Hegeler Institute

THE WASHINGTON MANUSCRIPT AND THE RESURRECTION IN MARKAuthor(s): Albert J. EdmundsSource: The Monist, Vol. 28, No. 4 (OCTOBER, 1918), pp. 528-529Published by: Hegeler InstituteStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27900705 .

Accessed: 22/05/2014 15:05

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Hegeler Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Monist.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.168 on Thu, 22 May 2014 15:05:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE WASHINGTON MANUSCRIPT AND THE RESURRECTION IN MARK.

THE discovery of the Washington MS. will materially

alter the critical apparatus of the next editor of the Greek New Testament. Soden has not observed the fact that this manuscript contains a reading of primary import, in agreement with the lost manuscripts of Eusebius. West cott and Hort give ekftovGai as a marginal reading at

Mark xvi. 5, but they omit its correlative, dtacovaaaai, at xvi. 8, a reading already known to John Mill of Oxford, in 1707. Westcott and Hort's oversight was due to the

fact that no Greek manuscript, used in 1881, contained the

reading (except the ungrammatical xouaavte of Greg ory's No. 565). Moreover, they had also failed to observe that lost manuscripts quoted by Eusebius read xovoaoai :

xai axouoaaai eqpuyov, xai oti evi oti ev eutov eqpo owco

ya . (Ad Marin. Quaest. 1.)

The critical apparatus of the future will read thus :

Mark xvi. 5.

Corrupted text : eiaeAikvuaai, from the parallel in Luke.

Primitive text: eXdouoai, with Ew. Matth., Johann., Petri; Codd. B, 127.1

1 In my article in The Monist, April, 1917, pp. 173 , I adduced the Gothic version here, on the authority of Tischendorf and Massmann; but a study of the Gothic has convinced me that Soden is right in ignoring it.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.168 on Thu, 22 May 2014 15:05:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE WASHINTON MANUSCRIPT. 5^9

Mark xvi. 8.

Corrupted text: eleAftowmi, inserted as a correlative to eiaeXftovoai.

Primitive text: xouoaaai, with lost manuscripts of Saecc.

II-III, apud Euseb. ad Marin., Quaest. 1 ; Codex W, Sinai Syriac, Armenian, and Sahidic versions.

The Washington MS. exhibits the first stage of cor

ruption :

xai axouaaaai | ]Xfrov xai ecpuyov.

The ^e ihnKxai or | ) $ov was then being added before the deletion of the xjovaaaai. The Vatican and Sinaitic

M SS. betray the last and complete stage of corruption, wherein the dxouaaaai is dropped altogether :

xai |e $ouaai eqwyov arco xov \ivr\\iziov.

Contrast with this the simplicity of Eusebius's early manuscripts which say nothing about the women going out of the sepulcher (because they had never been in it). The Armenian version omits the e^eMhwaai, and the Sinai

Syriac omits the arco xov \ivr\\iEiov. Thus do these two

ancient witnesses, based upon lost Greek manuscripts of the same age as those used by Eusebius, furnish complete support to the reading of that Father. The translator of the future will end Mark thus :

And when they heard, they fled, and said nothing to

any one, for they were afraid of. Here endeth the Gospel according to Mark.

ALBERT J. EDMUNDS.

PHILADELPHIA, PA.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.168 on Thu, 22 May 2014 15:05:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions