Vorkosigan

Was Detering Right about the Date of Mark?

The following verse, Mark 13:14 is one of the most famous verses in the Gospel:

14: "But when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains; (RSV)

This is the famous "Abomination of Desolation" that the writer derived from Daniel 9:27. The majority of scholars hold that it refers to the occupation of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 by Roman troops, who "worshipped" their standards there, according to Josephus. The reference to "false Christs" in 13:21-22 may well be a reference to messianic pretenders like Simon Bar Giora, a key Jewish leader of that war, which would also put the Gospel of Mark after 70. The "Legion" of the demoniac of Mark 5:1-20 that was sent into pigs may be a reference to Legio X Fretensis, which occupied the Temple after 70 and among whose legionnary standards was a boar.

However, a handful of exegetes, among them the brilliant German scholar Hermann Detering, see Mark 13 as referring not to the revolt of 70 but to the later revolt of 135, in which the Jewish nation was not only defeated but eliminated. The Jews were evicted from Palestine, the Temple area occupied by a Roman Temple, and Jerusalem renamed. Even the name "Judea" disappeared as Hadrian renamed the area "Syria Palestina" to deliberately blot it out.

The later revolt also fits the descriptions in Mark, in some ways slightly better. The catalyst for the Jewish Revolt of 135 was Hadrian's erection of not merely a statue of himself, but a statue of Jupiter and a Roman Temple on the site of the Jerusalem Temple. Construction began during the Emperor's visit to the area. When he left in 132 the rebellion began to swell as Jews fortified villages and occupied strongholds all over Palestine. A savage war ensued whose devastation far exceeded the affray of 70. No less than twelve Roman legions were brought in, some from as far away as Britain. The enormous number of Jews participating in the revolt forced the Roman leader, Julius Severus, to follow a policy of scorched earth and starvation rather than open confrontation. These events may also be seen in Mark 13, particularly since Hadrian persecuted both Christians and Jews, and animosity between the two groups grew throughout the second century. Since Legio X Fretensis remained in Palestine and occupied Jerusalem in the second century, the possible reference to it in Mark 5 is also supported, perhaps even enhanced

There is an additional piece of data that favors a later date for the Gospel of Mark than usually given. TE Schmidt (1995) argued that the scene depicted in Mark 15:16 to 15:22 is essentially meant to depict a mock Roman triumphal procession. Such mock processions are known from history. For example, Sejanus received one before his execution.

Schmidt was among a small number of exegetes who have observed that Golgotha may also be translated as head as well as skull. That would make Golgotha the Place of the Head. A Roman legend records that in Rome when a temple was being built on a hill, a human head was found with its features still intact. According to the legend, the soothsayers then said this meant the hill would be the head of all Italy. The hill was thus named Capitoline Hill. The significance of this should not be missed: the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus on Capitoline Hill, the Capitolium, the placed named after the Death's Head, was the terminus of every Roman triumph.

This may well be a pointer to another Capitoline Hill, the Temple Mount. In two important ways. If we take, in the writer's allegorical geography, the reference to Rome to understand where the writer wants us to think Jesus was crucified, we need only to know that Jerusalem was also a city with a key hill surmounted by a Temple, the Temple Mount itself. Mark may well be implying that Jesus was crucified on the Temple Mount.

The dating datum here is that the Temple Mount did have a Capitoline Temple on its mount, the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, erected by Hadrian on the ruins of the Temple. In which case the Place of the Skull would be a very direct reference to the Temple Mount indeed.

This now takes us back to Mark 13:14, where we can at last understand Mark's dual implication of the Abomination in the Desolation. Tate (1995) laid out the parallels between Mark 13:9-13, where Jesus makes a prophecy of future persecution:

Disciples before Councils
Jesus before Sanhedrin

Disciples beaten in Synagogues
Jesus beaten after Sanhedrin Trial

Disciples before Governors
Jesus before Pilate

Disciples brought to trial and "handed over"
Jesus on trial and "handed over"

Brother betrays brother
Judas betrays Jesus

Disciples hated in Jesus' name
Reaction to Jesus' claim to be the Blessed One.

This takes us through Mark 13:13. The very next verse, Mark 13:14, refers to the Abomination. This gives us the crowning parallel:

Abomination Stands in the Desolation
Jesus' Cross Stands on the Temple Mount

Now we have come full circle.

References
Schmidt, T.E. 1995. Mark 15:16-32: the Crucifixion Narrative and the Roman Triumphal Procession. New Test. Stud. vol 41, 1995. pp1-18.

Tate, W. Randolph. 1995. Reading Mark from the Outside: Eco and Iser Leave Their Marks. San Francisco: International Scholars Publications.

Chris Weimer

Well Vork, I see where you're going with this. But the late date on this surely would shift all areas of Christian studies. Everything from the Synoptic Problem to Textual Criticism would be topsy-turvey. Unless, of course, the Matthean quote from Ignatius is a forgery or Mark used Matthew (virtually disproven)...

Vorkosigan

Of course Ignatius is a forgery! I have every confidence Carlson will shortly prove that, and paint the face of another Patristic Father underneath the cockpit of his F4U. In fact, I can feel his spidey sense tingling already......

Chris Weimer

I'd hope so. Personally, too much rests on that particular quote, and it sticks out like a normal hair in a bad anime, but it's there, and I've yet to see ample evidence for it's forgery.

Wallener

Note he refers to Judea - not Israel. How about this: Jesus was a Samaritan Messianic figure and was alluding to the long-running dispute between Judea and (what was left of) the northern tribes about the establishment of Jerusalem's ascendancy over Mount Gerizim as the official place of worship. The Samaritan Messiah, according to Samaritan tradition, will be born of Joseph, named Joshua, and a 'hewer of wood' (a carpenter? Aramaic "nasar"?) And of course, Josephus records the 35 CE killing of a Samaritan messianic figure leading people up Mount Gerizim.

S.C.Carlson

Something's always bothered me about Ignatius, but there's a lot to learn yet.

In the meantime, I've got a lead on finding the true identity to pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. Now that would be fun one.

andrewcriddle

It is at least possible that the reference to the desolating sacrilege goes back originally to the attempt (narrowly averted) by Caligula to set up his image in the Jerusalem Temple.

Andrew Criddle

Amaleq13

Even though the "prophecy" indicates the sacrilege to be successful?

andrewcriddle

That's a good point, but on the other hand in the context of the passage as a whole the prophecy seems to be referring to something that indicates that the destruction of the temple is getting close not to something that happens afterwards.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle

The only way I could take seriously the idea that the 'abomination of desolation' passage in Mark 13 and Matthew 24 refers to events after the Bar Kokhba revolt, is as part of some scheme of Lukan priority.

ie Luke (which in the parallel passage in Luke 21 lacks any reference to any 'abomination of desolation') was before the Bar Kokhba revolt but Matthew and Mark are after it. (With Mark probably after Matthew and using both Matthew and Luke)

IMHO the idea that all the synoptics are after the Bar Kokhba revolt is a non-starter.

Andrew Criddle