| Matthean Passage | Eusebian Section Range (approx.) | Pericope Type | Canon Distribution | Canonical Behavior |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew 1:1–2:18 (Genealogy & Infancy) | §§1–9 | Narrative | Canons I, II, V, X | Broken into short narrative units; some align with Luke’s infancy material, others stand alone; no effort to preserve infancy narrative as a continuous Matthean block |
| Matthew 3–4 (John, Baptism, Temptation) | §§10–23 | Narrative | Canons I, II | Aligns smoothly with Mark and Luke; Matthew follows shared narrative without governing alignment |
| Matthew 5:1–12 (Beatitudes) | §§24–26 | Sayings | Canon II / V | Extracted individually and aligned with Luke’s Sermon on the Plain; detached from Matthean sermon framework |
| Matthew 5:13–16 (Salt & Light) | §27 | Sayings | Canon V | Treated as isolated saying; sermon continuity ignored |
| Matthew 5:17–48 (Antitheses) | §§28–31 | Teaching | Canon V (mostly Luke parallels) | Broken into multiple units; redeployed where Luke has parallels; no attempt to preserve discourse integrity |
| Matthew 6:1–18 (Almsgiving, Prayer, Fasting) | §§32–34 | Teaching | Canon V | Fragmented and aligned with Luke; Lord’s Prayer separated from surrounding material |
| Matthew 6:19–34 (Wealth & Anxiety) | §35 | Sayings | Canon V | Detached aphorisms aligned individually |
| Matthew 7:1–5, 7–11 (Judgment, Prayer) | §§36–38 | Sayings | Canon V | Detached from sermon sequence; redistributed |
| Matthew 7:24–27 (Wise/Foolish Builders) | §39 | Parable | Canon II | Aligned independently with Luke |
| Matthew 8–9 (Miracle Cycle) | §§40–55 | Narrative episodes | Canons I, II | Carefully arranged Matthean cycle dissolved; individual miracles aligned episode by episode with Mark/Luke |
| Matthew 10 (Mission Discourse) | §§56–65 | Teaching | Canons II, V | Mission instructions cut into discrete sayings; aligned where Luke has missionary parallels |
| Matthew 11–12 (Responses to Jesus) | §§66–79 | Mixed narrative & sayings | Canons I, II, V | Narrative aligns with Mark; sayings extracted and redistributed |
| Matthew 13 (Parables Discourse) | §§80–89 | Parables | Canons II, V, X | Each parable treated independently; discourse framework disappears entirely |
| Matthew 14–17 (Miracles & Confession) | §§90–110 | Narrative | Canons I, II | Matthew follows Mark’s narrative sequence; no attempt to control alignment |
| Matthew 18 (Ecclesial Discourse) | §§111–116 | Teaching | Canon V | Sayings detached and aligned with Luke where possible; discourse integrity not preserved |
| Matthew 19–20 (Journey & Teachings) | §§117–126 | Narrative & teaching | Canons I, II | Narrative aligns with Mark; teachings segmented |
| Matthew 21–25 (Jerusalem & Eschatology) | §§127–160 | Narrative & discourse | Canons I, II, V | Parables and eschatological sayings broken apart; discourse units not preserved |
| Matthew 26–28 (Passion & Resurrection) | §§161–235 | Narrative | Canon I (dominant) | Dense four-Gospel parallels, but Matthew follows Mark’s backbone; no dominance peak |
The reason Matthew has to be drawn differently is not aesthetic but documentary, and it can be demonstrated directly from the Eusebian section tables themselves. When one lays out Matthew’s sections in sequence and notes how they are distributed across the ten canons, the pattern that emerges is one of regular divisibility rather than structural resistance. From the opening genealogy onward, Matthew is segmented into comparatively short sections that Eusebius freely assigns to different tables in order to maximize cross-Gospel alignment. Matthew 1:1–2:18, corresponding to Eusebian sections 1–9, already illustrates the principle: the infancy narrative is broken into discrete units that align variably with Luke or stand alone, with no concern for preserving a continuous Matthean block. The same behavior governs the Sermon on the Mount. Matthew 5:1–7:28 is distributed across roughly Eusebian sections 24–35, and these sections are scattered across Canon II and Canon V rather than being preserved as a single governing unit. The sermon is not treated as a structural obstacle but as a reservoir of sayings that can be subdivided and redeployed wherever parallels occur.
This pattern continues through the central body of the Gospel. Matthew’s miracle cycles, mission discourse, parables discourse, and ecclesial instructions are repeatedly broken into short sections whose canon assignments alternate smoothly among Canon I, II, III, and V depending on whether Mark, Luke, or both provide parallels. When Matthew aligns closely with Mark, as in narrative material shared across the Synoptics, it does so without ever forcing the system to pause or suspend alignment. When Matthew diverges, as in expanded teaching material, the divergence is handled by further segmentation rather than by canonical restraint. There is no Matthean stretch equivalent to Mark 8:27–10:52 in which the text remains intact while simultaneously being unusable as an axis. The table of Matthean sections simply shows continuous forward motion, with section numbers advancing and canon assignments changing, but without any sudden drop in canonical visibility or any protected corridor.
Even in the Passion narrative, where Matthew shares extensive material with Mark, Luke, and John, the section tables show Matthew following rather than governing the alignment. Matthew 21:1–28:20, roughly Eusebian sections 117–235, is heavily populated by Canon I assignments, but the sequence does not dominate the system in the way Mark 11:1–16:8 does. Matthew’s Passion sections are parallel-rich but not structurally controlling; they align because Mark provides the backbone, not because Matthew imposes its order. The Matthean table thus rises in density toward the end but never produces a dominance peak comparable to Mark’s.
When these data are visualized, the resulting shape is necessarily smoother and more even. The Matthean section table justifies a gently rising profile because Matthew is consistently usable by the canon system. Its discourse blocks are divisible, its narratives are expandable, and its order is never so compact or interdependent that Eusebius must suspend harmonization to preserve integrity. The diagram reflects this documentary reality. Matthew’s shape in the canon tables is the shape of a text that cooperates with harmonization. Mark’s shape, by contrast, is the shape of a text that occasionally resists it. That difference is not inferred from theory but read directly from the behavior of the section tables themselves, and it is precisely that contrast which the differing illustrations are meant to make visible.
| Matthean Passage | Eusebian Section Range (approx.) | Pericope Type | Canon Distribution | Canonical Behavior |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew 1:1–2:18 (Genealogy & Infancy) | §§1–9 | Narrative | Canons I, II, V, X | Broken into short narrative units; some align with Luke’s infancy material, others stand alone; no effort to preserve infancy narrative as a continuous Matthean block |
| Matthew 3–4 (John, Baptism, Temptation) | §§10–23 | Narrative | Canons I, II | Aligns smoothly with Mark and Luke; Matthew follows shared narrative without governing alignment |
| Matthew 5:1–12 (Beatitudes) | §§24–26 | Sayings | Canon II / V | Extracted individually and aligned with Luke’s Sermon on the Plain; detached from Matthean sermon framework |
| Matthew 5:13–16 (Salt & Light) | §27 | Sayings | Canon V | Treated as isolated saying; sermon continuity ignored |
| Matthew 5:17–48 (Antitheses) | §§28–31 | Teaching | Canon V (mostly Luke parallels) | Broken into multiple units; redeployed where Luke has parallels; no attempt to preserve discourse integrity |
| Matthew 6:1–18 (Almsgiving, Prayer, Fasting) | §§32–34 | Teaching | Canon V | Fragmented and aligned with Luke; Lord’s Prayer separated from surrounding material |
| Matthew 6:19–34 (Wealth & Anxiety) | §35 | Sayings | Canon V | Detached aphorisms aligned individually |
| Matthew 7:1–5, 7–11 (Judgment, Prayer) | §§36–38 | Sayings | Canon V | Detached from sermon sequence; redistributed |
| Matthew 7:24–27 (Wise/Foolish Builders) | §39 | Parable | Canon II | Aligned independently with Luke |
| Matthew 8–9 (Miracle Cycle) | §§40–55 | Narrative episodes | Canons I, II | Carefully arranged Matthean cycle dissolved; individual miracles aligned episode by episode with Mark/Luke |
| Matthew 10 (Mission Discourse) | §§56–65 | Teaching | Canons II, V | Mission instructions cut into discrete sayings; aligned where Luke has missionary parallels |
| Matthew 11–12 (Responses to Jesus) | §§66–79 | Mixed narrative & sayings | Canons I, II, V | Narrative aligns with Mark; sayings extracted and redistributed |
| Matthew 13 (Parables Discourse) | §§80–89 | Parables | Canons II, V, X | Each parable treated independently; discourse framework disappears entirely |
| Matthew 14–17 (Miracles & Confession) | §§90–110 | Narrative | Canons I, II | Matthew follows Mark’s narrative sequence; no attempt to control alignment |
| Matthew 18 (Ecclesial Discourse) | §§111–116 | Teaching | Canon V | Sayings detached and aligned with Luke where possible; discourse integrity not preserved |
| Matthew 19–20 (Journey & Teachings) | §§117–126 | Narrative & teaching | Canons I, II | Narrative aligns with Mark; teachings segmented |
| Matthew 21–25 (Jerusalem & Eschatology) | §§127–160 | Narrative & discourse | Canons I, II, V | Parables and eschatological sayings broken apart; discourse units not preserved |
| Matthew 26–28 (Passion & Resurrection) | §§161–235 | Narrative | Canon I (dominant) | Dense four-Gospel parallels, but Matthew follows Mark’s backbone; no dominance peak |
The Matthean section tables make this visible at the level of individual pericopes, because the very passages that modern readers instinctively experience as unified blocks are precisely the ones Eusebius cuts up and redistributes. The Sermon on the Mount is the clearest case. Matthew 5:1–7:28 never appears as a single governing unit in the canon system. The Beatitudes (5:3–12), the salt and light sayings (5:13–16), the antitheses (5:17–48), the Lord’s Prayer (6:9–13), teachings on almsgiving, fasting, and prayer (6:1–18), warnings about wealth and anxiety (6:19–34), and sayings on judgment (7:1–5) are all separated into distinct Eusebian sections and assigned to different canons depending on whether Mark, Luke, or both supply parallels. Luke’s Sermon on the Plain repeatedly pulls Matthean sayings out of their narrative sequence, and Eusebius follows Luke’s order rather than preserving Matthew’s discourse integrity. What reads as one sermon in Matthew becomes, in the tables, a reservoir of detachable sayings.
The same pattern governs Matthew 10, the Mission Discourse. Instructions to the Twelve on persecution, flight, and proclamation are not preserved as a continuous Matthean block. Individual sayings such as “a disciple is not above his teacher,” “what you hear in whispers proclaim on the housetops,” and warnings about family division are sectioned independently and aligned with Luke’s missionary material wherever possible. Matthew’s discourse sequence dissolves into multiple canon assignments without resistance.
Matthew 13, the Parables Discourse, behaves similarly. The Parable of the Sower, its explanation, the mustard seed, the leaven, and the parable of the net are all treated as separate units. Some align with Mark, some with Luke, some stand alone, but none force the system to preserve the Matthean discourse as a whole. The discourse framework itself is invisible in the canon tables; only individual parables matter.
Even narrative material is treated flexibly. Miracle stories such as the healing of the centurion’s servant, the stilling of the storm, the demoniacs, and the healings clustered in Matthew 8–9 are broken apart so that each episode can align independently with Mark or Luke. Matthew’s carefully arranged miracle cycle is not preserved as a sequence; it is mined for parallel episodes and redistributed accordingly.
By contrast, nothing comparable happens to Mark 8:27–10:52. Peter’s confession, the passion predictions, the rebuke of Peter, the teachings on discipleship, the Transfiguration, the exorcism of the epileptic boy, the second and third passion predictions, the teaching on greatness, and the healing of Bartimaeus remain bound together in the tables even when Matthew and Luke scatter or relocate their parallels. Eusebius will fragment Matthew’s sermons, parable collections, and instructional sequences without hesitation, but he will not fragment that Markan middle block. Instead, he suspends Mark’s role as axis and allows Matthew and Luke to proceed in parallel.
This is why the Matthean diagram has to be smooth and continuous. The table of Matthean sections shows no protected corridor because Matthew never forces the system to choose preservation over harmonization. Its pericopes are consistently cut, reassigned, and reordered in service of alignment. The shape drawn for Matthew is therefore not interpretive flourish but a direct reflection of what the canon tables do to Matthew’s text at the level of individual pericopes.
