School Hands in Early Roman Egypt more

School Hands in Early Roman Egypt Earlier scholars have, quite commonly, doubted that the Roman conquest of Egypt had much impact upon its population. In particular, the importance of the Latin language in the land has been questioned and, for the earlier era at least, as I shall argue, perhaps undermined. Cribiore, whose view is typical of many who have written on the subject, comments to the effect that “...the use of Latin [in Egypt] was confined to official edicts and decrees, correspondence, and documents concerning the Roman army, Roman magistrates, and cives Romani.” 1 Such statements, however, are far too dismissive. 2 While indeed, during the first period of the Roman occupation, the quantity of Romans coming to Egypt was perhaps not overwhelming, much more important was their influence in the land and the power that they wielded in Egyptian society. 3 The laws of the land were now written in Latin, not Egyptian or Greek, and from henceforth the high status of the Latin-speaking Roman minority in Egypt meant that those Egyptians who now had to work with the Romans or under them would frequently have been obliged to speak and/or to write in the Latin tongue. The social differences are perhaps not immediately obvious, yet few native structures could have remained entirely unchanged while Egypt, as Eric Turner wrote, “became a kind of business appendage of the princeps.” 4 The Roman conquest of Egypt must necessarily have heralded the arrival in that land of a quantity of Roman administrative personnel and other Roman citizens, merchants and businessmen alongside higher-ranking officials, who came there looking for financial returns and for new areas ripe for exploitation. 5 Profit-seeking Romans (Cribiore: 2003/4, p.111). cf. N. Lewis’s comment “there is a growing sense that the changes effected by the Roman takeover have been underestimated” (Lewis: 1984, p.1079). 2 They take their cue perhaps from Kaimio (1979) who was himself indebted to the earlier work of Arthur Stein. 3 (Bieżunska-Małowist: 1975, pp.744-5). Rostovzeff points out that while little is known about Augustus’ reorganisation of Egypt, Strabo talks of a real revival in Egypt during this period (Rostovtzeff: 1929, pp.345-6). 4 (Turner: 2007, p.156). 5 See Rostovtzeff’s characterisation of the Roman incomers (1929, p.347). 1 1 needed low level scribes, clerks and financial staff to help properly manage their business concerns and to take on and manage their Egyptian-generated paperwork. Latin-literate personnel would suddenly, therefore, have been much in demand to carry out a variety of low-status administrative tasks and to prepare a variety of documentation for taxation purposes. 6 Literacy, although perhaps not always Latin literacy, was also a valuable skill for soldiers since they were often required to submit reports to the authorities, and to manage a wide range of other official documents. Sometimes, at least, military documents were required to be in Latin (not Greek) for symbolic or status-associated reasons. 7 Given this, it is interesting to note that in a small group of the earliest Latin papyri to survive from Egypt (all dated, at least approximately, to a point within the last quarter of the first century BCE), the script of each is sufficiently like to the other as to suggest that their writers had all, at one time, been taught to write Latin in essentially the same underlying handwriting style. 8 This, admittedly fragile, piece of evidence suggests that there was, at least during the first century BCE, a common school syllabus for the teaching of handwriting in use throughout Egypt. 9 Such an education, I suggest in this paper, can only have taken place in elementary schools or in institutions which adhered to and disseminated a standard, and which may have been expressly set up for this purpose. It is possible that there was a directive of some kind, coming ultimately from Rome, stipulating the dissemination in the primary schools of the Latin alphabet, as used for handwriting, in a consistent and regularised form. The instruction, if there was one, presumably reached Egypt very shortly after the Augustan accession to power there (30 BCE). The writing style itself is an early utilitarian or bureaucratic hand designed, perhaps, for use upon papyrus. 10 “und so gab es hier vom Beginn der römischen Herrschaft an einen Personenkreis, für den der Erwerb lateinischer Sprachkenntisse jedenfalls erstrebenswert war” (Kramer: 2001, p.9). 7 See (Adams: 2003a, esp. Section VII). 8 The palaeographic and linguistic evidence in each case, it is generally accepted, confirms the early datings given to these documents. 9 There is no surviving papyrus evidence other than from Egypt, but some examples of this early script can be found amongst the graffiti from Pompeii. 10 The style has been called variously: ‘cursive’, ‘capitale rustica cursiva’, ‘capitala rustica (latina)’ or ‘bureaucratic cursive’. 6 2 In the Appendix, I have set out representative alphabets from each of the documents discussed. 11 I have also appended photographic plates of two of them (Plates 1 and 2 – [details to be inserted]). In the ensuing discussion, I shall pass a few remarks upon the documents and upon the situation in the Egypt of the period that they evoke. Perhaps the most celebrated of the group is the papyrus known as P. Vindob. Lat. 1b. 12 This early text, of unknown provenance, contains a letter written to a certain Macedo, which was preserved as the second document on a roll of letters (pasted together, as Kramer points out, not by Macedo, the addressee, but by the writer of the later Demotic document that occupies the verso).13 It has been assumed that both the writer of this letter and Macedo himself are slaves. 14 The language the letter-writer uses is ‘heavily Graecised’ and this suggests that he is more linguistically proficient in Greek than in Latin. 15 Since Latin is not his native language he clearly is, or at one time he had been, a student of Latin; one who had learned the language formally rather than acquired it at birth. A Greek speaker, he chose to write his letter in Latin and he apparently took it also for granted that Macedo would know Latin too. 16 These slaves may well have been native Egyptians who had been schooled on Egyptian soil. Neither man, in this instance, although one almost certainly spoke it, may have known how to write Greek. Both were, on the other hand, literate in Latin and they must have received Latin training. Another document in this early group is also a personal letter written by a slave (P. Oxy. XLIV, 3208). 17 While the handwriting is in the same style, broadly speaking, as that of P. Vindob. Lat. 1b, the slave who wrote this letter betrays his Latin learning in his formulaic Latin epistolary sentences. 18 He has obviously learned to write Latin formally, and his knowledge of the language is relatively advanced and untainted by Not every document preserves a complete alphabet. ChLA XLIII, 1241 with further bibliography. The palaeographic characteristics of this document have been frequently remarked upon, perhaps most notably in (Seider: 1983). See also Cencetti (1993b, esp. p.62). Comparable with it is the hand of P. Vindob. Lat.1a., but this is unfortunately in very poor condition. 13 (Kramer: 1991, p.144, Note 18). 14 Based on elements in the letter’s content. 15 (Seider: 1983). 16 The roll contains letters addressed to Macedo written in both Greek and Latin showing that he understood both languages. Compare Adams’ interesting comments on the differentiated uses of both Latin and Greek by the bilingual soldier Claudius Terentianus (Adams: 2003a, pp.593-597). 17 = ChLA XLVII, 1420, to which refer for further bibliography. 18 As described by Brown (1970, p.138). 12 11 3 foreign interference. It is possible that he has come to Egypt on the staff, say, of a Roman official, but the contents of his letter suggest that he has good firsthand knowledge of several local individuals. 19 Note that this writer also anticipates that his addressee will share his own Latin linguistic abilities. A third, rather different type of document, written in the same early style Latin hand, is a list of slaves’ names (PSI Inv. 3244 olim CNR 136). 20 The papyrus is, unfortunately, extremely fragmentary and its contents unclear. However, several of the slaves mentioned in it have an association with finance or hold named jobs in that field. For example at least six of them are referred to as ‘collybistae’ (bankers or moneylenders). 21 Two others are described ‘ex ratione’ (accountants) and two further individuals are labelled ‘me(n)s[u]larius’ (money-changer). 22 Other slaves listed, whose professions are not mentioned, are recorded in the document as having been acquired at auctions (‘auctione’). The document may well have belonged among the personal papers of a Latin-speaking Roman entrepreneur, recently arrived in Egypt, and seeking to profit thereby. 23 Perhaps the clerk of a wealthy Roman banker, or someone who worked on his behalf - made a list of the accounting staff belonging to his bureau. The point to note, however, is that the document is in Latin, not Greek, and this must imply once again that its writer had had Latin schooling. While the model for their handwriting is very similar to that of the writers of the two Latin letters described above, these bank-workers, who were obviously numerate, were also possibly literate in Latin. 24 The fourth document is associated with a small group of weavers, paid workers rather than slaves. It records the payment of their wages (P. Oxy. IV, 737). 25 Once again, the papyrus is extremely damaged and very little text is preserved. Too little remains, Eric Turner also commented upon the possible context of this letter (Turner: 2007). This is an unpublished piece. ChLA XXV, 790 presents a draft edition by Manfredi. His promised final edition seems never to have appeared, but there is a brief commentary on the document in Papiri dell’Istituto Papirologico ‘G. Vitelli’ No. 1, Florence (1988), p.16, No. 7. 21 For the meaning of this term see Bogaert (1983). 22 Interestingly, the writer of P. Oxy XLIV, 3208 also refers to dealings with the ‘regius mensularius’. 23 Jones notes that it was common for Roman entrepreneurs to go into slave dealing and possibly this document is better explained by this type of context (2006, p.165). 24 P. Oxy XXXVI, 2772 is notable in this context. This is a note to a banker written in the Greek language but transliterated in Latin letters. Aside from its implications for Roman involvement in the banking industry, in this context is also suggests that the writer of this document also was literate in Latin although a speaker of Greek. 25 = ChLA V, 308, P. Cleveland, Freiburger Library, Case Western Reserve University. 20 19 4 in fact, to be able to ascertain any linguistic peculiarities of the scribe, but this man too must have had schooling in Latin. This document, like the previous one, was generated in a workshop context and perhaps belonged to a Roman businessman who made money from Egyptian labour potential. As Wipszycka points out, both the manager’s and the overseer’s wages are listed in it, as well as those of the workers, and this suggests that the owner does not himself work in the workshop and that he employs staff to run the concern for him. 26 If the business-owner was a Latin speaker, a Roman, and the document was drawn up for his accounting purposes, the use of Latin, rather than Greek, would be explicable. Alternatively, the Latin may represent a response to the need to submit certain financial records to the Roman authorities for taxation purposes. The last of this group, the most recently discovered, is the letter of a soldier which was found at the Nubian military base of Qaşr Ibrim. 27 It is now probably wellrecognised that soldiers were taught to write Latin (if they were not already literate pre-enrolment) during their service in the army, and this writer was probably a Roman soldier in correspondence with another. 28 Interestingly, however, the soldier’s handwriting style is very similar to that of the other documents already mentioned and this may indicate that he had learned to write before joining the army. A chance remark of Horace’s provides a clue as to the sort of institution in which the soldier could have been educated. Horace himself had received, as he tells us, an aristocratic education in Rome but this route had been settled upon by his father who had sought something out of the ordinary for the schooling of his son. Horace’s contemporaries and social equals were sent, as was more usual, the text implies, to Flavius’ local school. Of relevance here is the fact that the local institution was attended by, among others, the sons of soldiers, and specifically, by sons of centurions. 29 (Wipszycka: 1965, p.88). Egypt, El Quahira, El Mathaf El Misry PQasr Ibrim inv. 78-3-21/24 (ChLA XLII, 1238). Several other tiny fragments, showing traces of writing in a similar style, were also found with together with this fragment. These are referenced at El Quahira, El Mathaf El Misry PQaşr Ibrim Nos. 31-34 (ChLA XLII, 1228 – 1231). The finds from Qaşr Ibrim can now be compared with those from other Roman bases in Egypt, the ostraca from Mons Claudianus, for example, which preserve a small, but interesting sample of Latin texts. 28 See Adams (2003a, Section VII) which represents his mature views on a subject he has given his attention to on several earlier occasions. On the evidence for a ‘Latin circle’ amongst the soldiers based at Myos Hormos see Fournet (2003). 29 Pater… qui… noluit in Flavi ludum me mittere, magni quo pueri magnis e centurionibus ort, Sat. I, 6.65 – 78, cited by Booth (1979, p. 15). 27 26 5 The ludi magister, the first-stage school teacher was, as far as we know, the individual in elementary or primary schools who was charged with the teaching of writing. It may be that the majority of his pupils, who were taught at such schools alongside the sons of more humble citizens, were slaves. 30 The evidence suggests that slave literacy was highly valuable and quite common. 31 It might lead to manumission and could certainly help improve an individual’s status and standing in the world. 32 Slaves were probably often sponsored by their owners (often when they were children) to attend the ludi magister and to learn to read and to write basic Latin. 33 While many schools were privately run and required that their pupils paid fees, the basic education of his slaves is likely to have been a worthwhile investment for a slave owner to underwrite. 34 A literate slave was clearly of far more value, monetarily speaking at least, to his owner than an illiterate one, and literacy was useful for many purposes in the running of a large estate or family house as well as in more commercial concerns. 35 The syllabus on offer in the common schools was not the same as that given to the sons of aristocrats and wealthier families. 36 The distilling of basic literacy skills was cf. Booth on Martial, Epig. 10.62.1-5. which, he argues, portrays a ludi magister teaching slave children; see also (1973). 31 “The training of slaves in clerical skills ... was uncontroversial” (A.D. Booth: 1979, 14). In wealthy households it may often have been carried out in the paedagogium, but the evidence offered here suggests that the elementary schools were at least as important during this period in instilling basic Latin literacy skills. Bonner comments that the schools were more likely to teach Latin whilst in households Greek teaching perhaps predominated (Bonner: 1977, p.166). 32 Petronius’s Hermeros, he noted, was educated after purchase by his Italian owner: “outside his household, and… [by] class instruction… in the school of a calculator or a ludus litterarius” (Booth: 1979, p.16). 33 I suggest that it was usually Latin, not Greek that was taught in these classes. While Greek was certainly acceptable in the absence of Latin, for almost all purposes, this essentially Roman education would have regarded Latin as the more useful language to learn to write for a pupil who was illiterate in both. On the status of Latin see Adams (2003a, pp.527-637; Rochette: 1996: 1997). 34 Horace, Serm. (I,6,75) on pupils paying teachers on the Ides of the month (cited by Bonner: 1977, p.149. Plutarch (Cato Maior 21,7) refers to buying slaves pre-trained in clerical skills. There was also money to be made by buying untrained slaves and training them in literate skills before selling them on. Crassus, for example, recognised the economic value in training slaves (Mohler: 1940, p.264). Literate slaves were labelled as such when put up for sale. Cf. ‘in titulo... litteratorem inscribi solitum esse’, Suetonius, Gramm. 4., cited by Booth (1981). 35 cf. Trimalchio, “I have learned letters for domestic purposes” (Petr. Sat. 48.4; ii); see also (Martin: 1974, pp.274 ff.). 36Suetonius comments that in the era of his forefathers there was a distinction between one who was a “litterator”, i.e. literate, and “litterati” (scholars, ‘the lettered’), Suetonius, De Vir. Illus., IV. Cf. also Quintilian I.1.8,“Nihil est peius iis qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras progressi falsam sibi scientiae persuasionem induerunt.”; and Isid. Etymologiae (1.4.1- 1.4.2). 30 6 always kept distinct from the study of literature and rhetoric. The education given to ordinary working people, and the rhetorically-orientated, “liberal education” given to children of the nobility had entirely different aims. This point is well brought out in the literature. 37 The ludi litterarii offered a functional training, designed to instill utilitarian skills in their pupils and thus to provide wider Roman society with workers who were equipped to keep it running smoothly. 38 It was intended that they should be able to undertake a range of lower-status administrative tasks on behalf of their owners or social superiors. I have suggested above that the similarities in the handwriting style of these five early writers: two, possibly three, slaves, an artisanal worker and a soldier, suggest that they had all received a very similar education. This in turn leads to the supposition that they had all been to a similar kind of school and that taught in such schools was a standard and common syllabus, at least as far as handwriting is concerned. The question as to how this was facilitated has then to be raised. For, according to Marrou, in early Rome the state took little interest in financially supporting the education of its populace, and largely “… left education to the initiative and activity of its citizens”. 39 The effect of such a situation on the teaching of handwriting, however, would be idiosyncrasy and variation in style rather than the standardised model of handwriting that existed, as I have argued here and which is demonstrated in the Appendix given below. Primary school teachers must have been supplied with some kind of template for script such that students all over Roman territory were taught in the same way. 40 This would have been managed most effectively indirectly by the state and under the Horsfall suggests that the aspirations to liberal learning of the vulgar classes were a “satiric commonplace” in Roman Imperial literature {Horsfall, 1989 #73, p.82}. Seneca (Tranq. 9.5) underlines “not only the dichotomy between craft literacy and liberal culture, but assumes that a servile education (‘litterae serviles’) was a recognised concept” (cited by Booth: 1979, p.15). 38 Diodorus Siculus wrote that the Egyptians gave their sons a small amount of education in letters, “not all of them, but especially those engaged in technai” (Harris: 1989, p.134, Note 86, citing Diod. Sic. i.i.I.7). 39 (Marrou: 1956, p.229). 40 Cp. Bonner’s laconic comment “The [education] system was Greek in origin, and, as the Greek teachers kept to the same general pattern wherever they went the Romans followed suit” (Bonner: 1977, p.166). On the relationship between Greek and Roman education see Corbeill (2001). 37 7 ‘municipal system of education’ rather than by citizen initiative. The municipal system was an alternative that was, Bonner tells us, becoming increasingly popular. 41 Under such a system, schools were funded “either from special endowments or from the general city funds”.42 School teachers were nominated by local councils and had their candidacies approved by a body of citizens. Their professional appointments were made by the local councils who were authorised by the central government to pay out their salaries from municipal monies. 43 Under such a system, the syllabus in local schools and institutions could well have been common. It was government-disseminated rather than privately initiated and the state, I suggest, had more involvement in primary education, at least during this early period, than has so far been suspected. The handwriting style, which I maintain is a standard, in use in these five ancient papyrus documents strongly suggests then that, at least at this early date, the Egyptian ludi litterarii, or elementary schools responded to the Augustan conquest, and to the increased and urgent need for Latin literate workers that came with it, by offering state-supported classes in basic Latin language and literacy skills. 44 It is likely that such classes had long been on offer in Rome, where any highly motivated, relatively humble individual (or son of one) keen to better himself and to get on in society could have attended a local primary school. 45 Many of these may also have been sponsored by the government of the day. Commentary upon the Script I do not, to be clear, argue that the script of these documents is identical. Complete identity cannot be expected in a group of handwritten (as opposed, perhaps, to formally-written) documents originating from diverse areas and from entirely (Bonner: 1977, p.156). (Bonner: 1977, p.157) He notes also that ‘the system of public appointments, which gave the teacher a fixed salary... did not necessarily, or usually preclude his claim to fees’ (Bonner: 1977, p.156). 43 (Bonner: 1977, p.158). 44 (Harris: 1989, p.234 ff). 45 According to Plutarch the first Roman to open a “school of letters” (grammato-didascaleion) was the freedman Spurius Carvilius, in or around 234 BCE. (Plutarch, Quaest. Rom., 59, cited by Bonner: 1977, p.34). Marrou thought that there were probably primary schools in Rome before the fourth century (1956, p.250). 42 41 8 different circumstances. I do maintain, however, that while no document exactly replicates the hand of another, yet there are sufficient similarities and shared characteristics, particularly in the individual letter-forms used in each alphabet, as to strongly suggest that each writer had been initially taught to write in essentially the same handwriting style. The similarities between letter-forms should be clear from the chart in the Appendix. All the writers, we should observe, formed their letters quite carefully and meticulously, usually lifting the pen after pulling one stroke before re-placing it to draw the next. The component strokes of each letter are generally executed in discrete, self-contained movements and there is no linking between them. 46 Similarly, the individual letters themselves are well-separated and distinct from each other. In addition, the space between the letter-forms is frequently enhanced by the careful ‘pointing’ which is used in each document to separate the words. 47 These features, each in themselves, give an impression of antiquity and they are in evidence in all the chosen papyri. Letters with well-separated strokes are a prominent characteristic of wax-tablet writing, and assuming that the transition, for Latin writing, to papyrus as a writing surface is relatively recent, it is unsurprising that some of the letter-forms in these papyri share other features of letters as written on wax tablets with a stylus. 48 Here one might mention the vertically elongated aspect of several letters, the result of strongly pulled downward-direction pen strokes. The lengthened penstrokes are prominent and in particular, we should note the exaggerated length of the first stroke of several letters, of <a> (frequently), and invariably also of <m>, <n> and <r>. This stylistic feature is a strong identifying marker of this early script. Its effect is enhanced by the almost complete absence of horizontal composite strokes in the letter-forms themselves and the lack of horizontally-made ligatures between them. This writing technique E. Poulle referred to as ‘a major fact of [Western] civilisation’, ‘l’execution fractionnée’, (1977, p.135). 47 This practice is known to be archaic, was probably derived from the Etruscans, and had more or less entirely died out by the end of the first century, texts thereafter being written in scriptio continua., (Parkes: 1992, pp.11, 303-4). 48 Papyrus was introduced into Rome probably in the third century BCE. 46 9 While the script shows the influence of the stylus, however, other letters in the alphabet have ‘capital’ forms and these can be more closely related to the letter-forms as used in the inscriptions of the period, at least in their formality. Such are the forms of <e>, <f> and <l> we might imagine that these forms were artificially introduced into the papyrus-written script upon its invention and they distinguish the ink handwriting from the contemporary stylus-made styles. 49 Yet other letter-forms appear to be in an interim state between the ‘capital’ and the later, evolved cursive adaptation of the form. These include <b>, <d>, which is generally short and squat with some rounding, <g> and <p>. <q>, where it occurs, has a right-oblique slanting tail, which counteracts the effect of the repeated vertical descenders. <s> is straight and, while perhaps it usually stands on the baseline of the writing, it can sometimes extend both below it, and above the top (or head) line simultaneously. In sum, as I hope is sufficiently clear, the general similarities between the letter-forms as they occur in each of these five early documents go to support the idea that I have put forward in this paper: that behind the primary school handwriting lessons given to each of the writers was the same early alphabetic model or template. Adams, J. N. (2003a) Bilingualism and the Latin Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bartoletti, G. (1990) La scrittura romana nelle tabellae defixionum (secc. I A.C. – IV D.C.) Note paleografiche. Scrittura e Civiltà, XIV: 7-56 Bieżunska-Małowist, I. (1975) Les Citoyens Romains à Oxyrhynchos aux Deux Premiers Siècles de l'Empire in Bingen, J., Cambier, G. & Nachtergaal, G. (Eds.) Le Monde Grec: Hommages à Claire Préaux. Brussels: Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles. 741-747 Bogaert, R. (1983) Κολλγβιετικαι τραπεżαι. Anagennesis, 3: 21-64 Bonner, S. F. (1977) Education in Ancient Rome: From the Elder Cato to the Younger Pliny. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd. Booth, A. D. (1979) Elementary and Secondary Education in the Roman Empire. Florilegium, 1: 1-14 Booth, A. D. (1979) The schooling of slaves in first century Rome. TAPA, 109: 1 20 Booth, A. D. (1981) Litterator. Hermes, 109: 371-378 Brown, V. (1970) A Latin letter from Oxyrhynchus. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, 17: pp. 136-143 & Pl. 134. 49 On the interrelations of these two writing styles see (Bartoletti: 1990). 10 Cencetti, G. (1993b) Ricerche sulla scrittura latina nell’etá arcaica. I Il filone corsivo (2nd Ed) in Nicolaj, G. (Ed.) Scritti di Paleografia. Dietikon, Zurich: Urs Graf Verlag. pp. 135-170 Corbeill, A. (2001) Education in the Roman Republic: Creating Tradition in Too, Y. L. (Ed.) Education in Greek and Roman Antiquity. Leiden, Boston, Cologne: Brill. 261-288 Cribiore, R. (2003/4) Latin Literacy in Egypt. KODAI: Journal of Ancient History, 13/14: pp. 111-118 Fournet, J.-L. (2003) Langues, écritures et culture dans les praesidia in Cuvigny, H. (Ed.) La route de Myos Hormos. Cairo: Fouilles de l’IFAO 48. pp. 427-500 Harris, W. V. (1989) Ancient Literacy. Massachusetts, London: Harvard University Press. Jones, D. (2006) The Bankers of Puteoli: Finance, Trade and Industry in the Roman World. Stroud: Tempus. Kaimio, J. (1979) Latin in Roman Egypt Actes du XV Congrès Internationale de Papyrologie III. Brussels: Congrès Internationale. 27-33 Kramer, J. (1991) Die Verwendung des Apex und P. Vindob. L.1c. ZPE, 88 Kramer, J. (2001) Glossaria Bilinguia Altera (C.Glos. Biling. II). München: K. G. Saur. Lewis, N. (1984) The Romanity of Roman Egypt: A Growing Consensus Atti del XVII Congresso internazionale di Papirologia. Naples: University of Naples. 1077-1084 Marrou, H. (1956) A history of education in antiquity. London: Sheed and Ward. Martin, R. (1974) Familia Rustica: les esclaves chez les agronomes latins in Levi, A. (Ed.) Actes du Colloque 1972 sur L'Esclavage. Paris: Centre de Recherches d'Histoire Ancienne. 267-297 Mohler, S. L. (1940) Slave Education in the Roman Empire. Transactions of the American Philological Association, 71: 262-280 Parkes, M. B. (1992) Pause and Effect: An Introduction to the History of Punctuation in the West. Aldershot: Scolar Press. Poulle, E. (1977) Discussions: Une Histoire de l'Écriture. Bibliotheque de l'École des Chartes, 135: 137-144 Rochette, B. (1996) Sur le bilinguisme dans l'Égypte gréco-romaine. Chronique d'Egypte, 71: 153-168 Rochette, B. (1997) Le Latin dans le Monde Grec. Chronique d'Egypte, 71: 153-168 Rostovtzeff, M. (1929) Roman Exploitation of Egypt. Journal of Economic and Business History, 1: 337-364 Seider, R. (1983) Beiträge zur Paläographie der Ältesten Lateinischen Papyri der Sammlung Erzherzog Rainer der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek Festschrift um 100-Jährigen Bestehen der Papyrussammlung der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek (P. Rainer Cent.). Vienna: Verlag Brüder Hollinek. 135-143 and Pls 120-139 Turner, E. G. (2007) Oxyrhynchus and Rome in Bowman, A., Coles, R., Gonis, N., Obbink, D. & Parsons, P. J. (Eds.) Oxyrhynchus: A City and its Texts. London: Egypt Exploration Society. 155-170 Vogt, J. (1973) Alphabet für Freie und Sklaven. Rh. Mus., 116: 129 - 142 Wipszycka, E. (1965) L'Industrie textile dans l'Egypte Romaine. Warslaw: Zaklad Narodowy Imienia Ossolinskich. 11 12