Is Mark’s Gospel in a Mummy Mask?

Sources have recently reported that a late-1st century copy of Mark’s Gospel on papyrus has been discovered in secondary use as mummy wrapping. The dating is said to be ca. AD 90 or earlier, making it the earliest known copy of a New Testament book.

An ancient mummy mask made from papyrus sheets. This is similar to the mask alleged to contain a portion of Mark's gospel. (Photo courtesy of Prof. Craig Evans)

An ancient mummy mask made from papyrus sheets. This is similar to the mask alleged to contain a portion of Mark’s gospel. (Photo posted on LiveScience.com)

But is this really true? Archaeological reports in popular media should be viewed with a healthy dose of caution. Rumors and tidbits of what *might* be are often presented as established facts. News articles are written by journalists who are, at best, trying to manage information beyond their personal level of expertise.

A CNN article co-authored by professors Joel Baden and Candida Moss asks some very good questions about the Mark Mummy Papyrus. It is worth reading the full piece, which you can do here.

Whenever we learn of some new archaeological discovery from any media outlet, we should first ask:

  • Where, specifically, was the artifact found? If unknown, be wary.
  • Who discovered it, and under what circumstances? Was it in a controlled, legal excavation? If not, be wary.
  • Who specifically has studied/analyzed it? Specialists are usually required but they don’t always get the microphone.
  • Do the simple facts of the discovery really support the conclusion being presented? People sometimes s-t-r-e-t-c-h interpretation.
  • Is the discovery actually new? If so, be patient and let scholars/specialists separate the wheat from the chaff. If not new, there may be more solid information available from scholarly sources.

The Mark Mummy Papyrus may be genuine, but we don’t really know yet. Nothing has been published at this point beyond the news rumors. Substantive details will hopefully come out soon, giving us a better idea of whether it is such an early text.

BTW, Todd Bolen has a nice checklist for managing Sensational Stories from Archaeology.

Update: Here is a short message noting errors in the LiveScience article linked at the top of this post. The message comments are also quite illuminating. After reading them, note again the paragraph in this post that begins with, “But is this really true?”.

HT: Prof. Ulrich Wendel, Todd Bolen)

Advertisements

About LukeChandler

Luke holds an M.A. in Ancient and Classical History and has been an adjunct professor at Florida College in Temple Terrace, Florida. Luke and his wife Melanie have five children. He serves as a minister in English and Spanish with the North Terrace Church of Christ and participates annually in archaeological excavations in Israel. Luke also leads tours to Europe and the Bible Lands.
This entry was posted in Biblical Archaeology, Inscriptions and Manuscripts, Misuses of biblical archaeology, New Discoveries, New Testament and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s