This little gem came to me via the Lifeline Bookfest earlier this year.  For some reason books from around the turn of the 20^th century hold a fascination for me, and this one has some unique material to offer.  It is well worth the read.

Outline of the book

Smyth proceeds fairly steadily from the introduction of the issues that he is going to cover, explaining a few key issues and terms like textual criticism, to the explanation of manuscripts, versions, and quotations in the church fathers.  Brief overviews of the major manuscripts of interest are given in the chapter on Greek manuscripts, including codices Aleph (with a lengthy retelling of its discovery by Tischendorf), A, B, C, and D.  Chapter 3 gives an overview of versions and quotations from the fathers, with special emphasis on Jerome and the Vulgate.

The next chapter on early English versions serves as a transition between the previous material and the latter part of the book, which deals with middle to modern English versions.  Caedmon the poet (c. 700) is first mentioned, although Smyth makes it clear that "his work has of course no right to rank among Bible translations, being merely an attempt to sing for the ignorant people the substance of the inspired story" (p. 47).  Some examples of his work are given, also those of King Alfred the Great, and Archbishop Aelfric (c. 1000) along with the story of Bede's death (c.735).

Chapter 5 begins the detailed treatment of three major middle and modern English versions (Wycliffe's, Tyndale's, and the Revised Version), along with a chapter devoted to those between Tyndale and the RV.  Smyth devotes several pages to describing the political and religious climate of Wycliffe's and Tyndale's times, explaining to some extent why they faced the bitter opposition they did.  Very little space is devoted to the King James Version - only a little more than 7 pages.  Smyth appears to assume familiarity with the text, and to a certain extent with the history, of the KJV in his readers.  With the RV, he sums up the book, explaining the process by which it was translated, and noting with disappointment its lack of popularity with the people.

Dating the book

The title page of this book presented a challenge to me: it is not dated, so one of my first problems was determining a rough date of publication.  The text of the book indicates the earliest and latest possible dates: the Revised Version (NT 1881, OT 1885) is the last major English translation cited, providing the earliest possible date. The latest date can be determined by the location of Codex Sinaiticus, which Smyth speaks of as still residing in the Library of St. Petersburg.  It was purchased by the British Museum on Christmas Day, 1933.

Between these two dates, there are a couple of other indicators in the book that allow us to fix the date more precisely: firstly, Codex Sinaiticus is said to have been "restored to the world only fifty years since" (p. 20).  Dr. Constantine von Tischendorf discovered the manuscript in 1862.  Also, the "Revised Version of 1880" is said to be still lagging significantly behind the Authorised Version in popularity "after thirty years" (p. 152).  Both of these point to a date between 1910 and 1912 (c. 1880 + 30 years and 1862 + 50 years).  These two statements are likely approximations, so a date somewhere in the five or so years prior to the beginning of the First World War (1914) seems reasonable.  (If you can provide more accurate information about the date of this book, please let me know.)

[Update: 23 April 2003.  Jeff Kistler writes: "My book says 1889, with a signature inside of an owner, 1892. Also, the title page says, Senior Moderator, Rector of Christ Church, Kingstown."  It seems that my copy of the book is a 2^nd or later edition, since on the title page it says "largely rewriten with additional illustrations".  I've made a 211Kb JPG image of the title page in my copy for comparison.]

Opinion of the book

Let me state at the outset that, due to the similarity of subject material and the proximity of my reading of the two books, it was difficult for me to consider How We Got Our Bible without comparing it to Paul D. Wegner's The Journey from Texts to Translations (see my previous review).  Here are a few introductory comparisons:

• Smyth has not set out to produce a reference work.  Whereas Wegner provided detailed notes, clear tables, and basic overviews, Smyth has written flowing prose designed to be pleasant to read as a single narrative.
• Smyth had far less ground to cover in terms of English translations in the early 1900s than Wegner did in the late 1900s.
• Smyth confines his work to translations in Tyndale's line (e.g. The Great Bible, The Geneva Bible, The King James Version, The Revised Version), whereas Wegner includes a broad cross-section.
• Smyth includes only textual issues - canonicity, palaeography, and linguistics are not covered.
• Smyth covers textual issues primarily in the New Testament.  Many of the important discoveries of Old Testament manuscripts (e.g. the Dead Sea Scrolls) were not made public until well into the 20^th century, so Smyth breezes past the OT issues fairly quickly.

The few illustrations that Smyth includes (all but one of them being photographs of various manuscripts or printed versions) are of excellent quality.  The Greek text of Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph), Codex Ephraem (C), and Codex Bezae (D) can all be read clearly, even though at least the first two are printed at a fraction of their original size (see right).  This is remarkable considering the age of the book and the technology available at the time.  In fact, the glossy photographic pages have held up better than the main text - i'm sure this will not be the case with many of my more modern books when they are around 90 years old!

Smyth is concerned with presenting more than just the facts about people.  He frequently sums up by providing an evaluation of their life: what they did well and what they did poorly.  Such application is critical if we are to learn from the mistakes of the past.  This is especially important for translators who may be facing opposition from various factions of the Church, or for teachers or pastors seeking to lead their flocks in knowledge and wisdom around difficult issues such as the KJV-Only movement.

Examples of the material that make it more understandable to the modern reader are frequent.  For example, on p. 16 he explains how Titus 2:11-12 might look to us if we wrote English in the same way the ancient Greek manuscripts were written:

Smyth also includes interesting tidbits and quotes from people who are not always likely to be quoted.  For example:

A translator hath great nede to studie well the sense both before and after, and then also he hath nede to live a clene life and be full devout in preiers and have not his wit occupied about worldli things that the Holy Spyrit author of all wisdom and cunnynge and truthe dresse him for his work and suffer him not to err.

... God grant to us all grace to ken well and to kepe well Holie Writ, and to suffer joiefulli some paine for it at the laste.
¹

-- John Purvey², in the preface to his revision of Wycliffe's English translation of the Bible, c. 1388. (p. 71)

If every man had his humor about new versions, there would be no end of translating.

-- Richard Bancroft, bishop of London, at King James' ecclesiastical conference, Hampton Court Palace, January 1604. (p. 126)

Such material serves to enrich the narrative, giving more of a glimpse into the lives of the men about whom he is writing.  It is good to know that 17^th Century bishops were able to be sarcastic!

Smyth makes the important, practical point that many biblical scholars are considered heretics when their work first appears.  This was the case with Jerome ("Translating from Hebrew??", Wycliffe ("A Bible in English??"), Erasmus ("The Latin Vulgate is the only inspired version, isn't it?"), Tyndale, the KJV translators, the RV translators).  However, the work of dedicated and competent scholars will nearly always triumph, although not necessarily within their lifetime - Tyndale was strangled and burned at the stake, praying "Lord, open the King of England's eyes!", and three years later a revision of his translation was available to every church in England, with the king's authorisation.

Overall, i found How We Got Our Bible to be a good addition to my library.  Although not a comprehensive manual, it was a good read, with an emphasis on application and understanding the past, rather than just knowing about it.

Notes

1.  The spelling of this last part differs curiously from that of the same quote in F. G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, 5th ed. rev. A. W. Adams (New York: Harper; London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1958), p. 266, (quoted in Wegner, p. 281), which reads "God graunte to us alle grace to kunne wel and kepe wel Holi Writ, and suffre ioiefulli some peyne for it at the laste."  This seems to be a slightly more
primitive spelling - perhaps the quote as it came to Smyth had been updated in the intervening time by some other editor.  It seems unlikely that he would have updated 'alle' to 'all' and 'kunne' to 'ken', but not 'kepe' to 'keep' - not to mention the strangeness of updating 'Holi' to 'Holie' rather than 'Holy'.

2.  Smyth calls him Richard Purvey, but i can find no other reference to him under this name.  Whether it was an alternate name or just a mistake on Smyth's part is unclear.