The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part 8

Et vixit Cainan annis .lxx 12 And Cainan lived years 70
et genuit Malaleel
25 et vixit Cainan 13 and he begot Malaleel and Cainan lived

[quia sp]eciosae sunt because they are beautiful
[sumpse]runt sibi uxo they took to themselves wives
50 [res ex o]mnibus quas from all which

1. This verse is preserved in Jerome, Quaest. Hebr. in Gen. 313 Hebrew Questions on Genesis, where septingenti anni seven hundred years is written; cf. ll. 12-14, note.

3-6. Verse 5 is not extant elsewhere. For Adae Adam cf. e. g. Gen. ii. 16 praecepit Dominus Deus Adae the Lord God commanded Adam (from Augustine). Jerome in verse 4 has dies Adam. annis days of Adam. years should be anni years.

6-7 = Augustine, De Civ. Dei, xv. 15 The City of God. Augustine has quinque et ducentos annos two hundred and five years, but the ablative is attested in verses 3 (Hilary) and 25 (Jerome) and is no doubt correct; cf. l. 10.

8-11. Verse 7 as far as dcccvii 807 is preserved only here; Augustine, l. c., gives et genuit ... filias and he begot ... daughters.

12-14 = Augustine, l. c., where duodecim et nongenti anni nine hundred and twelve years is given; cf. note on l. 1.

15-25. These five verses are not found elsewhere.

26 sqq. The verse is extant in Jerome, Quaest. Hebr. 314, and part of it in Ambrose, De Noe et Arca, i. 2 (227 d) On Noah and the Ark. The former has iste requiescere nos faciet this one will make us rest, the latter hic faciet nos requiescere this one will make us rest. It is useless to attempt to decide whether iste or hic stood in our MS.; οὗτος this one is the Greek.

28-30. Jerome, l. c., has ab operibus nostris from our works, Ambrose, l. c., omits nostris and continues et a tristitia et a terra and from sadness and from the earth; the Greek is ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων ἡμῶν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν λυπῶν τῶν χειρῶν ἡμῶν from our works and from the sorrows of our hands. It is noteworthy that manum nos[traru]m of our hands, which is absent in Ambrose’s version, appears in our MS. as the equivalent of τῶν χειρῶν ἡμῶν, and that the preceding word is not tristitia sadness. What replaced tristitia is, however, doubtful. In l. 28 either ab o]per[ib]us or a la]bor[ib]us can be read, but the former seems preferable both in itself and on account of the patristic evidence. If a la]bor[ib]us were substituted, operibus would be available for the next line (cf. the Vulgate ab operibus et laboribus manuum nostrarum from the works and labors of our hands, and ]bus is a possible reading; but it is unconvincing, and ]tiis is really more suitable. tristi]tiis would be a literal rendering of τῶν λυπῶν; the difficulty is that [et *tristi]*tiis is a longer supplement than is expected in the lacuna. Perhaps tristiis was written, by a lipography; but i and t are both narrow letters and on the whole the reading suggested seems to be the least objectionable, though it is adopted with no great confidence. At the end of l. 29 os was written as a monogram, the o being utilized as the lower curve of the s.

31-41. Verses 30 and 31 of chap. v and the first part of verse 1 in the next chapter are found here only. In verse 31 there is nothing corresponding to μετὰ τὸ γεννῆσαι αὐτὸν τὸν Νῶε after he begot Noah, and postquam genuit Noe must have dropped out. If the length of the lines were the same in the archetype as in this copy, postquam ... Noe would just about have filled one line.

42 sqq. = Augustine, De Civ. Dei, xv. 23.

45. eis to them: so Tertullian, De Vel. Virg. 7 On the Veiling of Virgins, where also cum coepissent when they had begun appears for postquam coeperunt after they began and plures more/many for multi many; Augustine, l. c., has illis to them. In l. 44 multi suits the space much better than plures.

46. [vident]es seeing: so Augustine, l. c., and Jerome, Quaest. Hebr. 314; conspicati beholding Tertullian, l. c.

filii sons: so Jerome and Tertullian, ll. cc.; angeli angels Augustine, l. c., remarking LXX quidem interpretes et angelos Dei dixerunt istos et filios Dei; quod quidem non omnes codices habent, nam quidam nisi filios Dei non habent Indeed the Seventy-two translators called them both angels of God and sons of God; which indeed not all manuscripts have, for some have nothing but sons of God; cf. Aug. Quaest. in Heptateuch. i. 3 Questions on the Heptateuch quamvis non-