Mark’s Ending in the Digital Age

Paratextual Evidence, New Findings and Transcription Challenges


  • Mina Monier Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics



Gospel of Mark, Long Ending, Shorter Ending, Paratexts, Digital Humanities, Textual Criticism


In approaching the classic problem of Mark’s ending, it has been assumed that there was no stone left unturned. However, the dawning of the digital age has proven otherwise. As part of the SNSF–funded project MARK16, I have studied the complex evidence of Mark 16’s textual transmission to understand the scribal textual decisions. This was followed by electronic transcription of the studied material as part of the digitization process. I will argue, in the first part, that the hitherto neglected paratexts and codicological remarks provide rich evidence on the dynamics of the Endings’ reception, conception and later transmission, being inextricably interwoven with patristic interpretation. As a result, I will provide two new witnesses to the Shorter Ending, embedded in a commentary text. In the second part, I will show how transmitting this complex evidence through electronic transcription is another stage in line with earlier scribal experience that problematizes established categories in scholarship.


Aland, B. and K. Aland. 2012. Text Und Textwert Der Griechischen Handschriften Des Neuen Testaments IV. Band 1.2. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Aland, K. 1974. “Der Schluß des Markusevangeliums,” in L’Evangile Selon Marc. Tradition et Rédaction (BEThL 34), edited by M. Sabbé. Leuven: Presses universitaires, 435–470.

Allen, G. V. and A. P. Royle. 2020. “Paratexts Seeking Understanding: Manuscripts and Aesthetic Cognitivism.” Religions 11(10): 523.

Andrist, P. 2016. “Structure and History of the Biblical Manuscripts Used by Erasmus for His 1516 Edition.” In Basel 1516: Erasmus’ Edition of the New Testament, edited by M. Wallraf, S. S. Menchi and K. von Greyerz, 81–124. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

———. 2018. “Toward a Definition of Paratexts and Paratextuality: The Case of Ancient Greek Manuscripts.” In Bible as Notepad, edited by L. Lied, and M. Maniaci, 130–149.0 Berlin: De Gruyter.

Beza, T. 1559. Novum D. N. Iesu Christi Testamentum. Geneva: Nicolas Barbier et Thomas Courteau.

Black, D. A., ed. 2008. Perspectives on the Ending of Mark, 4 Views. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Burgon, J. W. 1871. The last twelve verses of the gospel according to S. Mark. Oxford: James Parker.

Cahill, M. 1946. “The Identification of the First Markan Commentary,” Revue Biblique 101(2): 258–268.

Caubet-Iturbe, F. J. 1969 La cadena arabe del evangelio de San Mateo, 2 vols. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana.

Clivaz, C. 2019. Ecritures digitales: Digital Writing, Digital Scriptures. Leiden: Brill.

Clivaz, C., M. Monier and J. Barda. 2021. “MARK16 as Virtual Research Environment. Challenges and Opportunities in New Testament Studies,” Classics@18 (2021):

Cramer, J. A., ed. 1844. Catenae Graecorum patrum in Novum Testamentum, vol. 1. Oxonii : E Typographeo academic.

De Bruin, C. C. 1970. Het Luikse Diatesseron. Leiden: Brill.

De Jonge, H. 2019. “Erasmus’ Novum Testamentum of 1519,” NovT 61: 1–25.

De Lagarde, P. 1886. Catenae in Evangelia Aegyptiacae. aedibus Dieterichianis Arnoldi Hoyer.

Ehrman, B. and Metzger, B. 2005. The Text of the New Testament. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Erasmus, D. 1516. Novum Instrumentum omne. Basel: In officina Frobenianna.

———. 1540. In novum testamentum annotationes. Basel: In officina Frobenianna, 1540.

Frey, J. 2003. “ Die Scholien nach dem jüdischen Evangelium und das sogenannte Nazoräerevangelium.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 94(1): 122–137.

Houghton, H.A.G. and D. C. Parker. 2016. “An introduction to Greek New Testament commentaries with a preliminary checklist of New Testament

manuscripts.” In Commentaries, Catenae and Biblical Tradition, edited by H.A.G. Houghton, 1–35. NJ: Gorgias Press.

Houghton, H.A.G. and M. Monier. 2020. “Greek Manuscripts in Alexandria,” The Journal of Theological Studies 71.1: 119–133.

Horner, G. 1911. The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Kelhoffer, J. 2001. “The Witness of Eusebius’ ad Marinum and Other Christian Writings to Text-Critical Debates concerning the Original Conclusion to Mark’s Gospel.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 92(1–2): 78–112.

———. 2014. Conceptions of Gospel and Legitimacy in Early Christianity. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Lamb, W. S. 2012. The Catena in Marcum: A Byzantine Anthology of Early Commentary on Mark Leiden: Brill.

Lunn, N. P. 2015. The Original Ending of Mark: A New Case for the Authenticity of Mark 16:9–20. Cambridge: James Clarke.

Metzger, B. M. 1980. “The Ending of the Gospel According to St. Mark in Ethiopic Manuscripts.” In New Testament Studies (philological, versional, and patristic), edited by B. M. Metzger, 127–147. Leiden: Brill.

Monier, M. 2019a. “GA 304, Theophylact’s Commentary and the Ending of Mark” Filología Neotestamentaria. 52: 95–106.

———. 2019b. “Mark 16 in the Arabic Diatessaron,” e-talk dataset: .

Moschonas, Th. D. 1945. Catalogs of the Patriarchal Library. Volume A: Manuscripts. Alexandria: Patriarchate of Alexandria.

Parker, D. C. 2008. An Introduction to the New Testament Manuscripts and Their Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Reuss, J. 1941. Matthäus-, Markus-, Lukas-, Johanness-Katenen. Münster: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung.

Schmidtke, A. 1911. Neue Fragmente und Untersuchungen zu den judenchristlichen Evangelien. Leipzig: JC Hinrichs.

Von Soden, H. 1911 Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments in ihrer ältesten erreichbaren Textgestalt hergestellt auf Grund ihrer Textgeschichte, vol.1 pt. 1. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.

Wasserman. T. 2010. “Greek New Testament Manuscripts in Sweden with an Excursus on the Jerusalem Colophon.” Svensk exegetisk årsbok 75: 77–108.



How to Cite

Monier, M. . (2021). Mark’s Ending in the Digital Age: Paratextual Evidence, New Findings and Transcription Challenges. Postscripts: The Journal of Sacred Texts, Cultural Histories, and Contemporary Contexts, 12(1), 75–98.