Papyri.info

Apparatus

Editorial History; All History; (detailed)

• 2013-12-06T09:40:21.674-05:00 [james.cowey]: Finalized - Ready. I found it very difficult to verify these readings from the online image, so I contacted M. Gerhardt in Berlin and asked him to check the original. This is what he reported: "I have read the suggestions for BGU XVI 2650 and I agree with you all: in line 1 I can clearly read adel(fw) with a wide lambda written over the epsilon (ok, it is a bit fainted); no underdots needed. In line 6 I can clearly read leg<e>is. I think both are typos in Brashear's editio princeps."
• 2013-12-06T09:40:21.66-05:00 [simoeis]: Vote - AcceptText - Ln1: I am willing to accept (ἀδελ̣(φῷ)), though I find it hard to make out all the letters. The beginning of ln 6 is difficult and I am not entirely persuaded by the readings discussed thus far. It makes sense however to add what the editor presumably meant, i.e. λέγ⟨ε⟩ις.
• 2013-12-06T09:40:21.643-05:00 [cisca.hoogendijk]: Vote - AcceptText - L. 1: On this dark image I think I see the usual abbreviation αδελ(φῷ) with a rather wide lambda written over the epsilon. What was read as the tail of the supposed phi is actually the top part of the epsilon. No underdots needed, too. L. 6: The editor has λέγ⟨ε⟩εις τῶι (l. ποιεῖς λέγων αὐτῶι), which, however, is quite an intrusive alteration. The DDBDP did not represent the real reading of the editor, someone seems to have it silently changed into <λ>έγε εις τῶι. This again, does not seem to be compatible with the photo. The first letter is rather lambda than epsilon. There is no way of finding out what the editor meant by adding this epsilon, but I think Josh is right in thinking it must have been λέγ⟨ε⟩ις. This could indeed be corrected (again) silently. Note that the line break before l. 6 is missing, and there are some superfluous spaces in l. 5.
• 2013-11-14T10:35:37.568-05:00 [joshuad.sosin]: Lin1 something clearly wrong with (ἀδε\φ/(ῷ)), but I cannot read the online image well enough to say what this should be. I think (ἀδελ̣(φῷ)) is most likely but I am not sure. Also something has gone wrong at lin6. Ed has λέγ⟨ε⟩εις (l. λέγων), which cannot be right. I suspect ed meant to print λέγ⟨ε⟩ις (l. λέγων), which the digital image seems (not perfectly legible in my opinion) to support. So => <:ποιεῖς λέγων αὐτῶι|reg|λέγ<ε>ις τῶι:> I am happy with this as a 'silent' correction of a typo, unless anyone disagrees. Digital image: http://smb.museum/berlpap/Original/P_25257_R_4.jpg

• 2011-12-14 [gabrielbodard]: rationalized languages in langUsage
• 2011-12-14 [gabrielbodard]: changed editor names to URIs
• 2011-10-04 [Faith]: Automatically updated revision description
• 2011-09-20 [Faith]: Automated transfer of accents across reg-orig pairs
• 2011-03-02 [gabrielbodard]: batch converted all tei:sic to tei:orig and tei:corr to tei:reg
• 2010-05-05 [gabrielbodard]: changed schema; added xml:space=preserve; indented; changed sic to surplus; moved title/@n to idno
• 2009-11-12 [gabrielbodard]: Added language la-Grek
• 2009-06-27 [gabrielbodard]: Converted from TEI P4 (EpiDoc DTD v. 6) to P5 (EpiDoc RNG schema)
• 2008-12-22 [papyri.info]: Automated split from transcoder files