By Rev. Chr. Wordsivorth. 13 



say that the date of the Alton IJarnes table is subsequent to the 

 union of the khigdom (24th March, 1603), as the quartering of the 

 royal arms shows, and probalily anterior to the int7'oduction of the 

 "authorised " version of the New Testament (which was published 

 in 1611), or at least to its acceptance at Alton Barnes. Of course, 

 it does not follow that even then the new version was generally 

 used at Alton. Even in larger parishes I do not find that a new 

 bible was at once procured in 1611. Churchwardens naturally 

 waited either until the old great bible was worn out, or else until 

 the Bishop or Archdeacon called upon them to make the change. 

 It is not until the account of 1618 that I find at the large ])erkshire 

 parish of Stanford-in -the- Vale there was "layde out at Oxford for 

 a Bil)le and a psalter and dinners, 53s. M." 



At St. Peter's, Marlborough, somewhat earlier, in their accounts 

 at Easter, 1615, the churchwardens entered a payment of 45s, 6d. 

 "for the Church Bible." Still more promptly, in 1613-14, at St. 

 Mary's, Heading, they sold " the ould Byble to Mr. W. Iremonger " 

 for 7s., the price for their " newe Byble " being 47s. In the fol- 

 lowing year they set up " the lordes prayer and the Command- 

 ments." 



I will print the two passages as they appear in the text, which 

 was given in parallel columns with the Romanist (Eheims) version 

 of 1582, by Dr. W. Fulke, Master of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, 

 in his " Bcfutation" (1589, 1601, 1617, &c.). He gives it as the 

 version commonly in use in England in his day. I suppose it was 

 what is known as the " Bishops' Bible" of 1568, and it differs, not 

 only from Cranmer's Great Bible of 1539, but also from the Geneva 

 (or " Breeches ") Bible, which was likewise largely used, and which 

 continued to be printed, after the appearance of King James' 

 "Authorized" version of 1611, until 1644, or later. The Bishops' 

 version conthiued to be printed (with Tyndale's notes) from 1614 

 to 1619. 



I take Fulke's text (ed. 1601) which seems to agree best with 

 the words which are still legible on the Alton Barnes " table." 

 And this, I believe, may be safely followed in restoring the nu- 

 merous missing words. The royal arms printed on the title-page 



