New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-05-31

was pertonsly disagreehlr and who dreaded n''
principles Of translation infected BY an excess o.
honesty. In January. 1904, the subject was al
length brought before the famous Hampton Court
Conference, and at once received the approval oil
King James He took the matter into his own
hands and Lost no time in adopting measures Tor
its realization. Bancroft, who had rendered his
adhesion to the policy of the King was appoinfod
general oyerseer and final reviser OF the work
Before the end Of July, fifty four of the most
eminent scholars OF the age selected as trans
lators. They were arranged into six companies,
two of which were 10 meet at Westminster fwo 81
Oxford and two at Cambridge. The heads OF tho
Universities were directed to add to the number
other competent translators according to the
qualifications which they might possess. Of the
ffty.four regular sranslators, only orty-seven ac-
tually engaged in the work. The exact time when
the translation was commenced has not been ascer-
tanned, but it was probably during the year 1904.
1t was published in 1911 with dedication to the
King, remarkable for its servilty aud criHgng
eattery. The work was not received with the
unsnimiy for which King james had hoped. AL
though Puritan scholarship had been summoned to
it's preparation no disguise could conceal the intent
of its projectors to eusnare the great body OF nom
conformists They, accordingly, chung to their be-
loved Geneva version, with an enthusiasm that
was haowed by early recollections, as we'll as BY
intellectual convictions. The new version was OBJ
iected to BY scholars, betraying the influence OF
sectarian partlsties. Critics, like John Selden,
though admitting its superiority to former popular
versions, complained of its style as rather "a
translation into English words than Esgsh
phrase" and Of the frequent naccuracy Of its req
deripgs. WhtelOcke says of him, when sitting
with the Westminster Assembly of Divines
Sometimes when they had cited text Of Scrip
ture to prove their assertions, Selden would tell
them, perhaps in your little pocket Bibles with
gilt leaves (Which they would often pull out and
read, sthe translation may be thus; but the Greek
and Hebrew signify thus and thus; and so would
totally silence them"
In the middle of the seventeenth century, the
discussion was agtsted of new translation OF the
Scriptures An order for this purpose was intro
duced into Parliament in 1862, and again in 1856,
aud was referred to q special committee of the
ss,s our author "the merits and the faults OF King
James's Bible would probably have been now
among the curOsities of literature; for it was in
the hands of scholars, whose names still shine with
uudimnshed spcndop among the great lights OF
sacred learning. A version executed by men like
Castell ard Cudworth, Clark and Walton, would
have embodied culture more comprehensive, va.
rious and profound than was ever before possessed
by English scholars or than ever yet has been be-
slowed Oh yernacular translation Of the Scriptures
in any land But the political changes which soon
interviewed frustrated this great design; and King
Jsmes's revision, now leit without rival, came
into univ ersal USE"
The facts brought out in this interesting volume
serve to diminish the sUpersttiOus reverence which
has been cherished for the Common Version, while
they also illustrate itz claims to religious affection
ard admiration. The anxiety of James for the
credit Of the Bible which bore the sanction of the
Church preserved the simple and glowing phrase.
ocgy in which Ty ndale had so long before clothed
lie sacred Oracles for the English people. No es-
sentia improvement has yet been made on the
style Of this venerable model 1t is not likely that
the English mind will ever accept version con-
c.ived in totally different spirit. Scholars and
critics may doubtless find instructive suggestions
n the works Of such translators as Campbell, New.
come, Wake field, Norton, and perhaps others of
less conspicuous eminence, but they will never find
their way to the popular heart, or be substituted
fer the quaint and touching words which combine
the faIcful conceptions of childhood with the
highest wisdom of maturity. Still, it ought not to
be supposed that the common version is exempt
from the necessity of revision. The seventh in
order, since the primitive version of Wicklife it
presents no claim to form the last number of the
series But the case is too we'll stated BY our
author to permit the use of any words bat her
own.
There il one point of view, in which all the English
versions and reyisions from Tyndales to that OF hng
James stand level. All belong to a single epoch
of scholarship, progressive, indeed, but in its leading
features and the same and our common venion |
the last great effort Of the infant period Of Biblical
science in England. With the second quarter of the
seventeenth century there dswned new-cra OF sacred
learning. Well was it said by royal lips: There were
giants in those days. The cOnstella ion Of Christian
scholars which then England Illuminated all |
Cbristendom and the epoch thus commenced reaches
do WI to and embraces own day. The works of |
Walton, Castell Lightfcot, Pococke, and their illus
rious conpers in the seventeenth century. and those
of Mill, Bentley, and others of the eighteenth, are
sosrc.s from which modern scholarship still draws large
supplies. All Europe witnessed q simuta-
neous advance both in the materials Of Biblical SCI
and in the genius ard ardor OF the minds devoted
to IT, From the middle Of the nineteenth century, We
lock Daek ON the accumulated reeus of more than
two hundred years of the most profound and brilliant
81 bolsrhp the world has known; and not ray of
this has yet been allowed to shine through our English
Bible
The character Of these results is very generally
known to English readers. Through popular workson