Eusebius divided each Gospel into numbered sections (Mark’s Gospel has 235), and grouped parallel sections across the four Gospels into ten “canon tables.” My reconstruction of these tables shows that Mark’s narrative is preserved intact and sequential. No Markan section is ever split or shuffled between tables – each numbered section is “a single, continuous pericope” that appears in only one canon. In fact, across all 235 sections, Mark is never broken up or re-stitched – each Mark section remains a fixed unit in one table. This confirms that Mark’s chronological sequence carries through the canons without disruption. For example, the canonical layout for Mark 1:1–45 (sections 1–19) shows Mark’s opening prophecy and baptism aligned with Matthew and Luke (Canon I and II), then later Galilean scenes aligned with Matthew only or unique to Mark, and finally a Mark‐only section (Mark 1:45) in Canon X. In all cases, the blog’s analysis finds that when Mark has parallels, they are grouped in the appropriate canon; when Mark is unique, it appears alone in Canon X.
Moreover, the notes to the tables emphasize that even complex units remain whole. For example, during the Passion Week (Mark 11–16), every major episode appears as one block in Canon I (the all-Gospels canon) with the same section number for Matthew, Luke and John. Mark’s Passion narrative (sections 103–165) maps closely to Matthew, Luke, and John,” and even when Mark’s account is unique (e.g. the young man fleeing naked, Mark 14:51–52, section 186) it appears as a single section in Canon X. In summary, the sequence of Mark’s narrative is fully preserved: each pericope runs in order (1 to 235) and is never split or recombined in Eusebius’s apparatus.
Supplementation by the Other Gospels
Where Mark’s account overlaps with Matthew, Luke or John, the canon tables insert those parallels seamlessly into the sequence. For instance, many of Mark’s miracles and teachings align with one or more Synoptics. In Mark 4:35–8:26 (sections 47–81), the feeding of the 5,000 (Mark 6:30–44) is placed in Canon I alongside Matthew and Luke (Mark 50, Matt 89, Luke 62) and John (John 146). Likewise, the Transfiguration (Mark 9:2–8) appears as one unit in Canon I with the parallel in all four Gospels (Mark 64, Matt 107, Luke 77, John 156). In each case the table shows that Mark’s section is paired with corresponding sections of the other Gospels, indicating those authors narrate the same event in sequence with Mark.
Other passages show Mark’s sections lining up with two or three Gospels. For example, in Mark 1 the “voice crying in the wilderness” (Mark 1:2–3) is placed in Canon I with both Matthew and Luke (Mark 2 parallels Matt 8, Luke 7), even though John has no parallel. In Mark 2–4, early Galilean scenes (e.g. healing the paralytic, calling Levi) cluster in Canon II (Matthew–Mark–Luke), while controversies like the Corban dispute fall under Canon II as well. When an event occurs only in Mark and one other, they appear in Canon VI or IX. For instance, Mark’s account of John the Baptist’s preaching nuance (Mark 1:3) and ministering angels (Mark 1:13) are grouped with Matthew only in Canon VI. The walking-on-water episode (Mark 6:45–52) appears in Canon IX with only Mark and John.
At the same time, Mark’s own unique material tends to form its own canon entries. The blog notes several wide stretches of Mark-only narrative in Canon X. For example, Mark 2:21–4:34 (sections 28–35) consists entirely of unique parables and controversies (the seed-growing parable, lamp parable, etc.) with no Synoptic parallels. Likewise, the blind man at Bethsaida (Mark 8:22–26) is Mark-unique in Canon X. In short, supplementary material from Matthew, Luke, or John is inserted exactly at the points where the canons show shared events. All Synoptic events fall under Canon II (Mt–Mk–Lk), all-four-Gospel events under Canon I, and so on. My table shows highlight these patterns: e.g. “Sections 28, 31–35 are Mark-only (Canon X), unique material never split or merged with others”, whereas “the many Synoptic parallels… fall under Canon II”.
Gaps in Mark and Gospel Fillers
Mark’s Gospel itself omits certain episodes that the others narrate. These gaps are evident in the canon tables as places where other Gospels continue the story without Mark. Most conspicuously, Mark begins with the ministry of John the Baptist, not with a birth or genealogy. The canons reflect this: the very first entry for Mark is “the beginning of the Gospel with prophecy” (Mark 1:1–2) paired with Matthew and Luke introductions, but Matthew’s genealogy appears “separate” (in Matthew’s own section 2). In other words, Matthew and Luke cover Jesus’ lineage and birth before the point where Mark’s narrative starts; Mark simply has no sections for those infancy narratives.
A second gap is at the end: Mark’s original Gospel likely ended at 16:8 (or 9), with no resurrection appearances beyond the empty tomb. The canons make clear how Matthew, Luke and John continue. In the tables, Mark’s “shorter ending” at 16:8 appears as section 215 (Canon I), after which the note reads “(Matthew only; Mark’s 16:8 stopping point)”. The women-at-the-tomb story (Mark 16:1–8) and the appearance to Mary Magdalene appear in Canon II with only Matthew and Mark (sections 197–198). Then there follows a series of sections (Mark 217–225) covering the post-resurrection appearances. These are mostly paired Matthew–Mark (often Canon II), with Luke’s order differing. In other words, where Mark’s narrative is silent (16:9–20), Matthew carries on in parallel (sometimes with John), and Luke also provides his own account at slightly different points.
Aside from beginnings and endings, Mark omits some teachings and parables that the others include. For example, the Sermon on the Mount parallels in Matthew and Luke have no Mark section. In the canons, those teachings appear under Canon II/Canon I aligning Matthew and Luke, with Mark simply absent. Similarly, John’s long discourses (e.g. the Bread of Life discourse, John 6) find their place with Mark only where they overlap narratively (Mark’s feeding of 5000 etc.), but otherwise do not interrupt Mark’s sequence.
Thus, other Gospels “fill the gaps” in Mark wherever needed. Infancy and resurrection material not in Mark are provided by Matthew/Luke/John in parallel tables. My table explicitly point this out: e.g. “Mark’s shorter ending at 16:8 is its last section… (section 233) canon II, paralleling Matthew,” and the longer ending (sections 234–241) was a later addition with no canonical parallels. In effect, Matthew and Luke book-end Mark’s Gospel, and the canons integrate their extra material around Mark’s framework.
Mark as the Narrative Spine
All of this strongly suggests that Mark’s Gospel functions as the backbone of the canon harmony. Because each Mark section is kept intact and arrayed in strict sequence, the other Gospels’ content is slotted in alongside without disturbing Mark’s flow. I show that in Eusebius’s system “Mark is never broken up” and “each numbered section of Mark stays as a fixed unit”. In practice, the canon tables trace a continuous timeline of events essentially following Mark’s order, with Matthew, Luke and John joining in or adding episodes as needed. For example, the feeding of 5,000 anchors the chronology at Mark 6:30–44 (Canon I), the Transfiguration at Mark 9:2–8 (Canon I), and so on; Mark’s sections provide the skeletal outline and the others flesh it out. Even in the Passion Week, “Mark’s sections remain intact blocks” and align tightly with the Synoptics.
In short, the Eusebian apparatus treats Mark’s narrative as the spine: it preserves Mark’s narrative continuity within the Eusebian system." Every Markan episode runs unbroken, with canonical parallels inserted in parallel columns. The summary table below illustrates how Mark’s sequence flows through the canons and where material from Matthew, Luke or John appears alongside it:
| Mark Section Range | Canon(s) & Parallels | Notes on Supplementation |
|---|---|---|
| Mark 1:1–1:45 (Sec 1–19) | Canons I, II, VI, X (Mark–Mt–Lk and Mark-only) | Matthew/Luke cover Jesus’ infancy outside Mark (Mark 1:1–2 vs. Matthew’s genealogy). Mark’s prophecy/baptism narrative parallels Mt/Lk in Canon I/II; some details (John’s preaching, angels) group with Matthew in Canon VI. Section 19 (Jesus’ fame spreads) is unique to Mark (Canon X). |
| Mark 2:1–4:34 (Sec 20–46) | Canons I, II, VI, VIII, X (Mt–Mk–Lk & various) | Early Galilean miracles (paralytic, calling Levi, Sabbath healing) fall under Canon II (all Synoptics). A few scenes align Mark–Matthew only (Canon VI). There is a long stretch of Mark-only material (parables of the growing seed, lamp, etc.) in Canon X (sections 28–35). Later miracles (Jesus stills storm, heals demonized) align Mark–John (Canon IV) or all four (Canon I) as noted in the table. |
| Mark 4:35–8:26 (Sec 47–81) | Canons I, II, IV, IX, X (various Gospel combos) | The walking-on-water episodes (Mark 6:45–52) are Canon IX (Mark–John only). The feeding of 5,000 (Mark 6:30–44) is Canon I (all four Gospels). Many Jesus–Pharisee debates (Corban, defilement) fall under Canon II (Mt–Mk–Lk). Mark’s unique miracle of the blind man at Bethsaida (Mark 8:22–26) is Canon X. Again each Mark pericope (e.g. Transfiguration at sec 64, Mark 9:2–8) occupies one block shared with parallels. |
| Mark 11:1–16:8 (Sec 82–233) | Canons I, II, VI, VIII, X (mostly all-Gospels) | The Passion Week is dominated by Canon I: Mark’s debates, parables and dying moments line up with all Gospels. For example, the Triumphal Entry, Temple teaching, crucifixion and burial each appear as unitary sections in Canon I. Mark ends at 16:8 (section 233, Canon II), with Matthew continuing beyond. A few episodes are Mark-unique: e.g. the young man fleeing (Mark 14:51–52, sec 186 in Canon X). In sum, Mark’s Passion chronology provides the main framework, and Matthew/Luke/John insert their version of each event alongside Mark’s. |
These patterns show that Mark’s Gospel runs continuously through Eusebius’s canons, serving as the spine of the harmony. Each pericope is preserved in order, and other material from Matthew, Luke or John is inserted where the narratives coincide or extend. No Mark section is dropped or sliced, confirming that in Eusebius’s view the “secret” was simply treating Mark’s narrative as the unbroken backbone of the Gospel canon.
