DCLP

sign in

P.Herc. 1520 = Trismegistos 62516 = LDAB 3697



DCLP Transcription [xml]

Introduction

This papyrus has been digitally edited by Marta Antola, Eleni Avdoulou, Federico Giulio Corsi, Martina Delucchi, Giulio Di Basilio, Vikram Kumar, Takeshi Nakamura, Marianna Angela Nardi, Alexandra Peralta and Chiara Rover, revised by Holger Essler as part of Philologia philosophica Herbipolensis V .

fragment 1
[κενῶς]
σπουδὴν ποιε[ῖ]ται ἂμ μὴ
τὸ καθόλου κοινὸν ἁπά-
σης ἀνοίας νόσημα ἐπὶ
πάντων δυσ[α]ρεστoῦν̣
5[γε μ]εταπείπ[το]ν διὰ τ[ρ]ο̣-
[πῆς, ἀ]νεστη[κ]ὼς [ἔ]χει να̣ι̣   ̣
  ̣  ̣  ̣  ̣ [τ]ὴν ἐναντίαν αὐ-
  ̣  ̣  ̣  ̣ αγακη τ̣ροπή, ἀ
  ̣  ̣  ̣  ̣ [ἀ]ναγκαίων καὶ τ   ̣ ν   ̣
10  ̣  ̣  ̣  ̣  ̣ νοντ   ̣  ̣ ηωνα   ̣  ̣  ̣
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
fragment 2
[οὐ χρώμενοι]
λογ[ι]σμοῖς ἕκα̣σ̣τα κ̣α[ὶ] πράτ-
τουσιν καὶ πάσχουσιν
οὐκ ἐπικρίν[ο]ντες ἀλ̣λ̣’ εἰ-
κῆ[ι] καὶ ποιοῦντες καὶ λέ-
5γοντες, ὅ τι ἂν τύχω̣σιν
εὑρ[ίσκ]ον̣[τ]αι καὶ παρ̣ὰ
τὰς προειρημ̣έ̣νας [αἰ]τ[ί-]
ας ὁμ̣οιοῦντες (*) τού[τ]ωι
[  ̣  ̣]Ο[  ̣  ̣  ̣]ΑΝΕ[ -2-3- ]ΑΛΛΕ[  ̣  ̣  ̣]
10Κ[ -5-6- ]Υ[ -5-6- ]ΗΣ  ̣[  ̣  ̣  ̣]
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
fragment 3
ἀληθῶς τοῦ μὴ π[ρ]οσήκον-
τος γείνεται λογισμοῦ·
οὕτω(*)ς γὰρ ὄψις καὶ ἄλλων
μὲν πολλῶν καὶ τῶν πε-
5ρὶ ψυχὴν δὲ {ον} φιλοσοφί-
α[ν] ἀληθιν[ὴ]ν̣ παρασκευά-
ζει οὐ πλάνη[ν, καὶ] πᾶσαν
ὁ φιλόσοφ̣[ος- ca.9 -]ὤν
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
fragment 4
ψευδῆ. καθό̣λ̣ου δ̣’ο̣[  ̣  ̣]ν
ἐμπεί[π]τει περὶ φιλοσοφί-
ας ἕκαστος. καὶ ἀπὸ τῆ[ς] αὐ-
τῆς αἰτίας περὶ πάν[τα]
5μᾶλλον ἢ τὰ χρησι[μ]ώ-
τατα τῶι βίωι σπεύδον-
τες ὀ[σ]φρήσονται κα[ὶ] τ̣ῆ̣[ς]
αὐτῶν ἁμα[ρ]τίας π[  ̣  ̣  ̣]
τὸ π[α]χύτατον ὡς ἀ[λη-]
10θῶς ε   ̣  ̣ σινοντες αμ   ̣  ̣
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
title subscriptio
Πολυστράτου
Περὶ φιλοσοφίας
α

Apparatus


^ 2.8. nos secuti Crönert : ὁμ̣οιοῦντος pap. prev. ed.
^ 3.3. l. ο (corr)

Notes

  • 5.

    A full stop after λέγοντες would break apart a quite common phraseology, often found at the end of a period: λέγω (or any verbum dicendi) + ὅ τι ἄν τύχωσιν, “speaking gibberish”, “talking nonsense” (e.g. Isocr., Pan. (Or. 12) 74,6: καὶ λέγουσιν ὅ τι ἂν τύχωσιν·; 239, 5 μὴ δόξῃς ὅμοιος εἶναι τοῖς λέγουσιν ὅ τι ἂν τύχωσιν). Moreover, choosing to relate ὅ τι ἄν τύχωσιν to εὐρίσκονται would create a redundant and repetitive phraseology “they end up finding in a slavish way the first things that happen to appear in front of them”.

  • 1.

    Capasso supplies δ’οὖν, but points out that between δο and ν there could be two letters. He suggests δ’ὅταν or δ’ὅθεν in his apparatus. While the traces on the papyrus could point to read δ’ὅταν, such a reading of the text does not seem satisfactory. In order to make the text intelligible, some kind of complement of the verb ἐμπίπτω (l. 2) seems to be necessary. Capasso suggests to interpret εἰϲ] ψευδῆ as the complement of the verb, but then δ’ in third position would be problematic.

Editorial History; All History; (detailed)