The Growth and Impact of Agricultural Tenancy in Jewish Palestine (III BCE-I CE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although there is little evidence of private farm tenancy in the Tanak, examination of documents from the third century BCE to the early second century CE suggests that this economic system became an important instrument of agricultural exploitation in Jewish Palestine sometime in the third or second century BCE. The growth of large estates, the implementation of tenancy, and shifts from polyculture to export-oriented monoculture had important effects on the structure of labor, creating classes of underemployed day laborers (ergatai) and 'free' tenants, who made their first literary appearances in the Septuagint, the parables of Jesus, and the Mishnah. Il n'existe guère dans le Tanak d'attestations de 'métayage agricole indépendant'. Néanmoins, l'examen de documents datant du IIIe siècle av. J.-C. jusqu'au début du IIe après, suggère que ce système économique devint un important instrument dans l'exploitation des campagnes en Palestine juive au cours du IIIe ou IIe siècle av. J.-C. L'accroissement des grands domaines au détriment des petites exploitations, l'établissement de métairies et le passage d'une polyculture à une monoculture orientée vers l'exportation eurent des conséquences notables sur la structure du travail. Des catégories de journaliers sous-employés (ergatai) et de métayers 'libres' furent ainsi générées, dont les premières mentions apparaissent dans la version des Septante, les Paraboles de Jésus et la Mishnah.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".