Dec 24, 2008

Translations of the Apocrypha

Mark Hoffman has posted on Bob Burns' compilation and comparison of different trnaslations of the Apocrypha. You can access Hoffman's post
here. You can access Burn's post here and a table here

The table as an XML spreadsheet:

As an MS Excel spreadsheet:

As an image file:

Concerning the table Burns offers the following explanatory notes:

The line items highlighted in blue represent the preferred available
text tradition for each book in the collection. For the 3 additions to
Daniel, for instance, the preferred text tradition is "Theodotion". In
this analysis, the Latin Vulgate (with the exception of 2 Esdras) is
never viewed as a preferred text tradition, because it is itself a
translation of the Greek; also it is known that Jerome, the translator
of the Vulgate, paraphrased and abridged a number of these books.

Esther poses the highest number of ways in which it has been handled by
translators. For instance, the translators of the KJV, EV and RSV did
not restore the portions from Greek Esther into the narrative sequence
of the book, so one is left with a jumble of incoherent chapters out of
their context.

Some translators DID reinsert the chapters, such as the NAB, NJB and the
NRSV-CE, but within the context of a translation of Esther from the

Few translators, such as NETS and NRSV, have translated all of Greek
Esther as a unit, thus giving us a better picture of what ancient
readers of Esther in Greek would have been reading.

Three compositions, 2 Esdras, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) and Psalm 151 have
been enlarged with previously lost portions. 2 Esdras had a portion of
chapter 7 recovered from versions of that book found outside of the
Vulgate. In the case of Psalm 151, its longer original form was
recovered from the Dead Sea Scroll caves. Sirach had portions recovered
from Hebrew fragments found in the Cairo Geniza.

No comments: