A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ram

[andrewcriddle]

This seems to require one to read the father of alexander and rufus so that it refers symbolically to two concepts one of which is represented by the father of alexander the other represented by rufus i.e. taking it as equivalent to (the father of alexander) and rufus. This seems forced.

Andrew Criddle

[hjalti]

Fascinating post.

Have you seen any scholar posit something similar, or is this totally original?

Any explanation for the name "Simon"?

[neilgodfrey]

Thanks Peter. Two questions to help me think through some of what you have written here:

1. I am not clear on the link with hyssop and the plant described by Pliny. Can you clarify that a little, please?

2. What do you see as the reason for introducing an association with Alexander the Great (if there is any apart from his ram-associated father)? Is there a reason to rule out Alexander Jannaeus as an equally likely ready-association?

[maryhelena]

Fascinating post.

Have you seen any scholar posit something similar, or is this totally original?

Any explanation for the name "Simon"?

How about Simon Maccabeus, the founder, the father, of the Hasmonean dynasty?

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Thassi
  
  He became the first prince of the Hebrew Hasmonean Dynasty. He reigned from 142 to 135 BCE.
  The Hasmonean Dynasty was founded by a resolution, adopted in 141 BCE, at a large assembly "of the priests and the people and of the elders of the land, to the effect that Simon should be their leader and high priest forever, until there should arise a faithful prophet" (1 Maccabees 14:41).

• SIMON MACCABEUS
  
  http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/artic ... -maccabeus
  
  Hereditary Prince.
  
  The high esteem in which Simon was held by foreign powers impelled the people to show their appreciation of him, and on Elul 18, 141 B.C., the assembly of the priests, the people, the leaders of the people, and the elders of the land resolved that Simon should be the high priest, strategus, and ethnarch of the Jews, "forever, until there should arise a faithful prophet" (I Macc. xiv. 41). By this phrase they probably intended to imply that the time would come when the spirit of prophecy would again appear in Israel, enabling them to learn the will of God; or they may have meant to express their conviction that the prophet Elijah would announce the Messiah, who would belong to the house of David, and in that case there could, of course, be no ruler but him. This resolution was inscribed upon brass tablets and set up in the court of the Temple. According to Willrich, this record can not have been quoted in the original text of the Maccabees, since the inscription states that Simon sent his deputation to Rome before he was recognized by Demetrius, and regards the Roman alliance as the motive for this confirmation, whereas xiv. 3 asserts that Demetrius was taken prisoner by the Parthians before the embassy went to Rome; furthermore, Numenius is said (xv. 15) to have returned in 139-138, when Antiochus Sidetes was already on the throne. Whether the inscription is authentic or not, it is at least certain that Simon bequeathed his dignities to his children, and thus became the founder of the Hasmonean dynasty.

Hasmonean history is being alluded to in the gMark story about Simon from Cyrene and his two sons, Alexander and Rufus. Hasmonean history from the time of Simon Maccabees to the end of the Hasmonean dynasty with the Roman execution, the hanging on a stake/cross of the last King and High Priest of the Jews, Antigonus, in 37 b.c.e. From the tragic end of that Hasmonean dynasty the gospel writers have woven their salvation story - a spiritual salvation story based upon the OT red heifer sacrifice. A sacrifice that had the potential to change the unclean, the cursed hanging on a tree, to a spiritual Pauline salvation theology/philosophy.

[Ben C. Smith]

I am not clear on the link with hyssop and the plant described by Pliny. Can you clarify that a little, please?

The chain of associations appears to me to run as follows: Cyrenian --> Cyrene --> silphium --> known medicinal properties --> hyssop.

Obviously Cyrenian --> Cyrene is an ironclad lock, and I can also attest from my own studies of culinary history that Cyrene --> silphium is an extremely strong association (something on the order of Wisconsin and cheese, for Americans). (The extinction of silphium is a sad chapter in culinary history. In my own cooking I make fairly regular use of asafoetida, which the Greeks and Romans imported from the east and substituted for silphium, especially after its extinction. Asafoetida being one of my favorite spices, I would naturally be very interested in tasting the spice that the Greeks and Romans considered to be its superior!)

The latter two links are the weakest here, IMO. True, silphium was used medicinally... but what ancient plant was not? Slight exaggeration there, but legions of plants have been used medicinally throughout history. The number of plants that could fall where silphium and hyssop fall in this chain of associations is very high. (My own sense is that silphium was more famous as a culinary delicacy than as medicine; however, my personal bias toward all things culinary may have colored my view on this point; perhaps an herbalist would disagree with me.)

Two more things to consider:

1. Silphium was famous (notorious) for its strong smell. (Asafoetida is similar in this regard; the raw form smells like a combination of chemical spill and dirty gym socks. But when heated, usually in oil or butter/ghee, it mellows out into a deeply pervasive garlicky, oniony, leeky goodness that fills every corner of the mouth and can still be tasted hours after the meal.) I am less familiar with hyssop; does it have a famous pungency or some such?
2. The important part of silphium, like that of asafoetida, was the resin. That was the export that made Cyrene famous. Hyssop, IIUC, is used more like most plants are used (either whole or divided into flowers, stalks, and so forth); I do not think there is anything special about its internal fluids in particular.

So my question on this connection is: granted that the mention of a Cyrenian naturally conjures Cyrene, and granted that the thought of Cyrene might summon to mind silphium as readily as the thought of Wisconsin might summon to mind cheese, is there anything about silphium in particular that would summon to mind hyssop (rather than any other herb used either medicinally or culinarily)? The medicinal connection seems pretty broad to me (hence my attempt to find other connections between the two plants, such as how they smell or how they are used; maybe there is a famous ancient recipe or panacea that gives both of them pride of place).

(I am aware that Peter argued that the weaker connections might draw strength from the stronger connections; what I am wondering is whether silphium is one of the weak ones or one of the strong ones.)

Ben.

[Peter Kirby]

This seems to require one to read the father of alexander and rufus so that it refers symbolically to two concepts one of which is represented by the father of alexander the other represented by rufus i.e. taking it as equivalent to (the father of alexander) and rufus. This seems forced.

That is not required. The literal meaning intended, at least, is still "the father of Alexander and of Rufus," as you expect, as they are both names. All that has been suggested here is that the words "father of" could be important hermeneutic clues in the case of Alexander, while being there but not critical to the symbolic interpretation in the case of Rufus. I would suggest that this criticism essentially requires that one has a hard time seeing symbolic references in the text, finding superficial reasons for dismissing such suggestions, and is itself a bit forced.

There has been a lot of comment so far on the potential connection apparently found in the phrase "father of Alexander" here. I suggested it principally because of the Leviticus 16 connection detected in the Barabbas story, which has an 'unused' ram (burnt offering) and bull (sin offering), suggesting that the parallel between Simon and Jesus may be similar to the parallel between Barabbas and Jesus. This is how it stands or falls. Fortunately, since it is the only part of the presentation that does not allude to the Numbers 19:1-10 passage, then if it is viewed as the weakest link, it should also be seen as the easiest link to replace with another sense. (The only reason that I did not, is that the sense given seemed to me the strongest. But then people differ in opinions.)

One possible suggestion (and in fact the first one that I considered) is that the name "Alexander" is to be read the same way as the name "Rufus," as pointing to the symbolic meaning by way of the literal interpretation of the name. This is suggested by the practice of the author of Mark elsewhere, e.g., Barabbas and Bartimaeus (in the way others have suggested that those names are to be read, anyway). One literal meaning of the name of "Alexander" is "helper of man," and the application here would be that this Simon is helping the "man," Jesus, if so. This would retain all the Numbers 19 connections while refusing to let the Leviticus 16 connection enter in here.

As one more note, I have never suggested that either name has any connection to any historical story or to any mythological story. I am so far unconvinced by any such suggestion, even as to their plausibility. I find them highly strained and controvertible, and they seem to rest much too much on assumptions about the method of the author of the Gospel of Mark that cannot be demonstrated from the text, as well as assumptions about the reader that cannot be demonstrated from an analysis of early Christianity. If there are any allusions here, I stick strictly to very famous associations and literal meanings of words, things that anyone can be expected to apply in almost any hermeneutical context, including one compatible with the apparent aims of Mark in the passion narrative of rewriting scriptural passages as applying to the death of Jesus. I strictly reject any attempt to find a historical or mythological hypotext here, instead of the series of scriptural archetypes to the story that I do detect.

[Peter Kirby]

is there anything about silphium in particular that would summon to mind hyssop

Without the connection between the death of Jesus and the items listed here in Numbers 19, no.

But then we know that the connection is drawn by early Christians from the references in Barnabas, John, and Hebrews.

I'd agree that this reference, along with the potential reference to the ram, may have been one of them that would have to be worked inwards, starting from the other allusions that are much more clear.

On the other hand, my point is definitely not that the two species are related, but that they are both related to a type. It is of little relevance in this context that there are many stalky herbal plants, unless this is a medical/scientific text or something where you can expect to find a lot of such things that need to be distinguished as to their function in the text. The relevance is not between two particular species of plant but between the connection both the detail applied to the man (Cyrenian, associated with laserpitium, a stalky herbal plant) and the detail in the list of things that are thrown into the sacrifice of the spotless red heiffer (hyssop, a stalky herbal plant) both have to a general shape or object (a little plant--I'd be fine if there were no more correspondence than what is suggested by that phrase, although there is a bit more).

This does amount to one of the harder-to-discern references, but as you've mentioned at least the connection between Cyrene and the plant is strong, which means perhaps we're both selling it a bit short (and focusing too much on the details of the supposed species mentioned here).

Perhaps the connection, if there is any specific connection to be found here, is merely that hyssop is the most famous biblical plant of its nature, while laserpitium was the most famous such plant in general.

[Peter Kirby]

Thanks Peter. Two questions to help me think through some of what you have written here:

1. I am not clear on the link with hyssop and the plant described by Pliny. Can you clarify that a little, please?

2. What do you see as the reason for introducing an association with Alexander the Great (if there is any apart from his ram-associated father)? Is there a reason to rule out Alexander Jannaeus as an equally likely ready-association?

It's entirely word association. There is no reference to any stories regarding Alexander the Great (or any other Alexander) here. Nor am I suggesting that the type of plants are particularly important, although I may have mislead by mentioning some of the similarities between the plants called hyssop and laserpitium. Because the point of the author in this context is drawing parallels from scripture and applying them to the death of Jesus, going any deeper than some meanings of words and simple, relatively-easy-to-understand association games seems unjustifiable. Fortunately, the suggestions made run no deeper than that.

Both of these word associations would be famously-known for people of the time and capable of being learned by a common man by looking at the coins in his pockets (coins from Cyrene, which showed their famous plant, and coins minted with the image of divine Alexander, with the ram horns). If I could suggest a mordern analogy, it would be like a person who wanted to evoke the number 100 (or $100) in his story or music by mentioning "Benjamin," the name of a US founding father whose face is on a $100 bill. In fact this is evoked all the time, and it is not being done to make any allusions to revolutionary history or the early years of the United States.

[Peter Kirby]

Fascinating post.

Have you seen any scholar posit something similar, or is this totally original?

It is not totally original, because many people have noted the similarity of Jesus and the heifer of Numbers 19.

What is (apparently) original is finding more details corresponding between this Simon and the reference to what is burnt along with the heifer.

Any explanation for the name "Simon"?

I have not attempted to find one, since it is not derived from the scriptural passages I've cited. Perhaps someone else will suggest something. There are four Simons in the gospel of Mark in total (Simon Peter, Simon the brother of Jesus, Simon the leper, and Simon the Cyrenian), in total, so there's that to consider.

[Peter Kirby]

I like where you're going with this. Makes a lot of sense, since so much of Mark seems to be a cipher for various Old Testament passages.

To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but for those outside, everything comes in parables;

Mark 4 is a synecdoche for the entire Gospel. Those who understand only the surface meaning of Mark don't understand Mark at all.

Thank you, Tenorikuma.