The "Western Non-Interpolations"
Among the peculiarities of Codex Bezae (a Greek/Latin manuscript of the 5th or 6th century) is the fact that it lacks several Gospel passages which occur in the otherwise most authoritative manuscripts (such as Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, from the 4th century, and the later discovered Papyrus 75, from the early 3rd century). Westcott and Hort, who regarded the Vaticanus group as representing a virtually pristine text (hence their term "Neutral"), in effect acknowledged the implication that the line of text evolution represented by Bezae (called by them the "Western" line) had branched off very early from the main line of descent, and so lacked these additions which were presently added to the text standing behind Vaticanus and the rest.
But they could not bear to admit that the "Western" Bezae was in these places more authoritative than their "Neutral" text, and they therefore designated the passages in question as "not interpolated in the Western text," whence the awkward term"Western Non-interpolations." The passages, as will presently appear, are actually very early interpolations in the otherwise very good "Neutral" text tradition.
Scholars differ in how many passages they recognize as part of the "Western Non-interpolation" group. The basic list of nine, which were double bracketed in the Westcott/Hort edition, are taken up separately below. One is at the end of Matthew; the rest are at the end of Luke. All are from the Resurrection and Appearances portion of the Jesus story. They are readily interpreted as pious or orthodox adjustments. Other passages present in Vaticanus et al, but absent in Bezae, and considered as possible interpolations by other scholars, are also given below, but simply as lists, for optional study by the viewer.
In discussing the Nine, we quote from the decisions of the United Bible Societies Committee, written up by Bruce M Metzger and issued in 1994 as a Textual Commentary to accompany the 4th edition of the UBS Geek New Testament (the arguments are little changed from those from the 1971 Commentary, also written by Metzger, which accompanied the UBS 3rd edition). We do this partly for its intrinsic interest (these five people are the arbiters of the Bible text that many accept as the last word in scholarly precision), and partly to expose new viewers to the style of argument employed by experts. It turns out that, precisely as regards the authenticity of the Nine, there was "sharp disagreement" among the Committee, a fact on which we will comment (in the Summary) after we have considered all the individual cases.
7 Dec 2006 / Contact The Project / Exit to Synoptica Page
