MOHAMED G. ELMAGHRABI A
DONATIO MORTIS CAUSA
aus: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 183 (2012) 197–202
© Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn
197
A P.Tebt. II 517 Tebtunis
DONAT IO MORTIS CAUSA 1
18.8 × 10.6 Fig. 1
2nd cent. A.D.
This light brown papyrus, now housed at The Center for the Tebtunis Papyri, contains the ends of 34 lines written in a small regular cursive of a practiced hand along the fibers; two more hands appear in the subscriptions. The top margin is preserved and measures 2.8 cm, while the lower margin is lost. The portion lost to the left of the preserved part of the document cannot be accurately defined, but depending on the formulas used in similar type of document a considerable part (not less than 70 letters depending on restoration of lines 20–21) of the original is not preserved. The verso is blank except of the T-number written in black ink: T 332.2 The text recorded belongs to a type of wills known as donatio mortis causa, a division (μεριτεία) or cession (συγχώρημα) of property after the donor’s death (μετὰ τὴν τελευτήν). It is the typically Egyptian form of will written in the form of contract (ὁμολογία) either independently or attached to a marriage agreement (συγγραφοδιαθήκη).3 The present document, which was included in several lists of donationes mortis causa but was never edited,4 is an independent agreement in which Athenodoros (son of Athenodoros?, see infra) declares that his property is to be ceded to his heirs after his death: to his wife, children, nephews, grandsons and a step granddaughter.5 From what is extant, the scheme of the present contract seems to follow the usual pattern of the conventional independent donationes. First there is the prescript providing the date and provenance of the document (line 1). The disposition (lines 1–25) uses the usual homologia-formula: ὁμολογεῖ συγκεχωρηκέναι μετὰ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ τελευτήν,6 within which the testator is defined, then the beneficiaries are defined (lines 2–5) and the terms of the contract are stated (lines 6–25). Two different stipulations can 1 This paper is the outcome of the Summer Papyrological Institute held at the Brigham Young University, Provo-Utah in 2011. I would like to thank Peter van Minnen and Klaas Worp for their help with deciphering the present text. I would also like to thank Todd Hickey at the Center for the Tebtunis Papyri, University of California, Berkeley for permission to publish the text. 2 For the T-number system see, E. R. O’Connel, Recontextualizing Berkeley’s Tebtunis Papyri, Proc. 24th. Intern. Congr. Pap. (Helsinki 2007) 815 ff. 3 For discussions and lists of donationes mortis causa, see H. Kreller, Erbrechtliche Untersuchungen auf Grund der graeco-aegyptischen Papyrusurkunden (Leipzig 1919) 204 ff.; O. Montevecchi discussed their stipulations from the economic and social points of view in Ricerche di sociologia nei documenti dell’Egitto greco-romano, Aegyptus 15 (1935) 72 ff.; A. Sansica, Un nuovo testamento greco-egizio dell’età romana, Acme 1 (1948) 233 ff.; R. Taubenschlag, The Law of Graeco-Roman Egypt in the Light of the Papyri 332 B.C.–640 A.D., 2nd ed. (Warsaw 1955) 204 ff.; E. M. Husselman, Donationes Mortis Causa from Tebtunis, TAPA 88 (1957) 135 ff.; P.Mert. III 105, introduction; P.Vind. Tandem, p. 204; P.Ups.Frid., introduction; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I (München 1971) 763 ff.; P. J. Sijpesteijn, A Donatio Mortis Causa, ZPE 98 (1993) 295; the usage of this form as manumission was studied by J. Farr, Manumission in the Form of a Donatio Mortis Causa, BASP 30 (1993) 93 ff.; Y. Yiftach studied the increasing corpus of this type of wills in Deeds of Last Will in Graeco-Roman Egypt: A Case Study in Regionalism, BASP 39 (2002) 149 ff., where he refused to call this group of documents donationes and preferred to call them by the original Greek term used in the papyri ie. συγχωρήματα or μεριτείαι; he also concluded that the donatio mortis causa was used most often in villages, while the διαθήκη was more commonly used in μητροπόλεις; P.Sijp. 44, introduction. 4 The most recent list of donationes is given by R. P. Salomons in P.Sijp. 44, appendix, 300 f. A copy of a donatio mortis causa is also included in a third century petition from the Heracleopolite nome (BGU XV 2462, ll. 1–10) but it doesn’t appear in any of the previous lists. 5 See note to line 5. 6 Other donationes use the verb μερίζω. For a discussion of the distinction between συγχωρῶ and μερίζω see Kreller (above, note 3), 77 f., 222, 241 f.; E. Kornemann, Elterliche Teilung für den Todesfall (P. Giss. Inv. Nr. 255), APF 10 (1932), 214 f. For συγχωρῶ cf. also H. J. Wolff, Das Recht der griechischen Papyri Ägyptens in der Zeit der Ptolemaeer und des Prinzipats (München 1978) II 93 and n. 57. For the evolution in usage of the verb συγχωρῶ see A. B. Schwartz, Die öffentlichen und privaten Urkunden im römischen Ägypten (Leipzig 1920) 222–24.
198
M. G. Elmaghrabi
be recognized to which we have other parallels. The first (lines 20–21) is the stipulation concerning the responsibilities of the heirs towards the testators and/or his spouse. This stipulation may include subsidiaries for the testators and his spouse in addition to other arrangements for the testator’s burial and the paying of the due debts and taxes.7 The second stipulation (lines 26–27) is the clause of revocability that gives the testator the right to alter the terms of the disposition as long as he lives.8 The enumeration and description of the ὑπογραφεύς and witnesses are partially preserved (lines 26–28); there are only few words of the recapitulation (lines 28ff), in which the disposition is rephrased in the subjective, before the papyrus breaks off. The family of Athenodoros Due to the mutilated state of the document we cannot draw up the full stemma of the family. The testator’s name is Athenodoros, his full name is missing in the lacunas. The only male string that can be followed is through his brother Herodes and his nephew Neilos. A man with the same name Athenodoros is mentioned in P.Tebt. 514, 9 which has a close T-Number (329),10 as being the son of Athenodoros. In the same document the name Herodes (his brother here) appears. The connection between the two can be further illustrated by the appearance of Herodes’ son Neilos in a tax list from Tebtunis (P.Phil. 18, l. 36) Νεῖλος Ἡρώδου τοῦ Ἀθηνοδώρου. This Neilos is perhaps the same nephew Neilos (I) in line 4, or the grandson of the same name in line 28, taking the patronymic Herodes as a possible name of one of Athenodoros’ sons whose name had fallen into the lacuna. Athenodoros’ wife is called Anoubiaina alias Apollonous. His children include a daughter called Kronous (II). It seems that he also has a step daughter called Kronous (I) and a step granddaughter called Sarapias. Three grandsons of Athenodoros are also mentioned, and they must be the children of one of his children missed in the lacuna, they are Neilos (II), Kronion and Herodes. Athenodoros I ∞ ? Athenodoros II ∞ Anoubiaina alias Apollonous ∞ ? HerodesII? ∞ Kronous II Neilos II
Kronion
Kronous I ∞ ?
Herodes (III?)
Herodes I ∞ ? Neilos I ?
Sarapias The property
Due to the incomplete status of the document a complete list of Athenodoros’ property cannot be given. But the property mentioned in the preserved part of the papyrus indicates that Athenodoros belonged to a wealthy family. It included at least a privately owned catoecic parcel of land, a female slave called Kleopatra and her offspring, and three houses. Text →
5
[Ἔτους ca.? ἐν Τεβτύνι τῆς Πολέ]μωνος μερίδος το[ῦ] Ἀρσ[ι]νοείτου νομοῦ. ὁμο[λογεῖ Ἀθηνόδωρος -- ὡς ἐτῶν -κ]οντα οὐλῂ ὀφρύι ἀριστερᾷ vacat συνκ[εχ]ω[ρηκέναι μετὰ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ τελευτὴν ca.?]ς γυνα[ι]κὸ[ς] Ἀνουβιαίνης τῆς καὶ Ἀπολλωνοῦ[τος ca.?, καὶ τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ ὁμοπατρίου] καὶ ὁμομητρ[ίο]υ ἀδελφοῦ Ἡρώδου υϊ῾οὺς Ν[εῖλ]ον, [ca.? καὶ τὴν τῆς α]ὐτ[ῆ]ς [Ἀ]νουβιαίνης θυγατρὸ[ς Κ]ρονοῦτο[ς] θυγατέ[ρα] Sαραπιάδα [ca.? τ]ῶν δὲ [ἄ]λλων μητρὶ Ἀνουβιαίνῃ τῇ προγεγραμμένῃ 7 See note to lines 20–21. 8 On this clause of revocability see Taubenschlag (above, note 3) 204–206. 9 A scan of P.Tebt. 514 was kindly provided by T. Hickey. 10 For the importance of T-numbers as a guide to establish connections between the documents see O’Connel (above, note 2).
A donatio mortis causa
Fig. 1
199
200
10
15
20
25
30
M. G. Elmaghrabi [ca.?] .... [κ]ατὰ τὸ λοιπ[ὸ]ν ἥ[μι]συ μ[έ]ρος τὰς ὑπαρχούσας [αὐτῷ περὶ ca.? τ]ῆς μὲν πρότης ⟨σ⟩φραγεῖ[δ]ος ἀρ[ο]ύρα[ς] τρεῖς ἕκτον ἐν τῇ [ca.? ἐν τῇ] αὐτῇ Τεβτύνι οἰκιῶν δύο καὶ τῶν ἀνὰ μέσον [ca.? το γει]τνεῦον ταύτῃ ἐκ τοῦ πρὸς λίβα μέρους ἥμ[ι]σ[υ] [μέρος ca.? αἰθρί]ου καὶ ἐξεδρείου παντὸς πηχεισμοῦ ἀ[ρ]χόμενον [ca? μέρος ? ca.? κ]αινοῦ δ[ι]ατῖνον νότον ἐπὶ βορρᾶ ὧν προσυνκε[χώρηκε ca.? γ]ῆν βασιλεικὴν πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἐξῖναι αὐτοῖς [μ]ήτε εἰσ[ca.? ἐκ λι]βὸς αὐ[τ]ῶν πύργου. vacat τῇ δ[ὲ] θυγατρὶ Κρο[ν]οῦτι [ca.? οἰκία]ν δείστεγον καὶ τὸ γει[τ]νιεῦο[ν] ταῦτα ἐκ τοῦ [ca.? ]ην τοῦ ὄντος αὐτῶν ὡς πρόκ[ει]ται πηχεισμ[οῦ] [ca.? τοῖς δὲ] τρεισὶ υϊ῾ωνοῖς Nείλῳ, Κρον[ί]ο[ν]ι, Ἡρώδῃ ἐξ ἴσου [ca.?] δουλεικὰ σώματα Κλεοπάτραν καὶ ταύτης [τέκνα ca.? ἐπίπλοα καὶ σκε]ύη καὶ ἐνδομενίαν καὶ ἐνοφειλόμενα αὐτῶι [ca.?]των κατὰ τὰ προκ[ί]μενα μέρη τῆς τε τοῦ Ἀθη[νοδώρου καὶ ca.? δη]μοσ[ί]ων. Προσσυνχωρῖ δὲ ὁ Ἀθηνόδωρος τῶ[ι] [ca.? Νείλου,] Kρονίωνος, Ἡρώδου ἐξ ἴ[σο]υ ἀρ[γ]υρίου δραχμὰς [ca.? ] γυναικεὶ Ἀνουβιαίνῃ τῇ προγεγραμμένῃ. [ca.? μέρος τ]ῆς ἀπὸ ἀπηλιώτου καινῆς οἰκίας καὶ χρῆσιν τῶν [ca.? ἐφ’ ὃν δὲ χρόνον περίεστιν ὁ ὁμολ]ογῶν ᾿A[θ]ηνόδωρος ἔχιν αὐ[τ]ὸν τὴν κατὰ τ[ῶ]ν [ca.? (2nd H.) Νεφ]ερσῶτ[ο]ς (ἐτῶν) ξζ οὐλὴ μετόπωι, Προτᾶς Ὅρεω(ς) [ca.? (ἐτῶν) οὐλὴ c? ]...ς Ἀρείου τοῦ Εὐτυ [́ χο]υ ὡς ἐτῶν ἑξήκον[τα οὐλὴ ca.?] (3rd H.) . [ca.?] .ωκα καὶ τοὺς υἱωνοὺς Νεῖλον, [Κρονίωνα, Ἡρώδην ca.?]ο[ca.?]τῇ μητρὶ αὐτῆς Ἀνουβιαίνῃ τῇ καὶ [Ἀπολλωνοῦτι ca.?] . [ca.? ἐ]ν δυσὶ σφραγῖσι κλήρου κατοικ[ι]κοῦ [ca.? αὐ]λῆς καὶ αἰθρίου ἐν ᾧ ἐξέδρι[ον] [ca.? κοινῶ]ς ἐξ [ἴσο]υ τ[ὴν] ἀπὸ λιβὸ[ς] οἰκίαν. [ca.? ]ρ υϊον [ca. 12?] .να [ca.? ]λ.[ca. 14?] ... 1 Ἀρσινοίτου 2 συγκεχωρηκέναι 8 πρώτης ⟨σ⟩φραγῖδος 11 ἐξεδρίου πηχισμοῦ 12 διατεῖνον προσυγκε- 13 βασιλικὴν ἐξεῖναι 15 δίστεγον ταύτῃ 16 πηχισμοῦ 17 τρισὶ 18 δουλικὰ προκείμενα 21 Προσσυγχωρεῖ 23 γυναικὶ 25 ἔχειν
Translation [The ? year of Imperator, in Tebtunis in the division of] Polemon of the Arsinoite nome. [Athenodoros son of Athenodoros? son of ? his mother being ?, from the aforesaid village, about] ? years old, with a scar on his left eyebrow, acknowledges that he[, the contracting party,] has granted that [after his death his heirs are to be the children born to him by his] wife Anoubiaina alias Apollonous and the sons of his brother on both his father’s and mother’s side Herodes: Neilos, (5) […] and Sarapias daughter of Kronous the daughter of Anoubiaina, […] and of the other to (their?) mother the aforementioned Anoubiaina, […] the remaining half share, his property in […] a plot of catoecic land in two parcels, the first parcel is three and sixth arourae in […], and in the same Tebtunis two houses and the (entrance?) in between, (10) […] and the half share adjoining it to the west part [… the aithrion and the] exedrion to the extent of the total measurements in cubits starting from […] extending from south to north of what he has ceded before […] and royal (public) land on condition that it is not allowed to them either to […] of the tower to the north of them. And to his daughter Kronous […] a double storied [house?] and the adjacent to the (15) […] their measurement in cubits as aforementioned. And to his grandsons Neilos, Kronion and Herodes in equal shares, […] and his slave Cleopatra and her [offspring …] and all the household goods that shall be left by him and the utensils and furniture and the sums owed to him, (20) [or other things of any kind whatsoever …] in correspondence
A donatio mortis causa
201
with the aforementioned shares. [The funeral rites and laying out] of both Athenodoros [and his wife? as well as paying off any due debts and taxes shall be the responsibility of …]. And he, Athenodoros, has also ceded to […] of Neilos, Kronion and Herodes in equal shares a sum of ? silver drachmas. […] to his aforementioned wife Anoubiaina […] a ? share of the new house to the east and the use of [all its appartenences]. [But for as long] the acknowledging party, Athenodoros (25) [lives he shall have complete power with respect to the ceded property to sell, to alter the will, to mortgage to whomsoever he wants.] (2nd H) [Hypographeus …] [Witnesses … ] son of Nephersos sixty seven years old with a scar on his forehead, Protas son of Horeus, -s son of Areius grandson of Eutyches 60+ years. (3rd H) [I Athenodoros acknowledge that after my death etc.] Commentary 2.
3.
5. 8. 9. 10. 11.
12. 13. 14.
In other instances the names of the heirs are in either the dative or the genitive, but the restoration of the accusative here is necessitated by υϊ῾οὺς in l. 4 and θυγατέρα in l. 5. A possible supplement could be [τὸν ὁμολογοῦντα Ἀθηνόδωρον μετὰ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ τελευτὴν εἶναι ἑαυτοῦ κληρονόμους τοὺς γεγονότας αὐτῷ ἐκ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ συνούση]ς. Other examples for the use of the accusative are: P.Mert. III 105 (Tebtunis, 164 A.D.), ll. 6–8: συνκ[εχωρη]κ[έ]ναι τὴν [ὁμολογο]ῦσαν Ταορσενοῦ|φιν μετὰ τὴν ἑαυτῆς τελε[ ̣ ̣] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣εἶναι ἑαυ[τῆς κ]ληρονόμους [τὰ γε]γονότα αὐτῇ | ἐκ τοῦ γενομένου καὶ μ[ετηαλλα]χότος αὐτ[ῇ ἀν]δρὸς Ποιήρε[ως; SB XII 10888 (Arsinoite c. 119 A.D.), ll. 1–4: συνκε]χωρηκέναι | [τὸ]ν ῾Hράκλη[ον μετὰ τὴ]ν ἑαυτοῦ τελευ|τὴν εἶναι αὑτοῦ [κ]λ[η]ρον(όμον) Εὐτυχίδα; BGU II 483 (Arsinoite, II A.D.), ll. 1–2 ὁμο[λογεῖ -ca.?- ] | [ -ca.?κλ]ηρονόμον τὸ[ν] ἑαυτοῦ [υἱὸν -ca.?- ]. See also SB VIII 9642 (5) (Tebtunis 139–161 A.D.) where the accusative is used only in the recapitulation ll. 21–22 Πετεσοῦχο[ς] Πελμ[άσιο]ς ὁμολογῶ συνκε|[χωρηκέναι -ca.?- ] μου Πετε[σοῦ]χον καὶ Ταπετέα. The name Anoubiaina is not attested in the papyri from Tebtunis so far. The name occurs in the following documents: P.Corn. 18 (Oxyrhynchus, 291 A.D.), P.Flor. I 40 (Hermopolite, 162–163 A.D.), P.Lond. III 604 (b) (Crocodeilopolis, 47 A.D.), SPP XX 68 (Hermopolite, III A.D.). The order of heirs denotes that Sarapias was the daughter of Athenodoros’ step daughter. As far as I know this is the first attestation of a step granddaughter as a beneficiary in this type of document. A possible supplement here could be [ἐν δυσὶ σφραγῖσι κλήρου κατοικικοῦ] which is also mentioned in l. 30. Anything could be between the two houses, an entrance or exit, a street or even both granary and dovecote: P.Mich. IX 554, ll. 8–9: καὶ ἐν τῇ Καρανίδι ο[ἰ]κ[ία]ι δύο [καὶ θησαυρὸς καὶ ἀνὰ μέ]σον περιστερεών. Both γειτνευ- and γειτνιευ- (l. 15) are used in the papyri, but this is the first time to have both forms used in the same document. This is the first attested ἐξέδριον (a small exedra) in the papyri. The exedra had a wide range of meaning in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, it is applied to structures ranging from free-standing outdoor sitting-place to subdivisions of or annexes to private houses and public buildings. The exedra is a place of semicircular shape, often entirely open on one side and fitted with seats. It is generally mentioned in the papyri as a part of a house. For ἐξέδρα in private houses see G. Husson, «OΙΚΙΑ». Le vocabulaire de la maison privée en Égypte d’après les papyrus grecs (Paris 1983) 73 ff., and R. W. Daniel, Architectural Orientation in the Papyri. Papyrologica Coloniensia XXXIV (Paderborn 2010) 152 ff. In l. 31, this ἐξέδριον (or another) is said to be located in the αἴθριον, see note to l. 31. μέρος is supplied because διατεῖνον is always used to refer to a share of property. μὴ ἐξῖναι αὐτοῖς κτλ. a condition is supplied concerning the parcel of public land just preceded and it is probably followed by an infinitive beginning with εἰσ-. It seems that the tower here is a free-standing building. The tower may be also a part of house and some houses are described as double-towered οἰκία διπυργία, a triple-towered house is also attested in P.Oxy. LXIV 4438. It is not clear what could be adjacent to the tower: in P.Oxy. II 243 (Oxyrhynchus, 79 AD) a double-storied tower is located in a house adjacent to an open courtyard (αὐλή) in which there was also a well and vacant lots ψιλοὶ τόποι; another tower is said to be located in a farmyard ἔπαυλις together with dovecotes and vacant lots in P.Oxy. LII 3691 (Oxyrhynchus, 139 AD) and P.Oxy. II 248 (Oxyrhynchus, 80 AD). Towers are also mentioned to be located in granaries in W.Chr. 192 (Arsinoite, 94 AD), P.Mich. V 226 (Tebtunis, 37 AD), BGU XI 2033 (Heracleia, 94 AD) and in catoecic land in W.Chr. 365 (Arsinoite, 46/7 AD). For πύργος in general see M.
202
M. G. Elmaghrabi
Nowicka, A propos des tours – ΠΥΡΓΟΙ dans les papyrus grecs, Archaeologia 21 (1970) 53–61, and Husson (note to line 11) 248 ff. 15. ταύτα here might be used instead of ταύτῃ, the dative expected after γειτνιεῦον. 19. A usual formula in the donationes. For example P.Kron. 50, ll. 5–6: π[ά]νθʼ ὅ[σα] ἂν καταλεί[ψ]ῃ ὁ πατὴρ Κρ[ονί]ων παντοῖα ὑπάρχοντα [καὶ] ἐπίπλοα καὶ σκεύη καὶ [ἐνδ]ομενείαν καὶ | ἄλλα καὶ [πάντα τὰ ἐ]νωφειλ[ομέ]να αὐτῶι ἢ [καὶ] ἕτ[ε]ρα καθʼ ὁνδήποτε τρόπο[ν] ἑ[κ]άστωι ἐξ ἴσου κατ⟨ὰ⟩ ⟨τ⟩ὸ τρίτον μέρος. 20. Here part of the stipulations concerning the funeral and burial of the testator and perhaps his spouse, as well as the payment of debts and taxes has been preserved. We should expect a formula such as in P.Kron. 50 ll. 10–12: πρὸς τοὺ[ς τρ]εῖς κληρο[νό]μους Ἁρμιῦσιν καὶ Ἁρφα[ῆ]σιν καὶ τὴν θυγατριδῆν Τεφορσάϊν ἀφήλικα οὔσης | τῆς τοῦ ὁμ[ολογ]οῦντ[ος Κρονί]ωνος κηδε[ίας] καὶ π[ερι]στ[ολ]ῆς καὶ ἀπο[δόσ]εως [τῶ]ν [πρ]οκειμένω[ν λ]ηγάτων [κ]αὶ ὧν ἐὰν ἄλλων φανῆι | ὀφείλων ἰ[διωτικ]ῶν χ[ρεῶν καὶ δ]ημοσίων. 25. A possible supplement at the beginning of this line could be χρηστηρίων πάντων. 25–26. Part of the revocability clause is preserved at the end of line 25 and should continue to the next line. The restoration is supplemented according to the formulary used in P.Kron. 50, ll. 12–13: ἐ[φʼ ὃν] δὲ χρόνον περίεστιν ὁ ὁμολογ[ῶ]ν Κ[ρ]ονίων ἔχειν αὐτ[ὸ]ν τὴν κατὰ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ ἁπάν|των ὁλοσχερ[ῆ] ἐξουσί[αν τοῦ οἰκο]νομεῖν ὡς ἐὰν αἱρ[ῆ]ι. The same formula is used with minor alterations in SB V 7559, ll. 13–15: ἐφʼ ὃν δὲ χρόνον | περίεστιν ἡ Θαισᾶς, ἔχειν αὐτὴν τὴν κατὰ το[ύ]του ἐξουσίαν οἰκονομεῖν | περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὡς ἐὰν αἱρῆται, SB VIII 9642 (1), ll. 14–16: ἐφʼ ὃν δὲ χρόν[ο]ν περ[ί]εστιν ἡ ὁμολ[ογο]ῦσα | Ταμύσθα ἔχ[ει]ν αὐτὴν τὴν κατὰ τῶν συνκεχωρημένων ὑπαρ[χ]όν[(των)] | ὁλοσχηρῆ (l. ὁλοσχερῆ) ἐξουσίαν οἰκονομεῖν περὶ αὐτῶν ὡς ἐὰν αἱ[ρ]ῆται, and SB XV 10888, ll. 14–16: ἐφʼ ὃν δὲ χρόνον περί|εστιν ὁ Ἡράκ(ληος) [ἔ]χιν (l. ἔχειν) τὴν ἐξουσίαν οἰκο|νο(μεῖν) ὡς ἐὰν αἱρῆ[τ]αι. Other formularies cannot be excluded; for example: SB XXII 15705 (Soknopaiou Nesos, 91 AD), ll. 31–36: ἐ]φʼ ὃν χρόνον περίεστιν | ὁ ὁμολ[ογ]ῶν {χρον χρόνον} ἔχειν | αὐτὸν τ[ὴ]ν κατὰ τῶν ἰδίων πάντ[ων] | ὁλοσχερῆ ἐξουσίαν {αὐτῷ οὔσης} | πωλεῖν μετατίθεσθαι ὑπο⟨τί⟩θεσθαι | οἷς ἐὰν β[ο]ύληται ἀμέμπτως, and P. Haun. Inv. 2811 (Karanis, 122–3 AD), ll. 18–19: ἐφ’ ὃν δὲ χρόνον περίεστιν ἡ ὁμο[λο]γοῦσα Θαῆσις ἔχειν ἁπάν[τω]ν ἐξουσίαν | πωλεῖν παραχωρεῖν ὑποτίθεσθαι μεσιτεύιν (l. μεσιτεύειν) μεταδιατάσσιν (l. μεταδιατάσσειν) οἰκονομεῖν ὡς εἰὰν (l. ἐὰν) αἱρῆται. 28. The recapitulation in the subjective starts after the witnesses, a supplement could be something like Ἀθηνόδωρος ὁμολογῶ συγκεχωρηκέναι μετὰ τὴν ἐμὴν τελευτὴν εἶναι κτλ. 31. This could be the same ἐξέδριον as in l. 11. The word-order suggests that the ἐξέδριον is located in the αἴθριον (the central court). Exedras are often connected with and open to the αἴθρια, but this is the first attestation of an architectural element other than storerooms κέλλα or κελλίον and cisterns to be located in the αἴθριον, see Husson (note to line 11) 29 ff. and Daniel (note to line 11) 123 ff.
Mohamed G. Elmaghrabi, University of Alexandria
[email protected]
11 P. Haun.inv. 28 was published by A. Bülow-Jacobsen and S. Ebbesen in: Five Copenhagen Papyri (Cahiers de l’Institut
du Moyen-Âge Grec et Latin 6; Copenhagen 1971) 194–201 as no. 2: “Homologia”. The text has not been included into SB XIV 11355–11358 (see the note to no. 11355), but was never re-edited later. The text will be included in the next volume of the Sammelbuch.