Because of their Roman coloration, some contemporary readers may have perceived them at least to imply an intolerable blending of biblical and pagan religious sensibilities. The fact that both of these Psalm volumes are dedicated to Sidney raises an interesting question. Gentili justified his versions by appeal to Beza and Buchanan, and as William A. Ringler pointed out in his great edition of Sidney's verse, had Gentili been aware that Sir Philip had written, or was writing, similar work in English, the temptation to mention it would have been irresistible. NOTE 5 13. The possibility that Gentili exerted some degree of influence on Sidney is not so easily dismissed.
Chronological considerations pose no obstacle.
It would appear likely that Gentili's metaphrases, and perhaps more particularly the dedicatory epistle prefacing the 1584 collection, defending the writing Psalm metaphrases against critical attacks and discussing the problems handling the Psalms poetically, served as an important spur for Sidney's decision to indulge in this same literary enterprise. Thanks to the great carelessness of the gentleman who set this small book in type, it has happened that in it neither the proper numeration of the Psalms, nor the page numerations are correctly maintained. Though such carelessness would be intolerable in a substantial work, in such a small one, which can be taken in virtually in a single reading, it deserves to be censured most lightly, nor is it worthy of notice. But something else may be at stake. There are two systems for numbering the Psalms, that of the Hebrew text and that of the Septuagint.