SECT. I. Different Readings, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
IT is observed by all that treat upon this Evangelist, that the reading doth vary in some Copies, and this instance is alledged for one.
a 1.1 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. These things were done in Bethabarah, but in other Copies it is, in Be∣thany.
But Drusius, Vulgati codices, &c. The vulgar hath it, in Bethabarah. which Epiphanius in the place above mentioned calls Bethamarah. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Of this reading Petavius is silent.
It might easily happen that Bethabarah should change into Bethamarah, partly consider∣ing the affinity of the characters, which (saith he) tanta est in antiqua Scripturâ, ut vix discerni possit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, & contra, is so great in antient writings, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 can hardly be distinguished; partly that the alternate use of Mem and Beth is so very common in those Countries.