The new knowledge that may be being conveyed is either that the betrayer's name was Judas or that Judas was one of the Twelve (or both).
But that Jesus was in fact betrayed seems to already be part of the knowledge base shared between author and readers.
Since words are added to languages through constant usage, tell your friend that magicians use the word all the time and really need "Routine" to be acceptable as a regular verb.
Now, to your specific question: Both my OED and Encarta make references to "Presto", or more specifically, "Praesto" which go back to 16th Century Italy.
Note also that in Syria the cult of Judas the twin was massive.
He is 'their' apostle antedating I suppose any special affection for Simon.
A quick check of named characters in the gospel of Mark, using the NASB translation, produces the following two lists.
The first one is of named characters who are introduced with some kind of descriptor, as if the reader is not necessarily already expected to know who the person is.
As such, I have always suspected there was only one Judas and the business about 'who betrayed Jesus' is a later addition to avoid the importance of the paradigmatic 'Jew' betrayer.There are probably several ways of reading this correspondence, but it is interesting, nonetheless.We ought to make note of one more thing: even though Judas, a member of the Twelve in 3.16-19, is introduced with his very own descriptor ("who betrayed Him"), there is still a very real sense in which prior knowledge of him is presupposed on the part of the readers of the gospel of Mark.For the betrayal does not take place until chapter 14 — so why is he being introduced as the betrayer already?This way of introducing him presumes that the reader already knows that Jesus is going to be betrayed.The second one is of named characters who are introduced cold, as it were, with no descriptor.The names of Jesus and of God will appear on both lists, since their first introduction to the narrative depends on what exactly we make of Mark 1.1: is it a title, a gloss, or the first sentence (sans verb) of the text?I am an email friend of Jesse Shiedlower, who is the American editor of the Oxford English Dictionary.He recently sent me the following: Quote starts *************************I had a few magic terms to deal with--well, only two, but in a total of eight (! Quote ends ******************************In other words, he is looking for quotes and citations for the phrases "presto chango" and "presto change" that antedate the dates listed, in the various parts of speech listed. 65 He spent the intervening days working out his routining.Two public figures (Pilate and Caesar) stand on their own, as does the concept of "the Christ".These two lists make me think that Mark 1.1 should not be considered part of the narrative proper, since both God and especially Jesus would seem to fit in better with the likes of Caesar, Simon, and Moses than with the likes of blind Bartimaeus or Jairus the synagogue official.