8 pm 27th Jan 07
Forgot to add another theological (not eyewitness verification) reason for the naming of Mary mother of James and Joses at the end of Mark’s gospel. Early in the gospel the author has Jesus ask who is his true mother. He employs a scene of his physical mother not being able to reach her son for the crowd (again– as in similar stories in this gospel — foreshadowing the time Jesus will be unreachable behind the door of the tomb) to draw the distinction between his spiritual family and his physical family. At the end of the gospel the author pointedly refers to Jesus’ mother as the mother of James and Joses, — Jesus is omitted (unlike earlier and 6.3). Following Weeden, Tolbert, et al, …. The author is telling the reader that his earthly mother, like the twelve, have no part in him. (Other gospel authors would later correct Mark.) His readers, rather, are his true spiritual family. So his mother is looking in the wrong place for him. (The Christ is not here — as was already alluded to in Mark 13. But there is so much more to this that it is really another topic.) The point is, this is enough to suggest that the mention of the Mary mother of James and Joses here is for theological reasons first and last.
10 pm. 26th Jan 07
Forgot to add that Schmidt does not himself single out the country origin of the bearer of the weapon of execution in the Roman triumphal procession.
That bit is added by just lil ol me — it comes from 3rd chapter of Heliodorus’s An Ethiopian Story — describes a triumphal procession and pays special attention to the country origin and dress of those bearing the weapons to be used in sacrificing the bull. Okay, Heliodorus might be a bit later than the first century but the description matches what we see in the relief sculptures of triumphs anyway. But it is Schmidt of course discusses the rest of the crucifixion details vis a vis the triumphal procession.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!