It must be borne in mind, that for Conflation two differently-attested phrases or words must be produced which are found in combination in some passage of the Traditional Text. If there is only one which is omitted, it is clear that there can be no Conflation because there must be at least two elements to conflate: accordingly our instances must be cases, not of single omission, but of double or alternative omission. If again there is no Western reading, it is not a Conflation in Dr. Hort's sense. And finally, if the remaining reading is not a 'Neutral' one, it is not to Dr. Hort's liking. I do not say that my instances will conform with these conditions. Indeed, after making a list of all the omissions in the Gospels, except those which are of too petty a character such as leaving out a pronoun, and having searched the list with all the care that I can command, I do not think that such instances can be found. Nevertheless, I shall take eight, starting from the beginning of St. Matthew, and choosing the most salient examples, being such also that, if Dr. Hort's theory be sound, they ought to conform to his requirements. Similarly, there will come then four from either of St. Mark and St. Luke, and eight from St. John. This course of proceeding will extend operations from the eight which form Dr. Hort's total to thirty-two. A. In St. Matthew we have (1) i. 25, [Greek: autes ton prototokon] and [Greek: ton Huion]; (2) v. 22, [Greek: eike] and [Greek: to adelpho autou]; (3) ix. 13, [Greek: eis metanoian]; (4) x. 3, [Greek: Lebbaios] and [Greek: Thaddaios]; (5) xii. 22, [Greek: typhlon kai] and [Greek: kophon]; (6) xv. 5, [Greek: ton patera autou] and [Greek: (he) ten metera autou], (7) xviii. 35, [Greek: apo ton kardion hymon] and [Greek: ta paraptomata auton]; and (8) xxvi. 3, [Greek: hoi presbyteroi (kai) hoi Grammateis]. I have had some difficulty in making up the number. Of those selected as well as I could, seven are cases of single omission or of one pure omission apiece, though their structure presents a possibility of two members for Conflation; whilst the Western element comes in sparsely or appears in favour of both the omission and the retention; and, thirdly, in some cases, as in (2) and (3), the support is not only Western, but universal. Consequently, all but (4) are excluded. Of (4) Dr. Hort remarks, (Notes on Select Readings, p. 11) that it is 'a case of Conflation of the true and the chief Western Texts,' and accordingly it does not come within the charmed circle.