Tyndale'S New Testament: Precursor Of The King James Bible
TYNDALE'S NEW TESTAMENT: PRECURSOR OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE
The edition of the English New Testament published at Worms in 1526 must be regarded as a landmark in the history of the English Bible. It is, of course, arguable that the Cologne text—with its explanatory notes—might have had still greater influence. Yet it was the edition of 1526 that was smuggled into England and created irreversible pressure for an English Bible. The book consisted of some seven hundred pages, using the exceptionally clear Schwabacher typeface. While the print run remains unclear, the printing is thought to have been in the region of three thousand.
No copy of the work with its original title page has survived. Only two copies of this work are known today; the first of which lacks a title page, and the second missing its first seventy pages. Yet it is known for certain that the name of William Tyndale was not mentioned on the title page, or at any point throughout the work. Indeed, there are good grounds for suggesting that no information concerning the publisher or place of publication was provided at any point. The work advertised itself simply as a “New Testament,” without making any mention of its translator. Save to those in the know, the origins of the work lay shrouded in mystery.
The Gospel of St. Luke from the Tyndale new testament
The unnamed translator—who, of course, we know to be Tyndale—made it clear to his readers that he wished to render the New Testament in “proper English.” This is a highly significant phrase, which is open to several interpretations. For example, Tyndale might be taken to imply that his concern is to use a form of English that was “proper” to this task—a judgment involving literary and aesthetic considerations, and suggesting that Tyndale wished his translation to be seen specifically as a work of literature. Although this sense of the word might seem reasonable to a modern reader, Tyndale himself understood it to mean “the right English words.” In other words, his criteria were accuracy and clarity. This is made perfectly clear in his own paraphrase of his intentions, in which he affirms his willingness to alter any parts of the translation in which he has “not attained the very sense of the tongue, or meaning of the Scripture, or has not given the right English word.” We shall see this theme recurring in our discussion of the King James Bible itself, in which accuracy and clarity were regarded as supreme virtues by the translators.
Certain aspects of Tyndale's translation were instantly perceived as a threat by more conservative English Catholics. Tyndale insisted that the Greek word presbyteros, used in Paul's letters to refer to an office within the Christian Church and traditionally translated as “priest,” should be rendered instead as “senior.” (In 1534, he altered this to “elder.”) The English word “priest” should, he argued, be reserved solely for translating the Greek term hiereus, used in the New Testament exclusively to refer to Jewish or pagan priests. The Greek term ekklesia, traditionally translated as “church,” was now translated as “congregation.” As a result, many New Testament references that could have been taken as endorsing the institution of the Church were now to be understood as referring to local congregations of believers.
Tyndale's literary achievement is best appreciated by considering two very different types of passages—narratives and arguments. The first passage is one of the parables told by Jesus, which is set in a narrative context. The speaker is Jesus himself.
Then he said also to him that bade him to dinner: when thou makest a dinner or a supper: call not thy friends, not thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen nor yet rich neighbours: lest they bid thee again, and make thee recompense. But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame and the blind, and thou shalt be happy, for they cannot recompense thee. But thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of just men.
When one of them that sat at meat also heard that, he said unto him: happy is he that eateth bread in the kingdom of God. Then said he to him. A certain man ordered a great supper, and bade many, and sent his servant at supper time, to say to them that were bidden, come: for all things are ready. And they all at once began to make excuse. The first said unto him: I have bought a farm, and I must needs go and see it, I pray thee have me excused. And another said: I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I must go to prove them, I pray have thee me excused. The third said: I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come. The servant went again, and brought his master word thereof.
Then was the good man of the house displeased, and said to his servant: Go out quickly into the streets and quarters of the city and bring in hither the poor and the maimed and the halt and the blind. And the servant said: lord, it is done as thou comman-dest, and yet there is room. And the lord said to the servant: Go out into the high ways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. For I say unto you, that none of these men which were bidden, shall taste of my supper (Luke 14:12–24).
Even today, the narrative is easily understood. Tyndale uses some words that are strange to modern readers—for example, the archaic “halt” for “lame” or “crippled.” But the simple style and vocabulary of the translation can be appreciated without serious difficulty.
A more argumentative passage, taken from Paul's letter to the Romans, shows how Tyndale deals with more complex forms of prose:
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid: but I knew not what sin meant but by the law. For I had not known what lust had meant, except the law had said, thou shalt not lust. But sin took occasion by means of the commandment, and wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For verily without the law, sin was dead. I once lived without law. But when the commandment came, sin revived, and I was dead. And the very same commandment which was ordained unto life, was found to be to me an occasion of death (Romans 7:7–10).
Paul's argument in this passage makes considerable demands of his readers, and Tyndale's translation conveys the thrust of the argument with a clarity that can still be appreciated today. The translators of the King James Bible appreciated Tyndale's clarity as can be seen by comparing this later translation with Tyndale's: changes have been made—yet the register of the original remains clearly discernible.
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
Many would argue that Tyndale's translation is to be preferred here, not least because it is more consistent in its translation of the Greek (the King James Bible changed one “lust” into a “covet” without good reason), and easier to understand (Tyndale's “I once lived without law” is much more intelligible than the somewhat cryptic “I was alive without the law once”).
Some comments are necessary here. First, note the phrase “God forbid!” used here by Tyndale to translate the Greek phrase me genoito. A literal translation of this Greek might be “let it not be so!” or “may it not be!” (Incidentally, I still recall with amusement an Oxford undergraduate's adventurous translation of these words: “not bloody likely!”). There is no explicit or implied reference to “God” whatsoever, and Tyndale's translation of this regular Pauline phrase—which was retained by the King James Bible—has perhaps confused some readers.
Second, Tyndale generally avoids Latinate terms, preferring to “English” them. On occasions, this means using words that had only recently been introduced, or coining new words altogether. Yet in this passage, he chooses to use the Latin word “concupiscence,” already used in the Vulgate translation of the text, despite the fact that he had already used the English word “lust.” The assumption here must be that Tyndale believed that his readers would be familiar with this term, and hence would not encounter difficulty in following the argument.
The impact of Tyndale's translation was immense. There is ample evidence to suggest that many used Tyndale's New Testament to learn to read, as well as to learn about the Christian faith. In what appears to be a recollection of the late 1520s, William Maldon related how, though initially illiterate, he determined to learn to read so that he might have access to Tyndale's New Testament for himself—despite the opposition of his father, who preferred his religion in Latin.
Divers poor men in the town of Chelmsford in the County of Essex, where my father dwelt, and I born and with him grew up, the said poor men bought the New Testament of Jesus Christ and on Sundays did sit reading in lower end of church, and many would flock about them to hear their reading. Then came I among the said readers to hear them reading of that glad and sweet tidings of the gospel, then my father, seeing this that I listened unto them every Sunday, then came he and sought me among them, and brought me away from the hearing of them, and would have me to say the Latin matins with him, which grieved me very much, and thus did fetch me away divers times, then I see I could not be in rest, then thought I, I will learn to read English, and then I will have the New Testament and read thereon myself.
Tyndale's translation would prove to be of foundational importance to the shaping of later English translations. Many of the words and phrases used by Tyndale found their way into the English language. Tyndale was a master of the pithy phrase, near to conversational English, but distinct enough to be used like a proverb. In his Bible translations, Tyndale coined such phrases as: “the powers that be” (Romans 13); “my brother's keeper” (Genesis 4); “the salt of the earth” (Matthew 5); and “a law unto themselves” (Romans 2). These phrases continue to be used, even in modern English, precisely because they are so well shaped in terms of their alliteration, rhyme, and word repetitions.
Tyndale also introduced or revived many words that are still in use. He constructed the term “Jehovah” from the Hebrew construction known as the “tetragrammaton” in the Old Testament. He invented the English word “Passover” to refer to the Jewish festival known in Hebrew as Pesah. Other neologisms developed by Tyndale to translate biblical words that had, up to that point, no real English equivalent include “scapegoat” and “atonement.” It should be noted that this latter word was invented by Tyndale to convey the idea of “reconciliation.” It can be seen immediately that biblical translation thus provided a major stimulus to the development of the English language, not least by creating new English words to accommodate biblical ideas.
Once Tyndale's translation of the New Testament was widely available, there was no turning back. Tyndale's translation would have to be authorized—or it would have to be bettered. There seemed to be no alternative. Reluctant to adopt the former course, Henry's advisers chose the latter. They would produce their own Bible, and require it to be used in the public worship of the churches.
A central feature of the Reformation, long resisted, had been forced upon the English church and state. Tyndale can thus be said to have achieved two remarkable successes: first, by producing an excellent English New Testament; and second, by forcing the hand of the English church and state to undertake something that would have been unthinkable only a few years earlier—an officially sanctioned English Bible.
Yet this decision lay some distance in the future. The immediate reaction of the English establishment was not to authorize Tyndale's translation, still less to produce one superior to it. Throughout 1526, a relentless campaign began to suppress the book. The campaign is of considerable interest to our story, as it indicates how many within the English church felt threatened by the new translation. To understand the importance of the fact that the King James Bible was authorized by the English state and church, we must consider what happened to Tyndale's decidedly unauthorized version of the New Testament.