10. Luke the evangelist and companion of apostles describes Christ's first martyr Stephen as relating what follows in a Jewish assembly. "With threescore and fifteen souls Jacob went down into Egypt, and died himself, and our fathers were carried over [1709] into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor [1710] the father of Sychem." [1711] In Genesis this passage is quite differently given, for it is Abraham that buys of Ephron the Hittite, the son of Zohar, near Hebron, for four hundred shekels [1712] of silver, a double cave, [1713] and the field that is about it, and that buries in it Sarah his wife. And in the same book we read that, after his return from Mesopotamia with his wives and his sons, Jacob pitched his tent before Salem, a city of Shechem which is in the land of Canaan, and that he dwelt there and "bought a parcel of a field where he had spread his tent at the hand of Hamor, the father of Sychem, for an hundred lambs," [1714] and that "he erected there an altar and called there upon the God of Israel." [1715] Abraham does not buy the cave from Hamor the father of Sychem, but from Ephron the son of Zohar, and he is not buried in Sychem but in Hebron which is corruptly called Arboch. Whereas the twelve patriarchs are not buried in Arboch but in Sychem, in the field purchased not by Abraham but by Jacob. I postpone the solution of this delicate problem to enable those who cavil at me to search and see that in dealing with the scriptures it is the sense we have to look to and not the words. In the Hebrew the twenty-second psalm begins with the exact words which the Lord uttered on the cross: Eli Eli lama azabthani, which means, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" [1716] Let my critics tell me why the Septuagint introduces here the words "look thou upon me." For its rendering is as follows: "My God, my God, look thou upon me, why hast thou forsaken me?" They will answer no doubt that no harm is done to the sense by the addition of a couple of words. Let them acknowledge then that, if in the haste of dictation I have omitted a few, I have not by so doing endangered the position of the churches.
11. It would be tedious now to enumerate, what great additions and omissions the Septuagint has made, and all the passages which in church-copies are marked with daggers and asterisks. The Jews generally laugh when they hear our version of this passage of Isaiah, "Blessed is he that hath seed in Zion and servants in Jerusalem." [1717] In Amos also [1718] after a description of self-indulgence [1719] there come these words: "They have thought of these things as halting and not likely to fly," a very rhetorical sentence quite worthy of Tully. But how shall we deal with the Hebrew originals in which these passages and others like them are omitted, passages so numerous that to reproduce them all would require books without number? The number of the omissions is shown alike by the asterisks mentioned above and by my own version when compared by a careful reader with the old translation. [1720] Yet the Septuagint has rightly kept its place in the churches, either because it is the first of all the versions in time, made before the coming of Christ, or else because it has been used by the apostles (only however in places where it does not disagree with the Hebrew [1721] ). On the other hand we do right to reject Aquila, the proselyte and controversial translator, who has striven to translate not words only but their etymologies as well. Who could accept as renderings of "corn and wine and oil" [1722] such words as cheima oporismos stilpnotes , or, as we might say, pouring,' and fruitgathering,' and shining'? or, because Hebrew has in addition to the article other prefixes [1723] as well, he must with an unhappy pedantry translate syllable by syllable and letter by letter thus: sun ton ouranon kai sun ten gen, a construction which neither Greek nor Latin admits of, [1724] as many passages in our own writers shew. How many are the phrases charming in Greek which, if rendered word for word, do not sound well in Latin, and again how many there are that are pleasing to us in Latin, but which--assuming the order of the words not to be altered--would not please in Greek.
12. But to pass by this limitless field of discussion and to shew you, most Christian of nobles, and most noble of Christians, what is the kind of falsification which is censured in my translation, I will set before you the opening words of the letter in the Greek original and as rendered by me, that from one count in the indictment you may form an opinion of all. The letter begins Edei hemas, agapete, me te oi& 208;sei ton kleron pheresthai which I remember to have rendered as follows: "Dearly beloved, we ought not to misuse our position as ministers to gratify our pride." See there, they cry, what a number of falsehoods in a single line! In the first place agapetos means loved,' not dearly beloved.' Then oiesis means estimate,' not pride,' for this and not oidema is the word used. Oidema signifies a swelling' but oi& 208;sis means judgment.' All the rest, say they: "not to misuse our position to gratify our pride" is your own. What is this you are saying, O pillar of learning [1725] and latter day Aristarchus, [1726] who are so ready to pass judgment upon all writers? It is all for nothing then that I have studied so long; that, as Juvenal says, [1727] "I have so often withdrawn my hand from the ferule." The moment I leave the harbour I run aground. Well, to err is human and to confess one's error wise. Do you therefore, who are so ready to criticise and to instruct me, set me right and give me a word for word rendering of the passage. You tell me I should have said: "Beloved, we ought not to be carried away by the estimation of the clergy." Here, indeed we have eloquence worthy of Plautus, here we have Attic grace, the true style of the Muses. The common proverb is true of me: "He who trains an ox for athletics loses both oil and money." [1728] Still he is not to blame who merely puts on the mask and plays the tragedy for another: his teachers [1729] are the real culprits; since they for a great price have taught him--to know nothing. I do not think the worse of any Christian because he lacks skill to express himself; and I heartily wish that we could all say with Socrates "I know that I know nothing;" [1730] and carry out the precept of another wise man, "Know thyself." [1731] I have always held in esteem a holy simplicity but not a wordy rudeness. He who declares that he imitates the style of apostles should first imitate the virtue of their lives; the great holiness of which made up for much plainness of speech. They confuted the syllogisms of Aristotle and the perverse ingenuities of Chrysippus by raising the dead. Still it would be absurd for one of us--living as we do amid the riches of Croesus and the luxuries of Sardanapalus--to make his boast of mere ignorance. We might as well say that all robbers and criminals would be men of culture if they were to hide their blood-stained swords in books of philosophy and not in trunks of trees.
13. I have exceeded the limits of a letter, but I have not exceeded in the expression of my chagrin. For, though I am called a falsifier, and have my reputation torn to shreds, wherever there are shuttles and looms and women to work them; I am content to repudiate the charge without retaliating in kind. I leave everything to your discretion. You can read the letter of Epiphanius both in Greek and in Latin; and, if you do so, you will see at once the value of my accusers' lamentations and insulting complaints. For the rest, I am satisfied to have instructed one of my dearest friends and am content simply to stay quiet in my cell and to wait for the day of judgment. If it may be so, and if my enemies allow it, I hope to write for you, not philippics like those of Demosthenes or Tully, but commentaries upon the scriptures.
[1649] Acts xxvi. 2, 3.
[1650] i.e., the son of Sirach.
[1651] Ecclus. xxv. 9.
[1652] Letter LI. to John Bp. of Jerusalem.
[1653] Cf. Jude 9.
[1654] i.e., most reverend pope.' This title at first given to all bishops was in Jerome's time becoming restricted to metropolitans and patriarchs. Jerome, however, still uses it in the wider sense. The omission of the title here may well have seemed deliberate, as Jerome was known to entertain very bitter feelings towards John of Jerusalem.
[1655] Livy v. 27.
[1656] Plutarch, Life of Pyrrhus.
[1657] Jerome constantly speaks of Rufinus in this way. See Letter CXXV. 18 and Apol. c. Ruf. I. 13, 32.
[1658] Rufinus is meant.
[1659] Danaë, the daughter of Acrisius, was confined by her father in a brazen tower to which Zeus obtained access in the shape of a shower of gold.
[1660] Epiphanius.
[1661] Ter. And. prol. 17.
[1662] The two speeches on the Crown.
[1663] Only a small part of this is extant.
[1664] Hor. A. P. 133.
[1665] i.e. the poets of the so called New Comedy.
[1666] kakozelian .
[1667] That is, five years later. Jerome translated the Chronicle of Eusebius at Constantinople in 381-2.
[1668] Vix brevis viæ spatia consummo.
[1669] Preface, translated in this Volume, § 1.
[1670] Preface §2.
[1671] This life long supposed to have been the work of Athanasius was originally composed in Greek but had been rendered into Latin by Evagrius bishop of Antioch.
[1672] i.e., Hilary of Poitiers.
[1673] Lit. the seventy translators.
[1674] Mark v. 41.
[1675] Matthew xxvii. 9, 10.
[1676] Quod. A.V. has whom.'
[1677] Zech. xi. 12, 13, Vulg.
[1678] Statuarius.
[1679] Zech. xi. 12, 13, A.V.
[1680] Pedissequus.
[1681] Joh. xix. 37; Zech. xii. 10.
[1682] i.e., the Italic, for the Vulgate, which was not then published, accurately represents the Hebrew.
[1683] Matt. xxvi. 31; Zech. xiii. 7.
[1684] Matt. ii. 13-15.
[1685] Hos. xi. 1.
[1686] i.e., the Septuagint and Vulgate versions.
[1687] James iii. 2.
[1688] Matt. ii. 23.
[1689] Isa. xi. 1.
[1690] So A.V. the Vulg. varies slightly.
[1691] Matt. i. 22, 23; Isa. vii. 14.
[1692] A.V.
[1693] Matt. ii. 5, 6.
[1694] i.e. the Versio Itala which was vulgata or commonly used' at this time as Jerome's Version was afterwards.
[1695] Mic. v. 2.
[1696] 1 Cor. i. 27.
[1697] Mark i. 1-3; see R.V.
[1698] Mal. iii. 1.
[1699] Isa. xl. 3.
[1700] Mark ii. 25, 26.
[1701] 1 Sam. xxi. 1.
[1702] 1 Sam. xxii. 16-18.
[1703] 1 Cor. ii. 8, 9.
[1704] This book is no longer extant. It belonged to the same class as the Book of Enoch.
[1705] Isa. lxiv. 4, lxx. A.V. has what he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.'
[1706] Rom. ix. 33.
[1707] Lit. with the old version.'
[1708] 1 Pet. ii. 8. A.V. is different.
[1709] So the Vulg.: A.V. punctuates differently.
[1710] i.e. Hamor.
[1711] Acts vii. 15-16.
[1712] Drachmæ.
[1713] Spelunca duplex.
[1714] A.V. marg.
[1715] Gen. xxxiii. 18-20. A.V. varies slightly.
[1716] Ps. xxii. 1.
[1717] Isa. xxxi. 9, LXX.
[1718] According to the LXX.
[1719] Amos vi. 4-6.
[1720] Jerome's Vulgate version supplied from the Hebrew the omissions and removed the redundancies of the old Latin version. These were due to the uncertain text of the LXX., on which alone the old Latin version was founded.
[1721] This statement is not borne out by the facts.
[1722] Cf. Deut. vii. 13.
[1723] proarthra.
[1724] Lit. with the heaven and with the earth' (Gen. i. 1). In Hebrew the preposition with' is identical in form with the sign of the accus. Hence Aquila's rendering.
[1725] Jerome apostrophises his critic.
[1726] The famous grammarian and critic of Homer.
[1727] Juv. i. 15.
[1728] Oleum perdit et impensas qui bovem mittit ad ceroma.
[1729] Rufinus and Melania, who were believed by Jerome to have instigated the theft. Their names are inserted in some copies.
[1730] Plato, Apol. Soc. 21, 22.
[1731] This saying is variously attributed to Chilon and others of the seven wise men of Greece.