The second title runs: ‘The | Newe | Testament of | our Lord and Sauior | Jesys Christ | {Newly translated out of | the Originall Greeke: and with | the former Translations diligently | compared andreuised, by his | Maiesties speciall Com | mande- ment. | Imprinted | at London by Robert | Barker, | Printer to the | Kings most Excellent | Maiestie. | Anno Dom. 1611. | cum Priuilegio.’
The first, or general, title is followed by the ‘Epistle Dedicatorie’ (A 2-3), and this by ‘The Translators to the Reader’ (A 3 verso to B 4 verso). Calendars, Tables to find Easter, and the like, occupy the remaining preliminary leaves. The text of this editio princeps is in black letter. Head- lines and summaries of the contents of chapters (the latter by Dr. Miles Smith) are in Roman letter. Words supplied, which would now be in italics, are in small Roman.* Various head-pieces, initial letters, and other embellishments, from the Bishops’ Bible, the further reprinting of which was discontinued after 1606, were used again in this edition. The figure of Neptune is now found at the beginning of St. Matthew, and the crest and arms of Walsingham and Cecil are left on in the Psalms.+ By what warranty the clause ‘ Appointed to be read in Churches’ was inserted in the title is not easy to determine, seeing that there can be found for it, so far as is known, ‘no edict of Con- vocation, no Act of Parliament, no decision of the Privy Council, no royal proclamation.’ The true explanation probably is that, as the new revision was meant to supersede the old Bishops’ Bible, it naturally took the place, and succeeded to the privileges, of that work. But, as has been before mentioned, the Bishops’ Bible was ordered, by the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical of 1571, to be placed in all cathedrals, and, so far as it was practicable, in all churches. Thus the new version was simply the heir of the old. It may be remarked, in passing, that the clause is not found in the NT title of the editio princeps, nor at all in the first Svo and some other early editions.§ It will be observed also that the OT and NT are spoken of in the general title as ‘newly translated out of the original tongues’; and the Preface is headed ‘the Zvanslators to the Reader.’ This might be thought a disregard of the very first of the king’s instructions. But we must bear in mind how the alternative word revised was then used, as for instance in this very title. And the ‘Trans- lators’ themselves, while content to use this desig- nation in their Preface, make it quite clear what their conception of their duty was in this respect. ‘But it is high time to leave them,’ they say, referring to Romanist objectors, ‘and to shew in brief what we proposed to our selves, and what course we held in this our perusall and survey of the Bible. Truely (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one. . . but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against ; that hath been our indeavour, that our mark.’
Whether or not the translators reached their mark, is now no matter of opinion: history has spoken. Especially as a well of English undefiled, drawing its waters in part from yet older springs,
* The copy used for this description is the one marked 466 i. 6(1) in the Library of the British Museum. Size of page, 16 x 10} inches.
+ See Loftie, A Century of Bibles, 1872, p. 6. t Eadie, ii. 204.
§ A list of those i p. 326.
n which it is wanting is given by Dore, /.c.
it has solaced the heart, and satisfied the taste, of peasant and scholar alike. One well entitled to be heard (the late Bishop Lightfoot), writing on a subject which made him rather a severe critic than a willing eulogist,* speaks of the ‘grand simplicity’ in which the language of our English Bible ‘stands out in contrast to the ornate and often affected diction of the literature of that time.’ Another, than whom few, if any, have studied the text of Holy Writ with minuter care, marvels at ‘the perfect and easy command over the English language exhibited by its authors on every page.’ + And yet another, whose testimony may be of the greater value from the fact that, when he gave it, he had ceased to be in the communion of the English Church, pays a generous tribute to the benefits derived from listening, in the course of public service, to the ‘grave majestic English,’ in which are enshrined ‘ the words of inspired teachers under both Covenants,’ and from associating religion with ‘compositions which, even humanly considered, are among the most sublime and beautiful ever written.’ +
But it is of more importance, especially as bear- ing on the question of subsequent revision, to form a just estimate of the defects of the AV than to record the language of panegyric. Some specimens of these defects, taken almost at haphazard, are accordingly given. But it must be borne in mind that their cumulative force loses its effect when a short list only can find place.