The Latin Translations Benjamin Kedar
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter Nine The Latin Translations Benjamin Kedar Old Latin Versions HISTORICAL AND TECHNICAL DATA The spread of Latin as the official, commercial, and military language of the ancient world 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 literature, philosophy and religion. The educated Romans as well as significant sections of the population in the prov inces were bilingual, the Greek and Latin languages 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 Church. 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 Bible translations, which probably was first felt in the provinces such as North Africa or Southern Gaul but subsequently even in the city of Rome. 2 The first tangible evidence for the existence of a Latin version dates back to the middle of the second century c.E. when Christian writers began to write their treatises in Latin, citing biblical verses and passages in this language. Tertullian (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's 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. Josephus, Ant. 14:196-98,319-22 testifies that inscriptions and official proclamations in the two languages mentioned, were quite common in Palestine. 2 Kaulen, Geschichte der Vulgata, 138-39; Stummer, Einfiihrung, 15-17; Sparks, 'Latin Bible', 101. In the middle of the 3rd century c.E. Novatian at Rome wrote Latin, the Roman bishop Cornelius, Greek; cf. Roberts, 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 lead us to believe that Tertullian was acquainted with Latin Bible translations, possibly quoting them from memory. The first Latin Father to cite a very precise text of long passages from the Bible was Cyprian (d. 258), followed by a long line of Latin Fathers, among them Augustine (354-430) and Jerome (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 Vulgate present an old Latin text in some biblical books or passages, or as marginal glosses. In addition 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 name 'Old Latin' (= OL) or 'Vetus Latina'.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 order 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 (Germany).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 translation which subsequently branched out 3 Campenhausen, Western Church, 4-35 (Tertullian), 36-60 (Cyprian). Braun, Deus 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 Italy (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 collect 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, Robert, Ranke, Dold, Belsheim, Weber, Schilden berger, from which our quotations are taken. 300 .