review of G. Smith/B. Landau book on "Secret Mark"

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

review of G. Smith/B. Landau book on "Secret Mark"

Post by StephenGoranson »

This book provides some new information on a case of a claimed ancient manuscript that remains controversial. But not all of the book's conclusions are compelling.
One new item is that Morton Smith (hereafter MS) visited the Mar Saba monastery in 1944; that is in addition to his previously-known visits in 1941 and 1958. This is based on a sketchbook (MS was an artist) now held by Thomas Alwood (misspelled in the book acknowledgements as Allwood).
The disputed text, written in Greek on blank pages of a book published in 1646, claims to be the beginning of a letter by Clement of Alexandria that quotes additional verses from an otherwise-unknown longer and secret version of the Gospel of Mark. The book by G. Smith and B. Landau (hereafter SL) makes a good case that this text was not by Clement, but by an author well after Clement died, in about 215. Eric Osborn and Andrew Criddle earlier argued against Clement as the author. I agree, even though MS defended it as a genuine Clement work.
So when was the pseudo-Clement written? Three of the options include (a) late antiquity, (b) the eighteenth century, because some estimate that the Greek handwriting dates as such, or (c) the 1950s by MS.
The SL book argues for option (a), an option previously suggested by Arthur Darby Nock. They offer text of John Moschos as being similar, but though that shares some sentiment about relationships between some monks, a sort of spiritual marriage, the proposal fails to explain the "Clement" text, which is quite anomalous.
As for the eighteenth century, option (b), SL underestimates the expert testimony of palaeographer Agamemnon Tselikas, who noted that the handwriting has modern anachronisms.
Though MS could not have composed and penned the text quickly, perhaps he had time to learn how.
Regarding the 1950s possibility, option (c), they write with disdain, minimizing proposals in support of the 1950s to a series of mere "breadcrumbs"--a dismissive term they use thirty times!
Though SL indeed mentions the biting humor of the learned scholar, MS, and his conflicted nature, and his turn against religion, they allow such insufficient weight.
One of the relevant people that the SL book does not mention is Prof. Theodor Gaster, a colleague of MS at Columbia Uni., who knew him well. Gaster's assessment:
"Morton Smith is like a little boy whose goal in life is to write curse words all over the altar in church, and then get caught."
The case is not yet resolved.
Post Reply