Page images
PDF
EPUB

bestowed on this edition it came to be the standard from which subsequent impressions were executed.

Another attempt in the same line seems to have been still more successful. The booksellers of the metropolis, having applied to his majesty's printers to undertake a new and handsome edition, confided its execution to Mr. George Woodfall in 1804. The copy selected for the purpose was the current Cambridge edition, with which the new edition agrees page for page. The proofs were read twice, and compared with the Oxford impression then in use, and were then transmitted to the Rev. Launcelot Sharpe, by whom they were read again, and compared with Dr. Blayney's 4to. edition of 1769. After the proofs returned for press had been corrected, the formes were placed upon the press at which they were to be worked, and another proof was taken. This was read by Mr. Woodfall's superintendent, and afterwards compared by Mr. W. himself with Dr. Blayney's edition, and any errors previously overlooked were corrected, the formes not having been removed from the press after the last proofs had been taken off. By this precaution was avoided a danger of frequent occurrence and considerable magnitude, arising from a removal of the formes from a proof-press to those on which the sheets were to be finally worked off. Of this edition, which was ready for publication in 1806, five hundred copies were printed on imperial 4to., two thousand on royal, and three thousand on medium quarto size. In the course of printing from the Cambridge copy a large number of gross errors were discovered in the latter; while the errors in the common Oxford editions were not so few as twelve hundred. The London edition of 1806 being exhausted, a new impression was put to press in 1810,

which was completed with equal beauty and accuracy in 1812, and published in 1813.*

The circulation of the Bible is intimately connected with the subject of this history. Before the end of the seventeenth century efforts were made to supply the poor with copies of the English Scriptures. Lord Wharton, a benevolent Puritan nobleman, who lived at Wooburn House, in the county of Bucks, directed by instructions, dated April 24, 1693, that 1,050 Bibles, with the singing psalms, should be provided for distribution in Yorkshire, Westmoreland, Cumberland, and Buckinghamshire. The Assembly's Catechism was to be distributed in like manner. The Christian Knowledge Society, instituted in 1698, and the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, instituted in 1701, promoted the dissemination of Bibles and Testaments. One private trust at least, in the course of the same century, took up the same object, and a like purpose no doubt animated many Christian minds; but it was not until the commencement of the present century, that any large combined catholic effort was made for the universal diffusion of the Word of God, without note or comment. The Rev. Thomas Charles, of Bala, in December, 1802, entertained "the idea of having a Bible Society established in London on a similar basis to that of the Religious Tract Society,—i. e., the union of different denominations in a common work." It was soon resolved “that it would be highly desirable to stir up the public mind to the dispersion of Bibles generally, and that a paper in a magazine to that effect might be singu

*

This account is taken from Horne's Introduction to the Bible, 5th Edit., vol. ii. p. 253. I cannot find it in the last edition.

+ Hist. of Crendon Lane Meeting House, Wycombe. Coward's Trust, of which I am an administrator.

larly useful." At length a committee met, when the object of the intended Society was maturely considered, and it was unanimously determined "to promote the circulation of the Holy Scriptures in foreign countries, and in those parts of the British dominions for which adequate provision is not yet made, it being understood that no English translation of the Scriptures will be gratuitously circulated by the Society in Great Britain ;" and on the 1st February, 1803, an important minute appears,-"That the translation of the Scriptures established by public authority be the only one in the English language to be adopted by this Society.'

* Minutes of the Committee of the Religious Tract Society.

[graphic][merged small][merged small]
[graphic]

HE idea of a Revision of our English Bible at the period of the Commonwealth we have seen came to nothing; and in the eighteenth century it attracted no large measure of attention. There were, however, learned men who saw the desirableness of attempting the object, and expressed an opinion to that effect. They felt that Biblical criticism had

made such strides, that so many MSS. had been collected for the rectification of the original text, that the Hebrew of the Old Testament and the Greek of the New were being more carefully examined than they had ever been; that the learned labours of much more than a hundred years had thrown additional light on the meaning of revelation, and that therefore these advantages ought to be made available for the improvement of our vernacular Scriptures. They appreciated the excellency of what is called the Authorized Version; but as there are spots even in the sun,

they did not think it presumptuous, nor any just cause of offence to the most enthusiastic admirers of what was finished in 1611, to assert that it contained obvious imperfections, which ought to be removed. Amongst those who took this view were Waterland, Blayney, Lowth, and Kennicott, not to mention others. But it was a long time before public opinion was ripe for a due consideration of the question.

In the meanwhile distinguished scholars issued versions of particular books, accompanied by explanatory notes, and more or less of critical discussion. Lowth's translation of Isaiah, Blayney's of Jeremiah, Newcome's of the Minor Prophets, and (in the present century Henderson's version of all these books) also Campbell's work on the Gospels, and Macknight's on the Epistles, may be regarded as productions of a tentative character preparing for a larger and a united effort. Boothroyd's Bible, Alford's Testament, and other books might be added to the list. The perusal of these volumes, though on some they produced the impression, and not without reason, of the superiority of the common version as a whole, on many they left the conviction that it was a great pity so noble a version as that universally used should not be made still more admirable, through a judicious use of modern scholarship for the purpose. More and more it came to be seen that objections to a revision of King James's Bible were no more valid than had been objections to a revision of the Great Bible, or of Matthew's Bible, or of any other ancient one. Every merely human work and translation is necessarily such a work-it was felt must admit of improvement, and that a careful distinction should ever be made between the perfect writings of men inspired,

-

« PreviousContinue »