24.  Though Mark has but little matter that is absolutely new, he yet handles his materials in an original and independent way, weaving into the narratives which he gives in common with one or more of the other evangelists numerous little incidents in the most natural and artless way.  His characteristics as a historian are graphic vividness of description and circumstantiality of detail.  If we except some striking passages of John’s gospel, he brings us nearer to our Lord’s person and the scenes described than either of the other evangelists.  He brings before us, as in a picture, not only our Lord’s words and works, but his very looks and gestures.  It is he that records as has been often noticed, how the Saviour “looked round about” him with anger on the unbelieving multitudes and on Peter (chap. 3:5; 8:33); with complacency on his disciples (chap. 3:34; 10:27); and with the piercing look of inquiry (chap. 5:32); how he looked up to heaven and sighed when he healed one who was deaf and dumb (chap. 7:34); and how he sighed deeply in spirit at the perverseness of the Pharisees (chap. 8:12).  He sometimes gives us the very words of the Saviour when he performed his mighty works—­Talitha cumi (5:41), Ephphatha (7:34).  His narratives are remarkable for bringing in little incidents which can have come from none but an eyewitness, but which add wonderfully to the naturalness as well as the vividness of his descriptions.  When the storm arises he is asleep on a pillow (chap. 4:38); Jairus’ daughter arises and walks, for she was of the age of twelve years (chap. 5:42); the multitudes that are to be fed sit down in ranks by hundreds and by fifties (chap. 6:40), etc.  As examples of vivid description may be named the account of the demoniac (chap. 5:2-20), and the lunatic.  Chap. 9:14-27.  It is not necessary to assume that Mark was himself a disciple of our Lord.  If, as ancient tradition asserts, he was the disciple and interpreter of Peter he could receive from his lips those circumstantial details with which his narrative abounds.

25.  The closing passage of this gospel, chap. 16:9-20, is wanting in a number of important manuscripts, among which are the Vatican and Sinaitic.  The same was the case also in the days of Eusebius and Jerome.  But it was known to Irenaeus, and quoted by him and many others after him.  The reader must be referred to the critical commentaries and introductions for the discussion of the difficult questions concerning it.  Tregelles, who, in his account of the printed text has given a full statement of the case, thus expresses his judgment (in Horne, vol. 4, p. 436):  “It is perfectly certain that from the second century and onward, these verses have been known as part of this gospel (whoever was their author).”  He thinks that “the book of Mark himself extends no farther than ‘for they were afraid,’ chap. 16:8; but that the remaining twelve verses, by whomsoever written, have a full claim to be received as an authentic part of the second gospel, and that the full reception of early testimony on this question does not in the least involve their rejection as not being a part of canonical Scripture.”