K. Meyer (ed.), Anecdota Oxoniensia, Med. & Mod. Ser. 8 (1894) — translated into modern British English from Meyer’s revised text of Rawlinson B. 512 (with Harleian 5280 collated). The source also prints Meyer’s corrigenda, an appendix, a short glossary, the diplomatic Rawlinson text, and the Harleian variants; the treatise proper is translated here with its own line-numbering.

Editorial Matter (condensed) #

Meyer prints first a wish of corrigenda to the earlier printing (p. 26 “essrlidiud”; p. 28 “emaigthe fil”; p. 30 “co n-dire”; p. 32 “dothcegar”); notes on the use of do-aitnim ‘I shine’ in the metaphorical sense ‘I please’, and on mórad cecha firinne; a comparison with the Félire’s citation of Isidore and Cassiodorus on beatus. An appendix identifies the first story in Rawl. B. 512 as the conclusion of Gein Branduib mic Aeda ocus Aedain mic Gabráin; further corrections concern slúag, féne, and mennata. A brief glossary discusses airm ‘place’ (neuter -man stem), rétae ‘who run’, screptra (borrowed from Latin scriptura), tiagaim (form dolágat in LU 65b), and Dulid Dauid.

The diplomatic Rawlinson text and the Harleian 5280 variant readings that follow are the manuscript evidence for the revised text translated below; Meyer notes the cases where H’s readings are plainly superior and have been adopted silently (e.g. laus not lus, croite not croiti, brunedach not bruinnide, coic not cethri, remsuidigthir for remodigud, and the like).

The Treatise #

The title that stands at the head of this book brightens the minds of those who read it. Its name in Hebrew is Sepher Tehallim, that is, “volume of hymns” — as it is called Liber Psalmorum, because psalmus is interpreted “praise” or “hymn”.

§6. Question: What is the name of this book in Hebrew, in Greek, in Latin? Not hard. Nabla in Hebrew, Psalterium in Greek, Laudatorium or Organum in Latin.

§9. Question: From where was this name given to it? Not hard. From the harp by which David sang the psalms — nabla its name in Hebrew, psalterium in Greek, laudatorium or organum in Latin; for organum is the generic name of every instrument of music. Nabla, however, is not the generic name of every harp — cithara is the generic name of every harp. Cithara means “pectoral”, that is, “chested”, because it is played against the chest.

§19. The nabla then is a ten-stringed harp — it rests upon ten strings, played by ten fingers, and the ten commandments are fulfilled in it. Its belly is below, and it is played from above; the music is made thereby downwards. From there it is compared to this book, which rests upon the ten strings of the Old Testament law, played by the Spirit of the most high mysteries — by the noble mysteries of the Holy Spirit.

§29. Psalterium in the Greek is the name that has been set upon this book. Five cognate names are reckoned: psalmus, psalterium, psalmista, psalmodium, psallo.

§33. Question: From where came this naming? Not hard. It is what Isidore says: the Greek letter psi at the beginning is a name for music. Psalmus is “playing” from it; psalterium is the instrument that is played; psalmista the name of the man who plays; psalmodium the name of the music played; psallo the verb of the man who plays.

§41. Question: How many names are in the Psalter, singular or plural? It is what some commentators have reckoned — that there are five books in the Psalter, as Hilary says: “The Psalter of David is divided into five books, where fiat fiat marks the end.” David’s Psalter is divided into five books, so that every place where fiat fiat stands is the end of a book. But this is what Jerome says: as every place where amen amen stands in the Gospel is not the end of a book, so every place where fiat fiat stands in the psalms is not the end of a book.

§53. This is likewise what they used to find in the Acts of the Apostles and of the disciples and in their examples — when they gave an example from the canon, the Psalter was one book to them, as Peter says: “It is written in the Book of Psalms.” Nor that only: wherever the twenty-two books of the Old Testament are numbered, they reckoned the Psalter to them as one book.

§61. Question: To which of the divisions of the canon do the psalms belong? There are three divisions in the Old Testament canon: Torah, Prophecy, and Hagiographa. The Torah, as the five books of Moses comprise — Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Eight books of the Prophets: the book of Joshua son of Nun, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Twelve — prophecy as the four greater prophets and the twelve lesser comprise them. The Hagiographa, the “holy writings”, as the book of Job and the three books of Solomon — Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Sirisirim, that is, the Song of Songs. And we reckon the psalms with the holy writings.

§76. Question: To which of the forms of the canon do the psalms belong? There are four forms in the Old Testament canon: history, prophecy, the proverbial form, and simple doctrine. Now prophecy is the form to which the psalms belong. And how so, when we reckoned them with the holy writings? It is not incongruous to call them prophecy, since they prophesied of Christ and of the New Testament; nor is it incongruous to call them holy writings, for there is nothing in the Old Testament canon that is not holy.

§88. By the three customary marks — place, time, and person — everything is examined, and by them this book is examined. The place is Judea, the land of the children of Israel; and it is shown to no particular city, because it is general instruction to all the peoples of the world, and it was not fitting that the divine, spiritual word should be confined and written in one place — “the spiritual word should not be comprehended and written in one place”.

§99. The time is the time of David, and it is he who wrote it. For there are three periods reckoned in the Old Testament canon: the period of kings, the period of judges, and the period of priests. In the period of kings it was written — the period of David.

§103. The persons, however, are many, as Isidore says: “The psalms of David, though they are comprised in one volume, we have heard ten men sang.” Though David’s psalms are confined to one book, we have heard that ten men composed them: Moses, David, Solomon, Asaph, Idithun, Heman, Assar, Abisar, the sons of Korah, Haggai, Zechariah.

§110. Question: How many psalms did each of them compose? Not hard. Moses two psalms — Exurgat and Domine refugium. David a hundred and thirteen. Solomon two — Deus iudicium and Nisi Dominus. Asaph twelve, from Quam bonus Israel — but Voce in concert with Idithun, and Deus deorum in the fiftieth first. Idithun two — Dixi custodiam and Nonne Deo in concert with Asaph. Heman Domine Deus salutis in concert with the sons of Korah and Voce. Ethan one — Misericordias. The sons of Korah, that is, Assar and Abisar — twelve psalms from Quemadmodum to Deus deorum, and four in the middle fifties in concert with Heman: Quam dilecta, Benedixisti, Fundamenta, Domine Deus salutis. Haggai and Zechariah the eight psalms before Benedictus and Lauda.

§126. Since it was ten men who composed the psalms, why is their authorship ascribed to David alone? Because when Scripture is read to establish the law of its examples from the psalms, their authorship is ascribed to David alone.

That is no wonder, by the familiar figure of part and whole — totum pro parte et pars pro toto.

§134. Nevertheless it is certain that David alone composed the psalms, but some of them are ascribed to the aforementioned persons by correspondence of their sense and meaning with them — as Hilary says: “It is not obscure in our faith that David alone sang all the psalms; but for the correspondence of their subjects, some psalms are ascribed to other persons.” Cassiodorus: “It is certain David is the author of all the psalms, though by correspondence of subjects some psalms are assigned to other persons.” Gregory: “We cannot affirm one person in the psalms, because of the commentators’ disagreement.” For some say David only.

§148. There is something on which their rule depends, and it is not outside, but in the middle of the Psalter itself — in the title which says: “The praises of David are ended; here begins a psalm of Asaph.” What that says is that the psalm is Asaph’s, and other psalms besides. That is no wonder: it is in Asaph that the Holy Spirit conceived the thought and prayer of the psalm, and David put melody and harmony to it — for he was a prophet, a poet, and full of the Holy Spirit’s grace.

§158. It is on four grounds the psalms are ascribed to other persons: correspondence of meaning, customary use in song, correspondence of deeds, and the mystery of names. It is clear and certain that David alone composed the psalms, and it is he who arranged the lore of the Old Testament. David appointed four chiefs for the singing of the psalms at the head of the choirs — Asaph, Heman, Idithun, Ethan, and others with them besides. What each one used to lead upon his choir became appropriated to him, and its naming. That is why the psalms are ascribed to the aforementioned persons, though David alone composed them. Yet it is true literally that the psalm is Asaph’s and that David composed it: the Holy Spirit wrought in Asaph’s mind the music and the meaning in the psalm, and David gave harmony to it.

§175. Question: Is it in prose or in metre that the psalms were composed? In metre — metrical composition. But Jerome says: there are five psalms of special metres — Noli, Confitebor, Beatus vir before Benedictus, Benedictus itself, and Exaltabo. Then each has a Hebrew alphabet set beside it, for it is in metre they were composed in Hebrew — and not in one metre only: “All the psalms among the Hebrews are known to be composed in metrical verse; some psalms run in iambic metre, others in hexameter feet.”

§186. Question: In metre or in prose were the psalms composed? There is no doubt — with Jerome — that it is in metre, metrical composition, as the Song of Solomon and the Lamentation of the book of Jeremiah were composed in metre. There are, however, five special psalms in the Psalter on which the Hebrew alphabet stands — Noli, Confitebor, Beatus vir before Benedictus, Benedictus, and Exaltabo te Deus meus — to show that they were composed in metre. And they say it is the elegiac metre, that is, the metre of elegy or composition.

§196. Question: What order is in the psalms — the order of narration, the order of expectation, or the order of singing? It is neither of these, but the order of mystery and correspondence. For the fiftieth psalm, Miserere mei Deus, was sung earlier than the third, Domine quid — it is fitting that the psalm should be in the third place after the resurrection on the third day. It is fitting also that the psalm of repentance should be in the fiftieth place, because it was at fifty that men under the law were loosed from guilt.

§207. Question: How were the psalms at first? Not hard. In pieces and disorder down to the Babylonian captivity, so that the canon — like all else — fell into slavery in the Temple, until the wondrous chief who came out of the captivity, Ezra, came. It was he whom the Holy Spirit inspired to restore it through his wisdom; and it is he who gathered it into one book and wrote and ordered a title for each psalm.

§216. Two things there are, and manifold is this book: the outward form of one book, and many psalms within it — like a city that one wall surrounds on the outside and many mansions are within. In such wise the Psalter was composed: the outward form of one book and many psalms within, like a wondrous mansion with many chambers, with variegated furniture, with special keys for opening each one of them. There is, then, a special key for each psalm — its title.

§229. Question: Are the titles part of the psalms? If they are, why are they not recited with them? If they are not, why are they written with them? Some say the titles are part of the psalms — and that is why they are not recited, because there is no prayer in them. That, however, is no good answer, for the titles are not part of the psalms. For it is David alone who composed the psalms and the psalm-singing in them; the titles, however, Ezra composed — or perhaps other commentators besides.

§240. There is a reason the titles are written in red: it was in red that the psalms were all written at first, before black was found; after black was found, the psalms were written in black and the titles in red — as they remain with the psalms.

§245. There are five things by which the science and the book of the psalms is marked. Two are outside and not written: the argument and the division. Three are written within: titulus, diapsalma, and sinpsalma.

§250. Question: What is an argument? Not hard. “The finding of a sharp mind”, a “clever device of the mind”, or “sharp finding”, or “wit-device” — a verbal arguo, that is, “I show”. An argumentum is then a “showing”, a demonstration.

§255. Question: What is the use of the argument’s designation? Not hard. To declare the sense that is taught in the compendium of words — as Isidore says: “Arguments are what show the causes of things; from the brevity of the words they have a long sense.”

§261. Question: What is the use of the designation “division”? Not hard. To unfold the sense that is taught or set forth.

§264. Question: What difference is there between the argument and the title? Not hard. The function of the argument is to declare the sense that is taught, as we have said; the title is for explaining the occasion and the cause for which the psalm was sung.

§269. Question: From where is titulus? Not hard. Titius is “a brand”, and titulus comes from it; and Titan is “the sun”, and titulus from it.

§272. There are four generic titles among the psalms, besides the special ones: psalmus, canticum, psalmus cantici, canticum psalmi.

§275. Question: How are they to be distinguished, and what difference is there between them? Not hard. It is what David did at last: he chose four thousand chosen men of the children of Israel for singing and the use of the psalms always without any hindrance — a third for the choir, a third for the harp, a third for both choir and harp. So psalmus is what is done and practised on the harp; canticum is what is practised in choir and sung to the harp; psalmus cantici is what is brought from harp to choir; canticum psalmi is what is brought from choir to harp.

§288. The special titles will be told of them before in their proper places.

§290. Diapsalma and sinpsalma — what is the difference between them? If you take Jerome’s sense, diapsalma first always signifies that the near things are alternate, sinpsalma for the instruction of praise. But this is what Augustine says: “diapsalma is an interval of psalming or in psalming; sinpsalma a joining of voices” — a joining of the voice.

§297. Question: How are these things arrived at? Not hard. A Greek neuter noun psalma, psalmatis, is taken — “iunctio” is what it is interpreted. The Greek preposition dia is prefixed, with the sense of separation, to make diapsalma — and “disiunctio” is what is interpreted: the separating of the sense and the meaning and the person and the form in the psalm. So diapsalma is placed for the separating of what had been joined in the former reading. Or the same Greek preposition sin is prefixed — “con” is what it is interpreted — to make sinpsalma, and “coniunctio” is interpreted. So sinpsalma is placed for the joining of what had been separated in the former reading.

§312. There are four things most noteworthy in the psalms: the first history, the second history, allegory, and the moral sense. The first history concerns David and Solomon and the aforementioned persons, Saul, Absalom, and the other persecutors. The second history concerns Hezekiah, the people, and the Maccabees. Allegory concerns Christ, the earthly and the heavenly Church. The moral sense concerns every saint.

§320. Question: Of what does the prophecy of the psalms prophesy? Not hard. Of the birth of Christ, His baptism, His passion, His resurrection, His expectation, and His sitting at the right hand of God the Father in heaven; of the calling of the Gentiles into faith; of the casting of Judah into unbelief; of the magnifying of every righteousness; of the ending of every tribulation; of the curse of sinners; of the coming of Christ to judge the living and the dead.

§329. Question: Which translation do the psalms follow? There are five translations upon them: the translation of the Seventy, of Symmachus, of Theodotion, of Aquila, and of Jerome. The translation of the Seventy indeed is what is upon the psalms, and it is that which was altered by Jerome. A translation from Hebrew into Greek, into Latin. And Jerome marked it with obelus and asterisk: whatever the Seventy added that was not in the Hebrew original, Jerome set an obelus (†) upon it — the obelus is a “slaying rod”, a smiting wand. But whatever the Seventy omitted that was in the Hebrew original of Jerome, Jerome set an asterisk upon it — the asterisk is interpreted “radiant star”, as Orion is to the poets.

§343. Here begins the first psalm.

Question: Which of the psalms was sung first? It is what some commentators say, that it was Te decet; others say it was Benedictus. There is something truer than both: Pusillus eram and another were sung first.

§349. Question: Why is this psalm set before all the psalms? Not hard. Because beatitude and praise are multiplied in it. For it is through mercy that righteousness and belief are severed. It is evident to us — the Centurion’s fulfilment: it was the deeds of his mercy that brought him into righteousness and belief. Since, then, it is through mercy and righteousness that one comes into belief, it is fitting that the psalm in which deed and beatitude and praise are multiplied should stand at the head of the psalms.

§360. Question: What is the argument of this psalm? Not hard. “In this psalm all peoples are generally exhorted; it incites them to the pursuit of virtues and likewise teaches them what reward follows the good, what punishment the evil.”

§365. Question: Why has this psalm no title? Not hard. “Therefore the first psalm has no title because it is the title of all the psalms.” “The first psalm,” says Bede, “has no title, because it ought not to be set before our Head, the Lord Saviour, of whom it speaks absolutely.” For though the psalms speak of Him, no psalm speaks so of His earthly life as this psalm does: “For although other psalms say much of Him, none speaks thus of His conversation which was on earth. This psalm is set as the head of the whole work, and to it all that is to be said refers.”

§379. Some of the commentators’ schools say that in this psalm alone are contained the three things contained in all the psalms: vox definitionis, the “voice of definition”; vox consolationis, the “voice of consolation”; vox increpationis, the “voice of rebuke”. “The first psalm is the title of all the psalms because in it are contained the three voices of all the psalms: the voice of definition, the voice of consolation, the voice of rebuke.” The vox definitionis is from Beatus vir down to die ac nocte; the vox consolationis from die ac nocte down to prosperabuntur; the vox increpationis from prosperabuntur to the end. Twelve verses in all.

§394. Question: Why has this psalm no opening word? Not hard. Like the rest of the holy canon: as the book of Isaiah has none — “of Isaiah the son of Amos”; as the book of Matthew has none — “the book of the generation”; as the book of Mark has none — “the beginning of the Gospel”; and the Apocalypse of John, and the book of the Apostles — “Paul the apostle” — and the rest. For the same reason this psalm has no opening word — Beatus vir — as Isidore says: “It is the manner of holy Scripture to avoid preambles of words…” For the meaning must be dug out by reading as it sounds.

§405. Gregory gave another sense of it in his words; Jerome gave another sense: “The spiritual word, though human…” — “It is not right for us that there should be any superfluity of holy Scripture: at no time did the author set a word outside his mouth but there was a word answering it upon his mind” — as it is said: “That word which he brought forth without, he joins to the word that lay hid within.”

§415. Question: What is the name of this book? Not hard. Others say its name is The Psalms of David or The Five Books of the Psalms — as though every place containing fiat fiat were the end of a book. That indeed is in the psalms, but it is not right; its true name is Liber Psalmorum.

§420. Question: What is the force of the word beatus? The force Isidore gives it: “beatus, as it were bene auctus — well-increased, namely having what he wills and not suffering what he wills not.” Beatus is, as it were, “well-increased”, because he possesses all he desires. “For he is truly blessed who has all he wills of good and wills nothing evil — of these two things a man is made blessed.” This is the truly happy man, or the just man, who desires all these particular beatitudes and desires not the evils. In this way every man is to be made happy.

§434. Seregius also reckoned another sense, namely “beatus as it were vivatus” — beatus as “enlived”, “because he enjoys eternal life”, since the people of this transitory age are spoken of. A compound name is taken for the fourth kind of joy, bes and vita put together — beo the verb, a second compounding upon a first compounding. Beatus is the seventh-derived form; it is an adjective derived from the first derivation, and is compared through its three grades.

§446. Cassiodorus also reckoned another sense: “beatus as it were bene aptus” — “well-fitted”, as it were well-prepared for going.

§449. Ambrose also reckoned “beatus as it were bene felix”; and either may stand with the other: beatus is “well-increased”, is “enlived” in this present world — vir.

§453. Question: Why did he not say homo? Not hard. Wherever homo stands in Scripture it is written of the lowliness of man’s frailty, for it is from humus that he was named. Vir, however, is from the strength of the soul in tribulations; it was so named even for his fourfold endurance.

§459. The first history of the psalms is applied to the time of David, the second to Jesus son of Sirach — he who left none of them in the time of persecution, though he left each one happy.

§463. He is happy indeed, the man “who went not” so as to be “in the counsel” — for abeo is a verb of going to a place, and it is on this the commentators ground another sense: “he who went not” is he who did not walk — for even the righteous go into the counsel of the sinners or of the ungodly, and abide not therein.

§470. Abeo is, then, the word that belongs to the man who goes a journey and comes from it, and thinks of what was said to him, and comes back to it again. Ab eo — “from him” — is departure…

[Here the printed text ends mid-gloss; the remainder was not captured.]