Compare προσέθηκεν for προέθηκεν, Ex. xxiv. 23; προσέθηκας, Ps. lxxxix. 8, Symmachus; προανεθέμην or προσανεθέμην, Gal. i. 16. In Wisdom, vii. 27, the first hand of Sinaiticus even writes προσφήτας for prophets. It is disputed whether the title of one of Philo’s books is προπαιδεύματα or πρὸς [τὰ] παιδεύματα. Etc. etc. _Sapienti sat._ Footnote 255: We find all the possible permutations of the words αὐτοῖς ἐλάλησεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς in John viii. 12. See my note on Codex Purpureus Petropolitanus (N) in Hilgenfeld’s _Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie_, 42 (1899), p. 623. Footnote 256: See Harnack, _Das Magnificat der Elisabeth_ (Lukas i. 46-55) in the _Berliner Sitzungsberichte_ of the 17th May 1900, p. 538 ff. A good example of how glosses may creep into the text is afforded by Philo “Quod det.” 11 (Cohn, 1, 266). Footnote 257: On the influence of a system of pericopæ on the text of Codex D, see Scrivener’s Introduction to his edition of the manuscript, p. li, and Zahn, _Einl._, ii. 355. Footnote 258: See Semler’s edition of _J. J. Wetsteinii libelli ad crisin atque interpretationem N.T._, Halae, 1766. Footnote 259: (1) Lectio quae in veteribus latinis non apparet probabilior est. (2) Codices qui cum graecis א B L concordant plerumque textum Hieronymianum ostendunt. Footnote 260: In view of the frequency with which the witnesses fluctuate between ἡμῶν and ὑμῶν, ἡμῖν and ὑμῖν, etc., it is impossible to adjust their claims on any mere arithmetical principle. Zahn (_Einl._, ii. 61) calls attention to an important consideration in support of the reading ὑμῖν in 2 Peter i. 4, which applies to other passages as well—viz., “that when the New Testament epistles were read at divine service, ἡμεῖς would very readily and very frequently be substituted for ὑμεῖς, which excluded the reader or preacher.” Compare Acts iv. 12: ἐν ᾧ δεῖ σωθῆναι—, ἡμᾶς or ὑμᾶς? It might be laid down as a second rule in this connection, that particular importance attaches to those versions in which the distinction of the persons does not depend simply on a single letter but on a separate word (_nobis_: _vobis_, etc.). In versions of this sort the original reading is preserved from the first; in the case of the others, the change could be made at any point of the transmission, especially when it was helped by the nature of the writing, which must also, of course, be taken into account.