MAP — Modular Aggregation of Principles for Bible Translation

Extracted text from Hasbrouck_bu_0017E_10963_spanish_bibles_motives.pdf:

Boston University OpenBU

http://open.bu.edu

Theses & Dissertations

Boston University Theses & Dissertations

2015

Enzinas to Valera: motives, methods and sources in sixteenth-century Spanish Bible translation https://hdl.handle.net/2144/15178 Boston University

BOSTON UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

Dissertation

ENZINAS TO VALERA: MOTIVES, METHODS AND SOURCES IN SIXTEENTH-CENTURY SPANISH BIBLE TRANSLATION

PETER W. HASBROUCK B.A., Moody Bible Institute, 1992 M.A., Wheaton College, 1998

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2015

Approved by

First Reader

Christopher Boyd Brown, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Church History

Second Reader

Rady Roldán-Figueroa, Th.D. Assistant Professor of the History of Christianity

DEDICATION

to my wife and children, Caryn, David, Julia, John and Emily.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the individuals who have facilitated and encouraged the completion of this dissertation. My advisor, Dr. Christopher Brown, provided encouragement and valuable assistance in developing the concept of this work. Kara Jackman, who helped me access the historical Bibles of School of Theology Library. Drs. Dana Robert, and Inus Daneel who encouraged me along in my studies at Boston University. Dr. Rady Roldán-Figueroa my fellow BU graduate student who became my second reader and gave detailed and helpful suggestions to improve my work. And finally my wife, Caryn, who did the final editing to make my work sound better, and my goddaughter Emily who helped check footnote and bibliographic references. Without each of these individuals this work would not have been completed.

ENZINAS TO VALERA: MOTIVES, METHODS AND SOURCES IN SIXTEENTH-CENTURY SPANISH BIBLE TRANSLATION

PETER W. HASBROUCK Boston University Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, 2015 Major Professor: Christopher B. Brown, Associate Professor of Church History

ABSTRACT This dissertation contributes to the understanding of sixteenth-century vernacular Bible translation by means of a comparative analysis of seven editions of the Old and New Testaments in Spanish: the New Testament of Francisco de Enzinas (1543), the Old Testament in two editions by Abraham Usque and Yom Tob Atias (1553), the New Testament of Juan Pérez de Pineda (1556), the complete Bible of Casiodoro de Reina (1569), the New Testament of Cipriano de Valera (1596) and Valera’s revision of Reina’s Bible (1602). These Spanish Bibles reflect both general trends in sixteenth-century scholarship and translation and the specific circumstances of Spanish Evangelicals and their communities in exile. In their prefaces, the motives and methods of the Spaniards for producing Bible translations are similar to those of Luther, Calvin, or Coverdale, yet there is a unique Spanish pride evident as well. The translations themselves provide examples both of a deliberately wooden, non-literary approach as well as a literary, premodern critical approach to translation. The Spaniards also negotiated questions of

political and religious authority in their prefaces, though philological concerns are also important, especially for Reina and Valera. A close examination of the Spanish texts clearly shows a direct line of descent from Enzinas to Pérez and on to Reina and Valera, with each borrowing substantially from the previous translation. The Complutensian Polyglot (1520) and Erasmus’ Novum Instrumentum (1516) as well as the traditional Vulgate influenced the Spanish translators, though not to the exclusion of their own independent judgment and their use of other vernacular translations such as the French of Pierre Olivétan (1535). These earlier models of scholarship influenced the first translations of Enzinas, Usque-Atias, and Pérez, but after the middle of the sixteenth century Reina and Valera became increasingly reliant on the Genevan biblical scholarship pioneered by Theodore Beza. Despite the context in which Reina worked, distinctly Lutheran renderings left virtually no mark on the Spanish Bible tradition. As the confessional boundaries of Protestant factions hardened, so did the theological orientation of the Spanish Bibles. The irenic humanism of Enzinas gave way to the Calvinism reflected in Cipriano de Valera’s translation.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION ................................................................................................................. iiv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. v ABSTRACT

.................................................................................................................. vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................. x CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2. LATE MEDIEVAL BIBLE INTERPRETATION AND TRANSLATION ........................................................................... 24 CHAPTER 3. THE SIXTEENTH-CENTURY WORLD OF VERNACULAR BIBLE TRANSLATION ........................................................................ 44 CHAPTER 4. USING THE BIBLE TO PERSUADE ................................................... 72 CHAPTER 5. MOTIVES AND METHODS OF THE SPANISH BIBLE TRANSLATORS: ENZINAS, USQUE-ATIAS AND PEREZ .............. 94 Francisco de Enzinas (c.1520-1552) ............................................................................. 97 Ferrara Bible: Yom Tob Atías and Abraham Usque .................................................. 103 Juan Pérez (c.1500-1567)............................................................................................ 113 CHAPTER 6. MOTIVES AND METHODS OF THE SPANISH BIBLE TRANSLATORS: REINA AND VALERA ......................................... 126 Casiodoro de Reina (1520-1594) ................................................................................ 128

viii

Cipriano de Valera (c.1530-c.1603)............................................................................ 147 Comparison to Other Prefaces .................................................................................... 160 CHAPTER 7. RESEARCHING THE FAMILY TREE: SELECTED OLD TESTAMENT PASSAGES .................................................................. 172 Translations for comparison ....................................................................................... 173 Passages for analysis ................................................................................................... 175 Jorge González’s Reconstruction of Valera’s Method ............................................... 176 Comparative textual analysis ...................................................................................... 179 Analysis of Hebrew Masoretic Text and Vulgate Variants ........................................ 200 CHAPTER 8. RESEARCHING THE FAMILY TREE: SELECTED NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES .................................................................. 218 Choice of Passages for Analysis ................................................................................. 221 Choice of Translations for Comparison ...................................................................... 222 Comparative textual analysis ...................................................................................... 226 Two Passages at Odds ................................................................................................. 257 Conclusions in New Tesatment Translation ............................................................... 262 CHAPTER 9. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................... 270 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 276 CURRICULUM VITAE ................................................................................................. 300

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ASD

Desiderius Erasmus, Opera omnia Desiderii Erasmi Roterodami recognita et adnotatione critica instrvcta notisqve illvstrata ordinis (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1969-2013)

Edward Boehmer, Bibliotheca Wiffeniana. Spanish Reformers of Two Centuries from 1520, 3 vols. (Strassburg: K. Trubner, 1874, 1883 and 1904; reprinted 1962)

CPB

Arnaldo Guillén de Brocar, and Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros, Vetus testamentu[m] multiplici lingua nu[n]c primo impressum. Et imprimis Pentateuchus Hebraico Greco atq[ue] Chaldaico idiomate. Adiu[n]cta vnicuiq[ue] sua latina interpretatione, 6 vols. (Academia Complutensi: Arnaldi Guillelmi de Brocario, 1514-1517)

Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami, ed. P.S. Allen et al., 12 vols. (Oxford, 1906-1958)

Fernández

Enrique Fernández y Fernaádez, Las Biblias castellanas del exilio: historia de las Biblias castellanas del siglo XVI (Miami: Caribe, 1976)

IBF

Iacob M Hassán, ed., Introducción a la Biblia de Ferrara : actas del Simposio Internacional sobre la Biblia de Ferrara, Sevilla, 25 - 28 de noviembre de 1991 (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1994)

Kinder

A. Gordon Kinder, Casiodoro De Reina: Spanish Reformer of the Sixteenth Century (1532? – 1602?) (London: Tamesis Books Limited, 1975)

KJV

The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised: by his Maiesties speciall Commandment (London: Robert Barker, 1611. Reprint, Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 1982)

M. Pelayo

Marcelino Menéndez Pelayo, Historia de los Heterodoxos Españoles, 2 vols. (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1967)

LXX

Septuagint

Masoretic Text x

SCJ

Sixteenth Century Journal

Sefarad

Journal of Sefardic Studies

Stockwell

Bowman Foster Stockwell, Prefacios a las Biblias castellanas del siglo XVI, 2nd ed. (Buenos Aires: Aurora, 1951)

Vg.

Vulgate

Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. (Weimar: Böhlau, 1883–2002)

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION It is difficult to imagine the time books were first being mass-produced and the influence they had in a changing society. A growing body of scholarship deals with the role of a specific book, the Bible, amid the religious changes of early modern Europe. Jaroslav Pelikan goes as far as to say that “the Reformation of the sixteenth century – whether Protestant, Roman Catholic, or Radical – is unthinkable apart from the Bible; and the Bible – at any rate as we know it in the realms of Western literature, culture, and faith – is almost equally unthinkable apart from the Reformation.”1 Recent research on sixteenth-century vernacular translations of the Bible has explored questions such as the complexity of the reformers’ appeals to sola scriptura, the dissemination of the Bible through printing and the book trade, the popular reception of the Bible, and commonalties and divergences in approaches to translation and interpretation across confessional boundaries.2 However, very little of this research is directed at the Spanish vernacular Bibles of the early modern era. The purpose of this dissertation is to contribute to the understanding of sixteenthcentury vernacular Bible translation by means of a comparative analysis of seven editions

Jaroslav Pelikan, The Reformation of the Bible: The Bible of the Reformation (New Haven: Yale UP, 1996), 1. 2

Recent collections of essays and conference papers on the early modern Bible include the following: Richard Griffiths, ed. The Bible in the Renaissance (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001), 45-70; Orlaith O'Sullivan and Ellen N. Herron, eds. The Bible as Book: The Reformation (New Castle, Del.: Oak Knoll Press, 2000); Bertram Eugene Schwartzbach, ed. La Bible imprimée dans l’Europe modern (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1999); David C. Steinmetz, ed. The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, Duke Monographs in Medieval and Renaissance Studies II (Durham, N.C.: Duke UP, 1990); and Irene Backus and Francis Higman, eds. Théorie et practique de l’exégèse: actes du troièsme Colloque international sur l’histoire de l’exégèse biblique au XVIe siècle, Genève, 31 aout-2 septembre 1988 (Geneva: Droz, 1990).

2 of the Old and New Testaments in Spanish. In particular, it will explore the relationships between the various Spanish versions of the Bible, and provide an assessment of their unique place in the broader European context of Bible translation. Fernández y Fernández observed in 1976 that these Bibles had not been studied exclusively, and the relationships between them and the medieval texts, or the other versions of the same period, had not been clearly established.3 Since the Protestant Reformation did not succeed in Spain, these Bibles were not reprinted multiple times,4 nor were they widely disseminated as were other vernacular Bibles. Neither have they been studied extensively as is the case with the Bibles of Luther or Tyndale. Spain was arguably the greatest political power in Europe in the sixteenthcentury, so it is notable that relatively little study has been made of the efforts at Protestant reform there, or of the Spanish Bibles produced by those who adopted Protestant views. This neglected aspect of Reformation studies provides a unique opportunity to engage contemporary scholarship in early modern religion and society along several trajectories. First, it will provide the opportunity to better understand the motives and issues related to vernacular Bible translation as identified by the Spanish translators. Evaluation of their perspectives in comparison with other contemporary translators will help broaden understanding of the value of the vernacular Bible in Protestant thought.

3 Enrique Fernández y Fernández, Las Biblias castellanas del exilio: historia de las Biblias castellanas del siglo XVI (Miami: Caribe, 1976), 144. 4

They were not reprinted during the sixteenth century, but during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries Reina’s Bible, as revised by Valera was widely reprinted in Spain and Latin America.

3 Second, this dissertation will provide the most comprehensive and detailed examination to date of the sources of the early modern Spanish Bibles and the relationship among the several translations. This will enhance understanding of the ways in which texts were appropriated through translation, and through borrowing from contemporaries. Third, it will provide a unique window into the interplay of confessional concerns in the middle part of the Reformation period. Since the Spanish Bibles were produced by a group of exiles, they occupy a distinct place in the history of vernacular Bible translation and publication in early modern Europe. To the extent that theological positions may be discovered from these Bibles, this dissertation will illuminate the role of vernacular Bibles in the establishment of confessional identity. The following pages will introduce these issues and some of the relevant literature. Modern scholars disagree over the importance of the printed page in bringing about reform.5 Febvre and Martin are not so bold as Pelikan to attribute the Reformation to the Bible, or even to books in general. They argue that books served to reinforce existing ideas, and that developments among the urban laity along with changes in

A number of scholars have explored the world of Renaissance and early modern printing in recent years. Notable works include: Lucien Febvre and Henri-Jean Martin, The Coming of the Book: The Impact of Printing 1450-1800, trans. David Gerard (London: Verso, 1984.); Henri-Jean Martin, The History and Power of Writing, trans. Lydia G. Cochrane (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994); Elisabeth Eisenstein, The Printing Press as Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe, 2 vols. (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979); and Andrew Pettegree, The Book in the Renaissance (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2010).

4 society in general, would have brought about the Reformation.6 Elisabeth Eisenstein, by contrast argues that the press was a powerful agent of change.7 While the role of printing as a cause or by-product of early modern religious change remains controversial,8 scholars agree that printed materials played a large role in the Protestant movement, and no single book played a larger role than the Bible. The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries also saw a tremendous increase in the study of the original languages of the Bible, as demonstrated by the increase of professors of Greek and Hebrew in the universities. During the twelfth through fourteenth centuries the study of biblical languages was carried out largely within the monasteries. In 1397 Manuel Chrysolorus was brought to Florence to teach Greek, and by the mid-fifteenth century more scholars were interested in this field.9 Also during this time, extensive efforts to correct the Latin text based on the Hebrew and Greek were carried out by Nicholas of Lyra, Lorenzo Valla, Erasmus of Rotterdam, and the Complutensian Polyglot editors.10

Lucien Febvre, and Henri-Jean Martin, The Coming of the Book: The Impact of Printing 14501800, trans. David Gerard (Paris: Albin Michel, 1958; London: Verso, 1984.), 288. All references are to the 1984 English edition. 7 Elizabeth Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformation in Early Modern Europe, 2 vols. (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 7-8. 8

See Febvre and Martin, The Coming of the Book, 10-11, 288; Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change; and the critique of Eisenstein in Adrian Johns, The Nature of the Book: Print and Knowledge in the Making (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998); also Sabrina Alcorn Baron et al., eds., Agent of Change: Print Culture after Eisenstein (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2007). 9 Jerry H. Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ: New Testament Scholarship in the Renaissance (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), 15-16. 10

Bentley examines the legacy of Valla, the Complutensian scholars, and Erasmus. Deanna Klepper’s study of Nicholas of Lyra provides an examination of his biblical Hebrew scholarship and his

5 Even before the Reformation the press had begun to serve humanist interest in the biblical text and its Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. Scholars could now produce editions of the biblical texts in the original languages along with Latin and even vernacular translations. Erasmus excelled at utilizing the press for biblical scholarship and popularized the work of earlier scholars such as Valla.11 His conveniently sized Greek New Testament12 was the first to enter the new market for original language texts, edging out the unwieldy multivolume Complutensian Polyglot Bible.13 Luther, however, most successfully used the press in support of vernacular Bible translation, from the “September Testament” of 1522 to his publication of a complete German Bible in 1534 (which he continued to revise until his death).14 Though Luther drew on humanist biblical scholarship, as well as on medieval and patristic resources, the

use of Jewish tradition in interpretation. Deeana Klepper, The Insight of Unbelievers: Nicholas of Lyra and Christian Reading of Jewish Text in the Later Middle Ages (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007). 11 Regarding Erasmus, see Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ; Erika Rummel, Erasmus' Annotations on the New Testament: from Philologist to Theologian (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1986); and Lisa Jardine, Erasmus, Man of Letters: The Construction of Charisma in Print (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1993). In addition to Erasmus’ well known work other pre-reformation projects of Humanist biblical scholarship included the Psalterium Quintuplex, gallicum, romanum, hebraicum, vetus, conciliatum by Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples (Paris, 1509) and the Complutensian Polyglot released in 1520. Arnaldo Guillén de Brocar, and Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros. Vetus testamentu[m] multiplici lingua nu[n]c primo impressum. Et imprimis Pentateuchus Hebraico Greco atq[ue] Chaldaico idiomate. Adiu[n]cta vnicuiq[ue] sua latina interpretatione, 6 vols. (Academia Complutensi: Arnaldi Guillelmi de Brocario, 1514-1517). 12

Desiderius Erasmus. Novum Instrumentu omne, diligenter ad Erasmo Roterodamo recognitum et emendatum. Basel: Johann Froben, 1516. 13

See especially Mark U. Edwards Jr., Printing, Propaganda, and Martin Luther (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994).

6 Reformation brought new concerns to the forefront. In 1518 Erasmus argued that students of scripture needed not only expertise in biblical languages, but also an understanding of the Bible on its own terms, its language, structure, idioms, its authors and their times.15 By the mid-sixteenth century, just as the Spanish Bibles began to appear, the scholarly environment for Bible translation began to change. Bentley argues that in the 1530s the work of textual studies passed from the Humanists to the theologians and “polemical exegetes.”16 He asserts that the best philological work was done before the Reformation, and seeks to show that the Reformation actually created a “new and not always healthy environment for philological studies on the New Testament.”17 Other scholars would contend that while theology certainly was of greater interest to the reformers than the humanists, philology and matters of good texts and translations was of no less concern.18 In his book Luther Translator of Paul: Studies in Romans and Galatians, Heinz Bluhm analyses Luther’s work by comparing his translations of passages in Romans and Galatians with those of the Vulgate, Lefèvre d’Étaples, Erasmus and Valla’s Adnotationes. He notes that comparison is often made to earlier translations into the

Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ, 180.

Ibid., 212.

Ibid., 13.

Orlaith O’Sullivan, “The Bible Translations of George Joye,” in The Bible as Book: The Reformation, ed. Orlaith O’Sullivan (London: The British Library and Oak Knoll Press, 2000), 28-29; and William S. Campbell, “Martin Luther and Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” in The Bible as Book: The Reformation. ed. Orlaith O’Sullivan (London: The British Library, 2000), 107. Burnett’s study of Johannes Buxtorf shows that by the late sixteenth-century Protestant theology students were expected to study Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. This counters the argument that philology had given way to polemics. Stephen G. Burnett, From Christian Hebraism to Jewish Studies: Johannes Buxtorf (1564-1629) and Hebrew Learning in the Seventeenth Century, Studies in the History of Chirstian Thought, vol. 68 (New York: Brill, 1996), 169. 18

7 German language, but finds this inadequate since these translators were not working from the Greek. He therefore argues that comparison should be made to the Latin translations because these were from the Greek as was Luther’s New Testament.19 Bluhm’s study serves as an example of the text critical methodology known as stemmatology20 as applied to early modern Bible translation. In a similar way this dissertation will explore the Spanish translations to discover their source texts, giving consideration to the possible use of medieval resources such as the Glossa ordinaria and the annotations of Nicholas of Lyra and Hugh of St. Cher.21 As Orlaith O’Sullivan argues in her preface to The Bible as Book: The Reformation, the reformers often cited from the Vulgate rather than humanist sources. Did this bias extend to their translation work? She suggests that “we

Heinz Bluhm, Luther Translator of Paul: Studies in Romans and Galatians (New York: Peter Lang, 1984) 9. See also Jean-Claude Margolin, “The Epistle to the Romans (Chapter 11) According to the Versions of Valla, Colet, Lefèvre, and Erasmus,” in The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, ed. David C. Steinmetz, 136-66. Duke Monographs in Medieval and Renaissance Studies II (Durham, N.C.: Duke UP, 1990), 165. 20

As a method of textual analysis, stemmatology makes comparison between variants in different editions of the same text in an effort to isolate the source from which the text was originally copied or translated and to trace its transmission. See Pieter van Reenen, Margot van Mulken, and Janet Dyk, eds., Studies in Stemmatology (Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1996) and Pieter van Reenen, Margot van Mulken, and August den Hollander, eds., Studies in Stemmatology II (Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2004). 21

An incunabular edition of the Glossa ordinaria (and glossa interlinearis) is reproduced in Biblia Latina cum Glossa Ordinaria: Facsimile Reprint of the Editio Princeps Adolph Rusch of Strassburg 1480/81, ed. Karlfried Froehlich and Margaret T. Gibson (Turnhout: Brepols, 1992). The Patrologia Latina (PL 113:67-1316 and 114:9-752) reproduces the marginal glosses. J.-P. Migne and A.-G. Hamman, Patrologiae cursus completus (Paris: Garnier Frères, 1958). On the history of the Glossa, see Beryl Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Oxford: Blackwell, 1952; reprint, Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1964), pp. 46-66. Nicholas of Lyra, Postilla super totam Bibliam, 4 vols. (Strassburg, 1492; reprint, Frankfurt am Main: Minerva, 1971). On Lyra, see Klepper, The Insight of Unbelievers. See also Hugh of St. Cher [Hugo de Sancto Caro or Hugo Cardinalis], Postillae in vetus et novum testamentum (Basel, 1498-1502). Both Lyra and Hugh are available in digitalized form through the Münchener Digitalisierungszentrum (http://www.digitale-sammlungen.de).

8 need broader perspectives, coupled with greater attention to detail” in order to better understand the role of the Bible in the Reformation.22 It is clear that the Protestant reformers quickly became advocates of translating the Bible into vernacular languages. Once the breach had been made with Rome, Luther set about the task of translating the Bible into German. A French New Testament, commonly attributed to Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples, appeared in 1523 and the Old Testament in 1528.23 In England the followers of Wycliffe had begun efforts to put the Bible into English in the fourteenth century, and the task was taken up in the sixteenth century even before Henry’s conflict with Rome.24 These versions were not intended only for scholarly or public reading in the churches. The size of many Bibles was quite small, so as to allow the books to be carried about and even hidden.25 Small books also provided a better return on investment for the printers.26

O’Sullivan and Herron, eds. The Bible as Book, 4-6.

Bettye Thomas Chambers, Bibliography of French Bibles. Fifteenth- and Sixteenth-Century French Language Editions of the Scriptures (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1983), 43-44 and 61-2. The four volumes of Lefèvre’s Old Testament were published between 1528 and 1532. The Wycliffite translations date from the c. 1382. See Henry Hargreaves, “The Wycliffite Versions” in The Cambridge History of the Bible: Volume 2 The West from the Fathers to the Reformation, ed. G. W. H. Lampe, 387- 414. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969) 392-3. The Tyndale New Testament was first published in 1526, with the Pentateuch following in 1530. The best summary history of the Bible in Europe is S.L. Greenslade, ed., The Cambridge History of the Bible: The West from the Reformation to the Present Day (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963). 24

The small size was all the better for smuggling the Bibles across borders, and keeping them from the eyes of unfriendly authorities. Tyndale’s New Testament was an octavo edition measuring about four by six inches. The three Spanish New Testaments published in the sixteenth century were also small, measuring no more than four by six inches. 26

Andrew Pettegree, The Reformation and the Culture of Persuasion (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2005), 153.

9 During the early decades of the Reformation, Lutherans and Calvinists developed two distinct approaches to Bible formats and reading. The Lutherans made the Bible available, but did not advocate private reading as strongly as the Calvinists, depending instead on the catechism for instruction in the faith. The Calvinists, meanwhile, strongly encouraged personal reading and created virtual study Bibles with marginal notes, chapter and book headings, and charts. The concern of Calvinists and Lutherans alike was to avoid misinterpretation.27 Catholic authorities made clear their disapproval of the trend toward vernacular Bibles. From country to country, responses ranged from bans and book burnings to producing vernacular devotional material as alternatives to the Bible. Censorship was nothing new in late medieval Europe. Grundmann observes that from the beginning of the thirteenth century synods in France, Germany and Spain issued bans and limitations on reading the Bible in the vernacular. A synod in Toulouse forbade the use of scripture by the laity in any language, while a council at Rheims forbade any translations into French.28 However, the ready availability of inexpensive books doomed efforts at restricting reading. As Maag says, the growth of censorship legislation indicates “it could be difficult to get the reading public to confine itself to approved texts only.”29

O'Sullivan and Herron, eds., The Bible as Book, 3 and Francis Higman, “’Without Great Effort, and With Pleasure’: Sixteenth-Century Genevan Bibles and Reading Practices,” in The Bible as Book: The Reformation, ed. Orlaith O’Sullivan (London: The British Library and Oak Knoll Press, 2000), 115. 27

28 Herbert Grundmann, Religious Movements in the Middle Ages, trans. S. Rowan (Notre Dame University Press, 1995), 191.

Karin Maag, “Education and the Works of Religious Instruction in French,” in The SixteenthCentury French Religious Book, ed. Philip Connor, Paul Nettles, and Andrew Pettegree (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001), 109. 29

10 Vernacular Bible reading was embraced in most of northern Europe. The situation in Spain, however, turned out differently. Late medieval Spain, like the rest of Europe, experienced significant change beginning in the fourteenth century. For seven hundred years the focus of the Christian monarchs of the Iberian Peninsula had been the reconquista of their land from the Moors. Mackay aregues that for many, their land occupied a unique place in Europe; it was the place of crusade, it was the New Jerusalem, the Holy Land.30 It was also unique for its mixed religious culture with Jews, Muslims and Christians occupying the same peninsula. Several events marked a new era in Spain. First, the marriage of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castille in 1469 united the two most powerful monarchs of the peninsula and led to the eventual unification of their kingdoms. The accession of Charles I in 1516 to the thrones of Castile, Aragon and León largely unified the Spanish kingdoms and was further enhanced by his election as Holy Roman Emperor in 1519. So the new Spain was thrust to the forefront of European politics. Second, the completion of the reconquista in 1492 brought an effective end to the Muslim political presence in the penisula. The third event, also in 1492, was the forced expulsion or conversion of Jews and Muslims31 which allowed the Christian rulers to forge a strong Catholic identity. Finally, the discovery of the New World brought wealth like Spain had never known. The sixteenth century was the golden age of Spain. 30 See Angus Mackay, “The Late Middle Ages,” in Spain: A History, ed. Raymond Carr (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 113-14. 31

These changes are described in Helen Rawlings, Church, Religion and Society in Early Modern Spain (New York: Palgrave, 2002), 2-26.

11 The Inquisition was founded in 1483 by Ferdinand and Isabella to deal with Jewish and Muslim converts, known as conversos or “new Christians,” who showed evidence of old religious practices. It was also confronted with theological questions championed by old Christians as well. The humanist philosophy and piety of Erasmus became popular in Spain at the beginning of the sixteenth century. By the late 1520s, his books, especially the Enchiridion, were being read by elites and merchants alike.32 But religious scholars raised doubts, and Erasmus’ reign of favor was soon brought to an end when his works were condemned at the Valladolid Conference of 1527.33 During the middle of the century the mystical spirituality of three great Spanish saints—Ignacio de Loyola (d. 1556), Juan de Avila34 (d. 1569), and Teresa de Avila (d. 1582) also attracted the attention of the Inquisition. These mystics,35 known as alumbrados because they sought enlightenment through long periods of contemplative prayer, were examined by the Inquisition, but were eventually exonerated. The concerns of the Inquisition over any unconventional religious practice or belief were exacerbated by the rise of the Protestant movement in Charles’ northern realms, which he did not wish to allow into Spain. Indeed, just after Charles retired to Yuste leaving his kingdoms to his son Philip II, the specter of Protestantism appeared in 32

Rawlings, Church, Religion and Society in Early Modern Spain, 29.

Lu Ann Homza, Religious Authority in the Spanish Renaissance (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), 49-54. See Rady Roldán-Figueroa, The Ascetic Spirituality of Juan De Ávila (1499-1569) (Leiden: Brill, 2010). 34

See E. Allison Peers, Studies of the Spanish Mystics, 2nd ed. 3 vols. (New York: Macmillan, 1951); and Melquiades Andrés Martín, Historia de la mística de la Edad de Oro en España y América (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1994).

12 Spain. In 1558 two conventicles36 of Protestants were discovered in Seville37 and Valladolid under the very nose of the Inquisitor General, Fernando de Valdes. The threat of Protestant influence in the halls of power was very real, but Charles encouraged Philip to root out the heresy, and root it out he did. The character and extent of a Protestant or Evangelical movement in Spain and the nature of the response to it remain matters of controversy. The dominant interpretations follow in the footsteps of Marcelino Menendez Pelayo, who attempted to refute the “black legend” view of the nineteenth century.38 Henry Kamen follows this line of thinking, arguing that the Inquisition was largely unconcerned with the Protestants, and there was little need for a reformation of the Protestant sort.39 Others such as David Coleman and A. Gordon Kinder argue that there was a movement of Protestant thought in Spain in spite of the harsh repression of the Inquisition. This view rejects the notion that Catholicism was any more vital, or reform less necessary, than in other countries.40 While

The term conventicle is used to refer to small groups of Protestants meeting covertly in Spain and elsewhere. See Pettegree, The Reformation and the Culture of Persuasion, 176; and Euan Cameron, “Italy,” in The Early Reformation in Europe, ed. Andrew Pettegree (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 204; and A. Gordon Kinder, “The Reformation in Spain: Stillbirth By-pass, or Excision?” Reformation and Renaissance Review: Journal of the Society for Reformation Studies (June 99, Issue 1): 114. 37 Kinder argues that the number of people involved in the movement around Seville was as high as 800, while Kamen puts the number at 120. See A. Gordon Kinder, “Spain,” in The Early Reformation in Europe, ed. Andrew Pettegree ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 227; and Henry Kamen, The Spanish Inquisition: An Historical Revision (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1997), 93. 38

Marcelino Menéndez Pelayo, Historia de los heterodoxos espñoles, 3 vols. (Madrid: Librería Católica de San José, 1880-82; reprint 2 vols. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1967.). References are to the reprint edition. (Hereafter M. Pelayo.) 39

Kamen, The Spanish Inquisition: An Historical Revision, 92.

David Coleman, “Spain,” in The Reformation World, ed. Andrew Pettegree (London: Routledge, 2000), 296-297. Kinder, “The Reformation in Spain: Stillbirth By-pass, or Excision?” 100-125. 40

13 the spread of Protestantism in Spain is not the subject of this dissertation, a greater understanding of the development of the Spanish Bibles will contribute to ongoing discussion regarding the impact of the Reformation in Spain. As in other countries, the printing press41 provided new opportunities for Bible production in Spain. Of the few medieval Spanish translations of the Bible, or portions thereof, none made the transition into print.42 The first Bible printed in Spain was the Valencian Bible in the Catalán language produced in 1478.43 However, prohibitions against Bible publication issued by Isabella and Ferdinand made vernacular translations in any language difficult to produce in the Iberian lands. The most notable Bible printed

See also Rady Roldán Figueroa, “Casiodoro de Reina as Biblical Exegete: Studies on the 1569 Spanish Translation of the Bible” (Th.D. Diss., Boston University, 2004), 79-100, for a social profile of the Protestant group of Seville. 41

Several works describe the rise of printing in Spain. See Conrad Häebler, The Early Printers of Spain and Portugal (London: Printed for the Bibliographical Society at the Chiswick Press, 1894); F. J. Norton, Printing in Spain, 1501-1520 (London: Cambridge University Press, 1966); and A Gordon Kinder, “Printing and Reformation Ideas in Spain,” in The Reformation and the Book, ed. Jean-Francois Gilmont, (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1998). Most recently the Spanish and Portuguese literature of the Iberian Peninsula, Mexico and Peru has been catalogued by Alexander S.Wilkinson in Iberian Books: Books Published in Spanish or Portuguese or on the Iberian Peninsula before 1601 (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010). 42

There were a number of Spanish Bible texts produced in the medieval period. The earliest translations are the so-called prealfonsine, or Biblia Romanceada, manuscripts held at the Museo Escorial that date from the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries. There are several manuscripts in the collection, of which I.i.6 and I.i.8 are the most significant. The Biblia Alfonsina was produced in 1280 at the order of King Alfonso X as part of the Grande e General Estoria, a five-volume history of the world. This is a translation of the complete Bible from the Vulgate in the form of paraphrase. See Alfonso X el Sabio, General estoria, ed.Pedro Sánchez-Prieto, (Madrid: Fundación José Antonio de Castro (Biblioteca Castro), 2009). The Biblia de Alba (1430) is a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew prepared by Rabbi Mosés Arragel de Guadalajara at the request of Grand Master of Calatrava, Don Luis de Guzman of Maqueda. The work was completed in 1430, but never made it past the Franciscan censors. It is available today as Biblia (Antiguo Testamento) traducida del hebreo al castellano por rabi Mose Arragel de Guadalfajara (1422-1433?) y publicada por el duque de Berwick y de Alba, 2 vols., (Madrid: Imprenta Artística, 1920). See Margherita Morreale de Castro, “Apuntes bibliográficos para la iniciación al studio de las Biblias medíevales en castellano,” Sefarad 20 (1960): 66-109. See Jordi Ventura, La Biblia Valenciana: recuperació de la història d’un incunable en català (Barcelona: Curial, 1993). 43

14 in Spain was the Complutensian Polyglot Bible (CPB) published in six volumes between 1514 and 1517. As it was not sanctioned by Pope Leo X until c. 1520,44 it did not circulate widely until well after Erasmus’ Greek New Testament appeared in 1516. The first Spanish language translation of the New Testament to appear in print was the work of Francisco de Enzinas, published in 1543 in Spanish controlled Antwerp.45 In 1553, Abraham Usque and Yom Tob Atías published a pair of editions of the Hebrew Bible, 46 intended for Jewish and Christian use respectively. 47 Because they were printed in Ferrara, they are known together as the Ferrara Bible. A second New Testament was published in 1556 by Juan Pérez in Geneva.48 The complete Bible in

44 See T. H. Darlow and H. F. Moule, Historical Catalogue of the Printed Portions of Holy Scripture in the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society, vol. 2 (London: The Bible House, 1911), no. 1412. 45

Francisco Enzinas, El Nuevo testamento de nuestro redemptor y Salvador Jesu Christo, tradizido de Griego en lengua castellana por Françisco de Enzinas, dedicado a la Cesarea Majestad (Antwerp: Stefan Mierdmann, 1543). Research on the sixteenth-century Spanish Bibles for this dissertation was done using the microfiche copies produced by Fritz Büsser and Christoph Weichert, Early printed Bibles: printed Bibles and Bible translations in the 15th and 16th centuries on microfiche (Leiden, Netherlands: Inter Documentation Co., 1988-1995). 46

The translation of the Hebrew Bible by Usque and Atías stands somewhat apart, since it is not the work of Spanish Evangelicals as are the others. However, there are good reasons for its inclusion. First, Casiodoro de Reina made use of the Ferrara Bible for his work on the Old Testament, so it is important to consider as a source text for the Protestant Bible. Secondly, because it was produced in two editions, one for Christian use and the other for Jewish readers, it provides a valuable source for evaluating confessional influences on translation. Finally, it provides a useful comparison point for possible variant readings in Old Testament passages. 47

For the purpose of distinguishing the two we must use the names and pseudonyms of the authors. Thus the Jewish edition is Abraham Usque and Yom Tob Atias. Biblia En lengua Española, traducida palabra por palabra dela verdad Hebrayca por muy excelentes letrados vista y examinada por el officio de la Inquisicion (Ferrara: Usque, 1553). The Christian edition is attributed to Jerónimo Vargas and Duarte Pinel, Biblia En lengua Española, traducida palabra por palabra dela verdad Hebrayca por muy excelentes letrados vista y examinada por el officio de la Inquisicion (Ferrara: Usque, 1553). 48

Juan Perez, El Testamento Nuevo de Nvestro Señor y Salvador Iesu Christo. Nueva y fielmente traduzido del original Griego en romance Castellano (Geneva: Crespin, 1556).

15 Spanish was published for the first time in 1569 by Casiodoro de Reina in Basle.49 In 1596 Cipriano de Valera published a New Testament in London,50 followed by a revision of Reina’s work in 1602.51 With minor subsequent revisions, the Reina-Valera Bible became the standard version of Spanish speaking Protestants for the next four centuries.52 While the Tyndale, Coverdale, Geneva and King James Bibles of the English Protestants and Luther’s German Bible have received considerable scholarly attention, the Spanish Bibles have been largely ignored. The chronological limits of this study may be defined by the fact that these translations represent a unique period in the history of Spanish Bible translation. The Enzinas’ New Testament (1543) was the first complete Spanish New Testament ever printed, while Valera’s 1602 revision of Reina’s 1569 Bible marked the end of the work of that generation of Spaniards. There were no significant revisions53 of the Spanish Protestant Bible until the nineteenth century, so the translations of the sixteenth century stand apart. There were no Spanish Bibles produced with approval from the Catholic authorities in Spain until the Padre Scio Bible in 1793. 49

Casiodoro de Reina, La Biblia, que es los sacros libros del Viejo y Nuevo testamento (Basel: Guarin/Biener, 1569). 50 Cipriano de Valera, El Testamento Nuevo de nuestro señor Jesu Christo (London: Ricardo del Campo, 1596). 51

Cipriano de Valera, La Biblia, que es los sacros libros del Viejo y Nuevo testamento revista y conferida con los textos Hebreos y Griegos y con diversas traslaciones por Cypriano de Valera (Amsterdam: Lorenço Jacobi, 1602). 52

There were several other partial translations made in the sixteenth century, of limited influence, that will not be considered for this study, such as Juan Pérez’ translation of Psalms (1557), and translations by Juan de Valdés of Matthew and Psalms. A minor revision of Valera’s 1596 New Testament appeared in 1708 as Sebastian de la Enzina and Casiodoro de Reina, El Nuevo Testamento Nuevamente sacado a luz, corregido y revisto por Dn. Sebastian de la Enzina (Amsterdam: Jacobo Borstio, 1708). 53

16 Within the context of early modern printing and Bible translation, this dissertation will explore questions specific to the Spanish Bible editions. First, what motivated these men, refugees from home and country, to translate the Bible? Second, what is the nature of the relationship between the translations of Enzinas, Usque and Atías (Vargas and Pinel), Pérez, Reina and Valera? Though it is clear from the prefaces that they borrowed liberally from one another, the extent of their borrowing is not clear. Can the connections between the various editions be demonstrated? Third, what may be determined, if anything, regarding the source of their translations? Did they depend more on the Vulgate or on Greek and Hebrew texts? What might be the extent of their dependence upon other vernacular translations? Taken together, the answers to these questions will lead toward a textual genealogy of these translations. While the Inquisition in Spain was burying the tender shoots of reform, the many branches of the Reformation movement in other parts of Europe were being carefully pruned to produce the forms desired by its leaders. The significance of religious confession for the social history of early modern Europe has been a major theme of historical research for the past half-century. In the 1960s scholars such as Gerhard Oestreich and Ernst Walter Zeeden pioneered the study of visitation records as a source for understanding the development of confessional identity among the people in sixteenth-century Europe. Later Heinz Schilling and Wolfgang Reinhardt developed confessionalization as a sociological concept.54 Schilling points out that religious confessions that are seen only as part of the social structure by modern scholars were, in 54

Ronald Po-Chia Hsia, Social Discipline in the Reformation (London: Routledge, 1989), 2-3.

17 the sixteenth century, “considered central, load-bearing pillars of the entire social order.”55 The formation of confessional identity in the changing social, political and religious context of early modern Europe was a complex affair in which religion played a large role. In his book Social Discipline in the Reformation, Ronald Po-Chia Hsia describes “confessionalism” as the formation of religious identities of Lutheranism, Calvinism and Catholicism. 56 Each group sought by means of catechisms, visitations, inquisitions and consistories, sermons, pastoral care, and other means to discipline their people in new forms of belief and practice. Chrisman argues that religious propaganda drove the development of distinctions between Christian factions. She says, The religious propaganda of the sixteenth century was more long-lasting. Based on the principle of religious separation, it created fundamental psychological and social distances which would become deeply rooted in Western European culture. The propaganda created a stereotype of The Other, each religious group accepted that stereotype of its antagonist.57 Once these distances had been created, not just between Catholic and Protestants factions but also between the various Protestant sub-groups, there was no going back, and woe to those who tried to straddle the divisions. The Spanish Protestants who had fled their lands, and others like them, would have to find a theological home in this divisive setting. Unlike the Anabaptists whose theology was too different to find accommodation,

Heinz Schilling, “Confessional Europe,” in The Handbook of European History, 1400-1600, vol. 2, ed. Thomas A. Brady, Heiko A. Oberman and James D. Tracy (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1995), 642. 55

Hsia, Social Discipline in the Reformation, 5.

Miriam Usher Chrisman, “From Polemic to Propaganda: The Development of Mass Persuasion in the Late Sixteenth Century,” Archiv fur Reformationsgeschichte 73 (1982): 195. 57

18 the Spaniards were more able to find a place, whether in Calvin’s Geneva, Cranmer’s England, or in the free imperial city of Frankfurt. More recently, however, Pettegree has argued that while the idea of confessionalization has much to offer, it also has some problems. In particular he faults the paradigm for “exaggerating the extent to which parish reform was imposed by the authorities, clerical and lay, on largely passive, or even sullen and resentful parishioners.” He instead considers the Reformation to have been a gradual process in which the public was a willing participant. He says “passivity was never a leading characteristic in the engagement of the governed with authority.”58 Additionally, not all theologians were aligned in specific camps, whether Lutheran or Calvinist, thus requiring a much more nuanced understanding of confessional positions. Edwards argues that theologians such as Wolfgang Capito were debating theology in a more irenic fashion.59 It could be said that the Calvinists in the sixteenth century were the irenic ones between the Lutherans and the Catholics.60 The Spanish reformers were thrust into this milieu when they left Spain to evade the Inquisition’s attempt to impose theological uniformity. The recent works of Nelson, Hasbrouck and Roldán-Figueroa explore the varied results of the

Pettegree, The Reformation and the Culture of Persuasion, 187.

Edwards, Printing, Propaganda, and Martin Luther, 148.

Hsia, Social Discipline in the Reformation, 61. See also, Howard Louthan and Randall C. Zachman, Conciliation and Confession: The Struggle for Unity in the Age of Reform, 1415-1648 (Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press, 2004).

19 Spaniards’ accommodation to the theological confines of the ecclesiastical communities in which they settled.61 This dissertation will look briefly at the confessionalism of this group of Spanish exiles62 through their vernacular translations of the Bible. As they sought to find a place in the strangers’ churches of England, the Lutheran Church of Germany, or in Calvin’s Geneva, did their translations reflect this accommodation? The recent dissertation of Rady Roldán-Figueroa at Boston University explores the theological views of Casiodoro de Reina as expressed in the paratextual material of his 1569 Bible translation and in other writings.63 Since then Roldán-Figueroa has published four articles discussing specific passages from the Spanish Bibles and how these gave evidence of the confessional position of the authors.64 This indicates that religious identity is closely connected to the translation of the Bible and must be considered as significant a factor for

61 See J. Jonathan L. Nelson, “The Nature and Authority of Scripture in Four Spanish Protestant Reformers of the Sixteenth Century: Fancisco Enzinas, Juan Perez, Casiodoro de Reina, Cipriano de Valera” (Unpublished M.A. thesis, Wheaton College, 1987); Peter W. Hasbrouck, “Free Will and Predestination in the Writings of Three Spanish Reformers of the Sixteenth Century: Constantino Ponce de la Fuente, Juan Pérez de Pineda, and Casiodoro de Reina” (Unpublished M.A. thesis, Wheaton College, 1998); and Roldán Figueroa, “Casiodoro de Reina as Biblical Exegete.” 62

As already implied, the geographic context of the dissertation is unique in that the men who translated the Bible into Spanish in the sixteenth century all came from Spain, but worked in places such as Italy, Antwerp, Frankfurt, Strasbourg, Geneva, and London. National identity was important to them, but their confessional identity was not a given as it might have been for a Frenchman in Geneva. 63

See Roldán-Figueroa, “Casiodoro de Reina as Biblical Exegete.”

Rady Roldán-Figueroa, “’Justified without the works of the law’: Casiodoro de Reina on Romans 3:28,” Nederlands archief voor kerkgeschiedenis 85, no. 1 (2005): 205-224); and Rady RoldánFigueroa, “Filius Perditionis: The Propagandistic Use of a Biblical Motif in Sixteenth-Century Spanish Evangelical Bible Translations,” Sixteenth Century Journal 4 (2006): 1027-1055; Rady Roldán-Figueroa, “Reina's vision of a truly Reformed ministry: a reconstruction,” in Lay Bibles in Europe 1450-1800, ed. M. Lamberigts and A. A. den Hollander, 159-81. (Leuven: Peeters, 2006); and Rady Roldán-Figueroa, "Translation, guided reading, and anti-Roman Catholic propaganda: the rendering of Deut 23,17[18] in the Reina-Valera Bible (1602)," in Infant Milk or Hardy Nourishment? (Leuven: Peeters, 2009 64

20 understanding what source texts the translator used. The present study will serve to broaden the understanding of how all the Spanish Bibles fit into this context. The next chapter will establish the context for the Spaniards’ work in the sixteenth-century world of Bible. In particular it will explore the late medieval ideas about Bible interpretation and the form of the text. During the late medieval era, biblical scholarship underwent significant change as humanist academics interested in the ancient languages began to raise questions about the Latin Vulgate text and how it should be understood. By the sixteenth century, scholars had begun to undertake not only the correction of the Latin Vulgate, but also the publication of collated Greek and Hebrew texts for comparison. These new interpretive principles and print resources, coupled with Reformation appreciation of the people’s need to understand the Bible, led a generation of scholars to produce vernacular Bible translations across the continent of Europe. The third chapter will explore this new world of vernacular Bible publishing. The process of printing and selling Bibles became quickly established, but questions of readership remain problematic. The potential market and literacy rates will be investigated to ascertain what opportunity existed for vernacular Bibles in Spain. Sixteenth-century translators were also concerned for proper reader understanding of the text, so translation methods and use of para-textual material will be considered. The fourth chapter will look at how vernacular translations were designed to educate followers, convince skeptics and to persuade. The debate between More and

21 Tyndale is evidence of the confessional and political ramifications of Bible translation.65 Duerden argues that translation was not simply an academic task or exercise in linguistic ability, but actually focused on power and ideology. He says, “the early translators and their detractors were concerned with power as a means to the end of social and individual transformation.”66 The many attempts to curtail the spread of vernacular Bibles were a logical response to this challenge from the traditional authorities. This chapter will consider the impact of the Inquisition’s efforts to restrict the reading of vernacular Bibles and other prohibited texts. The main goal of the fifth and sixth chapters will be to explore the motives and methods of the Spanish translators as described in the Bible prefaces and as compared to several others from the early modern period. The circumstances of each translation will be presented in order to understand influences and motives, which the preface material indicates differ from those of the humanists or the reformers. For example, national pride is evident in the preface to Pérez’s New Testament. He felt obligated to translate as a service to his country because of his calling to the Gospel and because Spain gloried in being the nation most pure from heresy.67 Finally, the two chapters will look at the available evidence of the translators’ sources and method. The material of chapters five

See David Ginsberg, “Ploughboys versus Prelates: Tyndale and More and the Politics of Biblical Translation,” SCJ 19 (Spring 1988): 45-61. 65

66 Richard Duerden, “Equivalence of Power? Authority and Reformation Bible Translation,” in The Bible as Book: The Reformation, ed. Orlaith O’Sullivan (London: The British Library, 2000), 13.

Juan Pérez, “Epistola,” in Bowman Foster Stockwell, Prefacios a las Biblias castellanas del siglo XVI (Buenos Aires: Aurora, 1951), 56-62. 67

22 and six is divided by the shift that occurred in the middle of sixteenth century due to the hardening of confessional boundaries. The seventh and eighth chapters will use textual analysis to study selected passages from both Testaments for evidence of particular sources of translation, methods and hints at bias. Comparisons to various potential source texts will serve to enable the creation of a genealogy of the Spanish Bibles. Two Ph.D. dissertations have laid some groundwork for this present study. Jorge González studied Valera’s revision to Reina’s Bible to determine his revision methods by comparing some four hundred and fifty-eight passages that Valera changed.68 Roldán-Figueroa’s dissertation describes some of the other changes Valera made in terms of the order of the canon, and the paratextual material.69 In addition to the attempt to source the Spanish Bibles in the Hebrew, Greek and Latin texts, this comparative analysis will clarify the lineage among the Spanish Bibles. Kinder and Roldán-Figueroa believe that Valera’s New Testament of 1596 was a revision of Reina’s New Testament, while Fernández y Fernández and Stockwell both argued for its connection to Pérez’s New Testament. Finally, the comparative analysis of the Old and New Testament passages, along with the previous discussion of the prefaces, will make it possible to place the Spanish translators in the sixteenth-century world of

68 Jorge A. González, “Valera’s Method for Revising the Old Testament in the Spanish Bible of 1602.” (Ph.D. diss., Emory University, 1967), 117-18. 69

See Roldán Figueroa, “Casiodoro de Reina as Biblical Exegete,” 164ff.

23 Protestant Bible translation and confessional identity. There is evidence that the Spaniards did not all fit comfortably into a single confessional identity.70 The final chapter will summarize what has been learned about the scholars and editions of the Spanish Bible in the sixteenth century. The place of the Spanish Bibles and their translators in the context of contemporary translation work will be established, and the translation lineage from Enzinas to Valera will be identified. The discoveries of this dissertation will be correlated to work being done by others, and areas for future study will be indicated.

See Hasbrouck, “Free Will and Predestination,” 118.

24 CHAPTER 2 LATE MEDIEVAL BIBLE INTERPRETATION AND TRANSLATION “And with wresting the scripture unto their own purpose clean contrary unto the process, order and meaning of the text, and so delude them in descanting upon it with allegories, and amaze them expounding it in many senses before the unlearned lay people (when it hath but one simple literal sense whose light the owls cannot abide) that though thou feel in thine heart and art sure how that all is false that they say, yet couldst thou not solve their subtle riddles.”1 It is necessary to consider the sixteenth-century world of Bible translation to understand the task to which the Spanish writers dedicated such effort. Over the past several decades, a number of books have been written concerning the history of printing,2 as well as the history of the Bible.3 This literature will provide the means to explore late medieval trends in the interpretation of the Bible. Tyndale’s interest in the literal sense of the Bible was not common to medieval biblical interpretation, and attitudes had not changed much by 1530 when he wrote the above indictment of the churchmen. This chapter will explore two developments of particular interest that set the stage for the vernacular Bible translation movement of the sixteenth century: the growing emphasis on the literal meaning of scripture and the rise of textual studies with the corollary interest in the revision of the Vulgate.

1 Tyndale's Old Testament: Being the Pentateuch of 1530, Joshua to 2 Chronicles of 1537, and Jonah (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992), 4. Emphasis added. 2

See p. 3, n. 5 and p. 4, n. 8.

See p. 1, n. 2.

25 The story of late medieval biblical interpretation really must begin with the Vulgate.4 Eventually comprising six folio volumes, the Vulgate of the late Middle Ages contained St. Jerome’s Latin text surrounded by extensive commentary. The Glossa ordinaria, as it is also called, refers to this body of commentary. It is described by Froehlich as “a collection of patristic and early medieval excerpts interpreting all the books of the Bible in a characteristic layout. Each page featured a central window of Vulgate text in larger script with short interlinear explanations and longer comments written around the window in the margins.”5 The authorship of the glosses is generally anonymous, though portions are attributed to Anslem of Laon, his brother Ralph, Gilbert the Universal, and others.6 By the twelfth century the glosses were being used for teaching in the universities, a practice extending to the Reformation period. Sixteenth-century scholars of all theological stripes continued to consult the Vulgate. Froehlich argues that Luther continued to consult the Glossa throughout his career, right down to his lectures on Genesis that ended in 1545.7 In addition, the Postilla literalis super Bibliam by Nicholas of Lyra, “became, after the Glossa ordinaria, the

For this dissertation two editions of the Vulgate were used. The first, Biblia latina, cum glossa ordinaria Walafridi Strabonis aliorumque et interlineari Anselmi Laudunensis et cum postillis Nicolai de Lyra expositionibusque Guillelmi Britonis in prólogos S. Hieronymi (Venetiis : Paganinus de Paganinis 1495), marks the beginning of the sixteenth century, while the second, Fulgensis Strabus, Nicholas of Lyra, Paul Burgensus, Matthias Toringus, François Feuardent, Jean Dadré, and Jacques de Cuilly, Bibliorum sacrorum cum glossa ordinaria, 6 vols. (Venetiis: [publisher not identified], 1603), stands at the other end of the century. It is readily available online from the Lollard Society http://lollardsociety.org/?page_id=409. 5 Karlfried Froehlich, “Martin Luther and the Glossa Ordinaria,” Lutheran Quarterly Volume XXIII (2009): 31. 6

See Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, 59-62.

Froehlich, “Martin Luther and the Glossa Ordinaria,” 37.

26 most widely copied and disseminated of all medieval Bible commentaries, finding its way into hundreds of libraries across the Continent in Scholastic, monastic, cathedral, and courtly settings.”8 Lyra’s explanations of the literal sense of scripture became highly influential in the late medieval and early modern period, especially with the advent of printing which allowed the Postilla to circulate with the Glossa ordinaria. By the early modern era the scholars of Europe were deeply familiar with the Latin Vulgate text and its interpretation in the glosses. Textual studies were less of a concern than theology through much of the Middle Ages. Since the time of Augustine the spiritual sense of the scripture, not the letter of the text was considered most significant.9 Two ideas dampened interest in the Hebrew and Greek texts: the belief that the Jews had corrupted the text of the Old Testament and that the Vulgate was a faithful reproduction of the original. The Renaissance saw the rise of new thinking in a wide variety of areas, including the study of the Bible. Renewed interest in the Hebrew and Greek texts behind the Latin Vulgate began growing as early as the intellectual renaissance of the twelfth century. The revival of Greek learning produced interest in improving the Latin text of the Bible based on close reading of the available Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. Bentley says three developments helped spur what he calls a new “brand of scholarship”: revival of Greek learning, the emergence of philological criticism, and the invention of printing.10

Klepper, The Insight of Unbelievers, 6.

Ibid., 13.

Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ, 15.

27 In the twelfth century the Augustinian monk, Hugh of St. Victor (d. 1141), began to rethink the medieval approach to scripture and sought out Jewish scholars to help understand the “literal meaning of the Old Testament text.”11 It was in the school of St. Victor, Klepper says, that interest in the “literal-historical sense of Scripture emerged.”12 From Hugh of St. Victor there extended a lineage of Hebrew study that continued down to the Reformation. The writings of Hugh’s pupil and friend Andrew (d. 1175) influenced scholars like Herbert of Bosham (d.c. 1194),13 Peter Comestor (d.c. 1198), Peter the Chanter (d. 1197) and Stephen Langton (c. 1155-1228)14 to study the literal meaning of the text and the value of consulting the Hebrew. These four continued the Victorine school of thought. Smalley notes of Comestor, the Chanter and Langton that whereas other Paris masters left glosses on the Psalms and the Pauline Epistles, these three made original contributions to the study of Scripture as a whole, the Comestor in his Histories and Gospel glosses, the Chanter and Langton in a vast series of glosses, covering the Old and New Testaments.15 While these Parisian scholars made use of Hebrew to gain a better understanding of the biblical text, others also found knowledge of Hebrew valuable for polemics with the Jews. The Spanish Dominican Raymond Peñaforte (c. 1180-1275) began to use postbiblical Jewish texts in his efforts to convert the Jews to Christianity. He then called for schools to be established to train preachers in Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic to aid 11

Ibid., 14.

Ibid., 14. On the Victorines see also, Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, 83195; and Fourier Bonnard, Histoire de l’Abbaye royale et de l’ordre des chanoines réguliers de St. Victor: première période 1113-1500 (Paris: A Savaète, 1904). 13

See Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, 186-95.

Comestor, the Chanter and Langton are also discussed in Ibid., 196-263

Ibid., 197.

28 missionary work among Jews and Muslims. One of his students, Raymond Martini, was noted for his competence in both Hebrew and Aramaic. Klepper observes that the Dominicans undertook language study mainly for mission work among the Jews, and those who studied Hebrew for other purposes did not tend to have comparable abilities.16 The Franciscans studied Hebrew for the purpose of working on the biblical text, and were increasingly concerned with understanding the literal sense, Keppler notes. To this end England and France became centers of Hebrew study, particularly at the Franciscan faculties.17 Among the most noteworthy thirteenth century figures were Robert Grosseteste (c.1175-1253),18 Roger Bacon (c.1214-1292) and Adam Marsh (c.1200-c.1258). Grosseteste, while not a Franciscan himself, influenced the others through his lectures at Oxford from 1230-35. Bacon, a Franciscan monk, taught that western Christians needed to study Greek in order to access the scientific works of antiquity and to be able to master the central documents of the church. He pointed to Grosseteste as the pioneer of this program.19 Grosseteste insisted that morning hours at Oxford be preserved for lectures on the Bible20 and that theology be taught from the Bible rather than from Lombard’s Sentences,

Klepper, The Insight of Unbelievers, 16-17.

Ibid., 17-18.

See Richard W. Southern, Robert Grosseteste: The Growth of an English Mind in Medieval Europe (Oxford: Clarendon, 1986) and James McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2000). 19

Southern, Robert Grosseteste, 15.

Ibid., 174.

29 which the Franciscans began using around 1250.21 Bacon warned against the use of translations for the study of works of antiquity due to the corruption of the texts. He also criticized, according to Klepper, the somewhat haphazard attempts of Dominicans and Franciscans to correct the text. Though they compared with older versions and different texts, they did not do so in a scientific way.22 While the school of St. Victor sought to discover the literal meaning of the biblical text, Grosseteste and his disciples were concerned first and foremost to derive theology from it. Only to the extent that they considered the medieval Latin text to have been corrupted was there a problem in need of correction. However, just a few decades later this was to change with the work of Nicholas of Lyra (1270-1349).23 Nicholas entered the Franciscan order about the year 1300, and was sent to Paris to take up the life of a scholar. He earned the master’s degree there in 1308 and spent the rest of his life in Paris as provincial minister of the Franciscans, involved with the University and in writing. Nicholas produced extensive commentary on the whole Bible, the Postilla literalis, between the years 1322 and 1331. In his work he drew heavily upon

Klepper, The Insight of Unbelievers, 19, 27.

See Ibid., 21-25. She also observes that the actual Greek and Hebrew skills of these medieval churchmen was rather limited. 23 On Nicholas and his interpretation of scripture see Klepper, The Insight of Unbelievers; Herman Hailperin, Rashi and the Christian Scholars (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1963); and Charles V. Langlois, “Nicholas fr Lyre, Frère Meneur,” in Histoire Littéraire de la France (Paris, 1937), 36:355401.

30 Jewish interpreters, particularly Rashi (d. 1105).24 He knew Hebrew, but not Greek, and worked to correct the Latin text as well as write commentary on it. Nicholas’ agenda was to provide “an up-to-date guide to the Hebrew text and to Jewish tradition.”25 His Postilla literalis offered commentary on the literal sense of the text that reflected Rash’s peshat interpretation. Peshat was the sense of the original author, while derash was the later, more mystical, spiritual or allegorical sense understood by the rabbinic interpreters.26 However, he did not particularly seek a literal understanding of the text as the Victorines, nor did he advocate learning Hebrew and Greek. Bentley argues that Nicholas betrays Aristotelian and Thomistic influences,27 which would set him apart from the Victorines. Nevertheless, Klepper sees Nicholas as a bridge between the era of medieval Christian Hebraists and the Hebrew study of the humanists and reformers.28 Klepper claims the medieval use of Hebrew “reached its apex in the early fourteenth century with Nicholas of Lyra,” and observes that the study of Hebrew was

Nicholas of Lyra, Postilla super totam Bibliam, 4 vols. (Strassburg, 1492; reprint, Frankfurt am Main: Minerva, 1971). The Victorines had also made use of Rashi but it was Nicholas whose Postillas brought Rashi’s thoughts into the mainstream of late medieval scholarship. See Hallperin, Rashi and the Christian Scholars, 105-15. Nicholas’ other writings include the Quaestio de adventu Christi (1309), De differentia nostrae translationis ab Hebraica littera Veteris Testamentis (1333), and Responsio ad quondam Iudaeum ex verbis evangelii secundum Matthaeum contra Christum nequiter arguentem (1334), and the Postilla moralis (1339). 25

Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, 274.

See Hailperin, Rashi and the Christian Scholars, 31-39 regarding Rashi’s approach to interpretation. 26

Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ, 26-28.

Klepper, The Insight of Unbelievers, 6.

31 rare in the century after Nicholas.29 Raymond Lull convinced the Council of Vienne to establish chairs of Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee and Arabic at the Universities of Paris, Bologna, Salamanca and Oxford, but this was only achieved much later. Finally in 1397 Manuel Chrysolorus was brought to Florence to teach Greek, and only in the midfifteenth century did the situation improve further.30 Scholars finally turned their attention to the New Testament in the fifteenth century. The Italian Lorenzo Valla (1407-57) was the first westerner with a complete grasp of Greek, and was thus able to begin the work of correcting the Latin text. Up to this point, the medieval Latin text of the New Testament was considered to be virtually sacrosanct; scholars dared not question the work of St. Jerome. Bentley argues that Valla’s main task was to evaluate the Vulgate as a translation of the Greek.31 Unlike his predecessors, who sought a clear understanding of the text for theological purposes and to expound its meaning in lectures, Valla was interested in the text in itself. He marks the shift from biblical studies to textual studies, which was the main concern of the humanist movement. Bentley argues that the humanists had three objectives in their work with the Bible: a correct Greek text, an accurate Latin translation, and an “accurate historical explanation of what New Testament writings meant to their earliest audiences.”32 Valla sought to gain a clear understanding of the Greek and Hebrew text as it was, not just in order to correct the Latin. He was interested in the words and their meanings, 29

Ibid., 30.

Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ, 15-16.

Ibid., 34.

Ibid., 19.

32 and it was this concern that led him to question the Donation of Constantine and the authorship of the so-called Apostles’ Creed. Valla and other scholars of the period, such as Giannozzo Manetti, Antonio Nebrija33 and Pedro de Osma began to work on the Greek text itself. Like Lyra they sought to know the meaning of the text, but unlike Lyra, they became interested in obtaining a text that was correct in both Greek and Latin. In 1442 Valla wrote notes on the text of the Greek New Testament, which he titled Collatio novi testamenti. He prepared a revision during the years 1453-57. Erasmus found a copy of the revised version of his work at the Parc Abbey near Louvain, which he published in 1505 with the title Adnotationes.34 In the Collatio, Valla worked to evaluate the Latin text based on the Greek. Bentley says Valla found three main problems with the Vulgate text: “it presented scripture in an inferior or inappropriate literary style; it inaccurately translated many passages of the Greek text; and it in general obscured the meaning of the original Greek New Testament.”35 In fact, Bentley argues that Valla’s “efforts to solve problems of New Testament text, translation, and explanation inaugurated the modern tradition of critical, philological scholarship on the New Testament.”36

Nebrija wrote Annotationes and Vocabulario, about textual criticism before Erasmus published Valla’s Adnotationes. See José C. Nieto, Juan de Valdés and the Origins of the Spanish and Italian Reformation, Travaux D’Humanisme et Renaissance, CVIII (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1970), 55. Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ, 34-35. These texts, along with Valla’s other works may accessed in Collatio novi testamenti, ed. A Perosa (Florence: Sansoni, 1970; and Opera omnia, 2 vols. ed. E Garin (Turin: Bottega d’Erasmo, 1962). 34

Ibid., 50.

Ibid., 34.

33 While Paris and Oxford emerged as key centers of biblical studies, they were certainly not the only universities where the humanist interest in accessing the original texts was transforming the approach to the Bible. In Spain Pedro Martínez de Osma, Elio Antonio de Nebrija, and others were also pursuing linguistic studies. Osma (c. 1415 – 1480) studied at the University of Salamanca and became a professor there in 1444. His student, Nebrija, considered Osma one of the wisest Spaniards of his time.37 Osma issued corrections to the Latin while teaching at Salamanca (prior to Erasmus’ publication of Valla), and attacked the church in his De Confessione, now lost.38 Like his mentor, Nebrija39 (1444-1522) took great interest in languages. He produced the first grammar and dictionary of the Spanish language as well as a Latin grammar.40 His Introductiones latinae, published in 1481, was a grammar text intended for teaching Latin in the humanist style and became the standard text at many Spanish universities. Van Liere calls it his most lasting contribution to Spanish scholarship.41 After 1495 Nebrija dedicated himself to work on biblical studies. He spent some ten 37

Antonio de Nebrija, Apologia, Granada, 1535, f5r.

Nieto, Juan de Valdés, 54. Osma was working on corrections several decades before Erasmus found Valla’s manuscript and began serious work of his own on the Latin text. Osma’s writings include: In libros Ethicorum, Compendio sobre los seis libros de la Metaphysica, De confessione. De confessione is lost, no doubt, due to the errors the Inquisition found in it, and for which Osma was tried and convicted. 39

The bibliography on Nebrija is limited in English and in Spanish. See P. Lemus y Rubio, El Maestro Elio Antonio de Lebrixa, R.H., ts. XXII and XXIX (1910 and 1913); Antonio Ordiozola, “La caracole del bibliófilo nebriense. Extracto seco de bibliografía de Nebrija en los siglos xv y xvi” Revista de Bibliografía Nacional (VII (1946): 3-114; Victor G. de la Concha, ed. Nebrija y la introducci6n del renacimniento en Espaina (Salamanca: Excma. Diputación Provincial de Salamanca, 1983); and Félix Olmedo, SJ., Nebrija en Salamanca (1475-1513) (Madrid:Editora Nacional, 1944). 40 Nebrija’s Humanist works are available in electronic form at: www.bibliotecavirtualdeandalucia.es.

Katherine Elliot van Liere, “After Nebrija: Academic Reformers and the Teaching of Latin in Sixteenth-Century Salamanca.” SCJ XXXIV/4 (2003): 1067. 41

34 years preparing notes on the translation of the Bible only to have them seized by the Inquisition. When Cisneros became Inquisitor General, Nebrija was able to recover his notes and publish them as Tertia quinquagena. In the Tertia he addresses 50 textual problems in the Bible in a manner similar to Valla.42 Another biblical commentary of note is Nebrija’s Apologia, written c. 1504 and published in 1516. Here Nebrija stated his rules of criticism: that whenever in the New Testament there appear variant readings in Latin books, we should have recourse to the Greek that whenever in the Old Testament there is some difference among Latin books or between Latin and Greek, we should seek reliable information from the truth of the Hebrew source.43 Nebrija intended to clear up any concerns over the variants in the Latin text by making recourse to the Greek and Hebrew texts, thus subjecting the Latin to them. Nebrija left Salamanca in 1513 and joined the scholars convened by Cardinal Ximénez at Alcalá to prepare a grand polyglot of the Bible (to be discussed below). His tenure there was not long, as conflicts with the team over the extent to which the Latin text should be subject to revision, and other matters, led to his separation from the group.44

42 For other biblical works by Nebrija, see see Nebrija, Nebrissensis biblica, ed. P. Galindo Romeo and L. Ortiz Muñoz 2 vols. (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Instituto Antonio de Nebrija, 1950). 43

Elio Antonio de Nebrija, Apologia cum quibusdam sacrae scripturae locis non vulgariter expositis (Alcalá, 1516), fol. A ii verso; quoted in Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ, 81. Translated by Bentley. 44 Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ, 89-90. Bentley argues that Nebrija would have been fully capable of carrying out a thorough revision of the Latin Vulgate in accord with the Greek and Hebrew. When he found that there would be no serious effort to correct the Latin text, he left the group. See Jeremy N. H. Lawrance, “Humanism in the Iberian Peninsula,” in The Impact of Humanism on Western Europe, ed. Anthony Goodman and Angus MacKay (London: Longman, 1990), 252.

35 The work of Nebrija thus leads to Alcalá and the great Complutensian Polyglot Bible (CPB).45 The CPB took its title from the Latin name for Alcalá, Complutum, and was the first major printed text of the Bible in Hebrew and Greek.46 The CPB consists of six folio volumes containing all of the Old and New Testaments arranged in columns. Volume five containing the New Testament in Greek and Latin was printed first, completed by 10 January 1514, and thus pre-dated Erasmus’ Greek New Testament of 1516.47 Volumes one through four contained the Old Testament in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and the Syriac Pentateuch. The sixth contains study aids such as grammars, lexicons, and dictionaries. The fourth and final of the Old Testament volumes was published last on 10 July 1517. As mentioned above, this CPB project was inspired by the reforming vision of Cardinal Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros (1436-1517),48 archbishop of Toledo and

Arnaldo Guillén de

ENZINAS TO VALERA: MOTIVES, METHODS AND SOURCES IN SIXTEENTH-CENTURY SPANISH BIBLE TRANSLATION by PETER W. HASBROUCK

1 comment