A reader writes:
A few quick questions:
1) Is the only difference between classical latin and ecclesiastical latin the pronunciation?
No. Ecclesiastical Latin also has vocabulary that classical Latin doesn’t (esp. biblical and theological terms). The grammar and syntax are also a little different. For example, ecclesiastical Latin has a tendency to use prepositions where classical Latin would rely on cases alone. This makes ecclesiastical Latin easier for English-speakers since we are used to using prepositions rather than cases.
2) I know there are at least three different versions of the Vulgate floating around currently . . . is there a particular version/edition you recommend? I checked out a version of the Vatican’s edition of the ‘Nova Vulgata’ and it has absolutely no footnotes, introductions, etc., so I’m looking for something a bit different . . .
I’m afraid that I don’t have a special recommendation, here. I tend to use the Neo-Vulgate because it’s available for free, in electronic form, on the Vatican’s web site. (HERE.) I’ve seen a nice edition of the Vulgate NT with the Greek NT on the facing page, but with my preference for electronic formats (makes it easier when I’m writing), I haven’t bothered getting one. (And, unfortunately, I don’t have the name of it, though Googling should turn it up.)
3) Similar question for the Septuagint . . . what edition should I pick up?
Same kind of answer as before. I don’t really have a recommendation. Almost any edition of the Septuagint will suffice for most purposes. Unless you’re doing someting of a scholarly nature, it really doesn’t matter which edition of the Vulgate or the Septuagint you use. Neither are original-language versions of the Bible, and if you’re just wanting them for language study or personal Bible study or for writing non-academic articles then any edition will work well.
Readers are welcome to share their favorite editions in the combox, though.
You can purchase a hard copy of the New Vulgate from:
http://www.paxbook.com
You can purchase a hard copy of the Clementine Vulgate (the one appearing in Tridentine missals) from the American Classical League:
http://www.aclclassics.org/tmrc/catalog.asp?parent=182&category=5&c=
You can view the Clementine Vulgate text online:
http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net
The Stuttgart Vulgate, which from my understanding is a critical reconstruction of the actual Vulgate text of Jerome (including lack of punctuation and classical spelling), is available from amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/3438053039/
When somebody posts the Vulgate on their web page (such as http://www.drbo.org/lvb/ ), they are usually using the Stuttgart one.
I own all three editions. I would recommend the New Vulgate hard copy from paxbook.com (Libreria Editrice Vaticana)
It not only contains the same text available on the Vatican’s web site, but it also contains footnotes which are not available on the web. These footnotes primarily serve two purposes. First, just like the RSV:CE, they make occasional notes about which manuscript they followed in particular cases. Second, they nearly always make note of where they diverge from the older Vulgate editions, usually based upon textual criticism. When they do diverge, they list the older rendering as well.
The only tough part about the New Vulgate is that it uses i for both consonant (j) and vowel (i), whereas older Catholic sources use j. Some of the spelling is odd, too.
The Clementine Vulgate is probably the easiest for a Latin student to read. I can’t recall whether it has footnotes, but it does have helpful chapter headings indicating what happens during that chapter. If you are into Gregorian Chant or reading your old missal, then definitely get the Clementine Vulgate as its text will match exactly.
I would avoid the most available one: the Stuttgart edition. Unless you’re doing scholarly work, the Stuttgart edition is simply difficult to read becuase it lacks puncutation. Without verse numbers, I’d be completely lost.
“I’ve seen a nice edition of the Vulgate NT with the Greek NT on the facing page”
That’d be the Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine. I have it, and though I wouldn’t give it to a beginner, it’s excellent for intermediate to advanced classicists. Relatively inexpensive, too.
I have all three, Sixto-Clemetine, Nova Vulgata, and the Stuttgart edition. I find the SC and NV to be the most useful. My SC has loads of footnotes, my NV has very few. My SC also has a vey nice topical index in back.
As to the Nova Vulgata on the Vatican’s website, I find it useful, but be advised it has quite a few typos. It seems that when they scanned it, the software did not properly take care of hyphenated words (i.e. words hyphenated to fit the line). All hyphens appear as blanks. Thus we see in Mark:
4:1 Et iterum coepit docere ad **ma re**. Et congregatur ad eum **tur ba** plurima, ita ut in navem ascendens sederet in mari, et omnis turba circa mare super terram erant.
One has to wonder how many days the posters of the NV will spend in Purgatory for corrupting Scripture! 🙂
I’m no expert, but if you’re studying the fathers of the church and need to refer to a vulgate, the neo-vulgate won’t help. iirc it’s a fresh translation from hebrew and greek sources. The clementine vulgate software at vulsearch (mentioned above) comes with the douay-rheims translation (challoner’s revision, I’d imagine).
Cheers –
bw
I’d steer clear of the Stuttgart Vulgate if you are a beginner. It uses non-standard spelling, which makes looking unfamiliar words up in a dictionary painful, or even impossible. It’s a shame, really. It could have been a great edition of the Vulgate.
Mr. Akin,
I clicked on the link for access to what you referred to as the ‘Neo-Vulgate’ on the Vatican Website.
Thinking this was somehow another authorized version of the Nova Vulgata promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1978 – of which I work with my hard copy, I clicked on the link —
only to find that it is just a link to the ‘Nova Vulgata’, the Latin Typica Edition of Rome, the official Biblical Text of the Latin Church.
I’m not meaning to knit-pick with you. Most any seruiys Latin student or scholar will come to the same conclusion I did above if you leave this the way it is.
Suggestion: Either call it the ‘Nova Vulgata’, or, its Latin equivalent – the ‘New Vulgate’.
That way you will instantly communicate an easily identifiable meaning to the reader. Just a suggestion. To call the ‘Nova Vulgata’ the ‘Neo-Vulgate’ might lead some to believe you are not as familiar as one might hope you are with Latin.
All my love in Christ
Desmond Birch