* There is a distinctly isolated element in Irenezus. specially ‘Gallic’?
t See Rendel Harris, Cod. Beze, p. 160 ff.
t See Passion of S. Perpetua, pp. 97-100.
§ Perhaps there may have been even a ‘ Gallican’ recension of the tr. The evidence for this is considerably ai ented by biblical quotations from recently discovered De Mysteriis of Hilary and Peregrinatio. See Bernard, Proc. of Royal Irish Acad, 8rd ser. vol. ii. No. 2, p. 155 ff.
_|| See references under Cod. Beze in list of MSS. But Blass himself would assign the origin of the ‘ Western’ text to Rome. See Acta Apost. sec. formam Romanam, 1896, p. 7.
“1 Perhaps its most intimate connexion is with q and t.
** See OL Texts, ii. Append. III. p. 136.
tt Tb. Addenda, p. 139.
ΤΣ In the European group, r is said to stand closest toh. From collations we have made, it has certainly a great resemblance to b.
§§ See OL Bibl. Texts, ii. pp. 206-212. Points of contact are shown between p and d.
i Many readings in the Book of Mulling recall God. τ. See H. J. Lawlor, Book of Mulling, Edin. 1897, esp. pp. 55-68, 134, 144. Most thorough discussion of affinities of Irish OL text. Concludes that Irish VS was prob. not indigenous, The VS on which it was founded, and from which its African, Italian, and d elements are derived, may have come from the ion wh. gave birth toh. Another distinctively Irish text in k of Armagh, which seems to have a definite relation to the texts. See Berger, Hist. de la Vulg. pp. 84 ff. 32 ff.
““ See especially the most important, Append. G in Haddan and Stubbs’ Councils, etc. vol. i. pp. 170-198.
*** See Wordsworth, Academy, Nov. 18, 1869.
Is this
LATIN VERSIONS, THE OLD
LATIN VERSIONS, THE OLD 57
vol. xviii. of CSEL. Those quotations, indeed, bear a great resemblance to the ‘ Late-African’ group, which will be glanced at immediately, but they present special points of affinity with typical Spanish MSS, especially those of Leon.* Of the other ‘European’ texts, g and g, of Ac agree remarkably with that found in the numerous uotations of Lucifer, Bp. of Cagliarit (in Sardinia).
of St. James + appears also to be of this family, although there is probably an African colouring in its text. It is of importance to notice that ‘European’ texts were those most commonly used
in Gaul. For this the chief witness is Hilary, ae of Poitiers. here is a less marked distinction between the
‘European’ and ‘Italian’ groups than between the former and the ‘ African.’ For, admittedly, the ‘Italian’ is a revision of the ‘European.’ We have already referred to the derivation of the name from Aug.’s celebrated dictum, de Doct. Chris. ii. 15: in ipsis autem interpretationibus Jtala ceteris preeferatur, nam est verborum tenacior cum per- spicuitate sententie. A keen discussion has centred round the expression ‘Itala.’ Bentley went the length of proposing to read ‘illa . que’ for ‘Itala . . . nam.’ This proposal has been revived by Corssen,§ who seeks to show that it fits in with the context. But this is merely to cut the knot. We cannot help believing that the true solution is that suggested by an admirable article in the Theolog. Review for 1874 by Kenrick, who proves beyond doubt that Northern Italy by the end of the 3rd cent. was regularly known under the name ‘ Italia.’|| But this was the very region in which Aug. had first become acquainted with the Scriptures. And the quotations of Ambrose, his teacher and guide, agree with this ‘Italian’ type of text. Is it not, at least, probable that this revision was made in N. Italy, and so naturally became known to Augustine? {/
Burkitt has recently essayed to prove that Aug. here means nothing else than the Vulg. of Jerome.** His main argument is the Gospel quotations in the De Consensu Evangelistarum and a passage in the Contra Felicem. It cannot be doubted that the text of the Gospp. in the former stands in closest agreement with the Vulg.; while the latter also appears to be Jerome’s revision, though it stands side by side with an ‘ African’ text of Acts. Yet it must be remembered that, in the Gospels, texts like fand ff, are in close agreement with the Vulg., and there would always be the tendency to correct Aug.’s text according to Vulg. readings. This latter hypothesis would quite account for the phenomena in Contra Felicem. But, even supposing ue: did (as he quite well may have done) use the Vulg. in this treatise, how can this be used to prove that he designates it by the name ‘Itala’ in the celebrated passage quoted? Surely the data are insufficient to justify so wide a generalization.+t+
*See Berger, Hist. de la Vulg. pp. Sff. (esp. pp. 27-28). The Frag. of Sir, lately published by Douais, belongs to the Spanish family, and Berger’s Perpignan Frag. of Acts has apparently a connexion with the Spanish text. It is of some Importance to find that the poet Juvencus, ἘΝ a Spaniard by sirth, is nearest, in his biblical text, to a and ἢ. Ε
¢ When Lucifer has an ‘African’ text, he is usually quoting dirsctly the works of Cyprian.
tIn this Ep. the remarkable resemblance between the