Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Papyrus of Euripides' Helena (P. Ox. 2336)

The Papyrus of Euripides' Helena (P. Ox. 2336) THE PAPYRUS OF EURIPIDES' HELENA (P. Ox. 2336) BY G. ZUNTZ The papyrus as published in Ox. Pap. vol. XXII (1954) 107 has suggested conclusions which may be pursued and modified on the basis of a reexamination of the original. I hope to present a detailed discussion in the not too distant future. Meantime it has seemed useful to present a new transcript and reconstruction in the hope of benefitting from the observations of fellow-students. Mr. C. H. Roberts and Profs. Kamerbeek and Turner have been good enough to comment on my draft; their observations appear in the notes below. Reference to the editio princeps will easily show the amount of agreement and difference with the text printed here; problematical points only are touched upon in the notes. Transcript (Incomplete letters are not marked as such, if the reading is certain) 1) See e.g. J.H.St. Ig56, 20 (J. Barns) and Gnomon 1955, 498 (K. Latte) 123 Notes on the transcript above: 635: ]E : the sigma is all but certain. 644: Mr. Roberts and Prof. Turner agree that 'there was some- thing' between auvacyocyev and 7toO'eL but deny that the remaining traces suggest w. 'I suspect there was http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Mnemosyne Brill

The Papyrus of Euripides' Helena (P. Ox. 2336)

Mnemosyne , Volume 14 (1): 122 – Jan 1, 1961

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/the-papyrus-of-euripides-helena-p-ox-2336-pLIbmdRn2b

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 1961 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0026-7074
eISSN
1568-525X
DOI
10.1163/156852561X00137
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

THE PAPYRUS OF EURIPIDES' HELENA (P. Ox. 2336) BY G. ZUNTZ The papyrus as published in Ox. Pap. vol. XXII (1954) 107 has suggested conclusions which may be pursued and modified on the basis of a reexamination of the original. I hope to present a detailed discussion in the not too distant future. Meantime it has seemed useful to present a new transcript and reconstruction in the hope of benefitting from the observations of fellow-students. Mr. C. H. Roberts and Profs. Kamerbeek and Turner have been good enough to comment on my draft; their observations appear in the notes below. Reference to the editio princeps will easily show the amount of agreement and difference with the text printed here; problematical points only are touched upon in the notes. Transcript (Incomplete letters are not marked as such, if the reading is certain) 1) See e.g. J.H.St. Ig56, 20 (J. Barns) and Gnomon 1955, 498 (K. Latte) 123 Notes on the transcript above: 635: ]E : the sigma is all but certain. 644: Mr. Roberts and Prof. Turner agree that 'there was some- thing' between auvacyocyev and 7toO'eL but deny that the remaining traces suggest w. 'I suspect there was

Journal

MnemosyneBrill

Published: Jan 1, 1961

There are no references for this article.