¹ tc Many important early mss (א B L W [0130] Ë^1,13 565 892 pc) lack “our,” while most (A C D [K] Θ Ψ 0177 33 Ï pc) supply it. Although the addition is most likely not authentic, “our” has been included in the translation due to English stylistic requirements.

³ tc Most mss, especially later ones (A C^vid Θ Ψ 0130 Ë^1,13 33 Ï lat) have εἰς ῾Ιεροσόλυμα (eij" &ierosoluma, “to Jerusalem”) here, but the ms support for the omission is much stronger (א B D L W 579 1241 pc co); further, the longer reading clarifies what they went up to and thus looks like a motivated reading.

¹ tc Most mss (A C Θ 0130 ˹³ Ï lat sy) have ἰδοῦσα (idousa, “when [she] saw [the angel]”) here as well, making Mary’s concern the appearance of the angel. This construction is harder than the shorter reading since it adds a transitive verb without an explicit object. However, the shorter reading has significant support (א B D L W Ψ Ë¹ 565 579 1241 sa) and on balance should probably be considered authentic.

⁴ tc Most mss, especially the later ones (A C D L Θ Ψ 0130 Ë^1,13 33 Ï sy), have πρὸ προσώπου κυρίου (pro proswpou kuriou, “before the face of the Lord”), but the translation follows the reading ἐνώπιον κυρίου (enwpion kuriou, “before the Lord”), which has earlier and better ms support (Ì⁴ א B W 0177 pc) and is thus more likely to be authentic.

⁵ tc A few mss (1216 pc) read ᾿Ισραήλ (Israhl, “Israel”) or ἐν τῷ ᾿Ισραήλ (en tw Israhl, “in Israel”), but this reading does not have enough ms support to be considered authentic. More substantial is the reading ἐν ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ (en Ierousalhm, “in Jerusalem”; found in A D L Θ Ψ 0130 ˹³ 33 Ï), though the preposition was almost surely added to clarify (and perhaps alter) the meaning of the original. The simple ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ, without preposition, is found in א B W Ξ 1 565* lat co.

⁵ tc Most mss, especially later ones (A C Ψ 0130 ˹³ Ï it), read ᾿Ιωσὴφ καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ (Iwshf kai Jh mhthr aujtou, “[both] Joseph and his mother”), a reading evidently intended to insulate the doctrine of the virgin conception of our Lord. But א B D L W Θ Ë¹ 33 579 1241 pc lat sa read οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ (Joi gonei" autou, “his parents”) as in the translation. Such motivated readings as the former lack credibility, especially since the better witnesses affirm the virgin conception of Christ in Luke 1:34-35.

⁵ tc The mss vary on what is read at the end of v. 34. Some have “they knew him to be the Christ,” with various Greek constructions (ᾔδεισαν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν εἶναι [hdeisan auton Criston einai] in B L W Θ Ë¹ 28 33^vid 565 2427 al; ᾔδεισαν τὸν Χριστὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι [hdeisan ton Criston auton einai] in [א²] C [˹³ 700] 892 1241 [1424] pc); codex D has “they knew him and he healed many who were sick with various diseases and drove out many demons,” reproducing exactly the first half of the verse. These first two longer readings are predictable expansions to an enticingly brief statement; the fact that there are significant variations on the word order and presence or absence of τόν argues against their authenticity as well. D’s reading is a palpable error of sight. The reading adopted in the translation is supported by א* A 0130 Ï lat. This support, though hardly overwhelming in itself, in combination with strong internal evidence, renders the shorter reading fairly certain.