two halves, while as the detached fragments for the most

away from the

lumps containing several thicknesses, the determination of any one of these layers is therepart

fell

fore sufficient to fix

in

the

certain

same
I

series.

do not wish

rest in

precisely the position of

That the

all

the others

position of every fragment

to maintain, but

would ask

my

is

readers

PREFACE.

viii

Prof. Petrie and I have spent much

the
places of the fragments, that the positions
fixing
depend for the most part on careful measurements, and that
where there was neither external nor internal evidence sufficient

to

believe that

time

both

in

position of a

fragment with a near approach to

certainty, the doubt has been recorded in the notes, or no
attempt has been made to decide the exact relation of the
to fix the

Thus in columns 79-107, I have left undeterseparate parts.

mined the amount lost between the two halves into which
nearly every column is divided, although the approximate
position of nearly all the fragments making up those columns
is

certain.

Dots outside square brackets indicate

letters which, either

through the dark colour of the papyrus or through the obliteration of the writing, we have been unable to decipher.

Dots underneath

letters

signify

letters is doubtful, in nearly all cases

that

the

owing

reading of the

to the mutilation

of the papyrus.
But where a letter is for the most part broken
away, and yet the context makes it certain what the letter was,

wishing not to create apparent

difficulties

where none

really

have generally printed the mutilated letter either

exist,
without a dot or inside the square bracket, and have reserved
I

the dots

underneath

letters

for cases

where there

is

a real

doubt.

Round brackets ( ) represent similar brackets in the original,

which mean that the part enclosed was to be omitted. Angular
brackets < > mean that the letters enclosed have been erased
in

the papyrus.

Corrections in the original are reproduced

as faithfully as possible, the smaller type implying that the

correction was made not by the scribe himself, but by another
writer.

This distinction

is

of considerable importance,

espe-

PREFACE.

ix

columns 38-56, where the reader will easily be able to

differentiate mere corrections of blunders by the scribes themcially in

selves from the changes introduced

by the

Siopflajnfc.

The

excellence of the facsimiles can hardly perhaps be

appreciated to the full by any one who has not the original

before him, and therefore cannot realize the difficulties with

which the photographers of the Clarendon Press have had

Most of the papyrus

to contend.

written in large clear

hands which are easy to read, and of which the facsimile is
But the papyrus
almost, or even quite, as clear as the original.
is in

many

black, and

is

parts stained a very dark brown, sometimes almost

many parts the surface of it has scaled off; and

in

these parts, although by holding the papyrus in different lights

they are generally decipherable with certainty, must of necessity

be

less clear in the facsimile

than

in

the original.

Nevertheless

that the facsimiles are, on the whole, extremely successful

I am sure, be admitted.

As
many

has been implied

will,

foregoing remarks, there are not

much doubt about the reading of

in the

passages where there

is

the papyrus, when the writing is there.

There are, however,
a few passages, which have resisted our combined efforts, but of

which the correct reading can be verified as soon as

it is
sugthe
other
the
hand,
gested.
great difficulty throughout has
been to fill up the lacunae. Here it will not be out of place to
explain the principles on which I have adopted or rejected
In printing a reconstructed text of a
conjectural readings.

On

papyrus so mutilated as the present one, two courses were

One would have been to carry conjectural emendapossible.

have stated the precise

grounds on which each one was made. The other course was
to draw a sharp distinction between conjectures which were
tions to

the furthest point, and

to

PREFACE.

based on parallel passages

in the

papyrus

or elsewhere,

itself

and conjectures which, though often probable enough

selves, were not so based, and while admitting the first

in

them-

class into

It is the
the text, to reserve the second for the Commentary.
if it be
I
And
latter course, not the first, which
have adopted.

a matter of regret to some that in so many places gaps have

been left, which could with more or less probability have been
easily filled up, the

answer

ments was not found

that the place of many fragour text had almost reached its

is this,

until after

present condition, and that we have therefore been able to some

The result showed
extent to test the value of our conjectures.

where our conjectures had been based on a parallel passage

papyrus itself, they were nearly always right, and where
had
been based on a parallel passage in another papyrus,
they

that

in the

they were generally right, but that where they were based on
the grounds of a priori probability, they were generally wrong.
I have therefore not admitted into the text
any conjectures

which are not based on a

parallel

passage either

in the

papyrus

or in papyri of the same period and dealing with the same

subjects, except in cases where the conjecture was so obviously
itself

right that it required no confirmation, and in a few other cases,

where some a priori conjecture was necessary in order to attach
any meaning to the passage. Where a conjecture is based on
a parallel passage in the papyrus itself, from considerations of

space

have not as a

unless there

rule stated the

was some

difficulty,

grounds

in the

as the reader

Commentary,

who wishes

to

do so by referring to the Index. But

based on a parallel passage in another

verify the conjecture can

where a conjecture is
papyrus, or where it is only based on a priori grounds, the fact
is recorded in the Commentary, in which will also be found
a number of conjectures not admitted into the text.

In addition,

PREFACE.
more or

less

not

are occasionally recorded.

suit,

obvious conjectures, which for various reasons

word of explanation
ing of the papyrus, and
facsimiled.

is

will

necessary with regard to the mountespecially of these columns which are

is

The

undertaken by

shown

xi

unrolling and mounting of the first roll was

Prof. Petrie himself, and the skill which he has

mounting so mutilated a papyrus of which the texture

excessively fine and brittle, is beyond all praise. It was clearly
in

impossible for him to accurately fix the position of fragments

which became loose as soon as the papyrus was opened, and he
rightly preferred to paste the fragments down in places which
were approximately correct, than to run the risk of their being
lost before their precise position

The

could be fixed.

result of

was that, especially in the earlier and most mutilated part,

a number of pieces were more or less misplaced, though the
this

but a very few has

correct position of

all

and

marked

in

many

claiming any

cases

infallibility,

they notice, as
both

in

in pencil

in

determined,

on the papyrus.

would therefore ask

they frequently

readings and

now been

will,

my

apparent

Without

readers

when

inconsistencies

spacings between the printed text and

the original, to believe that the arrangement or reading in the

In one or two
text has not been adopted without good reason.

on reading through the papyrus since my return

to England, that a few letters had disappeared, but fortunately
the loss was of practically no consequence.
I

places

noticed,

and most pleasant duty is to express my sincerest

thanks to the many friends who have aided me in the present
work, and particularly to those distinguished specialists in the

My

last

history
in

and palaeography of

common

study has

this period, with

made me

quainted.

ba

whom

privileged to

the interest

become

ac-

PREFACE.

xii

The debt which

PETRIE

lovers of antiquity

owe

to Prof.

and preservation of the

for the recovery

FLINDERS

first roll,

which

alone gives to the scanty fragments of the second what value

But it is my duty in
they possess, has already been stated.
particular to thank

my

hands, and

him

for placing the

work of publication

in

for his frequent help in the difficult matter of

arranging the detached fragments in their correct places.

With Prof. MAHAFFY I have discussed on frequent occasions
the problems both of reading and interpretation.
We have
read the original together, and the Translation and Commentary
have been completely revised by him.
Many both of the

all

readings in the text and of the explanations are his, and whatever merits this book may possess are in the main due to the

have had the constant help and criticism of a scholar

whose knowledge of both the history and the papyri of this
fact that

equalled by his brilliancy in overcoming difficulties.

nearly all points we are agreed, but as there are a few on
is

period

On

which

have ventured

to differ

from him, the responsibility for

error lies only with the writer of each section.

Prof.

G. LUMBROSO

visited at

Rome

in

September 1894,
had not nearly reached even its present
degree of completeness, and he most kindly consented to go
through the whole text with me, and to him I owe a large

when our

edition

number of most valuable

and suggestions.

August 1895, in our final consultation over the

we have had the great benefit of Prof. U. WILCKEN'S
Recently

text

criticisms

in

Several of the remaining difficulties were solved by

him, and he has also made many admirable suggestions and
criticisms.
Besides these I have specially to thank him for
aid.

most generously placing at my disposal the materials of his

two forthcoming great works, the Corpus of Greek ostraca

PREFACE.

xiii

These have proved of

and the Corpus of Ptolemaic papyri.

inestimable

service

in

several

places,

especially in reaching

that solution of the coinage questions which

in

Appendix

have proposed

III.

of Dublin has given me valuable

help on special points connected with botany, and Prof. P.
GARDNER has aided me on special points of numismatics.
Professor E. P.

Though he

WRIGHT

not in the least responsible for any errors in

Appendix III, without his aid I should not have ventured
with a boldness of which I am fully conscious an excursion
is

and technical

into the difficult

My
S.

friend

and partner

HUNT, has lightened

field

of Ptolemaic numismatics.

Craven Fellowship, Mr. A.

me considerably the burden of

in the

for

revising the proofs, and while doing so has

made

several

good

suggestions.

The typography
mendation

but

of the Clarendon Press requires no comcannot conclude without expressing my

thanks to the Delegates for publishing this book, and to the

Controller and staff of that institution for the care which they

have spent both in preparing the facsimiles and

a text so difficult as the present.

in

printing

some consideration will, I hope, be shown for the

shortcomings of this volume on account of the speed with which
it has been
Neither Prof. Mahaffy nor I saw the
produced.
papyrus until June 1894, and the work of publication had to
be suspended from November i894~April 1895 owing to my
enforced absence in Egypt, a delay which however has amply
Finally,

by the recovery during the winter of the second

It is possible that a longer period of deliberation would
roll.
have resulted in fewer difficulties in the text and greater com-

justified itself

pleteness in the explanations.

But

have not wished to violate

PREFACE.

xiv

the traditional example which this country has set to the rest of
Europe, of placing its latest discoveries before the world with
the utmost possible despatch.
Meanwhile, in the words
this field

of one of

my

predecessors in

of research, ludicent doctiores, et si quid probabilius

habuerint, profcrant.
B.

QUEEN'S COLLEGE,
October

5,

1895.

P.

GRENFELL.

CONTENTS
PACE

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION, BY THE REV.

J.

P.

MAHAFFY

xvii

TEXT

TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY

APPENDICES
I.

II.

III.

INDICES

75

Louvre papyrus

62.

Some unpublished

The

Silver

Text and Commentary

Petrie Papyri

177

-187

and Copper Coinage of the Ptolemies

193

I.

II.

III.

Index of proper names and place names

..

.241

Index of symbols and abbreviations

General Index

242
.

.242

INTRODUCTION
TO THE REVENUE PAPYRUS.

i.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION.

SINCE the discovery of the collection now known as Mr.

Petrie's papyri, of which the mummy cases of the Gurob cemetery

were mainly composed, no greater surprise has come upon the

students of Ptolemaic Egyptology than the acquisition, by the
same discoverer, of another great document belonging to the

In the year 1894 Mr. Petrie bought from

third century B.C.

a dealer in Cairo a

no

which

is

actually

44

feet long.

There was

be had concerning its provenance, but the

came from the Fayoum was raised to certainty

clear evidence to

probability that

by Mr. Grenfell
but

roll

in the

it

in 1895, since

he acquired, not only at Cairo,

further very important fragments so similar

in texture, handwriting, and subject, as to make it clear that
they

Fayoum,

belonged to the same roll or set of rolls. Most unfortunately,

Mr. Petrie's great roll had been broken near the top, probably
by a stroke of the spade, at the moment of its discovery, from

some

fellah digging for sebach or for antiquities,

the whole

roll

was

in the

most delicate and

and moreover

brittle condition.

It

could not be opened with safety without pasting down each

fragment as it was detached from the rest, and all the skill and
patience of Mr. Petrie were required to carry out so tedious au

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xviii

Even

was done, many replacements and

rearrangements were necessary, which could only be made by
Mr. Grenfell after he had become perfectly intimate with the
To him is due the first
subject and style of the document.
operation.

after this

transcription of the
stantly discussed

document

the

since that time

we have

con-

re-examined the original on

difficulties,

every doubtful passage, and solved many of the problems which

at first resisted his efforts.
In September, 1894, Mr. Grenfell

went

to

Rome, and consulted

In our

settled points.

final

Prof.

G. Lumbroso on several un-

conference over remaining

difficulties,

we have had

the advantage of the advice, the corroboration, and

in a few passages the corrections of Prof. Wilcken, who spent

a week with us (August, 1895)

Oxford, and examined with us
these passages with constant reference to the original, which is
now one of the treasures of the Bodleian Library.
have

We

thus had the advantage of the criticism of the two foremost

specialists on Ptolemaic papyri in Europe.
As regards the present state of the text, it will readily be
understood that nothing could save for us the outer parts of

which had been exposed to wear and handling. The

middle part of all the earlier columns was gone. It was only

the

roll,

was reached

as the interior

that

we found any

large proportion
of the writing preserved.
Fortunately the whole document was written on the recto
side of the papyrus, with the exception of

and

by a

corrector

EZH

OP A, look

specially referred to

two short notes added

by the curious

outside, at the point of the text

(cols.

direction
41, 43)

them belongs. It was accordingly necessary to

these
columns
up
only between panes of glass the rest has
been laid upon sheets of paper and framed.
The roll as
to which each of
set

originally

opened contained 72 columns of

text,

but the frag-

INTRODUCTION.

xix

ments since acquired, which apparently belong to a sister roll

wrapped round it, bring up the total number of columns, according to Mr. Grenfell's estimate, to 107, with some undetermined
I

fragments.

must

refer the

reader to

his translation

and

commentary for the details which justify our general conclusions, and for a discussion of the many particular problems raised
by this great new document. The only text which evidently
bears a close analogy to
of the Louvre collection
!

it

the well-known

is

This, as

it

both

Papyrus 62

illustrates

and

is

by the present documents, has been re-examined in

Paris, collated, and printed by Mr. Grenfell in a more accurate
form in this volume.
He has also added some unpublished
illustrated

fragments of the Petrie papyri on cognate subjects.

J

The

dates

2.

AGE OF THE DOCUMENT.

extant in the document are not only of the

precise age, but also because
important rectifications of the hitherto ac-

greatest importance in fixing

its

they suggest some

cepted facts of Ptolemaic history, and of the theories adopted
to explain them. It was plain at first sight, to any reader of the
Petrie papyri, that the various hands in the new document were
The occurrence of the year 27 in
all of the third century B.C.
several places made it further certain that it must have been
issued during the reign of the first or the second Ptolemy, for
of the succeeding kings, no successor till the sixth (known as

Ptolemy VII, Philometor) attained

The opening

to so

many

years' sovranty.

might very well have

misled us into attributing the ordinance to the first Ptolemy
for although such a formula as it now represents has never yet
formula

(cf.

Plate

I)

occurred,

it
1

could hardly, taken as

Cf. Les pap. grecs

it

stands, signify

du Musee du Louvre,
C 2

Paris,

any one

866.

else.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xx

we were

Nevertheless

The

second date

(col. 24),

though very much

plate,

moment

not for a

which

is

misled by this snare.

also reproduced in our first

mutilated,

was

clearly

to

parallel

occurring once in the Petrie papyri, and found also in

it was
a formula used by the second
demotic contracts
that

he had associated his son (afterwards Euergetes I)

I need not now refer to the fanciful
in the royalty.
theory of
Revillout, which is wholly inconsistent with this, but which
Ptolemy, after

now been so completely refuted that he himself has probably

abandoned it. So far then we find ourselves on firm ground,
and the date on cols. 24 and 38 is equivalent to 259-8 B.C., the
has

twenty-seventh year of Ptolemy usually called Philadelphus

But why does the first column contain a new and strange
formula ? The Petrie papyri show us in the king's later years
l

(33.

3 6)

well-known

title:

BACIAEYONTOC HTOAEMAIOY

TOY HTOAEMAIOY CHTHPOC, and

this

attempted to find
here, by assuming that the second HTOAEMAIOY had been
I

between the scraps containing TOY and CHTHPOC. To

solution Mr. Grenfell was from the first opposed, as he
urged that the two scraps fitted perfectly together. But I was

lost

this

Mr. Grenfell, arguing that the word CHTHPOC

had been thrust in at the end of a full line, and that even so
not satisfied

life,

As

is

though

now

till

well

known, we have no evidence that he was so called during his

The king and queen jointly are called 0EOI A A E A (f> O

his wife was.

I .

Strangely enough, we have

was recognized,

till

as yet found no epithet, such as Soter, by which he

at least a century later, when he is distinguished by historians,

Thus in Manetho's letter dedicating

&c. for convenience sake, by his wife's title.
the history to the second Ptolemy, of which Syncellus quotes the opening fiacr.
Ippcoo-o /uoi /Sao-. ^tArare, it was long since
observed that o-e/3aora> was an evidence of spuriousness. We now know that
is so also, and lastly that eppoxro would be an unpardonable piece of
<I>iAaSeA.(/>u>

IlroA. 4>iAa8eA$&> o-e/3aor<j> K.r.X.

rudeness,

Manetho being bound

to say

INTRODUCTION.
room

there was no

HTOAEMAIOY,

hit

upon

He

the true solution.

under the

therein for another

xxi

first line,

suggested that the erasures immediately

as well as the crowded and smaller characters

of the word CHTHPOC, pointed to a correction of the date.

Even so, the corrector must have blundered, for he should

have

left

CHTHPOC.
theory,
visible

HTOAEMAIOY

in

the second

line,

and there added

But on re-examining the original according to this

found the remains of the old formula still faintly
second

in the

line,

and

this

Grenfell and Professor Wilcken.

then

The

briefly this.

corrector desired to replace the older formula

but he erased too much, and then added his new

by the later
word in the wrong
;

corrected, as

was corroborated by Mr.

What happened was

is

document was officially

stated twice over, the corrector was fortunately
place.

Though

the

guilty of the further negligence of leaving the old formula un-

disturbed on

thus enabling us to solve the difficulty.

There remains the highly interesting question why should
col. 24,

the second Ptolemy have not only changed the formula of his
dates in his twenty-seventh year, but also have removed the

name

of his son, the crown prince, now of age and the accepted
Demotic
heir, to substitute for it the title of his deified father ?
scholars
point.

and numismatists are ready with an answer on the last

They maintain that the first Ptolemy was not formally

It is shown on apparently
long after his death.
good evidence by Revillout and Poole that this deification
took place in the twenty-fifth year of the reign *. Even then the

deified

till

gods Soteres were not introduced into the

list

of deified kings,

beginning with Alexander, whose priest was eponymous magistrate at Alexandria.

But as the cities of Phoenicia began to
coin widi the legend FTTOAEMAIOY CftTHPOC at this time, it
1

Cf. Coins

of the Ptolemies,

p.

xxxv.

xxii

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

is but reasonable to expect that the king would also now style
himself Ptolemy, son of Ptolemy Soter.
So far the change is explicable, but how can we account for

the extrusion of his son,

now

for

some years appearing

in the

For this Krall and Wilcken, with others, have

royal formula ?
the
adopted
hypothesis of an unknown son of Queen Arsinoe II,
born after her marriage with this Ptolemy, and associated by
her influence in the royalty, to the exclusion of the elder crown
1

This supposed youth is further assumed

have died when he was nearly grown up, and so to have
This complicated
given occasion for a change of the formula.
prince, her stepson

to

which has been consistently opposed by

series of assumptions,

is
highly improbable in itself, and contradicted by
In the first place it were passing strange that all
evidence.
good
our historical authorities should keep silence on such a matter.

Wiedemann,

The

crimes of Arsinoe in her earlier

life

are well known, and

had she indeed compelled Philadelphus to oust his elder children

for a new heir, not only would she have murdered them if she
could, but

we should

certainly

The very well informed

scholiast

have heard of

on Theocritus' i yth

even states directly the contrary.

she had none by Philadelphus
his

especially Euergetes,

own

He

Idyll (1. 128)

says that Arsinoe being

had been murdered, and

adopted her step-children, and

drewcs, her elder children

childless

more

this family feud.

dates, the son of

who

is

called in all the formulae of

Ptolemy and [of

this] Arsinoe,

6EHN

the young prince who appears with

2
nor is
his parents on the steles of Pithom and of Mendes
AAEA<J>ftN.

This then

is

Krall, Sitzungsber.

ARSINOE

of Vienna Acad. for 1884, pp. 362 sqq. Wilcken, art.

ii.
p. 1286; Ehrlich, De Callim, Hymnis
;

in Paully-Wissowa's Encyclop.

Quaest, Chronol. (Breslau, 1894), p. 56.

2

Wilcken was the

first

to call attention to these representations, as well as to

INTRODUCTION.

xxiii

there any positive evidence for the conjecture of Wilcken, that

this figure points to the newly assumed son of Arsinoe II. The

lady must have been forty years old when she became Queen of
Egypt, so that a new child would have been remarkable, and

would from

this

very circumstance have excited unusual notice.

His assumption into the succession would moreover not have

been delayed till the king's nineteenth year, from which Revilmention of an associated prince, and
time on we have mention of him in years 21,22, and 24,

lout has found the

from

this

first

These

not to speak of the present case in 27.

facts lead us to

though recognized as prince royal in earlier Egyptian

documents, such as the steles to which Wilcken has first called
attention, Euergetes was not formally associated in the sovranty
infer that

he had reached the age of puberty, when Arsinoe, his stepmother, was growing old, and the king's health was failing.

till

The

question, however, remains

more

why was

more pressing
name removed from the
strange,

the crown prince's

formula starting from the year 27 (B.C. 259-8) of his father's
After much perplexity, I have found what seems to me
reign ?
the true answer to this question.

than ever

We

know

that the prince

infant daughter of
to the
this

had been already betrothed

King Magas of Cyrene, who

most probable computation of

the Fair,

who

died, according

his fifty years' reign, at

The queen-mother

very time.

was opposed

to the

to

the

match,

of Cyrene, Apama, who

promptly sent for Demetrius

hurried at once to Occupy Cyrene.

The whole

narrative in Justin, our only and wretched authority, points to

one

young

prince.

son of Arsinoe

up

Denkm&lcr, iv. 6 a), where Isis is represented suckling the

from the youth of this figure that it must be an infant
But as the date of the relief is not given, it may have been set

at Philae (Lepsius,

He
II.

infers

just after her adoption of the future Euergetes,

and while he was but a

child.

xxiv

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

But Demetrius commenced an

a most rapid course of events l
intrigue with Apama, instead of waiting for the time when he
could marry her heiress-daughter, Berenike, and was put to death
.

with the knowledge, though not at the instigation of the child-

Thereupon, by common consent, Euergetes is called to

and
the marriage with Berenike follows, possibly as soon
Cyrene,
as the princess was of age, but in any case some years later.
princess.

has sometimes been assumed, perhaps on the suggestion of

a blunder in Porphyry's fragment, which confuses this Demetrius
It

with Demetrius
the intruder at

King of Macedonia, that the usurpation of

2
There is no
Cyrene lasted for some years
II,

Nay, the words of Justin imply that the

whole affair only occupied a few months. If so, and if Euergetes
was called by the people of Cyrene to assume the government
evidence for

this.

as prince consort expectant, he doubtless assumed a title there

inconsistent with his associated rank in Egypt. The Cyrenaeans

would have been offended that the second

in

command

of

Egypt should assume their sovranty in any case it would have

been a direct absorption of the royalty of Cyrene into the
;

in

Per idem tempus rex Cyrenarum Magas decedit, qui ante

Justin xxvi.
infirmitatem Beronicem, unicam filiam, ad finienda cum Ptolomeo fratre certamina
1

'

Sed post mortem regis mater virginis Arsinoe [of course

matrimonium solveretur, misit qui ad nuptias
Apama],
virginis regnumque Cyrenarum Demetrium, fratrem regis Antigoni, a Macedonia
Sed nee
arcesserent, qui et ipse ex filia Ptolomei [Soteris] procreatus est.
filio

eius desponderat.

ut invita se contractum

Demetrius

moram

fecit.

Itaque

lasset; fiducia pulchritudinis,

qua

quum

secundante vento celeriter Cyrenas advoa principio

riimis placere socrui coeperat, statim

superbus regiae familiae militibusque impotens

in

matrem

contulerat.

invisa

fuit.

Quae

res suspecta
versis

Itaque
busque
Demetrio comparantur, cui, cum

virgini, dein popularibus militianimis in Ptolomei filium insidiae

lectum

socrus

inmittuntur.'
2

Porph. Fr.

4,

9 in Muller,

FHG

iii.

studiumque placendi a virgine

primo

omnium
in

erat,

p.

701.

concessisset,

percussores

INTRODUCTION

xxv

crown of Egypt, whereas the dynastic rights of the popular

Berenike were to be preserved, so far as possible, intact
Morehave
been
must
to
to
over, Euergetes
obliged
hurry
Cyrene,
1

and

to remain there in charge of the disturbed

throne.

It

was,

and doubtful

believe, against the habit of these associations

the sovranty that the associated prince should be sent to

govern a distant province or dependency. Though the old
in

Pharaohs had called their eldest sons prince of Kush,' I cannot

find an instance where the associated crown prince of Egypt was
'

called prince of Cyrene, of Cyprus, or of Palestine.

reply then to the question for which an answer is imIn the year 27, or perhaps
peratively demanded, is simply this

My

28, of Philadelphus' reign, his son, the

crown

was

prince,

called

an independent control, probably with the title of king, by

the people of Cyrene
owing to which his title as associated
to

prince of Egypt was abandoned, being probably contrary to

court etiquette, as it certainly would be to the susceptibilities of

the Cyrenaeans
1

Thus

in

2
.

the inscription of Adule, in which Euergetes enumerates

provinces of the empire which he inherited from his father, Cyrene

studiously) omitted.
*

Strange to say, there

is

is

all

the

(no doubt

another consideration, overlooked hitherto, which helps

remove the

difficulty occasioned by the delay in Euergetes' marriage till he

became King of Egypt. In most other monarchies a suitable bride is found for
the crown prince as soon as he is of age
in Ptolemaic Egypt I have observed

to

with surprise that this is against the practice of the court, though the reigning
Ptolemies marry as early as possible.
Philadelphus, though grown up in 290 B.C.,

does not apparently marry till his. assumption of royalty, in the opinion of some
not till his father is dead. Euergetes, though long grown up, seems to have

critics,

no wife

till

his accession.

has no wife
succeeds in

Philopator, succeeding at about the age of twenty-four,

some years later. We hear of no wife of Euergetes

middle life and marries the widowed queen. So it is

till

II

till

(with

he

one

exception) down to the case of Caesarion, who would doubtless have been
married before his early death, but for this curious court tradition.
satisfactory

xxvi

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

A few words will

in

concerning the other dates occurring

to those earlier documents, which

suffice

the papyrus, and appended

The royal rescript ordering the

are cited as standing orders.
transmutation of the EKTH from a privilege of the temples into
a gift to the queen is dated in the twenty-third year of the reign.
In order to discover the average yearly value, the tax produced
explanation of

making upon

it

this

have not yet found.

new problem.

Among

But the following suggestion

the later Ptolemies

is

worth

we hear of a daughter

succeeding, because she was the only legitimate one (fj povrj yvrjvia ol rS>v nal8cai> fa,
were younger children of the same parents who
Paus. i. 9,
2), whereas there
must have been equally entitled ^o succeed but for their age. I have often

puzzled over this statement.

the child in question

now seems

It

was the

eldest

born

to

me

after

intended to point out that

her father had succeeded to

the throne, and that previous children born of the same mother were regarded
In the corresponding
as vodoi when the question of the succession arose.
it is even stated S>v pia yvqvia f) irpfa&vTarr), K.T.A.,
Strabo
of
i,
passage
(xvii.
n)

which,

I think,

the eldest,

should certainly be emended to

was the only

legitimate heiress.'

17

The

ov irpea-^vrdTTj,
text as

it

'

who, though not

stands seems to

me

have no point whatever. If this be so, there were obvious reasons why a crown
All the children begotten before his accession would be
prince should not marry.
to

technically illegitimate, as not being the offspring of an actual king and queen,
and the danger of having such elder children about the court was, of course,

very great.

Perhaps

this

explains the (false) declaration of the court poets

was marked out for sovranty while still in his mother's womb.
Thus, too, we might find some reason for the apparently tyrannous act of
Cleopatra III, widow of Euergetes II, who, when she was compelled by the
that Philadelphus

Alexandrians to associate her eldest son (Lathyrus or Soter II) in the throne,
compelled him to divorce his wife and sister Cleopatra, who had already borne

him two

and marry her younger daughter, Selene. These two children

from
disappear
history, as if they had no right to the throne, unless, indeed,
Auletes was one of them, and he is always spoken of as illegitimate.
Without
children,

the aid of

some hypothesis of

this

absurd facts retailed for us out of

kind

all

we cannot understand

the monstrous

and

logical connexion by the remaining histories

not improbable that Ptolemy Apion, who ruled for many

over
years undisputedly
Cyrene, was an elder son of Euergetes II, borne to him
a
or
Egyptian princess during his sovranty there, and whom he left
by Cyrenaic
behind in control, when he became King of Egypt in 146 B.C.
of the Ptolemies.

It is

INTRODUCTION.

xxvii

We

the previous years (cols. 36, 37) is to be ascertained.

know from independent sources that the deification of Arsinoe
in

Philadelphus was gradual that she attained divine honours first

at one, then at another of the Egyptian temples. The establish;

ment of a canephoros or eponymous

priestess in her honour, at

Alexandria, which dates as far back as the year 19 of the reign,

according to demotic documents, appeared to be the climax or

consummation of

We

this gradual apotheosis.

practically at least, the process

was not complete

when she absorbed one

twenty-third year,
of all the Egyptian gods.
3.

country.

We

the king's

SUBJECTS TREATED IN THE DOCUMENT.

What

Egypt was

till

that,

of the great revenues

Having determined the date we approach

the text.

now know

is

the subject

know from many

the contents of

Clearly the taxing of the

literary sources that the land of
?

a great measure regarded (even in old Pharaonic

and that in no
days) as the personal property of the sovran
kingdom of the Hellenistic epoch was the Exchequer more
in

carefully attended to, or the

Ptolemies always appear

income of the king so great.

The

the history of those days as com-

in

Even queens and

manding enormous wealth.

princesses

have

such fortunes that they can raise armies, and carry on wars
on their own account. There can only have been two sources
For it does not
of such wealth commerce and agriculture.

appear that the gold mines of Nubia afforded any considerable

portion of the royal revenue had such been the case, we should
;

have found a much wider use of gold coinage than existed in

Ptolemaic Egypt.
The largest item in the exchequer was
doubtless the revenue derived, not only from the taxing of
1

Cf. the account of the matter in Genesis

xlviii.

18-26.

Correct

vc-.

xUii.

IV2

fr

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xxviii

but from

produce,

its

The

regulation.

Petrie

papyri

have

made

us acquainted with a variety of imposts, such

as salt-tax, police-tax, grazing-tax, and even occasional benevo-

already

lences called crowns (the

Roman aurum

coronarium) presented

to the king as a gift, but a gift extracted from the population

by compulsion.

The

present ordinance (putting aside the most mutilated

columns and the fragments recently acquired by Mr. Grenfell)
is concerned with only
two of these sources of revenue,

we may

but

well

believe

that

they were two of the most

the tax upon vineyards and orchards

important
the second that upon oil, or rather the revenue from the monopoly exercised in the case of that indispensable article of
:

the

first

is

Egyptian diet. As the revenues both from; wine jand from xail
were farmed out to middlemen, the present Revenue Papyrus
is concerned exclusively with the regulation of these contracts
the

with

State.

In

both cases

it

Js very likely that the

Ptolemies merely adopted and regulated the practice of the

Pharaohs nay, in the former, they only extended a policy long
;

l
There had been a time when
by these kings
was so dominant as to secure
the
Established Church
enormous estates and revenues from the Crown. The inventory

since adopted

'

'

of the property of the temples of Amon in the Harris papyrus '\

and the fact that the twentieth dynasty was one of sacerdotal
kings,

whose

show us
1

On

Cf. A.

first

plainly

interest

was the exaltation of

priestly influence,

enough that the Egyptian corporations of priests,

this point I feel some hesitation, as the regulations concerning oil

seem to imply that the monopoly was an innovation at this very
49)
(col.
time.
Otherwise there could hardly have been private oil-presses recognized
as existing, without being contraband.

Erman's Aegyplen,

p.

405 sqq.

INTRODUCTION.

xxix

Europe, had gradually absorbed

But the reaction had
a great part of the property of the State.
set in long before the Ptolemies supervened. Successful soldiers
like the

mediaeval Church

in

who became

kings had begun to strip the temples gradually of

their estates, and there is not wanting direct evidence of the
remonstrances and complaints of the sacerdotal corporations.

Every

successful usurper

began by restoring

lost

revenues to

the priests in order to purchase their powerful support

established dynasty proceeded to
vading the privileges of this order.

Ptolemy admitted the claims of the

exhibit

its

by

security

Thus we know

every

that the

infirst

priests to large revenues in

the Delta, near the Sebennytic mouth of the river revenues,

1
The
too, which they claimed as the gift of a previous usurper
for
a
direction
we
present papyrus contains
step in the contrary
.

know from

that in the twenty-third year of the second Ptolemy

the share of one-sixth of the produce of all the vineyards and
it

orchards in Egypt, hitherto given to the gods of Egypt, and

apparently delivered by the husbandmen at the nearest temple,

was claimed by the queen, in consequence of her deification.

The stele of Pithom and that of Mendes commemorate, it is
true, vast gifts of money from this king and queen to the priests.
Very probably this may have been regarded as a sort of combut the change of the ecclesiastical property from
revenues or charges on the land of the country into a yearly
grant or syntaxis from the Crown must have been felt as a loss
pensation

For whenever the Crown

of dignity, and probably of wealth.
fell into pecuniary difficulties, the syntaxis could be diminished
or refused

2
.

It is

very likely that the national insurrections, so

and Thought, &c., p. 176 sq.

Ireland received for their College at
of
Catholic priesthood
a
of
over
26,000 from the British Government up to
Maynooth yearly syniaxis
1

Cf. the text translated in my. Greek Life

Thus

the

Roman

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xxx

frequent under the later Ptolemies, were aided by priestly discontent at this subordination of their wealth to the Crown.

The very command

to furnish an inventory of sacred property,

such as the king here issues (col. 37. 15-7), must have appeared

a gross insult to these proud conservative corporations.

Such however being the case, we may be certain that the

bulk of the duties to the local temples were .paid not in money,
but in kind, and this ancient and once universal form of tax

makes

the

institution

of

tax-farmers,

government, almost a necessity.

And

under

centralized

the State, in contracting

with private individuals or with joint stock companies, allows

them a certain profit for the cost and trouble of collecting such
taxes,

and

income

in

is

content to take from them a fixed income.

the instance before us was

more than one or two

settled

and

by

years, but

in

not

This

indeed fixed for

every recurring case

it

was

gublic. auction, the State selling the right of collection

sale of the

produce paid as

the highest bidder.

It is

were

secure

to

tax, or

even of money taxes, to

easy to see that many precautions

the State against loss.
Then

necessary
as now, dishonesty towards State charges, especially if they
be felt oppressive or unjust, is regarded as hardly an offence
against morality, or at most as a very venial offence, and so

a very careful householder, such as the Egyptian sovran, had

need to protect himself.
The most obvious policy was to

There
play off each of the parties concerned against the rest.
were three separate interests to afford scope for this diplomacy.
the year 1870, but they were quite content to take fourteen years' purchase of it
then in a lump sum, which brought them in only half the yearly amount, in order

endowment, and an escape from inquiries in Parliament

and by Royal Commissions: they also feel just as much at liberty to abet the
to attain security in their

national aspirations against the

Crown

as the Egyptian priesthood did.

INTRODUCTION.
First come, naturally, the

Government

xxxi

each

officials in

district,

who must

not be allowed to have any private pecuniary interests

to conflict with their loyalty to the king.
Secondly come the

who undertake the collection of taxes. They

must be rich men, at least men who can find good security to
guarantee the State against loss, and such men must on the one
contractors

hand be induced to come forward by allowing them considerable

profits, and hence
promoting competition for the contract,
whilst on the other they must not be allowed to damage the
State

by combining

to bid low at the auction, or

again

by

extorting from the population more than was due to the State.
Thirdly, the taxpayer must be protected from oppression, and
also punished for dishonesty to the State,

by allowing

stringent

inquisition into his produce in the latter case, facilities of appeal

to an umpire in the former.

Such are the general

lines of the

legislation before us.

J 4.

The

DIVISION OF SUBJECTS INTO CHAPTERS.

chapter or division (A), cols. 1-22, so far as we

can understand its mutilated text, contained the regulations
first

governing the relations of the Government officials in each

district, particularly of the OIKONOMOC and his deputy or
or companies of men who undertook
the farming of the revenue.
It appears from col. 15 that no
such official was allowed to take any such contract, either per-

ANTirpA4>EYC, to the

men

sonally or through his slaves an obvious precaution which

In
separated at once the official from the tax-farming class.

chapter the regulations seem to be quite general

special tax is even once mentioned.
this

The second
definite,

chapter (B), contained in

cols.

23-37,

and contains the orders and regulations

is

far

no

more

for the trans-

xxxii

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

mutation of the share (AflOMOlPA) of one-sixth of the produce

of all the vineyards and orchards of Egypt, hitherto paid to
gods of Egypt, into a Government tax, payable to the deified

queen Arsinoe Philadelphus. The just assessment and collection

of this tax must have been very difficult for much of it had
;

been paid to the local temples the produce of wine is always

the new form of the tax must have been
very variable
;

unpopular the State is therefore not satisfied with a statement

under affidavit from each cultivator, but authorizes the farmer
;

of the tax to watch the vintage, to pry into the profits, and to
secure both his own advantage and that of the State.
This
of the actual gathering of the crop is likely to
entail great hardships on the cultivator, for the inspector may
not attend when the time of harvest requires the crop to be
supervision

saved, and

exact bribes from the peasants either for his

prompt attendance or for an estimate favourable to themselves *.
These contingencies are provided for here, as they are not in

modern

may

which levy similar taxes, by permitting the

peasants to gather grapes and make wine under protest that it
cannot be delayed, and transact the payment of the tax directly
states

with the Government

officials.

For the

details

must

refer

the reader to the commentary.

Wherever this share of the gods (ATTOMOIPA) occurs, we
find coupled together vineyards and orchards (HAPAAEICOl).
the case both in the Petrie papyri and on the Rosetta
All the
stone, as well as in other fragments of that period.

This

is

regulations concerning the making and storing of wine from the

AMHEAflNEC are given us explicitly enough. But when we

come
1

to inquire

Such

is

the case

what was the produce of the TTAPAAEICOI,

now

in

Turkey, and

is,

or was, the case in Greece,

taxes were assessed upon standing crops, before they could be reaped.

when

INTRODUCTION.

xxxiii

and why they were coupled with vineyards in this tax, we

come upon a serious difficulty. What is meant by the term,
and is our orchard a proper equivalent ? It was adopted by
Xenophon from the Persians, among whom it meant a park
It is
with trees, even large enough for a game preserve.
distinguished not only from a vineyard, but from a garden
(KHTTOC) in a document among the Petrie papyri (II. p. 68).

Another document

in

that

series contrasts

a palm-

with

it

Another
was

grove (<t>OINIKnN), apparently for taxing purposes.

What

(CIK VHP ATOM).

then

pumpkin-field
produce of a paradeisos in a country where very few
kinds of fruit-trees grow ? There is but one column (29)
specifies

the

which

deals

HAPAAEICOI, without closer

with

specification,

except that here an estimate of the value is to be made in

money, and the sixth paid in money, not in kind. Were it not
should be inclined to hold that the crop
of the paradeisoi which paid the sixth to the gods was no other
than grapes.
For we know that in such climates it is both

for this provision,

and convenient to grow vines as creepers on trees and

trellises, and we have in the Petrie papyri (I. xxix.) one distinct

grateful

mention of an

As
it

it

is

by

that there

ANAAENAPAC which

exactly a case in point.

this established that vines were so grown, how is
is

is

no mention of the anadendras

careful legislation concerning grapes

the obvious answer

title

is

and wine

that such cultivation

of TTAPAAEICOI, and that the

fruit

in the
?

present

Here again

came under the

of these orchards

It seems to me
not wholly, of grapes.
exceedingly improbable that in a country noted for its very
careful and varied agriculture, any number of different pro-

consisted chiefly,

if

ducts should be confused under the

13,

title

without any apparent enumeration.

e

KAPTTOC, as
I

therefore

in col. 29.

still

incline

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xxxiv

AFTOMOIPA was a sacred due on wine

to the belief that the

probably coeval with

only,

ancient times, and that, as

all

papyrus relates exclusively to

as

Prof.

into

Egypt

in

the succeeding chapter of our

But
oil, so this does to wine.

have not been able to persuade either Mr. Grenfell or

Wilcken that this is so, and as they do not feel the

difficulty
I

introduction

its

which

have here stated to be of serious weight,

shall not here press the

5.

We

matter further

THE STATE MONOPOLY

IN OIL.

now

turn to the third part (C) of the papyrus, which

concerns exclusively the State monopoly in oil.
It was this
part of the text, which is in a far better state of preservation
than the rest, which led me at first to use the term Monopoly

But seeing that the growing of wine

and of orchard produce, treated in the second chapter, was
not a monopoly, and that the first chapter is quite general,
Papyrus for the whole.

Mr. Grenfell thought the word too narrow, and proposed to

But this term, now adopted, is
call it the Revenue Papyrus.
really too wide.

revenue

For so

far

as

discussed

is

we
in

can
it

see,

which

anywhere
middlemen,
through
through tax-farmers, and
the

officials to

farmer

fails

no source of
is

in

not

levied

no case are

deal directly with the peasants, unless the tax-

to perform his duties.

But

for

its

awkwardness,

the tax-farming^ and but for its pedantry, the Telonic Papyrus
would be the most accurate designation.

The manufacture
the same way

of wine was only under State control in

that our manufacture of beer and spirits is, for

both cases there

in
1

At

is

no limitation of the amount produced

the close of this Introduction the reader will find an important inscription

bearing on

this topic discussed.

Cf. also

Mr. Grenfell's note, pp. 94-6.

INTRODUCTION.

xxxv

or the retail price demanded, but an inquiry into the actual

in both cases the excise takes
quantity as a basis for taxation
;

care to watch and register the amount produced in each locality

of manufacture, and so far to pry into private industry.

The manufacture
conditions, such for

was carried on under quite different

instance as that of tobacco is in some modern
of

oil

For here not only is all private enterprise forbidden, but

the very amount of seed to be sown, the amount of oil produced,
the retail price all these are fixed with the greatest care.
states.

Importation of

oil

and every care

is

for

trading purposes is strictly forbidden,

taken to secure a fixed income from this

There

source for the State.

is

reason to believe that there

were other productions laid under this restriction. Papyrus

1
is said to have become extinct
owing to a private monopoly
probably introduced to prevent the library of Pergamum from
But in
obtaining it in large quantities or on easy terms.
,

the present case the State takes special care that a sufficient
For this the oecpquantity of oil shall be produced each year.
nomus and the nomarchs are bound to provide, and in case of
difficulty in
it

procuring seed the State

is

even prepared to advance

to the cultivator, just as in Ulster, thirty years ago, landlords

commonly advanced flax-seed

crop might be sown in good
that day there

was

to their tenants, in order that the

time.

In most Ulster leases of

also a clause restricting the

each farm, in the landlord's

interest, lest

the

amount upon
tenant should

exhaust the land with this crop.

The
of olive

first
oil.

point of interest in this section is the total absence

This in itself was no small evidence of the

antiquity of the ordinance, for

his

day the olive was quite at

1

Strabo,

we know from Strabo that in

home in the Fayoum, and we

xvii. i,

e 2

15.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xxxvi

that the large settlement of Greeks there during

Philadelphus' reign soon brought this favourite tree from their

may presume
homes

But

was only here, and

of
Alexandria, apparently in the specially
neighbourhood
Greek parts of Egypt, that it was even in his day cultivated.

old

into this rich province.

it

in the

The

oils dealt

with in the chapter before us are mainly of

two kinds sesame oil, and kiki, which is our castor oil, made
from the croton-plant, a tall shrub, with a ferruginous glow
upon its dark green leaves, which may yet be seen cultivated
:

for the
is,

same purpose

in

however, a foetid
two, which

these

to

Upper Egypt and Nubia.

oil,

mainly used for lamps.

seem

other kinds are mentioned,

seeds of gourds
cuecinum,
;

or artichoke

and linseed

be

to
viz.

the

This

latter

In addition

principal

products,
the

made from

colocynth
the head of a thistle
oil,

made from

oil

l
.

It is

how

not quite certain

far

the production of these lesser kinds was controlled, but the

chief kinds were certainly both grown and gathered under

State supervision the oil was made in State presses it was

by the middlemen to the retailers in each village by
;

sold

auction,

and was

retailed at fixed prices.

We

read in Pliny, N. H. xix. 5 (26) 'Aegypto mire celebratur [raphanus]

Hoc maxime cupiunt serere,
propter fertilitatem quod e semine eius faciunt.
liceat, quoniam et quaestus plus quam e frumento, et minus tributi est nullum1

olei
si

ibi

que
and

is

The

variety

Nubia
kiki,

This seems to be the pafyavfKaiov of Dioscorides, i. 26,

copiosius oleum/
therefore a species of oil additional to all those mentioned in our papyrus.

now

called oleifera of the

Raphanus

sativus

is

still

used in Egypt and

Pliny speaks (xv. 7) of the sesamine, and also of the

of which he describes the manufacture, likewise of the cnecinum

for the purpose.

or castor

oil,

MS. reading now rehabilitated (I think) by our papyrus.

cnecus a sort of urtica, a thistle, probably a species of artichoke. The
various aromatic oils mentioned by him and by Dioscorides, and used both for
if

we adopt

He

a discarded

calls the

medicines and unguents, have their parallel

the Pet. Pap.

ii.

p.

[114].

in the curious list I

have published in

INTRODUCTION.
The

details

of

this

are

legislation

xxxvii

amply

illustrated

in

Mr. Grenfell's commentary, but, as might be expected, many

are the difficulties which arise in the interpretation.
For in
such documents, the most necessary assumptions are those
which every contemporary reader took for granted as obvious,
all

whereas we have to

infer or detect

them from

stray

and casual

allusions.

In the whole of this intricate legislation, intended to secure

the State from loss, the peasants from oppression, the middle-

men from
for profit

at

injustice,

the restrictions are so precise, the

on the part of the middlemen so

a loss to

know why men of wealth

have competed at auction

for

small, that

room

we

are

or of credit should

business

so

and

onerous

so invidious.

f 6.

THE

COINAGE.

The

next question is one constantly suggested in this

papyrus, but which has long agitated the minds of those who
deal with the political economy of Ptolemaic Egypt, and espeIt is the relation
with that of the third century B.C.
are set down
which
of silver to copper in the many prices

cially

On

the complicated questions of the standard metal, the rate of exchange,

and the ratio of weights under the Ptolemies, Mr. Grenfell has

sometimes

in

attained to a
factory,

the one, sometimes in the other.

new

solution which

and which,

world from much

be generally adopted,

idle speculation.

his discoveries, but

important feature

if it

seems both simple and

I

will

satis-

save the

shall not here anticipate

merely refer the reader particularly to

in the

book, Appendix III.

this

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xxxviii

7.

THE

VARIETIES OF LAND TENURE.

Another interesting question raised by the present text

in land (cols. 24 and 36)
is that of the variety of tenure
have
We
first
the EPA I~H (which Prof.
throughout Egypt.
I

Wilcken restored

for us in

36. 8), apparently not subject to

AHOMOIPA, though it appears from the Rosetta stone that

there was a tax of a KEPAMION per aroura due to the State upon
Then comes the land
its vineyards, remitted by Epiphanes.

the

or farms granted by the king to soldiers

(KAHPOYXOl), of which we hear so much in the Petrie papyri.
There is further the land held EN AHPEAI, in gift from the

held in

II.

must be the meaning appears plainly

passages in the books of Maccabees (I. x. 29
This tenure, then, must have been either a life

For that

king.

from

KAHPOI,

parallel

iv.

31).

this

KAHPOC^ which was hereditary, or

some other limitation, such as the

tenure, as opposed to the

must have referred

to

produce of some particular crop, or the cession of the taxes

Another tenure,
due to the king from a definite estate.

EN CYNTAZEI, is mentioned (43. 12) as distinguished from

EN AOPEAl, but what is remarkable, both may include the
This points back to
possession of a village, as well as land.
those cases where the king gave a favourite or a mistress the
revenue of a town as a private gift.
Possibly CYNTAZIC means
by commutation of the various imposts for a yearly contribution,

which the people could levy among themselves and pay to

Seeing that the document is corrected according to
of
the copy
Apollonius the AIOIKHTHC, and that a man of
this name appears in the Petrie papyri as holding this office
the State.

Fayoum two years later,

be avoided, that we have before
in

the

hardly to
us the copy of the ordinance
the conclusion

is

INTRODUCTION.
specially intended for this province,

xxxix

and accordingly that the

KAHPOYXOI here mentioned are those whom we

find in the

we

possess no
Egypt; the

province
definite

inTTEIC

Hitherto
in the succeeding years.
evidence of such 'a class elsewhere

KATOIKOI of the next century

were evidently no landholders

in

the

at

in

Memphis

same

sense.

or

Thebes

It

is

not

impossible that though KAHPOYXIA is here stated quite generally among the various forms of land tenure, this particular

Fayoum may be

In any case, the

documents quoted from the twenty-third year of the reign
prove to us that the settlement of the Fayoum was not

colony in the

intended.

a sudden, but a gradual legislation.

The Petrie papyri show us the extension of dykes and
draining operations, and the larger reclaiming of land, which took
place in the province in the twenty-ninth and thirtieth years
But the new title, Arsinoite nome, is not known
of the reign.

the present document, where the word H AIMNH is used,

and this seems also the case with the earlier Petrie papyri.
in

There

but one fragment

among them

of the thirtieth year

(according to Mr. Grenfell) which speaks of the nome under
its new name.
may therefore refer this honour done to
is

We

the queen,

probably

relation

in

to

her ceding part of her

property in the fish of the lake for the reclaiming of land, to

the last years of her life, possibly even to an act of gratitude
passed after her decease. The fact of her being deified during
prevents our laying any stress upon the curious simplicity
with which she is named.
She appears either as Arsinoe

her

life

Philadelphus, or
this absence of
reverse.

or

sis.

still

titles

more
is

briefly as

4>IAAAEA<t>OC.

But

here rather a distinction than the

She appears simply as a goddess, like Aphrodite

I
have commented elsewhere on the remarkable

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xl

absence of honorary
grades of the
centuries

titles in all

official

the early papyri.

The many

hierarchy which appear

Not only the king and queen,

in the
following

seem as yet unknown.

appear without any cumbrous distinctions

attached to their names.
but the court

officials

THE BURDENS BORNE

$ 8.

What were

BY AGRICULTURE.

the actual burdens of the husbandman, and

what reward he got

for

his

labour, will only be

determined, according as we gain more and

Some of the prices given in this papyrus

gradually

more knowledge.

help us in
Hitherto our evidence comes either from other

this inquiry.

will

papyri on the same subject, or from ancient historians who

The case
tell us of the condition of other Hellenistic lands.
of Syria and Palestine, as

and

we

find

it

in the

books of Maccabees,

Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews^, affords us the closest

It may not be considered irrelevant, in a general
analogies.
in

introduction like the present, to call attention to these parallel

cases, which will help the reader to appreciate the details in

the present document.

But first as regards parallel papyri. In the Petrie collection
there are several which have only become intelligible since
we have examined them by the light of the present text.

Thus the long

of seven
list

-,

list

(P. P. II.

of names, and of

sums which are multiples

had problematically set down as a taxing

of retailers of oil, and
xxviii.), I found to be a list

which

of the amounts which they undertake to sell, in accordance with

Another
the express direction of our papyrus (col. 47. 10-15).
(xxxix. (a)

is

concerned with the amount of croton to be sown

xii.

4 sq.

Cf.

Mr. Grenfell's explanation of these

figures in

Appendix

III.

INTRODUCTION.

xli

on each farm, and perhaps with the seed to be advanced. As

regards the EKTH or AFTOMOIPA on wine henceforth to be paid
to Arsinoe Philadelphia, we have not only II. xxx. (e) and xlvi.,
but the papyrus Q of the Leiden collection, formerly referred
to a later date.
There is also P. P. II. xxvii. (i), which states
the wine produce of a farm, and adds the one-sixth on fruits and
garlands offlowers, so that this produce is classed with that of
the vineyard. This maybe the meaning of adding TTAPAAEICOI
throughout section B of our papyrus to the AMTTEAnNEC.

There

is

also an interesting letter, complete (P. P. II.

xi. (6) ),

upon the oeconomus, or perhaps the tax-farmer, to

attend on the next day but one, when the vine-grower was
going to have his vintage, according to the ordinance in col. 25.
calling

Other coincidences are mentioned in Mr. Grenfell's commentary,

and in the Appendix to Part II of the Petrie papyri he has

made some important corrections, or additions, to my readings

of the fragments just cited.
Thus the indirect light shed upon
the early papyri we have found makes it certain that we shall
be able to interpret future discoveries of the same kind with
greater certainty, and ultimately reconstruct a definite and
connected account of the whole financial system of the Ptolemaic

Exchequer.

As

regards their external system, we have the curious

narrative of Josephus, already cited, from which it appears that
as regards Palestine and Coele-Syria, the leading notables went

down

to

Egypt

to a yearly auction of the taxes,

no doubt

arranging on the way to what sum they would bid. But their
calculations are upset by the young adventurer who offers the

king a far larger sum, gets off giving security by cracking jokes
with the king, and, taking an armed force to help him, demands
higher taxes, confiscates the property (and even the lives) of
f

xlii

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

and by remitting

recusants,

had promised, gains

troller

sum than he

to the king a larger

and confidence, and remains con-

his favour

Here the
of the taxes of Palestine for twenty years.
does
insist
no
more
than
the
upon
punctual
Egypt

of

King
payment of a sum

the auction

fixed at

he gives, however,

military support to his tax-farmer in carrying out

ment which the

latter

deems

necessary,

take up the land and apportion it

But into
claims are not satisfied.

make no

any punish-

and even threatens

among new

settlers,

the details he

if

to
his

seems to

inquiry.

very different picture of the taxation of the same province

documents quoted by Josephus

from the books of the Maccabees, and dating a century later.

by the Seleucids appears

in the

If these

documents indeed describe a normal

we need

not wonder that the rule of the Ptolemies was more

state of things,

The
popular in Palestine than that of their rivals at Antioch.
facts come out incidentally in the offers made by rival claimants
who are bidding for the support of the
the
letters
cited are not genuine copies of State
Jews.
documents, there is no reason to doubt that the author of them,

to the Syrian throne,

Even

if

Maccabees, described an actual state of

things.
King Demetrius (Soter II, in 152 B.C.) writes (x. 29)
And now I let you off, and remit all the Jews from the taxes, and
especially in the

first

'

from the price of salt, and from the crowns (the Roman aurum
coronarium ), and what I was entitled to take in lieu of the third
l

sown crops and in lieu of the half of the tree crop.'

more
Many
imposts, such as the tolls on visitors to Jerusalem,

part of the

are mentioned in the sequel.

1

Cf. also Josephus,

Great to an
TOV arffyavirov

A. J.

officer called

xii. 3,

Ptolemy

not TOV nepi

(j)6pov,

3,

We

have not only these, but

for a similar letter

concerning the Jews.

from Antiochus the

We

have here too

TUV (i\uv (not nX\a>v, as in mOSt texts).

INTRODUCTION.
many
and

other small taxes mentioned

in the rest of the collection

in

xliii

the P. P.

II.

xxxix. (e)

which Mr. Grenfell

is

(f)

preparing

for publication.

comparison of the respective burdens which the second

Ptolemy demanded in 260 B.C. and the eighth Seleucid in

150

perhaps hardly possible from our evidence. It is

however, that the apparently much greater tax of

B.C.

likely,

50 per

is

cent,

the olive-oil

was a seed

on the crop of trees in Palestine may include

crop, whereas this part of the Egyptian revenue

crop, and, so far as

a very small share of

commentator.

{ 9.

THE

it.

we can

But these

see, the cultivator got

details

must be

left to

the

REVISION OF THE DOCUMENT.

The whole document

has undergone corrections, as is expressly stated more than once upon the face of it, and as appears
from various erasures and changes, and in Part C from large
additions.

done.

We

From

can also show that

this revision

was

carelessly

internal evidence, explained in the

commentary,
and from the curious repetition of a chapter (cols. 59 and 60)
without any apparent reason, Mr. Grenfell was led to an acute
conjecture concerning the whole appendix on the nomes which
He believes that at this point (col. 58) the corrector
ensues.
desired to fasten on a supplementary roll, containing the revised

made

the mistake of allowing the same

chapter to appear twice, immediately before and after his new
The height of the papyrus, which here changes, is
junction.
It appears from the
strongly in favour of this hypothesis.
list

of nomes, but that he

fragments Mr. Grenfell has since acquired that another roll of

the same character contained what we desiderated in Part A,
a general account

besides regulations for special taxes

fa

of the

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xliv

working of the royal and

local

banks

in regulating the

accounts

of the tax-farming.

Unfortunately these fragments are in such a condition as

to make all inferences from them hazardous.
But there is

one interpretation of
here, as

and

it

may

cols.

suggest a

73-8 which

new

is

worth setting down

idea in reading other fragments,

probably be established in course of time, if it indeed

the truth. If we were to read the heading AIATPAMMA

will

has hit

TPATTEZHN flNHC, and consider the whole

section

one

as

regulating the farming out of local banks by the State, under

the control of a central or BACIAIKH TPATTEZA in the capital

we should have found a new sort of tax-farming

hitherto unsuspected.
The existence of local banks in towns,
and even villages, is made certain by 75. i. The mention
of the nome,

of buying the bank seems also beyond doubt (75. 4).

It
would seem quite reasonable that if so many local banks were
required

if

it

were even necessary to make up accounts

in

each village daily, as is not impossible (cf. the difficult passage

57. 15-6), some such sub-letting would be almost necessary
to avoid

did

an endless

take place,

it

Egypt undertook
It

is

staff

will

of Government

officials,

and

if

probably be found that the Jews

it

in

this business.

a sad loss that

we have not

the details preserved

which seem to regulate the rate of exchange between silver

and copper (col. 76). But of course if the local banks were
I
had
out, such regulations were highly necessary.
inferred from the receipts printed in the Petrie papyri (II. xxvi.)

farmed

that the

bank

in

(the Arsinoite)

means of agents

all

very doubtful that

this

Ptolemais did business by

It now seems
through the province.
interpretation can be maintained.

The subsequent columns

are, if possible,

still

more

disap-

INTRODUCTION.
pointing, for here there

xlv

were regulations

affecting the produce

which
flax,
Egypt was so
famous, and which are specially mentioned as an industry
of the temples taxed by the Crown in the Rosetta inscription
1
This text, and the earlier inscription known as the
(1.
8).

from

both clothes and

sails, for

Canopus inscription, can now be conveniently consulted

Empire of Ike Ptolemies.
10.

THE

in

my

LISTS OF THE NOMES.

The problems suggested by

brief enumeration in col. 31,

respective burdens in cols.

the two

lists

of nomes

the

and the longer exposition with their

GO sqq. are many and interesting.

For they do not agree with the

enumerations those of Herodotus

and later Greek

and of Strabo, still less
with the older Egyptian, or the later Roman, as given by
the coins of the nomes under the Antonines 2 and by Ptolemy
the geographer.
It is certain that there were frequent changes
earlier

the limitation and arrangement of these counties, as we

might call them the two lists before us are written down in
in

the twenty-seventh year of the same reign, and yet they show
It is not therefore surprising
some notable discrepancies.
that Herodotus, visiting Egypt some 180 years earlier, and

Strabo some

should not agree with either.

It
was not, moreover, within the scope of Herodotus' account to
therefore are not surprised that
give an accurate list.
in which the military caste
the
nomes
Herodotus, specifying
dwelt (ii. 165), gives only nomes situated in the Delta and

240

later,

We

All that

is

to

be known concerning Herodotus'

Wiedemann

in his excellent

pp. 574 sq.

and the references

Cf. Coins

commentary on the

list

has been gathered by

historian's

Egyptian book

(II.),

there.

of Alexandria and

the

Nomes, published by the British Museum.

xlvi

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

the

Theban

the

full list

But from Strabo we should have expected

wherefore the commentators on his account have

district.
;

either supposed a lacuna in our texts,

because

names

he

or

negligence in the
twenty -four nomes,

only
the
southern
of
those
country (like Herodotus)
gathering
under the Thebaid, though we know that the old Egyptians

geographer,

all

counted at least

forty.

In the most recent atlas of ancient

Egypt (published by the Egypt Exploration Fund) there are

The two lists before us vindicate
even fifty enumerated.
Strabo remarkably as regards this supposed omission.
not only agree with him in specifying twenty-four nomes

They

they
1
as
last
in
the
Thebaid
the
the
series
Strabo
give
therefore must have copied his list from some financial document such as this, which recognized the whole southern province

also

as no complex of nomes, but as one district under the control

It is even easy for us now to lay down
of a single governor.

the southern boundary of the financial nomes from Strabo's text

'Then comes the Hermopolitic military station
(xvii. i, $ 41):
(<t>v\aKrj)

Thebaid

a sort of custom-house for the produce from the

from hence they begin to measure the schoeni of 60

up to Syene and Elephantine then the Thebaic station,

2
a
canal
and
leading to Tanis .' The two military posts, one
stadia,

There

is

an interesting

parallel in the second-century inscription in

honour

TON 0HBAIKON NOMON OIKOYNTEC

means
TTEPI
only
(unless
0HBAC) EAAHNEC are enumerated after those of
Alexandria, Hermoupolis, the BO YAH of Antinoopolis, and the Greeks of the
CIG 4679.
Delta.
of Aristides (the rhetor), where 01
it

This

latter

was of course

above the reach of the

the

best

Nile, the water

point and brought on the higher

mode

of irrigating the lower country

being drawn from the

level thus

river at this

remote

secured along the Arabian margin of

the Nile valley.

The account

of Agatharchides

is

quite similar (Photius,

22, in Geog. Grace.

INTRODUCTION.
to

watch imports down the

coming up the

river,

xlvii

the other to watch

them

the custom-houses of jealous'

as those of the Servians and the Turks

river,

are like

neighbours, such
in the present day.
Having recorded this negative agreement between Strabo
and the lists in the papyrus, we come to compare them in

both as to the number, order, and

detail,

All

three

Thebaid.
differ

they

But

the

in

the second

in

up

giving

list

Memphite nome.

the

titles

of the nomes.

twenty-four nomes and the

names and the order of the twenty-four
considerably, and the whole number is only made

agree

in

us

by counting Memphis as

distinct

Several of Strabo's names,

should have thought of

old

which we

standing, do not appear,

Menelaites, Momemphites, Phragroriopolites

and last of these most probably represent

from

viz.

but the second

the

Libyan and

Arabian nomes of the papyrus.

Moreover, Strabo gives names

(Hermoupolis, Aphroditopolis, Kynopolis) to nomes of the Delta
which appear in the papyrus as nomes of Upper Egypt. The
general order, beginning with the western Delta from Alexandria, and giving the nomes along each of the three great
outlets of the Nile, then ascending to Memphis and southward
to the

Theban custom-house,

is

nominal divergence, which amounts to

not be a real one.
But to identify
respectively with our

When we

lists is

not easy.

proceed to a closer examination of the

(cols.

31 and 60, sqq.)

Mm.

p. 122, ed. C. Mtiller, Didot).

i.

So that here the

seven new names, may
the seven new names

the same.

in

our papyrus

(I will call

From Memphis

to the

two

lists

them a and

b)

Thebaid there are

nomes, one of which is called *vXoq, or 2^iwi, where the tolls are levied. These
But then follow a list of <&
are vopol t6wv.
in the Thebaid, in which only
one nome, the Tentyrite, is mentioned, and Thebes omitted.
five

xlviii

we

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

find that there are serious discrepancies not only in the

Were

handed down to us
in texts of diverse age, we should at once infer that there had
been in the interval a formal redistribution of the nomes. Such
an explanation is impossible in the case of two contemporaneous
lists, unless there were special reasons for the variation in a list
order, but in the names.

required for the

The

oil

monopoly

first difficulty is

these

lists

only.

the absence of the Nitriote

a, or rather of this name, for

nome from

probably corresponds to either

For the second of
a 3 or a 6, both unfortunately mutilated.
these I conjectured MENEAAIC, i.e. the region about the town
called Menelaos, after

it

This town was

Ptolemy Soter's brother.

certainly situated in or by the Nitrian country, but the form of

the ending is without precedent among the nomes, and we know

was afterwards a nome called

MENEAAITHC along the seacoast east of Alexandria. But for
the present I have no better suggestion to offer.
There is no
town-name with this ending to be found in any of the geographies
from Strabo's

list

that

there

Supposing then that the enigmatical -AAIAI corIt

responds to NITPinTHC in b, where shall we place #3?
would appear that the clerk of b had absorbed either a 3 or
of Egypt.

a6

in the

of the
out of
it

Libya of his

official
its

number

place,

There

is

list,

and

(24),

then, finding himself

had thrust

in

one short

MEM<I>ITI

quite

and properly belonging to MEM4>EI to fill

good reason to identify the A EAT A of a with

up.
the HAIOTTOAITHC of

b,

for Strabo tells us that the

Delta was especially so called, and Heliopolis

to it, though on the Arabian side of the river.

is

apex of the

situated close

There seems no law or assignable cause for the variations in

the order of a and b. At all events, it may be inferred with
certainty that neither was copied from a fixed official list, though

INTRODUCTION.

xlix

there was a general consent that the number of nomes, excluding the Thebaid, amounted to twenty-four.

Thus

5-9, though varying in order, are a group which fairly

and 15 correspond to b 14 and 10.
corresponds in both, a

a 17 and 18 correspond to b 17 and 16, except that a 17 adds

Memphis to its nome, whereas b 1 7 gives only Memphis, while
b 24
to

is

the

of b up
the country south of

Memphite nome, thus bringing the

We

twenty-four.

now proceed

to

list

19 and 24 (EPMOfTOAITHC and OZYPYrXITHC)

Memphis,
correspond to b 18 and 19. a 21-24 agree with b 20-23, if
the lost
Both
23 be, as I think it must be, the Kynopolite.
lists end with the Thebaid.
It will be found, therefore, that,

with

small transpositions, there is nevertheless a general

The occurrence of H AIMNH and
conformity between the lists.
of AIMNITHC in a 22 and b 21 for the subsequent Arsinoite

many

nome,

first

revealed to us that the complete re-settlement, and

the re-naming, of that district did not take place till after the
twenty-seventh year of Ptolemy II. Alexandria belonged to no

nome, and had a reserved territory in the Libyan nome from

which it received produce. This reminds us in a general way
of the case of Washington with its territory, which belongs to
no State in the American Republic. The use of the large
terms Libya and Arabia as names of nomes is also foreign
to Strabo

and Herodotus, and was probably intended

that the desert limits were in each case unfixed

l
.

to signify

Possibly the

In one of the partitions of the empire of Alexander (at Triparadeisus) Ptolemy

countries, especially whatever he could

was granted Egypt and the adjoining

conquer to the west.
a political origin.

In

Hence to claim Libya in these lists may even have had

Theban papyri of the next century, such as the Turin
B. M. CCCCI, we find Arabia and Libya used simply for

papyrus VIII and the

the east and west banks of the Nile.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHIA.

occurrence of the

special

titles

Libyarchs

and Arabarchs also points to the

this

(in

fact that there

papyrus)

was here

a military officer instead of a nomarch, as there were certainly

desert marauders to be kept in order by what are called in the
I
Petrie papyri EPHMO<1>YAAKEC.
append the two lists, and
Strabo's enumeration, of the nomes, for the convenience of

who

those

The

desire to verify, without trouble,

figures after the

these

names occur

in

Col. 31 (a).
1.

AIBYH

2.

CAITHC

3.

[rYNAlKO?]nOAITHC
TTPOCnniTHC
A6PIBITHC

4.
5.

6.

?]AAIAI

AEATA

7.

names

a and

in

the third

what
list

have

said.

where

indicate

b.

Col. 60 sq. (b).

18 sqq.

Strabo, xvii.

CAITHC CYN NAY- MENEAAITHC

KPATEI
AIBYH TTACH XftPIC CEBENNYTOC (8,
THC A<J>riPICMENHC
TTPOCnniTHC
EPMOYTTOAITHC
NITPIHTHC
AYKOTTOAITHC 1

CEBENNYTOC
MENAHCIOC
BOYCIPITHC

MENAHCIOC

(lO, 6)

AEONTOTTOAITHC (ll, 14)

BOYCIPITHC KAI BOYCIP'C

(9, 7)

8.

CEBENNYTOC

A0PIBITHC

9.

BOYCIPITHC

HAIOTTOAITHC

KYNOfTOAITHC 1
A0PIBITHC (5, 8)

MENAHCIOC

BOYBACTITHC KAI

TTPOCnniTHC

10.

5)

(4, 3)

BOYBACTOC
12.

AEONTOTTOAITHC
CEGPniTHC

13.

<t>APBAl9ITHC

14.

APABIA

IJ.

APABIA
CE9PHITHC
TANITHC
AEONTOTTOAITHC

In the Delta, and not to be identified with the same

belongs to

Upper Egypt.

A0POAITOFTOAITHC

<t>APBAieiTHC (13, 15)

TANITHC (16, 13)

TYNAIKOTTOAITHC
name

in the other

two

lists,

which

INTRODUCTION.
Col. 31 (a).
15.

BOYBACTITHC

Col.

KAI

60

li

Strabo, xvii.

sq. (b).

<t>APBAI9ITHC

MHMEM0ITHC

AHTOnOAITHC

NITPIHTHC

8 sqq.

BOYBACTOC
16.

TANITHC

17. /v\EM<t>ITHC

KAI

(? 4)

MEM4>IC

MEM<t>IC
18.

19.

20.

21.
22.
23.

AHTOnOAITHC

EPMOnOAITHC

EPMOnOAITHC
OZYPYrXITHC
KYNOnOAITHC
H AIMNH
HPAKAEOnOAITHC

OZYPYrXITHC

24. A<t>POAITOTTOAITHC

6HBAIC

BOYBACTITHC KAI BOYBACTOC (15, 10)

HAIOnOAITHC (? 9)

HPAKAEOTTOAITHC AHTOTTOAITHC (18, 16)

AIMNITHC
HPAKAEHTHC (23, 20)
A<DPOAITOnOAITHC APCINOITHC (22, 2l)
MEM<t>ITHC

KYNOnOAITHC
OZYPYfXITHC

6HBAIC

0HBAIC

[KYNOnOAITHC

1 1.

?]

(21,

23?)

(20, 19)

CONCLUSION.

Such are the general considerations which the reader may

carry with him to the closer study of the text. We cannot
claim for it an universal interest such as that aroused by
the discovery of lost classical works, or of copies of
in

their antiquity.

known
But

to
masterpieces exceptional
those who desire a closer insight into the great and highly
civilized empire of the Ptolemies, and the causes of
its__extrafs

literary

ordinary wealth, such documents as this are of inestimable!

value.
For they supplement and correct the vague statements

of ancient historians, as well as the theories whereby modern

scholars have sought to explain away their inconsistencies and
obscurities.
Moreover to the student of Hellenistic Greek,

of that

common

dialect

which pervaded the

civilized

world

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

Hi

some

document affords great additional

It throws new
materials, both in vocabulary and in syntax.
light upon the contemporary documents known as the LXX
translation of the Old Testament, and tends to corroborate
for

centuries, such a

the dubious traditions of their origin.

From all these points
of view, the present papyrus affords a supplement of vast

importance to our knowledge.

12.

APPENDIX ON AN INSCRIPTION FROM TELMESSOS.

but one inscription of this period known to me which

bears upon the subjects of our papyrus, but its relation to them
is so intimate, that I can hardly avoid quoting it here.
It was

There

first

is

printed in the Bulletin de Corresp. Heltinique, xiv. 162.

BA]CIAEYONTOC TTTOAEMAIOY TOY TTTOAEMAIOY KAI

APCINOHC 6EHN AAEA<t>nN ETEI EBAOMHI MHNOC
AYCTPOY E0 lEPEftC 0EOAOTOY TOY HPAKAEIAOY
AEYTEPAI (sic) EKKAHCIAC KYPIAC TENOMENHC

EAOZE TEAMHCCIHN THI TTOAEI

ETTEIAH nTOAEMAIOC O AYCIMAXOY FTAPAAABnN
THN nOAIN TTAPA BACIAEHC 17TOAEMAIOY TOY TTTOA-

EMAIOY KAKHC [AIAKEI ?]MENHN AIA TOYC TTOAE

MOYC EN TE TOIC AAAOIC ETTIMEAOMENOC
EYNOIKnC AIATEAEI ar.r.A.
Let me dispose of the preamble very briefly. This decree
of the city of Telmessos in Lycia is dated 241-0 B.C., shortly
after the great campaign of the reigning king, Euergetes I,
against

which

Syria,

wherein he had

his grandfather

established

firmly

had taken of the coast

and Lycia (cf. Petrie pap. II.

priest mentioned to be a local

xlv).

cities

believe the

the

hold

of Caria

eponymous

priest, not the priest of Alexander,

INTRODUCTION.

liii

appears that the city of Telmessos had

been handed over to Ptolemy son of Lysimachus by the reigning

&c,

at Alexandria.

king's

father,

usually called,

It

Ptolemy son of Ptolemy, as Ptolemy II was

to distinguish him from his father, Ptolemy

son of Lagos. The expression TTAPAAABnN is quite vague,

used of a son succeeding his father, or a governor receiving
Here
authority from the king, or of any other appointment.
it

seems to

me

clearly to signify a present from the king.

This

personage had received Telmessos EN AHPEAI. We know

that he was a grandee in Asia Minor, for a decree issued by
Antiochus II (printed in DBCH. xiii. 525), appointing this
Ptolemy's daughter, Berenike, priestess of the deified Syrian
queen, Stratonike, speaks of him as related to the king in blood

(TOY TTPOCHKONTOC HMIN KATA CYrTENEIAN); nor is it impossible, though we cannot trace the relationship, that this is
more than a mere title of peerage (CYrTENHC), and that the
person in question may even have been the eldest son of
Arsinoe Philadelphia and King Lysimachus of Thrace, who
disappears from history without any evidence of his murder
by Ptolemy Keraunos, when the younger children were put
to death.

At

events this personage, receiving Telmessos from

Philadelphus, found it sorely tried by the great wars on the
all

Lycian coast during the early campaigns of Euergetes

The

inscription proceeds

I.

OPnN EN TTACIN Ed>6APMENOYC A<t>EIKEN

ATEAEIC THN TE ZYAINflN KAPHHN KAI ENNOMIHN
KAI

These are the ta-xes on

amounted to 50 per cent,

fruit trees,
(i

Mace.

which

x. 29),

in

Syria at one time

and on pastures.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

liv

AnOMOIPAC KAI
ocnPinN TTANTHN KAI KE[I~X]POY KAI EAYMOY KAI
CHCAMOY KAI GEPMttN TTPOTEPON TEAfiNOYMENOYC
CKAHPHC KATA TON NOMON TEAEIN AEKATHN METPOYN-TAC NATA (sic) [Til]l TE TEnprni KAI Tfll AEKATrtNHI
THN TE AOirmN TttN CYNKYPONTftN THI CITHPAI
ETTOIHCE AE KAI THC [OIN ?]HPAC

AnOM[OIPAl]

A<t>HKEN TTANTftN ATEAEIC

It is from the close connexion of these taxes in our papyrus,

and from the importance of wine-taxes, that I supply OINHPAC,

CITHPAC, as do the editors of the

not

Then

text.

follow

not in TTAPAAEICOI, but in

On these
KHTTOI, viz. millet (of two kinds), sesame, and lupine.
and
worried
the
taxed
been
had
crops
population
oppressively
This
by the TEAHNAI, and this according to the law.
the vegetables grown,

think,

Ptolemy enacted that they should only pay a tithe (AEKATH)

upon them all, and, what was perhaps a far greater relief,
should pay it on the. areas planted with these crops, and surveyed

husbandman and the tithe-farmer. So I render

the strange word NATA, which completely puzzled the former

jointly for the

Some

mistake has been made, as the letters are clear;

the smallest change we can assume is of course the most

editors.

reasonable as an emendation.

1
propose NEAT A

in

which the

perhaps because of the pronunciation of the word,

omitted the E.
It means in this sense fallow or ploughed
graver,

but surely may also mean fields in this condition after

the crop is sown.
The tithe, therefore, would be estimated

fields,

on an average yield of the area under cultivation for each sort

of produce.
It is added that all the subsidiary charges (beyond
1

I had thought of
oxytone in the Lexica.

ANTA

(adv.),

FIANTA, AYTA,

&c.

NEATA

is

marked

INTRODUCTION.

Iv

the tithe) which had been levied on the wheat crop, were also
remitted.

do not believe that any governor deputed by Ptolemy

The financial
could possibly have made such concessions.
officer of the province, O ETTI TnN TTPOCOAHN, would not
was according to the law
enforced by the Egyptians. But if this Ptolemy held Telmessos
either EN AHPEAI or EN CYNTAZEl, which latter I take to mean
for a rent, such benevolences were possible.
I return now to the
question of various taxes. The enumeration of the lesser crops is what strikes me as affording
have tolerated

especially as

it,

it

Is it
a remarkable contrast to the language of our papyrus.
in
that
all
these
flAPAAElCOl?
were
possible
crops
grown

Even

if

which

are they not specified in our papyrus ?

Is it possible that they were, but that the enumeration is lost
in one of the lacunae of the text ?
These are the difficulties

On

they were,

still

feel

why

concerning this portion of our Revenue

the other hand,

may be urged

if

that here

my

text.

suggestion OINHPAC be adopted,

it

we have

that very combination of winetax with other taxes on fruits and vegetables, so that the latter
I
do not feel
gathered up under one title.
on
either
side
to
advocate
a
decision.
strongly enough
I will
only add that my interpretation of the inscription
differs widely from that of its first editors, but in no case

may have been

without having carefully considered their arguments.

J.

P.

MAHAFFY.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY

PHILADELPHIA
BACIAEY[ONTOC DTOAEMAIOJY TOY
(TlTO\u[atov KCU TOV

'

vtov]

nroXfuatof)

The

IV

Plate

I.

rest lost.

>v a>vcov
a[l]

isthand

-n lpo *

......

Col. 2.

7T(i)X[l}v

T1)[

KGU
ot

TOlf

.............................
..............................
The

[r]rjf

8[e

y\tv{o]fjiv{r}?

7rp}ocro8ov rats covaif

TOV OIKOV

OfJLOV

Some
}av CK
}a

rest lost.

[K}vpiva{o]v(riv 01 [avriy\pa<f)ei$ 01
0(l>T[]f V7r[o

lines lost.
TTO[.

Aoyei
B

.]i[

Col. 3.

REVENUE LAWS
V7ra

ov

The
Col. 4.

[rjfjL^poXcydov Aoy[u](ra/x[ej/
[cav]

8e irXeiovs

[ra>]j>

ray

is

rest lost.

VTO]S

rjfjifpcov

T[piaKOvra]

......

axriv e7TtA[eA]oye[u

reoji/

ra ava

Some

}va

10

lines lost.

ra

KGti

Kara TOV

rrji

Col. 5.

CLV

&

TO

t[f

fia.(r}l\lK.OV

TTpos fjifpos VTrapxtro)

VOLS

rj

/cat

V[OIJLOV

avrrji OIK[

ajyopacra?

The

?ra[

rest lost.

(JMUVCOVTOLL

0(f)l\OVT9

TOLS

7r[p}ats

..... ]CIC
5

........... ]K[ ............

........................
The

Col. 6.

eeorra> rot?

7T/)fa[/xev]oty

ytv&OLVTwv XafitLv
TpiaKovr[a

TCOV KO,

rjfjiepcov]

/i[^j5e
rjt

rest lost.

Trapa TU>V

cav CVTO? TCOV

OLKOVOfJLWL

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
(

The

TO,

TWV

[ovoj/zara

7Tpt

KCU

ft

TL

/cat

r[

rest lost.

crvvtiSoTwv TOVTCOV irpaa-crfTwcrav

rwv

7TfAoyu<ra<rt[j/]

inrep

[\pOVCi)}t

CV

T&V Kara

(1)1

fJTpLQLVTO

TTTJV

rjs

Of

!/

8 av rjpepay
TO)L

efJWOpltot

ray eoza
r)

T0i[f

[wvqv

TTJV

The

a^

Col. 8.

7T7r/>ay/xari;/x^a)j/
01 irpiajj,cvoL

(a}vTtt>v

The

Trapa

/cat

iraTpoO[v}

<f)opTia>v

Tr[i\rjfjuo[v]

fjirj

7.

Ka(rro[$ 7rpay]fi[aTv}Tai

TIVWV

tav 8f

Col

KO.I

7r/[)ay/LtarUO/ifa)f

-ypa<f)TCt)o\a}v

/cat

r)

rest lost.

fiapTvpcw TO 8f fTfpov a(r(f)payi(rTOV

Xoyovf
^

]"

KO.I

ei>

{(i)Vr)V

rest lost.

rr)v (ovrjv

TrapaXapaxriv

\[o}-yVTCU [K\Tl0eTCO<Tav
a

T[

acriv

Some

lines lost.

ev rjfjip(aif
}<rov
]ptois

y/oa^ai/re

Kat tav TI

Some

TCOI]

lines lost.

B 2

Ck>l. 9.

REVENUE LAWS

10

covrji

y[

TTJL

TOVS a7To8[
K
tovrjv

Col. 10.

8e TCOV

(frvXaKrjv
KCLL

8e To[i]f TOV[

covyv TO 8e

<f)[o8co]v

KCLL

TCOV

aAAo

ro>v o"iA/3oAouA[aK]a>i/ KO[I] rcov

KOLL

TI

rrji

.......................... }(rav
........................ TO]V

VTTO

[ypa(j)a

Some

lines lost.

7rpo(7o8ov
10

.....

[.

o apya)vrj\s KCU 01 KOivasves

........
co\ .......

avev TO[V
[rj

TOV avriypafacos Aa/A/3ai/eraxraj/

Some

......
......

........

OL

lines lost.

TY)V covrjv

ai^Tiaev?
]

KCLL

OL

0)y

(J)o8oi

av[

KCU OL Aoi7r[oi OL

\(JLaTVOLLVO]L TCLS COVO.S eOLV TL T[ ...... ]

e

TL

avev TOV

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
\a/Sco(rii>

77

7rpaavTf

Col. 11.

ctveveyKcocri]

firj

irpos TOV avriypa(f)a a7ro[TivTcocrav]

TO

lf

[o

fict(TlXlKO[v

............... }v

a]vriypa(p[vs

Some
[

.................

[.

[ot
[

TTpiafjLfvot

..........

ray

a>v]af

OIKOV

TCOL

OfJ.tt>l

.............

lavriypafai iraTpoOtv}
[

TCOl
KCLL
>

[TCOV

TTCI/TT;

KCU TCOt

TraTpido?
.

.]

TO

TCOI

XoyevTrjpicoi

Ol>OfJ.a

KCU

KO.I

T]COV

\oytVTwv

KOLI

TCO]V virypeTtov TCOV

CTTI

TTJI

10

lines lost.

KOIVCOVCOV

[y]pa(f)VT{cov
01

dVTl

TCOl

Ofj/COJ/OflGH

..............
........ TOV apXCo]vOV

[TIOV

I?

.........................
Some

ava<t)pOfj.i>o[i]

fjirj

a7roTivTQ)(rav eiy TO (Sacr^XiKov

\ypa(f)i
[KOVTCL

a7TOTivTcocr]av

Kai TO fiXafiof TrevfrairXovv

lines lost.

(yyvijTcov

K.OLI

i^

covrji]

8e oiKovofJio? Kai o avTiypafavs fav Tiv[a]

Xaficocri

Tr/oay/xareuo/xei/oz/

Kai

JJLTJ

irapa

8c8oiJiv[o}v ev Trji ypct(^r)(i a}v{aye\Tco(ra.v

TOV ftacriXfa Trp]gTpov

vov

TJ

Col. 12.

\fi\afirjvai

TTI

Ti]va

\nr

OLVTOV

.............................
Some

lines lost.

]co

REVENUE LAWS

Some

lines lost.

}ra[

aa-ra
rj

........

5 [fJirjvof

[TOV
[.

Col. 13.

fJLtorOof

Spafyfjiat

\iKO(ri

[(rvfJL(3o]Xo(f)vXai.

8[K]a7r[VT]e

8pa^fjL\at

.......

[X]oyVT[rji eKajorau TOV

T[pL\aKov[ra VTr]rjpTais

Spa^fJLai

fJLrjvo?
.

o]

v7rijp]Tats KCLI

/cajra fjirjva

(f)o8a)i

5/3[a]^/xat

evi

CKOLTOV

[oa~ov]f

Xo-y[]vra?

KOLI

VTrrjpera? KCU

8iaypa\l/aTco o re o[i\K\o]vofJLOS

KOLI

TOV
5

ocrat

8 av wvai

c[

......... ............
Some

at.

...

lines lost.

...........................
Some

lines lost.

.................. TOV
T[ ................... }OLKOT[S
KO[

................ K
prf ................... }G>V

10 vo

TL

[.

aTTortjcrct

[y

TO]

09 [8 av}

fia[o-i}XiKOi>

?roirj

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
KCU

6/x

(j)v\[aKrjt

avrov

<rro)

}a)?

av o

fta[(ri\e}vs
Col. 14.

[ta]yj/o>t

oo-ot

APX(0[N(ON

a]v oxrt

ot

irpos rov 7ro>Aouj/[ra

I-

...... ]e5[ .....

-M
Some

lines lost.

Some

lines lost.

7rapvp<rci]

....................

wvcov KCU [TO>V

KOivwwy

09 8 av irapa r[avra
rj

/ncfroxJc"?

a}yop[acrr)i\

rj

cTTtoi ........

rrji

KO.L

o 8iyyvq>[iJLi>o? fav
.

.]oy

10

eco-fra)]

-q

/ir[ ..... ]

^va}$ Tpia.K[oiv]a

/xcrcx 7? 4 [7rpa^drja'f}Tai

KCU

rats

o av}
.

.}rj

yi[vr]}ran.

IJLTJ

15

7rap[a8]

/LIT;

a7rort[o";t et? ro fiaaiXtKov

[fj.v]a?

Col. 16.

Plate
ot]

[.

5e

IJLTJ

.}o<roi

TI

[/xarto-]rat

(ove[i](r0co(raif

TWV
/cat

firjSe

fiacri\LK(t)v

Ko[iva)if]iT(i)<rav

8ioiKo[v(ri

[t]<raya>y(i>s'

About 8

/cat

ot

.........

fJ.rj8[(

81}

\prj\

lines lost.

80V\OS

[8f

fJLTJ

KO]

II.

REVENUE LAWS

a.v

8ia(f)op[

IIPASIC TEACON
01

7rpiafjii>oi

V7TOT\if

ray eojVay

TTOLV

rouy]

7rpa(ro~]ecr6a)o-a[v

T[O

]tt

8e TL Trapa ra y[ey/oa/x//,e]fa 7roi[rj(rc0}(nv

aTTOTiveTcoorav
15 /cat

ra

t[y

reA?? ocra

TO fiaaiXiKOV

ay

[eXXnrrji

*] y

.....

eav

v roty Xo[oiy tv

2nd

AIAAOriCMOC

Col 16

[^i a ]Xoyt^eo-^a)

Platelll.

Trof TOVS ray covay

a
5

[/ot

TT/OO

ra>^]

r??y

Se o oiKOvofj.o$ KCU

ovra[y Ka.9

5e/carr;y

tcr[ra/Aei/ou

y[eyji/7;/>iev[ct)lt'

a[i/

[o]

/ca]crr[o^
?re]

r[ct)i

About

7 lines lost.

a
ra 5 fv
fJLrj

TCOL

eve[(TTO)TL

fj.rjvi

7rpoo~KaTa[xa>piTa>o-av ety

10 ava(f)opav
if

Tepa

fjLtjde
fj,r)8

[/xera06]
ei

Tif

T(*>[v

Aoyeurcoji/

rj

VTrrjpeTcw airo rr;y 7r[poo~o8ov]

Xa(3a)i>

15 orai/

TL

SiopOovTCU

fJLr}[

.....

rojuro

8e TOV tyofJitvov B\La\oyLcrfJLOv\

KCU TO Trtiov

e/c

rou

67raz/Q)

e[t]y

[ro]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

TO Tr[(piov

8r)\ovvT? QCTOV

rjv

tav 5c o

\povos fySttav

7rai>a>

o 8 ewiwv

/cat

7riyvrjiJLa

TO ao'ityyvov

TOV

TTJ?}

CTriyevrjiJLa

aVTO)l

cwrj[f

tcrTiv

.]ft)

TTJf

([yStia] yfvrjTat

iy

5e [ro]

(OVTJ?

r)$]

10

OTa>

TTpa^LS TOV ^TeV\y)(0v{T}oS

T]

7 lines lost.

.................

V(TTpOV Kai
TO

[o]t/coi/o[/xoy]

..................

About

cr[

......
T. ...... ]e[ .........

KaO~T(i)t

TOCTOVTOV

Col. 17.

rf^TroirjKW?

rjt

a7Tf[\}rjt

fJ.fp[os

Tnyvr)^.aTos

TOV

K]

7Tt

yevijfiaTOf e* TCOV t(yyvu>v} TCOV

CTTI

Trji

cwrjt

7rpoTpov 8e

ts

rjv

TO [irtpiov

fjC

K TOV av[ ...... aJTroKa^to-raro)

15

TO
TO>V $

8ia\oyio~fJUt)i>

Trpos T[O]VS ray cova?

KaOTft>[lJ

K.OLI

our

aV

7rotrj}o-rjTai

\ovray TTO.VTWV avTiypafya

TCOV KOLVWV[(>}V

CLVTOS avTiypa<f)a

o~

TCOV 8ia\oyio~a jJL\i>a)[v

About

7 lines lost

Col. 18.

REVENUE LAWS

io

Ta[vTtypa<f)a TCOV 8taXoy]to-fJLCov

7Ti

8ioiKijo-O)s rjeray/iei/oi/

[TTJ?

orav

'/X[o'/io~]T['rjv

io

TOV

OlKOv[ofJLOV

ray cava?

15 Kat

fts

e/caora

Acat

ei

Acat

TiOei? rrjv re

o 5et avrov? 8t[o]p0a)(Tao'0ou

KO.I

oi]Kovofj,ov jrpa^at

eav TL 7rpocro(f)iXa)(nv Kat TTOQ-QV

Col. 19.

TTDO

fJLTJVl

tv ot? \povoi?

TCOV a7r[o7T/o]a/xarft)z/

TOV

[et

^OfJ,V(Ol

avevrji/e-yfjietyov

airo]

[TI

e^o0eiAerai o

/cat]

...

[ro

iravres

%OVT?

5taA[oy]t(7/iov

[TTpoa-oSov

Tavro

TO)l

V\

oiKovojJLo? y[viKov]
Trj?

TOV

KO.I

Kai 8ia\oyi^(r6u> Trpos O.VTOV?

o]v

TifJLtjv

TOV

(jLrjva

o TreTrpa/jLcvof \povo? aira?

8]e

8teX0r)i 7ra/>[ecrra>cra]j/ ot

Kara

77

KO.L

aAAoy TWOS
TO XOITTOV

Ka<TTO)t TOVTCOV

e7Tt/3aAAet

Kat VTTO TO fjiepo? TOV cvo(f)eiXof4vov] inroypatyaTto oaov

Kat
totat
%et Trap avTGov r\ TOV ey['/v]ov ev ots \povots /cat ro
XOITTOV eav TI

7r[poo-o}(f)[iXrji} ea[v

About
5

7rt]ye[v]r;/ia

7 lines lost.

...........................
7Tl

T0]v
]rr)v

rjt

8lOlKfJO~C09

TT)?
7rt

T7]S

T^
re[ray/X]

8toiKrj(7Ci)S

rt

[vo?

7rto-K}yafjLvos eav

[a]XXo)[v o)va)v] ea^t

io

KaTa[^Q)pto~a]TO)

aXXo

t?

[vo(f)tX]rjt

JJLCV

rj}i

ety

TreptytvofJievov

aAAay wva?

e/c

evo(f)tXrj[i}

crvv[T\aaTa>

TCOI

oiKovofJLm

a7ro8ovvat avTO)t OTO.V

o 8e ot[KovofJLo]s a7ro[5o]ra> ev

eav 8 [awatTTiOei?

[TOUT]

TO evo(j)iXofJLvov eav 8e

Trap ov [7r/ooo"ol0etAe[r]a

AoyfjWty

r)t

/LIT;

a7ro8]a)t

TpnrXovv

r)

rjfjicpais

TTI

Tptatv

OF PTOLEMY PIIILADELPHUS.
8

OO[OL 8 av]

15

o]

TWV ray

cova? f^ovrcov

JJLTJ

SiaXoyKrcovrou wpos [TOV]

Col. 20.

^J>ou
T

rov oiKoifOJiov

KO.L

TO
T]pia.Koirra KCU o

About

7 lines lost.

...................
[

..... ]p[.]

[ra

[TCOI]

aurf

T[O]V

vo \JLQV

TJOJ/

5e

[5or]o)

]a>

/cai

8ia\o-yLa-fJLOv

avr[ov a a>]0e<[A]

KaO ov

rrjt]

rj

Kara ravra

r[(ov

/3a]

ot

[o<ra

[rwv] oi

(r]vyypa<f)ovTou OIKOVOJJLOL

ra j8a<r4A]tKa

tj

ot

avriypafytLS

rj

01 ir[ap av}

7rpa'/fjLaTVOfJLvot irepi TU>[V fis rovy]

15

oi

<6AC>

TG>V crvyypafywv

TQJV

Col. 21.

[KA]TE[P]rCON
[Ka0cos yy]pa7rrai ev TCOI

vofjuai

About 4

TOV

[OIK]OVOIJLOV

lines lost.

c 2

[....]

REVENUE LAWS

12

5 ret

vvvrtTayiieva

airoriv }Tcoo~av

avTcov 01 KaTao"r[aOtvTs
TO.

fJLTJ

r]a 8e Trpocr

01

([tcnrpaa'a'eo-dcDO'av]

ytypafJiiJitva
CLfJL

7T7rpa

OL

CLVTOIS

EKKAHTOI XPONOI

10

ocra 8 eyKXrjfjLaTa ytverai

orav fiovXcovrai
[o<r]a

vTrep

rwv

e/c

y[i]i/rai

K T[COV

rwv

8e

vo/juov

vofJLwv]

\O[LTT(DV

eyKA]?7/iar[ft)i/]

TK>V Te[\a>viKa)]v VTrep cov

aAXoy
T
TCTOLKTdl
Col. 22.

OTft)

KdXeL&OaL

KOLL

ev aXXrji

TreTrpavTOLL

KOLVWVOVVTWV

fj

V TCOL ^pOVCOl]
TpLfj[ri\i{Lai}

V7Tr)pTOVVT(o[l>]

TT][l

TOV yypafjLjJLvoi> \povov v

OV

1?

ea/t

fir)

(D\V1]I,

[at] 7T/)OCTo5o[t]

rty TCOV TL

Xf)[(f)0]rj

.............

V
[tav 8e Tif]

TOVTw

[Xrj(j)Or}L

................

About 4
5

[o]

OLKOVOIJLOS 7rap[a

rwv

.......

yyvwv

3rd
hand.
Col 23.

r
I

lines lost.

..... TCW ..................

]

................ ]?
,

TOV
(8lOl\Kr)TOV

]/o[.

.]

TT/oafarjo)

TCOV KO.L

rwv

OF ^PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
TOV

TOV vtov] nr[o

(

erovs

...............
........

[.

Trjv]

KTf)v irapa 8e

TWV

(TlfJiaplO-TOV

I.

Plate IV.

K[

.........

rouf?

T7)[f

7ravTXr)Tri? KCU o<ra

rj

Plate

7 lines lost.

KOLI

Kttl

7T(f)VTeVKOTQ)l>

8lOlKlTO.l

TOV ytVO]fJLVOV OLVOV[

TCOV <rrpaTvofjLV(0v

[KO]L

Col. 24.

....... ]/>[ .....

About
f

4th
hand.

Tfjl

% ..........

TrpOTfpo[v d]l(t)lK[tTO
10

rj[s

irpos apyvpiov TTJV

KTTJV

r[

[YOJEP T[O]Y TPYFAN KAI CYNAFEIN

[01]

8c ytwpyoi TO, yevr)^iara TpvyaTuxrav

OTOLV

T]

wpa

[rji

K]OU

QTO.V apical/Tat

[7ray]yc\[\T}too-av ran, SIOLKOVVTI

[ran

\oi>r]t

TJJV covrjv

/cat

OL

rj

(3ovXofJLvov

About

[o]ra/ 8f

Tpvyav

7 lines lost.

yecopyoi

TrapaKaXtiTOMTav TOV TTJV

VCLVTIOV TOV OlKOVOfJLOV

COVTJV

KOLl

TOV

8ioiKo[vma]
Ctv{Tiypa<f)(i)f]

Col. 25.

REVENUE LAWS

14

77

TOV Trapa TOVT(OV Kai 7rapayvofj.v[o]v oivo

TroieiTO)

o yecapyos

TpOLS TOLS
lo

[\ova]i[v]

Kao~TCDl TCOV
/eat

TOTTCOV

/xe

VTTOlp

eo-fipa-yLo-fJLevofc]

o]lKOVOfJLOV Kai TOV aVTtypa(f)Ct)[?]

TOV

[KO.I

TOLS

/zer/oeir&>

t^TjTao-fJievois

TOV

[VTTO

K.O.I

av

[ocro]v [3]

15 [ye]a>/oyo

<

TCOV

'y

TOV

KOLTO,

ypafj[fjL\vcoi'
v[o]fJLOi>

fJLt)

ot

TronrjcroHrt

[S^TrXrjv T-qv a7TOfi[oi\pav

TOLS

Col. 26.

[Trap 01$ 8e 7r/)0i7ra/)]^e[i]

opyava

oi[s]

OLVOTTOIOVQ-L a.7roypa'^rao~0a)[o-av\

TOV} 8io[LKOw]Ta TTJV covrjv OTOLV 7rav[

[irpos

About

.........

7 lines lost.

TO

7ri{3[X]r)0i>

TOV

vofJLOv

j]

fjirj

r]

/JLTJ

crr}fjiiov

ao~iv[s o de

e7rt5eiay ra opy[ava Kara]

7rapao-\(>v eif Trapao-fypayKrfJLOv /3ou]

Xo/JLevov cr(f)pa"yio-ao-6cu

rj

a7r[o]8i[a$ TTJV

JJLTJ

CTTL]

fiXrjQeicrav a(f)payLda aTTOTiveTco TOLS e\ovo~L [TTJV]

10 [a)]vr)v
[ocrja
[

oaov av
8 av

oi

Trapa^prjfjLa TO

fiXafios

yewpyoi TrpOTpvyrjaavTes

8iaTifJLr]o-a)[o-]i

oivo7roir)o-a)[o-i]v

........ ]coa-av TOV oivov CTTL TCOV Xrjvcov

en [TCDV]
........ Kat OTav TO TrpcoTOV K0fia irapay[.
...... ]vTai ev Trfri] TroXet
Ka[o~T]o[i]
KcofMrji ev rji
rj

.]

rj

v[cr]Tpaiai Kai

oi

ytwpyoL avOj]ij[e\po[v
7TL8lKVVTCOO~aV TOV OLVOV [Kat]

a7roypa[<f)]eo-0a>o-av

rj]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
[TO]V

afjL7T\a)v[a}

[ov]

15

TrpofTpvyrjcrav

[CYir]PA<i>EceAi
[o

}\cov Trjv covrj[v]

OTO.V TO TrXrjOos

About
[

TTJI

o-vyypa(f)r)i

......

Col. 27.

TTJS

(rvyypa(j)rjs r[o

<r(f)pa}ytoiafjL]yos [TTJ?]

7 lines lost.

..................... ]v

[KOLI

TOV

avriypa]

TOV opKOV TOV $a[(Ti\iKov]

irav TO. yi>rjfj.a KaTaK^coptK[vaL ev

/cat

ra 7rpooivo7roirj6[VT]
irpos OLVTOV VTTO T[O]V
/cat

topiKevai
(f>i<r0ai

jjLrjde

/caraTr/ooteer^at

[<r](f)p[a}'yi(raiJLi>ov
rj

TTJV

TOV yewpyov

10

Tpa[v]
o

^ra>

ot/coi/o[/xoy]

o Trap avTov truvaTrecrraAftet/oy

-)(ipoy{pa(f)r)}

[crjara)

TO

vv[o(r]

/j.rj0v

[8]c

yevrjfjia.

o yfcopyo? TOV (Sao-iXiKov opK[o}v [7r]av

aTroSeSei^cvat

/cat

ra

7r[o]irj0VTa 7t[a]vTa a.7royypa(f)0ai

a7TOfJLOlp[av]

TfJV 7T7T

avayc[ypa}<f)T)Kvai

fj[]vT)V

7rpooiv[o]
/cat

15

TTJV

[8]lKOLlCi)S

ra 8c avT[iypa}d)a avy
Col. 28.

aa^payia'Ta.

About

7 lines lost.

roty]

[ai/ 8 avrltXeyaxrtv cos TrXtov

\ovai

rj

TTJV co[vijv]

e\a[o~o-ov]

REVENUE LAWS

i6

7riKplVTCO O OlKOVOfJLO?

[yi]l>TCU

ypafav? Kat KaOon av

10

y&v

[a]vTcoi
[01]

&

TOVTCOV

rj

o avriypafavs (rwyy{p}a\lsa

77

rov yewpyov

TT/OO?

yL[v]o^JLvqv aTro/jLoipav

[rr]}v

i5[KaT]axa)pi[cr]aTa)<raj>
[a>i>]rjv

TTJV

TifJLrjv

[fJLTj

irpa^is

o OLKOVOIJLO$

[o-0}a)(rav

TCOV [yco]p

(3ovXo[jLi>ov

o-vyypa\lfr)Tai

LLT)

o-

7riKpi0rjt

dv Trpos riva

o 8e TeXcovrjs

O [dVTl]

KCLl

fJLTj

KCLI

KOfj.icrafjLvo[i]

TO (3a(TL\[iKov]

et?

rots 5e eyova-Lv

rrf^v]

v7roXoyiTO)[o-av]

[M]H EniMICFEIN
[c]av
Col. 29.
[

8e TOIS areAecrt ra VTroreXr] yvrj{^.a]ra

.......

J^|^

^y

QVTOL

TWV aT[\a)V

About
[

......

01

TrapaSeurovs KK]Tr)fJLevoi ai

[aOuxrav 7r]poy T[OV] TTJV

[TOV VTTO]
5

TOV

[co]vr}v

OLKO[V}OIJLOV

/cat

ev

rji

rat TTJV Trpocrodov rr/v

IJLV

TrpiafJLevfav

Kcojjirji

IKO
OVCTLV

V TCOL

7ra/oa[5et<7ft>t

evdoKTjL o TcXcovrj? o~vyypa(f)7]i>

aurco[t]

SnrXrjv

o-(f)pa-yto-fJLvrjv

10 VOfJLCOL ytypCLTTTCLL
TT/oacro-era)

/Cttt

/C

o ot/co^o/Ltoy

[a]v 8e a[v]TiXyTji irpos

/cat]

Tov avT[iypa(f)a)?}
<f)paov[TS TO re]

KCLI

[Ka]Oe(TTrjKOTa ev TCOL TOTTCOL

OLVTWV ovofiLa

7 lines lost.

/cat

TT[.

Ka6air[p

TOVTOV

Trfotrou
/cat

eav]

.]

ev]

TTJV [K\TT]V

rt/ia)f]

ra>[t]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
[ran Trj]v ayvrjv f^ovrt

KaO

[vov]

rjfj.pav

ert/XarO TO

[o]v

[to]vr^V\

7rpa0vr[os

7T\tOV

ttTTjO

o y{c}ci>py{o}?

KOfJLto"rjTai

fav 8

15

TTTJV

..............

K TOV KOLDTTOV TOV

7T/3a^ar[o)]

Af7r[Jo-7;t

fJ.rj

TOV TTV

ojATO9

(i)vrV

KGLl

.............. X ...............
7 lines lost.

[.

avTOL Trap[a}yev(i)VTaL fis Tfjv

aXXoi Trap avTwv

K[v]pic0$

/ca<rra

TOV

tav

ot\

(>(vrjv

<r)a(K>ra TOV

VQU.QV

rj

7rayy[\XovTa?]

TrapaKaXovvTas KCU (rvvrtXovifjas Kara]

\v]ofjLov

Trrfat]

e^fcrro)

(f>(i>9

Tots ycotpyoi?

[cof

y]eypa

Trapovrwv TOVTCOV (rvvT\X(r]a.i cva[v]

TIO\V T\OV Trapa

TOV oiKovofjiov

0-VVa7TCTTaXfJLVOV

KCLI

8iotKovvTos TJ)V

Ka(TTa 7TOICIV KOU

(avrjv

KO.I]

TTJV

a.7ro8iiv

0)9

U7T6/0

KO.(TT(i)V

TOV oiKOvofjiov

Ktti

10

TOV [a]vTiy[pa]

Kara TOVTO afajuovs TrapayfvofJLfvov

[TOV]

Trpay/xareufo-o/zei/o*]

TOV? ytwpyovs

(TriKcoXvo'coo'L
KCLI

ot

Col. 30.

....................... M ..........
.....
.]TO[ ................ jay cv a\\ou?

fJLTjTf

2O

About
(

av]

KTr)V CLTToSoTCi) O yt

Tt]fJLr)(ri9

rj

[5

/z7roAa>/4*]

OTO) TOV

{OIKOVO^JJLCOL

O OlKOVOfJ^Of

OTO.V 8e

)(OVTOf TfJV $

(a>]pyo$ [T]WI

airo TOV

a.7ro8i8oTO)

[7rtj3a]XXr)i

TOV KOLDTTOV p

yX[a]ftftv

17

iv[ai]

o{c]

8rjXovr(O(rav [TO yfvif\

7roti(T0(t)<rav Trod pa%

8t(i)lKrjKa(TlV

TOV avTtypa(f)Ci)9

p[r)}

15

REVENUE LAWS

i8

Tf

8oT(oo-av TOV re yez^/xaroy

THN AHOMOIPAN

AIIOKOMIZE[IN]
OL

8e yecopyoi

yLVO^vr^v
About 7

r[r)]v

Col. 31.

Plate V.

OLTTO

TTJS

TOV \oyov Kara yewpyov

fjLOipa[s]

20

/cat

[r]ou

a.7rofji0i[p]av

lines lost.

.................. airo^JLOLpav ty
ov ............... a7r<m]j/er&> TO[LS

[TO

onroo'oyj}

TTJV

e^ovcri TTjy evo<f)iXov[JLi>r)s avTOif aTrfo/iot/aay

TlfJLTjV

TTjL

KOLL

AeXra TOV

TCOl

KO.L

A.lfivf]l

KCU Upoo-ayn-iTrji

5 woXiTrjt

\ai8i

fJiV

fJL

KOLL

[^

.]

ev 5e ran (LeftevvvTr}L Kai BovcrLpiTrjL

(ricoi

(3aiT[i\Trji

KOLL

10 Bou/3[acr]TGH
/cat

r?;t

15

/Ltoy

KCLL

[/c]at

ApafliaL

TaviTrji

A.TjT07ro\LTr)L

7roAirr;t
[c]v

TTJL

KOLL

/cat

/cat

5e r[^]t Gr7/3at5t h
ra[y]

rt/xay 7ra/oa

cty

yccopycov

ro /3a<TtAt/c[oV

[/cajt

H/oa/c[Ao]

<T

i<T7rpaaT(o

rcoz^

O^j

/ca[t

XifJLvrji

A(f)po8LT07roALTrjL h

/cat

K]OLL

Me/x0tr[r;t

r^t

<&ap

/cajt

Bof^acrTfiTJ^i

E/?/i07roAtr?7t

KffOTroAtr^t
/cat

KCLL

M.v8rj]

[KO.L

Aeo^roTToAfr^i Kat C0pa>iT[r)i

KOLL

KCU

A0pifiiT[r)i

TOV X

fie

KO.I

CatT[rjL

[5]e.

K[OL]L

[ot

/c[a]ra

r?;y

A
[8

/c[a]rao-r[r;]o-ara)
e

20
Col. 32.

(T9atcrxa

torw

wv av

e^

e/ca[cr]r[?7t]

KOfJLL[rjTaL OLTTO

ro)[t

About 7

/cw

lines lost.

25

01]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

19

If

r[on a]rroo'o\icoi,

8c o Kp[a]fj.o9 Kpafj,ia Q-Ttyva [....]

CTTCO

pov

iKava

7rovfj.i>a

KCU [....]

TCOI

oivcoi

TCOI

crvva[yofJLifcoi

covrjy

o &

otKOVOfJLO?

KOU o avTtypa<f)v? 7rpo[Tpov

rpvyav TOVS yeaipyovs

fj.7rpocr0v [rjfJLpais

rot? ytwpyoLS

KaoTTOi> TrapcLaryeLv cif

yeifrjfJLdTcov

TOV

7TL

rrjv

rrjif

T77 ? /focrtAi/cr/y TTJ?

[C] 7/ 5

aTrop[oLpa]v raf^v]

reray^fvov] KCU

aypa\j/aTco rrjv TI\LI}V <roiy>

"

o[v]

(rvvTa^O^Krav] VTTO

StOLKfja-ecof

rr)f

.]

TOU [Kpa]fjLov

Tt/jLrjv

rj]

10
8{i]

8ia rrj?

ev TCOI

vofjic

[o]

Sc y[d)py]o5 Xaficov rrjv

ap[t]crrov [c]aj/

[paljJLOV

8c prj 8o0r]i avrcoi

ro/x,

[fJLv]

Kepafjiov Trapf^erco

airo

[rrjs]

aTroij[oipa.s}

rjs

8et

[rj\

15

r[t]/JiTj

5e

/co/Ai^ecr^a)

avrov [a]jro8ovvai

rrjv

OLVOV T[OV]

T;

[fi6

................

rrfy
20

About 7

lines lost.

Col. 33.

]at

ocroy 8

av

/x[

.........

7rfO"/<O7reir[a)

o ot/co^o/Ltoy

Siot^ovvra

a^v] r[ov} rrjv covrjv

KOLL

KCU TOV Tra/oear^Acora [vw avTOV

\ITCO
i/

COL

fJLTOL

TOVTWV 8l8oVf TOIS

SiopOcocrovTat

KCLI

.......

Trpacrcrcov

ray

/cat]

T\OV

TTCO]

")(J)o}vOV

[-nftay

.......

REVENUE LAWS

20

TCO

fif

Trjf

\oyov

covrjy

inrep TO>[V

(ovrjv

TTTJV

01

rov

5e (3ao-iXiKOi y/oa/i/iareiy aTroy/ja-^arjaxrai/ [rots] TTJV

10 covrjv TrpiafjLevois

rat cv

KaarwL
CTOL

rjfjLepais

afJL7T\(t)Vf

VTr[o]T\ts
5[e]ai/

8e

oaoi

i(Tiv

voptoi

7)

rjcrav

av

rjs

a(f)

afjLTrtXtove?

KCLI

[^eypa^ijKoref

[Tr]apa8e[i(roi

rj

TWV

ra tepa

wiroypwfyuxriv

fjirj

e[K#e]/aa 7ro[ir](Ta)v}

ev

TG>V apovpcov T[O] ir\rj\6os KCU

TTapadfKTOl
is

TO

rjfjiepas

fJL

^)[o/OoA]oy[it OVT(OV\

irpo TOV
/IT;

r)

o]

K[O\L

dtKaiws

0a[fi/]a)[v]ra[t

airo]

viKT]OevTs aTTOTiveT(oa[av T]OIS

SiKrji

'

T[TI\V

toviqv TrpiajJLfvois

KaO

e/ca<rroj>

a>v

av

\y)(0(a(cri]

T[O

oaoi 8e TCOV
20

T&V ev

rr)[i

Ke[KT]r)fjLv[cov

[TOIS

de TTpiaiJLevoi Trjv (DVJ]v

TW

r)jjLpa[is]

<j)tK]oo-Tcov

X ray

5 TCOV xprj/jLaTcov

d av

airo

Xr)(f)0r)i

Xoyio-0rjo-Tai

tc[

77

lines lost.

-yyvov$ /carao-ri/j

a(j)

av

[77$-

rjfjiepas

oTav 8e 7ravTs

Atou

eooy

........

/carja prjva

TO

TO /3ao-t]AtAcot> VTTO
Trap avTcov otv[os eis

TifJLrj

ot

ay]opao-(oo-[iv}

5e Ka7[aypa(f)as 7roirj](rovTai

is

ray

[yivofJLeva?

avatyopas

AIAAOr[IC]MOC
10

ra

Trjv cwrjv

[(rovcri

eis

TOV KO[L

About 5
[ot

TrapaSetcrovs

rj]

&vv er]c[A]oi>v

ovr[(*>v

(j)opoX]o'/tai

Kr[rjv irpo]
Col. 34.

afjCpreXcoisa^s

e* rr;y

cav[rjf

K]ap7ro[t

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

21

rjy[opaK]oTa

KCU TOVS fiToxovs avTov Kdi T[O}V ai^Tiypafyea 8\ia]

\oyta-acrdo) irpos TOV TTJV (DVTJV [f\o]vr[a

%ovs
TO)

*av fiV

KOLI

TOM T

7riyvr]fJLa 7r[pt}r)i

apXCWrjL

TOIS

KCLt

Kara

TOVS] ftro

[7Ti5tay/>]a>^a
T[O TOV]

fJLf[T]o[xOl\S

rrjv

/cat

iri

%rjv

a>j/r?v

7Tl

8ia rrjf (Sa<ri\iKijs rpa7T^rjf cav 8

ytvqrai

fj[f]TO\ca[v]

rrjv

irapa TOV ap^covov

irpacrcrtTdi)
KGLI

TCOV

8e [7r]pai[v]

tyyvwv Trap

7roi([i}(T0ci)

ev

About 8

ai>]

/LIT;

TO

*c[ai]

K(HrTov

r[a)t

rwv

r[o]

^o]/Ltcva>t

evtavrwi

lines lost.

20

Col. 35.

rai TOV

a?ro5a)t T

awat

ot

airo8a)i

About 6

lines lost.

ra

av

L/cy

T[OVS KCLTO.

6th
hand.
Col. 36.

Aaiaiov

TTfJV

a7r]oypa(f)tv ZKCLO-TOV ov VOIJLOV

TO

r]e

irXijdos

\o[v KCU] 7rap[a8]io-(t)v

TWV apovpwv TT)?

K TOVTWV
KOLI ra

KO[TO] yt(t>p{yo}v airo TOV

Plate VI.

REVENUE LAWS

22

i\pav

Trf^v
LVOL

[rj]

Kai ravra

y[rjv]

Xoiirrj

[.

10 rr?t [<J>t]Aa[5eA0&H

7;

K.OLL

.}rj

TOLVTIJS

Set TJ)V CKTTJV

TTJS

K\ai T[O]VTCOV

CaTVpo]

roi[f 7r]a[pa

8e

e/c

t^\r)po]v^ovy TOV? c^oi/ray (rouy)

rfoujy

7rapa[Si(r}ov{$ e]v TOI? K\rjpoif ois ei\r)(f)ao-i Trapa T[O]V (3a

(TiAecBy

Kai rfoujy AoiTrouy iravras TOVS KKrrjfjLvovs

15 afjLTreXowas

rj

7rapadei(rov$

rj

cv Scopeais e^ovray

WpyOVVTOLS KO.6 OVTIVOVV TpOTTOV

TOV aTToypafaiv TO re
ifTtjfjLaTa

KCLI

7rA[^]^os'

Ka(TTOV TO
TTJS

yrjf

KCt-d

rj

ye

CLV

Kac ra ye

TYfV
5i5of[a]i r[w]v yevr)[ij]aLTa>v
KTTJV

[Apcr]ivorji 4>[t]Aa5[eA]0a)i ct[s] T[TJV] Ovcriav KO[I]

About 7

Col. 37.

Plate
VII.

.<ELV

8e

.............
/cat

nroAe/^aioy [TOLS crr/jjar^yoty

[/3a<jiAe]i;y

[KO]L TOIS Tjytfjioo-i

[oiK\ovoiJiOis
5 [/cjai

lines lost.

KCU TO[I]S vofiap^aif

roty To[irapyais

Kai TOIS avTiypafavcn, KCU TOLS ^3a<jtA[iKOiy

roif AifSvapxats

/cat

t)i

OTTWS av yivrfrau

TOV

KCLI TO]LS

y/>a/x/xa]rei;<ri

roty ap^L(f)vXaKLTa[is iracn

Tai>Ti"ypa(j)a

[cr0]a>

KOLI

TOL[S

^a]i/>eii/

Tr/ooyf/oa/i/Ltaroy

/ca$ o 5ei

^iXa8eX(j>coi e7r[tfteAey out/

V(JLI]V

yivt

Kara raura

io[ocroi e]^ou(Tii/ a/LtTreAcovay

17
7rapa8ei(rov$ TpoTrcoi O>IT[IVIOV\V
re
[5t5o]raxrai> Travrey roty Trapa CaTVpov 7rpayfJLaT[vofJLevoi?]

TO]I$ Trapa Atovvo-odcopov

\t[i]poypa<l)ia$

77

aimu

reray/xej/cuy
T;

eyAoytttrraty /cara]

oi SLOLKOVVTZS

rj

[oc

ytcopyov]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
TCC

[i/]re?

TO T

K[T]r)fjLa.Ta

TT;J/

[T]CDS

8c

ic[a]t

01

KOLI

Lirj

ipif
rj

KCLI

K TTOiov

TOVT[Q)V

TOV

/cacrroy

apyvp[i]ov TOV eviavrov o/xoitwy

xfapoYpafyi^s

fJLfJVOS

A&MOU

fV
Col. 38.

TOty (irapa}

'a

Plate

6th
hand.

lines lost.

TOU]

[rj

Tf]v

TOU

/C

ecu/

6\]

is

KoXvKivOivov

TOU XlVOV
fj.rj

TOV 5e

TpLaKO^ra^oLVLK\ov KaOapov

8 KVTJKOV Ka6a[pov

Col. 39.

Plate
VIII.

ap[T]a(B[r)v

VLKOV

(TTTf/S/LtaTOy

fis

oX]fj.ov

apTa$r)v f-

Tr]v

fiovXrjTai o

oXfJiov 7rapa}jLTpiT(0

6\t8o}vat

awo

TT^f] aXco

KaOapov

KaOapa?

10

/cat

ft?

oXfJLov

TOV

/utej/

o"f]o-afjLov

TOV KpOTQ)i>os TO

(.CTOV

Tcuy

T7/9

I.

C.

TOU

About 5

T]J]V

20

3rd
hand.

ATToAAawou

15

vtavrov cocrau

KTrjfjLCLTOS

/8ao-iAtAf[oi -ypa]fjifjLaTif [K]EU gi

.]

iroiov ipoi> [e5]t6\>

is

iroarov

KCLI

yLvop.evr)v (KTTJV

TTQVQV OLVOV
i

CCTTO

TOW ytv-qnaTtoV

TrA^flo]?

[0-]aj/

avr&v

[5e

KOTOV ap
KvqK.]ov

ap

rj

REVENUE LAWS

24

8e Trapa TCO[V

Xa/jifBaveTQ)(rav

TOV

15 CCTTO

(rrjo~afjLov

crrjo-afjiov

Xo
a [TOU K]pOT(ovo9

Kat TTJV H

Kat KpoTcova

8iaypafjLfj,aTt

8e

r9

8vo 8pa%fjias

TOLS

tf

rt/zr??

ran

cv]

r[rjs

apyvptov

yey/oa/x/xei/T/y

jii

8e prjOevi e^ovcriav

01

\ra)(rav

20

About 5

Col. 40.

Plateix

lines lost.

.........................

TOV av]

7rap[a TOV Kco^a]p[^]ov K[CU airo]

TO
K

a7rocr(f)payto-fJLa

Trjf

i?

Xa(3o]v fav 8c

Ka(TT[ov] ycu>[pyov

Trap

TO fiao-LXiKov

7rpoi(r0a) o K&fJLapxrjs

fJLrj

de

KCOfJLTJf

\-

Saxri

fJLrj

fir)

aiTOTLVT(O

'A Kat o

av

TI

Tav

cwrj 8ta

rj

Ta KaTafiXafiij 7rv[T\air\ovv
i

TO T

8e TO eXat[ov] ev

10 o-rjaanivov Kat
TO/JL

Trjt

fJLETprjTTJV

ro(u)

^copai (TOV

KV[TJ]KIVOV Trpo?

TOV [8d)8]Ka^OVV h

[fJL\ev)

TOV KtfUOS Kdl TOV KO\VKVVTIVOV

KO.I.

%aXKOv

*cai

fJLTJ

TOV 8e KIKlOf Kat KOXOK[VVTIVO]V Kat

TOfJL

fiTprjTrjv

rrjv

8e K[at]
Kai TOV
1

TOU

a-qa[a^JLLv[o}v

TOfJL

TTJL

^[Tpr^T^v

bf

TT\V

Kiicifoy]
I-

firj

(/cat

TOV)

TTjV

fJL[T]pr)Trjv

[h]

fJLrj)

Kat

Trape

ovo~tv

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHIA.

25

I[KOLVO]V
ti[ia
[

xco]paf fv [7r]a<rai$ rat? iro\(riv [KCU

.....

[TOV

(T

fj[.

fJL\T[p}OLf

KOLI

OLKOVOIJLOV

TOV

TOlf

[o

ra

OIKOVO}/JLOS

*o

lines lost.

Col. 41.

(rvvrcay^va ran
o a

KO.I

(nro8iaTc0(rai> 8f TOV anropov

TCOI

SIOIKOVVTI

cwrjv <5t)a TOV OIKOVOJJLOV

KO.I

TOV a

rrjv

tav 8e y(t)fJLTprj(ravT?
ro)i/

o T
KO.I

vpa)(rtv

/LIT;

TO

apovpwv KaT<nrapiJLevov aTTOTiveTaxrav

KCU o Towap^rjf

i>OfJLapx[r)]s

/cat

o OIKOVO/JLO?

o avTiypafav? eAcaoro? TO>V O[LTL(OV ei?

TO fiacriXiKOv 7* @ KCLI TOLS TTJV wvrjv

T
TOV o~ijcrap]ov o e}8i Xaftetv O.VTOV? TTJS ap H
TO
TOV 8e Ac/)ora>[vop] Trjf ap h a KCLI 7Tfyvrjfj.a

TOV fXaiov

TWV

7Tl

Trjf

8lo[l}Krj(Ta)S

a{ir\ipeo-0a.i

TO

/8

io~7rpaaTa) 8e Trap av

TOV KiKioy

KO[I\

o 8e otKOVOfJLOf [irp}oTpov

TOV

V7TO

^Ta! (rdl(riv]

av]Ttypa(f)Ci>[f]

About 5

......

Ko>

^0)

TtTtyfJitVOS

rj

o-Tjaafjiov

opa

TTJV
KCLI

TOV KpoTwva

8oTO) TCOL 7TpOO~TTJKOTl TOV VOfJLOV

rj

TOV (ndo^pov TOV fj.v

apov]paf] H 8 TOV 8e /c/3OT[a)Vo[yl

TOTrapxrjt

ct[s]

rr;?

apov

15

REVENUE LAWS

26

\pa$ H]

/3

On
20

ois irpoo-rfejraKTai
[o

]TTI

TTJ[S]

a7ro5oT[co]

KO.I]

ei<nrpaas Trap

aira)i'

SioiKrjo-eco

ets ous

T[O]

aAa> avri rou

TTJ?

the verso of Col. 41, tb be read after line 13.

ayopa[<ras

25

awo

5c

/c[o]/t[f]{o-aa)

efiet

rojuous

Kat Toy Kporowa

(TTj[o-]afAOi'

About 5

Col. 42.
]v

[cop]a
KCU,

7ra/oz[

ayopacra[z/ra

)1/77]^

r]?;?

7re/Di

crvvayeiv T[O]

rjt,

(rrjoidlfJLOv

ran vo^,ap^r)L

KOLL

TCOL

fjirj

vofjLWi

OVTOL 8e 7rapaKa\iTCoo-av TOV TTJV

(ovrf\y]

e^oi/To.

6(t>v

fjiera

vonapyai

rj

TOTrap^ai

TCOL

OLKO

8e rrjv wvrjv SIOIKCOV

TOVTCOV

TTL

ray apovpas

10

01

ra

[Aaoi] /cat

01

Xonrot ytwpyoi.

a[vTQ)}v yevrjfjaTa eKacrra

TrpOT[fpo}v KOfufatv

TOV

roirap^qi

ov 8e

L<ri

/cat

7rayy\XeT(oa-av

K.vr}K.ov

5 Oi ftt/ yecopyot

lines lost.

KO.I

Kara yevos

crvyypa<f)r}v

Trpof T[OV] TTJV wvrjv eyovra rrjy

15 8nrX[rjv f^(f)pa-/io-iJLvrjv [y}pa<j)Ta)(7av

8e 01

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

\rtOl

[TO]V (TTTOpOV

V
Kar[a] ytvos
KCLI

fjLaTa[t]

fi0 opKOv

*[ai]

(r<f>payi[cr0co]<rav TTJV

trvv'jr[t<r}(f)pa-/i^(T[d]ci)

[\ov {rvv]aTro<rraXif

/cat

20
Col. 43.

lines lost.

a{ ......

rwv yewpywv

[tvavTio}v

8c o vo/jLapxrj?

rov vofiap

TO7r[ap-^ov]

rj

..... }vroy

K [TOU

[TI]

crvvypa^v

[ir]aLpa

About 5
/cat

fKacrTos

7ro[<ro](j/>

rj

[<>

opa]

o 7rpo(rrr)Ka)f TOV vo

TCOV ap[o]vpct)v TOV (nropov

Kara ytwpyov

irpo

repov 77 (rvvKOfJLieo'0ai TOV Kapirov rjfjLfpais 6^*7

Kovra tav 8e firj Scot rj /LIT; 7rapacr\rjTaL TOV?

(nrapKOTa$ TO 7rAr]6os TO diaypafav

ra
Teat

ra

Trjv covrjv irpia^vcoi

y-/pafj.iJLva

avTOf Se

KOLL

7ri

Trpacro-eTCi)

[ir}ap(t

I0

[T]COV "/(copycov TCOV ijTrcidrjKOTcov

8 aTeXfis

[or]ot

eicriv

Kara

TTJV

\(opav

rj

cv o\copa]i

e
[rj]

fv avvra^i

^oucrt(j/)

/ca)/Ltay

/cai

[T]piTO)crav TTOLV TO ytvofjievov CLVTOIS

[K}OLI

TOV KpoTcova

p[o]vra

if

TO LKO.VOV

TlfJLrjV

fJLV

TYJV

ap H y

ra Xonra

(rrj(7a[fjio}v

<f)opTia

ra crv{yKv

\aiKrjv VTroXnrofJLevoi ets (rniep^a

TTJV

TOV

KOLL

yr^v Tra^/a/ne]

KOfJuofJLVOl TTpOf \aXK[o]v

<ri/[<7]a/LtOU

Trfe}

Trjf

ap

|-

$ TOV $

5c KV[T)}K ov TTJV ap h

E 2

15

REVENUE LAWS

28

i\

On
20 TOV

[6]c

TO

TTO[V

(r]Tjara[fjL<ov

the verso of Col. 43, to be read after line

ftiaypafavTos <nrapr)[vai

2.

(njcrajujoi;

[]y aAAous vopovs

Tr[oir)<rov]

o oiK[o}vop.os Kai o [a\VTiypa

KOI T[O] o-T/aa/xoy KCU Toy KpoTava Tia[pa]

napa
25 8ora>

8[e o

ro]/*

About 5

Col. 44.

lines lost.

KCU

e^

oerat

co)eai

KW^JLOLL

icrii>

TrapaOecrOaMTav 5e ey eKao-rcoi
KCU

crrjcrafJLov

Kai Kporcova KCU KvrjKov rrjv

TOVS 5e eXaiovpyovs rovf ev

10

tv rauraty

aAXov

vofjiov

IKO,

c/cao-rcot

fJLTa7ropVcr0a[t

fjLTX0co<Tiv aycoyt/JLOi

ecrr[ft)o-a]j/

KOVVTI rrjv wvrjv Kai

TCOI

a}v 8e rives
TCOI

otKo[vo]fJLO)i

re 8101

Kai TCOL

avnypafai
o-a[i'}y

fav
]f

[K\a(TTOV
fJLOf

TLS cicos

avTCDL

fjir)

[\]aiovpyov

[(TT(D]

8e Tovf

[X]aiovpyov?

VTroerjTai

rj

ein

avayayrj aTTOTiveTO)
\-

Kai o eXaiovpyos aywyi

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
About 5
I

----

TO

Col. 46.

lines lost.

..........................

(Xatov /ze/>tera> [....]

[T]OV

/cat

X[a]iovpyots

TO[I]S

fJLfTprjTov

TOV dwSeKa^ov

TOV] ye

air[o

TOV (TTwAou/Mevou) eXaiov

TOV

29

(y) TOVTOV Sf

I-

Aa/i/3ai/ra> o /xt/ eXaiovpyos KCU 01 KOTTCIS h

(j8)

/=
OL

wvrjv r)yopaKOTf K <a>

TTfif

8f o oiKovofJLOs

avTOv

o Trap

rj

&
ft?;

Toif

a7ro8a)i

\aiovpyoi$ TO Ka.Tpyov

TO

rj

/Ufl(77)pt07ZI>O2> aVTOlf dTTO .Tfjf 7rpa.(T(i)S CLTTOTt

i>T(o

if

TO

fj,v

j8a[cnAt]Acoj/

KCU o TL a[v

ro/x ^.icrQov

(o}i>r)

rj

10

rot? eXatovpyoiy

/cat

8ia TOVTOVS /cara/3Aa

SnrXovv
tav $

TO.

eXaiovpy{i]a prj

TL ytypoLTTTCLL
[(fyavrai
[i/Jra>

KOLL

rj

TO.

Karaur 770-0) j>rat KaOo

<f)op[T]ia

5ta ravra

[rj]

iKOivov

TO.

wvrj

fJLrj

Trapo.

Acara/3Aa/3r;i

a-jroTi

15

o re OLKovofJios *[at o] avTiypafavs Trjv

[av] rr;t/

y^vo^vrjv

[KO.L]

TOIS TTJV wvr)

[TO /3Aja/8[oy 8i}rrXovv

[XOprjyetTtocrav] Se [o
[ei/

CAcaorwt

oi]/coi/o/xoy

/)y]acr[r]r;/o[ta)i

TT;I;

About 5

/c[a]t

[o

a]Krty[/) J a0e[uy]

20

/caracr/cei;?;!/]

Col. 46.

lines lost.

REVENUE LAWS

30

cis

r[o

Ka\Tpyov

KOLT(LW}V

ra/8Aa7rra>y TTJV covrjv

TL

av 8e

XP rJ'yi

firj

KaTafiXa\lfr)i Trjv avrjv

Kpiveo-

KOLl

5 0(0

7TL

Xr)(f)0r)i

TOV TTayfJLVOV
aTroretfera)

8tOLK7J(rCOf

TTJS

apyvpiov

KOLTOL

ro /3Aa

/cat

/8

CLV

SnrXovv
de Trjv wvr)v

ot

Kai o avTiypafav? o

\ovTS

Ta[0]tf VTTO TOV oiKovofJiOv Kai TOV

10

pL[cv<rov](rt,v
K[OLI

T(DV

TTOLVTWV

(yewpywv}

TWV ev

T[WL

pyacrTf]piwv Kai rryy Acaracr/ceu^y [Kai

T(D\V

KV

avTi"ypa(f)e[ci)]?

v]ofjLO)i

7r]a

ra opyava TOV apyov TO[V xpo]vo[v]

pa[(T<f)pa}yicr0a>(Tav

TOVS eXaiovpyovy [Ka0]

r)

fjipav
J

8f.

t[o-0](>o-av

/car

(rrj[o-]afjLOV

TO[V]

20 h

eXao-crov TTJV rjfjiepav TOV

8e]

T[

8 [ap 8pa%fjLas
[Trj]f

.....

[crvvT\aiv 8e 7rpo[s TOVS

JJLTJ

fjifv

7roet<r#a>

TOV

[.]

ap

lines lost.

X]aiovpyov[s
fj,rjT

o oiKovofj.os

y/xareuo/xevo? TTJV COVTJV Trapevpecrei

fj.rj8e

crTy^ra/xou

ap

About 5

TOV eXaiov

TOV

ap

TOV 8e KpoT\wvos TWV

8e KvrjK[ov TCOV

Col. 47.

[fj]ev

eKacrroi/ oXfJLov a/jrajSr/y (Kai TO[I}TOV)

8e KPOT(DV[OS} ap 8 TTJS 8e KvrjKov

aTr[o]8i8oTQ)a"a[v
[TCOV]

fjirj

/zr;re

o Trpa

fj.rj8fJLiai

ra opyava ra cv TOIS epyao-Trjptois TOV apyov

)(j)ovov

ao~<f)payio~Ta a7roXi7TT(t)O~av eav

8e o~vv

OF PTOLEMY PUILADELPHUS.
Trpof Tivas TCDV cXcuovpycov
TO.

TO

opyava

cAcacrro? ra>i> O.ITLWV

f3a<riXiKoi>

ao-<f)payi<rTa

rj

a7ror(e)tj/ra>[(r]ai/

a.7ro\nr(t)(r]ii>

31

apyvptov

* a

M
av

KOLI

rt

cwrj

rj

wapa rov

o 8e

y8[ia]v

OIKOVOIJLOV K]CU TOV

rrjKQ)? ava.ypatyaa'Oto

TO)V

!/

-jroirj

fKCKTTrjl

r[a oli/o/xara

7TO\l

TCW

Kdi

o[j/TJft)J/

I0

avriypafaws KaOfd
rwv Kairr)\a)v

e
/cat

(TVvra^aa'TW 7rpo[s d]vTOVS /nera TOJV rrjv

&t cXatov

Trpayp.arvoiJLV(DV 7r[ocro}v
K.a.6

TS

fv AXc^airSpfiai 5e crvvTacrcrca'OuHTa.v

Ka[(r]7[o]v

ts

oo~ov 8

oiKovofiov

l-

lines lost.

TOV]

TTJV

av

arvvypa'fytoVTa.i

V fKOurTrji
o T

TO
Kat

[/cat

rrji

c[

About 5
ro]i>

pev TOVS tv

irpos

crvi>ypa[<f>}rjv

[Kara }irjva Trpo? 5e rojuy

oi

15

rouy ira\ivTrpaT{o}vvTas KCU wyypatyao'Owo'av

[Trpos]

6w

KIKL

rifj.(pav

7T(o\fiv

7r/ooy

V[TTO

KOU

KcofjLrjL

01

KdTrrjXoi

KCLI

01 fJLTafioXot

8ta6r)cr(r0ai eXaiov Kat KIKI

OIKOVOS Kai o avriypa(j)Vf TrpoTtpov

7rXrj6[os]

iT(iTQ)<Tav

T0t[s]

cis

Kao~TJ]v

KaTTTjXots

KWfJirjif

KO.I

KOU KOfJiit(rO(D(Tav ray

1

rj

KCU Kara/aera>o-aj/

firj

(TTI

tKao~Tov

rj

TOV

fJLrjva

yvovs

TOtf /zera/SoAoty Kara

rt/Ltay

ea/ut

t~tov(Tu>V TWV 7TVT

TTJV [fta](riXiKiv

10

48

REVENUE LAWS

32

av TO 8e

avrjXcofjm TO

is

rrjv [7ra}paKOfJLL8rjv

o\i}8oTcoo~av airo
TTJV 8e

(TWTa^iv

TO

rjfjicpcu?

vpio~KOv

e(f)

Col. 49.

5c/ca

TOV

rj

p[rf\va

8eKa ev re

^TncrTTjvaL

JJL

TTJL

fjirjTpoTroXei

KO.I

TOV

OL

]i

7T\apa\anpa(v

.....

7r]Xeiovo[s

........................
About 4

CTTI

Trpof [e]/ca<rroj/

ypa.^ravTS e/crt^eroxrai/

/cat

rjfJLCpas

icai.

7th
hand.

Trotrjo-oiVTai

irpOTtpov

i^rj]pvo-o-TCt)o-av

15 Trpocrdev

av

rjv

TO

/3[

.....

/oya^[.

i7ra)T[rj]pia

IJirjTe

8e

jjirjTe

lines lost.

/^re

aAAo

o}Xfjiov?

fjirj

airoTivTto(rav

i?

/c[

TCOV TTJL

firjBev

(TVyKVpOVTWV 7TapVp(Tl

TOLVTrjl
i

.........

10 Trap

p[ya(rtai]

fJLTjdffJLiaL

fJLv TO ftao-L\iK.ov

01?

8e

Trpovwap^i TOVTCOV

a7roypa.<f>ecrO<i)o~a.v

Trpo?

Trapa

TOV

TT]V (>Vf]V

KCU TOV

8iOlKOVVTO.

avTiypacos

ev

KOLl

8e TT]V wvT)v e^ovrey KO[L

TOV avTiypafatos

ftao~iXiKa eXaiovpyia
TI

KpOTCova

rj

TTpOf TOV TOV OLKOVOfJLOV

TpiaKOVTa

rjfjiepai?

8iKi>VTQ)(rav TOVS re oXfi[o]vs

15 /cat

Tots TTJV covrjv TrpiafjLevois TO /3Aa/3o? TT^vrairXovv

KCLI

01

/cat

o]

5[e

TTI

ra

Trapa TOV OIKOVO/JLOV

/iere[t/ey]/cara)craj/

av

KCLI

TI]S

KVTJKOV KaT[pya]ofj.vo?

ety

ra

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
TO

KOLI

(rr](rafjitv[ov]

\aiov <Kai> KI^I]

OHTiviovv ro

r\

rj

TO KVTJKIVOV

aXXoOep

TTJ

TTCtpa TCOV TJJV WVrfV t\OVT6)V 7Tpt

fJLTJ

f^OVCTL

(-

KCU TOU

i(T7rpa(ro'O'6a) &

(TTpcr0a)

TO

iroOtv a>vov

avrov o (Sao-i\Vf 8ia-yva)o-Tai a.7roTivTO) $

TJ]V 0)V

33

\CLIOV
VTTO

KGLL

/LtI/

TWV

(f)OpTLGW

TOV OLKOVO^IOV KCU rov

avrov

>

................ /8oluAo/ii>oj/ ......

r[ ............. Trpay^jJLO.TvoiLt(v .....
cir

20

rot?

Col.
]

rrjl

........

rou OIKOVOILO]V

KOLI

TOV a[vTiypa]

About 3

lines lost.

]fJLOV

o)

TOV

ov neXXovcriv av-qXaxriv eAcaoroy (T^J/) Kara

rjfj.pcov

TWV TTOpflCW

KO.I

Kdl TrpOCraTrOTlMTOMTaV KO.6 6Ka

(TTOV fJLTptJTrjlf h p
rroi/o?

ot

/cara

avTO

KOLL

a~Tap

[}vavrtov TOV
[8e]

TOV TrXtlOVOS KCU TOV (XfHr

Xoyov

8e nayeipoi TO

(JLcpav

10

rpiwv T<DV re fyopnwv o-(6>re/)o-^a)o-ai/

KaO

OLVTO

iat

TTTJV

K(tTa.yjpa(T0(iHTav

TrwActrwcrat/ 7rap[fv]

(rvvTrjKTa)o-av

fj,rj8e

a7r[o]

o re aTToSofxcvos
et

5e

fj.rj

7;

(XaiKrjv e^ovTOS

fj.rj8ei>i

[4.r)8

KaO

O.TTOTIV^TV

c[at

so

REVENUE LAWS

34

Kad
T0)t

20 oi

T[TJ\V

CKO-VTOV coy av

Trpir]Ta[i]

\a[L\ovpyovvTs ev TOLS icpot? TOLS Kara

-^copav airoypafyecrOwo-av Trpos

eXatKrjv Trpia/jLevcoi (tKao-Tiqv rjfjicpav)

Trfrv]

7rpayfj.aTvofj[e}vov

TO/JL

TTJV wvriv KOU irpos rov Trapa rov OIKWVOJJLOV KO[I] rov

s irocra re
KO[I]

Col. 51.

[KO.L

rovf oAj/zouy

KOU

i7ra)T]r)pia

if

7rt8t[iaTa)o-av
K.OLI

ra

10

\IKOV

TCOV

Ka.(TTOS

...............
K[ .............. }KO

8e o rc[

eAcuou

ipcw

lines lost.

Teray/jLevoi

TCOV CUTIGW

oo~ov
(tivrjv

pyacrT}rftp}ia

About 3

7Ti

ra

nr[coTr)pia Trapacrye}T(o

Tralpao-^payia-fJLOv

........ jooerai/
........ rov

crav ot

/cacrro)t

7rocro[t]

[/ecu

[aav

\aiovpyia vwap^ei cv

av

^ y

is

KGll

fjiev

TO

(Souri

TOLS TTJV

8iarLfJi7jo'CovTat

TO fiXafios TrtvTairXovv OTOLV

TrptafJievois

be fiovXco i/rat KaTtpya^ecrdai ev TOLS tepoi? TO

o

ov TO

o-rjaa.fjLLVOv

irpayiJiaTevo^vov
15

7rapaXafjL^ai>TCoa-aif T{r)}v
KOLL

TOV Trapa TOV OIKOVOJJLOV

TOV avTi'/pa(f)a}f Kai evavTiov TOVTCOV eXaiovp

a^eo 0(a[(ra}v 8e ev
ei?

TOV

8LfJLr)vc0L

oo~ov

via[vTo]v avTjXcoOrjcre o~\6ai

KCU

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHIA'S.
TO

o\

TO avjj\i(TKO^vo[v

/t]t/ttt

o 8 oiKoi'Ofj.0?

tKOLCTTOV

tf

fJLVOV

KOLI

AJa/Ltj8aj/era>0iaji/

UpOV

r
<5>6 KIKlOf

r[o]u

vo]v
a-[6(i)crav

t$

fTTi

TOV

TO/JL

dioucrjo-cas

Trj?

KCLl

KCLI

TOV

20

\CtlOV

fiaaiXea

rcra

TOV KCLTp
ra icpa pr)0vi TrwActi/ t $

TOV fXatov

l4cTprjTov H p
/c[ara

TO>I

^0-T(i)

fJLfJ

irapa

o avTiypafav? TO ai>rjXd)fj[a} TO yivo

a.7ro(TT\{\}T(i)(rav Trjy ypo[<^.f)v Trpof

/cat

35

\OLIOV

firj

&Tfp

25
Col. 62.

7rpo(ra7roTivT[(0crav TOV]

K\at

TO]V irXtiovos

/cat

\[acro'ovos;}

\oyov}

o1
7Tt

}v
]

TOV

ejri

Hrj\ovo~iov

tav $

TOV

/xe

irpacrti
fJirjTf

H p

(Xaiov (rTfpt(rO(D(Ta.v
/cat

Xacrcrovos Kara

Xoyov

av &

TTJV idiav yjpeiav

faxriv
crav dv
/cat

Tivef
01

ty

lines lost.

Tives avayoMTLv TOV T

tLO'Trpao'a'tcrOwo'av

fJL

Two
/

Trjf TT/jacrfecoy

TOV TrXeiovo?

^CVIKOV eAatot/

/cat

/cat

/co/xt

^ AXe^avdpeia? ayovTts awoypa^fo-da)

AXfav8ptat /cat /cara/SaAAercocrai/ </ca(r>rou /itcr

TO[I>]

irpoo~ 10

fMv

Aao-(roj/oy

/car[a

oov
2

/cat

tj9

15

REVENUE LAWS

36

TO reAoy
K

5e

01

[Tit]

XOVO-LOV ayoi/Tff KaTa(3aXXTO)[o-av]

e/ti

KCU
20 OL

oeuoz/rey

avpiai

/ecu

TO [reJAoy as ov av vofiov

ea*>

r^cy

iy

TT;^

^p^iav ayovTfs ra reAr;

i8[iav]

r]o

aya>[o"i

/ca

/LIT;

r
TafiaXXcocriv

TO orv^oXov pr)

rj

K.OIJLI(}<JL><TIV

TOV pe H

25 o-TepeorOwaav Acai Trpoo-aTTOTivercocrav

fviKov eAaiov

ex OrjAoixriou

rj

Cvpoy

7rapaKopu[a>]crii;

/)

TOV re eAatou
00-01 8e ra>y epnro/ac

[AXje^arSfpjeiai' areXet?

[T]OU 6/

Kdl TOU OL
ev

[.

T(OI

.]

KCU TO[U]TOU
a?r

Col. 53.

{[.

pa7rrat coo-aurcos

voj.<i)i

...

Plate XI. .....

[

[(rvfj.(3o]\ov

..... eay bf

fJi(]vov
fj.](vov (rvp.(3o\ov TO>[

e
5

Kpo\T(ava

[ev rjfjCepaif
]v

TOV

01

Ka(TTCOl

\pv\0]v 60
\KOLI

e <cai TOU

fJL

[.

%ovTs
av

covrjv

TO
O"rj

rjij[pa? TJJV avrjv TrapaXa/Bcoaiv

crrfaa/JLOV
.

TTTJV

TOU eXcuou]

CL7rOTl0(T0ai

VO[J$a)l

779

y TOV

.............

TTJV

KCU KpOTWVOS

Two
]

ap h
.

KOLL

TOV

K\lKlOf

cr]r)o~a.

lines lost.

TlfJLrjs T/S[

.....

Tat auToty

[.

.}p[

.....

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
TO K

KCLl

TOV

<nj<TOflOl/

37

KOI

Kttt

TOK

TTjy

IO

ro

cav

TOV OLKOVO^JLOV

KOjJLL&crOtoa-av irapa

TI\JLT]V

H^/
TOV

o-rjcrafuvov

pel/

KiO? rou

/ii

TOV

(h

/tie

Xafv]

TOV &

HC-

h #c(a=) TOV 8c KvrjKivov TOV

roi>

5c (77/o-a/iou TTyf

TTJS

ap

ap

I-

KI

H (trjf)

/it

15

TOV Se KpoTtovos

rj

a=.
\-

Trjs

KVTJKOV h (a/") otroi/ 8 av

e/cacrrou

av
TO/X

TtoV

Td)i

VOfJLCOL

/X^pi}? KepaiJiov h

\aiOV TOV

\JJLt]v

TOV 8e

Xaf{v}

8c KvrjKivov h
if]/

\T[OV]
tf\cu.

TOV

v}rroXoyicr0r]crTai

rj

[TOV]
T[LfJLr)]

fJL

TOV

KIKI[O$]

\-

KOL =

v
8c AcoXoAcu[i/]rt<Aco)ou

TOIS

^ov(r[i]

20

1(3%

I-

ifi)

ray covas

T a? ava(f)opas ray yu>ojj{va}$ TJJV 8c T[ifj.]rjv TOJV

T[IU>]V KOLI TO KCiTep-yov Kcu rfoj avrjXcofJLa 7r[poa]vr)Xto-K
]

i[f

r[a>

OJ

<f)op

25

OlKOVOfJLOf

8 av yjptiav

f[av8piai

eXaiov

em

orrjo-a/juvov

TIJ?

7r[/oao-ea)y

rj

KLKIOS fv
.

AAe)
cJol.

.]

^*a[ ................. }TOV

firj) g[ .........
a-6[ ............... rj]fJuoXiv ray cXaio[ ..........
o\ ................ ^taroy Xoyov r[ ...........
................. ]vo)v
T(a[i ............
fji

\-

e[j/]

Two

lines lost.

54.

REVENUE LAWS

38

TOV eAaiov

eav 8c

8co(riv

fM7j

yo^oTes

ety

TOV Xoyov

[rj

TTOLV

AXe^avSpeiav

TO cXaiov

7rpoo-a7roTivTO)(rav (ety ro fiao~tXiKov > e/caaroy

T(W}V

ljL/JLlO-0a)fJLVa)V

is

0repf<ns

KCDfJLrjV

7*

TTJ\V

ai{Tiy}pa(l)if ev

ov TOV

[eK

ro fiacriXinov *ai Kara

OL
K.O.L

(ra

/XT;

TOV re eAatou

10 (JJLOVS
XTj(f)0a)crtv etorayovTes)
KGLI

TOVS yo)

eis

(77

ov av

Kat TlrjXovcricoi [TOV] eXat.

ety

2]i;/)tay

K.CLL

TlrjXo[v(riov}

ra a7ro5o

20 o

8e Ka[Ta]o'Ta0i? avTi[ypa]<f)evs Trjy

IJLOV

TOV O[L]KOVO

evavTLOv TOV avTi[yp]a(f)a)s ypa0era> de ev TOIS Xoyot?

ra re

(fropTia

oo~a

KO.O-TO[V

y]tvovs TraptiXrjcfiev

[ri/xTjs rrjs

[KaTi]pyacrTcu

/cat

[peTov] TTJV re

TtfJLfjv

[TCOI]

VTTO

8iaXo"/L^o~0co 7r[pOf] TOV Tfjv covrjv eyovTO. K[a\Ta

fjirjva

Col. 55.

wvqs

7re[7ra)Ar;Ace
T(f>[v

[Kpa]fJLLd)L

KCU TOIS Xot7roi[s

oo~a

fv rwi 8iay]pa/x/xari yeypa/i//i'7;y

......

y&pis] TOV

7rapiXrjiJLiJLva)v]

Trjv

.........

diaypanfiaTL yyp[aiJL/jLvr)v

KOLI

avr)Xci)fjia(rL

TOV

ev

o~]vv

[lev

a<j)ai

TOM

o-\qo-afjLov

ap h a TOV 8e Kpo[T(0vos TTJS 8e KV]TJKOV =

TOV 8e e/c TOV Xivov (rTre/oynaroy
[TOV 8e KoXoKWTtvov

5 [Trjy]

.]

Or PTOLEMY PHILADELPHIA.
[TOV 8c o"fjo-ap,ivov (Xaiov rutv

TOV 8e

[ap H]a

KVTJK[IVOV}

ap

TO>V

\-

rj

TOV 8c KIKIO? TWV]

ap

[h

.]

TOV 8

ap H a KO\OKVVTIVOV TQJV

C7r[\\]v\viov TCOV

39

ap a

tft

CC7TO

Kai TO (rvvTTay}jLvov fjLpif<r0ai TOV eTriycvrjfjLaTOf

10

eXatovpycDi Kai T&I TIJV covrjv SIOIKOVVTI Kai o TI av

To>t

ts

TOW
01

fJLlO~00l

TOlf 7TpayfJLaTVOIJiVOl? T7JV

CtiVTJV

8l8o(T0(O

K
o~av airo TOV fJLfjLpicrfJLvov

(arro) TOV

cv AX^^orftpeiai 8< TO re narcp-yov TOV (njaa^trov tAatov KOI TO TrpoiraiAjjrtKoi'

15

Kat 01 jiio-0

ZHTHCIC
tov

r;

TTJV (a[vrjv] 01
i

Ka[p7r]ifj,ov

r]

t\aiovpyi(ov}a

<?rt)

\}aiov irapa

rour<oi,'$']>
T[LO-L]V

^[rj]TiTCixraif if ap}ovTOS
{

TOV

20

[irapa T]OV

TJ

TOV OLKOVO^JLOV </cai> TOV [avrCypafyeas c[av 8] 7rapaK\rj

6[if o] Trapa TOV OLKOVOV j) TOV [av]Tiypa<f)(i)s fj^rj a]KO\ov0rjo-rji

7r[apa]

rj

[fJiij]

T[OIS]

7rapafJLivijL

rj

rjTrj(Tif

TJ\V (ovrfv TrpiafjLevoi? TIJV

(fir))

VTOf
TTOf.

av

cof

ytvr)Ta[i afroTivtT&o-av

8iaTtfj.rjo'iv

[oo~o}v

floret) 8e TOtf Trjv [wvtyv

rjfl\p(DV

av

8iaTifj.rj

x ov<rt

25

Col. 50.

REVENUE LAWS

40

sr.

<Aco>r.

.1

One
[

........ TV

TOV 8e

cvpovra

fJLrj

Tfjv
10

[a]

fy)Tiv

(f)rj

v lepwi

tjiTrja'iv

7roLio~0at

KOLL

av0r)}jipoi>

;OpKtoi>Tl TO

TlVT(i) TCOL

fjirjv

rj

ts

irpocr

rrjv covrjv

rrjt

77

aXXov

fjLTjdevof

aXXa rwv

crvyKvpovTwv

ofJioo-fji

fJLrj

line lost.

.]

opKio~ai

ayyeXei/rcoz/

av 8e

TlfJLrjfJLO,

vo-rcpcucu airo

0(TOV

irpiv

craro <7Tt>
OL

8e

7rpi.a.fjLvoi

15 O~OVO~L

TCo[v]

yeiyAa[r]a

8 avafyoplav
[TT/)O]

^"

57

PL XII.

TTJV

[CJTTI

TpaireQav

[fJL\CV

Xo

Trj\v

fjLrjvi

tv

T[COI

^]

8i.xo[fJL}r)vta?

TOLS

Xaiovpy[oL$ T]O yivo^vov

8i8ovai airo TO[V

^ Acat

8th

$LOp0(dO~OVTOLl TO.

KO.L

irL$a\{\}ovo~av TOOL

T\rjv

Trjf

tyyvovs Karacrr?;

[(t)}vr)v

rjfJLepav

'

20

Trjv

(f)LKOO~TCDV

KaO

iroieicrOai

r]Trj(riv

7771;

fJLrj

airo

[A]IOP9(OMA TO[Y

TOV a

NOMOY

EHI TH]I

[EAJAIKHI
TTwXovfJiev T[rjv fXcuKrjv Trjv

airo jJLrjvo? Top7rt[cuov

5 M.o~opr)

i?

T[rj

j3

TOV

Kara] Trjy

....

Kara TO
Three

ywpav

A.Ly]virTLwv

eK0e/xa] TO
lines lost.

]o[ei] r[o] r[eAo? TO]V [re o"t]}a{afjLov Ka]t

TOV

io-tovTa

^povov

TT/Dta/Ltei/ot?

TOV

oaas 8 av apovpa?

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

41

OL7TO

Xao~o~ovs (7ra/>a)5etG>/xej> KaT(o~Trapu.vas reap irpo

TO T

VOfJLCDV
KCLl

KOL TOV KpOTCOVa TOV fXXflTTOVTa

(TI/Cra/AOJ/

TOV 8o0r)(TOfJLVOV (T^CTa/XOU KOU KpOTWVOS

CL7TO

T\os

avrois TO

a/

h TOV o-^o-a/xou

/3

8 av
TO

TO airo TOV

KO.I

TO

[o~]rja-a^,ov

[\\]i7rov

KCLI

a,7ro

eXatov KOU TO

TOV

OLTTO

8ia TCOV oiKovofiMV

fty

o"r)o~a\jJLOv}

TOV Xivo[v

TOV

o-fja-a/jLov

TO icrov X[rj\^ov]Tai o<rov

eiriyevriiLa

fXatov

iy

8o)fJLv

fJLrj

h a rou

air[o

Acf/3o]ro)j/o?

\aiov

K.O.I

ocrov

15

ov

a(f>

T}OV (rrjcrafjuvov

8c TO KLK[L K]O\OKVVTIVOV

cr]7r[]/o/xaroy

fJLT[pr)}o-ofJLev

Trpoicrj

KpOTava ov

rj

T\oy

/cat

ir\ovaov TOV

ov 8 av vo^iov TO

Tat TO

10

a(f)

ov [TO

^a^p-yao-a^cvot
TO

7r}iyVY)iJLa

20

TOV

io~ov Xr)\lsovTau oo~ov CLTTO [re] ro[i>] KIKIOS KO[L airo]

OVCTiV
TCOI

ot Trjv covrjv

av

[ocrov 8
[rj

eXaiov

f^ovr9

[/cat

Kao~TOv

o-rjaa/jLtvov

[ov irpa^ovTai
[

8e

ot

[To>va
[crt

cty

[COVTJV

irX[tov

KL}KL

7rpiafjL}voi

rj

rj

[KpoTwva .......... }v

TTJV eXatKrjv ej;

/cat

To-o~apas eav 8e
c]ty

TO

[.

Tra^aX^erat

o"qo-a^.ov

cr^tra/xoi/ /cat

o [ot/coi/o/ioy

TO eXaiovpytov TO ev AX$;av8piai

\a\Kov

............

TO KO\OKVVTI(VOV

o]v0cv TO 8e (nr^pofjievov

Trjt a<f)a>picriJLi>r]i]

Trpof

[et/coo-t

VO^JJLOV cr^cra/xof

r)

............ reAoy
v

7r]apacr[(J)pa}'/LOVVT[at}

/cat

7T(t>XovfJLi>

XP

/3ao~tAt/c[oj/]

rj

pvais

ey/Sr/t

.]

Kpo]
ri7 rJ^> 5

8e Trjv]

Xij^o/jLeda cty TOV crTaTijpa ofioXovf]

TrXcia)

Col. 68.

V7rap^i TO]

REVENUE LAWS

42

NOMOY

AIOP6[(OMA TOY
Col. 69.

7r[ce)Aouftez/

eXaiKrjv

T-TJV]

Kara

r[r)is

5 [ro

L^g

e]t?

KKLfj,vov

...... apovpa?
]

et

At]

K0fj,a]

...........

7rape[

lines lost.

KOLI

(r[rj(rafjLo]v

TrXeiov

wrap]

TOV K/9or[a)^o? roiy rov]

icriovTa yjpovov 7rp[i]afjii>oi? ocras 8

av apovpa?

\acrcro[v?}

TGOI>

KaT(nrapfJivas

a7ro8eL^a)fjLi'

..................

TO reAoy rov

[.

TO

Acar[a

Two
[

TTJV]

TOV

airo fJLrjvo? T]op7riaiov

.(TOpr)

E]OI THI EAA[IKHI]

10

TO T

TOV KpOTcova TOV

K.OLL

arjcrafjiov

XetTrovTa Kai airo TOV Sodrja-o/jicvov

/cat

KpOTO)vof VTrap^et avToif TO reAoy aj

apTafirj? Kai

15

crrja'afjiov

ov 5 av

%0VTO?

\-

vofjiov

eto-ayoa/jicv

a TOV
TO TrXeova^ov TOV TrpoKtjpv
rj

(rr)o~afjiov

rj

KpOTcova ov

Trpa^ovTai TO reAo? TO airo TOV o^cra/iou

Kpo[T\a>vos OQ-QV

o-r)o{a]iJLov

20

Kai,

Xrj[/jL]\lsovTai

Kai [TOV]

[8]

av

a(f)

ov

awo TOV
1

o-rjo~afjiov

dcofjiev

fjirj

eAatofz^]

oo~o[v]

[ejts

-y[v7)fj.a

25 r[ou

8ia]

KpoTwvof

TOV

TO

ro eTTf/c^rjfjLa TO icrov

o~rjo~a^iv\ov

o-TrepjjiaTOf

TW[V O]IKOVO/JM)V

TO IQ-OV

K.O.L

et?

/cat

eXaiov

8e TO KLKL TO KoX[oKv]v0ivov eXai

ov K[ai T]O airo TOV [Ajt^ou

o-a[fjLvot

fi

K[.

/jLTpr)[o~ofJi]v

/cjareyoya

ov TO

[TTL]

TOV KLKLOS Kai airo]

Xrj]fjL\^ovTaL oo~ov airo r[e

XajjL\(3avov

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

43
CoL 60.

iraKo\ov0[r)(rov(riv 01 rrjv a>v\r)v

PI.
KCLI

OO-QV 8 av e
rj

KpOTca[va

[(r]rj(rapiv(ov

[TLVOV
[rat

ot

K[a(rTov

vo/iou

...........
KIKL

rj

cXat]ov

17

TO KO\OKV]V

rj

.............

ov irpa^ov]

\atKrjv 6^

rrjv

7rpia^jLifOL

<rr)(r}aiJLov

...

err)}

TO
KOU KpOTwv tv
vrji

i?

wvrjv Trpof
cis

KOLl

KLKL

19

EN

\a\Kov KCU

pvcri?

rj

KO.L

TO cXaiovpyiov TO cv

TOV crTaTrjpa ofioXovs

TrXeta)

10

a0a)^fcr/xe

o ot/coi/o/xoy

7rapa\rjfji\lfTaL

yoprfyr)<Tei.

Ttjt

TO

/c5

eai/

8e

15

//3^t V7rap^L TO eXaiov

/3a.(TlXlKOl>

CYN NAYKPATEI

T(OI CAITHI
a

&

id

M'AfA/^3

a
7

KCU UKTT

8iaO(riv

20

lf TT)V
[ov]

reAoy ovOtv

a
o TOV Ca[iT7j}v a-/opao[a}s
KO.I

o"rjaa[^ov]

at 8ta0cr[tif

is

Trjv
]

ap

e[v]

T
G

25

XIII.

REVENUE LAWS

44

EN [THI AIBYHI IIAjCHI X CO PIC THC

[MENHC o-Tjo-afjLov] U 'E^

col. ei.

[/cat

ev

[eis

TTJV

AX]av8piai

[Aifivrjv ayopacras]

[TOV 8e
V

[vat

[aXXctiv
10

Set,

8ia

reAo? ovOe[v Trpa^erai o

ov]

[Oecriv

(KJX]puriJXVfft o

Trjt

tt

Kpormva ov
covrji

rr)L

vofJLO)}v

.]

[.

Set.

K.aTpyacrOrj\

yoprj-y-qo-ofjiev

ap[.

e]

.]

ov reXof TO yivvptvov airo

TOV KpOTGWOS V7Tap^L

TCOt

TJ)V

Aifivrjv ayopaa-avTL

EN

T6)I DPOCCOniTHI

arjcrafiov
15

KpoTcovos
/cat

^
y

'Ato

*B

coore ety TTJV ev

dt,a0(TLV OV

T\0f

o TOV Tlpoo-atTriTrjv

20

EN

T6)I NITP[I]6)THI
8c KpOTcova ov Set KaTpy{a]cr0Tjva.i

[T]OV

[v]

Ti)i

[Xcov]

25
CJol.

62.

[ov

COVT][L\

vofj[a>]v

TeXos

[KpOT]covof

T]O

-)(oprjyr}a-OfJLV

ap

ef

[aX]

'A

yivofJLevov a?r[o rou]

V7rap[t

TCOI

TTJV]

ay[opao-avTi]

[AOCOPIC]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

45

[EN TCO]I CEBENNYTfHI]

cojore cis rrfrv ev AXe^avSpctat]

[KCLL

ov Tf[Aoy ovOe

[8ia0](rii>

[rat

TOV C[@VVVTT)V]

O]

ap

[ayopaa-as

.]

KpOTUva ov Set

[TOV 8e

ya[(r0Tjvai]

TTJI

(o[v7ji.

^ aXXcov

<ro[fJL\v

xoprjyjj]

10

[VOJJKOV]

M0

apra^as

ov TO reXoy TO yivoiitvov a
7TO

TOV KpOTCOVOf V7Tap^t

TQ)l

TOV CefavvvTrjv ayopa&avTi

15

EN TOI MENAHCICOI
/ca[t]

(wore

cv Toif aXXoif

TOV MevSrj

ov[0t\v Trpa^CTCu o
o~i[ov]

T[O}V

ayopacras

ov rcAoy

vofjioi?

KpOTQ)Va

'B

O[v]

T[rjL

Set

KCL

co]vr)i

Col. 63.

aXX]cov
[

ap

20

.}(f>

ov TO reAfor TO yivo^v\Qv
OLTTO

TOV KpOTCOVOS VTTap^\L

TOV M.v[8rj(riov ayopao~a]vTi

TCOl

REVENUE LAWS

46

EN

TCOI B[OYQPITHI]
coo-re

[KO,I

ov

TTJV

V TOLS aXXoif VOfJLOL?

\Tf]V

10

ets

r[o]

re[Ao]y ovOe[v 7rpa

o TOV Boi^aLlpiTrjv ay{op]acras

KpOTCOVO?

&
^

(rrjora/jiov

.]

'An/

EN
15

TCOI A0PIBITHI
^
o-rjcrajjiov
/cat

e/c

aXXwv

ra)V

ap
ov TO reAoy ro
afro T.OV (rrjo-dfjiov
20

TOV AOplfiLTTJV

TOOL

TL

KpOTWVo[s]
coorre

/cat

rlous

i[y

aXXovs

T
Col. 64.

o[w

TeXof

o T[OV A0pi(3iTrj]i> ayopacras

EN

HAIOn]OAITHI

T[(OI

/<c

rcov aXA]<z/ VOJJLCOV

]

[ou

ap 'B

ro reXos TO yi\vojJLevov

[euro

TOV

crrjo-afjiov

VOJJLOVS

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
[TO>L

47

TOV HXtOTToXlTTJv]

qkyopacravTi TOV $

10

Kpo]

ov 8f

r[a)i>a

6[rjv]ai
[(TO fJiV

TTJL

[co]vr)i

a\\O)V

VOfJLWV

[ov TO] rfAoy TO yivonevov

15

[ro]i>

T(oi

KpoTwvo? virap^ei
TOV H\i07r{o}\tTrjv ayo

pacravTi

EN

TCOI

BOYBACTITHI KAI

BOYB[A]CT(OI
M
arja-afjiov
JC[CM]

20

'A

K TWV a\Xa>v

[Xop7jyr)}(TOfJiv [ap

Col. 66.

.]

[ov TO rejAoy TO yLvo[jJivov airo TO]V

[crrja-afjL\ov

[jSaortjTTyz/

vwap^eL
Acat

[TCOL

TOV

Boi>]

Bof[/3ao-rov ayo]

[pao~av]Tt TOV $e KpoTwva ov

[KaTp'/}a(r6rjvai ev
fj;

[TTJL

covrjt

aX[Xcov vofjuov]
.

[ov TO reAoy TO ytvofjievov airo]

r[6\v

K^poTcovof vTrap^ei T&I TOV]

Bov(3(a(rTi}r7]v

ayopa[o~a}vri

KGU B[oi;^3 a(rr[o]v

10

REVENUE LAWS

48

EN THI APABIAI
&

o~r)o~afjLov

*5

/cat

tocrre

'A//,

rouy aAAouy vopovs

ty

'B

apovpas

ou reAoy ovOtv 7r/>a[e]rat o

Apafiiav ayopaaas TO[V

TTJI/

Kporco

8e]

va ov 8ei KaTpya[(r6]r]vai, ev
20

T7?t

Xatv

xoprj'yrj(roiJi[]v

a)vr)[i\

ap

vofjicov

a\

T\/^

ou [ro reAoy ro] yivop.ev[ov wrap]

Col. 66.

e[i

EN
5

ran TTJV A]pa(3iai> ay[opaa-avTi\

T[COI CEGPJCOITHI

K[OLL

cocrre

eis

TO]VS a\\ov[s VOJJLOVS}

ov [TO reAoy o]vOev 7rpa[eTcu]

o [TOP C.0panT}Tjv ayopa[(ras]

[apovpas

[TOV de Kporcova ov Set Karep]

10

ev

y[ao-0r)vai
yrjaofjiev

TTJL

u>vv}i

[a]XXo)v

l]

V[OJJL\O>V

'Eu^

aprafias

ou reAoy ro yivoptvov

TOV KpOTCOVOS V7Tap^L

15

xP r

[a]?ro

TCOl

TOV CeQpatiTrjv ayopaa{a}vTi

EN

TCOI TANITHI
y 'AuA
crr]o~afJLOV

Ka[t]

a>o-T

is

T[O]VS

aXXovf

VO/JLOVS

OF PTOLEMY PHfLADELPHUS.
ov0v wpa^Tai

ov reXos

TaviTTjv ayopao~as

TOV

*A<o

20

KpoTwva ov &t Ka.T{p}ya(r

TOV &
Orjvat

id

[o]

49

cv

\opr]

avrji]

[rrji

Col. 67.

aXXwv]

[ef;

OV TO Tf[\OS TO yiVO}fJLVOV
GLTTO

j;i

TOV [KpOTtoVOS] VTTap

TOV TaviT]rjv

Tca[t

ayopa(ra[vTi]

[EN TO) I AEONTOIIOAITHI]

[/cat

VOfJLOVS

OV

TOVS aA[Aot>y]

eiy

a)]r[r]

10

T\0f OV0V

7r/>aera o TOV A.COVTO

TroXtTTjv ayopa.(ra?

TOV &

KpOTCOVa OV
fv

TTJL

id

2/t

$1

KO.

covrji

15

aXXwv

ap
ov TO TeXos TO
euro TOV
TCOl

KpOTuvo?
TOV A.OVT07roXlTTJV

2O

[a]yopaa-avTt

[EN TCOI 4)A]PBA9ITHI

[/cat

wore]

cty

rouy a[XXouy]

coi. es.

REVENUE LAWS

50

TeXoy o[v0v]

o]v
[7T/?afer]at

o TOV

<$>[ap(3ai]

ay}opao~a$ [&

.]

de K\po[T](ov[a ov 8ei KO\

[Tpya(r0r/va]t ev
[XOpijyijo'OfjLev

10

ap

[vofjuov
[o]v

[TTJI

aXXcov]
.

covrji]

TO r[eA]oy r[o

yii/o/ze]

VQV aiTO TOV KpOTCOVO? V

eL

TOV

[rjoot

<$>ap(3aL0i

ayopao~avTi

15

EN

TCOI

AHTOnOAITHI
M
M

o"rjcrafjLov

KpOTCOVO?
KOll

TT]V

20

(OO~T

1?

VTT
(f)V

8ia0O~lV

T7JV

V TOtS aXXoi

VOfJLOl?

ov TeXos ovdev irpa^eTai

o TOV ArjTOTroXiTrjv

pao-as

ayo

y 'A2v

MEM$[IN AEI XjOPHFEIfN]

[E]K THC A[IMNHC]

EIC

col. 69.

o~r)o~a\jj.ov

ap]

KpoTO)[vos

ap

ov reA[oy ovOev

'A2
.

.]

7r]/>a[^erat]

o Ttjv eX[aiKrjv TTJ\V e[v Me/n]

(j)t

ay[opao~as]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

51

[EN T(OI EPMOIIOAITHI]

10

CK Ttov aXX(o(v] VOJJLWV

/ecu

M'B

ap

XOprjyr}[(r}oiJLv

OU TO TfAof TO yiVOfJLVOV

'

rou

OTTO

TOV

TCOL

ayopacravTi KCU TOV Kpo

15

&i

ov

^ aXXwv
OV TO
7TO

ap

VOIJLWV

T\OS

TO yiVO\l^\VQV

O\

TOV KpOTWVO? V7Tap[(]l

rcoi

TOV

2O

ayo

JZpfJiOTroXiTrjv

pacravTi

[EN] TCOI O[SYPYrXI]THI

[o-rjo-a/jLov

'Ao)[.]

id]

[TOV 8c KpoTcava] ov

[KaTpyacrdrjvai
[vrjL

coi. 70.

ev]

yopriyqa-oiJLe}v

8c[i\

TTJI

[co]

a[X]

[Xa)v

vofunv ap]

[ov TO TfXof TO
[OTTO

[ei
[TTJV

TOV KpoTcovos \nrap}

TCOI

TOV Ovpvy\i}
10

ayopao-avri]

REVENUE LAWS

EN

T6)I HPAKAEOnO[AI]TH[I]
'B

id

cnjcra/jLOv

K TCOV ttXXwV

KCLl

VOfJLWV

ap 'Bw

Xoprjyr)(TOfJLv

ov TO TeXof TO yivojJLvov

15

TOV

CLTTO

(TTjaafJiOV

TOV

TOOL

VOL

20

TOV

KO.L

ayopacravT[i]

ov Sei K.aTepyaa{0\rivaii ev
^oprjyrjcro^ev

covrji

rrji

'

[e]^ [a\]Xa)v
Col. 71.

[ov

TO]

ap

vofj,Q)v

reAoy TO [yLvo^v]ov airo

[TOV K\pOTcov[of VTrap^]cL root

[ro^]

HpaK\[o7roXiTrj]v ayo

[paa-av\Ti

[EN THI] AIM[NHI]

[o-rjo~a}fjLov

[KpOTCOVOf
[KOLL

[^

ti

.]

.]

coore ety TOVS aXXovs]

ov reAoy ovOev]
10

'-

y
jyj

irpatTaL o TOV
TTJV

ayopacras

o"r)crafj.ov

'H'J

EN TWI AOPOAITOnOAITHI
15

roz/

5e KpOTCova ov Set

KCL

53

Tpyao~0rjvai

o>

rrjt

a\

xoprjyrjo~ofJLv c

vrjt

*B2

Xcov vofjuov ap

ov TO TeXof TO

VOV

O.TTO

yivofji

TOV KpOTCOVOS
TCOI

2Q

TOV A0/)o
ay[o]pacrai'Ti

[EN TCOI KYNOnOAITHI]

ap
[ou

TO reXor TO yivoptvov}

[aTro

rou

o-rjo-afjLov

coi. 72.

vTrap^ei]

[TMI TOV KvvoTroXiTijv}

KCLI

[ayop]qo~avT[i
[r]&)j/a

[vai]

TOV Kpo]

ov Set ^aTtpyao-Or)

[.

10

.]

EN TCOI MEM^ITHI XOPH

THCOMEN EK THC AIMNHC
(Trjo~a.fJLOV

ap 'Bu

KpoTcovof

ap

'B/3K

ou TcXof ovdev Trpa^eTai

o TTJV eXaiKrjv TTJV
TCOI

Mfft^tTT/i ayopao~a?

EN THI 0HBAAI
a
KpOTCOVOf

U MAcOK

15

REVENUE LAWS

54

0)(TT

/Cat

lf

ev

loth
hand.

AIAlTPAlMMA
TPAnEZCOfNl
L

Col 73

ln"a>Aoi;fi]ei>

'

ra? Tpair^as

Kara

7rapa[

The
TrapaXrf^rovTai 8e

Col. 74.

3a<TtXiK[(a]v
K.O.00TL

/cat

ot

/cat

OLKOVO^JLOL

wapa TWV
T[YJ\V

rest lost.

TTOLVT^S
]

ev

TOLLS]

7roAecrti>

rj

[.

.]

-I

rrj\v

rest lost.

KcofJLai?

tav 8e
[TCOL

.............................
The

[at

aAAwt
'

Col. 75.

TI]

[r/o]a7reaj/ yeypafTrrat]

pa[

oao

7rpag"g\pVTes

/caTa/3aAAoyra>|V ra

]vcri

ot

/cat

rpaTrefyu, ^acrtAt/cat
evrjv

....... ]v

8e TOLS rp[a7T^iTaif Trapa]

[TOV fiao-L}XiKOv

TCOI>

TjfJLepav

[.

.]

/cara/3aA[Aoz/ro)i/]

................... X]a
c[ .................... ejav

apyv[pi

VTT[.

fji

rpairefav rjyopaKo[Ti KaO e/cajor^v

e^ejcrro)

/LIT;

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
}LV

77

55

.................... \v

/ioAv[S

I0

The
[

.............. ]a-TCL
Kat

.]KILLOV

...........

rest lost.

Trapao'^payi^ea'dco 8e o rjyopaKQ)? TTJV Col. 76.

Trape^TO) orav 8

Tpa7T^av ayopacras

o] TTJV

7rL7rapapi0/JLiv
KCLI

TOV \a\Kov Trapa

r)

irpos

TOV TjyopaKora

rr]v

rpaireav

eat/

<TVVTO. 5

8e a\t}(rKrjTai

........... ](TTp(r[da) .................... Jan

..........

...........

.........................

a[ .........................

8]i8oTo>

irpos

v[

The
[

.......

................

an av

rrjv

ypoL^rjL]

rest lost.

iravra ^OL\KOV 8i8ovat ^p-rj^anei

an 8 av

10

ypoL<^\r]i\

Col. 77.

irav apyvpiov VTTO\O

............ ]ov 8ct TOV ^aA/cof 8o0r]i>ai TOV

................ ]o 8iaypa<f)TQ) 8c eis TO (S[ao-]iXiK[o]v
............... a}yopa.LOi Kat OL ye[ ..............

................. ]ov Kai OL A[ ...................

................ ffJLTTOpCOV ...................

[yew
[

The
ra>[

................

]rj

rest lost.

88aviKvai avTOVs

7Tt

OL

T[.

8e8avi

.]

Col. 78.

REVENUE LAWS

56

Kor[f

firj]

,]vTf

e[

The

a7ro8e[

lines lost.

The
Col. 80.

rest lost.

av[

NOMOC AEKAT[
ot

Taxrav avrgvf

7riaJLvoi

/cat

K.OLL

T{

]cov

TO)[

[][

The
ran

Col. 81.

TOV

rest lost.

ir\OL(>[v
VOfJLOV

]6w Se ev
5

]fjir)L

o OIKOVO\ILO$

T[

r)fjiep[ais

KCLI

apy[

KCLI

o avTiypa[(f)vs

Trap avrois

vofjicoi

TCOfJi

]i

Tovf

The

AC[.

rest lost.

About 4

Col. 79.

aXXa

aTToypa^acrdaxrav

]os

TT[I

wpoio'Tao'Bai

v[

rest lost.

avrov

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
]

57

TCOV

Col. 82.

o[

avrois K

irpa[

KCU OV[
r)

]fJLVOV

TO(
fJLTJ

The

rest lost.

]ap X rjo[
]

rats

M(TO/)I
TOVS

*c[

}v

01

Col. 83.

OL\[

GOTO

]l>OfJLl>OV

/cat

Xonr[oi]

7rava[
o]

de

8[

KO[

rov Karq[
10

}v

The

rest lost.

rov
o

Col. 84.

TJ]V

a)[vr)v

rrjv covr)

aj/]rty/)[a]0e[i;]y

KCLL

of

7r/oaar[a> Trapa TOV TIJV wvrjv

I

^OV]TOS

/cat

REVENUE LAWS

58

eKacrTOL

]epo?

V TCOi

]q.L

fj[

.............

VO/JLCt)[t

.......

8tKT]i\

a7ro8an

]rj

VlKr)0l

(T\VV TOlf T7j[v WVrjV t\OV(TL

]THCIC

]crav Trj[

The
Col. 85.

rest lost.

7rm/4 ......

...... }av TO re[

r[ ....... efyovri. r[
a(Ti\ ..... o 5

fiao'iXtKOi' 7ra[

Sidoordo)

]ov

v ecrrw TOV

..........
]eOTyo4 ............
vavreiav

]v

]HCIC TEACO[N .....

T\Ci)V

10

}7TLTlfJiOV

ray

O(j)iXoVTCi)[l>

aTTO/eypa/il/te^

KCOfJLTJL

0V

Oi[

The
Col. 86.

]TL

rest lost.

KO[

]r)-yfj.a[

fjLTj]i'os'

Me^6t/o[

jicrrt
]i

a(f>

eAcaor

irpoevres Kar[

X
]

aXot VTrep avr[wv

UTroreXecri 7rp[

]s

}av
]g
}

01

7Tl

TOV 8LOlK[rjTOV

8LOtK7jT7jf[

'/KaXoVVT[f
KOLI

}eis

rrjf wvrjs

]icoray r)r[
]7TO[.

.]

OO\

]a,TUKrav

}(TV

a(f)

OV[

e[

r[

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

59

10

/3a<rt[Aea

TOV

OLTTO

a^royypa(f)rjKva.[L

a\\[

K TOV diay[

KCU

The

rest lost.

MJ
KOLL

].

IS

oi

TOV XlVOV

ra,[.

K[

]o[.

[.

.]rjvcu

Xivov

I-

4th
hand.
Col. 87.

,>a(.
.}KCO(.

.]

.}

LVO
[.

.]vf

TOV (3a(riXiKov

apovpa?
avr[

]TO>

KCLI

tav 8e ov[

VTO>

lf

U0at/ro>[.
lf

TO

]ia

virjpa Acara[

]ro)

T[.

/Lie

.]

.]

7r[a}pa['

.]

I0

h 'A
a>t.

KCLI

\va

The

rest lost.

Col. 88.

7TOL

60

REVENUE LAWS
K re

vrai

TTCO

]ay 8
tf

av

jroxrai/

10

r[.

.]

jewy eAcaar[
}v 8e XOLTTCOV
ri^z/

Col. 89.

KOLL

ir]pos

T*

eaz/

/XT;

7rapa8ei]yiJLa o

8e

re OLKOVO^JLOS

K[

Acara

jwra yiveg-[
]

7TL

TO

The

c[

7rapa8i[

Si

10

e[

r{6\

(njfjLaLveorBco

]ffcr0a>
]

rcov

cav 8e

/3[

rest lost.

rest lost.

ic[

r[.

rt/L4-

o rer[.

The

.]

.]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

61

Col. 90.

Trapa8i[
}v

[lev 7rap[a]8o[

]V

UTTOV TGJV

]/xa

wpos TO

ai>[

ira[

]vy ira[
]va-if
Tf)]?

K[

8lOlKr}CT[a)$
Acara[

]Kpi0r)i

The

rest lost.

rov OLKovo^Jiov

r[

Col. 91.

]COVTO.I
>

T\0

OVOfJLa

v TCOL

TOV

fJL7T[opOV

KOIT[

]a)i

KO.I

v]<j>avTa{.}

ci[

7rava[
T[

The

/Cat

rest lost.

llth

7TGU[

hand.
]

K T7? y

av[

The

rest lost.

Col. 92.

REVENUE LAWS

62

cw C^VVV[TOV

12th

Co*

KOLL

93.

as TWV
5

5[e

etf

HrjX]ov<riov

$VVVT[ .......
Trept

0w

CTriOaXaao'iav

f4v [avrov o ^}a<jL\vs

r[

5tayi/&)[o-erat

eLcnrpaacrea]

8e T[ ....... }v

............. TO
............. ]TO[
..........
........... TOV
............. }VOVT(DV

K[
[

10

The

rest lost.

Col. 94.

V7royeypai4fj]evr]?

]V

TOV LO~TOV h K
TOOL

(r}vv
]v

TOV

TpLrjpapxrjfjiaTL

Kai yeipwfjia ACT[.

L]CTTOV

/ce

TVXIG)[

KttL

The

rest lost.

.]

ra

raA[ ...... ]v(ri

[

10

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
Col. 95.

<TO>T(

re[

OL

117

<TQ>[

H /3-c

}V(TI

pK

\~

H pTT
]pl
re[

XlVOV TO

reAo?

]o

10

Ta\av

]r)<rov(rt

The
0(ro[v]
TCO[L

rest lost.

8 ay

oi]KOVOfJU0i

Col. 96.

7rapa[
TlfiTJ?

7jy[opa}KOT<0i> ro[.

The

rest lost.

OLK]OVOJJLOV

KOLL

avny[pa}(f)a>s

K.O.L

T[.

.]

col. 97.

jcrcw

jevrey rov
ty

cTTt

7*

H 'A

AjAe^aj/ 5

REVENUE LAWS
[8pei

Xaficov rrjv XLVO[

anvaiov

}v

]vois
10

Ka.0[

TOIS

}r)V TOLL?

0~V[

is

TO (3a[o-iXiKov

o~\TaXVTos

y[

]opaiov X[
LS

The

]a
}v

\-

fJL

V
OL

\-

\-

TO reXoy

KO,T[

LKOO~Tr)l>

TWV

}wv ir
v h
]a
]

TT[

}lf

KCLL

TO {3acriXiK[ov

a[

The
10th

av Ka6{

]KO

f yLTwvwv

ocrov

TWV

rest lost.

aXXwv a v

}a>v

10

av

]e

qve[

}v

Col. 98.

8e

rest lost.

].

.[.

.>

TO

09
]{oi

ev raty)
(TVv[.

OL

KcoX[

.....

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

65

7ra/>(.

hand.

<7ur[.

The

rest lost.

lOth

hand?
T0[

Col. 100.

a[

(T\OLVl[

The

rest lost

About 6

Col. 101.

lines lost.

]cup

=c

7Tl

The
[.

.]

a\\[.]tv

rest lost.

Col. 102.

T[

ov av{

TOV

1(TO[

TOV
TV\ia)l> 6V TOV
TifJirj

Xivov

[.]v[

7rpo<rK(f)a\ai[

to

AIOCn[
The

rest lost.

REVENUE LAWS

66

On

Col. 103.

]lfJLVOl TT)V

epiKwv ra

fj,v

r[au]

e/c/cet/xe^wt

CTTI

T0)[i
[

]ei>ou

10

T[COV

^[

o]0o[v

TTJ[L

TCOJJL

TO \ivov

a\Xa

TOVTCOI \prjcrovTai TOV

.la/itari

..... ]ovfj.evcov

.V ........

K.OLI

[{$\V<TCri[v}u>V

KOLI

Tr}paovTai 8e
V".

TOW

[TlfJLr)]v

ev
5

the verso of Cols. 99-100.

fj,ey

TifJirjo-ecos

TT[

7rapaKa[

TWV 5e

ai>8[

iTrrj

Tes
VTO.I

The

On

Col. 104.

/cat

ra

rest lost.

the verso of Cols. 98-99.

aw

avTaevs

.Taxrav
rav ran
8e
KCLL

fJLiq-Ka[

TTOLTpoOev K\ai TrarpiBos

.........
[/cat

TOVVOfJLO.

Trotay TroAecoy

e]/c

............ ]cri ra reA?;

]az/[ ................
o-(f)payida

TTOCTOU

e[

The

On

Col. 105.

the verso of Cols. 97-98.

raA]ai>ra irev

[r
[.

rest lost.

.]

oaf

ro 5e

eic

Tre/iTrrfoj/]

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
01

67

TOV[

TOM

fJL7T[

rwarav

\oiirov

01

LO

10

The

On

KCU

ravra
[.

the verso of Col. 97.

Cd.

ioe.

TOV

r[

.]av 8e rrji[

..... }rat 01
...... }o~av irpos
[

TWV

r[

10

V(f)Qv{T

The

On
ra

rest lost.

fJL7TOplO)l

rest lost.

the verso of Cols. 95-96.

T\r)

TQ3V

ov av
OL7TO

Col. 107.

vofJLo[v

TTJf

Tl[

TCOV KCLT

REVENUE LAWS

68

ov

TOVS

ay

7T[

10

<f)V\[

]ocr[

The

Frag.

rest lost.

Tops of columns.

1.

(a)

]KOV

(b)

TO

(d)

-ypv

]a>v

TTi[

]av Aetay 8ta[

]

ev

eav 8e

rrj[i

]<rrjTCU

]pot

VOfJLOV

ev T0)t

v[

u]crre[/oaiat
TL[

air[

TtfJLTJV

a,7roy[

7Tl[

cocr[

TOVS

Trap O.VT[

^[

[Y]HEP ANA$O[PCON

TO

K TOV

]8ev T[

]ei/r[
]

]7rcoXa[

e/cacrr[

]Xr)

aov
ere

OF PTOLEMY PH1LADELPHUS.
TOlf

(/)

(g)

TOV
}V(TIV

KCU Oca

](/>ov

ca{

yp]a<f)r)i

CC7r[

]oia[
]<r<r{

]*[

(TV[

IO

KO[

Frag.

Tops of columns.
blank

(a)

jecoy

]v

a?r[

lrot>

OTi OUAC

]ra[

(/)
TlfJirjV
]

TOV

VOfJLOV

a[

VL^ofJifi^

7TlKplv[

eav
}

KCU

l(TT[

TJ]V

f^ovra

(ovrjv

]pOV/JLVO)V T(OV

T[

cav 8e av[

KCLL

TTJV]

]/ie[.

}/JL
]

.}v

firjvt

fJLTJVl

KO.I

\[ota^

Xoftt^[
K0[

Kd[

2.

REVENUE LAWS

70

(g)

]fiov

(h)

.]

[.

ve[

jots-

>

blank

(i)

14
/cat

]e/o

oi

/cat

ttTTO

]a

Frag.

reAoi>[.

Tops of columns.

3.

(a)

KO[

}r]L

(b

Aeta[

]$

]/c

avro[

5ou[

jtort
]?//

J/[

Middles of columns.

Frag. 4.
(a)

]<rrou[

(b)

](f)(rdaL

}<jav

10

]z/cot

]fnj

e/caoroy
7r\i[

\afjL^a[v

}rofj[

]ety
]y

7rp[

5e/ca[

}ov

/car[

yj)ova>i[

7r]trt/io^

}crTpa[

(c)

oi\KovofjLOV

]rov

KCLT[

v]ofjLapxr)t
]v

T[

]TOV[

]v

rj[

TO (3a[(rt\iKOv

roty

]vTU

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
]ot

(d)

(/>

7r(

VTO

}Ticra[
}rji

a7ror[

}OL

airo[

fJL\]

jrer

*a[

Vow

ay[

ao-a>
Iff

IO

(i)

irapa rwv

viav[

}s

TOV

}pcu? r[

]V

TOV[

]TOV

c[

ayo[pa
oi

]crro[

]of

OTi

(k)

blank

(/)

a[

10

TO[

7rapa[

(fn)

M.]

/cai

M]e<ro/)r;

to

(;/)

ra

blank

REVENUE LAWS

72

?
10

Frag.

]coi

Middles of Columns.

5.

}v

(a)

r]

twonoi

K[

}poy TOVS

e[

}ai

(b)

avTiy[pa<f)

rrjt

]rjv

avr[

lara

]r)f

airoypl

}(rai

Tr/ooecr

ev[

(c)

]pa ra[

(d)

7r/oo/3ar[.

jot
]

TO[

TOLS

a]\Xoi?

av[

Frag.

TT}[.]

Bottoms of columns.

6.

(a)

M.

(b)

.]

blank

r[o]

7rapaK[.

.}

air[

eyyvovs

]aAety

KOLL

7r[

OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.
]

73

TOV OlKOVOfJLOV
Kara rpifirj

10

y]yvov irapa

T0

]o

]av 8e ot
]

(d)

Kdt

\tqs

TOV KaTp[y]ov
}KICU

KO[

TO
(A

TOV VO

M-W

a[

irapa

]rj

]<f)OV
}

TO

TCOi

TOV

TT[

joro) TOV
]

)8[

Jro[

]eta

Scot

firj
fJLTf]

lop

aAAoi

}v

ye[

8 av{
10

(f)

<TV[
}TJL

]V

TO re eroy KCU
KO.I

o]j/<tyta

}CTLV

TTJV

/cat

r)n[.

[.

.]e[.

KWfJirjV
.

.]

.]$

7rapa[
TTJV

10

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

USED

IN

THE COMMENTARY.
A
B
C

D
E

cols. 1-22.

cols.

23-37.

cols.

38-72.

cols.

73-78.

79-107 and Fragments.

Lumb. or L. Professor G. Lumbroso.
Prof. Lumbroso's Recherches sur 1'e'conomie politique de 1'Egypte sous
L. Rec.
:

cols.

'

les

Turin, 1870.
'Les papyrus grecs du Muse*e du Louvre et de la Bibliotheque Impe'riale,'
Notices et Extraits, vol. xviii. part ii. Paris, 1866.
Lagides.'

L. P.

M.

Professor

P. P.

P. P.

'

J. P. Mahaffy.
Flinders Petrie Papyri,' edited by Prof. Mahaffy. Dublin. Part
Part II. 1893. Part II is meant unless the contrary is stated.

The

'

App.

Appendix

to the Flinders Petrie Papyri.'

I.

1891,

Dublin, 1894.

Rev. M. E. Revillout.
R. E. Revue dgyptologique.
Wilck. or W. Professor U. Wilcken.

W.

Akt.

Prof. Wilcken's

'

Aktenstiicke aus der Koniglichen

Abh. der Kon. Akad. der Wiss. zu

W.
W.

G. G. A.

'

The

Bank

zu Theben,' in

1886.

Flinders Petrie Papyri

'

in Gottingische

Gelehrte Anzeigen 1895, No. 2.

Prof. Wilcken's forthcoming Griechische Ostraka.'
'

Ostr.

A. E. F.

Prof. Wilcken's review of

Berlin.

'

An

Alexandrian erotic fragment and other Greek papyri, chiefly Ptolemaic,'

by B.

P. Grenfell.

(In the press.)

Numbers enclosed

in brackets

refer to columns.

COMMENTARY.
[1.] 1.

ON

the formula and the correction see Introd. p. xix sqq.

was written by the first hand. But if so,

It is possible that o-corrjpos

absolutely certain that he wrote it as a correction, for o-oon/pos not

only projects at the end of the line, but is written in smaller and more
cursive letters, especially the T, which lacks the right-hand portion of the
it

is

cross-bar.

There

is

no other instance of r written thus

in

[1]-[15],

very far from proving that o-torjjpoy must have been

written by another scribe, since [1]-[15] are written in a hand even
more formal than most hands in the papyrus, and we cannot say what

though

this

is

hand would be. But though on palaeographical

alone
even
a
moderate degree of certainty is unattainable, on
grounds
other grounds there is a strong probability that the writer of O-WTTJPOS
this writer's natural

B and C were
different person from the writer of [1]-[15].
corrected in the office of Apollonius the dioecetes of the Fayoum, see
was
notes on [23] i and [38] i, and it is therefore likely that

was a

even possible that a note stating this before

has
been
but
fact
the
that the papyrus begins with the opening
lost,
[1]
formula is not likely to be a mere coincidence, though see note on

corrected there also.

[73]

i.

Still if

It is

was corrected

in Apollonius' office, the

presumption

favour of the corrector here being different from both the writer
of [1]-[15] and the writer of [16]-[22] and the few corrections in A,
is all in

when not

been written by

made by

the two scribes themselves, may all have

the corrector of C, who in addition probably inserted

clearly

[31] 21-25, the only correction

themselves.

in

B
2

not

made by

the writers of

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

76

The

three words, which

first

[15]

the headings, e.g. [5]

4,

than usual, have been printed

in

are,

10, written in larger characters

like

capitals.

end is quite discernible; the vestiges at the

with
are
consistent
nroAe^aiou, but that is all.
beginning
the
should
expect
year to be mentioned, cf. [24] 2, but
3.
2.

riroXe/xaiou at the

We

the papyrus is hopelessly effaced. The eponymous priesthoods were

probably not mentioned in [24], so that it is not likely that they

were mentioned here.

This section perhaps refers to a second auction after the
cf. L. P. 62
[3] 14-16, and Josephus,

[2.] 1-4.
a>*rj

A.

had been already bought;

J. 12. 4. 4.

-n-coXeiy
see note on [13] n.
so
far as they can be traced, are
discussed
in
A,
subjects
in
the
whole
on
chronological order.
arranged
[2] is concerned with

3.

fiv

cannot be the end of

The

do with the relations between

and
tax-farmers:
the outgoing
incoming
[9]-[15] 9 with the conditions
under which the new farmers and their subordinates entered office
the auction

[4]-[8] apparently have to

[15] 10-16 with the collection of taxes: [16]-[20] are concerned with
The last three
the final balancing of accounts.

the monthly and

headings,

a-vyypcKfxav,

Karepyav,

and

eKK\rjrot

\povoi,

stand

somewhat

chronological order is also observed in B, and in [44]-[48]

apart.
of C, where the subject is the manufacture of oil but in [39]-[43],
regulations concerning the oil-producing plants, little order of any kind
;

is

traceable,

and [49]-[56] are arranged on a

different system.

The

antigrapheis appointed by the oeconomus shall take

charge of the revenue payable to the different companies of tax'

[3.] 1-3.

farmers.'
2.

Cf.

salaries in

[12] 2

which

and [21]
ot

4,

both passages referring to payments of

Subperhaps reappear.

Karaorafleires avnypafais

ordinate antigrapheis appointed by the oeconomus and antigrapheus,

with other duties, occur in [46] and the succeeding columns, cf. [55] 21,
and an antigrapheus TTJS wi^s appointed by the oeconomus is mentioned

Not only are the subordinate agents or

the oeconomus and the antigrapheus (himself the
in [54] 20.

oeconomus) called

antigrapheis,

but

even the

representatives of

ego of the
tax-farmers appoint
alter

COMMENTARY.
antigrapheis, see [54] 16.

77

remarkable that the

It is

/ScurtAuct; Tpaircfa is

A, although the money payments were made to it,

Of course mentions of the bank may
see [31] 1 6 note, and [56] 16.
have been lost, though the columns dealing with the 8ioAoyto>ios are
But the explanation is, as
suggests, that A deals
fairly complete.
never mentioned

in

with the tax-farmers

See also note on

rpa-ntfav.

4-7.

the government officials the

banks are discussed in D, the biaypa^a

in their relations to

relations of the officials to the

[7] 5.

The

[4] 6-10,

is

position of this fragment, as well as the corresponding one

uncertain, except in so far that both belong to the first four

columns.
[4.] i. Possibly a reference to arrears of taxation, which were to be
collected in thirty days cf. [6] 2.
:

i
If they are discovered to be in debt to the Treasury, those
-3.
secured their condemnation shall have a share in exacting the
'

[5.]

who

payment.'
2.

If KaraSiKao-afierois

be correct, the

much

8 is written

smaller than

hand, and is more like a-. Possibly this section has

something to do with the informers, who were rife in the next century,
see L. P. 6l. 1516 ^aAiora 8e riav <rvKO<pavT(iv tin.\*ipovvTu>v reAtorooy
the usual

8 in this

(so the facsimile) auroi re Trapa(pv\aa<r6c KCU Tracri TOIS jcara /lepos Siaerrei\aar0f irtpt T(av avToiv /^ITJ Trapepycoj.
vTTap\(Tca is more than a mere

equivalent for eoro>, cf. [17] 11 and [28] 10, and the meaning perhaps
is that the persons in question were not only to join in
exacting the
payment, but to keep a share of it.
4.

AI[ErnfH]2l2 would

just

fit

the lacuna:

cf.

L. P. 62 [3]

6.

The

which has
appointment of sureties is not decreed by any provision in
been preserved, unless [9] bears on that subject ; but the sureties are
mentioned several times. The heading is here a substantive in the
nominative, as usual
[20] 13, [21]

2,

cf.

[14]

in [28] 17 ; the infinitive

genitive in Fr. i e.
'

It

shall (not ?)

payments from those who

thirty days.'

[15] 10, &c.

and [31] 17: the

fij

[6.] 1-3.

2,

The

genitive

is

found

in

with vntp in [24] 14; with

alone in [26] 18, [30] 20; vittp with the
infinitive

be lawful

for the tax-farmers to receive

collected the arrears, even

if it

be within the

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

78

The term

is new; from
[8] 4-6 it appears that
and
that their services were required
they like the \oyfvrat had uTnjpeTcu,
when the o>wj was changing hands. Cf. [19] 13, where tTriAoyeuo-is
probably means supplementary collection of taxes/ i. e. collection of
arrears.' Assuming /xrj to have been lost before eeoro> at the end of [5],
the sense may be that the tax-farmers were allowed thirty days in
which to collect arrears (cf. [4] i), but the arrears had to be paid not to
the tax-farmers but to the oeconomus direct, cf. [18] 17 and [19] u.
i.

01

fm\oyfv<ravTfs.

'

'

On

this theory,

fxerois, cf.

2.

[8]

sense being that

we should expect TreTrpay/xareufxerois, not irpiaM. suggests that 1-3 are complete in themselves, the
the new tax-farmers might receive the arrears left by

however,

their predecessors, but not until the thirty days had elapsed in which
the outgoing tax-farmers might settle their accounts. This gives a more

But instances in the

satisfactory meaning; cf. L. P. 62 [4] 10-12.
a
of
without
a
section
connecting
particle are rare,
beginning
papyrus
and there is no instance of such an ellipse of a verb after /xrjSe.

The

irpa/cTcop is

never mentioned in the Rev. Pap., though the

office

2, and Leyden pap. Q. 2. As Revillout

has pointed out (R. E. ii. 140), his services were only required when
some extraordinary payment, e. g. of a fine or arrears, was made. The
P. P. quite confirm this view. Then what was the relation of the Trpa/cToop

existed at this time

to

01 finXoyfvo-avTfs ?

see P. P. 42.

The

use of the aorist participle

is in

favour of the

term not being an official title cf. [52] 20 01 Aoyeuoyres e. Aoyeurai,

and [18] 8 o CTH rrjs 8totK?jo-eo)s rerayjuez/os i. e. the 8101*777775, though
o ayopaaas is found as often as o rjyopaKco? rrjv a>vr]v.
i.

(The one copy shall be sealed and contain the names of

of the witnesses, the other shall be unsealed and they
and
)
shall enter in their books the names of the persons employed, with their
fathers' names and their original homes, and the nature of each person's
'

[7.] 1-4.

the

employment.'

and 18 ra

8e avnypafya o-wTrpoo-eora) ao-$payio-ra.

a general term including all persons connected
with farming the taxes, [12] 2, but with especial reference to the Aoyeurai,
Cf. 01 ra /SaaiXiKa Ttpayp.aTfvopfvoi, i.e. the
rTnjperai, &c., [10] 3, 17.
1.

Cf. [27] 5

2.

ot Trpayp.aTfvop.fvoi is

government

officials,

identical with 01

[20] 15.

In

01

-npayp.aTfvop.fvoi

TIJV

(avr)v

are

COMMENTARY.

79

Cf.
the subject is the tax-farmers; see [15] 16.
ypafaTuxrav
18.
The official document of the oeconomus
[54] 22 and L. P. 62 [4]
:

3.

a ypafo, [12] 3.
narpibos: Egyptians, as well as the foreign settlers, could be taxfarmers in the second century B.C. Lumb. Rec. p. 322. But TraTpiSos
is

points to the fact, already traceable in the Petrie papyri, that most, if
not all, tax-farmers in the third century B.C. were foreigners.
5. <t>opTi(i>v
[l]-[22] no doubt apply equally to taxes in kind and
:

taxes in money ; hence the brevity and indefiniteness of [15] 10-16, the
The fact that taxes in kind as well as
section dealing with irpais T\U>V.
in money are meant helps to explain the absence of any mention of the
royal banks (cf. [3] 2 note), which only received taxes in money, [31]
1

6 note.

But if these persons did not connive at it, they shall exact
from
the outgoing tax-farmers.'
the payment
1. Cf.
[21] 4-9. If there is a real parallel between the two passages,
[8.] 1-2.

may be

row-air

with

'

01 Karaoraflcyres (sc.

(rvvfiboToiv,
'

3-6.

not with

arriypa^eis

see [3]

2),

and

/XTJ

goes

ear.

Let the tax-farmers bring an

action,

if

they have any complaints

make

against the collectors of arrears or their subordinates in matters

connected with the farming of the taxes during the time in which they

to

were engaged

buying the

Ka\i(rd(t>o-av

3.

may

in

[21] 12

cf.

and [35]

3.

In

all

these cases the

word

be passive.

4. uTTTjpcrai in

see

tax.'

[12]

12,

[13]

2,

are always mentioned together with the Aoyevrai ;

and probably [11] 16 and [16] 12. They are

subordinate to the Aoyeimu and receiving two-thirds

pay ([12] 15). Cf. the ray/xariKoi virqpercu in Wilck. Akt viii. 2.
In [22] 2 01 v7TTjperowTs are all those connected with the farming cf the
taxes, other than 01 irpia/ievot.

distinct class,

of their

[9.]

i.

TTapa\a.p<a<riv

2. TO (fj.iropi.ov

that there were

cf.

the subject

[107]

some taxes

TO.

is

probably the tax-farmers.

which seems to show

fv efA-n-opiau TC\TJ,

specially connected with the t^nopiov.

Other-

wise one might conjecture that the notice was put up in the bazar as
being the most frequented place.
3.

Possibly e[v T]OH T[\O)ZH&H ... TO m]6cKaToi>, referring to the cyyvoi.

8o

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

62 [1] 13-15 cyy uous K.a.TaaTt\aov(riv ..... TCDI; e7ri8eK<moi>. But

and [56] 15 the amount of the caution-money has to be only
one-twentieth greater than the sum promised by the tax-farmers.
It is difficult to see any reason for the correction of the a in btKarov,
unless, because from the way in which it was joined to the K by the first
Cf. [31] 17 and [52] 24, where there are
hand, it might be read as a
equally unnecessary corrections, and not improbably [15] 15.
5-8. The middle fragment in this and the succeeding columns is
Cf. L. P.

in [34] 3

much

nearer to the lower piece than to the upper.

'

They shall appoint a guard for the inspectors, the taxand the guardians of the vouchers, and all others engaged in

[10.] 1-4.
collectors

the tax-farming
i. <t>vXa,Kr]v, sc. KdTaoTTjfl-ouo-i.
In the provinces the tax-farmers were
sometimes assisted by troops in collecting the taxes, Jos. A. J. 12. 4. 5,
and Lumb. Rec. p. 325. ^vXaxTj is used in Leyden pap. O for the office of
the <rvyypa(f>o<t>vXaK(s cf. (ru/x/3oAo<|>vA.acs here. But as the $0801 are found
in connexion with </>uA<mrai in App. II (4) 10, I prefer to take </>uAa/oj in
its ordinary sense.
The e$o8oi were important officials, judging by the
amount of their pay, [12] 18. Their title is still frequently found in
;

the Berlin Urkunden of the

Roman

period.

[10.] 8-[H.] 10. The structure seems to be as follows: (a) [10]

8-12, a regulation applying to the tax-farmers, 'The chief farmer and
his associates shall not receive any payments except in the presence of
the oeconomus and antigrapheus.' The penalty for disobedience is

probably that fixed in [11] 5-6. ()

regulation that the tax-farmers
should report what they received either to the oeconomus or to the
antigrapheus.
[10] 14-15 may be the conclusion of this rule, the
penalty for disobedience being fixed in [11] 7-10. (c) and (d), parallel
regulations for the e$o5<n and others, [10] 16-18 the penalty is fixed in
:

[10] i8-[ll] 3.
in the other places where the word is used
[10.] 10. Koivavfs
is
mutilated
or consistent with the commoner form
papyrus
:

the

KOtKttVOf.

ii. avcv: cf. [25] 6

and [30]

10.

through the hands of the tax-farmers

Payments
;

in

money

see [31] 14 note.

did not pass

The

presence

COMMENTARY.
of a government

official,

8t

but not the presence of the tax-farmer, was

payments of taxes.
Perhaps [a><ravro>s ie], and then fav

essential in all
16.

[11.] i. a[vi>cyK<t><ri]
[19] 5 note.
3.

There are great

a coin to have been

are too much, 50

cf.

[11]

7.

Perhaps 'pay as an avafyopa? see

difficulties in the

lost after TrcirrjKon-a

drachmae too

ri r[<of rAo>i>] itpafcuxrw.

little,

way

of supposing the

here and in line

10.

name

of

50 talents

so that the only alternative

is

50 minae, which M. would adopt. But (i) 50 minae seem an inadequate

fine, and when this amount is expressed, it is called 5000 drachmae, not
50 minae. (2) As the amount appropriated by the tax-farmers might
vary, we should expect a sliding scale, not a fixed sum, for the penalty.
(3) The custom of the papyrus, to which in A there is no exception, is
that where there is no article the number comes after the noun. Therefore on the whole, since this offence would be one of the most serious
which the tax-farmers or their subordinates could commit, I prefer
ir(vrriKovTaiT\ovv here and in line 10, though there is no instance in the
papyrus of a

fine larger

than

five-fold,

when

calculated in this way.

[11.] 11-17-

n. Perhaps
cf.

[12]

ovop.ara TrapaSoxroim, as

Mr. Kenyon suggested to me:

2.

17. The exact position of the fragment containing pafyevr in relation

to the preceding line is doubtful.
CTTI T?/I oorqi, cf.
[17] 13, Wilck.
'

If the oeconomus and antigrapheus discover any person

farming the taxes whose name has not been entered in the
they shall bring him to the king before he has been able to injure

[12.] 1-6.

employed
list,

any

in

one.'

ot 8e oiKovopos: cf.
[28] 12, where 01 8e
of the Greek, is necessary, and [96] 4, where
ypa</>us is corrected.
i.

4.

[/3A.a/3T/i/ai

collector, see the

TI]

Wilck.

o,

whatever we

01 8e oixoro/ioy

may

think

KCU o CUTI-

For an instance of an unlicensed tax-

complaint of the cobbler, P. P. xxxii

(i).

[12.] 11-18.
II. Possibly

ot

KaT\a<rra[6tvT(s, see

[3] 2 note;

and then

roiy

ev

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

82

13. Probably ir]oeio-0a) and corco 8c] in line 14. TheAoyeurcu,

or B
&c. were to be paid out of the sums collected. But nowhere in
is there any mention of a pio-dos for the tax-farmers, nor did they

receive a pio-Oos in the second century B.C.; cf. note on L. P. 62 [5] 3.

as the account of the 8ioAoyi<r/io?, where it would certainly have

And

been mentioned, is fairly complete both in [16]-[20] and [34]-[35], we

may conclude that the tax-farmers received nothing but the surplus
above the sum which they had contracted to pay to the government

The

see [19] 4 and [34] 13.

monopoly was
an

is

eTnyeznj/jia, it

there was hardly

any room

for an cTriye^/xa in
and even if there was such
doubtful whether they received it moreover they had

different

the sense in which

position of the contractors for the oil

it is

in

employed

and

B,

definite administrative duties to perform.

Hence they received a

fu<r0os,

[39] 14 note.
15. Cf.

been

lost

App.

(4) 5, 8 cos TOU JUTJVOS.

ii.

In 17 a

number has perhaps

cf. ec/>o8cot e*u.

'

of all the collectors required for each farm, and

and the guardians of the receipts, shall be drawn up
by the oeconomus and antigrapheus acting in conjunction with the chief
[13.] 1-4.

list

their subordinates

farmer.'
i.

(Kaarrjv

shows that

this

is

quite general and applies to

all

wat

throughout the country.

a.

<,x/3o\a:

[13.] 7~[14]

taxes:

cf.

cf.

i.

[21]

[15] 2 sqq.

i,

[52] 16, 24.

regulation forbidding certain persons to farm the

The penalty is fixed in line
sqq. 'Whoever

disobeys any of these rules shall pay 5 talents to the Treasury and shall
be kept under arrest until the king decides his case.' This is the only
passage in the papyrus where the absence of a law of habeas corpus is

conspicuous

employed

but

cf.

P. P.

iv.

(7) 5.

as a punishment, though

it is

Imprisonment was but rarely

no doubt implied in [12] 2 and

[49] 20.
It is possible that the corrector, whether he be the scribe
I think, another person, intended to alter TTOJJCTTJI to TTOIT; ;
as
himself, or,
But it is more likely
cf. for the omission of the i adscript [22] 2 note.

11.

ITJ.

that he wished to correct the spelling, and divide the word differently,
instead of 7ro|7jo-rji, though instances of the division of a word
7roi7?|o-jji

COMMENTARY.

83

between two vowels are not uncommon in B and C, e.g. [29] 17 ye!a>,/yoy,
In the division of words the practice of the scribes was
[54] 6 A<u|ot>.
to divide a word at the end of a syllable, except in some cases where the
last letter of a syllable was a consonant.
Thus we find [52] 10 uy>o<r|<r1

"npa(T(T((rd<i)iTav t

even

[56] 9

irpo<r\a-/y (\evros,

[36] 5 ypaji|/*arevt,

where

and probably

attracted to
the preceding vowel, Kara<r|ra0cis). On the other hand, the tendency to
end with a vowel and begin the next line with a consonant is shown by
ap\\<ai'(i)v

[21] 7

9,

[14]

[46] 4 Kpivr\0(a

ir(Trpa\yn<iT(viJL(voi,

The fragment

(cf.

46.

8,

<r

is

[30] 9 yypa|7rrai, [37] 7 yir|o-0ou, &c.

containing ]<oi> os[ and ]/3a[ in line

to be insufficient room for

has disappeared.

There seems

12.

'

[14.] 2-5.
farmers shall

auction
3.

Registration of chief tax-farmers.

Intending chief taxthemselves
before
the official who holds the
register

.'

apxu>v[fiv]

Wilck.

The verb

not found elsewhere in the

is

papyrus, but apxwj^cu] would be very awkward here.

there was no special TTCOAT/TTJS in Egypt, the auction
4. TOP TrooAowra
being held by various officials, though generally by the oeconomus,
:

[20] 12.

Cf. L. P.

62 [7] i9-[8]

4,

where

01

irooAourres

nomus and probably the

are the oeco-

/Sao-iAixos y/ja^/xareus,
[8] 13 of that
the
officials
who
hold
the auction are subordinate to the
papyrus
In pap. Zois it is Dorion, o yeroeiri/xeATjTTjs as well as to the Sioi/ctjTr/y.
JA>OS eTTifieA^TT/? irpos TTT]v cy\r]\lnv rrjs JHT/HKT/S, who holds the auction.

for in

Cf. the papyrus published by Rev. R. E.

was probably the auctioneer. In [57] 3

speaks

cf.

[53]

[14.] 9-[16]

vii.

40,

where the oeconomus

TrcoAou/ie^ it is

the king

who

8 note.

i.

9- [Px]
though there is no other instance of
a word divided in such a way that there is a consonant at the end
of a line and a vowel at the beginning of the next, except in the case
I

wvwi; suits the context,

of a word compounded with a preposition see [13] 1 1 note.

12. fieT[ayopa<rTji] is too long for the lacuna.
Possibly /mT[oAa/3jji].
16. 5i5axru/ appears to be a mistake for SiSou, unless the subject is not
o 8iyyva>fA>os, but ot KOUHDVCS.
:

[15.] 2-9.

'They

shall

be

ineligible for

becoming cither chief tax-

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

84

or

farmers,

or

associates,

sureties.

(Likewise)

crown

officials,

the

chrematistae, the eisagogeus

M. suggests taking

3.

00-01 TI

*c.r.A.

closely with the preceding lines,

no parallel instance in the papyrus of an unfinished line

in the middle of a sentence.
Probably a division-line between lines
ot
and
has
been
and
8e refers to the persons mentioned in
4
lost,
3
But
in
the
case
meaning of lines 4 sqq. is that oo-ot K.T.A.
any
[14].
but there

is

are not to take part in the tax -farming.

5.

The

tistae in

always mentioned in connexion with the chremaPtolemaic papyri see L. Rec. p. 184.
eto-aycoyeus is

7-9. Apparently a regulation forbidding a slave to take part in

farming the taxes. Though the slaves of the government officials are
cf.

included,

M.

Introd. p. xxxi, this regulation

was probably quite

general.

The tax-farmers shall exact from

[15.] 10-16. 'Exaction of taxes.
who are subject to taxation all the (taxes) in accordance with the
If they disobey this rule in any particular, they shall pay a fine
laws.

those

of 3 talents to the Treasury, and (twice ?) the amount of the deficiency,

unless they enter in their books within 30 days the taxes that are
wanting.'
i a.

irav

the meaning

remissions of taxation:

that the tax-farmers were to grant no

L. P. 62 [1] 9-13, where SnrAas would suit

is

cf.

the lacuna in line 12, as 8i7rAa is possible in line 15 here; and pap. in
P. P. App. p. 3, the complaint of Apollonius, a tax-farmer, against
ez;ei TOVS woreAets TOU
Philo, his associate, on avev TJJUCOU
[71730]
<|>uAaKi[ri]/cou
TToieirat.

Though
15. The
still

eis

TO

ibiov

KCLI

(In line 5 of that

a before ex

eAarroros (not

document read

eaurou)

uTro/x^Tj/xara for

is

doubtful, Traz/rfas TO, TeA]rj is impossible.

letter written above the line may be a.
But if it is

possible that the

first

hand had written

/XTJ

77,

it is

see [9] 3 note.

Balancing of accounts. The oeconomus shall hold a balancing

of accounts with the tax-farmers every month before the loth with reference to the sums received during the previous month
They shall
not add the sums received in (the current month?) to the instalment
'

[16.]

belonging to the previous month, nor take sums which belong to one
instalment and credit them to another, and even if one of the tax-

COMMENTARY.
pays back

collectors or of their subordinates

received from

85

(?)

the revenue of the farm, this shall not

sum which he has

be credited to

his

But when the next balancing of accounts takes place,

they shall add to the revenue of the month the amount which was left
over from the previous balancing, making clear the amount of the sum
separate account.

left

over from the previous period.'

[34] 9, [54] 20, and L. P. 62 [4] 13.

of the paragraph depends on what these sums were
which were not to be put down to the account of the previous month,
i.

oioAoyio>ios

8.

The meaning

cf.

but were to be carried on to the next reckoning. I conjecture that they

were sums received between the end of the month and the day on which
the oioAoy 107109 was held, i. e. (v ran i><[0ra>ri fzjjm.
9. The subject of the imperatives here, as in lines 10 and 17, is
probably the oeconomus and antigrapheus cf. line 15 with [17] 17.
10. For the meaning of avcupopa cf. [34] 7, [53] 24, [56] 17, pap.
:

31 TfTa^dat TI\V TrpcoTTjv avcupopav, at 8 avatyopai frac)(6r\<Tav in an

unpublished Petrie papyrus, and L. P. 62 [4] 4. That ava^opa refers to

Zois

i.

the monthly instalment of revenue payable

clear, but it is difficult to decide whether it

or the account of

by the tax-farmers is
means the actual sum

In spite of the two instances where

it.

quite
paid,

rao-o-to-flai

is

used and where actual payment must be meant, and [56] 17, q.v., I think
that ava^opa here means the account of the instalment.
For the taxes
collected were sent

eiy

TO

/3curiAtKoi>,

[28] 14 note, and the actual

payments

might be made on any day. The ava<popa seems to be the account of

the payments during a month added together.
11. These four lines are very difficult.
biopdova-Oai, cf. [56] 15, is the
term used for paying off the balance of the avcupopa, if it did not reach
the required amount. It is possible that Xafiuv refers to the ju<r0os of

Lumbroso.
which
shows
that the tax-farmers had
13.
[19] 3,
a separate, as well as a general, account with the oeconomus, and [54]
the Aoyeurai, see [12] 13-16.
eis

TO ibtov

ir[po<ro8ov]

cf.

12 note.
16.

It

is

not clear whether TO

Ttepiov

CK

TOV cnavto 5ioAoyi(r/xou

is

identical with TO irfpiov

TOU t-nav<a \povov in line 18, and whether one
or both are equivalent to tTriycrrj^a in the next column, i. e. the surplus
of the taxes actually received over the amount, or, as the ara</>opat were

monthly, over the twelfth part of the amount which the tax-farmers had

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

86

If TO vepiov refers to the same

contracted to pay to the government.
sum in lines 16 and 18, it means the surplus carried over from the
previous month as distinct from the npoa-obos or receipts for the current

month.

If

however, as seems probable, there

two cases, TO
the sums mentioned in line

TO -nfpiov in the

-nepiov ex rou

draw

is

a distinction between

8iaAoyto-/j,ou

may

refer to

8,
-nepiov
\povov would
the surplus left* over when the accounts of the last month were
In either case therefore TO vcpiov CK TOU cnavca \povov probably
settled.

while TO

K TOV cnav<i)

mean

means the
for

eTriyeznj/xa

cf.

[17] 14,

where

it is

probably used as a synonym

it.

1 6.
[17.] i-

the next

'But

if

the previous period has produced a deficit, while

surplus, and the oeconomus receives in full

month produces a

that portion of the deficit in the farm which was not covered by surety
from the surplus
But if subsequently a deficit occurs in the
.

farm which produced the surplus, the oeconomus shall exact payment of
the surplus which had been transferred to another farm, from the sureties
inscribed on the register of the farm to which the surplus was trans-

him restore the surplus (?), which was transferred

to
the farm from which it was transferred.'
to another farm, back
i. Three cases are contemplated: (i) 1-5, when a period of deficit
was followed by a period in which there was a surplus of the course
ferred

but

first

...

let

by the oeconomus we

are ignorant, but a balance of some

kind must have been struck, so that the sureties were not made liable
to be pursued

whole deficit (2) 6-9, when a period of surplus in one farm

in this case the surplus
coincided with a period of deficit in another
and deficit were allowed to balance each other, i. e. the surplus was lent
to the farm which required it, instead of the deficit being at once made
for the

good by the sureties (3) when the period of deficit occurred in the
farm which had produced a surplus, but had lent it to meet the deficit of
another farm. In this case the oeconomus had first to recall the surplus
(15-16), in order to meet the deficiency in the farm which had lent its
;

surplus.

By

doing so he of course caused the

deficit in

the other farm

to reappear, and it was therefore necessary to call upon the sureties of

that farm to meet the deficit (13-14). Cf. for this balancing of surpluses

against deficits L. P. 62 [6] 4-7.

3. TO

a8ieyyuoi>:

apparently a deficit might be so great that the

COMMENTARY.

87

it.
Yet in [34] 3 and [56] 15 the sureties have
to be one-twentieth greater, presumably, than the sum due from the
cf. L. P. 62
tax-farmers
[1] 13, where they have to be one-tenth

sureties failed to cover

The

question of the sureties and their relations to the taxfarmers presents many difficulties, see note on [34] 4. a&icyyvov is

greater.

apparently equivalent to aveyyvov, as there seems to be no difference

yyva<r0ai and Suyyvao-tfai, tyyvjjo-is and 6teyyyjjo-ts, wherever they
occur in the Revenue papyrus, L. P. 62, and pap. Zois.

between
8.

9.

Possibly (K r[ov TrcpiovTov], if TO itffnov is right in 14.

piece of a letter after ]a[ will not suit <f> therefore

The

There

will not do.

room

not

is

/ieTa0f/>ereo

for Karao-TTjo-ara) or KaTa/3aAAereo.

jo. tK [TTJS a]vr7jy is inadmissible,

nor

is

aSteyyuou the

word

lost in 15.

[17.] I7-[18] 9. 'Copies of all the balancings of accounts held by

the oeconomus with the tax-farmers shall be sealed by him and given at
once to each of the associates,
and the oeconomus also shall have
.

copies which have been

and he

sealed

by

all

is

lost after KO,

hough

those

who took

part

shall send the copies of the balancings

balancing,
month to the dioecetes and eclogistes.'
3. The letter after auros may be 17, and
.

if so, it

in

the

every

not certain that any letter

can only be
The word, whatever it
it is

t.

has nothing to do with /xaprvpas. e^era) cf. [27] 1 2. Each party

had a copy sea'ed by the other, after the manner of modern agreements,
as Mr. Kenyon suggests.
is,

6. aTrooreAAtro)

cf.

where it is opposed to btbovai. While

and therefore we may conclude that the

[51] 22,

aTTooreAAeiz; implies distance,

dioecetes and eclogistes were not always accessible to the oeconomus,

aiways to be taken literally, e. g. [36] 8. On the dioecetes,

bibovai is not

see note on [38]

3.

yAoymji> cf. [J7] 12 rots VTTO Aiow<robtopov Ttray/xcixns 6yAoyi<rraiy,

and Tobit i. 22 'Axicix 00 * ^ n v oivo^oos Kal tirl TOV ba.Krv\tov KOI BIOIKTJTTJV
:

9.

Kal

The

eclogistae were accountants or paymasters, who

a central office at Alexandria controlled by Dionysodorus,

eKAoyioTT;?.

probably had
and branch offices

One of these was probably the

country.
in
mentioned
P. P. 25, line 23, and 26, line 4.
Fayoum
The simple word AoyiorTjs however is not found in the Revenue pap. or
in the Petrie papyri, and in a papyrus of the thirtieth year of PhilaAoyioTTjpiof in the

in the

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

88

delphus published by Rev. R. E. 1882, p. 268, where he reads

Qf<avi AoyeioTTji 5ia Aiowa-o6o)pou TMV 2rpara)i;os uinjpercoj;, Wilck.

tells

me

the correct reading cf. [8] 4 note. The eclogistae are

not mentioned in the papyri of the next century, but cf. B. M. pap. xxiii.
41 for the verb eyAoyieo-0ai meaning 'pay.' Later, eyAoyiorrjs is used
that AoyeurTji

for a

C.

I.

is

'

tax-collector,'

i.

e.

\o-yevrrjs

cf.

the edict of Tiberius Alexander,

G. 4957, line 36.

[18.] 9~[19] 4. 'When the period for which the tax was sold
expires, the tax-farmers shall all come to the oeconomus before the
tenth day of the following month, and he shall hold a general balancing
of accounts with them, in which he shall state both the value of the

revenue received, and the balance which they have still to pay, together
with the sums which have already been reported as paid and the dates
of the payments, and whether from the sub-letting of the farm or other
quarters any debts are owing of which it is the duty of the oeconomus
to exact payment, and the remainder still due, and how much is each

and underneath the share of the debt he

shall write the amount which he has received separately from them or
the surety, with the dates of the payments, and the remainder still due
but if there is a surplus, the oeconomus shall set it down to the credit of
tax-farmer's share of the debt

the tax-farmers.'
IO. TtapecrTbMrav vpos

cf.

Xen. Cyr.

2. 4.

21.

7ra/>[ayei>e(T0a>0-a]v is

too

long.

found in papyri of the Roman period.

o<eiAo>o-o>, deal with the collective account of the taxKOI 7r<Hroz>-[l 9] 4 with the separate accounts of each tax-

13. ycvutos Aoyos

i4--[19]
farmers, [19]

i.
i

is

farmer with the oeconomus.

(i)

TTOO-OV

Both sections may be sub-divided into

of the tax-farmers [18] 4, corresponding to [19] i *at

cKaoroH rourcoy e7ri/3aAAei (2) the sums either already paid to the

the

liabilities

which he was responsible, [18] 15-17

to
corresponding
(3) the balance due to the oeconomus,
[19] 2-3
Kcti
TO
\omov
fav
TI
7rpo(ro<eiAaKriy, corresponding to [19] 4 ecu/ ri
[18] 17

oeconomus or

for the collection of

Tipa^ai,

even where taxes were paid in kind, the accounts

Trjs irpocrobov
of the tax-farmers were kept in money, see [33] 2-8, [34] 7-10, and
:

cf.

[53] 23.

8io/>0co<rao-0cu

cf.

[16] 13

and [56]

15.

COMMENTARY.
15. TOVTO

avcvr)vcyn<vov

apparently for TOVTO.

cf.

[11]

16. cnroirpafjiaTiav

that

I,
cf.

M. suggests

[19] 5 notes.
L. P. 62 [3] 17.

refers to the sub-letting of the

it

89

TJ&TJ

for

the lacuna.

L.'s suggestion (Rec. p. 324)

farms

is

a perfectly satisfactory

explanation of that passage, but if a-no^pa^a is right here and has the
same meaning, it is curious that there should be no other reference to

A, mutilated though these columns

this subject in

are.

the singular, because each tax-farmer had only one

eyyvov
P.
P.
see
xlvi, where Theotimus is surety for Philip, and pap.
surety
where
Thanoubis
is surety for Dorion.
The uvai which were sold
Zois,
[19]

3.

separately for each nome, see L. P. [1] i, [57] 12, 14, [60] 23, &c., were
subdivided among the different members of the company, each of them

being especially responsible for a

whole company was

62 [6] 14-15.
4.

irpoo-o^eiATjt

cramped.

The
:

cTnypa\lraT<t)

farmers

bank.

cf.

if

this

is

though the
members, L. P.

district, cf. [54] 12 note,

liable for the failure of

right,

one of

its

the letters must have been very

not the eyyvoy, but the tax-farmer.

subject
here the oeconomus only credits the surplus to the taxis

[34] 14,

But from

is made through the royal

appears that the payment is authorized by

where the payment

line 9

it

the dioecetes.
[19.] 5-16. 'The oeconomus shall report ... to the dioecetes; and
the dioecetes shall examine his books to see whether there is a surplus

from the other farms ; and if there is a surplus due from

to other farms, he shall balance the arrears against this surplus,
but, if there is nothing due from him to other farms, he shall order the
oeconomus to exact the arrears and pay them over to him when the
in the receipts

him

collection of arrears takes place.

The oeconomus

pay the arrears

pay them over on
and the dioecetes

shall

to the dioecetes within three days, or, if he fails to

demand, he shall be fined three times the amount,

payment from the oeconomus,

cf. P. P. 47. 9, and 122. 5 avevryKotufv CTTI TOV 8ioiKJjrrji>,
5. arcrcyjcaTO)
in both cases meaning 'report,' not 'pay,' and [11] 7.
i.e. the tax-farmer; cf. lines i and 4.
12. irpoo-o^eiXerat
While the oeconomus
cf. 01 e7riAoy;0-ai>rj
e7TiAoyuo-is
[6] 2 note.
was responsible for the payment of arrears not only from the taxshall exact the

.'

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

90

farmers but in some cases from the tax-payers ([18] 16-17), this is not
inconsistent with supposing that the actual collection of the arrears

from the tax-payers was

[30]

the hands of

in

01 eTriAoyeuo-avres

see note on

5-

15. eio"7rpaaTa>

i.e.

from the oeconomus, not from the debtor;

cf.

12.

[41]

'Any tax-farmers who

when he desires them

[20.] 1-12.
the oeconomus,

fail

to balance their accounts with

do so and summons them for

the purpose, shall pay 30 minae to the Treasury and the oeconomus
shall at the same time compel them to balance the account
The
oeconomus shall also give to each of the sureties an account of his
If the oecobalance, stating that the surety has paid what he owed.
nomus when asked fails to give the account on the same day or the one
following, he shall render himself liable to proceedings for malversation.
Balancings of accounts shall be held in the same manner by all officials
to

who

shall

3.

put up to auction any of the Crown revenues.'

re is written

Though

above

eis TO, it

ought

strictly to

come

after

cuioTivfTOMrav, unless a second fine has been lost.

1 1.

iravres

see note on [14] 4.

[20.] i3~[21] i. 'Concerning contracts. With respect to all conmade by the oeconomi or antigrapheis or their agents, being
officials of the Crown, in matters connected with
officials shall
., the
tracts

not exact any

payment from the tax-farmers

for

the contracts or

receipts.'
13. Cf. [30] 5

{J.f]Tf

15. Possibly

is

SiaAoytcr^ous.

meaning of

aAXot nap avratv 01 irpayfj.aTV<roiJ.voi, x.r.A..

there is scarcely room for

TOVS Aoyou?

Though ]us
this section, as

is

doubtful, ]is or

was suggested by

coi>]as

is

rouy

The

L., is that the

were not to charge the tax-farmers anything

the
contracts and receipts.
sealing
officials

impossible.

for

government
drawing up or

'

the appointed antigrapheis shall

[21.] 2-9. Concerning wages
instead
of
them
but
the
additional
pay
penalties which have been
decreed shall be exacted from the outgoing tax-farmers, unless the
.

antigrapheis are discovered to have connived at the fraud with them.'

2. The spaced and enlarged letters indicate that the word is a

COMMENTARY.

91

heading, and therefore cannot be taken with the preceding genitives.

Though the r is rather doubtful, no other compound of epyov except
Kartpyov occurs in the papyrus.

wages

Cf. [45] 8

and [55]

15,

where

it

means

Lines 4-9 are not inconsistent with such a heading ;

with [55] 10 ro avvreraypfvov jiepi<r0ai, and 01 Karaora-

for piece-work.

ra owTfTay/biei'a
0rrs with [3] 2 and [12] 12.
cf.

Cf. [8] 1-2, from which I have conjectured eurTrpcunreotfuxray, though

rather long for the lacuna.

7.
it is

When disputes arise out of

[21.] io-[22] 7. 'Times for appeal.
the laws concerning tax-farming, the Crown officials may bring an
when they choose, but when disputes arise out of the laws
action
.

concerning tax-farming, and a different time for appeal has been appointed in each law, the Crown officials may bring an action, both in the
period for which the revenues have been sold and in the next three

months, unless one of the associates or subordinates connected with the

tax- farming is discovered after the three months have elapsed to have
peculated

.'

10. (KK\r)Toi \povoi

cf.

Dio Cass.

ras 8tKa?, ras re CKK\I')TOVS Kal ray

KK\rjrov biKafav,

51. 19

avaTrop.Trifj.ovs

and

52, 22

Kpivf.ru).

M. however objects
cf. line 14 and Dem. 732. i.
in
line
and
rovruv
12, referring to the word
i>ofio>i> here,
suggests p.fv
lost here.
But the phrase is certain in line 14.
As L. acutely observed, vo^oi TCA.OWKOI is really the title of A.
Moreover that throughout the Revenue papyrus we have the laws of
11.

vofj.<av Tf\<i)VLK<)v

to

Philadelphus, i. e. the TTOAITIKOI ro/moi of Pap. Taur. i. [7] 9, is shown, as

he remarked, by the various cross-references from one section to another
as rojzos.
See (i) [25] 15 Kara TOV vopov, i.e. the preceding section:
(2) [26] 7 icara TOV vop.ov, i.e. [26]

15:

(3) [29] 10 KaOairep tv ran i>o/ian

yeypaTmu,
(4) [30] 6 and 9 Kara rov vo^ov, i. e. [24]-[30]
[27]
In [4] 8,
28
fv
ton VO/IOH yeypaTmu, i.e. [52] 17-18.
KaOaittp
(5) [^2]
[20] 6, and [21] 3, there are also cross-references which, owing to the
Cf. also [57] i and the crowning instance
lacunae, cannot be verified.
i.

e. in

It was therefore
[80] 2 where there is the heading ro^o? 8eKar[o>i>?].
a series of documents like the Revenue papyrus, to which L. P. 62 [1] 6

referred, Kara TOUS vopovs KOI ra irpoo-raynara

8iop0a>jx0a (i.e. 8u>p0a>/Aara).

For besides
N 2

KOI ra

8taypa/njiara

xai TO

vopoi, there are examples of

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

92

the other three in the Revenue papyrus

2-8

see [39] 1-7 biaypa^a, [37]

and [57] I sqq., 8iop0o>/ia.

The first word is not KV/HOS, for no

Trpooray/xa,

15.

the line

admissible.

is

below
means
both on account of the context and
letter

nomes,' but it is very unlikely,

because we should in that case expect
1

8,

which reaches

far

It is just possible that vop.(av in this line

e/caorcoi

VOJUOH

cf.

[53] 5>

&c.

[22.] 2. \ri<j)0r): if this conjecture is correct, the i adscript is omitted,

a rare occurrence in this century. But see [44] 16 amyayrj, [47] 9 Troir/,
It is noticeable that
[40] 8 Kara/3A.a/3rj.
singular of the subjunctive.
3.

M. suggests

4.

This line

The

the cases are the 3rd person

all

cf.
[27] 10.
the
perhaps
protasis to which 5-7 are the apodosis.
rest of the column is blank.

t'oo-^io-ajue^oj

is

a foot of blank papyrus between this column and

the one preceding, so that this note refers to B, not to A. Cf. [38],
a similar entry prefixed by the same writer to C, and notes ad loc.
[23.]

There

is

i.

There

is

doubt that [23]

little

refers to the revision of

in the office

of Apollonius, the dioecetes of the Fayoum, though the few mistakes

which occur are not corrected, and the only change is the insertion of
[31] 21-25 cf. note on [48] 9.
;

[24.] 1-2.

'

In the reign of Ptolemy the son of Ptolemy, and the son

of Ptolemy, the twenty-seventh year.'

2. For the formula cf.
[1] i, P. P. xxiv,

and M.'s and my corrections

App. pp. 5-6. In line 4 of that papyrus 0e[<o]z; afaXQvv is
For the various meanings attached to the uios FlroXe^aiou see
right.
Rev. R. E. i. i
Krall, Sitzungsb. Wien. Akad. 105, 1884, p. 347 sqq.;
Rhein.
Mus. 1883, pp. 384-393 and Philol. 1888. pp. 81-91
Wiedemann,
Wilck. on Arsinoe Philadelphus in Pauly- Wissowa's Encyc. and Introd.
p. xix. sqq. where M. propounds a new explanation for the disappearin P. P.

ance of Euergetes' name from the formula after the twenty-seventh year,
a fact already known from demotic ostraca, see Rev. Proc. Soc. Bibl.

Arch. 1885,

p. 138.
'

[24.] 4-1 3. They shall receive for the tax on vineyards from
the sixth part of the wine produced, and from the
and the soldiers
.

COMMENTARY.
who have

93

and owners of land in the Thebaid,

planted vineyards
the tenth part of the
which requires special irrigation, or of land
wine.
For the tax on orchards in accordance with the method of
.

.,

valuation (hereinafter described) they shall receive the sixth part of the

produce

in silver.'

4-10 deal with the cnro/xotpa (see [125] 12, [27] 17, &c.) from vineyards,
which was generally a sixth, but in the case of the favoured classes in
5-9 a tenth part of the produce, and was paid under ordinary circumstances in kind, but sometimes in money, see [31] while the airo/xoipa
from 7rapa5<roi, 11-13, was in all cases a sixth, and was always paid in
;

money.
5. Possibly K[aroiK(or, but this term has not yet been found in papyri
of the third century B.C. K [Xrjpovx^v (cf. [36] 12) is not likely, as they
arc probably the persons meant in the next line.
6.

The absence

(TTpaTvofji(v<i>v refer

of TOOV before TOU[ shows that Tre^trtuKoreoy and

same class of owners, and the tense

to one and the

Ttf<pvTfVKOT<av points to the land not having been cultivated before.

Therefore, accepting Prof. Petrie's theory that the K\ripov%oi in the
Fayoum received land reclaimed from the lake, I think that the cleruchs

of

of P. P. are included in this class,

cf.

if

not directly referred to

by

it.

[36] 13, or even rov[s cv

TTJI Ai/^rji], cf. [69]

Perhaps rov[s /JamAi/cous],
5 note. But I think that M. is hardly justified (see Introd. p. xxxix) in
using the fact that the Revenue papyrus comes from the Fayoum as an

argument for supposing that only the cleruchs of P. P. are meant here. The
Revenue papyrus gives the law for the whole of Egypt, and is not more
concerned with the Fayoum than with any other nome. In any case
this passage strongly confirms Wilcken's theory (G. G. A. 1895, no. 2,
p. 132) that the cleruchs

in P. P. were, at any rate nominally, active

and
not
mere
soldiers,
pensioners cf. P. P. xxxi. 5-6.
8. e7rairr\TjTTjy
i. e. land on the
edge of the desert, out of reach of the
inundation, and irrigated probably by the sakiyeh, or wheel with buckets
:

attached.
9.

Cf. Diodorus' (i. 34) description of the KoyKias.

dtoiKctrou is

clearly opposed to itportpov SitoiKeiro, but the sense

lost in the lacuna.
Cf. [37] 13, where 01 bioiKovvres

depends on the word

are

'

land agents," opposed to

:

cf.

II

landlords

where

App.
(i) i,
and then bta

fraction for one-fourth,

'

'

and

2i/*api<rrou

ypafAjzar<[o>v.

'

is

tenants.'

followed

by the

Underneath are two

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

94

columns, one of dates, the other of figures, which, to judge by the

The quarter
fractions, refer to artabae, as Wilck. pointed out to me.
in question is probably a tax, cf. K for CIKOOTOV in P. P. 151. 15, and the

The
large, showing that the tax was an important one.
occurrence of the form rTaxcovs in that papyrus is, according to Wilck.,
in favour of assigning it to the earlier rather than to the later part of the
third century B.C., so that it is probably nearly contemporary with the
amounts are

Revenue papyrus.

But the meaning of St^apiorou

is

equally obscure in

both cases, though it is probably a proper name, for a Simaristus who

wrote a treatise on Synonyms is frequently mentioned by Athenaeus,
'

'

e 8- 99 c
'

M. suggests that here

it is

the

name

of a god.

where the heading of a tax list on

of
vineyards, palm groves and fruit trees, i.e. a-no^oipa, is ejcrr/s
produce
KOI Se/carr;?, and see note on line 13.
Elsewhere when the amount of the
of
is
tax on the produce
stated, it is always a sixth, cf. [37]
vineyards
19 note. It appears that while the tax of a sixth was a legacy from the
time when the a-no^oipa was paid to the temples, the payment of a tenth
by certain favoured classes was a change instituted by the government
[33] 21 note, and [36] 18.
10. bfKarrjv

cf.

P.

P. xliii (d)

11.

ence

Perhaps

u7royeypa/x]jitVT;s

to

is

or

In any case the referno other instance in the

viro/eei^a;*}?.

There

q. v.

is

probably
[29],
papyrus of such a spelling as efwn/zTjo-ecos for e*c (rwri^o-ecos.
1 2.
Trpos apyvpiov is opposed not only to payment in kind, which is
allowed in the previous section concerning vineyards, but to payment in
copper, cf. [40] 10 irpos \O.\KOV and App. Ill, and notes on line 13 and
[37] 19.
13.

Perhaps

ragova-iv

or

n/ATjo-oimj;.

The

tax-farmers or the government officials.

As the reader will have noticed in Introd.

subject

may be

p. xxxiii,

either the

Mr. Mahaffy and

the meaning of TrapaSeio-oi. He thinks that their produce

was only grapes, while I think that palm trees and fruit trees of all kinds
are meant. The distinction everywhere drawn between ajxTreAcove? and
I

differ as to

TrapaSeioroi,

especially in the

mode

and taxation, cf. [29],

from irapaSeto-oi.
obtainable
wine was
of valuation

me hardly accountable,
should the government insist on money-payment of the tax on
wine produced in irapotdeio-oi, but not on wine produced from apirf Atones ?

seems to

if

Why
On

the other hand

if

the produce of

7rapa8eto-oi

was miscellaneous, the

COMMENTARY.

95

is obvious.
The wine would keep, but fruit
and therefore the government required the tax to be paid
With regard to the araftcvftpav (cf. Introd. /. .), a single
in money.
instance of this mode of culture in the Fayoum does not seem to me
to justify the supposition that it was universal in the rest of the country.
The Fayoum, then as now, contained an unusual number of trees and
since the a7ro/iot/-a was a tax on produce, not on land ([33] 13 note), there
is no difficulty in supposing that wine obtained from avabfvbpabts, the
amount of which I believe to have been very small, was included in the
wine obtained from ajxTreAoorej. Secondly, Mr. Mahaffy adduces the
contrast drawn between -napabaa-os and KTJTTOS in P. P. xxii, the contrast
between 7rapa5ei<ros and <poivtK<i>v in P. P. xxxix (/'), and the mention of

reason for the difference

would

not,

fUKTjuqparov in P. P. xliv.

corrections,
Kptvrn

t]

KpiOrji

aKVpa eoru) tav

s

jvov

aXXorpiov K\r]pov

17

TJ

made a number

have

virovyiov

irapabturov

'A.

The

palms and

fruit

distinction

P. P.

whether

my

trees,

xxxix

/jtrjfleis

(av 5f ri9 rourcoy

/xTjSe/xtat

not militate against

flowers.

/Sous

ffx/Srji

CK Kpurfcas irpo Kpi<T(u>s 5e

irap(vprti
\-

in P. P. xxii. I

TJ

TJ

itpofiaTov

K^TTOV

fvrxypa&Ttt)
7r[oi]Tjg-Tji

drawn between

theory, for

77

T)

oAXo

ap.-ne\<ava

if

as

/jtrj8e

rj

av

a.TTofiia(ird<a

(?) airoTetaaTto Trapa

irapabcia-os

think the

TI

and

KT/TTOS

irapaSeio-oi

does

contained

may have

contained vegetables and

however seems at first sight to contradict it,

the

(/)

TI

of

rty irapa TO.VTO.

cara/3Acn|nji aTroreio-arco o Kvpios TOH (3\a(pd(i>Ti TO /3Aa/3os o

77

\a\l/r)i

As

give the important part, line 4 sqq. fav 8

KTJTTOI

taxing list refers to attop.oipa or, as I think is more

probable, to <popos (see note on [33] 13), (poiviKawcs are distinguished from
But cf. P. P. xliii (#), where Wilck. has made an important
nrapaScio-oi.

for

this

showing that xliii (a) 24-44 really belong to the bottom of

There seems to me to be no doubt that the tax in xliii (6) is
the airo/zoipa, see notes on line 10 above, [31] 16, and on [33] 13, yet in
addition to a/iTreXtores we have a*po8va and </>oiznca>res mentioned, but no
Now if the tax on afi-n-cAcore? is here the aTro/xoipa, it is
TTapabfKroi.
necessary to suppose on Mr. Mahaflfy's theory that the 7rapa5cio-ot have
for some reason been omitted, and that <poiviK<avs and aicpobva, which
have no right to be there, have been inserted instead. But if TrapaJeio-os
is a general term including both <J>OIVIK<DVCS and axpoSua, the omission of
irapafouros in xliii (b) is explained, and even the difficulty in xxxix (f)
If a person had only palm trees he paid the tax on palms,
disappears.
rectification,
xliii (d).

96

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

if he had
only fruit trees he paid on fruit trees, cf. CKTTJ anpobvuv in
a Ptolemaic ostracon, Wilck. Ostr. 1278. Trapabci<ros being a wider term
includes both.
Cf. P. P. xxvii (i), in which a man pays the sixth in

kind on wine and in

money on

which must mean

There can be little doubt that

axpobva,

oreQavoi,

and another word which is lost.

is the aTro^oipa, and that the sixth paid in money means the
tax on TrapaSeio-oi. This leads to the remaining difficulty, the absence of
any enumeration of the different kinds of produce, which are on my
theory classed together under the general term 7ra/m8eio-oi. But the
government did not fix the amounts to be grown or even the assessment
The oeconomus looked on while the tax-farmer
of the crop, see [29].
and tax-payer fought the question out, and was certain to get the full
flowers,

this tax too

in any case, [31] 14 note.

Nor can I see any difficulty
of
in
use
nap-nos
[29] 13 as a general term for the different varieties
of produce. There seems to be no special reason for enumerating the

amount of the tax

in the

different kinds, since the word irapabeia-os, however obscure to us, must
have been perfectly intelligible to the people for whom the law was
written.
But we are at liberty to suppose that a complete list was
at
the
given
top of [29] which is lost, though I do not think that this

supposition

is

cf.

necessary,

[36]

6 note.

That

TrapaSeto-oi

contained

(froiviKcaves, aKpoftva,
ore</>cu;oi seems to me certain from the instances
in the Petrie papyri quoted above, and it is possible that \a\ava,
cf. B. M. pap. cxix of the second
vegetables,' were also included

and

century A. D., a taxing list on a/A7reA.oi (so Wilck. for anavBa), anpobva,
Xa^ava, and tyoiviKtaves, a classification very like the Ptolemaic, and note
on [37] 19 for an instance of a7rojuoi/ra in the Roman period.
[24.] i4-[25] 3. Concerning the gathering and collection of the
Let the cultivators gather the produce when the season comes,
vintage.
and when they begin to gather it, let them give notice to the manager of
'

the farm or tax-farmer

them exhibit them

From

and

if

he wishes to inspect the vineyards,

let

to him.'

this point to [29] i the subject

is

the tax on vineyards, as

is

shown by the numerous references to wine, and by the tax being paid
in kind. The tax on orchards is discussed in [29]
[30]-[33] 8 revert to
;

the tax on vineyards [33] 9~[35] are general.

15. yea>/>y<n are 'cultivators' in the widest sense, whatever their
;

COMMENTARY.
the scale of society

in

position

of

01 irapaof itrous K(Krr]^(i>oi is

is Xaoi,

may

be;

a yo>pyos.

97

cf.

[29]

The word

2,

15,

for the

where one
'

fellaheen

'

[42] 16.

bioiKw

here distinguished from o c\u>v rrjv wrrjv, if

that be the right conjecture, the distinction is one of names, not of
persons cf. [42] 8, where o SIOIKCOJ; is identical with o t\<av. The fact
seems to be that 01 r;yopaKors or ayopao-avTes, ot -apia^fvoi, 01 %ovrs, 01
17.

Though

is

are mere synonyms for TAo>vcu, a term

and [29] 8, perhaps, as M. suggests, because
Where the singular of any of these expressions is
the
used,
tax-farmer,' whether ap^vtis or jxeroxoy, is generally meant.
Sometimes however one of them is equivalent to apxvvris, e.g. [34]
10-14, where o T/yopaKooy, o ex^, and ap^vr^s are interchanged.

bioiKovvrcs, ot

TrpayjxaTfuo/mereu

which only occurs

it was unpopular.

in [28] 9

'

[25.]

i.

/3ov\op.cvov

if

the tax-farmer did not come, the y*a>pyoi

might take matters into their own hands, [30] 4-13.

An example of
cf. P. P. xxiii
irt[8eu>
(2) 3 ((ptbuv TOV (nropov.
notice being given in accordance with this regulation is P. P. xl (b),
a letter from Dorotheus to Theodorus, no doubt a tax-farmer, ywixnce /ie
:

K.T.A.
3.

Probably the end of a regulation fixing the penalty

in case the

failed to give notice to the tax-farmer.

[25.] 4-16. 'When the cultivators wish to make wine, they shall
the tax-farmer in the presence of the oeconomus and anti-

summon

grapheus or their agent, and when the tax-farmer comes, let the cultivator make wine, and measure it by the measures in use at each place,
after they have been tested and sealed by the oeconomus and anti-

grapheus

pay the

and
tax.

accordance with the result of the measuring let him

If the cultivators disobey the law in any of these

in

particulars, they shall

pay the tax-farmers twice the amount of the

tax.'

see [30] 13.

8. /icrpois
the utmost variety in respect of measures of capacity is
found in Ptolemaic Egypt. Hence the necessity, when metretae or
7.

irapa-y(vofjL(vov

sc. TOV OIOIKOVVTOS

artabae were mentioned, to specify which metretes or artaba was meant

see [31] 6, [3 J] 2, [40] n. The variations were not only between the

measures commonly used in different places, which are referred to here,

but also between different measures used in the same place, as is shown

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

98

ever-recurring formula in Ptolemaic and even later contracts for

loans of wheat, airo8i5oToo .... jxtrpaH an Kai TrapeiAr/^ei;.

by the

10. efrraa-ufvois

[40] 19 and

cf.

has pointed out, for the

No

is

special So/ci/xaorrjs

Kepa/iioi>

(i.

mentioned

Leyden pap. Q, a
e. aTro/uoipa)

in the

TT/I,

receipt, as

not

TCOI,

Wilcken

<iXa8eA$coi.

Revenue Papyrus, as

there.

[26.] i-io. 'Those persons who already possess instruments for

making wine, shall register themselves before the tax-farmer, when
and when they intend to make wine, they shall exhibit the seal which
.

has been stamped upon the instruments, unbroken. Any person who
fails to register himself, or to produce his instruments for inspection as
the law requires, or to bring them to be sealed up when the tax-farmer
wishes to seal them, or to exhibit the seal stamped upon them, shall
pay to the tax-farmers the amount of the loss which the tax-farmers
consider at the

moment

that they have incurred.'

Cf. [49] 10-13 an d [50] 2 1 -[51] ii, parallel regulations concerning

the opyava for making oil.
i.

4.

Perhaps orav oivo-nomv

7.

TrapaoxppayioTXoy

cf.

jAeAAo>o-i]i;,

[51]

opyava TOV apyov TOV \povov,

3, 8,

cf.

[25] 4.

and [46]

which explains

II Trapaa-cppaytCfa-daxrav

this passage.

TO.

Trapao-tppayioyio?

and

7rapao-<payie<r0<u are used for sealing up something, i. e. putting it

aside for the time cf. [54] 18 and [57] 23.
10. Cf. [51] ii and [55] 24, where the tax-farmers are allowed to
:

demand

as

much compensation

as they like

but see also [56]

13,

where

the tables are turned upon them.

[26.] 11-17. 'If tne cultivators gather the vintage and make wine
before the tax-farmer comes, let them (keep ?) the wine at the vats or
.

.,

and when they hear

(?)

the

first

notice of the auction announced in

the town or village in which they live, they shall register themselves on
the same day or the one following, and shall exhibit the wine which

they have made, and the vineyard from which they have gathered the
crop prematurely.'
1 2. Faint traces of what are about the fourth and fifth letters of the
first

word are

visible,

and they

will not suit o-$payieo-0c><rai>, airoTiOfvduxrav,

or KOfju^eToxrav. bfi^Kv^yroxrav would be consistent with them, but does

not suit the context.
13.

have taken TO

-npiarov ex^e/xa

as referring to the proclamation of

COMMENTARY.

99

he highest bid on the first day of the auction by which the a-no^oipa was
sold, and suggest itapay[-yt\(v 7rv0a>]i/Tai, since op(o]vrai. is not satisfactory.
This is a mere guess, but for K0/xa and
Ti0rj/xi in the sense of proclamation of a bid see [48] 16 and probably [33] 10 cf. P. P. 44. 20, L. P.
62 [8] 2 and 10. The length of time during which the taxes were put
;

up

not stated in any part of the Revenue Papyrus which is

next century it was ten days, L. P. [8] u, and in
at the auction held by the contractors for the oil monopoly, ten

to auction

preserved, but
1 6,

[48]

is

in the

days are the period.

If tc0e/*a

'

means proclamation or
'

without reference to the auction,

it

is

difficult

to

'

'

edict

see

generally,

what

irpatrov

refers to.
1

5- KCITOIKOWI
:

L. P. 63.

cf.

SC. irpos

OO

T<av (V rats Keo/xais icaroiKovi>Ta>j; Aaa>*>.

TOV (\oirra nqv (avyv,

cf.

[27] 9.

.
.
The tax-farmer shall seal the
[26.] i8-[28] i. 'Agreements
of
the
it
and
the
to
In the agreement
cultivator.
copy
agreement
give
.

the tax-farmer shall declare under the royal oath that he has entered in
the agreement the full amount of the* produce, including all wine made

prematurely and reported to him by the cultivator, and has not pecuany of it, nor let it out of his possession. The other agreement,

lated
after

it

has been sealed by the cultivator, shall be kept by the oeconomus

or his representative and in this agreement the cultivator shall declare

under the royal oath that he has exhibited all the produce, and reported
;

all the wine made before the proper time, and has
honestly entered in
the agreement the (due) amount of the tax. And there shall in addition
be copies of both agreements, which shall not be sealed.'

There were two separate o-vyypa<pai (cf. [29] 9, [42] 15 8i7rAji>), one
by the tax-farmer, of which the original was no doubt kept by
the oeconomus, cf. line 1 2, and a sealed copy was given to the cultivator,
while the other was written by the cultivator, and kept by the oeconomus and there were besides unsealed copies of the second (rvyypa<prj
of which one was no doubt kept by the tax-farmer, another by the
cultivator, perhaps also of the first (rvyypcKpri, of which one might be
5.

written

required for the tax-farmer.

6. For
examples of the /3a<ri\tKos O^KOS see Wilck. Akt. no. xi ; P. P.
xlvi (a)
a demotic papyrus in Rev. Nouv. Chrest. Dem. p. 155 (cf. note
;

on [39]

8)

and probably App.

ii

(2).

loo

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

7.

by

in

Ttav TO.

a mistake for

TIO.V TO, cf.

few blunders

KaTcnrpoiffrdai

TTJV

frcpav

which payment

made

but see [31] 17.

cf. [40] 5 irpotfa-dai e* rrjs KCO/XTJ?.

P. P. xxvii (a) and xxx (e) are examples of this

I J.

The

line 15.

the writer of [24]-[35] are not corrected

:

made

is

in wine, cf. [31]

(ruyypa</>rj,

16 note, though there

is

no

royal oath.
13. (rvvaiTf(rTa\p.fvos
a-vv

1 8.

i.

e with the tax-farmer; so in [42] 20.

faint traces.

was deciphered by Wilck. from the very

'

[28.] 5-8.

But

if

the tax-farmer and the cultivator have a dispute,

the one saying that the produce is more, the other that it is less, the
occonomus shall decide the question, and the agreements shall be sealed
in

accordance with his decision.'

5.

Cf. [29] 1 2 sqq.

the parallel regulation for

irapabcta-ot.

9-16. 'If the tax-farmer fails to make an agreement with the

when the cultivator wishes him to do so, he shall not exact
payment of the tax. But the oeconomus and antigrapheus shall make

cultivator,

an agreement with the cultivator, and having conveyed the requisite

amount of wine to the royal repository, shall enter it as having been
received, but shall not put down the value of it to the credit of the taxfarmersT'

Quite a different meaning is obtained by taking j3ov\oij.vov with

what follows, and referring it not to the cultivator but to the tax-farmer,
but this suits neither the construction nor the context. The other
10.

is much more satisfactory, that lines 15-16 are the punishment which the tax-farmers incur, if they fail to come to an agreement

explanation

with the cultivator.

12. 01 6e o:

cf.
[12] i.
TO
a perfectly general term,
14.
/3a(rtAtKoi>

comprehending all places

where taxes were kept see Rev. R. E. vii. 90. When the taxes were
in money, TO fiacnXiKov is equivalent to the /fao-iAi*?/ Tpcurffr
cf. Wilck.
Akt. p. 49, and [31] 16. But taxes in kind were taken to vnobo^ia,
or 6r)<ravpot., W. Ostraca
[31] 2, 19, and [50] 8 or Ta/xieia, P. P. 108. 5
:

709) 7251 6.

TI/XTJI;.

The wine was sold

Hence the

[33] 2-8 and [34] 10.

[18] 14, and

App.

ii

(5).

before the 8iaAoyio>ios took place,

accounts were kept in money, cf.

COMMENTARY.
V7roAoyiTa><raj>
U7roAoyrj(ra

(sic)

P. P. 14. 3 trrroAoyrjrrai 619 ra aAtxa;

cf.

TOZ>

ts

101

ACUKT/S Aoyop TO

TTJS

</>operpov

P. P. 84. IS

and [34]

6,

[53] 23 viroAoyi0-0Tj<rTai
If the tax-farmers
[28.] i7-[29] i. 'Against confusion of produce.
mingle taxable produce with produce exempt from taxation, as if it

belonged to

this class,

Cf. L.

17.

P. 62

.'

15 for ar f Aticu wrongly awarded

[ft]

by the

tax-

farmers, and [15] 12 note.

[29.] 2-21. Owners of orchards shall register themselves before the

tax-farmer and the local agent of the oeconomus and antigrapheus,
'

stating their names, the village in which they live, and the sum at which
they assess the revenue from the produce in their orchard. If the tax-

farmer consent to the assessment, they shall (make) a double agreement

with him, sealed, as the law requires, and the oeconomus shall exact the

But if the tax-farmer object

to the assessment, he shall be allowed to seize the crop, and shall pay
the cultivator by instalments from what is sold from day to day ; and
sixth in accordance with the terms of it

when the

amount

which he assessed his

crop, the surplus shall belong to the tax-farmer, and the cultivator shall
pay the sixth to the oeconomus. On the other hand, if the crop when
cultivator has recovered the

sold does not reach the

amount

of the assessment, the

exact the deficit from the tax-farmer

2.

in

money,
i,

is

cf.

oeconomus

shall

.'

but, apart from my conjecture in line 7, the fact that

a sixth and is paid to the oeconomus direct, and therefore
[24] 12 and [31] 16, makes it certain that the tax on

Cf. [33] 19

here the tax

at

not on vineyards,
referred to in [24]

is

meant, and that this column describes the

n.

middle not passive, cf. [56] 6, for the cultivators made

their own assessment, which the tax-farmers might accept or reject. Cf.
[42] 17, where n/xarcu is probably passive.
6 TifATjs Tr/9 cv TOH 8iaypa/*jian yfypafi/zeio/s, from which it
7. Cf. [39]
6.

rifjuovrai

might be conjectured that

'law' or 'edict.'

But

irapa[ is the

(i) there

is

beginning of some word meaning

no room

for yfypa/i/iem/s

(2)

if

irapa

be the beginning of irapa[ypapi/Aari or some such word, the reference is to

something not contained in the papyrus, which is very unlikely, especially
as [24]

1-13 so

far

from explaining

this

passage probably refers to

it

for

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

102

explanation (3) the fact that the tax-farmer could reject the assessment
if he chose
Hence, in
implies that it had only been provisionally fixed
;

spite of the difficulty of the phrase,

prefer

irpovobov TTJV tv root

TT\V

This use of -777300-0805, meaning the land from which the

was derived, may be compared with the use of COVTJ in [30] 4,
and [34] 9 for the land, the tax on which was farmed.

7rapa8eio-a>i.

Ttpon-obos

[32] 4,
1.

see note on [27] 5.

The exercise of the tax-farmer's right to seize the
cf. P. P. part I. xvi (2), where a yecopyos
purely voluntary

SurArjz;

12. Cf. [28] 5-8.

crop was

makes an agreement with the oeconomus and topogrammateus

to

pay

part of the tax on his 7rapa8ei(rot, but refers the rest, irepi eoi> aimAeyco, to
a certain Asclepiades; and P. P. xxvii (i), where the yetopyos, after
stating his assessment of the produce from his vineyard, fruit trees, &c.,

says

fai' 8

e7ri[y>Tj|ua]

(Wilck.) yemjrai

7rpoo-ai>oi<ra> p.[era] yjELpoypafyias

opKov

presumably on the correct assessment.

the difference between the real value of the crop
and the, tax-farmer's valuation of it, not the tax, which must have been
paid by the cultivator as before. exTreo-jji is very doubtful, and there is
17. TTJV fKTqv:
19. Trpa^aro)

room

for

sc.

another letter

in

the lacuna.

[30.] 3-19. 'If the tax-farmers fail either to come in person or to

send representatives to carry out duly all the requirements of the law, or
in any other way hinder the cultivators when giving notice, or summoning
the tax-farmer, or paying the tax in accordance with the law, the cultivators shall be allowed in the presence of the agent of the oeconomus
and antigrapheus, as the law prescribes the presence of these two
officials when payments are made, full power of action, without incurring any penalty by so doing. But when the tax-farmer comes,
they shall show him the produce and bring evidence at once to prove
that they have done all that was required, and the agent of the oeconomus
and antigrapheus shall give the tax-farmer a written account both of the
produce and of the tax, cultivator by cultivator.'
i.

5.

From

8 the subject reverts to the tax on vineyards.

[30] to [33]
Wilck. In this class would be included the
7rpay/xarei;[o-oju,evoi]
:

Aoyeurcu and vTrrjperat, mentioned so often in

Elsewhere in B and C the subordinate
27.

cf.

[56] 1 8 and [52] 20,

of the CDVJJ are not

officials

COMMENTARY.

103

Similarly the oeconomus could have

a
small
part of the duties assigned to him
performed
person only
the rest must have been done by his agents.

distinguished from

01

irptantvot.

in

9. (oy ytypairrai

i.

in [25] 6.

e.

irapowwv TOVTW cf. P. P. ix, a petition from two peasants to

Theodorus, asking him to write to Theodorus the oeconomus, in order
10.

that they

may

receive permission eis

opyws p

TO yivoptvov

narayayav

is

TO vnobo\tov.
12. cKoora

iroiciy

to

gather the crop,

make

wine, and

pay the

13. aCnfjuov^: this refers to the penalty fixed in [25] 15.

15. ira[pax/"W*a]

Wilcken.

17. ypa\l/avTts boTaxrav: the plural is a mistake, as only one person is

and [46] 8, [47] 10, &c. Cf. [55] 22 for a precisely
meant, see line
similar error.

'Transport of the tax. The cultivators shall

of wine to the royal repository ... (if any
of them fail to do so) he shall pay the tax-farmers the value of the tax
which he owes them. This value is in Libya, the Saite,
polite,
[30.] 20-[31]
transport the due

6.

amount

Prosopite, Athribite nomes, the district round Menelaus, and the Delta,
drachmae for each metretes of eight choes in the Sebennyte, Busi-

Mendesian, Leontopolite, Sethroite, Pharbacthite nomes, Arabia,

the Bubastite nome and Bubastus, the Tanite, the Memphite nome,
with Memphis, the Letopolite, Hermopolite, Oxyrrhyncite and Cynorite,

nomes, the Lake district, the Heracleopolite and Aphroditopolite

and in the Thebaid five
nomes, six drachmae for each metretes
drachmae. The oeconomus shall exact the different values from the
cultivators and pay them over to the Treasury to the credit of the
polite

tax-farmers.'

[30.] 21.
next column

The connexion between

this line

and the adaeratio of the

probably that the cultivators had to bring the cwro/zoipa

to the vTToboxta (though see [31] 19 note), within a fixed time, under pain
of being compelled to pay the money equivalent if they failed to do so.
is

This explains both cnroTu>Ta>

as punishment of

payment was

some

in arrear.

sort,

which always implies paying

and ero<eiAoi>/zcjnjs, which implies that the
in

[31]

2,

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

104

the figure in line 13 might be 8, but it

[31.] 4. rtjUTji'
scale
is a descending than an ascending one,
that
the
likely
:

much more
than

probable.

Here therefore the

figure

is

is

more

and 9

is

probably greater

6.

On the value of wine in this century, see (i) P. P. Introd. p. 32,

where the price of \ x ovs ls 5 obols, and therefore the price of a metretes
at the same rate would be 13 drachmae 2 obols
(2) App. ii. (5), where
the prices of a metretes vary between 5 and u drachmae -npos xoAicoi;,
the average being between 7 and 8, i. e. nearly 7 silver drachmae, see
App. iii and (3) L. P. 60 (bis) 15-16, of the third century B.C., where
the price of 16 cotylae is 6 drachmae, and in the next line n cotylae
The price
at (ava) i\ obols each are worth 4 drachmae and f obol.
of a metretes of 8 choes would at the same rate be 36 drachmae, and
'

even

if

the prices in 60

(bis]

are

-npos

x a ^ KOV

cf-

App.

iii,

a great divergence from the other prices. But then as

of wine of course depended on the age and vintage.
is

there

now

is

here

the price

TroAirrji: see Introd. p. xlviii. rWaiKOTroAinji, cf. Strabo 803 b,

5
the most likely, if we are to look for a name not included in the

other

HAio-n-oAmji, cf. [64] 3, appears to correspond to

[60]-[7'2].
in line 6.
It is possible that the difference between this list and

list,

AeAra

that in [60]-[72]

is

due to the

The

originally made.

list

different periods at which they were

here cannot have been made out much before

the twenty-seventh year (see [38] i note), while the other

been based upon an older classification.
[Mei>e]Acu5t

cf.

Strabo

or not, the Nitriote nome,

was omitted

in this

list.

xvii. 23.
cf.

Ae Ara

[61]
:

cf.

list

may have

Whether M.'s conjecture is right

20, must be meant here, unless it
Strabo

xvii. 4,

and see Introd.

1.

c.

The

metretes of 8 choes was used for wine, cf. [32] 19, while the
ordinary metretes of 12 choes was used in measuring oil, [40] IT and
[53] 20,
12.

and

cf.

\ifjivrji:

note on [25] 8.
[71] 5 and

cf.

The chous approximately six pints.

u. The Fayoum received the title

of

nome between the twenty-seventh and probably the thirtieth

Philadelphus, when the new title occurs in a letter among Cleon's

the Arsinoite

year of

correspondence, P. P. 8. 2, in which Apollonius was still dioecetes of

See also P. P. 36. 9 77 avrov yrj
the Fayoum, cf. [23] 2 and [38] 3.
If the whole district is meant here, as seems
(v TTJI Ai/uinjt afipoxos eon.
probable, the date of the change

may

be after Mesore of the twenty-

COMMENTARY.

105

But the old name may have continued in occasional use

ninth year.
cf.
for a time after the Arsinoite nome became the official title
;

App.

ii.

where the Fayoum appears to be

a papyrus which cannot be earlier than the twenty-seventh

(2)

13

(v

TOH

\ifjLviTT]i,

meant, in
year of Philadelphus.

14. When the tax was paid in money, not in kind, it was exacted
the
oeconomus, not the tax-farmer; cf. [29] 10 and [48] i, 8. Even
by
when it was paid in kind, the presence of the tax-farmer was not

and the tax could under certain circumstances be paid direct

If the taxto the oeconomus or his agent, [28] 9-16, and [30] 4-13.
farmers were thus often reduced to the position of being mere spectators
of the payments, and were sometimes not even that, it may be asked
what purpose did they serve ? It was certainly not to save the government trouble in collecting the airo/xoipa, since their presence could be
dispensed with at the least provocation, while nothing could be done
But the tax-farmers were
without the oeconomus or his agents.
essential

necessary for two reasons, first because they enabled the government
to make an accurate estimate beforehand of its revenue, and secured
it against loss from a sudden fall in the value of crops ; and secondly

because the complicated system described here, of which the central

fact was the separation of tax-farmer and tax-collector, rendered it
as certain as any system could render it, that the Treasury received

what was due, the whole of what was due, and nothing but what was
due. For if the oeconomus attempted to defraud the government
either by granting exemptions or by peculations, the loss would fall
on the tax-farmers, who would then lose their surplus (see [34] 14),
and therefore had the strongest motive for seeing that the oeconomus
kept the accounts correctly, since every payment that was made to
On the other hand it was imposthe oeconomus belonged to them.
sible for the oeconomus to exact more than the legal amount of the
tax, because the amount was fixed by a contract between the tax-farmer
And
and the cultivator over which the oeconomus had no control.
if the tax-farmer tried to extort more than what he was entitled to,
in one case, by the no less ingenious than equitable arrangement
and
described in [2D] 13-20, he would find the tables turned on him
in the other, [28] 5-8, he would have to submit his demands to the
oeconomus, who, having no interest in allowing the tax-farmers to
;

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

io6

increase their surplus at the expense of the tax-payers, and having

been expressly forbidden to take any part in tax-farming himself,

an unfair decision. So far

[15] 4, would have no motive for giving
as mechanical safeguards could go, the interests both of the Exchequer

and the tax-payers were protected at every

worked we have little means of judging, but

point.

How

the system

probably more than

an accident that the Petrie papyri contain no complaints against unjust
taxation, for in P. P. 122 it is probably not the tax-farmers who are
[48] 4, and the writer of the papyrus
p. 3 only complains of wrongly awarded remissions of

to blame, but the c\aioKcnri)\oi,

in P. P.

is

it

App.

cf.

on [39] 14 for the position of the farmers of the

monopoly, which was somewhat different.
Cf. note

taxes.

15. Tip.as
cf.

the plural because the price varied in the different

oil

nomes

6.

[33]

In practice
16. ro /3a<rtAiKoy means here the royal bank, cf. [34] 17.
the aTro^oipa on vineyards was often paid in money during the third
century, and in the next century all the evidence points to exclusive

payment

in

money
'

[31.] 17-25.

see [37] 19 note.

Stamping of

repositories for the

what

wine

in

receipts.

each

village,

The oeconomus
and

shall establish

shall himself give a

stamped

brought, to the cultivator

(The oeconomus shall
wine
from
the
the
added
the
by
transport
vats(?)'
corrector).
17. For the correction of the third a in airoo-^payto'/uiaTos cf. note
receipt for

on

[9]

is

3.

the transport was usually done by the

note and P. P. ix quoted in note on [30] 10. auros
means that the oeconomus was to seal the receipt himself, cf. [18] 2
19.

KOfxi?]Tai is passive, for

yeo>pyos, cf. [31] 2i

cr<payt0-a/[i>os avros.

24.
It

is

Kouyiapx^t is possible in line 20, cf. [43] 3.

The meaning of
difficult

to take

by the corrector is very obscure.

any other sense than transport,
two letters of 25 are very doubtful

this addition
K0jiuea-0a>

in

but see previous note. The first

Wilck. thought they were not r<o but

yeo>, in

which case

yeoopycoy

hardly be avoided. But this suits neither e/c, nor, so far as

the context, and I have therefore conjectured Xyvw, which

can

may

can
see,

refer

to the exceptional cases mentioned in [26] 11-17.

'

[32.]

The

cultivator shall provide pottery for the repository,

and

COMMENTARY.

107

and the pottery shall consist of water-tight jars, which have been
and are sufficient for the wine payable to the tax-farmers. The
oeconomus and antigraphcus shall,
days before the cultivators gather
of
the
the crops, give them the price
pottery which each cultivator
this price
has to provide for the tax in wine upon his own produce
shall be fixed by the dioccetes, who shall pay it to the oeconomus
and antigraphcus through the royal bank in the nome the cultivator,
on receiving the price, shall provide pottery of the best quality and if
he does not receive the price, he shall nevertheless provide the pottery,
but shall recover the price of it from the tax which he has to pay
.

tested

in

money.'
2.

M. suggests

*rj]/)or,

and

8ia<rco]7rot;^eya in

the next line;

cf.

[25]

10 note.
3.

p. 7,

Kpa/bios

and App.

4.

cf.
ii

[55] 4, P. P.

xxx

(c)

and

my

corrections in P. P.

App.

(5).

c<: possibly viup,

but

cf.

The

[34] 10,

and [29]

7 note.

a-Tro/noipa
15.
ytv^artav appears to be
the ordinary tax on vineyards payable in wine while the airofjioipa of
which he has to pay the value' is the tax on vineyards when payable

5. Cf. [48]

rooi;

i8ia>y

'

in

and perhaps the tax on orchards besides. How

who paid the whole of his tax on vineyards
wine and yet had no orchard, was to be met, if he did not receive

money, see [31]

4,

the case of a cultivator

in

the price, is not explained but I suspect that the case is not mentioned,
either because it was not important, or because it was not likely to
There are several places where, if the letter of the papyrus
occur.
;

be observed, there are inconsistencies or omissions, the importance of

which it is easy to exaggerate cf. note on [42] 4.
10. TTJV <rvvTa\0fi(rav I have taken with TI/XTJV not with curofjioipav.
Besides the awkwardness of the intervening accusative, it may be
objected that the price appears to be fixed in 18-19, an d therefore
was not fixed by the dioecetes. This however is not an insuperable
difficulty, even if 18-19 do not refer to something else; and it is not
:

so great as the difficulty of taking <n>i;rax0io-ar with a7ro/bioipai>, seeing

that the a-no^oipa was fixed in [24] by law, and that this is the only

mention of the dioecetes in [24]-[35]. Moreover if the dioecetes is the

subject of Staypai/^aTo), it implies that he fixed the price of the pottery
and the fact that the singular is used not the plural, cf. 8
;

p a

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

io8

makes

to suppose that the

difficult

it

oeconomus

is

the subject, the

antigrapheus being omitted. Equally abrupt changes in the subject

are not rare in the papyrus, e.g. [54] 18, [49] 20, [48] 13, [34] 4.

boTwav here means that the money was given outright not as a loan,
cf.
[41] 1 6, and [43] 2, for otherwise there would be no reason for
the cultivators subtracting the price from the amount which they had
to pay.

n.

biaypa\lfa.T<a

nome

The

see note on [34] 14.

expression 'the royal

'

might seem to imply that there was only one, but

there were royal banks even in the villages, [75] i.
17. I have taken TL^V as the object of anobovvai not of Ko/neo-0o,
for which T^V TL^V has to be supplied
If
cf. [43] 16 and
[48] 8.
be
taken
with
and
as
an
accusative
attracted
into
TJS
Ko/ueo-0cu,
TI^V

bank

in the

the genitive, the

and

a.Trofj.oipa

in line

7 is

the

same

as the enro/ioipa in line 9,

both cases means the tax on vineyards paid in kind, contrasted

with the tax paid in money, which is in some respects more satisfactory.
in

1 8. Perhaps Aa/x/3ai>ero> 8e.

The price in question is probably that
which the yecopyos was allowed to subtract from the oTro/xoipa TJJ 8ei
airobovvai Trjv TI/XTJV, if he did not receive the price of the jars.
19. Cf. note on [31] 6.

and taking
[33.] 2-8. The oeconomus shall examine the (wine)
with him the tax-farmer, the antigrapheus and his agent, shall jointly
with them sell the wine, giving the (tax-farmers?) time in which to
settle their accounts.
He shall exact payment of the amounts and
'

shall put

them down

in the

oo-os: sc. oivos

6.

8iop0a>o-oimu, i.e.

Treasury;

cf.

[56] 15,

KOTnjAoi?, cf. [47] 10, is

the

first letter.

7. \oyov:
the lacuna, but
a penalty here.

there

is

it

not room.

cf.

credit.'

[34] 10.

'pay off the balance of what they owe' to the

which shows that the tax-farmers are meant.
less likely, and K does not suit the vestiges of

Perhaps

i.e. at

account of the tax-farmers to their

or nap-nos

2.

reAcovcuy, cf. [28] 9.

the royal bank; cf. [31] 16. [cnnmi/jero) would suit

is not the right word, as there is no question of
should expect Karaxcopi^ero), cf. [31] 16, for which

We

Wilck. suggests

[7rpoo-0]eTa>.

[33.] 9~[34] r. 'The basilicogrammateis shall, within ten days from

the day on which they proclaim the auction, notify to the tax-farmers

COMMENTARY.
how many

109

vineyards or orchards there are in each nome, with the

contain, and how many vineyards or

number of arourae which they

orchards belonging to persons on the tribute list paid the tax to the
temples before the twenty-first year. If they fail to make out the
is discovered to be incorrect, they shall be condemned in
list, or it

a court of law, and pay the tax-farmers for every mistake of which
they are convicted 6000 drachmae and twice the amount of the loss
All owners pf vineyards or gardens on the tribute
the
sixth
to the temples before the twenty-first year,
paid
shall henceforward pay it (to the tax-farmers).'

by them.

incurred

who

list

10.

fKOffjia:

nothing

in the

cf.
Here too there is
[48] 16.
to
refer
to, unless it be the auction.
K0efxa

see [26] 13 note,

papyrus

for

and

ten days, as was shown, was probably the time during which
the tax was put up for sale, it is not clear whether that has anything

Though
to

do with the ten days

here.

The absence

of

7rpa>Toj>, cf.

[26] 13,

and

the fact that the tax-farmers had already entered upon their duties,
line 9, are in favour of fide^a referring not to the proclamation of
the highest bid on the first day of the auction, or to a proclamation
that there was going to be an auction, but to the proclamation of the
final result.
13. (popoAoyia
7rpo<ro8a>y

cf.

Ros. stone 12,

KCU cpopoAoyiaw riraj

/iei>

eis

O.TTO

T(\OS

ra>v

virap\ov<T(av *v

ac/>rjKi>

aAAovs bt

AiyuTrrau

KtKov<f>iKcv

a second century B.C. fragment, Notices et Extraits xviii. (2) p. 413,

and B. M. pap. 401. 14, see M. Hermathena^
auaypcupei ci? [ras] cpopoAoyias
;

ix, no.

KCU

It is
ros c/>o(po)Aoyias.
xxi,
yrjy %(p<rov KCU oAAi/y
the
that
were
taxes
on
classified
land,
probable
c/>opoAoyicu
according
to the different kinds of produce, but not, as the aironoipa, taxes on

vol.

the produce itself. In that case the cpopoAoyta here would be the list
of cultivators of vineyards and orchards who paid c/>opos, not a list
of all landowners, much less a list of all inhabitants. Cf. (j) P. P.

the fact that the cultivators had

to pay
on the produce is clearly shown
by the recurrence of some names found in this list in the companion
document xliii (3) (see note on [24] 14), CKTTJS KCU SCKCITTJS i. e. cnr<yioipa.
xliii (a)

cpopos

c/>opos

a/^nrfAwvcor

on the land as well as

airo/xoipa

Cf. ArriTrarpos AT/JAT/TPIOU BeperiKiSoj aiyiaAov in (a) I and (d) 51

probably nothing lost between ArjpjTptov and BeptviKtbos,

is

that he paid 20 drachmae as <opos, but only

17

it

as there

appears

drachmae 4! obols

no REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

and therefore in his case $opos was a slightly heavier
tax than airo/iotpa, but whether he paid the sixth or the tenth as the
Cf. also (a) 17 Avribapos KOI Hyrjf*[a>i/] TO
latter tax we do not know.
for

airofj.oi.pa,

irapa

ria<riTos

[TOU]

Flao-tTos

belonging to the CKT^

/cat

with

binary,

lines 13-14 of the second column

but not printed by M., AunScopos KCU

Ilao-iTos; and (a) 4 nertjVouxos] ^fvapovvios /cat Marprjs TO>TOS

A\favbpov vr]<rov Kt], i. e. 28 drachmae, with (d) 56, HtTeo-ov^os tyfva.fjLovvt.os
/ecu Mavpys Ipovdov
afj.(irek(avos) A\eav(bpov) vr](<rov) o, i.e. 70 drachmae.
list on vineyards, from the mentions
P.
xxix
P.
"(2)
(a), a taxing

of the various KA^poi suits tyopos better than

the heading xa>(pos ?) a/x7reA.ooioy.

xxxix

airofj-oipa,

even apart from

an account of </>opos, not airo/xoipa

for there is no reference to wine, cf. xliii (a) 30 which belongs to the
/ecu 8e/ccmj?, not to the c/>opos (24- 14
note); and afj.(ire\<avo$) TOU
OVTOS riToXejuaiou, which is the correct reading in lines 5-6, suits
<popos better than airofj.oi.pa. The following corrections have also occurred
(3) P. P.

to
II.

me:

I.

7rpooTa/>)(ou

v 1.

A\(avopov

16.

(i)

is

also, I think,

Il7jA[ou]o-iou.

12. ITu[^]a)i'?

3.

Tlr]Xov(n

0ea5eA0eias

17. Tecos.

f.

TrSy*-.

4.

Ap/nais

14. Ovrjrcap

1 8.

riTjXovo-iou.
Ayadav.
19. ITjYJTOo-ipts.
conclusion which might be drawn from 9-23 is that owners who
were not on the tribute list, if there were any such, e.g. those CKTOS
But in [36] 12-16
<po(po)Aoyias, were not subject to the tax of a sixth.

oropTato?

it is most explicitly laid down that all cultivators of vineyards or orchards

whatever were to pay the tax, except the priests, who, if the strict letter
of the papyrus is to be observed, seem exempt from both taxes.
But
1.
31 of the Rosetta stone shows that before the ninth year of Epiphanes

a tax of a
temples was
escaped this

on each aroura of a/-nrAms 717 belonging to the

and
it is not likely that in Philadelphus' reign they
levied,
I suspect took the place of </>opo? in their
which
nepafjuov,

Kepo/xtov

case.

doubt that the year is the same as that in

line 21.
Though the a there has been mostly broken away, what is left
will not suit /3, and [36] 7 shows that from the twenty-second year
onwards the tax was paid to the government, not to the temples.
17. 6000 drachmae instead of i talent is remarkable, but there is no
doubt about the cipher, which recurs in [67] 17 and [70] 6.
21. The bfKarr], cf. [24] 10, is here ignored as in [36] 18 and [37] 16,
14.

There can be

little

COMMENTARY.

in

probably because the tax was a sixth both when paid to the temples
and when first appropriated by the government. The payment of a
tenth by certain privileged classes was instituted between the twentythird year, see [36] 2, and the twenty-seventh.
Perhaps [33] i9~[34] i
and
have been allowed to
the
law
as
it
was
first
promulgated,
represent
remain unmodified. But for the emphatic language of [36] and [37]
I should be inclined to think that the ficxarr; was simply omitted because
the vast majority of the tax-payers paid a sixth.
the inconsistency has a real meaning.

Here, however,

think

The use of the CKTT; for the tax on vineyards as well as on irapa8fi"oi
removes any doubt as to the identity of the (KTTJ in [36]-[37] with the
airo/xoipa, which is moreover proved by other papyri, see note on [37] 19.
Much as the Egyptian fellah has been able to endure, he could hardly
have borne a tax of a sixth besides <opos and aTro/ioipa, to say nothing of
oiroAoyia which is coupled with aTro^otpa in Wilck. Ostr. 711, of the third
century B.C., and which, since the payment is in kind, must be a tax
on produce.
i.

[34.]

TTJI

<fnAa8cA</>o>i is

possible,

cf.

[36] 10.

2-6. 'The tax-farmers shall within thirty days from the day on
which they purchase the tax, appoint sureties for a sum greater by onetwentieth than the price agreed upon for the tax, and the sureties shall
register the property which they mortgage, in monthly instalments from
Dius to
.'
.

2.

Cf. [56]

14-18 and L. P. 62

[1] i.3~[2]

i.

Something

Karaypa^as T<OV \Pr1tJLaT(a1 is probably lost there in [I] 16.

M.'s suggestion, is not found in the Revenue Papyrus, but
'

[6] 12

(rvyKaraypa</>7]0-ofiera>v.

On

the change of subject in

note on [32] 10.

5. Aiov: the first month of the Macedonian year.
generally sold for a regnal year, [57] 4 note but there

like ras 8e
*caraypa<i;,
cf.

L. P. 62

TTOIT/OXHTCU,

cf.

the

last

month Hyperberetaeus

The
is

taxes were

not room for

the lacuna, and the payments of the

only extended over the summer months, cf. note on line 9

aTTo/btoi^a

in

below.
'

7-8.

The

value

of

the

wine which

is

received

from the tax-

farmers for the Treasury shall be credited to the tax-farmers

instalments due from them.'

in

the

H2 REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

Cf. [53] i8-[54] 2.
for the king and court.
7.

which the king paid

fixed in [3

for

The wine

was that required

no regulation stating the price
the wine, probably it was the same as that

As

there

eis TO 0a<ri\iKov

is

].

is partly effaced, perhaps intentionally.

The use of
which rather implies a written transaction, and still more
the fact that the airo/xotpa if paid in money was received by the oeconomus, [3)] 16 note, and by him deposited in the royal bank, while if
paid in kind it was deposited by the yewpyoi in the official vnoboxt-ov,
[31] 19, so that in neither case was the payment really made by the

8.

The

of Aoyei

v7roAoyi6?or0cu,

tax-farmers, seem to me irreconcilable with the hypothesis that ava^opa

means the actual payment. It is only the account of the receipts for
the month. Cf. [53] 24, where the same difficulty recurs, and notes on
[16] 10

and [34]

9.

[34.] 9~[35]. 'Balancing of accounts. When all the produce has

been sold, the oeconomus shall take with him the chief tax-farmer and

and the antigrapheus, and shall balance the accounts with

If there is a surplus left over,
the chief tax-farmer and his associates.
he shall pay to the chief tax-farmer and his associates through the royal
bank the share of the surplus due to each member of the company.
But if there prove to be a deficit, he shall require the chief tax-farmer
and his associates and the sureties to pay each his share of it, the
payment to be exacted within the first three months of the following
his associates

year.'

There is no mention here of

a monthly 810X07107x09 cf. [54] 2O-[55] 12, where nothing is said about
the final 5iaA.oyio>ios of the oil-contract It is difficult to say whether
much stress is to be laid on the omission in either case. On the whole
I think that here it has a meaning, for the accounts of the a-no^ioipa were
kept in money, see [29] 10, [31] 15, [33] 5-8, [34] 6-7, which all deal
with rifxai, cf. L. P. [4] 1 8 note, and no accurate balancing could be done
9.

8iaA.oyioyzos

cf.

[18]

9~[19]

4.

until the

wine was sold,

cf.

line 10.

How

often the sale took place

is

uncertain, owing to the lacuna in [33] 2, but the prices received by the
oeconomus varied considerably, see App. ii (5), and note on [31] 4.
Moreover the receipts of the tax-farmers in the case of the a-no^oipa.

were limited to the summer months, and were not, like those of the
It is quite possible thereoil-contractors, spread over the whole year.

COMMENTARY.

113

one general &ioAoyio>xos was sufficient, but the term a

precise meaning, shows that a certain amount was expected
each month (cf. [56] 17) from the tax-farmers, and the regulation concerning the tyyvoi in [34] 4-6 implies that there was a monthly reckoning
fore that

whatever

of

some

n.

its

kind.
o r/yopaKcos, o

\<av,

and

a.pyjuvr]'}

are here interchangeable

cf.

note

.on [24] 17.

14.

ri8iaypa\/rara>

cf.

[19] 4 rniypatyarto

where there

is

no mention

of the royal bank, and [32] 10 where btaypa^xiv is used in the sense of
paying through a bank.' Cf. Suidas quoted in Peyron's admirable note
'

on btaypa<j>eiv, Pap. Taur. i. p. 144. There is not room for irpoo-5iaypa\/fara>

which is found in L. P. 62 [5] 5, 16, nor did the tax-farmers receive
anything besides the surplus, [12] 13 note. The fact that in one case
certainly, in the other probably, 8iaypa</>eiv is used in the Revenue
Papyrus for payment through a bank, is however, as Wilck. remarked,
an accident, for the meaning of biaypcupciv was rightly decided by Peyron
to be pay simply, whether through a bank, or, what is much more
'

'

frequent, to a

P. P. xlvi (c] 13 8iayeyp(a7TTcu) (is TTJJJ

.
1
L.
the
P.
62
&c.
Nevertheless
21,
6,
[5]
Tp(a-ncav)
[4]
agreement of the Revenue Papyrus with Suidas is remarkable.
1 8. The tax-farmers therefore as well as the sureties had to make up

bank; e.g.

/3a(<nAiKTji;)

the deficit, but in what proportions we do not know, since finftaX\ov is

should expect that the government would extract
quite vague.

We

what
rest.

could from the tax-farmers and force the sureties to pay the
But there is no regulation that the farmers' own property was

it

held in mortgage, and in the account of the 8iaXoyi(r/xos in

[16]-[17],
the yyuot alone seem responsible for making up a deficit, while from the
two series of papyri which bear on this subject, we should gather that
In P. P. xlvi the
the sureties were mainly, if not entirely, responsible.
half
has
to
more
than
the
whole
amount which
surety apparently
pay
the tax-farmer had promised to the government, though the question is

complicated by the occurrence of the obscure term \a\Kov irpos apyvpiov

(to adopt Wilcken's reacting), on which see App. iii, and by an erasure,
the amount paid by the surety
it was all that he was able to
or
whether
liability,
In the Zois papyri the surety is actually liable for the whole

which makes

it

uncertain whether

coincided with his

pay.

amount promised by the tax-farmer. Unfortunately there

Q

are no details

H4 REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

in either case concerning the failure of the tax-farmer to fulfil his contract

or of the penalty which he incurred, and presumably the loss to the

security in both cases was exceptional. The fact however remains that

be surety for a tax-farmer must have been an extremely burdensome

and it is surprising that any one could have been found to
undertake the duty except under compulsion. This I suspect was
exercised both in the case of the eyyvoi, and even in the case of the
tax-farmers, though not formally admitted either in the Revenue Papyrus
or in L. P. 62, in which a large amount of space is devoted to the
The edict of Tiberius Alexander C. I. G. iii.
sureties, [1] i3-[3] 16.
has
a
4957
significant passage, line 10 ff. cyv<av yap irpo iravros euAoycoto

KfiTovpyia,

owav

ryv fvrev&v VJJLMV virep TOV \j.t] aKovras avOpcairovs as reAcoreias TJ

aAAas /zt<r0a>o-eis ovcnaKas -napa TO K.OIVOV (Oos T&V eirapxeicoy Trpos /Stay
Tarrjf

ayecrtfai, K.T.A., which shows that the position of the tax-farmers and
Cf. L. P. 6 a
a fortiori that of the eyyuoi had become intolerable.
which
shows
the
of
tax-farmers.
difficulty
3,
finding
[5]

[35.] 3.

KaAei0-0<o0-ai>

cf.

[8] 3

and [21]

12.

01

abiKovpfvoi are

probably

who had

not received the surplus due to them.

this section the law concerning the aTro/xoipa comes to an end.

the tax-farmers

With
The next two columns
effected the

'

give the decrees by which the second Ptolemy

disendowment of the Church or state religion.
'

The

conclusion of a Trpoara-y^a enclosing a Ttpoypa^a

which quotes a previous irpoo-ray/xa [37] 2-9. This in

[36.] 1-2.

[36] 3~[37] i,
The sequence of these four
turn introduces the Trpo-ypa^a [37] 10-20.
documents in point of time is therefore the exact reverse of their written
order.

'The basilicogrammateis of the nomes throughout the

each for his nome, register both the number of arourae

[36.] 3-19-

country
comprised by vineyards and orchards and the amount of the different
kinds of produce from them, cultivator by cultivator, beginning with the
twenty-second year, and shall separate the land belonging to the temples
and the produce from it in order that the nest of the land may (be
shall,

determined), from which the sixth is to be paid to Philadelphus, and

they shall give a written account of the details to the agents of Satyrus.
Similarly both the cleruchs who possess vineyards or orchards in the
lots which they have received from the king, and all other persons who

COMMENTARY.

115

vineyards or orchards or hold them in gift or cultivate them on

any terms whatever shall, each for himself, register both the extent of
his land and the amount of its different kinds of produce, and shall give

own

the sixth part of

and

fice

all

the produce to Arsinoe Philadelphus for a sacri-

libation (to her).'

4. This passage shows clearly that there was one /3a<riAicos ypa/ufxartus
each nome, though cf. P. P. 138 (a), where the plural is found. But
probably the officials of more than the one nome are there meant, cf. [37]

in

of a

Fayoum the oeconomus was undoubtedly an officer

of the whole nome (see P. P. xviii. (i) 2), we do not know that

Though

2-5.

fi*pis,

not

in the

nomes were divided into /xpi8e?, and on the whole the Revenue
Papyrus points to the oeconomus being under ordinary circumstances an
officer of the whole nome, though it is by no means conclusive, for
throughout the papyrus officials are nearly always spoken of in the
singular, even when there were many bearing the same title, e.g. the
the other

comarch, [40] 3-5.

6. yfrrj/iara

the plural because referring to both

a/xireAou'es

and

-napa-

but perhaps with a secondary reference to the different kinds of

produce included under the head of TrapaSeio-oi ; cf. [24] 1 2 note.
the meaning is that the Trpoypap.^ is to be retro7. OTTO TOV K/3L
Sfio-oi,

spective, though issued between Dius and Daisius of the twenty-third

year, cf. [37] 9 with [36] 2. The Leyden papyrus
gives us actual

proof that the tax was paid to Arsinoe, not to the temples, on the
produce of the twenty-second year, though the transaction recorded by
that papyrus, the payment of 20 drachmae for the Kfpafjuov TTJI 4n\a8eA<pon

by the SoKijiaorr/s to the TtpanTap, is dated in the twenty-sixth year, and

the payment was therefore some years in arrear, which explains the
mention of the TrpaKT<ap ; cf. note on [6] i.

am

indebted to Wilcken for the restoration of this important

which
shows that the iepa yrj was exempt from the CKTTJ. It is
passage,
not surprising that Philadelphus, while diverting the revenue of the
8.

older gods to the new goddess Arsinoe, hesitated to demand a tax for
the deified Arsinoe upon land actually belonging to the gods, raura is

a mistake for ra
10.

The

TTJI

cf.

line 6.

4>iAa8eA</>coi

cf.

P. P. part

date of Arsinoe's death

Pauly-Wissowa's Encycl.

is

I.

70

uncertain

and note on [37] 19.

see Wilck. art. Arsinoe in

(2) i,

But as the Pithom

Q2

stele

shows that she was

n6 REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

it is probable that she was alive in the
Revenue Papyrus is equally consistent
the
twenty-third year, though
with the opposite hypothesis. Cf. Introd. p. xxxix.

alive in the twentieth year,

ii.

Satyrus: see [37]

i 2.

KXrjpovxoi

cf.

n.

[24] 6 note.

Some

of

them

at

any

rate paid only

a tenth after the twenty-seventh year. But nothing can be more precise
than this passage cf. [33] 19, which agrees with it.
It is clear from the references to
15. fv 8o>pecuy: cf. [43] n note.
;

mode

this

of tenure that it was very common, and that holders of land

were generally to some extent exempt from taxation.
Was the sacrifice to be offered by the tax-payers to Arsinoe, or

fv Soopecu
19.

M. prefers the latter meaning,

their behalf to the gods?
be no article before 6v<nav K<U
in
the
other
case
there
would
that
arguing
But
cf.
Rosetta
line
o-wreAowres
Ovonas KCU (nrovbas.
stone,
o-novbrjv,
50
by Arsinoe on

the fact that the tax was called sometimes the

sometimes

airo^otpa

of the

view.

first

It is

collected

TTJI

4>tAa8eA$coi, see

fK-nj

note on [37] 19,

TTJI

<I>iAa8eA</>aH,

is all in

favour

hardly necessary to point out that the CKTTJ TJJI <J>iAa8eA$on was
and paid ets TO /Sao-iAifcoy like any other tax. The dvcna nai

was an ingenious but transparent

ment of the temples.
a-irovbr]

fiction to cloak the

[37.] i. avTiypafyov probably refers to the following

note on [36] i.
'

[37.] 2-9.

King Ptolemy

disendow-

ir/aooroy/bia

see

to all strategi, hipparchs, captains, no-

marchs, toparchs, oeconomi, antigrapheis, basilicogrammateis, Libyarchs,

I have sent you the copies of my proclachiefs of police, greeting.

and

mation, which ordains the payment of the sixth to (Queen) Philadelphus.

Take heed therefore that my instructions are carried into effect. Farewell.
The twenty-third year, Dius the twenty
2. While the strategus already in the third century B.C. combined
civil with military duties (see M., P. P. Introd. p. 7 and Wilck. Anmerk.
.

.'

p. 437), the papyri in which he is mentioned either are

be
or may
later than Philadelphus' reign (including even P. P. ii, cf. note
on [57] 4) and probably at this period the position of the strategus was

Droysen Kl. Schr.

;

still

in the

main

so that there

is

military.

At any

rate the rjyfp.<v

a strong probability that the

was a military
whose title is

official

officer,

lost in

COMMENTARY.

117

the lacuna, was a military one also, and that the civil officials come
Neither the (TriorpaTTjyos nor the viroorpaT^yos has yet been
afterwards.
found in the third century B. C., while i-mrapxtat are frequently found in
is an unpublished papyrus of that collection which begins
orpanjyoH KOI wnap\rji.
The hegemones are thus subordinate to the strategi ;
3. ij-y(fjio(Ti.
nevertheless the Romans chose this title as an equivalent for the

There

P. P.

Ayadtbt

(sic)

an

Cf.

praefectus.

inscr. at

Alexandria, salle G, KaAXiorparos o Tjyc/zwy

This inscription has been asserted

KCU 01 TTayiM(voi VTT dVTov oTparicoTai.

(Mitth. d. K. Deutsch. Arch. Inst. Athen, 1894, p. 237) to

be a forgery, but on very inadequate grounds. He adduces four argu-

by Strack
ments,

(i)

The

writer of the inscription took account of the rough-

nesses of the stone, leaving a space where there was a hole or excrescence.
But this only proves that the writer did not select a very smooth piece

of stone, and by itself is no argument for the date. (2) Strack objects
that the second title of Ptolemy Epiphanes, Euxapioros, is absent.
But
the second

title is

omitted on coins,

cf.

Poole Catalogue,

PI. xxxii. 7,

riroAe/Liaiov Eiri^ayovs, and Epiphanes and Cleopatra are

always called foot ni(f>avcis simply. (3) Strack remarks that Callistratus,
being a Greek, ought to have his father's name mentioned, an argument
which is very far from being conclusive. (4) He says that qye/xoov by itself

which has

is in a Ptolemaic inscription an anachronism, an argurefuted not only by this passage in the Revenue Papyrus,
but by L. P. 45 verso line i, and P. P. xlv, cols. 2 and 3. Cf. pap. 32
in my A. E. F. which has Tjye/icor .... KCU 01 orpanoorai, like the

without

7r

avftpnv

ment which

is

inscription.
Finally the inscription has every appearance of antiquity
and it is not at all likely that a forged Greek inscription should have
found its way into the Alexandria Museum, when a forger could spend
his time much more profitably by turning his attention to 'twelfth
;

dynasty'

stelae, papyri,

or scarabs.

see [41] 16 note.

In P. P. 138 the nomarchs
are put after the oeconomi in the list of officials but cf. [41] 7, which
There
agrees with this passage in giving precedence to the nomarch.
ro/iapxcus KCU roirap^ais

can be no doubt that

this is the right order.

see [36] 4 note.
5. Ai/3uapx<us.
Ai/3u<ipx7js rStv Kara Kvpijvrjv TOTKDV is mentioned in
Polyb. xv. 25. 12, but I agree with M., who thinks that the Libyarchs of
4.

otKovo/iots

u8 REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

the Rev. Pap. were officials of the nome Libya, which included a wide
Cf. the terms Apaftapxns and, in the second century B.C. papyri,
district.
This passage shows that the Libyarchs ranked much lower
0Tjapx o?
-

than the nomarchs in the official hierarchy cf. [41] 16 note.

The absence of the eTn/ieATjnjs from not only this list of officials but
the whole Revenue Papyrus is remarkable, for he is often mentioned
Cf. Rev. R. E. v. 44,
in L. P. 62, 63 with the other financial officials.
;

and P. P. 61. i (fifth year), and 108. 2 (eighth year). Both papyri may
be forty or fifty years later than the Revenue Papyrus, especially the
see App. iii. There is
second, in which the drachmae are copper
But
therefore no direct evidence that the title was used at this time.
the office and title probably existed nevertheless.
6. The
of Kad, if 6 it be, is very irregularly formed and joined
;

to the
7.

o.

and App. p. 8.
Owners of vineyards or orchards, whatever their tenure,
the agents of Satyrus and the accountants who have

Cf. P. P. [122] 6,
'

[37.] 10-20.
shall all give to

been appointed agents of Dionysodorus, nome by nome, a written statement, which statement shall be given by themselves in person or by the
agents or tenants of their estates from the eighteenth to the twenty-first
year, and shall contain both the amount of the different kinds of produce and the name of the temple to which they used to pay the sixth
due, together with the amount of the sixth in each year.
Similarly
the priests also shall give a written statement of the estates from which
they severally derived a revenue, and the amount of the tax in each
year, whether paid in wine or in silver. Likewise the basilicogrammateis
shall send in a written statement of all these details.'
ii. Satyrus: cf. Strabo xvi. 4; a general of Philadelphus bearing
this name was sent on an expedition to obtain elephants and explore
the country of the Troglodytes. But it is not likely that he was the same
person as this Satyrus, who must have held a high financial office at
Alexandria, and possibly was the dioecetes par excellence, while 01
napa Sarupou may have been the ordinary dioecetae together with their
clerks and subordinates.
Cf. [18] 6, where the eKAoyiorr;? is coupled
the
with
SioiKTjrr;?.
14. The twenty-first year was the last in which the tax was paid
The information was
to the temples cf. note on [36] 7, and [33] 14.
;

COMMENTARY.

order that the tax-farmers might be able to take the

in

required

119

average of the four preceding years as their basis in bidding for the
tax.

Wilck. suggests

87j\ov<ras at

the end of the

line,

which makes the

construction easier, but I am not sure that it is necessary.

17. KTrj/xaros, as Wilck. pointed out to me, refers not to the Kn/jzara
of private persons mentioned in line 14, but to the tepa yrj belonging
to the temples cf. [36] 8, which explains this passage. The government
wished to ascertain the number of vineyards and orchards belonging
;

to the priests, in order that they might be

not in order that they might pay it.
18.

While

own

their

this

Krrj/iara

whether the

CKTTJ

exempted from the

tax,

passage shows that the priests received the rent of

partly in money, partly in kind, it is not stated

which they received from the

KTTj/iara

of other persons

same way. But in exacting the tax on napabfia-oi

in money always, and that on a/LnreAcoves in money under certain conditions, the government was probably continuing the regulations in
force when the cnro/xotpa was paid to the temples.

was paid

the

in

the position of the fragments at the end of this line

For no tax of the Ptolemies have we more information

19. [K]<U 01
is

doubtful.

than for the

There

is:

but

it

is

Leyden pap.

aTropoipa,

(i)

not easy to arrange it chronologically.

(see note on [36] 7), a receipt for the

4>iAa8fA<au, dated the twenty-sixth year of Philadelphus.

The
Revenue
Papyrus. (3) Wilck. Ostr. 711, a receipt for the pay(2)
ment of aTTOfzoipa and otvoXoyia in kind, dated the fifth year, probably of
Kfpafjuov

TTJI

Euergetes', perhaps of Philopator's reign.

papyrus at Dublin,
(4)
dated the eighth year, which mentions
the oTro/xoipa TTJS <Jn[Aa8eA<ov. From the close resemblance of the handwriting to that of the wills dated the tenth year of Euergetes in P. P.
part I, M. assigns this papyrus to Euergetes' reign. This document

C b No.
,

9 of

and P. P.

my

A. E.

xlvii. (see

of [24]- [35]

is

I,

(6) P. P. xxvii,

below) are conclusive evidence that the

aTrojxoipa

of [33], [36], and [37]. (5) P. P.

which records the payment of the tax on the produce of
identical with the

xvi. (2),
trapabc icroi in silver,

part

F., &c.,

and

and

(7)

is

xxx

kind upon vineyards, and

KTTJ

dated the seventeenth year of Euergetes.

which record the payment of the CKTT) in

(*?),

in silver

on

irapabfiaoi,

dated the twenty-third

year, probably of Euergetes, but possibly of Philadelphus.

(8) P. P.

120

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

xxx

(c\ in

partly

which the

in silver, that

SCKOTTJ, in

7rapa8et(Toi

upon vineyards

CXTTJ

upon

is

irapabeio-oi. in silver.

assessed partly in kind,

(9) P. P. xliii (6) CKTTJ K<H

a/z-7re\o>z/es are assessed partly in kind, partly in silver, and

in silver cf. note on [24] 1 3. This papyrus and (8) are before

which

Epiphanes' reign, see App. iii. (10) P. P. xlvi (see note on [34] 18), dated
the second and fourth years of Epiphanes, which refers to the airojuotoa
TTJI <J>iAa8eA</>un (cf. no. 3) KCU rots <I>iAo7rarop(ri 0eots.
(n) Wilck. Ostr.

322 = R. E.
royal

bank

vi.

p.

7,

no.

in the sixth

2,

a receipt for 2280 drachmae paid to the

Wilck. R. E. 1. c. assigned

year of a Ptolemy.

it on palaeographical grounds to Euergetes I, but the fact that the

drachmae are copper makes it much more probable that it belongs
to Epiphanes' reign; see App. iii.
(12) Rosetta stone, lines 13-15,

8e KOI ras Ttpo<robovs TCOV lepaw KCU ras bibop.vas eis aura nor

jrpoo-erafe

(viavTov aui>raeis o^in/cas re

aTro/ioipas rots
ra>z>

0eots

OTTO

re

aTrofj.oi.pas

Kai

apyvpiKas

TTJS

aftTreAmSos yrjs xai TO>V

aXX<av T<av vnapavTu>v rots 0eois

If ras Katfrjccowas

8e

/cat

eiri

rots 0eots

o/uotoos

ras
7ra/)a&ei<ra>v

rou Trarpos aurou pfv

has the meaning which has been

generally attributed to it, that the a-rro/xoipai were paid to the temples,
the inscription makes two statements, which if true would be of the
highest importance, (i) that in the reign of Philopator the temples
received

the

from vineyards and

orchards, (2) that they

the ninth year of Epiphanes. But there
are grave difficulties in the way of accepting either of these statements.
The association of the gods Philopatores with Arsinoe in P. P. xlvi (c\
a-n-o/xotpa

continued to receive them

in

dated the fourth year of Epiphanes, is much more consistent with the
supposition that the deified Philopator, far from giving back the
oTrojuotpa to the temples, went a step further than his predecessors, and

made

And

himself the recipient of the tax in name as well as in reality.

if the association of the gods Philopatores with Arsinoe

even

did not take place until the beginning of Epiphanes' reign, it is in

any case certain that the tax was paid to the government, not to the
temples, within five years, perhaps within three, of the Rosetta stone,
and that if Epiphanes gave it back in the ninth year, it was soon
for the payment of a-nonoipa in
appropriated by the government
;

copper drachmae to the royal bank occurs in numerous ostraca belonging

But I do not believe that
to the second century B.C., see (13) below.
these changes ever took place at all. Though Philopator and Epiphanes

COMMENTARY.
owing to the

civil

war

Egypt found

in

it

121

necessary

to conciliate

unlikely that either of them, considering the imof the exchequer shown by the deterioration of
condition
poverished
and
the
the coinage
adoption of a copper standard, could afford to

the priests,

is

it

and since
give up so profitable a source of income as the a-no^oipa
the evidence of the papyri and ostraca, while not absolutely irreconcilable
:

with the Rosetta stone, is all in favour of the supposition that the
government never renounced the airo^iotpa, I think that, if the meaning
generally given to this passage of the Rosetta stone be correct, the
But a distinction is carefully drawn
priests' statements are untrue.

the passage between the irpo<Tobot and <rwraets of the temples and
the ttTro/xoipat of the gods
and if we suppose that by the gods are
in

'

'

meant Arsinoe and the gods Philopatorcs (cf. P. P. xlvi), the passage
only implies that Philopator and Epiphanes maintained the fiction set

up by Philadelphus, that
when paid to Arsinoe.

the

was applied to

religious purposes
not find the priests
guilty of anything worse than an expression of flattery, not more abject
than other phrases in both the Rosetta and Canopus inscriptions.
(13) It is probably not a mere accident that all the receipts for
dTTo/uunpa

found

in

crn-o/Aoipa

In

that

case

we need

the second century B.C. ostraca (see

354, 1234, 123.5, &c.), refer to

payment

in

money, and

W. Ostr. 332,
conjecture that

payment in kind was not allowed after Epiphanes' reign. Moreover

an ostracon in Prof. Sayce's collection (no. 1518) deciphered by Wilcken
shows that the a-nopoipa. in the second century was no longer a Trpos
apyvpiov OH/TJ, but an <avrj TT/JOS x a^ KOV i-o'ovofj.ov, i. e. the tax-farmers were
allowed to pay in copper without having also to pay the difference
of the exchange, cf. L. P. 62 [5] 16 and App. iii.
The latest mention
of

airofjioipa is in

has

made

after the

[38.]

a papyrus at the British

Museum, from which Wilcken

the interesting discovery that the tax continued to be paid

Roman

conquest.

'The twenty-seventh

year, Loius loth,

we

will

correct

this

(among?) the agents of Apollonius:' altered by the corrector to 'we

corrected this in the office of Apollonius the dioecctcs.'
i. Between this and the
preceding column are 18 inches of blank
papyrus. The writer of it is the same as the writer of [23], the corrector
the same as the corrector of [39]-[56], who is in my opinion the writer
of the btopdoifj^a [57] and [58], besides having probably made the few

122

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

and B which are not made by the scribes themselves.

C fall into two classes, those in which he merely
corrects the blunders of the scribes, e.g. [41] 4 and [42] 17, and those
in which he alters the meaning of or makes some addition to the
The first question which arises in [38] is to which
original draft of C.
of these two classes do the corrections here belong? The erasure of
jrapa and the insertion of TOV SIOIKTJTOU obviously belong to the second,
the insertion of ey probably to the first.
For though a mistake in

corrections in

His corrections

in

very remarkable, the dative without a preposition

There is less doubt concerning the alteration of
the tense in 5iop0&xro/ze0a.
It is not necessary to suppose a blunder,
a note like this
is

is

untranslateable.

and therefore

it

is

not legitimate to do

so.

The meaning

of the cor-

that the writer of [38], after the first draft, i.e. [39]-[56],
was completed, inserted a note saying that he would cause the papyrus
rection

is

to be corrected in Apollonius' office.

The papyrus was accordingly sent
thither, and the corrector after revising it notified the fact that he had

The
past.
the
in
draft
of
while
corrections
therefore
consisted
original
[39]-[56],
those columns are contemporaneous with [57] and [58], as is also clear
done so by changing the tense from the future to the

from internal evidence, see notes on [41] 20, [53] 18. In what position
do [59]- [72], all written by one scribe, stand? [59] and [60] are
a repetition with a few variations of [57]-[58], the rest consists of
a list of nomes. Now though the original draft [39]-[56] refers in
one passage to a list of nomes, that list is certainly not the list which

we
'

have, while our list, see notes on [53] 18 and [57] 6, agrees with
the corrections in [39]-[56] and the two columns added by the corrector.
[59]-[72] were therefore added when the corrections were made, and

the explanation of the repetition of [57]-[58] in [59]-[CO] is that

[59]-[72] originally existed as a separate piece, different from the
papyrus of [1]~[58] not only in texture but by at least 3 inches in

and the corrector probably found it more convenient to join

than to copy out the list of nomes himself, although
by doing so he caused the needless repetition of two columns. Whether
[59] and [60] were directly copied from '[5 7]- [5 8] is doubtful, see note
on [57] 6, and the cause of the repetition must of course be a matter
but it concerns us very little whether the list of
of pure conjecture
nomes referred to in [53] 18 was, before the corrections were made,

height,

this strip to [58]

COMMENTARY.

123

joined to the papyrus at the point where [59] now joins it, and was
cut off by the corrector in order that the new list might be substituted,

or whether the

from the

list

draft

first

of the law was incomplete and contained

facts are that the official list of

The important

no list of nomes.
nomes referred to

the uncorrectcd draft of [53] was quite different

which we possess, that [59]-[72] originally formed a sepain

in [38]-[56] and the addition

of [57]-[72] represent changes introduced into the law concerning the
oil contract during the twenty-seventh year, as the date in [38] i

rate

document, and that the corrections

The first draft, [39]-[56] without

doubtless a copy of the older law on the subject,
older we cannot say, except that those parts of it

referring to the corrections shows.

the corrections,

is

though how much

which are 8iaypa^ara seem to have been revised yearly, [53] u, and
therefore may not be older than the twenty-sixth year.
Since C was written in Loius of the twenty-seventh year, the fact
that
and B precede C, even though originally they were- probably
separate documents, makes it certain that they too were written in the

twenty-seventh year. Therefore the date in [24] 2 is the actual year

in which the scribe was writing, not as in the case of the dates in [36]

and [37] the year in the document which he had before him. On D
and E which are contemporary with B see note on [73] i. As the
airo/ioipa was only transferred to Arsinoe in the twenty-third year,
B cannot be based on much older documents, cf. notes on [24] and
is quite
[33], but as Soter must have introduced ro/jiot rcAcoi-iKot, it
A
for
on
note
on
that
is
based
the
most
them.
Cf.
part
[31] 5possible
this is the only place in [l]-[72] where this official
3. TOU 5iouc?jrou
has the simple title, elsewhere he is called o cm rqs SIOIKTJO-CCOS Terayjxcroy,
though see [86] 7. But no stress is to be laid on the variation, cf. note
on [24] j 7.
:

M.

in P. P. Introd. p. 9,

has called attention to the fact that there

were local dioecetae as well as the principal dioecetes in Alexandria,

and I would go a step further and assert that of the dioecetae mentioned
by L. Rec. p. 339, all those quoted from papyri were local dioecetae.
It is in

were made

more probable

that the corrections in [39]-[56]

in the office of the local dioecetes than that the papyrus was

any case

far

sent to Alexandria to be corrected.

And

since the whole

Papyrus came from the Fayoum, see note on [73]

i, it is

Revenue

almost certain

124

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

that the Apollonius in line a

correspondence; see P. P. 6.

is

2,

the Apollonius mentioned in Cleon's

8.

i,

9.

8,

33. 3, 34. 3, 10, all either

certainly or probably belonging to the thirtieth year of Philadelphus.

The dioecetes, being the chief financial official, controlled not only

the oeconomus [18] 6-8, but the nomarch, [41] 12, [46]
;

5.

Prisoners

He

was not
34 [3] 10.
[8] 17,
resident in a nome, [18] 6 note, cf. P. P. 122. 5, 9, a letter
some one in the Nile valley, perhaps at Memphis, to the

were sent to him, L.

permanently
written from
Fayoum and
;

it

is

P.

and

62

P. P.

clear that the district under the care of the dioecetes

included more than a single nome.

[39.] 1-12.

'

The

contractors shall pay the cultivators for an artaba

of sesame containing 30 choenices prepared for grinding 8 drachmae, for

an artaba of croton containing 30 choenices prepared for grinding 4
drachmae, for an artaba of cnecus prepared for grinding i drachma
If the
2 obols, for an artaba of colocynth 4 obols, for linseed 3 obols.
cultivator will not give the contractors

produce prepared for grinding,

out from the store, having cleaned it with a sieve,
and shall measure out in addition for completing the preparation of the
he shall measure

produce

it

for grinding 7 artabae of sesame for

of cnecus 8 artabae.'

every 100, of croton the

same amount, and

1. This section is a Stay/m/A/ua, see 16 and

[53] IT, a term used in C
to express those sections of the papyrus which are concerned with values
or prices: e.g. [40] 9-16, [43] 11-19, an ^ [53].
Cf. [73] i note, and
L. P. 62 [8] 5.

2. Cf.
An artaba of 28 choenices is mentioned in my
[25] 8 note.
A. E. F. pap. 1 8. The difficult question of the various artabae in the
Ptolemaic period is fully discussed by Wilck. in his forthcoming Corpus
Ostracorum. The choenix, he tells me, is approximately a litre.
is found between
3. Cf. [53] 16, where this proportion of 8:4: i
the value of an artaba of sesame, croton, and cnecus; and [41] 10 and
17, [43] 17-18, where the same or nearly the same proportion is observed.
Cf. also the tax on sesame and croton, [39] 14-15, [57] 12.
The prices
here are probably Trpos x. a ^ KOV see [40] 10 and [43] 16, i.e. payment was
made in copper cf. line 1 7 below, where apyvpiov is probably opposed
to payment in copper as well as to payment in kind, and see App. iii.
I am indebted to Dr. E. P.
Wright of Dublin for the following notes
on the oil-producing plants.
Sesame oil is extracted from the seeds of
>

'

COMMENTARY.
Sesamum

oricntale

and Sesamum indicum.

125

When

the seeds are in good

condition, from 49 to 51 per cent, by weight of oil will be taken from

them.
Croton oil is extracted from the seeds of Ricinus communis,
the castor-oil plant
the seeds under favourable circumstances yield
about 25 per cent, by weight of oil. Cnecus oil was almost certainly
'

'

made from the seeds

The sunflower yields
a source are inferior.

of some composite plant, possibly an artichoke.

15 per cent, by weight of oil, but oils from such
As to colocynth oil, the seeds of Citrullus colo-

cynthis yield oil, but are not apparently used at present for such purposes.'
As Dr. Wright suggests, the fact that sesame yields 50 per cent, by
weight, and croton 25 per cent., helps to explain the proportion of 2 i
in their prices, but to what extent depends on the respective weights of
:

an artaba of sesame and an artaba of croton. In speaking of croton,'

I should explain that I mean throughout what the ancients meant by
it, the castor-oil plant, not the plant which is now by a misnomer called
croton.'
This does indeed produce an oil, but it is only useful as
'

'

a very powerful drug.

The most remarkable point in the list is the absence of olive-oil (see
Introd. p. xxxv), the place of which for cooking purposes was clearly taken
at this time by sesame oil.
For the uses of castor-oil, see Strabo xvii.

x^P ay ^xebov TI Tiao-tv, eis aAapi/xa 8c TOIS

Herod, ii. 94 and Wiedemann's note,
Herodot's zweites Buch, p. 382. Probably it was occasionally used then
even for cooking by the poorest inhabitants, a practice which has not yet
824

fly

pfv \v%vov TOIS airo

TT/S

ir>eoT^>ois Kal fyyariKcorc'poi?.

Cf.

Dr. Wright tells me that castor-oil is still used in

cooking purposes, but the Chinese have some method of
it
of its purgative principle. Verily dfc gustibus non est disdepriving
died out in Nubia.

China

for

putandum.
KoXoK.wOi.vov

6.
cf.

[55] 6,

is

used for the

e* K.T.\. in the

oil,

not the plant

next

but

line.

we have

oils, [40] 9-13 and [55] 7-9, in the place

TO tTttX\vyvi.ov 'oil for wicks,' but see [57] 19 TO

where the oil is meant, not the seeds, so that

doubt about the identity of TO cTreAXux 101 w ^h linseed oil,
improbable that this CTT\\VXI>IOV was a less valuable quality of

TOV \ivov onrp/xaTos

there

and

elsewhere this

In the enumeration of the

7.

of linseed oil
UTTO

and the ambiguity of TOU

is little

it

is

some of the other

1'

oils.

are meant here, not the

o-Trcp/xaTos is
oil.

governed by

e/c,

'

although the seeds

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

126

The

8.

cultivators.

regulated

yewpyoi in [39]-[60], like the yecopyoi in [24]-[37], are private

Though the cultivation of sesame and croton was strictly

by the government, the land was not

nor

j3a<nXi/c7j yrj,

is

there

any system of corvee such as that described in L. P. 63. Cf. a demotic

contract with Greek subscription in Revillout's Nouv. Chrest. Dem.
which Phib the son of Phib agrees, pledging himself by
P- J 55>

to plant 20 arourae of land belonging to the temples

and P. P. xxxix (a), where the KATjpen of private individuals

/3ao-iAiKos opuos,

with sesame

are to be planted with croton.

'

Trapafierpftra)

9.
cf.

[43]

aAo)

2, 1 2.

measure out' publicly, in the presence of some one,

the place where the produce was kept, cf. [41] 1 9,

and P. P. 121. 23 rcoi> 8e aA<oi> ov<r<av 07jKa>i>. The

in an eAatovpytor or epyao-Trjpiov, see [44], [45].

oil

was manufactured

pvnapos in Wilck. Ostr. 768, and a papyrus at

de Corr. Hell, xviii. p. 145, line 13
/j/uara a-Tro
TOV
aAco
line
cnrou.
<rvv
ran
and
TYJS
17 a-noKadapo-is
Koznopran ap it,
ii. The 'sign' for apra/3a is to be explained as ap with a stroke over
it to mark the abbreviation, the top of the p being added separately
cf.
[46] 17 where the same sign occurs, but without a stroke over it.
In [53] 16 the loop of the p is joined to the a, while the tail has almost
disappeared. In [60] 25 and the succeeding columns the sign is drawn
without lifting the pen from the papyrus, the form found most commonly
The addition of a curved line above, i. e. v, transin the Petrie papyri.
forms it into the 'sign' for apovpa, as. is clearly shown by pap. 33 of
my A. E. F. Cf. also [57] 12 and [59] 13, where artaba is represented
by a with a stroke after it, which may be p or a sign of abbreviation.
Ka6apas

cf.

Alexandria, M.

irvpos

Bull,

[39.] 13-18. 'The contractors shall receive from the cultivators, for
the tax of 2 drachmae payable on the sesame and the tax of i drachma

on the croton, sesame and croton at the value decreed in the legal tariff,
and shall not exact payment in silver.'
13. That the contractors are the persons meant throughout [39] and
Cf.
[40] is evident from numerous passages in the following columns.
[39] 13 with [41] 10 and [54] 23; and [40] 9 with [49] 18; and see
[53]

6 note.

tax was levied on each artaba, see [41] 10 and [57] 12 =

and
thus amounted to one-fourth of the value in the case of
[59] 13,
sesame and croton. No tax was levied on cnecus, colocynth, and flax,
14.

The

COMMENTARY.

127

the growth of which was not regulated by the central government,

though the distribution of all crops was supervised by the nomarch, see

note on [41] 16. On the other hand the precise amount of sesame and
croton to be grown throughout the country is fixed in [60]-[72].
Since the contractors paid the cultivator 8 drachmae for an artaba
of sesame but received 2

drachmae back

in

sesame,

why

is

there not one

regulation that they should pay the cultivator 6 drachmae, instead of

two regulations, one that they should pay him 8 drachmae, the other
It is quite certain that the contractors
that he should pay them two?
were the same in both cases, see [41] 10-11. Yet there is no mention
of the tax in the StaAoyio-^o? [54] 2o-[55] 1 2, and since the sesame and
croton collected as the tax must have been made into oil, like the sesame
and oil bought by the contractors, it is impossible that the account of
the tax should have been kept separate from the other accounts, and

administered according to the regulations laid down in

for farming
the taxes. As the effect of the tax on sesame and croton was to reduce

one element

making oil, the price of the seeds, by onefourth, probably the tax was ignored in the accounts, and the price of
sesame and croton treated as 6 and 3 drachmae for an artaba.
the cost of

in

The only explanation

of the circumlocution which I can suggest

is

that the government wished to draw a nominal distinction between the

V7rore\eis here and the areAeis in [43] 11, though in reality the
received scarcely anything more for their produce than the
The position of 01 irpta^fvoi n\v eAancrji; differs considerably from that

and B. The latter contracted to pay a fixed sum

If the tax produced more
for a tax the amount of which was uncertain.
than what they had agreed to pay, the surplus went to them
if it
produced less, they had to bear the loss. On the other hand the
of

01 Tipia^fvoi

in

contractors of the

sum

oil

monopoly agreed

to

pay the government a fixed

from the sale of oil [45] 2 and [55] 2, and

room for a deficit or a surplus such as that

for the profits arising

here there seems

little

mentioned in
and B. The precise cost of manufacturing a metretes
of oil was fixed beforehand, [55] 2-12, as was the retail price, [40] 9-16,
and since the amount of sesame and croton to be made into oil in each
nome was fixed in [59]-[7^], the number of metretae that could be sold
was also limited. The only elements of uncertainty were (i) the price
received

by the contractors from the

retailers,

which was fixed by

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

128

auction, [48] 14.

(2) The amount of oil produced from a given amount
of seed could not be anticipated with absolute precision, but apparently
there was a fixed amount of oil expected from each artaba, and if the

actually produced was above the average, this surplus

belonged not to the contractors, but to the Treasury [58] 8. (3) The
number of metretae sold might fall short of the contractors' expectations,

amount of

oil

and they received less for oil remaining over when the contract expired
than for the oil which they had sold, [53] 14. (4) The duty on foreign
oil

the

brought into the country was paid to the contractors, [52] 20, and
amount of this would be uncertain. But the margin for either profit

loss, so far as the contractors were concerned, was extremely narrow,

and the absence of any regulation like that in [18] 9 and [34] 9-21
might be thought to show that there was no margin at all. Still, as the
actual profit made by the sale of the oil must have had a definite relation
to the sum promised by the contractors, it is probable that any surplus
or deficit on the whole contract was treated in the usual way.
On the other hand there are good reasons for supposing that such
a surplus was likely to be very unimportant. These are (i) the absence

or

any regulation providing

contingency (2) the use of fmyevrjua
in C, not for the surplus above the total amount which the contractors
had agreed to pay, but for the profit on the sale of each metretes of
for the

of

the difference between the cost and the selling price, [41]
;
7riyei;T7/ia
(3) the fact that the contractors received a portion of this
as their pia-dos or pay, [45] 6, [55] 13-16, while in
and B there
oil,

i.e.

and
14 note. In
B the government by farming out the taxes secured a fixed revenue,
while the tax-farmers were allowed the opportunity of making a surplus.

is

In

no hint of a

/j.to-0oy

for the tax-farmers, [31]

the government farmed out the oil-monopoly, not in the least

to secure a fixed revenue, for the revenue from it was fixed already,
but to ensure the economical manufacture of the oil, while the tax-

farmers received a definite reward for their labour in superintending the

manufacture and sale of the oil instead of an indefinite surplus.
It is in their capacity of manufacturers far more than in their
capacity of tax-farmers that 01 Trpiapevoi -n\v eAaiKTjy were necessary to
the government, and for that reason throughout C I have translated
ot irpia/xeroi

17.

'

contractors.'

See notes on

lines

and

3.

COMMENTARY.

129

[39.] i9~[40] 8. 'The cultivators shall not be allowed to sell either

and the
sesame or croton to any persons other than the contractors
contractors shall give the comarch a sealed receipt for what they have
received from each cultivator if they do not give him the receipt, the
comarch shall not allow the produce to leave the village. If he disobeys
this rule, he shall pay 1000 drachmae to the Treasury, and five times the
amount of the loss which his action may have caused, to the contractors.'
.

[40.] 3. See note on [39] 13 line 7 also shows that the contractors
cf. [31] 17.
are meant.
a7ro0-</>payio-/ua
;

5. Trpoteo-flco

cf.

[27]

1 1

[40.] 9-20. The contractors shall sell the oil in the country at the
rate of 48 dr. for a metretes of sesame oil containing 12 chocs and
for a metretes of cnecus-oil, accepting payment in copper, and at the rate
'

'

of 30 dr. for a metretes of cici, colocynth oil, and lamp oil (altered
to 'The contractors shall sell the oil -in the country, both sesame oil,
oil, cici, colocynth oil, and lamp oil at the rate of 48 dr. for
a metretes of 12 choes, accepting payment in copper, and 2 obols for
a cotyle '). In Alexandria and the whole of Libya they shall sell it at

cnccus

the rate of 48 dr. for a metretes of sesame oil, and 48 dr. for a metretes
of cici (altered to
48 dr. for a metretes of sesame oil and cici, and
2 obols for a cotyle'), and they shall provide an amount sufficient to meet
'.

the demands of buyers, selling

it
throughout the country in all the towns
and villages, (measuring it) by measures which have been tested by the
oeconomus and antigrapheus.'
9. That the government were able to suddenly raise the price of the
inferior oils more than 50 per cent., making them equal in value to the
superior oils, shows the gulf which separates ancient from modern political
economy. It is difficult to see why any one should have bought e.g. oil
As M.
of colocynth, when he could get sesame oil at the same price.
it was probably with the object of maintaining the demand for
suggests,
sesame oil that the government levelled up the price of cici, colocynth,
and lamp oil to that of sesame and cnecus oil.
To anticipate, this passage means
10. irpos x a^ KOv: see App. iiithat 288 of the large copper coins which represent the obol (or an
equivalent amount of the smaller ones) would be accepted as the
equivalent of 48 silver drachmae, although in reality 48 drachmae thus

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

130

paid in copper were worth about 10 per cent, less than 48 drachmae
Since however the contractors of the oil monopoly not
paid in silver.
only received payments in copper but made them in copper to the

government, [58]
cf.

6,

The

not on them.

L. P. 62 [5]

9.

by the exchange

the loss
eAatfoj

u>vr\

was

in fact

Literally irpos

an

XO.XKOV

fell
u>vr\

on the government,
\a\Kov

Trpos

means

KTOVOIJ.OV,

'

against copper/

x a^ KOV

irpos apyvpiov, and my explanation of it in App. iii p. 204.

Petrie papyri have as yet yielded no information concerning the
price of oil in the third century B.C., which, as the correction here shows,
varied largely from year to year.
The Sakkakini papyrus however,
cf.

The

of the third century B.C. (Rev. R. E. iii. 89), mentions frequently the
payment of i obol for cici. M. Revillout suggests that the amount was

which would make the price of a metretes 12 ^drachmae.

about the price of oil in the next century, but
is hardly compatible with the
30 dr., still less with the 48 dr., which the
Revenue Papyrus states to be the price of a metretes of cici. I should
therefore suggest that the obol was the price of i cotyle or at most of
i cotyle.
On the price of oil in the second century B.C. see note on
2

cotulae,

This

suits his conclusions

[51] 12.
see note on [39] 7. While the retail price of oil is here
iT(X\vxvi.ov
fixed at 48 dr. vpos -^a\Kov, the contractors did not receive 48 drachmae,
as most of the selling, if not the whole, was done by small traders, [47]
:

sqq., to

ii.

[55]

On

whom

the contractors sold the

oil

by

auction.

the metretes of 12 choes see notes on [25]

8,

[31]

6,

and

8.

i. e.
14. TraoTji
including the atp^pio-^vrj, the produce of which was
reserved for Alexandria, [60] 10 and [61] 3.
It is obvious that the
nome Libya had no very clearly defined boundary. Cf. [37] 5 note.
:

15. Cnecus, colocynth, and linseed oil are omitted, though they must
have been required in Alexandria, cf. [53] 22, and [58] i note. Probably
cf. [42] 4
they were sold at the same price as sesame oil and cici
;

note.
16. TI]V written

comes

above

/ZTJ

means that
and [43]

TTJV

8e KoruXTjy, written in line 15,

25, where, a note having been

the
next
of
few
letters
the
inserted,
following sentence are written in
order to fix the place of the note.
in here.

Cf. [41] 27

19. Cf. the similar precaution in [25] 10.

COMMENTARY.

131

[41.] 3-13. 'They shall exhibit the land sown to the contractor in
conjunction with the oeconomus and antigrapheus, and if, after surveying
it, they find that the right number of arourae has not been sown, both

the nomarch and the toparch and the oeconomus and the antigrapheus
shall, each of them who is responsible, pay a fine of two talents to the

Treasury, and to the contractors for each artaba of sesame which they
ought to have received 2 dr., and for each artaba of croton i dr., together
with the surplus of the oil and the cici. The dioecetes shall exact the
payment from them.'
i. e. the nomarch and
toparch cf. [43] 3.
3. airo6fiaTO)(rai;
TO
number
in
the
decreed
TrAtjflos:
5.
Only sesame and
[60]-[72].
croton are meant in this column.
:

10.

The

11. TO

price

and

to [39] 13-18.
TTiyvr]fjM TOV f\aiov is the whole difference between the cost
the selling price of sesame oil, not merely the share of this

reference

is

surplus which the contractors received as pay for their trouble in superIt was this
intending the manufacture, cf. [45] 2 note, and [55] 9.
which
the
had
contractors
to
to
the
agreed
surplus
pay
Treasury, and

they are here completely secured against loss from a deficiency in the
c \aiov, when coupled with KIKI, means sesame
crop, cf. note on [39] 14.
oil here, as in [51] 21, 24,
[53] 20, [57] 16, and [60] 16; cf. B. M.
pap. xxi. 24. In [47] 14 and [48] 4, however, fhaiov appears to include
all the oils except cici, for cnecus, colocynth, and lamp oil must have

been distributed to the

KciTnjAoi like

sesame

oil

and

This argument

cici.

not conclusive, since in several places cnecus, colocynth, and lamp oil
are ignored, and we are left to assume the arrangements concerning
is

them from the regulations concerning sesame and cici see [42] 4 note.
But [47] 7 cicaoTov ycvovs, not (Karcpov, is strongly in favour of more than
two oils being meant; cf. [42] 12 CKCO-TCI Kara yews, where at least three
kinds of produce are referred to, and [54] 23, where fnaorov yerovs means
all the five kinds of produce mentioned in [39] 1-7.
That the phrase
TO (\aiov KCU KIKI was felt even at the time to be ambiguous, is shown by
;

[49] 1 8, where TO t\aiov ought from the context to include cnecus oil as
well as sesame, and it is more probable that the first hand intended it to

do so than that he omitted cnecus oil by mistake. But the corrector

was not satisfied with the clearness of the phrase, for after TO c\cuov he
inserted TO oTjaa/xirov

TJ

TO KVTJKIVOV.

S 2

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

132

follows from this frequent use of eXaiov for sesame oil that where
is found in papyri of this period, meaning one kind of oil, the
presumption is that sesame oil is meant: e.g. P. P. part I, 78. 7.
It

fXaiov

13.
'

line,

On

the dioecetes see note on [38]

3.

eo> opa at the end of the

look outside,' calls attention to the fact that a note on the verso

to be inserted at this point

'

[41.] 20-27.

The

cf.

[43]

is

2.

contractor shall give orders with respect to the

sesame and croton to be grown for other nomes, and (if the due amount
is not sown) the dioecetes shall exact the amount from the officials who
have received the orders, and shall pay it to those nomes which ought
to have received the sesame and croton '.
(Added by the corrector.)
20. Though the lacunae are too great to be filled up with any
certainty, this section clearly supplements the foregoing one, and provides for the case in which the deficiency affected the sesame and croton
to be grown for other nomes.
Since some nomes did not grow enough
sesame for their own consumption, e.g. the Heracleopolite, [70] 13, while
many of them did not grow enough, or even any, croton, e. g. Libya
[61] 7, and the Nitriote nome, [61] 22, the deficiency was made good by
making other nomes grow more than was required for their own consumption. It is noticeable that the case of sesame and croton being
thus transferred from one nome to another is not provided for in the
original draft of [39]-[56], but is frequently mentioned in the Stoptfco^ara,
as here, [43] 21, and [57] 8-13, where the general regulation concerning
it is laid down.
The use of e8ei and ei<T7rpaa? and the mention of the dioecetes, all
agreeing with 3-13, show that 20-27 refer only to the case in which the
proper number of arourae had not been sown, and are not a general
statement.
21. The letters at the end of the line do not suit Trpov
the papyrus
deeply stained here, and I am not certain that the piece containing
the end of this line is in its correct place.
;

is

27. Cf.

note on [40]

16.

[41.] 14-19. 'Before the season comes for sowing the sesame and
croton, the oeconomus shall give the official in charge of the distribution
of crops, be he nomarch or toparch,. if he desires it, for the seed sufficient
for

sowing an aroura of sesame 4 drachmae, and

for the seed sufficient

COMMENTARY.

133

an aroura of croton 2 drachmae, and he shall transport the seed

from the store instead of ..."

for

is here equivalent to VO//TJ in the sense of 'distri*

the sense of pasture,' cf. Hesych. Xojxtfo, vo\i.r\v and
where rutv apovptav probably goes with vopov, not <ntopov and

16. vo/ios

bution,' as

it

consider
in

is

[43] 3,
P. P. xxx (d), a

the Fayoum.

list

The

called

i,

made

out by a nomarch of various crops sown in

Fayoum was for this purpose divided into several

after

their

respective

nomarchs

e. g.

there

is

the

62 (2) 4; Aioyevous in part II. 46. 8;

Not until the second century
<t>iAiir7rou, and Maifxaxou in xxxix.
B.C. do we find the nomarch often identified with the strategus, and
I am fully aware of the boldness of
therefore chief of the 'nome.'
NIKCOVOJ in P. P. part

I.

'

taking vopov here in any other sense than that of nome,' though nome
But the difficulty of taking
itself of course originally meant a division.'
'

'

'

jrpofOTTjKwy TOU vopov

whelming.
phrase ran

here as

The absence

'

nome

chief of the

of an article before

'

appears to

roirapxtj'

me

over-

shows that the

applies as much to the toparch as to the

the 'chief of the nome' could be either a nomarch or

irpoeorr/jcon rou vopov

nomarch, i.e.
a toparch, cf. [43] 3, where the nomarch need not be chief of the nome,'
and [24] 6 note. Now, since we know from the Petrie papyri that there
were several nomarchs in a nome, the phrase o TrpoeorrjKeos rov vofj.ov would
mean that one of these nomarchs occupied a superior position to the
others, and that he is the person referred to here and in [43] 3, while in
the other passages the ordinary nomarchs are meant. This draws an
artificial distinction between two kinds of nomarchs, which does not in
the least suit the passages where they are mentioned in this papyrus or
'

elsewhere.
'

phrase

becomes

On

the other hand,

chief of the

nome

if

this difficulty is

avoided by taking the

'

as applicable to all nomarchs, the phrase

otiose
in
this
purely
passage, except in so far as it applies to

the toparch, and the papyrus is self-contradictory, for in [43] 3 it

stated that the chief of the nome is not always the nomarch.
But

is

'

'

if

'

the difficulty of the phrase chief of the nome,' even as applied to the
nomarch, is great, the difficulty of applying it equally to the toparch,

a consequence which necessarily follows from the absence of the article

before Ton-apxrji, is much greater. There are only two possible conditions under which a toparch could be chief of the nome.'
there were some nomes in which there were no nomarchs at
'

Either
all,

and

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

134

were performed by toparchs, or the nomarchs might all

be away on leave and hence a toparch might become for a time chief of
the nome.'
For, as has been shown, there were several nomarchs at any
rate in the Fayoum, and if only one went away, his place would obviously
be filled by another nomarch, not by a toparch who was necessarily
subordinate to a nomarch. But both of these suppositions are equally
So far from it being probable that certain nomes had
unsatisfactory.
all
the evidence we have points to their being universal,
no nomarchs,
their functions

'

while

we know

some nomes

for certain that in

there are no toparchs, see

Strabo 787 els yap ro-napxtas ol TrAeto-roi (vojiot) Siifprj^ro. Nor can [42]
5-6 be taken as an argument for the non-existence of nomarchs in certain
nomes, for (i) ou in line 6 refers to places, not to whole nomes, and (2)
that passage implies that where there were no nomarchs there were also

no toparchs,

cf.

vopapxai

As

TJ

ro7rapx a ' in line 6 with ran vop.apxrji, KCU ran

nomarchs
were for a time absent, we are forced to believe not only that all the
nomarchs could be away at once, which is very unlikely, but that their
absence was a matter of frequent occurrence, since it was necessary to
provide for the contingency, and further that, when a toparch was acting
for a nomarch under these circumstances, he could be called chief of the
nome.' But it is hardly credible that the toparch should have thus
TOTrapxn'- in line 5.

for the alternative supposition that the

'

title of the nomarch

moreover, if the writer of the papyrus
had meant that the toparch was for the moment acting-nomarch, he would
have used o Trapa or some such phrase. On the other hand, all these
difficulties are avoided by supposing that rojuou is here and in [43] 3
equivalent to I/O/XT;, a meaning which not only suits the context in both

usurped the

cases, but

is perfectly consistent with the duties of nomarchs, so far as

be
can
gathered from the Petrie papyri. The phrase chief of the
they
nome would apply with much greater propriety to the strategus.
17. I have taken (mopov here as equivalent to a-jrcpfjia, cf. [43] 4,
'

'

and perhaps [42]

It is not clear

why

16.
Elsewhere it means the 'crop': e. g. [41] 3.
the nomarch should receive this money, or who is the

which

subject of

Ko/zte<r0&>,

eoTTjKoos, cf.

[32] 10 note.

seed to the cultivators

and

19.

may mean

In [43] 3
cf.

App.

have now disappeared.

aXo)
see note on [39] 9.
:

ii

it is

(3).

'

simply

receive.'

the nomarch

The

first

who

few

If

it

is

o irpo-

distributes the

letters of lines 17

COMMENTARY.

135

'
[42.] 3~[43] 2. When the season comes for gathering the sesame,
croton, and cnecus, the cultivators shall give notice to the nomarch and
the toparch, or where there are no nomarchs or toparchs to the oeco-

nomus and these officials shall summon the contractor, and he shall go
with them to the fields and assess the crop. The peasants and the other
;

have their different kinds of produce assessed before

they gather it, and shall make a double contract, sealed, with the contractor, and every peasant shall enter on oath the amount of land which
cultivators shall

he has sown with seed of each kind, and the amount of his assessment,
and shall seal the contract, which shall also be sealed by the representative of the

nomarch or

toparch.'

3. Cf. [24] 15, the parallel regulation for cultivators of vineyards.

4. This passage and line 16 show that cnecus, whatever it was, did

not grow wild, but was cultivated like sesame and croton. The omission
of colocynth and linseed is a difficulty which arises in several places,
cf.

line 12, [40] 15, [43] 18, [44] 6, [46] 17, [49] 17, [53] 10, 15.

the inference to be drawn

But

not that the regulations were inapplicable

to colocynth and linseed, but that the regulations for them were parallel
to those for sesame, croton, and cnecus.
See [43] 14 TO Aoiira <o/ma,
is

while only cnecus is mentioned in 18 and [57] 18, where cnecus oil is
unaccountably omitted and cf. notes on [41] u, [57] 16.
6. This class of places where there were no nomarchs or toparchs,
included, as L. suggests, besides Alexandria, the cities with a Greek
;

constitution (e.g. Naucratis which

1 8,

[CO]

and Ptolemais

by Libyarchs,

[37] 5.

in the

The

was

distinct

from the Saite nome,

Thebaid), and possibly the places ruled

Thebaid, the government of which was

itself, being ruled by a

Tj/3apxos (Lumb. Rec. p. 239), contained roTrapx"" in the next century, Wilck. Observ. pp. 24-30. Cf. the

peculiar to

passage in Strabo quoted in note on [41] 16.

8. There is no difference intended between o tx <01/ and o
u>vj]v

see [24]

j
'

9.

apovpas,

5iotKo>i> TTJU

7 note.

fields ':

cf Rev. Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch. December, 1891,

p. 65.

II. Aaoi are the fellaheen

17.

cf.

L. P. 63. 100

TU>V cv TOIS /caucus *caroi-

and P. P. 14. 4. TipaffdoHrav is probably passive, as in line

The method of assessment resembles that for cultivators of vineyards

KOVVTW

\a<0v,

[25] 1-2, rather than that for cultivators of orchards [29] 6.

136

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

13.

TJ

is

omitted by mistake after Trportpov:

blunders of this scribe see note on [48]

see [27] 5 note.
15. 8177X771;

on the uncorrected

9.

1 7.

demotic contract quoted in note on [39] 8.

does not imply that the nomarch was there

opKov: sc.a<riA.iKov; cf.the

20. awctTTooraAeis

this

see note on [27] 13.

[43.]

2.

opa

efco

see [41] 13 note.

[43.] 20-25. 'The crop of sesame and croton assigned to the cultigrown for other nomes shall be assessed by the oeconomus

vators to be

and antigrapheus, who shall receive the sesame and croton from the
cultivators (added by the corrector).
cf.
i. e.
in [60]-[72]
The tax on
20. biaypa(f)VTo$
[41] 20 note.
sesame and croton grown for other nomes belonged to the contractors
Hence it
of the nome to which the produce was transferred, [57] 7-13.
was not allowed to pass through the hands of the contractors in the
nome where it was grown. Cf. [60] u, where the oeconomus, not the
'

contractor, receives the produce

25. Cf. [40] 16 note.
'

[43.] 3-10.

The nomarch

grown

fv

TTJI

a^copio-^ez^ji.

or official in charge of the distribution of

crops shall give out the seed to each cultivator sixty days before the
crop is gathered. If he fails to do so or to show the cultivators who

have sown the assigned number of arourae, he shall pay the contractor
the fine which has been decreed, and shall recover his loss by exacting
it from the disobedient cultivators.'
1 6 note.
8oro> does not imply that it was more than
3. Cf. [41]
a loan

see App.

(3) 2-4.
sixty days do not apply to croton, which takes a long time to
grow, or to cnecus, colocynth and flax, the amount of which was not
It is remarkable that sesame and croton are
fixed, cf. note on [39] 14.
5.

ii

The

treated throughout the papyrus as precisely parallel, although the one

had to be sown every year, and the other lasted several years.
6. TrapeurxTjrai
cf.
[51] 8, where too the middle is (probably) found
:

in place of the active.

i.e. in
7. biaypafav
[60]-[72], though the list of nomes to which
the scribe was referring before the corrections took place was different
:

see note

on [38]

and [57]

6.

yeypajujueva

see [41] 9-12.

COMMENTARY.

137

[43.] 11-19. 'All persons throughout the country who are exempt
from taxation, or hold villages and land in gift, or receive the revenues
therefrom as income, shall measure out all the sesame and croton
assigned to them, and the other kinds of produce included in the
oil-monopoly, leaving a sufficient amount for next year's seed and they
shall be paid the value of it in copper coin, at the rate of 6 dr. for an
artaba of sesame, 3 dr. 2 obols for an artaba of croton, I dr. for an
;

artaba of cnecus.'

[69]

it

grew

Fayoum was exempt, so far as

Memphite nome was concerned

e.g. the

ii. arcXeiy:

which

for the

the produce
see note on

i.

note on [36]

ev b<ap(ai: cf.

15.

tv

<rwrai

tribution,' especially for religious purposes

wvrafis means a 'con-

see the

Serapeum papyri,
L. suggests that the difference
between villages tv bupeai and villages fv owra^ei was that in the latter
case only the revenues were assigned to a person (cf. the case of
Ros. stone 15, and Rev. R. E.

Themistocles

who

I.

59.

received the revenues of five

cities,

Athen.

i.

30),

while

the former, besides the revenues, the whole village was made over,
including the duty of administering it. Cf. [44] 3, where it is stated that
in

no

oil factories

are to be set up in villages tv bvpeai.

This shows that

the administration of villages tv bupecu was not quite the same as that of
ordinary villages, from which villages er <rvvTafi are not there distin-

and I prefer Lumbraso's explanation to those suggested by

Introd. p. xxxviii. In any case the holders of land ei> owro&iwere no
doubt mainly, if not wholly, the priests, cf. [50] 20, while holders of land

guished

M.

were court favourites.

there is no reason to think that the arcAei? were
13. ycvonevov
allowed greater freedom in the choice of crops than other cultivators.
For this use of y(vop.cvov as due cf. [30] 21, [37] 16, [56] 19, but in all
these cases the present participle is used, and perhaps yivontvov here
merely means what they have grown.
16. 7iy>os \aXK.ov: cf. note on [40] 10, and App. iii pp. 194-198.
fv txapfai

'

'

17. In the case of sesame, since the arcXets only received 6 dr. instead
of 8 paid to the ordinary cultivators, [39] 3, who had, [39] 18, to give
back 2 dr. as tax, their areAeia was purely nominal cf. note on [39] 14.
;

With regard

to croton they were slightly better off than the ordinary

On
cultivators, receiving 3 dr. 2 obols instead of 3 drachmae net.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

138

the other hand, in the case of cnecus they were actually worse off,
Colocynth and linseed are
receiving only i dr. instead of i dr. 2 obols.
as usual omitted, cf. note on [42] 4, though they must have been included
in ra AoiTra </>opna.
Probably the areAets received the same amount for

these as the

cnecus

is

v7roreA.eis,

since there

was no tax on them

but the case of

remarkable.

The

'

'

cf.
they shall pay the deficiency
line 10.
It is unlikely that there is here a reference to their keeping
back sesame and croton and so violating the monopoly, for that is
1

9.

apodosis

discussed in [49] 16

is

probably

sq'q.

[44.] The oeconomus and antigrapheus shall appoint ... to be

a factory and shall seal their choice by stamping it. But in villages
which are held as a gift from the Crown they shall not set up an
oil factory.
They shall deposit in each factory the requisite amount
'

of sesame, croton, and cnecus.

appointed

who

in

each

nome

They

shall

workmen
workman
any

not allow the

to cross over into another

nome

by the contractor and the

No one shall harbour workmen from

crosses over shall be subject to arrest

oeconomus and antigrapheus.

nome if any one does so knowingly or fails to send back
workmen when he has been ordered to restore them, he shall pay
a fine of 3000 dr. for each workman, and the workman shall be subject

another

to arrest.'
i.

3.

5.

Akt.

7 and 13 with [44] 4 shows that the oecoare the subject.

comparison of [45]

nomus and antigrapheus

See note on [43]
Cf. an ostracon
p. 59,

dated

1 1

in Prof. Sayce's collection published

the

by Wilck.

year of Euergetes II, in which

eAcuoupyicu, i. e., if the law was still the

thirty-fifth

Asclepiades, probably o Ttpos r?jt

same, the chief contractor, gives a receipt to Heracleides, probably
a yeo>pyos, but possibly the oeconomus, for Kporo>i>[os] ft, as Wilck. now
reads, the sign for artaba being omitted.
1 6.
7n0raA;ro? Wilck. Cf. the frequent use of fiovXoptvov in [25]
10
cf.
et
al.
avayayr]
[22] 2, note.
[28]
:

i,

[45.] i-i2.

'
.

and from the surplus of the oil that is sold (altered

oeconomus shall divide among the workmen

to 'manufactured'), the

for every metretes containing

2 choes 3 dr. (altered to

'

2 dr. 3 obols.')

COMMENTARY.
Of

sum

this

the

workmen and the men who

2 dr. (altered to *
to '5 obols').
But

he

oil,

workmen

cut the crop shall receive

and the contractors

dr.

i
dr. (altered
4 obols'),
the oeconomus or his representative fails to pay
their wages, or their share in the profits from the sale

workmen

the

of the

139

if

fine of

pay a
pay, and

shall

their

3000

the Treasury, and to the

amount of the

dr. to

to the contractors twice the

which they may have incurred on account of the workmen.'

There is not room for TOU 7rtyerrj^aros probably the first scribe
wrote yfrq/xaro? by mistake, and <TTI was added by the corrector, for
yerrjpuiTos is meaningless and in [55] 9 and 13, which clearly refer back
loss

2.

to this passage, f-niytv^a

atro

is

As

found.

the phrase in line

9, TO /xe/xepi-

9 ro

<rvvTtTay\*.tvov p.cpirdai airo TOV

(cf. [55]
the
here
was
the profit on every metretes
shows,
surplus
of oil sold after the expenses of production had been deducted, cf.
[41] ii, and [39] 14, note, and is quite different from the 7riyerj/xa

of

irpaa-fats

and B.
[56] 19-21, a regulation which ought to have
no share of the profit was to be paid
for the oil that was stored, on which see note on

KaTcpya&ntvov

3.

come

TTJJ

cf.

in here to the effect that

to the

workmen

[53] 55.

The

construction

is

not very logical.

The

contractors are

men-

tioned here without having been mentioned in line 3, and nothing

said in lines 7-12 of the compensation which they are to receive,

is

if

the oeconomus does not pay them, for line 1 1 refers only to compensation
for loss inflicted on them through the workmen not being paid.
The

reason

that here the

is

payment of the workmen

payment of the contractors incidental.

discussed in [55].

the
is

The

the subject and

salary of the latter
is

one of the earliest examples

of profit-sharing, the workmen received more than the entrepreneurs.'
The author of this law, whether Soter or Philadelphus, certainly favoured
It

is

interesting to note that in this,

'

the fellaheen at the expense of the richer classes or the foreign settlers,
who in most cases farmed the taxes.
Koireis

new

manufacture of
aTTiTrovo-i, ot

sense of this word

cici,

ii.

94 TOVTOV

cf.

Herodotus' description of the

tirfav

xfyavrts
gives no

8* Kal (j>pvavT($ airtyowi.

details about roasting the seeds.

mbA/^mmu, di ptv
The Revenue Papyrus

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

140

8.

for piece

wages

KaTfpyov:

work,

cf.

[46]

18-20, while

jzi<r0os

is

where nivQov includes both narepyov

and the share of the profits [55] 14-15, where it differs from narepyov
as 'salary' from 'wages'; [46] 2, note; and LXX Exod. 30. 16, and
From the way in which the Karepyov
35. 21 TO KaTfpyov TT/S OTCTJI/TJS.
is mentioned here, we should expect that it had been fixed in the
'

a general term,

Cf. line

pay.'

1 1

lost

top of [45]

but see [46] 18, note.

[45.] 13-18. 'If the oeconomus and antigrapheus

fail

to set

up

oil

factories in accordance with these regulations, or to deposit a sufficient

quantity of produce, thus inflicting a loss on the contractors, both

the oeconomus and antigrapheus shall be fined the amount of the

deficit which results, and shall pay the contractors twice the amount

of the loss incurred.'

14. TrapaOtoVTai
16. rr]v eybeiav

cf.

[44] 5

sc. eis ro fiacnXiKov, cf.

[45.] I9~[46] 20.

[40]

7,

and [41]

'The oeconomus and antigrapheus

9.

shall provide

tools for each factory, .... when the oeconomus visits the factory in.
order to pay the wages (?), he shall not interfere with the work in

any way to the damage of the contractors. If he fails to provide tools,

or damages the interests of the contractors in any way, he shall be
judged before the dioecetes, and if he is found guilty, he shall pay (to
the Treasury) a fine of two talents of silver, and (to the contractors)
twice the amount of the damage which he has caused.
The contractors
and the clerk appointed by the oeconomus and antigrapheus shall have
joint authority over all the workmen in the nome, and over the factories
and the plant, and they shall seal up the tools during the time when
there is no work.
They shall compel the workmen to work every
day, and shall supervise them in person, and they shall every day
make into oil not less than i artabae of sesame (altered to i artaba')
in each mortar, and 4 artabae of croton, and i of cnecus, and they
'

shall

pay the workmen

as

wages

for

making 4 artabae of sesame,

artabae of croton 4 drachmae, and for

.,
cnecus 8 drachmae.'

into oil

for

[45.] 19.
Cf. [46]

The fragment containing

4 and n,

[46.]

2.

\opr\yrn

If KaTKDv

is

and
right

]KOI;O/ I[

and

]a<r[

artabae of

has disappeared.

Karao-/cwj?.

and goes with

narepyov,

it

is

difficult to

COMMENTARY.

141

take Kartpyov in its ordinary sense, cf. [45] 8 note. M. suggests that
it here means the
work,' i. e. if the oeconomus visited the factory while
'

the work was proceeding, he was not to interfere, and compares P. P.

a<rroi> apyov KCLI TO Karepyov, which
is
7. 8 (ypa\lra <roi o bet. 8o0Tjrcu
he thinks means 'working time' as opposed to 'time when there is
no work,' cf. [46] 12. But the ordinary meaning, 'wages' is equally
possible there, and therefore I hesitate to depart here from the ascertained

meaning of
fines

Karepyov.

The mention

6.

were

of silver here and in [47] 8 does not imply that other

trpos \CL\KOV.

an equally possible reading.

see note on [26] 7napacrcppayi&a-doMTa.v
the
subject may be the workmen, cf. note on
14. Ka.Tfpya((rOa><Tav:
is
not applied to the workmen only, see
[32] 10; but KciTfpya&o-Ocu
10. T]OTTO)I is

11.

[57] 19.
1 8. KdTfpyov might be expected
has just been mentioned, but there

in the lacuna, since KaTepyae<r0axrai;

is not room for it, and

against the
the
sums
here
that
the
of
the
workmen
represent
wages
hypothesis
is to be set the fact that Karcpyov is spoken of in [45] 8 as if it had
been already fixed, and that the wages were paid by the oeconomus,

not the contractors, [45] 7, while the subject of a-nobiboTaxrav is apparently

But see [53] 25 note.
the contractors and the clerk.
Colocynth oil
and lamp oil are once more ignored ; in fact in [44]-[47] 9, the section

dealing with the manufacture of oil, they are never mentioned. But
it is hardly possible that the conditions of their manufacture were different
;

note on [42] 4, and [54] 23~[55]

five kinds is implied.

cf.

I,

where the manufacture of

all

[47.] 1-9. No arrangement with the workmen regarding the flow

of the oil shall be made either by the oeconomus or the contractor
'

under any pretext whatever, nor shall the tools in the factories be
unsealed during the time when there is no work. If they make
an arrangement with any of the workmen, or leave the tools unsealed,
left

each of the guilty parties shall pay a fine of i talent to the Treasury,
and to the contractors the amount of their loss if the contract results
in

deficit.'

cf.
It is
[60] 15, which probably refers to this passage.
there stated that, if the flow resulted in a surplus, this surplus belonged

i. pva-is

142

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

But

to the Treasury.

it

is

not clear whether that section

alters,

or

merely supplements, the previously existing law. There is

nothing in [39]-[56], so far as they are preserved, to show what was
The
to be done with a surplus resulting from the 'flow of the oil.'

whether

it

case does not seem to have been contemplated, though if it went to

the contractors it is perhaps covered by [53] 12-15, since, if there was

an unexpectedly large amount of oil, there would be the more left

over when the term of the contract expired.
But in that case I do
not understand the anxiety of the government to prevent the contractors
from coming to terms with the workmen about the amount of oil to
be made from the seed provided for it would be to the contractor's
;

interest that the output should be as large as possible.

On the other
if
the
in
went
to
accordance
with
this
hand,
Treasury
surplus
[60] 15,
and the object of that passage is only to make the point clear, not to
alter the law, the anxiety of the

placed on the output of

government to prevent a limit being

Then however the difficulty

oil is intelligible.

arises that this passage, if

taken by

itself,

rather implies the absence

any fixed ratio of oil expected from the seed, while on the other
hand irXfiov in [60] 15 implies that there was a fixed ratio (cf. note
on [60] 25), and if the ratio was mentioned anywhere it must have
been mentioned at the top of this column, since it was certainly not
mentioned in the bLopO<Dfj.a. On the whole it seems to me least difficult
to suppose the ratio was fixed here at the top of the column, but the
question of the surplus was left open, i. e. it was not separated from
the other oil manufactured, and that [60] 15 is a real correction, altering
of

the previous law.

9.

Cf. [17]

on [22]

cav be o firava) ^povos eySeiay

771

TreTroiTjKco?,

and note

2.

'The clerk appointed by the oeconomus and

antigrapheus shall register the names of the dealers in each city and
of the retailers, and shall arrange with them in conjunction with the
contractors how much oil and cici they are to take and sell from day to
[47.] io-[48]

day.

2.

In Alexandria they shall come to an arrangement with the traders,

shall make a contract with each of them, with those in the

and they

.'
country every month, with those in Alexandria
n. The difference between KcnrTjAoi and )meraj8oXot on the one hand,
and TroAijixTrparowTes on the other, depends on the place where they
.

COMMENTARY.

143

carried on their trade, the KOTO/AOI and /btera/SoAoi trading in the

and MUCH throughout the country, and the 7raAtfi7r/xirQujrry, who were no

doubt as M. suggests large shop-keepers, in Alexandria. Whether the

between the xaTnjAoi and the fUra/3oAoi is on the same lines,
is somewhat doubtful.
For though from a comparison of [47] 10,
with [48] 3, 4, we might conclude that the KcnnjAoi traded in the TroAeis,
and the /zera/3oAoi in the villages, the mention of KCOJXTJ in [48] 6 referdistinction

ring to both

and /uera/3oAoi is against this supposition. The

far from being fatal
the language of the Revenue

KaTTT/Aoi

objection however is
Papyrus is often inexact, as

is

shown by the frequent omission of the

oils
and since the iroAeiy are mentioned in [47] 12 they
case
be
understood in [48] 6, though not expressed. M.
any
that
the
neTa(3o\oi sold by barter, but we have no evidence
suggests
of selling by barter in the papyri of this period.

less

important

must

in

15. KaO

rinepav:

perhaps by the same writer as the rest of the

column.

Between the o-vimif ts and the <nr/ypa^rj, at any rate in the case
and /zcra/3oAoi, intervened an auction, [48] 13-18.
1 8. That the agreement with 01 cv
rrji %<opai was for a month is
shown by [48] 5 probably that with 01 tv A\(avbpfiai was for a longer
period see note on [48] 13.
j

7.

of the

KOTiTjAoi

[48.]

2.

This probably refers to the money paid by the

TraAijz-

Trparowres at Alexandria to the oeconomus and antigrapheus, and

credited by them to the account of the contractors at the royal bank.
Cf. [48] 10 and [31] 14 note.
KaraxwptC* "^ is probably passive, as there
is

no instance

o-rrjKcuy, cf.

in the

[47] io,

is

papyrus of

this

verb in the middle voice,

o xafo-

therefore inadmissible.

[48.] 3~[49] 4. 'The amount of oil and cici which the dealers and
each village agree to dispose of, shall be conveyed by the
oeconomus and antigrapheus before the month arrives to each village,
each kind of oil being conveyed and they shall there measure it out
retailers in

and retailers every five days, and shall receive payment,

if possible, on the same
day, but if not, they shall exact payment before
the five days have elapsed, and pay the money to the royal bank, the
to the dealers

expenses of the transport of the oil being defrayed at the cost of the
The oil which it has been arranged that each of the
contractors.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

144

dealers and retailers shall take, shall be put up to auction ten days
before the month arrives, and they shall write out and publish the
of
highest bid for each day during ten days in both the metropolis
the nome and the village, and shall make a contract with the highest
bidder.'

the phrase frequently recurring in [60]-[72] eis

Hdt. i. I 8iari0e<r0ai ra <o/ma. eAcuov
TTJV fv A\favbpt.ai 8ia0e<nz>, and
all the oils except cici.
1
here
it
1
includes
see note on [41]
5. 5ia07jo-eo-0ai

cf.

(<:\6ov<T(av

9.

M.

that

is

right in supposing that

The text as
Though as a
there

is

left

in line 17.
left

et

5r/

/IT;

is

little

a mistake for

ei

5e

doubt
/xrj

/XT/.

stands gives just the opposite of the sense required.

rule it is very unsafe to attribute blunders to the text,

it

ample

is

OIKOVOS

There can be

was deciphered by Wilck.

justification for doing so here, since in this column

uncorrected in line 5, and there is certainly a mistake

Cf. [43] 8, [49] 18, [51] 8, [55] 23,

where the corrector has

blunders uncorrected, or made mistakes himself.

ii. ro ainjAcojua: the singular is used in the papyrus where

expect the plural,

cf.

we should

[53] 25.

probably refer only to the KcnrrjAoi and /^iera/3oAoi,

cf. 15 with 6, unless the contract with the -n-aAi/zTrparowre? was also
But in [47] 18 a contrast is drawn between 01 fv TTJI x<apcu
for a month.
and ot ev AAeaz;o>eiai, probably in reference to the length of the
13.

These six

contract.

lines

Moreover

tv re

not Alexandria, and

TTJI

/ur;rpo7roAei K<H rrji KWJUTJI suits

TrpaTovvTfs at Alexandria,

is

it

intelligible

why

this section

end and not between the a-vvTagis and the o-vyypa^

See also [55] 15, which shows that there were at Alexandria
between the contractors and the -TraAi/nTrparowres.
at the

14.

(TiLKripvo-acTtiHrav

1 6.

TO fvpio-Kov

17.

The

cf.

the nomes,

there was no auction in the case of the

if

cf.

pap. Zois

pap. Zois

simplest change

is

i.

[2]

i.

[2]

and L.

2:

P.

the scribe

62 [6]

to read nvpuOevros

is

iraAi/u-

placed

in [47] 17.
irpoTrwArjrai

first

wrote

9, rov

for the genitive

cf.

the passages just quoted.

On the price at which the eAcuo/cawr/Aoi bought the oil from the conIf my theory is correct,
tractors see P. P. xxviii and App. iii p. 197.
at the date of that papyrus they
V for a metretes.

were buying

it

at 42

drachmae

irpos

'COMMENTARY.

145

inches of blank papyrus between this and

[49.] i. There are
the preceding column, and a new hand begins here, but it is not clear
whether these four lines are connected with what precedes or with what

The

follows.

[52]-[56], but
scribe,

writing of [49]-[51] is slightly different from that of

I think that all these columns were written
by the same

who is probably different from the

many points of similarity between

there are

If the

may

word

run, as

ycypaji/xezrjs

M.

in

the

first line

writer of [24]-[35], though

[~4]-[35] and [49]-[56].

be intended for f\aioKanrj\oi, the sentence

suggests, TrapaAa/*/3aroz/T(s ro cAatoi;

tv ran Siaypa/u/xan KCU

TrAeioros,

/XTJ

cf.

TrajATjrroixri

TI/XTJJ

P. P. 122, a

TTJS

letter

from Horus, apparently an agent of the dioecetes, to Harmais about

oil being sold at a higher
In that
price than the irpooray/xa allowed.
case this section would be connected with the preceding columns.
eAcuoca[7njAoi however is certainly not what the scribe wrote, and
though he has in any case made a blunder and the letters are too
much rubbed for any certainty, fAeuovpyoi seems to be the word meant.
Moreover the gap between this column and the preceding one and
the fact that the rest of this column

concerned with a new subject,

is

possible violations of the monopoly, are all in favour of joining lines

1-4 with what follows, especially as 01 cAaioupyoi are in any case the

probable subject of the verb

in line 5.

mortars or presses or any other

[49.] 5~[50] 5- Nor shall they
implements used in the manufacture of oil on any pretext whatever,
under pain of paying a fine of 5 talents to the Treasury, and to the
'

contractors five times the

amount of the

loss incurred

by them.

Those

who

persons
already possess any of these implements, shall register
themselves before the contractor and the agent of the oeconomus and

antigrapheus within thirty days, and shall produce their mortars and
The contractors and the agent of the oeconomus
presses for inspection.

and antigrapheus shall transfer these to the royal oil-factories. If any

one is discovered manufacturing oil from sesame, croton, or cnecus under
any circumstances, or buying oil and cici (altered to 'sesame oil, cnecus
oil, or cici') from any persons other than the contractors, the king shall
decide his punishment, and he shall pay the contractors 3000 dr. and
be deprived of the oil and the produce the payment of the fine shall
be exacted by the oeconomus and antigrapheus, who, if the offender
is unable to
pay, shall send him to (prison?).'
;

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

146

5. [49]-[53] 3 deal with possible violations of the monopoly granted

to the contractors, (i) by manufacture of oil by private individuals,
(2) by importation of foreign oil into Alexandria (?),
[49]-[50] 5
:

[50] 6-13:

who

priests,

adulteration, [50] 14-19: (4) by the action of the

were allowed within certain limits to manufacture oil,

(3)

by

[50] 20 [52] a

(5)

by importation

of foreign oil into the country,

[52] 7 -[53] 3.
1

8.

77

before aAAofoju should come before ro eXatov. On the correction

n, and on the mistake TTJ for 77 note on [48] 9.

see note on [41]

[50.] 6-13. 'They shall not be allowed (to sell) the oil on any
pretext, nor even to bring it into Alexandria beyond the Crown reposiIf any persons introduce more oil than they will use up in three
tory.

own consumption, they shall be deprived of both the

and
the
means of transport, and shall in addition pay a fine of
freight
100 dr. for each metretes, and for more or less in proportion.'
6. The subject of this section appears to be foreign oil brought by
sea to Alexandria to be consumed there cf [52] 26 and [54] 17. The
oil brought to Alexandria or Pelusium, which was to enter the country,
is discussed in [52], where its importation for sale is absolutely forbidden,
though it might be imported for personal use on payment of a duty.
There is hardly any doubt however that oil brought to Alexandria to
be consumed there paid no duty, [52] 26 note. On the other hand the
merchants who brought the oil were not allowed to sell it the oil was
placed in official V7ro8oxia, [54] 18, which is the meaning of TO fiaa-iXiKov
in line 8 here (cf. note on
[28] 14), and the contractors superintended its
days

for their

sale, [54] 19.

10. (fropriow is

here clearly opposed to

Tropacoy,

and

is

not, as else-

where, the raw material, i. e. the seeds as contrasted with the manufactured product
TTO/JCUOZ; refers, as L. suggests, to ships in the first
instance.
For the regulation that oil brought overland to Alexandria
:

should be duty-free occurs in a correction, [52] 25-29, and therefore was

probably not contemplated by the writer of the first draft. But in the
light of the correction iropeicor

is

general.

[50.] 14-19. 'The cooks shall use up the lard every day in the
presence of the contractor, and shall neither sell it as lard to any one on
any pretext, nor melt it down, nor make a store of it. If they disobey,

COMMENTARY.

147

each of them

shall pay the oil-contractor for every day that he keeps

the lard, 50 drachmae (altered to each person who cither sells or buys
it shall pay the oil contractor for every piece that is bought, 50 drachmae').
14. Like 01 e\aiovpyovvTcs cv rots i*poi? in line 20, the cooks are probably
'

'

how

this remarkable regulation

kitchens where cooking was done for
a large number of people, e.g. for a regiment or at an inn. It is
impossible that the kitchens in private houses were subject to the
invasion of the tax-farmer.

a distinct class, but

was

it

is difficult

to be enforced, except

to see

in

The enormous

profit made by the government from the sale of

must
account for the adulteration of oil with animal
oil,
it
lard
is
the
which is often adulterated with (cottonfat.
Nowadays
seed) oil; cf. a paragraph in the Daily News for May 8, 1895, which
was pointed out to me by Dr. Wright, on The adulteration of lard.'
17.

see [53] 16 note,

'

[50.] 20-[52] 3. Those who make oil in the temples throughout the
country shall declare to the contractor and the agent of the oeconomus
'

and antigrapheus the number of oil-factories in each temple and the

number of mortars and presses in each workshop, and they shall exhibit
the workshops for inspection, and bring their mortars and presses to be
sealed up ... If they fail to declare the numbers, or to exhibit the workshops, or to bring the mortars and presses to be sealed up, the officials
in charge of the temples shall, each of them who is guilty, pay 3 talents
to the Treasury, and to the contractors five times the amount of their
according to the contractors' estimate of it. When they wish to
manufacture sesame oil in the temples, they shall take with them the

loss

contractor and the agent of the oeconomus and antigrapheus, and shall
make the oil in their presence. They shall manufacture in two months

amount which they declared that they would consume in a year

cici which they consume they shall receive from the contractors
the fixed price. The oeconomus and antigrapheus shall send to the

the

but the
at

king a written account of both the cici and the oil required for the
consumption of each temple, and shall also give a similar written account
It shall be unlawful to sell to any one the oil which is
to the dioecetes.

manufactured for the use of the temples

law shall be deprived of the oil, and shall
for every metretes,

[51.]

8.

and

for

irapa<r<J>payi.&jLov

more or
:

any person who disobeys this

pay a fine of 100 dr.

in addition

less in proportion.'

see notes

on [48] 9 and [26]

7.

148

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

[51.]

cm

01

9.

TO>V U/KOH rcray/tievoi

cf.

Canop.

Inscr. line

73 o

cv

ap\iptvs, and the eTnorarai TCDI;

iepo>v Ka^eorTjKws (ina-TaTrjs
B.
M.
pap. xxxv. 24), who were responsible for
(L. P. 26. 23, and
paying the Twins their o-wrafis.
12. If the present regulations remained in force under Philometor,
a possible explanation is suggested for the substitution of one metretes
It would have been
of sesame oil for two of cici in B. M. pap. xvii. 54.
much cheaper for the eTnorarat of the temple to supply sesame oil, which
they manufactured themselves, than cici, which they had to buy from the
/cai

ro)i>

In any case,

contractors.

sesame

if

the temples retained the right of making

the second century B.C., the value of sesame oil in relation

to cici in the temples may well have differed from its value in the rest of
oil in

On

the other hand, if the temples had lost the right, which M.
thinks probable, as there is no mention of oil manufactured in the temples

Egypt.

to be found in any of the Serapeum papyri, it is still quite doubtful

whether the substitution of one metretes of sesame oil for two of cici was
due to their being of equal value, as has been often assumed. The
Revenue Papyrus does not favour the idea that cici was half the value of
sesame, and the oft-quoted passage from B. M. pap. xvii. 54 is a very

uncertain basis for generalizations.

He
Cf. Rev. R. E. 1882, pp. 162-5.
show that the price of cici in the second century varied

there attempts to

1800

and 1300 copper drachmae, so that if the ratio of

was
1 20
i
had fallen considerably.
exchange
(cf. App. iii), the price
none
of
But
the instances which he quotes give a definite number of
drachmae as the price of a definite amount of oil, and they are therefore

between

not very convincing. The inferior oils together with cnecus are ignored
see note on [42] 4.
Probably they are to be classed here with the cici,
not with the sesame oil.
;

1 8.

The

final

of

KIKI is

repeated by mistake.

in [40] 9 sqq.
19. Kaflurra/zejTjs
biboTua-av
23.
usually airooreAAeiy
:

cetes

cf.

is

used

in reference to the dioe-

[18] 6 note.

[52.] 4-6. This probably refers to some

took over when they entered on the contract.

oil

which the contractors

Cf. [53] 3.

[52.] 7~[53] 3. 'No one shall be allowed to introduce foreign oil

into the country for sale, whether from Alexandria or Pelusium or any

COMMENTARY.

149

other place. Offenders against this law shall both be deprived of the
oil, and in addition pay a fine of 100 dr. for each metretes, and for less

any persons bring with them foreign oil for

enter the country from Alexandria shall
at
themselves
Alexandria, and pay a duty of 12 dr. for a
register
in
for
less
and
metretes,
proportion, and shall obtain a receipt for it
it
into
the country. Those who enter the country
before they bring
from Pelusium shall pay the duty at Pelusium, and obtain a voucher
Those who collect the duties at Alexandria and Pelusium
for it.
shall place the tax to the credit of the nome to which the oil is brought
If any persons, when bringing oil with them for their personal use, fail
to pay the duty or to carry with them the voucher, they shall both be
deprived of the oil, and pay in addition a fine of 100 dr. for each metretes.'
Those merchants who transport foreign or
(Added by the corrector
the country to Alexandria shall be
Pelusium
across
Syrian oil from
exempt from the duty, but shall carry a voucher from the tax-collector
appointed at Pelusium and the oeconomus, as the law requires ... If

or

more

in proportion.

their private use, those

If

who

'

they

to carry the voucher, they shall be deprived of the oil.')

Though foreign oil was necessary to supply the wants of Alex-

fail

8.

and [54] 18, the rest of the country was protected against
But it is doubtful how long the country remained
foreign competition.
in
for
a
self-sufficing,
papyrus published by Egger (Compt. Rend, de
1'Acad. d. Inscr. N. S. iii. p. 314) Asclepiades, superintendent of the oil
manufacture at Thebes, gives a receipt to the royal bank for 800 drachmae

andria, [50] 6

received for the carriage of 80 metretae eXaiou

that this oil was destined for Alexandria, and

the country

eis

tbiav xpeiav,

CI>IKOU.

It is

hardly likely

had been brought into

the expenses of transport would not have
if it

been paid by the royal bank.

15,

The

price of a metretes being 48 dr., the duty was 25 per cent.,

regarding the duty of 25 per cent,

which confirms the passage in Arrian

levied at Leuce Come on imports,
Wilcken is right in objecting to L.'s
L. P. 67 as an import duty. For an

quoted by L. Rec.

p. 306.

But

explanation of the tax rtrapn] in

unpublished Petrie papyrus, in the

same handwriting as P. P. xliii, has the heading Ttraprrj followed by

a list of names with sums of money, and the payment of the Ttrap-n] in
the Fayoum is consistent with W.'s theory that it was Tera/mj
but hardly with the theory that it was a duty on imports.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

150

none of the Red Sea ports are mentioned,

nor is Sebennytus, which is coupled with Pelusium in [93] i. Most of
the foreign oil came from Syria, where sesame is largely cultivated to
Olive oil probably formed a large
this day: cf. line 26 and [54] 17.
As
part of the ZVIK.OV eXaioy distinguished from Syrian oil in line 26.
a commercial port Pelusium appears in this column and elsewhere to be
no less important than Alexandria owing to the amount of the Syrian
18.

trade

21.
oil

in

It is noticeable that

of.

7 note.

[54]

The tax was

paid to the contractors in the nome to which the

for the diminished amount of oil sold

was brought, as compensation

the nome.
24. See note on [9] 3.

through the country by land, or by canal, not

appended to the regulations concerning the
introduction of oil into the \<t>pa, and meets the case of merchants who
were bringing oil to Alexandria, as they were entitled to do, and who, if
they brought it by sea direct would be exempt, but, if they wished to
26. TtapaKo^i^a-iv

by

sea.

i.

This biopOwna

e.

is

it by land, might, according to the foregoing regulations, either be

forbidden or be forced to pay the duty. The Sio/>0o>^a therefore decrees
that these persons shall be arcXeis, i. e. like those who brought the oil

take

be taken as transport by sea,' we

have to admit that for some reason those who took oil to Alexandria
via Pelusium were favoured beyond those who brought it direct, and that
direct to Alexandria.

the

biopdtofjia is

into

the x*

30 -

If 7rapaKo/uuaxn

'

misplaced, for this column has to do with

The other explanation, which gives a

oil

introduced

much

better

based on the assumption that at Alexandria there was no

duty upon oil imported direct from Syria or elsewhere for the consumption of the capital. This is not stated in [50], but neither is the
meaning,

is

the oil imported to Alexandria via Pelusium,

was
sea,
duty-free, the presumption is in favour of oil
direct
also
exempt. Moreover the persons appointed to
imported
being
watch over the importation of Syrian oil at Alexandria and Pelusium
were avnypacpfis, not Aoyevrat, [54] 16.
27. The AoyevrTj? was the representative of the contractors, see
reverse stated

and,

if

whether by land or

[13]

i.

10.
The merchants
vofj.(ai: i.e. in 18-19: cf. note on [21]
had to carry the voucher, although they had not paid the duty.

28. tv TOH

COMMENTARY.

151

[53.] 4-17. 'The contractors shall receive the sesame and croton, of
which a store (?) has been ordered for each nome, within three days from
the day on which they take over the contract, paying for it at the rate
of ... for sesame, ... for a metretes of sesame oil, for croton ... for cici
But if, when they give up the contract, they
(altered to 17 dr.')
leave behind them more oil (than they were ordered to store?) they shall
receive from the oeconomus as the value of the sesame oil 3 1 dr. 4! obols
'

28 dr. 3 obols') for a metretes, of cici 21 dr. 2 obols (altered

a metretes, of cnecus oil 18 dr. 4 obols (altered to ' 17 dr.
for
dr.")
obol ') for a metretes, and as the value of the sesame 8 drachmae for
'

20

an artaba, of the croton 4

'

'

(altered to

to

dr. 2 obols

dr.,

and of the cnecus

dr.

3 obols (altered to

').

The

lacunae are too great for any certainty, but I conjecture that
this section refers to the produce and oil of which a store had to be kept
by the predecessors of the contractors, and was bought by the incoming
4.

contractors within three days of their entering on the oanj, 7-11 being
the prices which the contractors paid for it, 12-17 the prices they
received on giving up the contract for any surplus above the amount
which they had been ordered to store for their successors. The price

which they received for what they were ordered to store is partly lost in
the lacuna, partly given by 9-11. For the construction of 4-8 irapacf. 1 8 21 oaov b av (\aiov
cnj<ra/ioy TOV <nj<rafiou TOV fj.f \~
ATJ^OITCU
.

vnoKi]pv<i>fj.(v

ATj^ofxcda

-napaKr}^fovro.i

5. aiTOTLdfa-Oai

There

certain.

is

cf.

[9]

TOV

fjitv

eAcuou TOV pe

\~

I.

[56] 21, where TOV a-noTiQeptvov sc. eAaiou is, I think,

no place where the regulations about the oil stored

cf.

can come except here, and this section cannot refer to the ordinary
sesame and croton required from each nome, because (i) that has been
discussed in [39] (2) it is impossible that it should have been received
;

within three days of any fixed time, cf. [42] 3 (3) the contractors are
to receive not only sesame and croton but sesame oil and cici, line 8.
;

Nor can

Alexandria or the king,

sesame and
other nomes, [41] 20, would be obviously

this section refer to oil required for

mentioned
croton to be grown
for that is

in the following sections, while the

for

irrelevant here.
9.

ii.

Possibly

The

rrjy

(V (Ka<TT<ai vofjuoi KafltoTa/ifinjs

reference

is

to [39].

As

TI/XTJS

the 6iaypa/i/xa

is

cf.

[51] 19fixed for, not

/'//,

152

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

the twenty-seventh year, probably the biaypa.wa.Ta were revised every

year: cf. note on [38] i.

Since the corrector says that the contractors are to receive for the
produce the prices mentioned in [39], and his corrections in the next
sections are all to the disadvantage of the contractors, probably the
original draft ordained that the contractors should receive more.
1 6. The corrected
prices here are the same as the prices in [39];
therefore on the produce the contractors only recovered what they had
I suspect that this is approximately the
themselves paid: cf. 10-11.

case with the oils also, and that* the corrected prices in 14-15 nearly
In
represent the cost price of the oils, or a little more see note on 20.
;

practically certain that the contractors did not receive less

for this oil than what the production of it had cost them.
The profit on

any case

it

is

much greater than on the superior, since there was

the (corrected) retail price of any of the oils, [40] 9-16.
Cf. [53] 22 for colocynth which is omitted here.
[53.] 17-26. 'The oil which we hereinafter proclaim our intention of

the inferior oils was

no difference

in

nome for disposal at Alexandria, we will take from the

contractors in the nome, paying for it at the rate of 31 dr. 4* obols for
a metretes of sesame oil containing 12 choes without jars, and 21 dr. 2
taking from each

cici, 18 dr. 4 obols for cnecus oil, and 12 dr. for colocynth oil.
(Altered to 18 dr. 2 obols for a metretes of cici.') This price shall be
credited to the contractors in the instalments due from them, but the

obols for

'

wages of manufacture, and the miscellaneous

be
paid by the oeconomus.'
expenses
1 8. v7roKTjpuo)/x;
i. e. in the list of nomes.
The original list, as this
contained
not
of sesame oil and cici
the
amounts
only
passage shows,
from
nome
for
of cnecus and
each
Alexandria
but
the
amounts
required
oil
see
notes
on
and
The
corrector,
colocynth
[41] 20.
[57] 6, [58] i,
however, substituting only one oil, cici, for the four, intended
to refer to [60]-[72], and in fact the produce eis ras ev
is in those columns always croton, except in two instances,
and
Hence his omission of the price of
24
[60]
[62] 5, of sesame.
sesame oil, about which there is no doubt, is a mistake, to which however little importance is to be attached.
Who is meant by the first person in vnoK.i]pv<*nev and
price of the produce, the
shall first

Cf. [53]

27 extopfv

[54]

\jnpoK.i]pv^\o^v

[57] 3

[59] 2

TT(

COMMENTARY.

153

= [60] 13 TT(a\ovfj.ev, and frequent instances in [57]-[72] together

[58] 6
with L. P. [1] i, where 7ro>Aoi'/xei> is probable; or, to put the question in
;

who

Laws ? Both the general

which all imply that the
person speaking lays down rules for the whole country, require as the
answer the king. The only other person who could possibly be meant
is the dioecetes at Alexandria, or the chief financial minister, whoever he
was.
Against the king being the author may be urged the fact that in
another form,

the author of the Revenue

is

probabilities of the case

and these

instances,

many places o ^ao-iAcuy is spoken of in the third person, while the

dioecetes at Alexandria is not mentioned.
But this is no real objection,
for in [36] 13 row /3ao-iA*u>s, not efxov, occurs in a Trpoypa^a
undoubtedly
by the king himself, and the difficulty of supposing that under an
government the law of the country should be issued in any
other name than that of the king is overwhelming. With regard to
issued

autocratic

L. P. 62, the

of which

uncertain, see note on [1] 6 of that

papyrus.
general similarity between it and the Revenue Papyrus is
so close that, even apart from my conjecture TrcoAov/xej; and the evident
official title

is

The

parallelism between L. P. [1] 1-3 and [57] 3-5, cf. notes ad loc., it is not
easy to separate the rank of the author in the two documents. The
ingenious argument by which Lumb. Rec. p. 342 tries to show that L. P.
62 was written by a vnobioiKi^s cuts both ways, and is not in the least

inconsistent with that papyrus, like the

Revenue Papyrus, having been

issued in the king's name.

see note on [48] 4.
19. btadfvcis
20. tv ro)i VOJXOH
the Crown paid the cost of the carriage to Alexon the other hand, the
andria, and also supplied the jars, cf. [55] 4
:

oeconomus paid

wages of manufacture, and the

miscellaneous expenses, presumably entering what he paid in the contractors' accounts against the sums credited to them.
There is no
therefore
that
all
these
were
more
than
covered by
question
expenses
the sums written by the first hand in 20-22, but the profit on the sale
of a metretes was even greater than the difference between these prices
and the selling price, cf. note on line 16 and the corrected price of cici
here, 18 dr. 2 obols, which covered the expenses in lines 24-25.
There is no mention here of the share of the surplus which, according
to the corrected reading in [45] 3, was to be paid to the workmen and
contractors on the oil that was manufactured.
Cf. [45] 9 ro
for the produce, the

154

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

which

uncorrected, though ircoXou/xevou in [45] 3

was altered. It is possible that oil eis ras fv AAear8paat 8ia0eo-ets was
not included in the oil sold,' but in any case according to the correction
O.TTO

TTJ? Trpaa-cias,

is left

'

the share ought to have been distributed from the profits of the
manufactured for Alexandria.

oil

wine required eis TO fiao-iXiKov.

and [56] 15.
25. The oeconomus here pays for the produce, which was usually
paid for by the contractors ([39] 13), and for the avr]\caij.a, which also
under ordinary circumstances was paid for by them, cf. [54] 4.
Was his payment of the /carepyoy also exceptional ? The answer to the
question depends on the meaning of [46] 18, which owing to the lacuna
is uncertain.
[55] 15 however is an argument in favour of supposing
that the narepyov was paid by the government, not the contractors, for it
is coupled there with fjaa-dot.
But the conditions of making oil at
Alexandria may have been different from those in the country, and
owing to the lacuna in [55] 3 it is not clear whether the wages were
included in the SiaXoyioyxos.
If the contractors had nothing to do with
the
it
must
have been paid out of the profits, and
paying
Kartpyov,
23. Cf. [34] 6, a similar regulation for

avatyopa

see note on [16] 10, [34]

8,

sum paid by the contractors to the government did not

the
net
represent
profits of the government, since the government would
have to subtract the narepyov. On the whole, however, it seems more
therefore the

probable that the contractors paid the eAaioupyoi as well as the yecopyoi
than that the account of the /carepyoy was kept separate. The question

does not

affect the general position of the contractors to the government,

note on [39] 13, for if they did not pay the Karepyov, they would bid
a correspondingly higher sum for the u>vr\.
cf.

'The amount of sesame oil or cici which we

require in Alexandria, we will proclaim at the time of the sale, and we
will pay for it (?) at the rate of 48 dr. a metretes. (Bracketed by the
[53.] 27~[54] 14.

they shall not be allowed to introduce the oil into

corrector)
Alexandria on any pretext (added by the corrector " if they are discovered doing so they shall be deprived of the oil "). If they fail to
render account of it, or if they introduce the oil into Alexandria without
.

all of it ("or are discovered introducing oil into the loads,"

bracketed by the corrector), they shall both be deprived of the oil and in
addition each of those who have contracted for the village, shall pay

declaring

COMMENTARY.
a

fine to the

Treasury of 3

talents.

(Altered

155

by the

corrector to

'

they
which they have introduced into
Alexandria without declaring it
The corrector in the next sentence
omits to the Treasury,' and adds a new section over one which he has
effaced, The fine shall belong to the Treasury and shall be put down to
shall

both be fined the value of the

.

oil

.'

'

'

the oil-contractors

in

the country.')

[53.] 27. This section is one of the most obscure in the whole
papyrus. In the first place there is the question whether [53] 2;-[54] 2
forms a complete section or whether it is connected with what follows.

The fact that it is bracketed and no new regulation added perhaps

shows that [54] 2-14 could stand alone, but as this section is clearly
concerned with oil required in Alexandria, it was probably connected by
the original scribe with [53] 27~[54] 3. On the other hand it is quite
possible that the corrector intended by bracketing [53] 27-[54] 3 to
connect [54] 3-14 with [53] 17-26. Next, what was this oil required in
Alexandria? It cannot be oil for sale there, for that subject has been

disposed of in the preceding section, 1 7-26, but if I am right in supposing

that the king is the subject of ex w M ey ( see note on
[53] 18), this oil was
for
the
of
the
court
cf.
perhaps required
consumption
[34] 6, which
;

however only mentions wine taken

Alexandria.

It

cts

possible that the oil

is

and does not specify

referred to here was to be

TO fia<ri\iKov

exported, but as Egypt produced hardly enough oil for its own use, that
is not likely.
Another difficulty is the high price, 48 dr., apparently
paid

by the king

bta0e<T(is at

for this

oil.

a reduced rate,

If

he received

oil eis ray tv AAe&u-fyjtiat

we should expect him

to pay still less for oil

which he required himself.
possible explanation is that as the profit
on the sale of each metretes ultimately came back to the government,
the king recovered the difference between the cost price which he might
have paid, and the price which he did pay, because the contractors who
knew beforehand the amount which the king would take (see [54] 2),
made for the contract a bid greater by the sum which they would
receive for this oil taken by the king cf. note on [53] 25.
3. The bracket after JZTJ is very irregularly formed and apparently

turned the wrong way.

4.

If

Tj/xioAii;

is

right, cf. the

not infrequent omission of the o in

apyvpiov at this period, e.g. Wilck. Ostr 329, see

12.

The farming

App.

of the taxes, which were sold

iii.

p. 200.

collectively to

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

156

whole nome, was sub-divided by the tax-farmers among

each contracting to collect the taxes of a parsometimes
themselves,
ticular district, e. g. P. P. xlvi, where Philip is stated to have bought the
for a

company

(
right of collecting the cnro/xotpa TU>V Trept I>iAa8eA.<eiaz; K.O.I Bovfiavrov romof,
here
sometimes, as the plural /ue/uuo-floo/uerot
shows, several of them combining to collect the revenues of a particular place. In this case the

of the nome was sub-divided into the smaller uvcu of the

and those who had contracted to make oil at certain villages

eXaiKTj OWTJ

villages,

were apparently responsible

Whether they had a

for

sending this

oil

required for Alexandria.

particular interest in introducing oil into

Alexandria

without declaring it is not clear, and the corrections are very difficult.
From the analogy of the other places in which K.aTay&pi&iv is used, we
should expect the meaning of line 14 to be that the fine was put down
to the credit of the oil contractors, though the emphatic manner in which
it is stated that the fine was to belong to the Treasury makes the opposite
'

meaning put down against quite

'

possible.

But as the

insertion of fv

x toP at implies a contrast with the contractors at Alexandria, i.e.

although the fine was exacted at Alexandria, it affected only the
contractors of the nome to which 01 jue/xto-^co/uei'ot Trjv KW/UITJI; belonged,

TTJI

and as the contractors

Alexandria had obviously done nothing to

in

incur a penalty, there is more point in the contrast if KaTax(api((r6<i> has

its usual meaning.
Then the explanation of the fine being credited to

the contractors of the

must be that

andria,

action of

nome from which

oil

was brought to Alex-

had been somehow damaged by the

not declaring all the oil. Perhaps 01 /xe/xt-

their interests

01 ^e/xto-tfoo/xeyot

in

had sold some of

<r0(tifjivoi.

the

it

secretly without entering

it

in the accounts,

see line 8 buxriv TOV \oyov.

[54.] 15-19.

'The contractors

shall appoint also clerks to act as

Alexandria and Pelusium for the oil imported from Syria

to Pelusium and Alexandria, and these clerks shall seal the repositories
and follow up the disposal of the oil.'
1 6.
see note on [3] 2, and cf. L. P. 62 [8] 15.
azmy/>a$eis
As the oil mentioned in this
17. (K. Svpias: see note on [52] 18.
their agents at

section
for oil

duty

is

to be

consumed

at the port to which it is brought (cf. [52] 26

on its way to Alexandria), and there was no

brought to Pelusium

at

Alexandria on the oil mentioned here, [52] 26 note, probably

it at Pelusium also.

there was no duty on

COMMENTARY.

157

18. airoftoxio: cf. [31] 19, and see note on [50]

change of subject see note on [32] 10.

6.

On

the abrupt

[54.] 2o-[55] 16. 'The clerk of the oil-contract appointed by the

shall hold a balancing of accounts every month with the

oeconomus

chief contractor in the presence of the antigrapheus, and he shall write

down in his books both the amount of the different kinds of produce

which he has received, with the amount of oil which he has manufactured
and sold (' at the price written in the legal tariff' added by the corrector),
except the oil which is set apart, and the price of the produce written in
the legal tariff, together with the price of the jars and miscellaneous
expenses, which shall be calculated at the rate of i dr. for an artaba of
obols for croton, 2 obols for cnecus, ... for colocynth, ... for
i dr.
metretae of sesame oil
., for 5 metretae of cici
i
of
oil
for
metretae
i obol, for 9 metretae of cnecus oil
.,
dr.,
7
lamp
for 12 metretae of colocynth oil i dr. i obol, and that share of the

sesame,

linseed, for

surplus of which the division between the workmen and the contractors
has been ordered, and the expenses, whatever they may be, of transport
of the produce.

The

contractors shall receive their

pay from

their share

of the surplus.' (' But in Alexandria the wages for the manufacture of the
sesame oil, the brokerage, and the pay of the contractors shall be given
in accordance with the proclamation which shall be made at the time of

the

Added by

sale.'

the corrector.)

[47] 10, &c., where an antigrapheus appointed

acts in conjunction with the
But this person is appointed only by the oeconomus and

[54.] 20. Cf. [46]

8,

by both the oeconomus and antigrapheus

contractors.
is

called

an antigrapheus

Cf. [3] 2 note.

2i. 5taAoyifo-0o>

rrjs

airrjs,

so that he

is

probably

different.

cf.
There is nothing
[16]-[19] and [34] 9-21.
said in this 8iaAoyio>ios of the final balancing of accounts, but see note on
:

[53] 25.

The re after Qopna is

see note on [41] u.
23. (Kcurrov yovs
contrasted with the re after ri^v.
[54] 23~[55] 2 a</>aiperov, are the
amounts for which the contractors were responsible, [55] 2-12, the
:

sums which they were allowed

two was due to the Treasury.
[55.]

i.

6iaypa/xjA<m

to deduct.

i.e. [40].

If

x^ns

The
is

difference between the

right, cf. [61]

\u>pis TJJS

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

158

perhaps refers to TO airoTiOffjifvov, [53] 5, or to

It cannot refer to the oil
Alexandria,
required
[53] 27.
fv
for
eis
that was included in the
T<W
A\eavbpfi<u 5m0eoreis,
required
TO atyaiperov

?.

the

in

oil

avafyopai, [53] 23.

2.

Whether a

see [39].

Tt/uT/z':

the lacuna in the next line

4. Kfpajjiiov:

cf.

[53]

is

reference to the Karcp-yov

is

lost in

doubtful, [53] 25 note.

Apparently the contractors received an

21.

allowance in the account for pottery and the miscellaneous expenses.

5. The proportion of two to one is that nearly always found between
the prices of sesame and croton, cf. note on [39] 3, and it is probable
that the allowance for the cunjAoj/xaTa of croton was 3 obols.
6. The insertion of this line is very doubtful.
If colocynth and
linseed were mentioned the arrjAcojuaTa
see [39] 3-7.

The

8.

ij,

is

must have been excessively small,

abbreviation which elsewhere means artaba, see note on [39]

oils: if the artaba and metretes had the same

here found with the

capacity (Rev. R. E. ii. 159)* it is here perhaps equivalent to metretes.

But which artaba was equivalent in capacity to which metretes ? The
papyrus elsewhere uses the ordinary sign for /ueTprjT?]?, /ne, and there is

no

parallel in

of metretes.

any papyrus for the sign meaning artaba as the equivalent

If however the abbreviation here really means artaba, it

would seem to be a mistake.

TO.

o-vvTfTayfjLfvov

i.e. in

[45] 1-6.

The

inyfvr]fj.a

here

is

the differ-

ence between the cost and the selling price of oil so far as the contractors
were concerned. Cf. notes on [41] 1 1 and [45] 2.
13.

fj.L(r9oi

see [45] 2 note.

KdTfpyov: see note on [45]

Alexandria there were middlemen
15.

In the rest

traders.

8.

TO Tipo-n OOXTJTIKOJJ

in

the case of

between the tax-farmers and retail

of the country the oil was sold by auction direct to

the retailers, [48] 13 note.

If the contractors or their subordinates
[55.] i7-[56] 13. 'Search.
make a search, on the ground that some persons have concealed

wish to

or oil-presses, they shall hold a search in the presence of the agent of

the oeconomus and antigrapheus (altered to or the agent of the antigrapheus '). If the agent of the oeconomus or antigrapheus when sum-

oil

'

moned
search

accompany the contractors, or to remain present until the

made, he shall pay the contractors twice the amount of the oil

fails
is

to

COMMENTARY.

159

supposed to be concealed, at their assessment of it, and the contractors

shall be allowed to make the search within
days ... If the contractor
fails to find what he declared himself to be in search of, he may be
compelled by the person whose property is searched to take an oath,
and swear that his search was made for absolutely no other than its
declared purpose, which strictly concerned the oil contract. If he fails
to take the oath on the day on which he is required to take it or on the
.

one following, he
the value of the

pay the person who requires him to take it twice

it was estimated before

shall

oil

supposed to be concealed, as

the search took place.'

see note on [13] 2.
though the general sense of the passage is clear, we
have been unable to make any satisfactory suggestion for this word.

[55.] !/

vTTTjperai

20. Kapir^jiov

The second

the only word

In line 19 the
possible, and that can hardly be used in a passive sense.
a of f\]aiov may possibly be f, but it is more like a. Wilck. suggests
letter

may

be

A, in

which case

uXo-ntfjiov

is

and p are practically indistinguishable in this hand), i.e.

eAcuoupyijzov, and thinks it is contrasted with Kapiupov, but
the correction of the singular to the plural seems to me in favour of
\aiorpfjiov (yi

a mistake for

eAaiovpyiov.

As

22. OIKOV(OH)OV.

the corrector has corrected KCU in line 21 to

/,

person
yet another antigrapheus see [3] 2 note.
23. a-noTiveTaxrav ought to have been altered to the singular as only
one person is meant, even if the original reading KOI in line 21 had not
this

is

been a mere blunder.

25. 5e

ought probably to have been erased when

note on [48]

KOI, cf.

[56.]

The

5-

a mistake for
8.

duty

TJ

it

pr\v

JXTJ

was altered to

9.

letters

above

T;

JXTJ

are

more

like ovpav,

which

may be

<apav.
cf.

Wilck. Akt.

xi. 2.

The temples had an

was to superintend the taking of oaths

official

whose

see Rev. Chrest.

Dhn.

The

object of forcing the searcher to take this oath must, as

M. suggests, have been to clear the character of the person whose house
was searched.
p. 45.

'

[56.] 14-18.

The

contractors shall appoint sureties for a

sum

greater

160

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

by one-twentieth than that which they have contracted to pay, and shall
pay up the taxes collected every day to the bank, while the monthly
instalment shall be paid up before the middle of the month following.'
14. Cf. [34] 2.
15. Aoyeupia, AoyevrTjs,

and

Aoytveii; are

the regular words for collecting

a tax, cf. [10] i, [12] I3(?), [16] u, [52] 20, 27. Hence the Xoyfv^ara
here have nothing to do with the ordinary payments for oil sold by the
Morecontractors, i. e. the avatfropa with which Aoyev/^ara are contrasted.

over neither biopQuxrovTai nor naO r^^fpav is consistent with the supposition
The only Aoyevthat ordinary payments are meant, cf. [48] 4-13.
fjiara mentioned in C are the duties on foreign oil in [52], and these
I

think are meant here, but both biopOoxrovrai and Ka9

Tj/xepaz;

as applied

even to them are extremely difficult. The last part of the regulation is
clear; an instalment (avafyopa) amounting to one-twelfth part of the
year's revenue which the contractors had agreed to pay the government

was expected from them every month, and

if

the actual instalment did

not reach the required amount, the contractors had to make up the
deficiency (biopOovo-daC), either themselves or through their sureties, before
the middle of the next month.

If naO -ij^cpav is opposed to irpo TTJS

no alternative but to suppose that a certain proportion
of the Aoyef/uara was expected every day and the contractors had to pay
the required amount
it, whether the Aoyeu/xara received each day reached
or not, unless indeed we admit that Siop&oo-ozmu does not mean, when
applied to Aoyeu/Aara, what it means when applied to ava(f>opav, which is
very unlikely. But it is hardly conceivable that the contractors should
bi.xoij.rjv

ms there

is

be required every day to make up any deficiency in the Aoyev/xara,

whether these are the duties on foreign oil or no and therefore I think
that KO.O r]^fpav is to be closely connected with Aoyev/xara, ra being
omitted by a very natural error, and is opposed to n\v eiufiaXkovvav ran
The meaning then is that the contractors or their sureties had to
jxrji>i.
make up the deficiency first on the Aoyeuju.aTa received every day, and
secondly on the monthly instalment, in both cases before the middle of
;

the next month.

open to the
applies to both

This gives a satisfactory sense, but

objection that if fv
halves of the section

TOH

we

(xopfvui

Ttpo

rrjs

Sixo/ATjjncw

is

should expect re ... K.O.I, not nev

8e, and that
as Kad -q^epav stands in the Greek, it is unquestionably opposed to fv ran
i, not to TTJI; fTTi(3a\\ov<rav ran
.

COMMENTARY.
16.
cf.

TTI

rrjv Tpaircfav in

161

any case applies to both halves of the

[48] ii and note on [75]

section

i.

[56.] 19-21. 'The oil-workmen shall receive their due from the
that is manufactured, not from the oil that is stored.'

oil

19. TO yivopcvov is the share of the surplus (see [45] 2, where this
regulation ought to have been placed), for the ordinary narcpyov seems

to have been paid in

KaTfpya&ufvov

is

20.

money, [46]

here passive.

i-5 = [59.] 1-5.

[57.]
contract.

'Revision of the law concerning the oiloffer for sale the oil-contract for the country from the

We

month Gorpiaeus, which

is in the Egyptian calendar Mesore, for a period

of two years in accordance with the proclamation which has been issued.'
i. On the relation of
[57]-[72] to [39]-[56] see note on [38] i.

8iop0o>/ia

fKdoroH

L. P. 62 [1] 7. CTTI 7771 eAaucqi

The 'law' here is [39]-[56].
vo/uau.
:

cf.

Alexandria

is

[53] 4 TO irpoKrjpv^dfv 6$

see note on [53] 18, and cf. L. P. 62 [1] I. ri]v yvpav:

therefore excluded, the conditions of the conj there being

irtu\ovfjiv

3.

cf.

required for the capital came partly from abroad,

partly from the various nomes, [53] 19, partly from the a</>o>piin Libya, [58] 5.
Cf. [47] 18 and [55] 15.

different, since oil

15,

[54]
o-ntvT!

4.

Though no formula

lacuna,

it

is

clear that

of the extant double dates helps to fill up the

no day was mentioned and therefore Gorpiaeus

coincided with Mesore in this the twenty-seventh year.

consistent with a double date in a papyrus at Leyden,

is

quite
379, of the

which Peritius 28 = Tybi 2. If the

during the two years' interval, Peritius a
2.
Therefore, between Gorpiaeus of the
of the twenty-ninth year, the Macedonian
month on the Egyptian. Other instances

twenty-ninth year of Philadelphus

two calendars had coincided

would have fallen on Tybi
twenty-seventh and Peritius
calendar had gained nearly a

This

in

of double dates in the third century B.C. are (i) P. P. 3, the twenty-fifth
year, Apellaeus 10 = Pharmouthi 6
(2) the Canopus inscr. ninth year of
;

Euergetes, 7 Apellaeus
17 Tybi and (3) P. P. part I. 67 (i), Daisius 23
Thoth 2, the year not being mentioned. M. assigns P. P. 3 to the
twenty-fifth year of Philadelphus, not Euergetes, but, as I think, wrongly.
;

For

if

Apellaeus

corresponded to

10= Pharmouthi
Mesore

6,

Xandicus would approximately have

and since Gorpiaeus

in the twenty-fifth year,

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

162

corresponded to Mesore in the twenty-seventh year, we must conclude

that the Macedonian calendar gained no less than five months or lost
seven on the Egyptian between Apellaeus of the twenty-fifth year and
Gorpiaeus of the twenty-seventh, which is scarcely credible. Leaving
that papyrus aside for the moment, the Canopus inscription, in which
the 7th Apellaeus corresponded to the i7th Tybi and therefore the 28th
Peritius to about the 8th Pharmouthi, shows that between the twenty-

ninth year of Philadelphus and the ninth of Euergetes, a period of

seventeen years, the Macedonian calendar had lost a little over three

months compared to the Egyptian, unless indeed it had gained nearly

nine months, in which case the confusion between the regnal years of
the king according to the two calendars must have been quite inBut if we suppose that P. P. 3 is the twenty-fifth year of
extricable.
In the ninth year of EuerTybi 17, and therefore, if in the
10
twenty-fifth year, Apellaeus
corresponded to Pharmouthi 6, the
Macedonian calendar had in sixteen years either lost nearly three

Euergetes, the following result

is

obtained.

getes, Apellaeus 7 corresponded to

months compared to the Egyptian, or gained a little more than nine.

This is approximately the same as the amount which it lost or gained in
the seventeen years preceding the Canopus inscription. Therefore, since
there is nothing in the correspondence of Diophanes, P. P. 2-4, which
points to Philadelphus rather than Euergetes being the reigning king,
(for the twenty-sixth

year mentioned on page 2

may belong to

Euergetes

just as well as to Philadelphus), and since, in opposition to M., I think

that there is no more reason to attribute undated or insufficiently dated

papyri in the Petrie collection to Philadelphus' or the early part of

Euergetes' reign than to the later part of Euergetes' reign, Philopator's,
or in

me

some

cases even to Epiphanes', the balance of probability seems to

year in P. P. 3 referring to Euergetes.

in favour of the twenty-fifth

From the twenty-ninth year of Philadelphus to the twenty-fifth of

Euergetes the Egyptian calendar was, as has been shown, gaining upon
the Macedonian
but between the twenty-fifth year of Euergetes and
the ninth year of Epiphanes, a period of twenty-six years, a reaction
;

for in the Rosetta Stone the 4th Xandicus = i8th Mecheir,

and therefore the loth Apellaeus corresponded to about Phaophi 24, and
Pharmouthi 6 to about Artemisius 22, i.e. the Macedonian calendar had
either gained six months and a half on the Egyptian or lost five and

took place

COMMENTARY.

163

a half. In the one case it had got back nearly to its original relation in
the twenty-seventh year of Philadelphus, in the other it had lost a whole
Such being the irregularity of the two
year, which is very unlikely.
calendars

it

is

impossible to fix the year of P. P. part I. 67 within any

but of the three double dates known for the third

approach to precision
century

B.C., it

comes nearest

On

to P. P. 3.

the superiority of the

Egyptian calendar to the Greek cf. a passage in the astronomical

treatise of Eudoxus, L. P. I. 62-80, pointed out to me by M., 810 ov
(rrp.(f>uu'ov(Tiv

rot? atrrpoAoyots at Tjjuepai otfie

aorpoAoyoi KOI ot icpoypa/a/iaret?

ai'a\cyofj.(voi ray

5.

of the

TjfA*pas

K TCOV

01

EAArjviKoi

/irj^es

01
.

8
.

AiyvTman; avrai yap ovre vnffcaipovvrai ovre

curious that the term of the contract began in the last

Egyptian year, Mesore, for OTTO cannot exclude the

It is

mentioned.

ra Kara^im/pta xat KVVOS avaro\ijv

But both the commencement

in

Mesore and the

month
month

fact that

the contract was sold for two years are, as Wilck. remarks, probably
due to exceptional causes, for elsewhere we find the <avai sold only

one year and that a regnal year e. g. Leyd. pap. F pap. Zois
Jos. A. J. 12. 4. 3
papyrus in Introd. to P. P. part ii. p. 29 line 3, and
P. P. xlvi (b) 2.
L. P. 62, where also by a strange coincidence Mesore,
for

not Thoth, is the starting-point, has several difficulties of its own (see
App. i), but the exceptional character of the starting-point is obvious.
[57.] 6-23 = [59] 6-[60] 2. '(Where the number of arourae sown

exceeds the number decreed), the tax on the additional sesame and
But
belong to the contractors for the coming term.
arourae
wherever it appears from the following list that fewer
have
croton shall

been sown than the number previously decreed, we jvill make up the
and the tax
deficiency both in sesame and croton from other nomes
on this sesame and croton which we shall supply, being 2 drachmae
for sesame and i drachma for croton, shall belong to the contractors
of the nome to which the produce is supplied.
But in the nome from
which we take away the sesame and croton in excess of the amount
previously decreed, the tax on sesame and croton shall not be exacted
upon the produce which we take away. But the colocynth and linseed
oil, which we do not take to fill up the deficiencies of other nomes
in sesame and sesame oil, we will manufacture through the agency
of the oeconomi and then measure it, and the contractors shall receive
;

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

164

a surplus from this oil equal to the surplus which they used to receive
from sesame oil and sesame and the colocynth and linseed oil, which
;

we do

not take to

up

fill

deficiencies of other

nomes

in cici,

we

will

manufacture through the agency of the oeconomi and then measure

receive a surplus equal to that
it, and from it the contractors shall
which they used to receive from cici and croton. The contractors
shall superintend the manufacture by the oeconomus, and shall seal
the

oil.'

[57.]

First as to the differences of reading between the two columns,

not enough to fill the lacuna, and I therefore

6.

(i) in [57] 6 [o-TjJfra/Mou is

conjecture re which

absent in [59] 7. (2) In [57] 12 the sign following

from that in [59] 13, but both can be resolved
into a with a stroke after it, i. e. ap(ra^rj)
see note on [39] 1 1.
Artaba
reAos

is

is

quite different

is required by the sense, and it is confirmed by the blunder of the

scribe in [59] 14, where r?js apra/3T/s is a mistake for rou oTjo-ajuou, showing
that he had artaba in his mind when writing that passage.
(3) In

15 has been changed for the worse into

TO eTrtyeurj/^a, [59] 19 inserts KCU before ro.
has
17
eto-aycojLter.
(4) [57]
1 8
has
airo
KCU
TOV
crrjcrajuou, while [59] 21 omits cnro or rov.
(5) [57]
1

[59]

(6)

In [57]

8 there

The

in [59] 21.

be
K[.

right
.

of [57]

(gayafj-fv

or

no room

which is found
whether
the passage
importance
see note on [57] 16.
In
21
we have
(7)
[59]
probably KCU, or else KCI was written twice over by
is

difference

not,

K]arepyao-jotei'ot,

is

for TO before KO\OKVVTIVOV

of

little

Karepyaaa^voi without KCU [57] 19 is correct. (8) In [59] 23

omitted, cf. [57] 20. Minor differences are [57] 8 TCOJU,
[59] 9 TCOJ;
10
eAAenro^ra
II
(v\movTa
17
[59]
[59]
[57]
[57]
A^r/roi/jrai
= [60] IT, for the same
Arj^orrai, cf. [57] 2i
[59] 24, and [58] 5
mistake.
a(f)

is

difference of spelling:

[57] 18 KO\OKVVTIVOV

[59] 21 xoXoKvvdwov.

The

changes of reading introduced by the writer of [59] are thus for the
most part mere variations, in no case improvements, except perhaps (6),

and

it maybe argued that

[59]-[fO] were directly copied from [57]-[58]
a
rather
careless
scribe.
But the number of differences in [59]-[60]
by
especially those which are mere variations, neither better nor worse

than [57]-[58], makes me incline to the belief that they are independent
copies of a common archetype which the scribes may have had before

them, or which

been dictated to them simultaneously.

of this difficult column depends on the sense of

may have

The meaning

COMMENTARY.

165

The reference is,

[57] 8 and irpoKijpv^Oevro^ [57] 13.
list
of
not
to
the
contend,
nomes, [60]-[72], but to a previous
following
with
which
to by airoSeifayiei;, are contrasted.
referred
list,
[60]-[72],
I

Since the original draft of the law concerning the oil monopoly contained a direct reference to a list of nomes, different from the list

which we have, [53] 18 note, and [60]-[72] were not part of the original
document, [38] i note, the list referred to by irpoKripv\0fiar<i)v is probably that referred to by viroKtipvfanev in [53], Assuming the correctness
of this identification, in what way did the original list, which no doubt
contained the law for the twenty-sixth and possibly earlier years, differ
from the list in [60]-[72] which represented the law for the twentyseventh year?
In the first place the number of arourae to be sown

with sesame and croton in the nomes was different in the two lists,
for the section beginning ocras 8 av apovpas fXaa-o-ovs,
[57] 7, is clearly

opposed to the preceding one which in that case may have begun
o<ras b av TrAeiovs, and the two lines which are left confirm this view.

The revised list therefore assigned in some cases more, in others fewer
arourae to the nomes, and where the revised amount was smaller the
deficiency was made up from other nomes, a contingency which, as
has been shown, see note on [41] 20, was not contemplated in the
original draft of [39]-[56], for under the old regulations each nome

grew enough for its own consumption. The difference however between
the two lists is not limited to sesame and croton. The original list
contained also the amounts of cnecus oil, colocynth oil, and perhaps
lamp oil required for Alexandria, [53] 22. In the revised list, in
accordance with the correction of [53] 20, only croton is required for
Alexandria, except in the two cases where sesame is required, [60] 24
and [62] 5, and there is no mention of the other oils, though see [58] i
note.

[39] 13-15. By ficriovra xpovov the two years mentioned

are
meant.
It is possible that the alterations in the law were
4
between the time of the sale and the collection of the tax, cf.

6. rtXos: cf.

in line

made

9 with [55] 16 and probably [54] i, and that

although the contractors for the different nomes had bought the tax
under the old regulations, in which the numbers of arourae to be sown
TtponTipvyQtHTtov in

line

were

government nevertheless allowed them to gain where

it secured them against

different, the

the change in the law was in their favour, just as

166

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

loss when the change injured them, see 8-10.

But the phrase rots rov
fimovra \povov Trpia^evoLs rather implies that the contract had not yet
been bought, and so I think does moAovjuev in [57] 3 and [58] 6. Hence
it is more probable that the alterations were made prior to the sale
of the contract and represent the terms under which it was to be

bought.
It is impossible of course to fix in which nomes the amounts of
sesame and croton to be grown for the nome itself were increased.
Many nomes in [60]-[72] have to grow croton (and two have to grow
sesame) for Alexandria, but as no tax was paid on this in the nome
where the produce was grown, see 13-15, this increase did not affect
the contractors who had bought the tax. The nomes meant in 6-7
are those in which the number of arourae was increased without the
surplus thus produced being taken away, and this section decides what
was to be done with the increase of the tax on sesame and croton.
What was to be done with the oil produced from this increased
amount of sesame and croton is perhaps laid down in 15-23, but see
note on line 1 6.
8. eAao-o-ous: e.g. the Heliopolite nome,
[64] 1-18, which only grew
had
be supplemented by 2000
arourae
of
and
therefore
to
sesame
500
artabae from other nomes, while it grew no croton at all cf. [63] 1 7,
:

[64] 22, &c.

u.

cf.
There are however two apparent
[61] u, [62] i, &c.
to
rule
and
this
exceptions
[69] 5-7
[72] 15-18.
13. e ou: e.g. the Tanite nome [66] 18, the Mendesian [62] 19, &c.
16. The construction and meaning of this section have given us

more

i>7rapei

trouble than

any passage

the papyrus, nor have

in

we been

The general outline of

successful in finding a satisfactory solution.
lines 16-22 is certain in so far that they consist of two parallel sections,
neither of which

decide

how

is

written out in

full,

far the parallelism is to

but the great difficulty

be carried.

Assuming

is

to

there are

16-22 and putting aside for the moment the

variations in [59] 18-25, the construction seems to be oaov 8 av 1^
KCU TO auo
ftcojuez' eis TO eAAeiuw o-r/aa^oy KCU eAcuov (K.O\OKVVTIVOV eAaioi>

no mistakes

in

[57]

TOV \ivov

(TTTC pharos, KaTcpya(rap.voi 5ia T<av oiKovop.u>v

a<
ou
/jierpqo-o/uev),
TO eTTtyffTj^a TO KTOV Kt]^rovrai ocrov ctTro TOU arjcraiuvov eAatou KCU airo TOU

(f\ap.(3avov

o<rov 5

av

JUTJ

Sca/ie^) eis

TO (eAAenroi;) KIKI

COMMENTARY.
(\aiov

KCLL

TO OTTO TOV \ivov

HCTpri<Ton(v, a<p

<T7T(/>/iaro9,

167

Karepyao-a/itroi 5ta rcov

ov TO cniydrr^jM TO i<rov Arj^ojmu o<rov OTTO Tf TOV KIKIOS

KCU OTTO TOD K/)orcoroy (\anftavov.

The variations in [59] 18-25 do no * affect the sense, the only one
of any importance being the insertion of TO before KO\OKVVTIVOV.
But
as
I
KO\OKVVTIVOV
eXaiov
is
the
of
both
and
if,
think,
ooififv
object
fitT/>rfo-o/xei>, it

cAcuov
b<an(v

KO.I

makes no

difference to the

meaning that

in

57 KO\OKVVTIVOV
is grammatically the object of
o-Trep^iaTos is the object of /iT0T/<ro/xi>,

TO OTTO TOV \tvov (TTKpfjLaTos

and the whole clause

oo-ov

while in [59] TO KO\OKVVTIVOV o-n-ep/wtros is the object of ^Tpr]<ro^(v and

is qualified by oa-ov py 8o>/i>.
The meaning then will be 'that colocynth
oil and linseed oil, when not required to fill
up deficiencies in sesame
oil and cici in the other nomes (cf. line 10
eAAfiiroimi), are to be manufactured

by the oeconomi, and the tax-farmers are

to

receive

an

7riyerrj/xa equal to that which they received from sesame oil and sesame
or cici and croton.
It might be thought that this explains the absence

of colocynth and linseed in [44]-[47] which are concerned with the

manufacture of oil. But there is no reference in C either to the
substitution of colocynth and linseed oil for sesame oil and cici or
to the adulteration of sesame oil

and cici with colocynth and linseed

M.
which
was
the
oil,
suggested
meaning of this passage. The oils
are invariably kept distinct, cf. [40] 10, [53] 14, 21, moreover in line
10 it has been already stated that the deficiency in sesame and croton
would be made up by sesame and croton from other nomes. There
is also the objection, why should the fniycvrma on the
colocynth oil
not given eis TO eAAeiTrov o-qo-a/Aov be different from the cTriyerrj/uia on
the colocynth oil not given eis TO (eAAeiiroy) KIKI? This firtyerrjjia is
itself one of the most obscure points in the whole section.
The only
mentioned
in
is
the
C
difference
between
and
the
cost
-7riyTj^a
selling
price of oil, a part of which was paid to the contractors, cf. [45] 2 and
This suits enro TOU <nj<r<tyui>ou eXaioi;, but is no explanation
[55] 14.
airo TOV cn/o-a/xou in
[57] 18, for which phrase C offers
Other alternatives are either to take ciriyevrina. as the
surplus on the whole account of the tax-farmers, which neither suits
TO laov.nor yields a satisfactory meaning, or to consider it equivalent
to -n\(iov in [53] 13, in which case the eTriyenjfia on the sesame oil
as well as the eniytinwa on the sesame must refer to the prices in

of the

no

eiriyerrj/ia

parallel.

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

168

But it is very difficult to see how the prices there

passage.
could be called an e^riyem/pio since they are much less than the selling
that

price, [53] 16 note.

If the explanation

suggested is very unsatisfactory, it is less so than

several other explanations which may seem possible,
(i) If o<rov in
refers
not
to
linseed
to
and
oil
but
sesame
oil, the
15
colocynth
[57]
construction becomes

still more complicated and the old difficulty of

and
linseed
colocynth
being used to supplement cici still remains.
If
eK
TOV
oo-ov
\ivov
(TTTepfcaro? be taken as one sentence, i. e. what
(2)
we do not give eis TO (XXenrov at](rafj.ov but what we do give ets TO

oil

KIKI,

ov

a(f>

(3)

We

and

TO

TOU

a-n-o

may

that

18,
is

16-18

in

in

excess

of the

not required for other nomes.

is

supply

oo~oj;

av

fxrj

left

is

been

has

/cat

unaccounted

for.

between

KIKI

omitted

which case [59] 21 is nearer to the correct

and the section will refer to the sesame

KoXoKwrivov, in

reading than [57]

and croton which

but

(TTjo-a/xou

suppose

Scojuiei'

KIKI

rj

previously

Then

in

line

TO KO\OKVVTIVOV

TJ

decreed amount,
18 we ought to
TO cnro TOU \LVOV

But the amount of colocynth and linseed

o-ncpnaTos
was
to be grown
not fixed, cf. [39] 14, note, and therefore it could
not be in excess TO>V TTpoKrjpvxQei<r(>v, and why is nothing said of the
fTnyvr]fji,a on colocynth and linseed or the oils produced from them?
LS

TO KIKI K.T.A.

18 we only supply KIKI, we avoid the last difficulties,

the deficiency in colocynth and linseed oil be supplied
should
why
and
not
cici
by colocynth and linseed oil ?
by
The omission of cnecus oil here, cf. [58] 2 note, is in any case remarkable. If the explanation of the passage which I have suggested
If in line

(4)

but

near the truth, and we have here a regulation concerning the manufacture of colocynth and linseed oil, the reason may be that the

is

regulations for the manufacture of cnecus have already been given and
But it is more
that a deficiency in its supply was not likely to occur.
likely the omission is a mere accident, cf. notes on [41] 1 1, [42] 4.
19. TO
it is

otTro

called TO

[58.]
i.

TOU \ivov a"iT(pp.aTos

i-4= [60]

Two

cf note

on [39]

7.

In

[39]-[56]

e -n e\\VXVIQV.

3-9-

facts are clear

concerning the sesame and croton mentioned

in this paragraph, (i) that they are taken away (e) from each
and (2) that no tax is to be levied on them by ot Ttpia^voi rrjv

nome,

COMMENTARY.

169

e
cither of these facts is sufficient to prove that the sesame
and croton mentioned here cannot be the ordinary sesame and croton
required for the nome itself, while
a<rrov, if correct, shows that the
sesame and croton cannot be that required ety oAAovy vopovs, even if
that subject had not been already discussed in [57] 7-15. The only
other classes of sesame and croton are that
y ray tv AAcfarfyetai
8ia0e<riy [53] 18 and that required w A\cavbpctai [53] 27.
Against
the latter class being meant here are the bracketing of the section
[53] 27~[54] 2 and the absence of any mention of this class in the
list of nomes.
On the other hand croton *iy Tay ev AA<arfymai 5ia0e<my,
on which no tax was to be levied in the nome, is frequently mentioned
in
[60]-[72], and in two cases, [60] 24 and [62] 5, sesame <iy ray et>
.

8ia0my. Since we should expect a general regulation

two columns concerning the tax on this class of sesame and
croton parallel to that concerning the tax on sesame and croton eiy
oAAovy rofiovy, and eiy AXcgavbpdav is possible in [58] 2, it is extremely
AAeai>8peiai

in these

probable that this section refers to the oil 'for disposal at Alexandria.'
The only difficulty is the mention of colocynth oil in [58] 2, cf. [53] 22

where colocynth
is

also bracketed

oil

is

by the

bracketed by the corrector. But as sesame oil

corrector, the inconsistency need not trouble us.

In [60] 8 <rq<r^apn> is impossible, as is

the a and v
I/JOJAOV, though
are extremely doubtful.
should expect the nome from which we
take away the sesame and croton,' cf. [57] 14 and [61] 17.

We

[58.] 4-6

which

is

vators,

'

[60] 9-13. 'The sesame and croton sown in the district

be received by the oeconomus from the culti-

set apart shall

and he

shall forward

it

to the oil factory in Alexandria.'

5. T; a</>a>/H(rjier77 was part of the Libyan nome, [61] 3 (cf. [40] 14),
the produce of which was reserved for Alexandria.
Hence as in the
case of sesame and croton grown eiy aAAous ixyiovy,
[43] 22-24, the
oeconomus, not the contractors, received the produce, and no tax was
paid on it to the contractors of the Libyan nome, [61] 4-6, and note

[on 61]

i.

In [60] 10 the a of Kporuva

[58.] 6-8

payment

in

[60] 13-15.

'We

copper coin, and we

6. TT(D\oviJ.fv

contract for the

reverts to
x<*>pa,

elided.

offer the contract for sale accepting

24 obols for the stater.'

will take

iro>Aov/iei>

not to the

is

in [57] 3

a</>a>/no>ien/

and

only.

refers to the

whole

170

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

important passage see App. iii. p. 195. To anticipate

my conclusions, this passage means that the government would not only
accept copper coin from the contractors as payment of the sum which
7.

On

this all

they had promised, but would take it at par, demanding no exchange

and counting 24 copper obols as the full equivalent of a silver stater
or tetrad rachm i. e. copper was legal tender not merely for the fractions
In the
of a drachma, as it always was, but for the whole amount.
;

case of most other taxes, e.g. the aTrojuoipa, the government insisted
on payment in silver, and if the tax-farmer was allowed to pay in copper
at all he

had also to pay the

to have been fixed in all cases

difference of the

by

exchange which seems

the government.

Cf. [76] 2-5.

'

[60] 15-17. If the flow of the oil produces a surplus,

oil and cici shall belong to the Treasury.'
8. pwis: see note on [47] i, to which, as L. remarked, this passage
probably refers. It seems that the reading differs in [58] 9 from [60] 16,
[58.] 8-9
this surplus of

the

first

having TO

the other TO eAcuoy KCU

irXeioz;,

be an error in my
same in both passages.

restoration of 8-9

and

in

KIKI,

but there

any case the sense

is

may
the

[60.] 18-25. 1 the Saite nome with Naucratis, of sesame 10,000

arourae, of croton 1 1,433$ arourae, and likewise for disposal at Alex'

andria, of croton,

on which no tax

of the Saite nome,

io,666

be levied by the contractor

and
of sesame for disposal at
arourae,
shall

Alexandria 3000 artabae.'

The mention of Naucratis here though its importance was
1 8.
rapidly decreasing, coupled with the absence of it from the list in [31],
is somewhat in favour of the view suggested in note on [31] 5, that
the

list

in

0r//3at8os is

[CO]-[72] is much the older classification.

not mentioned in either list.

Ptolemais

TTJS

Cf. also B. M. pap. cxix.

is common in P. P.
The sign for
/3'.
time
the
which
second
of
the
ft had degenerated into
42,
century A.D., by
o.
This passage and line 23 settle the question whether the aroura
was ever divided into thirds at this period, but Wilck. tells me that

20

he

adheres

to

the

fractions smaller than

opinion he has expressed that in the case of

other series, f |, TV and so on, is always
, the
,

used for arourae.

21.

wore:

cf.

App.

ii.

(4)

saep.

P.

P.

49

(i c)

4,

Ti\iv6ov\Koi

01

COMMENTARY.
(\Kva-ai.
/3an-i[AiKT;i/]

fTrioraAjji'at

by the

axrrc

[iThivOov]

KaTaAv<m>

O>OTC

rot? jxcraKcifxcpoi?.

dative or

is

In

(rvvrtKavnivqv (V

TTJI;

and Wilck. Akt.

171

15 ra ciOto-fura <rv/x/3oAa
these cases it is followed

vi.

all

s.

see note on [53] 20 and cf. [C2] 5.

25. After the lacuna is what looks like the tip of a
elsewhere followed immediately by the amount
24.

<T7j<rajiov

<r,

but as

Stafleo-iv

do not think
of sesame
The
amounts
is
lost.
8ia0e<ru>
on
cf.
note
anything
[48] 5.
and croton required for Alexandria are given here and in [61] 19 in
artabae, in other places, where there is not a lacuna, they are given
in arourae.
The fact that arourae and artabae are used indifferently
shows that there was a fixed amount of seed expected from each
aroura.
The enormous quantity of croton to be grown in the Saite
is

nome includes of course the croton already planted. Probably only

a very small amount was sown in each year, cf. note on [43] 5, while
the figures in the case of sesame meant the quantity to be actually
sown. There is no proportion between the relative amount of sesame
and croton to be grown in the various nomes, nor is there any between
the amounts to be grown for the nome itself and those to be grown
for

Alexandria or other nomes.

throughout the

The

figures exhibit the

utmost variety

list

[61.] 1-12. 'In

all

Libya, except the district set apart, of sesame

5700 arourae, and in the district set apart, of sesame which must be
supplied to Alexandria for disposal there, and on which no tax shall
arourae.
Of croton
be levied by the contractor of the Libyan nome,
nome
from
be
made
into
oil
in
the
we
will
other
which must
provide
nomes
artabae, the tax on which shall belong to the contractor
.

of the Libyan nome.'

i.

See [58]

in the
8.

coirji

on [29]

As

5,

a^pur^v^,
i.

e.

note.

does not seem that any croton was grown

hardly room for another line.

It

for there

the

is

nome

of which the tax was

farmed.

Cf.

note

7.

the

same formulae are repeated

to translate the rest of the

[61.] 20.

[62.]

5.

in

each column,

unnecessary

list.

See note on [31] 6 and Introd.

Though

it is

p. xlviii.

the lines are often very uneven, there

Z 2

is

not

room

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

172

for

fv TOU a\\ois VO/JLOIS biaOeviv, even

and not n\v biadeviv rr\v ev rots oXXots

Ttjv

order,

if

that

had been the usual

ro/xois.

[63.] 9. Perhaps TTJI> fv A\(avbpeiai, but from the Mendesian nome

to the Fayoum, [71], the formula, where preserved, is cts rows a\\ovs

Other mistakes

[67.] 12. ?r/>aera(i).

[72]

in spelling

occur in [68]

i,

19,

1 8.

and [72] 11-12. The Memphite nome as

was
supplied from the Fayoum.
Memphis
From these two passages it
Cf. [72] 15-17, and [71] 8-n.

[69.] 1-2.

Cf. [61] 3

well as
5.

appears that the produce of the

Fayoum

sent to the

Memphite nome

and Memphis was exempt altogether from the tax and is therefore
an exception to the rule decreed in [57] 13-15, unless, as is quite
possible, the scribe has written tv Me/x^ei and tv TCOI Mej^mjt for fv
For the position of the Memphite nome
Trjt XifMvrn or tv TCOI At/uzurqi.
in the list see M. Introd. p. xlviii.
But I am inclined to think that the
nome
from
of
the
Memphis is due to want of
separation
Memphite
precision

in

the drafting of the law rather than to any sacredness

number twenty-four, and that the agreement between

attaching to the

the two
18.

lists in

The

point of

number

figure after 'B

is

900

is

accidental.

so [71] 12.

Cf. note

on [31]

5.

cf. App. ii. (2) 13, which proves the existence

word and probably refers to the Fayoum. The note added
at the side in a very minute hand appears to refer to some amount
which had been omitted, and does not affect the construction of the
But it is possible that we ought to read eis TOV
principal sentence.
Meju^irrji; /ecu Me/xc/uz; in lines 8-9 and [Me/nc/H]^ in line u, cf. [69] 2
and [72] 12.

[71.] 10. At/xrtrrjy

of the

[72.]
polite

i.

which

hardly any doubt that the nome lost

wanting to complete the list in [31].

There
is

is

is

the Cyno-

The fragment

containing part of lines 8-10 is perhaps incorrectly

In any case there is a variaplaced here, though no other place suits it.
I conjecture that the scribe wrote KCU
tion in it from the usual formula.
8.

TOV KpoTMva ov bfi KaTfpyaa-Orjvai., which elsewhere is used only of the

croton supplied from other nomes, in place of KPOT<OVOS, i. e. the croton to
be grown in the Cynopolite nome. Where arourae are mentioned, they

COMMENTARY.

173

naturally refer to the sesame and croton grown in the nome, and where
sesame and croton are supplied from other nomes, the amount is given
in art abac.
1 1

See note on [69]

5.

Considering the size of the Thebaid compared to other nomes,

the amounts are not large, being less than those assigned to the Saite
nome [60] 19-20. The Thebaid was bounded by the Hermopolite nome
1 8.

on the north and by the

first

cataract on the south.

The roll bought from a dealer in Cairo by Prof. Petrie in Dec.

ends
with [72] the pieces which constitute D and E were bought
1893
by me in 1895 from the same dealer, with the exception of [100] and
part of [103] on the verso of [100]. This piece and the fragments
[73.]

printed after [107] I obtained in the Fayoum in December, 1894. For

and E and the
any one who has studied [l]-[72] a mere glance at
him
is
sufficient
convince
that
all
to
they
belong to the
fragments

same

series of documents as [l]-[72], and it is hardly necessary to call

attention to the close similarity in colour and texture of the papyrus,
the obvious parallelism of the subjects treated, and the identity of the

writer of [87]-[91] with the writer of [24]-[35].

The roll containing
[l]-[72] probably consisted originally of four separate documents, cf.
note on [38] i, so that the question whether [73]-[107] were ever
Since [1] is the
actually joined to [l]-[72] is of little importance.

and E were not actually

beginning of a section, it is probable that
as
but
in
the
distance
between
the
folds
joined,
[73]-[107], so far as it
can be ascertained, shows that these columns formed the outside of a roll,
the core of which had been separated from it, and the distance between
the outside folds of [l]-[72] is perfectly consistent with the view that
[l]-[72] are the missing core of [73]-[107], it is probable that [73]-[107]

were folded round [l]-[72] but not joined to them, and hence were
separated from [l]-[72] by the finders of the papyrus. Whether this
hypothesis be correct or not, [73]-[107] must have been found at the
same place as [l]-[72], and as it is quite certain that [73]-[107] were
found in the Fayoum, it follows that [l]-[72] were found there also
cf. note on [38] 3.
;

[73]-[78] form a section by themselves, and some folds

been lost between [78] and [79], but probably not many.

may have

174

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

see note on [39] i.

At first sight the word
[73.] i. 8iaypaju/xa
to
used
here
in
a
wider
sense
than
be
there, for
appears
appears to fix
the relations of the royal banks towards the government officials, cf. note
:

on [3] 2. But such a section as [76] is a biaypa^a in the sense of [39],

and as other sections of a similar character may have been lost, e. g. one
fixing the rate of interest (cf. [78] i), the meaning of Siay/oa/x/za may be
In line 4

the usual one.

[74.]
cf.

[52] 15,

[75.]
1895, no.

is

perhaps for

/3ao-]t\uTjy.

Kara/3aXA.oi/Ts are the tax-payers,

ot

2.

]t/3i/oji>

M.

not the tax-farmers,

1 8.

The

i.

2, p.

acute conjecture of Wilcken from P. P. xxvi (G. G. A.

156), that there were royal banks in the villages as well as

completely established. No one however had

suspected the surprising piece of information afforded by line 4 and
[76] 3, that the royal banks were farmed, and this fact produces important modifications in the current view concerning the position of the
in the large towns, is thus

banks

in this

and the next century

cf.

Wilcken's Ostraca.

The

The
subject of ava(f)fpeT(ao-av is probably not cu rpa7reai.
is uncertain.
exact breadth of all of the columns in
The number of
2.

beginnings and ends of lines here is calculated on the

supposition that 3-4 airoTLvcTaxrav ran TT/]V is correct, in [76] on the
supposition that o-iwa^rjrai trpos TOV TjyopaKora (cf. [47] 5 and 13) is right,
in [74] on the supposition that Tr/xxcnroyres u (cf. [15] 4) is right.
The
length of [73], [77] and [78] depends on the correctness of the previous
letters lost at the

conjectures combined.
5.

M. suggests

No

avTi\ r<av /cara/3aA

A.o/xercoi> \pi]^aTui\v.

is more deplorable than that at the

beginning of
have
line 5, which would
given us the discount on copper when paid in
Cf. App. ii (5) and
place of silver by the farmers of a vpos apyvpiov OWTJ.
L. P. 62 [5] 1 6, which gives the discount at some period of the second
century B.C., and App. iii. pp. 198-200 and 214-216.

[76.] 4-

7.

If TOOI

lacuna

TJ]V

rpaiiefav rjyopciKori, the lacuna

is

longer than

have

supposed.
[77.]

i.

iravra xaA.Koi> bibovai

e.g. the farmers of the c\aiKrj

paid in copper without any discount,

[78.]

i.

Probably em T[OKOH]

cf.

[58] 6

so in line

4.

and App.

iii.

cor?/,

p. 195.

who

COMMENTARY.
I.

[80.]
2.

av[Tiypa<j>ov ?

AEKAT[J2N.

10.

[84.]

Perhaps ZH]TH212, cf. [55] 17.

vavTeia
cf. Rosetta stone 1 7, Trpoa-cTafcv

6.

riav (is TJ]V vavrciav

6> KCU TTJV <rv\\rj\l/iv

irotci<r0at.

/ITJ

see note on [38] 3.

would seem to be the beginning of a /3a<nAiKos
But its occurrence here is very strange.
[27] 6 and App. ii (2).

[86.]

6. bioiKTjTov

10. o/xrva)

cf.

or

AEKAT[H2

Probably

[85.]

175

From

[87.]
clothes;

op*oy,

this point to
[107] the subject is a tax connected with
17, roov T eis TO fiaaiXiKov avvT(\ov[ji(i'<Dv tv TOIS

Rosetta stone

cf.

tcpot? (3v<r<riv(i>v

in [103]

this

odovuav aireXvo-fv ra bvo

and o0ona

8e

/cat

ras n^ias

T(ov

KCLI

in

/nepr/ with the mention of fivvo-uxav

and
[98] 9
[99] 5; and Rosetta stone 29,

TCOI;

/ITJ

(TvyT(r<Ae(r/xera)t;

(rvvTffo&ntvuiv eis TO (3a<ri\LKOv (3v<r<nv<av

ra irpo? Toy Sety/xaTKr/ioy

5ia<^)opa

(air-

with the TrapaSety/xa in [89] 3 and [102] 4.

Airos, toros and
are frequently mentioned, and there are two references to the
[106] 3 and [107] 4.
There does not seem to be room

priests,
9.

for a7roTi]i;eTa>.

Perhaps the

right-hand strip belongs to a different column.

[90.] There
[04.]

3.

[95.]

6.

a break between this and the preceding column.

is

Tpujpapxw*
2

e.

i.

cf.

drachmae,

P. P. 129. 8.
i

\ obols.

Probably xpai> fx^ cv c ^ [ 5 3] 27 and note on [53] 18.

r/pa seems to be the termination of a word expressing the
tax on some article, cf. Cin-qpa the tax on C^ ^ and fin TTJI
o0o[viTjpcu ?
[96.]

3.

i.

>

TpTjpav

"

[103] 3.
4-

Cf. note

[98.]
IT, i.

i.

e. TTTJX VS

av(a)

2.

i.

the curved line above

M. pap.

c f- B.

means

[103.]
3.

on [12]

'

'

at

or

1.

and

ITJ

in lines 2

and 3 represents

7.

'

a-TVTTTTfiv coy

multiplied by,'
:

cf.

LXX.

cf.

App.

ii

(5) passim.

Lev. 13. 47, where

has

<mrmrviv<jtv.

Cf. [96] 3 note.

[104.]

4- Cf. [7] 3.

[107.]

i.

[Frag.

Cf. [9] 2 note.

1.]

do not

feel

very confident that

all

the columns which

176

REVENUE LAWS OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS.

have assigned to the tenth scribe are by him, [73]-[86], [99]-[107],

except [99] 8-9, and the fragments. It is easy to select two columns
which, when put side by side, appear to be written by different persons,
e. g. [76] and [82], but there are several columns in which the writer's
hand changes gradually from one style to another, and after trying in
vain to distinguish more than one hand I have come to the conclusion
that these columns were all written by him. His change from a rather
I

much more cursive hand is clearly exhibited in [73]-[78].

That Fragments i and a do not belong to the parts of [73]-[102]
written by the tenth hand is quite certain
Frag. 3 is more doubtful.
6
and
to
might belong
Fragments 4, 5,
[73]-[102], but so far as can be
i
to
and
for
ascertained they belong
all of them seem to be concerned
2,
formal to a

The fragments grouped together under

one number come at corresponding folds and therefore at corresponding
intervals, most probably of about 8 inches, so that each one belongs to
a different column. But the order in which they are placed under each
number is in some cases doubtful. Frag, i (a) and (b) go together, and
are in the right order, and so are (c}-(g), but whether (a}-(b] come before
or after (c}-(g) and whether there are any corresponding fragments lost
between (a)-(b] and (c}-(g) is unknown. Similarly in Frag, a, (a) and
(b) go together, and so do (c}-(f) and (g)-(i], but the position of these
In Frag. 4, (a)-(e), (g)-(l],
three subdivisions to each other is unknown.
with the fwofuov or pasture-tax.

In Frag. 5, (a) and (b) are by

(m)-(n) go together, (/) is by itself.
themselves, (c] and (d) go together. In Frag. 6, (a)-(c) go together, so

do ()-(/), and

(g)-(h).

APPENDIX

I.

PAPYRUS 62 OF THE LOUVRE, NOTICES ET EXTRAITS DES

MANUSCRITS, VOL. xvm, PART II, 1866.
[

Col.

1.

[iHaXovfJiCV
[

[KOI

ray

airo

/zTji/]oy

.....

eiy

aL

TO

8a>8eKajUTjvoi;

a[y]opaere 8e

jxcAAere ftT)[0]era <rvKO<f)avTr]<Tfiv

KCU]

.......... P?^ 8[ia]/3aXAeiy aAX OTTO row

.............. ]i xara rovy vofwvs KOI ra
]

[ypa/xfxara Kai
[TO

ra irpjooray/xara

............. JT/ao^fva

[ray 8 covay avaJTrATjpaxreij;

10

iy

Meo-opr;

irayojji>ay] Tjjitpay e

[ray coray
5

ray tv rjau Ovpvyxirr/i coray

........

cai
</>

TO

8ta

biopO(t>fj.f0a

CKacrrTjy

ovOcva vnoXoyqv

............. TO] f3a<ri\i.KOv 7rapeu/3

.............. ]ci(T0ai coy icai ray <y8eiay itpa\di)
[(Tovrai ....... 01] ra reArj Aa^aro^rey oo-a xai
........... eyyjuovy 8e Kara<rT7j(70u<riy 01 eyAa

[.

rcoi
reoi

oiKojro/ucoi

Kat ^a<ri[AiKo)i]

15

Col. 2.

irapo^oAoyrj^Tjt

[eiri

TTI

a</>

jy

irpaaewy

y r/fxepaiy

A Kara

7ri]/3aAAoyroy roura)!/ 8e ra

[row
a[i

rrjy]

av

rrjy )3a<riAiK7j

yioyii>a UTTO [rwv

.]a>y

KOI rou rpaTre^irov ouroy

<[v roiy /A7}]iu[c]toty ro

y

[ojaa [iri roay vJTro^TjKcoy eoriy KOI r^v

Aa

.
[.

APPENDIX

178

KCU ocras cxao-jroi eis Tf\v /3e/3auocriv

/3ej3aio>r[.

vnoOrjKas

.........

10 ra 8ifyyu77/ji[aTa ray

ei<r> KO[I]
K

eicrii;

.]ypa<pas

on

a[ ....... ]0ous

row

Kai

SeScoKatriz;

ei[A]T7<po[ra)i>]

e7re<r/ce/x/x;[ai]

a>s

eav ri

a7r[oAi]7ra>cr[i

KaOrjKov T[......... ]a>criv ..... ]rei<roi>[r

avair\[ripov<ri ras] a>p[as .................
.

77

TOIS 8]

15

I.

fTti.fjLr]Trjs

Kai o

.]

Kai avoicr[ov<riv cni rr]v

8 av a\\[o)s OIKOVO/XTJCTTJI

[o]s

Tavra
Col. 3.

fca

rj

............

TO /3a(TiAiKOz> naO fKacrrov

eis

aTrorei<rei

aStKTj/^ia

KOI irpos rov bioi.K^rr]v KaraTrooTaATjcreTcu /xera

ra
5

r]()fVTa V7rapet ets

xai ayayKacrflrjo-erai Trpoo-Sieyyvay rou Trapop.o\oyrjOfVTOs

eav 8e 01 \af3ovres ra
CTTI

rpairf^av

e[/c]ao-ros

ou#]ei>

/c[at

10

ra

T}cr<Tov

(ru/xj3oAa eis

fv root

(roo(riy

auro>y

7^

ava-/K[a](r6r]cro

TTJZ;

8e ri^es rcoy

eaz>

rrjs

(n)/u,^3oAa

TTJV

[r]pa7refay

Kara^ovrcoy ra?

copto-juercot

covas

yjpovai fTrava.7rpa0r)<rovTat

a
ai

corai K[OI

c]ay rt

a(/

rot9 8e ^3ouAo/iei'ots
15

^aAAov

u:rep^aeiv

fiera TO rov

8o0Tji>ai e^eo-Tai ev auTcoi TCOI TrpaTr/ptau

ou/c

[Aao-jcrovos 8e Tcoy [ejiriSeKarcoy

[01

fyXafiovres ras

8]

[/xej-ra

[xai]

TOU

01

toj/as

TroirjtrovTat

Ta a7ro7rpap-aTa

[oiKoyo/^tov] Kai TOW /SacriAiKOU ypap.p.aTecoj

Trapa [TOUTtof] KaTacr^oyTes eyyvous

rois Trpoyeypa/z/xevoi? a ou Aoyio-flrjo-erai rois

Col. 4.

eis

ra

81 avrcoy

KaTao-Ta^T/o-o/xeva 8ieyyrrj/xaTa

Tj^rjcreTai

8e xai TO TOTrrcoy crv/u/3oAa TOI> avroy

ai 8 ava<popai /mepio-^rjcroi/Tai TTJS /xev {vTrjpas

5

TIJS

\tp.pLvr]y fafj.r)vov Aoyi^op.ei'ou TOD

APPENDIX
A

TTJS

5 aAAcoz'

Tol)

* ai;

firi

trvv\(aprj6rji

TTJS

CK rov Kara Aoyor

Tifcav

7ri

y(vi]fj.ara

vno

TWV

ra>t>

aAAo

7rpa<rea>? Tots 8

10 TOS coj-as fji(Tabo6rj(r(Tai

TO.

179

a>ra>i/

'-

I.

ri

eyAa/i^arov<rti;

TU>V TTpoirpa.yiJLa.Tfv

irpo(\r]Xv

\fipoypa<pias opxov /3a<rtAtKOU

o

<

Kara

iaoyTfxoy

eyTjxfcws (rvaTar}(TTat Troy avrous

TTJS

K TCDV iriTrrowwi' CTTI TTJV

/iT/ra

15 rooy 8e irpoy yerrj/xara

t<TTat 8ia T(ov irapa

ov&iv be

KCLI

irapa TU>V

ot

o(.x.ovo\J.(av

nai 01

o 8e Aoyos rrjy 7rpo(ro8ou ypa(^i}<T^ai irpos rows

irpos rpairffav KCLI TO. 8ieyyvrj/zara crt^fpao-^Tjo-f

20 Trpos

ra

fj.a.T<i)v

O(pfi\r]dr](rofj.(va

ra 8e

irpos

acoAov0a)s rots vnap-^ova-i

Col. 5.

rov

\cipi.(rfj.ov

T<DV

(rvva^drjcrofj.fva biaypa<pi](rcTa.[i\
Trcpi

cis

TO /3a<riAiKoi;

rot^ooy Trpoorayp-ao-i

/cat

TOI? 8 araTrAT/paxrovcrii; ray cora? 8o^7j(reTai o

yt]d(vra rov

([yjAqx/^ws

7*

h x

irpoo-Siaypa^ovo-iv CKTOS

8c irapa rcor Tonoypafj.fj.aTf<t)v

01

rovrois KOI rots aAAois X6ipi<r/iois

fj.voi irpos Tf

KOI

yAa/3ov<ri e^aKoAov^Tjcrci ra

10 atrrois TOIS 8
irpoort/Lia

8e KOTa/3oAa>y (n;/A/3oAa Aa/x^ayeTaxrav Trapa rou

vnoypa<pas (\ovra. irapa TU>V firanoXov

eav 8 a[AA]a>$

oiKOVOfJL<a<riv

a/crpoi

avrois

15 at 8oo-et?

rcay 8< irpos apyvfpjioy (avtav irpoGbiaypatfrovviv aAayrjy

cos

TTJS

pvas

[c]

xai Karaycoyiov

a 2

KCU

APPENDIX L

i8o

<nrvp(,b<av

Kai

TCOI>

Kai
Trpos

20 vnoKifj.vr)s

TaAA

%a\KOv
ij

rrjy

KaTaycoyiou aAAas

Col. 6.

Lcrovofj.[ov]

7ricrKVT]i>

faripas

X<opts rcoy OTTO TOV xipi.<riJ.ov

KOI 6^ ncriv

pev eTriyeyTj^a
arrtXoyio-^Tjo-eTai ra

rou eyKU/cAiou
HT)

TrpocrSteyyvT/o-ajo-ii'

at corai

ocroi

TOU

TTavaTTpa.di](TOVTaL

icrovofjiov]

raXA ar^Afco/xara H
a>i>[as

ey

ey [THTW 8

Trotcocrti'

7riyeznj//a[ra

ar .....

TT? S

31 *

..............

eay 8e Tires TWZ; reXcorcoi' irAeious

5

eis ro

COOT eiuat

T0)y 8e AotTTwr coycov TO>V Trpfos \CL\KOV

Kai fis Ti^rjv (TTruptScoy Kat

/uey x*

a KOI

bpaxjJirjs

]/3

cwai i/3y

COOT

afc

a^rjAco^iara

.......

KCU a?rot[ ........]

oc/>eiAr;/iaTO? TOU[

...........

TOV fvpicrKOvros K[at TO

o<^>ei]
'

10

Xrjfjia

Kai TO (xpevpena irpaxdr]arovTai. TOIS 8 ay[a.TT\r]pov(Ti\

TOS &)^a5 ou[^]ei? fic^e^ei TrArjr Tcoy CTTI TTJ[ ........ ]

(TW/caTaypac/>?7<roju,ez>a>z> ear 8e irapa TauTa Trfoujcrcoeriz/j
o Te ^Ta8ous aTTOTeto-et eTrmjuor J^ K Kai o [ ....... ]

6av

eav 8e rives Ttpos ras eyAr/\^eis

15 TJ Trpafis eTTai ef e^os Kai eK TravTa>v aTeArj
ea>s TOU aL eav 8e Tive[s
\a(3(av

7* K

oc/>e[iA.a>(rii;J

X<wpis T<)v vnap-^ovo-tov TO

Ttiiv

avevrivcy^evcov ye^^jaaTtoy ecos TOV a[L]

cay 8e TIS OTTO TU>V vnap^ovaaiv

20 Ta K.aOr]KOVTa TeArj
rj

TTJI

eyA?j/x\/rei

ava\.t]^>Qt]

irp[o](ra\0[ri(rcTai]

KOI or[...........

...........
..............
?;[

8ura/xeis a7r[oo-T]eiAayTo[s

7rai;a7rco[A]eio-0at

Taj coyas

Col. 7.
]fj.va

ey TOIS

01

]TOI eis

Ta

]vt$

oe/>ei

Ti]v <v]r]v

fxrj

APPENDIX

181

I.

pj
(v

rjcrav

TTJI

VTra]p\ov(riv ev rots
15

JKta

cy\a(3a>(Ti

row

Kara

VTTtp

]cvra
to

]rat

Col. 8.

rj/zepaj

8[exa

.........
ca0

Troi[rj<roj;]rai

[O/AOIOJJ]

[cara ro 8ia]
raj (K0<r[is fv roiy]

T]OU> rtjUTjo-^wf

[r//xc]paj;

KOI [irpoj T]OUJ arny/ofa^ea?

j/i^orrey row

.....

[rjyop]aKoros TO ovofj.a KOI 8ta

[rtoz;]

Trpoy TTJI rfpaJTre^rji ewi ras 8ia rou bta

br]\ovfjivas
Trapa/xevouo-i

bwa

[rj/ij^pas

(w?

TT/S

xai aei

eo-^arT;?

rr/i

8eKa[rrji]

copfajs rr;? Tj/xtpafs]

8 imep/3o\iov treoTTjKJjfi] tcoy row Xu0[?]va]i 01 8e rpa[7re]

avoio-ovo-iy cp. /jt> raiy

rjfiepav f(p[rj}fj.(pi<riv

[fcja^

10 (in rr/s 8iaypa0rjs rou reAovfs orjt ecKeirai eis i>7T6p/3o[Aioj;]

fv 8c rots

pirji'teioiy

v 5

rwi

>cat

K<a<riv

TO KaOfv

iri

cv[.

[ro>y]

[.

15 fjifvov TeXoj i:(VTaTT\ov[v fav 8]

ftTj

7roio)o-iv

Trpos

Toy

xfa^coj]

8io[iKJ7jT[T/f

[avr]a)V ava[\]ri(p0ri[<r(]Tai
[/3aoHA.]ei

20

At

TO 8^ov] ecrrai

..........

is

Taj 5fxa

r;p.fp[as]

7rapaxpj|i[a]

cTrifxcATjfrrji]

TrpaxOrja-ovraL (Ka<rrov

CTTI

(KT(Or]i

p-lrj

ot

.]/xaToj r[o
TeAa>[i>at

.......

x]ai 01 azr[i]

Trpoyeypaurai KaTairooraAT;
p-^Va </)uA.ac7/j xai ra i8ta
TO j3a(n\iKov OVTCOJ yap

01 Tf

TODI

/3ouXop,eroi KTr/o-ao-^ai TI Tcoy

ov] (TTfprjOrja-ovTai

TOV TOIOVTOV.

Lumbroso's suggestion I revised the text of this

papyrus in Notices et Extraits by a study of the original in September,
Several corrections of the numerous inaccuracies found -in the
1894.
Paris editors' text have already been published by Lumbroso, Revillout,
and Wilcken in various books or articles, and the last-named in August
1895 most generously placed at my disposal his unpublished copy of
Professor

APPENDIX

182

the text

made

Where

several years ago.

my

preference to

I.

previous ones,

I have adopted his readings in

have recorded the fact in the notes.

of the papyrus has been explained by Lumbroso in the eighteenth

chapter of his admirable Recherches. I confine my notes to points on

Most

which we have new suggestions to make, or on which the Revenue

Papyrus throws light.
note on [53] 18. Whether irwXov^z;
[1.] i. Cf. Rev. Pap. [57] 3 and
I
this
be right or not, think
papyrus was issued in the king's name.
The universal practice of the Ptolemies, so
TO a L is a great puzzle.
far as we know, was to count the period between their accession and the
beginning of the
is

civil year,

aL coincides with

fis TO

the

first

Thoth

year of this sovereign a

written before the

first

ist,

Therefore if
as their first year.
ras fTrayo/xe^as rj/xepas, not only

eis b<a$Kap.r]vov /ecu

full year,

but the papyrus seems to be

year had begun.

tried to solve the difficulty

by

Revillout (R. E. vi. 154) has

that
the first year applies to
supposing

Cleopatra, ?/ ct8eA.</>?7, who on his theory ousted EuerII

in
fortieth year of his reign, but decided not to begin the
the
getes
of
her
own reign before the next Thoth ist. The difficulty
computation

second

the

however of supposing that the sovereign did not begin his or her reign
at once is equally great whether the preceding sovereign was dead or
whether he was only exiled, and with regard to the particular year
suggested by Revillout there

is

the further difficulty that a

Theban

papyrus (A. E. F. pap. 19) and an inscription (Strack. Mitth. K. Deutsch.

A. I. in Ath. 1894, p. 230) are dated in the forty-first year of Euergetes II.
I

am

inclined therefore to doubt whether

ei?

TO

aL

really coincides with

especially as the starting-point of the tax is not, in accordance with the conjecture of the Paris editors, accepted by Revillout, a-no
fis b^beKafj-rjvov,

0o>0

eco]s Meo-oprj,

and

the

firayoiJLfvat.

Rev. Pap. [57] 4

the first year is meant only Mesore and
of the b(DOKap.r]vov falling in the second

but probably

would suggest that by

rj^epaL,

'

the rest

0.1:0

/UTJJ;]OS Me<ro/>?j,

cf.

'

not impossible that a reference to the second year is lost in

In any case there must have been
the lacuna at the beginning of line 2.

year.

It is

an exceptional cause for Mesore being the starting-point, as Wilcken

remarks ; cf. note on Rev. Pap. 1. c.
4.

Possibly 5uaio>s,

6.

Perhaps

biaypa.fjiiJ.aTa:

cf.

cf.

[8] 19.

npa-yp.aTevarecrda]!..

note on Rev. Pap. [21]

and [73] I. 5iop0<ofie0a

cf.

vopovs:

notes on Rev. Pap. [39]

II.
i.e.

APPENDIX

I.

183

From the way in which these classes

cf. Rev. Pap. [57] i.
,
are mentioned, it would seem that the papyrus is not included in any one
of them, and if so, I should suggest it is a Trpoypajz/ia, cf. Rev. Pap. [37] 6.
But in [8] 5 there seems to be a cross-reference to another passage in
the papyrus as a Siaypa^ia, though that would not show that the whole
document was a biaypa^na, for 5taypa/i/xara are scattered up and down
the

ro/ios art rqt tXaiiuji, cf.

Rev. Pap. 39.

The meaning appears

9.

to be, as

M.

note.

suggests, that the tax-farmers

fill
up the list of /^ro^oi, not passing over any person who
was liable (vTroAoyos) to be called upon to serve as r(Aa>i>Tjy, cf. [5] 3
where 01 ava-nXripovvrfs receive a special o\lru>viov, and note on Rev. Pap.

were to

[34] 4.
13. Cf. Rev. Pap. [34]
only one-twentieth greater.

In this papyrus

14.

we

[56] 14-15, where the security has to be

2,

find the /Sao-iAuos

ypa^arets associated with

the oeconomus, no longer the airiypacpeus, as in the Rev. Pap., cf. [3] 18,
The antigrapheus is not mentioned in L. P. 62, though
[4] 16-17.
are associated with the tax-farmers in [8] 15.
Cf. [8] 3,
it
is
not
clear
whether
these are
conjecture avnypafaas, though

ai>Tiypa<peiy

where

the same persons as those mentioned in [8] 15, and see note on Rev.

Pap. [3]

2.

The

1 6.

Paris editors read

nothing to justify

TTCTT

TT(TTTa>[Kfv

.......

[53]

by

Trapo/ioAoyTjflrji

[2.] 5.

them

next

line.

The
t

rtav in
9.

10.
1 1.

is

tv Tj/uepaiy A, cf. [2] 3,

should suggest some phrase like TO? be

cf.

[8]

1 1

was unable to decipher the mutilated

but there

these letters

Perhaps

6. juqiuctoi?

reads

and following [34] 4

6,

7.

if

But a$ TJS av Tj^cpas is

Rev. Pap. [34] 3 and

ever existed here, they disappeared long ago.

required

oAAcoi; (sic),

or oAAou' in the facsimile, so that

co-,

i.

e.

c<ro[ftvi}v]

The papyrus however seemed

Paris editors read

letters after

accepting the reading

ir]i

to

me

TU>V vnoOrjKtov,

Wilck.

rr/v.

/36/3auo<r[u/ in

to have

/3c/3cuo>r[.

but there

is

no

trace of

the facsimile.
iA7j</K)T<i)j;

cf.

[3] 6.

Perhaps Karaypa^ay,
airoAiTroxn, cf. pap.

M. suggests
cf.

Zois

TU>V

ova-iw for the lacuna.

Rev. Pap. [34]

i,

TO

4.

the

APPENDIX L

184

12. UHTIV I

are to be

owe

men

Wilcken

to

the meaning

is

clearly that the sureties

make up any

of substance able to

deficiency

left

by the

tax-farmers.

and note on

13. Cf. [1] 9

ny [fTTav\fvryK(i><riv rni

me

occurred to

[5] 3.

[3] 6-7 ear 8e ot \aj3ovrfs ra o-u;u/3oAa

The conjectural restoration of 16
Tpa-nffav.

8coa-ovo-i]v, cf.

14-16. Probably

since I

rrjv

had seen the

original,

and

do not know whether

rpancCav suits the vestiges of letters visible at the end of the line which
in the facsimile may be almost anything.
17. OIKOVO/XT/O-TJI

cf.

Probably Kara

1 8.

[5] 14.
TO upoypa^a or

whatever the

title

of the papyrus

was.
[3.] 9. K[CU
II.

Wilcken.

Karacr^ovTdiv

cf.

Jos.

A.

xii. 4.

J.

Rev. Pap. [2] I note.

cf. Rev. Pap.
a7ro7ipa/xa
[18]

IO

tlnocriv

ITTJ

KOI

8uo ra

TTJS

14. Cf.

16.

17.

[4.]

i.

TOIS irpoyeypa/^euois

mateus, [3] 18;

cf.

7.

M. suggests

8.

The number

i.

e.

the oeconomus and basilicogram-

[1] 14.

KaraXo-yov as

one word.

of the year here

each other closely, but

might be

in the other cases

it is

8,

and a often resembling

certainly

a.

15. Trpos yeiTj/xara was seen by Wilcken and Mahaffy to be two words,
and opposed to TO>V Trpos apyupiov a>vu>v and TO>Z> npos -^a\Kov HTOVOIJ.OV in
The aTToiJ.oi.pa was in the third century B.C. partly a TT/JOS
[5] 16-19.
yen;|u,ara oovrj, but subsequently became an wvr) irpos \a\Kov LCTOVO^OV,
cf. note on Rev. Pap. [37] 19, and App. iii.

Tpane&v implies, as M. suggests, that the receipts of the taxthem in money, and that the securities
would be held in trust pending the 'handling of the crops.' Cf. Rev.
19. Trpos

farmers were to be credited to

Pap. [34] 10 note.

note on Rev. Pap. [34] 14.

suggests, ot avairX-npovvres are those

21. Siaypcu^T/o-eTcu

[5.] 3-

As M.

cf.

who

offer to

fill

up

If they
of farmers or undertake to obtain rfXawcu and eyyvot.
were successful, they were to receive a commission of 10 per cent., but
they were not allowed to offer a person money if he would join in the

the

list

(a? x fP a

ovOfvt,

ovOev Saxrouori).

If

they offered money, their recom-

APPENDIX

I.

185

mendation was rejected. This is more satisfactory than taking 01 avawAqpovirrw as equivalent to 01 eyAa^oi-rcy, meaning the tax-farmers who
fulfilled the terms of the contract.
For in that case we should have to
suppose that all reAawcu might receive an o^Kaviov besides the cTuyerrj/ia,
but cf. Rev. Pap. [12] 13, [31] 14, and [39] 14 notes. These passages
show that the payment of anything besides the 7riyjnj/za was then quite
exceptional, and it is unlikely that the tax-farmers would obtain more
favourable terms in the second century B.C. than in the third. If M.'s
correct, the difficulty of obtaining tax-farmers
Cf. note on Rev. Pap. [34] 4.

explanation

is

had become

serious.

The premium on

16.

100 drachmae

silver at this

and

sureties

period was therefore IO^T percent,

being equivalent to ic^.v drachmae irpos xoAxor,

where
the
rate of exchange is not very different, and
App.
(5),
iii
and
214-216.
App.
pp. 198-200
Cf. Rev. Pap. [17].
[6.] 6. Wilckcn suggests aurois.

cf.

in silver

ii

7.

ay

Wilcken.

ii. ovOfis

13.

Perhaps

14.

Ofw

Mahaflfy.

At

the end of the line Wilcken suggests ewi

[Tiapa]\ap<av.

another hand seems to have no reference to the subject

in

of the papyrus.

There are here three regulations concerning exemptions from

15.

taxation; (i) arArj 8 (torto or /xcrera)?) eeos rou al_, stating that the
existing areAciai would continue as before: (2) 16-18, stating that if any

new exemptions were granted VTTO [ TOU /3a(o-iAeo>s) ?, an equivalent allowance would be made to the tax-farmers from the produce already
if any of the existing arfAeuu were
would be added to the sum which the tax-farmers
had contracted to pay. 20-22 are obscure, but apparently refer to the
tax being put up to auction again under certain circumstances.

collected

(3) 19-20, stating that

confiscated, the tax

[8.]

There

The

Paris editors read SCKU [TO] uTrep/3o[Aioi> TCO]V

trace of 7Tf/>/3o in the facsimile, and there is not

no
virep/3oAioy and
is

The

rtav.

Perhaps

rifiTjcre(oi>.

room

for

v[?rep rco]r.

Troirjo-orrai is probably the oeconomus and basiliconote, and Rev. Pap. [14] 4 note.
14
Perhaps irpos
[1]
rots TeAconois, cf. line 5 irpos TTJI TpaTTtfri, but in line 3 vrpos has the
accusative not dative, and the accusative is the natural construction.

2.

subject of

grammateus,

cf.

Bb

APPENDIX L

186

5.

The

'

'

ten days mentioned in the

the ten days in line

cf.

note on [1]

14. [o^o]juaros, i.e. 'item,'

the lacuna.

There

19. If /3cunA.]ei

is

is

not

it

for [a8iKTj]/xaros, cf. [3]

is

be a reference to

cf.

fills

i.

another argument against Revillout's

theory that the 'first year' refers to Cleopatra,

seems to be a mistake for 8i/ccucos.
20. Possibly ayopafrvruv,

may

6.

suggested by the Paris editors, hardly

room

correct,

8taypa/^t/xa

[1] 3.

cf.

[1]

note.

APPENDIX
SOME NEW PETRIE

II.

PAPYRI.

1.
6'

Uavvi 76
5

'A2/ia/3'

EiifKp y
[

...... aAAa
K

1.

'AToe/3'

See note on [24]

9.

2. (xx).
[/3curiAevoim>s nroAe/btaiov] TOV IlToAe/xatov (T<arqp[os
.

<p

lepeco?

......

................

rou Aaiorou

......

]s /3a<riAca

6
[

................ ]<is VJTO rou Ttpos nji av .....

............... fijtpiSos ra x M aTl ca Trpay^a
)

10 [ra

[
[

ovs aSeA^ov 1 rous T[ ..... ]

.........

o/^uo/xoJKa

ovre atTos voo-<pfiov<rdqi

................ -napcvpevi^vy TJITIVIOVV tav

.............. (Tv]vTf\lV (TOl avdr]fJLpOV TTJl
]

TJ

B b 2

'

[.

.]

[.

APPENDIX

i88

II.

]; TOH

[paiai

15

XI/XJHTIJI ypax/reoxu

.]v

,]<a T(0v TrpayiJ.a[T](i>v ei? TO /3ao-[iXi]

[KOI>

]c<rdat ran /3cunXei

fjL(U(Vov

1.

[.

The formula shows

O/JK[

Ci . . .
rcoi opf/can

as

.]

that this papyrus cannot be older than the

twenty-seventh year,
[1] i and Introd. pp. xix sqq.
2. After -rov are two letters like 171.
cf.

3.
is

The number

Rev. Pap.

may be

of letters which

lost at the

end of the

line

not quite certain. The writing is extremely faint throughout.

6. Cf. Wilck. Akt. xi, and P. P. xlvi
There is not much doubt
(b).

that this papyrus

[27] 6 note.
10.

a written

is

Apparently

/3ao-iXtKos opuos

roor$ieio-0cu is

intended.

see lines 15, 17, and

Cf. [27]

cf.

n.

perhaps the Fayoum, cf. [31] 12, note and [71]

note.
The subject of the papyrus is connected with the building
of the dykes for reclaiming land from the lake, cf. Cleon's correspondence
13. ev ran AtjumrTji

in P. P.

3
HpaxXetSTjs

.....

et

[j.Tpr)(rai rots UTroyeypa/jtjuevois yeoo/)yois

8ia TO>V

K(tifjiap-)(u>v

KCU mofJ-oypa^fJiaTfutv

baveiov eis TOV (nropov rgy

5

tv root
K

K<J-|_

K/)ora)j;ps

ap.a TOIS fK(popiois KQOTWVOS

TOV KbL fis be TOUTO

(TTL

n\r)6o$ Kai crvpfioXov Trapacr^

cppuxTo L Ke
et?

i.

BeiKViKiba bia K(p.ap\(av

The papyrus was covered

......
.

Tr/pps

A6vp a (or X)

upoTwos .....

Tiapa

with a thick coating of plaster and

APPENDIX
the ink
part

is

extremely

faint

189

the ends of the lines are for the most

Cf. the regulation

illegible.

II.

concerning the distribution of seed

in [48] 3 note.
7.

Perhaps uapaa-xts

8.

The

irpos ejxe.

twenty-fifth year belongs to Philadelphus or Euergetes.

4. (E").

..... ]TOV Xota\

[ws TOU]

/ujjuoy

KCU Tu/3t TOV

a T

1"

Kal

77

L
"

ft)<r7

Ap

5 [<vAa]Ktn/i TTJS Tlo\e)ji<avos ptpibos cos TOV

fx

Kai a)crr

]P

rov prfvos v

[cos

TOV

COS

[fXfptSos]

Afx

xa

.....

P Kat

fXTJVOS /*

toot

icut

yyvos

it

0e

TTJS

wre

BLMVI

rrjs

X a^ w Kat ^OTf

....... ]i TT;S fiixpa? Ai/ifT/s ws rov ^rjvos A x ^

...... Kat a>crre e</>o8ots TOIS axoXou^ouo-i rwi
......... roimoi> ^>[uX]oKiTtoy ov&i \ o\j/<aviov
........ ecaoTOj;[.
Kal wore TOIS
x
[
[

10

.]

.................. fiTjvos ovo-i K? vrj

.................. Kai a>0re TOIS axoXou
cai toore TOIS aKoAov
[dov&i ..............
...................
avrov TK Kat
[dovvi
.......................... Tots Ayr/uopi
[

15

3.

The

eighth year

may

belong to either the third, fourth or

fifth

Ptolemy.
4.

Judging by the comparatively low numbers of the drachmae, they

Trpos xaAnov, cf. Rev. Pap. [40]

are probably on the silver standard but

and App.

iii
If ^eptSos after
ejiiorov is understood, not
pp. 196-8.
written out, about five or six letters are lost at the beginning of lines
3-10. eoore: cf. Rev. Pap. [CO] 21 note.

5. cos TOU jiTjuos: cf.

9.

10.

Aif-irrjs

</>o8ois

M.
:

cf.

Rev. Pap. [12]

Rev. Pap. [10]

inspectors of the dykes.

15.

where a /xtKpa At/xirrj is mentioned.

note.
Here they are probably the

Cf. P. P. xiii (5) 3,

APPENDIX

190

II.

5.

(a) Col.

Col. 2.

1.

KOI

ava

]/3L

]/2fcyLy'r/3'

Ae

am

K-y

ava

pvp

//xe

ai apyvpiov
]vvr)

TO

[A5Ly'

]a"

9 20

yivcrai
10 (ruv

8e

(*)

ava

ava
ava

ava
5

[a]va

Tq a

at apyv[piov]
0)1

av[v] 5e [TOISJ -npos apyvpiov

10

[KOI irepie<yai]

oivou

]rots A0ia<n;Aoi;
]

Ka Lb'

pAa

ava

aya

rois

Trpos

apyvpiov

oivov -neptfivai

apy]vpiov

Ar/[

v\.

APPENDIX

II.

191

APPENDIX

192

Dismissing for the

moment

conclusion to be drawn from

there

no doubt.

is

The account

alone,
in lines

is

too fragmentary for any

proceed to

is

3-8

col. 2

about which

as follows

204 drachmae

70

8 dr. 3 obols (-npos xaA.Koy)

8 dr.

35

7 dr. 3 obols

262

24 metretae

at

5 dr-

23
152 metretae

which are in silver

It will be noticed that

number

the

which

col. i

it

II.

of

in line

560
T

dr. 3 obols.

3* dr.

obols

1157

dr. 3

1043

dr. 3 obols.

6 the multiplication is incorrect, since

115, but the addition is correct.

drachmae should be

3 obols in copper were therefore equivalent to 1043 dr. 3 obols

On this use of at meaning which are equivalent to cf.
Leipzig pap. 8 F 32, and on the importance of this for the coinage
The average price of these metretae was
question see App. iii.

1157

in

dr.

little

'

'

silver.

under

7 silver

drachmae each,

cf.

[31] 4 note.

IO44 T\ metretae for 7328 dr. 3 obols,

each metretes. In lines 5. 6, &c. L means J.
in line 9,

(b) is

a similar

list

obols.

The grand

dr.

little

The average
over 7 dr. for

x a ^ K v> the total in lines 6-7

which is in silver 3091 dr.
47 85! (corrected to 4810) metretae

of metretae sold

being 385^ metretae for 3428

is

irpos

i obol,

total in line 8 is

4 obols, i. e. about 8 dr. 4 obols each.

a
similar
list; a number of metretae are sold for 3/91 dr.
(c)
which
is
in silver 3399 dr. 4^ obols.
Total 574! metretae
ii obols,
dr.
for 4462
3 obols, i.e. a little over 7! drachmae each.
for

41964

dr.

is

In (d) the metretae are sold Trpos apyvpiov, the average being
8 drachmae, since far the greatest number is sold at that price.

To

about

i lines 10 and
obviously refer to metretae
(a), in col.
drachmae each, the totals being 209 and 160 drachmae, and
we should expect line 12 to be the sum of these two lines, cf. lines 7-9.
But in place of 369 drachmae, we have 332 dr. 4 obols. Probably the
prices in 10 and n were irpos x a ^ KW afl d the writer has given the
equivalent amount in silver without writing down the amount npos
The proportion between silver and copper is then very nearly
xaAKoy.
the same as in (c).

return to

sold for 6

>

APPENDIX

III.

THE SILVER AND COPPER COINAGE OF THE PTOLEMIES.

i.

PROPOSE

in this

Introduction.

Appendix

to discuss the evidence available for

(i) what was the normal ratio of

and a copper drachma (2) under what
circumstances was copper at a discount, and what was the discount
(3) what was the ratio of weight between a silver coin and an equivalent amount of copper coins, or what was the ratio between silver
and copper regarded as coins, and was this the same as the ratio
between silver and copper regarded as metals ? The generally accepted
authority for the monetary standards and ratios of value in Ptolemaic
coinage is M. Eugene Revillout, whose famous Lcttres d M. Lenormant

the solution of three questions;

exchange between

a__silver

in the Rev. Egypt, for 1882-3 have been thought to offer a satisfactory
The evidence on which he there
solution of the difficult problems.
relied consisted partly of demotic papyri, partly of coins.
Since then
however much new evidence has come to light. In 1883 appeared

Mr. Poolers monumental Catalogue of the Ptolemaic coins in the British

Museum, in which we have a classification of the copper coins by
a numismatist of the first rank. The discovery of the Petrie papyri
and now of the Revenue Papyrus has revolutionized our knowledge
of the earlier Ptolemaic period.
Lastly Prof. Wilcken has collected
much valuable information connected with the coinage in his forthcoming
Corpus Ostracorum, information which he has most generously placed
at my disposal. To these, I am told, will shortly be added M. Revillout's
long promised Mttangcs sur la mttrologie et tfaonomie politique, &c.
Whether he has changed his views in any respects I do not know,

though

from

the fact that he has

CC

just

republished his Lettres

APPENDIX

94

M. Lenormant

III.

with only a few unimportant alterations, I conjecture

The uncertainty is perhaps regrettable, for the con-

that he has not.

of this essay is that of the conclusions first enunciated by

Revillout in the Revue Egyptologique, re-asserted in his Papyrus

tention

M.

Bilingue du temps de Philopator (Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch. 1891-2), and

now once more asserted in his re-issue of the Lettres, the greater part
is
altogether invalid, and the remainder requires in several cases

much

modification.

Side by side with

my

criticism of

M. Revillout's

own theory on the whole problem,

theory,
propose to develop
can
as yet carry us.
And here let
so far as the available evidence

my

me

say that however

M.

Revillout,

much I may have occasion to disagree with

no one recognizes more fully than myself that it was
his elucidation of the signs for the fractions of the drachma in Greek
papyri, and the evidence from demotic papyri brought by him to
bear upon the question, which have made any satisfactory solution
possible.

The

history of Ptolemaic coinage has been divided

by M.

into three periods; (i) the period of the silver standard

to Euergetes
(2) the period of transition, when copper
;

Revillout

from Soter
first

comes

into general use in the reigns of Philopator and Epiphanes ; (3) the
period of the copper standard from Philometor onwards. It will be

convenient to follow this classification, and for the present I pass

over the evidence of the copper coins, and confine myself to the
documentary evidence, which, supplemented by the evidence of the
silver coins, must be the first guide towards forming a satisfactory theory

concerning the copper coinage, although the ultimate solution of the

chief problems connected with the standard and ratio must be looked
for

more from the numismatist than from the

2.

Documentary Evidence for

scholar.

the period of the Silver Standard.

First then as to the copper coinage of the three earliest Ptolemies,

what was a copper drachma, and in what relation did it stand to the
silver drachma?
Here we are met at the outset by M. Revillout,
who arguing from the silence of the demotic papyri on the subject
of copper maintains that copper was only money of account, used
merely for paying the fractions of the silver drachma, and that silver

APPENDIX

III.

195

was the practically universal coinage. But how little reliance can be
placed on the silence of the demotic documents was shown both by
the Petrie papyri, which contain mentions of comparatively large
sums paid in copper drachmae as far back as the thirty-first year of
Philadelphus, and by the Revenue Papyrus, which proves that in the
twenty-seventh year of the same king all the accounts of one of the
principal revenues in the country, the oil monopoly, were kept in
copper, the contractors paying the government in copper, [60] 13-15,
and receiving payments in copper, [40] 9-1 1 note.
Copper therefore was largely used in Philadelphus' time not merely
in private transactions,

but even in

In what relation did

it

in the case of the oil

official

payments

to the government.

The Rev.

stand to silver?

Pap. shows that

was
monopoly copper
accepted by the government

from the tax-farmers at

its full value.

This is the only possible
of
interpretation
[60] 13-15 7ra>Xou/i> TTJV o>rrji> -n-pos \a\Kov KOI Arj^o/ze^a
From the context either the stater or the
<is TOV orarTjpa ofio\ovs Kb.

obols must be copper coins,

cf.

[76] 4.

The

silver stater

is

by

far

the commonest silver coin of the Ptolemaic period, and there is no

evidence, documentary or numismatic, that there were copper staters.

phrase in the pap. C of Leyden, \O\KOVS orarrj/jfiTjovs, which has

been sometimes thought to prove the existence of copper staters, is,
as M. Revillout has excellently pointed out, quite different from \a\Kov

The

and means 'copper coins representing staters.'

Therefore
be
and
cannot
copper,
gold staters were worth
20 silver drachmae, which is clearly unsuitable, they must be silver
and the obols must be copper. The formula by which the equality
between silver and copper is here expressed, not 6 obols = i drachma,'
oTOTTjpa?,

in [60] 13 as the staters

'

24 obols = i stater,'
because
it
shows
that
extremely important,
just as the typical unit
of silver both here and in [76] 4 is the stater or tetradrachm, by far
the commonest coin, so the typical unit of copper in both cases is

or '48 chalci=i drachma,' or anything

else,

but

'

is

the obol, which therefore was probably also a

common

'far-reaching consequences of this formula will appear

to discuss the demotic papyri of the next period.

In the case of certain taxes then

coin.

when

The
come

copper obols were accepted in

But there is no mention
payment
in the Rev. Pap. of the 'copper drachmae' which are found in conof large

sums without discount.

CC2

APPENDIX

196

III.

temporary documents from the Petrie collection. Wherever payments

in copper are mentioned in the Rev. Pap., the payments are uniformly
irpos xaXnov, i.e. in drachmae on the silver standard paid in copper,
about which phrase there is no difficulty but the phrase \a\Kov bpaxpai
;

does not appear. With regard to the instances of the last phrase in
the Petrie papyri, is the theory provisionally proposed by Mr. Mahaffy
to be accepted, that they are copper drachmae in the same sense
'

'

as the copper drachmae of the next century which, whatever may

be their precise ratio of exchange, were worth but a small fraction of

a silver drachma

There are nine instances of copper drachmae among papyri which,

whether dated or not, can safely be attributed to the period before
the great change from a silver to a copper standard took place. These
part II. xiii (17), dated the thirty-first year of Philadelphus
xxvi
(2)
(7), dated the thirty-third year of Philadelphus, where in line 7
Wilcken reads the original TO. x a ^ KOV [fy ]p a X!u [ (01
*0]ifwwi (3) xxvi
(6), dated the eighth year of Euergetes, which has yjaXK\ov K]
(4)
xxvi (4), dated the eighth year of Euergetes, where in line 8 I read
are (i)

'

Xa\Kov h A
xxviii

(8)

(5) xliv, written in the reign

xxxix

(d]

(9)

xxiv

(&)

of Euergetes; (6) xiv (i c] (7)

these (2), (3), (4), (8), and (9)
;

Of

With regard to the rest the

them are found the enormous
sums in copper drachmae which are found in the next century, when
e.g. the price of an ox is 21,000 drachme (L. P. 58, 11. 4-5); and the
house of Nephoris and the twins is valued at 120 talents of copper

are too fragmentary to prove anything.

most noticeable fact is that nowhere among

(L. P.

In (i) 231 i dr. of copper are paid together

of silver; while in (5) the rent of a farm is 65 dr. of
copper, apparently for a year. These facts alone would make us suspect that X<*A.KOU bpaxpai at this period are equivalent to the drachmae
22,

with 617!

11.

18-19).

dr.

in

payments

at

first

-npos

^O\KOV of the Rev. Pap.

For though

it

may seem

sight that x a ^ KGV fy>axMt ought to mean in the third century B. C.

they mean in the second, to a Greek of the third century B. C. the

what
drachma was

essentially a silver coin,

and

in reality there

is

much

speaking of a drachma of copper as a silver drachma's

worth in copper than in using it for a ' copper drachma.' The question

less difficulty in

In P. P. part

I,

xxiii the large

numbers

refer not to

copper drachmae, but to

ravf)ia.

APPENDIX
where

III.

is

however

is

Tt\lvdoV\K<H Ot (fl\Tl(t>OTf$ (\KV<TO.l [7T\lP0Ou]

definitely settled

by

(6),

197

in lines

3-5 the correct reading

0)OT

<tS TTJV

Mr.
TTroXe/xai8i /3ao-i[XiKrjj;] KaTa\v<riv, eKaorr/s M H i, \O\KOV \~ K.
Mahaffy, reading the last letter x, was led to suggest that in this passage
600 copper drachmae were equivalent to 10 silver. But the K is certain,
tv

and therefore the

price for dragging 20,000 bricks (including the value

of the bricks themselves, cf. i b) was 10 dr. x^* " for each 10,000.
Now in xii (4) the price of 10,000 bricks is 12 dr., which, as the metal
is not stated, we should expect to be silver drachmae, and in xiv (i b)

the price of 10,000 bricks is 15 dr., \O\KOV being erased. The difference
in the prices depends, as Mr. Petrie suggests, on the distance which

they have to be carried. But it is absolutely impossible that the price

of bricks could ever have been 10 copper drachmae per 10,000, if these

copper drachmae are the copper drachmae of the next century and if
any doubt can still rest on the identity of x<*A./cou bpa\fj.ai at this period
;

with payments irpos x a^ KOV ft ls removed by (7). That papyrus contains

a long list of names with sums of money opposite to them that these
>

sums are copper drachmae is proved by the totals x a (^ KOV ) which occur
e.g. in [1] 2, and the payments are clearly concerned with oil, which is
probably sesame oil since cici is only specified in a few instances.
The whole process of the manufacture and sale of oil is known from
part C of the Rev. Pap., and there can be little doubt as to the correctness of Mr. Mahaffy's suggestion in P. P.
is

list

by them

of

eAaio/caTrrjAxH for the

Fayoum

App.

p. 5,

that this papyrus

together with the sums paid

Mr. Mahaffy remarked

that all the sums were
he might have gone a
If Mr. Mahafify's
step further, for they are nearly all multiples of 42.
explanation of this papyrus is correct, the meaning of this number in
the light of the Revenue Papyrus is clear. The retail price of a metretes
of sesame oil and cici was irpos x a^ KOV 4^ dr., [^0]. 9> therefore the
eAaioKaTTTjXoi must have received the oil from the contractors at a reAnd, though the retail price may of course have
duction, cf. [48] 13.
altered considerably between the date of the Rev. Pap. and that of
the P. P. xxix, the correspondence between the number which
[47] and [48].
multiples of 7, but

to the contractors,

cf.

would be expected and the number which

is

found

is

strong enough

APPENDIX

198

to

make

it

III.

extremely probable that the 42 drachmae x a^ KOU are the

price of a metretes paid to the contractors by the KcnrrjAoi, and that

7 drachmae, of which the remaining numbers are multiples, was the
In any case it is hardly possible to suppose that
price of 2 choes.

the 42 drachmae x a^ KOV are calculated on a standard different from

the 48 drachmae paid irpos x a^ KOV
"

To sum up

the results reached so

far,

while M. Revillout's contention

was only one

standard has been vindicated from objections which might be brought
from the Petrie papyri, his theory that copper was at this time merely
that in the reigns

of the

first

Ptolemies there

three

money of account, used for the fractions of the drachma, and that
as late as the time of Philopator all the taxes were paid in silver
(Pap. Biling. Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch. Jan. 1892, p. 128), has been shown to
As far back as the Greek papyri carry us, we find large

be erroneous.

payments being made in copper at its full value, even

to the government.
Moreover the excessive rarity of
silver coins of a smaller

in
all

payments
Ptolemaic

denomination than the tetradrachm shows that

payments of sums less than 4 drachmae must habitually have been

made in copper. In order to obtain the ratio between silver and copper
only remains to discover the normal weight of the obol.
M. Revillout and I are not agreed, I postpone the
question for the present, and pass to the consideration of the second
question under what circumstances was copper at a discount, and what
at par,
But as

it

on

this point

was the normal rate of the discount at

The

this period

all-important authority for this

would have been [76] 4-5, but

the passage is mutilated and the decisive number is lost. Nevertheless

several conclusions may be drawn from that passage.
First the regulation concerns all banks throughout the country, therefore the rate

copper in question was the same everywhere.

Secondly, as in [60] 13, the stater and the obol are used as the typical
silver and copper coins. Thirdly, this copper which was at a discount
must have been paid into the banks either as payment of a tax ir/aos
of discount

on the

But as
XaX/cov, or of a tax which ought to have been paid in silver.
the copper paid into the banks by the contractors for the oil monopoly
was accepted by the government from them at par, [60] 13-15, it is
very unlikely that, when the government came to reckon with the
contractors for the banks, the bankers had to pay on the copper

APPENDIX

III.

199

oil monopoly had escaped.

Moreover the analogy of the next century, when copper was accepted
at par (\a\Kos t<roi>o/*os) in the case of certain taxes and at a discount
as payment of taxes which ought to have been paid in silver (\O\KOS
ov aXAayrj), makes it practically certain that even in the time of Philadelphus copper was accepted at a discount by the banks on behalf
of the government in payment of taxes which ought to have been paid

a discount which the contractors for the

in silver.

What

has been lost through the mutilation of [76] 4, can however to

In App. ii. no. 5 there
sources.
are three examples of the conversion of sums paid irpo? \a\Kov into silver

some extent be recovered from other

drachmae.

In (a) [2] 7-8

silver, in (b)

157$ dr. in copper are equivalent to 1043 in

obol in copper to 3091 dr. i i ob. in silver, and
1

6-7 3429 dr. \

14-15 3791 dr. I \ obols in copper to 3399 dr. 4$ ob. in silver.
discount on copper is in the first two cases approximately loj per

cent.,

in the third

sums

in (c)

9JJ

per cent.

It is

noticeable that in the case of these

The

which refer to wine, probably received by the oeconomus as payment

of the aTro/iotpa and sold by him in the open market, cf. [33] 5, [34] 10,
the rate of discount varies slightly, so that the official rate for the banks
did not altogether control the rate of exchange in commercial transactions, although it is not likely that there was ever a considerable

between the official and the private rate of discount.

Besides this papyrus there is an instance of the rate of discount
in ostracon 331 of Prof. Wilcken's Corpus, which records the payment

difference

'

of \a(\Kov) as K<7V TT, i. e. 80 drachmae of copper at the rate of 26^ obols.'

The ostracon is dated in the twenty-second year of a Ptolemy who for
palaeographical reasons must be one of the earlier kings, and as the

drachmae

question must from the smallness of their

calculated on the silver not on the copper standard, it
in

number be
far more

is

likely that the ostracon belongs to the reign of Euergetes than to that

Epiphanes, when copper drachmae usually, perhaps universally,

meant copper drachmae on the copper standard. The meaning of
the 26^ obols was in the light of [60] 13 and [76] 4 at once obvious
to Mr. Mahafify and myself.
This copper 'at the rate of 26* obols'
means copper obols of which 26 J would be counted as the equivalent

of

of a stater, as opposed to the 24 copper obols of the Rev. Pap. accepted

at par.
This explanation is completely corroborated by a hitherto

APPENDIX

200

unexplained passage
i.

possibly
the papyrus
c,

in

Pap. Zois

III.

line 33, in

i obol) is prefixed to the sum

called \a\Kos ov a\\a-yrj, and these
e.

the view expressed above, that the obol

just as the stater is the typical silver coin.

is

which x a
* *<?* (or
which is elsewhere in
two passages confirm

the typical

According

copper coin

to the ostracon

therefore 26 J obols in copper are equivalent to a stater or 24 obols

in silver, and the rate of discount is
per cent., a little higher than

the rates found in

App.

ii

no. 5.

which belongs to the same reign as Ostr. 331, mentions TT/>OS

These must be different from 60 dr.
apyvpi(o}v ei]KovTa sc. drachmae.
apyvpiov, and probably %akKov is to be supplied, since x a ^ K s trpos apyvpiov
occurs in the next century, and, as I shall show, means copper accepted
Ostr. 329,

at par.

To sum up

the slender evidence available for the rate of discount at

most remarkable point is the excessive smallness of the

silver.
For it is possible that from the 10 per cent., which
on
premium
seems to have been the normal rate, something ought to be subtracted
for the carriage and other expenses of the heavier metal, cf. L. P. 62 [5]
17, so that the real rate of discount may have been even less than 10 per
this period, the

In any case

probable that

many private transactions copper

no evidence from the papyri that
copper was in the time of Philadelphia and Euergetes a token coinage,
The reign of Soter,
nor, as I shall show, is there any from the coins.
of whose copper coinage there is no literary and hardly any numismatic
evidence, will be discussed later.
cent.

passed at

its full

3.

it is

value,

and there

in

is

Documentary Evidence for

the period

of Transition.

The demotic papyri of this period show, according to M.Revillout,that

Philopator was the first Ptolemy who introduced the copper standard of
'
120: i, by which 24 copper argenteus-outens or, to give the demotic
names of the coins their Greek equivalents which have been perfectly
'

2
by M. Revillout,48o copper drachmae, were equal to T g- of a
argenteus-outen, or 4 silver drachmae. Silver, he thinks however,

established
silver
still

remained

in Philopator's reign

the principal standard (Pap. Biting.

Egypt, and in the next reign for the Thebaid,

so long as it was governed by the insurgent kings, the discovery of
whom is one of M. Revillout's most valuable contributions to Ptolemaic
1.

c.

Dec. 1891,

p. 80) for all

APPENDIX

201

III.

But for the rest of Egypt at the beginning of Epiphanes'

and for the Thebaid when it was reconquered at the end of his

history.
reign,

copper standard implying payment in copper became uniprivate transactions and appears even in payments to the

reign, the

versal

in

government.
Before discussing the demotic papyri of this period, I will consider
Two alone can be certainly assigned to the reign of Philopator, P. P. xlvii (see Wilck. G. G. A., Jan. 1895) in which the drachmae

the Greek.

are silver, and the bilingual papyrus in the British Museum commented
on (1. c.) at great length by M. Revillout. M. Revillout claims that the

Greek docket of

this

papyrus confirms his previous theory about the

in order to explain certain anomalies in
certainly a most elaborate and ingenious theory.

builds

it

up what

is

'

'

standard at this period, and

Unfortunately, in all the points essential for the question of the coinage,
Revillout has misread the papyrus, of which the correct transcription

M.

with an autotype is given by the Palaeographical Society, series ii, 143.

The papyrus has not OKTO> 8io/3oAovs, i.e. 8 diobols, but OKTCD 5uo/3oAovs
i.

e.

8 (drachmae) 2 obols, the sign for

happens on the ostraca

drachma being omitted

as so often

not \O\K(OV)
'

i.e.

r\
a(AAay/js) reo-aapas oftoXovs, but
for \a\Ktaia 4 drachmae I obol.'
If it

XaAKiaiav reacrapas o/3oAof

is worth while to hazard conjectures about an

unknown word like x<*^on copper, though on what sum

is not clear, since the sum for xa\Kiaia is half the 8 dr. 2 obols, which
was the tax of TV levied on the sale of the farm in question. But in the
absence of any parallel passage it is useless to found an argument upon it.
Kiaiav, possibly

it

refers to the discount

P. P. xxxii (i),

dated in the eighth year of a Ptolemy

was
almost certainly neither Philapalaeographical grounds
nor
and
as
there is no reason for assigning any
who,
delphus
Euergetes,
papyrus in the Petrie collection to the reign of Philometor, was therefore
Thirdly, there

is

who on

Philopator or Epiphanes, with a slight balance of probability, palacoThe question is of some importance since
graphically, for Epiphanes.

the copper drachmae mentioned in the papyrus are unquestionably on

the copper standard, but cannot be decided unless it should appear that
the copper drachmae on the copper standard were not instituted before

Epiphanes' reign. Fourthly, there is P. P. xxvii. 5, undated, but written

in a very peculiar hand quite different from the ordinary hands of the
third century.

The papyrus mentions enormous sums

Dd

in

\O\KOS

ro-

APPENDIX

202

III..

and x a^ K s ov aXAay?j which are unquestionably copper drachmae on

the copper standard, and it is therefore on every ground to be assigned
to the end of the third century or the beginning of the second.
Fifth,
and most important of all, is P. P. xlvi, dated the second and fourth
years of Epiphanes, where is found the mention of 2 talents and of
i talent
516^ dr. in x a ^ KOS ^P * a(pyvptov), for so Prof. Wilcken rightly
vofj.0?

explains the abbreviation comparing the known use of XO.\KOS irpos

It is quite certain that these sums were calculated
apyvpiov elsewhere.

on the copper standard

and this will be a convenient place for con;

the
of
the
three difficult phrases x a^ K s lowo/^oy, ov
sidering
meaning
The fourth technical term, x a^ KOS fis K T V
aAXayr? and vpos apyvpiov.
>

has already been explained.

It is to Prof.

terms

is

Lumbroso

that the credit of elucidating the first two

He there suggests that the distinction

due, see Rec. pp. 43-6.

between them
of coinage.

is

purely financial and has nothing to do with two kinds

is copper paid in the case of taxes in which

x a ^ KO? wovofjios

payment was required in copper and therefore no discount was charged,

while xaA*os ov aX\ayrj, copper on which there was a discount, is copper
paid in the case of taxes which ought to have been paid in silver. This
perfectly explains the passage in L. P. 62 [5] 16-21, and is confirmed

by the interchange
one explanation

was

issuing his

with x a ^ KO * t ? K<TV since the

Revillout however, when he
edition of the Lettres, was not content with this

of x a ^ K

suits
first

v o-XXayrj

>

M.

both terms.

view (see Rev. eg. iii. 117). He there suggests that X^KOS lo-ovofxos is
the new copper coinage of Philopator and Epiphanes at the ratio of
120: i, while XAKOS ou aAXayrj was the pre-existing copper of Phila-

delphus and Euergetes, which as it was not on a ratio of 120 i was at

a discount. That I am not misrepresenting M. Revillout's meaning is
:

shown by the fact that this view of XAKO? icrovonos as a coin is mentioned as his by Mr. Head in his Historia Nttmmontm, p. 713 note, and
by Mr. Mahaffy in P. P. part ii. Introd. p. 12. This explanation suits
and indeed would,

if correct, be a strong argument for the

Revillout there and elsewhere, as in Pap. Biting. 1. c.
Dec. 1891, p. 96, takes up, that a drachma x a^ KOV i<rovofj.ov, or copper
drachma weighing the same as a silver drachma of which it was worth

excellently,

position which

M.

was the invention of Philopator but it is quite incompatible with the

position which he adopts in his discussion of the weights of the copper
jl^,

APPENDIX

III.

203

when he speaks of la proportion prdexistante of 120 to i set up

by Philopator, and makes the identity of weight and value between the
obol on the silver standard and the 20 drachmae on the copper standard
the whole basis of his system. The confusion is made worse by the fact
'

coins,

that in his explanation of KTOVO^OS in Pap. Biling. I.e. Jan. 1892 he

returned to the view expressed by Prof. Lumbroso and yet speaks of
the nouvelle isonomie in the time of Philopator. The fact is that
'

'

M. Revillout has
positions.
was not.

Biling.

1.

tried to stand alternately upon two contradictory proEither copper at 120: i was instituted by Philopator, or it
If it was (as M. Revillout says in Rev. e*g. iii. 117 and Pap.
c. p. 96), and the previously existing obols of Philadelphus did

not weigh the same as the new 20 drachmae pieces of Philopator, then
M. Revillout has successfully demolished his own theory of the weights
and the identity of the obol with the 20 drachma piece, which is the basis
of his theory of

20 to

as the ratio between both the value of a silver

and a copper drachma, and the weight of 120 copper drachmae and
one silver drachma. On the other hand if M. Revillout elects to stand
by his weights, he must, to be consistent, renounce his first explanation
of HTovofjios as having anything to do with coins, and cease therefore
to

were a special coinage at all.

is prepared to choose I do not
recent re-issue of the Lcttres he speaks of KTOVO^OS as

speak of 'cuivre isonome' as

Which horn

of the

if

it

dilemma M. Revillout

know, for in his

he spoke of it in the first edition of the Lettres when, to judge by his
article which appeared contemporaneously in the Rev. eg., he believed
his own explanation of that term.
But as that explanation was fatal to
his theory of the coinage and is on his own showing contradicted by
the coins, I shall assume that he now adopts Prof. Lumbroso's explanation which is less disastrous to him, and for the present content myself
with pointing out that the only support from the papyri which might be
given to his theory that the copper drachma and silver drachma after
How far the
Philopator's time weighed the same, must be withdrawn.
theory will stand without this support will be discussed later.
It is noticeable that to-oropios and ov aAAay?; have not yet been
found with drachmae on the silver standard, while x a^ KOS CIJ K<3"V and
perhaps \O\KOS Trpos apyv^iov are found applied to copper drachmae on
both standards. Just as \a\nos is K$-V seems to be the forerunner of
\O\KOS ou aAAayr;, which usually, though not always, as the papyrus of

APPENDIX

204

III.

Zois shows, superseded it, so yaXwi Tipos apyvpiov seems to be the forerunner of \a\Kcs KrovofjLos, which after the adoption of the copper standard
became the commoner term. First a term is required in the period of
the silver standard to be contrasted with xaXnos ei? K<TV and to mean

copper which was accepted at par. Secondly the

literal

meaning of xaA*os

'copper against silver' (cf. [60] 13 ircoAov/xez; Trpos ^a\Kov),

suits the view that it is identical with XAKOS KTOVOJUOS, while it is very
difficult to see what third class of copper could exist in addition to copper
Trpos apyvpiov,

at par and copper at a discount (cf. L. P. [5] 16-21). My explanation is

somewhat confirmed by a comparison of P. P. xlvi with a second century
B. c. ostracon, cf. note on
[37] 19. In the papyrus a surety has to pay I
talent 516^ dr. x^A/coti irpos apyvpiov on behalf of a taxfarmer who was unable
to pay the goverment the two talents which he had agreed to collect as
the a-rrofj-oipa from two villages.
It is by no means certain that because
the surety had to pay in x a ^ KO * ^P * apyvpiov, therefore the two talents

originally promised were also in x a A<o? Trpos apyvpiov.

But the analogy

of the Zois papyri, in which the original debt and the sum paid by the
surety are both in x^A/cos ov aXXayy, at any rate makes that view tenable.
If this assumption be correct, the identity of \a\Kos Trpos apyvpiov with
XaAxos icrovopos is practically certain, for the ostracon shows that the
ciTro/uoipa in the second century B. C. was no longer an (avrj irpos yeinj/xara
or Trpos apyvpiov, as it had been in the time of Philadelphus [24] 4, 10,
12,

but had become an

recorded by the ostracon

corrj

is

Trpos

x a ^ KOV

KTOVOJJ.OV,

in x^A/cos i(rovop.os

since the

and there

is

payment

no reason to

suppose that XAKOS TT/JOS apyvpiov represents a third stage intermediate

between the other two. The phrase xA/cos Trpos apyvpiov is found as late
as the fortieth year of Euergetes II, see Wilck. Akt. i. 19; and the
meaning which I have proposed is quite consistent with its use there,

where

interchanged with xaAxo? alone.

So far as the slender evidence of the Greek papyri from this period
carries us, it confirms M. Revillout's theory that the general change
from the silver to the copper standard took place at the beginning of
it is

Epiphanes' reign, but

it is

indecisive on the question whether the copper

drachmae were instituted side by side with the silver by Philopator, and
on the question what their exchange value was. These problems thereThe
fore must be discussed on the evidence of the demotic papyri.
of
coins
in Greek drachmae has, as
names
the
demotic
of
equivalence

APPENDIX
I

have

said,

based at

III.

205

been perfectly established by M. Rcvillout, whose theory,

only on demotic, has been since confirmed by numerous

first

and ostraca.

bilingual papyri

'

The demotic system

is

founded on the

20 drachmae, divided into 5 shekels or tctraargcnteus-outen

drachms and 10 kati or didrachms and as the 'argenteus-outen,'
or

shekels, and kati may be either of silver or copper, the drachmae may
equally be silver or copper. The numbers found in the period of the
silver standard are very small compared with the numbers in the period
'

of the copper standard, when thousands of argenteus-outens not infrequently occur, and there is, as a rule, no difficulty in determining which
'

standard

The same cannot however always be said of the

from which M. Revillout arrives at the ratio of 1 20 i

meant.

is

formula 24

=T

2
ff

between the value of a silver and copper drachma. As M. Revillout

bases on two papyri his theory that Philopator gave the name of ' argenteus-outens and drachmae to the previously existing copper coins called
obols and chalci in Greek (since no mention of copper has yet occurred
in a demotic papyrus earlier than Philopator, I leave their demotic
'

names to M. Revillout), I give his latest translation of the passages in

the two papyri relating to the coinage, together with an example from
the later period, when there is no question as to the standard meant.
But

sake of clearness, it is necessary to point out that in

the
ratio
of exchange between silver and copper drachmae,
discussing
not
I am
discussing the ratio between silver and copper as such,
first,

for the

is to say the ratio of value between a silver and copper coin of

equal weight, which is another and distinct question, to be decided by
cannot find out the last question until we have
different evidence.

that

We

a more or less probable hypothesis on the question

drachmae were worth one silver drachma. But even

how many copper

we solve the first

if

question and find out how many copper drachmae were worth one
silver, we still cannot discover the answer to the second unless we know

how much

a copper drachma normally weighed, and this is just the disI do not of course mean by this to imply that we are not

puted point.

much

nearer to the ultimate ratio

when we have found out the

ratio of

value between a silver and a copper uten and drachma.

Both the
Greek and the demotic names for the copper coins imply certain weights,

but unfortunately there are at least two possible utens and drachmae of
The choice of one or the other of these alternatives

different weights.

APPENDIX

206

III.

must depend on which suits the general classification of the coins best,
and that can be decided only by an expert in the coins themselves. In
fact no theory of the ratio of exchange between a silver and a copper
drachma can, in the absence of direct evidence, be accepted unless it
explains the coins and on the other hand, a theory based on proba;

much

higher level of certainty, if it explains

the coins. The two questions therefore have these points in connexion,
and as on M. Revillout's theory the answer to each is the same, he

be raised to a

bilities will

naturally does not keep them distinct but, as I have said, the solution
No papyrus can tell us
to each really comes from a different quarter.
the normal weight of the copper drachma, on which the ultimate ratio
;

silver and copper depends.

The scholar may with the help of
the numismatist lead us to the edge of the stream which separates us

between

from the ultimate

ratio,

us across the ford.

but

It is

is

it

only the numismatist

because M.

Revillout, at

any

who can conduct

rate in the latest

exposition of his theory, has attempted to dispense with the numismatist,

that his system, as a whole, breaks down. But in the meantime I return
to the question of his demotic formula.

The formula 24 =

occurs in a papyrus dated the fifth year of

121 M. Revillout translates the passage
Philopator.
eg.
Tu as
le change a me reclamer.'
dont
In Lettres
argenteus
he
this
into
Le
debiteur
doit
expands
p. 238
payer 5 argenteus et TV
In Rev.

first

i.

5^

'

'

en tout (en monnaie d'argent) ou en monnaie d'airain au taux 24 unites

d'airain pour T-ff d'unite d'argent.'
The second instance occurs in a Theban papyrus dated the fifth year
of Harmachis, one of the insurgent kings, and M. Revillout translates
i.
dont le change en airain
p. 121) Tu as 2 T\j argenteus
'

(Rev. eg.
est

as

me reclamer.' In Lettres p. 238 he translates

2 TV argenteus a me faire ou en equivalence de 24 pour T%.'
24 pour

YJJ

it

'Tu

third instance, which I select from the period when there is no

question as to the standard, is in a papyrus at Dublin, dated the fifth year
'

of Philometor (Lettres p. 239), contenant une

amende de 1000 argenteus

2
The
j^

ou 5000 sekels en airain dont 1'equivalence est de 24 pour

same formula

.'

in numerous demotic papyri of the second century.

on the uncertainty still attaching to all translation
of demotic when there is not the Greek to compare it with, but shall
frankly admit the following points about the formula
I

shall lay

is

no

found

stress

APPENDIX

III.

207

That the word which M. Revillout translates variously* melange,'

'Equivalence,' change/ and taux has to do with the exchange between
silver and copper.
(2) That the 24 refers to unities of copper.
2
refers to a
unity of silver' and means TV of an
(3) That the T
(j)

'

'

'

ff

'

argenteus-outen,'
(4)

i.

e.

2 kati or

More than

Then does M.

lout himself cannot desire.

ratio of 120

4 drachmae.

a
T ff are equated.

That the 24 and the

between the value of a

silver

this

M. Revil-

Revillout's theory of the

and copper drachma

(a) for the reigns of Philopator and the insurgent kings in the
(b) for Epiphanes and his successors?

The

question turns on what

M.

three cases.

the copper

'

is

meant by the

'

unities of

follow,

Thebaid,
'

copper

in

the

that the 24 in all cases refer to

argenteus-outens,' and that, translated into drachmae, the
Revillout's explanation

is

formula means, '480 copper drachmae

4 silver drachmae.' There is however this great difference between the first two papyri and the third. In the
first two the only argentei mentioned in the papyrus are on the silver
The
standard, in the third the argentei are on the copper standard.
first papyrus does not say
or
in
argentei
copper 624 argentei at
'

the rate of 24 for

airain est 24

2
j ^,'
2

5^

but simply

'

5 T argenteus dont le change (en

was natural that M. Revillout, who denied the

pour T D ).' It
use of copper, except for the smallest payments, in the reigns of Philadelphus and Euergetes and thought that its extensive use began with

Philopator, should, ignoring this difference, explain the first two papyri
the third. Since however it has been shown that copper
was largely used even in the reign of Philadelphus, and M. Revillout
in the light of

other papyri of Philopator's reign and those of the

insurgent kings there are no instances of any argentei other than those
on the silver standard, and since it is obviously better to explain
a formula in the light of something which is known to have existed

admits that

in the

previously, than in the light of something which did not, it is necessary to ask is there anything in the first period, when it is certain that

no copper argentei on the copper standard existed, with which the

formula 24 =
can be connected? If so, the necessity for attributing

to Philopator at

of

20

any

rate the institution of copper argentei at the ratio

will disappear.

The answer

is

what the reader has doubtless himself anticipated

APPENDIX

2o8

that the formula of [60] 15 X^opeQa,

original of which the demotic formula
'

cis

IIL

TOV a-rar^pa o/3o\ous *8,

is

the

'

at the rate of 24 of copper for

the translation.
I say
advisedly

4 drachmae) of silver is
that the Greek is the original. The coinage of the Ptolemies was issued
by Greek kings from Greek mints at Greek cities, and under Greek
names. These names the Egyptians refused to adopt into their own
2 kati

(i.

e.

language, preferring to equate as far as possible the coinage of their

conquerors to their own time-honoured system. But it must not be
forgotten that the Egyptian names of coins and all the formulae con-

nected with them are translations from the Greek, and that the ultimate
explanation must come from the Greek, not from the demotic. I have

somewhat strongly on this point, because it is my answer to

the objection which may be levelled against this part of the present
essay that it is presumptuous for me to criticize the interpretations of

insisted

demotic scholars.

If the

formula 24 copper

2
j ^ silver has no analogy

to the passage in the Revenue Papyrus, M. Revillout's translation

of it must be far from the truth, for the correspondence between the
In both there is an equation beformula and [fO] 15 is exact.

and unities of copper, in both the number of

the copper unities is 24, and in both the meaning and number of the
The only difference
silver unities comes to the same, 4 drachmae.
name of the 24 copper unities is unis that in the demotic the
and therefore in the
certain, in the Greek it is given and is the obol
demotic it is the demotic equivalent of the copper obol, whatever

tween unities of

silver

that

may

At

be.

ground has been reached. There is no longer any

reason for separating the monetary system of Philopator from that of
his predecessors, or in fact to suppose a transitional period at all.
The
dividing line, so far as the evidence goes, is the adoption of the copper
last firm

standard at the beginning of Epiphanes' reign for Egypt without the

Thebaid, at the end of his reign for the Thebaid as well.

Another question, which

24 =

arises out of the occurrence of the formula

the 2 papyri of Philopator and Harmachis, is why was the

T ff
formula inserted, with what was it contrasted ? On M. Revillout's
2

in

theory the object of the formula was to show that the payment might
be made not in silver argentei, but in argentei on the copper standard of 1 20: i. But as it has been shown first that the 24 unities

APPENDIX

III.

209

of copper in question are probably obols, not copper argentci, secondly

that copper was largely used as far back as Philadelphus, some other
explanation is necessary. Here again, if the Greek be taken as the guide,
the solution

is

easily found.

In [60]

15, the

24 obols at par were

clearly contrasted with obols at a discount as in [76] 4, and the

ostracon which mentions xa\nos as K<J-V gives an example of what the
discount was. Since the formula 24
fv was the demotic equivalent

of the Greek, it too was contrasted with copper of which 26 J or any

M. Revillout will perhaps
other number of obols were paid for a stater
when
as
he
once
Rev. g. ii p. 279,
objected
criticizing
Droysen,
object,
that the demotic papyri give no examples of copper at any other ratio
but as another ratio is found in Greek papyri and ostraca,
-j's,

than 24

the objection is disposed of; moreover in denying the existence of an

extensive copper currency in the time of Philadelphus and Euergetes,
the unsoundness of arguing from the silence of the demotic documents

has already shown

So

itself.

the documents of Philopator's reign are conRevillout has not yet come to the ratio of value between
a silver and a copper drachma, for he has not yet come to the period
of copper argentci and drachmae, but is still in the period of copper
cerned,

far therefore as

M.

Does the demotic formula however give the ratio for the reign
of Epiphanes and his successors ? The fact that in the papyri of this
period the argentei mentioned are on the copper standard makes it
much more intelligible that the 24 should refer to them in these papyri
than in the two papyri where the only argentei mentioned were on the
obols.

silver standard.
On the other hand, since it appeared that in the case
of the two papyri of Philopator and Harmachis the 24 referred to obols,
it is a perfectly tenable position to hold that the 24 throughout means

In the first 'place it is now known that the

obols, not copper argentei.
in any case belongs to the period when there were as
formula 24 =
yet no copper argentei and, since the Greek original of the formula

&

dates back to Philadelphus, it is far more probable that the demotic

formula goes back to the same reign than that it was first used in the
And if the formula 24 = T% was well established
reign of Philopator.
at the time

when the change was made

to copper argentei,

it is

perfectly
'

'

24 unities of copper (i. e. obols) for TV silver

should be continued after obols had given place to copper drachmae on
possible that the formula

E e

APPENDIX

210

III.

a copper standard. This argument will be much strengthened if it can

be shown that a parallel case exists of a term properly belonging to
obols alone, but continued in the period of the copper standard. Such
That
a parallel is afforded by the converse phrase x a *> K s et * K TV
phrase was first found in the period when the copper coins were called
-

obols,
is

and

it

is

strictly applicable

used in the Zois papyri with a

only to that period. Nevertheless it

of copper drachmae on the copper

sum

But why, if the ratio of exchange between silver and copper

and the old copper obol was now 20 drachmae, did not the
writer say copper at the rate of 525 copper drachmae for a stater ?
Obviously the answer is that in equating silver and copper the obol
had been and continued to be the typical copper unity.
Applying this to the demotic formula we are on the firm ground
of the Greek so long as we maintain that the 24 refer to obols, but we
are on the treacherous path of assumption, if we maintain that the 24
refer to the copper argentei
while to argue that the obol was the copper
argenteus is obviously to beg the whole question at issue. If it can be
shown on other grounds that the ratio of exchange was 120:1, and
therefore the obol and the copper argenteus were identical, the demotic
formula may be taken as confirming that view. But to attempt to prove
standard.

was 120:

'

'

is to argue in a circle.
We should indeed find
we
but
because
had
i,
only
already put it there.
conclusion therefore is that if the demotic formula is the only

the ratio from the formula

the ratio of 120

The

evidence for the exchange ratio of 120:1, the verdict must be 'not
But the other evidence leads to the consideration of the
proven.'
third

and

4.

last period.

Documentary evidence for

the period of the copper standard.

With Epiphanes the monetary changes of the Ptolemies came to an

The Greek papyri mention almost universally copper drachmae

end.

on the copper standard, with occasional mentions of silver, chiefly in

payments of fines or taxes. In the demotic, from the reign of
Euergetes II M. Revillout distinguishes two kinds of silver coins,
first, the 'argenteus fondu du temple de Ptah' accompanied by the
same division into fractions which he says that he has found in the
demotic papyri of Darius, Philip, and Euergetes I, and secondly, the

APPENDIX

211

III.

The last he connects with the

'argenteus en pieces d'argent grave"
Greek phrase found in pap. O of Leyden, apyvpiov (TTKTTJ/ZOV riroAjiaiKou
.'

as the normal coinage struck by Euergetes II

he explains the other as the vieil argenteus,'
(LettrcSt p. 244), though whether he means by this the silver coins
of the Persians, as contrasted with the silver of the Ptolemies, or the
pofzioyxaTos,

and

and explains

it

'

his successors, while

heavier silver of Soter compared with the lighter coinage of his successors,
or the purer coinage of the earlier Ptolemies with the more or less

debased

silver of the later kings, or all three, is not clear.

But, at any
the argenteus en pieces d'argent grave" is equivalent to apyvpiov
fnicninov K.T.A., then apyvpiov cTiKnjfjMv according to M. Revillout, is not
'

'

rate, if

How

silver of the best quality.

Leyden

No

does this view suit the papyrus

of

papyrus has been more discussed than

this one,

which has been

the standing difficulty with regard to the rate of exchange between

silver and copper drachmae, and the rate of interest, for the last half

The papyrus is dated the twenty-sixth year of Ptolemy

Alexander and records the loan of apyvpiov fTTia-rj^ov TlroXe/LiaiKou VOJJ.KTThe debtor binds himself if he does not repay
/biaroj bpa%fjLas ZcKabvo.
century.

the

sum

at the stipulated time to pay the wioXiov, i.e. 18 drachmae,

interest from the stipulated time of repayment at the rate of

and
60 copper drachmae a month

for

each

stater.

In the discussion of this papyrus M. Lumbroso, as usual, is the best

In pp. 171-2 of his Rechcrc/ies, he states the theories of his
guide.
predecessors: (i) Letronne, who arguing that the stater was a gold
coin worth 100 silver drachmae and that 60 copper drachmae were

worth

1 2
per cent, a year (2) Reuvens,
worth 20 silver drachmae and an exchange
ratio of i 30 between silver and copper drachmae, arrived at the interest
of 1 20 per cent.: (3) Leemans, who assuming the same gold coin, but
an exchange ratio of r 120 between silver and copper, reached the

silver, arrived at

who postulating a

the interest of

stater of gold

interest of

30

per cent.

Against

two weighty objections

to show that the stater
;

all

these theories

M. Lumbroso brings

in the first place, there is absolutely

nothing

question was anything but a silver stater,

in
as
the
loan
question was in silver and the normal stater
especially
without
the
Ptolemaic
further definition is the silver stater,
of
period

a statement which

is

in

entirely confirmed
E e 2

by

[60] 15 and [76] 4

secondly,

APPENDIX

212

III.

that the rate of interest in the papyrus is clearly exceptional, being the
interest on a fine, and therefore it is difficult to apply to it more or less
cases

parallel

of the rate of

interest

under normal

circumstances.

own that the

tentatively suggested
question was a silver octodrachm, based on the erroneous
supposition of Letronne that the gold stater was an octodrachm.
M. Lumbroso

stater

a theory of his

in

But as M. Revillout has shown, the only staters in Egypt were the
gold didrachm and the silver tetradrachm, and the choice therefore
is narrowed down to these two alternatives.
M. Revillout (Lettres, p. 153) adopts M. Leemans' theory that the
stater in question was the gold didrachm, worth 20 silver drachmae,
which on the exchange ratio of 120:1 between silver and copper
drachmae gives 30 per cent, interest, and tries to support it by
adducing instances of interest at 30 per cent., though the fallacy of
the argument from analogy in this case had already been pointed
The supposition that the stater could be
out by M. Lumbroso.
a silver tetradrachm was dismissed by M. Revillout on the ground
r 20
per cent. M. Revillout
has here by an oversight understated his case, for if the stater in question
was an ordinary silver one and the rate of exchange 120: r, the rate of

that this would result in a rate of interest of

interest

is

150 per cent.

The

difficulty

however of supposing that the

rate of interest was, in the case of a fine, as high as 150 per cent, is much
less than that of supposing the stater to be a gold stater, seeing that the

papyrus records a loan of silver and the stater is the commonest silver
coin.
But was the stater in question an ordinary, i. e. as the silver coins
of this period show, a debased stater?
The phrase apyvpiov eirioTj/xou
seems
to
me
to
llToAe/xaiKov vo/xt(r/xaro9
point to the silver coins lent
Wilcken
in
a
as
recent
letter pointed out to me
being unusual, though
the 12 drachmae apy. CTTIO-. K.r.A. are in the summary at the beginning of
the document called 12 dr. apy(vpiov) po(/xio-juaros) simply, and apyvpiov
But in any case the
ro/xio-jbiaros does not differ from apyvpiov alone.
possibility that these 12 dr. were staters coined by one of the earlier
Ptolemies cannot be eliminated, and there is no means of discovering
what the premium on pure silver coins at this period was. It is perfectly
possible that in the first century B.C. the staters of Soter on the Attic
standard passed at 100 per cent, premium or more. But if the stater
in question refers to one of these staters at a premium, the interest was

APPENDIX

111.

213

very much less than 150 per cent., and as the argument from the analogy
of the rate of 30 per cent, found in other papyri is not only irrelevant
but misleading, since the rate in the case of a fine would probably be
higher than the normal rate, the theory that the stater in question was
a silver stater, whether of pure or of debased metal, provides an adequate
solution without rendering it necessary to complicate the question by
the irrelevant introduction of gold into a papyrus which records a loan
But as the rate
of silver and therefore implies interest on that silver.

unknown premium on pure silver,

under any circumstances exceptional, the papyrus cannot help
towards finding out the normal rate of interest, nor can it even be used
to confirm, much less to prove, any theory concerning the ratio of exof interest perhaps depends on the

and

is

change between the normal or debased

and the copper drachmae.

To

return to the question of

M.

silver

drachmae of

this period

Revillout's identification of 'pieces

d'argent grave*' with apyvpiov f-nia^fjiov and his explanation of both as

the ordinary silver coins of the late Ptolemies, the interpretation of the

papyrus O of Leyden is so complicated by the exceptional circumstances

of the case, that it is very doubtful whether it can serve as a basis for
The staters of Soter and Philadelphus which remained
generalization.
But the descripin circulation must have commanded a large premium.
tion in Greek of the staters of pure silver, as contrasted with the more
or less debased staters of the later Ptolemies, is quite uncertain.
Since the arguments in favour of the exchange ratio of 1 20

have

been found inadequate, and as the arguments adduced by Prof. Lumbroso

in his Recherches rest on passages where the original editors of the
papyri in question had misread the text, while the evidence of the

exchange in the Roman period, as Mommsen has pointed out,

cannot be admitted as evidence for the Ptolemaic, there remains the
argument of M. Bernardino Peyron, the original founder of the theory.
ratio of

Comparing two passages in papyri nearly contemporaneous in which

the price of an artaba of o\vpa is given, first as 2 silver drachmae,
secondly as 300 copper drachmae, the price in the latter case being
a period of great scarcity, he suggested that the normal price was
probably about 240 copper drachmae, and so proposed the exchange
in

ratio of

20:

basis for the

This argument, though far too weak to serve as a sole

exchange ratio of 120 i, is nevertheless fairly conclusive

i.

APPENDIX

214

III.

evidence against supposing that the ratio was more than 150: i, or so
low as 30 i, as was once proposed, and it is a strong though hardly
:

conclusive argument against the theory of Letronne that the exchange

was 60 i.
But though the documentary evidence on which these distinguished

ratio

scholars based the theory of 1 20 i is very far from being conclusive,

their verdict is not therefore lightly to be set aside.
Their general
:

conclusion, which is on the

i as the
is in favour of 1 20
:

whole supported by recent discoveries,

exchange ratio between silver and copper

drachmae, on the ground that it suits the comparative prices better than
any other theory, and if that ratio can by the numismatic evidence be

made practically certain or even only probable, no difficulty

to be raised on account of the papyri.

is

likely

For the

rate of discount on copper at this period the evidence consists

the Zois papyri of Philometor's reign in which ya\K.os eis K$-V is
interchanged with yaXnos ov aAAayT?, secondly, L. P. 62 [5] 17, probably
of, first,

belonging to the later part of the second century

which

B. c., in

the

in

irpos \a\Kov KTOVO^OV (vid. sup.), just as in the case of the

oil-monopoly during the third century, copper was accepted at par, but

case of

(DVCLL

the discount on copper paid in the case of Trpos apyvpiov <avai, or o>vai
which ought to be paid in silver, is lodr. 2\ obols for every mina in
;

other words
therefore

no

dr. i\ in

was approximately 10 per

the third century.

much

by the

in silver.

cent, at this period, as

The explanation

scarcer in the

afforded

copper were worth 100

it

The

rate

had been in
was

of this fact which, since silver

second century, is at first sight remarkable is

In a country like Egypt with a double

silver coins.

currency, silver and copper, exchanging at practically the market value,

for it is incredible that Philadelphus would have permitted large
payments of taxes in copper at its nominal value unless that nominal

value approximately represented the real value of copper there were,

when silver tended, as it did soon after Philadelphus' time, to become

before the Ptolemies.

Either they might

and copper, or they might
diminish the weight of the silver coins to meet the appreciation of silver,
or they might meet it by debasing the silver coinage.
That the
Ptolemies did not adopt the first course, is shown by the fact that
copper still in the second century exchanged at the same rate, either
scarce, three
alter the

alternatives

rate of

exchange between

silver

APPENDIX
at par or at a small discount, with silver,
of normal weights in the copper coins.

III.

215

and that there

is

no

alteration

Possibly their policy in not

adopting that course was sound for-the constant alterations of the rate
of exchange, which would have been necessary to keep the two metals at
their market value, might have been more fatal to all business transactions
;

than either of the other two courses.

Nor

did they choose, as the

Rhodians under similar circumstances chose, to diminish the weight

of the silver coins, keeping the metal pure
but, as the silver of the
later Ptolemies shows, they preferred to debase their silver, probably
to an extent which, while nominally keeping the same rate of exchange
as before, would alter the real ratio between silver and copper to the
level of the ratio of the two metals in the open market.
Therefore,
any particular weight of copper coins nominally continued in the second
century to exchange against the same amount of silver as that against
which it had exchanged in the third century. But the real silver
;

in

the

until

'silver'

coins of the later

Ptolemies continued to diminish,

become for the most part

by the reign of Auletes the metal had

alloy.

To sum up

the results which have been reached by the aid of

the documentary evidence, the dividing line in the history of Ptolemaic
is the adoption of the copper standard at the very
beginning of
Epiphanes' reign, perhaps at the end of Philopator's, side by side with
the silver standard which it never altogether superseded. In fact the
debased silver of the later Ptolemies is so common that it must have

coinage

much

larger part than can be concluded from the papyri, and

doubted
not only how far the recorded payments on the
may
in
third
silver standard
the
century were actually made in silver, but
also how far the recorded payments in copper drachmae during the
second were actually made in copper. In many respects however the
change to a copper standard seems to have made little difference. As
far back as Philadelphus' reign copper was used in the payment of large
sums in official as well as in private transactions, sometimes at par,
sometimes at a discount of about 10 per cent. In the second century,
as the history of the airo^oipa proves (see [37] 19 note), payments were
made more frequently in copper, but the rate of discount was apparently
still about the same and there is nothing to show that the rate of
exchange had altered.

played a
it

well be

APPENDIX

216

III.

Of the

three questions propounded at the beginning of this essay, the

and
ostraca have given an answer to the second, and this answer
papyri
has been verified by the silver coins with regard to the first, the normal
ratio between silver and copper drachmae in the third century B.C. is
known, and there is a certain presumption, though not yet a strong one,
in favour of the exchange ratio of 1 20 i between silver and copper
drachmae in the second century. The third question has necessarily
been left unsolved, except in so far that there is no longer any reason for
separating the two parts of it, since the large payments of copper made
to the government show that the ratio between silver and copper as
metals must have closely approximated to their ratio as coins.
;

5.

The copper

The evidence of

the copper coins.

by M. Revillout

in Lettres, pp. 112and table of weights, both of which

are, as I shall show, disfigured by the most astonishing blunders. These
pages are reprinted practically without alteration from his articles in the
Rev. egypt., though the subject had in the meantime been revolutionized
by the appearance of Mr. Poole's Catalogue of Ptolemaic coins in the
1

24,

coins are discussed

where he makes a

British

As

classification

Museum.

have already said, it is necessary to have some theory of the

exchange between silver and copper drachmae before we attempt
If it were possible to say at once that any
to argue from the weights.
was
the
coin
copper obol, since the normal rate of exchange
particular
in the third century between drachmae paid in silver and drachmae
paid in copper was par, it would be equally possible to obtain the
ultimate ratio between an equal weight of silver and copper in the third
century, and the knowledge of this would of course be of great service in
deciding both the ratio of exchange and the ultimate ratio between silver
and copper in the second century. But it is impossible to tell so easily
what coin the copper obol was. On the other hand, if it can be discovered with how many copper drachmae the obol was identical, and
how much the copper drachma weighed, the question of the ultimate
I

rate of

be solved for both centuries at once. It is therefore necessary

order to reach the ultimate ratio between silver and copper even in

ratio can
in

APPENDIX

III.

217

the third century, to overcome the old difficulty of the rate of exchange
silver and copper drachmae in the second, and if that can be

between
done,

it

will also

be possible to explain the ultimate

ratio in the

second

century B.C.
at this point there are some general considerations to be taken
into account.
First, to quote Mr. Poole (Catal. Intr. p. xiii), 'No series

But

of coins struck

by the

successors of Alexander

than that of the Ptolemies.'

And

is

more

difficult to class

the difficulty of classifying the gold

and silver coins is great, that of classifying the copper is far greater
owing to the increased rarity of dated copper coins, the uncertainty
if

name of each denomination, and the frequent deviawhatever

tions,
theory be adopted, from the normal standard of weights.
The time is never likely to come when every issue of copper coins can
be assigned to its correct reign, or when at any rate the smaller copper
coins can be assigned with certainty to their correct denominations.
attaching to the

Under
will

these circumstances, since finality

is

unattainable, the best theory

be that to which there are fewest objections.

Secondly, since the only numismatist of the

first

rank

who has

undertaken to weigh and systematize the copper coins is Mr. Poole, it

is absolutely necessary for any one who is not a numismatist to base
his explanations

upon the

conclusions likely to be of

Mr.

facts

as Mr. Poole records them, nor are

much

value,

if

they are irreconcilable with

Poole's.
If the classification of

the coinage according to weights

is

a task of

extreme difficulty, the copper coinage of the Ptolemies has nevertheless

two great advantages. It was at any rate from the time of Philadelphus,
as I have pointed out, in no sense a token coinage.
The smallness of
the discount and the fact that the government even in the time when
silver was plentiful sometimes accepted copper at par are conclusive
evidence that the nominal ratio of copper to silver approximately
coincided with the market ratio of the two metals.
It would obviously
be a vain task to attempt from a consideration of the weight and
exchange value of a shilling to deduce the ratio of value between silver
and gold as metals at the present day. But with the coinage of the
Ptolemies

it

the coins

if

is

somehow expressed by
and there is no
right way

certain that the ultimate ratio

they can be looked at

in

question of searching after a chimera.

Ff

the

is

Secondly, a general consideration

APPENDIX

2i8

III.

of the copper coins without adopting any particular theory of the normal
standard shows, as Mr. Poole remarks, that the change from the silver to
a copper standard in the reign of Epiphanes does not seem to have been

accompanied by an alteration of the normal standard of weights. The

names of the different denominations altered, but the normal weights
did not. There are great irregularities after the reign of Epiphanes as
there were before, but they are confined within the same limits, and
therefore an explanation of the normal weights and the names of the
denominations for one period will equally serve as an explanation for
the other. At the same time the normal weights primarily represent
the obol and its subdivisions to which the copper drachmae of the later
period were equated, and a theory of the normal weights can only be
accepted if it explains the origin of the subdivisions of the obol on the
other hand the ratio of exchange adopted in the reign of Epiphanes is
likely to have been such that the new copper drachmae would accommo;

date themselves to the fractions of the obol.

With regard to the copper obol, though nothing can be deduced

from its name concerning its weight, there are two important points to
be considered. The fact that the obol is spoken of as the typical copper
coin, and still more the absence of any silver coin, at any rate after the
reign of Soter, which represented an obol, make it certain that one
denomination of the coins in Mr. Poolers table is the obol of which the
lower denominations are subdivisions. Secondly, it is known that the
Greek subdivisions of the obol in Egypt were chalci or eighths, as at
Pap. Biting. 1. c. line 9, SixaXKoi/, &c. Therefore any satisfactory theory of the normal weights of the obol must show that the
coin which is assumed to be the obol, was divided into eighths at any

Athens,

cf.

rate approximately
and similarly no theory of the equivalence of
the obol in copper drachmae can be accepted, if the fractions which
result are unintelligible.
The exchange ratio must be such that the
;

coins representing the fractions of the obol can be converted conveniently

into copper drachmae.
Next, as to the names of the copper coins in the second century in
Greek they are called drachmae, in demotic argentei,' subdivided into
;

'

5 shekels and 10 kati or didrachms, the kati being also TV of the

which M. Revillout naturally identifies the argenteus, speaking

uten, with

frequently of the

'

argenteus-outen.'

The names

therefore of the copper

APPENDIX

III.

219

same as the names of the silver coins, and as the names

drachma and kati connote weights, there is good reason for assuming
that the coins which approximately weighed a drachma or a kati were
the copper drachmae and the copper kati.
But what were the weights connoted by the terms 'drachma' and
kati in Egypt ?
For this it is necessary to consider the history of the
silver coinage about which there is no doubt.
Soter at first issued silver
on the Attic standard, according to which the drachma weighed 67-5
grains, then adopted the Rhodian with a normal drachma of 60 grains,
and finally adopted the Phoenician with a normal drachma of 56 grains,
which standard was maintained by all his successors. Leaving the Rhodian
drachma which is intermediate out of account, the approximate limits at
each end are 67-5 and 56 as the weight of the copper drachma. Turning
to the demotic, in so far as a kati is the translation of a Greek didrachm,
it gives no new information, but it must be remembered that being the
tenth of an argcnteus-outen,' and the uten being an ancient Egyptian
weight of very nearly 1400 grains, the kati also had a definite weight of
its own, 140 grains, which, as it was equated to the didrachm, would give
a copper drachma of 70 grains. On the other hand, it will be objected,
have I any right to invent a fictitious copper drachma of which there is
no instance in Greek ? Is not this to explain the Greek coinage in the
coins arc the
'

'

'

'

'

'

demotic, a course which I have already frequently conis that in the first place 67-5 was but the approximate limit, and that no less an authority than Mr. Poole (Catal. Intr.
p. xci) remarks that the difference between the Attic and the Egyptian
light of the

demned

My answer

'

too small to be of consequence in the comparison (of the

coins), considering the irregularity with which the copper money was
struck.'
Any series of coins which points to a normal weight of 67-5

standard

is

can also be explained by a normal weight of 70. Therefore the Attic

and Egyptian standards are for the present purpose identical, and the
'

fictitious

But

drachma

still

it

'

may

nothing else than the Attic.

be objected that, as the Greek and the Egyptian

is

standards practically coincided, it was the Egyptian system which was

equated to the Greek, not vice versa, and that in speaking of the normal

weights I ought to keep to the Greek. Here however a distinction must

be drawn. There is all the difference in the world between explaining
technical phrases or

names of coins by the demotic instead of by the

Ff

APPENDIX

220

III.

Greek, and on the other hand arguing that the copper coins made in
Greek mints by Greeks and with Greek names may nevertheless have

been issued on an Egyptian standard to which the Greek was equated.

That it would be as inconsistent as it would be absurd to explain the
silver coins on any theory of an Egyptian standard, is obvious, for
the silver coins were clearly issued on Greek standards, to which the
But though a conquering race
Egyptian standard was equated.
naturally imposes its own silver standard on the conquered, there are
numerous cases, as in South Italy and Sicily, in which the conquerors
have adopted the copper standard of the conquered and equated it with
their own money.
Moreover the elaborate system of copper coinage
of the Ptolemies is peculiar to Egypt and quite foreign to the rest
of the Hellenistic world, while on the other hand copper had long been
In fact, if the question had to
used in Egypt as a standard of value.
be decided only on a priori grounds, the balance of probability would
be rather in favour of an Egyptian origin. But it is sufficient for
my present purpose to have vindicated the consistency of holding that
besides the kati which are equivalents of Greek weights, account must
be taken of the true Egyptian weight of the kati, although, as I have
said, for practical purposes a coin of 70 grains is not to be distinguished from the Attic drachma.
How does this bear on the ratio of exchange between silver and
copper drachmae

In the

first

place, if

it

is

granted that the copper

drachma weighs approximately the same as the Phoenician or the

Attic drachma, it can be shown that any ratio of exchange higher
than

20:

is

unsatisfactory

if

not impossible; e.g.

if it

were 180 to

but thirty times

30 copper drachmae would be equal to the obol
the weight even of the Phoenician drachma would result in a coin
i,

much

heavier than any quoted in Mr. Poole's table, and, as has been
is represented somewhere in the extant copper coins

shown, the obol

therefore this ratio will not do.

In

as the heaviest copper coin

is a little over 1400 grains, any ratio of
exchange over 150 is quite
on
same
the
This
ratio
however, which assigns
impossible
grounds.
25 copper drachmae to the obol, may be dismissed on the ground that
it

fact,

involves a very inconvenient number, 3!

chalcus, which will cause infinite confusion.

go through

all

copper drachmae for the

But it is unnecessary to

the unsatisfactory ratios in detail.

The number

of

APPENDIX

221

III.

copper drachmae in an obol cannot exceed twenty-four on the other

it cannot be less than ten, which would give a ratio of sixty,
for under any circumstances a ratio below 60 i is too low to account
;

hand

figures
copper drachmae in the papyri twenty-four
and ten are therefore the two possible extremes. Of the intermediate
numbers all the odd ones may be struck out, as they would lead at
once to impossible fractions in copper drachmae as the equivalents of
chalci, nor will twenty-two, eighteen, or fourteen suit for the same
reason.
There remain twenty-four, twenty, sixteen, twelve, and ten.
for the high

in

I have
proceeded so far on general grounds without assuming even
the normal weights of any particular coins, much less the relation of
any one supposed denomination to any other, but merely showing that

a number of ratios failed at the outset to

any

satisfactory solution

must have

fulfil

fulfilled,

the requirements which

it is worth while

before

to apply the consequences of the ratio to the coins themselves

but
it
is hardly necessary to point out that a theory which starts with
;

the outset, cannot possibly evercome the obstacles which

at the beginning, is bound eventually
to encounter.
In order to reduce the possible ratios of exchange on
difficulties at

any theory, however simple or easy

numismatical grounds to a still smaller number, it would be necessary

come to an understanding, if not about the supposed approximate
normal weights, at any rate about the relation which a higher series
bears to a lower one. But without prejudging the answers to these

to

questions, there

is

one

fact

which

the Ptolemaic coins, and indeed

the key to the whole problem.
in

is
it

certain about the subdivisions of

is

the explanation of

it

which

is

Whatever theory be adopted as to the number of copper drachmae

an obol, and whatever coin be therefore selected as the obol, the

subdivisions of

it

are not only in the series

i, i, 4,

which fractions

it

absolutely necessary to find in the coins, as the obol is known to

have been divided into these fractions. Intermediate between these
is

comes another series, and it is chiefly by its answer to the

questions, first what was this series both in terms of fractions of the
obol and of copper drachmae, and secondly, why was there this second
fractions

series, that

a theory of Ptolemaic coinage stands or

falls.

On

Mr.

Poole's theory that the normal weight of the highest copper coins was
20 Attic drachmae, he obtains as subdivisions 10, 8, 5, 4, aj, 2, 1$, i,

APPENDIX

222

(I

III.

leave out of account the smaller denominations which cannot be fixed

i,
independently of the larger), or, regarded as fractions of unity, \,
i> TV> A> 50- It i s obvious that by identifying 20 Attic drachmae with
,

the copper obol, which gives an exchange ratio of I 120, the fractions
of the obol which are wanted will be obtained, and equally, if 10 Attic
:

drachmae be

for the difference between the

identified with the obol
denomination of the small coin, which Mr. Poole supposes to be i,
3
i. e
4 ^, and the denomination of i-J-, i.e. on a theory of 60: i, & obol,
But there will also be a series
is so trifling that it can be neglected.
be finally proved until the
cannot
f> T> yV> ^V> which, though they
;

explanation of them is found, are at any rate convenient fractions of

the obol and can at once be converted into copper drachmae without

any difficulty. But these advantages, which are shared equally by the
exchange ratio of 120 i or 60 i, the copper drachma being in both cases
on the Attic standard, are not obtained by any of the ratios, according
to which 24, 1 6, or 12 copper drachmae are equal to the obol, whatever
normal weight of the copper drachma be assumed within the limits
of 70-56 grains mentioned above. These three ratios of exchange all
lead to inconvenient fractions both as divisions of the obol and as
:

copper drachmae.

down

Practically the
to the choice between 120:1

question

and 60

is

ultimately

narrowed

Further than that the

i.

evidence of the Ptolemaic coins cannot go, for if the coins can be
explained on the theory of the one ratio, they can equally well be

explained by the other, since the normal weights would remain the
same, and the only difference would be that the denominations of the
various fractions would on the theory of 60 i be twice what they are
:

on the theory of 120:1. But the theory of 120:1 is, Mr Gardner

tells me, on general grounds of numismatics, preferable to the other
theory, because the exchange ratio of 1 20 i leads, if the copper drachma
is on the Attic standard, as Mr. Poole supposes, and his classification
of the coinage is satisfactory, to a ratio of 143* i between the normal
weights of an equivalent amount of silver and copper, and even on
:

M.

Revillout's theory of the Phoenician standard of the copper coinage

i, and the analogy of other countries, e.g. Sicily and
is
in
favour
of a ratio over 100 in preference to one below.
Rome,

to a ratio of 120

Like the papyri therefore the coins on the whole point to the
exchange ratio of 120: i, and as they practically narrow the question

APPENDIX

111.

223

down

to a ratio of 120 or 60, while the former ratio suits the prices
in the papyri much the better of the two, there is not much
doubt that the exchange ratio is 120: i ; and if so the continuation of

found

*
the demotic formula 24
T ff in the period when obols had given
of
20
to
way
copper drachmae or 'argenteus-outens' is easily
pieces

explained.

That

much
but

it

all

these arguments for the exchange ratio of 120:1

leave

recognized by no one more fully than myself;

would be worse than useless to blind oneself to the fact that

to be desired

is

conclusive evidence for that ratio does not yet exist, though the question
will probably some day be solved by an instance of the conversion

of copper drachmae in the second century B.C. into

the instances in App. ii (5) for the third.

silver, similar

to

It has hitherto been argued that the exchange ratio of 120:1,

according to which the obol was equivalent to 20 copper drachmae
on the Attic standard, produces a satisfactory solution for the initial

which were fatal to the other ratios. But in order to place

on an approximately firm basis the ratio of exchange, together with
the ratio of weights between an equivalent amount of silver and copper,
which follows from the other ratio provided that the weight of a copper
drachma be discoverable, it is necessary both to show that, on the
assumption that the ratio of exchange was 120:1 and the normal
weight of the drachma was the Attic, the coins can be classified into
suitable subdivisions both of the obol and of 20 copper drachmae, and
Here if
to provide an explanation for the double series of fractions.
I wished I could stop, and, ignoring the table of weights proposed by
M. Revillout, whose classification and theory of normal weights are
quite different from Mr. Poole's, settle the questions at issue by an
appeal to the authority of the first numismatist on the subject. Seeing
that Mr. Poole has adopted the theory that the normal weights of
the copper coins were on the Attic standard, and that the normal
weight of the largest copper coins was 20 drachmae, which are on
the theory of an exchange ratio of 120:1 the obol, it will naturally
be asked, What is the use of going further? Is not Mr. Poole's verdict
sufficient ? and even if it is not, how can you who are not a numismatist
expect to strengthen it?' The fact that Mr. Poole, having for a short
difficulties

'

time accepted M. Revillout's theory of the Phoenician standard of the

APPENDIX

224

III.

it in favour of another
explanation before
Catalogue is a sufficiently strong condemnation of
M. Revillout's theory, and had M. Revillout in his recent re-issue of

weights, deliberately rejected

publishing

his

the Lettres renounced his classification, there would have been no

But as M. Revillout,
necessity for my discussing a superseded system.

who has committed in his classification, as I shall show, blunders which

would have been incredible if he had not made them, has made no
alterations in his theory of the weights, and dismisses the condemnation
of his theory by the first authority on the subject with the remark,
Maintenant M. Poole en est revenu a son ancienne erreur qu'il a encore
essaye" de defendre dans son catalogue,' it is necessary to put an end
to possible misconceptions, and to show on the one hand how and
why Mr. Poole's conclusions based on recorded facts solve the numerous
difficulties, and on the other how and why the generalizations of
I therefore proceed to a more or less
M. Revillout break down.
detailed examination of M. Revillout's theory and that of Mr. Poole,
into which I wish, though with considerable hesitation, to introduce
a few unimportant modifications and will only preface my remarks
by repeating that until a greater authority on Ptolemaic coins than
Mr. Poole shall arise, the question has been long ago settled, at any rate
for those who are not numismatists, and that if I have to spend my
'

readers' time in criticizing the revival of an obsolete theory,

I who am to blame.

6.

M.

it

is

not

Revillout's theory of the Phoenician standard of the

copper coinage.

M. Revillout, starting with the exchange ratio of 120 i, supposes

that the 20 copper drachmae, or a copper
argenteus-outen,' or an
obol on the silver standard, weighed the same as 20 silver drachmae
:

'

on the Phoenician standard which was

from the end of Soter's reign onwards.

in

use for gold and

silver

Having obtained the weights of a large number of copper coins,

he arranges them according to the following table of principales series,'
in which, as the differences between the coins are clearer when the
weights are expressed in grains than when expressed in grammes and
'

in

Mr. Poole's table the weights are given

in grains, I

have converted

APPENDIX

22

III.

M.

Rcvillout's weights into their nearest English equivalents.

be stated that M. Revillout takes 207-223 grs. as the
weight of the actual silver tetradrachms, but it is the higher
first

which

is

It

may

average

extreme

the normal weight, according to Mr. Poole.

Denomination

Supposed highest
normal weight.

1668 grains
1390

ma

34
695
556

445
417
278

223
139

in
70

56
28

APPENDIX

226

III.

only for the Greeks,' and that the coins represent only the
normal fractions, and on the other hand that the copper
drachmae, implying the extensive use of copper, were the invention of

copper was

obol and

'

its

Philopator ?

But what are the

facts

On

M. Revillout does not

this point

afford

any help. The only approach towards a fact in his discussion of the
weights (Lettres, pp. 1 13-117) is the statement that an indefinite number
of coins weigh 102 grammes, unless it be a quotation from Mommsen
about the weight of coin mentioned by Finder. In all the other cases
'

he gives generalizations about the limits within which the coins fell
sometimes he states how many coins fell within those ' limits,' though
But on the actual weights of actual
generally he does not do even that.
be tested, he is silent. Nothing
his
could
alone
coins, from which
theory
is said of their condition, a knowledge of which is the first essential
before any reliance can be placed on their weights nothing of their
provenance, though, as Mr. Poole shows, the copper coinage of the
Cyrenaica and Cyprus had distinct features of its own, which differentiate
Phoenicia and make it at least
it from the coinage of Egypt and
far
of
coins from the Cyrenaica and
how
the
weights
questionable
of
a
solution
can
afford
Egyptian coinage and with regard
Cyprus
to the dates he gives only the crude division between coins belonging
to the period before Philopator and coins belonging to the period after.
'

M. Revillout's theory is confessedly incomplete, for he gives us

only generalizations about les principales series' (Lettres, p. 113).
His generalizations must therefore be tested by the recorded weights
of the coins as they are found in Mr. Poole's table.
Here of course
Lastly,

'

always made to the particular coins, whether the weight

given represents the average of a particular number, or whether it is
based on single coins. The coins whose weights are given were selected
reference

is

on account of
available

their excellent condition (Catal. Introd., p. xci),

about their dates and provenances

information

before the reader.

and every
is

placed

Lastly, Mr. Poole gives not only the principal series

but the exceptional weights which he finds, however difficult they

be to reconcile with the classification which he proposes. And

be objected that
is
is

this contrast

is

unfair to

M.

may
if it

Revillout and that

it

unreasonable to expect a precise classification from any one who

not a trained numismatist, my answer is that M. Revillout, by the

APPENDIX

HI.

of his classification unaltered

rcpublication

227

in

spite

of Mr.

Poole's

Catalogue, has still chosen to appeal in support of his theory to the

coins, and to the coins he must go.

On

comparing the

facts recorded

M. Revillout four

izations of

by Mr. Poole with the general-

inconsistencies attract attention:

(i) that

the coins which, according to M. Revillout, not only ought to occur

but do occur only in the first period, nevertheless occur in the second,

and

vice versa

at all
in

M.

(2) that

some

series

of coins which

M. Revillout

'

do not occur in Mr. Poole's table

principales series
that
other
coins
which
are
extremely common do not occur
(3)
Revillout's table (4) that the actual coins by no means stop

includes in his

'

M.

Revillout's theory, their normal

take the chief instances of each incon-

short at the exact point where, on

will first
weights stop short.
sistency and then discuss their combined effect upon M. Revillout's
I

theory.

The

How many

obol of M. Revillout does not occur in Mr. Poole's table.

examples M. Revillout had before him he does not

say, but

the coin must be extremely rare, since it is not represented in the

The actual weights of the i] obol
collection of the British Museum.
There are however coins
are, according to M. Revillout, 1280-1390.

of 1445 and 1413, the first being the average weight of seven Egyptian
coins assigned by Mr. Poole to Ptolemy Philadelphus.
M. Revillout's
| obol does not appear in the British Museum collection, the only coin

Euergetes

being a Phoenician coin of 752 grains belonging to

but it is very difficult to suppose that this is an example of

it

approaching
;

a series whose normal weight rises to 834 grains. The

obol is not, as
M. Revillout supposes, confined to the first three Ptolemies. Egyptian
coins of 684 and 656 grains occur in the reigns of Epiphanes and
Therefore, on M. Revillout's theory of its denomination
must have then been equivalent to 12$ copper drachmae.
Next, the coin whose actual weight, according to M. Revillout, is
414-445 grains and denomination 8 copper drachmae is not found in
Mr. Poole's table, any more than his supposed coin of 387-417 or $ obol.

Philometor.

in silver,

it

On

the other hand, there is an Egyptian coin belonging to Philopator

which weighs 486, and there is a very large series of coins of somewhat

varying weights (325, 368, 332, 323, 330, 316, 354, 316, 354, 370),
enjoying the sole distinction in Mr. Poole's list of being assigned to

Gg.2

APPENDIX

228

every reign from Soter

M.

Revillout's

list.

M.

III.

to Soter II, not one of which

Revillout's

brilliant

found

is

in

imagination has at this

point soared so completely out of the region of facts that

to bring him back to earth at all.

it is

difficult

First as to the supposed coins representing 8 copper drachmae and

obol; even admitting their existence, it will be noticed that their actual

weights, according to
examples show that

M.
M.

Revillout, overlap each other, and as numerous

Revillout's assignment of certain coins to the

period before Philopator and certain coins to the period after is quite
M. Revillout may
invalid, he has clearly made two series out of one.

both he cannot have.

adopt whichever denomination suits him best
But it is worth while to point out that the one denomination will give
him an inconvenient fraction of the obol, the other an inconvenient
fraction of the copper drachma, and that whichever denomination he
adopts the weights of the other one will be a strong argument against
his theory of the normal weight of the denomination which he has
adopted being correct and that if his theory of the normal weights will
not suit the coins, it is not the coins which can be ignored. Secondly,
to extricate M. Revillout from the inevitable consequences of his remarkable blunder in omitting from his list of principales series the very
;

'

'

commonest

series of

Ptolemaic coins

is

not

my

affair.

Nevertheless, the

least havoc is wrought

system by supposing what is from the
weights the most probable solution that this series which he has
omitted represents a normal weight which is half of that series which
The omitted series then is
on M. Revillout's theory is f obol.
5
both
these fractions are highly
That
or
drachmae.
obol
6| copper
TF
is
of
course obvious, but some
and
in
fact
unintelligible,
unsatisfactory,
denomination has to be found for these coins between the denominations
which on M. Revillout's theory are f obol and \ obol, and I have been
unable to find any better explanation than that which I have suggested.
M. Revillout's \ obol may perhaps pass, although the coins do not
suit it by any means so much as from his statement of their actual weight
would be supposed, as the majority of those coins which can be
assigned to this denomination have lower weights than 258 grains. The
next two denominations present insuperable difficulties.- The coins
whose actual weight is from 207-223 grains are represented in Mr.
Poole's table by one series whose average weight is 214, but they all
in his

APPENDIX
come from Cyprus, and

111.

229

a very slender foundation for

arc therefore

founding a theory of the normal weight of Egyptian coins; and it is

far more probable that these coins are an exceptionally light issue of
the scries which M. Rcvillout makes his | obol. Between this doubtful

denomination of 4 copper drachmae weighing 207-223 and his next

denomination of \ obol weighing 129-139 grains, M. Revillout has
again committed the extraordinary mistake of omitting from his prina whole series of extremely common coins.
From
cipales series
and
four
from
five
from
Phoenicia
I's
coins
reign
Euergetes
Egypt have
an average weight of 168 grains, while there are two examples of iKo
and 157 171 is the average weight of three coins from Egypt belonging
to Philopator's reign, 170 the average of six from Cyprus belonging to
Epiphanes, and coins ranging from 145-170 are common in the reigns
'

'

of Philometor, Euergetes

and Soter II with various provenances.

of this series was apparently sufficient to
M. Revillout's list of principales series,'

II,

The extreme commonness

secure

its

rejection

'

from

amongst which are frequently found coins whose very existence may be
doubted, and which must in any case, since they are not found in the
magnificent collection of the British Museum, be extremely rare. But
as this series exists in great abundance, a place has somehow to be
found for

it

in

M.

Revillout's

system, though the stability of that

so questionable that a fresh shock

ingenious fabric has already

become

likely to prove fatal to

the most probable, theory

But the easiest, which is also

altogether.
to suppose a coin whose denomination is

is

it

is

half that coin equivalent to 3V obol or 6J copper drachmae of which

the insertion in M. Revillout's system was found to be necessary. This
series therefore will be -$ obol or 3$ copper drachmae, which is a more

inconvenient fraction than ever.

Next to his | obol, which, it may be noticed, is much commoner in

the period after Philopator than before and therefore must be also
2\ copper drachmae, M. Revillout places his copper didrachm of
104-111 grains.
then have been

As

this coin occurs

obol.

in

Next comes

Ptolemy

Ill's

his T\ obol,

it

must

may

pass,

reign

which

though whether it can be assigned only to the period before Philopator

rests on the admissibility or the reverse of coins weighing 67 grains
from Cyprus in the reign of Philometor, and a similar kind of difficulty
exists concerning the occurrence of his copper drachma before Philo-

APPENDIX

230

III.

obol.
M. Revillout has by this time
pator's reign, when it would be
so effectually led his readers to expect the omission of a more than
usually common series in his table, that it is not surprising to find no

mention

in

it

of a

number of very common

coins weighing 40, 45, 39, 40,

The
46, 40, 38, 32, 35, 33, 30 grains of various dates and provenances.
simplest explanation of them on his theory is to suppose that most, if
not all, are half of either his copper didrachm or his r\ obol, though
either course

is

practically fatal to supposing that his theory of their

correct, and either course involves him in a still

normal weights can be

fraction, both of the obol and of the copper drachma,

than those which have already been found to be necessary.
The denominations of the smaller coins are, on any theory, so

more inconvenient

not worth while to discuss them, beyond pointing out

the fact that the weight which, on M. Revillout's theory, represents the
copper drachma has not yet been found in coins which can certainly

doubtful that

it is

-J-

be ascribed to Egypt or Phoenicia, and that the period in which the

coin occurs is precisely that period in which M. Revillout says that it
does not.

To sum up

the leading objections to M. Revillout's classification, in

the
only chronological determination which he gives is
place
not only misleading but incorrect, and he has therefore found himself

the

first

number of fractions both of the obol and of copper

drachmae which are more or less inconvenient and improbable.
If
M. Revillout can show on numismatical grounds why the coins, which
Mr. Poole assigned both to the period before Philopator and to the period

involved in a

after, in reality

belong to either one period or the other,

am

ready to

accept his division. But if, as seems more probable, his chief, perhaps
his only, reason for assigning the coins to one period or the other was
that such a division was necessary for his theory, while giving ready

credence to this necessity, I cannot treat seriously a division that so

palpably assumes the whole point which it was required to prove.
Secondly, the weights of the actual coins are, to postpone other objec-

very much more irregular than M. Revillout allows. So far from

the actual weights of most coins corresponding with M. Revillout's supposed normal weights, there are considerable variations both above and
tions,

below.

If

exception,

M. Revillout should argue that these irregular coins are the

my answer is that by suppressing their weights and their

APPENDIX

111.

231

numbers compared with those which he says are the principales series,'
he begs the whole question at issue, and moreover, though the precise
condition of admission into M. Revillout's
principales series' must
remain a matter of conjecture, it at any rate had little to do with the
commonness of the scries.
'

'

Thirdly, in order to obtain any approach to a satisfactory classificawhich will give the ordinary fractions of the obol and the

tion

intelligible fractions of 20 copper drachmae, M. Revillout's theory rests

on several scries of coins which are not found in Mr. Poole's table.
I do not intend here to discuss the question whether any coin so rare

that

it

is

not represented

in

the table of copper coins in the British

Museum can be made to serve as one of M. Revillout's principales

When it is known where these coins are, what is their number,
series.'
'

what their condition, what their precise weight, what their probable date,
and what their probable provenance, it will be time to discuss them as
evidence for or against M. Revillout's and Mr. Poole's theories.
But
M. Revillout has by the astonishing omissions from his classification
completely given away his case, and forfeited any right to expect the
world to accept his generalizations about the weights of coins, whose
very existence he has not yet proved.
All the faults of M. Revillout's system however, amply sufficient

though they are to show its powerlcssness to overcome the difficulties

with which every system has to contend, pale into insignificance beside
his extraordinary mistake, in still ignoring in his classification of les
'

principales series' three series of coins, which were not only three of the
scries, but were absolutely fatal to the symmetry, and

very commonest

therefore to the correctness, of his system.

Further comment on M. Revillout's classification

is

needless, since

the internal evidence, which is by far the most important, has sufficiently
condemned it. But for the sake of completeness I will add what

appears to be a strong external argument against

it.

M. Revillout's theory supposes the identity of weight between

20 copper drachmae or one copper argenteus-outen,' and 20 silver
drachmae or one silver
argenteus-outen,' both on the Phoenician
'

'

standard.

posing

was

At

first

would seem to be no difficulty in supargenteus-outen on the Phoenician standard

sight there

that, as the silver

'

called an argenteus, although

'

it

only weighed

\ of the real utcn,

so

APPENDIX

232

IIJ.

'

might weigh only | of the real utcn. There

between the two cases, which becomes
of
the
the term argenteus,' i. e. uten, as the
soon
as
as
origin
apparent
is considered.
When Soter began to
silver
drachmae
of
20
equivalent
first
tetradrachms
has
been
his
as
coin silver,
were,
stated, on the Attic
normal
The
difference
between 20
standard and their
weight 270 grs.
silver drachmae and the argenteus-outen of about 1400 grs. is, as M. Revillout himself has occasion to point out, too trifling to be considered.
When the weight of the silver coins was reduced to the Phoenician
standard, it was natural that the demotic names continued to be used,
although the divergence in weight between the real uten and the coins
called argentei had become serious.
But this analogy does not hold good for the copper argentei. Here
there is no question of a coin which once approximately weighed an
the copper
is

'

argenteus-outen

however an

essential difference

'

uten and, though diminished in weight, still represented the same

denomination, but rather of the adoption of new terms to express coins
whose normal weights, as Mr. Poole remarks, had not diminished. Moreis this difference that while in silver there never were two
denominations issued simultaneously, one approximately weighing the
uten the other not, in copper there were, according to M. Revillout's
own theory, two series, one corresponding almost exactly to the real

over there

uten,

M.

and another weighing on the average 280 grains

less.

Yet on

Revillout's theory it is the latter coin, not the former coin approxi'
real uten, which in copper received the name argenteus
'

mating to the

'

be objected that the nouvel outen monetaire representing | of the old uten had been for a hundred years in existence ;
but this hardly alters the difficulty of supposing that one of the most
conservative nations in the world, a nation whose conservatism is shown
by nothing clearer than the fact of their preferring with regard to the
silver coinage an approximately equivalent term in their own language
to the official term used by their rulers, had in one hundred years so far
forgotten their ancient and historic weights, that they applied the names
of argenteus and kati not to classes of coins which were almost, perhaps
or uten.

It

may

'

actually, identical with them, but to another series of classes approximating in weight much less closely to the real and historic weights.

At any rate it will hardly be denied that a theory of the copper

drachma which will make the normal weights of the various denomina-

APPENDIX

IIT.

233

tions correspond closely, if not actually, to the literal meaning of the

demotic names will possess a great advantage; and it is in fact such
a theory of the copper drachma which Mr. Poole has adopted, though
on the evidence of the coins themselves.

.7.

The theory of

Mr. Poole

the

Egyptian standard of the copper coinage.

Catalogue hesitates between the Egyptian and the

Attic standard for the copper coins. On p. xxxvii he thinks it is probably Egyptian, on p. xci he adopts the Attic in preference on the
in his

ground that the subdivisions would rather suggest the Attic system, and
is unlikely that an Egyptian one would have been forced on the
it
inhabitants of Cyprus and the CyrenaYca.'
But he proceeds to say
The difference is too small to be of consequence in the comparison,
considering the irregularity with which the copper money was struck,'
and concludes by referring the reader to M. Revillout's researches in
In the light of the new information afforded
the demotic papyri.
by the Greek papyri discovered since 1883, the examination of M. Revillout's speculations based on the demotic papyri has shown that
Mr. Poole's estimate of their value was far too high
and M. Revillout's classification of weights, to which I have been unable to find any
reference in Mr. Poole's work except on p. xxxvii where he remarks
that
since M. Revillout's researches doubt has been cast on this
hypothesis (that the copper coinage was on the Egyptian standard),
has already been disposed of. The theory of the Egyptian standard has
'

'

'

'

therefore to be decided

by reference to the coins in accordance with the

Mr.
Poole's
table and by general considerations, but
given
without reference to M. Revillout's theories which cannot now affect it

facts

in

good or for evil.

As Mr. Poole concedes that the difference in the normal weights of
the denominations on the Attic and Egyptian standard is of practically
no consequence, so that, as far as the coins are concerned, they will suit
either theory, and as the latter standard is the one which I wish to
propose as the theoretical standard of normal weights, I will first give
a table of supposed normal weights, and then explain and, if I can,
justify the slight modifications which I have ventured to introduce into

either for

Mr. Poole's system.

It is

not necessary here to give the actual weights,

Hh

APPENDIX

234
which the reader

III.

will find stated at length in

Mr. Poole's table (Catal.

p. xcii).

Denomination

Denomination

Supposed
normal weight.

in copper.

in silver.

obol

20

16

dr.

uten

10

shekel

700
560
350
280

kati

175
140

4=1
2*

2=1

1400 grains
i i 20

87-5

70
43-75

35

40"

tV

21-87

*V

17-5

In so far as the denominations which

propose are taken direct from

Mr. Poole's table, it is not necessary for me to justify them in detail.

Mr. Poole considered them on the whole the most suitable, and that is
sufficient.
Difficulties and exceptions are of course numerous, as the
reader will see by referring to Mr. Poole's table, and difficulties and
exceptions there must be to every theory of a coinage so irregular.

The

question is which theory will explain the greatest number of

and it was because M. Revillout
coins with the greatest symmetry
could only obtain any approach towards symmetry by ignoring the
;

commonest coins, that his theory breaks down. Moreover, exceptions

are of two kinds, those above a supposed normal weight and those below
Imit, and of the two the first class is much the harder to explain.
poverishment of the Exchequer or frauds on the part of the Mint
supply an explanation for the frequent issue of coins even far below the
normal weights, and it is perhaps to causes which are the converse of
these, to a stop in the appreciation of silver, coinciding with the

appointment of a liberal director of the Mint, that issues of coins rising

It must also be taken
above the normal weights may be assigned.
into account that coins often gain weight

by oxidization

as well as

APPENDIX
lose

it.

III.

235

But the existence of coins above the supposed normal weight

It is therefore to some extent an
difficulty.

remains a permanent

advantage to place the normal weights as high as possible, since in

that case there are fewer coins above them and more below; and this
advantage, whatever it be worth, is gained by raising the supposed normal
weights from the Attic to the Egyptian standard, and substituting
a 20 drachma piece or uten of 1400 grains for Mr. Poole's 20 Attic

drachmae of 1340.
Moreover if it is supposed that 20 Attic drachmae
were equated to the uten, this hypothesis perhaps helps to explain the
variations in the weights of the coins which may have been issued

now

according to one system,

now according

to the other, in the different

countries.

Mr. Poole considers the coins whose weights are 1023, Jo82, and
1128 grains to be exceptionally light issues of the 20 drachma piece or
obol.
But though there are great irregularities in the weights of other
denominations there are none so great as these, and I prefer therefore to
suppose the existence of another denomination between the obol and

As

the copper coins have to be explained primarily as

fractions of the obol, not as fractions of 20 copper drachmae, which were
the

obol.

afterwards equated to the fractions of the obol the choice lies between
The second fraction is in some respects simpler, but its normal
\ and J.
weight, 1050 grains, does not suit the coins so well as the normal weight
of the other fraction
Moreover, between the coin whose denomination
is i obol or 10 drachmae and the coin whose denomination is ,V obol or
a copper didrachm, Mr. Poole sees two scries alternating with each other,
one \, \, i, the other f |, TV. For the sake of symmetry therefore it is
,

obol between the obol and the \ obol, and the

convenient to suppose a
\ or T
difficulty of the fraction $ is not any greater than that of
I have already pointed out that this second series,
} TVi which is found
,

i, },
TV, causes the
on
this point the
Ptolemaic
and
principal difficulty
copper coins,
of
the
For since,
seems
offer
a
solution.
standard
to
theory
Egyptian
as I have said, there are historical analogies for the case of a conquering

alternating with the easily explicable series of

in

race imposing its own silver coinage on the conquered, but retaining the
pre-existing system of copper coinage, there is not much difficulty, if the
theory of the Egyptian standard is correct, in supposing that these
fractions of the obol,
were issued because they were the
,
f, f, fv
,

Hh

APPENDIX

236

III.

copper uten to which the Egyptians had from time

immemorial been accustomed. But the advantage of this explanation,
the value of which I leave to the consideration of numismatists, is of
course shared by Mr. Poole's theory to practically the same degree,
since whether the normal standard was Egyptian or Attic or both, the
fractions of the

obol was at least as approximately identical in weight with the uten as

was the silver argenteus outen with the 20 Attic drachmae of which
'

'

it was the equivalent.

seems to have been that there were two series of fractions,
one for Greeks representing the normal fractions of the Attic obol, the
other for Egyptians representing fractions of the uten. The Greek
papyri naturally mention only chalci or the Greek fractions of the obol.
With regard to the demotic names of the copper coins, it is for demotic
scholars to decide whether the copper coins representing in weight the
uten and its subdivisions, shekels and kati, were in the third century
ever called utens, shekels and kati of copper, as they were called in the
second, or whether they were treated only as fractions of the silver kati.
In the latter case, it is probable that mentions of the Egyptian series of
fractions f |, T\ of the obol or ^,
y^ of the kati will be found in
demotic accounts of the third century corresponding to 2 shekels,
I shekel, and i kati, which are found in demotic
papyri of the second.
Between his didrachm of 135 grains and his drachma of 67-5
Mr. Poole places a supposed i| drachma weighing 101-25, which would
be 105 on the Egyptian standard. Both these normal weights are somewhat high, for the actual coins weigh 100, 92-5, 85 Phoenicia: 80, 75
Egypt: 85 Cyrenai'ca: 96 Phoen. 79 Cyprus: 80 Eg.: 91 Cyren:
I have therefore preferred to make the supposed normal
70, 87 Cyr.
of
this
series 87-5, i.e. half the coin weighing 175, and double the
weight
coin of which Mr. Poole considers the normal weight to be 45, while on
my theory its normal weight is 43-75. These modifications which I
have suggested have perhaps an advantage in making the denominations
descend more regularly, and, provided that they will suit the coins, the
bol are more convenient than /ff and -$.
fractions T\ and
The next coin is on Mr. Poole's Attic standard drachma or
obol,
and on mine /r obol or | copper drachma, the difference between our
supposed normal weights for it being just over \ grain. But the fixing
of all these small denominations below the drachma must remain largely

in Soter's reign

The

fact

APPENDIX

III.

237

a matter of conjecture, as even a slight irregularity of weight in the

coins is sufficient to make it uncertain to what series it should be

The important

thing is to fix the larger denominations,

the essential points the theory of the Egyptian standard
is perfectly consistent not only with Mr. Poole's facts, but with the
Whether the few slight
conclusions which he draws from them.
assigned.

and on

all

modifications in his system suggested by an amateur like myself have any

is a question which I leave to the consideration of numismatists,

value

who

alone can decide

But

it.

if

my

suggested improvements are found

unsatisfactory, their rejection will only bring out into still clearer relief
the authority attaching to the illustrious numismatist's own system and

to his condemnation of

There

M.

Revillout's.

one point which although already stated, will bear repetition,

that the Ptolemaic copper coins must, if not in the order of time yet in
the order of thought, be explained as fractions of the obol before they
are explained as copper drachmae.
My reason for insisting on this is
that Mr. Poole in his list of supposed denominations was clearly to some
is

extent influenced by M. Revillout's erroneous but generally accepted

theoiy that copper played a very unimportant part in Egypt before
Philopator and the period of copper drachmae. As Mr. Poole does
not in his Catalogue commit himself to any theory of the exchange
ratio, it was natural that he should look at the copper coins as multiples
of the Attic drachma, since he makes no statement about the weight of

a copper obol. But the coins were obols and fractions of obols long
before they were copper drachmae, and though it is necessary for
purposes of argument to begin with them as copper drachmae, it is
as far back as the reign of Philadelphus that the true meaning of the
weights is found in that equation of the obol with the uten of copper,
which, following equally from Mr. Poole's theory of the Attic standard
or mine of the Egyptian, appears to offer the least difficult, the most

symmetrical, and the most satisfactory classification of the coins.

This brings me to the last question to be considered, the origin of the

For the reign of Soter there are only a few demotic

papyri containing no mention of copper, and a certain number of copper
coins, which, so far as their provenances can be ascertained, are assigned
copper coinage.

How
to the Cyrenalca or Cyprus.
can be accepted as evidence for the Egyptian

by Mr. Poole with a few exceptions

far therefore these coins

APPENDIX

238

III.

coinage may well be doubted, for, if there is any appreciable difference

between Egyptian or Phoenician coins and those from the Cyrenafca or
Cyprus, it is that the Egyptian and Phoenician coins tend to be somewhat
heavier on the average, so that the Attic rather than the Egyptian
standard is the more suitable for Cyprus and the Cyrena'fca, in addition
to the argument brought by Mr. Poole of the improbability that an
Egyptian standard would be forced on the outlying Greek dependencies.

But a comparison of these copper coins assigned to Soter's reign with

the coins from the Cyrenai'ca and Cyprus of a later date shows that the
normal weights did not materially alter after Soter's reign, and it may
therefore be conjectured that copper in Egypt, so far as it was used in
Soter's reign, was on the same standard as it was afterwards.

circumstances of that reign were of course exceptional. The

conquests of Alexander had poured on the Hellenistic world the vast

The

which Soter had secured his full share.

Necessarily for a time silver was much cheapened, and as Soter could
afford at first to issue his tetradrachms on the Attic standard, the copper
coins which were actually or approximately on the Attic standard,
But the period of
stood during that period at the ratio of 120:1.
even
the
obol
to
silver
which
seems
have been coined
during
cheap

treasures

of the

East, of

the large copper coins representing the obol are not

Mr.
Poole to an earlier date than Philadelphus' reign
assigned by
and there are a few very small silver coins which may be assigned to
Soter first reduced his silver coins
that of Soter, soon passed away.
in silver, since

Rhodian standard, bringing the ratio between silver and copper

Phoenician standard for silver
i, and finally reached the
with a ratio of 150 I, maintained in reality by Philadelphus and
Euergetes, but only in name by their successors, who, as has been

to the

up

to 140

explained, adopted the alternative of debasing the silver down to the

market ratio in preference to that of reflecting the market ratio in

a pure coinage of diminished weight.

8.

Of M.

two

Conclusion.

and elaborate fabrics, based on his

interpretation of the demotic papyri and his classification of the coins, by
the glamour of which he has stood forth in the eyes of Europe since
Revillout's

brilliant

APPENDIX

III.

239

The

1882 as the chief authority on the subject, what remains?

has

in the light

of the

new information

afforded

first

by the Greek papyri

assumed an aspect so changed as to be hardly recognizable while of

the second a comparison with the recorded facts has left hardly one
stone standing.
In bidding farewell to M. Revillout's ingenious but
;

unsound speculations, the conclusion of the whole matter is this that

is concerned with actual, not with
imaginary
and
that if M. Revillout had been anxious not to risk his high
coins,
:

the science of numismatics

place in the long roll of the illustrious successors of Champollion, he

would have left questions of coinage to the numismatist, or, when he
had to discuss them, he would at any rate have listened, and listened
humbly, to what the numismatist has to say.

The
posed

at

evidence for the solution of the three problems which

the beginning of this essay has now been reviewed.

pro-

With

regard to the discount on copper and the standard metal in use at

various periods the papyri have provided the material for an approximate
generalization, which was both confirmed and explained by the history
of the silver and copper coinage.
Both papyri and coins were found
to converge towards the exchange ratio of 1 20 i
though they have
not yet finally reached the goal. Lastly the two divisions of the third
:

question, the ratio between silver and copper as metals and their ratio
as coins, were found to be practically one question, the answer to which
is

or

that from the time of Philadelphus the rate was either in reality
name approximately 150:1; and the answer to this problem is

whole system of Ptolemaic coinage, of which the outline as complete as the evidence will
allow has been given in these pages, into a consistent whole.
Much still remains to be done. The publication of detailed and
sufficient to convert, at least provisionally, the

accurate catalogues of the Ptolemaic copper coins in other European

collections on the lines of Mr. Poole's great work will probably go far
to solve many of the difficulties of classification which have yet to

be overcome. The demotic papyri may be expected to give some

new and much confirmatory evidence for the extensive use of copper
before Philopator and the problems connected with it.
But it is from
Greek papyri, especially of the reigns of Philopator and Epiphanes,
when taken in conjunction with the coins, that most will probably
some day be learnt, since it is there, if anywhere, that an instance of

APPENDIX

240

III.

the conversion of silver drachmae into copper drachmae

is

most

likely

to be found.
is even possible that the final solution of some of the problems
be within reach. Prof. Flinders Petrie has handed over to me
for publication the remainder of the vast Petrie collection, which

It

may

short in importance, the selections

Mahaffy. Many of these papyri, it has
already published by
now appeared from the occurrence in the collection of documents dated
as late as P. P. xlvi, might belong to the reigns of Philopator and

exceeds

in

bulk, though

it

falls

Prof.

Epiphanes, and the cursory examination which I have made of them

has shown me that many of them probably belong to the end rather
than the middle of the third century, and has resulted in my publishing
those printed in App. ii, of which the last is of the utmost importance
for the history of the

coinage.

To

the further examination of this

supplemented by the papyrus mummy cases of the same

I found at Gurob last spring but have not yet had time
which
period,
to open, I propose, with the aid of Mr. A. S. Hunt, to devote myself
in the course of the next few years, in the hope of making more complete the answer here given in outline to the questions of the coinage,
the solution of which must always, as Lumbroso has observed, form
collection,

the basis of a correct understanding of Ptolemaic political economy.

conclude by thanking Profs. Wilcken, Gardner, and Mahaffy who

have kindly revised the proofs of this Appendix, and who, I may
add, have expressed their agreement with the general theory which
I

have proposed.

INDEX.
PROPER NAMES AND PLACE NAMES.

I.

(The

figures in heavier type refer to columns.)

14, 20 ; 64. 2.
Fr. 6 (c) 1 2.
59. 3
AAccu>5pia 40. 14 ; 47. 15, 1 8 60.
7; 62. 8, 14, 15, 20, 26, 28; 53.
19, 27; 54. 9, 16, 18; 55. 15;
68. 6
60. 12, 21, 24; 6L 4, 16 ;
62. 5 ; 72. 22
91. 3 ; 97. 5 ; 99.
6; 107.45 Fr. 6(3)7.
38. ].
ATToAAcorto? 23. 2
Apa^ia 31. 9 65. 13, 18; 66. 2.
36. 19.

5; 63-

31.

AiyvTrrios 57.

Ai/3wj 31.
Aip-rr;

61. i, 6, 12.

12; 69. 2

71.

72.

2.

71. 10.

Aifmnj?

4; 40. 14;

31.

10; 69. I, 6.
IO; 72. II, 17.
31. 7
62. 16, 2O
63.

31.

31.

5.

31. 5.

60.

31.

13;

Nirpuorrjs 61.

62. 2.

II; 70.

81.

9.

(c) 6.

31. 9

64. 19

65. 3, II.

Bou/3curros 31. 10 ; 64. 2O ; 65. 4,

31. 7 ; 63. 6, n.

52. 9, 18, 19, 2O, 26, 27

93. I, 4.
;

rTTjAou<rioi>

5; 61. 13, 18.

31.
1.

2 bis

24.

&is, 2

37. 2.

31. 6.

Atorv(To8a>poy 37. 12.

2aiT7)s 31.

EAmy

89. 13.
69.

8, 14,

31. 7

17;

71.3.
24. 8

KwoiroAmjs

31. 14

31.

72. 18.

12; 72.

31. 8
31. II

-0>T7//)

u,

1. 1.

31.

I, 7.

67. 8,

18, 23.
37. II.

62. 3, 7, 15.
;
93. I, 4.
66. 3, 7, 15.
31. 8
2t/ia/)rro; 24. 9.
Svpia 54. 17.
2upo? 52. 26.

21.

HAioTroAiTTjs 64. 3, 9, 17.

31. 12; 70. II,

07?/3ais

4; 60.

Sarvpoy 36. II

31. II

54. 16, 17

1 .

FlroAe/icuos

AcAra

8.

71. 13, 21.

Ofrpuyxirrjs
Fr. 6

2O

2O.

IO; 66. 16, 20

<I>a/>/3at0m;s 31.

68. 15. 21.

68.

I,

67. 6.

5, 13.

<InAa5eA<p05 36. IO, 19; 37. 7.

I

INDEX.

242

SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS.

II.

a"

&

= ava 98. I,
= apovpa GO.

2,

bis,

foy.

23

19, 2O,

Fr.

59. 13.
a/=
ap or op
apr 0/377 39. II, 12; 41.
43. 17 fo.y, 18 foy; 46. 17
TO, ii
55.
53. 7, 16, 17
for, 19 fo.y, 20
61-72
5, 7, 8 bis, 9 fo.y ; 60. 25
;

13,

14

33. 17

n,

7,

13, 15,

16
41. 10, u, 18, 19; 43. 17,
18 bis; 44. 17; 45. 4, 5, 6, 10
46. 19, 20; 49. 21; 50. 12, 19;
52. 2, 6, n, 15, 25; 53. 7, 8 bis,
14 for, 15 bis, 16, 17 foy, 20, 21 bis,
22 for 54. 2 55. 5, 7, 8 bis, 9
57. 12 bis
59. 13, 14; 75. 4;
;

77. 8

76. 8
95. 5,

98.

6,

I, 3,

7,

87. 2,

8,

1 1

94.

25; 53.

64.

2.

31. 6

32. 19

= /zfTpTjrrj? 52. 15.

= obol 53. 14, 21.
C =
obol 95. 6 101. i.
- = I obol 53. 15 55. 8,

20. IO.

foy,

95.

-J-

5,6.
2 obols 39. 6

= =

43. 18;
101. I.

40. 13, 15

53.15,17,20,21; 55.5;

y=3 obols 39. 7 45-4 53. 14, 17.

/ = 4 obols 39. 6 45. 5 53. 14,
;

15, 21, 22.

/= = 5 obols 45. 6.
^i or ^ = OKTO-XOVS 31.
^
= TTTJXW 98.
^ = rakavrov 13.

32.

9.

i, 2, 3.

12 15. 14 41. 9 ;
46. 6 47. 8 ; 49. 8 ; 51. IO 54.
12 89. i
97. 4.
;

37.

6(<r)i2.

GENERAL INDEX.

60. 23
76. 1,3,6; 96. 3; Fr.
ayopcuos 77. 5; 97. 1 1.
aycoyt/xo? 44. II, 17.
abiryyvos 17. 3.
35. 3.

20

jner

IO 14. 12 34. 3, II
42. 2
45. 6; 55. 18
61-72 saep. 74. 6 75. 4

4.
;

52. 6,

14, 15 bis,

8,

52.14,18,21,23; Fr.

12; 96. 6; 97-4;

8a>8eKaxo7;s 53. 2O.

ero? 33. 14, 21 ; 36. 2, 7

ayopa&iv
41. 22

2,

foy.

III.

ayeiv

ii,

31. 6,

Spaxw

39. 3,5,6, 15; 40.

i/3x

38.1; 53. IO, II; 59.4;

for;

4 (l)3>5; Fr. 6(c)n.

= /Lurpjjrrjs

jue

JYJT/'.

apTafir] 57. 12

14

9,

61-72,

(t)

8.

30. 13.
20. 9.
47. 8
aiTios 41. 8
aKO\ov9fiv 55. 22.
aAi<TKe0-0ai 76. 6.
s

51. IO.

aAAayTj 76. 4.

aXXoOtv 49.
aAXos 10. 2
21.

43.

1
;

15; 22.
21

52.

18.

44.

9.
;

30.

10

19. 9
3,

fo.y,

1 1

5; 39. 19;

49. 6

57. 9

INDEX.
59. 10 ; 61-72 sacp.
103. 2, 8
08. 2, 3
oAAtos SO. 6.
a/ircuos 97. 7.
a/xTTfAos 36. 526. 17
afJLTTf\<av 25. 2
19; 36. 12, 15 37.
avaydv 12. 3 ; 44. 16
;

74. 5

76. 5
;
Fr. 6 (e) 10.

64. 8

33. II, 13,

10.

52. 8, IO, 17.

39. IO.

30. 2O.

1 1

airo-npafjia

i(T/^a

96. 4 ; 97. i ; 104.

Fr. 5 (a) i, (c) 5.
1

4,

51.

22

27. 4,

(i}

89.

56. 2 1.

13. 12

15. i,
2, 5, 9
14; 19. 14; 20. 3; 21. 5; 25.
16 26. 9 31. 2 33. 6 40. 6
41. 6; 43. 8
44. 16
45. 9, 15;
46. 6
49. 8, 20
50. 18 ;
47. 7
;

84. 8

55.

56.

75. 3 ;
Fr. 2 (,) 5 ; Fr. 6 (d) 5airpaKTos 49. 23.
apyos 46. I 2 ; 47. 4.
apyvpiov 24. 12; 37. 18; 39. 17;
46. 6
47. 8 ; 75. 6 ; 77. 2.
51.

23

J i

apioros 32. 15.

apovpa 32. 1 2 ; 36. 5 41. 6, 1 8 bis ;
42. 9
43. 4 ; 57. 7 ; 59. 6, 8 ;
See also
61-72 sacp.
87. 6.

I, 6.
;

2,

9,

Fr.

19; 40.

53. 5

11.

avTiXryav 28. 5 29. 12

airaiTfiv 19. 14; 35. 3.
-av 18. 9.
43. IO.

2.

Index of Symbols.
apTapr) 39. 2, 6 bis

17. 2.

14. 3; 26. I, 6,
9,

37. 6

31. 17,

50. 17

29.
34.
4, 8 ;

28. 6, 12
;
32. 6 ; 33. 4

1 1

37.

1 6.

84.5.

12; 37. 4 ; 40. I, 2O ; 41. 2,

43. 22; 44. 13; 45. 16, 19; 46.
8, 9; 47. 10;' 48. I, 5; 49. 12,
16, 23; 60. 3, 23; 51. 15, 20;
54. 16, 20, 22 ; 55. 21, 22 ; 81. 6
82. 3; 84. 3; 87. 13; 88. 14;

avriypa<t>ov 18.

18.

cnrooTf AAeiu 18. 6

10. 6, II, 14, 18

12. i; 13.3; 16.2;

30.

51. 17, 1 8
54. 19.
51. 2O ; 53. 25;

11.2,4,8,12;
20. 14 25. 6,
;

47. 5 725. 12, 15; 27. 3, 17; 28.

14; 30. 18, 20, 21 ; 31. I, 3; 32.
9, 17, 20.

54. 17.

ai'tt 41. 19.

avTiypcuptvs 3. 2

aijoKa6i(rrai'ai 17. 5-

41. 3 ;
87. 9.

i.

12, 13, 14; 26. 13;

17; 32. 17; 33. 21 35.
45. 8 46. 18
41. 25
50.
2, 4
18; 84. 7; 91. 9; 103. 9.
31. I, 19; 32. 2; 64. 1 8.

10; 34. 8; 53. 24; 56.

16.

Fr.

14.

7; 18. 15; 19. 5;

I,

17
(e)
av(v 10. II, 1 8.
50. 9
48. II
65. 4.
;

67. 8

19.

29.

75. 2, 3.
arcu/jo/Ki

26. 4, 8 ; 27. 15
59. 9 ; 76. 2
30. 15.

avaypafytiv 27. 18; 47. 11.

avafjLfTprjffts 27. 2.
ava<p(p(tv 11.

243

61-72 saep.
Symbols.

15; 27.

16; 29.2; 88.9,15; 86.4,17;

49. 10; 5O. 21 ; 51. 7, 17 52. 14;

78. 4 ; 85. 10
86. 12 ; Fr. 2 (d)
i, 2; Fr. 6 (d) 10.
14. 2; 86. II, 13.

46. 16

59. 14;

apxi<pv\aKi.Tris 37. 5-

14. 3*
apx">i7js 10. 10 ; 11. 14
14. 2,9; 34. 15, 18.
ap\d)i'fiv

See also Index of

13. 4, 7

INDEX.
26. 5.
47. 5>
28. I
43. II ;
areAqs 28. 18; 29. I
26 ; 83. 8.
48.
26. 15
av0r)fj.pov 20. 9
56. II.
55. I.
58. 5
(TJ a^pKT^vi]}
a<T(f)payi<rTOS 7. I

52.

60.

24.

I.

45. 17; 51. 20; 53. 24; 55. 12,

23 ; 56. 1 9 61-72 saep. ; 107. 6 ;
Fr. 5 (a) 6, (d) 3.
yo/xos 54. 9.

57.

49. 8

50. 8

51. 9

54.11,13; 68.9; 60. 17; 75.7;

77. 4; 85. 2; 87. 6, 10; 97. 9;
98. IO
Fr. 4 (b) 9.
ra Ja<r. 15.
;

4; 20.

II, 15; 74.

juarevy 33. 9 ; 36.
/3acr.

47. 8

ro /3a0\ 5. I ; 11. 3,9;

/3a<nAiKoy.
13. 12 ; 15. i, 14 ; 20. 3 ; 28. 14 ;
31. 16
34. 7 ; 40. 7 ; 41. 9 ; 45.
;

97. 2.

10

/3cunAt>s 12. 4; 13. 13; 36. 13; 37.

2; 49. 20; 51. 22; 86. 1O ; 93.

10; 61. 1,3.

/3curtAeuai> 1.

13; 29. 15, 17; 30. 7, 9, 19, 21 ;

15, 20; 32. 7, 8, 14; 36. 7;
39. 8, 13, 19; 40. 45 42. 5, II
43. 2,4, 7, 10, 24; 46. 10.
43. 12.
y?) 36. 8, 17
9. 8
14. 14
16. 5,
yi.ve(r0ai 3. i
8
17. II
21. 11,14; 24. 4; 25.
12 28. 6, 14 30. 21
34. 8, 18
36. I bis\ 37. 7, 8, 16
43. 13;
31.

6.

eAcuoupyia 49.

2; (3a<r. ypa/x3 ; 37. 4, 1 9.

1 6.

/3a0\ op/cos

27. 6, 14.
/3a<r. rpa7rea 32. 13
34. 17; 48. 10; 75. I.
pXapos 11. 6; 26. IO; 33. 18 45.
;

59. 3.

9. 6.

36. 4.
see /3a<riAi/co? ypaju-juareu?.
11. 7 ; 15. 13,
9. 6, 8
ypafytiv 7. 3
16; 21. 3, 7; 22. 3; 25. 14; 29.
10; 30. 9, 17; 33. 16; 36. i;
39. 17; 42. 15; 43. 9; 45. 14;
48. 15; 49. 3; 52. 28; 53. IO ;
54. 22
55. i 3
74. 3 ; 77. i, 2 ;
87. 6
91. 4
103. 4 ; 104. 2 ;
Fr. 2 (g] 5
Fr. 6 (/) 10.
,

12. 3

51. 22.

18; 46. 6; 49. 9

51.

n.

Aaio-tos 36. 2.

12. 4.

/SActTrreiy

2. 2
14. 3 ; 20. 2
21.
25. I, 4 ; 26. 7
28. IO
39.
13
8; 40.17; 41.17; 50. i ; 51. 12 ;
55. 19
87. 13 ; 88. 7.
103. I.

/3ouAetr0ai

24. 15; 27. 7, 15; 28. 18

30. 14, 18; 32. 10; 36. 6, 8, 17,
18; 37. 15; 42. 12; 45. 2.

yez/77/za

yeviKos 18. 13.

yevos 42. 12, 17

48. 6

54. 23.

yeajjuerpei^ 41. 5-

yecopyeiv 36. 15; 37. 13.

yecopyos

24.

15; 25.

Ji, 15; 27. 5, 9,

89. 14.
12. 17.
5e/carosr 9. 3 ; 16. 4; 18.
?)

12

8,

24. IO.

8eX co"^ at 66. 58rjAow 3O. 14.

8iaytyyco(TKeti; 14. I
97. 2.

49. 2O

8iaypa/^ia 39. 17; 49. 3;

55. 1,3; 73. i; 103.3.
biaypafaiv 13. 3 ; 32. 1 1
43. 7, 20
77. 4.
;

15; 26.
12, 14; 28. 9,
4,

bavciCeiv 78. I, 2, 3.
Sei 13. i; 18. 14, 17; 32. 9, 17;
36. 9; 37. 6; 41. IO, 25; 47. 14;
61-72. saep. ; 77. 3.

biabrj\ovv 16. 17-

93. 6

63. II

34. 22

INDEX.

245

dia0ris 53. 19; 60. 22, 25; 61-72

40.

biaXoyi&o-Oai 16. 2; 18. 5, 12

i, ii ; 34. 12 ; 64. 21.

SiaAoyur/ioy 16. I, 15, 16; 17.

18. 7, 13; 20.5, 8; 34. 9.

SiaoreAAeiy 36. 7(naTiOtrtii 48. 4.

Startjuar 26. IO ; 51.
8tartfiTj<riy 55. 24.

20.

36. 15

tyyvos 17. 13
19 ; 66. 14
27.

ey*aAf iv 8. 3
iTrety

13, 16; 56.

12, 18; 76.

59.
20; 57. II, 1 6
77.
84.
I,
9;
3;
3;

Fr. 2 (*)

Fr. 6

51.

41. 3

6.

55. ii.
19. 6, 7, 15

32.

24; 46-5; 51.23; 88

41. 13,

1 1
-

;
;

biopdovv
33. 6

23. 3
16.

57.

38. 3

13;

38. 2

86. 6,

7.

14; 29. 21
56. 15 Fr. i (e) 2.
18.

59.

I.

JouAoy 16.

56. 18.
7.

12. 15, 16, 17, 18; 16. 9;

bpa X
39. 14 ; 46. 20.
See also Index

of Symbols.
48.

9.

8.

2.

fio-npao-o-fiv 19.

41. 12,

64. 7 bis,

21. 7

49. 22;

23;

8,

14

8.

15

31.

64. II

93.

6.

12. 14
2,4,16;

13.

18.

17.5;
;

25. 9

31.

18

19. i;

16. 3

15

20.7;

26. 14
30. 6,
32. 9; 33. II,
34. 16, 19; 36. 4, 16; 37.
40-4; 41. 8; 42. 12, 16, 17;
21.

12,

17 ;
17;
44.
47. 8,
6O. 9,

5,8, 17; 45. 20; 46. 16

48. 4, 6 bis, 14;
12, 17
63. 5, 18;
ii, 18, 23; 51. 10
54. II, 23
57. 9; 58. I; 69. JO;
60. 3
75. 4
84. 7
86. 2
Fr.
;

34. 5 ; 37. 9.
25. 15 ; 29. 9
33. 18
42.
15; 45. 12, 18; 46. 7; 55. 25;
56. I 3
bt\ofJirivia

53.

16

8.

SioucTjrrjs

86.

44. 15.
98. 8.
50. 7, 8

(Kao-Tos 7.

SUHKTJO-IS 18. 8

59. 19.
eraya>yeus 16. 5ao-bibovai 83. 7i(ri<t)v 57. 7
69.

24. 9 bis, 17 ; 25. 5 ;

3O. 14, 16
33. 3
37. 13
42. 8
44. 1 1 ; 49. 11;

15.

22. 7 ; 34. 2,
Fr. 6 (a) 8.
1 1 ; 34.
17 ; 46. 16

21. II, 13.

(e) 8, 9.

Sucauos 27. 17; 33. 15; 86. II.

33. 16; 84. 8.

7.
;

cy\ap.pavfiv 29. 13 ; 73. 5.

37. 1 2.
eyAoyiorrjs 18. 9

5ieyyva(r0ai 14. 15; 15. 2.

bi(p\f(rOai 18. IO.

3.

47. 9.

15;

44.

20.

19. 3

17. I, 8,

ey8ez

1 1

60. 15.

cy-ypa<f)(tv 17. 13*

(yyvrjTTjs 11. 15 ;

33. 5; 36. 10, 18; 37. 11, 15, 18;

39. 8; 40.3,4; 41. J6; 43-3,6,
51. 23 ; 54. 8
65.
25 ; 48. 1 2

90.

Sec also

45. 4.

43.

58. 8

17;

55. 24.

5i5orai 14. 16; 18. 2 ; 20. 7, 9 ;

5; 30. 18; 31. 2O ; 32. 8,

26. 2

1 1

Index of Symbols.

saep.

(a) 6.

fnOffJia

26. 13

(KK(L<rdai 57.

33. IO

59. 4.
;
103. 3.

67. 5

59. 5

eKicATjTos 21. IO, 15.

fKTTiTTTflV 29. 19.

24. 5, 12;
bis; 36. 9, 18

29. IO, 17 ;
37. 7, 16.
;

33. 21

INDEX.

246

9. 2; 48. 15; 53. n.

50. 15, 19; 54. 14;
eAaurj 43. 15
60. 7
67. 2, 3 ; 68. 3 ; 59. I, 2
69. 6
72. 16.
45. 2, 3 ; 47.
41. 1 2
eAaiou 40. 9
2, 14; 48. 4; 49. 18, 21 ; 51. 5,
12, 21, 24; 52. I, 10, 13, 22, 24,
26; 53. 2, 17, 20, 27; 54. 8, 9,
57. 16, 18,
10, 16 ; 55. 7, 15, 19
19; 58. 2; 59.19,20, 21; 60.
;

2O

eAcuoupyiop, 44.
;

IO

40. 19.

39. 19
54. 6.
43. 2
50. 8.
;
30. 7
ayyeAAetr 24. 17
Fr. 2 (*/) 7.
;

57. 22

60.

42. 4

I.

24. 8.

51. 15.

45. 13
58. 6

\y\tiv 33.

4. 3

52.

17. 6.

34. 6, 16, 19
17.

eTriyejnjjua

15; 57. 10, 16;

59.

11, 18.

9.

8.

e7ri/3aAAeu' 19. I

17.

eAAei7reu> 15.

42.

6;

I,

17. I.

4O. IO, 12; 55.

16. 5, 9, 1 6, 18

26. 5, 8

29. 14

19. 4

56. 17.

II, 12

4,

2,

34. 14, 15; 41. II ; 65. 10,14;

67. 17, 20; 59. 19, 23.
e7rty oa</>eu> 19. 4.
(

e/XTToAay 29. 14.

93. 11
cfj.iropi.ov 9. 2
;

52. 25;

f-mbeiKweiv 25. 2
;

107.

77. 7;

12; 51.

I.

91.

5,

8;

26.

16

6,

49.

i, 7.
eii>

2.

34. 14.

7. 6.

48. 14.
3O. JO; 43. 2; 50.
15; 51. 15; 54. 22.
54. 10.
56. 9.
eviavros 34. 2O ; 37. 16, 18 ; 51. 17.
(UTTpoa-Qev 32. 7

e7Tt0aAao-(no? 93. 5-

evavTiov 25. 6;

ewrrarai 16.

8.

fWo/JLiov Fr.

4 (;)

Fr. 6

(<:)

Fr. 5

48. 13.
28. 6, 7
Fr. 2
30. 7 46. 2.
;

(tf)

5.

4.

6. I

8. 4.

19. 12.

37. 7.
28. 17

3,

29.

I.

fmTTa.papi6iJ.tiv 76. 2.

14, (d\ 7.

()

18. 17

2.
;

19. 2, 9, 10, 11

TTKTTHJ.atVlV 44.
CTTiVKOTTtlV 19. 8

I
J

33. 2.

44. 15.

20. IO.
4.

41. 13

co

49. 16
60. 12.
14, 17 bis; 45. 3,

4
55. 20

50. 23
(Xaiovpyos 44. 8,
46. 10, 13; 47.
5, 8, 10
49. I
55. 1 1
56. 19.
f \aa-o-ov 28. 5
46. 15
50. 12
2. 12, 16; 57. 8; 59. 8.

31. 3

v 46. 13.

eAcuou/jyeiv 50.

102.

14. IO

29. 12;
52. 7
55. 25 ;
76. 5 ; Fr. 2 (*) 7.

24

75. 5

4, 16.

e/x7ropos

6.

51.

v 10. 3 ; 25.
tj> 56. 12.

2.

30. 9
56. 7

6.

92-3.
2; 56.

eayeii; 57. 14.

101. I.
53. 12.

48. 9.

I.

TTLTI.IJ.OV

6,

43. 8

85.

I,

8.

(TTLTpfTTflV

44.

9.

eTTiwj; 17. 2.

epyaeo-0cu 46. 14

49. 5.

Fr.

(b)

INDEX.
54.

49. 6.
44.
1 1

247

45. 20;

.5;

I,

47. 4 ; 50. 24
103. 2.
37. 9.
36. 2

51.

Ova-ta 36. 19.

16.

27. H.
trcpos 7. i ; 16. 10, ii
Fr. 6 (//) 7.
<ros 24. 2 ; 67. .5

23

See

14

l6

49.

34. 3

56. 15-

48. 6, 14.
10. I, 16

popav 25.
4.

3
37. 16
54. 7

27.

31.

3
43. 12
88. 6

la-ravai.

16.

KTTOS 90.

18. i, 10;
ray corns 10. 13 16. 3
20. I
25. 1 1 6 ; 26. 9
27. 1
29.
34.
13,16,20;
28.3, 15;
13;
41. 9; 42. 7, 14; 46. 8; 49. 14,

xaOapos 39.

20; 60.

19,

1.5;

61.

19;

6,

13

94.

61. I, 2.

67. 17, 21
18. 12.
;

62.4;
;

55. 22.

2, 5.

3, 4, 5, 8.
41. 14.
3. 2 ; 13. I

29. 5

18

31.

74. 2

1,2; 6.3;
13; 29. 15;

9.

93. 10.

r)fji(po\cybov 4. I.

46.
51.

Fr.
74.

76. 5.

40. 8

1,5; 15. 16;

32. 7;

33. IO,
35. 4; 43-5; 46.

37. 3.

4.

II; 34. 3,4;

13, 15; 47. 15; 48. 10, 15, 16;
49. 12 60. 10, 14, 19
53. 6, 7
56. I, 16; 75.3,4; 81. 4; 86.
I,

Kad<t)s 21. 3.

66. 8.

21. 4, 6, 8

34. 2

44. 4
46. 8 ; 47. IO ; 48. I
7, 13
19 52. 27 ; 54. 20 56. 14
6 (a) 12.
Ka6oTi 28. 7
45. 13; 65. 16
3 ; Fr. 4 (;;/) 2.
:

19.

69. 19, 24.

KaAeir 8. 3
21. 12, 1 6
35. 3.
48. 3, 7.
ca7n;A.oy 47. 1 1
KapTTt/409 55. 2O.
Kapiros 29. 13, 18 ; 34. IO; 43. 5.
48. IO 62. 15, 1 8, 23

55. 19, 2O; 66. I, 7, 8.

65. 17, 23; 66.4,9, *3-

>v

KaOaipfiv 39. 9.
KaOaiTfp 29. 9 ; 62. 27.

64. 21 ; 55. 25
67.
23 ; 60. I ; 84. I, 2, 6, 9 85. 8 ;
107. 9; Fr. 2 (/) i.
13. 13; 34. 5; 37. 14;
)S IO. 14;
53. 4, 23

44.

43. 16;

40. I/;

49.

39. 12

1 2
39. 19 ;
;
85. 3
53. 2/
96. I.
f^ofifvos 16. 155 18- II j
34. 20; 56. 17.
*x- Trl v a> vrl v or

36.

107. 4.

46. 14.

nttorripiov
10-09

18.

32. IO; 52. 13,

LTTTTap\OS 37. 2.

12. 17.

I.
;

icpos 36. 8.

iKaros 32.

7.

/>eiKOorros

19.

Fr. 2 (h) 2.
37. 17; 106. 3

tcpov 33. 14, 20 ; 37. 1.5 ; 50. 2O, 24;

61. 9, 12, 21, 25 ; 66. 8.

also Index of Symbols.

fvboKav 29. 8.
cvpia-Kfiv 41. 5; 48. 16;
66.

3.

46.

45. II, 15.

Karaypa</>Tj 34. 4.
Kara8ifcae<r0ai 6. 2.

KaTa\afj.f3avav 46. 5KaraTrpoiepcu 27. 1 1 .

Kara<rKcvr; 45.

2O

jcaraoTreipeiy 41.

69. 9.

46.

1 1

6; 42. 16; 57. 8;

INDEX.

248
44. 9.
50. 14.
16.

'

14

11, 13, 14,

19.

IO;

27-7,
;

20

io,

52.

72 saep.
46. 2

53. 25

55.

15; Fr. 6 (a) 14.

26. 15-

47.
21

57.

60.

5,17-

4O. 10

49. 18; 53. 15, 22;

44.
42. 4; 43. 1 8
JOCKOS 39. 5, 12
6; 46. 17, 20; 49. 17; 53. JO,
;

55.5.

KOIVOW 10. io

15; 14. 10, 16;

11.

18. 2.

io

13.

21

15. 2

22.

2.

4O. io, 12
58. 2
57. 18
;

53.

55.

39. 3, 12, 15, 20; 41. II, 15,

21,26; 42.4; 43.14,17,21,

18,
;

Aa/u/3amz; 6. 2; IO. 12; 11. I; 12.

2
16. 13
22. 2, 4
32. 14; 34.
7; 36. 13; 37. 17; 39. 13; 40.
;

4; 41. io

45.5; 47.14; 51. 18;

52. 16, 19
53. 18, 19
54. 7, TO ;
57. 17, 21, 22
58. 7 ; 59. 20, 24,
25; 60. 14; 75. 6; 76. 4; 83.
io
97. 6; Fr. 4 (b) 5; Fr. 6
*
Aaos 42. II, 16.
Aeia Fr. I (d) I ; Fr. 3 (a) 3 ; Fr.
6 (C ) 13.
31. 24.
Arjyos 26. 12

44. 6

46. 17, 19
55. 5

53. 6, 8, TO, 17

6 57. 19 ; 59. 22 ;
95. 9 102. 6 103. 6.
39. 14 52. 2O.
Aoyeveiy 4. 1
12. 13 ; 56. 15.
Aoyev/xa 3. 5
Aoyeimjptoy 11. 13.
11. 16; 12.
Aoyeurrj? 9. 2; 10. 1
16. 1 1 ; 52. 27.
12, 14 ; 13. 2
87. 3, 5

59.
6, 9 ;
60. 5.
28. 13 ; 29. 15; 31. 19, 21
43. 16 ;
32. 16 ; 41. 19 ; 42. 13
48. 8; 52. 13, 27, 29: 53. 13.
K07T6US 45. 539. 9.
40. 13, 15.
46. 4 90. 9.

23

Ai/3uapx?7S 37. 5\LVOS 39. 7 ; 55.

15. 7-

39. 6

22

55. 8.

i>

40. 2, 3, 5.
26. 14
29. 6
31. 18
40. 6,
19; 43. 12; 44. 3; 48. 4,6, 17;
54. 12; 75. 1
85. 1 1
Fr. 6 (//)

KCO/XTJ

36. 13.

n\rjpov\os 36. 12.

30. 6.
Kvpovv 48. 17.

53. 21.

40. io, 12, 15, 16; 41. 12;

51. 18,
14; 48. 4; 49. 1 8
55. 7
53. 8, 14, 20, 21, 27
21
58. 2; 59. 21, 24;
1 8,

KIKI

saep.
33. 19 ; 36. 14.

5,8-

55. 4.
32. 3
/cepa/xos 32. 2, 3, 8, 14, 16

KVTjKivos

61-72

Ko>/zapxT?9

Tfpyov 21. 2

xXripos 24. 7

I, 4; 59.
25; 60. 4,

37. 14, 17.

3. 2 ; 46. io.

49.
56.

61-

29. 2

68.

ll, 13, 14, 16, 18,

7,

28. 15; 31. 15; 48. I

54. 13.
21
TfpyaCf 0-60.1 45. 3 ; 46. 14
17; 51. 12, 16, 24; 55. I;
20; 57. 19, 22; 59. 22, 25;

10

2T

I.5>

49. 17

30. 19 ; 33. 7 ;
Aoyo? 7. 3 ; 15. 16
50. 13; 52. 3, 12, 16.
AOITTOJ 10. 16; 18. 17; 19. 4; 21.
13; 36. 9, 14; 42. 11 ; 43. 14;
55. 4; 83. 4; 88. II
103. n;
105. 8.
Aauos 38. 1.
;

57. 6. 10,

5O. 14.

INDEX.
7. 1.

paprvs

26.
33.

= nome

re/bios

60. 9.

bis

44.

I.

iv 45. 2, 9 ; 66. 1 o, 14
107. 3.
19. 2 ; 107. 7.
r*t~> 8. 2 ; 17. 3
Fr.
59. 4
83. I
Meffopi) 67. 5
;

12; 48. 3, 7.
fM(Tairop(V((rdai 44. IO.
16. 10; 17. 12,

/LKTc^loAos 47.

14,

32. 13; 33. 12 ; 36.

41. 20, 25 43. 21 ;
46. IO; 62. 21 ; 53. 5,

37. 13

10

8,

18, 20; 57. 9, 10, 13 ; 68. I ; 69.

10, 11, 15; 60. 3; 61. 9,24; 62.
11, 19; 63. 2, 9, 16, 22; 64.5,
13, 22; 65. 7, 15, 21 ; 66. 5, 11,

18; 67. 2, II, 17;

69. 10, 18; 70. 6,
18; 72. 3; 107. 2;
distribution?
vofjLos
vcxr<j)i(u> 27. io.

16

49. 15.
44. II.

249

68. 3, IO, 19;

13, 21

Fr.

71. 9,

I.

(<r)

41. 16

43. 2.

14. II, 13.

10 34. 16.
34. 12, 13, 15, 19.
48. 7
25. H
67. 2O

14.

CVIKOS 52. 13, 26.

59.

23-

40. II, 13, 15, 16;

See also
60. 12; 52. 2.

45-4;
Index

TPTJTTJS

of Symbols.

58. 7; 60 15; 76. 4.

also Index of Symbols.
oQoviov 98. 9
99. 5.
29. 6.
3. 3
5. 6
10. J I
;

25. 8, 12
40. 19.
Mt\fip 86. 3 ; Fr. 6 (c) io.
52. 9.

1 1

1.

11

Fr.

86.3;
Fr. 6

fjiva

85. 6.
6.
Fr. 2
riKr 23. 16 84. 8.

41. I, 7, 1 6
42. 5,
ronapxns 37. 3
6, 19; 43. 3; Fr. 4(0)5.
15. 12; 20. 6
law 4. 8
ro/xos
;

29.

74.

91.

81.
;

Fr.

96.

2,

(c )

83. 7
87.
4 97. I ;
;

Fr. 6

9-

4; 25. 7 26. I, II.

26. 12, l6; 32.4,19;
;

34. 7
37. 1 8.
39. 3, 5 bis, 9, Ii
46. 16;
49. 5, J 3
60. 24 ; 51. 2.
56. II
86. IO.
;

37.

oA/Ltos

15; 2Q. 15; 26. 7;

30. 6, 9 62. 28
67. I
80. 2; 81. I, 3
84. 8;
;

89. 6

(uroy 24.

14,

ou-o-oteir 25.

28. 6,

Fr. 3 (b) 2

()

6O.

8.

29. io
59. I
Fr. 2 (</) 3.

27.

n,

11. 8,

17. 2,

48. 16; Fr. 4 (//) 8.

12. 14
45. ii
55. 13. 16.
64. 12.
16. I
20. 3 ; 25. 3.
14. 13

21. 3,

16. 2

20; 30. II, 17; 31. 14,

37. 4;
22; 32. 6; 34. ii
41. 2, 4, 7, 14, 27
42.
40. 20
6 43. 22 44. 12; 45. 7, 16, 19
46. 9; 47. 2, io
48. 1,5; 49.
51. 14,20;
ii, 14, 22; 60.3,22
62. 27
55.
53. 13, 26
64. 2O
21, 22; 67. 20; 58. 5; 59. 23;

18,

(c) 9, io, ii.

Ho\vpt>[ 76.

13.

4, II, 18,

67.4; 69.3;
2(/) 5; Fr. 4 (c) 3

17; 18. Ii, 13, 17; 19. II, 13;

22. 6
21. 3
3, 7, 14

56. 17;

12.

20. 2 dis,
25. 6, 1 1

15, 16, 18; 16. 4,8; 18. 7,

34.5; 38. I ; 47. 18; 48. 5,

I4;54.22;

See

1 8.

92. 4.

INDEX.

250

11. 14; 29. 6 ; 47. II ;

2
93.
8; 104.3; Fr.6(//) 9
91.5;
37. 8.
OTTO)? 36. I
opcu> 41. 13 ; 43. 2.
47. 4, 7.
opyavov 26. I, 6 46. 12

ovopa

7.

105. 2.
v 48. 8.
11. 6

8.

16. 16,

94.

7repia>fia

opKO? 27. 6, 14; 42. 17.

37. 10
49.
OO-THTOVV 36. 1 6
5. I
85. 9.
20. 8
;

47.

iv

3O. 4, 13.
102. 4.
7rapa8eiyp;a 89. 3
29. 2, 7
33. II,
TrapaSeto-os 24. II
13, 19; 36. 6, 13, 15; 37. 10.
j

7rapa8exeo-0ai 14. 15
7rapa5i8oz;ai 12. 2

87. 9.

49. 23

54. 15.
20. 2
25. 5
l

48.

TTapaKop,ibrj

30. 8

42.

9.

76.

44. 5
18. 2

18. IO

Trapevpecris 14. 7
;

54. 7

54.

3O. IO
47. 3
74. 7.

29. 6

50. 23, 24.

5O.

36.

2,

21

37.

14

1 1

5,

54.

55.

6.

I ; 11. I
14. 13
15.
19. II
20. 9, 16;
17
22.5; 29. II, 19 33.6; 34. 18;
39. 18; 43. 9; 57. 14; 58. 3;
59. 17; 6O. 6, 22; 61-72 saep.\
85. I
74. I ; 84. 6
94. 8 1O3.
5 ; 105. 4 Fr. 6 (c) 4.
8. 3, 6 ; 11. 7 ; 15.
-npiaadai 6. I

irpao-o-eiy

II

8.

18.

40.
59.

47. 2,

13; 55. 13.

15. 10
20. IO
17. 12

1 1

51.

11.

TTOVOS 19. I

7rpay/zarfUc(T0ai 7. 2, 4 ; 8. 2 ; 10. 3,
17; 12. 2,5; 20. 15, 16 ; 21. 7;

2.

7rpais 5. 3 ;
28. II
34. 20.
45.
ij-pao-ts
9 ; 52.

30. 15.
55. 2O.
49. 7
50.

Tiapiaravai 33. 4.
7.

45. 14.

irarpis 7.

51. 3, 8.

TTapexew 26. 7 ; 32. 2, 9, 14, 16

16 ; 43. 6
51. 2, 8
57. 9

10; 76.

I.
;

26. 10

14

2.

(g)

40. 18; 47. 12; 75.

30. 5
II

46.

104. 4.
Tropeia 50. II.

76. 3.

7rapao-0payto-/xos 26. 7

13; 13. II; 15. 13; 16.

15; 17. I, 17; 25. 14; 30. 12,
15; 33. 10 34. 3, 20 42. 13;
43. 21
48. 13, I 7 ; 56.
47. 2, 9

iroAts 26.

6,

?rapacr(ppayieo-0ai
57. 23 ; 60. 2

9, 13 ; Fr. i
Trotos 37. 15.

52. 26.

33. 3
34. II
43. 23; 49.2; 61. 13; 52. 4;
53. 4, 6
54. 23
58. 5
55. 2
60. II
74. I, 4.
55. 23.
39. 9
43. 2, 12, 19.

8,12;

55. 12.

TrapaKOfJ.ifiv 48. 4 ;
iiapaXa}Jifiaveiv 9. I

TTapapi6iJ.fi.v

50.

54.

17. 3.
TrAoioz; 81. 2.

7.

55. 21.

Trapa/coAoufletz;

22.

Troiav 12.

89.

28. 5
29. 16 ; 49.
52. 2, 1 1
53. 1 2 ;
57. 6; 58. 8, 9; 59. 6; 6O. 16.
57. 13
59. 15.
27. I; 33. 12; 36. 5, 17 ;
37. 15; 41.5; 43. 7; 48.6.

18. 9

7H7rre6i> 3. 6.

1 6.

Trapayivea-dai. 25. 7

I,

4. 2, 3

ar

18; 17. 14; 34. 14.

29. 19.

1 1.

7.

Tinrpaa-Keiv 2.
8.

51.

19. 8.

t.

opKi*tv 56.

49. 9

12; 104.
11.

4.

104. 4.

il; 25. 3;

29. 3;

33. 7,9, 16

INDEX.
34.

I,

2; 43. 8; 45. 17; 49. 9;

60.18,19; 51.10; 64.15;

13; 53. 7,
17 ; 58. 2

55.

60. 7 ; 80. 3.
56. 13.
Tjyxxu'TjAio-Kf iy 63. 25*
npofiarov Fr. 5 () 7.
;

77/iir

TTpoypanfjia. 9.

irpouvai 40. 5
Tr/joiorarai 41.
TTpoKT)pv(T(T(ii>

86. 3.

16; 43. 3

53.

54.

78. 3.
65.
;

27. 8, 15.
55. 15-

TTpocrfLO-npao-o-civ

52. i, 25

54.

52. IO

93. 7-

Trpo(TK<pa\aiov 102. 6.
16. 17.

39. IO.
I ; IO. 9 ;
16.
18. 14; 21. 16; 29. 7.
irpo<ro/)fueii> 99. 4.

12,

17;

103. 2.
20. 14: 26. 18; 28. IO,
12; 47. 16; 48. 3.
21. 1 ; 27. 4, 6, 8
yypcu^Tj 20. 13
29. 8; 42. 13, 18; 47. 17; 48.

41. 23.

49. IO.
npovTrapxdv 26. I
26.
34.
21.
TT/XOTOS
13;
14. 4
20. 12; 33. 4 ;
ircoAeip 2. 2
34. 10; 39. 20; 40. 9, 17; 45.
3; 47. 15; 6O. 16; 61. 25; 55.
1
6O. 13 ;
67. 3
58. 6 ; 59. 2
73. 2J 87. 14; 88. 8; 91. 2.

17; Fr.

20. 16;

68. 8

6O.

I
52. 1 6, 19, 24, 26,
53. 1,2
99.
89. 12
91. 4
2 ; Fr. i (c) 6 Fr. 2 (d) 4.
12. 16 ; 13. 2.
0-u/A/3oAo</>uAa IO. 2

(rvufioXov 21.

29

(TtyxTTapeu-ai

46. 14.
27.

8.

32.

1,

4; 36. y

42.3.
<rvvavayKa(w 20.

89. 4.
26. 5.

<njfjiaiviv

40. 10, 15; 49. 18

o-vnr/ar 24. 14;

6.

14; 49. 7;

43.

56. IO.

(rvfJiiTpo<r(ivaL
I

(/)2.

v 43. 5-

47.

41.
24. 9
32. 6
48.
42.
43.
4;
14;
5, 14.
13;
TTporpvyav 26. II, 17.

orpaTTjyos 37. 2.

1,4, 12.

TTpOOTlfJLOV 21. 6.
-npoTfpov 17. 15 ;

3.

7rpooTa<r<reii>

npo<rKaTa\<0pi(iv 16. 9.

T>pocro<pei\ii> 19.

dpav 41. 15; 43. 7,2O; 68.4;

60. 9.
39. 7 ; 43. 15
55. 6
57.
19 ; 69. 22.
a-novbr] 36. 19.
43. 4.
o-TTopos 41. 3, 17 ; 42. 1 6
60. 15; 76. 4.
ararrjp 58. 7
50. 14.
32. 3.
49. 22
60. IO 61. 25 52.
53. 3
54. 8, jo
76. 7.
10, 25
54. 13 ; 97. 3.
<TTpaTV<rdat. 24. 6.
;

npoo-ayyf \\fiv 56. 9.

1 1

saep.
1

67.8, 13; 59.9, 15.

uyMNrairortreir 5O.
II.

69. 2O

37. 6.

27; 65. 7,15; 67.

14,

60. 5.
39. 2, JI, 15, 2O ; 41. IO,
15, 17, 21, 26; 42. 3; 43.13,17,
19, 20, 23; 44. 6; 46. 16, 18 ;
49. 16; 63. 5, 7, IO, 16 ; 66.4;
67. 6, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18
58.
1,3.4; 89- 7. II, 12, 16, 17, 19,
21 ; 60. 3, 7, 9, 19, 24; 61-72

24; 66. 14; 57. 7; 58-3; 59.

8

25 1

3.
<rvvaTTO<rrf\\(i.v 27. 13;
;

20.

51.

k2

30. 12; 42.

INDEX.

252

8. I

29. 12, 19; 42. 14; 43. 22;

21. 9.

(rvvtTii(r<f)pa.yieiv 42. 19; 84. 2.

48. 13.
avvTagis 43. 12 47. I
32. i o
21. 5
(n>vTa<T<reiv 19. 1 1
76.
41. I
47. 5, 13, 15; 55. 10
;

58, TO
106. 2.
(TUimjKew 50. 17.

avireAay 30.
41.

2O

33.

37. 7

1 1

25. 1O ; 26. 8 ;
a(ppayiCfiv 18. 3, 4
27. 4, 12; 28. 7; 29. 9 ; 42. 15,
;

18; 9O.

rowans
20

37. 3

2, 4 ; 76. 2, 3,
Tpa.TTflT1]S 75. 5-

rptfyeiv Fr.

i, 2.

5 ()

105. 9.

Tpia.K.ovTa\oiviKOs 39. 2, 4.

i.

22.

100. 550. 9 ; 82.

42. 5, 6,

roirapxia 87. 4TOJTOS 25. 9 ; 29. 5.

rocrouros 17. 7-

26. 9
104. 6.
0-$pay 107x0. 104. 3.

(rffrpayis

41. 7, 17

87. 2.

ovvTi[j.av 42. 9.

24.

6.

56.
34. 17 ; 48. 1 1
rpcnrefa 32. 12
73.
I,
16;
2, 4; 74. I, 3; 75. 1,

<rvvTifJLr]<ns

103.

94. 3, 6.
I
34. 21.
;

Fr. 6 (#) 10,

(//)

6.

19. 14.

(T^OIVIOV

rptros 46.

85. 6.

6.

37. 10
49. 17.
rpoTros 36. 16
rpvyav 24. 14, 15 32. 7.
rv/3 1 Fr. 4 (^) 4.
;

ToXavrov 95. II
105. I.
See also
Index of Symbols.
rao-crav 21. 16
41. 22.
rcrayfj-fvos
18. 18; 19. 6, 7, 15; 32. ii
37.
12; 41. 13, 24; 46.5; 61.9,23;
89. 9.
;

94. 10

102. 5.

T\CiV 96.

I.

1.

24.

5. 2

25. 9

50. 23

54.

58. 8;
13; 55. 19; 57. 6, II
59. 6, 13; 60. 16; 61-72 saep.
80. 4; 86. II
106. 9.
;

52. 1 8, 21, 23
57.
15; 58.45 59. 7, 13, 17
60. 9, 22
85. 8
61-72 saep.
95. no; 98. 6; 1O4. 5; 107. I.

reAos 15. 10, 15

6, 12,

28. 9

29.

22. 2.

4; 11. 16; 12. 12, 15;

2; 16. 12; 55. 18.
94. I.
wrroypa(f)tiv 19. 2
8.

13.

8.

21. 12, 14.

9. 5-

53.

18. 13.

29.

16

6,

42. II, 17

56.

1 8.

43. 15.
28. 1 6
77. 2.
iy 34. 7
53. 23.
15. 12; 28. 1 8

2,

12.

14; 28. 16; 31. 4, 15; 32.

8, 12, 14, 15, 18; 33. 6; 34. 8;
39. 16
42. 2
43. 16; 48. 8;
49. 3; 51. 19; 53. 9, 10, 13, 23,
24; 54. n; 55. i, 2; 94. 12;
18.

96. 3
102. 6
2.
3 Fr. 2
56. 12.

2.
;

103.

Fr.

(*)

33.

14;

86.5.
uorepaios 20. IO
Fr. I (d) 2.

26.

16

VO'Tff.OV 17. IO.

5.

21. 8

33. 15.

56.

1 1

INDEX.
20. S 65. 19 56. 7.
33. 13, 2O.
(jbo/mov 7. 5; 43. 14; 46. 14;
54. 23
21 ; 50. 10
53. 24

</>ai>ai

40. 9, 1 8 43. 1 1
47.
17 ; 50. 21 ; 62. 8 ; 54. 14 ; 57.
3 ; 69. 3 ; 73. 3 91. 2 ; 105. 3.

X<pa 36. 3

</>o/ioAoyia

253

49.
55.

X<O/H; 53. 21

55.

61. I.

12.
<oi>io-0ai 15. 2

<t>pa&iv 29. 5.
<j!>uAaKT/ 10. i

13. 13.

24.

<jE>uri>ii>

60.
Fr. 6
;

3-

44.

I.

78.

Xdpoypafaiv 27.

5,

Xipoypa<3f)ia 36.

IO; 37. 13, 2O.

2.

Xirwi; 98. 4.

28. 3, 16;

46. 4

61-72 sacp.
23; 63. 27 96.

52. 13,
34. .5
86. II.

68.

77.

17. 1

21. 10, 15,

33. 5
46. 12; 47. 5
8; Fr. 4(^)2.
;

15. 4.

3;

I.

103. 4.
8 6 ; 16. 5, 18

1.

19.

Xoia X Fr. 2 (/) 4, 5.

45. 19
Xoprjyfiv 4L 25
60.

29. 3, 13, 17,

20 ; 3O. 4, 14 31. 16 32. 5 33.
3, 7, 8, 10, 17; 34. i, 2, 10, n,
13, 16; 35. I ; 4O. 7; 41.4, 9,
22 ; 42. 2, 8 bis, 14 43. 8 ; 44.
12; 45. 6, ii, 15, 17; 46. 3, 4,
49.
8; 47. 3, 9, 13; 48. 2, 11
51. II,
50. 22
9, II, 14, 19, 21
13, 19; 52. 4; 53.4,6, 13, 23;
64. 15,20,21
55.li, 13, 17,24;
58. 7 ; 60. i,
57. 23
56. 10, 14
84. i, 2, 6, 9
14; 61-72 saep.
Fr. I (d) 5;
86. 4
107. 2
85. 8
Fr. 2 (/) i ; Fr. 4 (i) 8.
42. 3.
copa 41. 14
52. 28.
coo-aura)? 36. 1 1 ; 37. 16
27.

Xetpcu/xa 94. 4.

15;

49. 18.

8.

yapa.(T(T(.iv

40. 17
;

40. 1O; 43. 16; 68.

14; 76. 3; 77. I, 3, 8;

12,
13.

7.

37. 5.

3. I

3,5,6; 9. 1,8,9,
14; 10. 3,4,8, 13, 17; 11. 7;
16. 3, 12; 17-3,
i, 5; 15. ii
18. i, 10: 19. 9 bis
20.
10, 14
I
22. 2
26. I, 5, 16
26. 2, IO

(0v*i 2.

18. 9,

16; 22.3;
57. 7

69.

wore 60. 21

61-72

saep.

Ojforfc

PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

BY HORACE HART. PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY