Literacy in the first century

[benAvram]

Very recently I read a scholarly analysis of literacy in the first century- broadly referring to literacy in the Roman empire on the whole and narrowly focusing on literacy in Judea in particular. There is debate among experts about the final numbers, but a broad consensus seems to exist around something approaching 10% literacy for the Roman empire and somewhat less, perhaps 5% in Judea. The study explained that literacy was mostly found among the governing class, scribes, and the wealthy in the empire, and more limited to the priestly class in Judea. Among the reasons, briefly, for the low rate: formal education was not widely available or needed, and writing materials (and manuscript production) were labor intensive and consequently, prohibitively expensive. These causes of low literacy persisted until the invention of the printing press in the mid 1400's. This little history lesson led me to wonder:

Given the extremely low rate of literacy and the limited availability of scriptures, is there any conceivable way that the early church was so closely related to the written word as modern Protestant Christians are? It is practically a given that Paul's letters and other NT texts were letters that most people experienced only through public readings, and a natural extension of this fact is that careful study of the words of scripture could not have been a widely practiced element of early Christian worship. If first and second century Christians had limited access to NT texts (few or no churches had all 27 books and most lacked more than a small collection, AND most followers could not read), what did their worship and daily faith center around? Should this be considered a model for us? Why or why not?

 

[kenisyes]

I do not believe the broad concensus. These values are a little high for the Middle Ages. But I have read too many Greek, Roman, and especially Jewish narratives about education to think the percentages are that low. I suspect that excepting slaves, 30% of Greeks and Romans were fluent enough to read documents and books, and almost all could read signs like "Cave Canem" (Beware of the dog) found in archeological digs. In Israel, every child started alphabet at age 3, and was expected to read Torah by age 8. Here is an article with more supporting data, of the type I have seen: Literacy in the Time of Jesus - Could His Words Have Been Recorded in His Lifetime?

 

[benAvram]

I do not believe the broad concensus. These values are a little high for the Middle Ages. But I have read too many Greek, Roman, and especially Jewish narratives about education to think the percentages are that low. I suspect that excepting slaves, 30% of Greeks and Romans were fluent enough to read documents and books, and almost all could read signs like "Cave Canem" (Beware of the dog) found in archeological digs. In Israel, every child started alphabet at age 3, and was expected to read Torah by age 8. Here is an article with more supporting data, of the type I have seen: Literacy in the Time of Jesus - Could His Words Have Been Recorded in His Lifetime?

I read the article and, unfortunately, I'm not especially convinced that it makes a case for higher literacy. The various examples of "literacy" in the first century cited are examples of nominal reading or writing ability- certainly nothing even remotely comparable to reading one of Paul's letters or similar literature. Being able to read "cave canem" is not an example of literacy in the sense that I was discussing above or that was in view with the article that I had read. I'll have more to write later and will also try to find the article I was reading, but for now I have other things to tend to.

 

[wdeaton65]

Acts 17;11 how could they search the scriptures daily if they couldnt read

 

[Angela53510]

I don't think this is at all right for the Jewish culture. The Jews established schools in the synagogues, which were everywhere there was a minyan or ten men. They taught all the boys till they reached their Bar Miztvah. They had to learn to read and memorize the Torah.

Now there were mostly uneducated women, except for maybe the upper class, and many slaves, but one only has to look at Paul, with his fluency in three languages, his letters, and realize he was raised in Antioch of Syria, not even Judea, the center of the Jewish culture, to realize the Jews had a huge educational system going on, so they could read the Scriptures.

I wonder if some secular humanist wrote that study? Hmm!

 

[benAvram]

Here is the study that I read, for those who want to evaluate the source material: Illiteracy in the Land of Israel in the first centuries c.e.

 

[benAvram]

I should add, while I'm taking a break from my other work, that the level of literacy in Israel is only of moderate import, since most of the NT was primarily intended for audiences outside of Israel.

 

[RedTent]

In our first centuries before Christ scripture was passed down by people who memorized it. That is almost unconceivable in our minds, dependent as we are on the written word.

By jumping ahead to history during the dark ages, most gentiles couldn't read. They weren't even allowed to have bibles, but priests gave them the word. It was the invention of the printing press in about 1500 that brought in a need to read. Up to that time, it was the Jews who learned to read because they had to to read the Torah. This made a huge difference in the culture of the Jew and gentile.

I should think that some, at least, of what we know of how people lived in the dark ages also applied to the first centuries.

 

[kenisyes]

Here is the study that I read, for those who want to evaluate the source material: Illiteracy in the Land of Israel in the first centuries c.e.

I saw the same study. It has a methodological problem, in that there is no way to know for certain that the modern sociocultural norms apply to the ancient world. In their study they compare countries of the Third World with countries of the Western culture. This division did not apply within the Roman Empire, and that included Israel at the time of Jesus. Within, the Empire was closer culturally to the Western world as it is now, than to the entire world. If we compare the Empire (or India or China) then, to the level of culture in the West now, that is fine, and we find a high rate of literacy. Comparing to the third world today, for countries back then, would require us to go to central Africa, the celts of northern europe, the Magyars, or to the Indians of Central America. The Mayans had a high literacy rate, otherwise we find very little literacy among these people. Pliny even quotes a tribe just outside the Empire who would summarily execute anyone who admitted he could read.

 

[benAvram]

I saw the same study. It has a methodological problem, in that there is no way to know for certain that the modern sociocultural norms apply to the ancient world. In their study they compare countries of the Third World with countries of the Western culture. This division did not apply within the Roman Empire, and that included Israel at the time of Jesus. Within, the Empire was closer culturally to the Western world as it is now, than to the entire world. If we compare the Empire (or India or China) then, to the level of culture in the West now, that is fine, and we find a high rate of literacy. Comparing to the third world today, for countries back then, would require us to go to central Africa, the celts of northern europe, the Magyars, or to the Indians of Central America. The Mayans had a high literacy rate, otherwise we find very little literacy among these people. Pliny even quotes a tribe just outside the Empire who would summarily execute anyone who admitted he could read.

I am sorry for taking so long to get back to this. I am only on ChristianChat every few days or so.

Frankly, I'm surprised that you have a problem with the methodology. Certainly there is a possibility that literacy in modern agrarian societies is different from literacy in ancient ones, but short of specific, credible ancient testimony about the rate of literacy in Israel, scientific methodologies are the best tools we have available to figure such things. And as far as scientific methodologies goes, this particular study is on pretty solid ground. The scientific method cannot tell us what the literacy rate was in ancient Israel, but what it does tell us is that short of the type of testimony I mention above, this is the best estimate that one can put forward. Unless specific credible testimony can be produced, all one can really do in the face of studies like the one I provided is demonstrate how and why a different methodology would be more accurate and support it with real research.

 

[crossnote]

In addition to the above, is there a different outcome from learning orally or through the written word, especially if the language spoken or written is current as it was then?

 

[zone]

By jumping ahead to history during the dark ages, most gentiles couldn't read.

oh rly?
which gentiles?

 

[kenisyes]

Unless specific credible testimony can be produced, all one can really do in the face of studies like the one I provided is demonstrate how and why a different methodology would be more accurate and support it with real research.

How's this: Greeks were taught to read as a matter of law: Education - Ancient Greece for Kids
All but the very poor were taught to read in Rome: Roman Education
Here is a more or less definitive study of Jewish education ca. 0-200AD. It states all boys were taught to read, and girls could learn as they chose (see the curriculum chapter starting on p.76. This is the text version, pdf etc. are in the site also): Full text of "Elementary Education In Ancient Israel"

 

[benAvram]

How's this: Greeks were taught to read as a matter of law: Education - Ancient Greece for Kids
All but the very poor were taught to read in Rome: Roman Education
Here is a more or less definitive study of Jewish education ca. 0-200AD. It states all boys were taught to read, and girls could learn as they chose (see the curriculum chapter starting on p.76. This is the text version, pdf etc. are in the site also): Full text of "Elementary Education In Ancient Israel"

It is going to take me some time to work through the "Elementary Education", but I can already say after reading about 1/3 of it that the author is quite loose with some of the information he sites in building the case for education or Jews in the first two centuries AD. For example, the codification of the Mishnah is hardly useful as evidence of literacy during the first two centuries since it happened around 220 and was the work of some of the most highly educated Jews of the time. Also, a lot of what this author is discussing has little or no significance for our understanding of literacy in Israel prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. The simple fact is that Judaism became a literary religion at the same time that it became a rabbinic religion, and for much the same reasons. All of this is occurring largely after the historical period with which my original question was concerned. Also, most of the examples of education that I have seen sited so far revolve around the urban centers in Israel (ex. the citation that there were 394 elementary schools in Jerusalem when it was destroyed), a fact which I think helps established the credibility of the study I cited previously. If the examples of education that various authors cite come exclusively from major cities, is that not significant?
I will continue to read the article and try to have an open mind. At the same time, it would be nice to see ONE scholarly source that explicitly states that true literacy among adult Jews in Israel or among the population of the Roman empire was higher than 10%. You say you don't agree with the consensus, but the truth is that even most conservative Christian scholars don't disagree with the 10% figure and cite it freely where appropriate.
I should also iterate that the point of my original post is not to suggest that we should not study the scriptures or that such study is not beneficial, but rather the point is to inquire whether we have become overly concerned with being literary Christians AT THE EXPENSE OF other beneficial elements of the Christian faith.

 

[kenisyes]

It is going to take me some time to work through the "Elementary Education", but I can already say after reading about 1/3 of it that the author is quite loose with some of the information he sites in building the case for education or Jews in the first two centuries AD. For example, the codification of the Mishnah is hardly useful as evidence of literacy during the first two centuries since it happened around 220 and was the work of some of the most highly educated Jews of the time. Also, a lot of what this author is discussing has little or no significance for our understanding of literacy in Israel prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. The simple fact is that Judaism became a literary religion at the same time that it became a rabbinic religion, and for much the same reasons. All of this is occurring largely after the historical period with which my original question was concerned. Also, most of the examples of education that I have seen sited so far revolve around the urban centers in Israel (ex. the citation that there were 394 elementary schools in Jerusalem when it was destroyed), a fact which I think helps established the credibility of the study I cited previously. If the examples of education that various authors cite come exclusively from major cities, is that not significant?
I will continue to read the article and try to have an open mind. At the same time, it would be nice to see ONE scholarly source that explicitly states that true literacy among adult Jews in Israel or among the population of the Roman empire was higher than 10%. You say you don't agree with the consensus, but the truth is that even most conservative Christian scholars don't disagree with the 10% figure and cite it freely where appropriate.
I should also iterate that the point of my original post is not to suggest that we should not study the scriptures or that such study is not beneficial, but rather the point is to inquire whether we have become overly concerned with being literary Christians AT THE EXPENSE OF other beneficial elements of the Christian faith.

I agree with your observations, and assumed you would say something of that type. However, if the study after the fall of Jerusalem is correct, it establishes that the observations obtained from the modern comparison study are wrong. The modern study is based on birthrates and urbanization, and these two items were probably the same or less after the fall of Jerusalem as they were before it. So the real issue hinges on whether the study I found applies only to major cities or to farming areas as well. Of course, I don't know where you live, but in the US, we see that parts of the country have a great difference between city and farms (such as in the west, where I have lived), and other places have little difference(such as in Delaware where I live now). It seems to me, that once population density gets up to around 50 or 100 per square mile overall, there is almost no cultural differences for a given area between city and farm. Just population statistics estimates from the Bible tell us that was much how Israel was. Three feasts a year brought a large cross-section of the population to Jerusalem, and the Levites (who were quite educated) wandered freely through the country. Everything I see in the Bible suggests to me the consistency of culture I see here in Delaware, not what I saw in the west.

And I certainly agree that we need the other elements of Christianity besides those of a literary nature. Let me point out that an internet site such as this is necessarily 100% literary in the threads. So we get a biased view of Christianity if we rely on it for our sample. But I am as concerned as you that internet seems to have replaced neighborhoods as places to live out all aspects of our lives, and this increasing dependence on threads, texting, and internet research, is not the best direction for a society to go.