D, in concert with several copies of the Old Latin (a b c ff^{2} h q, &c.), only removes clause (4) from its proper place in St.Mark's Gospel, in order to thrust it into the parallel place in St.Matthew,--where it supplants the [Greek: he lalia sou delon se poiei] of the earlier Evangelist; and where it clearly has no business to be.
Indeed the object of D is found to have been to assimilate St.Matthew's Gospel to St.Mark,--for D also omits [Greek: kai su] in clause (1).
2.

The Ethiopic version, on the contrary, is for assimilating St.Mark to St.Matthew, for it transfers the same clause (4) as it stands in St.
Matthew's Gospel ([Greek: kai he lalia sou delon se poiei]) to St.Mark.
3.Evan.33 (which, because it exhibits an ancient text of a type like B, has been styled [with grim irony] 'the Queen of the Cursives') is more brilliant here than usual; exhibiting St.Mark's clause (4) thus,--[Greek: kai gar he lalia sou delon se homoiazei].
4.

In C (and the Harkleian) the process of Assimilation is as conspicuous as in D, for St.Mark's third clause (3) is imported bodily into St.Matthew's Gospel.

C further omits from St.Mark clause (4).
5.

In the Vercelli Codex (a) however, the converse process is conspicuous.