Part II

Part II 164.

INTRODUCTION

Background and Sources

In the city of Antwerp towards the end of the summer of 1531 one more book was published by an English Protestant exile living on the Continent. The work was unassuming in appearance, its title page completely without ornament; it contained no mention of the printer or place of publication, and had only the initials of the author and a casual reference to two of his other works to identify him by. A colophon gave the date of publication, "The yere of our lorde .1531. In September" and the anonymous printer has since been identified as Martin de Keyser.¹ The title page exactly described the work's contents: "The exposition of the fyrste Epistle of seynt Ihon with a Prologge before it: by W.T."² Neither the sympathizers nor the opponents of the English Protestant exiles would have had any difficulty in identifying the author of the Exposition, William Tyndale.

^{1 For a brief summary of the problems and modern bibliographical work connected with English Protestant books printed in the low countries and Germany in the early sixteenth century, see Anthea Hume, "English Protestant Books Printed Abroad, 1525-1535: An Annotated Bibliography," Appendix B In The Complete Works of St. Thomas More: Vol. 8, The Confutation of Tyndale's Answer, ed. L. A. Schuster, R. C. Marius, J. P. Lusardi, and R. J. Schoeck (New Haven and London, 1973), pp. 1065-l066 and 1081-1082. This entire appendix will be cited as "Hume, Bibliography."

² Cited hereafter as the "Exposition."}

165.

In acknowledging his authorship of "diuerse introductions" to scripture, "one vpon the Epistle of Paule to the Romains and a nother callyd The pathe way in to the scripture" (16/17-21),¹ Tyndale placed the Exposition in the context of his continuing attempt to educate the laity both to understand the scripture and to defend their beliefs. "That he may haue to answer the hipocrites and to stoppe their mouthes withe all" (17/3-4) was a purpose that went beyond merely enlightening the Christian concerning his profession. In his translation and commentary on 1 John, Tyndale was actively defending his view of the gospel and preparing others for that defense.

The writing and publication of commentaries on scripture was a natural next step to

the translations of the Bible which Tyndale had gone into exile in 1524 to do.² He had

already published two works at Antwerp, at least one, and possibly both, on the press of

Martin de Keyser.³ But if the purpose of the Exposition and the bare facts of publication,

including place, date, and printer, are well settled, the matter of Tyndale's sources is not.

For lack of evidence it still appears that he did

^{1 All page and line references, unless otherwise noted, indicate Part I, The Text.

^{2 For the date of Tyndale's self-imposed exile, see J.F. Mozley, William Tyndale (London, 1937), p. 50.}

³The prophete Ionas with an introduccion before and An answere vnto Sir Thomas Mores dialoge, both of which were probably published in 1531. See Hume, Bibliography, pp. 1079, 1081.

166.
not use any existing commentary on the first epistle of St. John as his source. As for his translation, it seems that he translated the epistle anew, just for the purpose of the Exposition, from Erasmus's 1516 Novum Testamentum, a Greek text with a parallel Latin translation.
It is not difficult to demonstrate Tyndale's theological independence. For example, despite what his contemporaries thought, his positions were frequently quite different from those of Martin Luther.¹ But, perhaps because of Tyndale's imitation of Luther's biblical translations, at least one commentator has seemed almost reluctant to admit that there is no proof that the Exposition is based on a Lutheran source.² Whatever the specific influences of continental reformers were, however, no commentary or translation has yet been found to be a major source of the Exposition. This is not to say that it is an entirely original work. But a comparison of the Exposition with Luther's lectures on the first epistle of St. John will show how different Tyndale's approach is from that of the continental reformer.³}

^{1 See, for example, William Clebsch, England's Earliest Protestant 1520-1535 (New Haven and London, 1964), pp. 195-204.

^{2 E. G. Rupp, Studies in the Making of the English Protestant Tradition (Cambridge, 1947), p. 51.

^{3 Although the text we have of Luther's lectures on 1 John is derived from a manuscript of one of his hearers, it still represents Luther's own work. Cf. Luther's Works, vol. 30, ed. J. Pelikan and W. A. Hansen (St Louis, 1967), p. xi. W. A. Hansen's occasionally abbreviated translation of Luther's lectures on 1 John is found in this volume, pp. 221-237.
167.

Luther's lectures on 1 John were given between 19 and November 7, 1527.¹ In general, Tyndale is more polemical, more concerned with particular abuses in the church, and far less scholarly and painstaking in his interpretations of scripture than is Luther. Thus, while Luther in his discussion of 1 John 3:4 insists on both the sinfulness of man and his obligations to his neighbor ("Altera pars Christianismi est charitas, quae non sua quaerit, ergo qui est sine charitate, sua quaerit i.e. Est sequi suum peccatum et deserere proximum."²), Tyndale quickly turns from love of neighbor to the obligations imposed by the pope: "But & if they wil breake in to thy conscience / as the pope doeth with his domme traditions / and saith / to do this saueth thy soule / and to leaue it vndone loseth thy soule / then defie them as the workes of Antichriste / for they make the synne agenst the faith that is in Christes bloude / by which only thy soule is saued / and for lack of that only damned" (96/16-22).
In his discussion of 1 John 2:16, Luther condemns avarice in general, quotes some classical and scriptural examples, and only briefly cites the example of cardinals, bishops, and abbots enjoying their wealth, this to illustrate the lust of the eyes,³ while Tyndale devotes

1 Luther's Works, 30, x.

2 WA, 20, 701 (Luther's Works, 30, 269).

3 WA,20, 664-665 (Luther's Works, 30, 250,) but here, as elsewhere, the English version makes some omissions).

168.

a much longer section to the covetousness of the "spiritualtie" and their involvement in government and politics. He asks "whether pluralities / vnions / totquots / and chaungynge the lesse benefice and busshapericke for the greater (for the contrarie chaunge I trowe was never sene) maye be without couetuousnes and pride" (77/7-11). In another instance, Tyndale translates 1 John 3:20 and gives an even briefer explanation: "But if oure heres condemne vs / God is greater than oure harte and knoweth all thinge [Tyndale's italics]. If oure conscience accuse vs of synne / God is so great and so mightie that it cannot be hidde" (106/20-107/1). The same verse elicits a far more detailed commentary from Luther, who, nevertheless, manages to stay on the point of conscience and sin both in the Old and New Testaments and in his own experience.¹ A typical example of Luther's concern for detailed exegesis can be found in his commentary on 1 John 3:6, "All that abide in hym synne not. And all that synne haue nether sene hym nor knowen hym" (98/6-7 in Tyndale's translation). While Luther's explanation of the passage takes him into Paul's epistles to the Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, and Romans, the gospel of St. John, and the whole problem of sin and the passions,²

^{1 WA, 20, 716-717 (Luther's Works, 30, 280-281).}}}}^{2.2 WA, 20, 702-703 (Luther's Works, 30, 270-271).

169.

Tyndale solves the theological problem by ignoring it: "As ther is no synne in Christ the stocke / so can there be none in the quycke membres that liue and growe in hym by faith" (98/8-10). An attack on the pope's authority and on that of his disciples follows (98/12-19). At the end of the 1531 edition of the Exposition over seven folios are given to a discussion of various types of "imageseruice," including the worship of saints, the sacraments, and the mass and Eucharist, all this apparently elicited by 1 John 5:21, to which Luther devoted only a few sentences.¹ In brief, Tyndale is much more the polemicist than the exegete, at least when the Exposition is compared to the work of a theologian such as Luther.
Although the spirit of Luther's vernacular translations may have influenced Tyndale's translations of the scriptures into English, the translation of the first epistle of St. John which is found in the Exposition is solely Tyndale's work. It does not follow any other translation, not even Tyndale's own, and it is not certain what version of the scriptures, Greek or Latin, Tyndale was translating, although Erasmus's 1516 Novum Instrumentum would be a good bet. A careful comparison of the present translation with that of Tyndale's New Testament of 1526 ² reveals that he is not using even his own previous translation

¹ "Credo hoc esse adiectum propter infirmos. Nam quia eo tempore adigebantur ferro et tormentis ad abnegandum verum Deum, excitandi erant, ut non modo non adorarent simulacra sed custodirent se ab iis nec ullo eorum cultu se polluerent" (WA, 20, 801 [Luther's Works, 30, 327]).

^{2 Cited hereafter as NT, 1526. See Hume, Bibliography, p. 1068.
170.
of scripture, but most likely translating as he goes along. A fairly rigorous count of the substantive variants between the translation of 1 John in NT, 1526 and that in the Exposition of 1531 reveals approximately two hundred and fifty variants.¹ In almost ninety percent of these instances Tyndale's New Testament translation of 1534² agrees with NT, 1526 against the translation in the Exposition. In approximately a dozen instances all three translations differ, and, in about eighteen cases NT, 1534 differs from NT, 1526 and agrees with the translation of the Exposition. Thus, fewer than ten percent of the changes in translation from NT, 1526 which Tyndale makes in the Exposition in 1531 find their way into the NT, 1534 translation of 1 John. It is apparent that Tyndale did not use his previous translation as the basis for his translation for the Exposition, and that in revising NT,1526 for the edition of 1534 he did not follow his own 1531 translation of 1 John. ³

1 In the case of differences in a whole phrase, I have counted only one variant. Thus the actual number of changes is even higher. Mere differences in spelling are not counted,

^{2 The New Testament. translated by William Tyndale, ed. N. Hardy Wallis (Cambridge, 1938). Cited hereafter as NT, 1534.}

^{3 The implication that the major revisions of NT, 1534 occur after 1531 is important in evaluating Tyndale's controversy with George Joye over the revision of the NT. The possibility that he may not in 1534 have used some very good changes which appear in the translation for the Exposition casts some doubt on his expressed motivation for the 1534 translation. On the revision of the NT translation, cf. Mozley, pp. 268-293.
171.

Even where NT, 1534 does adopt--or at least repeat--the changes introduced by the translation in the Exposition of 1531, little is gained. A few examples may be cited. Both the Exposition and NT, 1534 have "knoweth not" (114/21) for "hath nott knowen" (1 John 4:8) of NT, 1526.¹ "It knoweth not" (93/6) replaces "it hath not knowen" (1 John 3:1), "haue nede" (104/9) replaces "in necessite' (1 John 3:17), and (102/13) stands for "ye" (1 John 3:11). "The same is" (84/1) replaces "he is" (1 John 2:22) and "that ye synne not" (29/18) takes the place of "that ye shulde not sinne" (1 John 2:1). Other examples include "thoughe" (102/17) for "yf" (1 John 3:13). "For therby" (105/8) for "And herby" (1 John 3:19), and "But" (106/20) for "For" (1 John 3:20). The rest of the changes of 1531 which appear in NT, 1534 are equally as unimportant. Their small proportion in comparison with the total number of changes made and their relatively minor importance are evidence that the correspondences against NT, 1526 of the translation of 1 John in the Exposition of 1531 and the translation in NT, 1534 are only coincidental.
A few changes also occur in the translation of 1 John for the Exposition that anticipate later English translations of that epistle. Thus, when NT, 1526 and NT, 1534 use "babes" to translate what

^{1 All quotations from NT, 1526 are from the facsimile edited by F. Fry, The First New Testament printed in the English Language (Bristol, 1862).

172.

appears in the the Vulgate as "filioli," the translation in the Exposition is "little children" (79/20 etc.). In translating 1 John 2:4 Tyndale uses "the truthe is not in hym" (67/7) in 1531, while both NT, 1526 and NT, 1534 have "the veritie is not in him." We may feel that such changes should have been carried over to the 1534 revision of the New Testament. Still, it is clear that for some reason Tyndale did not return to his translation of the first epistle of St. John as it appears in the Exposition of 1531 when he revised his NT, 1534 version. The reason may well have been that the translation of 1531 was intended only as an ad hoc work for the Exposition. The quality of the translation and the fact that he did not go back to it, show both Tyndale's ability as a translator and his focus on what he considered even more important than his translation, namely the explanation of scripture and the arming of his fellow reforming Christians against their--and his--opponents.

173.

Sixteenth-Century Editions of the Exposition

1. Bibliographical Descriptions

1531

STC 24443; N-3990

[no ornamental border]
C The exposi= / tion of the fyrste Epistle of seynt
Ihon with a Prologge be= / fore it: by W. T.

Colophon: The yere of our lorde .1531. in September.

Collation: 8⁰: A-H⁸}
Contents: A₁: title [verso blank]; A₂-A₇v;the prologue; A8-H7v: the text; H8-8v: blank.²}
Signatures: The first five leaves of each gathering are signed except for the title page and A5, B4, and G3 which are unsigned. E6 Is mismarked "E. v.".} ¹ "STC refers to A. W. Pollard and G. R. Redgrave, A Short-Title Catalogue of Books Printed in England, Scotland & Ireland, 1475-1640 (London, 1926).

"McKerrow and Ferguson No. __ refers to R. B. McKerrow & F. S. Ferguson. Title-page borders used in England & Scotland 1485-1640, Bibliographical Society, Illustrated Monographs no. 21 (London, 1932 [for 1931]).
"N-__" refers to W. Nijhoff and M. E. Kronenberg, Nederlandsche Bibliographie van 1500 tot 1540 (The Hague, 1923-61).
"STC²" refers to the revised edition of the Short-Title Catalogue, ed. W. Jackson and K. Pantzer (in progress). ???????????

² This is Hume's description (Bibliography, p. 1082). The Folger copy of 1531 which I examined has H8-8v lacking.

174.

Running titles: The Prologge. A2v-A7v: The fyrst(e) Chapter(.) A8v-B3, B4; The .first. Chapter. B3v; The .ij. Chapter. B 4v-B8v, C5- 8v, D5v , D6v; The (.)seconde Chapter(.) C1-C4v, D1v-D4v (verso only), D 7 v-E2v (verso only); Of Iohn. D1-G8 (recto only); The (.)thirde(.) Chapter. E 3 v-Flv (verso only); The fourth Chapter(.) F2v-F4v (verso only); The fowrth(.) Chapter. F 5v -F8v (verso only); The fyft Chapter(.) G1v-G8v (verso only); Beware of Images. H-H7 (recto only), H7v; Litle Childern Hiv-H4v (verso only); Litle Children. H 5v, H6v.
Copy used: A xerox made from a University Microfilms copy of the one in the British Museum. Also xerographic copies of the only other copies of 1531, those in the John Rylands Library and the Folger Library. The original in the possession of the Folger Library has been collated for press variants. A copy reported to be at Sion College in London is apparently non-existent.
Notes: Thirty-six lines per page, except fewer where scriptural quotations or headings occur. Woodcut initial capitals for the prologue and its divisions (A3v, A4v), and beginnings of chapters. No catchwords. Occasional ornaments (leaves). Text, running titles, and marginal glosses in textural scriptural quotations and first line of title in bastard.¹ The only press variants I have

^{1 For descriptions of these printing types and terminology, see A. F. Johnson, "The Classification of Gothic Types," The Library, 4th Series, 9 [1929], 359 and 361-372. Also cf. Daniel B. Updike, Printing Types Their History, Forms,and Use (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), I, 60.

175. discovered among the three known copies of 1531 occur on A6, the third line from the bottom (13/17 in the present text), where the Rylands copy has "beleue that / which hath lye-" [abbreviation of line over e] while the Folger and British Museum copies have "beleue the / which hath lyen". The compositor of the Rylands copy thus neatly compensated for the extra letter by abbreviating "lyen". Some differences exist in the texts due to damaged pieces of type, e.g., "frome"(A8 , l. 4) has a damaged e in the Folger and British Museum copies, while "respect" (C 3, l.32) has a damaged p in the Rylands copy.

1537¹

STC² 24443.5

[Title page missing]

Colophon: [none]

Collation: 8^o; A-N⁸}Contents: Al: [Title missing]; A2-B2v: the prologue; B3: woodcut, St. John and eagle; B3-M2: the text of Exposition of 1 John; M2v-N1: the text of 2 John; N1v-H5: the text
of 3 John; N5v-N7 v "The table . . . to finde y^e}

notable places treated".

^{1 In the descriptions of the editions of 1537 and 1538 the xerographic copies used have been supplemented by the notes of Katharine Pantzer for STC² and the notes of Dr. Anne Hudson of Oxford who kindly examined the unique copy of 1537 for me.

176.

Signatures: With the exception of C4, the first five leaves of each gathering are signed .
Running titles: The Prologe. A2v-B2v; The fyrst Chapter. B3-C1 (recto only); The .i. epistle of S. Ihon. B3v-M1v (verso only); The .ii. Chapter. C2-G3 [C5 mismarked "The fyrst Chapter"] (recto only); The iii. Chapter. G4-H4 [H4 running title badly damaged] (recto only); The iiii. Chapter. H5-I7 (recto only); The .v. Chapter. I8-M2 (recto only); [Running titles for second and third epistles not included in this description].
Copy Used: A xerox of the unique copy of this edition which is in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. The shelfmark is Vet. A. 1. f. 32.
Notes: The woodcut of St. John is the same as that in the 1538 edition printed by James Nicolson. Katharine Pantzer considers this work earlier than 1538 because 1538 is more compact, thus saving paper.¹ 1537 has twenty-nine lines per page except where scriptural quotations or chapter or section headings occur. Initial woodcut capitals for prologue and chapter one; large initial capitals for prologue divisions (A4v and A6 and for two remaining chapters. No catchwords. Occasional ornaments (leaves). Text and marginal glosses are textura, scriptural quotations
1 On the tendency of printers to save paper in later editions of a work and the use of this fact to distinguish later editions of a work, see R. B. McKerrow, An Introduction to Bibliography (Oxford, 1927), p. 195.

177.

and running titles in larger textura. The table is composed of marginal glosses, under various headings, along with folio numbers and serves as an index to the commentaries on all three epistles. Many of the headings, folio numbers, and glosses have been damaged or cut out as the margins were cut or damaged throughout the copy.
1538

STC 24444

[An architectural border, McKerrow and Ferguson, no. 30.] The ex= / position of the fyrste, seconde, and / thyrde canonical / Epistles of S. / Ihon wyth a / Prologe be= fore it. / [inserted by hand: by / Wiliam \X Tindall]/ Printed in South= /warke by me Iames / Nicolson. /

[ornament: leaf] / [in a compartment in border] 1538.

Colophon: [none]

Collation: 8^o: A-M8, N4

Contents: Al: title (verso blank]; A2-B2v: the prologue; B2v: [after prologue] woodcut, St. John and eagle; B3-L6v: the text of Exposition of 1 John; L7-M4v: the text of 2 John; M5-Nlv: the text of 3 John; N2-N4: "The vable"; N4v: blank.

Signatures: The first five leaves of each gathering, A-M.

178.

are signed, with the exception of Al, D4. and K4. The first two leaves of the final gathering of four leaves are signed.
Running titles: The Prologe(.) A2v-B2v; The fyrst Chapter. B3. B5-B 7 (recto only); The i. Chapter. B4 , B8; The i. Epistle of S. Ihon. B3v-D3v, D 5v-H2v, H4v -L6v (verso only); Epistle of Saynte Ihon. D4v; The i. Epistle of Ihon. H 3v; The .ii. Chapter(.) C1-F8 (recto only); The iii. Chapter. G1 [incorrectly marked], G2-H2(recto only); The iiii. Chapter. H3-H8, I2-I4 (recto only); The
.v. Chapter(.) I₁ [incorrectly marked], I 5-L6 (recto only); [Running titles for second and third epistles not included in this description].
Copy used: University Microfilms copy of the copy in the Bodleian Library.
Location of other copies: (L¹⁵, 0³, D, P) St. Paul's Cathedral; Christ Church, Oxford; Trinity College, Dublin; Peterborough Cathedral.

Notes: Same woodcut of St. John as in 1537. Generally twenty-eight or twenty-nine lines per page, except where headings or scriptural quotations occur. Catchwords. Initial woodcut capitals for prologue, chapter one of 1 John, and beginnings of 2 and 3 John. Large initial capitals for other chapters and prologue divisions (A4v, A6).

1 See above, Notes, p. 176.

179.

Occasional use of leaf as ornament. Text and glosses in textura, scriptural quotations in Roman. Some twenty of the folios are numbered incorrectly. The table at the end ("A table for to finde the notable places treated vpon in this exposicion of the epistles of S. Ihon") uses the marginal glosses to provide an index to all three epistles and their commentaries, although only four glosses are used for the last two epistles. A few of the references are inaccurate for 1538's folio numbers, apparently being copied from 1537. For example, under the heading "Doctrine" the first entry in the table is "The tuychstone of all true doctrine and preachers. xiiii." In 1538 this marginal gloss appears on fol. xiii, but in 1537 it appears, in damaged form, on fol. xiiii.
It appears, in

1573¹}

STC 24436

[An architectural border, McKerrow and Ferguson, no. 76.

[Par sign] THE WHOLE / workes of W. Tyndall, Iohn / Frith, and Doct. Barnes, three worthy Martyrs, and principall / teachers of this Churche of England, / collected and compiled in one Tome to= / gither, beyng before scattered, & now in / Print here exhibited to the Church. / To the prayse of God, and / profite of all good Chri = /,stian

1 A bibliographical description of the whole of 1573 is not necessary here and the description has been shortened as noted.

180.

Readers. / rule / Mortui resurgent. / [rule] / At London / Printed by Iohn Daye, and are to be sold at his shop / vnder Aldersgate. / An. 1573. / [rule] /

{para sign}Cum gratia & Priullegio / Regia Maiestatis / [in border] ARISE, FOR IT IS DAY. Colophon: [after Tyndale's works] Imprinted at London by

Iohn Daye, / dwellyng ouer Aldersgate. An. 1572 [uncorrected date]

Collation: A-Y4, Aa-Yy6, AA-EE6 , FF-GG4, HH-XX 6, YY4, *AAa*4, AAa-QQq 6 , RRr4, (B4, HH, AAa presumably blank, wanting).

Contents: Al: title; Alv: "A table of the seuerall Treatises conteyned In M. William Tyndals workes."; A 2-EE3v: the text of Tyndale's works.[text of the Exposition of I John runs from Tt6-AA 3 1; EE4-GG2: table; GG2 [after tablej colophon; [the texts of the works of Frith and Barnes are not included in this description].

Signatures: [in Exposition of I John only] Tt6, Vv6, XX6, and YY6 are all unsigned.

Running titles: [in Exposition of 1 John only] The Prologue vnto the reader. Tt6v, Vv pp. 387-390l; An exposition vpon the first Epistle Vvlv-AA2v (verso only); of S. lohn. Chapter .I. .i. [through] .5. Vv2-AA3 (recto only).

181.

Copy used: Copy 1 in the Beinecke Library, Yale University. Copy 2 in the Yale Library has also been consulted.

Notes: I John and prologue and commentary run from pages 387 to 429, text in textura, scripture in Roman, running titles in italic, Latin phrases in small italic. In Roman type, each line of smaller size, this title appears on Tt6: "The exposition of the first Epistle of / S. Iohn, set forth by M. William Tyndall / in the yeare of our Lord . 1531. Septemb." Woodcut initial capitals occur throughout the work. Sixty-two lines per column, two columns per page. The date of the colophons reads 1572, and copy 2 in the Beinecke Library has the date 1572 on the title page and on the cover, corrected to 1573. Page 409 of copy 2 bears an incorrect running title, which has been corrected in ink. Copy 1 has the correct running title.

182.

2. Later Editions and 1531

1537 and 1538

There is no evidence that William Tyndale ever revised the edition of 1531. At the time of his death In 1536 the Exposition had still not been published in England, but an examination of the first English editions clearly indicates that the work was carefully revised before its second edition which appeared in England in the following year.¹ Although they are distinct editions, 1537 and 1538 are very similar, despite some changes in spelling and a few variants. It appears, in fact, that 1538 has been set from 1537. In a few instances 1538 agrees with 1531 (e.g. 156/21) or corrects an error introduced by 1537 (e.g. 161/17). Although the compositor or editor of 1538 may have had access to a copy of 1531, the text of 1537 is followed closely throughout. STC² assigns both 1537 and 1538 to the same printer, James Nicolson of Southwark.

Some other changes between 1537 and 1538 should be noted. Both 1531 and 1537 have "but am compellyd" (42/4) while 1538 adds "I'' as the subject of the verb; 1531 and 1537 have "without al certentie" (89/14) while 1538 omits "al" and both the earlier editions have "But if oure hertes condemne vs" in which 1538 substitutes the singular "harte."

^{1 In the dating of the first two editions ofthe Exposition published in England I have followed STC^2.}

183.

1538 also introduces some errors, perhaps due to the compositor (e.g. 50/20, 114/16-17, and 127/21-22). But In more than ninety-five percent of the major variations between 1531 and the editions of 1537 and 1538, the changes made by are preserved by 1538. All major omissions made by 1537 are followed by 1538.

A consistent pattern of editorial changes emerges in 1537 and 1538, quite apart from occasional compositor's errors or misreadings. These include a series of deliberate omissions, a number of closely related additions, and a systematic pattern of changes in style. The main considerations in these changes by the editor of 1537 and 1538 (for we can consider both editions as basically the product of the same editor or reviser) seem to be political and religious, as well as literary.

One of the changes that occurs frequently throughout the Exposition in its first editions in England is the alteration of "pope''- to "Byshop of Rome" (6/11 etc.), "Romane" or "Romysh byshop" (76/21 etc.), or "Antichrist of Rome" (75/20 etc.). This, it appears, was not just a matter of style but a necessity in a work published in England after 1533, for in that year the Articles devised by the Whole Consent of the King's Council had set an official precedent for referring to the pope as the "Bishop of Rome".¹ The adjective "popyshe" (37/15 etc.) is retained, however,

1 St. Thomas More: Selected Letters, ed. E. F. Rogers, (New Haven and London, 1961), p. 189.

184.

providing further evidence that the change was aimed directly at the official title. The official position of the throne of England in 1537 and 1538 was that the pope was only the bishop of Rome, and it is not surprising that the editor of the first edition of the Exposition to be published in England should keep that position in mind. In one instance it seems to lead him astray: the adjective "holy" is omitted from Tyndale's obviously ironic aside in 1531, "with our holy fathers licence euer" (40/20).

Another noticeable change in 1537 and 1538 relates to both the political and religious controversy of the time, but may, in fact, be an attempt to omit material that was considered relevant by Tyndale in 1531, but that had become outdated by 1537. Two substantial sections dealing with Cardinal Wolsey in 1531, one (70/18-71/3) referring to Wolsey's honors and his taking of "a medicine / vt emitteret spiritum per posteriora" (71/2-3), and the other (76/7-11) alluding to the circumstances of his "shitten deeth" (76/9), are omitted in 1537 and 1538. Another long passage with political references which occurs at the end of 1531 (163/3-20) is also omitted in 1537 and 1538, perhaps because of its dated prophecy ("Ye shal see them tunne out before the year come aboute / that which they haue bene in bruwing (as I haue marked) aboue this dosen yeares." [163/18-20] or even because of its citation in a favorable light of the

185.

former Lord Chancellor: ".M. More coulde saye in his vtopia / that as englisshmen were wonte to eate shepe euen so their shepe now eat vp them by hole paresshes at once / besydes other inconuenientes that he then sawe" (163/9-12). The final section of 1531 also contains repeated references to "insurrection" and may have seemed too controversial to the editor of 1537.

There is one passage in 1531 that seems clearly to refer to King Henry VIII: "As ye se oure hypocrites haue vexed al Christendome this .xx. yeares to bringe a litle lust to effecte" (101/ 15-17).¹ Both 1537 and 1538 omit this sentence, a further indication that the editor of 1537 did not wish to give offence in high places. In the light of this omission, the dropping of a reference to a sinner's struggle against the flesh "to quench the lustis therof which ar waxen so ranke that they bud out openly" (45/13-15) becomes more meaningful both in terms of Tyndale's original intent and because of the interpretation put on the passage by the reviser of 1537.

By far the largest number of omitted passages are those in the last part of the Exposition of 1531 dealing with the eucharist. There is an omission of Tyndale's misquoting of Thomas Aquinas, "sed solis presbyteris / quibus sic congruit / vt sumant nec dent ceteris" (157/17-18), as well as an editing of some questioning remarks about

^{1 See the Commentary, p. 270.
186.
the bread and wine of the sacrament mocking the senses (157/16-22). A section in 1531 running over twenty lines in the original is next omitted (158/14-159/7). In it Tyndale attacked the use of "sotle argumentes of sophistries" (158/17-18) to maintain the "opinion of so turnynge bred and wine in to the body & bloude of Christ / that it ceaseth to be bred & wine in nature / vnto their awne glorie and profit / with out help of scripture" (158/14-17). He claimed that the taking of the chalice ("halfe the sacrament" 158/19) was refused the people "lest if the people shulde haue dronk the bloude of Christ / they shulde haue smelt the sauoure and fealte the tast of wine" (158/19-21).
In 1531 Tyndale asked "what had the sacraments bene / if they had not made of that other opinion ['eare confession' or aural confession] an article of the faith?" (159/11-12), but in 1537 and 1538 this is toned down to "what doth the sacrament admonysh vs of reconcylynge vs to god". Two other sections dealing with the eucharist are also omitted by the editions of 1537 and 1538: "But I aske / wherfore we beleue that Christes body and his bloude ys there presente? verely as many heades as many wittes / euery man hath his meanynge." (159/18-20) and "ye or of the other disgisinge" (159/22-160/1). If the omission of references to political figures can be understood as an attempt to keep the Exposition noncontroversial in its first editions printed in England, the

187.

toning down of the attacks on the doctrine of the eucharist can be viewed in the same way. Whoever the editor of 1537 was, he intended that his work not give offence to "the powers that be" in government and church in England at the time of publication.
It is more difficult to assign a reason for two omissions in 1537 and 1538, one of the phrase "promising to folow Christ" (34/22), the other of the interjected question "ye wil he perature forgiue me / but I muste make amendes?" (37/12-13). Two other passages are omitted, perhaps because of an editorial sense of decorum that the editor of 1537 felt was lacking in the original. Tyndale's example of the conscience-stricken "boy that wold fayne haue eaten of the pastie of lamprese but durst not vnto the belles sang vn to hym. Syt doune Iake boy and eate of the lamprey / to stablishe his waueringe conscience" (11/3-6) is dropped, as is a homely conclusion to a story of goods and money taken to protect the soul from purgatory while leaving the body "as bare as Iobe and baulde as a coote" (162/13-14). 1537 and 1538 are poorer for the loss.
The longer additions made by 1537 and 1538 also seem to follow a pattern. Most of them are moral or devotional additions to the text of 1531, and they all come at the end of a sentence in 1531, requiring only a slight change of punctuation to be fitted Into Tyndale's original text. The pattern of the additions is similar in every case:

"lustes." (5/22) becomes "lustes, and concupiscences

188.
of oure wycked nature."
"mercie" (29/15) becomes "mercye: whiche he geueth abundantly vnto them that requyre it wyth a faythfull harte, and not wauerynge in [in om. 1537] fayth."
"lawes." (97/12) becomes "lawes, and the thynge that Christ commaunded aboue all other."
"father." (100/10) becomes "father, for it is a commune prouerbe: The chylde followeth his fathers nature."
"nede." (131/11) becomes "nede, though he were euen an enemy to me, to geue the best counsell I can, to visite & relyue hym yf he be sycke & nedy, yee yf nede were to bestowe euen my lyfe also for hym."
A slight variation occurs at 33/20 where a whole new sentence is added after a quotation from St. Paul, but the effect and method are still very much the same. A single editor has apparently attempted to improve on or at least revise 1531 with his little devotional additions in the edition of 1537.
There are well over a hundred other notable changes in the text that occur in 1537 and 1538. Some of them involve changes in forms, such as "adulter" (156/4) to "adulterer" and "chast" (142/16) to "chastyse," and others are explanations or alternatives, such as "se not" (26/22) to "do not se nor perceaue" or "be healed" (28/4) to "be cured & healed". There are simple substitutions such as "waxen olde" for "antiquate" (70/5) or "on them" for

189.

"of them" (142/14), or changes in order, such as "fell wel ynoughe thorowe vnbelefe" for "fel thorow vnbelefe wel ynoughe" (126/14-15) and "to do hys deuty" for "his dutie to doo" (84/21). Of course, the latter type of change may be due to a compositor, but the overall impression is that a determined editor is at work, although of no exceptional literary nor spiritual gifts.
By far the largest number of substantive variants between the three earliest editions are due to changes in the language, but the next largest number of changes may be viewed as attempts to improve upon Tyndale's elliptical style. Some of the changes already cited fall into this category, but many others occur throughout the editions of 1537 and 1538. A dozen examples taken from two different sections of the Exposition will be sufficient as illustration:

"where wyth and" for "wher with (3/21)

"to kepe hym" for "to kepe" (6/6)
"exercysed than he is" for "exercysed" (7/2)
"but it is" for "but is" (11/17)

"sydes of it" for "sides" (12/20)

"scripture is" for "scripture" (15/16)
"and dyd sowe" for "and sue" (80/15)
"receaue the worde" for "receaue" (83/17)
"bewytcheth he" for "bewitcheth" (84/16)
"new learnynge" for "newe" (88/6)

"is it called" for "is called" (88/22)
"but euen" for "but" (90/11).

190.
An examination of the variant readings of any other part of the text will yield like results. It is clear that the editor of 1537 felt that Tyndale's work needed to be revised throughout. Not all of the above changes, however, succeed in making the Exposition more clear. Tyndale's style was at times difficult because of its elliptical nature. He goes from scriptural reference to scriptural reference, assuming that his reader is with him, and words seem at times to be dropped for the sake of rapidity and directness. The impression is occasionally that of someone with an urgent message, in a hurry, perhaps even "a man on the run," and the editor of 1537 and 1538 obviously felt that the text had to be filled out. He did not always do this successfully. Thus "and them busshopes that is ouersears" (86/6, but a modern editor would insert a comma after "busshopes") is misunderstood by the editor of 1537. Thus the texts of the first English editions have "are" substituted for "is" which makes nonsense of Tyndale's English equivalent of "id est." In 1531 Tyndale wrote: "And them that wold proue them selues his vicars with Sophistrie / and when it is come to the poynte make a swerd only their mightie arguments" (99/7-9), but the editor of 1537 misses the point of the argument by erroneously adding "of" after "only". Finally, 1537 and 1538 refine a neat syllogism from 1531: "Oure doctours know not whether they be in state of grace. Oure doctors kepe mens commaundementes / ergo mens commaundementes certifie not that we be in state of grace"
(66/18-20) becomes, in 1537 and 1538, "Nother knowe such doctours whether they be in state of grace, but kepe mens commaundementes, ergo mens commaundementes certifye not that we be in state of grace". Part of the effect of Tyndale's turning such traditional scholastic argumentation on the "doctours" is lost in the edited version.
The changes which occur between the first edition published on the continent and the editions published after Tyndale's death point to a consistent, deliberate editorial

191.

policy, more likely the work of one man, perhaps a churchman, certainly a man with some background in theology and a keen sense of the currents of his time. His deliberate purpose seems to have been to make William Tyndale's Exposition of 1 John acceptable to the church and government of England. The fact that two additional commentaries on 2 and 3 John were published in the editions of 1537 and 1538 and neither the name of Tyndale nor that of the author of the other two commentaries was added, may indicate that the editor wished the two shorter works identified with Tyndale's Exposition. Could the editor of the Exposition for 1537 and 1538 be the author of the two added expositions? Those later works have been attributed to one Lancelot Ridley,¹ and it is not unlikely that this man who wrote some scriptural commentaries of his own could have undertaken a major work of revision as well.²}

¹ Cf. STC2 24443-5.

² The DNB gives 1576 as the date of Ridley's death. Although the exact date of his birth is uncertain, it is known that he received his B. D. from Cambridge in 1537 and the next year published a commentary on the epistle of St. Jude and followed this with commentaries on some of the epistles of St. Paul.

192.

1573

In his introduction to the only complete edition of Tyndale's Exposition published since the sixteenth century, the Rev. Henry Walter referred to "Day's less ancient edition of

Tyndale's works".¹ The nineteenth-century editor noted that the St. Paul's Cathedral Library copy of 1538 was used as the copy text for the version of the Exposition he was publishing along with other works by Tyndale. It therefore seemed to him that 1573 represented a departure from the original, for example, by using "pope for the words 'bishop of Rome,' or for any other paraphrases to the same purport."² But even a casual examination of the variant readings between 1531 and the other sixteenth-century editions shows that it was 1537 that changed the original, and that 1573 followed the continental edition of 1531 quite closely.

^{1 Expositions and Notes on Sundry Portions of The Holy Scriptures (Cambridge, 1849), Parker Society, p. 134.

^{2 Ibid.}}

193.

Daye's edition of 1573 follows the text of 1531, but modernizes the punctuation throughout. Spellings and forms are also modernized. Forms such as "spirite" for "sprite," "example" for "ensample," "through" for "thorowe," and "Epistle" for "pistle" are substituted regularly in 1573 while occasional forms in 1531 such as "vnderstonde" (76/14), "prosperouser" (104/16), and "impossible" (28/13 etc.) become "vnderstoode," "more prosperous," and "vnpossible" in 1573. Other substitutions also occur, apparently aimed at accommodating the changes in the language which had taken place between the two editions. "Wittinge" and "willinge" (76/3) become "wittingly" and "willingly". "Pronite" becomes "readiness" in one change (29/3), but later on is rendered as "pronesse" (40/21), and "were" is substituted for "be" (60/9) as a first person plural form, although the editor may have used the incorrect tense.

Occasional careless errors are found in 1573 such as "hee" for "be" in "This be sayde" (10/10), "at" for "ar" in "toffore ar there (16/17), and "to fore" for "toffore" in "& toffore the worke of them to God" (136/12). There are other mistakes as well, but the text of 1531 is generally followed quite closely. Some emendations are made for the better. Thus where 1531 has "put golden shoose vpon his images foote" (62/4-5), 1573 substitutes the more easily understood "feete" for "foote". In one notable instance a compositor's error in 1531 which was incorrectly emended by 1537 and 1538 is corrected by 1573. The first

194.

edition of the Exposition has "then he ax what they preachyd,/ and beleue that doctrine" (52/4-5) which 1537 and 1538 emend by dropping "he" and leaving "axe" as the imperative. 1573, however, substitutes "heare" for "he ax" and this reading has been adopted in the present text. What the compositor of 1531 probably did was mistake the r for x in setting up "hear" and, as a result, set up "he ax" in order to make some sense.

195.

A Note on the Text

This edition of the Exposition is based on the British Museum copy of 1531 as reproduced by University Microfilms, but the Folger and Rylands copies of 1531 have been consulted in the few cases where the copy text appears to be damaged or unclear. A xerographic reproduction of the British Museum copy has been completely collated with the original copy of 1531 in the Folger Library and with a xerographic reproduction of the copy of 1531 in the John Rylands Library. Press variants among the various copies are listed in the description of the texts (see above, pp. 174-175). In addition, the text of 1531 has been completely collated with the other editions of the Exposition published in the sixteenth century, namely the editions of 1537, 1538, and 1573. The textual notes include a generous sample of the variants between the edition of 1531 and three later editions.¹

The spelling, capitalization, and punctuation of the text are those of the 1531 edition, unless an emendation is noted. A few adjustments have necessarily been made. Long s [***an f without the bar as in "our sacred Honor" in the original of our Declaration ofIndependence] is transcribed as modern s and Vv is transcribed as W. Abbreviations and contractions have been silently expanded with the exception of &, & cete, and the abbreviations y^e and y^t. The abbreviation for and (a~d) [***there will be a line over the preceding a once I master Word Perfect] has been capitalized when it appears at the beginning of a sentence. Capitalization has been silently adjusted for y and w when they appear at the beginning of a sentence or a scriptural quotation after a period (not a question mark), to compensate for de Keyser's evident lack of a capital y and a shortage of capital w's in both the bastard and textura type. All the early editions of the Exposition distinguish between the text of scripture and Tyndale's commentary by the use of different type faces, while

¹ The marginal glosses of 1573 have been treated separately. See below, p. 200, and Appendix.

*** indicates transcription of a letter or a symbol is an approximation

196.

in the present edition the use of bastard in scriptural quotations, most of the title page, chapter headings, and other places is indicated by the use of italics. Initial woodcut capitals, which appear at the beginning of each section of the prologue and each chapter of the 1531 edition, are not distinguished in the present text, nor is the occasional oversize printing. The symbol C [***] occurs regularly at the beginning of paragraphs in the 1531 edition, but I have not attempted to reproduce it in the present text.¹ The use of an ornamental leaf as a device is noted where it occurs.

The horizontal spacing of the original has in some situations been modified without comment, for example, to correct an obvious instance of words being run together, but the 1531 edition seems deliberately to combine certain types of words, especially verbs and their auxiliaries

^{1 For its use in the title, see above, p. 173.

197.

(e.g. "shalbe") and adjectives with adverbs or nouns (e.g. "welbeloued" or "falseprophetes") and these have been retained when they appear to be an attempt to form a new word or create a rhetorical effect. In questionable instances such words are separated but recorded in the textual apparatus. Often in the printed text a word is broken by a line-end without a hyphen. If it is obviously one word (e.g. "sin-ne"), it is transcribed as such; when the word may be taken as either one word or two, it is transcribed as it appears most frequently in the 1531 edition.
The spacing and punctuation of numerals, Arabic and Roman, is so varied as to demand special attention. Numerals are usually preceded and followed by periods, but when they appear in a series or in abbreviated references to the scriptures, the printed work makes the periods do double duty by running some of the items together: "Mattheu in the.v.vj.and.vij." or "Paule.2.Timoth.3.". For the sake of clarity the present text reads: "Mattheu in the v. vj. and vij." or "Paule .2. Timoth. 3.". On those few occasions where the original omits a period either before or after a number, it has been supplied silently. Where a period precedes a number but is not needed for a previous abbreviation (e.g. "Iohn. vi." or "after. xx. facions") the period has been placed next to the number in the present text for the sake of appearance and consistency. Spaces

198.

are also added before and after punctuated numbers and before and after phrases in parentheses.
Scriptural references preceded by a period occur frequently in the middle or at the end of a sentence almost as if they were intended as parts of the sentence. To distinguish what appears to be a distinct rhetorical device in the 1531 edition I have set such references off from the text by printing the period next to the first word or number of such references with no space intervening and only one space following the reference, unless it occurs at the end of a sentence. Thus "whose nature is to vtter synne.Rom.iij. and to sette man at variance" and "ye were once derknes saith Paule.Ephe.v.But nowe light" will appear in the present text as "whose nature is to vtter synne Rom. lij. and to set man at variance" and "Ye were once derknes saith Paule Ephe. v. But now light". Thus I have not treated the occasional capital letters that appear in the middle of a sentence after a scriptural reference as indicating the beginning of a new sentence and have spaced the reference as if it had been followed by a word beginning with a lower case letter.¹ Where the scriptural reference appears to be inserted between sentences, rather than as a part of a particular sentence, a period is placed immediately after the last word of the sentence, with two spaces before and after the reference

^{1 Examples of this are frequent. Cf. 20/17, 28/1, 77/14, 95/9, 119/4 etc.

199.

Spaces or their absence between sentences, before and after virgules, or following colons are so varied that it is difficult to find any rhetorical consistency in their use. Their occurrence or non-occurrence appears to be a matter of compositor's convenience and I have normalized his practice by placing two spaces after a period and one after both the virgule and the colon, with a single space preceding the virgule.¹ Periods at the end of a sentence are supplied silently in the present text where they are omitted in the printed text at the end of a line of print.

The spacing of the marginal glosses of 1531, 1537, and 1538 has been normalized in the same way as the rest of the text, but no punctuation marks have been added or omitted. The glosses of 1531 with a few additions from 1537 and 1538 have been placed on the same page with the textual notes to each page of the Exposition with a line number to indicate where the glosses begin. Where 1537 or 1538 has a gloss not in 1531 the gloss is included in the marginalia, but with a textual note that it is omitted in 1531. Substantive variants from the glosses of 1537 and 1538 are noted in the textual notes. Some of the glosses are a few lines off the point of citation, but their position in this edition indicates where they

^{1 There are at least a dozen instances of the simple period being used as a colon, to introduce a quotation. I have decided not to emend the punctuation and to use two spaces after the period. Cf. 11/4, 18/11, 25/4, 40/17, 61/3 etc.

200.

begin in the original, rather than where they should be. Since the lines of the present text do not correspond exactly with those of the edition of 1531, the glosses are located according to the line in the present text which contains the first word of the line next to which the gloss appears. Glosses of more than a few words extend for a few lines in the original because of the narrow margins, and this will explain the apparently imprecise location of some glosses. But if the location of glosses in l537 or 1538 differs from 1531 by more than four lines or so, I have recorded the differing location in the textual notes. Glosses which appear in all three of the early editions are not identified by references to 1537 and 1538, unless there is a marked difference in their location. The edition of 1573 adds a great many new glosses to those of the early editions. Although these are not authorial and are omitted from the apparatus, they are recorded in the Appendix.
There is a special problem with the glosses of 1537 because the margins of that text have been cut or damaged and most of the glosses have letters or whole words missing. The full text of glosses where 1537 and 1538 appear to agree against 1531 therefore follows the text of 1538. Where 1538 differs from 1531 by a word or a phrase that is not legible in the gloss of 1537 I have assumed that 1537 and 1538 have the same reading. All references to the glosses of 1537 are marked "1537?". Where 1537 appears to have a unique gloss any missing letters which I have attempted to reconstruct appear in square brackets. The unique copy of 1537 appears to be damaged in the margin next to 2/19 to a far greater degree than at any other place in the text, but in all other instances there is either part of a letter or enough of a margin to justify conjecture about the content or omission of glosses. In particularly difficult cases what remains of the gloss of 1537 has been noted in the apparatus.
The three extant copies of the edition of 1531 are identified as 1531^B, 1531^F, and 1531^R for the British Museum, Folger, and Rylands copies respectively. These identifications are used in the case of press variants noted in the textual apparatus.

201.
The signature marks of 1531 have been reproduced In this edition by placing them in the text, enclosed in square brackets, before the first word of the page in the original for which they stand. The running titles such as "The Prologge" and "The fyrste Chapter" have not been reproduced in this edition, but they are noted in the bibliographical description, above p. 174. Marginal handwriting, which occurs most frequently in 1531^R has generally not been noted in the apparatus.

The textual notes record all emendations of 1531 and a representative sample of the variant readings in 1537, 1538, and 1573, except for the glosses noted above. Neither catchwords nor folio numbers are used in 1531 and their presence in the later editions has not been noted in the present text. Casual misprints in the later editions have been ignored generally. Variant spellings in the later editions are not recorded unless they are of special interest, and where substantive variants are found in the later editions only the spelling of the earliest edition cited for that variant has been given, unless otherwise noted. Thus the spelling of substantive variants of 1537 or 1538 will be given if two or three of the later editions agree against 1531. The Oxford English Dictionary has been used as the final authority to determine whether a variant is a different word or a different spelling of the same word. If the OED lists two words separately, a variant has been recorded. This will account for the frequency of listing such modernizations as "spirites" for "sprites," "nor" for "ner," and "another" for "a nother". The Revised OED has shed little new light on Tyndale's usage.

The textual notes do not indicate differences in the spelling of word endings, but the use of different endings such as en for e in the past participle has been recorded. The difference between aphetic and non-aphetic formations (e.g., "pistle" for "epistle") has been recorded, but the use of th- combined with a following noun or pronoun beginning with a vowel, e.g. "thensample," has not been

203.

listed as a variant form of the plus the noun or pronoun. No notice has been taken of simple modernizations where a later edition has combined words separated by 1531.
Differences in punctuation are recorded only where an emendation has been made. The punctuation of 1531 will frequently give the modern reader pause, but emendations based simply on improvements in punctuation in the later editions have deliberately been kept to a minimum. The present edition follows the text of 1531 quite closely.

204.

COMMENTARY
The frequent references to scripture in The exposition of the fyrste Epistle of seynt Ihon and the relationship of this work to Tyndale's other translations of scripture require that some care be taken in distinguishing the various translations cited in the following Commentary. Passages from scripture are identified by the Vulgate reference; where the Authorized Version has a different identification it appears in parentheses with the abbreviation AV. Unless otherwise noted, quotations from the New Testament are from Tyndale's translation of 1534 (NT, 1534). When variant readings from the 1526 version (NT, 1526) are cited they appear in parentheses.
The references in the Commentary are generally given in short-title form for works cited frequently. The bibliography [******coming soon to this Internet outlet] and list of short titles includes the titles of works referred to in the Commentary and in the preceding Introduction, but works cited only once are usually omitted. The abbreviations for the books of the Bible are those given in Rules for Compositors and Readers at the University Press, Oxford, Thirty-sixth edition, 1954.

C:BIBLIO in progress}}}