372 Clarence Russell Williams 



Abbe Martin, howewr, tells us, (p. .''.98) that the Shorter Conclusion 

 is found in the margin of MS, Add. 14, 45G, a fact which need not sur- 

 prise us sincr this MS lias been enriched by a number of notes added 

 from the Philoxenian \'ersion, in which term he probably includes the 

 Harclean Version. 



The Philoxenian Version was made in 508 A.D. by Polycarpus, a 

 chorepiscopos, for Philoxenus, bishoj) of Hierapolis (Mabug), It 

 seems to have been a revision of the Peshitto, adding those books of 

 the Greek canon (2 Peter, Jude, 2 and .3 John, and Revelation) which 

 were lacking in the current Syriac version. 



In 616 A.D. this version was revised by Thomas of Harkel (Hera 

 clea), bishop of Hierapolis. This revision was made near Alexandria, 

 and was designed to represent the Greek as closely as possible, even to 

 the order of the words. Scrivener calls it "probably the most servile 

 version of Scripture ever made." We know that in the revision of the 

 Gospels Thomas of Harclea had two (or three) Greek MSS probably 

 from the library of the monastery at Enanton, a village "nine" miles 

 from Alexandria. To indicate the various readings found in his MSS 

 the critical symbols of the asterisk and obelus were used, as well as 

 marginal notes. 



The Shorter Conclusion is found in the margin of two MSS of this 

 version, one Rom. Vat. Syr. 268, of an unknown date, which Mai 

 thinks Thomas of Harclea wrote with his own hand in 615 A.D. and 

 the other a MS in the Library of the New College, Oxford, used by 

 Joseph ^^'hite in his edition which in reality presents us with the 

 Harclean text, though it i entitled " Sacrorum Evangeliorum versio 

 Syriaca Philoxeniana, Oxford, 1778. The text of these two MSS, 

 save for a couple of insignificant variations is the same, and presents 

 an exact translation of the Greek. The text of the \'atican MS is 

 found in Martin, II, p. 398. 



It is evident therefore that in one or more of the Greek MS of 

 Alexandria, used by Thomas at the beginning of the seventh century, 

 the Shorter Ending was found. His version therefore furnishes us 

 with another indication of the Egyptian origin of the Shorter Con- 

 clusion. 



The testimony of the Syriac versions therefore tells us : 



1. The Greek text as known at Antioch about 150 A.D. did not 

 contain any conclusion to Mark. 



2, The Greek text as known at Rome in 170 A.D. contained the 

 Longer Conclusion. Since by this date it seems to have been ac- 

 cepted as unquestionably a part of the Gospel, it must have reached 

 Rome bv 150 A.D. at the latest. 



