Once again, I open the pages of Near Eastern Archaeology, to offer a further review of the Talpiot Tomb debate, this time focusing on Stephen J. Pfann’s “Mary Magdalene has Left the Room: A suggested reading of ossuary CJO 710″.
Pfann’s initial presentation of the importance of the reading of this ossuary as Mariamene to the documentary and book The Jesus Family Tomb is certainly not an understatement, because, as he points out, it offers a strong level of uniqueness and a potential tie to a figure in the stories preserved about Jesus.
Concerning the original reading MARIAMENOU’MARA or “of Mariamene also called Mara”, Pfann offers a total of ten objections, dealing with anachronistic translations, misrepresentations of the script, and the use of an alternative name, specifically one of the same ethnic origin. While I cannot claim to be an expert in the areas necessary to critique these claims, the statement he makes concerning the likelihood of such errors from a literate carver does seem valid, and does lead easily to his attempt to find a more parsimonious reading.
For a better reading, Pfann settles on the reading MARIAME KAI MAR, suggested by Rahmani. This potential reading does offer potential implications to the study of the Talpiot Tomb. As Pfann points out, the name Mariame appears on a total of seven ossuaries, making it much more common, which has the possibility of changing the various statistical studies of the names found in the Talpiot Tomb.
To understand this reading of the text, Pfann looks to the hands of two engravers, one writing MARIAME and the other KAI MAR. This appears to be supported by a change in writing style. The shape of the cut marks can been used to eliminate the hypothetical “H” in the middle of the inscription, as it matches neither tool used in the other characters. This, says Pfann, leaves us with an inscription that reads “Mariame and Mara”, both relatively common names. Based on the hypothesis of two carvers, and inscription, Pfann presents that the inscriptions were made at different times. This seems to be tenable, though too hypothetical for blind acceptance at present. The potential of such an inscription would be to lead toward the understanding of later intrusive burial, a possibility does not explore, but one that would certainly question DNA tests carried out on remains found in this ossuary. As suggested by Pfann’s title, this should make us skeptical of the identification of this ossuary with a historical Mary Magdalene.
In the end, the basic questions presented by Stephen J. Pfann should allow the reader to better understand the debate concerning the rarity of the names found in the Talpiot Tomb and to question the validity of the scientific tests utilized in non-scientific ways throughout the focus on identifying the Talpiot Tomb with Jesus.
Pfann, Stephen J. “Mary Magdalene Has Left the Room: A suggested new reading of Ossuary CJO 710″ in Near Eastern Archaeology, 69 3-4 (2006), 130-131
Filed under: Archaeology, Archaeoporn, Religion, Talpiot Tomb | Tagged: Mara, Mariame, Mariamene, Mary Magdalene, Reviewed, Stephen J. Pfann, Talpiot Tomb
