Thompson – The New Biblical Papyrus: a Sahidic version of Deuteronomy, Jonah and Acts from MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum; notes and a collation (privately printed, 1913)

Source and licence

share: publicsahidic

Source: OCR (tools/batch_ocr.py, model coptic+eng) of Coptic Texts/newbiblicalpapyr00thomuoft.pdf; page files: L0/ocr/Coptic_Texts/newbiblicalpapyr00thomuoft/pages

Attribution: Thompson – The New Biblical Papyrus: a Sahidic version of Deuteronomy, Jonah and Acts from MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum; notes and a collation (privately printed, 1913); public domain in Canada (death year verified: Thompson d.1944 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Thompson_(Egyptologist)) — two-country rule met (LICENCES.md §7 + US ≤1930), REBUILD-PREP 2026-09-26); OCR text by the Kemetic project, Yousef Hanna 2026.

Licence: public domain in Canada (author died ≤ 1971, verified; LICENCES.md §7) — US position (recorded, does not gate the class; PD-CA 2026-09-26): PD-US (published ≤1930)

Jurisdiction note: this text is public domain under Canadian law (the project is published from Canada; LICENCES.md §7: author died in or before 1971). It may still be in copyright elsewhere — in countries with a life + 70 term, or where a later edition claims its own rights. The licence line above says what was verified. If you are outside Canada, check your own law before re-using it.

Full provenance and citation

The text

1,592 lines · a line number is a link to itself

English: quoted translations are shown as they are, with their credit in the provenance; lines marked draft are language-model drafts made for this project (to be corrected), and alignment unchecked marks a quoted verse whose placement was not cross-checked. Check the Coptic before relying on any English line.

ref	L0 witness (OCR)	English
page 1
1	THE
2	NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS
3	A Sahidic Version of
4	Deuteronomy, Jonah, and Acts of the Apostles
5	FROM
6	MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum
7	NOTES AND A COLLATION
8	BY
9	SIR HERBERT THOMPSON
10	PRINTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION
11	ⲑⲓ
page 2
12	RTHU ⲣⲃ ⲛⲛⲛ ⲓ -
13	a ph ⲥⲧ
page 3
page 4
14	ⲱ ⲙ
15	L +8 by the Internet Archive
16	in 2008 with funding from
17	Microsoft Corpor ⲡ I
18	re
19	hitp://www.archive.org/details/newbiblicalpapyr00
20	[ie
page 5
21	Bible
22	Cod. ® 9-7
23	Ish le , Cori
24	T -
25	THE
26	NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS
27	A Sahidic Version of
28	Deuteronomy, Jonah, and Acts of the Apostles
29	FROM
30	MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum
31	NOTES AND A COLLATION
32	BY
33	/ SIR) HERBERT THOMPSON
34	ⲩⲩ
35	ⲅ.
36	PRINTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION
37	1913
page 6
38	ⲓ
39	LONDON :
40	PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
41	DUKE STREET, STAMFORD STREET, S.E., AND GREAT WINDMILL
42	14 i
43	i} >
page 7
44	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
45	ON April 15 last the 77mes newspaper gave an account with
46	two facsimiles of the discovery, and acquisition by the British
47	Museum, of an important new biblical manuscript (MS Or.
48	7594) containing three books, viz. Deuteronomy, Jonah and the
49	Acts of the Apostles, in the Sahidic or Southern Coptic version.
50	On the same day was published a volume, issued by the British
51	Museum, containing the text of the original MS edited by
52	Dr. Wallis Budge with an elaborate introduction.
53	The great importance of the new manuscript, which is a
54	papyrus in Codex form, lies in the fact that there are means of
55	dating it. The text of the three books, which is written in
56	literary uncials, is followed by a short text, also in Coptic, in
57	cursive writing. It is a familiar fact to scholars that the literary
58	hands of the early centuries of the Christian era are peculiarly
59	difficult to date on purely palaeographical grounds when there is
60	no other evidence to determine their limits. If a general
61	consensus as to the dates of the earliest Greek biblical uncial
62	MSS has been reached, it is mainly from external considera-
63	tions. Cursive writing however is not beset with the same
64	difficulty. The large number of dated documents in cursive
65	script which Egypt has yielded enables palacographers to date
66	such writing with very considerable accuracy, and hence this
67	piece of cursive Coptic writing, as the Copts used Greek
68	characters, has enabled Sir F. Kenyon to say that it is not later
69	than AD 350, which throws back the biblical text to an earlier
70	date by some 30 or 40 years at least in all probability.
71	I have had an Opportunity, thanks to the kindness of the
72	! Coptic Biblical Texts in the Dialect of Upper Egypt, edited by E. A. Wallis
73	Budge, M.A, Litt.D., 1912.
74	B 2
page 8
75	4 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
76	authorities of the British Museum, of studying this extremely
77	interesting papyrus; and though it is unfortunate that the
78	earliest existing manuscript of any considerable portion of the
79	bible should be in Coptic rather than in Greek, yet the nature
80	of Copti¢ is such that it is nearly always possible to determine
81	the Greek reading which lies behind it. It is not my intention
82	however to enter here into the question of the relation of the new
83	papyrus to the earliest Greek texts. I propose to confine myself
84	to a much humbler. task, that of adding a few remarks to the
85	information given in the Introduction as to the material form of
86	the Codex and the palaeography, and of helping to establish the
87	correct text. This is necessary before the more important
88	problems can be approached.
89	The handwriting. On p. xii of his Introduction Dr. Budge
90	says “a careful examination of all the texts shows that they were
91	written by one and the same hand.” A comparison of the
92	plates in the printed volume suggests a considerable difference in
93	the hands of the three books at first sight, and there is some
94	reason on closer acquaintance for maintaining the view that the
95	writing is not all by the same hand. It is true that there is no
96	manifest difference in the materials employed and the quality of
97	the papyrus is fairly uniform throughout.
98	In Jonah certain letters are made quite differently from those
99	in Acts, especially ⲙ and ⲩ. The former is of a rounded form
100	as opposed to the square form employed in Deuteronomy and
101	Acts; and the ⲩ is distinguished by resting on the line instead
102	of being carried below it.
103	Further, as between Deuteronomy and Acts there are marked
104	differences in several letters. The crucial ones are ⲃ ⲕ, ⲛ ⲣ W,
105	Ϩ and 67
106	In Deuteronomy ⲃ is fairly large and always carried below
107	the line ; in Acts it is small and stands on the line.
108	In the ⲕ of Deuteronomy the lower diagonal stroke comes
109	away from the upper one at some distance from the vertical
110	stroke; in Acts the two diagonal strokes meet ⲟϩ the vertical
111	stroke.
page 9
112	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 5
113	In Deuteronomy the scribe writes ⲛ with a straight diagonal ;
114	in Acts the diagonal sags so much that part of it droops on to
115	the line.
116	In Deuteronomy p is formed with a full rounded top loop
117	which sometimes becomes a cap ; in Acts the loop is open at the
118	top and does not reach as high as the top of the shaft. :
119	In Deuteronomy Ϣϣ (also ⲱ) is made with the right half
120	tending to be larger than the left half; in Acts the left half
121	tends to be larger than the right half.
122	In Deuteronomy ϩ is always made with a sharp break where
123	the upper curve passes into the lower one, and the letter is apt to
124	be carried a little below the line ; in Acts there is no such break,
125	but the letter tends to an extreme form in which the upper curve
126	is carried down to the line almost vertically and the lower limb
127	is a horizontal stroke carried along the line, almost like a Z with
128	a small head ; and it is never carried below the line.
129	"In Deuteronomy 6 has a sloping body and a straight tail
130	which is carried above the other letters; in Acts the body is
131	round and the tail is curved over and does not rise above the
132	other letters.
133	These distinctions are so well defined and so consistently
134	maintained throughout the two books that it seems impossible
135	that they can have been adopted deliberately. One can imagine
136	a scribe being influenced by the script of the manuscript which
137	he is copying so far as to write a square ⲙ in one book and a
138	rounded ⲙ in another; so also with the forms of ⲩ or ⲁ or ⲃ
139	or ϭ but the distinctions in ⲕ and ⲛ and Ϣ are much subtler and
140	what may fairly be called unconscious. ⲱ and w are properly
141	of equal size in their two halves, and no man deliberately adopts
142	a preponderance on one side or the other ; he falls into it.
143	The literary hands of these scribes are artificial, and that is
144	why a copyist may be influenced by his original to the extent
145	above stated. Hence I do not regard the “rounded” ⲙ and
146	“short” ⲩ of the Jonah scribe as a decisive proof that he was
147	distinct from the others; and when he is examined with regard
148	to the crucial letters of Deuteronomy and Acts, he is found to
149	side in respect of all of them with the Deuteronomy scribe. Now
page 10
150	6 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
151	this papyrus has this in common with B, 8 and A that the scribe
152	often fits his words into the lines by writing the last letters of the
153	line very small, frequently about half the size of the others (cf.
154	Introduction p. xiii), and in so doing he is apt to use more cursive
155	forms of the letters. The Deuteronomy scribe under these cir-
156	cumstances uses just the same forms ⲙ and ⲩ as the Jonah
157	scribe ; but the scribe of Acts never does so; when the latter
158	writes ⲙ or ⲩ small at the line-ends they are still of the “square”
159	and “long-tailed ” form respectively. This is a further distinction
160	between the scribes of Deuteronomy and Acts, and I am strongly
161	of opinion that they are two and not one. As to Jonah and
162	Deuteronomy I do not feel sure; there is a marked resemblance
163	between the hands, but there are differences. The chief one is
164	that the Deuteronomy scribe in writing a 7 that is not “run on”
165	(as often happens) to the next letter, frequently turns the right
166	end of the horizontal bar upwards so as to make it look like an
167	apostrophe (- comma,” Introduction ⲣ. xiii) and as such it is often
168	printed by Dr. Budge, though I think mistakenly, especially in
169	the middle of a word. The scribes of Deuteronomy and Acts
170	both used apostrophes at the end of words, the Jonah scribe very
171	seldom, he has only about half a dozen in all; but the Jonah
172	scribe in making a non-ligatured ⲧ ends the cross bar with a
173	downward stroke at the right end; and this seems to me one of
174	those unconscious differences which betray a distinct hand? But
175	I have an open mind as to the identity of the scribes of the first
176	two books. A more prolonged study of the manuscript than I
177	have been able to give it on this point might lead to more definite
178	results.
179	In this connection it is worth remark that while each book
180	has a separate pagination, neither Jonah nor Acts begins on a
181	new quire. The page numbers are certainly contemporary, and
182	I believe in each case written by the scribe himself. Those of
183	Jonah look to me rather different in form from those of
184	Deuteronomy, but this is perhaps rather a matter of feeling than
185	2 In three instances (ⲉⲧⲃⲏⲏⲧ, ⲉⲧⲟⲟⲧ, ⲛ̀ⲧⲟⲟⲧ) the scribe has an
186	apostrophe after the final TJ to mark it as the termination of the 1st pers. singular.
page 11
187	THE. NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS, 7
188	of demonstration. It is curious that of the three page-numbers
189	which survive in Deuteronomy containing a sa (= 40) two are
190	round and one square. The only surviving one in Acts is square.
191	Structure of the Codex. Dr. Budge writes “ The quires
192	usually contained eight leaves, i.e. four sheets of papyrus
193	measuring about 12} in. in height and 13 in. in width, folded
194	in half, but some contained six leaves, and some only four.
195	Whether the quires were signed by letters or numbers cannot
196	be said, for no quire mark is preserved on any leaf” (Introd. p. xi).
197	It is not quite clear how he reaches these results; for my
198	examination of the papyrus and tabulation of the leaves according
199	to the arrangement of their fibres lead to the conclusion that the
200	volume was composed of thirteen quires.’
201	Each quire consisted of five or six sheets which when folded
202	gave ten or twelve leaves and therefore twice the number of
203	pages. They were arranged as follows, the figures representing
204	the number of leaves in each of the thirteen quires: 2)
205	2, ⲓⲟ 12, 12, ⲓⲟ, ⲓⲟ, ⲓⲟ, ⲓⲟ, 10, 10, 10, 10. This is confirmed
206	by the existence of several quire-marks which have been over-
207	looked by the Editor. Each quire seems to have been numbered
208	on the first and last page at the corner opposite to that bearing
209	the page number. At the left hand corner of fol. 46a is a g, in
210	the same ink as the pagination of the opposite corner pA[ a’
211	3 Dr. Budge allows for six missing leaves between Deut. ii 19 and iv 49 ; but I
212	am obliged to put eight leaves in this lacuna. The two leaves preceding it
213	(Deut. i 39 to ii 19) and the two leaves following it (Deut. iv 49 to v 27) each
214	correspond to exactly 58 lines of Greek printed text in Swete’s edition, or
215	29 lines Greek to each leaf of Coptic MS on an average. The lacuna equals
216	227 lines of Greek text; six leaves would be 6 X 29 = 174-lines of Greek text,
217	whereas eight leaves would be 8 X 29 = 232 lines. I think it admits of no doubt.
218	Similarly it appears to be necessary to assume ⲁ leaves rather than fwo are
219	lost between Deut. xxvi 10 and xxviii 1.
220	4 This allows for two blank leaves at the beginning of the book and three leaves
221	for the commencement of Deuteronomy, which is lost (ch. i 1-39). As the first
222	“extant leaf, fol. 1 in the printed edition, is HV (= horizontal-vertical fibres) while
223	fol. 2 is VH (vertical-horizontal), this arrangement is almost compulsory.
224	5 It is printed [pl but though it is put in brackets, remains of part of both
page 12
225	8 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
226	showing that it is the first page of the seventh quire, and on the
227	verso of the last leaf of this quire fol. 556 is a broken fragment of
228	a number, probably another ⲍ̄ to mark the end of the quire.
229	There is an ⲏ̄ on the left hand corner of fol. 56a, the first of the
230	eighth quire, and a fragmentary but unmistakable ⲏ on the last
231	page of the quire fol. 656. On fol. 66a again there is a fragment
232	of a © marking the commencement of the ninth quire,’ and on
233	fol. 756 is also a @ marking its end. Before the seventh and
234	after the ninth quire all the corners of the pages where quire-
235	marks ought to be found are broken away. In the last quire the
236	order of the fibres shows that there must have been two more
237	leaves (both VH) at the end after the last leaf of the extant
238	cursive writing.
239	A word may be added on the paragraph marks. In
240	Deuteronomy they are of somewhat varied forms (see’ Introd.
241	p. xii). Those on fol. 114, 214, 282 and 352 and perhaps one
242	also on fol. 244 (mostly broken away) are inserted by the ‘later
243	hand” in gray ink (see below). The rest are to all appearance
244	in the same ink as the text, but they vary in shape and size and
245	do not seem to be always by the same hand.” They bear no
246	relation to the various systems of paragraph division and
247	numeration found in Codd. B and A, nor to the Coptic lectionary
248	divisions given by Lagarde in his index to the Gottingen
249	lectionaries (Orientalia p. 48).
250	In Acts on the other hand the paragraph marks are all of one
251	form and are evidently inserted by the original scribe,® with two
252	exceptions, viz. that on fol. 656 is inserted by the “later hand”
253	letters are distinctly visible. It should be ⲣ︦ⲗ︦- ⲉ third digit is broken away,
254	but there is room for it—as by mistake two of the pages in the printed text are
255	given the same number ⲣ︦ⲕ︦
256	6 Below this quire-mark is ⲃ, which it is difficult to explain, unless the scribe
257	of Acts for some reason added a new series of marks for his own portion of the
258	codex. There is a fragment of what may have been the tail of an ⲁ on the first
259	page of Acts (visible on pl. V left hand corner, the & on the right hand is the
260	page-number), but this is not really the beginning of a new quire.
261	ⲧ There is none on fol. ⲑ as printed.
262	® There is none on fol. 4. as printed.
page 13
263	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 9
264	(gray ink) and that on fol. 644 is similar to the latter in shape,
265	but is written in heavy brown ink and does not appear to be by
266	the original scribe. Possibly also the small wedge-shaped sign
267	on fol. 614 is not due to him. This system of division again does
268	not correspond to those found in Codd. B and N nor to the
269	‘“ Euthalian ” system.
270	The “later hand.” As Dr. Budge states (Introd. p. xxxi)
271	with regard to the scribe of the Acts, and it is true of the whole
272	MS, such corrections of the text as are found seem to have been
273	made as he pursued his task by the original scribe or scribes.
274	There is no evidence that he systematically corrected his own
275	work, nor that any one else corrected it for him. Yet sporadically
276	we come across signs of a later hand, which confines its work to
277	touching up the text in parts where it was faded, and to adding
278	occasional apostrophes (‘commas ”) and also a few accents in the
279	Song of Moses, and in one or two instances deleting a word by
280	diagonal strokes. Its presence is easily distinguished by the ink.
281	The original scribes used an excellent ink which is nearly black
282	with the full pen and becomes a warm brown where it is thin.
283	But the later hand uses an ink which, while occasionally black,
284	is usually thinned to a gray, indeed mostly a palish gray. It is
285	a different kind of ink too, and seems to have been more fluid,
286	less viscous than the brown ink, so that even when used with a
287	full pen it is distinguishable. The new hand first appears, so far
288	as I have observed it, on fol. 114, it is busiest on fol. 24 to 30;
289	on fol. 294 is his only original contribution to the text; he inserts
290	in Deut. xxii 9 after 6po6~a word which Dr. Budge has read
291	ⲁⲓⲁⲛ (ⲣ. 63 note), but which I believe to be ⲥⲛⲁⲩ (“thou shalt
292	not sow thy vineyard with ϣⲟ seeds”). 1 see ⲡⲟ sign of his
293	work in the text of Jonah, except that there are slight traces of
294	what seems to be his ink in minute smudges in the margin; and
295	I have observed no sign of him in Acts except the addition of
296	one paragraph mark at ch. v 12, but I have not examined the
297	whole text with a view to his presence.
298	The end-script is also written in a black-gray ink, but though
299	I have made a careful comparison of its ink with that of the
page 14
300	10 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
301	“later hand,” IT cannot come to any certain conclusion as to
302	whether they are the same or not.
303	The end-script (“Colophon”). Whoever wrote the end-
304	script, it was not the scribe of Deuteronomy at any rate. The
305	latter has given us on fol 6 a specimen of his cursive writing.
306	At the beginning of Deut. vi 18 he wrote ⲉⲕⲉⲉⲓⲣⲉ ⲙ̄ on a bad
307	place of the papyrus, and apparently not being satisfied with the
308	result he wrote the same words in a cursive hand above it. His
309	ⲕ and ⲣ are so distinct from those of the end-script that they
310	cannot be attributed to the same hand.
311	The document has been partly translated by Dr. Budge on
312	ⲣ. Iv of his Introduction. As will be seen from the Collation
313	appended to these notes, I read several words differently from
314	him, and I give a translation of the whole, as far as I can, from
315	beginning to end, quite literally -
316	“The word of the Lord came to me, saying to me ‘Say to this
317	people (Aads) Why do you sin (perhaps have you sinned) ? You
318	add sin to your sins,’ you make angry the Lord God who created
319	you. Love not the world (kéopos) nor the things that are in the
320	world (ⲋ̅.) for the glory of the world (k.) is the devil's (8udBoMos),
321	and its dissolution. Remember that the Lord has pitied you, He
322	who [created ?] everything, in order that he may deliver us from
323	the bondage (aiypalwaia) of this world (aiwv), for often has the
324	devil (ⲑ.) desired (émbupetv) to prevent the sun from rising over
325	the earth, and the earth from [yielding her fruits (ⲕⲧ) ?], he
326	wishing to devour men as the fire which runs in a stubble field,
327	he wishing to swallow them up like water. And therefore God
328	pitied us by sending his Son into the world (kdopos) that he may
329	save us from the bondage (aiy.). He did not [send an ?] angel
330	(ⲉⲩⲉⲗⲟ) to come to us (?) nor archangel (?) (dpxdyyelos),”® but
331	He was (reading ⲁⲩϣ.) changed ..... (several lines lost)... ..
332	the earth on account of these deceivers (mAdvos) who will multiply
333	9 Isai. xxx 1, Sirach iii 26, v 5. 10 1 John ii 5. ⲙ VWisd. iii 7.
334	12 The reading is certainly & ⲣϫⲓⲁⲩ[. This cannot be Coptic and can hardly
335	be anything else than an error for & ⲣⲭⲓⲁⲅ[ Cf. the similar remarkable
336	transcription ϫⲓ ⲗⲓⲁⲣⲭⲟⲥ for xihiapxos throughout Acts xxi-xxiil.
page 15
337	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. II
338	at the end of the seasons, for they will set up teachings which are
339	not from God, who will reject (afereiv) the law (vdpos) of God,
340	they whose god is their belly,” who say that there is no fast
341	ⲧⲉ), nor hath God appointed it, who make themselves
342	strangers to the covenant (8wafyxy) of Ⲉⲟ who deprive them-
343	selves of the glorious promises,’ who are not established at any
344	time in the strong faith (wioris). Do not let them deceive
345	(m\avav) you [in] these things. Remember that the Lord
346	brought (?) fasting (v.) ever since he created the heavens......
347	men on account of the sufferings (wdfos) and the..... on your
348	account. .....
349	Other early Coptic MSS. Relying then on Sir F.
350	Kenyon’s date for the cursive script (‘about the middle of the
351	fourth century,” Introd. p. Ixiii), and bearing in mind the early
352	date of the documents found in the binding (“early in the fourth
353	or late in the third century” according to Mr. H. I. Bell, 22
354	p. xvi), we must place the writing of the papyrus itself not later
355	probably than Ap 300-320. Had there been no indications
356	such as the above, we should unquestionably, I think, have put
357	a considerably later date on the papyrus (cf. Sir F. Kenyon,
358	ⲣ. Ixiii). Dr. Budge says (p. xiii) Ⲧⲟ assign anything like an
359	exact date to the Codex is extremely difficult, because it is
360	manifestly older than any other Coptic document available and
361	because we have nothing else of the same period with which to
362	compare it.” With this verdict I cannot wholly agree. There
363	are in existence a few Coptic MSS which have hitherto been
364	tentatively dated later, but so closely resemble this one that I
365	think they must now be brought much nearer to the early date
366	of the new papyrus. At Berlin there is a papyrus (Or. 3063)
367	containing the First Epistle of S. Clement in the Achmimic
368	dialect,” written with a single column to the page, which Dr.
369	Carl Schmidt placed in the second half or end of the fourth
370	century. The character of the writing is so close to that of the
371	13 Phil. iii 19. 14 Ephes. ii 12. 1582 Pet. 10d.
372	16 Carl Schmidt ¢ Der erste Clemensbrief’ etc. : Zexte un. Untersuchungen xxxii
373	(1908) with a facsimile.
page 16
374	12 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
375	British Museum papyrus that it must be brought into its
376	immediate neighbourhood. Mr. Horner has claimed the fourth
377	century for a fragment of S. John’s gospel on papyrus in the
378	Brit. Mus.” Its heavy square uncials resemble those of the
379	Golenischeff version of the Martyrium Ⲣ but 1 am not
380	inclined to assign to either of them an earlier date than the fifth
381	century. The papyrus no. ⲓⲟ of the Rylands Library® has a
382	better claim to come into the latter half of the fourth century.
383	Among vellums there are one or two which also are entitled to
384	be associated with the earliest papyri. There is the Sahidic
385	Psalter at Berlin (P. 3259)® which is unfortunately so frag-
386	mentary that we cannot judge of the general aspect of the page,
387	use of capitals ⲉⲥ. and we are confined to the forms of the
388	letters, which are certainly early and very similar to those of
389	the small Apocalypse in the Brit. Ⲙ̅ These may perhaps
390	come into the second half of the fourth century. And very little
391	later, if at all, is the Codex containing the two Wisdoms at
392	Turin,” the fragment of the Middle Egyptian version of the
393	Catholic Epistles ® and perhaps the first hand of the Pzstis Soplia.
394	Evidence of Dialect. The documents found in the bind-
395	ing point to the papyrus having been bound at Hermopolis at
396	a very early date (Introduction ⲣ. xv-xvii). The dialect of
397	Acts is practically pure Sahidic with very few aberrant forms.
398	Deuteronomy on the other hand has a striking number of
399	unusual forms and it is an interesting fact that they give evidence
400	of a Hermopolitan dialect and so indicate that the book was
401	also written there.
402	ⲙ The Coptic Version of the N.T. in the Southern Dialect, Oxford 1911, vol. iii,
403	a facsimile on pl. I.
404	18 0. von Lemm, Koptische Apokryphe Apostelacten in Aé.. Asiat. Bull. Ae.
405	Imp. Sci. St-Pétersbd. x fasc. z (1892) pl. I.
406	19 Crum, Cat. of the Coptic MSS in the John Rylands Library, 1909, pl. I.
407	2 Rahlfs, Die Berliner Handschrift d. sahid. Psalters, Berlin ⲓ ⲫⲟⲓ with 3 plates.
408	21 Kenyon, Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the N.T. ⲑⲟ, facsimile at
409	p. 160. 22 Rossi, Trascrizione di un Codice Copto etc. Turin 1883, pl. III.
410	2 Crum, Coptic MSS from the Fayum, 1893, pl. I, no. II. He dated this as
411	early as 300-350 (ⲣ. 3).
page 17
412	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. ⲛ
413	ⲛ ⲉ know of the dialect of Hermopolis (Eshmunén) is
414	derived from a large number of documents, chiefly legal, which
415	had their origin there and are now in the Rylands Library * and
416	in Vienna.” One of its features is the substitution of ⲁ for
417	short ⲉ before ϩ in such words as ⲱⲛϩ̄ which becomes ⲱⲛⲁϩ.
418	Thus we find ⲱⲛⲁϩ (ⲟⲛⲁϩ) ten times in Deuteronomy (never
419	in Acts), ⲟⲩⲟⲛⲁϩ ⲉ̀ⲃⲟⲗ three times, ⲥⲟⲩⲁϩⲥ (i 41), ⲧⲱⲃⲁϩ
420	(ix 25), ⲥⲟⲃⲁϩ (xxiii 1), etopagc (xxviii 68) and perhaps ⲕⲁϩⲕ
421	(x 1). We have ⲛ̄ⲅⲁⲣ for ⲅⲁⲣ (ⲣ) in ii 5, v 11. 26, xxxi 23
422	(cf. Rylands Cat. no. 292). ϣⲟⲙⲧ is used for Sah. ϣⲟⲙⲛⲧ
423	all through Deuteronomy (the Sahidic form all through Acts),
424	and ϣⲟⲙⲧ is the usual form at Hermopolis. Other peculiarities,
425	which however I cannot trace to any special locality, are the plural
426	form ⲕⲉⲩ, only when used before ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ “other gods” (Deut. xiii
427	13, xvii 3, xxviii 14. 36. 64, xxix 26, xxx 17), and the constant
428	substitution of ⲉⲓ for t (hardly ever in Acts): but this, though it
429	occurs in documents from Eshmunén, is not characteristic there.
430	The Acts also contain some peculiarities of word-form, but 1
431	cannot associate them as a group with any known dialect. It
432	is noticeable that there is no trace of Achmimic in the MS.
433	The most remarkable feature of the language of Acts is the
434	frequent use of ⲡⲁⲓ etc. for ⲡⲉⲓ etc., the demonstrative adjective.
435	At Hermopolis the usual form was ⲡⲓ, and ⲡⲁⲓ is only known
436	to us as a Bohairic form. It occurs in Acts v 5. 32, vi 14, vii 1,
437	ix 13.14, X 44, xiil 42; never in Deuteronomy. In Acts we
438	also find ⲙⲁⲁϣⲉ for ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ (vii 57, normal in three other
439	places), ϣⲟϣⲛⲉ for ϣⲟϫⲛⲉ (xxvii 12, normal in five other
440	places), and ϣⲡ for ϫⲡ (xxiii 23, normal in x ⲑ). This can
441	hardly be accidental (cf. also ϣⲱⲡⲉ for 6m, i 16), nor.is
442	ϭⲱⲟⲩ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ for ⲕⲱ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ twice (xxvii 21, xxviii 10), though
443	ϭⲱ for ϫⲱ (iv 14) and ϫⲱ for ϭⲱ (xix 22) may be mis-
444	takes. Both Deuteronomy and Acts use ⲛⲙ̄ and ⲙⲛ̄ “and”
445	indiscriminately, and both write xe for Sah. ϫⲛ̄ “or” (Deut.
446	2% Crum, Cat. MSS Rylands Library nos. 115-385 with the exception of eight
447	mentioned on p. viii, and cf. Crum, Cat. Coptic MSS Brit. Mus. p. 418 n.
448	5 Krall, Rechtsurkunden 1895, over ⲧⲟⲟ documents, a list of which is given on
449	p. 224.
page 18
450	14 TIIE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
451	viii 2, Acts viii 34). The only word connecting Acts with
452	Hermopolis is ⲥⲉⲩⲁϩ twice for ⲥⲉⲩϩ (ⲩ 21, xxi 27).
453	The date of the papyrus carries us back probably beyond the
454	period of the foundation of the monasteries of Egypt, but there
455	are some traditions of Christianity as early in the neighbourhood
456	of Hermopolis. Nearly opposite it on the east bank of the Nile
457	was Antinoe, which sent a bishop to the Council of Nicaea (325)
458	and had in its vicinity one. of the oldest churches in Egypt,
459	behind Der Abu Hennis, said to have been built by the Empress
460	Helena (Butler, Coptic Churches, i 364; Clédat, Bull. Inst. fr.
461	Arch. Or. ii 45). Hermopolis had a bishop of its own however
462	already in the middle of the third century (Euseb. H. E. vi 46).
463	Collation of the printed text with the original
464	papyrus. Unfortunately the printed text is disfigured by
465	numerous misprints. Ⲓ have supplemented Dr. Budge’s list of
466	errata by a collation, which however does not include accents, nor
467	the breathing over ⲏ (represented usually in the printed edition
468	by a circumflex accent). Nor has any notice been taken of
469	the apostrophes (‘“commas,” Introd. ⲣ. xiii), as they are partly
470	really such and partly only details of the letters themselves, and
471	not always easily distinguishable. They are of little importance
472	except from the point of view of Coptic writing.
473	st at the end of a line is usually written in the original as a
474	prolonged superlineation. The Editor has written them out, and
475	they are not referred to in the collation; nor has any attention
476	been paid to the word-division, which, as printed, occasionally
477	destroys the sense of the Coptic, nor to the filling up of the
478	lacunae, save when obviously wrong.
479	Note. The passage in Deut. xxii 9 referred to on ⲣ. ⲑ above
480	does not exist in any other printed Coptic text; but the same
481	phrase occurs also in Levit. xix 19 as ⲡⲉⲕⲙⲁⲛⲉⲗⲟⲟⲗⲉ ⲛⲛⲉⲕϫⲟϥ
482	NEpo6 can (Miss. Arch. fr. vi p. 72).
483	The following abbreviations are used: 1. = read, v. = verse,
484	om = omit, orig = original, prob = probably, pt = point, sup =
485	superlineation.
page 19
486	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. ⲛ
487	DEUTERONOMY.
488	I 39 ⲛ̄ⲃⲣⲣⲉ] sup over ist ⲣ \| the mark over ⲏ by com-
489	parison with many later instances is not ϥ but a breathing [eⲧ]
490	l. ⲉⲧ] om pt after ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ 42 ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] om sup \| ⲛⲉⲕ] ⲛⲉⲧⲛ̄
491	43 ⲁⲓϣ] at. \| [Te]] ⲁⲧ[e] om pt at end of v. 44 [ⲁⲩ]ⲱ
492	Llalvw ...ⲁϥ ⲓ. [ⲣⲉ ⲛ]ⲁϥ 45[ⲉ glpai l ⲉϩⲣⲁⲓ̈ \| om pt
493	at end of v. 46 om pt at end of v.
494	II 4 om pt after ⲥⲏⲉⲓⲣ [ⲧ]ⲏⲟⲩⲧⲛ̄Ⲓ. ⲧⲏ. 5 ⲟⲩ[eⲉ]. ove \|
495	om pt at end of v. ⲛ̄ⲁⲟⲩⲟⲙ..) ⲛⲁⲟⲩⲟⲙ[ⲟⲩ] prob \| om pt at
496	end of v. 7 ϥⲉⲓⲙⲉ] I. ϯϩⲧ[ⲏⲕ] 8 om pt at end of ⲩ.
497	9 ⲙⲱⲁⲃⲓⲧⲓ̀ⲥ]ϯ one pt over i, prob accidental \| om pt at end
498	ⲟ . ⲓⲟ om pt at end of ⲩ ⲓⲓ om pt at end of ⲩ.
499	12 ⲁⲩⲱ ⲓ] add nfe] \| ⲛⲉ] me [ⲕⲗⲏ]ⲣⲟⲛⲟⲙⲓⲁ 1. [ⲕⲗ]ⲏⲣ.
500	om pt at end of v. 13 ⲧ[ⲱ]ⲟⲩⲛ Ll Town \| om pt at end of v.
501	14 posame]nm written above line 15 om pt after ϫⲱⲟⲩ
502	17 ⲡϫⲟ] ⲁⲡϫⲟ \| om pt at end of v. 18 om pt at end of ⲅ.
503	ⲓⲑ ⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲛⲟⲙ[ⲉⲓ]..] ⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲛⲟⲙⲓ [ⲁ]
504	IV 48 ⲁⲉⲣⲛⲱⲛ] ⲁⲉⲣⲙⲱⲛ
505	V ⲓ ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲉⲥⲃⲟ] ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛⲉⲥⲃⲟ 2 ⲇⲓⲁⲑ[ⲏⲕⲏ] \| ⲇⲓⲁⲑⲏⲕ[ⲏ]
506	\| ⲛ ⲭⲱⲣ.] ϩⲛ̄ ⲭⲱⲣ. : ⲛ̄ⲧⲁ] ⲛ̅ⲧⲁ ⲙ [ⲛⲉ] ⲙⲛⲛⲉ] 4 ϩⲓ
507	ϩⲟ] ⲓ. gifgo ⲁ ⲡⲧⲟ]ⲟⲩ ⲓ. ⲡ[ⲧⲟ]ⲟⲩ 5 anfok] lL. amok] \|
508	ⲡⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓϣ] ⲡⲉⲩⲟⲉⲓϣ [eⲧⲉ]ⲧⲛ̄ I. ϫⲉⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ ⲁⲩⲱ] add ⲙ̄]
509	[ⲙ︦]ⲡⲉ] om ⲙ︦] om pt after ⲡⲧⲟⲟⲩ and after ϫⲉ 7 om pt at
510	end of v. ⲕⲧⲁⲙⲓⲟ] ⲕⲧⲁⲙⲓⲉ ⲛ ⲧⲟⲛ[ⲧⲛ︦] I. ⲡ (prob)
511	ⲧⲟⲛⲧⲛ̄ \| ϫⲱⲕ] ⲧⲡⲉ 9 pt after ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲉⲓ at end ⲓⲓ pwp (?)]
512	ⲫⲱⲃ little doubt as this scribe writes ⲃ half below the line \|
513	ⲕⲁⲧⲁ] ⲕⲁ[ⲧ]ⲁ ⲓϧ no space in orig before ⲥⲟⲟⲩ 14 200%]
514	ϩ]ⲟⲟⲩ \| ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] nxoe[ic] \| ⲙ̄ ϩⲱⲃ] ⲛ̄ϩⲱⲃ \| pt after
515	ⲡⲉⲕⲙⲁⲥⲉ and ⲛⲉⲕⲡⲩⲗⲏ ⲡⲕ̄ϩⲙ̄ϩⲁⲗ] ⲡⲉⲕϩⲙ̄. \| margin [Ke \|
516	om brackets 16 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om sup ⲉⲧ] ⲉ̀ⲧⲉ ⲉⲣⲉ] pe \| 20
517	ⲙⲛ︦ⲧ︦ⲣⲉ] ⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉ 2ⲓ [gal nag]B I qlailvagB 22 margin
page 20
518	16 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
519	[ⲍ︦] om brackets \| om pt at end of v. 23 om pt at end of v.
520	24 ⲉⲧⲥⲁⲃⲟⲛ] om ⲉ \| pt after ⲧⲥⲁⲧⲉ ⲉ ϩⲣⲁⲓ] om ⲉ \| om pt
521	at end of v. 25 ⲛⲟⲩⲱϩ] om ⲛ prob the scribe intended to
522	superlineate & at end of preceding line but he omitted to do
523	so \| om pt after ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲙⲟⲩⲟⲩ] szc 26 ⲧⲉⲓ TE prob 27
524	ⲛⲉⲧ ⲓ. ⲛⲉⲧ[ϥ[] 2 om pt after ⲛⲁⲓ̈ ⲛⲉⲧ has been erased by
525	the scribe ⲓ mali] l. nal 32 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] eTETH
526	VI ⲓ ⲉⲓ̈ⲣⲉ] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ \| ϩⲓ] inserted above line \| ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲁⲃⲱⲕ]
527	om sup \| om pt at end of v. 2 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛⲉ] om sup \| om pt after
528	ⲡⲟⲟⲩ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦] om sup 3 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ om sup ⲡ[ⲉⲕ]ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲓ.
529	ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ 4 ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] ⲡϫⲟⲓ̈ⲥ 5 ⲧⲏⲣⲥ̄] om sup 8 om pt at end
530	of v. ⲑ Mpwo¥] ⲛ̄ϩⲟⲩ ⲓⲟ ⲉϥ] ⲉⲥ \| ⲧⲣⲉⲩ] ⲧⲣⲉϥ om pt at
531	end of v. ⲓⲓ pt after ⲕ̄ⲙⲁϩⲟⲩ ⲙⲛ︦] ⲛⲙ̄ \| om sup over K \| ce]
532	ⲥⲉⲓ 12 om pt at end of v. 14 ⲡⲕⲱⲧⲉ] ⲕⲱⲧⲉ, ⲕ is written
533	over ⲡ but only partly obliterates it ⲓⲑ ⲛⲁⲛⲟⲩϥ] ⲛ̄ⲁⲛⲟⲩϥ
534	ⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲛⲟⲙⲓ] ⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲛⲟ \| insert ⲙⲓ before ⲙ̄ \| Tal] nai \| om
535	pt at end of v. 20 ϫⲛⲟⲩⲕ] om sup \| om pt at end of v. ϩⲓ om
536	pt at end of v. 4 ⲧⲣⲉ 2] ⲧⲣⲉ \|om pt at end of v. ⲉ
537	ϣⲁⲛ] ⲉⲛϣⲁⲛ \| pt at end of v.
538	VII 1 ⲉⲧ ⲛ︦] ⲉⲧⲕ̄ 2 om ⲉ before ⲛⲁ ϥ nen]: ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲛ
539	5 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ 2°] om sup \| WPWOPOY] WPWWPOY \| ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲟⲩⲟ‐
540	6Ti0¥] ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛⲉⲟⲩⲟϭⲡⲟⲩ \| ⲉⲓ̈ ⲉⲩϣⲏⲛ] ⲉⲓⲉϩϣⲏⲛ \| CKOOPOY
541	ⲉⲕⲟⲟⲣⲟⲩ \| om ⲛ before ⲕⲁⲩⲡⲧ[ⲟ]ⲛ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲣⲟⲕϩⲟⲩ
542	ⲉⲧⲉⲧ ⲉ̀ⲣ[ⲟⲕϩ]ⲟⲩ \| om pt at end of v. 6 ⲛ̄ⲧⲕ̄ ⲛ︦[ⲟⲩⲗⲁⲟ]ⲥ ⲓ.
543	ⲛ̄ⲧⲕ̄ⲟⲩⲗⲁ]ⲟⲥ ⲡⲉⲕ[ⲛⲟⲩ]ⲧⲉ 1. ⲡⲉⲕⲛⲟⲩ[ⲧⲉ] the ⲧⲉ was prob
544	written below the line but all is now broken away except
545	perhaps a part of ⲧ 7 ceTn] om sup 8 ϫⲉ] om at end of
546	line and insert before ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ ⲓⲓ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦] om sup 12 om pt
547	at end of v. 13 ⲛϥ̄ 1°] ϥⲛⲁ \| wWpK] om sup ⲓϥ pt after
548	ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ 19 ⲧⲁⲓ̃ ⲧⲉ] add ⲑⲉ ϩⲓ 6WTN] om sup 22 pt
549	after ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲩⲛⲟⲩ ⲁϣⲁⲉⲓ ⲓ. [ⲁ]ϣⲁⲉⲓ \| om pt at end of ⲩ.
550	23 [ⲡⲉ]ⲕ L [nex \| om pt at end of v. 24 ⲣⲁⲧϥ̄ ⲉⲣⲁⲧϥ̄ \| om
551	pt at end of v. 25 weBe] ⲛⲑⲃⲉ sic ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ
552	26 ⲇⲉ] ϭⲉ
page 21
553	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. (
554	VIII 1 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ ⲓ 2] om sup ⲙ̄ ⲧⲉⲧⲛ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ ⲱⲣⲕ]
555	om sup 2 ⲛ︦[ⲣⲟⲙⲡ]ⲉ 1. ⲛ̄ⲣⲟⲙ[ⲡ]ⲉ \| [nq] I. ⲉϥⲉ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲛ]
556	ⲙ̄ⲙ[ⲟ]ⲛ 3 [aqlka. lL ⲁ[ϥ]ⲕⲁ. ekgo. \|. ⲉⲕϩⲟ[
557	IX margin [see] om brackets 7 om pt at end of v. ⲙ︦]
558	om sup \| om pt at end of v. 9 om pt at end of v. ⲓⲟ ⲙ̄ ⲡⲛ.]
559	om sup ⲉⲩⲥⲏϩ] ⲛⲉⲩⲥⲏϩ ⲓ ϩⲛ̄ 2°] ϩⲙ̄ ⲓ ⲉⲓ̈] ⲉⲓ \| om pt
560	at end of v. 16 ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] om sup ⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ 3°] ⲁⲩⲱ \| insert
561	ⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ before kw ⲓⲍ art] ait ⲁⲓⲛⲟϫ.] ⲁⲓ̈ⲛⲟϫ. ⲙ̄ⲡⲉ]
562	ⲙ̄ⲡⲉⲧⲛ̄ ⲓⲑ ⲙⲡ ⲓⲟⲩⲉⲙ] ⲉⲙⲡⲓⲟⲩⲉⲙ \| ⲙⲟⲟⲩ] ⲟⲩ above line \|
563	om pt at end of v. 20 ⲁⲁⲣⲱⲛ] omission here due to homoio-
564	teleuton \| om pt at end of ⲩ. ϩⲓ pokgq] ϩ above line \| pt after
565	ϣⲏⲙϣⲏⲙ ⲛⲟϫⲉ] ⲛⲟⲩϫⲉ 22 ϩⲛ̄ ⲓ] om sup ⲕⲱϩⲧ̄] om
566	sup \| om pt at end of v. 23 om pt at end of v. 24 ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲟ]
567	NETETNO 25 om pt after ϩⲟⲟⲩ and at end of ⲅ. 26 coT[ng]
568	Ⲓ. coc \| ⲉⲥϫⲟⲟⲣ] ⲉⲧϫⲟⲟⲣ 27 ⲓⲥⲁⲕ] icaK ⲉⲛⲧⲁⲩ] enTA[K ?]
569	\| ϭⲱⲛⲧ] om sup 28 om pt at end of v. 29 ⲉⲥϫⲟⲥⲉ ⲉⲧϫⲟⲥⲉ
570	X 1 ⲛⲅ̄ ⲉⲓ ⲛⲅ̄ ⲉⲓ \| om pt at end of v. 3 xoo[2ec] ⲓ.
571	ϫⲟⲟ[ⲁ]ⲉⲥ 4 om pt at end of v. 5 ⲁⲓ̈ⲉⲓ] Atel \| colon at end
572	of v. ϭ ⲙⲉⲥⲁⲇⲉ] ⲙⲉⲓⲥⲁⲇⲉ ⲙⲙⲁⲩ 2] ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ \| om pt at
573	end of v. 7 ⲁⲩⲱ] ⲁⲩ 8 the ends of all the lines of this v.
574	may be taken out of the brackets, the fragment of papyrus on
575	which they occur having been separated and mounted by mistake
576	with fol. 45 \| om pt at end of v. 9 [e ⲃⲟⲗ]ϫⲉ Ⲓ. [eT]Re \| om
577	pt at end of v. ⲓⲟ ⲁϥⲥⲱⲧⲙ︦] ⲁϥⲥⲱⲧⲙ ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ] ely \|
578	om pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ ⲕⲗⲏⲣⲁⲛⲟⲙⲓ] ⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲛⲟⲙⲓ ⲱⲣⲕ] ⲱⲣ︦ⲕ︦
579	13-15 remove all brackets from [ⲡⲉⲧ] down to [mov], see above
580	14 ⲛ︦ⲛ︦ⲕ]ⲁ lL ⲛ̄ⲕⲁ ⲓ5 ⲥⲱⲧⲡ̄] om sup 16 ⲛ[ⲙⲁⲕ]ϩ̄Ⲓ ⲙⲁⲕ]
581	17 ⲉⲙ[ⲡ] ⲉϥϫⲓ I ⲉⲙⲉϥϫⲓ 18 ⲉⲓ̈ⲣⲉ] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ 19 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om sup
582	20 ⲱⲣⲕ om sup ϩⲓ [ⲛ]ϣⲡⲏⲣⲉ] ⲛϣⲡⲏⲣⲉ 22 ⲁⲩⲉⲓ ⲅⲁⲣ
583	ⲉⲓ ⲙ] ⲙ̄ \| pt after ⲯⲩⲭⲏ \| ⲛ̄ⲑⲉ] add ⲛ︦
584	XI ⲓ ⲉⲧⲟⲟⲧⲕ] I. ⲉⲧⲟⲟⲧ[ⲕ︦] 2 ⲛⲥⲉⲓⲙⲉ] ⲛⲥⲉⲉⲓⲙⲉ ⲛⲉⲓ̈ 2°]
585	ⲛⲉϥ \| om pt at end of v. ⲙⲏⲏⲧⲉ] ⲙⲏⲧⲉ, there is a bad place
586	on the pap. before ⲏ : if anything was ever written there, it was
587	not ⲏ and has been erased \| om pt at end of v. 4 om pt after
588	ⲥ
page 22
589	18 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
590	ϩⲧⲱⲣ and at end of v. 7 ⲕⲉ] ϫⲉ \| om pt at end of v.
591	8 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ 1°] om sup \| ⲁⲛⲟⲛ] ⲁⲛⲟⲕ \| pt after ⲡⲕⲁϩ \| [mali 1.
592	[ⲡ]ⲁⲓ̈ \| om pt at end of v. ⲑ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om sup \| pt after mkag, \|
593	om pt at end of v. ⲓⲟ 0m pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ ⲉⲧ] ⲉⲧⲕ̄ 12 om
594	pt at end of v. 13 ⲉ ⲃⲟⲗ ⲛ̄ ⲛⲉⲕϩⲏⲧ] ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϩⲛⲡⲉⲕϩⲏⲧ \|
595	ext] ont \| om pt at end of v. ⲓϥ pt after ⲡⲉⲕⲕⲁϩ ϣⲟⲣⲡ̄
596	om sup \| it ϩⲁⲉ] sup over if \| ⲉ ϩⲟⲩⲛ ⲓ. [ⲉϩⲟⲩⲛ ⲏⲣⲡ︦] om
597	sup ⲛⲉⲕⲛⲉϩ] ⲡⲉⲕⲛⲉϩ 15 ϯⲛⲁ] ϥⲛⲁ ⲛ̄ⲉⲕⲥⲱϣⲉ] om sup
598	16, 17, 18, 19, om pt at end of v. 20 ⲛ] ⲛ̄ om pt at end of
599	ⲅ. 21 ⲛⲥⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲥⲉ \| wpk] om sup \| ⲛ ⲧⲡⲉ] sup over ⲛ 22
600	ⲡⲉⲕⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ] ⲡⲉⲛⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ϥ ⲡⲉⲓ̈ ⲉⲣⲟ] ⲡⲉⲓⲉⲣⲟ 26, 27, 28, om
601	pt at end of v. 27 ⲛⲉⲛⲧⲟⲗⲏ] om sup 28 ⲧⲏⲟⲩⲧⲛ̄ 2]
602	ⲧⲏⲩⲧⲛ̄ \| ⲉ ϩⲉⲛⲕⲉⲛ.] ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲛⲕⲉⲛ. 30 gi] ϩⲓ ⲓ om pt at end
603	of v.
604	XID ⲓ [ⲛⲉ]ⲧⲛ̄Ⲓ. [ⲛⲏ]ⲧⲛ̄ 2 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ ⲉ] om sup \| ⲛⲧⲁⲩϣⲙ̄]
605	ⲉⲛⲧⲁⲩϣⲙ̄. 3 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ 1° 2° 3° 4°] om sup ⲛ̄ ⲛⲉⲩⲣⲁⲛ]
606	ⲙ̄ⲡⲉⲩⲣⲁⲛ ⲙⲁ] ⲡⲙⲁ 3,4, 5 6 om pt at end of v. 5
607	ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲩ] ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ 6 ⲉ[ⲙ]ⲙⲁⲩ ⲓ. ⲉⲙⲁⲩ ⲟⲩⲱϣⲉⲙ] ⲟⲩⲱϣ \|
608	ϣⲣⲡ︦] om sup 7 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲁϩⲓ] om sup ⲛⲉⲧ[ⲛ̄ϣⲏ]ⲣⲉ lL
609	ⲛⲉⲧⲛϣ[ⲏ]ⲣⲉ, if there was a superlineation it is broken away
610	8, 9, 10, 11 om pt at end of v. ⲓⲟ ⲙⲉϩ] ⲙⲉⲧ \| wpx] om
611	sup ⲓⲓ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦] ⲟⲡⲓ sup \| ⲟⲩϣⲁ] ⲑⲩⲥⲓⲁ 12 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om sup \|
612	erasure] ⲙⲡⲉⲙⲧⲟⲉⲃⲟⲗ slightly rubbed but every letter legible
613	and I believe not intentionally erased ⲓϥ ϩⲙ̄ 2°] ϩⲛ̄ 14, 15
614	om pt at end of v. 16 ⲟⲩⲱⲙϥ̄ ⲟⲩⲟⲙϥ \| €TETN] om sup
615	17 ⲛ ⲡⲣⲉ] ⲙ̄ⲡⲣⲉ \| [aan] ⲛ̄ϣ[ⲣⲡ︦] I. ⲛϣⲣⲡ only \| margin [Z]
616	om brackets 18 ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] ⲙⲧⲟ \| om pt after ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ and at end
617	of v. \| pt after ⲡⲉⲕⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ 3° 19 ⲡⲉⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓϣ] ⲡⲉⲩⲟⲉⲓϣ om pt
618	at end of v. 20 pt after Tow \| p ⲛ︦] ϩⲛ̄ 21 ⲉⲥⲟⲟⲩⲉ ⲛ̄] ⲉⲥⲟⲟⲩ
619	ⲛ̄ⲛⲉ \| ⲧⲁⲁϥ] ⲧⲁⲁⲩ ⲉⲧⲟⲟⲧⲕ] ⲉⲧⲟ[ⲟ]ⲧⲕ̄ 23 ⲛ ⲁϥ sup over
620	ⲛ \| pt after ⲧⲛ̄ⲟⲩⲟⲙϥ︦ 24 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om sup \| NASTY] ⲡⲁϩⲧϥ
621	25 om pt after ⲛⲁⲛⲟⲩϥ 2° and at end of v. 26, 27 om pt at
622	end of v. ⲉⲓ̀ⲣⲉ ⲓ 2] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ 29 ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] add ⲇⲉ ϩⲟ
623	ⲙⲛ︦ⲛ︦ⲥⲁ] 1 ⲙⲛ︦ⲕ︦ⲥⲁⲧⲣⲉⲩ there is room.
624	© XIII om paragraph mark ⲓ init ⲉ not in margin ⲓ, 2 om pt
page 23
625	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 19
626	at end of v. 3 ⲛ̄ⲥⲁ] om sup ϫⲛ︦ⲓⲧ] om sup 4 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om
627	sup \| om pt at end of ⲅ. 5 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦] sic \| colon at end of ⲅ.
628	6 TekwBHP] ⲡⲉⲕϣ. ⲁⲛ] om sup \| om pt at end of v. 7
629	ⲉⲣⲟⲩ] ⲉⲣⲟⲕ \| pt after ⲡⲕⲁϩ 8 om pt after ⲉ ⲣⲟϥ and at end
630	of v. 9 om pt after ⲧⲏⲣϥ̄ ⲧⲟⲟⲧϥ] TOOT ⲓⲟ ⲛⲥⲉϩⲓ] sup
631	over ⲛ \| ⲛ̄ⲧ] om sup \| om pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ ⲉϥϣ[ⲁⲛⲥⲱ] ⲓ.
632	ⲉϥϣⲁ[ⲛⲥⲱ] ⲁⲩ[ⲱ nc] 1. ⲁⲩϣ[ⲛ︦ⲥ] \| colon at end of ⲅ.
633	12, 13 om pt at end of v. 13 ⲕⲉ]ⲕⲉⲩ ⲓϥ ⲉⲙ̄ⲁⲧⲉ] om sup
634	15 ϩⲱⲧⲕ] ϩⲱⲧⲃ̄ \| ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦] om sup 16 ⲉⲛ] ⲉⲕⲉ ⲣⲟⲕϩ̄]
635	ⲣⲱⲕϩ̄. (s om, the three dots are a broken but certain ϩ
636	viz. the first letter of gt; there is nothing between ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ and
637	ϩⲛ̄ \| om pt after ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ and at end of v. ⲓⲍ ⲛⲛⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲛⲉ ϩⲛ︦]
638	els]
639	XIV 17 om pt at end of v. 19 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om sup \| om pt at
640	end of v. 20 ant] om sup ϩⲉⲓⲃ] gletB 20, ϩⲓ om pt at end
641	of v. ϩⲓ ⲉⲕⲉⲧ] ⲉⲕⲉϯ 22 [xi] L [61] \| wpm] om sup \| p ϩⲟⲧⲉ]
642	om sup 24,25 om pt at end of v. 27 ⲉⲕⲉⲓⲛⲉ] exeeine \|
643	ⲅⲉⲛⲏⲙⲁ] ⲅⲉⲛⲛⲏⲙⲁ \| om pt at end of v.
644	XV ⲓ ⲛ] ⲛ̄ 2 pt after ϩⲓⲧⲟⲩⲱⲕ [weoe] [Ϣⲉⲟⲉⲓϣ]\|
645	[iw] lL [ⲡ]ⲉ 4 [ⲡⲉⲧ. ⲛ[ϭ︦ⲡⲉⲧ ⲙ̄ⲙ[ⲟ]ϥ. ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ 5 ⲥⲱ[ⲧⲙ︦]
646	Ⲡⲛ︦ⲥⲁ Ⲓ. ⲥⲱⲧ[ⲙ̄ ⲛ̄ⲥⲁ ⲉⲓ̈ⲣⲉ] eipe \| om ptatend of v. ϭ om pt
647	after ⲛⲉⲙⲁⲕ and at end of v. \| ⲉϫⲙ̄] ⲉϫⲛ̄ 7 ϣⲱⲡⲉ] add ⲉϥ] \|
648	ⲟⲩⲉⲓ] ⲟⲩⲉⲓ \| om pt after ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ ⲛ̄ⲛⲉ] 1 nex] \| p6plwe
649	lL poplwe 8 ⲙ̄] add neTq \| [ⲡⲉⲧⲉϥ] om \| om pt after
650	ⲡⲉϥⲣ︦ϭⲣⲱϩ ⲑ [ϫⲉ. [ϭ \| eqe[un] I. ⲉϥϩϣ[ⲡ] ⲉ ⲃⲟⲗ ⲓ.
651	ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲁⲥ and omit ⲁⲥ from bracket in next line 10 ⲉⲕⲉϯ ⲓ]
652	ket ϥ︦[ⲛ]ⲁ I. only \| om pt at end of v. 11 OTK 1° 2°]
653	[o]Tk 12 ⲉⲕⲉϫⲟⲟⲩϥ ⲓ ⲉⲕⲉϫⲟⲟⲩ[ϥ] 12, 13 om pt at end
654	of v. ⲓ [ⲉϥⲟ] om brackets \| paeg[e ⲉⲕϣⲁⲛ ⲓ. ⲣⲙ̄ϩⲉ ef kan]
655	14 ϥ︦ⲛ]ⲁϩⲉ I. gage \| ⲧⲉⲕϩⲣⲱⲧ] I. ⲧⲉⲕϩⲣⲱⲧ ⲛ̄ⲧ] ⲉⲛⲧ
656	ⲛ̄ϫ]. ⲛ̄ϭⲓ] 16,17 om pt at end of v. 16 ovw Tq] \|. ⲟⲩⲱⲧϥ
657	\| €ipc] eipe 18 colon at end of ⲅ. 19 ϣⲣⲡ̄] om sup ⲛ̄ϩ[ⲟⲟⲩⲧ
658	ⲓ. ⲛ̄ ϩⲟⲟⲩⲧ [ⲉⲕⲉⲧⲃ̄ⲃ]ⲟⲟⲩ 1. [ⲉⲕ]ⲧⲃⲃⲟⲟⲩ ϩⲙ̄] ϩⲛ̄ ϣⲣⲡ︦]
659	om sup \| om pt after ⲙⲓⲥⲉ and at end of v. 20, 21, 22, 23 om pt
660	at end of v. 20 [ⲉⲕⲉⲟⲩⲟⲙϥ 1. ⲉ[ⲕⲉⲟⲩⲟ]ⲙϥ̄ npo[aene] sup
661	ⲥ
page 24
662	20 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
663	over ⲛ 21 [ⲉϥϩⲟⲟⲩ etc.] prob only five letters in lacuna at
664	ⲉ ⲛ(sc)
665	beginning of line \| ⲛⲑⲩⲥⲓⲁ. ⲛⲑⲩⲥⲓⲁ\| 22 ⲟⲩⲟⲙ] ⲟⲩⲱⲙ
666	XVI 1,2 om pt at endof ⲩ ⲓ €f] ⲉⲓ 3 [ⲁ] om ⲡ[ⲙⲁ
667	ⲉⲧ ⲓ. ⲡⲙⲁ [ⲉⲧ ⲉⲕⲉ[ⲟⲩⲱⲙ 1. ⲉⲕⲟⲩⲱⲙ ⲛ̄ⲕⲏⲙⲉ 1. ⲛ̄ⲕⲏⲙ[ⲉ
668	4 ⲛⲁϥ ⲓ. ⲛ︦[ⲁϥ \| ⲡϣⲟⲣⲡ̄] om sup \| ⲛ︦ ϩⲧⲟⲟⲩⲉ] ⲛ︦ϩⲧⲟ[ⲟⲩⲉ]
669	5 ⲛ︦ ⲡ] IL ⲙ[ⲡ] \| after ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ] there is room for [ⲛⲁⲓ]
670	ⲛⲁⲧⲁⲁϥ] ⲛⲁⲧⲁ[ⲁⲩ] 5, 6 om pt at end of v. 6 ⲡϫⲟ] ⲡϫ[oⲟ] \|
671	ⲛⲁϥ] ⲛⲁ[ϥ] pt after ϩⲏⲧϥ̄ ⲛ̄ ⲣⲟⲩϩⲉ] om sup ϩⲱⲧⲡ]
672	ϩⲱⲧ[ⲡ] \| Boa] 1. ⲃⲟ[ⲁ] 7 [ⲡⲙⲁ] I. ⲡ[ⲙⲁ] ⲡⲉⲕⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ]
673	ⲓ. ⲡⲉⲕⲛ[ⲟⲩⲧⲉ] ⲉⲕⲉ] ⲉⲕ[ⲉ] om pt after ⲁⲑⲁⲃ ⲉⲛⲧ om sup \|
674	ϣⲁϫⲉ] altered to ϣⲁ, not ϣⲁⲓ̈. by a diagonal line drawn
675	through xe; a later hand, with gray ink, has put five dots over
676	and four dots under the xe \| € ⲃ[ⲟⲗ ⲓ. ⲉⲃⲟ \| g[uTq] L
677	en[7q] \| Tpe(?) ⲓ. ⲧⲣ[ⲉⲟⲩ] \| ⲯⲩⲭⲏⲁⲁⲩ] it is hardly
678	necessary to say that this is not a plural, but ⲯⲩⲭⲏ followed
679	by the verb ⲁⲁⲩ 9 ϩⲉⲃⲇⲟⲅ[ⲙⲁⲇⲁⲥ]ⲓ. ϩⲉⲃⲇⲟⲙ[ⲁⲥ] ⲉⲕⲛⲁϩⲓ]
680	om ⲓ \| awn ⲓ. ]ⲕⲛⲁⲱⲡ ⲓⲟ ϭⲟⲙ] ⲛ̄ϭϭ︦ⲙ [ⲡϫⲟⲉ]ⲓⲥ I. [ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓ
681	ⲓⲓ ⲙⲛ̄ ⲧ]ⲉⲕϩ. . ⲙⲛ︦]ⲧⲉⲕϩ. ⲉⲧ gn ⲓ. ⲉⲧ]ϩⲛ̄ ⲓϧ colon at
682	end of v. 15 ⲛ̄ ⲉϩⲟⲟⲩ ⲓ. [ⲛ︦ ϩⲟ]ⲟⲩ \| ⲛϭⲓ] ⲛ̄ϭⲓ 16 ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ 1. ⲙⲧⲟ
683	[ⲉⲃⲟⲗ] \| pt after ⲡⲉⲕⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ 2° and after ⲛ̄ⲛⲁⲑⲁⲃ and after
684	ⲥⲕⲏⲛⲟⲡⲏⲅⲓⲁ ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] om sup ⲓⲍ ⲛ̄ 2°] ⲙ̄ ⲁϥⲁⲁⲩ] aqraaq \|
685	colon at end of v. 19 ⲛϣⲁϫⲉ] sup over ⲛ 20 pt after
686	ⲟⲩⲙⲉ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦] om sup ϧⲓ ⲕⲧⲱϭ[ⲓ KTWOEE \| ϩⲛϣⲏⲛ(
687	ϩⲛϣⲏⲛ but no practical doubt as to reading \| Teevc.]
688	ⲡⲉⲑⲩⲥ.
689	XVII 2, 3, 4,5, 6 om pt at end of v. 2 ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] om sup
690	4 € 1°] add mec which has been added apparently by a later
691	hand but in brown ink \| ϩⲟⲧϩⲧ] om sup 5 ϩⲙ̄] ϩⲛ̄ 6 ϥⲙⲟ]
692	ϥⲙⲟⲩ ⲟⲩⲧ] ϩⲓⲧ 7 ⲁⲩⲱ ϩⲓ. ⲁⲩⲱ ⲧ[ϭⲓϫ] ⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉ etc.
693	ⲓ. ⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉⲉⲩ ⲉⲥⲉϣⲱⲡⲉ ϩⲓϫⲱϥ (si) \| ϣⲟⲣⲡ̄] om sup 8
694	ⲙ̄]ⲙⲟϥ] ⲓ. ⲛ̄ the letter before ⲁⲕ is prob narrower than
695	[ⲛ] and I suspect the whole is ⲛ︦[ⲛⲁϩ] [plak, but this is a
696	guess. ⲧⲙⲏⲧ[ⲉ] I. ⲧⲙⲏⲧⲉ ⲛ, the ⲛ is uncertain, but there
697	are the vestiges of a letter consistent with ⲛ ϩ ϩⲟⲧϩⲧ̄] om
page 25
698	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 21
699	sup ⲓⲟ ϩⲙ̄] ϩⲛ̄ eipe 2] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ \| om pt after ⲛⲓⲙ ⲓⲓ pt after
700	ⲉⲕⲉⲁⲁϥ ⲉⲧⲟⲩⲛ. ⲓ. [ⲉ]ⲧⲟⲩⲛ. \| om pt at end of v. ⲓϧ eipe]
701	ⲉⲓⲣⲉ \| om pt after ⲟⲩⲏⲏⲃ, after ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ and at end of ⲩ.
702	13 colon at end of v. 16 om pt after ϩⲧⲱⲣ and at end of v. \|
703	pt after ⲕⲏⲙⲉ and after ⲡⲁϩⲟⲩ. 17 om pt after ⲛⲟⲩⲃ and at
704	end of v. ⲛⲉϥⲧⲁϣ. \|. [ⲛⲛⲉϥⲧⲁϣ. ⲓⲑ ⲇⲉⲩⲧ.] orig written
705	ⲧⲉⲩⲧ. initial ⲧ altered to ⲇ by corrector in gray ink ⲓⲑ 19,
706	20 om pt at end of v. 20 [ϫⲉ] I. ϫⲉ] ecjep] om sup \| ⲧⲙⲏⲧⲉ]
707	ⲛ̄ϣⲏⲣⲉ
708	XVIII 1 om pt at end of v. ϣ[ⲱ]ⲡⲉ Ⲓ. ϣⲱⲡⲉ \| ⲁϥϫⲟⲟⲥ
709	ⲓ. ⲁ[ϥ]ϫⲟⲟⲥ 3 pt after ⲛⲟⲩⲏⲏⲃ ϣⲁⲁⲧ ⲉⲩ \|. ϣⲁⲁⲧⲟⲩ\|
710	ⲥⲛⲁⲩ ⲙⲁⲣ ⲑⲉ] ⲑⲏ \| om pt at end of v. 4 ⲛⲁⲡⲁⲣⲭⲏ]
711	ⲧⲁⲡⲁⲣⲭⲏ \| om pt after ⲥⲟⲣⲧ and at end of v. 5 ⲧⲉ lL ⲧ] \|
712	om pt after ⲡⲓⲥⲣⲁⲏⲗ ϭ ⲣⲟ[ⲕ] l. ⲣⲟⲕ \| ovawo[v] I. ⲟⲩⲁϣⲥ
713	7 ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] om sup 8 ⲙ̄ⲡⲉϥ] ⲙ̄ⲡⲉϣⲁ 9 ⲛⲁⲧⲁⲁϥ] ⲛⲁⲧⲁ[ⲁ]ϥ
714	ⲛⲛⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲛⲉ ⲓⲟ ϩⲱⲛⲧ] ϩⲱⲛⲅ̄
715	XIX ⲓ om pt at end of v. 2 pt after ⲡⲕⲁϩ 3 ϣⲟⲙⲧⲉ]
716	om sup \| room for [Tow] in first lacuna \| g////j/ 1. ϫ[e]
717	4 ⲛⲁⲡⲱⲧ] ⲓ. ⲛⲁⲡⲱⲧ] [ⲉ] ϥⲛⲁⲱⲛϩ ϥⲛⲁⲱⲛϩ [ⲡⲉⲧ]
718	lL ⲡⲉⲧ ϧ pt after ⲉⲩⲕⲉⲣⲉϣⲉ ⲛ̄ ⲡϣⲉ] ⲙ̄ⲡϣⲉ ⲉⲩⲉⲓ] ⲉⲩⲉⲓ \| om
719	pt at end of v. 6 ⲉⲛⲧ[ⲁϥ]. ⲉⲛⲧⲁϥ ⲙⲟⲟⲩⲧ] ϥ̄ has been
720	added by the corrector in gray ink, but I think over the same
721	letter by the orig scribe \| ϫⲉⲗ] ϫⲉⲁ prob \| om pt at end of ⲅ.
722	8 ⲉⲧⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲉ 9 ⲉⲓ̈ⲣⲉ] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ ϯϩⲱⲛ] ⲉϯϩⲱⲛ ⲛ ⲛⲉⲕϩⲟⲟⲩ]
723	sup over ⲛ ⲟⲩⲟϩ] ⲟⲩⲉϩ om pt at end of v. ⲓⲟ ⲡⲉⲓ̈] ⲡⲁⲓ̈
724	ⲓⲓ ⲉⲧ] ⲉϥ pt after ϩⲓⲧⲟⲩⲱϥ \| [ⲡ]ⲁⲧⲁⲥⲥⲉ \|. ⲡⲁⲧⲁⲥⲥⲉ ⲉⲩⲁ]
725	ⲉⲩⲉⲓ 12 ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ ] add pfceTa] and [ⲁϥ] at beginning of next
726	line ⲙ̄ [ⲡ] 1. aameT \| next line prob ⲓ. [ⲉⲧϫⲓ ⲉϩ]ⲟⲩⲛ
727	orfaseolowTq nnfe], ⲛ being omitted before ϥ 15 the
728	paragraph mark is only a short straight line and is not by the
729	original hand, but inserted later in gray ink ⲛ︦ⲛ︦ⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲛⲉ ⲧⲣⲉ [ϥ]
730	om brackets 17 om pt after ⲛⲉⲩⲉⲣⲏⲟⲩ ⲓ [ⲛ︦] om brackets \|
731	ⲟⲩ[ⲛ ⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉ I ⲟⲩ[ⲙ]ⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉ, no room for more 20 [ⲏⲡⲉ] L.
732	[ⲥⲉⲉⲡⲉ] \| ϩⲏⲧⲟⲩ] after ϩⲟⲧⲉ are remains of one letter only,
733	prob ⲛ︦[ⲥⲉⲧⲙ︦] \| ϫⲟ] ϫⲉ \| BARA in bracket] om 21 pt after
page 26
734	22 TIIE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
735	ⲟⲩⲟⲃϩⲉ 1° \| after 61x ⲓ insert ⲉ, and om in bracket at beginning
736	of next line \| ⲡⲙⲁ ⲛ̄] add ⲟⲩ \| [ⲟⲩⲉⲣⲏⲧⲉ ⲉⲣⲏⲧⲉ
737	XX ⲓ ⲙⲓϣⲓ] ⲙⲓϣⲉ \| [ove] L [ev] as there is prob only room
738	for two letters ; if three, 1. [ⲉⲟⲩ] ϩⲓ[ⲱ]ⲱϥ ⲓ. ϩⲓϫⲱϥ, the right
739	tip of the ϫ remains and shows that ⲱ is impossible \| [ⲡϫⲟ] om
740	brackets \| om pt after ⲛⲉⲙⲁⲕ \| ⲧⲁϥⲛ̄ⲧⲕ︦ ⲓ. [ⲧ]ⲁϥⲛ̄ⲧⲕ̄ 2 om
741	ptatend of v. 3 pt after ⲡⲓⲥⲣⲁⲏⲗ and ¢j6BRe \| ϩⲟⲧⲉ] there
742	is no trace of ϩⲟ left in the orig hand, the corrector in gray ink
743	has written, by mistake, prob po, carrying over p from the
744	previous line, but the reading should be ϩⲟⲧⲉ ϥ ⲛⲉⲧⲛⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ]
745	ⲡⲉⲧⲛⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ \| colon after ⲧⲏⲟⲩⲧⲛ̄ and om pt at end of ⲩ.
746	5 [oc xJe 1. [oc] ϫⲉ \| [kwT ⲛ︦] I. ⲕⲱⲧ[ⲛ︦] \| before ⲁⲉⲓⲕ (si)
747	there is room for [ϫⲓⲡⲉϥ] and in the next line for [nejkoTq] \|
748	[ⲙⲟⲟⲩⲧ ⲉ] room for five letters, perhaps [ⲙⲟⲩ git] \| after
749	ⲣⲱⲙⲉ ⲓ. [ϫⲓⲁ]ⲉⲓⲕ ϭ ⲡⲣⲱⲙ] om ⲙ and insert in bracket in
750	next line
751	XXII 3 [ⲁ]ϥⲥⲱⲣⲙ̄ om brackets \| om pt at end of v. 5
752	[ⲛ︦]ⲛⲉ om brackets ⲙ̄ ⲡϩⲃ̄ⲥⲱ 1. fgRcw 5, 6 om pt at end
753	of v. 6 ϩⲉⲛⲙⲁϩ] ϩⲉⲛⲙⲁⲥ ⲑⲁⲗⲡⲉⲓ] ⲑⲁⲗⲡⲉⲓ \| ⲛⲉⲥⲙⲁϩ
754	ⲛⲉⲥⲙⲁⲥ ⲍ ⲟⲩⲕⲱ] add ⲉ [e ⲃⲟⲗ] 1 [ⲃ]ⲟⲗ [[ϣ]ⲏⲏⲣⲉ .
755	ϣⲏⲣⲉ \| ka[c] om brackets \| ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲕ] om point and add ⲁⲩ \|
756	[ⲉⲕⲉⲉⲓⲣⲉ] ⲱ ⲛⲅⲉⲓⲣⲉ 8 [e]kwanmwT om brackets ⲕⲧⲟ] ⲕⲧⲉ
757	9 the addition after ϫⲉ above the line in gray ink is ⲥⲛⲁⲩ,
758	not ⲁⲓⲁⲛ 12, 13om ptatendof v. 14 ⲧⲏϭ] ⲧⲉϭ ⲉ ⲣ︦] cp \|
759	ⲉⲩϩⲟⲟⲩ] ⲉϥϩⲟⲟⲩ \| ⲁⲓϫⲓⲧⲥ] ⲁⲓ̈ϫⲓⲧⲥ︦ \| ⲡⲁ [o]ⲩⲟⲉⲓ. ⲡⲁⲩⲟⲉⲓ ⲓ
760	ⲧϣⲉⲉⲣⲉ 1°] ⲧϣⲉⲉⲣ[ⲉ] \| Twee[pe] \|. Tweep[e] \| pt after nes \|
761	om pt at end of v. 16 ϫ[ⲱ ⲙ̄ⲙ] ϫⲟ \| weep[e wHae] I. ϣⲉⲉⲣⲉ,
762	the final ⲉ is small and rather high, and it is clear ϣⲏⲙ was
763	never there 17 ⲧⲉⲛⲟ[ⲩ ϫⲉ] 1. ⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩ [6€] \| ⲧⲙⲛ︦ⲧ︦ⲣⲟ] I
764	ⲧⲙⲛ︦ⲧ︦ⲣ[ⲟ] \| om pt after ⲣⲟⲟⲩⲛⲉ 2° and at end of v. \| 6am]
765	om sup \| ⲡⲉϥ[ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ] ⲓ. ⲧⲡⲟ[ⲁⲓⲥ] ⲓⲑ ⲙ̄ ⲓ] ⲙ̄ altered to ⲛ̄ by
766	the orig scribe ⲓⲑ [ⲛ ϣⲟⲩ] ⲓ. [ⲛϣⲉ] \| ⲧⲁⲁϥ] ⲧⲁⲁⲩ \| pt
767	after ⲡⲓⲥⲣⲁⲏⲗ 2ⲓ ⲁⲥⲉⲓ̈ⲣⲉ] ⲁⲥⲉⲓⲣⲉ ⲛ̄ϣⲏⲣⲉ] om sup 2 ⲉⲧ
768	c] ⲉⲥ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om sup 23 ⲉⲥ ⲁⲩϣⲡ] ⲉⲁⲩⲱⲡ ⲛ̄ⲕ[ⲟⲧ]ⲕ 1
769	ⲛ̄ⲕ[ⲟ]ⲧⲕ̄ 24 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦] om sup \| ⲣ[ⲟⲟⲩ] ⲓ. Blo] ⲥϫⲓϣⲕ] sup
page 27
770	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 23
771	over ⲥ pt after ϩⲓⲧⲟⲩⲱϥ ⲙ̄ ⲡⲟⲛ. ⲙ̄ⲡⲡⲟⲛ. 26 om pt at end
772	of v. 27 colon at end of v. 29 om pt after ⲛⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲥ and after
773	ϩⲁⲧ [ⲉ Ron] I [e]ⲃϩⲗ 30 [pw] ⲓ. [plw \| ϩⲓⲧⲟⲩ[ⲱϥ ⲏ] L
774	ϩⲓⲧⲟⲩ[ⲱ]ϥ ⲏ̅ ϭⲱ[ⲣ]ⲃ I. ϭⲱ[ⲁⲡ ⲉ]ⲃⲟⲗ, space requires three
775	letters in the lacuna, o written small but certain \| om pt at end
776	of v.
777	XXIII ⲓ ⲛ︦ⲛⲉ ⲣⲱ] ⲛ︦ⲛⲉ]ⲣⲱ ⲧⲉⲕ[ⲕ]ⲗⲏⲥⲓⲁ 1. ⲧⲉⲕⲗⲏⲥⲓⲁ\|
778	colon ⲁ ⲉⲛ of v. 2 om pt at end of v. ⲛ︦] om, I can see
779	no trace of it 4 ⲃⲁⲗϩⲁⲙ ⲓ. ⲃⲁⲗ[ⲁ]ϩⲁⲙ traces show there
780	was another letter \| om pt at end of v. ⲃⲁⲁⲗϩⲁⲙ]
781	ⲃⲁⲗⲁϩⲁⲙ 7 ⲓ̈ⲇⲟⲩⲙⲁⲓ̈ⲟⲥ] ⲓ̈ⲇⲟⲩⲙⲁⲓⲟⲥ \| ⲕⲃ] 1. ⲕⲃⲟ, there
782	are remains of ⲃ and of a small letter, prob o, after it ⲃⲱ[ⲕ]
783	om brackets 9 ϩⲁⲣⲉ[ϩ] om brackets ⲟ, ⲓⲟ, 11 om pt at end
784	of v. ⲓⲟ ϫⲱⲣϩ] ⲉⲩϣⲏ, the corrector has re-written the original
785	word in gray ink, but it is possible to see that both original and
786	correction were ⲉⲩϣⲏ ⲛ̄ⲥⲁ ⲃⲟⲗ] ⲛ̄ⲡⲃⲟⲗ \| ⲡⲉ ⲉ ϩⲟⲩⲛ]
787	ⲡⲉⲥϩⲟⲩⲛ ⲓⲓ ⲉϥⲛϩⲱⲧⲡ︦] ⲉϥⲛⲁϩⲱⲧⲡ ⲉϥⲉ] om brackets
788	12 [ⲛ] om 13 ⲙⲱⲣ] ⲙⲏⲣ \| ANY] nny \| om pt at end of wv.
789	14 ⲉϥⲛⲁⲥⲉⲓⲛⲉ] ϥⲛⲁⲥⲉⲓⲛⲉ ⲓ ⲧⲟⲟⲧϥ] ⲉⲧⲟⲟⲧϥ ⲉⲁ om
790	accent over & \| ϭⲁ̃ⲗⲱⲱⲛ] ϭⲁ̃ⲗⲱⲱϥ 16 om pt after ⲛ̀ⲁⲣⲁ-
791	ⲛⲁϥ ⲓ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲛ︦] ⲉⲃⲟⲗϩⲛ̄ \| ⲛⲗⲁⲁⲩ] ϩⲛⲗⲁⲁⲩ \| om pt at
792	end of v. 19 ⲡⲉⲕ[ⲥⲟⲛ] 1. ⲡⲉⲕⲥⲟ 2 om pt at end of ⲅ.
793	24 ϩⲓⲱⲱⲕ. ϩⲓⲧⲟⲩ]ⲱⲕ
794	XXIV ⲓ om pt after ⲛⲉⲙⲁⲥ ⲉϥⲥϩⲁⲓ̈] ⲉϥⲉⲥϩⲁⲓ̈ 2, 3 om
795	ptatend of v. 3 oi] ϩⲙ̄ 4 ϣⲟⲣⲡ̄] ⲟⲓⲛ sup \| ⲉ ⲣⲟⲥ ⲓ. [e]poc \|
796	ⲙⲉⲛⲛ̄ (c ϯ ⲙⲛ̄ only ϧ om pt at end of v. 8 ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄] om
797	sup ⲓⲟ ⲉⲩϣⲱⲡⲉ] ⲉϣⲱⲡⲉ \| pt after ⲉⲣⲟϥ 12 ⲙⲟⲕϩ] sup over
798	ϩ 14 ⲡⲕⲉⲕⲉ] ⲡⲃⲉⲕⲉ ⲓ ϩⲱⲧⲡ̄] om sup \| [evn ⲛ]ⲟⲃⲉ ⲓ.
799	ⲉⲩ[ⲛ]ⲟⲃⲉ 17 pt after ⲭⲏⲣⲁ ⲓ ⲓⲑ ⲧⲟⲟⲧⲕ] sup over ⲕ ⲓⲑ
800	om pt at end of v. 20 ⲉⲕⲛⲁⲕⲟⲧϥ︦\| ⲉⲕⲛⲁⲕⲱⲧϥ ⲉⲕⲉⲣ] om sup \|
801	ⲡⲁⲓ] ⲡⲁⲓ̈ 21 ⲉⲥⲣⲁⲧ] ⲉⲥⲣⲁⲧ[ϥ̄\|• no practical doubt, as the
802	superlineation remains
803	XXV ⲙ̄) ⲛ̄ 3 pt after ⲥⲏϣⲉ \| ⲡⲉϥ] ⲡⲉⲕ ϥ ⲉϥϩⲉ ⲉϥϩⲓ
804	5 om pt at end of v. 6 om pt after ⲙⲟⲩ 7 EWAN] ⲉϥϣⲁⲛ
page 28
805	24 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
806	ⲡⲣⲱⲙⲉ ⲓ. ⲡⲣⲱⲙ[ⲉ] \| ⲁⲥⲧⲥⲟⲟⲩϩⲥ︦] nTcoovec ⲛ̄ ⲛⲟϭ]
807	ⲛ︦ⲛ︦ⲛⲟϭ \| ⲡⲏⲓ] ⲡⲁⲓ̈ \| om pt at end of v. ⲙ̄] ⲛ̄ⲧ \| p onal]
808	ϩⲛⲁⲓ̈ only \| om pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ p] + 12, 13 14 om pt
809	at end of v. ⲓ ⲛ̄ⲛⲉ] ⲛ̄ϣⲓ ⲓϥ [fe Le 15 ⲛ ⲟⲩⲁϣⲁⲓ]
810	ⲛ̄ⲟⲩⲁϣⲏ 17 the paragraph mark is added by the corrector in
811	gray ink \| om pt at end of v. 18 om pt after ⲉⲧϩⲟⲥⲉ \| pt
812	after ⲡⲉ
813	XXVI ⲓ om pt after ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ 2 pt after ⲟⲩⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲥ 2, 3, 4
814	om pt at end of v. ⲉⲧ] ⲡⲉⲧ ϭ ⲑⲙ̄ⲕⲟⲛ] ⲁⲩⲑⲙⲕⲟⲛ 7
815	ⲛⲉⲛⲑⲃ̄ⲃⲓⲟ] ⲡⲉⲛⲑⲃ̄ⲃⲓⲟ 8 NEO] om sup ⲑ ⲉϥϣⲟⲩⲥⲉ ⲣⲱⲧⲉ]
816	ⲉϥϣⲟⲩⲉ ⲉⲣⲱⲧⲉ ⲓⲟ ⲛ] ⲛ︦
817	XXVIII ⲓ ⲛ̄ ⲉⲓⲣⲉ] ⲧⲛⲉⲓⲣⲉ \| ⲗⲉ ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲛⲁⲓ̈] [2H ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ
818	ⲛ]ⲁⲓ̈ \| ϩⲓⲧⲧⲉ] ϩⲓⲧⲡⲉ [ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ] ⲓ. [ⲧⲏⲣ]ⲟⲩ 2 bracket after
819	[ⲡⲉⲕⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ : €[k] \|. ⲉⲕ ⲡ]ⲉⲕⲥⲱϣⲉ ⲓ ⲧⲉⲕⲥⲱϣⲉ ⲁⲩⲱ]
820	add ⲥⲉ 4 ⲉⲉ] ⲥⲉ ϧ ⲛ̄ϭⲓ] add ⲛⲉⲕ 6 ⲃⲱⲕ] ⲕⲃⲱⲕ 9
821	ⲉⲕ [ϣⲁⲛⲥ. \|. ⲉⲕϣⲁ[ⲛⲥ. ⲓⲟ ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ \|. ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ ⲁⲩⲧⲁⲩ]
822	ⲁⲩⲧⲁⲩⲟ \| Ncep\| ⲛⲥⲉⲣ \| om pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ ⲁϥ] ⲁϥϯ,
823	either ϯ or ⲧ, more probably the former \| ⲛⲉⲭ[ⲟⲓⲁⲓⲁ ⲓ.
824	ⲛⲉϫ[ⲡⲟ \| ⲧⲁϥ ⲡⲁⲓ̈ \| om pt at end of v. ⲓϥ ⲧⲏ]ⲩⲧⲛ︦] only
825	room for one letter in bracket, prob o from slight remains 16
826	ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ] ⲧⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ ⲓⲍ ⲁⲡⲟⲑⲏⲕⲉ] ⲁⲡⲟⲑⲏⲕⲏ ⲓⲑ ⲛⲅⲉⲛⲛ] sup
827	over first ⲛ 19 ⲉⲓ] ⲉⲓ ϩⲟ ⲧ-ⲁⲟⲟⲩ] ⲧⲛ̄ⲛⲟⲟⲩ ϩⲣⲁⲓ] ϩⲣ[ⲁ]\|
828	ne6plwwe] 1. ⲡⲉϭⲣⲱ[ϩ ⲁⲩⲱ] prob \| [e ϫⲱϥ] 1. ⲉⲣⲟⲟⲩ]
829	the p is uncertain, but it was a letter with a tail, not x \|
830	ϥ̄ϥⲟⲧⲉ] ϥ̄ϥⲟⲧⲕ̄ \| € ⲧⲣⲉ] ⲉⲧⲃⲉ 21 ⲡϫⲟ[ⲉⲓⲥ ⲛⲟⲩ] Ⲓ ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ
831	\| ϩⲓⲧⲛ̄] ϩⲓϫ[ⲛ︦]︦ \| ⲡⲕⲁϩ] add [ⲡⲁⲓ̈] there is room for it and
832	apparently remains of some letters \| ⲣⲟⲛⲟⲙⲓ ⲓ. ⲣⲟⲛⲟ[ⲙⲓ]
833	21, 22, 23 om pt at end of v. 22 ⲁⲣⲟ[ϣ] om brackets 23
834	ⲙ̄] ⲛ̄ 24 ⲛⲧⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲉ \| pt after ⲉⲃⲟⲗ 2 25 ⲥⲁϣⲉϥϯ ⲥⲁϣϥⲉ
835	ⲟⲣⲱⲟⲩ] ⲉⲣⲱⲟⲩ ϧ6 ⲛ̄ ⲡⲕⲁϩ] ⲙ̄ⲡⲕⲁϩ \| om pt at end of v.
836	27 ⲑⲙ̄ⲥⲟⲕ] ⲑⲙ̄ⲕⲟⲕ\| pt after ⲕⲏⲙⲉ ⲙ̄ⲧⲟⲛ] ⲉⲙⲧⲟ 3 ⲉⲓⲛⲉ]
837	ⲉⲓⲛⲉ 29 before ⲡⲉ ⲓ. ⲁⲩⲱⲕⲛ[ⲁϣⲱ, there are certain remains
838	of all these letters ⲙ̄ ⲡ] add ⲃⲗⲗⲉ at end of this line \|
839	ⲉⲕ... ⲏⲟⲩ \|. ⲉⲕⲑ︦ⲙ︦[ⲕ]ⲏⲟⲩ ϩⲟ ⲟⲩⲏⲓ] ⲟⲩⲏⲉⲓ ϩⲓ om pt after
840	ⲛⲁⲕ and at end of v. ⲛⲉⲕⲉⲥⲟⲩⲉ] ⲛⲉⲕⲉⲥⲟⲟⲩⲉ, there is a
page 29
841	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 25
842	small ⲟ at the end of the line 33 om pt at the end of the
843	ⲩ. 35 ⲛ︦[ⲣⲁⲧ]ⲕ̄ lL ⲛ︦[ⲣⲁ]ⲧⲕ̄ 36 the beginning of this v.
844	reads ⲉⲣⲉ [ⲡϫⲟ]ⲉⲓⲥ ϫⲓⲧ︦ⲕ︦ ⲛⲙ̄ ⲛⲉⲕⲕⲉⲁⲣ[ⲭⲱⲛ . . . \| [ex] L
845	[ⲉⲛⲅ︦] \| om pt at end of ⲩ 37 om pt after ϣⲁϫⲉ 38 om pt
846	"at end of v. 39 om pt after ϩⲏⲧϥ \| nT] sup over both ⲛ
847	and ⲧ ⲟⲩⲱⲙⲟⲩ] ⲟⲩⲟⲙⲟⲩ 42 colon at end of v. 44
848	ϥⲛⲁⲣ] om sup ⲛ̀ⲧⲟⲕ ⲓ. ⲛ̀ⲧⲟ[ⲕⲭ] 45 ⲥⲱⲧⲙ̄] om sup 4 om
849	pt after ϣⲡⲏⲣⲉ and at end of v. 48 ⲙⲁⲕϩ] sup over ϩ
850	ϭⲓ ⲉⲧ ⲙ̄ⲡ ⲉϥ] ⲉⲧⲙ̄ⲧⲣⲉϥ 52 ϥⲛⲁ] om sup \| om pt at end of
851	Vv. 54, 55 om pt at end of v. 57 ⲉⲓ( eT ⲉⲛⲧ[ⲁⲩϯ]ⲉⲓ︦]
852	ⲉⲛⲧ[ⲁⲥ]ⲉⲓ \| evc] add ⲛ[ⲁ] 5 ϣⲁϫⲉ] transfer xe from end
853	of this line to beginning of next ϧ [ⲁⲩⲱ] ⲓ. ⲁ[ⲩ]ⲱ ϭⲓ om
854	pt at end of v. 62 ⲕⲟⲩⲉ] ⲕⲟⲩⲉⲓ 63 ⲧ[ⲏⲟⲩⲧ]ⲛ] add Tal \|
855	Ro] I. ⲃ[oⲗ 64 [x]we 1. ϫⲱϥ \| pt after ⲡⲕⲁϩ \| ny]
856	eny \| om pt at end of v. 66 om pt at end of v. 67 pt after
857	ⲧⲛⲁⲩ 68 ⲛⲧⲁⲓ ⲓ. [ⲉ]ⲛⲧⲁⲓ̈ prob \| [palec: ⲁⲩ[ⲱ] ϯ ⲓ.
858	[plaec: ⲁⲩ[ⲱ ϯ] ⲛ̄ϩⲙ︦] om sup over ⲛ colon at end
859	of v.
860	XXIX ⲓ om pt after ⲙⲱⲁⲃ and at end of v. 2 ⲛ̄ ⲕⲏⲙⲉ]
861	om sup 3 om pt at end of v. 3 pt after ⲧⲉⲣⲏⲙⲟⲥ ϭ eTeTH \|
862	om sup \| om ptatend of v. 7 ⲟⲩ] add ⲁ 8 ⲡⲁϣⲉ] ⲧⲡⲁϣⲉ
863	ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ 1° 2°] om sup ⲓⲟ ⲅ[ⲁⲣ] I. Tern] prob ⲕⲣⲓⲧ[ⲉⲓⲥ I.
864	ⲕⲣⲓⲧⲏ[ⲥ, ⲏ is certain though broken \| ⲅⲣⲁⲙ written over ϩⲗ̄ⲗ
865	erased ⲓⲓ pt after ⲡⲣⲟⲥⲏⲁⲩⲧⲟⲥ ⲓⲓ, 12 om ptatendofv. 13
866	ⲛ̄ⲧⲉϥ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲟϥ \| ear] xe ⲓ5 ⲛ̄.. ⲟⲩⲥⲉ . ⲙ̄ ⲓ n[k]oove ⲉⲧⲙ̄ 16
867	om pt at end of v. 17 ⲛ[ⲁⲩ ⲛ̄ ⲛⲉⲩⲃⲟⲧⲉ ⲓ. ⲛⲁ[ⲩ ⲉⲛⲉⲩⲃ]ⲟⲧⲉ \|
868	ⲛⲙ̄ ⲟⲩⲓ. ⲛⲙ̄] ⲟ[ⲩ] 20 ⲧⲉⲇⲓⲁ] ⲧⲉⲓ̈ⲇⲓⲁ ⲡⲉⲓ] ⲡⲉⲓ̈ \| ϫⲟⲉⲓ[ⲥ
869	nal ϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] ⲛⲁ] 22 ⲛⲁⲉⲓ] ⲛⲁⲉⲓ [ⲟⲩⲏⲟⲩ] ⲟⲩⲏⲟⲩ] ⲡⲕⲁϩ
870	L ⲡ[ⲕ]ⲁϩ 2 pt after ⲣⲟⲕϩ̄ 24 ⲉ ⲑⲃⲉ] ⲉⲧⲃⲉ 25 ⲛ̄ ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ]
871	ⲙ̄ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ 26 ⲉⲛⲥⲉⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ] ⲛⲥⲉⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ ⲙ̄ⲡⲉ] ⲙ̄ⲡ 27 [ϩⲟⲩ ⲧ]
872	ⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲓ. [ϩ]ⲟⲩ [ⲧ]ⲏⲣⲟⲩ [︦︦]ⲧ[e mei] I. [︦]ⲡ[e] 29 ⲉⲛⲉϩ] add
873	€ \| om pt at end of v.
874	XXX ⲓ [ⲁϥⲛⲟϫⲕ] 1. nfoxk] 2 om pt at end of v. 3
875	ϥ̄ⲛⲁⲥ.] om sup \| ⲛ̄ⲧⲁ] om sup 4 om pt after ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ 50m
876	pt after ⲛⲉⲕⲉⲓⲟⲧⲉ ⲓ 6 ⲡϩⲏ[ⲧ ⲛ̄ ⲡⲉⲕ] ⲡϩⲏ[ⲧ] unex] \| xe
page 30
877	26 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
878	[ⲕⲁⲥ] 1. xek[ac ⲉⲕⲉ] there is room ⲧ nei [ⲥⲁϩⲟⲩ] ⲓ.
879	neiclajeoy ϩⲣⲟⲟⲩ] ⲓ. ϩⲣⲟⲟⲩ [ⲙ̄ⲡⲟⲟⲩ] ⲓ [ⲙ︦̄ⲡⲟⲟ]ⲩ
880	ⲟ... ⲉϩⲓ. [ⲛⲁϩⲁ]ⲣⲉϩ]\| om pt after ϫⲱⲕ \| ⲛ̀ⲧ] ⲉⲛⲧ ⲓⲟ ⲣⲓ after
881	ⲉⲛⲧⲟⲗⲏ \| ⲕⲟⲧⲕ] ⲕⲟⲧⲕ̅ \|om ptat end of v. ⲓⲓ ⲛ̄ⲉⲟⲩⲏⲟⲩϯ] ⲛ̄ⲥⲟⲩⲏⲟⲩ
882	13 ⲛ︦ gun 1 [adore \| weep] ⲛϥ̄ 14 [ⲧⲁⲡⲣ]ⲟ Ⲓ ⲧ[ⲁⲡⲣⲟ]
883	[ⲡⲉ ]ⲕϭⲓ︦ϫ 1. ⲛ[ⲉ]ⲕϭⲓ︦ ϫ ⲓ5 [etc ⲁⲛⲟⲕ] Ⲓ. ⲉⲓⲥ [amok] \| [ai] 1
884	[ait ⲙ︦︦ⲡⲉ ⲓ. une ⲓϭ [ⲁⲩⲱ] ⲓ. ⲙ[ⲛ︦]︦ pt after ⲉⲣⲟϥ
885	17 om pt at end of v. 18 pave] ⲣϩⲁϩ ⲉ[ⲧ] ⲉ I ⲉⲧⲉ
886	ⲧⲁ[ⲁϥ] om brackets 19 the paragraph mark is a simple line,
887	prob added by a later hand \| [gH] ⲙ̄ I. ϩⲏ ⲙ̄] ⲉⲕⲉ[ⲱⲛϩ︦] 1.
888	ekew[ng] 20 om pt after 66Aexk \| aBpa] ⲁ[ⲃ]ⲣⲁ, the ⲁ is
889	certain, though only the lower tip remains, and there was no ⲛ
890	before it \| icaax] ⲓ. ⲓ̈ⲥⲁⲁ]ⲕ \| om pt after ⲓ̈ⲁⲕⲱⲃ
891	XXXI 2 ⲛⲁⲩ] ⲛⲁⲩ \| [ⲁⲩⲱ ⲙ̄ⲡ ⲁⲓ] [fsa], space and
892	grammar require it 2, 3 om pt at end of v. ϥ ⲉⲓ̀ⲣⲉ] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ \| ⲑⲉ
893	ⲛ̄ⲧ] ⲑⲉ ⲉⲛⲧ ϭ [snp lL [nlp ⲣ︦ ϣⲗⲁϩ] add ⲁ[ⲩⲱ]\|
894	[ⲙ︦ⲡⲣ︦] ⲓ. [samp \| me ⲛ̀ⲧ] ⲡⲉⲧ ⲙ̄ⲙ[ⲟⲕ] [ⲛ︦ⲛⲉ ϥ] the space
895	allows equally of ⲙ̄ⲙ[ⲱ] [ⲧⲛ slg, the ϥ̄ is still there, 1
896	ϥ̄ⲛⲁⲥⲁϩⲱϥ [ⲃ]ⲟⲗ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲕ[ⲁ̄ \|-[avw] ⲛϥⲛⲁⲕⲁⲁⲕ \| after	Be courageous and strong, fear not, neither be cowardly neither be afraid before them; for it is the Lord your God that advances with you in the midst of you, neither will he by any means forsake thee, nor desert thee.
897	ⲕⲁⲁⲕ read [ⲁⲛ ⲛ︦]ⲥⲱϥ • ⲁⲩⲱ 7 ⲃⲟⲗ ⲙ̄ ⲡⲓⲥ 1 [ⲃⲟⲗ]
898	ⲙ̄ⲡⲓⲥ[ⲣⲁ] pan] ⲓ. [ⲏⲁ] ⲧ[ⲁϫⲣⲟ] I. ⲧⲁϫⲣⲟ] [1] should
899	be transferred to the end of the preceding line \| in the lacuna
900	after ⲉ L [ϩⲟⲩ]ⲛ ϣⲗⲁϩ ⲓ. ϣⲗⲁϩ ⲟ [ve2a2o?] vestiges
901	of letter following ⲛⲉ suggest [ⲡⲣⲉⲥⲃⲩⲧⲉⲣⲟⲥ] ⲓⲟ [ⲁϥ][ϫ]ⲟⲟⲩ
902	L [ⲙ̄ⲡⲉ] [ϩ]ⲟⲟⲩ [ⲉⲧ]ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ \| the first letter of the next line
903	is ϫ 12 ⲉⲧ ⲓ. [e]T ⲛ[ⲉⲧⲛ̄ ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ I. nfeTnn]oaetc ⲛ (2).
904	ⲥⲃⲟ ⲓ. ⲛ[ⲥⲉⲥ]ⲃⲟ︦ 13 ϣⲏⲣⲉ] add ⲛⲁⲓ \| . . ⲉⲛ ⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ ⲓ.
905	[ⲉⲧ]ⲉⲛⲥⲉ[ⲥⲟ]ⲟⲩⲛ \|. cRO ⲓ. [ⲛ︦ⲥ]ⲉⲥⲃⲟ [ⲡⲉⲧⲛ] . [ner] \|
906	before ⲁⲁⲩ read [ⲉⲧⲟⲩ]ⲛ \| pt after ⲡⲕⲁϩ \| before ⲧⲛ̄ read
907	[...0]Tw ⲓϥ [ⲡⲉ] . ...ⲛ ⲓ. [ⲏⲧⲉ ⲥⲉϩ]ⲱⲛ [ⲙⲱⲩⲥ]ⲏⲥ
908	there is room for ⲛ̄ϭⲓ in the bracket \| er ⲉ ⲥ. ⲧⲉⲥ \| ⲣⲁⲧⲟⲩ]
909	add ϩⲁⲧⲛ̄ ⲛ̄ⲣϣ ⲛ̄ 16 om pt at end of v. ⲓⲍ ⲧⲁϩⲟⲉⲓ̈] ⲧⲁϩⲟⲉⲓ
910	18 ⲛ ϩⲉⲛ] ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲛ ⲓⲟ ⲛ︦ⲧⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲱ \| ⲛ̄ⲧⲉ] ⲛ̄ only, the ⲧⲉ ought
911	to be there, but is not \| ⲉⲧⲉ [ⲧⲛ̄ⲧⲁⲡⲣⲟ] 1. ⲉⲧⲉⲩⲧⲁⲡⲣⲟ]
912	the ⲩ certain from remains \| wwe] there is room for ⲛⲁⲓ in
913	the lacuna \| ϣⲏⲣⲉ [ⲙ] I ϣⲏⲣ[ⲉ ⲙ] 20 [wplk 1 [ⲱ]ⲣⲕ \|
page 31
914	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 27
915	ⲉⲓⲟⲧⲉ] there is room for ⲟⲩ in the bracket ⲉⲃ[ⲉⲓⲱ] I.
916	ⲉⲃⲟ[ⲁϩⲓⲉⲃⲓⲱ], the ⲟ is certain and there is prob room for the
917	rest \| co(?). . lL ⲥⲉⲓ[ⲉ] \| . . ⲟⲩⲟ ⲓ. [ⲡⲉϩⲟⲩⲟ ⲕⲧⲟⲟⲩ] add
918	ⲉⲣⲁⲧⲟⲩ [ⲛ︦] \| ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲓ. [ϩⲉⲛ]ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ, space requires it \| omit
919	lacuna at end of line \| [ⲛⲥⲉ]ϯ ⲟⲩϫⲥ̄ ⲓ. [ⲛⲁⲩ] ⲛⲥⲉϯⲛⲟⲩϭⲥ
920	ϫⲱⲱⲣⲉ ⲉ ⲃⲟⲗ] ⲓ. ϫⲱ[ⲱⲣⲉ €] \| ⲧⲁ \|. ⲃⲟⲗ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲁ ⲓ
921	. apaTe(?) I. ⲁϩⲉⲣⲁⲧⲥ \| en] nT \| colon at end of ⲅ.
922	22 ⲁϥⲥϩⲁⲓ] ⲁϥⲥϩⲁⲓ̈ 23 ⲉ [ϩⲟⲩⲛ] ⲉϩⲟⲩⲛ] w[pk] I. ⲱⲣ]
923	24 ⲙ [ⲱⲩⲥⲏ]ⲥ \|. [ⲙⲱ]ⲩⲥⲏ]ⲥ 25 ⲉⲧⲟ] ⲉⲧⲣ \| Tal] ⲧ
924	26 ⲙ̄ ⲡⲙⲁ] ϩⲙ̄ⲡⲙⲁ [ⲙ]ⲙⲛ︦ⲧ︦ Ⲓ. [ⲉⲩ]ⲙⲛ︦ⲧ︦ space prob requires
925	it \| om pt at end of v. 27 [ϯⲥ]ⲟⲟⲩⲛ 1 [ϯ]ⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ ⲙ︦[ⲁⲕ[ϩ]
926	1. ⲙⲡⲉⲕϩⲏⲧ] prob \| ⲡⲟⲟⲩ] . . ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ 1. ⲡⲟⲟⲩ ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ \| 6€]
927	add ⲛϩⲉ] \| ⲙⲟⲩ] ⲙⲟⲩ 2 ⲥ[ⲱⲟ]ⲩϩ ⲓ. cufolve \| [e220]
928	lL ⲁ[ⲣⲭⲱ] ⲉⲓ̈ⲛⲁⲧⲁⲩⲟ] ⲉⲓⲉⲧⲁⲩⲟ \| om pt at end of v. 29
929	ⲁⲛⲟⲙⲓⲁ] accent on I, not on & \| ⲁⲛϭϧⲙⲉⲓ̈] ⲁⲛϭⲙⲉⲓ • \| pt after
930	ⲉⲧⲉⲧⲏⲟⲩⲧⲛ̄ ⲉⲓ̀ⲣⲉ] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ 30 Tek[K]A.] Tek. \| [Tali ⲧ
931	om pt at end of v. ;
932	XXXII ⲓ pt after ⲧⲡⲉ \| om pt after ϣⲁϫⲉ and at end of
933	verses ⲓ, 2, 2, 4, 5 2 OYEIWIE\| OVEIWTE 4 om pt after ϩⲁⲡ
934	and ϥⲟⲩ[ⲁⲁ]ⲃ ϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] ϫⲟⲓ̈ⲥ \| ⲁ[ⲩⲣ︦ⲛⲟ]ⲃⲉ 1. ⲁⲛ[ⲣ︦ⲛⲟ]ⲃⲉ 5
935	ⲥ. rove, there is room 6 om pt after ⲡⲉ, insert one
936	ϧⲉ ⲁϥⲥⲟⲧⲕ 7 ϫⲛ︦ ⲓ 2°] om sup \| om pt at end of ⲅ.. 8 om
937	pt after ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ 1°and 2° and at end of v. ⲑ [ⲡⲙⲉ] I. ⲧⲙⲉ]
938	ⲓⲓ ⲉϥⲛⲁⲡⲟⲣ] add ⲉ ⲛϥ︦︦ⲛⲉϥ ⲓϩ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ ] ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲟⲩ ⲙⲙⲟⲛ
939	ⲛⲟϯⲩⲧ[ⲉ 1 ⲙⲛ︦[ⲕⲉⲛⲟ]ⲩⲧ[ⲉ 13 ⲁϥϫ... Ⲓ ⲁϥϫⲓⲧⲟⲩ
940	ϩⲣⲁ[ⲡⲛ︦ 1. gpali ⲉ]ϫⲛ︦, there is room \| ⲁϥⲧ[ⲣⲉ ⲩ]ⲟⲩⲙ
941	ⲅⲉⲛ.. ⲁϥⲧ[ⲙ̄ⲙⲟ]ⲟⲩ ⲛ︦ⲛ︦ ⲅⲉⲛ. 14 om pt after ⲉⲥⲟⲟⲩ 15 om
942	pt after ⲁϥⲥⲉⲓ and at end of v. 16 ϯⲛⲟϫϥ︦] ϯⲛⲟⲩϭⲥ
943	[ϫⲱⲛⲧ ⲓ. [ϫ]ⲱⲛ︦ⲧ︦ \| ϩⲉⲛ] ϩⲛ̄ ⲓⲍ [ⲥⲟ]ⲟⲩⲛ LL ⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ ⲓ
944	ⲛ̄ⲥⲱϥ] ⲛ̄ⲥⲱⲕ 19 om pt at end of v. 20 om ⲣⲓ after
945	ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲟⲩ, ⲑⲁⲏ, ⲉⲥϭⲟⲟⲙⲉ and at end of v. \| 20 ⲧⲁⲓⲁⲙⲩ]
946	ⲧⲁⲧⲁⲙⲟⲟⲩ ϩⲓ [ⲙ̄ⲙⲟ]ⲟⲩ \|. ⲛ︦ⲧⲟ]ⲟⲩ 22 om pt after ϭⲱⲛⲧ
947	and ⲅⲉⲛⲛⲏⲙⲁ 24 om pt after ⲉⲣⲟⲟⲩ and insert one after
948	ⲥⲱϣⲉ 27 ⲛⲟⲣⲅⲏ . . ⲛⲉ] 1. [ⲧⲟⲣⲅⲏ] ⲛ[ⲛⲉ] \| om pt after
949	ⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓϣ and ϫⲱⲟⲩ \| [ⲛ︦]ⲛⲉ 1 [e]ⲛⲛⲉ 2 om pt at end of ⲅ.
950	30 om pt after ⲧⲁⲁⲩ and at end of v. 34 om pt after ϩⲁⲧⲏⲉⲓ\|
page 32
951	28 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
952	ceTcoBe\| ⲥⲉⲧⲟⲟⲃⲉ ϭ ⲉⲩⲃ[ⲱⲗ ⲓ ⲉⲩⲃⲏⲗ 37 om pt
953	after ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ and ⲉⲣⲟⲟⲩ 3 om ⲣⲓ after ⲑⲩⲥⲓⲁ and ⲉⲣⲱⲧⲛ̄
954	39 om pt after ⲡⲉ and ⲧⲁⲗϭⲟ 40 om pt at end of v. ϥⲓ
955	nov] I. ⲛ̄ⲟⲩ om pt after gar ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲉⲓ̈] ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲉⲓ 42 om pt
956	after ⲡⲉⲥⲛⲟϥ 2° \| pt after ⲣⲁϩⲧⲟⲩ 43 ⲧⲁϫⲣ[ⲟ] [ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ ⲛ︦]
957	ⲛ︦[ⲁⲅⲅ]ⲉⲗⲟⲥ ⲓ. ⲧⲁϫⲣ[ⲟϥ ⲛϭⲓ ⲛ̄ⲁⲅⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ \| om pt after
958	ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ] 44 ⲙⲱⲩⲥⲏⲥ ⲓ and in v. 45 has ⲡⲟ dots over ⲩ
959	ⲙⲱⲩⲥⲏⲥ 2° has 47 om pt after ⲱⲛϩ̄ ⲉⲓ̀ⲣⲉ] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ 49 v ⲉⲛⲧ
960	ⲙ︦] ⲓ. [ⲩ ere \| [2 ⲙ̄ ⲡϩⲓ] L [A ⲛ̄ϩⲓ] as Maspero, prob \|
961	ⲉⲧⲛⲁⲧⲁⲁϥ ⲉϯⲛⲁⲧⲁⲁϥ \| insert pt after ⲙⲱⲁⲃ and om at
962	end of v. 50 om pt after ⲉⲣⲟϥ \| con] si, the scribe has
963	written both st and the long superlineation
964	XXXII ⲓ ⲁⲩⲱ ⲡⲁ] ⲁⲩⲱ ⲡⲁⲓ̈ \| om pt at end of v. 2 om
965	pt after ⲛⲉⲙⲁϥ ⲉ( ⲉ is correct ⲛ[ⲉⲕϣⲁ]ϫⲉ ⲓ. ⲛ[ⲉϥϣⲁ]ϫⲉ
966	prob as Maspero \| om pt at end of v. 4 om pt after ⲙⲱⲩⲥⲏⲥ
967	and at end of v. ϧ om pt after ⲗⲁⲟⲥ 7 om pt after ⲗⲁⲟⲥ,
968	ⲃⲟⲏⲑⲟⲥ and at end of v. and insert one after 61x 9 ⲉ ⲣⲟϥ]
969	ⲉⲣⲟⲕ \| om pt after ϣⲁϫⲉ ⲓⲟ ⲓ̈ⲁⲕ[ⲱⲃ]• I Takw[B] \|
970	ⲟⲩ.. ⲙ. ⲛ︦]ⲟⲩϩ[ⲉⲓϣ line, there is room ⲓⲓ ⲛⲉϩⲃⲏⲟⲟ]ⲩⲉ
971	ⲓ. ⲛⲉϩⲃⲏ[ⲟ]ⲩⲉ ⲟⲩⲱ̄ ⲟⲡ] ⲟⲩⲱϭⲡ︦ 12 ⲛⲁⲣ] om sup \| om pt
972	after ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲛⲉϥⲧⲟⲩⲉⲓⲏ] ⲛⲉϥⲓⲟⲩⲉⲓⲏ (sic) 13 om ⲣⲉ after
973	ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ 14 om pt at end of v. 16 om pt after ⲡⲃⲁⲧⲟⲥ and
974	at end of v. \| ⲉ̄ⲟⲟⲩ] om sup ⲓⲍ 0] om sup \| wpm] om sup \| om
975	pt after ⲙⲟⲛⲟⲕⲉⲣⲱⲧⲟⲥ 18 om pt after ⲉⲃⲟⲗ and at end of ⲅ.
976	19 om pt after ⲉⲃⲟⲗ and ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ and ⲧⲥⲛ︦ⲕⲟⲕ 20 om pt after
977	ⲛⲁϥ and ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ϩⲓ om pt after ⲧⲁⲣⲭⲏ (sic) and ⲗⲁⲟⲥ 22
978	om pt after ⲛⲁϥ and ⲃⲁⲥⲁⲛ 2 om pt after ⲛⲁϥ, ϣⲏⲡ and
979	ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ \| me eine] ⲡⲥⲉⲓ̀ⲛⲉ, ⲥⲉⲓⲛ is written over an erasure,
980	the ⲛ over ⲡ prob; I think the first writing was ϯⲓⲡ (not ⲥⲉⲉⲡ
981	as Wessely) \| ⲙⲁⲣⲉϥⲉⲓ] ⲙⲁⲣⲉϥⲥⲉⲓ 2ϥ om pt after ⲛⲁϥ 26
982	om pt after ⲙⲉⲣⲓⲧ and at end of v. 27 ⲥⲕⲏⲡⲏ] ⲥⲕⲉⲡⲏ \| om
983	pt after ⲡϫⲁϫⲉ 28 om pt after ⲓ̈ⲁⲕⲱⲃ, ⲕⲗⲟⲟⲗⲉ and ⲉⲓⲱⲧⲉ
984	\| ⲡⲱⲣϣ] om sup 29 om pt after ⲡⲓⲥⲣⲁⲏⲗ, ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ and
985	ⲉⲣⲟⲕ ⲡⲉⲩⲕⲁϩ
986	XXXIV ⲓ om pt after ⲁⲃⲁⲩ \| ϩⲓⲉⲣⲓⲭⲱ] ϩⲓⲉⲣⲓⲭⲱ 2 \| pt
page 33
987	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 2
988	after ⲅⲁⲗⲁⲁⲇ 2 om pt at end of v. 3 pt after ϩⲓⲉⲣⲓⲭⲱ
989	and ⲧⲉⲫⲟⲓⲛⲓ̈ⲕⲏ \| ⲧⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ] ⲧⲡⲟⲗⲉⲓⲥ 4 ⲕⲁϩ ⲡⲕⲁϩ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ
990	1. ⲙ̄ⲙ[ⲟⲥ] \| ϯⲛⲁϯ ⲛⲁϥ ⲙ̄] ⲓ. ϯ[ⲛⲁⲧⲁ]ⲁϥ ⲙ̄ 56 om ⲣⲉ at
991	end of v. 6 ⲗⲁⲁⲩ] ⲗⲁⲁⲩ ⲉ ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] ⲟⲡ ⲃⲱⲣ ⲓⲓ [ⲁⲩⲱ ⲙⲛ̄
992	ⲛ] [ⲙⲛ̄ ⲡ] om pt at end of v. ⲓ2 om pt at end of v.
993	JONAH.
994	I 1omptatendof v. 2 ⲧⲱⲟⲩⲛ [ⲛ]ⲅ︦. ⲧⲱⲟⲩⲛⲅ \| om pt
995	after ⲡⲟⲗⲉⲓⲥ [ⲉ] om 3 om pt after ⲑⲁⲣⲥⲉⲓⲥ \| ⲧⲉⲧϩⲏⲙⲉ]
996	ⲧⲉϥϩⲏⲙⲉ \| eq] ⲁϥ 4 ⲉⲓ ⲉ] ⲉⲧⲉ \| pt after ⲑⲁⲗⲗⲁⲥⲥⲁ \|
997	[ϣⲱⲡⲉ] ⲉ. Wlwnle, prob not room for more 5 ϩⲛ̄ ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓ] ϩⲓ
998	ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓ ϭ ⲟⲩⲛ] ⲓ. ⲟⲩ 7 ⲧⲉⲕⲁϭⲓ︦ⲁ] TEIKAGIA \| ϩⲓϫⲱⲛ] •.
999	ϩⲓϫⲱⲛ] 8 ⲧⲉⲕ[ⲁ] I. Tei[ka] \| om pt after ⲉⲓⲟⲡⲉ ⲃⲱⲕ] ⲓ.
1000	ⲃⲱ[ⲕ] ⲛ̄ ⲁϣ] om sup 9 ⲧⲁⲙⲓⲟ] ⲧⲁⲙⲓⲉ ⲓⲟ ⲉⲡⲉⲓ̈] ⲉⲡⲉⲓ \| om
1001	pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ ⲛⲛⲁⲁϥ ⲛ̄ⲛⲁⲁⲁϥ ⲑⲁⲗⲗⲁⲥ[ⲥⲁ] ⲓ.
1002	ⲑⲁⲗⲗⲁⲥ 13 ⲉⲓ̈ⲣⲉ] ⲉⲓⲣⲉ 15 om pt at end of v. 16 ⲛ̄ⲣⲱⲙⲉ]
1003	ⲣⲣⲱⲙⲉ ⲛ̄.. MepHT \| ⲛ︦ϩⲉ]ⲛⲉⲣⲏⲧ
1004	II 1 ⲕⲏⲧⲟⲥ 2°] ⲡⲕⲏⲧⲟⲥ 5 ϫⲱ [ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ] l. ϫⲟϩ[c] ϭⲱ[Ϣⲧ]
1005	ⲓ. ϭⲱϣⲧ 6 ⲙⲱⲟⲩ] ⲙⲟⲟⲩ ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲛ Ⲓ. ⲡⲛⲟⲩ[ⲛ] \| single pt at
1006	end of v. 7 ⲃ[ⲱⲕ ⲉ ⲡⲉⲥⲏⲧ] ⲓ. ⲃ[ⲱⲕ ⲉⲡ]ⲉ[ⲥⲏⲧ] \| om pt after
1007	ⲥⲏ[ⲧ] and ⲉⲛⲉϩ and at end of v. ⲙⲙⲁ i] una 8 wwe (7)
1008	ⲛ︦] ⲓ. ϣⲱ[ⲥⲙ̄] ⲛ̄ ⲙⲉⲉⲩ[ⲉ] ⲙⲉⲉⲩ \| pt after ϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ \| om pt at
1009	end of v. 100m ptatendof v. ⲓⲓ ϣⲟⲩϣⲟⲩ ϣⲟⲩⲱⲟⲩ :
1010	IIT ⲓ om pt at end of v. 2 ϣⲟⲣⲡ̄] ⲟⲛⲓ sup 3 ⲡⲟⲗⲉⲓⲥ ⲡⲉ]
1011	ⲡⲟⲗⲉⲓⲥ ⲧⲉ ⲉⲥⲛⲁⲥⲟⲩϩⲓ If \|. ⲉⲥⲛⲁⲣⲟⲩϩⲓⲏ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲟϣⲉ] om sup
1012	4 ϫⲱⲛⲧϥ̄\| ϫⲱⲛⲧ ⲛ̄ϭⲓ ⲛ︦) ϩⲟⲟⲩ ⲟⲩⲁ] ⲛ̄ⲁⲟⲩϩⲟⲟⲩ 5 margin
1013	[ⲉ︦] om brackets ⲛ̄ 1°] ⲁⲩⲱ ⲛ̄ ⲍ, 8 om pt at end of v. 8 ⲁⲩ
1014	[60] ⲓ. ⲁⲩϭⲟ] eT ⲟ ⲛ︦] ⲉⲧϩⲛ̄ ϩ ⲡⲉϫⲁϥ ⲡⲉϫⲁⲩ ⲛⲁϣⲁ]
1015	ⲥⲟⲟⲩ , the superlineation not certain ⲓⲟ margin [ⲙ︦] om brackets
1016	IV 2 pt after ⲡⲕⲁϩ ϣⲟⲣⲡ̄] om sup \| exeipe] ⲉⲕⲉⲓⲣⲉ 3, 4
1017	om pt at end of v. ϧ om pt after ⲥⲕⲏⲛⲏ ϭ ϩⲙ̄] ϩⲛ̄ 7 ⲁϥⲟⲩ]
page 34
1018	30 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
1019	ⲁϥⲣⲱ 8 ⲁⲩⲱ] add ⲛ room for 1-3 more letters \| om pt at end
1020	of v. ⲑ BNT\|om sup ⲧⲓ om pt after ϣⲱ and at end
1021	ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.
1022	I 1 ⲁⲓ̈ⲧⲁⲙⲓⲟϥ ⲁⲓⲧⲁⲙⲓⲟϥ 1, 2 om pt at end of v. 3
1023	ⲙⲛ︦[ⲛ]ⲥⲁ Ⲓ. ⲙⲛ︦ⲥⲁ 7 om pt at end of v. 8 om pt after ϫⲱⲧⲛ̄
1024	and at end of v. ⲧⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓⲁ] ϯⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓⲁ ⲥⲁⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ̃] ⲥⲁⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ
1025	ⲟ ⲛ] ⲛ̄ \| om pt after ϥⲓⲧϥ̄ and at end of v. ⲓⲟ om pt after ⲧⲡⲉ
1026	and at end of v. ⲓⲓ om pt after ⲧⲡⲉ 1° 2°, ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ and at end of
1027	ⲅ. 12 om pt after ϫⲟⲉⲓⲧ and at end of v. ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩϩⲓⲏ] om sup
1028	13 om pt after ⲧⲡⲉ, ϩⲏⲧϥ̄ and at end of v. ⲓϥ ⲟⲩⲡⲣⲟⲥⲕ.]
1029	ⲉⲩⲡⲣⲟⲥⲕⲁⲣⲧ. \| om pt at end of v. ⲓ ⲉⲟⲩ (ⲉⲟⲩ \| om pt
1030	after ⲛ̄ⲣⲁⲛ and ⲡⲉϫⲁϥ 16 ϫⲓⲛ ⲛ︦] om sup ⲁϥϣⲱⲡⲉ] the
1031	ϣ is uncertain ; it looks as though the scribe had written w first,
1032	then half erased it and written 6 over it; in the next line ϣⲱⲡⲉ
1033	(clearly written) is intended for ϭⲱⲡ \| sic] sic \| om pt at end
1034	of v. ⲓ ϩⲏⲧϥ̄] ϩⲏⲧⲟⲩ \| om pt after ϩⲏⲧϥ̄ and at end of ⲅ.
1035	18 ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩϭⲟⲙ] om sup \| om pt after ϭⲟⲛⲥ, ⲡⲉϥϩⲟ and at end of
1036	ⲅ. 19 margin [¥] om brackets ⲙ̄ⲡⲉ ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] ⲛ︦ⲡⲉⲙⲧⲟ \| OM pt
1037	after ⲑⲓⲉⲣⲟⲩⲥⲁⲗⲏⲙ 20 om pt after ϣⲱⲡⲉ and at end of v.
1038	23 ⲛⲧⲁⲩϯ] ⲛⲧⲁⲩ, there is no trace of ϯ 24 ⲙ̄ ⲡϩⲏⲧ] om
1039	sup ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲓ. ⲉⲃ[ⲟⲗ] \| Tak] om sup \| om pt at end of ⲩ.
1040	25 ⲧⲙⲛ︦ⲧ︦ⲁⲡ.) om sup over ⲧ ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲥ ⲓ. ⲓⲟⲩⲇⲁⲥ \| om pt
1041	at end of v. 26 ⲡⲉⲩⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲥ] ⲡⲉⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟⲥ ⲉϫⲛ̄] om sup \|
1042	ⲡⲙⲛ︦ⲧ︦ⲟⲩⲉ om sup ⲛ̄ⲁⲡⲟⲥⲧ. om sup \| colon at end of v.
1043	II ⲓ ⲛⲉϩⲟⲟⲩ] ⲡⲉϩⲟⲟⲩ 2 margin [A] om brackets ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩ
1044	ⲡⲛⲟⲏ] om sup \| om pt after ⲛ̄ϭⲟ︦ⲛⲥ̄ \| ⲁⲩⲥⲙⲟⲩϩ] the « has been
1045	erased but incompletely 3, 4, 5, 6 om pt at end of v. 4 om pt
1046	after ⲟⲩⲁⲁⲃ 5 ⲛ̄ϭⲓ] om sup 8 Maw] om sup \| om pt at end
1047	of v. 9,10, 11 om pt at end of v. ⲟϩ ⲛ̄ⲙⲏⲇⲟⲥ ⲛⲉⲗⲁⲙⲓⲧⲏⲥ]
1048	om sup on both words ϯⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈ one dot over ⲓ ⲓⲟ ⲙⲛ︦ⲛ︦ⲥⲁ]
1049	ⲙⲛ̄ⲛⲥⲁ ⲉⲧ ⲛ︦] ⲉⲧϩⲛ̄ ⲓⲓ NACHE] om sup ⲛ ⲙⲛⲧⲛⲟϭ
1050	ⲙⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲛⲟϭ 12 ⲁⲡⲟⲣⲓ̃] ⲁⲡⲟⲣⲓ ⲛ ⲛ︦ ⲛ̄ ⲛ̄ 13, 14, 15 om pt at
page 35
1051	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 31
1052	end of v. 14 ϩⲣⲁⲓ̈] ϩⲣⲁⲓ ⲛⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈ sup over ⲛ \| om pt after
1053	ⲑⲓⲉⲣⲟⲩⲥⲁⲗⲏⲙ ⲓ ⲙⲉⲉⲩⲉ [ⲉ] ⲣⲟⲥ] seeevepoc 16 ⲁ] om
1054	17 ⲙⲛ︦ⲛ︦ⲥⲁ] ⲙⲛ̄ⲛⲥⲁ 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 om pt at end of v.
1055	ϩⲓ ⲙ̄ ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] om sup 22 om pt after ϣⲁϫⲉ ϩⲩⲡⲟⲧⲁⲧⲏ]
1056	ϩⲩⲡⲟⲧⲁⲅⲏ ⲙ[ⲛ︦] ⲓ. ⲙ only \| om pt after ϣⲡⲏⲣⲉ 23
1057	ⲡⲓϣⲟϫⲛⲉ] ⲡϣⲟϫⲛⲉ 24 to end of chapter om pt at end of
1058	every ⲅ. 24 ⲛⲙ̄] om sup 25 ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ] om Sup ϥϣⲟⲟⲡ] sup
1059	over ϥ 27 ⲙ̄ ⲁⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲁⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲉ 28 ⲛⲁⲓ̈ wall] ϩⲓ ⲙ̄ⲡ eq]
1060	ⲙ̄ⲡⲟⲩ 33 om pt after ⲡⲉϥⲉⲓⲱⲧ ⲁϥⲡⲟϩⲧ︦ ⲁϥⲡⲱϩⲧ :
1061	ⲇⲁⲩⲉⲓⲇ ⲓ. ⲇⲁⲩⲉⲓⲇ] [elgxw 1 ϥϫⲱ 3 ⲡⲉⲓ ⲡⲉⲓ 39
1062	ⲛⲏⲧⲛ̄] om sup ϥⲓ ⲛ̄ⲧⲁⲩ] om ⲃⲏⲣ 43 ⲁϥϣⲱⲡⲉ] ⲁⲥϣⲱⲡⲉ
1063	46 ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩⲧⲣⲟⲫⲏ] om sup
1064	III om every pt throughout this chapter except colon at
1065	end of v. 16 and pt after ⲛⲉⲛⲉⲓⲟⲧⲉ in v. 22 ⲓⲓ WTpTp]
1066	ϣⲧⲣ̄ⲧⲱⲣ, a small ⲱ inserted by original scribe between
1067	ⲧ ⲁⲡ ⲣ ⲓ ⲁⲃⲣⲁϩⲁⲙ ⲓ. ⲁⲃⲣⲁ[ϩ]ⲁⲙ ⲓ̈ⲁⲕⲱⲃ ⲓ. ⲓ̈ⲁ[ⲕ]ⲱⲃ
1068	14 ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩ ⲣⲱⲙⲉ] om sup ⲓϧ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ] om sup \| NTA] ⲉⲛⲧⲁ
1069	16 ⲧⲁϫⲣⲟϥ (?) reading certain \| ⲙ̄ ⲡⲉⲧⲛ︦] om sup over ⲙ \|
1070	ⲧⲏⲣⲛ̄] sic ⲓⲑ ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] om sup 22 ⲛⲁⲧⲟⲩⲛⲟⲥ] ⲛⲁⲧⲟⲩⲛⲉⲥ
1071	26 ⲧⲟⲩⲛⲟⲥ] ⲧⲟⲩⲛⲉⲥ \| ⲛⲏⲧⲛ̄] om sup \| gi] om sup
1072	IV om every point throughout this chapter except the
1073	colon at end of v. 7, a doubtful pt at end of v. 16, the colon
1074	at end of v. 26, a pt after conc in v. 31 and a colon (probably)
1075	at end of v. 32 2 Mic] Wic 6 1a] ⲛⲙ 7 ⲁⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦ⲣ︦ⲁⲁϥ]
1076	sic ⲑ ⲛ̄ⲧⲁϥⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ̈] om sup ⲓⲓ ⲡⲁⲓ] ⲡⲁⲓ̈ \| margin ⲓ︦ⲃ︦. [TR]
1077	14 TANABE] prob TANGO, but ⲟ not quite certain ⲓⲍ
1078	ⲡⲁⲣⲁⲛⲅⲉⲓ ⲗⲉ] ⲡⲁⲣⲁⲅⲅⲉⲓⲗⲉ 19 ⲙ̄ⲧⲟ] om Sup \| ⲧⲏⲩⲧⲛ
1079	om sup 20 ⲙ] ⲙ̄ 22 ⲉⲛⲧⲁ] NTA 26 ⲛⲉⲣⲣⲱⲟⲩ ⲛⲉⲣⲱⲟⲩ,
1080	there is a fracture after ⲉ but such that the tail of the first ⲣ
1081	would have been visible, had there been one ⲓ ⲉ ϩⲣⲁⲓ̈
1082	ϩⲣⲁⲓ̈ ⲛ̄ nw.] ⲙ̄ⲡϣ. ⲡⲡⲁⲣϩ.] sic 36 ⲛ̄ ⲕⲩⲡⲣⲓⲟⲥ] om sup
1083	37 ⲛ̄ ⲡⲉⲭⲣ.] ⲙ̄ⲡⲉⲭⲣ.
1084	V om every point throughout this chapter except the colons
1085	and the pt at end of v. 28 ⲓ ϯ ©] om sup. 2 if ⲟⲩⲙⲉⲣⲟⲥ] om
page 36
1086	32 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
1087	sup ⲛ̄ⲁⲡⲟⲥⲧ.) om sup ⲧ ⲥⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ] om sup 12 there is a
1088	paragraph mark by the “later” hand at the beginning of
1089	this v. ⲓϥ ⲛϩⲟⲩⲟ] sup over ⲛ ⲟⲩ[ⲱϩ] ⲓ. ⲟⲩⲱϩ ⲉ ⲣⲟ[ⲟ]ⲩ
1090	ⲉⲣⲟⲩ 15 ⲛ̄ ⲕⲟⲧⲕ ⲓ. ⲛ̄ⲛⲕⲟⲧⲕ̄ 16 ⲥⲱⲟⲩϩ] om sup 19 ⲉⲙ]
1091	ⲙ̄ ⲛ̄ⲣⲣⲟ] ⲛⲣⲣⲟ 2ⲓ ⲥⲱⲧⲙ̄] om sup ⲛ̄ ϣⲱⲣⲡ̄] om sup over
1092	ⲛ ⲁϥⲉⲓ ⲁϥⲉⲓ \| covag] ⲥⲉⲩⲁϩ ⲛϣⲏⲣⲉ] om sup ⲩⲛⲧⲟⲩ
1093	ⲩⲛ︦ⲧⲟⲩ 2 ⲛ ⲧⲉⲣ ⲛⲟⲩⲱⲛ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲣⲛ̄ⲟⲩⲱⲛ 24 ⲥⲱⲧⲙ̄ om
1094	sup ⲛ̄ⲁⲣⲭ.] om sup ⲁⲩⲁⲡⲟⲣ] ⲁⲩⲁⲡⲟⲣⲓ 25 ⲉⲓ̈] ⲉⲓ, the ⲉ is
1095	in the margin 6 ⲛ̄ϩⲩⲡⲏ.] om sup 27 ⲛ ⲧⲉ] NTE ⲁϥϫⲛ̄ⲟⲩ
1096	ⲛⲁⲩ] ⲁϥϫⲛⲟⲩⲟⲩ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ] om sup 28 ⲙ̄ⲡⲛ︦] om sup over
1097	ⲛ \| ent] ⲉϫⲛ, the ϫ is fragmentary but certain ⲡⲉⲓ] mer \| ⲙ̄]
1098	ⲛ̄ ⲛⲉⲧⲛ︦ⲥⲃⲱ] the first ⲛ has entirely disappeared under a fold
1099	of papyrus and, for all that is now visible, may be ⲧ ⲛ︦ⲡⲉⲥⲛⲟϥ]
1100	ⲙ̄ⲡⲉⲥⲛⲟϥ 29 [ⲉ]] om 31 ϥϯ ⲛ︦] om sup 32 ⲡⲉⲡⲛⲁ] ⲡⲉⲡ︦ⲛ︦ⲁ︦
1101	34 ⲛⲟⲙⲟⲥ] ⲛⲟⲙⲟ ⲛⲁϩⲣⲙ̄] ⲛ̄ⲁϩⲣⲙ̄ 35 ⲛⲉⲓ̈] ⲛⲉⲓ 36 ⲛ︦
1102	ⲟⲩⲕ.] om sup \| ⲛ̀ⲧⲁⲩ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲁⲩ 37 ⲛ̄ ⲧⲁⲡⲟⲕ.] om sup 39
1103	margin ⲓ︦ⲑ︦. ⲡ︦ⲑ︦]
1104	VI om every point throughout this chapter except a doubtful
1105	point at the end of v. 2 and what appears to be one after
1106	ⲡⲉϣⲗⲏⲗ In v. 4 ⲓ ⲁⲩⲕ︦ⲣ︦ⲙ︦ⲣⲙ︦] om sup over ⲕ ⲛⲟⲩⲉⲟⲓⲉⲛⲓⲛ]
1107	ⲛⲟⲩⲉⲉⲓⲉⲛⲓⲛ ⲉⲛⲟⲩ] ⲉⲛⲉⲩ ⲙ̄ⲙⲏⲛⲉ] Om sup ⲛ̄ⲕⲁ] ⲛ̄ⲕⲱ \|
1108	ⲛⲧⲛ̄ⲇⲓⲁⲕ.] sup over first ⲛ ⲛϩⲏⲧ] ⲛⲉϩⲏⲧ sic \| ⲟⲩ] ⲉⲩⲣ︦\|
1109	ⲙ̄ⲡⲉⲡⲛⲁ] ⲙⲡⲉⲡⲛ̄ⲁ 4 ⲛⲧⲛ. sup over first ⲛ ⲓⲟ ⲡϥ̄ϣⲁϫⲉ]
1110	ⲧϥ̄ϣⲁϫⲉ ⲓⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙ-ⲟⲥ ⲛ̄ϣⲁϫⲉ] N-ZENWAXE 12 ⲛ ⲡⲣ.
1111	ⲛⲉⲡⲣ. ⲓϥ ⲛⲛⲥⲱⲛⲧ] ⲛⲛⲥⲱⲛⲧ ⲓϧ ϩⲣⲁⲓ̈] ϩⲣⲁϥ ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩⲁⲅ
1112	om sup.
1113	VII om every point in this chapter except after ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ in
1114	ⲅ. 7, after ⲕⲏⲙⲉ in ⲩ. 34, at the end of v. 42, after ⲙⲟⲗⲟⲕ and
1115	ⲛⲁⲩ in ⲅ. 43, at the end of vv. 50 and 59 and after ⲛⲟⲃⲉ in
1116	v. 60, and colons at the end of vv. 5, 42-44, 53, 60 2 ⲛ ⲣⲱⲙⲉ]
1117	sup over ⲛ 3 TcaBO(?) ϥ] reading certain ϥ ⲡⲉⲓ̈] ⲓ̈ written
1118	over ϥ 6 ⲙ̄ⲡⲱϥ] ⲉⲙⲡⲱϥ \| ⲛⲥⲉⲙⲟⲕϩⲟⲩ] sup over ⲛ \| ⲛⲣⲟⲙⲡⲉ]
1119	supover ⲛ 7 ⲛ ⲛ[ⲁϥ ϯⲛ]ⲁⲒ. ⲛⲁϥ ϯⲛⲁ \| ⲙⲛ̄ⲛⲥⲁ] sup over second
1120	ⲛ \| wei] ⲡⲉⲓ 8 ⲛ︦] om sup \| icak 1° 2°] om dots \| ⲓ̈ⲁⲕⲱⲃ 1°]
1121	om dots ϩ ffwlcHd ⲓ. ⲓ̈ⲥⲏⲫ sic ⲓⲓ ⲉϫⲛ̄ ⲓ] om sup \| Mae] ⲛ̄ⲙ
page 37
1122	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 33
1123	12 ⲛ ⲧⲉⲣⲉ] sup over ⲛ ⲛ̄ϭⲓ] om sup 13 ⲟⲩⲟⲛϩϥ̄ sup over
1124	N15 ⲛ̄ⲧⲟϥ] om sup ⲓϭ ⲡ̄ⲟⲟⲛⲟⲩ] om sup \| ϩⲓⲧⲛ̄ ⲛ̄] ϩⲓⲧⲛ ⲛ
1125	17 [ⲛ︦] om, it was never there nor at end of preceding line 20
1126	ⲛ̄ wose.] om sup ϩⲓ ⲛ̄ϭⲓ] om sup 23 ⲛ ⲛⲉϥⲥⲛ. sup over
1127	ⲛ 2 ⲛ̄ϭⲓ 1 net] [ⲡ]ⲟⲩⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ̈ I. []ⲟⲩⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ̈ 26 ⲛ̄
1128	ⲣⲱⲙⲉ] om sup \| ⲙ̄] ⲛ̄ 2 ⲡⲉⲩ] ⲡⲉⲧ ⲟ ⲛ ⲧⲉⲣⲉ] sup over
1129	ⲛ \| ϩⲙ̄] om sup 2 TOA] TOA 34 ⲥⲱⲧⲙ̄] om sup 35
1130	ⲡⲉ . . ⲉ] prob only one letter missing, perhaps [ⲡ] ⲁϥ[ⲣ︦ⲣ]ⲱ
1131	L agk]w prob 36 ⲁⲩ[ⲱ] I. ⲁⲩ 38 margin [ke] there are
1132	remains of both letters 41 ϩⲛ̄ 2°] om sup 42 ⲧⲁⲁϥ] ⲧⲁⲗⲟ
1133	44 ⲡⲙⲛⲧⲣⲉ] om sup, the ⲧ stands in the margin 45 ϫⲓⲧⲥ̄]
1134	om sup ⲛ] ⲛ̄ \| ⲛⲧⲁ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲁ 46 ⲙⲁ ⲛ] ⲙⲁ ⲛ̄ 47 ⲟⲩⲏⲓ ⲟⲩⲏⲉⲓ
1135	49 ⲡ[ⲙ]ⲁ 1. ⲡⲁ (the word ⲙⲁ has been omitted) ϧⲟ ⲁϥ]
1136	AC 54 @poxpX] om sup 56 NCA] om sup 57 ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ]
1137	ⲙⲁⲁϣⲉ 59 TINA \| ⲡ︦ⲛ︦ⲁ
1138	- VIII om every point throughout this chapter except after ⲣⲱϥ
1139	in ⲅ. 32; the colons are correct, but add one after ⲫⲓⲗⲓⲡⲡⲟⲥ
1140	in v. 38 (sc) \| ⲓ ⲥⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ] cawcoc sic \| ⲛ̄ⲁⲡⲟⲥⲧ.] om sup
1141	5 TECA] ⲧⲉⲧⲥⲁ ⲟϩ ⲡⲉϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ] ⲡϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ ⲛ̄ⲧⲉ] NT ⲓⲓ ϩⲛ̄
1142	ff] ϩⲛ︦ⲙ︦ ⲓ ⲛⲣⲱⲙⲉ] sup over ⲛ IQ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ] om sup 23
1143	GING. \| ϫⲓⲛϭ 27 ⲛⲉϭⲱϣ] Mew 30 ⲛ̄ϭⲓ] om sup ϩⲓ
1144	ⲧⲥⲃ̄ⲃⲟⲓⲁⲧ] ⲧⲥⲃ̃ⲃⲉⲓⲁⲧ 32 ⲉⲛⲉ ϥϯ] ⲉⲛϥϯ \| ⲁⲛ] ⲁⲛ ⲙⲡ]
1145	ⲉⲙⲡ ⲟⲩⲱⲛ] a long sup over ⲛ ϩⲟ ϥ̀ⲕⲟⲧϥ] ϥ̄ⲕⲟⲧϥ̄
1146	IX 2, 3,4, 5 om pt at end of v. ϧ ⲡⲉⲧⲛ] ⲡⲉⲧⲕ ⲛ̄ⲧⲟⲕ]
1147	om sup 6, 7, 8,9, 10 om pt at end of ⲅ. 7 ⲛ̄ⲣⲱⲙⲉ] om sup
1148	9 ϥⲥⲱ] ϥⲥⲱ ⲓⲓ, 12, 13 om pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ ⲛⲅ ⲓ] NY
1149	13 ϩⲛ̄] om sup ⲓϥ ⲙⲡⲁⲉⲓ] ⲙ̄ⲡⲁⲉⲓ \| ⲁⲣⲭⲓϩ[ⲉ]. ⲁⲣⲭⲓⲉ
1150	ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩⲟⲛ] om sup 15-20 om pt at end of v. ⲓϧ ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ]
1151	om sup ϧⲟ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ] there are five dots over this word, evidently
1152	to delete it ⲛ︦ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈] om sup 21 ⲛ̄ⲁⲣⲭ.] om sup 22 ⲭⲥ︦]
1153	colon instead of pt 23 om pt at end of v. 24 ⲁⲩⲧⲁⲙⲓⲉ(
1154	ⲁⲩⲧⲁⲙⲉ, certain \| WH] sz, no trace of ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲩ in this or pre-
1155	ceding line 26 ⲉ ⲑⲓⲉⲣ.] om €(sic) 28 ⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ] om sup \| om
1156	ⲣ ⲁ endof v. ϩⲓ ϩⲛ̄ ⲛ︦] om ⲛ̄ \| ⲧⲏⲣⲥ̄ ⲛⲙ̄] om both sup \|
1157	conc] om sup 32 om pt at end of v. ⲛ̄ⲣⲟⲙⲡⲉ] om sup
1158	D
page 38
1159	34 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
1160	34 om pt after ⲧⲁⲗϭⲟ︦ⲕ \| colon after ⲡⲉⲭⲥ̄ 36 ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲟⲩ]
1161	ⲙⲙⲟⲟⲩ 39 ⲭⲏⲣⲁ ⲓ ⲭⲏⲣⲁ] ⲛ̄ϭⲓ] om sup 3. 40 om pt
1162	at end of v. ϥⲟ ⲛ ⲧⲉⲣ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲣ pt after ⲁϥϣⲗⲏⲗ ϭⲱ]
1163	between ϭ and ⲱ are remains of a letter, perhaps obliterated
1164	purposely
1165	X ⲛⲁⲛⲟⲩ[ϥ] sup over ⲛⲁ \| sree] ⲛⲓⲙ 3 om pt at end
1166	ⲟ. 4 om pt after ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ 5 om pt at end of v. 6 ⲡⲃⲁⲕ]
1167	nBakwa si apparently not erased 8 acj[xojov [cow] .
1168	ⲁϥϫⲟⲟⲩⲥ[ⲉ], vestiges at end of line seem to show that it was
1169	more prob c[e] than ⲥⲟⲩ] ⲑ 9, ⲓⲟ om pt at end of v. ⲑ
1170	ⲉⲩⲙⲟⲟϣⲉ] ⲉⲩⲙⲟϣⲉ, there is no trace of a second ⲟ ⲛ̄ ⲧⲉⲣ]
1171	om sup ⲓⲓ ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩⲛⲟϭ] om sup 12 ⲧⲃ̄ⲛ.] om sup 13 ⲧⲱⲟⲩⲛ]
1172	TWOYNY 13, 14, 15 om pt at end of v. ⲓϧ ⲙⲉ ϫⲁϩⲙⲟⲩ]
1173	ⲙ̄ⲥ ϫⲁϩⲙⲟⲩ, I think the ⲥ is certain, though there is a
1174	horizontal ridge in the middle of the letter which makes it look
1175	like ⲉ at first sight 17 ⲛ̄ϩⲏⲧϥ̄ om sup over ⲛ \| pt after
1176	ⲉ ⲣⲟϥ \| ⲡⲏⲓ ⲛ] ⲡⲏⲓ̈ ⲛ̄ \| ⲁⲩ ⲉⲓ ⲛ︦] read ⲁⲩⲉⲓ at end of line
1177	and ⲉⲣⲛ̄ at beginning of next \| om pt at end of v. 19
1178	ⲙⲟⲕⲙⲉⲕ] sup over first ⲙ \| ⲡⲉⲓ̈ ϩ]. mg] prob no room for
1179	‘more \| [mwa] ⲓ. ⲡ[ⲛⲁ︦] \| ⲣⲱ[ⲙ]ⲉ I. ⲣⲱⲙⲉ 19-23 om pt
1180	at end of ⲅ. 20 ⲛⲁⲕⲣⲓⲛⲉ] ⲇⲓⲁⲕⲣⲓⲛⲉ 21 ⲛ̄ⲣⲱⲙⲉ] om sup \|
1181	pt after ⲁⲛⲟⲕ 22 ⲧⲥⲃ̄ⲃⲟ] TcRBIA 2 ⲁϥⲉⲓ] ⲁϥⲉⲓ 24 ⲙ︦]
1182	om \| ⲛⲉ] ⲡⲉ \| pt at end of v. 25 ⲧⲱⲙⲛ︦ⲧ︦] om sup over ⲛ
1183	26 ⲉϥϫⲱ] ⲉϥ may be correct but it is written small above the line
1184	and blotted, and it is really illegible \| ⲧⲱⲟⲩⲛ 1. ⲧⲱⲟⲩ[ⲛ] \| om
1185	pt at end of v. 28 ⲧⲉⲧⲛⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ] add xe \| ⲛ︦ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈] ⲓ.
1186	ⲛ︦ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇ]ⲁⲓ \| ⲉ ϯ ⲓ. et \| [ⲡ]ⲉϥⲟⲩⲟⲓ 1. ⲡ]ⲉϥⲟⲩⲟⲉ[ⲓ ⲉ ⲉⲡ] om
1187	first ⲉ 30 ⲡⲁⲓ̈] there is a stroke through ⲓ̈ to erase it 31, 32
1188	om pt at end of v. also after ⲑⲁⲗⲁⲥⲥⲁ in ⲩ. 32 3 pt after
1189	ϣⲁⲣⲟⲕ 34 om pt at end of v. 36 ⲛ̄ϣⲏⲣⲉ] om sup [ⲟⲩⲟⲛ
1190	ⲛⲙ ⲓ. [ⲟⲩⲟⲛ] ⲛⲓⲙ 37 ⲙ̄] om sup \| om pt after ⲅⲁⲗⲓⲗⲉⲁ
1191	and at end of v. 38 om pt after ⲇⲓⲁⲃⲟⲗⲟⲥ and at end of v.
1192	39-47 om pt at end of v. 42 ⲕⲣⲓⲧⲏⲥ ⲓ. ⲕⲣ[]ⲧⲏⲥ 43 ⲙⲛⲧⲣⲉ]
1193	ⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉ ⲡⲓⲥⲧⲉⲩⲉ] ⲡⲓⲥⲧⲉ[ⲩ]ⲉ 44 ⲡⲉⲧⲣⲟⲥ] ⲡⲉⲧⲣⲟ[ⲥ] 45
1194	margin [ⲙⲁ] om brackets \| ⲁⲩⲉⲓ̈] ⲁⲩⲉⲓ \| ⲡⲱϩⲧ] ⲡⲱϩⲧ ⲛ̄
1195	Ke] om sup 4 pt after ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ 47 A] 2\, as the note says,
page 39
1196	TIIE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 33
1197	it is for ⲛ︦ ⲗⲁⲁⲩ and it is an interesting form of assimilation
1198	found in other early MSS; there is no question of deletion \|
1199	ϫⲓ ⲃⲁⲡⲧ.] ϫⲓⲡⲃⲁⲡⲧ. 48 ⲛ̄ Ic] om sup over ⲛ
1200	XI 1, 2 (prob), 3, 4, 5 om pt at end of v. ⲓ ⲑⲓⲉⲣ.. [ⲑ]ⲓⲉⲣ.
1201	5 ⲉⲍⲧⲁⲥⲓⲥ] egcTacic \| ⲥⲕⲉⲩⲟⲥ ⲓ. ⲥⲕⲉ[ⲩ]ⲟⲥ \| ⲣⲱⲓ] poi 6
1202	ⲧⲏⲣⲥ] ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ [ⲁⲩⲱ ⲛ̄ϩⲁⲗⲁⲁⲧⲉ ⲓ. ⲁ[ⲩⲱ ⲛ̄ϩ]ⲁⲗⲁⲧⲉ
1203	7 ⲉⲩⲥⲙⲏ 1. ⲉⲩⲥⲙ[ⲏ ⲡⲉϫⲁⲓ̈ I [ⲡⲉ]ϫⲁⲓ̈ 8 ⲏ is written ⲟⲩⲉⲓ
1204	ⲟⲩⲧⲉ erased \| mak.] the ⲡ has been crossed out by a diagonal
1205	stroke by the orig scribe 8, 9, 10 om pt at end of v. ⲓⲟ ⲛⲓⲙ]
1206	ⲛ̄ⲛⲓⲙ sic 12 ⲙⲡ] ⲉⲙⲡ \| ⲁⲩⲉⲓ̈] ⲁⲩⲉⲓ \| ⲡⲁⲓ̈] ⲡⲉⲓ̈ 12, 13 om
1207	pt at end of v. ⲓ ⲛⲧ] ENT ⲓϧ ⲉϥⲁⲣⲭⲏ] ⲉϥⲁⲣⲭⲉⲓ 16
1208	ⲡⲁⲃⲧⲓⲍⲉ] ⲃⲁⲡⲧⲓⲍⲉ \| ⲥⲉⲛⲁⲃ. 1. [clenaB. \| gn] om sup
1209	18 ⲁⲩ]ϯ ⲓ. ⲁ]ⲩϯ \| [ⲁ ⲡⲛⲟⲩ]ⲧⲉ ⲉⲩ[ϯ] ⲓ. [ⲁⲡⲛⲟⲩ]ⲧⲉ ϯ]\|
1210	ϩⲱ[ⲁⲩ I. ϩⲱ[ⲟⲩ ⲱⲛϩ] ⲱⲛϩ 19 ⲁⲩⲉⲓ̈] ⲁⲩⲉⲓ 22 om pt
1211	at end of v. 24 ⲉϥϫⲏⲕ] ⲉϥϫⲏⲭ ⲓ 25 om pt after ⲥⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ
1212	and at end of ⲅ. .26 ⲛ ⲧⲉⲣ] ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲣ ⲟⲩⲣ ⲛ︦] om ⲛ̄ [ⲛ]ⲉⲕⲕ]
1213	the letter in the bracket could be ⲧ \| ⲛ︦] om sup 2 ⲛ̄ ϩⲏⲧ]ⲟⲩ
1214	ⲓ. ⲛ̄ϩ]ⲏⲧⲟⲩ \| pt after ⲁⲅⲁⲃⲟⲥ [ϩⲓⲧⲛ̄] nenna 1. ϩⲓⲧⲛ̄ⲡ]ⲉ
1215	ⲡⲛ̄ⲁ \| om pt at end of v.
1216	XII 4 ⲡⲡⲁⲥⲭⲁ] sup over first ⲡ prob 5 ⲛⲉⲩϩⲁⲣⲉϩ] sup
1217	over ⲛ \| pt after ϣⲧⲉⲕⲟ \| om pt at end of v. 6 I. meTpo[c]
1218	and ⲥⲛ[ⲁ]ⲩ \| om pt after ⲥⲛ̄ⲧⲉ \| ⲛⲉⲩⲣ︦ϣⲉ] the first ⲉ has
1219	nearly disappeared and it was probably ⲁ rather than ⲉ or ⲟ,
1220	cf. v. 19 7 om pt after ⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓⲛ \| ⲧⲱⲟⲩⲛ ⲛⲅ︦] ⲧⲱⲟⲩⲛⲅ
1221	8 ⲡⲁⲅ]ⲅⲉⲗⲟ[ⲥ ⲇⲉ ⲛⲁϥ] \| ⲡⲁ]ⲅⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ ⲇⲉ [ⲛⲁϥ] [ⲇⲉ
1222	ϩⲓⲛ]ⲁⲓ̈ ⲓ. [Ade [ϩⲛⲁⲓ \| ⲛ̄ⲥⲱⲓ ϯ ⲛ̄ⲥⲱⲓ̈ ⲑ om pt at end of ⲅ.
1223	ⲓⲟ ⲙ ⲡⲉⲛⲓⲡⲉ] sup over ⲙ ⲓϯ ⲉⲥⲥⲟⲩⲛ ⲧⲥⲙⲏ ⲓ. ⲉⲥ[c]ⲟⲩⲛ .
1224	ⲧⲉⲥⲙⲏ ⲟⲩⲱⲙ] ⲟⲩⲱⲛ \| om pt at end of v. 15 ⲛ̀ⲧⲟⲥ] sup
1225	over ⲛ \| colon at end of v. 16 ⲛⲁϥ] ⲓ. ⲇⲉ] as Woide 17
1226	ⲧ[ⲣⲉ ⲩ]ⲕⲁ ⲓ. ⲧⲣⲉⲩⲕⲁ \| om pt after ⲕⲟ, ⲛⲁⲓ̈ and at end
1227	18 ⲛ̄ⲙⲁⲧⲟⲓ] om sup ⲓⲑ om pt at end of v. 23 om pt after
1228	ϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ and at end \| ϥϯ] ϥ̄ϯ︦ 25 om pt at end of ⲅ
1229	XIII 2 Ⲇⲉ] A is in margin ⲛ̄ⲧ ⲁⲓ] Tal 2-7 om pt at end
1230	of v. 4 ⲛ ⲧⲉⲣ] sup over ⲛ 5 ⲛ̄ CAA] ϩⲛ̄ⲥⲁⲗ \| ⲉⲩϣⲙ̄ϣⲉ]
1231	ⲣ 2
page 40
1232	36 THE NEW BIBLICAL. PAPYRUS.
1233	ⲉϥϣ. 7 ⲉ] om \| pt after ϩⲏⲧ \| I. ⲃⲁⲣⲛⲁⲃⲁⲥ] 8 xe] Ae \|
1234	ⲅⲁⲣ is written above the line, not ⲡⲉ, which does not exist \|
1235	ole ew. \|. o[e] ew. ⲉ ⲡⲁⲛⲑ.] om e \| [ⲃⲟⲗ ϩⲙ̄] ⲛ̄ ⲓ. [ⲃⲟⲗ]
1236	ϩⲛ̄ ol ⲥⲁ[ⲩ]ⲗⲟⲥ \| I ⲉⲓⲱⲣⲙ̄ ⲓⲟ om pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ
1237	ⲃⲗⲗⲉ] there are remains of a letter between ⲃ and Ⲁ prob
1238	a ⲃ, ⲃⲃⲗ̄ⲗⲉ = ⲛⲃⲗⲗⲉ \| ⲟⲩⲟ[ⲩⲟ]ⲝⲓⲥ (szc)-] 1. ⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓϣ only
1239	13 ⲛⲁⲡⲟⲥ[ⲧⲟ]ⲗⲟⲥ ⲓ. ⲛⲁⲡⲟⲥⲗⲟⲥ (si, not ⲛⲁⲡⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ), the ⲧⲟ
1240	was never there ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲟⲩ] the scribe orig wrote ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ, erased
1241	ϥ but omitted to write ⲟ over it and added ⲩ 14 ⲛⲁⲅⲱ[ⲅⲟⲥ].
1242	om ⲅⲟⲥ, it was never there ⲓϧ ⲛ̄ⲁⲣⲭⲓⲥ. lL stapygile. \| pt
1243	after ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ 16 om pt at end of v. ⲓⲍ ⲡ[ⲙⲁ ⲛ̄ ϭⲟⲉⲓⲗⲉ] lL
1244	ⲡⲙ[ⲁ ⲛ̄ϭⲟⲉⲓⲗ]ⲉ 18, 19, 20, 21 om pt at end of v. ⲓⲑ ⲛ̄
1245	ⲭⲁⲛ] om sup ϩⲟ ⲛϥⲧⲟⲩ] sup over ¢ \| om pt after ⲣⲟⲙⲡⲉ
1246	22 ⲉⲩⲣⲣⲟ] e¥pppo \| om pt after ppo \| ⲛⲧⲁϥⲣ] sup over ⲛ \|
1247	ⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉ] om sup ϩⲛ︦] ϩⲙ̄ 23, 24 om pt at end of v. 25
1248	ⲛⲁϩⲣⲛ︦] om sup \| ϩⲣⲱⲧⲛ] ⲁϩⲣⲱⲧⲛ, the ⲁ is above the
1249	line \| ⲙⲡϣⲁ] sup over ⲙ 26 pt after ⲧⲏⲩⲧⲛ̄ 26-32 om pt
1250	at end of v. 2 ⲛ ⲛⲉⲡⲣ.] sup over first ⲛ 28 ⲙ ⲙⲟⲩ] sup
1251	over first ⲙ ⲓ ϩⲛ̄ ⲧⲅⲁⲗ.] om sup 32 pt after ⲁⲛⲟⲛ \|
1252	ⲛ ⲛⲁϩⲣⲛ̄] sup over first ⲛ ⲛⲑⲉ] sup over ⲛ 34 ⲛ̄ ⲛⲉⲧ]
1253	om sup 36, 37, 38 om pt at end of v. 36 ⲕ̄ⲕⲟⲧⲕ̄ (ic)] NKOTK,
1254	the ⲛ̄ is partly broken, but I have no doubt of it 39 om pt
1255	after ⲙⲱⲩⲥⲏⲥ ⲡⲉⲧ] ⲉⲧ 40, 41 om pt at end of v. 42 pt
1256	after ⲥⲉⲡⲥⲱⲡϥ︦ 45 ⲛ̄ ⲧⲉⲣ] om sup 46 ϩⲏⲏⲧⲉ] ϩⲏⲧⲉ \| om
1257	pt at end of v. 47 ⲛ ⲛ̄ϩⲉ] ⲛ̄ⲛϩⲉ 48 [ϯ ⲉⲟ]ⲟⲩ ⲓ. ϯ[ⲉⲟ]ⲟⲩ
1258	50 om pt at end of v.
1259	XIV 1, 2 om pt at end of v. ⲓ ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲗⲗ.] om sup ⲓ.
1260	MIOYAA! ϧ ⲛⲥⲉϩⲓ] om sup 8 om paragraph mark ⲉϥ
1261	[ⲙ︦ⲡ]ϥ̄ⲙⲟ \| ⲉϥⲡϥ̄ⲙⲟ sic 8-15 om pt at end of v. 9 ⲛ̀ⲧⲟϥ]
1262	ⲛ̄ⲧⲟϥ \| ⲟⲩⲛⲧϥ︦] ⲟⲩⲛ̄ⲧϥ̄ ⲓⲟ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ] ⲙⲟⲥ sic 13 ⲙ̄ ⲃⲟⲗ]
1263	ⲙ̄ⲡⲃⲟⲗ ⲓϧ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲟⲩ] om sup \| ⲡⲁⲓ̈ ⲛ̀ⲧ] sup over ⲛ ⲓϭ ⲛ︦]
1264	om sup \| ⲛ̀ⲧ] ⲉⲛⲧ \| ⲧⲣⲉ] ⲧⲣⲉⲩ \| [vBwk] I. ⲃⲱⲕ ϩⲛⲛⲉⲩ]
1265	ϩⲓⲟⲟ[ⲩ]ⲉ [kat 17 ϭⲱ wo] ⲓ. ϭⲱ] ⲛϩ \| ⲛⲣ̄ ⲙ̄] om ⲙ̄ \| ⲡ ⲡⲉⲧ]
1266	sup over first ⲡ ⲛⲁⲛⲟⲩϥ add [ⲛ]ⲁ[ⲩ] 17, 18 om pt at end
1267	of v. 19 amTi0oy.] ⲧⲁⲛⲧⲓⲟⲭ. 20 om pt after ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲥ and
1268	at end 21, 22 om pt at end of v. 23 om pt after ⲡⲓⲥⲓⲇⲓⲁ
page 41
1269	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 37
1270	and at end 2 ⲉⲧⲧⲁⲁⲧⲗⲉⲁ (sic) ⲓ. ⲉⲧⲅⲁⲗⲓⲗⲉⲁ sic 26
1271	ⲁⲩⲥϭⲏⲣ ⲓ. avcon[p] 27 ⲛⲓⲙ ⲡⲉ ⲛ̀ⲧⲁ ⲓ. ⲛⲙ ⲉⲛ[ⲧ]ⲁ
1272	ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ] om sup 28 om ⲣⲉ at end of v.
1273	XV ⲓ ⲛ̀ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ⲙⲟ.] sup over first ⲛ \| ϣϭⲟⲙ] om sup \| om
1274	pt at end of v. 2 om pt after ⲛⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ ⲛ̄ⲁⲡⲟⲥⲧ.] om sup \|
1275	nei] om dots 3-11 om pt at end of v. ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ om sup
1276	4 ϩⲣⲁⲓ̈] om dots \| Tek[K]A. I. ⲧⲉⲕⲗ. 6 n6T] ⲛ̄ϭⲓ [Ⲃⲩⲧ]ⲉⲣⲟⲥ
1277	lL. [B¥]Tepoc 7 ⲥ[ⲛⲏ]ⲩ 1 ⲥⲛ[ⲏ]ⲩ \| BoA ⲓ. ⲃⲟⲗ] 8 ⲡⲉⲡⲛⲁ]
1278	ⲡⲉⲡⲛ︦̄ⲁ ⲓⲟ ⲙⲡⲉ] ⲙ̄ⲡⲉ ⲓⲓ ⲉⲙ̄] om ⲉ ⲓ ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ om sup
1279	13 ⲛⲙⲛ̄ⲥⲁ] ⲛⲙ̄ⲛⲥⲁ 14 ⲛ̄ ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ] om sup ⲓϭ ϯⲛⲁⲕⲟⲧⲉ
1280	ⲧⲛⲁⲕⲱⲧ] ϯⲛⲁⲕⲟⲧ [ⲛ︦]ⲧⲁⲕⲱⲧ, the ⲛ is certain as the super-
1281	lineation remains Ⲇⲁⲩⲉⲓ̈ⲇ] om dots \| om pt at end of v. ⲓⲍ
1282	[ⲱ] is almost certain from remains ⲧⲏ]ⲣ[ⲟⲩ I. ⲧ]ⲏⲣ[ⲟⲩ [ⲡⲁ]
1283	lL. [ⲡ]ⲁ \| om pt after ϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ 18 ⲃ[ⲟⲗ ⲛ̄ ⲛⲁⲓ̈] ⲓ. ⲃⲟ]ⲗ ⲛ̄ⲛⲁⲓ
1284	ϫⲓⲛ L ϫⲓⲛ 19 [ϯ] om \| om pt at end of v. 20 om pt after
1285	ⲥⲛⲟϥ \| pt after ϭⲉ 21 om pt at end of v. 22 om pt after
1286	ϩⲏⲧⲟⲩ and ⲡⲉ 23 ⲧⲉⲓ] om dots ⲡⲥⲩⲣⲓⲁ] ⲧⲥⲩⲣⲓⲁ 24 om
1287	all points 25-31 om pt at end of v. 25 ⲁⲥⲛ̄ⲇⲉϭⲓ̄] ACKAOGT
1288	26... [ⲯⲩ]ⲭⲏ ⲓ. [ⲉⲁ]ⲩϯ[ⲛ︦ⲛⲉⲩⲯⲩ]ⲭⲏ, there is room 27
1289	ⲧⲛ̅ⲛⲟⲟⲩ] ⲓ. ⲧⲛ︦[ⲛⲟⲟ]ⲩ \| ⲛ̄ⲧⲟⲟⲩ] om sup \| ⲛⲁⲓ] ⲛⲁⲓ 28 pt
1290	after ⲛⲁⲓ̈ 29 pt after ⲛϭⲉ \| [p] om 30 ⲛ̄ⲧⲟⲟⲩ has been
1291	erased by diagonal lines by the orig scribe ϩⲓ ⲛ Te] ⲛ̄ⲧⲉ 34
1292	ⲧⲣⲉ] ⲧⲣⲉ[ϥ] the tip of ϥ is left 34, 35, 36 om pt a tend of v.
1293	35 ⲁⲛⲧⲓⲟⲩⲓⲁ] ANTONIA, ⲧ is written larger than usual over
1294	an erasure and the ⲓ has been omitted by the scribe ; it is not ϯ
1295	36 ⲙⲁⲣⲛ̅] om sup ⲕⲟⲧⲛ︦] om sup ⲥⲛⲏⲩ ⲓ. ⲥⲛⲏⲩ] 38 [Cc ⲇⲉ
1296	ⲛⲉϥ] 1 [c ⲇⲉ] ⲛ[ⲉϥ]\| ⲡⲱⲣ[ϫ ⲉ ⲃⲟⲗ ⲓ. ⲡⲱⲣϫ ⲉⲃ[ⲟⲗ 38, 39
1297	om pt at end of v. ϥⲓ ⲛⲙ] ⲛⲙ̄ \| pt after ϭⲓ︦ⲗⲓϭⲓ̄ⲁ \| om pt at
1298	end of v.
1299	XVI om the pt at the end of every v. exc. vv. 6, 9, 13, 18,
1300	21, 36 ⲓ insert pt after ⲧⲉⲣⲃⲏ \| 1. ⲧⲓⲙⲟⲑⲉⲟⲥ ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩⲥϩ.]
1301	Om ⲃⲏⲣ 2 ⲣ︦ ⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉ] ⲣⲙ̄ⲛⲧⲣⲉ ⲥ \| ITH] om sup \| pt after
1302	ⲁⲩⲥⲧⲣⲟⲥ ϭ ⲁⲩⲉⲓ̈] ⲟⲓ dots 7 ⲛ̄ϭⲓ ⲓ. [n]6T ⲧⲉⲣ ⲟⲩⲥⲁⲁⲧ]
1303	I. ⲧⲉⲣ[ⲟⲩⲥ]ⲁⲁⲧ there are remains of the last letters ⲁⲩⲉⲓ̀ ⲉ
1304	ϩⲣⲁⲓ̈] om all dots ⲓⲟ ⲛ ⲧⲉⲣ] sup over ⲛ 12 ⲧⲉⲙⲉⲣⲓⲥ]
page 42
1305	38 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
1306	ⲧⲙⲉⲣⲓⲥ \| om pt after ⲙⲁⲕⲉⲇⲟⲛⲓⲁ 13 om pt after ϩⲏⲧϥ̄
1307	ⲛⲧ] ⲛ̄ⲧ ⲓϧ ⲡⲁ]ⲏⲉⲓ 1 [ⲡ]ⲁⲏⲉⲓ 16 ⲛ] ⲛ̄ ϩⲓⲱⲱⲥ ⲓ.
1308	ϩⲓⲱⲱ]ⲥ \| om pt after ⲉⲣⲟⲛ \| ⲉⲛⲉⲥϯ 1. ⲉⲛ]ⲉⲥϯ 17 ⲁⲥⲟⲩ[ⲁ]ϩⲥ̄
1309	om brackets 18 om pt after ϩⲏⲧⲥ 20 [p] om ⲓ ⲉⲛⲉⲥⲧⲟ]
1310	ⲉⲛⲥⲧⲟ 24 ⲛ̄ⲧⲟϥ] om sup Ⲓ. ⲡⲁⲣⲁⲅⲅⲉⲓ ⲁⲓⲁ ϩⲟⲩⲟⲛ] the
1311	second ⲟ has been deleted by a diagonal stroke thro’ it by the
1312	orig scribe 25 ⲟⲩ... ⲥⲱⲧ︦ⲙ︦] ⲓ. ⲟⲩ[ⲧ]ⲉ ⲛⲉⲩⲥⲱ[ⲧⲙ︦]
1313	26 ϣⲛⲉ] ϣⲥ̄ⲛ[ⲉ]\| ⲕⲙⲧⲟ] sup over ⲙ \| om pt after ϣⲧⲉⲕⲟ
1314	27 om pt after ⲥⲏϥⲉ 28 om pt after ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ 29 ⲛⲙ̄ ⲥⲓⲗⲁⲥ]
1315	these words are added in small writing and partly above the line,
1316	evidently an addition but prob by the orig scribe ϩⲓ ⲛ̄ⲧⲟⲟⲩ]
1317	om sup 33 ⲛ̄ ⲧⲉⲩϣⲏ] om sup \| om pt after ⲥⲏϣⲉ 34
1318	ⲡⲉϥⲏⲓ] ⲡⲉϥⲏⲉⲓ 36 pt after ⲉⲃⲟⲗ] \| [68 ⲁⲙⲉⲏⲓⲧⲛ̄ 1 [ϭⲉ
1319	ⲁ]ⲙ[ⲏⲓⲧⲛ̄ 37 ⲛⲁⲩ] ⲓ. ⲛ]ⲁⲩ \| 1. ⲇⲏⲙⲟ[ⲥⲓ]ⲁ ⲉ & \| om pt after
1320	ϩⲣⲱⲙⲁⲓⲟⲥ and after ϫⲓⲟⲩⲉ \| I ⲛ̄ⲥⲉⲛⲧⲛ̄ 39 ⲓ. ⲁⲩⲉⲓ 4.
1321	ⲟⲩⲉⲓ \| 1. ⲥⲉⲡⲥⲱⲡⲟⲩ \| ⲓ. ⲁⲩⲉⲓ
1322	XVII om pt at end of every v. in this chapter except 4, 14,
1323	15, 17, 33 \| 3 ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲟⲩ] om sup 5 ⲣⲉϥ [ⲣ] ⲛ̄ϩⲟⲥⲃ︦ ⲓ.
1324	ⲣⲙ︦ⲛ︦ ϩⲟⲥⲃ︦, the ⲉϥ is deleted by diagonal strckes and .a frag-
1325	ment of a letter, prob ⲙ̄ but not ⲣ, remains before ⲛ̄ \| ⲉ ⲡⲏⲓ]
1326	only a fragment remains of the letter before m, it looks more
1327	like ⲛ than ⲉ 7 ⲟⲩⲛ̄] om sup 8 ⲛ̄ⲁⲣⲭ.] om sup ⲓⲓ ⲛ̄ TAT]
1328	om sup ⲓ. ⲁⲩⲉⲓ \| ⲉⲙⲙⲏⲏ] a third ⲏ has been written and
1329	crossed through 16 ϩⲛ̄] om ⲃⲏⲣ 18 pt after ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ 1° 20 ⲛ̄]
1330	om sup ⲙ̄ⲃⲣ︦ⲣⲉ] nBppe sz, the whole word has been deleted
1331	by diagonal strokes. ϩⲓ ⲛ̄ ϣⲙ̄ⲙⲟ] om sup over ⲛ 22 ⲛ̄ⲁⲑⲏⲛ.]
1332	om sup 2 €TETHNCE.\| ⲉⲧⲉⲛⲥⲉ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ ⲓ ⲙ̄ⲙ[ⲟϥ] 24 ⲛ̄
1333	ϩⲏⲧϥ] om sup over ⲛ and ¢ \| om ⲣⲉ after ⲧⲏⲣⲥⲩ \| pre] om
1334	sup \| I. ⲛ̄ⲙⲟⲩⲛⲅ︦ 25 aN] om sup ⲛ̄ϭⲓϫ] om sup \| om pt after
1335	ⲣⲱⲙⲉ 26 om pt after ⲡⲕⲁϩ 27 om pt after ⲡⲟⲩⲁ 28
1336	ⲡⲟⲏⲧⲟⲥ] ⲡⲟⲓⲏⲧⲟⲥ \| ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ] ⲡⲛⲟⲩ 29 ⲓ [ⲡ]ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ \| L
1337	ⲟⲩϩ[ⲁ]ⲧ ⲓ om pt after ⲧⲟϣϥ 22 ⲛⲉⲧ ⲙ]ⲟⲟⲩⲧ ⲓ.
1338	ⲛⲉⲧⲙⲥ 34. ⲡⲓⲥⲧⲉ[ⲩ]ⲉ
1339	. XVIII 1 gn] om ⲃⲏⲣ ϩⲙ̄] ϩⲛ̄ 2-6 om pt at end of
1340	ⲩ. ⲉϥ] ⲉϥⲣ ⲛ︦ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈] om sup ⲓ. ⲧⲥⲩ[ⲛⲁⲅⲱ] ⲓ.
page 43
1341	ⲧⲓ NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 39
1342	[ⲕⲣⲓⲥⲡⲟⲥ] ⲇⲉ \| I. ⲡⲁⲣⲭⲓⲥⲩⲛ[ⲁⲅⲱ] ⲑ ⲙ] ⲙ̄ 8-15 om pt at
1343	end of v. 14 ⲛⲉ ⲉⲩⲗ.] ⲡⲉ ⲉⲩⲗ. ⲓⲍ om pt after ⲃⲏⲙⲁ and
1344	at end ⲓⲃ ⲓ. ϩ[ⲛ︦ ⲕⲉⲅⲭⲣⲉ]ⲁⲥ Ⲡϥⲉⲩ[ⲛⲧ]ⲁϥ \| om pt at end
1345	of v. 19 om pt after ⲛⲏⲩ 2ⲟ [ⲛ] om \| ⲟⲩ[ⲟ]ⲉⲓϣ] om brackets,
1346	there is a small ⲟ above the line 21 om pt after ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ 22
1347	[ⲧ]ⲕⲉⲥⲁⲣⲓⲁ] om [ⲧ] \| om pt at end of v. 24 om all points
1348	25 om pt after Ic 26 ⲡⲁⲣϩⲏⲥⲓⲁ ϫⲉ] ⲡⲁⲣϩⲏⲥⲓⲁⲍⲉ \| om pt at
1349	end of v. 281. [ⲉ]ⲙ[ⲁ]ⲧⲉ ϩⲛ̄ [ⲟⲩⲡ]ⲁⲣϩⲏⲥⲓⲁ ⲉϥⲧⲁⲙ]ⲟ
1350	XIX ⲓ ⲓ. [ⲉ]ⲣⲉ \| I. acjet ⲉⲓⲉ (sz¢) \| om pt at end of v. 2 om
1351	pt after ⲉϥⲟⲩⲁⲁⲃ ⲥⲱⲧⲙ̄] om sup 3 om pt after ⲛⲓⲙ and
1352	at end 4 om pt after ⲛ̄ⲥⲱϥ and at end 5-10 om pt at end
1353	of v. ⲑ ϩⲟ[ⲉ]ⲓⲛⲉ I. ϩⲟⲓ̈ⲛⲉ \| pt after ⲧⲉϩⲓⲏ \| 1. Jv ⲙ̄ⲙⲏⲛⲉ
1354	ϩⲛ̄ ⲧⲉⲥⲭ]ⲟⲗ[ⲏ ⲛⲧⲩ] ⲓⲟ om pt after ϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ. ⲛⲟⲩⲉ[ⲉⲓ]ⲛⲓⲛ
1355	11 ⲛ] ⲙ with room for 1 or 2 more letters in a fracture \| ⲛ̄ϭⲓϫ]
1356	om sup 12 om pt after ⲥⲱⲙⲁ ⲓϥ ⲉⲩⲛⲧϥ] om sup over ⲛ
1357	15 om pt after ⲉⲣⲟϥ and at end 16 om pt after ⲡⲟⲛⲏⲣⲟⲛ
1358	18 1. ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] ⲓⲥ̄ • ⲛⲉⲣⲉϩⲁϩ ⲇⲉ] [ⲛ︦ⲛ]ⲉ ⲛⲧ etc. \| ⲉⲩⲉⲍⲟⲙ. L
1359	[ⲉⲩ]ⲟⲍⲟⲙ. sic \| I [ⲛ]ⲉⲩϩⲃⲏⲩⲉ ⲓⲑ ⲡⲉⲣⲧⲉⲣⲟⲥ] ⲡⲉⲣⲡⲉⲣⲟⲥ \|
1360	ⲣⲟⲕϩⲟⲩ] om sup \| [ϯ] om 19-22 om pt at end of v. 21
1361	ⲥⲉⲧⲡ] om sup, there is no line but five dots over ⲉⲧⲡ implying
1362	deletion \| mca] om sup 23 ϩⲉ ϩⲓⲏ] ⲧⲉϩⲓⲏ 25 ⲡⲁⲓ̈ [Ale
1363	ⲉ ⲁϥϯ mali] 66 aq \| nace] ⲛⲁⲩ \| wBp] ⲛϣⲃⲣ, the ⲛ in
1364	margin ⲛ ⲁⲛ] om ⲛ \| om pt at end of v. 27 om all points
1365	except the final one \| I. ⲛⲧⲛⲟϭ] 28 om pt at end of v. 30-32
1366	om pt at end of v. ϩⲓ ⲛ̄ⲁⲣⲭⲱⲛϯ] om sup \| conc] om sup 32
1367	pt after ϣⲁϫⲉ \| om pt after ⲧⲱϩ 33 ⲉⲩⲛⲉϫ] ⲁⲩⲛⲉϫ prob \|
1368	l. ⲛ̄ϭⲓ \| om pt after ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈ 34 om pt after me \| ⲛ ⲛⲁ] ⲛ̄ ⲛⲁ
1369	31-41 om pt at end of v. ⲓ. ⲛ̄ⲧⲛⲣ 36 ⲧⲛ̄ ⲣ︦ ⲧⲙ̄ ⲣ︦ 37
1370	ⲙ̄ⲡ] ⲉⲙⲡ 38 1 ϩⲉⲛⲁⲅⲟ[ⲣⲁ]ⲓⲣⲟⲥ ϥⲟ ⲡⲁⲓ] ⲡⲉⲓ̈ prob, though
1371	it looks like ⲡⲑⲓ̈ \|. w[T]opTp ⲙ̄ⲡⲟⲟⲩ ⲉⲙⲛ̄ etc. the second ⲟ
1372	of ⲙ̄ⲡⲟⲟⲩ is very small and inserted as a correction between
1373	ⲟ and ⲩ
1374	XX 2 ⲛ̄ⲥⲁ] om sup \| om pt at end of v. 3 gue] gag \|
1375	KwTq] ⲱ altered to ⲟ, prob in the same ink \| om pt at end of ⲅ.
1376	4 1. ⲑ[ⲉⲥⲥⲁ]ⲗⲟⲛⲓⲕⲏ 6 ..go.. Lomo ⲉⲧ... eT...
page 44
1377	40 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
1378	ⲁⲩⲱ ⲛ̄ϩⲟⲟⲩ] ⲓ. ⲛ︦[ϩⲟⲟⲩ \| ⲁⲩⲱ ⲓ. [ⲁⲩ]ⲱ 7 om pt after
1379	ⲣⲁⲥⲧⲉ and at end of v. 8 gn] om sup [ⲙⲁ] I. [ⲙ]ⲁ \| om
1380	pt after ϩⲏⲧϥ̄ ⲑ om all points ⲓⲟ om pt at end of v. ⲓⲓ pt
1381	after ⲉϫⲱϥ \| om pt after ϫⲓ and at end of ⲅ. \| ..ⲡⲣⲏ prob
1382	[ⲡⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓⲛ] as Woide, there seems to be vestige of final ⲛ\|
1383	ⲓ. ⲁϥⲉⲓ 13 ⲙⲟⲟϣⲉ] ⲙⲟⲟϣⲉ 16 \| ⲡⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ] e[ Tar ⲙⲟⲟⲛⲉ,
1384	there is not room for all this, and there are remains of all the
1385	letters, prob ⲉ︦ ⲙ̄ⲟⲟⲛⲉ \| I. ϫⲉ]ⲕⲁⲁⲥ ⲉⲛⲛⲉ \| om pt after ⲧⲁⲥⲓⲁ,
1386	ⲉ[ϣⲱ] and at end of v. \| me ⲉ[ϣⲱ] after ⲡⲉ is nothing except
1387	remains of a letter, not ⲉ, perhaps ϣ and a fracture \| after
1388	ⲉϥⲛⲁϣϭⲙ the scribe wrote ϣ and deleted it with a diagonal
1389	stroke 17 1. ϩ[ⲙ̄ sat] \|\| ⲛ︦ⲧⲉⲕ] 17, ⲓⲑ om pt at end of v.
1390	18 ⲓ. ⲧⲉⲧ[ⲛ︦] \| L ⲡϣⲟ[ⲣⲡ︦] \| I. ⲧⲁ[ⲥⲓⲁ] ⲓⲑ ⲓ. ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ \| gn
1391	1°] the ϩ inserted later as a correction in margin \| 1. en[1]R¥2H \|
1392	ⲛ︦ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈] om sup 20 ϩⲉ[ⲡ]. ϩⲉ \| om pt after ⲉⲣⲟⲟⲩ and at
1393	end ⲛⲏⲧⲛ̄ 2°] ⲓ. [ⲛⲏ]ⲧⲛ̄ \| I ⲛ̄ⲏⲉ et] 21 [ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ] room for
1394	[ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ] as Woide 21-23 om pt at end of v. 2.
1395	entcloown \| I ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲓ̈ 24 1 ⲇⲣ[ⲟ]ⲙⲟⲥ 25 om pt after
1396	ⲛⲟⲩ and at end of v. 26-30 om pt at end of v. 28 om pt
1397	after ⲧⲏⲣϥ̄ and ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ 29 ⲛ︦] ⲛ sic perhaps ⲅⲁⲣ has dropped
1398	out after it (cf. Deut ii 5, ⲩ 11, 26, xxxi 23) \| ⲛ̄ⲥⲁ] ⲟⲛ
1399	sup \| ⲟⲩⲱⲛϣ] om sup \| I ⲉⲛⲥⲉϯⲥⲟ ϩⲟ ⲛ̄ ⲛ] ⲛϩⲉⲛ] ⲓ.
1400	[ⲡⲱϣⲥ] ⲛⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲑ. 31 om pt after ⲙⲉⲉⲩⲉ \| I. ϣⲟⲙⲧⲉ]
1401	ⲓ. ⲙ̄ⲡ[ⲟⲩⲁ] 32 L [Tq ⲙ̄ ⲡⲛⲟⲩ]ⲧⲉ ⲛⲙ̄ \| in the middle of the
1402	next line is 60, fragmentary but certain \| I. [k2wportjostia \| om
1403	pt at end of v. 34 om pt at end of v. 35 om pt after ⲛⲓⲙ
1404	\| ϣϣⲉ] eTwe \| pwTH] om sup \| Wi] om sup \| om pt after
1405	ϣⲱⲛⲉ, Ic, ϫⲟⲟⲥ and at end of ⲅ. \| ⲛ̄ⲧⲟϥ om sup 36 NX ⲛⲁⲓ̈]
1406	ⲛ ⲛⲁⲓ ⲓ. agkAZ \| om pt after ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ and ϣⲗⲏⲗ 37 L
1407	[ⲁⲩ ]Ⲓⲣⲛϭ ⲓ. ⲡⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ ⲁⲩϯⲡⲉ \| om pt after ⲉⲣⲟϥ 3.
1408	ⲉⲩⲙⲟ[ⲕϩ] ⲁϥϫⲟⲟⲩ] ⲁϥϫⲟⲟϥ ⲓ. [ⲛ]ⲉⲩⲧϩⲡⲟ
1409	XXI om all points throughout the chapter except ⲅ. 1 after
1410	ⲡⲁⲧⲁⲣⲁ, Vv. ⲓⲓ after ⲟⲩⲉⲣⲏⲧⲉ (insert) and ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈ ⲩ. 25
1411	after ⲧⲡⲟⲣⲛⲓⲁ (insert), v. 27 after ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⲓ (insert), v. 28 after
1412	ⲉⲃⲟⲗ (insert), v. 30 after ϩⲟⲧⲃⲉϥ, v. 32 after maTOl, ⲩ. 33
1413	after ⲡⲉϥⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓ and ⲥⲛ̄ⲧⲉ, ⲩ. 34 after ϣⲁϫⲉ and ϣⲧⲟⲣⲧⲣ̄
page 45
1414	ⲧⲓⲓⲃ NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 41
1415	\| 1 [kw] 4 or 5 letters required in lacuna \| 1. ⲙ︦[ⲡ]ⲉϥ̀ⲣⲁⲥⲧⲉ \| I.
1416	[ⲇⲉ €] \| ⲙ̄ ⲡⲙⲁ] ϩⲙ̄ⲡⲙⲁ ⲓ. ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲣⲉⲛϩⲉ ⲓ. [ⲉϥⲛ]ⲁϫⲓⲟⲟⲣ
1417	[ⲉ ⲕⲩ]ⲡⲣⲟⲥ ⲁⲛ[ⲕⲁ]ⲁⲥ [ϩⲓ] I. [ⲁⲛ]ⲉⲓ ⲉϩⲣⲁⲓ̈ ⲉ [ⲧ] 4 ⲙ
1418	ⲙⲁⲑ.] ⲛⲙⲁⲑ. ⲓ. ⲡⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ ϭ ⲛⲉⲩⲛⲏⲉⲓ] ⲛⲉⲩⲏⲉⲓ, the scribe
1419	orig wrote ⲉⲣⲏⲩ, erased it and wrote ⲏⲉⲓ over it, the super-
1420	fluous ⲛ is really the half-erased ep 8 ⲡⲏⲓ] ⲡⲏⲓ̈ ⲓⲟ Te[pl-en
1421	lL. ⲧⲉ-ⲣⲉⲛ ⲓⲓ. [ϭ] \| . . ⲁⲁϥ] there is room for [ⲛ︦ⲥⲉⲧ]ⲁⲁϥ \|
1422	ⲛ̄ϩⲉⲑⲛⲟⲥ] om sup ⲓ ⲁⲩⲱ ⲉ] ⲉⲁⲩⲱⲉⲧ, prob nothing after
1423	ⲧ in this line \| I. ϥⲙ̄ⲡⲁϩⲏⲧ \| 1. ⲉ ⲧⲣⲉⲩ \| [ic] doubtful, prob
1424	not room for it 16 ⲛ̄ϭⲓ] add ⲛ prob, or ⲙ possibly 18 ⲛ̄ ⲛⲉ
1425	ⲛⲡⲣ.] ⲛ̄ϭⲓ ϩⲉⲛⲡⲣ. 19 lL ⲡⲛⲟ[ⲩ]ⲧⲉ \| gl] L ϩⲓⲧⲛ̄] prob
1426	ϩⲟ [ϩⲛ̄ 7] L ϩⲛ︦[ϯ] ϩⲓ ⲁ[ⲩ] lL. ⲁⲩ \| [ⲉⲧⲙ] om brackets, the
1427	line began with ⲉⲧⲙ̄ \| ⲛⲉⲩⲥⲱ] the ⲩ is broken, it was more
1428	prob ¢ than ⲩ 23 ⲓ. ⲡⲁⲓ̈ 6€ ⲉⲧ ⲛ︦] 2. ⲛ̄ ⲛⲣⲱⲙⲉ 27
1429	[ⲡⲙⲏⲏϣⲉ] om brackets 28 [Tomo]c Ⲓ ⲡⲉⲣⲡ]ⲉ, remains of
1430	letter preceding ⲉ show it was ⲡ or ⲧ, Ⲟ impossible. 29 at end
1431	of line above ⲡⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ are probable traces of Ⲁⲓϩⲛⲙ (ⲙ is
1432	certain) \| ⲉ... ⲛⲧⲁ ⲓ. ⲩⲉϫ[ⲉ]ⲛⲧⲁ \| 1. ⲛⲉ ⲡⲉⲣⲡⲉ 30 ⲓ. [ⲧ]ⲏⲣⲥ̄
1433	ⲛⲟⲉⲓⲛ \| I. ⲡⲗⲁⲟⲥ [ⲥⲱⲟⲩϩ • Ⲓ. ⲁⲩⲥⲱ[ⲕ] 31 ϫⲓⲗⲓⲁⲣⲭⲟⲥⲓ]
1434	ϫⲓⲗⲓⲁⲣⲭⲟⲥ and similarly in every instance of this word in
1435	this chapter and in ch. xxii and xxiii 37 1. ⲉⲛⲉⲕⲥϩ[ⲟⲩⲛ] 3.
1436	ⲁⲛⲅⲟ[ⲩⲣ]ⲙ̄ \| Ale ⲛⲧⲉ] not room for. four letters in lacuna,
1437	perhaps Ale gt]
1438	XXI om all points in this chapter except in ⲅ. 3 after
1439	ⲟⲩⲱⲣϫ and ⲅⲁⲙⲁⲗⲓⲏⲗ in v. 5 after ⲑⲓⲉⲣⲟⲩⲥⲁⲗⲏⲙ and at
1440	end, in v. 8 after ⲛⲁⲍⲱⲣⲁⲓⲟⲥ and at end, in v. 10 after
1441	ϯⲛⲁⲁϥ, ⲅ. ⲓⲓ at end, v. 15 at end, v. 20 after ⲡⲉⲕⲙⲛ̄ⲧⲣⲉ
1442	(insert) and me and at end, v. 21 at end (colon), v. 22 after
1443	ⲡⲕⲁϩ v. 25, 27 at end, v. 28 after ⲡⲟⲗⲓⲧⲓⲁ and xe (insert) \|
1444	3 ⲁⲛⲅ] om sup \| wpZ] om sup ϥ ⲛ̄ⲣⲱⲙⲉ] om sup ϭ 12]
1445	ⲓϩⲱⲛ ⲧⲓ. [ⲥⲁ]ⲩ[ⲗⲉ] cave] \| I. ⲛ̄ⲥⲱ[ⲓ︦] 8 1. ⲙ̄ⲙ[ⲟⲥ]\|
1446	ⲡⲉⲕ] ⲡⲉⲧ ⲑ ⲧⲥⲙⲏ twice] ⲧⲉⲥⲙⲏ \| the last three lines are
1447	repeated from those preceding without any sign of erasure or
1448	deletion ⲓⲟ ⲧⲱⲟⲩⲛ ny] ⲧⲱⲟⲩⲛⲅ ⲓⲓ ⲛϭ the reading is
1449	certain, the ⲛ has a faint line over its right half and above that
1450	a dot, the 6 has over it and rather to the right remains of a
page 46
1451	42 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
1452	superlineation or possibly of a ⲧ above the line 13 ⲓ. ϣⲁ
1453	ⲣⲟ] \| ⲓ. [eBJo 2° 16 ⲛⲅ̄ enmik.] om sup 19 ⲛ̄ⲥⲩⲛⲁⲅ.] om sup
1454	22 ⲉ ⲡⲉϫⲁⲩ] om ⲉ 22 [xe ⲡⲁⲓ̈] l. prob [ϫⲉϥⲓⲙⲡ]ⲁ] to fit
1455	the lacunae and remains 2 ⲁⲩⲱ ⲁⲩ]ⲛⲉϫ ⲓ. ⲁ[ⲩⲱ ⲉⲩⲛⲉϫ
1456	24 ⲓⲅⲝ︦] om sup \| [xe ⲕ]ⲁⲁⲥ ⲓ. [ϫ]ⲉⲕⲁⲁⲥ \| L ⲉϥⲉⲉⲓⲙⲉ ϫⲉ 5
1457	1 ⲛⲙ[ⲙⲟⲩ]ⲥ \| 1 ⲡϩⲉ[ⲕ]ⲁ 26[ⲡⲉ]• om 27 ⲉⲛⲉⲩ] there has
1458	been an erasure and the supposed ⲩ is the remains of the erased
1459	letter 28 ⲛ̄ ⲟⲩⲛⲟϭ] om sup ϩⲟ ⲓ. ⲛ̄ϭⲓ̈ \| I. [ⲁ]ϥⲟⲩⲉϩⲥⲁϩⲛⲉ
1460	[ⲉⲧⲣ]
1461	XXIII ⲓ ⲓ ϩⲟⲩⲛ ⲉⲡⲥⲩⲛϩⲉ \| 1 ⲁⲡ]ⲟⲗⲓⲧⲉⲩⲉ 2-8 om
1462	ptatend of v. 3 om pt after ⲡⲛⲟⲙⲟⲥ 5. ⲛⲉⲓ̈ om pt after ⲡⲉ
1463	6 om pt after ⲡⲉ \| ϩⲙ̄] om sup \| any 2] om sup ⲓ. ϣⲱⲡⲉ
1464	ⲛⲉⲫⲁⲣⲓⲥⲥ[ⲁⲓⲟⲥ] ⲛⲙ̄ [ff] \| om pt after ⲥⲁⲇⲇⲟⲩⲕⲁⲓⲟⲥ 8 ⲁⲩⲱ]
1465	ⲟⲩⲱ apparently 9 lL sfev]pase. ⲙ︦[ⲡⲥ]ⲁ [8] 9-12 om pt
1466	at end of.v. ⲓⲟ om pt after ⲡⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ ⲓⲓ om pt after ⲉϫⲱϥ
1467	12 ⲛ̄ ⲛ︦ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇ.] ⲛ̄ ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇ. only ⲓϥ ⲛⲉⲩⲟⲩⲉⲓ] ⲡⲉⲩⲟⲩⲉⲓ ⲓϧ om
1468	pt after 66 16-24 om all points in these verses except in v. 18
1469	after gpwipe and in ⲅ. 21 atend 19 I. ⲉⲣⲟⲓ̈ 20 eke[n] om
1470	[ⲛ] ⲓ [wan]T ⲓ. ϣ[ⲁ]ⲛⲧ 22 1 ϫⲉ ⲁⲕⲧ]ⲁⲙⲟⲓ [enal]
1471	27-35 om all points except ⲩ. 31 at end ⲟ v. ⲓ.
1472	ⲙ̄ⲙ[ⲁⲧⲟⲓ̈ ϭ[ⲉ ⲁ ⲛ︦ⲧⲟ[ⲟⲩ \| IL ϩ[ⲓⲥ]ⲧⲁ ⲛⲁⲩ (sic) ⲙ̄
1473	ⲡⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ ⲛ̄ⲧ]ⲉⲣ[ⲉϥ] 4 ⲓ ⲁϥϣ]ⲛ[ⲉ ϫ]ⲉ \| I ϩⲛ̄ⲛⲁϣ
1474	ⲛ̄ⲛⲉ] 5 ⲛⲉⲕⲕⲁⲧⲏⲣⲟⲥ (sic) 2,
1475	XXIV om all points in this chapter except v. 2 at end and
1476	ⲅ. ⲓⲟ after ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ ⲓ. ⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓϣ 4 ⲓ ⲟⲩϣⲱⲱⲧ ⲓ. ⲁⲛϩⲉ
1477	ⲅⲁⲣ ⲉⲡϯⲉⲓ̈ⲣⲱ[ (sic) 6 [ⲛ︦] om ⲓ. ⲛ︦ⲛⲁ[ⲍⲱ]ⲣⲁⲓⲟⲥ ⲓ.
1478	ⲙ̄ⲙⲟϥ] ⲉⲉⲓⲙⲉ ⲛ︦ ϩ]ⲏⲧ[ⲟⲩ] ⲟⲩⲱϣⲃ] om ⲃⲏⲣ. ϩⲱ [ⲟⲩ]
1479	ⲛ̄- [ϭⲓ︦ⲛ︦ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇ. ⲓⲓ \| ⲉⲩⲛ[ϣϭⲟ︦]ⲙ ⲓⲓ. ϩⲛ̄ⲛⲉⲩⲥⲩⲛ. 13 ⲙ̄]
1480	om sup ⲉ ⲛⲉ] ⲛ ⲛⲉ \| ⲟⲩⲕⲁⲧⲏⲣⲓ (sic) ⲓ. ⲛ̄ϩⲏⲧⲟⲩ ⲓϯ
1481	ⲓ. ϯϩⲟⲙⲟⲗⲓ (sic) \| 1. ϩⲁⲓⲣⲉⲥ (sic) ⲛⲉⲓ̈ϣ. ⲓ. ⲉⲓⲡⲓⲥⲧ. prob \|
1482	en] ϩⲙ̄ ⲓ5 ⲓ. mali 6] ⲛ̄ⲇⲓⲕ.] om sup ⲓϭ [ ⲧ]ⲣⲁ] om
1483	brackets ⲓ. ⲥⲩ[ⲛⲁⲓ]ⲇⲏ[ⲥ]ⲓⲥ
1484	XXVI ⲕⲁⲓⲥⲁ]ⲣⲥ̄ \|. [ⲙ︦ⲡⲣ︦]ⲣⲟ, the o is not certain but the
1485	word is much more probable, since katoap is always repre-
page 47
1486	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 43
1487	sented by ppo in the Sahidic N.T. except in Luke iii 1 and
1488	John xix 15 where it is treated as a proper name \| om pt at
1489	end of v.
1490	XXVII om all points in this chapter except in v. ⲓ after
1491	ϩⲏⲧⲁⲗⲓⲁ, v. 3 after ⲥⲓⲇⲱⲛ, ⲩ. 6 after ϩⲓⲧⲁⲗⲓⲁ (insert),
1492	v. 12 after ⲕⲣⲏⲧⲏ, ⲅ. 14 after ϩⲣⲁⲛ, ⲅ. 23 at end, v. 24 after
1493	ⲡⲁⲩⲗⲉ, ⲩ. 25 and 32 at end, ⲩ. 33 after ⲉⲃⲟⲗ (insert), v. 34
1494	at end, v. 38 after ⲇⲉ (insert) and at end, ⲅ. 40 after ⲉⲃⲟⲗ
1495	1° 2° and ⲛⲃⲟⲗ (insert), v. 41 after ⲑⲁⲗⲁⲥⲥⲁ and at end and
1496	v. 42 at end (?) ⲓ ⲓ. ⲥϭⲏ︦ⲣ- ⲉⲧ[ϩ]ⲏⲧⲁⲗⲓⲁ \| ⲓ. ⲛ[ⲙ̄]-
1497	ϩⲉ[ⲛⲕ]ⲟⲟⲩⲉ 2 ⲓ. [ⲁ]ⲧⲣ̄ⲙⲩⲛⲧⲏ, perhaps the line above ⲣ is
1498	really a small ⲁ written above the line \| 1. ⲉϥⲛⲁⲣ︦ϩⲱⲧ ⲛ̄] om
1499	sup ⲇⲉ] € \| ⲛ̄ⲧⲉ ϧⲛ] om sup \| \|. ovaartTaeael], apparently
1500	not room for ⲣⲱⲙⲉ, but not impossible \| ϩⲟⲩⲛ] ϩⲣⲁⲓ 4 ϩⲙ̄]
1501	om sup \| I [ⲁⲛ]ⲥϭⲏ︦ⲣ . ⲛ̄ⲧⲏⲩ etc] \| [ϫⲉ]ⲛ̄ⲧⲏⲩ ⲕⲱ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲛ
1502	[ⲁ]ⲛ ep, the line ends there, [ϩⲱ]ⲧ 5... ⲑⲁⲗⲗⲁⲥ ⲓ.
1503	[ⲡ]ⲡⲉⲗⲁ[-v-]ⲥ \| 1 T2av6ia ϭ ⲓ. ϩⲉⲕⲁⲧⲟⲛⲧⲁⲣ- [ⲭ ]ⲟⲥ\|
1504	ⲣⲁⲕⲟⲧⲉ] om sup \| L ⲁϥⲩⲧⲁⲗⲣ [ⲙ︦]-ⲙⲟ]ⲛ 7-9 the text of,
1505	these verses can be improved by study as follows (the contents
1506	of brackets are conjectural) ⲁⲩⲱ ⲛⲧⲉⲣⲉⲛⲱⲥⲕ̄ ⲛϩⲁ[ϩ]-
1507	[ⲛ̄ϩⲟ]ⲟⲩ ϩⲙ[ⲡ]ⲉⲥϭⲏ︦ⲣ ⲁⲩϣ ⲛ- [...]ⲛ̃ⲧⲉⲣⲉⲛⲡⲱϩ[-[c or 3]
1508	ⲡ. . ⲧⲏⲩ ⲕⲱ ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲛ ⲁⲛ [ⲁⲛ]-[ⲣ︦ϩⲱ]ⲧ []ⲧⲟⲩⲛⲕⲣⲏⲧⲏ[
1509	-[ⲧⲥⲁⲗⲙⲱ]ⲛⲏ ⲙⲟⲅⲓⲥ ⲇⲉ ⲛⲧ[ⲁ]-[ ⲭⲔⲁⲁⲥ ⲛ̄ⲥⲱⲛ ⲁ]ⲛⲉⲓ
1510	ⲉⲩⲙ[ⲁ] ⲉⲩ- [ⲙⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲉⲣ]ⲟϥ ϫⲉ ⲛ̄ⲗⲓ[ⲙⲏ]ⲛ ⲉ — [ⲛⲁⲛⲟⲩⲟ]ⲩ
1511	ⲉⲣⲉⲟⲩⲡ[ⲟⲗ]ⲓϩ [ϫⲉ]-......... 9 ⲛⲧⲉⲣⲉⲟⲩⲛⲟϭ ⲇⲉ]-
1512	[ⲛⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓϣ oveline ⲁⲛⲣ̄ϩⲓⲃⲁ ϩⲙ- [ⲡⲉⲥϭⲏ︦ⲣ] ⲉⲧⲃⲉ ⲡⲉ (sic L
1513	ϫⲉ) ⲁⲧⲕⲉ[ⲛⲏ]-[ⲥⲧⲓⲁ ⲟⲞⲩⲉ]\|ⲛⲉ ⲡⲁⲩⲗⲟⲥ [ⲁϥϫ]ⲓ -[ϣⲟ]ϫⲛ[ⲉ
1514	ⲛ]ⲁⲩ ⲉⲓⲥ. ⲓⲟ ⲓ. ⲟⲩⲙ[ⲕⲁϩ]\|Ⲓ. ⲛⲙⲟⲛ[ⲟ]ⲛ end of line ⲓ ⲛⲙ]
1515	sup over ⲙ ⲓ2 ⲓ. ⲡⲁ[ⲙⲏⲛ ⲓⲓ. ⲉⲩⲙⲉⲉⲩⲉ] ⲛ︦] ⲟⲡ sup ⲓϥ
1516	ⲓ. ⲉϣⲁⲩⲙⲟⲩⲧⲉ [ⲉ]-[ⲣ]ⲟϥ ⲓ ⲛⲧⲉⲣⲉϥ- ⲧⲱⲣⲡ ⲇⲉ, the first
1517	letter ⲟ ⲧⲱⲣⲡ has nearly disappeared but the remains are more
1518	consistent with ⲧ than @ \| I. ⲁⲛ[ⲕⲱ] there is a fracture after ⲛ
1519	and no trace of any further letter, the next line begins [ⲉⲃ]ⲟⲗ
1520	ⲁⲛⲣϩⲱⲧ 16 after ⲧⲱⲙⲛⲧ] is a fracture which would allow
1521	! For ⲅ. g cf. CrRuM, Coptic Ostraca No. 3.
page 48
1522	44 THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS.
1523	of more letters, but there need not have been more and none are
1524	wanted ⲓ. ⲙ[ⲟ]ⲅⲓϩ [an] \| [ⲁ]ⲯⲏ 17 L [ⲉⲩⲁ]ⲗⲉ € ⲉⲣⲟⲥ
1525	ⲁ... Ⲓ.[ⲃ]ⲟⲏ[ⲑⲉ]ⲁ evarov[p \| I. [evpglo[Te] ϫⲉ ⲙⲏⲡⲱⲥ
1526	ncege]-[egpar ⲉⲩⲙ]ⲁ ⲉϥⲟ ⲛ︦[ϩⲱⲛ] 21 L [ⲛ̄ⲧⲉ]ⲣⲟⲩ \| L
1527	ⲙ̄ⲙⲟⲥ ϫⲉ ⲛ \| L [ⲥⲱ] ⲉⲧⲙ̄ 22 L ⲧⲱⲕ ⲛϩ[ⲏ]ⲧ ⲧⲉⲓ̈
1528	24 \|. ⲉⲩⲧⲁϩⲟⲕ ⲉⲣⲁⲧⲕ 25. ϫⲉ ⲥⲛⲁϣⲱⲡⲉ 27. ⲙ︦ⲛ︦ⲧ︦ⲁϥⲧⲉ
1529	ⲓ. ⲛⲟⲩϣⲏ 2 in line above ϩⲧⲟⲟⲩ ⲓ. ϩ[ⲁ]ⲩ ϩⲓ, though broken
1530	ⲩ seems certain (nof 632) \| 1. ⲣⲉϩⲧⲟⲟⲩ ϣ[ⲱ] 30 lL ⲛⲥⲁ]
1531	32 [ⲛ︦] L.22 \| Tpe[c] is possible, as a strip of repairing papyrus
1532	covers anything after ⲉ 36 av ⲓ. ⲛⲁⲩⲟⲩ 37 1 [ⲟⲫ]ⲏ ⲛⲉⲛⲉⲓⲣ[ⲉ
1533	38 ⲓ. ⲛⲧⲉⲣ 4. ⲛ̄ϩⲱⲛ \| [an]: ⲁ̄ 44 ⲁⲁⲩ ⲓ. ϩⲛⲁⲁⲩ \|
1534	ⲓ. ⲑⲉ stra \| after ⲛⲓⲙ] 1. [ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ̈ ⲉⲡⲉ]ⲕ po, there is room
1535	XXVIII omit all points in this chapter except v. 2 after
1536	ⲣⲱⲙⲉ, ⲅ. 3 at end, v. 6 after ⲕⲟⲟⲩ, ⲅ. ⲓⲟ after ⲉⲃⲟⲗ (insert)
1537	and at end, v. 11 after ⲣⲁⲕⲟⲧⲉ (insert), v. 13 after ϩⲣⲏⲅⲓⲟⲥ
1538	(insert), v. 15 after ⲉⲣⲟⲛ, ⲅ. 16 after ⲁⲣⲭⲱⲛ (insert) and at
1539	end (colon), v. 20 after ⲛⲙ̄ⲙⲏⲧⲛ̄ and at end, ⲩ. 23 after
1540	ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ, Ic (insert) and ϩⲧⲟⲟⲩⲉ, v. 24 end, ⲩ. 25 after
1541	ⲛⲉⲩⲉⲣⲏⲩ and ⲛⲉⲧⲛⲉⲓⲟⲧⲉ (insert), v. 26 end, v. 27 after
1542	ⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ (insert), v. 31 after ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ‘and end (colon) ⲓ.
1543	ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲣⲉⲛ — ⲟⲩϫ[ⲁⲓ̈], there is prob nothing after ⲛ in that line
1544	2 ⲛ︦] ⲛ 3 enkwgT 2°] this word has been deleted by a
1545	diagonal stroke through each letter \| ⲉ ⲃⲟⲗ] om ⲉ ϥ ⲱⲛϩ]
1546	om sup 5-L ⲛ̄ ⲧⲉⲣ 6. mew6w-wT ⲓ. ⲉϥⲛⲁϣⲱϩⲃ\|
1547	1 ϩⲛ̄ⲟⲩ- [ϣ]ⲥ̄ⲛ[ⲉ ⲛϥ̄ⲙⲟⲩ 7 1. ⲛⲙⲇⲉ[ \| beginning next line
1548	ⲙ ⲁⲩⲉⲛ ⲓ. ⲡⲟⲩⲃ]ⲗⲓⲟⲥ ⲡⲉ ϩⲓ. ϣⲱⲡⲉ ⲡⲕⲉ but hardly room
1549	for ⲥⲉⲉⲡⲉ \| 1. ⲛ̄ⲛⲉⲧ \| ⲡⲉϥ] ⲡⲉⲩ prob ⲓⲟ Tepe the super-
1550	lineation is long = Teper 13 ⲓ. ⲁⲩⲱ ⲙ[ⲛ︦ⲛ︦ⲥⲁ \| I [ⲛϥ
1551	ⲧⲓⲟⲗⲟⲩⲥϯ the ⲩ has been deleted by a diagonal stroke 15 1.
1552	ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲓϭ. ⲛ̄ ⲧⲉⲣⲉⲛ ⲓⲓ. ⲉⲓ̈ⲙⲏⲣ ⲑⲓ (?), the reading
1553	is certain 18 ⲓ. ⲛ̄ϩⲏⲧ 19 ⲓ ⲛ︦ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲓ̈ 20 ⲓ. ⲁⲓ̈ⲧⲓ \| L
1554	ⲁⲓ̈ⲥⲉⲡⲥ̄ⲧⲏⲩⲧⲛ̄ ⲓ. ⲉⲣⲱ[ⲧⲛ︦]︦ ⲓ. . ϣⲉ \| I. ⲡⲛⲟⲙⲟ[ⲥ]
1555	ⲛⲙ̄ⲛⲉ- ⲡⲣⲟⲫⲏⲧⲏⲥ (the reading is certain, there is no trace of
1556	ⲙⲱⲩⲥⲏⲥ etc) 25 1 ⲁⲩ-ⲉⲓ \| ⲁⲛ ⲛ̄ϩⲏⲧ (sz) \| 1. ⲡⲉⲡ︦ⲛ︦ⲁ
1557	26 there are quotation marks (>) against the lines from ⲫⲏⲧⲏⲥ
1558	to ⲛⲉⲩⲙⲁⲁϫⲉ, but they are broken away against the lines
page 49
1559	THE NEW BIBLICAL PAPYRUS. 45
1560	beginning ⲁⲩⲱ, ⲛ̄ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄, ϣⲟⲧ \| lL ⲛ̄ⲁⲩ lL ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄-
1561	ⲁⲥⲱⲧⲙ̄ \| prob nothing after ⲛⲟⲓ̈ 27 1. 2A[a]-oc 3
1562	..ⲙⲟϥ ⲁⲩϣ [ⲛⲉϥ]ϣⲱⲡ ⲉ ⲣⲟ[ϥ]- ⲛ̄ⲟⲩⲟⲛ ⲛⲓⲙ. ϩⲟⲩ[ⲛ]-
1563	[ⲛ]ⲁϥ ⲙ̄ ⲡⲙ.. ⲧⲉ ⲓ. ⲥⲃⲱ ⲓ. ⲡϫϩⲉⲓⲥ \| 1. ϩⲛ̄ⲟ[ⲩ]
1564	Ⲧⲓⲧⲓ. 1. ⲡⲟⲥⲧⲟⲗⲟⲥ
1565	Ⲥⲟⲓⲟⲣⲏⲟⲛ. fol. 1084 om all points \| line 1 1. [ⲁ]ⲡϣⲁϫⲉ, 2 1.
1566	ϫⲉ ⲉⲧⲃⲉ 4 ⲧⲉⲧⲛ︦ⲣ︦] ⲧⲉⲧⲛ̄ϯ︦ fol. 1092 om all points except
1567	perhaps that after ⲡⲕⲁϩ ⲓ. ϩ[ⲛ︦ⲧⲉ] 4 [wat](?) ⲓ. [wa]
1568	5. ⲡⲕⲁϩ ⲉ[ϯⲕⲁⲣ] 6 I. ⲱⲙ̄ⲕ, the scribe first wrote ⲱⲙ︦ⲛ︦
1569	and then wrote a ⲕ over the ⲛ̄ \| I. fee ⲙ︦] ⲧⲓ. ⲡⲉⲕⲣⲱⲙ
1570	ⲉϥⲡⲏⲧ ϩⲓ. ⲙ̄ⲡ[ⲧⲣⲉϥⲧⲛ︦] ⲓⲟ L ⲡⲕⲟⲥⲙⲟⲥ ϫⲉ[ⲉϥⲉⲛⲁϩ] ⲓⲓ
1571	ⲙ̄ ⲙ̄ⲡ] sang 12 ⲧⲉⲗⲟⲥ] ⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ ⲓ. ⲉϥⲛⲏⲩ ϣⲁⲣ[ⲟ]ⲛ, ⲣ
1572	uncertain, it may be ⲓ and if there was an ⲟ it must have been
1573	quite small \| 1. o¥["T]e ⲁⲣϫⲓⲁⲅ, in connection with [ⲁⲅ]ⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ
1574	just above, this strongly suggests ⲁⲣⲭⲓⲁⲅⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ] but the ϫ
1575	is certain (cf. however the writing ϫⲓⲗⲓⲁⲣⲭⲟⲥ for ⲭⲓⲗ.
1576	throughout chapters xxii — xxiv of Acts). ⲓ ⲓ. ⲁⲗⲗⲁ
1577	ⲁ. ϣⲃⲧϥ̄ nf fol. 1096 line ⲓ begins ⲙ ⲡⲕⲁϩ ⲉⲧⲃⲉ
1578	ⲛⲉⲉⲓⲡⲗⲁⲛⲟⲥ 2 ⲧⲁⲏ]ⲑⲁⲏ, prob nothing lost before it 3 the
1579	line begins with ⲥⲃⲟⲟⲩⲉ and is complete, the last word is correct
1580	4, 5 nothing lost at beginning 6 begins ⲁⲛ ⲟⲩⲇⲉ 7, § 9
1581	nothing lost at beginning ϩⲓ. ⲛ̄ⲥⲉ \| I. ⲧⲡⲓⲥⲧⲓⲥ ⲉⲧ] ⲓⲟ.
1582	ⲧ]ⲁϫⲣⲏⲩ ⲓ. ⲧⲣⲉⲩⲡⲗⲁⲛⲁ 6€ ⲙ̄ⲙⲱⲧⲛ̄ [ϩⲓⲧⲛ̄] ⲓⲓ.
1583	[ⲛ]ⲁⲓ̈ ⲉⲧⲙ̄ⲙⲁⲩ 12 begins [ⲛ̄ⲧⲛⲏⲥⲧⲓⲁ (there is no ⲩ)
1584	14 1. ϫⲉ 151 ⲏⲣⲟⲥ ⲭ ⲓ6. ⲛⲧⲙ̄ϣ[ 17 1 ϣⲟⲛⲉ[
page 50
1585	LONDON :
1586	PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
1587	STREET, STAMFORD STREET, S.E., AND GREAT WINDMILL STREET, WV.
1588	DUKE
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
page 55
1589	snakded ⲧⲉⲟⲧⲧϥⲧϥ ⲛⲑ ⲛ 4
1590	ϥⲑϥⲑⲏ ⲧ) Ke ϥ a
1591	wy ⲉ ⲡⲟ ⲉⲧϥⲉ
1592	ⲛⲟ
page 56

Provenance

title: Thompson – The New Biblical Papyrus: a Sahidic version of Deuteronomy, Jonah and Acts from MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum; notes and a collation (privately printed, 1913)
dialect: sahidic
source: OCR (tools/batch_ocr.py, model coptic+eng) of Coptic Texts/newbiblicalpapyr00thomuoft.pdf; page files: L0/ocr/Coptic_Texts/newbiblicalpapyr00thomuoft/pages
licence: public domain in Canada (author died ≤ 1971, verified; LICENCES.md §7) — US position (recorded, does not gate the class; PD-CA 2026-09-26): PD-US (published ≤1930)
share: public
attribution: Thompson – The New Biblical Papyrus: a Sahidic version of Deuteronomy, Jonah and Acts from MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum; notes and a collation (privately printed, 1913); public domain in Canada (death year verified: Thompson d.1944 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Thompson_(Egyptologist)) — two-country rule met (LICENCES.md §7 + US ≤1930), REBUILD-PREP 2026-09-26); OCR text by the Kemetic project, Yousef Hanna 2026.
file: Bible/Old Testament/Thompson – The New Biblical Papyrus- a Sahidic version of Deuteronomy, Jonah and Acts from MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum; notes and a collation (privately printed, 1913)/newbiblicalpapyr00thomuoft.ocr.L0.txt
what it is: DRAFT English. Not a published translation: `existing` rows quote an aligned translation named in `basis`; `llm` rows are a language-model best guess from the dictionary gloss and context (Yousef asked for them, 2026-09-27; to be corrected later); check the source text before relying on any of it.
lines: 1 quoted · 0 quoted with the alignment not cross-checked · 0 model drafts (marked “draft”)
quoted from: Brenton's Septuagint (1851), Deuteronomy 31:6 — read from Coptic SCRIPTORIUM bohairic.ot; by alignment: the line located in the SCRIPTORIUM Bible by its words (4 of its 4 words anchored, 1 more than anywhere else); the line carries no usable verse number; both SCRIPTORIUM releases attach this English to the same Coptic; the KELLIA gloss of that Coptic fits no neighbouring verse's English better (1 lines)

Cite as:

Thompson – The New Biblical Papyrus: a Sahidic version of Deuteronomy, Jonah and Acts from MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum; notes and a collation (privately printed, 1913). OCR (tools/batch_ocr.py, model coptic+eng) of Coptic Texts/newbiblicalpapyr00thomuoft.pdf; page files: L0/ocr/Coptic_Texts/newbiblicalpapyr00thomuoft/pages. Layers as published by the Kemetic project (Yousef Hanna), 2026: Coptic · Cairene · Kemetic, /doc/bible/old-testament/thompson-the-new-biblical-papyrus-a-sahidic-version-of-deuteronomy-jonah-and-act-183516/newbiblicalpapyr00thomuoft.ocr/. Thompson – The New Biblical Papyrus: a Sahidic version of Deuteronomy, Jonah and Acts from MS. Or. 7594 of the British Museum; notes and a collation (privately printed, 1913); public domain in Canada (death year verified: Thompson d.1944 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Thompson_(Egyptologist)) — two-country rule met (LICENCES.md §7 + US ≤1930), REBUILD-PREP 2026-09-26); OCR text by the Kemetic project, Yousef Hanna 2026.

What the layers are

L0 witness
The text as its witness or edition has it, original spelling; its dialect is a description and is never standardized.

L0.5 transliteration
For Egyptian texts: the transliteration with the editors' marks turned into the symbols ° * < > _ ^ (ruled 2026-09-10). For papyri: the edition's Leiden marks as the same symbols, and the editors' readings beside the scribe's as ‹scribe→editors› (ruled PAP-3).

L1 Cairene
Standardized Greco-Bohairic spelling and grammar, generated by code from the layer above under the rulings of the project.

L2 Kemetic
The Kemetic alphabet, generated by code from L1.

English
Quoted translations where they exist, credited; otherwise model drafts, marked as drafts.

Source and licence

The text

Provenance

L0 witness (OCR)

English

What the layers are