Bengel, like our modern expositors, says nothing of the interpolation in his _Gnomon_, and his view with respect to it has, therefore, to be gathered from his apparatus. “Interjicit cod. Lat. vetustissimus Vos autem, etc. ... Vid. Rich. Simon, _Obs. Nouv._, p. 31. Et sic fere Cant. (_i.e._, D) cuius lectio passim exstat. Idem vero Codex Graeca sua ad Latina haec, quae modo exscripsimus, confecit: Latina autem sua, sub manu, vehementius interpolavit, magno argumento licentiae suae. Eandem periocham legit Juvencus, Hilarius: habentque praeterea codd. Lat. aliquot, et inde Sax. Ex. Luc. xiv. 8 f., interveniente forsan Evangelio Nazaraeorum ... Priorem duntaxat partem, ‘Vos autem ... minui’ habet alius cod. Lat. antiquiss. ut si Librarius, cum describere coepisset, non scribendum agnosceret: eandemque Leo M. sic exhibet. Et tamen ... porro ab hoc loco ad Luc. xxii. 28, verbum _crescendi_ protulit Cant. _coenaeque invitator_ ei dicitur δειπνοκλήτωρ.” The truth is, of course, the very opposite of this, as is shown by the indicative _quaeritis_ and the imperative of the Syriac, which are both derived from the ambiguous ζητεῖτε. There cannot be the slightest doubt of this, seeing that the discovery of Codex Beratinus (Φ) has added a second Greek witness in support of the interpolation. It reads ἐλάττων (_cf._ _minor_, c), omits the καὶ before ἐπέλθῃ just as m does with _et_, has ἄγε in place of σύναγε (_accede_: d, _collige_), and the comparative χρησιμώτερον (_utilius_) for the positive read by D d. The word δειπνοκλήτωρ also occurs in Φ.[270] It is not found in Bekker’s _Pollux_ or in Schmid’s _Hesychius_, and the only instance that ancient lexicons are able to cite for its usage is that of Athenæus, who observes (4. 171 B) that Artemidorus calls the ἐλέατρος by that name. The note appended in Hase-Dindorf’s _Stephanus_ was not correct at the time of its publication: Quidam codices Matt. xx. 27, Hesych., Wakef. Eust. _Od._, p. 1413, 3; nor the quotation from Ducange: Δ. in Lex. MS. Cyrilli exp. ἑστιάτωρ. In the same work δειπνοκλητόριον is cited from Eust., _Il._, 766, 58, and as an explanation of ἑστιατόριον from the Lex. MS. Cyrilli. The word therefore belongs to the later popular language. The question is whether it may not also belong to the vocabulary of Tatian. Moreover, it reminds us of the equally rare word κτήτωρ in Acts iv. 34. On the occurrence of the passage in Tatian, see Zahn, _Forsch._, i. 85, 179. On the questions connected with its interpolation see Chase and p. 216 above.