StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I was just overhearing another bullshit documentary, in what I caught the words "maria magdolna's diary".

The stupidity of those words left me reeling. Even assuming that there was such a personage, that such a personage was actually literate, it was amazingly stupid to think that some people imagine that people written diaries then. At best, rich nobles with time on their hands written memoir, like Ceaser's conquest of Gall.

However, I do wonder: just how large libraries were then, especially private ones? How affordable was it to write? I know that up until the industrial revolution's efficiency of paper pulping, making paper was difficult, so I can't imagine that the basic things needed was any way cheap.

So:

How large were private libraries?

What was the size of a library that was considered "respectable" (for Romans or otherwise)?

Who stored and made libraries?

How likely was that someone taught literacy could amass a library?

Were there copiers, people copying and selling books written by others?

I assume that most writers (Cicero, etc) were either self-published (as they had the money) or had someone publish (as they didn't have the money). How big a business was publishing?

Who were taught literacy? Say, among Romans. Was it a priority to teach literacy compared to say, volunteering to the Legion? Were boys only taught literacy or were girls too?

There is no way I am going to write a 15 page essay to answer that. Especially as most answers can be found with a bit of googling.

So pick one and I'll try to answer that when I have the time. But please try to at least make some effort yourself.

Quick and dirty answers:

Zixinus wrote:How large were private libraries?

Depends on the person.

What was the size of a library that was considered "respectable" (for Romans or otherwise)?

Depends on the Roman citizen and on the time period. Some senators had entire rooms filled with it, other senators had just one.

Who stored and made libraries?

Depends on the person, the time period and the region.

How likely was that someone taught literacy could amass a library?

Again, depends on the person.

Were there copiers, people copying and selling books written by others?

Yes, mostly in the university towns and in the administrative centers.

I assume that most writers (Cicero, etc) were either self-published (as they had the money) or had someone publish (as they didn't have the money). How big a business was publishing?

Depends on the work. Cicero was self-published as well as had people copy his works (often without permission). Intellectual property was dicy. Usually one did not make much money of it, the most money was earned by writing for others (say, composing a speech for rich senator on occasion of a festival or so).

Who were taught literacy? Say, among Romans. Was it a priority to teach literacy compared to say, volunteering to the Legion? Were boys only taught literacy or were girls too?

Depends on the persons and the time period you are talking about.


So you can see how this is a bit hard to answer. You are asking for one size fits all answers for a time period of about 700 years. So please, narrow it down to a specific region, a specifc class and a specific time period.

Thanas wrote:So you can see how this is a bit hard to answer. You are asking for one size fits all answers for a time period of about 700 years. So please, narrow it down to a specific region, a specifc class and a specific time period.

OK. How about this? Let us say that it's the province of Aquitania; and the person is a relatively prosperous merchant, about equivalent to someone who owns a general store. Time period is about 117 AD (Trajan).

Thanas, correct me if I'm wrong (I'm sure you will whether I want you to or not, anyway ) but didn't Ancient Rome have professional scribes? So didn't a certain number of people who were essentially illiterate "write" letters by dictating what they wanted to say to scribes, then sending the letter off to someone else, who would then take it to a scribe to have it read to them?

By "essentially illiterate" I mean anywhere between completely illiterate to perhaps being able to spell their name and make out some words/simple sentences but not really being up to write coherent paragraphs and such. That, and maybe some people who were literate might have employed people with decent handwriting to write things down as I don't think learning penmanship was something people other than scribes spent a lot of time on back then.

If you don't consider something like that I could see one's impression of Roman literacy levels being greatly distorted.

Broomstick wrote:If you don't consider something like that I could see one's impression of Roman literacy levels being greatly distorted.

You don't think people take that into account when figuring literacy levels out? I mean, this is one of those "go figure" stuff that people are easily able to figure out.

MKSheppard wrote:

Thanas wrote:So you can see how this is a bit hard to answer. You are asking for one size fits all answers for a time period of about 700 years. So please, narrow it down to a specific region, a specifc class and a specific time period.

OK. How about this? Let us say that it's the province of Aquitania; and the person is a relatively prosperous merchant, about equivalent to someone who owns a general store. Time period is about 117 AD (Trajan).

Okay. I assume you mean that he is a member of the upper class (if there was such a thing). Not obscenely wealthy, but wealthy enough to live in a Roman domus and be a member of the ordo decuriones (the main figures of the citiy)? If so, he would most likely be able to read and write at least latin, if not greek as well.

If you mean that he is just a typical store owner, then it depends on a whole host of figures - is he a Roman citizen? Is he a member of the provincial nobility? Is he a veteran or decended from one? Or is he simply a provincial romanized gaul? And does he live in a major city like Burdigala or not?

You can see the problem here - not all of Aquitania was equally romanized. (You can see some maps and charts here, done by actual ancient historians). Generally - and this is just a very broad guess - is that a typical merchant would be able to at least read and write conversational latin and make an inventory or so. However, he would probably not own a lot of works. Maybe a book from Vergil or Caesar, but the amassing of works and books was typical for the upper class. However, we do know that people were organised in guilds, which had guild halls and maybe libraries too.

There were basically three ways to learn reading and writing:
- private tutors and private school (limited to the middle class or people for whom it was a necessary work skill)
- military service (if such an opportunity was given to you, certainly it was not guaranteed)
- friends and families

However, we do know that a lot of people wrote and read latin, simply because Graffiti were commonplace and apparently effective. Link. We even have "Vote for X" graffiti, which means that at least enough citizens could read to get a political discourse going. I think a good guess is that if someone was upper middle class, he could probably read latin.


However: Real connoisseurs of literature were probably limited to senators and knights, or scholars or bureaucrats.

Thanas wrote:

Broomstick wrote:If you don't consider something like that I could see one's impression of Roman literacy levels being greatly distorted.

You don't think people take that into account when figuring literacy levels out? I mean, this is one of those "go figure" stuff that people are easily able to figure out.

I expect actual historians to figure this out, but not people in random internet discussions. The average person is intellectually lazy, even stupid.

Though, honestly, I'd forgotten about the graffiti... which means at times and places literacy wasn't that uncommon, either.