make it evident either that the original translators consulted that version, or that subsequent revisers introduced renderings from it. This is largely the case in the Psalms1. (iv) The later Greek Versions require only a brief mention. That of AQUILA of Pontus, a Jewish proselyte from heathenism, was made in the beginning of the second century A.D., when the breach between Church and Synagogue was complete, and the Jews desired an accurate version for purposes of controversy with Christians. It is characterised by a slavish but ingenious literalism. That of THEODOTION, made towards the end of the second century, or possibly earlier, was little more than a revision of the LXX. That of SYMMACHUS, made probably a little later than that of Theodotion, was also based on the LXX. It aimed at combining accuracy and perspicuity, and was by far the best of the three. These versions were collected in the gigantic work of ORIGEN (A.D. 185—254) called the HEXAPLA, which contained in six parallel columns, (1) the Hebrew Text, (2) the Hebrew transliterated into Greek letters, (3) Aquila, (4) Symmachus, (5) the LXX, (6) Theodotion. In the Psalter the Hexapla became the Octapla by the addition of two columns containing two more Greek versions known as the 'Fifth' (Quinta) and 'Sixth' (Sexta). Unfortunately only fragments of these versions are extant3. Generally, though not always, they agree with the Massoretic Text. (v) The Latin Versions. The earliest Latin Version of the 1 See Wright's Short History of Syriac Literature, p. 3. 2 See Schürer's Hist. of the Jewish People &c., Div. ii. § 33 (Vol. iii. P. 173, E. T.). 3 Collected with exhaustive completeness in F. Field's Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt. 1875. But since then fresh discoveries have been made. On some palimpsest leaves brought from the Genizah at Cairo by Dr Schechter some continuous fragments of Aquila's version (including portions of Pss. xxii, xc, xci) have been discovered: and a fragment of a copy of the Hexapla of the Psalms has come to light in the Ambrosian Library at Milan. See Swete, Introd. pp. 34, 62. O.T., the VETUS LATINA or OLD LATIN, was made in North Africa from the LXX1. This version, of which various recensions appear to have been current, was twice revised by ST JEROME (Hieronymus). The first revision, made about A.D. 383, is known as the Roman Psalter, probably because it was made at Rome and for the use of the Roman Church at the request of Pope Damasus; the second, made about A.D. 387, is called the Gallican Psalter, because the Gallican Churches were the first to adopt it. Shortly afterwards, about A.D. 389, Jerome commenced his memorable work of translating the O.T. directly from the Hebrew, which occupied him for fourteen years. After bitter opposition and many vicissitudes, it won its way by its intrinsic excellence to be the Bible of the Latin Church, and came to be known as THE VULGATE. But long familiarity with the Old Latin Version of the Psalter made it impossible to displace it, and the Gallican Psalter is incorporated in the Vulgate in place of Jerome's new translation. That new translation, "iuxta Hebraicam veritatem," never came into general use. It is of great value for the interpretation of the text, and shews that the Hebrew text known to Jerome was in the main the same as the present Massoretic Text. Accordingly, the student must remember that in the Psalter the Vulgate is an echo of the LXX, and not an independent witness to text or interpretation: while Jerome's translation (referred to as Jer.) occupies the place which the Vulgate does in the other books of the O.T.2 iii. The English Versions3. It would be impossible to give here even a sketch of the history of the English Bible. But as the Version with which many readers are most familiar is not that in the Bible, but that in the Prayer-Book, it seems worth while to give a brief account of its origin and characteristics. As the Old Latin Version held its ground against Jerome's 1 See Swete, Introd. p. 98. 2 The best edition of Jerome's Psalter with critical apparatus is that by P. de Lagarde, Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos Hieronymi, 1874. 3 See Bishop Westcott, History of the English Bible, ed. 2, 1872. more accurate translation, because constant liturgical use had established it too firmly for it to be displaced, so the older English Version of the Psalter taken from the Great Bible has kept its place in the Prayer-Book, and has never been superseded for devotional use. The 'Great Bible,' sometimes known as Cromwell's, because the first edition (April 1539) appeared under the auspices of Thomas Cromwell, Henry VIII's famous minister, sometimes as Cranmer's, because he wrote the preface to the second edition (April 1540), was a revision of Matthew's Bible (1537), executed by Coverdale with the help of Sebastian Münster's Latin version, published in 1534-51 Matthew's Bible was a composite work. The Pentateuch and N.T. were taken from Tyndale's published translation; the books from Ezra to Malachi and the Apocrypha from Coverdale's version; the remaining books from Joshua to 2 Chron. from a translation which there is little reason to doubt was made by Tyndale. The Psalter in Matthew's Bible was therefore Coverdale's work and Coverdale's Version (1535) lays no claim to independence. He tells us in the Epistle unto the Kinges hyghnesse prefixed to the work, that he had "with a cleare conscience purely and faythfully translated this out of fyve sundry interpreters," and the original title-page described the book as "faithfully and truly translated out of Douche and Latyn into Englishe2." It is not certain who the "fyve sundry interpreters" were ; but the 'Douche' included the Swiss-German version known as the Zurich Bible3 (1524-29), and Luther's version; and among the 'Latyn' translations, beside the Vulgate, was the version of Sanctes Pagninus (1527). It is worth while thus 1 Münster was largely indebted to the commentaries of medieval Jewish scholars, especially R. David Kimchi (1160-1235), and their influence is constantly to be traced in the English Versions. 2 For a full account of Coverdale's work see Bp Westcott's History of the English Bible, chap. iii. 3 So called, because it was the work of a band of scholars at Zurich, including Zwingli, Pellican, and Leo Juda. Coverdale's indebtedness to this version in the Psalter is very large. to trace the pedigree of the Prayer-Book Version, for in spite of successive revisions, it retains many marks of its origin. Many of its peculiar renderings, and in particular the additions which it contains, are derived from the LXX through the Vulgate. In the Great Bible these additions were clearly distinguished by being printed in smaller type, and enclosed in brackets. Thus e.g. in Ps. xiv, no not one (v. 2), euen where no fear was (v. 9), and the whole of vv. 5-7, are in smaller type: and in xxix. I, bring yong rammes unto the Lorde. These distinctions were retained in the Standard Prayer-Book of 1662 (the so-called Annexed Book), but have been dropped in modern editions. The Prayer-Book Psalter appears to be a reproduction, not critically exact, of the last revision of the Great Bible (Nov. 1540)1. The text differs in a considerable number of passages2 from that of 15393. The A.V. of 1611, though more accurate, is less melodious, and when, at the revision of the Prayer-Book in 1662, the version of 1611 was substituted in the Epistles and Gospels, the old Psalter was left untouched. "The choirs and congregations had grown familiar with it, and it was felt to be smoother and more easy to sing." Coverdale was a consummate master of melodious prose; and the “ exquisite rhythm, graceful freedom of rendering, and endeavour to represent the spirit as well as the letter of the original" have justly given to his work "the pre-eminent distinction of being the version through which the Psalms as an instrument of devotional exercise, as an aid to meditation and the religious habit of mind, and as a formative influence in the spiritual education of man, now live in their fullest and widest use." 1 Bp Westcott, The Paragraph Psalter, p. xi. 2 See examples in Driver, The Parallel Fsaller, p. xv. Some interesting archaisms disappeared in the revision: e.g. loave for praise (Ps. cvii. 32); starsed for dispersed (cxii. 9). See Driver, p. xvii. 3 This is easily accessible in Prof. Earle's reprint, with introduction and notes, The Psalter of 1539, a Landmark in English Literature (1892). 4 Earle, p. vi. The Revised Version of 1885 has made a great advance upon the A.V. in respect of accuracy of rendering. The changes made by the Revisers will, as a rule, be quoted in this commentary, but the translation must be read and studied as a whole in order properly to appreciate their force and value. Even with the help which the R.V. now supplies to the English reader, it does not seem superfluous to endeavour by more exact renderings to bring the student closer to the sense of the original. It is well known that the A.V. frequently creates artificial distinctions by different renderings of the same word, and ignores real distinctions by giving the same rendering for different words: and this, though to a far less extent, is still the case in the R,V.1 Rigid uniformity of rendering may be misleading, but it is well that attention should be called to distinctions where they exist. Again, the precise force of a tense, or the exact emphasis of the original, cannot always be given without some circumlocution which would be clumsy in a version intended for general use: but it is worth while to attempt to express finer shades of meaning in a commentary. : The best translation cannot always adequately represent the original and it is well that the English reader should be reminded that the sense cannot always be determined with precision, and may often best be realised by approaching it from different sides. 1 See, for example, iii. 2, 7, 8, where the connexion is obscured by the rendering of the same word help in v. 2, and salvation in v. 8. Two entirely different words are rendered blessed in xli. 1, 13. The first expresses congratulation (Happy: cp. be made happy in v. 2): the second expresses the tribute of human reverence to the divine majesty. The word rendered trust or put trust in in vii. 1, xi. I is quite distinct from the word similarly rendered in xiii. 5. It means to take refuge in, and the sense gains remarkably by the correct rendering. The exact rendering of a tense may be sufficient to draw a forcible picture, as in vii. 15. For some excellent remarks upon principles of translation see Driver, The Parallel Psalter, pp. xxv ff. |