東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Jesus and the "middle peasants": Ch...

Mattila, Sharon Lea.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Jesus and the "middle peasants": Challenging a model of this socioeconomic context.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Jesus and the "middle peasants": Challenging a model of this socioeconomic context./
作者:	Mattila, Sharon Lea.
面頁冊數:	306 p.
附註:	Adviser: Margaret M. Mitchell.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International67-05A.
標題:	Economics, History. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3219555
ISBN:	9780542710995

Jesus and the "middle peasants": Challenging a model of this socioeconomic context.
Mattila, Sharon Lea.

Jesus and the "middle peasants": Challenging a model of this socioeconomic context. - 306 p.

Adviser: Margaret M. Mitchell.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Chicago, 2006.

In this dissertation, I critique Richard Horsley's model of socioeconomic relations in Jesus' Galilee. The paucity of direct evidence presents a relatively blank screen, which cannot provide a proper check against the largely theoretical constructs that Horsley projects upon it. These include a common social-scientific concept of "historical peasants" as a distinct cultural and socioeconomically homogeneous human type, essentially the self-sufficient "middle peasants" of A. V. Chayanov's highly influential microeconomic analysis. This concept of "peasants" has been increasingly challenged in the social sciences themselves. Likewise contested has been the theoretical framework, virtually identical to Moses Finley's modification of Karl Polanyi's theories on pre-industrial economies, which Horsley uses to buttress his argument that most of Jesus' fellow Galileans were "middle peasants." This Polanyian-Finleyan view of the ancient world---which posits a dichotomy between the Greco-Roman Mediterranean basin and the market-less "oriental despotic" inland regions---is dated, dangerously Hellenocentric, and flawed. As for the sparse and ambiguous evidence that is available from the reign of Antipas itself, it can be interpreted in an entirely opposite way to how Horsley has construed it. Antipas may not have had to rely almost entirely on an unprecedented efficiency in the taxation of "middle peasants" in order to fund his building projects in Sepphoris and Tiberias, but may have held a considerable number of royal estates, especially in the Great Plain. The tetrarch's urban projects, moreover, may have benefited the local economy rather than inducing an economic crisis in the countryside. Indeed, a rather sophisticated, complex, and heterogeneous network of socioeconomic relations in the Galilee is attested by the tannaitic rabbis only a century after Jesus' time. The basic socioeconomic structure of the Galilee may not have changed dramatically between the first and second century, as is corroborated by recently published archaeological data from Jotapata, Gamala, and Tel Anafa, as well as by a closer reading of Josephus. Hence, many of Jesus' fellow Galileans may not have been "middle peasants," but may have participated in a much more complex network of socioeconomic relations than depicted by Horsley's model.

ISBN: 9780542710995Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017418
Economics, History.

Jesus and the "middle peasants": Challenging a model of this socioeconomic context.
LDR:03271nam 2200289 a 45 001 973802
005 20110928
008 110928s2006 eng d
020 $a 9780542710995
035 $a (UnM)AAI3219555
035 $a AAI3219555
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Mattila, Sharon Lea. $3 1297753
245 1 0 $a Jesus and the "middle peasants": Challenging a model of this socioeconomic context.
300 $a 306 p.
500 $a Adviser: Margaret M. Mitchell.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-05, Section: A, page: 1770.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Chicago, 2006.
520 $a In this dissertation, I critique Richard Horsley's model of socioeconomic relations in Jesus' Galilee. The paucity of direct evidence presents a relatively blank screen, which cannot provide a proper check against the largely theoretical constructs that Horsley projects upon it. These include a common social-scientific concept of "historical peasants" as a distinct cultural and socioeconomically homogeneous human type, essentially the self-sufficient "middle peasants" of A. V. Chayanov's highly influential microeconomic analysis. This concept of "peasants" has been increasingly challenged in the social sciences themselves. Likewise contested has been the theoretical framework, virtually identical to Moses Finley's modification of Karl Polanyi's theories on pre-industrial economies, which Horsley uses to buttress his argument that most of Jesus' fellow Galileans were "middle peasants." This Polanyian-Finleyan view of the ancient world---which posits a dichotomy between the Greco-Roman Mediterranean basin and the market-less "oriental despotic" inland regions---is dated, dangerously Hellenocentric, and flawed. As for the sparse and ambiguous evidence that is available from the reign of Antipas itself, it can be interpreted in an entirely opposite way to how Horsley has construed it. Antipas may not have had to rely almost entirely on an unprecedented efficiency in the taxation of "middle peasants" in order to fund his building projects in Sepphoris and Tiberias, but may have held a considerable number of royal estates, especially in the Great Plain. The tetrarch's urban projects, moreover, may have benefited the local economy rather than inducing an economic crisis in the countryside. Indeed, a rather sophisticated, complex, and heterogeneous network of socioeconomic relations in the Galilee is attested by the tannaitic rabbis only a century after Jesus' time. The basic socioeconomic structure of the Galilee may not have changed dramatically between the first and second century, as is corroborated by recently published archaeological data from Jotapata, Gamala, and Tel Anafa, as well as by a closer reading of Josephus. Hence, many of Jesus' fellow Galileans may not have been "middle peasants," but may have participated in a much more complex network of socioeconomic relations than depicted by Horsley's model.
590 $a School code: 0330.
650 4 $a Economics, History. $3 1017418
650 4 $a History, Ancient. $3 516261
650 4 $a Religion, Biblical Studies. $3 1020189
690 $a 0321
690 $a 0509
690 $a 0579
710 2 0 $a The University of Chicago. $3 1017389
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 67-05A.
790 $a 0330
790 1 0 $a Mitchell, Margaret M., $e advisor
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2006
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3219555