21 Die Insehriften des Wiistentempels von Sedesiye, in the Neue Jahrbiicherfar
Philologie, 1896, parts 3-4.
22 TJne collection de tesseres, in Melanges d'archeologie et d'histoire, xvi. 3-4 (1896).
23 Die Dj/naslie der Ptolemiier. (Berlin, 1897.)
24 Die JBegriindung des Alexander- und Ptolemaits- Kultus in Agypten, in
Rhevnisehes Museum, lii. 1 (1897).
25 Philip and Alexander of Macedon. (London, 1897.)
1. Biblical. The first of a series of articles appearing in the Revue
Biblique and dealing with the Coptic versions of the Bible was noticed
in last year's Report. Their writer, Prof. Hyvernat, has by now com-
pleted them,1 and given us thereby an exceedingly useful work, which
will be of great service to all interested in the subject. And since
the Hesychian recension—the once current Bible, that is, of a con-
siderable portion of eastern Christendom—is still to be recovered,
the subject must be among the most important to students of the Sep-
tuagint. Prof. Hyvernat's treatise consists of (1) a brief discussion o
the peculiarities of the various dialects—no fewer than four—into which
translations of the Greek Bible were made ; (2) a list, which appears to
be exhaustive up to the last year or so's acquisitions, of the known MSS.
in each dialect (with dates for the Bohairic MSS.); (3) a description
of all publications of these texts; (4) a discussion of the dates of the
Coptic versions, the author drawing attention to the manner in which
Graeco-Coptic bilingual texts of the 6th or 7th centuries may influence
this question ; (5) an estimate of the nature and importance of the
versions, both relatively one to another, and for the reconstruction of a
Greek text. It will be seen that this work in its 2nd and 3rd sections
embraces a larger field than the lists either of Ciasca, Maspero or
Headlam (in Scrivener), no one of which deals both with Old and
New Testament together.
In printing, some years ago, certain valuable fragments from the
Achmimic version of the Minor Prophets, M. Maspero was well aware
of the probable inadequacies of the only copy then available. M.
Bouriant has since had the good fortune to obtain that part of the
original MS. made use of by his predecessor and, adding thereto other
fragments, publishes the whole afresh.2 Further portions of this same
MS. in Vienna (see Mittheil. Eainer, II—III, 2G4) help to make it the