Through him I certainly hope for your letters, so that I cannot hope for anything more assured in this kind of matter. For neither will zeal in seeking replies be lacking to our said son, nor grace in earning them, nor diligence in guarding them, nor eagerness in bearing them, nor good faith in delivering them; only, if in any way I deserve it, may the Lord help and be present to your heart and to my desire, that no greater will may hinder our brotherly will.
Since therefore I have already sent two letters and have received none of yours afterward, I have wished to send those same ones again, believing they did not arrive. But if they did arrive, and perhaps yours could by no means reach me, then those very writings which you have already sent, send again, if by chance they have been kept; but if not, dictate again what I may read—provided, however, that you do not find it burdensome to reply to these, which I have now for a long time awaited.
The first letter also, which I had prepared to be sent to you while still a presbyter, through a certain brother of ours, Profuturus—who afterward, having become our colleague, has already departed from this life, and could not then himself deliver it, because immediately, while he was arranging to set out, he was detained by the burden of the episcopate and shortly afterward died—even now I have wished to send, that you may know how long ago I have burned for converse with you, and what force I suffer because the senses of your body, through which my soul might approach yours, are so far from me, my sweetest brother, to be honored among the members of the Lord.
But in this letter I add this, that we have afterward learned that you have translated Job from the Hebrew, whereas we already had a certain translation of yours of that prophet, turned into Latin from the Greek tongue, where nevertheless you marked with asterisks what is in the Hebrew and lacking in the Greek, and with obeli what is found in the Greek and is not in the Hebrew, with such marvelous diligence that in certain places we see, at individual words, the stars signifying that the same words are in the Hebrew but are not in the Greek. But in this later translation, which is turned from the Hebrew, the same fidelity of words does not occur.
And it not a little troubles one who ponders it, either why in that first version such great diligence was employed that the asterisks indicate even the smallest particles of speech to be lacking in the Greek codices which are in the Hebrew ones, or why in this second, which is from the Hebrew, this has been more negligently attended to, so that these same particles should be found in their places. I wished to set down something thence by way of example, but the codex which is from the Hebrew was lacking to me for the hour. Nevertheless, since you fly ahead in genius, you understand well enough, as I think, not only what I have said but even what I meant to say, so that, the cause being rendered, you may explain what disturbs me. I for my part would rather that you translate for us the Greek canonical scriptures, which are said to be of the Seventy translators.
For it would be very hard if your translation should begin to be more frequently read in many churches, that the Latin churches should be discordant with the Greek churches, especially since a gainsayer is easily convicted when a Greek book is produced—that is, of a most well-known tongue. But whosoever should be disturbed by anything unusual in that which is translated from the Hebrew, and should bring a charge of falsehood, scarcely ever or never is recourse had to the Hebrew testimonies by which the objection might be defended. And even if recourse be had, who would endure that so many Latin and Greek authorities be condemned? To this is added that even Hebrews when consulted may answer otherwise, so that you alone should seem necessary, who could refute even them—but yet.
before what judge, it would be a marvel if you could find one. For a certain brother of ours, a bishop, when he had ordained that your translation be read in the church over which he presides, came upon a certain thing put far otherwise by you in the prophet Jonah than what was fixed in the senses and memory of all and had been chanted through so many successions of ages. So great a tumult arose in the people, especially with the Greeks arguing and inflaming a charge of falsity, that the bishop—for the city was Oea—was compelled to demand the testimony of the Jews. But whether through inexperience or through malice they answered that this was in the Hebrew codices which both the Greeks and the Latins had and asserted. What more?
The man was compelled — wishing, as it were, to correct a faulty reading — not to remain without his congregation after so great a peril. Hence it also seems to us that you too could at times have erred in certain matters; and consider what kind of thing this is in those writings which cannot be corrected by comparing the testimonies of the familiar languages. Accordingly, we render no small thanks to God for your work, in that you have translated the Gospel from the Greek, because — in almost every place — there is no discrepancy when we have compared it with the Greek Scripture. Hence, if anyone should contentiously favor the old error, by producing and comparing the manuscripts he is either most easily instructed or refuted.
And if a very few passages rightly give one pause, who is so hard-hearted as not readily to pardon a labor so useful — a labor for which mere praise is not a sufficient recompense? But what your own view is — why in many places the authority of the Hebrew manuscripts differs, and that of the Greek, which is called the Septuagint, differs otherwise — I could wish you would deign to explain. For that version carries no small weight, which has so deserved to be renowned; and that the apostles made use of it not only the matter itself indicates, but I also recall that you yourself have attested it.
And by this you will do the greatest service, if you render into faithful Latin that Greek Scripture which the Seventy produced — a text which in the various manuscripts is so variable that it can scarcely be endured, and so open to suspicion that one hesitates to bring forward or prove anything from it, for fear that something different may be found in the Greek. I thought this letter would be brief, but somehow it has become so sweet to me to go on in it, as though I were conversing with you. But I beseech you by the Lord, do not be reluctant to answer everything and to grant me, as far as you can, your presence. Letter 105. To Augustine. To the truly holy lord and most blessed pope Augustine, from Jerome.
You send me frequent letters and often press me to reply to a certain letter of yours, copies of which reached me — as I have already written before — through the brother Sisinnius the deacon, without your signature; and you indicate that you sent it first through the brother Profuturus, and secondly through some other man. Meanwhile Profuturus was recalled from his journey, was made a bishop, and was carried off by a swift death; while the other man, whose name you withhold, feared the perils of the sea and changed his plan of sailing.
Since these things are so, I cannot sufficiently wonder how that very letter is said to be held by many both at Rome and in Italy, yet has not reached me alone, to whom alone it was sent — especially since this same brother Sisinnius said that he had found it, among your other treatises, not in Africa, not with you, but on an island of the Adriatic, about five years ago. From friendship all suspicion must be removed, and one must speak with a friend as though with a second self.
Some of my familiar friends — vessels of Christ, of whom there is a very great abundance at Jerusalem and in the holy places — were suggesting that this had been done by you not with a single-hearted intent, but out of a craving for praise and idle gossip and a little popular glory, so that you might grow great at my expense: that many might learn that you were the challenger and I the one afraid, that you wrote as the learned man and I kept silent as the ignorant, and that at last one had been found to set a limit to my garrulity. But I, to confess it plainly, at first was unwilling to answer Your Reverence for this reason — that I did not clearly believe the letter to be yours, nor, as the common proverb says of certain things, that it was a sword smeared with honey.
Next, I was on my guard lest I should seem impertinently to answer a bishop of my own communion, and to censure certain things in the letter of one who was censuring me — especially since I judged certain things in it to be heretical. Finally, lest you should rightly protest and say: 'What is this? Had you seen my letter and recognized in the signature the marks of a hand known to you, that you so lightly wounded a friend and turned another man's malice into an insult against me?' Therefore, as I have already written before, either send me the same letter signed by your own hand, or cease to provoke an old man hiding away in his little cell.
But if you wish either to display or to exercise your learning, seek out young men, eloquent and noble — of whom there are said to be very many at Rome — who are able and dare to engage with you and to draw the yoke with a bishop in the disputation of the holy Scriptures. I, once a soldier, am now a veteran, and I ought to praise your victories and those of others, not myself to fight again with a worn-out body — lest, if you push me repeatedly to enlist, I recall that old story, how Quintus Maximus broke Hannibal, who was exulting in youthful spirit, by his own patience. 'Age bears away all things, the mind as well; often, as a boy, I remember that I laid the long days to rest with singing. Now so many songs are forgotten by me; even my very voice now flees from Moeris.'
And — to speak rather from the holy Scriptures — that Barzillai the Gileadite, delegating to his young son King David's favors and all their delights, showed that old age ought not to seek after such things nor to accept them when offered. But as to your swearing that you have not written a book against me nor sent to Rome one which you did not write — but that, if perchance some things be found in your writings which disagree with my understanding, I have not been wronged by you, but rather you have written what seemed right to you — I beg you to hear me patiently. You did not write the book. Then how have writings of your censure of me been brought to me by others? Why does Italy possess what you did not write? On what ground do you demand that I write back to things which you deny having written?
Nor am I so dull that, if you have thought differently, I should count myself wronged. But if you censure my words to my face, and demand an accounting of my writings, and compel me to correct what I have written, and challenge me to a recantation and to 'restore my sight,' in this friendship is wounded, in this the laws of our bond are violated. Lest we seem to quarrel childishly and to give our respective partisans or detractors material for strife, I write these things because I desire to love you purely and in a Christian manner, and to keep nothing in my mind that differs from my lips.
For it is not fitting that I, who from youth up to this present age have sweated at my labor in a little monastery with the holy brethren, should dare to write anything against a bishop of my own communion — and against that bishop whom I began to love before I knew him, who first challenged me to friendship, and in whom, rising after me, I rejoiced at his erudition in the Scriptures. Therefore, either deny that the book is yours, if perchance it is not yours, and cease to demand a reply to things you did not write; or, if it is yours, frankly confess it — so that, if I write anything in my own defense, the fault may lie with you who provoked it, not with me who was compelled to answer.
You add, moreover, that you are ready — if anything in your writings should move me, or if I should wish to correct it — to take it in a brotherly spirit, and that you will not only rejoice at my goodwill toward you, but even entreat me to do this very thing. Again I say what I feel: you are provoking an old man, you are goading one who keeps silent, you seem to be flaunting your learning. But it does not befit my age to be thought ill-disposed toward one whom I ought rather to favor. And if perverse men find in the Gospels and the Prophets something they may strive to censure, do you wonder if in your books — and especially in the exposition of the Scriptures, which are of all things the most obscure — certain things should seem to depart from the straight line? And this I say, not because I already judge that certain things in your works are to be censured.
For I have never given attention to the reading of them, nor is there among us any abundance of these copies, apart from the books of your Soliloquies and certain little commentaries on the Psalms; and if I wished to sift these, I could show that they disagree — I will not say with me, who am nothing — but with the interpretations of the ancient Greeks. Farewell, my dearest friend, in age my son, in dignity my father; and, since I ask this of you, observe that whatever you write to me, you cause to reach me first. Letter 106. To Sunnia and Fretela, concerning the Psalter, on those passages that have been corrupted in the edition of the Seventy Translators. To the most beloved brethren Sunnia and Fretela, and to the others who serve the Lord together with you, Jerome. Truly in you has the apostolic and prophetic word been fulfilled:
'Their sound has gone forth into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.' Who would believe this — that the barbarous tongue of the Getae should seek out the Hebrew truth, and that, while the Greeks slumber, nay rather contend, Germany itself should search into the utterances of the Holy Spirit? In truth I have learned that God is no respecter of persons, but in every nation he who fears God and works the righteousness of God is accepted by him. Hands once hardened by gripping the sword-hilt, and fingers fitter for handling arrows, now grow soft for the pen and the reed, and warlike breasts are turned to Christian gentleness. Now we also behold the prophecy of Isaiah fulfilled in deed:
'They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not take up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.' And again in the same prophet: 'The wolf shall feed with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; the calf and the lion and the bull shall feed together, and a little child shall lead them; the ox and the bear shall feed in common, and their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion and the ox shall eat straw' — not that simplicity should pass over into savagery, but that savagery should learn simplicity.
You ask of me a task of great labor and of still greater ill-will, in which not the writer's talent but his learning is put to the test — so that, while I myself desire to judge concerning others, I offer myself to be judged by all; and, in the work of the Psalter, according to the arrangement of your memorandum, wherever there is dispute between the Latins and the Greeks, I am to indicate what better agrees with the Hebrews.
In this matter I briefly admonish you to know that there is one edition which Origen and Eusebius of Caesarea and all the commentators of Greece call koine — that is, the common and vulgate edition — and which by many is now called the Lucianic; and another, that of the Seventy translators, which is found in the Hexaplar manuscripts and has been faithfully rendered by us into the Latin tongue, and is chanted at Jerusalem and in the churches of the East. About this matter my holy son Avitus had often inquired; and since the opportunity of our brother Firmus the presbyter presented itself — who delivered your letter to me from you — I answer, writing to all in common, and I free myself of the great loan of friendship, in which the more we repay, the more we owe.
But just as in the New Testament, whenever a question arises among the Latins and there is variation among the copies, we have recourse to the fountainhead of the Greek tongue, in which the New Instrument was written, so also in the Old Testament, whenever there is a difference between the Greeks and the Latins, we take refuge in the Hebrew truth, so that whatever proceeds from the source we may seek in the little streams. Now this koine, that is, the common edition, is the very one which is also the Septuagint.
然而二者之間有此區別：那舊版本因著地點、時代與抄寫者的任意而被訛誤了，而《六欄對照本》中所載、經我們翻譯的那一種，正是七十士譯者的譯本，在學者的書卷中被完好無損、純潔無瑕地保存下來。所以凡與此不合的，人人都毫無疑問地知道，它必也與希伯來文的權威相悖。第一個問題出自第五篇：『惡人也不得住在你旁邊。』希臘文作 oute paroikēsei soi ponēros，或 ponēreuomenos，正如通行本所載。
But this is the difference between the two: that the old edition has been corrupted according to places and times and the will of the copyists, whereas that which is contained in the Hexapla and which we have translated is the very translation of the Seventy translators, preserved uncorrupted and unspotted in the books of the learned. Whatever, therefore, disagrees with this, there is no doubt for anyone that it likewise is at variance with the authority of the Hebrews. The first question concerned the fifth Psalm: 'Neither shall the malignant dwell beside you.' For which is found in the Greek: oute paroikesei soi poneros, or poneruomenos, as the vulgate edition holds.
And you wonder why the Latin translator did not render paroikia, that is, 'sojourning,' but instead put for it 'dwelling,' which in Greek is called katoikia. Indeed he is shown to have done this in another place: 'Woe is me, that my sojourning is prolonged.' And in the fourteenth Psalm again he put 'dwelling' for 'sojourning': 'Lord, who shall dwell in your tabernacle?' And it must be understood that, if we should wish to say, 'Lord, who shall sojourn in your tabernacle?' or that phrase from the fifth, 'Neither let the malignant sojourn beside you,' you will lose the euphony; and while we follow a misplaced affectation of translation, we lose all the grace of the rendering.
這正是好譯者的準則：以自己語言的固有特性來表達另一語言的慣用語（idiōmata）。我們可以證明，西塞羅在翻譯柏拉圖的《普羅塔哥拉篇》、色諾芬的《經濟論》以及狄摩西尼《控訴埃斯基涅斯》的講辭時，也是如此行的；普勞圖斯、泰倫提烏斯和凱基里烏斯這些最博學之士，在翻譯希臘喜劇時亦然。人也不當因此就以為拉丁文極其狹隘，說它不能逐字對譯，因為連希臘人翻譯我們大部分的表達時也用迂迴之語，並且他們表達希伯來文詞語時，也不憑翻譯的忠實，而是憑他們自己語言的固有特性。論同一篇詩：『在我眼前引導你的道路』——希臘文作 kateuthynon enōpion sou tēn hodon mou，即：
And this is the rule of a good translator: that he express the idioms of the other language by the proper usage of his own. This we show that Cicero also did, in Plato's Protagoras, and in Xenophon's Oeconomicus, and in Demosthenes' oration against Aeschines, and that Plautus, Terence, and Caecilius — most learned men — did in translating the Greek comedies. Nor should anyone on that account think the Latin language most narrow, because it cannot render word for word, since even the Greeks render most of our expressions by a circumlocution, and strive to express Hebrew words, not by fidelity of translation, but by the proper usages of their own tongue. Concerning the same Psalm: 'Direct in my sight your way' — for which in the Greek is: kateuthynon enopion sou ten hodon mou, that is:
'Direct in your sight my way' — which neither the Seventy have, nor Aquila, nor Symmachus, nor Theodotion, but only the koine edition. Finally, in the Hebrew too I found it thus written: oser laphanoi darchach, which all have translated with like phrasing: 'Direct your way in my sight,' according to that which is said also in the Lord's Prayer: 'Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be your name' — not that, when we pray, that which is holy in itself is made holy, but that we may ask that what by its own nature is holy may be hallowed in us. So now too the prophet asks that the way of the Lord, which is in itself straight, may become straight also for him. Concerning the sixth Psalm: 'Let all my enemies be ashamed and sorely troubled.'
你們說希臘文中沒有『大大』一詞。我知道；但這是通行本的讀法。此外，希伯來文中也有 mod，即『大大』，眾人也都一致譯作 sphodra。論第七篇：『主啊，求你按我的公義判斷我。』希臘文作 kata tēn dikaiosynēn sou，即『按你的公義』。但這裡也是錯的；因為希伯來文作 sedechi，意即『我的公義』，而非 sedecach，那才是『你的公義』之音。眾譯者都以相近的措辭譯作『我的公義』。也不要有人覺得，他求人按自己的公義來判斷是狂妄的，因為下一節正說明了這同一件事：
And you say that in the Greek 'sorely' is not found. I know; but this is the vulgate reading. Moreover, in the Hebrew too it has mod, that is, 'sorely,' and all have translated it alike as sphodra. Concerning the seventh Psalm: 'Judge me, Lord, according to my righteousness.' For which is found in the Greek: kata ten dikaiosynen sou, that is, 'according to your righteousness.' But here too it is wrong; for in the Hebrew it has sedechi, which is translated 'my righteousness,' and not 'sedecach,' which sounds 'your righteousness.' But all the translators rendered it 'my righteousness' with like phrasing. Nor let it seem rash to anyone that he should ask to be judged according to his own righteousness, since the following verse signifies this very thing:
'and according to my innocence upon me'; and let this be the opening of the sixteenth Psalm: 'Hear, Lord, my righteousness'; and in the seventeenth also let it be said: 'The Lord will reward me according to my righteousness, and according to the cleanness of my hands he will recompense me'; and in the twenty-fifth Psalm too let it be written: 'Prove me, Lord, and try me; burn my reins and my heart'; and in the fourth let it be said: 'When I called upon him, the God of my righteousness heard me'; and in the eighty-fifth: 'Preserve my soul, for I am holy'; let Jacob too speak in Genesis: 'Tomorrow my righteousness will answer for me.' Concerning the eighth Psalm: 'For I shall behold your heavens.' And you say that 'your' is not found in the Greek.
It is true; but in the Hebrew is read samacha, which is translated 'your heavens,' and it was added in the Seventy translators from the edition of Theodotion under an asterisk. Of this matter I will briefly open the sense to you. Where something is found less in the Greek than in the Hebrew truth, Origen added it from the translation of Theodotion and set the sign of the asterisk, that is, a star, which illuminates what seemed before to be hidden and brings it into the open. But where something that is not in the Hebrew is found in the Greek manuscripts, he placed before it an obelus, that is, a lying-down mark, which we in Latin can call a 'spit,' by which it is shown that what is not found in the authentic books is to be slain and pierced through.
These signs are found also in the poems of the Greeks and the Latins. On the sixteenth: 'Let your eyes behold equity.' For which you said you had read in the Greek: hoi ophthalmoi mou, that is, 'my eyes'; but 'your eyes' is more correct, because he had also said above: 'Let my judgment come forth from your countenance,' so that the eyes of God, in the prophet who is at work, may behold not crooked but straight things. In the same: 'Keep me as the apple of the eye.' And you say that in the Greek is read: 'Keep me, Lord,' which is found neither in the Hebrew nor in any translator. In the same: 'Arise, Lord, forestall him and supplant him.' For which in the Greek is: prophthason autous, that is, 'forestall them and supplant them';
But it is better if it is read in the singular, since it is said of the impious one, of whom there immediately follows: 'forestall him and supplant him; snatch my soul from the impious.' And there is no doubt for anyone that it signifies the devil. On the seventeenth: 'hail and coals of fire.' And you ask why the Greek does not have that second verse, two verses having been interposed. But it must be known that it was added in the Seventy translators, under an asterisk, from the Hebrew and the edition of Theodotion. In the same: 'who made my feet perfect like the harts'.' For which you write that there is found in the Greek: hosei elaphou, that is, 'like a hart's,' the singular number for the plural.
But in the Hebrew the plural number is set down, chaialoth, and all the translators rendered the plural number. In the same: 'and you have given me the protection of your salvation.' For which you said you had read in the Greek: tes soterias mou, that is, 'of my salvation.' But in the Hebrew iesacha means 'of your salvation,' not 'of mine'; which all the translators also rendered. In the same: 'you have supplanted beneath me those who rose up against me.' For which you say you found more in the Greek: 'all who rose up'; but 'all' was added. In the same: 'The Lord lives, and blessed be my God.' And you say that in the Greek 'my' is not found; which was translated not under an asterisk, but by the Seventy themselves from the Hebrew truth;
and all the translators agree in this passage. In the same: 'my deliverer from the wrathful nations.' For which you say you found in the Greek: 'from my strong,' or 'mighty,' 'enemies.' And since we are once for all zealous for the truth, if anything has been corrupted either by the haste of the translator or by the fault of the copyists, we ought simply to confess and correct it. In the Hebrew it has nothing else but: 'my deliverer from my enemies.' But the Seventy added 'wrathful.' And for 'nations,' both in the Hebrew and in all the translators, 'enemies' is set down; and I wonder how 'nations' were substituted for 'enemies.' On the eighteenth: 'He rejoiced as a giant to run his way.' And you say that in the Greek 'his' is not found;
but we found this added under a 'spit' (obelus), and it is evident that it is not in the Hebrew. On the nineteenth: 'May he grant you according to your heart.' And you say that in the Greek you found the name of the Lord added to this verse, which is superfluous, because from the preceding verses it is understood 'in common' (apo koinou), whence the Psalm also began: 'May the Lord hear you in the day of tribulation,' so that here too it is said in the same sense: 'May he grant you according to your heart,' that is, the Lord himself, of whom it was said above. In the same: 'and hear us in the day in which we shall call upon you.' For which you say you read: 'in whatever day'; but the preceding agrees with the Hebrew truth, where it is written biom, that is, 'in the day.' On the twenty-first: 'But you, Lord, do not put your help far from me.'
for which you say you found 'my'; which is also true and is thus to be corrected. For, in brief: if anything has been altered by the error of the copyists, we consider it foolish to defend it with contentious obstinacy. In the same: 'All the seed of Jacob, magnify him,' for which in the Greek is written: doxasate auton, that is, 'glorify him.' But it must be known that wherever in the Greek 'glorify' is written, the Latin translator has rendered 'magnify,' according to that which is said in Exodus: 'Let us sing to the Lord, for he has been gloriously magnified,' for which in the Greek is written 'has been glorified';
1:1849
sedinLatinosermone, sitransferatur, fitindecoratranslatioetnosemendantesolimpsalterium, ubicumquesensusidemest, ueteruminterpretumconsuetudinemmutarenoluimus, nenimianouitatelectorisstudiumterreremus. Uicesimosecundo: calixmeusinebriansquampraeclarusest. proquoinGraecolegisseuosdicitis: calixtuus; sedhocinxoivfjerroreobtinuit. ceterumetSeptuagintaetHebraicumetomnesinterpretes \'calixmeus\' habent, quodHebraicediciturchosi; alioquin \'calixtuus\' esset \'chosach\'. Uicesimoquarto: confundanturomnesiniqueagentes. etdicitis, quod \'omnes\' inGraecononhabeat, etbene; namnecinHebraeohabet, sedinSeptuagintasubueruadditumest.
but in the Latin tongue, if it were so rendered, the translation becomes unseemly; and when we once corrected the Psalter, wherever the sense is the same, we were unwilling to change the custom of the ancient translators, lest by too much novelty we should frighten off the reader's zeal. On the twenty-second: 'My inebriating cup, how excellent it is.' For which you say you read in the Greek: 'your cup'; but this prevailed in the koine by error. For the rest, both the Seventy and the Hebrew and all the translators have 'my cup,' which in Hebrew is said chosi; otherwise 'your cup' would be 'chosach.' On the twenty-fourth: 'Let all who act unjustly be confounded.' And you say that 'all' is not in the Greek, and rightly; for neither is it in the Hebrew, but in the Seventy it was added under a 'spit' (obelus).
同篇：『無辜正直的人親近我，因我等候你。』你們說希臘文中發現有『主』，其實是多餘的。論第二十六篇：『如今，看哪，他已高舉我的頭。』但『看哪』是多餘的。同篇：『我的臉尋求了』，希臘文作『我的臉尋求了你』。但上面的讀法更好。論第二十七篇：『求你垂聽我懇求的聲音』，你們說發現作『主啊，求你垂聽』。但這也是後加的。論第二十八篇：『在他的殿中，凡有氣息的都要述說他的榮耀』，希臘文作 pas tis。這若我們想逐字譯作『凡是誰』，就陷入翻譯的矯揉造作（kakozēlia），譯文便成了荒謬。同篇：
In the same: 'The innocent and upright have cleaved to me, because I waited for you.' And you say that in the Greek you found 'Lord,' which is superfluous. On the twenty-sixth: 'and now, behold, he has exalted my head.' But 'behold' is superfluous. In the same: 'My face has sought out,' for which in the Greek is set: 'My face has sought you.' But the former is better. On the twenty-seventh: 'Hear the voice of my supplication,' for which you said you found: 'Hear, Lord.' But this too was added. On the twenty-eighth: 'and in his temple everyone shall tell his glory,' for which in the Greek is: pas tis. But if we should wish to translate it word for word as 'everyone who,' we fall into an affectation of translation, and the rendering becomes absurd. In the same: