The Scottish Celtic review

150 Notca on Gaelic Grautinar and OHhognipky.at another time, to notice more fully this last attempt to revisethe Gaelic Scriptures; and, therefore, we confine our presentremarks to some points suggested by a somewhat careful readingof the last two chapters of the New Testament. It is, perhaps,right to state that we take up these chapters, not because weconsider them either better or worse than other chapters in thesame edition, but simply because they happen to come first underour notice. To enable the reader to judge how far later revisershave improved upon the work of their predecessors, we printthe successive verses of these chapters from the editions of 1690,1767, 1796, 1826, 1860, and ISSO respectively. A few wordsabout these editions may be interesting.The edition of 1690 is O'Donnell's Irish Translation publishedin the Roman character, for the benefit of the Highlanders ofScotland, by Mr. Robert Kirke, minister of Balquidder. Thisedition is now very scaixe. The edition of 1767 was the firstpublished in Scottish Gaelic. It was prepared by Dr. JamesStewart, minister of the parish of Killin, Perthshire, and maybe regarded as a translation from the original, although thetranslator must have made use largely of O'Donnell's previoustranslation. The edition of 1796 was revised by Dr. JamesStewart before his death ; and it was, subsequently, prepared forpublication by his son, Dr. John Stewart, minister of Luss, thetranslator of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd parts (Genesis—Canticles) of theGaelic Old Testament. The edition of 1826 was prepared by acommittee of the General Assembly, and is the last edition whichreceived the Assembly's sanction. The edition of 1860 wasprepared by Drs. Maclauchlan, Edinburgh, and Clerk, Kilmallie,for the Edinburgh Bible Society, and now forms the 8vo editionsold, but with a difierent title-page, by the National Bible Society.Since this edition was first published in 1860, many corrections,several of which wei-e suggested by the writer of these notes, havebeen introduced into it ; but in consequence of the difficulty ofmaking alterations in stereotype-plates, the attempts at correctionhave frequently resulted in other errors as awkward as those itwas sought to remove. Altogether, this edition is extremely inaccurate;and now it stands practically condemned, as we shallhave occasion by-and-bj'e to show, by its own editors ! Theedition of 1880, to which the following remarks chiefiy refer,has been prepared by the editors of the edition of 1860 :—Rev. xxi. 1.— "Agus do chonnairc me neamh uuadh, agus talamh