From: <Saved by Microsoft Internet Explorer 5>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:50:19 -0800

MARY MAGDALENE IS
NOW MISSING:

A CORRECTED READING
OF RAHMANI OSSUARY 701

By Stephen J. Pfann,
Ph.D.

SUMMARY POINTS OF DISCUSSION:

*The original transcription of
the inscription was incorrect.

*The inscription does not read
“Mariamene the Master”nor does the name Mariamene or Mariamne appear on the
ossuary at all.

*The inscription reflects the
writing of two distinct scribes who wrote in different forms of the Greek
script.

*The correct reading of the
inscription is “Mariame and Mara,” based on parallels from contemporary
inscriptions and documents.

*The ossuary thus contained
the bones of at least two different women, interred at two separate times, one
named Mariame and the other Mara.

*No support exists for ascribing the ossuary to Mary
Magdalene.

Rahmani
Ossuary 701

“MARIAMENOU MARA”; Rahmani 701.

The name "Mariamene" is of central importance to the story
line of the documentary The Lost Tomb of Jesus and its companion book. Since “Mariamene” is unique
(and likewise, “Mariamne,” is rare) among the ossuaries, this name is also
highly significant when creating statistics and probabilities concerning the
uniqueness of the Talpiot cave and its inscribed ossuaries.

According to Prof. François Bovon of Harvard University Mary
Magdalene's name in the apocryphal Acts of Philip was "Mariamne." Based upon
apocryphal stories which speak of a close relationship between Mary Magdalene
and Jesus, and which give a high prominence to her in the early church, the
storywriters have surmised that Jesus and Mary were married and even produced a
family. (Of these three assumptions—(1) that the name of Mary Magdalene was not
Maria or Mariam, as recorded in the Gospels, but rather Mariamne; (2) that the
Mariamne of the Acts of Philip is to be identified with Mary Magdalene, though
the Acts of Philip never says so explicitly, and (3) that Jesus was married and
fathered a child—none is supported by any of the earliest records dealing with
these individuals, namely the canonical Gospels and Josephus).

The original publication of the ossuaries by archaeologists
L.Y. Rahmani and A. Kloner interpreted this inscription as reading
MARIAMENOU-MARA: "of Mariamene (a.k.a.) Mara." However, recent publications of
Greek papyrus manuscripts among the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided evidence to
clarify the reading of the ossuary. The following evidence challenges the
existence of the name "Mariamene/Mariamne" in this tomb at all.

The first name and the first scribe:

The first name on the ossuary was written in the contemporary
Greek documentary style of the first century. Four letters of the first name are
clear and erect: M, A, R, I. The next three letters are written a bit more
clumsily but are certainly recognizable, and in the same style: A, M, E. So far,
the word as it stands forms 'MARIAME," which is the normal Greek form of the
Hebrew name “Mariam.” (“Mariame” appears seven times in the Rahmani Ossuary
Catalogue.)

Of particular note, are the "M" mu, the “A” alpha and the “P” rho of the inscription. The lines on both parts of the
inscription were inscribed, not deeply, with a dull pointed metal object. This
instrument was most likely a metal stylus which was commonly used for taking
notes on portable wax tablets and which makes similar marks.

The "M" is formed by a number of separate but intersecting
strokes. The separate strokes are indicated by the nonalignment, scissor-like
appearance of the ends the various of the strokes where they intersect.

The "A" is formed by two strokes instead of three, comprising
a right-tilted "V" followed by a left-tilted diagonal line. This reflects a
semi-cursive tendency in this letter that appears in non-literary documents as
well on ostraca and tituli picti in the
first century CE at Masada and elsewhere. (Tituli picti are inscriptions on wine jars.)

The "P" (= R) is inscribed with two strokes. The vertical
stroke descends well below the baseline. This feature is common among the
ossuaries and is also typical of non-literary documents of the period as well as
on the ostraca and tituli picti of
Masada.

This name is followed by a gap that is sufficiently wide to
signify a space between distinct words.

After this series of letters, the irregularities begin.  Rahmani suggested that the next letter
was an “N.” However, it can only be read so if it is taken to be retrograde
(i.e., written backwards.) The suggestion that it should be read as a retrograde
“N” raises the question of whether it is truly an "N" at all. Among all of the
ossuaries inscribed in Greek listed in Rahmani's Catalogue and the numerous
ossuaries from Dominus Flevit (on the west slope of the Mt. of Olives), there
are no other cases in which it has been suggested that an "N" has been written
in this way. Furthermore, the following two letters do not resemble the
combination “OU,” as proposed in Rahmani’s original publication.

As we shall see, this is not because the scribe suddenly
introduced anomalous letterforms, nor even changed his handwriting style in
mid-sentence. Rather, it is because a second scribe had subsequently added the
last two words of the inscription in a different handwriting style. Upon closer
examination, it appears that the three letters Rahmani read as "NOU" are almost
certainly to be translated by the common word “KAI” and, written in the Greek cursive form of the
word.

Cursive tendencies and the second
scribe:

Cursive tendencies among the various scribal hands led to
varying degrees of cursive letter forms. These cursive forms often appeared in
official documents which normally would be written in the formal Greek
documentary script. These forms may be termed as cursive or semi-cursive
depending upon the extent to which these tendencies were exhibited. The most
common cursive tendency was to execute individual letterforms without lifting
the tip of the pen from the writing surface. Another tendency was to connect
consecutive letters without lifting the pen to form ligatures. This tendency is
known as "connected writing" when the interconnection of letters is more
prevalent. The overall appearance of cursive writing is that there is a graceful
sequence of looping strokes as can be seen in KAI MARA. This stands in contrast
to the triangular, squared and rather jagged succession strokes of the more
formal script used by the first scribe while inscribing MARIAME.

As usual for both the semi-cursive and cursive "K," its left
vertical stroke ascends above the rest of the letter (cf. 5/6Hev 12 and 5/6Hev16
below). A kappa that is written with
only two separate strokes rather than three might be termed "semi-cursive" (as
in the case of 5/6Hev12 below). The kappa on this ossuary exhibits the full cursive form of
this letter, which requires that the letter's three strokes be executed without
lifting the tip of the pen (cf. Masada tituli picti 858 and 5/6Hev16 below).

"KALON
KERAMION" Masada tp 858

This is also true concerning the cursive form of the
remaining letters A and I which, as in this case, were commonly written together
as a ligature, i.e., without lifting the tip of the pen (cf. both 5/6Hev12 and
5/6Hev16 below). At times the entire word is written without lifting the pen as
is clearest in XHever/Seiyal 63 and 69 and 5/6Hev16. (The cursive form of the
“A” appears also in the second name "MARA").

Document exhibiting KAI with a semi-cursive kappa followed by the cursive ligature AI (5/6
Hev12):

Another document parroting the same text containing KAI but
with cursive kappa, ligature AI and
connected writing
(5/6Hev16):

Following normal scribal practice of the period, the scribe
engraved the words of his inscription in scripta continua: with no space between the words, writing KAIMARA.
He, or someone else, subsequently provided a stroke, a word divider, to separate
the KAI from the name, apparently to distinguish the two words, resulting in
KAI'MARA.

He also continued in the cursive style with respect to the
word MARA.

The mu “M” of the
second name Mara, is written in one continuous looping gesture. The first leg of
the letter is initiated below the base line upon which the body of each letter
sits, with the center of the letter sitting higher and formed like the letter
"U", and the right leg curving toward the next letter. This is typical of Greek
cursive and miniscule forms of the letter (e.g., see Masada
tp858 and both 5/6Hev12 and
5/6Hev16 above). This stands in contrast to the practice illustrated in the
first name of this inscription, where the entire letter “M” remains above the
base line and the middle forms a pronounced "V").

The alpha "A," in
both cases, appears to have been written with one continuous looping stroke. The
first form exhibits a counterclockwise rotation with its final stroke finishing
high near the letter's ceiling line. This is common among medial forms of the
letter (i.e., a letter appearing before another letter in the same word) where
the letter ends in a place near to where the initial stroke of next letter
rho will begin (not dissimilar to
the formation of the alpha of the
ligature "AI" in the previous word KAI). The second example is a typical final
form of the alpha (being the last
letter of a word or line) where the final diagonal stroke of the enlarged letter
descends and ends, almost emphatically, at its baseline.

The letter rho "R"
(resembles a "P" but is pronounced like "R") is drawn with two strokes as is
generally the case in most contemporary, locally inscribed papyrus documents,
with the crescent shaped head written first, followed by the down stroke which
descends well below the baseline.

In the photographs there appears to be a small line surviving
between the last two letters of MARA. Upon close examination, it is clearly a
small natural pit that must have preceded the inscription. This is similar to
natural pitting found in various places elsewhere on the ossuary.

Yet another Mary and
Martha?

This revised reading of the inscription based on contemporary
inscriptions and documents would leave the words MARIAME KAI MARA "Mariam and
Mara." Mara, as noted by Tal Ilan among other scholars, was a common shortened
form of the Aramaic name “Martha.”

Due to the fact that (1) an ossuary would often contain more
than one individual's bones and (2) these two names are among the most common
personal names of the first century, the combination of these two names together
on an ossuary is not unique.

In fact an ossuary was discovered at Dominus Flevit on the
west slope of the Mt. of Olives that has the Hebrew equivalent of the two names
as a pair written three times on the same ossuary (however, with the order
reversed: "Martha and Maria"; Dominus Flevit, ossuary 7):

Multiple burial and DNA

The fact that two individuals were named on the side of an
ossuary does not limit the remains inside to be of those two individuals. There
may have been others inside whose names were not inscribed. To give us an idea
as to how many idividuals might have been inside a single ossuary, there was one
ossuary, also from the Dominus Flevit tomb complex (Dominus Flevit, Ossuary 37),
which bears the names of five individuals, indicating that the ossuary contained
at least five distinct burials. The named individuals buried in the ossuary were
Zacharias, Mariame, El'azar, Simon, and Sheniit(?).The variety of scripts and
character of the cuts indicate that the inscriptions were written by different
individuals with distinct instruments. There may be the skeletal and DNA remains
of at least five individuals in this box (not accounting for others who went
unnamed).

CONCLUSION

The so-called "Mariamene" ossuary contained the names and
remains of two distinct individuals. The first name on the ossuary, “MARIAME.”
was written in the common Greek documentary script of the period on the occasion
of the interment of the bones of this woman. The second and third words “KAI
MARA” were added sometime later by a second scribe, when the bones of the second
woman Mara were added to the ossuary. This scribe's handwriting includes
numerous cursive elements not exhibited by the first scribe who wrote “Mariame.”
In view of the above, there is no longer any reason to be tempted to link this
ossuary (nor the ambiguous traces of DNA inside) to Mary Magdalene or any other
person in Biblical, non-Biblical or church tradition.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bagatti, P.B.
and Milik, J.T. Gli Scavi del “Dominus Flevit”, Parte 1. Jerusalem. Franciscan Printing Press.
1981.

Benoit, P.,
Milik, J.T., and de Vaux, R. Les Grottes de Murabba’at. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert II. Oxford.
Clarendon Press. 1961.

Cotton, H.M.
and Geiger, J. Masada II: The Latin and Greek Documents. Jerusalem. Israel Exploration Society/The Hebrew
University of Jerusalem. 1989.

Cotton, H.M.
and Yardmen, A. Aramaic Hebrew and Greek Documentary Texts from Nasal Hover
and Other Sites. Discoveries in the Judaean
Desert XXVII. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1997.

Ilan, T.
Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity: Part 1: Palestine 330 BCE-200 CE.
Tübingen. Mohr Siebeck. 2002.

Lewis, N.,
Yadin, Y., and Greenfield, J.C. The Documents from the Bar Kokhba Period in
the Caves of the Letters: Greek Papyri; Aramaic and Nabatean Signatures and
Subscriptions. Jerusalem. Israel
Exploration Society/The Hebrew University of Jerusalem/The Shrine of the Book.
1989.

Rahmani, L.Y.
A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries in the Collections of the State of
Israel. Jerusalem. The Israel Antiquities
Authority/The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
1994.

© 2007 University of the Holy Land