Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [textualcriticism] Re: Vulgate text-form

Expand Messages
  • Larry Swain
    ... It would be interesting to know how he determined what Greek manuscripts to choose (besides the oldest ) to compare the Latin with. On a related note,
    Message 1 of 24 , Sep 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      >
      >
      > (((((((((
      > A) Since a similar practice of translation was followed by the KJV
      > and RSV committees, i. e. substantial revision of an existing text
      > in the target language with an eye on both other, previous versions
      > as well as the original, I'd say that Jerome's gospels are a translation in
      > as much as we also call those texts translations rather than updates of
      > Tyndale and Wycliffe.
      > )))))))))
      >
      > What you're saying about the KJV is correct, which is why I would not
      > consider the KJV a fresh translation either, but merely a revision of
      > previous translations, much like Jerome describes the Vulgate as a revision
      > of the previous Latin.
      >
      > One argument Jerome made was that he claimed he really couldn't conclude
      > that differences between the Latin and Greek were necessarily Latin
      > deficiencies. He also argued that perhaps the Greek scribes goofed. But he
      > did seem to use the Greek as the final authority anyway. For example, he
      > argued in one place that the Johanine comma was legit, but he appears to
      > have left it out of the Vulgate.

      It would be interesting to know how he determined what Greek manuscripts to choose (besides the "oldest") to compare the Latin with.

      On a related note, Nestle argued in a couple of places that translation choices in the gospels indicated to him the presence of multiple hands there, and that John was all but untouched.

      I haven't looked at the Comma problem in the Vulgate, what evidence is there that it wasn't in the Vulgate? It is in Codex Amiatinus, the oldest complete Vulgate mss., I didn't check Codex Fuldensis, the oldest Vulgate NT, since its gospels are a Vulgatized version of the Diatesseron in which case it wouldn't tell us one or another if the Comma was in the Vulgate. Other evidence?

      Larry Swain

      --
      _______________________________________________
      Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
      Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com

      Powered by Outblaze
    • Daniel Buck
      ... is there that it wasn t in the Vulgate? It is in Codex Amiatinus, the oldest complete Vulgate mss., I didn t check Codex Fuldensis, the oldest Vulgate NT,
      Message 2 of 24 , Sep 7, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In msg #2563, "Larry Swain" wrote:

        >>I haven't looked at the Comma problem in the Vulgate, what evidence
        is there that it wasn't in the Vulgate? It is in Codex Amiatinus, the
        oldest complete Vulgate mss., I didn't check Codex Fuldensis, the
        oldest Vulgate NT, since its gospels are a Vulgatized version of the
        Diatesseron in which case it wouldn't tell us one or another if the
        Comma was in the Vulgate. <<

        You may be thinking of the Johannine Pericope, which is in the
        gospels. The Johannine Comma is 1 John 5:7/8. It is apparently not
        original to the Vulgate as it dominates the late Vulgate tradition
        only.

        Daniel Buck
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.