Authorized King James Version 1

Authorized King James Version

Authorized Version

The title page to the 1611 firstedition of the Authorized

Version Bible by Cornelius Boelshows the Apostles Peter and

Paul seated centrally above thecentral text, which is flanked by

Moses and Aaron. In the fourcorners sit Matthew, Mark, Luke

and John, authors of the fourgospels, with their symbolic

animals. The rest of the Apostles(with Judas facing away) standaround Peter and Paul. At the

very top is the Tetragrammaton."יהוה"

The title page's central text is:"THE HOLY BIBLE,

Conteyning the Old Testament,AND THE NEW:

Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majestiesspeciall Comandement.

Appointed to be read in Churches.Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie.

ANNO DOM. 1611 ."At bottom is:

"C. Boel fecit in Richmont.".

Full name: Authorized VersionKing James

Abbreviation: KJV or AV

Complete Biblepublished:

1611

Textual basis: NT: Textus Receptus, similar to the Byzantine text-type; some readings derived from the Vulgate. OT:Masoretic Text with Septuagint influence. Apocrypha: Septuagint and Vulgate.

Authorized King James Version 2

Reading level: US and Canada Grade 12,[1] US and Canada Grade 8–10[2]

Copyright status: Public domain due to age, publication restrictions until 2039 in the United Kingdom(See Copyright status)

The Authorized Version, commonly known as the King James Version, King James Bible, KJB, or KJV, is anEnglish translation of the Christian Bible by the Church of England begun in 1604 and completed in 1611.[3] Firstprinted by the King's Printer Robert Barker,[4][5] this was the third official translation into English. The first was theGreat Bible commissioned by the Church of England in the reign of King Henry VIII, and the second was theBishop's Bible of 1568.[6] In January 1604, King James VI of Scotland and I of England convened the HamptonCourt Conference where a new English version was conceived in response to the perceived problems of the earliertranslations as detected by the Puritans,[7] a faction within the Church of England.[8]

James gave the translators instructions intended to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiologyand reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its belief in an ordained clergy.[9] The translationwas done by 47 scholars, all of whom were members of the Church of England.[10] In common with most othertranslations of the period, the New Testament was translated from Greek, the Old Testament was translated fromHebrew text, while the Apocrypha were translated from the Greek and Latin. In the Book of Common Prayer (1662),the text of the Authorized Version replaced the text of the Great Bible – for Epistle and Gospel readings – and assuch was authorized by Act of Parliament.[11] By the first half of the 18th century, the Authorized Version waseffectively unchallenged as the English translation used in Anglican and Protestant churches. Over the course of the18th century, the Authorized Version supplanted the Latin Vulgate as the standard version of scripture for Englishspeaking scholars.

NameThe title of the first edition of the translation was "THE HOLY BIBLE, Containing the Old Testament, AND THENEW: Newly Translated out of the Original tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared andrevised, by his Majesties special Commandment".For many years it was common not to give the translation any specific name. In his Leviathan of 1651, ThomasHobbes referred to it as the English Translation made in the beginning of the Reign of King James.[12] A 1761 "BriefAccount of the various Translations of the Bible into English" refers to the 1611 version merely as a new, compleat,and more accurate Translation, despite referring to the Great Bible by that name, and despite using the name"Rhemish Testament" for the Douay–Rheims Bible version.[13] Similarly, a "History of England", whose fifthedition was published in 1775, writes merely that [a] new translation of the Bible, viz., that now in Use, was begunin 1607, and published in 1611.[14]

King James's Bible is used as the name for the 1611 translation (on a par with the "Genevan Bible" or the "RhemishTestament") in Charles Butler's Horae Biblicae (first published 1797).[15] Other works from the early 19th centuryconfirm the widespread use of this name on both sides of the Atlantic: it is found both in a "Historical sketch of theEnglish translations of the Bible" published in Massachusetts in 1815,[16] and in an English publication from 1818,which explicitly states that the 1611 version is "generally known by the name of King James's Bible".[17] This namewas also found as King James' Bible (without the final "s"): for example in a book review from 1811.[18] Thephrase "King James's Bible" is used as far back as 1715, although in this case it is not clear whether this is a name ormerely a description.[19]

The use of Authorized Version or Authorised Version, capitalized and used as a name, is found as early as1814.[20] For some time before this descriptive phrases such as "our present, and only publicly authorised version"(1783),[21] "our authorised version" (1792),[22] and "the authorised version" (1801, uncapitalized)[23] are found. TheOxford English Dictionary records a usage in 1824.[24] In Britain, the 1611 translation is generally known as the"Authorized Version" today.

Authorized King James Version 3

As early as 1814, we find King James' version, evidently a descriptive phrase, being used.[25] "The King JamesVersion" is found, unequivocally used as a name, in a 1855 letter.[26] The next year King James Bible, with nopossessive, appears as a name in a Scottish source.[27] In the United States, the "1611 translation" (actually theStandard Text of 1769, see below) is generally known as the King James Version or King James Bible today.

History

Earlier English translationsThe followers of John Wycliffe undertook the first complete English translations of the Christian scriptures in the15th century. These translations were banned in 1409 due to their association with the Lollards.[28] The WycliffeBible pre-dated the printing press but was circulated very widely in manuscript form, often inscribed with a dateearlier than 1409 to avoid the legal ban. As the text translated in the various versions of the Wycliffe Bible was theLatin Vulgate, and as it contained no heterodox readings, there was in practice no way by which the ecclesiasticalauthorities could distinguish the banned version; consequently many Catholic commentators of the 15th and 16thcenturies (such as Thomas More) took these manuscript English Bibles to represent an anonymous earlier orthodoxtranslation.

William Tyndale translated the NewTestament into English in 1525.

In 1525, William Tyndale, an English contemporary of Martin Luther,undertook a translation of the New Testament.[29] Tyndale's translation wasthe first printed Bible in English. Over the next ten years, Tyndale revised hisNew Testament in the light of rapidly advancing biblical scholarship, andembarked on a translation of the Old Testament.[30] Despite somecontroversial translation choices, the merits of Tyndale's work and prose stylemade his translation the ultimate basis for all subsequent renditions into EarlyModern English.[31] With these translations lightly edited and adapted byMyles Coverdale, in 1539, Tyndale's New Testament and his incompletework on the Old Testament became the basis for the Great Bible. This wasthe first "authorized version" issued by the Church of England during thereign of King Henry VIII.[6] When Mary I succeeded to the throne in 1553,she returned the Church of England to the communion of the Roman Catholicfaith and many English religious reformers fled the country,[32] some

establishing an English-speaking colony at Geneva. Under the leadership of John Calvin, Geneva became the chiefinternational centre of Reformed Protestantism and Latin biblical scholarship.[33]

These English expatriates undertook a translation that became known as the Geneva Bible.[34] This translation, datedto 1560, was a revision of Tyndale's Bible and the Great Bible on the basis of the original languages.[35] Soon afterElizabeth I took the throne in 1558, the flaws of both the Great Bible and the Geneva Bible (namely, that the GenevaBible did not "conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefsabout an ordained clergy") became painfully apparent.[36] In 1568, the Church of England responded with theBishops' Bible, a revision of the Great Bible in the light of the Geneva version.[37] While officially approved, thisnew version failed to displace the Geneva translation as the most popular English Bible of the age – in part becausethe full Bible was only printed in lectern editions of prodigious size and at a cost of several pounds.[38] Accordingly,Elizabethan lay people overwhelmingly read the Bible in the Geneva Version – small editions were available at arelatively low cost. At the same time, there was a substantial clandestine importation of the rival Douay-Rheims NewTestament of 1582, undertaken by exiled Roman Catholics. This translation, though still derived from Tyndale,claimed to represent the text of the Latin Vulgate.[39]

In May 1601, King James VI of Scotland attended the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland at St Columba's Church in Burntisland, Fife, at which proposals were put forward for a new translation of the Bible into English.[40]

Authorized King James Version 4

Two years later, he ascended to the throne of England as King James I of England.

Considerations for a new versionThe newly crowned King James convened the Hampton Court Conference in 1604. That gathering proposed a newEnglish version in response to the perceived problems of earlier translations as detected by the Puritan faction of theChurch of England. Three examples of problems the Puritans perceived with the Bishops' and Great Bibles were:

First, Galatians iv. 25 (from the Bishops' Bible). The Greek word susoichei is not well translated as now it is,bordereth neither expressing the force of the word, nor the apostle's sense, nor the situation of the place.Secondly, psalm cv. 28 (from the Great Bible), ‘They were not obedient;’ the original being, ‘They were notdisobedient.’ Thirdly, psalm cvi. 30 (also from the Great Bible), ‘Then stood up Phinees and prayed,’ theHebrew hath, ‘executed judgment.’[41]

Instructions were given to the translators that were intended to limit the Puritan influence on this new translation.The Bishop of London added a qualification that the translators would add no marginal notes (which had been anissue in the Geneva Bible).[9] King James cited two passages in the Geneva translation where he found the marginalnotes offensive:[42] Exodus 1:19, where the Geneva Bible had commended the example of civil disobedience showedby the Hebrew midwives, and also II Chronicles 15:16, where the Geneva Bible had criticized King Asa for nothaving executed his idolatrous grandmother, Queen Maachah.[42] Further, the King gave the translators instructionsdesigned to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology of the Church of England.[9] CertainGreek and Hebrew words were to be translated in a manner that reflected the traditional usage of the church.[9] Forexample, old ecclesiastical words such as the word "church" were to be retained and not to be translated as"congregation".[9] The new translation would reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and traditionalbeliefs about ordained clergy.[9]

James' instructions included several requirements that kept the new translation familiar to its listeners and readers.The text of the Bishops' Bible would serve as the primary guide for the translators, and the familiar proper names ofthe biblical characters would all be retained. If the Bishops' Bible was deemed problematic in any situation, thetranslators were permitted to consult other translations from a pre-approved list: the Tyndale Bible, the CoverdaleBible, Matthew's Bible, the Great Bible, and the Geneva Bible. In addition, later scholars have detected an influenceon the Authorized Version from the translations of Taverner's Bible and the New Testament of the Douay-RheimsBible.[43] It is for this reason that the flyleaf of most printings of the Authorized Version observes that the text hadbeen "translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by HisMajesty's special command."The task of translation was undertaken by 47 scholars, although 54 were originally approved.[10] All were membersof the Church of England and all except Sir Henry Savile were clergy.[44] The scholars worked in six committees,two based in each of the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge, and Westminster. The committeesincluded scholars with Puritan sympathies, as well as High Churchmen. Forty unbound copies of the 1602 edition ofthe Bishops' Bible were specially printed so that the agreed changes of each committee could be recorded in themargins.[45] The committees worked on certain parts separately and the drafts produced by each committee werethen compared and revised for harmony with each other.[46] The scholars were not paid directly for their translationwork, instead a circular letter was sent to bishops encouraging them to consider the translators for appointment towell paid livings as these fell vacant.[44] Several were supported by the various colleges at Oxford and Cambridge,while others were promoted to bishoprics, deaneries and prebends through royal patronage.The committees started work towards the end of 1604. King James I of England, on 22 July 1604, sent a letter toArchbishop Bancroft asking him to contact all English churchmen requesting that they make donations to his project.

Right trusty and well beloved, we greet you well. Whereas we have appointed certain learned men, to the number of 4 and 50, for the translating of the Bible, and in this number, divers of them have either no ecclesiastical preferment at all, or else so very small, as the same is far unmeet for men of their deserts and yet

Authorized King James Version 5

we in ourself in any convenient time cannot well remedy it, therefor we do hereby require you, that presentlyyou write in our name as well to the Archbishop of York, as to the rest of the bishops of the province ofCant.[erbury] signifying unto them, that we do well, and straitly charge everyone of them ... that (all excusesset apart) when we prebend or parsonage ... shall next upon any occasion happen to be void ... we maycommend for the same some such of the learned men, as we shall think fit to be preferred unto it ... Given untoour signet at our palace of West.[minister] on 2 and 20 July , in the 2nd year of our reign of England, France,and of Ireland, and of Scotland xxxvii."[47]

They had all completed their sections by 1608, the Apocrypha committee finishing first.[48] From January 1609, aGeneral Committee of Review met at Stationers' Hall, London to review the completed marked texts from each ofthe six committees. The General Committee included John Bois, Andrew Downes and John Harmar, and othersknown only by their initials, including "AL" (who may be Arthur Lake), and were paid for their attendance by theStationers' Company. John Bois prepared a note of their deliberations (in Latin) – which has partly survived in twolater transcripts.[49] Also surviving is a bound-together set of marked-up corrections to one of the forty Bishops'Bibles – covering the Old Testament and Gospels,[50] and also a manuscript translation of the text of the Epistles,excepting those verses where no change was being recommended to the readings in the Bishops' Bible.[51]

Archbishop Bancroft insisted on having a final say, making fourteen changes, of which one was the term"bishopricke" at Acts 1:20.[52]

Committees• First Westminster Company, translating from Genesis to 2 Kings:

Lancelot Andrewes, John Overall, Hadrian à Saravia, Richard Clarke, John Layfield, Robert Tighe,Francis Burleigh, Geoffrey King, Richard Thomson, William Bedwell;

• First Cambridge Company, translated from 1 Chronicles to the Song of Solomon:Edward Lively, John Richardson, Lawrence Chaderton, Francis Dillingham, Roger Andrewes, ThomasHarrison, Robert Spaulding, Andrew Bing;

• First Oxford Company, translated from Isaiah to Malachi:John Harding, John Rainolds (or Reynolds), Thomas Holland, Richard Kilby, Miles Smith, RichardBrett, Daniel Fairclough, William Thorne;[53]

• Second Oxford Company, translated the Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, and the Book of Revelation:Thomas Ravis, George Abbot, Richard Eedes, Giles Tomson, Sir Henry Savile, John Peryn, RalphRavens, John Harmar, John Aglionby, Leonard Hutten;

• Second Westminster Company, translated the Epistles:William Barlow, John Spenser, Roger Fenton, Ralph Hutchinson, William Dakins, Michael Rabbet,Thomas Sanderson (who probably had already become Archdeacon of Rochester);

• Second Cambridge Company, translated the Apocrypha:John Duport, William Branthwaite, Jeremiah Radcliffe, Samuel Ward, Andrew Downes, John Bois,Robert Ward, Thomas Bilson, Richard Bancroft.[54]

Authorized King James Version 6

Archbishop Richard Bancroft was the "chief overseer" of theproduction of the Authorized Version.

Printing

The original printing of the Authorized Version was publishedby Robert Barker, the King's Printer, in 1611 as a completefolio Bible.[55] It was sold looseleaf for ten shillings, or boundfor twelve.[56] Robert Barker's father, Christopher, had, in1589, been granted by Elizabeth I the title of royal Printer,[57]

with the perpetual Royal Privilege to print Bibles inEngland.[58] Robert Barker invested very large sums inprinting the new edition, and consequently ran into seriousdebt,[59] such that he was compelled to sub-lease the privilegeto two rival London printers, Bonham Norton and JohnBill.[60] It appears that it was initially intended that eachprinter would print a portion of the text, share printed sheetswith the others, and split the proceeds. Bitter financialdisputes broke out, as Barker accused Norton and Bill ofconcealing their profits, while Norton and Bill accused Barkerof selling sheets properly due to them as partial Bibles forready money.[61] There followed decades of continuallitigation, and consequent imprisonment for debt for members of the Barker and Norton printing dynasties,[61] whileeach issued rival editions of the whole Bible. In 1629 the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge successfullymanaged to assert separate and prior royal licences for Bible printing, for their own university presses – andCambridge University took the opportunity to print revised editions of the Authorized Version in 1629,[62] and1638.[63] The editors of these editions included John Bois and John Ward from the original translators. This did not,however, impede the commercial rivalries of the London printers, especially as the Barker family refused to allowany other printers access to the authoritative manuscript of the Authorized Version.[64]

Authorized King James Version 7

The opening of the Epistle to the Hebrews of the 1611 edition of theAuthorized Version shows the original typeface. Marginal notesreference variant translations and cross references to other Bible

passages. Each chapter is headed by a précis of contents. There aredecorative initial letters for each Chapter, and a decorated headpiece

to each Biblical Book, but no illustrations in the text.

Two editions of the whole Bible are recognized ashaving been produced in 1611, which may bedistinguished by their rendering of Ruth 3:15; the firstedition reading "he went into the city", where thesecond reads "she went into the city.";[65] these areknown colloquially as the "He" and "She" Bibles.[66]

However, Bibles in all the early editions were made upusing sheets originating from several printers, andconsequently there is very considerable variation withinany one edition. It is only in 1613 that an edition isfound,[67] all of whose surviving representatives havesubstantially the same text.[68]

The original printing was made before English spellingwas standardized, and when printers, as a matter ofcourse, expanded and contracted the spelling of thesame words in different places, so as to achieve an evencolumn of text.[69] They set v for initial u and v, and ufor u and v everywhere else. They used long ſ fornon-final s.[70] The glyph j occurs only after i, as in thefinal letter in a Roman numeral. Punctuation wasrelatively heavy, and differed from current practice.When space needed to be saved, the printers sometimesused ye for the, (replacing the Middle English thornwith the continental y), set ã for an or am (in the styleof scribe's shorthand), and set & for and. On thecontrary, on a few occasions, they appear to haveinserted these words when they thought a line needed tobe padded. Current printings remove most, but not all,

of the variant spellings; the punctuation has also been changed, but still varies from current usage norms.

The first printing used a black letter typeface instead of a roman typeface, which itself made a political and areligious statement. Like the Great Bible and the Bishops' Bible, the Authorized Version was "appointed to be read inchurches". It was a large folio volume meant for public use, not private devotion; the weight of the type mirrored theweight of establishment authority behind it. However, smaller editions and roman-type editions followed rapidly,e.g. quarto roman-type editions of the Bible in 1612 (Herbert #313/314). This contrasted with the Geneva Bible,which was the first English Bible printed in a roman typeface (although black-letter editions, particularly in folioformat, were issued later).

In contrast to the Geneva Bible and the Bishops' Bible, which had both been extensively illustrated, there were noillustrations at all in the 1611 edition of the Authorized Version, the main form of decoration being the historiatedinitial letters provided for books and chapters – together with the decorative title pages to the Bible itself, and to theNew Testament.The original printing of the Authorized Version used roman type to distinguish text supplied by translators, orthought needful for English grammar but not present in the Greek or Hebrew. In the first printing, the device ofhaving different type faces to show supplied words was used sparsely and inconsistently. This is perhaps the mostsignificant difference between the original text and the current text. When, from the later 17th century onwards, theAuthorized Version began to be printed in roman type, the typeface for supplied words was changed to italics.

Authorized King James Version 8

The original printing contained two prefatory texts; the first was a formal Epistle Dedicatory to "the most high andmighty Prince" King James. Many British printings reproduce this, while a few cheaper or smaller Americanprintings fail to include it.The second preface was called The Translators to the Reader, a long and learned essay that defends the undertakingof the new version. It observes that the translators' goal was not to make a bad translation good, but a goodtranslation better, and says that "we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of theBible in English, set forth by men of our profession ... containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God" inEnglish.[71]

The first printing contained a number of other apparatus, including a table for the reading of the Psalms at matins andevensong, and a calendar, an almanac, and a table of holy days and observances. Much of this material becameobsolete with the adoption of the Gregorian Calendar by Britain and its colonies in 1752, and thus modern editionsinvariably omit it.So as to make it easier to locate a particular passage, each chapter was headed by a brief precis of its contents withverse numbers. Later editors freely substituted their own chapter summaries, or omit such material entirely. Pilcrowmarks are used to indicate the beginnings of paragraphs in the Gospels and Acts, but rarely elsewhere.

Authorized Version

While the Authorized Version was meant to replace the Bishops' Bible as the official version for readings in theChurch of England, it was apparently (unlike the Great Bible) never specifically "authorized", although it iscommonly known as the Authorized Version in the United Kingdom. However, the King's Printer issued no furthereditions of the Bishops' Bible, so necessarily the Authorized Version supplanted it as the standard lectern Bible inparish church use in England. In the 1662 Book Of Common Prayer, the text of the Authorized Version finallysupplanted that of the Great Bible in the Epistle and Gospel readings – though the Prayer Book Psalter neverthelesscontinues in the Great Bible version.The case was different in Scotland, where the Geneva Bible had long been the standard Church Bible. It was notuntil 1633 that a Scottish edition of the Authorized Version was printed – in conjunction with the Scots coronation inthat year of Charles I.[72] The inclusion of illustrations in the edition raised accusations of Popery from opponents ofthe religious policies of Charles, and of William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury. However, official policy favouredthe Authorized Version, and this favour returned during the Commonwealth – as London printers succeeded inre-asserting their monopoly of Bible printing with support from Oliver Cromwell – and the "New Translation" wasthe only edition on the market.[73] F.F. Bruce reports that the last recorded instance of a Scots parish continuing touse the "Old Translation" (i.e. Geneva) as being in 1674.[74]

The Authorized Version's acceptance by the general public took longer. The Geneva Bible continued to be popular, and large numbers were imported from Amsterdam, where printing continued up to 1644 in editions carrying a false London imprint.[75] However, few if any genuine Geneva editions appear to have been printed in London after 1616, and in 1637 Archbishop Laud prohibited their printing or importation. In the period of the English Civil War, soldiers of the New Model Army were issued a book of Geneva selections called "The Soldiers' Bible" (1643, Herbert #577). In the first half of the 17th century the Authorized Version is most commonly referred to as "The Bible without notes", thereby distinguishing it from the Geneva "Bible with notes". There were several printings of the Authorized Version in Amsterdam – one as late as 1715 (Herbert #936) – which combined the Authorized Version translation text with the Geneva marginal notes;[64] one such edition was printed in London in 1649. During the Commonwealth a commission was established by Parliament to recommend a revision of the Authorized Version with acceptably Protestant explanatory notes,[75] but the project was abandoned when it became clear that these would be nearly double the bulk of the Bible text. After the English Restoration, the Geneva Bible was held to be politically suspect and a reminder of the repudiated Puritan era. Furthermore, disputes over the lucrative rights to print the Authorized Version dragged on through the 17th century, so none of the printers involved saw any

Authorized King James Version 9

commercial advantage in marketing a rival translation. The Authorized Version became the only current versioncirculating among English speaking people.Slowest of all was acceptance of the text by Biblical Scholars. Hugh Broughton, the most highly regarded EnglishHebraist of his time (but who had been excluded from the panel of translators because of his utterly uncongenialtemperament), issued in 1611 a total condemnation of the new version,[76] criticizing especially the translators'rejection of word-for-word equivalence and stated that "he would rather be torn in pieces by wild horses than thatthis abominable translation (KJV) should ever be foisted upon the English people".[77] Walton's London Polyglot of1657 disregards the Authorized Version (and indeed the English Language) entirely.[78] Walton's reference textthroughout is the Vulgate. The Vulgate Latin is also found as the standard text of scripture in Thomas Hobbes'sLeviathan of 1651,[79] indeed Hobbes gives Vulgate chapter and verse numbers (e.g., Job 41:24, not Job 41:33) forhis head text. In Chapter 35: 'The Signification in Scripture of Kingdom of God' , Hobbes discusses Exodus 19:5, firstin his own translation of the 'Vulgar Latin' , and then subsequently as found in the versions he terms "...the Englishtranslation made in the beginning of the reign of King James", and "The Geneva French" (i.e. Olivétan). Hobbesadvances detailed critical arguments why the Vulgate rendering is to be preferred. For most of the 17th century theassumption remained that, while it had been of vital importance to provide the scriptures in the vernacular forordinary people, nevertheless for those with sufficient education to do so, Biblical study was best undertaken withinthe international common medium of Latin. It was only in 1700 that modern bilingual Bibles appeared in which theAuthorized Version was compared with counterpart Dutch and French Protestant vernacular Bibles.[80]

In consequence of the continual disputes over printing privileges, successive printings of the Authorized Versionwere notably less careful than the 1611 edition had been – compositors freely varying spelling, capitalization andpunctuation[81] – and also, over the years, introducing about 1,500 misprints (some of which, like the omission of"not" from the commandment "Thou shalt not commit adultery" in the "Wicked Bible" (1631, Herbert #444),became notorious). The two Cambridge editions of 1629 and 1638 attempted to restore the proper text – whileintroducing over 200 revisions of the original translators' work, chiefly by incorporating into the main text a moreliteral reading originally presented as a marginal note.[82] A more thoroughly corrected edition was proposedfollowing the Restoration, in conjunction with the revised 1662 Book of Common Prayer, but Parliament thendecided against it.By the first half of the 18th century, the Authorized Version was effectively unchallenged as the sole Englishtranslation in current use in Protestant churches,[11] and was so dominant that the Roman Catholic church in Englandissued in 1750 a revision of the 1610 Douay-Rheims Bible by Richard Challoner that was very much closer to theAuthorized Version than to the original.[83] However, general standards of spelling, punctuation, typesetting,capitalization and grammar had changed radically in the 100 years since the first edition of the Authorized Version,and all printers in the market were introducing continual piecemeal changes to their Bible texts to bring them intoline with current practice – and with public expectations of standardized spelling and grammatical construction.[84]

Over the course of the 18th century, the Authorized Version supplanted the Latin Vulgate as the standard version ofscripture for English speaking scholars and divines, and indeed came to be regarded by some as an inspired text initself – so much so that any challenge to its readings or textual base came to be regarded by many as an assault onHoly Scripture.[85]

Standard text of 1769By the mid-18th century the wide variation in the various modernized printed texts of the Authorized Version, combined with the notorious accumulation of misprints, had reached the proportion of a scandal, and the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge both sought to produce an updated standard text. First of the two was the Cambridge edition of 1760, the culmination of twenty-years work by Francis Sawyer Parris,[86] who died in May of that year. This 1760 edition was reprinted without change in 1762 (Herbert #1142) and in John Baskerville's fine folio edition of 1763.[87] This was effectively superseded by the 1769 Oxford edition, edited by Benjamin Blayney (Herbert

Authorized King James Version 10

#1196), though with comparatively few changes from the 1760 edition, which became the Oxford standard text, andis reproduced almost unchanged in most current printings.[88] Parris and Blayney sought consistently to removethose elements of the 1611 and subsequent editions that they believed were due to the vagaries of printers, whileincorporating most of the revised readings of the Cambridge editions of 1629 and 1638, and each also introducing afew improved readings of their own. They undertook the mammoth task of standardizing the wide variation inpunctuation and spelling of the original, making many thousands of minor changes to the text; although some ofthese updates do alter the ostensible sense – as when the original text of Genesis 2:21 "in stead" ("in that place") wasupdated to read "instead" ("as an alternative"). In addition, Blayney and Parris thoroughly revised and greatlyextended the italicization of "supplied" words not found in the original languages by cross-checking against thepresumed source texts. Unfortunately, Blayney assumed that the translators of the 1611 New Testament had workedfrom the 1550 Stephanus edition of the Textus Receptus, rather than from the later editions of Beza; accordingly thecurrent standard text mistakenly "corrects" around a dozen readings where Beza and Stephanus differ.[89] Like the1611 edition, the 1769 Oxford edition included the Apocrypha, although Blayney consistently removedcross-references to the Books of the Apocrypha from the margins of their Old and New Testaments wherever thesehad been provided by the original translators. Altogether, Blayney's 1769 text differed from the 1611 text in around24,000 places.[90] Since that date, only six further changes have been introduced to the standard text – although 30 ofBlayney's proposed changes have subsequently been reverted.[91] The Oxford University Press paperback edition ofthe "Authorized King James Version" provides the current standard text, and also includes the prefatory section "TheTranslators to the Reader".[92]

The 1611 and 1760 texts of the first three verses from I Corinthians 13 are given below.1. Though I speake with the tongues of men & of Angels, and have not charity, I am become assounding brasse or a tinkling cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophesie, and understand allmysteries and all knowledge: and though I have all faith, so that I could remoove mountaines, and haveno charitie, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestowe all my goods to feede the poore, and though I give mybody to bee burned, and have not charitie, it profiteth me nothing.1. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become assounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand allmysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and havenot charity, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give mybody to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

In these three verses, there are eleven changes of spelling, nine changes of typesetting, three changes of punctuation,and one variant text – where "not charity" is substituted for "no charity" in verse two, in the erroneous belief that theoriginal reading was a misprint.A particular verse for which Blayney's 1769 text differs from Parris's 1760 version is Matthew 5: 13, where Parris(1760) has

Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it isthenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out, and to be troden under foot of men.

Blayney (1769) changes 'lost his savour' to 'lost its savour', and troden to trodden.For a period, Cambridge continued to issue Bibles using the Parris text, but the market demand for absolute standardization was now such that they eventually fell into line. Since the beginning of the 19th century, almost all printings of the Authorized Version have derived from the 1769 Oxford text – generally without Blayney's variant notes and cross references, and commonly excluding the Apocrypha.[93] One exception to this was a scrupulous original-spelling, page-for-page, and line-for-line reprint of the 1611 edition (including all chapter headings, marginalia, and original italicization, but with Roman type substituted for the black letter of the original), published by Oxford in 1833.[94] Another important exception was the 1873 Cambridge Paragraph Bible, thoroughly revised, modernized and re-edited by F. H. A. Scrivener, who for the first time consistently identified the source texts

Authorized King James Version 11

underlying the 1611 translation and its marginal notes.[95] Scrivener, however – as Blayney had done – did adoptrevised readings where he considered the judgement of the 1611 translators had been faulty.[96] In 2005, CambridgeUniversity Press released its New Cambridge Paragraph Bible with Apocrypha, edited by David Norton, whichmodernized Scrivener's spelling again to present-day standards and introduced quotation marks, while restoring the1611 text, so far as possible, to the wording intended by its translators, especially in the light of the rediscovery ofsome of their working documents.[97] This text has been issued in paperback by Penguin books.[98]

From 1769, the text of the Authorized Version remained unchanged – and since, due to advances in printingtechnology, it could now be produced in very large editions for mass sale, it established complete dominance inpublic and ecclesiastical use in the English-speaking Protestant world. Academic debate over the next hundred years,however, increasingly reflected concerns about the Authorized Version shared by some scholars: (a) that subsequentstudy in oriental languages suggested a need to revise the translation of the Hebrew Bible – both in terms of specificvocabulary, and also in distinguishing descriptive terms from proper names; (b) that the Authorized Version wasunsatisfactory in translating the same Greek words and phrases into different English, especially where parallelpassages are found in the synoptic gospels; and (c) in the light of subsequent ancient manuscript discoveries, theNew Testament translation base of the Greek Textus Receptus could no longer be considered to be the bestrepresentation of the original text.[99]

Responding to these concerns, the Convocation of Canterbury resolved in 1870 to undertake a revision of the text ofthe Authorized Version, intending to retain the original text "except where in the judgement of competent scholarssuch a change is necessary". The resulting revision was issued as the Revised Version in 1881 (New Testament),1885 (Old Testament) and 1894 (Apocrypha); but, although it sold widely, the revision did not find popular favour,and it was only reluctantly in 1899 that Convocation approved it for reading in churches.[100]

The Authorized Version maintained its effective dominance throughout the first half of the 20th century. Newtranslations in the second half of the 20th century displaced its 250 years of dominance (roughly 1700 to 1950),[101]

but groups do exist – sometimes termed the King James Only movement – that distrust anything not in agreementwith ("that changes") the Authorized Version.[102]

Literary attributes

TranslationLike Tyndale's translation and the Geneva Bible, the Authorized Version was translated primarily from Greek,Hebrew and Aramaic texts, although with secondary reference both to the Latin Vulgate, and to more recentscholarly Latin versions; two books of the Apocrypha were translated from a Latin source. Following the example ofthe Geneva Bible, words implied but not actually in the original source were distinguished by being printed indistinct type (albeit inconsistently), but otherwise the translators explicitly rejected word-for-word equivalence.[103]

F.F Bruce gives an example from Romans Chapter 5:[104]

2 By whom also wee have accesse by faith, into this grace wherein wee stand, and rejoyce in hope ofthe glory of God. 3 And not onely so, but we glory in tribulations also, knowing that tribulation workethpatience:

The English terms "rejoice" and "glory" stand for the same word in the Greek original. In Tyndale, Geneva and theBishops' Bibles, both instances are translated "rejoice". In the Douay-Rheims New Testament, both are translated"glory". Only in the Authorized Version does the translation vary between the two verses.In obedience to their instructions, the translators provided no marginal interpretation of the text, but in some 8,500 places a marginal note offers an alternative English wording.[105] The majority of these notes offer a more literal rendering of the original (introduced as "Heb", "Chal", "Gr" or "Lat"), but others indicate a variant reading of the source text (introduced by "or"). Some of the annotated variants derive from alternative editions in the original languages, or from variant forms quoted in the fathers. More commonly, though, they indicate a difference between

Authorized King James Version 12

the original language reading and that in the translators' preferred recent Latin versions: Tremellius for the OldTestament, Junius for the Apocrypha, and Beza for the New Testament.[106] A few more extensive notes clarifyBiblical names, units of measurement or currency, and in a very few places (e.g. Luke 17:36) record that a verse isabsent from most Greek manuscripts. Modern reprintings rarely reproduce these annotated variants – although theyare to be found in the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible. In addition, there were originally some 9,000 scripturalcross-references, in which one text was related to another. Such cross-references had long been common in LatinBibles, and most of those in the Authorized Version were copied unaltered from this Latin tradition. Consequentlythe early editions of the KJV retain many Vulgate verse references – e.g. in the numbering of the Psalms.[107] At thehead of each chapter, the translators provided a short précis of its contents, with verse numbers; these are rarelyincluded in complete form in modern editions.In the Old testament the translators render the Tetragrammaton YHWH by "the LORD" (in later editions in smallcapitals as LORD),[108] or "the LORD God" (for Adonai YHWH, "Lord YHWH"),[109] and in four places by"JEHOVAH" (Exod. 6:3, Psalm 83:18, Isaiah 12:2 and 26:4).

Old Testament

For their Old Testament, the translators used a text originating in the editions of the Hebrew Rabbinic Bible byDaniel Bomberg (1524/5),[110] but adjusted this to conform to the Greek LXX or Latin Vulgate in passages to whichChristian tradition had attached a Christological interpretation.[111] For example, the Septuagint reading "Theypierced my hands and my feet" was used in Psalm 22:16 (vs. the Masoretes' reading of the Hebrew "like lions myhands and feet"[112]). Otherwise, however, the Authorized Version is closer to the Hebrew tradition than anyprevious English translation – especially in making use of the rabbinic commentaries, such as Kimhi, in elucidatingobscure passages in the Masoretic Text;[113] earlier versions had been more likely to adopt LXX or Vulgate readingsin such places.

New Testament

For their New Testament, the translators chiefly used the 1598 and 1588/89 Greek editions of Theodore Beza,[114]

which also present Beza's Latin version of the Greek and Stephanus's edition of the Latin Vulgate. Both of theseversions were extensively referred to, as the translators conducted all discussions amongst themselves in Latin.F.H.A. Scrivener identifies 190 readings where the Authorized Version translators depart from Beza's Greek text,generally in maintaining the wording of the Bishop's Bible and other earlier English translations.[115] In about half ofthese instances, the Authorized Version translators appear to follow the earlier 1550 Greek Textus Receptus ofStephanus. For the other half, Scrivener was usually able to find corresponding Greek readings in the editions ofErasmus, or in the Complutensian Polyglot. However, in several dozen readings he notes that no printed Greek textcorresponds to the English of the Authorized Version, which in these places derives directly from the Vulgate.[116]

For example, at John 10:16, the Authorized Version reads "one fold" (as did the Bishops' Bible, and the 16th centuryvernacular versions produced in Geneva), following the Latin Vulgate "unum ovile", whereas Tyndale had agreedmore closely with the Greek, "one flocke" (μία ποίμνη). The Authorized Version New Testament owes much moreto the Vulgate than does the Old Testament; still, at least 80% of the text is unaltered from Tyndale's translation.[117]

Apocrypha

Unlike the rest of the Bible, the translators of the Apocrypha identified their source texts in their marginal notes.[118]

From these it can be determined that the books of the Apocrypha were translated from the Septuagint – primarily,from the Greek Old Testament column in the Antwerp Polyglot – but with extensive reference to the counterpartLatin Vulgate text, and to Junius's Latin translation. The translators record references to the Sixtine Septuagint of1587, which is substantially a printing of the Old Testament text from the Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209, and alsoto the 1518 Greek Septuagint edition of Aldus Manutius. They had, however, no Greek texts for 2 Esdras, or for thePrayer of Manasses, and Scrivener found that they here used an unidentified Latin manuscript.

Authorized King James Version 13

Sources

The translators appear to have otherwise made no first-hand study of ancient manuscript sources, even those that –like the Codex Bezae – would have been readily available to them.[119] In addition to all previous English versions,including the Douay-Rheims Bible, they also consulted contemporary vernacular translations in Spanish, French,Italian and German. They also made wide and eclectic use of all printed editions in the original languages thenavailable, including the ancient Syriac New Testament printed with an interlinear Latin gloss in the AntwerpPolyglot of 1573.[120]

The translators took the Bishop's Bible as their source text, and where they departed from that in favour of anothertranslation, this was most commonly the Geneva Bible. However, the degree to which readings from the Bishop'sBible survived into final text of the King James Bible varies greatly from company to company, as did the propensityof the King James translators to coin phrases of their own. John Bois's notes of the General Committee of Reviewshow that they discussed readings derived from a wide variety of sources and versions, including explicitly bothHenry Savile's 1610 edition of the works of John Chrysostom, and also the Rheims New Testament, which was theprimary source for many of the literal alternative readings provided for the marginal notes.

Variations from recent translationsThere are a number of Bible verses in the New Testament that are present in the King James Version (KJV) butwhich are absent from those modern Bible translations derived from modern critical texts. Most modern textualscholars now favour manuscripts conforming to the Alexandrian text-type as the best witness to the original text ofthe biblical authors; whereas the translators of the King James Version favoured the Textus Receptus, whichconformed more frequently to the Byzantine text-type, and which tended to transmit a fuller text.

Style and criticismA primary concern of the translators was to produce a Bible that would be appropriate, dignified and resonant inpublic reading. Although the Authorized Version's written style is an important part of its influence on English,research has found only one verse – Hebrews 13:8 – for which translators debated the wording's literary merits.While they stated in the preface that they used stylistic variation, finding multiple English words or verbal forms inplaces where the original language employed repetition, in practice they also did the opposite; for example, 14different Hebrew words were translated into the single English word "prince".[121]

In a period of rapid linguistic change the translators avoided contemporary idioms, tending instead towards formsthat were already slightly archaic, like verily and it came to pass.[122] The pronouns thou/thee and you areconsistently used as singular and plural respectively, even though by this time you was often found as the singular ingeneral English usage, especially when addressing a social superior (as is evidenced, for example, inShakespeare).[123] For the possessive of the third person pronoun, the word its, first recorded in the Oxford EnglishDictionary in 1598, is avoided.[124] The older his is usually employed, as for example at Matthew 5:13: "if the salthave lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted?";[124] in other places of it, thereof or bare it are found.[125] Anothersign of linguistic conservativism is the invariable use of -eth for the third person singular present form of the verb, asat Matthew 2:13: "the Angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dreame". The rival ending -(e)s, as found inpresent-day English, was already widely used by this time (for example, it predominates over -eth in the plays ofShakespeare and Marlowe).[126] Furthermore, the translators preferred which to who or whom as the relative pronounfor persons, as in Genesis 13:5: "And Lot also which went with Abram, had flocks and heards, & tents"[127] althoughwho(m) is also found.[128]

The Authorized Version is notably more Latinate than previous English versions,[129] especially the Geneva Bible. This results in part from the academic stylistic preferences of a number of the translators – several of whom admitted to being more comfortable writing in Latin than in English – but was also, in part, a consequence of the royal proscription against explanatory notes.[130] Hence, where the Geneva Bible might use a common English word – and

Authorized King James Version 14

gloss its particular application in a marginal note – the Authorized Version tends rather to prefer a technical term,frequently in Anglicized Latin. Consequently, although the King had instructed the translators to use the Bishops'Bible as a base text, the New Testament in particular owes much stylistically to the Catholic Rheims NewTestament, whose translators had also been concerned to find English equivalents for Latin terminology.[131] Inaddition, the translators of the New Testament books habitually quote Old Testament names in the renderingsfamiliar from the Vulgate Latin, rather than in their Hebrew forms (e.g. "Elias", "Jeremias" for "Elijah", "Jeremiah").While the Authorized Version remains among the most widely sold, modern critical New Testament translationsdiffer substantially from it in a number of passages, primarily because they rely on source manuscripts not thenaccessible to (or not then highly regarded by) early 17th-century Biblical scholarship.[132] In the Old Testament,there are also many differences from modern translations that are based not on manuscript differences, but on adifferent understanding of Ancient Hebrew vocabulary or grammar by the translators. For example, in moderntranslations it is clear that Job 28: 1–11 is referring throughout to mining operations, which is not at all apparentfrom the text of the Authorized Version.[133]

InfluenceDespite royal patronage and encouragement, there was never any overt mandate to use the new translation. It was notuntil 1661 that the Authorized Version replaced the Bishops Bible in the Epistle and Gospel lessons of the Book ofCommon Prayer, and it never did replace the older translation in the Psalter. In 1763 The Critical Review complainedthat "many false interpretations, ambiguous phrases, obsolete words and indelicate expressions...excite the derisionof the scorner". Blayney's 1769 version, with its revised spelling and punctuation, helped to change the publicperception of the Authorized Version to a masterpiece of the English language.[121] By the 19th century, F. W. Fabercould say of the translation, "It lives on the ear, like music that can never be forgotten, like the sound of church bells,which the convert hardly knows how he can forego."[134]

The Authorized Version has been called "the most influential version of the most influential book in the world, inwhat is now its most influential language", "the most important book in English religion and culture", and "the mostcelebrated book in the English-speaking world". It has contributed 257 idioms to English, more than any other singlesource, including Shakespeare; examples include feet of clay and reap the whirlwind. Although the AuthorizedVersion's former monopoly in the English-speaking world has diminished – for example, the Church of Englandrecommends six other versions in addition to it – it is still the most popular translation in the United States,especially among Evangelicals.[121]

Copyright statusThe Authorized Version is in the public domain in most of the world. However, in the United Kingdom, it isprotected under perpetual Crown Copyright. The rights are held by the British Crown, which licenses publishers toreproduce it under letters patent. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland the letters patent are held by the Queen'sPrinter, and in Scotland by the Scottish Bible Board. The office of Queen's Printer has been associated with the rightto reproduce the Bible for centuries, the earliest known reference coming in 1577. In the 18th century all survivinginterests in the monopoly were bought out by John Baskett. The Baskett rights descended through a number ofprinters and, in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the Queen's Printer is now Cambridge University Press, whoinherited the right when they took over the firm of Eyre & Spottiswoode in 1990.[135]

Other royal charters of similar antiquity grant Cambridge University Press and Oxford University Press the right to produce the Authorized Version independently of the Queen's Printer. In Scotland the Authorized Version is published by Collins under licence from the Scottish Bible Board. The terms of the letters patent prohibit any other than the holders, or those authorized by the holders, from printing, publishing or importing the Authorized Version into the United Kingdom. The protection that the Authorized Version, and also the Book of Common Prayer, enjoy is the last remnant of the time when the Crown held a monopoly over all printing and publishing in the United

Authorized King James Version 15

Kingdom.[135]

ApocryphaEnglish-language Protestant Bibles in the 16th century included the books of the Apocrypha – generally in a separatesection between the Old and New Testaments – and there is evidence that these were widely read as popularliterature, especially in Puritan circles.[136][137] However, starting in 1630, volumes of the Geneva Bible wereoccasionally bound with the pages of the Apocrypha section excluded. In 1644 the Long Parliament forbade thereading of the Apocrypha in Church and in 1666 the first editions of the King James Bible without Apocrypha werebound.[138]

The standardization of the text of the Authorized Version after 1769 together with the technological development ofStereotype printing made it possible to produce Bibles in large-print runs at very low unit prices. For commercial andcharitable publishers, editions of the Authorized Version without the Apocrypha reduced the cost, while havingincreased market appeal to non-Anglican Protestant readers.[139] With the rise of the Bible societies, most editionshave omitted the whole section of Apocryphal books.[140]

The Apocrypha were excluded from most Bibles following a withdrawal of subsidies by the British and ForeignBible Society in 1826, which made the following resolution:[141]

"That the funds of the Society be applied to the printing and circulation of the Canonical Books of Scripture, tothe exclusion of those Books and parts of Books usually termed Apocryphal;"

The society revised its position in 1966.

Notes[1][1] (Anonymous (a) 2008)[2][2] (Cloud 2006)[3] (fascimile Dedicatorie): "And now at last, ...it being brought unto such a conclusion, as that we have great hope that the Church of England

(sic) shall reape good fruit thereby..."[4][4] (fascimile Frontis)[5][5] (fascimile)[6][6] (Daniell 2003, p. 204)[7][7] (Daniell 2003, p. 435)[8] (Hill 1997, pp. 4–5)[9][9] (Daniell 2003, p. 439)[10][10] (Daniell 2003, p. 436)[11][11] (Daniell 2003, p. 488)[12] Leviathan, chap. xxxv[13] "A Brief Account of the various Translations of the Bible into English", in Pearse, Salem (1761). The Second Part of the Celestial Diary.

London: Robert Brown. p. 79. Available in "Collection of English Almanacs for the years 1702–1835" (http:/ / books. google. com/books?id=s1EsAAAAMAAJ), New York Public Library.

[14] Kimber, Isaac (1775). The history of England, from the earliest accounts, to the accession of his present Majesty King George III (http:/ /books. google. com/ ?id=7WNCAAAAYAAJ) (fifth ed.). London: J. Buckland. p. 279. OCLC 14263883. .

[15] Butler, Charles (1807). Horae Biblicae: volume 1 (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=MHVAAAAAcAAJ) (fourth ed.). London: J. White.p. 219. OCLC 64048851. .

[16] Holmes, A. (1815). "An Historical sketch of the English translations of the Bible". The Christian Disciple, vol. iii. Boston, MA: Cummings& Hilliard. p. 277

[17] Horne, Thomas Hartwell (1818). An introduction to the critical study and knowledge of the holy Scriptures, Volume 2 (http:/ / books. google.com/ ?id=8KQUAAAAQAAJ). London: T. Cadell and A Davies. p. 14. .

[18] The Monthly Anthology, and Boston Review (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=QzsEAAAAQAAJ). Boston, MA: T. B. Wait. 1811. p. 110. .[19] Hacket, John (1715). Bishop Hacket's memoirs of the life of Archbishop Williams (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=JosAAAAAMAAJ).

London: Sam. Briscoe. p. 205. OCLC 8965030. .[20] Society, Church Missionary (1814). Missionary register, vol. ii (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=6nICAAAAYAAJ). London: Ellerton and

Henderson. p. 356. .[21] Anon. (1783). A Call to the Jews, by A Friend to the Jews (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=ai83AAAAMAAJ). London: J. Johnson. p. 27.

OCLC 23646397. .

Authorized King James Version 16

[22] Newcome, William (1792). An Historical View of the English Biblical Translations (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=tr47AAAAcAAJ).Dublin: John Exshaw. p. 113. OCLC 488182103. .

[23] The Anti-Jacobin Review and Magazine (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=lPbVAAAAMAAJ). London: J. Whittle. 1801. p. 145. .[24][24] (OED 1989)[25] Smith, William (1814). The reasonableness of setting forth the most worthy praise of Almighty God: according to the usage of the primitive

church (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=0V0XAAAAYAAJ). New York: T. and J. Swords. p. 209. OCLC 3512140. .[26] Chapman, James L. (1856). Americanism versus Romanism: or the cis-Atlantic battle between Sam and the pope (http:/ / books. google.

com/ ?id=SZ4uAAAAYAAJ). Nashville, TN: the author. p. 270. OCLC 1848388. .[27] The Original Secession Magazine, vol. ii (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=7EIRAAAAIAAJ). Edinburgh: Moodie and Lothian. 1856.

pp. 530–531. .[28][28] (Daniell 2003, p. 75)[29][29] (Daniell 2003, p. 143)[30][30] (Daniell 2003, p. 152)[31][31] (Daniell 2003, p. 156)[32][32] (Daniell 2003, p. 277)[33][33] (Daniell 2003, p. 291)[34][34] (Daniell 2003, p. 292)[35][35] (Daniell 2003, p. 304)[36][36] (Daniell 2003, p. 339)[37][37] (Daniell 2003, p. 344)[38][38] (Bobrick 2001, p. 186)[39][39] (Daniell 2003, p. 364)[40][40] (Bobrick 2001, p. 221)[41][41] (Daniell 2003, p. 433)[42][42] (Daniell 2003, p. 434)[43][43] (Bobrick 2001, p. 328)[44][44] (Bobrick 2001, p. 223)[45][45] (Daniell 2003, p. 442)[46][46] (Daniell 2003, p. 444)[47][47] (Walleshinsky 1975, p. 235)[48][48] (Norton 2005, p. 11)[49][49] (Allen 1969)[50][50] (Norton 2005, p. 20)[51][51] (Norton 2005, p. 16)[52][52] (Bobrick 2001, p. 257)[53] Matthew DeCoursey, "William Thorne," British Rhetoricians and Logicians, 1500–1660, Second Series, DLB 281, Detroit: Gale, 2003, pp.

326–333 at 331–332[54] (Bobrick 2001, pp. 223–244)[55][55] (Herbert, p. 309)[56][56] (Herbert, p. 310)[57][57] (Daniell 2003, p. 453)[58][58] The Royal Privilege was a virtual monopoly.[59][59] (Daniell 2003, p. 451)[60][60] (Daniell 2003, p. 454)[61][61] (Daniell 2003, p. 455)[62][62] (Herbert, p. 424)[63][63] (Herbert, p. 520)[64][64] (Daniell 2003, p. 457)[65][65] (Norton 2005, p. 62)[66] The Elizabeth Perkins Prothro Bible Collection (http:/ / smu. edu/ bridwell_tools/ specialcollections/ prothroexhibit/ Private/

heandshebibles. htm). Perkins Thological Seminary, Southern Methodist University. ISBN 0-941881-19-9. .[67][67] (Herbert, p. 322)[68][68] (Norton 2005, p. 76)[69][69] (Norton 2005, p. 46)[70][70] (Bobrick 2001, p. 261)[71][71] (Daniell 2003, p. 775)[72][72] (Daniell 2003, p. 458)[73][73] (Daniell 2003, p. 459)[74][74] (Bruce 2002, p. 92)

Authorized King James Version 17

[75][75] (Hill 1993, p. 65)[76][76] (Bobrick 2001, p. 266)[77][77] (Bobrick 2001, p. 265)[78][78] (Daniell 2003, p. 510)[79][79] (Daniell 2003, p. 478)[80][80] (Daniell 2003, p. 489)[81][81] (Norton 2005, p. 94)[82] (Scrivener 1884, pp. 147–194)[83][83] (Daniell 2003, p. 515)[84][84] (Norton 2005, p. 99)[85][85] (Daniell 2003, p. 619)[86][86] David Norton; A Textual History of the King James Bible; Cambridge, University Press, 2005.[87][87] (Norton 2005, p. 106)[88][88] (Norton 2005, p. 113)[89][89] (Scrivener 1884, p. 242)[90][90] (Norton 2005, p. 120)[91][91] (Norton 2005, p. 115)[92] (Prickett & Carroll 2008)[93][93] (Norton 2005, p. 125)[94] The Holy Bible, an Exact Reprint Page for Page of the Authorized Version Published in the Year MDCXI. Oxford: Oxford University Press,

1833 (reprints, ISBN 0-8407-0041-5, 1565631625). According to J.R. Dore, Old Bibles: An Account of the Early Versions of the English Bible(2nd edition, Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1888), p. 363, the edition "so far as it goes, represents the edition of 1611 so completely that it may beconsulted with as much confidence as an original. The spelling, punctuation, italics, capitals, and distribution into lines and pages are allfollowed with the most scrupulous care. It is, however, printed in Roman instead of black letter type."

[95][95] (Daniell 2003, p. 691)[96][96] (Norton 2005, p. 122)[97][97] (Norton 2005, p. 131)[98][98] (Norton 2006)[99][99] (Daniell 2003, p. 685)[100] (Chadwick 1970, pp. 40–56)[101][101] (Daniell 2003, p. 764)[102][102] (Daniell 2003, p. 765)[103][103] (Daniell 2003, p. 792)[104][104] (Bruce 2002, p. 105)[105][105] (Scrivener 1884, p. 56)[106][106] (Scrivener 1884, p. 43)[107][107] (Scrivener 1884, p. 118)[108][108] e.g. Gen. 4:1[109][109] e.g. Gen. 2:4[110][110] (Scrivener 1884, p. 42)[111][111] (Bobrick 2001, p. 271)[112][112] The Jewish Publication Society Tanakh, copyright 1985[113][113] (Daiches 1968, pp. 208)[114][114] (Scrivener 1884, p. 60)[115] (Scrivener 1884, pp. 243–263)[116][116] (Scrivener 1884, p. 262)[117][117] (Daniell 2003, p. 448)[118][118] (Scrivener 1884, p. 47)[119][119] (Scrivener 1884, p. 59)[120][120] (Bobrick 2001, p. 246)[121] "400 years of the King James Bible" (http:/ / entertainment. timesonline. co. uk/ tol/ arts_and_entertainment/ the_tls/ article7171739. ece).

The Times Literary Supplement. 9 February 2011. . Retrieved 8 March 2011.[122][122] (Bobrick 2001, p. 264)[123] (Barber 1997, pp. 153–154)[124][124] (Barber 1997, p. 150)[125] e.g. Matt 7:27: "great was the fall of it.", Matt 2:16: "in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof", Lev. 25:5: "That which groweth of it

owne accord of thy harvest". (Lev 25:5 is changed to its in many modern printings). (Barber 1997, pp. 150–151)[126] (Barber 1997, pp. 166–167)[127][127] (Barber 1997, p. 212)

Authorized King James Version 18

[128] e.g. at Gen. 3:12: "The woman whom thou gavest to be with mee"[129][129] (Daniell 2003, p. 440)[130][130] (Bobrick 2001, p. 229)[131][131] (Bobrick 2001, p. 252)[132][132] (Daniell 2003, p. 5)[133][133] (Bruce 2002, p. 145)[134] "Isaac H. Hall, ed., ''History of the King James Version''" (http:/ / www. bible-researcher. com/ kjvhist. html). Bible-researcher.com. .

Retrieved 13 January 2012.[135] (Metzger & Coogan 1993, p. 618)[136][136] (Daniell 2003, p. 187)[137][137] (Hill 1993, p. 338)[138] "Sir Frederic G. Kenyon, ''Dictionary of the Bible'' edited by James Hastings, and published by Charles Scribner's Sons of New York in

1909" (http:/ / www. bible-researcher. com/ kjv1. html). Bible-researcher.com. . Retrieved 13 January 2012.[139][139] (Daniell 2003, p. 600)[140][140] (Daniell 2003, p. 622)[141] Canton, W (1904). A History of the British and Foreign Bible Society. p. 341. ISBN 0-8370-1189-2.

References• fascimile. The Holy Bible King James Version: 1611 Edition. Hendrickson Publishers. ISBN 1-56563-160-9• Allen, Ward (1969). Translating for King James; being a true copy of the only notes made by a translator of King

James’s Bible, the Authorized Version, as the Final Committee of Review revised the translation of Romansthrough Revelation at Stationers’ Hall in London in 1610–1611. Taken by John Bois ... these notes were for threecenturies lost, and only now are come to light, through a copy made by the hand of William Fulman. Heretranslated and edited by Ward Allen.. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press. ISBN 0-8265-1136-8

• Barber, Charles Laurence (1997). Early modern English (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=Iat4Bk_YeR4C)(second ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 0-7486-0835-4.

• Bobrick, Benson (2001). Wide as the waters: the story of the English Bible and the revolution it inspired. NewYork: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-684-84747-7

• Bruce, Frederick Fyvie (2002). History of the Bible in English. Cambridge: Lutterworth Press.ISBN 0-7188-9032-9

• Chadwick, Owen (1970). The Victorian Church Part II. Edinburgh: A&C Black. ISBN 0-334-02410-2• Cloud, David (2006). Isn't the King James Bible too Antiquated and Difficult to Understand? (http:/ / www.

wayoflife. org/ database/ kjvtoodifficult. html). Way of Life Literature. Retrieved 1 August 2009• Daiches, David (1968). The King James Version of the English Bible: An Account of the Development and

Sources of the English Bible of 1611 With Special Reference to the Hebrew Tradition. Hamden, Conn: ArchonBooks. ISBN 0-208-00493-9

• Daniell, David (2003). The Bible in English: its history and influence. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press.ISBN 0-300-09930-4

• Ehrman, Bart D. (2005). Misquoting Jesus: the story behind who changed the Bible and why. San Francisco:HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-073817-0

• Hill, Christopher (1993). The English Bible and the seventeenth-century revolution. London: Allen Lane.ISBN 0-7139-9078-3

• Hill, Christopher (1997). Society and Puritanism in pre-revolutionary England. New York: St. Martin's Press.ISBN 0-312-17432-2

• Keay, Julia (2005). Alexander the Corrector: the tormented genius who unwrote the Bible. London: HarperPerennial. ISBN 0-00-713196-8

• Merriam-Webster (2008). Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (http:/ / www. merriam-webster. com).Merriam-Webster

• Metzger, Bruce M.; Coogan, Michael D., eds. (1993). The Oxford Companion to the Bible. Oxford, UK: OxfordUniversity Press. ISBN 0-19-504645-5

Authorized King James Version 19

• Norton, David (2005). A Textual History of the King James Bible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.ISBN 0-521-77100-5

• Norton, David, ed. (2006). The Bible (Penguin Classics). Penguin Classics. ISBN 0-14-144151-8• OED (1989). Oxford English Dictionary (http:/ / dictionary. oed. com) (2 ed.). Oxford University Press• Prickett, Stephen; Carroll, Robert P., eds. (2008). The Bible: Authorized King James Version (Oxford World's

Classics). Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 0-19-953594-9• Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose (1884). The Authorized Edition of the English Bible, 1611, its subsequent

reprints and modern representatives (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=TH0fAAAAYAAJ& pg=PA314&dq=Scrivener,+ Frederick+ Henry+ Ambrose+ (1884). + The+ Authorized+ Edition+ of+ the+ English+ Bible,+1611,+ its+ subsequent+ reprints+ and+ modern+ representatives. + Cambridge:+ Cambridge+ University+Press#v=onepage& q& f=false). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

• Story, G.M. (1967). Lancelot Andrewes Sermons. Oxford: Oxford University Press• Walleshinsky, David (1975). The People's Almanac. Doubleday & Company Inc.

Further readingChronological order of publication (oldest first)

• McGrath, Alister E. (2002). In the beginning: the story of the King James Bible and how it changed a nation, alanguage and a culture. New York: Anchor Books, a Division of Random House, Inc. ISBN 0-385-72216-8.

• UK edition: Nicolson, Adam (2003). Power and Glory: Jacobean England and the Making of the King JamesBible. London: HarperCollins. ISBN 0-00-710893-1.

• US edition: Nicolson, Adam (2003). God's secretaries: the making of the King James Bible. London:HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-018516-3.

• Paperback edition: Nicolson, Adam (2011). When God Spoke English: The Making of the King James Bible.London: HarperPress. ISBN 978-0-00-743100-7.

• The Diary Of Samuel Ward: A Translator Of The 1611 King James Bible (http:/ / books. google. com/books?id=tC1kuaetNqoC& dq=The+ Diary+ Of+ Samuel+ Ward,+ A+ Translator+ Of+ The+ 1611+ King+James+ Bibleâ��), edited by John Wilson Cowart and M.M. Knappen, contains surviving pages of Samuel Ward’sdiary from 11 May 1595 to 1 July 1632.

External links• "King James Version (text of original 1611 Bible)" (http:/ / www. kingjamesbibleonline. org/ 1611-Bible/ ).

kingjamesbibleonline.org. Archived (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20110427015446/ http:/ / www.kingjamesbibleonline. org/ 1611-Bible/ ) from the original on 27 April 2011. Retrieved 5 April 2011. Onlinesearchable database of the original 1611 text, including the Apocrypha and introductory text. It also contains the1769 standard edition.

• "Online gallery: Sacred texts: King James Bible" (http:/ / www. bl. uk/ onlinegallery/ sacredtexts/ kingjames.html). British Library. Archived (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20070823084804/ http:/ / www. bl. uk/onlinegallery/ sacredtexts/ kingjames. html) from the original on 23 August 2007. Retrieved 27 September 2007.On-line image of a page (beginning of St John's gospel) with a written description by the British Library.

• "The Holy Bible, conteyning the Old Testament, and the New. Imprinted at London: By Robert Barker ..., 1611."(http:/ / dewey. library. upenn. edu/ sceti/ printedbooksNew/ index. cfm?textID=kjbible& PagePosition=1).Schoenberg Center for Electronic Text & Imaging, University of Pennsylvania Library. Archived (http:/ / web.archive. org/ web/ 20070911130833/ http:/ / dewey. library. upenn. edu/ sceti/ printedbooksNew/ index.cfm?textID=kjbible& PagePosition=1) from the original on 11 September 2007. Retrieved 27 September 2007..On-line facsimile (page images) of the 1611 printing of the King James Bible, "He" Bible variant.

Authorized King James Version 20

• "King James Version (facsimile of alternative 1611 edition, "She" Bible)" (http:/ / www. bibles-online. net/ 1611/). Retrieved 31 August 2011. On-line facsimile (page images) of the 1611 printing of the King James Bible.

• "The King James Dictionary" (http:/ / bible. christianity. com/ Dictionaries/ KingJamesDictionary/ ).Christianity.com. Archived (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20071016153620/ http:/ / bible. christianity. com/Dictionaries/ KingJamesDictionary/ ) from the original on 16 October 2007. Retrieved 25 October 2007. OnlineDictionary of Words from the King James Bible

• Downloadable King James Audio Bible (http:/ / www. believersresource. com/ downloads/king-james-audio-bible-8. html)

• The King James Bible Translators Preface 1611 (http:/ / www. thelostbooks. com/ preface. htm)• Books by or about KJV translators (http:/ / en. literaturabautista. com/ node/ 48)• The Official King James Bible Trust Website (http:/ / www. kingjamesbibletrust. org/ ) Includes information on

the 2011 Events surrounding the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible, the History of the KJV and a digitalversion of how it looked originally.

Article Sources and Contributors 21

Article Sources and ContributorsAuthorized King James Version  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=502162401  Contributors: 137.111.13.xxx, 1700-talet, 24.28.85.xxx, 66.153.24.xxx, ABF, Abce2,Ad.minster, Adam Sampson, Adam sk, Adam00, Aesopos, Alai, Alan Millar, Aldo L, Alex earlier account, Alexrexpvt, American Eagle, AnakngAraw, Ancos, Andre Engels, Andrew Gray,Andrew c, AndrewNJ, Andycjp, Anglicanus, Angr, Angusmclellan, Anonymous from the 21th century, Another berean, Antandrus, ApostleJoe, Art and Muscle, Arthena, Arthur Holland,Ashmoo, Astrotrain, Attilios, Aunt Entropy, Avanu, B00P, BD2412, Barringer87, BarryNorton, Barticus88, Beginning, Ben Asher, BenBaker, Benne, Bible1611man, BibleRick, Bigjimr, BillFlis,Billinghurst, BirgitteSB, Bishoymly, Blainster, Bobo192, Branddobbe, Brendan Moody, Brianboulton, BrownHairedGirl, BruceGrubb, Brusselsshrek, Bryan, Bryan Derksen, Bucksburg,Buonaparte69, Burntsauce, CL8, Camerong, Carlaude, Cassowary, Cavila, Ccacsmss, Cdc, Celuici, CesarB, Cha'yu, Chabuk, Charles Matthews, Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, Chenyu,Chihuahua0, Chironomia, Choess, Chris Capoccia, Chris the speller, ChristTrekker, Christaan T., Chuckcreator, CityOfSilver, Ck lostsword, Clay70, Colemanyee, Collard, Commander Keane,Considerinfo, Conversion script, Courcelles, Crazytonyi, Crust, Csernica, CyrilleDunant, DCEdwards1966, DJ Clayworth, DTOx, Dangaard, Daniel Olsen, Dave L, Dave souza, David Haslam,David Newton, DavidFarmbrough, Davilla, Dbachmann, Dcoetzee, Dean Wormer, Deineka, Denihilonihil, Derek Ross, Derek.cashman, Deville, Dhodges, Discospinster, Disinclination,Doctrine612, Dominics Fire, DopefishJustin, Doug, Drdisque, Dtbrown, Dwheeler, Dycedarg, Dystopos, EEye, Ed Brey, Editor2020, Egmontaz, El Cubano, Ellenois, Elmer Clark, Endomion,Epbr123, Espoo, Eubulides, EugeneZ, Evanh2008, Evercat, Evertype, Evil Monkey, Ewlyahoocom, Falcon8765, Fan-1967, Farsight001, Filiocht, FisherQueen, Fiziker, Flockmeal, FlorianBlaschke, Franklin 78, Frans Fowler, Frecklefoot, Fredeboulou, Friends2, Future Perfect at Sunrise, Fæ, GHarshfield, Gabrielwhitestone, Gaius Cornelius, Galoubet, Gareth E Kegg, GarethGriffith-Jones, Gary D, Gdo01, Gekritzl, Gerdthiele, Gfoley4, Gideon.judges7, Gilliam, Gimboid13, Good Olfactory, GraceGuy, Graham87, Grand Dizzy, Grandmasterjethro, Grantsky, Grovercleveland, Grstain, Gschadow, Guyd, Guðsþegn, Hairy Dude, Hajenso, Hanina, Harbinger42, Heimstern, Hellomate1224, Hemmingsen, Henry Flower, Hermitstudy, Heyzeuss, Hippietrail,Histrydude, Hlanefaber, Hmghosthost, Hoshie, Howcheng, Hroðulf, Hujaza, Ian.thomson, Ig0774, Igiffin, Ihcoyc, Iluvcapra, Infinitelink, Invmog, Irendraca, IronGargoyle, Itai, J.delanoy, J04n,JRosine, JaGa, Jacotto, Janus10, Jaraalbe, Jason1980athotmail, Java7837, Jdavidb, Jdforrester, Jeff3000, Jengod, JerryFriedman, JesseW, Jesus Saves!, Jfruh, Jgstokes, JimPettis, Jjy627, Jklin,Jmabel, JoanneB, Joebengo, Joedeshon, Joefromrandb, Joelr31, John Vandenberg, JohnChrysostom, JohnThorne, Johnbod, Johncmullen1960, Johnleemk, Johnmarkh, Jonathunder,Joshuajohnson555, Joyceann47, Jprw, Jstanley01, JustTheFacts, Justinchanband, Jwrosenzweig, Kaihsu, Kangna, Katbun, Kazrak, Kbthompson, Keith D, Kelleheretic, KeyStroke, Kinneyboy90,Kloth, Knight1000, Koavf, Komusou, Kona1611, Kpalion, Ksmithtn, Kubigula, Kyk, Kyoko, KyraVixen, L Kensington, Larris, Leandrod, Leithp, Leonard^Bloom, Leszek Jańczuk, Leuko,LilHelpa, Ling.Nut, LittleDan, Lord Emsworth, LovesMacs, Lugnad, Lupin, Lusanaherandraton, Luwilt, Macgruder, MakeRocketGoNow, Man vyi, Mangoe, Marek69, Mario777Zelda, Mark,Markchris, Marskell, Masalai, MaxVeers, MediaGod2004, MeekMark, Meelar, MelbourneGuffman, Melongrower, MerricMaker, Meursault2004, Mhiji, Michael Devore, Michael Glass, MichaelHardy, MisfitToys, Mkcas, MollyTheCat, Mongolmax, Monkthecat, Morn, Morriswa, MrWhipple, Mrevan, Mrrealtime, Msrasnw, Mysticquill, Naive cynic, Nasugbu batangas, Neddyseagoon,Netoholic, Nixeagle, Noctibus, Noq, Notbyworks, Nsaa, Numbo3, Nunh-huh, Nyttend, Oedlan, Ohconfucius, Ohnoitsjamie, Ohsimone, Olessi, Oliverkeenan, Ollhondallo, Optigan13, Pasta3049,Pastordavid, Patrick, Paul A, Pauljeffersonks, Pcpcpc, Peter jackson, PeterR, Pftaylor, Piast93, Pigman, Pigsonthewing, Piledhigheranddeeper, Portillo, Prapsnot, Prayspot, Prisonblues,ProhibitOnions, Ptolemy Caesarion, QVanillaQ, Quadalpha, Quadell, Quasihuman, Quest for Truth, R000t, RBBrittain, RadioFan, Raekwon, Raggio, RandomCritic, Raptors1, Rascallee, Rausch,Raymondwinn, Rclark7791, Rdsmith4, Realwebpages, Redrose64, Refprotevang, Reginmund, RetiredUser2, Rfmansfield, Rich Farmbrough, RickReinckens, Rje, Rjwilmsi, Rmhermen,Roadrunner, Robby.is.on, Robert K S, RobertG, RockRockOn, Rogerdpack, Roryjon, Rossp, RoyBoy, Rpyle731, Rrius, Rsquire3, Ruakh, Rwflammang, Ryulong, SE7, Sabbetius, Sailsbystars,Salimfadhley, Sandwiched, Sannse, Saverx, Scarian, Schizmatic, SchreiberBike, Scott1329m, Sfcongeredwards, Shadowjams, Shanes, Shii, Shirt58, Shredded77, Simongraham, Simply31, SirLancegalawain, Sjc, SkyWriter, SlackerMom, Sladen, Slon02, Smyth, Snaxe920, Snowdog, So-called Genius, Sodermalm, SomeUsr, SouthernNights, Spanish.aaron, Spanishpastor, Special-T,Spellbinder, SpookyMulder, Srnec, Ssluiter, Stapletongrey, Stephen C. Carlson, Stephensuleeman, Stephenw32768, Steve Dufour, Stickee, Stifle, Studge, Sue Wallace, Summer Song, Suruena,Susfele, Susie Brooke, Susurrus, Svick, TBall84, TOPPublications, TShilo12, Taragui, Tassedethe, Tb, TeaDrinker, Teingram, Template namespace initialisation script, ThaddeusB, The 80schick, The Thing That Should Not Be, Thebestofall007, Thecheesykid, TheoClarke, ThomasCamps, Thruston, Toby Bartels, Tom harrison, TomHennell, TomViza, Tomisti, Tonicthebrown,Tony164, Trevjos, TrickyApron, Trödel, Tsunaminoai, Tverbeek, TyneMike, Uncle G, Val42, Valenciano, Vanished user 03, VerticalDrop, Vgy7ujm, VigilancePrime, Villaroman83,ViperSnake151, Visorstuff, WaidmannsHeil, Wareh, Warriorspikes51, Washburnmav, Wassupwestcoast, Wayward, Wdford, Wereon, Wesley, WhisperToMe, White whirlwind, Whiteghost.ink,Wikid77, Wikitedium, Wikitheologin, Willricho, Wilson44691, Woohookitty, Yahnatan, Yeanold Viskersenn, Ylee, Zigger, Ἀλήθεια, 679 anonymous edits

Image Sources, Licenses and ContributorsImage:KJV-King-James-Version-Bible-first-edition-title-page-1611.jpg  Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:KJV-King-James-Version-Bible-first-edition-title-page-1611.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Church of EnglandFile:William Tyndale.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:William_Tyndale.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: B. Železník, Billinghurst, FA2010, Filip em, Manvyi, Martin H., Pieter Kuiper, Túrelio, 1 anonymous editsImage:Richard Bancroft.png  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Richard_Bancroft.png  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Original uploader was Meleagros atde.wikipediaImage:Kjv-hebrews.png  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Kjv-hebrews.png  License: Public Domain  Contributors: CountingPine, Ihcoyc, Stefan2, 1 anonymous edits

LicenseCreative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/