Today I was thinking again about this story and wondering if Mark even wants his audience to think in royal terms. When reading the Greek, I noticed another strange omission. Mark doesn't use the term ἀπάντησις. Apantēsis is the word that we might expect for a "royal meeting." In short, when dignitaries entered cities, they would often be greeted by a parade of people outside the city who would then accompany the person(s) of honor as they completed their journey. Josephus offers a great description of this:
But when the people of Antioch were informed that Titus was approaching, they were so glad at it, that they could not keep within their walls, but hasted away to give him the meeting; nay, they proceeded as far as thirty furlongs, and more, with that intention. These were not the men only, but a multitude of women also with their children did the same; and when they saw him coming up to them, they stood on both sides of the way, and stretched out their right hands, saluting him, and making all sorts of acclamations to him, and turned back together with him. (JW 7.100-102)This term is used a few times in the New Testament, but never to refer to Jesus' entry [although, cf. 1 Thess 4:17]. If Jesus got "the meeting" from anyone in Jerusalem, Mark neglects to mention it. After a close reading of Mark 11, it seems that nobody (save a few boisterous disciples) knew or cared about Jesus.
Finally Jerusalem's collective disinterest in Jesus at this point might fit well with Mark's larger literary agenda. Jesus is on his way to conflict, betrayal, and crucifixion. But none of this has happened yet to draw anyone's attention. Jesus probably wasn't yet on anyone's radar in Jerusalem. If so, Jesus' entry would not have been seen as a "royal meeting" in anyway recognizable to the folks of Jerusalem.
-anthony
I've always thought of the triumphal entry not so much as a mirror image of the royal meeting as an echo of 1 Kings 1, where Adonijah's attempt at succeeding David, complete with a procession of chariots, calvary, and runners, is subverted by Solomon's procession on a mule. The Son of David is one who comes to be coronated on a mule, not a horse. It seems possible that the correspondence between 1 Kings 1:40 and Luke 19:40 is dropping a hint that this is Jesus' reenactment of Solomon's royal procession.
ReplyDeleteChris, sounds like you've been reading my dissertation. Well said. Even so, we must wonder why this typology enters this narrative at the stage that it does.
Delete-anthony
-anthony
The story of the healing of yhe blind man, Bartimaeus, by the side of the road near Jericho takes place just before this. Bartimaeus has called Jesus "Son of David," and Jesus accepts the the designation, thus publicly admitting for the first time that he believes he has a claim to kingship. So the accompanying Galilean "multitude" has now been tipped off on how to understand and repsond to Jesus's riding a donkey into Jerusalem. I think this is the crowd that surrounds Jesus while he is in Jerusalem by day, and accompanies him back to Bethany by night, providing protection from the Temple authorities.
ReplyDeleteJust curious... technically, Mark doesn't say it was a donkey (ονος), only a "foal" (πωλον)... which could be the young of a horse, donkey, camel, elephant, etc. Only Mt 21 & Jn 12 specifically mention a donkey (ονος)... both of which also explicitly cite Zech 9:9 being fulfilled. Does this affect your understanding of the episode in Mark?
ReplyDeleteNot really, no.
Delete-anthony
Could not the entry's anti-climax be seen as a part of the gospel's pattern of irony beginning with the comparable anti-climax of "nothing happening" after Jesus is introduced with prophetic expectations of bringing the fiery judgment of God?
ReplyDeleteAnthony, how would you relate this to the later portrayal of Jesus as someone who was crowned, robed, and worshipped in ironic terms? I think I know what you'll say, but want to ask anyway.
ReplyDeleteChris, at this point, I'm thinking that this procession foreshadows Jesus' ultimate rejection. If so, the ironic king imagery of the passion is also in play. The question is then, is Mark 11 ironic? On this, I'm not certain.
Delete-anthony
Anthony, how does "collective disinterest" foreshadow rejection? Isn't rejection a form of "interest"?
DeleteMark seems rather Roman. For Romans, the advent of a Jewish kingdom in Roman-occupied Jerusalem, would not be good.
ReplyDeleteOr say, someone writing under a Roman overseer and editor, redactor.
ReplyDeleteI have heard it said that the signifigance of the foal is that it would nor have been broken in yet and thus very resistant to being ridden. Yet, this foal knew its Creator was who sat upon it and was completely calm as if broken in. This feeds into Jesus' claim that if those who praised him with Hosanna! did not then the very rocks and trees would cry out. Also, it shows him not as a triumphant conquerer as royal meetings of the time would communicate but as a gentle, welcoming king...one who will not force his will upon you but sets an example of humility and simplicity and peace as the means by which His kingdom should be entered.
ReplyDeleteThough tougher prophesy is supposed to be fulfilled later, in the Second Coming.
DeleteI'm hopeful that Anthony will see this comment due to the Canadian connection. CBC Radio's weekly spirituality program, Tapestry, featured a documentary (termed a "donkumentary") today (April 5) called "In the Spirit of the Donkey." Discussed, among other things, was the entry into Jerusalem (about three-quarters of the way through the documentary), but the whole program provides a view of the donkey and its gentle spirit that is both interesting and uplifting. If the link does not work, the show can be found by searching on "CBC radio tapstry."
ReplyDeleteLink: http://www.cbc.ca/radio/tapestry/wine-wisdom-and-work-1.3018195/in-the-spirit-of-the-donkey-a-tapestry-donkumentary-1.3018239