Influence of Theodore Beza on the English New Testament

Our aim, in this work, is to establish the influence of Theodore Beza on the English New Testament, particularly the Authorised Version of 1611. However, as the reader can see, reference is made throughout to other English versions both earlier and (occasionally) later. Reference is made also to New Testament scholars contemporary with Beaa who appear to have had some influence on the English versions.
In the first chapter the following material is discussed: manuscript variants used by Beza, the availability of Patristic material in the late sixteenth century, and Beza's attitude to the theology and text of the Fathers. We then briefly examine the type of influence Beza had on the English Geneva Bible of 1560, and give an account of L'Oiseleur's 1574 edition of Beza's Latin New Testament and of Tomson's 1576 English translation of it. We conclude that both Geneva 1560 and Tomson's 1576 N.T. were influenced by Beza primarily in their doctrine. Finally, in the first chapter we describe the Bodleian copy of the 1602 Bishops' Bible, examining in some detail what appear to be typographical annotations in the volume. We suggest that there is a close link between Bodleian Bishops' and the AV since the typographical annotations correspond to the AV's use of italics.
In the second chapter we are concerned with the influence of Beza on the English Synoptic Gospels. We examine the annotations on the text of Matthew, Mark and Luke in the Bodleian Bishops', we relate those to the corresponding readings in the AV and we examine the influence of Beza on the two sets of readings, referring throughout to other English versions. We conclude that the influence of Beza on the AV Synoptic Gospels is considerable especially in rotters of text and style, and although there is a slight difference between the Bodleian Annotator's and the AV's use of Beza this difference points to two different stages in the process of Revision. This slight difference in the use of Beza and the actual differences in readings in the two versions mean that the Bodleian Bishops' cannot be a later collation of the Bishops' and Royal text, especially as some of the readings in the Bodleian Bishops' are not supported by any other English version. A short section is appended giving an account of theological views of two members of the Oxford Company of translators and comparing their theology with that of Bodleian Bishops' and the AV. This short enquiry shows there is good reason to suppose that a member of the Oxford Company owned the Bodleian Bishops'.
In the third chapter we deal with the influence of Beza on Paul's epistles to the Romans, (1) Corinthians and Galatians and on the epistle to the Hebrews. As well as examining selected readings from the AV 1611 from the point of view of Beza's influence, we also relate those to the remarks made by the Revisers in the Fulman manuscript. The Fulman MS (Professor Ward Allen's edition) contains translation notes made by the Final Revision Committee and is supposed to represent the very last stage in the making of the AV. We discover that Beza has a crucial influence on the AV epistles so far as text and style is oonoerned. In matters of doctrine the Revisers tend to Moderate Beza's more extreme pronouncements. The sane applies to style and to text in places where Beza's version is idiosyncratic or inadequately supported. We also notice that there is a difference between the Final Committee's and the Revisers' attitude to Beza, the latter showing a more marked preference for Besan readings.
We finally conclude that the difference between the Fulmanan MS and AV 1611 is greater (so far as Bezan readings are concerned) than the difference between the Bodleian Bishops' and AV 1611. We therefore suggest, taking into account the additional evidence of the typographical annotations in Bodleian Bishops' and the theology of the Oxford Company, that it represents a later stage in the making of the AV than the Fulman MS. We also conclude that, in spite of the Revisers tendency to 'moderate' Beza's doctrine and some of his unsupported textual and stylistic pronouncements, Beza's 1308 N.T. had a crucial influence on AV 1611 and that his influence seemed to increase as Revision progressed.
We add an appendix which contains a short biography of Laurence Tomson, together with an account of his works and a summary of the relationship between his New Testament and the AV. This is intended as an example of the English Puritans' attitude to Beza during the late sixteenth century.