Sixty-four Early Witnesses

The following chart depicts 64 pieces of evidence, all of which are texts as old or older than Codex
Ephraemi ("C"), the fifth-oldest Greek manuscript of the Gospel of Mark.
The more a witness supports Mark 16:9-20, the higher it is placed on the chart. Some witnesses which
are essentially silent are placed in the grey area in the middle. Chronology is given from left (beginning
at A.D. 100) to right.

Patristic works are red. Manuscripts (extant or mutilated) are black.
Non-extant but credibly extrapolated witnesses are green.
Early versions (attested by more than one manuscript) are in blue.
Dates assigned to patristic evidence and versions are production-dates.
To see which source a number represents, just scroll down the page).
1. Papias (died c. 110) - stated that Jesus Barsabbas once was forced to drink a noxious drink (snake venom, according to
Philip Sidetes) and was not harmed ~ a possible allusion to 16:18.
2. Epistula Apostolorum (pre-150) - according to researcher M. Hornschuh, the structure of this work reflects the influence
of the Long Ending.
3. Justin Martyr (pre-165) - in First Apology, ch. 45, he used language highly reminiscent of Mark 16:20.
4. "Gospel of Peter" (pre-150) - this unorthodox, patchwork composition refers to the disciples weeping and mourning, as in
Mark 16:10.
5. Tatian (wrote c. 172) - in the Diatessaron, a single narrative integrating the four Gospels, he used the Long Ending, as
shown by the Syriac manuscript of Ephrem's Commentary on the Diatessaron, the Arabic Harmony, and other sources.
6. Irenaeus (wrote c. 180) - in Against Heresies, Book III, 10:5-6, he quoted explicitly from Mark 16:19 and stated that the
material was from the end of Mark's Gospel.
7. Clement of Alexandria (died c. 215) - made no comment about Mark 16:9-20 in his extant works, but likewise made no
explicit quotation from Matthew 28. Seems to have highly regarded a spurious work called the "Preaching of Peter" which
may have used (or contradicted) material from Mark 16:9-20.
8. Ammonius (c. 200) - known only for the harmony of the Gospels which he made, and which Eusebius later used as a
model for his Canon Tables. The earliest known form of the "Ammonian Tables," having been extensively re-worked by
Eusebius, should be regarded as the work of Eusebius, not Ammonius.
9. Tertullian (c. 220) - wrote in detail about believer's baptism but never explicitly quoted Mark 16:16. However, he may have
used a creed which used Mark 16:19 in Against Praxeas, and De Baptismo 10:7 might allude to Mark 16:16.
10. Hippolytus (c. 230) - in Apostolic Tradition 32:1, he seems to have used part of Mark 16:18 when describing the positive
effects of partaking of the Lord's Supper.
11. p45 (c. 225) - this papyrus, the earliest known copy of the Gospel of Mark, is heavily damaged. A study by L. Hurtado
involving a comparison of 103 readings in p45 indicated that p45's text is related to the text of Codex W, which includes Mark
16:9-20 (with the Freer Logion).
12. Origen (died 254) - did not quote explicitly from Mark 16:9-20 in his extant works, but in Against Celsus VII:17 he
mentioned that signs of the destruction of Satan's kingdom include deliverance from the power of demons; this may be an
allusion to Mark 16:17. He mentions signs again at the beginning of Book VIII.

13. Non-extant ancestor of Codex Bobiensis (c. 250) - The text of Old Latin "k" frequently agrees with citations of
Scripture made by Cyprian in the mid-200's, indicating that Bobiensis' text is, generally, from that era.
14. Non-extant ancestors of Old Latin mss. (c. 250) - Codex Monacensis and other Old Latin manuscripts descend from
texts written at or before this time.
15. Cyprian (c. 250) - wrote a lot about baptism but never explicitly quoted Mark 16:16 in his extant works.
16. Non-extant earliest strata of Sahidic Version (250) - since one Sahidic manuscript (the Crosby Codex) from about
300 contains First Peter, it seems fair to conclude that a Sahidic text of the Gospels was in use before that time.
17. Vincentius of Thibaris (258) - otherwise unknown, he seems to have made a rough quotation using Mark 16:15-18 at
the Seventh Council of Carthage.
18. Treatise on Baptism (c. 250) - this was incorporated into another work at a later time by a writer named Ursinus. Uses
Mark 16:14.
19. Non-extant copy used by the Author of the Freer Logion (pre-300) - Bruce Metzger (in the UBS Textual
Commentary, p. 125) stated that the Freer Logion is "probably the work of a second or third century scribe."
20. Non-extant ancestor of Sinaitic Syriac (pre-300) - this may be the source of several features shared by the Sinaitic
Syriac and some African Old Latin manuscripts.
21. Claromontanus Catalog - found in Codex Claromontanus after Titus, this list of books gives the line-count for each book
(a line = 16 syllables). For Mark, the line-count is listed as 1,600, which according to Kirsopp Lake indicates the inclusion of
Mark 16:9-20.
22. Porphyry and/or Hierocles, as quoted by Macarius Magnes (c. 270 or 305) - The writings of Porphyry, an opponent of
Christianity, were probably used by his student Hierocles, whose statements -- including a use of Mark 16:18 -- were
answered later by Macarius Magnes in Apocritus.
23. Syriac Story of Abgar (pre-300) - a source translated by Eusebius in Ecclesiastical History.
24. Acts of John (usually assigned to c. 200; here assigned to c. 300) - this apocryphal story repeatedly uses material from
Mark 16:9-20, especially 16:18.
25. Non-extant Manuscript Known to the Copyist of Codex Vaticanus (pre-325) - the blank space after Mark 16:8 in
Codex Vaticanus, as shown on another page, seems to be reserved for 16:9-20.
26. Non-extant Manuscript Used by the Copyist of Codex Vaticanus (pre-325) - this exemplar may have contained the
abrupt text, or perhaps the Short Ending.
27. Codex Vaticanus - the earliest extant evidence for the abrupt ending. Closely associated with Codex Sinaiticus.
28. Marinus (between 290 and 340) - assumed the authenticity of Mark 16:9 when asking Eusebius how to harmonize Mark
with Matthew. However, "Marinus" might be a literary device, a non-existent character invented simply to introduce the
29. Ad Marinum (between 290 and 340) - Eusebius pictured a Christian apologist who wished to evade the question as
saying that "some" or "the best" or "almost all" manuscripts did not contain Mark 16:9-20. (In the 1800's, Burgon and Hort
both expressed a suspicion that Eusebius was using an older work, by Origen.)
30. Ad Marinum (between 290-340) - Eusebius attributed 16:9 to Mark and explained how it may be harmonized with
Matthew 28:1.

31. Eusebian Canons (between 290 and 340) - made by Eusebius, based on an earlier harmony designed by Ammonius,
who, according to Dionysius bar Salibi (a medieval writer), stopped harmonizing when he came to the resurrection-accounts.
32. Asterius (c. 340) - cited in the UBS textual apparatus as an apparent witness for inclusion.
33. Aphrahat (wrote 345) - used 16:16 and 16:17-18 in First Demonstration 17.
34. Gothic Version (350) - made by Ulfilas, who was made bishop of Antioch in 341.
35. Hilary of Poitiers (pre-360)
36. Non-extant ancestor of Curetonian Syriac (pre-350)
37. Non-extant ancestor of Bohairic Version (pre-350)
38. Acts of Pilate, a.k.a. Gospel of Nicodemus (330)
39. Codex Vercellensis (365) - made by Eusebius of Vercelli, this Old Latin manuscript is extensively damaged at the end
of Mark.
40. Non-extant exemplar of Codex Sinaiticus (pre-360)
41. Ephrem Syrus, apparently using the Diatessaron (370)
42. Codex Sinaiticus (360-370) - possibly made at Caesarea under the supervision of Euzoius and Acacius.
43. Basil (pre-379)
44. Apostolic Constitutions (380) - possible incorporating material from Didascalia Apostolorum, which is pre-300.
45. Vulgate Gospels (384) - Jerome included Mark 16:9-20. He stated that he used old Greek manuscripts as the basis for
his revision of the Latin text.
46. Ambrose (390) - quotes from Mark 16:9-20 repeatedly.
47. Epiphanius (400)
48. John Chrysostom's Lectionary (pre-360)
49. Didymus of Alexandria (390) - cited in the UBS textual apparatus.
50. Macarius Magnes, in Apocritus (400)
51. Codex Alexandrinus (400)
52. Armenian Version of the Separate Gospels (410)
53. Jerome in Ad Hedibiam (407) - here Jerome is summarizing and repeating material from Ad Marinum.
54. Jerome in Against the Pelagians (417) - here Jerome independently cites the text preceding the Freer Logion, and
states that the Freer Logion is present in some copies, especially Greek ones.
55. Codex Washingtonensis (c. 400-425) - includes Mark 16:9-20 with the Freer Logion between v. 14 and v.15.
56. Peshitta (pre-430) - This, the standard Syriac Version, is carefully preserved in many manuscripts.
57. Codex Bobiensis (c. 430) - besides including the Short Ending and not 16:9-20, this Latin manuscript's text of Mark 16
also adds an interpolation describing Christ's resurrection and ascension after 16:3, presents the angel saying that he will be
seen in Galilee, and removes part of 16:8.
58. Augustine's Lectionary (pre-430)
59. Augustine (430) - quotes from Mark 16:9-20 repeatedly. Made some use of old manuscripts.
60. John Cassian (430)
61. Nestorius and Cyril of Alexandria (pre-444) - Cyril quotes Nestorius' use of 16:20.
62. Philip Sidetes (430) - gives a description of Papias' account of Jesus Barsabbas' poison-drinking which in some aspects
may be more accurate than Eusebius' account.
63. Marcus Eremita (pre-450) - cited in the UBS textual apparatus.
64. Theodoret of Cyrrhus (c. 450) - states that all four Gospels say that Mary Magdalene told the disciples about the risen
Lord. He may also refer to Irenaeus' quotation of Mark 16:19.

This list is not exhaustive; even more early witnesses could be added in support of the inclusion of Mark 16:9-20.
Nevertheless this may sufficiently show that the external evidence in support of the inclusion of Mark 16:9-20 is earlier and
broader than the external evidence against it.