One Small Typographical Error, One Giant Leap For Mankind

     In 1631, the then royally appointed printer, Robert Barker published a reprinted version of the King James Bible, within which a small error was made that drastically changed the way that Exodus chapter 20 read when listing the 10 commandments. In the 7th commandment, where it is written "thou shalt not commit adultery" the single word "not" was omitted. Resulting in the commandment now reading as "thou shalt commit adultery." One can easily see how troublesome this error could be especially concerning the fact that many Christians of the time were just beginning to have access to reading The Bible for themselves. This great invention, the printing press gave many advantages to those who wanted to spread authentic writings and truth, as Berlyn Flake points out in her blog post titled "The Printing Press and the Weakening of Catholicism," but the invention also proved to enable the hasty spread of misinformation in some cases. 

(Below is a depiction of the type and text.)

     I think that this error points out some of the differences between communication as it pertains to the Renaissance and the Reformation. For example, one great writer and philosopher of the Renaissance, Petrarch, heavily focused on finding, preserving, and analyzing the ideas and writers of the past in their most accurate forms. On the other hand, Robert Barker, and other publishers of the Reformation, seem to have been less concerned with keeping the texts and ideas exactly as they were.      

     Much like the differences between the Catholic Church and early reformers that Amy Johnson posted about in her blog post "Pageantry vs. Simplicity," the Renaissance seemed to focus, to some degree, on intellectual pageantry; keeping texts in their original language, writing in Latin and Greek, et cetera. Martin Luther and those that followed his example in the Reformation did not seem to care for the classical bravado in the same way. That is not to say that Luther's theses were at all without bravado and boisterousness, as he did post these theses originally in Latin and in a very bold and challenging way, but he later posted them in the language common people spoke, German, to appeal more keenly to the layman. This sort of general idea of accessibility that pervaded the Reformation definitely had roots in the beginning of the Renaissance, but really took shape when religious thinkers wanted to persuade and change the mind of the people as a whole. 


(Pictured below is a remaining copy of the Bible including the aforementioned error.)

     Both the Renaissance and the Reformation stand as brilliant bastions of thinking and communicating in new and important ways. Without the focus on Greek and Roman Philosophy the focus on learning would have never pushed the reformers to do what they did. Similarly, without the questioning of the Catholic Church, Post-Reformation humanists might not have had the legal leeway to take their ideas on humanism and philosophy where they went. 

    These differing emphases on communication apply to many different discussions and comments made on the internet today. Many times I have seen a post with the instruction to copy and paste in order to share the post exactly as it was. How many people push forward information for the sake of spreading information only to spread something that is incorrect? I believe that society could do a better job at emulating the praiseworthy aspects of communication of this time period, and perhaps a better job at learning from the errors of them, too. 

Citations:
(Photographs added from first citation)

Brown, DeNeen L. “The Bible Museum's 'Wicked Bible': Thou Shalt Commit Adultery.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 18 Nov. 2017, www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/11/17/the-new-bible-museums-wicked-bible-thou-shalt-commit-adultery/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b3cdcbc74ee3.

Flake, Berlyn. “The Printing Press and the Weakening of Catholicism.” Rhetoric and Civilization, 28 Sept. 2018, rhetciv.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-printing-press-and-weakening-of.html.

Johnson, Amy. “Pageantry vs. Simplicity.” Rhetoric and Civilization, 21 Sept. 2018, rhetciv.blogspot.com/2018/09/pageantry-vs-simplicity.html.