854 THE GERMAN REFORMATION. A.D. 1517 To 1580.
plausible argument which Dr. Keller brings out in his second publication (pp. 80 sqq.) is the fact that Emser, in his Annotations to the New Test. (1523), charges Luther with having translated the N. T. from a “* Wickleffisch oder hussisch exemplar.’’ But this refers to copies of the Latin Vulgate; and in the examples quoted by Keller, Luther does not agree with the Codex Teplensis.
The hostility of several Popes and Councils to the circulation of vernacular translations of the Bible implies the existence of such translations, and could not prevent their publication, as the numerous German editions prove. Dutch, French, and Italian versions also appeared among the earliest prints. See Stevens, Nos. 687 and 688 (p. 59 sq.). The Italian edition exhibited in 1877 at London is entitled: La Biblia en lingua Volgare (per Nicolo di Mallermi). Venetia: per Joan. Rosso Vercellese, 1487, fol. A Spanish Bible by Bonif. Ferrer was printed at Valencia, 1478 (see Reuss, Gesch. der heil. Schr. N. T., 11. 207, 5th ed.).
The Bible is the common property and most sacred treasure of Γ all Christian churches. The art of printing was invented in Catholic times, and its history goes hand in hand with the history of the Bible. Henry Stevens © says (The Bibles in the Caxton Exhibition, Ὁ. 25): ‘‘The secular history of the Holy Scriptures is the sacred history of Printing. The Bible was the first book printed, and the Bible is the last book printed. Between 1450 and 1877, an interval of four centuries and a quarter, the Bible shows the progress and comparative development of the art of printing in a manner that no other single book can; and Biblical bibliography proves that during the first forty years, at least, the Bible exceeded in amount of printing all other books put together; nor were its quality, style, and variety a whit behind its quantity.”’
δ 68. A Critical Estimate of Luther's Version.
Luther’s version of the Bible is a wonderful monument of genius, learning, and piety, and may be regarded in a secondary sense as inspired. It was, from beginning to end, a labor of love and enthusiasm. While publishers and printers made fortunes, Luther never received or asked a copper for this greatest work of his life.}
We must judge it from the times. A German translation from the original languages was a work of colossal magnitude if we consider the absence of good grammars, dictionaries,
1 He could say with perfect truth: ‘‘ Ich habe meine Ehre nicht gemeint,
auch keinen Heller dafuir genommen, sondern habe es zu Ehren gethan den lieben Christen und zu Ehren einem, der droben sitzt.”
§ 63. CRITICAL ESTIMATE OF LUTHER’S VERSION. 305
and concordances, the crude state of Greek and Hebrew scholarship, and of the German language, in the sixteenth century. Luther wrote to Amsdorf, Jan. 18, 1522, that he had undertaken a task beyond his power, that he now understood why no one had attempted it before in his own name, and that he would not venture on the Old Testament without the aid of his friends! He felt especially how difficult it was to make Job and the Hebrew prophets speak in barbarous German.? He jocosely remarked that Job would have become more impatient at the blunders of his translators than at the long speeches of his “ miserable comforters.”
As regards the text, it was in an unsettled condition. The science of textual criticism was not yet born, and the materials for it were not yet collected from the manuscripts, ancient versions, and patristic quotations. Luther had to use the first printed editions. He had no access to manuscripts, the most important of which were not even discovered or made available before the middle of the nineteenth century. Biblical geography and archeology were in their infancy, and many names and phrases could not be understood at the time.
In view of these difficulties we need not be surprised at the large number of mistakes, inaccuracies, and inconsistencies in Luther’s version. They are most numerous in Job and the Prophets, who present, even to the advanced Hebrew scholars of our day, many unsolved problems of text and rendering. The English Version of 1611 had the great advan-
1“ Interim Biblia transferam, quanquam onus susceperim supra vires. Video nunc, quid sit interpretari, et cur hactenus a nullo sit attentatum, qui proficeretur nomen suum. [This implies his knowledge of older German translations which are anonymous.| Vetus Testamentum non potero attingere, nisi vobis presentibus et cooperantibus.”’
2“ Ach Gott! wie ein gross und verdriesslich Werk ist es, die hebrdischen Schreiber zu zwingen deutsch zu reden ; wie strdéuben sie sich und wollen ihre hebrdische Art gar nicht verlassen und dem groben Deutschen nachfolgen, gleich als wenn eine Nachtigall . . . sollte ihre liebliche Melodei verlassen und dem Kukuk nachsingen.’’ Walch, XVI. 508. Comp. his letter to Spalatin about the difficulties in Job, Feb. 23, 1524, in De Wette, II. 480.