Opinions on the synoptic hypothesis are divided, particularly when it comes to the question of what the shared Gospels of Matthew and Luke passed down beyond the Gospel of Mark: traditionally, "Q". This work provides new insights into this subject: It analyzes the double tradition as a text corpus – thereby exploring not only coherence, but also a non-shared textual profile vis-à-vis the other Jesus-related traditions, above all in the Gospel of Mark. The conclusive parameters are the texts'' social categories. Behind these attributions – put into a social historical context – the author provides an original draft of identification options: hungry children of God, alternative royal messengers, unacknowledged prophets, faithful and discreet slaves as well as others.

Opinions on the synoptic hypothesis are divided, particularly when it comes to the question of what the shared Gospels of Matthew and Luke passed down beyond the Gospel of Mark: traditionally, "Q". This work provides new insights into this subject: It analyzes the double tradition as a text corpus – thereby exploring not only coherence, but also a non-shared textual profile vis-à-vis the other Jesus-related traditions, above all in the Gospel of Mark. The conclusive parameters are the texts'' social categories. Behind these attributions – put into a social historical context – the author provides an original draft of identification options: hungry children of God, alternative royal messengers, unacknowledged prophets, faithful and discreet slaves as well as others.

Opinions on the synoptic hypothesis are divided, particularly when it comes to the question of what the shared Gospels of Matthew and Luke passed down beyond the Gospel of Mark: traditionally, "Q". This work provides new insights into this subject: It analyzes the double tradition as a text corpus – thereby exploring not only coherence, but also a non-shared textual profile vis-à-vis the other Jesus-related traditions, above all in the Gospel of Mark. The conclusive parameters are the texts'' social categories. Behind these attributions – put into a social historical context – the author provides an original draft of identification options: hungry children of God, alternative royal messengers, unacknowledged prophets, faithful and discreet slaves as well as others.