N.B.: I am in the Holy Land at this time. As my travel schedule is heavy, I am republishing some articles about life in Jesus’ day. I hope you will enjoy reading (or re-reading) them as much as I did.
The Jews of Galilee, where Jesus grew up, were essentially a rural people. The great majority lived in the many small towns and villages scattered throughout the countryside. They worked the land, tended their flocks, and plied their trades, seldom venturing more than a day’s journey from home. However, many went to Jerusalem, some as often as every year, to celebrate the Passover. And that was no small journey, up to 70 miles on foot each way!
According to Josephus, a Jewish historian of the time, there were 240 villages scattered throughout Galilee. The average village might be no more than a few acres with a population of a few hundred souls. (Larger villages called towns might cover ten acres or more and were often walled in.)
The world was pretty much limited to their small village and the fields around it. The inhabitants lived in modest one-story houses of stone covered with a kind of stucco.
The houses tended to be clustered around a town square. In the square were some shops, an open air market, and usually a communal well or spring.
Each town had a handful of local craftsman, typically including a potter, a weaver, a carpenter, a blacksmith, and a shoemaker. Most of the men in the village, however, worked in the fields, whether tilling, sowing, pruning, or harvesting. Life was a long, difficult struggle against the elements.
Most families kept a small number of animals such as sheep and goats. These were useful for milk, wool, and eventually leather and food. Most villages also had a shepherd or two tending village flocks on the nearby hillsides.
On many evenings the men gathered in the village synagogue for evening services and Scripture study. During the day the synagogue served as a school for the young men of the village, who learned ancient Hebrew and studied the Scriptures. Most people no longer spoke Hebrew; it was a sacred language used only in the Temple and in the synagogue, similar to Latin for the Catholic Church. Most villagers spoke Aramaic, but they also knew some Greek because it was the native tongue of the pagans around them. The Jews of Galilee spoke with a distinctive accent.
Villages were often in well-protected locations. They were generally built on hilltops rather than in the long sloping valleys. Here they were more easily protected and the best land in the valleys was reserved for agriculture.
The streets were generally quite narrow, more like alleys. The homes that fronted the streets came right up to the edge of the street. The walls of homes tended to be at least ten feet high, with only a few windows at the top. This is because one generally entered a home by walking into an open courtyard off the street. Whereas we tend to have front yards today, homes at this time tended to have courtyards, around which were clustered rooms of varying size depending on the wealth and needs of the owner.
Villages tended to be small because of the needs of each village were associated with pastureland around it. Each village depended on both crops and the livestock that used the surrounding fields and the sloping valley beneath. Further, each village was either built around or near a well or spring.
Each village tended to be self-sustaining in terms of basic needs. Occasionally, people would come from larger towns to provide specialized services, but except for a yearly pilgrimage, most Galileans did not travel far from their village.
Galilean villages were rather distinct from the Greek cities of the Decapolis, which were built in classical Greek style and tended to be much larger and more cosmopolitan. In a certain sense, the villages of Galilee were a world apart from the cities of the Decapolis.
Nazareth was a fairly typical Galilean village. It was laid out on a steep hillside and at the time of Jesus probably had no more than 300 residents. It was so unremarkable that Nathaniel asked “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” (John 1:46) Today Nazareth has some 60,000 residents, mostly Arab Muslims, with a smaller number of Arab Christians. Its streets are steep, almost reminiscent of San Francisco.
Here’s a video I put together about the villages of Jesus’ day, with numerous pictures to illustrate:
N.B.: I am in the Holy Land at this time. As my travel schedule is heavy, I am republishing some articles about life in Jesus’ day. I hope you will enjoy reading (or re-reading) them as much as I did.
The word family had a wider meaning both in Aramaic and in Hebrew than it does in English. The Hebrew, ah, and the Aramaic, aha, could be used to refer to brothers, sisters, half-brothers, half-sisters, cousins, and even other near relations. Extended family networks were both insisted upon and essential for survival. It was every Jewish person’s duty to maintain and depend upon these ties.
Marriage – Marriage, of course, is the heart of family. The very first direction that God gave to Adam and Eve was that a man should leave his father and mother cling to his wife, that the two should become one, and that they should increase and multiply. Ancient rabbis said that a man wasn’t really a man at all until he did so. However, especially by the time of Christ, there were some men and women who lived celibate lives so as to be free to serve God; by studying the Torah, teaching, or engaging in some great work for God’s people. Jesus and Paul seem to have been in this category. Jesus praised those who did so in Matthew 19, as did Paul in 1 Corinthians 7.
In the earliest years of Israel, there seems to have been some tolerance for polygamy, despite the fact that it was a departure from what God had set forth. Many overlooked it, given the urgent need to grow the family of God, the chosen people. Men were often lost in war, which led to more women than men looking for a spouse. Generally, only wealthier men could afford to have more than one wife. Although the Bible does not explicitly condemn polygamy, it does demonstrate that polygamy often led to intractable troubles, sometimes between the women involved, but other times between their sons (particularly when it came to inheritance rights). By the time of Jesus, polygamy seems to have disappeared among the Jews. There is simply no mention of the practice in the New Testament. Jesus summoned the men of his day to love their wives and specifically prohibited other Mosaic leniencies in marriage. He re-proposed God’s original plan of one man for one woman till death do them part.
Call to marriage and engagement– Marriage took place at a young age for the ancient Jews. Most rabbis proposed 18 as the most appropriate age for men to be married, but it wasn’t uncommon for them to be younger, especially in times of peace. Young women were married almost as soon as they were physically ready, approximately age 13.
In most cases, marriages were arranged by the respective parents. However, arranged marriages were seldom forced on young people who had absolutely no attraction to or interest in each other. Nevertheless, the view in the ancient world—and even in many places today—was that marriage was not so much about love and romance as it was about survival. Further, it was not merely the individuals who were married; the two families came together in mutual support. Beauty and romance, while considered pleasant things, were noted to be passing. Life and survival had to be based on sturdier foundations.
When a future bride had been chosen for a young man, either by his parents or more rarely by himself, there followed a period of one year called “betrothal.” During this time the couple still lived apart while delicate, often-protracted negotiations occurred between the families regarding dowries, etc. The groom or his family paid the dowry to the father of the bride as compensation for the loss of a working member of his household. It was also understood that some money should be set aside for the woman to protect her in the event of her husband’s premature death.
Marriage ceremonies – At the conclusion of the betrothal period, when all the agreements were signed, the wedding could occur. Weddings of that time typically extended over five to seven days. Autumn was the best time for marriages because the harvest was in, the vintage was over, minds were free, and hearts were at rest. It was a season when the evenings were cool, making it pleasant to sit up late at night. In small villages, the entire community would usually gather to celebrate.
On the evening before the first day of the wedding feast, the bridegroom, accompanied by his friends, went to fetch his betrothed from her father’s house. He would wear particularly splendid clothes and sometimes even a crown. A procession was formed under the direction of one of the bridegroom’s friends, who acted as master of ceremonies and remained by his side throughout the rejoicing.
Having been fetched, the beautifully dressed bride joined in the procession, carried in a litter. Along the way people sang wedding songs drawn from the Song of Songs in the Bible: Who is this coming up from the wilderness like a column of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and incense made from all the spices of the merchant? (Song of Songs 3:6) When the procession reached the bridegroom’s house, his parents uttered a traditional blessing, drawn from Scripture and other sources. The remainder of the evening was passed in games and dancing, with the bridegroom taking part. The bride, however, withdrew with her friends and bridesmaids to another room.
The next day the great wedding feast came. Once again there was general rejoicing and a sort of holiday in the village. Toward the end of the day there was a meal; men and women were served apart. This was a time for the giving of presents, etc. The bridesmaids stood around the bride, who was all dressed in white; there were usually ten of them. The bride sat under a canopy while traditional songs were sung and blessings recited. In the evening the groom arrived, and while the exact ritual words are not certain, there seems to have been a dialogue between bride and groom, which is recorded in the Song of Songs: The bride said, Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth—for your love is more delightful than wine. Pleasing is the fragrance of your perfumes; your name is like perfume poured out. No wonder the young women love you! Take me away with you—let us hurry! Let the king bring me into his chambers (Song of Songs 1:2-4). The groom responded, Arise, come, my darling; my beautiful one, come with me. My dove in the clefts of the rock, in the hiding places on the mountainside, show me your face, let me hear your voice; for your voice is sweet, and your face is lovely (Song of Songs 2:13-14).
Now that the couple was together, all the men and women in attendance were together as well. Religious leaders imparted blessings on the couple, who were now together under the canopy. The words of these blessings are not known and seem to have varied. After these blessings came the evening feast.
Later on that first evening, the couple retired and the marriage was consummated. The celebration often continued for several more days; the couple did not go on a “honeymoon” but remained for the duration, sharing in the merriment.
The family – The concept of the strictly nuclear family living completely independently was largely unknown in the ancient world. That said, among the Jewish people each family was considered an independent unit. The father was considered the head of his household. Families did not exist in clans, in which all the families (including the fathers) were under the authority of a clan leader or patriarch. Such a system was more common among the Arabs.
Among the Jewish people, the father had absolute authority over the household. So absolute were his rights that he could even order members of his family put to death or sell his children into slavery. However, by Jesus’ time, selling children into slavery was unheard of and the death penalty was extremely rare—only inflicted with the agreement of other members of the village. Roman government actually forbade Jewish authorities from exacting the death penalty, reserving all such cases to itself.
Along with the many rights enjoyed by men and fathers in Jewish family life, there were also great responsibilities. A man was expected to provide his wife and children with all of their basic needs. Wives often referred to their husbands as lord (Baal) or master (Adon).
Wives and mothers had very few legal rights but a lot of practical authority in the home. One recourse she did have was to her father, who might rebuke her husband if he did not properly care for her. However, most men ensured that their wives were provided with the basics of life; in addition, they enjoyed seeing them well-adorned.
Wives did an enormous amount of work and their husbands depended on them. They prepared the meals, fetched the water, baked the bread, squeezed the oil, made the butter, tended the animals, and of course cared for the children. Most men knew that they utterly depended on their wives, and wives knew that they knew this.
Wives often generated extra income for the household by sewing and selling surplus oil and other food products. While some marriages were strained, most couples developed a loyalty based on mutual need.
Children – Jewish law and custom commanded from children absolute respect, honor, and reverence for both their father and their mother. They were also expected to care for their parents in their old age.
Children were greatly desired; large families were very common. Barrenness was considered a great curse and many Scriptures speak to the blessing of children. Clearly children were helpful with the household and field tasks, and later on they provided “social security” for their aging parents. Several generations of families usually lived in the same town, providing a good support system. The Jewish family was strong and was admired by the pagans, whose families by this time were in the kind of disarray we see today in the post-Christian West.
In today’s Gospel, Jesus, the Light of the World, brings light to a man born blind. If you are prepared to accept it, you are the man born blind, for all of us were born blind and in darkness. It was our baptism and the faith it gave that rendered us able to see and to come gradually more fully into the light. The man in today’s Gospel shows forth the stages of the Christian walk, out of darkness and into the beautiful light of Christ. Let’s take a moment to ponder the stages of the blind man’s walk, for each of us is the man.
I. The Problem that is Presented– We are introduced to a man who was blind from birth, incapable of seeing at all. As Jesus passed by he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “Neither he nor his parents sinned; it is so that the works of God might be made visible through him. We have to do the works of the one who sent me while it is day. Night is coming when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”
So there is the problem: he is blind; he has no vision. On account of Original Sin, we lost all spiritual vision. We could not see God or endure the light of His glory. This lack of vision causes many to have no “vision” for their life. They don’t know why they were made or what the true purpose of their existence is. Many cannot see past the sufferings of this world to the glory that awaits. Others have retreated into the material world and cannot see beyond it. Still others have retreated even further, away from reality into the realm of their own mind, their own opinions. St. Augustine describes this condition of the human person as curvatus in se (man turned in on himself). Yes, there is a blindness that imprisons many in the darkness. Even for us who believe there are still areas where it is hard for us to see. Coming to see God more fully, and to see ourselves as we really are, is a journey; one we are still on.
While the disciples want to dwell on secondary causes, Jesus sidesteps these and focuses on solutions. Assessing blame is unproductive; healing the man is uppermost. In a statement dripping with irony, Jesus says that the works of God will be made visible in a blind man. For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength (1 Cor 1:25). Yes, God can make a way out of no way and write straight with crooked lines.
II. The Purification that is Prescribed – Having diagnosed the problem, Jesus begins the work of healing this man. When he had said this, he spat on the ground and made clay with the saliva, and smeared the clay on his eyes, and said to him, “Go wash in the Pool of Siloam”—which means Sent. So he went and washed, and came back able to see.
Hopefully, you can see baptism here. Jesus tells him, “Go wash … he went and washed, and came back able to see.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church says this of the Sacrament of Baptism:
This bath is called enlightenment, because those who receive this [catechetical] instruction are enlightened in their understanding … Having received in Baptism the Word, “the true light that enlightens every man,” the person baptized has been “enlightened,” he becomes a “son of light,” indeed, he becomes “light” himself (CCC 1216).
Baptism is required in order to truly see. It is no accident that John mentions the name of the pool to which the man goes: Siloam, a name meaning “sent.” Jesus sends him and He sends us. Baptism is required. Jesus says elsewhere, Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5).
Notice that the man comes back able to see. But just because you’re able to see doesn’t mean you actually do see. Right now I am able to see the Statue of Liberty; my eyes function properly, but I do not see it; I have to make a journey in order to do that. Similarly, the man here is able to see Jesus, but he does not yet see Him. He has a journey to make in order to do that. He has a long way to go to see Jesus fully, face to face. Baptism is not the end of our journey but the beginning of it. It renders us able to see, but we are still newborn babes. We need to grow. We can see, but there is plenty we haven’t yet seen.
III. The Perception that is Partial – The man can see but still does not know much of the one who has enabled him to see. His neighbors and those who had seen him earlier as a beggar said, “Isn’t this the one who used to sit and beg?” Some said, “It is,” but others said, “No, he just looks like him.” He said, “I am.” So they said to him, “How were your eyes opened?” He replied, “The man called Jesus made clay and anointed my eyes and told me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So I went there and washed and was able to see.” And they said to him, “Where is he?” He said, “I don’t know.”
So he’s able to see. But he hasn’t yet seen much. The man must grow in faith to come to know who Jesus really is. Look at how his partial perception is described. For now, he merely understands Jesus as “the man called Jesus.” To him, Jesus is just “some guy.” When asked where Jesus is, all he can say is that he doesn’t know. Although he is able to see, he does not yet actually see Jesus.
This describes a lot of Christians. They know about Jesus but they don’t know Him. Many Catholics in the pews are “sacramentalized but unevangelized.” That is, they have received the sacraments but have never really met Jesus Christ; they do not know Him in any more than an intellectual way. Many don’t even expect to know Him. He is little better to them than “the man called Jesus.” They’ve heard of Jesus and even know some basic facts about Him, but He is a distant figure in their lives. When asked questions about Him, they respond like this man: “I don’t know.”
IV. Progress through Persecution and Pondering – The text goes on to show us the progress that this formerly blind man makes in coming to know and finally see Jesus. It is interesting that this progress comes largely through persecution. Persecution need not always be understood as something as severe as being arrested and thrown in jail. It can come in many forms: puzzlement expressed by relatives and friends, ridicule of Catholicism in the media, or even those internal voices that make us question our faith. In whatever form, though, persecution has a way of making us face the questions and refine our understanding. Our vision gets clearer as we meet the challenges.
Notice the man’s progress thus far. He has been baptized and is now able to see, but he still knows little of Jesus, referring to Him only as “the man called Jesus,” He doesn’t know where Jesus is. He is about to grow, though, and does so in several stages.
In stage one of the man’s post-baptismal growth his neighbors turn on him and bring him to the Pharisees, who interrogate him because Jesus had healed him on the Sabbath.
They brought the one who was once blind to the Pharisees. Now Jesus had made clay and opened his eyes on a Sabbath. So then, the Pharisees also asked him how he was able to see. He said to them, “He put clay on my eyes, and I washed, and now I can see.” So some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, because he does not keep the Sabbath.” But others said, “How can a sinful man do such signs?” And there was a division among them. So they said to the blind man again, “What do you have to say about him, since he opened your eyes?” He said, “He is a prophet.”
Notice what this persecution does for him. As he is challenged to say something about Jesus, he moves beyond calling him “the man called Jesus” and describes Him as a prophet. The man has gained some insight. A prophet speaks for God and Jesus is the Word made flesh.
In stage two of the man’s post-baptismal growth the Pharisees doubt his story and broaden their persecution, interrogating and threatening his fearful parents.
Now the Jews did not believe that he had been blind and gained his sight until they summoned the parents of the one who had gained his sight. They asked them, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How does he now see?” his parents answered and said, “We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. We do not know how he sees now, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him, he is of age; he can speak for himself.” His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone acknowledged him as the Christ, he would be expelled from the synagogue. For this reason, his parents said, “He is of age; question him.”
In stage three of his post-baptismal growth we note that the continuing persecution seems to make him grow even stronger and more able to withstand his opponents. Note his determination and fearlessness during the second interrogation he faces, which includes ridiculing him and placing him under oath:
So a second time they called the man who had been blind and said to him, “Give God the praise! We know that this man is a sinner.” He replied, “If he is a sinner, I do not know. One thing I do know is that I was blind and now I see.” So they said to him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?” He answered them, “I told you already and you did not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you want to become his disciples, too?” They ridiculed him and said, “You are that man’s disciple; we are disciples of Moses! We know that God spoke to Moses, but we do not know where this one is from.” The man answered and said to them, “This is what is so amazing, that you do not know where he is from, yet he opened my eyes. We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if one is devout and does his will, he listens to him. It is unheard of that anyone ever opened the eyes of a person born blind. If this man were not from God, he would not be able to do anything.” They answered and said to him, “You were born totally in sin, and are you trying to teach us?” Then they threw him out.
The result of this is to further deepen his vision of Jesus. At first, he saw Jesus only as “the man called Jesus.” Then he sees Him as a prophet. Now he goes further and sees Him as “from God.” He’s progressing from sight to insight. His ability to see, given to him in baptism, is now resulting in even clearer vision.
V. Perfection that is Portrayed – The man has been thrown out of the synagogue, as many early Christians were. He has endured the hatred of the world and the loss of many things. When Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, he found him and said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” He answered and said, “Who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?” Jesus said to him, “You have seen him, the one speaking with you is he.” He said, “I do believe, Lord,” and he worshiped him.
Now the man’s vision is clear. After all this, he finally sees. Not only does he see Jesus, he sees who Jesus is. First he saw Him only as “the man called Jesus.” Then he sees Him as a prophet. Next, he says that He is from God. The final stage is the best of all. He actually sees Jesus and falls down to worship Him. Jesus is not only from God, he is God. Christ has fully enlightened him.
This is our journey, moving in stages to know Jesus more perfectly. One day we will see Him face to face; we will see Him for who He is.
Where are you on this journey? If we are faithful, our vision is getting better daily, but it is not yet complete. Scripture says,
For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood (1 Cor 13:12).
Beloved, we are God’s children now; it does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is (1 John 3:2).
My soul is thirsting for God, the God of my life; when can I enter and see the face of God? (Psalm 42:2)
For now, make this journey. Make it in stages. Come to know who Jesus is.
I have it on the best of authority that the man, on his journey to Jesus, sang this song:
Walk in the Light, beautiful light. Come where the dew-drops of mercy shine bright. Walk all around us by day and by night, O Jesus the Light of the World!
In preparation for today’s Feast of the Annunciation I picked up Jesus of Nazareth, Vol. 3 (The Infancy Narratives), by Pope Emeritus Benedict. I was very moved by a brief reflection that he made on Mary as the Angel Gabriel left her. His remarks consider her faith in a very touching manner.
I must say that I have always been moved—and intrigued—by the faith of the Blessed Mother. She is “a woman wrapped in silence,” a phrase that forms the title of an excellent book by Fr. John Lynch. The pope’s words capture both her faith and her mystery:
I consider it important to focus also on the final sentence of Luke’s Annunciation narrative: “And the angel departed from her” (Luke 1:38). The great hour of Mary’s encounter with God’s messenger—in which her whole life is changed—comes to an end, and she remains there alone, with a task that truly surpasses all human capacity. There are no angels standing around her. She must continue along the path that leads to many dark moments–from Joseph’s dismay at her pregnancy, to the moment when Jesus is said to be out of his mind (cf. Mark 3:21; John 10:20) right up to the night of the cross.
How often in these situations must Mary have returned inwardly to the hour when God’s angel had spoken to her, pondering afresh the greeting: “Rejoice, full of grace!” And the consoling words: “Do not be afraid!” The angel departs; her mission remains, and with it matures her inner closeness to God, a closeness that in her heart she is able to see and touch (Jesus of Nazareth, The Infancy Narratives, Kindle edition (loc 488-501)).
I am moved by this image of Mary, there all alone, perhaps wondering how it would all unfold and whether what she just experienced had really happened. The angel departs and she is alone (and yet never alone).
As background, I would like to say that I have read some accounts of Mary’s life that placed her in such rarefied air that I could no longer relate to her. I vaguely remember reading some accounts of visionaries saying that Mary did not even have to do housework because the angels swept the house, did the dishes, and so forth. Some other accounts spoke of how she had detailed foreknowledge of everything that would take place in her life as well as in Jesus’ life. I even recall one purported visionary who wrote that Mary had extensive theological discussions with Jesus even while He was still an infant. I do not remember who these alleged visionaries were or if any of them were even approved visionaries. Yet in the early 1980s a large number of books were published containing the observations of various “visionaries.”
Such accounts often left me cold and made me feel distant from our Blessed Mother. They also did not seem to comport with the Scriptures, which present Mother Mary as a woman of great faith, but one who has to walk by faith and not by perfect sight, just as all of us do. She wonders at Gabriel’s greeting, is troubled, and does not understand how it will all work out (cf Luke 1:29).
Yet she presses on and we next see her having made haste to the hill country, rejoicing in ecstatic praise with her cousin: My spirit rejoices in God my savior! She still does not know how it will all work out, but in spite of that she is content to know the One who holds the future; it is enough for now.
Years later, when she finds Jesus teaching in the Temple after days of agonized searching for the “missing” boy, she does not fully understand His explanation (Luke 2:48-50), but ponders these things within her heart (Luke 2:51).
At the wedding feast at Cana, Jesus seems almost to rebuke His mother. Although the text omits many of the details, there must have been something in her look, something of the look that only a mother can give to a son. By now, Mary’s understanding of her son has surely deepened; she has known Him and pondered and reflected in her heart over Him for more than thirty years. She simply looks at Him, and He at her—a look that only the two would have known. Something passed between them, a look of understanding. Whatever it was remains wrapped in silence; it’s none of our business, something that only she and her Son could know. Whatever it was, it prompts her to turn and with confidence, knowing the situation will be well-handled, says to the stewards, “Do whatever he tells you” (Jn 2:5).
Of the three years to follow we know very little. We know that she is not far away. We see her in Mark 3:31 as she asks after Jesus, seemingly concerned that others are saying “He is beside himself!”
Now we find her gently and supportively present at the foot of the Cross. The sword that Simeon had prophesied (Lk 2:35) is thrust through her heart. More than thirty years earlier she could only wonder what Simeon meant when he said that her child was destined for the fall and the rise of many in Israel and that a sword would pierce her heart (Luke 2:33). In the intervening years her faith had surely deepened; now, here she is at the foot of the Cross. It is her darkest hour, but surely all those years of pondering and reflecting on these things in her heart helps to sustain her.
Yes, Mother Mary is a woman wrapped in silence. We know so little, for she is reflective and quiet. She says little, silently standing by, silently supportive of Jesus in His public ministry. Now, again silently, she is at the foot of the Cross.
Yes, this is the Mary, this is the Mother that I know: a woman of faith but also a human being like you and me. As the Pope Benedict suggested, she is a woman who had to make a journey of faith without knowing how everything would work out, without the omniscience that some visionaries ascribe to her. She knew what the angel had said, but it seems clear that she did not know how it would all come to pass. She, like us, walked by faith and not by earthly sight.
Mary is the perfect disciple, the woman of faith, the one who presses on, not knowing all, but pondering and reflecting everything in her heart.
N.B.: I am in the Holy Land at this time. As my travel schedule is heavy, I am republishing some articles about life in Jesus’ day. I hope you will enjoy reading (or re-reading) them as much as I did.
The modern person, especially in the West, thinks of time in a very mechanistic way. We watch the clock, which is in itself a mechanical device without intrinsic meaning. For shorter periods of time we look at the clock rather than the sun. For longer periods, we watch the crops, track our children’s growth, or more broadly chart the rise and fall of nations. For most of us, time is not the unfolding of eternity or the cycle of life; time is simply a span to be reckoned by its length, by the number of ticks on a device we have invented. We also tend to measure time by what we can do with it: if we have a lot of time we can get a lot done; if we don’t have much time we can’t much done.
The modern, Western mind tries to control by measuring; and boy do we love to measure time! Having measured it, we somehow think we control it. We assign monetary value to it by stating that time is money. We have many expectations based on it: “You’re taking too long to do that,” or “The deadline has passed.”
For the ancients, such precision about time was unknown and to some degree impossible. For them, demarcations of time were of divine origin. God set forth the sun to rule the day, the moon, and the stars the night (cf Ps 135:8-9).
The daily cycle of the sun defined the day and night. A lengthier cycle of the sun, its rising and falling in the horizon, marked the year. Seasons could also be discerned by this cycle. There were the longest and shortest days of the year (the solstices) and the equinoxes, when the night and the day were essentially the same length.
The moon declared the passage of months. In fact, the very word “month” in English has the same origin as the word “moon.”
There were different systems used by the ancients to demarcate time, some of them were based on the sun and others on the moon. It is clear that in Jesus’ time, the lunar year (354 days) was used. The lunar year has the serious disadvantage of being some 11 days behind the solar year, which quickly causes a discrepancy between the months and the seasons. This difference had to be adjusted for periodically; otherwise, “summer” would eventually have occurred in the winter months!
Generally speaking, the Jewish people waited until the error of the lunar calendar amounted to about a full month, at which time they inserted an extra month (Veadar) between the months of Adar and Nisan. A year with this extra month amounted to almost 400 days instead of the usual 354 days of the Jewish lunar calendar.
The decision as to when exactly to insert this extra month was made rather empirically. Farmers might comment to rabbinic officials that the lambs were still too young or the grain was not yet ripe. When consensus built that the month of Veadar needed to be inserted, it was ordered to be done. Decisions of this sort were usually made by a Beth Din (a rabbinical court) following a complex procedure. Witnesses were examined as to the problem of the lagging calendar in relation to the season. Chosen observers of the sun and moon were asked to testify in great detail about the location of the moon, the size of its crescent, and its height above the horizon. When the sufficient evidence was collected, the Veadar month was declared. This happened approximately every three years.
Generally, a month was said to begin in the evening of the 29th day, at the moment when the thin sliver of the new moon appeared in the sky. When all seven Beth Din members agreed to the new month, it legally began; fires were lit on the hilltops to announce it to the populace.
In ordinary years (those without a Veadar) there were 12 months. In actuality, though, the ancient Jews told time more by their feasts than by the month. The Jews thought of yearly time in this manner:
Jewish Month
Western Equivalent
Cycle of Feasts
Nissan
March–April
Passover
Iyar
April–May
Lag B’Omer
Sivan
May–June
Shavuot
Tammuz
June–July
Menachem Av
July–August
Tisha B’Av
Elul
August–September
Tishrei
September–October
Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Succoth, Shmini Atzeret, and Simchat Torah
Marcheshvan
October–November
Kislev
November–December
Chanukah
Tevet
December–January
conclusion of Chanukah
Shevat
January–February
Tu B’Shvat
Adar
February–March
Purim
Months (the moon cycle) and festivals were the essential divisions of the year. The four seasons, which are important to us, were less significant to the ancient Jews, who lived in a climate that did not fall into four distinct periods. For them there was only the cool, wet period of October through March and the hot, dry period of April through September; the transition between them was fairly rapid. But again, the chief points of the year were known in relation to the feasts. For ancient Jews, hearing of the Feast of Passover, the Feast of Tabernacles, or the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) provided very guides to the time of year.
Despite all these reference points, telling time in Jesus’ day was fairly murky. There were any number of different calendars used in Palestine at the time. The Jews had an official calendar but were divided as to its details. This difference finds its way into the Scriptures, wherein the three synoptic gospels seem to date Passover on one day, while John’s Gospel pinpoints it on another. There is strong evidence that the Essene community used a solar calendar from the Book of Jubilees rather than the lunar calendar of many other Jews. So even in the significant feasts like Passover, different groups of Jews specified them on different days. Added to this was the fact that the Romans had a completely different calendar from the Jews, as did the Samaritans. Further, the Greek cities of the Decapolis used the Macedonian calendar, and others made reference to as many as four calendars: Jewish, Syrian, Egyptian, and Roman.
We who are used to more certainty about time will wonder how anyone knew when to show up anywhere! Yet it must be said that the ancient Jews lived in greater conformity with the natural cycles of the day than we do. They got up when the sun rose and generally followed its daily cycle, finishing work before dusk and then enjoying a few evening hours gathered around oil lamps or illuminated by the moonlight. Their lives were generally synchronized with the sun and the seasons, while our notions of the day are often artificial and in some ways unhealthy.
One of the greater mysteries in terms of telling time is the seven-day week. Most of the other increments make sense based on the cycles of the moon or the sun, but there seems to be no obvious reference in the natural order to explain a week being seven days in length. Surely the book of Genesis is the theological source for this practice. God worked for six days, creating the heavens and the earth, and then rested on the seventh. Thus man, made in God’s image, did the same. It seems clear that most cultures throughout human history have “reset the clock” every seven days. It is possible that the influence of the Jewish scriptures had some role, but the seven-day cycle seems common even where Jewish faith could not have had much influence; perhaps there is some inner circadian rhythm in the human person. For the Jews of Jesus’ time, though, it was clear enough that God had set this forth and thus it was to be followed.
Weeks lasted from one sabbath to the next, but there is no evidence that the Jews named each day. Of course the Sabbath itself was named, and the day before the Sabbath was called Preparation Day (see Mk 15:42), however other days were simply called the first day of the week (see Mk 16:2), the second day of the week, and so forth. Romans and Greeks named each day off after a god or a planet, but there is no evidence that the Jews did this.
For the ancient Jews, the day began at sundown. In larger towns, and especially in Jerusalem, the end of the day was marked by the sound of trumpets. This pattern is of course very different for us, who mark the beginning of the new day literally at midnight but practically most of us consider it as beginning at sunrise. We begin the day with work and then rest; they rested and then worked.
The division of the day and the hours was a comparatively recent phenomenon in Jesus’ time. In fact, the very word “hour” is not even found in the Old Testament, except perhaps once in the book of Daniel. By the time of Jesus, though, the division of the day into 12 hours was commonly accepted. This is referenced in many places in the New Testament. For example, there is the parable of the laborers who were hired at about the eleventh hour (Mt 20:9). There are references to Jesus meeting the Samaritan woman at the well at the sixth hour (Jn 4:6). St. Mark recounts that Jesus was let out for crucifixion at the third hour and died at the ninth hour (Mk 15:25,33). Jesus admonished the disciples when they were unable watch and pray for even one hour.
Exactly how an hour was reckoned was obviously less precise than it is today. There was a general sense of the position of the sun, and there were sundials in use (especially among the Greeks), but there was a vagueness about its length and in determining the time of the day. Yes, our obsession with promptness and our exactitude with respect to time were utterly unknown in Jesus’ day and even in many places in the world today. Time was a much more flexible back then; in Jesus’ day it would’ve been meaningless to set an appointment for 10:30 AM or 6:00 PM. One would have had to be content with arranging to meet in the “late morning” or the “early evening.” To us this would be infuriating, but life was slower then and people were rarely in a hurry.
As for the night hours, things were even less precise. For those who were awake at night (and cared), the night was divided into watches, apparently four of them. St. Matthew, for example, states that it was in the fourth watch of the night that Jesus walked on the water to join His disciples (Mat 14:25). The last watch of the night also featured the cockcrow as dawn drew near.
Imagine how lost most of us would be in a world in which time was not of the essence but rather existed on the periphery. For us who are ruled by the clock, the whole experience might be quite disorienting. On the other hand, though, it might be liberating to look to the gentler, cyclical rhythms of God’s design rather than being slaves to some artificial, unrelenting timepiece. We might actually slow down to the pace of life He intended for us. Most of us could easily say, “I’m so busy I met myself coming back!” Somewhere, even in the world today, there are still those who, by the glow of gentle oil lamps, wait patiently until the day dawns and the morning star rises (2 Peter 1:19).
N.B.: I am in the Holy Land at this time. As my travel schedule is heavy, I am republishing some articles about life in Jesus’ day. I hope you will enjoy reading (or re-reading) them as much as I did.
The climate in Palestine, both today and at the time of Jesus, has two distinct seasons. The wet or rainy season runs from the mid-October to the mid-April while the dry season lasts from the mid-June to mid-September. During the dry season rainfall is rare. Although it can get very hot during summer, it often does not feel that way. Cool breezes and low humidity are typical, making the summers quite pleasant, especially in areas directly on the coast or on the higher slopes of the hills. During these months it is almost always sunny and the sky cloudless. Rain rarely falls during the summer because of the dominance of high-pressure zones. This provides challenges for farmers, who have to develop special methods for trapping water during the rainy season. During rainy season, although it does not rain every day, there can be significant rains that cause periodic flooding. While it gets cool in the winter and at higher altitudes (areas near Jerusalem and Bethlehem can even see snow), this is rare and usually limited to brief periods during December and January. Although the Bible refers snow in the area, it is mostly mentioned as occurring in the mountains to the north near Mt. Hermon.
The climate of the Holy Land varies from north to south and from east to west. Because the topography is varied there can be dramatic differences within a few miles. Generally, there is more rain in the eastern part of Palestine and it gets hotter the farther south one travels. The Dead Sea region and the area around Jericho are deep crevasses and pure desert. The mountainous regions have more rain on the west side than on the east side. The hottest days of the year occur during the transition between the two seasons.
The climate of Israel in Jesus’ day may not have been quite as warm and dry as it is today. Several references in Scripture would seem to imply that the land was wetter and more suitable for agriculture, without the need for the significant irrigation that is prevalent in the Middle East today. For example,
And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar (Genesis 13:10).
And the LORD said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows; And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey (Exodus 3:7,8).
The Bible also describes Solomon’s use of prodigious quantities of lumber to build the Temple and other buildings (circa 1000 B.C.)
Land-use studies throughout the Mediterranean, North Africa, and the Middle East show the prevalence of crops and forests, which were well suited to the cooler, wetter climates in the period before 1000 B.C.
Just as is the case today, in Jesus’ time the highly varied topography strongly affected the microclimate from mile to mile.
Lower Galilee (pictured at left), where Jesus lived most of His life, was Israel’s lushest region, known for its sunny, temperate climate and its spring-watered lands. Each spring, the valleys and slopes became an ocean of wildflowers and blossoming trees. Beginning in March, the area was covered by a vast blanket of green. The fertile land was a texture of vineyards and fruit orchards. Grapes, figs, olives, pomegranates, oranges, and other fruits flourished in its pleasant, subtropical climate.
The first century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who knew the area well, wrote this about it:
Its nature is wonderful as well as its beauty; its soil is so fruitful that all sorts of trees can grow upon it, and the inhabitants accordingly plant all sorts of trees there; for the temper of the air is so well mixed, that it agrees very well with those several sorts, particularly walnuts, which require the coldest air, flourish there in vast plenty; there are palm trees also, which grow best in hot air; fig trees also and olives grow near them, which yet require an air that is more temperate. One may call this place the ambition of nature, where it forces those plants that are naturally enemies to one another to agree together; it is a happy contention of the seasons, as if every one of them laid claim to this country; for it not only nourishes different sorts of autumnal fruit beyond men’s expectation, but preserves them a great while; it supplies men with the principal fruits, with grapes and figs continually, during ten months of the year and the rest of the fruits as they become ripe together through the whole year (The Jewish War, Book 3, Chapter 10:8).
Around the Sea of Galilee crops were plentiful and fish were abundant. Despite its name, the Sea of Galilee is a fresh water lake, about 13 miles long and 8 miles wide. The typical crops grown in the region in Jesus’ day were grain, olives, and grapes. The drier area to the east of the Sea of Galilee had less vegetation.
via Creative Commons 2.5
An area to the south between Galilee and Samaria is called the Valley of Jezreel (pictured at right) and featured rich soil and moderate rainfall. Judea, south of Samaria, has a gradual change in landscape, but the most notable change is the decrease in rainfall.
Since Jesus’ time the overall area has undergone gradual desertification, a process through which once-fertile land becomes desert (typically due to natural factors such as drought or through inappropriate agriculture). Desertification in the area has become especially noticeable during the last few centuries, although it had been occurring to some degree even before Jesus’ time. This leads to less water, less arable land, warmer days, and cooler nights. The chief human contributors to this gradual change have been wars and poor land management. Deforestation was a major issue during the Jewish-Roman War of 66-70 A.D, but in the past two thousand years there have been many other factors causing environmental damage as well.
It seems a reasonable conclusion that in Jesus’ day, the climate was noticeably more moderate and wet than it is today, with more trees. However, there still are many beautiful regions, especially in Galilee in the north. We ought not to overestimate the difference in climate between the ages; although it would be noticeable to people of His day, it would not astonish them. The decrease in the number of trees would likely be more noticeable to them than the slightly warmer, drier weather.
Israel currently has a program that is attempting to reverse the desertification by planting trees (cedars, the same type used by Solomon!). It has received a huge amount of private financial support. They are, in effect, attempting to partially reforest Israel. The expected result is that the land will hold more water, permitting more land to be available for farming.
N.B.: I am in the Holy Land at this time. As my travel schedule is heavy, I am republishing some articles about life in Jesus’ day. I hope you will enjoy reading (or re-reading) them as much as I did.
Karya ini diberi lisensi dan tunduk di bawah ketentuan Creative Commons Atribusi versi 3.0.
Nomenclature – The land today called Israel or the Holy Land, was known to the Greeks and Romans in Jesus’ day as Palestine. This name came from the Philistines, who had lived there some 2000 years before Christ.
The Jewish people, however, never called their land Palestine, although they did use that name to refer to an area near the Mediterranean. They tended to refer to their land is the “Promised Land,” or the “Land of Canaan.” They also spoke of it as the “Land of Judah.” The Talmud simply calls it “The Land.”
Geologically, the Holy Land is a volatile area. Earthquakes and volcanoes have plagued the region for millennia. Numerous plates and rifts run under and adjacent to it. Although many think of the Bible lands as flat, desert landscapes, the region is in fact better described as mountainous (or at least hilly) and has areas that are quite green.
Much of the diversity in terms of vegetation can be seen in the rather significant hills, which stretch from Judah in the south all the way up through Galilee in the north. Although areas to the east are dry, these hills tend to collect the Mediterranean moisture and concentrate it in that region. They are not steep, high mountains like the Rockies, but neither are they small hills. In many areas they resemble the Appalachians here in the United States in terms of slope and height.
Although forests are not widespread in the Holy Land, there are numerous trees in the Mediterranean hills. Sadly, many areas that were once more heavily forested have been deforested. The slender band of forests along the western side of Israel just east of the Mediterranean Sea is sometimes called the Mediterranean Forest. It is not a dense forest, but it is dotted with small pines and oaks. Between the foothills and the encroaching deserts to the east are the steppes—areas filled with low shrubs and wild grasses. These regions are devoid of trees but are particularly good for shepherding. Due to the copious rainfall, the western side of modern Israel was the favored land. This was Canaan, the land of milk and honey.
The Sea of Galilee is actually a freshwater lake. It is 700 feet below the level of the Mediterranean Sea and surrounded by gently sloping hills that descend from the mountains in the west to the lake that is today called Kinneret. Galilee is a beautiful region with reasonably abundant rainfall and it supports various types of agriculture as well as the tending of flocks.
Geographically, the land is rich in complexity, featuring a coastal plain, a semi-mountainous hill country in Judah and Galilee, the wide valley of Jezreel, and a fertile sloping region in Galilee that sloped down to the Sea of Galilee. A tremendous rift in the earth makes up the southern part of the Jordan River near Jericho and the Dead Sea. There is the deep desert of Judah, which swings around south and west to the Negev. West of the Jordan is the steppe and the dry, barren Golan Heights. There is the snow-covered Mount Herman to the northwest and the rich stands of cypress trees in Lebanon to the northeast.
By David Shankbone GFDL or CC-BY-SA-3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
It is a land of great variety and the terrain is incredibly complex. This brings about dramatic, localized effects on the weather and vegetation. Fertile valleys can give way to deep desert within miles. Just to the west of Jerusalem are the green hills of the Judean Hill country that (as previously noted) resemble the Appalachians. Yet just to the east of Jerusalem, over the Mount of Olives, begins a 3500-foot descent into the deep and extremely dry desert of the Dead Sea and Jericho (see photo at right). At 1400 feet below sea level, the Dead Sea is the lowest place on earth. There, two plates in the earth’s crust are opening up.
Indeed, there is probably no place on earth like the Holy Land in terms of the incredible diversity in such a small area. A walk of one hour can take one from one of the richest valleys, up over barren hills, and down on the other side into the hot wind of the desert. And on a clear day one can see the snow shining on Mt. Herman in the north.
It is likely that at the time of Jesus the Holy Land had more greenery than it does today, but not so much more that it would be unrecognizable to an ancient Jew. The diversity described here still existed at that time.
The people who lived in Jesus’ time were surely a hearty stock to be able to thrive in such a wide rage of conditions.
Here’s a video I created that might help to give you a better feel:
N.B.: I am in the Holy Land at this time. As my travel schedule is heavy, I am republishing some articles about life in Jesus’ day. I hope you will enjoy reading (or re-reading) them as much as I did.
The smallest homes of the very poor might be little better than a square, stone structure, covered with a whitewashed sort of stucco. There would typically be one larger multi-purpose room and a smaller back room for the animals. Some houses in hilly regions were partial cave dwellings, built up against the limestone rock face, perhaps with the front section built on to it. The traditional site at the house of the Annunciation (in Nazareth) seems to have been built this way. However we need not conclude from this that Joseph and Mary were destitute. Many homes employed the hillside strategy that made use of hollowed out caves. Such structures were easy to build and there was a certain natural coolness to them.
Another sort of house, also common among the working poor and typical village-dwellers, was one built around a central open court with small rooms opening on to it (see drawing at upper right). Because the central court had no roof, this kind of building had the advantage of needing only short beams for the roof structures. The open concept retained the coolness by allowing air to move freely throughout. Cooking could also be done in the open central court, when the weather permitted.
If the family had some animals, they were often kept in this part of the house at night.
Families, sometimes including several generations, tended to live under one roof and had little or no privacy.
The roof was of real importance in everyday life. It was flat, with just enough slope to drain off the rainwater. In the relatively arid climate of the eastern Mediterranean, rainwater was precious; therefore, it was carefully collected into cisterns or large containers. The roof of the house was flat and sturdy, enabling people to go up on it. Because roofs were used so often, the Law of Deuteronomy required guard rails to be installed to prevent falling.
The roof areas provided an open second floor. On it, tools could be stored and laundry put out to dry. Scripture also speaks of it as a place to retire and pray. In the evening, when it was cool, people often sat there and talked; they would even sleep there when the weather was good. The climate of the Mediterranean provides an ideal setting for this at most times of the year. Some also placed tents and other coverings on the roof to increase its usefulness during inclement weather.
Except for the roof structures, which included wood timbers, the basic building material in Palestine was stone. Limestone is excellent building material, and as the stones were fashioned into a wall they would be coated with a stucco-like material and smoothed over. Foundations were dug with great care (Jesus said that we should build upon rock rather than sand). The mortar used to bond the stone was made of clay mixed with shells in potsherds.
Wooden trusses were necessary for the structure of the roofs, since they would be used a kind of second floor. Then a firm lattice of straw mats would be added, covered and smoothed with hard clay. Yearly repairs were made just prior to the rainy season.
Most of the inner doors were narrow. Only the door facing the street was wider and had a hinged door that could be secured.
In poorer homes the floor was simply pounded earth. The more affluent might have had pebbles or tiles made of baked clay. Wooden floors were only an option for the affluent.
Only the very wealthy could have water piped to their house. Ordinary people went to the well or spring-fount, or perhaps to a local stream, and collected water with skins, jars, and all manner of pitchers. Some larger towns had conduits or aqueducts that brought water into certain public areas. The washing of clothes was done away from the main house lest water run back in.
There was little need for much heating, except in the cooler months of the year. Most of the houses, therefore, had no fireplace. If it did grow cold, there were charcoal braziers in which small fires would be kindled.
Lighting was not very abundant. Small oil lamps were used. Because much time was spent out-of-doors, interior lights were not an absolute necessity.
Furniture was extremely simple. The most important pieces in the home were chests. There were chests for provisions and chests for clothes. For the poorest families, chests doubled as tables. Because clothing was simple, there was little need for many different sets or changes of clothing, thus there was less need for numerous chests and the sorts of insanely large closets many have today.
Most moderately well off families had a low table at which to recline and eat. People in this region and time reclined on their left elbow and ate with their right hand. It was rare to sit on chairs at higher tables in order to eat.
The kitchen as we know it did not exist. In small houses, cooking was done out back over an open fire or fire pit. Utensils were kept in a chest. In larger houses, the courtyard might be the place of the cooking fire with kitchen items kept in a store room. Only the largest homes had a dedicated area with a fiery oven.
Bedding was rolled out on the floor. The bed as a raised piece of furniture was largely unknown then, except among the very wealthy. Family members stretched out on mats, covering themselves with their own cloaks. Many slept on the roof in warmer months.
Even smaller houses seem to have had a bath of some sort. The ancient Jews were conscientious about cleanliness and viewed it as closely related to holiness and ritual purity. The usual bath (often called a mikveh) was narrow and one stepped down into it. Bathing was for hygiene to be sure, but the Jews also undertook ritual baths. In the Holy House in Nazareth, a mikveh is located in or near the house, adjacent to Joseph’s carpenter shop.
Latrines were more likely outhouses, and were removed from the main dwelling. They may have been shared facilities between several dwellings depending on the size and layout of the town or village. There is a phrase used in the Torah, in which Moses tells the ancient Israelites, “build your latrines outside the camp.” It further states, “When you go to the toilet, take a paddle or a shovel with you and use the toilet and then cover it up.” This suggests that some sort of lime was thrown in after the use of the facility. Other directions about latrines were that they should be in discreet and private locations. Certain archeological sites have disclosed the presence of latrines consisting of a pit dug into the ground and of an enclosed, roofed chamber; basically, an outhouse.
It was a simpler time to be sure, but the homes still provided families with their basic need for shelter.
Here’s a video I put together on this topic with lots more pictures:
The Jews of Galilee, where Jesus grew up, were essentially a rural people. The great majority lived in the many small towns and villages scattered throughout the countryside. They worked the land, tended their flocks, and plied their trades, seldom venturing more than a day’s journey from home. However, many went to Jerusalem, some as often as every year, to celebrate the Passover. And that was no small journey, up to 70 miles on foot each way!
