B reads [Greek: kai periegen en holei tei Galilaiai]. [Symbol: Aleph] " [Greek: kai periegen ho _is_ en tei Galilaiai]. C " [Greek: kai periegen ho _is_ en hole tei Galilaiai]. But--(I shall be asked)--what about the position of the Sacred Name? How comes it to pass that [Greek: ho Iesous], which comes after [Greek: Galilaian] in almost every other known copy, should come after [Greek: periegen] in three of these venerable authorities (in D as well as in [Symbol: Aleph] and C), and in the Latin, Peshitto, Lewis, and Harkleian? Tischendorf, Alford, Westcott and Hort and the Revisers at all events (who simply follow B in leaving out [Greek: ho Iesous] altogether) will not ask me this question: but a thoughtful inquirer is sure to ask it. The phrase (I reply) is derived by [Symbol: Aleph]CD from the twin place in St. Matthew (ix. 35) which in all the MSS. begins [Greek: kai periegen ho _is_]. So familiar had this order of the words become, that the scribe of [Symbol: Aleph], (a circumstance by the way of which Tischendorf takes no notice,) has even introduced the expression into St. Mark vi. 6,--the parallel place in the second Gospel,--where [Greek: ho _is_] clearly has no business. I enter into these minute details because only in this way is the subject before us to be thoroughly understood. This is another instance where 'the Old Uncials' shew their text to be corrupt; so for assurance in respect of accuracy of detail we must resort to the Cursive Copies. Sec. 5.