xxiv. 37. Zahn (_GK._, i. 681) rejects the supposition that the reading φάντασμα for πνεῦμα was coined by Marcion and taken from a Marcionite Bible into D. That he is right in doing so appears from Chase, who shows that φάντασμα here is the same as δαιμόνιον ἀσώματον in Ignatius (_Ad Smyrnaeos_, iii. 2). See my _Philologica Sacra_, p. 25. The Semitic equivalent of φάντασμα as well as of δαιμόνιον is שֵׁאד, שִׁאדָא,[273] which is used in both the earlier Syriac versions, the Curetonian and the Lewis, to represent φάντασμα in Matt. xiv. 26 and Mark vi. 49. I find that שאדא is used for πνεῦμα in the translation of Eusebius (_Eccles. Hist._, v. 16, ed. Wright-Maclean, p. 289). xxiv. 39. All the authorities agree in saying that Marcion omitted the words ψηλαφήσατέ με καὶ ἴδετε, while Tertullian and Epiphanius state that he also omitted σάρκας καὶ. See Zahn, _GK._, ii. 495, who adds that “the longer clause—_i.e._ ψηλαφήσατέ με καὶ ἴδετε—is also omitted by D, it (with the exception of Colbertinus), vg, but not Syr^{cu}, as Tischendorf wrongly states.” This however is a misapprehension. The _om_ in Tischendorf refers only to με after ψηλαφήσατε. This is omitted by Syr^{cu} as well as by D and also by Syr^{sin}. It would be more exact to say, however, that the καὶ before ἴδετε is also omitted by Syr^{cu}. Moreover, Syr^{sin} agrees with Syr^{cu} in reading ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι αὐτός after ἴδετε. The subscription of certain minuscules states that Luke’s Gospel was written fifteen years after the Ascension. Some say εἰς Ἀλεξανδρείαν τὴν μεγάλην, others ἐv Ῥώμῃ, while one says very strangely, ἐv τῇ Ἀττικῇ τῆς Βοιωταίας, “for Theophilus, who became bishop after divine baptism.” Λ, 262, 300 also contain here the notice of careful collation. The chapter enumeration in these manuscripts is not the same, being 342, 349, and 345 respectively. John. In this Gospel the attention of textual critics was long confined to the passage vii. 53-viii. 11. They failed to observe that in other places there are clauses and whole verses whose omission or interpolation has to be investigated in connection with vii. 53 ff., as, for example, iv. 9, v. 3, 4, and that interesting questions of textual criticism are raised in other parts of the book as well.