(Victor.) τὸ μὲν “ἀναστὰς,” ὰναπέμψωμεν ἐπὶ τὴν παρὰ τῷ Ματθαίῳ “ὀψὲ σαββάτων.” (τότε γὰρ ἐγηγέρθαι αὐτὸν πιστεύομεν.) τὸ δὲ ἑξῆς, ἑτέρας ὄν διανοίας παραστατικὸν, συνάψωμεν τοῖς ἐπιλεγομένοις; (Eusebius.) (“πρωί” γὰρ “τῇ μιᾷ τοῦ σαββάτου ἐφάνη Μαρίᾳ τῇ Μαγδαληνῇ.”) (Victor.) (τὸν γὰρ “ὀψὲ σαββάτων” κατὰ Ματθαῖον ἐγαγερμένον ἱστορεῖ “πρωί” ἑωρακέναι Μαρίαν τὴν Μαγδαληνήν.) (Eusebius.) τοῦτο γοῦν ἐδήλωσε καὶ ὁ Ἰωάννης “πρωί” καί αὐτὸς “τῇ μιᾷ τοῦ σαββάτου” ὤφθαι αὐτὸν τῇ Μαγδαληνῇ μαρτυρήσας. (Victor.) τοῦτο γοῦν ἐδήλωσε καὶ Ἰωάννες, “πρωί” καὶ αὐτὸς “τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων” ὤφθαι αὐτὸν τῇ Μαγδαληνῇ μαρτυρήσας. [31 words here omitted.] (Eusebius.) ὡς παρίστασθαι ἐν τούτοις καιροὺς δύο; τὸν μὲν γὰρ τῆς αναστάσεως τὸν “ὀψὲ τοῦ σαββάτου.” τὸν δὲ τῆς τοῦ Σωτῆρος ἐπιφανείας, τὸν “πρωί.” (Victor.) ὡς παρίστασθαι ἐν τούτοις καιροὺς δύο; τὸν μὲν τῆς ἀναστάσεως, τὸν “ὀψὲ τοῦ σαββάτου;” τὸν δὲ τῆς τοῦ Σωτῆρος ἐπιφανείας, τὸ “προί.” [EUSEBIUS, _apud Mai_, iv. p. 256.] [VICTOR ANTIOCH, _ed. Cramer_, i. p. 444-5: (_with a few slight emendations of the text from_ Evan. Cod. Reg. 178.)] Note, that Victor _twice_ omits the word πρῶτον, and _twice_ reads τῇ μιᾷ τοῦ σαββάτου, (instead of πρῶτῃ σαββάτου), _only because Eusebius had inadvertently_ (three times) _done the same thing_ in the place from which Victor is copying. See Mai. _Nova P. P. Bibl._ iv. p. 256, line 19 and 26: p. 257 line 4 and 5. 114 οὐκ ἀγνοῶ δἐ ὡς διαφόρους ὀπτασίας γεγενῆσθαί φασιν οἱ τὴν δοκοῦσαν διαφωνίαν διαλῦσαι σπουδάζοντες. Vict. Ant. _ed. Cramer_, vol. i. p. 445, l. 23-5: referring to what Eusebius says _apud Mai_, iv. 264 and 265 (§ iiii): 287-290 (§§ v, vi, vii.) 115 e.g. in the passage last quoted. 116 For the original of this remarkable passage the reader is referred to the Appendix (E). 117 How shrewdly was it remarked by Matthaei, eighty years ago,—“Scholia certe, in quibus de integritate hujus loci dubitatur, omnia _ex uno fonte promanarunt_. Ex eodem fonte Hieronymum etiam hausisse intelligitur ex ejus loco quem laudavit Wetst. ad ver. 9.—Similiter Scholiastæ omnes in principio hujus Evangelii in disputatione de lectione ἐν ἡσαίᾳ τῷ προφήτη ex uno pendent. _Fortasse Origenes auctor est hujus dubitationis._” (N.T. vol. ii. p. 270.)—The reader is invited to remember what was offered above in p. 47 (line 23.) 118 It is not often, I think, that one finds in MSS. a point actually inserted after Ἀναστάς δέ. Such a point is found, however, in Cod. 34 ( = Coisl. 195,) and Cod. 22 ( = Reg. 72,) and doubtless in many other copies. 119 Scrivener’s _Introduction_, pp. 47, 125, 431.