This is memorably the case in respect of the Codex Bezae [vi]: more memorably yet, in respect of the Gothic version of Ulphilas (A.D. 360): in both of which MSS., the order of the Gospels is (1) S. Matthew, (2) S. John, (3) S. Luke, (4) S. Mark. This is in fact _the usual Western order_. Accordingly it is thus that the Gospels stand in the Codd. Vercellensis (_a_), Veronensis (_b_), Palatinus (_e_), Brixianus (_f_) of the old Latin version. But this order is not _exclusively_ Western. It is found in Cod. 309. It is also observed in Matthaei’s Codd. 13, 14, (which last is _our_ Evan. 256), at Moscow. And in the same order Eusebius and others of the ancients(451) are occasionally observed to refer to the four Gospels,—which induces a suspicion that they were not unfamiliar with it. Nor is this all. In Codd. 19 and 90 the Gospel according to S. Mark stands last; though in the former of these the order of the three antecedent Gospels is (1) S. John, (2) S. Matthew, (3) S. Luke;(452) in the latter, (1) S. John, (2) S. Luke, (3) S. Matthew. What need of many words to explain the bearing of these facts on the present discussion? Of course it will have _sometimes_ happened that S. Mark xvi. 8 came to be written _at the bottom of the left hand page_ of a MS.(453) And we have but to suppose that in the case of one such Codex the next leaf, which would have been _the last_, was missing,—(_the very thing which has happened in respect of one of the Codices at Moscow_(454))—and what else _could_ result when a copyist reached the words, ΕΦΟΒΟΥΝΤΟ ΓΑΡ. ΤΟ ΤΕΛΟΣ but the very phenomenon which has exercised critics so sorely and which gives rise to the whole of the present discussion? The copyist will have brought S. Mark’s Gospel to an end there, _of course_. What else could he possibly do?... Somewhat less excusably was our learned countryman Mill betrayed into the statement, (inadvertently adopted by Wetstein, Griesbach, and Tischendorf,) that “the last verse of S. John’s Gospel _is omitted_ in Cod. 63:” the truth of the matter being (as Mr. Scrivener has lately proved) that _the __ last leaf_ of Cod. 63,—on which the last verse of S. John’s Gospel was demonstrably once written,—_has been lost_.(455) XIV. To sum up. 1. It will be perceived that I suppose the omission of “the last Twelve Verses” of S. Mark’s Gospel to have originated in a sheer error and misconception on the part of some very ancient Copyist. He _saw_ ΤΟ ΤΕΛΟΣ written after ver. 8: he _assumed_ that it was the Subscription, or at least that it denoted “the End,” _of the Gospel_.