There are many phrases that we tend to take for granted in every day use, which come from the Bible. It’s no wonder that they still give the Bible to castaways on Desert Island Discs, and quite rightly so. ‘The road to Damascus’ is one such phrase, and as we mark the Conversion of Paul on Sunday 25th January, we should spare a thought for all the great Biblical scholars who have gone before, wrestling with the original texts (Hebrew and Greek), ploughing through the commentaries (largely medieval Latin), and comparing the countless translations.
I have it in mind as a little semi-retirement project to have a go at producing a Vulgate Latin course, to teach the rudiments of Latin as used in the Bible. I taught Latin and Greek in another life, but always through the great classical texts, and it seems to me that many people might like to read the texts as studied by the great Fathers of the Church, St Augustine, Bede, Aquinas et al. One advantage of such a scheme is that many of the passages would be so eminently familiar, in a way that, perhaps, Julius Caesar’s campaigns against the Gauls might not be. The disadvantage, namely that the Bible was not actually composed in Latin can be skirted around, because for a thousand years or so, Latin was the language through which it was accessed.
So back to St Paul, and that road to Damascus moment… How will I deal with the perceived inconsistency in the accounts, relating to the translation of the Greek words akouo (= I hear or perhaps understand) and phone (= voice or perhaps sound)? Did Paul’s companions just hear a sound, without understanding it? Well luckily I’ll be able to say ‘it’s all Greek to me’ and just serve up the Latin equivalents, audio and vox.
And of course, it being Burns Night, there is always the option of sitting down to some haggis and a chunk of Rabbie Burns – which would make even the hardest passage of medieval Latin seem clear!
Very interesting, thank you