^{page 81 note 1} Bernard, J. H., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on St John’s Gospel, I.C.C., 1, 43.Google ScholarMoulton, J. H., A Grammar of New Testament Greek, 111, Syntax, by Nigel Turner (Edinburgh, T. and Clark, T., 1963), pp. 166–7.Google Scholar

^{page 81 note 2} Nevius, R. C., ‘The Use of Proper Names in St Mark’, Studia Evangelica II, Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, Band 87 (Berlin, Akademie Verlag, 1964Google Scholar), and Nevius, R. C., The Divine Names in St Mark, vol. xxv, Studies and Documents (Salt Lake City, University of Utah Press, 1964).Google Scholar

^{page 81 note 3} Middleton, T. F., The Doctrine of the Greek Article: applied to the Criticism and the Illustration of the New Testament (New York, 1813; first published in England in 1808), p. 59.Google Scholar

^{page 81 note 4} Ibid. p. 64.

^{page 81 note 5} Robertson, A. T., A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (London, 1914), P. 761.Google Scholar

^{page 81 note 6} Ibid.

^{page 81 note 7} Cf. Turner, C. H., ’Notes on Marcan Usage‘, in J.T.S. (1924–1929).Google Scholar

^{page 82 note 1} Birdsall, J. N., The Bodmer Papyrus of John (Tyndale Press, 1960).Google Scholar

^{page 82 note 2} Black, M., An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (Oxford, 1946), p. 70.Google Scholar For a cautionary note see Brock, S. P., ’A Note on Luke ix. 16 (D)‘, J.T.S. (October 1963), pp. 391–3Google Scholar, where the position that all of D‘s peculiarities are Semitic is challenged, and it is suggested that some are merely careless habits while others could be Latinisms. It seems to me that some of D‘s omissions of the definite article could, indeed, be due to Latin influence.

^{page 82 note 3} Charles, R. H., Commentary on the Apocalypse, I.C.C., p. cxxi.Google Scholar

^{page 82 note 4} Kilpatrick, G. D., ‘Atticism and the Text of the New Testament’, Neutestamentliche Aufsatze (Verlag Friedrich Pustet, Regensburg, 1963), p. 131.Google Scholar

^{page 83 note 1} At xi. 54 and xii. 12, B does add the article. Sinaiticus has the article at v. 1, xi. 54, xii. 36 xvi. 19, and xxi. 1. 60 has the article at xi. 54, xii. 12, and xiii. 21. A has the article at v. 1, xi. 54 xvi. 19, and xxi. 1.

^{page 84 note 1} Though it could, perhaps, be Latin.

^{page 85 note 1} Turner, Nigel, SyntaxGoogle Scholar, above, believes it is John‘s usage.

^{page 85 note 2} Cf. the discussion in Robertson, A. T., pp. 46–7.Google Scholar

^{page 85 note 3} Middleton, , Doctrine, p. 170.Google Scholar