438 Clarence Russell Williams, 



no means sure. The similarity of language may be a mere coin- 

 cidence, or may be due to the use of a common source. 



We conclude that the Longer Conclusion was taken from an in- 

 dependent writing which originated in Asia Minor ; that during the 

 first half of the second century it was added to the Second Gospel to 

 form a conclusion . Before the middle of the second century it passed to 

 Rome, where it scon gained currency as the only authentic conclusion 

 of the Gospel. The authority of the church of Ephesus, the authority 

 of the church of Rome, the intrinsic excellence of C, and current dis- 

 satisfaction with an incomplete Gospel, all tended to its early and 

 rapid acceptance in the regions dominated by the influence of these 

 two great churches. 



The Syrian Church, whose canon presents an unusual development, 

 probably followed the ancient tradition in her earliest version, and 

 concluded Mark at v. 8, as is witnessed by Ss. It was Tatian who, in 

 his Diatessaron, gave currency to the Longer Conclusion in the East, 

 and through the Diatessaron C gained in time a place in the Old 

 Syriac, as we learn from Sc which is to be dated about the beginning 

 of the third century. By the time the Peshitto was issued in 411 A.D. 

 it had so thoroughly established itself in the Syrian text that no MS 

 of that version (with one exception) hints at any other form. In 

 616 A.D. Thomas of Harclea revised the Peshitto in a monastery 

 near Alexandria, employing Alexandrian MSS for the purpose and 

 the Shorter Conclusion is found in the margin of two MSS of the Hare- 

 lean Syriac. It is quite evident that the Shorter Conclusion found 

 its way into the Syriac from Egypt. 



The Armenian, based at least to a certain extent on the Syriac, 

 persisted in rejecting any conclusion until the Middle Ages, for the 

 Longer Ending is scarcely found in any MSS until the thirteenth cen- 

 tury, and is wanting in half the later ones. There is a suggestion, 

 however, that the early form of this version knew C. Be that as it 

 may, the Armenian Version is unique in allowing the abbreviated 

 form of the Gospel to persist as the recognized and authentic type for 

 many centuries, in fact until comparatively recent times. 



For light upon the origin of the Shorter Conclusion we must look 

 to Egypt whence our witnesses to this form come. 



Modern criticism is inclined to recognize three early types of text 

 as belonging to the church of Alexandria : 



1. The earliest known to us is represented by the quotations found 

 in Clement of Alexandria (cir. 190) and must therefore belong to the 

 end of the second and beginning of the third centuries. This text 

 is not found re])roduced in any extant MS, but we know that it 



