aut propheta.f.
18 fiant: cadinn et terra
transibwit, verba au- tem iiiea non prmteri- bunt.
22 fratri sno sine, causa.
25 es cum illu in iia.
29 eat in gehennam. 37 quod auteni aiiqMtts.
41 adhuc alia duo.
43 odies.
44 vestros, et benedicite qui
tnaledicent vobi)i et be- nefacite.
Vui.QATE.
7 ipsi misericordiam con- fteqid'ntur.
11 dixcrint . . . mcntientcs. — propter me.
12 ante vos.
17 non veni solvere. IS fiant.
22 fratri sno.
25 es in via cum eo (and of- ten).
29 m,ittatur in gehennam.
37 quod autem his abun- dantius.
41 et alia duo.
43 odio habebis.
44 vestros benefacite.
Of these variations, those in vcr. 17, 44 are only partial- ly supported by the old copies, but thej' illustrate the character of the interpolations from which the text suf- fered. In John, as might be expected, the variations are less frequent. The 6th chapter contains only the following:
2 sequebatur autetn. ' 2 et seqnebatur.
21 (volebam). 21 (voluerunt). 23 queui benedixerat Dorai- 23 (gratias agente Domino).
uus [Mlii aliter]).
39 haec est enim. 39 hrec est autem.
— (Piitris mei). — {Patris mei qui misit me).
53 (manducare). 53 (ad manducandum).
66 (a patre). 66 (a patre meo).
67 ex hoc ergo. 67 ex hoc.
Some of the changes which Jerome introduced were, as will be seen, made purely on linguistic grounds, but it is impossible to ascertain on what principle he pro- ceeded in this respect. Others involved questions of interpretation (!Matt. vi, 11, supersuhstantialis for tTriov- (Tiog). But the greater number consisted in the re- moval of the interpolations by which the sj-noptic gos- pels especially were disfigured. These interpolations, unless his description is very much exaggerated, must have been far more numerous than are found in exist- ing copies; but examples still occur which show the important service which he rendered to the Church by checking the perpetuation of apocryphal glosses: Matt, iii, 3, 15" (v, 12) ; (ix, 21); xx, 28;''(xxiv, 36); Mark i, 3,7,8; iv, 19; xvi,4; Luke (v, 10); viii,48; ix,43, 50; xi,36; xii,38; xxiii, 48 : John vi, 56. As a check upon further interpolation, he inserted in his text the nota- tion of the Eusebian Canons [see New Tkstament]; but it is worthy of notice that he included in his re- vision the famous pericope, John vii, 53; viii, 11, which is not included in that analysis.
The preface to Damasus speaks only of a revision of the gospels, and a question has been raised whether Jerome really revised the remaining books of the New Test. Augustine (A.D. 403) speaks only of " the Gos- pel" (Ep. civ, 6, quoted above), and there is no preface to any other books, such as is elsewhere found before all Jerome's versions or editions. But the omission is probably due to the comparatively pure state in which the text of the rest of the New Test, was preserved. Damasus had requested (^PrcfJ] ad Dam.) a revision of the whole ; and when Jerome had faced the more invid- ious and difficult part of his work, there is no reason to
think that he would shrink from the completion of it. In accordance with this view he enumerates (A.D. 398) among his works " the restoration of the (Latin version of the) New Test, to harmony with the original Greek." {I-Jp. ad Lnciii. Ixxi, 5: "N. T. (ira^cic reddidi aucto- ritati, ut enim Yeterum Lilirorum tides de Hebra;is vo- luminibus examinanda est, ita novorum Grseca; [V] ser- mouis normam desiderat." iJe Vir. III. cxxxv. : " N. T. Grwcas fidei reddidi. Vetus juxta Hebraicam trans- tuli.") It is yet more directly conclusive as to the fact of this revision that in writing to Marcella (cir. A.D. 385) on the charges which had been brought against him for " introducing changes in the gospels," he quotes three passages from the epistles in which he as.serts the superiority of the present Vulgate reading to that of the Old Latin (Rom. xii, II," Domino servientes," for "tem- pori servientes ;" 1 Tim. v, 19, add. " nisi sub duobus aut tribus testibus;" i, 15, "Jidelis sermo," for " humanus sermo"). An examination of the Yulgate text, with the quotations of ante-Hieronymian fatliers and the imper- fect evidence of MSS., is itself sufficient to establish the reality and character of the revision. This will be ap- parent from a collation of a few chapters taken from sev- eral of the later books of the New Test. ; but it will also be obvious that the revision was hasty and imperfect; and in later times the line between the Old Latin and the Hieronymian texts became very indistinct. Old readings appear in MSS. of the Vulgate, and, on the other hand, no MS. represents a pure African text of the Acts and epistles.
Acts i, 4-25.
Vdloate.
Old Latin. 4 cum conversaretur cum quod audistis
4 convescens . . . qnam an- distis per as ineum.
5 bripti:ahimiii1.
6 luitin- ijiii ronveneraut.
7 Dixil iiiitnn.
S supervi-iiientis S. S. 10 intuereulur.
13 In coenaculum ascende- rnnt. maii.ebaiit.
illis . a vie.
5 tingemini.
6 at illi convenientes.
7 at ille respondens dixit.
8 superveniente S. S. 10 inteudeieut. Comp. iii
(iv), 12; vi, 15; x, 4 ; (xiii, 9).
13 ascenderuut in siiperi-
ora.
— erant habitantes.
14 perseverantes unanimes 14 persev. unanimiter in