Why Did King James Support A New Translation of the Bible

Why did King James I of England decide to embark on a new translation of the Bible? Below are two articles about the motives for the king.

The following was paraphrased from "The Reformed Reader introduction to the Geneva Bible for the historic Baptist faith".
BEGIN
The sole intent of King James support for a new translation of the Bible was to deny the people the marginal notes of the Geneva Bible. The Puritans, the Calvinists, and the Pilgrims who landed at Plymouth Rock, would never use a King James Bible even if it had been given to them free. The King James Bible was, and is for all practical purposes, a government publication. The Geneva Bible annoyed King James I because it does not support the "divine right of kings". Since a king's power came from God, the king then had to answer to no one but God. The Geneva Bible had marginal notes that simply didn't conform to that point of view. Those marginal notes had been, to a great extent placed in the Geneva Bible by the leaders of the Reformation including John Knox and John Calvin. Knox and Calvin could not and cannot be dismissed lightly or their opinions passed off to the public as the mere dithering of dissidents. First, notes such as, "When tyrants cannot prevail by craft, they burst forth into open rage," (Note i, Exodus 1:22) really bothered King James. King James disapproved of the Geneva Bible because of its Calvinistic leanings. He also frowned on what he considered to be seditious marginal notes on key political texts. A marginal note for Exodus 1:9 indicated that the Hebrew midwives were correct in disobeying the Egyptian king's orders, and a note for 2 Chronicles 15:16 said that King Asa should have had his mother executed and not merely deposed for the crime of worshipping an idol. The King James Version of the Bible grew out of the king's distaste for these brief but potent doctrinal commentaries. He considered the marginal notes to be a political threat to his kingdom. In 1604, shortly after his own accession to the throne, King James I commissioned his own version of the Bible, that would later come to be known as "The Bishop's Bible" or, more commonly, the Authorized Version. James' motive for promulgating his own version was simple: he did not want the people to have in hand a Bible with all the marginal notes that the Geneva Bible had. This version was first published in 1611. A later king (Charles I) would take the first steps toward suppression of the Geneva Bible toward the end of his reign. In 1644, the Geneva Bible went out of print and would remain out of print for more than four hundred fifty years.
END

The following was quoted from "A Puritan's Mind » The Proposal of John Reynolds - by Dr. C. Matthew McMahon".
QUOTE
Three reasons prompted King James I to make a new translation.  One reason was the "back to the Bible" movement trying to recapture the true meaning of scripture as a result of the Reformation, and the King desired to ride that soap box as a way to "identify with the people" as best he could.  The second reason was the scholarship which was beginning to become prominent during the Renaissance. Being a King during the reign of scholarship was always something that has been noted in history. It was another way King James would be "remembered." Thirdly, the King detested the current bible.  The most beloved bible was the Geneva Bible.  It was the favorite of Puritans and almost every home had one. But the Geneva Bible had something the other bibles had not previously had - extensive notes reflecting reformation thought. This was dangerous to the King because of his immoral lifestyle. (He was a very corrupt king, and a sodomite as well.) The Geneva Bible extensively spoke against corrupt kings. King James did not favor this at all. So he desired a new translation without notes.
What ancient texts did they work with? They had the Complutensian Polygot of 1517, published at Complutum, now in Alcala de Hanares, Spain, and they had the Antwerp Polygot, 1569-1572. These gave the Hebrew and Greek texts with versions in other tongues added. Of course they had the Latin Vulgate, though that was suspect because it was popish and uninspired. With some fragments of early church scrolls, they had countless comments by the early church fathers and ancient scholars. Often they referred to Saint Chrysostom, (347-407 A.D.), whose works Sir Henry Saville had begun to edit, with the help from Andrew Downes and John Bois. Another reference authority was the Geneva scholar, Theodore Beza, (1519-1605 A.D.).
The outcome was not a bible literally translated from the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, but a redaction of the Geneva bible (20%) and the Bishop's Bible (80%) but all without notes.  Some of the more difficult passages were translated from the original, but most of the Bible was cutting and pasting from the other sources. 
After the final draft was completed by the fifty-four scholars, a concluding committee of twelve reviewed what the lower committees had prepared, and then Bishop Thomas Bilson and Dr. Miles Smith added the finishing touches. By 1609 the whole revision was ready for the public. Though the King contributed no money to its production, and though no record of an official authorization of the finished product survives, if such were ever given, the Bible became to be known as the King James Version.     Miles Smith, Canon of Hereford, later to be known as the Bishop of Gloucestor, and Thomas Bilson, Bishop of Winchester, saw it through the press, and Miles Smith composed the informative preface, "The Translators to the Readers."     The title of this new translation was: "The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament and the New: Newly Translated out of the Original tongues, with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties speciall commandment. Appointed to be read in the Churches. Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. Anno Dom. 1611."   The New Testament Bore a different title: "The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Newly translated out of the Originall Greeke; and with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by His majesties speciall Commandment. Imprinted at London by Robert Baker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. Anno Dom. 1611. cum Privilegio."    
Though the King James Bible was never "authorized" by King James, it was called the authorized King James Version nevertheless.     "Many stood up against the King James Version. Dr. Hugh Boughton, a distinguished scholar recognized by John Lightfoot, said "The late Bible...was sent to me to censure: which bred in me a sadness that will grieve me while I breathe, it is ill done. Tell His Majesty that I had rather be rent in pieces with wild horses, than any such translation by my consent should be urged upon poor churches...The new edition crosseth me. I require it to be burnt."  Even John Lightfoot, in 1629, objected to the Apocrypha being placed in the canon.     The King James Version went through fifteen printings in the first three years. It seems many disagreed with its translation and the committees were forced to revise it over and over again.     The first major revision being some months after the 1609 version and the authorized version (1611) came two years after.
The King James Version underwent a flutter of minor revisions until a final revision was brought about by Dr. Benjamin Blaney in 1769.  This revision was not authorized. Not until 1881 was an official revision done.
UNQUOTE