In 1921 Eduard Meyer pointed out that in Mark we have clear indications of the use of sources; the Gospel is not merely a compilation of anecdotes, but an attempt to bring into order a set of earlier records of the life and teaching of Jesus, which would be inevitably needed for the preaching of the Gospel. But by 1921 the star of form-criticism had already risen above the horizon, and in the fascinating exercise of fitting the stories of the Gospels into the various ‘forms’ of popular story-telling, and discovering situations in the supposed life of the early Church which might have led to the invention of a particular anecdote or saying, Meyer's warning was allowed to pass unheeded. Rawlinson dismisses his view on the ground of'the persistence throughout the Gospel of the very peculiar and characteristic Marcan mannerisms of style. The evangelist may have been using sources, but, if so, it is extremely unlikely that modern conjecture can succeed in determining what they were.'

The first objection raised by Rawlinson is quite beside the point. In most ancient historians we get a general uniformity of style, owing to the fact that the author has rewritten his sources more or less completely.