What if the Coverdale Bible didn't switch the word "vile"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
In 1535 A.D., the printing of the Coverdale Bible began a disastrous treatment of the Book of Daniel by taking the word "vile" from chapter eleven, verse twenty, and moving it to verse twenty-one.

All but one (Douay-Rheims) English translations of the Holy Bible have followed suit on this error since.

The first English translation, the Wycliffe Bible (1378 A.D.), remains correct, too.

My perspective on this remains unchanged, and I can offer insights of which you more than likely are not aware.

I'll gather the pertinent texts of Daniel 11:19-21 :

John Wycliffe (1378 A.D.) :

19 And he shall turn his face to the lordship of his land, and he shall stumble, and fall down, and he shall not be found.

20 And the vilest and (most) unworthy to the king’s honour shall stand in the place of him, and in few days he shall be all-broken, not in strong vengeance, neither in battle (but not openly, nor in battle).

21 And a despised man shall stand in the place of him, and the honour of a king shall not be given to him; and he shall come privily, and he shall get the realm by guile (but he shall come privately, or furtively, and he shall get the kingdom by deceit, or by trickery).

Myles Coverdale (1535 A.D.) :

19 Thus shal he turne agayne to his owne londe, stomble, & fall, and be nomore founde:

20 so he that came vpon him & dyd him violence, shal stonde in his place, & haue a pleasaunt kingdome: and after few dayes he shal be destroyed, & that nether in wrath ner in batell.

21 In his steade there shal aryse a vyle person not holde worthy of a kinges dignite: this shall come in craftely, & optayne the kingdome with fayre wordes:

Douay-Rheims (1899 A.D.) :

19 And he shall turn his face to the empire of his own land, and he shall stumble, and fall, and shall not be found.

20 And there shall stand up in his place, one most vile, and unworthy of kingly honour: and in a few days he shall be destroyed, not in rage nor in battle.

21 And there shall stand up in his place one despised, and the kingly honour shall not be given him: and he shall come privately, and shall obtain the kingdom by fraud.

***

However, the first part of verse 20 of the Coverdale, "so he that came vpon him & dyd him violence", is accurate because I witnessed said foretold violence.
 
Last edited:
The chapter and verse divisions are quite recent, no? and mainly for reference/editorial convenience, not actually units of meaning?
 
The chapter and verse divisions are quite recent, no? and mainly for reference/editorial convenience, not actually units of meaning?
Chapter and verse are recent modifications, but the misplacement is deliberate because of all the other text involved, it couldn't have been 'just an accident'.
 

DougM

Donor
I think you are going to need to give an example of where exactly the word was. I can find where it is but it is not obvious where it would have been.
 
What is the importance?
If I'm correct that translation essentially states that sub-saharans are inferior people that had to be enslaved, thus resulting in the massive exportation of slaves from Africa into America. I guess if the bible was printed correctly the afroamerican population would be much lower and maybe some kind of mestizo culture could arise. I can imagine that area as OTL Brazil.
 
If I'm correct that translation essentially states that sub-saharans are inferior people that had to be enslaved, thus resulting in the massive exportation of slaves from Africa into America. I guess if the bible was printed correctly the afroamerican population would be much lower and maybe some kind of mestizo culture could arise. I can imagine that area as OTL Brazil.
I fail to see the connection in the passage at all.
 
If I'm correct that translation essentially states that sub-saharans are inferior people that had to be enslaved, thus resulting in the massive exportation of slaves from Africa into America. I guess if the bible was printed correctly the afroamerican population would be much lower and maybe some kind of mestizo culture could arise. I can imagine that area as OTL Brazil.

"20 Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle.

21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries."

Is this the text people are referring to? Because i too can not see a connection to the trans Atlantic slave trade.
 
To move the conversation along.

KJV bible
20Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle. 21And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.

Douay-Rheims
[20] And there shall stand up in his place, one most vile, and unworthy of kingly honour: and in a few days he shall be destroyed, not in rage nor in battle. And there shall stand up in his place one despised, and the kingly honour shall not be given him: and he shall come privately, and shall obtain the kingdom by fraud.
 
Iirc Daniel is supposed to be one of the go to books for biblical prophecy.
Thus if the text is altered then so can certain interpretations of it.
 
Ban
How does a history of Antiochus IV Epiphanes lead to the transatlantic slave trade?
Said Antiochus Epiphanes has absolutely nothing to do with chapter eleven of the Book of Daniel, this has also been part of the vandalism done to the Book of Daniel since prophet Daniel was told to close and seal-up the vision (Book).

Every king foretold in Daniel 11 was born within the 20th century A.D.
 

Philip

Donor
Said Antiochus Epiphanes has absolutely nothing to do with chapter eleven of the Book of Daniel, this has also been part of the vandalism done to the Book of Daniel since prophet Daniel was told to close and seal-up the vision (Book).

Every king foretold in Daniel 11 was born within the 20th century A.D.

And thus we cross the threshold from alternate history to alternative history.
 
What is the importance?
"What if" can be a great tool for studying and learning history, but if the history recorded is wrong from the start, one is then at risk of promoting error rather than fact.
I don't understand the significance of the textual differences, please describe the importance of these changes.

How does a history of Antiochus IV Epiphanes lead to the transatlantic slave trade?
Said Antiochus Epiphanes has absolutely nothing to do with chapter eleven of the Book of Daniel, this has also been part of the vandalism done to the Book of Daniel since prophet Daniel was told to close and seal-up the vision (Book).

Every king foretold in Daniel 11 was born within the 20th century A.D.
That may be true, or it may not be; but I still do not understand what the importance of these different textual translations are.

edit
You have obviously been looking at this for a long time, I haven't, and most people here probably haven't either. What is clear and meaningful to you looks plain and inconsequential to me. Please don't keep dribbling out information - spill the beans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top