Order, Language, and Property: Textual Formulae and Legal Relations in the Mycenaean Greek Land Records

Abstract Since the earliest Ancient Greek written records from the Mycenaean palaces (ca. 1450–1200 BC) contain no laws, contracts, or judicial decisions, some scholars have considered them unsuitable evidence for legal historical study. Yet this large body of administrative documents reveals much about the operation of the land regime and the interaction of property relations with the central power of the palaces. This article offers a treatment of the relationship between structures in language and normativity in the administrative records relating to land from Late-Bronze-Age Pylos, in particular focussing on a family of textual formulae constructed with the preposition pa-ro , which represents a derivative proprietary relation. By focussing on how the records represent the land regime through the use of this formula, and what inconsistencies in its use may tell us, this article explores how we can analyse textual strategies towards an understanding of the system of order in documentary sources. While the tablets are not formally ‘legal’ or normative sources, a study of strategic patterns in the structure of the texts, as well as their inconsistencies and limitations, together shows that normative and legal relations are indeed represented in the records, but appear to be more complex than what is written down. The technical language used by the Mycenaean administrators does not construct a perfectly applied system of abstractions, which has consequences for our understanding of power in the period, perhaps indicating that the complicated sphere of land relations operated partly beyond the palatial system of order. Through this case study this article proposes a method for a more critical approach to normativity in documentary records more generally. The approach outlined here for critically analysing formulae which carry legal meanings may be applied in other contexts using the evidence of ‘practice’, which has often been sidelined by legal historians in favour of normative or formal legal texts.