Rom. ii, 7, is translated, "To them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory, and honour, and immortality, eternal life." But Beza, as if afraid of the connection. of the patient continuance in "well-doing" with glory and ultimate eternal life, separates the words and renders, "to them who according to patient expectation seek the glory of a good work." There are different modes of construction; but Beza's exegesis, "that is, who seek eternal life," is wholly unjustifiable. Rom. v, 16, "judgment was by one to condemnation," Beza translates, "the guilt, indeed, is of one offence to condemnation," implying a distinct doctrinal bias and a mistranslation of the noun.

Rom. viii, 4, "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us";1 here the Greek term, however, is not that rendered usually by righteousness, but a word which may mean the whole requirement of the law. Whether he be right or wrong, Beza did not lead them; they virtually followed Tyndale," the righteousness required by the law."

Rom. xi, 32, "That he might have mercy upon all." Beza renders the last words, "all these," his explanation being "elect," viz., but he was not imitated.

1 Tim. ii, 4, "Who will have all men to be saved"; Beza translates," who will have any men to be saved."

1 Tim. ii, 6, "Gave himself a ransom for all"; Beza rendering by the same pronoun. But the revisers of 1611 without hesitation disavow these unfaithful versions. 1 Tim. iv, 10, "Who is the Saviour of all men, especially of those who believe"; Beza preserves the "all," and he could not well attempt its alteration; but he changes "Saviour" into "Preserver," as if the statement referred to temporal preservation; and to show under what pressure he must have made the change, this is the only place in his New Testament where he has ventured on such a translation, which our version at once tosses aside, and follows all the earlier English translations.

1"Ut jus illud legis compleatur

in nobis."

2" Omnes illos."

3" Qui quosvis homines."

4" Pro quibusvis.”

XLVI.]

FULL AND LITERAL SENSE NOT ALWAYS GIVEN. 279

If the Authorized Version, in connecting "all men "appeared," steps back from the true translation in Titus. ii, 11, it is put in the margin; and there is no hesitation in rendering Heb. ii, 9, "that he . . should taste death for every man," the defining supplement "man" not even printed in italics. Thus, while the revisers of 1611 were often tempted to follow Beza, they had often the courage to judge for themselves. At the same time some of the most erroneous marginal renderings came from Beza: Mark i, 34, 'or, to say that they knew him"; similarly, Luke iv, 41; Acts i, 8, "or, the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you"; Rom. xi, 17, " or, for them."

The revisers occasionally fall from the full and simple meaning of the text. Sometimes they insert a diluting supplement. 2 Thess. iii, 5, in rendering the last clause "into the patient waiting for Christ," after Beza's "expectationem," they shrank from the real translation and put it into the margin, "into the patience of Christ." It was probably some felt incongruity in the true rendering, "leadeth us in triumph" (2 Cor. ii, 14), that prompted the inferior version, “causeth us to triumph," after Beza.

Though the charge of theological bias cannot be fully supported against the text, the margin, however, yields some examples.

"

Rom. iii, 25, text, "set forth"; margin, "foreordained "—a verb taken from the Vulgate, and occurring only once in the version, 1 Pet. i, 20, where it should be "foreknown." Rom. v, 12, text, "for that all have sinned"; margin, "in whom all have sinned," after Augustine and Beza-a rendering which even Calvin himself did not adopt. "In which" is used in the Rheims, but "forasmuch as" is the translation both in the Genevan and in the Bishops'.

CHAPTER XLVII.

THERE are, however, several things about the translation which detract somewhat from its great excellence. They can scarcely be said to be of the essence of it, but they are very closely connected with it. The fourteen original rules given to the Companies at Westminster, Oxford, and Cambridge, make no rfeerence to the use of supplemental words; but the sixth rule presented by the English deputies to the Synod of Dort was to this effect, "that the words necessary to be inserted into the text, in order to complete the sense, were to be distinguished by being printed in another and smaller character." 1 In a popular translation, such as that of the Bible, such supplemental words are indispensable in many places. But whatever accuracy might appear in their own copy, the printing was done in a very careless way, being devoid of all uniformity; and in the anxiety to be intelligible, or in their own phrase, “to be understood even of the very vulgar," the supplemental words were inserted with liberal allowances. To show how the supplemented words have been treated, and how largely such words have been put into italic types, it may be mentioned that in the first edition the eleventh chapter of John has no supplements printed in italics; that in the revised edition of 1638 it has fifteen words so marked; while some modern editions have as many as sixteen such terms.2 In Exodus xxxii, 18, in the midst of twenty-five words, there are now eleven italic words,

1 See page 201.

2 Turton's Text of the English Bible, passim, Cambridge, 1833.

CAPRICE IN ITALIC SUPPLEMENTS.

281

but only five in the first edition. In some New Testaments issued at Edinburgh, of last century, there is not a single word printed in italics from beginning to end of the volume. In the first edition these words were printed in Roman, the text being in black letter, but when it was printed in Roman, they were presented in italic letter. Some supplemental words are indispensable: Genesis xxi, 33, "Abraham planted"; xxv, 8, "full of years"; Exodus xxxiv, 7, "clear the guilty”; Numbers xv, 26, "gathered unto his people"; John iv, 33, brought him ought to eat"; vi, 1, "the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias"; xv, 18, "ye know that it hated me before it hated you"; 25, "this cometh to pass"; xix, 5, "and Pilate said unto them". the proper name being introduced to give consecutive clearness to the narrative; 1 John ii, 2, "the sins of the whole world"; ii, 19, "they went out." The Saviour's name is inserted often in the gospels where it is not required.

Not a few of the numerous italic words should be excluded. In many cases the supplement is included in the original idiom, as that of the substantive verb between a subject and a predicate-or in a simple assertion: Genesis ii, 12, the gold of that land is good," or Matt. v, 3, "blessed are the poor in spirit." The supplied verb is really borne in by the original phrase as an essential portion of it, and needs not be put in italics. Of this kind there are numerous instances. There are other cases where the italic words introduced for the sake of connection may be often omitted, as the participle "saying" when the oblique form suddenly changes into the direct: "He spake, saying," "to curse and to swear, saying." Instances are perpetually occurring: Ps. xlv, 8, "an evil disease, say they, cleaveth fast unto him"; 1 Chron. xxiii, 5, "the instrument which I made, said David"; Acts i, 4, "which, saith he, ye have heard of me." The result of a previous condition, or contingence, is omitted sometimes in the original, but is supplied in the version; Luke xiii, 9, "if it bear fruit,well." The emphasis is more striking without any insertion in Exodus xxxii, 32, "yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin—; and, if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book." There is

a host of idiomatic adjectives which contain their object in themselves, and many verbs have a similar pregnancy-as "dry land," "bitter herbs," "cold water," "draw sword," "draw water," "set in array," " tread grapes," "shut the door,” "sitteth on eggs," "feed the flock"-and there is no weighty reason why such supplied terms should be in italics. Many particles are found in italics-"like," "as," a weakening of the Hebrew metaphor; “and,” “when," "though," "that," having their origin in the change of the simple and sequent Hebrew clauses into the more intricate English syntax. Italics may be allowed for such words, if they cannot be omitted without detriment. There are also cases of zeugmas, as 1 Tim. iv, 3, "forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats"; 1 Cor. xiv, 34, " they are commanded to be under”; or the supplement is suggested by a previous clause, “as thou didst deal with my father, even so deal with me," 2 Chron. ii, 3; Ps. ix, 18, "the expectation of the poor shall not perish," the negative being carried from a previous clause. There are many expletives which might be dispensed with, as "even" and "namely." In John viii, 6, the whole clause inserted, "as though he heard them not," is from a various reading of no authority. Besides, many of the supplied words are directly expository: Gen. xviii, 28, "for lack of five"; Num. xiv, 28, "as truly as I live"; 2 Sam. v, 8, "he shall be chief and captain," taken from 1 Chron. xi, 6; 2 Kings x, 24, he that letteth him go"; Psalms lviii, 7, "his bow to shoot"; 1 Peter v, 13, "the church that is at Babylon." The same practice is found in some doubtful cases: Job iii, 23, why is light given"; 1 Chron. ix, 41, "and Ahaz," taken from viii, 35; 1 Chron. xxiv, 23, "the sons of Hebron"; Jeriah, the first," taken from xxiii, 19. 2 Chron. xxiv, 6, "according to the commandment"; Job xix, 26, "and though after my skin worms destroy this body"; xxxv, 3, "if I be cleansed"; Ps. vii, 11, "God is angry with the wicked every day"; liv, 7, "his desire"; lxix, 22, "that which should have been... let it become"; 1 Cor. i, 26," not many noble are called"; Deut. xxxiii, 6, "let not his men be few," directly the opposite of what the Hebrew asserts; Exodus,