Literacy in the Spartan Oligarchy

Author(s): Paul Cartledge

Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 98 (1978), pp. 25-37
Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/630191 .
Accessed: 09/02/2011 06:08

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hellenic. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org
 LITERACY IN THE SPARTAN OLIGARCHY*
I

SOMEWHERE in the first half of the eighth century B.c. the 'graphic counterpartof speech'
(Diringer's nice expression)and a fully phonetic alphabeticscriptwere respectivelyreintroduced
and invented in Greek lands.' Thus the Greeks achieved the feat, unique among European
peoples,of rediscovering(afteran intervalof more thanfour centuries)the literacythey had lost.
The alphabetof coursemarkedan enormous advanceon the clumsy 'LinearB' syllabicscript,in
the sensethat it made it possible'to write easily and readunambiguouslyabout anything which
the society can talk about'.2 However, as Harvey's exhaustive study demonstrated,even in
ClassicalAthens, where popularliteracyattainedthe highest level hitherto known in the Greek
world, therewere still significantareasof illiteracyor at best semi-literacy.3Widespreadliteracy
cannotsimply be deduced(asit was by Goody and Watt) from the mereavailabilityof a phonetic
alphabeticscriptof the Greek type.4 Furtherfactorsmust be taken into account. One of these,
Harveysuggested,is the politicalsystem.Foralthough'democracyandliteracydo not necessarily
go handin hand' (p. 590), the high level of literacyat Athens in the fifth and fourth centurieswas
perhaps'not entirely unconnectedwith the fact that she was a democracy' (p. 623).
In order to test this postulatedcorrelation,Harvey compared the case of ClassicalSparta,
which he saw as the opposite politicalpole to Athensand for whose degreeof literacytherewas a
fairamount of literaryand epigraphicalevidence. His conclusionwas that 'the averageAthenian
could read and write with greaterfacility than the average Spartiate'(p. 628). Harvey's main
argumentseems to me to be wholly cogent: but Spartaof coursewas only of indirectinterestto
him and for severalreasonsmerits thorough examinationfrom the standpointof literacy in its
own right.
First,it is time the belief (entertained,for example, by George Grote) that the Spartanswere
completely illiteratewas reviewed. Secondly, what is probably the earliestexample of Spartan
writing so far discoveredhas been publishedvery recently,raisingafreshthe questionof Sparta's
role in the developmentand diffusionof the alphabetin the Peloponneseandelsewhere.Thirdly,
it is only against the backdrop of Spartanliteracy that the proverbial'laconic' speech can be
properlyevaluated.Finally,a just appreciationof the natureand level of literacyat Spartacan, I
believe, makea significantcontributionto the recentlyreviveddebateon the correctcharacteriza-
tion of the ClassicalSpartan'constitution'.

In 1975, two remarkableinscribedbronze artefactswere excavatedat the Menelaionsanctu-

ary near Sparta.One was a sacrificialmeat-hook, inscribedsimply 'to Helen' in letteringof the
sixth century (probablylate). The other, dedicatedapparentlyto 'Helen wife of Menelaos'by a
Deinis, was a pointed or ovoid aryballosof exceptionalquality, whose shape-if it is appropriate
to comparethe Protocorinthianseriesin clay-should give it a firm approximatedateof 650 B.c.
If (aswe must assume)the aryballoswas dedicatedsoon afterits manufacture,the incisedlettering
it bearsconstitutesthe earliestknown Spartanor-to employ the conventionalregionalnomen-
clature-Lakonian writing by a quarter of a century or more.5
* Dr R. R. 2 J. Goody/I. Watt, 'The
Bolgar, Mr F. D. Harvey, ProfessorG. L. Consequencesof Literacy'
Huxley, Dr L. H. Jeffery and Mr P. J. Parsons made (1962/3), reprintedin Goody (ed.), Literacyin Traditional
illuminatingcommentson earlierdraftsof thisarticle.To Societies(Cambridge1968) 39.
them I am indebtedfor suchimprovementsas I have been 3 F. D. Harvey, 'Literacyin the AthenianDemocracy'
able to effect. The remainingerrorsof factandjudgement in REG lxxix (1966) 585-635 (hereafterHarvey).
are entirely my own responsibility. 4 As it is by Goody/Watt, art.cit. (n. 2).
1 The finest discussion of the possible occasion and s H. W. Catling/H. Cavanagh,'Two inscribedbronzes
probable date of the invention of the Greek alphabetis from the Menelaion, Sparta',Kadmosxv (1976) 145-57.
L. H. Jeffery, The LocalScriptsof ArchaicGreece(Oxford
1961) 1-42 (hereafterJeffery). See also below, n. 9.
26 PAUL CARTLEDGE
We may indeedgo further.It is farharderto inscribebronzethanivory, clay or soft limestone
(the materialscarryingthe earliestexamples of the Lakonianscriptknown hitherto).6Yet the
letter-formson the aryballosare not merely recognizably 'Lakonian'but (given the constricted
surface)remarkablyclearand neat too. This one inscription,in other words, seemsto presuppose
a traditionof literacyof considerableduration.It thereforerendersplausiblethe assumptionthat
the alphabethad reached Lakonia within a couple of generationsof the generally accepted
approximatedateof its invention (c.775 B.c.)-in time, thatis to say,for it to have been exported
to Tarasby Spartancolonistsin c. 7oo.7The new inscriptionmay alsohave politicalimplications,
in the sense that it lends weight to the view that the so-called 'Great Rhetra' (Plut. Lyk. 6),
whateverits precisenatureor significance,was given written form as early as the firsthalf of the
seventhcentury.8
How then did the Greek alphabetreach Spartain the first place?The possibilitythat it was
actuallyinvented on the islandof Kythera,which lies off the Maleapeninsula,was canvassedby
DrJeffery.ForKytherawas a known meeting-placeof GreeksandPhoenicians(whose role in the
transmissionof 'letters'even the invention-consciousGreeksdid not seek to deny) and a Spartan
dependencyby c. 545 at the latest.9The possibility,however, was ruledout chieflyon the ground
(not entirelycogent, see Thuc. iv 53.3) thatKytheradid not lie on a regulartrade-route.We can
now add that the island has yielded no clear archaeologicalevidence of connections with
mainland Lakonia before the second half of the seventh century, although Xenodamos, a
Kytheranpoet of the firsthalf of the century, was said to have visited Sparta.
Instead,therefore,DrJeffery suggestedtwo potentialsourcesof a developedalphabet,Rhodes
and Delphi. It is hard to decide between these alternatives,but on balance I prefer Delphi:
negatively, because of the almost total absence of archaeologicalevidence for direct contact
between Lakoniaand Rhodesearlierthan the sixth century;positively, becauseof the peculiarly
close contact Sparta maintainedofficially with the Delphic Oracle from the eighth century
onwards.We do not know when Pythioi (below, Section III)were firstappointedin Sparta,but
the assertedconnectionof the 'GreatRhetra'with Delphi and of both with Kings Theopompos
and Polydoros implies for me a terminusante quemof c. 675.10 Indeed, traditionallythe first
Delphic oraclegiven to Spartawas deliveredto KingsArchelaosand Charillos,whosejoint reign
could have fallen between c. 775 and 76o, satisfyingly adjacentto the suggested date for the
invention of the alphabetitself and for the startof the oracle." Archaeologicalconfirmationof
some form of official Spartaninterestin Delphi before 700 may perhapsbe derived from an
exemplary 'Geometric'bronze horse-figurineof undoubtedly Lakonianstyle (and presumably
manufacture)excavatedin the areaof the Roman agora.'2 Thus the close similaritybetween the
Lakonianand Phokian local scriptsis consistentwith Dr Jeffery's suggestion that the Pythioi
broughtbackfrom Delphi examplesof alphabeticwriting in the shapeof oracleswrittenperhaps
on stripsof leather(cf.Eur.fr. 627 Nauck).
Closely parallelliteraryand archaeologicalevidence attestsan early and continuing Spartan
interestin Olympia (the Oracle of Zeus as well as the Games).'3 The discusinscribedwith the
name of Lykurgos,which Aristotlesaw at Olympia and dated776/3, must of coursebe dismissed
6 S. Casson, 'Early Greek 10
inscriptions on metal', AJA Cf. W. G. Forrest, 'The Date of the Lykourgan
xxxix (1935) 510-17. Reforms at Sparta',Phoenix xvii (1963) 158 f., 166-8;
7 On the Tarentine alphabet see Jeffery 279-82 (the M. L. West, Studies in Greek Elegy and Iambus(Ber-
only serious divergence from Lakonian is the absence of lin/New York 1974) 184-6.
11H. W. Parke/D. E. W. Wormell, The
the multi-limbed sigma); equally close dependence on the DelphicOra-
metropolis is visible in religion and material culture. cle2 (Oxford 1956) i 83 f.; ii no. 539. For the suggested
8 Jeffery, ArchaicGreece. The City-States c. 700-5oo B.C. datesof Archelaosand Charillossee Forrest,A Historyof
(London 1976) I 17 raises the possibility of 'the inscribing Sparta 950-192 (London 1968) 21.
of a rhetra, perhaps on a bronze plaque like the sixth- 12 C1. Rolley, Fouilles de Delphes V2.
Monumentsfigures:
century examples of rhetrai found at Olympia' (cf. 42, les statuettesde bronze(Paris 1969) 61 f., no. 61. For a
169). But see below, n. 69. possible dedicationat Delphi by a Pythios see below, n.
9 Jeffery 8. On the connections of the Phoenicians with 32.
Kythera see now J. N. Coldstream/G. L. Huxley (eds.), 13 A. H6nle, Olympiain derPolitikdergriechischen
Staa-
Kythera (London 1972) 36. On the transmission of'letters' tenwelt, von 776 bis zum Ende des 5. Jahrhunderts (Diss.
to the Greeks by the Phoenicians see Jeffery, "Apxata Tiibingen 1968) 19-24.
some ancient Greek views', Fest. E. Grumach
ypCppalra:
(Berlin 1967) 152-4. See also below, n. 8o.
 LITERACY IN THE SPARTAN OLIGARCHY 27
as a 'forgery'. But Dr Jeffery'ssuggestion that the alphabetwas transmittedto Olympia from
Spartais, if anything, strengthenedby the new aryballosinscription.14However that may be, the
debt of Messeniato Spartafor its alphabetis not controversial,although the earliestknown
inscriptionsfrom Messeniaitself are not earlierthan the sixth century, and diasporaMessenians
(whetherformer Helots or other expatriates)are not attestedepigraphicallybefore the fifth.'5

III

So much for what we might loosely call the 'prehistory'of Spartanliteracy. Hereafter,
although most of what I say will have implicationsfor the earlierperiod, and although I shall
returnin variousconnectionsto the epigraphicalevidenceof the sixthcentury,I shallbe primarily
concernedto discussSpartanliteracyin the fifth and fourth centuries.I shouldalso make it quite
clearthat by 'literacy'I mean simply what Trollope called 'the absolutefaculty of reading'(and
writing) ratherthan 'the adequateuse of a book' or any deeper sensitivityto literarycreations
(although I shall shortly be consideringthe transmissionof seventh-centurySpartanpoetry to
writersof the fifth andfourthcenturies).SinceI am concernedexclusivelywith Spartansof citizen
status,and not with the other free inhabitantsof Lakonia,I shall draw my evidence solely from
literarytexts pertainingto Spartansand (with a few justifiedexceptions)from inscriptionsfound
on territory directly held by the SpartanState. In this Section I shall attempt to answer the
straightforwardquestion:were the Spartans,or any Spartans,literatein the basicsenseoutlined
above?
First, the literary sources.According to the 'Dissoi Logoi' (90oF 2.o DK), to Sokratesin
Plato's Protagoras (342a ff.), and to Isokrates(Panath.209; cf. 251), all Spartanswere illiterate.
Pseudo-Plato(Hipp.Ma. 285c) addsthat many were also innumerate;and if a man broughtonto
the stageby the comic poet Philyllios(fr. I I Kock) was both an illiterate(which is not certain)and
a Spartan(which is merely a guess),this may be furtherevidence at leastof Athenianbeliefs.We
shouldnot, I think, takethesepassagesaupieddela lettre.The Protagoras passageis ajoke, as to some
extent is the one from the Pseudo-PlatonicHippiasMajor.Isokrateswas a rhetoricianand an
Athenianculturalchauvinistto boot.'6 The 'DissoiLogoi', finally,spoilsits effectby includingan
allegedSpartanhostility to music. In short,what thesesourcesaredoing is producingyet another
variationon the well-worn theme that,in comparisonto the cultivatedAtheniansof the Periklean
FuneralSpeech, the Spartanswere unletteredphilistines(cf. Plut. Lyk. 20.8; Mor. 192b, 217d,
226d, 231d, 239b).
This was of course a charge which the most rabid 'Lakonizer'of the late fifth or fourth
centurieswould have been hardput to it to deny, even in the unlikely event of his wishing to do
so. There was no market in Sparta, as there was in Athens, for the works of such as
Anaxagoras-or for any otherPlt'Ao yeypapL'vwafor that matter.17We should not, however,
misreadthe significanceof this contrastby projectingit backinto the seventhand sixth centuries,
when there was no 'market' in books anywhere in the Greek world and when Spartawas a
leadingpatronof creativeliterature.Apartfrom TyrtaiosandAlkman (who, I believe, were both
seventh-centurySpartansborn and bred), a successionof foreign poets from Terpanderin the
early seventh century to Simonides in the early fifth found Sparta a congenial-and no doubt
lucrative--field for the display of their talents. Whether or not this justifies the description of
Archaic Sparta as in any sense 'remarkably literate' (Davison) I am unclear; but it does at least raise

14 Discus: G. L. Huxley, 'Aristotle as Antiquary', discourse,if theyfind any one to readit to them"'(Grote's
GRBS xiv (1973) 281 f. Transmissionof alphabet to italics). I do not see why this expression should be
Olympia:Jeffery 185. For Lykurgos'alleged literacy see exempted from the chargegenerallyacceptedas valid by
also below, n. 5o. Grote, that Isokratespreferredrhetoric to factual accu-
is Jeffery 202-6. racy; cf. C. B. Welles, 'Isocrates'view of history' in Fest.
16G. Grote, Historyof Greece2ii (I2-vol. ed., London H. Caplan(Ithaca1966) 3-25.
1884) 390 n. 2 argued that Isokratesshould be taken 17 Harvey 633-5. Compare the alleged banning of
literally, since the second passage cited contains 'an sophists from Sparta(Plut. Mor. 226d); but see Harvey
expressiondroptalmostunconsciouslywhich confirmsit. 627 n. 29.
"The most rationalSpartans(he says)will appreciatethis
28 PAUL CARTLEDGE
the questions of how Tyrtaios and Alkman (to ignore the practicallyunknown Kinaithon,
Spendonand Gitiadas)acquiredtheirfamiliaritywith the leadingliteraryKunstsprachen andhow
theirwork was transmittedto ClassicalAthens.In other words, did TyrtaiosandAlkmanpractise
their craft(if only in part)through the medium of the written text?
It should be stressedat once that, even after the inaugurationof a 'market'in books, most
Greekstypically recited from memory or heard, ratherthan read, their literature,and that the
processwhereby ancientGreekliteraturewas disseminatedor handeddown in written form was
always more akin to samizdatthan to publication in the post-printing sense. Thus poems of
Tyrtaioswere sung by the Spartanson campaign(LykurgosLeokr.107;PhilochorosFGrH 328 F
216), while those of Alkman received an annual airing at the Gymnopaidiaifestival (Sosibios
FGrH 595 F 5). By the fifth century,however, Alkman was known to Eupolis(fr. 139Kock) and
perhapsAristophanes,andin the fourth Tyrtaioscould be quoted in extensoby Lykurgos.Hence,
since'any book thatwas well known at Athensin the fourthcenturyis likely to have beenknown
at Alexandriain the third'(West),it is not surprisingthatour earliestbook-text of Tyrtaiosshould
belong to the lattercenturyor thatAlkman shouldhave excited the scholarlycuriosityof no lessa
critic than Aristarchos.For the seventh century, however, we are reduced to inference.Thus,
given the close verbal dependenceof Tyrtaios on the Iliadand of Alkman on the Odyssey(or at
least an Odyssey),it is quite possible-though by no meansinevitable-that they had accessto a
text of the poems, as is implied by the story that 'Lykurgos'had Homer copied (Plut. Lyk.4.4).
Again, although we have no specificevidence that Alkman causedwritten versionsof his own
poems to be produced,it is at leastconceivablethat those most interestedin theirverballyfaithful
preservation(one or both of the Spartanroyal families, for example) would have had them
committed to papyrus.'8
Nevertheless, despite this evidence for literary creativity (and perhaps literate poets) in
Archaic Sparta,it must be admitted that the characterof Spartanpublic education does not
automaticallyrule out the imputationof illiteracyto the Spartansof the Classicalperiod.For the
dywy' was, at best, 'educational'only in an extended senseand is more fruitfullyregardedas a
comprehensivemeans of socialization.'9Thus in the developed system of the fifth and fourth
centuries the more orthodox musical and gymnastic exercises were combined with social
institutions like age-classesand common meals and with rites de passageto produce tough,
self-disciplinedand unquestioninglyobedient military men. Furthermore,Spartansupremacy
abroad,which dependedon repressionof the Helots (andto a lesserextent the Perioikoi)at home,
was not eitherwon or maintainedby skillsand techniquesinvolving a developedlevel of popular
literacy.
However, despite the evidence of the 'Dissoi Logoi', Plato and Isokrates,and despite the
characterof Spartaneducationand society, the selectionof the literaryand epigraphicalevidence
set out below is, I think, sufficientto refute the chargeof total illiteracy,even in the caseof the
humblest Spartanranker.

1. Kings20
We are bound to infer from Plutarch (Ages. I.I) that the heir-apparent was normally released
from the universal obligation to go through the dywy'4. This inference is apparently contradicted
by Teles (fr. 3 Hense), but he is not a particularly trustworthy witness and anyway may only mean
that a king's sons other than the heir-apparent were not so exempted. However, we need not in
is On the transmissionof Archaic Greek poetry in desEpos(G6ttingen1969);on thatof AlkmanseeE. Risch,
general see J. A. Davison, 'Literatureand Literacy in MH xi (1954)20-37.
Ancient Greece',FromArchilochus to Pindar(London,etc. 19 The standardmodern treatment is H.-I. Marrou,
1968) 86-128 (my quotation, however, is from p. 184); Histoirede l'dducationdansl'antiquitd7(Paris1971) 45-6o;
the samizdat simile is borrowed from M. I. Finley, but see also R. R. Bolgar, 'The trainingof 'lites in Greek
'Censorshipin ClassicalAntiquity', TLS 29 July 1977, education'in R. Wilkinson (ed.), GoverningElites.Studies
923. The quotation from West is from his op. cit. (n. Io) in Trainingand Selection(New York 1969) 23-49, esp.
57. Alexandriancommentarieson Alkman include R. A. 30-5. Cf. my remarksin 'Toward the Spartanrevolu-
Pack, The Greek and Latin LiteraryTextsfrom Greco- tion', Arethusaviii (1975) 75.
RomanEgypt2(Ann Arbor 1965) nos. 81, 1950. On the 20 See in generalG. Gilbert, GreekConstitutional Anti-
language of Tyrtaios see B. Snell, Tyrtaiosu. die Sprache quitiesi2 (London 1895)42-7 (hereafterGilbert).
 LITERACY IN THE SPARTAN OLIGARCHY 29
any caseconclude from this exemption that the kings were typically illiterate,since the teaching
of literacycould hardlyhave been an integralpartof the
It is of coursetruethat the storiesand anecdoteswhichdywyoi.
involve kings sendingletters(e.g. Hdt.
vi 50.3; Thuc. i 128 ff.; 132.5; 133.1; Plut. Mor. 2IIb, 212e, 219a, 222a-b, 225c-d) or receiving
letters (Plut. Lys. 28.2; Athen. vii 289e) could all be interpretedin terms of dictation to or
recitationby a literateperson,asindeedcould the politicaltractcomposedby the exiled Pausanias
(FGrH 582); and we do once hear of a king (Agesilaos)being accompaniedon campaignby a
personalprivate secretary(ypae"gs:Xen. Hell. iv 1.39; Plut. Ages. I3.2).21 On the other hand,
there are three anecdotesin which literacyis explicitly attributedto a Spartanking.
In the first (Hdt. vii 239) the exiled Damaratosfor reasonsof secrecyand diplomacy scraped
the wax off a wooden tablet,wrote his messageto the Spartanson the wood and then re-covered
the tablet with blankwax.22 Aeneas 'Tacticus'(31.14) would have approvedthe strategem,but
the Spartanswho receivedthe tabletwere baffleduntil Gorgo, daughterof KleomenesI and wife
of Leonidas,advisedthem to scrapeoff the wax.23 The whole passagehas in fact been suspected
(probablyunjustly)of being an interpolationin Herodotus, but at least its author did not find
anythingunusualor extraordinaryin the literacyof Damaratos.It is only unfortunatethathe was
not more explicit about the identityof 'the Spartans'(EphorsandGerousia?)who eventuallyread
Damaratos'message.The two otheranecdotes(Plut. Mor.2I4e-f: writing; EphorosFGrHist70 F
207: reading)both concernAgesilaos,who, incidentally,did participatein the dywyy4.
Those are the only explicit piecesof evidence, but the use of the aKvArdArl,
whateverits exact
nature,seems to demandthat any king (or other commander)could, unaided,write and readat
least simple messages,which would naturallybe expressedas laconicallyas possible.24Finally,it
seemslegitimateto inferfrom the fact that the kings had custody of Delphic oracles(Hdt. vi 57-4)
that they could at leastread (cf.Hdt. v 90 f.; and perhapsPlut. Lys. 26.2).
Monarchy, even in a literate society, does not of course connote literacy on the part of the
monarch.But the Lakonianalphabetwas infinitely simplerto masterthan, say, the scriptwhich
the Assyrianking Ashurbanipaltriumphantlyclaimed to have learned. Besides, Ashurbanipal
could rely on an elaboratescribalbureaucracy,somewhat as the mediaevalEnglishkings could
employ a literateclerical'lite. Neither of these propswas availableto a Spartanking-although
there was perhapssomeone in Spartacompetent to decipher 'Aaaopta (Thuc. iv 50),
ypdtpLLara
i.e. Aramaicscript.25 On the whole it seemsreasonableto concludethat Spartankings could both
read and write.

2. OtherCommanders
In some respects(dispatches,letters,aKUvrdAr) the remarkson the literacyof the kings apply
here too. Indeed, the Spartan&LotroAevs(Vice-Admiral)may have acquiredhis title from his
function as irloroAtacopos(Xen. Hell. vi 2.25). The bulk of the explicit evidence, however,
concernsthe roi manquiLysander(Xen. Hell. i 1.23; Plut. Lys. 14.6, with Mor. 229b; Lys. 16.2,
19.8-12, 20.I-4, 28.3, 30.4); but note also, for example, Thuc. viii 33.3.

3. Ephors
The five members of the annual board of Ephors were also presumably literate.26 For apart

21 Idaios is not otherwise 25 The old view (that

mentioned, and his name 'Assyrianletters'meant Persian
may indicate that he was an Asiatic Greek or even a cuneiform) was refuted by C. Nylander, Op. Ath. viii
Hellenizedoriental. (1968) 119-36, esp. 123 f. (I owe this referenceto Robin
22 For the kind of tablet Damaratoswould have used Lane-Fox).
see T. Birt, Das AntikeBuchwesen (Munich 1913)259-63. 26 See generally Gilbert 52-9. The Chief Ephor is
23 It is not stated whether Gorgo herself was literate, explicitly creditedwith the abilityto readin the secondof
but if I am right about Spartanwomen in general (see the anecdotesinvolving Agesilaosquotedabove;the same
below) she was. goes for the Ephorsas a whole in Plut. Lys.20. Cf. Thuc. i
24 The evidence for the aKvr'Aqis collected in Jeffery 128 ff. (letterof Pausaniasthe Regent to the GreatKing)
57 f. According to the New Encyclopaedia Britannica
(Mac- and Xenophon, Hell. iii 3.4-I I (furtherdiscussedbelow),
ropaediav 332), it representsboth 'the firstrecordeduse of which strongly suggest but do not state that the Ephors
cryptographyfor correspondence'and 'thefirsttransposi- were literate.
tion system'!
30 PAUL CARTLEDGE
from exercisinga generalsupervisionof the laws of Sparta,which were unwritten(SectionV),27
and a particularwatching brief over the conduct of royalty, they played a key role in foreign
affairs, which involved the sending and receiving of dispatchesand the drafting of treaties
(SectionV). At leastby the fourthcenturythe Ephorswere elected'from all the damos'(Arist.Pol.
ii, I265b39 f., I270b25-28 [the selection-procedureis here stigmatizedas 'extremely childish'],
I272a3I f.). But this is not unfortunatelythe convincing proof we are seeking that all Spartans
were functionallyliterate,for presumablyonly qualifiedpersonnelwould have put themselves
forward for election in the first place.

4. Gerousia28
It may be doubtedwhether the ye'povrS, who of coursecountedin theirnumberthe kings ex
officio,had to produceeither theirlrpoflovAhetara or theirlegaljudgments in writing. But since
they co-operated closely with the Ephors, for example when sitting as the Spartan'Supreme
Court', they are unlikely to have been less literatethan they. A fourth-centuryB.C.inscription
from the oracularshrineof Ino-Pasiphacat PerioikicThalamai,which recordsa dedicationby a
memberof the SpartanGerousia(IG v I.1317), may supportthis assumption.

5. Envoys
In the fifth and fourth centuriesdiplomacy was a relativelyunderdevelopedaspectof Greek
statecraft.29Sparta,however, took more trouble than most Greek states to get its diplomacy
right.30 For, since war is one expression of failed diplomacy, part of the explanation of the
Spartans'diplomatic finesse is, somewhat paradoxically,their general unwillingnessafter the
sixth century to become involved in a fight. It would be surprisingif Spartanenvoys were not
requiredto be literate(and possiblymultilingual).3'
As an extensionof theirinterstatediplomacy Spartadeviseda specialkind of envoy, the four
Pythioi, whose possiblerole in the introductionof the alphabetto Lakoniain the eighth century
and the preservationof a text of the 'Great Rhetra'we have alreadynoticed (Section II). The
Pythioi were permanentdelegatesto the Oracle at Delphi, two being selectedon a hereditary
basisby each of the kings (Hdt. vi 57.2, 4; Xen. Lak.Pol. Cic. De div. i 43.95; Sudas.v.).32
15.-5;
They may also have playeda wider role in Sparta.As we shallsee, the Greeksin generaldid not
acquirethe habitof keeping documentaryrecordsuntil fairlylate. But if therewas ever anything
like a SpartanPublic Record Office, the Pythioi arepossiblecandidatesfor the role of archivists.
The records,however, are unlikely to have consistedof much more than Delphic (andother?)
oracles,royal pedigrees,andlistsof kings, Ephorsand perhapsthe victorsat the Karneiaandother
festivals.33

6. and T7TEL9s34
67roLELOVew
Xenophon's account (Hell. iii 3.4-1I) of the abortive conspiracyorganized by Kinadon in
c. 398 is remarkablein severalways, but it hasnot in the pastbeen treatedfrom the standpointof
27 It was
presumablyin thisconnectionthatthe Politeia
of Dikaiarchos (fr. I Wehrli) was allegedly read out
annuallyto the youngest warriorsin the Ephors'apXdov.
28 Gilbert 47-9. Aristotle (Pol. ii
127Ia9 f.) found the
method of their election 'childish' too; presumablythe
marksscratchedon by the election 'jury'did
ypapparE•a
not call for any greater degreeof literacythanthose made
by Athenianjurors in &8Kat 7Llir701o.
29 See my review in TLS 24 November 1975,
1348,of
F. E. Adcock/D. J. Mosley, Diplomacyin AncientGreece
(London 1975).For the HellenisticandRoman periodssee
D. Kienast,RE Supp. xiii (1973) s.v. 'Presbeia'.
30 See in general Adcock, 'The
development of
Ancient Greek Diplomacy' in AC xvii (1948) 1-12, esp.
p. 5; cf. id., 'Some Aspectsof Ancient GreekDiplomacy'
in PCA xxi (1924) 92-I 16, esp. p. I 13. Of the 232 treaties
collectedin H. Bengtson (ed.), Die Staatsvertrage desAlter-
tumsii2 (Munich 1975)nearlyone fifth involve Spartaor
Spartans.In fifth-century Spartaheraldsconstitutedone
of the threehereditaryprofessions(Hdt. vi 60).
31 See below p. 35.
32Jeffery 190 suggeststhat the '-das, son of Dexippos'
who dedicateda bronze lebesat Delphi in the firsthalf of
the sixth century (Jeffery 199, no. II) may have been a
Pythios.
33 Plutarch(Ages19.6)refersto the dvaypakalinwhich
he discovered the names of Agesilaos' wife and two
daughters. The list of victors at the Karneiawas 'pub-
lished' by Hellanikos (FGrH 4 F 85-6; cf.Jeffery 59 f.,
195). Private inscriptions commemorating Spartan
Olympic victors areIG v 1.649, 708;note also the victor-
lists on stone cited below, n. 79.
34 Gilbert39 f.; 'r7reLr
(an lite corpsof 300
drawn tnro/doveg:
from the younger adult warriors):Gilbert6o f.
 LITERACY IN THE SPARTAN OLIGARCHY 3I
literacy.35Kinadon himself, who is expresslysaid to have been able both to read and write, is
especially interesting as belonging to the status of vtroprEove~ ('Inferiors')not that of (OotoL
('Peers').Thus if the 'Inferiors'were lapsed 'Peers',this would strongly suggest that the average
full Spartancitizen was functionally literate. Alternatively, though, we might suppose that
Kinadonhad been speciallyselectedand trainedfor his role as secretagent.
In the same story the eldest of the irwaypkraland the 'younger men' (presumably•1r1nLs)
detailedto arrestKinadonare also said to be literate.An inscribedrelief in honour of a Thiokles
was erectedby the Ln7T7TfES(herecalled KopOL) at Spartain the sixth century.36

7. OrdinarySpartans
The statementofJustin/Trogus (iii 5.10 f.) that during the MessenianWar of the seventh
century the Spartansoldierswrote their names and patronymicson wooden plaques (tesserae)
which they then tied to their arms cannot be disproved, at least not on purely chronological
grounds;but it can never be positively verified either. Nor can we say who was responsiblefor
drawingup the presumablywritten wills referredto by Aristotle(Pol.ii 1270a28) or the certainly
written mortgage-deeds(KA6pla)mentioned in a third-centurycontext by Plutarch(Agis 13.3).
In the second centuryB.C.,however, a Spartanturnsup unexpectedlyon a papyrusas party to a
written contract.37

8. Women
It is well known that Spartangirlsreceivedan educationequalto, though separatefrom, that
accordedtheirmale counterparts.Much of thiswas allegedlydesignedto producerobustmothers
of sturdy male offspring,though no doubt it also servedto socializethe politicallydisfranchised
half of the citizen population. However, Plato in the Laws(806a) speaksalso of a 'compulsory
education in the arts'and earlier,in the Protagoras(342d), had made Sokratesrefer to Spartan
women who were 'proudof theirintellectualculture'.Plato is admittedlya tendentiouswitness,
but Aristophanes(Lys. 1237) apparentlymentions a Spartanpoetess,and lamblichos(VitaPyth.
267) severalfemale SpartanPythagoreans.We need not take literally the anecdotes in which
Spartanmotherswrite to their warriorsons (Plut. Mor.24Ia, d, d-e), but the slight epigraphical
evidence (dedicationsby women, not specificallycited below) at least does not contradictthe
view that some Spartanwomen were basicallyliterate.38

So much for the literaryevidence;let us now turnto the epigraphical.This, however, is not as
helpful as we might have hoped, for two main reasons. First, all known private Spartan
inscriptionshave accruedfrom formal, religiouscontexts. The vast majorityof them is made up
of ex-votos, mainly of the type of those offered to Helen with which we began (Section II), but
including also a significantquantityof victory-dedications.To these can be added a handfulof
inscribed gravestones and funerary reliefs.39Naturally, writing on perishablematerialslike
leather,papyrusand wax has not survived the Lakonianclimate and soil-conditions.40But it is
still disappointingto have nothing comparableto, for example, the informalnote scratchedon a
potsherdin sixth-centuryAthens, in which the author (probablya Megarian)instructssomeone
to 'put the saw under the threshold of the garden gate'.4' Excavation in a settlement-area of

35 See now P. Oliva, Spartaand its Social Problems Harvey 625.

(Amsterdam 1971) 192 f.; M. Austin/P. Vidal-Naquet, 39 Victory-dedications:Jeffery 199-201, nos. 22, 23(?),
Economieset sociedtsen Grdceancienne2 (Paris 1972) io6 f., 28, 31, 41, 42, 48, 50, 51, 52 (stele of Damonon). Grave-
279-82, no. 59. stonesand funeraryreliefs:IG v 1.699, 713, 824(?);Jeffery
IG v 1.457, discussed by E. Bourguet, Le dialecte
Cf. below, n. 71.
36 200 f., nos. 26, 29, 57, 59.
laconien (Paris 1927) 35 f. 40 Leather: Birt, op. cit. (n. 22) 254--6.
Papyrus: N.
37 P. Berl. 5883+ 5853:see now G. E. M. de Ste. Croix, Lewis, Papyrusin ClassicalAntiquity(Oxford 1974) esp.
'Ancient Greek and Roman Maritime Loans' in H. 84-8. Wax: Birt, loc.cit. (n. 22).
Edey/B. S. Yamey (eds.), Debits, Credits,Financeand 41 M. Lang, Graffiti in the Athenian Agora (Agora Pic-
Profits.Studiesin Honourof W. T. Baxter(London 1974) 53 f.
ture Book, Princeton1974)no. 18. For Athenianwriting
38 None of the more recent discussionsof Spartan in privatelife see Harvey 615-17.
women raisesthe questionof theirliteracy,but see briefly
32 PAUL CARTLEDGE
ClassicalSpartamight conceivablytransformour pictureof Spartanliteracy.To the fifth-century
Athenian ostraka,however, which have figured prominently in the argumentsfor widespread
Athenianpopularliteracy, there could of coursebe no Spartancounterpart.
Secondly, even if we adopt the useful distinctionbetween 'formal'inscriptionsexecuted by
professionals(whether incised on stone and bronze or painted on pottery before firing) and
'informal'cursiveinscriptions,we can never be sure whether the professionalin any particular
instancewas a Spartancitizen. The point of difficultyhere is the widespreadbelief, amountingto
a dogma, that no full Spartancitizen ever practiseda manualtechne.I have questionedthis belief
elsewhere,42but in any case the scholarly tendency to make Spartan society unique in all
particularsat all periods(alegacy from antiquity)ratherthanasa whole in specificperiodsshould
be firmly resisted.43If I were to hazarda guessat a possibledivisionof labour,I would tentatively
assignat leastthe public (andpossiblyall) formalinscriptionson stone (cf.SectionV) to the hands
of Perioikoi, who may have organizedtheir professionon a hereditarybasis.44
What then are we to make of the informal cursive graffiti?Those certainly produced by
craftsmen-the doodleson scrappiecesof soft limestonefrom the Orthiasanctuary,the 'ossified'
abecedariumon the neck of the Vix krater(if the alphabetis indeed Lakonian)and the masons'
signaturesat Amyklai45-involve the ambiguity just discussed.But the graffito dedications
incised on fired pottery, of which there is a fair number (though fewer than those painted on
before firing), could well be the work of Spartancitizens.46At least, the frequency of erroris
perhapssufficientto exclude the possibilitythat they were all the work of professionals,while it
also suggeststhat orthography,let alone calligraphy,was not highly esteemedin Sparta.47Even
if, strictlyspeaking,such graffitoinscriptionsimply no more than that Spartanscould read,I am
preparedto takethem as evidencethat they could write too.48 I am fortifiedin this inferenceby a
remarkablegraffitoof c. 500on a sherdfrom the Spartanakropolis,whose authorwas presumably
an illiteratetrying to keep up with the literateJoneses.49

That then is the sum of evidence from literatureand privateepigraphyfor ClassicalSpartan

literacy,considerablyeked out by inference.5sThough ratherpaltry,it is still, I believe, adequate
to refute the imputationsof illiteracycited at the beginning of this section and so to supportthe
unequivocalstatementof Plutarch(Lyk. 16.Io; Mor. 237a) that the Spartans-like the Cretans
(Arist.fr. 61 I.15 Rose)-were taught as much readingand writing as was needful (cf.generally
Thuc. i 84.3 f.).5' For then to make senseof the evidenceset out above we need'onlysupposethat
for most Spartansthe needs were ordinarilyneither many nor pressingand that only public

42 'Did Spartancitizensever
practisea manualtekhne?',
LiverpoolClass. Monthly i (1976) II5-19. The useful
remarksof Jeffery, op. cit. (n. 8) 3I f. apply chiefly to
internationalstar craftsmenratherthan the anonymous
membersof the supportingcast.
3Cf. M. I. Finley, 'Sparta' (1968), reprinted with
some changes in his Use and Abuseof History(London
1975)ch. Io, p. 162.
44Jeffery 187.
45 Limestone doodles: Jeffery 188, 198, no. 6. Vix
abecedarium:Jeffery 183, 191 f., 202, no. 66, 375; but see
Rolley, 'Hydriesde bronze dansle P0loponesedu Nord',
BCHlxxxvii (1963)483 n. I. Masons'graffiti:Jeffery194,
200, no. 32 (one at least may not have been a Lakonian:
Jeffery 183).
46 Spartan akropolis: A. M. Woodward, BSA xxx
(1928/9) 241-52. Orthia sanctuary:id. in R. M. Dawkins
(ed.), ArtemisOrthia(JHS Supp. v, London 1929) 371-4.
Eleusinion south of Sparta: R. V. Nicholls, BSA xlv
(1950) 297, nos. 53-4. Note also the inscribedbone flutes
at the Orthia sanctuary,appropriateofferings for con-
temporariesof Alkman:Jeffery 188, 198, no. 3.
47 Spartanepigraphicorthography moved Bourguet
(n. 36) 8 to exclaim, 'je croisque nulle partn'estattesteun
usage aussi peu tyrannique';cf. ibid. 19 f., 27, 140 ('la
fantaisiede l'6criture').
48 It is probably true that in all societies more people
have been able to read than write. As is noted by E. G.
Turner, GreekManuscripts of the AncientWorld(Oxford
1971) 7, representationsof people readingwere far com-
moner in Greekart than those of people writing.
49 Woodward, BSA xxx (1928/9) 247, no. 5, fig. 4
('presumably a votive inscription by an illiterate person').
Dr Jeffery, however, has suggested to me that this may be
a trial piece.
so For the sake of completeness I note that 'Lykurgos',
besides having had the Homeric poems copied (Plut. Lyk.
4.4), was reported to have transcribed personally a final
Delphic oracle sanctioning the 'Great Rhetra' (Lyk. 29.4).
5 The process of instruction need not have taken long:
see Plato Laws 8o9e-8Ioa for the distinction between
functional literacy and fluent calligraphy. For the further
distinction between 'slow' and 'retarded' hands at the
level of functional literacy in Ptolemaic Egypt see H. C.
Youtie, 'Ppa~wcoypdowov:between literacy and illiter-
acy', GRBS xii (1971) 239-61, esp. 252 f., 256 n. 78
(reprinted in his ScriptiunculaeII [Amsterdam 19731
6 I -27).
 LITERACY IN THE SPARTAN OLIGARCHY 33
functionarieswere called upon to perform routine acts of literacy on a day-to-day basis. The
Spartans,thatis to say, dwelt primarilyin a world of oral discourse,a world in which they were
well fitted to survive.

IV

For the reverseside of limited Spartanliteracyis the premium placedby that society on the
ability to converse in a succinct and stimulating manner, employing the &AqrlsPpaxvAoyL'a
(SextusEmp. Adv. Math.ii 21) immortalizedin the Spartans'honour as 'laconic'.52Ratherthan
this necessarilybeing a sign that they had nothing worthwhile to say,53it implied a rejectionof
the customaryGreekidolatryof the spokenword, which could lead, if not to inaction,at leastto
an exaggerationof form at the expenseof content. Herodotus (iv 77) was of courseright to pour
scornon the story thatthe ScythianAnacharsishad found only the conversationof the Spartansto
be 'sensible',but at leastin thisinstancethe inventorof the fiction was basinghimselfon a genuine
distinction between Spartanand general Greek practice. Well was the Spartan Chilon, the
reputedauthorof memorably gnomic utterances,accountedone of the 'Seven Sages'of ancient
Greece.
However, our specific information about the conversational topics covered in high and low
Spartan society suggests a level well below that of these lofty dicta. In an intentionally humorous
passage in a pseudo-Platonic dialogue (Hipp. Ma. 285d) we are told that the (presumably
ordinary) Spartans listened 'most readily to tales about the generations of heroes and men, the
ancient foundations of cities, and in general to the whole range of stories about the distant past
(dpXatoAoyla)'.54 As for the Spartan aristocracy, represented here by its most blue-blooded
members, the doubtless well-informed Xenophon (Hell. v 3.20) relates that 'Agesipolis was well
suited to share with Agesilaos in conversation about youthful exploits, hunting, riding, and
homosexual love-affairs'. This tallies well with Plutarch's list (Lyk. 24.5) of favourite Spartan
'out-of-hours' activities: dancing, feasting, festivals, athletic exercise and ... conversation.55

Thus we come to the last of the particular problems we set out to tackle: does an understand-
ing of the nature of literacy at Sparta help us to characterize correctly the Spartan 'constitution'?
The study of the Spartan polity has been described as a form of 'intellectual gymnastics';s6 but an
outsider might be pardoned for using a less friendly metaphor after contemplating the volu-
minous modern literature on Sparta's 'constitutional antiquities', much of it scarcely more than
free invention, the remainder at best intelligent speculation sometimes distorted by ancient
theory.57 Matters, however, could hardly have been otherwise: two partly overlapping and
mutuallyreinforcingaspectsof the 'Spartanmirage'5"saw to that.
The firstin point of time and significancewas the 'Lykurgos-legend',which treatedSpartaas
the paradigm of a state that owed all its economic, social and political institutions to the

52 The earliestsourceis eitherIon of Chios

(fr. 107 von
Blumenthal)or Herodotus (iii 48, dramaticdate c. 525).
For a curious(andpainful)method of inculcatinglaconic
brief (fr. com.adesp.417-19 Kock). The quintessentially
1954) 274-81. Spartanletterswere saidto be comparably
brief (fr. com.adesp.417-19 Kock). The quintessentially
Spartanapophthegms are of course of highly dubious
authenticity: see now E. N. Tigerstedt, The Legendof
Spartain ClassicalAntiquityii (Stockholm 1974) 16-30.
53 M. I. Finley, The Ancient Greeks (rev. ed. Har-
mondsworth 1975) 83. For the view expressedin the text
see M. B. Sakellariouin Historyof the Hellenic Worldii.
TheArchaicPeriod(Athensand London 1975) 275.
54 As suggestedby E. Norden, AgnostosTheos.Unter-
suchungenzur Formengeschichte religi6serRede (Leipzig
1913) 372 f., the word dpXa&oAoyla could be a Sophistic
invention.
ss On the role of conversationin education cf. Sosi-
krates,FGrH 461 F I (Crete).
56 V. Ehrenberg, From Solon to Socrates2(London
1973) 389.
57 The earlier literature is assembled in G. Busolt,
Griechische Geschichtei2 (Gotha1893)510-79; addGilbert.
More recentstudiesareamassedin the footnotes to Oliva,
op. cit. (n. 35) 71-Io2.
58ssF. Ollier, Lemiragespartiate(Paris1933, 1943); for its
continuationto the present century see E. Rawson, The
SpartanTraditionin EuropeanThought(Oxford 1969).
34 PAUL CARTLEDGE
enactmentsof a singlelawgiver-in thiscaseto the wondrouslyomniprovidentLykurgos.9 The
ancientcontroversiesover who or what (andeven how many) Lykurgoswas, when he lived, and
precisely what he did and why still rage today; but for my limited purposes Lykurgos is a
side-issue,no matterhow much colour he might have addedto the picture.60 Nor is thisthe place
to enter the minefield of 'GreatRhetra'Forschung.Suffice it to say here that in my view this
document representsthe essenceof the complex political solution wrongly attributeden blocto
'Lykurgos'and that it should be dated somewherein the firsthalf of the seventh century.
The second distorting aspect of the 'mirage' was the theory of the 'mixed constitution'
developed perhapsin the fifth century but not apparentlyapplied to Spartauntil the
(/PKr4), This
fourth.61 theory held that the best (becausemost stable)form of politicalsystem was either
one which combined in a harmoniouswhole ingredientsfrom each of the three basic'constitu-
tions' (monarchy,aristocracy/oligarchy,democracy)62or one in which the differentelements
acted as checks and balances to each other. The 'mixed constitution' theory overlaps and
reinforcesthe 'Lykurgos-legend'most insistentlyin its stresson the supposedabsenceof stasisin
SpartaafterLykurgos'reforms.
Happily for us, however, not all the ancient sourceswere equally persuadedof the truth of
every aspect of the 'mirage', and, since Spartadid in fact experiencesevere stasis, the ancient
explanationof its supposedabsencein terms of the 'mixed' natureof Sparta's'constitution'is
hardlycogent. Therehave, nonetheless,been isolateddefencesof the ancientview in more recent
times,63but today it is usuallydenied that suchan entity as a 'mixed constitution'is theoretically
possible. Sparta,at any rate, is no longer analysedin such terms. Thus, to take a representative
modern statement,A. W. Gomme could describeSparta'spoliticalsystem as being 'of a normal
aristocratictype' apart from 'the anomaly of the two kings'.64It is unclearwhether Gomme
thought the anomalyconsistedin theirbeing twoSpartankingsor in the survivalof the monarchy
itself, but he obviously consideredhis descriptionto be uncontroversial.In 1966, however, A.
Andrewes re-openedthe questionin a powerfully succinctarticle.65After giving what I would
regardas a very acceptablepictureof the Spartanpoliticalsystem ('anoligarchynotoriousfor its
disciplineand respectfor age and authority')he concludedfrom the relativeprominenceof the
EphorsandAssemblyand correspondinglylow profileof the Gerousiain the periodon which we
arebestinformed(roughly the lifetime of Xenophon) thatSpartahad 'in some ways a more open
constitutionthan most oligarchies'.
This conclusionhasnot passedunchallenged,66but to the argumentsagainstit thatfallwithin
Andrewes' own immediate frame of referencecan be added those arising from the study of
literacyat Sparta.To summarisethe former, whateverview we takeof the politicalcompetence
of the damosunderthe termsof the 'GreatRhetra',it is extremelydoubtfulwhethertherewas ever
much debatein the Assembly.At any rate,8 fiovAo'•dvoswas almostcertainlynot permitted(even
if he had the courageand motivation) to speakas and when he pleased.On the one occasionon
which we know the Spartans held 'frequent assemblies' (Hdt. vii 134.2: &A~ls
7TOAAdKLS"
the agendumwas 'Does any Spartanwish to die for the fatherland?'The distance in
uvAAeyojuEv)sq)
atmosphereand conceptionbetween thisand,for example,the Mytilenedebateat Athensin 427 is
absolutely unbridgeable. Voting in the Assembly was conducted according to an archaic
procedure'by shouting and not by ballot' (Thuc. i 87); in other words, there was no theory of
one man, one vote' with everyone counting for one and no one for more than one. Moreover, as

59 Cf. Arist. Pol. ii I274a29 for some others (though Constitutional

Solon of courseis substantiallya historicalfigure).
60 On the historicityof Lykurgos (as opposed to 'his'
laws) see A. J. Toynbee, SomeProblemsof GreekHistory
(Oxford 1969)274-83; Oliva, op. cit.63-70.
61 G. J. D. Aalders,Die TheoriedergemischtenVerfas-
sungim Altertum(Amsterdam1968);Rawson, op. cit. (n.
58) Index, s.v. 'Mixed Constitution'.
62J. de Romilly,
' 'Le classement des constitutions
d'H&rodote Aristote' in REG lxxii (1959) 81-99; F.
Lasserre,'H&rodoteet Protagoras:le debat surles consti-
tutions' in MH xxxiii (1976)65-84.
63 For
example,A. H. J. Greenidge,Handbook of Greek
History(London 1896) 74-107; but even he
ends by adopting a position not dissimilar to that of
Andrewes (below).
64 A HistoricalCommentary on Thucydidesi (Oxford
1945) 129 (adThuc. i 18.I).
65 'The Government of ClassicalSparta'in E. Badian
(ed.), AncientSocietyand Institutions.Fest. V. Ehrenberg
(Oxford 1966) 1-20 (my quotations are from p. I; the
comparisonwith the Atheniandemocracyis broachedon
p. 16).
66 G. E. M. de Ste. Croix, The Origins of the Pelopon-
nesian War (London 1972) 125 ff.
 LITERACY IN THE SPARTAN OLIGARCHY 35
we have noted, the methodsof electing Ephorsand Geronteswere in both instancesdismissedby
Aristotle as 'childish',presumablybecausethey were so easily manipulated.Once elected, the
membersof the Gerousiawere non-responsible(Arist.Pol. ii I27Ia5 f.), although they together
with the Ephorsconstitutedthe Spartan'Supreme Court'. It cannot be stressedtoo much that
there was no popularjudiciaryin Sparta.67
We come now to the argumentsagainst'openness'drawn from a considerationof literacy.
First, there were no written rules governing the conduct of lawsuits heard before the Ephors
(Arist. Pol. ii 127ob28-31). Secondly, and yet more importantly, legislation was not a typical
featureof the ordinarySpartan'spoliticalexperience,68and even such laws as were passedwere
not committed to writing (hence perhapstheir 'laconic' expression:Plato Laws721e). Indeed,
accordingto a doubtlessapocryphaland inevitably 'Lykurgan'rhetra(Plut. Lyk. 13.1 ff.: cf. Mor.
227b), it was forbiddento inscribelaws in Sparta,on the unimpeachablycorrect psychological
ground thatpaideiawas a better teacherof obedienceand disciplinethan externallegal compul-
sion.69 The sameleitmotif liesbehindthe explanationattributedto Zeuxidamosson of Latychidas
II (Plut. Mor. 221b) for the fact that Spartanlaws on braverywere unwritten. The one possible
contraventionof thisprohibition,interpretedas a sixth- or fifth-centurysacredlaw regulatingthe
cult of Demeter, is of highly dubiousstatusand value.70Indeed,the generalprohibitionof named
tombstonesat Sparta(Plut. Lyk.27.3), at leastafterc. 500, might be takento imply thatsome areas
of Spartanexperiencethe written word was endowed with a quasi-magicalpotency.71
However that may be, a cursory survey of Spartanepigraphicalevidence reveals at once a
dearthof official State documentsof any kind. It was known from literarysourcesthat treaties
were draftedat Spartaand publicly displayedthere--or ratherin the chief sanctuaryof Sparta's
fifth constituentvillage, the Apollonion at Amyklai.72But only one actualexample on stone is
known to have survived from Sparta,a fifth-century treaty of offensive and defensive alliance
with the hitherto unattestedAitolian Erxadieis.73Since the latterwere presumablynot admitted
to membershipof what we call the 'PeloponnesianLeague',it is uncertainwhat relationthe terms
of this treatybear to those of what was probablythe earliestbuilding-blockof the 'League',the
treaty with Tegea of c. 550.74 The only other extant State inscriptionknown from Spartalists
contributionsby variousindividualsand statesto a war-fund (IG v 1.1).75
Apart from these two from Spartaitself, public inscriptionsin the Lakonianscriptinclude
only four from Olympia (a dedication of a bronze lebesby 70oZrrapTraraL; two marble seats
occupiedby Spartanproxenoi of Elisin the sixth century;and the baseof an offeringto Zeusby the
67 No isegoria:M. I. Finley, 'The Freedom of the 197, 2o01,nos. 57, 59;for the latterperhapsIG v 1.824 (all
Citizen in the GreekWorld', Talantavii (1976)9. Voting three cited above, n. 39). R. Flacelierein REG lxi (1948)
and elections:de Ste. Croix, op. cit.348 f. (on Thuc. i 87); 403-5, has argued from IG v 1.713 that the text for the
E. S. Staveley, Greek and Roman Voting and Elections latter exemption should be emended to read 'women in
(London I972) 73-6. No popularjudiciary:de Ste. Croix, childbed'.
op. cit. 133, 349 f.; cf. 'enerally R. J. Bonner/G. Smith, 72 Thuc. v 77, 79; I8.IO= Bengtson, op. cit. (n. 30) nos.
CPh xxxvii (1942) 113-29. 194, I88. For some illuminating remarkson their tran-
68 K. O. Miuller,TheHistoryandAntiquities of theDoric scriptionand dialectsee Bourguet,op. cit. (n. 36) 148-50.
Race2ii (London 1839) 91; cf. his correct descriptionof Note also Thuc. v 41.3=Bengtson no. 192 (unratified
'the aristocraticalspiritof the constitution,which feared treaty of 420 between Argos and Sparta, which the
nothing so much as the passionateand turbulenthasteof Spartans vveypdc0avro).
the populacein decreeingand deciding' (p. 87). 73 W. Peek, 'Ein neuer SpartanischerStaatsvertrag',
69 For the range of meanings of rhetrasee F. Quass, Abh.Sdchs.Akad. Wiss.Leipzig,phil.-hist.Kl.lxv 3 (1974)
Nomos und Psephisma(Munich 1971) 7-II. If it meant 3-15; cf.,however, my articlein LiverpoolClass.Monthlyi
'law' in the case of the 'GreatRhetra',then ex hypothesi (1976) 87-92.
this document was never inscribed. 74 Bengtson no. I12. However, we should probably
70 IG v 1.722=F. Sokolowski, Lois sacrees des cite's distinguishbetween the stele set up 'on the (banksof the)
grecques(Suppl.) (Paris1962)no. 28. This may, however, Alpheios' (Aristotle fr. 592 Rose) and the treaty of
have been inscribedfor the benefit of Perioikoi, whose alliance. Such a stele, with its injunction to the Tegeans
literacy need carry no implicationsfor Spartanliteracy, not to make Messenianscitizens,does not of courseprove
given the profoundlydifferentsocial organizationof the that MessenianHelots were typically literatein the mid-
two groups. sixth century.
71 According to the MSS. of Plutarch, loc. cit., there 75 R. Meiggs/ D. M. Lewis,A Selection of GreekHistori-
were two classesof Spartansexempted from the prohibi- cal Inscriptions
to theEndof theFifthCenturyB.C. (Oxford
tion on named gravestones:men who died in war and 1969)no. 67; C. W. Fornara(ed.), ArchaicTimesto theEnd
priestesseswho died in office. For the former seeJeffery of thePeloponnesian War(1977)no. 132.
36 PAUL CARTLEDGE
Spartansc. 490/80);76 one from Athens (polyandrionof the Spartansburiedin the Kerameikosin
403);77 and one from Delos (stele recording a decree of protection granted to the Delians by
Sparta between 403 and 399).78 For the sakeof completenesswe could perhapsadd to the tally of
known public inscriptionstwo victor-listsfrom Sparta,five manumission-stelaifrom Tainaron
(IG v 1.1228-32), the steleinscribedwith the nameof thosewho fell at Thermopylai in 480 (Paus.
3.14.1; cf. Hdt. vii 224.I1), the boastful epigram which Pausaniasthe Regent had inscribedat
Delphi (perhapson the limestone baseof the SerpentColumn), and the inscribedstelaimarking
the site of the official reburialof the samePausanias(Thuc. i 134.4;Paus.iii 14.1).79 This is a poor
harvestindeed,and the fact that six of them (thededicationsand the funeraryinscriptions)do not
differin kind from privateinscriptionsservesto underlinethe absenceof documentswith political
implicationsof the sort a law or other public ordinancewould have had.
Thus far then the contrastbetween Spartanand democraticAthenian practicein respectof
public documentationis stark.We shouldnot, however, distortits significance.In the firstplace,
Athens, possiblyfollowing the example of those inveteratepublishersof lawcodes, the Cretans,
had publishedlaws more thana centurybefore the democracywas establishedin 508/7, the initial
impetus being the growth of the coercive power of the polis at the expense of, and in open
opposition to, the self-help justice of feuding aristocraticfamilies.80 Secondly, although no
ancient state, democratic or otherwise, could rival democratic Athens in the publication of
documentsaffectingthe common weal, even Athensdid not set up a centralarchiveuntil the last
decadeof the fifth century(in what laterbecamethe Metro6n).81 Finally,on presentevidenceit is
hard to draw a sharpdistinctionin regard to public documentationbetween Spartaand, say,
Corinth.82
Despite thesenecessaryqualifications,however, we need not, I think, go so faras M. I. Finley
has recently,83 in denying that the publicationof documentsby the Atheniandemocracymeant
anything more thana claim to 'open' (ratherthanclosed,aristocratic)government.For at Athens
the connection between the publication of political documents in permanent form and the
development of democraticinstitutionsand practiceis apparent,not only chronologicallybut
also from, for example,ideological statementsemphasizingthe radicallydifferentunderpinnings
of written and unwritten lawcodes in terms of social classand political power (esp. Eur. Supp.
433-7; cf. Gorgiasfr. Iia, 30 DK; Diod. xii I3.1). Especiallynoteworthy is the insertion in
publisheddocumentsof a clauseto the effect that0 may read
flovAo'•evos
It is of course true that written definition of rights and duties will notthem..4
automaticallysecure
theireffectiveexercisefor all alike,whetherrich or poor, strongor weak. But thereseemsequally
to be something approachinga general rule that, to paraphraseEuripides,written definition
marksan indispensablestep on the road towards achieving this objective. Thus since even the
notoriouslyoligarchicRoman Republic(anotherfavouredcandidatefor the 'mixed constitution'
treatment,incidentally)had its Twelve Tables, there is a strong presumptionthat the Spartan

76 Lebes:Jeffery190, 199,no. io (c.600-550?).Seats:(I) sanias'epigram:Meiggs/Lewis,op. cit. no. 27, p. 6o. The

Jefferyloc.cit., no. 15 (c.600-55so?-perhapstoo high); (2)
A. Mallwitz, Arch. Delt. 27, Chron. (1972, publ. 1976)
275, pl. 212a (c. 5oo). Offering:Jeffery 195f., 201, no. 49
(republishedby Meiggs/Lewis,op. cit.no. 22, cf.Fornara,
op. cit.no. 38).
77 M. N. Tod, 'A SpartanGraveon Attic Soil', G&Rii
(1933) Io8-II; Jeffery 198, 202, no. 61.
78 Jeffery loc.cit., no. 62.
79 Victor-lists:Jeffery 195, 2oi, nos. 44, 47 (the precise
natureof no. 44 is unclear,and the lastof the four pairsof
names is written in a different hand from that of the
others). Manumission-stelai:the sanctuaryof Pohoidan
(Poseidon)is known to have been an asylum for fugitive
Helots (Thuc. i 13I. I), but, despitethe useof Ephor-dates,
it is uncertain whether the manumittees are Helots or
private slaves (whether of Spartansor Perioikoi). The
Thermopylailist is discussedin connectionwith the rele-
vant poem(s)of Simonidesby A.J. Podlecki, 'Simonides:
480', Hist. xvii (1968) 257-75, esp. 257-62, 274 f. Pau-
stelaimarkinghis officialreburialpresumablyfell outside
the scope of the prohibitiondiscussedin n. 71.
R. S. Stroud, Drakon'sLaw on Homicide(Berkeley
80so
1968).Cretanprecedent:Meiggs/Lewis,op. cit.no. 2; cf.J.
Boardman, TheGreeksOverseas2(Harmondsworth1973)
6o;Jeffery, op. cit. (n. 8) 43, 194.
81 A. L. Boegehold in AJA lxxvi (1972) 23-30; cf.
Welles, art.cit. (n. 16) 6 n. 16. But see below, n. 84.
82 Using Jeffery'scataloguesas rough samples,we find
that in the Corinthianalphabetthereare7 publicinscrip-
tions out of the 40, in the Lakonian(counting only those
from Spartaand Amyklai) I out of the 32, or (counting
them all whereverfound) 6 out of the 67.
83 Art. cit.
(n. I8) 924.
84 Harvey 6oo f. This
implies that the absence of a
central archive need not have prevented persons from
perusingany document in which they were particularly
interested.
 LITERACY IN THE SPARTAN OLIGARCHY 37
political system, which eschewed even as much 'open government' as the publication of the
Twelve Tablesmay have implied, was yet more oligarchicstill. IndeedSpartanswere reportedly
not permittedso much as to criticizethe laws.
To conclude, the alleged'openness'of the Spartan'constitution'is merelyapparentand stems
from the peculiarlySpartanfeaturethat the Assemblywas simply the army of adult male hoplite
warriorsin civiliandress.It naturallythereforehad to rubber-stamp,in an open demonstrationof
solidarityand token sovereignty, decisionswhich in practicehad alreadybeen takenelsewhere.

VI

If we returnfinallyto the broaderquestionwith which we began, the role of literacyin social

organization,we must at least conclude that the Spartanevidence does not supportthe techno-
logical determinismimplicit in the simple deductionby Goody and Watt of widespreadpopular
literacyfrom the mere availabilityof a versionof the Greekalphabet.Certainly,the simplicityof
the alphabetmade it possiblefor the ordinarySpartanman (and probablywoman) to acquirea
rudimentaryknowledge of readingand writing. Yet at the sametime literacyin Spartaremained
very thinly spread,and deep literacywas the preserveof an 'lite operatingat the highestlevels of
state.
On the other hand, to say, as does H.-I. Marrou,85that Spartamadeit 'son point d'honneura
resterune ville de semi-illettr6s'is to introduce a false note of conscious planning. Rather, the
natureof the developmentof Spartansociety from the eighth centuryB.c. onwards,above all its
oligarchicpolitical system and the relationshipof the citizen-body to the Helots, did not either
necessitateor even encouragethe development of those socialartswhose successfulperformance
is dependenton a high level of popularliteracy.
PAUL CARTLEDGE
TrinityCollege,Dublin

85 Op. cit.
(n. 19) 45.