The 1599 Geneva Bible

originally posted by: nenothtu

There was a death penalty at the time for anyone who read the bible in any language other than Latin

Actually you would risk getting burnt at the stake if you owned a copy of any bible, the Latin Vulgate included. Or any book that wasn't cleared by the religious police. If you knew Latin, Greek, Arabic or Hebrew and had no business with the Church you were prospect for a bonfire lighted with your books, writings and manuscripts, maps, art. People scream like in Rama about Alexandria, it was the fires made by bogous priests and terrifying sharpretters in the Darkages that really destroyed much of the juiciest stuff. One can only hope they saved some in their vaults.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Bloody Mary of England wanted religious texts read by catholic priests in latin, approxiamately 10 000 people ( whole families if parents taught bible in english to their kids ) were executed then.

a reply to: dollukka

I relate. They bloody killed Jeanne d'Ark and Giordano Bruno too. Savages.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

I am aware of Gutenberg, but please note I specified that the Coverdale Bible was the first complete, printed Bible in English.

Gutenberg did not print in English. The Gutenberg Bible was actually printed in Latin.

Text That would be the version I now have on my shelf, a CD was even included. Does anyone have experience with or know more about this bible?

You must have what they call a Facsimile of the 1599 edition of the Geneva Bible. This 1599 edition is the revision of the 1560 edition. I have a 1560 Geneva Bible which is very valuable to myself as well as bible dealers. It has a long and sad history starting with the 1382 Wycliffe NT. followed with the 1388 Pervey revision of the Wycliffe translation. Eventually Tyndale produced his 1524 NT. with a revision in 1534. Thomas Matthew & Coverdale made a stab at it in 1537 and so the story goes on till Bloody Mary took the English throne in 1553. The heads rolled and the Protestant bible translators and printers fled to Geneva Switzerland. Geneva was the worlds center for biblical studies in the 1550's and Calvin was the master of Geneva at this time.

It was Calvin who then shielded and invited over 700 to 1000 English men to seek asylum, build their church and continue their work with the English Translation of the entire bible including the Apocrypha. This resulted in the most complete English rendition with marginal notes known as the 1560 Geneva Bible. This bible was a thorn in the side of the crown. The marginal notes were what irritated the throne more so than the bible itself. This was the main reason that the English throne wanted the bible notes revised from crediting Jesus above the throne. Finally in 1611 James the 1st of Scotland and 6th of England decreed a new translation to appease the throne. this is called the 1611 King James Version.

I gave only a brief synopsis of the complicated history in the development of the English bible because dates and history are not my best study. You are actually very near to the complete English (understandable) rendition of the English bible. There have been additional manuscripts discovered since this Geneva period but not regarded to overtly change the structure of understanding. I use and keep my Geneva Bible here on my desk and even though it is written in old English I have no problem in reading and understanding. I also have a facsimile of the 1611 King James Bible with the Apocrypha which is also the old English. The difference between King James Version and Geneva is mostly in the marginal notes. The KJV took almost all marginal notes out of the bible and left the interpretation of the bible to the church which was controlled by the crown.

originally posted by: JustMike
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

I am aware of Gutenberg,

but please note I specified that the Coverdale Bible was the first complete, printed Bible in English.

Gutenberg did not print in English. The Gutenberg Bible was actually printed in Latin.

Sorry I was mixing up the centuries here. Looks like you're right. en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Seede

Text That would be the version I now have on my shelf, a CD was even included. Does anyone have experience with or know more about this bible?

You must have what they call a Facsimile of the 1599 edition of the Geneva Bible.

Not exactly, it's not a facsimile or a photo copy, it's a reprint made by a bunch of protestant scholars in 2006 ==> en.wikipedia.org... and Amazon page

Thanks for your insight btw.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim
No problem.

It's a fascinating and also sad and disturbing topic, when we consider how many people suffered terribly or lost their lives because of a desire to have or publish the Word in a language those around them could understand.

The oldest Bible I owned was a 1620 printing of the King James version, which I bought in an antique book store in London in 1976. It was a small one -- octavo -- but in very nice condition and complete. It cost 65 pounds. I later sold it on to a Christian school (basically at cost) so the staff & students there could use it to compare with modern versions of the KJV.

However, in that same shop, they had an original 1611 printing of the KJV. The genuine, full-sized pulpit version. I don't know if it was a "He" Bible or a "She" Bible (as I was not aware of this distinction at the time), but it was complete, in superb condition and beautifully bound. (Just to clarify, more recent research suggests the "He" and "She" Bibles were printed at the same time, but on different presses. Some "She" Bibles can also be from 1611 if the title pages and woodcuts indicate it. All "He" Bibles were definitely first editions.)

"He" or "She" Bible, it was a 1611 original, not a later one. And the price? 300 pounds. Yes, three hundred. That might sound cheap to us now but being a poor college student at the time, I just didn't have that much money. For such an old and rare book I guess it was relatively cheap even then, because in those days there was little demand for very old Bibles -- certainly nothing like there is now -- and the dealer said they'd had it for about a year, if I recall correctly.

So, hoping my next question might lead them to offer it at a lower price or at least let us do some kind of deal, I asked what they would do if they didn't sell it soon. The answer appalled me: "Oh, if we can't sell it soon, then we'll break it up and sell the individual leaves."

I suppose that is what happened. Such a terrible fate! A first-edition King James Bible, taken apart and sold off one page at a time!

That Bible would be worth a great deal more than 300 pounds these days (probably at least 100 times more), but it is not its "investment value" that bothers me most when I contemplate that I held it in my hands but couldn't afford to buy it. It's the thought that it was probably broken up and basically lost forever as a complete book.

My main reason for writing all of the above is just to give a little personal insight on one of the problems of preserving old books. Some dealers see their worth only as a money figure and many great works have been lost as complete books because of that.

This is why I feel threads like yours are also important. It's not even a matter of individual faith, it's the history that is linked to these old and rare books. They chronicle so much more than the words they contain, they tell us about the times in which they were created.

a reply to: JustMike

Yes, let's hope they atleast didn't split the spreads, but merely unseamed it. It could be collected or fully restored for that matter, and even change the gender and species of the olde booke by chosing another kind of calf for his or her leather cover. Even cows can have eternal life.

As for old books, and preservation, it's a saddening war where time and oxygen are your two main enemies. And bleeders like the ones in that store who'd rather make a few dollars on selling parts of pages instead of simply handing it over to some who could put it up on Southerby's or wherever they auction off books to serious collectors and institutions. I've owned a few old books myself, but I gave them away, I buy books to read and study or for reference and simply collecting knowledge, giving the world an egg to open when I die.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim
I'm similar. I've given away more books than I can remember,

About the "gender" thing, it actually relates to a Bible text. Ruth 3:15 ends with the statement, "and she went into the city."

However, when they were doing the first printings of the KJV in 1611, there was an error in the typesetting so it read, "and he went into the city."

Originally it was thought that when this error was discovered and the "he" was corrected to "she", it was only the very first edition 1611 version that had the error and that the ones containing "she" were all printed some weeks or months later. However, more recent studies suggest that the books were printed at the same time, but those pages were done on different presses. There is no hard evidence to support the original notion that one is older than the other.

As the "he" versions had that error it's possible some were recalled and had a new page inserted so they would be correct. In any case "he" 1611 first-edition versions are much rarer than the "she" ones.

Regarding that first edition KJV I couldn't afford, it only occurred to me later that I could have contacted a congregation I knew in London and told them about it. They had 600 members, so if they put in just 50 pence each their church could have bought that Bible and saved it. At that time, I was too focused on wanting that Bible for myself. The folly of youth.

But I learned a lesson. If something is very rare and special and hence deserves to be saved, then find any legal way to do it. Personal possession doesn't matter. Preserving these precious books (and other ancient works) is what really counts. That's one reason why I "sold" my 1620 KJV for what it cost me. I was just its custodian for a while and I was happy to pass it on to people who would care for it and study it in the decades to come. Since then, I've given away many books, especially to students who lack the funds to buy them. I am sure they will do the same as and when they are able. But meanwhile, the books are safe.

a reply to: JustMike

Haha, gives the term Freudian slip a whole new dimention, doesn't it? Loved your KJV printing tidbits there, I didn't know that, I just assumed it would be either because of the former gender of it's cover or if it had been printed on parchment, it's very pages. To me I am not so concerned by old manuscripts surviving as artifacts, I leave that to the Smithsonian and the Vatican, but the messages and art inside them belongs to the whole human race and every ancient book in existence should be transcribed and translated so anyone can read them and make up their minds. Think about how useful a searchable database of all issued editions of KJV would be, or the possibility to compare thousands of different editions any bible or of Plato's Republic or Aristotle's Politics for that matter? Why don't we do that? It's humanity's inheritence and it rots away in damp lockers and bank deposit boxes around the world! We should do something. Transcribe and translate every antique book in the world and put it up on the web. Alexandria go home.