IX. These expositions are in many places deficient, because the copyists did not transcribe everything, but brought forward fewer things than the codices of Athanasius contained. It rarely happens that foreign interpretations bear the name of Athanasius; this we have noted in the margin insofar as our ability allowed. And indeed, it is very easy to discern the style of Athanasius in these, both because in the argument he generally places before the eyes a sort of synopsis of the whole psalm, and one akin to the interpretation he is about to offer, so that by this token it is easy to distinguish the true from the false; and because Athanasius is so perspicuous, so brief, and concise in these that he can be distinguished from others in this respect as well. In these, moreover, he generally sets forth the meaning, as they call it, spiritual, so that Nicetas in his catena cites Theodoret for the literal, and Athanasius almost for the spiritual. Yet it is not rare for him to touch upon the letter, and indeed most correctly toward the end of the Prophet, so that no one will fail to appreciate him. The arguments of the psalms are of the highest value, where he also often touches upon the literal mind aptly and acutely before he approaches the spiritual. Many readings from Aquila and Symmachus are present here, hitherto unobserved by Drusius and others. There is a place in Psalm LXVII, which we consider alien, and it smacks of invention, namely that concerning the reed at verse 17; it is said that the Son, when He was entreating the Father, spoke these words: *Let this cup pass from me*, not in hypocrisy, not to snare and deceive Satan, not because He was exalting the will of the world as His own. This is openly refuted by the explanation which exists in the book *On the Passion of the Lord* in Volume IV, which we have not unjustly relegated among the suspect. The Argument of Psalm LXX mentions the ruin of Jerusalem under the Romans for the first time, because the second was likewise inflicted by the Romans under Hadrian. These things concerning the expositions on the Psalms are sufficient.
After this admonition was written, I received letters from the illustrious Anthony Muratori, who with his own hand transcribed for me into the aforementioned commentary on the *Canticle of Mary, sister of Moses*, a very few things, as you see. Here, then, is a specimen of our commentary on the *Canticle of Deuteronomy*.
It signifies also the falling away of the Jews themselves and the goodness of God, which He provided to them, and the admission of the nations. *Give ear, O heaven, and I will speak, and,* etc. Since the transgression of the Jews was great, and witnesses were not found in heaven, God calls to witness, through the prophet, heaven and earth, the great elements. *Let it be awaited.* For the word of God is great as rain, and profitable, being held fast. *And let it come down.* With gentleness and quietness, that is, as dew upon grass, and as snow.
After two other verses, it is added: The rest are missing, and here the Athanasian expositions have their end.
From the aforementioned commentary on the Psalms, the praised man sent us some very brief clauses, quite unlike our own, so that because of their brevity, a judgment cannot be formed as to whether they are the same as our expositions or not. Whatever the case may be, since our own are very frequently praised by authors under the name of Athanasius, it is concluded from this that they are not indeed other than genuine expositions of Athanasius.
ADMONITION
In the Argument of Athanasius on the Psalter, and in the subsequent supplements (a).An excellent Argument on the Psalms comes forth from an eleventh-century parchment codex of the Ambrosian library, of the best quality, whose every word argues the judgment and skill of the writer. Athanasius begins, however, from the order of the Psalms, the confused series of which he thinks to have arisen from the carelessness and negligence of the Jews. For once the paternal laws were despised, and their mind was inclined to the worship of idols, they destroyed the books and the writers who were the interpreters of the ancient religion, so that many things were scattered here and there and nearly consumed by age, and a great part even perished entirely. Under these circumstances, however, when they were worn down by many disasters in punishment for their crimes, and had migrated to Babylon by the command of the victors, a certain prophet among them undertook the task of collecting the sacred books: these he arranged as they were given to him, and in the individual parts as they first occurred to him, and not in their natural order. Hence arises that confusion of the Psalms, hence the perturbation of the series. But Athanasius seems to have borrowed these things from Eusebius, whose words he also for the most part transcribes. In this, however, he varies slightly, in that he assigns the work of restoring the Scripture, which Eusebius says was undertaken by Ezra, to one of the prophets, with no one mentioned in particular.
The matters subsequently mentioned concerning the authors of the Psalms are indeed proposed accurately and learnedly, and have great affinity with Origen's short work, which we shall soon edit (a). Furthermore, Athanasius concludes his argument with a most beautiful admonition, where he discourses excellently, albeit briefly, on the frame of mind with which the Psalms should be read, addressing the ascetics. We transcribed the Supplements to the Expositions on the Psalms from an Ambrosian codex while we were in Milan. That codex is recent, taken from an older Scorialensis. For, as we warned in the edition of Athanasius which we prepared not long ago (above, col. 53), those Expositions of Athanasius are not complete in all their parts and details, but have been truncated and abridged here and there by the boldness of copyists: some have even been extracted from catenae. I pay no heed to the modern writer who rashly pronounced that those Expositions on the Psalms are not by Athanasius, but without providing any reason for the denial. He cared nothing about this, or rather, he chose to ignore the fact that the work is attributed to Athanasius in all the centuries after Athanasius, and is mentioned by the majority of writers, mostly in the places where they exist in the modern Commentary: the affinity of style, the frequent words of Athanasian usage, and the antiquity of the codices from which they came did not move him—all of which a careful critic should have seriously examined before passing judgment. But he thought he was playing the part of a discerning critic when, having dismissed the labor of investigating and inquiring with ill-timed eagerness, he pronounced unhesitatingly: "They are not Athanasius's." To whom we answer with equal ease: "They are Athanasius's"; and you have exempted us from having to prove this anew, since you offer nothing to overthrow so many testimonies of writers and so many other arguments. Certainly, let no one accuse us of having presented as genuine and confirmed, works that are spurious or doubtful out of affection or preconceived opinion: for we have done our utmost, and as the requirements of fairness demanded, we have prefaced each work with notes; and although we leave it to the judgment of everyone to hold an opposing opinion, if anyone should undertake this task, let them occupy the role of judge and critic only by thoroughly examining the arguments and notes which we, according to our ability, have prefaced to each individual treatise. It is helpful to warn the reader that another Commentary on the title of Athanasius is kept in the Justinian library in Venice and in the Ambrosian in Milan, which is entirely different from the published one, beginning: "The prophecy is fulfilled in regard to Joseph of Arimathea." But since it is mentioned by no writers, it is either the work of another of our people, or it falsely claims to be that of the great Athanasius.
SAINT ATHANASIUS, ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA, ARGUMENT ON THE PSALMS.
In the Hebrew book of the Psalms, all the psalms are inscribed without the addition of numbering, and in various ways. For some are joined together, while others are divided. Indeed, immediately at the beginning, the first and second are joined in the Hebrew text; but on the contrary, the ninth, which is joined in our version, is divided into two in the Hebrew text. Moreover, the whole book of the Psalms is distributed into five parts. It must be noted, however, that the order of the psalms by no means follows the sequence and rationale of history and the times; rather, the order of the times is often changed, as the Book of Kings demonstrates. For when the Jewish people were exceedingly addicted to the worship of idols, they came to a complete oblivion of their ancestral Scriptures, to such an extent that not even the book of the Law of Moses appeared, nor did anything of the piety of the fathers remain among them. Therefore, when they killed the prophets who were convicting them of their impieties, and were for this reason delivered into the captivity of the Assyrians, under these circumstances a certain prophet, who was diligently caring for their Synagogue, gathered the book of the Psalms along with other Scriptures: not that he found all the psalms at one and the same time, but at diverse times; and he placed in the beginning those which were first found: which resulted in the fact that not even all the psalms of David himself are placed in order, and the psalms of the sons of Korah, and of Asaph, and of Solomon, and of Moses, and of Ethan the Israelite, and of Heman, and again of David, are found mixed in
A the book; not according to the times in which they were spoken, but according to the times in which they were found. You may find the same thing having occurred in the pericopes of the prophets.
As for the psalms after the first and up to the twelfth that are without a title, and those that have a title but do not declare whose they are, the Hebrews say they belong to those whose names are written in the titles preceding the untitled ones. However, I believe that the first and second, being one B both together, belong to David, because all those that follow in the first part of the Psalms are his. From the third, indeed, up to the fortieth, all are inscribed as David’s; wherefore it seems to me that the first and the second also belong to him. The book of the Acts of the Apostles confirms this argument, in which it is said: "Master, you who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them; who by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said: 'Why did the nations rage, and the peoples meditate vain things?'" For by these words he clearly said that the second psalm is David's. C It is likely that the title "of David" was omitted in that psalm because it contains a naked and open prophecy concerning the Lord, where it is said: "Against the Lord and against His Christ." Consistently with this, he adds from the very person of Christ: "The Lord said to me, You are my Son."
All the psalms, therefore, are one hundred and fifty. Some, however, think that all belong to the blessed David; yet this is not indicated by any mark. For while all are referred to David, it is shown in the titles whose psalm each one has become. For four leaders of the songs were chosen, with two hundred and eighty-eight attendants. D There are psalms placed under the four leaders, as the titles also demonstrate. For when it says: "A psalm to the sons of Korah, Ethan, Asaph, and Heman," the sons of Korah, Ethan, Asaph, and Heman themselves sing it. When it says "A psalm of Asaph," Asaph himself spoke it; when it says "A psalm of Idithum," Idithum himself chants it; whenever it says "of David," David himself was the one speaking; but when it says "to David," the psalm is recited by others for David.
There are indeed one hundred and fifty in all, of which seventy-two are of David, nine to David, twelve of Asaph, twelve to the sons of Korah, one of Idithum, one of Ethan, one of Heman, one of Solomon, two of Haggai and Zechariah, thirty-nine untitled, and one of Moses: all one hundred and fifty.
We must, therefore, consider this mystery: for what reason, while there are different singers and not all the psalms are David's, is the Psalter referred to David? We shall not pass over this. It was inscribed thus because he himself was the cause of these being published; for he himself chose the singers. He, therefore, having been the cause, was deemed worthy of this honor, so that all things that the singers said might be reckoned as David's.
Since David was a prophet, and held his interior eyes opened, and knew that the evil spirits rejoice in the fall of men, and conversely grieve when they are defeated by the repentance and amendment of men, he offered prayers against them in an intelligible and spiritual manner, using the visible enemies as a metaphor. For if we do not interpret the aim of the prophets in this way, we shall not only receive no profit for our soul from their words toward the acquisition of gentleness, but we shall even slip into a certain harshness of mind, contrary to evangelical doctrine, from the frequent prayers against enemies, and far from loving them. For David says a hundred times B: Let all my enemies be ashamed and confounded, and let me not be confounded. We must not believe that the prophets and friends of God spoke such things in any other manner than that which we have explained above. For thus the diligent and studious man should understand, whenever he finds the prophet praying [curse-like], that the transfer has been made from the perceptible enemies to the intelligible ones. Finally, the ascetic must be free for the understanding of individual words.
SAINT ATHANASIUS ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA EXPOSITIONS ON THE PSALMS
PSALM I. Argument.
David offers the beginning of the prophecy to Christ, who was to be born from him according to the flesh. Wherefore in the first place he calls happy those who hope in Him. C [He calls happy those who have not walked in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of the pestilent. For there were three orders among the Jews rising up against the Savior, namely, the Scribes, the Pharisees, and the lawyers, who are rightly and deservedly called ungodly, sinners, and pestilent. The way is called this life, because those who are born progress toward the end.]
1. *Blessed is the man who has not walked in the counsel of the ungodly.* The counsel of the ungodly can be called the assembly and gathering of the wicked. And since it is harmful to mix oneself with the assemblies of the ungodly, he declares him happy who does not approach their company even in the slightest. Such was Joseph of Arimathea, who buried the body of the Lord and God. For it was said of him that he did not consent to the counsel of those who betrayed Jesus. *And has not sat in the seat of the pestilent.* By the seat...