Bible of 1537'. From internal evidence it seems CHAP. 1 The following collation of Tyndale's Testaments of 1534, 1535, and Matthew of 1537 in Mark xvi. and the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians will justify in all respects the statements made in the text. The error in Mark xvi. 17 is very remarkable. The readings in ( ) are those of the Testament of 1534. Mark xvi. 11 though (when 1534) they heard...and (he 1534) had appeared...yet (om.)...they believed not. So Matthew (1537). - 17 these things (these signs). So Matthew. xii. 13 be ready to harbour (diligently to h.). So Matthew. xiii. 8 the commandments be (these c.). Not Matthew. 13 as were it in (the 1534) day. Not Matthew. xiv. 15 with (thy 1534) meat. Not Matthew. xv. 5 Christ + Jesu. So Matthew. xvi. 5 the congregation that is in their house (all the company that is in thy house). So Matthew. 18 preaching (preachings). So Matthew. 19 innocent as concerning (innocents concerning). So Matthew. Gal. ii. I thereafter (after that). So Matthew. 2 between ourselves with them (apart with them). So Matthew. 16 can be (shall be). So Matthew. iii. 4 then ye (there ye). Matthew omits. 9+ the faithful A. Not Matthew. 16 as one (as in one)....Not Matthew. Compare also App. 111. HISTORY. III. CHAP. likely that both these texts were taken from the INTERNAL Same corrected copy of Tyndale. Such a hypoHISTORY. thesis would account equally for the discrepancies The Great Bible a revision of Matthew's by Coverdale. Coverdale's plan. June 23rd, 1538. between them, since the New Testament at least is most carelessly printed, and for their agreement in errors, which can only have been derived from the original copy1. S4 THE GREAT BIBLE. Matthew's Bible was essentially a transitional work. It had hardly passed into circulation when a careful revision of it was undertaken. This, as all evidence external and internal goes to prove, was entrusted to Coverdale. It was thoroughly characteristic of the man that he should be ready to devote himself to the perfecting of another's labours; and he has left us an account of his method of procedure. 'We follow,' he writes, 'not 1 The Books of the Bible are arranged in the following order: The books of the Old Testament. Genesis-The Ballet of ballets. The Prophets: Isaiah-Malachi. The Apocrypha : 3 Esdr. 4 Esdr.......Baruch......I Mach. 2 Mach. The New Testament. The four Gospels. The Acts. The Epistles. T RomansPhilemon. TI. 2 S. Peter. 1. 2. 3 S. John. TS. James. ¶ Judas. The Revelation. The order of the books in Ta verner (1539) is the same. in the III. HISTORY. 'only a standing text of the Hebrews, with the in- CHAP. 'terpretation of the Chaldee and the Greek1; but INTERNAL we set also in a private table the diversity of read'ings of all texts...' And again when the work Aug. 9th. had made some progress he enters into greater details: 'As touching the manner and order that we 'keep in the same work, pleaseth your good lord'ship to be advertised that the mark 'text signifieth that upon the same in the latter ' end of the book there is some notable annotation 'which we have written without any private opi'nion, only after the best interpreters of the He'brews, for the more clearness of the text. This 'mark of betokeneth that upon the same text 'there is diversity of reading among the Hebrews, 'Chaldees and Greeks and Latinists; as in a table 'at the end of the book shall be declared. This 'mark sheweth that the sentence written in 'small letters is not in the Hebrew or Chaldee, but in the Latin, and seldom in the Greek, and that 'we nevertheless would not have it extinct, but 'highly accept it for the more explanation of the 'text. This token † in the Old Testament giveth 1 These would be accessible in the Complutensian Polyglott. A copy of this with the auto graph of Cranmer is now in the CHAP. 'to understand that the same text which followeth III. INTERNAL HISTORY. Münster's edition his chief help in the ment. 'it is also alleged of Christ or of some Apostle in the New Testament. This among our other necessary labours is the way that we take in this 'work...' It is obvious that a man who thus describes his plan is not the mere press-corrector of another's Old Testa- revision, but himself the editor of the entire work'. If there were any doubt remaining it would be removed by the character of the revision. About the time when Coverdale's own Version was passing through the press a new Latin Version of the Old Testament with the Hebrew text and a commentary chiefly from Hebrew sources was published by S. Münster (1534-5). It does not appear that at that time Coverdale was able to avail himself of it. The Zurich Version was sufficient. But a very slight comparison of Münster with the Zurich Bible could not fail to bring out the superior clearness of the former. Even a poor Hebrew scholar must feel its general faithfulness. Thus 1 It is a very important confirmation of this view that Fulke speaks of the Bible of 1562 'most 'used in the Church Service in 'King Edward's time' as 'Doc'tor Coverdale's translation.' (Defence of Eng. Trans. p. 68). This was an edition of the Great Bible. This passage also explains the anecdote which he gives of the criticism and revision of 'Coverdale's Bible.' See p. 254, n. 2. III. Coverdale found an obvious method to follow. He CHAP. revised the text of Matthew, which was laid down as the basis, by the help of Münster. The result was the Great Bible. One difficult passage given in full will be sufficient to shew the certainty of this explanation of the origin of the text of the Great Bible, and for the interest of the comparison the Zurich original of Coverdale's translation is added1. INTERNAL HISTORY. 28-30. MATTHEW (TYNDALE). Through a window Judges v. 'looked Sisera's mother and howled through a lattice 'Why abideth his chariot so long, that it cometh not? 'Why tarry the wheels of his waggons? 'The wisest of her ladies answered her, yea and 'she answered her own words herself, Haply, they 'have found and divide the spoil: a maid, yea two 'maids, for a piece: a spoil of diverse colours for 'Sisera, a spoil of divers colours with brodered 'works, divers coloured brodered works for the neck ' of a prey.' COVERDALE. His mother looked out at the window, and cried piteously through the trellis, Why 1 The italicised words are differently rendered in the several versions, and furnish the best ZURICH VERSION. Seyn mutter sach zum means of comparison with the |