224 ALEx DAmm The essential point is this: the progymnasmata and ancient rhetoric bear constructively on the synoptic problem. As michael Schufer and others have suggested, principles for effective composition in the pro- gymnasmata — for example, Theon’s conviction that we must express narratives in terms that are “clear, concise and plausible” — can be- come criteria for determining which of two evangelists has more likely polished or improved upon the other’s work. Schufer’s study investi- gated which of two narratives, one in mark (14,53-72) and the other in Luke (22,54-71), had likely improved upon the other, as measured by the progymnastic principle of Theon that a good narrative should be clear, concise and plausible. Schufer argued that on the Two-Document Hypothesis (2DH), Luke plausibly improves mark by rendering his narrative clearer, more concise, and more plausible. Accordingly, Schufer showed that it appears suspect to imagine, on the Two-Gospel Hypothesis (2GH), that mark would have systematically rendered Luke’s narrative vague, verbose and less plausible. in this, Schufer also made the critical observation that the rhetorical insights we apply should be relevant to the form of material that we examine; for example, if we are to assess chreiai, then we must examine rhetorical rules specific to chreiai or to material which parallels or encompasses chreiai 7. in my work, i have built upon these insights by suggesting a com- prehensive rhetorical approach to infer gospel sequences in material known as chreiai, which Theon defines as “a brief saying or action making a point, attributed to some specified person or something cor- responding to a person” 8. Significantly, V. K. robbins and B. L. mack have shown that chreiai mimic and anticipate actual speeches (lo,goi), and we know that speeches were the central genre discussed in ancient rhetorical theory 9. For these reasons, i felt that it was most valuable to 7 SCHUFEr, “Evaluating Luke 22,54-71 as Emulation of mark 14,53-72”. 8 i quote Theon from G. A. KEnnEDy, Progymnasmata. Greek Textbooks of Prose Composition and rhetoric. Translated with introductions and notes by G. A. Kennedy (SBL WGrW 10; Atlanta 2003) 15. This is the usual structure of the chreia, that is to say, it contains a brief mention of the speaker along with his or her “saying or action”, and robbins reminds us that it might also have a character which is “humorous, virtuous, religious or philosophical.” The following is an example: “Learning that in gambling with dice some of his friends did not enter into the game as a sport, he [Alexander the Great] punished them”. When an author provides a lengthier narrative preface to the saying or action, we call the chreia an expanded chreia (see note 12, below). The chreia was an oft-used rhetorical form in ancient Greek literature. For these points and further introduction see Damm, Ancient Rhetoric and the Synoptic Problem, xxiv, 22-24, 34-35, 38-58. 9 B. L. mACK, “Elaboration of the Chreia in the Hellenistic School”, Patterns