WRITERS AND WRITING IN THE ROMAN ARMY AT DURA-EUROPOS by Jacqueline Austin A dissertation submitted to the Department of English/Institute of Archaeology & Antiquity for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy College of Arts & Law University of Birmingham Birmingham B15 2TT July 2010 ‘ …l’écriture est la base même de notre civilization… N’y voir qu’un aspect secondaire de la révolution des communications, c’est sous-estimer son rôle absolument décisif dans la création de notre civilization’.1 Jack Goody 1 (1996), L’homme, l’écriture et la Mort: Entretiens avec Pierre-Emmanuel Dauzat, Paris: LesBelles Lettres, p.199. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Plates iv List of Figures xv Acknowledgements vi Abstract vii Preface 1 1. The Argument 6 2. Dura-Europos 2.1 Archaeology and Early History 17 2.2 Under the Romans 23 2.3 The Cohors XX Palmyrenorum 33 2.4 Camp Life 41 3. Writing in the Camp 3.1 Uses of Writing 47 3.2 Daily Administration 55 4. The Papyri 4.1 Discovery 62 4.2 Content & Function 71 5. Latin Literacy and Learning 5.1 Learning Latin 78 5.2 Military Literacy 86 5.3 Language Teaching 93 6. The Clerical Officium 6.1 The Workers 102 6.2 The Writing Teachers 110 6.3 Pens and Papyrus 119 6.4 Writing Posture 130 7. Roman Writing – General Introduction 140 8. Ductus 8.1 Transmission 149 8.2 Ductus, Form and Context 160 8.3 Change and Development 170 9. Script Styles at Dura 9.1 Script Variety 180 9.2 Trained and Untrained Writers 188 9.3 The Trained Hand: An Example 199 10. The Clerical Hand 10.1 Class Characteristics 209 10.2 P. Dura 98 and Historical Development 218 10.3 Comparative Exercises 231 11. Camp Signage 256 12. Conclusion 257 Appendix 1 – Concordance of Shelfmarks for the Papyri 261 Appendix 2 – Additional Figure 262 Abbreviations 263 Bibliography 266 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS A. PLATES PLATE 1. View of the Euphrates from Dura-Europos (Photo: John Parker) PLATE 2. View of Dura-Europos showing the outer wall (Photo: John Parker) PLATE 3. Sketched overview map of the region of Dura-Europos (Christopher Austin) PLATE 4. Zeus Dolichenus relief (currently held in the Hatay Archaeological Museum, Antakya (ancient Antioch) (Photo: Jacqueline Austin) PLATE 5 Map of Dura (TEAD-VII-VIII, inside back cover). PLATE 6 View of the Palmyrene Gate (Photo: Antony Houghton-Brown) PLATE 7 Detail of the Principia and Writing office area in the camp of Dura-Europos, from the excavators’ city plan (TEAD-V, Pl. III). PLATE 8 Iarhibol graffito from W14 in the scribal complex (TEAD-V, XXXVI, 3) PLATE 9 Reed pens (Photo J. Austin) PLATE 10 Funerary relief from Maria Saal, Hungary (reproduced from Boeselager: 1989, pp.228-229, Abb. 18). PLATE 11 Funerary relief St. Martin im Sulmtal, Hungary (reproduced from Boeselager: 1989, p.230, N.37, Abb.19). PLATE 12 The ‘scriptorium’ at Bu Njem (reproduced from Rebuffat: 1975, Pl. LXI). PLATE 13 Roman scribe (reproduced from Parassoglou: 1979 Pl. 2). PLATE 14 Military Clerical Hands: A Selection. PLATE 15 Reproduction of PSI XI 1183 a. and b. PLATE 16 Alphabet taken from PSI XI 1183 a.. PLATE 17 Alphabet taken from PSI XI 1183b.. PLATE 18 Three juxtaposed alphabets, taken from P. Dura Nos. 54(ii), 98a. and 125. PLATE 19 Alphabets from P. Dura Nos. 26, 30 and 125. PLATE 20 Dura Papyri in the Clerical Hand – A Selection PLATE 21 Stroke Resemblances in the Letters of P. Dura 98a. PLATE 22 Dipinto of actuarius Mocimus (reproduced from TEAD-V, pp.226-9, No. 561, Pl. XXIX, 2). PLATE 23 Dipinto left by librarius Julius Domninus of the Legio IV Scyth(ica) and his four assistants (TEAD-V: p. 224, Nos. 560 & Pl. XXVII, I). NOTE: all plates are annexed to the work in Adobe PDF form from page 299 B. FIGURES Figure 1: Cutting a Reed: The First Cut (Johnston: 1977, p.18, Fig 17) Figure 2: Cutting a Reed: Removing the Pith (Johnston: 1977, p.18, Fig 18) Figure 3: Cutting a Reed: Fashioning the Nib (Johnston: 1977, p.18, Fig 19) Figure 4: Cutting a Reed: and Splitting the Nib (Johnston: 1977, p.19, Fig 20) Figure 5: Ductus Illustration (reproduced from Sassoon: 1995, p.16). Figure 6: Graffito on a Pompeii wall (reproduced from Garrucci: 1856). Figure 7: Forms of <b> (reproduced from Mallon: 1952, p.34). Figure 8: Diagram showing the chronological progression of Roman letters. Figure 9: Forms of <e> (diagram reproduced from Gilissen: 1982, p.308). Figure 10: Forms of <e> (reproduced from Casamassima & Staraz: 1977, p.22, Fig. I. 1). Figure 11: Forms of <e> (reproduced from Casamassima & Staraz: 1977, p.22, Figure I. 2). Figure 12: Forms of <m> (reproduced from Casamassima & Staraz: 1977, p.23). Figure 13: Forms of <m> (reproduced from Casamassima & Staraz: 1977, p.23). Figure 14: Detail from P. Tebtunis 686a. Figure 15: Detail of the Principia at Dura (reproduced from TEAD-V, Pl. III, as slightly amended by James (2007, p. 34, Fig. 5, with kind permission of the author). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful to the following individuals and institutions for permission to use their reproductions in this work. The Yale Art Gallery for permission to reproduce the images shown in Plates 5, 7, 8, 22 and 23. Rosemary Sassoon for permission to reproduce her illustration used in Figure 5; To John Parker and Antony Houghton-Brown for their holiday photographs reproduced in Plates 1, 2 and 6 (and to everyone else who sent me their photographs); To Christopher Austin for drawing the map in Plate 3; To the Beinecke Library, University of Yale for making images from their database freely downloadable; To Simon James for permission to reproduce a detail from his plan used in Figure 15; To the online papyrological database APIS: Advanced Papyrological Information System, hosted by the University of Michigan for putting online the image used in Figure 14; To A. G. Bowman and J. D. Thomas for permission to reproduce the drawings in Figure 11 of their Vindolanda: The Latin Writing Tablets (1983), London: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies; To the collections from which I have freely taken the details used in Plate 14; and To authors of all other publications from which I have reproduced images and figures without specific acknowledgement. All have been both inspirational and important. ABSTRACT This socio-palaeographic thesis maintains that behind the uniform appearance of Roman army writing was a particular, dedicated training. Focussing on the third century Dura-Europos, it uncovers evidence for the thorough schooling given to the clerks of the resident Cohors XX Palmyrenorum enabling them to fulfil their administrative duties. These include maintaining efficient documentation systems and preparing a range of accurate, legible texts, and the clerks were trained to produce a repertoire of standard military scripts. Additionally other soldiers and the more general public were taught to read and to understand, to varying degrees, but the clerks, distinct, were specialist writers who found dignity in the work that they did. This dissertation, a preliminary study, draws throughout from the camp’s rich epigraphic and papyrological evidence. It sets out the context in which clerical soldiers worked and the evidence for army literate education and then introduces Roman writing, its form and development generally, before analysing in detail the letter-forms used in one particular standard hand over the decades the cohort’s documents span. In this hand, the well-known development out of Old Roman Cursive is presented and discussed. A brief additional chapter presents the possibility that military clerks also produced camp signage. PREFACE Prior to their enlistment in the Roman army the clerical soldiers at Dura-Europos had probably been, many of them, illiterate farmers, desert peasants and traders who spoke exclusively native languages and worshipped local gods. Their military careers changed and moulded their lives. Like thousands of other scribes and clerical staff working in the service of the Roman Empire in other military bases equally distant from Rome, many of them learned, apparently willingly, to produce functional documents in a range of recognisably Roman handwriting styles. In this thesis, I set out to explore the working practices of the clerical soldiers at Dura-Europos with the intention of, at least partially, both revealing their training and accounting for some of the precise graphic details that characterise their writing styles. Reasons for choosing Dura-Europos as the focus of any contextually-based study are not hard to find. The unusually well-preserved remains of the Syrian city mean that the archaeological records from the site, though they have their limitations and difficulties, are relatively full. The ruins and also the important wall paintings from the city have attracted the interest of many and drawn much and varied scholarship to the site. The importance of the East, and of Syria, in the third century Roman Empire has made Dura - a strategically-situated base in its wider environment - important too to several other historical disciplines, many of which are concerned with uncovering the history of the Roman army. The city’s epigraphy, architecture, art and abundant ‘graffiti’ all contribute to general understanding of life there, so that regarding evidence for a study of writers and of writing no other army camp compares. Indeed nothing is perhaps as important for the study of Latin writing in the Roman Empire as the survival of the magnificent collection of documents known as ‘the Dura papyri’. There are now hundreds of published Latin papyri from the Roman era. Observations can, and ought, to be made about their writing styles.