| List Price: | |
| Price: | $11.99 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details... |
| You Save: | $0.00(0.00%) |
| Binding: | Kindle Edition |
| EAN: | |
| Feature: | |
| Label: | HarperCollins e-books |
| Publisher: | HarperCollins e-books |
| Studio: | HarperCollins e-books |
| Tags: |
Editorial Reviews
A network of complex currents flowed across Jacobean England. This was the England of Shakespeare, Jonson, and Bacon; the era of the Gunpowder Plot and the worst outbreak of the plague. Jacobean England was both more godly and less godly than the country had ever been, and the entire culture was drawn taut between these polarities. This was the world that created the King James Bible. It is the greatest work of English prose ever written, and it is no coincidence that the translation was made at the moment "Englishness," specifically the English language itself, had come into its first passionate maturity. The English of Jacobean England has a more encompassing idea of its own scope than any form of the language before or since. It drips with potency and sensitivity. The age, with all its conflicts, explains the book.
This P.S. edition features an extra 16 pages of insights into the book, including author interviews, recommended reading, and more.Related Reviews
The Committee that Made a Classic
A Challenging Foray into Jacobean Society
Understand that Nicolson's book is not "Bible study": It does not deal with issues of spirituality; it does not attempt to explicate biblical passages; and it does not care whether or not heaven and hell exist or whether or not God is dead or alive-or has ever existed. It does deal with the social, cultural, economic, and governmental milieu that existed at the time King James VI of Scotland and I of England directed that a new translation be made of the Greek and Hebrew texts comprising the Bible. It explains why yet another Bible was to be created-in addition to the multiple versions that already existed. It explains why, despite the efforts of six companies of Translators, the world has never enjoyed a totally authentic copy of the King James Bible (think "printers' errors," including such egregious mistakes as replacing the name "Jesus" with the name "Judas").
As do some other reviewers represented here, I feel that Nicolson has perhaps tried to make too strong a case for the power of the language used in the Bible. In this instance and others, he is dealing with highly subjective topics, and I do not always find his arguments persuasive. He is also hampered by the fact that we are now four centuries removed from the events he describes, and much evidence has been lost to the passage of time. Consequently, there is little concrete cause-and-effect in the book and much surmise and supposition. Are Nicolson's conclusions accurate? Alas, the most we can say at this point in history is "perhaps."
The casual reader also needs to be forewarned that Nicolson's use of language is, at its best, erudite and, at its worst, obfuscated. Have a dictionary handy before plunging into Nicolson's text and be prepared to add to your existing vocabulary because this book can be a learning experience in more ways than one!
Is this the best book available on Jacobean society in the early 17th century in England? I have no idea for, as I stated in the beginning, this was my first venture into that particular subject. Is it sometimes challenging reading? Yes. Does its reliance upon conclusions based on subjective interpretations produce frustration in readers hoping for concrete evidence? Again, yes. Do these weaknesses condemn the book? Definitely not, at least not for a reader newly come to this subject, for there is much here to be learned about the far-reaching theological conflicts between the austere Puritans and the Catholic-influenced Anglicans, about the other versions of the Bible extant when the King James Bible was being written, and about the King himself. And did you know that the King James Bible was NOT the one that the Puritans brought with them to the New World? Nicolson's book will cause many Americans-at least those of us who are products of the Bible Belt-to correct quite a few erroneous assumptions. It is indeed a learning experience and worth the effort to study it.
Middle-brow history of a working committee
--This book is not an advocate of any particular religious issue, sect or cause.
--This book is not a Bible study or, indeed, any sort of religious study guide. Those seeking an exposition of religious truth should turn away right now. This is not for you.
--This book is not an academic text, being largely free of any formal thesis and paying no particular homage to whatever Theory happens to be on the academic boil these days. Academic drudges burrowing for material with which to footnote their footnotes will be wasting their time here in a manner even more dramatically pointless than usual.
--This book is not a self-consciously designed "easy read" written in words and phrases suitable for the comprehension of fourth graders. This author occasionally dares to quote people who lived four hundred years ago in their own words, styles and spellings. Consider this passage: "I am persuaded his Royall mynde reioyceth more with good hope, wch he hathe for happy successe of that worke [the new Bible], then of his peace concluded with Spayne." [Page 65-66 of the hardcover edition] If that taxes your reading skills to the breaking point, seek enlightenment elsewhere.
This book does provide an overview--or perhaps more accurately, a sketch of religion and politics in 17th century England. In many ways, the two words were alternate terms for the same phenomenon, much as they are in Baghdad today. (A single generation after this translation of the Bible was made, the intertwining of religion and politics would become almost as deadly as it is in Baghdad today.)
The book offers thumbnail biographies--and in a few cases, somewhat more than that--of the fifty or so grave and learned scholars tasked with preparing the translation. In so far as the records survive, it outlines their organization and their contributions--for even in those long-ago days there were bosses and drudges.
Finally, the book deals with the majestic 17th century translation of the Bible as a literary entity. Here, at last, Adam Nicolson becomes an advocate. While acknowledging that scholarship and learning have made advances in the three centuries since the translation was made, he argues forcefully that no English translation made before or since has matched the King James Version in effectiveness, directness, power and sublimity.
Nicolson is such an advocate of the grand style of the KJV that it affects his own writing style. He does not emulate the actual style of the Bible--a thing, he makes clear, that was deliberately chosen and already noticeably archaic in the early 17th century, but he is much more orotund than is common in our piping times. He models his prose more on Gibbon or Macaulay than, say, Hemingway.
Consider the author's handling of a meeting at Hampton Court that involved the newly crowned King James, some gorgeously bedecked senior bishops of the Church of England and four black-clad Puritan ministers. All were assembled to bring sweet harmony to the land under a King who liked to think of himself as a peacemaker--and who sometimes was. That, of course, turned out to be a flat failure, but one of the Puritans, John Reynolds, almost casually remarked that the ministers he represented would like to have "one only translation of ye Bible to be authenticall and read in ye churche." Richard Bancroft, the Bishop of London (who a few years earlier had taken up a pike among his own armed guards to repulse the Earl of Essex's ragtag rebellion and who would soon become Archbishop of Canterbury) sneered at that, saying "If every man's humour might be followed, there would be no end of translating."
To everyone's surprise, the King commanded that a translation be made. In Adam Nicolson's long-breathed, parentheses-strewn, semi-colon-laden words, it was a "translation that was to be uniform (in other words with no contentious Geneva-style interpretations set alongside or within the text); with the learned authority of Oxford and Cambridge (which, at least in their upper echelons, were profoundly conservative institutions ...); to be revised by the bishops (the very influence that Reynolds did not want); then given, for goodness' sake, to the Privy Council, in effect a central censorship committee with which the government would see that its stamp was on the text, no deviation or subversion allowed; and finally to James himself, whose hostility to any whiff of radicalism ... had been clear enough. And this ferociously episcopal and monarchist Bible was to be the only translation to be read in church: `no other'." [Page 60.]
It must be pointed out, however, that Nicolson's prose does not always march to the solemn beat of the kettledrums ("for goodness' sake"), but sometimes dances to a merrier piper: "For these Puritans, and in a way we can scarcely understand now, the words of the scriptures were thought to provide a direct, almost intravenous access to the divine." [Page 135]
This is a good, middleweight book that, so far as I can tell, does not push unduly beyond the bounds of the scanty evidence. It can be justly criticized for being as much a series of raconteurial anecdotes as a logically-structured book. Its underlying preference for style over content is, at the very least, open for debate.
Four stars--but well worth reading in any case.
A MINOR OBSERVATION:
Adam Nicolson is obviously an Englishman, but my American edition from HarperCollins consistently uses the typically North American term, "King James Version," rather than the English "Authorised Version." I therefore suspect that other Americanisms may also have been edited into the English text.
Nicolson's preference for the King James Bible, and for Jacobean thought, is clear. Yet, even in his bias, he does provide some convincing arguments. Much criticism has been leveled at the accuracy and clarity of the translation. He acknowledges that it is fraught with error - particularly in the Hebrew sections. But with respect to the language itself, he contends that the translators spent much time arguing over the specific words to use. And their selection criteria included, among other things, richness of meaning and rhythm. Their translation was meant to replace the Bishops Bible and so to be read out loud during sermons. Modern day society tends to crave the specific, the exact. Jacobean England did not. And the translation reflects that. For Nicolson, the King James Bible still holds power and authority precisely because it hasn't been reduced to a common language and because it still retains a richness and drama that, for him, modern translations lack in their enthusiasm for exactitude. His answer to the criticism that the Tyndale Bible is the greater of the two since the King James Bible takes 80-90% of its material from Tyndale's earlier translation is that that 10-20% difference is what counts. Where Tyndale is clumsy and halting the King James is majestic, rhythmic, and powerful. He also points out that the translators did not set out to make something new, but rather to improve on what had already been done; and that this was to some extent driven by political motives. All-in-all Nicolson's analysis is interesting, biased and yet convincing despite that, and well worth the time to read.
A highly readable account with many levels of insight
But he adds much more: There's a wonderful social commentary on life at the Jacobean court and the astounding contrasts within King James's personality. Throughout the book, Nicholson weaves in interesting character sketches of the diverse group who came together for this monumental task. He adds concise discussions of the doctrinal issues that were separating the Puritans from the established Church of England, and many protestants will recognize the same issues we see today in discussions of "high church versus low church."
For many bible readers, the Christmas story can only be told in the language of the King James. "God's Secretaries" shows how the placement of a single word can change the rhyhthm of a sentence from poetry to prose. Nicholson even dares to show the errors that the Translators made. The King James is beautiful, yes, but imperfect as any Sunday morning lay reader who has tried to make sense of "He who was sin who knew no sin" knows.
This book will make a wonderful gift for any Epsicopalian, or someone with an interest in popular history of the British Reformation. Then borrow it to read yourself.
Popular history that informs without rigor
The initial historical context was very helpful for me. Understanding that this book was created by a new Scottish king of England to unify his kingdom and further solidify his throne is a major insight for me. The paradox of James with his consuming personality and foreign influences generating this project is powerfully stated. The irony of a man like Lancelot Andrewes, who evaded serving the poor and sick during the plague on London, serving as a chief translator pricks the balloon that these were holy infallible men who had nothing but the unadulterated word of God as their guide. Nicholson makes it clear that this was both a religious and a political project, a sharp contrast to the earlier translation by the martyr Tyndale.
Nicholson admits late in the book that he is not a churchgoer and his interests in the work seem to be more poetic than spiritual. Several specific examples highlight what he feels to be the vastly superior word choices of translators in comparison to both earlier and later translations. He does seem to do a good job of capturing the regalness of the translation.
As someone who has read more thorough historical works, I wanted a more thorough job of fleshing out the history. Several times in the book, Nicholson will find one historical reference that allows him to speculate on the biographical motivations of the translators. At times, Nicholson seemed to oscillate between a series of biographical portraits which may be interesting but divert away from his subject and a meditation on the beauty of the text. He makes a case for how the majesty of the King James Bible parallelled the architectural excess of Jacobean England as well that I was unconvinced by. I wanted more historical details so that I could devise some of my own interpretations to how this book and its authors affect the Bible in practice. Only in the last few pages does he describe what happened to the Bible once it was created.
I feel this book, while helpful, was confused between a historical meditation on the Bible and a choppy biography of the interpreters. I learned a great deal, but I will probably find other books on the subject more helpful. For a popular audience, this readable book may be a good introduction, but I suspect there's better stuff out there.
[3 stars]
Sermons, sedition and social stability
For once, the renaming of a British publication - the original was "Power and Glory" - was appropriate. Nicolson opens with the accession of King James I of England, but the VI of Scotland. This unusual transformation of a monarch brought about a new wave of stresses to a nation that had endured a succession of religious upheavals over the previous century. From Henry VIII's break with Rome, through an unmitigated Protestantism and sudden reversion to Roman Catholicism, to Elizabeth's long, waffling reign, the British welcomed a king they felt promised religious stability. They hadn't counted on James' unhappy years under Scots Presbyterian mentors. Nicolson's depiction of James is of a man almost obsessed with exercising power over religious matters. If not the subtle initiator, James certainly pounced on the idea of creating a "new" English Bible.
It was an era of Bible writing. The Douai had been recently produced by English Catholics in exile, while the very Presbyterians James loathed had imported Calvin's Geneva text enthusiastically. Anglicans had struggled with earlier English-language versions, from Tyndale through the half-century old Bishop's Bible. Having been smothered by the heavily annotated Geneva version, James was keen to have a "pure" text. Nicolson convenes, almost one at a time, the Translator committee to produce it. Calling them "a disparate lot" is but mildly descriptive. There were stern theologians, frowning at any challenge to episcopal prerogatives. Others were known to weep while delivering sermons. The Presbyterian presence, no matter how unwelcome in James' view, still had to be tolerated. The Geneva, as Nicolson notes repeatedly, is what came to the Western Hemisphere on the Mayflower.
However pedantic this book might have been in another's hands, Nicolson's characterisations elevate it to gripping reading. Lancelot Andrewes, the weeping pastor, takes centre stage as the chief Translator - James insisted on the capitalisation. Andrewes, along with most of the team, was driven by the notion of a monarch closely aligned with the church. No more backsliding to Rome! The Puritans, although not yet granted that appellation, wanted even stronger guarantees - bishops were the banana peels leading to papistry. Get them out! The tenor, ably captured by Nicolson, is a strong church under a strong king. Yet among the Translators was one entertaining the most seditious thought of all. Henry Savile, whose family would later found the London haberdashery locus, had travelled and read probably more widely than any of his colleagues. Describing him as "the most glamorous of the Translators", Nicolson also reveals that Savile harboured the idea of a nation without kings! Savile's experience kept him from the confines of holy orders, but his language capability was undeniable.
As the work begins, Nicolson is forced to reveal that almost nothing of the Translators' notes or exchanges has survived. Although they had access to a large compendium of works by Church Fathers and other commentators, no list of what they consulted is available. There are some personal journal entries in various locations - mostly uncovered by American researchers beavering away in dusty vaults. These, however, are but a tantalising sample. No record of submissions, disputations, arguments or reasons for resolutions are provided. Instead, we are given Nicolson's paean to the formal language of Jacobean England. His disparagement of more recent versions isn't even camouflaged scorn. He longs to return to the subject of his study, but what would be sacrificed to accomplish this end?
Although this is supposed to be a study of Jacobean times, there are a few gaps. The communication between Britain and the Continent, only touched on with Savile, had more impact than Nicolson grants. Explorers were widening the view of the world, which led many to wonder what the deity had been up to in those remote places. Within the British Isles, Savile was but a symptom. The rapid change of faiths led to serious questioning of long-standing dogmas. If religion could change so often and so dramatically, how could the deity tolerate it.
Nicolson ignores the growing tendency to question and the resulting emergence of "the village atheist" in Britain. As the most literate people, which Nicolson notes was increasing in this period, it was only logical that questions would increase. Nor does he see fit to note that the very effort the Translators made laid the foundation for an even greater upheaval in the Puritan Revolution and Cromwell. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
While I enjoy the King James style, Nicolson was weakest when trumpeting the superiority of the King James to other contemporaneous translations. Seeing various versions side by side, it wasn't altogether clear to me that the King James was the obviously better choice. It doesn't hurt that the king is behind your version. That being said, "God's Secretaries" was a terrific read, full of the anecdotal information that brings history alive.
A superb and enlightening read
In a beautifully written book, Adam Nicolson explores the efforts of a group of fallible human beings--clergymen, power-brokers, drunkards and even a few rogues--who produced a divine work of art that was to become a standard for generations. A committee of 54 men translated the King James Bible, a book that has inspired the world and influenced the work of countless great writers and thinkers, including William Shakespeare, Abraham Lincoln, William Faulkner, Martin Luther King and John F. Kennedy.
In God's Secretaries, Nicolson draws the reader into a world of political, religious, social and cultural change. Crowned in 1603, the impoverished King James VI of Scotland had ascended to the throne of England as King James I, inheriting great wealth and a country divided by religious and political turmoil. Nicolson writes, "The period was held in the grip of an immense struggle: between the demands for freedom of the individual conscience and the need for order and an imposed inheritance; between monarchy and democracy; between extremism and tolerance." The reign of King James marked the beginning of a united England and Scotland.
Long before James's ascension, after King Henry VIII had broken from the Roman Catholic church in 1534, the Church of England was created with the king as its head. By the time James became king, England was a crucible of Catholic loyalists, royalists, Puritans and Presbyterians, all of whom were in disagreement over how God's word should be translated. Several translations were in existence, but King James wanted one Bible for everyone. Drawing on existing translations, including the Reformation-era Geneva Bible, the king's men labored for seven years to create the King James Bible. Not surprisingly, King James wasn't overly concerned with proper biblical interpretation; he wanted to maintain the order of his kingdom and preserve the "divine right of kings." While James was open to examination of the theological basis of the Church of England itself, he wouldn't tolerate the questioning of his own authority.
Nicolson does an excellent job illuminating a world now ancient to modern eyes as he takes the reader into the conflicted society of Jacobean England. A great admirer of the literature of the Bible, Nicolson's own prose is magnificent. Rarely does one come across an engrossing book that elevates the ordinary, banal language often heard and spoken today. Nicolson further draws out the beauty and musicality of the language as he compares select passages from other translations to the King James Bible to show the linguistic superiority of the latter.
Readers will also learn interesting facts. For instance, the English in the King James Bible was already archaic in 1611, and the Puritans--opponents of the Church of England and future pilgrims to the New World--did not bring the King James Bible with them. Thus, the KJV didn't become popular in America until after the Civil War.
God's Secretaries is definitely not a Bible study, so Christian readers shouldn't expect an exposition of Biblical truth. Regardless, this book is an enjoyable excursion into an age that produced the greatest work of English prose. For those readers who believe the Bible is the infallible word of God, Nicolson's book offers an intriguing snapshot of a brief time in history guided by the very hand of God.
Excellent Non-scholarly Treatment
Each of the three have a different emphasis: McGrath focuses on the theological aspects, with a look at the history of the age, Bobrick looks more at the history and the results of the translation of the Bible into English in general rather than focusing on just the King James. Nicolson looks more at the individuals involved in the translation process, and the cultural environment that produced the KJV.
Nicolson does an outstanding job of pointing out the warts in the lives of each translator that he discusses. He also points out the contradictions in their lives, showing people of remarkable piety and humility who were quite willing to parlay their ecclesiastical positions into lucrative political and social positions. This was not an age of "Be ye separate". It was a majestic age, and that fact is shown in the language of the King James Bible.
This is not a book that will address the current KJVOnly controversy, which I was relieved to discover. It is simply a very accessable work that highlights the personalities and culture that produced a work that, in spite of it's deficiencies and archaic language (even then!) has served the church of Christ quite ably for the past four hundred years. Along with the two works I mention at the beginning of this review, this book makes a good contribution to the modern literature on the subject, and will serve as a good introduction for those who are just beginning their reading on this fascinating subject.
Rich discussion of the skimpy evidence
In the face of this paucity of hard documentation, Nicolson draws his account out to book length by examining the personalities, theological sympathies, and careers of a dozen individual translators, and by limning the political and theological atmosphere of England under King James: its extravagance and its horror of extravagance, its insatiable appetite for three hour sermons and for generous decolletage, and its capacity for combining fierce and ascetic intellectualism with passionate feeling, a capacity we've forgotten the Puritans were capable of, and pretty much lost the knack of ourselves.
All these characters of the age found their way into the irreplaceable, apposite music of the King James Bible: in its unhurried pace, its direct Anglo-Saxon vocabulary set in those sonorous rhythms that even in 1611 harked back to an older diction; in its frank refusal to clothe the heavy-breathing Song of Songs in euphemisms; in the countless precise choices that left ambiguities in the original unresolved, and so secured the peace; in the Translators' conscious plan to compile majestic words fit to present to a majestic king.
I thoroughly enjoyed the book. It will appeal more to history buffs than it will to most people who spend a lot of time actually reading the KJV. For us in the 21st century, politics and theology are two realms with a great gulf fixed between them, and the story spelled out here will sound like it had far more to do with government than with God. As Nicolson ably explains, that wouldn't have been the Translators' point of view at all. Their mental and spiritual world, for which the divine right of kings was a life and death issue, and a faith issue, barely intersects with our own. And it connects only slightly more solidly with the world modern fundamentalists inhabit. It is remarkable that the six companies' labor produced so much language that still speaks to us so intimately and insistently, and seems to dissolve the divide. It's a tribute both to their literary skill, and to their unparalleled fidelity to the original, timeless text.
The making of the KJV is a picture that can never be painted. "God's Secretaries" does a fine job of sketching the surroundings, sometimes in glorious Rembrandtian oils. (Nicolson's own style has the evenly paced dignity common to the seventeenth century texts he has steeped himself in.) But the central figures, their actual writing and translating, is lost in the chiaroscuro of history. The best periscope into the minds of the translators is still going to be found by opening the Authorized Version itself.
Engaging without being Trivial, Erudite without being Obscure
I have sometimes thought that the best way to learn history is not to read a textbook or historical synthesis, but to read about one event, one person, or one cultural artifact. In order to understand the significance of any historical particularity, we must understand the surrounding context. But if we wish to understand the context, we can grasp it through that particularity.The philosophical remarks are necessary, as it is that idea-that we can begin to understand the dynamics of a culture through a particular event-that undergirds Adam Nicolson's methodology in God's Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible
After all, God's Secretaries is not only about the King James Bible: it is about England and its transition from Elizabeth to James. With tensions increasing between the newly formed Church of England and the Puritans, James saw the creation of a new Bible, a Bible for all of England, as essential to keeping the country together. In order to do so, he commissioned this new translation to be a moderate translation, one that would marginalize the anti-hierarchical translations of the popular Puritan Geneva Bible, which he saw as a threat to his own rule.
God's Secretaries is the story of the men and the events that shaped that translation.
The end result of their efforts, argues Nicolson, is a Bible that reflects the moderate inclusiveness of the King James court : "[The King James Bible] does not choose. It absorbs and includes. It is in that sense catholic, as Jacobean Englishmen consistently called their church: not Roman but catholic, embracing all."
Nicolson does not limit his analysis to the abstract generalizations. At points, he reads the text of the King James Bible extremely close, comparing it to previous and later translations. In his discussion of Mark 14:4, where (as the KJV puts it) Judas asks, "Why was this waste of the ointment made?," Nicolson concludes: "In this sentence, one can see the extraordinary phenomenon of the King James Bible conforming both to Protestant and pre-Protestant ideas about the nature of Christianity. It is both clear and rich. It both makes an exact and almost literal translation of the original and infuses that translation with a sense of beauty and ceremony. It has that peculiarly Jacobean combination of light and richnesss, the huge windows illuminating the densely decorated room, the unfamiliar amalgam of the court-Puritan, both strict and grand...It doesn't choose between the clear and the rich but makes its elucidation into a kind of richness."
As much could be said of Nicolson's prose. As might be expected from someone steeped in the language of the King James Bible, Nicolson is very aware of language-including his own. In comparing the King James Bible to the recent New English Bible, Nicolson concludes that the New English Bible is "a descent to dreariness, to a level of banality below Tyndale's...The language of the King James Bible is the language of Hatfield, of patriarcy, of an instructed order, of richness as a form of beauty, of authority as a form of good; the New English Bible is motivated by the opposite, an anxiety not to bore or intimidate. It is driven, in other words, by a desire to please and, in that way, is a form of language which has died." Nicolson's own prose, however, avoids the pretentiousness of someone who is self-consciously trying to resurrect the English tongue. His musical and poetic style flows too freely to be intentional.
God's Secretaries is valuable not only as a window into the England of King James, though it is an excellent window. It contains a rich analysis of the King James Bible and an fascinating recounting of the men and events that shaped the translation. Nicolson's work contains illuminating comparisons of our own era and language to the era of the King James Bible, comparisons that are as thoughtful as they are wistful.
Through it all, Nicolson is engaging without being trivial and erudite without being obscure, which makes God's Secretaries a must read for anyone interested in history.
The KJV- a Cosmopolitan Production
Nicolson's is a poignant history offering a plethora of data, reflecting his vast knowledge of the era. From this book we learn about Anglican leaders (Andrewes, Abbot, Layfield, etc.) and their Puritan adversaries (Reynolds, Chaderton, Barrow, etc.). Strategically, and perhaps providentially, positioned in the middle of this theological melee King James (the staunch Scottish anti-Presbyterian monarch) orders a new Bible translation that will bring theological peace to his riotous realm. Nicolson adroitly answers the question of how the KJV could have emerged from such a violent, chaotic, and self-absorbed world.
Speaking to the KJV's production Nicolson makes the rare point that King James himself orchestrated much of the Bible's translation efforts. "With [Archbishop] Bancroft's help he drew up the instructions for the Translators...," (page 182). The King also took a hand in helping the Archbishop to choose the lead translation team (pages 85-86). The KJV was a momentous document for king and kingdom while, as Nicolson points out, it was to become a watershed event for the English nation and language.
Although the book's intent is focused on the KJV's preparation, Nicolson also proffers good history as he tells its gripping story. In speaking to the language of the 17th century translation he wrestles with the disinformation caused through contemporary (21st century) language. Nicolson believes that language which does not inform, or teach, is dead (page 154) and that post-modern English has lost its authority. As proof, he cites the KJV for the prime example in "the use of moving and informative language" and the New English Bible (1972) as it's opposite, emerging from "anxiety not to bore or intimidate".
Nicolson also relates many historical anecdotes (i.e. Andrewes' prison interview with Barrow, James' expensive and debauched entertainment for his brother-in-law the King of Denmark, and Savile's costly and clever rise to ecclesial power even those he was never ordained, to name only a few interesting accounts). Nicolson supports his notion that the KJV is in effect a creation from a group of holy, for the most part, but cosmopolitan, from every part, group of 17th Jacobean male translators. He is proud of their great, history making, accomplishment with the KJV. (His book inspired for me a re-reading of the original biblical text.)
The book offers a very useful appendix section containing an interesting four page study on "the seventeenth century Bible", an informative eight pages of brief description for each of the translation companies (fifty scholars translated the KJV from the original biblical languages from six different teams, or "companies", across southern England), and a helpful three page chronology (from 1603 to 1611, the KJV translation period). The book also contains 14 black and white photo pages showing its principal characters and a couple of prominent translation locations.
This is an interesting narrative about the most famous (and most used) English Bible translation. It is recommended to all students of English history, Reformation scholars, Bible translators, the general history reader, and anyone who admires the King James Version of the Bible. If you like thorough well-written history, you will enjoy this book! Order your copy soon.
The Beauty of Words Evoking the Beauty of The Word
The first portion of the book puts the process of translation into the context of the early Jacobean era. Nicolson traces the end of the Elizabethan era and the ascension of James I (James VI of Scotland) to the throne of England in 1603. There were numerous issues of state and theology (the two are inexorably mixed) that James needed to navigate.
James I, was the head of the English church (referred to here as the Anglican church) that operated on a theological level that was betwixt and between Catholicism and the `purer' (for wont of a better adjective) Protestantism of Calvin and Luther (to name two) that had spread like wildfire across the continent and had made serious inroads into English religious life. Those Protestants were referred to as nonconformists in England because their practice did not conform to the Anglican tradition. Nicolson does an admirable job of setting out the doctrinal and political justifications for this tripartite divide. At its most superficial level, Catholicism because of its focus on the religious dominance of Rome and the Pope served to lessen the authority of the crown because it split the allegiance of the faithful and belied the critical notion that the King's authority flowed directly from God without reference to or reliance on the Pope.
The differences between nonconformists and Anglicans were more doctrinal but those differences were as politically laden, if not more so, than those with the Catholic Church. Specifically, the centerpiece of the Anglican Church was the Altar. The idea of the `ceremony' of Christianity took pride of place. There was also a clear hierarchy in the form of the King, Archbishops, and Priests tasked with reading and interpreting God's words. By contrast, the centerpiece of the nonconformist rite was the pulpit. The idea of the word of God took pride of place. Further, nonconformists believed that the individual had the ability to understand the word of God and that the individual could have a personal relationship with God without the guidance of Bishops, Archbishops, or the King. The difference in focus was a direct and immediate threat to the King's authority. If an individual could derive divine guidance without recourse to the church or King the very need for a King and that King's divine right to rule, would be (and was) called into question.
Nicolson devotes the rest of his book to the creation of the King James Bible by a committee of generally unknown churchmen and scholars. Split into groups and assigned different books of the Old and New Testaments the translators (as they were known) were provided with earlier versions (specifically the Geneva and Tyndale versions) and tasked with creating a new, `improved' version. The translators included both Anglicans and nonconformists. Nicolson provides compelling reasons why this committee was so constructed.
It seems clear that James I intended to co-opt a certain moderate segment of the nonconformist tradition and in so doing render them and their flocks less likely to challenge to the authority of royal rule. If successful such a co-option would make his reign less vulnerable from that side of the religious divide. Nicolson infers that the creation of a universally accepted version of the Bible would mitigate doctrinal differences making a ceremony out of the word itself. Focusing more attention on the `word' might appease some nonconformists. Creating a version rich and rife with meaning also had certain ceremonial aspects that might appease the Anglican powers that feared undue focus on the word. It was an admirable goal even if the bloody civil war that followed a mere 30 years or so from its publication proved the attempt futile.
The most important element of the book for me lies with Nicolson's unrelenting love for the words created by this `great commission'. Nicolson does acknowledge that much of the core text of the King James Bible is freely adopted from the Tyndale version. He does show, however, how the change of only one or two words can turn "those words into a tangible experience" that enhances the beauty and power of the previous text. Nicolson is also not averse to castigating contemporary versions of the Bible that denude the language of meaning for the sake of making it a bit easier to read. Nicolson cites T.S. Eliot's admonition of the New English Bible that it "astonishes in its combination of the vulgar, the trivial, and the pedantic."
Nicolson does seem more kindly disposed to James I than may be warranted. He notes James' profligate spending and sensual appetite only in passing. However, my impression was that the beauty and power of the Bible prepared at his direction and published under his name covered a multitude of sins and that James' other actions were not particularly relevant to the creation of `his' Bible.
The King James Bible: A new Bible for a new age
King James commissioned this version of the Bible as a unifying force. It was intended to be the official Bible of England. To do this, King James assembled a group of more than 50 translators including members from both the established Church of England and the more moderate amongst the puritans.
This book is the story of how the committee worked together to deliver a translation of the Bible which many of us consider to be a beautiful piece of literature in its own right.
Mr Nicolson's book is informative, enjoyable and well-written. The book provides considerable insight into both the politics of religion in Jacobean England and the personal reign of James I and VI himself. While King James's unifying objectives for the project were not met, the King James Bible itself endures as one of the most beautiful pieces of English literature.
This is a book well worth reading for anyone who wonders how the King James Bible came into being. It is also, for those so inclined, a fine example of how a committee can actually work collaboratively to achieve something of lasting value.
Jennifer Cameron-Smith
Here is an excerpt from Nicolson's book, commenting on a passage from Mark's Gospel:
There came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head. And there were some that had indignation within themselves, and said, Why was this waste of the ointment made? For it might have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and have been given to the poor. And they murmured against her.
"This is a particularly resonant and revealing passage about the way in which the King James Bible works. The private ritual of the woman with the spikenard is cloaked in an air of what can only be called holiness. Her bringing the oil of spikenard (an aromatic plant, sometimes identified with lavender) carries echoes of the Magi bringing their precious substances to the child in the stable, and the words these translators chose also carry forward-echoes of the Last Supper, now only hours away ('and she brake the box, and poured it on his head, 'Jesus took bread, and brake it'). This atmosphere of holiness is made to reside in the strange, formal, ritualised language of the seventeenth-century Bible (which also happens to be an intimately exact translation of the original)...."
Nicolson notes that this passage "is both clear and rich." The wording infuses the translation "with a sense of beauty and ceremony." Eloquently, Nicolson concludes his praise for the King James translation of this passage with this: "the richness of the words somehow represents a substance that goes beyond mere words and that is its triumph." (See p. 196.)
Thanks to Nicolson, I became aware that the King James Bible was translated with attention to how it would sound to its listeners. The final committee of scholars read the text aloud as part of the process of deciding on the wording. This accounts for the sense of rhythm in so many passages.
I enjoyed learning more about the 50 scholars who did the work and came away amazed that such imperfect individuals could accomplish something so wonderful. Nicolson, whose liking for his subject shines through with unabashed enthusiasm, explains how the translators worked (in six companies) and sheds much light on the atmosphere and beliefs of the time. I'm so grateful I had the opportunity to read this book.
Indeed, this was work done individually and communally. As Nicolson points out, the King James Version did not arise in a vacuum; there were earlier translations of the Bible into English, the greatest and most influential of which was the Tyndale Bible, whose influence was so great that at least three-quarters of the King James Version (and a goodly percentage of many future versions of the Bible) is directly from Tyndale.
This is no simple tale of translation. Nicolson explores the troubled times surrounding the early Jacobean reign in England. The glory of the Elizabethan age, with its turbulent times politically, socially and religiously, gave way to this somewhat-foreign influence now in authority. Part of the purpose of King James (the first of England, the sixth of Scotland) was to put an indelible English stamp on his reputation and reign, and succeeded such that his name continues to be near-synonymous with the holy scripture.
This age was one of change and growth, but also one of maturity and establishment. The Bible itself, from the very first page, proclaims this - this is the 'Authorised' version. The process itself took seven years, from the first commissioning in 1604 to the publication in 1611. Nicolson argues that there is a deep mystery in the process, whereby the names of the Translators (an official title for the 50 or so scholars from across Britain) are not known to the common reader of the Bible, despite the ubiquitous nature of the text. Their names are not inscribed in the text the way modern scholars ensure their names are duly credited - this anonymity strengthens the idea that this is a transmission of text from God, and not merely the work of human hands.
Nicolson applauds the political purposes behind the text (and yes, there were politics afoot here) - stating that this was 'a work of majesty, not of tyranny', this was an effort to place something in the country as a unifying entity that was simultaneously of the time and timeless, specific to the culture and yet universal.
Nicolson is no fan of Elizabeth, this is clear - the bleak picture of the end of her reign is about as far from a tribute to Gloriana as one can get; of course, this helps set the stage for the heroic James Stuart to appear. This early depiction gives the reader a clue to the bias inherent in the text, and biases there are, many. However, they are generally readily apparent, and the astute reader can glance over lightly interpretations while still enjoying the base information and turns that Nicolson devises as his narrative progresses.
Among the many personalities introduced here are Lancelot Andrewes, the chief Translator, a man of contradictory sensibilities - at once a lavish courtier and a world-denying, remorseful character. Richard Bancroft, Archbishop of Canterbury, was the chief organiser; Henry Savile, a figure of some glamour and prestige, is called by Nicolson a buccaneer-scholar - the only Translator not in Holy Orders. In addition to the personalities of the Translators were the characteristic events of the time - colonists setting off for the unknown lands of Virginia, the publication of Shakespeare's sonnets, and the freezing over of the river Thames all occurred during the translation process.
This is a wonderful book to read, not only to gain some back-stage information about the King James Bible, but to experience anew a world so vital for and yet so distant from our own.
This is not a "Christian" work, but is a secular, historic work. I found this book to be what all historical writers say they achieve, a fair, unbiased work. Some facts may be disputed amongst historians, but I do not believe that Mr. Nicolson intentionally put a spin in this book. Well done, Mr. Nicolson.
One can read volumes of books on King James and English history. One can read volumes of books on church history. One can read volumes of books on the KJV. One will find it difficult to find a nice book to put all the three together and be written in a clear manner that is also an enjoyable read.
How a committee produced a miracle
First, Nicholson points out that there were Many versions of the Bible,including Latin, German, and English versions. The German Bible is attributed to Martin Luther. There were several English language Bibles that influenced the King James Bible. These included the Bible translated and written during the early years of the reign of King Henry VIII, and the Geneva Bible, written in Switzerland by Englishmen escaping from the religious tyrany of Queen Mary. There was also a Bible written during the reign of Elizabeth and widely used through the Church of England, which was called the Bishop's Bible.
Second, Nicholson points out that King James I had a hand in the final versions of the Bible. James was reared by devoute Scottish Calvinists and he was extremely knowledgeable about scripture. He was not pleased with the Geneva Bible that used the term tyrant repeatedly. James insisted that the King James Bible not use this word. He also was not pleased with the running commentary that was included with the Geneva Bible. The King James Bible does not have a third column on each page offering a commentary as to the meaning of the text. James I was an interesting fellow, probably gay, and certainly not overpowered by religious types who had tried to dominate him since he was a child left an orphan when his mother, Mary Queen of Scotts, was beheaded by Elizabeth I.
Third, Nicholson sensitizes us to the fact that the King James Bible was written by a committee, an miracle in itself. The learned scholars however who translated and coallated the Bible however we also enforcers of a central state religion and therefore there is much history offered as to their treatment of Catholics, Calvinists, and Puritans.
Fourth, the historic characters of the times, such as Sir Thomas More and others are revealed to have had multiple sympathies and prejudices and competitions, some of which were deadly.
Fifth, the central theme that controlled much of the translation was reaction to the Roman Catholic beliefs that the word of God must be mediated and moderated by the Catholic Church. The Church of England did not hold to this belief and the Bible relfects language that would emphasize that the Bible is accessible unto all and is not a secret document that must be translated by an elite priesthood.
Of course more could have been written about the political and theological context of the writing of the King James Bible, as well as comparisons in passages from Bible to Bible. There was one comparison that was both interesting and critical to interpretation, which had to do with whether Ecclesiasties refers to the word 'church' or 'congregation'. This is critical in that the Church of England sees the church as both a hierarhy and a following whereas the Calvinists and Puritans would discount the hierarchy and emphasize the congregation of believers.
This is a well written good read that made me want to learn more.
"More than we can perhaps realize now, a change of monarch in an age of personal rule meant not only a change of government and policy, but a change of culture, attitude and belief. A new king meant a new world."
"Early Jacobean England is suffused within this drama of authority and legitimacy and of the place of the state within that relationship. The `reformers,' it has often been said, `dethroned the pope and enthroned the Bible.'"
"That might have been the case in parts of Protestant Europe, but in England the process was longer, slower, less one-dimensional and more complex. The authority of the English, protestant monarch, as head of the Church of England, had taken on wholesale many of the powers which had previously belonged to the pope. The condition of England was defined by those ambiguities." "Othello, King Lear, and the Tempest---all centered on the ambivalences of power, the rights of the individual will, the claims of authority and the question of liberty of conscience---were written and staged for the first time."
The author remarks of the era in which the KJB was written: "It was a culture of repetition, of piling richness on richness, in love with the exotic and with the exotic enriched." A conference on church issues held between Dec Jan 1603- 1604 got the ball rolling on the new Bible. Each translator did an assigned chapter individually, and then conferred with colleagues to choose the best of the group. I was a Translator (a phrase that was capitalized during this era) was something said with pride then.
The era was one wherein "Plainness was poverty..." "This Bible, in other words, would absorb the full aesthetics of the age." "It was an intense, competitive and vitalized world." Moreover, the translators were very cognizant of the fact that they lived in..."the kingdom of the spoken. The ear is the governing organ of this prose; if it sounds right, it is right." The "main function," of the KJB, after all, "was to be read aloud in church on Sundays."
But the question remains: how did this Bible actually emerge? How did the selected men deliver?" And it is this which this book tries to make come alive, this era. Rather little herein, surprisingly, covers the hows and details of actually fashioning the KJB. Perhaps it's not so surprising not to get much in the way of how a book was put together, but nevertheless one may find oneself wanting to know more of what actually transpired regarding the putting together of the KJB as opposed to a watercolor of sorts that God's Secretaries actually is, heavy on the general picture and rather lacking in detail.
I have not read it yet, but I think you might be wise to at least consider In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Cultureby Alister Mcgrath before ultimately deciding whether to read this book or not. (08Nov) Cheers
The author's love of the English language is perhaps the dominant theme of the book, and his own approach encourages a much more careful - and enjoyable - reading of the KJV than many of us have experienced before. While we need the other translations to exploit the fruits of more recent scholarship, this book shows that the KJV's value is undiminished over the centuries. I hope it will also enable people who have dismissed the KJV as outmoded to go back to look at it with refreshed eyes and to reclaim its beauty and authority.
Not bad but not as good as Alister McGrath
A Monumental Project Reveals an Age
To create this translation - a project many consider to be the greatest work of English prose - he assembled about 50 scholars to do the work. Despite their individual failings - drink, ambition, self-promotion, obsequiousness, greed and pedantry-they labored together for seven years to give the first Stuart king his translation. It is a text, which for all of its failings, is without equal.
Its language drips with potency and sensitivity. The English language had just reached its age of maturity. This translation reflected the times - boisterous, subtle, majestic, nuisanced and musical. King James' Bible reflects the Jacobean England. This book relates not only the translation's tale, but also the England of Shakespeare, Bacon, the plague and the Gunpowder plot.
It is insightful read into the greatest monument of those times.
I hope you like the word "Jacobean"
This whole book reads like a term paper that's being padded to make a minimum word count. The author has a little bit of very good material to work with; enough for 50 pages maybe, and that part of the book is great.
Then basically he talks about anything he can think of that has anything to do with anything near the Bible, just to run the page count up to something appropriate for a full length book instead of the novella this could have been.
There's 30 pages on the Pilgrims going to America, for some reason. There's about 20 pages in the middle that are just a re-statement of 20 pages near the beginning. 15 pages or so of pictures of the tranlators. 10 or 15 pages on Shakespeare, including a section on how King Lear is the "opposite" of the King James Bible, whatever that could mean
I was left disappointed. I expected this to be either in depth biographical sketches of the Translators themselves, or a blow by blow account of the actual translation process of the King James Bible. Instead what you get is a little bit of both, totalling maybe 30 pages, and then about 190 pages on the architecture of the time, long exerpts in archaic dialogue from books and letters of the time, basic history lessons on King James, and like I said earlier, anything else Nicolson can think of to run the page count up
As one other reviewer stated, there doesn't seem to be any clear method to the presentation of the information either. It isn't Chronological or translator by translator or topic by topic or any kind of system that I can tell, and because of that there is ALOT of restatement of the exact same information 2 and 3 times, adding to the feeling that either the author was just running the page count up or at the very least published a draft of the book that hadn't been run by an editor yet.
I would say google this topic instead. you could read all the pertinent information in maybe 20 minutes and save the time and money associated with reading "God's Secretaries".
Not God's, but King James' Church Secretaries
The work is born of an enthusiasm for the men and the times that gave birth to that noble and beloved translation, and a celebration of the decidedly un-spiritual and worldly atmosphere it breathed. Vernacular versions are bashed, from Tyndale to the Twentieth Century.
There is a good deal of material about the scholars, but disappointingly, very little about the scholarship that went into the translation - no details of the particular recensions used (we know that Erasmus' Textus Receptus was the basis of the King James' New Testament, but we hear little of it or it's history here). The King James Bible, it turns out, was essentially a cut-and-paste job, from the contemporary versions of the day. The author admits as much, but some insights into the use of original-language manuscripts and recensions would have been apropos - very little is said on the subject.
The author does not appear to be a serious student of textual transmission, and his occasional forays into exegesis are hard to take seriously. And I personally couldn't subscribe to his nostalgia for an age where religious passion for a churchly authoritarianism results in the death of innocent dissidents, nor could I appreciate the parallel drawn between Jacobean religious intensity and the beliefs of modern day religious terrorists.
As for the author's ridicule of all Bible translations guilty of a blunt simplicity, lacking in ornamentation - if this is a crime, it was the crime of the original. The New Testament was written in Koine Greek, the workingman's Greek, what one scholar called the "coffee and doughnuts" Greek - a plain and unpretentious language of the everyday person.
To people like William Tyndale, and many others since, the beauty is in the message, not in the eloquence of language used to express the message. By the author's own admission, the King James Bible was written in an affected, formalized literary English that was never spoken, not even at the time it was written, based on an antiquated English of a previous century.
Still, the King James Bible is a very good translation for all it's shortcomings, which the author argues persuasively. The story of it's creation is interesting, and there is an attempt to explain the Jacobean literary influence by likening it to an architecture enamored with overt ornamentation and overlay, married to a utilitarian simplicity of egalitarian elegance.
The book jumps around quite a bit, wandering off in various and sundry tangents, exploring this tenuous detail, then that. In spite of which, it remains relatively readable and informative. I learned something of the circumstances and milieu that gave birth to this most popular translation.
If you think the King James Bible is the be-all do-all of Bible translations, you'll probably enjoy this book. If you lean toward a vernacular, colloquial rendition, be prepared to have your feathers ruffled. And don't expect a scholarly look at the textual geneology of the King James translation from this enjoyable but rambling essay.
I chose this book because of the topic. A browse of the first few well written pages pulled me right in. The writing style stayed strong throughout, but the book has a content problem. Nicolson is trying to put too much into too a small book.
The book has 2 titles, and this may be the problem. There should be plenty to fill a 400 page book on God's secretaries alone. The second title, the actual making of the KJV, gets short shrift in favor of a third topic which is England in the early period of the King James reign. The author discusses topics such as the Elizabeth-James transition, Guy Fawks plot and the flight of the Separatists to the New World. While these are strong sections, they are not clearly woven into either of the book's two themes.
The content sprawls. A biography of a "secretary" can bleed into a piece on the time's economics, style or furnishing. Pages 148 and 201 have references to material found in the 1950s demonstrating the translation process, are these one and the same? Tyndale is sprinkled throughout the text, and the Geneva Bible is frequently cited, but in the end it will come as a surprise if you don't know it, Tyndale is credited with providing 94% of the KJV's text.
The author clearly loves the KJV. Some of his strongest prose is in parsing word choice and comparing it to previous and later editions of the Bible. Because of his clear love of his subject matter, I'm presuming that this volume was rushed to publication.
God's Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible
Background to the King James Bible
Why I keep coming back to the King James version.
Writing literature by committee
Nonetheless, there were a few amazing tidbits about the participants in this great project. My favorite is about John Layfield, a writer who actually journeyed to the Caribbean and then contributed to the work on Genesis in this bible. The experience enriched Layfield's prose and perspective, Nicolson claims. He says: "The seventeenth-century English idea of Paradise, a vision of enveloping lushness, was formed by this seduction of an almost untouched Caribbean."
Good context, but lacking in content
Unfortunately, I found the very small portion of his book dedicated to the actual translation deficient. Rather than showing how the context he so carefully provided has affected the language with any specific examples, he time and again applauds the King James Version as superior to modern ones. His reasoning is, again and again, due to the beautiful language of the KJV. Unfortunately he does not spend sufficient time defending his view that beautiful language and majestic tone equate superior translation. It is a well-known fact that the New Testament is written in common Greek and not the exalted language that Nicolson loves. Why is this change valid, and more importantly, why is it superior?
I see nowhere in this book any reason to believe that Nicolson has ever done any translation work or knows either Greek or Hebrew. In fact, the deplorable rendition of Greek on page 166, with only one accent (and one apostrophe to signify an accent) and no final sigmas, shows me that no one involved with the book knew Greek well or at all. (Unless this Greek phrase is given in the exact form Savile wrote it, which I do not have the ability to determine for myself.)
In short--as far as his description of the political and historical background of the King James Version, Nicolson does a nice job. However, he would do well to keep his praise for the language of the KJV but lose the criticisms of how translation ought to be done which he does not appear to have the background or knowledge to develop or defend.
Well-written Overview of the Jacobean Age
Even though I enjoyed the book, Nicolson did not convince me that the translators added very much to the work of William Tyndale, the martyred 16th-century translator; nor did he convince me that the King James Bible remains the best available translation. At the end of the book, Nicolson quotes a few beautiful verses from Psalm 77 to demonstrate the superiority of the KJV. But other lines from the same psalm are either mistranslated or obscure. Here they are, with comparisons from more recent translations:
KJV - my sore ran in the night and ceased not
NEW KING JAMES VERSION - my hand was stretched out in the night without ceasing
KJV - thou holdest mine eyes waking
NEW REVISED STANDARD VERSION - you keep my eyelids from closing
KJV - I will remember the years of the right hand of the most High
NEW AMERICAN BIBLE - my sorrow is this, the right hand of the Most High has left us
The King James Bible was great in its day, but newer translations are more accurate and more intelligible. Nevertheless, "God's Secretaries" shines a vivid light on a passionate, contradictory age.
fascinating story told in clear, gem-like prose
Nicholson's book is rather loosely organized, with many anecdotal asides about the various translators, especially in describing their connections to each other across doctrinal lines. In one chapter he dwells heavily on the attitude of some clergymen that the plague was God's vengeance, and that devout, pure people need not fear the disease. (Interestingly enough, our modern term "stroke" probably originated from this time----some churchmen believed that an plague-stricken person was felled by God's stroke.) In another chapter, Nicholson describes the sights, sounds, and smells of London and its sprawling suburbs (which were the slums, the counterpart to the"inner city" of today) with such detailed accuracy that the reader will see, hear, and smell what the Londoner of the early 1600s encountered.
"God's Secretaries" is a beautifully written, well-researched book that will bring delight to the general reader as well as to the religious scholar. Kudoes to Nicholson, and the five-star rating to his work!
Not only has this book been regarded as "notable" by the New York Times, but even textual scholars like David Norton, editor of the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible, recommend it as among the top selected reading for any bibliography concerning the textual history of the King James Bible.
So why only 3 stars?
No doubt Nicolson has assimilated into a somewhat continuous, flowing and highly entertaining narrative the socio-political circumstances that (perhaps) came to shape the ideology of the KJB Translators and, by extension, the language of the translation itself; and no doubt Nicolson has provided many somewhat meaningful short biographies of a fraction of the men involved with the translation's production and, again by extension, the language of the translation; however, these concerns often venture too far into the speculative, the assumed, and the generally unknown. It may sound nice on paper, but that's because Nicolson is a excellent writer. This isn't to say that the book is abounding in factual or historical error, no; rather, where Nicolson is at fault is in his over-extenuating of the historical evidence to draw conclusions which simply aren't tenable, such as the relationship between the architecture, style and mode of dress, and general social customs to the poetic language of the translation itself. If Nicolson wants to draw a parallel between the lusciousness of the Jacobean England and the lusciousness of the language, that's fine, but his prose tends to lack restraint in making this single point.
Also, even while it should be acknowledged that the King James Bible does contain some of the most beautiful, unprecedented language of any Bible translation in the history of Christendom, much of Nicolson's book reads like an unnecessary apology for the translation, comparing the King James Bible to later translations of the same texts, whether it be Milton, or the New English Bible, or even, as in the post-script, Today's English Version. Much of Nicolson's laudamente for the seventeenth-century translation was overkill and won't strike home for many readers; and, likewise, his disparagement of the New English Bible and Today's English Version and others will seem unnecessary for persons who may find greater spiritual comfort in those specific translations.
By and large, what Nicolson has written here isn't so much a history of the making of the translation since, like other historians faced with a dearth of information on the subject, he often has to improvise in order to meet his quota, but rather he's written an ode to Lost Religion, as he himself freely admits in the book. In many respects, he longs for the days of a Christianity which spoke with the conceptually dualistic terseness and richness of the King James Bible itself that sees and speaks of God and Unity in all things and that pursues life with an unflinching, concrete resolve. In short, he desires the Lost Religion of seventeenth-century aristocracy, and it's this precise ode which ultimately leaves the whole of his narrative somewhat dubious and questionable.
Very interesting and helpful. Loved it.
The how is as difficult to fathom as is the notion of reading your words to be in the final draft of "The Bible". Just amazing and you must read it and ponder the how.
A tribute to a translation and the Jacobean Era
The writing is well done and the story is fascinating. My only small criticism is that the author made some rather weak conclusions to show how the different influences contributed to the book. The book shows the author's love for wording and cadences of the King James version. At times, the author's effusiveness is irritating, but the book is always entertaining and informative. The author's love for the language of the King James version is contagious.
How the bestselling Bible in history came to be
We often locate ourselves in history by memories of a dramatic day, from President John Kennedy's assassination in 1963 to the Challenger explosion in 1986. What were you doing, we will ask, the day the World Trade Towers fell?
In "God's Secretaries," the story of the King James Bible's translation, Adam Nicolson gives us another benchmark. What were we doing between 1603 and 1625, the reign of James I? Quite a lot. During that time, the bestselling Bible in history was minted, Puritan dissenters left for America, and literary genius spilled from the pen of William Shakespeare.
It was also the English era of "companies," or joint enterprises, that included the Virginia Company that arrived here in 1607. For our story, the important "company" was a group of about 50 men on six different committees who between 1604 and 1611 produced a new Bible for the king.
Mr. Nicolson argues that only the Jacobean age (Latin for James) could produced such a work - the age's landmark was not a painting or piece of architecture, but a book. Because of this unique chemistry of royalty and worthy scholars, "the greatest translation of the Bible could be made then, and cannot now."
The greatness, the author says, arose from the musicality of the verse. It used Elizabethan prose and when the final meeting of translators gathered, they read through it for final corrections on the principle that "if it sounds right, it is right."
Reared in Scotland, James was baptized a Catholic and brought up by Presbyterian governors. He was intellectually inquisitive, wanted "the medium in all things," had held a "dream of coherence" of society under his own kingship. "The Bible was to become part of the new royal ideology," Mr. Nicholson writes, part of a "large-scale redefinition of England."
The Reformation-produced Geneva Bible had been the favorite of English dissenters, who recoiled at the Church of England's bishops, crosses and ceremonies and its staid Bishop's Bible. When 1,000 Puritans appealed to James for a new translation, he used that momentum for his won purposes - he wanted a simple royal Bible to be read from every pulpit in the realm.
The cultural times lent to honoring hierarchy and pageantry, which would end up a quality of the King James. "Plaintiffs knelt in court, children to their fathers, MPs and bishops when addressing the king," Mr. Nicholson said. While the Geneva Bible used the word "tyrant" for ruler, the Jacobean text proudly used "king."
"For the strict reformers, only the naked intellectual engagement with the complexities of a rational God would do," Mr. Nicholson writes. For Jacobean royalty, the carnal beauty, passion and pageantry of the world also were prized.
When James set up his company of translators, separatists and Presbyterians were excluded, yet the text ended up a synthesis of verbal simplicity and earthy richness. The most famous of the translators was the Cambridge don and dean of Westminster Abbey, Lancelot Andrewes. A brilliant and pious man, he was far from saintly. He fled his flock during the plague and abetted the torture of a Puritan heretic. But he spoke 15 modern languages and six ancient. He was one of the great preachers of that epoch.
Other dramas enthralled the era. The plague of 1603 killed 30,000 Londoners, and two years later some estranged Catholics were caught in a "gun powder plot" to blow up Parliament. A real plot now is questionable, but amid the public hysteria the crown executed the innocent leader of the English Jesuits.
Meanwhile, the royal agents in 1608 had finally banished "a separatist cell in Scrooby in Nottinghamshire," namely the Puritans who left for Holland and then Plymouth colony to found the United States.
Through his splendid narrative, Mr Nicholson raises the ironies of such a glorious enterprise as he believes this work of sacred Scripture turned out to be. A skilled theological disputant, King James was also an active bisexual, which the author discretely hints at with comments about the married king being "vulnerable to the allure of beautiful, elegant, rather Frenchified men" and boys.
The Jacobean period was one of relative peace that preceded the bloody English Civil Wars, which tried to level royalty, but were defeated by the ultimate Restoration of the crown again. The wars had no little source in the corruption, moral and financial, of James' court. "The court was corrupt and everyone knew it," Mr. Nicholson notes.
Then there is the question of the prose itself, which Mr. Nicholson shows in many comparisons of Bible translation to be rhythmically superior, and not just sentimentally preferred. Indeed, the King James phraseology was so influential in the United States that it was almost believed that God spoke in Elizabethan cadences - and the fact that the lascivious King James was enemy to the Puritans is happily forgotten.
While the Bible's language is beautiful on tombstones, and it compelled great oratory down to Abraham Lincoln, John Kennedy and Martin Luther King, this must also be said: The living-room Bible study of the 21st century can barely get through the King James without a commentary.
Mr. Nicholson closes his lively narrative by acknowledging that partisans of William Tyndale (the British Lutheran executed in 1536 for translating the Bible from Latin to English) call the King James Version a 94-percent plagiarism. Tyndale did indeed fashion most of the great biblical phrases. But he "was working alone," Mr. Nicholson said, and thus his prose lacked the "musicality" of the final King James masterpiece.
This book is a delight to read, and leaves us with wonder at the strange times of Jacobean England and the wonderful literature it wrought.
The book jumps erratically from biography to often pretentiously worded speculation based on the author's imagination, to a few paragraphs on a bit of manuscript with a few markups that did survive, to bits of general Jacobean history, to cultural/ psychological analysis of why such a book/translation could not happen today. The most ambitious aspect I would say is Nicolson's attempt to paint for us the inner world of the faithful, religious Jacobean. The book is thus much more than just a history of external events, it is more a cultural study.
Much is interesting, although the whole is badly organized.
The plague afflicted London at the time of James's accession to the throne. The best way to avoid catching the plague was to leave the city. The royal supremacy over Church and State was the foundation of James' position. In Church matters James was faced with contending parties of Presbyterians, Puritans, and others.
Rather than use the Bishops' Bible or the Geneva Bible, another version was constructed. The King James Bible became part of the new royal ideology. The translation work was a tightly organized and managed programme. The organization created for the task resembled a commercial company.
Richard Bancroft issued the royal orders to the translators. The author speaks of jointedness, a quality existing in the culture and particularly characteristic of the manner in which the work of translation was undertaken. The translation committee was separated into six subcommittees. Rules provided for continuity and noncontentiousness. The organization, the setting of tasks of translation, contained a sort of system of checks and balances.
The Jacobean atmosphere was one of openness, tolerance, discussion. Lancelot Andrewes was a leader of the enterprise. He was clever, learned, and had a network of connections. He was Master of Pembroke College, Cambridge. The others in the major leadership roles were Hadrian a Saravia, a Protestant Fleming, and John Overall, Dean of St. Paul's. Saravia was a linguist and Overall a classicist. Both wee members of the anti-Puritan party in the Church.
In the first years of James's rule, eighty or so Puritans were expelled from the Church. Puritans working on the new translation were by definition moderates. The richness of the King James Bible was caused by the coming together of diverse religious mentalities.
In the Jacobean era there was a love of variegation, of the multiplicity of things. The author uses a glorious description of Hatfield House, the estate of Robert Cecil, to make his point. The size of the windows at Hatfield House was immense, letting in the light. In the new translation the objective was to bring to readers the light of understanding.
The final printed volume of the Bible appeared in 1611. Word-counting is not a route to understand a translation. The King James Bible, as the Tyndale, reflects its historical circumstances. The Jacobean translation process was social. The result had a heard rhythm. T.S. Eliot cited auditory imagination.
The printshop of Robert Baker produced some anarchy with the copy so that no version of the 1611 Bible is the same. The translation was not successful when issued. Some complained that the English used was sixty or so years out of date, but the fact of the matter was that the language used was a kind of English that had never been spoken. Initially the Geneva Bible was preferred.
The King James Bible became popular after 1660 and the Restoration. Subsequent translations have lacked the rich, deep, true, and alive qualities of the seventeenth century phrases. Appendices include a piece on sixteenth century Bible translations, a comprehensive list with identifying information of the individual translators, bibliography, chronology, and index. The circumstances surrounding the translation venture and the personalities involved are described vividly and winningly.
Interesting background but speculative in places.
The majority of the author's treatment concerns the social, political, and ecclesiastical fabric of Jacobean England within which the translation of the King James Version (KJV) was undertaken. This is perhaps the most valuable contribution of the book which deals relatively less with the issues and technical process of the translation itself. For those translators for which historical records are still available, he undertakes each personality in turn, reviewing their education, political and ecclesiastical position, and their station in 17th century England, as well as their contribution to the translation process itself.
A particularly valuable contribution of the text is the understanding that the KJV translation occupied a position of reconciliation and mediation-eschewing the influences of both Roman Catholicism and Separatist Puritanism. This was due, in large part, to the ecclesiastical middle-ground occupied by the King and to the translator's commitment to operating as a committee, something which seems most unlikely, to the modern mind, to produce an enduring work (p. 69):
"Everything in the modern frame of mind, trained up on centuries of individualism, and on the overriding importance of individual freedoms, rebels against the idea. Joint committees know nothing of genius. They do not produce works of art. It is surely lonely martyrs who struggle for unacknowledged truths. Committees thrive on compromise and compromise produces fudge and muddle. Isn't the beautiful, we now think, to be identified with what is original, the previously unsaid, the unique vision of the individual mind? How can a joint enterprise of this sort produce anything valuable?"
The author helps us to understand how far our present age has come from the historical position within which the translators performed their task-changes which help explain the uniqueness of the KJV and why a work of its kind is unlikely to be produced in our own age.
Although the book is a valuable contribution to the subject of historical translation, and the KJV in particular, this reviewer has several reservations concerning the author's treatment of the subject.
Although the author exhibits great respect and admiration for the KJV as a literary and historical work, it is evident that he himself has never come to terms with the central issue of the text itself: the claims and identity of Jesus Christ. The author writes from the perspective of an uncommitted agnostic, "I am no atheist but I am no churchgoer" (p. 241). This works itself out in several ways. An underlying theme seems to be the thesis that none of the translators could possibly have been motivated by genuine altruism. Like most skeptics, the author majors in digging up and highlighting inconsistencies and impugning motivations behind the lives and work of the divines assigned to the translation. This is a questionable process when so little in the way of hard historical evidence is available-leaving the author in a similar position to that of an historical novelist, reading much between the lines which may not be factual. In the end, one is left wondering how the translation work was ever accomplished since it seems, according to this treatment, as if politics, academic vanity, and ecclesiastical maneuvering were the prime movers behind the work.
The author also evidences a lack of familiarity with the essential message of the Bible. In an otherwise insightful exchange between one of the translators and a jailed Puritan Separatist, their discussion concerning the Holy Spirit, Who only indwells believers, is mistaken for the spirit of man, common to all men (p. 91).
Also typical of an unbeliever, he is highly critical of basic Calvinist teachings-as if they were the creation of Calvin when in fact they simply reflect teachings basic to the Biblical text (p. 229 cf. Romans 9; 13):
"Calvinist Christianity is inherently fissive. Its emphasis on the primacy of a vengeful God constantly throws into doubt the validity of worldly government, and its repeated emphasis on the difference between the elect, who would be saved, and the rest, who would be damned, is no basis on which to found a nation. These radically disruptive ideas are the repeated threnody of the Geneva Bible, . . "
Yet such basic Biblical teaching was the basis for Calvin's Geneva and the Puritan experiment which resulted in one of the greatest nations in our own time (the United States).
Lastly, numerous comments throughout the text betray the author's disregard for the reliability of the Biblical text itself.
Assuming the reader is able to keep these biases of the author in mind, there is much valuable material to be found in the work-especially in relation to understanding the thought patterns and social influences of the 17th century which made the King James Version of the Bible the popular translation and cornerstone of western civilization that history has shown it to be.
We could not agree more with the author when he asserts that an English translation with the combined grandeur, literary beauty, accuracy, and enduring value of the KJV is no longer possible to produce-the historical factors which made it possible no longer exist.
Create your own review
There were English Bibles before 1611. The KJV grew out of a conference at Hampton Court where the new king took up grievances of the Puritans; the Bible was a byproduct of the conference. James was heartened by the idea of a new translation. He distrusted the widely used Geneva Bible because it had marginal notes about how people ought to view kings, notes he viewed as seditious. Less self-servingly, he thought an authoritative translation might bring religious peace to his conflicted land. The translation was his personal project. There are plenty of jokes about how committees invariably complicate rather than solve problems, but Nicolson shows that in Jacobean England, individuality was distrusted and "Jointness was the acknowledged virtue of the age." The KJV was a product of 54 translators, broken into teams and organized in a fashion that would befuddle a modern CEO, and they followed general or specific rules laid down by King James. The notes and directives generated by the translators have been largely lost, but Nicolson is able to tell us about a few of the translators themselves, a mixed bunch. A combination of puritans, prudes, drunkards, scholars, libertines, hotheads, and other eccentrics were perhaps just the crew to be involved in translating a work of such breadth. Among the most interesting parts of Nicholson's book are comparative translations. He gives a history of Luke 1:57, for instance, to show how it was rendered as "Now Elizabeths full time came that she should bee delivered, and she brought forth a son." Nicholson points out the richness of "full" meaning plump, perfect, or overbrimming. He also gives us another committee translation, performed over three centuries after the KJV, the New English Bible: "Now the time came for Elizabeth's child to be born, and she gave birth to a son." There is nothing at all remarkable in these flat words; they might have come from a social worker's report. Nicolson says of these translators, "Wanting timelessness, they achieved the language of the memo."
Recently we have been treated to gender-free translations of the Bible, or the Ebonics Bible, as attempts to make the book relevant or up to date. There are also "modern" translations into American English that are as dull as they are easy to read. Such translations will quickly themselves be out of date curiosities, but the KJV will never be antiquated. _God's Secretaries_ is a fine tribute to the imperishable majesty of its words, and to the particular Jacobean circumstances that brought it about.