Toto

More on what Historicists are up to:

The Jesus Blog: Was Jesus a Peasant?

Bauckham's argument is (quoted here)

Bauckham then goes on to quote the story of the Desposynoi from Hegesippus, who supposedly were hauled before Domitian as potential terrorists, and showed their rough hands to show that they were hard working farmers, not political revolutionaries. They described their land as a farm worth 9000 denarii, 39 plethra in size.

He then says: Why does anyone take this man seriously?

outhouse

I would say some will. Ben Witherington might., be he is a apologist.



Scholarships ae divided on this issue, many want to claim that because Nazareth was so close to Sepphoris that Nazareth would have shared the wealth. I dont.


There is a large gray area here and divides even in the cultural anthropology.



I believe there was a large gap between the have's and have not's, but most of all we need to define what a peasant really was. In Galilee most were peasants less the Hellenistic elites in Sepphoris Herod had placed in power. Peasants wasnt really a bad term, its just what the people were living a life surrounding agriculture.


Then to address what level of a peasant he was, we need to undrestand how Tekton translates to this time period. If we follow Johnathon Reed he states these were displaced people who had lost their farms or houses and were "hand workers" who lived a life below that of the common peasant.


We also need to address Nazareth which also lacks evidence. What evidence we do have almost shines a negative light on the place.


There so much we dont know one way or the other to be able to determine socioeconomics. Roll the dice, ill run with poor.

Toto

The word "tekton" could refer to a carpenter, but also a master builder. McDonald points out that Odysseus was referred to as a tekton at one point, because of his technical skill at shipbuilding.

But this is all an exercise in the Impossible to Disprove Historical Jesus. The historicists start off assuming that Jesus must have existed, and constructing a character that cannot be disproved by the available evidence.

No secular record of Jesus? He must have been an obscure, marginal type, although we know from other social movements of this sort that poor, marginal peasants do not suddenly become social leaders.

DCHindley

I think it is a little premature to dismiss such a statement as baseless without considering the possibilities.

39 plethron (Greek)

=19.500000 aroura(e)
=0.195000 pecheis(2)
=19.500000 schoinion(2)
=19.500000 iugerum(-a)
=5.374200 hectare(s)
=13.279648 acre(s)
=537.420001 are(s)
=53742.000069 metres(2)
=53.742000 dunam(s)
=2.312619 cors-space
=39.000000 plethron (min)
=19.500000 plethron (max)

39 iugerum (sometimes called a plethron in Greek sources under Roman rule)(-a)

=39.000000 aroura(e)
=0.390000 pecheis(2)
=39.000000 schoinion(2)
=39.000000 iugerum(-a)
=10.748400 hectare(s)
=26.559296 acre(s)
=1074.840001 are(s)
=107484.000138 metres(2)
=107.484000 dunam(s)
=4.625237 cors-space
=78.000000 plethron (min)
=39.000000 plethron (max)

Denarius Converter v1.0
Copyright (C) 2001
by Stefan Kloppenborg

Nine thousand denarii was over 40 years of net pay for a Roman legionnaire, but they didn't serve for longer than 20 yrs. If one served 20 years @ 225d/yr + 3,000d pension = 7,500d., so 9,000 was 120% of a Roman legionnaire's service pay between recruitment and retirement. Each denar = 64 asses. Bread cost about 3 asses per pound (Tenney Frank, An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, V: Rome and Italy of the Empire, 1940, two volumes, page 144f).

This land, it should be noted, is in Judea, not Galilee. This was then, not now. "Free-hold" land virtually did not exist. All of Judea became the emperor's personal property upon its conquest by Vespasian's son Titus. He gifted some of it to favorites (Josephus for one, probably Titus and the generals under his or Vespasian's direct command in the conquest), and respected grants given in the past to those local leaders who had remained loyal in the rebellion. Gift land, FWIW, could be bestowed or taken away at the emperor's discretion, because he owned all land he conquered or was conquered by preceding emperors (and I can cite the tertiary source for this statement if anyone wants to know).

This means this Judean land was leased from the emperor or one of his cronies, and not freehold land. Rents paid by peasant farmers varied by where it was located and who it was leased from. If anyone has a copy of The Moral Economy of the Peasant by Scott will learn that lease terms could vary from a % of the total crop, to a flat proportion with the farmer getting any residue. The former shared the risk with the farmer so that a good farmer and his landlord could do well, while a bad farmer would be replaced in short order by his landlord. The latter case was good for the farmers when the crop yields were good, but bad for them when there was drought or locusts.

The following sources make quite a few questionable assumptions about land tenancy in Judea in 1st century, but here you go:

David H Fiensy, The Social History of Palestine in the Herodian Period (1991, pp 92ff:

Although there were probably some small freeholders who lived fairly comfortably, the peasant in the Greco-Roman world in general "was always at the margin of safety." This condition was due to small farmplots, natural and man-made disasters, and taxation. Ben-David (whose figures match those of Oakman) has calculated that a family of six to nine people would have needed seven hectares or around 16.8 acres (half of which would lie fallow each year) to subsist comfortably and pay taxes or rents. A study by Hopkins found that a family of 3.25 persons would require in Italy 7 to 8 iugera of land ( = around 4.5 acres) to meet the minimum food requirements or 8 acres for a family of six people. But K. D. White argues that this acreage is too low and that a peasant holding such a small amount of land would have to hire out as a day laborer to supplement his income. Dar maintains that a peasant owning 5 to 6 acres could live comfortably meeting all his subsistence needs. Applebaum, however, has challenged Dar's estimate on the amount of land needed to feed a family especially since Dar failed to consider that virtually all ancients let half their land lie fallow every year to replenish it. Brunt's estimate as to how many iugera could feed one person in Italy results in the sum of 10.8 acres for six people. Thus the suggestions of necessary acreage are as follows:

1. Ben David	16.8 acres
2. Oakman	16.5 acres
3. Hopkins	8 acres
4. Dar	6 acres
5. Brunt	10.9
6. White	(more than 8 acres)
7. Applebaum	(more than 6 acres)

We must remember that half of this land would lie fallow every year, a standard practice in the ancient world.
Perhaps the simplest way to figure the crop yield for Palestine is to take the standard measurement of a Kor's space (i.e., the area which one Kor's measurement, or 5 bushels of seed, could sow). A Kor's space was approximately 5.8 acres and would yield normally five fold. Thus one Kor's space (leaving half fallow) could feed a family of six, after taxes (see below) for about 110 days at the rate of 400 grams of wheat per day. A farm consisting of three Kor's spaces then (17.4 acres) could feed the family the basic grain staple for a year.

Jack Pastor, Land and Economy in Ancient Palestine, 1997, pp 8-10):

The literary sources are few, and not necessarily illustrative of the common situation. However, Brunt used information provided by Cato and Polybius on ration needs of slaves and soldiers, demonstrating that two iugera were needed to support one adult. This has been confirmed by the work of White and Hopkins. Some modern works quote Eusebius' anecdote about the sons of Jesus' brother. These two men lived off a farm of 39 plethora (Alon claims that equals 34 dunams.) Oakman tried to compare the figures from Italy derived by Hopkins, and the figures from Eusebius, while taking into consideration that some land had to be fallow. His conclusion was that a "subsistence plot in antiquity was, then, about 1.5 acres" (6 dunams). Feliks notes that the Talmudic literature mentions plots of a few dunams to plots of 23 dunams which are considered generous.

Shimon Dar working on the basis of archaeological surveys in northwestern Samaria reached a conclusion for the Roman-Byzantine era that a family holding averaged 39-45 dunams. Admittedly the evidence is drawn from a limited geographical area, but another survey in the western Hebron Mountain region found the average size of farms to be 30-50 dunams. Comparative figures for other Mediterranean areas are 40 dunams for Attica and 5-25 dunams for Italy.

Dar contends that the average Jewish farmer lived on a smallholding worked by himself and his family. It is difficult if not impossible to determine what the average size of an agricultural unit was. The Mishnah recognizes the minimum size of a field to be nine "kabs." The Tosefta mandates 9.5 kabs as the minimum size of a field. Dar notes that deeds from the Nessana area in the late Roman-Byzantine period show small plots of only 1-4 dunams.

Applebaum, working from the archaeological research in Samaria, maintains that 25 dunams may have been the average figure of a holding. He quotes Ben-David, who working from talmudic sources suggests 40 batei scab as the average holding needed to support a family, which he computes as 31.3 dunams. These figures of Ben-David are derived from the Mishnah. Orman based on a survey of the Golan region found an average settlement comprised 20 dunams? Golomb and Kedar found enclosed fields in the Galilee were about 16 dunams, although individual plots may vary between about 4 dunams to even 60 dunams.

There is a lot of pure wishful thinking going on here.

DCH

Chili

Joseph was a carpenter to say that he was a big sinner since all is created in sin, and so if carpenters make many things they are big sinners too.

He also had 12 shepherds on the go so now he was a rancher too, while each shepherd represents a pillar of strength based on 'insight' that Plato called and ousia and those were on-the-run that Plato called full blooded kinetic vision that enhances our love for present circumstances, as if to say: who am I really beside these eidolons that made me if they are not really mine now seen as demiurgic art.

So he was no carpenter at all, nor a pheasant but upright sinner, yes!

MrMacSon

So the narrative goes. But that aspect, like all the other parts of the story, is unsubstantiated.

outhouse

How many master builders would be in a dump like Nazareth? with little to no wood at all.


Here's a few scholars view.


http://www.bibleinterp.com/review/man35821.shtml

outhouse

Who really states he was a social leader?????


Historians state he was a traveling teacher going around Galilee healing for food scraps, avoiding the large Hellenistic centers.


A social leader would be apologetically inclined nonsense.


He was only a social leader after his death.


He only found fame by becoming a martyr by being executed on a cross sticking up for poor people, fighting the corrupt temple like any Galilean Zealot would do.

Chili

What baffles me here that scholars will write something like that. Are they schoolboys maybe and you call that biblical criticism? . . . and are they all like that to even get published?

At least in literary criticism they talk about hues and tones and modes and colors while still never get to the point, but this just beyond belief. They must still have a Sunday suit, do they?

Toto

The gospels, which your historians mine for details about the historical Jesus. In the gospels, Jesus attracts followers right and left.

I would classify a traveling teacher as a social leader. In order to carry out his faith healing, he would need some stature or charisma.

Er, no, that's generally when people stop being social leaders.

That's your fantasy. It's a nice fantasy, but there's no real evidence for it.