70 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



"do not strike a person at all save a child ior instruction", /x^ rv-n-Te 

 avOpoiTTov el /at) fxovov iratStW aov fxiKpov Trpos TratSetav. The Vatican 

 text has w-kwi ntak, iraihlov crov. 



114. Again, lie corrects M. EeTillout, at the same time that he 

 translates M. Eevillout's text, and not his own, at [13a25]: 



mprheke tekmort non tosare la tiia barba, 



wde mpr sobs nevariarla (con colore). 



His note says that M. Eevillout "reads mprsobe": thereupon, 

 Prof. Eossi translates this same sobe, which does mean "to alter", 

 instead of rendering his own word sobs, which does 7iot mean 

 " alter", but, " do not shave iV' \ 



Compare the following passage, Ezek. xxix. 18: ape nim 

 nahooke, auo nahbe nim senasobw: "every head will 

 be scraped, and every shoulder shall be shaved'\ 



Here are the identical words coupled : TrScra Ke(j>aXr] (jiaXaKpd, kol 

 Tra? oi/Aos fxaSwy, with two words of similar import, <f)aXaKpd and 

 /AaSwv, denoting the baldness resulting from the radere and tondere 

 expressed by the two Coptic words, sb-j6 and hk-jo being in use 

 for that purpose. 



And what has the Greek here ? /^T^Se irepiKovpLOL's yfiwjxevo'i ! 



115. [14yl2]: I do not see any reason for his omission of the 

 clause: sope eknkotk hipeset esope ekmotn, "let thy bed be 

 on the ground when thou art well [lit. 'be sleeping below']", 

 ^a/ievvetv 6iXe lav tj? vyLr]<;. 



But, while omitting the whole precept, he is careful to extract 

 the mote out of M. Eevillout's eye by noting that the latter reads 

 esope ekmotn [which is right] instead of the esopekmotn of 

 the papyrus. 



116. So at [15 y8 2], he chides M. Eevillout for editing mntatbei 

 (sic), the sic being that of M. Eevillout ; and what has he himself 

 given ? 



ebol an hn heniuese non colV usura, 



e hn Tvniutatbes coW omicidio, 



e hn wprag^matia col traffico. 



His version, therefore, "homicide," makes it clear that he accepts 

 mnt-atbes; but how does that come to mean "homicide"? That 

 would be hatbes , not atbes , and still less with the abstract prefix, 

 mnt - atbes ! If the papyrus gives mnt - atbes really, the papyrus 

 is wrong: the word intended is certainly mnt-atsei, as in the 



