Evidence

1. Papias (wrote c. 110) - stated that Joseph Barsabbas (see Acts 1:23) once was forced to drink a noxious drink (snake
venom, according to Philip Sidetes) and was not harmed ~ a possible allusion to 16:18. Papias also said that Mark did not
omit any of what Peter preached.

2. Epistula Apostolorum (pre-150) - according to researcher M. Hornschuh, the structure of this work reflects the author's
awareness of Mark 16:9-20; a woman informs the apostles that she has seen Jesus, and they do not believe her.

3. Justin Martyr (died in 165) - in First Apology, ch. 45, he employed language highly reminiscent of Mark 16:20, using the
word "pantachou" twice. He utilized a Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels throughout First Apology.

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) - Tatian incorporated Mark 16:9-20 into the Diatessaron, a single narrative integrating the four
Gospels. This is shown by Chester Beatty Syriac manuscript 709 of Ephrem's Commentary on the Diatessaron, and by the
Arabic Diatessaron, and by other sources. A "Diatessaronic" variant in 16:11 (they did not believe them) is found in Eastern
and Western branches of Diatessaronic witnesses.

6. Irenaeus (wrote c. 180) - in Against Heresies, Book III, 10:5-6, Irenaeus quoted explicitly from Mark 16:19 and stated that
the material was from the end of Mark's Gospel. This statement is preserved in the Latin translation of Irenaeus and is
mentioned, in Greek, in a margin-note in MS 1582.

7. Clement of Alexandria (died c. 215) - made no comment about Mark 16:9-20 in his extant works, but likewise
(according to Burgon and Farmer) made no explicit quotation from Matthew 28. Seems to have highly regarded a spurious
work called the "Preaching of Peter" which may have included material modeled after Mark 16:15-16. A statement attributed
to Clement of Alexandria by Cassiodorus (d. 560) says that Mark "wrote entirely what is called the Gospel of Mark."

8. Ammonius (c. 200) - known for a non-extant Matthew-centered harmony of the Gospels which he made. Eusebius of
Caesarea used Ammonius' work as a model for his Canon Tables. However, 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. Acts of John (c. 200) - this apocryphal story repeatedly uses material from Mark 16:9-20, especially 16:18. In part 20,
John is depicted telling a pagan opponent, "If you give me poison to drink, it will not be able to harm me." In part 16, John is
depicted saying, "These words our Lord and Master confirmed by examples of mighty works."

10. Tertullian (c. 212) - wrote in detail about believer's baptism but never explicitly quoted Mark 16:16. In Scorpiace ch. 15
he uses a phrase which agrees closely with part of Mk. 16:18.

11. 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. The statement is extant in Greek and in

12. Source-text of Doctrine of Addai (pre-217?) - used Mark 16:15.

13. p45 (c. 225) - this papyrus is the the earliest known manuscript of the Gospel of Mark. It is heavily damaged and
contains no text at all from Mark chapter 16. 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).

14. Origen (died 254) - did not quote explicitly from Mark 16:9-20 in his extant works. In Against Celsus VII:17 and in
Philocalia ch. 5 he might allude to Mark 16:17 and 16:20, but this is not definite. These might be allusions to Mark 16:17 but
not definitely. Some scholars, including Hort, have expressed suspicion that Eusebius' comments in Ad Marinum might be
based on a work of Origen.

15. 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. However, the copyist
of Codex Bobiensis displayed a talent for misreading his exemplar.

16. 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.

17. Cyprian (died 258) - wrote a lot about baptism but never explicitly quoted Mark 16:16 in his extant works. (This is,
however, an argument from silence, and the argument is not as strong as Hort made it appear.)

18. Non-extant earliest strata of Sahidic Version (pre-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.

19. 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.

20. De Rebaptismate (Treatise on Rebaptism) (c. 258) - uses Mark 16:14.

21. 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."

22. 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.

23. 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.

24. Porphyry and/or Hierocles, as quoted by Macarius Magnes (Porphyry: c. 270, Hierocles: 305, Macarius Magnes:
405) - The writings of Porphyry, an opponent of Christianity, were probably used by his student Hierocles, whose statements,
including a quotation from Mark 16:18, were answered later by Macarius Magnes in Apocriticus.

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 have been added with 16:9-20 in mind.

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
question.

29. Copies Described by Eusebius of Caesarea as "Accurate Manuscripts" (between 290 and 340) - In Ad Marinum,
Eusebius pictured a Christian apologist who, to resolve a superficial discrepancy between Matthew 28:1 and Mark 16:9, noted
that in the accurate copies, and in almost all copies, the Gospel of Mark ends at the end of Mark 16:8. Eusebius seems to
encourage this approach, although he also explains how Mark 16:9 may be harmonized with Matthew 28:1.

30. Other Manuscripts Known to Eusebius of Caesarea (between 290-340) - in Ad Marinum, Eusebius quoted from 16:9,
indicating that he possessed copies with the entire text of 16:9-20.

31. Non-extant Manuscript Known to the Supervisor of Codex Sinaiticus (c. 350) - the uniquely emphatic decorative
design after Mark 16:8 indicates that the person who made the replacement-pages that contain Mk. 14:54-Lk. 1:56 was aware
of copies which had additional material after Mark 16:8.

32. 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.

33. Asterius (c. 340) - cited in the UBS textual apparatus as an apparent witness for inclusion.

34. Aphrahat (wrote 336) - used 16:16 and 16:17-18 in First Demonstration 17 and 16:20 in Demonstration 20.

35. Gothic Version (350) - made by Ulfilas, who was made bishop of Antioch in 341.

36. Hilary of Poitiers (pre-360) - a silent witness.

37. Non-extant ancestor of Curetonian Syriac (pre-350)

38. Non-extant ancestor of Bohairic Version (pre-350)

39. Acts of Pilate, a.k.a. Gospel of Nicodemus (330) - incorporates Mk. 16:15-16.

40. Codex Vercellensis (365) - made by Eusebius of Vercelli, this Old Latin manuscript was extensively damaged at the
end of Mark. Its original pages might not have contained Mark 16:9-20.

41. Non-extant exemplar of Codex Sinaiticus (pre-350)

42. Ephrem Syrus (370), apparently using the Diatessaron, used Mark 16:15a in a hymn.

43. Codex Sinaiticus (c. 350) - possibly made at Caesarea under the supervision of Acacius.

44. Basil (pre-379) - a silent witness.

45. Apostolic Constitutions (380) - possible incorporating material from Didascalia Apostolorum, which is pre-300.

46. Vulgate Gospels (384) - Jerome included Mark 16:9-20. He stated in his Preface to the Gospels, and in a letter (Letter
27, To Marcella), that he used old Greek manuscripts as the basis for his revision of the Latin text.

47. Ambrose (bishop of Milan in 374-397) - quotes from Mark 16:9-20 repeatedly.

48. Epiphanius of Salamis (400) - cited by Hort as support for the inclusion of Mark 16:9-20.

49. John Chrysostom's Lectionary (pre-360) - this provides evidence that the assignment of texts for major feast-days
(such as Eastertime and Ascension-Day) was carried out before Chrysostom's time.

50. Didymus the Blind (390) - Cited Mark 16:15-16 in De Trinitate, II:12. The authorship of this text has been contested, but
the date and location are congruent to those of Didymus.

51. Macarius Magnes (405) - in Apocriticus, this author from the city of Magnesia in Asia Minor, presents a citation of Mark
16:18, and offers a figurative interpretation of the passage.

52. Codex Alexandrinus (400) - contains Mark 16:9-20.

53. Greek copies of Mark used by Augustine (400) - in Harmony of the Gospels, Augustine cited Greek manuscripts when
commenting on Mark 16:12.

54. Jerome in Ad Hedibiam (407) - Jerome, using the dictation-method he described in Letter 75, To Augustine, loosely
summarizes material from Ad Marinum.

55. Jerome in Against the Pelagians (417) - Jerome uses Mark 16:14 to describe the location of the Freer Logion, and
states that the Freer Logion is present in some copies, especially Greek ones.

56. Codex Washingtonensis (c. 400-425) - includes Mark 16:9-20 with the Freer Logion between v. 14 and v.15.

57. Armenian Version (c. 430) - first translated from Syriac, and then thoroughly revised to conform with imported Greek
copies, the Armenian Gospels' translators may have differed among themselves about how to treat Mark 16:9-20.

58. Peshitta (pre-430) - This, the standard Syriac Version, carefully preserved in many manuscripts, includes Mk. 16:9-20.

59. 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, and removes part of 16:8. The copyist did
not know Latin very well.

60. Augustine's Lectionary (pre-430) - shows the acceptance of Mk. 16:9-20 in North Africa.

61. Augustine (c. 400) - quotes from Mark 16:9-20 repeatedly.

62. John Chrysostom (died in 407) - used Mk. 16:20 in Homily 14 on First Corinthians, part 2 (on I Cor. 4:19) and Mk. 16:9
in Homily 38 on First Corinthians, part 5 (on I Cor. 15:5).

62. John Cassian (430) - seems to allude to Mk. 16:18 in On the Incarnation Book VII, and uses 16:17 in Book VII, ch. 20.

63. 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. The description seems to be tinted by Philip's recollection of Mk. 16:18.

64. Nestorius and Cyril of Alexandria (pre-444) - Cyril quotes Nestorius' use of 16:20.

65. Marcus Eremita (c. 430) - is cited in the UBS textual apparatus as support for Mark 16:9-20.

66. Saint Patrick (c. 450) - quotes Mark 16:15-16.

67. Prosper of Aquitaine (c. 450) - used Mark 16:15 in The Call of All Nations II:10.

68. Leo the Great, bishop of Rome (453) - used Mark 16:16 in Epistle 120, To Theodore of Cyrus.

69. Codex Bezae (400? 500?) - includes Mark 16:9-20; the first hand's text of Mark 16 in Greek is extant up to the middle
of 16:15.

70. Eznik of Golb (c. 450) - In the 1890's, F. C. Conybeare stated that Eznik used Mk. 16:18 in De Deo ("Against the
Sects") 1:25. Theodor Zahn agreed that this was the case.