These we may call his Marcan and his Logian document.
The instances in which he has departed from the Marcan order, and the manner in which he has introduced his additional matter into the Marcan outline, do not suggest the idea that he had any independent knowledge of an exact kind of the chronological sequence of events.
It seems more likely that he had a good many distinct oral traditions for this part of the history and that he used them freely, sometimes substituting them for passages of the Marcan document, sometimes altering the latter in accordance therewith.
The phenomena which are sometimes supposed to require the hypothesis of an Ur-Marcus are more simply and satisfactorily explained as incidents in the transmission of the Marcan text.
The account in Matthew is practically identical with that in Mark and is no doubt taken from the Marcan source, but Luke and John have different traditions.