How to find dating

(a) What kind of historical events are mentioned in the text and what is the latest historical event, the text narrates (= level of narration)? To what kinds of historical data as a historical context does the text refer (= synchronistic elements)? What kind of historical material (e. g., documents, literary sources) is mentioned explicitly or at least presupposed narratively (= level of composition)?

An example for this: In the beginning of his Histories (I:1ff.) Polybius defines his rationale for writing a history of the rise of the Romans in the course of 53 years (220–168 B. C. E.). This might refer to his writing plans around ca. 160 B. C. E. In books XXX–XL, however, Polybius adds the history of 168 until 145 B. C. E., by telling us about the consolidation of the Romans. So this must be a part of a later passage. Most convincingly the Histories have been composed in a multi-stage-process
(b) To what kind of historical events that are not part of the narration itself does the author refer (= level of reference)? What kind of references to the author’s life-time are implied in the text (= the narrator’s perspective)?
An example for this: In his biographical writing, Agricola, Tacitus gives two indications for a post quem-dating which go beyond the narration of Agricola’s life. Tacitus refers to the death of the protagonist Agricola (1:4) and to the beginning of the emperorship of Trajan (44:5).18 These references, however, differ in respect to their literary function: In 1:4 Tacitus mentions a historical date that is not part of the narration itself. By doing so, he legitimates his interest in writing about Agricola. The note in 44:5 tells something about the narrator’s perspective on his writing. Here Tacitus refers to the current livingconditions in Trajanic time

The following distinctions for dating ancient texts

Mark 13

Markan priority and Matthew’s usage of Mark

Three observations support the idea of Markan priority and Matthew’s usage of Mark:

(a) There are several indications showing that Matthew uses Mark as a literary ‘Vorlage’: He takes over most of the Markan pericopes precisely (e. g., Mark 13 in Matt 24) or even accepts narrative doublets that Luke rejects (Mark 6:17ff. in Matt 14:13ff.; Mark 8:1ff. in Matt 15:32ff.).
(b) By taking Mark as a literary ‘Vorlage’ Matthew corrects, improves and interprets, or enhances the Markan text several times.
(c) By including another source (Q) and further material (M) Matthew presents more traditions, e. g., creates further doublets, shapes a much longer and extended Gospel-version (e. g., Matt 1–2; speech-concept; 28:9ff.), and finally embeds Mark 13 even in a longer context of eschatological discourses (Matt 23–25). Although extending Mark, Matthew seems to follow first of all the Markan Vorlage: The Gospel of Mark functions as his basic book while the other material is included and added in a supplementary way.

Ten types of generic transformation by Alastair Fowler:

• (1) topical invention (topics added to the repertoire of a genre)
• (2) combination
• (3) aggregation (short works are groups in an ordered collection)
• (4) change of scale (expansion or contraction)
• (5) change of function
• (6) counterstatement (i. e., counter-genres or “anti-genres,” as antitheses to existing genres)
• (7) inclusion (embedding one genre in another)
• (8) generic mixture
• (9) hybrids (two or more repertoires present in such proportion that none dominates)
• (10) satire

Mark’s date: