Atkinson — On a South-Coptic Text of M. Bouriant. 267 



become desolate on earth.", as lie continues, " every man has fled from 

 me on accoujit of my poverty". 



118. And twice he has spoilt a quotation from Eom. iii. 19 ; at 

 [213, lo], tapro nim natom nte pkosmos terf sope ha phap 

 mpnwte, to2(,te louche sera muette, qiiancl le moncle entier paraUra au 

 tribunal de Dieu; and subsequently, at [241, 12], quand le monde 

 entier serajuge par JDieu ; neither of "which versions gives the force of 

 the Coptic, a literal rendering of the Greek, Iva irav a-To/xa ^payj; «:ai 

 {"TToStKOS yivrjTai ttSs o koo"/xo§ tw ©ew. 



119. Equally obvious is it that his translation of [214,2] is a 

 mere guess, je pre/ere aller entre les mains die Seipieur &c., for 

 his je prefere can certainly not be extracted out of his text smot 

 nnai! That combination of letters has not the slightest meaning; 

 it should be of course s-motii nai, for it has nothing to do with 

 smot, 'form'. There is here a play on the immediately preceding 

 ])hrase from Job, in which death is declared to be mton, ' a [transfor- 

 mation to] rest '; so here David says that the penalty rpeis rj/j.epa? 

 Odvarov iv rfj yfj is motn, 'a state of rest ', to him : the prefixed 

 s- is the fem.-neider of the impersonal subject. 



120. M. Bouriant has introduced a very considerable variation 

 into the traditional story of this punishment of David for the enormity 

 of his offence in having a census of his people taken. His version is : 

 Ze troisieme chdti^nent qu'infligea Dieu au roi David fut d^ eloigner de 

 hii la mort. 



That statement runs so differently from the tenor of the original 

 narrative that it at once arrests attention : it apparently means that 

 immortality is one of God's punishments, and that after having 

 inflicted two other punishments. He now hurls upon David the last 

 dire penalty, — of immortality ! 



What says the Coptic text ? 



kaigar prro Daueid ntere pjoeis horize ejof 

 nsomte nepitimia we'i naf nsa pmw [213, z]. 



And I confess to the utterest inability to extract M. Bouiiant's version 

 out of these words : what is opc^eLv, then? and how is nsomte an 

 ordinal? and what is naf? and what tense is we'i? and what is its 

 regent? and what is nsa ? 



And what words of his MS. has he omitted? 



121. The next sentence is again mere guessing, voici trois choses 

 auxquelles je veux comparer {mes souffrances). The parenthesis again ! 

 there is no mes souffrances, and no reason for their mention. The text 



