The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part 69

unidentified literary text; the latter may be assigned to the early second century. The hand responsible for the text of Hermas is an informal round one, which I would place in the earlier part of the third century. It belongs to the same paleographic environment as III 412 = GLH 23a (Iulius Africanus, Kestoi Girdles), of the mid-third century; compare also GMAW² 63 (the Bodmer St John), assigned to the first half of the third century. It is generally bilinear; only ι and ρ descend slightly below the notional baseline. α is usually formed in a looped sequence, but occasionally is wedge-shaped; ε has long mid-stroke sometimes detached from the back; the stem and upper arm of κ are made in a single movement.

Θεόc God is abbreviated in the usual way. There is punctuation in the form of a middle point written in a blank (more than one-letter) space left for it (4, 5, 7, 9), but once we find a high point within the normal spacing of letters (8; it is unclear whether this is by the first hand). These may have served as pointers for reading aloud (cf. also P. Mich. 130). Elision is signalled in the only case that can be verified. A correction in 3, making good a phonetic spelling, is probably not due to the copyist (the cancelling stroke is in a different ink).

The text overlaps with S, B, and A. Too little has survived to allow a reliable judgement on the relation of 4705 with the other witnesses, though we may note that, when the tradition is split, 4705 mostly, but not always, sides with S. There is one new reading (9), while in another case the papyrus illustrates the complexities of the tradition (7).

1 At the start of the line, perhaps καρδι[αι]c hearts, with SA (ταῖc καρδίαιc om. B).
6–7 των αγαθων των [μελλον]των of the future good things with SB: τῶν μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν A.
7 μετ]αμεληcουcιν they will regret: μετ[αμε]ληcονται B: μετανοήcουcιν they will repent S (et debent paenitere and they ought to repent E): πολλὰ μεταμελήcουcιν A: vagantur they wander L¹: non resistent hisdem luxuriis they will not resist these same luxuries L². μεταμελήcουcιν is wrong in terms of grammar: neither NT nor documentary papyri provide any evidence for the use of the active forms of this verb with personal subject. 4705 now shows that the corruption is ancient. Carlini has argued that B preserves the original reading; see his 'METANOEIN