DCLP Transcription [xml]
Introduction
Parts of Hippocrates, De mulierum affectibus 1.1 (P.Köln 7.311 + P.Oxy. 80.5221). The two papyrus fragments (Köln: 2.5 x 4.5 cm; Oxy.: 6,5 x 15 cm) have been recognized as belonging to the same roll, coming from Oxyrhynchus, originally used on the recto to record a tax list and subsequently reused on the verso across the fibres to transcribe Hippocrates' treatise De muliebribus (περὶ γυναικείων). The Köln scrap is too fragmentary to allow a plausible reconstruction of the lines (see discussion by F. Adorno in CPF and by D. Leith in the Oxy. edition; some parallels may be found with §§ 6.8 = p. 88,13-17 Grensemann), while the Oxy. piece contains Hp. Mul. 1.1,8-14 for sure, with interesting variants with respect to the manuscript tradition. P.Oxy. 5221,16-19 overlaps with P.Ant. 3.184 (codex, 6th cent.), the only other papyrus witness to Mul.. Punctuation is effected by single and double dots. The text is written in a cursive script assigned to the late 2nd-early 3rd c. AD.
(This papyrus has been digitally edited by Francesca Corazza as part of the Project "DIGMEDTEXT - Online Humanities Scholarship: A Digital Medical Library based on Ancient Texts" (ERC-AdG-2013, Grant Agreement no. 339828) funded by the European Research Council at the University of Parma (Principal Investigator: Prof. Isabella Andorlini). The digital edition is mostly based on the previous editions (ed.pr. = M. Gronewald, P.Köln VII 311; ed. alt. = F. Adorno, CPF 1.2.1, 18 10; add. D. Leith, P.Oxy. LXXX 5221).)
1[ -ca.?- οἴσε]ι̣ κ̣ἢν ἄ[τοκος ᾖ](*) [ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- τ]ὸ σῶμά εἰ[σι -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ἐχούσ]ῃ ∶ καὶ ἅμ̣[α -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- σώμ]ατι πλείων [ -ca.?- ]
5[ -ca.?- ] τ̣οῦ σώματος [ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ἐν εὐρυ]χωρίῃ ἐον[ -ca.?- ](*)
[ -ca.?- γίνετ]αι ἢν μὴ [ -ca.?- ]
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
1[ -ca.?- ὑπερτονε]ω̣σ̣[ιν ∶ ἀτόκῳ]
[δὲ ἐούσῃ τοῦ τε σώματος οὐ ξ]υ̣ν[ήθεος ἐόν-]
[τος ἐπὴν πληρωθη ἰσ]χ̣υ̣ρ̣[ο]ῦ κ̣[αὶ σ]τ̣ερε̣[ωτε-]
[ρου ἐόντος ἢ εἰ(*) λοχίων] ἔμπει̣ρ̣[ο]ς̣ γ̣έν\ο̣ι̣[το(?)]/(*)
5[τῶν μητρέων ἀστομω]τ̣έρων ἐουσέων τὰ [ -ca.?- ]
[καταμήνια ἐπιπονώτε]ρ̣ως χωρέει καὶ τὰ̣ [ -ca.?- ]
[παθήματα προσπίπτει] πλείονα ὥστε τὰ [ -ca.?- ]
[καταμήνια ἀποφράσσε]σ̣θαι ((high-punctus)) ἐπὴν ἀτοκήσ̣η̣ [ -ca.?- ]
[ἔχει δέωδε ὡς μοι καὶ π]ρὶν ειρητ̣αι ∶ φημ[ι]
10[τῆν γυναικα αραιοσα]ρ̣[κ]οτερην καὶ απαλωτε̣[ -ca.?- ]
[ρην ειναι η τὸν ἄνδρ]α̣ ∶ καὶ τουτέου ωδε
[ἔχοντος ἀπὸ της λοι]λιης ελκει τὴν ι(*)κμαδα
[καὶ ταχιον καὶ μαλ]λ̣ον τ̣ὸ σῶμα τῆς γυ̣να[ι-]
[κος η τοῦ ανδρὸς κ]αὶ γὰρ ει τις ὑ(*)πὲρ ὕ̣δατο̣ς̣
15[ἢ καὶ ὑδρηίου δύο] ἡμέρας \καὶ/ δύο ευφρονας-
[θειη ειρια καθαρὰ κ]α̣ὶ ειμα καθαρὸν καὶ βε-
[βυσμένον εὐ ἴσο]ν̣ τοισιν ειριοισιν ανε-
[λων ευρησει στησ]ας πολλον βαρυτερα
[τὰ ειρια η τὸ ειμα ὅτι] δὲ τούτο γίγνετα̣ι αιει
20[ἀποχωρέει ἐς τὸ ανεκ]α̣ς [ἀ]π̣ὸ̣ τοῦ ὕ(*)δτατο[ς ἐ]ν̣ ἀγ-
[γείῳ εὐστόμῳ(?) ἐόντο]ς̣ ((high-punctus)) κα̣ὶ τ̣ὰ μεν ειρ̣[ι]α̣ (added at right: εὐρυστό-
21bμῳ)
Apparatus
Notes
- 2-3.
The papyrus reads ει[σι instead of εσ[τι attested by manuscript tradition. The supplement πληροῦσθαι ἅτε ἐν γαστρὶ in ll. 2-3 is too long; ἄτε is probably lacking in the papyrus.
- 6-7.
The lacuna between the end of l. 6 and the beginning of l. 7 cannot contain the supplement ἐόντο[ς τοῦ] αἵμα[τος] suggested by Ermerins.