particle in the original text; and being at the same time desirous to prevent the obscurity which would be the necessary consequence of that mode of translating, our translators have encumbered their version with a load of useless italics, and often without the slightest necessity. Of this, among other examples, there is one of a very striking nature in Ex. xxxii. 18, where there are no fewer than eleven words in italics, which not only add no force to the passage, but convey a false idea.-" And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome; but the noise of them that sing do I hear." Who would not suppose, on reading this passage, that the words shout, cry, sing, correspond to so many plural participles, and were equivalent to shouters, cryers, singers? But such is not the

case.

Let the reader compare this version with that by Dr. Geddes, and the great superiority of the latter will be immediately obvious.

Authorised Version." And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome, but the voice of them that sing do I hear."

Geddes." Not the shouting voice of victory,

said Moses, nor the howling voice of defeat, but the voice of licentiousness I hear."

There is no comparison as to the fidelity of these versions; and less, if possible, as to perspicuity and strength of expression.

In general, it will be no difficult task to ascertain where the translators were embarrassed to make out the sense of the original, from their liberal employment of italic letters. Wherever these are found, it may be taken for granted that something is wrong; or at least, that the translator was not fully satisfied of his being in the right. It is said that Archbishop Secker had dashed over many thousands of italics, in the copy of the English Bible he used; and hardly ever without some improvement to the passage. In fact, as Dr. Geddes has remarked, either the words in italics are virtually implied in the original, or they are not. In the former case, they are a real part of the text, and should be printed in the same character: in the latter, they are generally ill-assorted and clumsy ekes, that may well be spared; and which often disfigure the narration, under pretence of connecting it.

4. In some cases, the translation has been influenced either by the desire of the translators

to conform it to their royal master's prejudices in favour of episcopacy, or, which is equally probable, to render it accordant with their own sentiments on this subject. One of the biographers of the learned Henry Jessey, a pious Nonconformist, who laboured, with the assistance of some other person, to make a new and more correct translation, represents him to have said, in an essay which he drew up in justification of his design, that Dr. Hill declared, in a great assembly, that Archbishop Bancroft, who was a supervisor of the translation, "would needs have it speak the prelatical language; and to that end altered it in fourteen several places ;" and that, "Dr. Smith, who was one of the translators, complained to a minister of that country, of the Archbishop's alterations: but," said he, "he is so potent, that there is no contradicting him."*

"In fine, through the constant fluctuation and progress of living languages, there are many words and phrases, in the vulgar version, now become obsolete; a specimen of which may be seen in 'Pilkington's Judicious Remarks.' The construction, too, is frequently

Townley's Illustrations of Biblical Literature, vol. iii. p. 327.

60 DEFECTS IN THE AUTHORISED VERSION.

less grammatical than the present state of our language seems to require: and the arrangement of words and sentences is often such as produces obscurity or ambiguity."*

Such I conceive to be a fair representation of the imperfections by which our otherwise excellent and unrivalled version of the Scriptures is characterised. True it is, that there are very few matters of importance greatly affected by them; but still it is desirable that we should approach as nearly as possible to the original purity of the text, that we may discover the unrivalled beauties, as well as the incomparable truths which are therein contained. With a view to this, I will now merely direct my reader's attention to the words which I have adopted as the motto to this chapter.

* Geddes' Prospectus, p. 96.

CHAP. V.

THE PUNCTUATION AND DIVISIONS ADOPTED IN THE ENGLISH BIBLE.

"Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most holy place; that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water."--English Translators.

I WILL not here detain my readers by any prefatory remarks, but pass at once to the discussion of the several topics which claim our attention. It will be remembered that my object is to communicate to the reader such a knowledge of the character of the English Bible, as that he may be able to read and study it with profit.

1. The first thing which claims our notice, then, is the punctuation of the text.

It may be necessary to inform some of my readers, that the sacred writings had originally, and for a long period of time, no marks of punc

G