| Bible Research > English Versions > 19th Century > Belsham |
[Thomas Belsham et al.,] The New Testament, in an Improved Version, upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome's New Translation: with a Corrected Text, and Notes Critical and Explanatory. London: Richard Taylor & Co., 1808. An American edition was distributed by William Wells of Boston in 1809. A fourth London edition "with corrections and additions" was printed by Richard and Arthur Taylor in 1817. These three editions were published online by Google Books in 2007-2008: London, 1808; Boston, 1809; London, 1817
This “Improved” version of the New Testament was a revision of Newcome's version (1796), done chiefly by Thomas Belsham, a prominent Unitarian minister in England. In a subsequent work Belsham wrote:
The Author of the present Work regards it as an honour to have been one of a Committee appointed by the Unitarian Society for publishing the Improved Version of the New Testament. He was indeed the party chiefly concerned in carrying it through the press. He is also responsible for the whole of the Introduction, and for many, perhaps the major part, of the Notes: but whatever credit may be due to the alterations in the Primate's text, to this he can lay but a very limited claim. It having been determined to adopt Archbishop Newcome's text as the basis of the Improved Version, it was his own wish, in no case to have departed from that text, excepting in those instances in which the learned Prelate's predilection for system might be supposed to have given a bias to his Version. Others, however, members of the same Committee, thought differently; and many contributed, some in a greater and others in a less degree, their corrections of the Primate's Version; which corrections were admitted and published. It was, however, agreed, that every variation from the Primate's text should be noted in the margin, and that his own words should be inserted there; that so his character might be protected from every shadow of responsibility for any alteration that was introduced. This rule was invariably observed, except in very few instances, owing to inadvertency, which candour, not indeed always exercised, would readily excuse. This being the state of the case, it is surely no great breach of decorum in the Editors to have given the Work the title of the Improved Persian, at which some have taken such great offence. No biblical scholar can deny the great superiority of Archbishop Newcome's Version, with all the helps and discoveries of the last two centuries, over that of King James's translators, which was made in the beginning of the seventeenth century, and, for the time in which it appeared, is no doubt excellent, but which makes no pretensions to be either inspired or immaculate. 1
The version encountered much criticism when it appeared. Thomas Hartwell Horne writes:
This version is avowedly made to support the modern Socinian scheme; for though the name of Archhishop Newcome is specified in the title-page, as a kind of model, his authority is disregarded whenever it militates against the creed of the anonymous editors. The errors and perversions of this translation have been most ably exposed by the Rev. Dr. Nares, in his "Remarks on the Version of the New Testament, lately edited by the Unitarians," &c. 8vo. London, 1808 (2d edit. 1814); by the Rev. T. Rennell, in his "Animadversions on the Unitarian Translation by a Student in Divinity," 8vo. London, 1811; and by the Rev. Dr. Laurence (afterwards archbishop of Cashel), in his "Critical Reflections on some important Misrepresentations contained in the Unitarian Version of the New Testament," 8vo. Oxford and London, 1811; and especially in the "Vindication of the Authenticity of the Narratives contained in the first two chapters of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke," by a Layman. London, 1822. 8vo. The three last-mentioned treatises discuss various topics, which it did not fall within Dr. Nares's plan to notice. Two short but very able critiques on this Version may also be seen in the Quarterly Review, vol. i. pp. 315-336., and in the Eclectic Review for 1809, vol. v. pp. 24-39., 236-251. 2
A Unitarian historian who is more sympathetic to Belsham writes:
[Thomas] Belsham was busily occupied in his own field in London. As minister at Essex Street he was looked to as practically the leader and mouthpiece of the Unitarians. Thus in his sermons he not only powerfully maintained the Unitarian cause, and expounded its doctrines, but also discussed in the light of liberal principles certain questions of national policy, or measures debated in Parliament ... But his predominant interest at this period was in the preparation of a new version of the New Testament, based upon a Greek text embodying the results of recent criticism. A project for a work of this sort had been proposed by [Joseph] Priestley in 1789, and was well advanced toward completion, when an important part of the manuscript was destroyed in the Birmingham Riots in 1791. Later in the same year, when the Unitarian Book Society was formed, the translation of the New Testament was made one of its main objects. After some five years' delay it was decided not to make an independent version, but to adopt the excellent one of Archbishop William Newcome, Primate of Ireland, as a basis, chiefly because it followed Griesbach's text, and to accompany it with an introduction and notes. The plan was taken up with ardor, and the work was published in 1808, in three sizes, and later in several editions; and it was at once reprinted in America (Boston, 1909), where Unitarianism was already incubating. It included a valuable introduction on the progress and principles of textual criticism, anticipating many judgments later adopted in the Revised Version of 1881; but drew the fire of the orthodox by omitting as late interpolations several passages traditionally cited as pillars of trinitarian doctrine. Belsham had taken the leading part in the editing of the work, and he regarded it with great satisfaction. It was widely circulated in Unitarian quarters; but in spite of its presenting a much more correct text, many strictures upon it were passed even by Unitarians, while to the orthodox its notes gave much offence, and by them it was generally scorned as a sectarian work, 'The Unitarian New Testament,' though it was never officially adopted even by the Unitarians. 3
1. “Advertisement” in vol. 1 of The Epistles of Paul the Apostle Translated, with an Exposition, and Notes, by the rev. Thomas Belsham, Minister of Essex Street Chapel (London: R. Hunter, 1822), p. ix.
2. Thomas Hartwell Horne, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures ninth ed., vol. 5 (London, 1846), p. 354.
3. Earl Morse Wilbur, A History of Unitarianism in Transylvania, England, and America (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952), pp. 338-9.
| Bible Research > English Versions > 19th Century > Belsham |