The women watching at the crucifixion of Jesus in Mark 15:40-41

[Michael BG]

Dbz posed a link to Richard Carrier discussing Bayesian Probabilities which led me to a discussion of Mk 15:40-41 by Carrier https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/18498 and Mark Goodacre https://www.academia.edu/35287782/Proph ... card=title

[40] There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Mag'dalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salo'me,
[41] who, when he was in Galilee, followed him, and ministered to him; and also many other women who came up with him to Jerusalem.

Goodacre quotes Crossan, “Their existence and names in 15:40-41 are pre-Markan tradition” while 15:47 and 16:1ff are Markan redaction.

Mark Goodacre points out that “from afar” echoes the wording from Ps 38:11 LXX “my friends and companions …. stand afar”. He suggests that these are historical words derived from the psalms (p 44). I think it would be better to consider them an addition to the tradition from the Old Testament.

Goodacre write, “While Mary Magdalene and to a lesser extent Salome have left their mark on the tradition more generally, the same can’t be said” of Mary. … the text can be translated in six different ways. Unless Mark is being deliberately vague, we must assume, with Gerd Theissen that the family relationships of Mary were transparent to the audience. Again with Theissen, we might add another observation, ‘… the second Mary … is described in terms of her sons’.”

Theissen sets out the six ways the text can be translated
Mary (the wife) of James the younger and mother of Joses
Mary the mother of James the younger and Joses
Mary (the daughter) of James the younger and mother of Joses

Mary (the wife) of James the younger and (Mary) the mother of Joses
Mary the mother of James the younger and (Mary) the mother of Joses
Mary (the daughter) of James the younger and (Mary) the mother of Joses

He states, “‘Mary the mother of James the younger and Joses’ has the advantage of being intelligible without speculative additions” (p 177 The Gospels in Context). Therefore to me it seems that the other five translations are red herrings and this removes the idea that the family relationship had to be known to the audience of this tradition.

The question arises who are James the younger and Joses. In Mark 6:3 Jesus is described as the son of Mary and the brother of James (Greek for Jacob), Joses (Greek shortened version of Joseph), Judas and Simon. Is James described in Mk 15:40 as the younger to distinguish him from James the son of Zebedee, who is described as one of Jesus’ disciples?

In Mark’s gospel Mary the Magdalene appears only three times here and at 15.47 to see where Jesus was buried and 16:1 on the way to the tomb. In Luke’s gospel she has seven spirits removed from her (8:1). Salome only appears twice in the New Testament here and at Mk 16:1.

Salome was a common name according to Wikipedia Herod the Great has both a sister and daughter called Salome. There was also Queen Salome Alexandra mother of Hyrcanus II and Aristobus II rival kings of Judea. Then there was Salome, Herodias’ and Herod II’s daughter who married Philip the Tetrarch and then her cousin Aristobulus of Chalcis.

Carrier discusses Goodacre’s thinking on Mk 15:40-41 in the second paragraph under the heading “Questioning Axiomatic Inferences”. He implies that because three women attend “the ‘three stations’ of Jesus’s death, burial and resurrection” this makes the story suspect. He implies that the three names are suspect too - https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/16366#women

Even the names of the women in Mark’s empty tomb tale are likely symbolic. Salome is the feminine of Solomon, an obvious symbol of supreme wisdom and kingship. Wisdom was often portrayed as a feminine being (Sophia), so to have her represented here behind a symbolic name rich with the same meaning is not unusual. Mariam (the name we now translate as Mary) was famously the sister of Moses and Aaron, who played several key roles in the legendary escape from Egypt, including her connection with that famous well of salvation that acquired her name, and being the one who led the Hebrew women in song after their deliverance from Egypt—and Egypt was frequently used in ancient Jewish literature as a symbol of the Land of the Dead, just as crossing the wilderness into Palestine symbolized the process of salvation, escaping from death into Paradise.

But Mark gives us two Mary’s, representing two aspects of this legendary role. “Magdalene” is a variant Hellenization of the Hebrew for “tower,” the same exact word transcribed as Magdôlon in the Septuagint—in other words the biblical Migdol, representing the borders of Egypt, and hence of Death. In Exodus 13, the Hebrews camped near Migdol to lure the Pharaoh’s army to their doom, after which “they passed through the midst of the sea into the wilderness three days” (Numbers 33:7-8), just as Jesus had done, on their way to the “twelve springs and seventy palm trees” of Elim (33:9), just as we know the gospel would be spread by twelve disciples and—according to Luke 10:1-17—seventy missionaries. Meanwhile, “Mary the mother of Jacob” (many don’t know it, but “James” is simply Jacob in the original languages, not a different name) is an obvious reference to the Jacob, of Jacob’s well, whose connection we already see Mark intended. This Jacob is of course better known as Israel himself.

So these two Marys in Mark represent Egypt and Israel, one literally the Mother of Israel; the other, the harbinger of escape from the land of the dead. Thus they represent (on the one side) the borders of the Promised Land and the miraculous defeat of death needed to get across, and (on the other side) the founding of a new nation, a New Israel—both linked to each other, through the sister of the first savior, Moses, and Aaron (the first High Priest), and mediated by Wisdom (Salome).

At the end of the sixth paragraph under the heading “Questioning Axiomatic Inferences” Carrier writes, “In other words, Goodacre’s argument is that we can’t explain how they are in the narrative otherwise. But this is a modal argument (an argument about what’s possible), and a modal argument can be refuted by any possible alternative explanation–we need not prove the alternative probable, only possible. The burden is then on anyone who wishes to insist the “historicity” explanation is the one that’s more probable (and as I find, there simply is no argument for that to be had)."

James David Audlin comes up with 36 suggestions where the word ‘Magdalene’ might come from https://www.academia.edu/6485720/Quite_ ... Magdalene_
Firstly (a) from “Magdala a village on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee”
Secondly (b) from the Hebrew “migdal tower related to μαγδωλος in Greek watchtower
Thirdly (c) from the Aramaic “magdala, ‘tower’ ‘elegant’ or ‘great’ … Joan Taylor (Palestine Exploration Quarterly 146:3 [2014]) suggests, her cognomen means ‘the Tower-ess’ to say she was a towering woman in faith or personality.” Or why not a tall woman? Or he writes it could refer to her tall neck or large breasts.
Fourthly (d) from the Aramaic “mgdlā … for a woman braiding her hair, to the woman being “described as … mgdlytā, which is exactly Mary’s cognomen in Aramaic”. This seems to be a very good fit. He says that women who had taken the vow of Notzrim braided their hair (Nazarite).
He writes the word was later associated with the town Magdala
Fifthly (e) from the Hebrew “Mahanaim … meaning ‘Two Camps’, a place so called by Jacob because he and God both camped there”. At this place Jacob erected a watchtower (Gen 31:48-52 …)”

Audlin states there is no evidence that Magdala existed in the first century CE.
He said that the Hebrew migdal should be rejected because the Aramaic word magdala (for a the description of a woman who has braided hair) is closer to the Greek text.

He concludes that “I personally lean toward (the) option” that “her cognomen means ‘of the Plaited Hair’, … one of those who took the vows of the Notzrim (Nazarite)”.

If Audlin is correct and migdal should be rejected and Mary the Magdalene is another way of saying she is a Nazarite then Carrier’s explanation of her name would fall. His explanation of Salome I find weak and it should be remembered that Mary was a very popular name to give girls at this time.

It seems to me that Carrier’s view is based on his conclusion that “most of the book of Mark is constructed fictionally … (therefore) we really ought to admit it’s more likely so is the rest of it. While Goodyear’s view is that it is possible that behind what Mark has written is a tradition which goes back to an actual Jesus who lived in the first century CE.

If Mary the Magdalene was originally in Aramaic is this a factor in favour of Mark having Aramaic traditions which he has translated into Greek? There are other Aramaic words which Mark explains (talitha koumei - girl arise 5:21, ephphatha – be opened 7:34) and some New Testament scholars see Aramaic behind some of parables and sayings of Jesus.

Each person should decide for themselves which they feel is the more probable. Having different options should not be used as evidence that the idea that Mark is relaying a tradition which he had been told about can’t be the most probable. A person’s choice will be influenced by how they feel about the likelihood that there was an actual man called Jesus (Greek shortened version of Joshua) who was believed after his death to have be ‘resurrected’ (whatever that may have meant).

[davidmartin]

most likely c) tower cause of something omited in the above. the penchant for giving nicknames to disciples in the tradition! there should at least be a strong suspicion Mary would also have been given one, combined with the etymology of Magdalene for Tower. It logically fits the nickname paradigm

Logically also the attributation to 'of Magdala' is dubious on multiple grounds. First, why when there's a nickname tradition. Second, women are not normally named of places. Third, 'the' Magdalene doesn't work if its a place

Something to do with hair uh well mean the word tower is sort of connected to growth and growing
but the 'uta' ending could just be the Aramaic grammar for 'plural feminine ending', eg what turns 'great' into 'greatness'.

[Paul the Uncertain]

In thinking of parallels, it may be helpful to bear in mind an anecdote told by the American playwright David Mamet, who attributes to his rabbi a saying to the effect that the Hebrew Bible tells not what happened, but what always happens.

Male disciples scatter. The other disciples keep their distance. In the whole Hebrew Bible can we find an example of men running away when their leaders are neutralized? Why, yes, look here. How amazing is that? And spectators at the tortuous killing of their best friend keep their distance? That is mentioned, too. Can you believe it?

I generally agree with Goodacre, I think, that the mention of two generations (parents who witness, children who might transmit to their generation what their parents witnessed) is a claim by Mark that sources exist. I see no reason why Mark's audience would necessarily have any familiarity with his claimed sources, or reason to care who they are, unless those children were available to the audience for cross-examination (so to speak).

So, on the "six translation" issue, it would be nice to know for sure what Mary's relationship with Smaller Jacob was. Regardless, she has at least one child, Joses, who thereby qualifies as a potential tradent. Mark is not otherwise fastidious with his language. Whether that habit is intentional vagueness ... who knows?

Maybe the younger people were familiar or otherwise available, but that's not on the page in Mark, only the existence claim and the suggestion that Mark's narrator knows enough about these sources to state their names and relationships with the now-departed witnesses. Thus, the audience has enough to justify the narrator's confident recital of the facts of the story universe without raising any issue of supernatural or preternatural cognition.

As to Carrier's analysis, I suspect certain names are common in a population partly because they appear in the national literature of that population, making "scriptural allusions" inevitable even in secular narratives of people and events. Also, I think Goodacre met his burden of disclosing that he was assuming the historicity of some crucifixion event. If so, there is no "modal argument" issue - "core" historicity is simply a premise of Goodacre's exposition.

[davidmartin]

yes that's the problem with Carrier's approach in general, if these references are derived from the religious tradition then there is no oral tradition at work to help untangle things. If there's no oral tradition the reason it's a problem is in the case of Mary there's plenty of allusions and vague places she appears to pop up. If her name were merely invented as a crucifixion witness you'd ignore all these as it undermines that theory when it could be more profitable to do the opposite and pull them together

So, for example, in the gospel of John what to make of the song of songs like allusion around Mary's meeting Jesus at the tomb, the anointing with perfume which looks a heck of a lot like Magdalene, heh, the only person who baptises Jesus in John is her. This quite easily feeds into an oral tradition of a prominent female disciple that the gospels treat and relay in various ways. Given her association with spreading messages about chances are she'd be at the bedrock earliest layer prior to James, Peter and Paul's prominence later on. What this does is invite speculation on the 'agenda' of each gospel author as they re-interpret an earlier layer, what that layer may have looked like and been about. But if Carrier is right there is no earlier layer, only the agenda of the gospel author!

[rgprice]

I don't think that Psalm 38 is in mind here, given the content of Psalm 38.

I think first of all, that any of these names are original to the text cannot be assumed, though they might be.

It seems to me that the three women are juxtaposed against Peter, James and John, who have now abandoned Jesus.

Why do they have the names Mary, Mary and Salome? Not sure.

However, the idea that any nuance that isn't easily explained on some literary basis is thus "based on history" is itself entirely baseless. When a story is proven to be 90% based on literary sources, to assume that the 10% for which the literary sources cannot be identified "must be true" is just nonsense.

It can be a sign either that the material is not original, that we simply haven't discovered the literary source, that the writer invented some details on their own, etc. Note also that these types of details are often added to stories to give them a sense of authenticity.

Why people get so hung up on this I have no idea. There are literally millions of made up stories with named characters in them that were simply plucked from the air by their authors. Writers invent things.

Look at the story of Philinnion https://www.theoi.com/Phasma/PhasmaPhilinnion.html

Check out this paper on the use of names in ancient "tall tales": https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/doc ... 04p145.pdf

Both the story of Philinnion and Bouplagos and Publius feature several named characters. Where did the names come from? If we can't explain why the author chose these names, are we then forced to concede that the stories are true?

Why does the the little green creature that trains Luke Skywalker have the name Yoda? Oh no. we can't explain it, so it must mean there was a real alien named Yoda! I mean come on...

[nightshadetwine]

Anybody who's familiar with the mystery cult context of Christianity can see that the "mourning women" who anoint him throughout the Gospels and witness his death, burial, and resurrection are in the role of the mourning women/goddesses of the mystery cult stories and rituals. It's always the mourning women who protect and care for the dying savior deity and are present at the resurrection. The story about the women going to the tomb to anoint the corpse and finding the tomb empty is not historical. So whether these women are based on historical women who mourned Jesus's death or not is beside the point. Their roles in the Gospels are fictional.

Mark: A Commentary (Fortress Press, 2007), Adela Yarbro Collins:

The statement that “a woman came” is ambiguous, but probably indicates that she came to Jesus from outside the house of Simon and was an uninvited guest. The fact that she brought a glass bottle of expensive aromatic oil suggests that she was rich... It has been suggested that, in an earlier form of the story, the gesture of the woman signified an anointing of Jesus as the royal messiah. But in the classic scriptural passages of royal anointing, what is poured on the king’s head is “olive oil”, not “aromatic oil” as here. This may be one of the connotations of the woman’s deed, but it is not the only one... Just as the bridegroom is “taken away” from those who rejoice with him (2:20), there will come a time when Jesus is no longer with those whom Jesus is correcting. Nothing can be done to prevent this absence of Jesus, but the woman “did what she could”. Finally, in v. 8b, Jesus explains why the woman’s action is “a good deed” to him: “She anointed my body for burial beforehand”. As noted above, aromatic oil was used to adorn oneself, especially for a festive meal. It was also used to anoint the dead before burial...

The women see the place where Jesus is buried (v. 47) and return after the Sabbath to anoint him. Their intention to anoint the body of Jesus is problematic, since they arrive after the body has been in the tomb for two nights and a day, but this aim fits well in the overall narrative. It is motivated by the fact that the body of Jesus was not anointed when he was buried. At the same time, the narrated intention of the women is an instance of dramatic irony. The body is not there to be anointed. Furthermore, Jesus declared earlier in the narrative that his body had already been anointed for burial (14:8).

The three women who go to the tomb are the same three who are introduced in 15:40 as observing the crucifixion of Jesus from afar... As Joseph is portrayed as purchasing a linen cloth before taking Jesus’ body down from the cross and burying it in 15:46, the women are portrayed here as buying “aromatic (oils)” before they go to the tomb. The time of the women’s purchase is not made explicit. Since the women go to the tomb “very early in the morning”, “when the sun had risen”, it may be implied that they purchased the aromatic oils the evening before, once the Sabbath had ended...

The Search for God in Ancient Egypt (Cornell University Press, 2001), Jan Assmann:

Both spells proceed from the situation of the deceased lying on his bier, and both set it in the light of a mythic situation or an event in the divine realm: the discovery of Osiris, who has been slain by his brother Seth. The mythic explanation facilitates action; in spell 532, the action of the mourning women, who bewail the deceased as Isis and Nephthys, embalm and awaken him... Death is not an end, but the beginning of the funerary rites, and thus it is also the beginning of the story that explains these rites. If we wish to locate the story at the point where it becomes spoken, we must point to death as its starting point and its theme. The Osiris myth overcomes the experience of death by according this apparently catastrophic and hopeless situation an orientation in which it becomes meaningful to say to the deceased: "Arise!" "Stand up!" "Lift yourself!"—called out to the deceased as he lies stretched out, these exhortations constitute a common element shared by the two texts. They occur in a hundred other spells of the Pyramid Texts, and in later funerary literature, they are expanded into lengthy recitations and litanies that make a refrain of them, consistently addressing them to the deceased lying on the bier or to Osiris... We can summarize all these recitations, from the Pyramid Texts through the latest Osirian mysteries, as a genre of "raise-yourself spells."... Addressed to the deceased lying inert, the spells say, "Raise yourself!" on various mythic grounds. Their function is to raise the dead... Osiris was the object both of mourning that was directed backwards, that derived from the experience of loss, and of acts that looked forward, that sprung from a belief that a disturbed order could be restored. The myth extended the temporal horizon of the situation of the deceased both forward and backward, breaking the seal of death. All this took form in Osiris: he was the mourned and resurrected god who experienced and overcame death...

The nightly journey of the sun as a descensus ad inferos brought the sun god into constellations with the inhabitants of the netherworld, the transfigured dead. His light, and in particular his speech, awoke them from the sleep of death and allowed them to participate in the life-giving order that emanated from his course. But in this, the god himself experienced the form of existence of the transfigured dead and set an example for them by overcoming death... The icon of sunset represents the cosmic process in such a way that it can be the archetype of the fate of the dead. It invests actions and events in the divine realm with a formulation that makes them comprehensible on the level of the mortuary cult. The same is true of the morning icon, which symbolizes the overcoming of death and the renewal of life, rebirth from the womb of the sky goddess. Connected with it are Isis and Nephthys, the divine mourning women, whose laments and transfigurations raise the dead into the morning constellation of the course of the sun... The icons give the course of the sun a form that makes it possible to relate it to the world of humankind... The course of the sun was at the same time the pulse-beat of the world, which filled the cosmos with life force by means of the cyclic defeat of the enemy and of death. The constellation that lent the clarity of an icon to this idea was that of Re and Osiris.

Jesus rising out of the tomb early in the morning when the sun rises is like the sun god rising/resurrecting out of the underworld tomb (which was also said to be the womb of the goddess) in the morning. The goddess who gives birth to the sun in the morning is the mother, and Isis and Nephthys are the mourning sisters. This is pretty much the same role the women play in the Gospels.

Death and Salvation in Ancient Egypt (Cornell University Press, 2001), Jan Assmann:

“Salvation” and “eternal life” are Christian concepts, and we might think that the Egyptian myth can all too easily be viewed through the lens of Christian tradition. Quite the contrary, in my opinion, Christian myth is itself thoroughly stamped by Egyptian tradition, by the myth of Isis and Osiris, which from the very beginning had to do with salvation and eternal life. It thus seems legitimate to me to reconstruct the Egyptian symbolism with the help of Christian concepts. As with Orpheus and Eurydice, the constellation of Isis and Osiris can also be compared with Mary and Jesus. The scene of the Pietà, in which Mary holds the corpse of the crucified Jesus on her lap and mourns, is a comparable depiction of the body centered intensity of female grief, in which Mary is assisted by Mary Magdalene, just as Isis is assisted by Nephthys.

The Mortuary Papyrus of Padikakem Walters Art Museum 551 (ISD LLC, Dec 31, 2011), Yekaterina Barbash:

Both compositions of papyrus W551 are mortuary in character and address Osiris or the deceased associated with him... Thus while section 1 contains earthly expressions of love and mourning for the deceased, section 2 deals with his transition to a new state of being in the hereafter. The sequence of the texts corresponds with the Egyptian perception of death, i.e., the deceased is gradually transformed after death, from this world to the sphere of the divine... The lamentations bring about the revitalization of Osiris by means of mourning itself. The two goddesses, Isis and Nephthys, refer to death from the viewpoint of the living, uncovering their human emotions, as they recall their love for Osiris and grieve for him... For a discussion of the revival of the deceased by means of mourning, see Smith, Mortuary Texts of Papyrus BM 10507. He points to an inscription on col. 2 of the back pillar of a LP statuette, addressing the deceased person: "The two sisters will glorify you as they lament"... The Liturgy of Opening of the Mouth for Breathing depicts the same concept: "You Osiris will rise up from Rostau diurnally in exultation every day. Betake yourself to earth daily"... Thus Osiris is enabled to rise up from the underworld and travel to earth daily by praises/songs of Isis and Nephthys... Similarly, Osiris' mother, Nut, functions mainly as the protector in his time of vulnerability and rejuvenation, as for example in spell 5 of PW 551: "Your mother, Nut, has spread herself over you... She protected you of all evil things". Her motherly role is repeatedly stressed throughout the composition... Isis and Nephthys perform the widest range of tasks for the deceased Osiris, including purification, protection, and reassembling. At the same time, the two sisters act as they do in the lamentations, mourning and "glorifying" Osiris.

Jesus is anointed with aromatic oils by the women and wrapped in linen like a mummy. When he is resurrected he removes the linen and leaves it behind in the tomb.

Death and the Afterlife in Ancient Egypt (British Museum Press, 2001), John H. Taylor:

The exterior of the body was anointed with oils and perfumes, to provide a pleasant odour and to restore some degree of suppleness to the dried limbs. The Ritual of Embalming emphasises the religious significance of these operations. According to this text, the anointing sought to endow the body with the ‘odour of a god’. The Ritual enumerates several applications of oils at this stage. These included an anointing of the body from the shoulders to the feet with oils identical to those used in the Opening of the Mouth... The standard material for mummy wrappings was linen... Wrapping the body, of course, helped to preserve its integrity, but texts indicate that in the pharaonic period the wrapping also possessed religious significance. Several texts explain that the wrappings were supposed to be provided by Tayet, the goddess of weaving, or by the weavers of the goddess Neith... In the ritualised process of mummification the deceased was identified with Osiris...

Mummies & Magic: The Funerary Arts of Ancient Egypt (Dallas Museum of Art, 1993):

The last sentence has been interpreted to mean, “The old man is cast off and the new man is put on.“ It may also call to mind the mummy-bandages that are thrown off in the decisive moment of resurrection and the white garments that the glorified dead wear in depictions of the Underworld... Mummy-bindings had to be removed at the moment of resurrection. Mummification prepared the body for resurrection in the Underworld and protected it in its journey to that mysterious space. Mummy-bindings were both protective attire for the "space traveler" and, at the same time, the bonds of death. They may be called the bonds of Seth, because Seth was the god of death, who brought death into the world by murdering Osiris. The thoroughness with which the Egyptians are wrapped makes understandable such special prayers as the one written on a coffin in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, directing the goddess Isis to free the mummy from its wrappings at the moment of resurrection: “Ho my mother Isis, come that you may remove the bindings which are on me".

Dionysos (Routledge, 2006), Richard seaford

There is considerable evidence (albeit much of it from late antiquity) for lamentation in mystery-cult, sometimes for the deity. The dismemberment of Dionysos was associated with – or perhaps in some way enacted in – his mystery-cult: we know this mainly from late texts, but there is evidence that the myth was known in the archaic and classical periods (Chapters 5 and 8), and in view of our vase-painting of maenads attending the head (mask) of Dionysos in the liknon, it is possible that in the fifth century BC maenads in mystery-cult lamented the death of Dionysos. And given the importance of Dionysiac cult – and specifically of mystery-cult performed by the thiasos – in the genesis of Athenian tragedy, it is not unlikely that the centrality of lamentation for an individual in tragedy derives in part from maenadic lamentation.

Tragedy, Ritual and Money in Ancient Greece: Selected Essays (Cambridge University Press, 2018), Richard Seaford:

I have argued elsewhere that important elements in the genesis of tragedy were mystery cult and hero cult. These two cultic forms were able to combine because of what they had in common, in particular lamentation (for Dionysos or the hero). Lamentation, like mystery cult, unites death with life, both in the death-like state of the mourners and in the life accorded to the mourned...

Ritual Texts for the Afterlife: Orpheus and the Bacchic Gold Tablets (Routledge, 2007), Sarah Iles Johnston, Fritz Graf:

Second, a mother–child relationship between Persephone and Dionysus would echo the Eleusinian mysteries, which according to myth had been founded to help assuage the grief of another mother (Demeter) over the loss of her child (Persephone). The Dionysiac myth in effect carried the Eleusinian saga into the next generation by making Persephone the mourning mother instead of the stolen child... Further impetus for involving Rhea or Demeter in the story of Dionysus’ dismemberment would have come from the tale of Isis’ search for her dismembered husband, Osiris. Particularly in the context of mystery cults, Dionysus had been equated with Osiris by at least the late sixth or early fifth century and Demeter had been equated with Isis by at least the time of Herodotus... At Eleusis, Persephone was the lost child mourned by her mother; in the new story Persephone became the mourning mother. Another innovation was thereby necessitated – Dionysus the lost child had to be revived in some way – and this was accomplished by improvising on one of several other well- known themes. Depending on which particular version of the story we choose to follow, Dionysus’ revival parallels that of other children who had been sacrificed and then revived (e.g., Pelops); parallels that of Osiris, whose dismembered pieces were cared for by Isis, a goddess similar to Rhea and Demeter... Notably, whichever version we take, Dionysus’ revival also serves as an implicit parallel for what the initiates themselves anticipated: they, too, would die but, in somewhat the same fashion as Dionysus, they would win a new existence after death.

Plutarch, On Isis and Osiris 378e:

How, then, are we to deal with their gloomy, solemn, and mournful sacrifices, if it be not proper either to omit the customary ceremonials or to confound and confuse our opinions about the gods by unwarranted suspicions? Among the Greeks also many things are done which are similar to the Egyptian ceremonies in the shrines of Isis, and they do them at about the same time. At Athens the women fast at the Thesmophoria sitting upon the ground; and the Boeotians move the halls of the Goddess of Sorrow and name that festival the Festival of Sorrow, since Demeter is in sorrow because of her Daughter's descent to Pluto's realm.

[davidmartin]

the description mystery cult context of Christianity might apply to the type found in the epistles its not clear if its the earliest type then if the role of the women is still there its as messengers of it continuing after loss of the leader, viz they were the true believers. it doesn't matter if later the story got adapted and looks more mystery cult-ish. question is, is there is hidden layer. i see one, i understand why a lot don't it's a matter of opinion i guess

[Michael BG]

Something to do with hair uh well mean the word tower is sort of connected to growth and growing
but the 'uta' ending could just be the Aramaic grammar for 'plural feminine ending', eg what turns 'great' into 'greatness'.

I can’t see Audlin’s meaning of braided hair being linked at all to the idea of tower.
The Greek ending is according to Strong feminine.
In the five examples I give from Audlin I can’t see any reference to an 'uta' ending in the Aramaic.

I see no reason why Mark's audience would necessarily have any familiarity with his claimed sources, or reason to care who they are, unless those children were available to the audience for cross-examination (so to speak).

I think Maurice Casey was nearly alone in dating Mark’s gospel to the 50s CE. Gerd Theissen’s position is that Mark is using a written text here and it is the audience for this earlier c 50s CE source that knew the family relationships of Mary. I am sorry I didn’t make this clear.

As to Carrier's analysis, I suspect certain names are common in a population partly because they appear in the national literature of that population, making "scriptural allusions" inevitable even in secular narratives of people and events.

I agree.

However, the idea that any nuance that isn't easily explained on some literary basis is thus "based on history" is itself entirely baseless. When a story is proven to be 90% based on literary sources, to assume that the 10% for which the literary sources cannot be identified "must be true" is just nonsense.

It has not be proven and it can’t be proven. What Carrier does say is that because we can show that the most probable explanation for some of the text is that it has a literary basis, therefore it is also probable that the rest is not based on historical traditions.

It can be a sign either that the material is not original, that we simply haven't discovered the literary source, that the writer invented some details on their own, etc.

You seem to be arguing that the material is based on a literary source even if we don’t have that literary source. This seems worse than looking at the text and trying to see if there could be a historical tradition behind the text we have.

Most current New Testament scholars are aware of the issue of names being created by authors. Recently I have been re-reading the Acts Seminar Report which concludes lots of names in Acts were created by the author. However, there are arguments that the two Mary’s were not created by Mark.

Anybody who's familiar with the mystery cult context of Christianity can see that the "mourning women" who anoint him throughout the Gospels and witness his death, burial, and resurrection are in the role of the mourning women/goddesses of the mystery cult stories and rituals. It's always the mourning women who protect and care for the dying savior deity and are present at the resurrection. The story about the women going to the tomb to anoint the corpse and finding the tomb empty is not historical. So whether these women are based on historical women who mourned Jesus's death or not is beside the point. Their roles in the Gospels are fictional.

The quotation from Adela Yarbro Collins argues that the pouring of aromatic oil on Jesus, and the women going to the tomb on the Sunday to anoint the body are not historical. What is interesting is that either could be historical but it is unlikely both can be, not that I am arguing that either is historical. The point I was making was that Mark 15:40-41 could go back to a tradition Mark received. In my original post I point out that Crossan rejected the other references to these women.

You make a case that the women at the tomb are based on the goddesses Isis and Nephthys bringing Osiris back from the dead and I had not heard of this before. Thank you. I am not sure that it being early morning is really important. Light and day for life and darkness and night for death are old ideas. Also Jesus’ body unlike Osiris' is not in the tomb.

[nightshadetwine]

The quotation from Adela Yarbro Collins argues that the pouring of aromatic oil on Jesus, and the women going to the tomb on the Sunday to anoint the body are not historical. What is interesting is that either could be historical but it is unlikely both can be, not that I am arguing that either is historical. The point I was making was that Mark 15:40-41 could go back to a tradition Mark received. In my original post I point out that Crossan rejected the other references to these women.

You make a case that the women at the tomb are based on the goddesses Isis and Nephthys bringing Osiris back from the dead and I had not heard of this before. Thank you. I am not sure that it being early morning is really important. Light and day for life and darkness and night for death are old ideas. Also Jesus’ body unlike Osiris' is not in the tomb.

What I think is that any historical mourning women are being reinterpreted as mourning women from mystery and hero cults in Mark's Gospel. So it's not necessarily that they're directly based on Isis, Nephthys, Demeter, etc. but that the author of Mark is using that theme for his "mystery" story that he's telling about Jesus's death and resurrection. I personally don't think we can know what actually happened historically. Obviously Jesus likely had women followers who also mourned for him when he died but in the Gospels, these women are being put in the role of the mourning women/goddesses from mystery cults who mourn the death of a deity. Jesus is raised or reborn out of the tomb/womb/underworld to heaven like the sun god in Egyptian texts. The women are the ones who find the tomb empty because it's always the women who are the ones who take care of the body/corpse of the dying deity and the tomb is giving birth to the reborn Jesus like the Egyptian mother goddess. In mystery cults the initiate's second birth after death is through the womb of the goddess. So even though the authors of the Gospels are influenced by mystery cult stories, it doesn't mean their story has to be exactly the same. This "mystery cult story" is being brought into a Jewish context.

Instructions for the Netherworld The Orphic Gold Tablets (Brill, 2008), Alberto Bernabé Pajares, Ana Isabel Jiménez San Cristóbal:

In the light of these texts, the initiate takes refuge in the protective lap of the goddess. However, although this connotation is acceptable, it still remains insuficient for understanding why the transformation takes place. It therefore seems necessary to have recourse to an interpretation that goes further. Here, too, a starting point is Dieterich, who sees in the formula an allusion to a kind of second birth from the divine mother after death. Burkert, who comes out in favor of this line of interpretation, relates the phrase to a passage from the end of Plato’s Republic (621a), where the souls, once they have chosen their destiny, must “pass beneath the throne of Necessity”. Burkert considers that the phrase we are studying and the Platonic one are illustrations of the same ritual sphere: we have clearly to do with a ritual of birth, which, in myth, leads to rebirth... Such images have been interpreted as a symbol of the initiate’s penetration within the goddess’ bosom in order to be born again. Other similar figures show the goddess suckling a child. In the light of these figures, it is appropriate to interpret that when the initiate says ‘I plunged beneath the lap’, it means that he penetrates inside the goddess’ womb in order to be born again, converted into a god... the fact is that we seem to have reasons to suppose that the Orphic initiate, re-creating very ancient beliefs of the Mediterranean world, believed that after having been born from his mother’s womb, he is received at his death by the womb of Mother Earth, from which he is reborn, but to a new, higher, and divine life...

In sum, the womb of Persephone is simultaneously the womb of the earth, also used as a reference to the innermost part of the underworld regions, the protective womb of the mother or nursemaid in which the child takes refuge, and the maternal womb from which the initiate hopes to be reborn, transfigured and divinized... However, Egyptian and Near Eastern sources exist from much earlier with this motif of the divine nursemaid, as is the case of Nephthys and Isis suckling the divine child Horus or the pharaoh in the afterlife... Friedh-Haneson associates these images with Orphic religion, which could have incorporated various influences from the Mediterranean, including those from Egypt. She takes up the enigmatic expression of the tablets from Thurii “like a kid I fell into the milk” (cf. L 8, 4; L 9, 8), which she associates with the suckling of Dionysus—and of the initiate as Dionysus—by the goddess Persephone... Since the beginning of the 20th century, historians of religion have compared the refrigerium in the Beyond of some Orphic tablets with this eschatological development of ancient Egypt. The suckling by which the deceased is initiated into the Orphic-Dionysiac rituals may also have vague parallels in the funerary images of Egypt.

"Death and Initiation in the Funerary Religion of Ancient Egypt", Jan Assmann in Religion and Philosophy in Ancient Egypt, Yale Egyptological Studies 3, 1989:

In accordance with the principle of "transfiguration," as the correlation of this world's symbolic objects and actions with yonder world of values and realities, the coffin becomes the body of the sky- and mother-goddess, thus enabling the "placing of the body in the coffin" to be transfigured into the ascent of the deceased to the heavens and the return to the mother-goddess. The sky-goddess is the Egyptian manifestation of the Great Mother. A central aspect of this belief is the fact that the Egyptians imagined the deceased as being the children of this Mother-of-all-Beings... The texts underline the indissolubility of this bond, or more precisely of the embrace into which the deceased, when laid in his coffin, enters with the sky- the mother goddess, the goddess of the dead. The concept of rebirth, however, still plays an important role. "I shall bear thee anew, rejuvenated," exclaims the sky-goddess to the deceased in one of many such texts inscribed on or in nearly every coffin and tomb. "I have spread myself over thee, I have born thee again as a god." Through this rebirth, the deceased becomes a star-god, a member of the AKH-sphere, a new entity. This rebirth, however, does not imply a de-livery, a separation, but takes place inside the mother's womb, inside the coffin and sky... The deceased, now reborn through the sky-goddess as a god himself, is subsequently breast-fed by divine nurses and elevated to the heavens.

Death and Salvation in Ancient Egypt (Cornell University Press, 2011), Jan Assmann:

In the coffin, the vindicated deceased experiences a revelation of the great mother, the sky goddess, who incorporates him into herself for eternal regeneration. But the deceased encounters her in many forms, not just that of the coffin. She is the tomb, the necropolis, the West, and the realm of the dead; all the spaces that receive him, from the smallest to the largest, are manifestations of the womb into which the transfigured deceased enters. In all these welcoming and embracing forms, she promises the deceased security, eternal renewal, air, water, and nourishment.

So in my interpretation, the women in the Gospels are in the role of the mourning women/goddesses, the women initiates who perform ritual mourning, the mother goddess who gives birth to divine or "glorified" beings out of her womb/tomb, and the divine nurses.

[davidmartin]

I can’t see Audlin’s meaning of braided hair being linked at all to the idea of tower.
The Greek ending is according to Strong feminine.
In the five examples I give from Audlin I can’t see any reference to an 'uta' ending in the Aramaic.

Migdal's also a raised bed of spices in the song of songs (with ITA ending). What I mean is this word doesn't seem to be a simple translation to English it has nuances
On the root Gadel gets to the hair
2054) ldc (גדל GDL) AC: Magnify CO: Rope AB: Magnificent: A cord is made by twisting fibers together, the larger and more numerous the fibers, the stronger the cord will be. Anything that is large or great in size or stature.
cause to grow, e.g. hair Numbers 6:5 which ironically concerns the Nazirite vow

Aramaic has the same Hebrew words according to the lexicons, MGDL - Tower/bulwark/fortress
and GDL to plait/weave/twist the hair a crown/nest/rope
there's also a GDLUTA derivative if the ending is thought to be significant. Its not in the lexicon but would just change the meaning slightly and make it feminine as it does in Greek and English when we add 'ess'. I meant that it's not just a Greek ending which the Audlin quote might have given that impression of the ending being a Greek thing only

It's a perfect epithet for a female disciple and it's clearly an epithet from Luke 8:2 "Mary (called Magdalene)"
The Mary of Magdala idea is crazy

By the way, the story of women anointing a body isn't too Jewish. In their society women wouldn't be permitted to touch a male body there were men for this job. I heard this from a Rabbi on youtube heh. No-one seems too bothered about this in the gospels.