Book Title

Appendice

Un nouveau fragment du codex Bodmer de Ménandre

William H. WILLIS

27 October 1989 – Duke University

Durant la préparation de ce volume, nous avons appris l’existence d’un nouveau fragment du codex Bodmer de Ménandre. Le professeur William H. Willis, de Duke University, a bien voulu en réserver la primeur au présent volume, ce dont nous lui sommes vivement reconnaissants. On le constatera : le fragment qu’il livre au public vient apporter un complément à l’une des parties les plus mutilées de notre document.

A new fragment of the Bodmer Aspis

In 1967 Reinhold Merkelbach published as « Wartetexte 2 » a fragment of a papyrus codex leaf (P. Köln, inv. 904) bearing on each face parts of 16 lines which he recognized as deriving from the end of a comedy celebrating a double bethrothal1. Soon afterwards, the fragment was restored by Colin Austin to its proper place in Acts IV and V of Menander, Aspis, 482-497 and 520-535 2, a section of the broken final surviving leaf 31 (originally the penultimate leaf) of the thirdcentury P. Bodmer XXVI 3. Now, directly adjoining the Cologne fragment, a new fragment has come to light among the Robinson Papyri at Duke University (P. Rob., inv. 38). It adds from three to eight letters to the beginnings of lines 487-498 preserved on the Cologne fragment and two to eight letters preceding the line-ends of 525-535.

The new fragment was found in the collection of the noted archaeologist David Moore Robinson among the several dozen texts he had acquired in 1955 from a dealer other than those who purveyed papyri to the Bodmer and Cologne collections. Altogether seven literary texts in this group have been found to join fragments of the same texts in Cologne. In order that the fragments of Aspis might be rejoined, the Robinson fragment has been transferred to the Cologne collection on indefinite loan.

Except for the confirmation of a few conjectures and the invalidation of other reasonable ones, our gain from the added words and letters is small. At 488 ἀποφαίνειν is proved right rather than ἀποφέρειν. The subject of ϰελεύης (489) is second-person singular, not third, so that ὅσ’ ἂν must be read, not ὃς ἂν. While σεσωϰώς’ ει is a welcome addition to 493, πολλον remains obscure : whether πολλὸν or πολλῶν, πολλ’ ὃv (the reading of most editions) seems ruled out. διαπέφευγε (496) and εύτυχῶς (497) clarify Kleostratos’ hope for Daos’ escape.

At the beginning of Act V the chief gains are the vocative Χαιρέα at 528 (replacing the widely accepted oath νὴ τὸν ῾Hρακλέα), which may prove evidential for the assignment of speakers. Since Chaireas is addressed directly, he presumably cannot be the speaker of 526-529 (unless antilabe is hidden in lacuna), but is the likely speaker of 530. If so, a third character (generally thought to be Daos) spoke 520-525, since he cannot be Chairestratos, Chaireas nor Kleostratos. The ὡς Κλεόστρατος of 530 suggests that he is not present on stage ; in any case ἀρτίως ὡς lays σῶς to rest1. Chairestratos is then the likely speaker of 526-529 and therefore of 521-522. If so, Chaireas or Daos speaks 533-536, and the οὑτοσί at 536 may well be Smikrines. τ’ ἀσπάσαι at 533 and ]αλαλῶν at 535 may give rise to further emendation.

In the text that follows, the readings preserved on the Robinson papyrus are underlined and attached to the affected lines of the Cologne fragment.

Text

recto (→)

1__υ.[ ]….[482
__λαμβαν[
τὸ μὲν ἐγγυᾶν [
ἴσως τοιούτου π[– – –485
5ὑμῖν γενομεν[
πολλῶν σεπ[…]υρο[
ἕτοιμος ἀποφαίνει488
ὅσ’ ἂν ϰελεύης πρα[489
__ἐναντίον σου ταυται[490
\Κλεόστρατος/491
10ὧ φιλτάτη γῆ χαῖρ
προσεύχομαί σοι μ[
πολλον σεσ[[ο]]\ω/κώςεἰ [μέν493
πάρειμι τὴν σωτηρ[ίαν
ὁρῶ δεομένην τὴν [495
15εἰ δ’ αὗ διαπέφευγε496
ὁ Δᾶ[ο]ς εὐτυχῶς απ[
νομίσαιμ’ ἐμ’αυτὸ[ν498

verso (↑)

1].[
]ν παρείλϰυσεν520
γί]νεται διπλοῦς {ό} γάμος
] ἑαυτοῦ θυγατέρα
5] τὴν άδελφὴν πάλιν
]··[··] τὴν δὲ πᾶσαν οὐσίαν
]ν τ[αῦ]τα πάντα ἕξει πέρας :525
]αν που περιπατεῖ τὸν γείτονα526
]ηρον οὑτοσί γε, νὴ {τον} Δία527
10] Χαιρέα, πρόσελθέ μοι
]. πάντα, νὴ τὸν ‘Ήλιον :
]τιν ἀρτίως ὡς Κλεόστρατος :530
μὲν οὗν ὤμην ἐγώ531
]φεις εἷτα ποῦ ’στιν : ἐνθαδὶ
15]τ’ ἀσπάσαι φίλον λαβὼν
νεις⸱ προσέρχεται
]αλαλῶν εὐωχίαν535535
]εξων δῆλός ἐστιν οὑτοσί·

____________

1 ZPE 1 (1967), 103-104 and Tafel II.

2 Menandri Aspis et Samia, I Textus (cum apparatu critico) et indices, ed. C. Austin (Kleine Texte 188a, De Gruyter, Berlin, 1969), pp. 22-24.

3 Ménandre : Le Bouclier, ed. R. Kasser and C. Austin (Bibliotheca Bodmeriana, Cologny-Genève, 1969), pp. 44-47 and plates 12-13.

1 Unless, of course, it is to be resurrected by conjecture : ἄρτι{ω} σῶς (E. Handley).

488 ἕτοιμος ἀποφαίνει[v, « ready to produce ».

489 ὅσ’ ἂν ϰελεύης πρα[, « however many you order… ». Here the second-person subject is apparently Smikrines, and the speaker of 484-490 Daos, or possibly Chaireas.

491 Kleostratos enters an empty stage and declaims his apostrophe not quite in the words of fr. 287 but to ὧ φιλτάτη Γῆ, χαῖρ[e, perhaps followed by μῆτερ.

493 The form πολλὸν, though not found elsewhere in Menander, occurs at Plato Comicus fr. 173.15 (Kock) and in trimeters at Soph., Ant., 86 and Trach. 1196 ; the high stop after aeacoxax ; precludes a reading πολλ’ ὅν. Omicron, cancelled by a stroke, is replaced by supralinear omega, apparently by a corrector. εἰ μὲν doubtless followed, to be balanced by εἰ δ’ αὗ at 496.

496 διαπέφευγε[ν, « If (Daos) in turn has come through safely ».

498 ἐμ’αυτὸ[ν on the Robinson fragment confirms the traces on the Cologne, adding an apostrophe.

526 The first letter preserved on the Cologne fragment is read as tau in the editions, but with down-turning crossbar ligatured to the middle of omicron it is unlike any other tau in the Bodmer codex ; nor is there any trace of a crossstroke left of the hasta. Elsewhere throughout the codex tau is ligatured to the top of a following omicron. I therefore record it as a doubtful pi, though gamma is also possible. On the Robinson fragment only a dot remains of the preceding letter.

527 Perhaps ἐπίϰλ]ηρον ?

531 Cf. νῦν μὲν οὗν at Epit. 611, but with a present tense (οἷδα).

535 Perhaps παρ]αλαλῶν εὐωχίαν could refer either to a « wake » for Chairestratos anticipated by Smikrines, or the ensuing wedding feast, which Smikrines will have to furnish, παρ]έξων δῆλός ἐστιν by virtue of having lost both Kleostratos’ booty and Chairestratos’ legacy.