JULIA LOUGOVAYA

C OUNTING WITH I SOCRATES

aus: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 208 (2018) 203–212

© Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn

 203

C OU N T I NG WITH I SOCR AT ES*

Papyrological evidence, primarily wooden tablets, preserves a number of compilations of material intended
for training in math and grammar widely understood. The grammatical exercises range from syllabaries to
short literary passages apparently meant for copying, and those in math consist of rudimentary arithmetic.1
In what follows I present a hitherto unattested type of school exercise in which the literary and the mathe-
matical tasks merge: a literary passage of moralizing content copied down or written by dictation serves as a
means to produce sets of numbers, upon which relatively complex arithmetic operations are then carried out.
In 1994, Yale University’s Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library acquired a lot of seven wooden
tablets (PCtYBR inv. 3674–3680). Five of these date on internal or palaeographical grounds to the seventh
century (PCtYBR inv. 3674–3677, 3680); one, which is inscribed with accounts, seems to be of an earlier
date (PCtYBR inv. 3679). Of the seventh-century tablets, four appear to have come from a school context
(PCtYBR inv. 3674–3676, 3680), as does the seventh and last tablet of the bunch, PCtYBR inv. 3678. Since,
however, it has a post-consular date corresponding to AD 470, it is likely to be unrelated to the others. Con-
sidering PCtYBR inv. 3678 the most interesting piece of the lot, Ruth Duttenhöfer promptly published it
in the proceedings of the 21st International Congress of Papyrology, which was held in Berlin in 1995 (TM
61399 = LDAB 2543).2 Duttenhöfer recognized that both sides of the tablet featured a short passage from
the Isocratean ad Demonicum 17, preceded by a dating formula and the name of the writer and followed
by the names of the twelve Egyptian months written in six columns. Presumably because of its didactic
content, ad Demonicum seems to have been particularly liked in late antique school contexts, and the other
elements – the name of the writer, dating clause, a list – can also be found in compositions associated with
education.3 In addition to these unsurprising components, side A of the tablet has two columns of numbers
inscribed on either side of the passage of Isocrates. The editor interpreted them as possibly a further type of
copying exercise and pointed to a similar assemblage of exercises on another tablet, which at the time was
in a private collection in Cologne and had been published a few years earlier by Franco Maltomini and Cor-
nelia Römer (TM 61398 = LDAB 2542, 5th c.).4 That tablet, of which only the upper third or half survives,
* This article results from my research within the University of Heidelberg’s Sonderforschungsbereich 933, “Materiale
Textkulturen. Materialität und Präsenz des Geschriebenen in non-typographischen Gesellschaften”, funded by the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft. I would like to thank Ellen Doon and Mark Custer of the Beinecke Library for their assistance in
providing images and collection information; Franco Maltomini and Cornelia Römer for their help in obtaining new high-res-
olution photographs of the tablet that they published in 1988; and Elke Fuchs for preparing the digital image of the Yale tablet
for publication. Dieter Hagedorn offered helpful advice on the article, and Rodney Ast assisted in deciphering particularly
challenging places. The task of calculating numerical values of a string of alphabetic characters has been made easy by the
“Isopsephia Calculator” at http://opsopaus.com/OM/BA/Isopsephia.html. All translations are my own and all dates, unless
stated otherwise, are AD.
1 See, for example, Pap.Lugd.Bat. 25.15 (TM 61386, ca. 350), a school book of Aurelius Antonius, who seems to have
practiced writing a short passage from the Isocratean ad Demonicum 1 (identified by Hagedorn [1977]) on all pages but one
(IV A), on which there are exercises in syllabification and simple multiplication; an earlier set of two tablets (TM 61495, 2nd c.)
has a similar combination of gnomai, syllabic exercises and elementary multiplication tables. Cf. also a late tablet with multi-
plication tables and lists of words divided into syllables in Fournet (2001) 169–175, no. 9 (TM 68648, 7th c.). It can be added that
in the oldest surviving compilation of educational materials (Guéraud–Jouguet [1938], TM 59942, 3rd c. BC, Fayum?), at the
end of the preserved part of the roll, literary excerpts are followed by a table of squares and a list of fractions of the drachma.
2 Duttenhöfer (1997) 244–245; here one finds also a brief description of other tablets belonging to the lot. The text of the
ed.pr. is reproduced in CPF 1.2.2 21 109 T, pp. 925–927.
3 A parallel is furnished by a partially preserved tablet published in Fournet (2001) 160–162, no. 1, which opens with
the name of the writer followed by the date, a writing exercise, and a list of Egyptian months (TM 68641, 5th–6th c.). See also
Cribiore (1996) 88–91 for dated school texts; (1996) 146–148, for the inclusion of the name of the writer; and (1996) 42–43, for
a discussion of various types of lists originating in educational contexts.
4 Maltomini–Römer (1988); the text is republished, with no changes to the ed.pr., in CPF 1.2.2 21 112 T, pp. 932–934.
The publication of the Yale tablet helped confirm Maltomini and Römer’s intuition about the date of their tablet, which they
assigned on the basis of palaeographical parallels to the fifth century.
204 J. Lougovaya

also has a dating clause, the name of the writer, a list of words written alphabetically in six columns, and a
passage from the same work (Isocr. ad Dem. 24) flanked by columns with numbers; the editors wondered
whether the numbers were an exercise, too.
With the help of high-resolution images provided to me by the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript
Library, I was able to decipher previously unread digits in the number columns of the Yale tablet and to
establish the principle behind them. It turns out that the numbers in both columns are related to the text of
Isocrates on the corresponding line. The number on the right represents the sum of the isopsephic values
of the letters in the line, while the number on the left is the quotient arrived at by dividing the sum on the
right (the dividend) by four. The first line of the exercise (line 3 of the text), which I print here, illustrates
the principle:
χλγ 𐅸 ̣ οἱ γὰρ πολὺ τὴν μὲν ἀλήθειαν ἀγνουοῦσι βφλε
633 ¾ (70+10+3+1+100+80+70+30+400+300+8+ 2535
(= 2535÷4) 50+40+5+50+1+30+8+9+5+10+1+50+1+3+
50+70+400+70+400+200+10 = )
The task, in which a moral precept serves as the basis for training in arithmetic, is carried out over six lines.
The calculations of the isopsephic values of the lines follow the spellings on the tablet (as in the case of
πολύ [= 580], which is a misspelling of πολλοί [= 290], and of ἀγνουοῦσι [= 1204] for ἀγνοοῦσι [= 804]),
but there are exceptions: ἄμ (= 41) is calculated as ἄν (= 51) in line 6 and δ’ (= 4) as δέ (= 9) in line 7. When
making the additions, perhaps the writer inadvertently used the forms of these particles as if unaffected by
their position in the text.
The unique parallel of the Maltomini–Römer tablet, in which a passage from the same work of Isocrates
is accompanied by numbers (side A), made me suspect that a comparable principle could be at work there.
Unfortunately, the writing on this tablet is very poorly preserved and difficult to decipher. Working from
the ed.pr. and from photographs kindly sent to me by Professor Maltomini, however, I was able to confirm
the overall similarity between the two tablets and determine the calculations involved. The numbers on the
right of the text field represent the sums of the isopsephic values of the letters in the corresponding lines of
the text, just as they do in the Yale tablet. The numerals in the columns on the left are hardly visible, but it
looks as if col. 1 contains the divisor recorded as a fraction (τὸ N for N' = 1/N) and col. 2 has the quotient,
with the dividend supplied by the number in the column to the right of the text.5 The second line of the
exercise, partially restored, demonstrates the principle:
[τὸ ϛ] φοε γ ιν καὶ πολοὺς ἑταίρους μεταλλάττειν μήτε γϋνβ
1/6 575 1/3 (10+50+20+1+10+80+70+30+70+400+200+5+300+ 3452
(= 3452÷6) 1+10+100+70+400+200+40+5+300+1+30+30+1+
300+300+5+10+50+40+8+300+5 =)
While in the Yale tablet the divisor (4') is the same for all operations of division and is not recorded,6
calculations in the Maltomini–Römer tablet, as I argue in detail below, feature consecutive divisors from
5' to 7' before the tablet breaks off.7 The closest parallels to such divisions are furnished by a miniature
codex from Kellis, which contains lists of division calculations with consecutive divisors and seemingly
unrelated dividends (TM 91948, ca. 325–375, Kellis),8 and T.Varie 45, a wax tablet inscribed with a list of
divisions with also apparently random dividends and consecutive divisors from 91' to 100' (TM 65098, late

5 Throughout the article, I employ the notation N' = 1/N (with 3'' for 2/3) after Fowler (1988) 273.
6 It seems rather unlikely that it was recorded at the end of line 2, where the text is abraded on both sides of the tablet, but
perhaps it cannot be definitely ruled out.
7 Notably, vertical guidelines drawn in the tablet make column 2 significantly wider than column 1, presumably because
the quotient in divisions with variable divisors could comprise several fractions and thus require more room for inscribing.
8 Worp (2006) 247–254. The calculations are arranged by consecutive divisors from 2' to 12', including 3'', but omitting
7' and 11'.
 Counting with Isocrates 205

6th c.).9 Overall, though, division tables are much better attested in the papyrological evidence than division
calculations.10
While the educational nature of the Yale and Maltomini–Römer tablets is clear, the circumstances
associated with their production and use are much less so. Both are inscribed in a fluent, even if not
particularly nice, hand and on both the first-person verb, ἔγραψα, seems to refer to the writer – Aurelius
Koustantis son of Ioannes in the Yale piece and Aurelius Theodoros son of Iustus in the Maltomini–Römer
text. The proficiency of writing on the latter tablet led its editors to assert that it was likely the teacher who
inscribed it for his student Theodoros.11 Duttenhöfer, on the other hand, argued that the Yale tablet was an
exercise written by a student.12 Indeed, Cribiore has demonstrated that compilations of educational materi-
als that include mathematical and other kinds of exercises tend to be inscribed by advanced students, that
is, the fluency of the handwriting in our tablets does not need to point to a teacher.13 In the case of the Yale
tablet, however, the matter is further complicated by the text in line 2, which can be reconstructed from
remains on both sides as Αὐρήλιος Κουστάντις Ἰωάννου φιλοπόνι καλῶς ἔγραψα [ - - - ]. The exhorta-
tion φιλοπόνει is well attested in teachers’ models and is sometimes also copied by the student,14 but its use
in conjunction with the statement καλῶς ἔγραψα is baffling, since it looks like the writer has commended
himself. Duttenhöfer suggests that perhaps the imperative φιλοπόνει should be taken closely with καλῶς
ἔγραψα and understood together as an appeal, presumably by the teacher, to the students, “Practice! I have
written nicely.”15 Dieter Hagedorn (per e-mail) has wondered whether the verb could be in the second
person, i.e. ἔγραψας, which is certainly possible paleographically; in this case, φιλοπόνει would serve as
further encouragement: “Apply yourself! You have written nicely!” If so, the encouragement would more
naturally come from the teacher, but since there seems to be no change of hand, we must imagine that the
student wrote it down almost as a quotation, leaving his own name as a nominal construction with no verb.
Thus, whether the verb was in the first or second person, I find it difficult to account for all elements of this
sentence,16 but I am inclined to see both tablets as exercises carried out and penned by students who were
somewhat beyond elementary schooling.
Nothing in the text of either tablet suggests that it was a part of a continuous set, but typologically they
are uniquely similar to one another, with the similarity extending to their physical features, too. Both are
inscribed with ink and have the surface primed with a whitish slip in which guidelines are drawn. They
have approximately the same width and thickness (the dimensions of the Yale tablet are w. 27.3 × h. 13.8 ×
th. 0.8 cm, and those of the Maltomini–Römer tablet are w. 27 × h. 6 × th. 0.7 cm, but, due to breakage,
the height of the latter is not the original height, which could well have been similar to the Yale tablet).
On side B of the Yale tablet, two holes were drilled ca. 1 cm from the top and ca. 4.7 cm from each other.
9 The wax tablet comes from a set of four tablets that constituted a kind of notebook belonging to a certain Papnoutis son
of Silvanus.
10 For division tables, cf. Fowler (1988), Fowler (1995), P.Harrauer 3 with a list of division tables on p. 22, and P.Bastianini
10 with a list of division tables for 11', 13', 14', 17', and 19' on pp. 77–78. For extensive fraction calculations in computational
problems, cf. Baillet (1892), also known as P. math. Akhmim (TM 64999, 6th c., Panopolis) and P.Köln 7.325 (TM 65187, 7th c.,
Herakleopolite); word problems can of course entail various arithmetic operations including divisions, e.g. MPER, N.S. 15.179
(TM 63194, 1st c., Soknopaiou Nesos).
11 Maltomini–Römer (1988) 298; Cribiore (1996) 248, no. 308, concurs with this, describing the hand as that of “a teacher
making a writing model”.
12 Duttenhöfer (1997) 249–250.
13 Cribiore (2001) 182–183 concludes that “[w]hen tablets containing mathematical models also include students’ work in
other areas, it appears that these pupils … had already acquired good handwriting”, stating also that “[s]ystematic and extensive
written work with arithmetical operations … was part of the curriculum of specialized schools”.
14 Cribiore (1996) 127–128, cf. also Hagedorn (2015) 233–234 no. 812.
15 Duttenhöfer (1997) 247.
16 On a recent photo of the Maltomini–Römer tablet I can hardly see any traces where the editors print ἔγραψα followed
by four underdots and thus cannot assess whether reading ἔγραψας is a possibility. In the tablet published by Fournet (2001)
160–162 no. 1, we find κυρει ἔγραψα π (̣ ) [ in line 2; the verb is quite clearly in the first person, but the word κυρει preceding
it is puzzling.
206 J. Lougovaya

They are not visible on side A, because they curve upwards and come out at the upper edge of the tablet. As
Duttenhöfer notes, the string laced through the holes left a visible trace in the white slip between them; she
suggests that the tablet was either hung on the wall or carried by the string.17 The Maltomini—Römer tab-
let had originally the same kind of upwardly curved drillings going from side A to the upper edge, though
they were set closer to each other (ca. 3.5 cm) and to the upper edge (ca. 0.7 cm) than those on the Yale
tablet. The wood broke off along these drillings, possibly because of another pair of straight holes that were
drilled between them and ca. 1.5 cm from each other.18 The editors also report a notch in the upper edge
of the tablet and suggest that its presence, along with two different types of holes, points to a complicated
system by which the tablet was fastened with several other tablets.19 One wonders, however, whether the
two sets of holes were not contemporaneous but perhaps due to reuse.20 The curved holes and the self-con-
tained composition of the exercises on both tablets seem to me to be more consistent with Duttenhöfer’s
hypothesis of an individual tablet than of a codex.21
How widespread the practice of developing skills in arithmetic with the help of moralizing literary pas-
sages was is difficult to ascertain from two tablets, albeit two attestations suggest that we are dealing with
a pedagogical method rather than a curiosity. Remarkably, the use of isopsephisms in the tablets appears
to be completely devoid of any magic or religious connotations and is rather akin to the way Apollonius
of Perga is reported to have exploited them when explicating his method of multiplication: taking the
numerical values of 38 letters in the verse Ἀρτέμιδος κλεῖτε κράτος ἔξοχον ἐννέα κοῦραι as factors, he
proceeded to explain how to find their product.22 Pappus of Alexandria, who narrates Apollonius’s method,
then illustrates it with another example, also based on a hexametrical line, Μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ ∆ημήτερος
ἀγλαοκάρπου. The ultimate purpose of using the verses was, from a mathematical point of view, simply
to generate the large number of factors needed for the demonstration of the multiplication method. It could
have been of didactic value, too, because numbers generated by a line of poetry were easy to remember
by the very virtue of its being in verse and thus one could, for example, reproduce multiplications on one’s
own and then compare them to explications such as those preserved by Pappus. Furthermore, a poetic line
constitutes an easily recognizable and well-defined unit – a hexameter in this case – so that whether one
reproduces it from memory or copies it from a model, the format and layout of each particular example
make no difference for the result.
17 Duttenhöfer (1997) 245.
18 That is to say that within a space of 3.5 cm there were four drillings, all 0.7 cm from the top, which together would
surely have contributed to the weakening of the wood.
19 Maltomini–Römer (1988) 297; they note that a complicated assemblage of curved and straight holes and notches is
otherwise found in a tablet that served as a book-cover published in Koenen (1974) (TM 60945, 3rd–4th c.), which is unlikely
to be the case here. Yet, notches on the spines of tablets, which are meant as collational marks to indicate their sequence in a
codex, normally are done in pairs, cf. Scharpe (1992), but only one is reported for the Maltomini—Römer tablet. A wax-tablet
school-book from the Berlin collection (P.Berol. 14000, TM 64557, 4th–5th c., Tebtynis?), though, also features one notch per
tablet-spine.
20 It would not be difficult to rub off the writing and prime the surface with whitewash again; e.g. a school tablet in the
University of Michigan collection (van Minnen [1992], TM 64891, 5th–6th c.), which also has curved holes, must have been
reused. Cf. also Cribiore (1996) 68.
21 For individual tablets, see Cribiore (1996) 66 and Cribiore (1993). For discussion of the curved holes in school tablets
as suggesting that they were displayed on a wall, cf. van Minnen (1995), esp. 177 with fn. 17, the publication of a late-antique
school tablet with curved holes (TM 65410, 7th–8th c.). Alternatively, van Minnen notes that a tablet with such holes could have
been bound with another tablet so as to create a diptych; he doubts that such holes were used to affix more than two tablets. A
comprehensive study of wooden tablets that considers their texts along with material aspects remains a desideratum; for cata-
logues of wooden tablets from antiquity, cf. Worp (2012), Cauderlier (1992), and Brashear–Hoogendijk (1990).
22 Apollonius of Perga in Pamphylia (ca. 260–190 BC) worked and taught in Alexandria; much of what is known of his
work survives in the Synagoge of Pappus of Alexandria, who lived in that city in the first half of the fourth century. Pappus
describes the multiplication method of Apollonius in Book 2, proposition 26. For the text and an extensive commentary, see
Hultsch (1876) 19–29; for a brief summary of the method, cf. Heath (1921) 54–57; a French translation and detailed notes are
available in Ver Eecke (1933) 13–19. Recent bibliography on Greek isopsephisms is abundant, cf. Luz (2010) 247–325, who
treats isopsephy within the larger context of technopaegnia, but does not include Apollonius’s usage of it; for a short introduc-
tion, cf. Ast–Lougovaya (2015).
 Counting with Isocrates 207

Although the same idea of a literary quotation functioning as a number generator was made use of in
the two tablets with the Isocratean passages, the set of produced numbers would depend on the physical
parameters of each act of inscribing. Whether students memorized a passage of Isocrates, copied it from
a model, or took it down by dictation before performing arithmetical operations on the numbers derived
from the quotation, what constituted a unity for the arithmetical task was determined by how many letters
fit the line, that is, on how one wrote and on the tablet’s layout. Consequently, even if multiple students
were ‘working’ with the same text, they were likely to end up with unique exercises, each of which would
be attention demanding, but not exceedingly difficult.23 One can imagine the pedagogical benefits of this
method, too.
Another interesting feature of the mathematical exercises produced by this ‘counting with Isocrates’
method is that they lack any immediate applicability and are rather pure mental gymnastics, almost a game
meant to make the rote training in addition and division less dull. This approach to education harkens all
the way back to Plato’s Laws, where the Athenian praises Egyptian educational methods, in which princi-
ples of elementary arithmetic were taught with the help of amusing games.24 And while practicing arith-
metic comes in handy in various activities from domestic economy to politics, its “biggest advantage,” as
Plato reflects on elsewhere in the work, “is that it wakes up him who sleeps and is sluggish by nature, and
makes him quick to learn and mindful and shrewd”.25

Counting with Isocrates (1): The Yale Tablet, Side A (PCtYBR inv. 3678, TM 61399)
Both sides of the tablet are ruled with horizontal guidelines for 10 lines of text. On side A, a further two
vertical lines have been drawn in the white slip ca. 4 cm from each edge of the tablet; they set off and help
frame the numerals. On both sides, the texts open with a dating clause (line 1), followed by the name of the
writer (line 2), then by a passage from the Isocratean ad Demonicum 17 (lines 3–8), and finally by a list of
the twelve Egyptian months written in six columns (lines 9–10). On side A, two columns of numbers are
inscribed to either side of the text, so that the text field on side A is smaller than that on side B; consequent-
ly, a different amount of text is inscribed on the two sides. The received text of the passage in question is
as follows (Isocr. ad Dem. 17):
οἱ γὰρ πολλοὶ τὴν μὲν ἀλήθειαν ἀγνοοῦσιν, πρὸς δὲ τὴν δόξαν ἀποβλέπουσιν. ἅπαντα
δόκει ποιεῖν ὡς μηδένα λήσων· καὶ γὰρ ἂν παραυτίκα κρύψῃς, ὕστερον ὀφθήσει. μάλιστα
δ’ ἂν εὐδοκιμοίης, εἰ φαίνοιο ταῦτα μὴ πράττων.26

For the many do not know the truth, but consider only reputation. Do all things in such a way
that you do not hide anything from anybody. For if, only for the moment, you conceal your acts,
later you will be found out. You will gain most respect if you clearly avoid doing this.
On side B, the quotation runs from οἱ γὰρ πολλοί (spelled πολύ) to μὴ πράττων in lines 3–7, and then starts
repeating itself up to the word ἀποβλέπουσι in line 8. On side A, the text stops abruptly at πρ-, leaving out
the last five letters of πράττων. Since I have no significant changes to make to the ed.pr. of side B, I give
below the text of side A only; in the translation, I reproduce the quotation from Isocrates without translating
it or indicating uncertain readings:

23 Adding thirty-some numbers and then dividing the sum by a single-unit divisor might be more challenging than the
simplest arithmetic we find in compilations cited in fn. 1 above, but it is a far cry from the math explicated by Apollonius and
Pappus.
24 Plato, Leges 891a–c.
25 τὸ δὲ μέγιστον, ὅτι τὸν νυστάζοντα καὶ ἀμαθῆ φύσει ἐγείρει καὶ εὐμαθῆ καὶ μνήμονα καὶ ἀγχίνουν ἀπεργάζεται
(Plato, Leges 747b).
26 In the manuscript tradition the sentence in fact does not end here, but continues with a relative clause expanding the
demonstrative ταῦτα: μάλιστα δ’ ἂν εὐδοκιμοίης, εἰ φαίνοιο ταῦτα μὴ πράττων ἃ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἂν πράττουσιν ἐπιτιμῴης,
“You will gain most respect if you clearly avoid doing those things that you would censure others for doing.”
208 J. Lougovaya

Fig. 1. Yale Tablet, Side A (PCtYBR inv. 3678, TM 61399)

Courtesy of the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University

μετὰ τὴν ὑπα[τεία]ν Φλα[ουίων Ζή]νονος καὶ M[α]ρ[κιανοῦ τῶν] λαμπρωτάτω[ν]

Αὐρήλιος Κουστάντις [Ἰωάννου] φιλοπόνι καλῶς ἔγραψα ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣
χλγ 𐅸 ̣ οἱ γὰρ πολὺ τὴν μὲν ἀλήθειαν ἀγνουοῦσι- βφλε
4 φιβ 𐅵̣ ν, πρὸς δὲ τὴν δόξαν ἀποβλ°π[ουσιν] βν
υοϛ d ̣ ἅπαντα δόκει ποιεῖν ὡς μηδένα λ- αϡε
χξα 𐅸 ̣ ήσ[ον] καὶ γὰρ ἂμ παραυτίκα κ〚υ〛ρύψ- βχμζ
χπα 𐅸 ̣ ῃ[̣ ς, ὕ]στερον ὀφθήσει. μάλιστα δ’ ἂ- βψκζ
8 χπθ d ̣ ν εὐδοκιμῇς̣ εἰ φένοιο ταῦτα μὴ πρ βψνζ
Θώθ Ἁθύρ Τῦ[βι] Φαμενώθ Παχών Ἐπείφ
Φαῶφι Χοίακ [Μ]εχε[ίρ Φαρμοῦθι] Παῦ[νι Μεσορή]
1 l. Ζήνωνος, l. λαμπροτάτων 2 l. φιλοπόνει 3 χλγ 𐅸 ̣ : χλη ed.pr., βφλε : ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ed.pr. 3–4 l. ἀγνοοῦσιν
4 φιβ 𐅵 ̣ : φι ̣ ed.pr., βν : σλ ̣ ed.pr. 5 υοϛ ḍ : υοϛ̣ ed.pr., αϡε : Dρε ed.pr. 6 χξα 𐅸 ̣ : χξα ed.pr., l. ἂν,
βχμζ : χμζ ed.pr. 7 χπα 𐅸 ̣ : χπα ed.pr., βψκζ : Βυκ ̣ ed.pr. 8 χπθ ḍ : χπθ ed.pr., εὐδοκιμῇ̣ς : [ε]ὐδοκιμ[οίης]
ed.pr. codd., l. φαίνοιο, βψνζ : ̣ψ ̣ ̣ ed.pr.

In the year after the consulship of Flavius Zenon and Flavius Marcianus, most illustrious.
Aurelius Koustantis, son of Ioannes, take great care, I wrote beautifully . . . .

633 ¾ οἱ γὰρ πολὺ τὴν μὲν ἀλήθειαν ἀγνουοῦσι- 2535

4 512 ½ ν, πρὸς δὲ τὴν δόξαν ἀποβλέπουσιν. 2050
476 ¼ ἅπαντα δόκει ποιεῖν ὡς μηδένα λ- 1905
661 ¾ ήσον καὶ γὰρ ἂμ παραυτίκα κρύψ- 2647
681 ¾ ῃς, ὕστερον ὀφθήσει. μάλιστα δ’ ἂ- 2727
8 689 ¼ ν εὐδοκιμῇς εἰ φένοιο ταῦτα μὴ πρ 2757
Thoth Hathyr Tybi Phamenoth Pachon Epeiph
Phaophi Choiak Mecheir Pharmouthi Pauni Mesore

2 It is possible that the verb was in the second person, i.e. ἔγραψας, as the traces after the second
alpha are compatible with a sigma, but since what follows defies deciphering and very little is visib-
le, the reading cannot be confirmed. All together, there are traces of perhaps five or even six letters
 Counting with Isocrates 209

following the last alpha of ἔγραψα. There appears to be a phi towards the end of the line, which could
suggest that a month, e.g. Epeiph, and a day were written, but it is difficult to account for all the traces.
The corresponding area on side B is even more damaged.
3 The isopsephic value of οἱ γὰρ πολὺ τὴν μὲν ἀλήθειαν ἀγνουοῦσι is 2535 (βφλε), and 2535 ÷ 4 =
633 ¾.
χλγ 𐅸̣: Although the sign for ¾, which is essentially a combination of the symbols for ½ and ¼, often
has a more curved left-hand stroke than what is visible on the tablet, a parallel can be found, for
example, in P.Oxy. 24.2421.32 (ca. 312–323).27
βφλε: beta and phi are well visible and the traces following them are compatible with lambda and
epsilon.
4 The sum of the numerical values of ν πρὸς δὲ τὴν δόξαν ἀποβλέπουσιν is 2050 (βν), and 2050 ÷ 4 =
512 ½.
φιβ 𐅵:̣ The top of beta is visible above the horizontal break of the tablet, and to the right of the beta
there are traces consistent with the L-shaped stroke used for ½.
βν: Both letters are written quite large.
5 The isopsephic value of ἅπαντα δόκει ποιεῖν ὡς μηδένα λ is 1905, and 1905 ÷ 4 = 476 ¼.
υοϛ ḍ: there is a small circle of ink from the ¼ symbol following the stigma and close to the bottom
line.
αϡε: The numeral for the hundreds looks somewhat like a rho, but it is a well-attested type of a
sampi.28
6 The numbers in this line do not immediately work out because the value of the letters as inscribed
and restored, ήσ[ων] καὶ γὰρ ἂμ παραυτίκα κ〚υ〛ρύψ, is 3367 (γτξζ), but this is not what is written
on the tablet: the last three digits of βχμζ (2647) are quite certain and the traces in front of them are
not compatible with a gamma, but could fit a beta. For the sum on the right to correspond to the text,
it is necessary to assume that ήσ[ον] was written in place of ήσ[ων] and that ἂμ was calculated as αν.
These assumptions are not supported by the text on side B, where λήσων καὶ γὰρ ἂμ is well visible in
line 5. Yet, considering how all other lines are construed and taking into account the shaky spelling
elsewhere, I believe that ήσ[ον] is to be restored; calculating ἂμ as αν is somewhat analogous to that
of δ’ as δέ in line 7. That the number on the right should indeed be βχμζ is confirmed by the quotient
inscribed on the left, as 2647 ÷ 4 = 661 ¾.
χξα 𐅸̣: Though the alpha with a very upright left-hand stroke is somewhat unusual, it is not dissimilar
to the first alpha of μάλιστα in the next line. The left vertical line of the ¾ symbol is visible to the
right of alpha.
7 The value of ῃ[ς ὕ]στερον ὀφθήσει μάλιστα δ’ ἂ is 2722, but the number on the right is βψκζ, 2727.
The only explanation that occurs to me is that the writer calculated the value of an un-elided δέ
despite writing δ’ in the text. 2727 ÷ 4 = 681 ¾.
χπα 𐅸̣: The alpha of this number, small and raised, can be compared to the first alpha of ταῦτα in line
8; the symbol for ¾ is smudged.
8 εὐδοκιμῇς̣ : The manuscript tradition has the optative form, εὐδοκιμοίης, which the ed.pr. restores
here. On the high-resolution photo, however, one can see a vertical stroke immediately following the
mu as well as faint traces of the horizontal of the eta, indicating that the subjunctive εὐδοκιμῇς̣ was
written. The number recorded on the right, βψνζ, supports this restoration because the isopsephic
value of ν εὐδοκιμῇς εἰ φένοιο ταῦτα μὴ πρ- is 2757. 2757 ÷ 4 = 689 ¼.
χπθ ḍ: Only faint traces of the ¼ symbol are visible.

27 The image is at http://163.1.169.40/gsdl/collect/POxy/index/assoc/HASH01b4.dir/POxy.v0024.n2421.a.01.hires.jpg.

Line 32 corresponds to line 8 of col. 2.
28 See Soldati (2006) for a survey of the forms of sampi in papyri. By chance, the same type of the letter appears also on
another tablet in the Yale collection coming from the same purchase, P.CtYBR inv. 3676(B) col. 4 line 2 and col. 5 line 1. The
image is accessible at http://findit.library.yale.edu/bookreader/BookReaderDemo/index.html?oid=15523397#page/1/mode/1up.
210 J. Lougovaya

Counting with Isocrates (2): The Maltomini–Römer Tablet, Side A (TM 61398)
Unlike the Yale specimen, this tablet does not seem to have horizontal guidelines, but vertical lines drawn on
side A divide the surface into four uneven columns or fields; side B seems to have no guidelines. It is likely
that both sides of the tablet opened with the identical line of text, in which the writer first identified himself:
Aὐρήλιος Θεόδωρος ϋἱὸς Ἰούστου ἔγραψα [ - - - ], “I Aurelius Theodoros son of Iustus wrote ….”29 Then
he gave the date, of which the month and the day are preserved on side A: μηνὶ Φαρμοῦθι ⸌η⸍ ἡμέρᾳ ̣ [̣
- - - ], “in the month of Pharmouthi, the 8th … ”; there probably followed either the planetary day of the week
or an indiction.30 Next, on side A, Theodoros wrote a passage from ad Dem. 24 flanked by columns with
numbers, and on side B an alphabetic list of words, starting with the letter iota and ending with xi. The list
includes proper names and common nouns and adjectives, and is arranged in six columns. If there is any
principle in the selection of the words beyond the alphabetical order of their first letters, it eludes me.
The quotation from ad Dem. 24 on side A comes from the adage on friendship, but it is impossible to
know how much of it was quoted. The following excerpt, in which the surviving part of the quotation is in
bold, gives an idea of its immediate context:
ὁμοίως γὰρ αἰσχρὸν μηδένα φίλον ἔχειν καὶ πολλοὺς ἑταίρους μεταλλάττειν. μήτε μετὰ
βλάβης πειρῶ τῶν φίλων μήτ᾽ ἄπειρος εἶναι τῶν ἑταίρων θέλε. τοῦτο δὲ ποιήσεις, ἐὰν μὴ
δεόμενος τὸ δεῖσθαι προσποιῇ.
For it is equally shameful to have no friend at all as to make many changes to your friends.
Neither make trial of your friends in a harmful way, nor willingly refrain from testing your
companions. You will accomplish this if you pretend to be in need, even though you don’t
actually need anything.
The surviving portion of the quotation is written over three lines, two of which are preserved well enough
to verify that the numbers in the column to the right of the text represent the isopsephic sums of the letters
in these lines. In the far left column (col. 1), only one numeral is clearly visible, the fraction τὸ ζ, 1/7 (line
4), but neither the isopsephic sum on the right nor the line of text itself are preserved. Yet, the principle of
calculations can be surmised from line 3, where the numeral in the second column corresponds to one sixth
of the number given to the right of the text field. This correlation, along with the fraction τὸ ζ in line 4, helps
establish that the first column contains divisors and the second column has quotients, with divisors increas-
ing consecutively and the dividends generated by the isopsephic sums of the Isocratean text inscribed in the
line. The missing divisor in line 2 can then be plausibly restored as 5' and the quotient, which equals 740.6
in modern notation, likely expressed as 740 ½ 1/10. With some tentative restorations of line 4 confined to the
commentaries below, I suggest the following text for side A:
[Αὐρήλιος Θεόδωρος ϋἱὸς Ἰούστου ἔγραψα - - - ] μηνὶ Φαρμοῦθι ⸌η⸍ ἡμέρᾳ ̣ [̣ ]
[τὸ ε ψμ 𐅵 ι?] ὁμο[ί]ως γὰρ αἰσχρὸν μηδένα φίλον ἔχε- γψγ
[τὸ ϛ] φοε γ ιν καὶ πολοὺς ἑταίρους μεταλλάττειν μήτε γϋνβ
4 τὸ ζ / ̣ / ̣ χοϛ ̣ ̣ ̣ β
̣ [μετ]ὰ β[λ]άβ[ης - - - ] δ[ ]
---------------------------------------------
1 Αὐρήλιος–ἔγραψα, ed.pr. comm. ad loc. 2 γψγ : γψγ [ ] ed.pr. 3 φοε γ ιν : φ ̣ ει ̣ ιν ed.pr., πολοὺς
(l. πολλοὺς) : πολλοὺς ed.pr., γϋνβ : ϛ̣ϋνβ ̣ ̣ ed.pr. 4 / ̣ / ̣ χοϛ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ β : ̣χοσσ ̣ ο ed.pr., δ[ ] : . [ ] ed.pr.

Aurelius Theodoros, son of Iustus, I wrote … in the month of Pharmouthi, on the 8th, the day (of ?).
[the 1/5 740 ½ 1/10?] ὁμοίως γὰρ αἰσχρὸν μηδένα φίλον ἔχε- 3703
[the /6]
1 575 1/3 ιν καὶ πολοὺς ἑταίρους μεταλλάττειν μήτε 3452
4 the /7 //
1 676 ̣ ̣ 2̣ μετὰ βλάβης [ ] 4[ ̣ ̣ ]̣
---------------------------------------------
29 This is the text as preserved on side B.
30 See Maltomini–Römer (1988) 299–300. On the use of planetary days in school texts and other papyri, see Ast (2013)
14 with fn. 35.
 Counting with Isocrates 211

Fig. 2. Maltomini—Römer Tablet, Side A (TM 61398)

Courtesy of Franco Maltomini

1 The supplement at the beginning of the line is printed on analogy with side B. The day of the month
was inserted slightly below the line.
2 The sum of the numeric values of letters in ὁμοίως γὰρ αἰσχρὸν μηδένα φίλον ἔχε is 3703. Assum-
ing that the divisor column had τὸ ε, for one-fifth, the quotient would probably be rendered as ψμ 𐅵 ι,
i.e. 740 ½ 1/10.31
3 πολούς: It is discernible on the high-resolution photo that the word is spelled with one lambda only.
γϋνβ: The isopsephic sum of the letters in this line, with πολλούς spelled and counted as πολούς, is
3452. The traces of the first digit which the editors interpreted as ϛ̣ are consistent with a gamma, too.
3452 ÷ 6 = 575 1/3.
φοε γ: The three digits of the integer part of the quotient are quite clear. Following them is a vertical
stroke of what I would expect to be a gamma for 1/3; whether slight traces in two places to the right of
it belong to the number or are unrelated residual marks I do not know. After a space, there is another
vertical, the nature of which is not obvious to me. The text of the Isocratean quotation in this line
likely began on the left side of the vertical divider separating the text field from the quotient column
because the word καί is written immediately to the right of the divider. I am not sure, however, which
of the faint verticals is the vertical hasta of the kappa. Even if both the iota and the nu of the ιν were
written to the left of the divider, I wonder whether they would be inscribed far enough to the left for
the stroke in question to be the iota.
4 τὸ ζ / ̣ / ̣ χοϛ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ β: Following τὸ ζ and written over the divider between columns 1 and 2, there seems
to be a pair of small slanting strokes (ed.pr. has an underdot there), the purpose of which is unclear,
nor is it possible to discern if similar strokes were used in other lines. Following them, I suggest to
read χοϛ̣ (in place of χοσ read by the editors) for the integer part of the quotient, 676. If this is correct
and the quotation followed the same text as known from the manuscript tradition, the line in the text
field is likely to have been μετὰ βλάβης [πειρῶ τῶν φίλων μήτ’ ἄπειρο-], because the sum of isopse-
phic values of its 32 letters would be 4738, the division of which by 7 results in a quotient with an
integer of 676. Cutting the quotation at any other point does not produce that result.32 The quotient of
the division of 4738 ÷ 7 is 676 6/7, the fractional part of which would probably be expressed as 𐅵 γ μβ
(½ 1/3 1/42).33 The full quotient would then be written χοϛ 𐅵 γ μβ (676 ½ 1/3 1/42). I believe that what
is printed as an omicron in the ed.pr. is rather the upper loop of the beta, inscribed over the divider
between columns 2 and 3. The traces immediately before it might be consistent with the top part of
31 This is how the division of 6 by 10, which constitutes the fractional part of the quotient here, is rendered in P.Mich. 3.146,
col. vii (TM 64468, 4th c.), although other compositions of unit fractions are possible to express the same value (e.g., 1/3 1/5 1/15).
32 Since lines 2 and 3 are 30 and 35 letters long respectively, the length of 32 letters required by this restoration for line
4 is reasonable.
33 The fractional part of the quotient, which amounts to the division of the remainder 6 by 7 and thus figures in the divi-
sions by 7 of such dividends as 6, 20, 90, etc, is expressed as ½ 1/3 1/42 in, for example, SB 20.15071.[8], 13, 20, and 23 (TM
64346, 3rd–4th c.), edited in Sijpesteijn (1990) 246.
212 J. Lougovaya

mu, but I am not sure how exactly, or even whether, the traces to the left of them could have formed
the signs for ½ and 1/3.
δ[ ]: The tip of the delta is visible, but no other traces can be discerned of what, upon my hypothesis,
should have been δψλη (= 4738).

Bibliography
Ast (2013) = R. Ast, Schedule of Work Days, in: R. Ast, H. Cuvigny, T. M. Hickey, J. Lougovaya (eds.), Papyrological
Texts in Honor of Roger S. Bagnall, Durham, 9–16.
Ast–Lougovaya (2015) = R. Ast and J. Lougovaya, The Art of the Isopsephism in the Greco-Roman World, in:
A. Jördens (ed.), Ägyptische Magie und ihre Umwelt, Wiesbaden, 82–98.
Baillet (1892) = J. Baillet, Le Papyrus mathématique d’Akhmim (Mémoires publiés par les membres de la Mission
archéologique française au Caire 9), Paris.
Brashear–Hoogendijk (1990) = W. M. Brashear and F. A. J. Hoogendijk, Corpus Tabularum Lignearum Ceratarum-
que Aegyptiarum, Enchoria 17, 21–54.
Cauderlier (1992) = P. Cauderlier, Les Tablettes grecques d’Égypte: inventaire, in: É. Lalou (ed.), Les Tablettes à
écrire de l’Antiquité à l’Époque moderne: Actes du colloque international du C.N.R.S., Paris 10–11 octobre
1990 (Bibliologia 12), Turnhout, 63–96.
Cribiore (1993) = R. Cribiore, A Homeric Exercise from the Byzantine Schoolroom, Chronique d’Egypte 68, 145–154.
– (1996) = R. Cribiore, Writing, Teachers, and Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt (American Studies in Papyrology
36), Atlanta.
– (2001) = R. Cribiore, Gymnastics of the Mind. Greek Education in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, Princeton/Oxford.
Duttenhöfer (1997) = R. Duttenhöfer, Schultexte auf byzantinischen Holztafeln: Isokrates, Pros Demonikon § 17, in:
B. Kramer, W. Luppe, H. Maehler, and G. Poethke (eds.), Akten des 21. Internationalen Papyrologenkongres-
ses, Berlin, 13.—19.8.1995 (Archiv Beiheft 3), Stuttgart/Leipzig, 240–250.
Fournet (2001) = J.-L. Fournet, Nouveaux textes scolaires grecs et coptes, BIFAO 101, 159–181.
Fowler (1988) = D. H. Fowler, A Catalogue of Tables, ZPE 75, 273–280.
– (1995) = D. H. Fowler, Further Arithmetical Tables, ZPE 105, 225–228.
Guéraud–Jouguet (1938) = O. Guéraud and P. Jouguet, Un livre d’écolier du IIIe siècle avant J.-C. (Publications de
la Société royale égyptienne de papyrologie, Textes et documents, II), Le Caire.
Hagedorn (1977) = D. Hagedorn, Isokrates, Ad Demonicum 1 auf Leidener Wachstafeln, ZPE 24, 110.
– (2015) = D. Hagedorn, Korr. 809–814, in: Bemerkungen zu Papyri XXVIII (<Korr. Tyche> 767–819), Tyche 30,
231–236.
Heath (1921) = T. L. Heath, A History of Greek Mathematics, Vol. 1, Oxford.
Hultsch (1876) = F. O. Hultsch, Pappi Alexandrini collectionis quae supersunt, Vol. 1, Berlin.
Koenen (1974) = L. Koenen, Kritzeleien eines Gelangweilten Lehrers auf einem hölzernen Buchdeckel, ZPE 13, 97–103.
Luz (2010) = C. Luz, Technopaignia. Formspiele in der griechischen Dichtung (Mnemosyne supplements 324),
Leiden/Boston.
Maltomini–Römer (1988) = F. Maltomini and C. Römer, Noch Einmal ‘Ad Demonicum’ auf einer Schultafel, ZPE
75, 297–300.
van Minnen (1992) = P. van Minnen, A Schooltablet in the University of Michigan Collection, ZPE 93, 209–211.
– (1995) = P. van Minnen, A Late Antique Schooltablet at Duke University, ZPE 106, 175–178.
Scharpe (1992) = J. L. Sharpe, The Dakhleh Tablets and Some Codicological Considerations, in: E. Lalou (ed.), Les
Tablettes à écrire de l’antiquité à l’époque moderne (Bibliologia 12), 127–148.
Sijpesteijn (1990) = P. J. Sijpesteijn, Varia papyrologica II, ZPE 81, 245–251.
Soldati (2006) = A. Soldati, Τὸ καλούμενον παρακύϊσμα. Le forme del sampi nei papyri, APF 52, 209–217.
Ver Eecke (1933) = P. Ver Eecke, Pappus d’Alexandrie. La Collection mathématique avec une introduction et des
notes, vol. 1, Paris.
Worp (2006) = K. A. Worp, II. A Parody of Homer, Arithmetical Exercises and a List of Greek Verbs, in: C. Hope –
K. A. Worp, Miniature Codices from Kellis, Mnemosyne 59, 226–258.
– (2012) = K. A. Worp, A New Survey of Greek, Coptic, Demotic and Latin Tabulae Preserved from Classical Anti-
quity, Version. 1.0 (Trismegistos Online Publication, 6), Leuven.

Julia Lougovaya, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg

lougovaya@uni-heidelberg.de