PREFACE  vii

was  no  mere  oomiHler  but  an  author,  who  has  either  freely
revised,  or  written  down  in  his  own  language,  the  mformation
supplied  to  him :  the  selection  of  incident,  moreover,  and  the
arrangement  of  the  different  parts  of  the  book,  shew  that  he
was  an  author  with  a  personality  of  his  own  which  is  impressed
upon  his  work.  Further,  it  is  no  less  evident  to  me  that  this
autiior  must  be  the  same  as  the  final  editor  of  The  Gospd
according  to  8.  Lvke :  and,  as  will  appear  in  the  Introduction,
I  am  find  no  adequate  reasons  for  calling  in  question  the
testimony  of  tradition  that  this  writer  was  S.  Luke.  Having
this  conviction,  I  have  thought  it  sufSicient — and  sufficiently
honest  to  the  reader—to  call  attention  in  the  commentary  to
the  more  obvious  differences  of  style,  at  the  same  time  vindicating
their  compatibility  with  the  Lucan  authorship,  and  to  leave  to
scholars  the  fuller  investigation  of  the  sources  of  The  Acts  and
its  relation  to  the  problem  of  the  composition  of  the  Qospels.
A  few  words  must  be  added  in  explanation  of  the  footnotes.
Besides  the  ordinary  use  of  footnotes  for  reference  to  authorities
and  the  discussion  of  details,  these  also  serve  other  purposes.
