Briasco ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 Graphic Skills and Literacy in Greek in Sixth-Century Aphrodito: The Issuers of Contracts and Petitions Livia Briasco OCUMENTS such as contracts and petitions are rich sources of information about the lifestyle, economy, and culture of the communities in Late Antique Egypt. However, they provide insight not only through their content (i.e., their text) but also through their external features, spe- cifically the handwriting.1 In fact, the study of handwritings has recently been identified as a key component in prosopographical studies and research on literacy in Late Antiquity.2 Considering all the individuals who could be involved in drafting a document, 1 Twenty years ago Jean-Luc Fournet proposed a new approach, called “paléographie signifiante,” in the study of documentary papyri. This ap- proach involves considering documents not only as vehicles of textual content but also as cultural objects with specific external features, such as format, mise en page, and handwriting, which can provide valuable infor- mation for reconstructing the social and cultural context in which each document was produced: J.-L. Fournet, “Disposition et réalisation gra- phique des lettres et des pétitions protobyzantines: pour une paléographie ‘signifiante’ des papyrus documentaires,” Pap.Congr. XXIV (Helsinki 2007) 353–367, “Beyond the Text or the Contribution of ‘Paléographie signi- fiante’ in Documentary Papyrology. The Example of Formats in Late An- tiquity,” in K. Bentein et al. (eds.), Novel Perspectives on Communication Practices in Antiquity (Leiden 2023) 17–28, and “La ‘paléographie signifiante’ 20 ans après,” in A. Ghignoli et al. (eds.), Written Culture in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. Signs Texts Data (Rome, in press). 2 See R. Ast, “Telling Them by Their Hands. What Palaeography Has to Offer Prosopography,” in F. A. J. Hoogendijk et al. (eds.), The Materiality of Texts from Ancient Egypt. New Approaches to the Study of Textual Material from the Early Pharaonic to the Late Antique Period (Leiden 2018) 27–34, at 27. D 524 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 issuers differ from notaries and witnesses, in that their parti- cipation is not due to their ability to write.3 Indeed, contract signatories were often ordinary people who did not use writing in their everyday life or at most could use it sporadically for private, work-related or financial, purposes. Therefore, it is to be expected that a certain number of issuers were illiterate, at least in Greek.4 Given the bilingual context of Late Antique Egypt, some individuals who were unable to write in Greek may none- theless have been literate in Coptic. The subscriptions of the parties involved in a document served, then as now, as evidence of their full consent to the content of the text. It seems very likely that they were perceived as indispensable elements for its validity, long before Justinian’s law (Cod.Iust. 4.21.17) established that they were mandatory. Therefore, we can infer that the issue of having illiterates as contracting parties was already addressed before the promul- gation of the Code, and that a solution was found in practice. This is shown by the fact that some documents from before Justinian’s time already show the involvement of someone who could write, acting to assist the illiterate party (presumably the weaker one) by signing on their behalf.5 This practice, which had emerged in 3 For such a study on the Dioskoros archive see K. A. Worp, “Witness Subscriptions in Documents from the Dioscorus Archive,” in J.-L. Fournet (ed.), Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans apres leur decouverte (Paris 2008) 143–153. 4 This scenario is not expected, however, for witnesses, who appear to be involved in contracts or receipts because they are capable of writing. Yet that is not always the case: a few, very interesting documents show us that witnesses too could be replaced by a hypographeus. It is our intention to con- sider these few cases in a future study. 5 On this figure see R. Calderini, “Gli ἀγράµµατοι nell’ Egitto greco- romano,” Aegyptus 30 (1950) 14–41, at 27–32; H. C. Youtie, “Because They Do Not Know Letters,” ZPE 19 (1975) 101–108, and “Ὑπογραφεύς. The Social Impact of Illiteracy in Graeco-Roman Egypt,” ZPE 17 (1975) 201– 221. More recently see A. Monte, “Firmare un documento quando non si può scrivere: le croci come sostitute di ‘firme’ autografe nei documenti greci LIVIA BRIASCO 525 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 concrete circumstances, was given legal status in Novel 73, issued by Justinian in 538, which regulated the drafting of contracts in cases involving illiterate issuers.6 This article investigates literacy rate by focusing on issuers’ subscriptions on private documents in sixth-century Aphrodito in order to analyse the social meaning of handwriting outside of the official or elite modes of cultural transmission.7 The overall outcome of this study is that the level of literacy in sixth-century Aphrodito is not as low as might have been expected. 1. The evidence base For the present study, just over 180 Greek contracts written in Aphrodito were considered (listed in the Appendix). Contracts that lack subscriptions by the issuers or preserve them in very bad condition were excluded.8 The only exception made is for su papiro dell’Egitto bizantino,” Scrineum 20 (2023) 29–53, and L. Briasco, “Should We Always Trust hypographeis? When Palaeography Contradicts the Text: The Case of P.Cair.Masp. III 67296,” Scrineum 21 (2024) 7–22, for interesting anomalies in some hypographai from Dioskoros’ archive. 6 For a recent translation of the Novel in English with comments see D. J. D. Miller and P. Sarris, The Novels of Justinian: A Complete Annotated English Translation (Cambridge 2018) I 515–521. 7 On the usefulness of studying this graphic substratum made by ordinary handwritings, not only in investigating the various functions historically per- formed by writing but also in studying graphic systems and types themselves, both Greek and Latin, see A. Petrucci, “Funzione della scrittura e termino- logia paleografica,” in Palaeographica, diplomatica et archivistica: studi in onore di Giulio Battelli (Rome 1979) 3–30. It should further be noted, more generally, that studies on the role and social impact of writing and the modes and characteristics of writing in daily life, which have flourished in the field of papyrology in recent decades, were preceded by a long tradition in the field of palaeography, with Armando Petrucci, along with others (such as Giorgio Cencetti and Guglielmo Cavallo, to name just a few), being among its leading figures in the second half of the last century. 8 The following documents have been excluded because they lack sub- scriptions: P.Cair.Masp. I 67089A, 67097r, 67098, 67099, 67101, 67102, 67107, 67108, 67111, 67113, 67118, 67123, P.Cair.Masp. II 67125, 67130, 526 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 documents that, although lacking subscriptions, contain clear information about the issuer’s literacy in the body of the text.9 And lastly, of the remaining documents written in Aphrodito during the sixth century, issuers from places other than the one in which they acted as contracting parties (i.e. Aphrodito) have also been excluded.10 As is well known, contracts from Aphro- dito are preserved in two archives: those of Flavius Dioskoros, son of Apollos (TM Arch 72), and Phoibammon, son of Triadel- phos (TM Arch 193). With regard to petitions, which are preserved only in the Dioskoros archive, three were considered alongside the con- tracts, while the others are fragmentary and lack subscriptions. In addition to contracts and petitions, another type of document 67232 descr., 67235, 67239 descr., 67243v descr., 67244 descr., 67245 descr., 67246 descr., 67247r descr., 67248 descr., 67255 descr., 67257 descr., 67265 descr., 67266 descr., 67269 descr., 67270 descr., 67297 + P.Flor. III 287, P.Cair.Masp. III 67332, 67333, 67334, P.Flor. III 282, 285, 294, 342, P.Lond. V 1699, 1706, 1841 descr., 1842 descr., 1843 descr., P.Hamb. I 23, P.Hamb. III 233, P.Heid. V 347, P.Michael. 41, 47, 49, 50, 56r, 56v descr., 57r, 60, P.Palau.Rib. 20, 23, 24, PSI IV 283, PSI VIII 931, P.Vat.Aphrod. 3 A+C, 3 B+D, 6, 19B, 25, 26, SB III 6704, 7201, SB XVI 12256, SB XXII 15633, SB XXIV 16125. 9 This is the case of P.Flor. III 283, the upper fragment of a misthosis con- tract written in 536, whose issuer, the farmer Ioannes, son of Dorotheos (no. 88), is described as a slow writer. It is also the case of P.Vat.Aphrod. 14, a contract of uncertain nature written in 524, whose issuer, the anonymous daughter of Isidoros and Antonia (no. 23), is qualified as a slow writer in the praescriptio. Despite Jean-Luc Fournet’s suggestion to reunite this frag- ment with P.Vat.Aphrod. 19C, this latter fragment contains only a few traces of the subscription by one witness and the completio by the notary Aurelius Apa Victor, on which see J. M. Diethart and K. A. Worp, Notarsunterschriften im byzantinischen Ägypten (Vienna 1986) 29–30, no. 15.1. 10 They are: Aurelius Psais, son of Horos, a farmer from the plain of Phthla, who issued an acknowledgment of a debt in 545 (P.Ross.Georg. III 37); the soldier Samouel, from the village of Tanyaithis, issuer of three contracts drafted in 526 and 527 (P.Michael. 43, 44, P.Mich. XIII 670); and Aurelius Abramos, from the hamlet of Psinsou, issuer of a sublease in 522 (P.Ross.Georg. III 33). LIVIA BRIASCO 527 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 from the Byzantine period requires subscriptions by the issuing party: receipts. However, receipts from Aphrodito are excluded from this study because they are generally signed by officials or agents representing the issuing party, and therefore do not repre- sent private citizens. 2. Quantifying and qualifying literacy The aim of this study is not only to quantify but also to qualify the literacy of documents’ issuers in sixth-century Aphrodito. This means that we not only estimated, based on the surviving documents with subscriptions of the issuer, how many of these could write, but also who they were and how they wrote.11 These aspects have not yet been fully elucidated in studies on literacy in ancient or Late Antique Egypt.12 To quantify and qualify literacy, we decided to use three levels, with the third level divided into further sub-levels (see the Tables, 530 infra). The illiteracy level is coded as A; this category also includes individuals who could eventually sign using their semeia.13 By examining the documents we can, at least in theory, distinguish between those who could not write and those who 11 In a few cases, the poor quality of the digital reproduction of a docu- ment and/or the scarcity of preserved letters from the subscription does not allow for the handwriting to be analysed in a way that is sufficient for it to be classified at a specific level of execution and complexity. 12 On the ancient period see J. Baines, “Literacy and Ancient Egyptian Society,” Man 18 (1983) 572–599; on the Greco-Roman period see Cal- derini, Aegyptus 30 (1950) 14–41; H. C. Youtie, “βραδέως γράφων: Between Literacy and Illiteracy,” GRBS 12 (1971) 239–261, and ZPE 17 (1975) 201– 221; U. Yiftach, “Quantifying Literacy in the Early Roman Arsinoitês: The Case of the Grapheion Document,” in D. M. Schaps et al. (eds.), When West Met East: The Encounter of Greece and Rome with the Jews, Egyptians, and Others. Studies Presented to Ranon Katzoff (Trieste 2016) 269–280. On the Byzantine period see E. Wipszycka, “Le degré d’alphabétisation en Égypte byzan- tine,” REAug 30 (1984) 279–296. 13 This is not the case for any of the issuers attested in documents written in Aphrodito: see Monte, Scrineum 20 (2023) 33–34. 528 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 could sign their names.14 To qualify the level of writing ability, however, an examination of each handwriting is necessary. We identified a semi-literacy level, coded as B, characterized by poor, trembling, and slow execution of handwriting. In the majority of cases, individuals who could write Greek letters did so hesitantly, as beginners, using the bilinear system and tracing large, spaced capital letters.15 They typically wrote only a few words: those necessary, in the case of contract issuers, to express their free consent to the transaction. In some instances, a scribe or hypographeus intervened to complete the sentence.16 However, as we shall see, there are a few exceptions to this scenario. In some cases, those who wrote slowly are presented in the text as βραδέως ὑπογράφοντες (slow subscribers).17 Nevertheless, other 14 For an exception to this theoretical assumption see Briasco, Scrineum 21 (2024) 7–22. 15 The expression “bilinear system” refers to a type of script in which the letters are of roughly uniform height and the graphic chain is confined be- tween two parallel lines; those lines coincide with the ruling, if present. This system is characteristic of majuscule handwritings. In contrast, the “quadri- linear system”—to which frequent reference will be made below—is defined by the presence of four ideal horizontal lines: the two central lines enclose the main body of the letters, while the upper and lower lines indicate the possible extensions of ascenders and descenders. This system is typical of minuscule handwritings, in which the form of various letters includes upward and downward strokes. In the specific case of Greek script, especially during the transitional phase from majuscule to minuscule, one may observe hybrid forms as well as majuscule handwritings executed in a manner that does not strictly adhere to the bilinear system, showing a certain tendency toward vertical extension beyond the central writing zone defined by the ruling. 16 In our evidence base, see for example the subscriptions of Aurelius Mathias, son of Ponnis (no. 121), and Aurelius Phibis, son of Apollos (no. 139), issuers of a misthosis contract written in 547 (SB XIV 11855.32–38), where the words πρὸς τὰ ὅρια are added by the nomikos Kyros. We will men- tion below another example of this behaviour. 17 On this category of writers see in particular H. C. Youtie, “Pétaus, fils de Pétaus, ou le scribe qui ne savait pas écrire,” ChrÉg 41 (1966) 127–143, and ZPE 19 (1975) 201–221; T. Kraus, “ ‘Slow Writers’—βραδέως γράφον- LIVIA BRIASCO 529 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 subscribers—especially issuers—wrote in the same slow and in- secure manner, even though their difficulties are not stated in the text. We have decided to classify these individuals in the same category. The same shaky and clumsy handwriting is also found in those who wrote very long sentences. These writers have been referred to in the literature as “retarded hands,” but the boundaries between these two types of writing are often subtle, as the results are nearly identical.18 Furthermore, it seems that only we, as modern scholars, have considered the extent of writing, as well as the use of majuscule or minuscule forms, as parameters for distinguishing semi- literacy from full literacy. On the other hand, from the perspec- tive of the ancients, it appears that the mode of execution was the first—and seemingly the only—marker of semi-literacy. That is why we can also find individuals explicitly described as slow writers who wrote long subscriptions or, in rarer cases, used min- uscule forms and ligatures, without this altering their status.19 The full literacy level is labelled C, This is divided into three sub-levels, while acknowledging that boundaries can be fluid, especially when it comes to classifying handwriting, particularly cursives. The first sub-level (C1) is basic skills, resulting in clear and smooth capital letters, with few simple ligatures or none. The second (C2) represents good graphic skills, demonstrated by individuals who have mastered the quadrilinear system and use minuscule forms (sometimes mixed with majuscule) with fre- τες: What, How Much, and How Did They Write?” Eranos 97 (1999) 86– 97. Moreover, on the phenomenon of slow writers within the wider picture of illiteracy levels in Late-Antique Egypt see Calderini, Aegytpus 30 (1950) 34–36; H. C. Youtie “AΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΟΣ. An Aspect of Greek Society in Egypt,” HSCP 75 (1971) 161–176; T. Kraus, “(Il)Literacy in Non-Literary Papyri from Graeco-Roman Egypt: Further Aspects of the Educational Ideal in Ancient Literary Sources and Modern Times,” Mnemosyne 53 (2000) 322–342. 18 Cf. Youtie, GRBS 12 (1971) 256 n.78. 19 This is the case, for example, of Aurelius Besarion, son of Mousaios (no. 46). 530 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 quent and elaborated ligatures. The highest sub-level (C3) is that of professional scribes, who use formalized and stylized scripts often employed for writing entire documents. The identity and number of literates and illiterates, along with the characteristics of literates’ handwriting, are analysed here from the perspectives of gender, status, and profession. Tables 1–6 illustrate the literacy rate of sixth-century Aphrodito as fur- ther measured by these variables. For our model, we used the charts provided in a recent study by Uri Yiftach on literacy in the Early Roman Arsinoites.20 Number of issuers (despite gender) Rate on the subtotal Illiterates 91 47: 15% Literates 102 52: 85% Total 193 TABLE 1: Literacy rate disregarding gender and status Literates Illiterates Total Literacy rate Men 99 81 180 55% Women 3 10 13 23% Total 102 91 193 52.8% TABLE 2: Literate/illiterate issuers and literary rate by gender Illiterates (A) Semi- literates (B) Fully literates (C) Total Literacy rate Civil Flavii – – 3 3 100% Military Flavii 1 – 1 2 50% Aurelii/Aureliae 65 13 34 112 41.9% TABLE 3: Literacy rate by “Aureliate” and “Flaviate” status Literates Illiterates Total Literacy rate Deacons 2 1 3 67% Monks 1 – 1 100% Presbyters 15 3 18 83% of which also oikonomoi 1 1 2 50% Total of clergymen 18 4 22 81% TABLE 4: Clergymen 20 Yiftach, in When West Met East 278. LIVIA BRIASCO 531 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 Literates Illiterates Total Literacy rate Landowners 18 6 24 75% Tenants 9 15 24 37.5% Shepherds 4 24 28 14% of which also agrophylakes 3 14 17 17% TABLE 5: Tenants, landowners, and shepherds Literate Illiterate Total Literacy rate Manufacturers 2 11 13 15% Merchants 1 1 2 50% TABLE 6: Craftsmen and merchants 3. Analysis of the data Considering the full range of information that we can derive from this evidence base, it emerges that the level of literacy in sixth-century Aphrodito was not very low. As shown in Table 1 and below, out of a total of 193 issuers, 102 were capable of writing, i.e. a solid 53%.21 As expected, the proportion is heavily skewed toward male issuers, but we will revisit this aspect below to quantify the impact of gender on literacy in this case study. Among the 102 issuers who were able to write, 25 are classified as semi-literate (Table 1); for two of them, this condition is known from the text of the contracts in which they were issuers, but it cannot be confirmed through an analysis of their hand- writing, as their signatures are lost.22 Among these, we also find 21 Percentages will be rounded down if there are numbers from 1 to 4 after the decimal point, and rounded up if the numbers are 6 to 9. 22 See n.9 above. Illiterates 47% Literates 53% ISSUERS 532 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 all three literate women so identified in our evidence base, who will be discussed below. Most of the literate issuers thus exhibited basic or strong writing skills. Twelve issuers were able to write as proficiently as notaries or professional scribes, using different styles within the category of formalized cursives (C3). The combination of ele- ments emerging from the analysis of their handwriting and the prosopographical information provided by the text of their sub- scriptions reveals an interesting picture, which will be presented in its main aspects in §3.3. 3.1 The impact of gender As expected, the ability to write in sixth-century Aphrodito, as elsewhere in Egypt, seems to be a prerogative of men.23 It is im- portant to note, however, that the presence of women as issuers of contracts or signatories of petitions is very rare. Of the 193 issuers considered in this study, only 13 are women. As shown in Table 2, three of these women are known to be literate, although at a semi-literate level. The anonymous daughter of Isidoros and Antonia (no. 23) is attested as an issuer—apparently not under the guardianship of a man—of a contract of uncertain content, written in 524. We know from the praescriptio (P.Vat. Aphrod. 14.4– 5) that she was a slow writer. Unfortunately, her signature is lost, hence we cannot analyse her handwriting. Aurelia Tsyros,24 daughter of Phoibammon (no. 175), is the seller in a contract for the sale of a house written in the second half of the sixth century 23 On female literacy in Greco-Roman and Byzantine Egypt see J. A. Sheridan, “Not at a Loss for Words: The Economic Power of Literate Women in Late Antique Egypt,” TAPA 128 (1998) 189–203; E. Salmenkivi, “Some Remarks on Literate Women from Roman Egypt,” in U. Terva- hauta et al. (eds.), Women and Knowledge in Early Christianity (Leiden 2017) 62– 72; S. R. Hübner, “Frauen und Schriftlichkeit im römischen Ägypten,” in A. Kolb (ed.), Literacy in Ancient Everyday Life (Berlin 2018) 163–178. 24 On the reading of this name see J.-L. Fournet, “Sur les premiers docu- ments juridiques coptes (2): les archives de Phoibammon et de Kollouthos,” in A. Boud’hors et al. (eds.), Études coptes XIV (Paris 2016) 115–141, at 119 n.31, and The Rise of Coptic (Princeton 2020) 21 n.59. LIVIA BRIASCO 533 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 (P.Vat.Aphrod. 4). Not only did she act without the guardianship of a man, but she also demonstrated her literacy by signing the document in her own hand (15–17). The text of her signature presented some reading difficulties, which have been explained by the editor Rosario Pintaudi.25 In any case, Tsyros’ hand- writing ( fig. 1) is an almost unimodular majuscule (except for omicron, written in smaller dimensions), slow and elementary but not particularly shaky or messy. Figure 1: Tsyros’ handwriting, P.Vat.Aphrod. 4.15–17 © 2025 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana As noted, another woman can be considered semi-literate, although with some uncertainties. The anonymous Aurelia (no. 17), who acts as the seller under the guardianship of a man along with another illiterate woman, also anonymous (no. 18), in the contract for sale Vat.Aphrod. 5, seems to have signed on her own, apparently without the intervention of an hypographeus. The papyrus is quite damaged, so one cannot be completely certain, but there appears to be no space for the signature of the hypo- grapheus between the end of the first Aurelia’s signature and the beginning of her guardian’s, Aurelius Paulus. The lines contain- ing her subscription (15–18), reconstructed in this manner by the editors, show very little handwriting—a well-formed majuscule, potentially more precise than Tsyros’ script, which could indi- cate a basic level (C1). Given that 3 of the 13 women attested as issuers were able to write, the literacy rate among women is 23%. The other 10 women attested as issuers but not able to write were all 25 R. Pintaudi, I Papiri Vaticani di Aphrodito (Rome 1980) 25, on lines 15 and 29. 534 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 Aureliae.26 Given, however, the total number of literate indi- viduals (193), women’s literacy is quantified at 1.5%. 3.2 Literacy and status This leads to another aspect to consider in a study of literacy: the status of the issuers, specifically their belonging to the “Aureliate” or the “Flaviate” group, to use James Keenan’s ter- minology.27 Among the 193 issuers considered, only 5 are Flavii, and there are no Flaviae.28 This data aligns with prosopographi- cal studies of Aphrodito society, which suggest that it was primarily composed of Aurelii, with the Flavii being somewhat ‘outsiders’ in this context.29 However, a preliminary distinction must be made between those who derive their status as Flavii from holding the highest positions in civil society and those who, on the other hand, derive it from holding the highest ranks in the military, in other words, between a “civil Flaviate” and a 26 They are Eirene, daughter of Besarion (no. 55), Eirene, daughter of Ioannes (no. 56), Elisabeth, daughter of Triadelphos (no. 57), Eudoxia, daughter of Georgios (no. 59), Eudoxia, daughter of Triadelphos (no. 60), Iudith, daughter of Ioannes (no. 106), Maria, daughter of Papnouthis (no. 119), Sophia, daughter of Ioannes (no. 170), and two anonymous (nos. 18 and 171). 27 On these concepts and on the names Flavius and Aurelius see J. Keenan, “The Names Flavius and Aurelius as Status Designations in Later Roman Egypt,” ZPE 11 (1973) 33–63; “The Names Flavius and Aurelius as Status Designations in Later Roman Egypt,” ZPE 13 (1974) 283–304; “An Afterthought on the Names Flavius and Aurelius,” ZPE 53 (1983) 245– 250; “On the Aureliate of Clergy and Monks,” ZPE 151 (2005) 145–152. 28 The number refers to the Flavii from Aphrodito. One Flavius, Samuel, son of Kollouthes (TM Per 410293), a soldier of the numerus of the Ptolemaites nomos, is attested as an issuer in three contracts between 526 and 527, two of which were written in Aphrodito. But he specifies his origin as the village of Tanyaithis. He is described as a “slow writer” (C. Bala- moshev, “Notes, New Readings and Corrections to Papyri from the Ar- chive of Dioskoros of Aphrodite,” Tyche 38 [2023] 221–233, at 229), but is excluded from the present research because of his provenance. 29 See Keenan, ZPE 53 (1983) 249, quoting from the Prosopografia written by Victor Antoun Girgis in 1938 on the “Aureliate” composition of Aphro- dito society. LIVIA BRIASCO 535 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 “military Flaviate.”30 Under this distinction, civil Flavii show a 100% literacy rate, 3 literate out of 3 (nos. 47, 53, 107); the military Flavii, on the other hand, exhibit a 50% literacy rate, with 1 of 2 being literate in Greek. Flavius Anoubis, son of Abramos (no. 27), who issued with the presbyter Anoubis, son of Psentaesis (no. 34) a contract of surety in 535 (P.Cair.Masp. III 67296) as former praipositos of a castrum P[…] in the Antaiopolite nome, was unable to sign by his own hand in Greek. Involved as his hypographeus in the same document we find the other military Flavius of our evidence base: the former praipositos Theoteknos, son of Psais (no. 173). He acted as a subscriber on behalf of other illiterate issuers in other contracts, but he is also attested as the issuer of a petition sent by the inhabitants of Aphrodito to Em- press Theodora (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.3 line 9) in 547. From this subscription as an issuer, we discover that he was also a land- owner. Among the three literate Flavii issuers, we find a professional scribe (C3): Flavius Dioskoros, son of Apollos, the famous land- owner and notary, whose handwriting in various styles is par- ticularly recognizable and well known to scholars.31 The two other civil Flavii attested as issuers show a basic level of graphic competence (C1); one, a landowner, is left anonymous due to the poor condition of the papyrus (no. 97). In the following discus- sion, dedicated to literacy and professions, we will return to both categories of landowners and notaries. Turning to the Aurelii and Aureliae issuers—who as men- tioned are significantly more numerous—the literacy rate is lower. Out of 112 Aurelii, 47 are capable of writing (42%) and include 13 semi-literate and 34 fully literate. This rate is lower 30 I would like to thank Prof. Fournet for suggesting that I emphasize this aspect. 31 On Dioskoros’ scripts see J.-L. Fournet, Hellénisme dans l’Égypte du VIe siècle. La bibliothèque et l’oeuvre de Dioscore d’Aphrodité (Cairo 1999) 245–248, and L. Del Corso, “Le scritture di Dioscoro,” in Les archives de Dioscore 89– 115. 536 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 not only compared to the Flavii but also in comparison to the overall literacy rate of 53%, as we saw above, irrespective of gender and status. Some of the Aurelii demonstrate very good writing skills, which likely stem from their professions or employ- ment rather than their status—an aspect we analyse in what follows. 3.3 Literacy and employment or offices We will now quantify and qualify literacy in sixth-century Aphrodito from the perspective of professions and employment. In this analysis, we should first isolate clergymen, distinguishing them from all who are laypeople. 3.3.1 Clergymen Among the 193 issuers examined, 22 are clergymen. This is not a large group, but it is characterized by a very high literacy rate: as shown in Table 4, 18 out of 22 clergymen are able to write, 81%.32 When considering only the presbyters, the rate slightly increases: 15 out of 18 presbyters from Aphrodito who are attested as issuers can write (83%). Yet an upgrade in rank does not appear to necessarily have a positive impact on literacy. This is evident in the case of Psais, son of Besis (no. 159), the issuer of two loan contracts written in 547 and 549. In the first he is a deacon while two years later he is a presbyter; but in both documents he is presented as illiterate. Regarding church offices, two presbyters who are issuers also present themselves as oikono- moi. This additional role does not necessarily entail writing com- petence, as one of them, Palos, the oikonomos of Apa Hermauos (no. 131), is attested as illiterate. Another interesting finding is that among the 25 individuals attested as semi-literate, 6 are clergymen. One of them, Ioseph son of Iakob (no. 94), presbyter of the Holy Oratory of the Archangel Michael, is presented as a slow writer in the praescriptio of a surety contract written in 535 (P.Cair.Masp. III 67297 + 32 This confirms the conclusions reached by Ewa Wipszycka, which opposed the widely-held claim of illiteracy among clerks and monks: REAug 30 (1984) 288–295. LIVIA BRIASCO 537 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 P.Flor. III 287), which he subscribed in a spaced and elementary majuscule ( fig. 2). The other semi-literates are not explicitly labelled as slow writers by notaries, but their graphic execution does not exceed that level. These include the presbyters Eulogios (no. 61), Iakob, son of Abramos (no. 72), Petros (no. 137), Psais (no. 158), and the monazon Aurelius Isak, son of Victor (no. 103), whom we will revisit below. Figure 2: Ioseph son of Iakob’s handwriting (P.Flor. II 287.5–6) © by permission of Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana Other reproduction by any means is forbidden Promaos, son of Ioannes (no. 157), presbyter of the holy place of Apa Promaos martyros, subscribed the petition to the Empress (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 2) in a clear and well-executed majuscule, with some refined elements such as small hoops in the form of alpha, my, and omega ( fig. 3), of the type used for copying books.33 Apparently, he did not master the quadrilinear system, but he stands out from the other basic writers (C1) for his graphic execution, made more sophisticated also by the slight inclination toward the right of the axis. Figure 3: Promaos’ handwriting (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 2) © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues Photo: Mohammed Ibrahim Among the clerics of Aphrodito, there are a few very skilled writers who reach the level of professional scribes. One of these is Victor, presbyter of the Holy Church of Aphrodito (no. 176), who is recorded as one of the issuers of the petition to the Em- press, signing in a highly stylized, sloping quadrilinear cursive. On this individual and his particular handwriting see §4. 33 For his handwriting see Fournet, in Written Culture. 538 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 3.3.2 Landowners As is well known, rent contracts drafted in sixth-century Aphrodito are primarily designated as misthosis or misthothike homologia, and more rarely antimisthosis.34 Misthosis contracts are written from the perspective of the lessee, who is the issuer of the document addressed to the lessor, the landowner. Conversely, antimisthosis contracts are written from the perspective of the lessor. These latter contracts are less common than misthoseis. Nevertheless, landowners are key figures in the petition ad- dressed by the inhabitants of Aphrodito to Empress Theodora. Thus we have information on the literacy of both groups. The landowners (ktetores) attested as issuers in our sample are 24, of whom 18 are literate, a high literacy rate of 75%. Almost all of the literate landowners have at least a basic level of literacy (C1). Only one, Kallinikos, son of Hermauos (no. 109), who sub- scribed the aforementioned petition (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.3 lines 20–21), did so in a clumsy majuscule resembling the hand- writing of slow writers. It is likely that some of these landowners combined their status with other roles, including ecclesiastical ones. For one indi- vidual, Georgios, son of Psenpnouthes (no. 65), we know for sure that he held both titles: he signed the petition as διάκ(ονος) καὶ κτ̣[ή]τορ (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 23). His handwriting, a quadrilinear cursive with long vertical strokes, many ligatures from bottom-up, small hoops in some letter forms (such as alpha), and a pleasant contrast between wide and small letters, brings him close to professional scribes, although his graphic skills do not fully match theirs ( fig. 4). Figure 4: Georgios’ handwriting (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, pg. 2 line 23) © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim 34 On antimisthosis contracts see F. Lemaire, “Antimisthosis in the Dioscorus Archive,” Pap.Congr. XXV (Ann Arbor 2010) 397–408. LIVIA BRIASCO 539 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 Among the literate landowners, we also find the owners of both archives known from late antique Aphrodito. We will re- turn to Flavius Dioskoros, son of Apollos (no. 53), at §3.3.5, as his profession as a notary surpasses his role as a landowner as regards graphic expertise. Let us here discuss Phoibammon, son of Triadelphos (no. 150), the issuer of several documents pre- served in his archive. To judge from the few clear graphic signs still visible in the subscription of issuer 14 of the long petition to the Empress (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 14), this ktetor Phoi- bammon should be identified as the son of Triadelphos, as has been suggested by Giovanni Ruffini.35 Phoibammon’s hand- writing is a majuscule with many ligatures, achieved by pro- longing the horizontal stroke of one letter into the following vertical stroke (e.g. in the sequence πρ) or extending the last stroke of one letter from bottom up to form the vertical stroke of the following letter with a thickening (e.g. in the sequence δι). The use of ligatures indicates good graphic competence, though the execution is not always consistent. 3.3.3 Tenants Our evidence base includes 24 tenants, who, as lessees, are issuers of land contracts in the form of misthosis. Like the land- owners, some of these tenants combined their status with other roles or titles. Four such cases are in our evidence: a monazon (no. 103), a copper craftsman (no. 110), a syntelestes (no. 121), and a shepherd (no. 184). Some tenants are explicitly qualified as farmers. Among the tenants, only nine are literate, a literacy rate of 37.5%, half that of the landowners. Seven are fully literate, including the copper craftsman (whom we will revisit in §3.3.6 on manufacturers) and the syntelestes, both demonstrating good or basic graphic competence, respectively. It is unclear whether the good graphic skills exhibited by some tenants were the result of their other employment or roles. The tenant who was also a shepherd, however, is among the illiterates, which is not sur- prising, as we will see that the literacy rate among shepherds was 35 G. Ruffini, A Prosopography of Byzantine Aphrodito (Durham 2011) 465. 540 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 particularly low. The tenant and monazon Isak, son of Victor (no. 103), men- tioned above (537), subscribed a misthosis contract in 514 (P.Flor. III 279.20–21 and 23–24) by his own hand. He is not described in the praescriptio as a slow writer; however, his uncertain and coarse graphic execution qualifies him as one. He was also un- able to write the entire sentence that would have expressed his full consent to the contract, which led the notary to intervene and complete it himself. Isak then resumed his writing tool, the calamus, and reaffirmed his identity ( fig. 5). Figure 5: Isak’s handwriting in P.Flor. III 279.20–24 © by permission of Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana Other reproduction by any means is forbidden 3.3.4 Syntelestai The term syntelestes, which appears frequently in the papyri from Aphrodito, has been subject to debate by scholars. Jean Gascou, who did not believe that the term referred to ‘mere’ tax payers/contributors, suggested that it indicated also a role as intermediaries with local authorities for the collection of these taxes.36 Following the definition in the Preisigke Wörterbuch, he also emphasized the collegial nature of the term, considering the syntelestai as a consortium and comparing that of the protokometai and ktetores, the two other categories of inhabitants in the village of Aphrodito who are attested as acting as a group, that is, col- legially. However, according to Avshalom Laniado, unlike the protokometai and ktetores, there is insufficient evidence in the papyri 36 J. Gascou, Les grandes domaines, la cité et l’état en Égypte byzantine (Paris 1985) 49–52. LIVIA BRIASCO 541 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 to support the idea of collegial action by the syntelestai, who in the majority of the documents from Aphrodito act as individuals.37 The aspect that seems to emerge from the documents of Aphrodito, however, is a ‘notable’ status of the syntelestai in this community.38 Laniado (37–48) provided a list of all the syntelestai and syntelestriai that he was able to trace in the papyri from Aphrodito. Many of these—the majority of whom are included in the Appendix below—in fact hold other honorary titles or are prominent figures in the village, including the two already- mentioned owners of the archives through which we know so much about the history of Aphrodito: Dioskoros, the son of Apollos, and Phoibammon, the son of Triadelphos. Of these two, it is interesting to note that they both never identify themselves as syntelestes in their own signatures as senders of documents; rather, they are presented as such in, for example, the praescriptio of the documents they are sending. Regardless of the various interpretations offered for this term, the fact remains that, if we limit ourselves to considering only the syntelestai—that is, the male individuals bearing this title— their literacy rate appears to be the highest possible: 10 out of 10 syntelestai are capable of writing, with only one, Ioannes, son of Constantinus (no. 81), being semi-literate. The two syntelestriai attested as issuers in our evidence base, on the other hand, are both illiterate. 3.3.5 Shepherds and agrophylakes Among the contracting parties and issuers of contracts and petitions in Aphrodito are a significant number of shepherds. Their literacy rate is quite low: of the 28, only 4 are able to write (14%). The majority, 17, are also attested as field guardians 37 A. Laniado, “Συντελεστής: Note sur un terme fiscal surinterprété,” JJP 26 (1996) 23–51, at 32–33 and 47. 38 It should also be noted that the situation is different for other locations: see the considerations put forward based on a papyrus from Oxyrhynchus in Laniado, JJP 26 (1996) 48–50. 542 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 (agrophylakes).39 This dual function is well attested in papyri from Aphrodito, and we know that it was regulated by a contract concluded in late 514 between the community of shepherds and field guardians and the communities of protokometai, syntelestai, and ktetores of Aphrodito (P.Cair.Masp. I 67001), representing the written formulation of a pre-existing custom.40 Considering only those who were both shepherds and field guardians, the literacy rate rises slightly to 17%, with 3 out of 17 literates. Among these, the brothers Aurelius Kollouthes (no. 111) and Aurelius Victor (no. 189), sons of Phoibammon, issuers of a land sale contract in 540 (P.Michael.gr. 45), are slow writers, with handwriting that shows this qualification. The third literate shepherd, however, demonstrates very good writing skills (C2/C3). Aurelius Phoibammon, son of Hermauos (no. 141), one of the 13 shepherds and agrophylakes involved in the aforementioned contract to represent their community, is the only one who can sign his name (P.Cair.Masp. I 67001.35).41 His small cursive, with many ligatures from bottom up, involving vertical strokes of letters such as eta and iota, is almost equivalent to certain handwritings used to draft entire documents ( fig. 6): Figure 6: Phoibammon’s handwriting in P.Cair.Masp. I 67001.35 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: A. Bülow-Jacobsen 39 On this figure see D. Bonneau, “Ἀγροφύλαξ (agrophylax),” in Pap. Congr. XVIII (Athens 1988) II 303–315. 40 For a commentary on this important document in the context of the tensions attested in Aphrodito see J. Keenan, “Village Shepherds and Social Tension in Byzantine Egypt,” YCS 28 (1985) 245–259, at 254–256. 41 Interestingly enough, the other 12 are divided into two groups, with two individuals intervening as subscribers on behalf of each group. This is not the only instance of multiple illiterate issuers with several hypographeis, which may suggest that there was a sort of maximum number of individuals who could be substituted in the act of writing. LIVIA BRIASCO 543 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 3.3.6 Manufacturers and merchants Among the issuers of contracts and petitions from Aphrodito we find 13 manufacturers and 2 wine merchants (Table 6). The literacy rate among manufacturers is very low: all are illiterate except for Aurelius Kyriakos, son of Andreas (no. 113), a copper craftsman (chalkotypos) and tenant, and Aurelius Victor (no. 179), a wine dresser (ampelourgos), who represent 15% of the sample. Among the illiterate manufacturers are a tailor, a washerman, a potter, and a linen weaver, as well as headmen of specific trades (e.g. copperworkers, carpenters, weavers). Merchants show a higher literacy rate (50%), although the sample is not large enough to draw firm conclusions. Ezechiel, son of Victor (no. 62), headman of the wine merchants, sub- scribed the petition to the Empress (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.3 line 14) with his own hand, while Dorantinoos, son of Ioseph, an ordinary wine merchant,42 is attested as illiterate in the same document (p.2 line 15). 3.3.7 Military officers As we saw concerning literacy rate among the Flavii, two soldiers are attested as issuers in our evidence base. It should be noted that, since the age of Augustus, there had been an increase in the level of literacy among soldiers and a significant demand for litterati milites, for whose recruitment both proficiency in writing and arithmetic skills were considered.43 In some Byzan- tine communities, soldiers were even involved as drafters of private contracts, effectively replacing professional notaries: the most evident example of this practice is provided by the archive of Patermouthis (TM Arch 37), documents primarily related to the economic interests of a soldier in the numerus of Syene and 42 He is part of a group of six illiterates, all manufacturers, and all sub- stituted in the act of writing by the same hypographeus: the tabellio Ieremias, who also subscribed for himself, a point we will return to. 43 See W. V. H. Harris, Ancient Literacy (London 1989) 253–255, 293– 294, and S. E. Phang, “Military Documents, Languages, and Literacy,” in P. Erdkamp (ed.), A Companion to the Roman Army (Malden 2007) 286–305. 544 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 his family. Military officers and soldiers known as “occasional scribes”44 in Syene used informal, non-stylized cursives, immedi- ately distinguishable from the writings of professional notaries and scribes.45 Similarly, the only literate soldier in our evidence base, the aforementioned Flavius Theoteknos, son of Psais (no. 173), despite being often involved as subscriber on behalf of others or as a witness—as if he served as a point of reference, in this regard, for the community of Aphrodito—used a sloping rightward and highly ligatured quadrilinear cursive, inelegant, sometimes imprecise, with no attempt at stylization (C2).46 3.3.8 Civil officials Officials of various kinds are attested as parties in contracts and issuers of petitions. There are six in our evidence base, almost all of whom are literate. One can expect that the proto- kometai, headmen of the village, were able to write, since their main duty was the collection of taxes. It is therefore not sur- prising to find that all four of these (one of whom is attested as apoprotokometes) subscribed to four contracts by their own hand. One of the protokometai, Aurelius Senouthios, son of Apollos (no. 169), also appears as one of the issuers of the petition to the Em- press (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 21). Another is Aurelius Apollos, son of Dioskoros (no. 38), father of the famous notary, landowner, and archive owner, Dioskoros. The literacy of other officers tasked with local tax duties is also assumed: boethoi and (chrys)hypodektai were frequently intermediary signatories of re- ceipts issued by the pagarchs to individual taxpayers. As already 44 For this expression see S. Richter, “Byzantine Sales: Some Aspects of the Development of Legal Instruments in the Later Roman and Byzantine Period,” in J. G. Keenan et al. (eds.), Law and Legal Practice in Egypt from Alexander to the Arab Conquest (Cambridge 2014) 83–95, at 87. 45 On their handwritings see L. Briasco and A. Skalec, L’archivio di Pater- mouthis (Rome 2024) 16–29. 46 James Keenan called him an “amateur writer”: “On Languages and Literacy in Byzantine Aphrodito,” Pap.Congr. XVIII II 161–167. On his handwriting see also Briasco, Scrineum 21 (2024) 7–22. LIVIA BRIASCO 545 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 mentioned, we did not consider receipts in the present study be- cause they are typically signed by officers. However, we find one boethos and one chrysypodektes among the signatories of the petition to the Empress. Let us now examine how these different officers wrote. Three protokometai, including Apollos,47 used informal quadrilinear cursive with ligatures (C2). The only one to stand out is the previously mentioned Senouthios, whose stylized quadrilinear cursive ( fig. 8) places him at a highest level of literacy (C3). Figure 8: Senouthios’ handwriting in P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 21 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim This high level of literacy is also evident in the handwritings of other officers. The boethos Hermauos (no. 66) and the chrysypo- dektes Apollos, son of Ioseph (no. 41), used an upright and rounded quadrilinear script with features typically associated with a bureaucratic or chancellery context: the contrast between wide and narrow letters, the evident prolongation of the vertical ascendant and descendant strokes (sometimes ending in small hooks), the presence of loops in single letters (e.g. minuscule alpha), and the creation of stretched and narrowed loops on vertical strokes involved in counterclockwise ligatures ( figs. 9 and 10).48 47 On Apollos’ Greek handwriting see J. Keenan, Pap.Congr. XVIII II 165; on his Coptic handwriting see L. Vanderheiden, “The Figure of Apollos, Father of Dioscorus, in the Light of Coptic Letters From Sixth-Century Aphrodito,” in S. R. Huebner et al. (eds.), Living the End of Antiquity (Berlin 2020) 119–128, at 124–125. 48 On features of bureaucratic/chancellery style of Greek quadrilinear cursives see G. Cavallo, Il calamo e il papiro. La scrittura greca dall’età ellenistica ai primi secoli di Bisanzio (Florence 2005) 59–66, and Briasco and Skalec, L’archivio di Patermouthis 17–18. 546 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 Figure 9: Hermauos’ handwriting in P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 24 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim Figure 10: Apollos’ handwriting in P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 22 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim 3.3.9 Notaries The last category to be examined here is that of notaries. As we observed of tax officers, this is not a question of literacy rate, which is of course 100% for these persons who made writing their profession. Four professional scribes are attested as issuers in our evidence base, all subscribing to the petition sent by the inhabitants of Aphrodito to the Empress before 547. Two of them, Pilatus, son of Apollos (no. 149), and Ieremias, son of Victor (no. 78), described themselves with two of the numerous terms used in Late Antique Egypt to qualify notaries (tabellio and nomikos).49 The other two signed the petition as landowners but are known as having drafted documents: Flavius Dioskoros, the most famous notary of Aphrodito and drafter of many documents, including this petition itself; and Amais, son of Apollos (no. 4), identified on palaeographic grounds as the drafter of a loan contract in 544 (P.Cair.Masp. II 67127).50 As expected, their level of literacy is the highest possible. We wish to draw attention to their graphic choices when they acted as issuers, i.e. when they wrote not as professionals but as private citizens. The interesting point is that some notaries use the exact same handwriting when subscribing as issuers and when drafting 49 On these terms see Diethart and Worp, Notarsunterschriften 9–10, 13. 50 The identification was first suggested by the editor J. Maspero. LIVIA BRIASCO 547 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 entire documents, while others alter the graphic execution or even the graphic system depending on the role in which they are called to write.51 Consider the notary Pilatus, for example. When subscribing to the petition (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 lines 19–21) for him- self and on behalf of three individuals, he used the same inclined quadrilinear cursive that he used in drafting many contracts as a nomikos.52 His handwriting is typical of notarial contracts drafted in Aphrodito.53 Amais, son of Abramos (no. 4), used a slightly sloping to the right quadrilinear cursive with few ligatures while subscribing as issuer ( fig. 11). While drafting a contract as notary, instead, he wrote more quickly, tracing many clockwise ligatures, and with a strong inclination to the right ( fig. 12). Figure 11: Amais’ handwriting as issuer, P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.3 line 6 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim 51 On his habit of handwritings used for different purposes see L. Briasco, “Scelte grafiche e uso dei simboli nelle sottoscrizioni finali dei contratti dall’Egitto tardoantico (Provincia di Tebaide, secoli V–VII),” in M. Boccuzzi (ed.), Mani e scritture, simboli e testi. Ricerche su fonti documentarie ed epigrafiche tardoantiche (Rome 2024) 23–70, at 39–42. 52 For a list of contracts drafted by Pilatus see Diethart and Worp, Notarsunterschriften 30–31, no. 16.1. In the subscription as issuer and hypo- grapheus in the petition P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, Pilatus presented himself first as tabellio (p.2 line 19), followed by two individuals who were incapable of writing, and then, in the last part of the subscription reserved for the hypographeus, as nomikos (line 21). The same lexical choice with the same order, which indicates the same ratio, is displayed in the subscription as issuer and hypographeus by Ieremias, discussed below. 53 Briasco and Skalec, L’archivio di Patermouthis 30–31. 548 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 Figure 12: Amais’ handwriting as notary, P.Cair.Masp. 1 67127.9 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim Consider now the case of the notary Ieremias. He subscribed to the petition as issuer and on behalf of six other individuals (P.Cair.Masp. 3 67283, p.2 lines 15–19)54 using an inclined and neat majuscule with elongated and thin vertical strokes and horizontal strokes systematically prolonged to connect letters to one another, as a chain. However, in the only surviving docu- ment that was drafted by Ieremias as a notary, in 541 (P.Bingen 132), a different picture emerges: he used a sloping to right quadrilinear cursive, of the type frequently seen in notarial con- tracts, rich in clockwise ligatures. Besides Ieremias, Dioskoros also alters graphic system depend- ing on his role and even within the same document. He wrote the body of our repeatedly-cited petition in his upright and wide majuscule (p.1 line 9: fig. 13), but chose his slightly inclined quadrilinear script for his subscription as megaloktetor (p.3 lines 7– 8: fig. 14). Dioskoros is known for his ability to modulate his handwriting, while keeping it absolutely personal and recog- nizable, which demonstrates his high level of literacy and graphic expertise.55 Figure 13: Dioskoros’ handwriting for the body of the petition (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.1 line 9) © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim 54 At the beginning of the subscription, in his own name and on behalf of the illiterates, he, like Pilatus, presented himself as tabellio, and then closed the hypographeus formula by repeating his name and qualifying him- self as nomikos. On this matter see Ruffini, Prosopography 241–242 (Ieremias 16, Ieremias 20). 55 Del Corso, in Les archives de Dioscore 89–115, and Briasco and Skalec, L’archivio di Patermouthis 18. LIVIA BRIASCO 549 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 Figure 14: Dioskoros’ handwriting for the subscription as issuer in P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, pg. 3, lines 7–8 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim 4. Doubtful cases Most of the problems in literacy studies arise from homonymy. To resolve these, Ruffini’s prosopography was used, along with the re-edition of some documents and new palaeographic iden- tifications made by members of the NOTAE team, which are reported in the entries available on the public database of the project. We will here discuss a few cases of particular interest. In our evidence base, a Ioannes, son of Hermias, appears twice as an issuer: once as the issuer of a lease contract written in 530 (P.Cair.Masp. I 67104.18–19), and once as the issuer of a deposit contract, fragmentary and without a precise date (P.Mich. XIII 671.22–23). Ruffini, listing different individuals bearing the name Hermias, suggested a match between the father of Ioannes 123 and Ioannes 174, although he chose to keep them as distinct individuals. Upon examining the handwritings, we can confirm the match ( figs. 15 and 16): there is only one Ioannes, son of Hermias, who wrote long subscriptions in a clumsy majuscule with spaced letters and irregularities in some forms, qualifying him as a semi-literate (B). Figure 15: Ioannes’ subscription in P.Cair.Masp. 1 67104.17–18 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: A. Bülow-Jacobsen Figure 16: Ioannes’ subscription in P.Mich. XIII 671.22–24 © Image courtesy of the University of Michigan Library Digital Collections 550 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 Similarly, analysis of the handwritings leads to the identifi- cation of Anoubis, son of Psentaesis (no. 34), presbyter of the Apa Mousaios church, who issued a surety contract in 535 (P.Cair.Masp. III 67296.16–17), with Anoubis presbyter of the same foundation who signed, without a patronymic, the petition to the Empress.56 His handwriting, a quadrilinear cursive with some counterclockwise ligatures, qualifies him as a good writer (C2). In our evidence base the name Victor is very frequent; in par- ticular, we find several presbyters Victor as issuers. Alia Hanafi suggested that Aurelius Victor, son of Besarion (no. 182), who subscribed as issuer a deed of exchange between 514 and 535 (P.Thomas 28.23–24) and then, as presbyter, a loan contract in 544 (P.Mich. XIII 669.18–20), should be identified with one of the presbyters named Victor who signed the petition to the Em- press (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 lines 1, 7, 9).57 Unfortunately, in the latter’s subscription, Victor did not specify his affiliation to a church or a monastery. Based on their handwriting, we can exclude a match with the second Victor (no. 177) and the third (no. 178) in the petition, as they show lower skills—they are both basic writers (C1)—than the homonymous subscriber of the deed of exchange P.Thomas 28. As mentioned in the discussion on clerks, the first presbyter Victor (no. 176) in the petition, by con- trast, had very good writing skills. He wrote his subscription in a stylized way: his quadrilinear cursive is decidedly inclined to the right, with ascendant strokes that are prolonged in the blank upper margin and sometimes doubled ( fig. 17). This kind of stylization is often used by skilled writers at the beginning of a document or a block of text, made possible by the availability of more space. This Victor is the only one who could be matched with the issuer of P.Thomas 28, who did not describe himself as a presbyter but as Aurelius. His handwriting qualifies him as a 56 For this identification see Briasco, Scrineum 21 (2024) 15. 57 A. Hanafi, “Two Documents from the Archive of Dioscorus,” Bulletin of the Center for Papyrological Studies 1 (1985) 57–70. LIVIA BRIASCO 551 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 good writer (C2), though it is not as stylized, and more rounded ( fig. 18). Even assuming a stylistic change in execution, in exam- ining the shapes of the letters and ligatures we do not find a convincing match. Figure 17: Victor’s subscription in P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 lines 1–2 © Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Association Internationale de Papyrologues photo: Mohammed Ibrahim Figure 18: Victor son of Besarion’s subscription in P.Thomas 28.23–24 © Cambridge University Library Some homonymy exists between two or more individuals attested as both illiterates and literates. This is the case with Aurelius Phoibammon, son of Psentaesis (no. 148), an illiterate issuer of the petition, substituted by a hypographeus (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283, p.2 line 23); the homonymous illiterate (no. 147) issuer of a fragmentary surety contract written between 527 and 552 (P.Flor. III 288.12–14); and the homonymous issuer (no. 149) of a loan contract written before 540 (P.Lond. V 1844 descr. 12– 13), who seems to be literate. The sheet of papyrus is very dark where Phoibammon should have signed, such that we cannot conclusively determine his literacy level. Nevertheless, judging by the space occupied by his subscription, it seems that no hypo- grapheus was involved on his behalf. In that case, we are forced to consider them as three distinct individuals, as we lack hand- writings on which to base identification.58 The situation is com- 58 Ruffini distinguished the two illiterate Phoibammons as Phoibammon 114 (P.Cair.Masp. III 67283) and Phoibammon 39 (P.Flor. III 288), but sug- gested that the latter may be identified with the literate subscriber in P.Lond. V 1844 descr., based on the fact that they seem to have been involved in 552 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 parable with Sansneus, son of Isak, who is attested as illiterate (no. 167) in a loan contract drafted in 526 or 541 (P.Cair.Masp. III 67308.5) and as literate (no. 168) in a lease contract drafted in 524 or 542 (P.Flor. III 342 + P.Cair.Masp. II 67259 descr., fr.B.3–4). 6. Closing remarks We now can offer some final considerations. First, in general, half of the issuers of contracts and petitions drafted in Aphrodito during the sixth century were able to write and signed without the intervention of an hypographeus. This is not the worst-case scenario. Second, belonging to the “Flaviate” did not entail literacy, as the presence of one illiterate Flavius confirms. Literacy surely came with social, economic, and political connections in Aphro- dito society, which was still, as noted by scholars, dominated by the “Aureliate.” As far as women are concerned, they were rarely involved as issuers of contracts and petitions in the first place. This means that the number of literate women is very low in absolute terms, with only three known to be able to write in the entire evidence base over a span of one century. In relative terms, their literacy rate remains low (23%), but is still slightly higher than the literacy rates of shepherds (14%) or manufacturers (15%). This is consistent with the fact that two of the women attested as capable of writing are property owners, as they are both involved in house sales. We can therefore infer that they came from a higher social background than shepherds or manufacturers. Regarding clergymen, it must be noted that they were gen- erally able to write. However, they rarely reached a high level of graphic skills. Another category that stands out for its literacy rate is landowners, who evidently needed to write to manage their properties. Officers like boethoi or hypodektai show handwritings with chan- similar business. Nevertheless, we prefer to keep them separate, as the issuer of P.Lond., unlike Ruffini’s Phoibammon 39, seems able to write. LIVIA BRIASCO 553 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 cellery elements. Lower officers, such as village headmen, surely knew how to write, but used more informal and less elegant cur- sives. Predictably, the highest skills were found among notaries as professional scribes, some of whom chose to use different styles depending on the type of graphic intervention. Those with good or great graphic skills are often found in other roles within the documentary practice of the village. This is why we find skilled writers not only among the issuers but also in the roles of scribes, hypographeis, and/or witnesses. These in- dividuals seem to have shared their skills with the Aphrodito community, as its prominent inhabitants.59 July, 2025 Roma, Sapienza Università di Roma livia.briasco@uniroma1.it 59 The research lying at the core of this article was carried out within the framework of the ERC-2017 Advanced Grant project NOTAE (“Notae: not a written word but graphic symbols,” Principal Investigator Antonella Ghignoli), funded by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Agreement No. 786572). I am deeply grateful to Jean-Luc Fournet for having generously devoted his time to reading this article; his insightful comments and sug- gestions have significantly enriched its content. I also wish to extend my sincere thanks to Antonella Ghignoli, Daniele Bianconi, and Aneta Skalec for the fruitful exchange of ideas and discussions on these subjects. ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 APPENDIX: The Evidence Base The Evidence Base lists all individuals considered in the present study. For each individual, we provide praenomen (if reported), name, patronymic, the date(s) or date range(s) in which they are attested as issuers of contracts and petitions, any prosopographical information regarding profession or employment, and all identifiers up to a maximum of three: the Trismegistos identifier (TM Per), Ruffini’s prosopographical identifier (Name + number), and the NOTAE Per identifier, which groups together only the documents in which the same individual graphically intervened. The NOTAE Per identifier can be consulted on the Notae Public website at link https://notae-erc.eu/. Names are given in the form preferred by Trismegistos People. All cited papyri are repro- duced at least in the image bank bipab.aphrodito (http://bipab. aphrodito.info/, and sometimes also in the digital libraries of their respective places of conservation. In the absence of a digital identifier, a footnote will indicate the document in which the individual acted as issuer. In all other cases, the identifier(s) will be sufficient to identify that particular individual and, if necessary, with the help of the date, the document(s) to which we are referring. The professions, employments, and titles in the fifth column are those by which an individual is identified in the document(s) issued by him/her in the signature or in the praescriptio. In many cases, we are aware of other professions, employments, or titles of an individual from other documents in which he/she appears as recipient, witness, hypographeus, or notary, or even simply where he/she is mentioned, as in the tax register of Aphrodito. This is why Flavius Dioskoros son of Apollos, to name the most famous example, is listed here as landowner only, and not as notary and owner of the archive; nonetheless, of course, we had to take into account his profession in this research. LIVIA BRIASCO 555 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 60 Even if the subscription is barely legible, one can see some hoops on top of the letters kappa and eta in κώµης, which are stylized elements typical of chancellery cursives. 61 We know him as ktetor from his only subscription as issuer, which appears in the petition from the inhabitants of Aphrodito to the Empress. Nevertheless, he has been identified on palaeographical grounds with the Amais who drafted and completed, with his final subscription, a contract from the same Dioskoros archive, thereby acting as a notary even though he did not present himself as one. On this matter see 547 above. No. Prae- nomen Name and patronymic Date(s) or range of activity as issuer Profession, employment, title TM Per Ruffini’s identifier NOTAE Per Literacy level 1 Abramos ante 547 Presbyter of the Holy Church of Apa Romanos TM Per 406713 Abraam 49 – A 2 Abramos son of Anoubis ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406767 Abraam 48 – A 3 Aurelius Abramos son of Victor ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 135677 Abraam 3 NOTAE Per 137 C360 4 Amais son of Abramos ante 547 landowner (ktetor)61 TM Per 406776 Amais 1 NOTAE Per 773 C3 556 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 62 The ink has partly vanished on the fifth issuer’s subscription, but traces of wide, spaced, and uncertain majuscule forms can still be seen. 5 Andreas 534–535 tenant TM Per 406251 Andreas 9 – A 6 Anonymous ante 540 – – – NOTAE Per 3100 C2 7 Anonymous ante 540 – – – NOTAE Per 4441 C1 8 Anonymous ante 540 – – – NOTAE Per 3101 C1 9 Anonymous ante 540 – – – NOTAE Per 3105 B62 10 Anonymous ante 540 – – – NOTAE Per 3107 B 11 Anonymous ante 540 – – – NOTAE Per 3108 B LIVIA BRIASCO 557 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 63 Traces of clumsy majuscule forms. 64 Issuer of P.Vat.Aphrod. 3 B+D. 65 Issuer of P.Palau Rib. 22. 66 Even though the papyrus is quite damaged, there is a clear change of hand between the subscriptions of the anonymous Aurelia on one side and her guardian Paulus on the other. Therefore, despite the fragmentary state of the document, it seems that there is not enough space for the name of a literate hypographeus between these two subscriptions, which, by contrast, is present in the subscription of the second anonymous female issuer, written by Triadelphos. 12 Anonymous ante 540 – – – NOTAE Per 3111 B63 13 Anonymous64 547–559 – – – – A 14 Anonymous65 500–599 tenant – ]ios 2 – A 15 Anonymous 500–599 – – – NOTAE Per 2187 C2 16 Anonymous 500–599 – TM Per 412534 – NOTAE Per 2015 C3 17 Aurelia Anonymous 500–599 – TM Per 412709 Anonymous 32 – B?66 558 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 67 His subscription is in poor condition, which makes it difficult to define his graphic skills more precisely. From the few visible signs, we can say that he is fully literate. 68 Cf. BL 9.44. 69 One of P.Cair.Masp. I 67122 issuers. 18 Aurelia Anonymous 500–599 – TM Per 412714 Anonymous 33 – A 19 Aurelius Anonymous 518–527 – TM Per 261780 [—].ou 1 NOTAE Per 1942 C1 20 Aurelius Anonymous 547–559 – TM Per 415689 – – C67 21 Anonymous 547 koursor – Koursor 268 NOTAE Per 3122 C1 22 Aurelius Anonymous brother of Makarios (no. 117)69 525–575 – – – – A LIVIA BRIASCO 559 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 70 Presented in the text as slow writer: see Balamoshev, Tyche 38 (2023) 229. Unfortunately her subscription is lost, so we do not have a specimen of her handwriting. 71 One of P.Cair.Masp. 1 67122 issuers. 23 Anonymous daughter of Isidoros and Antonia 524 – – Anonymous 49 – B70 24 Aurelius [...]os son of Hermauos 500–599 tenant TM Per 414378 Anonymous 95 NOTAE Per 2185 C1 25 Anonymous son of Roup71 525–575 – – – – A 26 Aurelius Anonymous son of Senouthes 575–625 tailor TM Per 387092 Anonymous 100 – A 27 Flavius Anoubis son of Abramos 535 apopraepositus of the castrum P[…] in the Antaiopolite nome TM Per 406827 Anouphi(o)s 26 – A 560 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 28 Aurelius Anoubis son of Abramos 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 182721 Anouphi(o)s 11 – A 29 Aurelius Anoubis son of Bottos 521 – TM Per 407042 Anouphi(o)s 12 NOTAE Per 3187 C1 30 Aurelius Anoubis son of Hermauos 521 – TM Per 407065 Anouphi(o)s 13 – A 31 Aurelius Anoubis son of Horos 523 – TM Per 408381 Anouphi(o)s 14 – A 32 Aurelius Anoubis son of Isakios 615 or 645 syntelestes TM Per 138045 – – C1 33 Aurelius Anoubis son of Palos 572 shepherd TM Per 138091 Anouphi(o)s 34 – A 34 Anoubis son of Psentaesis 535 and ante 547 presbyter of the Holy Church of Apa Mousaios TM Per 406825 + 406774 Anouphi(o)s 25 + Anouphi(o)s 28 NOTAE Per 847 C2 35 Apollos ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406717 Apollos 116 NOTAE Per 2059 C1 LIVIA BRIASCO 561 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 36 Aurelius Apollos son of Abramos 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 135270 Apollos 38 – A 37 Aurelius Apollos son of Constantius, brother of Ioannes no. 81 and Victor no. 183 511/2, 526/7, or 541/2 – TM Per 414515 Apollos 41 – A 38 Aurelius Apollos son of Dioskoros and father of Dioskoros no. 53 ante 540 and 544 protokometes and syntelestes TM Per 131663 Apollos 2 NOTAE Per 1548 C2 39 Aurelius Apollos son of Hermauos 544 shepherd TM Per 407195 Apollos 125 – A 40 Aurelius Apollos son of Hermias 521 syntelestes TM Per 406977 Apollos 44 NOTAE Per 3201 C1/C2 41 Apollos son of Ioseph ante 547 chrysoypodektes TM Per 406750 Apollos 120 NOTAE Per 2066 C3 562 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 72 Presented in the text as slow writer: Balamoshev, Tyche 38 (2023) 229. 42 Aurelius Apollos son of Kyros 539 shepherd TM Per 135723 Apollos 101 – A 43 Apollos son of Pi[...] ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406748 Apollos 119 NOTAE Per 2065 C3 44 Aurelius Besis son of Phoibammon 559 shepherd TM Per 410301 Besis 16 – A 45 Aurelius Besarion son of Dioskoros 511/2 or 526/7 or 541/2 protokometes TM Per 135751 Besarion 1 NOTAE Per 1706 C2 46 Aurelius Besarion son of Mousaios 515 – TM Per 453658 Besarion 2 NOTAE Per 2981 B72 47 Flavius Bessourous ante 547 – TM Per 406793 Bessourous 10 NOTAE Per 2081 C1 48 Aurelius Charisios son of Hermauos 524 and ante 540 syntelestes TM Per 138073 Charisios 4 NOTAE Per 534 C2 LIVIA BRIASCO 563 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 49 Chrystes ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406794 Chrestes 7 NOTAE Per 2082 C2 50 Aurelius Constantinus 631–632 – TM Per 415675 Ko(n)stantinos 4 – C2 51 Constantinus son of Hermauos ante 547 headman of the copper workers TM Per 406723 Ko(n)stantinos 9 – A 52 Aurelius David son of Victor 514 apoprotokometes TM Per 186866 Dau(e)id 4 NOTAE Per 882 C2 53 Flavius Dioskoros son of Apollos no. 38 565 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 135684 Dioskoros 3 NOTAE Per 6 C3 54 Dorantinoos son of Ioseph ante 547 wine merchant TM Per 406725 Dorantinoos 4 – A 55 Aurelia Eirene daughter of Besarion 566 syntelestria – Eirene 7 – A 564 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 56 Aurelia Eirene daughter of Ioannes and Thetous 553 – TM Per 407922 Eirene 4 – A 57 Aurelia Elisabeth daughter of Triadelphos (?), sister of Eudoxia no. 60 520–545 – TM Per 425882 Elisabet 3 – A 58 Enoch son of Hermauos 521 and ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406789 Enoch 7 NOTAE Per 2079 C1 59 Aurelia Eudoxia daughter of Georgios 615 or 630 or 645 – TM Per 138035 Eudoxia 9 – A 60 Aurelia Eudoxia daughter of Triadelphos(?) sister of Elisa- beth no. 57 520–545 – TM Per 425883 Eudoxia 5 – A LIVIA BRIASCO 565 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 73 His subscription is in a bad state of preservation, which makes it difficult to define his graphic skills more precisely. From the few visible signs, we can say that he is fully literate. 61 Eulogios ante 547 presbyter of the Holy Church of the martyr Apa Biktor TM Per 406711 Eulogios 7 NOTAE Per 2056 B 62 Ezechiel son of Victor ante 547 headman of the wine merchant TM Per 406787 Iezekiel 1A+1 NOTAE Per 2078 C73 63 Aurelius Georgios son of Ioannes 525–575 – TM Per 413169 Georgios 16 NOTAE Per 2040 C1 64 Aurelius Georgios son of Psaios 555 shepherd TM Per 183156 Georgios 17 – A 65 Georgios son of Psenpnou- thes ante 547 deacon and landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406752 Georgios 13 NOTAE Per 2067 C2/C3 66 Hermauos ante 547 boethos TM Per 406761 Herma(o)(u)os 92 NOTAE Per 2069 C3 566 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 74 Even though his subscription as issuer in PSI VIII 932 is incomplete, we know that he was capable of writing from his intervention as a witness in P.Cair.Masp. I 67001 (Aphrodito, 514). Therefore, we can say with good certainty that nobody was involved on his behalf in subscribing PSI VIII 932. 67 Aurelius Hermauos son of Bottos 518–527 – TM Per 182725 Herma(o)(u)os 17 NOTAE Per 140 C274 68 Aurelius Hermauos son of Ioseph 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 182708 Herma(o)(u)os 19 – A 69 Aurelius Hermauos son of Psenthaesios 541 – TM Per 427184 Herma(o)(u)os 88 – A 70 Aurelius Hermauos son of Psentouoris 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 182709 Herma(o)(u)os 20 – A 71 Horouonchis son of Mathias ante 547 head of the weavers TM Per 406732 Horouogchi(o)s 6 – A 72 Iakob son of Abramos 549 presbyter TM Per 407620 Iakob 27 NOTAE Per 734 B LIVIA BRIASCO 567 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 73 Aurelius Iakob son of David 548–549 or 563– 564 tenant TM Per 137544 Iakob 28 – A 74 Aurelius Iakob son of Phoibammon ante 547 and 566 syntelestes TM Per 406762 Iakob 26 NOTAE Per 2071 C1 75 Aurelius Ieremias son of Apollos 525–575 – – Ieremias 24 – A 76 Ieremias son of Phibis ante 547 head of the paktonopoioi TM Per 406734 Ieremias 21 – A 77 Aurelius Ieremias son of Ponnis 527–533 landowner (ktetor) – Ieremias 11 – A 78 Ieremias son of Victor ante 547 tabellio/nomikos TM Per 406736 = TM Per 406721 Ieremias 16 NOTAE Per 2063 C3 79 Aurelius Ioannes 500–550 – TM Per 381385 Ioannes 49 NOTAE Per 3428 B 80 Aurelius Ioannes son of Beskouis 521 and ante 540 deacon TM Per 182720 Ioannes 58 NOTAE Per 136 C2 568 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 75 Presented in the text as slow writer: Balamoshev, Tyche 38 (2023) 229. Unfortunately his subscription is lost, so we do not have a specimen of his handwriting. 81 Ioannes son of Constantius, brother of Apollos no. 37 and Victor no. 183 511/2 or 526/7 or 541/2 and 521 syntelestes TM Per 407084 + 414514 Ioannes 53 NOTAE PER 3200 B 82 Aurelius Ioannes son of Cornelius ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 201023 Ioannes 31 NOTAE Per 60 C1 83 Aurelius Ioannes son of Dorotheos 536 farmer (georgos) and tenant TM Per 408230 Ioannes 127 – B75 84 Aurelius Ioannes son of Hermias and Rachel 530 and mid 6th cent. tenant TM Per 408030 + 415586 Ioannes 123 + Ioannes 174 NOTAE Per 4204 B 85 Aurelius Ioannes son of Hermauos 552 tenant TM Per 408249 Ioannes 186 – A LIVIA BRIASCO 569 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 76 His subscription is in a bad state of preservation, which makes it difficult to define more precisely his graphic skills. From the few signs visible we can say that he is fully literate. 77 At the beginning of P.Flor. III 284.16 we read ἔγραψα ὑπὲρ α[ὐτο(ῦ)], which is absent from the edition, indicating that a literate individual was involved to subscribe on his behalf. 86 Aurelius Ioannes son of Isakios 559? – – Ioannes 154 – C76 87 Aurelius Ioannes son of Kyriakos 552 – TM Per 135737 Ioannes 175 – A 88 Aurelius Ioannes son of Psais 538 – TM Per 408236 Ioannes 130 – A77 89 Aurelius Ioannes son of Psentaesis 552 – TM Per 407945 Ioannes 199 – A 90 Ioannes son of Samuel 565 monk, presbyter, and dioiketes of the monastery of Apa Souroutos TM Per 146913 Ioannes 176 NOTAE Per 4255 C1 91 Aurelius Ioannes son of Victor 521 farmer (georgos) and tenant TM Per 407017 Ioannes 62 – A 570 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 78 With the name of the oratory incorrectly given as the patronymic, the upper part (P.Cair.Masp. III 67297) of the surety contract issued by Ioseph in 535 and its lower part (P.Flor. III 287), which contains the subscriptions, are not joined yet in Trismegistos. 79 Presented in the text as slow writer: Balamoshev, Tyche 38 (2023) 229. 92 Ioseph son of Apollos ante 547 washerman TM Per 406727 Ioseph(i)(o)s 57 – A 93 Aurelius Ioseph son of Daniel 582–602 – TM Per 410316 Ioseph(i)(o)s 73 – A 94 Ioseph son of Iakob 535 presbyter of the Holy euktêrion (oratory) of the Archangel Michael TM Per 45364978 Ioseph(i)(o)s 32 NOTAE Per 846 B79 95 Ioseph son of Ioannes ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406743 Ioseph(i)(o)s 59 – A 96 Aurelius Ioseph son of Phios 538 – TM Per 408242 Ioseph(i)(o)s 40 NOTAE Per 1913 B 97 Aurelius Isak son of Apollos 521 farmer (georgos) and tenant TM PER 406990 Isak(i)(os) 19 – A LIVIA BRIASCO 571 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 80 Issuer of P.Palau Rib. 22. 98 Aurelius Isak 500–599 TM Per 412536 Isak(i)(os) 12 NOTAE Per 2016 C3 99 Isak son of Ioannes ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406765 Isak(i)(os) 40 NOTAE Per 2072 C1 100 Isak son of Mousaios ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406755 Isak(i)(os) 47 – A 101 Isak son of Onophrios 500–526 tenant TM Per 414658 Isak(i)(os) 14 NOTAE Per 3286 C1 102 Aurelius Isak son of Psentaesis 527 shepherd TM Per 408398 Isak(i)(os) 18 – A 103 Aurelius Isak son of Victor 514 monazon and tenant TM Per 186864 Isak(i)(os) 16 NOTAE Per 886 B 104 Aurelius Isi[...]i[...]80 500–599 tenant – Isi[...]i... 1 – A 105 Aurelius Isidoros 550–625 – – Isidoros 1 NOTAE Per 3447 B 572 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 81 His subscription is in a bad state of preservation, which makes it difficult to define more precisely his graphic skills. From the few signs visible we can say that he is fully literate. 82 Even though his handwriting is shaky, clumsy, and imprecise, many minuscule forms are used, frequently in ligatures traced from bottom to top or formed by prolonging the horizontal strokes, which would indicate a good level of graphic education. The execution style, in this case, could be explained by hypothesizing the writer’s old age. 83 His subscription is in a bad state of preservation, but we can see a few letters written in a unsure and shaky way. 106 Aurelia Iudith daughter of Ioannes 584/5 or 590/1 syntelestria TM Per 448931 Ioudith 1 – A 107 Flavius K[...] ante 547 landowner (ktetor) – K[........] 1 NOTAE Per 2080 C81 108 Kallinikos ante 547 presbyter of the Holy Church of Ama Maria TM Per 406792 Kallinikos 13 NOTAE Per 2054 C282 109 Kallinikos son of Hermauos ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406795 Kallinikos 14 NOTAE Per 1375 B83 110 Aurelius Kallinikos son of Victor ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406715 Kallinikos 6 NOTAE Per 736 C1 LIVIA BRIASCO 573 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 84 Presented in the text as slow writer: Balamoshev, Tyche 38 (2023) 229. 111 Kollouthes son of Phoi- bammon, brother of Victor no. 189 540 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 138084 Kollouthos 28 NOTAE Per 4373 B84 112 Aurelius Kollouthes son of Tri- adelphos, brother of Phoibammon no. 150 520–545 – TM Per 415703 Kollouthos 16 NOTAE Per 4168 C1 113 Aurelius Kyriakos son of Andreas 532 copper craftsman (chalkotypos) and tenant TM Per 408412 Kuriakos 10 NOTAE Per 73 C2 114 Aurelius Kyriakos son of Menas 600–650 tenant TM Per 425984 Kuriakos 1 – A 115 Kyros son of Victor ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406782 Kuros 19 NOTAE Per 2077 C2 574 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 116 Lucanus ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406718 Loukanos 6 NOTAE Per 2061 C2 117 Aurelius Makarios 525–575 – – Makarios 47 – A 118 Makarios son of Ioseph ante 547 headman of the [...]oi TM Per 406740 Makarios 45 – A 119 Aurelia Maria daughter of Papnouthis 575–650 – TM Per 146892 Maria 1 – A 120 Mathias son of Ioseph ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406773 Math(e)ias 22 NOTAE Per 2076 C1 121 Aurelius Mathias son of Ponnis 516/7 or 531/2 tenant TM Per 408439 Math(e)ias 7 NOTAE Per 80 B 122 Aurelius Menas 557? – TM Per 410251 Menas 52 NOTAE Per 4214 C1 LIVIA BRIASCO 575 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 85 His subscription is in a bad state of preservation, which makes it difficult to define more precisely his graphic skills. From the few signs visible we can say that he is fully literate. 123 Aurelius Menas son of Phoibammon 547–559 – TM Per 415691 Menas 1 NOTAE Per C85 124 Menas son of Psatis 631 or 646 syntelestes and tenant TM Per 138056 Menas 72 NOTAE Per 4282 C1 125 Aurelius Mousaois 563–572 tenant TM Per 415704 Mousaios 1 – A 126 Aurelius Mousaios son of Martes 521 cumminseller (kyminopoles) TM Per 406946 Mousaios 12 NOTAE Per 3199 C1 127 Aurelius Mouses son of Psais 500–550 syntelestes TM Per 184111 Mouses 1 NOTAE Per 2017 C2 128 Aurelius Nikantinoos son of Isidoros 537 syntelestes TM Per 184104 Nikantinoos 1 NOTAE Per 4286 C1/C2 576 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 129 Aurelius Orsenouphis alias Pnote son of Hera- kleios 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 182718 Oursenouphios / Ouersenouphios 1 – A 130 Aurelius Pakouis son of Ieremias 572 shepherd TM Per 138101 Pakou(i)s 5 – A 131 Palos ante 547 monk, presbyter and oikonomos of Abba Hermauos monastery TM Per 406797 Palos 19 – A 132 Aurelius Palos son of Papeus 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 182717 Palos 3 – A 133 Aurelius Panoupis son of Hermauos 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 182711 Panoube 1 – A LIVIA BRIASCO 577 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 86 A bad state of preservation, and thus difficult to define more precisely his graphic skills. From the few signs visible we can say that he is fully literate. 134 Papnoutis son of Beskouis 587/8 shepherd – Papnouthis 21 NOTAE Per 3338 C86 135 Aurelius Paulos son of Psais 524 syntelestes TM Per 408085 Paulos 12 NOTAE Per 1717 C2 136 Aurelius Pekysis son of Hermauos 539 shepherd TM Per 135725 Pekusis 12 – A 137 Petros ante 547 presbyter of the Holy Catholic Church of the Apostles TM Per 406763 Petros 13 NOTAE Per 2049 B 138 Petros son of Apollos 552 hupodiakonos of the Holy topos of the martyr Apa Horouonchis TM Per 407960 Petros 18 – A 578 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 87 Identification by J.-L. Fournet, who suggested to correct Hibeis to ibeis in P.Lond. V 1694. 139 Aurelius Phibis son of Apollos 516/7 or 531/2 and 547(?) – TM Per 408435 + TM Per 361234 Hibeis 1 + Phibeas 187 NOTAE Per 1392 B 140 Aurelius Phibis son of Harauos 552 furrier? (kaunakoplokos) TM Per 407941 Phib 19 – A 141 Phoibammon son of Hermauos 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 182707 Phoibammon 43 NOTAE Per 135 C2/C3 142 Aurelius Phoibammon son of Hermauos 521 TM Per 406961 Phoibammon 45 NOTAE Per 3204 C1 143 Phoibammon son of Papnoutis ante 547 head of the carpenters TM Per 406729 Phoibammon 116 – A 144 Phoibammon son of Phibis ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406771 Phoibammon 78 NOTAE Per 2075 C2 LIVIA BRIASCO 579 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 88 This individual may be identified with the following, as both are illiterate. Unfortunately, the beginning of P.Flor. III 288 is lost, and so we do not have more prosopographical information on the issuer, nor do we know whether or not he was a ktetor, like the homonymous individual in P.Cair.Masp. III 67283 (no. 148). 145 Phoibammon son of Psais 521 presbyter of the Holy topos of Apa Pinoution TM Per 406975 Phoibammon 46 NOTAE Per 3203 C1 146 Aurelius Phoibammon son of Psais 526 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 261778 Phoibammon 50 – A 147 Aurelius Phoibammon son of Psentaesis 527–552 – TM Per 414592 Phoibammon 3988 – A 148 Phoibammon son of Psentaesis ante 547 landowner (ktetor) TM Per 406757 Phoibammon 114 – A 580 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 89 I am not persuaded that one can identify an individual explicitly presented as illiterate with another who has basic or even good writing skills “on the grounds that they are engaged in comparable activities” as suggested by Ruffini. 90 The bad state of preservation of the papyrus makes it not clear whether his level was that of semi-literacy or full literacy. 149 Phoibammon son of Psentaesis ante 540 – TM Per 414866 Phoibammon 3989 NOTAE Per 3109 B or C90 150 Phoibammon son of Tri- adelphos, brother of Kollouthes no. 112 520–545, ante 547 and 565 landowner (ktetor) and owner of the archive TM Per 138089 Phoibammon 1 NOTAE Per 3977 C1/C2 151 Phoibammon son of Victor 544–545 shepherd TM Per 408074 Phoibammon 79 – A 152 Pilatus son of Apollos ante 547 tabellio/nomikos TM Per 147006 Pilatos 1 NOTAE Per 5 C3 153 Aurelius Ponnis son of Hatres 521 – TM Per 406935 Pon(n)is 8 – A LIVIA BRIASCO 581 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 154 Aurelius Pouoris son of Makarios 500–599 tenant TM Per 449046 – – A 155 Aurelius Promaos son of Pabesios 506 farmer and tenant TM Per 407998 Proma(u)os 6 – A 156 Promaos son of Apollos ante 547 – TM Per 406738 Proma(u)os 35 – A 157 Promaos son of Ioannes ante 547 presbyter of the Holy topos of the martyr Apa Promaos TM Per 406742 Proma(u)os 36 NOTAE Per 2047 C1 158 Psais ante 547 presbyter of the southern Holy Catholic Church TM Per 406783 Psai(o)s 71 NOTAE Per 2053 B 159 Psais son of Besis and Tasais 547 and 549 deacon (547) and presbyter (549) TM Per 135673 + 407204 Psai(o)s 72 – A 160 Psais son of Ieremias 565 potter (keramoplastes) TM Per 408058 Psai(o)s 79 – A 582 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 161 Aurelius Psais son of Ioannes 598? tenant TM Per 405606 Psai(o)s 82 – A 162 Aurelius Psais son of Pouonsis 537 tenant TM Per 406493 Psai(o)s 56 – A 163 Psais son of Victor 563–572 tenant TM Per 415706 Psai(o)s 3 – A 164 Aurelius Psenpnouthes alias Lilos son of Hermauos 565 mechanicos TM Per 135743 Psempnouthi(o)s 16 – A 165 Aurelius Psentaesis son of Mousaios 514 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 182719 Psenthaesis 4 – A 166 Aurelius Romanus son of Isak ante 540 – TM Per 414862 Romanos 5 NOTAE Per 3106 C2 LIVIA BRIASCO 583 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 91 It seems unlikely that this individual should be identified with the following homonymous one, as suggested by Ruffini, because in one instance Sansneus is attested as illiterate, while in the other, not only does he subscribe in his own hand, but he also shows a good level of graphic competence. 92 Even though the fragment bearing the subscription is in poor condition, we can observe minuscule forms involved in ligatures; therefore, the choice of level C2 is justified. 167 Aurelius Sansneus son of Isak 526 or 541 – TM Per 406880 Sansneus 191 – A 168 Aurelius Sansneus son of Isak and Herais 524 tenant TM Per 408278 Sansneus 1 NOTAE Per 2147 C292 169 Aurelius Senouthios son of Apollos 544 and ante 547 headman of the village (protokometes) TM Per 183699 Senouthes 1 NOTAE Per 3975 C3 170 Aurelia Sophia daughter of Ioannes 587–588 syntelestria TM Per 459636 Sophia 13 – A 171 Aurelia T[...] 631–632 – TM Per 415676 – – A 584 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 172 Theodoros 524 presbyter of the Holy topos of Apa Dios TM Per 408090 Theodoros 4 NOTAE Per 1715 C2 173 Flavius Theoteknos son of Psais ante 547 landowner (ktetor) and apopraepositus TM Per 135675 Theoteknos 1 NOTAE Per 62 C2 174 Triadelphos son of Constantinus ante 547 – TM Per 406759 Triadelphos 7 NOTAE Per 2068 C2/C3 175 Aurelia Tsyros daughter of Phoibammon 500–599 – TM Per 412682 Tirenat 1 (= Tsura 1?) – B 176 Victor ante 547 presbyter of the Holy Church of Aphrodito TM Per 406731 Biktor 180 NOTAE Per 2045 C3 177 Victor ante 547 presbyter of the Holy Church of Apa Menas martyr TM Per 406710 Biktor 181 NOTAE Per 2055 C1 178 Victor ante 547 presbyter of the new Holy Church of Aphrodito TM Per 406712 Biktor 182 NOTAE Per 2057 C1 LIVIA BRIASCO 585 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 179 Aurelius Victor 500–599 wine dresser (amplourgos) TM Per 414678 Biktor 1 NOTAE Per 86 C2 180 Aurelius Victor son of Anoubis 582–602 – TM Per 410328 Biktor 224 – A 181 Victor son of Apollos 548 linen weaver TM Per 408079 Biktor 187 – A 182 Aurelius (in 514– 535) Victor son of Besarion 514–535 and 544 presbyter in 544 TM Per 135657 Biktor 8 NOTAE Per 3973 C2/C3 183 Aurelius Victor son of Constantius, brother of Apollos no. 37 and Ioannes no. 81 511/2, 526/7, or 541/2 – TM Per 414512 Biktor 42 – A 184 Aurelius Victor son of Hermauos 514, 523/4, and 526 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 261776 Biktor 46 – A 185 Aurelius Victor son of Ioannes 553 farmer (georgos) TM Per 407935 Biktor 196 – A 586 GRAPHIC SKILLS AND LITERACY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 93 Presented in the text as slow writer: Balamoshev, Tyche 38 (2023) 229. 186 Aurelius Victor son of Makarios 521 and 522–553 shepherd and tenant TM Per 186862 Biktor 54 + Biktor 55 – A 187 Aurelius Victor son of Makarios 514–527 tenant – Biktor 233 NOTAE Per 3080 C1 188 Victor son of Papnoutis 527 tenant TM Per 135263 Biktor 74 – A 189 Aurelius Victor son of Phoibammon, brother of Kollouthes no. 111 540 shepherd and guardian of the fields (agrophylax) TM Per 138070 Biktor 150 NOTAE Per 3416 B93 190 Aurelius Victor son of Promaos 514 shepherd and agrophylax TM Per 182715 Biktor 47 – A 191 Aurelius Victor son of Psais 514 shepherd and agrophylax TM Per 182710 Biktor 43 – A LIVIA BRIASCO 587 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 65 (2025) 523–587 192 Aurelius Victor son of Psais son of Simous 514 shepherd and agrophylax TM Per 182712 Biktor 45 – A 193 Aurelius Victor son of Psenpnouthes 526 shepherd and agrophylax TM Per 261777 Biktor 58 – A