RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Bible Versions
^4-430 (from this author alone Lagarde collected 13 276 !f,ntations of the Old Testament and 29,540 of the New Testament); Capreolus, bishop of Carthage c. 431; Cassian, monk at Marseilles (d. about 435); Commodian (perhaps middle of third century); Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (d. 258- cf Sanday, in OLBT, ii; Lagarde, Symmicta, i, 74; Mittheilungen, ii, 54; P. Corssen, Der cyprmnische Text der Acta Apostolorum, Berlin, 1892); Teaching of the Twelve Apostles; Philastrius, bishop of Brescia (c. 380; ed. Marx, in CSEL, xxxviii); Fulgentius, bishop of Ruspe (c. 468-533); Uildas of Britain; Eucherius; Hilarius, bishop of Poitiers (d. 380; cf Zingerle.in Kleine philologische Abhandlungen, Innsbruck, 1SS7V Irenseus, bishop of Lyons (c. 180, Novum Testamentum Irencei; to be published in OLBT by Prof. Sanday); Jovinian (in the time of Jerome); Lactantius (in Africa c. 260-340); Lucifer, bishop of Cagliari (d. 371; cf. Dombart, in Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift, 1866, no. 6); Julius Firmicus Maternus (c. 345); Maximin (cf. TLZ, 1900, 17); Novatian (at Rome c. 252; cf. Harnack, in TV, xiii, 4); Origen (Latin translation; c. 251); Optatus, bishop of Mileve in Numidia, c. 368; Primasius, bishop of Adrumetum, sixth century (cf. Haussleiter, in Zahn, Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons,iv, Berlin, 1900, 1-224); Pelagius of Ireland; Priscillian, bishop of Avila in Spain, fourth century (cf. CSEL, xviii); Salvianus of Marseilles, c. 450 (cf. Ullrich, De Salviani scriptures sacrce versionibus, Neustadt, 1893); Tertullian of Carthage, c. 150-240 (cf. Rbnsch, Das Neue Testament Tertullians, Leipsic, 1871, and J. N. Ott, in Neue Jahrbiicher fur Philologie, 1874, p. 856); Tyconius, in Africa, c. 340 (cf. F. C. Burkitt, in TS, iii, 1, 1894); Verecundus (cf. Lagarde, Septuagintastudien, i); Victorinus, bishop of Pettau in Pannonia, c. 300 (cf. Haussleiter, in ZWT, vii, 239-257); Vigilius, bishop of Thapsus, c. 484.
Some parts of the Old Latin Bible are still in ecclesiastical use and even in the works of Luther Denifle has shown readings from this source. The same is the case with some of the translations in the vernacular dialects of medieval Europe, such as the Anglo-Saxon (cf. for instance R. Handke, Ueber das Verhdltnis der westsdchsischen Evangelienubersetzung zum lateinischen Original, Halle, 1896; A. S. Cook, Biblical Quotations in Old English Prose Writers, New York, 1898; Max Forster, in Englische Studien, Leipsic, 1900, p. 480).
2. The Bible of Jerome (the "Vulgate): Toward the end of the fourth century the inconvenience from which the Western Church suffered because there was no single authorized Latin version of the Bible must have been seriously felt, and Damasus, bishop of Rome (d. 384), commissioned Jerome (q.v.) to prepare an authoritative revision, probably in the year 382.
WoJrkr01ThS The lett6r With Which Jerome dedi" New Testa- ca*e<i the first part (the Gospels) to ment. the pope gives the only authentic record of the work and its scope (cf. NPNF , 2d ser., vi, 487-488). Jerome accepts the task set him by Damasus, notes its extreme difficulty and the resulting peril to himself, anticipates the harshest criticism of himself and of the results of his labor, and states that his emendations have been as conservative as possible. Notwithstanding Jerome's modesty concerning his work, it has had an unparalleled history, inasmuch as it became the Bible of the whole Occident.
To estimate Jerome's work properly, it would be necessary (1) to know what were the Latin texts which he had to revise; (2) what were the Greek texts which he chose as standard; (3) to have his work in its original form. The last is now realized, at least for the first part of the New Tes-
tament, since the monumental edition of Wordsworth-White. The Greek manuscript or manuscripts used by Jerome must have been of the type of the Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus ; there are, however, some readings not attested by any Greek manuscript (cf ., for instance, John x, 16, unum ovile; xvi, 13, docebit; and on this question cf. the letter of Wordsworth and White in The Academy, Jan. 27, 1894; their Epilogue, 657-672; E. Mangenot, in RSE, Jan., 1900). About Jerome's Latin texts there is still less information. Wordsworth and White printed under Jerome's text that of the Codex Brixianus (/) as most nearly related to it; but according to Burkitt and Kaufmann it is rather a text of Jerome himself adapted to the Gothic version. Jerome's statement in his prefatory letter that he changed as little as possible is probably true; for the language indicates that the Gospels came from different translators. Identical expressions in Greek are quite differently rendered into Latin (cf. the history of the Passion in the different Gospels, and notice for instance lagenam aqua baiulans = amphoram aquce portans, or the rendering of " high priest " in Matthew by princeps sacerdotum, in Mark by summus sacerdos, in John by pontifex). It is, therefore, quite wrong to treat the Vulgate of the Gospels as a harmonious work, and it is clear that the value of it for textual criticism is greatly enhanced, since it preserves the text of the time when the Gospels were not yet united into one collection. Whether also in the second part of the New Testament such differences can be detected has not yet been investigated. It is not even quite certain how far Jerome revised the second part of the New Testament. Only the Gospels have his prefaces, and Augustine writes to him only of the Gospel: " We give no small thanks to God for your work in which you have interpreted the Gospel from the Greek." Jerome, however, answers: " If, as you say, you suspect me of emending the New Testament "; and in 398 he wrote to Lucinius Beticus, to whom he sent the first copy ready (Epist., lxxi, 5, NPNF, 2d series, vi, 154): "The New Testament I have restored to the authoritative form of the Greek." In his De vir. ill. he says: "The New Testament I have restored to the true Greek form, the Old I have rendered from the Hebrew." Jerome's work on the Old Testament was more thorough. First he revised the Psalter [from the Septuagint] in 383 in Rome. This revision was introduced by Damasus into the liturgy and is hence called the Psalterium Romanum in distinction from the Psalterium vetus or the unre vised Old Latin. It was in use in Italy till Pius V (1566-72) , and it is still used in St. Peter's in Rome and in Milan, partly in the Roman Missal and in one place in the Breviary, in the hortatory Psalm xcv (xciv). About four years later in Palestine Jerome 2" The revised the Psalms a second time, Old Testa- making use of tne critical marks of m ' Origen, the obelus and asterisk. _ This revision is known as the Gallican Psalter, as it was first used chiefly in Gaul (it seems through Gregory of Tours), but finally it became the current version in the Latin Church (through Pius V), of course
Bible Versions