4. To remedy the defects of Olivetan's version and produce one more suited to the wants of the age, the Venerable Company of Pastors at Geneva undertook a thorough revisal of the work with the special aid of b'eza, Goulart, Fay, etc., and under the editorial care of Cornelius Bertram. This ap peared in 1588. In this revision rili14, which, in all the other Protestant versions is rendered by word equivalent to Loa, is throughout trans lated L'Eternel. Revised editions have been issued by the Venerable Company in 1693, 1712. 1726, 18o5, and of the N. T. in 1833 ; the two last very modernized in style. This claims to be the most elegant of the French versions, but it is far from being an adequate rendering of the original.
5. The Bible of Diodati,, Gen. 1644 ; of Des marets, Amst. [669 ; of Martin, Utr. (N. T.) i696, (Bible) 1707, 2 vols. fol. ; of Rogues, liable 1744 ; Osterwald, Neufeh. 1744, are revisions of Olivetan's text undertaken by individuals. Of these Oster wald's is the most thorough, and may be viewed as occupying the place in the French Protestant Church of an authorized version, though tartin's is the one most esteemed by the more orthodox of its members, while that of Desmarets is sought by those who attach value to fine paper and printing. A carefully revised edition of Osterwald's Bible, with parallels by the Rev. W. Mackenzie, has just been issued by the French Bible Society, Par. 1861.
6. Of avowedly new translations from the origi nal by individuals may be mentioned that of Seb. Chastillon (Castalio) 2 tomes fol., Bas. 1555, in which the translator aimed to impart classical elegance to the style, but which was universally regarded as neither conveying the just sense of the original nor being in accordance with French idiom ; that of Le Clerc, 2 VOIS. 4to, Amst. 1703, in the interests of Arminianism ; that of Le Cene, published after his death in 2 vols. fol., Amst. 174r, deeply marked by Socinian leanings ; and that of Beausobre and L'Enfant, 2 VOIS. 4to, Amst. r718. This last is by much the best, and has been repeatedly reprinted [BEAuso-BRE].
7. Of Roman Catholic versions of the Bible the first is that of Rene Benoist, a member of the theological faculty at Paris, which appeared in [566. It was condemned by Pope Gregory XIII. in 1575, and involved the author in much trouble because of its supposed Protestant leanings. It is in fact only a slightly altered transcript of the Geneva Bible. A revised edition, conformed to the Vulgate, was proposed and issued by the divines at Louvain. Four translations of the N. T. had ap peared before this, viz., that of Claude Deville, 1613 ; that of Jaques Corbin, an advocate of Paris, z643 ; that of Michel de Marolles, Abbe of Ville loin, 1649 ; and in [666 that of Denys Amelotte, a priest of the oratory, whose hatred of the Jansen ists and desire to damage their version, then in the press, prompted him to a work for which he wa.s wholly unfit, and the blunders of which drew down on him the unsparing criticism of Richard Simon, a priest of his own order. Marolles had begun a trans
lation of the O. T., but it \vas suppressed after the printing had proceeded as far as Lev. xxiii. A translation of the N. T. by the Theologians of Louvain appeared in 1686 ; of this only a few copies exist. All these are made from the Vulgate. So also is the famous Jansenist translation begun by Antoine Lemaitre, and finished by his brother Isaac Louis Lcmaitre de Sacy, aided by Antoine Arnauld, P. Nicole, etc. The N. T. was first published in z vols. Svo. in 1667, and subsequently the O. T., nominally at Mons, but really at Am sterdam. It is variously styled the Version of Mons, the Version of Port Royal, but now com monly the Version of De Sacy. Many editions of it have appeared, with and without notes ; the best is that of Fosse and Beaubrun, Par. 1682, 3 vols. Svc ; a beautifully illustrated edition \vas issued at Paris in 1789-1804, in 2 vols. 8vo. It was with an edition of this version, altered so as to be more conformed to the Vulgate, that Ques nel published his Reflections, 1671-80. The trans lation of Calmet, in his Commentaire Littera/ et Critique, Paris, 1724, may be also viewed as a re vised edition of the Mons Bible. Antoine Godeau Bishop of Grasse, published a translation made from the Vulgate, in 2 VON. 8vo, Paris, 1668. It holds a middle place between a liteml version and a paraphrase. The translation of Nic. Legros WEIS published anonymously at Cologne in 1739, and afterwards with his name in several editions. Of the N. T., a translation, from the pen of Richard Simon, appeared anonymously in 17o2 at Trevoux. This version was charged by 13ossuet with Socinian leaninns, and was condemned by Caidinal de Noailfes. Of the translation by Hure, 1702, and that by the Jesuits Bouhours, Tellier, and Bernier, between 1697 and 403, it may suffice to make mention.
S. In our own day several versions of the Psalms have appeared in France. A translation of the whole Bible from the Vulgate, by Eugene Ge ronde, in 23 vols. Svo, appeared at Paris between 1820 and 1824. This has been frequently re printed, and has excited much attention, some of the journals vehemently commending it, while by others it has been no less severely criticised. The latest appearance in this department is the transla tion of the Gospels by La Mennais, 1846, the style of which is admirable, but the notes ap pended to it are in the interest of Socialism. Diu the most important work of this kind is undoubt edly the translation from the Hebrew of the O. T. by S. Cahen, La Bible: Traa'uction Nouvelle avec l'Hebreu en regard, etc. ; IS vols. 8vo, Par. 1832-39 [CmIEN]. (Le Long, Bibliotheca Sacnz ; Simon, Hist. Cris: du N. T . , liv . ; Brunet, Manuel du Libraire ; Home, Introduction, vol. ii. pt. 2 ; Reuss, Geschichte des V. T., sec. 466, etc., and art. Romanische Bibelzibersetzungen, in Herzog's Encyclopadie).—W. L. A.