400th Anniversary of the KJV

[Jeff Wrangler]

The year 2011 will mark the 400th anniversary of the publication of what we know as the "King James Version" of the Bible. Seven years in preparation, the version "authorized" by King James I of England was finally published in 1611.

It is generally acknowledged that for 300 years, the KJV had enormous influence on the development and usage of the English language. In the U.S. its influence and echoes can be heard in such important documents as the Declaration of Independence and Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.

For anyone who might be interested in learning more about how this monumentally influential book came about I can recommend the following from personal experience (that is to say, I've read them both):

Adam Nicolson, God's Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible (HarperCollins, 2003)

Alister McGrath, In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture (Anchor Books/Random House, 2002)

Neither is a "religious book." They are studies of the KJV as an historical and cultural document.

[Shakesthecoffecan]

Hmmm, how about a big cake in the shape of an open book with numeral candles on it that say "400" instead of 400 individual candles because a) it would be impossible to light all of them at once and; b) If one did, it would look like you were burning the book, and that would be bad karma.

Funny how that started out to be a question and then there was no place for a question mark.

Seriously, I think in the English speaking work it will be the standard for the foreseeable generations. I remember reading that earlier attempts to translate the Bible from Latin ended in death for several people. I say good for King James, he opened a pandora's box in a way, but a lot of people learned to read just so they could know what it said.

[Front-Ranger]

I was listening to an interesting show on NPR about all the phrases from KJB that have made it into common vernacular, such as "do not cast your pearls before swine."

[Jeff Wrangler]

I was listening to an interesting show on NPR about all the phrases from KJB that have made it into common vernacular, such as "do not cast your pearls before swine."

The McGrath book has a chapter on the Bible and the shaping of modern English that includes a list of phrases from the KJV that have been absorbed into common, everyday usage, such as "sour grapes" (Ezekiel 18:2), "to see the handwriting on the wall (Daniel 5:5), "the salt of the earth" (Matthew 5:13), "a thorn in the flesh" (2 Corinthians 12:7), and "the powers that be" (Romans 13:1).

[Shakesthecoffecan]

The other night I watched The Big Gay Musical on DVD and they referred to the "Breeders Imformational Book of Living Examples", or B.I.B.L.E. for short.

[delalluvia]

Saw a special the other night where a religious scholar suggested that the reason the KJV bible is so much ingrained in our language is because during the Reformation, the tangilble objects of worship and artwork - statues, stained glass, crosses, etc., - disappeared and all that was left was the beauty of the language of the KJV bible later.  So people took pleasure in that.  FWIW 

[Lynne]

It is interesting...I daresay that between the KJV and William Shakespeare, we get most of our idiomatic expressions.

The language of Brokeback Mountain is gradually replacing both, of course, sure enough.   

[David In Indy]

Wasn't King James gay? Or allegedly gay? Or at least bi? Or was that a different King James? Perhaps I should consult my good friend Google and ask him about it.

Anyway, if true, I wonder how many of these evangelicals who hate gay people so much realize their favorite bible is named after a gay king?

[delalluvia]

Wasn't King James gay? Or allegedly gay? Or at least bi? Or was that a different King James? Perhaps I should consult my good friend Google and ask him about it.

Anyway, if true, I wonder how many of these evangelicals who hate gay people so much realize their favorite bible is named after a gay king?

Court gossip and some writings certainly say so.  He had quite a few good looking favorites and was a faithful gentleman to his wife i.e. never kissed another woman or had mistresses it is said.  Course, they don't count the men he reportedly kissed.

[Lynne]

Wikipedia says some scholars believe so:

"Throughout his life James had close relationships with male courtiers, which has caused debate among historians about their nature.[114] After his accession in England, his peaceful and scholarly attitude strikingly contrasted with the bellicose and flirtatious behaviour of Elizabeth,[114] as indicated by the contemporary epigram Rex fuit Elizabeth, nunc est regina Jacobus (Elizabeth was King, now James is Queen).[115] Some of James's biographers conclude that Esmé Stewart (later Duke of Lennox), Robert Carr (later Earl of Somerset), and George Villiers (later Duke of Buckingham) were his lovers.[116] Restoration of Apethorpe Hall, undertaken in 2004–2008, revealed a previously unknown passage linking the bedchambers of James and Villiers.[117] Others argue that the relationships were not sexual.[118] In Basilikon Doron James lists sodomy among crimes "ye are bound in conscience never to forgive", and James's wife Anne gave birth to seven live children, as well as suffering two stillbirths and at least three other miscarriages.[119]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_I_of_England

And this source certainly thinks so:

http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/history/king_james_gay.html

I doubt it was unusual, David - one in 7 - 10 throughout history, consistently.  But yes, it's nice to have one more weapon in the arsenal against the Intolerants.

[Wayne]

"And thou shalt not have sex with a man in the wife's bed, for cryin' out loud." - Leviticus 18:22

ואת זכר לא תשכב משכבי אשה

[Wayne]

Wasn't King James gay? Or allegedly gay? Or at least bi? Or was that a different King James? Perhaps I should consult my good friend Google and ask him about it.

Anyway, if true, I wonder how many of these evangelicals who hate gay people so much realize their favorite bible is named after a gay king?

Yeah, and just wait until they actually read the gospel of John and find out that it was written by Jesus's boyfriend.

[Jeff Wrangler]

I doubt it was unusual, David - one in 7 - 10 throughout history, consistently.  But yes, it's nice to have one more weapon in the arsenal against the Intolerants.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean here, Lynne, but, all things considered--and I do mean all things--I would not want to hold up James VI of Scotland/James I of England as an example of anything. I speak/write as someone who has read an awful lot of Tudor/Stuart English history, both in school and since. Whether or not he slept with pretty boys, the man was a biggoted tyrant and a disaster as king of England.

[Lynne]

I believe by 'weapon' I just meant another historical example of homosexuality not being a fad that arose out of the free-love 60's.  I don't know the first thing about his character or most historical figures, really. I was too busy in school being a lab rat :/.

[Jeff Wrangler]

I've been meaning all week to comment that over last weekend I saw a syndicated newspaper article that was attempting to debunk the influence of the King James Bible on the English language. This is all from memory, so apologies in advance for any inaccuracies, if anyone digs up the actual article.

Anyway, the author claimed to have found only a small number of phrases--somewhere in the twenties, I think, or maybe even fewer--that he said were unique to the King James  Version of the Bible that had become common usage. By "unique," the author meant that the phrases had not appeared in earlier English translations.

Well. ...

OK, but the problem I have with that is that the KJV New Testament is overwhelmingly the New Testament as translated by William Tyndale in the first third of the sixteenth century (put another way, in the time of Henry VIII), so of course most of the New Testament is not going to be "unique"--that is, it didn't appear in a previous English translation.

But I also think counting up phrases and quotations kind of misses the point. Yes, the Bible did give us some words and phrases, but to me it seems the more important influence was in the way the language was used. More English-speaking people were exposed to the language of the KJV than to Shakespeare or the Book of Common Prayer (two other big influences).

Think of Jefferson's use of language in the Declaration of Independence, and especially think of Lincoln's usage in his speeches and writings. Nothing would have prevented Lincoln from beginning the Gettysburg Address with a simple and straight-forward "Eighty-seven years ago." But no. Lincoln went with "Fourscore and seven years ago." The rhythm and the cadence are those of the KJV. The line does not quote Psalm 90:10, "The days of our years are threescore years and ten," but it echoes it, and it was probably even intended to form a connection in the minds of people who were much more Biblically literate than a lot of people are today.

When people learned to read from the KJV, when poorer and/or isolated homes didn't own any other books besides the KJV, it's difficult to escape the conclusion that the KJV had a significant influence on the way people wrote and used the English language.