We turn, once again, to early patristic testimony. When we compare the relevant statements of Papias and Irenaeus, an apparent discrepancy surfaces. Was Mark’s Gospel written before or after Peter’s death? Much hinges on how we interpret the term exodos in Irenaeus’s testimony (i.e., whether it means a literal departure from a certain locality or a euphemism for death). That said, a case has been made that Irenaeus may, after all, be consistent with Papias.14 Whatever the case may be, it does not contradict the proposed pre-70 date. Taking all this into consideration, the range AD 64–68 appears cogent.
What is of significance here is that these were turbulent years, occasioned by Nero’s persecution of Christians in Rome (AD 64) and the Jewish conflict with Rome (AD 66–70), concluding in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. As Gaston observes, it is in this particular time span that all the motifs of Mark 13 would be operative to the fullest extent.15
Provenance and Audience
The questions of provenance (i.e., where the document originated) and audience may be answered by looking at the evidence provided by early patristic testimony, and by the text itself.
To start with the former, the two best candidates are Rome and Egypt (probably Alexandria). Early and wide testimony supports Rome as the place of composition (the evidence is provided by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and the Anti-Marcionite Prologues among many others). This is further supported by the presence of Latinisms in the Gospel (see especially Mark 7:26; 12:42; 15:16).16 These are either Latin terms that have been transliterated into Greek, or terms that have a uniquely Roman flavor. Furthermore, Mark’s text assumes a Gentile audience (cf. 7:3–4), especially one that was well-versed in the OT because he cites from it and alludes to it in many places. The Christian community at Rome fits this bill: Paul’s letter to the Romans paints a picture of a Gentile community that knows its LXX well.
The other candidate attested in patristic writings is Egypt. The testimony is provided by one lonely voice: John Chrysostom (c. 347–407). Measured against the early and widely-attested Roman provenance,17 the Egyptian provenance appears improbable. That said, there is a rich tradition that locates Mark in Alexandria, but this does not necessarily contradict the testimony that the Gospel was written in Rome. Eusebius mentions that Mark was sent to Alexandria after he had written his Gospel in Rome.18 Epiphanius’s testimony supports this, with the additional detail that it was Peter who sent him there.19
Interestingly, a handful of scholars have argued that Mark was composed in Syria-Palestine.20 However, no external testimony supports it. The case is derived from internal evidence, inferring from passages such as 7:31 and 15:21.
If the Gospel of Mark has a Roman provenance, we may presume Mark is writing for a Roman audience, particularly the church at Rome. Much of Markan scholarship then utilizes this assumption to reconstruct the profile of the community to which Mark is writing. He mentions some details such as the young man who fled naked (14:52), and Simon of Cyrene (15:51–52) who is also described as the father of Alexander and Rufus. These details would interest only a particular community.
There are, however, other considerations to bear in mind. Recently, Bauckham has argued that unlike the letters, the Gospels are meant for a wider circulation, and not just for one community.21 The ably-argued case need not be rehearsed here. Consider the itineraries of the apostles, the frequent communication between churches, and the fact that we could not expect an elaborate work such as Mark’s Gospel to be written only for a community of about fifty to one hundred Christians. That said, Bauckham’s case must be balanced against the quaint details found in Mark. The resultant picture is that of a writing that has been shaped by a specific audience, but without limiting itself to that audience.22 Mark certainly wrote for his immediate community but he also had in mind Christians all over the Empire who might find his writing beneficial and edifying.
Occasion and Purpose
To answer the questions of occasion and purpose we must depend substantially on our reconstruction of the origin of the writing, especially the dating, the provenance, and the audience. But the text itself may also play a part.
It has frequently been observed that Mark’s Gospel shows a heightened interest in discipleship, focusing especially on the suffering awaiting them, either in the form of repudiation or persecution. From this observation, it is often thought that Mark was written to an audience experiencing persecution from society or state. Thus Mark’s Gospel would have the purpose of reaffirming the importance of the gospel to a beleaguered community, and helping them fall in line with the way of the Lord, especially during times of persecution. The way of the cross is the way of Jesus, and this is the way that would lead ultimately to glory. History tells us Nero began an intense persecution of Christians in Rome in AD 64. This might have been the impetus for Mark’s Gospel to be written.23
The other possibility is that Mark intended to set in writing the oral apostolic tradition, especially Peter’s, as the band of apostles was passing away. This serves the purpose of preserving the tradition for future generations. The evidence from Papias lends support to such a theory, for he implies that Mark wrote before Peter’s death.
There is no need to choose between the two, as Mark could conceivably have had a few purposes in mind (including those not discussed earlier). Here it may be instructive to note the subtle difference, and yet inter-dependability, between occasion and purpose. The occasion which led to the writing may arguably have been the onset of persecution or the aging of the apostles. This might have triggered an intention to write a document to achieve not just one but a set of objectives.24 Such objectives may have been pastoral in nature, didactic or polemical (i.e., Mark might be countering some false teaching),25 or all of the above. So we need not come down firmly on a particular purpose.
Literary Characteristics
What sort of writing is the Gospel of Mark? Comparing it with the whole range of ancient literature, what comes closest to it is known as the bios or “Life.”26 This is an ancient form of biography, often written to encourage the audience to follow the example of the featured life. To be sure, Mark’s writing would appear rather different from such bioi in that the focus is on the passion and death of his “hero.” But what makes it different is the character not the genre. Mark wants his audience to know that his central character, Jesus of Nazareth, is unlike any other in the ancient world, indeed in the whole of human history. This character’s significance is intimately connected to his passion and death, and hence the nature of the focus. In this regard Mark is not inventing a new genre. Later on, others emulated his writing, and such writings became known as “Gospels” or churchly writings. It is only after this that one can speak of a new genre, or better, a sub-genre.
It may be claimed that Mark intended his writing to be read in the setting of worship (cf. Acts 2:42; 5:42; Col 4:15). Moreover, literacy rates were rather low in the ancient world.27 Hence Mark would have designed his work not for self-study but to be read aloud to Christian communities gathered at worship. Certain features of Mark’s text demonstrate this. His style is vivid (e.g., Mark 14:32–52; compare this with the parallel accounts in Matthew and Luke), and is often replete with dual expressions—a feature of oral communication and not formal writing. An example of this dual expression is found in Mark 1:32, where the time of the event is described as “evening, when the sun has set.” This may appear tautologous to the trained eye of a good writer. But for oral communication, such dual expressions make the message memorable. Furthermore, repetitiveness is a feature (e.g., the threefold passion prediction: 8:31; 9:31; 10:33), which helps especially a listening audience, who would not have the document to refer to. All these stylistic devices are in keeping with a text written for oral presentation.28
Certain corollaries