I find another persuasive evidence of
Mcn's priority over Mark in p. 1177-1178.
I have to do clear that 'persuasive', in my metric of judgement , means that it persuades me about the sound truth of this thesis: the assumption of
Mcn's priority over Luke
implies the
Mcn's priority over Mark. You can't accept the former without the latter.
Now, if
Mcn precedes Luke, then the ping pong "Pilate
→ Herod
→ Pilate" is found in
Mcn and precedes
equally Luke.
This has sound collateral effects on the relation between
Mcn and Mark (about which I am interested principally here):
*Ev makes obvious that Herod's joy (verse *8a) may have been only shortlived, since Jesus did not respond to the inquiry (verse *9b) as attested by Tertullian. Jesus' silence in response to Herod's questions and — one may add — to the reproaches by the chief priests and scribes (verse *10, unattested), shaped the subsequent tradition: Mark 15,3f || Matt 27,12 adopted this element into Pilate's interrogation, and even John 19,8 describes it in that context. This insight into the reception of elements of the Herod episode by Mark and Matthew is important because the following mockery of Jesus by Herod and the soldiers (verse *11) is unattested and has a counterpart in the mockery by the soldiers of Pilate (Mark 15,17-20a || Matt 27,27-31a). The omission of the Herod episode through Mark and Matthew had the consequence that they adopted these elements, placed them into the mockery by Pilate's soldiers, and combined with elements from the pre-canonical crucifixion episode.
This fits perfectly the clash between Gentilizers and Judaizers during the II° century CE: the mockery by Herod's soldiers has been introduced againt the Judaizers, while the mockery by Pilate's soldiers has been introduced against the Gentilizers.
"Mark" (editor) was too much a moderate Gentilizer to have still the trial of Jesus before Herod.
To this regard, Robert Eisler argued that Agrippa was made, in the Christian tradition, author of the evils made by the Zealots, i.e. his figure was
zealot-ized, against the historical truth.