sign in sign up
<<
Home , Latin, Old Latin

Chapter Nine

The Benjamin Kedar

Old Latin Versions

HISTORICAL AND TECHNICAL DATA

The spread of Latin as the , commercial, and military of the ancient was concurrent with the growth of the Roman state and the advance of its armies. Hellenistic Greek maintained, however, for a relatively long time its position as the language of , and . The educated Romans as well as significant sections of the population in the prov• inces were bilingual, the Greek and Latin strongly influencing each other in their further development until finally Latin became predominant. 1 This provides the linguistic setting for the operations of the early Christian . In the beginning Greek was the cultural language of Christendom, it was then forced to make room for Latin which finally gained absolute dom• inance. The one consequence of this process that concerns us here is the growing demand for Latin translations, which probably was first felt in the such as North or Southern but subsequently even in the of . 2 The first tangible evidence for the existence of a Latin version dates back to the middle of the second century .. when Christian writers began to write their treatises in Latin, citing biblical verses and passages in this language. (c. 130-230 c. E.) though he himself wrote in both Greek and Latin, testifies to the exclusive use of the Latin language in the African church of his time. In his Latin works we find long scriptural quotations which, however, exhibit such lack of textual consistence that they hardly point to one author• itative version. Some scholars think they have been able to detect two different versions at the basis of Tertullian' quotations while others assume that the

1 Palmer, Latin Language, 148-80. On the mutual influence cf. Debrunner-Scherer, Geschichte der griechischen Sprache 2, 77-78,82-88. , . 14:196-98,319-22 testifies that inscriptions and official proclamations in the two languages mentioned, were quite common in . 2 Kaulen, Geschichte der Vulgata, 138-39; Stummer, Einfiihrung, 15-17; Sparks, 'Latin Bible', 101. In the middle of the 3rd century c.E. at Rome wrote Latin, the Roman Cornelius, Greek; cf. , Text and Versions, 237.

299 THE LATIN TRANSLATIONS

Latin Father offered ad-hoc renderings from the Greek Bible. 3 Be this as it may, there still exists a sufficient measure of uniformity in Tertullian's biblical extracts and of concurrence with other known Latin textforms as to us to believe that Tertullian was acquainted with Latin , possibly quoting them from memory. The first Latin Father to cite a very precise text of long passages from the Bible was (. 258), followed by a long line of Latin Fathers, among them Augustine (354-430) and (d. 420), whose works contain ample extracts from Latin Bible versions. From a somewhat later time there exists the direct evidence of MSS, unfortunately fragmentary, that contain old versions which are not Hieronymian, and finally not a few manu• scripts of the present an text in some biblical books or passages, or as marginal glosses. In to this, also in the liturgy many an old wording has been preserved.4 This multiplex material that gives fragmentary and sometimes contradictory evidence of old Latin Bible translations is subsumed under the 'Old Latin' (= OL) or ''.5 This term is not meant to suggest the notion of originally one complete Latin Bible. It is merely a convenient reference term for any Latin text-form independent of the Vulgate. There is not extant, then, a single MS that covers the whole range of biblical books, and indeed, only when a purely scholarly interest arose long after the Vulgate had gained the lead, attempts were made to compile the innumerable pieces of evidence from all such disparate sources as are at our disposal and to arrange them consecutively according to the of the biblical books. Worthy of mention is the work of P. Sabatier in the middle of the 18th century and its new edition, extensively enriched and improved though incomplete as yet, by the Vetus Latina Institut at the Erzabtei Beuron ().6 In view of the complex textual evidence the following question, much debat• ed also with regard to other classical versions and even the Hebrew Bible for that matter, presents itself in relation to the Latin Bible: Should we assume that originally there existed only one which subsequently branched out

3 Campenhausen, Western Church, 4-35 (Tertullian), 36-60 (Cyprian). Braun, Christiana• rum, 21; Gribomont, 'Vetus Latina', 1178. 4 Kennedy, 'Latin Versions', 49-53, offers an extensive list of the extant authorities for non• Hieronymian Latin Bible texts. This list should be supplemented according to Fischer, Vetus Latina 1-Verzeichnis, and Ayuso Marazuela, Vetus Latina Hispana- Proleg6menos. A concise enumera• tion of the important MSS and editions is given by Noth, Welt, 272-74. Concerning the NT, cf. Birdsall, 'Latin Versions', 370-74. 5 The Latin Fathers mention vetus editio, antiqua translatio, vulgata editio and the like. Whether (vetus) ita/a refers to a Latin version used in (Stummer, Einfuhrung, 55) or to Jerome's translation (Burkitt, Old Latin, 55-65) is a moot question. 6 Cf. Sabatier, Vetus Italica and Fischer, Vetus Latina. A certain Flaminius Nobilius at Rome antedated Sabatier by almost two centuries attempting to and edit the fragments of ancient Latin texts. The Vetus Latina lnstitut of Beuron possesses a complete card-index, verse by verse, of all witnesses to an OL text. Kind permission has been granted to the present writer to consult it. Important text-editions are those by Fischer, , Ranke, Dold, Belsheim, Weber, Schilden• berger, from which our quotations are taken.

300