Papyri.info

sign in

Trismegistos 59697 = LDAB 801 = michigan.apis.1738



Introduction

Extract from the treatise de materia medica (MM) by Pedanius Dioscorides (Ann Arbor, Michigan University, Library P. 3). Parts of three columns from a papyrus roll (13.8x32.7cm) of unknown provenience. In fact, only few letters on a projection at the upper left-hand side are left of column one, whereas the other two columns are preserved to full height and contain ca. 88 lines of text each; column 2 shows small holes and striping which accounts for loss of text along the left margin and column 3 breaks off at midpoint. The papyrus exhibits generous margins (3,8cm at the top, 3,1 cm at the bottom) and circa 25-30 letters per line with an intercolumnar space between 1,5 and 1,1cm. Concerning the text, there are no accents and breathings to be found, but in col. 3 l. 40 a diairesis is visible. Furthermore, it is structured by paragraphoi (8 are visible in col. 3) and on-line blank spaces followed by ekthesis of the succeeding line and by diplai obelismenai appearing in col. 2. Additionally, at the end of several lines in col. 2 (and possibly also in col. 1) there is some kind of check which was considered as a space-filler by Bonner, but instead might signal the scribe’s uncertainties about the text he has written. On the verso, a notation of the date is written in a rapid cursive which indicates the year 33 of Emperor Commodus' reign (= 192/193 AD). Serving as a terminus ante quem the treatise on the recto can be dated to the second century AD. Moreover, on the verso appear some scattered letters which, however, don't yield an identifiable text. On the recto, the papyrus contains a geater part of Dioskorides MM II, 76, 2 & 7-18 (ed. Wellmann) which deals with the preparation and medicinal properties of animal fats. It shares many similarities with the MS E against the rest of the manuscript tradition (cf. commentary). The text is written by a good, small and right sloping hand of an accomplished professional which can be attributed to Turner's category of the formal, mixed style.

(This papyrus has been digitally edited by Marcel Moser as part of the Project "DIGMEDTEXT - Online Humanities Scholarship: A Digital Medical Library based on Ancient Texts" (ERC-AdG-2013, Grant Agreement no. 339828) funded by the European Research Council at the University of Parma (Principal Investigator: Prof. Isabella Andorlini). The digital edition is mostly based on the previous editions (Campbell, TAPhA 53 (1922), 142-168; Flemming-Hanson, Estratto provvisorio del Corpus dei papiri greci di medicina (1998), 4-30; Flemming-Hanson, GMP 1.2 (2001)))

DCLP transcription: 59697 [xml]

r

column 1
[7 lines missing]
8[ -ca.?- ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἄλλο]ς τρο-
[πος θεραπείας τοιοῦτος· μετ]ὰ τὸ ἐξ-
10[υμενισθῆναι τὸ στέαρ λεαί]νεται καὶ
[εἰς λοπάδα ἐμβληθὲν τήκε]τ̣α̣ι, ἁλὸς
[ὀλίγου καὶ λεπτοῦ προσεμπασθέντο]ς̣, ((diple?))
[εἶτα διὰ ῥάκους λινοῦ ὑλισθὲν ἀπ]ο̣-
[τίθεται. ἁρμόζει δὲ τὸ τοιοῦτο εἰς] τ̣ὰ̣
15[ἄκοπα. vac. ? στέαρ ὕειόν τε]
[——]
[καὶ ἄρκειον(?) θεραπεύεται οὕτω]ς·
[λαβὼν τὸ πρόσφατον καὶ καταπίμ]ε̣-
[λον, οἷόν ἐστι τὸ νεφριαῖον, ἔμβαλε]
[εἰς δαψιλὲς ὕδωρ ὄμβριον ὡς ὅτι ψυ-]
20[χρότατον καὶ ἐξυμένισον καὶ τρῖβε-]
[ταῖς χερσὶν ἐπιμελῶς, ἀνατρίβων]
[αὐτὸ καὶ οἱονεὶ ἀποψήχων· εἶτα ἑτ]έ-
[ρῳ ὕδατι πολλάκις ἀποκλύσας δός]
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
column 2
[πλυνον] πάλιν σφοδρῶς τρείβων, τοῦ ((diple))
[μὲν ἀπο]χεομένου ὕδατος τοῦ δὲ ἐπι-
[χεομέ]ν̣ου, ἄχρι ἂν παγῇ καλῶς, καὶ
[πάλιν ε]ἰς χύτραν ἐμβαλὼν ἕψε με-
5[τ’ ἴσου οἴν]ου(*) εὐώδους. ὡς δ' ἂν ζέσῃ δίς,
[ἄρας ἀπ]ὸ τοῦ πυρὸς τὴν χύτραν ἔα-
[σον ἐν]ν̣υκτερεῦσαι τὸ δὲ στέαρ ἐν-
θάδε· τῇ ἐχομένῃ ἐὰν δὲ δυσωδίαν
ὑπολείπητι, ἀνελόμενος τὸ προει-
10ρημένον εἰς ἑτέραν χύτραν καινὴν
προσεπιχέας οἶνο̣ν εὐώδη καὶ ταὐτὰ
τοῖς προειρημένοις ποίει, ἕως ἂν ἅπα-
σαν τὴν δυσωδίαν ἀποβάλῃ. τήκε-
ται δὲ χωρὶς ἁλῶν ἐπ' ἐνίαις διαθέ-
15σεσιν, ἐν αἷς οὗτοι ἐναντιοῦνται· γί-
νεται μέντοι τὸ οὕτως σκευασθὲν
οὐκ ἄγαν λευκόν. vac. ? ὡσαύτως δὲ παρ
- ⤚
δ̣άλειον σκευαζστέον(*) κ̣α̣ὶ̣ [λεόντει-]
ον συάγρειόν τε καὶ καμήλειον καὶ
20ἵππειον. vac. ? ἀρωματι̣[σ]τέον δὲ στέαρ
20
μόσχειον καὶ ταύρειον, [ἔ]τι δὲ̣ [ἐ]λάφει - ((diple))
ον καὶ μ̣υελὸν τῶνδε τῶν̣ ζῴων
τὸν τρόπον τοῦτον· ἐ̣ξυμ[ε]νίσας ((diple))
αὐτῶν τὸ μὲν εὐωδιά̣ζ̣εσθα̣ι καὶ ἐκ-
25πλύνας, ὡς̣ προείρη[τα]ι, [σύν]ζεσον (hand 2) οἴνωι
ἀθαλάσσῳ τε καὶ εὐώδει, εἶτ[α] ἀ̣νελό-
μεν[ος] ἐννυκτερεῦσ̣αι ἀφεὶς ἕτε-
ρον ο̣ἶ̣ν̣ον ἀπὸ τοῦ αὐτοῦ γέν[ους ἐ-]
πίχ̣ε̣[ε] τῷ̣ πλήθει τοσοῦτον, ὅσον ἦν
30ἔμπροσθεν δοθείς, καὶ τῆξον ἀπο-
κογχίσας τε ἐπιμελῶς, πρὸς \ἑ̣/β̣[δ]ομή - ((diple))
κοντα(*) κοτύλας τοῦ στέατος ἔμ̣βαλε̣
σ̣χ̣οίνου ἀραβικῆς ὁλκὰς ἑπτά̣· ἐ̣ὰν
δ̣ὲ εὐωδέστερον θέλῃς ποιῆσαι, τοῦ
35ἄνθο[υ]ς̣ ὁλκὰς μ, προσαπόδος [δ]ὲ καὶ
φοίνεικος καλάμου τὰς ἴσας ὁλκάς,
ἀσπαλάθου τε καὶ ξυλοβαλσάμο̣υ̣ ἀ-
νὰ ὁλκὴν α πάντα δὲ ἔστω ὁλο-
σχερέστερον κεκομμένα - εἶτ̣α ἐ-
40πιδοὺς οἶνον εὐώδη ἀπέρεισαι ἐπ' ἀν-
θράκων πεπωμασμένον τὸ αγγεῖ-
ον καὶ σύνζεσον τρίς, ἄρας τε ἀπὸ
τοῦ πυρὸς ἔασον νυκτερεῦσαι αὐτά·
τῇ δ' ἐχομένηι ἀποχέας τὸν οἶνον
45καὶ ἄλλον ἐπιδοὺς τ̣ο̣ῦ αὐτ̣ο̣ῦ̣ γέν[ους]
[σ]ύνζεσον ὁμοίως ἔτι τ[ρίς. καὶ πρωὶ](*)
[ἀ]νελόμενος τὸ στέα[ρ ἀπόχεον τὸν]
[οἶ]νον, ἐκπλύνας τε τὸ ἀγγ[εῖον καὶ]
[καθ]άρας πρὸς τῶι πυ[θ]μέν[ι καὶ τή-]
50[ξας] δ̣ι̣υ̣λ̣ί̣σ̣α̣ς̣ τ̣ε̣ χ̣ρ̣ῶ̣ καὶ α[ὐτῶι vac. ?]
[——]
[ἀρωματί]ζεται δὲ τὸ̣ τ̣ε̣θ̣α̣ρ̣α̣π̣ε̣υ̣μ̣έ̣ν̣ο̣ν̣
[τὸν] α̣ὐ̣τὸν τρόπον. προστύφεται δὲ
[τὰ] προε̣ι̣ρημένα σ̣τέατα πρὸς τὸ ῥᾳδί-
[ως] δέξασθαι τὴν τῶν ἀρωμάτων
55[δ]ύναμιν οὕτως· λαβὼν αὐτοῦ ὅ τι ἂν
[αἱρ]ῇ ζέσον ἀλλὰ οἴνωι, συνκαθεὶ[ς]
[μυ]ρσίνης κλάδο̣ν ἕρπυλλον καὶ
[κύ]παιρον, ἔτι δὲ [ἀσπ]άλαθον ὁλοσχε-
[ρέσ]τερον ἔτι δὲ συνκοπέντα· τινὲς
60[τού]των(*) ἀρκοῦνται. ὅταν δὲ τρίτον ἀν-
[ελό]μενος ζέσῃ, πραέως καὶ δι' ὀθονί-
[ου ὑ]λίσας ἀρωμάτιζε, ὡς δεδήλωται.
[ vac. ?] ἔτι δὲ καὶ οὕτως προστύφεται
[——]
[τὰ στέ]ατα· κόψας ὡς ὅ τι̣ ἂν αὐτῶν ἐθέλῃς
65[πρόσ]φατον δὲ καὶ ἀμιγὲς αἵματος
[τά τε] ἄλλα ἔχον, ἃ πολλάκις εἴρηται̣
[ἐμβ]α̣λὼν εἰς̣ λο[π]άδα κ̣αινὴν ἐπ̣[ιχέ-]
[ας] τε οἶν[ο]ν̣ [λευκὸ]ν̣ [εὐώδη παλαιό]ν̣, [ὡς]
[ὑπερ]έ̣χειν δακτύλους η, σύνζεσον
70[ἐλαφ]ρῶι χρώμενος πυρ̣ί, ἕως ἂν τὴν
[σύμφ]υτον ὀσμὴν ἀποβάλῃ καὶ μᾶλ-
[λον οἰ]νίζῃ. εἶτα καθελὼν τὸ ἀγγεῖ-
[ον κ]αὶ ψύξας ἀνελοῦ τοῦ̣ στέατ̣ος
[μνᾶ]ς β καὶ ἐμβαλὼ̣ν ε[ἰ]ς λοπάδα
75[προσε]πιδούς τε τοῦ αὐτοῦ οἴνου κο-
[τύλας] δ καὶ λωτίνου καρποῦ, ο̣ὗ τὰ
[ξύλα] οἱ αὐλοποιοὶ παραλαμβάνου-
[σι, κε]ομμέν\ο/(υ) μν(ᾶν) δ ἕψε πυρὶ κού-
[φῳ κι]ν̣ῶν διηνεκῶς. ὅταν δὲ τὴν
80[στεατώ]δη ἀποφορὰν ἀποβάλῃ πᾶ-
[σαν, δι]υλίσας αὐτὸ ψῦχε, καὶ λιβανω(*) ((diple))
[τοῦ ἀσ]π̣αλάθου κεκομμέν\ο/(υ) μ\ν/(ᾶν) α, ((diple))
[ἀμαράκο]υ κεκομμένης μν(ᾶς) δ οἴνῳ
[παλαιῷ] φύρασον καὶ ἐάσας μίαν νύ-
85[κτα συ]μ̣πεσεῖν· τῇ̣ δ̣' ἐχομένῃ εἰς ((diple))
[χύτρα]ν̣ κεραμεᾶν τρίχουν καινὴν
[κάθες τ]ὰ αὐτά τε καὶ τὸ στέαρ, προσ-
[απόδος] δὲ καὶ οἴνου χοὰν ἥμισυ καὶ
[σύνζεσ]ον ἅπαντα ὁμοῦ· ὡς δ' ἂν
column 3
στυμμάτων τήν [τε δύναμιν καὶ]
τὴν ὀσμὴν ἀνα[λάβῃ τὸ στέαρ, καθ-]
[ε]λὼν αὐτὸ καὶ διυλ̣[ίσας πῆξον ἀπόθου]
τε. ἐὰν δὲ εὐωδέ̣[στερον θέλῃς ποι-]
5ῆσαι, μίσγε αὐτῶι σ[μύρνης λιπαρω-]
τάτης ὁλκὰς η οἴν̣[ῳ διειμένας πο-]
λυετεῖ̣. vac. ? τὸ δὲ ὀ̣[ρνίθειον καὶ χή-]
——
νειον στέαρ οὕτως ἂ̣[ν εὐωδιασθείη· οἵ](*)-
ο̣υτινος αὐτῶν τε[θαραπευμένου κο-]
10τ̣ύλας δ καθεὶς εἰς [ὀστρακίνην(?) χύτραν]
πρόσμιξον ἐρυσι[σκήπτρου καὶ ξυλοβαλ-]
σ̣άμου, ἔτι δὲ φοίν[ικος ἐλάτης καὶ κα-]
[λ]άμου ἁδρομερῶς [κεκομμένου(?)](*) [ἀνὰ δρα-]
[χμ]ὰ̣[ς] ιβ, ἐπιδούς τε [οἴνου Λεσβίου πα-]
15[λαι]οῦ κοτύλην α θὲ[ς ἐπ’ ἀνθρακιᾶς(?) καὶ]
σ̣ύ̣νζε̣σον δίς· εἶτα [ἀνελόμενος ἀπὸ]
τοῦ πυρὸς τὸ ἀγγεῖον̣ [καὶ ἐάσας ψυγῆ-]
ναι τὰ ἐν αὐτ̣ῷ̣ ἡμ̣[έραν α καὶ](*)
νύκτα, τῆι ἐχομέν̣[ῃ τῆξον αὐτά, καὶ]
20δι̣ὰ ῥάκους λινοῦ κ[αὶ καθαροῦ ὕλισον εἰς]
ἀργυροῦν ἀγγεῖο̣ν. ὅ[ταν δὲ παγῇ, ἀν-]
ελόμενος κόγχῳ τ[ὸ προειρημένον]
εἰς κεράμεον καειν̣[ὸν ἀγγεῖον βά-]
λε πωμ[ά]σας στεγν̣[ῶς ἀπόθου ἐν]
25καταψύχρῳ τόπωι· χ[ειμῶνος δὲ ταῦ-]
τα δρασ[τ]έον, ἐν γὰ[ρ θέρει οὐ]
πήσσεται. τινὲς δ[ὲ πρὸς τὴν σύστα-]
σιν αὐτ[ο]ῦ καὶ πῆξι[ν βραχὺ κηροῦ τυρ-]
ρηνικ[οῦ] μίσγουσιν. [τῷ δὲ αὐτῷ τρόπῳ]
30ἀρωματ̣[ι]στέον καὶ ἄ̣[ρκειον καὶ τὰ ὅμοι-]
α. vac. ? σαμψουχίζεται [δὲ στέαρ οὕτως· λα-]
——
βὼν τοῦ μὲν καλῶς \τε/θαρα̣[πευμένου ὅσον]
μνᾶν α̣ ― ἔστω δὲ μᾶλ̣[λον ταύρειον] ―
καὶ σαμψούχου ὡρ̣ίμ̣[ου τεθλασμέ-]
35νου ὁλοσχ̣ερῶς μνᾶ[ν α ἥμισυ μεῖξον ἐπι-]
μελῶς κ̣αὶ μείξας ἀν̣[άπλασον ἐπι-]
ραίνων δ̣αψιλέστερ[ον οἶνον, εἶτα]
ἀποτιθέμενος αὐτὰ [εἰς ἀγγεῖον καὶ]
σκεπάσας ἔασον ἐν̣[νυκτερεῦσαι].
40πρωῒ δὲ εἰς χύτρ̣α̣[ν κεραμεᾶν ἐμ-]
βαλὼν καὶ ὕδω̣ρ̣ [ἐπιχέας ἕψε κούφως].
ὅταν δὲ τὴν ἰ̣δ̣ί̣α̣ν [ὀσμὴν ἀποβάλῃ]
τὸ στέαρ, διυλίσας α[ὐτὸ καὶ ἐάσας αὐ-]
τὸ μεῖναι̣ ὅλην τὴν̣ [νύκτα πεπω-]
45μασμένον καλῶς, τῇ̣ [ἐπιούσῃ ἀν-]
ελόμενο[ς] τὸν [τ]ρ̣οχίσ[κον καὶ ἀπο-]
ξύσας τὴν πρὸς τ[ -ca.?- ] πυθ̣[μεν -ca.?- ](*) [ῥυπαρί-]
αν μεῖξον πάλιν̣ [σαμψούχου κεκομ-]
μένου, ὡς εἴρηται, [ἄλλην μν(ᾶν) α ἥμισυ καὶ](*)
50ἀναστρέ̣φω̣ν, μαγ̣[ίδας τε(?) ποιῶν καὶ]
τὰ ἄλλα̣ [ -ca.?- π]ροειρη̣[ -ca.?- ](*)· [ἐπὶ πᾶσι δὲ]
ἑψήσας καὶ ὑ[λ]ίσας ἀφ̣[ελών -ca.?- πρὸς]
τῷ πυθμέν[ι] ῥυπαρία[ -ca.?- ὑπαρχ -ca.?- ](*), [ἀπόθου]
ἐν καταψύχ̣[ρ]ῳ τόπωι. [ vac. ? εἰ δὲ]
[——]
55 ἀθαράπευτον σ[τ]έαρ χήν[ηον ἢ ὀρνί-]
[θ]ηον ἢ ἐχιδ̣νῆον θέλῃ̣ [τις ἄσηπτον]
διατηρῆσα̣[ι], οὕτως προι[ητέον αὐτό]·
λαβὼν πρό[σ]φατον, ὅ τ̣[ι ἂν αἱρῇ, ἔκ-]
πλυνον ἐπ[ι]μελῶς κα[ὶ διαψύξας ἐ-]
60πὶ κοσκίνου̣ ἐ̣ν σκιᾷ, μ[ετὰ τὸ ξηραν-]
θῆναι ἔμβα̣λε εἰς ὀθόν[ιον καὶ ἐκ-]
πίασον ταῖς χερσὶν εἶτα ἐ̣[ρρωμένως],
εἶτα λίνῳ ε̣ἴ̣ρας κρέμα[σον ἐν τό-]
πωι σκιερῶι μετὰ δὲ ἡμ[έρας πολ-]
65λὰς καινῶι ἀποδήσας χ̣[άρτῃ ἀπο-]
τίθεσο ἐν κα[τ]α̣ψύχρῳ̣ [τόπῳ. ἄσηπτα]
δὲ διαμένει̣ καὶ μέλ[ιτι ἀποτι-]
θ̣έμενα ἄση̣πτα μένει. [ vac. ? δύνα-]
——
μιν δὲ ἔχει πάντα τὰ στέα̣[τα θερμαν-]
70τικήν. τὸ μέντοι ταύρειον̣ [στύφει πο-]
σῶς καὶ τὸ μό̣σ̣χειον καὶ τὸ̣ [βόειον],
καὶ τὸ λεόντειον ἀναλογ[εῖ τούτοις]·
φασὶν δὲ καὶ ἀντιφάρμακ̣[ον αὐτὸ]
τοῖς ἐπιβουλ̣ε̣ύουσιν εἶναι. [ vac. ? τὸ δ’ ἐ-]
——
75λάφειον καὶ ἑ̣ρ̣π̣ετὰ διώκει κ̣[αταχρι-]
όμενον· vac. ? τ[ὸ] δὲ αἴγειο[ν στυπτι-]
——
κώτερον , ὅ̣θεν [δυ]σ̣εντερικοῖ[ς δίδοται]
σὺν ἀλφίτωι κ̣[αὶ] τυρῶι, ἑψόμε̣[νον ὅ-]
θεν ἐν̣κλυζό̣[μ]ενον μετ̣[ὰ χυλοῦ]
80πτισάνης. ε̣ὐ̣θ[έ]τεῖ δὲ καὶ φθ̣[ισικοῖς]
ἐν ῥοφήμασι ὁ ἐ̣ξ αὐτῶν ζ[ωμός, καὶ τοῖς]
κανθαρίδας πεπωκόσι ὠφελ̣[ίμως]
δίδοται. vac. ? τὸ δὲ τράγειον δ̣[ιαλυ-]
——
τικώτερον βοηθοῦσι ποδαγρικο[ῖς σὺν]
85αἰγὸς̣ σπυράθοις καὶ κρόκῳ ἐπιτι̣θ[έμε-]
νον, vac. ? τό τε προβάτειον̣ [δὲ ἀνα-]
——
λογεῖ τούτῳ. vac. ? τὸ δὲ ταριχηρ[ὸν]
——
v
(ἔτους) λγ(*) Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Λουκίου
Αἰλίου Αὐρηλίου Κομμόδου Ε̣ὐσεβο̣ῦ̣ς̣
του̣[ -ca.?- ](*)τουκητου Ῥωμαίου
[ -ca.?- ]του Ῥω(  ) τοῦ Ἡ̣ρ̣α̣κ̣λ̣έ̣ο̣υ̣

Apparatus


^ r.2.4-5. με|[τ’ οἴνου ἴσ]ου Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.2.18. l. σκευασζτέον, l. σκευαστέον
^ r.2.31-32. corr. ex ⟦α̣⟧β̣[δ]ομή|κοντα
^ r.2.46. τ[ρὶς καὶ ἄφες. πρωὶ δὲ] Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.2.60. [ἑνὶ τού]τ̣ων Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.2.81. l. λαβὼν (corr)
^ r.3.8. [ἂν εὐωδιασθείη· λαβὼν οἵ] Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.3.13. [κεκομμένων] Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.3.18. ἡμ̣[έραν καὶ] Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.3.47. τ[ὸν] πυ[θμένα] Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.3.49. [καὶ ὡσαύτως] Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.3.51. [τὰ π]ροειρη̣[μένα] Bonner ed. pr.
^ r.3.52-53. [τε, εἴ τις πρὸς] | τῷ πυθμέν̣[ι] ῥυπαρία [ὑπάρχοι] Bonner ed. pr.
^ v.1. λα Bonner ed. pr.
^ v.3. Π̣α̣ῦ̣[νι -ca.?- ] Bonner ed. pr.

Editorial History; All History; (detailed)

Creative Commons License © Duke Databank of Documentary Papyri. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Notes

  • r.1.8-9.

    MS E transmits θεραπείας τρόπος which cannot have been the order in the papyrus, since it would leave l. 9 too short.

  • r.1.10.

    Instead of λεαί]νεται which is also found in Oribasius' and Wellmann's edition, MS E conveys διαίνεται with δι in rasura.

  • r.2.1.

    Deviating from the order in the papyrus, MS E offers the reading ἔκπλυνον σφοδρῶς πάλιν, whereas Wellmann prints πάλιν ἔκπλυνον σφοδρῶς.

  • r.2.3.

    MS E also conveys παγῇ, while Oribasius has παγηθῇ and Wellmann πλυθῇ.

  • r.2.5.

    Wellmann has οἴνου ἴσου which also Bonner supplements in his edition of the papyrus.

  • r.2.7.

    δέ is a singular addition in the papyrus.

  • r.2.8.

    Almost all other sources read τῇ δ' ἐχομένῃ ἐάν τι τῆς δυσωδίας.

  • r.2.9.

    Instead of ὑπολείπητι, E, Oribasius and Wellmann have ὑπολείπηται.

  • r.2.11.

    Oribasius and Wellmann read προσεπίχεον which seems preferable in combination with καί. Furthermore, ταὐτά might be written separately, without crasis, like in E, Oribasius and Wellmann (cf. col. 2 l. 87).

  • r.2.15.

    Dioscorides endorses the principle of curing through opposites, a basic concept of Greek medicine since Hippocrates. Therefore ἐναντιοῦνται here has the meaning "these (salts) are counter-indicated" as in e.g. Gal. De simpl. med. temp. ac fac. XI 31.

  • r.2.18.

    σκευαζστέον seems to be a mistake of copying: in documents from Roman Egypt sigma is sporadically written σζ, but not ζσ.

  • r.2.20.

    After ἵππειον the papyrus omitted καὶ τὰ ὅμοια which is a recurrent phrase in the MM also appearing in col. 3 ll. 30-31.

  • r.2.22.

    E and Wellmann have the singular τοῦδε τοῦ ζῴου instead.

  • r.2.24.

    Instead of μέν, E and Wellmann read μέλλον.

  • r.2.25.

    The word οἴνωι was added at the right side after the line was written. Both the hand and the ink indicate another scribe who made this addition.

  • r.2.30.

    Before ἔμπροσθεν the papyrus omitted the article ὁ.

  • r.2.31-32.

    The only instance in the papyrus in which a numeral is written out in full. Probably a faint epsilon was written above the α which can be interpreted as to be cancelled since there is ink set on this letter. The rest of the tradition has the number ἔννεα which can easily be explained by a misreading of θ (=9) as ο (=70), because the middle stroke was lost.

  • r.2.36.

    The papyrus omits καί after φοίνεικος which is preserved elsewhere in the Greek MS-tradition.

  • r.2.38.

    The papyrus omits the sentence μεῖξον δὲ καὶ καρδαμώμου καὶ νάρδου καὶ κασσίας καὶ κιναμώμου ἀνὰ σύγγιαν μίαν which was also absent in E, but was subsequently added in the margin with slight deviations.

  • r.2.43.

    E and Wellmann read ἐννυκτερεῦσαι αὐτό.

  • r.2.44.

    MS E also has ἀποχέας, whereas Wellmann's edition exhibits ἀπόχεε.

  • r.2.49.

    The papyrus wrongly omits the needed article τὸ, but it is found in a similar phrase in col. 3 l. 47-48.

  • r.2.50.

    Wellmann's text has an additional αὐτὸ ἀπόθου καὶ between τε and χρῶ which is quite common in Dioscorides at the end of a clause (cf. MM II 76.1, 151.16), but other instances (e.g. MM V 72.1, 6.15) prove that also this reading is possible.

  • r.2.51.

    Before τὸ the papyrus omits καὶ. Additionally, Wellmann reads τεθεραπευμένον instead of τεθαραπευμένον which also E exhibits.

  • r.2.55.

    Wellmann and E have the genitive plural αὐτῶν.

  • r.2.56.

    ἀλλὰ seems to be an error for ἅμα which is transmitted by E and Wellmann.

  • r.2.59.

    The papyrus erroneously repeated ἔτι δὲ from the preceding line which Wellmann omitted.

  • r.2.60.

    Before τρίτον, τὸ is omitted by the papyrus.

  • r.2.64.

    The papyrus added ὡς and instead of θέλῃς which is conveyed by E and Wellmann, it has ἐθέλῃς.

  • r.2.76-78.

    Wellmann has the dative plural τοῖς ξύλοις and instead of παραλαμβάνουσι transmits χρῶνται. MS Di also exhibits only the verbal form found in the papyrus, while E has both connected with καί.

  • r.2.81.

    The papyrus erroneously transmits λιβανω- instead of the regular λαβών.

  • r.2.83.

    The MSS show either ἀμαράκου (E and Dl) or ἀμαρακίνου (Wellmann). Only the papyrus, however, conveys κεκομμένης which is the wrong gender for both supplements. Therefore, the participle might have been repeated from l. 82 and the original reading might be preserved by Wellmann: ἀμαρακίνου δὲ ἄνθους.

  • r.2.84.

    καί seems better as a connector between φύρασον and ἔασον (Wellmann), rather than the form in the papyrus.

  • r.2.85.

    The reading συμπεσεῖν in the meaning 'settle' might be right as opposed to E's impossible συμπεῖν or ποιεῖν in other MSS. Wellmann corrected to συμπιεῖν ('soak') which occurs five other times in the MM in combination with ἐάσον and also has a parallel in Theophr. HP V 7.4.

  • r.2.86.

    Wellmann reads τριχουνιαίαν which is thusfar apax legomenon. Therefore the adjective τρίχους ('holding 3-choes') used by the papyrus and E is to be preferred since it is also attested elsewhere in Greek literature, e.g. Aristot. Ath. Pol. 67.2.

  • r.2.87.

    Instead of τὰ αὐτά, Di reads just αὐτὰ, while E and Wellmann have ταῦτα.

  • r.2.88.

    The papyrus exhibits a kind of accusative of χοῦς which, elsewhere in the MM, is either χοῦν or χοέα. In fact, the latter one is conveyed by E and seems the best reading compared to Wellmann's genitive χοέως, since the MM seems to use genitive of ingredient plus accusative of measure as a rule.

  • r.2.89.

    E has ὡς ἂν (leg. ἕως δ' ἄν as in Di), while Wellmann reads a temporal clause with ὅταν δέ.

  • r.3.1.

    According to Bonner τῶν was lost before στυμμάτων, when the scribe switched from one column to the next. In fact, also the word πάντων is omitted before the article like in MS E.

  • r.3.8.

    If one wanted to restore Wellmann's text (ἂν εὐδιασθείη· λαβὼν οἱούτινος) in the remainder of the line, it would be too crowded, as Bonner noted. Therefore, the papyrus probably omitted λαβὼν.

  • r.3.10.

    The papyrus omitted the connector καὶ before καθεὶς. In addition, the combination of χύτρα and ὀστράκινος seems strange, since in the MM, Dioscorides usually combines this adjective with the vessels ἀγγεῖον and λοπάδιον to indicate that they are 'earthen'. For χύτρα, however, it's his habit to use the adjective κεραμεοῦς to indicate an 'earthen pipkin'.

  • r.3.13.

    Although Bonner restored Wellmann's κεκομμένων, the singular is more likely, since elsewhere in the MM (e.g. I 55.1) reed (κάλαμος) is chopped, but never fir (ἐλάτη).

  • r.3.15.

    The larger measure κοτύλην α seems more appropriate for the context than the κυάθον ἕνα conveyed by Wellmann. In the MM, the kyathos is often the amount of an individual dosage (e.g. V 55.1, III 32.6), while the kotyle is some 6 times as large.

  • r.3.16.

    Instead of δίς, Wellmann has τρίς and E exhibits τετράκης ἢ τρίς. The latter reading was discarded by a second hand and only τρίς remained. In fact, the initial delta of δίς appears to have been deliberately transformed into 'four times'. Hence, either the reading in the papyrus or δὶς ἢ τρίς is right.

  • r.3.23.

    The papyrus' reading καειν[ὸν] occurs as the regular καινόν after βάλε only in the MSS H and Dl.

  • r.3.24.

    Wellmann reads καί after βάλε which is needed to connect the imperatives in this clause.

  • r.3.27.

    πήσσεται, recalled in E's πίσσεται, is a later alternative for πήγνυται transmitted by Wellmann. The latter's root is in general more common in the MM.

  • r.3.30.

    The papyrus omits καὶ τὸ ὕειον in this short enumeration. For another omission of pig fat confer col. 3 l. 87.

  • r.3.31.

    The papyrus is the only witness in the tradition that preserves the preferred orthography for σαμψουχίζεται with ου.

  • r.3.32.

    μὲν is a singular addition in the papyrus.

  • r.3.35.

    ὁλοσχερῶς, as preserved by the papyrus and E, is probably better than ἐπιμελῶς which occurs in the rest of the tradition. With this reading, the meaning is rendered more emphatically and it also has a parallel in MM V 72.1. Furthermore, ἐπιμελῶς is found in E and the papyrus 5 words later which may point to its erroneous transference to this earlier position by the other witnesses.

  • r.3.36.

    Instead of μείξας, E exhibits μαλάξας, while Wellmann reads μαγίδας which also recurs in col. 3 l. 50.

  • r.3.36-37.

    The papyrus and Di read ἐπιραίνων with E showing a related ἐπιραίνου. Wellmann, however, has ἐπιχέας.

  • r.3.38.

    Wellmann reads ἀποθέμενος αὐτὰς referring to μαγίδας in l. 36.

  • r.3.43-44.

    The papyrus added the second αὐτὸ in this line.

  • r.3.47.

    The reading of the papyrus is uncertain here; E has τὴν πρὸς τὸν πυθμένα which also Bonner adopts, but which is wrong, since the dative case is needed here. Wellmann exhibits τὴν ἐν τῷ πυθμένι and here we have probably the same reading with the preposition πρὸς which is also found in col. 3 ll. 52-53.

  • r.3.50.

    Ε and Wellmann have ἀναστρέφου instead of the participle also conveyed by MS Q.

  • r.3.51.

    Bonner adopted Wellmann's text, while E has ἃ ἠδίως (leg. ἰδίως) προείρηται.

  • r.3.52-53.

    Bonner accepted Wellmann's reading which is shown in the apparatus. E instead exhibits ἀφ[ελών τε τὴν πρὸς] τῷ πυθμέν[ι] ῥυπαρία[ν ὑπαρχοῦσαν ἀπόθου].

  • r.3.56.

    The papyrus has ἐχιδνῆον, a previously unattested alternate for ἐχιδναῖον, which also E transmits with the form ἐχίδνιον. Opposed to that, Oribasius and Wellmann convey μόσχειον, but both the Latin translation in Dl and the fact that the fat of vipers is not an uncommon ingredient in ancient medicine (cf. Nik. Ther. 209) support the reading of the papyrus.

  • r.3.57.

    προι[ητέον] is an error for ποιητέον transmitted by the rest of the tradition.

  • r.3.61-62.

    ἐκπιάζειν is the later Attic form of ἐκπιέζειν and it often appears in many MS traditions, like here and in E, as opposed to the older form in Oribasius and Wellmann.

  • r.3.62.

    The scribe erroneously added εἶτα from line 63 here.

  • r.3.63.

    Instead of simple εἴρας, Oribasius, E and Wellmann have the composite διείρας.

  • r.3.68.

    ἄσηπτα μένει is wrongly repeated from the preceding lines 66-67.

  • r.3.72.

    The papyrus omitted δὲ after λεόντειον.

  • r.3.74-75.

    τὸ δὲ ἐλεφάντειον is omitted by the papyrus, leaving only fat of the stag as ointment against snakes. This reading seems preferable, since Dioscorides makes no mention of elephant fat elsewhere in the MM and also the translation in Dl knew only stag fat.

  • r.3.77-79.

    The papyrus duplicates ὅθεν (also reflected in Dl) which seems hardly plausible. The duplication, however, may signal that a connector between the two participles ἑψόμε[νον] and ἐνκλυζό[μ]ενον is missing. Instead, E and Wellmann read ἑψόμενον ἐνκλύζεται as well as καὶ before μετὰ.

  • r.3.84.

    The papyrus and E omitted ὂν after διαλυτικώτερον which is perhaps an haplography, and φυραθὲν before σὺν which might be an intrusion anyway, because, in the MM, it signifies in most instances the kneading of the solid with a liquid.

  • r.3.85.

    After κρόκῳ another καὶ was omitted by E and the papyrus.

  • r.3.86.

    This line shows no signs of ekthesis on the papyrus, although a paragraphos as well as an on-line space is present.

  • r.3.87.

    The papyrus omitted a sentence about pig fat (vd. col. 3 l. 30): ὕειον δὲ [ἀναλογεῖ, om. E et secl. Wellmann] τοῖς περὶ ὑστέραν καὶ ἕδραν καὶ πυρικαύτοις ἁρμόζει.

  • v.1.

    A conflated version of the dating formular for year 33 of Commodus' reign which corresponds to 192-193 AD. It's the regnal year in which the emperor was murdered on 31 December 192 (= 5 Tybi). The news of his death didn't reach the Arsinoite nome or was not officially recognized there until the end of February 193 which may explain the way Commodus' titulature appears here.

  • v.2-3.

    Although Commodus' titulature begins much in the same way as in PHeid. IV 301 ii 2-3 and iii 12-13, it veers off after l. 2 omitting his victory titles Ἀρμενιακοῦ Μηδικοῦ Παρθικοῦ Σαρματικοῦ Γερμανικοῦ μεγίστου Βρετανικοῦ.

  • v.3-4.

    In year 33 of his reign, Commodus' six victory titles were sometimes followed by εἰρηνοποιοῦ τοῦ κόσμου εὐτυχοῦς ἀνικήτου Ῥωμαίου Ἡρακλέου (e.g. POxy XXXI 2611.26-27 & PSI IX 1036.25-26) and both ll. 3 and 4 might represent unsuccessful attempts in this direction.