THE MANUSCRIPT BIBLE The first essays in Biblical translation, or rather paraphrasing, assumed in English, as in many other languages, a poetical form. Even in the 7th century, according to the testimony of Bede (Hist. Eccl. iv. 24) Caedmon sang "of the creation of the world and the origin of man, and . . . of many other stories from Holy Writ." It is, however, doubtful whether more than the following lines can claim to be regarded as his genuine work: Nu scylun hergan hefaenricaes uard, Now we must praise of the heavenly kingdom the guardian, Metudaes maecti end his modgidanc, Of the maker the might and his uerc uuldurfadur; sue he uundra gihuaes the work of the father of glory; even as he of wonders each eci Dryctin, or astelidae.
the eternal Lord, the beginning established.
He aerist scop aelda barnum He first created for mankind's children heben til hrofe, haleg scepen.
heaven as a roof, the holy creator.
Tha middungeard, moncynnes uard, Then the of mankind the guardian, eci Dryctin, aefter liadae the eternal Lord, afterwards established The first prose rendering of any part of the Bible—and with these we are mainly concerned in the present enquiry—originated in all probability in the 8th century, when Bede, the eminent scholar and churchman, translated chapters i.–vi. 9 of the Gospel of St. John into the vernacular, but no part of this rendering is extant. (Hist. Eccl. 1., lxxv., ed. Plummer.) Ninth and Tenth Centuries.-The 9th century is character ized by interlinear glosses on the book of Psalms, and towards its close by a few attempts at independent translation. Of these Psalters, glossing either the Roman or Gallican text, the oldest and most important is the so-called Vespasian Psalter, which was written in Mercia some time during the course of the first half of the 9th century (H. Sweet, Oldest Engl. Texts, E.E.T.S., No. 83, London, 1885).
To the late 9th or early loth century a work may be assigned which is so far an advance upon preceding efforts as to be a real translation, not a mere gloss corresponding word for word with the Latin original. This is the famous Paris Psalter, a rendering of the first 5o Psalms (Vulg. i.–L. 1o), contained in the unique ms. lat. 8824 in the Bibl. Nationale, Paris. The authorship of the version is doubtful, though tradition associates its name with King Alfred (ed. B. Thorpe, Oxford, 1835; J. D. Bruce, Baltimore, 1894). The first two verses of Psalm I. may serve as a specimen of the translation.
I. (1) Eadig .by se wer Pe ne gaeb on ge teaht Blessed shall be the man who not walketh in the counsel unrihtwisra, ne on Pam wege ne stent synfulra, of the unrighteous, nor in the way not standeth of the sinful, ne on heora wolbaerendum setle ne sitt.
he shall be meditating by day and night.
In the course of the loth century the Gospels were glossed and translated. The earliest in date is a Northumbrian Gloss on the Gospels, contained in a beautiful and highly interesting ms. vari ously known as the Lindisfarne Gospels, the Durham Book or the Book of St. Cuthbert (ms. Cotton, Nero D. 4, ed. W. W. Skeat, Cambridge, 1871-87). The Latin text dates from the close of the 7th century, and is the work of Eadfrith, bishop of Lindis farne (698-721). The English gloss was added about a century and a half later (c. 95o) by one Aldred, who is held to have been the bishop of Durham of that name. The Lord's Prayer is glossed in the following way:— Matthew vi. (9) Suae bonne iuih gie bidde fader urer 6u aro Sic ergo uos orabitis +Pater nosier qui Is bu bist in heofnum in heofnas; sie gehalgad noina fin; (io) in caelis; sanctificetur nomen tuum; adueniat tic bin, sie willo fin suae is in heofne J in eorbo. (II) hlaf regnum tuum, fiat uoluntas tua sicut in caelo et interra. panem userne oferwistlic sel Cis to daeg. (12) forgef us scylda nostrum dd nobis hodie. et demitte nobis debita usra suae uoe forgefon scyldgum usum. (13) l ne inlaed usih nostra sicut nos dimittirnus debitoribus nostris. et ne inducas nos in costunge ah gefrig usich from yfie.
Of a somewhat later date is the celebrated Rushwortli Version of the Gospels (ms. Bodl. Auct. D. ii. 9, ed. W. W. Skeat, op. cit.), which contains an independent translation of the Gospel of St. Matthew, and a gloss on those of St. Mark, St. Luke and St. John, founded upon the Lindisfarne glosses. From a note in the manuscript we learn that two men, Faerman and Owun, made the version. Faerman, a priest at Harewood or Harwood in York shire, translated the whole of St. Matthew, and wrote the gloss of St. Mark i.–ii. 15, and St. John xviii. 1-3. The remaining part, a mere transcript, is Owun's work. The dialect of the translation of St. Matthew is Mercian.
A further testimony to the activity which prevailed in the field of Biblical lore is the fact that at the close of the century— probably about the year moo--the Gospels were rendered anew for the first time in the south of England. Of this version, the so-called West Saxon Gospels (ed. W. W. Skeat, op. cit), not less than seven manuscripts have come down to us. A note in one of these mss., Corp. Christ. coll., Cambridge, 14o, states that "Aelfric wrote this book in the monastery of Bath," but of this Aelfric nothing further is known. The Lord's Prayer is rendered in the following way in these Southern Gospels:— Matt. vi. (9) Eornustlice gebidda5 eow 6us, Faeder Cue P1.1 Pe eart on heofonum; si Pin nama gehalgod, (1o) to-becume Pin rice; gewurPe bin willa on eortan swa on heofonum. lame gedaeghwamlican hlaf syle us to daeg. (12) forgyf us fire gyltas swa swa we forgyfa6 drum gyltendum. (i3) ne gelaed ru us on costnunge ac alys us of yfele soPlice.
Towards the close of the century parts of the Old Testament found a translator or rather paraphraser in Aelfric (q.v.), the emi nent scholar and churchman. According to his own statement in De vetere Testament° (ed. Grein-Willker, Bibl. d. Ags. Prosa,I., Cassel-GOttingen, 1872), written about o, he had at that period translated the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Kings, Job, Esther, Judith and the Maccabees. His rendering is clear and idiomatic, and though he frequently paraphrases and abridges, the omissions never obscure the meaning or hinder the easy flow of the narrative.
When English finally emerged victorious towards the middle and latter half of the i4th century, it was for all practical pur poses a new language, largely intermixed with French, differing from the language of the older period in sound, flexion and struc ture. It is evident that any Old English versions which might have survived the ravages of time would now be unintelligible; it was equally natural that as soon as French came to be looked upon as an alien tongue, the French versions hitherto in. use would fail to fulfil their purpose, and that attempts should be made to render the Bible into the only language intelligible to the greater part of the nation—English.
The following two verses of the first Psalm may exemplify this:— Ms. Brit. Mus. Add. z7376 I. (I) Beatus uir, qui non abiji in consilio impiorum, et in uia Pecca forum non stetit,et in cathedra iudicio pestilencie falsitatis non sedit. Blessed. be Pe man Pat 3ede nou3t in Pe counseil of wicked, ne stode nou3t in pe wale of sin3eres, ne sat nou3t in fals iugement.
(2) Sed in lege domini uoluntas eius, et in lege eius meditabitur die ac node. Ac hijs wylle was in the wylle of oure Lord, and he schal benche in hijs lawe boPe daye and. ny3t.
Before the middle of the century Richard Rolle of Hampole (q.v.), the Yorkshire hermit, had translated the Psalter anew and provided it with a Commentary (ed. H. R. Bramley, Oxford, 1884) The work was undertaken, as the metrical prologue of one of the copies tells us (ms. Laud Misc. 286), "At a werthy recluse prayer, cald dame Merget Kyrkby." The commentary, written in the northern dialect of the author's Yorkshire home, gained imme diate and lasting popularity and spread in numerous copies throughout the country, the peculiarities of the hermit's harsh and vigorous speech being either modified or wholly removed in the more southerly transcripts. The translation, however, is stiff and literal tc a fault, violating idiomatic usage and the proper order of words in its slavish adherence to the Latin. The following ex tracts -nay exemplify the hermit's rendering and the change the text underwent in later copies:— Ms. Univ. Coll. Oxford. 64 Ms. Brit. MUS. Reg. 18.B. 21 I. (I) Blisful man Pe whilk I. (I) Blessed is Pat man Pat oway 3ed noght in pe counsaile of haP not gone in pe counsell of wicked, and in be way of synful wicked men, and in Pe weye of sin stode noght, & in Pe chaiere of full men haP not stonde, and in pestilens he noght sate. (2) Bot in Pe chaire of pestilence sat not.
laghe of lord Pe will of him; and in (2) But in Pe lawe of our lorde is his laghe he sall thynke day & re Wilk of him; and [in] his lawe nyght. we shall Pinke day and nyght.
Approximately to the same period as these early renderings of the Psalter belongs a version of the Apocalypse with a Commen tary, the earliest ms. of which (Brit. Mus. Harl. 874) is written in the dialect of the north Midlands. This commentary, for a long time attributed to Wycliffe, is really nothing but a verbal rendering of the popular and widely spread Norman Commentary of the Apocalypse (Meyer and Delisle, L'Apocalypse en Francais au XIII' siecle, Paris, 1901), which dates back as far as the first half of the i3th century, and in its general tenor represents the height of orthodoxy.
To the north Midlands or the north belongs further a complete version of the Pauline Epistles found in the unique ms. 32, Corp. Christ. coll., Cambridge, of the sth century (ed. M. J. Powell, E.E.T.S., 1916).
Commentaries on the Gospels of St. Matthew, St. Mark and St. Luke were also translated into English by "a man of the north cuntre." A version of the Acts and the Catholic Epistles (ed. A. C. Paues, A Fourteenth Century Biblical Version, Cambridge, 1904) completes the number of New Testament books translated in the northern parts of England. It is found in several mss. either sep arately or in conjunction with a fragmentary Southern Version of the Pauline Epistles, Peter, James and I. John in a curiously compiled volume, evidently made, as the prologue tells us, by a "brother" for the use and edification of an ignorant "sister" or woman vowed to religion (ed. A. C. Paues, op. cit.). The transla tion of this, our only southern text, surpasses all previous efforts from the point of view of clearness of expression and idiomatic use of English, and, though less exact, it may even be said in these respects to rank equal with the Later or Revised Wycliffite version.
Apart from these more or less complete versions of separate books of the Bible, there existed also numerous renderings of the Lord's Prayer, the Ten Commandments, Gospel Harmonies (e.g., M. Goates, The Pepysian Gospel Harmony, E.E.T.S., Oa. Serv. 157, 1922), translations of the epistles and gospels used in divine service, and other means of familiarizing the people with Holy Scripture.
The first of these, the so-called Early Version, was certainly in the making about 1382; the second, or Later Version, was prob ably finished by the time its "General Prologue" was written "be tween February 1395 and February 1397." (See M. Deanesly, The Lollard Bible, Cambridge, 192o, p. 258.) It is a matter of uncertainty what part, if any, Wycliffe himself took in the work. He is, however, definitely connected with the Early Version through the name of Nicholas of Hereford, one of his early and prominent adherents. For, miraculously, the translator's original copy and a coeval transcript of it are still ex tant in the Bodleian Library, Oxford (Bodl. 959, Douce 369). Both break off abruptly at Baruch iii. 19, the latter having at this place a note inserted to the following effect : Explicit transla cionem Nicholay de herford. In view of the magnitude of the undertaking there must have been a whole circle of translators, but no other name is recorded in connection with this noble work.
The Early Version, apart from its completeness, shows but little advance upon preceding efforts. The translation of the Old Testa ment as far as Baruch iii. 19 is stiff and awkward, sometimes unin telligible from a too close adherence to the Latin text ; in the re maining parts the rendering is somewhat easier and more skilful, though even here Latinisms and un-English phrases abound.
It is small wonder, therefore, if a revision was soon found neces sary and actually taken in hand within a few years of the com pletion of the Earlier Version. John Purvey, the eminent scholar and leader of the Lollard party after Wycliffe's death in 1384, is generally assumed to have taken a prominent part in this under taking, and to have written the "General Prologue" where the principles of work adopted by the revisers have been clearly and forcibly laid down.
This Revised or Later Version is in every way a readable, cor rect rendering of the scriptures. It is far more idiomatic than the Earlier, having been freed from the greater number of its Latin isms ; its vocabulary is less archaic. Its popularity admits of no doubt, for even now in spite of faggots and burning, in spite of the ravages of time and neglect, over 15o copies remain to testify to this fact. The following specimens may afford comparisons with previous renderings:— Early Version Late Version Psalm I. (1) Blisful the man, I. (z) Blessid is the man, that that went not awei in the counseil 3ede not in the councel of wickid of vnpitouse, and in the wei off men; and stood not in the weie of sinful stod not; and in the cha3er synneris, and sat not in the chaier of pestilence sat not. (2) But in of pestilence. (2) But his wille is the lawe of the Lord his wil; and in in the lawe of the Lord; and he the lawe of hym he shal sweteli schal bithenke in the lawe of hym thinke dai and ny3t. dai and ny3t.
The Lord's prayer is almost identical in the two Late Version. Matt. vi. 9-13. Oure fadir that art in heuenes, halewid be thi name; thi kyngdoom come to; be thi wille don in erthe as in heuene; 3yue to vs this dai oure breed ouer othir substaunce; and for3yne to vs oure dettis, as we for3yuen to oure dettouris; and lede vs not into tempta cioun, but delyuerc vs fro yuel. Amen.