Minuscule Evan. 72 (Harleianus 5647 of the eleventh century) on Matt. xxvii. 48: ση[μείωσαι] ὅτι εἰς τὸ καθ’ ἱστορίαν εὐαγγέλιον Διοδώρου καὶ Τατιανοῦ καὶ ἄλλων διαφόρων ἁγίων πατέρων τοῦτο προσκεῖται. Instead of Διοδώρου, Harnack-Preuschen (i. 493), read Διαδώρου, whether rightly or not I do not know. Nothing being known of the historical Gospel of one Diodorus, it is natural enough to conjecture (Zahn, _Forsch._, i. 28) that the reading should be διὰ δ’, but what becomes then of ωρου καὶ? Harnack suggests διὰ δ’ Σύρου Τατιανοῦ, but see Zahn, _Forsch._, ii. 298. The omission of the article before διὰ δ’ is a difficulty. Footnote 223: In his Ἐπιτομὴ αἱρετικῆς κακομυθίας (i. 20; vol. iv. 312), written in the year 453, he says at the end of the chapter on Tatian:—οὗτος καὶ τὸ διὰ τεσσάρων καλούμενον συντέθεικεν εὐαγγέλιον, τάς τε γενεαλογίας περικόψας καὶ τὰ ἄλλα ὅσα ἐκ σπέρματος Δαβὶδ κατὰ σάρκα γεγεννημένον τὸν κύριον δείκνυσιν, ἐχρήσαντο δὲ τούτῳ οὐ μόνοι οἱ τῆς ἐκείνου συμμορίας, ἀλλὰ καὶ οἱ τοῖς ἀποστολικοῖς ἑπόμενοι δόγμασι, τὴν τῆς συνθήκης κακουργίαν οὐκ ἐγνωκότες, ἀλλ’ ἁπλούστερον ὡς συντόμῳ τῷ βιβλίῳ χρησάμενοι. Εὗρον δὲ κἀγὼ πλείους ἢ διακοσίας βίβλους τοιαύτας ἐν ταῖς παρ’ ἡμῖν ἐκκλησίαις τετιμημένας, καὶ πάσας συναγαγὼν ἀπεθέμην καὶ τὰ τῶν τεττάρων εὐαγγελιστῶν ἀντεισήγαγον. Footnote 224: See Hamlyn Hill, _Earliest Life of Christ_, etc., p. 324; Hope W. Hogg, Ante-Nicene Library, Additional Volume. Footnote 225: See _Die Ueberlieferung der griechischen Apologeten_, 1882, pp. 196-218, and, on the other side, Zahn, _Forschungen_, ii. 292 ff. Footnote 226: _The Diatessaron of Tatian: a Preliminary Study_, 1890. Footnote 227: See _ThLz._, 1891, col. 356. Footnote 228: It is not clear whether Harnack gives this as his own opinion or not. For a reading of cod. W^d, akin to that of Tatian, see below on Mark vii. 33, p. 264. Footnote 229: Ante-Nicene Christian Library, Additional Volume, p. 38. Footnote 230: See _Forschungen_, i. 130, 140, 216, 228 f., 237, 248, 263. Footnote 231: London, Macmillan, 1895. Footnote 232: _Forschungen_, i. 179. Footnote 233: This will be found most conveniently in Hogg’s translation—Ante-Nicene Library, Additional Volume. Footnote 234: _Cf._ p. 393: “To judge from Ephraem’s Commentary, the Diatessaron contains scarcely as much apocryphal matter as Codex Cantabrigiensis of the Gospels and Acts.” Footnote 235: