βυβλιοθήκ[ης vac. ]. The preceding lines can be restored from P.Mich. 9 539, 540, and P.Oxy. 47 3332 as follows: [Θρακίδαι γυμνασιάρχωι | βυβλιοφύλακι τῆς | ἐν τῶι Ἀρσινοείτηι] | βυβλιοθήκ[ης]. Nothing is expected after βυβλιοθήκ[ης, even though there is room for about four or five letters. Writers of hypomnemata often left space after the addressee’s title and began the next line with παρά (Martin 2007: 668).

The nome archive is called βυβλιοφυλάκιον in the Memphite and Oxyrhynchite declarations of this year.

Τέωτ[ος τοῦ δεῖνος] | τοῦ Τ̣έ̣ω̣τ̣ο̣[ς. An example of the common practice of papponymy. This individual does not appear to be known from other texts. A large part of Theadelphia texts from the first century of Roman rule belong to the archive of Harthotes (TM Arch 99), which was acquired in various purchases in the 1920s including some from the same lot as the present papyrus, but the name Teos is not associated with this family.

[οὐσιακ(οῦ)]. For the supplement, cf. P.Mich. 9 539, submitted by an οὐσιακοῦ γεωργο̣ῦ̣ καὶ ἀ̣π̣ο̣λ̣υ̣|σίμου Καμηλιανῆς οὐσίας; in P.Mich. 9 540, the declarant is called simply γεωργοῦ | [οὐ]σίας Γερμανικιανῆς (ll. 5–6).

Ἀντ̣[ωνίας] | θυγατρός. Antonia, daughter of the emperor Claudius, is known in the papyri as Ἀντωνία θυγάτηρ (with θεοῦ Κλαυδίου added after her father’s death) to distinguish her from her paternal grandmother, known as Ἀντωνία Δρούσου, the wife of Drusus: see Hanson 1980: 245. The lack of θεοῦ Κλαυδίου following Antonia’s name suggests that Claudius is still alive (or thought to be), which would set the end of 54 CE as the terminus ante quem of this text. Claudia Antonia’s estate in Egypt (TM Ousia 5) included an epoikion named after her (TM Geo 209) and holdings around several villages of the Fayum, to which list Theadelphia can perhaps now be added (the location of the estate land on which Teos worked is not stated): Hiera Nesos (P.Bour. 42.89, 111, 117, and 201), Karanis (?) (P.Sijp. 44.4), Kerkeesis/Perkeesis (P.Bour. 42.140–141), and Theoxenis (P.Fay. 40.7).

τ̣ι̣[νῶν ἐδαφῶ(ν)]: οὐσίας is not consistent with the traces and would not fill out the line. Instead, there is a looped letter most consistent with tau (that of θυγατρός in the same line is damaged but might also have been looped), which ligatures into a hasta. This combination suggests τινῶν ἐδαφῶν: cf. in particular P.Lond. 2 445.4–8 (Bakchias, 14–19), γεωρ|γοῦ τινῶν ἐδαφῶν Ἰουλίας | Σεβαστῆς καὶ Γερμανικοῦ Καίσαρος | ὄντος δὲ καὶ ἀπολυσίμου τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας, where τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας refers back to τινῶν ἐδαφῶν of Livia and Germanicus.

ὑπάρχι μοι. This formula, taken over from census declarations, only appears in the Arsinoite property declarations from 53. It corresponds to ἀπογράφομαι … τὸ ὑπάρχον in the Memphite and Oxyrhynchite declarations of this year, a formula followed in later general declarations, including those from the Arsinoite (see P.Oxy. 47 3332 introduction with l. 4 n. and Wolff 1978: 231).