Responses to prompts for words and phrases used to describe personal attributes

Responses to prompts for words and phrases used to describe personal attributes

In the previous chapter, we examined patterns in descriptive representation, ideological congruence representation, and policy responsiveness across economic groups in communities throughout the United States, revealing the substantial underrepresentation of citizens with low wealth at the municipal level. Importantly, however, Chapter 7 focused largely, though not exclusively, on general patterns of (inequality in) representation. This emphasis, while vital, has the effect of minimizing the nontrivial number of instances in which less affluent residents receive considerable representation at the local level.

The purpose of this chapter is to utilise a more wide-ranging assessment of textual material, incorporating an approach from oral testimony, in order to understand the Evangelists’ understanding of Jesus’ attitude towards the Temple and its administration. The Gospels of Mark and John attest to the authenticity of the Temple incident, and also confirm that Jesus did speak openly about the destruction of the Temple. They also tally with reference to their Old Testament citations in that Jesus appears to be accusing the Temple authorities of corrupt behaviour. These New Testament texts have originated from oral versions that would have been in circulation much earlier than the written material, and therefore are strongly reminiscent of the words of Jesus. Jesus saw the Temple as a money-spinning enterprise operating at the expense of the poor, the intense commercialization obliterating any sense of a ‘house of prayer’. He viewed the rich landowners of the priesthood as a major cause of misery for the poor. Indeed his brother James carried on his ministry to the impoverished, and was remembered as vehemently denouncing the avarice and venality of the rich.

In order to pinpoint the centralization of wealth and power in Palestine, this chapter compares and contrasts levels of wealth across Galilee and Judea. There is no longer a clear demarcation between urban and rural settlements in first-century Galilee. Some villages demonstrate urban characteristics reflected by a variety of building styles and house decoration, and this is indicative of a distinct socio-economic hierarchy, with the emergence of an elite espousing Graeco-Roman tastes. In addition to arable and pastoral farming, various industries flourished, some on an industrial scale. The infrastructures of both Sepphoris and Tiberias had scarcely been developed by the early first century, with the houses of the rich at Sepphoris dating to the second century. Taking Magdala aside, which Jesus appeared to avoid as with other Galilean cities, the level of wealth identified in Galilee is far surpassed by that uncovered in Jerusalem, in particular the lavish mansions of the priestly aristocracy in the Upper City. The Upper City priestly quarter and its relationship to the nearby Temple embodies the centralization of wealth and power that Jesus opposed in first-century Palestine.

The strong eschatological vein portrayed in Jesus’ teaching raises questions concerning the nature and degree of instability being experienced by the inhabitants of Galilee and Judea. This chapter evaluates the documentary evidence for discontent at the time of Jesus, against a backdrop of foreign invasions and conquests over five hundred years. There is substantial evidence that there was discontent among the people: the cumulative evidence from Josephus, the Dead Sea Scrolls, certain apocalypses, and the Evangelists, especially the literarily distinct Gospels of Mark and John, supports this. After the Feeding of the Five Thousand clearly a large crowd wanted Jesus as their leader, even their king, and tried to coerce him into this, but he was not interested. His focus was on God and the implementation of his kingdom through discipleship. As an apocalyptical and eschatological prophet Jesus believed that God’s rule was in the process of happening, and he is remembered as warning about judgement to come for the unrepentant. His ministry centred on the welfare of the poor, and their inclusion in the coming kingdom.

This chapter explores socio-economic versus halachic explanations for the distribution of ethnic indicators between Judea and Galilee. Fewer miqwa’ot and scant ossuaries have been found in Galilee. Regarding ossuaries, the trickle-down effect from the Judean elite, who had adopted this Roman mode of burial, to the Galilean elite, would have taken time and resulted in smaller and more modest adjustments; this could partially account for any ossuary disparity between Galilee and Judea pre-70 CE. But, more importantly, the difficulties in distinguishing between first-century and second-century Galilean tombs have hampered firm conclusions being made. The miqwa’ot data demonstrate a difference in the interpretation of the Halacha (religious rules), that reflects a diverse Judaism firmly underpinned by a common Judaism identified through a number of archaeological artefacts, such as the Herodian or knife-pared oil lamp common in both Galilee and Judea. The widespread presence of pig bones on Jewish sites, albeit in low numbers, also demonstrates a diverse Judaism. Stone vessels were discovered on all types of site across Judea and Galilee and, with the exception of large jars clearly produced for the wealthy, were used by all classes. This stone vessel revolution has been interpreted as establishing Jewish identity and self-sufficiency.

Throughout this book you have been challenged to look at the role the Arts play in society and in education. Various methodologies have been suggested and each specific Arts area has been broken down for you. The tools are now in place for you to organise Arts learning and teaching in your classroom. You also have reflective tools to apply to the learning and teaching you undertake. In this final chapter, we challenge you to imagine your Arts-rich classroom. What do you want the Arts to look like and how do you want your students to engage in them? These decisions will reflect your vision and rationale for teaching the Arts and your many experiences in working with the Arts as you have progressed through this book. These decisions are best made by the person who decides the ‘what’ and ‘how’ for their students every day – YOU.