commencement of our era, How far changes may nave been introduced
before that time is another question. To all appearances the Homeric
texts read in Egypt in the third century b.c. were very different from
our vulgate; and the Phaedo and Laches fragments belonging to the
same period proved for the text of Plato the existence of a tradition
varying to a certain extent from that which has descended to us. In a
text of the third Epistle of Demosthenes attributed to the second
century b.c., the variations, though considerable, are much less marked.
But of these Homer, of course, stands rather apart; and as for Plato,
the critics have been unable to agree whether or no the readings of the
papyri are to be preferred to those of the Codex Bodleianus. The
Demosthenes fragment may be a safer guide to the average degree of
deterioration during the earliest period of transmission. But naturally
the works of different authors have been subject to different conditions.
The evidence upon this question is as yet insufficient j we can but hope
for fresh discoveries to supplement it.
The text of the papyrus is reproduced as it stands in the original,
except for the division of words. The accompanying collation is based
upon Bekker's Berlin edition of 1821, from which the supplements
(inclosed in square brackets) have also been made.
[So]u? Tij? vrjaov Trpoafiai »
\_v\a>v km fji 01 \a/ce8aip,o
[caJi'Te? ovk €<f>v\a'TT'op %aA.e
5 [VJ&x, re Kai fjLo'X'is Trepie\6cov
[e]A.a#e icai em rov /xeTeoopov
[e]£a7TM/?7? ava<f>ave[i]<; Kara
vanov avTwv To[tA'] p-tv tcoi a
Sokt]to)[i] e^eirXri^e tow; Se
10 [a] wpoaehe~)(ovjo iSovres 7roX
1. TTpaarfiaivuv : so vulg. ; irpofialvcov, Bekk. with Bdg.
3. There seems to be no variation in the MSS. which would explain the
4. e(f>vXaTToi>: for a Bimilar alteration of tt to acr cf. 1. 38 ; Bekk. reads e<pv\a<rtrov.
5. /xoAts : v.l. fioyit; fxakis, Bekk., with the MSS.
10. iSoires was of course a slip; the correction seems to be by the second hand.