DOI Artikel:
Kenyon, Frederic George: Progress of Egyptology: graeco-roman Egypt, 1902-1903
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.12052#0061
48
Progress of Egyptology.
No. 18) on national styles of writing, showing that it was hased on a false
date for the papyrus in question,—a correction accepted by Zereteli himself.
Outside of these collections of articles, two works of some considerable
size may be mentioned. Prof. Dieterich 2S sees in 11. 475-723 of the great
Paris magical papyrus a liturgy of the worship of Mithras. Its connection
with Mithraism is obvious ; but Cumont, in his great work on the subject,
does not regard it as of much importance, or as a genuine Mithraic
document at all. Dieterich, on the other hand, edits and restores it from
this point of view, and adds a long discussion on the creed and cult of
Mithraism, whicli will have to be taken into account, along with Cumont's
book, by all students of this interesting and obscure subject. The second
of the two works above referred to is historical, a study, by B. Breccia,2'J
of the royal dynasties established by the successors of Alexander, dealing
with their principles of succession, their titles and honorary names, their
families, and other kindred topics. It is not, of course, confined to Egypt;
and for the part that relates to the Seleucids, it is unfortunate that it
should have appeared almost simultaneously with Mr. Bevan's remarkable
history, so that neither writer could make use of the other.
Shorter contributions to knowledge include an article by Wessely 30 on the
Latin elements in Greek papyri (Roman soldiers and functionaries, Roman
names in the census-lists, Roman law, Graecized forms of Latin words, &c,
all elaborately catalogued), a short note31 on the dating of the first year of
Tiberius, showing (what was, however, already known) that the ten days
by which Tiberius' reign preceded the beginning of the Egyptian year
(Aug. 29) were practically ignored in his dates ; and an elaborate treatise
on the town of Arsinoe,32 tabulating its buildings, streets, inhabitants, &c,
as revealed to us in the papyri,—a work of enormous labour, which it is to
be hoped a future historian will find useful as a compendium of facts.
Cronert33 publishes some useful notes, mainly linguistic, on the British
Museum papyri; Krall34 makes an addition to the attempts to elucidate
the obscure subject of the Macedonian calendar in Egypt before the reform
of Augustus, but does not carry the matter far; Weinberger35 briefly discusses
the question of abbreviation by contraction (as opposed to abbreviation
by omission of the termination) in Greek and Latin; Gradenwitz 3G explains
the mutilated Latin document contained in Amherst Pap. 27 as a rescript
of the period of Diocletian ; and contributes a juristic commentary to an
edition by Dr. G. A. Gerhard of a small papyrus from Heidelberg,3" con-
taining the ends of a few lines from the Digest (v. 2, laws 17-19), with
Greek glosses, whicli I am not competent to discuss. On the literary
side, M. Weil has collected into a volume33 a number of his contributions
Progress of Egyptology.
No. 18) on national styles of writing, showing that it was hased on a false
date for the papyrus in question,—a correction accepted by Zereteli himself.
Outside of these collections of articles, two works of some considerable
size may be mentioned. Prof. Dieterich 2S sees in 11. 475-723 of the great
Paris magical papyrus a liturgy of the worship of Mithras. Its connection
with Mithraism is obvious ; but Cumont, in his great work on the subject,
does not regard it as of much importance, or as a genuine Mithraic
document at all. Dieterich, on the other hand, edits and restores it from
this point of view, and adds a long discussion on the creed and cult of
Mithraism, whicli will have to be taken into account, along with Cumont's
book, by all students of this interesting and obscure subject. The second
of the two works above referred to is historical, a study, by B. Breccia,2'J
of the royal dynasties established by the successors of Alexander, dealing
with their principles of succession, their titles and honorary names, their
families, and other kindred topics. It is not, of course, confined to Egypt;
and for the part that relates to the Seleucids, it is unfortunate that it
should have appeared almost simultaneously with Mr. Bevan's remarkable
history, so that neither writer could make use of the other.
Shorter contributions to knowledge include an article by Wessely 30 on the
Latin elements in Greek papyri (Roman soldiers and functionaries, Roman
names in the census-lists, Roman law, Graecized forms of Latin words, &c,
all elaborately catalogued), a short note31 on the dating of the first year of
Tiberius, showing (what was, however, already known) that the ten days
by which Tiberius' reign preceded the beginning of the Egyptian year
(Aug. 29) were practically ignored in his dates ; and an elaborate treatise
on the town of Arsinoe,32 tabulating its buildings, streets, inhabitants, &c,
as revealed to us in the papyri,—a work of enormous labour, which it is to
be hoped a future historian will find useful as a compendium of facts.
Cronert33 publishes some useful notes, mainly linguistic, on the British
Museum papyri; Krall34 makes an addition to the attempts to elucidate
the obscure subject of the Macedonian calendar in Egypt before the reform
of Augustus, but does not carry the matter far; Weinberger35 briefly discusses
the question of abbreviation by contraction (as opposed to abbreviation
by omission of the termination) in Greek and Latin; Gradenwitz 3G explains
the mutilated Latin document contained in Amherst Pap. 27 as a rescript
of the period of Diocletian ; and contributes a juristic commentary to an
edition by Dr. G. A. Gerhard of a small papyrus from Heidelberg,3" con-
taining the ends of a few lines from the Digest (v. 2, laws 17-19), with
Greek glosses, whicli I am not competent to discuss. On the literary
side, M. Weil has collected into a volume33 a number of his contributions