The Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels Being the Sequel to The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels — Edition Insights

The Hazard of Short Clauses

Burgon devotes a striking passage to the vulnerability of short clauses—those of twelve to fourteen letters, the exact length of a line in early copies. He warns that when such omissions leave the sense unimpaired, modern critics are tempted to eject them from the text. As an example, he cites the omission of και οι συν αυτω (Luke 8:45) by Westcott and Hort, relegated to the margin by the Revisers, and bracketed by Tregelles. Burgon attributes this solely to a scribe skipping a line, followed by Codex B and a few other witnesses. He argues that remote omissions (second or third century) become entrenched: defective originals spawn defective copies, which are then cited as independent witnesses. The taint can even spread to Old Latin versions, creating formidable opponents. This analysis reveals Burgon’s deep concern with the mechanics of textual transmission and the lasting damage of early scribal errors.

Patristic Quotations as Witnesses

A central method in Burgon’s argument is the use of patristic quotations to determine the original text. He corrects a reviewer’s list of testimonies for Matthew 5:44 by insisting on three principles. First, the presence of the phrase υπερ των διωκοντων υμας (a label unique to Matthew) proves a quotation’s origin, even if the same words appear in Luke. Second, the context—sentences before or after the quote—often decides the reference. Third, he notes that Fathers commonly quote verse 45 of Matthew, which is unlikely if they had Luke 6:27–28 in mind. By applying these rules, Burgon revises the tally: before Chrysostom, twenty-five testimonies support the Traditional Text of Matthew 5:44, with only nine against. This methodological rigor underscores his conviction that patristic evidence, when properly handled, overwhelmingly favors the traditional readings.

The Weight of Early Versions

Burgon frequently appeals to early versions, especially the Peshitto Syriac, as guardians of the traditional text. In the preface, he dismisses a critic’s charge of “extravagant claim” for a second-century origin of the Peshitto, noting that he stands with leading Syriac scholars. Later, he discusses how omissions in Greek manuscripts can be reinforced by versions: the Sahidic, Curetonian, Lewis, and Jerusalem Syriac all follow Codex B in omitting και οι συν αυτω at Luke 8:45. Burgon sees this as a chain of dependence on a defective original. He also engages with Latin witnesses, remarking that the Old Latin versions, when tainted by early corruptions, become “formidable because very venerable foes.” His treatment of versions reveals a nuanced view: they are valuable but must be weighed critically, as they can perpetuate errors as easily as preserve authentic readings.

Readers approaching this work should be prepared for a dense, polemical style. Burgon writes as a defender of a tradition under attack, and his arguments are built on detailed collations of manuscripts, versions, and patristic citations. The book is best read alongside The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels and with a critical edition of the Greek New Testament at hand. Burgon’s evidence is copious, but his conclusions are fiercely contested; this volume offers a window into the late-nineteenth-century debate over the textual basis of the Gospels.

Holding Burgon’s fierce defense of the Gospels, I remembered a worn copy of The Expositor’s Bible: The Epistle to the Galatians — Edition Insights on my grandfather’s shelf. Both feel like quiet letters from someone who loved the text enough to argue with it, and I miss that kind of patient company.