[1] Translations of biblical texts are from the RSV. The majority of scholars favour the reading μίγμα (‘mixture’ - p⁶⁶ Ν^C A D ^supp K Let et al.) over ἔλιγμα (‘package’ – ^* B S).Σμίγμα (‘mixture’) and σμηγμα (‘ointment’) have little textual support. The following scholars, among others, opt for μίγμα. Brown, R., The Gospel According to John (AB 29A; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1970) 940;Google ScholarKruijf, T. C. De, ‘“More Than A Half A Hundredweight”’, Bijdragen 43 (1982) 236;Google ScholarBernard, J., The Gospel According to John (ICC 2; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1928) 653;Google ScholarBeeckman, P., L'Evangile Selon Saint Jean (Bruges: Ch. Beyaert, 1951) 403.Google Scholar On the other hand, Barrett, C. K. (The Gospel According to John [2nd ed.; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978] 559) favours ἔλιγμα.Google Scholar

[2] In the NT όθόνιον (‘linen cloth’) is only used in John 19. 40; 20. 5, 6, 7 and in the Western Non-interpolation in Luke 24. 12.

[3] If λίτρας in 19. 39 is meant to be a dry measure then the amount is about seventy-five pounds because the Roman pound was about twelve ounces. Even if λίτρας is meant to be a liquid measure this is a large amount of spices. T. C. De Kruijf (‘“More Than A Half A Hundredweight”’, 23) suggests that λίτρας in 19. 39 is a liquid measure amounting to four and a half imperial gallons.

[4] Meeks, W., ‘The Son of Man in Johannine Sectarianism’, JBL 91 (1972) 55, n. 39.Google Scholar

[5] In addition to Meyer, see Krafft, E., ‘Die Personen des Johannesevangeliums’, ET 16 (1956) 20;Google ScholarJonge, M. De, ‘Nicodemus and Jesus: Some Observations on Misunderstanding and Understanding in the Fourth Gospel’, BJRL 53 (1971) 343.Google ScholarNicholson, G. (Death as Departure: The Johannine Descent-Ascent Schema [SBLDS 63; Chico: Scholars Press, 1983] 66)Google Scholar said that possibly this is the significance of the large amount of spices. On the other hand, Zahn, T. (Das Evangelium des Johannes lsqb;Erlangen: Deichert, 1921; reprinted, Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1983] 672) wrote that the large amount of spices was used to prevent the decay as long as possible, and that this shows that Nicodemus expected Jesus to live again.Google Scholar

[6] Bruce, F. F., The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983) 379;Google ScholarMorris, L., The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971) 825;Google ScholarMcPolin, J., John (Wilmington, DE.: M. Glazier, 1979) 210, 211;Google ScholarObach, R. & Kirk, A., A Commentary on the Gospel of John (N.Y.: Paulist, 1981) 246;Google ScholarTaylor, M., John: The Different Gospel (N.Y.: Alba House, 1983) 237.Google Scholar More cautiously, Brown, R. (The Gospel According to John, 960) has said that the spices may signify a royal burial.Google Scholar Josephus (Ant., 17.199) wrote about a large amount of spices used for the burial of Herod the Great.

[7] Bultmann, R., The Gospel of John (Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1971) 680, n. 4;G.Google ScholarMacgregor, , The Gospel of John (N.Y.: Harper & Brothers, 1928) 353;Google ScholarPink, A., Exposition of the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975) 251;Google ScholarSpörri, G., Das Evangelium nach Johannes (Zurich: Zwingli, 1950) 184;Google ScholarKnabenbauer, J., Commentarius in Quatuor S. Evangelia (Paris: P. Lethielleux, 1906) 569;Google ScholarSaunders, E., John Celebrates the Gospel (Nashville: Abingdon, 1968) 152;Google ScholarBelser, J. E., Das Evangelium Des Heiligen Johannes (Freiburg: Herder, 1905) 522;Google ScholarBüchsel, F., Das Evangelium nach Johannes (NTD 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1935) 175;Google ScholarMahoney, R., Two Disciples at the Tomb. The Background and Message of John 20.1–10 (TW 6; Frankfurt: H. Lang, 1974) 131:Google ScholarSchnackenburg, R., The Gospel According to St. John (N.Y.: Crossroad, 1982) 3.295;Google ScholarBroer, I., Die Urgemeinde und Das Grab Jesu (SANT 31; Munich: Kösel, 1972) 235, n. 115.Google Scholar

Views which have not won much scholarly support are those of Mercurio, R., Loisy, A. and Lagrange, M. J.Mercurio, R. (‘A Baptismal Motif in the Gospel Narratives of the Burial of Jesus’, CBQ 21 [1959] 52)Google Scholar proposed that the large amount of spices signifies the giving of God's spirit without measure to ‘we who are united in baptism with Christ…filled with the Spirit, wrapped up in him, anointed in him by means of this sacrament’ (my emphasis). Loisy, A. (Le Quatrieme Evangile [2nd ed.; Paris: Nourry, 1921] 497)Google Scholar suggested that the Johannine account of Jesus' burial may allude to Isa 53. 9 (‘They made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death’), and thus, to the Suffering Servant. Nicodemus is the ‘rich man’ as shown by the amount of spices which he brought. I do not think that John 19. 39 is an allusion to Isa 53. 9 because there is no mention of Jesus being buried with the wicked in John's gospel. Finally, Lagrange, M. J. (Evangile Selon Saint Jean [7th ed.; Paris: J. Gabalda, 1948] 503)Google Scholar suggested that possibly a scribe changed the number of spices from a much more modest amount to one hundred λίτρας of spices. However, as has been noted by others, there are no textual witnesses to support this proposal.

[8] Thus, Perkins, P. (The Gospel According to St. John lsqb;Chicago: Franciscan Herald, 1978] 228)Google Scholar wrote that a source may have mentioned an unnamed person who brought the spices, and the evangelist identified this person as Nicodemus. Fortna, R. (The Gospel of Signs [Cambridge: U. Press, 1970] 244) proposed that all of 19.Google Scholar 39 comes from the Semeia Quelle. However, Schnackenburg, R. (Gospel According to St. John, 295)Google Scholar said ‘it is questionable whether the source already said anything about the mixture of myrrh and aloes’, and Broer, I. (Die Urgemeinde und Das Grab Jesu, 235, 241) argued that the amount of spices has been added by the evangelist.Google Scholar

Many scholars are interpreting the Gospel of John as we now have it without attempting to break it up into various layers of source and redaction. See, e.g., Culpepper, R., Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983);Google ScholarOlsson, B., Structure and Meaning in the Fourth Gospel (Lund: CWK Gleerup, 1974);Google ScholarMoloney, J., The Johannine Son of Man (Rome: LAS, 1976);Google ScholarForestell, T., The Word of the Cross (AnBib 26; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1974).Google Scholar

[9] Schnackenburg, R. (Gospel According to St. John, 298)Google Scholar said that τνὡρωμάτων in 19. 40 refers to ‘the mixture of myrrh and aloes, as shown by the article (which refers back)’. Brown, R. (Gospel According to John, 942) proposed that τνὡ ρωμάτων in 19. 40 refers to a third element which was used along with the myrrh and aloes.Google Scholar

[10] Schreiber, J., ‘Die Bestattung Jesu’, ZNW 72 (1981) 168–71.Google Scholar

[11] Some scholars interpret the mention of the discovery of these cloths (John, 20. 58–7Google Scholar) as functioning to prove that the body of Jesus had not been stolen, but that Jesus had really risen from the dead. In the words of John Chrysostom, ‘if anyone had removed the body, he would not have stripped it first; nor would he have taken the trouble to remove and roll up the σουδάριον and put it in a place by itself’ (Jo. Horn. LXXXV 4; PG 59:465). Perhaps this is placing too much emphasis on the rolled up σουδάρων. The term ντυλίσσω is used and ‘John may simply mean that the σουδάρων was rolled up in an oval loop, i.e., the shape it had when it was around the head of the corpse’ (Brown, R., Gospel According to John, 987Google Scholar). In any case, the mention of the cloths also shows the futility both of the large amount of spices which Joseph and Nicodemus used with the θονίοις, and of their binding (δησαν) of Jesus in these cloths.

[12] An implication of this study is that if the abundant spices are also meant to indicate a royal burial, then Nicodemus and Joseph have not understood that Jesus' kingdom is not of this world any more than Pilate has (John 19. 36, 37).

A separate but related question concerns the Johannine valuation of Joseph's and Nicodemus' actions. I have argued that their actions show that they have not understood Jesus' life beyond death. But are their actions courageous ones? Have they come out of the closet and manifested their faith and in the process become true disciples? Many would answer this question in the affirmative. See e.g., Flanagan, N., The Gospel According to John and the Johannine Epistles (CBC; Collegeville, MN.: Liturgical Press, 1983) 91;Google ScholarCraddock, F., John (Atlanta: John Knox, 1982) 140;Google ScholarSanders, J. N. & Mastin, B. A., A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John (N.Y.: Harper & Row, 1968) 414;Google ScholarTillman, F., Das Johannesevangelium (Bonn: P. Hanstein, 1931) 330;Google ScholarSchnackenburg, R., Gospel According to St. John, 3.295, 297, 464, n. 106;Google ScholarHoskyns, E., The Fourth Gospel (2nd ed.; London: Faber & Faber, 1947) 536;Google ScholarHemelsoet, B., ‘L'Ensevelissement selon Saint Jean’, Studies in John (SNT 24; Leiden: Brill, 1970) 47–65;CrossRefGoogle ScholarBruce, F. F., Gospel of John, 378;Google ScholarValentine, F., Reading Between the Lines (Oxford: Blackfriars, 1947) 44, 45;Google ScholarPink, A., Gospel of John, 251;Google ScholarTaylor, M., John: The Different Gospel, 237.Google Scholar On the other hand, Jonge, M. de (‘Nicodemus and Jesus’, 342, 343)Google Scholar does not think that this action of Nicodemus and Joseph signifies a change in the evangelist's perception of their faith, and Schreiber, J. (‘Die Bestattung Jesu’, 168)Google Scholar argues that the clause καθώς θος στίν τος Iουδαίοιςνταϕιάζειν (‘as is the burial custom of the Jews’) links them to the Jews as ‘representatives of the anti-godly world in John's gospel’ (my translation).