Lindisfarne and Rushworth One Reconsidered

Abstract

IN his article entitled ‘Lindisfarne and Rushworth One’, Ross finds similarities between the two interlinear glosses to the Gospels, not only in Mark 1:1–2:15 as formerly recognized but also in Matthew 26 onwards.1 While his argument is valid in so far as it points out that linguistic similarities between the two glosses are prominent in that particular section, a significant point of interest deserves reconsideration, that is, his theory on the direction of influence: he concludes that the similarities arise because Aldred was ‘influencing Farman and not vice versa’, by emphasizing one ‘important’ instance in Mark, and enumerating others.2 It seems, however, that he does not provide solid evidence for the direction as to Matthew 26–28, and instead he simply tries to extend his theory established in Mark back to the earlier portion. It must be understood, however, that the direction may not be the same in Matthew as observed in Mark.3 The present study aims to reconsider the similarities between the two glosses in Matthew 26–28, paying special attention to the direction of influence.