British New Testament Society

Mark's passion narrative contains a large number of personal names: Simon the Leper, Pilate, Barabbas, Simon of Cyrene, Alexander and Rufus, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and Joses, Salome, and Joseph of Arimathaea. Most of these are introduced abruptly into the narrative, suggesting that Mark's readers were well acquainted with the people connected with Jesus' last few hours. One striking omission, however, is the name of the High Priest, Caiaphas. The paper will argue that this omission is deliberate, that Mark intentionally wished to broaden Jewish involvement in Jesus' death, and that Mark's elaborate courtroom scene represents not so much the trial of Jesus as the beginning of God's rejection of the Jewish leadership.

Mark's portrait of Jesus is made up primarily of a series of encounters and exchanges with opponents, supporters, supplicants and spirits. In endeavouring to understand this portrait, we therefore need to study not only the words of Jesus but also the shape and nature of the encounters in which these words are uttered. This paper offers an overview of the methodology of the project, and some examples of how the approach 'cashes out' with the text. In particular we see how complex power games are played out subtly within the context of responsiveness and apparent submission.

What to make of the women at the tomb in Mark 16:1-8 is a much-disputed issue. In this paper, I propose that they play an important apologetic role as witnesses of the reality of Jesus' death, the place of the burial, and the vacant tomb in Mark. Moreover, through focusing on the narrative dynamics of the Markan passion-resurrection narrative, and the significance of named women disciples (uniquely here in Mark), I offer further reason to support Catchpole's proposal that in 16:7-8 the women are not to be seen as in any sense failing in the mission that they are given to carry news of the empty tomb to the other disciples.