372 К. TAUBENSCHLAG
effected b y traditio or mancipatio. I n view, however, of t h e simila-r i t y of t h e f o simila-r m u l a e (e.g. t h e optimo maximoque lusimila-re-clause expsimila-res- expres-sing complete f r e e d o m f r o m servitudes, a n d t h e p h r a s i n g of t h e g u a r a n t e e clause) in t h e t a b l e t a n d the T r a n s y l v a n i a n t r i p t y c h , which is expressly s t a t e d t o h a v e been t r a n s a c t e d per mancipatio-п е т , it is perhaps w o r t h while t o call a t t e n t i o n t o t h e l a t t e r possi-bility, and to its consequences. I n his i n t r o d u c t i o n to t h e t e x t of t h e T r a n s y l v a n i a n t r i p t y c h in Negotia, p . 289, A r a n g i o - R u i z s t a t e s the now accepted view t h a t real p r o p e r t y on provincial soil could be regarded as res mancipii only if it were s i t u a t e d in t h e t e r r i t o r y of a city t h a t h a d been g r a n t e d ius Italicum, a n d t h a t it is unlikely t h a t A l b u r n u s Maior, t h e place in question, h a d received this privilege. H e concludes t h a t t h e formulae of mancipatio h a v e been wrongly used in t h a t t e x t . T h e t a b l e t would fall i n t o the sa-me case for t h e f a c t t h a t it m a y h a v e been d r a w n u p a f t e r t h e Con-stitutio Antoniniana is n o t r e l e v a n t to the s t a t u s of provincial soil. T h e possibilities are twofold: (1) the p r o p e r t y t o which t h e sale relates was s i t u a t e d in t h e t e r r i t o r y of a c o m m u n i t y e n j o y i n g ius Italicum. Possibly this was n o t s i t u a t e d in B r i t a i n a t all. If it was in B r i t a i n , could it h a v e been A q u a e Sulis or G l e u u m ? (2) The f o r m u l a e are in f a c t wrongly used. P e r h a p s t h e p u r c h a s e r was n o t sure whether t h e land in question was fundus Italicus a n d wished t o p r o t e c t himself in case it was. Or p e r h a p s b y application of t h e f o r m s of mancipatio he hoped t o assert a dominium over a res пес mancipi a n d u s u r p a b e t t e r t i t l e to i t .
J . S c h w a r t z , Deux ostraca de la region du ivädi Hammämät (Chroń. d'Egypte X X X I , No. 61 [1956] 118—-123).
These two ostraca of t h e R o m a n epoch concern t h e a r m y . T h e f i r s t of t h e m confirms t h e presence of t h e cohors Prima
Apameno-rum in t h e zone, where t h e ala VocantioApameno-rum a n d t h e cohors I Fla-via Cilicum equitata h a v e b e e n a t t e s t e d .
T h e second ostracon c o n f i r m s t h e presence of a c u r a t o r , a real chief of a cohort of t h e a u x i l i a r y b o d y , in t h e zone of w ä d i H a m -m ä -m ä t . T h e receiver of t h e ostracon see-ms t o live in t h e environ-m e n t of t h e curator.
G. F l o r e , Un atto di divorzio (Studi in on. P. Francisci I [1956] 395—397).
SURVEY OF PAPYRI 373
I n t h i s deed of divorce: Mil. I n v . 79 (139 A.D.) (cf. m y Law2
121 ff.) of a marriage b e t w e e n b r o t h e r a n d sister (cf. on such mar-riages m y Law2 111) is only t h e r e s t i t u t i o n of t h e κόσμος b y t h e
h u s b a n d m e n t i o n e d , as t h e only t h i n g of which t h e φερνή of t h e wife consisted. N o t e w o r t h y is t h e provision in 11. 26—28, b y which t h e divorcing h u s b a n d promises n o t t o b r i n g a n y claims to t h e acquisitions m a d e b y t h e wife d u r i n g the marriage, e v i d e n t l y be-cause t h e y h a d been acquired w i t h her own m o n e y . I t m a y be fi-n a l l y m e fi-n t i o fi-n e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r of t h e couple acts ifi-n t h i s deed as t h e i r κύριος.
S. E i t r e m — L. A m u n d s e n , Sale of Wine on Delivery (Symbo-lae R. Taubenschlag dedicatae I I = Eos 48, 2 [1957] 77—81). This t e x t : P . Osl. i n v . No. 1440 (91 A.D.) belongs to a well-k n o w n a n d m u c h discussed group of d o c u m e n t s , c o n t r a c t s for cash p a y m e n t w i t h deferred delivery. W h e r e wine is concerned m o s t of t h e c o n t r a c t s of t h i s t y p e d a t e f r o m t h e V I a n d V I I cen-turies. Beside t h i s t e x t , t h e only specimen t h a t h a s so f a r come to light f r o m t h e 1st c e n t u r y A . D . seems t o be P . A t h e n . 23 (Theadelphia, A.D. 82). F r o m t h e 2nd c e n t u r y A.D. comes t h e f o r m u -l a r y d r a u g h t P . Os-l. 43, a n d f r o m t h e 3d c e n t , t h e group P S I 1249, 1250, 1252 ( O x y r h y n c h u s , A.D. 265). On sale on delivery see m y Law2 336 f f .
F . Z u c k e r (rev. of:) J . D a y — C. W . K e y e s , Tax Documents from Theadelphia (G.G.A. 211, No. 1/2 [1957] 59—72).
J . D a y — C. W. K e y e s , Tax Documents from Theadelphia: Co-lumbia Papyri vol. V (1956) 342 p p .
T h e rectos of t h e p a p y r i whose versos are published in this vo-lume were edited b y W . L. W e s t e r m a n n a n d C. W . K e y e s a n d published in 1932 u n d e r t h e t i t l e Tax Lists and Transportation Re-ceipts from Theadelphia ( h e r e a f t e r referred t o as P . Col. I I ) .
I n t h e new volume of t h e Columbia P a p y r i No. 1 verso l b — l c (ca 160 A.D.) contains records of t a x e s owed a n d p a y m e n t s of ta-xes. No. 1 verso l a (160 A.D.) balances of t a x collections in m o n e y . No. 1 verso 3 (155 A.D.) a c c o u n t s of t a x p a y m e n t s a n d lists of
