IV. I/i.ftori/ of Jerome's Translation to the Invention of Printin;/. — 1. Eai'ly Acceptance. — The critical labors of Jerome were received, as such labors alwaj^s are re- ceived by the multitude, with a loud outcry of reproach. He was accused of disturbing the repose of the Church
and shaking the foundations of faith. Acknowledged errors, as he complains, were looked upon as hallowed by ancient usage i^Prcrf.in Jo6. ii), and few had the wisdom or candor to acknowledge the importance of seeking for the purest possible text of Holy Scripture. Even Augustine was carried away by the popular jircju- dice, and endeavored to discourage Jerome from the task of a new translation {Ep. civ), which seemed to him to be dangerous and almost profane. Jerome, in- deed, did little to smooth tlie way for the rece|)tion of his work. The violence and bitterness of his language is more like that of the rival scholars of the IGth cen- tury than of a Christian lather, and there are few more touching instances of humility than that of the young Augustine bending himself in entire submission before the contemptuous and impatient reproof of the veteran scholar {Ep. cxii, s. f.). But even Augustine could not overcome the force of early habit. To the last he re- mained faithf(d to the Italic text which he had first used; and while he notices in his Ketractationes several
j faulty readings which he had formerly embraced, he shows no tendency to substitute generally the New ver- sion for the Old. In such cases Time is the great reformer. Clamor based upon ignorance soon dies away, and the
I New translation gradually came into use equally with the Old, and at length supplanted it. In the oth cen-
j tury, it was adopted in (Jaul by Eucherius of Lyons.
\ Vincent of Lerins, Sedulius. and Claudianus ISIamertus (Hody, p. 398), but the Old Latin was still retained in Africa and Britain (ibid.). In the Gth century, the use of Jerome's version was universal among scholars ex- cept in Africa, where the other still lingered (Junilius); and at the close of it, Gregory the Great, while com- inenting on Jerome's version, acknowledged that it was admitted equally with the Old by the apostolic see {Prcf. in Job. ad Leandrum, "Novam translationem dissero, sed ut comprobationis causa exigit, nunc No- vam, nunc Veterem, per testimonia assumo ; iit quia sedes apostolica [cui auctore Deo praesideo] utratpie utitur mei quoque labor studii ex utraque fulciatur"). But the Old version was not authoritatively displaced, though the custom of the Roman Church prevailed also in the other churches of the West. Thus Isidore of Seville {De Ojjic. Eccles. i, 12), after affirming the in- spiration of the Sept., goes on to recommend the ver- sion of Jerome, "wliich,"' he says, "is used universally as being more truthful in substance and more perspicu- ous in language" (Hody, p. 402). In the 7th century the traces of the Old version grow rare. Julian of Toledo (A.D. 67G) affirms with a special polemical pur- pose the authority of the Sept., and so of the Old Latin; but still he himself follows Jerome when not influenced by the requirements of controversy (ibid. p. 405, 406). In the 8th century, Bede speaks of Jerome's version as "oi<r edition" (ibid. p. 408) ; and from this time it is needless to trace its history, though the Old Latin was not wholly forgotten. Yet, throughout, the New version made its way without any direct ecclesiastical authori- ty. It was adopted in the different churches gradually, or at least without any formal command (see ibid. p. 411 sq. for detailed quotations).
But the Latin Bible which thus passed gradually into use under the name of Jerome was a strangely composite work. The books of the Old Test., with one exception, were certainly taken from his version from the Hebrew ; but this had not only been variously cor- rupted, but was itself in many particulars (especially in the Pentateuch) at variance with his later judgment. Long use, however, made it impossible to substitute his Psalter from the Hebrew for the Galilean Psalter; and thus this book was retained from the Old version, as Je- rome had corrected it from the Sept. Of the Apocry- phal books, Jerome hastily revised or translated two only, .ludith and Tobit. The remainder were retained from the Old version against his judgment; and the Apocry- phal additions to Daniel and Esther, which he had care- fully marked as apocryi>hal in his own version, were
VULGATE
831
VULGATE
treated as integral parts of the books. A few MSS. of the Bible faitlifiilly preserved the " Hebrew canon," but the great mass, according to the general custom of copy- ists to omit nothing, included ever\'thing which had held a place in the Old Latin. In the New Test, the only important addition which was frequently interpo- lated was the Apocryphal epistle to the Laodiceans. The text of the gospels was in the main Jerome's re- vised edition; that of the remaining books his very in- complete revision of the Old Latin. Thus the present Vulgate contains elements which belong to every period and form of the Latin version — (1.) Unmnsvd Old Lat- in: Wisdom, Ecclus., 1 and 2 Mace, Baruch. (2.) Old Latin revised from the Sept. : Psalter. (3.) Jer(tme!sfree translation from the oriyinal text: Judith, Tobit. (4.) Jerome's translation from the original: Old Test, ex- cept Psalter. (5.) Old Latin revised from Greek MSS. : Gospels. {&.~) Old Latin cursorily revised: the remain- der of the New Test.