gathered at the same time."* How difficult, even then, must it have been for private Christians to obtain a copy of the Bible! This sacred book was, indeed, publicly read in the Christian churches, from a very early period; but, beside the expense of a copy, written entirely, as every copy then was, and the poverty of the primitive Christians, the persecutions, to which they were subjected during the three first centuries, must effectually have prevented any public associations for the diffusion of the Holy Scriptures. Among the human means, however, which during the second and third centuries contributed to the success and propagation of the Christian doctrine, ecclesiastical historians distinctly mention the pious diligence and zeal with which many learned and worthy men recommended the sacred writings, and spread them abroad in translations.† However diverse the interpretations of different sects, yet all were unanimous in regarding with veneration the Holy Scriptures, as the great rule of faith and manners.‡ In the third century, the number of Chris tians was multiplied, and the limits of the church extended, by the translations of the sacred writings into various languages, and the zeal and labour of Origen in spreading abroad copies of them every where.§ Theodoret, who lived in the beginning of the fifth century, says, "We Christians are enabled to show the power of apostolic and prophetic doctrines, which have filled all countries under heaven. For that which was formerly uttered in Hebrew is not only translated into the language of the Grecians, but also of the Romans, the Indians, Persians, Armenians, Scythians, Sarmatians, Egyptians, and, in a word, into all languages that are used by any nation." When the Roman empire became Christianized under Constantine, the external peace and liberty of the church seem not to have been propitious to its internal prosperity, to that apostolic zeal especially, which is requisite to the propagation of the gospel. Religion lost in spirit * Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. i. 108, 109. Paley's Evidences, P. I. ch. ix. sec. 3. † Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. i. 151, Cent ii. The Syriac Version of the New Testament appears to have been made within a few years of the apostles' time. Jerome, who plainly speaks of himself as being a disciple of the apostles, tells us that the writings of the apostles and prophets were read every Lord's day in the religious assemblies. See Lardner's Credibility of the Gospel History; and Jones's new and full method of settling the Canonical authority of the New Testament. Mr. Jones (Vol. i. P. i.) concludes that the Syriac version was the one used in the churches mentioned by Jerome; for he was a native of Syria, and no other language was then understood. + Mosheim Eccl. Hist. i. 186, Cent. ii. Ib. 245, Cent. iii. "An Historical Account of the several English Translations of the Bible, and the opposition they met with from the church of Rome. By Anthony Johnson, A. M." Lond. 1730. In Watson's Theological Tracts, Vol. iii p. 61. and purity, what it gained in extension and splendour. When at length "Ignorance" was believed to be the mother of devotion," we cease to wonder, either that the scriptures were not circulated, or that even the use of them was denied to the common people. TRANSLATIONS. ANGLO SAXONIC* TRANSLA TIONS. bishop of Sherborn,† is said to have translated the Psalter into the Saxon tongue. He wrote a letter to EGBERT, bishop of Lindisfarne, in which he exhorts him, that, for the common bene. fit and use of all people, the Scriptures might be put into the vulgar language; which he is said to have done.§ After the Saxon inhabitants of Great Britain became converted to Christianity, “we are sure they had the whole Bible in their own country characters and language, and that the four Gospels in the same language were read in their religious assemblies."|| BEDE, who flourished at the In our parent country it is pleasing to find individuals, from an early period, bursting the shackles of Romish superstition, and promoting the knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. About the year 706, ALDHELM, the first * A language, compounded of the English and Saxon, spoken by the inhab itants of England after the Saxon conquest. It has often been called English. The Diocese of Winchester at first contained all the kingdoms of the West Saxons, until it was divided by king Ina between Winchester and Sher-. born, A. D. 705. Bingham's Antiquities of the Christian Church, Book ix. ch. 6. I follow the orthography of the old writers, in preference to that of the later. "In the kingdom of Northumberland there were at first but two bishops, whose sees were York and Lindisfarne. But not long after, An. 678, Egfrid, king of Northumberland, having expelled Wilfrid, bishop of York, from his sec, four or five bishops were ordained in his room." Bingham's Antiquities, B. ix. ch. 6. "Insula Lindisfarnea;" Bedæ Opera Hist. p. 241. § Johnson, in W. T. p. 61, who there says, the letter of Aldhelm to Egbert is extant in Wharton's Auctarium Hist. Dogmat. Usserii; and archbishop Usher tells us, that the Saxon translation of the Evangelists, done by Egbert, without distinction of chapters, was in the possession of Mr. Robert Bowyer. Bede, who was contemporary with Aldhelm, describes him as a very learned man, a neat writer, and admirably versed in the scriptures. Beda Opera Hist. 203. Lewis Hist. Eng. Transl. p. 3. Fox (ib. p. 6) says, "that K. Alfred translated both the Old and the New Testament into his own native language;" but, not finding this mentioned either in Asserius or in Bede, I have not confidently affirmed it. A Saxon version of the Four Gospels, said to Le made by one Aldred, a priest, is, we are told, "in the very celebrated Code of Eadfride, bish op of Lindisfarne, about the year 680," as Mr. Selden conjectured. A Saxon copy of the four Gospels, by the aid and encouragement of archbishop Parker, was printed by the learned martyrologist John Fox, from a MS. now in the Bodleian Library, with this title: "The Gospels of the fower Evangelists translated in the olde Saxons tyme out of Latin into the vulgare toung of the Saxons, and now published for testimonie of the same. At London by John Daye dwelling over Aldersgate 1571. Cum privilegio Regiæ Majestatis per decennium." In the dedication of it to the queen, it is observed, that "this booke with others moe had been collected and searched out of the Saxon monuments." The archbishop himself said of it, that he edited the four Gospels in the Saxon tongue, that it might appear that the scriptures had been before known to the English people in the vulgar language. ... "Scripturas antea fuisse vulgari scrmone Anglicano populo notas." Lewis, 4. Parker, De Antiquit. Brit. Eccles. 4 beginning of the eighth century, To the immortal honour of king ALFRED, in the ninth century, he eucouraged others and laboured himself in the same benevolent and pious work. He observed, in a letter to Wulfsig, bishop of London, that the Bible, written in Hebrew, was translated into Greek and Latin, and that all Christendom had some part of the inspired writings turned into their own language. Emulating these worthy examples, he caused the Old and New Testaments to be translated into the Anglo Saxonic tongue. He undertook the translation of the book of Psalms himself, but died (A. D. 900) when it was about half finished. This was completed by another hand, and published in quarto, in 1640, by Sir John Spelman. Several other translations of the Psalms and of the New Testament were made afterwards.‡ About thirty years after Alfred's death, king ATHELSTAN caused the Scriptures to be translated out of the Hebrew into the Anglo Saxon tongue by some Jews, who, it is probable, had been converted to Christianity.§ Toward the close of the same century ELFRIC,abbot of Malsmbury, afterwards archbishop of * Lewis Hist. Eng. Translat. p. 6. Lewis mentions Bede's translation of the Bible as undoubted, on the authority of Fox; but, finding no notice of it in Bede's works, nor in Cave's Historia Literaria, where a complete catalogue of Bede's writings is professedly given, I have not felt equally confident, and have therefore stated this article with caution. See Beda Opera Hist. Edit. 1772. Præf. and pp. 809, 823. Cave's Hist. Lit. i. 612-618. Johnson, in W. T. p. 62. +Fulke's Preface to the Rhemish and English Testament, p. 4. Johnson, in W. T. iii. 62. The letter of Alfred to the bishop of London was prefixed to the king's translation of the Pastoral of Gregory the Great, and may be seen in "Annales Rerum Gestarum Elfredi Magni" by Asserius Menevensis, Edit. Oxon. 1772. The passage concerning translations is at page 89, and the antiquary, or the Christian, will read it with inexpressible delight in the very words of that truly great prince, written nearly a thousand years ago; "Tum vero venit mihi in mentem, legem Dei primum in Hebræo sermone fuisse inventam..... libros..... in linguam, QUAM OMNES INTELLIGUNT, convertamus," &c. ..... Alfred died A. D. 901. Asserius, bishop of Sherborn, was contemporary and most intimate with him, and died about A. D. 909. See Narrat. De Vita et Scriptis Asserii præfixa Annalibus Alfredi, pp. xxiii, XXV. Usserii Britan. Eccles. Antiquitates, ii. 59. Cave's Hist. Lit. Rees's Cylopæd. Art. ALFRED. Johnson, in W. T. iii. 63. Usher places this translation, A. D. 930. Canterbury, translated from the Latin into the Saxon language most of the books of the Old Testament; and "it is in no wise to be doubted, that the books of the New Testament were long before turned into Saxon, and commonly read in that language." On the change of the civil government in England by the Norman conquest (A. D. 1066), every thing was done to abolish the native language of the inhabitants, and to introduce the French. Hence the Saxon language became so altered, that the Saxon inhabitants could understand very little or nothing of what had been their mother tongue, or at least of their English ancestors. The Old English or Anglo Saxonic had "not only become unintelligible, for the most part, as to the words and spelling, but even the letter, or character, was so different from that which was used after the Conquest, as not to be read by the common people, and but by very few even of the learned; so that even to the English" it was at least as "much an unknown language, as Latin itself." By this means, the Anglo Saxonic Translation was, Soon after the Conquest, of little or no use to the subjects of England, at least to the commou people. When this language had thus become obsolete, and the Bible was now in Latin only, and copies of it not very common even in that language, an opinion seems to have prevailed, * that the knowledge of the Scriptures was unnecessary, and, indeed, that it was not lawful for private Christians to read them in their native language. In this dark age, however, there were some, of more enlightened understandings, and of a more liberal spirit. In France, John Beleth, an eminent Paris divine, observed, that "in the primitive church it was forbidden to any one to speak in an unknown tongue, unless there was some one to interpret; since it was agreeable to common sense, that it was a thing perfectly useless for a man to speak, and not be understood. Hence, he said, grew that laudable custom in some churches, that after the Gospel was pronounced according to the letter, or read in Latin, immediately it was explained to the people in the vulgar tongue. But, adds he, what shall we say of our times, when there is scarcely any one to be found, who understands what he reads or hears." In England the same sentiment and spirit so far prevailed, that several attempts were made to translate the Scriptures into the English of that day.§ ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS. One of the first, who attempt< ed an English Translation, seems to have been RICHARD ROLLE, an hermit of Hampole in Yorkshire, who died A. D. 1349. He translated the Psalms into English, and wrote a gloss upon it in the same language. Lewis Hist. Eng. Transl. p. 7. Elfric died A. D. 1006. Id. ibid. 11, 12. This was A. D. 1190. § Id. ibid. p. 12. This portion of scripture was translated and commented on by several hands, and the church Hymns were rendered into English; and "it seems as if some parts, if not all the New Testament, were by different persons rendered into the English then spoken, and glossed or explained in the same manner." These translations appear to have been made sometime before Wickliff's day; but they seem to have been translations of some parts only, not of the whole Bible, and not to have been published, but made only for the translator's own use.* Wickliff's Bible. About 1370. The first English Bible, of which we have any account, was translated by the famous JOHN WICKLIFF. He was born in Yorkshire in England, and edu. eated at the university of Oxford, where he was for some years professor of divinity. This translation was made from the Latin, because, as has been supposed, he was not sufficiently skilled in the original Hebrew and Greek languages to translate from them.t To the several Books of the New Testament of this translation are prefixed the Prologues or Prefaces of Jerome, with some additions. Copies of this version of the New Testament seem to have been multiplied; but the price of them must have prevented their general circulation.‡ A more serious and humiliating reason why they were so little made use of, may be perceived in what Wickliff and other writers of his day observe, "that the clergy were generally so ignorant as not to be able to read Latin, or con their Psalter." The prejudices against translations must also have had great influence. We have an example of this in Henry Knyghton, a canon of Leicester, in the neighbourhood of Wickliff and contempary with him, who complained severely of his making and publishing this translation: "This Master John Wickliff,” says he, "translated out of Latiu into English the Gospel, which Christ had entrusted with the Clergy and Doctors of the church, that they might minister it to the laity and weaker sort according to the exigency of times and their several occasions. that by this means the gospel was made vulgar, and laid more open to the laity, and even to women who could read, than it Rees's Cyclopæd. Art. BIBLE. So * Lewis Hist. Eng. Transl. p. 12-17. Lewis Hist. Eng. Transl. 19. Fuller (B. iv. 142.) says, there is "a fair copy" of this Translation of the Bible "in Queen's college in Oxford, and two more in the University Library, done no doubt in the most expressive language of those dayes, though sounding uncouth to our ears. He gives an example or two of this uncouthness.... The knave of Jesus Christ, for ser vant," &c. In 1429, the price of one of the English Testaments was four marks and forty pence, or, 21. 16s. 8d. which, archbishop Usher about 200 years afterwards observed, "is as much as will now buy 40 New Testaments." In 1457 the followers of Wickliff had become so numerous, and copies of his New Testament so common, that an English Bible was sold for twenty shillings. Lewis, p. 24. § Lewis Hist. Eng. T. 20. |