Chris Keith, «'In My Own Hand': Grapho-Literacy and the Apostle Paul», Vol. 89 (2008) 39-58
Recent research in the school papyri of Egypt, especially Oxyrhychus, has illuminated our understanding of the pedagogical process in the Greco-Roman world. Particularly interesting in this respect is the acquisition and social function of grapho-literacy (i.e., the ability to compose writing). Since few were literate, and of those few, fewer could read than could write, understanding how one gained grapho-literacy, who gained grapho-literacy, and how that literacy was employed in day to day life shines new light on passages such as 1 Cor 16,21, Gal 6,11, Col 4,18, 2 Thess 3,17, and Phlm 19. In these passages, Paul draws attention
to the fact that he has personally written in the text. This paper will argue that these passages are not merely interesting asides, but rather significantly heighten the
rhetorical force of the text. They draw attention not only to Paul’s grapho-literacy, but also to his ability to avoid using it.
“In My Own Handâ€: Grapho-Literacy and the Apostle Paul 51
Shepherd of Hermas was a “slow writerâ€. Though the command of Vis.
2.4.3 presumes he can read, Hermas must copy letter by letter since he
cannot identify the syllables (ta;" sullabav"), even if writing books (58).
Papyrologists have criticized Cribiore’s methodological basis for
identifying the “syllabic†and “copying†methods as two separate
instructional techniques (59). In her later work, Cribiore acknowledges
the possibility that teachers could have practiced both simultaneously
while advancing students with varying competencies through the
different stages of literate education (60). However, Cribiore has
demonstrated conclusively that, in the ancient world, ability in one
literate skill does not automatically imply ability in the other and that
compositional writing dwelled at the high end of the pedagogical
spectrum, where few students ever progressed. That is, the ancient
context was certainly familiar with individuals such as the town clerk
Petaus (discussed immediately below), who could write a short
formula but was not literate enough to know when he had made a
mistake in his copying.
Of the minority of children who were educated, most did not
progress far through the pedagogical system, and thus were
——————
Writing, 116-117, 150 -152; Gymnastics of the Mind, 163-164, 176-177; HARRIS,
Ancient Literacy, 254, 254, n. 419, 276-277, 318; T.J. KRAUS, “ ‘Slow Writers’—
BRADEWS GRAFONTES: What, How Much, and How Did They Write?â€, (ID.)
Ad Fontes. Original Manuscripts and Their Significance for Studying Early
Christianity – Selected Essays (Leiden 2007) 131-147; YOUTIE, “Bradevw"
grafwnâ€, 239-261.
v
(58) Herm. Vis. 2.4.3 (read); 2.1.4 (letter by letter); 2.1.4 and 2.4.3 (writing
“little†books). One may compare here with Cicero’s scribes (librarii) Spintharo
and Tiro, discussed in Att. 13.25. Spintharo has attained a slightly higher gradation
of writing ability than Hermas, since he can follow dictation syllable by syllable.
Even more advanced, however, is Tiro, who can follow whole sentences. For
discussion of Hermas and Christian copyists, see K. HAINES-EITZEN, Guardians of
Letters. Literacy, Power, and the Transmitters of Early Christian Literature (New
York 2000) 36-37.
(59) See especially K. VÖSSING, “Schreiben lernen, ohne lesen zu können? Zur
Methode des antiken Elementarunterrichts,†ZPE 123 (1998) 121-125. Other
reviews of Cribiore’s work are H. MAEHLER, review of Writing, Teachers, and
Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt by Raffaella Cribiore, Gnomon 75 (2003) 229-
235; K. VÖSSING, review of Gymnastics of the Mind by Raffaella Cribiore,
Gnomon 75 (2003) 613-616.
(60) CRIBIORE, Gymnastics, 176-177. For her discussion of various ancient
educational theorists and their descriptions of learning to write, see CRIBIORE,
Writing, 139-152.