DOI 10.1515/bz-2024-0010 BZ 2024; 117(1): 183–192 Konstantine Panegyres Hymn fragments on a papyrus from the ruins of the monastery at Deir el-Bala’izah, Egypt Abstract: In BZ 18 (1909), 309 – 323, Paul Maas published six hymns belonging to the fifth or sixth century. The earliest textual witnesses he was able to use were P.Lond. III 1029 of the sixth century (for only one of the six hymns), and MS Erlangensis 1234 (53v–56r), dated to 1025 (for all six of the hymns). Mercati in 1932 discovered that parts of the fourth and fifth hymn were also attested on a different papyrus of the fifth or sixth century (P.Lond.Lit. 235). No other witnesses from the same early period have since come to light. The purpose of this article is to publish a new papyrus fragment datable to the sixth century from the Bodleian Library, MS. Gr. liturg. f. 2 (P), on which verses from the fourth and fifth hymns have also been preserved. This papyrus contains substantial textual variations, and is to be regarded as a witness of considerable importance in the textual tradition of the hymns. Adresse: Dr. Konstantine Panegyres, School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; konstantine.panegyres@unimelb.edu.au The papyrus fragment in question, Bodleian MS. Gr. liturg. f. 2 (P), was excavated from the ruins of the monastery of Deir el-Bala’izah, Egypt, by Flinders Petrie in 1907, and was subsequently given over to the Bodleian Library, Oxford, in 1908. Its dimensions are 6.7 cm (w) × 12.6 cm (h). It was mounted alone on a small glass frame (see figures 1a and 1b). Preserved is a fragment of a papyrus roll. The text is written on both sides of the papyrus. The greater part of the side written along the fibres (→) is free of text, and this is because the scribe finished writing the fourth hymn somewhere in the central part of the column and did not use the leftover space to write anything else, preferring to begin the fifth hymn at the top of the next side of the sheet. A small The papyrus and its photographs are published here by permission of the Bodleian Library, Oxford. 1 This information comes from an unpublished handlist belonging to the archive of the Bodleian Library. On the site of Deir el-Bala’izah and its excavation, see P. Grossmann, Ruinen des Klosters Dair al-Balaiz in Oberägypten. JbAC 36 (1993), 171 – 205. 184 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 117/1, 2024: I. Abteilung part of the right-hand margin is preserved on the side written against the fibres (↓). The papyrus itself is remarkably clean and well preserved, with only a few stains on the back side (↓). The hand is a clear and fairly elegant sloping majuscule. Notable letters are β with a fat and rounded base; ε with an extended middle stroke; ο small and sometimes raised from the baseline; and χ with a left leg that extends considerably and has a small ornamental tick at its end. The scribe almost always avoids having letters touching, except sometimes in the case of αρ (→ 2), ει (e. g. ↓ 3), and γι (e. g. ↓ 5). The hand bears a close resemblance to P.Oxy. XI 1357 = TM 65049 = LDAB 6290 (‘Liturgical church calendar’, securely dated to 535/536), and to P.Oxy. XXXI 2531 = TM 62827 = LDAB 4017 (‘Theophilus of Alexandria, On Contrition’, assigned to the first half of the sixth century). The writing is a little more formal than what is found on those papyri, though the scribe does tend to vary the spaces between letters and letter sizes considerably, with the result that in the reconstructed computerized edition printed here the line lengths look more uneven than they really would have been in handwritten form. There must also have been some abbreviation of at least a few of the words, since otherwise the verses do not fit so well into the space on the papyrus. On palaeographical grounds, therefore, the present papyrus may be assigned to the first half of the sixth century. In 1909 Paul Maas published from collation of over a dozen manuscripts of a Horologion (‘Book of Hours’) six anonymous hymns of the fifth or sixth century. The hymns were meant to be sung for the �π�δειπνον (compline) during Lent. The hymns were later republished in 1931. At the time of publication, Maas knew of only one papyrus in which any one of these six hymns was transmitted, namely P.Lond. III 1029 = TM 65190 = LDAB 6432), of the sixth century. This papyrus contained the first of the six hymns, and had originally been published by Kenyon and Bell in 1907, and in 1908 Maas himself had discussed P.Lond. III 1029 in some detail in a paper of his own. 2 For plates and descriptions, see G. Cavallo / H. Maehler, Greek bookhands of the early Byzantine period. London 1987, 68 – 69, where these papyri are nos. 30a and 30b respectively. 3 P. Maas, Gleichzeilige Hymnen in der byzantinischen Liturgie: I. Die Abendhymnen. BZ 18 (1909), 309 – 323. 4 P. Maas, Frühbyzantinische Kirchenpoesie, I: Anonyme Hymnen des V.–VI. Jahrhunderts. Berlin 2 1931, 3 – 8. 5 On the date of this papyrus, see now Á. Mihálykó, The Christian liturgical papyri: an introduction. Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum, 114. Tübingen 2018, 336 note 161, whose conclusions are accepted here. Kenyon originally dated the papyrus to the sixth century, whereas Maas dated it to the sixth or seventh century. 6 F. Kenyon / H. I. Bell, Greek papyri in the British Museum III. London 1907, 284 – 285. 7 P. Maas, Ein frühbyzantinisches Kirchenlied auf Papyrus. BZ 17 (1908), 307– 311. K. Panegyres, Hymn fragments on a papyrus 185 At the time when he was working on this material, Maas had access only to a limited number of manuscripts. Although he had the sixth-century papyrus of the first hymn, the earliest manuscript available to him in which all six of the hymns were transmitted was MS Erlangensis 1234 (53v–56r), dated to 1025 owing to its subscription. The other manuscripts only transmitted a partial number of the six hymns. As Maas observed, this Erlangen manuscript was the oldest copy of a Horologion that was accessible to him, and the only one that was fully intact and preserved the six hymns together. Maas knew of but could not access an older copy of a Horologion in the Library of the Monastery of Saint-Catherine on Sinai, namely Codex Sinaiticus Graecus 864, of the ninth century. This manuscript with versions of the six hymns was published by Sister Maxime Leila Ajjoub. A few decades after Maas wrote his contributions, Silvio Giuseppe Mercati recognized in a papyrus of the fifth or sixth century, P.Lond.Lit. 235 = TM 64882, lines from the fourth and fifth hymns. As Maas wrote in reviewing Mercati’s contribution, “Der Text besteht aus Hymn. 4, 1 – 8. 5, 9. 8. 10. 13. 17, alles ohne Kolometrie und ohne Lesezeichen. Die Orthographie ist ebenso barbarisch wie die in [P.Lond. III 1029]”. This papyrus was later re-edited by Dieter Hagedorn (and printed as a parergon to his edition of P.Heid. IV 293), and its reconstruction has since received some further discussion from Diethart and Grassien. As was noticed by Hagedorn and later by Diethart and Grassien, it turns out that P.Lond.Lit. 235 preserves part of a single hymn that is a composite of material from the known hymns, with verses from the fourth hymn mixed with verses from the fifth hymn. This curious fact, as Diethart and Grassien observed, attests to “une production hymnographique massive et infiniment variée”. No other new early witnesses to the text have since come to light. 8 On this manuscript, see H. Thurn / O. Stählin, Die griechischen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Erlangen. Wiesbaden 1980, 21. 9 M. Ajjoub, Livre d’heures du Sinaï (Sinaiticus Graecus 864). SC, 486. Paris 2004. This was the doctoral dissertation of Sister M. Ajjoub, worked up for publication with the collaboration of J. Paramelle. 10 H. J. M. Milne, Catalogue of the literary papyri in the British Museum. London 1927, 198 (no. 235). 11 S. G. Mercati, Osservazioni sul testo e sulla metrica di alcuni papiri Cristiani. Chronique d’Égypte 7 (1932), 183 – 201: 186 – 189. 12 P. Maas, BZ 32 (1932), 423. For his later views on this subject in general, see P. Maas, Gleichzeilige Hymnen in der Liturgie der Griechischen Kirche. Studia Patristica 2 (1957), 47– 48. 13 J. Diethart / C. Grassien, Remarques sur la composition, la transmission et l’édition de trois hymnes chrétiennes en provenance d’Égypte. Archiv für Papyrusforschung 51 (2005), 95 – 104: 102 – 104. 14 Ibid., 95. 186 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 117/1, 2024: I. Abteilung The current state of the question, therefore, is that whereas the first hymn is earliest attested in a papyrus fragment of the sixth century (P.Lond. III 1029), material from the fourth and fifth hymns is earliest attested in a papyrus fragment of the fifth or sixth century (P.Lond.Lit. 235). The papyrus being published in this article, Bodleian MS. Gr. liturg. f. 2 (P), contributes to this picture in a substantial way. The front side of the fragment (written along the fibres, →) offers the end of the fourth hymn, while the back side of the fragment (written against the fibres, ↓) offers the end of the fifth hymn. The papyrus interestingly, like P.Lond.Lit. 235, also supplies evidence that lines were shared between the fourth and fifth hymns. Most of the lines on the front side (→) come from the fourth hymn, while most of the lines on the back side (↓) come from the fifth hymn. However, on the front side (→), line 1, the traces do not match anything in the known versions of the fourth hymn, and the best option for reconstruction is that the traces in the line belong to a verse attested in hymn no. 5, line 33 Maas. On the back side (↓), lines 4 – 5, there are two unreconstructable verses that do not appear in the other versions of the fifth hymn; and in lines 6 – 7, the traces in the line seem to belong to a verse attested elsewhere in hymn no. 4, line 13 Maas. The obvious question this new evidence raises is whether the present papyrus offers expanded versions of the hymns known in shorter form in the other manuscripts, or whether the hymns known in the other manuscripts are reduced versions of hymns that were originally longer in form. That seems difficult to answer unless further witnesses come to light. The evidence of P.Lond.Lit. 235, mentioned above, suggests also that the hymns underwent expansion of various kinds, and if the evidence from P.Lond. Lit. 235 is combined with that of the present papyrus, then one would have to conclude that the main form of expansion was the exchange of a line or lines from one hymn into the other. The hymns preserved on the papyrus are both in the same metre. The metre is what Maas calls a ‘proparoxytone eleven syllable-line’, namely υ υ – υ υ – υ υ – υ υ (–). The main freedom of this metre is the possible addition of various syllables 15 Similar overlaps of content could already be seen in the previously extant medieval manuscript material written in the same metre: for example, the second hymn (line 6 Maas) has Χερουβ�� κα� Σεραφ�� τ� πολυ���ατα, and the same line occurs in the fifth hymn (line 20 Maas). The second, fourth, and fifth hymns also all end with the words σο� γ�ρ πρ�πει τι�� κα� προσκ�νησις ε�ς α��νας α�τ�ν τ�ν α��νων, ���ν (“for honour and adoration are fitting for you for ever and ever, amen”). 16 Maas, Gleichzeilige Hymnen. BZ 18 (1909), 309 – 356: 317, describes the rules of this metrical form. K. Panegyres, Hymn fragments on a papyrus 187 anywhere in the line; corruption in such poems by the addition of extraneous syllables is common. In the present papyrus, in order to save space, the scribe did not write out the hymn colometrically with a single verse per line of the papyrus, but instead indicated the divisions between metrical cola with small rightward-slanting diagonal slashes between words (i. e. / ): this form of verse division can be seen in ↓ 2 and 7. The scribe only seems to have placed this division after each eleventh syllable (thus the mark comes before the added twelfth syllable at the end of the verse at ↓ 7 ε�, and there is no similar diagonal slash after it). The indication of cola by the use of dashes of this kind is known elsewhere in early Christian hymns; for an example, compare another papyrus of the sixth century that uses oblique strokes to divide cola, namely P.Ryl. III 465 (TM 65053, 65054). Another scribal marking that might have served a metrical purpose is the dot to the above right of � in ↓ 3 Χερουβε��. This dot is of uncertain purpose, but perhaps it served to indicate that the previous syllable had the stress accent. The purpose of the scribal middle-dot in → 3 after α�]τ̣�ν is also unclear. The only place in the preserved portion of the fragment where there is a new metrical difficulty (that is to say, a metrical difficulty not already found in the other manuscript witnesses and not discussed by Maas or other editors) is at ↓ 6 – 7. The correct metrical form of the line is �ν Τρι�δι θε�της ���ριστος (“divinity indivisible in the Trinity”), but the scribe wrote � �ν Τρι�δι θε�της ���ριστος (“the divinity invisible in the Trinity”). The additional syllable created by the writing of the article violates the pattern υ υ – υ υ – υ υ – υ υ. It would be incautious to describe this as an error, since as noted above the addition of extra syllables is a feature of this metre. The presence of the article in this line brings it into structural symmetry with � καθ��ενος in 7– 8, but there the article fits the metre perfectly. The orthography of the papyrus does not display anything unusual. There is the writing of ο for ω (↓ 8 �ς for �ς). In the writing of Hebrew names the scribe prefers the forms Χερουβε�� and Σεραφε�� (↓ 3), whereas the other manuscript witnesses have Χερουβ�� and Σεραφ�� in the same place. This just reflects a common type of variation between ει and ι, and should not be interpreted in any other way. As for lectional markings, the scribe marks breathings: smooth breathings 17 Ibid., 317 (“Auch im Versinnern ist Zusatz von einer oder zwei Silben gewöhnlich”). 18 Á. Mihálykó, Christian liturgical papyri (as footnote 3 above) 171. 19 Maas does not correct these intrusive syllables by deleting them from the text; Ajjoub prefers to put brackets around the extra syllables. 20 See F. T. Gignac, A grammar of the Greek papyri of the Roman and Byzantine periods, I: Phonology. Milan 1976, 189 – 190: “There is a very frequent interchange of ει and ι (whether long or short etymologically) in all phonetic environments throughout the Roman and Byzantine periods”. 188 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 117/1, 2024: I. Abteilung with a small apostrophe to the above right of the vowel (for ε� in ↓ 6 and 7) and rough breathings with a horizontal dash above a letter (for �ς l. �ς in ↓ 8). The comma marks on the baseline after ε� in ↓ 7 and �ς in↓ 8 are of uncertain significance. The full dimensions of the papyrus cannot be determined with absolute certitude, given that the hymns show signs of expansion. However, basic possibilities can be put forward. Since the front side of the papyrus preserves the end of the fourth hymn and the remaining space seems to have been left free, the fifth hymn most probably began at the start of the next side. Taking Maas’ edition of the fifth hymn as a guideline, there would have been about thirty-three verses written before the first verse preserved on the papyrus. Since the scribe wrote about one and a half verses per line of papyrus, there would have been about twenty-two lines lost. The same calculation can be applied to the fourth hymn. Taking Maas’ edition of the fourth hymn as a guideline, there would have been about twenty-three verses written before the first verse preserved on the papyrus. Since the scribe wrote about one and a half verses per line of papyrus, there would have been about fifteen lines lost. No weight can be given to this apparent disparity of several lines between the respective number of lines that might have come above what survives on both sides of the papyrus. The difference of several lines suggested by these figures could be resolved easily if we assume that this version of the fourth hymn was several verses longer than the version printed by Maas, or that the version of the fifth hymn was shorter than the version printed by Maas. There were usually around forty letters written per line. The spacings of the papyrus strongly suggest that some words in the text must have been abbreviated, even though no abbreviations appear in the preserved portions of the papyrus. These probably took the form of nomina sacra and other common abbreviations. The spacings of the text ↓ do not work so well unless the use of scribal abbreviations is assumed. At any rate, because as mentioned earlier the scribe’s spacings between letters are inconsistent, the handwritten version of the text will have been more uniform than the text as it appears in reconstructed computerized form. Some ancient grammarians claim that the forms Χερουβε�� and Σεραφε�� are to be written for the singular, whereas the forms Χερουβ�� and Σεραφ�� are to be written for the plural (Suid. σ 241 Adler: Σεραφ��· πληθυντικ�ς δι� το� ι, �π� δ� �νικο� Σεραφε�� δι� διφθ�γγου – “Seraphim: in the plural with the iota, but in the singular Serapheim with a diphthong”); this difference is not observed in practice in ancient texts, and the spellings of the papyrus should just be regarded as orthographical equivalents. The plurals are obviously required by sense in the place where they appear in the hymn. K. Panegyres, Hymn fragments on a papyrus 189 Bodleian MS. Gr. liturg. f. 2 (P), recto and verso Commentary below is only given to problems raised by the papyrus itself. For full commentary and explanatory notes on these lines of the hymns, the edition of Ajjoub provides everything necessary. The line divisions given below are conjectural. Bodl. MS. Gr. liturg. f. 2 (P) Deir el-Bala’izah, Egypt 12.6 cm (h) × 6.7 cm (w) Sixth century Recto (→) 1 2 3 4 ] [̣ ]β ̣ ̣ [̣ ]υπυροσεξαρ[ ] ιτι�ηκα[ ̣ ] ων·των[ ̣ ] [̣ ]β ̣ ̣ [̣ το]� πυρ�ς �ξαρ[π�σαι κα� σ�σαι ���ς σο�] [γ�ρ πρ�π]ε̣ι τι�� κα[� προσκ�νησις, ε�ς α� ] [�νας α�]τ̣�ν τ�ν [α��νων, ���ν.] Normalized and arranged into verses, the papyrus reads as follows (the letters preserved on the papyrus are highlighted in bold): Reconstruction Uncertain ��γα �υστ�ριον κα� φοβερ�ν Uncertain Metre Hymn and line number according to Maas (1931) Unknown –υυ–υυ–υυ– Unknown Unknown No. 5, line 33 Unknown 190 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 117/1, 2024: I. Abteilung το� πυρ�ς �ξαρπ�σαι κα� σ�σαι ���ς σο� γ�ρ πρ�πει τι�� κα� προσκ�νησις ε�ς α��νας α�τ�ν τ�ν α��νων, ���ν. υυ–υυ–υυ–υυ– υυ–υυ–υυ–υυ υυ–υυ–υυ–υυ– No. 4, line 24 No. 4, line 25 No. 4, line 26 Translation: “… a great and fearful mystery … he snatches us from the fire and saves us. For honour and reverence are fitting for you for ever and ever, amen”. 1 – 2 There is space for two verses to have been written here. Since the β does not match anything in the known lines that come in this position in the fourth hymn in the other witnesses, it seems that there was a variant verse here. What matches the traces is a verse from the fifth hymn, line 33 Maas, ��γα �υστ�ριον κα�] φ̣[ο]βε̣ρ[�ν “a great and fearful mystery” (probably ��γα stood in the previous ̣ line of the papyrus, since the space in this line of the papyrus is not quite big enough for it, unless some words were abbreviated). It is possible that the rest of the space here was filled by the verse that follows in the fifth hymn, line 44 Maas, �τι δο�λος δεσπ�την �β�πτισεν (“because slave baptized master”), but since no traces at all remain it is prudent not to put this in the reconstructed version of the papyrus. 2 Maas corrects this to �ξαρπ�σ� κα� σ�σ�. 3 The writing in this line is followed by a large blank space. This was the end of the hymn and the scribe did not use the rest of the space to write anything else. Verso (↓) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] βαπτισεν �τι δο�λος δεσπ�την] �̣β�πτισεν ̣ ]ησεν/τετρα [τετρακ�ρυφον δ�νδρον �βλ�στ]ησεν, τετρα]βει�’σεραφε [̣ [π�ρατον κ�σ�ον �φ�τισεν, Χερου]βε�� Σεραφε�[�] ] προσαγ [̣ [πολυ���ατα] προσαγ [̣ ̣ ̣ ]αγιονυ�νο ̣ [τ�ν τρισ]�γιον ��νον̣ ] ̣ /ει’οεντρια [προσφ�ρουσιν σο�, �τι �γιος �γιος �γιο]ς ̣ ε�, � �ν Τρι�]αγιοσ/ει’,οκα[ [δι θε�της ���ριστος, �τι �γιος �γιος] �γιος ε� � κα[θ� ] ] σ,αχωριστ[ [�ενος �ν δεξι� το� Πατρ�ς.] �ς �χ�ριστ[ος ] [̣ ] [̣ Normalized and arranged into verses, the papyrus reads as follows (the letters preserved on the papyrus are highlighted in bold): Reconstruction �τι δο�λος δεσπ�την �β�πτισεν· τετρακ�ρυφον δ�νδρον �βλ�στησεν, Metre Hymn and line number according to Maas (1931) υυ–υυ–υυ–υυ υυ–υυ–υυ–υυ No. 5, line 34 No. 5, line 35 K. Panegyres, Hymn fragments on a papyrus τετραπ�ρατον κ�σ�ον �φ�τισεν. Χερουβε�� Σεραφε�� πολυ���ατα Uncertain Uncertain τ�ν τρισ�γιον ��νον προσφ�ρουσιν σο�, �τι �γιος �γιος �γιος ε�, � �ν Τρι�δι θε�της ���ριστος �τι �γιος �γιος �γιος ε� � καθ��ενος �ν δεξι� το� Πατρ�ς. �ς �χ�ριστος σο� � θε�της, Χριστ�. υυ–υυ υυ–υυ Unknown Unknown υυ–υυ υυ–υυ υυυ–υ υυ–υυ υυ–υυ υυ–υυ –υυ–υυ –υυ–υυ – – υ – – – υ υ – υ υ υ υ υ υ υ υ υ – – υ – – – υ υ – υ υ υ υ υ υ υ υ υ υ - No. 5, line No. 5, line Unknown Unknown No. 5, line No. 5, line No. 4, line No. 5, line No. 5, line No. 5, line 191 36 37 38 39 13 39 40 41 Translation: “… because slave baptized master. The tree with four peaks has sprouted, it has illuminated the cosmos with four quarters. The Cherubims and Seraphims with many eyes … they address to you the thrice-holy hymn, because you are holy, holy, holy, the divinity indivisible in the Trinity, because you are holy, holy, holy, the one seated at the right hand of the Father. Since the divinity is inseparable from you, Christ …”. 4] προσαγ [. ̣ ̣ This does not match anything in the versions found in the other manuscript witnessses, so it seems most prudent not to attempt a reconstruction. The trace is likely to be ο but potentially could also be α. Perhaps there was a repetition of the refrain in slightly different language, e. g. τ�ν τρισ�γιον ��νο]ν̣ προσ�γο̣[υσι σο�] | [�τι �γιος �γιος �γιος ε�. Another possibility that has been considered is that the line �ν ο� ��γοι τ� δ�ρα προσ�φερον was written here, but with a present tense verb, προσ�γουσιν, although this solution is not especially convincing. In conclusion, this papyrus fragment from the monastery of Deir el-Bala’izah, Egypt, Bodleian MS. Gr. liturg. f. 2 (P), supplies important new evidence for the text of two early Byzantine hymns. These hymns have only been attested previously in two other papyri, P.Lond. III 1029 and P.Lond.Lit. 235. Tantalizingly, the papyri suggest that the text of the hymns in the fifth and sixth centuries was far more fluid than that found in later medieval manuscripts. Without more evidence it is not possible to determine the exact reason(s) for this, though if the hymns were popular then this popularity would have meant that many different versions could easily have come into existence. A stemma lies beyond reconstruction, but what is now clear is that the text of these early hymns was being copied on papyrus and used during the liturgical services of the great monasteries of the fifth and sixth centuries.