The Translators to the reader: (This letter was in the very first 1611 King James, it  was removed from your bibles many years ago, along with all of the books of the Apocrypha)

Zeal to promote the common good, wether it be by devising anything ourselves, or revising that which has been labored by others, deserves certainly much respect
and esteem, but yet finds but cold entertainment in the world. It is welcomed with suspicion instead of love, and with emulation instead of thanks: and if there be any
hole left for cavill to enter, (and cavill, if it does not find a hole, will make one) it is sure to be misconstrued, and in danger to be condemned. This will easily be
granted by as many as know story, or have any experience. For, was there ever anything projected, that savored any way of newness or renewing, but the same
endured many a storm of gainsaying, or opposition? A man would think that Civil, wholesome laws, learning and eloquence, Synagogs, and Church maintenance,
(that we speak of no more things of this kind) should be as safe as Sanctuary, and out of shot, as they say, that no man would lift up the heel, no, nor dare move his
tongue against the motioners of them. For by the first, we are distinguished from brute beasts with sensuality: By the second, we are bridled and restrained from outragious behaviour, and from doing injuries, wether by fraud or by violence: By the third, we are enabled to inform and reform others, by the light and feeling that we have attained unto ourselves: Briefly, by the fourth being brought together to a parley face to face, we sooner compose our differences then by writings, which are endless: And lastly, that the Church be sufficiently be provided for, is so agreeable to good reason and conscience, that those mothers are holden to be less cruel, that kill their children as soon as they are born, then those nourishing fathers and mothers (wheresoever they be) that withdraw from them who hang upon their breasts (and upon whose breasts again themselves do hang to recieve the Spiritual and sincere milk of the word) livelyhood and support fit for their estates. Thus it is apparent, that these things which we speak of, are of most necessary use, and therefore, that none, either without absurdity can speak against them, or without note of wickedness can spurn against them.

Yet for all that, the learned know that certain worthy men have been brought to untimely death for none other fault, but for seeking to reduce their Countrymen to
good order and discipline: and that in some commonwealths it was made a capital crime, once to motion the making of a new Law for the abrogating of an old,
though the same were most pernicious: And that certain, which would be counted pillars of the State, and patterns of Virtue and Prudence, could not be brought for a
long time to give way to good Letters and refined speech, but bare themselves as adverse from them, as from rocks or boxes of poison: And fourthly, that he was no
babe, but a great clerk, that gave forth (and in writing to remain to posterity) in passion peradventure, but yet he gave forth, that he had not seen any profit to come
by any Synagog, or meeting of Clergy, but rather the contrary: And lastly, against Church maintenance and allowance, in such sort, as the Ambassadors and
messengers of the great King of Kings should be furnished, it is not unknown what a fiction or fable (so it is esteemed, and for no better by the reporter himself,
though superstitious) was devised; Namely, that at such time as the professors and teachers of Christianity in the Church of Rome, then a true Church, were liberally
endowed, a voice forsooth was heard from heaven, saying; Now is poison poured down into the Church, &C. Thus not only as often as we speak, as one saith, but
also as often as we do anything of note or consequence, we subject ourselves to everyones censure, and happy is he that is least tossed upon tongues; for utterly to
escape the snatch of them is impossible. If any man conceit, that this is the lot and portion of the meaner sort only, and that Princes are privileged by their high estate,
he is decieved. As "the sword devoureth one as well as another", as it is in 2 Samuel 11:25; nay as the great Commander charged his soldiers in a certain battle, to
strike at no part of the enemy, but at the face; And as the King of Syria commanded his chief Capitans to "fight neither with small nor great, save only with the King
of Israel" (1 Kings 22:31): so it is also true, that Envy strikes most spitefully at the fairest, and at the chiefest. David was a worthy Prince, and no man to be
compared to him for his first deeds, and yet for as worthy an act as ever he did (even for bringing back the Ark of GOD in solemnity) he was scorned and scoffed at
by his wife (2 Samuel 6:16). Soloman was greater than David, though not in virtue, yet in power: and by his power and wisdom he built a Temple to the LORD, such
a one as was the glory of Israel, and the wonder of the whole world. But was that his magnificence liked by all? We doubt it. Otherwise, why do they lay it in his sons
dish, and call unto him for the easing of the burden, Make, say they, (1Kings 12:4) the grievous servitude of thy father, and his sore yoke, lighter. Belike he had
charged them with some levies, and troubled them with some carriages; Hereupon they raise up a tragedy, and wish in their heart the Temple had never been built. So
hard a thing it is to please all, even when we please GOD best, and do seek to approve ourselves to every ones conscience.

If we will descend to later times, we shall find many the like examples of such kind, or rather unkind acceptance. The first Roman Emporer (Constantine) did never
do a more pleasing deed to the learned, nor more profitable to posterity, for conserving the record of times in true supputation; then when he corrected the calander,
and ordered the year according to the course of the sun: and yet this was imputed to him for novelty, and arrogance, and procured to him great obloquie. So the first
Cristened Emperor (at the leastwise that openly professed the faith himself, and allowed others to do the like) for strengthening the Empire at his great charges, and
providing for the Church, as he did, got for his labor the name Pupillus, as who would say, a wastefull Prince, that had need of a Guardian, or overseer. So the best
Christened Emperor, for the love that he bare unto peace, thereby to enrich both himself and his subjects, and because he did not seek war but find it, was judged to
be no man at arms, (though in deed he excelled in feats of chivalry, and showed so much when he was provoked) and condemned for giving himself to his ease, and
his pleasure. To be short, the most learned Emperor of former times, (at the least, the greatest politician) what thanks had he for cutting off the superfluities of the laws, and digesting them into some order or method? This, that he had been blotted by some to be an Epitomist, that is, one that extinguished worthy whole volumes, to bring his abridgements into request. This is the measure that had been rendered to excellent Princes in former times, even, Cum bene facerent, male audire, For their good deeds to be evil spoken of. Neither is there any likelihood, that envy and malignancy died, and were buried with the ancient. No, no, the reproof of Moses takes hold of most ages; (Numbers 32:14) You are risen up in your fathers stead, an increase of sinful men. (Eccles. 1:9) What is that that hath been done? that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun, saith the wiseman: and S. Steven, as your fathers did, so do you (Acts 7:51). This, and more to this purpose, His Majestie that now reigns (and long, and long he may reign,
and his offspring for ever, himself and children, and childrens children always) knew full well, according to the singular wisdom given unto him by GOD, and the rare
learning and experience that he has attained unto; namely that whosoever attempts anything for the public (especially if it pertains to Religion, and to the opening and
clearing of the word of GOD) the same sets himself upon a stage to be glouted upon by every evil eye, yes, he casts himself headlong upon pikes, to be gored by
every sharp tongue. For he that meddles with mens Religion in any part, meddles with their customs, nay, with their freehold; and though they find no content in that
which they have, yet they cannot abide to hear of altering. Notwithstanding his Royal heart was not daunted or discouraged for this or that color, but stood resolute,
as a statue immovable, and an anvil not easily to be beaten into plates, as one saith; he knew who had chosen him to be a soldier, or rather a Captain, and being
assured that the course which he intended made much for the glory of GOD, & the building up of his Church, he would not suffer it to be broken off for whatsoever
speeches or practises. It does certainly belong unto Kings, yes, it does especially belong unto them, to have care of Religion, yes, to know it aright, yes to profess it
zealously, yes to promote it to the uttermost of their power. This is their glory before all nations which mean well, and this will bring unto them a far more excellent
weight of glory in the day of the LORD JESUS. For the scriptures say not in vain, (1 Sam. 2:30) Them that honor me, I will honor, neither was it a vain word that
Eusebius delivered long ago, that piety towards GOD was the weapon, and the only weapon that both preserved Constantines person, and avenged him of his
enemies.

But now what piety without truth? What truth (what saving truth) without the word of GOD? what word of GOD (whereof we may be sure) without the scripture?
The scriptures we are commanded to search. John 5:39, Isa 8:20. They are commended that searched & studied them. Acts 17:11 and 8:28,29. They are reproved
that were unskilful in them, or slow to believe them. Mat. 22:29, Luke 24:25. They can make us wise unto salvation. 2 Tim. 3:15. If we be ignorant, they will instruct
us; if out of the way, they will bring us home; if out of order, they will reform us; if in heaviness, comfort us; if dull, quicken us; if cold, inflame us. Tolle, lege, Take up
and read, take up and read the scriptures, (for unto them was the direction) it was said unto S. Augustine by a supernatural voice. Whatsoever is in the scriptures,
believe me, said the same S. Augustine, is high and divine; there is verily truth, and a doctrine most fit for the refreshing and renewing of mens minds, and truly so
tempered, that every one may draw from thence that which is sufficient for him, if he come to draw with a devout and pious mind, as true Religion requires. Thus S.
Augustine. And S. Hieroine: Ana scripturas, & anabit te sapientia & c. Love the Scriptures, and wisdom will love thee. And S. Cyrill against Julian; Even boys that
are bred up in the Scriptures, become most Religious, &c. But what mention we three or four verses of the Scripture, whereas whatsoever is to be believed or
 practised, or hoped for, is contained in them? or three or four sentences of the Fathers, since whosoever is worthy the name of a Father, from CHRISTS time
downward, have likewise written not only of the riches, but also of the perfection of the Scripture? I adore the fullness of the Scripture, saith Tertullian against
Hermogenes. And again, to Apelles an Heretic of the like stamp, he said; I do not admit that which you bring in (or conclude) of thine own (head or store, de tuo)
without Scripture. So Saint Justin Martyr before him; We must know by all means, saith he, that it is not lawful (or possible) to learn (anything) of GOD or of right
piety, save only out of the Prophets, who teach us by divine inspiration. So Saint Basill after Tertullian, It is a manifest falling away from the Faith, and a fault of
presumption, either to reject any of those things that are written, or to bring in (upon the head of them, xxxxxxxxx) any of those things that are not written. We omit to
cite the same effect, S. Cyrill B. of Hierusalem in his 4. Cataches. Saint Hierome against Heluidius, Saint Augustine in his 3. book against the letters of Petilian, and in
very many other places in his works. Also we forbear to descend to latter Fathers, because we will not weary the reader. The scriptures then being acknowledged to
be so full and so perfect, how can we excuse ourselves of negligence, if we do not study them, of curiosity, if we be not content with them? Men talk much of
xxxxxxxxx, how many sweet and goodly things it had hanging on it; of the Philosophers stone, that it turns copper into gold; of Cornu-copia, that it had all things
necessary for food in it; of Panaces the herb, that it was good for all diseases; of Catholicon the drug, that it is instead of all purges; of Vulcans armour, that it was an
armour of proof against all thrusts, and all blows, &c. Well, that which they falsely or vainly attributed to these things for bodily good, we may justly and with full
measure ascribe unto the Scripture, for spiritual. It is not only an armour, but also a whole armory of weapons, both offensive, and defensive; whereby we may save
ourselves and put the enemy to flight. It is not an herb, but a tree, or rather a whole paradise of trees of life, which bring forth fruit every month, and the fruit thereof is
for meat, and the leaves for medicine. It is not a pot of Manna, or a cruise of oil, which were for memory only, or for a meals meat or two, but as it were a shower of
heavenly bread sufficient for a whole host, be it never so great; and as it were a whole cellar full of oil vessels; whereby all our necessities may be provided for, and
our debts discharged. In a word, it is a Panary of wholesome food, against fenowed traditions; a Physicians shop (Saint Basill called it) of preservatives against
poisoned heresies; a Pandect of profitable laws, against rebellious spirits; a treasury of most costly jewels, against beggarly rudiments; Finally a fountain of most pure
water springing up unto everlasting life. And what marvel? The original thereof being from heaven, not from earth; the author being GOD, not man; the enditer, the
holy spirit, not the wit of the Apostles or Prophets; the Pen-men such as were santified from the womb, and endowed with a principal portion of GODS spirit; the
matter, veritie, piety, purity, uprightness; the form, GOD's WORD, GOD's testimony, GOD's oracles, the word of truth, the word of salvation, &c. the effects, light
of understanding, stableness of persuasion, repentance from dead works, newness of life, holiness, peace, joy in the Holy Ghost; lastly, the end and reward of the
study thereof, fellowship with the Saints, participation of the heavenly nature, fruition of an inheritance immortal, undefiled, and that shall never fade away: Happy is
the man that delighteth in the Scripture, and thrice happy that meditate in it day and night.

But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknown tongue? as it is written, except I
know the power of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh, a Barbarian, and he that speaketh, shall be a Barbarian to me. The Apostle excepteth no tongue; not
Hebrew the oldest, not Greek the most copius, not Latin the finest. Nature taught a natural man to confess, that all of us in those tongues which we do not
understand, are plainly deaf; we may turn the deaf ear unto them. The Scythian counted the Athenian, whom he did not understand, barbarous: so the Roman the
Syrian, and the Jew, (even S. Hierome himself called the Hebrew tongue barbarous, belike because it was strange to so many) so the Emperor of Constantinople
called the Latin tongue, barbarous, though Pope Nicolas do storm at it: so the Jews long before CHRIST, called all other nations, Lognazim, which is little better than
barbarous. Therefore as one complains, that always in the Senate of Rome, there was one or other that called for an interpreter: so lest the Church be driven to the
like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readiness. Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the
kernal; that puts aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place; that removes the cover of the well, that we may come by the water, even as Jacob
rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which means the flocks of Laban were watered (Gen. 29:10). Indeed without  translation into the vulgar tongue,
the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which was deep) without a bucket or something to draw with: or as that person mentioned by Esay (Isaiah), to
whom when a sealed book was delivered,
with this motion, Read this, I pray thee, he was faine to make this answer, I cannot, for it is sealed (Isaiah 29:11).

While GOD would be known only in Jacob, and have HIS Name great in Israel, and in none other place, while the dew lay on Gideons fleece only, and all the earth
besides was dry; then for one and the same people, which spoke all of them the language of Canaan, that is, Hebrew, one and the same original in Hebrew was
sufficient. But when the fulness of time drew near, that the Sun of righteousness, the SON of GOD should come into the world, whom GOD ordained to be a
reconciliation through faith in HIS blood, not of the Jew only, but also of the Greek, yes, all of them that were scattered abroad; then loe, it pleased the LORD to stir
up the spirit of a Greek Prince (Greek for descent and language) even of
Ptolome Philadelph King of Egypt, to procure the translation of the book of GOD out of Hebrew into Greek. This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters,
commonly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John Babtist did among Jews by voice. For the
Grecians being desirous of learning, were not want to suffer books of worth to lie moulding in Kings Libraries, but had many of their servants, ready scribes, to copy
them out, and so they were dispersed and made common. Again, the Greek tongue was well known and made familiar to most inhabitants in Asia, by reason of the
conquest that there the Grecians had made, as also by the Colonies, which thither they had sent. For the same causes also it was well understood in many places of
Europe, yes, and of Africa too. Therefore the WORD of GOD being set forth in Greek, becomes hereby like a candle set upon a candlestick, which gives light to all
that are in the house, or like a proclamation sounded forth in the market place, which most men presently take knowledge of; and therefore that language was fittest
to contain the Scriptures, both for the first preachers of the Gospel to appeal unto
for witness, and for the learners also of those times to make search and trial by. It is certain, that the Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but that it needed
in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolike men? Yet it seemed good to the HOLY GHOST and to them,
to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather than by making a new, in that new world and green age of the Church.
to expose themselves to many exceptions and cauillations, as though they made a Translation to serve their own
turn, and therefore bearing witness to themselves, their witness not to be regarded. This may be supposed to be some cause, why the Translation of the Seventy was
allowed to pass for current. Notwithstanding, though it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned, no, not of the Jews. For not long after
CHRIST, Aquila fell in hand with a new Translation, and after him Thoedotion, and after him Symmachus: yes, there was a fifth and sixth edition, the Authors
whereof
were not known. These with the Seventy made up the Hexapla, and were worthily and to great purpose compiled together by Origen. Howbeit the edition of the
Seventy went away with the credit, and therefore not only was placed in the midst by Origen (for the worth and excellency thereof above the rest, as Epiphanius
gathereth) but also was used by the Greek fathers for the ground and foundation of their Commentaries. Yes, Epiphanius above named does attribute so much unto
it, that he holds the Authors thereof not only for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some respect: and Justinian the Emperor enjoining the Jews his subjects to use
specially the Translation of the Seventy, rendereth this reason thereof, because they were as it were enlightened with Prophitical grace. Yet for all that, as the
Egyptians are said of the Prophet to be men and not GOD (Isaiah 31:3), and their horses flesh and not spirit: so it is evident, (and Saint Hierome affirmed as much)
that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through
oversight, another while through ignorance, yes, sometimes they may be noted to add to the Original, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to
leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sense thereof according to the truth of the WORD, as the Spirit gave them utterance. This may
suffice touching the Greek Translations of the old Testament.

There were also within a few hundred years after CHRIST, translations made into the Latin tongue: for this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the
Gospel by, because in those times very many Countries of the West, yes of the South, East and North, spoke or understood Latin, being made Provinces to the
Romans. But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interpretes nullo modo numerari possunt, said S. Augustine).
Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being
not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. This moved S. Hierome a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his
age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testament, out of the very fountains themselves; which he performed with that evidence of
great learning, judgement, industry and faithfulness, that he has for ever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and thankfullness.

Now the Church was thus furnished with Greek and Latin Translations, even before the faith of CHRIST was generally embraced within the Empire: (for the learned
know that even in S. Hieroms time, the Council of Rome and his wife were both ethnics, and about the same time the greatest part of the Senate also) yet for all that
the godly-learned were not content to have the Scriptures in the Language which themselves understood, Greek and Latin, (as the good lepers were not content to
fare well themselves, (2 Kings 7:9) but aquainted their neighbors with the store that GOD had sent, that they also might provide for themselves) but also for the
behoofe and edifying of the unlearned which hungered and thirsted after Righteousness, and had souls to be saved as well as they, they provided Translations into the
vulgar for their Countrymen, insomuch that most nations under heaven did shortly after their conversion, hear CHRIST speaking unto them in their mother tongue, not
by the voice of their minister only, but also by the written WORD translated. If any doubt hereof, he may be satisfied by examples enough, if enough will serve the
turn. First S. Hierome said, Multarum gentiu linguis Scriptura ante translata, docet falsa esse qux addita sunt, &c. i. The Scripture being translated before in the
languages of many Nations, do show that those things that were added (by Lucian or Hesychius) are false. So S. Hierome in that place. The same Hierome
elsewhere affirmed that he, the time was, had set forth the translation of the Seventy, sux lingux hominibus.i. for his Countrymen of Dalmatia. Which words not only
Erasmus does understand to purport that S. Hierome translated the Scripture into the Dalmatian tongue, but also Sixtus Senesis, and Alphonsus a Castro (that we
speak of no more) men not to be excepted against by them of Rome, do ingeniously confess as much. So, S. Chrysostome that lived in S. Hieromes time, gives
evidence with him: the doctrine of S. John (said he) did not in such sort (as the Philosophers did) vanish away: but the Syrians, Egyptians, Indians, Persians,
Ethiopians, and infinite other nations being barbarous people, translated it into their (mother) tongue, and have learned to be (true) Philosophers, he means Christians.
To this may be added Theodorit, as next unto him, both for antiquity, and for learning. His words be these, Every Country that is under the Sun, is full of these words
(of the Apostles and Prophets) and the Hebrew tongue (he means the Scriptures in the Hebrew tongue) is turned not only into the language of the Grecians, but also
of the Romans, and Egyptians, ans Persians, and Indians, and Armenians, and Scythians, and Sauromatians, and briefly into all the Languages that any Nation uses.
So he, in like manner, Vlpilas is reported by
Paulus Diaconus and Isidor (and before them by Sozomen) to have translated the Scriptures into the Gothic tongue: John Bishop of Sivil by Vasseus, to have turned
them into Arabic, about the year of our LORD 717: Beda by Cistertiensis, to have turned a great part of them into Saxon: Enfard by Trithemius, to have abridged the
French Psalter, as Beda had done the Hebrew, about the year 800: King Alured by the said Cistertiensis, to have turned the Scriptures into Sclauonian: Valdo,
Bishop of Frising by Bealus Rhenanus, to have caused about that time, the Gospels to be translated into Dutch-rithme, yet extant in the Library of Corbinian: Valdus,
by divers to have turned them himself, or to have gotten them turned into French, about the year 1160: Charles the 5. of that name, surnamed the wise, to have
caused them to be turned into French, about 200. years after Valdud his time, of which translation there be many copies yet extant, as witnesseth Beroaldus. Much
about that time, even in our King Richard the seconds days, John Treuisa translated them into English, and many English Bibles in written hand are yet to be seen with
divers, translated as it is very probable, in that age. So the Syrian translation of the New Testament is in most learned mens Libraries, of Widminstadius his setting
forth, and the Psalter in Arabic is with many, of Augustinus Nebiensis setting forth. So Postel affirms, that in his travail he saw the Gospels in the Ethiopian tongue;
And Ambrose Thesius alleges the psalter of the Indians, which he testified to have been set forth by Potken in Syrian characters. So that, to have the Scriptures in the
mother-tongue is not a quaint conceit lately taken up, either by the Lord Cromwell in England, or by the Lord Radeuil in Polonie, or by the Lord Vngnadius in the
Emperors dominion, but have been thought upon, and put in practise of old, even from the first times of the conversion of any Nation; no doubt, because it was
esteemed most profitable, to cause faith to grow in mens hearts the sooner, and to make them to be able to say with the words of the Psalm, As we have heard, so
we have seen (Psalm 48:8).

Now the Church of Rome would seem at the length to bear a motherly affection towards her children, and to allow them the Scriptures in their mother tongue: but
indeed it is a gift, not deserving to be called a gift, an unprofitable gift: they must first get a Licence in writing before they may use them, they must approve themselves
before their confessor, that is, be such as are, if not frozen in the dregs, yet sowered with the leaven of their superstition. Howbeit, it seemed too much to Clement the
8. that
there should be any Licence granted to have them in the vulgar tongue, and therefore he overruled and frustrated the grant of Pius the fourth. So much are they afraid
of the light of the Scripture, (Lucifugx Scripturarum, as Tertullian speaketh) that they will not trust the people with it, no not as it is set forth by their own sworn men,
no not with the Licence of their own Bishops and inquisitors. Yes, so unwilling they are to commumicate the Scriptures to the peoples understanding in any sort, that
they are not ashamed to confess, that we forced them to translate it into English against their wills. This seemed to argue a bad cause, or a bad conscience, or both.
Sure we are, that it is not he that has good gold, that is afraid to bring it to the touch-stone, but he that had the counterfeit; neither is it the true man that shuns the light,
but the malefactor, lest his deeds should be reproved: neither is it the plain dealing merchant that is unwilling to have the weights, or the meteyard brought in place, but
he that uses deceit. But we will let them alone for this fault and return to translation.

Many mens mouths have been open a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about the Translation so long in hand, or rather perusals of translations
made before: and ask what may be the reason, what the necessity of the employment: Has the Church been deceived, say they, all this while? Has her sweet bread
been mingled with leaven, her silver with dross, her wine with water, her milk with lime? (Lacte gypsum male miscetur, saith S. Jreney), We hoped that we had been
in the right way, that we had the Oracles of GOD delivered unto us, and that though all the world had cause to be offended and to complain, yet that we had none.
Has the nurse holden out the breast, and nothing but wind in it? Has the bread been delivered by the fathers of the Church, and the same proved to be lapidosus, as
Seneca speaks? What is it to handle the WORD of GOD deceitfully, if this be not? Thus certain brethren. Also the adversaries of Judah and Jerusalem, like Sanballat
in Nehemiah, mock, as we hear, both at the work and the workmen, saying; What do these weak Jews, &c. will they make the stones whole again out of the heaps
of dust which are burnt? although they build, yet if a fox go up, he shall even break down
their stony wall (Neh. 4:3). Was their Translation good before? Why do they now mend it? Was it not good? Why then was it obtruded to the people? Yes, why did
the Catholics (meaning Popish Romanists) always go in jeopardy, for refusing to go to hear it? No, if it must be translated into English, Catholics are fittest to do it.
They have learning, and they know when a thing is well, they can manum de tabula. We will answer them both briefly: and the former, being brethren, thus, with S.
Hierome, Damnamus ueteres? Mimine, sed post priorum studia in domo Domini quod possumus laboramus. That is, do we condemn the ancient? In no case: but
after the endeavors of them that were before us, we take the best pains we can in the house of GOD. As if he said, Being provoked by the example of the learned
that lived before my time, I have thought it my duty, to assay wether my talent in the knowledge of the tongues, may be profitable in any measure to GODS Church,
lest I should
seem to have labored in them in vain, and lest I should be thought to glory in men, (although ancient), above that which was in them. Thus S. Hierome may be thought
to speak.

And to the same effect say we, that we are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either
in King Henries time, or King Edwards (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queen Elizabeths of ever renowned memory, that
we acknowledge them to have been raised up by GOD, for the building and furnishing of HIS Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in
everlasting remembrance. The Judgement of Aristotle is worthy and well known: If Timotheus had not been, we had not much sweet music; but if Phrynis (Timotheus
his master) had not been, we had not had Timotheus. Therefore blessed be they, and most honored be their name, that break the ice, and glues onset upon that which
helped forward to the saving of souls. Now what can be more available thereto, then to deliver GODS book unto GODS people in a tongue which they understand?
Since of an hidden treasure, and of a fountain that is sealed, there is no profit, as Ptolmee Philadelph wrote to the Rabbins or masters of the Jews, as witnesseth
Epiphanius: and as S. Augustine said; A man had rather be with his dog than with a stranger (whose tongue is strange unto him). Yet for all that, as nothing is begun
and perfected at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundations that went before us, and being helped by
their labors, do endeaver to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, had cause to mislike us; they, we persuade
ourselves, if they were alive, would thank us. The vintage of Abiezer, that strake the stroake: yet the gleaning of grapes of Ephraim was not to be despised. See
Judges 8:2. Joash the King of Israel did not satisfy himself, till he had smitten the ground three times; and yet he offended the prophet, for giving over then (2 Kings
13,18,19). Aquila, of whom we spoke before, translated the Bible as carefully, and as skilfully as he could; and yet he thought to go over it again, and then it got the
credit with the Jews, to be called xxxxxxxxxx, that is, accurately done, as Saint Hierome witnessed. How many books of profane learning have been gone over again
and again, by the same translators, by others? Now if this cost may be bestowed upon the gourd, which afords us a little shade, and which today flourishes, but
tomorrow is cut down; what may we bestow, no what ought we not to bestow upon the Vine, the fruit thereof maketh glad the conscience of man, and the stem
whereof abideth forever? And this is the WORD of GOD, which we translate. What is the chaff to the wheat, saith the LORD? (Jer. 23:28) Tanti vitreum, quanti
verum margaritum (saith Tertullian), if a toy of glass be of that reckoning with us, how ought we to value the true pearl? Therefore let no mans eye be evil, because his
Majesties is good; neither let any be grieved, that we have a Prince that seeks the increase of the Spiritual wealth of Israel (let Sanballats and Tobiahs do so, which
therefore does bear their just reproof) but let us rather bless GOD from the ground of our heart, for working this religious care in HIM, to have the translations of the
Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this means it comes to pass, that whatsoever is sound already (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of
our editions, and the worst of ours fare better than their authentic vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be
halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and truth set in place. And what can the King command to be done, that will
bring him more true honor than this? and wherein could they have been set a work, approve their duty to the King, yes their obedience to GOD, and love to HIS
Saints more, than by yielding their service, and all that is within them, for the furnishing of the work? But besides all this, they were the principal motives of it, and
therefore ought least to quarrel it: for the very Historical truth is, that upon the importunate petitions of the Puritans, at his Majesties coming to his Crown, the
Conference at Hampton Court having been appointed for hearing their complaints: when by force of reason they were put from all other grounds, they had recourse
at the last, to this shift, that they could not with good conscience suscribe to the Communion book, since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated, which was
as they said, a most corrupted
translation. And although this was judged to be but a very poor and empty shift; yet even hereupon did his Majesty begin to bethink himself of the good that might
ensue by a new translation, and presently after gave order for this Translation which is now presented unto you. Thus much to satisfy our scrupulous brethren.

Now to the later we answer; that we do not deny, no we afirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession
(for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the WORD of GOD, no, is the WORD of GOD. As the Kings Speech which he uttered in
Parliment, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian and Latin, is still the Kings speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor
peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, every where. For it is confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part; and a
natural man could say, Verum vbi multa nitent in carmine, non ego paucis offendor maculis, &c. A man may be counted a virtuous man, though he have made many
slips in his life, (else, there were none virtuous, for in many things we offend all) also a comely man and lovely, though he have some warts upon his hand, yes, not
only freckles upon his face, but also scars. No cause therefore why the WORD translated should be denied to be the WORD, or forbidden to be current,
notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolike
men, that is, men endowed with an extraordinary measure of GODS SPIRIT, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand? The Romanistes
therefore in refusing to hear, and daring to burn the WORD translated, did no less than despite the spirit of grace, from whom originally it proceeded, and whose
sense and meanings, as well as mans weakness would enable, it did express. Judge by an example or two. Plutarch writes, that after that Rome had been burnt by the
Galles, they fell soon to build it again: but doing it
in haste, they did not cast the streets, nor proportion the houses in such comely fashion, as had been most sightly and convenient; was Catiline therefore an honest
man, or a good Patriot, that sought to bring it to a combustion? or Nero a good Prince, that did indeed set it on fire? So, by the story of Ezra, and the prophecy of
Haggai it may be gathered (Ezra 3:12), that the Temple built by Zerubbabel after the return from Babylon, was by no means to be compared to the former built by
Soloman (for they that remembered the former, wept when they considered the latter) notwithstanding, might this later
either have been abhorred and forsaken by the Jews, or profaned by the Greeks? The like we are to think of Translations. The translation of the Seventy dissents
from the Original in many places, neither does it come near it, for perspicuitie, gravity, majesty; yet which of the Apostles did condemn it? Condemn it? No, they
used it, (as it is apparent, and as Saint Heirome and most learned men do confess) which they would not have done, nor by their example of using it, so grace and
commend it
to the Church, if it had been unworthy the appellation and name of the WORD OF GOD. And whereas they urge for their second defence of their villifying and
abusing of the English Bibles, or some pieces thereof, which they meet with, for that heretics (forsooth) were the Authors of the translations, (heretics they call us by
the same right that they call themselves Catholics, both being wrong) we marvel what divinity taught them so. We are sure Tertullian was of another mind: Ex personis
probamus fiden, an ex fide personas? Do we try mens faith by their persons? We should try their persons by their faith. Also S. Augustine was of another mind: for
he lighting upon certain rules made by Tychonius a Donatist, for the better understanding of the WORD, was not ashamed to make use of them, yes, to insert them
into his own book, with giving commendation to them so far forth as they were worthy to be commended, as is to be seen in S. Augustines third book De doctrina
Christiana. To be short, Origen, and the whole Church of GOD for certain hundred years, were of another mind: for they were so far from treading under foot, (much
more from burning) the Translation of Aquila a proselite, that is, one that had
turned Jew; of Symmachus, and Theodotin, both Ebionites, that is, most vile heretics, that they joined them together with the Hebrew Original, and the Translation of
the Seventy, (as had been before signified out of Epiphanius) and set them forth openly to be considered of and perused by all. But we weary the unlearned, who
need not know so much, and trouble the learned, who know it already.

Yet before we end, we must answer a third cavill and objection of theirs against us, for altering and amending our Translations so often, wherein truly they deal so
hardly, and strangely with us. For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to go over that which he had done, and to amend it where he saw
cause? Saint Augustine was not afraid to exhort S. Hierome to a palinodia or recantation; the same S. Augustine was not ashamed to retract, we might say revoke,
many things that had passed him, and does even glory that he sees his infirmities. If we will be sons of the truth, we must consider what it speaks, and trample upon
our own credit, yes, and upon other mens too, if either be any way an hinderance to it. This to the cause: then to the persons we say, that of all men they ought to be
most silent in this case. For what varieties have they, and what alterations have they made, not only of their Service books, Portesses and Breuiaries, but also of their
Latin Translation? The Service book supposed to be made by S. Ambrose (Officium Ambrosianum) was a great while in special
use and request: But Pope Hadrian calling a Council with the aid of Charles the Emperor, abolished it, yes, burnt it, and commanded the Service-book of Saint
Gregorie universally to be used. Well, Officium Gregorianum gets by this means to be in credit, but does it continue without change or altering? No, the very Romane
Service was of two fashions, the New fashion, and the Old, (the one used in one Church, the other in another) as is to be seen in Pamelius a Romanist, his Preface,
before Micrologus. The same Pamelius reports out of Radulphus de Riuo, that about the year of our LORD, 1277. Pope Nicolas the third removed out of the
Churches of Rome, the more ancient books (of Service) and brought into use the Missals of the Friers Minorites, and commanded them to be observed there;
insomuch that about an hundred years after, when the above named Radulphus happened to be at Rome, he found all the books to be new, (of the new stamp).
Neither was there this chopping and changing in the more ancient times only, but also of late: Pius Quintus himself confessed, that every Bishopricke
almost had a peculiar kind of service, most unlike to that which others had: which moved him to abolish all other Breuiaries, though never so ancient, and privileged
and published by Bishops in their Diocesses, and to establish and ratify that only which was of his own setting forth, in the year 1568. Now, when the father of their
Church, who gladly would heal the sore of the daughter of his people softly and sleightly, and make the best of it, findeth so great fault with them for their oddes and
jarring; we hope the children have no great cause to vaunt for their uniformity. But the difference that appears between our
Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that we are specially charged with; let us see therefore wether they themselves be without fault this way, (if
it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and wether they be fit men to throw stones at us: O tandem maior parcas insane minori: they that are less sound themselves,
ought not to object infirmities to others. If we should tell them that Valla, Stapulensis, Erasmus, and Viues found fault with their vulgar Translation, and consequently
wished the same to be mended, or a new one to be made, they would answer peradventure, that we produced their enemies for witnesses against them; albeit, they
were in no other sort enemies, then as S. Paul was to the Galatians, for telling them the truth (Gal. 4:16) and it were to be wished, that they had dared to tell it them
plainlier and oftner. But what will they say to this, that Pope Leo the tenth allowed Erasmus Translation of the New Testament, so much different from the vulgar, by
his Apostolike letter & Bull; that the same Leo exhorted Pagnin to translate the whole Bible, and bear whatsoever charges was necessary for the work? Surely, as
the Apostle reasoned to the Hebrews (Heb. 7:11, and 8:7), that if the former Law and Testament had been sufficient, there had been no need of the latter: so we may
say, that if the old vulgar had been at all points allowable, to small purpose had labor and charges been undergone, about framing of a new. If they say, it was one
Popes private opinion, and that he consulted only himself; then we are able to go further with them, and to averre, that more of their
chief men of all sorts, even their owne Trent-champions Paiua & Vega, and their own Inquisitors, Hieronymus ab Oleastro, and their own Bishop Isidorus Clarius,
and their own Cardinal Thomas a Vio Caietan, do either make new Translations themselves, or follow new ones of other mens making, or note the vulgar Interpretor
for halting; none of them fear to dissent from him, nor yet to except against him. And call they this an uniform tenour of text and judgement about the text, so many
of their worthies disclaiming the now received conceit? No, we will yet come nearer the quick: does not their Paris-edition differ from the Louaine, and Hentenius his
from them both, and yet all of them allowed by authority? No, does not Sixtus Quintus confess, that certain Catholics (he means certain of his own side) were in such
an humor of translating the  Scriptures into Latin, that Satan taking occasion by them, though they thought of no such matter, did strive what he could, out of so
uncertain and manifold a variety of Translations, so to mingle all things, that nothing might seem to be left certain and firm in them, &c? No further, did not the same
Sixtus ordain by an inviolable decree, and that with the council and consent of his Cardinals, that the Latin edition of the Old and New Testament, which the council
of Trent would have to be authentic, is the same without controversy which he then set forth, being diligently corrected and printed in the Printing-house of Vatican?
Thus Sixtus in his Preface before his Bible. And yet Clement the eight his immediate successor, published another edition of the
Bible, containing in it infinite differences from that of Sixtus, (and many of them weighty and material) and yet this must be authentic by all means. What is to have the
faith of our glorious LORD JESUS CHRIST with Yea and Nay, if this be not? Again, what is sweet harmony and consent, if this be? Therefore, as Demaratus of
Corinth advised a great King, before he talked of the dissentions amoung the Grecians, to compose his domestic broiles (for at that time his Queen and his son and
heir were at a deadly feud with him) so all the while that our adversaries do make so many and so various editions themselves, and do jarre so much about the worth
and authority of them, they can with no show of equity challenge us for changing and correcting.

But it is high time to leave them, and to show in brief what we proposed to ourselves, and what course we held in this our perusal and survey of the Bible. Truly
(good Christian reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, (for then the
imputation of the Sixtus had been true in some sort, that our people had been fed with gall of Dragons instead of wine, with whey instead of milk): but to make a
good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that has been our endeavor, that our mark. To that purpose
there were many chosen, that were greater in other mens eyes than in our own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise. Again, they came or were
thought to come to the work, not exercendi causa (as one said) but exercitati, that is, learned, not to learn: For the chief overseer and xxxxxxxn under his Majesty, to
whom not only we, but also our whole Church was much bound, knew by his wisdom, which thing also Nazianzen taught so long ago, that it is a preposterous order
to teach first and learn after, yes that xxxxxxxxxxx to learn and practise together, is neither commendable for the workman, nor safe for the work. Therefore such
were thought upon , as could say modestly with Saint Hierome, Et Hebrxum Sermonem ex parte didicimus, & in Lation pene ab ipsis incunabulis & c. detriti sumus.
Both we
have learned the Hebrew tongue in part, and in the Latin we have been exercised almost from our very cradle. S. Hierome makes no mention of the Greek tongue,
wherein yet he did excel, because he translated not the old Testament out of Greek, but out of Hebrew. And in what sort did these assemble? In the trust of their
own knowledge, or of their sharpness of wit, or deepness of judgement, as it were an arm of flesh? At no hand. They trusted in him that had the key of David,
opening and
no man shutting; they prayed to the LORD the FATHER of our LORD, to the effect that S. Augustine did; O let thy Scriptures be my pure delight, let me not be
deceived in them, neither let me deceive by them. In this confidence, and with this devotion did they assemble together; not too many, lest one should trouble another;
and yet many, lest many things haply might escape them. If you ask what they had before them, truly it was the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the Greek of the
New. These are the two golden pipes, or rather conduits, where-through the olive branches empty themselves into the gold. Saint Augustine called them precedent,
or Original tongues; Saint Hierome, fountains. The same Saint Hierome affirmed, and Gratian has not spared to put it into his decree, That as the credit of the old
books (.he means of the Old Testament) is to be tried by the Hebrew Volumes, so of the New by the Greek tongue, he means by the original Greek. If truth be to be
tried by these tongues, then whence should a Translation be made, but out of them? These tongues therefore, the Scriptures we say in those tongues, we set before
us to translate, being the tongues wherein GOD was pleased to speak to his Church by HIS Prophets and Apostles. Neither did we run over the work with that
posting haste that the Septuagint did, if that be true which is reported of them, that they finished it in 72 days; neither were we barred or hindered from going over it
again, having
once done it, like S. Hierome, if that be true which himself reported, that he could no sooner write anything, but presently it was caught from him, and published, and
he could not have leave to mend it: neither, to be short, were we the first that fell in hand with translating the Scripture into English, and consequently destitute of
former helps, as it is written of Origen, that he was the first in a mannor, that put his hand to write Commentaries upon the Scriptures, and therefore no marvel, if he
overshot
himself many times. None of these things: the work had not been huddled up in 72 days, but has cost the workmen, as light as it seemed, the pains of twice seven
times seventy two days and more: matters of such weight and consequence are to be speeded with maturity: for in a business of moment a man fears not the blame of
convenient slackness.Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French,
Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we
had hammered: but having and using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have at the length,
through the good hand of the LORD upon us, brought the work to that passe you see.

Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding controversies by that show of uncertainty,
should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgemnent to be not so sound in this point. For though, whatsoever things are necessary are manifest, as S.
Chrysostome said, and as S. Augustine, In those things that are plainly set down in the Scriptures, all such matters are found that concern Faith, hope, and Charity.
Yet for all
that it cannot be dissembled, that partly to exercise and whet our wits, partly to wean the curious from loathing of them for their every-where -plainenesse, partly also
to stir up our devotion to crave the assistance of GOD's SPIRIT by prayer, and lastly, that we might be forward to seek aid of our brethren by conference, and never
scorn those that be not in all respects so complete as they should be, being to seek in many things ourselves, it has pleased GOD in HIS divine providence, here and
there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doublfulness, not in all doctrinal points that concern salvation, (for in such it has been vouched that the
Scriptures are plain) but in matters of less moment, that fearfulness would better beseem us than confidence, and if we will resolve, to resolve upon modesty with S.
Augustine, (though not in this same case altogether,
yet upon the same ground) Melius est dubitare occultis, quam litigarede incertis, it is better to make doubt of those things which are secret, than to strive about those
things that are uncertain. There be many words in the Scriptures, which be never found there but once, (having neither brother nor neighbor, as the Hebrews speak)
so that we cannot be holpen by
conference of places. Again, there be many rare names of certain birds, beasts and precious stones, &c. concerning which the Hebrews themselves are so divided
among themselves for judgement, that they may seem to have defined this or that, rather because they would say something, the because they were sure of that which
they said, as S. Hierome somewhere said of the Septuagint. Now in such as case, does not a margin do well to admonish the reader to seek further, and not to
conclude or to dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For as it is a fault of incredulitie, to doubt those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the
Spirit of GOD has left (even in the judgement of the judicious) questionable, can be no less that presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine said,  that variety of
Translations is profitable for finding out for the sense of
the Scriptures: so diversity of the signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good, yes, is necessary, as we are persuaded.
We know that Sixtus Quintus expressly forbids, that any variety of readings of their vulgar edition, should be put in the margin, (which thought it be not altogether the
same thing to that we have in hand, yet it looks that way) but we think he had not all of his own side his favourers, for this conceit. They that are wise, had rather have
their judgements at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other. If they were sure that their high Priest had all laws shut up
in his breast, as Paul the second had bragged, and that he was as free from error by special privilege, as the Dictators of Rome were made by law inviolable, it were
an other matter; then his word were an Oracle, his opinion a decision. But the eyes of the world are now open, GOD be thanked, and have been a great while, they
find that he is subject to the same affections and infirmities that others be, that his skin is penetrable, and therefore so much as he proveth, not as much as he claims,
they grant and embrace.

(Reasons inducing us not to stand curiously upon an identity of phrasing.)

An other thing we think good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some
peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe, that some learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we
might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places (for there be some words that be not of the
same sense everywhere) we were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty. But, that we should express the same notion in the same
particular word; as for example, if we translate the Hebrew or Greek word once by Purpose, never to call it Intent; if one were Journeying, never Traveiling; if one
where Think, never Suppose; if one where Paine, never Ache; if one where Joy, never Gladness, &c. Thus to minse the matter, we thought to savour more of
curiosity than wisdom, and that rather that it would breed scorn in the Atheist, than bring profit to the godly Reader. For is the Kingdom of GOD become words or
syllables? why should we be in bondage to them if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously? A godly Father in the
primitive time showed himself greatly moved, that one of newfanglenes called xxxxxxxxxx, though the difference be little or none; and another reports, that he was
much abused for turning Cucurbita (to which reading the people had been used) into Hedera. Now if this happens in better times, and upon so small occasions, we
might justly fear hard censure, if generally we should make verbal and unneccessary changes. We might also be charged (by scoffers) with some unequal dealing
towards a great number of good English words. For as it is written of a certain great Philosopher, that he should say, that those logs were happy that were made
images to be worshipped; for their fellows, as good as they, lay for blocks behind the fire: so if we should say, as it were, unto certain words, Stand up higher, have a
place in the Bible always, and to others of like quality, Get ye hence, be banished for ever, we might be taxed peradventure with S. James his words, namely, To be
partial in ourselves and judges of evil thoughts. Add hereunto, that niceness in words was always counted the next step to trifling, and so was to be curious about
names too: also that we cannot follow a better pattern for elocution than GOD HIMSELF; therefore HE using diverse words, in HIS Holy writ, and indifferently for
one thing in nature: we, if we will not be superstitious, may use the same liberty in our English versions out of Hebrew & Greek, for that copy or store that HE has
given us. Lastly, we have on the one side avoided the scrupulositie of the Puritanes, who leave the old Ecclesiasticall words, and betake them to other, as when they
put washing for Baptism, and Congregation instead of Church: as also on the other side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, and their Azimes, Tunike,
Rational, Holocausts, Prxpuce, Pasche, and a number of such like, whereof their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense, that since they must
needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may be kept from being understood. But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language
of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the
very vulgar.