Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From what I have read, 90% illiterate is probably a low estimate. The literacy rate would have been a little higher among the Roman citizens which most Jews were not. But scribes and the priesthood were probably the only literate among the ancient Jews.
From what I have read, 90% illiterate is probably a low estimate. The literacy rate would have been a little higher among the Roman citizens which most Jews were not. But scribes and the priesthood were probably the only literate among the ancient Jews.
Are you sure of this? I thought reading, interpreting, discussing and arguing the Torah was a big deal in ancient times, rich and poor alike.
Out of surrounding peoples (excluding the Romans), it would be my opinion that the Jews were comparatively much more literate.
The Jews have always put a very heavy emphasis on education and learning. By comparison, mass European populations were highly illiterate, and that may be why people here are assuming Jews must have been too. But it was an entirely different culture. Europe had *pockets* of literate and educated times separated by stretches of time when education was considered silly for anyone but a monk or a record-keeper of some other order. But it's not like the entire world went from enormously illiterate, to partially literate, to fully literate. History has never gone in this perfectly linear a way--not for Europe and not for the Middle East and not even for ancient Rome--so to assume that "olden days" and "poor people" meant illiteracy for Jews just because we generally group our own predominantly non-Jewish, highly European-based roots as illiterate doesn't necessarily make it true.
Okay, here's something. I don't know how legitimate the organization is or isn't, but it's the first thing I came across on Google.
As far as the OP, what is the question based on? I think you should be wondering more about Greek-speaking peoples than Jews as a whole since a good portion of the NT was originally written in Greek, I think. Again...anyone correct me.
That page is full of nonsense like most religious apologists. It cites all manner of stuff that didn't actually exist at all. The Torah was written by Persian priests about 2600 years ago under the aegis of Cyrus the Great to cement control over the illiterate population of Palestine. So citing made up stuff about things that supposedly happened centuries before it existed at all is ridiculous. The Torah didn't exist at the purported time. No tribe identifiable as Jews existed before 2600 years ago (about 500 BCE). The book of the Torah was the domain of priests who used it to control the population (the reason why The Word is so important). Ever wonder why there is nothing at all written about the Jews from 500 BCE to 0 BCE (who actually existed during this time)?
The Jewish concentration on learning the Torah and debating was something that arose after the diaspora (~70AD) when the Romans kicked them out of Palestine for constant rebellion. Then, it was fundamental to their remaining a cohesive group, but this was much later than the period asked about by the OP.
Widespread literacy didn't arise until the printing press was invented. It was just too expensive to create books so it was limited to priests and scribes. Priests needed to keep the organization of the priesthood intact and the special knowledge they had impressed the illiterate population. Scribes were needed to help in this as well as keeping records for commerce. They were a special class and highly valued as well.
Much learning was done by rote. We are so used to being able to read and write, we have no concept how much information can be learned by memorization as we don't require it anymore. Ancient peoples memorized tremendous amounts of information, but it is subject to changes over time. Memorization is not literacy, however.
I originally asked this question because I was wondering if anyone knew of a scholarly source about this subject. The main reason I asked was because it would make sense why the Bible was written for an illiterate audience that needed to remember things by memory and poetry, rather than a historical treatise. By looking at the original Greek, one can see that the way the text was written was for memorization and oral transfer.
This makes sense why so much of it was written in an allegorical and/or symbolic manner.
TThe Torah was written by Persian priests about 2600 years ago under the aegis of Cyrus the Great to cement control over the illiterate population of Palestine.
Sources...? I'm curious about this. Specifically I'm interested in the proof of the reason being control over a population, since the same could easily be said about the Bible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tesaje
Widespread literacy didn't arise until the printing press was invented. It was just too expensive to create books so it was limited to priests and scribes.
Again, I think you may be thinking of European history (as we're taught it...with the importance seemingly not beginning until the withdrawal of greater Roman occupation in GB in the 5th century) specifically. There were certainly huge numbers of Roman scholarly youth and literate Romans well before the printing press.
The question was literacy in the first century AD, and your arguments seem to center around pre-2600 BCE, but I would still be interested in sources (again, out of curiosity).
I originally asked this question because I was wondering if anyone knew of a scholarly source about this subject. The main reason I asked was because it would make sense why the Bible was written for an illiterate audience that needed to remember things by memory and poetry, rather than a historical treatise. By looking at the original Greek, one can see that the way the text was written was for memorization and oral transfer.
This makes sense why so much of it was written in an allegorical and/or symbolic manner.
Okay...hmmmmmmm. I don't know a scholarly source, but someone probably does. Anyway, as far as whether the NT would have been allegorical for easier memorization, I can't see why that would be easier to memorize than truth or what people believed to be truth, unless it had been written in some style specific to allowing more ease of memorization (for example, in rhyme, or in same-length segments or with repeated "refrains" or what have you). Is that what you're saying the original Greek writings involved? Could you tell me how the original Greek was written specifically for memorization?
Now if it were, that still wouldn't necessarily make it allegorical. Poetry has been used throughout history to recall events, but not necessarily in a fully allegorical way. Exaggerated at times, but not in order to fit refrains or stanzas...rather, to butter up the poem's subject, usually. But again, that's exaggeration of deeds believed to be true. (ETA: For example, "Columbus 1492/Sailed across the ocean blue" is flowery and poetic, but is considered history and not an allegory. It's a rhyme that helps children recall the year but is considered to be truth, as far as we know from records.)
I'm not sure how to ascertain whether the NT was meant to fully be allegorical. I do think it makes a point of Jesus stating when stories are parables, hence separating these stories as just that, stories. So probably...no.
Hi Jerz,
Thanks for your feedback. We know that the Bible, as we know it today, was not written until around 3-4AD. Before it was written, the sayings in the Bible were passed down through the generations through oral traditions. Your comment about "Columbus in 1942 sailed across the ocean blue" is a good example of how easy it is to remember important historical information.
Was looking at this book for a good source of the level of illiteracy among the Jews:
Sources...? I'm curious about this. Specifically I'm interested in the proof of the reason being control over a population, since the same could easily be said about the Bible.
Again, I think you may be thinking of European history (as we're taught it...with the importance seemingly not beginning until the withdrawal of greater Roman occupation in GB in the 5th century) specifically. There were certainly huge numbers of Roman scholarly youth and literate Romans well before the printing press.
The question was literacy in the first century AD, and your arguments seem to center around pre-2600 BCE, but I would still be interested in sources (again, out of curiosity).
One that has a good synopsis and citations is jesusneverexisted.com with obvious intent.
Cyrus the great conquered Babylon along with the rest of the near east. Nebuchadnezzar before him had conquered Palestine and forced the tribal leaders of the population to reside in Babylon. This was a common strategy at the time - take away the leaders and replace them with foreign leaders under your control - makes the population easier to control. Cyrus then had some of the exiled Palestinians along with his Persian ones create the Torah and sent them to take control over the population of Palestine in much the same strategy. Only this time, he had a religion codified in a book that had strict authoritarian control features built in. They stole or bastardized a lot of other local religions and legends and even some history to create the society. Ever actually read it? It is an extremely authoritarian and fear-mongering book. It worked so well, that it took on a life of its own. There were so many transgressions that no human could ever live up to it and the punishment for most transgressions was death, usually by torture. This allowed the priesthood to exercise complete dictatorial control over the population.
Literacy was better among the elite in Roman society, but it was nothing like the literacy rates of today. There were never huge numbers of literate people in any society until modern times. There were relatively more in Roman times than in the Dark Ages, but not huge numbers. It was a skill reserved for the wealthy and priesthood with a class of scribes to do the laborious work. There was limited literacy among the merchant classes.
The vast majority of people in Palestine at 1 AD were not Roman citizens or priests. They were a conquered people who had been the lower classes from the time of Nebuchadnezzar. Before that, they were illiterate tribes of Arabs indistinguishable from any other Semite tribe.
There was never a public school system. Books were precious because it was so expensive and difficult to make them. They had to be hand copied onto papyrus or sheepskins. Where is there any evidence that literacy rates were high at that period?
What does the New Testament have to do with 1 AD? It didn't exist for 1 to 4 centuries after that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
