A post in the autumn of an election year sixteen years ago covered the chapter mottoes in The Gilded Age. These were supplied to Twain and Warner by James Hammond Trumbull, friend and neighbor of the former. Trumbull has appeared here before and since, most recently in connection with Maize.
Of specific interest to this blog, a paper by Trumbull, published in 1872, with “Notes on Forty Versions of the Lord's Prayer in Algonkin Languages,” remarked:
Bread was not the staff of life to an Indian, and his little corn-cake, baked in hot ashes, was perhaps about the last thing he would remember to pray for. So, on “daily bread,” translators were left to a large discretion. The diversity of judgment manifested in the selection of a corresponding Indian word is noticeable.
There are several possible high-level approaches. (The numbers in parentheses are Trumbull's items; the links are to his sources.)
- Word for European wheat bread.
- (25) Ojibwe pakkwejiganiminān 'thing from which pieces are cut off' + 'grain', so, 'loaf bread'.
- Bread-like native staple.
- Food or nourishment in general.
- (21) Innu nimitchiminan 'noſtre nourriture'.
- (20(b)) Cree
Míyĭnán anꝏ’ts ká kisĭkák ke ꝏ’tchi pimátisĭyákh.
Give-us now on-this day and henceforth our-living.
This seems to match this 1884 edition of Hunter's translation of the Book of Common Prayer (Trumbull cites 1859):
ᒦᔨᓈᐣ ᐊᓅᐦᐨ ᑳ ᑭᓯᑳᒃ ᑫ ᐅᐦᒋ ᐱᒫᑎᓯᔮᕽ
It is somewhat different from Horden's 1889 translation:
ᒥᓕᓈᓐ ᐊᓄᒡ ᑳ ᑭᔑᑳᒃ ᑫ ᐅᒋ ᐱᒫᑎᓯᔮᒃᕽ
Neither seems to agree with any modern online Cree prayer sites.
While it is true that bread itself often means 'food' in general, and perhaps so in the prayer, that does not imply that there is no choice involved when removing the synecdoche by using a 'food' word that might rather have 'eat' as source. To this food category might be added the Chinook Jargon version(s) of the Lord' Prayer.
Potlatch konaway sun nesaika muckamuck. (Gibbs, here.)
Give every day us food.
Okuk san, pi kanewe san potlach nsaïka mokamok. (Demers, here.)
This day and every day give us food.
Showing two Chinook Jargon words that were borrowed into English: potlatch 'give' and muckamuck 'food'.
The Lord's Prayer occurs twice in the New Testament, in two of the three Synoptic Gospels, Matthew 6:9-13 and Luke 11:2-4. Since it is absent in Mark, and since neither version obviously derives from the other, it is generally accepted that they derive it from a common source, perhaps Q. We shall be primarily concerned here with two specific verses, Matt 6:11 and Luke 11:3.
τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον·
the bread of-us the daily(?) give.AOR to-us today.
τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δίδου ἡμῖν τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν·
the bread of-us the daily(?) give.PRES to-us the each day.
Moreover, focus will widen and narrow, from whole translations to the 'bread' word, as appropriate. For these verses, the text of the Didache is identical to Matthew and that of Marcion (here) to Luke. So there is even less reason to touch on issues of the text (interesting as they might be).
In the Codex Vaticanus, the Matthew version begins at the bottom of the left column of p. 1241 and the verse quoted above continues to the top of the middle column. (I do not see how to deep-link to a specific scanned page on that site.)
Here is a parchment Gnostic fever amulet with αρτον υμων των επιουσιων (at the bottom starting about half a dozen lines up), making it “your daily bread.”
ἄρτος means loaf of (wheat) bread specifically, and bread collectively. It occurs twice in the Odyssey, 17:343 and 18:120, both times in the same way, but that probably isn't enough to declare a Homeric stock phrase.
ἄρτον τ’ οὖλον ἑλὼν περικαλλέος ἐκ κανέοιο
taking a whole loaf from out the beautiful basket (tr. Murray)
ἄρτους ἐκ κανέοιο δύω παρέθηκεν ἀείρας
took up two loaves from the basket and set them before him (tr. Murray)
It may occur in Mycean Linear B as part of the compound 𐀀𐀵𐀡𐀦 a-to-po-qo 'bakers'. For example, in MY Au 102. This site proposes a relationship with Basque arto, originally 'millet', but now 'maize', though Trask does not mention anything like that.
English arto- words mostly seem to relate to religion, and heresy in particular. OED has, besides the always rare artophagous for 'bread-eating'; artolater and artolatry for those excessively devoted to the host (viz. Catholics); and artotyrite for a Montanist sect that ate cheese with theirs. Artotyrites were XXVIII of Augustine's Heresies; Christine Trevett has written a paper and book with more details. Artos is used to refer to ritual leavened bread in Eastern churches. Artocarpus is the generic name for breadfruit, named by the father and son Forster, who accompanied Captain Cook.
ἐπιούσιον only occurs in the Lord's Prayer. As a result, there are various theories for what it might really have meant. Meaning that the two-word title of this post, as a problem in translation, involves a word whose original meaning is unknown, but with a well-established (if wrong) guess; plus a word referring to something specific, but perhaps too tightly bound to the material culture of the source. That said, with a few exceptions early on, epiousion controveries will not affect what follows here much, since the translations involved are, by and large, from 'daily' traditions.
The Peshitta has:
Matthew 6:11ܗܰܒ݂ ܠܰܢ ܠܰܚܡܳܐ ܕ݁ܣܽܘܢܩܳܢܰܢ ܝܰܘܡܳܢܳܐ ܀haḇ lan laḥmā dəsūnqānan yawmānā.
Luke 11:3ܗܰܒ݂ ܠܰܢ ܠܰܚܡܳܐ ܕ݁ܣܽܘܢܩܳܢܰܢ ܟ݁ܽܠܝܽܘܡ ܀haḇ lan laḥmā dəsūnqānan kulyūm.
ܠܚܡܐ lḥmˀ is 'bread'. ܝܘܡܢܐ ywmnˀ 'today' for σήμερον and ܟܠܝܘܡ klywm 'daily' for τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν. For ἐπιούσιον, there is ܣܘܢܩܢ swnqn 'needed'. On the other hand, Old Syriac translations have:
Matthew 6:11ܘܠܚܡܢ ܐܡܝܢܐ ܕܝܘܡܐ ܗܒ ܠܢ ܀wlḥmn ᵓmynᵓ dywmᵓ hb ln.
Luke 11:3ܘܗܒ ܠܢ ܠܚܡܐ ܐܡܝܢܐ ܕܟܠܝܘܡ ܀whb ln lḥmᵓ ᵓmynᵓ dklywm.
with ܐܡܝܢ ˀmyn 'constant'. Agnes Smith Lewis, one of twin sister Semitic scholars, has 'the continual bread of every day'. It is possible to see this text from the Sinaitic Palimpsest (Luke, it lacks that part of Matthew) on the Sinai Palimpsests Research Site: after registering and logging in, Search for Syriac 30, then click the thumbnail to bring up the image view, scroll to folio 5 v, expose the side menu and navigate to the Layers submenu, turn off the visible layer and turn on one of the sharpies instead, the bread petition is the third line down.
Hebrew לֶחֶם lékhem is the ordinary word for 'bread' as well. But the same Semitic root, lḥm, gives Arabic لَحْم laḥm 'meat'. As a result, Bethlehem as בֵּית לֶחֶם appears to be 'house of bread', but as بيت لحم 'house of meat'; though that is probably the least of its worries these days. I also believe that it is generally understood to actually be named after a Canaanite god.
Vetus Latina has:
Matthew 6:11 panem nostrum cotidianum da nobis hodie
Luke 11:3 panem nostrum cotidianum da nobis cottidie
introducing the familiar cotidianum 'daily'. This is the form of the prayer that Tertullian De Oratione 6 quotes. The Codex Bezae has hodie at the end in Luke as well. You can see a good quality scan of that page here (a little more than halfway down), with transcription and image tools.
The Vulgate introduces a strange divergence:
Matthew 6:11 panem nostrum supersubstantialem da nobis hodie,
Luke 11:3 panem nostrum cotidianum da nobis cotidie:
In Luke, some manuscripts spell it quotidianum and some have hodie. The above is also the same as in the Neo-Vulgate used in the modern Latin Rite. Translations that are then based on the Vulgate have a corresponding difference between Matthew and Luke. For example, the Douay-Rheims has, “give us this day our supersubstantial bread” for Matthew, as against the more familiar “daily bread” for Luke. The liturgial Pater Noster (such as from a Missale Romanum: 1491 1947 1962) is the text from Matthew, with all the petitions, except with cotidianum. That is, the prayer is still 'daily'.
The scribe of Luke in the Book of Kells reflexively inserted part of the prayer that isn't in the gospel, fiat voluntas tua sicut in coelo et in terra. You can see this on the TCD website here. The Luke page is 234v, Image 471 of 681; for comparison, Matthew is 45v, Image 93 of 681.
Almost every Romance language translation has a 'bread' word, and moreover one that is derived straightforwardly with Latin panis.
pa pain pam pan pane panem panon pani paun pein penia puine pâinĕ pão pîi̯ne
There are exceptions to 'bread', such as Castellio's Latin Bible with 'nourishment' or a 13th century Old French manuscript Bible with 'life'.
Victum nostrum alimentarium da nobis hodie.
Sire done noſ hui noſtre uiure de chaſcun ioꝛ.
And for 'bread' words that don't derive from Latin, there are some in Romanian: the first printed Tatăl nostru is in the Cyrillic Slavo-Romanian Tetraevangelion of Sibiu and it is such a one (upper-right).
пїта̀ ноⷶⷭтра̀ са́цїѡса̀ дъ не а҆́стъѕь
pita noastră saţioasa dă-ne astădzi
bread our nourishing give-us today
The OED and Wiktionary summarize some of the theories around the various Balkan pita words, including a possible relationship with pizza. Romanian pită, in particular, means 'bread' and 'food' in general. Coresi's Tetraevangelion has pâinĕ in Matthew and pita in Luke.
In Old English, the Pater Noster can be found in Ælfric's Homilies and the Lindisfarne Gospels.
De Dominica Oratione: Syle ús to-dæg urne daeghwamlican hláf.
Matthew 6:11: Hlaf userne ofer ƿistlic sel us todæg..
Luke 11:3: hlaf userne dæguhæmlice sel us eghuelc dæge.
The Lindisfarne is an interlinear translation of the Vulgate, so not much should be inferred about word order. Most of this is recognizable, even from the point-of-view of Modern English. Sell no longer means 'give', but that is the first sense in the OED, with the Matthew verse as a quotation. day-whom-ly I suppose involves a wh-indeterminacy as universal quantification that isn't productive any more. Loaf for 'bread' is, again, the first, obsolete, sense in the OED, again with this citation. Over-wist-ly uses wist 'sustenance', which I don't believe survives; but, again, this verse is given for the supersubstantial entry, in the etymology notes. Both of these manuscripts have been digitized by the British Library. But the library suffered a ransomware attack around a year ago and still hasn't got everything back online. According to the latest update the 1,000 most important ones are back and more are to come. Royal 7 C XII is there. There does not seem to be a share button on the viewer, perhaps because services are only partially restored or perhaps because it has some funny Crown copyright. But FR.III. DEDOMINICA ORATIONE starts at f 91r and the verse above is in the middle of the page, with an erasure between sẏleus and todæȝ. Cotton Nero D IV is still to be done so missing from the list.
The Eadwine Psalter's Pater Noster page glosses Panem noſtrum with Noſtre pein and bꞃeod ꝉ hlaf (elsewhere in that manuscript, panis is hlaf alone).
Wycliffe's Bible has,
Ȝyve to vs this dai oure breed ouer othir substaunce.
And, of course, the King James is,
Giue vs this day our daily bꝛead.
There is a payn in Middle English, included as pain in the OED, on account of its use in Piers Plowman, and marked obsolete. I do not know of any Middle English use related to the Lord's Prayer. It should be remembered that Anglo-Norman is French spoken in England and not English, though attempts to give it a better name like Insular French have failed. So the following does not count, from a poetic paraphrase in Bodley 57, f. 91:
Donez nus hui nostre jurnal pain
The loaf to bread development happened elsewhere in Germanic. Gothic was,
hlaif unsarana þana sinteinan gif uns himma daga.
One can see the Codex Argenteus here; that is on fol. 5r, the fourth and fifth lines. Luther had,
Vnſer teglich bꝛot gib vnß heute /Unser täglich Brot gib uns heute.
The NED, s.v. bread, quoted Sievers as saying, “OHG. shows no clear distinction of meaning between brôt and hleib.” Later editions of the Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache, s.v. Laib, suggest that the older word meant unleavened bread and Brot emerged later for leavened. (That link is is the 1967 edition; compare 1899, which I think implies this was not Kluge's own idea.) The OED's loaf has never been revised and so refers to various theories in Uhlenbeck's Gotische Etymologie.
As discussed in some comments on an earlier post here, Vuk Karadžić and Jernej Kopitar used this development in their pair of macaronic “Gotho-German” Pater Nosters, meant as a parody / critque of Slaveno-Serbski, as part of their review of Milovan Vidaković's Љубомир у Јелисијуму. The results being,
Hlaif unsaran tagalihhan gib uns hiutu,
Unseraz Brot sinteinan gif uns himmadaga.
Proto-Germanic *hlaibaz (for instance, the Genitive of Gothic hlaifs is hlaibis) was borrowed to Proto-Slavic *xlěbъ. The Old Church Slavonic in the Codex Zographensis can be seen here (a little less than halfway down, where there is some missing on the right).
ⰘⰎⰡⰁⰟ ⰐⰀⰞⰠ ⰐⰀⰔⰕⰑⰧⰞⰕ ⰄⰀⰆⰄⰠ ⰐⰀⰏⰟ ⰄⰐⰅⰔⰠ·
хлѣбъ нашь настоѩшт[ьнꙑи] даждь намъ днесь ·
Or, for an older Cyrillic version, the Savvina Kniga here (select image 77; on the left, 6 lines down).
хлѣбъ нашъ наставъшаго дн҅е · даждъ намъ дьньсъ ·
*hlaibaz was also borrowed into Baltic. But the sense there, such as Lithuanian kliẽpas or Latvian klaips is 'loaf'. The ordinary Lithuanian 'bread' word is dúona. The oldest surviving writing in Lithuanian happens to include the Pater Noster; here is an image from Wikipedia.
Dvanv mvſu viſu dzenv dvaki mvmvſ nv
Duonų [duoną] mūsų visų dzienų [dienų] duoki mumus [mums] nū [nūnai]
bread our every day give us now
This has some Indo-European cognates, mostly meaning 'grain', and so a reconstructed form *dʰoHn. But this paper (section 2.10) proposes that it is a Semitic loanword, and so Orel's 727 *doh_Vn- 'millet, grain'. And thus possibly cognate, in turn, with Hebrew דוחן dóchan and Akkadian duḫnu.
The ordinary Latvian word for 'bread', màize, came up in the Maize post, as it occasioned even wilder etymological theories. The oldest printed occurrence of Latvian is the Pater Noster in some editions of Cosmographia, such as this 1575 French one.
Muſſe deniſche maiſe duth mums ſchodeen
noſtre quotidien pain donne nous auiourd'huy
That Maize post introduced the Nahuatl word tlaxcalli 'tortilla', subsequently generalized to 'bread'. This appears in Alonso de Molina's Doctrina Christiana translation in the Pater Noster.
totlaxcal momoztlae totech monequi ma axcan xitechmomaquili
our-bread daily to-us necessary may now you-give-us.HON
That same post quoted comparisons of that with the Quechua tanta, now the regular word for 'bread'. That is similarly used in Juan de Atienza and José de Acosta's Doctrina Christiana translation, with the Aymara beside it.
Punchaunincuna tantaycucta cunan coaycu.
everyday bread-our now you-give-us.
Vrunhàma tàntaha ichúru nanacaru churita.
everyday bread today us give.
The Aymara having tanta as well. This page includes more modern Quechua versions, including ones with 'food' instead of 'bread':
Sapa p'unchaw t'antaykuta kunan quwayku.
Sapa punchaw mikunaykupaq kunan qowayku.
Pukina, the third language of the area, also has tanta, here with odd punctuation.
Kaa gamenque ehehesuma. Señ guta camen señ tanta,
now day.TOP also-give.IMP.2>1 us DAT daily our bread.
And for Kallawaya, the final language mentioned in the relevant part of the earlier post, several very close versions are recorded.
qaman khoolos yayasqata jeqawaicu
kamana kaalaa yapaskata jeka waiku
daily bread do.NML.AC give-to-us.IMP
Hannß's Etymological Dictionary does not give further source for kaalaa / khoolos.
Russell's biography of Mezzofanti tells how the Cardinal learned Luiseño from Pablo Tac and the other boy who had been brought to the Collegio de Propaganda Fide (p. 356-7),
Upon Mezzofanti, therefore, in his intercourse with these youths, devolved all the trouble of discovering the grammatical structure of the Californian language, and of reducing it to rules. It was a most curious process. He began by making his pupils recite the Lord's Prayer, until he picked up first the general meaning, and afterwards the particular sounds, and what may be called the rhythm of the language. The next step was to ascertain and to classify the particles, both affixes and suffixes ; to distinguish verbs from nouns, and substantives from adjectives ; to discover the principal inflexions of both. Having once mastered the preliminaries, his power of generalising seemed rather to be an instinct than an exercise of the reasoning faculty. With him the knowledge of words led, almost without an effort, to the power of speaking.
(I do not know where else this story is told; it has more detail than the Civiltà Cattolica piece mentioned in a footnote.) Mezzofanti's papers are in the Fondo Speciale Giuseppe Mezzofanti in Bologna; they are due to be digitized, but so far only the Inventario is there, where Cart. VII (first PDF, p. 31) has, “Il Pater Noster, l'Ave Maria ed il credo in più di 30 linque dell'America Meriodionale.”; I don't think they have been published elsewhere; see also here. It is possible to snippet-extract some version in Luiseño from The Sparkman Grammar of Luiseno.
4. ovi om ča.mik čam-na.čaxoni čoun teméti.
give to.us our-food all day
More generally, by the time (1872) of Trumbull's Algonkin paper, the Pater Noster was well established as a standard text for language and translation comparison. Again, Russell's Mezzofanti covers the history of famous polyglots and includes sections on polyglot Pater Noster collections in particular. John Chisholm Lambert's article on the Lord's Prayer in Hastings' Dictionary says, “The Lord's Prayer has been frequently published in Polyglot editions.” Adelung's Mithridates, which we met before in the second peanut post and will cite frequently below, in addition to being such a collection, has a detailed appendix covering its predecessors.
Before listing published polyglot collections, it is worth noting one of the famous polyglots that Russell mentions, whose collection was never published. That is Nikolaus Schmidt, Küntzel of Rothenacker, der gelehrte Bauer 'the learned farmer'. He did not learn to read and write until he was sixteen, but then quickly absorbed as much as he could, eventually amassing a large (for a peasant) library in many languages. Lots of sources record that he translated / transcribed the Pater Noster into 51 languages. There are / were manuscripts with alphabets, version of the prayer and Bible verses, and grammatical notes on various languages. That late nineteenth century biographical dictionary entry says these Polyglotten-Handschriften were in the Dresden and Schleiz libraries. The town's website refers to a 1645 Gena Polyglot and repeats the Lord's Prayer in 51 languages claim. But a book by Hermann Dunger said that was a misunderstanding and gives detailed summaries of the Dresden and Schleiz polyglots' contents. In the end, I cannot seem to find out whether these manuscripts still survive and, if so, where.
A Historical Paternoster Database website, on GitHub pages, promises, when complete, to catalog translations before 1900. It has pages by book, with links to online scans, and cross-referenced pages by language.
In the meantime, here is just a list of significant works of the sort, sometimes cross-linked in what follows.
- 1480. Johann Schiltberger. Reisebuch. Heidelberg manuscript, incunable edition. Pater Noster in Armenian and Tartar.
- 1539. Teseo Ambrogio degli Albonesi. Introductio ad Chaldaicam linguam, Syriacam, atque Armenicam, et decem alias linguas. Armenian and Syriac, illustrated by Pater Noster with interlinear transliteration and literal Latin translation.
- 1538. Guillaume Postel. Linguarum Duodecim Characteribus Differentium Alphabetum Introductio. Six of the twelve are illustrated by the Pater Noster.
- 1548. Theodore Bibliander (Buchmann). De ratione communi omnium linguarum et litterarum commentarius. Fourteen columns of the Precandi Formula Chriſtiana.
- 1555. Conrad Gessner. Mithridates: De Differentiis Lingvarvm tvm vetervm tum quae hodie apud diuersas nationes in toto orbe terraru[m] in usu sunt. Brief language descriptions, twenty-five of which end with a Pater Noster translation.
- 1575. André Thevet. La Cosmographie Universelle: 3 + 9 versions of the Oraiſon Dominicale.
- 1591. Angelo Rocca. Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana a Sixto V. Pont. Max. in Splendidiorem, Commodioremq. Locum Translata. With an appendix of thirty translactions.
- 1593, 1603. Hieronymus (Jerome) Megiser.
- 1597. Bonaventura Vulcanius. De literis & lingua Getarum, siue Gothorum. Gothic Pater Noster from the Codex Argenteus.
- 1605. Paulus_Merula. Cosmographia. Nine Oratio Dominica versions in a work on European history and geography.
- 1622. Jean-Baptiste (John Baptist) Gramaye. Oratio Dominica : Centvm Et Amplivs Diversis : expressa Linguis seu dialectis ex varijs Auctoribus Laudatis in Libro de litteris & Linguis Vniuersi Orbis.
- 1629. Christoph Crinesius. בָּבֶל Sive Discursus de Confusione Linguarum, tum Orientalium : Hebraicæ, Chaldaïcæ, Syriacæ, Scripturæ Samariticæ, Arabicæ, Perſicæ, Æthiopicæ ; tum Occidentalium, nempe Græcæ, Latinæ, Italicæ, Gallicæ, Hiſpanicæ, ſtatuens Hebraicam omnium eſſe primam et ipſiſſimam Matricem, concinnatus. Six of the descriptions include a Pater Noster.
- 1668. Bishop John Wilkins. An Essay Towards a Real Character And a Philosophical Language. Part IV, Chapter IV is, “An Inſtance of the Philoſophical Language, both in the Lords Prayer and the Creed. A Compariſon of the Language here propoſed, with fifty others, as to the Facility and Euphonicalneſs of it.”.
- 1660. Jan van Vliet based on work of Francis Junius (Van der Yonghe). 't Vader Ons in XX oude Duijtse en noordse taelen met d'uijtleggingen, &c. Another edition seems to differ only in the frontispiece. Nineteen Germanic languages.
- 1662, 1675. Johannes Reuter. Oratio Dominica XL Linguarum. Google Books only has snippets of the 1954 reprint.
- 1680. Thomas Lüdecke(n) pseudonym of Andreas (Andrew) Müller. Oratio Orationum. Eighty-three arrange by family.
- 1692. Nicolaes (Nicholas) Witsen. Noord en Oost Tartarye. Eleven Siberian languages.
- 1713. Benjamin Motte (typographer and preface). Oratio Dominica : Πολύγλωττος, Πολύμορφος : Nimirum plus Centum Linguis, Versionibus, aut Characteribus Reddita & Expreſſa. Mostly a London reprint of Müller.
- 1715. John Chamberlayne & David Wilkins. Oratio Dominica in Diversas Omnium Fere Gentium Linguas Versa et Propris Cujusque Linguae Characteribus Expressa. One hundred fifty-two translations, usually with a transliteration of non-Roman scripts.
- 1740. Orationis Dominicae Versiones Fere. Centum Summa. Qua. Fieri. Potuit. Cura. Genuinis. Cuiuslibet. Linguae Characteribus Typis. Vel. Aere. Expressae. Leipzig reprint of Müller.
- 1741. Johann Christoph Wagner. … Das ist, das Gebet dess Herrn oder Vater Unser in viel Sprachen und Schreib-Arten, nemlich, in mehr als hundert Sprachen. Augsburg reprint like Motte.
- 1748 Johann Friedrich Fritz, Benjamin Schultze. Orientalischer und Occidentalischer Sprachmeister. The Brown Library copy is bound with another work: inside title page; start of Orationis Dominicæ Versiones. Two hundred languages.
- 1787. Don Lorenzo Hervás y Pandura. Saggio Pratico delle Lingue: con prolegomeni e una raccolta di orazioni dominicali in piú di trecento lingue e dialetti, …. Over a hundred of the prayers are the Pater Noster.
- 1789. Gustav von Bergmann. Das Gebeth des Herrn oder Vaterunsersammlung in hundert zwey und funfzig Sprachen. All are printed in Fraktur.
- 1799. Edmund Fry. Pantographia; containing accurate copies of all the known alphabets in the world. About one hundred forty are illustrated with a Pater Noster.
- 1805. Jean-Joseph Marcel for Napolean's Typis Imperialibus, Paris. Oratio dominica CL linguis versa, et propriis cujusque linguæ characteribus plerumque expressa.
- 1806. Giambattista Bodoni Typis Bondonianis, Parma. Oratio Dominica in CLV linguas versa et exoticis characteribus plerumque expressa.
- 1806-17. Johann Christoph Adelung & Johann Severin Vater. Mithridates, oder allgemeine Sprachenkunde:
- 1818 Serampore Mission Press. Specimens of Editions of the Sacred Scriptures in the Eastern languages, Translated by the Brethren of the Serampore Mission, and of Several Others, Printed at the Mission Press. Forty-nine languages, mostly from India.
- 1844, 1847. Alois Auer for Hof- und Staats-Druckerei, Vienna. Sprachenhalle.Often bound together. A higher resolution scan here.
- 1855. Giuseppe Giorgio Sulzer. Dell'origine e della natura dei dialetti comunemente chiamati romanici messi.
- 1855. E. J. Brill. Het gebed des Heeren, in 14 talen, strekkende tot proeve van letters van het gewoon Europeesch karakter afwijkende, aanwezig ter boekdrukkerij van E.J. Brill te Leiden. Fourteen languages / typefaces.
- 1870.
Imperial Russian Academy of Sciences.
- Hermann Dalton for the Evangelische Haupt-Bibelgesellschaft, dedicated to Georg von Meyendorff. Gebet des Herrn in den Sprachen Russlands. With a section of Vater-Unser-Texte.
- Образцы шрифтов типографіи и словолитни Императорской академіи наук. Including all of the previous work. That is not a very good scan. There is a much better one here, but of an abbreviated edition.
- 1870. Edited by Pietro Marietti, Director of the Tipografia di Propaganda Fide, responsible for printing its missionary works, and the son of Giacinto Marietti of Marietti Editore. Oratio Dominica in CCL. lingvas versa et CLXXX charactervm formis; reprinted, with additional notes in English, in the '70s.
- 1871. S. Apostolides. Our Lord's prayer in one hundred different languages. “Published for the Benefit of the Poor Cretan Refugees now in Greece.” (Due to the Cretan Revolt.)
- 1884. Gustaf Fredrik Bergholtz, Chicago. The Lord's Prayer in the Principal Languages, Dialects and Versions of the World : Printed in Type and Vernaculars of the Different Nations.
- 1890, 1891, 1905.
Gilbert & Rivington.
- Lord's Prayer in Languages of Africa;
- The Lord's Prayer In Three Hundred Languages : Comprising the : Leading Languages and their Principal Dialects throughout the World : With the Places Where Spoken.
- The Lord's Prayer In Five Hundred Languages.
The German Wikipedia uniquely(?) has a page on Sprachvergleich anhand des Vaterunsers 'Language Comparison based on the Pater Noster', containing a table by language. But that section is flagged, „Dieser Artikel oder Abschnitt bedarf einer grundsätzlichen Überarbeitung,“ so who knows what will happen.
What do these collections say about the faith or obsessions of the collectors, or the power of their backers, or about the languages, or the glyphs used to record them, or about the speakers themselves? Is the Lord's Prayer a particularly good choice for a canonical text to compare?
Continued in part 2.
0 comments:
Post a Comment