I am interested in what term Philip Ludwell III used.
I'm still interested.
But in the meantime, I've been looking at some early translation. All the ones done by Prof. Nicholas Orloff in London published by the MHGS of Russia (he dedicates them to Abp. Nicholas and St. Tikhon of North America, but commemorates the Czar and Queen Victoria):
Horologion, or Book of Hours. — Containing the daily devotions for the stated or canonical hours. Translated from the Slavic (1897)
Octoechos: or The book of eight tones, a primer containing the Sunday Service in Eight Tones (1898)
http://books.google.com/books?id=yYMTAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=falseThe general Menaion: or, The book of services common to the festivals of our Lord Jesus of the Holy Virgin and of the different orders of saints (1898)
http://books.google.com/books?id=VgfZAAAAMAAJ&dq=General%20Menaion&source=gbs_similarbooksThe ferial Menaion: or, The book of services for the twelve great festivals and the new-year's day (1900)
http://books.google.com/books?id=_iYlAQAAIAAJ&source=gbs_similarbooksuse Theotokos.
The divine liturgies of our fathers among the saints John Chrysostom and Basil the Great with that of the presanctified preceded by the Hesperinos and the Orthros edited by James Nathaniel William Beauchamp Robertson
http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA14&dq=Robertson+Chrysostom+Liturgy&ei=rh4xTauqKMrLgQep0rytCw&ct=result&id=KDQ3AAAAMAAJ#v=onepage&q&f=falseThis work, done in 1894 in London, is based on his earlier work:
In 1886 the Editor brought out an edition of the divine Liturgies of our Fathers among the Saints John Chrysostom and Basil the Great, in Greek and English. This work was commended by the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, and Jerusalem, and other Ecclesiastical Authorities
It has the added benefit of having the facing Greek Text. It uses Theotokos.
The office for the Lord's day, as prescribed by the Orthodox Greek Church, tr. [by S.G. Hatherly]. Published by Theodor Schermann in 1880
http://books.google.com/books?id=6e8CAAAAQAAJ&q=Schermann+Theotokos&dq=Schermann+Theotokos&hl=en&ei=aSQxTfKRM8XTgQeY9cCECw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDgQ6AEwBAIt uses Theotokos. On Fr. Hatherly:
http://orthodoxhistory.org/tag/stephen-hatherly/This seems to be the same as his "The Divine Liturgies of our Holy Fathers, John the Goldenmouthed (S. Chrysostoni), and Basil the Great. From the Greek and Russian. London: Shepherd. 1865," which he states in his compendium of English translations of the DL in 1895 this 1865 "version was approved and sanctioned for English use by the Most Holy Governing Synod of the Church of All the Russias." A 1865 review "New Translations of Eastern Liturgies"
The Christian remembrancer; or, The Churchman's Biblical, ecclesiastical & literary miscellany
http://books.google.com/books?id=d_UDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA427&dq=Hatherly+Divine+Liturgies+of+John+the+Golden-mouthed&hl=en&ei=dEYxTfP4NYjTgQfRhNilCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Hatherly%20Divine%20Liturgies%20of%20John%20the%20Golden-mouthed&f=falseputs it in the context of the translation of DL in England at the time.
The offices of the Oriental church: with an historical introduction By Orthodox Eastern Church, published in New York in 1884
http://books.google.com/books?id=RuPr7ABxTt8C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=falseis interesting in that Fr. Bjerring, the Danish immigrant and convert priest of the Russian mission/metochion in New York, edited it. It uses Mother of God (which IIRC he got from German translation: Fr. Bjerring spoke neither Greek nor Russian/Slavonic, and was not a native English speaker). On him and his mission:
http://orthodoxhistory.org/tag/nicholas-bjerring/He actually either apostocized while this book was being published, or shortly thereafter.
A general collection of DL over all the East, "The liturgies of S. Mark, S. James, S. Clement, S. Chrysostom, and the Church of Malabar, translated with introd. and appendices, by J.M. Neale," of 1859 in London
http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001933645uses "Mother of God."
The Divine Liturgy of our Father among the Saints, John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople. Done into English, with some Prefatory Notes, and the Original Greek of the open parts" published anonymously in 1866 at London, attributed to Crichton
http://books.google.com/books?id=l-8CAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR1&dq=The+Divine+Liturgy+of+our+Father+among+the+Saints,+John+Chrysostom,+Archbishop+of+Constantinople.+Done+into+English&hl=en&ei=zUAxTbXEBcqs8Abf8pGrCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=falseuses Mother of God. On it Fr. Hatherly in his compendium notes "Its popularity with members of the Greek Church in England was great, and increased, if that were possible, when it was found the edition was sold out, and copies were no longer procurable."
A lot of these translations were associated with Overbeck's movement to revive Western Orthodoxy.
"OVERBECK'S COLLABORATORS"
http://www.westernorthodox.com/overbeck/collaborators.htmThat it was not, at the time, at least among the native and non-Orthodox British, a question of Theotokos versus Mother of God (neither being used over "Blessed Virgin Mary" by them) is seen in the review of
A Synopsis of the Daily Prayers, the Liturgy, and Principal Offices of
the Greek Orthodox Church. By Kathar1ne, Ladv Lechmere.
(London : Gilbert and Rivington, 1890.)
Euchology: Prayers of the Holy Orthodox Church, done into English. By G. V. Shann. (Kidderminster, 1891.)
Equally we might learn very much from the careful study of their ancient and venerable Liturgies. Much has, we know, been done among us of late years in this direction by such writers as the late Dr. Neale and the Rev. C. E. Hammond. But the knowledge of their works is confined to scholars. These translations, of moderate size and price, are accessible to alL The ' Introduction' to Lady Lechmere's Synopsis, and the preliminary 'Notes' to Mr. Shann's Euchology, give such necessary explanations as will make the Services which follow intelligible. The 'Office of the Passion of Our Lord' (Synopsis, p. 281, &c), and the Services for Good Friday, Holy Saturday, and Easter, at the close of the volume, will be found to be of great interest. Perhaps the portion most likely to be useful to English Church people is that which is common to both volumes (Synopsis, pp. 123-154 ; Euchology, pp. 221-259) containing private devotions before, at, and after Holy Communion. In this section are given many valuable prayers translated from St. Basil, St. Chrysostom, St. John Damascene, and St. Simeon. Here, as elsewhere in the Greek Services, are to be found some prayers and addresses to the Blessed Virgin which English Catholics could never use, and the presence of which, whatever explanation may be given of them, they cannot but regret But here, as in the ancient Western Breviary Services, these comparatively modern elements are evident accretions and appendages, which may be ruled out without any loss to the completeness and value of the more original portions. The same cannot be said of the Services which occupy pp. 66-122 of Lady Lechmere's translation (pp. 397-433 of the Greek Horology, Venice ed. of 1664). These correspond to the special 'Officia' of the B.V. Mary in the Roman Breviary and to such devotions as the' Litany of Loretto.' In some respects, in the language used they seem to go beyond these. We know that much is explained as mere poetical hyperbole, and we may well believe in charity that for well-instructed Christian souls, who know that worship is due to God alone, such language may mean but little. But is it well at times of devotion to use language which means but little, or to leave in Public Service Books what must be a snare and a danger to the uninstructed?
The Church quarterly review, Volume 33 By Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (Great Britain)
http://books.google.com/books?id=5JE3AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA266&dq=Euchology&output=textBtw, Shann seems (I know only by citation) to use "Theotokos."
Fr. Hatherly in 1895 reviewed the history of the DL in English in the compendium published as "Office of the credence & the divine liturgy of our father among the saints, John Chrysostom Archbishop of Constantinople, Done into English by John Covel D.D. 1722, John Glen King D.D. 1772, John Mason Neale D.D. 1859, & by the anonymous translator of 1866 [John Patrick Crichton, marquis of Bute]. Ed. & annotated by Stephen G. Hatherly, Proto-Presbyter of the Oecumenical Throne of Constantinople," in which he comments
Curiously enough, the only theological word not in common use of which all four translators agree in the rendering, is (I say it with reluctance and regret) incorrectly translated, viz.:—the important word Theotokos, given as "Mother of GOD :" but which, having been sufficiently commented on in footnote at page 6, is here passed over. On the other hand, the only occasion when the Greek phrase Meter tou Theou justifies the translated term given to Theotokos, Dr. King alone is in order. The generally careful 1866 translator, instead of Mother, gives us the word " Parent," a title given by all four translators, in accordance with
the originals, to Sts. Joakeim and Anna respectively. See footnote t on page 80.
Though having no connection with this I cannot but object to the American paraphrase "Bringer forth of GOD " (Papers Of the Russo-Greek Committee, No. VI. New York, 1865), as being more wordy than Mother of GOD; while the latest English proposal, based on the paraphrase " Bearer of GOD " is, as is " Parent of GOD," already appropriated to other Saints. See the Great Dismissal.
DR. COVEL. 1722
Especially for our all-holy, spotless, above all blessed, glorious Lady, Mother of GOD and always Virgin, Mary,
DR. KINO. 1772
Especially the most holy, most pure, most blessed, and glorious Lady, the Mother of GOD, and Ever-virgin Mary.
Choir sings:
It is meet and right to bless thee, who art most highly blessed above all, 0 most spotless, and the Mother of our GOD.t Thou who art purer than the Cherubim, and incomparably more glorious than the Seraphim, who being immaculate, brought forth GOD the Word: we magnify thee the Mother of GOD.
DR. NEALE. 1859
Especially the most holy, undefiled, excellently laudable, glorious Lady, the Mother of GOD and Ever-virgin Mary.
Choir.
In thee, O Full of grace, (as in the Liturgy of S. James.)
ANONYMOUS. 1866
Especially our Lady, the all-holy, imma
culate, supremely blessed, glorious, Mary,
Mother of GOD and always a Virgin.
The Choir answers,
Meet is it to bless thee in truth, Mother of GOD, ever most blessed, altogether immaculate, and Parent of our GOD, more honourable than the Cherubim, and infinitely more glorious than the Seraphim: thee who didst without corruption bear GOD the Word, truly Mother of GOD, thee we magnify.
This is the one only place in the Liturgy, alluded to in note $ on page 6, in which the phrase "Mother of GOD " is borne out by the Greek. It is curious to observe the trouble which both the above translators put themselves to, to avoid the tautology of the triple occurrence, in so short ahymn, of what they treat as the same phrase. The first of the three occurrences Dr. King boldly omits, following by that safe course his own precedent on page 34 (see note If on page 35); and the second, or only real instance of Mother, becomes in the hands of the 1866 translator a mere " Parent," a title given on pages 10 and 11 to Sts. Joakeim and Anna, but not to the Ever-virgin Mary. Neither of these devices can be commended. Far better for the reader will it be to grasp the nettle firmly. The following is submitted as a preferential reading to both the above :—
It is truly meet to bless thee, the Theotokos, the ever most blessed, and entirely blameless, and Mother of our GOD. The more honourable than the Cherubim, and beyond compare more glorious than the Seraphim, who didst bear without corruption GOD the Word: thee, verily the Theotokos, we magnify.
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015010962879;q1=Theotokos;start=1;size=100;page=root;view=image;seq=15