72. First Quarto Edition of the Version of 1611. by Robert Barker, 1612.

A close reprint of the folio of 1611, and printed in roman type.

Printed

73. First Octavo Edition of the Version of 1611. by Robert Barker, 1612.

Printed

Also a close reprint of the folio of 1611, and printed in roman type. 74. Second Folio Edition of the Version of 1611. Printed by Robert Barker, partly in 1611, partly in 1613.

This second edition differs from that of 1611 on every leaf and there is no justification for speaking of it as a second issue' of that edition, a phrase which could only be used correctly of the original sheets of the first edition with a new title-page prefixed. These are not the original sheets, but reprints of them, in which some errors are corrected and other differences introduced. One of these differences is that in Ruth iii. 15 the verse ends And she went into the city', whereas in the 1611 edition it ends 'And he went into the city', and a custom has grown up of speaking of that as the 'Great He Bible' and of this as the 'Great She Bible', but it seems simpler to call them respectively the First and Second folio edition. In subsequent reprints the readings of the Second edition were mostly followed.

Owing probably to an accident in the printing-office by which a large quantity of the stock of about one-third of the sheets of this edition was destroyed, these sheets had to be reprinted, and the sheets as originally printed and as reprinted are found in many different combinations.

75. Third Folio Edition of the Version of 1611. In smaller type. Printed by Robert Barker, 1613.

Instead of only 59 lines to a column, this edition has 72, and by this increased number of lines and a reduction in the width as well as the height of the type the book contains only 508 leaves instead of 732. No doubt this was done to meet the needs of churches which could not afford the larger edition.

76. Fourth Folio Edition of the Version of 1611. Printed by Robert Barker, 1617.

This is the third folio edition of the largest size. Two copies of it are known with title-pages dated 1614. No further edition of this size was issued until 1634, and this must therefore be taken as completing the supply necessary to enable every parish in England to obtain a copy, in addition to any copies that may have been sold for other purposes. It is thus possible that each of these four editions consisted of as many as 5,000 copies. The three editions of 1611, 1611-1613, 1614-1617, are so printed that the corresponding sheets in each contain exactly the same amount of the text. Sheets from one of the three editions could thus be used to supply deficiencies in either of the others, and this mixture, with the double printing of part of the 16111613 edition, has caused some confusion. But the three large-type folios of 732 leaves

and one smaller-type folio of 508 leaves are essentially distinct, however much leaves may be found mixed in individual copies.

77. Geneva Bible. Printed in Holland after 1611, with the false imprint, London, 1599.

The imprint on the title-page reads: Imprinted at London by the Deputies of Christopher Barker, Printer to the Queenes most Excellent Maiestie. 1599'; that on the New Testament, Imprinted at Amsterdam, for Thomas Crafoorth. By Iohn Frederickse Stam, dwelling by the South-Church, at the signe of the Hope. 1633.' This used to be considered a 'made-up copy', composed of parts of two different editions, but it is more probably only one of the Amsterdam reprints with an accidentally truthful imprint to the New Testament.

78. The last Geneva Bible.

Printed at Amsterdam in 1644.

'The Bible: That is, The Holy Scriptures contained in the Old and New Testament. Translated according to the Hebrew and Greek, and conferred with the best Translations in divers Languages. With most profitable Annotations upon all the hard places, and other things of great importance. [Quotation.] Amsterdam. Printed by Thomas Stafford : And are to be sold at his house, at the signe of the Flight of Brabant, upon the Milk-market, over against the Deventer Wood-market. According to the Copy printed at Edinburgh by Andro Hart, in the year 1610.'

MDCXLIV.

This last Geneva Bible is a close reprint of one issued from the same press in 1640. The fact that both these Bibles specify the much earlier Edinburgh edition in accordance with which they were printed, suggests an alternative explanation for the 1599 imprint in other Dutch editions of the Geneva Bibles, viz. that it was merely intended to show the edition whose text it followed. But it is more probable that this object was combined with a desire to secure for them an unimpeded sale.

LATER EDITIONS OF THE VERSION OF 1611.
Nos. 79-87.

In the course of the interminable lawsuits connected with the office of King's Printer and the disputes about Bible-printing in the seventeenth century, references have been found to the original manuscript of the Version of 1611, which is said to have cost Robert Barker £3,000 or £3,500, though to whom this sum was paid remains unexplained. But there was no standard copy of the new version analogous to the 'sealed' copy of the Book of Common Prayer, and the text on the one hand was exposed to constant corruption by the carelessness of printers, and, on the other, was subjected to several minor revisions by the scholars of the two Universities. The most famous example of corruption by careless printing was the 'Wicked Bible' of 1631 with its omission of the word not in the Seventh Commandment. Of the revisions the first was undertaken in connexion with the first Cambridge edition, in 1629, and this was carried much further in another edition, nine years later. Other minor revisions were those of Thomas Paris for a Cambridge edition of 1762, and an Oxford one, by

Benjamin Blayney, in 1769. In 1833 the Oxford University Press, to allay some doubts which had been raised, produced a careful reprint of the original edition of 1611, with all its faults, and thus showed that the changes which had been introduced were almost exclusively of a kind necessitated by the modern system of punctuation and the more consistent use of italics for supplementary words.

79. First Cambridge Edition of the Version of 1611. Printed by T. and J. Buck, printers to the University, in 1629.

This Cambridge edition was revised for the Press by Dr. Samuel Ward, of Sidney Sussex, one of the original revisers of 1611. When put on the market at 10s., which was 2s. cheaper than the London price for small folios, it was itself vigorously undersold by the King's Printers, but without the desired effect of causing the University Press to forgo Bible-printing.

80. The 'Wicked' Bible. Printed at London by Robert Barker and the Assigns of John Bill. 1631.

For printing the Seventh Commandment in this edition in the form, 'Thou shalt commit adultery', the printers were fined £300 and the whole impression was called in.

81. The Cambridge Revision of 1638. Printed by Thomas Buck and Roger Daniel, printers to the University.

In this second Cambridge folio the revision of the text was undertaken by Dean Boys, Dr. Goad, Dr. Joseph Mede, and Dr. Samuel Ward, and not only were misprints removed and the use of italics made more uniform, but changes were made in the translation, in some cases of some doctrinal importance.

82. The Version of 1611 with the notes of the Geneva Version. Printed at Amsterdam by Joost Broerss in 1642–3.

6

On the title-page it is said of the Annotations that they have never before been set forth with this new translation; But are now placed in due order with great care and industrie'. That the text of the Geneva version should thus be abandoned, while an attempt was made to revive the popularity of its notes, offers striking evidence of the general acceptance which the Version of 1611 had by this time attained.

83. Another 'Wicked' Bible. Printed at London by J. Field in 1653.

This pocket Bible is even more incorrectly printed than Barker's edition of 1631. Among other errors it reads, in 1 Corinthians vi. 9, Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the Kingdom of God' for 'shall not inherit'.

84. The 'Vinegar' Bible. Printed at Oxford by John Baskett in 1716-17.

This handsome edition, with its engraved plates and initial-letters, was so incorrectly printed that it was called from the name of its printer, the Basket-full of Errors.' Its

nickname, the 'Vinegar' Bible, was caused by the misprint "The parable of the vinegar' (for 'The parable of the vineyard') in the headline to Luke xx. The early record of Oxford as regards Bible-printing offers a striking contrast to its modern developments. For many years the University Press was content to forgo its right to print Bibles, in consideration of a money payment, the first Oxford Bible only appearing in 1673-1675, when the Press had been aroused to activity by Bishop Fell. For some time after this its chief aim seems to have been to produce handsome editions. This copy was presented to King George II by Arthur Onslow, Speaker of the House of Commons,

in 1756.

85. Dr. Paris's Revision. Printed at Cambridge by J. Bentham in 1762.

In this quarto edition prepared for the Cambridge University Press, Dr. Thomas Paris, of Trinity College, introduced systematic modern spelling and punctuation into the text of the Bible, and extended the use of italics. At the same time the number of marginal notes was increased.

86. Dr. Blayney's Revision. Printed at Oxford by T. Wright and W. Gill, in 1769.

Dr. Benjamin Blayney, of Hertford College, took over most of the improvements of Dr. Paris and extended them. His own edition, unfortunately, contained an unusual number of printers' errors.

87. The Oxford Reprint of the Edition of 1611. Printed by S. Collingwood and Co. at the University Press in 1833.

In a four-page pamphlet issued with this edition it is stated that, Complaints having been made that the English Bibles printed at the Universities, besides necessary alterations in the spelling, differed greatly from the Authorized Version of the Scriptures, and a committee of Disserting Ministers having addressed a letter on the subject to the Vice-Chancellor, bearing date London, April 2, 1832, the Delegates of the Press took the most effectual method for enabling themselves and others to judge how far these complaints were well-founded. They commenced an exact Reprint in Roman Letter of the original Edition of King James printed in the year 1611, and were able to complete and publish it in the month of November, 1833, having previously issued the Book of Genesis as a specimen.'

57

SECTION III

LETTERS AND DOCUMENTS

88. Edward Lee, the King's Almoner and Ambassador to Spain (Archbishop of York in 1531), to Henry VIII, with reference to Tyndale's version of the New Testament.

'Please it your Highnesse morover to vndrestond that I ame certainlie enformed as I passed in this contree [France] that an Englishman your subiect at the sollicitation and instaunce of Luther, with whome he is, hathe translated the Newe Testament in to Englishe, and within four dayes entendethe to arrive with the same emprinted in Englond. I neede not to advertise your Grace what infection and daunger maye ensue heerbie, if it bee not withstonded. This is the next waye to fulfill your realine with Lutherians, ffor all Luthers peruerse opinions bee grownded opon bare wordes of Scripture not well taken ne vndrestonded, wiche your Grace hathe opened in sondrie places of your royall booke. All our forfadres gouernours of the_chirche of Englond hathe with all diligence forbed and exchued publication of Englishe Bibles, as apperethe in constitutions prouinciall of the chirche of Englond. . . Hidretoo, blessed bee God, your realme is save from infection of Luthers sort, as for so mutche that althow anye peradventure bee secretlie blotted within, yet for feare of your royall Maiestie, wiche hathe drawen his swerd in Godes cawse, they dare not openlie avowe,' etc. Dated [Bordeaux], 2 Dec. [1525]. [Cotton MS. Vespasian C. iii, f. 211 b.]

89. Richard Nykke or Nix, Bishop of Norwich, to William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, in reply to his request for subscriptions to defray the cost of buying copies of Tyndale's New Testament (1525) for burning.

I lately receyued your letters dated at your Manour of Lambethe the xxvi daie of the monethe of Maij, by the whiche I do perceyue that youre Grace hath lately goten into your handes all the bokes of the Newe Testamente translated into Englesshe and pryented beyonde the see, aswele those with the gloses ioyned vnto theym as thoder withoute the gloses, by meanes of exchaunge by you made therfore to the somme of lxvil. ixs. iiijd. Surely in myne opynion you haue done therin a graciouse and a blessed dede, and God, I doubt not, shall highly rewarde you therfore. And where in your said letters ye write, that in so moche as this mater. . . shulde not only haue towched you but all the Busshoppes within your province. and for that entente desire me to certifie you what conuenyent somme I for my parte wulbe contented to avaunce in this behalue... Pleaseth it you tundrestande that I am right wele contented to yeue and avaunce in this behalue ten markes. . . the which somme I thinke sufficient for my parte if euery Busshopp within your said provynce make like contribution and avauncemente after the rate and substance of their benifices.' Dated, Hoxne in Suffolk, 14 June, 1527. [Cotton MS. Vitellius B. ix, f. 131.]