Talk:Psalm 130

Untitled

Regarding the merge from De profundis: at first blush it seems like a good idea. A disambig page may be the best choice for "De profundis", though, since there are several non-psalm entities with that name (such as the works by Wilde and Garcia Lorca)

As a precedent, Miserere redirects to Psalm 51. I need to write the music history of settings of De profundis, and it could be done at Psalm 130; articles on the individual settings can go under De profundis (Josquin), De profundis (Lassus), etc. Antandrus (talk) 17:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

There is perhaps a case for Psalm 130 to be merged into the de profundis article, but certainly not the other way around, since this article has several uses that do not relate to the psalm. Peterkingiron 14:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Greek/Hebrew/Neo-Vulgate question: I'm seeing that the neo-vulgate (current version) on the Vatican website has the following: 5 Sustinui te, Domine, sustinuit anima mea in verbo eius; speravit 6 anima mea in Domino magis quam custodes auroram. Magis quam custodes auroram 7 speret Israel in Domino, quia apud Dominum misericordia, et copiosa apud eum redemptio.

I took a look at the Septuagint Greek, and it's just plain odd, but tends more towards the Clementine vulgate than anything else. However, given the way most modern English translations look, and the revision to the vulgate by the Vatican, I'm assuming that the Hebrew must clear the question up. I don't know Hebrew, but perhaps someone who does can shine some light on the matter.

--Brendan 24 Sept. 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.183.109.5 (talk) 03:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposal

Although this discussion is about some sort of detailed merger of "Psalm 130" and "De profundis", could I suggest looking wider, and considering both the Psalms in general and their incipits in general? To that end, I propose the following:

• Articles "Psalm nnn" (the word "Psalm" is literal, e.g. "Psalm 130") should be slanted principally towards that psalm's texts, with viewpoints mainly of theology, Bible study, and literary analysis. Interpret all those terms reasonably widely, although the "literary analysis" aspect here might prefer a scripture/theology focus.
• Articles "Incipit xxx" (the word "Incipit" is representational, e.g. "De profundis") should be slanted towards use made of such texts in music, literature and culture. Again, give reasonably broad interpretation, including literary analysis that is significantly outside scripture/theology bounds. It would also often carry disambiguation details.
• Articles "Incipit xxx (Name AAA)" should be about specific instances, which may be multiple, corresponding to multiple "AAA".

There would thus be 150 "Psalm nnn" articles, one per psalm. There would (probably) be fewer "Incipit xxx" articles although a particular "Incipit xxx" may then have several "Incipit xxx (Name AAA)" articles.

Each "Incipit xxx" would, near its start, contain a link to its corresponding "Psalm nnn". And any "Psalm nnn" which had a corresponding "Incipit xxx" would carry a corresponding link in the other direction.

(There may also be other related articles, such as "Psalms of Ascent". But whilst bearing that in mind, I suspect it needn't further complicate our discussions here.)

Taking two sample psalms with different "Incipit xxx" characteristics:

• Psalm 130 would probably warrant all three types:
  • The usual "Psalm 130" about text, theology, etc.
  • A "De Profundis" about its use in culture. It may also have aspects of disambiguation.
  • A "De Profundis (Josquin)" about a particular setting. Similary a "De Profundis (Lassus)" etc.

• Psalm 88 has (let's assume) no major significant use in culture or music. There are then:
  • The usual "Psalm 88" about text, theology, etc.
  • A "Domine Deus" placeholder (with potential disambiguation aspects from other psalm incipits or entities which might be the same).

This principle could well extend to the non-Psalm canticles (Magnificat etc.).

Where would aspects of (say) liturgical use fit most naturally? Under "Psalm nnn" (text) or "Incipit xxx"? I would venture to suggest under "Incipit xxx" because liturgy ("the work of the people") is about our use (with implicit cultural associations) rather than about the textual or theological study inherent in the (proposed) characterstic "Psalm nnn" naming. More subtly, in the case of (say) article "Psalm 51" its corresponding (incipit) "Miserere" article would cover general season of Lent (and other penetential) liturgical aspects, and the additional (incipit) "Miserere (Allegri)" article would include, amongst other things, the specific liturgical history of that particular setting.

Another point (minor, I think). There are sometimes multiple incipits to a given Psalm: in such a case, one is picked to be the main "Incipit xxx" article, and the others are simply redirects onto it. Psalm 51 is such an example: it would probably be principally "Miserere", but an additional redirection from a "Miserere mei, Deus" tag might be useful to cover (for example) that incipit in the UK 1662 Book of Common Prayer.

How does that set of principles seem? Does it seem sufficient to cover both our immediate "De profundis" example and the generalisation to all psalms, canticles, etc.?

For "Psalm 130" and "De profundis", we then end up with or more less the current state (resisting the suggested merge) but perhaps doing a little textual migration. And only a little, for those principles already seem mostly to be in place anyway. (For instance, in the opening paragraph of the current "Psalm 130", the opening paragraph's "The composer John Rutter included a ..." might be better placed in the "De profundis" article.)

Feline Hymnic 13:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I think this is way too complex, and will be confusing. Most of the psalms do not have significant musical traditions associated with them, nor is it clear how to separate "cultural" from "liturgical" from "musical". I'm going ahead and doing the long overdue merge. Tb (talk) 21:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge complete

Merge from De profundis is complete. Perhaps grander plans can one day be brought to bear, but for now, I think it works well with all the material here, and is less confusing. Tb (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Drop text

It is proposed on Talk:Psalms to drop the text of psalms from the individual psalm articles. If you wish to weigh in, please do so there. Tb (talk) 21:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Shoel

Sheol is no where in the original hebrew. ממעמקים קראתיך יהוה --Teacherbrock (talk) 02:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Musical settings?

Psalm 130 is not part of the Requiem text, so how did Mozart set Psalm 130? No source. This is just an example. - John Rutter included Psalm 130 in his Requiem setting, that is different. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:20, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

I began working on it. Help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 1 June 2019 (UTC)