The Authorised Version of 1611, whose history we have followed, won its way gradually to national acceptance, and did so not because invested with royal authority, but by virtue of its own intrinsic excellence. Its one and only competitor of influential sort was the Genevan version which was still in great favour with many. Indeed, the same year in which the new revision appeared, two other editions of the Genevan, a folio and a quarto, were published by the King's printer; and for five years more, further editions continued to be sent forth. Then, too, even after 1616, when it ceased to be printed in England, it continued to be printed abroad and sent over to this country. But at length this competition came to an end, the Revision of 1611 obtained wider acceptance and soon became without question the Bible of the English people.
Still, as the book became better known the question of further revision began to be discussed. There is no finality in human affairs, and each generation has to take its own part and place in the general advance. Deepening acquaintance led to deeper certainty that, in spite of all the care which had been taken, numerous errors, verbal and otherwise, had been retained in the version so recently revised. And others came to be added from time to time as new editions, edited with insufficient care, were sent forth into the world. For example, the edition of 1631 acquired the name of "the wicked Bible," because it read "thou shalt commit adultery," instead of "thou shalt not." In editions of 1638 it was stated that "the fire devoured 2050 men," instead of 250; "He slew two lions like men," instead of "two lion-like men"; "taught by the people of men," for "by the precept of men." These are only a few examples out of many, and the list was made longer by the importation of Bibles from abroad. The printers of Amsterdam made the discovery that Bible-printing might be developed into a lucrative business, and sent over considerable consignments to this country. It scarcely needs to be pointed out that English Bibles set up by Dutch compositors were not likely to be productions of unfailing accuracy. The process went on so long and so far that in 1643 the Assembly of Divines at Westminster found it necessary to make a report to Parliament on the subject, giving instances of mistakes which had been made, such as "found the rulers" for "found the mules"; "corruption" for "conception"; "condemnation" for "redemption." It was resolved in consequence that foreign Bibles should not be sold until they had been "passed and allowed," It was stated in 1646, at Amsterdam, that an English printer there had sent out in five years 40,000 copies; that his last edition consisted of 12,000 copies, and that altogether in that Dutch city 150,000 English Bibles had been printed.
In Bibles also produced in this country as well as in those sent from abroad new errors were made and old ones copied from one to another. A considerable sheaf of mistakes, such as the following, came to be gathered by observant readers: "shall glean" for "shall not glean"; "in the throne of David" for "in the room of David"; "shined through darkness" for "walked through darkness"; "delighted herself" for "defiled herself"; and "I praise you" for "I praise you not." This kind of process went on year after year, repeating itself and extending itself. When Dr Scrivener set about making the Cambridge Paragraph Bible of 1873 as strictly accurate as possible, the changes, most of them trivial, but many not trivial, which had to be made in the text, were to be counted by hundreds.
Then too, as another reason for revision, language itself undergoes change, and words pass out of use or become unintelligible. So again there are many words which, while still in use, are understood in a different sense from that prevailing in 1611. The translators in writing attached one meaning, we in reading quite another. So that words which once served as stepping-stones to the reader become stumbling-blocks in his path. Instances of this may be found in such cases as where carriage means baggage (Acts xxi. 15); careful, anxious (Phil. iv. 6); liberal, noble and churl, crafty (Isa. xxxii. 5); delicately, luxuriously (Luke vii. 25); and publican, a revenue officer. Then again as to the MSS. of the Greek Text from which translations had to be made. It stands to reason that, in the manuscripts from which we translate, the nearer we get to the time when Gospels and Epistles were written, the more likely we are to get the actual words first written. Now it is well known that what are regarded as the most authoritative MSS. of the Greek Text of the New Testament have, with two exceptions, come to light since the time of the translators of 1611. Of the Uncial manuscripts the most ancient and important are: the Sinaitic, written in the 4th century, and now deposited in the Imperial Library at St Petersburg; the Vatican, also of the 4th century, and preserved in the Vatican Library at Rome; the Alexandrine of the 5th century, now in the British Museum; the Ephraem Codex of the 5th century, in the National Library at Paris ; Beza's Codex of the 6th century, in the University Library, Cambridge; and the Claromontane, also of the 6th century, which formerly belonged to Beza, but is now in the National Library at Paris. Yet not one of these was available at the time when King James's translation was made. The Vatican MS., one of the two oldest, though known to be in existence as early as 1587 was so jealously guarded at the Vatican, so far as the New Testament was concerned, that not till the first half of last century could its text be ascertained and then only by a comparison of three more or less imperfect collations. Whereas now we have a magnificent reproduction in photographic facsimile of the entire MS. The Sinaitic MS., also of the 4th century, was discovered by Dr Tischendorf as recently as Feb. 4th, 1859. The Alexandrine was not brought to light until 1628 when it was presented to Charles I by Cyril Lucar, patriarch of Constantinople. And although the Ephraem Codex was brought to Europe in the early part of the 16th century, it was not known to contain a portion of the New Testament until towards the close of the 17th century, and was not collated until 1716. Then, too, MSS. are not our only source of knowledge of the original text of the Scriptures. There are ancient versions such as the Old Latin, the Old Syriac and the two Egyptian versions, all of which came to be accessible to the scholars of the 19th century as they were not to the revisers of 1611, and from their early date must have been made from the earliest manuscripts and were likely therefore to furnish, in the case of disputed passages, valuable suggestions as to the actual words employed at first. Thus the possession of greatly improved apparatus furnished an additional reason for undertaking a further revision.
By the time that the Authorised Version was forty years old men's thoughts began to be turned to the subject. As early as 1655 the Long Parliament made an order that a Bill should be brought in for a new translation of the Bible, and four years later the House directed "that it be referred to a Committee to send for and advise with Dr Walton, Dr Cudworth and others such as they should think fit, and to consider of the translations and impressions of the Bible and to offer their opinions therein." The Committee met from time to time at the house of Bulstrode Whitelocke, but eventually the death of Cromwell put an end to all further endeavours in the way of revision.
Nothing was done, as we might expect, after the coming in of the Restoration, but in the 18th century various tentative efforts were made, some of them by able men. Revised translations of the New Testament were made by Gilbert Wakefield in 1795; by Archbishop Newcome in 1796; and by Scarlett in 1798. But then came the French Revolution and frightened Englishmen. In 1796 the note of alarm was sounded in a letter to the Bishop of Ely, and, as Dr Plumptre has said: "from that time conservatism pure and simple was in the ascendant. To suggest that the Authorised Version might be inaccurate, was almost as bad as holding French Principles."
When we pass into the 19th century the long-defeated hope was revived by the appearance of Lectures in 1810 by the Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, Dr Marsh, afterwards Bishop of Peterborough. In his first edition he plainly said: "It is probable that our Authorised Version is as faithful a representation of the original Scriptures as could have been formed at that period. But when we consider the immense accession that has since been made, both to our critical and philological apparatus; when we consider that the most important sources of intelligence for the interpretation of the original Scriptures were likewise opened after that period, we cannot possibly pretend that our Authorised Version does not require amendment"; the italics here given are the Professor's own. Forty-six years later the Rev. Wm. Selwyn, another Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, spoke out to the same effect. In a work of his entitled "Notes on the proposed Amendment of the Authorised Version of the Holy Scriptures," he said: "I do not hesitate to avow my firm persuasion that there are at least one thousand passages of the English Bible that might be amended without any change in the general texture and justly reverenced language of the version." Professor Selwyn also brought the subject of revision before the Lower House of Convocation of the Province of Canterbury; and that same year, 1856, Mr Heywood, M.P. for North Lancashire, moved in the House of Commons an Address to the Crown praying that Her Majesty would appoint a Royal Commission of learned men to consider of such amendments of the Authorised Version of the Bible as had been already proposed, and to receive suggestions from all persons who might be willing to offer them, and to report the amendments which they might be prepared to recommend.
About the same time also there was published a translation of "The Gospel of John newly compared with the original Greek and revised by five clergy men." The five clergymen were Dr John Barrow, George Moberly, D.C.L., Henry Alford, B.D., W. G. Humphrey, B.D., and Charles J. Ellicott, M.A., their purpose being to show by example the kind of thing in the way of revision many were desiring to see. That same year, also, Dr Trench, then Dean of West minster, published his work "On the Authorised Version of the New Testament," pleading for movement in the same direction.
The first actual step was taken ou February 10, 1870, when a resolution was moved in the Upper House of Convocation by Bishop Wilberforce and seconded by Bishop Ellicott, that a committee of both Houses be appointed to report upon the de sirableness of a revision of the Authorised Version of the New Testament. On the motion of Bishop Ollivant seconded by Bishop Thirlwall it was agreed to enlarge this resolution so as to include the Old Testament also, and the resolution so amended was ultimately adopted, and communicated to the Lower House the following day, where it was accepted without a division.
The Committee thus appointed, consisting of seven Bishops and fourteen members of the Lower House, met on March 24 and agreed to report: That it was desirable that a revision be undertaken; that it should comprise both marginal readings and such emendations in the text of the Authorised Version as may be found necessary; that it should not contemplate any new translation of the Bible, or any alteration of the language except where, in the judgment of the most competent scholars, such change is necessary; and that where such change was made the language of the existing version should be closely followed; finally that it was desirable that Convocation should nominate a body of its own Members to undertake the work of revision, who shall be at liberty to invite the co-operation of any eminent for scholarship, to whatever nation or religious body they may belong.
This Report was presented to the Upper House on May 3rd, where its adoption was carried unanimously, and a committee appointed to carry it into effect. In the Lower House an attempt was made to confine the revision to scholars in communion with the Church of England. This however was unsuccessful and the adoption of the Report was carried with two dissentients only. The joint Committee held their first meeting on May 25th and agreed to separate into two Companies one for the revision of the Old Testament and one for that of the New. They also selected the scholars who should be invited to join the Companies and decided upon the general rules which should guide their procedure. The rules agreed upon were: To introduce as few alterations as possible consistent with faithfulness; to keep as far as possible to the language of the Authorised and earlier versions; each Company to go twice over the portion to be revised; the Text to be adopted to be that for which the evidence is decidedly preponderating; to make or retain no change in the Text on the second and final revision by each Company, except two-thirds of those present approve of the same; to revise the headings of chapters, pages, paragraphs, italics and punctuation; and, finally to refer on the part of each Company, when considered desirable, to divines, scholars and literary men, whether at home or abroad, for their opinions.
The Old Testament Company as at first constituted consisted of twenty-four members; an equal number acted also for the New Testament. In the course of the ten years they were at work changes from various causes had to be made, and ultimately the revisers consisted of sixty-five English scholars who took part in the work. Of these forty-one were members of the Church of England, and twenty-four members of other churches. Of the latter number two represented the Episcopal Church of Ireland, one the Episcopal Church of Scotland, four the Baptists, three the Congregationalists, five the Free Church of Scotland, five the Established Church of Scotland, one the United Presbyterians, one the Unitarians, and two the Wesleyan Methodists. Varied representation was still further secured by the co-operation of a number of American scholars, selected and invited by the Rev. Dr Schaff of New York, acting on behalf of the English Companies. Various causes of delay, however, intervened, and it was not until July 17, 1872, that the communication was made that the American Companies were duly constituted. It thus came about that the English revisers of the Old Testament had already made some progress, had in fact gone twice through the Pentateuch before they secured the co-operation of the American Old Testament Revision Company. The English New Testament Company assembled for the first time on Wednesday, June 22, 1870. They met in the Chapel of Henry VII, and there united in the celebration of the Lord's Supper. After this act of worship they formally entered upon the task assigned them.
Through the kind arrangement of Dr Stanley, then Dean of Westminster, the Jerusalem Chamber of the Abbey was assigned as their place of meeting. This room, as Dr Newth one of the revisers reminded us, is one of more than ordinary interest. Originally the parlour of the Abbot's palace, it was here the Assembly of Divines of Commonwealth days, driven by the cold from Henry VII's Chapel, held its 66th session, on October 2nd, 1643, and there thenceforward continued to meet until its closing session on February 22nd, 1649. Here were prepared the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Longer and Shorter Catechisms which formerly played so conspicuous a part in the religious education of the Presbyterians of Scotland and the Independents of England. And here, also, just fifty years later, assembled the Commission appointed by William III to devise a basis for a scheme of comprehension in a revision of the Prayer Book. It was in this same room the New Testament Company held their meetings for ten years, except on the few occasions when it was not available.
Dr Newth has further told us of the method of procedure. The Company assembled at eleven a.m. and continued in session till six p.m., with an interval of half an hour. Prayer being offered, and preliminary matters of correspondence disposed of, the Chairman read a short passage as given in the Authorised Version. The question was then asked, first, as to textual changes; that being settled the Chairman asked for proposals of rendering, and free discussion having followed, the vote of the Company was taken. They resolved the work should be thoroughly done, but eventually grew alarmed at the probable length of time the revision would take.
At the end of the ninth day of meeting, not more than 153 verses had been revised, an average of only seventeen verses a day. By and by, however, progress became more rapid, but even then the average did not rise above thirty-five verses a day. The first revision of the Gospel of Matthew was completed on the 36th day of meeting, May 24th, 1871, and that of John on the 103rd day, February 19th, 1873. The first revision of the Apocalypse, the final book, was completed on the 273rd meeting, April 20th, 1877. The meetings were held monthly for a session of four consecutive days, excepting only August and September. Thus the first revision required 241 meetings, during sixty monthly sessions; the second revision was completed on December 13th, 1878, having occupied on the whole 96 meetings or about two years and a half. Then came the suggestions of the American Company for consideration, and these, together with the preparation of the preface, occupied the Company until November 11th, 1880, on which day, at five o'clock in the afternoon, after ten years and five months of labour, the revision of the New Testament was brought to its close. On the evening of that same day, being St Martin's day, the Company assembled in the church of St Martin's-in-the-Fields and there united in a special service of prayer and thanksgiving--Thanksgiving for the happy completion of their labours, for the spirit of harmony and brotherly affection that had pervaded their meetings, and for the Divine goodness which had permitted so many to give themselves continuously to this work, and Prayer that He whose glory they had humbly striven to promote might graciously accept this their service, and deign to use it as an instrument for the good of man and the honour of His holy name. The New Testament was published on May 17th, 1881, and that same day was also presented to the Queen.
The Revision of the Old Testament, being of a much larger book, took longer time than that of the New; but in one important respect the work was much simpler than that which the New Testament Company had before them. They had no difficulty in determining the Original Text from which to translate, whereas in the case of the New Testament that was often matter for anxious and prolonged consideration. The Received, or, as it is commonly called, the Massoretic Text of the Old Testament Scriptures, has come down to us in manuscripts which are of no great antiquity. The earliest of which the age is known is as late as A.D. 916, and they all belong to the same family or recension. That there were other recensions at one time is probable from the fact that there are variations in the ancient Versions, the oldest of which, the Greek Septuagint, was, in part at least, made over two centuries before the Christian era. But as the state of our knowledge on this subject is not at present such as to justify any attempt at an entire reconstruction of the text on the authority of these Versions, the revisers felt it most prudent, as they tell us, simply to adopt the Massoretic Text as the basis of their work, and, following the example of the translators of the Authorised Version, to depart from it only in exceptional cases. The Revision of the Old Testament was commenced on the 30th of June, 1870, and was completed in eighty-five sessions, occupying 792 days, and ending on 20th June, 1884. The greater part of the sessions were for ten days each, and each day the Company generally sat for six hours. The labour therefore was great, but ungrudgingly rendered, and the revisers, like their brethren of the New Testament Company, brought their long task to a close with a feeling of deep thankfulness to Almighty God, and the earnest hope that their endeavours might with His blessing tend to a clearer knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures.
The revision of the Authorised Version of the Apocrypha was included in the arrangement between the Companies and the Representatives of the Presses of Oxford and Cambridge, the publishers and proprietors of the New Version. But this last portion of the work was not to be undertaken until the other and greater portions of the work were concluded. As early, however, as March 21, 1879, it was resolved that after such conclusion, the Company should be divided into three Committees, to be called the London, Westminster and Cambridge Committees, whose work should be the revision of the Apocrypha also. This was done, and thus in 1895 was completed the work begun in hope and prayer no less than five and twenty years before. This work in its completed form as a revision of the great version of 1611 has been spreading more and more widely among the Christian people of the land. It has not escaped criticism, no work of man's hand can hope to do that. In many ways it is open to criticism, but it has made a new Bible for many, and made plainer to them the revelation of the mind of God. What does this renders effectual service to humanity. The Bible is the greatest of all great books. "There are many echoes in the world," said Goethe, "but few voices." This book is a living voice carrying its own authority with it. As the Confession of Faith of the Scottish Church declared: "Amongst the arguments whereby the Holy Scripture doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God are the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole."