Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of illustrations
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- PART 1 THE HISTORY
- 1 Making the text
- 2 Pre-1611 evidence for the text
- 3 The first edition
- 4 The King's Printer at work, 1612 to 1617
- 5 Correcting and corrupting the text, 1629 to 1760
- 6 Setting the standard, 1762 and 1769
- 7 The current text
- PART 2 THE NEW CAMBRIDGE PARAGRAPH BIBLE
- PART 3 APPENDICES
- Bibliography
- General index
- Word index
- Index of biblical references
2 - Pre-1611 evidence for the text
from PART 1 - THE HISTORY
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of illustrations
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- PART 1 THE HISTORY
- 1 Making the text
- 2 Pre-1611 evidence for the text
- 3 The first edition
- 4 The King's Printer at work, 1612 to 1617
- 5 Correcting and corrupting the text, 1629 to 1760
- 6 Setting the standard, 1762 and 1769
- 7 The current text
- PART 2 THE NEW CAMBRIDGE PARAGRAPH BIBLE
- PART 3 APPENDICES
- Bibliography
- General index
- Word index
- Index of biblical references
Summary
Introduction
There are two main kinds of pre-1611 evidence for the text of the KJB: the sources, and the written or printed versions directly, physically involved in the making of the translation. The sources are, of course, the original language texts (Hebrew and Greek), the ancient translations (particularly the Vulgate and the Septuagint), modern translations (including Luther's German and the Latin of Tremellius and Junius) and the earlier English translations. These contribute intellectually (and of course crucially — without them there would be no KJB) but not physically to the KJB. Crossing the line between an intellectual and a physical source is the Bishops' Bible of 1602. In a sense Bois's notes also cross the line, for they are evidence of the intellectual process that led to the text. MS 98 and the annotations in Bod 1602 are physical sources. Though they contain no direct evidence of the thinking that led to particular readings, they show the particularities of the text being established.
Until now these physical sources have not been used for editorial work on the text: whatever they might tell about why the 1611 text reads as it does has been ignored. On the other hand, the chief intellectual sources, the original language texts, have been treated as direct evidence for how the text of the KJB should read. This is a natural way of working: errors in the printed text of 1611 may be discovered by reference to the originals.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- A Textual History of the King James Bible , pp. 29 - 45Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005