72 Lods (before A.D. 150), _Ev. sec. Petrum_, 1893, pp. 26 f.; Robinson (before A.D. 160), _The Gospel according to Peter_, &c., 1892, p. 32; Harnack (beginning of second century), _l.c._ p. 80; Zahn (A.D. 140-145), _Das Ev. des Petrus_, 1893, p. 75; Kunze (about A.D. 170), _Das neu aufgefund. Bruchstück des sogen. Petrusev._ 1893, p. 47; Hilgenfeld (end of first century), _Zeitschr._ 1893, pp. 266 f.; Swete (A.D. 150-165), _The Akhmîm Fragment_, 1893, p. xlv; von Schubert (soon after middle of second century), _Die Comp. des Pseudopetr. Ev. Fragments_, 1893, p. 195; W. C. van Manen (older, rather than later, than our Gospels), _Theol. Tijdschr. 5de Stuk_, 1893, pp. 565 ff.; Martineau (A.D. 130), _Nineteenth Century_, June 1893, p. 925, September, p. 633; J. Rendel Harris (no objection to A.D. 130), _Contemp. Rev._ August 1893, p. 236. 73 Zahn, _l.c._ pp. 18 ff.; Swete, _l.c._ pp. xliii, f. 74 Zahn considers ὁ κύριος inauthentic in this place, but it stands in A C D, and many other codices, and it is adopted by the Revisers of the N. T. 75 Although this is not part of the Gospel, it is very ancient. _ 76 L.c._ p. xliii. _ 77 L.c._ pp. xliii, f. _ 78 Magn._ ix. 79 Cf. Ἀναστὰς δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ βήματος ἐζήτει ἐξελθεῖν. _Evang. Nicod._ Pars 1. A. ix. 3; Tischendorf, _Evang. Apocr._ 1853, p. 229. 80 For the sake of brevity these Gospels will be called simply Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. 81 Hilgenfeld conjectures that this abrupt mention of Joseph indicates that he must already have been mentioned in the Gospel of Peter. _Zeitschr._ 1893, 11. Heft, pp. 244 f. 82 Cf. προσελθὼν τῷ Πιλάτῳ ᾐτήσατο τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ._ Evang. Nicod._ Pars I. A. xi. 3; Tischendorf, _Evang. Apocr._ 1853, p. 234. _ 83 L.c._ pp. 26 f. 84 Zahn, of course, argues that the commands of Herod can only have been given to the previously named Jews, the judges of Jesus, “and perhaps to their servants” (_und etwa deren Diener_), and he finds fault with Harnack for here bringing in “soldiers” from the canonical Gospels, without warrant from the text. He declares them to be directly excluded by the leading tendency of the Gospel of Peter (_l.c._ p. 27). This supposed “leading tendency,” of hatred of the Jews, is a good deal exaggerated. _ 85 Zeitschr._ 1893, ii. 248 f. 86 Murray, _Expositor_, January 1893, pp. 55 f. 87 Van Manen conjectures that the author got this “King of Israel” from the independent use of some Hebrew or Aramaic source. _Tijdschr._ Juli 1893, p. 408. 88 So, for instance, Swete, J. Rendel Harris, Robinson, and others. Others distinctly identify the αὐτῷ with the malefactor: as, for instance, Kunze, _l.c._ p. 22; Von Schubert, _l.c._ pp. 28 f.; cf. Lods, _l.c._ p. 21. _ 89 L.c._ p. 26.