Women Leaders, Synagogue Heads, and the Founder of Christianity: What History Reveals About Jewish Women in Jesus’ Time

Johnny Ova: Welcome everybody to the Dig In Podcast. I am your host, Pastor Johnny Ova, and today I'm joined by historian and Hebrew scholar Professor Tal Ilan. Thank you so much for joining me today. I'm looking forward to our conversation.

Prof. Tal Ilan: Thank you.

Johnny Ova: Let's get started, because I'm excited to peel back what this world was like. When most Christians imagine first century Jewish women, they picture them as silent, secluded and powerless. How much of that image is shaped by later interpretation rather than historical reality?

Prof. Tal Ilan: Well, I think it's probably 70 percent correct. If you think of the whole world before the feminist revolution, beginning in the 50s, 60s and 70s, or maybe going back to World War I, when women took over from men, this is what the world looked like everywhere, and you needed a dramatic change for it to look different. So yes, it's probably 70 percent correct, and the 30 percent that is incorrect are the exceptions, as it is in such societies even today, where women are basically in a worse position than in the West. But still, there can be dramatic decisions made by women that make a difference.

Johnny Ova: Your Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity catalogs thousands of names from inscriptions and texts. What did you discover about women's visibility and presence in public Jewish life that maybe surprised you?

Prof. Tal Ilan: I don't think it surprised me, but I can give you a very vivid picture of what the sources record. About 20 percent of all the names we have are names of women. That's not because there were fewer women in those days. It's because the texts, history books, talk about men. All kinds of buildings are commemorated with names, mostly men. When there's a question of who contributed and the names appear, they are of course men, because women didn't have money. Even in cemeteries, men are commemorated more. There were probably just as many women underground, in caves or wherever, but they weren't commemorated. Their names are not there. They're much less famous.

Prof. Tal Ilan: There's another thing that makes men much more visible, and that is how you identify a man. You call him, I don't know, Joseph son of Abraham. And how would you call his sister? Miriam daughter of Abraham. So even if the same number of men and women were recorded in those texts, you'd have three quarters men and one quarter women, because for every man there are two men, and for every woman there's a woman and a man. That's one thing. Now, the place where this changes is in magic: magical texts, amulets and other artifacts, especially incantation bowls, where you have the name of the client, and the client is called after his mother. There's a great question about why they're all called after their mothers. The usual explanation is that in magic you have to be very precise, and if you want to be sure who the parent is, you'd better mention the mother, because there's always a question of who the father is. It sounds like a joke, but it was apparently a very serious matter for people who took these things seriously. So when you look at magic, you suddenly have the reverse. You have three women to every man.

Johnny Ova: Besides society and culture, we know women were unfortunately second-class citizens in that time frame. Was it more of a society-wide anti-female thing? Was it financial, that they couldn't get schooling to be recognized? Or was it that they just wanted to honor the men and not the women because of status?

Prof. Tal Ilan: Listen, this is what society was all about. I'm not going to say that the Jews or the Christians or the Muslims or whoever were worse than the others. This is what society looked like everywhere. I suppose you can talk of nuances. For example, compare Athens to Sparta. In our Western democratic world we think Athens was this wonderful democratic place. But in Athens, women were like nothing. The famous symposia, where people sat and talked philosophy, were all men. If women ever appeared there, they were brought in as musicians and singers, and they were actually all slaves. The real women, the mistresses of the house, if you can call them that, were behind the scenes. There was a back part of the house, and that's where they lived. But in Sparta, that horrible, militaristic, terrible place, you had almost equal education for girls and boys, sports and things like that. They both did it, and a lot more was asked of them. So there are nuances. But basically, this is what society looked like.

Johnny Ova: Let's talk about sources. When it comes to ancient Jewish women, what kind of evidence are we working with, and what are some of the challenges of piecing their stories together?

Prof. Tal Ilan: The most important source we all use, and actually learn by heart, is the historian Flavius Josephus. He's interested in real history: kings and priests and wars and generals and sects and the leaders of sects, and they're all men. Some of them are extremely men. For example, one of the three sects Josephus says the Jews had at this time, the Essenes, didn't have women at all. On principle, they didn't have women among them. People who say the Dead Sea sect, whose documents were found at Qumran, were the Essenes have a problem, because that group apparently did have women, though how exactly and to what extent is an open question.

Prof. Tal Ilan: So that's Josephus. Of course, once you suddenly get a woman who becomes a queen, he writes about her, and we have one such woman. She was the last Hasmonean queen, Shelamzion Alexandra. Josephus only calls her Alexandra. She was queen for nine years. Josephus doesn't like her, or doesn't write too enthusiastically about her, but she was apparently quite loved by part of the population, particularly a group also mentioned in the New Testament, the Pharisees. They were great fans of hers. Josephus also tells us about many other women of the royal family, but none of them are as influential or important as she was. Perhaps the most interesting of them, though Josephus tells the least interesting things about her life, and I have my ideas why, is Queen Berenice. She was the sister of the last king of Judea, Agrippa II, and during the war against Rome, the destruction of the temple and everything after it, she became the lover of Titus, the general who destroyed Jerusalem. So she's a very interesting woman, and Roman historians mention her and have one or two things to say about her, mostly not very nice.

Johnny Ova: Very interesting. You've written about women as donors, patrons and even synagogue leaders, and I really want to talk about that. Can you walk us through some concrete examples of women who held real economic and religious power in these Jewish communities, besides the queen you mentioned?

Prof. Tal Ilan: This wasn't something I found out. It was a colleague of mine whom I like very much and greatly admire, Bernadette Brooten. She's a professor at Brandeis, or was, maybe she's retired. Back in 1982 she wrote a book called Women Leaders in the Ancient Synagogue. The evidence for these women is inscriptions. The result is that we know practically nothing about them except that they bear the title archisynagogos, or other titles like mater synagogae, mother of the synagogue, or archon, and others I'd have to remember. They're all on inscriptions. And we know they're Jews. That isn't in doubt. If they're doubtful, they don't appear in our count. There are about 25 or 26 such women.

Prof. Tal Ilan: The other thing we know is where they were. Some were in Asia Minor, some in Rome, some in North Africa. In Egypt I remember only one woman who may have had a relevant title. That's more or less the spread of these women around the world. And different titles were used in different places. If you find an archisynagogos in Greece, he or she may not be Jewish. It's the only place where that's true. In Rome, North Africa and many other places they were Jews. I think "mother of the synagogue" was more popular in the East. And I'm sorry to say that the land of Israel itself apparently didn't foster such roles for women.

Prof. Tal Ilan: Now, the question is what they did, and this is where you're completely in the dark and you speculate. One way to speculate is to ask what men with this title did, and a lot of people aren't sure about that either. For example, in diaspora Jewish communities, some think the synagogue had a committee and the archisynagogos was the head of the committee that ran the synagogue. Others think they were responsible for the service in the synagogue. They knew how to read, pray, pronounce things correctly, maybe even sing. So maybe they did that. It would be very interesting if there were women out there singing in the synagogue. I don't think anybody knows. But it's something to think about. I'm not going to give any definite answer.

Johnny Ova: Wasn't there one inscription where some of the women had "head of the synagogue"?

Prof. Tal Ilan: Yes, that's the archisynagogos. That's head of the synagogue. Mater synagogae is mother of the synagogue. And there are other titles that aren't coming back to me now. I know there's one woman who is an archontissa, which is a sort of leader. There are about five or six titles like that all over. And there are also women called priestess. But I don't think there was ever a situation where a woman served as a priest. I think the priestess is the wife of the priest.

Johnny Ova: It's so interesting to see, and honestly it's unfortunate, because of the dogmas in some of the Christian church. As a pastor, I see the oppression of women inside the church all the time. We have women on our leadership team here on Long Island, New York, and we get criticized for it, and it just blows my mind. Some of the women on our team are some of the most powerful people we have. They bring some of the most valuable insight and leadership skills, things we could never bring to the table. Everybody's got their unique part. Besides being oppressive, I feel like people are missing the grand picture of what, in my opinion, the church can and should look like. But that's just me. How did Jewish women participate in the religious festivals, temple life and community worship? Is there any insight into that?

Prof. Tal Ilan: Yes. We have a lot of evidence that women were allowed to go up to the temple for the three major festivals, and apparently did. We all know the story of when Jesus was three years old and Mary went up to the temple. That's not a story invented for her. For example, in the Talmud there's a story about a man with sons and daughters who tells them, "Whoever arrives in Jerusalem first, I'll give them this, that and the other," and the girls got there first. There's a real story like that in the Talmud. So you have them going there, and it was allowed. One of the things that unfortunately happens with the destruction of the temple is that the institutions that took its place didn't have anything women could participate in. One of the things that replaced the temple was the study house, and that was completely male. It was completely closed to women. I don't know how many women could read and write.

Johnny Ova: So were women allowed in the sacred spaces of the temple at all? And I'm assuming from your last comment that they never learned Torah directly themselves in the study houses?

Prof. Tal Ilan: In the study houses, no. But as for the temple itself, look at the way it was built. There's the place where the temple stood, and then there are concentric courtyards. The one furthest away is called the Court of Women. That means men could go nearer to the temple, and then there was a point beyond which nobody could go, because it was the priests' court, and then the temple itself, where only the high priest could go in. But we do know that when women brought sacrifices, they were allowed to go from the women's court into the men's court to perform a ritual called the laying on of hands. You put your hands on the animal, then gave it to the priest, and he sacrificed it. So women were allowed into that part of the temple to do it. It was called the women's court because that's basically where the women were, but that doesn't mean they couldn't go anywhere else.

Johnny Ova: A couple of questions on the biblical text. How does this change how we look at figures like Mary Magdalene, Joanna and Susanna, the women who supported Jesus' ministry?

Prof. Tal Ilan: The point is that they were, I think, completely normal Jewish women like anybody else. But Jesus' movement was not a normal Jewish movement. It was a sect. We have such sects. I just talked about the Essenes as a sect that didn't have women at all. The Pharisees, I don't know if they actually had women members, though I suspect they did, but they supported the queenship of Queen Shelamzion, a woman. So we have a favorable attitude toward women among the Pharisees. In the priesthood, no. That was closed to women. But the moment there's a sect, it has its own principles, and they can be dramatically different. When I began studying all this, there was a lot of talk about Jesus as a feminist, which of course I don't believe in. But some of the principles he worked with, particularly the idea that there are always people who are left out and shouldn't be, and that we want to take them into account, allowed him to be more open to Samaritans, to lepers, to beggars.

Prof. Tal Ilan: I always think about the episode with the non-Jews, where he goes to Sidon and a woman wants him to heal her daughter. It's a famous story. He tells her he has come only to the house of Israel. And she says, "But even in the master's house the dogs get food under the table." In other words: look, you're already here, and here's my daughter, and she's sick. Fine, the dogs under the table, but please, this is my sick daughter. And then he heals her. In that discussion she isn't represented as a woman. He doesn't refuse to heal her because she's a woman. He had already healed women as we go along in the New Testament. She represents the non-Jew. But it's this idea that if there's some sort of discrimination, he doesn't like it, he talks against it, he says you should treat them fairly. A woman brings a very small amount of money to the temple, and he says, well, that's all she has. A rich king can of course bring more, but that doesn't make his present worth more.

Prof. Tal Ilan: So I think in many respects he's a true socialist, in the original sense of the word. And the Jesus movement after Jesus was a socialist movement, where you brought your property and shared it. I was born on a kibbutz. I know what socialism looks like, and I always feel it doesn't always work. When people ask me about the kibbutz, I say it's a great idea, it's just not fit for people. Because people are greedy, and all the other words I could say. But basically I think Jesus had these socialist ideas, and therefore he also had women disciples. Mary Magdalene, at least according to Luke, had demons he had to exorcise. So I think he really did have women members, if there was any way of becoming a member. Well, followers. But "followers" already recreates the hierarchy, which I think he would have objected to. If there was anything like joining, you could be a woman and join.

Prof. Tal Ilan: The problem, of course, is that they always talk about them as mendicants, who walked around with nothing from one place to another and begged as they went. It's much easier for men to join such a group. For one thing, it's safer for men. For women there's always the sexual danger, which makes both their families and the women themselves want better protection in a world that is sexually dangerous. And there were expectations about women. They had to be married very young, they had children to look after, and so on. So it was more difficult. But take Mary Magdalene as an example. If you were possessed by demons, I don't think anybody wanted to marry you. I don't think her family was particularly happy about her. They were glad when she went away. That's the way I look at it.

Prof. Tal Ilan: I remember someone once wrote, and I won't name the author, about why women would be interested in joining. They had families and children and so on. And the answer is, that's the point. You're thinking about the normal, but what about the people who are really in trouble? That always seems to be the issue Jesus is interested in. So I believe Mary Magdalene was of course a member of his close circle. And I also believe, and this is my special baby, which I think many people are worried about, that she is the founder of Christianity. Why Christianity? Because as long as Jesus was alive, there was no Christianity. What is Christianity? It's the belief that Jesus is the son of God, that he came to this world to rid us of our sins, that he died for our sins and was resurrected after three days. If you believe that, you're a good Christian. But who proved it, who claimed it, who showed you that he was resurrected after three days? Where does this come from? In all the Gospels it's women who tell you this. In all of them she is there, and in the Gospel of John she is the only one there. So I seriously think that the idea that if you're a Christian, you have to believe that Jesus was resurrected on the third day, this was her idea. And therefore, I think she's the founder of Christianity.

Johnny Ova: What would you say to someone who asks about the people he showed himself to afterward? She was definitely one of the first to make that proclamation, but then the text records that others saw him too.

Prof. Tal Ilan: First of all, you have all these stories about the disciples who don't believe Mary Magdalene and go to the cave to check whether he's there or not. That's one way of looking at it. But the more interesting case is Paul, who lists all the people to whom Jesus appeared. He begins with the disciples, and he is the last one. And who isn't in his list? There's not even one woman there. So where's Mary Magdalene? Some people would say this is the original list, since Paul's letters are older than the Gospels. But if that's true, who invented the women? You never invent women. You always get rid of them. As time goes by, if they couldn't get rid of them, it's because they couldn't. They were just there. In fact, I think Paul tried to get rid of them in the list he made.

Johnny Ova: Very interesting. What about women leaders like Phoebe, Priscilla and Junia? That's a big talking point in pastoral circles, especially Junia, where the scriptures seem to mention her as a female apostle. What are your thoughts?

Prof. Tal Ilan: I think Phoebe is called prostatis, am I right? Yes. One of the women leaders, not a synagogue leader but an important Jewish leader, is a woman named Jael, from the city of, that's what happens to old women, Aphrodisias, in Asia Minor. There's a very interesting big inscription. She apparently founded a soup kitchen, and the inscription lists about 30 people contributing money to it. They're all men, except for Jael, who is the founder, and she's called prostatis, like Phoebe. I think she's more or less a contemporary, too. So if Phoebe is called prostatis, I wouldn't be surprised. It makes sense that she was something like that.

Prof. Tal Ilan: And I don't see why they shouldn't be apostles. The women who followed Jesus were not counted among the Twelve, and twelve is a special number, like the twelve tribes of Israel. But they were apostles. They were obviously apostles. And if people continued later to call themselves apostles as they went about spreading the message, there were women there too. Why not? I think Junia is a nice name for a woman. I know that once upon a time they used to read it as Junias and think he was a man.

Johnny Ova: What do you think? Woman or man?

Prof. Tal Ilan: The truth is, I don't care. But in my opinion, Junia makes more sense to be a woman than a man. What are the names of the couple from Corinth, a husband and wife, where one is definitely a woman?

Johnny Ova: Priscilla and Aquila.

Prof. Tal Ilan: Yes, Priscilla and Aquila. So there you are. You have a couple working together, and there's no doubt she's a woman. Junia, I think, is also mentioned with a man. I don't see any reason why she shouldn't be a woman just because the word apostle is there. I wouldn't be surprised if she was.

Johnny Ova: My opinion is she's a woman. I just don't like the excuses from some of my brethren, where it's always "it's an exception to the rule." There's always a reason, always an exception. In their eyes God lays rules out and then breaks his own rules. But to me it's very clear that God in the Bible is using men and women. I've got a couple more questions before we wrap up. For Christians reading the New Testament, what do we need to understand about the world of first century Jewish women when we read these texts, so we're not carrying over some of the oppressiveness Jesus came to break?

Prof. Tal Ilan: For example, I think that in the Jewish world, women were married off very young. I don't think they had a say in it. I don't even think they had a say in the sense of being told, "You can have this one, this one or this one," and saying, "Okay, I'll take this one." No, I don't think so. It was a family matter. But there were other things too. You may remember the story at the end of the book of Judges, where the girls of Shiloh go out to dance in the vineyards, and the men of Benjamin come and abduct them. That's a biblical story. Why would it interest me when I'm talking about the third or second century BCE and the first century CE? Because in the Mishnah, at the end of tractate Ta'anit, there's a story about a specific date, the 15th of Av, a Jewish month, when the girls used to go out and dance in the vineyards.

Prof. Tal Ilan: And what did they do? They danced and praised their qualities to the men. "I'm so beautiful, you should choose beauty above everything else." And those who weren't beautiful said, "Ignore beauty, there's always money," and all kinds of things like that. There's a whole text. And it seems to be the exact opposite of everything we know about Jewish society. Some people would say, and I suppose it's true, that in the elite, the aristocracy, the higher echelons of society, the position of women is very strict and policed. But of the ordinary people we know very little. This is a peek into levels of society we just don't know, and here you have a story that helps you understand some of these things.

Johnny Ova: Last question, Professor, and again, thank you so much for your time. I've enjoyed our conversation. It's been a lot of fun learning from you. Your work on the Feminist Commentary on the Babylonian Talmud project is reshaping how scholars read the rabbinic texts. What's one insight from that work that would help Christians better understand the Jewish context of the New Testament?

Prof. Tal Ilan: First, people should know that the Talmud is much later than the New Testament. And this is again one of those places, like when I talked about Mary Magdalene and said this is my opinion. Now I'm going to give my opinion about the Jews. There is the Old Testament, or the First Testament, whatever you want to call it, and the New Testament refers to it. You can't imagine the New Testament without the Old Testament, because it's a sort of commentary on it. So I think there was some envy there among the Jews, and they also wanted to distinguish themselves from the Christians, who said that if you want to be real, you can't just go around with your Old Testament. You have to have a New Testament as well.

Prof. Tal Ilan: So the Jews went and composed the Mishnah, and they said, if you want to be a real Jew, it's not enough to have the Bible. You need the Second Testament, which is the Mishnah. So I think that the need to canonize the second text and make it as important as the first comes from a place where somebody else was doing this, in other words Christianity. And the Jews too created a situation where you needed two books to be a proper Jew.

Johnny Ova: Professor Ilan, thank you so much for your time today. I truly appreciate it, and thank you for all the knowledge. I know people are going to be very interested in and blessed by our conversation today.

Prof. Tal Ilan: I hope so. Thank you very much for inviting me.

Johnny Ova: You're welcome.