BL 3124 (TM 397934) is a, so far, unique papyrus containing a bilingual, ‘Latin’–Arabic, private letter entirely written in Latin script. The first six lines of the letter itself are in a form of Late Latin/Proto-Romance, while the rest of the text is in Arabic. The first editors dated this document between the end of the seventh and the ninth century and considered it as possible evidence for the existence of Latin-speaking communities in the Near East at the time. This chapter shows that important linguistic and palaeographical features of the letter link both the language of its ‘Latin’ section and its script to Italy and argues that it provides a potential very early document of the evolution of Italian vernacular, as well as suggesting connections between the peninsula and the Near East in this period.

The recto of Hamburg papyrus II 167, dated to the late first century CE, presents an intriguing case study of a text that has so far resisted generic classification. Rhetorical declamation and theatre (fabula togata/mime) are the two literary categories for which scholars have argued most strongly in their attempt to explain the papyrus and understand the story it presents – a conversation between characters with historically attested names involving a journey and family-related motifs, such as a husband’s faithlessness, a father-in-law, and a restored marital relationship: the text gives the impression of a ‘theatricalised’ novelistic tale. The difficulty in reaching consensus on the matter is only partly due to the lacunose state of the papyrus. This chapter favours the interpretation of the text as a theatrical script (an extract from a mime, perhaps written in prose, rather than a fragment from a literary fabula togata), but also points out the unique (dramaturgical, lexical, thematic, and visual) features of the text that challenge our assumptions about viewing Latin theatrical genres as forms of entertainment with fixed and rigid boundaries and about imagining how Latin literature was performed and circulated in antiquity.

Chapter 15 compares the personifications of philosophy which we find in Synesius’ De regno and in Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy. I describe the relationship between philosophy and politics, as presented by Synesius, as ‘tense’. Synesius, ambassador for Cyrene at the court of Constantinople at the beginning of the fifth century (and later bishop of Cyrene), asserts the superiority and independence of true philosophy in relation to politics, while asserting the advantages that philosophy can bring to politics. Boethius, a high-ranking Roman official awaiting his execution in 524, is consoled by Philosophy; his mission to bring philosophy and rulership together was not in vain. I mention three factors which can limit the intervention of philosophy in the political sphere.

Proclus did not accept Plotinus’ position that matter is absolute evil and responsible for other evils. I return to his position in Chapter 12, as it is followed by Simplicius in explaining the evils of his period, the reign of the Emperor Justinian, a period which was afflicted by a series of natural catastrophes (earthquakes, fires, the plague) and human disasters (military, social, economic). Natural disasters, Simplicius explained, are part of the compensatory balance of forces of the natural world and are not evil, as such; human moral evil can be of benefit to those who suffer it. I contrast this account of evil with that given by a contemporary, Procopius of Caesarea, who explains the same evils of his time in terms of the Justinian’s demonic nature.

This chapter attempts to reconstruct the textual history of the Latin–Greek glossary known as Hermeneumata Celtis, from antiquity to the year 1495, when the Humanist Conrad Celtis transcribed the work from a medieval antigraph that was subsequently lost. The thematic glossary of Hermeneumata Celtis is unique among other extant bilingual glossaries because it was supplemented, at some time in Late Antiquity, with the inclusion of Greek words and definitions culled from a Greek alphabetical lexicon similar to Hesychius (but possibly earlier). Other increments came from contamination with other thematic glossaries; the most recognisable points of contact are with what modern scholars call the Hermeneumata Montepessulana.

Chapter 18 introduces the theory of natural law to be found in Plotinus and in Proclus in connection with the interpretation of Plato’s Timaeus. Natural law derives from the ‘law of being’ which is divine Intellect and from souls which, in their nature, are laws unto themselves (autonomous). Divine and natural law are considered as paradigmatic for human law. I explore this relationship as it is presented in Proclus and as exemplified in the idea of rulership for women. Appropriate knowledge in metaphysics and physics is required of the legislator in formulating corresponding human law.

The initial editions and, more importantly, the first reproductions of the few extant Latin papyri introduced a novel approach to our understanding of writing and provided new interpretative tools that generally remain relevant well beyond the Roman period. This brief reflection discusses several technical terms used to describe significant graphic features from the Roman era. The author maintains that a specialised vocabulary – essential in any discipline aspiring to scientific rigour, such as palaeography – is both a fundamental tool and a product of a systematic methodology and critical analysis.

Chapter 20 presents the way in which Proclus interpreted the figure of the tyrant in Plato’s dialogues. Tyranny is based on force, violates law, both cosmic and human, and is motivated by a misled desire for power, power divorced from goodness and knowledge. I argue that Proclus and other Platonists, Damascius and Simplicius, could use this interpretation of Plato to describe the political regimes of their period, in particular the rule of Emperor Justinian, as tyrannies. These tyrannies, in their metaphysical ignorance and moral turpitude, violated divine order and law in destroying pagan temples and statues. I consider finally the cases of two authors, John Lydus and Procopius of Caesarea, who describe Justinian’s rule in terms of kingship or tyranny.