Letters 106.43–106.77

On the seventieth: 'O God, do not be far from me.' What you say is in the Greek, 'my God,' is superfluous. In the same: 'O God, you have taught me from my youth.' In this too, what you say you found among the Greeks, 'my God,' is superfluous. In the same: 'Until I declare your arm.' And you say you found in the Greek 'your wonders,' which comes from the preceding verse: 'And until now I will declare your wonders.' So here 'arm' is right.

On the seventy-first: 'And all kings shall worship him.' What you say you found in the Greek, 'the kings of the earth,' is superfluous. In the same: 'Blessed be the Lord God, the God of Israel.' You say that 'God' is not found twice in the Greek, although it is in the Hebrew and in the Seventy, and most plainly the threefold naming of Lord and God is the mystery of the Trinity. In the same: 'And blessed be the name of his majesty for ever.' Know, then, that what you say you found in the Greek, 'for ever and for ever and ever,' was added superfluously by the Greeks; neither the Hebrew nor the Seventy has it.

On the seventy-second: 'It shall come forth as from fat.' And you say that you found among the Greeks exeleusontai, that is, 'they shall come forth,' which is false. For in the Seventy it is written, 'Their iniquity shall come forth as from fat.' In the same: 'How does God know?' You say that 'God' is not in the Greek, although in the Seventy too it is written, 'How did God know?' and all the translators rendered it likewise from the Hebrew. In the same: 'I will understand in their last things.' For this you say you read in the Greek, 'And I will understand'; but here the conjunction is superfluous. In the same: 'My flesh and my heart have failed.' Some wrongly keep the reversed order, 'My heart and my flesh have failed.' In the same: 'That I may declare all your proclamations.' For this you said you read in the Greek, 'your praises.' And you should know that in the Hebrew malochothach is written, which Aquila rendered 'your messages,' the Seventy 'your proclamations' or 'promises,' although 'praise' and 'proclamation' both mean the same thing.

On the seventy-third: 'Why, O God, have you rejected us to the end?' For this the Greeks wrongly read, with the order changed, 'Why have you rejected, O God?' In the same: 'How great the evil the enemy has done in the sanctuary!' I wonder who, in correcting your manuscript, perverted it so as to put 'in the holy ones' for 'in the sanctuary,' since in our manuscript too 'in the sanctuary' is found. In the same: 'Let us burn all the feast days of God from the land.' For this the Greek has katapausomen, and we translated it so: 'Let us make all the feast days of God cease from the land.' And I wonder how some rash person thought that our note in the margin should be written into the body of the text, which we wrote for the reader's instruction in this way: 'It does not have katapausomen, as some think, but katakausomen, that is, let us burn.' And since the holy presbyter Firmus, who pressed me for this work, told me that there has been much discussion of this among very many, it seems right to discuss it more fully. In the Hebrew it is written: sarphu chol moedahu hel baares, which Aquila and Symmachus rendered, 'They burned all the assemblies of God in the land'; the Fifth, 'They burned up'; the Sixth, katakausomen, that is, 'let us burn up,' which it is clear the Seventy too translated, according to the truth of the copies. Theodotion also rendered it 'we set on fire.' From this it is clear that it should be sung as we have translated it, and yet one should know what the Hebrew truth has. For what the Seventy translated should be sung in the churches because of its antiquity, and the other should be known by the learned for the knowledge of the Scriptures. Hence, if anything has been added in the margin for study, it ought not to be put in the body of the text, lest it disturb the earlier translation at the will of copyists. In the same: 'You crushed the heads of the dragons in the waters; you broke the heads of the dragon.' The order of the text runs thus: the first verse does not have 'you,' but the second does, and 'waters' is written in the plural, not the singular, as Aquila too translated the Hebrew word ammaim as ton hydaton, that is, 'of the waters.' In the same: 'Do not forget the voices of your enemies.' For this you say the Greek has 'of those who entreat you.' In the Hebrew sorarach is read, which Aquila rendered 'of your foes,' Symmachus 'of those who war against you,' the Seventy and the sixth edition 'of your enemies.' And the sense hangs on what precedes: 'Remember your reproaches, those which come from the fool all day long; do not forget the voices of your enemies,' that is, the voices that blaspheme you and slander you among your people. Hence there follows, 'The pride of those who hate you rises continually'; that is, while you delay punishment, they advance in blasphemies.

On the seventy-fourth: 'We will tell your wonders.' For this the Greeks wrongly read, 'I will tell all your wonders.'

On the seventy-fifth: 'All the men of riches with their hands,' and not, as you read it, corrupted by someone, 'in their hands.' In the same: 'To the terrible one, and to him who takes away the spirit of princes.' You say that 'to him' is not written in the Greek; that is true, but unless we add 'to him,' the Latin does not sound right. For we cannot correctly say, 'To the terrible one and who takes away the spirit of princes.'

On the seventy-sixth: 'And I meditated at night with my heart, and I was exercised, and I swept my spirit.' For this we read in the Hebrew: 'I remembered my psalms in the night, I spoke with my heart, and I swept my spirit.' For 'exercise' the Seventy translated adoleschian, that is, a kind of chanting and meditation; and for what we rendered 'I swept,' they put eskallon, which Symmachus translated aneureunon, that is, 'I searched' or 'I sought,' and the Fifth likewise. Properly, skalismos is said in agriculture of hoeing, that is, weeding with a hoe; and as there weeds are sought out with the hoe to be cut away, so he has shown the re-examination of his thoughts metaphorically from the hoe. And one should know that eskalon means doing it once, eskallon doing it often. In the same: 'From generation to generation.' What you say you found following in the Greek, 'he has finished his word,' is rightly absent from the Latin, since it is found in none of the translators.

On the seventy-seventh: 'And they shall tell their children.' For this the Greek has anangelousi, which is 'they shall announce.' But one should know that in the Hebrew iasaphpheru is written, which Aquila and Symmachus translated 'they shall tell.' In the same: 'And he slew their fat ones.' So it is in the Hebrew too, that is, bamasmnehem, which Aquila rendered 'among their sleek ones,' Symmachus 'the sleekest of them,' the Seventy, Theodotion, and the Fifth 'among their fat ones.' Some, not understanding this, thought that pleiosin, 'the more numerous,' was written instead of piosin. In the same: 'They loved him with their mouth, and with their tongue they lied to him.' In the Hebrew too it is written so, icazbulo, and all translated in like words, epseusanto auto, that is, 'they lied to him.' Who chose to put 'him' for 'to him' and corrupt the copies is not for me to judge. In the same: 'And he will be merciful to their sins and will not destroy them.' You say that the Greek does not have 'them,' which is true; but we, so that the sentence should not hang, completed the Latin by its own usage. And if anyone thinks that diaphtherei means not 'destruction' but 'corruption,' let him remember that title in which is written, telos me diaphtheires, that is, 'To the end: do not destroy,' and not, as most render it with misguided zeal, 'do not corrupt.' In the same: 'And he brought them into the mountain of his sanctuary, the mountain which his right hand had acquired.' For this in the Seventy one reads, 'this mountain which his right hand acquired' (ektesato, and not, as you put it, ektisato, 'created'), that is, 'which his right hand acquired.' So, according to the Hebrew usage, Symmachus translated, 'the mountain which his right hand acquired.' In the same: 'And they turned away and did not keep the covenant, like their fathers.' I know that 'covenant' is not in the Hebrew; but since all translated in like words, esynthetesan, and among the Greeks syntheke means 'covenant,' 'they did not keep the covenant' is signified by the one word, although the Seventy put ethetesan. In the same: 'In the land which he founded for ever.' For this you say you found written, 'In the land he founded it for ever.' In the Hebrew it is written, as Symmachus also rendered: 'In the land which he founded for ever.' But if it is said not of the land, that it was founded, but of something else which seems founded in the land, let them prove from what precedes and follows what the sense is, so that some unnamed thing seems to be founded in the land. And if they think that it is the sanctuary that was founded in the land, it should have been written: 'In the land he founded it for ever.' In the same: 'And he led them by the understandings of his hands.' It does not have en te synesei, in the singular, as you write, but en tais synesesin, which means 'understandings,' as it is also in the Hebrew, bathabunoth, which is 'by understandings.'

On the seventy-eighth: 'They have made Jerusalem a watch-hut for fruit.' In Greek this is eis oporophylakion, and it cannot be translated otherwise than as we have rendered it; it means the lookout that keepers of fields and orchards usually have, so that of a very large city scarcely a small hut remained. That is according to the Greeks. But in the Hebrew lichin is written, which Aquila rendered lithaorion, that is, a heap and pile of stones, such as vineyards and fields are commonly cleared of.

On the seventy-ninth: 'And you planted its roots from here.' And you say that the Greek does not have 'from here'; and rightly, for it is not in our manuscripts either; and I wonder what ignorant person falsified your books.

On the eighty-second: 'Let us possess the sanctuary of God as an inheritance.' And you say that the Greek has kleronomesomen, that is, 'let us possess for ourselves.' That is a superfluous question; for when 'let us possess' is said, 'for ourselves' is also understood.

On the eighty-third: 'My heart and my flesh exulted in the living God.' For this you say the Greek has 'they exulted.' There is no dispute in this; for if we read 'exulted,' it is understood 'my heart exulted and my flesh exulted'; and if 'they exulted,' two exulted together, that is, heart and flesh. And I ask you to avoid absurdities and superfluous disputes of this kind, where there is no change of sense. In the same: 'Blessed is the man whose help is from you.' You say you found in the Greek, 'to whom is his help from you'; and because we avoided this in the Latin translation, you say, we are criticized. For to whom is it not obvious that if we chose to say, 'to whom is his help,' it would be a most obvious fault, and that when 'to whom' has gone before, 'his' ought not to follow? Unless perhaps we are accused of a fault because we avoided a fault. In the same: 'In the valley of tears.' For this you say the Greek has klauthmonos, that is, 'of weeping'; but whether we say 'weeping' or 'lament' or 'tears,' the sense is one. And we follow this rule, that where there is no change in sense, we preserve the elegance of the Latin language.

On the eighty-fourth: 'You have blessed your land, Lord.' For 'you have blessed,' you say the Greek has eudokesas, and you ask how this word should be expressed in Latin. If we examine words and syllables contentiously, we can say, 'Your land has well pleased, Lord,' and while we follow the words we lose the order of the sense. Or else something must be added to keep the order of the speech, and we must say, 'Your land has pleased you, Lord.' If we do that, again we are asked why we added 'you,' since it is neither in the Greek nor in the Hebrew. The same rule of translating, then, must be followed which we have often stated: where there is no loss to the sense, the good sound and proper usage of the language into which we translate should be preserved. In the same: 'Mercy and truth have met each other.' And you say that the Greek does not have 'each other.' Nor does the Hebrew have it, and in the Seventy it is marked with an obelus; and since these signs, through the carelessness of copyists, are left out by most as superfluous, great error arises in reading. But if 'each other' had not been added, mercy and truth would be believed to have met not each other but someone else, and righteousness and peace to have given a kiss not to each other but to another.

On the eighty-fifth: 'And they have not set you before their eyes.' And you say that your manuscript does not have 'you.' Add 'you,' and by correcting the copyist's error you will also correct your own. In the same: 'And you, Lord God, compassionate and merciful.' You say you found in the Greek, 'And you, Lord my God,' which is superfluous; for 'my' is found neither in the Hebrew nor in the Seventy.

On the eighty-eighth: 'Great and dreadful.' For this you say you found in the Greek phoberos, which means 'terrible,' 'to be feared,' 'to be dreaded.' I think that 'dreadful' means this very thing (not, as the common people suppose, 'contemptible and squalid'), according to the lines: 'A cold dread shakes my limbs,' and 'Dread everywhere in my mind, the very silence terrifies,' and 'a monster dreadful, huge,' and many like them. In the same: 'Then you spoke in a vision to your holy ones.' For this you say you found in the Greek 'to your sons.' But one should know that in the Hebrew it has laasidach, which all rendered tois hosiois, that is, 'to your holy ones,' and only the sixth edition rendered 'to your prophets,' expressing the sense rather than the word; and only in the common edition did I find 'sons' for 'holy ones.' In the same: 'But you have rejected and looked upon.' For this you say you found in the Greek exoudenosas. How great an error the change of a single letter has caused you! For we translated not 'you have looked upon' (respexisti) but 'you have despised' (despexisti) and counted as nothing. Unless perhaps you think that exoudenosas should not be translated 'you have despised,' but, following the most eloquent translator of our time, 'you have annihilated' or 'you have nullified' or 'you have nothingified,' and whatever other monstrosities of words can be found among the unlearned.

On the eighty-ninth: 'From age to age you are, O God.' And you say that 'God' is not in the Greek. It is clear that it is missing among them. For it is in the Hebrew, and all the other translators and the Seventy likewise translated, 'From age to age you are, O God,' which in Hebrew is meolam ad olam ath hel. In the same: 'For gentleness has come upon us, and we shall be corrected.' You say you found in the Greek, 'gentleness upon us.' But this too is superfluous.

On the ninetieth: 'He shall say to the Lord, You are my protector.' And you say that the Greek does not have 'are.' I will tell you more: among the Hebrews it has neither 'are' nor 'you,' but in the Seventy and among the Latins it was put in for good sound and the connection of the words.

On the ninety-third: 'Blessed is the man whom you instruct, Lord.' You say that 'you' is not in the Greek. That is true, but it was put in among the Latins for good sound. For if we say, 'Blessed is the man whom instruct, Lord,' it will not have elegance of composition; and when 'Lord' is said and the Lord is addressed directly, it does no harm to the sense if 'you' is also put in. In the same: 'And in their malice he will destroy them.' You say that the preposition 'in' is not in the Greek, but that one reads, 'he will destroy their malice.' But one should know that in the Hebrew and in all the translators it is put, 'in their malice he will destroy them.' And if we choose to read, 'he will destroy their malice,' then 'them,' which follows at the end of the verse in the Seventy, will be both superfluous and faulty.

On the ninety-seventh: 'He has remembered his mercy.' For this you say you found in the Greek, 'his mercy to Jacob'; but here the name Jacob is superfluous.

On the hundredth: 'My eyes are on the faithful of the land, that they may sit with me.' For this you say you found in the Greek, 'that they sit together with me.' Who would not shun a translation that, expressing word for word, says, 'that they themselves sit together with me'?

On the hundred and first: 'I watched and became like a solitary sparrow on the roof.' And you say you found in the Greek en domati, which the old Latin manuscripts rendered 'on the building.' In the eastern provinces doma means the same as our 'roof'; for in Palestine and Egypt, where the divine books were written or translated, they do not have gabled roofs but domata, which at Rome are called sun terraces or balconies, that is, flat roofs supported by crossbeams. Thus Peter too, in the Acts of the Apostles, when he went up onto the doma, is to be understood to have gone up onto the roof of the house; and when we are commanded to make a parapet for our doma, the command is to make certain raised edges round the roof, so that a fall headlong may not easily happen. And in the Gospel: 'What you hear in the ear,' he says, 'proclaim upon the domata,' that is, upon the housetops. And in Isaiah: 'What is it with you, that you have all gone up to the empty housetops?' and many such passages. In the same: 'I became like a nycticorax in the house.' The Greek has the same; and you ask what nycticorax means in Latin. In the Hebrew, for nycticorax the word bos is written, which Aquila, the Seventy, Theodotion, and the fifth edition rendered nycticorax, Symmachus 'hoopoe,' the sixth edition 'owl,' which we too rather follow. Indeed, where among our people and the Greeks one reads, 'I became a nycticorax in the house,' among the Hebrews it says, 'I became like an owl in the ruins.' Many contentiously think the eagle-owl is meant. In the same: 'From the face of your wrath and indignation.' For this you say you found in the Greek, 'from the face of your wrath,' although it is most evident that both the Hebrews and the Seventy have, 'from the face of your wrath and your [indignation].' In the same: 'For its stones have pleased your servants, and they will have pity on its earth.' For 'earth' the Hebrew has afar, which all translated chous, and it can be rendered either 'dust' or 'soil,' that is, earth.

On the hundred and second: 'He will not be angry for ever.' For this you say you found in the Greek, 'not to the end.' But the Hebrew word nese is understood as 'for ever,' 'end,' and 'victory,' according to the nature of the passage.

On the hundred and third: 'You who make your angels spirits.' For this you say you found in the Greek, 'who makes his angels,' that is, 'who makes his angels.' Ask them briefly how, when the address is to God, the prophet should suddenly change as though speaking to another; especially since it begins thus: 'Lord my God, you are greatly magnified; you have put on praise and beauty,' and, 'You who cover its upper rooms with waters' (that is, of heaven), 'who make the cloud your ascent, who walk upon the wings of the winds.' And at once there follows: 'You who make your angels spirits and your ministers a burning fire; who founded the earth upon its firm base.' And a little after: 'At your rebuke they will flee, at the voice of your thunder they will be afraid.' And: 'In the place which you founded for them. You who send forth springs in the valleys.' And that: 'That you may bring forth bread from the earth.' If, then, everything is in the second person, that is, addressed to God, how is the third person suddenly and out of order brought in in a single verse? In the same: 'At the voice of your thunder they will be afraid.' The Hebrew too has 'your thunder'; and I wonder how it was dropped among the Latins by the error of copyists. In the same: 'This great sea, and wide with hands.' You say that 'with hands' is not in the Greek. I know that too, but it was added in the Seventy from the Hebrew and from Theodotion's edition under an asterisk. Indeed in the Hebrew too it is written thus: ze haiam gadol uarab idaim, which Aquila rendered thus: 'This is the sea, great and broad in hands,' and all the translators: 'This great sea, wide with hands.' And this is said metaphorically according to Hebrew usage, as though it had its hands spread out and received all things into itself. In the same: 'That you may bring forth bread from the earth.' For this you say you found 'that he may bring forth'; but one cannot say some things to him and others about him. Either the prophet was speaking all of it as to God, or he was referring all of it to another about him. And since most of it is addressed to him, the ambiguous parts too should be addressed to his person. In the same: 'The house of the heron is their leader.' For 'heron,' which in Hebrew is asida, Symmachus rendered iktina, that is, 'kite.' So we too translated it into Latin: 'There the birds will build their nests; the fir tree is the kite's house,' since it is its custom always to make its nests in high and lofty trees. Hence the sixth edition rendered it more plainly: 'the cypresses for the kite to nest in.' For 'firs' and 'cypresses' the Hebrew has barusim, which means 'firs' rather than 'cypresses.' In the same: 'The rock is a refuge for the hedgehogs.' For this the Hebrew has sphannim, and all rendered it in like words tois choirogryllois, except the Seventy, who rendered 'hares.' One should know that it is an animal no larger than a hedgehog, resembling a mouse and a bear, and so in Palestine it is called arktomys ('bear-mouse'). There is a great abundance of this kind in those regions, and they always dwell in the clefts of rocks and holes in the ground.

On the hundred and fourth: 'Their land gave frogs.' For this you said you read in the Greek exerpsen, which can be translated, 'Their land bubbled forth frogs'; but in this too there is no change in sense, and, following the old translation, we did not wish to change what did no harm. In the same: 'And he broke the trees of their borders.' For this you say you found in the Greek 'every tree.' But this too has been added and is superfluous. In the same: 'Because he remembered his holy word, which he had to Abraham his servant.' For this you say you read in the Greek hon dietheto, that is, 'which he appointed.' For so it is in the Hebrew and in the Seventy: 'Because he remembered his holy word, which he had to Abraham his servant.' So what is said in the Greek, 'which he appointed,' is in this place superfluous and should be erased.

On the hundred and fifth: 'Confess to the Lord, for he is good.' For this you say you read in the Greek 'for he is chrestos,' that is, 'kind.' But one should know that chrestos can be translated both 'good' and 'kind.' Indeed in the Hebrew it is written thus, chi tob, which all translated in like words, 'for he is good.' From this it is clear that chrestos too is understood as 'good.' In the same: 'They did not remember the multitude of your mercy.' You say you found in the Greek, 'And they did not remember.' The conjunction too is superfluous. In the same: 'And they provoked him as they went up to the sea, the Red Sea.' For this you say you found in the Greek kai parepikranan, and you think it ought to be translated word for word, 'and they embittered.' But this translation too is just like 'annulling' or 'annihilating.' Read Ezekiel, and you will find parapikrasmos always expressed as 'provocation' and 'exasperation,' where it is said oikos parapikrainon, that is, 'an exasperating house.' In the same: 'And he saw when they were in distress, and heard their prayer.' Whatever beyond this you said you found in the Greek is superfluous.

On the hundred and sixth: 'And he stilled its storm into a breeze, and its waves were silent.' So what you say you found in the Greek instead of this, 'And he rebuked its storm, and it stood still into a breeze,' is superfluous. In the same: 'And he led them into the haven of their will.' For this you say you found, 'into the haven of his will.' But the Hebrew does not have ephsau, which means 'of his will,' but ephsam, which means 'of their will.'

On the hundred and seventh: 'Awake, my glory.' As for your saying that this is not in the Latin, it is rightly absent from this Psalm, since it is found neither among the Hebrews nor in any of the translators; but it is in the fifty-sixth Psalm, from which it seems to me to have been carried over into this place by someone. In the same: 'The foreigners have become my friends.' For this you say you found in the Greek hypetagesan, that is, 'have become subject.' But that is written in the fifty-ninth Psalm; in the present one we find it so in all the translators: emoi allophyloi ephiliasan, that is, 'they have become friends,' which in Hebrew is ethrohe.

On the hundred and ninth: 'The Lord will send forth the rod of your power from Zion.' You say that you did not read 'of your power' in the Greek manuscripts, which is plainly in the Hebrew and in the Seventy. In the same: 'Rule in the midst of your enemies.' You say one reads in the Greek, 'And rule.' But this is found neither in the Hebrew nor in the Seventy and is superfluous.

On the hundred and tenth: 'I will confess to you, Lord, with the whole heart.' You say you found in the Greek, 'with my whole heart.' But this too is superfluous here.

On the hundred and thirteenth: 'But our God is in heaven.' For this you say you read in the Greek, 'in heaven and on earth.' But this too is superfluous.

On the hundred and fourteenth: 'And in my days I will call upon you.' You say that 'you' is not in the Greek, and rightly; it should be erased from your manuscripts too. In the same: 'I will please the Lord in the land of the living.' For this you say you read in the Greek, 'I will please in the sight of the Lord.' But this is superfluous.

On the hundred and seventeenth: 'And in the name of the Lord, for I have taken vengeance on them.' You say that 'for' is not found in the Greek manuscripts; but in the Latin too it should be read under an asterisk.

On the hundred and eighteenth: 'And I meditated on your commandments, which I loved.' You say you read in the Greek 'greatly' added; but this is superfluous. In the same: 'I lifted up my hands to your commandments, which I loved.' You say you read in the Greek, 'to your commandments (which I loved greatly),' but this is superfluous. In the same: 'I thought on my ways.' You say you read in the Greek 'your ways,' but this is superfluous, and 'my' is more correctly read. In the same: 'And I turned my feet to your testimonies.' You say you read in the Greek, 'and I turned away.' But this too is superfluous. In the same: 'But I will search your commandments with my whole heart.' You say you read in the Greek 'with my whole heart,' but here 'my' is superfluous. In the same: 'My soul is in my hands always, and I have not forgotten your law.' For this you say you read in the Greek, 'My soul is in your hands always.' But one should know that among the Hebrews, the Seventy, and all the other translators it is written 'in my hands,' and not 'in your hands,' which in Hebrew is bachaffi; and all the church's commentators among the Greeks expound this place so; and the sense in brief is this: every day I am in danger and carry my blood as it were in my hands, and yet I do not forget your law. In the same: 'My eyes brought down streams of waters, because they did not keep your law.' For this you say you read in the Greek, 'because I did not keep your law.' But this is superfluous, since in the Hebrew too one reads: 'Rivers of waters flowed from my eyes, because they did not keep your law.' In the same: 'My tongue shall declare your word.' For 'shall declare' you said you read in the Greek phthengetai, a word that means the same whether you say 'shall declare,' 'shall utter,' or 'shall speak.' Indeed, translating from the Hebrew, we rendered it thus: 'My tongue shall speak your word.'

On the hundred and nineteenth: 'Lord, deliver my soul from wicked lips, from a deceitful tongue.' You say you read in the Greek, 'and from a deceitful tongue.' That is superfluous.

On the hundred and twenty-sixth: 'Blessed is the man who shall fill his desire with them.' You say that 'man' is not in the Greek, though it is most plainly contained in the Hebrew and in the Seventy.