Septuagint, especially in those passages, in which the latter differs from the Hebrew.

II. EGYPTIAN VERSIONS. Two Translations of the Scriptures have been made in the Egyptian language,— one in the Coptic or antient dialect of Lower Egypt, the other in the Sahidic or dialect of Upper Egypt, and both from the Greek. The Coptic Version is by some eminent scholars referred to the second or third century, though others carry its date so low as the fifth century; the Sahidic Version was probably executed in the second century.

III. Several ARABIC TRANSLATIONS have been made at different times between the seventh and the tenth or eleventh centuries, for the inhabitants of those countries, where the Syriac and Egyptian languages have been supplanted by the Arabic. They were not all executed from the original text, but from those versions, which they were intended to accompany.

IV. The ETHIOPIC or ABYSSINIAN Version of the Old Testament was made from the Septuagint; some fragments of it only have been printed, but the entire New Testament has been published. This version is of considerable antiquity, the Old Testament being referred to the second, and the New Testament to the fourth century. V. The ARMENIAN Version of the Old Testament was also made from the Septuagint; the New Testament has been twice translated, from the Syriac, and then from the Greek. This version is ascribed to Miesrob, the inventor of the Armenian Alphabet, towards the close of the fourth, or early in the fifth century.

VI. Though the Scriptures are said to have been early translated into the PERSIAN language, no fragments of this antient version are extant. The Pentateuch is all that has been printed of the Old Testament; it was translated by a Jew, and for the benefit of Jews. Of the New Testament, there are extant two versions of the four Gospels; the most antient and valuable of which is

F

printed in the London Polyglott, by Bishop Walton, from a manuscript of the fourteenth century.

§ 4.

On the Antient Western Versions of the Scriptures.

I. Many LATIN Versions of the Scriptures were made, at the first introduction of Christianity, by unknown authors. One of these, called the Vetus Itala, or Old Italic, appears to have acquired a more extensive circulation than the others, to which it was preferred on account of its clearness and fidelity. It was translated from the Greek, both in the Old and New Testaments; and was made in the early part of the second century. In the progress of time, very numerous alterations, however, being made by transcribers, Jerome, towards the close of the fourth century, undertook to revise it, and make it more conformable to the original Greek. Some parts only of this revision have been preserved. But before it was completed, he undertook and at length accomplished a version of the Bible, which gradually acquired so great an authority in the West of Europe, that, ever since the seventh century, it has been exclusively adopted by the Romish Church; and in the sixteenth century the assembly or council of Trent pronounced the Latin Vulgate (for so this version is termed) to be authentic, and to be exclusively used in the public service of that church. Various grave errors having crept into this version in the lapse of ages, several revisions were undertaken by learned men. Of these the most celebrated is the revision of Pope Sixtus V. published at Rome in 1590, but suppressed by Pope Clement VIII. whose authentic edition appeared in 1592. This edition has been followed in all subsequent impressions of the Latin Vulgate. Notwithstanding the variations between the Sixtine and Clementine editions, (both published by infallible pontiffs!) and that several passages are mistranslated in order to

support the peculiar dogmas of the Romish Church, the Latin Vulgate preserves many true readings, where the modern Hebrew copies are corrupted.

II. The GOTHIC VERSION of the Bible was made from the Greek, both in the Old and New Testaments, by Ulphilas, Bishop of the Mæso-Goths, who invented the Gothic characters. A fragment of the Book of Nehemiah, the four Gospels, and some portions of the Epistles, are all that has been published, from this version, which, though interpolated from the Latin Vulgate, is nevertheless much esteemed for its general fidelity.

III. The SCLAVONIC or OLD RUSSIAN translation was executed from the Greek, in the ninth century, by the two brothers, Cyril and Methodius. It is said to have undergone several revisions; and the New Testament is rendered with more perspicuity than the Old.

IV. The ANGLO-SAXON Version is ascribed by Dr. Mill to several authors, and is supposed to have been executed in the eighth and ninth centuries. Having been made from the Old Latin, it may be of use in determining the readings of that version. Several portions of it have been published at different times.

SECTION II.

History of the Modern Versions of the Scriptures.

Numerous as were the antient versions of the Sacred Scriptures, the publication of a version, being accomplished by the tedious process of transcription, was necessarily slow, while the high price of manuscripts enabled only the wealthy to procure them. The discovery of the art of printing in the fifteenth century, and the establishment of the glorious reformation throughout Europe in the following century, facilitated the circulation of the Scriptures, both in the original Languages and through the medium of translations. The Modern Versions of the

Scriptures are twofold, viz. in the Latin Language, and in the vernacular languages of almost all the countries in which Christianity has been propagated: and both are made, either by persons in communion with the Church of Rome, or by Protestants.

§ 1. On the Modern Latin Versions of the Old and New
Testaments.

I. Modern Latin Versions, executed by persons in communion with the Church of Rome.

1. The Version of Sanctes Pagninus, a Dominican monk, was undertaken under the patronage of several popes; and, after twenty-five years of unremitting labour, was published in 1528. Though it has been censured by one critic for its close adherence to the original text, all the later commentators and critics commend it for its exactness and fidelity. It contains only the Old Testament. This translation was revised by

2. Arias Montanus, who has from this circumstance been, erroneously, considered as a new translator of the Bible into the Latin Language. Montanus's aim being, to translate the Hebrew words by the same number of Latin words, his edition may rather be considered as a grammatical commentary than a true version, and is best adapted to suit young beginners in the Hebrew language.

3. The translations of Thomas Malvenda, and of Cardinal Cajetan (who was not the author of that which bears his name) have both fallen into oblivion.

4. Houbigant's Latin Version of the Old Testament is framed according to the corrected Hebrew Text, published by him in 1753, in 4 vols. folio, a work, which has not answered the high expectations entertained of it.

II. Modern Latin Versions of the Bible, executed by Protestants.

1. The Translation of Sebastian Munster, first published

in 1534, is considered, upon the whole, as very exact and conformable to the original.

2. The Version which bears the name of Leo Juda, though commenced by him, was finished by others: it is acknowledged to be very faithful. It was first published in 1543.

3. Sebastian Chatillon (better known by the name of Castalio) in 1551 published a version of the Bible, in which he aimed at rendering the Old and New Testaments into classical Latin. His style has been severely censured, as departing from the simple grandeur of the sacred originals.

4. The Version of Francis Junius and Immanuel Tremellius, first printed in 1575, is held in great estimation for its simplicity, perspicuity, and fidelity.

5. The Latin Translation of Sebastian Schmidt, published in 1696, is strictly literal.

6. The Version of Professor J. A. Dathe, printed between the years 1779 and 1789, is deservedly in high repute for its general fidelity and excellence.

7. The Version of the Old Testament, commenced in 1816 by H. A. Schott and J. F. Winzer, professes to be very close. The Pentateuch only has been published.

III. Besides the preceding new modern Latin Versions, there have been several editions of the Latin Vulgate, so much corrected from the Hebrew and Greek originals, as in some degree to be considered new translations. Of this number are the Latin Bibles published by Isidore Clarius, in 1542; by Paul Eber, in 1565; and by Luke Osiander, in 1578, and Andrew Osiander in 1600. The edition of Clarius, who was a Romanist, is preferred to those of the other three Protestant scholars.

IV. Of the Latin Versions of the New Testament the following are the principal :

1. Erasmus claims the first place. His version was published in 1516; and it is admitted that he succeeded in giving a clear and faithful version as far as it was pos