Re: tc-list FW: Mark 16:9-20
- On Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:03:35 -0400 "R. David Large" <David@...>
> I might add that the passage is extant across a geographically andtextually diverse > range of evidence-- which diversity testifies to
originality more than the Alexandrian > codices (Sinaiticus and
Vaticanus)-- and I would add 304-- testify against it.
Side note to this point:
MS 304 (12th century) is a commentary MS on Mt and Mk, in which the
primary matter is the commentary. The gospel text is merely interspersed
between the blocks of commentary material, and should not be considered
the same as a "normal" continuous-text MS. Also, it is often very
difficult to discern the text in contrast to the comments in this MS.
The text of Mk 16:8 in MS 304 agrees with N27 except that it reads EICE
and EIPON for EICEN and EIPON, as well as DE in place of GAR1. Following
GAR2 at the close of the verse, the MS has a mark like a filled-in "o",
followed by many pages of commentary, all of which _summarize_ the
endings of the other gospels and even quotes portions of them.
Following this, the commentary then begins to summarize the "ETERON DE TA
PARA TOU MARKOU," presumably to cover the non-duplicated portions germane
to that gospel in contrast to the others. There remain quotes and
references to the other gospels in regard to Mary Magdalene, Peter,
Galilee, the fear of the women, etc. But at this point the commentary
abruptly ends, without completing the remainder of the narrative or the
parallels. I suspect that the commentary (which contains only Mt and Mk)
originally continued the discussion and that a final page or pages at the
end of this volume likely were lost.
Also, MS 304 has no note regarding the Eusebian questions regarding the
ending of Mark, nor any mention of what the "AKRIBWS" manuscripts might
read regarding the ending, either of which would likely be expected
within a commentary MS at such a point.
I would suggest that MS 304 should NOT be claimed as a witness to the
shortest ending any more than the (now-discredited) claim of UBS2 that
such was the case of MS 2386 (11th century). In the case of MS 2368, a
page ended at 16:8 with TELOS written in abbreviated form, but the TELOS
simply marked the end of a lection, and there was clear evidence that a
subsequent continuing leaf had been lost (cf. Metzger, Textual
Commentary, in loc.). This was also the case with several other MSS noted
in the course of my research. The only Greek MSS which actually omit the
long ending of Mark are Aleph and B.
Maurice A. Robinson
Professor of NT and Greek
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
Wake Forest, North Carolina
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]