Inventory Catalog of the Papyri Collection at the Center for Advanced Judaic Studies of the University of Pennsylvania
(with appendices on the associated paper [mostly Arabic] and leather [mostly Hebrew] fragments)

03.12 (see 01.10)
[not yet identified in microfilm 1A.31x]
CD 1.017 (neg 1.18)

04.01-02 Arabic (paper) [removed from papyri collection]

04.03 Mostly Greek collage, also enlarged (from cartonnage?) -- see also 05.03 below.
10.8 x 6.5 cm. plus 3 loose fragments;
collage of attached fragments separated by RAK 7/96
[then mounted and numbered separately]
[identified on microfilm 1A.71x]
CD 1.069 (neg 3.06)

Detailed Report by Daniel Harris (11/2003)

CJS 04.03 is a collage of more than 20 pieces of papyrus and assorted scraps, some of which might have broken off from other fragments in the collage when it was dismantled. The collage might be from ancient cartonnage, although there is no evidence that the various pieces were significantly larger when the layers were glued together, nor that any plaster adhered to the surface. The fact that the collage exposes the greatest amount of writing on the member pieces is also suspicious. Thus it might be an artificial collage created in modern times to enhance the value of the fractured materials, although if that were the case, we might expect more care to have been taken in aligning the visible surfaces! For a similar collage in the CAJS collection, see 05.03 below.

Some 23 of the pieces are inscribed or show traces of ink, though not all produce legible letters. Some of the currently separate pieces probably were joined together originally -- the process of separating them was not flawless. Pieces on which letters can be deciphered are written in various documentary hands in black ink, excepting 04.03.07 which is written in greyish ink, possibly due to fading. The verso of 04.03.10 appears not to be in Greek (Demotic?). Dating is difficult overall, but those fragments which can be dated paleographically appear to belong to the pre-Constantinian Roman period. Only 04.03.08 is substantial enough to provide any definite context (perhaps a receipt), though a context for 04.03.09 is also suggested below (schoolpupil's notes?).

Overall, these pieces appear to have been inconsequential to their owners, which is consistent with the liklihood that they were discarded as trash in antiquity. Whether they were glued together in antiquity (e.g. before the 4rd century CE, since those that can be dated fall into the 1st through 3rd century range), and why, remain open questions.

#

04.03.01 - image
1.0 x 2.6 cm; from upper right side (as on CD-ROM), upside down;
4 (or 5) lines <-->, small hand and format

#

04.03.02 - image #"1"
2.1 x 3.8 cm; from right side below #1, upside down;
6 (or 7) lines <-->

1       .U
2      ..O
3   M..O.
4  .M . . TAW
5  WOISA
6       U

Written in a small, rapid hand with a strong tendency towards cursive, consistent with a 2nd-3rd century CE date. Some supralinear corrections appear to have been added between some letters in line 5. The small lunate S added after the I and slightly above the left part of the A in line 5 is probably a correction rather than a rounded rough breathing (which it resembles) since these do not appear regularly until centuries later.

-line 1, there are traces of another letter to the left
-line 2, the top of the O is open, and there are traces of letters to the left
-line 3, room for 2 or 3 letters between M and O (or R?), which is followed by a damaged vertical stroke, perhaps P or U.
-line 4, M is probable (with damaged initial stroke), preceded by a damaged letter and followed by perhaps two unread letters; the final W is damaged but probable.
-line 5, the W could be an M, but if it is being corrected with an O, this would support reading the first letter as W (an initial dative singular corrected to dative plural?).
-line 6, the U has a different shape from that in line 1, but both are consistent with 2-3 century forms.

note also small uninscribed piece from back of #2

#

04.03.03 | image
1.4 x 1.8 cm; from upper middle below #5, upside down ?;
2 (or 3) lines <||>, medium size letters

1   .A

The letters of the verso seem to be written upside-down, relative to the recto. There is only one clear letter. Nevertheless, the hand is obviously much less deliberate: the letters are much less carefully formed and are strongly ligatured. The verso appears to have been used as scrap taken from a much more carefully written piece (note the wide spacing and neat hand of the recto).

04.03.03- image
2 lines <-->, upside down relative to the other side?

1    NA.
2    OS

Medium-small, neat round hand. Wide spacing between lines.

#

04.03.04 - image #"5"
3.0 x 3.6 cm; from right middle below #3, upside down;
5 lines <-->, medium-small size letters

1 [traces]
2 P'OGR?UM
3 . .
4 ?AT PO
5

The most interesting aspect of this papyrus, whose letterforms are difficult to distinguish, is the presence of various symbols or abbreviations. In line 2, P' can be an abbreviation, representing para, per, peri or pros -- the lack of context makes a decision between these options difficult. Line 2 also contains a large s-shaped mark after GR, followed by two more broken letters. Line 3 contains 3 or 4 symbols/letters, perhaps including the abbreviation for aroura. Finally, there is a large cross at the beginning of line 4, with a trace of a vertical stroke to the left; the final letter in this line is a large rounded form (unlike the tiny O in line 2), broken to the right.

#

04.03.05 - image #"4"
2.4 x 1.1 cm; from upper middle above #3
3 lines <-->, small hand

1 G
2 ILO
3 TOO.

or, rotated 180 degrees

1 UOOI
2 OUIU
3 ?

Three lines of text with letterforms that can be "read" from either orientation, exchanging "top" and "bottom." Transcriptions for both possibilities have been provided.

04.03.05 |
2 lines? (plus mirrored ink?) <||>

Also could be read either way, but probably a single line including the letters CA (when read in the direction of the second alternative above), or possibly U if read the other direction.

#

04.03.06 - image #"6"
2.0 x 2.7 cm; from left side under #7
5 lines <-->, smallish hand; reverse uninscribed

1 [traces]
2 LAT
3 PEI
4 ..E..
5 TR

Clear, round letters suggest the Roman period. Perhaps 3 CE based on the to three-stroke (or maybe just two strokes, but at least somewhat unusual) epsilons. Line 3 might be GEI. Line 4 has at least two broken letters to the left, and two more to the right. Line 5 is broken at the bottom.

#

04.03.07 - image #"7"
2.2 x 2.7 cm; from far left side above #6, upside down?;
4 (or 3) lines <-->, with symbols?; reverse uninscribed

1 ..Q.
2 L . . W
3 ?
4 [traces]

Four lines of text written in greyish ink, perhaps due to fading (note the darker shade at the top and bottom of the piece). The letters are written in large, flourishing strokes. What seems to be an awkwardly slanted Q in line 1 is preceded by traces of two letters, and followed by the bottom of a hooked vertical stroke. In line 2, two small dots separate the L (or D?) and W. Some sort of symbol or perhaps a drawing appears in line 3, or possibly an exaggerated C?

note two very small pieces removed from left side

#

04.03.08 - Greek, in the collage (also from microfilm) and separated
4.7 x 4.3 cm;
from center below #6, above #9
8 lines <-->, smallish hand and format
other side blank
[preliminary reading by RAK class, Feb 2001; improved by Daniel Harris]

1 [traces]
2 MISTAIRAG
3 DRAXMW[N]
4 UTOUKM.H
5 TOUM[E]ROSDETAPANH
6 EOUK
7 GRA
8 [traces]

This papyrus is the most substantial inscribed fragment in the 04.03 collage. There is a large main piece, thinly attached to the left of which is a less well preserved section. It is written in a small, clear hand with some tendency towards cursive, typical of 1-3 CE. This is the only piece of the collage which betrays a definite context. It appears to be an economic document of some sort and includes words for "drachmae" (a monetary denomination) possibly in the genitive of price (line 3), "portion" and "price" (line 5). Although less certain, the ending -istai in line 1 could belong to a verb referring to conveyance of goods (e.g. komizein and/or its various compounds).

line 1: originally read as AR
line 7: originally read as TRW

#

04.03.09- tiny fragment
1.2 x 1.0 cm <-->; from left center below #8, upside down?;
4 lines, small hand and format (other side blank)

1 . BW
2 PIW
3 PAUW
4 MU .

Written in a very small hand with an interesting preponderance of what may be first person verbal forms in a vertical column. Could this be a schoolpupil's notes?

#

04.03.10-
1.4 x 2.1 cm; top large frg (sideways on microfilm);
2 (or 3) lines <-->; medium sized hand;

1 I
2 OUIS

Wide spacing both between letters and lines. Written in a clear hand.

04.03.10|
2 lines <||>, symbols?
see CD 1.070 (neg 3.07)

Apparently not Greek. Could the markings be symbols? Demotic? If we assume that the initial text was on the recto (along the fibers), the verso probably was used as scrap. Note the swift hand compared to the clarity of recto (unless we are dealing with non-Greek writing!).

#

04.03.11|
0.7 x 1.2 cm <||>; was attached to back of 04.3.10-
traces of ink on both sides -- see CD 1.070 (neg 3.07)

04.03.11-

#

04.03.12-
0.6 x 1.4 cm <-->; was on surface in microfilm, but mounted separately in CD-ROM image;
evidence of 2 letters on same line (perhaps an M)

04.03.12|
traces of ink on back -- see CD 1.070 (neg 3.07)

#

#

#

04.03.15-
2.3 x 2.0 cm <-->; from area of frg #4;
apparently uninscribed, both sides (?)

04.03.misc
more than 14 tiny and/or uninscribed scraps (two are relatively larger than most = 16, 17, etc.)

04.03backside (see above, fragments 04.03.10-12)
CD 1.070 (neg 3.07)

04.04-05 Arabic (paper) [remove from papyri collection]

04.06 Language unclear
(2 small papyrus fragments not from same document)

#

#

#

04.07- Greek official register (?).
9.7 x 11.7 cm.;
top margin and middle parts of at least 9 lines <-->;
surface layer gone at bottom;
light color, very fine texture, thin strokes in black ink;
dated 176-192 ce, Hermopolite nome (?) (Todd Hickey)
edited by Todd Hickey (Jenni Sheridan class)
[identified on microfilm 1A.71x]
CD 1.005 (neg 1.06), CD 1.037 (neg 2.05), CD 3.004 (neg 9.01); also enhanced

1.]OIKAIARWIABAI\L/ OITOULUPA... EPISTA\L/[

2.]TWI DWRON E . LOGIS.H.. POLISXURIWNI. .[

3.

4.

5. [single word]

6.

7.

8. ]. AI ERMOPO\L/ EDAFW[

9. ] [surface missing] IAMOIP[

#

04.08 Greek.
4.5 x 9.2 cm.;
parts of 4 lines <-->, mirror writing (blotted?) after vacat(?);
central fragment, perhaps lower margin intact;
medium brownish color with surface abrasions;
date undetermined
[identified on microfilm 1A]
CD 1.074 (neg 3.11); also enhanced
+new scan 2003 r&v

1. [trace of bottom of rounded letter]

2.

3.

4.

#

#

#

#

05.01 | Greek. ( 150 dpi image with color adjusted; 600 dpi natural image, and 600 dpi with color adjusted).
in three joined pieces (formerly a, b, c);
10.6 x 6.9 cm;
6 lines from central portion, possibly lower margin <||>;
dark reddish color, upright cursive;
late;
no evidence of writing on reverse

1.                                          ] . AS . . . . [

2.                       ] ONFNEUQEWSFA . .[

3.                       ]OIHMERI . . . KIOIPAGIS .[

4.                       ] UISXIGARTWNSTE . .[

5. ]FEA . . OUALLHNFA.FHN . . O . [

6. [about 6 letters with elongated final S]

#

#

05.02 - Greek
5.5 x 8.6 cm.;
5 visible lines (possibly were 7), lower right corner <-->;
possibly more traces of writing beneath Japanese Paper
+new scan 2003 r&v [CJS_05_02_r.jpg]

05.02 | Greek
5.5 x 8.6 cm.;
4 lines, left margin and upper and lower (?) <||>
fine black strokes, highly abbreviated
+new scan 2003 r&v [CJS_05_02_v.jpg]

1.

2.

3.

4.

05.03 Greek & Demotic collage, alsoenlarged (from cartonnage?) -- see also 04.3 above.
10.1 x 8.1 cm.;
14 or more lines;
some 20 adhering fragments of various shapes and sizes;
treated and separated (also enlarged here) by rak in 7/96 (see separate notes)
scanned and printed as separated pieces 8/98
CD 1.0082 (no back?)

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#xxx / Latin 002

#

#

#

#

#xxx / Coptic #xxx

#xxx / Gk #xxx

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

11.07- Greek Receipt (?).
8.8(8.3) x 5.9 cm.;
center parts of 6 lines plus underline <--> bottom margin intact;
medium-dark orangish color, dark brown ink, decorated lower margin;
probably 3rd century CE
[seems to have multiple layers in upper left corner]
[preliminary work by Vance Whitesides (for Jenni Sheridan class); suggestions from Helsinki team after 1998 Florence Papyri Congress; April 2001 examination and transcription by RAK's RelSt 735 workgroup]

[Request to publish from Michael Cottier (Toronto), 27 March 2006.]
CD 1.014,042; 2.042; microfilm 3A (in two pieces)

01. . . . . ] . [ . . . .
02. ]GS[.]T.[.]DIA[..]UFIL[..].LKLH.O[
03. ]MEMF . . . . LLYR[.].IOI DE-AO.[
04. ]. . E . . . E . EIAS[.] . BOU-.-DUO[
05. ]. Z-KD//FAWFIEP[T]AKAIDEKA[
06. ]. H-IZ (10 decorative looped strokes)[
07. (horizontal line, with lower margin below)

line 2: perhaps dia tou filadel(fiou) klhrou
line 3: badly abraded
line 4: badly abraded, especially on the left side; probably abbreviation for artabh between ...bou and duo on the right
line 5: the first three letters are clearly visible, but are not easily recognized forms (KD is not the only possible transcription for those letters, although a number such as 24 might be expected); they are followed by two supralinear diagonal strokes (not the more expected overline as in the next line); FAWFI is a fall month, and the 17th would be mid-October; although we expect the final letter of the line to be A, it is only vaguely similar to that letter form and might be an abbreviation of some sort (the reading "seven and ten" seems obvious)
line 6: the initial H is clear, followed by a mid-point dot and the letters IZ, with the Z overlined (thus doubtless the number 17)

#

This text is written with the grain on two central fragments. Both are from the same document, as evidenced by the hand, ink and fiber pattern. The larger fragment contains a portion of one letter on the right side as line 1, and then parts of ten more lines. The text of the larger fragment is written over a join in the papyrus running down the center of the fragment, roughly three centemeters from the left edge. The papyrus to the left of the join is visibly lighter in color than the surface to the right. Holes and missing strands of the papyrus obscure some characters in lines 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8, and the combination of erased/abraded ink and a missing portion of the top layer of papyrus has eradicated the ends of lines 2 and 7, unless they were intentionally left blank.

The smaller fragment contains parts of three lines with a hole in its top line and missing horizontal fiber surface above that line. This fragment had been mounted with the larger fragment, but upside down at the lower left. The color and striations of this fragment suggest that it should, in fact, be located (right side up) at that location, with the first line of the smaller fragment as the left part of the last line of the larger fragment (electronically repositioned in the image).

The letters of this document are written with dark ink in bold strokes in a cursive form that is often ligatured and difficult to decipher. References to A)ROU/RAI in lines 3 and 6 and to PAREU/RESIS in line 9 suggest, perhaps, a land contract. Mention of an indiction year in line 8 guarantees that the earliest possible dating is 313/314 CE (see R.S.Bagnall and K.A.Worp, Chronological Systems of Byzantine Egypt, chapter 2).

While the document clearly concerns land, its precise nature cannot be determined due to the lack of any phrases specific to a particular genre of documentary papyri.

01. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ]S[
02. ]ONURAU . . . . N TON[
03. ]WN ALLWN AROURWN TAIS O[
04. ]EMENHS AURHLIAS ANX[
05. ]EMM . S TALANTA DEKA .[
06. ]AROURWN EBDOMHKONTA DE[
07. ]A.RPAUSONTOIS PARUM . . . .[
08. ].AUTAS OGDOHS INDIKTWNOS TO.[
09. ]WN PAREURESI MHDEMIA ALLA KAI .[
10. . . . ]ENXRITHS PARLI[
11. ]. S TOUT][.ESI .[
12. ]. XROS .[
13. ]. SEO .[

01. ...
02. ...
03. ...of the other arouras for the...
04. ...of Aurelia Anx...
05. ...ten talents...
06. ...of seventy arouras...
07. ...
08. ...in the eighth (year) of the indiction...
09. ...under no pretext whatsoever, but even...
10. ...
11. ...
12. ...
13. ...

line 4: While several masculine names beginning with ANX are found in the available papyri (DDBP, Namenbuch and supplement), only one feminine name, ANXARHNIA, is attested (PLond 191.20 in Preisigke Namenbuch 37).

line 6: DEKA is perhaps possible, but not at all sure.

line 8: The initial iota of INDIKTIWNOS is marked with a bold dieresis, as also in numerous papyri (e.g. BGU 2156, CPR 62, PHerm 42, PLond 1781, PMichael 40, PNYU 4a, PStras 15). Since "indiction" is often abbreviated in papyri (e.g. IN, IND, INDIK), it would be possible to read this line differently (INDIK() TWN ...), but it is also sometimes spelled out (usually with two omicrons, but with omega and omicron in PCol 144). With the first year of the first indiction set at 312 CE, the earliest year eight would be 319, and then would be repeated every 15 years thereafter into the early seventh century (Bagnall and Worp, Chronological Systems 72ff). Unfortunately, the fragment does not seem to provide any other dating clues to enable us to fix its date more exactly.

line 9: The stock phrase PAREURESEI MHDEMIA is attested in numerous papyri of various genres, almost always in the dative (see e.g. POxy 1716, Acknowledgement of Repayment of Loan Debt; POxy 2349, Receipt for Settlement of Rent; POxy 2583, Division of Inherited Property). The spelling -RESI is also found in the 4th century CE (e.g. PKoeln 5, PMich 5.322). Normally the clause is preceded by a list of counter-actions to the document's stipulations, prohibited "under any pretext whatsoever" to the parties involved. Without further indications of these expected prohibitions, it is impossible to know the precise nature of the agreement represented in this document.

#

#

#

#

Appendix 1: Paper Materials [mostly Arabic]

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

Appendix 2: Hebrew Materials

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

First draft 1994; expanded and updated 1996 (latest update 2 March 2001)