xiv. 65. ἔλαβον, א A B and most authorities: ἐλάμβανον, D G, 1, 13, 69, 2^{pe}, al^{10}: ἔβαλλον, H....: ἔβαλον, E M U etc. The simplest explanation of this variety of readings is that ἐλάμβανον was first, and that it was changed into the more common aorist ἔλαβον, which then became ἔβαλον or ἔβαλλον. The converse is not so likely, viz. that ἔβαλλον or ἔβαλον became first ἔλαβον and then ἐλάμβανον, or that ἔλαβον gave rise directly both to ἐλάμβανον and ἔβαλον or ἔβαλλον. On these and also on internal grounds the reading of D G is to be preferred: “they began to spit upon him, and continued to buffet him.” xv. 28. Syr^{sin} is now to be added to the authorities that omit the interpolation. On the interesting names, Zoatham and Chammatha, Dysmas and Gestas, Titus and Dumachus (_i.e._ Θεομάχος), see Berger in the notice of Wordsworth, and White’s _Epilogus_ mentioned above, and also J. R. Harris in the _Expositor_, March 1900, p. 162 ff., April, p. 304. xv. 34. It is extraordinary that no reference is made in Swete’s edition to the very singular reading of Codex D, ὠνίδισας instead of ἐγκατέλιπες. In addition to the testimony of the Old Latin manuscripts c (exprobrasti me), i (me in opprobrium dedisti), k* (maledixisti: see Burkitt in the _Journal of Theological Studies_, i. p. 278), this reading is attested in Greek by Macarius Magnes. No explanation of it has yet been given that is in all respects satisfactory. See _Expository Times_, August 1898, and February, March, and April 1900. xvi. 9-20. The English Revisers had not the courage to omit the conclusion. They print it quite like the rest of the text, only they separate it from the foregoing by a somewhat wider space than usual, and give a note in the margin to the following effect—viz. “The two oldest Greek manuscripts and some other authorities omit from verse 9 to the end. Some other authorities have a different ending to the Gospel.” The German Revised Version has no remark to offer, which is easily accounted for on the principles on which that version is made. The most careful discussion of the passage is now that of Swete, pp. xcvi-cv. See also Zahn, _Einl._, ii. 227-235, 237, 240, and compare the Appendix in Chase’s _Old Syriac Element_, pp. 150-157, “Note on Mark xvi. 9-20,” and Arthur Wright, _The Gospel according to St. Luke_, p. xv. The subscription of several minuscules bears that Mark’s Gospel was written at Rome ten years after the Ascension, and delivered to the brethren there by Peter, the πρωτοκορυφαῖος of the Apostles. Others give Egypt as the place of origin. It is of more importance to observe that Λ 20, 262, 300 contain the note: ἀντεβλήθη ὁμοίως ἐκ τῶν ἐσπουδασμένων. This refers to the subscription to Matthew found in these manuscripts: ἐγράφη καὶ ἀντεβλήθη ἐκ τῶν ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις παλαιῶν ἀντιγράφων τῶν ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ ὄρει ἀποκειμένων. A similar subscription occurs in 2^{pe}, a minuscule of considerable importance for Mark (473 in Scrivener; see above, p. 151, n.).