BY THE REV. D. BEATON, WICK.
TO the “Most High and Mighty Prince James, by the grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland,” the English-speaking people throughout the world are indebted for the translation, or more correctly, the revision of the Bible which has maintained its place of exalted eminence for three hundred years. James’s part in this work, which has had an incalculable influence on the great bulk of the English-speaking people of the two great nations of the United States and Britain, is soon told. On his ascension to the English throne in 1603, James was approached by the Puritans through their millenary petition in order that he might redress some of their grievances. The king astutely promised a Conference where points of difference between the Prelatic and the Puritan parties might be discussed.
The Conference was held at Hampton Court in January, 1604. Prelatist and Puritan discussed long and learnedly the points on which they disagreed, but the main interest of the Conference, as far as our present purpose is concerned, is the suggestion thrown out by Dr. Reynolds, the leader of the Puritans, that there should be a new version of the English translation of the Scriptures, which was very heartily supported by the king. “May your Majesty be pleased,” said Dr. Reynolds, “that there might be a new translation of the Bible, such as are extant being corrupt, and not answering the original.” Bancroft, Bishop of London, objected to the suggestion, giving as his reason that “if every man’s humour might be followed, there would be no end of translating.” The king, however, was of a different opinion, and took occasion to have a hit at the Geneva version and its notes which certainly did not encourage the Stewart doctrine of kingship. “I profess,” he said, “I could never yet see a Bible well translated in English; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva is the worst. I wish some special pains were taken for a uniform translation, which should be done by the best learned in both Universities, then reviewed by the Bishops, presented to the Privy Council, lastly, ratified by Royal Authority, to be read in the whole Church, and no other.” This was the chief connection James had with the Authorised Version, but his intervention at the Conference led to the appointment of a number of scholars whose work was issued to the public three hundred years ago.
Six months after the Hampton Court Conference, fifty-four dignitaries and scholars were appointed by some unknown, though competent authority. Of these, however, only forty-seven were actually engaged in the work. The translators, if regally appointed, did not receive royal treatment. Some of them, it is true, afterwards were promoted to bishoprics or deaneries, but, generally speaking, they “received nothing but free entertainment in the colleges, till some of them met in London for the final revision of the work.” The publisher and printer, Robert Barker, bore the burden of the expense to the extent of £3,500. Dr. Reynolds, the Puritan leader and one of the translators, was not privileged to see the completion of the work which was the outcome of his own suggestion. He died in May, 1607. He was a man, says Anthony Wood, who “had turned over all writers, profane, ecclesiastical, and divine, all the councils, fathers and histories of the Church.” Associated with him were the foremost scholars of Hebrew and Greek in their day. The translators were divided into six companies. Two of these met at Westminster, two at Oxford, and two at Cambridge. The Scriptures, including the Apocrypha, were likewise divided into six portions, and a portion assigned to each company.
“Never,” says Dr. Scrivener, “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 working.” The lengthy preface—The Translators to the Reader—gives very little information. We learn from the instructions to the translators, that they were to make use of “the ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishop’s Bible—and as little altered as the truth of the original will permit” (Instruction I.) The old ecclesiastical words were to be kept, e.g., the word Church was not to be translated Congregation (Instruction III.) The division of chapters were not to be altered, or, if necessary, as little as possible (Instruction V.) Every particular man of each company was to take the same chapter or chapters, and, having translated or amended them severally by himself as he thought good, the whole company was then to meet together and confer on what they had done, and agree as to what was to remain as the translation (Instruction VIII.) When a whole book was thus finished, it was to be sent to the others (Instruction IX.), and if they discovered any passage on which they were not agreed, the place was to be noted, and the reasons of disagreement were to be stated. The book was then returned to the company responsible for its translation, and, if they disagreed with the amended translation, the matter was to be discussed at the general meeting, “which is to be of the chief persons of each company at the end of the work” (Instruction X.) In cases of special difficulty the translators were allowed to send “letters to be directed by authority, to any learned man in the land for his judgment” (Instruction XI.)
While the Bishop’s Bible was to be used as the basis of the new version and to be altered as little as possible, yet, as the translators point out:—”If you aske what they had before them, truely it was the Hebrewe text of the Olde Testament, the Greeke of the New. These are the two golden pipes or rather conduits where through the olive branches empty themselves into the golde.” In their fourteenth instruction they were to make use of Tyndale’s, Matthews’, Coverdale’s, Whitchurch’s, and the Genevan version. The latter, though so distasteful to James, was evidently held in high esteem by the translators, for, as Professor Moulton has pointed out, that of one hundred and eighty-two words of six verses in Isaiah liv. 11-17, eighty remain unchanged from the previous versions, sixty of these being from the Geneva version. Dr. Westcott has also pointed out that in Isaiah liii., seven-eighths are due to the Genevan. But the translators did not confine themselves to these helps, for, to quote their own words:—”Neither did wee thinke much to consult the translators and commentators—Chaldee, Hebrewe, Syrian, Greeke or Latin, no, nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch.” Strictly speaking, the Authorised Version is more a revision than a new translation, and this fact is to be borne in mind in awarding it its permanent position as an English classic. The English of this “well of English undefiled” is not the language spoken at the time of the translation. It had been the work of generations—revision after revision had all gone to the completion of the building. But to Tindale must be given the credit of laying the foundation firm and sure for his successors. “From first to last,” says Dr. Westcott, “his style and his interpretation are his own, and in the originality of Tindale is included in a large measure the originality of our English version.”
The new version was completed in 1611—seven years after the Hampton Court Conference. But the real work of revision did not begin until 1607, and did not occupy more than two years and three-quarters. It was published in a large folio volume at London, 1611, with the well-known dedication—”To the Most High and Mighty Prince James”—a dedication which must have made even King James to blush. This is followed by what Dr. Schaff terms “a very long, and learned, but pedantic and tedious preface” by Dr. Miles Smith, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester. Its heavily-weighted sentences with patristic learning contrast strangely with the simple idiomatic English of the Bible. There were two folio editions published in 1611, and also a duodecimo edition of the New Testament. Dr. Scrivener in his learned introduction to the Cambridge Paragraph Bible—the first critical edition of the English text—has shewn what liberties were taken in changing words. The new version met with a good deal of opposition, and there is abundant evidence to shew, that notwithstanding it was authorised to be read in churches, that the older versions held the ground for many years after the publication of the Authorised Version. But gradually by its merits it made its way and attained ultimately to its present high position—the national Book of the English-speaking race.
The Long Parliament, among its multitudinous projects, had its thoughts turned to the revision of the new version. On April, 1653, an order was made that “a Bill should be brought in for a new translation of the Bible out of the original tongues.” The project, however, for the time being ended there. Three years later the matter was brought up again, when a sub-committee were appointed by the Grand Committee for Religion “to consider of the translation and impressions of the Bible, and to offer their opinions thereon to this committee.” The committee met at Whitelocke’s house, who has given an account of the matter in his Memorials. They “had the most learned men in the Oriental tongues to consult with . . . and divers excellent and learned observations of some mistakes in the translations of the Bible in English; which yet was agreed to be the best of any translation in the world; great pains was taken in it, but it became fruitless by the Parliament’s dissolution.”
The most formidable attempt to dethrone the Authorised Version came through the Revised Version, but as yet it has not gained the day, and the translation of King James’s day still holds the ground as the Bible of the English-speaking race. To the 1611 translators, the world owes a debt of gratitude for presenting to the English-speaking people the best Book of all in chaste and idiomatic English. For though much of the praise due to its happy turns of expression and musical rhythm belongs to its predecessors, yet it must be admitted that the translators of 1611 had a fine ear for the beauties of their mother tongue.
Such, in brief outline, is the history of our English Bible. In giving this brief sketch we have been confining ourselves, to what may be termed, the outer court, but it would be blindness indeed if we did not recognise the wonderful providence of the Author of the Scriptures that has given to the English-speaking race one of the most beautiful and successful translations of the Scriptures ever made. Tindale’s life was the penalty paid for the first real translation of portions of the Bible into English. There was a thoroughness about his work which stood the test of time, and though the Church of Rome hurried him to his death, she has failed to rob the English-speaking races of much of the work accomplished by the martyr-translator. For it is not to be forgotten that much of the originality and freshness of our translation is traceable to Tindale’s work. Of the Book itself, we may join with Robert Pollok in saying:—
“Most wondrous Book! bright candle of the Lord!
Star of Eternity! The only star
By which the bark of man can navigate
The sea of life, and gain the coast of bliss
Securely; only star, which rose on time,
And, on its dark and troubled billows, still
As generation, drifting slowly by,
Succeeded generation, threw a ray
Of heaven’s own light, and, to the hills of God—
The everlasting hills—pointed the sinner’s eye.”