Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

as used in his printed works, have been highly approved by the Abyssinians.1

4. The ARMENIAN VERSION was also made from the Alexandrian Septuagint its author was Miesrob, who invented letters fully expressive of the Armenian tongue, towards the close of the fourth or early in the fifth century. It is said to have been subsequently altered according to the Peschito or old Syriac version, and according to the Latin vulgate, by Uscan, an Armenian bishop, who was specially sent to Amsterdam to superintend the edition there printed in 1666. The edition printed at Constantinople in 1705, 4to., was collated by Bredencamp, for the late Rev. Dr. Holmes's edition of the Septuagint. The Armenian version of the Scriptures has been attributed to Chrysostom, but, it does not appear, on satisfactory authority.

5. The SCLAVONIC or OLD RUSSIAN VERSION is derived from the Septuagint it was executed in the ninth century by Cyril of Thessalonica, the inventor of Sclavonic letters, in conjunction with Methodius, by both of whom the Gospel was preached to the Bulgarians. The Pentateuch was first printed at Prague in 1519; and the entire Bible, in 1570: the edition of the Sclavonic scriptures, executed at Ostrog in 1581, is the exemplar whence all the modern Russian editions are printed. It is said to have undergone several revisions, particularly in the time of the patriarch Nicon: and the New Testament is rendered with more perspicuity than the Old.

II. Account

4. ON THE ANTIENT LATIN VERSions of the scriptures. 1. Of the OLD ITALIC or Ante-Hieronymian Version. of the Biblical Labours and Latin Version of Jerome. VULGATE Version and its editions. — IV. Critical value Vulgate version.

- III. Of the of the Latin

I. AT the commencement of the Christian æra, the Latin was gradually supplanting the Greek as a general language, and it soon might be called the language of the Western church. From the testimony of Augustine, it appears that the Latin church possessed a very great number of versions of the Scriptures, made at the first introduction of Christianity, and whose authors were unknown; and that, in the pri

1 For other particulars relative to the Ethiopic Version of the Scriptures the reader is referred to "A Catalogue of the Ethiopic Biblical Manuscripts in the Royal Library of Paris, and in the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society, also some account of those in the Vatican Library at Rome : with remarks and extracts. To which are added Specimens of Versions of the New Testament into the modern languages of Abyssinia, &c. With fac-similes of an Ethiopic and an Amharic Manuscript. By Thomas Pell Platt, B. A. Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. London, 1823." 4to.-A valuable accession to biblical literature.

2 Jahn, p. 82. Masch, pp. 169-173; in pp. 173–181. the Armenian editions are described; Kortholt, pp. 304, 305. On the present state of the Armenian church in India, see Dr. Buchanan's "Christian Researches," pp. 341–346.

3 A copy of this singularly rare book is in the Library of Earl Spencer: it is de scribed by Mr. Dibdin, who has given a fac-simile of it, in his Bibliotheca Spenceriana, vol. i. pp. 90-93.

mitive times, as soon as any one found a Greek copy, and thought himself sufficiently versed in both languages, he attempted a translation of it. In the course of time, this diversity of translation produced much confusion, parts of separate versions being put together to form an entire composition, and marginal notes being inserted into the text: but one of these Latin translations appears to have acquired a more extensive circulation than the others, and for several ages was preferably used, under the name of the Itala or old Italic, on account of its clearness and fidelity. This version, which in the time of Jerome was received as canonical, is by him termed sometimes the Vulgate and sometimes the Old, in opposition to the new translation undertaken by him. He mentions no other version. The Old Italic was translated from the Greek in the Old Testament as well as in the New, there being comparatively few members of the Western church, who were skilled in Hebrew.3 From the above cited expressions of Augustine, it has been inferred that the old Italic version was made in the first century of the Christian æra; but the New Testament could not have been translated into Latin before the canon had been formed, which was certainly not made in the first century and the great number of Hebraisms and Syriasms observable in it, particularly in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, have induced some eminent critics to conjecture that the authors of this translation were Jews converted to Christianity. There is, however, every reason to believe, that it was executed in the early part of the second century: "at least it was quoted by Tertullian before the close of that century. But, before the end of the fourth century, the alterations, either designed or accidental, which were made by transcribers of the Latin Bible, were become as numerous as the alterations in the Greek Bible, before it was corrected by Origen."5

II. To remedy this growing evil, Jerome, at the request and under the patronage of Pope Damasus, towards the close of the fourth century, undertook to revise this translation, and make it more con

1 Augustine, de Doct. Christ. 1. ii. c. 11.

2 Ibid. c. 15. This passage of Augustine is suspected to be incorrect, and Bishop Marsh, after many other critics, thinks that we ought to read illa for Itala. Michaelis, vol. ii. part ii. p. 623. See also Dr. Lardner's Works, vol. v. pp. 115, 116. 3 A Codex Rescriptus or Palimpsestus of an Antehieronymian Version has been discovered by Dr. Feder at Wurtzburg, who has transcribed nearly all that is legible, comprising the prophecies of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel. These portions supply the chasms occurring in Sabatier's Edition, and differ materially from the fragments of antient versions printed in his Collection. The latter are not fragments of the Itala, for they want that perspicuitas sententiæ, which characterises it. Dr. Münter, Bp. of Seeland, supposes them to be of African origin: and as M. Feder allowed him to make use of his labours, Bp. M. copied them, and announced his intention of publishing an edition of them. (Letter of Bp. Munter to M. Gregoire, dated Copenhagen, Feb. 7. 1819, in Revue Encyclopedique, for March 1819, p. 545.) But this design has not yet been realised.

4" The learned and ingenious Eichhorn, in his Introduction to the Old Testament, supposes that the first Latin Version of the Bible was made in Africa; where Latin alone being understood, a translation was more necessary; where the Latin version was held in the highest veneration; and where, the language being spoken with less purity, barbarisms might have been more easily introduced than in a provincial town in Italy." Bp. Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. part ii. p. 628. 5 Bishop Marsh's Divinity Lectures, part i. p. 66.

formable to the original Greek. He executed the revision of the Old Testament according to the Hexaplar text of Origen, which he went to Cæsarea to consult, and the New Testament after the original Greek; and completed his task A. D. 384. Of this revision, the Book of Job and the Psalms (which alone have been preserved to our times), together with the Chronicles, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon, are all that were ever published; Jerome's manuscripts, comprising the remaining books of Scripture, being lost or destroyed through the wilful negligence or fraud of some individual whom he has not named.1 But before Jerome had finished his revisal, he had commenced a translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew into Latin, in order that the Western Christians, who used this last language only, might know the real meaning of the Hebrew text, and thus be the better qualified to engage in controversial discussions with the Jews.

III. This version, which surpasses all former ones, was executed at different times, Jerome having translated particular books in the order requested by his friends. We learn from Augustine that it was introduced into the churches by degrees, for fear of offending weak persons at length it acquired so great an authority from the approbation it received from Pope Gregory I., that ever since the seventh century it has been exclusively adopted by the Roman Catholic church, under the name of the Vulgate version: and a decree of the Council of Trent, in the sixteenth century, commanded that the Vulgate alone should be used whenever the Bible is publicly read, and in all sermons, expositions and disputations; and pronounced it to be authentic, a very ambiguous term, which ought to have been more precisely defined, than the members of that council chose to define it. "Upon this ground many contended, that the Vulgate version was dictated by the Holy Spirit; at least was providentially guarded against all error; was consequently of divine authority, and more to be regarded than even the original Hebrew and Greek texts. And, in effect, the decree of the council, however limited and moderated by the explanation of some of their more judicious divines, has given to the Vulgate such a high degree of authority, that, in this instance at least, the translation has taken place of the original: for these translators, instead of the Hebrew and Greek texts, profess to translate the Vulgate. Indeed, when they find the Vulgate very notoriously deficient in expressing the sense, they do the original Scriptures the honour of consulting them, and take the liberty, by following them, of departing from their authentic guide; but, in general, the Vulgate is their original text; and they give us a translation of a translation; by which second transfusion of the Holy Scriptures into another

1 Jerome, Ep. 64. ad Augustin.

2 With the exception of the Psalms; which being daily chanted to music in the church service, made it difficult to introduce alterations. The Old Italic Psalter, as corrected by Jerome, has therefore been used ever since the time of Gregory I. The apocryphal books of Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, and the two books of Maccabees, are also retained from the old Latin version.

tongue, still more of the original sense must be lost, and more of the genuine spirit must evaporate."

The universal adoption of Jerome's new version throughout the Western church rendered a multiplication of copies necessary; and with them new errors were introduced in the course of time, by the intermixture of the two versions (the old Italic, and Jerome's or the Vulgate) with each other. Of this confusion, Cassiodorus was the principal cause, who ordered them to be written in parallel columns, that the old version might be corrected by the Vulgate; and though Alcuin in the eighth century, by the command of Charlemagne, provided more accurate copies, the text again fell into such confusion, and was so disfigured by innumerable mistakes of copyists (notwithstanding the efforts made to correct it by Lanfranc archbishop of Canterbury in the eleventh century, and by Cardinal Nicholas, and some other divines, about the middle of the twelfth and in the thirteenth centuries) that the manuscripts of the middle ages materially differ from the first printed editions.

Robert Stephens was the first who attempted to remedy this confusion, by publishing his critical editions of the Vulgate in 1528, 1532, 1534, 1540,2 and particularly in 1545 and 1546. These, particularly the last, having incurred the censures of the doctors of the Sorbonne, John Hentenius, a divine of Louvain, was employed to prepare a new edition of the Vulgate this he accomplished in 1547 in folio, having availed himself of Stephens's previous labours with great advantage. A third corrected edition was published by Lucas Brugensis, with the assistance of several other divines of Louvain, in 1573, in three volumes 8vo., which was also reprinted in 1586 in 4to. and 8vo., with the critical notes of Lucas Brugensis. The labours of the Louvain divines not being in every respect approved by Sixtus V., he commanded a new revision of the text to be made with the utmost care to this work he devoted much time and attention, and corrected the proofs himself of the edition which was published at Rome in 1590, in folio. The text thus revised, Sixtus pronounced to be the authentic Vulgate, which had been the object of inquiry in the Council of Trent; and ordained that it should be adopted throughout the Romish church. But, notwithstanding the labours of the Pope, this edition was discovered to be so exceedingly incorrect, that his successor Clement VIII. caused it to be suppressed, and published ano

1 Bp. Lowth's Translation of Isaiah, vol. i. Prel. Diss. p. lxxiii.

2 The edition of 1540 was Stephens's principal edition of the Latin Vulgate; as his edition of 1550 was his principal edition of the Greek. In magnificence it surpasses every edition of the Vulgate that ever was printed and it is likewise of great value to a critic, as it contains a copious collection of readings from Latin manuscripts, and some of the early editions. Father Simon, (Hist. Crit. des Versions du N. Test. ch. xi. p. 130.) calls it un chef d'œuvre en fait de Bible;' and (p. 131.) he terms this edition la meilleure de toutes.' Hentenius, in his preface to the Louvain edition, calls it 'accuratissima et castigatissima Biblia.' (See also the praises bestowed on it in Masch's edition of Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, Part 11. vol. iii. p. 187.) The title page prefixed to the New Testament bears the date of 1539; though that which is prefixed to the Old Testament is dated 1540. (Marsh's Letters to Travis, p. 254. note.) It is by this latter date, that Stephens's best edition of the Vulgate is usually known and cited.

ther authentic Vulgate in 1592, in folio: this however differs more than any other edition, from that of Sixtus V., and mostly resembles that of Louvain. These fatal variances between editions, alike promulgated by pontiffs claiming infallibility, have not passed unnoticed by Protestant divines, who have taken advantage of them in a manner that sensibly affects the church of Rome; especially Kortholt, who has at great length refuted the pretensions of Bellarmine in favour of the Vulgate in a masterly manner, and our learned_countryman Thomas James, in his Bellum Papale, sive Concordia Discors Sixti V. (London, 1600, 4to.) who has pointed out very numerous additions, omissions, contradictions, and other differences between the Sixtine and Clementine editions. From this very curious and now rare volume, the following specimens of the differences between these two editions are transcribed.

1. Clauses omitted in the Sixtine, but inserted in the Clementine Bible.

Num. xxx. 11.

Prov. xxv. 24.

Lev. xx. 9.

Jud. xvii. 2, 3.

1 Kings iv. 21.

3 Kings (same as 2 Chron. ii. 10.

Matt. xxvii. 35.

Uxor in domo viri, &c. to the end of the verse.
Melius est sedere in angulo domatis, &e.
Patri matrique maledixit.

Reddidit ergo eos matri suæ, &c.

Quia capta est arca Dei.

our first) xii. 10. Sic loqueris ad cos.

Et vini vigenti millia metretas.

Ut impleretur quod dictum est per prophetam dicentem, diviserunt sibi vestimenta mea, et super vestem meam miserunt

sortem.

2. Clauses or Words introduced into the Sixtine, but omitted in the Clementine Bible.

1 Sam. xxiv. 8. Vivit dominus, quia nisi dominus percusserit eum, aut dies ejus venerit ut moriatur, aut decendens in prælium periret ; propitius mihi sit dominus ut non mittam manum meam in Christum Domini.

1 Sam. xxv. 6.

2 Sam. vi. 12.

2 Sam. viii. 8.

2 Sam. xix. 10.

Prov. xxiv. ult.
Hab. i. 3.

Matt. xxiv. 41.
Acts xiv. 6.

xxiv. 18, 19.

Ex multis annis salvos faciens tuos et omnia tua.
Dixitque David, ibo et reducam arcam.

De quo fecit Salomo omnia vasa ærea in templo et mare æne-
um et columnas et altare.

Et concilium totius Israel venit ad regem.

Usque quo piger dormis? usque quo de somno consurges. Quare respicis contemptores et taces conculcante impio justi orem se? Et facies homines quasi pisces maris, et quasi reptilia non habentia ducem.

Duo in lecto, unus assumetur, et unus relinquetur.

Et commota est omnis multitudo in doctrina eorum, Paulus autem, &c.

Et apprehenderunt me clamantes et dicentes, tolle inimicum

nostrum.

3. Manifest contradictions, or differences between the editions. Sixtine Tue, Clementine Meæ.

Ex. xxiii. 18.

Numb. xxxiv. 4.

Deut. xvii. 8.

Jos. ii. 18.

iv. 23.
xi. 19.

S. Ad meridiem, C. A meridie.

S. Inter lepram et non lepram, C. Inter lepram et lepram.
S. Signum non fuerit, C. Signum fuerit.

S. Deo nostro, C. Vestro.

S. Quæ se non traderet, C. Quæ se traderet.

1 Kortholt, de variis Scripturæ Editionibus, pp. 110-251.

2 Additional instances of the contradictions between the above mentioned papal editions, together with a defence of the Bellum Papale, may be seen in Mr. James's "Treatise of the Corruptions of Scripture, Councils, and Fathers, by the Prelates, Pastors, and Pillars of the Church of Rome, for the maintenance of Popery," pp. 272-358. London, 1688. 8vo.

« AnteriorContinuar »