1. Introduction: Purpose and Scope

When I first approached the Old Latin Psalter, I did not expect it to be simple. My instincts were already shaped by work in difficult textual environments, especially in the textual criticism of the Old Testament. Even with that background, however, the Psalter turns out to be a different matter. Its complexity is not the familiar complexity of a long textual tradition. Rather, it is unruly, layered, and often reluctant to make its own boundaries visible. What is commonly called “the Old Latin Psalter” is not a single text, but a loose constellation of practices, revisions, and inherited forms that resist being treated as one coherent tradition.

Part of the problem is historical. By the time Jerome began revising the Psalms, the Latin West was already accustomed to living with several forms at once: older translations shaped by local usage, earlier attempts at revision, and finally Jerome’s own effort to impose a measure of order on a tradition that did not easily submit to it. The manuscripts that have come down to us preserve traces of all these stages. They are rarely uniform. More often, they contain several textual layers within the same witness. As a result, when modern scholarship labels a manuscript or a reading as “Old Latin,” the term often conceals more than it clarifies.

The aim of this guide is therefore not to impose yet another system on the material. Instead, it seeks to offer orientation. It provides a map that helps make the terrain navigable: what can meaningfully be described as “Old Latin” in the case of the Psalter, how the Roman and Gallican traditions relate to earlier forms, how mixed and marginal witnesses are to be understood, and how historical development helps explain the shape of the surviving evidence.

2. What “Old Latin” Means in the Case of the Psalter

From an early stage, the Psalms occupied a distinctive place in Christian engagement with Scripture. They were not encountered primarily as a clearly delimited biblical book, but rather as a body of authoritative language that could be drawn upon in a variety of contexts. New Testament references to ψαλμοί and to ψάλλειν (e.g. Eph 5:19; Col 3:16; Jas 5:13) point to practices of praise and prayer, but they do not presuppose a fixed textual corpus or a clearly defined liturgical form. Even the term “psalm” itself remains fluid: it may refer to texts from the biblical Psalter, but also to other scriptural songs or canticles.

What these passages indicate, therefore, is not an already stabilised psalmody in the later liturgical sense. Psalm verses serve as words of prayer, interpretation, and self-expression, and they appear naturally in a wide range of narrative and theological contexts. The citation of Ps 22 by Jesus on the cross is a particularly striking example of this mode of use. Such cases presuppose a close familiarity with the Psalms as Scripture, while leaving open the concrete forms in which they were recited, sung, or adapted.

This openness of use has important consequences for the transmission of the Psalter. The Psalms were not only copied and revised as a biblical book, but continuously reworked through practices that did not sharply separate textual authority, prayer, and interpretation. Their intensive use in prayer and recitation did not stand in tension with textual attention; on the contrary, it generated a heightened sensitivity to wording, variation, and coherence. In this sense, prayer and textual scrutiny are not opposing modes of engagement. The Psalms thus became both the most frequently prayed and one of the most closely attended biblical texts of late antiquity.

As a result, the surviving evidence does not preserve the history of the Old Latin Psalter in the form of clearly separable translation stages. Instead, it reflects a tradition shaped by repetition, adjustment, and gradual convergence. The extant manuscripts suggest the presence of a broadly shared textual core alongside persistent local variation, while patristic quotations point to earlier phases of Latin engagement with the Greek Psalter that are no longer directly accessible. Although it is likely that several acts of translation preceded the forms preserved in our sources, the number and mutual relationships of these early translations cannot be securely reconstructed.

This situation cautions against treating the Old Latin Psalter by simple analogy with other Old Testament books. Description must take precedence over premature synthesis. Transmission and use are decisive factors for understanding the shape of the tradition. Within this Greek-derived Old Latin context, a range of regional forms can be observed, commonly labelled according to later liturgical usages (such as Ambrosian or Mozarabic) or associated with particular areas of transmission, including North Africa. Their boundaries remain fluid, and their textual profiles often extend well beyond their original settings.

3. The North African Old Latin Psalter: The Point of Departure

Among the strands that make up what is conventionally called the Old Latin Psalter, the North African evidence occupies a distinctive position. It is not only chronologically early, but also methodologically crucial, because it preserves forms of the Latin Psalter that precede later processes of revision, harmonisation, and liturgical stabilisation. At the same time, it is the least accessible part of the tradition, since it survives almost entirely outside the manuscript transmission.

What we possess from North Africa is not a Psalter codex, but a dispersed body of quotations embedded in the works of Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine, and other Latin authors. These citations point to a Latin Psalter that stands in close contact with the Greek text. The phrasing is often concise and direct, and in a number of cases it preserves readings that later disappear from the European Latin tradition. For this reason, the African material is commonly regarded as preserving the earliest recoverable layer of Latin psalm translation.

At the same time, the nature of the evidence places clear limits on what can be reconstructed. The quotations are always mediated by their literary contexts and rhetorical aims. They do not allow us to determine with certainty whether an author cited from a fixed Psalter text, from a form adapted for liturgical use, or from a rendering shaped ad hoc by memory or interpretation. Nor is it possible to assign individual psalm renderings securely to particular local communities or settings. What survives is therefore a spectrum of usage that reflects both textual plurality and theological appropriation.

This situation raises fundamental questions about the mode of translation and transmission underlying the African Old Latin Psalter. The traditional alternative between a single translation and multiple independent translations proves too rigid to account for the evidence. On the one hand, the degree of consistency observable across a wide range of African authors makes it unlikely that the material can be explained solely in terms of spontaneous or purely individual renderings. Certain recurring formulations suggest that Latin psalm texts circulated in recognisable forms and that authors such as Tertullian were drawing on an existing Latin Vorlage. This points to a level of textual continuity that goes beyond what would be expected from entirely ad hoc translation.

On the other hand, the liturgical character of the Psalter makes it equally unlikely that this continuity depended on a single, fixed written text. Psalms were used in communal prayer, recitation, and memorisation, contexts in which wording could be adjusted without necessarily giving rise to clearly distinct textual traditions. It is therefore plausible that local communities translated or adapted psalm texts for use without leaving traces that can be identified as separate translations in the surviving evidence. Such practices need not be understood as evidence for multiple independent translations of the Psalter. Rather, they point to a mode of transmission in which a dominant Latin psalm text circulated while remaining open to variation in use.

This perspective also helps to account for the close relationship between the African Latin Psalter and the Greek text. The African material often reflects Greek readings that precede later stages of standardisation. This suggests that the Latin Vorlage itself stood in close proximity to a relatively fluid Greek textual tradition. The African evidence thus preserves not only an early phase of Latin reception, but also indirect traces of the diversity of the Greek Psalter at an early stage.

Despite the fragmentary character of the evidence, the North African Psalter plays a decisive role in the textual history of the Psalter as a whole. Precisely because it predates later revisions of the Greek text and their Latin reception, it provides an indispensable point of comparison for identifying older strata behind later Roman and Gallican forms. In some cases, African Latin readings align with early Greek variants that are otherwise preserved only indirectly. In others, they resist later tendencies toward stylistic smoothing or liturgical adjustment.

For these reasons, the African Old Latin Psalter forms the natural point of departure for any discussion of the tradition as a whole. It represents the earliest recoverable phase of Latin engagement with the Greek Psalter. The Italian forms, the Roman and Gallican Psalters, and the mixed-text manuscripts of the medieval period can only be properly understood when read against this African background.

4. Old Latin Psalters in Italy and Europe

Outside North Africa, Old Latin psalm texts are preserved primarily within the manuscript tradition of Italy and Western Europe. Unlike the African material, these witnesses are transmitted in codices, yet they rarely represent uniform textual forms. Instead, they reflect a complex interaction between inherited Latin renderings and emerging attempts at stabilisation. The European evidence thus points to a stage of the tradition in which textual plurality coexists with a growing concern for consistency.

These forms cannot be understood simply as regional variants in a narrow sense. Rather, they reflect different ways of negotiating the relationship between the Psalter as a text of prayer and the Psalter as a text subjected to correction in comparison with Greek exemplars. The same dynamics observed earlier, namely the interaction between lived liturgical use and emerging practices of textual control, continue to shape the European tradition. Stability developed gradually within the practice of use itself.

Within this European context, three Old Latin psalter forms can be distinguished with some clarity: the Roman Psalter, the Mozarabic Psalter, and the Milanese or Ambrosian Psalter. All three presuppose earlier Old Latin psalm texts, and all three were in circulation prior to Jerome’s revisionary activity. They represent not successive stages of a linear development, but parallel responses to the need for coherence within a tradition that was already diverse.

5. The Roman Psalter (Psalterium Romanum)

The Roman Psalter occupies a central position among the European Old Latin forms. It represents an early and relatively stable liturgical Psalter, firmly rooted in Roman usage. Its antiquity is well attested, and its text stands in clear continuity with earlier Old Latin renderings, while at the same time showing signs of selection and consolidation.

The Roman Psalter should not be understood as a pristine or original text. Rather, it is the outcome of a process in which older Latin material was preserved for liturgical use. Its relative consistency does not reflect the elimination of variation, but the gradual preference for certain formulations within a living tradition. In this way, the Roman Psalter became both recognisable and durable.

Jerome was familiar with the Roman Psalter, and it formed part of the textual situation to which his later revisions responded. Its long survival in Roman liturgy, even after other psalm texts had been revised or replaced elsewhere, gives it particular importance. It allows us to trace continuity within the Old Latin tradition and to identify features that resist later forms of standardisation.

6. The Mozarabic Psalter

The Mozarabic Psalter represents another European strand within the Old Latin Psalter tradition. While it shares substantial material with other Old Latin forms, it also displays a distinctive profile shaped by its own liturgical environment. Its text preserves older Latin renderings alongside local developments.

Like the Roman Psalter, the Mozarabic Psalter presupposes an inherited Latin psalm text rather than a fresh act of translation. Its particular character emerges through use within a specific liturgical framework. The Mozarabic evidence thus confirms that Old Latin psalm texts could attain a measure of coherence within regional practice without becoming fully standardised.

7. The Milanese or Ambrosian Psalter

The Milanese, or Ambrosian, Psalter forms a third European Old Latin tradition. Closely associated with the liturgical practice of Milan, it preserves yet another configuration of inherited Latin psalm material. It offers a clear indication of how regional traditions could remain vital even as broader processes of consolidation were underway.

As with the Roman and Mozarabic Psalters, the Ambrosian Psalter reflects a balance between continuity and adaptation. It draws on earlier Old Latin renderings while responding to the needs of a particular liturgical setting. Its survival underscores the fact that multiple Old Latin psalter forms could coexist over extended periods.

8. The Hexaplaric Psalter (Psalterium Gallicanum)

The Roman, Mozarabic, and Ambrosian Psalters illustrate the diversity of Old Latin psalm traditions circulating in Europe in late antiquity. This plurality forms the historical background against which Jerome began his work on the Psalter. When he turned to the Psalms, the Latin tradition was already characterised by the coexistence of inherited Old Latin forms, regional usages, and texts shaped by long-standing liturgical practice.

Before producing a new translation of the Psalter from a Hebrew Vorlage, Jerome undertook a comprehensive revision of the existing Latin psalm text on the basis of a Greek exemplar associated with Origen’s Hexapla. In principle, revising an established Latin text against a Greek Vorlage was not an unusual undertaking. What distinguishes Jerome’s hexaplaric revision, however, is the degree to which it succeeded in bringing together textual correction and liturgical usability. The revised text offered a Latin Psalter that was both more closely aligned with a carefully controlled Greek text and suitable for sustained communal prayer.

The success of this revision cannot be explained by textual considerations alone. The hexaplaric Psalter did not displace earlier forms simply because it was textually “better”, but because it met the practical needs of a Church increasingly concerned with stability and coherence. It provided a form of the Psalter that could function at once as a liturgical text and as a reliable scriptural authority.

For this reason, the hexaplaric Psalter gradually replaced the Roman Psalter and other Old Latin forms across most of the Latin West. Its adoption marks a decisive shift in the history of the Latin Psalter and shaped the dominant form of medieval transmission.

9. Jerome’s Psalter iuxta Hebraeos

Alongside the hexaplaric revision of the Psalter, Jerome later produced a new Latin translation based directly on the Hebrew text, the so-called Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos. In contrast to the hexaplaric Psalter, this version did not aim at revising an existing Latin tradition for liturgical use, but at offering a translation grounded in the Hebrew Vorlage and informed by philological comparison.

Despite its scholarly ambition, the Psalter iuxta Hebraeos never achieved liturgical acceptance in the Latin West. Its divergence from established psalm texts, combined with the already strong position of the hexaplaric Psalter, limited its practical impact. The iuxta Hebraeos thus remained largely a text for study rather than prayer.

Nevertheless, its existence is significant for understanding Jerome’s work on the Psalms as a whole. It illustrates the range of approaches available in late antiquity, from revision within a received tradition to fresh translation from the Hebrew.

10. Transmission, Use, and Afterlife of the Old Latin Psalter

The transmission of the Old Latin Psalter does not follow the patterns familiar from other parts of the Latin Bible. Its history is shaped less by the circulation of fixed book texts than by continuous use in prayer and teaching. Psalms were learned by heart, adapted to local practice, and corrected in light of communal performance. As a result, textual transmission and liturgical use remain inseparable throughout the history of the Psalter.

Before the dominance of Jerome’s hexaplaric revision, Old Latin psalm texts circulated widely across the Latin West in forms that were neither uniform nor sharply delimited. Italian, African, Iberian, and northern traditions shared a common Greek foundation, but differed in wording, order, and stylistic profile. These differences reflect a context in which the authority of the Psalter lay as much in its function as prayer as in its status as Scripture.

The gradual success of the hexaplaric Psalter did not erase this older landscape at once. Older Old Latin forms continued to survive in local traditions and in mixed-text manuscripts. In some regions, particularly those with strong local liturgical identities, earlier Latin psalm texts remained in use alongside the revised Psalter for extended periods. Even where Jerome’s revision became dominant, traces of older Latin readings persisted, sometimes as isolated variants, sometimes more deeply embedded in the textual fabric.

The geographical spread of the Psalter further complicates the picture. While Old Latin psalm texts clearly travelled beyond their places of origin, their transmission cannot be reconstructed as a simple line of diffusion. The movement of texts was closely tied to networks of learning and liturgical practice, in which memorisation and oral transmission played a central role. In such contexts, textual stability and variation could coexist without necessarily producing distinct, clearly identifiable textual families.

In regions such as Ireland, where the Old Latin Bible exerted a lasting influence, the Psalter presents a particular challenge. Although Old Latin psalm texts do not survive there as complete, independent witnesses, their presence can be inferred indirectly through citations, adaptations, and the broader reception of Old Latin biblical language. This suggests that the influence of the Old Latin Psalter extended beyond the limits of the surviving manuscript evidence, shaping linguistic and theological habits even where the texts themselves have not been preserved.

The afterlife of the Old Latin Psalter is therefore not confined to the period before standardisation. Its versions continued to inform later transmission, both directly, through surviving readings, and indirectly, through patterns of use that shaped how the Psalms were sung and interpreted. Attention to this layered afterlife is essential for understanding the relationship between Old Latin psalm texts and the later Roman and hexaplaric traditions.

12. Old Latin Psalter Manuscripts: A Select Overview

The manuscript evidence for the Old Latin Psalter is fragmentary and uneven. No single codex preserves a complete Old Latin Psalter in a pure form. Instead, Old Latin psalm texts survive in palimpsests, mixed-text manuscripts, bilingual witnesses, and liturgical books, often alongside Roman or hexaplaric material. The following overview is therefore selective and illustrative rather than exhaustive, highlighting key witnesses that are frequently cited in scholarship.

African evidence

No independent Old Latin Psalter manuscripts survive from North Africa. The African Old Latin Psalter is reconstructed almost exclusively from patristic quotations, especially in Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine, and related authors. These citations remain the primary source for the earliest layer of Latin psalm translation.

Italian and European manuscripts

Several manuscripts preserve Old Latin psalm material within mixed or layered textual contexts. Among the most important are:

• Verona Psalter (Verona, Biblioteca Capitolare, I (1)): VL 300
• Psalterium Augiense 1 and 2 (Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Aug. CCLIII): VL 301–302
• Coislin Psalter (Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France Coislin 186): VL 333
• Sinai Psalter (Sinai, Slavonic Ms. 5): VL 460

Roman, Mozarabic, and Ambrosian contexts

Old Latin psalm texts also survive embedded within manuscripts associated with Roman, Iberian (Mozarabic), and Milanese liturgical traditions. In these cases, Old Latin material often appears alongside later revisions, reflecting long periods of coexistence and gradual replacement rather than abrupt textual change.

Short Bibliography

Allgeier, Arthur, Die Altlateinischen Psalterien, Freiburg: Herder, 1928

Capelle, Paul, Le Texte du Psautier Latin en Afrique, Collectanea Biblica IV; Rom: Pustet, 1913)

Fischer, Bonifatius, Zur Überlieferung Altlateinischer Bibeltexte im Mittelalter, Nederlands archief voor kerkgeschiedenis/Dutch Review of Church History, Nieuwe Serie, Vol 56, No. 1 (1975, 19–34 = id., Lateinische Bibelhandschriften im Frühen Mittelalter, Vetus Latina 11, Herder: Freiburg 1985, 404–421

Gryson, Roger, Altlateinische Handschriften/Manuscrits vieux latins: répertoire descriptif. Deuxième partie. VL 1/2B. Freiburg: Herder, 2004

Norris, Oliver, The Latin Psalter, in: H.A.G. Houghton, The Oxford Handbook of the Latin Bible, New York: Oxford University Press, 2023, 65–76