Page:Gospel of Saint John in West-Saxon.djvu/159



'''Cap. 1, 1.' Ælfric renders this verse in the following manner three times: 'On frymðe wæs Word, and þæt Word wæs mid Gode, and þæt Word wæs God' (Hom. i, 40, 70, 358); in Gregory's Dialogi'' it runs thus: 'In fruman wæs þæt Word, and þæt Word wæs mid Gode, and God wæs þæt Word' (Hecht's ed. p. 240).

1, 2-3. Ælfric continues: 'Þis wæs on frymðe mid Gode. Ealle ðing sind þurh hine geworhte; and nis nān þing buton him gesceapen' (Hom. i, 70); the continuation in the Dialogues (p. 240) it runs thus expressed: 'ēac swylce be þæs mægne wæs þǣr tō gecīged, Ealle gesceafta wǣron þurh þæt gewordene.'

1, 4. The Anglo-Saxon version is here in accord with a non-Clementine reading (Wordsworth's MS. Z.) which connects this verse with the preceding one in the following manner: et sine ipso factum est nihil; quod factum est in ipso uita erat. So too in the Greek, ὃ γέγονεν (= quod factum) was sometimes joined to what follows (Herzog's Realencykl. f. protest. Theologie u. Kirche 3d ed., 1897, II, 735).

1, 5. genāmon (comprehenderunt) is less explicit than 'fornōmon' of the Lindis. and Rush$2$ Glosses, or befōn of xii, 35.

1, 8. The omission of the principal verb before þæt is in conformity with the original: sed ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine.