Continuing with my characters assassination of the earliest Manuscript support for LE, we have seen that the earliest Manuscript support for 16:8 as original is Sinaiticus and Vaticanus which is unqualified support. Regarding the inferior, later Manuscript support for LE, Codex Washingtonianus and Codex Alexandrinus, we have seen that they are qualified support for LE due to significant textual variation, a common sign of forgery.
Another early witness for LE is Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus:
Everyone agrees that it contained the LE. In discussions of the ending of Mark its LE is never described as containing any textual variation. The original text though is very difficult to read due to most of it being written over. I have faith that its LE has significant textual variation but is not mentioned in LE discussions because the specifics of the variation are unclear. The online pictures look unreadable to me. Is anyone aware of an available scholarly attempt to recreate the specific wording of its LE?Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (Paris, National Library of France, Greek 9; Gregory-Aland no. C or 04, von Soden δ 3) is a fifth-century Greek manuscript of the Bible, sometimes referred to as one of the four great uncials (see Codex Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus and Vaticanus). The manuscript is not intact: in its current condition, Codex C contains material from every New Testament book except Second Thessalonians and Second John; however, only six books of the Greek Old Testament are represented.
The New Porphyry