style="font-size:15px;"> Finally, let us note that neither the just quoted passage nor any other part of the treatise necessarily reads like a prologue to the English Bible: there is no indication that the reader is to “look at the text following” or the like. It could just as easily be intended as a separate treatise.
The Conjunction Either Preferred to Or in GP and LV Old Testament
The most important differentiator between GP and most of EV/LV that I will put forward is a dialectal one, Simple Creature’s overwhelming preference for either over or, as in: “The first is Proverbis, either Parablis.”41 He uses either 195 times in the sixty pages of his treatise, and or only two times (and other two times).42 In Table 2.1, I give the incidences in FM’s copy texts, which are followed by most of the other manuscripts.43 I also give the related preference for neither over ne.44
Table 2.1. Dominance of Either in GP
| GP (SC) | Chaps. 1–14Harley 1666 | Chap. 15Cambridge Mm.2.15 |
| either 141, eithir 25, ether 1 other 1, outher 1 or 0 neither, neithir, nether 66 ne 1 | either 22, eithir 6 or 2 neither 6 ne 0 |
It is noteworthy that the two uses of or occur in a statement in which he hopes that wise men who know the Scriptures will judge that his translation renders the Bible as clear or even clearer than the original Latin:
And where [i.e., whether] I have translatid as opinly or opinliere in English as in Latin, late wise men deme, that knowen wel bothe langagis and knowen wel the sentence of Holy Scripture; and wher [i.e., whether] I have do thus, or nay, ne doute, they that kunne wel the sentence of Holy Writ and English togidere, and wolen travaile with Goddis grace theraboute, moun make the Bible as trewe and as opin, yea, and opinliere in English than it is in Latin.45
The use of either for or is comparatively rare in England as a whole, to judge by the data provided by the Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English (LALME), especially when either is preferred so exclusively.46
When we look at a sampling of the Old Testament (Genesis at the beginning, 1 Samuel and Job in the middle, and 1 Maccabees at the end), we find that the EV prefers or, but LV Old Testament regularly transforms EV or into either.47
In the New Testament, looking only at the Gospels, we observe that EV Matthew, Mark, and John, like the Old Testament books, favor or, but Luke favors either, though there is much variation evident.48 It turns out that EEV Luke prefers or, meaning that an either-speaking scholar like Simple Creature meddled with EEV to produce the EV mixed bag.49 The striking thing is that all EEV Gospels use only or, and the same is true of all LV Gospels.50
Lindberg observes that all EV manuscripts show signs of revision.51 But let us note Fristedt’s view that some new readings are systematic changes to EEV made by the First Revision team (instructed by the postulated Latin Bible annotated by Wyclif), whereas other manuscripts “were tampered with by men of small learning who for reasons unknown sporadically and at random corrected texts from other manuscripts.”52 One typical First Revision characteristic is the introduction of glosses after or or ether.53
Let us now see what the rest of the New Testament shows us on or and either. First of all, we can say that there is a preference for or in the Pauline Epistles of both EV and LV.54 Moreover, like the whole of EV, the rest of the LV is equally sparing in its use of either, with the notable exception of four books, namely, Acts, James, 1 Peter, and the Apocalypse.55 Here at last, then, we may speculate that Simple Creature may have at least participated in a later phase of the Bible-translation project: but it is a far cry from his having done the whole thing.
There is another use of either in GP and the LV Old Testament that may indicate Simple Creature’s participation in the LV Old Testament: namely, the phrase ever-either to mean “each of two.”56
To summarize, we see that EV favors or in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. LV favors either in the Old Testament and or in the New Testament, except that four of the later books of LV (Acts, James, 1 Peter, and the Apocalypse) favor either. The phrase ever-either is also favored by GP and the LV Old Testament.
By the either criterion alone, therefore, we might conclude that Simple Creature, the author of GP, was the translator of the LV Old Testament and the four either-favoring books of the LV New Testament. But now we will look at some peculiarities that will tend to exclude the LV Old Testament from Simple Creature’s handiwork.
Forsooth Shunned in GP and LV New Testament, but Not in LV Old Testament
At one point in his discussion of translation principles, Simple Creature takes up the frequent Vulgate use of the postpositive narrative particles autem and vero (which translate the still more frequent Greek postpositive de), saying that they can mean either “forsooth” or “but,” and that he himself in his Bible translation commonly renders them as “but”; but he adds that the Latin particles can also mean “and,” according to the grammarians.57 In the sixty pages of Five and Twenty Books (GP), he never uses forsooth in these ways. Let us see what the practice is of our versions.
In the Old Testament, LV consistently continues the EV style of translating autem and vero as forsooth or, less frequently, soothly, in Genesis, 1 Samuel, Job, and 1 Maccabees. LV, however, invariably changes the postpositive position to initial.58
This usage would indicate that Simple Creature is not the translator of the LV Old Testament, in spite of LV’s preference for either.
As for the New Testament, forsooth and soothly are favorite words for this context in the EV New Testament, but not in LV, where they were actively boycotted.59
Now let us look at a different stylistic use of forsooth. At the end of his treatise, as an afterthought, Simple Creature returns to translational style with three notes, all of which are relevant for our discussion. We will begin with the second, since it deals with forsooth. He says that the conjunction enim commonly means “forsooth,” but, as Jerome warns, it can also signify cause, “forwhy.”60 It turns out, however, that out of the more than eight hundred uses of enim in the Vulgate New Testament, LV translates it as forsooth only once (Romans 9.28). LV does translate enim as forwhy twenty-six times, but this can hardly be interpreted as meaning that it was an important principle to the translator.61 Rather, it is more likely that Simple Creature noticed this use in LV and turned it into a principle.
Simple Creature’s Declarations on the Latin Prepositions Ex and Secundum
The other notes that Simple Creature adds at the end of his treatise deal with two prepositions.
Ex to Be Rendered as Of or By (According to SC)
First, he says that the Latin preposition ex can mean sometimes “of” and at other times
