Eve-Marie Becker, «Mk 1:1 and the Debate on a 'Markan Prologue'» filologia-neotestamentaria, Vol. 22 (2009) 91-106 page 103

Eve-Marie Becker, «Mk 1:1 and the Debate on a 'Markan Prologue'», Vol. 22 (2009) 91-106

On the basis of observations to the syntactical structure and the literary style of Mk 1:1-15 as well as to the literary genre of the Markan Gospel, this paper questions those concepts of subdividing Mk 1 according to which Mk 1:1-13/15 is classified as a 'Markan prologue'. It is argued instead, that already Mk 1:4 opens up the Gospel narration and that only Mk 1:1-3 has to be regarded as a literary unity: Mk 1:1-3, however, is in no case part of a 'Markan prologue' or a 'prologue' in itself. These verses are rather more to be understood as a prooemium to the overall prose-text of the Gospel narrative, consisting of a 'Buchüberschrift'/title (1:1) and an opening introductory close (1:2-3).

TAGS

Prologue of Mark

Page 103/106
«
‹
103
104
105
106
›

Mk 1:1 and the debate on a ‘Markan prologue’ 103 c) as a title for Mk 1:1-13/15, as well as for the whole Gospel narrati- ve75. What evidence do we have for any of these assumptions? We could already see that Mk 1:1-3 has a specific structure that is unique for the Markan Gospel narrative (elliptic, quotation formula, mixed quotation). Complementary to this, Mk 1:4 already contains a narrative element that will be characteristic for the Markan paratactical narrative style in gen- eral ([kai?]76 eögeßneto)77. Thus, the history of events starts in Mk 1:478 and continues in 1:14 and 1:16, so that we cannot observe any further shift in between 1:13 and 1:14 or 1:15 and 1:16. Therefore the literary function of 1:1 is evidently not defined in the frame of Mk 1:1-13/15. It seems to me that Mk 1:1 stands by itself: Mk 1:1 acts as an inscriptio or an initium to the overall Gospel writing (cf. Tacitus, hist 1: initium mihi operis Servius Galba iterum Titus Vinius consules erunt…)79. In that respect we even might define Mk 1:1 – according to Gérard Genettes classification of paratexts – as a ‘rhematic title’ that indicates the information or message (= rhema) that is provided in the Gospel story80. At the same time, however, Mk 1:1 has to be related to Mk 1:2-3: Mk 1:1 has a ”doppelte, nämlich eine formale und eine zeitlich-propo- sitionale Funktion... Mit der Eröffnungswendung wird der Beginn des Berichtszeitraums zeitlich-propositional benannt und kurz eingeleitet. Die Darstellung selbst folgt erst in Mk 1,4. Mk 1,1 ist also vom Beginn der eigentlichen Darstellung formal abgegrenzt. So dienen Mk 1,1-3 als kurze Einleitung in die mit dem Wirken des Täufers in 1,4 beginnende Darstellung der Ereignisgeschichte. Diese Interpretation von Mk 1,1 macht – insbesondere im Vergleich mit Tacitus, hist 1,1 – die historio- graphische Grundkonzeption des Markus-Evangeliums deutlich”81. Thus, Mk 1:1 opens up the narration temporarily (ἀρχή). Mk 1:2-3 acts as a legitimating prophecy (’Schriftbeweis’) to this, and constitutes – together with 1:1 – a ’prooemium’ to the overall Markan narrative of the history of events. 75 Cf. e.g. Marcus, Mark, 143: „Mark begins his work with a title … that introduces both the prologue … and the Gospel as a whole …“. 76 Concerning textual criticism s. above. – To the Markan style: Voelz, “The Greek of Codex Vaticanus”, 234. 77 Cf. also e.g.: Mk 1:9; 2:15, 23. 78 Cf. e.g. Meyer, Kommentar, 12. 79 Concerning biblical book openings in general cf. also: J. D. W. Watts, “A Frame for the Book of the Twelve. Hosea 1-3 and Malachi”, J. D. Nogalski et al. (eds.), Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve (SBL Symposium Series 15; Atlanta 2000) 209-217. 80 Cf. Genette, Paratexte, 82-89. Genette distinguishes here between ‘thematic’ and ‘rhematic’ titles. 81 Cf. Becker, Markus-Evangelium, 110.