Introduction

A major element in the recent attempts to rehabilitate the Western text of Acts has been the detection of ‘Lucanisms’ in the text. In the face of studies which have argued that there is a gap between the outlook and language of Luke and those of the Western text of Acts, several recent writers have maintained that there is no appreciable difference between them, and that the case for Lucan authorship of the Western text is therefore a strong one.

Martini's work (see p. 27 above) demonstrates that it is possible to recognise a strongly Lucan character in the Western text, and yet to conclude that the Western readings are later developments. This should make it clear from the outset that the detection of Lucanisms in the Western text cannot necessarily by itself demonstrate that the text is Lucan in origin. However, it is important to describe the literary characteristics of the text as clearly as possible, not only for the possible positive indications of Lucan authorship, but also because un-Lucan characteristics, if found, would provide strong evidence that Luke was not responsible for the Western text of Acts.

Lucanisms are of two types: linguistic and theological. Studies of the language of Luke have been made by several scholars. Since the advent of redaction criticism, studies of the theological emphases of Luke, in the Acts as well as in the Gospel, have also become numerous.