M02a
Audio Reading
Module Two: Social Context
​
​
​
Social Class
​
Video: Stu Talené
​
​
Roman society across the empire can be divided into the elites and non-elites. The social distance between the two was enormous, and there was no middle class to speak of. Social migration from non-elite to elite was rare, since one’s birth determined status and there was very little opportunity for financial development. The stories of Jesus in the Gospels transcend the socio-economic boundaries. Whereas Luke tends to associate Jesus with non-elites, John connects him more with the elites. For example, in John, Jesus’ first miracle is on a prosperous estate in Cana. Another example is his close connection with the Beloved Disciple who seems to be well acquainted with Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the High Priest, who was surely an elite.
In addition to this most basic economic division, the first-century population can also be divided into citizens, slaves, and those who were simply called free peoples of the Empire, who were neither slaves nor citizens.
​
​
​
Roman soldier with two slaves in neck collars. (Click the image to see the Ashmolean Museum where this relief is housed)
​
​
​
Elites
The elites were in the top three to five percent of the population in wealth, power, education, authority, and honour. Their value system was guided by personal gain and security, as opposed to the enhancement of the common good. Preservation of the political and economic status quo with its inherent social inequalities factored prominently in public policy. Although they showed disdain for manual labour, they depended on it for food, construction, and the trade of other goods and services. The elites were voracious consumers, living lavish lifestyles, exhibiting their status and wealth through clothing, jewelry, estates, exotic artifacts, entertainment, and meals.
​
A floor mosaic in the home of an elite in Sepphoris. (Click to learn more about mosaics and mosaic making).
​
​
​
The elites were the primary providers of employment, but exploitation of their labourers was rampant. In addition to profiting from the productivity of the labourers, the elites were ensured a constant cash flow from taxes and rents imposed on the non-elites. Since long term productivity was economically advantageous, the elites ensured that there was enough food distributed to the families of labourers during times of shortage. Jesus‘ parables in the Synoptic Gospels are firmly set within the socio-economic matrix of the “haves” and “have nots.”
​
House of a 1st century elite. Pompeii.
​
In most villages throughout the provinces, a group of men called “retainers” served as overseers for the elite and the government of Rome, and safeguarded the hierarchal system. They ensured that order and security were established and they served as liaisons to village elders who would have had most of the influence among local populations. The retainers, however, also interfered in long-established patterns of reciprocal trade among village households. These patterns, despite their benefit for the poor, were regarded as being economically counterproductive. In the new model, times of struggle were alleviated by a lightening of the tax load, reduction of debt, and even rent. Elites, through retainers, even sponsored village entertainment, communal events, and burial associations. The underlying purpose of patronage (or investment), however, was long-term productivity. Often patronages resulted in placing the villages further in debt.
​
​
Non-Elites
The non-elites, or peasants, can be categorized into levels of poverty. Some tradesmen earned enough to sufficiently provide for their families, while others barely scraped by, living in a state of perpetual near-starvation. Income from farming, too, fluctuated dramatically. Some seasons would have yielded enough to meet the needs of families, perhaps with some surplus, whereas other seasons would have been dire, especially if the elite withheld some of the supply to increase their own profitability.
​
Palestinian farmer in the Battir hills (southwest of Jerusalem) working on his land in much the same way as first-century Jewish peasants.
​
​
Rural Peasants
​
In most Roman provinces, about ninety percent of the population lived in villages. The vast majority of these were peasants, which are not to be equated with the absolute poor. They were small farm owners and day labourers, working the land. The majority lived at a subsistence level, meaning that production was geared toward immediate consumption and allowed for very little (if any) surplus or disposable income. For peasant families, their plots of inherited land were their greatest possession, providing for their families’ sustenance and some degree of dignity in a society where the educated classes deemed the farmer as a necessary simpleton who had no impact on the cultural and political landscape. Hardships for these farmers were plentiful. Every year they risked losing crops due to floods, drought, or fire. When crops failed or farmers could not afford to pay taxes, they may have had to sell their land to opportunistic landowners or they may have even had to sell a child as a slave. Additional information about peasant farmers is found below under “Commerce”.
​
According to Josephus, the agrarian life was nowhere more concentrated than in Galilee. Despite his demographic and spatial exaggerations, Josephus’ description of Galilee, in contrast to commercial cities on the coast, is noteworthy. He writes,
​
These two Galilees, of so great largeness, and encompassed with so many nations of foreigners, have been always able to make a strong resistance on all occasions of war; for the Galileans are inured to war from their infancy, and have been always very numerous; nor hath the country been ever destitute of men of courage, or wanted a numerous set of them; for their soil is universally rich and fruitful, and full of the plantations of trees of all sorts, insomuch that it invites the most slothful to take pains in its cultivation, by its fruitfulness; accordingly, it is all cultivated by its inhabitants, and no part of it lies idle. Moreover, the cities lie here very thick, and the very many villages there are here are every where so full of people, by the richness of their soil, that the very least of them contain above fifteen thousand inhabitants
Jewish War 3.42-43
​
The average life expectancy of peasants was between thirty and forty. By age thirty, most peasants had suffered from internal parasites, carried by livestock, rotting teeth, and bad eyesight. The archaeological evidence is sporadic, but still helpful. For example, fifty percent of the hair combs found at Masada, Murabba‘at and the Negev were infected with lice and lice eggs. There is also good reason to believe that malaria was a problem in the Sea of Galilee basin. For instance, Peter’s mother-in-law is described as suffering from a fever in Capernaum (Mark 1:30-31), and a centurion’s son also is said to have had a fever in the same city (Mark 4:52). These accounts come from an intensely malarious region, whereas towns like Nazareth and Cana were not situated in a valley, but atop a hill and therefore experienced fewer instances of this dreaded disease.
​
Infant mortality rates are estimated at thirty percent in many comparable peasant societies, often due to disease and malnutrition. In ancient Palestine, about sixty percent of those who survived their first year of life died by age sixteen, and in only a few families would both parents still be living when the youngest child reached puberty. Poor nutrition and illness was commonplace. Getting to a marriageable age for the peasant required overcoming pervasive health risks; thus most lives ended in premature death.
​
In Jewish burial practices, decomposed bodies were sometimes placed in stone bone boxes called ossuaries. They were often decorated and painted in red. About 750 ossuaries have been found around Jerusalem.
​
​
A stone ossuary (bone-box).
​
​
Urban Peasants
​
In urban centers, peasants lived in deplorable conditions by today’s Western standards. Dwellings were often small, crowded, and unsanitary. Neighborhoods were dirty and smelled of human and animal excrement and garbage. Water was often contaminated. Refrigeration did not exist, though some dwellings did have crawl spaces that acted as coolers. Although there were shortages of food, some nonetheless did spoil and rot before it could be eaten. Urban life was replete with conditions that elevated the risk of infectious diseases.
​
Although social inferiority, exploitation, illness, and poverty characterized daily life, and status was accepted as fate, negative reactions by the peasant class is well documented. At times, protests were nonviolent, amounting to tax evasion, work slowdowns, desecration of Roman symbols, and vandalizing of the property of the elite. Often these actions were well calculated, so as to prevent the capture of the perpetrators.
​
The book of Revelation, in fact, can be viewed as a symbolic (and therefore disguised) protest letter in condemnation of Roman persecution. In this case the protest is ideological. The New Testament contains several subversive teachings directed at Rome, its system, its elite, and its sympathizers, such as the Jerusalem establishment. One well known ideological subversion is Jesus’ admonition, “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” in Matt 22:21/Luke 20:25. Historical Jesus scholars have argued that Jesus’ announcement of the kingdom of God should be understood as a subversive reaction to the kingdom of Caesar.
​
​
The Flagellation of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by William-Adolphe Bourguereau (1880), Cathedral of La Rochelle, France.
​
​
Still other protests took the form of violent resistant movements. When taxation and debt reached a critical point, usually at the loss of family land, revolts sometimes took place against Roman occupation in the provinces. A number of violent uprisings against the Romans occurred from 4 BCE to 66 CE in Palestine, but each time the violence was short lived. Rome did not tolerate any kind of defiance, and dealt with it swiftly and aggressively. For deterrence purposes, perpetrators were punished publicly and harshly, including scourging and crucifixion. Although Jesus’ protest against social injustice was nonviolent, he was perceived as a messianic figure who posed a political threat and thus was subjected the same punishment.
​
Roman Citizens
The success of Roman expansion can be credited to its policy of incorporating conquered peoples into its empire. Instead of annihilating native populations, local political structures often remained in place, traditional cultural practices were encouraged, and grants of citizenship were offered to compliant groups and especially to wealthy/elite individuals in the provinces. The children of these new citizens would automatically inherit citizenship. The easiest way to become a citizen was to be born into it. Whether one was born into a Roman family or born in a foreign city whose residents were already granted citizenship, such citizenship was automatic. Paul likely received his citizenship in this latter manner, since the residents of his home city of Tarsus were granted citizenship decades before his birth. Children of freed slaves were also known to receive citizenship. Individuals were granted citizenship for a variety of services that benefited the empire. Usually these were granted by the Senate, a General in the field, or even the emperor himself.
​
Household of an elite Roman citizen with slaves.
Casa deli Amorini Dorati, Pompei. 1st century CE.
​
​
Citizenship had its benefits. Roman citizens could participate in the election of magistrates, had the right to be tried in Roman courts, had the right to appeal convictions, were exempt from personal tax, and (usually) could not be legally crucified, tortured, flogged, thrown to beasts, or sentenced to hard labor. Citizens could also serve in the Roman army, which provided a steady income, honour, and a pension that often included a residence in an outlying part of the empire, such as Philippi.
​
Perhaps the most well known Roman citizen in the New Testament is the apostle Paul, who at times appealed to his status for fairer legal treatment. At other times, however, Paul said nothing about his status, such as when he was imprisoned at Philippi. Why did Paul remain silent? Did he not have documentation with him? Or did he not want to be given special treatment while his fellow workers suffered? Appeals to citizenship required one to provide some kind of evidence. Travelers like Paul would usually carry their citizenship documentation with them, but in cases where the document could not be produced, the challenge to prove one’s citizenship could become a very difficult task. New documentation would have to be ordered from the applicant’s home region.
​
​
​
Paul Writing his Epistles, by Valentin de Boulogne (1620). Museum of Fine Arts, Houston.
​
​
Slaves
The inhabitants of the empire can also be categorized into citizens, free people of the provinces, and slaves. Slavery was practiced throughout the Roman provinces and was culturally accepted. Slaves were the lowest class of people in Roman society. However, while slaves had very few rights, they were legally protected from gross mistreatment.
​
Seneca writes advice on the treatment of new slaves in his Essay About Anger 3.29.1–2:
​
It is base to hate a man who commands your praise, but how much baser to hate any one for the very reason that he deserves your pity. If a captive, suddenly reduced to servitude, still retains some traces of his freedom and does not run nimbly to mean and toilsome tasks, if sluggish from inaction he does not keep pace with the speed of his master's horse and carriage, if worn out by his daily vigils he yields to sleep, if when transferred to hard labour from service in the city with its many holidays he either refuses the toll of the farm or does not enter into it with energy - in such cases let us discriminate, asking whether he cannot or will not serve. We shall acquit many if we begin with discernment instead of with anger.
​
As Rome gained more ground, it gained more slaves. Some slaves were caught, bought and sold by slave traders; others were prisoners of war, such as those brought from Palestine after Rome’s conflicts with Jewish revolutionaries. Many were either born or adopted into slavery. Slavery was sometimes the fate of unwanted children (usually female) who were sold as a debt payment or given away or left to die because they were an economic liability for their parents. Some of these children were adopted and appropriated as personal property.
​
Slaves were valuable assets for the elite. Since they were property, they could be bought, sold, traded and inherited. To support this trade, slave markets were commonplace, especially in port cities.
​
​
A mosaic from Carthage depicting a mistress and her slaves. Bardo Museum, Tunis. 3rd century CE.
​
​
The quantity of slaves one owned corresponded with one’s status. An elite master of high standing would have had slaves that numbered into the thousands. Pliny the Elder (23-79 CE) provides a summary of assets recorded in the will of a Gaius Caecilius Claudius Isidorus (who was probably at the upper end of the elite). Pliny writes that despite his losses in the civil war, Gaius left behind 4,116 slaves, 3,600 oxen, 257,000 head of other cattle, and 60,000,000 sesterces (Natural History 33.47).
​
​
Floor mosaic of four slaves serving two masters in the middle. The two large figures are carrying wine. The figure on the far left is carrying water and towels. The figure on the far right is carrying flowers. Dougga, Tunisia, 2nd century CE.
​
​
It has been said that Rome was built on the back of its slaves. Though this is a highly simplistic statement, slavery certainly contributed to its growth. Slavery provided for inexpensive labor in a variety of areas, thus maximizing the profit margin for the owners and elevating lifestyles for both the elite and for some slaves; not all slaves were used for hard physical work. Most of the time they were used to perform household duties, such as cooking, cleaning, painting, building and host of physical tasks. Some were used as gladiators and others as prostitutes. A few slaves, however, had specialized skills and advanced education in medicine, philosophy, rhetoric and/or mathematics (such as the slaves that were brought from Greece when Rome defeated the Macedonians). These slaves performed more specialized duties which required literacy and writings skills, such as managing the financial affairs of their masters, recording business transactions in ledgers, teaching both the children and adults in their master’s household and looking after the medical well being of their owners.
​
There is no indication in the New Testament that the early Christians opposed slavery. There is no mandate for its abolishment or that it was considered morally reprehensible. Paul, who had direct contact with the runaway slave Onesimus simply encouraged him to return and reconcile with his master, Philemon. In 1 Cor 7:20-24 Paul indicates that freedom is the better option if it becomes available, but he tells slaves to be content in the condition they find themselves, since they are free in Christ.
Freedmen
When slaves were freed, they were known as freedmen. Some masters freed their slaves as acts of kindness. In some cases, this was requested in the master’s final will. Some masters freed their slaves by marrying them. Other slaves, who saved enough, requested to pay for their own liberty. This was known as a “ransom fee”—terminology used by Paul on occasion to explain liberation from the bondage of sin (e.g. 1 Cor 7:20-24).
​
Once freed, slaves were incorporated into the mainstream culture and given a qualified citizenship through the patronage of their masters. Male children of freedmen automatically qualified for unrestricted citizenship. The ancestral line of a freedman bore the name of the master or master’s family. A freed slave may have had an ongoing obligation to that family. For example, if the slave Onesimus was freed by his owner, Philemon, Onesimus would be known as “Philemon Onesimus.” The freedmen and his family also continued to worship the same deities as their former masters. This may explain how Onesimus became a Christian.
​
​
​
Procession of the Imperial Family. Frieze from the Altar of Augustan peace commemorating Augustus’ campaigns against Spain and Gaul. Museum of the Ara Pacis, Rome, 13-9 BCE.
​
​
​
​
Family Life
​
​​
The basic building block in Greco-Roman society was the family, highly valued by both Jews and gentiles. Unlike today’s Western societies, which can be classified as individualistic, first century society was collectivistic. Families included aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins, and even included the extended families of the extended families. If the family was wealthy, their slaves were also included.
​
​
​
Fresco of a family banquet, Pompeii, 1st century CE. National Archaeological Museum, Naples.
​
​
The most basic social unit in a traditional agrarian society, such as first-century Palestine, was the household family, which consisted of a husband, his wife, their children, the husband’s parents, and his brothers’ families. Sons generally stayed at home after marriage. Family ties, or “kinship,” shaped identity, political views, religion, vocation, and roles. Kinship networks played a key role in the arrangement of marriages, dowries, occupations, and economic wellbeing. The position of an individual within a kinship network helped define that person’s position in the broader community and largely determined one’s own identity and prescription for life. Gender, race, religion, and social status were prescribed identity boundaries which were rarely crossed.
​
Marriage
​
Nuptial ceremony of the elite class. Frieze on the sarcophagus of the bridegroom.
Ducal Palace, Mantua. Italy. 2nd century CE.
​
​
The importance of kinship and community was particularly noticeable in the institution of marriage. Almost everyone married at least once. Children were raised with a clearly established view of marriage and spousal roles. Women were usually married by their late teens. Men married slightly older. Marriage was not orchestrated or determined by individuals who entered into a romantic relationship. Instead, the entire family was involved in choosing and negotiating suitable marriage partnerships, often for pragmatic reasons. The preparations began with a betrothal period, which could last from a short time before a wedding, to years before the couple was eligible for marriage. During this time the dowry was set from the bride’s side, and goods and services were transferred from the groom’s family (e.g. Gen 34:12; m. Ket. 1.2; 5.1).
​
One of the ways in which property was retained in a kinship network was by marrying relatives, such as cousins. Incidences of endogamy (marriage between kinship group members) in the ancient world ranged from nineteen to sixty percent of all marriages. One of several examples from the Jewish scriptures is Abraham’s request that Isaac marry within their kinship group. Another example comes from Josephus, who writes that, of the eight generations of the Herodian family, twenty-two of the thirty-nine marriages mentioned were endogamous.
​
As with marriage, divorce was not an individual decision, but involved the two families, who were responsible for the repayment of dowries, redistribution of property, and settlement of other accounts. In practice, this was complicated by the fact that the husband controlled all of the property.
​
​
Men
​
The ancient Mediterranean world was patriarchal. In broader society, the father of the family (the most senior male) was known as the paterfamilias. He had absolute power over his entire household: wife, children, extended family, and slaves. He controlled the finances for the family, directed the religious life of the household and chose his children’s spouses. He even had the power to “expose” his newborn infants if they proved to be a financial liability. “Exposure” or “casting out” refers to abandoning infants in remote areas. Some would be picked up by slave owners, whereas others would be eaten by animals. We do not know how often this happened, but when it did, it usually did not affect the firstborn or boys. We have no record of Christians or Jews practicing the exposure of infants, nor any contemporary record of them speaking for or against it.
​
Oxyrhynchus Papyrus (P. Oxy.) 4 744. Courtesy of Duke databank of documentary papyri.
​
​
​
The following quotation comes from a first-century (BCE) letter, discovered in Oxyrhinchus, Egypt. It conveys the father’s power and attitude about his unborn child. While away in Alexandria, Hilarion writes to his wife, Alis:
​
I beg and entreat you, take care of the little one, and as soon as we receive our pay I will send it up to you. If by chance you bear a child, if it is a boy, let it be, if it is a girl, cast it out” (P. Oxy. 4 744).
​
Note Ovid’s condemnation of self-administered abortions. Interestingly, the blame removes the man from the practice, which is another example of patriarchy.
Of what use is it for damsels to live at ease, exempt from war, and not with their bucklers, to have any inclination to follow the bloodstained troops; if, without warfare, they endure wounds from weapons of their own, and arm their imprudent hands for their own destruction? She who was the first to teach how to destroy the tender embryo, was deserving to perish by those arms of her own. That the stomach, forsooth, may be without the reproach of wrinkles, the sand must be lamentably strewed for this struggle of yours.
​
If the same custom had pleased the matrons of old, through such criminality mankind would have perished; and he would be required, who should again throw stones on the empty earth, for the second time the original of our kind. Who would have destroyed the resources of Priam, if Thetis, the Goddess of the waves, had refused to bear Achilles, her due burden? If Ilia had destroyed the twins in her swelling womb, the founder of the all-ruling City would have perished.
​
If Venus had laid violent hands on Æneas in her pregnant womb, the earth would have been destitute of its Cæsars. You, too, beauteous one, might have died at the moment you might have been born, if your mother had tried the same experiment which you have done. I, myself, though destined as I am, to die a more pleasing death by love, should have beheld no days, had my mother slain me.
​
Why do you deprive the loaded vine of its growing grapes? And why pluck the sour apples with relentless hand? When ripe, let them fall of their own accord; once put forth, let them grow. Life is no slight reward for a little waiting. Why pierce your own entrails, by applying instruments, and why give dreadful poisons to the yet unborn? People blame the Colchian damsel, stained with the blood of her sons; and they grieve for Itys, Slaughtered by his own mother. Each mother was cruel; but each, for sad reasons, took vengeance on her husband, by shedding their common blood. Tell me what Tereus, or what Jason excites you to pierce your body with an anxious hand?
​
This neither the tigers do in their Armenian dens, nor does the lioness dare to destroy an offspring of her own. But, delicate females do this, not, however, with impunity; many a time does she die herself, who kills her offspring in the womb. She dies herself, and, with her loosened hair, is borne upon the bier; and those whoever only catch a sight of her, cry "She deserved it.” But let these words vanish in the air of the heavens, and may there be no weight in these presages of mine. Ye forgiving Deities, allow her this once to do wrong with safety to herself; that is enough; let a second transgression bring its own punishment (Ovid, Loves 2.14.27-38).
​
Likewise in Jewish households, men were the heads. They attended to most of the work in the fields (except at harvest when all the family members participated), worked in trades, trained their sons, interacted with other household heads, and made important family decisions.
​
The eldest son became the head of the family and bore the responsibility to ancestors and descendants. Perpetuation of the family unit through marriage ensured the inheritance and continued maintenance of the family land, always under male control. Inheritance was not equally distributed. According to biblical law codes (Deut 21:17), the eldest son would inherit twice that of any brother.
​
​
Rembrandt van Rijn, Return of the Prodigal Son, c. 1661-69.
Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg.
​
​
The privileged status (and the elevated responsibilities) of the first-born son in ancient Mediterranean culture provides an important exegetical background for the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32) and the Parable of Wicked Tenants (Mark 12:1-11) and several Christological images and titles in the New Testament, such as “son of God”.
​
The male/female divide was rationalized partly along biological lines and partly along theological lines. It seemed reasonable that since the father produced the seed from which the child was born (Wis 7:1-2) and the mother merely supplied a womb, a privileged status was assumed for the male as the sole procreator of children—the provider of life. It was also argued that since God created man before the woman, and the woman from the bone of the man (Gen 2:7-23; 1 Cor 11:7-9), the man was regarded as having the dominant position.
​
​
Women
​
In Roman society, each wife was expected to obey her husband, serve his interests, raise his children, worship his gods, and manage his household(s). Managing the household was no small task in elite families, and allowed some women to wield significant power. Women were obligated by law to remain faithful to their husbands; whereas husbands were afforded latitude to satisfy their sexual desires outside the marriage. When a woman married, she passed from being under her father’s control to being under her husband’s. In many cases wives were confined to their own area of the house, which was designated as the “women’s quarters.” Female subordination may have been influenced in part by traditional Greek thinking, which saw the female as an undeveloped male.
​
With regard to female liberty, the Roman historian Livy (c. 59 BCE - 17 CE) writes, “Never, while their men survive, is feminine subjection shaken off; and they themselves abhor the freedom which the loss of husbands and fathers produces.”
History of Rome 34.1.12
​
However, by the first century CE, women in Roman society were becoming more autonomous. They were gaining, more liberty, power, influence, and a higher legal status. One of the reasons for progress was necessity. Since Rome’s political conflicts and peace-making ventures throughout the empire took a toll on the male population in Rome, many women were left to fend for themselves. These women would eventually become more socially self-determined and visible in financial and political affairs. The same kind of progress was usually not seen outside of Rome.
​
​
This figure of a woman holding a pen and codex (book) implies literacy among at least some of the Roman women. Pompeii, 1st century CE. National Archaeological Museum, Naples.
​
​
Like today, women were greatly appreciated in many households. The following quote from a tombstone reflects a common view of womanly virtues. “This is the unlovely tomb of a lovely woman. Her parents named her Claudia. She loved her husband with her whole heart. She bore two sons.… She was charming in conversation, yet her conduct was appropriate. She kept house, she made wool” (from Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum1.2.1211).
​
​
Fayum mummy portrait of an adorned woman, Egypt, late 1st century.
Walters Art Museum, Baltimore.
​
​
Some Jewish texts did not portray women in a flattering manner: they were perceived as inherently sinful (Philo, Hypothetica 11:14-17; Sir 42:12-14) and potentially dangerous (Philo, Virtues 38-40). Other texts advocated respect and honour for their roles as wives, mothers, and teachers in the home (Prov 1:8; 6:20; 31:10-31). A woman’s primary value lay in her ability to give birth, raise children, and take care of the domestic duties. According to some Jewish texts, marketplaces, council chambers, and courts of justice were viewed as more suitable for men; whereas, informal household management was for women (Philo, Special Laws 3.169-71; see also Flaccus 89). In Jewish society, women were restricted from many religious duties. They were not regarded as trustworthy witnesses in court proceedings. The standard prayer in the rabbinic prayer book did not help their cause either: “Blessed art thou O Lord our God, who has not made me a woman.” Although this prayer should be viewed in the context of male responsibility and honour to fulfill the whole law, it was nonetheless patriarchal. In the home, women prepared the meals, washed clothes, made clothing, cleaned the house, and raised the children. However, when the crops were ready to be harvested, the division of labour was not so rigid. Both men and women worked in the fields.
​
On the character of women from a first century BCE Jewish writing:
​
For evil are women, my children; and since they have no power or strength over man, they use wiles by outward attractions, that they may draw him to themselves. And whom they cannot bewitch by outward attractions, him they overcome by craft. For moreover, concerning them, the angel of the Lord told me, and taught me, that women are overcome by the spirit of fornication more than men, and in their heart they plot against men; and by means of their adornment they deceive first their minds, and by the glance of the eye instill the poison, and then through the accomplished act they take them captive. For a woman cannot force a man openly, but by a harlot’s bearing she beguiles him. Flee, therefore, fornication, my children, and command your wives and your daughters, that they adorn not their heads and faces to deceive the mind: because every woman who useth these wiles hath been reserved for eternal punishment. For thus they allured the Watchers who were before the flood; for as these continually beheld them, they lusted after them, and they conceived the act in their mind; for they changed themselves into the shape of men, and appeared to them when they were with their husbands. And the women lusting in their minds after their forms, gave birth to giants, for the Watchers appeared to them as reaching even unto heaven.
Testament of Reuben 5:1-7
​
Daughters were valued less than sons. Several rabbinic texts speak of an elevated rejoicing at the birth of a son in contrast to the birth of a daughter. In dire economic circumstances when families had to provide a debt-slave to a landowner, daughters were the first to go, since sons were needed to maintain the family line and to do manual work. According to marriage contracts, a daughter’s value was primarily based on her potential fertility. A dowry would have been an economic liability, especially since its size displayed a family’s honour. By twelve and a half, the father could transfer dominion over his daughter to the betrothed and his family. After the marriage, her husband could maintain patriarchal control over his wife for the rest of their lives. All of her economic assets, such as an inheritance, were transferred at the discretion of the husband. The popular perception of daughters in early Judaism is well expressed in the proverbs of Sirach 42:9-14.
​
​
Women in Early Christianity
​
Early Christian perspectives on women are sometimes criticized as being misogynist. Paul is grilled for his negative comments about women—that they should keep silent in the churches, attend only to household duties, be submissive to their husbands, not teach men and learn from their husbands (e.g. 1 Tim 5:14; Titus 2:3-5). However, like us, Paul is a child of his time, influenced by the dominant culture. One of the most hotly debated issues in the study of Paul and his letters is his view on the religious roles of women. At first glance, the evidence seems to go in opposite directions.
​
On the one hand there is no question that women played an important, even prominent, role in the early Christian communities. In Romans 16 Paul greets Phoebe who was both a deacon and his patron. He greets Prisca and her husband Aquila and thanks them for risking their lives for the gentile mission. Placing Prisca before her husband suggests prominence. He greets Mary, who works among the Romans. The most interesting in this long list is his greeting to Junia (along with Andronicus) in v.7, whom he calls “prominent among the apostles.” He greets other female fellow workers, named Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and Persis. He concludes his greeting by including Julia, the mother of Rufus, and the sister of Nereus. The list of women who are greeted and praised for their faith, service, and leadership in the fledgling church communities extends to Corinthians and Philippians. In Gal 3:27-28, Paul makes what appears to be a counter cultural pronouncement that there is no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, and male or female, since all are one in Christ. It is difficult, though, to say that Paul intended equality on every social level.
​
​
​
Fresco from the Catacomb of Priscilla, Rome. 2nd-3rd century CE. In this depiction of the Eucharist, the participants may well be women, which would have been contrary to view of many Church Fathers.
​
​
In other parts of the New Testament, women also take on prominent positions. Luke’s gospel is particularly positive on the role of women. For example, at the beginning of the gospel, women prophesy about the coming of a saviour. It is Mary, also, who prays the first gospel message in the Magnificat (1:46-55), and is chosen to be the one through whom salvation comes into the world. At the end of Luke, it is the band of women who come to anoint Jesus’ body that are privy to the first announcement of the good news that Jesus has risen from the dead. It is also these women (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women) who then preach the good news to the apostles, though it falls on deaf ears (24:10). Positions of prominence among women continued well into the second century, but primarily among Gnostic Christians. By the end of the first century, as more mainstream Christianity became institutional, leadership positions were held almost exclusively by men.
​
Though this was not the case everywhere. In a letter to the Emperor Trajan, Pliny to the Younger, Governor of Bithynia (111-113 CE), seeks advice on how to legally treat Christians, since they were neither paying homage to the emperor, nor buying goods for sacrificial rituals. Perplexed by the spread of this new religion, Pliny begins to interrogate Christians. At one point he targets female deacons.
​
It is customary for me, sir, to refer to you in all matters wherein I have a doubt. Who truly is better able to rule my hesitancy, or to instruct my ignorance? I was never present at examinations of Christians, therefore I do not know what is customarily punished, nor to what extent, nor how far to take the investigation. I was quite undecided; should there be any consideration given to age; are those who are however delicate no different from the stronger? Should penitence obtain pardon; or, as has been the case particularly with Christians, to desist makes no difference? Should the name itself be punished (even if crimes are absent), or the crimes that go with the name….
​
They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food--but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition (Pliny, Letter to Trajan).
​
​
​
Fresco of Paul and Thecla near Ephesus, 6th century CE. Both are portrayed as equals. Probably influenced by a the 2nd century writing Acts of Thecla, they share the same height and teaching posture, but Thecla’s eyes and hand are disfigured, while Paul’s is left intact. The vandalism may indicate opposition to the teaching role of women.
​
​
On the other hand, there are several references in Pauline letters that can be taken as negative characterizations of women. We read that women are to be subordinate to men, forbidding them to take on leadership positions in the church, and not allowing them to teach men. We find these sentiments primarily expressed in the Pastoral letters (1, 2 Timothy, Titus), written to pastors Timothy and Titus who were to appoint only male leaders meeting specific criteria, such as having wives who were submissive (e.g. 1 Tim 2:4, 11-13; 3:2-5, 12; 4:7). The root of this view may be found in the retelling of human creation in 1 Tim 2:14, which identifies Eve (and hence female nature) as the transgressor and deceiver of men, since she was the one who was deceived by Satan. So why is the portrayal of women so different in the Pastoral letters?
Some scholars reason that the Pastorals were not written by Paul, but by his followers several decades after his death. The arguments for this view is too vast to discuss at this point, but is summarized below in the chapter on the Pastoral letters. Other scholars argue that since very similar stipulations against women are found in 1 Cor 14:34-35, an undisputed Pauline letter, Paul’s negative views about the role of women in the church are directed at specific individuals who are disrupting their congregations.
​
​