succession from Henry the Eighth down to this period; while establishing the high independence of the English Bible as a distinct undertaking, and not to be confounded with other things; the present history may seem to have borne hard upon some men in high places; since it has bereaved the reigning prince, as well as some of his titled advisers, of an honour and influence which have too often been falsely ascribed to them. But in never soliciting their patronage, and in no vital point admitting of their control, it becomes a very observable circumstance, that, at this crisis, when the question of our present version of the Bible came to be settled for two centuries to come, the history will effectually redeem itself from all imputations as to anything invidious towards the Crown, as the Crown. The course it held under monarchical government, will not change when this is gone. Let executive human power be held by whomsoever it might, if put forth here, in the shape of control, it cannot be allowed, and, like former attempts, it must come to nothing. The proposal may be hinted, but it will die away.

It happened about eight years after the death of Laud, and four after that of Charles the First, that a Bill was introduced into the Long Parliament, on the 11th of January, 1653, for "a new English translation of the Bible out of the original tongues." Such a Bill, it must be remembered, had never before been laid before any previous Parliament in England. Once upon a time indeed, under Edward VI., we have seen that a Bill was brought before the Senate referring simply to the reading of the Bible, which was never mentioned a second time, or heard of more; but respecting any version, or revision of the Scriptures, as the consent of Convocation had never been deemed necessary, so that of Parliament had never been consulted. At a period, therefore, when there was no King upon the throne, no Primate in existence, nor any House of Lords, such a proposed Bill excites special notice; while as an attempt on the part of official power to interfere, it becomes the more striking, as being of a new character. The Bill was once mentioned, and only once; but the Parliament of the Lord-Brethren must no more invade the peculiar character of this cause, than the Parliament of royalty; nor must the sovereignty of the people be flattered, any more

than the sovereignty of the Prince. This Parliament had already sat for more than twelve years, retaining the supreme authority in their hands, so that this Bill sunk into oblivion by the well-known dissolution of the House soon after. On the 20th of April, Cromwell, surrounded by some of his officers and several hundred men, repaired to the Parliament, and after hearing them for a quarter of an hour discuss the question as to the form of their own dissolution, he rose and peremptorily settled it. In the way which has been so often described, he upbraided certain members, dissolved the House, ordering the members to disperse, the mace to be taken away, and carrying the keys of the House with him, in the afternoon of the same day, he also dissolved the Council of State.

It was just at the time that the London press was occupied with the last volumes of the London Polyglot, edited by Walton, in 1657, that the final attempt to interfere with our present version occurred. Walton himself and a few others appear as though they were about to reconsider it; that is, they were deputed to do so, but as they come before us under the orders of a parliamentary sub-committee, they were not allowed to proceed. The existing Parliament had been summoned by Cromwell, as the Lord Protector, to represent England, Scotland, and Ireland. They had chosen what they were pleased to style "The grand committee for Religion," but whatever else they had done, or did after, they must not interfere in regard to the Scriptures. This Committee assembled at the house of Lord Commissioner Whitlock, who has himself recorded their fruitless attempt in the following words :—

"Jan. 16, 1656," (that is, 1657,) "ordered that it be referred to a sub-committee to send for and advise with Dr. Walton, Mr. Hughes, Mr. Castell, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Poulk, Dr. Cudworth, and such others as they shall think fit; and to consider of the translations and impressions of the Bible, and to offer their opinions therein to this committee; and that it be specially commended to the Lord Commissioner Whitlock to take care of this business."

This Committee accordingly often met, from this date to November following, when they gave in a Report. They might say what they pleased, as to any existing impressions of the Bible, but, as an official body, they must not touch with the Translation itself. Accordingly they had occasion to reprobate

the incorrectness of certain editions, but particularly one, printed by John Field for the Barkers, in 1653, or twenty years after their father had been fined under Charles, for the same crime. As for the Translation itself, they made several remarks upon some mistakes; while they agreed, that, as a whole, it was "the best of any translation in the world." In this testimony, Walton, Castell, Pocock, Seldon, and others concurred; but official authority could not be permitted to proceed any farther.

Parliament was soon dissolved, and from about this period the general acquiescence of the nation in that version of the Bible, which has been read and revered ever since, may be considered as having taken place. The reader cannot fail to mark the season of this very important national occurrence; but of this we must refrain from taking any farther notice, till the History of the Bible in SCOTLAND be brought down to the same period.

SCOTLAND.

INTRODUCTION.

BRIEF NOTICE OF SCOTLAND DURING THE FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH CENTURIES THE OPENING OF THE SIXTEENTH BEFORE THE SACRED SCRIPTURES IN PRINT WERE FIRST IMPORTED.

BEFORE the Sacred Volume in our vernacular tongue, and in a printed form, was brought into England itself, we had occasion to notice the two preceding centuries; and it would be doing injustice to the northern part of our island, were we not now to glance, however briefly, at the same period.

The early connexion of Scotland with France is distinguished by the institution of the Scots College, or "Séminaire des Ecossais," in Paris, founded in 1325, by the Bishop of Moray; and in the revival of literature during the fourteenth century, such as it was, individual natives of Scotland must have taken an interest, if one of her sons may be admitted in evidence. In furnishing a poetical historian, contemporary with Wickliffe and Chaucer, of whom an Englishman, even Wharton, has told us, that he "adorned the English language by a strain of versification, expression, and poetical imagery, far superior to the age;" Caledonia had so far already proved herself to be no unmeet "nurse for a poetic child." We refer to John Barbour, Archdeacon of Aberdeen, the author of "The Bruce"'—a soothfast history of the life and adventures of Robert the First; for, independently of its poetical merits, it is acknowledged to be a book of good authority. Barbour," says Dr. Irving, in such branches of knowledge as were then cultivated; and his learning was so was evidently skilled well regulated, as to conduce to the improvement of his mind: the liberality of his views, and the humanity of his sentiments, appear occasionally to have been unconfined by the narrow boundaries of his own age." His apostrophe to Freedom, like the earliest lark of the morning, though hailing a day which he could not anticipate, has been quoted with admiration in his own country, at the distance of more than four hundred and fifty years.

"Ah! freedom is a noble thing!

Though he that aye has lived free
May not know well the property."

66

This work, finished about the year 1375, was written while Wickliffe was yet busy with his translation of the Scriptures; and we notice them together,

simply for the purpose of remarking, that as there was but little difference in the phraseology of the Scottish and English writers of this period, so the prose of Wickliffe must have been as intelligible in North Britain, as the poetry of Barbour in the south. "The obscure and capricious spelling," it has been said, may, perhaps, deter some readers from a perusal of "The Bruce," (a supposition equally applicable to Wickliffe ;) "but it is very remarkable, that Barbour, who was contemporary with Gower and Chaucer, is more intelligible to a modern reader, than either of these English writers." Nor was the language unfelt by those who first read it. On the contrary, so highly was the work appreciated, that, by Robert II., the author had a pension assigned to him, which was punctually paid until the day of his death in 1395.

Seventeen years, however, before that event, this man, along with the rest of his countrymen, had taken part in that great controversy, which agitated all Europe, when Scotland and England became divided in opinion, and on a point of such vital importance as the Pontificate itself. To this subject, reference has already been made, in our introduction at the commencement of the volume; but to understand it now, so far as Scotland was concerned, we know not of a shorter method, than that of exhibiting the two countries in the position which they respectively occupied for nearly half a century.

Thus strikingly had Providence shed confusion into the counsels of Rome; and throughout the whole period, there must have been a degree of mental agitation such as the entire island had not experienced for many a day, if, indeed, ever before. During all these years, England had been bowing to seven different Pontiffs in succession; but six of these Scotland would never acknowledge. On the contrary, she abode by Clement and Benedict, two different men; and yet it was at one of the most perplexing moments of this schism, or in 1411, that the first University in Scotland was founded at St. Andrews. Then, there were three rivals before the world; Gregory, Benedict, and John; and the grand question of the day was, which was the true Pontiff. Two years before this, the Council of Pisa, by way of allaying all strife, had increased the confusion, by deposing Benedict, the Scottish, and Gregory, the English Pontiff; leaving both England and Scotland to make their choice of Alexander V., a poor feeble character. England acquiesced, but Scotland had taken her ground, and was never to be moved; though her Monarch, James I., was then a captive in England, unrighteously detained. The consequence was, that when the University of St. Andrews came to be founded, Henry Wardlaw, the Bishop, who must have not fewer than six bulls to confirm the appointment, obtained them from Benedict, dated at Paniscola in Arragon, 25th August, 1412. Thus the first school of learning in Scotland received its authority from Peter de Luna, then in his 80th year, but a deposed Pontiff; while two other men besides himself, Gregory and John, were fighting for the same chair.