Translations of the Psalms in Old Polish Biblical-Apocryphal Narrative Texts: The Beginnings of Vernacular Religious Language

Translation

The authors of the Old Polish apocrypha came up with various different translations of their sources, including Scripture. Their methods included both formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence, and often also paraphrase or summary. The authors used the Latin text freely, adapting it to their subject, combining it with others, removing redundant or inconvenient passages, or adding others. In this process, they took care to ensure that the text was consistent. Interestingly, fragments of psalms are almost always translated accurately, word for word, with due accounting for Latin word order, as shown below.

Neque iniquitas mea, neque peccatum meum, Domine. (Ps 58.5[59.5])

Neither is it my iniquity, nor my sin, O LORD.

A dobrześ tu rzekł, Piłacie, prawdę, iże na nim nietu winy, bo tem poćwirdzasz słowo Boże przez Dawida proroka rzeczono w personie Bożej: “Ani zgłoba moja, ani grzech moj, Gospodnie.” (RP 788/9–14)

And you have spoken the truth well, Pilate, that there is no guilt in him, for you thus confirm the word of GOD said by David the prophet in the name of GOD, “Neither is it my iniquity, nor my sin, O LORD.”

As the authors of the introduction to the volume Vehicles of Transmission, Translation, and Transformation in Medieval Textual Culture noted,

Translation is never an innocent act. Because languages, as the semiologist Umberto Eco has noticed, are “reciprocally incommensurable,” translation is always, on some level, implicated in processes of interpretation, appropriation, or re-creation, even when a translator positions himself as a fidus interpres. (Wisnovsky et al. 2011, 16)

Given the usual variety of translation strategies used by medieval Polish authors (Rojszczak-Robińska 2020), the way in which the book of Psalms was translated is puzzling. This might be due to the fact that psalms were used in monastery schools for teaching Latin (hence, translations had to be formal by necessity), and also that psalms—because they are in the daily breviary prayers—were known by heart. Frans van Liere has pointed out that “medieval authors quoted the Bible more often from hearing than from a written source, suggesting that medieval Christians, especially monks, had a large memory store of Scripture that resulted from the hours they spent each week reading it aloud” (van Liere 2014, 208). This is confirmed by an observation made by Alain de Libéra, that “the textuality of the Middle Ages is hence, if I may use this term, oral textuality, whereas a medieval text combines speech and writing; for a modern reader, determining the ratio of ingredients in this mixture is sometimes impossible and almost always highly difficult” (Libéra 1988, 332). George Brown noted that in the oldest psalters, English glossing was done word for word, not necessarily in accordance with the proper word order in English:

A glance at this Old English reveals immediately that the glossator has supplied the Old English word in its correct flexion but not in its correct English word-order. Later psalters and other texts remedy this problem by a system of syntactic glosses and other “paving” marks. … The early glossator, however, at least built a major heuristic bridge by providing a vernacular translation for nearly every word of the psalter. (Brown 1999, 10)

Van Liere wrote that the reading of psalms (even in lieu of the gospel) has its origins in the apocryphal texts (van Liere 2014, 211). This particular approach of apocryphal authors is visible in the language, in the accuracy of translation, regardless of its source text, even with the Gospels, which were used in a multitude of ways, as shown below:

Odpowiedziawszy miły Jesus i rzekł: “Nigdyście nie cztli w Piśmiech: ‘Kamień, ktory odrzucili murując, ten sie przygodził w głowę <węgielną>. Od Boga sie to stało a jest dziwno przed naszyma oczyma’?” (RP 411/2–8)

In response, good Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: ‘The stone which the builders rejected; the same has become the chief cornerstone. This was the LORD’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?”

dicit illis Iesus numquam legistis in scripturis lapidem quem reprobaverunt aedificantes hic factus est in caput anguli a Domino factum est istud et est mirabile in oculis nostris. (Matt 21.42; see Ps 117.22-23[118.22-23])

Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: ‘The stone which the builders rejected; the same has become the chief cornerstone. This was the LORD’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?”

And similarly with other apocrypha, such as LL:

A przeto rzekł Dawid o niem: “Nadobniejszy w postawie nad syny ludzskie.” (LL 303r/10–11)

For David said about him, “a form beautiful above the sons of men.”

speciosus forma prae filiis hominum (Ps 44.3[45.3])

a form beautiful above the sons of men

ut merito secundum prophetam diceretur: “speciosus forma prae filiis hominum.” (EpLent)

so that, according to the prophet, it was rightly said: “a handsome form above the sons of men.”

or LSM:

gustate et videte quoniam suavis est Dominus. (Ps 33.9[34.9])

O taste, and see that the Lord is sweet.

A z tego kwiata, to jest z Maryjej dziewice, wynidzie na świat owoc on nasłodszy, Syn Boży i zbawiciel wszystkiego świata, o ktorym pisano jest: “Ukuście a patrzcie, bo słodki jest Pan.” (ŻSA 4r/1–5)

And from that flower, that is, from the virgin Mary, the sweetest fruit will be born into the world, the Son of GOD and the savior of the whole world about whom it was written, “O taste, and see that the LORD is sweet.”

Ex flore vero virgine Maria fructus ille suavissimus in lucem prodibit, dei filius et salvator totius humani generis. De quo scriptum est: “Gustate et videte, quam suavis est dominus.” (LSM cap. I).

No differences based on the source were observed in the translation of fragments of psalms. Likewise, no differences were observed among individual apocrypha in their approach to the translation of psalms, despite the fact that such differences are noticeable when it comes to other sources. The translation is literal, which is possibly due to yet another fact, namely that psalms have a specific rhythm and were also known from church songs. The Old Polish apocrypha come from a time when such church songs were already being used. Psalms were also chanted during the liturgy:

These Bible readings were alternated with the reading (or rather singing) of psalms. . . . The singing of psalms as a liturgical custom was introduced by Pope Celestine in the fifth century. . . . Psalm verses were also the basis of many of the other liturgical chants that were sung during the rest of the liturgy. (van Liere 2014, 211)

Nonetheless, this does not mean—as one could assume—that some no-longer extant psalter in Polish was used. Polish texts vary. For instance:

Jesus autem dixit eis: Utique; nunquam legistis: Quia ex ore infantium, et lactentium perfecisti laudem. (Matt 21.16)

And Jesus said to them, “Have you not read, ‘Out of the mouth of babies and sucklings you have perfected praise’?”

Ex ore infantium et lactentium perfecisti laudem propter inimicos tuos. (Ps 8.3)

Out of the mouth of babies and sucklings you have perfected praise because of your enemies.

A miły Jesus im odpowiedział rzekąc: “Zaprawdę, tedyście nie czli w Piśmie, iż ‘z ust dziatek młodych i nieumiejących mowić skonasz chwałę prze twoje nieprzyjaciele’?” (RP 450/22–451/5)

And the good Jesus replied to them, saying, “Yes. Have you not read in the Scriptures, ‘Out of the mouth of babies and those unable to speak you have perfected praise because of your enemies’?”

A miły Jesus im odpowiedział rzekąc: “Azaście nie czcili w Piśmie, iż ‘z ust dziatek młodych i nieumiejących mowić skonałeś chwałę prze twoje nieprzyjaciele’?” (ŻPJK 44v/26–28)

And the good Jesus replied to them, saying, “Have you not read in the Scriptures, ‘Out of the mouth of babies and those unable to speak you have perfected praise because of your enemies’?”

Ale Pan Jesus rzekł: “Izaście nie słychali nigdy albo nie czcili w Piśmiech: ‘I z ust młodzieńcow i używających piersi skonał jeś chwałę’?” (SCh 14r/7–10)

But the Lord Jesus said, “Have you never heard or read in the Scripture, ‘And out of the mouth of the young men and sucklings you have perfected praise’?”

Pan Jezus jem rzekł: “Azaście nie czli w Piśmie psa<lm>, gdzie prorok mowi: ‘Z ust dziecinnych będzi<e> objawiona chwała Boża’?” (RD 10/19–22)

The Lord Jesus said to them, “Have you not read in the psalm in which the prophet says, ‘Out of a child’s mouth the praise of GOD shall be revealed’?”

A few things can be noticed: First, these translations differ from those preserved in the medieval psalters:

Z ust dziecskich i ssących swirzchował jeś chwałę prze nieprzyjaci<e>le twoje. (PsFl)

Out of the mouth of babies and sucklings you have perfected praise through your enemies.

Z ust niewinych i ssących zwirzchowałeś chwałę prze nieprzyjaciele twoje. (PsPuł)

Out of the mouth of innocents and sucklings you have perfected praise through your enemies.

Second, these translations vary from one to another, and are independent of one another. The Latin phrase ex ore infantium was translated in two texts as “z ust dziatek młodych i nieumiejących mowić” (out of the mouth of babies and those unable to speak; RP, ŻPJK), in one text as “z ust młodzieńcow” (out of the mouth of the young men; SCh), and in one text as “z ust dziecinnych” (out of a child’s mouth; RD). This was translated from Latin, not copied from some Polish text that was not preserved. This might be the reason why multiple renderings were used. For instance, the Latin word infans has two meanings, namely “a child,” and also “lacking the power of speech.” ¹⁰ The authors of RP and ŻPJK conveyed both these meanings, yet omitted the other element (lactentium), which appeared only in SCh: For et lactentium it has “i używających piersi” (and of sucklings).

Likewise, the verb and the object were translated in different ways. The Latin perfecisti laudem is the second-person singular active perfect. The form in RP is deformed—the copyist wrote “skonach”; here, the publisher can implement two possible emendations: “skona<łe>ś” (past tense) or “skonasz” (future tense). The authors of ŻPJK and SCh used the past tense with the perfective aspect: The pluperfect in SCh (“skonał jest chwałę”) and the form with l-participle and the ending for the second person in ŻPJK (“skonałeś chwałę”). The author of RD chose yet another solution, namely an impersonal, passive form (“będzie objawiona chwała Boża”). There is no agent; in this way, the result of the activity is emphasized.

Third, two authors (of RD and SCh) translated in a way that is faithful to the Gospel of Matthew, whereas two others expand the citation from the book of Psalms by adding a translation of the Latin phrase propter inimicos tuos: “prze twoje nieprzyjaciele.” There are more examples of this type of addition, consisting in completing a partial citation of a verse from a psalm cited by the evangelist. George Brown noted that it was required that a full text be memorized. When travelling, a monk was ordered to take with him wax tablets with the text of psalms and to learn them by heart at every stop (Brown 1999). Interestingly, we find the greatest number of such additions in RP, demonstrating a strong familiarity with the entire text; the author of this text proves himself to have the highest theological awareness. Regardless of whether the direct source was the Gospel or not, it can be seen that the author was able to cite the Psalter from memory. For example, when the author of RP quotes Saint Augustine, in which the citation from the book of Psalms is found, he adds,

Sed ista dicebant, de quibus per prophetam iam ipse praedixerat: Retribuebant mihi mala pro bonis. (Augustine, In Evangelium Johannis tractatus 114)

But they said those things, which he had already foretold through the prophet: They repaid me evil for good.

Retribuebant mihi mala pro bono, sterilitatem animae meae. (Ps 34.12[35.12])

They repaid me evil for good: the barrenness of my soul.

Ale to mowili oni, o ktorychże tako pisano (mowi) w żołtarzu: “Wracali mi złe za dobre, sturzenie duszy mojej.” (RP 771/10–12)

But that was spoken by those about whom it was written (said) in the Psalter, “They repaid me evil for good: the barrenness of my soul.”

This approach is atypical of this author, as he usually translated the writings of Saint Augustine conveying everything, including errors made by the church father (Rojszczak-Robińska 2016, 164–71). Here, he added to the citation, creating a word that is preserved only in this Polish text (hapax legomenon). The Old Polish term sturzenie is equivalent to sterilitatem in Latin.

The fact that psalms were translated from Latin is evidenced also by errors arising from the choice of incorrect meanings of Latin words, for instance:

A tedy popełniło sie jest ono proroctwo mowiące: “Przekopali są ręce moje i nogi moje i liczyli kości moje.” (SCh 104r/9–12)

And then, the prophecy that said, “They dug my hands and my feet and counted my bones” was fulfilled.

Foderunt manus meas et pedes meos, dinumeraverunt omnia ossa mea. (Ps 21.17-18[22.17-18])

They pierced my hands and my feet and counted my bones.

The fundamental meaning of the Latin word fodio, fodere is kopać, skopać, ryć (to dig, to spade, to root) or wykopywać, utworzyć coś przez kopanie (to excavate, to form something by digging), but also przebijać, przeszywać (to pierce through, to lance), especially in texts from the turn of the sixteenth century, as evidenced by the entry in the “eLexicon of the Polish Medieval Latin” (2014). The Polish author chose the wrong meaning. ¹¹ This situation is very common. It is also noticeable that errors are individual, characteristic of a given writer. And so, for instance, the author of RP would often mistake salvo (zbawić [to save]) for salveo (uzdrowić [to heal]), and so did the author of RD:

Salvum me fac, Deus, quoniam intraverunt aquae usque ad animam meam. (Ps 68.2[69.2])

Save me, O GOD, for the waters have come in even unto my soul.

A tu mienią, iże miły Krystus siedząc w tej ciemnicy i piał ten psalm: “Salv<u>m me fac, Deus”—“Uzdrowi mię, Gospodnie, iże przyszły wody aż do dusze mojej.” (RP 733/1–6)

And here they recall, that sitting in the cell, the good Christ was singing the psalm, “Salvum me fac, Deus”—“Save me, O GOD, for the waters have come in even unto my soul.”

I mowił ten psalm Jezus w tej to piwnicy: “Uzdrowi mie, Boże, abowiem weszły smrody do dusze mojej.” Bociem tam była sprośna i śmierdząca woda, przed ktorą sie dusza i serce jego zdrygało. (RD 112/16–20)

And Jesus said this psalm in this very cell, “Save me, GOD, for odors have come in unto my soul.” For there was repulsive and rancid water that made his soul and heart tremble.

I mowią mistrzewie Świętego Pisma, iż wtenczas mowił Pan Jesus ten psalm: “Zbawionego mie uczyń, Boże, bo wesz[e]ły są wody aż ku duszy mojej,” o ktorymże Dawid mowi. A przeto Pan Jesukryst mo<w>ił: “Wybaw mie z w<o>dy,” toczu ze smętku, alboż przeto mowił, bo w tej ciemnicy była woda. (SCh 63v/5–12)

And the masters of the holy Scripture say that at that time, the Lord Jesus was saying the psalm that David said, “Make me safe, GOD, for waters have come in unto my soul.” And Lord Jesus said, “Save me from water,” meaning from grief, or because there was water there in the darkness.

Mowią tu niektorzy nabożni, iże miły Krystus, będąc w onej piwnicy aż do dnia w wielkim udręczeniu piał, płacząc gorzko, ten psalm: “Salvum me fac, Deus”—“Zbaw i uzdrow mie, Boże moj, boć przyszły wody aże do dusze mojej.” Bo zmęczywszy ji, w kadź, w zimną wodę go wrzucili. (ŻPJK 75v/33–37)

Some of the pious say that the good Christ, whilst in that cell, sang this psalm until morning in great anguish, weeping bitterly, “Salvum me fac, Deus”—“Make me safe and healed, my GOD, for waters have come in unto my soul.” For after having exhausted him, they tossed him into cold water in a barrel.

The Latin phrase salvum me fac literally means zbawionym mnie uczyń (make me safe). For the Polish language, the word order is atypical. This literal approach was adopted in the translation devised by the author of SCh (“Zbawionego mie uczyń, Boże”). The two writers conveyed it as “Uzdrowi mię, Gospodnie” and “Uzdrowi mie, Boże.” This error might be a result of the close proximity of these two words: salvo—salveo, salvare—salvere, and, perhaps, the associations with the Latin word salus—zdrowie (health). In the medieval manuscript, v and u are multifunctional graphemes. The error may also be due to another reason, for I have noticed that this error is common in the scene of the entry into Jerusalem. In the past, I explained it as follows:

In his translation of the Gospel of Nicodemus, the author of RP combined two sentences from the original text by considering one of these sentences an explanation of the other (“Osanna synu Dawidowu, jakoby rzekł: Zdrow bądź”). He deemed the word Hosanna a greeting, though in actuality, it is a cry for salvation. This (mis)translation did not bother him, as he understood it based on the context in which it appeared in the Bible and during the mass (Sanctus), without taking into account its literal meaning. His familiarity with it is evidenced by the explanation he put into the priests’ mouths only two pages further on, namely, “Osanna, przez ktore sie słowo tako wiele rozumie, jakoby rzekł: O Gospodnie, zbaw mię albo zdrow bądź a slutuj sie nad nami rychlej i zbaw nas naszego zamęta” (RP 754/1–5). (Rojszczak-Robińska 2012, 231–32)

In this context, the choice made by the author of ŻPJK is extremely intriguing, as he decided to convey both these meanings: “Zbaw i uzdrow mie Boże moj, boć przyszły wody aże do dusze mojej” (Make me safe and healed, my GOD, for waters have come in unto my soul).

In the examples cited from ŻPJK and RP, one can see yet another characteristic thing: Known by heart, psalms were called up in the opening verse:

Hugh [of St. Victor] suggested the art [of memory] would be useful for memorizing the texts of the Psalms. With the Psalms memorized so that the number of a Psalm calls up the opening verse, which “leads” to the remaining verses of the Psalm “stored” in the memory, there is no need to page through a book to find the Psalm text. (Zinn 1999, xi)

In the apocrypha in Polish, there are few excerpts in Latin (with occasional calques, borrowed incomprehensible proper names, rarely entire phrases). Among these few, the opening lines of psalms can be found:

Ale Jezusa przybito ku krzyżu jego. I mowił tu Pan Jezus psalm “In te, Domine, speravi.” (RD 198/24–25)

But Jesus was nailed to his cross. And here, Lord Jesus recited the psalm, “In te, Domine, speravi.”

Alain de Libéra made a similar observation, claiming that

W wersji pisanej, pod tym względem chyba wiernie oddającej przebieg lektury ustnej, takie przytoczenia rzadko bywają kompletne, najczęściej zaś również one są jedynie sygnalizowane jako lemmy, zwłaszcza gdy chodzi o wypowiedzenia biblijne (enonces bibliques), a mianowicie Psalmy, z racji swej roli w liturgii zawsze żywe w pamięci słuchaczy. (Libéra 1988, 334)

In the written version, which seems to convey faithfully the course of oral readings in this regard, such citations are seldom complete; most often, they are also only signaled as lemmas, especially when it comes to biblical utterances (enonces bibliques), namely, the Psalms, ever-present in the memory of the audience due to their role in the liturgy.

This shows how natural the application of this signaling is. Old Polish authors also happen to specify the range of the psalms recited:

a zatem wźwiąwszy i poczęła czyść ten psalm: “Błogosławiłeś, Gospodnie, ziemię twoję,” aże do tego wirsza: “Co będzie Bog moj mowić.” (RP 48/23–49/1)

and so she began reading this psalm, “LORD, thou hast blessed thy land” until the line, “I will hear what the Lord GOD will speak in me.”

The familiarity with the entire text is apparent: The first line Benedixisti, Domine, terram tuam (LORD, thou hast blessed thy land; Ps 84.1[85.2]) calls up the entire text, with the author easily specifying how big the discussed excerpt was by indicating line 9 of 14: Audiam, quid loquatur in me Domine Deus (I will hear what the Lord GOD will speak in me; Ps 84.9[85.9]). This situation occurs several times elsewhere.

The examples cited above are atypical for yet another reason. In the Old Polish apocrypha, citations taken from psalms are relatively seldom expanded with an additional commentary. It is rather that these citations serve as a commentary for other sources—explaining, indicating former portents, serving as testimonies of a prophecy that is being fulfilled, or evidencing the divine nature of Jesus. In passages where such commentaries appear, differences between the consciousness and education of individual writers reveal themselves. In the passage where Ps 68[69] was quoted, the author of RP did not add anything. The author of ŻPJK attempted to justify the citation of this psalm by reference to the situation (Jesus was thrown into the water). This is also the case with SCh. Here, we have a commentary on two levels: The author explains that water is a metaphor for grief (“wybaw mie z wody, toczu ze smętku”). In Old Polish apocrypha, the coordinating conjunction toczu is used extremely frequently for introducing such metatextual explanations that clarify the meaning of words or the spiritual and allegorical sense of a text. ¹² Menochio commented on that verse also by referring to Jesus: “To bowiem co i dalej następuje, przez allegoryą tonącego w falach i obcej pomocy wzywającego, stawi nam przed oczy niezmierne boleści Chrystusowe” (For that which comes next, by means of the allegory of a man drowning in waves and calling for someone’s help, brings the insurmountable grief of Christ before our eyes). ¹³ The other explanation, which states that Jesus spoke the words of the psalm because there was water in the cell, is mundane. ¹⁴ Here, as can be seen, the author of SCh did not use any commentaries to the Scripture and took the entire passage literally. Interestingly, in RD, the author modified only the quote. The Latin aquae (wody, plural for woda “water”) was replaced with the word smrody (plural for smrod “unpleasant odor”). “In practice, transmitted texts underwent a variety of transformations—some intentional, others unintentional—during each of the acts of textual motion and change listed above” (Wisnovsky et al. 2011, 10). The indicated modification seems to be deliberate. In Polish, the shift from wody to smrody is based on sound combination. Knowing the entire text of the Bible, the reader could fill in the quote correctly. However, the author of RD continues to specify, “Bociem tam była sprośna i śmierdząca woda, przed ktorą sie dusza i serce jego zdrygało.” Of all the Old Polish authors of apocrypha, the author of RD applies the most verbatim approach, whereas the author of RP is most theologically aware. In the case of psalms, this awareness reveals itself in the lack of added comments. The passage discussed above confirms this observation.