Jan. 31. 1852.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



109 



tendency to be hyperbolical in our estimation of 

 crowned heads ; in all probability, if one was no 

 monster the other was no saint. 



The circumstances in favour of the more fa- 

 vourable view of Brunehilda's character, are suffi- 

 ciently well attested. That she was the superior 

 in every respect to Fredegunda probably she felt 

 herself, and as probably the latter was made to 

 feel. Gregory of Tours was not merely struck by 

 the beauty of her person and her engaging manner, 

 but he has also remarked upon her good sense and 

 her agreeable conversation. Sisterly affection 

 appears in the first instance to have precipitated 

 her into a conflict that ended but with her life. 

 Her sister's murder was followed by those of 

 Sigebert and Merowig ; and it is not a little re- 

 markable that though it is not doubted who was 

 the instigator of these crimes, the name of 

 "monster" is never applied to Fredegunda, but 

 reserved for the familiar appellation of her victim. 

 When we consider how generally vague are the 

 charges against Brunehilda, and,'regarding what 

 is otherwise known of her, how improbable, I 

 think some suspicion of an undue leaning on the 

 part of the Frankish historians will not be al- 

 together misplaced. My own opinion is that she 

 was one of those remarkable women who from 

 time to time astonish the world ; one, whom for 

 her superior knowledge and acquirements, the ru- 

 mour of a rude age gifted with supernatural 

 powers. And I am farther inclined to think that 

 in the course of time the characters reported of 

 her from opposite sources became finally so an- 

 tagonistic, that they came to be considered as 

 those of two distinct persons ; and with a reference 

 to the eternal enmity between Fredegunda and 

 herself, she became more world-wide famous than 

 has been hitherto supposed, as both the Criemhilda 

 and Brunehilda of the Nibelungen Noth. Many 

 circumstances may be brought forward to support 

 this latter view. Samuel Hickson. 



St. John's Wood. 



COVERDAI/E 8 BIBLE. 

 (Vol. v., p. 59.) 



The answer of our friend ]\Ir. Offob to the 

 inquiry of your correspondent H. H. II. V., Vol. v., 

 p. 59., would have requii-ed no remarks but for 

 the paragraph which follows his description of the 

 copies of Coverdale's Bible in his valuable col- 

 lection. That paragraph was as follows : — 



" The introduction of the words /rom the Douche and 

 Latyn has never been accounted for ; they probably 

 were inserted by the German printer to make the vo- 

 lume more popular, so as to interest reformers by the 

 German of Luther, and Romanists by the Vulgate 

 Latin. The translation is certainly from the Hebrew 

 and Greek, compared with Luther's and the Vulgate." 



If Mb. Offob will look at "the Prologue to the 

 Translation of the Bible — Myles Coverdale unto 

 the Christian Reader," in that copy of his, which, 

 he describes with the delight of an amateur of rare 

 editions as having " several uncut leaves," he 

 may read in its first page, how Coverdale confesses, 

 with that humility which especially adorned his 

 character, that "his insufficiency in the tongues" 

 made him loath to undertake the task. He then 

 touchingly alludes to Tyndale's adversity, sup- 

 pressing his name, while he speaks of his " ripe 

 knowledge," and laments the hindrances to his 

 completing the translation of the Scriptures. But 

 "to help me herein," he proceeds, "I have had 

 sundry translations, not only in Latin, but also of 

 the Dutch \i.e. German] interpreters, whom be- 

 cause of their singular gifts and special diligence 

 in the Bible, I have been the more glad to follow 

 for the most part, according as I was required." 

 And again he says, " Lowly and faithfully have I 

 followed mine interpreters." 



My attention was drawn to this subject nearly 

 thirty years ago by the strange inaccuracies in 

 Bishop Marsh's account of the sources of our 

 authorised version ; in which he had assumed that 

 Tyndale could not translate from the Hebrew, 

 which there is the clearest evidence that he knew 

 well; and that he therefore translated from the 

 German, of which language it is almost equally 

 certain that he was ignorant. 



I saw, on the other hand, that Coverdale ho- 

 nestly confessed that his own translation was a 

 secondary one, from the German and the Vulgate. 

 He named the language, but not the translator, 

 Luther, for the same reason that in two references 

 to Tyndale's ability he desisted from naming him, 

 viz., that his translation was to be dedicated to 

 Henry VIII., who hated both their names. 



To test the different sources from which Tyndale 

 and Coverdale formed their respective translations, 

 nothing more is necessary than to open any 

 chapter in the Hebrew and German Bibles ; and 

 whilst the translators from either will of course 

 be found to agree in the broad meaning of any 

 verse, there will be delicate distinctions in render- 

 ing idiomatic forms of speech, which will be de- 

 cisive of the question. Having preserved my 

 collation of some verses in Genesis xli., I find, the 

 following : 



Ver. L First word, ^rTil, literally, And it was. 

 An introductory expression fairly represented by 

 the Greek E7€veTo Se. Tyndale, And it fortuned. 

 Luther and the Vulgate have omitted it, and 

 therefore so has Coverdale. 



njni, lit. And behold; Luther, SBie; Coverdale, 

 How that. 



IXTT^y, LXX, Eiri Tov voratiov; Tyndale, By 

 a rivers side ; Luther, %m aSaffer ; Coverdale, By a 

 water side. Here the Greek preserves the emphatic 

 article n, which pointed to the Nile ; the Latin ne- 



