120 Φασὶ δέ τινες τῶν ἐξηγητῶν ἐνταῦθα συμπληροῦσθαι τὸ κατὰ Μάρκον εὐαγγέλιον; τὰ δὲ ἐφεξῆς προσθήκην εἶναι μεταγενεστέραν. Χρὴ δὲ καὶ ταύτην ἑρμηνεῦσαι μηδὲν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ λυμαινομένην.—Euthym. Zig. (_ed._ Matthaei, 1792), _in loc._ 121 For some remarks on this subject the reader is referred to the Appendix (F). 122 Viz. A, C [v]; D [vi]; E, L [viii]; F, K, M, V, Γ, Δ, Λ (quære), Π [ix]; G, H, X, S, U [ix, x]. 123 Vercellone,—_Del antichissimo Codice Vaticano della Bibbia Greca_, Roma, 1860. (pp. 21.) _ 124 Dublin Univ. Mag._ (Nov. 1859,) p. 620, quoted by Scrivener, p. 93. 125 ὁμοιοτέλευτον. 126 See Scrivener’s _Introduction_ to his ed. of the Codex Bezæ, p. xxiii. The passage referred to reappears at the end of his Preface to the 2nd ed. of his _Collation of the Cod. Sinaiticus_.—Add to his instances, this from S. Matth. xxviii. 2, 3:— ΚΑΙ ΕΚΑΘΗΤΟ Ε ΠΑΝΩ ΑΥΤΟΥ [ΗΝ ΔΕ Η ΕΙΔΕΑ ΑΥΤΟΥ] ΩΣ ΑΣΤΡΑΠΗ It is plain why the scribe of א wrote επανω αυτου ως αστραπη.—The next is from S. Luke xxiv. 31:— ΔΙΗΝΥΓΗ ΣΑΝ ΟΙ ΟΦΘΑΛΜΟΙ ΚΑΙ [ΕΠΕΓΝΩΣΑΝ ΑΥΤΟ ΚΑΙ] ΑΥΤΟΣ ΑΦΑΝ ΤΟΣ ΕΓΕΝΕΤΟ Hence the omission of και επεγνωσαν αυτον in א.—The following explains the omission from א (and D) of the Ascension at S. Luke xxiv. 52:— ΑΠ ΑΥΤΩΝ ΚΑΙ [ΑΝ ΕΦΕΡΕΤΟ ΕΙΣ ΤΟΝ ΟΥΡΑΝΟΝ ΚΑΙ] ΑΥ ΤΟΙ ΠΡΟΣΚΥΝΗΣΙ The next explains why א reads περικαλυψαντες επηρωτων in S. Luke xxii. 64:— ΔΕΡΟΝΤΕΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΕ ΠΙΚΑΛΥΨΑΝΤΕΣ Ε [ΤΥΠΤΟΝ ΑΥΤΟΥ ΤΟ ΠΡΟΣΩΠΟΝ ΚΑΙ Σ] ΠΗΡΩΤΩΝ ΑΥΤΟ The next explains why the words και πας εις αυτην βιαζεται are absent in א (and G) at S. Luke xvi. 16:— ΕΥΑΓΓΕ ΛΙΖΕΤΑΙ [ΚΑΙ ΠΑΣ ΕΙΣ ΑΥΤΗΝ ΒΙ ΑΖΕΤΑΙ] ΕΥΚΟΠΩ ΤΕΡΟΝ ΔΕ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΤΟ 127 In this way, (at S. John xvii. 15, 16), the obviously corrupt reading of Cod. B (ινα τηρησης αυτους εκ του κοσμου)—which, however, was the reading of the copy used by Athanasius (_Opp._ p. 1035: _al. ed._ p. 825)—is explained:— ΕΚ ΤΟΥ [ΠΟΝΗΡΟΥ. ΕΚ ΤΟΥ] ΚΟΣΜΟΥ ΟΥΚ ΕΙΣΙΝ ΚΑΘΩΣ Thus also is explained why B (with א, A, D, L) omits a precious clause in S. Luke xxiv. 42:— ΟΠΤΟΥ ΜΕΡΟΣ ΚΑΙ [ΑΠΟ ΜΕΛΙΣΣΙ ΟΥ ΚΗΡΙΟΥ ΚΑΙ] ΛΑΒΩΝ ΕΝΩΠΙΟΝ And why the same MSS. (all but A) omit an important clause in S. Luke xxiv. 53:— ΕΝ ΤΩ ΙΕΡΩ [ΑΙΝ ΟΥΝΤΕΣ ΚΑΙ] ΕΥΛΟ ΓΟΥΝΤΕΣ ΤΟΝ ΘΗΟΝ And why B (with א, L) omits an important clause in the history of the Temptation (S. Luke iv. 5) :— ΚΑΙ ΑΝΑΓΑΓΩΝ ΑΥ ΤΟΝ [ΕΙΣ ΟΡΟΣ ΥΨΗ ΛΟΝ] ΕΔΙΞΕΝ ΑΥΤΩ 128 In this way the famous omission (א, B, L) of the word δευτεροπρώτῳ, in S. Luke vi. 1, is (to say the least) capable of being explained:— ΕΓΕΝΕΤΟ Δ Ε ΕΝ ΣΑΘ ΒΑΤΩ Δ[ΕΥΤΕΡΟ ΠΡΩΤΩ Δ]ΙΑΠΟΡΕΥΕ