Who was taught to read during Jesus' time?

[Kaninchen]

Most paintings of the Annunciation depict her having just put down a book that she was reading.

She’d have been a very early adopter of new technology then.

 

[Maximian]

Or: artists are allowed license.

 

[BartholomewB]

It should be noted that the Rabbinic ideal [of education] does not include writing alongside reading

A contributory factor would have been the high cost of writing materials, I think. Papyrus was an expensive luxury product, and parchment more expensive still. Even so, some children, at least, must have been taught to write. Did they use wax tablets, or was that strictly a Roman thing?

 

[Jbrady]

A contributory factor would have been the high cost of writing materials

As was the high cost of written material. Any books that were available were written by hand, which was expensive, using, as you said, materials that were very expensive.

 

[TMC]

I don’t think there is much support for the idea that first century Jewish peasants were literate, at least as we would use that word today. As someone else pointed out, even those that could read could often not write. Jewish boys may have learned some Scripture passage by rote, but learning select passages for ritual purposes is very different from being able to read fluently, which is different from being able to write.

 

[irishcolleen45]

Thank you all for your comments. I learned a lot from you all.

 

[Bithynian]

Did they use wax tablets, or was that strictly a Roman thing?

I think it was a Roman peculiarity. Young’s article cites a number of studies on Greco-Roman literacy, which are used comparatively to assess literacy in other societies of antiquity. Even in ancient Greece, the literacy rate is generally not assumed to be over 10%. Most studies point out that widespread literacy did not feature in any society until the Industrial Revolution. While the technological advancements were important (steam powered printing presses allowed for more automation), more important were the shifting perceptions of children’s welfare and the formalisation of national education systems.

Apart from this, Young and most other scholars note that the experience itself of reading and writing was very different in antiquity. One didn’t really didn’t have books as personal possessions, and one rarely read for leisure given that entertainment literature was rather non-existent. It was a predominantly oral culture, and reading and writing served to support this ‘orality’: reading was done aloud for others, usually in public scenarios, and likewise writing was a technical skill (much like typing in the late 19th century) and done for others, usually in the context of dictation.

That sort of conceptualisation didn’t change for quite a long time. Even Augustine frequently assumed that his written words (whether in a sermon or a lengthy treatise like De Trinitate) are being read aloud, and this audience are listeners rather than silent readers.

 

[Kaninchen]

It was a predominantly oral culture, and reading and writing served to support this ‘orality’: reading was done aloud for others

I’ve conjectured here in the past whether the style of parts of the NT suggests that they were written to be read or performed (depending on circumstances) - “Scene 1: Jesus & Apostles chatting, Enter Scribes and Pharisees, muttering and complaining, Stage Left” - possibly in what would have been the very familiar style of Greek Theatre.

Drama might have been an effective form of both of evangelisation and repeated experiencing of the story.

 

[Bithynian]

I’ve conjectured here in the past whether the style of parts of the NT suggests that they were written to be read or performed

Most certainly read aloud. Luke is probably the author most attuned to the Hellenistic ear, and the incipit to his Gospel has a very common rhetorical flourish in its alliteration of the p sound: epeideper polloi epecheiresan. It seems rather pedestrian and whimsical to us, but this alliteration (and other devices) was very much part of the formal ‘theatricality’ of Greek rhetoric.

Whether it was performed as drama is an interesting question. Greek (and Roman) theatre suffered quite heavily in the Christian era. Theatre in general was viewed as a very base form of entertainment by many Church Fathers, who (for their own peculiar reasons) essentially equated it with prostitution. I don’t think there was any earnest attempt to stage the Gospels until the development of the Passion plays in the late Medieval era, and the innate Hellenistic drama of the Gospels wasn’t especially examined until the 18th century during the Neoclassical revival. A lot of the older commentaries from the 19th and early 20th centuries tend to highlight the influence of Hellenistic literary culture on the Gospels. Now that an awareness of the Classics is essentially dead amongst biblical scholars, most contemporary commentaries don’t even mention it!

 

[BartholomewB]

reading was done aloud for others, usually in public scenarios,

Augustine’s famous passage in the Confessions about watching Ambrose reading silently and without moving his lips has often been understood to mean that, in antiquity, that was an unusual, or even unique, achievement. But was that really the case? Was reading aloud to yourself really thought to be the right way, or even the only way, to do it? Nietzsche reportedly disapproved of silent reading and wanted to bring that back, though I doubt he went so far as to follow his own advice.

 

[Kaninchen]

Greek (and Roman) theatre suffered quite heavily in the Christian era.

My suggestion was more about much smaller group interactions than would be accommodated by those kinds of entertainment arenas that are a ‘must see’ on the tourist itinerary of Ancient Greek/Roman world.

It could just be a case of a non-Christian reading too much into the apparent style of some of what might be described as ‘set piece’ Gospel passages - like Mark 8 where Jesus feeds thousands, a chorus of moaning Pharisees turn up and get admonished followed by Jesus healing a blind man (blind to the ‘true’ Law/none so blind as those who will not see?).

 

[Bithynian]

But was that really the case?

I don’t think it was. I think most contemporary analyses of Augustine’s observation of Ambrose sees it more as Augustine’s wonderment at Ambrose attentiveness to reading: that he could find small opportunities to read amid the noise and bustle of his household, and that he could not be dissuaded from reading even when there were guests present.

Some other analyses explained it as Augustine’s frustration at Ambrose’s apparent rudeness. Reading was still considered a rather social affair: you share it with your friends, family and guests. You don’t hog the TV remote for yourself.

But to a large extent I think ancient Romans and Greeks had to be able to silently read. Even when reading aloud, the nature of both languages (very long clauses with heavy subordination) often requires ‘reading ahead’ silently of what one is speaking in order to make sense of the grammar.