(xi.) EVAN. 41 (= Coisl. 24.) _Fol._ This is a Commentary, not a Text. It is expressly claimed for VICTOR. The recension seems to approximate to that published by Matthaei. (See on No. viii.) One leaf is missing. (See fol. 136 b.) (xii.) EVAN. 50 (= Bodl. Laud. Gracc. 33.) 4to. The Commentary here seems to be claimed for CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA, but in the same unsatisfactory way as No. iii and xiv. (See Coxe’s _Cat._ i. 516.) (xiii.) EVAN. 299 (= Reg. 177: anciently numbered 22423). The Commentary on S. Mark is Victor’s, but is without any Author’s name. The Text of S. Mark is given _in extenso_: Victor’s Commentary, in the margin. (xiv.) EVAN. 300 (= Reg. 186: anciently numbered 692, 750, and 1882.) _A noble Codex: but the work of different scribes. It is most beautifully written._ At fol. 94, the Commentary on S. Mark is claimed for CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA, in the same equivocal manner as above in No. iii and xii. The writer states in the colophon that he had diversely found it ascribed to Cyril and to Victor. (ἐπληρώθη σὺν Θεῷ ἡ ἑρμηνεία τοῦ κατὰ Μάρκον ἁγίου εὐαγγελίου ἀπὸ φωνῆς, ἔν τισιν εὗρον Κυρίλλου Ἀλεξανδρέως, ἐν ἄλλοις δὲ Βίκτορος πρεσβυτέρον.) See above, the note on Evan. 20 (No. iii),—a MS. which, as already explained, has been elaborately assimilated to the present. (xv.) EVAN. 301 (= Reg. 187: anciently numbered 504, 537 and 1879.) _A splendid fol. beautifully written throughout._ The Commentary on S. Mark is here claimed for VICTOR. (xvi.) EVAN. 309 (= Reg. 201: anciently numbered 176 and 2423.) _A very interesting little fol.: very peculiar in its style. Drawings old and curious. Beautifully written._ The Commentary is here claimed for VICTOR. This is not properly a text of the Gospel; but parts of the text interwoven with the Commentary. Take a specimen(530): (S. Mark xvi. 8-20.) ΚΑΙ ΕΞΕΛΘΟΥΣΑΙ ΕΦΥΓΟΝ ΑΠΟ ΤΟΥ ΜΝΗΜΕΙΟΥ. ΕΙΧΕΝ ΔΕ ΑΥΤΑΣ ΤΡΟΜΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΕΚΣΤΑΣΙΣ. ΕΩΣ ΔΙΑ ΤΩΝ ΕΠΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΟΥΝΤΩΝ ΣΗΜΕΙΩΝ. Over the text is written ΚΕΙΜ (κειμένον i.e. _Text_) and over the Commentary ΕΡΜ (ἑρμηνεία, i.e. _Interpretation_.) See the next. (xvii.) EVAN. 312 (= Reg. 206: anciently numbered 968, 1058, 2283; and behind, 1604. Also A. 67.) _A beautiful little fol._ Contains only the Commentary, which is expressly assigned to VICTOR. This Copy of Victor’s Commentary is very nearly indeed a duplicate of Cod. 309, (No. xvi.) both in its contents and in its method; but it is less beautifully written. (xviii.) EVAN. 329 (= Coisl. 19.) _A very grand fol._ The Commentary on S. Mark is Victor’s, but is without any Author’s name. (See above, on No. viii.) (xix.) REG. 703, (anciently numbered 958: 1048, and Reg. 2330: also No. 18.) _A grand large 4__to__._ The Commentary is here claimed for ORIGEN. Such at least is probably the intention of the heading (in gold capital letters) of the Prologue:— ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΠΡΟΛΟΓΟΣ ΕΙΣ ΤΗΝ ΕΡΜΗΝΕΙΑΝ ΤΟΥ ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΥ. See on this subject the note at foot of p. 235.