The present paper deals with the representation of the names of the ancient gods in New Testament translations. In the text of the original which was Greek the names of gods were naturally Greek. But as in Antiquity the characters of the Greek mythology were identified with the Roman ones, the text of the Vulgate renders them in Latinized form. Because in Europe before the Reformation the Latin translation was the main and the most authoritative version of the Holy Writ, it had been used as the source text for the rendering of the Bible, even by the authors, who were opposed to Catholic Church (e.g. Wycliffe). After the Reformation, the Catholic translators continued the use of the Vulgate as the original even until the middle of the 20th century. In contrast to them, the Protestants translated the Bible almost exclusively from Hebrew and Greek texts, but often retained the Latin names of the Greek gods until approximately the same period. The Russian tradition of translating the Bible is characterized by some peculiarities. On the one hand, there was a general orientation towards the Greek and Church Slavonic texts; on the other, the influence of the Latin forms also occurred in the early New Testament version edited by the Russian Bible Society in the first quarter of the 19th century.

The present paper deals with some aspects connected with the selection of the translation strategies represented in different Bible versions. The view according to which the piety towards the sacred content of the Holy Writ and the danger of its possible distortion stimulated the tradition of the literal translation and led quite often to the literality, archaization, etc., is widely spread among the specialists, although at the same time the great role of the Bible translations as the means of the formation and development of the many literary languages is also recognized. On the other hand, besides the pure linguistic aspect as such, the strategy of the different Bible translators could also touch the substantial part of the original due to different pragmatic reasons. This is particularly evident in so-called ‘modern translations’. This process has been influenced by the appearance of the new translation theories. In turn, ‘pragmatics’ itself may have a different character and be related with different sides of the text: from the methods of the representation of the so-called cultural words (‘realia’) to the interpretation consistent with the norms and principles accepted by the translation organizers and the target audience.