Talk:1614 Low German Bible

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bible Low‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Talk: 1614 Low German Bible

Bhschwarting may still have more history and also another image(s) to add to this article.

Individual copy not notable

This article should be converted, basically just by rearrangement, to one on the edition as a whole. An individual copy of a printed book, even of a rare edition, is not notable in itself & creates a bad precedent. I don't think there is a problem with the sections on the Texas copy staying, but lower down. Johnbod 10:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because the main article is about the Bible, the short paragraph on language is meant to be small and simple. Jhb18

Date of Issue

Why does the page shown say 1613 in Roman numerals? 72.160.196.208 (talk) 22:33, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Books at this time were set as individual letters, so to save expense on type hey were printed in sections. The type was then dismantled for reuse in subsequent sections. It is thus not uncommon for different parts of a book to have different prinitng dates. In a Bible, this often results in the New Testament having an earlier date than the Old.

This seems to be what has happened here. The last page of the NT carries the date 1613; the title page of the whole Bible carries 1614. I would be interested to see if there is a date on the last pages of the OT and Apocrypha, or on the Title pages of the Apocrypha and NT which I assume this Bible would have.

As an aside, it makes collecting quite interesting, as mixed editions occur quite frequently - spare sections of a first edition being 'used up' to supplement a second edition, for instance. .John M Brear (talk) 09:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

poor quality article

The problem with the article is that it is sourced from poorly researched sources.

For example, As far as I can tell, there were no publisher in Luneburg by the name of 'Hans Stern' that published Luther bibles in low german, but there was a 'Cornelius Johann Stern' who did. Also, afaik there are stern bibles in loww german from 1615 - 1721, so did he really stop publishing the bible in low german?

Somebody needs to check this out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.191.186.223 (talk) 22:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Both the title page and last page shown in the article clearly give the printer as Johann Vog(d)t and the publisher as Hans Stern, of Luneberg. OK, this is a primary source, but...

We should note that 'Hans' is the common familiar form of 'Johann', so it is quite possible that 'Hans' and 'Cornelius Johann' are one and the same - the latter being his full name in official records and the former what he was actually called day-to-day. .John M Brear (talk) 10:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic

The tone and style of the article is unsuitable to an encyclopedia, especially the last section. Kernaazti (talk) 08:10, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]