164 Stephen H. Levinsohn 4c and untie (λύουσιν) it. foreground Some of those standing there were saying (ἔλεγον) to them, “What 5 foreground are you doing, untying that colt?” 6a They spoke (εἶπαν) to them as Jesus had told them to, unmarked 6b and they let them go (ἀφῆκαν). unmarked 7a They lead (φέρουσιν) the colt to Jesus foreground 7b and throw (ἐπιβάλλουσιν) their cloaks over it, foreground 7c and he sat (ἐκάθισεν) on it. unmarked 8a Many people spread (ἔστρωσαν) their cloaks on the road, unmarked 8b others having cut branches from the fields. Those who went ahead and those who followed were shouting (ἔκραζον), “Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the 9-10 foreground: peak Lord! Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David! Hosanna in the highest!” 11a He entered (εἰσῆλθεν) Jerusalem, into the temple. unmarked Having looked around at everything, since it was already late, he 11b unmarked went out (ἐξῆλθεν) to Bethany with the Twelve. In the above passage, independent verbs in the imperfect feature three times. It is not difficult to view the cries of the crowd (11,9-10) as a prominent foreground event in the episode. It is less obvious, though, that “prominence” is the right explanation for the other two imperfects. Gundry calls ἠκολούθει in 10,52c an “inceptive imperfect”, which suggests that the motivation for using it is to indicate that Bartimaus not only began to follow Jesus, but continued to do so12. As for ἔλεγον in 11,5, the onlookers’ question was predicted in v. 3, so is part of a schema13, which is why Longacre could view the imperfect of v. 5 as backgrounding the speech concerned with respect to the mainline events of v. 614. In summary, the use of an imperfect in Mark 11,9 is consistent with Porter’s position, but presents a problem for Longacre. The use of an imperfect in v. 5 is consistent with Longacre’s position, but does not readily support Porter’s claim. And it is questionable whether the use of an imperfect in 10,52c sits well with the position of either Porter or Longacre15. 12 R.H. Gundry, Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross (Grand Rapids, MI 1993). Campbell (Basics 76-77) refers to the aktionsart of such imperfects as “ingressive”. 13 Heimerdinger, Topic 228. 14 The prominence associated with the historical present is discussed in sec. F. 15 Longacre would need to claim that, whereas the restoration of Bartimaeus’ sight was a foreground event, his subsequent act of following Jesus was of secondary importance, as far as Mark’s account was concerned.