Evidence of Pet-Keeping in First Century Judea and Roman World
Religious Restrictions on Non-Utilitarian Animal Keeping
The most striking evidence comes from religious prohibitions that specifically address keeping animals for non-utilitarian purposes. In Islamic hadith collections (dating from the 7th century but reflecting earlier cultural attitudes), there are clear warnings against keeping dogs as pets:
- “If someone keeps a dog neither for hunting, nor for guarding livestock, the reward (for his good deeds) will be reduced by two Qirats per day”
- Multiple hadiths repeat this prohibition, allowing dogs only for specific purposes: hunting, herding livestock, or farming
- The angels are said to not enter houses containing dogs
In Jewish law from the Talmudic period (compiled 200-500 CE but containing earlier traditions), similar restrictions appear:
- “No man should breed a dog unless it is on a chain”
- Restrictions on breeding small cattle in certain areas, with exceptions for “village dogs, cats, apes, porcupines” that help keep the house clean
- Maimonides’ codification of these laws states dogs should only be kept chained unless in border cities
Evidence of Emotional Bonds and Companion Animals
Despite religious restrictions, there’s evidence of emotional attachment to animals:
- Biblical and Talmudic concern for animal welfare:
- Laws prohibiting killing a mother animal and her young on the same day because “there is no difference betwixt the grief of men and that of irrational animals”
- Philo discusses how “beasts ought to become tame through association with men” and notes that dogs guard and die for their masters
- Archaeological evidence from Roman world:
- Clement of Alexandria (2nd-3rd century CE) references Egyptian practices of embalming cats and dogs after death
- Roman households kept geese and dogs for protection
- The text mentions “feeding dogs in the capitols” and giving “food and nourishment to geese” as guardians
- Evidence of pet-keeping in elite households:
- A hadith mentions the Prophet ordering a dog to be removed from a house, noting “the dog belonged to Hasan or Husain, and it was under a bedstead of theirs”
- This suggests children in wealthy households might have kept dogs despite religious restrictions
Cultural Context and Practical Realities
The evidence reveals a complex picture:
- Utilitarian vs. Companion Animals: Animals were primarily kept for specific purposes: hunting, herding, protection, or pest control. The concept of keeping animals purely for companionship was viewed with suspicion in religious circles.
- Class differences: Wealthier households (like those of Hasan and Husain) might have kept animals that served both utilitarian and companion roles, while religious authorities discouraged this.
- Regional variations: Egyptian practices of embalming pets suggest different cultural attitudes in Hellenistic Egypt compared to Judea.
- Evolution of attitudes: The repeated prohibitions in religious texts suggest that people were keeping dogs as companions, necessitating these warnings. As Maimonides notes, “cursed be one who raises dogs and pigs, because they frequently cause a great degree of damage” – indicating the practice existed enough to require condemnation.
What’s Missing from the Record
The archaeological record in the documents shows:
- No evidence of specialized pet foods or accessories
- No mention of pet cemeteries in Judea (though they existed in Egypt)
- Limited evidence of birds or cats as pets in Jewish contexts (though cats are mentioned as useful for pest control )
Conclusion
During the time of Jesus, people did keep domestic animals that could be considered pets, but this was generally discouraged by religious authorities. Dogs were the most commonly kept companion animals, but primarily justified for utilitarian purposes like protection or hunting. There’s clear evidence of emotional bonds with animals in philosophical writings , and archaeological evidence from the broader Roman world shows pet-keeping practices, especially in Egypt.
The modern concept of pets as primarily for companionship existed but was viewed with suspicion in religious Jewish and early Islamic contexts. The repeated religious prohibitions actually prove that people were keeping animals as companions, otherwise such specific rules wouldn’t have been necessary.
