*** • • • • • & • • • …………
*****~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~. r.a.….….………
' : - »šºka tās
-* ſ- ， ：




º º ãºzizFF - º ºğºlliſillſº
f % %; % #. §§§ º āşşlſ º §§
S.A. ||########$ ſº Śººl ºffſ: N
§ 4%||||||fºº}ſº & ºzº wº
à-4 || #º 3% g- }
& %|}}}|†† ºf -- º 2 º
f º v.
ãºft#Aſºº 2%
#|#&##############
§:
lºst
gºs
º
:E:
*
º
ãº
§§
º š
&#s;
*ś
§§W_º º
jº
§:
ze, ºxº º
ºt :
°º º * º
ººlºº
2% sº º
º ޺
tº sº a sº
º
:
|
i.
§
%
| tº
## º
£3. §§
:8: |].''
§§ É)||
< … ë:- º .."?
$5. -
**s IC # º |
is sº º †º º 3.
#35 | jñºl
g 5 § § §Sºs
| 3 : T. *ś
"E.g.: * Sº
### XTº
© Cº. §
###
: ... O
%
*
ºg
à%º
f;
-
3.
:
3.
i
i
ºš.
1jš % § º:
gº Ç º 6.
§§§5%;
sº
2s, ºz.%.
gº i º º Fººt; jº
}
º Q
£º
&
- ºWN
jº#||
| º
*
SN
&
*



























































































































THE HISTORY
OF
THE ENGLISH BIBLE
à."
REV. wºmoulton, M.A., D.D.,
MASTER OF THE LEYS SCHOOL, CAMBRIDGE,
sº. By THE
CASS E L L PET T E R & G A LP IN :
LONDON, PARIS & NEW YORK.
[ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.]

Bs
455
, W4%
P R E F A C E.
—6—
THE following pages are, in the main, a reprint of
articles which appeared in the “Bible Educator,”
edited by Professor Plumptre. I have made some
corrections and slight additions, and restored some
pages (about twenty in all) which the necessary
limits of space excluded from the “Bible Educator.”
That the little book owes very much to the many
able writers on the subject need hardly be said. I
trust that in every case I have made full acknow-
ledgment of my debt. My own labour has been
chiefly devoted to a careful examination of the
characteristics of each version ; and here, unless the
contrary is expressly stated, I have depended entirely
on my own collations. In most instances these will
be found to confirm, but occasionally to correct or
extend, the conclusions now generally received.
One obligation demands special mention, and I
make the acknowledgment with special pleasure and
iv AAEAEFA CAE.
gratitude. The number of references to Professor
Westcott’s “History” is but an inadequate measure
of my indebtedness to that work. Those only who
have endeavoured to work on the lines which Dr.
Westcott has marked out can really understand
how much he has done to promote the accurate
knowledge of the English Versions of the Bible.
CAMBRIDGE,
Pebruary, 1878.
C O N T E N T S.
—º-
CHAPTER I.
THE EARLIER PARAPHRASTS.
PAGE
Our English Bible one out of many Translations—The History of the
English Bible not identical with that of the Authorised Version—
What is “English?”—The Earliest Paraphrases—Caedmon—Specimen
of his Work—Aldhelm—Guthlac—Bede's Translation of St. John—
Alfred’s “Dooms”—The Anglo-Saxon Versions only Partial—Anglo-
Norman Translations—Metrical Paraphrases—Specimens—Versions of
the Psalter ... e is tº tº º ſº. e is tº tº & tº * f e * e º e gº º & = & ... I–16
CHAPTER II.
THE WYCLIFFITE VERSIONS.
Birth and Early Life of Wycliffe—Patronised by John of Gaunt—The Early
and Later Wycliffite Versions—The General Prologue—Authorship of
the Versions—Specimens—Introduction of Textual Glosses and Expla–
natory Notes — Latin Original of the Versions — Rapid Multiplication
of Copies – Is this the First English Bible 2 – Statement of Sir T.
More ... a º tº * tº º tº gº tº * G - g º is & & & * * * is a tº * * * ... I7–32
CHAPTER III.
A CENTURY OF PREPAIRATION.
Important Events in the Period between Wycliffe and Tyndale—Wycliffe's
Translations Condemned—John Huss—Revival of the Study of Greek
—The Invention of Printing—Erasmus in England—His Greek Testa-
ment and Latin Paraphrase—The Complutensian Polyglott—The Vul-
gate — Other Latin Versions — Vernacular Translations — The First
French Bible—German and Italian Bibles—Luther's Version—Trans-
lations of Luther's Bible—Other Workers in Germany ... & a tº ... 33-42
vi CONTENTS.
CHAPTER IV.
WILLIAM TYNDALE. —I.
PAGE
Birth and Early Life of Tyndale—His Residence with Sir John Walsh—
Determines to Translate the Bible—Visits London—Leaves England—
Discovered at Cologne by Cochlaeus—Flees to Worms—Tyndale’s New
Testament Reaches England—Endeavours to Prevent it—The Transla-
tion of the Old Testament Commenced—Tyndale's Betrayal and Exe-
cution—Various Estimates of his Character... g = ºr * † & tº gº º ... 43–58
CHAPTER V.
WILLIAM TYNDALE. –II.
Examination of Tyndale's Work—The New Testament — Comparison of
the Different Editions—Revisions of Tyndale's Version—joye—Speci-
mens of the Different Editions Compared—Characteristics of Tyndale’s
Version—Very few Unfamiliar Words in it—Similarity to the Authorised
Version—What Greek Text did Tyndale use ?—Order of the Books... 59–78
CHAPTER VI.
WILLIAM TYNDALE. —III.
Original Editions of Tyndale's Version in Existence—Illustrations and
Marginal Notes—Specimens of Tyndale's Translations of the Old
Testament—Characteristic Peculiarities — Question of Tyndale’s Inde-
pendence—Attacks by Sir Thomas More—Objections to his Language
—How far Indebted to Previous Workers—General Estimate of Tyn-
dale’s Work .. tº ſº tº tº g & tº tº º s e & sº e & s s sº $ 8 tº tº º ſº ... 79-94
CHAPTER VII.
MILES COVERIDALE. —I.
Birth and Early Life of Coverdale—Stirring Contemporary Events—Con-
demnation of Tyndale—Permission Given for Translation of the Bible
—Coverdale’s Bible Printed—His Work on the Continent—Return to
England — Subsequent History and Death — Coverdale’s Account of
his Labours—Specimens of his Translation ... gº 8 º' tº º tº g & e ... 95-IO4
CHAPTER VIII.
MILES COVERIDALE. —II.
Characteristics of Coverdale's Version—Attacks upon it—Question as to his
Original—Comparison with Tyndale’s Translation and the Swiss Version
—Estimate of Coverdale's Bible—Divisions of the Work—Dedications
and Prologues—Coverdale's Psalter mainly the Psalter of the Prayer-
book—Use of Unfamiliar Words—Copies in Existence—The Latin-
English Testaments ... * * * * * * & g tº is tº gº * * g. gº º & tº & & Ioš–12 I
COAV 7'EAVT.S. vii
CHAPTER TIX.
“MATTHEW's BIBLE”—JOHN ROGERs—RICHARD TAVERNER.
Publication of a New Translation by Matthew—Accepted by Cranmer and PAGE
Cromwell—The Royal License Granted—The First Authorised Version
of the English Bible—Who was Matthew 2–Share of John Rogers in
the Work—His Life and Martyrdom—Similarity of most of the Work
to Tyndale's—Rogers Editor rather than Translator—Comparison with
Previous Versions—Order of the Books—Copies in Existence—Richard
Taverner–His Translation Published—Characteristics of his Version—
Changes introduced by him tº sº e & © º * & © g g tº tº º & & ºn 122—136
CHAPTER X,
T H E G R E. A. T B I B L E .
Coverdale Charged with the Preparation of Another Bible — His Work in
France with Grafton — Interrupted by the Inquisition — Returns to
England—The First Edition of the Great Bible Published—The Title-
page — License to Print Granted by the King to Cromwell — Various
Editions—Cranmer's Preface—Plan for a New Translation—The Great
Bible Compared with Previous Versions—The Psalter—Force and Beauty
of the Translation—Copies in Existence g º º & ſº tº º ºg & e tº tº I37–149
CHAPTER XI.
THE GENEVAN VERSIONS.
Accession of Edward VI.—Active Printing and Circulation of the Scriptures
—Cheke's Translation of St. Matthew—Accession of Mary—Persecution
of the Translators—The Exiles in Geneva with Calvin—The Geneva
New Testament—Whittingham—First Division of the English Bible
into Verses—The Geneva Bible—Compared with the Geneva Testament
—Examples–Notes—Peculiarities of Language—The English Bible Pre-
sented to Queen Elizabeth—Tomson S Revision tº dº e * & 4 g º º I50–167
CHAPTER XII.
THE BISHOPs’ BIBLE.
Two Versions of the Bible in Circulation — The Bishops' Bible Projected
by Parker—Rules for the Revision—Allotment of the Books—Publica-
cation of the Work—The Second Edition in Quarto—Estimate of the
Bishops' Bible—Special Peculiarities in the Old Testament and the
New — Criticisms by Lawrence — The Version Corrected — Marginal
Notes ... & & tº fe & sº e tº q * tº º tº e e e gº º § 3 & & e = & sº tº 168–180
CHAPTER XIII.
THE RHIEIMS AND DOU AI BIBLE,
English Version of the New Testament Circulated among Romanists—The
New Testament from Rheims—The Old Testament from Douai–Pro-
bable Authors of the Version—Translated from the Vulgate—Estimate
of the Vulgate—The Douai Version Faithful, but Pedantic—Examples
—Various Editions Published ... e is g tº g tº tº € ºt s & tº tº e & 181—189
viii COAVTEAVTS.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE AUTHORISED VERSION.
PAGE
Accession of James I.—The Hampton Court Conference—A New Transla-
tion of the Bible Asked for—Concurrence of the King—The Translators
Appointed—Allotment of the Books—Character and Position of the
Translators—Their Duties Defined—Publication of the New Translation
–Its Relation to Previous Versions—Estimate of the Work—Alterations
in Later Editions—Curious Misprints ... tº a tº tº ſº tº © & © e a tº 190—211
CHAPTER XV.
LATER HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE.
Complaints against the New Version—Bill Brought into Parliament for a
New Translation—Revision of the Book of Common Prayer—Various
Schemes of Revision subsequently Proposed—The Subject Revived by
Professor Selwyn — The Revision Committee Appointed — The Old
Testament Company—The New Testament Company—The Duties of
the Revisers Defined—Commencement of the Work—Co-operation of
American Scholars Invited—Objects of the New Revision tº dº ſº 212–223
THE
HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE.
CHAPTER I.
THE EARLIER PARAPHRASTS AND TRANSLATORS.
THERE are probably few readers of the English Bible who
are not aware that the sacred volume in their hands is
but one of various translations of the Scriptures into our
language. We have only to look at the opening pages to
become acquainted with this fact. The title-page presents
the Holy Bible as “translated out of the original tongues,
and with the former translations diligently compared and re-
vised.” “Your Highness,” say the translators in their dedi-
cation to King James, “ out of deep judgment apprehended
how convenient it was, that out of the original sacred
tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in
Our Own, and other foreign languages, of many worthy men
who went before us, there should be one more exact trans-
lation of the Holy Scriptures into the English tongue.”
Whilst the existence of earlier translations is thus acknow-
ledged on the first pages of Our Bibles, the translations
themselves are represented in the Book of Common Prayer;
in which the Psalms, the Ten Commandments, the Lord's
Prayer, and many other passages of Scripture scattered
through the various offices, are found to differ, sometimes
materially, from the Authorised Version of 1611.
This version, then, was not the result of a single effort ;
B
2 The English Bible.
it represents the last stage of a growth. The object of the
present work will be to trace the progress of this growth,
and then to inquire by what means, and amid what
influences, it has arrived at its present maturity.
It is not desirable, however, that the history of the
English Bible should be treated as identical with the his–
tory of the Authorised Version. Such a limitation would
render it necessary to pass over some most interesting
attempts to make the Scriptures known to our countrymen,
because these attempts, important in themselves, left no
mark on the great work whose history we are tracing.
These isolated efforts, however, can receive only sub-
ordinate attention. Our main inquiries must be —To
whose labours are we indebted for our English Scriptures P
In what proportion has each labourer added to the value
of the treasure ? The work must have our chief considera-
tion, not the workman. In the case of some men, indeed,
the life and the labour can with difficulty be separated ;
but, as a rule, we must leave others to trace the course of
the reformer, the divine, or the martyr, contenting ourselves
with following the translator and his translation.
What is an English Bible P This simple question has
received different answers. If the English language is the
language of the people called English, it has been spoken
in this country for the last 1,400 years. We are carried
back to the invasions of Britain in the fifth century; for the
tribes usually known by the name of Saxons called them-
selves English (AEnglisc). According to this view, “Utan
tobrecan heora bendas, and aweorpan heora geocu of us,”
and “Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their
cords from us,” are alike specimens of English. Certainly
the former sentence would not suggest Psalm ii. 3 to the
ordinary English reader; but, on the other hand, when the
key is once supplied, he may easily discover that almost all
The Parap/hrase of Cadmon. 3
the unfamiliar words are closely connected with the language
of his daily life. For our present purpose it is not of much
consequence to decide whether the speech of our fore-
fathers, between A.D. 450 and A.D. IIoo, should be called
English or Anglo-Saxon : if the former name reminds us of
the essential unity of the language spoken in this land since
Roman times, the latter has the advantage of avoiding all
ambiguity. At all events, the early translations into this
language are too important to be passed over, even though
it may seem unlikely that they can have exercised much
influence upon succeeding versions.
The earliest portion of Anglo-Saxon sacred literature now
extant is the Paraphrase of Caedmon, a monk of Whitby,
who lived in the seventh century. The venerable Bede
relates of Caedmon that “he sang the creation of the world,
the origin of man, and all the history of Genesis, and made
many verses on the departure of the children of Israel out
of Egypt, and their entering into the Land of Promise,
with many other histories from Holy Writ; the incarnation,
passion, resurrection of our Lord, and his ascension into
heaven; the coming of the Holy Ghost, and the preaching
of the apostles ; also the terror of future judgment, the
horror of the pains of hell, and the delights of heaven.”’’
That which has come down to us under Caedmon's name
may have received considerable alteration at the hands of
later poets and reciters; but the relics agree with Bede's
description. The following extract from Thorpe's prose
translation will illustrate the merits of Caedmon as a para-
phrast of Scripture :—
Then the chief earnestly proved
began the Powerful what the man’s
King to tempt, fortitude were ;
1 Bede’s Zecſesiastical History, translated by Dr. Giles, page 218.
(Bohn.)
B 2
4. The English Biffle.
and then with Swart flame
burn the beloved’s body,
and offer it to me as a gift.
He delayed not the journey,
but soon began
to hasten for the way.
To him was the Lord of angels'
word terrific,
and his Sovereign dear.
Then the blessed
Abraham his
night-rest gave up,
the Preserver's
behest despised not,
but him the holy man
with words austere
he with his voice addressed him :-
Go thou, with utmost haste,
Abraham, journeying
set thy steps,
and with thee lead
thine own child.
Thou shalt Isaac to me
Sacrifice, thy son,
thyself, as an offering,
after thou mountest
the steep downs
(the ring of the high land,
which I from hence will show thee)
up with thine own feet;
there thou shalt prepare a pile,
a baleº-fire, for thy child,
and thyself sacrifice
thy son with the Sword’s edge,
girded with a gray Sword,
showed that of the Guardian of
spirits
dread in his breast dwelt.
Important as this paraphrase is, as the earliest Anglo-
Saxon work presenting Scripture in any form, it has, of
course, no claim to rank among translations. The first
translators of whom we have any information are Aldhelm,
Bishop of Sherborne (who died A.D. 709), and Guthlac,
a hermit of Crowland, near Peterborough ; to each of these
is ascribed a version of the Psalter, now probably lost. The
last work in the laborious life of Bede was a translation
of the Gospel according to St. John into the language of
the people. His devotion to this labour of love, and
his eagerness to complete it, are touchingly described
by his disciple Cuthbert, in a letter to his “fellow-reader
Cuthwin,” on the death of their “father and master, whom
God loved.”
“During these days,” Cuthbert writes, “he laboured to
compose two works well worthy to be remembered, besides
1 A funeral pile.
**
Bede's Translation of St. John. 5
the lessons we had from him, and singing of Psalms; viz.,
he translated the Gospel of St. John as far as the words
“But what are these among so many,' etc. [St. John vi. 9],
into our own tongue for the benefit of the Church ; and
some collections out of the Book of Notes of Bishop
Isidorus, saying: ‘I will not have my pupils read a false-
hood, nor labour therein without profit after my death.’
When the Tuesday before the ascension of our Lord came,
he began to suffer still more in his breath, and a small
swelling appeared in his feet; but he passed all that day
and dictated cheerfully, and now and then, among other
things, said, “Go on quickly, I know not how long I shall
hold out, and whether my Maker will not soon take me
away.’ But to us he seemed very well to know the time of
his departure ; and so he spent the night, awake, in thanks-
giving ; and when the morning appeared, that is, Wednesday,
he ordered us to write with all speed what he had begun ;
and this done, we walked till the third hour with the relics
of the saints, according to the custom of that day. There
was one of us with him, who said to him, ‘Most dear
master, there is still one chapter wanting: do you think
it troublesome to be asked any more questions P’ He
answered, ‘It is no trouble. Take your pen, and make
ready and write fast.' . . . . . . Having said much more,
he passed the day joyfully till the evening; and the boy
above mentioned said: ‘Dear master, there is yet one
sentence not written.” He answered, “Write quickly.’ Soon
after, the boy said, ‘The sentence is now written.” He
replied, ‘It is well, you have said the truth. It is ended.
Receive my head into your hands, for it is a great satis-
faction to me to sit facing my holy place, where I was wont
to pray, that I may also sitting call upon my Father.’ And
thus, on the pavement of his little cell, singing: ‘Glory be
to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost,’
6 The English Biffle.
when he had named the Holy Ghost, he breathed his last,
and so departed to the heavenly kingdom.”
The next translator is a royal personage, the great
Alfred (A.D. 849–901). In the preface to his translation of
Gregory’s “Pastoral Care,” the king gives expression to his
wish that “all the free-born youth of his people, who possess
the means, may persevere in learning, so long as they have
no other affairs to prosecute, until they can perfectly read
the English Scriptures.” How far he himself was able to
minister to the fulfilment of this noble wish, by providing
versions of Scripture for the use of his people, we cannot
say with certainty. According to William of Malmesbury,
Alfred began a version of the Psalms, but the work was
interrupted by his death. One monument of Alfred's
devout zeal is too characteristic to be passed over, especially
as very possibly we have in it the earliest extant portion of
Scripture in Anglo-Saxon prose. At the head of his “Book
of Laws” he places the Ten Commandments, not indeed
rendered with verbal accuracy, but differently arranged and
somewhat abridged. The following literal translation is
given by Mr. Thorpe in his edition of the “Ancient Laws
and Institutions of England:”—
“ALFRED's DOOMS.
“The Lord spake these words to Moses, and thus said :
I am the Lord thy God. I led thee out of the land of the
Egyptians and of their bondage.
“I. Love thou not other strange gods above me.
“2. Utter thou not my name idly, for thou shalt not be
guiltless towards me, if thou utter my name idly.
“3. Remember that thou hallow the rest-day. Work for
yourselves six days, and on the seventh rest. For in six
1 Giles, Bede's Acclesiastical History, pp. xx., xxi. (Bohn.)
* Pauli, Zife of Alfred the Great, p. I59. (Bohn.)
Alfred's Dooms. 7
days Christ wrought the heavens and the earth, the seas,
and all creatures that are in them, and rested on the seventh
day: and therefore the Lord hallowed it.
“4. Honour thy father and thy mother, whom the Lord
hath given thee, that thou mayest be the longer living on
earth.
“5. Slay thou not.
“6. Commit thou not adultery.
“7. Steal thou not.
“8. Say thou not false witness.
“9. Covet thou not thy neighbour's goods unjustly.
“ Io. Make thou not to thyself golden or silver gods.”
The Decalogue is followed by an abridged version of the
twenty-first, twenty-second, and part of the twenty-third
chapters of Exodus, faithful in the main, but with certain
alterations (e.g., in xxi. 2, “a Christian * for “a Hebrew ")
which occasionally give the document an incongruous appear-
ance. After Exod. xxi. I3, we read, “These are the dooms
which the Almighty God himself spake unto Moses, and
commanded him to keep : and after the only begotten Son
of the Lord, our God, that is, Our Saviour Christ, came on
earth, he said that he came not to break nor to forbid these
Commandments, but with all good to increase them : and
mercy and humility he taught. Then, after his passion, be-
fore his apostles were dispersed throughout all the earth,
teaching, and while they were yet together, many heathen
nations they turned to God. When they were all assembled,
they sent messengers to Antioch and to Syria, to teach the
law of Christ. But when they understood that it speeded
them not, then sent they a letter unto them. Now this is
the letter which all the apostles sent to Antioch, and to
Syria, and Cilicia, which now, from heathen nations, are
turned to Christ.” Then follows a free version of the epistle
(Acts xv. 23–29), of which we may quote the concluding
8 The English Biöſe.
part (as rendered by Mr. Thorpe). “It seemed to the Holy
Ghost and to us, that we should set no burthen upon you
above that which it was needful for you to bear : now that
is, that ye forbear from worshipping idols, and from tasting
blood or things strangled, and from fornications ; and that
which ye will that other men do not unto you, do ye not
that to other men.”
The Anglo-Saxon versions which have come down to us
comprise little more than the Psalter, the four Gospels, the
Pentateuch, and some of the historical books of the Old
Testament. Of the Psalter, three versions have been given
to the world, edited by Spelman (1640), Stevenson (1843),
and Thorpe (1835). The last-mentioned version (from
which Ps. ii. 3 is quoted in page 2) is found in the
National Library of Paris; Ps. i.-li. are rendered in
prose, the remainder in verse. It has been maintained
that this is Aldhelm’s translation, and is therefore as old
as the seventh century: of this, however, there is not suffi-
cient proof. It is more probable that all three versions
belong to the ninth century. The version edited by Steven-
son for the Surtees Society in 1843 is taken from a MS. in
the British Museum : it is written between the lines of a
Latin Psalter which is believed to belong to the sixth
century, and to have been sent by Gregory the Great to
Augustine soon after his arrival in England" (A.L. 596).
The Psalter edited by Spelman is of a similar kind. These
translations, of course, are from the Latin. For many
hundred years Hebrew was almost an unknown language
in Europe, and the old Latin version, or that of Jerome
(partly a revision of the old Latin, partly a new translation),
was the Bible of Western Christendom. The Latin Psalter
which accompanies the Anglo-Saxon in the two MSS. of
which we are now speaking, is not identical with that which
* Baber, Mew Zestament by Wicleſ, p. lviii.
Anglo-Saaron Versions. 9
is contained in ordinary editions of the Latin Bible: it
represents the earliest of Jerome's revisions, known as the
Acoman Psalter. Of the Gospels, also, three versions are
extant, which appear to belong to the tenth century." One
of these, probably the earliest in date, was first published in
1571, by Archbishop Parker, with a dedication to Queen
Elizabeth, written by John Foxe; afterwards by Junius and
Marshall (1665), by Thorpe (1824), and by Bosworth (1865).
Several MSS. of this version exist in our great libraries, some
furnished with rubrics for guidance in public reading. Of the
translator nothing is known, nor is it certain that the whole
work is from the same hand. From certain peculiarities in
the text of St. John's Gospel, Dr. Marshall was led to con-
jecture that in this Gospel we may have Bede's version,
referred to on page 5. It is not probable that any portion
of the Anglo-Saxon Gospels was derived immediately from
the Greek original ; but to all who study the text of the
Latin New Testament this version is of great importance.
The Latin text before the translator evidently agreed fre-
quently with the oldest and best manuscripts of the Vulgate,
properly so called, but not unfrequently with the translation
in use before the time of Jerome. In Matt. v. 22, for
example, “without a cause” is not found either in the Vul-
gate or in the Anglo-Saxon, though the more ancient Latin
version contained the words ; on the other hand, the 28th
and 29th verses of the twentieth chapter of St. Matthew are
in the Anglo-Saxon separated by a verse of considerable
length, which Jerome rightly removed from the Latin text.
* An admirable edition of the Anglo-Saxon Gospels is now in course
of publication at the Cambridge University Press, under the editorship
of the Rev. W. W. Skeat. In this edition the readings of all the MSS.,
including the Lindisfarne and Rushworth Glosses, are carefully given.
For an excellent description of the MSS., and of the printed editions,
See the Introductions to Part II. (St. Mark), and Part III. (St. Luke).
IO The English Bible.
A version of a different kind is preserved in one of the
Cotton Manuscripts in the British Museum, known as the
“Book of Durham,” the “Gospels of St. Cuthbert,” or the
“Lindisfarne Gospels.” This manuscript contains the four
Gospels in Latin, transcribed by Eadfrith, afterwards Bishop
of Lindisfarne, late in the seventh century. About two
hundred and fifty years later, a priest named Aldred added
an Anglo-Saxon “gloss” or word-for-word translation, writ-
ing it between the lines of the Latin text. A third version,
similar to the last both in age and in character, is found
in one of the manuscripts in the Bodleian Library. This
manuscript is usually known as the “Rushworth Gloss,” or
(from the name of the scribe who wrote the Latin text) the
“Gospels of Macregol.”" The names of the translators of
the Rushworth Gospels appear from notes which they have
added to the gloss : “Farmen presbyter thas boc thus
gleosede, dimittet ei Dominus omnia peccata sua si fieri
potest apud Dominum.” That is: “Farmen the presbyter
this book thus glossed; the Lord will forgive him all his
sins, if it is possible with the Lord,” “. . . Owun the thas
boc gloesde. Faermen tha-m preoste aet Harawuda haefe nu
boc awritne.” “(Let him who profits by me pray for)
Owun, who this book glossed, Farmen the priest at Hare-
wood, who has now written the book.”
Near the close of the tenth century, AElfric translated
into Anglo-Saxon (with Omissions and abridgments) the
Pentateuch, the books of Joshua, Judges, Esther, Job, part
of the history of the Kings, and the books of Judith and
Maccabees. The greater portion of this version has been
preserved to us, and has been twice published; by Thwaites
in 1698, and recently by Grein, in his “Library of Anglo-
Saxon Prose.” In language and style this work is excellent:
* Mr. Skeat has shown that the Rushworth is, to a considerable
extent, a copy of the Lindisfarne Gloss.
Anglo-Saxon Versions. I I
the translation is very varied in character, sometimes
close and literal, sometimes degenerating into free para-
phrase. It is interesting to note that in some portions of
his work (especially in the latter half of Genesis) AElfric
found yet earlier translations existing, and turned them to
aCCOunt.
With the exception of a few fragments, these are the only
Anglo-Saxon translations of Scripture that are now extant.
We cannot doubt that much of the work accomplished in
this field is lost to us. Tradition points to translations of
the whole Bible as existing in these early times. Thus
Purvey (writing about 1388) appeals to chronicles and
books as showing that “Bede translatile the bible, and
expounide myche in Saxon, that was English, either comoun
langage of this lond, in his tyme”; and similar statements
are found in early writers in regard to Alfred, Eadfrith, and
others. It were to be wished that the documents which
time has spared had received a fuller examination. We are
still uncertain what relation exists between the copies of the
same book of Scripture, whether they are independent of
each other, or merely varieties of one translation. All
these relics of antiquity are rich in philological interest;
but they are still more valuable as monuments of the
love of the Bible among our forefathers. It is of course
impossible to determine to what extent these vernacular
translations were known and read. Some were evidently
intended for private use : others, if we may judge from
the number of copies preserved, seem to have been widely
circulated.
The translations of Scripture into the Anglo-Norman
dialect (the variety of French spoken by the upper classes
in England in the ages succeeding the Norman Conquest)
Call for no more than a passing notice here. Little, indeed,
is known of these productions. It will be sufficient to say
I 2 The English Bible.
that a considerable portion of Scripture appears to have
been rendered into Anglo-Norman, and that in part these
translations still exist in manuscript.
As in Anglo-Saxon, so also in early English, the first
essays in the translation of Scripture were in the form of
metrical paraphrases. Among the manuscripts in the Bod-
leian Library is one containing a poetical version of the
Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, together with a com-
mentary. What was the extent of the original work we
cannot tell: the portion preserved contains about 20,000
lines. This paraphrase was written by Orm or Ormin, a
monk of the order of St. Augustine, who himself gives to
his poem the name of “Ormulum.” No other copy of this
work is known to exist, and it is commonly supposed (appa-
rently with good reason) that the manuscript we possess was
written by the author himself. We have no certain indica-
tion of the date of the “Ormulum :” it should probably be
placed late in the twelfth century, or early in the thirteenth.
A few lines (Luke ii. 42—44) will illustrate the writer's style,
and will also show that we are fairly on English ground. It
should be said that the system of orthography seems to be
peculiar to the author.
And siththenn' o thatt ger” thatt Crist
Wass off twellf winnterr elde,
Thegg comenn inntill Gerrsalaem
Att teggre” Passkemesse ;
And heldenn thar thatt hallghe 4 tidº
O thatt Judisskenn wise."
And Jesu Crist wass thar withth hemm,
Swa summ? the Goddspell kithethth.*
And affterr thatt te tid wass gan,
Thegg wenndenn fra the temmple:
1. Afterwards. * In the year. 8. At their. 4 Holy.
5 Time (compare “eventide’”). ° In the Jewish manner.
7 So as. 8 Showeth.
Early English Metrical Paraphrases. I 3
And ferrãenn” towarrd Nazaraeth
An daggess gang” till efenn ;
And wenndenn" thatt te Laferrd4 Crist
Withth hemm thatt gate” come :
And he wass tha" behinndenn hemm
Bilefedd 7 att te temmple.:
In the same library is a large volume entitled Sozv/ehele
or Salus Anima, containing amongst other poems a para-
phrase of the Old and New Testaments in verse: this also
is ascribed to some part of the twelfth century. Of greater
interest is a version of Genesis and Exodus found in a MS.
belonging to Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. The
author is unknown, but probably lived about the middle of
the thirteenth century. The following extract (taken from
Dr. Morris's edition) relates to Gen. xlv. 1-6 –
Thoë cam iosep Swilc rewthe" upon,
He dede halle ut the tothere gon,”
And spac unethes,” so egret,”
That alle hise white wurth” teres wet.
“Ic am iosep, dredeth gu” nogt,
For gure helthe or” hider brogt ;
To ger ben nu” that derthe is cumen,
Get Sulen. v. fulle ben numen,”
That men ne sulen sowen ne sheren,”
So sal drugte” the feldes deren.”
The edition of the Anglo-Saxon Psalter referred to above
as edited by Stevenson for the Surtees Society also contains
a Northumbrian version of the Psalms, made from the Latin,
probably near the close of the thirteenth century. As
several MSS. of this version survive, we may fairly infer
1 Fared, i.e., went 5 Way. 11 Uneasily. 17 Yet shall five
(“thorough-fare,” 6 Then. 12 Wept. fully be taken.
“way-farer”). 7 Remaining. 13 Face became. 18 Reap.
* A day's journey. 8 Then. 14 You. 19 Drought.
8 Weened, 9 Such pity (ruth). 15 Formerly (ere). 20 Harm.
thought. 10 He made all the 16 Two years are
* Lord. others go out. IłOW.
I 4 | The English Bible.
that it was widely known. Its merit will be seen from the
subjoined specimen —
PSALM CXXI.
I. I hove mine eghen l in hilles to se
Whethen? Sal come helpe to me.
2. Mi helpe sal be Laverdà fra,
That maked heven, erthe als-swa.4
3. Noght in stiring” mi fote give he,
Ne he sal slepe that yhemes 6 the.
4. Loke, noght sal slepe, ne slepe Sal wele,
Whilke that? yhemes Iraele.
5. Laverdyhemes the, Laverd in-schilders be
Over the right-hand of the.
6. Bi dai noght the sunne skalde the sal,
Ne the mone bi night with al.
7. Laverd fra alle ivelyheme the,
Laverd thi sauleyheme he. '
8, Laverdyheme thine in-gang and thine out-gang,
Fra hethen, and in to werld lang.
In the first half of the fourteenth century appeared many
metrical paraphrases of portions of Scripture, which it is
impossible here to enumerate. The following version of
the Lord’s Prayer” belongs to this period —“Vader oure
thet art ine heuenes, y-halged by thi name . cominde thi
riche". y-worthe thi wil as ine heuene : and ine erthe. bread
Oure echedayes : yef ous to day . and uorlet ous" Oure
yeldinges”: ase and we uorleteth oure yelderes”. and ne
l Eyes. 3 Lord. to stiring (stir- 7 He that.
* Whence; so Æe- 4 Also. ring, moving) & Protector.
theme (hence) in 5 So Wycliffe : thi foot.”
verse 8. “Give he not in 6 Protects.
* Specimens of Æarly AEnglish, by Morris and Skeat : Part II.,
p. IO5.
* Kingdom (German, A’eich). * Let alone.
* Debts, debtors (“ yielders”).
Early English Versions of the Psalter. I 5
ous led nagt : into uondinge". ac vri ous vram queade'
zuo by hit.”
About the same period we meet with two versions of the
Psalter, the earliest versions of any book of Scripture in
English prose. The former of these was executed (about
1327) by William of Shoreham, near Sevenoaks: the second,
later by a few years only, by Richard Rolle, of Hampole,
near Doncaster. Of the latter many copies are still extant.
The subjoined specimens are taken from the Preface to
Forshall and Madden's edition of the Wycliffite versions:–
PS. XXII. (XXIII.), SHOREHAM's VERSION.
I. Our Lord gouerneth me, and nothyng shal defailen to me; in the
stede 2 of pasture he sett me ther.
2. He norissed me vpº water of fyllynge ; he turned my soule fram
the fende. A
3. He lad me vp the bistiges" of rigtfulnes; for his name.
4. For gif" that ich haue gon amiddes of the shadowe of deth ; Y
shal nougt douten" iuels, for thou artwyth me.
5. Thy discipline and thyn amendyng ; conforted me.
6. Thou madest radi grace in my sight ; Ogayns hem 7 that
trublen me.
7. Thou makest fatt myn heued wyth mercy; and my drynke
makand 8 drunken ys ful clere.
8. And thy merci shal folwen me ; alle daies of mi lif.
9. And that ich wonne” in the hous of our Lord ; in lengthe of
daies.
PS. LXXVIII. (LXXIX.), RICHARD ROLLE's VERSION.
1. God, gens” come in thin heritage; thei filed thi holy tempul, thei
sette Jerusalem in kepyng of appuls.
2. Thei sette the dyande bodyes of thi Seruaunts mete to the fowles
of the lyſt;" flesche of thi halowes” to bestis of erthe.
1 Uondinge, temptation ; queade, evil. Compare Chaucer's words
fonde (to try), quad (bad).
3 Place. 8 Upon. 4. Paths. 5 If. 6 Fear. 7 Them.
8 Making. 9 Dwell. 10 Nations. 11 Air. 12 Saints.
I6 The English Bible.
3. Thei spille horel blode as watir in vmgong of? Jerusalem ; and
none was for to graue.”
4. Made we are reprofe to oure neghbors; skornynge and hething”
to alle that in Our vngong are. -
5. Howe longe, Lord, shalt thou be wrothe in ende; kyndelt shal be
thi lufs as fire.
That these versions are derived from the Vulgate may
very easily be seen, by comparing them with the Roman
Catholic translation (the “ Douay Bible”), which is avowedly
made from the Latin. Thus in Ps. xxiii. 1, 2, 5, the Douay
rendering is as follows: “The Lord ruleth me : and I shall
want nothing. He hath set me in a place of pasture. He
hath brought me up, on the water of refreshment. Thou
hast anointed my head with oil; and my chalice which
inebriateth me, how goodly is it !” The last clause in
Ps. lxxix. I stands thus: “They have made Jerusalem as a
place to keep fruit.”
We have now reached in our review the middle of the
fourteenth century. Before the close of this century the
whole Bible had been rendered into English by John
Wycliffe and his followers. Their labours will next claim
our attention. -
1 Their. * Round about. 8 Bury. * Contempt. 5 Love.
CHAPTER II.
THE WYCLIFFITE VERSIONS.
THE most conspicuous name in the religious history of
England during the fourteenth century is that of John de
Wycliffe." He was born about the year 1320, near Rich-
mond, in Yorkshire ; and died at Lutterworth, on the last
day of the year 1384. His life is closely connected with
the University of Oxford, in connexion with which he held
in succession various important offices: in 1356 he is
Seneschal (or steward) of Merton College, in 1361 Master
of Balliol, in 1365 Warden of Canterbury Hall, a founda-
tion afterwards merged in that of Christ Church. In 1374
we find him at Bruges, one of the commissioners sent by
the king, Edward III., to treat with the Papal Nuncio on
the subject of “reservation of benefices,” an encroachment
by which many of the livings in England had been drawn
into the hands of the Pope. In the same year he was pre-
sented by the king to the rectory of Lutterworth, which pre-
ferment he retained to the close of his life. His last years
were troubled by persistent attacks from the enemies whom
his uncompromising resistance to the abuses of the times
had aroused against him. In 1377 he is summoned before
Convocation, at St. Paul's, to answer charges of erroneous
teaching; in the following year he appears before a synod
at Lambeth ; three years later the Chancellor of the Univer-
sity of Oxford condemns opinions on the eucharist which
1 Or Wyclif, or Wiclif. The name is written in twenty or thirty
different ways.
C
I 8 The English Biffle.
were ascribed to Wycliffe and his followers. Amidst these
assaults, occasioned by his faithful teaching, and his vehe-
ment opposition to the “begging friars” (whom he pro-
nounced to be the “cause, beginning, well, and maintaining
of perturbation in Christendom, and of all evils of this
world”), he pursued to the last his course of unremitting de-
votion to the work of teaching and preaching. The power-
ful patronage of John of Gaunt and others of high station
and great influence saved Wycliffe from the fierce persecu-
tion which overpowered many of his adherents. Nicholas
de Hereford was excommunicated and imprisoned, and
seems to have regained his liberty at the sacrifice of his
Lollard Opinions. Ashton gave way for a time; Repingdon
recanted, and became a persecutor of his former friends.
John Purvey, who was Wycliffe's associate at Lutterworth,
suffered imprisonment in 1390; in 14oo, terrified by the
fate of Sautre, who was burnt alive as a heretic, he publicly
retracted his obnoxious tenets; the record of a second im-
prisonment in 142 I affords evidence that he rejoined the
party of which he had been the leader. We must not, how-
ever, dwell on the fortunes of these early reformers: it is
from their connexion with the first translation of the Bible
into English that they call for notice here.
At this point several questions present themselves. Is
there sufficient ground for believing that Wycliffe translated
the Scriptures into English P Iſ he did, where is his trans-
lation ? Did he stand alone in this work, or was it accom-
plished with the help of others? Is his translation really
the first 2 These questions have received various answers
in former times, but there is now little room for serious
difference of opinion.
We possess two early versions of the Bible, closely re-
lated to each other, and yet separated by clear marks of
distinction. It is certain that these versions were made in
7%e 7zwo Versions. I9
the closing years of the fourteenth century. As the art of
printing was invented fifty years later, and not introduced
into England until 1477, the English Bible was only acces-
sible in manuscript to its earliest readers. In point of fact,
however, neither of these versions (which we shall designate
as the early and the later) ever appeared in print until 1850.
In Dr. James's “Treatise of the Corruption of Scripture”
(1612), many passages are quoted from a MS." of the later
version, and the New Testament in the same version was
published by Lewis (1731), by Baber (1810), and in
Bagster's English Hexafla (1841). Of the early version
the first portion printed was the Song of Solomon, given by
Dr. A. Clarke in the third volume of his Commentary
(1823): the New Testament was published by Pickering
in 1848. In 1850 the Oxford University press issued a
complete edition of the two versions in four volumes, under
the title, “The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New
Testaments with the Apocryphal Books, in the earliest
English versions made from the Latin Vulgate by John
Wycliffe and his followers; edited by the Rev. J. Forshall
and Sir F. Madden.” This noble work, the fruit of twenty-
two years of labour, is the source of almost all our know-
ledge on the subject of the Wycliffite versions. As many
as 17o MSS. were examined by the editors, and the various
readings of some sixty MSS. are given throughout. Words
that are obsolete or obscure are explained in a glossary
appended to the fourth volume. In a masterly preface the
editors discuss the whole question of the origin and mutual
relations of the two versions, and their main conclusions
have met with universal acceptance.
We have designated the two versions “early” and
* Evidently No. 277 in the Bodleian Library, of which he was the
first librarian. This MS. is denoted by the letter I in the Oxford
edition.
C 2
2O The English Bible.
“later,” but until the appearance of the Oxford edition the
correct appropriation of these names was matter of doubt.
That the translation which was first executed must be
associated with Wycliffe's name has not been questioned;
but the publications of Lewis, Baber, and Bagster, referred
to above, profess to contain “Wycliffe's Testament,” though
really presenting the later version. On what ground, then,
is that translation which formerly passed as the earlier, now
considered to be the later of the two P The evidence is
of various kinds, but it will be sufficient to refer to that
which is furnished by the preface to this version, commonly
known as the General Prologue. This prologue is of con-
siderable length, occupying a space equal to nearly 120 of
these pages. The writer first gives an abstract of the con-
tents of the several books, from Genesis to 2 Chronicles,
and forcibly applies the lessons drawn from the Books of
Chronicles to the circumstances of his own time. Then
follows a brief notice of the remaining books of the Old
Testament and the Apocrypha, with the exception of the
prophetical books, to which a special prologue was devoted.
After discussing the general principles of interpretation, the
writer enters on a defence of translations of Scripture, and
concludes with a very interesting account of his own mode
of procedure. “A simple creature,” he says, “hath trans-
lated the Bible out of Latin into English. First this simple
creature had much travail, with divers fellows and helpers,
to gather many old Bibles and other doctors and common
glosses, and to make one Latin Bible somedeal [partly
true ; and then to study it anew, the text with the gloss and
other doctors as he might get, and specially Lire [Lyra] on
the Old Testament, that helped full much in this work;
the third time to counsel with old grammarians and old
divines, of hard words and hard sentences, how they might
best be understood and translated ; the fourth time to
Prologue to the Zafer Version. 2 I
translate as clearly as he could to the sentence [sense], and
to have many good fellows and Cunning at the correcting of
the translation.” He shows that “in translating into Eng-
lish, many resolutions can make the sentence open.” For
“the master reading, I stand,” we may write “while [or
“if,” &c.] the master readeth, I stand;” “saying” may be
changed into “and saith” or “that saith;” “which runneth’
into “and he runneth.” Instead of translating literally
Pominum formidabunt adversari; ejus, I Sam. ii. Io (“the
Lord his adversaries shall dread"), we may say “the adver-
saries of the Lord shall dread him ;” arescentibus hominibus
prae timore, Luke xxi. 26, may be expressed by “and men shall
wax dry for dread.” Those who find faults in this trans-
lation are intreated to alter it into the true sense of Holy
Writ; but the critic is warned first to examine truly his
Latin Bible, for “no doubt he shall find full many Bibles in
Latin full false, if he look at many, namely [especially] new;
and the common Latin Bibles have more need to be cor-
rected, as many as I have seen in my life, than hath the
English Bible late translated.” His concluding words are
memorable: “By this manner, with good living and great
travail, men can Come to true and clear translating, and true
understanding of Holy Writ, seem it never so hard at the
beginning. God grant to us all grace to know well and
keep well Holy Writ, and suffer joyfully some pain for it at
the last ! Amen.”
It will be seen that the writer of this prologue refers to
a former translation into English which stood in need of
correction, and gives clear indications of the changes which
must be made in order to transform a sentence literally
rendered into one that runs smoothly and presents a clear
sense. On comparing the two versions of which we are
speaking, we find that in the passages referred to, and in a
multitude of other places, the renderings differ in the very
22 The English Bible.
particulars specified above ; one version being characterised
by close adherence to the Latin construction, the other
showing a true appreciation of English idiom. When we
add that the more literal version “is found in those MSS.
which are the earlier in point of date,” and that “these
MSS. are comparatively rare,” it will hardly be doubted
that this version is the earlier of the two, or that the other
translation is the work of the writer of the General Pro-
logue. It is not necessary to pursue this question further,
or to examine the grounds on which a contrary opinion was
formerly held by those who were not in possession of the
evidence now before us.
The next question is that of authorship. Both versions
are anonymous. The peril to which a translator of Scrip-
ture was exposed rendered such concealment strictly neces-
sary. We can hardly doubt, however, that the later version
was executed by Purvey. His close association with Wy-
cliffe, his learning, and his eminence amongst the Lollards
after Wycliffe's death, first led to the conjecture that the
work was from his hand; but the most convincing proof
is furnished by the General Prologue, which agrees remark-
ably, both in style and in sentiment, with writings which
can be proved to be Purvey's. Still less hesitation can be
felt in associating Wycliffe with the earlier work. On this
point friends and foes are at one in their testimony. Henry
Knighton, who wrote his Chronicle within twenty years of
Wycliffe's death, complains that John Wycliffe had trans-
lated the Gospel into the English tongue, and made it more
plain to the laity and to women than it formerly was even
to the learned amongst the clergy, thus throwing the Gospel
pearl before swine. From John Huss, the Bohemian re-
former (writing in 1411), we learn that it was then said by
the English that Wycliffe had translated the whole Bible
* Preface to Oxford edition, p. xxii.
Authorship of Earlier Version. 23
into their vernacular tongue. To Wycliffe then must be
assigned the post of honour in connexion with this noble
undertaking. Earnestly maintaining that “Christian men
ought much to travail night and day about text of Holy
Writ, and namely [especially] the Gospel in their mother
tongue,” he could not rest until he had placed in the hands
of his unlettered countrymen the Law of God and “the
Gospel of Christ's life.”
The translation, however, is not the work of one hand.
A manuscript in the Bodleian Library, containing a large
portion of the Old Testament and Apocrypha in the earlier
version, breaks off suddenly after the second word of Baruch
iii. 20, a note being added to the effect that here ended the
translation of Nicholay de Hereford. This manuscript is
copied from another, also preserved in the Bodleian Library,
which ends in the same abrupt manner at the same place.
“There is no doubt,” say the Oxford editors, “that this
MS. is the original copy of the translator.” Other willing
labourers may have been engaged on the earlier portion of
the Old Testament; internal evidence makes it not im-
probable that this really was the case. The many resem-
blances between the New Testament and the later portion
of the Old would seem to prove that Hereford's unfinished
work was completed by Wycliffe himself. Hence our
general conclusion must be that the Scriptures were ren-
dered from Latin into English, about the year 1382, by
Wycliffe and Hereford, aided possibly by others of the same
party; and that after Wycliffe's death, probably in 1388,
there appeared a revision of the earlier version, executed by
Purvey, with the help of “many good fellows.” N
* The abrupt termination of the work is supposed to have been
occasioned by the citation of Hereford to appear before the synod in
London in 1382, and his subsequent departure from England.
*
24. The English Biöſe.
The subjoined specimens will show the character of
each version :-
2 SAM. XXIII. 3—5.
EARLIER WERSION.
3. He seyde, God of Yrael to
me hath spokyn, the strong of
Yrael, the lordshipper of men,
the rigtwise lordshipper in the
dreed of God.
4. As ligt of morwtide," spring-
inge the sunne eerli with out clow-
dis, gliterith ; and as bi reynes bu-
riouneth? the eerbe of the erthe.
5. And not so mych is myn
hows anentisº God, that euerlast-
ynge couenaunt he shulde goo yn
with me, ºtable in alle thingis and
warnysshit ; * forsothe al myn
heelth and al wil, ne there is eny
thing of it, that ne buriowneth.”
ST. JOHN
EARLIER WERSION.
14 Forsothe now the feeste
day medlinge, or goynge bitwixe,
Jhesu wente vp in to the temple,
and taugte.
I5 And the Jewis wondriden,
seyinge, Hou kan” this man
lettris, sithen" he hath not lernyd?
I6 Jhesu answeride to hem,
and seide, My doctrine is not
myn, but his that sente me.
LATER VERSION.
3. ZXazzād Seide, God of Israel
Spak to me, the stronge of Israel,
the iust Lord of men, is Lord in
the drede of God.
4. As the ligt of the morew-
tid," whanne the sunne risith
eerli, is brigt with out cloudis ;
and as an erbe cometh forth of
the erthe bi reynes.
5. And myn hows is not so
greet anentiss God, that he schulde
make with me euerlastynge coue-
naunt, stidefast and maad strong
in alle thingis; for al myn helthe
Åangith of him, and al the wille
that is, aſ my desir, goiţă îzz to
Żymz, and no thing is therof, that
makith not fruyt.
VII. I.4—18.
I,ATER VIERSION.
I4. But whanne the myddil
feeste dai cam, Jhesus wente vp
in to the temple, and taugte.
1 Morning-time.
* Germinates (French, Öourgeon, a bud).
3 With.
15 And the Jewis wondriden,
and seiden, Hou can 5 this meazz
lettris, sithen 6 he hath not lerned 2
16 Jhesus answerde to hem,
and seide, My doctryne is not
myn, but his that sente me.
3 Strengthened.
5 Knoweth.
6 Since.
The Versions Compared. 25
I7 If ony man schal wilnel to
do his wille, he schal knowe of the
techinge, wher it be of God, wher
I speke of my silf.
18 He that spekith of himself
sekith his owne glorie ; forsoth he
that sekith the glorie of him that
sente him, this is sothfast,” and
wnrigtfulnesse is not in him.
I7 If ony man wole do his
wille, he schal knowe of the
techyng, whethir it be of God, or
Y speke of my silf.
18 He that spekith of hym silf
sekith his own glorie; but he that
sekith the glorie of hym that sente
hym, is Sothefast,” and vnrigtwis-
nesse is not in hym.
PSALM XC. (LXXXIX.) 9, Io. LATER VERSION.
For alle oure daies han failid ; and we han failid in thin ire. Oure
geris” schulen bithenke,4 as an yreyn;" the daies of oure geeris ben in
the seuenti geeris. Forsothe, if fourescoor geer ben in mygti men ; and
the more tyme of hem is trauel and sorewe. For myldenesse cam
aboue; and we schulen be chastisid.
COLOSSIANS I. I3—17. LATER VERSION.
Which delyueride vs fro the power of derknessis, and translatide in
to the kyngdom of the sone of his louyng, in whom we han agenbiyng"
and remyssioun of synnes. Which is the ymage of God vnuysible, the
first bigetun? of ech creature. For in hym alle thingis ben maad, in
heuenes and in erthe, visible and vnuysible, ether trones, ether domina-
ciouns, ether princehodes, ethir poweris, alle thingis ben maad of nougt
bi hym, and in hym, and he is bifor alle, and alle thingis ben in hym.
The reader will not fail to recognise in these specimens
the characteristic differences between the two versions.
Thus, for “springinge the sunne eerli” (Hereford), Purvey
writes, “whanne the sunne risith eerli; ” for “now the
feeste day medlinge,” he writes, “whanne the myddil feeste
dai cam.” It is also evident that Hereford’s renderings are
altered by the reviser much more freely than those of
Wycliffe, whose style is clearer and more flowing. The
frequent occurrence of the word forsooth has often been
remarked on as a characteristic of the early version (and the
I will. 2 True. 8 Years.
* “Again-buying,” redemption.
* Meditate.
7 Begotten.
5 Spider.
26 The English Bible.
first part of the later); in the first chapter of Matthew, for
example, Wycliffe uses this word more than forty times,
Purvey not once. In the passages cited above there occur
two explanatory notes, in 2 Sam. xxiii. 5 (Purvey) and John
vii. 14 (Wycliffe). These “textual glosses” are not uncom-
mon in the books translated by Wycliffe. Purvey admits
them freely in the Old Testament, but very rarely (see
(Matt. xiv. I ; Heb. ix. 3, &c.) in the New. Hereford
seems to have intended to exclude such explanations
altogether, but occasionally they are found in almost all the
copies of his version (see Lev. xi. 17, 22, 29, 30). On
the other hand, in the Song of Solomon he goes very far in
the way of interpretation, actually apportioning the contents
to various speakers. Thus in chap. i. the first verse is intro-
duced by “The Chirche of the comyng of Crist spekith
seiende, ’’ after “mouth" we read, “The zoás of the Fader; "
and after ver. 2, “The vois of the Chirche.” All these notes
were removed by Purvey.
A striking feature of the later version is the introduction
of short comments in the margin. In the Prologue to the
Old Testament, Purvey tells us that “where the Hebrew,
by witness of Jerome, of Lire, and other expositors, dis-
cordeth from " the Latin, he has set in the margin “what
the Hebrew hath, and how it is understood in some places.”
These “glosses,” some critical and Some explanatory, are
very unequally distributed. They are most numerous in the
Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, Job, the early
chapters of Isaiah, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, and the former
half of the Acts of the Apostles; in the Prophetical Books
and in the Gospels we find but few. Though many of these
annotations are absent from a large number of copies, we
can hardly doubt that they are (in the main) from Purvey's
hand; it is only natural that they should often be neglected
by transcribers. The names of Jerome and Augustine
7%e Zafer Version. 27
occur frequently in these glosses;" those of Chrysostom,
Ambrose, Isidore, Hilary, occasionally. Purvey's chief
authority, however, is the writer referred to above as “Lire.”
Nicholas de Lyra was the most celebrated commentator
of the fourteenth century, distinguished for his knowledge
of both Hebrew and Greek. A very large number of the
“marginal glosses” are subscribed with his name. In the
Book of Proverbs, for example, the common copies of the
Vulgate contain nearly twenty verses or sentences not found
in the Hebrew text ; in several of these we find the note,
“This vers is not in Ebreu. Zire here.” The first four
verses of St. Luke, however, are omitted without remark in
the later version, and in almost all the copies of the earlier.
The following are examples of the explanatory notes:—
Exod. xii. 40 (430 years). “Rekenynge tho geris” in whiche they
dwelliden as pilgryms in the loond of Canaan, and of Egipt, and of
Filisteys. Zire here.”
Lev. v. I (sinneth and heareth). “This word and is seet for that
Žs. Zire, and the glos here.”
Lev. xi. 5 (a “cirogrille’’3). “That is, a beeste ſul of thornes,
and more4 than an irchoun." In Ebru it is a cony.”
Psalm ii. “A glos. The secounde salm, that hath no title in
Ebreu, and in Jeromes translacioun, was maad of Dauith, as the
postlis" witnessen in iiij chapitre of Dedis.”7
Prov. viii. 22. “Here Salamon spekith of wisdom vnmaad, that
1 Other authorities often cited are “the Gloss” (or “the common
Gloss”), and “ the Gloss interlineary.” The former is the Glossa
ordinaria, a compilation by Walafrid Strabo (about A.D. 84O), much
esteemed and widely circulated in the Middle Ages. The latter was
the work of Anselm of Laon (about A.D. I IOO).
2 Years.
* Chaerogrillies (probably meaning either hedgehog or Žorcupine) is the word by
which the Vulgate renders the Hebrew shaftan, translated “coney” in our version.
* Larger. 5 Urchin, hedgehog. * Apostles.
7 The Acts of the Apostles.
28 The English Biffle.
is, of the secunde persoone in Trinyte, which is the kyndlyl Sone of
God, with oute bigynnyng and ende. . . . Zire here.”
2 Cor. v. 21 (sin). “That is, sacrifice for synne. Auszyn.”?
I John i. I (That thing that was, &c.). “ Thus the lettre schulde
be ioyned; we tellen to gou that thing, &c.; that is, Goddis kindely 1
sone, that was born without bigynnyng of the fadir. Zire here.”
In contents and arrangement the Wycliffite versions
differ from our ordinary Bibles. The books which we know
as the 1st and 2nd Books of Esdras (otherwise called the
3rd and 4th, Ezra and Nehemiah being I and 2 Esdras)
were rejected by Purvey; the former is included in the
early version. The apocryphal additions to Daniel and
Esther are in each case placed with the canonical book;
the Prayer of Manasses is added to 2 Chronicles; Tobit
and Judith stand before Esther, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus
before Isaiah, Baruch (including the Epistle of Jeremiah)
before Ezekiel, I and 2 Maccabees after the Minor Prophets.
In the New Testament, St. Paul's Epistles precede the Acts
of the Apostles. The Oxford edition of the Wycliffite ver-
sions contains the spurious Epistle to the Laodiceans, as
being in several copies of the later version; this Epistle,
however, was rejected both by Wycliffe and by Purvey.
Many of the books of Scripture have short prefaces, also
rendered from the Latin. In the Old Testament Purvey
is contented with the General Prologue and a brief intro-
duction to the Prophets. In some copies of his New Testa-
ment several books have additional “prologues,” evidently
written by himself.
The fundamental defect of the Wycliffite versions is
that they are derived from the Latin, not from the original
Hebrew and Greek. The translators were not able even to
consult the original texts. What they profess to do they do
well, representing the Latin with great care and with general
I By nature, own (“God’s own Son”). * Augustine.
The Latin Original. 29
accuracy. Where the text before them was faulty, the error
was faithfully reflected in their work. We have heard Pur-
vey's complaint of the inaccuracy of the common Latin
Bibles; and though he sought to remedy the evil by col-
lation of many copies, an examination of his renderings
shows that he was not fortunate in meeting with manuscripts
of any great excellence. The weakest part of the Vulgate,
and of all translations made from it, is the Book of Psalms.
Jerome's translation of this book from the Hebrew never
attained currency; the old and familiar version from the
Greek, revised, but not materially changed, maintained
its ground. A comparison of the authorised version of
Ps. xc. 9, Io, with the quotation given above (page 25) will
show how far the Latin (faithfully represented in almost
every particular in Purvey's translation) may depart from the
sense of the original. From verse 9 it seems hard to extract
any clear meaning; and yet the English reader was in
no worse plight than the great Augustine himself, who
understood the Psalmist’s words in no other sense. But
this dependence on the Vulgate was not without some com-
pensating advantages. The English Bible, at this its first
appearance, was seen to be identical with the “common
Bible” received by the whole Western Church : a version
taken from the language of the Jews or of the Greeks might
in those days have been suspected of some grievous taint.
The translator moved freely amongst the well-known words
and phrases, and his familiarity with the Latin text left him
at liberty to expend his strength on the English : hence the
force and the homeliness so often apparent in the style. In
the New Testament, at all events, the Vulgate is often
nearer to the sense of the sacred writers than are many
of the later manuscripts of the Greek Testament. In Col.
i. I4, for example (see page 25), Purvey's text agrees with
that of the best Greek manuscripts, the words “through his
3O The English Bible.
blood” having accidentally come in from Eph. i. 7 : in
the first chapter of the Acts, containing only twenty-six
verses, there are as many as ten examples of a similar kind,
though of smaller importance. Whilst, then, it is very plain
that the version of a version is necessarily placed at great
disadvantage, that the Latin language is incapable of repre-
senting the beauty and fulness of the Greek, and that the
Vulgate is in some places disfigured by serious errors,
we may thankfully acknowledge that the derivation of the
first English Bible from the Latin was productive of good.
Whether Wycliffe and his coadjutors made any use of
the earlier translations of parts of Scripture it is hard to
say ; we have no direct evidence bearing on the point, but
the question has not been fully examined. It is of greater
importance to determine the degree of influence exerted by
these versions on the work of later translators. It is very
easy to find coincidences of expression between Purvey’s
translation and our Authorised Version. When the structure
of the Greek is simple (see John vii. 14—18, quoted above,
but especially John xiv.), many consecutive verses may read
as if taken from Our Own familiar Bible : in most instances,
however, the agreement may be traced to the influence
of the Latin version, faithfully followed in the one case,
diligently consulted in the other. It would be premature
to say more at this point : we shall return to the subject
in connexion with Tyndale's translation. Whatever may be
thought of the amount of influence directly exerted by the
Wycliffite versions, no one can doubt that their indirect
effect has been great, both on the general style of Scrip-
ture translations and on the development of the English
language.
For this work was not hidden in the cloister or buried in
the libraries of the learned. “The new version was eagerly
sought after, and read. Copies passed into the hands of all
Multiplication of Copies. 3 I
classes of the people. Even the sovereign himself and the
princes of the blood royal did not disdain to possess them.
The multiplication of copies must have been rapid. Nearly
I5o manuscripts, containing the whole or parts of Purvey's
Bible, the majority of which were written within the space
of forty years from its being finished, have been examined.
Others are known to have existed within the last
century; and more, there can be no doubt, have escaped
inquiry; how many have perished it is impossible to cal-
culate. But when it is remembered that from the first
the most active and powerful measures were taken to
suppress the version ; that strict inquisition was made for
the writings and translations of Wycliffe, Hereford, Ashton,
and Purvey; that they were burnt and destroyed as most
noxious and pernicious productions of heretical depravity;
and that all who were known to possess them were exposed
to severe persecution ; and then if there be taken into
account the number of manuscripts which in the course
of four or five centuries have been destroyed through
accident or negligence ; it is not too much to suppose that
we have now but a small portion of those which were
originally written.”
One question still remains. Have we good grounds for
believing that Wycliffe's version is the earliest of English
Bibles P. On this subject a few words must suffice. We
have testimony to the existence of versions of a still earlier
date. In a tract,” which cannot have been written much
later than the year 14oo, preserved in the first edition
of Foxe's Acts and Monuments, we read of a “Bible in
1 Preface to Forshall and Madden’s edition of 7%e Wycliffite
Versions, p. xxxii. -
2 A compendious old 77-eatise, shewing how we ought to have the
Scriptures in AEnglish. See Foxe, Acts and Monuments, vol. iv., pp.
671–676 (ed. Cattley: 1837).
32 The English Bible.
English of Northern speech,” which “seemed to be two
hundred years old.” Sir Thomas More (1532) declares that
the whole Bible was translated into the English tongue
by virtuous and well-learned men long before Wycliffe's
days. In the preface to the Authorised Version (1611) our
translators speak of John Trevisa (who died about 1397) as
having translated the Scriptures (or the Gospels) into English
in the time of Richard II. ; Fuller, writing in 1655, ascribes
to the same “godly and learned servant of God” a transla-
tion of the whole Bible. On the other hand, Wycliffe and
his followers evidently knew of no version prior to their
own. Desirous in every way to strengthen their position,
they could not possibly have neglected the most convincing
of all answers to those who accused them of introducing the
pernicious novelty of an English translation of the Scriptures.
The Bible two hundred years old can only have been Anglo-
Saxon. Where mistake was so easy (copies of Purvey's
version having been ascribed to a much earlier date), we
cannot rely very confidently on unsupported testimony
of such a kind as More's. There are indeed translations of
portions of Scripture of a character very similar to Wycliffe's
(as of the first three Gospels," of St. Paul's Epistles,” &c.),
but these belong to Wycliffe's age, and were probably
executed by some of his party. These efforts resemble
those of an earlier age : interesting and valuable monuments
of learning and private zeal, they cannot disturb the place of
the great work which makes an epoch as well in the literary
as in the religious history of our country.
1 With the Latin text and a commentary, in the University Library
and in the Library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.
* Also in the Library of Corpus Christi College.
CHAPTER III.
A CENTURY OF PREPARATION.
THE interval between the death of Wycliffe and the birth of
Tyndale is nearly a hundred years. Amongst the events
of this century are the revival of learning in Europe, the
invention of printing, the discovery of a new world. It is
impossible to pass suddenly from one period to the other.
If we would understand and appreciate the work of Tyndale,
his coadjutors, and his successors, we must give attention to
the age of preparation and to the influences amidst which
they lived and laboured. The field that opens before us is
as extensive as it is inviting. We must confine ourselves as
far as possible to a notice of those persons, books, or events
which clearly stand connected with the history of the English
Bible.
The fruit of Wycliffe's labours did not immediately
appear. The active persecutors of the Lollard party suc-
ceeded in obtaining from Henry IV. a statute which pro-
scribed all books teaching the new doctrines, and threatened
heretics with the stake. A few years later (1408) Wycliffe's
translations were expressly condemned as unauthorised and
incorrect. As a party the Lollards could not make head
against their foes, but the leaven of their teaching silently
spread through all classes of Society; and when an age of
greater freedom dawned, men saw that the toil and suffering
of the persecuted had not been endured in vain. But it was
in Bohemia that the work of the English reformer exerted
the most immediate effect. John Huss avowed his ardent
D
34 The English Bible.
sympathy with Wycliffe, and boldly preached many of his
doctrines. The Council of Constance (A.D. 1414), assembled
for the reformation of the Church and the removal of abuses,
condemned all Lollard writings, decreed that Wycliffe's
bones should be disinterred and burnt, and sentenced Huss
to the stake. The death of Huss drove Bohemia into revolt,
and kindled a furious war. The minds of men were stirred
with unwonted excitement : if outward inquiry was checked
by force, the spirit of eager questioning remained.
At the beginning of the fifteenth century the language of
Greece was almost an unknown tongue in Western Europe.
A few scholars, such as Petrarch, had sought to inspire a
taste for Grecian literature, but with little success. At this
time, however, various causes concurred to bring about
increased intercourse between the Christians of the East
and the West. The sudden collapse of the Eastern Empire
in 1453, when Constantinople fell into the hands of the
Turks under Mohammed II., is the epoch from which the .
revival of Greek learning in Europe must be dated. Exiled
from their Country, the scholars of Greece, carrying with
them the treasures of their literature, sought a home in the
West, especially in Italy, where Pope Nicolas V. in Rome
and Cosmo del' Medici in Florence rivalled each other in
the patronage of learning. From this time the study of
Greek spread rapidly. In 1458 a public teacher of the
language was appointed in the University of Paris.
Neanwhile a revolution yet more wonderful was pre-
paring in Germany by the invention of printing. The
history of this invention is involved in obscurity, but it
seems certain that before 1440 the use of movable types
had been discovered by Gutenberg of Mayence (or Mentz).
About 1455 the first printed work (of any magnitude) was
issued from the press of Gutenberg and Fust in the same
city. This work was a magnificent edition of the Latin
The Invention of Printing. 35
Bible, commonly known as the Mazarin Bible," because a
copy was found in the library of Cardinal Mazarin. Within
twenty years of this date the invention had found a home
in more than a hundred European cities, and by the end
of the century more than a thousand presses were at work.
The first book which is explicitly stated to have been
printed in England is dated 1477. In the same year was
first printed (probably at Bologna) a portion of the Hebrew
Bible, the Psalter. In 1488 the entire Hebrew Bible was
printed at Soncino, near Cremona. This edition was
followed within a brief period by many others, some of
which leave little to be desired as editions of the ordinary
text. The Greek Testament was not printed until 1514.
The earliest Greek Grammar (by Constantine Lascaris)
appeared in 1476 ; the earliest Lexicon in 1480. The first
Hebrew Grammar that appeared in print (1503) was written
by Pellican, at the age of twenty-five ; three years later a
Grammar and Lexicon by the celebrated Reuchlin were
given to the world. It has been calculated that more than
ten thousand editions of books or pamphlets were published
between 147 o and I5oo ; of the Latin Bible alone as many
as ninety-one editions had been issued before the close of
the fifteenth century. *
England was slow in welcoming the new learning.
Greek was first taught in the University of Oxford in
1491, by William Grocyn, who had studied in Italy.
Besides Grocyn, Oxford possessed a noble band of scholars,
Thomas Linacre, William Latimer, Thomas More (after-
wards Lord Chancellor), also John Colet and William Lily,
the founder and the first head-master of St. Paul's School ;
1. At the sale of the “Perkins Library” at Hanworth Park
(June 6th, 1873), a copy of the Mazarin Bible, on vellum, was sold for
A3,400; another, on paper, for £2,690. Copies may be seen in the
libraries of the British Museum, Lambeth Palace, &c.
D 2
36 The English Bible.
a few years later Cambridge could boast of Thomas Smith,
John Cheke, and Roger Ascham. In 1497 Erasmus of
Rotterdam, then thirty years of age, came to Oxford,
attracted by the fame of its teachers of Greek. Twelve
years later, after studying in various cities of Italy, he
returned to England, and accepted a professorship of
Divinity at Cambridge. Here he remained till 1514,
teaching theology and Greek, preparing an edition of the
works of Jerome, and engaged in diligent study of the
Greek Testament. In 1516, at the instance of the printer
Froben of Basle, he undertook an edition of the Greek
Testament, which was published the same year, with a
dedication to Pope Leo X. Unfortunately this work,
the first edition of the Greek Testament given to the
world, was executed with great haste, and for the most
part was derived from inferior manuscripts of the text.
From the second edition (published in 1519), in which
many errors were corrected, Luther made his translation
of the New Testament; the third (1522) was used by
Tyndale. The Greek Testaments in ordinary use at this
day agree in the main with that of Erasmus. In 1518
appeared the first portion of Erasmus's Latin paraphrases
of the Books of the New Testament, which Milman does
not hesitate to call the most important book even of
that day, and which thirty years later “was almost legally
adopted by the Church of England,”’ Edward VI. en-
joining that the paraphrases upon the Gospels in English
should be set up in some convenient place in all churches.
In 15oo a university was founded at Alcala, near
Madrid, by Cardinal Ximenes, Archbishop of Toledo.
Here was prepared and published, through the exertions
and at the expense of the Cardinal, the famous Complu-
* Milman, History of Zatin Christianity, vi. p. 624.
Farly Printed Bibles. 37
tensian Polyglott, in six folio volumes. This Polyglott
contains the original texts of Scripture, together with the
Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Chaldee paraphrase of the
Pentateuch (with a Latin translation), Greek and Hebrew
Grammars, and a Hebrew vocabulary. It derives its name
from Complutum, the ancient name of Alcala. The volume
containing the Greek Testament was printed in 1514,
but the publication of the work was not authorised until
1520. An edition of the Septuagint (and Greek Testa-
ment), known as the Aldine edition, was printed at Venice
in 1518.
The study of the original languages of Scripture had
commenced in earnest, but still it was through Latin
translations that the Sacred books were mainly accessible
even to men of education and learning. The wide cir-
culation of the Vulgate in this age has been already
noticed. Next in importance stand the Latin versions
executed during the first half of the sixteenth century.
Sanctes Pagninus, a Dominican, published in 1528 a Latin
translation of the whole Bible, much used and highly
prized on account of the literalness with which the Hebrew
text is rendered ; this is the first translation of the Old
Testament in which the division into verses is given. In
1 535 appeared a valuable translation of the Old Testament
by Sebastian Münster, a Hebraist of considerable repu-
tation. Leo Juda, the friend and coadjutor of the Swiss
Reformer Zwingli, was at the time of his death engaged
on a Latin version of the Old Testament. The work
was taken up by the other Biblical scholars whom Zwingli
had drawn to Zurich, Pellican (author of the earliest
Hebrew Grammar, and of Commentaries both on the
Old and on the New Testament), Bibliander, and others.
It was printed by Froschover at Zurich in 1543. This
translation is less literal than those of Pagninus and
38 The English Bible.
Münster: the authors are more intent on the preservation
of the sense, than on verbal accuracy in the rendering.
For the New Testament, Erasmus's elegant Latin version,
which accompanied his Greek text, was very extensively
used. The whole Bible was rendered into Latin with care
and elegance by Castalio in 1551 ; the New Testament
by Beza in 1557.
But the study of the Sacred Word was no longer to
be confined to men of learning. On every hand we
observe tokens of an importunate desire on the part of
the common people to possess the Scriptures in the lan-
guages of ordinary life. The history of vernacular trans-
lations of the Bible in other countries of Europe resembles
that which we have traced in our own. As a rule, poetical
paraphrases of the historical books (such as the Heliand, a
Gospel history of the ninth century in the old Saxon
language) or of the Psalms, interlinear glosses (see page
Io), translations of those portions of Scripture which
were most frequently read in the services of the Church,
prepared the way for more systematic and complete under-
takings. As early as the fourth century, however, the
Goths on the lower Danube received the Bible in their
own language from the hands of Ulfilas, their bishop, who
translated it from the Greek. In the ninth century Cyril
and Methodius, sent by the Byzantine emperor into
Moravia as missionaries, translated the Scriptures into the
Slavonic language. Three hundred years later, the Gospels
and several other books of Scripture were rendered into
one of the dialects spoken in the south of France, through
the zeal of Peter Waldo, of Lyons. The first French Bible
(1294) was a version of Comestor's Scholastic History, a
free paraphrase of the historical books made about
1170. At the commencement of the fifteenth century, we
find the Scriptures translated (from the Latin) into the
Earliest Printed Versions in Europe. 39
languages of Poland, Bohemia, and Germany, as well
as England.
In our own country, “the first attempt at giving forth
any portion of the Scriptures in print is to be found in
the AExposition of the Sezem A^mitemſtal Psalms, by John
Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, which was published in the
year 1505.”* The Continental presses, on the other hand,
almost in the earliest years of their existence, teem with
editions of the Bible in different languages. Before 1474
four editions of the German Bible had been given to
the world : ten more were issued during the forty years
which followed. The Italian Bible of Malermi (or Mal-
herbi) was printed at Venice in 1471 : before the end
of the century nine editions had been issued. A French
New Testament appeared in 1478: the whole Bible fol-
lowed in 1487. In 1522 there were in circulation printed
versions of Scripture, in whole or in part, in six languages
(besides German, Italian, and French), viz., Danish, Dutch,
Bohemian, Slavonic, Russian, and the dialect of Spanish
spoken in Valencia.
The appearance of Luther's version constitutes an epoch
in the history of this subject. The influence which this
version exerted directly was very considerable, forming as
it did the basis on which many other translations were
executed; but the impulse which it gave to the study of
the original texts of Scripture (the early versions having
been derived from the Vulgate) was perhaps of even
greater importance. The Swedish New Testament and
Bible (1526, 1541) were avowedly taken from Luther's :
translations into the languages of Holland, Denmark, and
Iceland were made on a similar principle. Roman Catholic
* Aſistorical Account, prefixed to Bagster's English Hexafla, p. 37.
The Penitential Psalms are Psalms vi., xxxii., xxxviii., li., cii., CXXX.,
cxliii.
4O The English Bible.
versions appeared in rapid succession in Germany, most of
them betraying very distinctly the influence of the trans-
lation they were intended to supplant.
In France a complete Bible was published in 1530,"
translated (mainly from the Vulgate) by Le Fèvre (or
Faber), the first of the French reformers; on this all sub-
sequent versions have been more or less dependent. Five
years later appeared another translation, by Olivetan, a
cousin of John Calvin. After receiving many corrections
at various times from Calvin and others, this translation was
subjected to thorough revision by the College of Pastors
and Professors at Genéva in 1588 : the Bibles which now
stand highest in the esteem of French Protestants are
further revisions of the same work, by Martin (1707) and
Osterwald (1744). The Italian version of Bruccioli was
published at Venice in 1532, and was shortly followed by
other translations, executed by Roman Catholics. The
Spanish New Testament, translated from the Greek by
Enzinas, was published at Antwerp in 1543; the entire
Bible, by De Reyna, appeared in 1569. Before the middle
of the sixteenth century, therefore, the Scriptures were
circulated throughout almost the whole of Europe, in the
language of each nation.
These facts, most interesting in themselves, would
require remark in any history of the English Bible, in
Consequence of the influence, general and special, which
the labours of Continental translators exercised on our own
country. One version, however, cannot be dismissed with
a passing notice. In 1521 Luther, returning from the Diet
of Worms, by which he had been denounced as a heretic,
was arrested by friendly hands, and carried off to the castle
of the Wartburg, near Eisenach, in Saxe-Weimar. Here
* Having previously appeared in six parts (I523–1528). See the
Caxton Celebration. Catalogue, p. II.4. $
Luther's Bible. 4 I
he remained in retirement for ten months. The fruit of
this enforced withdrawal from active life was the German
New Testament, which was published at Wittenberg, in
September, I 522, in a thin folio volume. The title-page
contains the name neither of translator nor of printer. The
Pentateuch and the poetical books of the Old Testament
speedily followed, the Prophets at longer intervals: it was
not until 1534 that the whole Bible (including the Apocry-
pha) was issued from the press. In this its earliest form
the work seems to have been executed by Luther himself,
with but slight and occasional assistance from friends. His
stock of books to aid in so arduous an undertaking was
scanty. His Hebrew Bible (of the edition printed at Brescia,
in 1494) is still preserved in the Royal Library, Berlin: his
Greek Testament was Erasmus's second edition. The
Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Latin translations of Pagninus,
and (afterwards) of Münster, a few Latin Fathers, the Glossa
Ordinaria, and the Commentaries of Lyra," were all the aids
at his command. Many editions of the separate parts of
the German Bible were called for before the completion of
the work : the numerous alterations introduced show Luther's
zeal for the improvement of the translation. With the help
of his friends, Melanchthon, Bugenhagen, Creuziger, and
others, he travelled over the whole ground afresh, and a
new edition, thoroughly revised, was completed in 1541.
Before 158o thirty-eight editions had been issued from
the press.
The translations of Luther's Bible into other European
languages have been already noticed. Two revisions or
modifications, however, require attention, as having exerted
an independent influence on One or more of our English
versions. These are the Bibles of Zurich and Worms. Soon
after Luther's Testament appeared, a translation (if so it can
* See page 27.
42 The English Bible.
be called) into the German-Swiss dialect was published at
Zurich. Impatient at the slowness with which Luther's
work progressed, Zwingli and his associates resolved that
they would themselves supply the remaining portions. The
translation of the Prophets, issued in 1524, is the work of
“the preachers of Zurich;” that of the Apocrypha is from
the hand of Leo Juda. The whole Bible appeared in 1530.
The second edition, dated 1531, contains an excellent
introduction, probably from the pen of Zwingli himself.
The Worms Bible (1529) is a work of the same kind, known
in Germany as a “combined Bible.”
Having thus hastily noticed the work of other labourers
in the same field, we are now at liberty to follow, without
interruption, the course of our English translators. Of these
the first, both in time and in importance, is William
Tyndale.
CHAPTER IV.
WILLIAM TYNDALE.-I.
WILLIAM TYNDALE, “the faithful minister and constant
martyr of Christ, was born about the borders of Wales,
and brought up from a child in the University of Oxford,
where he, by long continuance, grew up and increased as
well in the knowledge of tongues and other liberal arts, as
especially in the knowledge of the Scriptures, whereunto his
mind was singularly addicted. Insomuch that he, lying
then at Magdalen Hall, read privily to certain students and
fellows of Magdalen College some parcel of divinity, in-
structing them in the knowledge and truth of the Scriptures.
Whose manners also and conversation, being correspondent
to the same, were such that all they which knew him reputed
and esteemed him to be a man of most virtuous disposition
and of life unspotted. Thus he, in the University of Oxford,
increasing more and more in learning and proceeding in
degrees of the schools, spying his time, removed from
thence to the University of Cambridge, where after he had
likewise made his abode a certain space, being now further
ripened in the knowledge of God’s word, leaving that uni-
versity also he resorted to one Master Welch, a knight of
Gloucestershire.”
Such is the brief account which John Foxe gives" of a
period comprising more than two-thirds of Tyndale's life.
Unhappily, we can add very little to fill up the outline here
given. Even the time and place of Tyndale's birth are not
1 Acts and Monuments, vol. v., p. II.4.
44 The English Bible.
known with certainty. The most probable date appears to
be 1484, the year following that in which Luther was born ;
the place was either North Nibley or (more probably) Slym-
bridge," near Berkeley, in Gloucestershire. As little known
are the details of his university career. We can hardly
suppose that he would proceed to Oxford earlier than 1503.
At that time, and for two years later, Colet was still deliver-
ing lectures on the Epistles of St. Paul; and we cannot
doubt that Tyndale was one of the many eager listeners
to these fresh and vivid expositions. The reasons which
induced Tyndale to leave Oxford for Cambridge we can
only conjecture. On the one hand, he may very probably
have been attracted by the teaching of Erasmus; on the
other, he may have seen the necessity of avoiding a threat-
ened storm. Colet himself was suspected of heresy; and
his disciple, who occupied himself in reading “to students
and fellows some parcel of divinity,” would naturally be
looked upon with distrust. The account of Tyndale's resi-
dence in the family of Sir John Walsh, of Little Sodbury
(a village in South Gloucestershire), we take from the first
edition of Foxe's Acts and Monuments, since the narrative,
as there given,” bears marks of being immediately derived
from one of Tyndale's friends.
“Master Tyndale being in service with one Master
Welch, a knight who married a daughter of Sir Robert
Pointz, a knight dwelling in Gloucestershire, the said Tyn-
dale being schoolmaster to the said Master Welch's children,
and being in good favour with his master, sat most commonly
at his own table, which kept a good ordinary, having resort
* See the admirable biography of Tyndale by the late Rev. R.
Demaus, pp. 5, 6.
2 Reprinted by Arber in the Preface to his Facsimile of the Grenzille
Fragment, pp. 8–10. Mr. Demaus (p. 44) is convinced that Foxe's
informant was Richard Webb, afterwards a servant of Latimer.
Tyndale's Early Life. 45
to him many times divers great beneficed men, as abbots,
deans, archdeacons, and other divers doctors and learned
men. Amongst whom commonly was talk of learning, as
well of Luther and Erasmus Roterodamus as of opinions in
the Scripture. The said Master Tyndale, being learned,
and which had been a student of divinity in Cambridge,
and had therein taken degree of School, did many times
therein show his mind and learning, wherein as those men
and Tyndale did vary in opinions and judgments, then
Master Tyndale would show them on the book the places,
by open and manifest Scripture. The which continued for
a certain season divers and sundry times, until in the con-
tinuance thereof these great beneficed doctors waxed weary,
and bare a secret grudge in their hearts against Master Tyn-
dale. . . . Then did he translate into English a book
called, as I remember, Enchiridiom Militis Christiani." The
which being translated he delivered to his master and lady.
And after they had read that book, those great prelates were
no more so often called to the house, nor when they came
had the cheer nor countenance as they were wont to have,
the which they did well perceive, and that it was by the
means and incensing of Master Tyndale, and at the last
came no more there. After that, when there was a sitting
of the bishop's commissary or chancellor, and warning was
given to the priests to appear, Master Tyndale was also
warned to be there. And whether he had knowledge by
their threatening, or that he did suspect that they would lay
to his charge, it is not now perfectly in my mind; but thus
he told me, that he doubted their examinations, so that he
in his going thitherwards prayed in his mind heartily to God
to strengthen him to stand fast in the truth of His word; so
he being there before them, they laid sore to his charge,
saying he was a heretic in Sophistry, a heretic in logic, a
* Written by Erasmus in 1501.
46 The English Bible.
heretic in his divinity, and so continueth. But they said
unto him, ‘You bear yourself boldly of the gentlemen here
in this country, but you shall be otherwise talked with.”
Then Master Tyndale answered them : ‘I am content that
you bring me where you will into any country within Eng-
land, giving me ten pounds" a year to live with, so you bind
me to nothing but to teach children and preach.” Then had
they nothing more to say to him, and thus he departed and
went home to his master again.
“There dwelt not far off an old doctor that had been
arch-chancellor to a bishop, the which was of old familiar
acquaintance with Master Tyndale, who also favoured him
well, to whom Master Tyndale went and opened his mind
upon divers questions of the Scriptures, for he durst boldly
open to him his mind. That ancient doctor said, “Do you
not know that the Pope is the very antichrist which the
Scripture speaketh of P but beware what ye say, for if you
shall be perceived to be of that opinion it will cost you your
life;’ and said, ‘I have been an officer of his, but I have
given it up, and defy him and all his works.’ And soon
after Master Tyndale happened to be in the company of a
learned man, and in communing and disputing with him
drove him to that issue that the learned man said,
“We were better be without God's law than the Pope’s.’
Master Tyndale hearing that, answered him, ‘I defy
the Pope and all his laws ;' and said, ‘If God spare
my life, ere many years I will cause a boy that driveth
the plough shall know more of the Scripture than thou
doest.’”
It is very interesting to mark the dawn of Tyndale's
great purpose of translating the Scriptures into the language
of the people. The words last quoted may have been Sug-
gested by a striking passage in the “Exhortation ” prefixed
* Equal to 4 I2O or 4, 130 at the present day.
Tyndale's Translation Projected. 47
by Erasmus to his edition of the Greek Testament.” “I
would,” says the great scholar of the Reformation age, “that
all private women should read the Gospel and Paul’s
Epistles. And I wish that they were translated into all
languages, that they may be read and known, not only by
the Scotch and Irish, but also by the Turks and Saracens.
Let it be that many would smile, yet some would receive it.
I would that the husbandman at the plough should sing
something from hence, that the weaver at his loom should
sing something from hence, that the traveller might beguile
the weariness of his journey by narrations of this kind.”
But even before he listened to Erasmus this subject had
been in Tyndale's thoughts. It is remarkable that almost
the only reminiscence of his childhood is connected with
the labour of his life. In his work on the Obedience of a
Christiaz Man,” in the course of an argument that with
special propriety may the Bible be translated into English,
because the Greek and Hebrew tongues agree so much
more with English than with Latin, he says, “Yea, and
except my memory fail me, and that I have forgotten what
I read when I was a child, thou shalt find in the English
chronicle how that king Adelstone (Athelstane) caused the
Holy Scripture to be translated into the tongue that then
was in England, and how the prelates exhorted him
thereto.” *
It soon became evident to Tyndale that his work could
not be accomplished at Sodbury. “When I was so tur-
moiled,” he says,” “in the country where I was, that I
could no longer there dwell, I this wise thought in myself:
1 Historical Account (in the English Hexapla), pp. 43, 44.
* Tyndale’s Doctrinal Treatises (Parker Society), p. I49. See also
Demaus, p. II.
* In the Preface to the Book of Genesis (I531). See Arber, Fac-
simile, pp. 16, 17.
48 The English Bible.
This I suffer because the priests of the country be unlearned.
As I this thought, the Bishop of London" came to
my remembrance, whom Erasmus. . . praiseth exceed-
ingly for his great learning. Then thought I, if I might
come to this man's service I were happy. And so I gat me
to London, and through the acquaintance of my master
came to Sir Harry Gilford, the king's grace's controller, and
brought him an oration of Isocrates which I had trans-
lated out of Greek into English, and desired him to speak
unto my lord of London for me, which he also did, as he
showed me, and willed me to write an epistle to my lord,
and to go to him myself, which I also did. . . Where-
upon my lord answered me, his house was full, he had more
than he could well find ; and advised me to seek in London,
where he said I could not lack a service. And so in London
I abode almost one year, . . . and understood at the
last, not only that there was no room in my lord of London's
palace to translate the New Testament, but also that there
was no place to do it in all England.”
It was probably in 1523 that Tyndale came to London.
During the year of anxious waiting he found a home in the
house of Humphry Monmouth, a cloth-merchant of London,
who proved himself now and in after years Tyndale's zealous
and loving friend. When at last compelled to renounce the
hope of translating the New Testament in England, Tyndale
did not hesitate to give up his country in favour of his work;
but in May, 1524, he left England—never to return.
Of Tyndale's movements during the first year of his Con-
tinental life we have very scanty information. It appears
certain that he arrived in Hamburg in May, 1524; that he
was in the same city in the early spring of the following
year; and that a few months later he was superintending
the printing of his New Testament at Cologne. It is very
1 Tunstal, who succeeded to the see of London in 1522.
Tyndale in Germany. 49
possible that Tyndale remained in Hamburg for a year, en-
gaged in the preparation of his translation : the fact that
Hamburg did not then possess a printing-press' can hardly
be regarded as conclusive against this view. On the other
hand, we have contemporary evidence that Tyndale visited
Luther about this time. Sir Thomas More asserts that
“Tyndale, as soon as he got him hence, got him to Luther
straight;” that at the time of his translation of the New
Testament he was with Luther at Wittenberg; and that
the Confederacy between him and Luther was a thing well
known. Tyndale, in reply, simply denies the last charge,
that he was confederate with Luther. It is needless to
quote other statements to the same effect. Clear and defi-
nite as they appear to be, they may perhaps be explained
away, as suggested by the prevailing tendency to associate
all work similar to Luther's with this Reformer himself. On
the whole, however, it is safer to accept the evidence of
Contemporaries, and to assume that either in 1524 or in
1525 Tyndale spent some time at Wittenberg. Another
question which has been much discussed is of considerable
interest. Was any portion of the New Testament published
in the course of this year P There is some reason to believe
that Tyndale gave to the world his translation of the first
two Gospels before the middle of 1525; but the evidence
adduced is somewhat uncertain, and the verdict must be
“not proven.”
We reach firm ground in the autumn of 1525. Our
information is derived from an enemy, who triumphantly
records his success in embarrassing and partially frustrating
Tyndale's work. In 1525, John Dobenek, better known
as Cochlaeus, was living in exile at Cologne, engaged in
literary labours. Becoming intimate with the printers of
Cologne, he heard them boast at times, in their cups, that
* Demaus, Zife of Zyndale, p. 92.
E
5O The English Bible.
England would soon become Lutheran. He heard, more-
over, that in Cologne were lurking two Englishmen, learned
and eloquent men, well skilled in languages; but all his
efforts to gain a sight of these strangers were without avail.
At last, plying one of the printers with wine, Cochlaeus drew
from him the secret of the Lutheran design on England.
The two Englishmen were apostates" who had learnt the
German language at Wittenberg, and had rendered Luther's
Testament into English. This English Testament they had
brought to Cologne, that it might be multiplied by the
printers into many thousands, and, concealed among other
merehandise, might find a way into England. So great was
their confidence, that they had sought to have 6,ooo copies
printed ; but through the timidity of the printers only 3,000
were issued from the press. These copies, in quarto, had
already been printed as far as the letter K (that is, as far
as the tenth sheet, probably a little beyond the end of St.
Matthew’s Gospel). The expense was met by English mer-
chants, who had also engaged to convey the work secretly
into England, and to diffuse it widely in that country. On
receiving this information, Cochlaeus lost no time in reveal-
ing the plot to Hermann Rinck, a nobleman of Cologne,
well known to Henry VIII. and to the Emperor Charles V.
Having convinced himself of the correctness of the account
received, Rinck went to the senate, and obtained an inter-
dict of the work. On this the two Englishmen, carrying off
the printed sheets, fled hastily from Cologne, and went up
the Rhine to Worms. Their enemies could do no more
than send letters to Henry, Wolsey, and Fisher, warning
them of the danger at hand.”
1 The second “apostate” was William Roye, who for some time
acted as Tyndale's amanuensis.
2 The letters of Cochlaeus in the original Latin, with a translation by
Mr. Anderson, are given by Arber, Facsimile, pp. 18–24.
Tyndale's Testament in England. 5 I
Worms was a city in every way suitable for Tyndale's pur-
pose. Cologne was devoted to the Romish faith ; Worms
was all Lutheran : both cities enjoyed considerable inter-
course with England. In comparative quiet Tyndale now
pursued and Completed his work, carrying it farther than he
had at first designed. The edition commenced by Quentel,
the Cologne printer, was in quarto: at Worms Tyndale
not only completed this edition, but also brought out an
edition in octavo." Of each of these editions, which will
be described in detail hereafter, 3,000 copies were printed.
No copy that we possess contains the title-page, but we
know on Tyndale's own authority” that the work was issued
without the translator's name.
The Testaments reached England probably in the spring
of 1526. Cochlaeus was not the only one who gave notice
of their coming. Lee, the king's almoner (afterwards Arch-
bishop of York), wrote to Henry in December, 1525, that,
according to certain information received by him while
passing through France, “an Englishman, at the solici-
tation and instance of Luther, with whom he is, hath
translated the New Testament into English, and within few
days intendeth to arrive with the same imprinted in Eng-
land.” There was no lack of willingness on the part of the
authorities to take this warning, but we have no record of
any public action until the autumn of 1526. We hear then
of a meeting of bishops to deliberate on the measures to
be adopted. Our account is taken from a poem by Roye,
Tyndale's former companion, which contains “A brefe
I See Canon Westcott's History of the English Bible (ed. 2), pp.
32, 33; Arber, pp. 26, 27, 65, 66. It may now be considered certain
that the Worms printer was P. Schoeffer, son of the great printer of
that name, who was in partnership with Fust.
* See his Parable of the Wicked Mammon, in his Works, vol. i.,
p. 37 (Parker Society).
E 2
52 The English Bible.
Dialoge betwene two prestes servauntes, named Watkyn
and Jeffraye":”—
“/eſ. But nowe of Standisshe” accusacion
Brefly to make declaracion,
Thus to the Cardinall he spake:
* Pleaseth youre honourable Grace,
Here is chaunsed a pitious cace,
And to the Churche a grett lacke.
The Gospell in oure Englisshe tonge,
Of” laye men to be red and songe,
Is nowe hidder come to remayne.
Which many heretykes shall make,
Except youre Grace some waye take
By youre authorite hym to restrayne.’
* + + * * + * 3: * *
Wat. But what sayde the Cardinall here at?
/eſ. He spake the wordes of Pilat,
Sayinge, ‘I fynde no fault therin.”
Howe be it, the bisshops assembled,
Amonge theym he examened,
What was best to determyn P
Then answered bisshop Cayphas,”
That a grett parte better it was
The Gospell to be condemned ;
Lest their vices manyfolde
Shulde be knowen of yonge and olde,
Their estate to be contempned.
The Cardinall then incontinent”
Agaynst the Gospell gave judgement,
Sayinge to brenne he deserved.
Wherto all the bisshoppis cryed,
* A poem which “represents at least the popular opinion as to
the parts played by the several actors.” (Westcott, p. 36.)
* Standish, Bishop of St. Asaph.
3 By.
* Tunstall, Bishop of London.
* Immediately.
Attempts to Prevent its Introduction. 53
Answerynge, ‘It cannot be denyed
He is worthy so to be served.”
* + º: * + * * +: + +
Jeſ. They sett nott by the Gospell a flye:
Diddest thou nott heare whatt villany
They did vnto the Gospell?
Wat. Why, did they agaynst hym conspyre?
Jeſ. By my trothe they sett hym a fyre
Openly in London cite.
Wat. Who caused it so to be done?
Jeſ. In sothe the Bisshoppe of London,
With the Cardinallis authorite:
Which at Paulis crosse ernestly
Denounced it to be heresy
That the Gospell shuld come to lyght;
Callynge them heretikes execrable
Whiche caused the Gospell venerable
To come vnto laye mens syght.
He declared there in his furiousnes,
That he fownde erroures more and les
Above thre thousande in the translacion.
Howe be it, when all cam to pas,
I dare Saye vnable he was
Of one erroure to make probacion.”
The utmost efforts were used to prevent the intro-
duction of the forbidden books into England, and to
discover and destroy the copies which were already in
circulation. Many copies were bought up for large sums
of money, which afforded means for reprints and new
editions : accordingly as many as three editions were
issued by Antwerp printers in 1526 and the two following
years. The detailed narratives of search and persecution
are full of interest, but they lie beyond the limits of
our space.”
| Nearly 300 lines of this satire are given by Arber, pp. 29–32.
* One narrative especially we exclude with regret, as too lengthy for
quotation. This is the “Story of Thomas Garret, and things done in
54 The English Bible.
In the midst of this turmoil Tyndale quietly pursued
his labours. At first he was not recognised in England
as the author of the obnoxious translation, which bore
no name on the title-page. The secret, however, could
not long be kept. Wolsey, connecting Tyndale with the
satire published (by Roye) against himself," used vigorous
efforts to get him into his power. Tyndale now found
it necessary to leave Worms. In 1527, probably, he re-
moved to Marburg in Hesse Cassel, where he spent the
greater part of the four years following, leaving Marburg
for Antwerp early in 1531. At Marburg his principal
doctrinal and controversial works were printed, at the
press of Hans Luft; as his Parable of the Wicked Mammon
(1528), his Treatise on the Obedience of a Christian Man
(1528), the Practice of Prelates (1530). The work of
translation, however, was not neglected. After the New
Testament, Tyndale devoted himself to the Old, com-
mencing with the Pentateuch. Foxe's statement is as
follows: “At what time Tyndale had translated the fifth
book of Moses, called Deuteronomy, minding to print
the same in Hamburg, he sailed thitherward; where by
the way, upon the coast of Holland, he suffered ship-
wreck, by which he lost all his books, writings, and
copies, and so was compelled to begin all again anew,
to his hindrance and doubling of his labours. Thus,
having lost by that ship both money, his copies, and his
time, he came in another ship to Hamburg, where, at
his appointment, Master Coverdale tarried for him, and
helped him in the translating of the whole five books
of Moses, from Easter till December, in the house of
a worshipful widow, Mistress Margaret Van Emmerson,
Oxford, reported by Antony Delaber:” see Foxe, vol. v., pp. 421–427;
Arber, pp. 57–63.
* Demaus, p. 16O.
The Penzazezach Translated. 55
A.D. 1529; a great sweating sickness being at the same
time in the town. So, having dispatched his business at
Hamburg, he returned afterwards to Antwerp again.” It is
hard to reconcile every particular of this narrative with what
we learn from other sources, and from Foxe himself; but
there is little doubt that it is in the main correct. The
Pentateuch appears to have been published at Marburg in,
I53o or 1531 : a second edition was issued in 1534. The
Pentateuch was followed, in 1531, by the Book of Jonah,
probably printed at an Antwerp press. At this period
Tyndale was involved in active controversy with Sir T.
More, who had violently attacked his translation of the
New Testament and his other writings. The only part of
the controversy with which we are concerned is that which
relates to Tyndale's accuracy as a translator : More's stric-
tures will be noticed presently. The year 1534 is especially
memorable for the publication of Tyndale’s revised trans-
lation of the New Testament, “imprinted at Antwerp by
Marten Emperowr.” The title runs thus: “The newe
Testament dylygently corrected and compared with the
Greke by Willyam Tindale, and fynesshed in the yere of
ber.” Besides the New Testament, this volume contained
a translation of “the Epistles taken out of the Old Testa-
ment, which are read in the Church after the use of Salis-
bury upon certain days of the year.” These “Epistles”
include 78 verses from the Pentateuch; 51 from I Kings,
Proverbs, and the Song of Solomon ; 147 from the Pro-
phetical Books (chiefly from Isaiah); and 43 from the
Apocrypha (chiefly from Ecclesiasticus).” The work of re-
vision and translation occupied Tyndale's attention to the
last. Very shortly before (or perhaps even after) his arrest.
1 Foxe, vol. v., p. I2O. Compare Demaus, pp. 229, 230.
* Westcott, p. 48.
56 The English Bible.
appeared a third edition of his New Testament, bearing
marks of assiduous labour. In a recently discovered letter
written during his imprisonment, Tyndale begs that he may
be allowed the use of his Hebrew books, Bible, grammar,
and dictionary. There is good reason for believing that
he left behind him in manuscript a translation of the
Books of the Old Testament from Joshua to 2 Chronicles
inclusive.
The touching details of Tyndale's treacherous betrayal,
while residing in the house of his warm and true friend,
Thomas Poyntz, of Antwerp, cannot be given here. In
May, 1535, he was committed to the castle of Vilvorde,
near Brussels. Notwithstanding all the efforts of his friends
in England and in the Low Countries to procure for him
protection, he was condemned to death. On Friday,
October 6th, 1536, he was strangled at the stake, and his
body burnt to ashes. His last words were, “Lord open
the King of England's eyes.”
“And here to end and conclude this history with a few
notes touching his private behaviour in diet, study, and
especially his charitable zeal and tender relieving of the
poor : First, he was a man very frugal and spare of body, a
great student, and earnest labourer, namely [especially] in
the setting forth of the Scriptures of God. He reserved or
hallowed to himself two days in the week, which he named
his days of pastime, and those days were Monday the first
day in the week and Saturday the last day in the week.
On the Monday he visited all such poor men and women
as were fled out of England by reason of persecution into
Antwerp ; and those, well understanding their good exer-
cises and qualities, he did very liberally comfort and re-
lieve ; and in like manner provided for the sick and diseased
persons. On the Saturday he walked round about the town
in Antwerp, seeking out every corner and hole where he
Death of Tyndale. 57
suspected any poor person to dwell (as God knoweth there
are many); and where he found any to be well occupied,
and yet overburdened with children, or else were aged or
weak, those also he plentifully relieved. And thus he spent
his two days of pastime, as he called them. And truly his
almose [alms] was very large and great; and so it might
well be, for his exhibition that he had yearly of the English
merchants was very much ; and that for the most part he
bestowed upon the poor, as aforesaid. The rest of the days
in the week he gave him wholly to his book, wherein most
diligently he travailed. When the Sunday came, then went
he to some one merchant's chamber or other, whither came
many other merchants; and unto them would he read some
one parcel of Scripture, either out of the Old Testament or
out of the New ; the which proceeded so fruitfully, sweetly,
and gently from him (much like to the writing of St. John
the Evangelist), that it was a heavenly comfort and joy to
the audience to hear him read the Scriptures: and in like
wise after dinner he spent an hour in the aforesaid manner.
He was a man without any spot or blemish of rancour or
malice, full of mercy and Compassion, so that no man living
was able to reprove him of any kind of sin or crime ; albeit
his righteousness and justification depended not thereupon
before God, but only upon the blood of Christ and his faith
upon the same, in which faith constantly he died, as is said
at Vilvorde, and now resteth with the glorious company of
Christ's martyrs blessedly in the Lord, who be blessed in
all his saints. Amen.” "
Some recent writers have endeavoured to place his
character in a very different light. It may be acknowledged
that in controversy Tyndale frequently used language which
cannot be defended, especially when (with or without
sufficient reason) he suspected an adversary to be actuated
* Foxe's Life of Tyndale. See Arber, pp. 17, 18.
58 The English Bible.
by corrupt motives; but those who best know the character
of the times in which he lived will judge most leniently
of this excess. Certainly it is not possible to condemn
Tyndale on this charge and absolve his opponents. His
fervent zeal for the truth may have led him into extremes,
but it was free from any taint of selfish considerations. “I
assure you,” he says * (at a time when overtures were made
to him to return to England), “if it would stand with
the king's most gracious pleasure to grant only a bare text
of the Scripture to be put forth among his people, like as is
put forth among the subjects of the emperor in these parts,
and of other Christian princes, be it of the translation
of what person soever shall please his Majesty, I shall
immediately make faithful promise never to write more, nor
abide two days in these parts after the same ; but im-
mediately to repair into his realm, and there most humbly
submit myself at the feet of his Royal Majesty, offering my
body to suffer what pain or torture, yea, what death his
Grace will, so that this be obtained.” Of the value of
his work we shall speak hereafter when we examine it
in detail. Whether we look at his work or at his life, it
is impossible not to admire and reverence “the worthy
virtues and doings of this blessed martyr, who, for his pain-
ful travails and singular zeal to his country, may be called
an apostle of England.”
* Demaus, p. 3O8.
* Foxe, Acts and Monuments, vol. v., p. 129.
CHAPTER V.
WILLIAM TYNDALE. –II.
FROM the brief sketch that has been given of the life of
Tyndale, we turn now to the examination of his work. We
shall first notice his translation of the New Testament.
On the following page is given a facsimile of some verses
of St. Matthew from one of Tyndale's Testaments. The
Specimen is taken from the first edition, from the sheets
printed at Cologne in 1525, before Cochlaeus appeared
on the scene to obstruct Tyndale's labours. These sheets,
it will be remembered, were in quarto, whereas the edition
commenced at Worms was in octavo. The facsimile, there-
fore, represents the earliest English Testament ever printed
—the first English translation of the New Testament made
from the original.
Until recently it was supposed that no portion of this
quarto Testament had escaped destruction. In the year
1836, however, a London bookseller accidentally met with a
portion of an English translation of St. Matthew's Gospel,
in black letter, bound up with another tract. The fragment
consisted of thirty-one leaves. Seven of these contained a
prologue, commencing “I have here translated (brethern
and susters moost dere and tenderly beloued in Christ) the
newe Testament for youre spirituall edyfyinge, consolacion,
and solas.” After the prologue we find a complete list
of the books of the New Testament, and a woodcut
representing an angel holding an inkstand into which St.
Matthew dips his pen. Then follows the translation of
ºppº &méfºllºponſtony groºmbe obºithsomet
º ſpeakſ
1bg that bath, whº
tº the wºb2'of 968
is xuberſtöbe / tºº
rebit multiplict #2
makith the poeffle
better where hiti;
mot wriberſtobey tº
gate hit betraafii.)
imakºth the peºple
wooiſe.
FAC-SIMILE OF ST. MATT. XIII. I–15 IN TYNDALE's FIRST TESTAMENT
ſº bºsis:/thofovár went fººtbfoſº/º
Øit is gºver unto you to mowt the ſecrettſ of the tymgbo
& W =
ſ
cutofthe bouff/ant fatt by the ſeeſ bºyanº mº
fºldbegosºlo reſºrt& ontº bim/ſº gretly that be točt
|Sºftingſbype/amball the peºple ſººnºº
#ºn She ſhafo many'tbyngſ tº them in ſmittuši/%
§§ºmofºſſbyttºyºſºft tº fºllº/º bewoº
mºbººtb/ons a mºnit fronge tºppe/becauſe it hº mºbe.
pht :fº: vobgn #. was oppé /bit ſº bot/am
for life of rºtyngewyobrébºyº fºll amonge º
hogyaºs tº thoriºg aroſe ſambchoofeº it, patte fºlli
cºso groutbe ſºns broq}t fortb gº frutº: ſºme tº buy
Śrºsſ.ſoſſoms fifty ſºlºſſºms tyrtyſoſº.ºboſeverbat
egreš to becore/let bim bedrº, -
thou totbcmin parables: be anſwereb &mb ſaibe ontº them
mesſbovew/buttstbºm it is mott gºvºu, for wbºſomever
batbſtabumſ ball bit begovem; ant be ſhall baye boumbam.
acet' ºut whoſoevey bºth mott; from bim (bulbé taſym
wdye evé that ſºme that bºat.8 beforeſpeate 3 to them
infimititubſ: $orthoughtbºyſ/tºy'ſemit amb bºyng
tºybeare notinctber onbºxſtomº, 2nbin them y5 fulfylk
the propheſy of º ſº : witbyotirectly
yeſball bedrº/ambſball not omberſtºbó/gmo with your eye;
yeſhall ſeſambſbaſl not perceque $ot this peoples berty;
(QUARTO EDITION).



















Tyndale's New Testament. 6 I
rather more than two-thirds of the Gospel, the last words of
the fragment being, “howe camyst thou in hydder, and ”
(Matt. xxii. 12). As now the prologue contains the very
passages which were alleged against Tyndale by his ene-
mies; as the list of books embraces the whole New Testa-
ment, and follows the peculiar arrangement which is adopted
in Tyndale's octavo Testament; as it can be shown from
the woodcut and from typographical evidence" that the
fragment was printed (by Quentel) at Cologne before 1526;
and as the translation agrees to a remarkable extent with
that of the octavo Testament; there cannot remain the least
doubt that in this fragment we have, as has been said,
a portion of the first New Testament published by Tyndale,
and that the eight sheets which it contains are part of
the ten so hastily carried off from Cologne to Worms. Out
of 3,000 copies printed, this alone is known to exist. It is
now in the Grenville Library of the British Museum, and is
commonly spoken of as the Grenville Fragment. This work
has recently been rendered accessible to all, through the
publication by Mr. Arber of an admirable facsimile edition :
from the editor's excellent Preface, which contains docu-
ments of great importance, we have already given many
quotations.
Before entering into further detail respecting this earliest
version, let us look at the companion volume, the octavo
Testament issued at Worms in 1525. Of this edition we
happily possess one complete copy—complete, that is, so
far as the translation is concerned, for here also the title-page
is missing. This copy, which is in the library of the Baptist
College, Bristol, has been most carefully reproduced in
facsimile by Mr. Francis Fry. It contains no prologue,
or list of contents; but at the close, before the list of errors
Corrected, there is a short address to the reader, of which
* See Arber's Facsimile, pp. 65, 66.
62 The English Bible.
we shall have to speak presently. An imperfect copy of the
same edition, preserved in the library of St. Paul's Cathedral,
contains about six-sevenths of the New Testament, being
defective both at the beginning and at the end. In 1836
Messrs. Bagster republished this translation, under the
editorship of Mr. Offor. These who have not access to Mr.
Fry's beautiful (but expensive) facsimile, will find this edition
convenient, and sufficiently correct for most purposes.” The
same translation of the Gospels is given, together with
Wycliffe's, in Bosworth and Waring's Gothic and Anglo-
Saxon Gospels. It will not be necessary to adduce at
length the evidence on which we receive this Testament as
Tyndale’s. In the introduction to the facsimile, Mr. Fry
fully proves that the book was printed by P. Schoeffer
at Worms about the time at which Tyndale is known
to have been in that city. In a later work Tyndale makes
reference to the address to the reader which this volume
contains; and a comparison of the translation with that
of subsequent editions which bear Tyndale's name is of
itself sufficient to place the authorship beyond doubt.
As might be expected, the differences between the two
editions of 1525 are very slight, so far as the translation is
concerned. A careful collation of the Grenville Fragment
with the corresponding portion of the octavo edition shows
that, if we pass over variations in Orthography and some
manifest misprints, there are hardly more than fifty differ-
* There is considerable inaccuracy in minor points, such as the
spelling of words. In the course of about thirty chapters (taken from
St. Matthew, the Acts, and the Epistle to the Colossians) there are
not more than four mistakes which affect the sense ; but within the
compass of fifty verses only there are nearly thirty differences in
orthography, &c., between this edition and Mr. Fry's facsimile. It
should be said that the title-page inserted by Mr. Offor has no
authority whatever.
Tyndale's New T.estament. 63
ences of text in 740 verses. Many of these are of very
little consequence (as to for unto, unto for to, which for the
which), but others show the hand of the careful reviser,
omitting unnecessary words or improving the style. There
is but little advance in correctness of translation, the emen-
dations being balanced by almost an equal number of mis-
takes. The only alteration of real importance is found
in Matt. xx. 23, where the quarto text has “is not mine
to give you ;” in the octavo Tyndale rightly removes the
“you,” which had come in from the Vulgate. That the
Testament to which the Grenville Fragment belongs is of
earlier date than the octavo, would be clear even if we had
only internal evidence to guide us ; for in more than forty
out of the fifty places in which the two texts differ, the
reading of the octavo is that which is found in Tyndale's
later editions. In other respects the two Testaments of
1525 have much less in common. The brief epistle “To
the Reader” stands in marked contrast with the lengthy
prologue prefixed to the quarto edition, and the absence
of notes in the octavo is a still more striking characteristic.
Our specimen of the earlier work contains an explanatory
comment in the outer margin, the inner being reserved
for references to passages of Scripture, usually to parallel
passages in the other Gospels. As, however, these two
Testaments so nearly agree in the text which they present,
they are usually spoken of as one work, under the name of
Tyndale's first edition of the New Testament.
The publication of unauthorised impressions of Tyndale’s
Testament, by printers in Antwerp, has already been re-
ferred to ; these will require no further notice. In 1534,
however, George Joye, the author of translations of Isaiah,
Jeremiah, and the Psalms (not from the Hebrew, but from
the Latin), took in hand a revision of Tyndale's version,
correcting it by the help of the Vulgate. Many of the
64 The English Bible.
alterations which Joye made were very offensive to Tyndale;
though, no doubt, made with good intentions, they betray
great weakness of judgment, and frequently depart widely
from the meaning of the Original text." Perhaps it is to this
unauthorised procedure that we owe Tyndale's distinct
avowal that the translation of the New Testament (which
had hitherto appeared anonymously) was from his hand.
The revised version on which he had been long engaged
was published in November, 1534, three months later than
Joye's ; and not only does the title-page contain Tyndale's
name, but at the head of the Preface we find “W. T. yet
once again to the Christian Reader.” In this edition,
usually known as the second, the text is accompanied by
marginal notes. Besides the address to the reader, there is
a separate prologue to almost every book, those prefixed to
the Gospel of St. Matthew and the Epistle to the Romans
being of considerable length. A translation of Epistles
taken out of the Old Testament,” and a short exposition
upon certain words and phrases of the New Testament,
“added to fill up the leaf withal,” are the remaining contents
of the volume. A few copies of this edition are preserved
in our great libraries; for example, those of the British
Museum, St. Paul's Cathedral, the University of Cambridge,
&c. In 1843 Messrs. Bagster published in their Znglish
Aexapla a careful reprint of Tyndale's Testament of 1534,
taken from a copy in the Library of the Baptist College,
Bristol.
“One of the few copies of this edition which have been
preserved is of touching interest. Among the men who had
suffered for aiding in the circulation of the earlier editions
* One copy of Joye's work has been preserved, and is now in the
British Museum. For further particulars, see Westcott, Aſistory, pp.
46–48; Demaus, Zife of Zyndale, pp. 387–391.
* See above, p. 55.
Tyndale's Wew Testament. 65
of the Testament was a merchant-adventurer of Antwerp,
Mr. Harman, who seems to have applied to Queen Anne
Boleyn for redress. The queen listened to the plea which
was urged in his favour, and by her intervention he was
restored to the freedom and privileges of which he had been
deprived. Tyndale could not fail to hear of her good
offices, and he acknowledged them by a royal gift. He was
at the time engaged in superintending the printing of his
revised New Testament, and of this he caused one copy to
be struck off on vellum and beautifully illuminated. No
preface or dedication or name mars the simple integrity of
this copy. Only on the gilded edges in faded red letters
runs the simple title, Anna Regina Angliae. The copy was
bequeathed to the British Museum by the Rev. C. M.
Cracherode in 1799.”
The final results of Tyndale's labours on the New Testa-
ment are found in the edition which was published about
the time of his imprisonment. There is some difficulty in
identifying this edition, as the same text appears in two
forms, one bearing date 1535, the other 1534 (that is, pro-
bably, the commencement of 1535); where the latter date
is given, the initials “G. H.” follow. It is probable that the
edition “1534 (G. H.)” is Tyndale's genuine work, the other
being a pirated edition. One circumstance has brought the
book dated 1535 into special notoriety—viz., the extra-
Ordinary Orthography of the words. A glance at the
specimens which we give of the earlier editions will show
how wonderfully the spelling of English words may be made
to vary, but in the edition now under consideration there
is a method in the madness which cannot fail to attract
attention. In Col. i. 9—17, for example (see page 68),
1 Westcott, History, p. 49.
2 It has been suggested (by Mr. H. Stevens) that these initials
stand for Guillaume Hytchins, Tyndale's assumed name.
F
66 The English Bible.
we find praeyānge, fruefull, ſaether, haeff, maede, saeyncies,
derknes, whoom, rue/e, &c. It has been suggested that the
peculiar Orthography was adopted intentionally; that Tyn-
dale, wishing to adapt his work not only to his countrymen,
but also to those of his own county, wrote the words ac-
Cording to the pronunciation current among the peasantry
of Gloucestershire, that even the “boy that drove the
plough" might learn to read the Holy Scriptures." It
appears certain, however, that the strange guise in which
the words appear is the result of the employment of Flemish
printers, the novel combinations of vowels being due to
peculiarities of Flemish pronunciation. It is worthy of
remark that Tyndale's last edition, though it has marginal
references and (in part) short headings of chapters, is without
notes. Two copies of the edition dated 1535 are preserved.
That in the British Museum is imperfect both at the be-
ginning and at the end; a complete copy may be seen in.
the Cambridge University Library. The text of this edition
has not been republished.
The following specimens will illustrate the various forms
of Tyndale's work on the New Testament, and will enable
our readers to judge for themselves in regard to some
interesting questions which remain to be considered. The
first extract is taken from the second edition (1534), as
printed in Bagster's Hexapla. The portion selected is
Matt. xiii. 1–14, Tyndale's earlier translation of which
verses has already been given (p. 60). For the purpose of
comparison, the later Wycliffite version of the same passage
is added. The next extract is from the British Museum copy
of the Testament of I535; Col. i. 9—17 has been chosen,
as a passage of some difficulty. Here also the reader may
compare Tyndale's work with that of Purvey, some verses
of the early version having been given on a preceding page
* See above, p. 46.
Specimens of Tyndale's Work. 67
(p. 25). The last passage from the New Testament is
Heb. xi. 29–34, as it appears in the edition of 1535: in
this the spelling has been assimilated to that of our ordinary
Bibles, in order that the two versions may be more easily
compared.
ST. MATTHEW XIII. I—I4 (TYNDALE, I534).
The same daye went Iesus out of the house, and sat by the see
syde, and moch people resorted vnto him, so gretly that he went and
sat in a shippe, and all the people stode on the shoore. And he spake
many thynges to them in similitudes, sayinge: Beholde, the sower
went forth to sowe. And as he sowed, some fell by the wayes syde,
and the fowlles came and devoured it vp. Some fell apon stony
grounde where it had not moche erth, and a nonne it spronge vp,
because it had no depth of erth : and when the sunne was vp, it cauht
heet, and for lake of rotynge wyddred awaye. Some fell amonge
thornes, & the thornes spronge vp and chool<ed it. Parte fell in good
ground, & brought forth good frute : some an hundred fold, some
sixtie fold, some thyrty folde. Whosoever hath eares to heare, let him
heare.
And the disciples came and sayde to him : Why speakest thou to
them in parables? He answered and sayde vnto them : It is geven
wnto you to knowe the secretes of the kyngdome of heven, but to them
it is not geven. For whosoever hath to him shall be geven ; and he
shall have aboundance. But whosoever hath not : from hym shal be
takyn a waye even that he hath. Therfore speake I to them in
similitudes: for though they se, they se not : & hearinge they heare
not : nether vnderstonde. And in them is fulfilled the Prophesie of
Esayas, which prophesie sayth: With the eares ye shall heare and
shall not vnderstonde, and with the eyes ye shall se, and shall not
perceave.
ST. MATTHEW XIII. I—I4 (PURVEY, 1388).
In that dai Jhesus gede out of the hous, and sat bisidis the see.
And myche puple was gaderid to hym, so that he wente up in to a
boot, and sat ; and al the puple stood on the brenke. And he spac to
hem many thingis in parablis, and Seide, Lo! he that sowith gede out
to sowe his seed. And while he sowith, Summe seedis felden bisidis the
weie, and briddis of the eir camen, and eeten hem. But othere seeds
felden in to stony places, where thei hadden not mycheerthe; and anoon
thei sprongen vp, for thei hadden not depnesse of erthe. But whanne
F 2
68 The English Bible.
the sonne was risun, thei swaliden, and for thei hadden not roote, thei
drieden vp. And other seedis felden among thornes; and thornes woxen
vp, and strangeleden hem. But othere seedis felden in to good lond,
and gauen fruyt, Summe an hundrid foold, an othir sixti foold, an othir
thritti foold. He that hath eris of heryng, here he. And the disciplis
camen nyg, and seiden to him, Whi spekist thou in parablis to hem?
And he answeride, and seide to hem, For to gou it is goulun to knowe
the priuytees of the kyngdom of heuenes; but it is not goutin to hem.
For it shal be goulan to hym that hath, and he shal haue plente ; but
if a man hath not, also that thing that he hath shal be takun awei fro
hym. Therefore Y speke to hem in parablis, for theiseynge seen not,
and thei herynge heren not, nether vndurstonden ; that the prophesie
of Ysaie seiynge be fulfillid in hem, With heryngge schulen here, and
ge shulen not vndurstonde ; and geseynge schulen se, and ge shulen
not Se.
COL. I. 9–17 (TYNDALE, I535).
For this cause we also, sence the daye we harde of it, haue not
ceasyd praeyinge for you, and desyringe that ye might be fulfilled with
the knowledge of his will, in all wysdome & spirituall vnderstondinge,
that ye might walke worthy of the Lorde in all thinges that please,
beynge fruetfull in all good workes and encreasinge in the knowledge
of God, strengthed with all might thorowe his glorious power vnto all
pacience and longe sufferinge with ioyfulnes, geuinge thankes vinto the
faether which haeth maede vs meete to be parttackers of the enheri-
taunce of Saeynctes in light.
Which haeth deliuered vs from the power of derknes, and haeth
translated vs into the kingdome of his deare sone, in whoom we haue
redempcion thorowe his bloud, that is to Saey forgeuens of sinnes,
which is the ymage of the inuisible God, first begotten of al creatures.
For by him were all thinges created, thinges that are in heauen, and
things that are in earth : thinges visible, and thinges inuisible, whether
they be maieste or lordshippe, ether ruele or power. All thinges are
created by him, and in him, and he is before all thinges, and in him all
thinges haue there beynge.
HEB. XI. 29–34. (TYNDALE, 1535: SPELLING MODERNISED).
By faith they passed through the Red Sea as by dry land, which
when the Egyptians had assayed to do, They were drowned.
By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were compassed
about, seven days.
Successive Editions of 7 yndale's 7 estament. 69
By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with the unbelievers, when
she had received the spies to lodging peaceably.
And what shall I more say P the time would be too short for me to
tell of Gedeon, of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae : also of
David and Samuel, and of the prophets: which through faith subdued
kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained the promises, stopped the
mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the
sword, of weak were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to
flight the armies of the aliens.
If our readers will now place side by side our facsimile
(p. 60) and the first of the passages just given, the relation
between Tyndale's first and second editions will be easily
seen. In the fourteen verses there is no difference between
the octavo and quarto of 1525 (except in spelling); the
second edition exhibits seven changes—no inconsiderable
amount of alteration for a passage of this nature and extent.
In one case an oversight is corrected (sixty for fifty); in
two or three others the original is followed more closely. A
more graphic expression, “the thorns sprung up,” takes the
place of “the thorns arose: ” here, however, the gain is
more than doubtful, for now two different Greek words are
rendered by “sprung up,” and the hasty growth of the seed
which fell on the stony ground is not distinguished from the
“coming up " of the thorns. It will be seen that most of
the alterations stood their ground, and are in the Authorised
Version.
The second and third passages happen to illustrate the
agreement amongst Tyndale's successive editions, rather than
their difference ; the only variations being found in Col. i.
14 (“the forgiveness” for “forgiveness”), Col. i. 17 (“before
all” for “of all”), and in Heb. xi. 31 (“them that believed
not” for “the unbelievers,” and “after” for “when"). In
fact, not one of the examples here given fully illustrates the
amount of revision bestowed by Tyndale on his earlier work.
In a chapter of St. Matthew taken at hazard (chap. xxi.) we
7O The English Biffle.
find that, whereas the two Testaments of 1525 differ in one
word only, the second edition (1534) differs from them in
forty or fifty places. In twenty of these the new rendering
is nearer to the Greek, in three only is it less faithful than
the former version; in more than thirty of these instances
Tyndale's later rendering is preserved in the Authorised
Version. Professor Westcott has compared the three
editions throughout the First Epistle of St. John. He finds
thirty-four changes introduced in 1534, sixteen more in
1535; in most instances the change was for the better."
Enough has been said to show that Tyndale, like
Luther, was continually bent on the improvement of
his work. At the same time, we need not go beyond the
illustrations here given to be convinced of the excellence
of Tyndale's first attempt, all the changes introduced by
him at a later period affecting but a small portion of his
earliest text.
The first impression produced by the reading of the
passages we have cited from Tyndale's Testament will per-
haps be one of surprise that there is so little difference
between the English of 1525 and that of our ordinary
Bibles. Two or three words or phrases are unfamiliar, but
even these present no real difficulty; the sense is plain.
This impression is strengthened when we pass from short
extracts to whole chapters and books of Tyndale's version.
In the Gospel of St. Mark and the Epistle to the Hebrews
there are not more than eighty words (or, as some of these
words occur two or three times, not more than ninety words
in all) which are not found in our Authorised Version of the
Bible ; that is to say, there are not more than four strangers
in every thousand words, or nine in every hundred verses.
In the whole of Tyndale's New Testament the number of
different words of this description is probably below 350.
* Alsº, of Æng. Æible, pp. 309—312.
Similarity to the Authorised Version. 7I
This number may seem high, amounting as it does to nearly
a tenth part of the vocabulary of our New Testament, but
many of the unfamiliar words occur once or twice only. We
have, indeed, no right to speak of the words as unfamiliar,
for comparatively few (such as assoil, arede, gobbeſ, grece, to
Zºil/, /a/ºerous, Jozeff, ſo disdain aż, ſo disease, partleſ, man-
queller) would cause the ordinary reader any embarrassment.
Many of them differ very slightly from well-known Bible
words, as ignorancy, mois/ness, zwarmness, vantage, uncredible,
temperancy, conspiration, frailness, prisonment. Alarge number
belong to the English of the present day; such are emperor,
scruple, breakfast, farmer, tenant, gozom, trifte, fiend, prompt,
befoken, compile, friendless, rose-coloured, vainglorious, hang-
man, effusion, beseem, suspicious, to piece, to swarm, Žaschal,
zightful, sermon, prelate, angrily, ineffable, parish, Žith, Good
Friday, Sunday, Whitsunfide. The only surprise that can
be excited by the occurrence of some of these words arises
from their apparent modernness; we can hardly bring our-
selves to believe that they are nearly a century older than
King James's Bible.
On more attentive study, however, we discover that the
familiar look which Tyndale's version wears (when once we
have overcome the difficulty of the spelling) is not due
to familiar vocabulary alone. Not words only, but phrases
and whole sentences have rung in our ears from childhood.
Take for example the passage given from chapter xi. of the
Epistle to the Hebrews, and compare it with the common
translation ; not twenty words in the six verses do we find
changed. This, as all will admit, is a passage of great
beauty—a passage most happily rendered; but a glance will
show that almost all the excellent points are due to the first ſ
translator. The other passages we have cited have, perhaps,
undergone greater change, but in these also the well-known
terms of expression are continually presenting themselves.
72 The English Bible.
It has been estimated" that, in our Authorised Version,
about nine-tenths of the First Epistle of St. John and five-
sixths of the very difficult Epistle to the Ephesians are
retained from Tyndale. When a new rendering has dis-
placed Tyndale's the change has not always been for the
better. It would be a gain, for instance, if in John x. 16
we still read “one flock,” instead of “one fold ;” if I Cor.
xiii. set forth the excellence of “love,” and not of “charity;”
if in Rom, i. 18 St. Paul were not made to speak of “men
who hold,” but of “men who withhold” (or “hinder") the
truth; or if “in the name” took the place of “at the name’”
in Phil. ii. Io, and “by Jesus” (or “through Jesus”) were
substituted for “in Jesus” in I Thess. iv. I4. In these and
in other examples which might be adduced the earlier ren-
dering (in substance) should be replaced. On the other
hand, there is no doubt that, on the whole, the translation
has gained largely in faithfulness under the hand of the
loving labourers who followed Tyndale. Still greater has
been the gain in rhythm and beauty of phrase, though even
here Tyndale stands high. Happy turns of expression such
as “singing and making melody in your hearts,” “in him
we live, move, and have our being,” “turned to flight the
armies of the aliens” (which are all due to Tyndale), with
many others which might be quoted from sections of
peculiar tenderness and charm of language (as Acts xx. 18
–35, Eph. iii., I Peter ii.), tell their own tale.
The connexion between Tyndale's work and our Author-
ised Version has a less favourable side. If many of the
excellences of the latter are due to the first translator,
so also are some of its characteristic faults. The incon-
sistency of rendering so often alleged against Our version
(and not without reason) appears very strikingly in Tyndale,
the same word being very frequently rendered in two different
* Westcott, History, p. 165.
Characteristics of Tyndale's Version. 73
ways in the same verse or even line. Thus, in Matt. xxi. 23
we now read, “By what authority doest thou these things P
and who gave thee this authority ?” The Greek word
occurs twice, and the English reader receives the very
impression which the Greek conveys. Tyndale, however
(no doubt, to avoid the repetition of a word), translates the
Greek word in the first clause by “authority,” in the second
by “power.” It is less surprising to meet with inaccuracies
of other kinds. At so early a period of the revived study
of Greek, the influence of the Latin language was naturally
very great, and we cannot wonder if we find a translator
neglecting the Greek article because it was necessarily passed
over in the Vulgate (the Latin language having no definite
article), or failing to perceive the exact force of tenses and
constructions when the peculiarities of the same familiar
language rendered it an unsafe guide. The real ground
for wonder is that, with resources so imperfect, work so
valuable should have been accomplished.
One characteristic of Tyndale’s translation strikes the
reader at once. No One can read the narrative portions
of the Gospels, as presented in our Authorised Version,
without remarking the multitude of connective words. And,
but, now, then recur so often that we feel at once that we are
reading a translation from some other tongue. The repeated
use of a few of the simplest Greek conjunctions to dovetail
together the successive portions of a narrative would have
appeared monotonous to an Athenian, and is really a pecu-
liarity of the Hebrew language, naturally reproduced in
Greek that was spoken or written by Jews. An idiomatic
English translation might efface this feature of the origi-
nal ; a literal rendering seeks to present to the English
reader every characteristic of the Greek which can be
expressed without danger to the clearness or force of the
sentence. In Tyndale's first essay he sacrifices literalness
74. The English Bible.
to English idiom, and very frequently neglects the con-
nective word. In four chapters of St. Matthew (xviii.-xxi.)
we find forty-four omissions of this kind in the course of
I45 verses; in his second edition, however, Tyndale
reduced this number to thirty-six. Scholars still differ as
to the course which a translator should take, but Tyndale
had a definite idea on the subject, and the result is a
clearly-marked feature of his work.
These various questions of translation suggest another
important inquiry. What was the Greek text which Tyndale
rendered into English P Without entering into any technical
details, we may remind the reader that the manuscripts of
the Greek Testament differ widely among themselves. Whilst
agreeing so remarkably that (as was said by Bentley) not
one article of faith or moral precept is either perverted or
lost in the whole mass of various readings, yet they present
many very interesting and very important variations, none
of which will the reverent student of Scripture be willing to
neglect. Until the year 1516 not more than six or seven
chapters of the Greek Testament had been printed and
published; the sacred book was accessible in manuscript
only. In that year Erasmus's first edition of the Greek
Testament was given to the world. It is obvious that the
correctness of this printed text would depend on the ex-
cellence of the manuscripts from which it was derived.
These manuscripts (five in number) are still at Basle," where
the volume was printed; and when the science of textual
criticism began to be studied with care, scholars were at
pains to examine them and estimate their value. Not one
of these manuscripts is ancient. The most valuable of the
* With the exception of that from which the Book of Revelation
was taken. This manuscript was missing until 1860, when it was
discovered by Professor Delitzsch in the library at Mayhingen, in
Bavaria.
Tyndale's Greek Original. 75
five was written in the tenth century; to this manuscript,
however, Erasmus seems to have attached but little value. In
the Gospels Erasmus followed almost entirely a manuscript
written in the fifteenth century. Before Tyndale's earliest
translation was placed in the printer's hands, Erasmus had
published three editions of the Greek text, the third bearing
date 1522. Tyndale may have had in his possession manu-
script copies of the Greek Testament, but there can be
no doubt that he made full use of the results of Erasmus's
labours, and that the printed text was the basis of his trans-
lation. As, however, the successive editions of this text
differ among themselves in many places, we must carry the
inquiry farther, and endeavour to ascertain which edition
was the source from which the English version was derived.
One well-known characteristic of Erasmus's third and most
celebrated edition enables us to apply a very simple test.
In 1 John v. 7, 8, “For there are three that bear record [in
heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost ; and
these three are one. And there are three that bear witness
in earth], the spirit, and the water, and the blood, and these
three agree in one ;” the Greek words corresponding to
those which we have placed within brackets are contained in
no manuscript earlier than the fifteenth century, and were
not inserted by Erasmus in his first and second editions.
As the missing clauses were found in the Latin Vulgate,
their absence from the Greek text gave rise to much con-
troversy. Erasmus's reply to his objectors was, that as soon
as any Greek manuscript containing the words should be
discovered, he would insert them in his text. One “British
manuscript" (probably the “Montfortian manuscript,” in
the library of Trinity College, Dublin, written in the fifteenth
or sixteenth century) was found to answer this requirement ;
and Erasmus fulfilled his promise, giving the words a place
in his third edition. If now we turn to Tyndale's octavo
76 The English Bible.
Testament, published three years later, we find the con-
troverted clauses given without any mark to indicate a
doubt of their genuineness," almost as they stand in our
Authorised Version. Here, then, we have a clear proof
that our translator made use of the third edition of Eras-
mus's Greek Testament. We must not hastily assume that
this edition was the basis of Tyndale's whole translation.
It may easily be shown that Tyndale's work agrees with
no one of Erasmus's editions. For example, a peculiarity
of his first is the omission of several words in Acts ii. 30,
and in Tyndale's first Testament these words are wanting;”
on the other hand, nearly twenty passages might be quoted
in which Tyndale differs from Erasmus's first edition and
agrees with his second. A very clear mark of the second
edition is the substitution of “ye envy.” for “ye kill” in
James iv. 2; in all other editions, earlier and later, Erasmus
set aside this reading, which had no other authority than his
own conjecture, and restored “ye kill;” Tyndale has “ye
envy,” not only in his first edition, but also in his revised
version. Where Erasmus's second and third editions differ,
Tyndale seems to agree with the second more frequently
than with the third. It appears clear, then, that Erasmus's
second edition (1519) was that with which Tyndale was
most familiar; but that on the appearance of the third,
which contained so remarkable an addition as that in
1 John v. 7, 8, he followed the authority of Erasmus in this
passage, and possibly in some others. Before Tyndale's
revision was published, Erasmus had given to the world
a fourth edition (1527) in which the text of the Book of
Revelation was materially improved by the use of the Com-
* In his revised translation (1534), Tyndale prints the disputed
words in different type and in a parenthesis.
2 Perhaps the omission is due to the influence of the Vulgate.
Influence of Zafim Versions. 77
plutensian Polyglott," which had been prepared from better
manuscripts. Unfortunately, Tyndale appears to have made
no use of this edition. In Rev. xiv. 1, “havynge his fathers
name written in their forheads,” he has one of its improved
readings, “written’ instead of “burning;” but as he gave
this rendering as early as 1525, it is evident that he obtained
it from some other source, most probably from the Vulgate.
If this reading was taken from the Latin, it would not be a
solitary instance of the kind. In Matt. i. 18, for example,
the word “Jesus” is omitted in Tyndale's first edition,
though no Greek manuscript leaves out the word, and
the Vulgate must have been the authority which Tyndale
followed. To the same influence we must attribute the
absence of the doxology from the Lord's Prayer, as given in
the first Testament. In both these instances the words omitted
were restored in the revision of 1534. In later translations
as well as in Tyndale's, we shall find that the influence of the
Latin versions sometimes led to the adoption of readings
not found in the Greek text which the translators possessed.
Not unfrequently, as has been already explained (page 29),
these readings have been since discovered to rest on high
authority, being confirmed by ancient manuscripts not
known or not appreciated in the sixteenth century. This
question, however, is only one branch of another, much
wider and more important—what influence did the Vulgate
and other translations of Scripture (by Erasmus, Luther,
and others) exert upon Tyndale's version ? This question
must be reserved until Tyndale’s work upon the Old Testa-
ment has been reviewed.
Before we pass away from our present subject a word
must be said on the order in which the books of the New
Testament are placed. The list of books preserved in the
Grenville Fragment is very curious. As far as the Epistle to
* See above, p. 37.
º,
78 The English Bible.
Philemon the arrangement does not differ from that of our
own Bibles, but this Epistle is immediately succeeded by
those of St. Peter and St. John. So far, the books are
numbered from 1 to 23. After the 3rd Epistle of St. John
there is a break in the list, and the names of the four
remaining books, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistles of
St. James and St. Jude, and the Apocalypse, are left without
numbers, and most carefully kept apart from those which
precede. This arrangement is Luther's ; the four books
were placed last by him because, in his judgment, they
stood below the other books in rank and importance. It is
clear that in 1525 Tyndale accepted in the main Luther's
opinion on this point. In his Testament of 1534 the order
remains unchanged; but the break in the list before the
Epistle to the Hebrews has disappeared; and in his prologues
Tyndale distinctly admits, and even argues for, the authority
of the three Epistles as portions of Holy Scripture.
CHAPTER VI.
WILLIAM TYNIDALE. —III.
THE two specimens given in facsimile on the following page
are taken from originals in the British Museum. The former
is one of the Epistles from the Old Testament which are
appended to Tyndale's New Testament of 1534; the second
is from the first edition of Tyndale's Pentateuch. There
are two copies of the latter work in the British Museum :
one (in the Grenville Library) is perfect; the other wants a
few pages, which have been supplied in facsimile. In this
edition each of the books of the Pentateuch has its own
title-page, but in no case does this page contain the date of
publication or the printer's name. The only information on
these points is supplied by a note at the end of Genesis:
“Emprented at Malborow in the lande of Hesse, by me
Hans Luft, the yere of Oure Lorde M.CCCCC.xxx., the xvij.
dayes of Januarij.” The Books of Genesis and Numbers
are in black letter; Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, in
Roman. It seems clear from these indications that the five
books were published and circulated separately; whether
they were collected by Tyndale and issued by him in one
volume, we do not know with certainty. Each book has its
own prologue. The preface to Genesis is headed, “W. T.
To the Reader,” and opens with a reference to the writer's
translation of the New Testament. To this document we
have already referred," as affording trustworthy information
respecting Tyndale’s labours before he left England for the
* See above, p. 47.
viſion of the gitimightieſanowººmbeſòſteth
boome haſh his eyes openeb. 2ſe bim but
not moto/2, beborbo bim but not mye,0here
aff come a ſtarre of 36cob anotyſcaceptºr
of 33rgeſ.ſtobid, ſhaftſmytex cooſtégeſ&mo:
abanöumbermyne affthe djitoerm of ºth.
21mbºom ſhafbe big poſſeſſion/ambypeſ:
ſeſſion of Śeir ſhafbe their chimyºg/aw83f
rººf ſhaft boomſmſuffy ºlně out of 3d.cobs
shaft come 92 that ſhaft beſtroyo the temnaſt
of the cities.
NUMBERS xxIV. I6–19: TYNDALE (1531).
{T tº asſºs.sys %
iſt €e
*7(Moiſt payſe (): T toxbe/tºattöough . .
>\} f)ow toere angrge ºf{} *:::::::::: eſoleyl.
!’ gérig targeb/amb tºou aft comfoxie
Yae, ºeſothº (508 is tºyfūtūqāoºpi'ſ 8e
80%e tºexfore amb wet fºre, fox tºo £ºbe
Goo igtay ſtrengtſ dub wººdyſe toºtof
3| §. ambié Become tay ſooyourºlºyº
fºã& 8tawa water in gºabited oute of 19e we?
tea of ſafúacio). Ambye,6%ff ſayein 1864 ba:
Ye:gève Baukeg unto the foxbé/cation figua.
me: make big bebeg hmomen amonge 19e 9e:
them: remember that flie, name is § £yffe
up. Synge unto the Boxbe/fox 92 ºat? Some
exce(fenffye/anó 16al ic knºem tºozºo Guz
té ºf the pºſée: £rye aub fºotbte 199ainz
habiter of Şicº/for great amonge you is the
$otye of 3ſraet.
ISAIAH, CHAP. XII. : TYNDALE (IS34).

Tyndale's Bible. 8 I
Continent. The initials “W. T.” stand at the head of every
page of the prologues to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy. In Exodus several full-page illustrations are
introduced, representing the furniture of the tabernacle, the
dress of the high priest, &c. Each book is furnished with
marginal notes, keenly controversial in spirit, and vigorous
in language; everywhere the writer is bent on tracking out
and exposing the errors and corruptions of Rome. Are the
Sons of Aaron commanded not to “make baldness upon
their head" (Lev. xxi. 5), at once follows the comment,
“Of the heathen priests then took our prelates the ensample
of their bald pates.” Where the text brings before us the
self-sacrificing spirit of Moses (Exod. xxxii.), Tyndale is
ready with a parallel and a contrast : “O pitiful Moses, and
likewise O merciful Paul (Rom. ix.). And O abominable
Pope with all his merciless idols.” Though such comments
as these cannot but remind the reader of Luther, it has
been shown by Mr. Demaus' that they are altogether
different from the notes in Luther's Pentateuch : in this
respect they differ widely from the marginal annotations in
Tyndale's first Testament, which were in great measure
taken from the German.”
In the Library of St. Paul’s Cathedral we find a volume
very similar in character and contents to that which has just
been described. It contains the Pentateuch in the form of
five separate books, with different title-pages and prologues,
and printed in different descriptions of type. Here, how-
ever, the Book of Numbers alone is in black letter; Genesis
is in Roman, and plainly professes to be “newly correctyd
and amendyd by W. T., M.D. xxxiiii.” It is clear, then,
that we have before us a new edition of the translation of
Genesis; but whether the translation of the other books has
* Zife of Tyndale, p. 238.
* See Westcott, A'istory, p. I53; Demaus, p. 129.
G
82 The English Bible.
been in any way altered is very doubtful. Even in Genesis
the changes introduced are probably of no great magnitude.
In the earlier edition Gen. iv. 7 is rendered thus: “Wotest
thou not yf thou dost well thou shalt receave it? But & yf
thou dost evell, by & by thy synne lyeth open in the dore.
Not withstondyng, let it be subdued unto the, and see thou
rule it.” In the corrected edition dosſ is twice changed into
do, but in other respects the rendering is unaltered. The
later translation of Gen. xx. 16, a difficult verse, is as
follows: “He shall be a couerynge to thyne eyes vnto all
that ar with the, and vnto all men an excuse.” The earlier
text reads, “and vnto all men, and an excuse.” The two
translations have not as yet been compared throughout.
It is generally believed that Tyndale proceeded much
farther than the Pentateuch in the translation of the Old
Testament, and that in a Bible published the year after his
death all the books from Genesis to 2 Chronicles (inclusive)
are from his hand. The evidence in support of this opinion
will be given when we come to speak of “Matthew's Bible.”
The only portion of the Old Testament which appeared in
Tyndale's name, besides the Pentateuch and the “Epistles,”
was the Book of Jonah (1531). The prologue to the trans-
lation (which is five or six times the length of the book
itself) is well known, but the translation was until very
recently supposed to be entirely lost. As lately as 1848
the editor of Tyndale's works for the Parker Society did not
hesitate to maintain that Tyndale had never published a
version of Jonah, but a (so-called) prologue only. In 1861
all doubts were set at rest, a copy of the translation being
discovered by Lord A. Hervey, now Bishop of Bath and
Wells; a facsimile edition was published by Mr. Fry, in
1863.
To illustrate more fully Tyndale's labours on the Old
Testament, we append the whole passage in Numb. xxiv.
Specimens of Tyndale's 7'ranslations. 83
from which some verses have been already taken, and also
a part of the 4th chapter of Jonah.
NUMBERS XXIV. I 5–24 (TYNDALE, I 531).l
* And he began his parable and sayed : Balam the sonne of Beor
hath Sayed, and the man that hath his eye open hath sayed, * and he
hath Sayed that heareth the wordes of God and hath the knowlege of
the most hye and beholdeth the vision of the allmightie, and when he
falleth downe hath his eyes opened. 7 I se him but not now, I beholde
him but not nye. There shall come a starre of Jacob and ryse a cepter
of Israel, which shall smyte the coostes of Moab and vndermyne all the
childern of Seth. 18 And Edom shal be his possession, and the posses-
sion of Seir shalbe their enimyes, and Israel shall doo manfully. * And
out of Jacob shall come he that shall destroye the remnaunt of the
cities.
* And he loked on Amaleck and began his parable and sayed:
Amaleck is the first of the nacions, but his latter ende shall perysh
utterly. * And he loked on the Kenites, and toke his parable and
sayed : stronge is thi dwellynge place, and put thi nest apon a rocke.
* Neuerthelater thou shalt be a burnynge to Kain, untill Assur take the
prisoner. * And he toke his parable & Sayed : Alas, who shall lyue
when God doeth this? 24 The shippes shall come out of the coste of
Cittim and subdue Assur and subdue Eber, and he him selfe shall
perysh at the last.
JONAH IV. I—5 (TYNDALE, I53I).
Wherfore Jonas was sore discontent and angre. And he prayed
wn to the lorde, and Sayd: O lord, was not this my Sayenge when I was
yet in my contre? And therfore I hasted rather to fle to Tharsis: for
I knew well ynough that thou wast a mercifull god, ful of compassion,
long yer” thou be angre and of great mercie, and repentest when thou
art come to take punishment. Now therfore take my life from me,
for I had leuer 3 dye then liue. And the lorde said vn to Jonas, art
thou so angrie P And Jonas gatt him out of the citie and sate him
downe on the est syde theroffe, and made him there a bothe, and sate
thervnder in the shadowe, till he might se what shuld chaunce vn to the
citie.
1 The verses are marked for convenience of reference: in Tyndale's
Pentateuch, as in his New Testament, there are no divisions except
those of paragraphs and chapters.
* Ere, before. 8 Rather.
G 2
84 The English Bible.
Let us now examine these passages in detail, taking first
the verses from Numb. xxiv. (This passage, we may say,
has been selected solely on account of its intrinsic interest,
and because it well tests the powers of a translator.) As in
the extracts from Tyndale's New Testament, so here, we
notice much that is preserved in our Authorised Version ;
we may easily calculate that nearly seventy words out of
every hundred have remained unchanged. Even a hasty
comparison, however, will reveal some important differences
(of interpretation, and not merely of phraseology) between
the two versions. The renderings which will strike the
reader most forcibly are the present tenses in verses 16 and
17 (heareth, hath, beholdeth, Z see, I behold); the last few
words in verse 16 (“when he falleth down hath his eyes
opened"); the substitution of coasts for corners, and under-
mine for destroy, in verse 17 ; of is, for was in verse 20 ; and
of Żuł for thou puttest in verse 21 ; the omission of “shall
have dominion and ” in verse 19 ; and the changes in the
first half of verse 22 : in verse 18 the meaning intended is
probably the same in both versions. Now in most of these
points of difference Tyndale's version clearly deserves the
preference. In verses 16, 17, an accurate modern trans-
lation would come very near to Tyndale’s. Both coasts and
corners (verse 17) are possible renderings of the Hebrew
word, and either is preferable to the renderings found in
the Vulgate and Luther's version. The translation under-
mine (verse 17) is interesting as an attempt to render the
Hebrew word with great exactness—an attempt not sug-
gested by either of the versions just mentioned, or by the
Latin version of Pagninus. The omission in verse 19 seems
to be due to a different reading of the Hebrew, probably
incorrect, but not without some critical support. Commen-
tators still differ in opinion as to the choice of is or was
in verse 20. The same may be said of Żuł and is put in
Tyndale Compared with the Authorised Version. 85
verse 21 ; the rendering of the Authorised Version (“thou
puttest”) cannot stand, unless as a free translation, following
the sense rather than the form of the original. In verse 22
our common version is probably right, but it is interesting
again to note in the word “burning.” Tyndale's effort to
keep close to the Hebrew. The general results of a careful
comparison of Tyndale's version with the Authorised in this
passage may be stated as follows : — There are in these
verses about seventeen differences of some importance ; in
eleven of these Tyndale is probably right. In three of the
eleven he agrees with Luther and the Vulgate, in three more
with the Vulgate against Luther; in five he has the support
of neither of these versions. The instances in which Tyn-
dale is wrong are of less moment. Once he follows a
different reading of the original text, twice he inserts and,
twice omits and or also, once reads which in the place of
and; in verse 19 he has cities for city. In minor points the
Authorised Version has some advantage : for example, took
uſ is better than began or flook, and Knez" (verse 16) is more
literal than hath. It should be said that in one of the
important variations (ſºut, in verse 21) Tyndale's translation
may be due to the Latin version of Pagninus. Surely
nothing can be clearer than that in this passage (and we
repeat that the verses were selected for their internal cha-
racter alone) Tyndale has played the part of the careful,
able, and honest translator, using all available helps, but
studying the original for himself with independent judgment.
The second passage is of a different cast. There are no
difficulties of account in Isa. xii., and hence the differences
between Tyndale's version and the Authorised consist almost
entirely in the phraseology. It is therefore with some sur-
prise that we discover the verbal agreement between the
two versions to be no greater than in the passage last
examined. Here again Tyndale's translation often shows
86 The English Bible.
close attention to the original; whereas he is frequently at
variance with the Vulgate; and the extent of his divergence
from Luther is really remarkable. In the third passage,
Jonah iv. I—5, hardly more than half the words in our
version are found in Tyndale's, though here also there is
not much room for serious difference in interpretation. The
translation “Art thou so angry P” differs from both Luther
and from the Vulgate.
We may at present dismiss from consideration Tyndale's
translations from the prophetical books ; though interesting
in themselves, they are of little importance for our present
purpose in comparison with his version of the Pentateuch.
Of this it would not be right to form a judgment from an
examination of one passage only. Indeed, this passage
taken by itself gives an inadequate impression of the extent
to which our version is indebted to Tyndale in the Penta-
teuch. The more difficult the passage chosen as a speci-
men, the larger is the amount of variation which different
translations will exhibit. If we take the last twenty-four
verses of Deuteronomy, we shall find that, in the first half
of this portion, which is difficult, we owe to Tyndale about
two-thirds of the Authorised Version ; in the second half, a
plain narrative, the debt is largely increased, amounting to
eighty-six words in every hundred. A study of difficult
verses, taken from such chapters as Deut. xxxiii. and Gen.
xlix., confirms the conclusions already expressed in regard
to Tyndale's position as a translator.
No one will suppose that the characteristics which we
have discovered in Tyndale's Pentateuch will be wanting in
his New Testament. Here, however, we cannot go into
detail; the limits of our space will not permit more than a
statement of the results of examination. The translations
accessible to Tyndale in the New Testament were Luther's,
the Vulgate, and the Latin version of Erasmus, which
Independence of Tyndale's Woré. 87
accompanied his editions of the Greek text. A careful
examination of continuous passages of some length, and also
of isolated verses of peculiar difficulty, leads us to the same
conclusion as in the former case. Alike in the Old Testa-
ment and in the New, Tyndale had before him the best
of existing translations, and every page shows that he was
largely influenced by them ; but all who scrutinise his work
with care will testify that Tyndale's version was made neither
from the German nor from the Latin, but most undoubtedly
from the original tongues.
It may be thought that too much stress has been laid on
Tyndale's independence. Seldom, however, has any trans-
lator been so completely misjudged as Tyndale has been,
One cause of this misapprehension is no doubt to be found
in the vigour and warmth (to use no stronger terms) of his
controversial works. The unprejudiced reader who looks at
his writings as a whole will do justice to Tyndale's deep
religious feeling and fervent zeal for the truth ; but it is no
matter of surprise that those who were the objects of his
unsparing attacks should have depreciated his labours and
misunderstood his character. Their assertions, unhappily,
have been repeated by later writers, who in their haste have
mistaken the statements of partisans for authentic history.
It was natural for More to connect Tyndale's New Testa-
ment with Luther; but we may well be astonished when we
find a modern historian of note describing Tyndale's trans-
lation as “avowedly taken from " Luther's and from the
Latin Vulgate, and another affirming that “Tyndale saw
Luther, and under his immediate direction translated the
Gospels and Epistles while at Wittenberg.” More recently
still Tyndale has been classed among certain translators
who, whilst professing to carry out the idea of forming an
English Bible from the original languages, “seem chiefly to
have worked for the printers, and to have translated chiefly,
88 The English Biffle.
in the end, from Luther's German Bible and the Vulgate.”
It is therefore still necessary to insist on the internal evi-
dence which so strongly supports the claim which Tyndale
everywhere makes (by implication, if not openly), to have
had resort to the original Scriptures. When he made his
first attempt to obtain the countenance of Bishop Tunstal as
a translator of the Greek Testament, he offered an English
version of Isocrates as a token of his competence. More
himself allowed and appealed to Tyndale's knowledge of
Greek. One of the most celebrated scholars of that day,”
spoke of the Englishman who was translating the New
Testament at Worms as a man “so learned in seven lan-
guages—Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Italian, Spanish, English,
and French—that, whichever he spoke, you would think it
his native tongue.” Tyndale speaks familiarly of the peculiar
constructions of Hebrew, and the extent to which they influ-
ence the Greek of the New Testament; * his remarks on the
translation of Greek and Hebrew into English” will command
the assent of all who are acquainted with the properties of
the languages in question. In his Pentateuch he explains
many peculiar words—such as Abrech (Gen. xli. 43) and
Zaphnath-paaneah—in such a way as to show familiarity
with the subject; his explanations not unfrequently differ
from those found in the two versions to which he is sup-
posed to be in bondage, and not always for the worse. But
enough has been already said to show how baseless are the
reflections which are cast on Tyndale's work as a translator
of Scripture. His independence in this respect really stands
in frequent and marked contrast with his close adherence to
Luther in many of his prologues, notes, and expositions of
* Hermann von dem Busche, usually known as Buschius. See
Arber, Preface, p. 25.
* Works, vol. i., p. 468.
3 Works, vol. i., p. 148.
Controversy with More. 89
Scripture. To use the words of one who has examined this
subject with the greatest care, “Tyndale availed himself of
the best help which lay within his reach, but he used it as a
master and not as a disciple. In this work alone he felt
that substantial independence was essential to success. In
exposition or exhortation he might borrow freely the lan-
guage or the thought which seemed suited to his purpose,
but in rendering the sacred text he remained throughout
faithful to the instincts of a scholar.””
One of Tyndale's adversaries must receive more than a
passing notice. We have already referred to Sir T. More's
violent attacks upon Tyndale and all who were supposed to
be confederate with him. In the folio edition of More's
works, more than a thousand pages are taken up with this
controversy.” More's skill in Greek is not doubted, and as
little can any one question his eagerness as a disputant; if,
then, Tyndale's translation of the New Testament were bad
and false, by such an opponent the defects must surely be
brought to light. It is no small testimony to Tyndale's Sub-
stantial accuracy that More occupies himself so largely with
his adversary's doctrines, so little with the translation. In
this, it is true, he discovers many errors, as the following
quotation will show, but the same passage will also reveal
the method of reckoning employed:—
“So had Tyndale, after Luther's counsel, corrupted and
changed it from the good and wholesome doctrine of Christ
to the devilish heresies of their own, that it was clean a
contrary thing. ‘That were marvel,’ quoth your friend,
‘that it should be so clean contrary; for to some that read
it it seemed very like.’ ‘It is,’ quoth I, “never the less
Contrary, and yet the more perilous. For like as to a true
silver groat a false copper groat is never the less contrary,
1 Westcott, History, p. 164.
* Demaus, p. 281.
90 The English Biffle.
though it be quicksilvered over, but so much the more false,
in how much it is counterfeited the more like to the truth,
so was the translation so much the more contrary in how
much it was craftily devised like, and so much the more
perilous in how much it was to folk unlearned hard to be
discerned.” “Why,’ quoth your friend, ‘what faults were
there in it?’ ‘To tell you all that,’ quoth I, ‘were in a
manner to rehearse you all the whole book, wherein there
were found and noted wrong or falsely translated above a
thousand texts by tale.’ ‘I would,’ quoth he, “fain hear
some one.’ ‘He that should,’ quoth I, ‘study for that,
should study where to find water in the sea. But I will
show you for ensample two or three such as every one of the
three is more than thrice three in one.’ ‘That were,' quoth
he, “very strange, except ye mean more in weight; for one
can be but one in number.’ ‘Surely, quoth I, ‘as weighty
be they as any lightly can be. But I mean that every one
of them is more than thrice three in number.’ ‘That were,’
quoth he, “somewhat like a riddle.’ ‘This riddle,' quoth I,
‘will soon be read. For he hath mistranslated three words
of great weight, and every one of them is, as I suppose,
more than thrice three times repeated and rehearsed in the
book.’ ‘Ah, that may well be, quoth he ; ‘but that was
not well done. But, I pray you, what words be they P’
‘The one is, quoth I, ‘this word priests; the other, the
church; the third, charity.”
This was the head and front of Tyndale's offending.
He had discarded some of the familiar ecclesiastical words,
employing common words in their place. For church he
uses congregation, as More's friend Erasmus had (sometimes)
done before him ; for priest he uses senior, as a less am-
biguous word; grace gives way to favour, confess to know-
* More's Dialogue, book iii., ch. 8. See Arber, Preface, p. 55.
Tyndale and the Wycliffite Versions. 9I
ſedge (that is, acknowledge), Žemance to reſentance. “Senior,”
Tyndale admits, “is no very good English ;” and in his
later editions he puts elder in its place. Whatever judgment
may be passed on Tyndale's procedure, his defence deserves
consideration;" Surely at a time when so many injurious and
false notions were attached to the words in question, a
translator might well take refuge in simple terms of un-
doubted signification. Even should the older terms be
restored at length, to have been reminded of their proper
meaning would be a gain to every reader.
One other point remains, a point referred to in an earlier
paper,” but left for consideration in this place. Was Tyn-
dale indebted in any degree to the early English versions of
Wycliffe, Hereford, and Purvey P. It is hardly possible that
he can have been unacquainted with these versions, though,
as we have seen, they were not printed for two or three
centuries after Tyndale’s age. A very able writer on the
English language, Mr. G. P. Marsh, considers it certain that
“Tyndale is merely a full-grown Wycliffe.” “His recension
of the New Testament is just what his great predecessor
would have made it, had he awaked again to see the dawn
of that glorious day of which his own life and labours kindled
the morning twilight. Not only does Tyndale retain the
general grammatical structure of the older version, but most
of its felicitous verbal combinations, and, what is more re-
markable, he preserves even the rhythmic flow of its periods,
which is again repeated in the recension of 1611. Wycliffe,
then, must be considered as having originated the diction
and phraseology which for five centuries have constituted
the consecrated dialect of the English speech ; and Tyndale
as having given to it that finish and perfection which have
I See his Works, vol. i., pp. 16—24 (Parker Society).
* See above, p. 30.
92 The English Bible.
so admirably adapted it to the expression of religious
doctrine and sentiment, and to the narration of that remark-
able series of , historical facts which are recorded in the
Christian Scriptures.” On the other hand, Tyndale must
be heard in his own cause. “Them that are learned
Christianly,” he says,” “I beseech . . . that they con-
sider how that I had no man to counterfeit” (that is, imi-
tate), “neither was holpen with English of any that had
interpreted the same or such like thing in the Scripture
beforetime.” These words do not disavow all knowledge
of the earlier version, but they distinctly deny that that
version served as a basis for the new work. A comparison
of the two translations (if we bear in mind that they are
Żrans/ations—one avowedly taken from the Vulgate, the
other frequently influenced by the Vulgate) will fully confirm
Tyndale's statement. Again and again we meet with start-
ling resemblances, but on examination it becomes evident
that the Vulgate has supplied the connecting link. At first
sight it appears strange that in Col. i. 13 both versions
should have the word “translated ;” that in both we should
read “pinnacle of the temple” in Matt. iv. 5; “compre-
hended” in John i. 5; “tribulation and anguish’ in Rom.
ii. 9 : for in none of these examples is there anything in the
Greek which compels the adoption of one particular English
word. When we observe that the familiar Latin words are
transfuſiº, pinnaculum, comprehenderunt, tribulatio ef angusłia,
we understand at once the coincidences in the English.
We are, however, willing to admit that this explanation will
not account for every instance of affinity between Tyndale
and Wycliffe. Many of the earlier renderings must have
become current phrases; proverbial sayings from the New
* Zectures on the English Zanguage, p. 447 (Murray).
* In the Address to the Reader, added to the octavo edition of his
New Testament (1525).
Tyndale and the Wycliffite Versions. 93
Testament could hardly fail to present themselves to the
new translator in their familiar guise. Hence we cannot be
surprised to find that “mote” and “beam ” are common to
both versions of Matt. vii. 3 ; that “God forbid” is used in
both, though the Greek phrase is altogether different in
form ; that the promise of the “Comforter” remains un-
changed, though the Latin translations either retain the
Greek word (the “Paraclete”) or express it by “Advocate;”
that in Matt. vii. 6 both Wycliffe and Tyndale adopt a
rendering (not suggested either by the Greek or by the
Latin) which refers the “trampling” to the “swine,” the
“rending” to the “dogs; ” or that in the 14th verse of the
same chapter both speak of the “gate’ as “strait,” of the
“way” as “narrow.” We might even concede to Mr. Marsh
that Wycliffe and his coadjutors had in some degree suc-
ceeded in fixing the general character and style of an English
version of the Bible, and that through their labours English-
men had been taught to look for simplicity and literalness
of rendering instead of idiomatic paraphrase." When all
this allowance has been made—and in making it we are
convinced that we have rather enhanced than depreciated
the just rights of the older versions—Tyndale's claims on
our gratitude remain unimpaired; he is still the father of
our present version. The labours of his successors effected
many improvements in detail, but the plan and spirit of the
work have been left unchanged. Mr. Froude's well-known
words, if understood of the whole rather than of each part,
if read with the recollection that Tyndale was cut off before
1 “The language of the Court or of scholars is as far as possible
avoided, and that of the people followed. In this respect the principle
has been acted on by later translators. The style of Wycliffe is to that
of Chaucer as Tyndale's is to Surrey's, or that of the Authorised Version
to Ben Jonson’s.”—Prof. Plumptre, in Smith's Dict, of Bible, iii.,
1667.
94. The English Bible.
his cherished task was finished, and that others entered into
his labours and made his work complete, are as just as they
are eloquent :—
“Of the translation itself, though since that time it has
been many times revised and altered, we may say that it is
substantially the Bible with which we are all familiar. The
peculiar genius—if such a word may be permitted—which
breathes through it—the mingled tenderness and majesty—
the Saxon simplicity—the preternatural grandeur—un-
equalled, unapproached in the attempted improvements of
modern scholars—all are here, and bear the impress of the
mind of one man—William Tyndale. Lying, while engaged
in that great office, under the shadow of death, the Sword
above his head and ready at any moment to fall, he worked,
under circumstances alone perhaps truly worthy of the task
which was laid upon him—his spirit, as it were divorced
from the world, moved in a purer element than common
air.” 1 t
* History of Ængland, vol. iii., p. 84.
CHAPTER VII.
MILES COVERDALE.-I.
THE next stage of our history is widely different from that
which preceded it. Our interest has been concentrated on
Tyndale, and hence it is rather the Continent than England
which has occupied our thoughts. We have followed from
labour to labour the zealous translator who, almost alone,
with little help or encouragement, strove unremittingly to
fulfil his appointed task until martyrdom stayed his unfinished
work. The scene now changes to English ground : the
chief actor is one who afterwards became a bishop of the
English Church.
Of the early life of Miles Coverdale very little is known,
nor indeed have we more than scanty information respecting
many of his later years. It has been supposed that Cover-
dale's name points to his birth-place, and that, like Wycliffe,
he was a native of North Yorkshire. The year of his birth
was 1488.
The first notice which we possess connects him with the
monastery of the Augustine Friars at Cambridge, at the head
of which was Dr. Robert Barnes, well known in the early
records of the Reformation. In 1526, when Barnes was
required on pain of death to abjure the errors laid to his
charge, Coverdale stood by his side. His earliest extant
writing is a letter which (probably in 1527) he writes to
Thomas Cromwell, then one of Wolsey’s dependents, after-
wards his successor as Lord High Chancellor. In this letter
Coverdale refers to the “godly communication * which
96 The English Bible.
Cromwell had had with him in the house of “Master
Moore” (Sir Thomas More), and earnestly solicits assist-
ance in the prosecution of sacred studies. “Now,” he says,
“I begin to taste of holy Scriptures ; now, honour be to
God I am set to the most Sweet Smell of holy letters, with
the godly savour of holy and ancient doctors, unto whose
knowledge I cannot attain without diversity of books, as
is not unknown to your most excellent wisdom. Nothing
in the world I desire but books, as concerning my learning;
they once had, I do not doubt but Almighty God shall per-
form that in me which He of His most plentiful favour and
grace hath begun.”
If we pass over some incidental notices of his preaching,
very interesting as showing the distinct opposition which he
offered to the errors of the Romish Church, the next refer-
ence to Coverdale is presented in Foxe's statement (quoted
above, p. 54), that in 1529 he assisted Tyndale in translating
the Pentateuch. It is impossible to say what reliance is to
be placed on the details of this isolated statement; but the
passage has the look of truth, and some of the minor parti-
culars have recently been proved' accurate.” We cannot
indeed regard Tyndale and Coverdale as co-translators,
working on common principles: as will be shown here-
after, the work of each differs essentially from that of
the other. Still Tyndale would certainly welcome, and
would receive valuable assistance from, such a companion
as Coverdale, whose zeal in the good work was Only
equalled by his retiring modesty. After this Coverdale
passes away from view until the appearance of the first
English Bible, in 1535.
How eventful were the intervening years in England is
known to every reader. In 1529 Wolsey is dismissed from
* Coverdale's Remains, p. 490. (Parker Society.)
* Demaus, Zife of Zyzedale, p. 229.
Henry VIII. and the English Bible. 97
office ; the great seal is committed to More ; Cranmer
receives his first public employment. In 1531 Henry is
declared supreme head of the Church of England. In 1533
the King marries Anne Boleyn, notwithstanding the threats
of the Pope ; and shortly after the papal authority in
England is formally annulled. Fisher and More pay the
penalty of their lives for their denial of the king's supremacy
(1535). The rapid changes which the scantiest historical
Summary reveals could not but be attended with alternations
in the fortunes of the English Bible. In 1526 Tyndale's
New Testament was formally proscribed by Tunstall, Bishop
of London, and Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury. Three
years later the king issued a proclamation against heretical
books, and amongst these Tyndale's writings (including
his New Testament) were expressly specified. In 1530
the condemnation of these books by an assembly of learned
men (after a conference of twelve days) was succeeded
by another royal proclamation “against great errors and
pestilent heresies, with all the books containing the same,
with the translation also of Scripture corrupted by William
Tyndale, as well in the Old Testament as in the New,
and all other books in English containing such errors.” In
a “Bill in English to be published by the preachers,” we
read —
“Finally it appeared that having of the whole Scripture
is not necessary to Christian men; and like as the having of
the Scripture in the vulgar tongue and in the common
people's hands hath been by the holy Fathers of the Church
in some times thought meet and Convenient, so at another
time it hath been thought not expedient to be communicate
amongst them. Wherein, forasmuch as the King's High-
ness, by the advice and deliberation of his council, and the
agreement of great learned men, thinketh in his conscience
that the divulging of this Scripture at this time in the
BI
98 The English Bible.
English tongue, to be committed to the people, should
rather be to the farther confusion and destruction than the
edification of their souls. And it was thought there in that
assembly, to all and singular in that Congregation, that the
King's Highness and the Prelates in so doing, not suffer-
ing the Scripture to be divulged and communicate to the
people in the English tongue at this time, doth well. “And
I also think’ (was the preacher to say) “and judge the
same; exhorting and moving you, that in consideration
his Highness did there openly say and protest that he
would cause the New Testament to be by learned men
faithfully and purely translated into the English tongue,
to the intent he might have it in his hands ready to
be given to his people, as he might see their manners
and behaviour meet, apt, and convenient to receive the
same.’”"
In a noble letter written to the king in December, 1530,
Hugh Latimer boldly reminded Henry of his promise; and
as the faithful monitor was soon afterwards made a royal
chaplain, we can hardly doubt that this promise faithfully
expressed the intentions of the king.”
In 1533 Cranmer was made Archbishop of Canterbury ;
and the Convocation over which he presided in 1534 made
petition to the king that “his Majesty would vouchsafe to
decree that the Scriptures should be translated into the
vulgar tongue by some honest and learned men, to be
nominated by the king, and to be delivered to the people
according to their learning.” In this year Coverdale Com-
mitted his Bible to the press, and the printing was finished
on the 4th of October, 1535. The place of publication is
still a matter of dispute, but the probability is that the
* Anderson, Annals of the English Bible, vol. i., pp. 257, 258.
* Demaus, Zife of Latimer, p. 103.
* Anderson, Annals, vol. i., p. 414.
Coverdale in Paris.
volume was printed by Froschover, of Zurich." Though
issued under the patronage of Cromwell, and dedicated to
Henry VIII., the book appeared without express license.
In 1536 Convocation petitioned the king “that he would
graciously indulge unto his subjects of the laity the reading
of the Bible in the English tongue, and that a new trans-
lation of it might be forthwith made for that end and
purpose.”
The following year a second and a third edition of
Coverdale's Bible were published by Nycolson, of South-
wark; and here at last we read at the foot of the title-page,
“Sett forth with the Kynges most gracious license.”
We next find Coverdale in Paris, engaged, under Crom-
well's direction and patronage, on Biblical work, the nature of
which will presently appear. In the same year were published
three editions of a Latin-English Testament, containing the
ordinary Latin text of the New Testament (the Vulgate), with
an English rendering by Coverdale. All these labours on the
translation of Scripture will presently be noticed in detail. As
long as Cromwell lived, Coverdale seems to have retained
his close connexion with his patron. His last letters to
Cromwell are dated from Newbury, where he is employed
in proceedings against Romish usages and books. In July,
1540, Cromwell died on the scaffold. Coverdale appears to
have left England for Germany in the same year, for in a
letter to John Calvin, written from Frankfort in 1548, he
speaks of his approaching return to England, “after an exile
of eight years.” During this exile he was occupied with the
1 See, however, the Caxton Celebration Catalogue, p. 88, where
Mr. Stevens gives reasons for believing that this Bible was printed at
Antwerp, at the cost and charges of Jacob van Meteren. That the
translation was by any other hand than Coverdale's we should be very
slow to believe.
2 Anderson, vol. i., p. 562.

H 2
IOO The English Bible.
instruction of pupils, and with the care of a church at
Bergzabern, not far from Strasburg. On the accession of
Edward VI. he was made one of the king's chaplains. His
appointment on the Commission against Anabaptists (1550)
is another proof of the high estimation in which he now was
held. In 1551 he was promoted to the bishopric of Exeter,
a preferrnent which he retained for two years only, being
deprived of his see on the accession of Queen Mary. For
some months Coverdale remained in a position of Consider-
able peril ; many a less active opponent of the party now
in power atoned for his zeal by the sacrifice of his life.
Coverdale owed his release to the intercession of the King
of Denmark. After a second exile of about three years,
towards the close of which period we find him at Geneva,
he returned to England in 1558. In 1564 he was appointed
to the living of St. Magnus the Martyr, London Bridge ; but
either through the pressure of age and infirmity, or in con-
sequence of his adhesion to the views of the Puritan party
in the matter of vestments, &c., he retained his benefice
only two years. He died in February, 1569. His cha-
racter is faithfully reflected in his writings, especially in
the work which will immediately come under review.
The brief sketch which we have given is sufficient to
show how zealous, consistent, and devoted was the life
of the second labourer in the field which we are here
Surveying.
The Biblical labours of Coverdale may be divided into
two classes, distinguished by a very simple Criterion.
Some translations bear his name ; his connexion with
others is only matter of inference. We are now concerned
with the former class, in which are included the Bible of
1535 (1537, 1550, 1553) and the Latin-English Testaments
of 1538. It is somewhat surprising that the character of
Coverdale's Bible should have been greatly misunderstood.
Coverdale’s “Pro/ogue.” IOI
Had the translator left his work to make its own impres-
sion, the misunderstanding might have been natural ; but
nothing can be clearer than the language which he uses in
his Prologue “unto the Christian Reader.” “Consider-
ing how excellent knowledge and learning an interpreter of
Scripture ought to have in the tongues, and pondering also
mine own insufficiency therein, and how weak I am to
perform the office of a translator, I was the more loath to
meddle with this work. Notwithstanding, when I con-
sidered how great pity it was that we should want it so
long, and called to my remembrance the adversity of them
which were not only of ripe knowledge, but would also
with all their hearts have performed that they began, if
they had not had impediment; considering, I say, that by
reason of their adversity it could not so soon have been
brought to an end as our most prosperous nation would
fain have had it ; these and other reasonable causes con-
sidered, I was the more bold to take it in hand. And to
help me herein I have had Sundry translations," not only in
Latin, but also of the Dutch interpreters, whom (because of
their singular gifts and special diligence in the Bible) I
have been the more glad to follow for the most part,
according as I was required. But, to say the truth before
God, it was neither my labour nor desire to have this work
put in my hand ; nevertheless it grieved me that other
nations should be more plenteously provided for with the
Scripture in their mother tongue than we ; therefore, when
I was instantly required, though I could not do so well as I
would, I thought it yet my duty to do my best, and that
with a good will. Whereas some men think now that many
translations make division in the faith and in the people of
* In his Dedication to the king, Coverdale speaks of himself as
having “with a clear conscience purely and faithfully translated out of
five sundry interpreters.”
I O2 The English Bible.
God, that is not so ; for it was never better with the con-
gregation of God than when every church almost had the
Bible of a Sundry translation. . . . . . Now whereas
the most famous interpreters of all give sundry judgments
of the text (so far as it is done by the spirit of knowledge
in the Holy Ghost), methink no man should be offended
thereat, for they refer their doings in meekness to the spirit
of truth in the Congregation of God; and sure I am that
there cometh more knowledge and understanding of the
Scripture by their sundry translations, than by all the
glosses of our sophistical doctors. For that one inter-
preteth something obscurely in one place, the same trans-
lateth another (or else he himself) more manifestly by a
more plain vocable of the same meaning in another place.
Be not thou offended therefore, good reader, though one
call a scribe that another calleth a Zazeyer ; or elders that
another calleth father and mother ; or reſentance that
another calleth penance or amendment. For if thou be not
deceived by men's traditions, thou shalt find no more
diversity between these terms than between fourpence and
a groat. And this manner have I used in my translation,
calling it in some place penance, that in another I call
nepentance ; and that not only because the interpreters have
done so before me, but that the adversaries of the truth
may see how that we abhor not this word ženance, as they
untruly report of us, no more than the interpreters of
Latin abhor paniſere, when they read resiſſiscere.”
Three things are clear from this quotation. First,
Coverdale did not seek the work of translation. Though
full of zeal in sacred study, he was not the man who would
aspire to speak with the authoritative voice of a translator.
The commission was pressed on him by others, who urged
the claims of duty and prevailed. Secondly, as a trans-
lator Coverdale instinctively adopted a policy of mediation.
Coverdale's Bzó/e. IO3
Tyndale would discard words which had been misunder-
stood, though his strictness might isolate him from all
ecclesiastical writings. Coverdale now accepts the current
term, now adopts the explanation, that he may show the
equivalence of the two, if rightly understood. But the
most important point is this. Coverdale expressly dis-
claims the honour of direct translation. Not the original
tongues, but Sundry interpreters, German and Latin,
are the sources of his work. Before entering on the
various questions which have been raised in connexion
with this subject, we will give some specimens of the
translation itself. The passages selected are those which
have already been given in Tyndale's version (see
pp. 80, 83), viz., Numb. xxiv. I5–24, Isa. xii., Col. i.
9–I7.
NUMBERS XXIV. I5—24.
And he toke vp his parable, and sayde : Thus sayeth Balaam the
sonne of Beor : Thus sayeth the man whose eyes are opened: Thus
sayeth he which heareth the wordes of God, & that hath the knowlege
of the hyest, euen he that sawe the vision of the Allmightie, & fell
downe, and his eyes were opened : I shal se him, but not now :
I shal beholde him, but not nie at hande. There shal a starre
come out of Jacob, & a cepter shall come vp out of Israel, and
shal Smyte the rulers of the Moabites, and ouercome all the children
of Seth.
Edom shalbe his possession, and Seir shalbe his enemies possession,
but Israel shal do manfully. Out of Jacob shal come he that hath
dominion, and shall destroye the remnaunt of the cities.
And whan he sawe the Amalechites, he toke vp his parable, &
sayde: Amalec the first amonge the Heithen, but at the last thou shalt
perishe vtterly. And whan he sawe the Kenites, he toke vp his
parable, & Sayde: Stronge is thy dwellinge, and on a rocke hast thou
put thy nest, neuertheles thou shalt be a burninge vnto Kain, tyll Assur
take the presoner.
And he toke vp his parable agayne, & Sayde : Alas, who shal lyue,
whan God doth this? And shippes out of Citim shall subdue Assur
and Eber. He himself also shal perishevtterly.
IO4. * The English Bible.
ISAIAH XII.
So that then thou shalt saye : O Lorde, I thanke the, for thou wast
displeased at me, but thou hast refrayned thy wrath, and hast mercy
upon me. Beholde, God is my health, in whom I trust, and am not
afrayde. For the Lorde God is my strength, and my prayse, he also
shalbe my refuge. Therefore with ioye shal ye drawe water out of the
welles of the Sauioure, and then shal ye Saye : Let us geue thankes
unto the Lorde, and call vpon his name, and declare his councels
amonge the people, and kepe them in remembraunce, for his name is
excellent. O synge praises vnto the Lorde, for he doth greate things,
as it is knowne in all the worlde. Crie out, and be glad, thou that
dwellest in Sion, for greate is thy prince : the holy one of Israel.
COLOSSIANS I. 9—17.
For this cause we also, sence the daye that we herde of it, ceasse
not to praye for you, & desyre that ye mighte be fulfylled with the
knowlege of his will, in all wyszdome and spirituall vnderstondinge,
that ye mighte walke worthy off the Lorde, to please him in all thinges,
and to be frutefull in all good workes, and growe in the knowlege of
God: & to be strengthed with all power acordinge to the mighte of
his glory, to all pacience and longsufferynge with ioyfulness, and geue
thankes vnto the father, which hath made vs mete for the enheritaunce
of Sayntes in lighte.
Which hath delyuered vs from the power of darknesse, & translated
vs in to the kyngdome of his deare sonne (in whom we haue redempcion
thorow his bloude, namely, the forgeuenes of synnes). Which is the
ymage of the inuisyble God, first begotten before all creatures. For by
him were all thinges created, that are in heauen and earth, thinges
vysible and thinges inuysible, whether they be maiesties or lordshippes,
ether rules or powers: All thinges are created by him and in him, and
he is before all thinges, and in him all thinges haue their beynge.
CHAPTER VIII.
MILES COVERD AL E.—II.
IN dealing with Coverdale’s Bible, as in every similar case,
we have two questions before us: What are the charac-
teristic features of the version ? From what sources is
it derived, and with what helps was it executed P. In this
particular instance the latter question may with advantage
take precedence, not only because of its intrinsic impor-
tance, but also because the quotation already given (p. IoI)
from the Prologue has brought the subject into promi-
nence. Coverdale's own words would prepare us for find-
ing little originality in his work. Had we no specimen of
his translation, we should conclude that he ought to be
placed in the same class with Wycliffe and Purvey rather
than with Tyndale. The title-page alleges that the work
has been faithfully translated out of Dutch (i.e., German)
and Latin into English. It is true that other copies of the
book have a title-page from which these words are absent;
but the agreement between them and Coverdale's statement,
already quoted, is so complete, that we cannot but regard
the title as presenting Coverdale's own description of his
work. The reader may be surprised to learn that so clear
a statement has been challenged, but such is the fact.
In 1818 a new translation of a portion of the Old
Testament was published by Dr. Bellamy, who justified his
enterprise by laboured and wholesale depreciation of the
existing versions. According to this writer, “the common
translations in all the European languages were made from
IO6 The English Bible.
the modern Septuagint and the Vulgate ;” and, in particular,
“the present authorised version and all the national ver-
sions of Europe were translated from the Vulgate.” These
extravagant assertions were strongly controverted by Dr.
Whittaker, in Am Historical and Critical Enquiry into the
Interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Unfortunately the
critic was himself led into extremes. In his zeal to prove
that our translators had not been servile imitators of Jerome
and others, Whittaker stoutly maintained that Coverdale as
well as Tyndale had translated directly from the Hebrew
original. Coverdale's avowal that he translated out of
“five interpreters ” is explained as a mere acknowledgment
of help received, such help as every conscientious translator
will seek. As to the statement in the title, Dr. Whittaker
owns that he had not becn able to consult a copy of the
book in which the title-page had been preserved, but adds
that, if the words are found there, “the title-page contains
a very great misapprehension.” This bold language is the
result of a defective knowledge of the facts of the case.
Coverdale's five translators, Whittaker maintains, “can have
been no other than the Latin Vulgate, the Latin of Pagninus,
the German of Luther, a Dutch translation of Luther, and
a German translation of the Vulgate.” These five are, of
course, practically three—two Latin, and one German. In
some passages, however, as Isaiah lvii. 5 (“Ye take youre
pleasure vnder the okes, and vnder all grene trees”), Cover-
dale agrees with no one of these versions, nor with the
Septuagint. If, then, the premises be granted, viz., that no
other version than these could possibly be consulted, the
conclusion will be clear. Coverdale's translation of the
passage (which agrees in the main with the true sense of
the original) must come directly from the Hebrew. Whit-
taker's mistake (which has been endorsed by many later
writers) has been exposed by Dr. Ginsburg, who shows that
Variations between Coverdale and Tyndale. 107
in this and many other passages Coverdale has followed
the version by Leo Juda and others (see p. 42), Commonly
called the Zurich Bible. This version Whittaker cannot
have examined ; as, however, he makes a passing reference
to it in another place, it is not a little surprising that he
should have excluded it from the list of the authorities
accessible to our translator. That this version was acces-
sible to Coverdale would be in every way probable,
even were the proof of his actual use of it much less
complete.
It is not easy to decide which were the “five” inter-
preters whom Coverdale “was glad to follow,” but the
question is one of great interest. If the reader will care-
fully compare the two translations of Numbers xxiv. 15—
24 which have been given (pp. 83, Iog) from Tyndale’s
Pentateuch and Coverdale's Bible respectively, he will
find that there are about forty-three variations which
may be called differences of translation, some (twenty-
two) of greater, Some (twenty-one) of smaller moment.
Besides these, there are fourteen variations in points of
English expression, and six in the order of words. In
all there are about sixty-three variations, an average of
twenty-seven in every hundred words. Of the forty-three
variations of translation, every one agrees with Luther and
the Zurich version (which in this passage differ only in
points of dialect), though in one instance the Vulgate has
distinctly influenced the choice of words. Of the fourteen
variations in the next class, three are merely points of
English, points in which no external influence can have
play: in the eleven which remain, Coverdale agrees with
the German. In five out of the six variations in the order
of words the same coincidence may be traced. Hence,
where Coverdale differs from Tyndale, the variation is
almost invariably in agreement with the German. Wherever
IO8 The English Bible.
in these ten verses the two versions agree in a point of
interpretation, they agree with Luther also. Where Luther
and the Vulgate differ, Coverdale is almost always on the
side of the former. So far, therefore, as this passage bears
evidence, we are led to Luther and the Vulgate as two of
Coverdale's interpreters. To these we must add Tyndale ;
for though the difference between the two is often marked,
there are coincidences of expression which cannot have
been accidental, and which can only be explained on
the supposition that Coverdale had Tyndale's translation
before him. In these verses, then, we must call Cover-
dale’s version a translation from the German, exe-
cuted with the assistance of the Vulgate and Tyndale's
version.
Let us now take a chapter of the New Testament, Luke
xv., a chapter not presenting many difficulties to the trans-
lator. It is evident, to begin with, that Coverdale made
use of Tyndale's version here. Both use the word “re-
sorted" in verse I, “similitude” in verse 3 (though the
Vulgate would suggest “parable”), “wilderness” in verse
4 (Latin, in deserto). In verse 13 we find in both, “took
his journey into a far country, and there he wasted his
goods with riotous living,” except that Coverdale reads
“wasted he,” instead of “he wasted.” If further proof
than this example were needed, the agreement in verse 25,
“minstrelsy" (where we now read “music”), and in verse
27, “safe and sound,” would convince the most incredulous
that the translations are not independent. Still, the amount
of variation is great. A minute examination shows that in ,
this comparatively easy chapter Coverdale departs from
Tyndale's Testament of 1534 in 146 instances. (If we
were to take Tyndale's first edition as our standard, this
number would be increased to 150.) Many of the varia-
tions, no doubt, are very slight, but for Our present purpose
Sources of Coverdale's Version. IO9
it is necessary to include all. In several instances the varia-
tion, as in the former passage, is purely verbal,—upon for
on, unfo for to, &c. Here, of Course, no foreign influence
can be traced. Setting these instances aside, we find that
in almost every variation Coverdale agrees with Luther's
version. The direct influence of the Vulgate is seen in
such renderings as “doth penance” (verses 7, Io), where
Tyndale has “repenteth.”
In the Pentateuch and in the New Testament the Swiss
translators to a very large extent followed Luther, merely
adapting his work to the dialect of their country. In the
Prophets and some other books of the Old Testament, the
Zurich Bible differs widely from Luther's ; and here Cover-
dale's preference for the Swiss version is strongly marked.
One example has been given, from Isaiah lvii. 5. Dr.
Ginsburg, in his Commentary on Ecclesiastes, gives a number
of passages in which Coverdale has literally followed the
Zurich Bible; and remarks that in this book of Scripture
the instances in which Coverdale follows the Vulgate and
Luther are comparatively few. Professor Westcott goes
carefully into this subject in an Appendix to his History of
the English Bible (second edition). He examines fifty-five
passages in which Coverdale has shown some doubt as to
the meaning, and has therefore given one interpretation in
the text, and an alternative in the margin. For example:
in Genesis xxxiii. I9 we find in the text “an hundred
pence;” in the margin, “Some read, an hundred lambs.”
In Psalms xxxvii. 2 I the text is, “The ungodly borroweth,
and payeth not again :” the marginal note, “Some read
thus, The ungodly lendeth upon usury, and not for naught.”
Here then, reckoning text and margin, we have more than
one hundred renderings to trace. Dr. Westcott discovers
almost all in one or more of the following five versions—
the Vulgate, Pagninus's Latin version, Luther, the Zurich
I IO The English Aiſle.
Bible, and Tyndale. In seven instances only does he not
identify the rendering. A more recent examination of early
editions of the two German versions (in the library of the
British Museum) has brought to light this small remainder,
so that we have now presumptive evidence that the sources
of Coverdale's work are completely before us. We cannot,
indeed, say with certainty whether Tyndale's translation is
included among the “five ’’ of which Coverdale speaks, or
whether the fifth, like the other four, is some additional
Latin or German version. Nothing but an examination of
the whole fabric of his version can set this question alto-
gether at rest. Whatever light further research may throw
on points of detail, it is not likely that these general results
can be in any way shaken. We may safely conclude, there-
fore, that the words upon the title-page of Coverdale's Bible
are to be taken in their simple and obvious meaning, not
set aside as a “bookselling artifice of the time;” and that
the straightforward confession was made, not because it
would “make the work circulate better, as being intimately
connected with the reformed doctrines,” but because the
truthful modesty of the translator shrank from claiming
credit for work which he had never done, and which really
lay beyond his powers.
Coverdale's relation to Tyndale requires a little further
attention. No writer on the subject appears to have
noticed how this relation varies in different parts of the
New Testament. Luke xv., referred to before, will serve
as a specimen of the historical books—the Gospels and the
Acts. In most of the Epistles Coverdale makes many
changes. Taking sixty verses at random from Romans,
2 Corinthians, 2 Thessalonians, Titus, Philemon, and
Hebrews, we find that Coverdale departs from Tyndale's
Testament of 1534 rather more than twice in every verse.
In the subjoined extract from Romans iii. (in modern
|Wariations àetween Coverdale and Tyndale. I I I
spelling), the words which differ from Tyndale are printed
in italics —
“What furtherance then have the /ews 2 Or what
advantageth circumcision ? Surely very much. First :
unto them was committed what God spake. But whereas
some of them did not believe thereon, what then P should
their unbelief make the promise of God of none effect?
God forbid. Let it rather be thus, that God is true, and
all men liars. As it is written : That thou mayest be
justified in thy sayings, and shouldest overcome when thou
art judged. But if it be so, that our unrighteousness
praiseth the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is
God then unrighteous, that he is angry therefore ? (I speak
thus after the manner of men) God forbid. How might
God then judge the world? For if the truth of God be
through my lie the more excellent unto his praise, why
should I then be judged yet as a sinner P and not rather to
do thus (as we are evil spoken of, and as some report, that we
should say). Let us do evil, that good may come thereof.
Whose damnation is just.”
In the first Epistle of St. John, Professor Westcott
reckons about one alteration for every verse. In the
Epistles of St. Peter also there are many changes. In the
Epistle of St. James, however, containing IoS verses, the
difference between Coverdale and Tyndale amounts to
three words only ; and even here the change merely consists
in the adoption of Tyndale's earlier instead of his later
rendering. In St. Jude the agreement is complete. In
Revelation i. two words are altered. One of these is ange/
for messenger (verse 20): throughout the Epistles to the
Seven Churches Coverdale retains this word, whereas
Tyndale, with strange inconsistency, has now messenger,
now angel, and once (chap. iii. 7) tidings-bringer. In chap.
ii. there are besides two slight verbal changes, and one
II 2 The English Bible.
alteration which is sufficiently interesting to be noticed
more particularly. In verse 3, “and hast suffered and hast
patience” is the very clear rendering of Tyndale's earlier
Testament; but in his second edition we are startled to
find the words “didst wash thyself” in the place of “hast
suffered.” Strange as the words appear in this connexion,
we find on examination that they are a faithful translation
of Erasmus's Greek text, which in the Apocalypse was very
incorrect. Coverdale, gaining by his dependence on other
translators in such an instance as this, where editions of
the Greek Testament presented an incorrect text, naturally
retained the earlier words, and Tyndale's later rendering
found no place in any other version.
Although Coverdale's is but a secondary translation, a
version derived from other versions, its importance in the
history of the English Bible is great. We cannot too care-
fully bear in mind that in three-fourths of the Old Testa-
ment this was the first printed version presented to the
English reader. Throughout this large portion of the
Bible Coverdale for the present stands alone. Some
isolated chapters had been published by Tyndale, the
“Epistles from the Old Testament,” already described ; but
a comparison of the two versions of Isaiah xii. will show
that they have little in common. If we go on to compare
with both the chapter as it stands in our present Bibles, we
shall find that, in one hundred points of translation, the
Authorised Version agrees with Tyndale against Coverdale
in thirty-two, with Coverdale against Tyndale in twenty-
seven, with both in nineteen, with neither in twenty-two.
In Luke xv. the Authorised Version accords with these two
versions where they agree with each other, except in about
one instance in every verse. In ninety-four instances the
Authorised Version agrees with Tyndale against Coverdale,
in thirty-two with Coverdale against Tyndale : in nineteen
Coverdale’s B2ó/e. II 3
places where the two differ the Authorised Version agrees
with neither. We will not further tax the patience of our
readers by numerical statements. Such analyses, however,
are the only means by, which the exact relation of the
versions can be made clear.
Coverdale's Bible is divided into six parts. The first
contains the Pentateuch ; the second, the historical books
from Joshua to Esther (or, as it is here written, Hester),
Ezra and Nehemiah being denominated I and 2 Esdras;
the third, Job, the Psalter, the “Proverbs of Salomon,”
the “Preacher of Salomon,” and “Salomon's Balettes.” In
the fourth, embracing the prophetical books, Baruch (with
the Epistle of Jeremy) finds a place before Ezekiel; but a
note at the end states that the book “is not in the canon
of the Hebrew,” and a later notice explains that Baruch
belongs to the Apocrypha, but is “set among the prophets
next unto Jeremy, because he was his scribe, and in his
time.” The Book of Lamentations is thus introduced :
“And it came to passe (after Israel was brought into cap-
tiuyte, and Jerusalem destroyed) that Jeremy the Prophet
Sat wepinge, mournynge, and making his mone in Jeru-
Salem ; so that with an heuy herte he sighed and sobbed,
sayenge.” The fifth part contains the Apocryphal Books,
arranged in the same order as in the Authorised Version :
the Prayer of Manasses, however, is omitted altogether.
The short preface to the Apocrypha is so characteristic,
that we venture to give it in full:—“These bokes (good reader)
which be called Apocrypha, are not iudged amonge the
doctours to be of like reputacion with the other scripture, as
thou mayest perceaue by S. Jerome in epistola ad Paulinum.
And the chefe cause therof is this: there be many places in
them that seme to be repugnaunt vnto the open and many-
fest trueth in the other bokes of the byble. Neuertheles
I haue not gathered them together to the intent that I wolde
I
II.4. The English Bible.
haue them despysed, or little sett by, or that I shulde thinke
them false, for I am not able to proue it: Yee I doute
not verely, yf they were equally conferred with the other
open scripture (tyme, place, and circumstaunce in all thinges
considered) they shulde nether seme contrary, ner be vntruly
and peruersly aledged. Treuth it is : a mans face can not
be sene so wel in a water as in a fayre glasse : nether can it
be shewed so clearly in a water that is stered or moued, as
in a styll water. These and many other darck places of
scripture haue bene so stered and myxte with blynde and
Cuvetous opynions of men, which haue cast soch a myst
afore the eyes of the symple, that as longe as they be
not conferred with the other places of scripture, they shall
not seme other wyse to be vnderstonde, then as cuvetousnes
expoundeth them. But who so euer thou be that readest
scriptures, let the holy goost be thy teacher, and let one text
expounde another vnto the : As for Soch dreames, visions
and darck sentences as be hyd from thy vnderstondinge,
commytte them vnto God, and make no articles of them :
But let the playne text be thy gyde, and the sprete of God
(which is the author therof) shal lede the in all treuth. As
for the prayer of Salomon (which thou findest not herin),
the prayer of Azarias, and the Swete song that he and
his two felowes songe in the fyre: the first (namely the
prayer of Salomon) readest thou in the eight chapter of the
thirde boke of the kynges, so that it appeareth not to
be Apocryphum : The other prayer and songe (namely
of the thre children) haue I not founde amonge eny of
the interpreters, but onely in the olde latyn texte, which
reporteth it to be of Theodotios translacion. Neuertheles,
both because of those that be weake and scrupulous, and
for their sakes also that loue soch swete songes of thankes-
geuinge : I haue not left them out : to the intent that the
one shulde haue no cause to complayne, and that the other
Coverdale's Bible. II 5
also might haue the more occasion to geue thankes vnto
God in aduersite, as the thre children dyd in the fyre.
Grace be with the. Amen.”
The sixth part of Coverdale's Bible consists of the New
Testament. In the table of contents the books are arranged
in the same order as in Luther's and Tyndale's Testaments,
but are placed in three groups:–(1) The Gospels and Acts;
(2) the Epistles of St. Paul; (3) the Epistles of St. Peter and
St. John, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistles of St.
James and St. Jude, and the Revelation. No part has any
preface, with the exception of the fifth, containing the
Apocrypha; but at the commencement of the volume there
is a dedication to King Henry, which is followed by a pro-
logue to the Christian reader. Each book (except the Psalms,
Solomon's Song, Lamentations, and two or three short pieces
in the Apocrypha) is preceded by a table setting forth the
contents of the several chapters ; hence in the body of the
work there are no headings of chapters. There is, as a
rule, no division into short verses, but every chapter is
subdivided into sections (indicated by letters A, B, &c.),
each section answering to perhaps five or six of our verses.
These sections, however, are frequently broken up into
smaller paragraphs. Four chapters of Lamentations are
divided as in our Bibles, the Hebrew letters which com-
mence the several verses being placed in the margin. A
few references to similar or parallel passages are supplied,
together with the marginal notes to which we have already
referred. Besides those notes which contain alternative
renderings, we find a few of an explanatory kind. Thus in
Numbers xxxiii. the high places are stated to be “hill-
chapels, or altares builded vpon hilles.” In Job ix. 9, on
“the seven stars,” we read, “some call the seuen starres
the clock henne with hir chekens.” At the end of the
Psalter is given a note on Selah : “In the psalter this worde
I 2
II6 The English Bible.
Sela commeth very oft, and (after the mynde of the inter-
preters) it is asmoch to saye as, allwaye, contynually, for
ever, forsoyth, verely, a liftinge vp of the voyce, or to make
a pause, and earnestly to consider, and to ponder the
sentence.” In Acts xxvii. “syrtes” (in the Authorised
Version “quicksands”) are explained as “perlous places in
the see ;” and in Titus i. 12, Epimenides is given as the
name of the “ own prophet.” There are in all twenty-three
of these explanatory notes.
The most interesting portion of Coverdale's Old Testa-
ment is the Psalter. It is hardly too much to say that this
portion is still familiar to all who read the Book of Common
Prayer, for the Prayer-Book Psalter is in essence the Psalter
of Coverdale's Bible. Out of the seventeen verses in the
Prayer-Book version of Psalm xc., a very difficult Psalm,
twelve stand now exactly as they stood in 1535; in the six
Psalms, xc.—xcv., the amount of difference between Cover-
dale's Bible and the Prayer-Book is little more than two
words in each verse. The numbering of the Latin version
is retained, so that Psalm ix. is joined with x., Psalm Cziv.
with cxv. ; cxvi., and also cxlvii., are divided into two. In
each case a note of explanation is supplied. The titles of
the Psalms are abridged, everything except the indication of
authorship being, as a rule, omitted : no notices such as
Song of Degrees, Maschil, or Michtam, are to be found.
Most of those who are accustomed to the liturgy of the
Church of England are strongly attached to the Psalter as
given in the Prayer-Book. The greater freedom of transla-
tion, the introduction of words which may make the sense
clearer, the tender rhythm, for the sake of which expansion
and paraphrase are not unfrequently adopted, are characteris-
tics which with many go far to atone for the inferiority of the
version in point of exactness. It must not be supposed,
however, that Coverdale's Psalter is of interest for those
The Psalter. I 17
only who are familiar with the Book of Common Prayer.
A multitude of passages, remarkable for beauty and tender-
ness, and often for strength and vigour, are common to both
our versions of the Psalms, and are due to Coverdale.
“My flesh and my heart faileth, but God is the strength of
my heart, and my portion for ever.” “Enter not into judg-
ment with thy servant, for in thy sight shall no man living
be justified.” “Cast me not away from thy presence, and
take not thy Holy Spirit from me.” “For thy lovingkind.
ness is better than life ; my lips shall praise thee.” “Thou
Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth,
and the heavens are the works of thy hands. They shall
perish, but thou shalt endure: they all shall wax old, as
doth a garment ; and as a vesture shalt thou change them,
and they shall be changed. But thou art the same, and thy
years shall not fail.” It would be easy to multiply these
quotations, some identical in their language with the Autho-
rised Version, some agreeing with it in almost every point
of importance ; but enough has been given to show to how
great an extent the noble language of our Psalter is derived
from the Bible of 1535.
In the other poetical books, in the Prophets, and in the
Apocrypha, a much smaller proportion of Coverdale's work
survives in our present Bibles. Every page of the older
version contains many phrases and turns of expression which
are familiar to us all, but comparatively few passages of any
length have remained untouched by successive revisers and
translators. It is not difficult to find passages in which the
change is but slight. “Incline your ears, and Come unto
me, take heed and your soul shall live. For I will make an
everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of
David.” “Seek the Lord while he may be found; call upon
him while he is nigh.” “But who may abide the day of his
coming?” “She [i.e., Wisdom] is the breath of the power
II 8 The English Bible.
of God, and a pure clean expressing of the clearness of
Almighty God. Therefore can no defiled ' thing come into
her, for she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the
undefiled mirror of the majesty of God, and the image of
his goodness. And for so much as she is one she may do
all things, and being stedfast herself she reneweth all, and
among the people conveyeth she herself into the holy souls.”
It would be easy to accumulate examples on the other
side, and point out the faults of the version. These faults
are in the main those of the authorities whom Coverdale
followed: as a translation from German (and Latin) sources,
the work is deserving of high praise for faithfulness and
beauty.
To one peculiarity the translator himself has called
attention. The reader will remember his defence of the
principle of varying the English rendering of the same
word. He has certainly illustrated this principle in his
work, but perhaps not so frequently as we might have
expected. In the words which express the idea of repent-
ance he is far from regular ; penance and amendment fre-
quently occur, but reſentance four times as often as either.
He refers to scribe and lawyer, but here his practice is
remarkably consistent; in every New Testament passage he
adheres to scribe. It is not a little surprising to find the
Greek ecclesia uniformly rendered congregation (never church)
throughout Coverdale's New Testament.
The English of this version does not often present much
difficulty to the modern reader. A long chapter will often
contain no word or phrase which is not still understood.
The enumeration of ornaments given in Isa. iii. is as intel-
ligible as that found in our Authorised Version. We meet
with many words which are no longer current in literary
English, but are familiar in various dialects; others are more
* In the text “wndeſyled,”—clearly an error of the press.
Peculiar Words employed. I IQ
antiquated. The following will serve as specimens of each
class —to far a door, to cliff sheep, a maund of figs, chaft-
bone (jawbone), ſever (rather), symme! (a cake), doorcheek
(door-post), body (as in “an indiscreet body”), you/ (yell),
perguellies, cresheſ, venison (in the sense of a hunted animal),
hoo (an exclamation, “stop 1"), smoor (smother), chevesance
(agreement, gain), a cankered carle, back (bat), rigðone (back-
bone), rowſes (waves), mastress (mistress), funicle, innermer
(inner), bug (object of fear, bugbear), wood (mad). Some
words now in common use, but not found in our present
Bibles, meet us here: as conjuror, troweſ, sturdy, surgeon.
A collection is a hand-reaching, augury is birds crying or
fozwls crying. One peculiarity in the spelling is very marked :
the eye requires a special education to recognise and inter-
pret such words as széynne, buszshed, wyszdome, which are
found on every page. The proper names are usually given
in their Latin form, Eliseus, Ezechias, Manasses, Amasias,
Mardocheus. Zessa/ozzians seems to be the form used
throughout, both in the Epistle itself and in references,
though the city is called Thessalonica. These minor pecu-
liarities connect themselves with the place of publication
and the authorities chiefly followed in the work.
Several copies of the first edition of Coverdale's Bible
are known to exist. Two are amongst the treasures of the
British Museum. The variations in the title-page of the
book have been already adverted to. Five title-pages in all
have been preserved, some printed in England, some
abroad; the latter alone contain the reference to “Dutch
and Latin” sources. Two of the title-pages bear the date
1536, but the imprint states explicitly that the printing was
finished in October of the previous year." Of the later
1 For further information on this subject see Fry On Coverdale’s
Bible of 1535; see also Westcott's History of the Ænglish Bible, pp.
57, 58.
I 2C) The English Biffle.
editions of Coverdale's Bible it is not necessary to speak, as
they are said to vary but little from the original work. In
1838 the first edition was reprinted by Bagster. The reprint
is in ordinary type, and the lines and pages do not corre-
spond to those of the original work; in all important
matters, however, it appears to be a thoroughly faithful
and trustworthy reproduction.
The Latin-English Testaments of 1538 cannot receive
more than a hasty notice, as they hardly fall within the plan
of this brief history. We have seen that Coverdale was in
Paris in this year, engaged in Biblical work. During his
absence from England appeared a New Testament bearing
his name, and dedicated by him to Henry VIII. “The
newe testament both latine and Englyshe ech correspondent
to the other after the vulgare text, commonly called S.
Jeroms. Faythfully translated by Myles Couerdale, Anno
MCCCCCXxxvi II. Printed in Southwarke by James Nicolson.
Set forth wyth the kynges moost gracious licence.” Later
in the same year Coverdale printed a second edition of this
work in Paris. The cause of this proceeding is thus ex-
plained by himself in the Dedication (to Lord Cromwell)
prefixed to the new edition. “This last Lent I did with all
humbleness direct an epistle unto the king's most noble
grace; trusting that the book whereunto it was prefixed
should afterward have been as well correct as other books
be. And because I could not be present myself, by the
reason of sundry notable impediments ; therefore inasmuch
as the New Testament which I had set forth in English
before doth so agree with the Latin, I was heartily well
content that the Latin and it should be set together ;
provided alway that the corrector should follow the true
copy of the Latin in any wise, and to keep the true and
right English of the same. And so doing I was content
to set my name to it. And even so I did, trusting that,
The Latin-English Testaments. I 2 I
though I were absent and out of the land, yet all should be
well ; and as God is my record, I knew none other till this
last July, that it was my chance here in these parts at a
stranger's hand to come by a copy of the said print : which
when I had perused I found that as it was disagreeable to
my former translation in English, so was not the true copy
of the Latin text observed, neither the English so corre-
spondent to the same as it ought to be; but in many places
both base, insensible, and clean contrary, not only to the
phrase of our language, but also from the understanding of
the text in Latin. . . . And therefore as my duty is to
be faithful, to edify, and with the utmost of my power to put
away all occasion of evil, so have I, though my business be
great enough beside, endeavoured myself to weed out the
faults that were in the Latin and English before.” Strange
to say, a third edition was issued (by Nycolson) before the
close of the year; this edition bears the name of John
Hollybushe, who may also have been the editor of
the first edition. The second (printed by Regnault) is
obviously the only edition which we can closely associate
with Coverdale. The text of this Testament has not been
collated as a whole with that of Coverdale's Bible; but,
if we may judge from a comparison of selected passages, the
amount of difference is not large. In I John i., for example,
the alterations do not exceed four words in a hundred ; the
changes are usually in the direction of the Latin, but
the sense is rarely affected. The first and third editions
vary somewhat more freely from Coverdale's Bible. It
is not probable, however, that any of these Testaments
exerted any appreciable influence on the later English
versions.
CHAPTER IX.
“MATTHEW's BIBLE.”—JOHN ROGERs: RICHARD
TAVERNER.
ABOUT two years after the publication of Coverdale's trans-
lation appeared another folio volume containing the Bible
in English. The inscription on the title-page runs thus:
“The Byble, which is all the holy Scripture : In which are
contayned the Olde and Newe Testament truly and purely
translated into Englysh by Thomas Matthew. Esaye I.
Hearcken to ye heauens and thou earth geaue eare: for the
Lorde speaketh. M,D,xxxvii, Set forth with the Kinges
most gracyous lycence.” In no part of the volume is any
information given as to the place of publication, and all
that we can say is that the book was printed abroad." The
Dedication to Henry VIII. bears the signature of Thomas
Matthew, but contains nothing which throws any light on
the translator or on the circumstances of the translation.
A brief “Exhortacyon to the studye of the holy Scrypture”
is signed with the initials I. R. The only remaining
indications which can point to any persons connected
with the work are the initials R. G. and E. W., found
on the reverse of the title-page of the second part of the
volume (containing “The Prophetes in Englysh *), and
the letters W. T., which occur at the end of the Book of
Malachi.
It is evident at a glance that this book is no reprint of
* At Antwerp, possibly. See the Caxton Celebration Catalogue,
p. 90.
The First Authorised Version. I 23
Coverdale's translation. Yet, notwithstanding the measure
of favour shown to Coverdale's Bible, the new volume made
its way into England with surprising ease and success. The
first notice of it that we find is in a letter from Cranmer to
Cromwell, dated August 4, 1537. The Archbishop begs
Cromwell to read the book, a copy of which he sends with
his letter, assuring him that, so far as he has examined the
translation, it is more to his liking than any translation here-
tofore made. He prays Cromwell to exhibit the book to
the king, and to obtain from him a “license that the same
may be sold and read of every person, without danger of
any act, proclamation, or ordinance heretofore granted to
the contrary, until such time that we the Bishops shall
set forth a better translation, which I think will not be
till a day after doomsday.” A few days later Cranmer
again writes, expressing his most hearty thanks to Cromwell
for having obtained from the king that the book “shall be
allowed by his authority to be bought and read within this
realm.” This translation may therefore be called the first
Authorised Version of the English Bible." The initials men-
tioned above, R. G. and E. W., are those of the London
printers, Richard Grafton and Edward Whitchurch, at whose
expense the volume was printed. From a letter written by
Grafton to Cranmer, in which he seeks protection against
unauthorised reprints, we learn that the impression had con-
sisted of 1,500 copies, and that Grafton had ventured in the
undertaking the sum of 24.5oo—a large venture at that time,
The whole impression appears to have been sold within
a short period. The royal license had removed all obstacles
which could embarrass the sale or the reading of the book,
and the English nation joyfully welcomed the gift of the
Scriptures translated into their mother tongue.
* In the same year, 1537, the royal license was obtained for Cover-
dale's Bible. See above, p. 99.
I 24 The English Bible.
But it is time to ask, Who was Thomas Matthew P What
is the meaning of the initials I. R. and W. T., which, as
we have seen, are found in this book P. The second of these
questions may be easily answered. Foxe's testimony, though
of doubtful accuracy in some details, is of itself sufficient
to show that under “I. R.” we must understand John
Rogers, the first who suffered for his religion in the reign of
Queen Mary.
John Rogers was born about the year 15oo. Soon after
taking the degree of B.A. at Cambridge, in 1525, he received
an invitation to Christ Church, Oxford, then known as
“Cardinal College.” About the year 1534 he accepted the
office of Chaplain to the Merchant Adventurers at Antwerp,
in which city Tyndale was then residing. Foxe relates that
in Antwerp Rogers chanced “to fall in company with that
worthy martyr of God, William Tyndale, and with Miles
Coverdale, which both for the hatred they bare to Popish
superstition and idolatry, and love they bare toward true
religion, had forsaken their native country. In conferring
with them the Scriptures, he came to great knowledge in
the Gospel of God, insomuch that he cast off the heavy yoke
of Popery, perceiving it to be impure and filthy idolatry,
and joined himself with them two in that painful” (i.e. dif-
ficult) “and most profitable labour of translating the Bible
into the English tongue, which is entitled, ‘The Translation
of Thomas Matthew.’” Rogers's association with Tyndale
seems to have been very intimate, though of but short dura-
tion. His Bible was published a few months after Tyndale's
death. In 1537 he married, and removed to Wittenberg,
where, probably, he remained until 1547. During the short
reign of Edward VI. he received many marks of favour from
the party then in power. His elevated position and his
courageous advocacy of Protestant opinions marked him out
* Acts and Monuments, vol. vi., p. 59I.
Rogers's Biö/ica/ Zabours. I 25
as an early victim in the persecution which followed; and
in February, 1555, he was burned alive in Smithfield.
The nature of Rogers's Biblical labours will appear when
we examine the internal character of Matthew's Bible.
Enough has been said to show that “W. T.” can hardly
have any other meaning than “William Tyndale.” It is
much more difficult to deal with the remaining question,
relating to Thomas Matthew. Foxe intimates that this was
merely a name which Rogers assumed from prudential
motives, lest his known connexion with Tyndale should
prove injurious to the undertaking. In favour of this view,
which is accepted by most modern writers, is the fact that
in the Official record of the apprehension of Rogers he is
described as “John Rogers, alias Matthew.” It is possible,
however, that the name is a real one, and belongs to some
patron through whose aid the work was undertaken. Neither
view is free from difficulty. If Matthew and Rogers were
different men, it is singular that all knowledge of Matthew
should so soon have been lost, and that in less than twenty
years the name should have been supposed to be a mere
alias. If but one person is signified, it is somewhat strange
that both names should occur in the documents prefixed to
the Bible. On any supposition the statement on the title-
page is inaccurate.
Let us now examine the translation itself. The New
Testament need not detain us long, for with very slight and
occasional exceptions it is a reproduction of Tyndale's
version. Where Tyndale's second and third editions differ,
Matthew seems usually to agree with the third, that of 1535.
In the Old Testament the case is not so clear. It will be
remembered that in 1537 there existed in print the following
versions of the Old Testament, or parts of the Old Testa-
ment: Tyndale's Pentateuch (1531, 1534), Jonah (1531),
and “Epistles” from the Old Testament and Apocrypha
I 26 The English Bible.
(1534), and Coverdale's Old Testament and Apocrypha. If
we compare the translation before us with each of these, we
meet with the following results:—
(1) The translation of the Pentateuch is certainly Tyn-
dale’s. The changes introduced are very slight, hardly
greater perhaps than the variations between the two editions
published by Tyndale himself. For example: in the list of
clean beasts (Deut. xiv. 4, 5), the last five are given by
Tyndale as the bugle, hart-goat, unicorn, “ origen, and
camelion; ” in Matthew’s Bible wild goaf takes the place of
Aarº-goat, but no other change is made. In Lev. xi. 22
Rogers and Tyndale agree (with Luther) in leaving untrans-
lated the four words which in the Authorised Version are
represented by locust, bald-locust, beetle, grasshopper.
Tyndale, however, gives no explanation of the words;
whereas in Matthew's Bible it is stated that “Arbe, Selaam,
Hargol, Hagab, are kyndes of beastes that crepe or scraul on
the grounde, which the Hebrues themselues do not now a
dayes know.” In the passage which we have referred to so
frequently, Numb. xxiv. I 5–24, the two versions differ only
in spelling.
(2) An example of Tyndale’s “Epistles” from the Old
Testament has been already given (see p. 80), and has also
been compared with Coverdale's version (see p. 104). It is
therefore only necessary to say that Matthew’s Bible and
Coverdale's are here perfectly in accord.
(3) In the books from Ezra to Malachi, not excluding
the Book of Jonah, and in the Apocryphal books (with one
exception, which will be referred to afterwards), Matthew's
Bible is almost identical with Coverdale’s. In Ioo verses
taken at random from various books within these limits, the
difference in text between the two versions does not amount
to eight words in a thousand. In Psalms Xc.—xcv. (87
verses) the only variations in translation are an insertion of
Translator of the AWine Books. 127
the, and the substitution of thine for thy (three times), dis-
dainfully for disdainedly, and we for as for us we (xcv. 7),
said for sware (xcv. II). With the exception of the last,
for which it is hard to account except on the supposition of
accident, all these alterations maintained their ground, and
are still to be found in the Prayer-Book Psalter.
(4) We have now examined all the books of the Old
Testament except nine—Joshua to 2 Chronicles. Here we
should naturally expect that Matthew’s Bible would give
Coverdale's translation, as the only English translation then
extant. The most cursory examination will show that this
is not the case. This part of Matthew's Bible therefore is
new. Who then is the translator P The statements of our
authorities are conflicting. Foxe' ascribes nearly the whole
of Matthew's Bible to Tyndale and Coverdale, Rogers being
the translator of some Apocryphal books and the “corrector
to the print.” Bishop Bale” (writing about 1548) speaks of
Rogers as translating the whole Bible, making use of Tyn-
dale's version. Another writer, quoted by Lewis,” tells us
that to the end of the Books of Chronicles the translation is
Tyndale's ; and from thence to the end of the Apocrypha,
Coverdale's; and that the whole New Testamentis Tyndale’s.
There can be no doubt that the last of these statements is
almost literally true, and that Tyndale left behind him in
manuscript a version of the books from Joshua to Chronicles,
which was first given to the world by Rogers in Matthew's
Bible. We know that Tyndale continued to labour on the
Old Testament for months, if not for years, after the com-
pletion of his Pentateuch; and we can point to no one
more likely than Rogers to be intrusted with the results of
his labours. It is also clear that, if these books had been
1 Vol. v., p. 4I2.
* See Strype, Cranmer, vol. i., p. 119.
* History of Zºranslations, p. IO7.
I 28 The English Bzó/e.
translated by Tyndale, the general principle on which
Rogers acted would lead him to adopt this version in pre-
ference to Coverdale's. If we examine the translation itself,
it lends evidence on the same side. One or two illustrations
only can be given here.
We have to show that the translation of the Books from
Joshua to Chronicles is probably from the same hand as the
translation of the Pentateuch, and not from the same hand
as the translation of the later books (from Ezra onwards).
There is a Hebrew word (é/ön), occurring nine times in the
Old Testament, which is rendered “plain" in our common
Bibles, but which in Tyndale's Pentateuch is more correctly
translated “oak” or “Oak-grove” (in Deut. xi. 3o, “grove”).
We turn to the later passages in which the word occurs, viz.,
Judg. iv. II, ix. 6, 37, I Sam. X. 3, and find that in each of
these passages Matthew's Bible has “Oak.” The curious
expression rendered in our Bibles “shut up and left” occurs
five times (with slight variations), viz., once in Deuteronomy
and four times in the Books of Kings. In Matthew’s Bible
the uniform rendering is “prisoned (or in Żrison) and for-
saken.” It is not necessary to inquire into the correctness
of this rendering ; whether Correct or not, the same trans-
lation of this peculiar phrase was adopted by Tyndale in his
Pentateuch, and by the translator of the Books of Kings.
Amongst the musical instruments frequently mentioned in the
Old Testament is the tambour or hand-drum, in Hebrew
toph. Now this word occurs three times in the Pentateuch,
five times between Joshua and 2 Chronicles, and nine times
in later books—that is, three times in the part which was
certainly Tyndale's, nine times in Coverdale's portion, and
five times in the books which lie between. In the Pen-
tateuch the translation is always fimbrel. In the books from
Ezra onwards (setting aside three passages in which entirely
different words occur) Coverdale always adopts fabreſ. In
Rogers's Woré as Editor. I29
the books of which we are now speaking, Matthew's Bible
has always timbrel, never fabreſ—that is, has Tyndale's
rendering and not Coverdale’s. The effect of such evidence
as this, the accumulation of minute coincidences between
Tyndale's acknowledged work and the work which tradition
ascribes to him, is such as to produce the strongest per-
suasion that the tradition is true. This conclusion would
seem to leave Rogers no part in the work of translation, and
to assign him no higher place than that of editor. There
is, however, a small contribution from his own hand. In
Coverdale's Bible one portion of the Apocrypha was absent,
the Prayer of Manasses; the Zurich translators, whom
Coverdale mainly followed, having passed over this book.
The omission is here supplied. The translation, however, is
made neither from the Greek text, which at that period was
not accessible, nor directly from the Latin, but probably
from the French Bible of Olivetan (1535).
Rightly to estimate Rogers's work, it would be necessary
to institute a minute comparison between his Bible and the
earlier translations: the hand of the careful editor is evident
throughout, as a few miscellaneous examples will prove. In
Psalm xiv. the intrusive verses admitted by Coverdale, and
still allowed to stand in our Prayer Books, are entirely
removed. The numbering of the Psalms is changed, and
made to agree with the Hebrew. As in the Hebrew Bible,
the Psalter is divided into five books or “Treatises.”
“Hallelujah,” left untranslated by Coverdale, is rendered
“Praise the everlasting.” In Psalm Cxix., and in other
alphabetical poems, the several letters of the Hebrew
alphabet are written at the head of each section and before
each verse. In Job i. 21 Coverdale had inserted after the
words, “the Lord hath taken away,” the parenthesis, “the
Lord hath done his pleasure ;” but Rogers removes these
words, adding the following note, “The Greek and Origen
J
I3O The English Biffle.
add hereunto, As it hath pleased the Lord, so it is done.”
In Job xxxiii. 23, Coverdale has “angel,” where we read
“interpreter:” Rogers substitutes “messenger,” with an ex-
planation in the margin, “That is, an instructor with the
word of God.” These notes are the most characteristic
feature of Matthew's Bible. Sometimes dealing with points
of translation, sometimes with verbal explanations, some-
times with matters of doctrine, they furnish an interesting
and often a valuable commentary on the text. As Cover-
dale's note on Selah has been quoted, Matthew's may be
given for the sake of comparison : “This word, after Rabbi
Kimchi, was a sign or token of lifting up the voice, and also
a monition and advertisement to enforce the thought and
mind earnestly to give heed to the meaning of the verse
unto which it is added. Some will that it signify perpetually
or verily.” Rogers deals very freely with the notes of his
predecessors. Where Tyndale presses unduly into contro-
versy with Rome, Rogers again and again declines to follow
him, but he retains useful explanations of the text. He
does not always, however, decline controversy. Almost the
only note in the Apocryphal books (on 2 Macc. xii. 44) is a
protest against the practice of praying for the dead. In
the canonical books these notes, placed sometimes in the
margin, sometimes at the end of the chapter, are frequently
of considerable extent, especially in the Psalms and in some
parts of Isaiah—chap. xliii. for example. The titles of the
Psalms are carefully explained, the opinions of various
authors being quoted. In Ps. ii. the verses are allotted to
the several speakers—the prophet, the enemy, God, and the
King Christ. The same separation of personages is given
very elaborately in the Song of Solomon. In Ps. xcvii. 8,
daughters are explained as towns and villages. On the last
verse of Ps. cxxxix. there is a curious remark: “Some read,
Then lead me by the way of the world, that is, destroy me.”
Notes and Comments. I 3 I
In Gen. ii. 17, “die the death,” the editor carefully explains
the force of such apparently redundant expressions, such
“rehearsals of words,” as he calls them. On Numb. xxxiii.
52, “chapels,” he quotes two Rabbins for the alternative
rendering “graved paving stones.” In the New Testament
Rogers sometimes gives in substance one of Luther's vigorous
comments. Thus on John v. 17 : “That is, my Father
keepeth not the Sabbath day, no more do I. But my Father
used no common merchandise on the Sabbath, and no more
do I.”
Rogers does not follow Coverdale in giving the contents
of chapters in one body at the commencement of a book,
but usually prefixes a heading to each chapter. No pro-
logues or introductions are given, as a rule. A note at the
commencement of the Song of Solomon briefly states the
writer's view of the meaning of this “mystical device.”
The Book of Lamentations has an introduction slightly
altered from Coverdale’s. The Apocryphal books are intro-
duced by a preface (translated from Olivetan's French
Bible), in which the inferior authority of these books is
carefully pointed out. In the New Testament the only
insertion of the kind is of considerable length, and is no
other than Tyndale's famous Prologue to the Epistle to the
Romans.
The preliminary matter in Matthew's Bible is unusually
elaborate. Besides the dedication and the exhortation
already spoken of, and some other sections of no great
length (as a Calendar and an Almanac, at the close of which
we are told that “the year hath . . . fifty-two weeks and one
day . . . in all, 365 days and six hours”), we find a very
copious “Table of the principal matters contained in the
Bible,” occupying twenty-six pages. This concordance or
dictionary is not original, but is translated from Olivetan.
Rogers's obligations to this French Bible were very great
J 2
I 32 The English Biffle.
throughout his work. Thus, the notes above referred to
on Job i., xxxiii., Numb. xxxiii., Ps. Xcvii., Cxxxix., 2 Macc.
xii. 44, and on Selah, the preface to Solomon's Song, the
division of the Psalter into five “Treatises,” the rendering
of Hallelujah, are either altogether or in the main derived
from this source. Much of the explanatory matter is taken
from the commentaries of Pellican.
The order of the books is nearly the same as in Cover-
dale's Bible; but Baruch is removed from its place by Jere-
miah, and placed between Ecclesiasticus and “the song
of the iii children in the oven.” The Prayer of Manasses
precedes 1 Maccabees. The books of the New Testament
are divided into two groups, the historical books and the
Epistles. The order of the Epistles remains unaltered,
1, 2 Peter and 1, 2, 3 John coming between Philemon and
Hebrews; but there are no breaks in the list, separating
the Epistles into different classes. There is a curious
tendency to give two forms of names, as “Ezechiel or
Jehezekiell,” &c.
Copies of Matthew's Bible are to be found in the
libraries of the British Museum and of Lambeth Palace,
the Bodleian Library, &c. The volume is a fine folio, of
larger size than Coverdale's Bible. Like that Bible, it is
ornamented with woodcuts, most of them small : these are
most numerous in Exodus and the Revelation. Of the sub-
sequent editions of Matthew's Bible (1549, 1551, &c.) it is
not necessary to say more than that considerable alterations
were introduced in the notes, introductions, &c., and some
changes made in the text.
Closely connected with Matthew’s Bible is that of
Taverner. Our information respecting this translator is
mainly derived from a graphic account given by Anthony
a Wood (one of his descendants), in his Athenae Oxonienses.
Richard Taverner was born in 1505. He was educated for
Taverner’s B26/e. I33
a time in Benet (Corpus Christi) College, Cambridge ; but
after a year and a half went to the Cardinal College, Oxford.
About 1530, being now Master of Arts in both universities,
he “went to an inn of Chancery, near London, and thence
to the Inner Temple, where his humour was to quote the
law in Greek when he read anything thereof.” In 1534 he
went to the Court, and was taken into the attendance of
Cromwell, through whose influence he was afterwards made
One of the clerks of the signet. In 1539 Taverner pub-
lished his edition of the Bible: “The most sacred Bible,
whiche is the holy scripture, conteyning the old and new
testament, translated in to English, and newly recognised
with great diligence after most faythful exemplars, by
Rychard Taverner. tº Harken thou heuen, and thou
erth gyue eare : for the Lorde speaketh. Esaie. i. Prynted
at London in Flete strete at the sygne of the sonne by John
Byddell, for Thomas Barthlet. Cum privilegio ad imprimen-
dum so/um. M. D. XXXIX.” The version was allowed
to be publicly read in churches. After the fall of Cromwell,
in 1540, Taverner's labours on the Scriptures brought him
under censure, and he was committed to the Tower : his
imprisonment, however, was of short duration, and he was
soon restored to the king's favour. In 1552, though a
layman, he received from Edward VI. a general license to
preach. We are told that he preached before the king at
Court, and in some public places in the kingdom, wearing a
velvet bonnet or round cap, a damask gown, and a chain of
gold about his neck; in which habit he was seen and heard
preaching several times in St. Mary's Church, Oxford, in
the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth. During Mary's
reign Taverner prudently remained in retirement. Eliza-
beth showed him marks of special favour, and made him
high sheriff of the county of Oxford. He died in the year
I 575.
I 34. The English Bible.
The dedication of Taverner's Bible is to King Henry,
and is characterised by manliness and good sense. The
preliminary matter is nearly identical with that found in
Matthew's Bible. There are no woodcuts, and but few ex-
planatory notes. In the numbering of the Psalms Taverner
returns to the Vulgate reckoning, giving the Hebrew num-
bers in the margin : the division of the Psalter into five
books no longer appears. The influence of the Vulgate is
distinctly traceable in many, if not in most, of the changes
which Taverner introduced in the Old Testament. Thus,
in Gen. iii. 5, where Matthew has “ye shall be as God,”
Taverner changes the last word into “gods;” in verse 24, for
“a naked sword” he writes “a fiery sword.” In the closing
words of Gen. xlix. 6 the earlier rendering, “they houghed
an ox,” is changed, certainly not for the better, into “they
threw down the walls of the city;” in verse Io “Shiloh"
becomes “he that is to be sent.” In Matthew's Bible the
obscure word Abrech (Gen. xli. 43) is retained in the text,
different opinions as to its meaning being given in the
margin ; Taverner removes the note, and reads, “that every
person should bow his knee before him.” For “prisoned
and forsaken” (I Kings xxi. 21), Taverner has “incluse and
furthest,” a bare and hardly intelligible translation from the
Latin. Many of the alterations, however, give greater clear-
ness to the English. Thus, “a curtesye bawlme" (Gen.
xliii. 11) is changed into “a quantitie of bawlme;” by and
by into forthwith , but and if into but if. On the whole,
the amount of alteration is but small. In Numb. xxiv.
15–24, for example, only two words in Matthew's Bible are
changed by Taverner—viz., remnant into residue, and never-
thelater into nevertheless. The principal difference between
the two works in the Old Testament, therefore, consists in
the absence of so large a proportion of Rogers's notes from
Taverner's edition.
Changes introduced by Taverner. I 35
In the New Testament the changes introduced by
Taverner are more numerous. Thus in Matt. xxi., xxii.,
containing ninety-two verses, we find about forty variations,
of which one-third are retained in the Authorised Version.
In ten or eleven of these changes the object has been to
remove superfluous words; in nearly twenty a more terse
or expressive phrase has been sought for, or a more correct
and literal rendering of the Greek. In xxii. 12, “had never
a word to say” is more forcible than “he was even speech-
less ;” “intreated them foully” (ver. 6), than “intreated
them ungodly;” “stopped the Sadducees' mouths” (ver.
34), than “put the Sadducees to silence.” In Luke xii. 29,
where we read “neither be ye of doubtful mind,” Tyndale's
translation is “neither climb ye up on high ;” Taverner's,
“and be not carried in the clouds.” In John viii. 25, a very
difficult verse, Tyndale reads, “Even the very same thing
that I say unto you;” Taverner, “First of all, even that I say
unto you.” In John iii. 8, Taverner adopts the rendering,
“The spirit breatheth,” but with a note that “spirit is here
taken for the wind.” Another added note is in the Epistle
of St. Jude, on the word “feasting” (ver. 12): “Feastinges
for the relyef of the poore were called charytyes.” Many
more examples of improved English or more faithful render-
ings might easily be given. It must, however, be confessed
that in difficult passages Taverner often fails us, and that
many plain mistakes in earlier versions remain uncorrected.
In Acts xxvii. 9, for instance, Taverner retains Tyndale’s
translation, “because that we had overlong fasted ;” and in
Acts xii. 19 we read even here that Herod commanded the
keepers “to depart.” A curious feature in this edition is
the occasional adoption of a novel spelling, in accordance
with the etymology of a word. As a whole, the version is
of very unequal merit—the work of a scholar, able and
energetic, but somewhat Capricious and uncertain.
136 The English Bible.
Taverner's Bible was published both in folio and in
quarto; his New Testament in quarto and in octavo in the
same year. Another edition of the New Testament (some-
what altered) appeared in 1540 ; of the Old Testament in
1551. Copies of Taverner's Bible may be seen in the
libraries of the British Museum, St. Paul's, the University
of Cambridge, &c."
1 In his description of the copy lent by Earl Spencer to the Caxton
Exhibition, Mr. Stevens—after remarking that Taverner's Bible is very
seldom found quite complete—says: “This copy, like all others I have
seen, wants signature K, or folios 55–60 in the New Testament. This
hiatus of six leaves was probably intended to be filled with a Prologue
to the Epistle to the Romans.” (Catalogue, p. 128.)
CHAPTER x.
THE GREAT BIBLE.
THE current of our history now returns to Coverdale, whom
we left in Paris in the year 1538. He had been charged
by his patron, Cromwell, with the duty of preparing another
Bible, differing in some important respects from the two
already in circulation—his own of 1535 and that bearing
the name of Thomas Matthew. The excellence of Parisian
paper and typography was the cause of the Selection of this
city for the new work. There was nothing stealthy or
secret in the procedure adopted. Cromwell was the patron
of this especial undertaking; and through his influence a
license was obtained from the king of France, Francis I.,
by which Coverdale and Grafton were authorised, in con-
sideration of the liberty which they had received from their
own sovereign, to print and transmit to England the Latin
or the English Bible, on condition that there were no private
or unlawful opinions in the new work, and that all dues,
obligations, &c., were properly discharged. Under this pro-
tection Coverdale and Grafton applied themselves with the
utmost diligence to the fulfilment of their commission.
Letters to Cromwell are still extant, which contain very
interesting notes of progress, and also show how deeply
Cromwell interested himself in the work. For seven or
eight months the two Englishmen and their associate, Reg-
nault, the French printer, seem to have been left unmolested.
In December, however, there came a mandate from the
Inquisition, which stayed all progress. Happily, a portion
I 38 The English Bible.
of the Bible was safe in England. Many sheets were seized;
but even these were in large measure afterwards recovered,
“four great dry vats-full” being re-purchased from a haber-
dasher, to whom they had been sold. The interruption
caused a slight delay, but was most beneficial in its results.
Cromwell was not the man to be foiled in his purpose:
being unable to secure the accomplishment of the work in
France, he brought over types, presses, and men to England.
In April, 1539, this “Bible of the largest volume,” as it was
then spoken of, or the first edition of the Great Bible, was
issued from the press.
The title-page, said to have been designed by the cele-
brated Hans Holbein, is curious and very interesting. A
reduced copy is given at the commencement of this volume.
The original measures about fourteen inches by nine ; the
copy, about eight and a half by five and a half. The highest
figure in the engraving represents the Lord Christ in the
clouds of heaven. Two labels contain His words. On that
which extends towards the left of the engraving we find
Isa. lv. II (Verbum meum, &c.). The other is directed
towards the king, who, having laid aside his crown, and
kneeling with outstretched hands, receives the declaration,
“I have found a man after mine own heart, which shall
fulfil all my will” (Inveni, &c., Acts xiii. 22); and himself
exclaims, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet” (Ps.
cxix. IoS). The king appears again as the most prominent
of all the figures. Now he is seated on his throne : the
royal arms and motto will be recognised at once. The king
hands the word of God (Verbum Dei) to bishops and clergy
on his right hand, to Cromwell and others of the laity on
his left. To the former he says, Hac praecipe et doce (“These
things command and teach,” I Tim. iv. II): to the latter,
Quod justum est judicate, ita parvum audieſis ut magnum
(“Judge righteously . . . ye shall hear the small as
Title-page of the Great Biöle. I39
well as the great,” Deut. i. 16, I7); and also words taken
with slight alteration from Dan. vi. 26, “I make a decree ;
. . . fear before the living God.” Below, on the right,
Cromwell appears a second time, pointed out by the device
and motto at his feet : he is delivering the Word of God to
the laity, admonishing them in the words of Ps. xxxiv. 14.
On the other side is Cranmer, clearly indicated by his
costume and his arms, placing the sacred volume in the
hands of one of his clergy, and solemnly repeating the
charge of I Peter v. 2. Below stands a preacher, enforcing
the duty of prayer and thanksgiving on behalf of kings
(1 Tim. ii. 1). The chorus of joy and thankfulness expressed
in the attitude of the king's lieges, no less distinctly than in
the shouts of “Viva! A'ex,” and “God save the king,” needs
no comment. Prisoners look wistfully from their cells; but
whether they are introduced as wondering at the commo-
tion, or as sharers in the joy, or as affording in their own
persons a warning that such punishment awaited all undu-
tiful subjects, it is not easy to decide. Many smaller
features of this remarkable composition well deserve a
Careful examination. It represents, with great faithfulness,
a page of the history of the times. That the precious
boon now conferred was the result of no human contri-
vance, is thankfully acknowledged here, and in the
imprint even more clearly still: A Domino factum est isłud
(“This is the Lord's doing”) are the translator's pious
words, in which the devout student of history will heartily
unite.
Nor does the engraving exaggerate the liberty granted
by the king. An injunction to the clergy, issued by Henry's
authority, required them to provide by a certain date, in
each parish, “one book of the whole Bible, of the largest
volume in English,” the cost to be divided between the
parson and the parishioners. It was ordained that this
I4O The English Bible.
Bible should be set up in a convenient place within the
church, and that the clergy should “expressly provoke, stir,
and exhort every person to read the same.” This injunc-
tion, drawn up by Cromwell before the publication of the
work, was twice repeated in subsequent years; and no his-
torian fails to relate that Bishop Bonner placed six Bibles in
St. Paul's.
Another point worth careful notice is the prominence
assigned by the artist to Cromwell. This Bible is often
called Cranmer's, but without any just reason. All honour
is due to the Archbishop for his exertions to promote its
circulation, but the undertaking was not his, but Comwell's ;
and the Bible is now rightly associated with Cromwell's
name. Fifteen months after its publication Cromwell was
disgraced and sentenced to death ; but, though the circle
under his feet is left blank in the title-page of subsequent
éditions, the figures remain unchanged, and thus all copies
of the Great Bible preserve the memorial of Cromwell's
zeal,
Equally truthful is this celebrated engraving in its
presentation of the national feeling. “It was wonderful,”
says Strype,” “to see with what joy this book of God was
received, not only among the learneder sort, and those that
were noted for lovers of the Reformation, but generally all
England over, among all the vulgar and common people ;
and with what greediness God’s word was read ; and what
resort to places where the reading of it was. Everybody
that could bought the book, or busily read it, or got others
to read it to them, if they could not themselves; and divers
more elderly people learned to read on purpose. And
even little boys flocked among the rest to hear portions of
the holy Scripture read.” The most convincing proof of
the accuracy of these statements is the rapidity with which
* Zife of Cranmer, I., p. 92.
Cram/zer's Bzó/e. I4 I
successive editions were printed and circulated. Cromwell's
Bible, hastily snatched from destruction, was given to the
world in April, 1539. There are still extant copies of six
editions bearing the date 1540 and 1541. Nor were these
mere reprints of Cromwell’s Bible. As we shall see, the
agreement amongst the seven Bibles is sufficiently great to
authorise us in including them in one family and under one
designation; but each has peculiarities which distinguish it
from the rest. t
Cranmer's direct connexion with the book begins with
the second edition. On the 14th of November, 1539,
Henry bestowed on Cromwell, for five years, the exclusive
right to grant a license" for the printing of the Bible in the
English tongue. A letter from Cranmer to Cromwell is
extant, bearing the same date, in which the Archbishop
conveys the undertaking of the printers to sell the Bibles at
a price not exceeding ten shillings, on condition of receiving
a monopoly of the publication. In this letter Cranmer asks
“the king's pleasure concerning the Preface of the Bible,”
which had been sent to Cromwell to “oversee.” This
Bible had been committed by Henry to Gardiner and
Others among the bishops for their judgment. “After they
had kept it long in their hands, and the king was divers
times sued unto for the publication thereof, at the last
being called for by the king himself, they re-delivered the
book ; and being demanded by the king what was their
judgment of the translation, they answered that there were
many faults therein. “Well,” said the king, “but are there
any heresies maintained thereby P’ They answered, there
were no heresies that they could find maintained thereby.
“If there be no heresies,” said the king, ‘then, in God’s
name, let it go abroad among Our people.’ According to
this judgment of the king and the bishops, M. Coverdale
defended the translation, confessing that he did now himself
I42 The English Bible.
espy some faults, which, if he might review it once over
again, as he had done twice before, he doubted not but to
amend; but for any heresy, he was sure there was none
maintained by his translation.” ". In April, 1540, the Book
was published with Cranmer's preface, which henceforth was
attached to all editions of the Great Bible. Three months
later appeared another edition, which, like the last, bore
Cranmer's name on the title-page. In November of the
same year the fourth edition was ready for issue, though
not published until 1541. It appeared under very strange
auspices, as the title will show : “The Byble in Englyshe
of the largest and greatest volume, auctorysed and apoynted
by the commaundemente of oure moost redoubted Prynce
and Soueraygne Lorde Kynge Henrye the viii., supreme
heade of this his Churche and Realme of Englande : to be
frequented and used in every churche within this his sayd
realme accordynge to the tenour of his former Iniunctions
geven in that behalfe. Oversene and perused at the com-
maundement of the kynges hyghnes, by the ryghte reve-
rende fathers in God Cuthbert bysshop of Duresme” and
Nicolas” bisshop of Rochester.” It is probable that the
association of Tunstall and Heath with this edition was
little more than nominal. Lest the work in which Crom-
well had taken so deep an interest should suffer after his
fall, other names, representing widely different tendencies
and sympathies, must give it warrant and authority. Three
other editions were issued in 1541, one (November) similar
to that just described, in its connexion with the two
bishops; two (May, December) bearing Cranmer's name
upon the title-page. We are not told how large were the
impressions of the later editions; but as the first edition
* Fulke, Defence of Ænglish Translations, p. 98 (Parker Society).
2 Cuthbert Tunstall, Bishop of Durham.
3 Nicholas Heath.
Plan for a Wew Zºrams/ation. I43
consisted of 2,500 copies, we may reasonably conclude
that the number circulated during these years of liberty was
very large.
The liberty was too remarkable to be of long duration.
Soon after Cromwell's disgrace the opposite party at-
tempted to avail themselves of Coverdale's scheme for
annotations on difficult texts (a scheme never carried into
effect), for the purpose of checking altogether the printing
of the Bible. Grafton indeed was committed to the Fleet,
and bound under a heavy penalty not to print or sell any
more Bibles until the king and clergy should agree on a
translation. In 1542 Convocation, at the king's instance,
arranged a plan for a new translation. The books of the
New Testament were allotted to various bishops—St.
Matthew, for instance, being taken by Cranmer, St. Luke
by Gardiner, the Acts by Heath. The plan soon fell to
the ground. When one of the translators (Bishop Gardiner)
could propose that ninety-nine words, such as £anis propo-
sitionis (shewbread), simulacrum (image), hostia (victim),
efficere (to cast out), should “on account of their genuine
and native meaning, and the majesty of the matter signified
by them,” be presented to the people in this Latin dress, it
became very evident that the bishops had no real wish for a
vernacular translation. The king now directed that the uni-
versities should be intrusted with the work, but the adverse
influences had become sufficiently powerful to frustrate this
design. About this time Anthony Marler, a haberdasher of
London, who had borne the expenses of the earlier editions
of the Great Bible, received from Henry a patent, conveying
to him the exclusive right of printing the English Bible during
four years. In 1543, however, the reading of the Scriptures
was by Act of Parliament placed under very severe restric-
tions. The use of Tyndale's translations was entirely for-
bidden, and three years later Coverdale's Testament was
I44 The English Bible.
placed under the same ban. Permission to read the Bible
in English was accorded to certain classes only. Obedi-
ence to these injunctions was enforced by many penalties,
and was still more effectually promoted by the zeal of the
numerous opponents of the Reformation, who spared no
pains to crush out the growing love for the Scriptures.
On all sides the proscribed Bibles were sought for and
destroyed. All the better traditions of earlier years were
fast passing into oblivion, when the reaction was suddenly
stayed by the death of the king in January, 1547.
We pass to a brief examination of the character of this
translation. The principal questions before us are these :-
In what relation does the Great Bible stand to those
previously published by Coverdale and Rogers? What
influences may be traced in this new version P. How far
are we justified in speaking of the seven issues in 1539
and the two following years as editions of the same work?
Comparing Numb. xxiv. I5–24, as given in the Great
Bible, with the translations of Tyndale and Coverdale, we
find that in every four places in which these two translators
differ, the Great Bible agrees with Tyndale three times, with
Coverdale's Bible once. Very rarely do we find any new
rendering of importance. The most striking are in verse
16, “and that falleth with open eyes;” verse 18, “and
Edom shall be possessed, and Seir shall fall to the pos-
session of their enemies;” verse 22, “the Kenite shall be
rooted out;” verse 24, “Italy,” in the place of “Chittim.”
In most of the new renderings the authority followed is
Münster's Hebrew-Latin Bible, published in 1534-5. In
the early books of the Old Testament the successive editions
of the Great Bible appear to be nearly in accord, the
work of revision being in the main completed when the
book was first published in 1539. If we pass to the pro-
phetical books we meet with a much larger proportion of
Comparison with Previous Versions. I4.5
new matter. In Isa, liii., for example, the Bible of 1539
differs in about forty places from Coverdale's former trans-
lation ; in the Bible known as Cranmer's we find about
twenty additional alterations, some of great importance;
in the editions of 1541 hardly any further change was made.
The influence of Münster is to be seen in almost every
case. We gladly welcome such renderings as “the chas-
tisement of our peace" (1540) in the place of “the pain
of our punishment” (1539); and “the Lord hath heaped
together upon him the iniquity of us all,” is a more ade-
quate representation of the prophet's meaning than “through
him the Lord hath pardoned all our sins.” We need not
examine other passages in detail. So far as the Old
Testament is concerned, we see that the term Great Bible
represents in the main two revisions (1539, 1540); and
that, whilst much use was made of the Vulgate and of the
Complutensian Polyglott, Münster's Latin version was the
authority to which Coverdale chiefly deferred.
In its general character the New Testament is very
similar to the Old, In Luke xv., xvi., for example, the
Great Bible almost always agrees either with Tyndale's or
with Coverdale's earlier version, but in most instances with
Tyndale. What is new is of little value. The impression
produced by these chapters is confirmed as we extend our
survey. There are, however, some changes of detail which
are very important, though they are not always changes for
the better. Thus in John iii. 3, “born anew.” gives place
to “born from above ;” in John x. 16, “one fold * is unfor-
tunately substituted for “one flock;” in John xiv. 1, the
familiar rendering, “ye believe in God, believe also in me,”
takes the place of Tyndale's, in which all was exhortation
(“believe in God, believe also in me”). In these passages
the change is apparently due to the authority of Erasmus.
Throughout the New Testament, indeed, the new render-
K -
I46 The English Bible.
ings are mainly derived from Erasmus and the Vulgate.
The later editions of the Great Bible sometimes contain
valuable emendations, but the amount of variation is
apparently not great.
The chief characteristic of the Great Bible is found, not
in its translations, but in its text. In one of his letters to
Cromwell, Coverdale speaks of the care with which he notes
the “diversity of reading among the Hebrews, Chaldees,
and Greeks, and Latinists.” The result is, that on every
page of this version we find some additions to the text.
The reader may remember that Purvey’s version of Pro-
verbs contains several clauses and verses found in the Latin
text, but not in the Hebrew (see p. 27). Almost all these
supplements may be seen in the Great Bible. The same
phenomenon meets us in the New Testament. In Luke xvi.
21, for instance, we read of Lazarus, that “no man gave
unto him ;” at the end of I Cor. xvi. 19, we find the words,
“with whom also I am lodged ;” and it is in this version
that Luke xvii. 36 first finds a place. It must be confessed
that his unwillingness to give up any portion of the text
presented by the Vulgate sometimes (in I John ii. 23, for
example) led Coverdale to adopt readings which are now
recognised as correct; but this good fortune is only occa-
sional. As a rule, the additions found no favour with later
editors. These supplements, however, were not presented
by Coverdale as part of the text, but were placed within
parentheses, printed in a different type, and pointed out to
the reader by a special sign. Besides this sign, a hand
(º) is of very frequent occurrence in both text and
margin of the Great Bible. It had been Coverdale's in-
tention to supply numerous annotations on difficulties of
every description, and great was his regret when the
hurry and Confusion amidst which the first edition was
completed rendered this part of his scheme impracticable.
The Psa/fez. I47
The notes were never published, but in the first three
editions the sign remained. Another mark (+) is used in
the Old Testament, to point out passages which are
“alleged of Christ or of some apostle in the New
Testament.”
One portion of the Great Bible stands apart from the
rest, not indeed in internal character, but in virtue of its
subsequent history. A note at the beginning of the Book
of Common Prayer states that the Psalter therein contained
“followeth the division of the Hebrews, and the translation
of the great English Bible, set forth and used in the time
of King Henry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth.” This
translation was necessarily adopted in connexion with the
first Prayer Book (1549), and obtained a very strong hold
upon the people. At the last revision of the Prayer Book
(1662), when the new translation was accepted for the
Epistles and Gospels, it proved impossible to change the
Psalter. “It was found, it is said, smoother to sing; but
this is not a full account of the matter, and it cannot be
mere familiarity which gives to the Prayer Book Psalter,
with all its errors and imperfections, an incomparable ten-
derness and sweetness. Rather we may believe that in it
we can yet find the spirit of him whose work it mainly is,
full of humility and love, not heroic or creative, but patient
to accomplish by God's help the task which had been set
him to do, and therefore best in harmony with the tenour of
our own daily lives.”" The general characteristics of the
version are found here also. Every careful reader has been
struck with the additional words and clauses found in the
Psalter of the Prayer Book. For example, “him that rideth
upon the heavens, as it were upon an horse” (Ps. lxviii.
4); “their corn, and wine, and oil ' (iv. 8); “a moth
fretting a garment * (xxxix. I2); “God is a righteous Judge,
* Westcott, History, p. 294.
K 2
I48 The English Bible.
strong and patient’’ (vii. 12); “even where no fear zvas” (xiv.
9); “neither the temples of my head to take any res?” (cxxxii.
4). In Ps. xxix. 1, we find a double translation of one
clause, “bring young rams unto the Lord,” and “ascribe
unto the Lord glory and strength.” A verse is added to
Ps. cxxxvi., and three verses are introduced into Ps. xiv.
Canon Westcott gives a list of more than seventy of these ad-
ditions, some from Münster, but for the most part brought in
from the Vulgate. In the Great Bible the word, or clause,
or verse, is in almost all cases carefully separated from the
context, and marked as an addition ; but unfortunately all
such distinction has been obliterated in our editions of the
Prayer Book. The titles of the Psalms, and such notes as
Selah, omitted in the Prayer Book, are here given in full.
The curious love of variety of rendering, so characteristic
of Coverdale, is often observable. The “chief musician’’ is
usually “the chanter,” but sometimes “he that excelleth.”
Michtam of David becomes “the badge or arms of David.”
Halleluya is retained from the original, but a translation,
“Praise the everlasting,” is placed by its side. As we
might expect, the inscriptions of the Psalms are sometimes
enlarged from the Latin. Thus Ps. xxiv. is assigned to
“the first day of the Sabbath.” It is curious to read at
the beginning of Ps. xxvi. “a Psalm of David afore he was
embalmed.”
There is little requiring notice in the arrangement of
the Great Bible. It contains no dedication. In the table
of contents the word “Hagiographa " (a name designating
those books of the Old Testament which are not included
under “the Law " and “the Prophets”—such as Job, the
Psalms, &c.) strangely takes the place of “Apocrypha.”
As in the earlier editions of the Great Bible Rogers's pre-
face to the Apocryphal books is retained, we light upon the
astonishing statement that “the books are called Hagio-
Copies in Existence. I49
grapha because they were wont to be read, not openly and
in common, but as it were in secret and apart.”" The pre-
liminary matter resembles that of Matthew’s Bible. The
Concordance, however, is omitted, and a short prologue is
inserted, to explain the marks found in the text and margin.
Short headings are usually prefixed to the chapters, but no
book has a preface, unless the three or four lines expressing
the general meaning of the Song of Solomon can be so
considered.
Many copies of the Great Bible have been preserved.
Mr. Fry, to whom we owe the most complete and accurate
account of the various editions, has examined nearly one
hundred and fifty copies; most of these, however, are in-
complete, perfect copies being very rare. The library of
the British Museum contains every one of the seven editions.
At Lambeth Palace may be seen copies of the first two
editions which may very possibly have belonged to Cranmer
himself. Amongst the treasures of the library of St. John's
College, Cambridge, is a splendid copy of Cromwell's Bible,
printed on vellum and illuminated ; another copy on vellum
(April, 1540), presented by Anthony Marler to Henry VIII.,
is preserved in the British Museum. A useful reprint of
the New Testament of 1539 will be found in Bagster's
English Hexapla.
I See Prof. Plumptre’s article in Smith's Dict of Biöle, iii. 1,675.
CHAPTER XI.
THE GENEVAN VERSIONS.
THE accession of Edward VI. gave new life to the hopes of
all friends to the diffusion of Scripture truth. We are told
by some writers that from the very first the young prince mani-
fested his reverence for the Bible, requiring that the Sacred
Book, the sword of the Spirit, should at his coronation be
carried before him. The restrictions which Henry had laid
upon the printing and reading of the Scriptures were at once
removed. In the first year of Edward's reign an injunction
was issued requiring every beneficed person to provide
within three months a copy of the English Bible “ of the
largest volume,” and within twelve months a copy of
Erasmus's Paraphrase on the Gospels. As before, it was
required that the books should be set up in some convenient
place within the church, that they might be read by the
parishioners. In 1548 official inquiry was made as to the
obedience which had been paid to this injunction. A period
of remarkable activity in the printing and circulation of the
Scriptures immediately followed. Mr. Anderson's list of
the editions published in Edward’s short reign comprises
thirteen or fourteen Bibles, and as many as thirty-five New
Testaments separately printed. Of the editions of the
whole Bible seven were of the last translation, three of
Matthew's, two of Coverdale's, one (and, in part, another)
of Taverner's. Of the editions of the New Testament two
out of every three contain Tyndale's version.
The many important events of this reign do not fall
Cheke's 7 ranslation of St. Matthew. I5 I
within our province. The Prayer Books issued in 1548
and 1552 contain portions of Scripture which call for a brief
notice, but they will most naturally come before us at a later
period, in connexion with the final revision of the Liturgy.
There is, however, one version (a fragment) of the New
Testament which must not be passed over. The author is
no obscure divine, but the scholar who, as Milton says,
“taught Cambridge and King Edward Greek.” Sir John
Cheke, appointed by Henry (in 1540) Professor of Greek in
the University of Cambridge, and in 1544 chosen as tutor
to the young prince, was one of those scholars who laboured
with the greatest zeal and success in the revival of the study
of the classical languages. In one of the manuscripts in
the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, is a trans-
lation of St. Matthew written by Cheke's own hand, pro-
bably about the year 1550, The manuscript was first
printed in 1843, under the editorship of the Rev. J. Good-
win. Besides the Gospel of St. Matthew (which is complete,
with the exception of about fifty verses) the translation
embraces part of the first chapter of St. Mark. In the
orthography, which is very peculiar, Cheke follows a system
of his own. But the most remarkable feature of his work
is the persistent endeavour to express all ideas by means of
home-born words; we might almost suppose the translation
to have been the result of a reaction against Gardiner's
movement for a semi-Latin version of the Scriptures. The
following extract, though short, will sufficiently show the
character of this singular fragment. The peculiar ortho-
graphy is preserved, but not the contractions in writing,
which are numerous.
ST. MATTHEW XIV. 26–33.
And his discipils seing him walking on the see weer trobled, saieng
that it was a phantasm, and thei cried out for fear. Jesus bi and bi
Spaak to them and said, Be of good cheer. Jt is J, fear not. Peter
I 52 The English Bible.
answerd vnto him. Sir, saith he, Jf it be thou, bid me comm on the
water vnto the. And he said, Comm on. And Peter cam doun out of
the boot and walked on the waters to com to Jesus. And seing the
wind strong, was aferd, and when he began to sink he cried out. Lord,
Saith he, save me. Jesus bi and bi stretched forth his hand, and took
hold of him, and said vnto him, Thou Smal faithed, whi hast thou
doughted? And when thei weer ones enterd into the boot the wind
ceased. Thei that weer in the boot cam and bowed down vnto him and
said, Suerli thou art the Sonn of god.
In a marginal note Cheke explains the meaning of
phantasm as “that which appeared to the eies to be sum-
thing and is nothing in deed.” Several of the notes and
explanations are of interest, but the boldness of the voca-
bulary is the characteristic which most impresses the reader's
mind. A proverb is a bizword, apostle is a frosent, regenera-
tion is gainbirth, the lunatic are moond, the demoniacs
spirited, Matthew is said to be called while sitting at the
folbooth, the natural man is soulisch , phylacteries and
borders (Matt. xxiii. 5) are gardes and weſtes; the magi are
zviseards ; the last of the signs of Messiah (Matt. xi. 5) is
that “the beggars be gospe/d.”
The abrupt conclusion of this interesting fragment is no
inapt symbol of the fortunes of the writer and of the results
of Edward’s premature and sudden death. One of the first
acts of Mary’s reign was the prohibition of the public reading
of Scripture. A second proclamation, in June, 1555, de-
nounced the writings of the Continental reformers and of
many noble Englishmen, among whom were Tyndale, Frith,
Cranmer, and Coverdale. Three years later a more stringent
injunction was issued, requiring that wicked and seditious
books should be given up on pain of death. Though the
English Bible is not expressly mentioned in these two pro-
clamations, there can be no doubt that under their sanction
many copies of the Scriptures were destroyed. Two men
whose names are nobly connected with the history of the
The Exiles in Geneva. I 53
English Bible, John Rogers and Thomas Cranmer, were
committed to the flames; Coverdale narrowly escaped with
his life, and went into exile. We cannot wonder that during
the five years of Mary's reign no Bible or Testament was
published on English ground. Still the persecution was not
without its influence for good. As “the blood of the
martyrs’ became emphatically in England the seed of a
reformed and purified Church, the policy which drove
learned and good men into banishment from their country
was destined to prepare the way for a more accurate and
worthy representation of Scripture truth.
With the foreigners who, compelled by a royal proclama-
tion, left England without delay, many learned Englishmen
sought refuge from the troubles of their country in flight.
Some betook themselves to Strasburg, Some to Frankfort-on-
the-Maine, some to Zurich, and other towns in Germany
and Switzerland. Our concern is with a band of exiles who
left Frankfort in 1555 in consequence of dissensions re-
specting matters of ritual, and removed to Geneva, where
Calvin, who had little liking for the English Prayer Book,
exercised unbounded influence. Among these exiles were
John Knox, the celebrated Scottish reformer; Miles Cover-
dale; Thomas Cole, said to have been Dean of Salisbury;
Christopher Goodman, at one time a divinity-professor at
Oxford, author of a violent treatise against “the monstrous
regiment” (government) of women, afterwards a leader of
the extreme Nonconformists; John Pullain, noted for his
poetical powers, a translator of Ecclesiastes, Esther, and
other books of Scripture into English verse; Anthony Gilby,
Thomas Sampson, and William Whittingham. It is mainly
with the three last named that we are here concerned.
Gilby was a Cambridge scholar, Sampson and Whittingham
were educated at Oxford. Of Gilby we know comparatively
little, except that he was educated at Christ's College, Cam-
I 54. The English Bible.
bridge; that the troubles of Frankfort drove him to Geneva;
and that on the accession of Elizabeth he returned to Eng-
land, and received the vicarage of Ashby-de-la-Zouch. He
died in 1584. Sampson was Dean of Chichester in Edward's
reign. On the accession of Mary he fled to Strasburg, and
afterwards joined the band of exiles at Geneva. In 1561
he became Dean of Christ Church, Oxford, but was shortly
afterwards deprived of his office for nonconformity. William
Whittingham was born near Durham in 1524; at the age of
twenty-three he was made one of the senior students of
Christ Church, Oxford. When Knox left Geneva, in 1559,
Whittingham was ordained his successor in the pastorate of
the English church. In 1560 he returned to England, and
three years later was made Dean of Durham. Whittingham
was one of the translators of that metrical version of the
Psalms which is known by the names of Sternhold and
Hopkins, the largest contributors to the collection. He
died in 1579.
In 1557 a duodecimo volume was published at Geneva,
entitled “The Newe Testament of Ovr Lord Iesus Christ.
Conferred diligently with the Greke, and best approued
translations. With the arguments, as wel before the chapters,
as for euery Boke and Epistle; also diuersities of readings,
and moste proffitable annotations of all harde places; wher-
unto is added a copious Table. At Geneva Printed by
Conrad Badius. M.D. LVII.” The title-page also contains a
curious woodcut, representing Time raising Truth out of her
grave, with the motto, “God by Tyme restoreth Trvth, and
maketh her victoriovs.” After the table of contents is given
“The Epistle, declaring that Christ is the end of the law, by
John Calvin.” This is followed by an address to the reader,
giving some account of the work. The writer uses the first
* A very convenient reprint of this Testament has been published by
Messrs. Bagster.
The Geneva New Testament. I 55
person singular throughout, and clearly shows that the trans-
lation is from his own hand. After describing the various
kinds of men in the Church of Christ, and speaking espe-
cially of the “simple lambs which partly are already in the
fold of Christ, and partly wandering, through ignorance,” he
says, “To this kind of people in this translation I chiefly
had respect, as moved with zeal, counselled by the godly,
and drawn by occasion both of the place where God hath
appointed us to dwell, and also of the store of heavenly
learning and judgment which so aboundeth in this city of
Geneva, that justly it may be called the pattern and mirror
of true religion and godliness.” To these, then, he will
“render a reason " of his work. The text has been “dili-
gently revised by the most approved Greek examples and
conference of translations in other tongues, as the learned
may easily judge, both by the faithful rendering of the sen-
tence, and also by the propriety of the words and perspicuity
of the phrase.” For the profit of the reader the text has
been “divided into verses and sections, according to the
best editions in other languages.” Hard Hebrew and Greek
phrases he has sometimes “interpreted” by an idiomatic
translation, sometimes made less obscure by adding a word;
setting it, however, “in such letters as may easily be dis-
cerned from the common text.” In the annotations, he
says, “To my knowledge I have omitted nothing unex-
pounded whereby he that is anything exercised in the
Scriptures of God might justly complain of hardness: and
also . . . I have explicate all such places by the best learned
interpreters as either were falsely expounded by some or else
absurdly applied by others . . . Some time, when the place
is not greatly hard, I have noted with this mark (") that
which may serve to the edification of the reader. Moreover,
the diverse readings, according to diverse Greek copies,
which stand but in one word, may be known by this note ("),
I 56 The English Bible.
and if the books do alter in the sentence, then is it noted
with this star (*), as the quotations are.”
Though no name is given, we can have little doubt that
the work was executed by Whittingham. This might be
probable in itself on account of the position held by Whit-
tingham among his countrymen in Geneva, and from the
association of Calvin (whose sister Whittingham had married)
with this translation ; but, as we shall see presently, there
are other indications which point to the same conclusion.
Apart from the translation and the notes, which are con-
sidered below, the chief characteristics of the book are the
use of Roman type (additions and explanatory words being
printed in italics) and the novel arrangement of the text.
Our modern verses are here seen for the first time in an
English Bible. In the Old Testament the division into
short verses was ready to hand in the Hebrew Bible ;
through Pagninus (1528) this division became familiar to
readers of Latin. In the New Testament there was no
precedent of the kind. From the earliest times, however,
the text had been broken up into paragraphs of various
lengths, and Pagninus, for the sake of uniformity, introduced
into the New Testament verses similar to those now in use,
but of greater length. R. Stephens, when preparing for one
of his editions of the Greek Testament, resolved on an
arrangement more nearly resembling that of the Old Testa-
ment. He worked out his plan on a journey from Paris to
Lyons, and the Greek Testament published in 1551 in this
respect resembles our present Bibles. For the Apocryphal
books this work had been accomplished a few years earlier
by the same hand. The complete system of verses first met
the eye of English readers in the Bible of 1560, of which
we have now to speak.
Three years after the publication of the Genevan Testa-
ment an edition of the whole Bible in English was published
The Geneva. Bzó/e. I 57
in the same city: “The Bible and Holy Scriptures conteyned
in the Olde and Newe Testament. Translated according to
the Ebrue and Greke, and conferred with the best trans-
lations in diuers languages. With moste profitable annota-
tions vpon all the harde places, and other thinges of great
importance, as may appeare in the Epistle to the Reader.”
On this title-page, also, is a woodcut, representing the
passage through the Red Sea. The book is a quarto of
about 600 pages, printed (like the Testament of 1557) in
Roman and italic types, and furnished with “arguments,”
marginal references, headings of chapters, and explanatory
notes. This is the first edition of the celebrated Genevan
version, of which more than 130 editions were published,
and which retained its popularity with the English public
for nearly a hundred years.
The book is introduced by an address : “To our Beloved
in the Iord the Brethren of England, Scotland, Ireland,
etc.” After pointing out that the former translations required
greatly to be reformed, the translators go on to say, “Not
that we vindicate anything to ourselves above the least of
our brethren (for God knoweth with what fear and trembling
we have been for the space of two years and more, day and
night, occupied herein), but being earnestly desired, and by
divers, whose learning and godliness we reverence, exhorted,
and also encouraged by the ready wills of such whose hearts
God likewise touched, not to spare any charges for the
furtherance of such a benefit and savour of God toward his
Church (though the time then was most dangerous and the
persecution sharp and furious), we submitted ourselves at
length to their godly judgments, and seeing the great oppor-
tunity and occasions which God presented unto us in his
Church by reason of so many godly and learned men, and such
diversities of translations in divers tongues, we undertook
this great and wonderful work (with all reverence, as in the
I 58 The English Bible.
presence of God, as entreating the word of God, whereunto
we think ourselves insufficient), which now God, according
to his Divine providence and mercy, hath directed to a most
prosperous end. And this we may with good conscience
protest, that we have in every point and word, according to
the measure of that knowledge which it pleased Almighty
God to give us, faithfully rendered the text, and in all hard
places most sincerely expounded the same. For God is our
witness that we have by all means endeavoured to set forth
the purity of the word and right sense of the Holy Ghost,
for the edifying of the brethren in faith and charity.”
One distinction between the former publication and the
present is obvious. Whereas that was clearly from one hand,
this openly professes to be the result of combined labours.
Anthony à Wood tells us that Coverdale, Goodman, Gilby,
Sampson, Cole, and Whittingham “undertook the translation
of the English Bible, but before the greater part was finished,
Queen Mary died. So that, the Protestant religion appear-
ing again in England, the exiled divines left Frankfort and
Geneva, and returned into England. Howbeit, Whitting-
ham, with one or two more, being resolved to go through with
the work, did tarry at Geneva a year and a half after Queen
Elizabeth came to the crown.” The “two or three * who
remained with Whittingham seem to have been Gilby and
Sampson. Knox, Goodman, Cole, Pullain, Bodleigh, and
Coverdale returned to England in 1559. Coverdale, indeed,
seems to have spent but a short time in Geneva ; but it is
hardly possible to believe that the veteran translator had no
share in this undertaking. Whittingham, however, was in
all probability foremost in the company of translators; and
the prominent position which he holds in this work, together
with the intimate relation between the translations of 1557
and 1560, warrants the belief that the earlier was mainly
from his hand.
Comparison with the Geneva Testament. I 59
The relation between the “Genevan Testament” (1557)
and the Testament of the “Genevan Bible” (1560) requires
careful attention, as some have represented them to be prac-
tically the same version, whilst others have considered them
altogether different works. It may easily be shown that the
truth lies between these extremes. We will, as before, first
examine a single chapter throughout, and then notice ren-
derings of particular interest. Luke xvi. is a chapter of
moderate length, and of rather more than average difficulty.
The principal English versions available for the use of the
exiles of Geneva were Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Matthew's,
and the Great Bible. In this chapter, Matthew (1551) agrees
word for word with Tyndale; the Great Bible departs from
Tyndale in about thirty renderings; Coverdale varies much
more frequently—in ninety or a hundred places. The
Genevan Testament deserts Tyndale in favour of Coverdale
about twelve times only ; hence it is evident that, though
Coverdale's translation was used, it was not the basis of the
new version. The Great Bible in this chapter introduces
about seventeen new renderings, mostly of very little con-
sequence, and in verse 2 I a clause is added. The Genevan
Testament adopts not more than three or four of these
changes. It is clear, therefore, that it is on Tyndale's
Testament that the new version is founded. From Tyndale
the translator departs rather more than forty times; in thirty
of these instances the rendering is new, and in eight of the
thirty this new rendering obtained a place in our Authorised
Version. The Genevan Bible, again, varies from the Testa-
ment of 1557 in nearly forty places; in thirty-three of these
the rendering is new, and in sixteen the alteration still
maintains its ground. Hence, so far as this chapter is
concerned, we may say that the Testament is a careful
revision of Tyndale, and that the Bible is again a careful
revision of the Testament. As an example of extensive
I6O The English Bible.
alteration may be given the introduction to the Gospel
of St. Luke —
ST. LUKE I. I–4.
I For asmuch as many haue taken in hand to write the historie of
those thynges, wherof we are fully certified,
2 Euen as they declared them vnto vs, which from the begynnyng
saw them their Selues, and were ministers at the doyng (margin : or, of
the thing):
3. It seemed good also to me (moste noble Theophilus) as sone as I
had learned perfectly all thynges from the beginnyng, to wryte vnto thee
therof from poynt to poynt :
4 That thou mightest acknowlage the trueth of those thinges where
in thou hast bene broght vp.
In these four verses several renderings are introduced
for the first time, as write the history, whereof we are fully
certified, it seemed good, learned perfectly, thereof, from point
to point, most noble. The Bible of 1560 differs in several
places:–set forth the story (ver. I), persuaded (for certified),
as they have delivered (ver. 2), ministers of the word, in-
structed (ver. 4). The reader will not fail to observe that
several of these renderings are found in our Authorised
Version. Taking another chapter, at hazard, we find that
in Matt. xviii. 8, the Testament of 1557 has “cause thee to
offend’ for the not very plain rendering “offend thee;” in
ver. 17, “refuse to hear,” instead of “hear not;” in ver. 29,
“fell down at his feet” takes the place of “fell down ; ”
in ver. 2, where earlier versions have “child,” the Genevan
have “young’’ or “little child.” These changes, selected
from those found in a single chapter, show the care of the
translator, and it is very easy to light upon examples of a
similar kind. In Matt. xx. 23, the words in italics which
are found in our Authorised Version are due to the Genevan
Testament; in Matt. xxviii. 14, “come before the governor”
is a more exact translation than “come to the governor's
ears; ” in Mark xiv. 7.2 earlier versions have “began to
Framples. I6 I
weep,” but the Genevan, more correctly, “weighing this
with himself, he wept.” In James i. 17, for the older render-
ing, “neither is he changed into darkness,” we here read
“neither shadowing by turning.” It is in the Genevan
Bible that we first find the rendering of John iii. 3 which is
now most familiar, “Except a man be born again.” In
most of these instances we trace Beza's hand. His influ-
ence is usually for good in points of interpretation ; as a
critic, however, deciding on the Greek text to be adopted in
any passage, he is often rash and misleading. We owe to
him the true reading in Rom. xii. II, “serving the Lord,”
where Tyndale and others have “apply yourselves to the
time.” On the other hand, in Mark xvi. 2, as the ordinary
Greek text signified “the sun having risen,” and so appeared
to conflict with the narrative of the other Gospels, Beza
adopted another reading, which was very slenderly sup-
ported, and translated the words “while the sun was rising.”
Not satisfied with this, however, he hazarded a conjecture
that the words “not yet” might have accidentally fallen out
of the text. The Genevan translators actually insert this
conjecture in their margin as an alternative translation, and
in the text read “when the sun was yet rising.” In Matt. i.
II, the clauses which we now find in the margin of our
Bibles were introduced into the text of the Genevan ver-
sions, again on very insufficient evidence. There are other
blots of the same character, but on the whole Beza's influ-
ence tended greatly to the improvement of the work.
Mistakes were removed which had disfigured all preceding
versions. Thus in Acts xxvii. 9, the earlier versions had
followed Tyndale (and Erasmus) in the translation “be-
cause we had over-long fasted.” The Genevan Testament
was the first to give what is now generally acknowledged to
be the true translation, “because the time of the fast was
now passed; ” the meaning being made still clearer by the
L
I62 The English Bible.
following note, “This fast the Jews observed about the month
of October, in the Feast of their expiation (Lev. 32.d"). So
that Paul thought it better to winter there, than to sail in
the deep of winter which was at hand.” In the 13th verse
of the same chapter, Tyndale, Coverdale, and the Great
Bible have the rendering “loosed unto Asson’’ (Assos),
supposing the Greek word asson to be a proper name ; the
Genevan translation is the first to give the true meaning,
“nearer.”
The notes in the Genevan version have already been
referred to. They are not derived from Matthew's Bible,
but were prepared by the Genevan translators themselves,
and prepared with much care. As may be supposed, the
comments belong to the school of theology which we asso-
ciate with the names of Calvin and Beza, but a very large
proportion of them contain nothing to offend readers of
other schools. In the Epistle to the Romans, for instance,
the Genevan Testament contains about 220 explanatory
notes (not including alternative renderings), the Bible of
1560 about 250, but not more than six or seven can be
called “Calvinistic.” The condensed commentary which
the notes contain is usually good and useful, supplying his-
torical and geographical information, clearing up obscure
texts, but most frequently containing pithy observations on
lessons that are taught by a narrative, or inferences which
may be drawn from a text. In the Bible of 1560 most of
the notes of the earlier Testament were retained, and several
additions made ; the commentary was also extended to the
whole Bible, with the exception of the Apocryphal Books,”
* That is, Lev. xxxii. (a mistake for xxiii.) 27—29. Though the
text is divided into verses, the marginal references of the Genevan
Testament follow the old paragraphs, marked by letters of the alphabet.
* It is sometimes stated that the Apocryphal Books are omitted in
the Genevan Bible ; but this is a mistake.
Moſes. 163
in which the notes are scanty. The matter of the annota-
tions was derived from Beza, Calvin, and others. Our
limits will not permit us to give many examples; the follow-
ing will serve as a specimen:-
Exod. i. 19. Their disobedience herein was lawful, but their dis-
sembling evil.
2 Chron. xv. 16. Herein he showed that he lacked zeal, for she
ought to have died, both by the covenant, as verse 13, and by the law
of God; but he gave place to foolish pity, and would also seem after a
sort to satisfy the law.
Ps. xlvi., title. (Alamoth), which was either a musical instrument
or a solemn tune, unto the which this psalm was sung.
Ps. cxix. 25 (cleaveth unto the dust). That is, it is almost brought
to the grave, and without Thy word I cannot live.
I Sam. iii. 4. Josephus writeth that Samuel was twelve years old
when the Lord appeared to him.
Matt. xx. 23. God my Father hath not given me charge to bestow
offices of honour here.
John vi. 28 (the works of God). Such as be acceptable unto God,
Ephes. v. 16 (Redeeming the time). Selling all worldly pleasures to
buy time.
Heb. xi. 4 (by the which). Meaning faith."
Occasionally (especially in the Acts) the note contains
some considerable additions to the text, similar to those so
freely admitted into the Great Bible. Thus in Acts xiv. 7,
we read that others add “insomuch that all the people
were moved at the doctrine. So both Paul and Barnabas
remained at Lystra.” This reading Beza mentions in his
note as contained in his own most ancient MS.—a MS.
of the sixth century (Codex Bezae), now preserved in the
Library of the University of Cambridge, and remarkable
for such additions to the ordinary text.
1 Professor Plumptre (Dict, of Bible, III., 1674) notices another
point of interest—that the Genevan Version (in both forms) “omits
the name of St. Paul from the title of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and,
in a short Preface, leaves the authorship an open question.”
L 2
I64 The English Bible.
Let us now turn to the Old Testament. If in the pas-
sages which we have before taken as a test we compare the
Genevan Bible with the translations of Tyndale and Cover-
dale, and with the Great Bible, we shall find that consider-
able variation exists, but that the Genevan translation is
nearer to the Great Bible than to any other. In Numb.
xxiv. I 5–24, the Genevan Bible differs from Tyndale about
forty-six times, from the Great Bible about thirty-five. In
Isa. xii. the variation from the Great Bible is about the same
in amount, four changes in each verse ; in several of these
the version returns to Tyndale. In Ps. xc, the Great Bible
is deserted in more than eighty instances; in two out of
every three the change is an improvement, and more than
fifty of the changes hold their ground in the Authorised
Version. As will be seen hereafter, the Authorised Version
has been very largely influenced by the Genevan Bible,
which, in that part of the Old Testament not translated by
Tyndale, was the most thorough and satisfactory of all the
earlier versions. The rendering of some words in Gen. iii.
7, “ and made themselves breeches,” has given to the Gene-
van translation the name by which it is popularly known,
the “Breeches Bible.” One peculiarity strikes the reader
at once, and points to a writer much followed by the trans-
lators. This is the Orthography of the Hebrew proper names,
which not only frequently appear in a dress novel to the
English reader, but also have an accent to mark the original
pronunciation. Thus we find Iaakāb, Izhák, Zidkiáh, Hábel,
Rahél, Heuáh (Eve). This peculiarity was derived from
Pagninus, whose translation, remarkable for literal fidelity,
had very great weight with the Genevan translators. Dr.
Westcott examines minutely the variation of this version
from the Great Bible in several portions of the Old Testa-
ment, and proves that most of the changes were made in the
interests of literalness of translation; that many are traceable
Peculiarities of Language. I65
to Pagninus, some to the Latin versions of Münster and Leo
Juda, and to the French Bible; and that in the Apocryphal
Books the Genevan version was much influenced by a French
translation by Beza. The Apocryphal Books in this version
require special notice. In the earlier English Bibles the
translation of these books was based on the Latin, either
directly or through the intervention of other versions. Thus
in Tobit i., ii., iii., the narrative was given in the third per-
son, as in the Latin Bible; in the Greek text the first person
is mainly used, and accordingly we find this person in
the Authorised Version. This important change of text
was made by the Genevan translators. The Prayer of
Manasses, given by Rogers and in the Great Bible, is here
omitted.
The language of the Genevan version does not present
much difficulty to the reader of the present day. Sometimes
we find words which have a more modern look than those
of the Authorised Version, as excommunicate, amity, hurdy-
Čurčy, $747 geon, empire, several other words are strange, or
are used in a peculiar sense, as quadrin (Mark xii. 42),
chapman, improve (reprove), frai! (basket), grenne (gin),
commodity (Rom. xiii. 16), grieces (Acts xxi. 40). On this
subject the reader may find much interesting information
in a little book entitled English Æefraced (Cambridge, 1862).
To the great and deserved popularity of the Genevan
Bible we have already referred. The times were favourable
to its success. No one can forget the incident which
occurred on the day of Elizabeth's coronation, when the
City of London presented the young Queen with an English
Bible. Elizabeth thanked the City for their “goodly gift,”
kissed the sacred book, and promised she would “diligently
read therein.” The people saw in this the symbol of the
restoration of the Scriptures to their rightful place of autho-
rity; and though many expectations were disappointed, yet
I66 The English Bible.
from that day the English Bible has been free. In 1559
Elizabeth repeated the injunctions issued by Edward VI.,
that every parish should provide “one whole Bible of the
largest volume in English,” together with the paraphrases of
Erasmus. It was ordered that inquiry should be made
whether any “parsons, vicars, or curates did discourage any
person from reading any part of the Bible.”
The expense of the publication of the Genevan Bible
was borne by the English community in that city. In 1561
Bodley obtained from the Queen a patent for the exclusive
printing of this version during seven years. In the same
year he published an edition in folio at Geneva. In the
course of Elizabeth's reign as many as seventy editions of
the Genevan Bible and thirty of the New Testament, in all
sizes from folio to 48mo, some in black letter and others in
the Ordinary character, were issued from the press. A few
of these were printed abroad, but the large majority at home.
In 1578 were added, by Robert F. Herry, “two right pro-
fitable and fruitful concordances, or large and ample Tables
alphabetical.” This two-fold Index, explanatory of difficult
words and proper names, and also serving as a guide to
important passages, was often bound up with the later
editions, to the great advantage of the readers. In 1579
appeared the first Bible printed in Scotland, a folio volume,
“printed by Alexander Arbuthnot, Printer to the King's
Majestie.”
Amongst the editions of the Genevan Testament referred
to above are included those of a revision by Lawrence
Tomson, first published in 1576. Tomson was secretary to
Sir Francis Walsingham, then Secretary of State; an inscrip-
tion on a marble tablet in Chertsey Church celebrates his
knowledge of twelve languages and the excellence of his
character. On the very title-page of his Testament Tomson
professes his obligations to, or rather dependence upon,
Tomson's Revision. 167
Beza, whose annotations he reproduces to a very consider-
able extent. The text, however, is not much altered, and
the chief characteristic of this edition is the large extent of
the commentary in the margin. This revision passed
through many editions, and was not unfrequently substituted
for the Testament of 1560 in issues of the Genevan Bible,
CHAPTER XII.
THE BISHOPs’ BIBLE.
DURING the early part of Elizabeth's reign, the English Scrip-
tures were circulated mainly in two versions. Four editions,
indeed, of Tyndale's Testament are assigned to the years
1561, 1566, 1570, but it does not appear that the Bibles of
Coverdale, Taverner, or Matthew were reprinted after 1553;
hence the Great Bible and the Genevan Bible, the versions
associated with Archbishop Cranmer and with the Puritan
exiles, were left in possession of the field. The former
alone had any authority or ecclesiastical influence on its
side, but the latter was the household Bible of England.
For some years new editions of Cranmer's version continued
to appear. Eight in all are known to have been published
in this reign—together, it is said, with one New Testament
of the same version, for printing which without license the
printer, Richard Harrison, was fined eight shillings. One
of these Bibles, printed at Rouen in 1566, at the cost
of R. Carmarden, is especially noted as a fine specimen of
typography.
This state of things could not continue. It could not
be expected that the Genevan version (with its body of
notes, which reflected the views of one particular school
of theology, and which were not always guarded in expres-
sion) would receive such official sanction as to displace the
Great Bible ; and, on the other hand, the manifest supe-
riority of the later translation, joined with its great
popularity, made it impossible to restore Cranmer's Bible
The “Bishops' Bible” Projected. I69
to its former position. Matthew Parker, the celebrated
Archbishop of Canterbury, consecrated in 1559, resolved
on undertaking a revised translation, upon a plan similar to
that which Cranmer had tried (though without success) in
1542. Letters collected in the volume of the Parker corre-
spondence, published by the Parker Society, contain much
interesting information respecting the archbishop's design.
In 1566 he writes to Sir W. Cecil, stating that he has
“ distributed the Bible in parts to divers men,” and express-
ing a hope that Cecil will undertake the revision of some
“one epistle of St. Paul, or Peter, or James.” As early as
December, 1565, we find a letter from Parkhurst, Bishop of
Norwich, acknowledging the receipt of the portion which
had been assigned to him—five of the Apocryphal books.
About the same time, Geste, Bishop of Rochester, writes,
returning the Book of Psalms revised, and expressing a
hope that the archbishop will excuse his “rude handling of
the Psalms.” This modest description of his work is not
far from the truth. “I have not altered the translation,” he
says, “but where it giveth occasion of an error, as in the
first Psalm, at the beginning, I turn the preterperfect tense
into the present tense, because the sense is too hard in the
preterperfect tense. Where in the New Testament one
piece of a Psalm is reported, I translate it in the Psalm
according to the translation thereof in the New Testament,
for the avoiding of the offence that may rise to the people
upon diverse translations.” Sandys, Bishop of Worcester
(father of the poet, George Sandys), writes on the 6th of
February, 1566, announcing that he has completed his
portion (Kings and Chronicles); he adds a criticism on
the Great Bible—that Münster had been followed too much
by the translators. Davies, Bishop of St. David's, writes
that he received the archbishop's letter of December 6th,
1565, towards the close of the following February, and the
17o The English Bible.
“piece of the Bible" (Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Samuel)
a week later | He was at the same time engaged, with
William Salisbury and Thomas Huatt, upon the first Welsh
translation of the New Testament, which was published in
1567. A letter from Cox, Bishop of Ely, who was intrusted
with the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the
Romans, shows a just appreciation of the magnitude of the
task on which Parker had ventured. “I would wish,” he
adds, “that such usual words that we English people be
acquainted with might still remain in their form and sound,
so far forth as the Hebrew will well bear. Inkhorn terms
to be avoided. The translation of the verbs in the Psalms
to be used uniformly in one tense, &c.; and if ye translate
ãonitas or misericordia, to use it likewise in all places of the
Psalms, &c.” On the 5th of October, 1568, Parker writes
to Cecil, sending at the same time a copy of the completed
work, to be presented to the Queen. “Because I would,”
he says to Cecil, “you knew all, I here send you a note to
signify who first travailed in the divers books, though after
them some other perusing was had ; the letters of their
names be partly affixed in the end of their books, which
I thought a policy to shew them, to make them more dili-
gent, as answerable for their doings. I have remembered
you of such observations as my first letters sent to them (by
your advice) did signify.” The rules for the revisers here
referred to were the following:—“First, to follow the com-
mon English translation used in the churches, and not to
recede from it but where it varieth manifestly from the
Hebrew or Greek original. Item, to use sections and
divisions in the text as Pagnine in his translation useth, and
for the verity of the Hebrew to follow the said Pagnine and
Munster specially, and generally others learned in the tongues.
Item, to make no bitter notes upon any text, or yet to set
down any determination in places of controversy. Item, to
Allotment of the Books. 171
note such chapters and places as contain matter of genea-
logies, or other such places not edifying, with some strike or
note, that the reader may eschew them in his public reading.
Item, that all such words as sound in the old translation to
any offence of lightness or obscenity, be expressed with more
convenient terms and phrases.”
It is a matter of greater difficulty to determine with
exactness who were the revisers of the several books. The
letter just quoted contains a list, and at the end of some
books in the new Bible are initials which can be identified
with more or less certainty. Unfortunately the list does not
always agree with the initials; but the discrepancy may
perhaps be explained by the archbishop's statement
that some books passed through the hands of more than
one reviser. From the list we learn that Parker himself
undertook Genesis, Fxodus, the first two Gospels, and the
Pauline Epistles, with the exception of Romans and
I Corinthians. Leviticus and Numbers were revised at
Canterbury, probably by A. Pierson, to whom Job and
Proverbs also seem to have been committed. Deuteronomy
was placed in the hands of Alley, Bishop of Exeter. At the
end of the Psalter are the initials T. B., supposed to indi-
cate Thomas Bacon, a prebend of Canterbury. Ecclesiastes
and Canticles fell to the lot of A. Perne, Dean of Ely. The
earlier Apocryphal books were revised by Bishop Barlow;
Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Lamentations by Horne, Bishop of
Winchester; 'Ezekiel and Daniel by Bentham, Bishop of
Lichfield and Coventry; the Minor Prophets by Grindal,
Bishop of London. The third and fourth Gospels seem to
have been committed to Scambler, Bishop of Peterborough ;
I Corinthians to Goodman, Dean of Westminster; the
General Epistles and the Book of Revelation to Bullingham,
Bishop of Lincoln. The remaining books have already
been referred to in connexion with their respective revisers.
I72 . The English Bible.
The above particulars are not free from doubt, but they are
probably not far from the truth. It will be observed that
most of the contributors were bishops, hence this version is
commonly known as the Bishops' Bible. Archbishop
Parker, in reserving for himself so large a proportion of the
books of Scripture, some of these remarkable for their
difficulty, was no doubt sure of obtaining efficient co-opera-
tion in his work. The memory of one scholar, Lawrence
(possibly the Thomas Lawrence who was head-master of
Shrewsbury School from 1568 to 1583), is preserved by
Strype in his account of this version. Lawrence, who was
famed for his knowledge of Greek, sent to the archbishop
“notes of errors in the translation of the New Testament.”
These notes relate to nearly thirty passages of the New
Testament, almost all taken from the first three Gospels. It
has been generally supposed that the criticisms refer to the
earlier translations, and hence Lawrence has been classed
amongst the objectors whose complaints led to the scheme
for a new version. Upon examination, however, it will
be found that the renderings on which he comments belong,
without exception, to the first edition of the Bishops' Bible
itself; some, indeed, are not found in any other version at
all. These criticisms belong, therefore, to a later date.
The preparation of this version appears to have ex-
tended over three or four years. The letter accompanying
the splendid copy which was presented to the Queen bears
date October 5, 1568. The Bible itself had no dedication.
On the title-page are no other words than “The Holie
Bible,” with a quotation from Rom. i. 16. In the centre
is a portrait of the Queen, and at the commencement of
Joshua and the Psalter are introduced portraits of the Earl
of Leicester, and of Cecil (Lord Burleigh). Prefixed to
the book we find a sum of the whole Scripture, a table of
genealogy, a table of the books of the Old Testament, with
A Second Edźſion. I73
tables of lessons and psalms, an almanac and calendar, two
prologues, a chronological table, and the table of contents;
woodcuts, maps, and other tables are also introduced into
the volume. The second of these prologues is Cranmer's,
taken from the Great Bible. The first is written by Parker
himself, and mainly consists of a defence of translations of
the Bible, and an earnest exhortation to all to search the
Scriptures : the design and plan of the new version are
also briefly explained. There is also a preface to the New
Testament from the archbishop's hand. At the end of the
volume is the name of the printer, John Jugge, and the last
page is adorned with a woodcut representing a pelican feed-
ing her young with her blood, and a Latin couplet on this
symbol of our Saviour's love.
A second edition, in a small quarto volume, was issued
in 1569; a third of the Bible and an edition of the New
Testament followed in 1570, 1571. In 1571 Convocation
ordered that every archbishop and bishop should have a
copy of this version, “ of the largest volume,” in his house,
“to be placed in the hall or the large dining-room, that it
might be useful to their servants, or to strangers;” also that
a copy should be placed in every cathedral, and, as far as
possible, in every church.
The criticisms of Lawrence referred to above may have
been the occasion of a new revision of the work. However
this may be, it is certain that the edition published in 1572
contains a corrected translation of the New Testament, in
which nearly all the improvements suggested by Lawrence
are found in the text. In all, about thirty editions of this
version appear to have been published, almost all of these
containing the whole Bible. There are some singular differ-
ences of text and many other variations in the several edi-
tions. The edition of 1572, for example, contains two
translations of the Psalter in parallel columns—one properly
*-
I74 The English Bible.
belonging to the version, the other taken from the Great
Bible. Other editions—those of 1575, 1595, for instance—
contain only the latter version of the Psalms. Sometimes
Parker's preface is omitted, so that Cranmer's stands alone,
giving to a hasty reader the impression that he has before
him a copy of the Great Bible. The last edition of the
Bishops' Bible bears the date 1608.
As to the character of the translation very different
views have been held. As the Genevan version and the
Bishops' Bible represented widely different ecclesiastical
opinions and sympathies, we can hardly wonder that many
a critic has given a partisan's opinion instead of a sober
judgment. We are, moreover, confronted by a difficulty
which no earlier version has presented. The revision was
intrusted to many hands ; each reviser seems to have acted
independently, and the Superintendence exercised by the
archbishop and others could not possibly render uniform
the results of the separate action of many minds. The
version must therefore be examined in various parts ; one
book cannot be taken as representing others. It need
hardly be said that the basis of the translation is the Great
Bible; a glance is sufficient to make this certain. The
merits of the Genevan Bible are so great, that, without
losing sight of the Hebrew and Greek scholarship of the
revisers, or of the aids which they (in common with the
Genevan translators) possessed and used, we may be con-
tent to try the Bishops' Bible in most instances by one
simple test—how far have the revisers of the Great Bible
availed themselves of the corrections and the improvements
which are found in the Genevan version P Less could
scarcely be expected than that those changes which were
real improvements, and which could be adopted without
sacrificing the style and Spirit of the older translation,
should be taken into the text.
Estimate of the Bishops' Bible. I 75
In Numb. xxiv. 15–24 the Bishops' Bible agrees in
almost every point with Cranmer's. In verse 15 we read
the plural (eyes are offen) instead of the singular ; in the next
verse, “falleth with open eyes” is changed into “falleth,
and his eyes are opened ; ” and in verse 24 “Chittim” is
retained in the place of the doubtful interpretation “Italy,”
adopted in the Great Bible. Two of these are changes for
the better, but, on the other hand, five or six clear improve-
ments introduced by the translators of the Genevan version
are passed over here. 2 Sam. xxiii. I-7 is a passage of
considerable difficulty, and has given great trouble to trans-
lators, ancient and modern. In these seven verses the
Bishops' and the Great Bible differ about eighteen times.
Fifteen of the new renderings in the former version are
taken from the Genevan Bible. Of the eighteen changes,
thirteen may be called improvements; with one exception
they are derived from the Genevan Bible, from which also
come two changes which are clearly for the worse. About
twelve better renderings found in the Genevan Bible are
here neglected. In I Kings xix., which is a fair specimen
of a chapter of the historical books, the Bishops' Bible can
hardly be distinguished from Cranmer's. In fourteen verses
of the twenty-one there is no difference whatever, and in
the remaining seven the discrepancy does not average as
much as two words in a verse. The chief variations are in
verse 6, where we read “a cake baken on the coals' for
“a loaf of broiled bread ;” and in verse 15, where “that
thou mayest anoint” is rightly changed into “and when thou
comest there anoint.” For these two corrections the re-
viser was indebted to the Genevan Bible ; but more than
twenty emendations which the same version suggested he
has left unnoticed. In two difficult verses (12, 13) of
Isa. xliv, in which the Genevan Bible departs from Cran-
mer's at least twenty times (and usually for the better), the
176 The English Bible.
Bishops' Bible agrees with Cranmer's as far as the last word,
which is “house * instead of “temple.” In Prov. viii.
22–35, not more than six words of the Bishops' Bible differ
from Cranmer's, and in Eccles. xii. not more than twelve,
though in each chapter the Genevan Bible contains some
useful corrections. On the other hand, in Job xix. there
are few verses of the Great Bible which have not been
altered in the revision. Verses 25, 26, for example, stand
thus in Cranmer's Bible: “For I am sure that my Re-
deemer liveth, and that I shall rise out of the earth in the
latter day; that I shall be clothed again with this skin, and
see God in my flesh.” In the Bishops' Bible of 1568 we
read : “For I am sure that my Redeemer liveth, and that
he shall raise up at the latter day them that lie in the dust ;
and though after my skin the worms destroy this body, yet
shall I see God in my flesh.” This passage, it may be re-
marked, illustrates clearly the variations in the different
editions of the Bishops' Bible. The folios of 1568 and
1575, for example, read as above ; the quarto of 1569 and
the folio of 1595 go back in all important respects to the
reading of the Great Bible, the other translation of verse 26
being placed in the margin. The remarkable rendering
in verse 25 is new ; the changes in verse 26 are from the
Genevan Bible.
The conclusion from this investigation is not very favour-
able to the Bishops' Bible. In the Old Testament, it is
clear, Cranmer's Bible was too closely followed, and im-
provements which were ready to the hand of the translators
were not appreciated. What is original in this version does
not often possess any great merit; nor does it appear that
the revision of 1572 produced much effect in the Old
Testament.
When we come to consider the New Testament, it is
more important to distinguish between the two editions of
Criticisms by Lawrence. 177
the Bishops' Bible. Lawrence's criticisms, already spoken
of, bring before us some thirty passages which stood in need
of correction. All the renderings to which Lawrence raised
objection are to be found in the first edition of the Bishops'
Bible : his corrections, with the exception of One, are almost
literally adopted in the revision of 1572. In two or three
instances the faulty rendering is found in the Bishops' Bible
alone; thus in Matt. xxi. 33 we read “made a vineyard,”
where almost all other versions rightly have “planted ; ” and
in Col. ii. 13 we find “dead to sin, and to the uncircum-
cision of your flesh.” The latter is so serious a mistake,
both as a translation of the Greek and in the sense Con-
veyed, that charity would require us to regard it as a mis-
print if the preposition “to " were not repeated. In most
of the passages the renderings to which Lawrence takes
exception are simply retained from the Great Bible and
other early versions. Lawrence's criticisms are very in-
teresting, and in most points unquestionably just. We owe
to him several readings in our present Bibles—for example,
armies in Matt. xxii. 7 ; besides (instead of with) in Matt.
xxv. 20; seize upon in Matt. xxi. 38 (Lawrence's suggestion
was, “take possession or seisin upon his inheritance”);
&ramble bush (instead of bush or bushes) in Luke vi. 44.
The last words of Mark xv. 3, “but he answered nothing,”
were introduced at his suggestion from the Greek text of
Stephens (1546); this clause, however, is probably not
genuine.
In judging of the merits of the translation of the New
Testament, we must take the version in its corrected form,
as it appeared in 1572. The verdict of the student will
vary according to the portion which he is examining. Again
and again he will wonder at the retention of an early
rendering which had been corrected by a later translator, or
the preference shown for a roundabout phrase (such render-
M
178 The English Biffle.
ings as “when he had gone a little farther he,” &c., instead
of “he went a little farther, and,” &c., are especially common
in the Bishops' Bible); but he will meet with many proofs of
close study of the original text, and an earnest desire to
represent it with all faithfulness to the English reader. Dr.
Westcott's comment on the translation of Eph. iv. 7–16 (a
very difficult section) will show how much merit is possessed
by some portions, at least, of the Bishops' Bible. Having
pointed out that in this section the Great Bible and the
Bishops’ differ in twenty-six places, he adds: “Of these
twenty-six variations no less than sixteen are new, while
only ten are due to the Genevan version, and the character
of the original corrections marks a very close and thoughtful
revision, based faithfully upon the Greek. The anxiously
literal rendering of the particles and prepositions is specially
worthy of notice; so too the observance of the order and .
of the original form of the sentences, even where some
obscurity follows from it. In four places the Authorised
Version follows the Bishops' renderings; and only one
change appears to be certainly for the worse, in which the
rendering of the Genevan Testament has been followed.
The singular independence of the revision, as compared
with those which have been noticed before, is shown by the
fact that only four of the new changes agree with Beza, and
at least nine are definitely against him.” The same writer
compares the two chief editions of the Bishops' Bible
throughout the Epistle to the Ephesians. The changes
amount to nearly fifty, and among the new readings are
some phrases most familiar to us all, as “less than the least
of all Saints,” “middle wall of partition,” “fellow-citizens
with the saints.”
The marginal notes in the Bishops' Bible consist of
alternative renderings, references to similar passages, and
comments explanatory of the text. The comments are
Marginal AVožes. I79
much less numerous here than in the Genevan Bible. They
are very unevenly distributed. On the first five chapters of
Job, for example, there are (in the edition of 1575) more
than fifty notes, a larger number than we find on the whole
book of Isaiah, with its sixty-six chapters. The Epistle to
the Romans contains nearly seventy explanatory notes, in
the place of the 250 of the Genevan Bible: a few, perhaps
a dozen, of the Genevan annotations are retained in the
Bishops' Bible. It is curious to notice the difference in the
passages chosen for explanation in the two versions. Some-
times it is a rendering of the Genevan Bible that calls forth
the remark in this. Thus in Rom. viii. 6 the Genevan
translators read “the wisdom of the flesh.” The note in the
Bishops' Bible is as follows: “@povoſori and ºppóvmua,
Greek words, do not so much signify wisdom and prudence
as affection, Carefulness, and minding of anything.” A
little lower down there is a curious note on another Greek
word. In verse 18, where we now read “I reckon,” the
Bishops' Bible has “I am certainly persuaded.” The note
runs thus: “Aoytºopal signifieth to weigh or to consider;
but because the matter was certain, and St. Paul nothing
doubted thereof, it is thus made : I am persuaded.” Where
an uncommon word is used in the text, the translator some-
times adds a short note on its meaning. Thus in Rom. xi.
8, where we now read “the spirit of slumber,” this version
has “the spirit of remorse,” the last word being explained
as “pricking and unquietness of conscience.” In Isa.
lxvi. 3 we read, “he that killeth a sheep for me Anetoheth a
dog,” with a note which certainly cannot be considered
superfluous: “That is, cutteth off a dog's neck.”
The general tendency and character of the Bishops'
Bible are perhaps shown most clearly in the Apocryphal
books. Strange to say, the Great Bible is followed here
also, though representing the Latin and not the Greek text.
IM 2
I8O The English Bible.
The precedent of the Genevan Bible, therefore, is entirely
neglected, as a glance at the beginning of Tobit, or Esther,
or at the fourth chapter of Judith, is sufficient to prove. As
in the Genevan version, however, the comments on the
Apocrypha are very scanty. The Prayer of Manasses is
restored to its former position between the additions to Daniel
and the First Book of Maccabees.
Copies of the two chief editions of the Bishops' Bible
will be found in many libraries, as, for instance, those
of the British Museum and the Universities of Oxford
and Cambridge. The inferior editions are frequently to
be met with.
CHAPTER XIII.
THE RHEIMS AND DOUAI BIBLE.
HITHERTO our history has mainly recorded the efforts made
by earnest reformers of the Church to diffuse throughout
England the knowledge of the Scriptures. The opposition
to these endeavours has proceeded from the Church of Rome,
and has at times been as successful as it has been intense.
Fifty years have not elapsed since the time when Tyndale's
Testaments were burned at St. Paul's Cross, and now an
English version of the New Testament is offered to the
Romanists themselves, with the sanction of an authority
which none could dispute. This version bears the following
title: “The New Testament of Iesus Christ, translated
faithfully into English out of the authentical Latin, according
to the best corrected copies of the same, diligently conferred
with the Greeke and other editions in divers languages:
with argvments of bookes and chapters, Annotations, and
other necessarie helpes, for the better vnderstanding of the
text, and specially for the discouerie of the Corrvptions of
diuers late translations, and for cleering the Controversies
in religion of these daies. In the English College of
Rhemes. Psalm II8.* . . . That is, Giue me vnder-
standing and I will searche thy law, and will keepe it with
my whole hart. S. Aug. tract 2, in Epist. Ioan. . . . .
that is, Al things that are readde in holy Scriptures, we must
heare with great attention, to our instruction and saluation :
* This verse and the quotation from Augustine which follows are
given in both Latin and English.
I82 The English Bible.
but those things specially must be commended to memorie,
which make most against Heretikes : whose deceites cease
not to circumuent and beguile al the weaker sort and the
more negligent persons. Printed at Rhemes by Iohn Fogny.
I582. Cum privilegio.”
The translation of the Old Testament was not published
until 1609, 16Io, though finished long before. The title is
similar to that of the New Testament, “Doway,” how-
ever, being substituted for Rheims; the text on the title-
page is Isaiah xii. 3, “You shall draw waters in joy
out of the Saviour's fountains.” The work was printed
at Doway by Lawrence Kellam at the “sign of the Holy
Lamb.”
The Romish College at Douai was one of the “English
Colleges beyond the seas,” founded with the object of
Organising missionary work in England. William Allen,
through whose efforts the college was founded, was a man
of learning and of untiring energy. In Mary's reign he was
Principal of St. Mary’s Hall, Oxford, and Canon of York;
Soon after the accession of Elizabeth he left England, and
for a quarter of a century was the mainspring of the move-
ment for the restoration of England to communion with
Rome. He was made Cardinal by Sixtus V., in 1587. In
consequence of the disturbed condition of the country the
college was (in 1578) removed to Rheims for a time. One
of the early students at Douai was Gregory Martin, formerly
fellow of St. John's College, Oxford, who afterwards became
teacher of Hebrew and reader of divinity in the College at
Rheims. It is probable that the “Rhemish Testament »
and the “Douay Bible” owe their origin to Allen, but that
the translation was mainly executed by Martin. Besides
Allen, three other English scholars, graduates of Oxford, are
said to have been associated with Martin in the work—Dr.
J. Reynolds, Dr. Briston, or Bristol, and Dr. Worthington.
Translated from the Vulgate. I83
The last two are supposed to have contributed the notes,
which are an essential part of this version.
The preface to the Rhemish Testament is an elaborate
and ingenious document. The translators are at no pains
to conceal that their motive in undertaking the work was the
extensive circulation of other versions of the Scriptures.
Not content with translating truly, they “ have also set forth
large Annotations” to help the studious reader embarrassed
by the controversies of the times. The text which they
follow is not the Greek, but the “old vulgar Latin” used
in the Church for 1,300 years, corrected by St. Jerome
according to the Greek, commended by St. Augustine, de-
clared by the holy Council of Trent to be of all versions the
only “authentical,” preferred even by adversaries such as
Beza, so exact in representing the Greek that “delicate
heretics” have pronounced it rude, shown to be impartial
by the fact that even the versions of Erasmus and others
are more to the advantage of the Catholic cause than this
ancient Bible of the Church. The Latin (they say) is found
to agree either with other manuscripts of the Greek or with
the reading of ancient Fathers of the Church. Whilst, how-
ever, the translation is from the Latin, the Greek text is not
to be disregarded : the reader will often find the Greek word
(also the Latin word) placed in the margin when the sense
is hard or the reading ambiguous. The peculiarities of this
version, therefore, result partly from the use of the Vulgate
as a basis, and partly from the principles by which the trans-
lators were guided in their work.
We must keep in mind that the Vulgate is really not
one book, but a combination of several. The Old Testa-
ment, with the exception of the Psalter, is a translation from
the Hebrew, executed by Jerome about the end of the
fourth century. The Psalter is a revision (by Jerome) of a
much older translation, made not from the Hebrew, but
I84 The English Bible.
from the Septuagint. The Apocryphal Books also mainly
belong to the same early version, revised and corrected in
part. The Old Latin version of the New Testament probably
dates from the beginning of the second century; the New
Testament of the Vulgate consists of this older translation,
revised with care in the Gospels, but imperfectly in the
Epistles. In the Psalms, therefore, a translation from the
Vulgate presents the Original at fourth hand, so to speak,
the Hebrew having passed into a Greek version (often of
very inferior quality), the Greek into a Latin, before the
translation into English commenced. On the other hand,
Jerome's own work is of great excellence. We may expect,
therefore, that any correct reproduction of the Vulgate in
English will be very faulty and imperfect in the Book of
Psalms, but usually good and true in the greater part of the
Old Testament. In the New Testament the case is more
complicated. The Latin translation, being derived from
manuscripts more ancient than any we now possess, is
frequently a witness of the highest value in regard to the
Greek text which was current in the earliest times, and (as
was remarked in an earlier chapter) its testimony is in many
cases confirmed by Greek manuscripts which have been
discovered or examined since the sixteenth century. Hence
we may expect to find that the Rhemish New Testament
frequently anticipates the judgment of later scholars as to
the presence or absence of certain words, clauses, or even
verses. Thus in Acts xvi. 7, there is now overwhelming
evidence for reading “the Spirit of Jesus suffered them
not ; ” in Matt. v. 44, the words “bless them that curse you,
do good to them that hate you,” and the words “which
despitefully use you and,” should be omitted from the text,
having found their way into later manuscripts from St. Luke's
Gospel; and in I Peter iii. 15 we must read “Lord Christ”
instead of “Lord God.” In these and many other instances
Foreign Words retained. 185
the Rhemish Testament agrees with the best critical editions
of the present day. There are, no doubt, many examples
of a different kind, such as the reading “ by good works make
your calling and election sure” (2 Peter i. Io); but on the
whole, the influence of the use of the Vulgate would in the
New Testament be more frequently for good than for harm
in respect of text. As a translation the Vulgate is, as a rule,
literal and faithful, but often obscure; a correct reproduc-
tion of the Vulgate will reflect these qualities, and this the
Rhemish Testament certainly does. If, however, we allow
that this version faithfully represents the Latin, it must be
understood that it is the Latin as current in the time of the
translators. Even then it was acknowledged that the com-
mon copies of the Vulgate differed widely from Jerome's
text, and the need of a new examination of manuscripts was
felt as early as the Council of Trent. It was not until 1587
and 1592 that the authorised editions of the Vulgate
appeared, and these were very far from supplying the want.
We come now to the consideration of the principles
of action adopted by the translators. Having the Latin
text before them, how did they deal with it? The answer
may be given in few words: the translation is literal and
(as a rule, if not always) scrupulously faithful and exact,
but disfigured by a profusion of unfamiliar and Latinised
words, which convey no meaning whatever to the ordinary
English reader. The last peculiarity strikes the eye at
the first opening of the volume. The translators argue
skilfully in defence of their practice. If (they ask) such
words as Raca, Hosanna, and Belial be retained, why not
Corbana (for treasury, Matt. xxvii. 6)? If Sabbath is kept
for the seventh day, why not Parasceue for the Sabbath-
eve P If Pentecost is a proper word, what objection is
there to Pascha for Passover, Azymes for sweet (i.e., un-
leavened) bread, bread of proposition for shew-bread P If
I86 The English Bible.
proselyte and phylacteries be allowed, why not neophyte
and didragmes P. It is not possible, they maintain, to
avoid the word evange/ise, for no word can convey its
meaning ; and for the same reason they use “depositum ”
in I Tim. vi. 20 ; “He exinanited himself” in Phil. ii. 7 ;
“to exhaust the sins of many ” in Heb. ix. 28. A table
containing the explanation of fifty-eight words is given at
the end of the book. Some of these words are now
farmiliar to all : acquisition, victim, prescience, grafis, allegory,
adulterate, advent, resuscitate, co-operate ; others, as commes-
sation, contristate, prefinition, are strangers still. Others
are still in use, but not in the sense here assigned. Thus
ca/umniate does not now denote “violent oppression by
word or deed,” nor is prevarication equivalent to “trans-
gression,” nor is issue limited to a “good event.” But
this list does not by any means do justice to the peculiar
vocabulary of the Rhemish translators, as the following
quotations will prove : “He will shew you a great refectory
adorned " (Luke xxii. 12); “I will not drink of the
generation of the vine" (ver. 18); “sleeping for pensive-
ness” (ver. 45); “transfer this chalice” (ver 42); “averting
the people’’ (xxiii. 14); “adjudged their petition to be
done” (ver. 24); “wrapped it in sindon” (ver. 53); “society
of his passions” (Phil. iii. Io). To say nothing of words
now well known (as altercation, fallacy, primacy, demureness,
confume/ious), we find many other Latin words disguised,
or hardly disguised, such as odible, coinquination, acception,
correption, exprobraſe, poſestaſes, longanämääy, offsecration, sceno-
pégia. The translation of some verses in the Epistle to
the Ephesians will illustrate at once the Latinised diction
and the excessive literalness of this version : “To me
the least of al the sainctes is giuen this grace, among
the Gentils to euangelize the vnsearcheable riches of Christ,
and to illuminate al men what is the dispensation of the
Fidelity of the Version. 187
sacrament hidden from worlds in God, who created al
things : that the manifold wisedom of God may be notified
to the Princes and Potestats in the celestials by the Church,
according to the prefinition of worlds, which he made in
Christ Jesus our Lord ; ” “Our wrestling is not against
flesh and bloud : but against Princes and Potestats, against
the rectors of the world of this darkenes, against the
spirituals of wickednes in the celestials.”
On the other hand, the translator's care strictly to follow
the text before him often led to happy results, the pre-
servation of a significant phrase of the original, or of an
impressive arrangement of words. Thus every translator
would now agree with this version in the words, “liberty
of the glory of the children of God” (Rom. viii. 21);
“holiness of the truth” (Eph. iv. 24); “by their fruits
you shall know them " (Matt. vii. 16). If we turn to
any chapter of the Gospels we shall find examples of
excellent translation, which in some cases have been
followed by our Authorised Version. In Matt. xxv., for
example, the translation in ver. 8, “our lamps are going
out,” is unquestionably correct ; in verses 17, 18, 20, 22,
the article should certainly be inserted, the five, the favo,
in verse 21, “place thee" is much better than “make
thee ruler ; ” and in verse 27, “bankers,” if a somewhat
bold rendering, is more intelligible than “exchangers.”
It is from the Rhemish Testament that the Authorised
Version obtains “blessed” in Matt. xxvi. 26 (for “gave
thanks”); “hymn " in verse 30 ; “adjure” in verse 63 ;
and it would have been well if our translators had also
adopted “court” in verse 3, and “Rabbi” in verses 25
and 49. In the first chapter of St. James we owe to
the Rhemish version “upbraideth not ” (verse 5), “nothing
doubting” (verse 6), “the engrafted word” (verse 21),
“bridleth not ” (verse 26). If three chapters, taken by
I 88 The English Bible.
accident, yield such results, the reader will not doubt
that very many examples of the same description might
be produced. Nothing is easier than to accumulate
instances of the eccentricity of this version, of its obscure
and inflated renderings; but only minute study can do
justice to its faithfulness, and to the care with which the
translators executed their work. Every other English
version is to be preferred to this, if it must be taken as
a whole; no other English version will prove more in-
structive to the student who will take the pains to separate
what is good and useful from what is ill-advised and wrong.
The marginal notes which are added by the translators
from time to time prove that they kept the Greek text
before them, though translating from the Latin. Sometimes
this saves them from mistake, as in Phil. iv. 6, where
the Latin might mean “in all prayer,” but the Greek must
signify “in everything by prayer.” The most remarkable
proof of their use of the Greek is their treatment of the
Greek article. As the Latin language has no definite
article, it might well be supposed that of all English
versions the Rhemish would be least accurate in this point
of translation. The very reverse is actually the case.
There are many instances (a comparatively hasty search
has discovered more than forty) in which, of all versions,
from Tyndale's to the Authorised inclusive, this alone is
correct in regard to the article. This is the more re-
markable, as the older versions were certainly known and
used by the translators of the Rhemish Testament. They
make no allusion in their preface to any indebtedness to
preceding translators, but of the fact there can be no
doubt. The comparison of any chapter with the trans-
lations in the Genevan and Bishop's Bibles will be sufficient
to convince the most incredulous. -
It is not necessary to say much on those peculiarities
Various Editions. I89
of this Testament which stand connected with the faith
professed by the translators. In a Roman Catholic version
we expect such renderings as do penance, Ariest (for elder),
sacrament (for mystery or secret); “Catholic usage” has also
led to the substitution of “Our Lord ” for “the Lord.”
There is but little, however, in the text to favour Romish
doctrine : it is in the notes that this is strenuously and per-
severingly taught. With these, differing widely from the
translation in their spirit and characteristics, we are happily
not concerned in this place. Elaborate confutations of the
teaching of these notes were published within a few years,
by W. Fulke in 1589, and T. Cartwright in 1618. In the
former work the Rhemish Version and that of the Bishops'
Bible are given in parallel Columns. Neither of these
writers appears to criticise the translation to any large
extent.
On the Douai Version of the Old Testament it will not
be necessary to dwell. As it was not published until 1610,
it does not belong (so to speak) to the line of ancestry of
our Authorised Version.
Editions of the New Testament appeared in 16oo, 1621,
1633, and of the whole Bible in 1635. In 1749, 1750, the
work was revised by Dr. Challoner; another revised edition,
by Dr. Troy, bears date 1791. The later editions differ
widely from the original version ; an interesting paper on
the variations will be found among the collected Essays of
the late Cardinal Wiseman.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE AUTHORISED WIERSION.
WHEN James I. succeeded to the throne in March, 1603, he
found the southern part of his dominions in a state of great
uneasiness and disquiet in consequence of the differences
between the Puritan party and their opponents in the Church
of England. One of the first events in his reign was the
presentation of the celebrated “Millenary Petition,” sub-
scribed by some hundreds of Puritans, praying for alterations
in the Church service, and for greater strictness in eccle-
siastical discipline. The king, by no means unwilling to
play the part of moderator, resolved to convoke an assembly,
in which the discordant opinions of the rival parties might
be stated, and be submitted to free discussion. Thus
originated the famous Hampton Court Conference, held on
the 14th, 15th, and 16th of January, I 604. We are not
here concerned with the petitions and arguments which
mainly occupied the hours of debate; our present interest
is in a question which was altogether subordinate at the
time, but which the event proved to be the most important
and the most fruitful of all the questions raised. At this
conference the Puritans were represented by Dr. Reynolds,
President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, Dr. Sparke,
Mr. Knewstubbs, and Mr. Chaderton ; the opposite party
by Whitgift, Archbishop of Canterbury, Bancroft, Bishop of
London, seven other bishops, and five deans. An account
of the sum and substance of the conference, written by Dr.
Barlow, Dean of Chester, is our chief authority for the
proceedings of this assembly.
A Wew Translation asked for. I9 I
In the course of the second day, Dr. Reynolds “moved
his Majesty that there might be a new translation of the
Bible, because those which were allowed in the reign of
King Henry VIII. and Edward VI. were corrupt, and not
answerable to the truth of the original. For example, first,
Gal. iv. 25, the Greek word ovo Touxet is not well translated,
as now it is ; bordereth neither expressing the force of the
word, nor the Apostle's sense, nor the situation of the place.
Secondly, Ps. cw. 28, “They were not obedient,’ the original
being, ‘They were not disobedient.’ Thirdly, Ps. cwi. 30,
* Then stood up Phinees and prayed ; the Hebrew hath
‘ executed judgment.’ To which motion there was, at the
present, no gainsaying, the objections being trivial and
old, and already in print, often answered ; only my lord of
London well added, that if every man's humour should be
followed, there would be no end of translating. Whereupon
his Highness wished that some special pains should be taken
in that behalf for one uniform translation (professing that he
could never yet see a Bible well translated in English, but
the worst of all his Majesty thought the Geneva to be), and
this to be done by the best learned in both the universities;
after them to be reviewed by the bishops and the chief learned
of the church; from them to be presented to the privy
council; and lastly to be ratified by his royal authority. And
so this whole church to be bound unto it and none other.
Marry, withal, he gave this caveat (upon a word cast out by
my lord of London), that no marginal notes should be added,
having found in them which are annexed to the Geneva
translation (which he saw in a book given him by an
English lady) some notes very partial, untrue, seditious,
and savouring too much of dangerous and traitorous
conceits. As, for example, the first chapter of Exodus,
and the nineteenth verse, where the marginal note
alloweth disobedience unto kings; and 2 Chron. xv. 16,
I92 The English Bible.
the note taxeth Asa for deposing his mother only, and
not killing her.”
It is not necessary to defend the Genevan Bible against
the royal critic. On the real excellence of the translation
enough has been said already, and the two notes quoted as
dangerous do not need any apology. The narrative well
illustrates the conflicting views of two parties, for the quota-
tions given by Dr. Reynolds are from the Great Bible and
the Bishops' Bible, and in each case the rendering is cor-
rected in the Genevan Version. On the one side, therefore,
the Genevan Bible is the standard by which the translations
are tried ; on the other, the faults and the dangerous teach-
ing of this same version are taken as the ground for a new
translation.
It is not improbable that the scheme would have fallen
to the ground, had it not harmonised so completely with the
king's turn of mind and favourite pursuits. When Convo-
cation met, shortly after the conference, not a word appears
to have been said on the subject. A letter from the king to
Bancroft, dated July 22nd, 1604, gives us our earliest infor-
mation, but by this time the plans for the execution of the
work seem to have been completely arranged. The king
announces that he has chosen (chiefly, we may suppose, on
the nomination of the universities) fifty-four translators, to
meet in various companies at Westminster, Oxford and
Cambridge, under the presidency of the Dean of West-
minster and the two Hebrew Professors. Bancroft is re-
quired to take steps, in conjunction with the other bishops,
for providing the translators with church preferment in recom-
pense for their labours, and also for procuring from learned
men throughout the kingdom criticisms on the earlier trans-
lations, and suggestions on difficult passages. Other letters
like this bear testimony to the king's earnestness in the pro-
secution of the work. It is therefore not a little surprising
The Translators appointed. I93
to find that three years passed away before the com-
panies entered on their labours. The difficulty in providing
funds to meet necessary expenses, the death of Lively, the
Hebrew Professor at Cambridge, and probably of others
who had been selected as translators, were, no doubt,
amongst the obstacles which retarded the work.
The letter in which the king refers to the fifty-four trans-
lators contains no list of names, and no information from
other sources enables us to ascertain with exactness on
whom the choice had fallen. The lists we possess specify
no more than forty-seven. Whether the discrepancy arises
from the changes in the composition of the companies which
took place (through death or other causes) between 1604
and the completion of the work in 16 II, or whether the
list of fifty-four included bishops or other scholars, intrusted,
not with translation, but with the revision of the work of
the six companies, it is impossible to say.
When we inquire more particularly into the details of
the plan, other difficulties present themselves, which cannot
now be cleared up. The following account, however, derived
from the best authorities, may be relied on as generally
COrrect.
To the first company, which met at Westminster, were
assigned the books of the Old Testament, as far as 2 Kings.
At the head of this company was Dr. Launcelot Andrews,
celebrated equally for piety and for learning, then (1604)
Dean of Westminster, afterwards, in succession, Bishop of
Chichester, Ely, and Winchester. His coadjutors were
Dr. J. Overall, Dean of St. Paul's, and Professor of Divinity
at Cambridge, afterwards Bishop of Norwich ; Dr. A. de
Saravia (the friend of Hooker), a noted linguist; Dr. R.
Clark, Fellow of Christ's College, Cambridge; Dr. J. Lay-
field, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, said to have
been “skilled in architecture;” Dr. R. Teigh, called by
V N
I94 The English Bible.
Wood “an excellent textuary, and a profound linguist; ”
F. Burleigh ; G. King, afterwards Professor of Hebrew at
Cambridge; R. Thomson, known as “Dutch Thomson”
(from the land of his birth), said to have been “an admirable
philologist ;” and the celebrated William Bedwell, “the
principal Arabic scholar of his time.”
To the first Cambridge Company were intrusted the
books from 2 Chronicles to Ecclesiastes. This band con-
sisted of eight divines: Edward Lively, an eminent Oriental
scholar, Professor of Hebrew in the University from 158o
to his death, in 1605; Dr. Richardson, afterwards Master
of Trinity College; Dr. Laurence Chaderton (already spoken
of in connexion with the Hampton Court Conference), the
first Master of Emmanuel College, in which is preserved a
Hebrew Bible with his annotations, attesting his Rabbinical
learning; F. Dellingham, Fellow of Christ's College ; T.
Harrison, Vice-Master of Trinity College, noted for his
excellent knowledge of Hebrew and Greek; R. Andrews
(brother of the Bishop), afterwards Master of Jesus College;
R. Spalding, Lively's successor as Professor of Hebrew ;
A. Byng, who succeeded King in the same office. John
Boys, mentioned below, afterwards joined this company.
The third company met at Oxford, and had the honour-
able task of translating the prophetical books from Isaiah to
Malachi. At its head was Dr. J. Harding, President of
Magdalen College and Professor of Hebrew. With him
were associated Dr. Reynolds, President of Corpus Christi
College, a man of remarkable learning, by whose early
death (in 1607) the work which he was the first to suggest
suffered great loss; Dr. T. Holland, Rector of Exeter
College, formerly Professor of Divinity; Dr. R. Kilbye,
Rector of Lincoln College, afterwards Professor of Hebrew;
Dr. Miles Smith, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester, renowned
for his familiar knowledge of Hebrew, Syriac, and cognate
A/lotment of the Books. I95
languages; Dr. R. Brett, also noted for Oriental learning;
and R. Fairclough, Fellow of New College.
The Apocryphal books were translated by a fourth
Company, meeting at Cambridge. This company numbered
Seven scholars: Dr. J. Duport, Master of Jesus College;
Dr. W. Braithwaite, Deputy Margaret Professor of Divinity,
afterwards Master of Caius College; Dr. J. Radcliffe,
Fellow of Trinity College; Dr. T. Ward, afterwards Master
of Sidney Sussex College, and Margaret Professor ; A.
Downs, for nearly forty years Professor of Greek, and one
of the best scholars of his age; John Boys, distinguished
alike for Greek and Hebrew ; and Mr. Ward, Fellow of
King's College.
The four Gospels, and the Acts, and the Book of Revela-
tion, were placed in the hands of eight Oxford scholars:
Dr. T. Ravis, Dean of Christ Church, afterwards Bishop of
Gloucester ; Dr. G. Abbot, for some time Master of Uni-
versity College, Archbishop of Canterbury from 1610 to
1633; Dr. G. Thompson, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester;
Mr. Savile, afterwards Sir H. Savile, tutor in Greek to
Queen Elizabeth, Provost of Eton, celebrated also for his
splendid edition of Chrysostom, and for his noble bene-
factions to his university ; Dr. J. Perin, and Dr. J. Harmer,
at different times Professors of Greek. Of the remaining
names some lists specify Dr. Eedes, Dean of Worcester,
who died in 1604, and Dr. Ravens : others, Dr. Aglionby,
Principal of St. Edmund's Hall; Dr. Montague, afterwards
Bishop of Winchester ; Dr. L. Hutton, Canon of Christ-
church, “an excellent Grecian, and well read in the Fathers
and Schoolmen.”
Of the remaining company, which translated the Epistles,
we know but little. Dr. Barlow, Dean of Chester, afterwards
Bishop of Lincoln, has been already mentioned ; W. Dakins
was Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Greek
IN 2
I96 The English Bible.
Lecturer; Dr. T. Spencer is supposed to be the successor
of Dr. Reynolds in the Presidency of Corpus Christi College,
Oxford. Of Dr. Hutchinson, Mr. Fenton, Mr. Rabbett,
and Mr. Sanderson, nothing is known. This company also
met at Westminster.
The duties of the revisers, and the plan of the new
work, were defined in the following body of instructions
supplied to each company —
“I. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly
called the Bishops' Bible, to be followed, and as little altered
as the truth of the original will admit.
“2. The names of the prophets and the holy writers,
with the other names of the text, to be retained as nigh as
may be, accordingly as they were vulgarly used.
“3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept, viz., the
word church not to be translated congregazzon, &c.
“4. When a word hath divers significations, that to be
kept which hath been most commonly used by the most of
the ancient fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the
place and the analogy of the faith.
“5. The division of the chapters to be altered either
not at all, or as little as may be, if necessity so require.
“6. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for
the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words which cannot,
without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed
in the text.
“7. Such quotations of places to be marginally set
down as shall serve for the fit reference of one Scripture to
another.
“8. Every particular man of each company to take the
same chapter or chapters; and having translated or amended
them severally by himself where he thinketh good, all to
meet together, Confer what they have done, and agree for
their parts what shall stand.
The Duties of the Revisers. I97
“9. As any one company hath dispatched any one book
in this manner, they shall send it to the rest to be considered
of seriously and judiciously, for his Majesty is very careful
in this point. -
“Io. If any company, upon the review of the book so
sent, doubt or differ upon any place, to send them word
thereof, note the place, and withal send the reasons; to
which if they consent not, the difference to be compounded
at the general meeting, which is to be of the chief persons
of each company at the end of the work.
“II. When any place of special obscurity is doubted of,
letters to be directed by authority to send to any learned
man in the land for his judgment of such a place.
“12. Letters to be sent from every bishop to the rest of
his clergy, admonishing them of this translation in hand,
and to move and charge as many as being skilful in the
tongues, and having taken pains in that kind, to send his
particular observations to the company either at Westmin-
ster, Cambridge, or Oxford.
“13. The directors in each company to be the Deans
of Westminster and Chester for that place, and the king's
professors in the Hebrew or Greek in either university.
“I4. These translations to be used when they agree
better with the text than the Bishops' Bible: Tindale's,
Matthew’s, Coverdale’s, Whitchurch's, Geneva.
“15. Besides the said directors before mentioned, three
or four of the most ancient and grave divines in either of
the universities, not employed in translating, to be assigned
by the Vice-Chancellor upon conference with the rest of the
Heads to be overseers of the translations, as well Hebrew
as Greek, for the better observation of the fourth rule above
specified.”
When each company had completed the allotted task,
the several parts were collected for revision. The ninth rule
I98 The English Bible.
prescribed that every book should be submitted to the judg-
ment of all the companies; but even had it been possible
to carry such a rule into effect, yet much would afterwards
remain to be done in the way of arrangement and the
harmonising of details. Six of the translators—twelve,
according to another account—one (or two) out of each
Company, met together at the close to review the work.
Boys and Downs, of the Cambridge company, “were sent
for up to London, where, meeting their four fellow-labourers,
they went daily to Stationers' Hall, and in three-quarters of
a year fulfilled their task. All which time they received
duly thirty shillings each of them, by the week, from the
Company of Stationers;" though before they had nothing.”
Who the “four fellow-labourers” were, we have no means
of ascertaining. Bishop Bilson, though not one of the
translators, is said to have been connected with the final
revision, and the account which is given us of Bancroft's
influence on the translation has led some to add his name
also. The reader may be surprised to find that so much of
the history is involved in obscurity. “Never,” says a writer
who is our highest authority on the translation of 1611,”
“was a great enterprise like the production of our Authorised
Version carried out with less knowledge handed down to
posterity of the labourers, their method and order of work-
ing.” The only account which we possess of the procedure
of the translators is to be found in Selden's Zable Za/4. it
appears to relate to the last revision. “The translation in
King James' time took an excellent way. That part of the
Bible was given to him who was most excellent in such a
tongue (as the Apocrypha to Andrew Downs), and then
1 Mr. Anderson makes it very probable that the money was fur-
nished by the printer, R. Barker.
* Dr. Scrivener, Zntroduction to the Cambridge Paragraph Bible,
p. I2.
The Wew Translation published I99
they met together, and one read the translation, the rest
holding in their hands some Bible, either of the learned
tongues, or French, Spanish, Italian, &c.; if they found any
fault, they spoke ; if not, he read on.”
In 1611, seven years after the Hampton Court Con-
ference, the new translation was given to the world. The
title-page of the volume (a folio printed in black-letter by
R. Barker), contains the statements with which we are all
familiar, and the Dedication which follows is equally well
known. It is otherwise with the Translators’ Preface, which
is not to be found in modern Bibles. This is a document of
considerable length (equal to about thirty of these pages),
written by Dr. Miles Smith, in which the translators justify
the demand for a new translation of the Scriptures, and
explain the principles which have guided their own action.
We have not space for quotations, but must content our-
selves with urging our readers to make themselves acquainted
with this learned and very interesting document." Besides
a Calendar, Table of Lessons, and other matter, belonging
rather to the Prayer-book than to the Bible, there are given
elaborate Tables of Genealogies, drawn up by John Speed,
the celebrated historian. The Table of the Books of Scrip-
ture agrees in almost all respects with that contained in our
present Bibles.
The statements on the title-page are of importance.
What we are to understand by the notice that the version
is “appointed to be read in churches,” it is hard to say.
“No evidence has yet been produced to show that the
version was ever publicly sanctioned by Convocation or by
Parliament, or by the Privy Council, or by the king. It
gained its currency, partly, it may have been, by the weight
1 A reprint of this Preface (price one penny) is issued by the Society
for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
2OO The English Bible.
of the king's name, partly by the personal authority of the
prelates and Scholars who had been engaged upon it, but
still more by its own intrinsic superiority over its rivals.
Copies of the ‘whole Bible of the largest volume and latest
edition’ are required to be in churches by the Visitation
Articles of Laud, 1622 (St. David's), 1628 (London). In
the Scotch Canons of 1636 it is said still more distinctly
that ‘the Bible shall be of the translation of King James’
(cap. 16, § 1). . . . The printing of the Bishops' Bible
was at once stayed when the new version was definitely
undertaken. No edition is given in the lists later than
1606, though the New Testament from it was reprinted
as late as 1618 (or 1619). So far ecclesiastical influence
naturally reached. But it was otherwise with the Genevan
Version, which was chiefly confined to private use. This
competed with the King's Bible for many years, and it was
not till about the middle of the century that it was finally
displaced.”"
On the other question, the relation between the Autho-
rised Version (so called) and earlier translations, the reader
shall judge for himself. On pages 202–205 are given
two passages, from the Old Testament and the New,
respectively, as they appear in the most important of our
English versions. An examination of these specimens will
show how far the translators of 16II were indebted to their
predecessors.
In that part of the Old Testament from which our
specimen is taken the true line of succession begins with
Coverdale's Bible. The three versions which precede
(those of Wycliffe, Purvey, and the Douai Bible), all derived
from the Latin Vulgate, can have exercised but little in-
fluence on our present translation. The Douai Old Testa-
ment, it will be remembered, was not published until 16Io.
* Westcott, History, p. 123.
Its Re/aſion to Previous Versions. 2O I
In the New Testament, on the other hand, the eight
versions are connected together by strict relationship. It
will be observed that Tyndale's work really occupies two
Columns, the first of these containing his earliest translation
(1526), the third his last revision, which was incorporated
in the Bible of “Thomas Matthew.” The quotations are
made from the earliest editions of Coverdale's Bible, the
Rhemish Testament, and the Authorised Version ; from the
second edition of Matthew's Bible, and of the Douai Ver-
sion ; from the Great Bible of May, 1541, the Genevan
Bible of 1578, and the Bishops' Bible of 1575. The ver-
sions not given are of secondary importance. Taverner
does not materially differ from Tyndale and Coverdale ; the
Genevan Bible usually contains the improvements intro-
duced into the Testament of 1557; and Tomson's revision
can hardly be regarded as a distinct work.
The passage from the Old Testament (Isa. liv. II—17)
is one which most will confess to be well translated in our
ordinary Bibles. One or two points of interpretation are
still undecided, but there are, perhaps, not a dozen words
in the seven verses which an exact translator would now
find it necessary to change. What light, then, does the
comparison of versions cast upon this result? The passage
contains 182 words, of which about 86 have remained
unchanged during all the fluctuations represented by the
five (or six) versions given above. If we set these aside,
and consider only the variable element, consisting of 96
words, we shall find on comparison that in more than 60
of the 96 the Authorised Version agrees with the Genevan
Bible, whereas its agreement with the Bishops' Bible does
not extend to more than twelve out of the same number.
Hence, though the Bishops' Bible nominally furnished the
basis for the new translation, it is clear that the Genevan
exercised a much more powerful influence. Indeed, a
§
i
;
§:
WYCLIFFE.
ISAIAH liv. II—17.
II Thou porelet, with tem-
pest al to-pullid, with oute any
coumfort, lo I shal araie by
order thi stones and founde thee
in safires;
12 And I shal sette jasp thy
pynacles and thi gates in to
grauen stones, and alle thi termes
in to desirable stones.
13 Alle thi somes tagt of the
Lord, and multitude of pes to thi
Sones,
14 And in rigtwisnesse thou
shalt be foundid. Go awei aferr
fro chalenge, for thou shalt not
drede, and fro inward ferd, for it
shal not neghe to thee.
15 Lo ! an earth tiliere shal
come, that was not with me ; thi
comeling sumtyme apassid shal
be ioyned to thee.
16 Lo ! I shop a smyth blow-
ende in the fyr coles, and bring-
ende forth a vessel in to his
werk; and I shop the sleere to
destroyen.
17 Eche vessel that is mad
agen thee, shal not be rigt reulid;
and eche tunge withstondende
to thee, in dom thou shalt deme.
This is the eritage of the ser-
uauns of the Lord, and the rigt-
wisnesse of hem anent me, seith
the Lord.
PURVEY.
ISAIAH liv. II—17.
II Thou litle and pore, drawun
out bi tempest, with outen ony
coumfort, lo Y schal strewe thi
stoony's bi ordre, and Y Schal
founde thee in Safiris;
12 And Y schal sette jaspis thi
touris and thi gatis in to grauun
stoonys and alle thin eendis in to
desirable stoonys.
13 Y schal make alle thisones
taugt of the Lord ; and the mul-
titude of pees to thisones,
14 And thou schalt be foundid
in rigtfulnesse. Go thou awei fer
fro fals caleng, for thou Schalt not
drede ; and fro drede, for it schal
not neige to thee.
15 Lo, a straunger Schal come,
that was not with me; he that
was sum tyme thi comelyng Schal
be ioyned to thee.
16 Lo Y made a smyth blow-
ynge coolis in fier, and bringynge
forth a vessel in to his werk ; and
Y haue maad a sleere, for to leese.
17 Ech vessel which is maad
agens thee, schal not be dressid ;
and in the doom thou Schalt deme
ech tunge agenstondynge thee.
This is the eritage of the ser-
uauntis of the Lord, and the right-
fulnesse of hem at me, seith the
Lord.
DOUAI BIBLE.
ISAIAH liv. II—17.
II Poore litle one shaken with
tempest without al comfort, be-
hold I will lay thy stones in order
and wil found thee in sapphires.
I2 And I wil put the jasper
Stone for thy munitions, and thy
gates into grauen stones, al thy
borders into stones worthie to be
desired.
13 Althy children taught of our
Lord ; and a multitude of peace
to thy children.
I4 And in justice thou shalt be
founded, depart far from calumnie,
because thou shalt not feare: and
from dread, because it shal not
approch to thee.
15 Behold, the borderer shal
come, which was not with me,
thy stranger sometime shal be
ioymed to thee.
16 Behold I have created the
smith that bloweth the coles in
the fire, and bringeth forth a
vessel for his worke and I created
the killer to destroy.
17 Euerie vessel that is made
agaynst thee shal not prosper and
euerie tongue resisting thee in
judgement thou shalt judge. This
is the inheritance of the seruants
of our Lord, and their justice with
me sayth our Lord.
COVERDALE. (MATTHEW.)
ISAIAH liv. II—17.
II Beholde, thou poore, vexed
and despised, I wil make thy
walles of precious stones and thy
foundacion of Saphires,
12 Thy windowes off Cristall,
thi gates of fyne cleare stones and
thy borders of pleasaunt stones.
13 Thy children shal all be
taught of God, and I will geue
them plenteousnes of peace.
14 In rightuousness shalt thou
be grounded, and be farre from
oppression : for the which thou
medest not be afrayed nether for
hynderaunce, for it shal not come
nye the.
I5 Beholde the aleaunt that
was farre from the shal dwell with
the, and he that was sometyme a
Straunger vnto the shalbe ioyned
with the.
I6 Beholde I make the smyth
that bloweth the coles in the fyre
& he maketh a weapon after his
hondy worke. I make also the
waister to destroye:
I7 But all the weapens that are
made agaynst the shal not pros-
pere. And as for all tunges that
shal resiste the in iudgment thou
shalt ouercome them & condemne
them. This is the heretage of
the Lordes seruauntes and the
rightuousnes that they shal haue
of Ine saieth the Lorde.
Ö
GREAT BIBLE.
ISAIAH liv. II—17.
II. Beholde the poore ouer-
whelmed with tempest and with-
out, conforte, I wyll make thy
walles of precyous stones and thy
foundacyon of Saphires.
12 Thy wyndowes of Chrystal,
thy gates of fyne cleare stones
and all thy borders of pleasaunt
Stones.
13 Thy chyldren shal all be
taught of god, and I will geue
them plenteousnes of peace.
14 In ryghteousnes shalt thou
be grounded & be farre from
oppressyon for the whiche thou
nedest not be afrayde, nether for
hynderaunce for it shall not come
nye the.
15 Beholde, the aleaunt that
was farre from me shal dwel with
the, and he that ioyneth batayle
agaynst the shal perysh.
16 Beholde, I make the smyth
that bloweth the coles in the fyer,
and he maketh a weapen after his
handy worcke, I make also the
waster to destroye :
17 But all the weapens that are
made agaynst the shal not pros-
pere. And as for all tonges that
shal resyst the in iudgement thou
shalt ouercome them & condempne
them. This is the herytage of
the Lordes seruauntes & theyre
ryghteousnes cometh of me sayth
the Lorde.
GENEVAN BIBLE.
Isaiah liv. II—17.
Ir O thou afflicted and tossed
with tempest that hast no comfort,
beholde, I wil lay thy stones with
the carbuncle and laye thy foun-
dation with Saphirs.
12 And I will make thy win-
dowes of emeraudes, and thy gates
shining stones, and all thy borders
of pleasant stones.
13 And all thy children shall be
taught of the Lorde and much
peace shalbe to thy children.
I4 In righteousnesse shalt thou
be established and be farre from
oppression ; for thou shalt not
feare it : and from feare, for it
shall not come neere thee.
15 Beholde the enemie shall
gather himselfe but without me :
whosoeuer shall gather himselfe
in thee, against thee shall fall.
16 Behold, I haue created the
smith that bloweth the coles in
the fire, and him that bringeth
forth an instrument for his worke:
and I haue created the destroyer
to destroy.
17 But all the weapons that
are made against thee shall not
prosper ; and euery tongue that
shall rise against thee in iudge-
ment thou shalt condemne. This
is the heritage of the Lords ser-
vants and their righteousnes is of
me, saith the Lord.
BISHOPS’ BIBLE.
ISAIAH liv. II—17.
II. Beholde, thou poore vexed
and despised, I will make thy
walles of pretious stones and thy
foundation of Saphires.
12 Thy windowes of Christall,
thy gates of fyne cleare stone,
and all thy borders of pleasaunt
Stones.
13 Thy children shal be all
taught of God, and I will give
thee plentecusnesse of peace.
14. In righteousnesse shalt thou
be grounded and bee farre from
oppression for the which thou
needest not to be afrayde, neyther
for hinderaunce, for it shall not
come nigh thee.
I5 Loe, who so gathereth to-
gether against thee doth it without
me, and who so within me dothe
ioyne together againste thee shall
surely fall.
16 Beholde, I make the smyth
that bloweth the coales in the
fyre, and he maketh a weapon
after his handie worke: I make
also the waster to destroy.
17 But all the weapons that
are made against thee shall not
prosper: and as for all tongues
that shall resist thee in judge-
mente, thou shalt ouercome them
and condemne them : this is the
heritage of the Lordes seruauntes
and their righteousnesse commeth
of me sayth the Lorde.
AUTHORSIED WERSION.
Isaiah liv. II—17.
II. Oh thou afflicted, tossed
with tempest and not comforted,
behold I will lay thy stones with
faire colours and lay thy founda-
tions with Saphires.
I2 And I will make thy win-
dowes of Agates, and thy gates
of Carbuncles, and all thy borders
of pleasant stories.
13 And all thy children shalbe
taught of the Lord, and great
shalbe the peace of thy children.
14 In righteousnesse shalt thou
be established : thou shalt be
farre from oppression, for thou
shalt not feare ; and from terrour,
for it shall not come neere thee.
15 Behold, they shall surely
gather but not by me, whosoeuer
shal gather together against thee,
shall fall for thy sake.
16 Behold I haue created the
smith that bloweth the coales in
the fire and that bringeth foorth
an instrument for his worke, and
I haue created the wasrer to
destroy.
17 No weapon that is formed
against thee shall prosper, and
euery tongue that shall rise
against thee in iudgement thou
shalt condemne. This is the
heritage of the seruants of the
Lord and their righteousnesse is
of me, saith the Lord.
i
S;
i
§
§
Š
§,
TYNDALE.
Romans xii. 6—15.
6 Seyinge that we have divers
gyftes accordynge to the grace
that is geven vnto vs, yf emy man
have the gyft off prophesy lett
hym have it that itt be agreynge
vnto the fayth.
7 Let hym that hath an office,
wayte on his office. Let hym
that teacheth take hede to his
doctryne.
8 Let hym that exhorteth geve
attendaunce to his exhortacion.
Yf eny man geve, lett hym do it
with singlenes. Let hym that
rueleth do it with diligence. Yf
eny man shewe mercy lett hym do
itt with cherfulnes. e &
9 Let love be without dissimu.
lacion. Hate that which is evyll
and cleave vnto that which is
good.
Io Be kynde one to another
with brotherly love. In gevynge
honoure goo one before another.
II Let not that busynes which
ye have in honde be tedious to
you. Be fervent in the sprete.
Apply yourselves to the tyme.
12 Reioyce in, hope. Be pa-
cient in tribulacion, continue in
prayer. tº º
13 Distribute vnto the necesiite
off the saynctes.
14 Blesse them which persecute
you, blesse but course mott.
15 Be mery with them that are
mery, wepe with them that wepe.
COVERDALE.
RoMANs xii. 6—15.
6 And (we) haue dyuers giftes
accordinge to the grace that is
geuen vnto vs. Yf eny man haue
the gifte of prophecienge let it be
acordinge to the faith.
7 Let him that hath an office
wayte vpon the office, let him that
teacheth take hede to the doc-
tryne.
8 Let him that exhorteth geue
attendaunce to the exhortacion.
Yf eny man geueth let him geue
with synglenesse. Let him that
ruleth be diligent. Yf eny man
shewe mercy let him do it with
chearfulnesse.
9 Let loue be without dissimu-
lacion. Hate that which is euell.
Cleue vnto that which is good.
Io Be kynde one to another
with brotherly loue. In geuynge
honoure go one before another.
II Be not slouthfull in the busy-
nesse that ye haue in hande. Be
feruent in the sprete. Applye
yourselues vnto the tyme.
12 Reioyse in hope, be pacient
in trouble. Continue in prayer.
13 Distribute vnto the necessi-
ties of the sayntes. Be glad to
harbarow.
14 Blesse them that persecute
you. Blesse and curse not
15 Be mery with them that are
mery and wepe with them that
wepe.
MATTHEW'S BIBLE.
ROMANs xii. 6—15.
6 Seynge that we haue diuers
gyftes, accordynge to the grace
that is geuen vnto vs. Yf anye
man haue the gyfte of prophesye,
let hym haue it that it be agre-
ynge vnto faythe.
7 Let hym that hathe an offyce,
wayte on hys office. I.et hym
that teacheth take hede to hys
doctryne.
8 Let hym that exhorteth geue
attendaunce to hys exhortacion.
Yf any man geue let him do it
with singlenes. Let hym that
rueleth do it with diligence. Yf
any man shew mercy, let him do
it with cherfulnes.
9 Let loue be wythout dis-
simulacion. Hate that whiche is
euel and cleaue vnto that whych
is good.
Io Be kynd one to another with
brotherlye loue. In geuynge ho-
noure go one before another.
II Let not the busynes whiche
ye haue in hande be tedious vnto
you. Be feruent in the spirite.
Apply yourselves to the tyme.
12 Reioyse in hope. Be pa-
cyent in trybulacion. Continue
in prayer.
13 Distribute vnto the necessite
of the Say nctes, be dilgient to
harboure.
14 Blesse them whiche perse-
cute you : blesse but curse not.
15 Be mery win them that are
merye. Wepe wyth them that
wepe.
GREAT BIBLE.
ROMANs xii. 6—15.
6 Seynge that we haue dyuers
gyftes accordynge to the grace
that is geuen vnto vs : yf any man
haue the gyſte of prophecy let
him haue it that it be agreing vnto
ye fayth.
7 Let hym that hath an office
wayte on hys office. Let hym
that teacheth take hede to hys
doctrine.
8 Let hym that exhorteth geue
attendaunce to his exhortacion.
If any man geue, let hym do it
wyth Synglenes. Let hym that
ruleth do it with diligence. If
any man shewe mercy, let him do
it with cherfulnes.
9 Let loue be wythout dissimu-
lation. Hate yt whych is euyll
and cleaue vnto yt which is good.
Io Be kynde one to another
with brotherly loue. In geuynge
honoure go one before another.
II Be not slouthful in the busi-
nes whych ye haue in hande. Be
feruent in the sprete. Applye
yourselues to the tyme.
I2 Reioyse in hope. Be pa-
cient in tribulacyon. Continue in
prayer.
13 Distribute vnto the neces-
sitie of the sayntes : be ready to
harbour.
14 Blesse them which persecute
you : blesse (I say) and curse not.
15 Be mery wyth them that are
mery. Wepe also wyth them that
Wepe.
GENEVAN BIBLE.
ROMANS xii. 6–I5.
6 Seeing then, that we haue
giftes that are diuers, according
to the grace that is giuen vnto
vs whether we haue prophesie,
let us prophesie according to the
proportion of faith : e
7 Or an office let vs waite on
hé office : or hee that teacheth
on teaching.
8 Or he that exhorteth on ex-
hortation : hee that distributeth
let him do it with simplicitie:
he that ruleth with diligence :
hee that sheweth mercie with
chearefulnes.
9 Let
simulation, Abhorre that which
is euill, and cleaue vnto that
which s good.
ro Be affectioned to loue one
another with brotherly loue. In
giving honour goe one before
another, *
11 Not slothful to doe Seruice :
feruent in spirit Seruing the Lord.
12 Reioycing in hope, patient
in tribulation, continuing in
prayer.
13 Distributing vnto the ne-
sessities of the Saintes, giuing
your selues to hospitalitie.
14 Blesse them which persecute
you; blesse I say and curse not.
15 Reioyce with them that
reioyce, and weepe with them
that weepe.
loue be without dis- |
BISHOPS' BIBLE.
ROMANs xii. 6—15.
6 Seeing that wee haue diuers
giftes according to the grace that
is giuen vnto vs. eyther prophecie,
after the measure of fayth,
7 Eyther office, in adminis-
tration : or he that teacheth, in
teaching.
8 Or he that exhorteth, in
exhorting: he that giueth in
singlenesse, he that ruleth in
diligence: hee that is mercyfull
in chearefulnesse.
9. Loue, without dissimulation,
hating euil, cleauing to good.
Io Affectioned one to an other
with brotherly loue, in giung
honoure, goyng one before an-
other. -
II Not lyther in businesse,
feruent in spirite seruing the
Lorde.
12 Reioycing in hope, patient
in trouble, instant in prayer.
13 Distri's uting to the neces-
sitie of Saintes, giuen to hospi-
talitie.
14 Blesse them whiche perse-
cute you, blesse, and cursse not.
15 Reicyce with them that doe
reioyce, and wepe with them that
weepe.
RHE IMS TESTAMENT.
ROMANS xii. 6—15.
6 And hauing giftes, according
to the grace that is giuen vs,
different, either prophecie accord-
ing to the rule of faith,
7 Or ministerie in ministring,
or he that teacheth in doctrine.
8 He that exhorteth in ex-
horting, he that giueth in sim-
plicitie, he that ruleth in care-
fulnes, he that sheweth mercie
in cheerefulnes.
9 Loue , without simulation.
Hating euil, cleauing to good.
Io Louing the charitie of the
brotherhod one toward an other.
With honour preuenting one an
other.
II. In carefulnes not slouthful.
In Spirit feruent. Seruing our
Lord.
12 Reioycing in hope.
in tribulation.
: Patient
Instant in praier.
13 Communicating to the ne-
cessities of the sainctes. Pursu-
ing hospitalitie.
14 Blesse them that persecute
you: blesse and curse not.
15 To reioyce with them that
reioyce, to weepe with them that
weepe.
AUTHORISED VERSION.
RoMANs xii. 6—15.
6 Hauing then gifts, differing
according to the grace that is
giuen to vs, whether prophecie,
let vs prophecie according to the
proportion of faith.
7 Or ministery, let vs wait,
on our ministring : or hee that
teacheth on teaching.
8 Or
exhortation : he that giueth let
him doe it with simplicite : hee
that ruleth, with diligence: hee
that sheweth mercy with cheere-
fulnesse.
9 Let loue bee without dis-
simulation : abhorre that which
is euill, cleaue to that which is
OCl.
Io Bee kindly affectioned one
to another with brotherly loue,
in honour preferring one another,
II Not slouthfull in busines;
feruent in spirit, Seruing the
Lord.
12 Reioycing in hope, patient
in tribulation, continuing instant
in prayer. - -
13 Distributing to the neces-
sitie of Saints: giuen to hospi-
talitie.
14 Blesse them which persecute
you, blesse and curse not.
15 Reioyce with them that doe
reioyce, and weepe with them that
weepe.
he that exhorteth, on
i
§
2O6 The English Bible.
glance will show that the five translations divide themselves
into two classes—the Bibles of Coverdale, Cranmer, and
the Bishops standing on One side, the Genevan and Autho-
rised Version on the other. In the few places in which
the Authorised Version differs from the Genevan, the
change (which is but rarely suggested by any other version)
is usually for the better, the new rendering being more
literal or idiomatic, better in style or rhythm.
It must not be supposed, however, that any one
example will adequately illustrate the character of our
translation of the Old Testament. Taking a chapter from
the historical books (I Kings xix.), we find that, whilst
thirty or forty renderings from the Genevan Bible were
preferred by the translators, this version was deserted by
them twice as frequently; they depart from the Bishops'
Bible on an average four times, and from the. Genevan
three times, in every verse, and many of the renderings
do not appear to be suggested by any earlier version. On
the other hand, a section to which we have often referred
(Numb. xxiv. I 5–24) contains very little that is not found
either in Tyndale or in Coverdale, or in the Genevan
Bible.
It is perhaps unnecessary to remark in detail on the
New Testament passages, but the reader will find it an
interesting and useful occupation to trace for himself the
manner in which the structure now so familiar was gradu-
ally built up. In earlier chapters we have pointed out
passages which have been retained with comparatively
little change, in one version after another; this passage
rather shows how far alteration may extend, not more
than one-third of the words having remained untouched.
It will be found that very little in the last translation of
these verses is absolutely new. The translators show much
tact and skill in selection, combination, and arrangement,
Fstimate of the Woré. 2O7
but the number of words first introduced by them does not
amount to four in a hundred. It is obvious that the
Genevan and Rhemish versions have exercised much
greater influence than the Great and Bishops' Bibles. The
Rhemish Testament was not even named in the instruc-
tions furnished to the translators, but it has left its mark on
every page of their work.
An inquiry into the exact relation in which the
Authorised Version stands to earlier English translations,
to the various foreign versions of Scripture, and to the chief
critical authorities of the time, is of Course impossible in
these pages. For more detailed information the reader
is referred to Professor Westcott's most valuable work," so
often quoted already. By an analysis of passages of the
translation and of the alternative renderings offered in the
margin, it is shown that the authorities most frequently
followed by our translators were Beza in the New Testa-
ment (both for text and for interpretation), and in the Old
the Latin versions of Junius and Tremellius, Münster, Leo
Juda, and Pagninus. The influence of the Vulgate was
exercised mainly through the Rhemish version.
When all critical helps and sources of influence have
been taken into account, the student whose analysis has
been most complete will find most to admire in the work
that the translation or revision of 1607–161 I has given us.
The praise he will award to the revisers will not be indis-
criminate eulogy. He will discover that very much that
they have transmitted to us was inherited by them from
others; the execution of different parts of the work will
prove to be unequal—the Epistles, for example, standing
far below the Pentateuch in accuracy and felicity of render-
ing; many flaws and inconsistencies will reveal themselves;
occasionally it will be found that better renderings have been
* History of the English Böle (2nd edit.), pp. 267–289.
2O8 The English Bible.
deliberately laid aside and worse preferred : but, notwith-
standing, almost every paragraph will bear testimony to the
tact, care, diligence, and faithfulness of the men to whom,
in God’s providence, we owe the version of the Scriptures
which has come down to us Consecrated by the associations
of 250 years.
If we compare one of our modern Bibles with a copy of
the first edition, we find that the differences are by no means
few or slight. There is a history of the text which it is very
interesting to trace. In Dr. Scrivener's Preface to the Cam-
bridge Paragraph Bible, which embodies the results of many
years of labour, the reader will find this history carefully
and fully narrated. We content ourselves with calling atten-
tion to the most important facts. The first issue of the
present version was a folio volume (printed in black-letter),
bearing date 16II. It has recently been discovered by Mr.
Fry and Dr. Scrivener that two editions were issued in that
year, and it is not yet decided to the satisfaction of all which
edition can claim to be the first. In 1833 the delegates of the
Oxford University Press published a reprint of the Bible of
1611, and it is by means of this volume that the peculiarities
of the earliest editions can most conveniently be studied.
Probably this reprint represents the second, not the first
issue of the year. Both issues are incorrectly printed; the
earlier, for example, reads in Matt. xxvi. 36, “Then Cometh
Judas;” whilst in the later, twenty words of Exod. xiv. Io
are given twice over. There are also differences of text
which are not misprints. In Matt. xiii. 45, for example, the
earlier edition reads “good,” the later “goodly” (pearls)
in Acts iv. 27 the two editions have “the ” and “thy”
(Holy Child); and in I Peter i. 22 they read “your souls”
and “yourselves.” Many copies of each issue are still
preserved. In 1612 appeared an octavo edition, in Roman
type; other editions quickly followed, in 1613, 1617 (black-
A/terations in Later Editions. 209
letter), and 1616 (Roman). The earliest edition in which
the Apocryphal books are omitted is that of 1629 (London).
ºn the same year appeared the first Cambridge edition, a
work of considerable importance. Some revision and cor-
rèction had been attempted in 1616, but the two Cambridge
books of I629 and 1638 were the first in which the text
was examined with care and accurately printed. In many
ins tances the changes introduced in these two editions were
clear improvements, and as such they have maintained their
ground S Thus in 1 John v. 12 the words “of God” were
omitted until 1629, and in 1 Tim. i. 4 the word “godly"
until 1638; disthe other hand, in Matt. xii. 23 the edition
of 1638 led all subsequent editions into error by the inser-
tion of “not” in the question, “Is this the son of David P”
The amount of corrections introduced was of course rela-
tively very small (perhaps thirty changes in all being made
in Genesis, for instance, and six in the Epistle to the
Romans); but, to say nothing of the correction of mis-
prints, the examples just quoted are sufficient to show the
value of the revision. |
The only other editions which we can mention particu-
larly are three which have eventh great influence on all
modern Bibles. Bishop Lloyd's Bible (London, 1701) is
remarkable as being the first that contains the marginal
dates, mostly derived from Archbishop Ussher. In the
Cambridge Bible of 1762, edited | by Dr. Paris, and the
Oxford edition of 1769, edited by Dr. Blayney (afterwards
Professor of Hebrew), considerable º was expended in
the effort to improve the ordinary editions. These editors
sought to apply with greater consistency the principle of
denoting additions to the Original text by italic type, Sub-
stituted ordinary forms of words for such as had, in their
Opinion, become obsolete, and phade very large additions to
the number of marginal references, which in our present
O

2 IO The English Bible.
Bibles are said to be seven times as numerous as in the
edition of 1611. The chief increase in the marginal notes
also is due to Dr. Paris and Dr. Blayney. These notes are
an essential characteristic of the Authorised Version, though
by a wise rule restricted within very narrow limits, and
therefore rendered wholly unlike the commentary with
which Matthew's, the Genevan, and the Bishops' *
had been furnished. It has been computed that 8,448
marginal notes were inserted by the original translators,
that 35 in all were added between 16II and * 383
more by Dr. Paris, 76 only by Dr. Blayney. nhappily,
each of these editions was disfigured by errors, which main-
tained their place in the text until a very recent period.
Some of the differences in text between various editions
of the Authorised Version have excited so much attention as
to call for special notice. In * vi. 3, “ye may appoint”
(for “we”) found its way into/many editions between 1638
and 1682 ; in 1 Tim. iv. 16; “thy doctrine” took the place
of “the doetrine’ betweepi 1629 and 1769; in 2 Cor. xii. 2,
“about” was substituted for “above" by Dr. Blayney:
“unto me” for “under me” in Ps. xviii. 47, and “abide’”
for “abide still” in Rom. xi. 23, are mistakes from the same
source. Some editions have owed their celebrity to faults
more or less serious, as the “Vinegar Bible " (Oxford,
1717), so called from a misprint of vinegar for vineyard in
the heading of the page containing Luke xx. The “Pearl
Bible” of 1653, and other editions of about the same date,
some imported from abroad, some from the press of the
privileged printers, are notorious for scandalous blunders,
such as righteousness for unrighteousness (Rom. vi. 13).
In 1632 Laud inflicted a fine of 4,300 on the king's printers
for an edition of the Bible in which “not” was omitted in
the Seventh Commandment. Negligence gross as this
belonged to an unsettled age, but as late as 1830 Bibles

Curious Misprints. 2 II
were often printed with serious want of accuracy. The last
forty years have witnessed a considerable improvement, and
recent editions have left little to be desired. The Cambridge
Paragraph Bible, edited by Dr. Scrivener, is the classic
edition of the Authorised Version, and is a monument of
minute accuracy and unsparing labour.
Many points of interest the limits of our space compel
us to pass over entirely. Such are the use of italics in our
Bibles, the punctuation, the division of the text into para-
graphs; also the important questions relating to peculiar
words and forms of words, changes in spelling, &c." The
headings of chapters must not be dismissed without a word,
especially as they proceed from the hands of the original
translators. There are, Dr. Scrivener informs us,” only
twelve variations between our present headings and those
of 1611, “the only one of importance being that prefixed
to Psalm cylix.,” where “that power which he hath given to
the Church to rule the consciences of men’’ is discreetly
curtailed in the edition of 1762 by the omission of the
last six words, that of 1769 further amending by substituting
“his saints" for “the church,” which latter some modern
Bibles still retain.
1 See Z'he Bible Word-book, by Eastwood and Wright; Bible-
Anglish, by the Rev. T. L. O. Davies ; and the papers on Bible-Words
in the Bible Educator.
* Preface to Aaragraph Bible, p. lxv.
CHAPTER XV.
I,ATER HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE.
THE revision of 1611 was not at once received with general
favour. Romanists complained (as Romanists still com-
plain) of unfairness in the translators’ treatment of con-
troverted passages; and Puritans clung tenaciously to the
translation and commentary furnished in the Genevan
Bible. On the whole, however, the opposition seems to
have been but faint; and though for half a century the
rival versions circulated side by side, the latter steadily
gained ground. It could not altogether escape the perils
of those troublous times. In 1652 the Long Parliament
made an order that a Bill should be brought in for a new
translation of the Bible, and four years later the House
directed “that it be referred to a committee to send for
and advise with Dr. Walton, Mr. Hughes, Mr. Castle, Mr.
Clerk, Mr. Poulk," Dr. Cudworth, and such as they should
think fit, and to consider of the translations and impres-
sions of the Bible, and to offer their opinions therein.”
The care of this business was especially commended to
Whitelocke, and at his house in Chelsea the committee often
met, “and had the most learned men in the Oriental
tongues to consult with on this great business; and divers
excellent and learned observations of some mistakes in the
translations of the Bible in English, which yet was agreed
* Probably Samuel Clark and Matthew Poole. See Westcott,
Aſ story, p. 124.
* Lewis, History of Translations, p. 354.
The Book of Common Prayer Revised. 213
to be the best of any translation in the world.” “I took
pains in it,” adds Whitelocke, “but it became fruitless by
the Parliament's dissolution.”
About the same time appeared the only work of that
age in which any detailed criticism of the Authorised
Version was attempted." The author, Dr. Gell, who had
been chaplain to Archbishop Abbot, complains that the
last translation is wrested and partial, speaking the language
of one sect or party (the Calvinistic), and that the better
renderings have usually been relegated to the margin.
Many of his criticisms are of little worth, but in some
instances (as in Gal. v. 17) he exposes serious mistakes.
Shortly after the Restoration, the Book of Common
Prayer once more underwent revision, and in 1662 was
issued in its present form. The changes which were made
at once declared and established the supremacy of the last
translation of the Scriptures. As we have already seen,
the Psalter of the Great Bible was left undisturbed, but in
the Epistles and Gospels, and in all the longer portions
of Scripture which are read in the occasional services (as
I Cor. xv. 20–58; Acts vi. 2–7 ; xx. 17–35, &c.), the
version of 16II was uniformly adopted. The Psalms
which are interspersed amongst the various services naturally
agree in almost every point with the Prayer-book Psalter.
Perhaps the only variations which exist are the following:
xcviii. 9 (is come), lxvii. 5 (yea), xli. I (six words in the
former part of the verse), cKxviii. 2 (labour), lxxi. 5 (alway
Že), xxxix. II (by means), xC. I2 (O teach), cxvi. 4 (found,
called), li. 9 (away). The translations of the Benedicite,
Aenedictus, Magnificat, the Offertory sentences, and the
“Comfortable Words” in the Communion Service, stand
by themselves, agreeing in many renderings with some of
* An Essay toward the Amendment of the last AEnglish Translation of
the Aićle, by Robert Gell (London, I659).
2I4. The English Bible.
the older versions (especially the Great Bible), but in many
others with none. The Benedicite, for example, agrees
almost verbally with the Great Bible in the first part of
each verse; but where the Great Bible has speak good of
and set him up, we find bless ye and magnify him in the
Prayer Book. The verses from Job xiv. in the Burial
Service and from Deut. xxvii. in the Commination Service
Come very near the Great Bible. The translation of Rev.
xiv. 13 is peculiar to the Prayer Book, and the same may
be said of the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Commandments.
Other passages agree with the Authorised Version, with a
few slight variations, such as the insertion of but in 1 John
i. 9, to be in Luke ii. 32, and the reading acceptable unto in
I Tim. ii. 3. Now and then the language of a prayer
or exhortation recalls an old or peculiar rendering of a
passage of Scripture, as “not considering the Lord's body”
(I Cor. xi. 29), “pastors and doctors’ (Eph. iv. II), and
the quotation from Matt: xxv. 34 in the Burial Service.
These details will show that the Book of Common Prayer,
whilst it enshrines fragments of our various English ver-
sions, has largely contributed to establish and render
familiar the translation of 1611.
An instructive volume might be written on the various
schemes of revision which have been proposed since the
beginning of the last century. It would answer no good
end, however, to give a mere list of names and works; and
to enter into any useful detail would require as many pages
as we can command lines. In the third volume of Smith's
Zictionary of the Bible (pp. 1,678–1,682) the reader will find
a singularly interesting account of the controversy, written by
the Rev. Professor Plumptre. The same article also con-
tains a brief notice of the attempts which Lowth, Geddes,
Blayney, Newcome, and other scholars have made to im-
prove the translations of particular books of Scripture.
Revision Committee appointed. 2 I 5
In 1856 the subject of revision was brought by Professor
Selwyn before the Lower House of Convocation of the
Province of Canterbury, but his proposals met with little
favour. The desirableness of the appointment of a Royal
Commission was urged upon the House of Commons, but
without effect. Meanwhile the general interest in Biblical
studies was continually advancing. The merits of our trans-
lation, on the One hand, and on the other the amount of
improvement absolutely required, became more fully under-
stood from year to year. Some specimens of a revised
version by five clergymen (the present Bishops of Gloucester
and Salisbury, the late Dean Alford, the Rev. W. G. Humphry,
and Dr. Barrow), published about this time, showed that
reverent regard for the Authorised Version might coexist
with an earnest desire for its improvement, and helped to
prepare the way for the remarkable change in public opinion
which has recently taken place.
In February, 1870, both Houses of the Convocation of
Canterbury unanimously passed a resolution to the following
effect:-‘‘That a Committee of both Houses be appointed,
with power to confer with any Committee that may be ap-
pointed by the Convocation of the Northern Province, to
report upon the desirableness of a revision of the Authorised
Version of the Old and New Testaments, whether by mar-
ginal notes or otherwise, in all those passages where plain
and clear errors, whether in the Hebrew or Greek text origi-
nally adopted by the translators, or in the translation made
from the same, shall, on due investigation, be found to exist.”
The mover and seconder of the resolution in the Upper
House (the late Bishop of Winchester and the Bishop of
Gloucester and Bristol) had limited their proposal to the
New Testament, but on the motion of the Bishop of Llan-
daff it was at Once agreed to extend the inquiry so as to
include the whole Bible. Eight members of the Upper and
2 I6 The English Bible.
sixteen of the Lower House were appointed the Committee
of the Convocation of Canterbury. The Northern Province
declined to co-operate with the Southern in this inquiry, on
the ground that the time was not favourable for revision, and
that the risk was greater than the probable gain. Early in
May the Committee presented a report recommending that
a revision of the Authorised Version of the Holy Scriptures
should be undertaken, on the principle of departing as little
as possible from the general style and language of the exist-
ing version, and “that Convocation should nominate a body
of its own members to undertake the work of revision, who
shall be at liberty to invite the co-operation of any eminent
for scholarship, to whatever nation or religious body they
belong.” A Committee was accordingly appointed, con-
sisting of eight members of each house—viz., Dr. S. Wilber-
force, Bishop of Winchester; Dr. C. Thirlwall, Bishop of St.
David's ; Dr. A. Ollivant, Bishop of Llandaff; Dr. C. J.
Ellicott, Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol; Dr. G. Moberly,
Bishop of Salisbury; Dr. E. H. Browne, Bishop of Ely
(now Bishop of Winchester); Dr. C. Wordsworth, Bishop
of Lincoln ; Dr. A. C. Hervey, Bishop of Bath and Wells;
Dr. E. H. Bickersteth, Prolocutor of the Lower House of
Convocation, now Dean of Lichfield ; Dr. H. Alford, Dean
of Canterbury; Dr. A. P. Stanley, Dean of Westminster;
Dr. H. J. Rose, Archdeacon of Bedford ; Dr. W. Selwyn,
Canon of Ely and Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity,
Cambridge ; Dr. J. W. Blakesley, Canon of Canterbury
(now Dean of Lincoln); Dr. J. Jebb, Canon of Hereford;
and Dr. W. Kay, late Principal of Bishop's College, Calcutta.
This Committee held its first meeting on the 25th of May.
It was then resolved that two companies should be formed for
the revision of the Authorised Version of the Old Testament
and the New Testament respectively ; that the company for
the revision of the Authorised Version of the Old Testament
The Old Testament Company. 217
should consist of the Bishops of St. David's, Llandaff, Ely,
Lincoln, and Bath and Wells, Archdeacon Rose, Professor
Selwyn, Canon Jebb, and Dr. Kay, together with eighteen
scholars and divines, who should be invited to join in the
work; and that the company for the revision of the Author-
ised Version of the New Testament should consist of the
Bishops of Winchester, Gloucester and Bristol, and Salisbury,
the Prolocutor, the Deans of Canterbury and Westminster,
and Canon Blakesley, together with nineteen invited scholars
and divines.
An invitation to join the Old Testament Company was
sent to Dr. W. L. Alexander, Professor of Theology, Con-
gregational Church Hall, Edinburgh ; Mr. T. Chenery, Lord
Almoner's Professor of Arabic, Oxford; the Rev. F. C.
Cook, Canon of Exeter; Dr. A. B. Davidson, Professor of
Hebrew, Free Church College, Edinburgh; Dr. B. Davies,
|Professor of Hebrew in the Baptist College, Regent's Park;
Dr. P. Fairbairn, Principal of the Free Church College,
Glasgow; Dr. F. Field (editor of the Septuagint, Origen's
Aſexap/a, &c.); Dr. Ginsburg (editor of Canticles, Ecclesi-
astes, &c.); Dr. F. W. Gotch, Principal of the Baptist
College, Bristol; Rev. B. Harrison, Archdeacon of Maid-
stone; Rev. S. Leathes, Professor of Hebrew, King's
College, London ; Rev. J. McGill, Professor of Oriental
Languages, St. Andrew's ; Dr. R. Payne Smith, Regius Pro-
fessor of Divinity, Oxford (now Dean of Canterbury); Dr.
J. J. S. Perowne, Canon of Llandaff, and now Hulsean
Professor of Divinity, Cambridge ; Dr. E. H. Plumptre,
Professor of the Exegesis of the New Testament, King's
College, London; Dr. E. B. Pusey, Regius Professor of
Hebrew, Oxford; Dr. W. Wright, now Professor of Arabic,
Cambridge; Mr. W. A. Wright, Librarian (now Bursar) of
Trinity College, Cambridge.
An invitation to join the New Testament Company was
2 I 8 The English Bible.
sent to Dr. R. C. Trench, Archbishop of Dublin; Dr. J.
Angus, President of the Baptist College, Regent's Park;
Dr. J. Eadie, Professor of Biblical Literature and Exegesis
to the United Presbyterian Church, Scotland; Dr. F. J. A.
Hort, now Fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge; Rev.
W. G. Humphry, Prebendary of St. Paul's; Dr. B. H.
Kennedy, Canon of Ely, and Regius Professor of Greek,
Cambridge; Dr. W. Lee, Archdeacon of Dublin, and Lec-
turer in Divinity; Dr. J. B. Lightfoot, now Lady Margaret
Professor of Divinity, Cambridge, and Canon of St. Paul’s ;
Dr. W. Milligan, Professor of Divinity, Aberdeen; Dr. W.
F. Moulton, Professor of Classics, Wesleyan College, Rich-
mond; Dr. J. H. Newman, formerly Rector of the Roman
Catholic University, Dublin; Dr. S. Newth, Professor of
Classics (now Principal), New College, London; Dr. A.
Roberts, now Professor of Humanity, St. Andrews; Dr. G.
Vance Smith (joint author of a Revised Translation of the
Scriptures); Dr. R. Scott, then Master of Balliol College,
Oxford, and Professor of Exegesis, now Dean of Rochester;
Dr. F. H. Scrivener (editor of the Cambridge Paragraph
Bible, Codex Bezae, &c.); Dr. S. P. Tregelles (editor of the
Greek Testament); Dr. C. J. Vaughan, Master of the
Temple; and Dr. B. F. Westcott, Canon of Peterborough,
now Regius Professor of Divinity, Cambridge.
At the same meeting of the Committee it was further
resolved :—
I. That the general principles to be followed by both
companies be as follows:—
I. To introduce as few alterations as possible into the
text of the Authorised Version consistently with faithfulness.
2. To limit, as far as possible, the expression of such
alterations to the language of the Authorised and earlier
English Versions.
3. Each company to go twice over the portion to be
Rules for the Revision. 2 IQ
revised, once provisionally, the second time finally, and on
principles of voting as hereinafter is provided.
4. That the text to be adopted be that for which the
evidence is decidedly preponderating; and that when the
text so adopted differs from that from which the Authorised
Version was made, the alteration be indicated in the
margin.
5. To make or retain no change in the text On the
second final revision by each company, except two-thirds
of those present approve of the same, but on the first revi-
Sion to decide by simple majorities.
6. In every case of proposed alteration that may have
given rise to discussion, to defer the voting thereupon till
the next meeting, whensoever the same shall be required by
one-third of those present at the meeting, such intended
vote to be announced in the notice of the next meeting.
7. To revise the headings of chapters, pages, paragraphs,
italics, and punctuation.
8. To refer, on the part of each company, when Con-
sidered desirable, to divines, scholars, and literary men,
whether at home or abroad, for their opinions.
II. That the work of each company be communicated
to the other as it is completed, in order that there may be as
little deviation from uniformity in language as possible.
III. That the special or bye-rules for each company be
as follows:—
I. To make all corrections in writing previous to the
meeting.
2. To place all the corrections due to textual considera-
tions on the left-hand margin, and all other corrections on
the right-hand margin.
3. To transmit to the chairman, in case of being unable
to attend, the corrections proposed in the portion agreed
upon for consideration.
22O The English Bible.
Of the scholars named above, Canon Cook, Dr. Pusey,
and Dr. Newman declined to take part in the work. Dr.
Wright, who at the time was compelled to decline the invi-
tation, has now joined the Old Testament Company. The
first meeting of the New Testament Company took place on
June 22, 1870; before entering on the work of revision many
members of the Company joined in the Holy Communion,
in Henry VII.'s Chapel, Westminster Abbey. The Old Testa-
ment Company met for the first time on the 3oth of June.
Several changes have taken place in the composition of
the companies. The Old Testament Company has lost
through death Bishop Thirlwall, Archdeacon Rose, Canon
Selwyn, Professor McGill, Professor Fairbairn, and Professor
Davies (also Dr. Weir, mentioned below); and by resignation
the Bishop of Lincoln, Professor Plumptre, and Canon Jebb.
The following new members have been added:—Mr. R. N.
Bensly, Fellow and Hebrew Lecturer, Caius College, Cam-
bridge; Rev. J. Birrell, Professor of Oriental Languages, St.
Andrews ; Dr. F. Chance (Editor of a Commentary on /ob);
Rev. T. K. Cheyne, Fellow and Hebrew Lecturer, Balliol
College, Oxford ; Mr. S. R. Driver, Tutor of New College,
Oxford; Dr. G. Douglas, Professor of Hebrew, Free Church
College, Glasgow; Rev. C. J. Elliott, late Fellow of St.
Catharine's College, Cambridge; Rev. J. D. Geden, Pro-
fessor of Hebrew, Wesleyan College, Didsbury; Rev. J. R.
Lumby, Fellow of St. Catharine's College, Cambridge; Rev.
A. H. Sayce, Fellow and Tutor of Queen's College, Oxford;
Rev. W. R. Smith, Professor of Hebrew, Free Church
College, Aberdeen; Dr. D. H. Weir, Professor of Oriental
Languages, Glasgow.
Four members of the New Testament Company have
been removed by death—Dean Alford, the Bishop of Win-
chester, Dr. Eadie, and Dr. Tregelles (who was prevented
by ill health from taking any part in the work). Three mem-
American Co-operation. 22 I
bers were added shortly after the commencement of the
work—Dr. David Brown, Professor of Divinity and Principal,
Free Church College, Aberdeen ; Dr. C. Merivale, Dean of
Ely; and Dr. C. Wordsworth, Bishop of St. Andrews. Dr.
Merivale resigned his place as a reviser in 1871. In 1873,
the Rev. Edwin Palmer, Professor of Latin, Oxford, became
a member of the company, which now numbers twenty-four
members. The Bishop of Winchester is the Chairman of
the Old Testament Company, the Bishop of Gloucester and
Bristol of the New. The former usually meets for a session
of ten days five times in the year; the latter for a session of
four days every month, except August and September.
Soon after the commencement of the work in England,
the Committee of Convocation sought the co-operation of
American scholars. The negotiations were conducted mainly
through an eminent American Professor, Dr. Philip Schaff,
of New York. Through his exertions two companies of
revisers, “men of ability, experience, and reputation in
Biblical learning and criticism,” and fairly representing “the
leading churches and theological institutions” of the United
States, were formed before the close of 1871. The following
list of names is taken from an interesting account of the
revision written by Dr. Schaff:-
THE OLD TESTAMENT COMPANY.
Dr. T. J. Conant (Baptist), Brooklyn, New York.
Dr. E. Day (Congregationalist), New Haven, Conn.
Dr. J. De Witt (Reformed), New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Dr. W. H. Green (Presbyterian), Princeton, New Jersey.
Dr. G. E. Hare (Episcopalian), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Dr. C. P. Krauth (Lutheran), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Dr. J. Packard (Episcopalian), Fairfax, Virginia.
Dr. C. E. Stowe (Congregationalist), Cambridge, Mass.
Dr. J. Strong (Methodist), Madison, New Jersey.
Dr. C. V. A. Van Dyck 1 (Missionary), Beyrout, Syria.
Dr. T. Lewis (Reformed), Schenectady, New York.
1 Corresponding member.
222 The English Bible.
NEW TESTAMENT COMPANY.
Bishop Lee (Episcopalian), Wilmington, Delaware.
Dr. E. Abbott (Unitarian), Cambridge, Mass.
Dr. G. R. Crooks (Methodist), New York.
Dr. H. B. Hackett (Baptist), Rochester, New York.
Dr. J. Hadley (Congregationalist), New Haven, Conn.
Dr. C. Hodge (Presbyterian), Princeton, New Jersey.
Dr. A. C. Kendrick (Baptist), Rochester, New York.
Dr. M. B. Riddle (Reformed), Hartford, Conn.
Dr. C. Short (Episcopalian), New York.
Dr. H. B. Smith (Presbyterian), New York.
Dr. J. H. Thayer (Congregationalist), Andover, Mass.
Dr. W. F. Warren (Methodist), Boston, Mass.
Dr. E. A. Washburn (Episcopalian), New York.
Dr. T. D. Woolsey (Congregationalist), New Haven, Conn.
Dr. P. Schaff (Presbyterian), New York.
To the Old Testament Company have since been added
Dr. C. A. Aiken, of Princeton, New Jersey. Dr. C. M.
Mead, Andover, Mass. ; Dr. H. Osgood, Flushing, Long
Island. To the New Testament Company (which has lost
from its ranks Dr. Crooks, Dr. Hadley, Dr. Smith, and Dr.
Warren) have been added four members, Dr. J. K. Burr,
Madison, New Jersey ; Professor T. Chase, Haverford
College, Pennsylvania; Dr. H. Crosby, New York; and
Dr. T. Dwight, New Haven, Connecticut. Dr. Schaff is
the president of the committee, Dr. Green and Dr. Woolsey
the chairmen of the two companies. On the 7th December,
1871, a number of American revisers met in New York for
the purpose of adopting a “constitution,” which provided
that “The American committee shall co-operate with the
British companies on the basis of the principles and rules
of revision adopted by the British committee. The British
companies will submit to the American companies, from
time to time, such portions of their work as have passed the
first revision, and the American companies will transmit
their criticisms and suggestions to the British companies
Oójects of the Wew Revision. 223
before the second revision.” The American companies
entered on their work in October, 1872.
During the last seven years and a half the English revi-
sion companies have regularly met, but as yet no portion of
their work has been given to the world. It would be pre-
mature to speculate on the character of the revised version,
or on the reception which awaits it. On one point, however,
no apprehension will be entertained by any who have studied
the constitution of the companies or the rules which guide
their action. There will be no attempt to introduce a new
translation under the mask of revision. The bond that
has united the several versions which have successively
been given to the English people will not now be broken.
Amongst those who meet in the Jerusalem Chamber are
found some of the most careful students of our early English
Bibles; and the labours of Tyndale and Coverdale and their
noble followers are never forgotten in the discussions on the
sacred text. In the last century the chief aim of revisers
may have been to depart as widely as possible from the
severe style and simple language of the Authorised Version.
The highest praise sought by any now engaged in revision is
that they may be held to have removed the blemishes with-
out impairing the excellence of our revered English Bible.
I N D E X.
A
Acts, Anglo-Saxon, Free Version of, 7.
AElfric, Translations of, II.
Aldhelm, Bishop of Sherborne, 4.
Aldine Septuagint, Date of, 37.
Alfred the Great as a Translator, II.
Allen, William, 182.
American Committee of Revisers, 221,
222.
Andrews, Dr. Launcelot, 193.
Anglo-Norman Translations, II.
Anglo-Saxon Decalogue, 6.
> 3 Earliest Sacred Literature,
3.
33 Tongue, 3.
Apocrypha, Coverdale's Preface to, 113.
35 of the Authorised Version,
T95.
32 of the Bishops' Bible, 179.
Authorised Version and Geneva com-
pared, 202-—206.
and Modern Bibles,
208.
Character of, I.
comp are d with
other Translations,
2OO.
,, T)r. Gell’s Criticism
Of, 213.
,, Headings of Chap-
ters, 2II.
Illustrations of, 203,
2O5.
Marginal Notes,
2O9.
Merits and De-
merits of, 207.
Texts, Differences
in the several Edi-
tions, 210.
Translators’ Preface
to, I99.
B.
Bagster's Edition of Tyndale's Testa-
ment, 62.
Bancroft, Bishop, James I.’s Letter to,
I92.
Bede, Account of Caedmon's Works, 3.
,, Death of, 4–6.
,, Translation of St. John, 4.
P
Bellamy, Dr., Estimate of Scriptural
Translation, Ioff.
Beza New Testament, Date of, 38.
Bible and the Vulgate, 29.
,, Authorised Version indebtedness to
Tyndale and Coverdale, II2.
,, Authorised Version, Merits and
Demerits of, 207.
,, Authorised Version compared with
other Translations, 200.
, Bishop Lloyd's, 209.
,, Bishops’, 168.
Revisers of, 171.
Apocryphal Books, 179.
compared with the Great
and Genevan, 175.
Contents of, 172.
Marginal Notes, 178.
35 55 Variations in Different
Editions, 173.
,, Breeches, 164.
, Bruccioli’s, 40.
,, Cambridge, 209.
,, Character of Present, I.
,, Coverdale's, published, 98.
33 3 x How divided, 113—
II6.
,, Cromwell, Thomas, licensed to
Print the, 141.
,, Crusade against the, 144.
,, Douai, 182.
3 y ,, Authors of the, 182.
,, Douay, 16.
,, Edward VI. and the, 150.
,, English, Later History of the,
212–223.
,, English of Coverdale’s, 118.
,, First Authorised Version of the
English, I23.
,, First French, Date of, 38.
,, First printed, 34.
,, First printed Hebrew, 35.
,, First printed in Scotland, 166.
,, Gell, Dr., Criticism on the Au-
thorised Version of the, 213.
,, Genevan, 156.
Address to the Reader,
157.
and Great, Circulation
in England, 168.
and Authorised Version
compared, 201–206.
226
AWDA.X.
Bibles, Genevan compared with othe
103.
,, printed in Edward VI.’s Reig,
I5O.
Bishops as Translators, 143.
,, at the Hampton Court Confe
ence, Igo.
,, their Judgment of the Gre:
Bible, 141.
Book, Date of the First English printe
35.
“Book of Durham,” The, to.
“Book of Laws,” Alfred the Great's, 6
“Breeches Bible,” The, 164.
British Museum, Copies of Tyndale
Work in, 66, 79.
Bruccioli’s Italian Translation of th
Bible, 40.
C
Caedmon, The Paraphrase of, 3.
Cambridge Bible, The, 209.
33 Colet at, 44.
53 Company of Translators, 19.
I95.
* 3 Coverdale at, 95.
5 x Tyndale at, 43.
Castalio, Latin Bible, by, 38.
Canterbury Houses of Convocation,
Resolution of, 215.
Century, An Eventful, 33.
Chapters, Headings of, in Authorise
Version, 2II.
Character, Summary of Tyndale's, 56.
Characteristics of Tyndale’s Old Testa
ment Translation, 84. |
Cheke, Sir John, translates St. Mat
thew, 151.
Colet, Dr., at Cambridge, 44.
Cochlaeus' Conspiracy against Tyndale
49.
College, The Douai, 182.
Cologne, Tyndale at, 43.
5 3 Printing the English Testamen
... at 49.
Companies of Translators, Five, 193–
I95.
35 Instructions to, 196.
Concordances, Robert Hervey's, 166.
Conference, The Hampton Court, 190.
Cotton Manuscripts, The, Io.
Controversalist, Tyndale as a, 57.
Constance Council and the Lollards, 34.
Coverdale, Birth and supposed Birth.
place, 95.
2 5 at Cambridge, 95.
3 3 Letter to Thomas Cromwell,
95.
33 Connection with Tyndale, 96.
35 publishes his Bible, 98.
... Third Edition, dedicated to
the King, 99.
Bible, Genevan, Rapid Increase of the,
39.
, Great, Arrangement of, 148.
Chief Characteristic of, I46.
compared with Tyndale and
Coverdale's, I44.
35 ,, Copies of, still preserved, I49.
33 ,, Psalter of, I47.
,, Italian of Malermi, 39.
,, James I.'s Opinion of the Genevan,
IOI.
, Le #vre's Translation, 40.
,, Latin, First printed, 34.
,, Long Parliament and the, 212.
,, Luther's, 41.
,, Marginal Notes to Authorised Ver-
sion, 209.
,, Matthew's, 122.
and Tyndale’s, com-
93 33
39 35
pared, I28.
3 y 3 x compared with Earlier
Translations, 129–
I32
corresponds with Tyn-
dale's and Cover-
dale's, 126.
Copies still existing,
I 32.
Examination of, 125.
Order of the Books, 132.
Preliminary Matter,
I 2 I.
Tºiators of several
Books, I27.
, Modern and First Edition of
Authorised Version, 208.
,, of English Northern Speech, the,
3I.
,, Qlivetan's Translation, 40.
,, Oxford Edition of the, 209.
,, Popularity of the Great, I40.
, Publication of the Authorised Ver-
Slon, IQ9.
,, Reyna's, De, Translation, 40.
,, Reynolds, Dr., moves for a New
Translation, 191.
,, Rogers’, John, 128–132.
,, Taverner's, 133.
Copies of, 136.
3 5 examined, 134.
,, The Great, of 1539, 138.
Successive Editions,
5 y 55
5 3 33
I42.
,, Title-page of Coverdale’s, 119.
the Great, 138.
the Fourth Edition
of the Great, 142.
, Two Early Versions of the, 18.
,, Variations in Tyndale and Cover-
dale's, Io'7.
,, What is an English, 2.
Worms, The, 42.
, Zurich, The, 41.
33 ,, Coverdale's indebtedness
** to, Io9.
35 53
33 35
53 Patronage of Cromwell, 99.
33 Exile from England, roo.
33 Honours and Death, Ioo.
IZVDAE.X.
Coverdale's Reasons for Translating, IoI.
indebtedness to other Trans-
lations, Io2–106.
Specimens of his Transla-
tions, Io9, roA.
33 Translation vindicated by
Whittaker, 106.
* 3 Five Interpreters assist. Io'7
2 x and Tyndale’s Translation,
Variations in, Ioy, Io8, IIo,
III.
and Luther's Version, Io9.
3 2 and the Zurich Bible, Io9.
Importance of his Transla-
tion, II2.
3 * and the Authorised Version,
II2.
y 3 his Preface to the Apocrypha,
II.3.
Divisions of his Bible, 113—
II.O.
Psalter, II6.
English of his Version, II8.
7 x Title-Pages to his Bible, Irg.
x 3 his Latin-English Testa-
Iment, I2O.
3.2 Authorised by Cromwell to
Prepare a Third Bible, 137.
5 3 his Bible compared with the
Great, 144.
Convocation, A Petition from, 98.
Houses of, Resolution
passed by, 215.
Committee
of, 216.
Cranmer and Matthew's Bible, 123.
Connection with the Great
Bible, 141, 142.
Crowland, Guthlac of, 4.
Cromwell, Thomas, and the Great Bible,
2 3
9 3 35
3 ×
I4O.
Coverdale's Letter to, 95.
obtains a License for Print-
ing the Bible, 14.I.
25 Patronage of, 99.
Cuthbert’s account of Bede's Death,
4–6.
53
33
D.
Decalogue, The Anglo-Saxon, 6.
Dobenek, John, conspires against Tyn-
dale, 49.
“Dooms,” King Alfred's, 6.
Douai, Roman College of, 182.
Douay Bible, The, 16.
IE.
Eadfrith's Gospels, Io.
Edward VI. and the Bible, 15o.
Elizabeth, Queen, and the Bible, 165.
Bibles published in her
Reign, 168.
Fruchiridiom Militis Christiazzi, Trans-
lated by Tyndale, 45.
33
227
England, Date of the first Book printed
III, 35.
Tyndale's Testament Intro-
duced into, 51.
English Metrical Paraphrases, Early, 12.
,, of Coverdale’s Translation, 118.
Engraving, Holbein’s, for the Great
Bible, 138.
Enzimas, Spanish Translation by, 40.
Epistles, Authorised Version, Translators
35
Of, IQ5.
Erasmus and the Scriptures, 47.
5 x in England, 36.
5 x his Latin Paraphrases, 36.
22 his Greek Testament, 36, 74.
25 Greek Manuscripts used by,
74.
Exodus, Anglo-Saxon Portion of, 7.
F.
Farmen and Owun, Anglo-Saxon Trans-
lators, Io.
Fèvre, Le, Translation by, 40.
Fisher's, Bishop, Penitential Psalms, 39.
Forshall and Madden's Edition of
Wycliffe, 19.
Foxe's Account of Tyndale, 43.
,, Summary of Tyndale’s Charac-
ter, 56.
Fragment, The Grenville, 60.
French Bible, Date of the first, 38.
Froude's Eulogy on Tyndale, 94.
Fry, Francis, Facsimile of Tyndale's
Testament, 61. r
G
Gaunt, John of protects Wycliffe, 18.
Gell, Dr., Criticism on the Authorised
Version, 213.
Genesis, Character of Tyndale's Trans-
lation of, 81.
Geneva, Band of Exiles in, 153.
Bible and Testament, Editions
of, 166.
55 Bible, James I.'s Opinion of, 191.
and Authorised Version
compared, 201–206.
Genevan Bible, 156.
Address to the Reader,
I57.
compared with others,
3 ×
33 33
I64.
Explanatory Notes of,
I62
Examples of 163.
Language of, 165.
33 ,, Result of combined
Labour, 158.
,, Testament, and Testament of
Genevan Bible, 159.
German Bible, rapid Increase of, 39.
Geste, Bishop of Rochester, and the
Psalter, 169.
Gilby, Anthony, 153.
Gloss, Manuscript of the Rushworth, yo.
228
AVZDAX.
Gospels, Character of the Anglo-Saxon,
9.
5 x Extract from, Io.
ry Lindisfarne, Io.
53 of Authorised Version, Trans-
lators of, 195.
35 of Macregol, Io.
5 3. of St. Cuthbert, Io.
Goths, Bible translated for the, 38.
Grafton, Imprisonment of, 143.
Greek Grammar, Date of first printed, 35.
,, Lexicon, Date of first printed, 35.
,, Learning, Revival of, 34.
,, Testament, Date of the first
printed, 35.
,, Testament Erasmus', used by
Tyndale, 76.
,, Text of Tyndale, 74.
Gregory’s “Pastoral Care,” King Al-
fred’s Preface to, 6.
Guthlac of Crowland, 4.
H
Hamburg, Tyndale in, 48.
Hampton Court Conference, 190.
Harman and Anne Boleyn, 64.
Hebrew Bible, Date of the first printed,
35.
,, Grammar and Lexicon of
Reuchlin, 35.
Henry VIII. and the Great Bible, 139,
I4I.
33 and the Translators of the
Testament, 98.
2 2. Coverdale's Bible dedi-
cated to, 99.
> 3. Lee's Letter to, 51.
Hereford, Nicholas de, Translation, and
Wycliffe, 22.
and Purvey's
Translation, 25.
Heresy, Tyndale accused of, 45.
Hervey, Lord A., discovers Tyndale’s
Jonah, 85.
Hervey, Robert F., Concordances of
66
IOO.
Holbein, Hans, and the Great Bible, 138.
Huss, John, on Wycliffe's Translation,
5.5 55
22.
5 3 Sympathy with Wycliffe,
33.
I.
Idiom and Literalness, 73.
Inquisition, Mandate of 137.
Interpreter's, Coverdale's Five, Ioy.
Italian Bible of Malermi, 39.
J.
James I. arranges for a New Transla-
tion, 192.
y 3 Opinion of the Genevan Bible,
I9I.
22 Religious Parties on his Ac-
CeSSlon, Igo.
Jerome's Psalter, 8.
John's, St., Gospel, Bede's Translation
Of, 4.
Joye's Revision of Tyndale's Testament,
3.
Juda, Leo, Date of Translation by, 82.
K.
Knighton, Henry, and Wycliffe's Trans-
lation, 22.
L
Labours, Tyndale’s, depreciated, 87.
Latin-English Testaments, Coverdale's,
I2O.
Latin, Wycliffe’s Translation from, 28.
Laurence, Thomas, and the Bishop's
Bible, 172, 173.
Lee's Letter to King Henry VIII., 51.
Lindisfarne Gospels, Io.
Literalness and Idiom, 73.
Literature, Sacred, Earliest Anglo-
Saxon, 3.
Lloyd's, Bishop, Bible, 209.
London, Bishop of, and Tyndale, 48.
Lollards, Influence of, 33.
3 3 Writings condemned, 34.
Lord's Prayer, a Fourteenth Century
Version of, I 3.
Luther, Tyndale’s Visit to, 49.
Luther's Arrangement of the Books of
the Testament, 78.
,, German Testament and Bible,
4I.
,, Translation, Influence of, 39.
Lyra, Nicholas de, 27.
M
Macregol, Gospels of, Io.
Malermi, Italian Bible of, 39.
Malmesbury, William of, referred to, 6.
Manuscripts, The Cotton, Io.
33 Greek, Variations in, 74.
25 ,, used by Erasmus,
74, 75.
Marburg, Tyndale's Residence and Work
at, 54.
Marginal Comments, Purvey's, 26.
33 Notes of Authorised Version,
2OC).
Marler, Antãº, Granted a Patent to
|Print the Bible, 143.
Marsh, G. P., Estimate of Tyndale, 91.
Martyrdom, Tyndale's, 56.
Mary, Queen, prohibits Scripture read-
1ng, I52.
Matthew, St., Gospel of, translated by
eke, I51.
32 Specimen, I51.
33 Thomas, 125.
2 3 Vocabulary and Character-
istics, 152.
Matthew's Bible, 122.
2 x ,, and Tyndale's com-
pared, 128.
z
JAV/OA: Y.
Matthew's Bible compared with Earlier
Translations, I29–
I32.
Copies still existing,
I32.
corresponds with Co-
verdale's and Tyn-
dale’s, 126.
Joshua to Chronicles,
Translators of, 127.
Order of the Books,
I32.
Preliminary Matter,
I31.
Recommended to
Cromwell, 123.
Mazarin Bible, the first printed Book, 35.
2 3 ,, . Value of a, 35.
Millenary Petition, The, 190.
Monmouth, Humphrey, 48.
More, Sir Thomas, and Tyndale's
Translation, 89.
2 3 3 5 quoted, 32.
Münster, Sebastian, "Old Testament
Translation, 37.
N.
Nation and the Bible, The, 14o.
Notes, Early Explanatory, 27.
,, Explanatory of the
Bible, 162.
33 5 y
Genevan
Examples, 163.
$ 2 5 y of Wycliffe. 27.
,, Marginal of Authorised Version,
2O9.
,, of the Bishops' Bible, 178.
O
Olivetan, Translation by, 40.
“Ormulum,” the Poem, 12.
Orm's Metrical Paraphrase, I2.
Oxford Company of Translators, 194,
I95.
,, Edition of the Bible, 209.
,, Greek First Taught in, 35.
,, Tyndale at, 43.
P.
Pagninus's, Sanctes, Latin Translation,
37.
Paraphrase of Caedmon, 3.
Paraphrasts, The Earlier, I—I6.
Paris, Coverdale in, I37.
Parker, Archbp., designs a Translation,
6
I09.
Edition of the Anglo-
Saxon Gospels, 9.
5 y 2 3 Letter to Cecil, 17o.
Parliament, Act of, relating to the
Scriptures, 14.3.
33 and the Bible, the Long,
32 33
2I2.
“Pastoral Care,” Gregory's, Alfred's
Preface to, 6.
229
Pentateuch translated by Tyndale, 79.
x 3 Tyndale's, 79.
Illustration of, 8o.
2 3 Character of, 81.
3 3 of the Authorised Version
and Tyndale's, 86.
Period, An Eventful, g6.
Petition, Millenary, Igo.
Poem, Roye's Satirical, 52.
Pope, Tyndale defies the, 46.
Polyglott, the Complutensian, 36.
Prayer-Book and Coverdale's Psalter, 116.
Revision of, 213.
Character of, 213,
> 3 2 3
33 y 5
3 y 2 3 5 5
2I4.
,, Lord's, I4th Century Version of,
I3.
Preface of Authorised Version, 199.
Printing, Invention of, 34.
5 * Rapid Spread of, 35.
Proclamation, A Royal, 96.
Prologue, Character of Wycliffe’s, 20.
Prophets, Coverdale's and Authorised
ersion, II7.
Psalms, and Geste, Bishop of Rochester,
6
IOC).
5.5 Nºumbian Version of, 13.
,, Penetential, Bishop Fisher's, 39.
Psalter, Anglo-Saxon Versions of, 8.
,, Coverdale's, II6.
, Shoreham and Rolle's Versions
of, I5.
, The Great Bible, 147.
Puritans at Hampton Court Conference,
I90.
Purvey, John, quoted, II.
3 * Retraction of, 18.
,, Translation by, 22.
comparison of, with
ereford’s, 25.
Marginal Comments,
26.
2 3 2 3
; 3 3 y
R.
Reuchlin's Hebrew Grammar and Lexi-
COn, 35.
Revisers, American Committee of, 222.
2.5 Archbishop Parker’s Rules for,
I70.
3 3 Names of Old and New
Testament, 217, 218.
5 3 Rules adopted by, 218.
Revision, Bible, Various Schemes for,
2I4.
5 y of Authorised Version, Last,
I98.
35 Probable Results of the
Present, 223.
2 3 Specimens of a New, 215.
Reynolds, Dr., petitions for a New
Translation, 191.
Rheims Testament, The, 181.
Rinck, Hermann, 50.
Rogers, John, Career of, 124.
,, Bible compared with others, 128.
23O
JAWDA2_X.
Rolle’s Version of the Psalter, 15.
,, Illustrations from, 15.
Roman Psalter, Jerome's, 9.
Rome, Tyndale as an Assailant of, 81.
Roye's Poetical Satire, 52.
Rules for Revisers, 170, 218.
“Rushworth Gloss” Manuscript, The,
IO.
S
Salus Animae, 13.
Sampson, Thomas, 154.
Saxon Translation, Loss of, II.
Scholars, English, of the 15th Century,
35.
Scotland, First Bible printed in, 166.
Scriptures, Erasmus and the, 47.
ontents and Arrangement
of Wycliffe's, 28.
First Portion printed in
England, 39.
in Anglo-Saxon Prose, 6, 7.
Names of Revisers of the,
217, 218, 220–222.
Petition for their Translation,
53
9ö.
> x Portions assigned to be
translated, 193–195.
9 Prohibited in Mary’s Reign,
I52.
33 Reynolds, Dr., petitions for
a New Translation, 191.
3 * Reading of, restricted, r33.
3.3 Royal Proclamation against,
97. tº-
33 Translation of, in the 14th
Century, 23.
Translated into Slavonic, 38.
> 3 Two Versions of the 14th
Century com-
pared, 21.
Illustrations
Oi, 24, 25.
Supposed Au-
thors, 22.
Vernacular Translation of,
3 x 92 25
3 * 33 x 3
53
3ö.
Selden quoted, 198.
Septuagint, the Aldine, Date of, 37.
Sherborne, Aldhelm, Bishop of, 4.
Shipwreck, Tyndale suffers, 54.
Shoreham's Version of the Psalter, 15.
Slavonic, Scriptures translated into, 38.
Spelman's Anglo-Saxon Psalter, 8.
Spanish Translation of the Bible, 4o.
Stevenson's Anglo-Saxon Psalter, 8.
Sowlehele, The, 13.
T.
Taverner, Richard, 132.
publishes the Bible, 133.
Bible examined, 134.
New Testament examined,
I35.
33
33
32
Testament, New, Anne Boleyn's Copy
of, 65.
Authorised
compared
others, 206.
Copies of Tyndale’s
preserved, 64, 66,69.
Coverdale’s, Arrange-
In e n i.
of, II5.
L at in-
Version
with
I2O.
5 2 , , Date of Beza's, 38.
Discovery of a Por-
tion of Tyndale's, 59.
Facsimile of a Portion
of Tyndale’s, 60.
Erasmus's Greek, 36.
35 and Tyn-
dale’s com-
pared, 76."
German, 41.
Genevan, I54.
compared
with others,
I59. I60.
Revision of
33 3.5 22
3 * 3 * Luther's. 78.
of the Bishops' Bible,
176.
printed at Cologne, 49.
Rheims, 181.
Tyndale’s Arrange-
ment, 77.
Several
Editions,
61, 62,64,
65, 69.
and Autho-
rised Ver-
sion, 70.
53 Old, Munster Translation
Of, 37.
Text? Greek, Did Tyndale use the, 74.
Texts, Variations in Authorised Version,
3 y 39 3 y
2.I.O.
Textual Differences in Nicholas and
Purvey, 25.
Thorpe's Translation of Caedmon, 3.
Title-Page of Coverdale's Bible, £19.
3.5 of the Great Bible, 138.
to the Authorised Version,
199-
$ 3 to the Genevan Testament,
I54.
to the Fourth Edition of the
Great Bible, 142.
Tomson, Laurence, Edition of the
Genevan Testament, 166.
Translation by Le Fèvre, 40.
23 I
Tyndale on the Continent, 48.
33 visits Luther, 49.
,, Dobenek's Conspiracy against,
49.
33 Prints the New Testament,
49, 5 I.
93. Efforts made to Suppress his
Translation, 53.
2 3 at Marburg, 54.
3 y suffers Shipwreck, 54.
32 assisted by Coverdale, 54.
3 3 Translates the Pentateuch, 55.
5 p. Controversy with Sir T. More,
55.
5 § Title of his Revised Testa-
ment. 55.
,, Third Edition of his Testa-
ment, 56.
33 Martyrdom, 56.
3 y Summary of Character, 56.
3 3 as a Controversalist, 57.
y 9 Discovery of a Portion of his
First Testament, 61.
,, his Octavo Testament, 61.
2 3 his Octavo and Quarto com-
pared, 62.
3 5 his Second Edition, 64.
,, his Third Edition, 65.
3 y Illustrations of his Translation,
. 67, 83.
2 3 his Pentateuch, 79.
33 his Genesis examined, 81.
9 3 his Book of Jonah, 82.
3.3 and the Authorised Version 85.
33 Translates from the Original,
86
* 5 misjudged, 87.
2 3 his Learning, 88.
2 3 Independence as a Translator,
88
$ 3 and Sir T. More, 89.
3 y and Wycliffe, 90, 92.
53 Froude's Eulogy on, 94.
3 × vindicated by Dr. Whittaker,
Ioô.
35 connection with Matthew’s
Bible, 127.
his Translation and the Great
Bible compared, 144.
TJ.
Ulfilas, 38.
V.
AVADAX.
Translation by Qlivetan, 40.
3 3 Italian, 40.
Influence of Luther’s, 39.
2 3 e -
Translation, Illustrations of:—
Alfred, King, “ Tooms,” 6.
Anglo-Saxon, Luke ii., 12.
3 y Genesis xlv., 13.
5 3 Psalm czXi.. I4.
Authorised Version, Isaiah liv., 203.
33 33 om a ns xii.,
2O5.
Bishop's Bible, Isaiah liv., 203.
5 x ,, Romans xii., 205.
Caedmon, Paraphrase, 3.
Cheke, Sir John, Matthew xiv., 151.
Coverdale, Numbers xxiv., Io9.
55 Isaiah xii., IoA.
53 Isaiah liv., 202.
5 y Romans xii., 204.
3 y Colossians i., IoA.
Douai Bible, Isaiah liv., 202.
Genevan Bible, Isaiah liv., 203.
Luke i , 16o.
5 y ,, Romans xii., 205.
Great Bible, Isaiah liv. 203.
2 3 3 * omans xii., 204.
Matthew’s Bible, Romans xii., 204.
Purvey, 2 Samuel xxiii., 24.
3 3 Psalm xc., 25.
35 Matthew xiii., 67.
3 × John vii., 24.
33 Colossians i , 25.
Rheims Testament, Romansxii., 205.
Rolle, Richard, Psalm lxxviii., 15.
Shoreham, Psalm xxiii., 15.
Tyndale, Numbers xxiv., 83.
2 3 Isaiah xii., 8o.
2 3 Jonah iv., 83.
3 y Matthew xiii., 60, 67.
* 3 Romans xii., 204.
55 Colossians i., 68.
3 * Hebrews xi., 68.
Wycliſſe, 2 Samuel xxiii., 24.
5 y 95
2 3 Psalm Xc., 25.
3 y Isaiah liv., 202.
9 3 John vii., 24.
Colossians i., 25.
Translation Spanish, 40.
Translators, Bishops as, I43.
3 y Early English, 4.
5 5 Method of Work, 20.
33 Tyndale's Independence of
other, 88.
Tyndale, Foxe's Account of, 43, 44.
33 Date and Place of Birth, 44.
33 Residence with Sir J. Walsh,
44.
5 3 accused of Heresy, 45.
5 3 Translates Enchiridiom, &c.,
45.
2 3 and the Pope, 46.
53 Dawning of a Great Purpose,
40.
3 y Reminiscence of Childhood, 47.
53 and the Bishop of London, 48.
Variations in Tyndale and Coverdale,
29.
Verses, First Translation with, 37.
Version, Authorised, Translation of,
I93–195.
Genevan, 150.
Vulgate, Character of the, 183.
,, Translation critically examined,
185-–188.
, Various Editions of, 189.
,, Weakest Part of the, 29.
232
JAWDAX.
W.
Waldo, Peter, 38.
Walsh, Sir John, and Tyndale, 44.
Westminster Company of Translators,
I93.
Whittaker's, Dr., vindication of Tyndale
and Coverdale, Ioff.
Whittingham, William, 154.
Wish, A King's, 6.
Wolsey, Cardinal, and Tyndale, 54.
Wood's, Anthony à, Account of Taverner,
I32.
Words, Ecclesiastical, discarded by Tyn-
dale, 89.
,, Different ways of Spelling, 65.
,, Familiar and Strange, of Tyn-
dale, 71.
,, Tyndale's use of connective, 73.
INDEX OF BOOKS QUOTED AND
REFERRED TO.
Work and Workmen, The, 2.
Worms Bible, 42.
,, Tyndale at, 5o.
Wycliffe, Career of, 17.
53 Did he Translate the Scrip-
tures? 18, 22.
25 the First Translator, 23.
9 3 completes Hereford's Trans-
lation, 23.
3 5. Contents and Arrangement of
his Versions, 28.
,, his Versions and Later Trans-
lations, 30.
2 3 Is his the Earliest? 31.
33 his Translations condemned,
33.
Z.
Zurich Bible, The, 41.
Anderson, Azazzals of the English Bzółe,
98, 99.
5 3 Aletters of Cochlazes, 50.
Arber, Facsimzile of the Grenz/ille Frag-
272ezz”, 44, 47, 54, 57, 61.
,, Preface to More's Dža/ograze, go.
Baber, Weze, Testazazent by Wicăſ, 8.
Bagster, Ezeglish Hexaºla, IQ, 39, 47,
64.
Bede, Ecclesiastical Aſſistory, 3, 6.
Bible AEdatcator, 2II.
Caxton Celebratione Catalogºte, 40, 99,
I22, 136.
Clarke, Dr. A., Comzmeezetary, 19
Coverdale’s Rezzzazzas, 96.
Davies, Rev. T. L. O., Biöle-English,
2 II.
Demaus, Life of Latimzer, 98.
, Zöfe of Zyndale, 44, 47,49, 54,
55, 58.64, 81.96.
Earlwood and Wright, The Biöle Word-
Book, 2II.
Erasmus, Ezechºridiom. Milzās Chris-
#2azzi, 45.
Forshall and Madden, The Wycliffite
Verszozzs, 31.
Foxe, Acts and Mozzlements, 31, 42, 44,
54, 55.58, 24, 27.
,, Zºſe of Tyzzdale, 57.
Froude, A., History of Ezeglazed, 94.
Fry, Cozerdale’s Bable, 119.
Fulke, Defence of English Translationes,
I42.
,, English Refraced, 165.
Gell, Robert, Azz Essay Toward the
A mezzdmaenzz of the Last English
Trazzs/ationz of the Bible, 213,
Ginsburg, Comamentary one FCC/esiastes,
Io9.
James, Dr., Treatise on the Corruption
of Scripture, 19.
Lewis, History of Translations, 127,
2 I2.
Marsh, G. P., Zeczzeres on the English.
Zazºg 24&ge, 92.
Milman, History of Zafizz Christianity,
6
30.
More, Sir Thomas, Dialogue, go.
Morris and Skeat, Specimens of Early
Anglish, I4.
Pauli, Life of Ažfred the Great, 6.
Scrivener, Dr., Cambridge Paragraph
Biöle, 199, 2II.
Smith, Dr., Dictionary of the Bible, 93,
I49. IO3.
Strype, Life of Crazemzer, 127, 140.
Thorpe, Azzcienz Zaws and Zzzstitutions
of Ezeglazed, 6.
Tyndale, Doctrinal Treatises, 47, 91.
33 Parable of the Wicked Mamz-
7/2072, 51.
Westcott, Canon, History of the English
Azöle, 51, 52, 55, 64, 65, 70, 72, 81,
II9, I47, 200, 207.
Whittaker, Dr., Aze Historical and
Critical Engzairy into the Interſ re-
tation of the Hebrew Scriffſſacres,
Ioô.
CASSELL PETTER & GALPIN, BELLE SAUVAGE WORKS, LONDON, E.C.
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
3 9015 06267
||||||||||||
º * . . . . º ... ºr
. . . ºº : sº, º
- ~\º- * --
DD NOT REMOVE
DR
MUTIILATE [ARD

· №rr
:，:
¿¿.**
∞∞∞
aeta 3 •
· · · · ·
;---）;
ºº！, :）.
[]
« »， §: ****
º ：**） , （* * r '
· § . . .
- 4 + · · *
• • •
ae
“… . . ~ ~ !
• -s （ſ.º ： （ ）
… tº
... x Mºº
sº wº
* *
*.*, *.
* * *
* * *
*
3.
.*
¿¿.*#:
ſºſº.， ， ，
！！！！！！！
：
， ！
→ ··
iſ （???-№vºſ.
ſ （， ， ， '） *： ***
· × ≤ ≥ ≡.·
º
*
**.*.*.
º º v.
！， º
§§
º
*
** .*
¿a.
***¿.*¿¿.*
ſț¢--
ſsº. №º）, *'，;*，
|-*** … ，·
·:（5$$$
∞ √∞∞∞
»№，-
*... i.
B
L. wº
$º
A *
º
*...* * * *.*
****
~ : -
gº ºf ..." v tº
* : * *
3 * * * * *
º, º f : * *
º
* M:
::::::::
*.*.
º
º
ºt.º.º.º.
Pºw ºf -
º “sº,
§§§§