Keywords: Gospel of John, Lazarus, Mary of Bethany, Magdalene, early Christian art

Abstract: This interdisciplinary essay employs early Christian art of the Raising of Lazarus to demonstrate that art sometimes performs as a type of visual text that can open windows onto lost narratives. This case study is about art that depicts Jesus raising a young man named Lazarus from the dead. Today the gospel of John describes Lazarus with two sisters, Mary and Martha, who were with Jesus when he resurrected Lazarus from the dead. However, nearly all third and fourth-century artists who portrayed a sister at the raising of Lazarus portrayed just one sister, not two. This early art seems to map onto a hypothesis proposed by some New Testament textual and redaction critics that the earliest circulating narrative about the Raising of Lazarus included only Mary, and that a later editor added Martha.

It is easy to imagine that biblical stories were the only inspiration of artists who created early Christian art, but their art also illustrates other early Christian writings that circulated among the followers of Jesus yet were excluded from the bibles we read today.[1] This interdisciplinary study will demonstrate that early Christian art can sometimes be read as a type of visual text that preserves glimpses of the estimated 85% of first and second-century Christian writings that have been lost.[2]

Specifically, I shall demonstrate that the early iconography of the Raising of Lazarus supports a hypothesis proposed by some New Testament textual and redaction critics, most recently Elizabeth Schrader, that the earliest circulating narrative about the miracle of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead included solely Mary as Lazarus’s sister.[3] While today John 11:1-42 describes two sisters, Mary and Martha, with Jesus when he raised Lazarus, these New Testament specialists hypothesize that the author of the gospel of John had access to—or wrote—a version of the Lazarus story that had only Mary, and that Martha was added later.

The question of how many sisters were portrayed with Jesus at the Raising of Lazarus in early Christian art has not previously been explored, and interestingly, the hypothesis that Martha was added later aligns with the number of sisters portrayed in early art of the Raising of Lazarus. Today, art depicting two sisters is virtually universal—but according to my assessment, 96% of the third and fourth-century scenes that included a sister with Jesus at the raising of Lazarus portray only one sister. Another phenomenon worthy of note in these scenes is the way that, over time, artists changed the female posture from standing beside Jesus to lying at his feet. In addition, two third-century pieces of art appear to be miscategorized, one in the Cappella Greca of the Priscilla Catacomb and the other on the Jonah sarcophagus in the Vatican Museum, and I analyze the history of these two in separate sections.

Early Art Representing the Raising of Lazarus

***Figure 1*** Wall painting, Catacomb of Marcellinus and Petrus. 4th c. Rome. Wilpert, *Malereien,* pl. 159.1.

As seen in Figure 1, art of depicting Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead usually portrayed Lazarus wrapped in strips of burial cloth like a mummy inside a shrine-like tomb structure, and Jesus waving a rod or wand, which early Christian artists often used to signify that Jesus was performing a miracle. The oldest surviving examples are third century, and rare, because Christian art did not truly begin to flourish until after the Roman Emperor Constantine’s policy shifts in the early fourth century.

Most third and fourth-century Christian art is from cemeteries, especially the catacombs of Rome, where, as might be imagined, Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead was the most popular gospel scene, found on wall paintings, glass, marble plaques, and sarcophagi, the carved stone coffins of wealthy Christians. These early artists sometimes abbreviated scenes, occasionally to the extent that they did not include Jesus, such as seen on a tiny fourth-century gold glass found in the Christian catacombs of Rome, Figure 2.[4]

***Figure 2*** Gold glass from the Christian catacombs of Rome. 4th-century.

While the oldest scenes of a sister with Jesus and Lazarus are very early, dated to the second half of the third century, this iconography flourished in the fourth century, and was especially popular on sarcophagi, where the solo sister is depicted in approximately four-fifths of Lazarus scenes. It is worth noting that artists often portrayed characters whom they deemed less important smaller, so the relatively small size of Lazarus and his sister compared to Jesus on many of these fourth-century sarcophagi, as seen in Figure 3, does not mean that they were interpreted as children.

***Figure 3*** *LHS:* A small Lazarus and a small solo sister. 4th-c. Rome. Repertorium 1, 85.

My sources for this art are as follows. The sarcophagi are detailed in the volumes of the Repertorium, the comprehensive catalogue of early Christian sarcophagi.[5] Third and fourth-century two-dimensional art of the Raising of Lazarus is mainly wall paintings in the catacombs of Rome, and Jan Stanisław Partyka examines these.[6] Unless otherwise specified, illustrations of catacomb wall paintings are from Joseph Wilpert’s early colorized photographs, mostly from his massive 1903 Die Malereien der Katakomben Roms.[7] Wilpert was a Vatican priest who became the premier expert on catacomb art during the late 1800s and early decades of the 1900s. He was the very first to capture catacomb art with early photography, and because at that time photographs were black and white, he employed watercolorists to colorize some of them with the hues of the original paintings.

The Solo Sister vs. Two Sisters in the Fourth Century

Although in our modern bibles two sisters are in the story about the raising of Lazarus, in this early art, the solo sister was far more popular. By my assessment, of the sixty-one surviving third and fourth-century pieces of art that securely depict one or more sisters at the Raising of Lazarus, fifty-nine depict one sister (96%) while only two depict two sisters (4%).[8]

One of the most astonishing aspects of this early art is that we see solely one sister at the Raising of Lazarus in a variety of media, in a variety of artistic styles, and regardless of the level of detail on the piece or the amount of space available. Forty-nine sarcophagi, plus two sarcophagus fragments, depict only one sister. In addition, six pieces of two-dimensional catacomb art in Rome—paintings, a mosaic, and a marble plaque—depict one.[9] A solo sister is also depicted on an etched drinking glass from Cologne and on a pottery plate from Tunisia, both dated fourth-century.[10] One can see from the composition on the pottery plate in Figure 4—Jesus on the left, solo sister on the right, and Lazarus in his tomb at the top—that the potter had plenty of space to add another sister if desired.

***Figure 4*** Solo sister on the right. 4th-c. plate. Walters Art Museum. Open access.

The two scenes that depict two sisters are on fourth-century sarcophagi, and these further clarify that other sculptors and painters could have included a second sister had they or their patrons wished. One of these two sarcophagi is in Rome and dates to the second third of the fourth century. The other, in Arles, dates around the year 330. Both depict a standing sister next to a hunched sister, as seen on the left-hand side of the Arles sarcophagus, shown in Figure 5.[11]

***Figure 5*** Two sisters with Jesus on LHS. 4th-c. sarcophagus, Arles. Repertorium 3, 34. Photo courtesy of John Saxon and Deborah Niederer Saxon.

Many fourth-century artists portrayed the solo sister kneeling or prostrate, and art historians typically identify her as Mary because John 11:32 says Mary fell at Jesus’s feet. When the solo sister is depicted standing, some art historians identify her as Mary, while some suggest she could represent either Mary or Martha, and others identify her as Martha.

Another indication that sculptors probably were not abbreviating their scenes of the Raising of Lazarus—that is, sculpting only one sister even if they knew a narrative with both Mary and Martha—is that the scenes usually identified as Paul (or Peter) baptizing his jailer/s virtually always include two small jailers with round hats. Sculptors often paired the scenes of Jesus raising Lazarus with one sister and the apostle baptizing two jailers. In Rome alone, six of these pairings are vertical, one directly above the other, and eleven more are horizontal on opposite ends of the sarcophagus—and all of them depict one sister and two jailers—as seen in Figure 6, where Jesus raising Lazarus with one sister is on the far left edge, and the apostle baptizing two jailers is on the right.[12] See also Figure 3.

***Figure 6*** Left: Jesus raising Lazarus with one sister. Right: Peter baptizing two jailers. 4th-c. ROme. Main part of the sarcophagus of Marcus Claudianus, Repertorium 1, 771.

Much fourth-century art of the Raising of Lazarus depicts the solo sister child-sized, but some artists represented her full-sized, sometimes bending or kneeling, and sometimes standing with Jesus. Five fourth-century pieces of art portray her full-sized and standing tall with Jesus: the pottery plate from Tunisia seen above, the drinking glass from Cologne, a sarcophagus fragment in Rome, a catacomb wall painting in Rome, and the sarcophagus in the crypt of the cathedral in Clermont-Ferrand, which is seen in Figure 7.[13]

***Figure 7*** Solo sister stands behind Jesus on LHS. 4th-c. Clermont-Ferrand sarcophagus. Repertorium 3, 58. Image: Wilpert, *Sarcofagi* vol. 1, pl. 99.1.

As seen on the left side of the Clermont-Ferrand sarcophagus, a full-sized veiled woman stands erect beside Jesus at Lazarus’s tomb. Two more full-sized women are carved on this sarcophagus. An arms-raised woman stands between two men, and another kneels and touches the hem of Jesus’s skirt, the woman with a hemorrhage of blood.[14]

Figures 8 and 9 illustrate the shocking difference in how various fourth-century artists in the city of Rome portrayed the solo sister. Figure 8 is a beautiful carving from the Sarcophagus of Two Brothers in Rome, and it shows a full-sized sister bending over Jesus’s hand. Figure 9 illustrates how a different artist, also in the fourth century, also in Rome, portrayed a small, subservient solo sister crouched at Jesus’s feet.

Figure 8 [Left] 4th-c. Rome. Repertorium 1,45. Figure 9 [Right] 4th-c. Rome. Repertorium 1, 42.

The solo sister standing tall beside Jesus appears to be the original posture; at least, a third-century scene of the Raising of Lazarus depicts her standing beside Jesus. This painting is in the Praetextus Catacomb. Only its bottom half survives, albeit enough to show the steps of the tomb, Jesus’s legs, and the solo sister’s legs and longer skirt within the frame, indicating that they were portrayed standing side by side. See Figure 10.[15]

***Figure 10*** Praetextus Catacomb, 2nd half of the 3rd-c. Source: WIlpert, Malereien 2, pl. 19.

Whether kneeling or standing, whether large or small, the solo sister’s pose may have depended on the artist, their master, or traditions about women’s gender roles in their church community. This alone may explain why some fourth-century artists depicted the solo sister in a subservient pose, while others depicted her full-sized and standing beside Jesus. Worthy of consideration, given the dominance of the solo sister in this iconography, is the possibility that only one sister was present in an early edition of John or some other early version of the Lazarus story that artists knew.

Did an Early Narrative about the Raising of Lazarus Feature Only One Sister?

Consistent with the 96% of scenes of the Raising of Lazarus that depict only one sister, four sets of data suggest that the earliest circulating narrative about the raising of Lazarus may have described only Mary as Lazarus’s sister—and that Martha was added to the story later.

1. Variants in Papyrus 66. Papyrus 66, the oldest nearly complete manuscript of John, has multiple variants in its text about the raising of Lazarus, variants that, when considered collectively, suggest that whoever penned it may have known a narrative that included only Mary. For example, two variants are in its very first verse, John 11:1. A later “corrector” of the original text of Papyrus 66 partially erased the original iota (ι) in Maria and wrote a small theta (θ) above it, thereby making Maria (Μαρια) into Martha (Μαρθα). This “corrector” also changed his sister into her sister, thereby again making it seem as if there were two female protagonists in the passage. Both of these “corrections” made the passage read like our modern text of John, whereas the original text suggests that whoever penned Papyrus 66 may have known a narrative without Martha. Another set of variants likewise consistent with this conclusion is at John 11:3. Here the later “corrector” tried to erase what appears to have been the name Maria, wrote “the sisters” on top of the partial erasure, and then changed all the verbs from singular to plural, thereby making two sisters where originally there had been one. Schrader details other variants, which when considered holistically, further suggest that a version with only one sister was circulating at this time, something also suggested by art of the Raising of Lazarus.[16]

2. Martha was added to other texts in ways that undermined Mary. Authors, editors, or translators of some second- and third-century Christian writings appear to have added a woman named Martha in order to undermine the leadership authority of a woman named Mary, who sometimes was identified as Mary the Magdalene.[17]

The Apostolic Church Order preserves perhaps the most transparent example of an author using “Martha” to undermine the leadership authority of a Mary. According to its fictional scene, “Martha” blames “Mary” for Jesus not permitting women to officiate with the men at the last supper during the sacrifice of the Body and Blood—Martha says, it was because Mary laughed.[18]

The Epistula apostolorum is a second-century gospel summary originally composed in Greek, and it provides an example of “Martha” more subtly undermining the leadership authority of specifically Mary the Magdalene. Its Ethiopic and Coptic translations include Martha in the list of women going to Jesus’s tomb, despite that Martha is not in any of the canonical gospel lists. Most significantly, they name Mary the Magdalene last, as if she were least important. The most important person typically was named first in a list, and Richard G. Fellows shows how editors sometimes moved a gospel woman from the beginning of a list to the end as a sexist tactic to undermine the impression of the woman’s leadership.[19] Moving Mary the Magdalene to the end of the list of women going to the empty tomb contradicts the resurrection narratives in the canonical gospels, all of which name her first, or in the case of John, names only her.[20] The Coptic translation of the Epistula apostolorum even says that Jesus first sent Martha to go tell the male disciples that he had risen, despite that John 20:17 says Jesus only sent Mary the Magdalene. Both François Bovon and Schrader propose that Martha was not original to the Epistula apostolorum, which otherwise generally follows the Johannine narrative.[21]

A number of early Christian writings, all assessed a century or more later than the composition of John, similarly specify Martha first in the list of women and give her the prominent role. These include Hippolytus’s Commentary on the Song of Songs, the Coptic Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ by Bartholomew the Apostle, and an Ambrosian post communion song.[22] These writings also seem to follow the Johannine structure, which describes Mary in the leadership role that these later authors give Martha.

3. The canonical gospel text names Mary before Martha at John 11:1. John 11:1 is at the very beginning of the narrative about the raising of Lazarus, and as mentioned above, Mary named first indicates that she is the leader and will have the key role, but instead, Martha is the female star of the story. Richard Fellows argues that if someone had wished to undermine Mary, they would have made Martha’s name first.[23] In my opinion, more problematic is that Martha, named second, is portrayed as the most important. She meets Jesus on the road. She frequently speaks to him. And she is portrayed as the most believing disciple, giving the all-important first Christological Confession at John 11:27, telling Jesus, “I believe you are the messiah, the Son of God.” This confession is by far the most significant signal of leadership authority in the passage, yet somehow, the second-named sister speaks it. This confession essentially places Martha in a competition for authority with Peter, the ostensible figurehead of the proto-orthodox church, who gives an almost identical Christological Confession in Matthew 16:16—yet no other early Christian text describes Peter in competition with Martha. However, four early Christian texts describe Peter in competition with Mary.[24] John 20:1-17 says Peter looked inside Jesus’s empty tomb then went home, but Mary faithfully remained at the tomb, becoming the first to see and speak with Jesus, who sent her as his chief apostle to tell the disbelieving men the good news. Non-canonical texts offer further support for this view, for example, the Gospel of Mary 10.3 quotes Peter jealously questioning whether Jesus would have spoken to Mary, a woman, in private. Additionally, Pistis Sophia 1.36 quotes Peter complaining to Jesus that Mary gets to speak to Jesus more than the men do. And finally, Gospel of Thomas 114 quotes Peter asking Jesus to make Mary leave them, because, says Peter, women are not worthy of life. Given these examples of an apparently rather widespread perceived competition for leadership between Peter and Mary, it seems probable that early Christians believed Mary, not Martha, spoke the Christological Confession. Thus, we are not surprised that around the year 208, Tertullian (c. 160 – 240) wrote that it was Mary who spoke the Christological Confession.[25]

4. Mary of Bethany could be the same Mary at Jesus’s resurrection.[26] Still today the Raising of Lazarus evokes the Resurrection of Jesus, and from a literary point of view the parallels between the two resurrection scenes suggest that a single female protagonist might be featured in both scenes, and even more so when one considers that in our modern text of John, Mary the Magdalene pops up at the very end with zero backstory to explain her relationship to Jesus, or why he chose her over Peter as his apostle to the apostles. Mary the Magdalene is often said to be from a town named Magdala—in which case she could not be from Bethany, nor could anything Mary of Bethany does be ascribed to her—but none of the four gospels speak of Mary of Magdala, they all speak of Mary the Magdalene. The town called Magdala today was called Tarichaea in the first century and not called Magdala until the fourth. Consistent with this, recent research indicates that most likely “the Magdalene” is a nickname that Jesus gave Mary, an honorific that means “the Tower” in Aramaic, much like he gave Peter the nickname “Cephas,” which means “Rock” in Aramaic.[27] The Mary who lived in Bethany with her brother Lazarus, thus, also could be known as “the Tower,” the Magdalene. If that were the case, then the author of John did give the Magdalene a backstory, a backstory that included that Jesus loved her and her brother (Jn 11:5), that she was his most believing disciple and most likely gave the first Confession of Faith, that he raised her brother from the dead, that many people came to see her (Jn 11:45), that she anointed Jesus (Jn 11:2, 12:3), and that he rebuked those who criticized her for doing so and then foretold that she would anoint him on the day of his burial (Jn 12:7-8)—all of which would explain why she was the one who faithfully remained at his empty tomb after Peter left, why Jesus appeared first to her, and why he sent her as his apostle to the apostles to tell the disbelieving men that he had risen from the dead.

In brief, there appear to be multiple reasons, both literary and iconographic, to hypothesize that only Mary was original to the story of the raising of Lazarus, and that Martha was added later.

Potentially Miscategorized Third-Century Art: The Cappella Greca Painting

A third-century painting in the Cappella Greca of the Priscilla Catacomb is the first of the two pieces of art that I mentioned in my introduction that appear to have been miscategorized as the Raising of Lazarus with two sisters. The history of this painting indicates that in the decades after its discovery, it may have undergone touchups that made it conform more closely to the canonical narrative.

Deposits completely concealed this painting when Wilpert, suspecting that something might be underneath, used chemical reagents to remove them. It is in worse condition now, in part because the Priscilla Catacomb has long been open to the public, allowing the moisture from human respiration to affect the paintings. Paintings in public catacombs are especially susceptible to degradation and the associated attempts to touch them up, although catacomb authorities often try to match the composition of the ancient paints.

The oldest image of this painting was printed by photogravure and published by Wilpert in 1896.[28] A fire at his publishing house prior to publication damaged many of his plates, and while some were retaken, Wilpert said this plate was “retouched.”[29] See Figure 11.

***Figure 11*** Wilpert’s 1896 image of the 3rd-c. painting of the Raising of Lazarus *without Jesus* in the Cappella Greca of the Priscilla Catacomb in Rome. Source: Wilpert, Fraction Panis, pl. 11.

Wilpert identified it as a scene of the Raising of Lazarus with one sister, but three details are striking. First, the woman is the tallest figure in the composition and painted closest to the top of the arch, suggesting that the painter intended for her to be the focal point. Second, according to Wilpert and later authors, her arms are raised in the style of the catacomb orante, that is, a female figure commonly identified as the portrait of a deceased woman in a posture of prayer. Third, and most problematic for identifying this as the Raising of Lazarus, in my opinion, according to Wilpert, the artist did not include Jesus in the scene. Wilpert claimed the figure standing beside the woman was not Jesus, but Lazarus with “mortuary wrappings” and “his arms crossed on his chest.”[30] As we see in the next section, scenes with two Lazaruses, one in the tomb and one outside it, are well-attested among the earliest examples, but with Jesus present instead of a woman. Wilpert apparently diligently searched for the figure of Jesus in this painting but did not find him. He wrote:

As for Our Lord, who performed this miracle, he does not figure in any way. The painting is badly damaged; however, it is safe to say that the painter did not give him a place in his composition. The road where Lazarus and his sister find themselves ends with them, for it is not possible to accommodate the figure of a man in the limited space between Mary and the hill at the [far left] end of the painting. . . We find ourselves here in front of the oldest painting representing the miracle of the resurrection; it is the only one where Christ does not appear and where Lazarus appears twice.[31]

The earliest catacomb art often does not resemble later scenes, and identifiable gospel scenes in particular are exceedingly rare.[32] While several scenes from the Hebrew Bible—Susannah, Noah, Daniel, and Abraham—are identifiable in the Cappella Greca, the only other gospel scene is the Adoration of the Magi. Other scenes appear to have no scriptural origin. For example, the painting opposite the so-called Raising of Lazarus depicts seven people at a table, including a veiled woman, and is usually identified as the scene of a funerary meal. Another depicts an arms-raised woman with a lion in front of an ornate building, a composition found nowhere else in early Christian art.

In his 1903 Priscilla Catacomb guidebook, Orazio Marucchi mentions the scene of the Raising of Lazarus, but gives no detail.[33] In 1928, however, Henri Leclercq, in the widely read Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, explained that Lazarus was in two scenes, in his tomb and with his sister, but that Jesus was not present.[34]

In 1933, for the first time, Jesus is seen instead of Lazarus. Paul Styger, a Swiss priest, writes that the figure of Jesus is in the painting, and the photograph he published suggests the vague outline of the figure’s right arm gesturing towards the tomb, as if performing a miracle. Styger also specified one sister, her arms raised.[35] Notably, the innermost part of the Cappella Greca apparently was restored not long after 1936, and this restoration is the only major restoration in this area of the Cappella Greca.[36]

The PCAS’s black and white photographs taken after the restoration show the figure previously known as Lazarus with his arm outstretched towards the tomb. The photo legends still specify one sister.[37] Figure 12 is the only color photo that I have found of the Cappella Greca painting of the Raising of Lazarus, and neither photographer nor the date it was taken are available from artres.com, where I licensed it. The differences between Figures 11 and 12 are rather striking, even though they are the same fresco photographed perhaps a century apart.

***Figure 12*** The Raising of Lazarus, Cappella Greca. Scala / Art Resource, NY.

Notably, from Wilpert until 1970, there appears to have been continuous agreement that only one sister was in the painting. In addition to Leclercq, Styger, and the PCAS photo legend mentioned above, an undated PCAS drawing also depicts one sister.[38] In 1955, Robert Darmstaedter likewise specified “a sister of Lazarus.”[39] In 1965, Johannes Kollwitz analyzed various catacomb areas, assessed most as later than previously dated, and when considering the Cappella Greca he did not mention the Lazarus painting, indicating that it still depicted only one sister, because otherwise the two fourth-century sarcophagi with two sisters would have supported his overall argument that the Cappella Greca dates to the fourth century.[40]

In 1970, however, the second sister arrives, at least in some minds. Publishing in two different PCAS journals, Lucien de Bruyne, a Vatican prelate, and Francesco Tolotti, a Vatican architect, both casually mention there are two sisters.[41] This is the very first time anyone published anything about a second sister, and neither de Bruyne nor Tolotti give any explanation as to why, or how, she appeared.

Quite telling, other catacomb specialists did not agree with de Bruyne and Tolotti. For example, three years later, in 1973, the PCAS published its catalogue of legends for its photos, including those taken after the restoration, and these legends specify one sister in the painting.[42] Similarly, in 1975, Aldo Nestori, in his massive volume of catacomb paintings, also specified one sister.[43]

In 1977, however, Sandro Carletti publishes a new PCAS guidebook for the Pricilla Catacomb, the same slim guidebook translated into several languages and still sold in the catacomb today. Like de Bruyne and Toletti, this guidebook, without explanation or illustration, claims two sisters: “Martha and Mary.”[44]

What could have been the catalyst for this second sister? The timing suggests that it may have been the Secret Gospel of Mark.

The Secret Gospel of Mark

The so-called Secret Gospel of Mark (hereafter Secret Mark) includes a narrative about Jesus resurrecting a young man at Bethany, a narrative embedded in a letter purportedly written by the early third-century theologian, Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – 215). This letter’s passage about Jesus raising a young man has two significant differences from the story in John. The first is that Secret Mark describes only one sister at the miracle. The second is that while John says that Jesus loved Lazarus, Secret Mark says that the young man loved Jesus, and, after Jesus resurrected him, for six days begged Jesus to be with him, and then, with only a linen cloth over his naked body, he spent the night with Jesus, who taught him the mystery of God. The text of the letter is here.

This passage has intriguing resonance with Mark 14:50-52, which says that when Judas brought a crowd of men with swords and clubs to Jesus, all the disciples fled—but a young man wearing only a linen cloth over his nakedness was still following Jesus. The crowd caught him, grabbed his cloth, and he ran away naked. In both Mark and Secret Mark, the Greek word for the linen cloth is the same, σινδών, which in Liddell and Scott has as its first meaning the fine linen cloth used to wrap mummies.[45]

The story of Secret Mark is intertwined with that of Morton Smith, the Columbia University professor who discovered the letter. In 1960, he reported at the Society of Biblical Literature that in the library of the Mar Saba monastery near Jerusalem, he had discovered a letter purporting to have been composed by Clement of Alexandria that discussed a secret gospel of Mark.[46] The morning after Smith gave his talk, the inflammatory news of a secret gospel appeared on the front page of the New York Times, and word quickly spread about this lost gospel with its scene of Jesus spending the night with a nearly naked young man who loved him. Without its sensational undercurrent of same sex love, almost certainly Secret Mark would not have been controversial, but heated arguments followed it, both for and against its genuineness, even until today, with Geoffrey S. Smith and Brent C. Landau publishing the most recent scholarly book about it in 2023.

Various articles came out in the years following Morton Smith’s 1960 announcement, but it was not until 1973, after a decade of discussion and study, that he published the first two books about Secret Mark, both his long-awaited scholarly book and also, a popular mass market book tantalizingly titled, The Secret Gospel.[47]

The reason Secret Mark could have been a catalyst for the arrival of the second sister is not just the timing, or that the solo sister in Secret Mark maps onto the solo sister in early art of the Raising of Lazarus; it is also that some catacomb depictions of Lazarus also map onto the young man whom Jesus raised. Scenes on three fourth-century sarcophagi depict Lazarus both as a mummy inside his tomb and also as a naked youth standing beside Jesus, his sister on the opposite side of Jesus. Two of these are in Figures 13 and 14. Interestingly, the mummy in Figure 14 is not original, as shown in Figure 15, where Wilpert circled the mummy in white on his photograph, signifying that it was added later.

***Figure 13*** *Left*: Jesus raises Lazarus, a sister and a nude youth flanking him. *Center:* Jesus heals a blind man. *Right:* Jesus rides a donkey into Jerusalem. 4th-c. Rome. Repertorium 1, 21.

Figure 14 [Left] Solo sister and nude young man flank Jesus. 4th-c. Rome. Repertorium 1, 25. Figure 15 [Right] White outline means added. Wilpert, Sarcophagi 2, pl. 233.3.

Lee M. Jefferson provides the only sustained investigation of these carved stone portraits of a naked young man in the Lazarus scene, and although Jefferson discounts that Secret Mark could have circulated in Rome in antiquity, he nonetheless says, “The Secret Gospel of Mark presents the most compelling scriptural association with the nude youth featured in the sarcophagi.”[48]

Jefferson makes this association without considering the two oldest catacomb wall paintings of the Raising of Lazarus, both dated to the first half of the third century. Both of these portray Lazarus outside his tomb with a nearly transparent cloth covering his nakedness, as seen in Figures 16 and 17. These two are the very oldest surviving scenes of the Raising of Lazarus in any medium, and both artists apparently considered it important to portray Lazarus, naked beneath a filmy cloth, walking out of his tomb and following Jesus.

***Figure 16*** Lazarus, first half of 3rd-c. Callistus Catacomb. Wilpert, *Malereien* 2, pl. 46.2.

***Figure 17*** Lazarus, first half of 3rd-c. Callistus Catacomb. Wilpert, *Malereien* 2, pl. 39.1.

Catacomb art of Lazarus naked, or covered by a nearly transparent cloth, along with the solo sister in some cases, almost certainly has suggested the narrative of Secret Mark to other art historians, not just Jefferson. The arrival of a second sister in the Cappella Greca painting would disrupt any theory that the earliest catacomb art maps onto Secret Mark.

I would give de Bruyne and Tolotti the benefit of the doubt, and I would like to be proven wrong, but they published their articles in the same year, which suggests a collaboration.[49] Perhaps worthy of mention is the documentation the first-century architect Vetruvius provides about the pigments used in Roman wall painting (On Architecture 7.7-14). In any case, after de Bruyne and Tolotti’s publications in 1970, scholarly queries to the PCAS about the solo sister in Secret Mark could be directed to them, and, after Carletti published the 1977 PCAS guidebook, Priscilla Catacomb guides could point tourists who had read Smith’s 1973 The Secret Gospel to it.

In summary, the Cappella Greca painting seems likely to have been painted originally with only one woman. No one reported a second sister, even after the restoration, until 1970, a time when Secret Mark was causing debates between some conservative and liberal scholars. Still today, the PCAS website specifies only one sister in the legends of the photographs taken after the restoration.[50] This suggests to me that current PCAS authorities and catacomb experts also may have questions about what was originally portrayed in the painting.

Potentially Miscategorized Third-Century Art: The Jonah Sarcophagus

***Figure 18*** Jonah Sarcophagus, ca. 300, Rome. Repertorium 1 no. 35.

I propose that a second miscategorized scene is on the top left corner of a sarcophagus dated around the year 300, Figure 18. This sarcophagus is called the Jonah Sarcophagus, because most of it is carved with the story of Jonah, who was in the belly of a whale for three days and three nights before being expelled, which Jesus compares to his own death and resurrection in Matthew 12:39-40. I have saved this scene for last because it has long been identified as the Raising of Lazarus, and for years I did not question that identification. Although I always thought that this sculptor carved three women with Jesus, previously I was focused on how early Christian artists changed women’s postures over time.[51] Today, I believe that this scene of three women and one man with Jesus most likely did not represent the Raising of Lazarus.

***Figure 19*** Three women and one man with Jesus. Jonah sarcophagus scene, ca. 300. Wilpert, *Sarcophagi* 2, pl. 233.1.

Wilpert said that the scene had been “deformed by an arbitrary restorer,” and Figure 19 is a photograph from his massive study, Sarcofagi, where he outlined in white what is not original.[52] Two peculiar details stand out. First, Wilpert encircled the entire mummy; that is, the mummy was added, as confirmed by its Repertorium entry.[53] However, unlike other sarcophagi where Wilpert encircled a mummy, he did not encircle the adjacent column; for example, he encircled both the mummy and the outside column on the sarcophagus in Figure 15.[54] On the Jonah Sarcophagus, the outside column is intact, which raises the question of how a mummy would have broken off. In addition, this columned structure may not represent a tomb; Friedrich Gerke points out that the mummy stands in an arcade, not the standard shrine-like tomb structure seen in other early art of the Raising of Lazarus.[55] Was there originally a mummy? Or did the restorer, whom Wilpert calls “arbitrary,” simply add a mummy in the arcade due to their familiarity with Lazarus scenes?

The second peculiar detail is that there are three women (and one man) with Jesus. That there are three women with Jesus is not obvious in the literature, largely, in my opinion, because of the longstanding identification of the scene as the Raising of Lazarus, which has led to the related modern assumption that there are two sisters in it. Most art historians say there are two sisters in the scene and then move on. However, five art historians and one restorer carefully analyzed it, and they split on which figure is Martha. While they agree that the figure with a short skirt directly behind Jesus is a man, and they agree that the kneeling figure, whom they call Mary, is a woman, they do not agree which of the two remaining figures is Martha. Three—Wilpert, Gerke, and the editors of the Repertorium—identify “Martha” as the woman standing by the arcade on the far left.[56] The other three—Garrucci, de Waal, and the restorer of the scene—identify “Martha” as the woman on the far right, standing behind the kneeling woman.[57] A seventh art historian, Johannes Ficker, identifies three women in the scene.[58] I agree with Ficker. Three women were sculpted with Jesus.

The analysis behind identifying both of these standing figures as women, the one on the far left and the one on the far right, is as follows. The standing figure on the left clearly represents a woman because she has a head covering and is wearing what looks like a woman’s long Greek peplos, which, while uncommon in catacomb art, is also worn by a woman featured on the third-century Via Salaria Sarcophagus. And, when one looks behind the figure standing on the far right, as seen in Figure 20, one can see the outline of a short surcoat as well as a skirt carved much longer than those of the two men. This figure’s posture is slightly hunched and more deferential than the men’s, a contrast that, along with the clothing, suggests the sculptor intended to portray a woman. Furthermore, the composition of two women, one standing and one kneeling, is similar to the composition of the two sisters at the Raising of Lazarus on an ivory carving dated 900-1100 in the British Museum. However, as noted above, in catacomb art, a kneeling woman often represents the woman with a hemorrhage, and from this angle, we can see she is reaching with her right hand and touching the hem of Jesus’s tunic.

Who were the three women on the Jonah Sarcophagus? Was this possibly a scene of Jesus’s own resurrection? We cannot identify the scene with certainty, but we can remember that an estimated 85% of first and second-century Christian writings—gospels, narratives, and other texts—have been lost.[59] While we cannot know what their authors wrote, early Christian art is a form of visual text, and sometimes we get glimpses of their early stories. The mysterious scene of three women and one man with Jesus on the Jonah Sarcophagus may give us a glimpse of one.

In any case, a significant percentage of the lost writings seem likely to have featured women, like this scene. That is because a remarkable amount of the earliest Christian art, especially when compared to later art, includes a surplus of women. For example, the Christian catacombs feature far more painted portraits of women than men. Another example of a surplus of women in early art is the monumental wall painting in the third-century Dura-Europos baptistery that portrays eight women—five on the back wall and three on the side wall walking towards a white tomb-like structure. Yet another example is in Figure 21, a beautiful fourth-century carving on an ivory box today in the Santa Giulia Museum in Brescia, Italy, which art historians agree depicts Jesus—he is portrayed the same in other scenes—standing before a woman on a bed, with four more women present, and no men.

***Figure 21*** Carving on ivory box. 4th-c. Santa Giulia Museum, Breschia Alinari Archives / Art Resource, NY.

Just as with the scene on the Jonah Sarcophagus, many art historians try to shoehorn this scene into the canonical gospels despite that it does not fit. Seventeen of twenty art historians call it a scene of Jesus raising the daughter of Jairus, the leader of the synagogue[60] —yet every other artistic rendition of the Raising of Jairus’s Daughter depicts at least one man in the scene who could be Jairus. If the mummy on the Jonah Sarcophagus were original, its scene of three women and one man with Jesus would more closely represent Jesus resurrecting Jairus’s dead daughter than this ivory does, because the man standing behind Jesus could represent Jairus, and the woman kneeling and reaching out to touch Jesus’s hem could represent the woman with a hemorrhage, who interrupted Jesus on his way to Jairus’s house, according to Matthew 9:18-26, Mark 5:22-43, and Luke 8:40-56.

Art of the Raising of Lazarus after the Fourth Century

By my assessment, prior to the fifth century, there are only two pieces of art that clearly depict the Raising of Lazarus with two sisters, and both are on fourth-century sarcophagi. After the fourth century, artists more commonly portrayed two sisters, and by the sixth century, scenes with two sisters were typical. Artists usually portrayed the two sisters kneeling, as in the St. Augustine Gospels illumination,[61] or prostrate, as in the Rossano Gospels illumination, seen in Figure 22.

***Figure 22*** Two sisters prostrate 6th-c. Rossano Gospels illumination. Source USA public domain, Wikimedia Commons.

We find this crowd of men and two prostrate women as early as a fifth or sixth-century sarcophagus fragment.[62] In these later scenes, men are virtually always portrayed standing above the two sisters, as if the women were their enslaved persons. Another example of this is a twelfth-century mosaic from the Cappella Palatina in Palermo, Italy, Figure 23. Here Lazarus stands inside a box-like sarcophagus, and all the men stand tall while the two sisters, one prostrate and one kneeling, are tiny.

***Figure 23*** Two tiny sisters. 12th-c. Church mosaic, Palermo. Photo: Alfredo Dagli Orti / Art Resource, NY.

Artistic production, however, is conservative, meaning that it changes slowly. Thus, an iconography may persist even after the early narrative upon which it was based has fallen out of favor.[63] Although all surviving manuscripts of the gospel of John mention Martha at the raising of Lazarus, we continue to see the solo sister in some art of the fifth century and even later. Fifth-century artifacts depicting the solo sister include an ivory pyxis, an ivory book cover, and the lid of a silver reliquary box found in Brivio, Italy, shown in Figure 24.[64]

***Figure 24*** Silver reliquary box. 5th-century. RMS-Grand Palais / Art Resource, NY.

Some communities seem to have preserved the motif of the solo sister, perhaps because the narrative of the Raising of Lazarus with one sister did not quickly change, at least not in oral tradition. Even later, around the seventh century, the solo sister was painted on a wood diptych.[65] And in the early ninth, a sculptor carved her on one frame of an ivory diptych today in the British Museum, shown in Figure 25.

***Figure 25*** Carving on ivory diptych. 9th-century. V&A Images, London / Art Resource, NY.

The only second millennium solo sister that I have found (in a search that was by no means exhaustive) is in one of the two panels representing the Raising of Lazarus on the twelfth-century western lintel of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, today in the Rockefeller Archeological Museum in Jerusalem. This lintel is approximately the same age as the Palermo Church mosaic, illustrating that even at this late date some churches, or their patrons, may have known two narratives about the Raising of Lazarus, one with two sisters and the other with one sister, because that is what is seen in two adjacent panels on this lintel. One panel portrays Jesus holding an open book, two sisters at his feet, a crowd of men around them, but no tomb or Lazarus. The adjacent panel, shown in Figure 26, presents a more detailed composition of the Raising of Lazarus, once again with numerous men, but also with Lazarus, standing stiffly above what appears to be a box with a sarcophagus lid, and, near the center of the panel, the solo sister, veiled, kneeling, her hands reaching towards Jesus, who holds an open book.

***Figure 26*** Raising of Lazarus with solo sister, Western lintel, Church of the Holy Sepulcher, 12th-c. Rockefeller Archeological Museum, Jerusalem. Photo courtesy author.

The trajectory over time from one sister to two does not appear to be related to the fact that later iconography often included more detail. There was room for a second sister in the earliest scenes, and artists could have included a second sister, just as they did on the two fourth-century sarcophagi, but they did not. The second sister was slowly added, starting after Constantine in the fourth century. Yet the solo sister persisted, in both small, valuable pieces and prominent church art, an ancient motif preserved until sometime after the twelfth century, when two sisters finally became ubiquitous. Art is conservative. It took over a thousand years for the original iconography with the solo sister to disappear from all scenes of the Raising of Lazarus—and from modern memory.

Conclusion

As the scene carved on the Jonah Sarcophagus and the scene carved on the ivory box in the Santa Giulia Museum demonstrate, when we privilege the canonical gospels as if they were the only narratives valued at the beginnings of Christianity, we can obscure early traditions of Jesus’s teachings and doings. Art, however, performs as a type of visual text that preserves glimpses of the estimated 85% of first and second-century Christian writings that have been lost.[66]

Of the sixty-one surviving third- and fourth-century pieces of art that depict one or more sisters at the Raising of Lazarus, fifty-nine depict one sister (96%). Only two, both on fourth-century sarcophagi, depict two sisters (4%). By the sixth century, two sisters had become dominant, but the solo sister did not entirely disappear until at least after the twelfth century. The hypothesized early narrative tradition of the raising of Lazarus with one sister seems to best explain the dominance of the solo sister in early Christian art. The subsequent circulation of a redacted edition of John with two sisters would explain the progression through time in both narrative and art, from the solo sister to two.

Did the addition of Martha to texts and iconography correlate with a change in women’s agency and authority in the broader culture? The trajectory of female postures—from one woman standing tall with Jesus, to kneeling at his feet, to two women prostrate with a crowd of men towering over them—is shocking.[67] This trajectory appears to reflect changing cultural perspectives regarding the proper place of women in Christian society as held by artists, their patrons, their churches, or communities. Artists mapped these social views onto the bodies of biblical women, and this art performed as a model for how actual women should comport themselves.

Acknowledgments: My thanks to Mary Ann Beavis, Tony Burke, Mark Ellison, Richard Fellows, David Edward Kateusz, Geli Katsioti, Deborah Niederer Saxon, Elizabeth Schrader Polzer, Erga Schneurson, Joan E. Taylor, and Cornelia Horn and the participants of the Oriental Art, History and Culture Group, as well as the two anonymous AJR reviewers, all of whom provided helpful comments for earlier drafts of this essay.

Ally Kateusz is Senior Research Associate with the Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research in London. She has published two books on the Marys (Palgrave Macmullen 2019 and T & T Clark 2020), as well as numerous peer-reviewed articles and chapters related to the intersection of gender, religion, and art history.

Notes

[1] Other narratives depicted in some of the earliest art include the Protoevangelium of James, the Acts of Peter, the Acts of Paul and Thecla, and the Dormition narratives; see David R. Cartlidge and J. Keith Elliott, Art and the Christian Apocrypha (London: Routledge, 2001).

[2] Christoph Markschies, “Lehrer, Schüler, Schule: Zur Bedeutung einer Institution für das antike Christentum,” in Religiöse Vereine in der römischen Antike. Untersuchungen zu Organisation, Ritual und Raumordnung, ed. Ulrike Egelhaaf-Gaiser and Alfred Schäfer (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002), 97–120, 98.

[3] Elizabeth Schrader, “Was Martha of Bethany Added to the Fourth Gospel in the Second Century?” Harvard Theological Review 110.3 (2017): 360–92; Urban C. von Wahlde, Gospel and Letters of John: Volume 2, Commentary on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 515; John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, vol. 2 (New York: Doubleday, 1994), 831; Robert Tomson Fortna, The Fourth Gospel and Its Predecessor: From Narrative Sources (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 98, 101; Gérard Rochais, Les récits de resurrection des morts dans le Nouveau Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981); and Marie-Émile Boismard and Arnaud Lamouille, La vie des Évangiles. Initiation à la critique des textes (Paris: Cerf, 1980), 83–84.

[4] For the identification of this piece of glass as the Raising of Lazarus, see Andrew Simsky, “Позолоченные стекла и их иконология,” 13, online [accessed June 2, 2025]. See also, Jan Stanisław Partyka, La résurrection de Lazare dans les monuments funéraires des nécropoles chrétiennes à Rome (Warsaw: Zakład Archeologii Śródziemnomorskiej Polskiej Akademii Nauk, 1993), figs. 2 and 3.

[5] Giuseppe Bovini and Hugo Brandenburg, Repertorium der christlich-antiken Sarkophage, vol. 1, Rom und Ostia, 2 vols., ed. F. W. Deichmann (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1967); Jutta Dresken-Weiland, Repertorium der christlich-antiken Sarkophage, vol. 2: Italien mit einem Nachtrag Rom und Ostia, Dalmatien, Museen der Welt, ed. Jutta Dresken-Weiland (Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern, 1998); Giuseppe Bovini and Hugo Brandenburg, Repertorium der christlich-antiken Sarkophage, vol. 3: Frankreich, Algerien, Tunesien, ed. Brigitte Christern-Briesenick (Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern, 2003); and Nora Büchsenschütz, Repertorium der christlich-antiken Sarkophage vol. 4., Iberische Halbinsel und Marokko (Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 2018). Volume 5, of Constantinople and the eastern Mediterranean, has no relevant images.
[6] Jan Stanisław Partyka, La résurrection de Lazare dans les monuments funéraires des nécropoles chrétiennes à Rome (Warsaw: Zakład Archeologii Śródziemnomorskiej Polskiej Akademii Nauk, 1993).

[7] Joseph Wilpert, Die Malereien der Katakomben Roms, 2 vols. (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herdersche, 1903).

[8] Thirty sarcophagi and two sarcophagus fragments depict one sister in Repertorium vol. 1, Rome and Ostia; two fragments are nos. 103 and 375, with a reconstruction of 375 in Josef Wilpert, I sarcofagi cristiani antichi (Rome: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 1929), vol. 2, pl. 234.2. Seven sarcophagi depicting one sister are in vol. 2, mainly Rome and Dalmatia. Six depict one sister, and one depicts two sisters in vol. 3, Gaul and northern Africa. Finally, six sarcophagi depict one sister in vol. 4, primarily Spain. None are in vol. 5, Constantinople and the eastern Mediterranean. The two sarcophagi that depict two sisters are in Repertorium 1 no. 88 (Rome) and Repertorium 2 no. 34 (Arles).

[9] For these six, see Partyka, Résurrection du Lazare. 1) Cat. no. 21, fig. 31, 2nd half 4th-c. wall painting Callistus Catacomb. 2) Cat. no. 26, fig. 34, 2nd half 3rd-c. wall painting Praetextatus Catacomb. 3) Cat. no. 68, figs. 75 and 76, begin 4th-c. wall painting Priscilla Catacomb. 4) Cat. no. 69, figs. 77-79, 2nd half 3rd-c. wall painting Priscilla Catacomb. 5) Cat. no. 74, fig. 84, 350-384, mosaic St. Hermes Catacomb. 6) Cat. no. 83, figs. 93-94, end 3rd/begin 4th-c. marble plaque Priscilla Catacomb. One more painting that depicts a woman next to the Raising of Lazarus has the name GRATA above her, suggesting that this may be an image of deceased woman (Cat. no. 61, fig. 66). Two others have two people besides Jesus in the scene, but Partyka points out that it is impossible to know what they represent or their sex. Of these two, Cat. no. 40 (fig. 49) appears to be a composite scene of two miracles because both Jesus and the second person have wands. The photo for Partyka’s Cat. no. 19 (fig. 29) shows the painting is quite deteriorated, almost a blur, but Wilpert’s much earlier photograph, Malereien 2, pl. 137.2, demonstrates that the dress of the first person is masculine, almost identical to that of Jesus, and while only the head of the second person survives, it has no indicator of female sex, such as a head covering, which is ubiquitous in fourth-century depictions of women, and thus the second person likewise may be assumed to be male, which no doubt is why Wilpert identified them as two men. Men only with Jesus was common in other scenes of his miracles, and also in, for example, two Via Latina catacomb paintings that depict crowds of men, and no women, with Jesus at the Raising of Lazarus (see below).

[10] The drinking glass appears to depict three scenes: Jesus with Lazarus in his tomb, Jesus with a man who is alive, and an arms-raised woman speaking to Jesus; it is described in Paul Ganz, “Two Roman Drinking Glasses,” The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs 39, no. 220 (July 1921), 8–9, and a curved drawing of the figures around the glass can be seen in the Index of Medieval Art, images/074839.gif.

[11] Two sisters with Jesus at the Raising of Lazarus, Museé de l’Arles Antique FAN 92.00.2516; Repertorium 2 no. 34. The sarcophagus in Rome with two sisters is Repertorium 1 no. 88.

[12] For the vertical pairings in Rome, see Repertorium vol. 1 nos. 39, 42, 43, 45, 86, and 625, and for the horizontal pairings, see nos. 6, 11, 15, 85, 665, 674, 770-772, 807, and 919.

[13] The pottery plate, or flat-bottomed bowl, is in The Walters Art Museum, accession no. 48.2632. The drinking glass appears to depict three scenes: Jesus with the Lazarus in his tomb, Jesus with a man who is alive, and an arms-raised woman speaking to Jesus; it is described in Ganz, “Two Roman Drinking Glasses,” 8–9, and a curved drawing of the figures around the glass can be seen in the Index of Medieval Art, images/074839.gif. The fourth-century sarcophagus fragment is Repertorium 1 no. 375, also shown reconstructed in Wilpert, vol. 2 pl. 234.2. The wall painting is in Partyka, Resurrection du Lazare, cat. no. 21, fig. 31. Repertorium 3 no. 218 is the fourth-century Clermont-Ferrand sarcophagus.

[14] Repertorium 3 no. 218. Image from Wilpert, Sarcofagi vol. 1, pl. 99.1; per Giorgio Nestori of the Vatican Library, this book is out-of-copyright under Vatican law, and its many photos may be reproduced.

[15] Partyka, Résurrection, Cat. no. 26, fig. 34, 2nd half 3rd-c. Praetextatus Catacomb. Image from Wilpert, Malereien 2, pl. 19.

[16] For more detail on these and other variants, see Schrader, “Was Mary of Bethany Added,” 362–86.

[17] For a full list of texts and art that include Martha where we might, based on the canonical gospels, expect to see Mary, see Allie M. Ernst, Martha from the Margins: The Authority of Martha in Early Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2009).

[18] See George Horner, The Statutes of the Apostles (London: Williams & Norgate, 1904), for the Ethiopic (137 ), Arabic (243), and Sahidic Copic (305); and Alistair Stewart-Sykes, Apostolic Church Order: The Greek Text with Introduction, Translation and Annotations (Strathfield, Australia: St Pauls, 2006) for the Greek (172 [Gk.] / 173 [Eng.]).

[19] Richard G. Fellows, “Early Sexist Textual Variants, and Claims that Prisca, Junia, and Julia were Men,” CBQ 48 no. 2 (April 2022): 252–78.

[20] The only exception in the canonical gospels to the Magdalene being named first in a list of women, or being the only woman named, is John 19:25, the scene at the foot of the cross, where Jesus’s mother is named first and the Magalene is named last, but this is not a list of the women going to Jesus’s tomb, and none of the canonical gospel lists include Martha.

[21] Epistula apostolorum 9 and 10. François Bovon, “Le privilège pascal de Marie-Madeleine,” NTS 30 (1984): 50–64, 53; and Schrader, “Was Martha of Bethany Added,” 390–91. Francis Watson makes a clear case that the Epistula Apostolorum is most directly based on John, in Francis Watson, “A Gospel of the Eleven: The Epistula Apostolorum and the Johannine Tradition, “ in Connecting the Gospels: Beyond the Canonical/Non-Canonical Divide, ed. Francis Watson and Sara Parkhouse (Oxford, 2018) , 189–215.

[22] For a full list of texts and art that include Martha where we might expect, based on the canonical gospels, to see Mary, see Allie M. Ernst, Martha from the Margins: The Authority of Martha in Early Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2009), esp. 2–7.

[23] Richard Fellows, “Early Textual Variants That Downplay the Roles of Women in the Bethany Account,” TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism 28 (2023): 67–82, 81. Although Fellows’ thesis that sexism explains many New Testament variants that downplay women is persuasive in his other work, in this article it seems to me that he analyzes each tree, but overlooks the forest.

[24] For a discussion of the competition for authority between Peter and Mary, see Ann Graham Brock, Mary Magdalene, the First Apostle: The Struggle for Authority (Harvard University Press, 2003). For discussion of the potential identities of these Marys, see Anna Cwikla, Placeholders, Lessons, and Emasculators: The Literary Function of Women in Early Christian Texts (doctoral diss., University of Toronto, 2024), 60–78.

[25] While the manuscripts containing Tertullian’s Treatise against Praxeas specify “Maria,” the printed editions, including Evans’, have canonically corrected “Maria” to “Martha.” See Ernest Evans, ed. and trans., Tertullian’s Treatise against Praxeas: The Text Edited, with an Introduction, Translation, and Commentary (London: SPCK, 1948), 84 117n. A third of the Old Latin manuscripts of the Gospel of John affirm Tertullian’s reading; see Schrader, “Was Martha of Bethany Added” 382–83.

[26] Schrader, “Was Martha of Bethany Added,” 388–89. Mary Ann Beavis also suggests that Mary of Bethany could be identified with Mary the Magdalene in John; see Mary Ann Beavis, “Reconsidering Mary of Bethany,” CBQ 74 (2012): 281–97, esp. 282–89.

[27] Elizabeth Schrader and Joan E. Taylor, “The Meaning of ‘Magdalene’: A Review of Literary Evidence,” JBL 140 no. 4 (2021), 751–73; Ally Kateusz, “Two Women Leaders: ‘Mary and the Other Mary Magdalene’,” in Rediscovering the Marys: Maria, Mariamne, Miriam, ed. Mary Ann Beavis and Ally Kateusz (London: T&T Clark, 202094; Joan E. Taylor, “Missing Magdala and the name of Mary ‘Magdalene’,” PEQ 146 (2014): 205–23, esp. 212–22; and Margaret Starbird, The Woman with the Alabaster Jar (Rochester, VT: Bear & Company, 1993), 50–51.

[28] Partyka, Résurrection du Lazare, 171–73, 173 n. 110, Cat. no. 69, figs. 77-79 (fig. 79 is the PCAS photo after the restoration); and Josef Wilpert, Fractio Panis: La plus ancienne représentation du sacrifice eucharistique: a la “Cappella Greca,” (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1896), 4.

[29] Wilpert, Fractio Panis, viii, pl. 11.

[30] Wilpert, Fractio Panis, 4. For the French, see the online book, [accessed 5/1/24].

[31] Wilpert, Fractio Panis, 4.

[32] For the rarity of gospel scenes, see Paul Corby Finney, The Invisible God: The Earliest Christians on Art (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). Scenes from Jewish scripture are far more common.

[33] Orazio Marucchi, Guida del Cimitero di Priscilla (Paris and Rome: Desclée, Lefebvre, 1903), 17.

[34] Henri Leclercq, “Lazare,” in Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, vol. 8, part 2, ed. Fernand Cabrol and Henri Leclercq (Paris: Letouzey, 1928), col. 2012.

[35] Paul Styger, Die römischen Katakomben: archäologische Forschungen über den Ursprung und die Bedeutung der altchristlichen Grabstätten (Berlin: Verlag für Kunstwissenschaft, 1933), 141–42, fig. 49; this photo is also in Partyka, Résurrection, fig. 79.

[36] Fabrizio Bisconti, Raffaella Giuliani, and Barbara Mazzei, La catacomba di Priscilla: Il complesso, i restauri, il museo (Todi: Tao Editrice, 2013), 12. The authors do not mention the scene of the Raising of Lazarus in the Cappella Greca.

[37] The link to this photo with its legend is often difficult to access. The link to the After Restoration photo is here [accessed Aug. 1, 2024]. For the legend, also see Catalogo delle fotografie di antichita cristiana (Città del Vaticano: Pontificia Commissione di Archeologia Sacra, 1973), 34, where the photo legends identify one sister, “Marta.”

[38] P.C.A.S unnumbered in Partyka, Résurrection, fig.78.

[39] Robert Darmstaedter, Die Auferweckung des Lazarus in der altchristlichen und byzantinischen Kunst; diss. University of Bern (Bern: Arnaud Druck, 1955), 11.

[40] Johannes Kollwitz, Die Malerei der konstantinischen Zeit (Trier: Internationalen Kongresses für Christliche Archäologie, 1965), 93.

[41] Lucien de Bruyne, “La ‘cappella greca’ di Priscilla,” Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana 46 (1970): 291–330, 315; Francesco Tolotti, Il cimitero di Priscilla: studio di topografia e architettura (Vatican City: Pontificia Commissione di Archeologia Sacra, 1970), 273.

[42] Catalogo delle fotografie di antichita cristiana, 34.

[43] Aldo Nestori, Repertorio topografico delle pitture delle catacombe romane (Vatican: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 1975), 27.

[44] Sandro Carletti, Guida delle Catacombe di Priscilla (Vatican City: Pontificia Commissione di Archeologia Sacra, 1977), 23.

[45] Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, (Oxford, 1996), 1600.

[46] Morton Smith, The Secret Gospel: The Discovery and Interpretation of the Secret Gospel According to Mark (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 30.

[47] Morton Smith, Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973); and Morton Smith, The Secret Gospel (New York: Harper & Row, 1973).

[48] Lee M. Jefferson, “Perspectives on the Nude Youth in Fourth-Century Sarcophagi Representations of the Raising of Lazarus,” Studia Patristica 59 (2013): 77–87, 82, 82 n. 24.

[49] For another collaboration involving Vatican specialists in the same timeframe, this one regarding an ancient artifact that depicts a woman at the altar in Old Saint Peter’s Basilica, see Ally Kateusz and Luca Badini Confalonieri, “Women Church Leaders in and around Fifth-Century Rome,” in Patterns of Women’s Leadership in Early Christianity, ed. Joan E. Taylor and Ilaria L. E. Ramelli (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021), 228–260, 233–41, esp. figs. 12.4 and 12.5.

[50] The link to this photo with its legend is often difficult to access. The link to the After Restoration photo is here [accessed Aug. 1, 2024].

[51] See, for example, my PowerPoint, “The Disappearing Women at the Raising of Lazarus” [accessed May 21, 2025]. See also my discussion in the 2018 BBC documentary, Jesus’ Female Disciples: The New Evidence Today you can find it on various channels on YouTube [accessed May 21, 2025]. See the discussion starting at minute 39:00.

[52] Wilpert, Sarcofagi 2:303. Per Giorgio Nestori of the Vatican Library, this book is out-of-copyright under Vatican law, and its many photos may be reproduced.

[53] Repertorium 1, no. 35; Deichmann and Brandenburg, Repertorium vol. 1, text, 30.

[54] For others, see Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pl. 1:86.3, 2:218.1, 2:233.3.

[55] Friedrich Gerke, Die christlichen Sarkophage der vorkonstantinischen Zeit (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1940), 41.

[56] Wilpert, Sarcophagi, 2:303; Gerke, Die christlichen Sarkophage, 41; and Bovini and Brandenburg, Repertorium 1, 30.

[57] Raffaele Garrucci, Storia della arte cristiana nei primi otto secoli della chiesa, 5 vols. (Prato: Gaetano Guasti, 1872–1881), 5.17; Von A. de Waal, “Die biblischen Totenerweckungen an den altchristlichen Grabstätten,” Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertunskumde und Kirchengeschichte 20 (1906): 27–48, 34; and for the unnamed restorer, see Wilpert, Sarcophagi, 2:303.

[58] Johannes Ficker, Die altchristlichen Bildwerke im Christlichen Museum des Laterans (Leipzig: Verlag von E. A. Seemann, 1890), 62. See also a previously unpublished seventh-century ivory enkolpion in a Greek monastery museum that portrays three women (two prostrate, one standing) with Jesus at the raising of Lazarus; Geli Katsioti proposes that the standing woman may be identified as Mary Magdalene. See Geli Katsioti, “A Liberated Miracle: An Alternative Seventh-Century version of the Raising of Lazarus,” Deltion of the Christian Archaeological Society, forthcoming. Neither Katsioni nor I know of any other potential depictions of the Raising of Lazarus with three women.

[59] Markschies, “Lehrer, Schüler, Schule,” 98.

[60] The other three art historians identify it as Jesus healing Peter’s mother-in-law. Catherine Brown Tkacz, The Key to the Brescia Casket: Typology and the Early Christian Imagination (Paris: University of Notre Dame Press, 2002), 230.

[61] The illumination of the St. Augustine Gospels is at this link, second frame down on the left side of the folio.

[62] The Princeton Index of Christian Art dates this sarcophagus fragment 400-599. For the image, see Pedro de Palol, Arqueología cristiana de la España romana, Siglos IV-VI (Madrid: Instituto Enrique Flórez, 1967), 315, pl. 94.1.

[63] An example of early iconography based on a narrative that fell out of favor, but which persisted for centuries reinterpreted as a scene from a different narrative, is detailed in Ally Kateusz, “Ascension of Christ or Ascension of Mary? Reconsidering a Popular Early Iconography,” JECS 23.2 (2015): 273–303.

[64] For the fifth- or sixth-century ivory pyxis with one sister depicted standing, see Gertrude Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, vol. 1, trans. Janet Seligman (Greenwich, CT: New York Graphic Society, 1971), fig. 564. The Princeton Index of Christian art also identifies a solo sister on an embroidered cloth, but the embroidery itself identifies her as the woman with a hemorrhage, so it appears to be a composite of two scenes, neither with a sister. For this image and that it is two scenes, not one, see Erich Dinkler, “Old and New Testament,” in Age of Spirituality: Late Antique and Early Christian Art Third to Seventh Century, ed. Kurt Weitzman (New York: Metropolitan Museum, 1979), cat. no. 391, 434–35.

[65] Catharina Blänsdorf et al., The Boethius Diptych: New Findings in Technical Art History, Iconography, and Paleography (Passau: Klinger Verlag, 2021).

[66] Markschies, “Lehrer, Schüler, Schule,” 98.

[67] This visual denigration of women over time was not exclusive to the two sisters. For example, it is also found in representations of the two Marys with the resurrected Jesus. The oldest surviving depiction of this scene is on a carved panel of the wood doors dated 420 to 430 on Saint Sabina Basilica in Rome, and it portrays the two Marys standing tall beside Jesus. Later artists typically portrayed the women bending, kneeling, or prostrate at Jesus’s feet.