DCLP Transcription [xml]
Introduction
Scholia ad Nic. Ther. 526-9. The papyrus consists of two fragments belonging to the same roll: frag. a (= P.Mil.Vogl. 2.45; 17 x 7.5 cm) bears on the recto 29 lines from the upper part of a single column of writing (ll. 17-29 are almost unreadable). The top margin survives to a length of ca. 2.7 cm. Frag. b (= P. Mil. Vogl. 6.262; 4 x 9.5 cm) contains scanty remains of 14 lines written along the fibers (on the verso, traces of a documentary text). The left margin is partially visible opposite l. 6. The text of frag. a preserves a scholion to Nic. Ther. 526, in which the semantic value of κύμβοιο (‘drinking cup, bowl’ LSJ) is thoroughly discussed, also in connection with other related words (κύμβα, κύμβη, κυμβεῖον, κυμβίον) and passages (Sophr. 195 Kaibel; Nic. Ther. 948). At l. 25, a second lemma (taken from Ther. 269) is quoted; apparently, Ther. 267-8 are not commented. The brevity and the lacunosity of frag. b make the positive determination of its meaning impossible. The script is a neat book-hand with cursive traits assignable to the 1st cent. AD.
[ -ca.?- ]τ̣α κύμβα λέγεται καθάπερ καὶ
[ -ca.?- ]ων(*) κυμβέων ὄγκον ἔχων ((diple))
[ -ca.?- οἰ]ν̣ο̣φορείωι καὶ παρεχόμενος
5[ -ca.?- ]ν κομβώματα λέγομεν τὸ κατὰ
[ -ca.?- ὑ]φ' ἅμμα γεινόμενον κύρτωμα
[ -ca.?- ·δ]ι̣ὸ καὶ τραπεζῆε{α}ν προσήγα-
[γε -ca.?- ]ν· πεπλάνηται δέ· κυμβίον
[ -ca.?- ]ν τὸ ὀξόβαφον· λέγεται δὲ
10[ -ca.?- ] ̣ τόσ\ον̣/δε κυμβίον πληρώσας
[ -ca.?- ] ̣δε κερά[τι]ον· ἔστι τὸ ὀξύβα-
[φον -ca.?- ] ̣ν̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ι ̣ ̣ ̣εν vac. 1 ε̣ ̣ ̣ ̣αι
[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣ον̣(*) ἁλὸς ἐνπληθέα κύμ-
[βην -ca.?- κ]αὶ πάλιν· ἐν μὲν γὰρ μίσυος
15[ -ca.?- μ]ε̣τ̣αβαλλ̣ό̣μ̣ε̣ν̣ο̣ς̣(*) συν
[ -ca.?- ]μ̣β̣ι̣α(*) περιπλήθοντα ῥοάων
[ -ca.?- ]ν̣ι̣ο̣ ̣ ̣λ ̣ντο̣ν̣ κύμβον
[ -ca.?- ο]ξοβαφο[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣ ̣ δε ̣[ -ca.?- ]
20[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣ καὶ ου ̣[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣τα ὀξοβ[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣α ̣τ ̣ ̣ ̣εζ ̣ ̣[ -ca.?- ](*)
[ -ca.?- ]· ἁπλαὶ γὰρ αἱ προειρημέναι[ι λέξεις εἰσίν·]
25[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣ θρινακίην μὲν ῥίζα[ν ἕλευ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣[ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣καλε[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣φη ̣[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣εμα ̣[ -ca.?- ]
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
1[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ] ̣ε ̣ ̣ ̣(*)ρ[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ]τεον δ ̣(*)[ -ca.?- ]
5[ -ca.?- ] ̣δεσθω ̣(*)[ -ca.?- ]
[ -ca.?- ]σ ̣(*)ναπ̣ο ̣ρ[ -ca.?- ]
̣ ̣[ ̣] ἤτοι κατε[ -ca.?- ]
προ τοῦ πολυτρο ̣[ -ca.?- ]
κ̣α̣ὶ̣ ε̣ἶτα τῶν αι̣θ̣[ -ca.?- ]
10κατῆρξεν ἐπ[ -ca.?- ]
λιας(*) καὶ \ἡ/ ἀποδο[ -ca.?- ]
ροιας θ' ηὑρε ̣(*)[ -ca.?- ]
δε ̣[ ̣ ̣ ̣] ̣[ -ca.?- ]
σ̣ασ̣ ̣[ -ca.?- ]
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Apparatus
^ a.3. or [ -ca.?- ξυλίν]ων
^ a.12-13. or σ̣ὺ̣ν̣ κ̣αὶ|[σφονδύλ]ε̣ι̣ον
^ a.15. or [κύμβην κ]α̣τ̣αβάλλε̣ο̣ - ca.2 -, Lloyd Jones-Parsons 1983, 278 : [ -ca.?- μ]εταβαλλόμενος prev. ed.
^ a.15-16. or συν | [δ’ ἐλάης κυ]μ̣β̣<ε>ῖ̣α̣, Lloyd Jones-Parsons 1983, 278 : [ -ca.?- καὶ γλάγεος κυ]μβ<ε>ῖ̣α prev. ed.
^ a.23. or τρ̣α̣π̣εζή̣ε̣[ντος -ca.?- ]
^ b.3. or φ
^ b.4. or ι
^ b.5. or τ
^ b.6. or ι, or υ
^ b.10-11. or [ -ca.?- Σικε]|λίας
^ b.12. or θ
Notes
- frag. a, l. 1.
It is not clear what τὰ γὰρ τοι precisely refers to.
- 2.
A comma presumably occurs before κύμβα. καθάπερ καί introduces the following quotation (i.e. Sophr. 195 Kaibel; see e.g. Sch. Nic. Alex. 67.3-4 Geymonat).
- 3.
= Sophr. 165 Kaibel. [ξυλίν]ων κυμβέων: see Cazzaniga 1961, 36. The diplé marks the end of the quoted passage (Sophr. 195 Kaibel).
- 4-7.
Probably, the scholiast is distinguishing between τραπεζήεν κυμβίον (see l. 7 and Nic. Ther. 526: κύμβοιο τραπεζήεντος) – which is decorated on the outside (cf. κομβώματα ‘ornamental bands’, l.5; ἅμμα ‘knot’, l. 6) – and a simple κύμβα or κυμβεῖον (see Cazzaniga 1961, 36-7).
- 8-9.
κυμβίον (l. 8) must be semantically related to ὀξόβαφον (l. 9), see Schol. Nic. Ther. 526.10-11 Crugnola (κύμβοιο ἀντὶ τοῦ ὀξυβάφου) and Hsch. κ 40 (κύμβη· νεὼς εἷδος, καὶ ὀξόβαφον).
- 9.
λέγεται δέ: the paraphrase of Ther. 526 probably begins here.
- 13-4.
= Nic. Ther. 948: σὺν καὶ σφονδύλειον ἁλός τ’ ἐμπληθέα κύμβην. The sequence σ̣ὺ̣ν̣ κ̣αὶ (l.12) and the supplement [σφονδύλ]ειον (l.13) are uncertain (Cazzaniga 1961, 37-8). The omission of τ’ before ἁλός is probably a scribal error. “Fortasse post βην [l. 14] aut nihil aut paulum deest” (H. Lloyd-Jones-P.J. Parsons, Supplementum Hellenisticum, Berlin-New York, 1983, 278).
- 14-5.
[κ]αὶ πάλιν introduces a new, unknown Nicandrean verse: “ἐν μὲν γὰρ μίσυος hexametri initium; finem in v. 15 stetisse suspicamur” (H. Lloyd-Jones-P.J. Parsons, op.cit., 278).
- 15.
[κύμβην κ]α̣τ̣αβάλλ̣ε̣ο̣...: see Nic. Ther. 101-2 and H. Lloyd-Jones-P.J. Parsons, op.cit., 278. Less persuasively, Cazzaniga 1961, 38 suggests something like συν[ομωνυμεῖ δὲ κυμβίον καὶ κυμβεῖον] (cf. Schol. Ar. Ra. 494 Chantry). κυμβεῖα must be supplied for metrical reasons.
- 16.
κυμβεῖον has here the same meaning as κισσύβιον (‘rustic drinking-cup’ LSJ; ‘milk pail’), see Cazzaniga 1961, 38. Most likely, this quotation too comes from Nicander. For [καὶ γλάγεος κυ]μβεῖα (Cazzaniga 1961, 38-9), see Hom. Il. 10.642-3.
- 17.
[.?]ν̣ι̣ο̣.2λ.1ν τὸ̣ν̣ κύμβον: again, the sequence seems to refer to Ther. 526 (see Cazzaniga 1961, 39).
- frag. b, ll. 10-1.
[Σικε]λίας: see frag. a, l. 25 θρινακίην μὲν ῥίζα[ν] (= Ther. 529).
- 12.
θ’ ηὑρε was probably part of a lost quotation.