• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Pilcrow in the KJV?

Jordan Kurecki

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
In the KJV and possibly other versions I'm not quite sure, you'll often see this mark: ¶

This mark is called a pilcrow and from my research it's used to show breaks between paragraphs.

My question is this: Where do these pilcrows come from? who put them into the text? are paragraph breaks found in the Hebrew and Greek? Or are the pilcrows just inserted by translators or publishers?
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
They are a result of the way an electronic text is formatted.

They were not part of any ancient Hebrew or Greek manuscript.

Rob
 

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Origin of the Pilcrow

Pilcrow (¶)

Before there was any other punctuation there was the paragraphos—from the Greek para-, “beside,” and graphein, “write”—a precursor to the paragraph mark known as the pilcrow. A simple horizontal stroke placed in the left margin beside a line of text, the paragraphos was used in ancient Greece to call attention to conceptual changes in an otherwise unbroken block of text: a new topic, perhaps, or a new stanza in a poem. . .
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
My repro AV 1611 has pilcrows thru Acts 20:36, and, while I haven't had time to look closely, I haven't found any after that verse.
 
In the KJV and possibly other versions I'm not quite sure, you'll often see this mark: ¶

This mark is called a pilcrow and from my research it's used to show breaks between paragraphs.

My question is this: Where do these pilcrows come from? who put them into the text? are paragraph breaks found in the Hebrew and Greek? Or are the pilcrows just inserted by translators or publishers?
Biblegateway.com has an interesting article on the origin of the mark.

[URL="http://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2011/03/punctuating-the-bible-the-pilcrow/]Punctuating the Bible: The Pilcrow[/URL]​
Monastic scriptoria worked on the same principle as factory production lines, with each stage of book production delegated to a specialist. A scribe would copy out the body of the text, leaving spaces for a ‘rubricator’ to later embellish the text by adding versals (large, elaborate initial letters), headings and other section marks as required. Taken from the Latin rubrico, ‘to colour red’, rubricators often worked in constrasting red ink, which not only added a decorative flourish but also guided the eye to important divisions in the text. In the hands of the rubricators, ‘C’ for capitulum came to be accessorised by a vertical bar, as were other litterae notabiliores in the fashion of the time; later, the resultant bowl was filled in and so ‘¢’ for capitulum became the familiar reversed-P of the pilcrow….

As the capitulum’s appearance changed, so too did its usage. At first used only to mark chapters, it started to pepper texts as a paragraph or even sentence marker so that it broke up a block of running text into meaningful sections as the writer saw fit. … Ultimately, though, the concept of the paragraph overrode the need for efficiency and became so important as to warrant a new line[†] — prefixed with a pilcrow, of course, to introduce it.

¶ The pilcrow’s name — pithy, familiar and archaic at the same time — moved with the character during its transformation from ‘C’ for capitulum to independent symbol in its own right. From the Greek paragraphos, or paragraph mark, came the prosaic Old French paragraphe, which subsequently morphed first into pelagraphe and then pelagreffe. By 1440 the word had entered Middle English, rendered as pylcrafte — its second syllable perhaps influenced by the English crafte, or ‘skill’ — and from there it was a short hop to its modern form.
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
are paragraph breaks found in the Hebrew and Greek?

There are some breaks indicated in the Masoretic Hebrew manuscripts but the chapter divisions in some of the printed editions of the Masoretic text and in the KJV may not match all of them.

Ginsburg indicated that in the First Rabbinic Bible that both Samuel and Kings are for the first time divided into two separate books in a Hebrew Bible (p. 930). He noted that the division of Samuel into two books and Kings into two books “does not occur in the MSS. nor in the early editions” (p. 45). Arno Gaebelein confirmed that “in Hebrew manuscripts and the earlier printed editions of the Hebrew text, both of the Books of Samuel appear as one; the same is true of the Book of Kings” (Annotated Bible, p. 131). In the introduction to a Jewish commentary on Samuel edited by Cohen, it is noted that the division of Samuel into two books “is unknown to the Talmud and Hebrew MSS, and was first introduced into the Hebrew Bible by the Venetian printer Daniel Bomberg in his edition dated 1516. He had taken it over from the Vulgate which, in turn, had borrowed it from the LXX” (p. ix).


David Ewert affirmed that "Bomberg's Bible had the Christian chapter divisions, as these were found in the Vulgate" (From Ancient Tablets, p. 94). Ginsburg observed that those Christian chapter divisions in Bomberg’s were given in Roman numerals in the margin (Introduction, p. 26). Ginsburg indicated that “no fewer than 162” of the Christian chapter divisions “are positively contrary to the Massorah, inasmuch as the editors who introduced them into the text have made breaks for them which are anti-Massoretic” (p. 29).
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
My repro AV 1611 has pilcrows thru Acts 20:36, and, while I haven't had time to look closely, I haven't found any after that verse.

Yes, the 1611 edition of the KJV only has pilcrows [paragraph markings] to that point. It is a mystery or unknown for certain why the rest of the New Testament in the 1611 does not have them.

If either Miles Smith or Thomas Bilson, the co-editors who went over the 1611 text, was responsible for them, it could be possible that they were instructed to turn their editing of the work of the translators over to Archbishop Bancroft or to the printers before they had time to finish inserting the rest of the pilcrows.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yes, the 1611 edition of the KJV only has pilcrows [paragraph markings] to that point. It is a mystery or unknown for certain why the rest of the New Testament in the 1611 does not have them.

If either Miles Smith or Thomas Bilson, the co-editors who went over the 1611 text, was responsible for them, it could be possible that they were instructed to turn their editing of the work of the translators over to Archbishop Bancroft or to the printers before they had time to finish inserting the rest of the pilcrows.

Or, maybe Barker ran outta pilcrow type pieces, as they weren't something he used every day.

Years ago, when I got my first KJV edition with pilcrows in it, I didn't know what they were, and so I asked one of my old English teachers. She had to place a call to Marshall University, where their staff found a professor who knew what they were.

Here's the Unicode symbol:
U+00B6 ¶ pilcrow sign (HTML: ¶ ¶).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top