(v.) Evan. 25 (= Reg. 191: anciently numbered Colb. 2259): 1880. Folio: grandly written.
No Author's name to the Commentary on S. Mark. The text of the Evangelist is given in extenso.
(vi.) Evan. 34 (= Coisl. 195.) A grand folio, splendidly written, and in splendid condition: the paintings as they came from the hand of the artist.
At fol. 172, the Commentary on S. Mark is claimed for Victor. It will be found that Coisl. 23 (infrà, No. ix.) and Coisl. 195 are derived from a common original; but Cod. 195 is the more perfect copy, and should have been employed by Cramer in preference to the other (suprà, p. [271].) There has been an older and a more recent hand employed on the Commentary.
(vii.) Evan. 36 (= Coisl. 20.) A truly sumptuous Codex.
Some notices of this Codex have been given already, at p. 229. The Commentary on S. Mark is Victor's, but is without any Author's name.
(viii.) Evan. 37 (= Coisl. 21.) Fol.
The Commentary on S. Mark is claimed for Victor at fol. 117. It seems to be very much the same recension which is exhibited by Coisl. 19 (infrà, No. xviii.) and Coisl. 24 (infrà, No. xi.) The Text is given in extenso: the Commentary, in the margin.
(ix.) Evan. 39 (= Coisl. 23.) A grand large fol. The writing singularly abbreviated.
The Commentary on S. Mark is claimed for Victor: but is very dissimilar in its text from that which forms the basis of Cramer's editions. (See above, on No. vi.) It is Cramer's “P.” (See his Catenae, vol. i. p. xxviii; and vide supra, p. [271].)