Latin Psalter with interlinear translation
  • mikaelofMary
    Posts: 2
    Hello,

    I have question I wanted to know if you could shed any light on.

    I would like to find or create a Latin vulgate or new vulgate psalter with an interlinear english translation.
    By Psalter I mean psalms 1-150 in that order. It also needs to have the marked accents, asterisks, and little crosses.


    I have searched quite a bit but can't find anything quite like this.


    Are you aware of any book or text file like this? Or a program that I could you used to produce it? (Though I'm not super-techy.) Or is it best just to do it by hand?

    Thank you very much

    Jesus we trust in You
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,157
    This looks close to your idea:
    https://www.amazon.com/Psalter-Latin-English-Interlinear-Texts/dp/0956511848
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • mikaelofMary
    Posts: 2
    Thanks. That is very close, but it doesn't have the asterisks, accents, or little crosses
  • JonathanKKJonathanKK
    Posts: 542
    Of the different Latin versions of the psalms, the one proper to use with Gregorian chant is what is called the "Gallican psalter". It is what is used in the "Vatican Edition" of the chant books which Pius X's commission edited for use by the whole church.

    The "Vatican Edition" Antiphonale Romanum (1912, and subsequent years), however, only has around 100 or so of the psalms; the rest of the psalms would have been included in the book that was never published for Matins.

    If an edition with flex + and mediant * marked for all 150 psalms in a manner consistent with the AR exists, I have not seen it.

    ..........................................................................................................................................

    A breviary will have all 150 psalms, but with only the mediants * marked.

    However, the mediants * marked in the breviary do not have a predictable relationiship (at least, not an easily discernable one, as far as I can tell) to those in the Antiphonale Romanum.

    This is because when the antiphonale will have:

    Sample text A, + sample text B, * sample text C.


    The breviary may have:

    Example 1.
    Sample text A, * sample text B, sample text C.


    or:

    Example 2.
    Sample text A, sample text B, * sample text C.


    I found a useful insight on with-flex versus without-flex editions in a Psalmi in notis book here. It says that in verses such as the "Example 1." above, the Roman (e.g. Breviary-ish) way is to make a pause in the middle of the long second half of the verse. But sometimes in the Breviary the first half is the long half, in the manner of "Example 2". Look up e.g. Psalm 23.

    ..........................................................................................................................................

    A thing I have wondered is, what were the criteria used for making these divisions in editions that use both the + and * markings? Was there an historical source followed, or was it grammatical divisions in the verses, or number of syllables?

    [This could make an interesting, and potentially tedious study.]

    Another issue with the psalms is punctuation, which is not always the same from edition to edition. This is nuisance in that it is only the Breviaries that have all 150 psalms, but AR is still the book that ought to be followed for chant.

    And by the way, we do know for sure that as far as "Vatican Edition"-type chant books go, the 150 psalms are not all covered, because in the 1958 document De musica sacra there is a list of all the official editions put out so far, and the list of these is only: the Graduale Romanum (everything for the Mass), the Antiphonale Romanum (all the day hours of the Office), and then the complete (including Matins) Offices of the Dead, Holy Week, and Christmas.

    These Matins editions do supply some additional psalms not found in AR (however, I think they also provide examples of psalms found in AR divided in a manner contrary to AR, which I think is because of having taken them from the Breviary - but I have not surveyed these editions systematically).

    Then, the Solesmes editions of the 1890's also use the flex in a similar way.

    Also, the Antiphonale Monasticum 1934 is another book which uses the flex.

    It would be interesting to gather the data available from these edition listed above, which I would regard as being part of the same tradition as AR (which is not the case with, e.g. Dominican books, which use the flex), and see what information could be deduced.

    However, at the moment I have come up with satisfactory results for my own purposes (Matins for the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary), and have not done anything with these problems recently; hopefully I will be able to finish my project without being troubled much by them again.

    ..........................................................................................................................................

    Be that as it may, this is definitely a topic I find interesting, and I agree heartily with you that a collection of all 150 psalms, marked with + and * would be a great thing to have.

    Who knows? - the needed sources to make such a collection may yet exist, if only we could locate them.
Add a Comment