THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
12S
can; all future editions were to be carefully collated with it, " that no smallest part be changed, added to, or taken away," and they were to be accompanied with the official attestation of the inquisitor of the province or of the bishop of the diocese, no variant readings, scholia, or glosses being allowed on the margins. In August of 1590 Sixtus V died, and was followed by several short-lived popes; in 1592 Clement VIII called in all copies of the edition which were within reach — copies are, therefore, of extreme rarity — and replaced it under the direction of Cardinal Bellarmine with a new Biblia Sacra Vulgatce Editionis. Romm : Ex Typographia Apostolica Vaticana M,D.XCII (on the second titlepage: Biblia Sacra Vulgatm Editionis Sixti Quinti Pont. Max. Jussu recognita atque edita). The accompanying bull decreed: " From the form of this copy let not even the least particle be changed, added to, or taken away, unless it happens that some fault is unmistakably due to typographical carelessness — let this be inviolably observed." The reasons for this whole proceeding are not quite clear. That the printing of the first edition was not correct enough is not true; as a matter of fact the Sixtine edition is typographically more correct than the Clementine, but the text of the Clementine is an improvement on that of the Sixtine. Sixtus was personally interested in the work and changed the text frequently to accord with that of Stephens, while the editors of the Clementine edition followed more often that of Hentenius. There are some 3,000 differences between the two editions. Nevertheless the names of both popes were placed on the title-pages of the later reprints, first, it seems, at Lyons, 1604, then at Mainz, 1609, the official title being now: Sixti V et dementis VIII. Pontt. Maxx. jussu recognita atque edita. A quarto edition was issued in 1593 with " marginal references, explanations of Hebrew names, and an index of subjects," and a small quarto edition in 1598 with a correctorium. All four editions (1590, 1592, 1593, 1598) are compared by Leander van Ess in his edition of the Vulgate (3 parts, Tubingen, 1S22-24j. Of editions by other editors, those of C. Vercellone (Rome, 1861) and particularly M. Hetzenauer (Innsbruck, 1906) may be mentioned; the latter has useful appendices.
Since the edition of 1592 scarcely any attempt has been made in the Roman Church to apply to its Bible the most necessary emendation. D. Vallarsi printed an emended text Work (Verona, 17.34), under the title Dirina Problems, bibliotheca , in his edition of the works of Jerome. [A Biblical commission was appointed late in the pontificate of Leo XIII, and Pius X has lately commissioned members of the Benedictine Order to revise the Vulgate. It is intended to restore, so far as possible, the exact text of Jerome.] Among Protestants, Richard Bentley contemplated a new edition of the Latin New Testament together with the Greek (see Bible Text, II, 2, § 3); about the same time J. A. Bengel (q.v.) did much for it; in the nineteenth century S. Berger in France should have the greatest credit for clearing up the history of the Latin Bible; at last Wordsworth-White have
issued what must be called the first critical edition of the Latin New Testament; and in Bavaria P, Thielmann is engaged in publishing those books of the Old Testament which were not translated by Jerome himself.
It is a matter of surprise that a task so easy and interesting as the criticism of the Latin Bible has received so little attention. Berger knew more than 8,000 manuscripts of the Latin Bible; few of them have been properly investigated. What kind of surprises they may offer is shown by the recent discovery of two different translations of the Third Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians in two manuscripts of the tenth and thirteenth centuries at Milan and Laon. The order of the Biblical books in the manuscripts; the prefaces and summaries (cf. on this point Les Prefaces jointes aux limes de la Bible dans les manuscrits de la Vulgate; memoire posthume de M. Samuel Berger, in the Memoir es de I'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, ser. i, vol. xi, part 2, 1902); the capitulation and divisions; the illumination and miniatures (many of the manuscripts belong to the most beautiful productions of Christian art); ecclesiastical or private notes; connection with the vernacular versions, influence upon the dialects of Europe; lists of the passages in literature which mention manuscripts of the Latin Bible; and many other points may be named as those which await investigation.
3. Later Latin Translations: That the Latin Vulgate was not sufficient was asserted in the Middle Ages by scholars like Nicolaus de Lyra and Raymond Martini. The English Benedictine Adam Easton (d. 1397) is said to have been one of the first to think of a new translation. It was Erasmus, however, who vindicated the right to place new Latin translations by the side of the Vulgate through his translation of the New Testament (Basel, 1516, 1519, 1522, 1527, 1535, and more than 200 times since the death of Erasmus; see Bible Text, II, 2, § 1; Erasmus, Desiderius). He has had many followers who have translated into Latin either the Old or the New Testament or both, as well as separate books of the Bible, even as late as the nineteenth century. But the time has passed when Latin versions were necessary or helpful; since the Reformation translations into the vernacular languages have taken their place.
The more important new translations of the whole Bible are those of the Dominican Sanctes Pagninus (Lyons, 1528; revised and annotated by Michael Servetus, Lyons, 1542), of Arias Montanus in the Antwerp Polyglot (1.572), and one prepared under the direction of Cardinal Cajetan (1530 sqq.; see Cajetan, Thomas).
The Old Testament was newly translated by the Hebraist Sebastian Miinster (Basel, 1534-35 and often); by Leo Jud and (after Jud's death) T. Bibliander, C. Pellican, P. Cholinus, and R. Gualtherus (Zurich, 1543); by Sebastian Castellio (complete ed., Basel, 1551, with a dedication to King Edward VI of England); by Immanufl Tremellius, a Jew of Ferrara, and his son-in-law, Franciscus Junius- (du Jon; 5 parts, Frankfort, 1575-79; best ed., with full index, by P. Tossanus, Hanati, 1624. Tremellius's work was well received); by J. Piscator(24 parts, Herborn, 1601— 1616; really a revision of Tremelliu.i); by Thomas Malvemla. a Spanish Dominican (left incomplete at Malvenda's deata in 1628 and first published with his Commentarii, 5 vols., Lyons, 1650); by J. Cooreius (published with his commentaries, Opera, vols, i-vi, Amsterdam, 1701; incomplete; contains also most of the New Testament); by .Sebastian