Leave a comment

Comments 9

luckymarty December 11 2007, 15:18:25 UTC
The King James version was a dead-on-arrival flop on its debut in 1611. Only after the Reformation, when Britons sought to reestablish a continuity to a past that never quite was, did it catch on as the authoritative version.

Since the Reformation in England was 77 years old in 1611, or 52 years if you date from the final settlement, I am not sure what "after the Reformation" means in this sentence.

Reply

jeffwik December 11 2007, 15:20:13 UTC
I mentally elided that to "Restoration," but I dunno.

Reply

robin_d_laws December 11 2007, 15:21:39 UTC
Corrected to read "Restoration." Thanks for spotting my error.

Reply


adrienne_j December 11 2007, 15:29:27 UTC
Ohh, adding this to my Christmas list. Thanks for the recommendation!

Reply


wickedthought December 11 2007, 16:10:38 UTC
There's a lot of really good Bible scholarship out there. One of my favorites is Robert Price. He recently did a complete translation of the Gospels that rocks my boat.

Interestingly enough, this is also the same Robert Price who edits Chaosium's fiction line. I had the opportunity to chat with him once. One of the smartest men I ever met.

Reply


agrumer December 11 2007, 19:24:57 UTC
According to Wikipedia, the Geneva Bible was also published in a smaller, cheaper edition than other translations of the time.

Reply


mhacdebhandia December 11 2007, 19:47:07 UTC
There is also the bit about Shakespeare's name being encoded in Psalm 46.

Reply

varianor December 11 2007, 23:52:32 UTC
Yes. My college literature professor mentioned this. There's some evidence to suggest that he wrote or consulted on the language for portions of the King James.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up