SOURCE: Westcott, Brooke Foss. “The Printed Bible: External History” and “The Internal History of the English Bible.” In A General View of the History of the English Bible, pp. 71-110, 212-220. London: Macmillan and Co., 1868.

[In the first excerpt which follows, Westcott considers the textual history of both the Coverdale Bible of 1535 and the Great Bible, analyzing the creation of the works and the garnering of official royal sanction. In the second excerpt, Westcott considers the bases and distinctive qualities of each of Coverdale's major Biblical translations.]

THE PRINTED BIBLE: EXTERNAL HISTORY

§ 2. COVERDALE.

Tyndale's character is heroic. He could see clearly the work to which he was called and pursue it with a single unswerving faith in God and in the powers which God had given him. It was otherwise with Miles Coverdale, who was allowed to finish what Tyndale left incomplete. The differences of the men are written no less on their features than on their lives. But our admiration for the solitary massive strength of the one must not make us insensible to the patient labours and tender sympathy of the other¹. From the first Coverdale appears to have attached himself to the liberal members of the old party and to have looked to working out a reformation from within through them. As early as 1527 he was in intimate connexion with Crumwell and More²; and in all probability it was under their patronage that he was able to prepare for his translation of Holy Scripture. How long he thus laboured we cannot tell³. In 1529 he met Tyndale at Hamburgh⁴, and must have continued abroad for a considerable part of the following years up to 1536. In the meantime a great change had passed over England since the ‘Bill’ of 1530⁵. At the close of 1534 a convocation under the presidency of Cranmer had agreed to petition the king that he would ‘vouchsafe to decree that a translation of the Scriptures into English should be made by certain honest and learned men whom the king should nominate; and that the Scriptures so translated should be delivered to the people according to their learning⁶.’ Crumwell, who must have been well aware of the turn which opinion had taken, seems now to have urged Coverdale to commit his work to the press. At any rate by 1534 he was ready, ‘as he was desired,’ ‘to set forth,’ (i. e. to print) his translation⁷, and the work was finished in October, 1535.

But up to the present time the place where it was printed is wholly undetermined, though most bibliographers agree that it was printed abroad. Various conjectures have been made, but when examined minutely they are found to be unsupported by any substantial evidence. The wood-cuts and type are certainly not those used by Egenolph of Frankfort, to which however they bear a very close resemblance⁸. On the other hand, no book printed by Froschover of Zurich has yet been found with more than the two larger kinds of type used in Coverdale's Bible⁹. The question is further complicated by the fact that the title-page and preliminary matter were reprinted in a different (English) type¹⁰, and the five remaining title-pages represent three distinct issues, two in 1535, and one in 1536. Two copies have a title-page corresponding to the body of the book, dated 1555, and one of them preserves a single page of the original preliminary matter. Another copy has a title-page in English type, corresponding to the English preliminary matter, dated also 1535. The two other title-pages are printed in English type, but with the date 1536¹¹. Thus there can be no reason to doubt that the book was issued both with the foreign and English title-pages, &c.¹², though it may still be doubted whether the English title-page, &c. belongs to 1536 or to 1535¹³.

One important difference between the foreign and English title-pages must be noticed. In the former it is said that the book is ‘faithfully and truly translated out of Dutch [German] and Latin into English:’ in the latter the sources of the version are left unnoticed, and it is said simply to be ‘faithfully translated into English.’ It is possible that the explanatory words taken in connexion with some further details in the original prologue may have been displeasing to the promoters of the edition, and that a new and less explicit title-page, &c. was substituted for the first. However this may have been, the statement itself, as will be seen afterwards, was literally true, and Coverdale describes clearly enough in the existing prologue the secondary character of his work¹⁴.

Coverdale indeed disclaims the originality which friends and detractors have alike assigned to him. And it is in this that the true beauty and truth of his nature are seen. He distinctly acknowledges that he could but occupy for a time the place of another; nay he even looks to this as the best fruit of his labours that he should call out a worthier successor to displace himself. ‘Though Scripture,’ he writes, ‘be not worthily ministered to thee [good reader] in this translation by reason of my rudeness; yet if thou be fervent in thy prayer, God shall not only send it thee in a better shape by the ministration of other that began it afore (Tyndale), but shall also move the hearts of them which as yet meddled not withal to take it in hand and to bestow the gift of their understanding thereon¹⁵.’ …

Yet in the meantime he saw that there was something for him to do. It was a noble end if he could secure that Holy Scripture should be ‘set forth’ (as he was able to obtain) ‘with the Kynge's most gracious license.’ And so plainly disclosing his motives he says … ‘when I considered how great a pity it was that we should want it so long and called to my remembrance the adversity of them which were not only of ripe knowledge, but would also with all their hearts have performed that they begun if they had not had impediment … these and other reasonable causes considered I was more bold to take it in hand. And to help me herein I have had sundry translations not only in Latin but also of the Dutch (German) interpreters, whom because of their singular gifts and special diligence in the Bible I have been the more glad to follow for the most part, according as I was required. But to say the truth before God it was neither my labour nor desire to have this work put in my hand; nevertheless it grieved me that other nations should be more plenteously provided for with the Scripture in their mother tongue than we: therefore when I was instantly required, though I could not do so well as I would, I thought it yet my duty to do my best and that with a good will¹⁶.’

Some good indeed he did hope might permanently remain from his work. As the faithful and honest interpretation of one man it might serve as a kind of comment to another version.

… ‘Divers translations,’ he writes, ‘understand one another and that in the head articles and ground of our most blessed faith though they use sundry words. Therefore methink we have great occasion to give thanks unto God, that He hath opened unto His Church the gift of interpretation and of printing, and that there are now at this time so many which with such diligence and faithfulness interpret the Scripture to the honour of God and edifying of His people¹⁷ … For the which cause according as I was desired¹⁸ I took the more upon me to set forth this special translation, not as a checker, not as a reprover or despiser of other men's translations (for among many as yet I have found none without occasion of great thanksgiving unto God) but lowly and faithfully have I followed mine interpreters, and that under correction, and though I have failed anywhere (as there is no man but he misseth in some things) love shall construe all to the best without any perverse judgment … If thou [reader] hast knowledge therefore to judge where any fault is made, I doubt not but thou wilt help to amend it, if love be joined with thy knowledge. Howbeit whereinsoever I can perceive by myself or by the information of other that I have failed (as it is no wonder) I shall now by the help of God overlook it better and amend it¹⁹.’

The translation of Tyndale went forth to the world without any dedication or author's name. All that was personal was sunk in the grandeur of the message opened to Englishmen. But it could not be so with Coverdale's. His object was to bring about the open circulation of the Scriptures, and that could only be by securing the king's favour. To this end the work was dedicated to Henry VIII. in language which to us now is in many parts strangely painful, though it was not out of harmony with the taste and peculiar circumstances of the time²⁰.

… ‘I thought it my duty,’ he says, ‘and to belong to my allegiance when I had translated this Bible, not only to dedicate this translation unto your highness, but wholly to commit it unto the same; to the intent that if any thing therein be translated amiss (for in many things we fail even when we think to be sure) it may stand in your grace's hands to correct it, to amend it, to improve it, yea and clean to reject it, if your godly wisdom shall think it necessary.’ But even so the spirit of the humble and true scholar asserts itself. For he continues, ‘And as I do with all humbleness submit mine understanding and my poor translation unto the spirit of truth in your grace, so I make this protestation, having God to record in my conscience that I have neither wrested nor altered so much as one word for the maintenance of any manner of sect, but have with a clear conscience purely and faithfully translated this out of five sundry interpreters, having only the manifest truth of the Scripture before mine eyes²¹.’ …

Still acting on the broad principle of ‘becoming all things to all men,’ Coverdale afterwards (1538) revised his New Testament according to the Latin and published it with the Vulgate in parallel columns²². His great object was to interpret the Latin itself to some who used it ignorantly, and also to shew openly the substantial identity of Scripture in different languages. Many disparaged this translation or that. … ‘as though,’ he says, ‘the Holy Ghost were not the Author of His Scripture as well in the Hebrew, Greek, French, Dutch and in English as in Latin. The Scripture and word of God is truly to every Christian man of like worthiness and authority in what language soever the Holy Ghost speaketh it. And therefore am I and will be while ‘I live under your most gracious favour and correction,’—he is still addressing Henry VIII.—‘alway willing and ready to do my best as well in one translation as in another²³.’ And thus in the particular case of translations from different texts he reaffirms his general principle of the utility of various translations, applied before to various renderings of the same text … ‘for thy part, gentle reader, take in good worth that I here offer thee with a good will and let this present translation be no prejudice to the other, that out of the Greek have been translated before or shall be hereafter. For if thou open thine eyes and consider well the gift of the Holy Ghost therein, thou shalt see that one translation declareth, openeth and illustrateth another, and that in many places one is a plain commentary unto another²⁴.’

It is very difficult to ascertain the exact relation in which the first edition of Coverdale's Bible stood to the civil authority. There can be no doubt that it was undertaken by the desire of Crumwell, and its appearance may have been hastened by the change of feeling which found expression in the resolutions of Convocation in 1534, though it could not have owed its origin to them. But when it was finished in October 1535 Crumwell appears to have been unable to obtain a definite license from the king, or it may be that he thought it more prudent to await the publication of the book. So much is certain that the first edition went forth without any distinct royal sanction. The book was not suppressed, and this was all²⁵. But Convocation was not satisfied; and in 1536 they again petitioned that a new translation might be undertaken. Nothing however was done; but the relation in which the king stood to the Papal See had already given greater importance to the public recognition of the supremacy of Scripture.

So it happened that when a council was held in the next year under the presidency of Crumwell, as vicar general, to determine certain articles of faith, the varieties of opinion about Scripture found vigorous expression. Alexander Ales has left a vivid account of the meeting which has been transcribed by Foxe. ‘At the king's pleasure all the learned men but especially the bishops assembled, to whom this matter seemed to belong. … The bishops and prelates attending upon the coming of Crumwell, as he was come in, rose up and did obeisance unto him as to their vicar-general, and he again saluted every one in their degree, and sat down in the highest place at the table, according to his degree and office. …’ Thereupon Crumwell opened the discussion by sketching in a short speech the king's purpose and commands. [‘He will not] admit’ he said ‘any articles or doctrine not contained in Scripture, but approved only by continuance of time and old custom, and by unwritten verities as ye were wont to do. … His majesty will give you high thanks if ye will act and conclude a godly and perfect unity, whereunto this is the only way and mean, if ye will determine all things by the Scripture, as God commandeth you in Deuteronomy; which thing his majesty exhorteth and desireth you to do.’ On this ‘the bishops rose up altogether giving thanks unto the king's majesty … for his most godly exhortation. …’ There was less unanimity afterwards. The discussion turned upon the Sacraments. Cranmer wisely urged moderation and accuracy of definition. Ales, at the invitation of Crumwell, proceeded to investigate the meaning of the word. Stokesley, bishop of London, interrupted him as he was examining the opinions of the fathers, and was in turn checked by Fox of Hereford, who reminded both that ‘they were commanded by the king that these controversies should be determined only by the rule and judgment of the Scripture.’ Then specially addressing the bishops he continued. … ‘The lay people do now know the holy Scripture better than many of us; and the Germans have made the text of the Bible so plain and easy by the Hebrew and Greek tongues that now many things may be better understood without any glosses at all than by all the commentaries of the doctors. And moreover they have so opened these controversies by their writings, that women and children may wonder at the blindness and falshood that have been hitherto. … Truth is the daughter of time, and time is the mother of truth; and whatsoever is besieged of truth cannot long continue; and upon whose side truth doth stand, that ought not to be thought transitory or that it will ever fall …’ But Stokesley hard pressed in the argument, replied to Ales with inconsiderate warmth. … ‘Ye are far deceived if ye think that there is none other word of God but that which every souter and cobbler doth read in his mother tongue. And if ye think that nothing pertaineth unto the Christian faith, but that only which is written in the Bible, then are ye plainly with the Lutherans. … Now when the right noble lord Crumwell, the archbishop with the other bishops who did defend the pure doctrine of the Gospel, heard this, they smiled a little one upon another, forasmuch as they saw him flee even in the very beginning of the disputation unto his old rusty sophistries and unwritten verities. …’ ‘Thus through the industry of Crumwell the colloquies were brought to this end, that albeit religion could not wholly be reformed, yet at that time there was some reformation had through England²⁶’.

In the meantime the first edition of Coverdale's Bible was exhausted. The fall and death of Queen Anne, which had seemed likely to be fatal to the cause of the reformers had not stayed the desire for the vernacular Scriptures which sprang from popular and not from political impulses. The feeling of the clergy and the bishops was indeed divided on the question, but even among them the king could find sufficient support to justify a decided step in directly authorising the publication of the English Bible²⁷. Two editions of Coverdale's translation ‘overseen and corrected’ were published by Nycolson in Southwark in 1537, and for the first time ‘set forth with the king's most gracious license.’ The name of Queen Jane was substituted for that of Queen Anne in the dedication without further change, and at length the English Bible was not only tacitly overlooked but distinctly allowed to circulate freely. Coverdale, through Crumwell's influence, had established a precedent, and successors were found at once to avail themselves of it.

The revised edition of Coverdale differs slightly in text and arrangement from that of 1535. One significant addition is worthy of notice, ‘A prayer to be used before reading the Bible: Because that when thou goest to study in Holy Scripture thou shouldest do it with reverence, therefore for thine instruction and loving admonition thereto, the reverend father in God Nicholas, Bishop of Salisbury, hath prescribed this prayer following, taken out of the same.

“O Lord God Almighty which long ago saidst by the mouth of James thine Apostle: If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask it of God. … Hear my petition for this thy promise sake. … Have mercy upon me and graciously hear me for Jesus Christs sake our Lord, which liveth and reigneth with Thee, His Father and the Holy Ghost, world without end. Amen.”

‘After the end of any Chapter (if thou wilt) thou mayest say these verses following.

“Lead me O Lord in thy way, and let me walk in Thy truth. Oh let mine heart delight in fearing thy name.

Order my goings after Thy Word that no wickedness reign in me.

Keep my steps within thy paths, lest my feet turn into any contrary way.”’ …

§ 4. THE GREAT BIBLE (CRUMWELL, CRANMER, TUNSTALL AND HEATH).

It is indeed evident that Crumwell's zeal for the circulation of the vernacular Scriptures could not be satisfied with the license which he had obtained for the Bibles of Coverdale and Matthew. The first was imperfect in its conception: the second was burdened with notes and additions which could not fail sooner or later to call out bitter antagonism. Under these circumstances he appears to have applied to Coverdale, who was in England in the early part of 1538, to undertake the charge of a new edition on the basis of Matthew's but with a more complete critical collation of the Hebrew and Latin texts than had been hitherto attempted. Grafton and Whitchurch had earned by their former work the privilege of undertaking the conduct of this, but the resources of the English press were not adequate to carry it out as Crumwell wished. And so about Lent Coverdale proceeded with Grafton to Paris to superintend the printing there. A license was obtained from Francis for the execution of the work²⁸, which was commenced on a splendid scale by Regnault. Coverdale pressed forward the enterprise with all haste, for even from the first they were ‘daily threatened and looked ever to be spoken withal.’ By September he could inform Crumwell that ‘Your Lordships work of the Bible … goeth well forward, and within four months will draw to an end by the grace of Almighty God.’ Three months later when the text was almost finished the danger of interruption to the printing became imminent. Coverdale conveyed as much of the Bible as was ready to Crumwell by the help of Bishop Bonner, ambassador at Paris, that if ‘the rest were confiscated yet this at least might be safe.’ In four days more the expected inhibition came. An order from the inquisitor general for France forbade the further progress of the work and the removal of the printed sheets. Coverdale and Grafton made their escape, but not long after returned to Paris and conveyed presses, types and workmen to London, and even rescued a large quantity of the condemned sheets—‘four great-dry vats’ full—which had been sold to a tradesmen as waste paper, instead of being burnt. Thus that which had seemed to be for the hindrance of Crumwell's design really forwarded it permanently in a wonderful manner by introducing into England the materials and men best suited to carry it out. The Bible, henceforth known as the Great Bible, was finished in April, but without the critical and explanatory commentary which Coverdale had designed²⁹. While the revision was going forward he had ‘set in a private table the diversity of readings of all texts [Hebrew, Chaldee, Greek, Latin] with such annotations in another table, as shall doubless elucidate and clear the same, as well without any singularity of opinions as all checkings and reproofs.’ And when it was drawing to a close, he writes regretfully: ‘Pity it were that the dark places of the text, upon which I have always set a hand should so pass undeclared. As for any private opinion or contentious words, as I will utterly avoid all such, so will I offer the annotations first to my said Lord of Hereford [Bonner], to the intent that he shall so examine the same, afore they be put in print, if it be your Lordship's good pleasure that I shall do so.’ But Coverdale's regret was ineffectual. The various marks which he designed remained in the text of several editions of the Great Bible, but nothing more than a general explanation of their import was ever given. The volume of ‘annotations’ was deferred till a more convenient occasion, which never came. But in the mean time a complete English text of the Scriptures was provided for public use, which by an injunction framed beforehand Crumwell, as the king's vice-gerent, required should be set up in some convenient place in every church throughout the kingdom before a specified day³⁰. ‘A domino factum est istud’ is the worthy motto with which it concludes³¹.

There is no evidence to shew that Cranmer had any share in the preparation of the Great Bible, or even that he was acquainted with the undertaking. The selection of Coverdale for the execution of the work, and Coverdale's correspondence, distinctly mark it as Crumwell's sole enterprise. But Cranmer was not slow in furthering it. By the autumn of the same year arrangements were completed for the printing of a new edition in London with the help of the materials obtained from Paris; and the archbishop had drawn up a preface for it which he had transmitted to Crumwell for the approbation of the king. By a strange coincidence Crumwell received from Henry on the very day on which Cranmer wrote to him to make a final decision about the price, &c., the absolute right of licensing the publication of Bibles in England for five years. Thus all difficulties were removed from the way, and the Bible with the Preface of the archbishop was finished in April 1540³². Two other editions followed in the same year (July: November, the title-page is dated 1541): and three more in 1541 (May: November: December). These six editions all have Cranmer's prologue, but the third and fifth bear the names of Tunstall and Heath upon the title-page, who are said to have ‘overseen and perused’ the translation ‘at the commandment of the King's Highness.’ The cause of this nominal revision is obvious. Crumwell had been disgraced and executed in July. The work which he had taken so much to heart was naturally suspected; and thus the open sanction of two bishops, prominent among the party opposed to him, was required to confirm its credit. And so it was that at last by a strange irony ‘my lord of London’ authorised what was in a large part substantially the very work of Tyndale, which he had before condemned and burnt³³.

The variations in the texts of these editions of the Great Bible will be considered afterwards. But one important change was made in the original design of the book which requires to be noticed now. Coverdale, as we have seen, looked upon the notes as an important part of the work, and the reference to them was retained through three editions³⁴. With the fall of Crumwell all hope of publishing a commentary disappeared, and the ‘pointing hands’ were removed. It is not difficult to understand the objections to Coverdale's design, and a narrative which Foxe has preserved will explain the influence which led to its suppression.

‘Not long after [the death of Crumwell],’ he writes, ‘great complaint was made to the king of the translation of the Bible, and of the Preface of the same, and then was the sale of the Bible commanded to be stayed, the bishops promising to amend and correct it, but never performing the same. Then Grafton was called and first charged with the printing of Matthew's Bible, but he being fearful of trouble made excuses for himself in all things. Then was he examined of the Great Bible, and what notes he was prepared to make. To which he answered that he knew none. For his purpose was to have retained learned men to have made the notes, but when he perceived the king's majesty and his clergy not willing to have any he proceeded no further. But for all these excuses Grafton was sent to the Fleet, and there remained six weeks, and before he came out was bound in three hundred pounds that he should neither sell nor imprint or cause to be imprinted any more Bibles until the king and the clergy should agree upon a translation. And thus was the Bible from that time stayed during the reign of Henry VIII.³⁵’

The publication of the Great Bible and the injunction for its free exhibition in the Parish Churches marked a memorable epoch. The king in a declaration appointed ‘to be read by all curates upon the publishing of the Bible in English’ justly dwelt upon the gravity of the measure. He commanded ‘that in the reading and hearing thereof, first most humbly and reverently using and addressing yourselves unto it’—the curate is speaking to his congregation—‘you shall have ‘always in your remembrance and memories that all things contained in this book is the undoubted will, law, and commandment of Almighty God, the only and straight mean to know the goodness and benefits of God towards us, and the true duty of every Christian man to serve him accordingly … And if at any time by reading any doubt shall come to any of you, touching the sense and meaning of any part thereof; that then, not giving too much to your own minds, fancies and opinions, nor having thereof any open reasoning in your open taverns or alehouses, ye shall have recourse to such learned men as be or shall be authorised to preach and declare the same. So that avoiding all contentions and disputations in such alehouses and other places … you use this most high benefit quietly and charitably every of you, to the edifying of himself, his wife and family …³⁶.’

Among others Bp. Bonner ‘set up Six Bibles in certain convenient places of St Paul's church,’ after the king's proclamation in May 1540³⁷, with an admonition to readers to bring with them ‘discretion, honest intent, charity, reverence and quiet behaviour. That there should be no such number meet together there as to make a multitude. That no exposition be made thereupon but what is declared in the book itself. That it be not read with noise in time of divine service; or that any disputation or contention be used at it³⁸.’ It is scarcely surprising that the novelty of the license granted to the people should have led them to neglect these instructions. Bonner was forced, as he pleads, by the great disorders created by the readers to issue a new admonition in which he threatened the removal of the Bibles. ‘Diverse wilful and unlearned persons,’ he writes, ‘inconsiderately and indiscreetly … read the same especially and chiefly at the time of divine service … yea in the time of the sermon and declaration of the word of God … Wherefore this is eftsoons of honest friendship to require and charitably to desire and pray every reader of this Book that either he will indeed observe and keep my former advertisement and friendly admonition adjoined hereunto … either else to take in good part and be content that the said Bibles for the said abuses be taken down, for assuredly, the fault and disorder herein not amended but increased, I intend, being thereunto enforced, upon right good considerations, and especially for the said abuses, to take down the said Bibles, which otherwise I would be right loth to do, considering I have been always and still will be by God's grace right glad that the Scripture and Word of God should be well known and also set forth accordingly³⁹.’

The popular zeal for reading the Scriptures was not always manifested thus inconsiderately. In a public document drawn up to justify the position of the English Church in 1539⁴⁰ great stress is laid upon the revolution in common habits which was thus effected. ‘Englishmen have now in hand in every Church and place and almost every man the Holy Bible and New Testament in their mother tongue instead of the old fabulous and fantastical books of the Table Round, Lancelot du Lac, &c. and such other, whose impure filth and vain fabulosity the light of God has abolished utterly.’

One narrative, which is derived from actual experience will illustrate the feelings of the time. It was taken by Strype from a manuscript of Foxe.

‘It was wonderful to see with what joy this book of God was received not only among the learneder sort and those that were noted for lovers of the reformation, but generally all England over among all the vulgar and common people; and with what greediness God's word was read and what resort to places where the reading of it was. Every body that could bought the book or busily read it or got others to read it to them if they could not themselves, and divers more elderly people learned to read on purpose. And even little boys flocked among the rest to hear portions of the holy Scripture read. One William Maldon happening in the company of John Foxe, in the beginning of the reign of Q. Elizabeth, and Foxe being very inquisitive after those that suffered for religion in the former reigns, asked him if he knew any that were persecuted for the Gospel of Jesus Christ that he might add it to his Book of Martyrs. He told him he knew one that was whipped by his own father in king Henry's reign for it. And when Foxe was very inquisitive who he was and what was his name, he confessed it was himself; and upon his desire he wrote out all the circumstances. Namely that when the king had allowed the Bible to be set forth to be read in all Churches immediately several poor men in the town of Chelmsford in Essex, where his father lived and he was born, bought the New Testament and on Sundays sat reading of it in the lower end of the Church: many would flock about them to hear their reading; and he among the rest, being then but fifteen years old, came every Sunday to hear the glad and sweet tidings of the Gospel. But his father observing it once angrily fetched him away and would have him say the Latin Matins with him, which grieved him much. And as he returned at other times to hear the Scripture read, his father still would fetch him away. This put him upon the thoughts of learning to read English that so he might read the New Testament himself; which when he had by diligence effected he and his father's apprentice bought the New Testament, joining their stocks together, and to conceal it laid it under the bedstraw and read it at convenient times. One night his father being asleep he and his mother chanced to discourse concerning the crucifix, and kneeling down to it and knocking on the breast then used, and holding up the hands to it when it came by on procession. This he told his mother was plain idolatry. … His mother enraged at him for this said, “Wilt thou not worship the cross which was about thee when thou wert christened and must be laid on thee when thou art dead?” In this heat the mother and son departed and went to their beds. The sum of this evening's conference she presently repeats to her husband; which he impatient to hear and boiling in fury against his son for denying worship to be due to the cross, arose up forthwith and goes into his son's chamber and, like a mad zealot, taking him by the hair of his head with both his hands pulled him out of the bed and whipped him unmercifully. And when the young man bore this beating, as he related, with a kind of joy, considering it was for Christ's sake and shed not a tear, his father seeing that was more enraged, and ran down and fetched an halter and put it about his neck, saying he would hang him. At length with much entreaty of the mother and brother he left him almost ‘dead⁴¹.’

It would be impossible to paint in more vivid colours the result of the first open reading of the English Bible, and the revelation which it made of the thoughts of many hearts. Classes and households were divided. On the one side were the stern citizens of the old school to whom change seemed to be the beginning of the license: on the other young men burning with eager zeal to carry to the uttermost the spiritual freedom of which they had caught sight. And between them were those to whom all they had been taught to reverence was still inestimably precious while yet they could not press to extremity those by whom the old tenets were assailed.

.....

THE INTERNAL HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE

§ 2. COVERDALE.

The contrast between Tyndale and Coverdale has been already pointed out; and in spite of all that has been written to the contrary it is impossible to grant to Coverdale's Bible a place among independent translations. In fact Coverdale distinctly disavows the claim for himself. ‘I have,’ he writes to the king in his dedication, ‘with a clear conscience purely and faithfully translated this out of five sundry interpreters, having only the manifest truth of the Scripture before mine eyes …⁴²’ ‘To help me herein,’ he informs ‘the Christian reader,’ I have had sundry translations, not only in Latin but also of the Dutch [German] interpreters, whom, because of their singular gifts and special diligence in the Bible, I have been the more glad to follow for the most part, according as I was required⁴³.’ ‘Lowly and faithfully,’ he adds, ‘have I followed mine interpreters and that under correction⁴⁴.’ And so it was that the title-page of his Bible which was printed with it described it as ‘faithfully translated out of Latin and Dutch⁴⁵.’

Nothing, it might be supposed, could be more explicit or intelligible or consistent with Coverdale's aims; but his critics have been importunately eager to exalt his scholarship at the cost of his honesty. If the title-page, said one who had not seen it, runs so, ‘it contains a very great misrepresentation⁴⁶.’ To another the notice appears to be a piece of advertising tact. Expediency, a third supposes, led Coverdale to underrate his labours. And yet it may be readily shewn that the words are simply and literally true. Coverdale certainly had some knowledge of Hebrew⁴⁷ by which he was guided at times in selecting his rendering; but in the main his version is based on the Swiss-German version of Zwingli and Leo Juda, Zurich (1524-9, 1539, &c.), and on the Latin of Pagninus. He made use also of Luther and the Vulgate. His fifth version may have been the Worms German Bible of 1529, or the Latin Bible of Rudelius with marginal renderings from the Hebrew (1527, 1529), or (as is most likely), for he does not specify that his ‘five interpreters’ are all Latin or German, the published English translations of Tyndale to which he elsewhere refers.

The examination of a few chapters will place the primary dependence of Coverdale in the Old Testament on the Zurich Bible beyond all doubt. Thus in the four short chapters of Malachi there are about five-and-twenty places where he follows the German against the Hebrew and Vulgate. Three sample instances may be quoted. In i. 4, it is said ‘they shall be called The border of wickedness,’ in the Hebrew and Latin as in the Authorised Version, but in Coverdale ‘A cursed land,’ a literal translation to the German. Again in i. 13, ‘it is weariness to me,’ a single word, but in Coverdale and the German we read ‘it is but labour and travail.’ Once again in iii. 8, ‘will a man rob God?’ is represented in Coverdale and the German by ‘should a man use falsehood and deceit with God?’ And such coincidences occur not in one book only but throughout the Old Testament⁴⁸. But at the same time on rare occasions Coverdale prefers to follow some one of the other translations which he consulted. Thus in two passages, ii. 3; 14, 15, of which the latter is a very remarkable one, he adopts the renderings of Pagninus and Luther in preference to those of the Zurich Bible.

It is not therefore surprising that notwithstanding his acknowledged partiality for the German translators, Coverdale availed himself freely of the work of Tyndale as far as it was published, the Pentateuch, Jonah⁴⁹, and the New Testament⁵⁰. His Pentateuch may, indeed, unless a partial examination has misled me, be fairly described as the Zurich translation rendered into English by the help of Tyndale, with constant reference to Luther, Pagninus and the Vulgate. In the remaining books of the Old Testament the influence of the Zurich Bible greatly preponderates⁵¹. In the Apocrypha Coverdale moves with comparative freedom, and his translation has far more originality.

The New Testament is a very favourable specimen of his labour. Its basis is Tyndale's first edition, but this he very carefully revised by the help of the second edition⁵² and yet more by the German. Thus on a rough calculation of changes, not simply of form or rhythm, more than three-fourths of the emendations introduced by Coverdale into Tyndale's version of 1 John are derived from Luther, but the whole number of changes, and they are nearly all verbal, is, if I have counted rightly, only a hundred and twenty-three.

Thus the claims of Coverdale, as far as his Bible is concerned, must be reduced to the modest limits which he fixed himself. But though he is not original yet he was endowed with an instinct of discrimination which is scarcely less precious than originality, and a delicacy of ear which is no mean qualification for a popular translator. It would be an interesting work to note the subtle changes of order and turns of expression which we owe to him. In the epistle from which most of our illustrations have been taken ‘the pride of life’ and ‘the world passeth away,’ are immeasurable improvements on Tyndale's ‘the pride of goods,’ and ‘the world vanisheth away;’ and the rendering ‘shutteth up his heart,’ (due to Luther) is as much more vigorous than Tyndale's ‘shutteth up his compassion’ as it is more touching than the strange combination of the Authorised Version ‘shutteth up his bowels of compassion.’

Coverdale has a tendency to diffuseness, which in some places (as Ecclus. xliv.) leads him to long paraphrases of his text. The fault is one from which the Zurich Bible also suffers, and he may have fallen into it from imitating the style of his model too closely even when he abandoned its words. But his phrasing is nearly always rich and melodious. The general character of his version as compared with that of Tyndale may be very fairly represented by that of the Prayer Book Version of the Psalms as compared with the Authorised Version in the Bible. In both cases Coverdale's work is smooth rather than literal. He resolves relatives and participles and inserts conjunctions, if in that way he may make the rendering easier⁵³.

Just as Coverdale valued highly the existence of many translations⁵⁴ so he claimed for himself the right to extend this characteristic of diversity to his own work. He thought that he could thus attain comprehensiveness by variety, and secure in some measure for one translation the advantages which he found in many. ‘Whereas the most famous interpreters of all give sundry judgments of the text, so far as it is done by the spirit of knowledge in the Holy Ghost, methink no man should be offended thereat, for they refer their doings in meekness to the Spirit of truth in the congregation of God … Be not thou offended therefore, good reader, though one call a scribe that other calleth a lawyer; or elders that other calleth father and mother; or repentance that another calleth penance or amendment … And this manner have I used in my translation, calling it in some place penance that in other place I call repentance; and that not only because the interpreters have done so before me, but’—and this introduces a second characteristic reason—‘that the adversaries of the truth may see how that we abhor not this word penance, as they untruly report of us⁵⁵ …’

There may be some weakness in this, and Coverdale suffered for it; yet it may not be lightly condemned. In crises of great trial it is harder to sympathize with many views than with one. There is a singularity which is the element of progress; but there is a catholicity which is the condition of permanence; and this Coverdale felt. ‘As the Holy Ghost is one working in thee and me as He will, so let us not swerve from that unity but be one in Him. And for my part I ensure thee I am indifferent to call it as well with the one term as with the other, so long as I know that it is no prejudice nor injury to the meaning of the Holy Ghost …⁵⁶’ He may have carried his respect for some so-called ‘Ecclesiastical’ words to an excessive length, but even in this repect his merit was substantial. It was well that Tyndale should for a time break the spell which was attached to words like charity, confess, church, grace, priest, and recall men to their literal meaning in love, [ac]knowledge, congregation, favour, elder; but it was no less well that the old words, and with them the historical teaching of many centuries, should not be wholly lost from our Bibles. That they were not lost was due to the labours of Coverdale; but his influence was felt not so much directly through his own first bible, as through Matthew's Bible, in which a large portion of it was incorporated, and still more through the Great Bible, in which he revised more than once his own work and that of Tyndale with which it had been joined⁵⁷. …

Notes

1. The later Puritanism of Coverdale is consistent with this view of his character. He was a man born rather to receive than to create impressions.

2. Anderson, I. p. 186.

3. In an undated letter to Crumwell he says, evidently in reference to some specific ‘communication’ from him, ‘Now I begin to taste of Holy Scriptures … Nothing in the world I desire but books as concerning my learning: they once had, I do not doubt, but Almighty God shall perform that in me which he of his plentiful favour and grace hath begun.’ Anderson fixes this in 1531. The letter however from style seems to be nearly contemporary with another addressed to Crumwell in 1527.

4. Foxe, Acts and Monuments, v. 120. I see nothing derogatory to Tyndale or improbable in Foxe's explicit statement that at this time Coverdale helped him in translating the Pentateuch; though on such a point Foxe's unsupported statement is not sufficient evidence.

5. See p. 54.

6. Strype, Cranmer, p. 34. It is uncertain whether it was after this resolution (as seems most likely), or not till after the corresponding resolutions of 1536, that Cranmer endeavoured to engage the bishops in a translation or revision of the English Bible [New Testament], of which attempt Strype has preserved an amusing anecdote: Cranmer, p. 48.

7. The date is added in the edition of 1550. The words do not imply that he commenced it then.

8. Mr Fry on Coverdale's Bible of 1535, p. 32. On this point I have satisfied myself completely.

9. Mr Fry, l.c. p. 28. It is right to add that I am convinced, on internal grounds, that Froschover was the printer, though at present no satisfactory direct evidence of the fact can be adduced. Froschover, it may be added, printed the edition of 1550.

10. Probably, as Mr Fry shows, by Nycolson: l.c. p. 20.

    In the same way the title-page and preliminary matter of the edition of 1550 printed abroad were cancelled, and a new title-page &c. printed in England substituted in their place.

11. See App. 11.

12. The fragment of the foreign printed Prologue offers only one important variation from the corresponding part of the English Prologue: Mr Fry, l.c. p. 18.

    It is of course impossible to determine the cause of the suppression of the foreign title-page and Prologue. Coverdale may have explained too much in detail ‘the Douche and Latin’ sources from which he borrowed to suit the wishes of his patrons or publishers. The change in the title-page suggests the conjecture, which is however otherwise unsupported.

13. If it could be ascertained whether the title-page of Lord Northampton's copy is a single page added to the Prologue, or printed on the same sheet with a part of it, something might be done towards settling the question.

14. The supposition that the publication of the work was delayed by the fall of Q. Anne Boleyn is quite baseless. The substitution of the name of Q. Jane without any other alteration in the edition of 1537 is like that of the name of Edward VI. for Henry VIII. in the edition of 1550. The appropriateness of epithets was not much considered by early editors. Mr Fry has shewn, l.c. pp. 10 ff. that all the dedications found in copies of the first edition with Q. Jane's name belong to the edition of 1537.

15. Coverdale's Remains, p. 30 (ed. Park. Soc.)

16. Remains, p. 12 (Prologue).

17. Remains, p. 13.

18. In the edition of 1550 is added ‘in 1534.’

19. Remains, p. 14.

20. The Dedication of the Authorised Version is even more painful and less capable of excuse. It seems strange that this should hold its place in our Bibles while the noble Preface is universally omitted.

21. Remains, p. 11.

22. Of this Latin-English Testament there are three editions. The first was printed by Nycolson 1538 and dedicated to Henry VIII. This was executed while Coverdale was in Paris and disowned by him on the ground that ‘as it was disagreeable to my former translation in English, so was not the true copy of the Latin text observed’ (Remains, p. 33). Accordingly he revised it ‘weeding out the faults that were in the Latin and English before’ (id.), and printed a new edition in Paris in the same year which was published by Grafton and Whitchurch, and dedicated to Lord Crumwell. Nycolson however put forth another impression of his edition under the name of John Hollybushe (1538).

    It is probable that Coverdale simply left instructions with the printer as to how the work should be done, not foreseeing the difficulties which would arise, and that the printer engaged Hollybushe to superintend the work which Coverdale when he saw it disavowed. Coverdale's own Testament is an adaptation of his version to the Latin. Hollybushe's is a new version from the Latin on the basis of Coverdale's. Specimens are given in App. VI.

    The titles of the two principal editions are the following:

    The newe testament both Latine and Englyshe ech correspondent to the other after the vulgare text, commonly called S. Ieroms. Faythfully translated by Myles Couerdale Anno MCCCCCXXXVIII. … Printed in Southwarke by james Nicolson. Set forth wyth the Kynges moost gracious licence.

    The new testament both in Latin and English after the vulgare texte: which is red in the churche. Translated and corrected by Myles Couerdale: and prynted in Paris by Fraunces Regnault. MCCCCCXXXVIII in Nouembre … Cum gratia et privilegio regis.

23. Remains, p. 27.

24. Id. p. 36.

25. On the whole it seems best to refer Coverdale's account of the reference of ‘his Bible’ by the King to the Bishops to the Great Bible. See p. 97.

26. Foxe, Acts and Monuments, v. 378 ff.

27. According to Foxe Crumwell, as Vicegerent, issued in 1536 an injunction that by Aug. 1 every church should be provided ‘with a book of the whole Bible in Latin and also in English … for every man that will to look and read therein …’ (Foxe, Acts and Monuments, v. 167.) It is however certain that this injunction was not published. The original draught may have contained the provision, which is the more likely as it is not similar in form to the corresponding injunction of 1538.

28. The license granted by Francis is given by Strype, Cranmer, p. 756, App. xxx. After the permission to print and export is added the provision: ‘Dummodo quod sic imprimetis et excudetis sincere et pie, quantum in vobis erit, citra ullas privatas aut illegitimas opiniones impressum et excussum [excusum] fuerit. …’ This clause was of course sufficiently wide to admit of the interference of the inquisition.

29. A copy of this edition on vellum designed for Crumwell and described by Coverdale himself, is now in the Library of St John's College, Cambridge.

    It is worthy of remark that this Bible has no dedication. The title-page—said to have been designed by Holbein—represents (at the top) the king giving the Bible (Verbum Dei) to Crumwell and Cranmer: they in turn (on the sides) distribute it among ecclesiastics and laymen: at the bottom a crowd is listening to a preacher. Labels with various texts &c. issue from the mouths of the chief figures. The composition includes many other details and will repay a careful examination. It is well described in the Historical Account, p. 92.

    The reference of ‘Coverdale's Bible’ to the Bishops by the king, and their confession that there were no heresies to be maintained thereby, appears to refer to this edition (Fryth, p. 78). See p. 82.

    In a preliminary explanation of signs some account is given of the delay in the publication of the notes: ‘We have also (as ye may see) added many hands both in the margin of this volume and also in the text, upon the which we purposed to have made in the end of the Bible (in a table by themselves) certain godly annotations: but forasmuch as yet there hath not been sufficient time ministered to the king's most honourable Council for the oversight and correction of the said annotations, we will therefore omit them till their more convenient leisure, doing now no more but beseech thee, most gentle reader, that when thou comest at such a place where a hand doth stand … and thou canst not attain to the meaning and true knowledge of that sentence, then do not rashly presume to make any private interpretation thereof, but submit thyself to the judgment of those that are godly learned in Christ Jesus.’

30. There cannot be the least doubt that the ‘Bible of the largest volume in English’ was the edition being prepared in Paris. No one who has seen Coverdale's, Matthew's and Crumwell's Bibles together would hesitate as to the application of the description: the Bible and the injunction corresponded and were both due to the same man. I cannot agree with Mr Anderson in supposing Matthew's Bible to have been intended: II. 34, in spite of Strype, Cranmer, I. 117. The date by which the Bible was to be procured was left blank. At the time when the injunctions were drawn up, the interruption of the printing could not have been definitely foreseen. Similar proclamations were issued by the king in May 1540 immediately after the publication of the second (Cranmer's) Great Bible; and again in May 1541, after the publication of the third, which bore the names of Tunstall and Heath. Anderson, II. pp. 131, 142.

    It may be added that Cranmer in his injunctions for the clergy of the diocese of Hereford (between May and November 1538) requires that every one ‘shall have by the first day of August next coming (1539?), as well a whole Bible in Latin and English, or at least a New Testament of both the same languages, as the copies of the king's highness' injunctions.’ These injunctions were probably issued after September, and the date fixed in 1539. Cranmer, Works, II. p. 81.

31. One passage which occurs at the end of the Introduction is worthy of being quoted, and it seems characteristic of Coverdale:

    ‘With what judgment the books of the Old Testament are to be read.

    … ‘The books of the Old Testament are much to be regarded because they be as it were a manner of foundation whereunto the New Testament doth cleave and lean, out of the which certain arguments of the New Testament may be taken. For there is nothing shewed in the New Testament, the which was not shadowed before in the figures of Moses' Law, and forespoken in the revelations of the Prophets, some things even evidently expressed …’

32. Letter 264.

33. The expense of these editions was defrayed, as seems certain, by ‘Antony Marler a haberdasher’ of London, who presented to Henry a magnificent copy on vellum, with an autograph inscription, which is preserved in the British Museum. Mr Anderson quotes a minute of the Privy Council bearing on his privileges with regard to the sale, dated April 1541 (II. p. 142), and a patent for printing the Bible alone for four years: March 1542 (II. p. 152).

34. Of April 1539: April 1540: July 1540. After this the reference to notes was omitted.

    For the relation between the texts of the several issues of the Great Bible see Chap. II. § 4. I cannot tell by what surprising oversight Mr Anderson describes Crumwell's Bible as being Matthew's text.

35. Foxe, Acts and Monuments, II. p. 135 (fol. ed.).

36. Strype's Cranmer, II. 735—6.

37. See p. 99, n. 1.

38. Strype's Cranmer, I. 120.

39. Foxe, Acts and Monuments, V. App. 14.

40. A Summary Declaration of the Faith, Uses and Observations in England (dated 1539). Collier, Ecclesiastical History, II. Collection of Records, 47.

41. Strype's Cranmer, I. 91, 92.

42. Remains, p. 11.

43. Id. p. 12.

44. Id. p. 14.

45. See pp. 73, 74.

46. Whittaker, Historical Inquiry, p. 59 n. In support of this bold statement Dr Whittaker quotes four passages from Coverdale (pp. 52 ff.), and compares them with all the versions which, as he affirms, he could have consulted. As Coverdale differs from these, he is pronounced to have translated ‘from the Hebrew and from nothing else’ (p. 50). Unhappily Dr Whittaker was not acquainted with the German-Swiss Version—a sufficiently famous book—from which they are all rendered. Ex. xxxiv. 30: Num. x. 31: Is. lvii. 5: Dan. iii. 25. [Since this was written I find that Dr Ginsburg has already pointed out the falsity of Dr Whittaker's argument: Kitto's Cyclopœdia, s. v. Coverdale. To him therefore belongs the credit of having first clearly proved the dependence of Coverdale on the Zurich Bible. It was indeed from the reference to Dr Ginsburg in the Dictionary of the Bible, that I was led to examine in detail the Zurich Versions. Henceforth it may be hoped we shall hear no more of Dr Whittaker's mistake.]

47. Compare p. 98.

48. Other examples are given more at length in § 4, and App. VII.

49. A verse from Jonah (iv. 6) may be quoted to shew the extent of the resemblance. The variations of Tyndale are noted in italics and given below: ‘and the Lord God* prepared † a wild vine which sprung up over Jonas that he might have shadow above‡ his head, to deliver him out of his pain. And Jonas was exceeding glad of the wild vine.’

    * om. Tyndale. † add as it were. Tyndale. ‡ over, Tyndale.

    One singular phrase in ii. 3 common to Cov. and Tyn. may be noted, ‘all thy waves and rowles of water went over me.’

50. Like Rogers he neglected the fragmentary ‘Epistles.’ See p. 229.

51. His various renderings throw great light on the authorities which he consulted. These are traced to their sources in App. IV.

52. In 1 John he appears to follow the first and second editions where they differ in about an equal number of places. But it is evident that the first edition was his foundation, for he follows it in one clear mistake of reading iii. 11, that ye should love, and in one error of grammar, iv. 20, hateth, both of which were corrected by Tyndale on revision, and would not have been reintroduced.

    The changes are such as would easily have been made while the book was passing through the press.

53. See p. 165.

54. See p. 76.

55. Remains, pp. 19, 20.

56. Remains, p. 29.

57. The classification of the books in Coverdale's Bible (1535) is the following:—

    1. (1) The Pentateuch.
    2. (2) The second part of the Old Testament.
    3. Josua—1 Esdr. 2 Esdr. Esther.
    4. Job—Salomons Balettes (with no special heading).
    5. (3) All the Prophets in English.
    6. Esay, Jeremy, Baruch, Ezechiel—Malachy.
    7. (4) Apocrypha. ‘The books and treatises which among the fathers of old are not reckoned to be of like authority with the other books of the Bible, neither are they found in the Canon of the Hebrew.
    8. 3 Esdras, 4 Esdras … 1 Mach. 2 Mach.
    9. Unto these also belongeth Baruch, whom we have set among the prophets next unto Jeremy, because he was his scribe, and in his time.’
    10. (5) The New Testament. iv. Gospels. Acts. The Epistles of S. Paul. Romans—Philemon.
    11. 2 S. Peter.
    12. 2. 3 S. John.
    13. Hebrews.
    14. S. James.
    15. S. Jude.
    16. The Revelation of S. John.