The Appendices to the Gospel according to Mark. 443 



Morgan Library one is found to contain the double ending to Mark. 

 As all these MSS are reported to be in the Sahidic dialect, this dis- 

 covery furnishes additional support to our inference concerning the 

 place of B in the Sahidic version. It is to be hoped that Prof. Hyvernat 

 will soon make this evidence available for critical use. 



That the Bohairic Version shows the Shorter Conclusion in the 

 margin of two MSS, Hunt. 17 and Brit. Mus. Or. 1315, agrees with the 

 reconstruction of the history already suggested, since critics hold that 

 the Bohairic Version is later than the Sahidic, and was based on a later 

 Alexandrian text, the so-called "Neutral" text. These two Bohairic 

 MSS, therefore, are witnesses for our fourth stage, when B is relegated 

 to the margin. 



But while the witness of Hunt. 17, — which seems to include most 

 of the readings Avhich had at any time found their way into the Sahi- 

 dic,— would not in itself imply that B was more than sporadic in this 

 version, it is to be noted that one or more of the ancestors of this MS, 

 as Zahn has pointed out, concluded the Gospel with B and that v. 8 

 was violently altered to conform to it, as in k. Therefore, while it 

 would be rash to conclude that B at one time formed the sole and 

 authoritative ending of Mark in the Bohairic Version, we are jus- 

 tified in declaring that there existed MSS of this type in the Bohairic. 

 Further, as the note "In the Copy of the Sa'id," of Or. 1315 proves, 

 the Shorter Conclusion in the Bohairic was held to be related in some 

 way to the Sahidic Version, whether to the extent of being derived 

 from it, or simply being looked upon as similar to it, we cannot say. 



In the Ethiopic Version we have a group of MSS showing A, another 

 group showing B, and a third A-j-B+C, a further confirmation of 

 the Egyptian origin of the Shorter Conclusion, although we again 

 suggest that possibly the original form of the Ethiopic ended with v. 8, 

 There is a possibility that the Gospels were brought to this region at 

 the first from Palestine, rather than from Egypt. 



The Old Latin Version of Roman North Africa, as represented by k 

 is unique in showing us a version from which we have a MS which ex- 

 hibits the Shorter Conclusion alone. Since this version, as represented 

 by k and e, seems based on the Alexandrian rather than on the Roman 

 type of Greek text we infer that here also the Shorter Conclusion was 

 introduced from Egypt. Whether B formed the recognized conclusion 

 of Mark as read by Cyprian in Carthage (f 250), is not certain, since e, 

 the only other MS representing this recension, lacks the close of the 

 Gospel. But that the B form was not introduced by the scribe of k, 

 even though he was probably an Egyptian, seems certain from the 

 careless and inaccurate manner in which these lines are written in 



Trans. Conn. Acad., Vol. XVIII. 30 Februaky, 1915. 



