Steven Avery
Administrator
Peter Gurry
By 1870, an installment of all four Gospels was printed and circulated privately by the publishers,55 brought
to press, Hort tells us, because of the work of the revision committee.56 This printing would include a
“temporary introduction” written by Hort which markedly diƦferent from the ƧƬnal introduction included with
volume one.57 A second would be printed in July 1871 followed by installments of Acts in February 1873, the
Catholic Letters in December of the same year, the Pauline epistles in February 1875, and Revelation in
December of 1876.58 These tended to follow the schedule of the revision committee as attested by letters from
Hort to Macmillan requesting their printing in time for the committee’s next meetings.59
Along with the letters, these installments give us a unique window on the editorial decisions made in this
period. The existence of the 1870 edition of the Gospels is of special interest. It goes unmentioned in their ƧƬnal
edition and is not noted in their respective Life and Letters and I have not seen any later scholars discuss it.60 It
is, however, described brieƥƷy by Eduard Reuss in 187261 and comes up in the authors’ unpublished
12
his proofreader in Rev. Hilton Bothamley although none of their correspondence is included in the Cambridge
letter collection.53 All of this meant, according to Hort, that “everything will pass under four pairs of eyes; but
this plan involves loss of time as a matter of course.”54
By 1870, an installment of all four Gospels was printed and circulated privately by the publishers,55 brought
to press, Hort tells us, because of the work of the revision committee.56 This printing would include a
“temporary introduction” written by Hort which markedly diƦferent from the ƧƬnal introduction included with
volume one.57 A second would be printed in July 1871 followed by installments of Acts in February 1873, the
Catholic Letters in December of the same year, the Pauline epistles in February 1875, and Revelation in
December of 1876.58 These tended to follow the schedule of the revision committee as attested by letters from
Hort to Macmillan requesting their printing in time for the committee’s next meetings.59
Along with the letters, these installments give us a unique window on the editorial decisions made in this
period. The existence of the 1870 edition of the Gospels is of special interest. It goes unmentioned in their ƧƬnal
edition and is not noted in their respective Life and Letters and I have not seen any later scholars discuss it.60 It
is, however, described brieƥƷy by Eduard Reuss in 187261 and comes up in the authors’ unpublished
correspondence.62 The only copy I am aware of is held in reserve at Trinity College, Cambridge.63 Its most
obvious diƦference with the 1871 installment and the ƧƬnal 1881 edition is to be found at the end of John’s Gospel
where the pagination has been aƦfected.64 The issues are three: how to relate chapter 21 to the preceding
13
chapters, how to relate 21.24–25 to each other and the formatting of the passage on the woman caught in
adultery (7.53–8.11).
Starting with the last ƧƬrst, the Pericope Adulterae is not to be found at all in the 1870 installment. This,
however, may be a printing error as it is mentioned in the introduction as being found “alone at the end of the
Gospels with double brackets”65 just as it would be in the 1871 installment and still in ƧƬnal 1881 edition. Likewise,
Reuss mentions this placement explicitly in his summary of the edition in 1872. Perhaps it was a misprint due to
a failure in communication (cf. note 57 above). However, it is clear from the letters that the ƧƬnal placement was
their plan from very early on. In a letter to Vansittart in May of 1865, Hort explained their reasoning:
53 Though he is mentioned by Hort in letter 78, dated October 8, 1864.
54 LLH, 2.35. Later W. F. Moulton would also provide corrections to the 1870 printing according to his William F. Moulton: A Memoir
(London: Isbister, 1899), 176.
55 See letter of Hort to Macmillan, dated Dec. 26, 1870 in the Macmillan Archives and cf. LLH, 2.148.
56 LLH, 2.137. For a careful look at supplementary role this played alongside other editions used by the committee, see
Cadwallader, Politics of the Revised Version, chap. 4.
57 Hort to Macmillan on June 28, 1870: “I have just sent you […] of the temporary introduction, which may go to press as soon as
you like. I send also my clean copy of the gospels, which I shall be glad to have back when you have done with it. I forgot to say that the
ƧƬrst leaf of the following sheet containing the story of the Woman taken in Adultery will have to go with the last of the gospels” (British
Library, Macmillan Archive, vol. CCCIX). For the role of this introduction in the revision committee’s work, see Cadwallader, “Politics of
Translation,” 430.
58 As noted in B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek: Introduction, Appendix, 2nd ed. (London:
Macmillan, 1896), 18. Cf. LLH, 2.148; LLW, 1.430.
59 See letters dated Jan. 17 and Nov. 21, 1873 in British Library, Macmillan Archive, vol. CCCIX. In the former letter, forty-ƧƬve copies
of Acts are requested.
60 The exception being A. Cadwallader.
61 Eduard Reuss, Bibliotheca Novi Testamenti Graeci cuius editiones ab initio typographiae ad nostram aetatem impressas quotquot
reperiri potuerunt (Braunschweig: Schwetschke, 1872), 246–47.
62 Notably in Add. MS 6597, letters 134–136, dated July and August 1869.
63 The introduction is signed “Christmas 1870” and there is a sticker from the “University Press, Cambridge” hand-dated November
17, 1870 and initialed as what appears to be “W.C.” The library class number for this particular volume is 272.c.87.27.
64 Like the ending of John, Westcott and Hort discussed the ending of Romans (Add. MS 6597, letters 139–140, dated February
1870), but the formatting was not changed there between the 1875 installment and the ƧƬnal edition in 1881. Cf. F. J. A. Hort, “On the End
of the Epistle to the Romans,” Journal of Philology 3, no. 5 (1871): 51–80.
correspondence.62 The only copy I am aware of is held in reserve at Trinity College, Cambridge.63 Its most
obvious diƦference with the 1871 installment and the ƧƬnal 1881 edition is to be found at the end of John’s Gospel
where the pagination has been aƦfected.64 The issues are three: how to relate chapter 21 to the preceding
‘A Book Worth Publishing’: The Making of Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament (1881) – Prepub
‘A Book Worth Publishing’: The Making of Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament (1881) – Prepub
www.academia.edu
By 1870, an installment of all four Gospels was printed and circulated privately by the publishers,55 brought
to press, Hort tells us, because of the work of the revision committee.56 This printing would include a
“temporary introduction” written by Hort which markedly diƦferent from the ƧƬnal introduction included with
volume one.57 A second would be printed in July 1871 followed by installments of Acts in February 1873, the
Catholic Letters in December of the same year, the Pauline epistles in February 1875, and Revelation in
December of 1876.58 These tended to follow the schedule of the revision committee as attested by letters from
Hort to Macmillan requesting their printing in time for the committee’s next meetings.59
Along with the letters, these installments give us a unique window on the editorial decisions made in this
period. The existence of the 1870 edition of the Gospels is of special interest. It goes unmentioned in their ƧƬnal
edition and is not noted in their respective Life and Letters and I have not seen any later scholars discuss it.60 It
is, however, described brieƥƷy by Eduard Reuss in 187261 and comes up in the authors’ unpublished
12
his proofreader in Rev. Hilton Bothamley although none of their correspondence is included in the Cambridge
letter collection.53 All of this meant, according to Hort, that “everything will pass under four pairs of eyes; but
this plan involves loss of time as a matter of course.”54
By 1870, an installment of all four Gospels was printed and circulated privately by the publishers,55 brought
to press, Hort tells us, because of the work of the revision committee.56 This printing would include a
“temporary introduction” written by Hort which markedly diƦferent from the ƧƬnal introduction included with
volume one.57 A second would be printed in July 1871 followed by installments of Acts in February 1873, the
Catholic Letters in December of the same year, the Pauline epistles in February 1875, and Revelation in
December of 1876.58 These tended to follow the schedule of the revision committee as attested by letters from
Hort to Macmillan requesting their printing in time for the committee’s next meetings.59
Along with the letters, these installments give us a unique window on the editorial decisions made in this
period. The existence of the 1870 edition of the Gospels is of special interest. It goes unmentioned in their ƧƬnal
edition and is not noted in their respective Life and Letters and I have not seen any later scholars discuss it.60 It
is, however, described brieƥƷy by Eduard Reuss in 187261 and comes up in the authors’ unpublished
correspondence.62 The only copy I am aware of is held in reserve at Trinity College, Cambridge.63 Its most
obvious diƦference with the 1871 installment and the ƧƬnal 1881 edition is to be found at the end of John’s Gospel
where the pagination has been aƦfected.64 The issues are three: how to relate chapter 21 to the preceding
13
chapters, how to relate 21.24–25 to each other and the formatting of the passage on the woman caught in
adultery (7.53–8.11).
Starting with the last ƧƬrst, the Pericope Adulterae is not to be found at all in the 1870 installment. This,
however, may be a printing error as it is mentioned in the introduction as being found “alone at the end of the
Gospels with double brackets”65 just as it would be in the 1871 installment and still in ƧƬnal 1881 edition. Likewise,
Reuss mentions this placement explicitly in his summary of the edition in 1872. Perhaps it was a misprint due to
a failure in communication (cf. note 57 above). However, it is clear from the letters that the ƧƬnal placement was
their plan from very early on. In a letter to Vansittart in May of 1865, Hort explained their reasoning:
53 Though he is mentioned by Hort in letter 78, dated October 8, 1864.
54 LLH, 2.35. Later W. F. Moulton would also provide corrections to the 1870 printing according to his William F. Moulton: A Memoir
(London: Isbister, 1899), 176.
55 See letter of Hort to Macmillan, dated Dec. 26, 1870 in the Macmillan Archives and cf. LLH, 2.148.
56 LLH, 2.137. For a careful look at supplementary role this played alongside other editions used by the committee, see
Cadwallader, Politics of the Revised Version, chap. 4.
57 Hort to Macmillan on June 28, 1870: “I have just sent you […] of the temporary introduction, which may go to press as soon as
you like. I send also my clean copy of the gospels, which I shall be glad to have back when you have done with it. I forgot to say that the
ƧƬrst leaf of the following sheet containing the story of the Woman taken in Adultery will have to go with the last of the gospels” (British
Library, Macmillan Archive, vol. CCCIX). For the role of this introduction in the revision committee’s work, see Cadwallader, “Politics of
Translation,” 430.
58 As noted in B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek: Introduction, Appendix, 2nd ed. (London:
Macmillan, 1896), 18. Cf. LLH, 2.148; LLW, 1.430.
59 See letters dated Jan. 17 and Nov. 21, 1873 in British Library, Macmillan Archive, vol. CCCIX. In the former letter, forty-ƧƬve copies
of Acts are requested.
60 The exception being A. Cadwallader.
61 Eduard Reuss, Bibliotheca Novi Testamenti Graeci cuius editiones ab initio typographiae ad nostram aetatem impressas quotquot
reperiri potuerunt (Braunschweig: Schwetschke, 1872), 246–47.
62 Notably in Add. MS 6597, letters 134–136, dated July and August 1869.
63 The introduction is signed “Christmas 1870” and there is a sticker from the “University Press, Cambridge” hand-dated November
17, 1870 and initialed as what appears to be “W.C.” The library class number for this particular volume is 272.c.87.27.
64 Like the ending of John, Westcott and Hort discussed the ending of Romans (Add. MS 6597, letters 139–140, dated February
1870), but the formatting was not changed there between the 1875 installment and the ƧƬnal edition in 1881. Cf. F. J. A. Hort, “On the End
of the Epistle to the Romans,” Journal of Philology 3, no. 5 (1871): 51–80.
correspondence.62 The only copy I am aware of is held in reserve at Trinity College, Cambridge.63 Its most
obvious diƦference with the 1871 installment and the ƧƬnal 1881 edition is to be found at the end of John’s Gospel
where the pagination has been aƦfected.64 The issues are three: how to relate chapter 21 to the preceding
