Archaic Mark a fake

http://www.realitysandwich.com/archaic_mark_proved_fake

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091211203717.htm The scientific process of ms analysis is alluded to in this article and it has been bookmarked on my Google account.

For diverse motives many manuscripts and texts of the gospels and other sectarian and religious documents have been forged or falsified as to what they purport to represent. The methods to detect manuscript forgery as in this instant case can prove most enlightening in diverse aras of scholarship in the humanities and social sciences.

• Mark is considered the first of the canonical gospels.
• Goodspeed acquired this fake ms and apparently was deceived as to its authenticity . The authenticity of text was questioned a short year later.
• The ms included 16 colorful illustrations often the hallmark of medieval copyists and medieval texts and ms per se.
• This turned out to be a modern forgery, and not a witness to the early text.
• It embraced deades of speculation before the following tests were applied to draw the conclusion of forgery:polarized light, energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry, X-ray diffraction, Fourier Transform infrared spectroscopy, and Raman spectroscopy
• February 2010 Novum Testamentum The detailed findings will be presented.

'Archaic Mark' Proved Fake
Kyle
Davis

The Gospel of Mark narrates the birth of Jesus of Nazareth and
focuses primarily on the last week of his life. In this book, Jesus is portrayed
as a man of action--a healer and a miracle worker. It is considered by most
temporary scholars to be the first Gospel written. Recently, a prized copy of
this text, known as the "Archaic Mark" was revealed as fake.
Edgar J. Goodspeed of the University of Chicago acquired the Archaic Mark in
1937, and just one year later, the book’s authenticity was under question.
Opinion was divided on whether the manuscript, which also includes 16 colorful
illustrations, was an important witness to the early text of the gospel or a
modern forgery, said Margaret M. Mitchell, Professor of New
Testament and Early Christian Literature. After decades of speculation, experts
in mico-chemical analyst and medieval book making have concluded that it's a
forgery from the late 1800’s. Samples of parchment, ink, and paint
underwent a wide variety of tests, including polarized light,
energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry, X-ray diffraction, Fourier Transform
infrared spectroscopy, and Raman spectroscopy. The book has been determined to
be created no earlier then 1874. There will be a detailed paper of the findings
in this February’s publication of Novum Testamentum.
12-22-09
Kyle
Davis's blog
Login or register to post comments
ShareThis
Printer-friendly version
Tags:
Gospel
Christianity