Imagini ale paginilor
[ocr errors]

when the first series is completed, a second is begun, the letters of which are distinguished by two points . a ..b..č. &c.

In the central compartment, between the busts above described, is the type or principal subject; it represents the rewards of the righteous in the eternal world, and the Redeemer is introduced as bestowing the crown of life on one of the elect spirits. The antitype on the left is the daughter of Sion, crowned by her spouse with the following

Leonine verse,

[ocr errors]

Laus aie vere : spõsū sēst here ;

that is, Laus anime vere sponsum bene sensit habere. The antitype on the right is an angel, speaking to St. John, with this verse beneath : Spôs9 amat spõsam Xs nimis et speciosam ;

that is, Sponsus amat sponsam Christus nimis et speciosam. From the left hand figure of the bust at the bottom of the plate, proceeds this label : corona tua c'culigata (circumligata] siet (sit] et calciame (calciamenta] i peb9 [in pedibus], with a reference to Ezekiel

, ch. xxiv. The twenty-third verse of that chapter (Vulgate Version] is most probably the passage intended.

From the figure on the right (which seems to have been designed for the prophet Hosea, as the other figure may mean the prophet Ezekiel) proceeds the label, Sponsabo te mihi in sempiternum, &c. with a reference to Hosea v. The passage alluded to will be found in Hos. ii. 19. which runs thus :--Sponsabo te mihi in sempiternum, et sponsabo te mihi in justitia, et in misericordia et in miserationibus. [Vulgate Version]

The last line in our fac-simile of the Biblia Pauperum may be thus read : Vtüc gaudēt aie sibi qu bonu datr ome.

that is, Versus.

Tunc gaudent animæ sibi, quum bonum datur omne. Bibliographers are by no means agreed concerning the age? which 1 Baron Heinecken, who has examined several copies of this work with minute attention, has discovered five different editions of the Biblia Pauperum ; the fifth is easily known, as it has fifty plates. In executing the other four editions, the engravers, he observes, have worked with such exactness, that there is very little difference between any of them, so that it is impossible to determine which is the first. The attentive bibliographer however will discover several variations. These are pointed out by Heinecken, who has described the subjects of the different plates or leaves with much minuteness ; as his interesting work is in the hands of every bibliographer and amateur, it will be sufficient to refer to his Idée d'une Collection d'Estampes, pp. 293–333; from which Santander has abridged his neat account, Dict. du xv. Siccle, vol. ii. pp. 207–210. Lambinet (Recherches sur l'Imprimerie, pp. 61–72;) and Daunou (Analyse des Opinions sur l'Origine de l'Imprimerio, pp. 7--15.) have short but interesting notices, relative to this and the other Books of Images, which will repay the trouble of perusal to those who have not the dear volume of Heinecken, or the elaborate work of Santander,

they assign to the curious volume above described. Mr. Dibdin, it is apprehended, dates it too low, in fixing it to the year 1450 : and though the cuts are not designed in so heavy and Gothic a style as Baron Heinecken ascribes to them, yet the execution of them on the wood-blocks is confessedly very coarse, as our specimen (which is an exact fac-simile) will abundantly prove. The form of the letters also is too Gothic, and too void of proportion to bear so late a date : indeed, if they be compared with the letters exhibited in some of the fac-similes in the Bibliotheca Speencriana (which are supposed to have been executed between 1420 and 1430), the similarity of coarseness in the shape of the letters, will render it probable that the Biblia Pauperum is nearly of equal antiquity. In fact, it is this very coarseness of the letters (as Heinecken has remarked) which has caused the edition above described to be preferred to every other of the Biblia Pauperum.”

III. The discovery of the art of printing in the fifteenth century, and the establishment of the glorious Reformation throughout Europe, in the following century, facilitated the circulation of the Scriptures. Wherever its pure doctrines penetrated, the nations that embraced it, adopting its grand principle — that the Bible contains the Religion of Protestants, were naturally desirous of obtaining the sacred volume in their respective languages. And even in those countries, into which the Reformed Doctrines were but partially introduced, it was found necessary to yield so far to the spirit of the times, as to admit, in a limited degree, vernacular translations among the people. Since the Reformation, wherever learned and pious missionaries have carried the Christian Faith, the Scriptures have been translated into the languages of its professors.

The total number of dialects, spoken in any part of the world, is computed to be about five hundred; and of these somewhat more than one hundred appear to constitute languages generically distinct, or exhibiting more diversity than resemblance to each other. Into upwards of one hundred and fifty of these various dialects, the sacred

1 Bibliotheca Spenceriana, vol. i. p. xxvi.

2 The rarity of the Biblia Pauperum has caused the few copies of it, which are known to be extant, to be sold for the most exorbitant prices.' These indeed have varied according to the condition and difference of the several editions. The copy which Heinecken describes as the

first (and which

is noticed above ; cost at the sale of M. de Boze, in 1753, 1000 livres, (431. 15s.); at the sale of M. Gaignat in 1769, 830 livres, (361. 6s.); at the sale of M. Paris in 1791, 511.; and at that of Mr. Willet, in 1813, two hundred and forty-five guineas ! The edition, described by Heinecken as the second, produced at M. Verdussen's sale, in 1776, 250 florins of exchange, (about 241.); at that of M. la Valliere, in 1783, 180 livres, (341. 2s. Ed.); and at that of M. Crevenna, in 1789, 946 livres, (411. 73. 9d.) Copies of the Biblia Pauperum are in his Majesty's library (formerly Gaignat's copy); in that of Earl Spencer; the Bodleian and Corpus Christi Libraries, at Oxford; Bennet College Library, Cambridge ; in the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow, (it is very imperfect); in the Royal Library at Paris (formerly Valliere's copy, it is imperfect); and in the Public Library at Basle. For an account of the Speculum Humanas Salvationis and other curious Books of Images, see the author's Introduction to Bibliography, vol. ii. Appendix,

pp. v~xiv.;

and Baron Heinecken's Idée GénéTale d'une Collection complette d'Estampes. Leipsic, 1771. 8vo.

3 Historical Sketch of the Translation and Circulation of the Scriptures, by tho Rev. Messrs. Thomson and Orme, (Perth, 1815, 8vo.) p. 44.

Scriptures have been translated, either wholly or in part; and not less than sixty of them are versions in the languages and dialects of Asia. It is obvious that very few modern versions can be of service in the criticism or interpretation of the Bible; but as the author has been censured for omitting them in the first edition of this work, he has endeavoured to supply that deficiency, and to procure the best information possible, on a topic so interesting to every sincere professor of Christianity.

The modern versions of the Scriptures are twofold, viz. in the Latin language, and in the vernacular languages of all the countries in which Christianity has been propagated : and both are made either by persons in communion with the church of Rome or by Protestants.




I. Modern Latin Versions of the entire Bible executed by persons in

communion with the church of Rome. - 1. Of Pagninus. — 2. Of Montanus. - 3. Of Malvenda and Cardinal Cajetan. - 4. Of Houbigant. - II. Modern Latin Versions of the whole Bible erecuted by Protestants. - 1. Of Munster. - 2. Leo Juda. - 3.

Of Castalio.-4. Of Junius and Tremellius. - 5. Of Schmidt.

-6. Of Dathe. - 7. Of Schott and Winzer. - III. Modern

Revisions and Corrections of the Vulgate Latin Version, by Catholics and Protestants.- IV. Modern Latin Versions of the New Testament. - 1. Of Erasmus. - 2. Of Beza. - 3. Of Se

bastiani. Other modern Latin Versions of less note. 1. Of the modern Latin versions of the Old Testament, made by individuals in communion with the church of Rome, those of Pagninus, Montanus, Malvenda, Cajetan, and Houbigant, are particularly worthy of notice.

1. SANCTES PAGNINUS, a Dominican monk, was the first modern oriental scholar who attempted to make a new translation of the Scriptures from the original languages. Having, in the course of his studies, been led to conceive that the Vulgate Latin Version of Jerome (of which an account has been given in the preceding chapter), was greatly corrupted, he undertook to form a new translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, following Jerome only where he thought that his version corresponded to the original. Under the Patronage of the Popes Leo X. Hadrian VI. and Clement VI., he devoted twenty-five years to this great work; which was first printed at Lyons in 1528. The Jews who read it, attested its fidelity. The great fault of Pagninus is, that he has adhered too closely and ser

1 The materials of this section are derived from Masch's and Boerner's Edition of Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. ii. Walchii Bibliotheca Theologica Selecta, vol. iv. pp. 64–76. Carpzovii Critica Sacra Veteris Testamenti, pp. 707-757. Simon's Hist. Critiqne du Vjenx Testament, livre ii. ch. xxii.

vilely to the original text; and this scrupulous attachment has made his translation obscure, barbarous, and full of solecisms. He has also altered the commonly received names of men and cities, and has substituted others in their place, which are pronounced according to the pronunciation of the Masorites. Though this translator's labours were very severely criticised by Father Simon, yet he acknowledges his great abilities and learning: and all the latter commentators and critics concur in justly commending his work, as being remarkably exact and faithful, and admirably adapted to explain the literal sense of the Hebrew text. Pagninus afterwards translated the New Testament from the Greek, which he dedicated to his patron, Pope Clement VII. It was printed with the former at Lyons, in 1528. In 1557, Robert Stephens printed a new edition of his translation in two volumes folio, with corrections, but it contains only the Old Testament of Pagninus's version. The New Testament is given in the Latin version of Beza, which is noticed in p. 225. infra.

2. The translation of Pagninus was revised by BENEDICT ARIAS MONTANUS, who has erroneously been considered as a new translator of the Bible in the Latin language. His chief aim was, to translate the Hebrew words by the same number of Latin ones ; so that he has accommodated his whole translation to the most scrupulous rules of grammar, without any regard to the elegance of his Latinity. Montanus's edition, therefore, may be considered rather as a grammatical commentary, than a true version, and as being adapted to instruct young beginners in the Hebrew than to be read separately : being printed interlinearily, with the Latin word placed exactly over the Hebrew, it saves the student the trouble of frequently referring to his Lexicon. In the New Testament, Montanus changed only a few words in the Vulgate version, where he found it to differ from the Greek. This translation has been very frequently printed in various sizes; but the best edition is the first, which is in folio, and printed at Antwerp in 1571.

3. The translation of THOMAS MALVENDA, a Spanish Dominican, being more grammatical and barbarous than that of Montanus, is but little esteemed, and has fallen into oblivion. The version, which bears the name of CARDINAL CAJETAN, strictly speaking, is not his production; having been made by two persons (one a Jew, the other a Christian), both of whom were well skilled in the original language of the sacred volume. The whole of the New Testament was likewise translated, except the Revelation. Cajetan carefully avoided those barbarous expressions which he niust have used, if his version had been grammatically literal.

4. The Latin version of the Old Testament, printed by Father HOUBIGANT in his critical edition of the Hebrew Bible (noticed in p. 122. supra) is not framed according to the present Hebrew text, but according to the text, as he thought it should be corrected by manuscripts, antient versions, and critical conjectures.

II. Since the Reformation, several Latin versions of the Old Testament have been made from the original Hebrew by learned Protes

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

tants. The most esteemed are those of Munster, Leo Juda, Castalio, Junius and Tremellius, Schmidt, Dathe, Schott and Winzer.

1. In the year 1534, SEBASTIAN MUNSTER printed at Basle a new translation of the Old Testament from the original Hebrew : and in 1546 he published a second edition, with the Hebrew text, and with the addition of some notes, which Father Simon thinks useful for understanding the style of the sacred writings. Without rigidly adhering to the grammatical signification of the words, like Pagninus and Montanus, he has given a more free and intelligible version : but by not deviating from the sense of the Hebrew text, he has retained some of its peculiar idioms. He has also availed himself of the commentaries of the best of the rabbinical writers. Though Simon freely censures particular parts of Munster's version, he decidedly prefers it to those of Pagninus and Montanus : and Huet gives him the character of a translator well versed in the Hebrew language, whose style is very exact and conformable to the original.

2. The translation which bears the name of LEO JUDA was commenced by him, but being prevented by death from finishing the work, he left it to be completed by Theodore Bibliander, professor of divinity at Zurich. With the assistance of Conrad Pellican, who was professor of Hebrew in the same place, Bibliander translated the rest of the Old Testament from the Hebrew ; the New Testament was undertaken by Peter Cholin and Rodolph Gualter, two learned Protestants, at that time resident at Zurich. This version was first printed in 1543, and was reprinted by Robert Stephens at Paris, in 1545, with the addition of the Vulgate version, in two columns, and with short notes or scholia, but without specifying the translator's name. Though it was condemned by the divines at Paris, it was favourably received by those of Salamanca, who reprinted it with some trifling alterations. It is acknowledged to be very faithful ; and its style is more elegant than that of Munster; but the translators have in some instances receded too far from the literal sense.

3. The Latin version of SEBASTIAN CHATILLON or Castalio (as he is generally called) was begun at Geneva, in 1542, and finished at Basle in 1550, where it was printed in the following year, with a dedication to Edward VI. king of England. His design was, to render the Old and New Testaments in elegant Latin like that of the antient classic authors; but his style has been severely censured by some critics, as being too much affected, and destitute of that noble simplicity, grandeur, and energy, which characterise the sacred originals. Professor Dathe, however, has vindicated this learned Protestant from these changes. Castalio's version has been frequently reprinted : the best edition of it is said to be that printed at Leipsic, in 1738, in 4 vols. 12mo., but the folio edition, printed in 1573, is in most request, not only on account of its beauty, but also because it contains the author's last corrections, together with a very complete table of matters.

4. The version of FRANCIS JUNIUS and IMMANUEL TREMELLIUS was first published in 1575; it was subsequently corrected by Junius,

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
« ÎnapoiContinuă »