The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part XVI

2. Governor: probably the praeses, as often at this date; see e.g. 1888. 2 and note. The dispositions of the pagarchy: the sense is by no means clear. Typos, besides its meaning of “form” or “model,” has two meanings in papyri: (1) a decree or rescript, as e.g. in P. Brit. Mus. 77. 46-7 (divine and pragmatic typos), (2) a judgment or decision. Neither meaning is appropriate here, and it is desirable to find one as little removed from them as possible. Two senses suggest themselves: (1) “minutes” (acta), (2) “(testamentary) dispositions,” i.e., “will.” In favor of (1) it may be urged that the plural typoi could be a translation of acta, and that this sense involves a not-too-great divergence from known uses of typos; also that the “legacies,” taken in conjunction with the mention of the collectors, may well be interpreted as “revenues,” the pagarch’s business being mainly financial. These arguments, however, are hardly sufficient to establish the meaning “acta.” Arguments in favor of (2) seem stronger. The reference to the division of property in lines 20-21 suggests the writer is referring to matters immediately affecting the personal interests of his correspondents. That typos refers to a will is suggested by the word emfanizo to exhibit/register, since emfanisis was the technical word for insinuatio legal registration. Typos, meaning “decree” or “decision,” and so “disposition,” might not unnaturally be used in the plural to denote a will; and since the deceased may well have had outstanding obligations for unpaid taxes, the intervention of the collectors is no difficulty. Prosfora never occurs as “revenues,” but prosfein and prosfora are used of marriage settlements and similar dispositions and can here be interpreted as the legacies in the will. Hence, this explanation gives a unity to the letter which the other excludes.

4. In them: grammatically this should refer to the typoi, but the technical meaning of dialaleo and dialalia as an investigation before a magistrate makes it not unlikely that the writer has used the words loosely to refer to the court of the praeses. This is supported by the fact that in the second letter, which shows some improvements in wording, a different phrase is used.