King James Version
| King James Version | |
|---|---|
 The title page to the 1611 first edition of the authorised version of the Bible by Cornelis Boel shows the Apostles Peter and Paul seated centrally above the central text, which is flanked by Moses and Aaron. In the four corners sit Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the traditionally attributed authors of the four gospels, with their symbolic animals. The rest of the Apostles (with Judas facing away) stand around Peter and Paul. At the very top is the Tetragrammaton "יְהֹוָה" written with niqqud. | |
| Abbreviation | KJV[a] |
| Complete Bible published | 1611 |
| Online as | King James Version at Wikisource |
| Textual basis | OT: Masoretic Text Apocrypha: Septuagint and Vulgate NT: Textus Receptus |
| Translation type | Formal equivalence[1] |
| Version revision | 1769 |
| Copyright | Perpetually copyrighted in UK De facto public domain elsewhere[b] |
| Religious affiliation | Anglican Presbyterianism[2][c] |
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. | |
| Part of a series on |
| Anglicanism |
|---|
 |
 Christianity portal |
| Part of a series on |
| Reformed Christianity |
|---|
 |
 Reformed Christianity portal |
The King James Bible, widely known by the nickname King James Version (KJV) and the Authorized Version, is an Early Modern English translation of the Christian Bible for the Church of England and Church of Scotland, which was commissioned in 1604 and published in 1611, by sponsorship of King James VI and I.[d] The 80 books of the KJV include 39 books of the Old Testament, 14 books of Apocrypha, and the 27 books of the New Testament.[4]
The KJV does not include a commentary on the text as the King believed that might contain anti-monarchist sentiment as had its predecessor the Geneva Bible.[5]
Noted for its "majesty of style," the KJV has remained in continuous use for over four centuries, exerting more influence on English literature and Christian thought than any other English Bible translation. Its phrasing has been credited with shaping not only hymnody and liturgy, but also the idioms of everyday speech used in the English-speaking world.[6][7][page needed][8] It is considered[by whom?] one of the important literary accomplishments of early modern England. The original KJV is a 17th-century translation and thus contains a large number of archaisms and false friends - words that contemporary readers may think they understand but that actually carry obsolete or unfamiliar meanings - making understanding the text difficult for modern readers, even pastors and preachers trained in formal theological institutes.[9] While the 1611 text reflects Early Modern English usage, subsequent standardisations—most notably the 1769 Oxford edition and the more recent 1900 Pure Cambridge Edition—have made the KJV considerably more accessible to later generations. Many scholars note that its sentence structure is often clearer and more direct than some modern versions, despite occasional obsolete vocabulary.[10]
The King James Version was the third translation into English approved by the Church of England. The first had been the Great Bible in 1535, and the second had been the Bishops' Bible in 1568.[11] Meanwhile in Switzerland, the first generation of Protestant Reformers had produced the Geneva Bible in 1560,[12][13] which proved more popular among the laity. However, the footnotes represented a Calvinistic Puritanism.
King James convened the Hampton Court Conference in January 1604, responding to Puritan grievances outlined in the Millenary Petition.[14][15][16] At this conference, a proposal for a new English translation of the Bible was presented, aiming to address perceived issues in existing versions. King James issued directives to ensure the translation adhered to the ecclesiology of the Church of England, reflecting its episcopal structure and doctrines, including the belief in an ordained clergy.[17] Notably, translators were instructed to avoid marginal notes whenever possible, a feature in the Geneva Bible that had been criticised for promoting Puritanical and anti-monarchical sentiments.[18] For the New Testament, the Textus Receptus was utilized; the Old Testament was revised from the Bishop's Bible with reference to the Masoretic Text; and the Apocrypha was rendered from the Septuagint and Latin Vulgate.[19]
By the first half of the 18th century, the King James Version had become effectively unchallenged as the only English translation used in Anglican and other English Protestant churches, except for the Psalms and some short passages in the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England. Over the 18th century, the KJV supplanted the Latin Vulgate as the standard version of scripture for English-speaking scholars.[20] With the development of stereotype printing at the beginning of the 19th century, this version of the Bible had become the most widely printed book in history, almost all such printings presenting the standard text of 1769, and nearly always omitting the books of the Apocrypha.[21] Today the unqualified title "King James Version" usually indicates this Oxford standard text.
In surveys of English-speaking Christians, the KJV frequently ranks among the most read and memorised translations, with one publisher citing its linguistic beauty and imagery as reasons for its continued preference.[22]
Name
[edit]
The title of the first edition of the translation, in Early Modern English, was "THE HOLY BIBLE, Conteyning the Old Teſtament, AND THE NEW: Newly Tranſlated out of the Originall tongues: & with former Tranſlations diligently compared and reuiſed, by his Majesties ſpeciall Comandement." Underneath the title, it is written that the Bible is "[a]ppointed to be read in Churches."[23] Biblical scholar F. F. Bruce suggests it was "probably authorised by order in council," but no record of the authorization survives "because the Privy Council registers from 1600 to 1613 were destroyed by fire in January 1618/19."[24]
For many years it was common not to give the translation any specific name. In his Leviathan of 1651, Thomas Hobbes referred to it as "the English Translation made in the beginning of the Reign of King James."[25] A 1761 "Brief Account 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 its name, and despite using the name "Rhemish Testament" for the Douay–Rheims Bible version.[26] Similarly, a "History of England," whose fifth edition was published in 1775, writes merely that "[a] new translation of the Bible, viz., that now in Use, was begun in 1607, and published in 1611."[27]
King James's Bible is used as the name for the 1611 translation (on a par with the Genevan Bible or the Rhemish Testament) in Charles Butler's Horae Biblicae (first published 1797).[28] Other works from the early 19th century confirm the widespread use of this name on both sides of the Atlantic: it is found both in a "historical sketch of the English translations of the Bible" published in Massachusetts in 1815[29] 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".[30] This name was also found as King James' Bible (without the final "s"): for example in a book review from 1811.[31] The phrase "King James's Bible" is used as far back as 1715, although in this case it is not clear whether this is a name or merely a description.[32]
The use of Authorized Version, capitalized and used as a name, is found as early as 1814.[33] For some time before this, descriptive phrases such as "our present, and only publicly authorised version" (1783),[34] "our Authorized version" (1731,[35] 1792[36]) and "the authorized version" (1801, uncapitalized)[37] are found. A more common appellation in the 17th and 18th centuries was "our English translation" or "our English version", as can be seen by searching one or other of the major online archives of printed books. In Britain, the 1611 translation is generally known as the "Authorised Version" today.
King James' Version, evidently a descriptive phrase, is found being used as early as 1814.[38] "The King James Version" is found, unequivocally used as a name, in a letter from 1855.[39] The next year, the King James Bible, with no possessive, appears as a name in a Scottish source.[40] In the United States, the "1611 translation" (actually editions following the standard text of 1769, see below) is generally known as the King James Version today.
History
[edit]Earlier English translations
[edit]There were several translations into Middle English of large portions of Scriptures in the 14th Century, with the first English complete bibles probably being made by the followers of John Wycliffe. These translations were effectively but not formally banned in 1409 due to their association with the Lollards.[41] The Wycliffite Bibles pre-dated the printing press but were circulated very widely in manuscript form.
In 1525, William Tyndale, an English contemporary of Martin Luther, undertook a translation of the New Testament into Early Modern English.[42] Tyndale's translation was the first printed Bible in English. Over the next ten years, Tyndale revised his New Testament in the light of rapidly advancing biblical scholarship, and embarked on a translation of the Old Testament.[43] Despite some controversial translation choices, and in spite of Tyndale's execution on charges of heresy for being a Lutheran,[44] the merits of Tyndale's work and prose style made his translation the ultimate basis for all subsequent renditions into Early Modern English.[45]
With these translations lightly edited and adapted by Myles Coverdale to remove offensive notes, in 1539, Tyndale's New Testament and his incomplete work on the Old Testament became the basis for the Great Bible. This was the first "authorised version" issued by the Church of England during the reign of King Henry VIII.[11] When Mary I succeeded to the throne in 1553, she returned the Church of England to the communion of the Catholic faith and many English religious reformers fled the country,[46] some establishing an English-speaking community in the Protestant city of Geneva. Under the leadership of John Calvin, Geneva became the chief international centre of Reformed Protestantism and Latin biblical scholarship.[47]
These English expatriates undertook a translation that became known as the Geneva Bible.[48] This translation, dated to 1560, was a revision of Tyndale's Bible and the Great Bible on the basis of the original languages.[49] Soon after Elizabeth I took the throne in 1558, problems with both the Great and Geneva Bibles (namely, that the latter did not "conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy") became apparent to church authorities.[50] In 1568, the Church of England responded with the Bishops' Bible, a revision of the Great Bible in the light of the Geneva version.[51]
While officially approved, this new version failed to displace the Geneva translation as the most popular English Bible of the age, in part because the full Bible was printed only in lectern editions of prodigious size and at a cost of several pounds.[52] Accordingly, Elizabethan lay people overwhelmingly read the Bible in the Geneva Version, as small editions were available at a relatively low cost. At the same time, there was a substantial clandestine importation of the rival Douay–Rheims New Testament of 1582, undertaken by exiled Catholics. This translation, though still derived from Tyndale, claimed to represent the text of the Latin Vulgate.[53]
In May 1601, King James VI of Scotland attended the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland at Saint Columba's Church in Burntisland, Fife, at which proposals were put forward for a new translation of the Bible into English.[54] Two years later, he ascended to the throne of England as James I.[55]
Considerations for a new version
[edit]The newly crowned King James convened the Hampton Court Conference in 1604.[56] That gathering proposed a new English version in response to the perceived problems of earlier translations as detected by the Puritan faction of the Church of England. Here are three examples of problems the Puritans perceived with the Bishops and Great Bibles:
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 not disobedient.' Thirdly, psalm cvi. 30 (also from the Great Bible), 'Then stood up Phinees and prayed,' the Hebrew hath, 'executed judgment.'[57]
Instructions were given to the translators that were intended to use formal equivalence and limit the Puritan influence on this new translation.[58] The Bishop of London added a qualification that the translators would add no marginal notes (which had been an issue in the Geneva Bible).[59] King James cited two passages in the Geneva translation where he found the marginal notes offensive to the principles of divinely ordained royal supremacy:[60] Exodus 1:19, where the Geneva Bible notes had commended the example of civil disobedience to the Egyptian Pharaoh showed by the Hebrew midwives, and also II Chronicles 15:16, where the Geneva Bible had criticised King Asa for not having executed his idolatrous 'mother', Queen Maachah (Maachah had actually been Asa's grandmother, but James considered the Geneva Bible reference as sanctioning the execution of his own mother Mary, Queen of Scots).[60]
Further, the King gave the translators instructions designed to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology of the Church of England.[59] Certain Greek and Hebrew words were to be translated in a manner that reflected the traditional usage of the church.[59] For example, old ecclesiastical words such as the word "church" were to be retained and not to be translated as "congregation".[59] The new translation would reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and traditional beliefs about ordained clergy.[59]
The source material for the translation of the New Testament was the Textus Receptus version of the Greek compiled by Erasmus; for the Old Testament, the Masoretic text of the Hebrew was used; for some of the apocrypha, the Septuagint Greek text was used, or for apocrypha for which the Greek was unavailable, the Vulgate Latin.
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 of the biblical characters would all be retained. If the Bishops' Bible was deemed problematic in any situation, the translators were permitted to consult other translations from a pre-approved list: the Tyndale Bible, the Coverdale Bible, Matthew's Bible, the Great Bible, and the Geneva Bible.[61] In addition, later scholars have detected an influence on the Authorized Version from the translations of Taverner's Bible and the New Testament of the Douay–Rheims Bible.[62] A recent estimate is that 84% of the New Testament in the KJV is word-for-word identical to the Tyndale Bible, and about 76% of Tyndale's incomplete Old Testament is in the KJV.[63]
It is for this reason that the flyleaf of most printings of the Authorized Version observes that the text had been "translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by His Majesty's special commandment." As the work proceeded, more detailed rules were adopted as to how variant and uncertain readings in the Hebrew and Greek source texts should be indicated, including the requirement that words supplied in English to 'complete the meaning' of the originals should be printed in a different type face.[64]
Translation committees
[edit]The task of translation was undertaken by 47 scholars, although 54 were originally approved.[65] All were members of the Church of England and all except Sir Henry Savile were clergy.[66] The scholars worked in six committees, two based in each of the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge, and Westminster. The committees included scholars with Puritan sympathies, as well as high churchmen.[67] Forty unbound copies of the 1602 edition of the Bishops' Bible were specially printed so that the agreed changes of each committee could be recorded in the margins.[68]
The committees worked on certain parts separately and the drafts produced by each committee were then compared and revised for harmony with each other.[69] The scholars were not paid directly for their translation work. Instead, a circular letter was sent to bishops encouraging them to consider the translators for appointment to well-paid livings as these fell vacant.[66] Several were supported by the various colleges at Oxford and Cambridge, while others were promoted to bishoprics, deaneries and prebends through royal patronage.
On 22 July 1604 King James VI and I sent a letter to Archbishop 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 we in ourself in any convenient time cannot well remedy it, therefor we do hereby require you, that presently you write in our name as well to the Archbishop of York, as to the rest of the bishops of the province of Cant.[erbury] signifying unto them, that we do well and straitly charge everyone of them ... that (all excuses set apart) when a prebend or parsonage ... shall next upon any occasion happen to be void ... we may commend for the same some such of the learned men, as we shall think fit to be preferred unto it ... Given unto our 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.[70]
The six committees started work towards the end of 1604. The Apocrypha committee finished first, and all six completed their sections by 1608.[71] From January 1609, a General Committee of Review met at Stationers' Hall, London to review the completed marked texts from each of the committees, and were paid for their attendance by the Stationers' Company. The General Committee included John Bois, Andrew Downes, John Harmar, and others known only by their initials, including "AL" (who may be Arthur Lake). John Bois prepared a note of their deliberations (in Latin) – which has partly survived in two later transcripts.[72] Also surviving of the translators' working papers are a bound set of marked-up corrections to one of the forty Bishops' Bibles - covering the Old Testament and Gospels;[73] 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.[74] Archbishop Bancroft insisted on having a final say making fourteen further changes, of which one was the term "bishopricke" at Acts 1:20.[75]
Printing
[edit]
The original printing of the Authorised Version was published by Robert Barker, the King's Printer, in 1611 as a complete folio Bible.[78] It was sold looseleaf for ten shillings, or bound for twelve.[79] Robert Barker's father, Christopher, had, in 1589, been granted by Elizabeth I the title of royal Printer,[80] with the perpetual Royal Privilege to print Bibles in England.[e] Robert Barker invested very large sums in printing the new edition, and consequently ran into serious debt,[81] such that he was compelled to sub-lease the privilege to two rival London printers, Bonham Norton and John Bill.[82] It appears that it was initially intended that each printer would print a portion of the text, share printed sheets with the others, and split the proceeds. Bitter financial disputes broke out, as Barker accused Norton and Bill of concealing their profits, while Norton and Bill accused Barker of selling sheets properly due to them as partial Bibles for ready money.[83] There followed decades of continual litigation, and consequent imprisonment for debt for members of the Barker and Norton printing dynasties,[83] while each issued rival editions of the whole Bible. In 1629 the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge successfully managed to assert separate and prior royal licences for Bible printing, for their own university presses - and Cambridge University took the opportunity to print revised editions of the Authorised Version in 1629,[84] and 1638.[85] The editors of these editions included John Bois and Samuel Ward from the original translators. This did not, however, impede the commercial rivalries of the London printers, especially as the Barker family refused to allow any other printers access to the authoritative manuscript of the Authorised Version.[86]
Two editions of the whole Bible are recognised as having been produced in 1611, which may be distinguished by their rendering of Ruth 3:15;[87] the first edition reading "he went into the city", where the second reads "she went into the city";[88] these are known colloquially as the "He" and "She" Bibles.[89]
The original printing was made before English spelling was standardised, and when printers, as a matter of course, expanded and contracted the spelling of the same words in different places, so as to achieve an even column of text.[90] They set v for initial u and v, and u for u and v everywhere else. They used the long s (ſ) for non-final s.[91]
As can be seen in the example page on the left, the first printing used a blackletter typeface instead of a roman typeface, which itself made a political and a religious statement.[further explanation needed] Like the Great Bible and the Bishops' Bible, the Authorised Version was "appointed to be read in churches". It was a large folio volume meant for public use, not private devotion; the weight of the type—blackletter type was heavy physically as well as visually—mirrored the weight of establishment authority behind it.[citation needed] However, smaller editions and roman-type editions followed rapidly, e.g. quarto roman-type editions of the Bible in 1612.[92]
In the Great Bible, readings derived from the Vulgate but not found in published Hebrew and Greek texts had been distinguished by being printed in smaller roman type.[93] In the Geneva Bible, a distinct typeface had instead been applied to distinguish text supplied by translators, or thought needful for English grammar but not present in the Greek or Hebrew; and the original printing of the Authorised Version used roman type for this purpose, albeit sparsely and inconsistently.[94] This results in perhaps the most significant difference between the original printed text of the King James Bible and the current text. When, from the later 17th century onwards, the Authorised Version began to be printed in roman type, the typeface for supplied words was changed to italics, this application being regularised and greatly expanded. This was intended to de-emphasize the words.[95]
So as to make it easier to know a particular passage, each chapter was headed by a brief précis of its contents with verse numbers. Later editors freely substituted their own chapter summaries, or omitted such material entirely.[citation needed] Pilcrow marks are used to indicate the beginnings of paragraphs except after the book of Acts.[f]
Authorised Version
[edit]The Authorised Version was meant to replace the Bishops' Bible as the official version for readings in the Church of England. No record of its authorisation exists; it was probably effected by an order of the Privy Council, but the records for the years 1600 to 1613 were destroyed by fire in January 1618/19,[96] and it is commonly known as the Authorised Version in the United Kingdom. The King's Printer issued no further editions of the Bishops' Bible,[80] so necessarily the Authorised Version replaced it as the standard lectern Bible in parish church use in England.
In the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, the text of the Authorised Version finally supplanted that of the Great Bible in the Epistle and Gospel readings[97]—though the Prayer Book Psalter nevertheless continues in the Great Bible version.[98]
The case was different in Scotland, where the Geneva Bible had long been the standard church Bible. It was not until 1633 that a Scottish edition of the Authorised Version was printed—in conjunction with the Scots coronation in that year of Charles I.[99] The inclusion of illustrations in the edition raised accusations of Popery from opponents of the religious policies of Charles and William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury. However, official policy favoured the Authorised Version, and this favour returned during the Commonwealth—as London printers succeeded in re-asserting their monopoly on Bible printing with support from Oliver Cromwell—and the "New Translation" was the only edition on the market.[100] F. F. Bruce reports that the last recorded instance of a Scots parish continuing to use the "Old Translation" (i.e. Geneva) as being in 1674.[101]
The Authorised 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.[102] 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".[103] In the first half of the 17th century the Authorised Version is most commonly referred to as "The Bible without notes", thereby distinguishing it from the Geneva "Bible with notes".[99]
There were several printings of the Authorised Version in Amsterdam—one as late as 1715[104] which combined the Authorised Version translation text with the Geneva marginal notes;[105] one such edition was printed in London in 1649. During the Commonwealth a commission was established by Parliament to recommend a revision of the Authorised Version with acceptably Protestant explanatory notes.[102]
A small minority of critical scholars were slow to accept the latest translation. Hugh Broughton, who was the most highly regarded English Hebraist of his time but had been excluded from the panel of translators because of his utterly uncongenial temperament,[106] issued in 1611 a total condemnation of the new version.[107] He especially criticised the translators' rejection of word-for-word equivalence and stated that "he would rather be torn in pieces by wild horses than that this abominable translation (KJV) should ever be foisted upon the English people".[108] Walton's London Polyglot of 1657 disregards the Authorised Version (and indeed the English language) entirely.[109] Walton's reference text throughout is the Vulgate.
The Vulgate Latin is also found as the standard text of scripture in Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan of 1651.[110] Hobbes gives Vulgate chapter and verse numbers (e.g., Job 41:24, not Job 41:33) for his head text. In Chapter 35: "The Signification in Scripture of Kingdom of God", Hobbes discusses Exodus 19:5, first in his own translation of the Vulgar Latin, and then subsequently as found in the versions he terms "... the English translation made in the beginning of the reign of King James", and "The Geneva French" (i.e. Olivétan). Hobbes advances detailed critical arguments why the Vulgate rendering is to be preferred. For most of the 17th century the assumption remained that, while it had been of vital importance to provide the scriptures in the vernacular for ordinary people, nevertheless for those with sufficient education to do so, Biblical study was best undertaken within the international common medium of Latin. It was only in 1700 that modern bilingual Bibles appeared in which the Authorised Version was compared with counterpart Dutch and French Protestant vernacular Bibles.[111]
In consequence of the continual disputes over printing privileges, successive printings of the Authorised Version were notably less careful than the 1611 edition had been—compositors freely varying spelling, capitalisation and punctuation[112] - 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",[113] became notorious). The two Cambridge editions of 1629 and 1638 attempted to restore the proper text - while introducing over 200 revisions of the original translators' work, chiefly by incorporating into the main text a more literal reading originally presented as a marginal note.[114]
By the first half of the 18th century, the Authorised Version was effectively unchallenged as the sole English translation in then current use in Protestant churches,[115] and was so dominant that the Catholic Church in England issued in 1750 a revision of the 1610 Douay–Rheims Bible by Richard Challoner that was much closer to the Authorised Version than to the original.[116] However, general standards of spelling, punctuation, typesetting, capitalisation and grammar had changed radically in the 100 years since the first edition of the Authorised Version, and all printers in the market were introducing continual piecemeal changes to their Bible texts to bring them into line with then current practice—and with public expectations of standardised spelling and grammatical construction.[117]
Over the course of the 18th century, the Authorised Version supplanted the Hebrew, Greek and the Latin Vulgate as the standard version of scripture for English speaking scholars and divines, and indeed came to be regarded by some as an inspired text in itself—so much so that any challenge to its readings or textual base came to be regarded by many as an assault on Holy Scripture.[118]
In the 18th century there was a serious shortage of Bibles in the American colonies. To meet the demand various printers, beginning with Samuel Kneeland in 1752, printed the King James Bible without authorisation from the Crown. To avert prosecution and detection of an unauthorised printing they would include the royal insignia on the title page, using the same materials in its printing as the Authorised Version was produced from, which were imported from England.[119][120]
Standard text of 1769
[edit]
By 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 20 years' work by Francis Sawyer Parris,