Eusebius’s Gospel Canon II (parallels in Matthew, Mark, Luke) shows the Rich Young Man pericope as contiguous sections in Mark aligned with Matthew 19:16–30 and Luke 18:18–30. In Eusebius’s numbering Mark 10:17–21a is section 107.2 (Canon II), 10:21b is 108.2, 10:22–28 is 109.2, 10:29–30 is 110.2, and 10:31 is 111.2. All appear under Canon II (“In Matthew, Mark and Luke”), meaning each is paralleled by Matthew and Luke. For example, Mk 10:17–21a (sec. 107) parallels Mt 19:17–18 (Matt sec. 197) and Lk 18:18–19 (Luke sec. 218); Mk 10:21b (sec. 108) parallels Mt 19:18B (sec. 198) and Lk 18:22 (sec. 219); Mk 10:22–28 (sec. 109) parallels Mt 19:20–22 (sec. 200) and Lk 18:23–28 (sec. 220); Mk 10:29–30 (sec. 110) parallels Mt 19:28–30 (sec. 203) and Lk 18:29–30 (sec. 221); and Mk 10:31 (sec. 111) parallels Mt 19:30 (sec. 204) and Lk 18:29–30. (See table below.)

Mark 10:…	Euseb. Sect. (Canon)	Matt. parallel (Mt 19:…)	Luke parallel (Lk 18:…)
17–21a	107.2 (Canon II)	19:17–18A (sec. 197.1)	18:18–21 (sec. 218.2)
21b	108.2 (Canon II)	19:18B (sec. 198.1)	18:22 (sec. 219.2)
22–28	109.2 (Canon II)	19:20–22 (sec. 200.10)	18:23–28 (sec. 220.2)
29–30	110.2 (Canon II)	19:28–30 (sec. 203.4)	18:29–30 (sec. 221.2)
31	111.2 (Canon II)	19:30 (sec. 204.1)	18:29–30 (sec. 221.2)

Each Mark section is explicitly tied to a Matthew and Luke section. Notably, Eusebius splits Mark 10:21 into two parts (10:21a vs 10:21b) to match Matthew’s similar split after “one thing you lack” (Mt 19:21 vs 19:22). Otherwise the sections follow Mark’s own sequence. In all entries Matthew is listed first (as the leading Gospel), then Mark, then Luke, reflecting Eusebius’s ordering. This shows that Eusebius treated Mark’s narrative on its own terms but aligned it parallel to Matthew and Luke, rather than collapsing or “fusing” it. There is no indication of a single harmonized Mark text: Mark’s verses are simply numbered to correspond to the synoptic parallels.

Clement’s Rich Man Question vs Eusebius’s Canon

Clement of Alexandria’s Quis dives salvetur? (Who is the rich man that shall be saved?) renders the familiar “rich young ruler” story with wording that often matches Matthew’s unique phrases or Luke’s formulation. Notably, his account of Mark 10:17–31 splits into sections that correspond to Eusebius’s Canon Tables II (aligning Matthew–Mark–Luke). For example, Eusebius’s Canon II groups Mark 10:17–21a as section 107.2, Mark 10:21b as 108.2, 10:22–28 as 109.2, 10:29–30 as 110.2, and 10:31 as 111.2. These mark the same ranges paralleled by Matthew 19:17–30 and Luke 18:18–30.

The phrasing in Clement’s text often echoes these parallel passages. In particular, Clement’s version of the question and commands uses Matthew’s distinctive wording:

“Εἰ θέλεις τέλειος εἶναι” – Clement quotes Jesus saying “If you wish to be perfect,” the exact phrase from Matthew 19:21. This phrase (τέλειος ἐῖναι) does not occur in Mark or Luke (Mark 10:21 has no “εἰ θέλεις” clause), so its presence in Clement aligns with Matthew alone.
“πώλησον ὅσα ἔχεις καὶ δῶρον πτωχοῖς” – Clement has “sell whatever you have and give to the poor,” mirroring Matthew 19:21 (he even uses διάδος “distribute/give” as in Luke’s parallel). Matthew’s formulation uses δῶρον πτωχοῖς, and Luke 18:22 uses διάδος πτωχοῖς; Clement’s text follows Matthew’s wording but agrees with Luke’s sense.
“θησαυρὸν ἐν οὐρανῷ” – Clement speaks of “treasure in heaven,” again matching Matthew’s Greek θησαυρόν ἐν οὐρανοῖς (Mt 19:21). (Mark 10:21 likewise has θησαυρὸν ἐν οὐρανῷ.)
Omission of μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς – Mark 10:19 includes the clause Μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς (“do not defraud”), but Matthew 19:18–19 omits it. Clement’s text likewise omits ἀποστερήσῃς, aligning with Matthew. (This indicates Clement was using a text like Matthew’s or a harmonized Mark that dropped the Markan addition.)
Perfection (τέλειος) framing – The theme of “perfection” (τέλειος) recurs (cf. Matt. 5:48; 19:21), and Clement explicitly comments on being τέλειος. This Matthean perfection-ethic is absent in Mark’s canonical text, again suggesting Clement’s dependence on Matthew’s version.

These Matthean parallels show Clement adopting Matthew’s distinctive phrases and redaction. They mirror the Eusebian alignment above, since Canon II puts Mark’s narrative in parallel with Matthew 19.

Likewise, Clement’s wording reflects Luke’s distinctive elements of the story:

“κληρονομήσω ζωὴν αἰώνιον” – In Clement’s text, the ruler asks how to inherit eternal life. Luke 18:18 uses the exact phrase “κληρονομήσω ζωὴν αἰώνιον” (Mt rewrites it as “have eternal life”). This Luke wording appears in Clement as well, indicating his source followed Luke’s phrasing here.
“τίς δύναται σωθῆναι;” – After Jesus says it is difficult for a rich man, Clement has the bystanders ask “Who then can be saved?” using the exact Greek τίς δύναται σωθῆναι; (Luke 18:26). Matthew’s version phrases it slightly differently (“Who can be saved?”), but Clement’s version matches Luke word for word.
“τὰ ἀδύνατα παρὰ ἀνθρώποις δυνατά παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ” – In response, Clement uses the saying “What is impossible for man is possible with God,” again matching Luke 18:27 (Luke: τά ἀδύνατα παρὰ ἀνθρώποις δυνατὰ παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ). Matthew 19:26 has a similar idea (“πάντα δυνατά…”), but Clement’s phrasing aligns precisely with Luke’s wording.
The “ruler” figure – Luke explicitly calls the inquirer an ἄρχων (“ruler”) in 18:18, whereas Matthew calls him a νεανίσκος (“young man”). Clement avoids νεανίσκος and simply says τις (“someone”), which matches Luke’s anonymous “ruler” motif. In Luke 18:18 the word ἄρχων appears, and Clement’s generic τις fits Luke’s model better than Matthew’s “young man.”
Absence of νεανίσκος – As noted, Matthew 19:20 explicitly says λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ νεανίσκος, but neither Luke nor Clement uses νεανίσκος. Luke 18:18 has no age term (and uses ἄρχων instead), and Clement likewise omits any such term.

Finally, double-tradition elements (common to both Matthew and Luke) also appear consistently. Both Gospels mention the ruler “keeping the commandments from his youth”, selling possessions, and the difficulty of a rich man entering the kingdom (Matt 19:23–24; Luke 18:24–25). Clement’s text touches all these motifs in order, just as the Canon table indicates. Even the final “first shall be last” saying (Mt 19:30; Lk 13:30) appears conceptually. In sum, Clement’s rendering frequently weaves together Matthew’s and Luke’s wording within what he calls Mark’s Gospel. This harmonization mirrors Eusebius’s Canon II arrangement of the pericope (effectively a sync of Mark with Matthew–Luke parallels).

Parallels with Matthew: Clement’s Greek often matches Matthew’s exclusive phrases. For instance, Jesus’ challenge “If you wish to be perfect…” (Εἰ θέλεις τέλειος εἶναι) is found only in Matthew 19:21, and Clement retains it. Likewise the commands “sell what you have and give to the poor” (πώλησον ὅσα ἔχεις … δώσον πτωχοῖς) and “you will have treasure in heaven” (θησαυρὸν ἐν οὐρανῷ) are word-for-word from Matthew 19:21. Notably, Clement omits “μην ἀποστερήσῃς” (Mark 10:19’s “do not defraud”), just as Matthew does. This shows Clement following Matthew’s redaction of Mark. Clement even echoes Matthew’s use of τέλειος (perfect) – for example, commenting on Jesus’ words “If you wish to be perfect” – a moral ideal more strongly emphasized in Matthew (cf. 5:48).

Parallels with Luke: Clement’s account also incorporates Luke’s idiomatic phrases and emphasis. The rich man’s question, “Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” appears in Clement exactly as in Luke 18:18 (κληρονομήσω ζωὴν αἰώνιον). When the disciples ask “Who then can be saved?” Clement uses Luke’s precise wording “τίς δύναται σωθῆναι;”. Jesus’ answer in Clement – “The impossible for man is possible with God” – matches Luke 18:27 almost verbatim (τὰ ἀδύνατα παρὰ ἀνθρώποις δυνατὰ …). And where Luke 18:18 calls the questioner an ἄρχων (ruler), Clement likewise avoids “young man” and simply has τις. In all these details, Clement’s text aligns more with Luke’s Greek than with Matthew’s.

These correspondences show that Clement’s “Mark” text of the pericope is not the same as the standalone Mark of our canon but is harmonized with Matthew and Luke. Remarkably, they also coincide with how Eusebius’s Canon II table arranges the story: Mark’s sections are linked to Matthew 19 and Luke 18 passages in exactly these groupings. In other words, the pattern of parallels in Clement matches the implicit “synoptic harmony” found in Eusebius’s canon, suggesting that both reflect a harmonized approach to Mark’s pericope.

Rich Man Pericope (Mark 10:17–31) in Eusebius’s Canon II vs Clement’s Quis Dives Salvetur

Eusebius’s Canon II (Matthew/Mark/Luke) splits the rich young man pericope into sequential Gospel sections that correspond to the synoptic parallels. In Clement’s Quis dives salvetur, Mark’s text of 10:17–31 is noticeably harmonized with Matthew and Luke (e.g. the young man kneels and calls Jesus “good teacher,” the command “Defraud not,” “for My sake and the Gospel’s,” etc.). The table below maps the relevant Canon II section numbers (Ammonian sections of Matthew, Mark, Luke) to Clement’s quoted text and the canonical verses in each Gospel. Harmonized or non‑Markan elements in Clement’s version are highlighted.

Canon II Sec (Mt/Mk/Lk)	*Clement’s Quis Divēs* (excerpt)**	Mark 10	Matt 19	Luke 18	Notes (harmonization)
172 / 87 / 98	“…καὶ προσῆλθεν τις ἐγονυπέτει λέγων: Ἄγαθε Διδάσκαλε, τί ποιήσω ἵνα ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσω;…”	17–18	16–17	18–19	Clement adds ἐγονυπέτει (“knelt,” a Lukan/Matthaean detail) and “Good Teacher” (Ἄγαθε διδάσκαλε) as in Luke/Matt. Eusebius aligns Mk 10:17–18 with Mt 19:16–17 and Lk 18:18–19.
174 / 91 / 99	“Ἴσθις οἶδας τὰς ἐντολὰς· μὴ μοιχεύσῃς, μὴ φονεύσῃς, μὴ κλέψῃς, μὴ ψευδομαρτυρῇς, μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς, τίμα τὸν πατέρα… – Ἔφη πρὸς αὐτὸν· Τὰῦτα πάντα τετήρηκα. – Ἔλεγον αὐτῷ, Ἑνά σελμών ὑστερῇ.”	19–22	18–20	20–22	Clement includes “μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς” (“do not defraud”), aligning Mark with Matt 19:19 and Lk 18:20. Eusebius pairs Mk 10:19–22 with Mt 19:18–20 and Lk 18:20–22. (“One thing you lack…” Mt 19:20–21 parallels Mark 10:21.)
176 / 93 / 101	“Ἄρα τίς οὖν δύναται σωθῆναι; – ὁ δὲ ἀτενίσας αὐτοῖς, εἶπε· Ἀδύνατον παρὰ ἀνθρώποις, τὰ δὲ παρὰ Θεῷ δυνατά ἐστιν. … Ὑμεῖς μετὰ σοῦ εἰμὶ† – ὁ δὲ εἶπεν· Ἀληθῶς, ὅστις ἀφῆκεν·… ἔσται αὐτῷ ἐν αἰῶνι τῷ μέλλοντι τὸν αἰῶνα ζωήν. Πολλοὶ οἱ πρῶτοι ἔσονται ἔσχατοι.”	27–30 (31A)	27–30	28–30	Clement adds “for My sake and the Gospel’s” (10:29) matching Luke/Matt, and explicitly includes “μετὰ σοῦ εἰμὶ” (“we have left all…and followed You”) from Matthew. Eusebius aligns Mk 10:27–30 with Mt 19:27–30 and Lk 18:28–30. (Verse 31 “many first last” Clement cites as variant.)

Each row cites Eusebius’s Canon II entries (transcribed above) to show the Gospel sections in parallel. For example, Canon II lists Mt sec 172 – Mk sec 87 – Lk sec 98, covering Mark 10:17–18 vs Matthew 19:16–17 vs Luke 18:18–19. Clement’s Quis dives indeed quotes Mark 10:17–18 with the “Good Teacher” formula and the kneeling (Luke). Similarly, Canon II shows Mt 174 – Mk 91 – Lk 99 (Mark 10:19–22 vs Mt 19:18–20 vs Lk 18:20–22), and Mt 176 – Mk 93 – Lk 101 (Mark 10:27–30 vs Mt 19:27–30 vs Lk 18:28–30).

Harmonization notes: Clement’s version weaves in Matthean/Lukan elements (e.g. “οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς…” and kneeling at 10:17; “μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς” at 10:19; the rich man’s pledge “for My sake and the gospel’s” at 10:29). The canonical parallels (Matt 19 and Luke 18) indeed contain these phrases. Eusebius’s canon aligns Mark’s sections with the corresponding Matthew and Luke passages – for instance, Mark 10:17–18 is linked to Luke 18:18–19 and Matt 19:16–17 – matching Clement’s observation that “in all the rest [Gospels] correspondingly” the meaning agrees.

Conclusion: The pattern shows Eusebius cross‑referenced exactly the traditional parallels of Mark 10:17–31 with Matthew 19 and Luke 18. Clement’s Quis dives clearly uses a harmonized Mark text (noting Luke/Matthew wording), but Eusebius’s Canon II entries reflect the standard synoptic alignment. On their own, there is no evidence in Canon II of unique Alexandrian readings beyond what Matthew and Luke contain. Instead, the tables simply demonstrate that all three Gospels record the rich young man’s story with the same substance. Thus, while Clement’s harmonized Mark is consistent with the parallels Eusebius cites, the Canon tables themselves neither require nor explicitly preserve Clement’s variant reading – they merely reinforce the agreement of Mark 10:17–31 with Matthew 19 and Luke 18 as we now know them.