A mountain of God is the moun- tain of Bashan ; An high mountain is the mountain of Bashan. Why look ye askance, ye high mountains?
Therefore the wild beasts of the desert with the wolves (Heb. ‘howl-
ing creatures’)shall dwell there.
The free manner in which Challoner borrowed from the AV (itself enriched by earlier borrowings from the Rhemes and Doway version) has been often remarked. A few verses will suffice in illustration.
Ro gi8 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come, that shall be revealed in us.
Eph 612 For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers ; against the rulers of the world of this darkness ; against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.
Ph 26-7 Who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But debased himself .. .
He 1316 And do not forget to do good and to impart; for by such sacrifices God’s favour is obtained.
viii. Tue ‘ AUTHORIZED.’—The so-called Autho- rized Version of 1611 had its origin in the Hampton Court Conference, held on Jan. 14th, 16th, and 18th, 1604. On the second of these days, one of the four representatives of the Puritan party, Dr. John Reynolds, President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, a learned and temperate divine, ‘ moved His Majesty that there might be a new translation of the Bible,’ * alleging in support of his request the presence of many faults in the existing ones. Tt is not likely that much would have come of the motion, but for its happening to chime in with the mood of the king. The caustic remark of Ban- croft, Bishop of London, that ‘if every man’s humour should be followed, there would be no end of translating,’ probably indicates the spirit in which the proposal would have been received by his party generally. But, while they were content to let the matter drop, James was thinking out his plans for carrying Dr. Reynolds’ suggestion into effect. By July of that year we find him writing to the Bishop of London, informing him that he had made out a list of fifty-four learned divines, to whom the work he had at heart might be suit- ably entrusted. Healso drew up, for the guidance of the workers, a paper of instructions, too long to be given here in full,t but containing some sensible rules. In this he requires the bishops to see that provision be made, where necessary, for those en- gaged on the task of translation. The king’s letter, dated July 22nd, 1604, was communicated by Bishop Bancroft ¢ to his brother prelates on the 31st. In this letter king James speaks of having already
* Sum and Substance of the Conference... by_ William Barlow, dean of Chester, reprinted in Cardwell’s History of Conferences, ii. 187, 188.
+ It may be seen in Cardwell’s 1844, pp. 145, 146.
+ Bancroft was appointed to the see of Canterbury at the latter end of 1604. Whitgift having died in February of that year, Bancroft discharged in the interval some of the archi- episcopal duties.
Documentary Annals, ed.
appointed ‘certain learned men, to the number of four and fifty, for the translating of the Bible.’ But, for some unexplained reason, the scheme did not come into operation till 1607. Possibly the death of some of those selected, or the difficulty of providing for the maintenance of others, may have caused the delay. However, by 1607 all was in working order. A list of the companies of revisers was issued, together with a paper of rules to be observed in the conduct of the work. Bancroft, no doubt, had a hand in drawing up both these documents. The most important of the rules were the following : *—
I. The ordinary Bible read in the church, commonly called ‘the Bishops’ Bible,’ to be followed, and as little altered as the truth of the original will permit.
Ill. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept, videlicet, the word ‘church’ not to be translated ‘congregation,’
etc. VI. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words. . .
VIII. Every particular man of each company to take the same chapter or chapters, and having translated or amended them severally by himself, where he thinketh good, all to meet together, confer what they have done, and agree for their parts what shall stand.
As each company finished one book, they were to send it to the other companies for their careful consideration. Where doubts prevailed as to any passage of special obscurity, letters were to be sent to ‘any learned man in the land’ for his judg- ment. Finally, ‘three or four of the most ancient and grave divines in either of the universities, not employed in translat- ale oe to be ‘ overseers of the translations as well Hebrew as
reek.’
It will be seen at once how much more effectual were the provisions made for securing accuracy and thoroughness in the work than those devised by Parker and his coadjutors for the Bishops’ Bible. :
The lists of translators which have been pre- served offer some difficulties. The king, in_ his letter before referred to, speaks of the workers appointed as numbering fifty-four. Burnet’s list, which he obtained from the papers of one of the company engaged in the work, gives only forty- seven names. The discrepancy may be accounted for by the death of members (as in the case of Mr. Lively, who died in May 1605), or some of the other changes to be looked for in a period of three