Ρ. 412-427, with copious grammatical notes; and
anday’s dissertation on Cod. k, OL Bibl. Tezts, ii. § 14. Perhaps we ought to mention also Rendel Harris’s Study of Cod. Bez, ch. iv. v. xii. XXVi., and Burkitt’s Rules of Tyconius, pp. Ixviii-ey. Sanday has an important appendix in Studia Biblica, ii. p. 309 ff., and in vol. iv. of the same series there is a valuable essay on the Style and Language of S. Cyprian, by E. W. Watson. See also Ehrlich, Beitrage z. Lat. der Itala, 1895. By
* Rules of Tyconius, pp. cxvi, exvii. See also Streane, Double Text of Jeremiah, 369-372.
LATTER
far the richest storehouse of matter bearing on the Latinity of the OL is the Archiv fir tatein. Lexikographie, ed. by Wolfilin (pub. at Leipzig). The following articles are of special importance : ‘Die ersten Spuren des African. Lateins,’ b
Wolfilin (Jahrg. vi. Heft i. p. 1 ff); ‘ Die Heimat:
der Appendix Probi,’ Sittl (vi. 3, p. 557 ff.); ‘ Die Sprache Priscillian’s,’ Schepss (ii. 3, fy 307 ff.) ; ‘ Lucifer von Cagliari und sein Latein,’ Hartel (iii. 1, p. 1ff.); ‘Lexikographisches aus dem Bibellatein,’ Thielmann (i. 1, p. 68 1); ‘Minucius Felix,’ Wollfllin (vii. 4, p. 467 ff.); ‘Die latein. Sprache auf. african. Inschriften,’ Kiibler (viii. 2, p. 161 ff.) ; ‘Spuren gallischen Lateins bei Marcellus Empiri- cus,’ Geyer (viii. 4, p. 469); articles on ‘ Wisdom of Solomon’ and ‘Sirach,’ by Thielmann, already referred to; ‘Die europiiischen Bestandthéile des latein. Sirach,’ Thielmann (ix. 2, p. 247 ff.). See also the ‘ Jahresbericht iiber Vulgiir-und Spitlatein,’ by K. Sittl in Bursian-[wan Miiller’s Jahresbericht, Ixviii. pp. 226-286, and that on ‘Die christlich lateinische Litteratur von 1886-87 bis Ende 1894’ in the same series, by C. Weyman, 1896.* For further references to the language of particular authors see the list of Fathers. e have omitted mention of the numerous works which deal with the Latin language in general.
This article has dealt only with the early histo: of the Latin translations of the Bible. Their later developments from the time of Jerome on- ward are treated under VULGATE.
For the general literature of the subject, see the authorities referred to throughout the article, Nestle’s art. in Herzog’ (iii. 24 ff.) which appeared while this was in the press, and Corssen’s admirable Bericht tiber die latein. Bibeliibersetzungen (Bur- sian’s Jahresb. Bd. ci.), published only in time to admit of a few footnotes Peing added from it during final revision. . A. A. KENNEDY.
LATTER.—The adj. ‘late’ is now regarded as having two forms for the compar. and superl., stars Inteet: and latter, last, and a difference in meaning is usually observed. But the distinction is quite recent. In modern editions of AV the only spelling is ‘latter,’ but the ed. of 1611 had “Ἰαΐρ ἡ in four places, Is 477, Jer 5% 4847 4039. and there is no difference in meaning. Shakespeare has ‘later’ twice (acc. to Bartlett’s Concordance), once in ref. to time, ‘ And she goes down at twelve —I take’t, ’tis later, Sir’ (Macbeth τι. i. 3), once as equivalent to ‘latter’ as it was then used, Κ΄. John m1. 1. 288—
‘Therefore thy later vows against
Is in thyself rebellion to thyself.’ He also uses ‘latest’ for ‘last,’ as Love’s Labour's Lost, Vv. ii. 797,—‘ At the latest minute of the hour.’
In AV as in Shakespeare ‘latter’ is always (except when distinctly opposed to ‘ former’) equivalent to ‘last.’ Thus in AV, Job 1955 ‘For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth’ (RV ‘at the last upon the earth’); 2 Ρ 2” ‘the latter end is worse with them than the beginning’ (RV ‘the last state is become worse with them than the first’): and in Shaks. Henry V. tv. i. 143, ‘All those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in a battle, shall join together at the latter day’; and 1 Henry VJ. π. v. 38—
‘And in his bosom spend my latter gasp.’
The expressions ‘latter end’ and ‘last end’ are thus equivalent, and both old-fashioned redun- dancies.
For Latter Rain see RAIN.
thy first
J. HASTINGS.
* For later lit. see ‘ Jahresb, tiber Vulgar-und Βρασδίεῖα. by P. Geyer, Bursian’s Jahresbericht, xeviii. pp. 33-117.
LATTICE
LATTICE.—See under Window in art. House, vol. il. p. 435°.
LAUD (taken directly from Lat. laudare, to pa) as a synonym for ‘praise’ seems never to
ave been very frequently used, either as verb or subst., though the latter was more common than the former. Shaks. has each twice. In AV the subst. does not occur, and the verb was retained ouly once, Ro 15" ‘ Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people.’ The Greek verbs here are different (αἰνέω and ἐπαινέω), and no doubt Tindale, from whom the tr. comes, introduced the variation purposely ; but AV seems simply to have accepted it from the immediately preceding versions, for in Ps 117? of which this is a quotation, the Heb. verbs are again different, and Coverdale’s tr. was again ‘praise’ and ‘laud,’ but the Geneva version, followed by the Bishops, changed ‘laud’ into ‘praise,’ and AV has ‘O praise the Lord, all ye nations: praise him, all ye people.’ RV obliter- ates the distinction between the Greek verbs in to 15" giving ‘praise’ twice, but restores it in Ps 117!; and in Ps 1454 RV again introduces ‘laud’ for ‘praise’ to tr. the same Heb. verb. But in Ps 1472 RV has taken over the AV tr. ‘Praise the Lord, O Jerusalem; praise thy God, O Zion,’ though the Heb. shows the same dis- tinction in its verbs. Driver (Parallel Psalter, 1898) is more consistent, rendering πεῷὸ by ‘laud’ wherever in the Psalter it can be so rendered (63* 117! 1454 1472), and keeping ‘ praise’ for $5z.