May 2, 1611

King James Version

First edition of the King James Bible appears in London

The publication date repeated as 2 May cannot be recovered: the book was never entered in the Stationers' Register.

Sometime in 1611

At an unknown point in 1611, the King's Printer Robert Barker issued the first large-folio edition of the new English Bible in London.

Because the work was treated bibliographically as a revision rather than a new book, it was never entered in the Stationers' Register — so no exact publication date survives. Cambridge University Library says only that publication occurred sometime that year.

Never actually authorized

The formal title described a Bible newly translated from the original languages, compared with earlier translations by royal command, and 'Appointed to be read in Churches.'

The names King James Bible, King James Version, and Authorized Version appear nowhere on that title page, and no surviving act formally authorizes the translation.

A church folio, not a bestseller

What Barker produced was a new and very large church Bible. Parishes were not ordered under penalty to buy it, and it did not immediately displace the Geneva Bible.

Preparation and printing were estimated at £3,000, and Barker raised the money himself rather than receiving it from the Crown.

The Folger Shakespeare Library reports scholarly estimates of a first-edition run between 500 and 1,000 copies; the actual number is unknown.

Sources

Researched 24 Aug 2026 7 sources not yet audited Date disputed

How this was checked

Researched from the web into a fact sheet and rewritten from that sheet. This article has not yet had an independent model audit. How the pipeline works →

Date disputed. Sources disagree; the research places it at 1611.

What the sources leave uncertain

The exact date, price and print run are unknown. Cambridge University Library explicitly says only that publication occurred sometime in 1611, so May 2 is not independently supportable.
One University of Glasgow exhibition dates publication broadly to May 1611, but this does not establish May 2 and conflicts with Cambridge's conclusion that no precise publication date is recorded.
Bibliographers distinguish 1611 “He” and “She” impressions by their different readings of Ruth 3:15, adding complexity to descriptions of the first edition.