The Appendices to the Gospel according to Mark. 381 



self to judge from the prominence given to his name, and the red 

 uncials in which it is written." 



We further take exception to Conybeare's inference that the trans- 

 lator of these twelve verses into the Armenian must have had a Greek 

 or Syriac MS in which they were prefaced by the words "Apio-Tiwvo? 

 7:p£<7[3tjTspou. The opposite seems to us to be more probable since: 



1. The scribe clearly indicates that in some sense he considers the 

 Gospel to end at v. 8 since he has filled the remainder of the last line 

 of this verse with the vermilion flourishes by which he indicates the 

 close of a Gospel. 



2. He has at this point inserted the boss which further indicates 

 the end of the Gospel at this point. 



3. The scribe does not give a line to this rubric but crowds it in as 

 an afterthought. As Conybeare acknowledges, "if the scribe had 

 from the first meant to keep it, he would have left room for it, instead 

 of cramping it above the terminal flourishes." 



4. Even acknowledging that the insertion is contemporary with the 

 original transcribing of the codex, it may have been inserted not by 

 the scribe but by the Biop8-o)'Lrrj?, as Mr. Conybeare acknowledges. 

 This admission seems to us to seriously weaken his argument for the 

 existence of this rubric in the exemplar. 



This codex was written by the scribe Johannes at the commission 

 of a monk and presbyter, Stephanus, who in a note he appends to the 

 book declares "this book is to be read in this church, for it is copied 

 from authentic and old originals" (Strzygowski, Byzantische Denk- 

 maler, I Vienna, 1891 p. 19, quoted in Zahn's articles). The same 

 authority declares that the covers and the pictures bound with this 

 codex belong to the first half of the sixth century, and they seem very 

 probably to be taken from one of these "old originals" (so Zahn, and 

 Conybeare acknowledges it possible). If this is correct at least one 

 exemplar of this codex is to be dated before 550 A.D. It is possible, 

 however, as Conybeare has pointed out, to hold that these illustrations 

 belonged to the Syriac exemplar from which the Armenian scribe 

 translated the last twelve verses. 



But if these words were in the exemplar, and especially if they 

 are to be considered as of equal importance with the titles of the 

 Gospels, why were they not copied at the first, instead of being 

 crowded in as an afterthought ? 



5. But if the Armenians considered this a true and authentic 

 tradition, why is this rubric never found in other Armenian MSS which 

 contain these twelve verses translated as they are in the Edschmiadzin 

 codex ? A search in all the other codices found in the library at 



