turns upon these heads: 1. The critical apparatus used by the translators of the Authorized Version. 2. The nature and origin of the improvements made upon former versions. 3. The alleged blemishes, imperfections, infelicities, and archaisms remaining in the version, and necessitating revision. 1. The Critical Apparatus at their command embraced not only the editions of the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament, already enumerated in the chapters relating to the earlier versions, but also the interlinear Latin translation of the Hebrew text, based on that of Pagninus, added to the Antwerp Polyglot by Arius Montanus, 1569-1572, and the celebrated original Latin translation of the Old Testament by Immanuel Tremellius, 1575-1579, revised and extended to the Apocrypha by Francis Junius, his son-in-law, with a translation of the Syriac New Testament by the former, and a Latin translation of the Greek Testament by Theodore Beza, 1590; two editions of the latter, in folio, were printed in London in 1593 and 1597. There is abundant evidence a, that King James's translators were not independent of these works, and b, that they were not free from caprice in their adoption of various readings, e. g., Is. ix. 3, where the clause "not increased the joy," contradicts the remainder of the verse, from their disregard of the Masoretic notation to him in place of not, the not belonging to the margin, and the reading to him being required to complete the sense of the text; they probably followed Tremellius who renders with the Vulgate non magnificasti lætitiam; in Judg. xviii. 30, they overlooked the presence of the suspended n in the proper name which they render Manasseh, instead of Moses, probably again misled by Tremellius who gives the former rendering, against the Vulgate which rightly translates Moysi. Their philological helps in the Old Testament terminated with Buxtorf's Lexicon, 1607, and his Hebrew grammar, 1609; they had the bare Hebrew text without more light shed on it by the ancient versions except that derived from such editions of the Septuagint and the Vulgate, as were then circulating, the Sixtine edition of 1587, being the latest of the former, and the Sixtine (1590) and Clementine (1592-3) editions the latest of the latter version. The Chaldee Paraphrase of Onkelos (1482, 1546, and 1590) was also available to them, but the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac and Arabic versions, and the fragmentary Ethiopic and Persian translations were unknown to them. For the Greek text of the New Testament they had the various editions of Beza from 1560 to 1598, and the fifth edition of Beza, 1598, is probably that which they used, as well as the third edition of Stephens, 1550-51; they likewise consulted the Complutensian Polyglot, 1514, the different editions of Erasmus, 1516-1535, Aldus, 1518, Colinæus, 1534, Plantin, 1572, the Vulgate and Beza's Latin version of 1556. The common statement is that the Greek text of the Authorized Version of 1611 agrees in eighty-one places with Beza against Stephens, in about twenty-one with Stephens against Beza, and that in twenty-nine places the translators follow the Complutensian, Erasmus, or the Vulgate. To state this somewhat differently, the Greek text used by King James's translators was that found in the editions of Erasmus (five, 1516-35), of Stephens (four, 1546-51); Beza (four in folio, 1565-98, five in smaller form, 1565-1604), and the Complutensian Polyglot (1514, published 1522). Erasmus had for his text one valuable MS. of the Gospels; Stephens two (D. and L.); Beza had also D. of the Gospels and Acts, and D. (the Clermont MS.) of the Pauline Epistles; but they hardly used them. As already stated, the text of the A. V. agrees more nearly with the later editions of Beza than with any other; but Beza followed Stephens (1550) very closely, and Stephens is hardly more than a reprint of the fourth edition of Erasmus (1527). Erasmus had for the basis of his text in the Gospels an inferior MS. of the fifteenth century, and in Acts and the Epistles one of the thirteenth or fourteenth century. In Revelation he had only the inaccurate transcript of a mutilated MS. (wanting the last six verses) of little value, the real and supposed defects of which he supplied by translating from the Latin Vulgate into Greek. For his later editions he had altogether three MSS. of the Gospels, four of the Acts and Catholic Epistles, and five of the Pauline Epistles, together with the text of the Aldine edition of 1518, and of the Complutensian Polyglot, neither of much critical value. In select passages he had also collations of some other MSS. The result of the whole is that in a considerable number of cases—not of great importance-the reading of the A. V. is supported by no known Greek manuscript whatever, but rests on an error of Erasmus or Beza; (e. g., Acts ix. 5, 6; Rom. vii. 6; 1 Pet. iii. 20; Rev. i. 9, 11; ii. 3, 20, 24; iii. 2; v. 10, 14; XV. 3; xvi. 5; xvii. 8, 16; xviii. 2, etc.) and it is safe to say that in more than a thousand instances the text used by the translators of the A. V. requires to be corrected by what is now known to be the true text (condensed from Professor Abbott's Paper on the New Testament Text in AngloAmerican Bible Revision, New York, 1879).* * Dr. Scrivener's The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the text followed in the Authorized Version together with the variations adopted in the Revised Version, Cambridge, 1881, is a timely, judicious, and very valuable volume, deserving to be in the hands of all interested in the textual basis of the versions in question. Tremellius' and Beza's Latin versions being often referred to, I subjoin a passage from each in parallel columns with the Vulgate and Authorized Versions: Vulgate. 10 Quis est in vobis, qui claudat ostia et incendat altare meum gratuito? Non est mihi voluntas in vobis, dicit Dominus ex MALACHI I. IO, II. See also, p. 379. Authorized Version. Who is there even among 10 you that would shut the doors for nought? Neither do ye kindle fire on mine altar for nought. I As to modern versions of the period, they had besides those previously enumerated, the Genevan French Bible (1587-8), chiefly rendered by Bertram, who had the assistance of Beza, have no pleasure in you, Authorized Version. And if some of the bran- 17 ches be broken off, and thou being a wild olive tree, were graffed in amongst them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; boast not against the bran- 18 Well, because of unbelief 20 for if God spared not the 21 Or, for them. Goulart, and others; the Italian version of Diodati (Geneva, 1607); both capital in their way. There were also three Spanish versions, that of C. Reyna (Basel, 1569), and C. de Valera's based on Reyna's (Amsterdam, 1602), and Usque's (Ferrara, 1553). As all these versions, as well as Luther's and parts of the Zürich, not taken from Luther, are independent translations from the original tongues, they possess of course, within proper limits, (imposed by the condition of the text of the originals available to the respective translators), critical value. 2. The nature and origin of the improvements made upon former versions. Professor Westcott gives as the result of his collation of Isaiah liii. in the Authorized Version with the Bishops' Bible these data: that about seven-eighths of the changes are due to the Genevan version, either alone, or in agreement with one or both of the Latin versions, that two renderings, viz., tender plant, v. 6, and because-done no violence, v. 9, are due to Tremellius, two others, viz., a man of sorrows, v. 3, bruise—hath put him to grief, v. 10, to Pagninus, that the Genevan version is abandoned in three places, viz., vv. 9, 10, bis, and that one rendering, when thou shalt make, v. 10, appears to be independent. To this account I would add as the result of my examination of the chapter, that shall, v. 2, is a return from the Bishops' to Coverdale (Matthew), when we shall see, v. 2, a return to the Great Bible; that acquainted with grief, v. 3. comeliness, v. 2, and griefs, v. 4, may be regarded as original; and that the influence of Luther directly, or indirectly through the German-Latin versions, may be traced in the renderings believed, and, revealed, v. 1, tender plant (Reis), out of, form, v. 2, surely, smitten of God, v. 4, but, v. 5, of us all, v. 6, brought dumb, v. 7, many, v. 11, and bare the sin of many (v. 12).* ... * Professor Moulton (History of the Bible, pp. 202-205, Bible Educator, iv. p. 380) calculates that, in one hundred and eighty two words of six verses, Isaiah liv. 11-17, eighty remain unchanged from the previous versions, sixty are from the Genevan, and |