The governor's soldiers took Jesus into the residence and gathered around him the whole company. He was stripped naked and put on Him a purple robe (Mt 27.27-28) [trad. Juan Mateos].
This passage, which is unparalleled in other two Evangelists (Mark 15.17 and Jn 19.2), founded iconography of derision or mockery of the soldiers . Interestingly here some would warn one of those tiny inconsistencies in the Gospels: What color was the coat, cloak or covering chlamys with praetorian soldiers to Jesus? "Red Matthew, or purple of Mark and John? Let's see what the text says in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark in some translations I have consulted:
chlamyda Kokkino / endydiskousin auton porphyra [Greek].
chlamydem coccineam / induunt eum purpura [Latin Vulgate].
Zauber kirmidzi / wa-hu-albasu uryuwan [Arabic, Lebanon Bible Society].
a mantle of purple / purple dress it [Castilian, EEC].
joins chlamyde écarlate / ils will revêtent of pourpre [French Bible de Jerusalem].
mantell of porpra a / the dress of porpra [Catalan, Montserrat Monjos].
mantle um vermelho / Vestiram Jesus com um purple robe [Portuguese CNBB].
a mantello Scarlatta / lo di Porpora vestirono [Italian CEI].
a scarlet robe / they Clothed him with purple [English, King James Version].
einen Purpur tablecloth / und ihm ein zogen Purpura [German Luther Bibel].
I now some notes to these versions, starting with those that I find unacceptable. Pour into two gospels purple is bad translation (like that offered by the official version of the English Episcopal Conference published this year), because it obscures the reader the discrepancy of the two parallel passages, which is evident in the original Greek and the Vulgate [ clamydem coccineam / purple ]. It is striking that the same defect incurred in the German version of Luther.
chlamyda Kokkino / endydiskousin auton porphyra [Greek].
chlamydem coccineam / induunt eum purpura [Latin Vulgate].
Zauber kirmidzi / wa-hu-albasu uryuwan [Arabic, Lebanon Bible Society].
a mantle of purple / purple dress it [Castilian, EEC].
joins chlamyde écarlate / ils will revêtent of pourpre [French Bible de Jerusalem].
mantell of porpra a / the dress of porpra [Catalan, Montserrat Monjos].
mantle um vermelho / Vestiram Jesus com um purple robe [Portuguese CNBB].
a mantello Scarlatta / lo di Porpora vestirono [Italian CEI].
a scarlet robe / they Clothed him with purple [English, King James Version].
einen Purpur tablecloth / und ihm ein zogen Purpura [German Luther Bibel].
I now some notes to these versions, starting with those that I find unacceptable. Pour into two gospels purple is bad translation (like that offered by the official version of the English Episcopal Conference published this year), because it obscures the reader the discrepancy of the two parallel passages, which is evident in the original Greek and the Vulgate [ clamydem coccineam / purple ]. It is striking that the same defect incurred in the German version of Luther.
terms also regulates the Catalan version of the Abbey of Montserrat [ porpra ], although mitigated with a valuable note to Matthew ("the porpra imitated Vermella layer amb d'un soldat was a badge reial "), which already points to a more faithful translation of the text evangelist [ Vermella layer ], similar to the English of Juan Mateos P. sj [ red cloak ]. The Jerusalem Bible notes the same thing to chlamyde écarlate [" manteau of soldat romain ( sagum ). Sa couleur rouge pair will evoke derision the pourpre royale."]
If purple translate 15.17 in Mc raises no doubts, what would then be a good translation of chlamydem coccineam of Mt 27.28? Kokkinos (coccinus) and porphyra (purple), are different colors, then require different translations. The purple dye was obtained in antiquity, in the Phoenician city of Tyre, a marine gastropod mollusk. The Kokkinos is another dye obtained from a hemipteran insect, the kermes, which was extracted the crimson or scarlet. Not be confused.
Arab voices translation, which beat remotely in western languages \u200b\u200bare eloquent. The kirmidzi [ قرمزيا ] of the verse of Matthew, this is our crimson denotes the voice of Arab origin kermes , which is similar to hemipteran insect cochineal. Then the Arabic version endorses the Greek and Latin Kokkinos Mt coccinus be interpreted as the color that gives the insect cochineal: scarlet, crimson or red (purple ever!), Just how the vermilion Castilian, and Catalan vermell, come from vermiculus, vermis (worm, worm).
The translation that I like of which I consulted, is the New American Bible (Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington DC, 1970). Compare the Latin version, in the passage from Matthew: exuentes et eum, ei Circumdederunt coccineam chlamydem / they stripped off His clothes and wrapped him in a scarlet military Cloack. And in the passage of Mc: induunt et eum purpura / they dressed him in royal purple . The American version is very periphrastic (requires 75% more words than the Vulgate), but for that very very clear and explanatory. Shy away from cultism chlamys , preferring military Cloack circumlocution. And he believes necessary to specify royal purple (because readers do not understand the symbolism and regions this color). Thus, the modern English version leaves the primitiveness of the King James Bible (whose formal simplicity the like, however, to the classical languages).
The New American Bible (Ricciardi and Hurault, 1972) has the same virtues of clarity and precision. Mt Read: took away his clothes and put a layer of red soldier. While Mark made the mistake of erasing all traces of purple: was dressed in a red cape (sic), which is unacceptable for the reasons translation reverse to that are found in the standard versions of these two passages (correct red with purple).
And now back to our first question: that layer with the soldiers covered the nakedness of the Nazarene, was red or purple? The Gospels are not contradictory. Child would be a fallacy to claim that one of the evangelists were right, and the other in error, as a logical disjunction . Layer soldier, or chlamys, was red in all cases, as they say good translations of Mt Purple [eum purpura induunt ] is the meaning of royalty (away ridiculous, write the Bible of Jerusalem) that the Evangelist Mc fact attributed to a more vulgar and offensive, the mockery of the soldiers.
Therefore it must be assessed contradiction in Mt describe the event as it was (and color as it would), and instead set its symbolism Mc. The story is the same (the mockery of Jesus), although the interpretation of the Evangelists, expressed in the coat color [ chlamydem coccineam, purple ], differs. For some reason which we will not stop now, hebraizante Matthew is more sensitive to the fact mondo, and avoids stressing the sense of majesty in drafting the Roman Marcos.
therefore seems unfaithful to the letter that the term is regularized in both gospels, Matthew doing that I did not want to say (ie purple). The official version of the English Episcopal Conference, at least in the minimum fare, I think is unfortunate. If you have tried to resolve an apparent contradiction between making evangelists agree by force, saying so would not understand the meaning of the differences between parallel passages, and if, for catechetical and pastoral aims to avoid the perplexity of the faithful, This is so as to minors, which would be juggling the rich diversity of topography and the letter of the Gospels (as well as children are told not all).
Image: Canvas Ecce homo restored the Hungarian painter Mihály Munkácsy [link ].
If purple translate 15.17 in Mc raises no doubts, what would then be a good translation of chlamydem coccineam of Mt 27.28? Kokkinos (coccinus) and porphyra (purple), are different colors, then require different translations. The purple dye was obtained in antiquity, in the Phoenician city of Tyre, a marine gastropod mollusk. The Kokkinos is another dye obtained from a hemipteran insect, the kermes, which was extracted the crimson or scarlet. Not be confused.
Arab voices translation, which beat remotely in western languages \u200b\u200bare eloquent. The kirmidzi [ قرمزيا ] of the verse of Matthew, this is our crimson denotes the voice of Arab origin kermes , which is similar to hemipteran insect cochineal. Then the Arabic version endorses the Greek and Latin Kokkinos Mt coccinus be interpreted as the color that gives the insect cochineal: scarlet, crimson or red (purple ever!), Just how the vermilion Castilian, and Catalan vermell, come from vermiculus, vermis (worm, worm).
The translation that I like of which I consulted, is the New American Bible (Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington DC, 1970). Compare the Latin version, in the passage from Matthew: exuentes et eum, ei Circumdederunt coccineam chlamydem / they stripped off His clothes and wrapped him in a scarlet military Cloack. And in the passage of Mc: induunt et eum purpura / they dressed him in royal purple . The American version is very periphrastic (requires 75% more words than the Vulgate), but for that very very clear and explanatory. Shy away from cultism chlamys , preferring military Cloack circumlocution. And he believes necessary to specify royal purple (because readers do not understand the symbolism and regions this color). Thus, the modern English version leaves the primitiveness of the King James Bible (whose formal simplicity the like, however, to the classical languages).
The New American Bible (Ricciardi and Hurault, 1972) has the same virtues of clarity and precision. Mt Read: took away his clothes and put a layer of red soldier. While Mark made the mistake of erasing all traces of purple: was dressed in a red cape (sic), which is unacceptable for the reasons translation reverse to that are found in the standard versions of these two passages (correct red with purple).
And now back to our first question: that layer with the soldiers covered the nakedness of the Nazarene, was red or purple? The Gospels are not contradictory. Child would be a fallacy to claim that one of the evangelists were right, and the other in error, as a logical disjunction . Layer soldier, or chlamys, was red in all cases, as they say good translations of Mt Purple [eum purpura induunt ] is the meaning of royalty (away ridiculous, write the Bible of Jerusalem) that the Evangelist Mc fact attributed to a more vulgar and offensive, the mockery of the soldiers.
Therefore it must be assessed contradiction in Mt describe the event as it was (and color as it would), and instead set its symbolism Mc. The story is the same (the mockery of Jesus), although the interpretation of the Evangelists, expressed in the coat color [ chlamydem coccineam, purple ], differs. For some reason which we will not stop now, hebraizante Matthew is more sensitive to the fact mondo, and avoids stressing the sense of majesty in drafting the Roman Marcos.
therefore seems unfaithful to the letter that the term is regularized in both gospels, Matthew doing that I did not want to say (ie purple). The official version of the English Episcopal Conference, at least in the minimum fare, I think is unfortunate. If you have tried to resolve an apparent contradiction between making evangelists agree by force, saying so would not understand the meaning of the differences between parallel passages, and if, for catechetical and pastoral aims to avoid the perplexity of the faithful, This is so as to minors, which would be juggling the rich diversity of topography and the letter of the Gospels (as well as children are told not all).
Image: Canvas Ecce homo restored the Hungarian painter Mihály Munkácsy [link ].
.
