Upon reading the list below of just commentaries in English (and I know there are probably a number that I missed), some might exclaim, “Of making many books there is no end.” Nevertheless, there are many good commentaries on Mark out there and I would be interested in knowing which is your favourite(s) and why? For instance, one could point to Adela Collin’s commentary for its wealth of information (as to be expected from Hermeneia) and supplying not only Jewish but also many Greco-Roman parallels, Joel Marcus for his thorough knowledge of the Jewish background of Mark, Ched Myers for setting the gospel in its political context and the liberation theology lens he brings to his reading, Nineham and Boring for representing the form-critical paradigm, Mary Ann Tolbert as a literary critic reading Mark as a literary whole, Gundry for his consistent focus on a single thesis (Mark is an apology for outsiders with an overarching Christology of Power) and most formidable defense of the Papias tradition of any conservative commentaries I have come across, or there may be reasons to pick another one as your favourite. So of the options listed below, which commentary (or commentaries) do you prefer?
Commentaries
Black, C. Clifton. Mark. Abingdon New Testament Commentaries. Nashville: Abingdon, 2010.
Boring, M. Eugene. Mark: A Commentary. The New Testament Library. Westminster John Knox Press: Louisville, London, 2006.
Collins, Adela. Mark: A Commentary. Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.
Cranfield, C.E.B. The Gospel According to St Mark. The Cambridge Greek New Testament Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959.
Donahue, John R. and Harrington, Daniel J. The Gospel of Mark. Sacra Pagina. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2002.
France, R.T. The Gospel of Mark. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids and Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2002.
Guellich, Robert A. Mark 1-8:26. Dallas: Word, 1989.
Gundry, Robert H. Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
Hurtado, Larry. Mark. New International Biblical Commentary. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1989..
Hooker, Morna D. The Gospel According to St. Mark. Black’s New Testament Commentary. PeabodyMassachusetts: Hendrickson, 1991.
Juel, Donald H. Mark. Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990.
Lane, William L. The Gospel According to Mark. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.
Maloney, Francis J. The Gospel of Mark. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2002.
Marcus, Joel. Mark 1-8. Anchor Yale Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2000.
. Mark 8-16. Anchor Yale Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2009.
Myers, Ched. Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1988.
Nineham, D.E. The Gospel of St Mark. The Pelican New Testament Commentaries. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1963.
Painter, John. Mark’s Gospel. London and New York: Routledge, 1997.
Rawlingson, A.E.J. The Gospel According to St. Mark. London: Methuen & Co., 1925
Schweizer, Eduard. The Good News According to Mark. Translated by Donald H. Madvig. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1970.
Stein, Robert H. Mark. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Taylor, Vincent. The Gospel According to St. Mark. New York: St Martin’s Press, 1966.
Tolbert, Mary Ann. Mark’s World in Literary Historical Perspective. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989.
van Iersel, Bas M.F. Mark: A Reader-Response Commentary. Translated by W. H. Bisscheroux. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998.
Williamson Jr., Lamar. Mark. Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Louisville: John Knox, 1983.
Witherington, Ben. The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
Hi! Wonderful project you’ve got here. I will be following. You should add Burton Mack’s A Myth of Innocence. Maybe not a commentary per se, as it goes a little further afield into the subject of Christian Origins in general, but it definitely has as its starting point and focus the Gospel of Mark. Tolbert also has another commentary, called Reading Mark. There’s also one I have from the 50s or 60s, in translation from French, but I’m blanking on author and title. I’ll dig it up and let you know.
I have only read a few from the list here, but the most eye-opening for me was the Meyers. The Nineham is a classic. Tolbert is hit and miss.
Thanks C.J. for the encouragment and the good suggestions. Although I probably disagree with Mack’s “Myth of Innocence” more than I agree, I definitely think that he made an important contribution to the debate on Mark and the study of Christian origins.
How about Richard Horsley’s _Hearing the Whole Story: The Politics of Plot in Mark’s Gospel_? I’m not entirely persuaded by it, but it does represent a significant development by combining literary and political (liberation and empire-critical) approaches. Myers was eye-opening for me as well, though I also highly value Marcus and Collins and need to look at Black’s. (I think CJ is thinking of F. Belo, _A Materialist Reading of the Gospel of Mark_.) And ditto, a helpful list here.
Thanks Eric. I quiet enjoyed Horsley’s “Hearing the Whole Story” as well – not sure I agree entirely as well with the non-messianic Markan Jesus, but I think much of his liberation reading is right and especially the postcolonial reading of the demonic legion. I have not yet read Black’s commentary, but his other books on “The Disciples According to Mark” and “Images of an Apostolic Interpreter” are really solid books. And I should add F. Bello to the list.
[...] and led to a huge increase in scholarly interest as can be observed in the continuing stream of commentaries on Mark that have been written. However, the situation for Mark throughout most of church history has [...]
Hey Mike, glad to see you back in the game. I’ll get back into it sometime. A good list. I just wanted to put in a spelling correction for Ched Myers’ name. You’ve got an extra “e”. It stood out to me because he goes to my church and I see his name fairly often
Keep up the good work!
Oh yeah, thanks for catching that Pat (actually think there may be a bunch of other errors in the publishers and the like, I have never been good with formatting footnotes and bibliographies). That is really interesting that he goes to your church.
[...] case for an alternative. One sign of this consensus is that, of all the commentaries I listed here, the vast majority start from the premise of Markan priority. The one significant exception I [...]
The book I was thinking of is The Formation of the Gospel According to Mark, by Etienne Trocme. I was reminded I’d mentioned it when a saw another book by Trocme referenced in this essay, “Scripturalization in Mark‘s Crucifixion Narrative”, by Mark Goodacre, in which you may also be interested.
Thanks C.J. for the book reference. Mark Goodacre’s essay is also quite useful in challenging the view of Crossan (and Mack as well) that the passion narratives are simply constructed out of scriptural images (“prophesy historicized”), but rather Mark’s passion narrative is a combination of actual historical memories of Jesus death reinterpreted in light of Scripture in the context of communal worship. Mark also has a useful podcast on this question (http://podacre.blogspot.com/2011/04/nt-pod-53-are-passion-narratives.html)