Old English translations

Although John Wycliff is often credited with the first translation of the Bible into English, there were, in fact, many translations of large parts of the Bible centuries before Wycliff's work. Toward the end of the seventh century, the Venerable Bede began a translation of Scripture into Old English (also called Anglo-Saxon). Aldhelm (AD 640–709), likewise, translated the complete Book of Psalms and large portions of other scriptures into Old English. In the 11th century, Abbot Ælfric translated much of the Old Testament into Old English.

The English Bible was first translated from the Latin Vulgate into Old English by a few select monks and scholars. Such translations were generally in the form of prose or as literal translations above the Latin words. As time went on, however, English translations became more frequent into the evolving Middle English. All of the translations made the Bible more accessible to the public, both to those who were literate and through oral interpretation.

Despite differences between the Middle English Bible and more contemporary English versions of the Bible, the importance of the texts in both times should not be doubted. While literacy was more limited in the Middle Ages, the oral tradition, especially through the reading of scripture at Mass, was still very important. In fact, what scriptures would be read at what time of year was largely shaped during this time period. Additionally, the grand cathedrals and smaller churches in the Middle Ages conveyed Biblical stories through their art and stained glass windows. The Bible also played a prominent role in other literary works of the time, both in passing and as the primary subject.

The general perspective on the Bible in the Middle Ages was somewhat different from contemporary views. For instance, very few complete translations existed during that time. Rather, most of the books of the Bible existed separately and were read as individual texts. Thus, the sense of the Bible as history that often exists today did not exist at that time. Instead, a more allegorical rendering of the Bible was more common and translations of the Bible often included the writer’s own commentary on passages in addition to the literal translation.

Despite the lack of “completed” Bibles at that time, there is little evidence to suggest that people felt deprived or as though their parts were less valid than the whole. According to Christian tradition, if all of the scriptures are inspired by God, than any part of the scriptures has complete authority. Additionally, the New Testament in particular, is not just about the life of Jesus Christ, but rather is Christ as well. Thus, the Bible (as a whole or in parts) was seen as equivalent to the Eucharist in being Christ. This perspective helps lay the foundations for John Wyclif’s denial of transubstantiation and the Protestant theology shaped by the Reformation.

0 comments: