RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Bible Versions
Srhmid a Strasburg Lutheran, who worked forty years on the translation (Strasburg, 1696; photographic facsimile, with manuscript notes by Swedenborg, ed. R. L. Tafel, Stockholm, 1872); by Jean Le Clerc (Clencus; Amsterdam 1693-1731); by C. F. Houbigant (4 vols., Paris, 1753)- by J. A. Dathe (Halle, 1773-89); and by H. A. Schott and J. F. Winzer (Leipsio 1816)
Forty years after the first edition of the New Testament of Erasmus, Beza's Latin New Testament appeared (Geneva 1556 1565, 1582, 1588, 1598, and more than 100 subsequent editions; by the BFBS, 1896). A translation by H A Schott was published at Leipsic in 1805. The latest works of the kind are by F. A. A. Nabe (Leipsic, 1831) and A. Goschen (Leipsic, 1832).
For other translations, including those of separate books of the Bible, cf. the Hauck-Herzog RE, iii, 49-58. On translations of the Psalms into Latin verse, cf. Hugues Vao-anay, Les Traductions du Psautier en vers latin au seizicme siecle, in Compte rendu du quatriime Congr'es international des Catholiques (Freiburg, 1898), part vi, Sciences
E. Nestle.
Bibliography: On the Latin Bible before Jerome consult; H Ronsch, Itala und Vulgata, Marburg, 1875; idem, in ZWT, 1875, pp. 76, 81, 425, 1876, pp. 397, 1881. p. 198; Desjacques, in Etudes, religieuses, philosophiqucj, historiques et litteraires de la compagnie de Jesus, 1878, pp. 721-724; L. Ziegler, Die lateinischen V ebersetzungen vor Hieronymus und die Itala des Augustinus, Munich, 1879; G. Koffmane, Geschichte des Kirchenlateins bis auf Augustinus-Hieronymus, Breslau, 1879-81; P. Corssen, Die vermeintliche " Itala " und die Bibeliibersetzung des Hieronymus, in JPT, 1881, pp. 507-519; F. Zimmer, in TSK, 1889; F. C. Burkitt, The Old Latin and the Itala, in TS, iv, 3, Cambridge, 1896; E. Ehrlich, Beitrage zur Latinitat der Itala, Rochlitz, 1895; idem, Quce sit Italos quo; dicitur verborum tenacitas, Leipsic, 1889; P. Monceaux, Les Africains. Etude sur la litterature Latine d'Afrique and La Bible Latine en Afrique, in RE J, 1901; DB, iii, 47-64; EB, iv, 5022-24.
On the Vulgate consult: S. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate, Paris, 1893 (this work was crowned by the Academy, pp. xx-xxiv contain a full list of earlier literature); G. Riegler, Geschichte der Vulgata, Sulzbach, 1820; L. Van Ess, Pragmatisch-kritische Geschichte der Vulgata, Tubingen, 1824; A. Schmitter, Kurze Geschichte der hieronymianischen Bibeliibersetzung, Freysing, 1842; F. Kaulen, Geschichte der Vulgata, Mainz, 1868; O. Rottmanner, in Historisch-politische Blatter, cxiv, 31-38, 101-108; DB, iv, 873-890.
On the grammar and the language consult: W. Nowack, Die Bedeutung des Hieronymus fur die alttestamentliche Textkritik, Gottingen, 1875; J. A. Hagen, Sprachliche Erorterungen zur Vulgata, Freiburg, 1863; J. B. Heiss, Zur Grammatik der Vulgata, Munich, 1864; V. Loch, Materialien zu einer lateinischen Grammatik der Vulgata, Bamberg, 1870; P. Hake, Sprachliche Bemerkungen zu dem Psalmentexte der Vulgata, Arnsberg, 1872; H. Golzer, Etude de la latinite de St. Jerome, Paris, 1884; P.
Thielmann, in Philologus, xlii, 319, 370; G. A. Saalfeld, De bibliorum sacrorum Vulgatm editionis grcecitate, Quedlinburg, 1891; W. M. C. Wilroy, The Participle in the Vulgate N. T„ Baltimore, 1892; L. B. Andergassen, Ueber den Gebrauch des Infinitivs in der Vulgata, 1891; P. Thielmann, Beitrage zur Textkritik der Vulgata, Speier, 1883; S. Berger, in Revue de thitoloqie et de philosophic, xvi (1883), 41 sqq.; idem, in Memoires de la societe des antiquaires de France, Iii, 144; P. Martin, in Le Museon, vii (1888) 88-107, 169-196, viii (1889), 444; H. P. Smith, in Presbyterian and Reformed Review, April, 1891; E .von Dobschutz, Studien zur Textkritik der Vulgata, Leipsic, 1894 (cf. on it H. J. White, in Critical Review, 1896, pp. 243-246); J. Ecker, Porta Sions, Lexikon zum lateinischen Psalter, viii, 234, 1,936 columns, Trier, 1904; F. Kaulen, Sprachliches Handbuch zur biblischen Vulgata, Freiburg, 1904 (cf. on it Julieher, in TLZ, 1905, no. 6).
On the printed text consult: W. A. Copinger^ Incunabula biblica, etc., London, 1892; cf. L. Delisle, in Journal des savans, 1893, pp. 202-218, where Copinger's 124 editions prior to 1500 are reduced to ninety-nine, and W. Muller, in Dziatzko's Bibliothekswissenschaftliche Ar&etfen, no. 6? 1894 pp 84_95). L Hain Uepertorium oibliographicum, 4 vols., Paris, 1826-38, Index volume, Leipsic, 1891, Supplement by W. A. Copinger, 3 vols.,
London, 1895-1902, Appendices by D. Reichling, fasciculus 1, Munich, 1905 (gives ninety-seven editions prior to 1500). On the first printed Bible consult K. Dziatzko, Gutenbergs friiheste Druckerpraxis auf Grund einer Vergleichung der Jflzeiligen und 36zeiligen Bibel, Leipsic, 1891 ;. L. Delisle, in Journal des savans, 1894, pp. 401-413; British Museum Catalogue, entry Bible.
III. Syriac Versions.— 1. The Peshito: According to some Syrians certain of the Biblical books (enumerated by Ishodad, bishop of Haditha, c. 862) were translated into Syriac under Solomon at the request of Hiram, king of Tyre. Another tradition refers this work to a priest Asa or Ezra, who was; sent by the king of Assyria to Samaria, and the rest of the Old Testament with the New to the . . days of King Abgar V of Edessa and and1" the aP°stle Addai (i-e-> ThaddEeus; see Name. Ab«aR- Cf. II Kings xvii, 24, I Chron. xv, 18, in the editions of Lee and Ceriani; J. P. N. Land, Anecdota Syriaca, iii,. Leyden, 1870, 11; Bar Hebraeus on Ps. x; J A,. 1872, 458). Bar Hebraeus makes the strangestatement that, according to Eusebius (cf. Hist, eccl., VI, xvi, 4, and VI, xvii), Origen found the Syriac version in the keeping of a widow at Jericho; and equally curious is the tradition which refers the translation of the New Testament to Mark. Some manuscripts of the Psalms state that they were translated from Palestinian into Hebrew, from Hebrew into Greek, from Greek into Syriac Theodore of Mopsuestia (commentary on Zeph. i, 6) rightly says: " These books were translated into Syriac by some one, but who he was no one knows to this day." Some scholars have thought to discover, at least for the New Testament, the influence of the Latin Vulgate; more probable is the supposition that at least some parts of the Old Testament are pre-Christian or certainly Jewish; and the home of the translation is not Jerusalem and Palestine (J A, 1872, 458) or Antioch, but Edessa and its neighborhood.
The name which is commonly given to the oldest and most important Syriac version, " Peshito " (" Peshitto "), is first found with Moses bar Kepha, (d. 913) and in Masoretic manuscripts of the ninth and tenth centuries (cf. N. P. S. Wiseman, Horce Syriacw, Rome, 1828, p. 223; J. P P Martin, Introduction a la critique textuelle du Nouve.au Testament, Paris, 1883, p. 101; ZDMG, xxxii, 589). It means " the simple " in contradistinction to the more elaborate versions, such as that made from the Greek by Paul of Telia (see below, 2 ; on the name, cf. K. W M. Montijn and J. P. N. Land, in Godgeleerde Bijdragen, 1882; F. Field, Origenis Hexapla, i, Oxford, 1875, p. ix; ZDMG,. xlvii, 157, 316; A. Mez, Die Bibel des Josephus,. Basel, 1895, 4; F. C. Burkitt, Early Eastern Christianity, London, 1904, chap. ii).
The Syriac Old Testament is practically the same as that of the Palestinian Jews. Chronicles, however, was missing in the Nestorian canon and, as it seems, also in that of the Jacobites; at least it is not treated in their Masoretic 2. The Old manuscripts, but it is found in very Testament. old manuscrjpts. Ezra-Nehemiah too, are not treated in the Masoretic manuscripts nor Esther by the Nestorians, while in Jacobite manu-
Bible Versions