Audio • Season 1 • Episode 5 • (New) Series 1 Episode 5 Part Two. Geneva — The Bible of a Generation.

The artwork is: A copy of the Bassandyne Bible, the first full Bible printed in the country.

In 1579, Scotland reached an important milestone with the publication of the Bassandyne Bible, the first complete Bible printed in the country. Begun in Edinburgh by Thomas Bassandyne and completed by Alexander Arbuthnot after Bassandyne’s death, it was a large folio reprint of the 1561 Geneva Bible. Every parish kirk was required to obtain a copy, helping to establish the Geneva translation at the heart of Scottish religious life.

While the preface and dedication, - "To the heich and michtie Prince James the Sext King of Scottis", - is in Scots, the main text is in English.

Since the Bible was the most popular book in Scotland – and often the only book found in poorer households – the English text had a very damaging impact on the Scots language. Literacy was largely driven by a desire to read the Bible, so schooling, gradually became associated with English rather than Scots. Its widespread use therefore contributed to the growing importance of English in Scottish worship, education and culture. Ironically, the king named in its dedication would later condemn some of its marginal notes at Hampton Court.

A rare surviving copy is now held by Edinburgh Central Library.

The Music is: Psalm 18:28-35. The Lord will light my candle so, that it shall shine full bright.

Sung by the Evangelical Presbyterian Church Launceston Tasmania. Presented by the The Westminster Covenanter. Further details, including lyrics are included in the epilogue.

The music plays for the first 30 seconds.

Notes:

Part Two explores the features that made the Geneva Bible both popular and controversial. It examines the thousands of notes printed in its margins, including their explanations of Scripture and the small number that challenged religious and political authority.

It also follows the Bible’s spread through England and Scotland, revealing who actually read it and why it cannot simply be described as the Puritan Bible. Along the way, we encounter bishops, Shakespeare and the famous Breeches Bible, before discovering why its marginal notes would eventually trouble King James.

© 20 26 The Rise of the Protestants., Author, Shaughan Holt.

"All rights reserved. No part of this podcast may be reproduced, translated, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the copyright holder, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law".

Requests regarding translation, licensing, or republication should be directed to: [email protected]

Your feedback matters, send me an email, with any comments, suggestions, or criticisms. I read every message.

Series 1.

Episode 5, Part Two:

Geneva, – The Bible of a Generation.

The Bible in the Margins.

In Part One, we followed the English Protestant exiles as they created and published the Geneva Bible.

Their Bible was designed not simply to present the words of Scripture, but to help ordinary people read, compare and understand them.

Surrounding the biblical text, the translators placed thousands of explanatory notes.

Those notes would become one of the Geneva Bible’s most celebrated features, and the source of much of its later controversy.

Yet their reputation has often been misunderstood.

The common idea that the Geneva Bible’s margins were filled with attacks on popes, bishops and kings is not accurate.

Most of the notes served a more practical purpose.

They explained unfamiliar words, clarified Hebrew expressions, identified people and places, and directed readers to related passages, contained elsewhere in Scripture.

Occasionally, a note would step in, to reveal exactly which king or nation was under discussion.

In some sections, the notes provided historical or geographical details, that would help readers, better understand the passage.

The notes were designed to assist everyday readers, similar to the guidance provided by skilled ministers or teachers.

This objective was especially important to the translators.

In their address to the reader, the translators said they were concerned that people in England, Scotland and Ireland did not always get enough help from their parish clergy, when trying to understand difficult parts of Scripture.

The Geneva Bible attempted to place some of that assistance directly on the page.

So readers got more than just a translation.

Alongside the biblical text, a running commentary guided its readers through its language, history and meaning.

It makes sense therefore, that this guidance would reflect the beliefs of its creators.

The translators were Reformed Protestants, so their notes often explained Scripture from that perspective.

They emphasised the Bible’s authority, salvation through faith, and God’s sovereignty, while rejecting religious practices they believed had no foundation in Scripture.

However, that reputation needs to be placed in perspective.

Out of more than sixteen thousand notes in the Bible, only a small number directly criticised the Roman Catholic Church.

Apart from the Book of Revelation, just thirteen notes mentioned the Pope, Papists, or Antichrist by name.

The terms “mass” and “purgatory” were not used in any of the notes.

Most of the notes explained the biblical text, rather than attacking other beliefs.

The Book of Revelation was an exception.

Many Protestants saw its visions of beasts, false prophets, persecution, and corrupt religious power as descriptions of the religious conflicts of their own time.

In the original 15 60 notes, most mentions of the Pope, Papists, or Antichrist, appeared in this, last book of the Bible.

These ways of interpreting Revelation were part of a larger Protestant tradition.

John Bale was one English writer, who helped shape that tradition.

Bale was once a Carmelite friar, but later became an outspoken Protestant writer and opponent of papal authority.

In 15 45, he published, “The Image of Both Churches”, a commentary on the Book of Revelation.

Bale saw Revelation, as describing an ongoing struggle, between two churches.

One was the true Church, which stayed loyal to Scripture but was often persecuted.

The other was a false and corrupt Church, which he closely linked to the papacy.

Rather than seeing Revelation only as a prediction of the future, Bale used its images, to speak about Christian history and the Reformation’s conflicts.

His writing helped establish an English Protestant tradition, of reading Revelation in strongly anti-papal terms.

This tradition later appeared in the notes of the Geneva Bible, although we cannot say with certainty that Bale influenced any particular annotation.

Debate flared up over more than just questions of religious doctrine.

A much smaller number of notes, focused on government, obedience, and rulers' responsibilities.

The Geneva translators, believed, that although rulers received their authority from God, they remained subject to God’s law.

This raised a dangerous question.

What should people do, if a ruler ordered something that went against Scripture?.

One of the most disputed notes, appeared beside the story of the Hebrew midwives, in the Book of Exodus.

Pharaoh had ordered them to kill the newborn sons of the Israelites, but the women refused to obey him.

Next to this passage, the Geneva note said: “Their disobedience herein was lawful, but their dissembling evil”.

The note therefore approved their refusal to obey an evil command, but criticised the lie they told to conceal their actions.

The note’s meaning was more balanced than some later descriptions made it seem.

Nevertheless, it clearly stated that disobedience to a ruler, could in certain circumstances, be lawful.

Another controversial annotation, appeared in the Second Book of Chronicles.

King Asa removed his mother from her royal position, because she had erected an idolatrous image.

The Geneva note argued that Asa should not merely have deposed her, but should have put her to death.

Later critics, thought these notes put the reader’s judgment, above the authority of kings and queens.

They appeared to suggest that rulers could be resisted—and perhaps even punished—when they acted against God’s law.

These ideas were particularly sensitive during an age of rebellion, religious conflict and disputed royal authority.

Still, these political notes made up only a small part, of the thousands of notes in the Geneva Bible.

They did not turn the whole book into a call for rebellion.

Most readers opening the Geneva Bible, encountered explanations of language, history, geography and doctrine, not instructions to overthrow a monarch.

Even so, a few sentences in a margin, could acquire a life, far beyond the page on which they appeared.

More than forty years later, these notes would attract the attention of a king.

At the Hampton Court Conference in 16 04, James the First pointed to them, as examples of why he believed the Geneva Bible, encouraged disobedience to rulers.

But that confrontation comes later in our story.

First, the Geneva Bible had to reach the readers for whom it had been created.

For fifteen years after its publication in 15 60, not one complete edition was printed in England.

Fifteen Years without an English Edition.

The Geneva Bible had been created for readers in England, Scotland and Ireland.

But when it appeared in 15 60, every copy had to be printed abroad.

The following year, John Bodley attempted to change all that.

Bodley helped fund, the Geneva printing press, and was the father of Thomas Bodley, who later founded Oxford University’s Bodleian Library.

On 8 January 15 61, Queen Elizabeth granted John Bodley and his associates the exclusive right to print the Geneva Bible in England for seven years.

But this privilege came with an important condition.

Before it could be published, the edition had to be reviewed, and possibly changed, under the guidance of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London.

The Geneva Bible was originally produced without oversight from the English bishops.

Now, if Bodley wanted to print it in England, the bishops could demand changes to the features that made the Geneva Bible, so distinctive.

The main figure involved was Matthew Parker, the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Parker did not oppose English translations of the Bible, nor did he argue that only one translation should exist.

His primary concern, was maintaining the authority of the bishops over any English Bible printing.

He objected to translations, produced beyond the authority of the English Church, especially when they included notes on disputed religious or political questions.

In 15 66, Parker and Edmund Grindal, the Bishop of London, supported extending Bodley’s printing rights.

But they also made it clear, that no edition could be published without their guidance, consent and approval.

No Geneva Bible was ever printed under Bodley’s privilege.

Throughout the seven years in which he held the exclusive printing rights, not one complete edition appeared from an English press.

English readers could still obtain imported copies, but the Geneva Bible remained excluded, from all English printing presses.

Meanwhile, Parker had begun organising a new translation.

This new version was intended to replace the ageing - Great Bible, as the primary Bible used in English churches.

The work was divided among several bishops and senior churchmen, and the completed translation became known as the Bishops’ Bible.

Parker gave the translators, a set of written instructions.

They were to use the Great Bible, already read in English churches, as their starting point.

They should depart from it only where it clearly differed from the original Hebrew or Greek.

They could include brief explanatory notes, however, those notes were to contain no bitter comments, and make no firm judgements on controversial passages.

This last instruction, reflected one of Parker’s main objections to the Geneva Bible.

Parker wanted a Bible suitable for public worship that did not include marginal notes, which could encourage readers to take sides in religious or political controversies.

The Bishops’ Bible was published in 15 68.

The Bishops’ Bible was richly illustrated and produced principally as a large folio for use in churches.

However, it did little to meet the needs of readers, seeking a smaller Bible for personal study at home.

For fifteen years after the Geneva Bible was first published, no complete edition was printed in England.

Then, in May 15 75, Archbishop Parker died.

In the same year, English editions began to appear.

Thomas Vautrollier, a French Protestant printer working in London, printed the first English editions for Christopher Barker.

At the time, Barker was a businessman and bookseller, but he would soon become one of the most influential Bible printers, in the English book trade.

Later accounts, often date the beginning of English Geneva Bible printing, to 15 76.

But surviving editions from 15 75, show it began a year earlier.

After fifteen years, the long wait was over.

The Bible created by English refugees in Geneva, could now be finally printed on English soil.

A Bible for the Home and Kirk.

After the English printing started, the Geneva Bible quickly became popular.

But the Geneva Bible did not replace the Bishops’ Bible right away, because each served different purposes.

The Bishops’ Bible was designed chiefly for use in churches, with large folio editions made for lecterns and public reading.

The Geneva Bible was also produced in large formats, but publishers would increasingly offer it as a quarto, octavo or duodecimo.

These smaller editions were easier to hold, carry, and use at home.

The Geneva Bible met a need that the Bishops’ Bible mostly overlooked.

English readers wanted a Bible they could use, outside the parish church.

They wanted to read it privately, study it with their families, compare one passage with another, and discuss its meaning with friends and neighbours.

Numbered verses, chapter summaries, cross-references, and marginal notes, made the Geneva Bible especially well-suited to this kind of reading.

However, its success cannot be explained by price alone.

A complete Bible remained expensive.

In 15 78, a large bound Geneva Bible was advertised at twenty-four shillings, approximately a month’s wages for a London labourer.

Smaller editions cost less and were easier to use, but buying a complete Bible, still represented a major investment for most families.

Although a New Testament on its own was far more affordable, demand for the complete Geneva Bible continued to grow.

Of the twenty-seven complete Bibles printed in England between 15 76 and 15 85, twenty, were editions of the Geneva Bible.

This translation, created by refugees, was becoming the Bible many English families chose to keep at home.

Its impact was even greater in Scotland.

In 15 75, the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, approved plans to print a complete Bible in Edinburgh.

The work began under Thomas Bassandyne, but when he died in 15 77, responsibility passed to Alexander Arbuthnot.

Arbuthnot completed the project, and the new edition appeared in 15 79.

Known as the Bassandyne Bible, it was the first complete Bible printed in Scotland.

It was an edition of the Geneva Bible.

The book was dedicated to James VI of Scotland, who was just thirteen at the time.

The preface and dedication were written in Scots, but the Bible itself was printed in English.

The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, required every parish church, to obtain a copy.

The Scottish Parliament would go even further.

In November 15 79, it ordered householders of sufficient means, to possess both a Bible and a psalm book, with a financial penalty for those who failed to comply.

The Geneva Bible, would now gain a standing in Scotland, that it never formally enjoyed in England.

It was no longer simply a popular translation.

It had become the recognised Bible of the Reformed Scottish Kirk.

Parish churches kept copies, and smaller editions were read at home and in schools.

Less than twenty years earlier, the Geneva Bible had been the unfinished project of a diminishing refugee congregation.

Now, it was printed in England, placed in Scottish churches, and carried to Protestant homes across both kingdoms.

It was no longer just the Bible of the Marian exiles.

It was becoming the Bible of an entire generation.

Who Actually Red, the Geneva Bible.

The Geneva Bible is sometimes called the Puritans bible, and there is some truth to that name.

Its translators belonged to the Reformed Protestant tradition, and many Puritans valued its clear language, useful study aids and detailed marginal notes.

Those notes encouraged readers to study Scripture for themselves, and sometimes to question the actions of rulers and religious authorities.

These qualities appealed to those seeking further reform within the Church of England.

But describing it simply as the Puritan bible, can also be misleading.

By the end of Elizabeth’s reign, the Geneva Bible was so widely read that no single religious group could claim it.

Puritan ministers used it, but so did conforming clergy, bishops and leading supporters of the established Church.

John Whitgift provides a revealing example.

Whitgift became Archbishop of Canterbury in 15 83 and strongly opposed Puritan nonconformity.

He defended the government of the Church by bishops and required ministers to follow its authorised forms of worship.

When they refused, he used his authority to enforce conformity.

One of Whitgift’s principal opponents was Thomas Cartwright, a prominent Puritan theologian.

The two men became involved in a lengthy and sometimes bitter published controversy, over how the English Church should be governed, how it should worship and how it should be disciplined.

Yet when Whitgift, quoted Scripture during this dispute, he frequently used the Geneva bible.

The Archbishop, who opposed the Puritan movement, was therefore drawing upon the same translation, often remembered as the Puritan Bible.

However, this did not mean that Whitgift accepted all its marginal notes or shared the religious views of its translators.

What it did show was that the translation had become familiar and respected, even among those fiercely divided over the future of the English Church.

Whitgift was not alone.

Richard Hooker, another key defender of the Elizabethan Church, also used the Geneva translation.

Hooker was an English priest and theologian, best known for his major work, “Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity.”

He wrote it partly in response to Puritan criticism, defending the Church of England’s organisation, worship and authority.

However, Hooker did not limit himself to the Bishops’ Bible, which was made for use in churches.

When he quoted Scripture, he also used the Geneva Bible and other English translations.

The same was true of Lancelot Andrewes.

Andrewes was a respected preacher and scholar.

He later became a bishop and was one of the principal translators of the King James Bible.

Although he disagreed with some of the Geneva Bible’s theology and marginal commentary, he knew the text, - and sometimes used its language in his sermons and lectures.

These examples, reveal how widely the Geneva Bible had come to be used.

Whitgift, Hooker and Andrewes were not Puritan opponents of the established Church; in fact they were among its most prominent defenders.

Yet all three drew upon a translation, closely associated with the very people they opposed.

In reality, readers didn't always stick to a single English Bible.

A person might hear the Bishops’ Bible read during worship, follow the Psalms in the Book of Common Prayer, and then return home to read the Geneva Bible with their family.

Ministers and scholars could compare several translations when preparing sermons or studying a difficult passage.

So, the boundaries between these Bibles were less strict than people might think today.

The Geneva Bible was still especially important to Puritans and Separatists.

But simply owning or using it did not mean someone was a Puritan.

It was read by people seeking further reform, and by people defending the established Church, against the very same reform.

Both sides could, and did use, the same translation in a religious argument.

By the end of the sixteenth century, the language of the Geneva Bible had spread far beyond private study and religious debate.

Its words rang out in sermons, lingered in conversation, and echoed through Elizabethan literature.

No writer has been more closely linked, to that literary influence than William Shakespeare.

The Geneva Bible and Shakespeare.

William Shakespeare was born in 15 64, only four years after the Geneva Bible was first published.

By the time Shakespeare started writing plays in London, the Geneva Bible was already well known across England.

Shakespeare’s plays often include stories, characters and phrases from the Bible.

He mentions Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Job, Judas, the Prodigal Son and many other biblical figures.

Sometimes, the Bible’s influence on his writing is very clear.

In “Hamlet,” the prince declares that there is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow.

These words remind us of Christ’s teaching in the Gospel of Matthew, where even the fall of a sparrow is known to God.

Many people in Shakespeare’s audience, would have recognised these references immediately.

For generations, scholars have compared Shakespeare’s language with the English Bibles available during his lifetime.

In many passages, his wording appears closest to the Geneva Bible.

This has led to the widespread description of the Geneva Bible as Shakespeare’s Bible.

However, the evidence is not so clear cut, no Bible, known to have belonged to Shakespeare, has survived.

Nor is there any record identifying one particular translation as the Bible he kept or used.

During Shakespeare’s lifetime, several English Bible translations were in use.

He might have heard the Bishops’ Bible read in church, followed the Psalms in the Book of Common Prayer, and read the Geneva Bible privately.

He may also have encountered biblical language in sermons, school lessons, plays and everyday conversation.

His writing therefore reflects a mixture of biblical influences, rather than a single translation.

Even when Shakespeare’s words resemble those of the Geneva Bible, it is difficult to know whether he was reading directly from it as he wrote.

Some phrases were already common in Elizabethan religious language, while others appeared in several different translations.

The most reasonable conclusion, is that Shakespeare knew the Geneva Bible, and often used language associated with it, although it was not his only possible source.

The Geneva Bible formed part of a wider biblical culture that shaped both Shakespeare and his audience.

Created by a small community of Protestant refugees, it reached far beyond its origins, finding a place in homes, churches, sermons and religious debates, while its language echoed through some of the greatest works of English literature.

The Breeches Bible.

Over time, the Geneva Bible picked up one of the most memorable nicknames in Bible translation history.

People began calling it the Breeches Bible.

This nickname comes from how it translated Genesis, chapter three, verse seven.

After Adam and Eve, ate the forbidden fruit, they became aware of their nakedness.

The Geneva Bible described what happened next.

“They sewed fig tree leaves together, and made themselves breeches.”

Other English Bibles chose a different word.

Tyndale’s translation, the Great Bible, the Bishops’ Bible and later the King James Bible, all said that Adam and Eve, - made themselves aprons.

Today, the word breeches might sound a little amusing.

But in the sixteenth century, breeches meant clothing, that was worn over the lower part of the body.

So what the Geneva translators were describing, was something as simple as a covering, or even a pair of short trousers.

However, the Geneva Bible was not the first English translation to use the word breeches.

More than a century earlier, English Bibles associated with John Wycliffe, had said that Adam and Eve made themselves "brechis".

This famous wording was therefore much older than the Geneva Bible.

Most readers in the sixteenth century did not call it the Breeches Bible.

They knew it as the Geneva Bible, or simply as the English Bible printed at Geneva.

The nickname only became popular much later, especially among booksellers, collectors and historians, who identified early Bibles by unusual translations or famous printing mistakes.

Other editions acquired nicknames such as the Wicked Bible, the Vinegar Bible and the He Bible.

In some cases, including the Wicked and Vinegar Bibles, the nickname resulted from a printing error.

The Breeches Bible was different.

The word breeches was a deliberate translation, and it appeared throughout the Geneva Bible’s long publishing history.

Whilst the nickname is memorable, it can give the wrong impression.

The Geneva Bible was not controversial because Adam and Eve wore breeches.

The real controversy, lay in the notes printed beside the biblical text.

It was those notes, rather than its unusual translation of Genesis, that would trouble King James.

That confrontation, is where our story will continue in Part Three.

Epilogue

Psalm 18 : 28 - 35

Sung by the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, Launceston, Tasmania

Presented by the Westminster Covenanter.

An anonymous YouTube content creator who publishes traditional Reformed and Presbyterian Christian media.

Focusing heavily on recordings from the Scottish Psalter, historical Covenanter and Puritan audio books, and curated historical sermons.

Lyrics.

28 The Lord will light my candle so, that it shall shine full bright:

The Lord my God will also make my darkness to be light.

29 By thee through troops of men I break, and them discomfit all; And, by my God assisting me, I overleap a wall.

30 As for God, perfect is his way: the Lord his word is try'd; He is a buckler to all those who do in him confide.

31 Who but the Lord is God? but he who is a rock and stay?

32 ‘Tis God that girdeth me with strength, and perfect makes my way.

33 He made my feet swift as the hinds, set me on my high places.

34 Mine hands to war he taught, mine arms brake bows of steel in pieces.

35 The shield of thy salvation thou didst on me bestow: Thy right hand held me up, and great thy kindness made me grow.