taking account of the changes of text that actually were proposed in one Gospel and three long Epistles in a revision already alluded to,-the Revision by Five Clergymen of the Authorized Version of St. John's Gospel and the first three of St. Paul's Epistles, as arranged in our ordinary Testaments —viz., Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians. The Gospel and these three Epistles amount to, estimated in verses, between one quarter and one third of the whole New Testament: an estimate therefore founded on the consideration of so large a portion of the Sacred Volume will not be very seriously incorrect. By inspection of the Revision referred to, we find that in the 2006 verses which the Gospel and three Epistles together contain, there are 253 changes of text due to critical considerations, being 48 for the 879 verses of the Gospel of St. John, 56 for the 433 verses of the Epistle to the Romans, 91 for the 437 verses of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, and 58 for the 257 verses of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. In this enumeration we observe that there would seem to be an increase in change as the work went on; but it would seem ultimately to have become stationary, and to have finally amounted to about one change in every five verses in St. Paul's Epp. And that this seems accurate may be proved by an inspection of the changes in the Revision of the four succeeding Epistles, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians-in all 496 verses. Here we find 109 textual changes, or very nearly the same proportion. If then we assume that more changes would have been made in St. John's Gospel if the gradually established standard of revision had been applied to it, though, as the nature of the text reminds us, not to the extent arrived at for St. Paul's Epistles,-and if also we take into account the increase of differences over those in St. John's Gospel that would be probably found in the Synoptical Gospels, and in the Acts and Revelation, we should hardly be far wrong in estimating the amount of changes that would be introduced in any English revised Version of the whole 6944 verses of the New Testament, as not exceeding one for every five verses, or under fourteen hundred in all, very many of these being of a wholly unimportant character. Such seems the answer to the last question we have suggested in the present Chapter. The subject of the text and of probable textual change seems now concluded, and the second portion of our work to begin-viz., a consideration of, and finally a rough estimate of the changes that would have to be introduced on grammatical, exegetical, and possibly also some other grounds which may suggest themselves in the review of the whole subject. This second class of changes can only be introduced with strict and persistent reference to the general aspect and characteristics of the last Revision. We proceed then next to consider these characteristics, and the principles on which the Authorized Version of the New Testament appears to have been constructed. CHAPTER III. LEADING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. of our Ver be pre served. Ir is obvious that no revision of the present Version can Character properly be undertaken that does not preserve the wisely sion must drawn lines on which that Version was constructed. No reasonable Englishman would tolerate a Version designed for popular use, and to be read publicly, that departed from the ground-principles and truly noble diction of the last Revision. Such a Version would simply pass into that limbus of 'improved' and happily forgotten translations to which almost every generation, for the last hundred and fifty or two hundred years, has added some specimen. The present century has been more prolific than those which preceded it, but very few of the yet extant revisions have been happy in preserving the character, tone, rhythm, and diction of the Version they have undertaken to amend. It may be wise then, at the very outset, to endeavour to obtain a clear knowledge of the principal features and general characteristics of our present Version, that so, before revision is undertaken, we may be able to define sharply what must be its nature and limits, if it is to be a revision that is in any degree to meet with general acceptance. If it is to be hereafter a popular Version it can only become Pedigree of our present Version. so by exhibiting, in every change that may be introduced, a sensitive regard for the diction and tone of the present Version, and also by evincing, in the nature and extent of the changes, a due recognition of the whole internal history of the English New Testament. In other words, the new work must be on the old lines. And now what were those lines, and how may we best trace them? Perhaps thus; first by briefly considering what may be termed the pedigree of the present English Version, and secondly by shortly noticing the principles which in the last revision appear mainly to have been followed. The literary pedigree of our present Version has perhaps never been more succinctly and, for the most part, accurately stated than in the following words: Our present English Version was based upon the Bishops' Bible of 1568, and that upon Cranmer's of 1539, which was a new edition of Matthew's Bible of 1537, partly from Coverdale of 1535, but chiefly from Tyndale; in other words, our present Authorized translation is mainly that of Tyndale made from the original Hebrew and Greek." A little expansion and illustration of this sentence will enable the general reader fairly to appreciate the internal character of our present Version. The first fact clearly to be borne in mind is this, that after all changes and revisions our present English Testament is 1 This accurate and inclusive sentence is taken from the Preface to the scholarly work of Bosworth and Waring, entitled Gothic and Anglo-Saxon Gospels, Lond. 1865. See pages xxviii., xxix. The word 'mainly' has been italicized for the reasons that will appear later in this chapter. The relation of the A.V. to Tyndale's is very close. Version: the Greek. substantially that of William Tyndale.' This we shall deem it necessary to prove distinctly by a comparison in parallel columns of three or four passages, taken from different parts of the New Testament. Before, however, we give these specimens, let us briefly notice the characteristics of this Version, to which our own maintains so close a resemblance. Tyndale's English Testament of 1534 will remain to the Tyndale's end of time a monument of the courage, patience, learning, made from competent scholarship, thorough faithfulness, and clear English sense of its noble-hearted and devoted editor. Of his courage and patience history sufficiently speaks: in reference to his learning and scholarship, with which we are here more especially concerned, a few remarks may not unsuitably be made. That his learning was sufficient for his work is shown by the work itself. Besides this, however, we know that more than twenty years before his first edition of 1525 he made translations of portions of the New Testament, and Tyndale was not a man to let those twenty years pass away without study and fresh acquisitions of knowledge. We know also that he went to Cambridge, after having spent some years at Oxford, most probably with the view of 1 It has been observed by Mr. Westcott that in several portions of the New Testament Tyndale's original translation remains almost intact. For instance, in the 1st Epistle of St. John about nine-tenths are due to Tyndale, and even in the more difficult and (as to translation) debateable Epistle to the Hebrews about five-sixths belong to the same |