When James I came to the English throne in 1603, after the appearance of the Bishops Bible in 1568, there had been no further revision of the Scriptures for more than a generation. The Great Bible of 1539, partly because it was heavy and costly, and partly also because it had been superseded by the Bishops Bible, had long ceased to be reprinted. Old copies, no doubt, were still to be found here and there in village churches, but there were no new issues. And yet that Bible by which it had been superseded had not really taken firm and enduring hold of the popular mind. Dean Plumptre said, and said truly, that "of all the English versions the Bishops Bible had probably the least success. It did not command the respect of scholars, and its size and cost were far from meeting the wants of the people. Its circulation appears to have been practically limited to the churches which were ordered to be supplied with it." There were only six editions in quarto and one in octavo; the other thirteen were in folio. On the other hand, the Genevan version retained its unrivalled popularity. Between 1568 and 1611 there were no fewer than sixteen editions in octavo, fifty-two in quarto and eighteen in folio. Thus there seemed to be little prospect of unity in the matter of Bible usage. For the Genevan version was too pronouncedly puritan in its notes and comments to be acceptable to the authorities of the Church; while the version favoured by the bishops had too many drawbacks ever to win its way among the people at large. So matters remained till the beginning of the reign of King James I, when, as one may say, in an almost accidental way, a new version was projected and prepared that of the Authorised Version of 1611, which ultimately had the happy effect of uniting the whole nation for more than two centuries and a half in the use of the same book as the household Bible of the English people. James I was proclaimed King on the 24th of March 1603, and on the 7th of the following May he entered London to take possession of the throne. Between these two dates, and while he was the guest of the Cromwells of Hinchinbrook, near Huntingdon, he was approached by certain of the puritan clergy who presented him with what is known as the Millenary Petition. This was a petition for the abolition of certain usages in the Church which they regarded as superstitious and savouring of Rome; also against "longsomeness of service, profanation of the Lord's Day, and against excommunication by such lay persons as the archdeacon's commissary, and without the consent of pastors." They had "some good conference with his Majesty and gave him a book of reasons." Though no definite answer was given to their plea at the time, it was not altogether fruitless; for the following October the King appointed a meeting to be held in January, 1604, for the hearing and determining "things pretended to be amiss in the Church." This meeting has taken its place in history as the Hampton Court Conference, and it is said that on the second day of this Conference, Dr Reynolds, the leader of the Puritans, "moved his Majesty that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reign of King Henry VIII and Edward VI were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the original." Though this statement is made in Dr Barlow's "Sum and Substance of the Conference at Hampton Court," there is reason to doubt whether it gives a quite accurate account of what actually took place. The Puritans were somewhat roughly handled at that Conference, and were there only to plead for concessions to their views which they knew the bishops were unwilling to grant, and that they should, under such circumstances, have been the originators of the idea of a new Authorised Version seems somewhat improbable. Moreover, it is at variance with what the translators of that version have themselves told us in that preface of theirs prefixed to the version. What is there said is as follows: "The very historical truth is, the Conference having been appointed for hearing the complaints of the Puritans, and when by force of reason they were put from all other grounds, they had recourse at the last to this shift, that they could not with good conscience subscribe to the Communion Book [the Book of Common Prayer] since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated, which was, as they said, a most corrupted translation. And although this was judged to be but a very poor and empty shift, yet even hereupon did his Majesty begin to bethink himself of the good that might ensue by a new translation, and presently after gave order for this translation which is now presented." This is a much more probable account, it is the account given by the translators themselves, and from it we are entitled to say that the idea of the Authorised Version of King James was really started by King James himself. It is clear the King was more in earnest about the matter then than anyone else. Some of the bishops, at any rate, looked coldly upon it. Bancroft, Bishop of London, said at the time that "if every man's humour was to be followed, there would be no end of translating." The King thought otherwise, thought that pains ought to be taken to secure one uniform translation, to be made by the best learned in both the Universities, reviewed by the bishops, then presented to the Privy Council and finally ratified by his royal authority: "and so this whole Church to be bound unto it and none other." Thus in this unexpected, and almost accidental way, came about the first conception of that Authorised Version whose Tercentenary we are now celebrating in 1911.
In the practical carrying out of that conception, again, the King was most actively concerned. Convocation met shortly after the Conference, but not a word appears to have been said there on the proposed revision. The King, however, did not let the matter fall into forgetfulness. He must have been already making enquiries at the Universities as to what learned men there were fit for the enterprise, for on the 22nd of July, 1604, he wrote to the Bishop of London telling him that he had chosen fifty-four translators to meet in various companies at Westminster, Oxford and Cambridge, under the presidency of the Hebrew professors of the two Universities and the Dean of Westminster. He further asked him to move the bishops to inform themselves of all such learned men within their several dioceses as had especial skill in the Hebrew and Greek tongues, and to write to them urging them to send any observations they had made on previous translations to Mr Lively the Hebrew reader in Cambridge, or to Dr Harding the Hebrew reader in Oxford, or to Dr Andrewes, Dean of Westminster, to be by them imparted to their several companies.
It is somewhat surprising to find that the scheme so promptly outlined hung fire for the next three years, nothing further being done, so far as we know, till 1607. From that point, however, the work proceeded with vigour. The fifty-four learned men mentioned by the King, but afterwards, possibly by death, reduced to forty-seven, were divided into six companies, four for the Old Testament and Apocrypha and two for the New Testament. The company meeting at West minster under the presidency of the Dean, the saintly Lancelot Andrewes, and consisting of ten persons, were to undertake the revision of Genesis on to 2 Kings inclusive. The company meeting at Cambridge, and consisting of eight persons, were to take from 1 Chronicles to Ecclesiastes inclusive. The company meeting at Oxford, consisting of seven persons, were to make themselves responsible for the Prophets from Isaiah to Malachi. A separate company, also meeting at Cambridge, were to undertake the Apocrypha. Then, as to the New Testament, a second company meeting at Oxford were charged with the revision of the Four Gospels, the Acts and the Apocalypse, a second Westminster company taking from Romans to Jude inclusive.
Rules for the guidance of these different companies were elaborately drawn up beforehand. They were to take the Bishops Bible as their basis, altering it as little as the truth of the original would permit; the names of prophets and writers and also other names in the text were to be given as commonly used, and the old ecclesiastical words to be kept, as, for example, the word church was not to be translated congregation. The translations by Tyndale, Matthews, Coverdale, and those of the Great Bible and the Genevan Version were to be used when agreeing better with the text than the Bishops Bible. Each separate translator was first to go over the part assigned to him by himself alone, then all were to meet together, confer as to what they had done, and agree as to what should stand. Selden in his Table Talk tells us further as to their method of procedure. They took, says he, an excellent way: "That part of the Bible was given to him who was most excellent in such a tongue, and then they met together and one read the translation, the rest holding in their hands some Bible, either of the learned tongues, or French, Spanish, Italian, &c.: if they found any fault, they spoke; if not, he read on."
When the several companies had completed the portions assigned to them, there would still be a necessity for general supervision. So far as we know the six companies never met as one body, but when three years had been spent in revision, the writer of the life of John Bois tells us, arrangements were made for a general supervision: "The whole work being finished, and three copies of the whole Bible sent from Cambridge, Oxford and Westminster to London, a new choice was to be made of six in all, two out of every company, to review the whole work, and extract one copy out of all these to be committed to the press, for the dispatch of which business Mr Downes and Mr Bois were sent for up to London, where meeting their fellow-labourers, they went daily to Stationers Hall, and in three-quarters of a year fulfilled their task, all which time they had from the Company of Stationers thirty shillings each per week duly paid them. Last of all Bilson, Bishop of Winchester, and Dr Miles Smith, again reviewed the whole work, and prefixed arguments to the several books."
The three years of slow and patient scholarship spent on the Authorised Version were not completed without a certain touch of pathos. It has often been told how the Venerable Bede completed the translation of John's Gospel in the closing hours of life. "It is completed now," said the boy scribe. "Thou hast said the truth," replied the dying man, "all is ended. Take my head in thy hands. I would sit in the holy place in which I was wont to pray." And seated there, while he chanted the Gloria, his soul passed away. A kindred story has come down to us concerning Dr Reynolds, one of the translators of the version of 1611, of whom Thomas Fuller says you could never tell which was greater, his learning or his goodness. He was one of the company engaged upon the Books of the Prophets, but in the course of the work he was seized with consumption, and slowly faded out of life. Yet as Featley tells us, "for his great skill in the Originall Languages," the other members of the company had recourse to him "once a weeke and in his Lodgings perfected their Notes." In a great part of the sickness of which he died the meeting was held in his rooms at Corpus Christi, in Oxford, "and he, lying on his Pallet, assisted them, and in a manner, in the very translation of the booke of life, was translated to a better life."
The striking document which all the revisers adopted as their preface to the New Version was drawn up by Dr Miles Smith, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester. As serious-minded men they felt, they said, the importance of the work they had taken in hand. There was need of translation, for translation it is that openeth the window to let in the light; that breaketh the shell that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain that we may look into the most holy places. By doing the work they had done they had no thought of disparaging those who had been in the field before them. Rather they acknowledged them as having been raised up of God for the building and furnishing of His Church, and deserve to be had of posterity in everlasting remembrance. If they, building upon their foundation and being helped by their labours, are only trying to make that better which they left so good, no man would have cause to mislike them; indeed their predecessors, if they were alive, would thank them. When they took up the work at first it was no thought of theirs that they had to make a new translation, nor yet to make a bad one a good one, but to make a good one better, or, out of many good ones one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against. They felt they had to tread a difficult path, for it is hard to please all even when we please God best; For he that meddleth with men's religion in any part meddleth with their custom, nay, with their freehold. Yet, though difficult, how important the work! For what is piety without truth? What truth, what saving truth without the Word of God? What Word of God whereof we may be sure without the Scriptures? If we are ignorant they will instruct us; if out of the way they will bring us home; if in heaviness they will comfort us; if dull quicken us; if cold inflame us. The Bible is not only an armour but also a whole armoury of weapons both offensive and defensive; it is not merely a tree but a whole paradise of trees of life. It is a treasury of most costly jewels, a fountain of most pure water springing up unto everlasting life. With wise thoughts like these, thus briefly summarised, the translators commend their readers to God and to the Spirit of His grace, which is able to build further than we can ask or think.
In 1611 the book upon which they had laboured so faithfully appeared from the press of Robert Barker, Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty. The title occupies the centre of an engraving, on the right and left of which are the figures of Moses and Aaron, with the Four Evangelists at the corners. At the top in Hebrew characters is the sacred name of God, with the Holy Dove beneath. The New Testament has a separate title within a woodcut border representing along one side the badges of the twelve tribes of Israel, and along the other the twelve Apostles; the emblems of the Four Evangelists being at the corners. The book was issued in folio size, and being well printed in fine black Gothic letter presented a handsome appearance. There seems to be no authority for calling it the "Authorised Version," since, so far as is known, there was no Edict of Con vocation, or Act of Parliament, or decision of Privy Council, or royal proclamation giving it authority. The words "Appointed to be read in Churches" mean not authorised, but, as explained on a page in the preliminary matter, how the Scriptures were arranged for public reading. In many editions these words were omitted. Possibly it was described as "Authorised" as taking the place, and consequently assuming the privileges, of the Bishops Bible by which it was preceded.
There seem to have been two impressions of the first edition of 1611, probably due to the impossibility of one printing office being able to supply in the time allotted the 20,000 copies required. The pair are distinct throughout every leaf and are the parents of millions of our Bibles. They are distinguished by calling the first the GREAT HEE BIBLE, and the other the GREAT SHE BIBLE, from their respective readings of Ruth iii. 15, the one reading "he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her: and HEE went into the city." The other has "and SHE went into the city." These two editions, both standard but varying in many places, seem to have been deposited in two different printing houses as standard copy, for the subsequent editions in quarto and octavo, run in pairs, he and she, and as a rule the faults of each follow those of its own office-copy. The "She" Bible has a yet more distinctive mark in translating Matthew xxvi. 36, "Then cometh Judas [instead of Jesus} unto a place called Gethsemane." The "He" Bible is by some regarded as the true first edition, and as giving the true reading, and on this point is sustained by the Revised Version of 1881. On the other hand the "She" Bible is in accord with almost every other edition. In 1612 the original folio was followed by a quarto edition in Roman type, and also by one in octavo resembling in appearance the octavo copies of the Genevan Version. In that year also appeared the first quarto New Testament; it was not however the first separate New Testament of King James's Version, for a duodecimo edition had been published in 1611.
The two ancient Universities, which in so enterprising a manner produced the most recent Revised Version of 1881, rendered important service also in reprints of the Authorised Version by which it was preceded. In 1629 there appeared the first complete edition of King James's Version ever printed at Cambridge. A separate New Testament in 32mo was, however, printed there the previous year. The 1629 edition had undergone very careful revision, great care also had been exercised in the matter of punctuation and as to the words to be printed in italics. In 1638 appeared the first folio edition of the "Authorised Version" printed at Cambridge. This again gave evidence of careful and extensive revision of the text, italics, and marginal readings, and it remained the standard text until the publication of the Cambridge edition of 1762. In this edition, however, in spite of all the care, appeared the reading in Acts vi. 3 "whom ye may appoint," instead of "whom we &c. As this reading gave power of appointment of officers to the people rather than to the Apostles, the alteration has often been ascribed to the Puritans, and was reputed to have cost Cromwell a bribe of £1000. Yet here it was in 1638 and before Long Parliament days.
The "Standard Edition," as it has been called, of 1762, prepared by Dr Thomas Paris of Trinity College, Cambridge, was issued from the University Press in four volumes, folio. In this, again, a further serious attempt was made to correct the text, by amending the spelling and punctuation, regulating the use of italics and removing printers errors. Marginal notes, also, were received into the place they have since occupied, and were much extended. The greater part of this impression of 1762 was destroyed by a fire at Dod's the bookseller. To pass by intervening editions a high place for care and laborious exactness must be assigned to the Cambridge Paragraph Bible (in three parts, 1870-3), edited by Dr Scrivener. This has ever since been regarded, as for correctness, the standard text of the Authorised Version. Within the last few years (1903--1905), also, Dr Scrivener has published an edition in five volumes, folio, of King James's Version, "with the Text revised by a Collation of its early and other principal editions." This work deserves special mention for several reasons, and certainly not least for this, that it is a superb piece of typography. It was edited for the Syndics of the University Press, Cambridge, and was printed at the press founded by Mr Cobden Sanderson at Hammersmith. The type was designed by Mr Emery Walker in imitation of the beautiful fount of type used by Jenson, the famous Venetian printer in 1472. The book has been well described as one of the most beautiful Bibles ever printed.
Mention may also be made of the fact that, by way of celebrating the Tercentenary of the Authorised Version, Dr Aldis Wright, Vice-Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, has issued an edition in five volumes, giving an absolutely faithful reproduction of the original text; the text reprinted being that of the first of the two issues of 1611.
It was not till 1675 that the sister University of Oxford entered upon the work of Bible publication. In that year appeared in quarto the Holy Bible, printed "At the Theater Oxford." A second edition from the same press came out in 1679, and among the booksellers names on the title-page is that of Thomas Guy, "at the corner of Little Lumbard Street," who had grown rich by the trade in Bibles, had increased his wealth by successful speculation in South Sea Stock, and, before his death in 1724, founded the great Hospital known by his name. Three years later the Oxford Press sent forth its first folio reprint of the Authorised Version; this being followed by an Imperial folio copy printed at the same press by John Baskett. The latter was a magnificent edition printed in large type and illustrated by many plates engraved on steel. It came however to be nicknamed the Vinegar Bible, because the headline of Luke xxii. reads "the parable of the Vinegar" instead of the Vineyard. Of this most sumptuous of all the Oxford Bibles three copies at least were printed on vellum. Unfortunately its fine appearance was discounted by so many misprints that it acquired another nickname and came to be called from its printer "a Baskett-full of printers errors." In 1769 there came out another folio copy known as the Oxford "Standard Edition," edited and revised by Dr Benjamin Blayney of Hertford College, who followed the lines of Dr Paris Cambridge edition of 1762. This and the quarto edition, commonly called Dr Blayney's editions, were adopted as standards by the University Press, Oxford, in 1769, and are still the Oxford Standard. In 1833, when Samuel Collingwood and Co. were the University printers, there was sent forth in quarto an edition with the title: "The Holy Bible, an exact reprint, page for page, of the Authorised Version published in the year 1611." And now in this Tercentenary year there has again been issued "a reproduction in Roman type, page for page, of King James's Bible, as published in 1611," with a bibliographical introduction by Mr A. W. Pollard.
Turning back to the past for a moment we find that in 1633 there was printed in Scotland by Robert Young, a Londoner, the first edition of King James's version which then began to supplant the Genevan version in the north. In 1714 the earliest edition of the same version was printed in Ireland; and in 1782, a duodecimo edition of the earliest English Bible, avowedly printed in America, came from the press of R. Aitken in Philadelphia. This was followed in 1793 by one printed in Worcester, Massachusetts, by Isaiah Thomas, whom Benjamin Franklin called the "Baskerville of America."
Beyond such details as these just given it is not possible to follow all the fortunes of the Great Version of 1611. The catalogue of the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society enumerates nearly a thousand separate editions of the English Bible, or of some part of it published before the close of the 18th century, and this one Society has since its foundation in 1804, sent out in English alone no fewer than seventy-two millions of copies. The appearance of this version, therefore, is one of the great facts in the history of the world. What it has been in personal life and character, in the family, in the history of churches and nations can only be known when the great day of final revelation shall come.