Letters (CSEL) 1 part 50/85

But if it is said not of the land that it was founded, but of another thing which may seem to be founded in the land, let them prove from the preceding and following what the sense is, so that some unnamed thing which is not stated may seem to be founded in the land. But if they think that a sanctuary was founded in the land, it ought to have been written: 'in the land he founded it for ever.' In the same: 'and by the understandings of his hands he led them.' It does not have ἐν τῇ συνέσει, as you write, in the singular number, but ἐν ταῖς συνέσεσιν, which sounds 'understandings,' just as it is had also in the Hebrew 'bathabunoth,' which is 'by understandings.' On Psalm 78: 'they have made Jerusalem into a keeping-place for fruit.'

which in Greek is called εἰς ὀπωροφυλάκιον and cannot be otherwise translated than as it was rendered by us; and it signifies a watch-tower which the keepers of fields and orchards are wont to have, so that of a most spacious city scarcely a little hut should remain. This according to the Greeks. But in the Hebrew it has written 'lichin,' which Aquila rendered λιθάριον, that is 'a heap and pile of stones,' with which vineyards and fields are wont to be cleared. On Psalm 79: 'and you planted its roots from here.' And you say that in the Greek it does not have 'from here'; and rightly, for in our codices too it is not had; and I wonder which of the ignorant falsified your books. On Psalm 82: 'let us possess the sanctuary of God by inheritance.'

And you say that in the Greek is written κληρονομήσομεν, that is 'let us possess for ourselves.' This is a superfluous question; for when it is said 'let us possess,' 'for ourselves' is also understood. On Psalm 83: 'my heart and my flesh have exulted in the living God.' In place of which you say that in the Greek is written 'they have exulted.' In this there is no dispute; for if we read 'has exulted,' it is understood 'my heart has exulted and my flesh has exulted'; but if 'they have exulted,' the two exulted alike, that is, heart and flesh. And I beg you to avoid trifles of this kind and superfluous disputes, where there is no change of meaning. In the same: 'blessed is the man whose help is from you.' You say that you found in the Greek:

'to whom is his help from you'; and because we avoided this in the Latin translation, as you say, we are reproved. For to whom would it not be plain that, if we wished to say 'to whom is his help,' it would be a most manifest fault, and that, when 'to whom' has preceded, '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.' In place of which you say that in the Greek is written κλαυθμῶνος, that is 'of weeping,' but whether we say weeping or wailing or crying or tears, the sense is one. And we follow this rule, that where there is no change of meaning, we preserve the elegance of the Latin speech. On Psalm 84: 'you have blessed, O Lord, your land.'

In place of what is 'you have blessed,' you say that in the Greek is written εὐδόκησας. And you ask how this word ought to be expressed in Latin. If we contentiously scrutinize words and syllables, we can say: 'your land, O Lord, was well pleasing' — and while we follow the words, we lose the order of the sense. Or certainly something must be added, so that the order of the discourse be preserved, and we must say: 'your land, O Lord, was pleasing to you.' And if we should do this, again it is asked of us why we added 'to you,' since it is neither in the Greek nor in the Hebrew. Therefore the same rule of translating must be followed which we have often stated: that where there is no loss in the meaning, the euphony (εὐφωνία) and property of the language into which we translate should be preserved. In the same:

'mercy and truth have met each other (sibi).' And you say that in the Greek it does not have 'each other.' Neither does it have it in the Hebrew, and among the Septuagint it is marked beforehand with an obelus; and while these signs are, through the negligence of copyists, left out by most as though superfluous, a great error arises in the reading. But if 'each other' had not been added, mercy and truth would be believed to have met not each other but another, nor would justice and peace be believed to have given a kiss to each other, but to another. On Psalm 85: 'and they have not set you before their sight.' And you say that in your codex it does not have 'you.' Add 'you,' and when the copyist's error is amended, you will also amend your own error. In the same: 'and you, O Lord God, are compassionate and merciful.'

You say that you found in the Greek: 'and you, O Lord my God,' which is superfluous; for 'my' is had neither in the Hebrew nor in the Septuagint. On Psalm 88: 'great and dreadful (horrendus).' In place of which you say that you found in the Greek φοβερός, which means 'terrible, to be feared, formidable.' I think that by 'dreadful (horrendum)' too the very same thing is signified — not, as the common crowd supposes, 'contemptible and squalid' — according to that verse: 'a cold horror shakes my limbs,' and: 'horror everywhere in the mind, and the very silences themselves terrify,' and: 'a dreadful monster, huge,' and many others like these. In the same: 'then you spoke in a vision to your holy ones.' In place of which you say that you found in the Greek 'to your sons.'

But it should be known that in the Hebrew it has 'laasidach,' which all translated τοῖς ὁσίοις, that is 'to your holy ones,' and the sixth edition alone translated 'to your prophets,' expressing the sense rather than the word; and only in the Koine (the common edition) did I find 'sons' for 'holy ones.' In the same: 'but you have cast off and regarded (respexisti).' In place of which you say that you found in the Greek ἐξουδένωσας. How great an error the change of a single letter has made for you! For we translated not 'you have regarded (respexisti)' but 'you have despised (despexisti) and counted for nothing.'

Unless perhaps you think that ἐξουδένωσας is to be translated not 'you have despised,' but, according to the most eloquent translator of this age, 'you have annihilated' or 'you have annulled' or 'you have nullified,' and whatever other monstrosities of words can be found among the unskilled. On Psalm 89: 'from age and unto age you are, O God.' And you say that in the Greek there is no 'God.' That it is lacking among them is manifest. For it is in the Hebrew, and all the other translators and the Septuagint likewise translated: ἀπὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ ἕως τοῦ αἰῶνος σὺ εἶ, ὁ θεός, which in Hebrew is said: 'meolam ad olam ath hel.' In the same: 'for meekness has come upon us, and we shall be corrected.' You say that in the Greek you found: 'meekness upon us.'

But this too is superfluous. On Psalm 90: 'he shall say to the Lord: you are my protector.' And you say that in the Greek it does not have 'are.' I will tell you further, that among the Hebrews it has neither 'are' nor 'you,' but among the Septuagint and among the Latins it was placed for the sake of euphony (εὐφωνία) and the sequence of words. On Psalm 93: 'blessed is the man whom you shall instruct, O Lord.' You say that in the Greek there is no 'you.' And it is true, but among the Latins it was placed on account of euphony (εὐφωνία). For if we should say: 'blessed is the man whom you shall instruct, O Lord' (without the 'you'), it will not have the elegance of composition. And when 'O Lord' is said and an apostrophe is made to the Lord, it does no harm to the sense if 'you' is also placed. In the same: 'and in their malice he shall destroy them.'

You say that in the Greek there is no preposition 'in,' but it is read: 'their malice shall destroy.' But it should be known that both in the Hebrew and in all the translators it is placed: 'in their malice he shall destroy them.' But if we should wish to read: 'he shall destroy their malice,' then that which follows in the Septuagint at the end of the verse, 'them,' will be both superfluous and faulty. On Psalm 97: 'he has remembered his mercy.' In place of which you say that you found in the Greek: 'his mercy to Jacob'; but here the name 'Jacob' is superfluous. On Psalm 100: 'my eyes are upon the faithful of the earth, that they may sit with me.' In place of which you say that you found in the Greek: τοῦ συγκαθῆσθαι αὐτοὺς μετ' ἐμοῦ ('that they may sit together with me').

Who would not shun such a translation as would, rendering word for word, say: 'that they might sit down together with me'? In Psalm 101: 'I have watched, and am become as a sparrow alone upon the housetop.' You say that in the Greek you have found 'en dōmati,' which the ancient Latin codices translated 'in aedificio' (in a building). That very thing which among us is called 'roof' is in the eastern provinces called 'dōma'; for in Palestine and Egypt, where the divine books were either written or translated, they do not have ridges upon their roofs, but 'dōmata,' which at Rome they call either 'solaria' or 'Maeniana' — that is, flat roofs, which are supported by cross-beams.

Finally, Peter too in the Acts of the Apostles, when he went up onto the 'dōma,' must be believed to have gone up onto the roof of the building; and when it is commanded us to make a parapet for our 'dōma,' this is commanded, that we should make around the roof certain raised edges, lest a headlong fall be easy. And in the Gospel: 'What you hear,' he says, 'in the ear, speak upon the dōmata,' that is, upon the roofs. And in Isaiah: 'What ails you, that you have all gone up onto the roofs?' — vain things, and many of this sort. In the same psalm: 'I am become like a nyktikorax in the house.' This is likewise found in the Greek; and you ask what nyktikorax means among the Latins.

In the Hebrew, for 'nycticorax' the word 'bos' is written, which Aquila, the Septuagint, Theodotion, and the fifth edition translated 'nycticorax,' Symmachus 'upupa' (hoopoe), the sixth edition 'noctua' (owlet) — which last we rather follow. Finally, where among our translators and the Greeks it reads: 'I am become a nyktikorax in the house,' among the Hebrews it is said: 'I am become like an owlet amid ruins.' Most people contentiously suppose that the 'bubo' (horned owl) is signified. In the same psalm: 'from the face of thy wrath and indignation.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you found: 'from the face of thy wrath,' whereas it is most manifest that both among the Hebrews and among the seventy translators it stands thus: 'apo prosōpou tēs orgēs sou kai tou thymou sou.' In the same psalm:

'for thy servants took pleasure in her stones, and shall have pity on her earth.' For 'earth' the Hebrew has 'afar' set down, which all rendered 'choun'; and it can be translated both 'dust' and 'ground,' that is, 'earth.' In Psalm 102: 'He will not be angry forever.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you found: 'not unto the end.' But the Hebrew word 'nese' is understood, according to the quality of the passages, as 'forever' and 'end' and 'victory.' In Psalm 103: 'who makest thy angels spirits.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you found: 'ho poiōn tous angelous autou,' that is: 'who makes his angels.' Ask them briefly how it is that, when the discourse is addressed to God, the prophet is suddenly changed as though speaking to another.

especially since he begins thus: 'O Lord, my God, thou art exceedingly great; thou hast put on confession and comeliness,' and: 'who coverest the higher parts thereof with waters' — that is, of heaven — 'who makest a cloud thy ascent, who walkest upon the wings of the winds.' And there immediately follows: 'who makest thy angels spirits, and thy ministers a burning fire; who hast founded the earth upon its own stability.' And a little after: 'at thy rebuke they shall flee; at the voice of thy thunder they shall be afraid,' and: 'into the place which thou hast founded for them,' 'who sendest forth springs in the valleys,' and that: 'that thou mayest bring bread out of the earth.' If therefore all is in the second person, that is, addressed to God, how in one little verse is the third person suddenly and out of order introduced? In the same psalm:

'at the voice of thy thunder they shall be afraid.' It has in the Hebrew too 'thy thunder'; and I wonder how among the Latins, by a copyist's error, it was dropped. In the same psalm: 'this great and spacious sea by his hands.' You say that in the Greek 'by his hands' is not to be found. I too know this, but from the Hebrew and from Theodotion's edition it was added into the Septuagint under an asterisk. Finally, in the Hebrew it is written thus: 'ze haiam gadol uarab idaim,' which Aquila thus rendered: 'aulē kai chersin,' and all the translators: 'hautē hē thalassa hē megalē eurychōros chersin'; and this is said according to the Hebrew idiom metaphorically, because it is as though it had hands outstretched and receives all things into itself. In the same psalm: 'that thou mayest bring bread out of the earth.' In place of which you say that you found:

'that he may bring forth'; but one thing cannot be said to Him, another about Him. Either the prophet was speaking of everything as to God, or he was referring everything about Him to another. But since most things are directed to Him, even those which are ambiguous are to be directed to His person. In the same psalm: 'the house of the herodius is their leader.' For 'herodius,' which in the Hebrew is called 'asida,' Symmachus rendered 'iktina,' that is 'miluus' (kite). Finally, we too thus translated into Latin: 'there the birds shall build their nests; the fir tree is the house of the kite' — because, namely, it is wont always to make its nests in high and steep trees. Whence the sixth edition too translated more clearly: 'the cypresses for the kite to nest in.'

Now for 'firs' and 'cypresses' the Hebrew sets down 'barusim,' which signifies 'firs' rather than 'cypresses.' In the same psalm: 'the rock is a refuge for the hedgehogs.' In place of which the Hebrew has 'sphannim' set down, and all rendered it with a similar-sounding word 'tois choirogryllois,' except the Septuagint, who translated 'hares.' Now it should be known that it is an animal no larger than a hedgehog, having a likeness to a mouse and a bear, whence in Palestine too it is called 'dorchōn.' And there is a great abundance of this kind in those regions, and they are wont always to dwell in the caverns of rocks and in the pits of the earth. In Psalm 104: 'their land brought forth frogs.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read 'enērpsen,' which can be translated thus:

'their land teemed with frogs'; but even in this there is no change in the sense, and we, following the ancient translation, since it did no harm, were unwilling to change it. In the same psalm: 'and he shattered the wood of their borders.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you found 'all the wood.' But this too is added and superfluous. In the same psalm: 'for he was mindful of his holy word which he had toward Abraham his servant.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read 'ho dietheto,' that is: 'which he ordained.' For thus it stands both in the Hebrew and among the seventy translators: 'hoti emnēsthē tou logou tou hagiou autou tou pros Abraam ton doulon autou.' Therefore what in the Greek is said 'ho dietheto' is in this place both superfluous and to be erased. In Psalm 105:

'Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read: 'for he is chrēstos,' that is 'sweet.' But it should be known that chrēstos can be turned both into 'good' and into 'sweet.' Finally, in the Hebrew it is written thus: 'chi tob,' which all rendered with a similar-sounding word: 'for he is good.' From which it is clear that chrēstos too is understood as 'good.' In the same psalm: 'they were not mindful of the multitude of thy mercy.' You say that in the Greek you found: 'and they were not mindful.' And the conjunction is superfluous. In the same psalm: 'and they provoked, going up into the sea, the Red Sea.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you found: 'kai parepikranan,' and you think the word ought to be translated word for word: 'and they made bitter.'

But this translation too is similar to 'annulling' or 'annihilating.' Read Ezekiel and you will find 'parapikrasmos' always rendered 'provocation and exasperation,' where it is said: 'oikos parapikrainōn,' that is 'a provoking house.' In the same psalm: 'and he saw when they were in tribulation, and he heard their prayer.' Whatever beyond this you said you found in the Greek is superfluous. In Psalm 106: 'and he established its storm into a breeze, and its waves were silent.' Therefore this, which in place of it you say that in the Greek you found: 'kai epetimēsen tē kataigidi autēs kai estē eis auran,' is superfluous. In the same psalm: 'and he led them into the harbor of their desire.' In place of which you say that you found: 'into the harbor of his desire.'

But in the Hebrew it does not have 'ephsau,' which signifies 'of his desire,' but 'ephsam,' which sounds 'of their desire.' In Psalm 107: 'Arise, my glory.' As to what you say is not in the Latin, rightly it is not in this psalm, since it is found neither among the Hebrews nor in any of the translators, but it is found in the fifty-sixth psalm, whence it seems to me to have been transferred by someone into this place. In the same psalm: 'strangers are become friends to me.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you found 'hypetagēsan,' that is 'they are made subject.' But this is written in the fifty-ninth psalm; in the present one, however, we find it thus among all the translators:

'emoi allophyloi ephiliasan,' that is 'they are become friends,' which in Hebrew is said 'ethrohe.' In Psalm 109: 'The Lord shall send forth the rod of thy strength out of Zion.' You say that in the Greek codices you have not read 'of thy strength,' which manifestly both in the Hebrew and in the seventy translators it has. In the same psalm: 'rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.' You say that in the Greek it reads: 'and rule thou.' But this is found neither in the Hebrew nor among the Septuagint, and is superfluous. In Psalm 110: 'I will confess to thee, O Lord, with my whole heart.' You say that in the Greek you found: 'with my whole heart.' But this too here is superfluous. In Psalm 113: 'but our God is in heaven.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read:

'in heaven and on earth.' But this too is superfluous. In Psalm 114: 'and in my days I will call upon thee.' You say that in the Greek there is not 'thee,' and rightly; from your codices too it is to be erased. In the same: 'I will please the Lord in the region of the living.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read: 'I will please in the sight of the Lord.' But this is superfluous. In Psalm 117: 'and in the name of the Lord, because I was avenged upon them.' You say that 'because' is not found in the Greek codices; but in the Latin ones too it is to be read under an asterisk. In Psalm 118: 'and I meditated on thy commandments, which I have loved.' You say that in the Greek you read 'exceedingly' added; but this is superfluous. In the same: 'I lifted up my hands to thy commandments, which I have loved.'

In the Greek you say that you read: 'to thy commandments, which I have loved exceedingly,' but this is superfluous. In the same: 'I have considered my ways.' In the Greek you say that you read 'thy ways,' but this is superfluous, and it is more correctly read 'my.' In the same: 'and I have turned my feet unto thy testimonies.' In the Greek you say that you read: 'and I have turned away.' But this too is superfluous. In the same: 'but I with my whole heart will search out thy commandments.' In the Greek you say that you read 'with my whole heart,' but here 'my' is superfluous. In the same: 'my soul is always in my hands, and I have not forgotten thy law.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read: 'my soul is always in thy hands.'

But it should be known that both among the Hebrews and among the Septuagint and all the other translators it is written 'in my hands,' and not 'in thy hands,' which in Hebrew is said 'bachaffi'; and all the ecclesiastical interpreters among the Greeks expound this passage thus, and the sense is briefly this: 'daily I am in peril, and as it were carry my blood in my hands, and yet I do not forget thy law.' In the same: 'my eyes have sent forth streams of waters, because they have not kept thy law.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read: 'because I have not kept thy law.' But this is superfluous, since in the Hebrew too it reads: 'rivers of waters flowed from my eyes, because they have not kept thy law.' In the same:

'my tongue shall pronounce thy word.' For 'shall pronounce' you say that in the Greek you read 'phthegxetai,' which word, whether you say 'shall pronounce' or 'shall utter' or 'shall speak,' signifies the very same thing. Finally, we too from the Hebrew thus translated: 'my tongue shall speak thy word.' In Psalm 119: 'O Lord, deliver my soul from wicked lips, from a deceitful tongue.' In the Greek you say that you read: 'and from a deceitful tongue.' The 'and' is superfluous. In Psalm 126: 'blessed is the man that shall fulfill his desire from them.' In the Greek you say 'man' is not found, which most manifestly is contained both in the Hebrew and in the seventy translators. In Psalm 129: 'for thy law's sake I have waited for thee, O Lord.'

You say that in the Greek you found: 'for thy name's sake,' and we too acknowledge that many copies are found thus. But since we are zealous for the truth, we ought simply to state what is in the Hebrew: for 'name' or 'law' among them is read 'thira,' which Aquila translated 'phobon,' that is 'fear,' Symmachus and Theodotion 'nomon,' that is 'law,' supposing it 'thora' on account of the likeness of the letters iod and vau, which are distinguished only by size. The fifth edition translated 'terror,' the sixth 'word.' In Psalm 131: 'as he swore to the Lord, he vowed a vow to the God of Jacob.'

In place of what we translated 'he vowed a vow,' you say that in the Greek you read 'ēuxato,' and you think it ought to have been translated 'he prayed'; but this is wrong, for 'euchē' signifies, according to the quality of the passages, both prayer and vow, according to that: 'pay to God thy vows,' that is 'tas euchas sou.' In Psalm 135: 'who made great lights.' You say that in the Greek you found: 'great, alone'; but this belongs to the earlier verse, where we read: 'who alone doth great wonders.' There therefore it is to be read, and here it is not to be written, as being superfluous. In Psalm 137: 'for thou hast magnified thy holy name above every name.' In the Greek you say that you found: 'above all.' But in the Septuagint it reads thus:

'hoti emegalynas epi pan to onoma to hagion sou,' just as we too translated into Latin. But among the Hebrews know that it is thus: 'for thou hast magnified thy word above thy every name.' According to the Latin edition, however, this is the sense: 'because thou hast magnified above every name — that is, whatever in heaven and on earth can be called holy — thy Son.' In Psalm 138: 'for there is no word in my tongue.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read: 'for there is no guile in my tongue,' which only the sixth edition translated. But both among the Septuagint and among all the translators and the Hebrew itself has written either 'lalian' or 'logon,' that is 'utterance' and 'word.' Finally, in Hebrew it is called 'mala.'

In Psalm 139: 'they stretched out cords for a snare.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you found: 'they stretched out cords, a snare for my feet.' But this in this place is superfluous. In the same, in place of what is: 'the upright shall dwell with thy countenance,' in the Greek you say that you found: 'and they shall dwell'; but here the conjunction 'and' is superfluous. In Psalm 140: 'our bones are scattered beside hell.' In place of which you say that in the Greek you read: 'their bones.' But this too is superfluous. In Psalm 146: 'neither in the legs of a man shall it be well-pleasing to him.' For 'to him' you say that you read 'to the Lord,' which is not found.

But since both you inquire at the end of the sheet, and my holy son Avitus frequently entreats, how the Greek words are to be translated, I have briefly annotated. 'Neomēnia' is the beginning of the month, which we, according to the property of the Latin language, may call 'kalends.' But since among the Hebrews the month is reckoned according to the course of the moon, and among the Greeks the moon is called 'mēnē,' 'neomēnia' is so called as it were 'new moon.' 'Erēmos,' moreover, signifies 'desert' or 'solitude'; 'thronos' a 'seat' or 'throne'; 'nyktikorax,' as we have said, an 'owlet.'

'Kynomyia' is not, as the Latins translated, called 'dog-fly' through the Greek letter y, but according to the Hebrew understanding it ought to be written with a diphthong 'oi,' so that it is 'koinomyia,' that is 'every kind of fly,' which Aquila translated 'panmyion,' that is 'fly of every sort.' 'Laxeutērion,' moreover, in place of which the Latin turned it 'ascia' (adze), we translate 'a kind of iron tool,' with which stones are hewn. Finally, translating from the Hebrew we said thus: 'and now they have scraped away its carvings alike with axe and with chisels'; 'laxeutērion' therefore can be called 'a chisel.' CVII. TO LAETA, ON THE EDUCATION OF HER DAUGHTER.

The blessed apostle Paul, writing to the Corinthians and instructing the raw church of Christ in sacred disciplines, among other commands also set down this, saying: 'If any woman has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to dwell with her, let her not put away her husband. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the believing wife, and the unbelieving woman is sanctified in the brother. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.'

If perhaps the bonds of discipline have hitherto seemed too much relaxed, and the indulgence of the teacher headlong, let one consider the house of thy father — a most illustrious and learned man indeed, but still walking in darkness — and he will understand that the counsel of the apostle has advanced to this, that the sweetness of the fruits might compensate for the bitterness of the root, and that lowly twigs might sweat forth precious balsams. Thou wast born of an unequal marriage: of thee and my Toxotius, Paula was begotten. Who would believe this, that the granddaughter of Albinus the pontiff should be born by the promise of her mother, that in the presence and rejoicing of her grandfather the tongue of the little one, still lisping, should sound forth 'Alleluia,' and that the old man should nurse in his own lap a virgin of Christ? Well and happily have we waited.

A holy and faithful house sanctifies the one unbeliever. He is a candidate of the faith whom a believing throng of children and grandchildren surrounds. I think that even Jupiter himself, had he had such kindred, could have believed in Christ. Let him spit and mock at my letter, and cry out that I am either a fool or mad — his son-in-law also used to do this before he believed. Christians are made, not born. The gilded Capitol grows squalid; all the temples of Rome are covered with soot and spiders' webs; the city is moved from its foundations, and the overflowing populace runs past the half-ruined shrines to the tombs of the martyrs. If prudence does not wring out faith, let modesty at least wring it out.