Not that the “new translation”, as it was known, was popular when it came hot off the printing press. The early responses were unenthusiastic, if not furious. One leading Hebrew scholar wrote: “Tell his Majesty that I had rather be rent in pieces by wilde horses, than any such translation, by my consent, bee urged upon our poore churches.” Like all innovations, it took time to cross the English-speaking world, to influence preachers, poets and politicians and to bed into the national psyche. Melvyn Bragg’s The Book of Books is subtitled The Radical Impact of the King James Bible 1611-2011 and attempts to chart these widespread effects. Bragg’s skill is in translating lofty subjects into a language that we all understand. As such, his endeavour could be compared with that of the 17th-century translators, whose job it was to produce an acceptable vernacular Bible that could be read by every literate English speaker.
As Bragg explains, the enterprise was originally prompted by James I’s need to throw a bone to the Puritan faction, who at the time of his accession were threatening to become a political problem. Rather than accept their proposed liturgical reforms, he seized upon a relatively minor demand for a new version of the Bible, strategically declaring: “I wish some special pains were taken for an uniform translation, which should be done by the best learned men in both Universities … ”
[blockquote] “Tell his Majesty that I had rather be rent in pieces by wilde horses, than any such translation, by my consent, bee urged upon our poore churches.†[/blockquote]
Given the predilections of many monarchs during this period, I hope he thought long and hard before uttering these words!