Vulgate (Hastings' Dictionary)

i. Life of JuDinic. and the circumstanc^a under which his translation was made. Ii. lliBtory of tlie V'ul^'ale after Jerome's death, lii. Nature and mettiod of Jerome's revision ; textual criticism of tlie Validate. It. History of the name. T. Main difTerenc«-s between the Latin and the English Bible. t1. Manuscripts of the Vulgate. LitetBtut*. i. Life of Jkkomi:, and Circumstances undi;r WHICH Hi.s Translation wa.s made.

— Jerome, or to give him his full name, Eusehius Ilieronymus, was horn at Stridon, on tlie borders of Dalmatia and Pannonia, probably about A. I). 340-342. His parents were Christian, and sullieieiitly wealthy See the discussion on the question lo Zockler, //itfronymtu, tin Leben u. Wirkm, p\>. 21-'24. to give him a good education and to send him early to Uome, to study under the celebrated grammarian Donatus.

From the first, Latin literature attracted him, aiul he especially studied Vergil, Terence, and Cicero ; he also worked at rhetoric under Caius Marius Victorinus,* laid the foundation of a good knowledge of Greek, and collected a considerable library. Thence he moved to Gaul, where, stayin" at Trier, he began serious theological study, whic-li he prosecuted further, on settling in Acjuileia in 370.

Four years later he travelled with several friends in the East, and at Antioch was attacked by a fever, during which a dream made a deep impression on him, and re- sulted in his abandoning all secular studies. He dreamt that he was summoned to the judgment- seat of Christ ; on beiu" asked who he was he replied ' a Christian,' nut received the stem answer, ' Meiitiris, Ciceronianus es non Chris- tianus ; ubi enim thesaurus tuus, ibi et cor tuum' (Ep. xxii. ad Enstui-kium, 30).

Yet this classical training and fondness for the best Latin literary models proved one of the greatest possible advant- ages to Jerome for the work of his life, and tlirough him to the whole Christian Church ; he had been preparing himself unconsciously for making that translation of the Bible which was to be the Editii) Vulgata, the authorized version for the whole of Western Christendom during more than a thousand years.

In search of a life of solitude and asceticism he moved the same summer (374) to the desert of ChalcLs, east of Antioch, where he passed five years in strict self-discipline ami diligent study, a Rahbi who had been converted to Christianity teaching him Hebrew. But this period also saw the beginning of the correspondence and warm friendship with pope Damasus, which afterwards led to the request that Jerome would undertake to put forward an authoritative Latin version of the Scriptures.

The correspondence began [Epp. xv., xvi., written about 376-378) on doctrinal, but was a few j'ears after renewed on biblical questions (Epp. xviii., xix., xx., xxi., .<cxxv., xxxvi., written during the years 381-384), Jerome giving Dama-sus the information he li.ad desired on such questions as the meaning of the word Hosnnna, the inter- pretation of Gil 4'°, the reason why Abraham re- ceived circumcision as a sign of faith, etc.

In 379 Jerome moved to Antioch, where he was ordained presbyter, and then to Constantinople, where he listened to the expositions of Gregory Nazianzen (Epp. 1. 1, lii. 8), and probably con- tinued the systematic study of Greek ; and in 382 he returned to Rome. Here he spent nearly three years in close connexion with Damasus (Ep. cxxvii. 7), whose confidence and allection he thoroughly enjoyed, lie refers witli naive self- .

satisfaclion to his popularity in Koine at this time : ' Totius in me urhis studia consonabant. Omnium pa;ne judicio dignus suiiimo sacerdotio decernebar. Beatte memoria,' Damasus mens sermo erat. Dicehar sanctus ; dicebar humilis et disertus ' (Eji. xlv. 3, written on leaWng Home, Aug. 385). The inconveniences from which the Western Church sufl'ered owing to the absence of one authorized Latin version of the Bible, had long been felt.

' Tot exemplaria pajne quot codices ' was Jerome's description of the state of things ; and the confusion caused by a number of inde- pendent and auonynious translations of the NT was worse confoundol by the carelessness of scribes and copyists.t Whether in private study or in * Victorinus was converted to Christianity in old n^e, and \t known amongst Patristic writers as Victorinus Afer ; Zockler (p. :io) doubts whether Jerome studied under him.

t This is a point of which Jerome constantly conii>lains ; see Ep. Ixxl. 6, Comin. in Malt. ii. 5, iii. 3, vi. 1(1. etc.; alw iii the books ol the OT, I'rt^. in litir. Chrun. iuzta i.V.V. 874 VULGATE VULGATE public preaching, in controversy with heretics or in litui'gical use, this ' Latinorum interpretuni inlinita varietas'* must have been almost in- tolerably confusing to the more cultivated mem- bers of the Churcii, though the common folk felt it not, and were angered at any change.

Damasus therefore initiated a valuable and much-needed reform when he commissioned Jerome to under- take the preparation of a revised and autlioritative Latin version of the NT. He could not have placed the work in better hands.

Jerome's quali- lications were unique : he was fully sensible of the urgency and importance of such a revision ; lie was a good Latin scholar, writing a style that Avas both pure and vigorous ; he had been studying Greek carefully, and had already a fair knowledge of Hebrew ; t in later years, when he was trans- lating the OT from the original, he had attained a tliorough knowledge of that language, wliile long residence and travel in the East had given him that first-hand acquaintance with the country and its customs which must be invaluable to any one undertaking a task of this nature.

His abilities also as a scholar and writer were well known ; and Damasus must have argued that a version proceeding from an authority so eminent, and backed by the influence and power of the Roman see, could not faU to obtain a wide acceptance.

Jerome undertook the task proposed to him by Damasus, we may well believe somewhat gladly, though in the letter to the pope which forms his preface to the Gos]iels, he professed reluctance to face so great a task, with the odium and the opposition to which he would be exposed from those who were used to the older translations. His fears were well grounded.

Even his very s]iaring emendations in the Gospels were attackecf, and he was accused of tampering with our Lord's own words, and denying the inspiration of Scrip- ture (Ep. xxvii. 1) ; though, in Africa, Augustine welcomed this part of Jerome's work. J It was his translation of the OT, however, wliicli brouglit on him the fiercer storm of indignation and opposition (see below, p. 876'').

The exact date of the pope's commission to Jerome is not known ; but the first instalment of the revised text, consisting of the four Gospels, appeared in 383 ; and this was apparently fol- lowed, either the same year, or shortly after, by the Acts and the rest of the NT.

It has indeed been doubted whether Jerome ever did revise more than the Gospels; the Latin of the other books sliows verj' few marks of having been emended by liim, and there is a rather suspicious absence of tlic prefaces which usually accompany his emended translations of the books of the Bible ; § while the preface he affixed to the Gospels promises ' quattuor taiitum Evangelia,' and Augustine, in his well- known letter written in 403, || speaks with favour of Jerome's translation of the Gospel, not of the New Testament.

Against this, however, we must set the fact that Jerome more than once definitely asserts that he revised the whole New Testament, IT • Aug. De doctr. clirist. ii. 11. The Jews, too, laughed at the variations in the Latin versions ; see Jerome's Comm. in Ezech. c. xxxvii. (v. 432 in Vallarsi's edition, Venice, 1706-71). t Apol. adv. liu/. iii. ti (\'all. ii. 637), ' Ego philosophus, rhetor, graminaticus. dialecticus, hebrseus, grscus, latinus, triiin^iis ' : see van Ess, pp. 101, 108. } kp.

c\v. 6 {Au(]itRtini ad Uieron.) § f.fj. I'TCPf. in lilrr. Job ex Graico, * Igitur et vos et unum- 5nemque lectorem solita pnefatione comuioneo ' ; J'rcp/. in lihr. 'satmorum iwcta LXX, ' unde cousueta praifatione commoneo,' etc. II Ep, civ. 6 (Aug^tstini ad Uieron.), 'Proinde non parvas Deo gratias agimus de opere tuo, quo Evangclium ex Gneco interpretatus es.' •l kp. Ixxi. 6, ' Novum Testamentum GrsecsQ reddidi auctori- tati." cf. De ttir. illustr. cxxxv.; Ep. cxii.

20 (ad Avguntimnn), *Et si me ut dicis, in Novi Tcstamenti emendatione susripis,' etc.. which looks like a correction of Augustine's ' Evangehum ex GrsBco interpretatus es.' and even mentions jiassages in the Epistles where his own version differs from the Old Latin.

If seems liardly possible to doubt, therefore, that he did revise tne whole of the New Testament, though no doubt the revision was much more hurried and perfunctory after the Gospels were off his hands ; t such readings, liowever, in the Acts as 8^ curavcrunt for coniportavcrunt of the OL, 11 urdinem for per ordinem, IG" laudabant dcum for hi/mnum dicebant {canebani) deo, \G^ dimiltite for diinitte, are obvious instances of Ilieronymian cor- rection, sometimes against all known Gr.

MSS (see below, p. 882). At the same time, apparently, Jerome made his first revision of the Olil Latin I'salter ; it was simply emended from the Greek of the LXX, and the translation was altered only where the sense absolutely demanded it.J This revision was caUcd the lioman Psalter, in opposition to the Psnlterium Vetus, and was in use in the Churches in Rome and Italy till the pontificate of Pius v. (1566-1.")

72), who introduced the Gallican Psalter (see below) generally, though the Roman was still retained in three Churches in Italy. § Towards the end of 384 pope Damasus died ; and in the August of the following year (385) Jerome left Rome for Pales- tine.

There he and his companions studied the topography, scenery, and cities of the Holy Land ; || and after a journey to Egypt returned thither again to settle at Bethlehem, wliere (389) the two conventual buildings were founded, over one of which — that for monks — Jerome was for so long to preside, while over the other — that for nuns — Paula, the devout widow wiio had been his companion in travel, ruled ; and was succeeded, on her death, in 404, by her daughter Eustochium.

Meanwhile, Jerome's Biblical studies had not slackened.

The Roman Psalter had been so rapidly multiplied and so carelessly copied, that its text was soon in as bad a state as the Old Latin ; IT and in answer to the requests of Paula and Eustochium he undertook a second revision, correcting in addition the Greek text from the other Greek versions, and making use of Origen's critical signs : a passage between an obelus and two points was to be understood as present in the LXX but absent from the Hebrew ; that between an asterisk and two points was lacking in the LXX, and had been supplied not directly from the He- brew, but from the Greek version of Theodotion.

* This version is known as the Gallican Psalter, as it early obtained wide popularitj' in Gaul, probably through the influence of Gregory of Tours.tt and ultimately became the current version in the Latin Church ; the exact date of its publication is not known^but it was probably about A.D. 387. e.g. Ep. xxvii., where he quotes from Eo 12" '3, 1 Tl l'» 6'». t See especially on this point Vallarsi's preface to vol. x. of Jerome's works, pp. xix-xxi ; and also Bp. J.

Wordsworth in Sludia BiMica, vol. i. p. 128. I I^rcef. in libr. Pnabnoniin (Vq-W. x. 106), * Psalterium Ronia3 dudum positus emendaram, et juxta LXX interpretes, licet cursim, magna illud ex parte correxeram.' § Hody, p. 3S3, • in una Uoma} Vaticana ccclesia, et extra urbem in Mediolanensi et in ecc. S. Marci, Venetiis ' ; it is still used in S. Peter's at Rome, and at Milan ; and also iiarlly retained in the Roman Missal, and in one place in the Brevii.

ry in the Invitatory psalm 90 (94) ; see Kaulen, p. 100. II The advantages of such study for the purposes of tran»> lation he insists on in the Pr<e/. in libr. I'aralip. iitxtn LX.K. II PrcE.f. in libr. Psalm, (x. 106), 'Quod quia rursuiu v:leci§ . . scriptorum vitio dcjiravatum, plusque antiouuxr ^rrorem, quam novum emendationem valerc' • Id., ' Uhicumque viderit virgulam prscedentem (-H), ab ea usque ad duo puncta(:) quaj imprcssimus, sciat in LXX trana- latoribus plus haberi.

Ubi autem steihe (•) similitudinem per- spexcrit, ae Ilebrxns vohiminibus additum noverit, a^que us()U« ad duo puncta, juxta Theodotionis dumtaxat editioiicm, qui simplicitate semionis a LXX interpretibus non discordat.' The virijula of cour8e = the obelus, and the g(f^/o = the aiti^risk. U i.e. at the end of the 8th cent. ; see Walafrid Strabus in Hody, p. 382.

VULGATE YULGATE 87: Jerome was also perfecting himself in the know- ledge of Hebrew, and was studying under a Jew, who, in fear of being persecuted by his country- men, used to visit him at night, like a second Nicodemus (Ep. l.\x.\iv. 4). He also published new translations of other books of the OT from the LXX, but as to both the extent and date of this revision there is a considerable amount of un- certainty.

Job was certainly revised soon after the Psalter, and in the same way, and published with a jireface to Paula and Eustochium ; * and these two books alone of all Jerome's revisions ivxta LXX have come down to us. We also know- that he similarly revised Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, and Clironicles, for the prefaces to these books remain though the books themselves are lost.t Elsewhere be speaks generally of having revised 'the Septuagint' (i.e.

the Latin translation of it), and ' the Canonical Books,' which certainly sug^'csts that all the OT underwent this revision (c. liuj. ii. 24, ' Egone contra LXX interpretes aliquid sum locutus, quos ante annos plurimos dUigen- tissime emendatos mea- linguie studiosis dedi?'; cf. iii. 25; Ep. Ixxi. 5; Ep. cxii. 19, 'Quod autem in aliisqua;ris epistolis, cur prior raea in libris Canonicis interpretatio asteriscos liabeat et virgulas pncno- tatas').

Two objections have been felt against this supposition. (1) The absence of prefaces to the other books, and of any reference to a previous translation in the prefaces which he affixed to those books when he translated them from the Hebrew ; whereas rather pointed references occur in the case of Chronicles, Job, etct (2) The enormous amount of labour that such a work must have in- volved, when compressed into a very few years (for bj' ."

iOl he was already engaged on the transla- tion from the Hebrew), — j'ears, too, that were deeply occupied witli other business. The second objection need not detain us long. Jerome was an extra- ordinarily rapid worker : Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs were translated from the He- brew in three days, as he was recovering from a severe illness {Prcef. in lihr. Salomonvi) ; Tobit was translated in a single day {Prrrf. in Tohiam) ; one 'lucubratiuneula' sulliced for Judith (Prrc/".

in libr. Judith) ; when writing his commentary on the Ei)hesians he would sometimes tinish a thousand lines in a day.§ The lirst objection is similar to that felt against the revision of the later books of the New Testament (see above, p.

874) ; and though there is again something suspicious in the absence of his wonted jtrefaces, we can hardly press such negative arguments against positive asser- tions, which, if they mean anything at all, mean that he revised the whole of the OT From the LXX: thus in the Prirf. in lihr.

Saloinonis iiixta LXX he states that he did not correct the books of Wis- dom and Eeclesiasticus, ' tantummodo Canonicas scripturas vobis emendare desiderans ' ; which language certainly implies that he did correct aU the otiier books. Their total disappearance is easily accounted for if the postscript to his Ep. cxxxiv. to Augustine II (written A.D. 416) be • See vol. z. 49-100 (the references are always to Vallarsi's •d.

of Jerome's works) ; the pa-ssages wlded either from the LXX or from the Hebrew throuf^h Thcodotion's version were marked in the same way as in tlie I'salms. t Pr(r.f. in libr. Solum, iuxia LXX (x. 435 f.), 'Tres libros SatomoniH, id eat, Provcrbia, Ecctcsiasten, Canticum Canticomm, veteri L.\.\ interpretum auctorilali reddidi'; see also Prtvf. in Wir. I'aralip. itixta LXX (p. 431); the passages added from LXX or lleb. were also marked us in the Ptialms. t Proi/.inlihr. ParaH\\.

1408), 'Ceterum memini editionem LX.\ translatorum olim de firaeco emendatam tribuisne me noBtris ' ; in Job, ' Utraquc editio, et LX.\ apud Gnecos, et niea JiixUi IlebraiOB, in Latinum nieo laboro translata est ' i^x. 1101) ; in tibrog .Salomoni^, ' Si ciii sane LXX interpretum niagis editio placet, habet earn a nobis olim emendatam ' (ix. 1290). $ Prce/. ad libr. II. Comment, in Eph. (vli. 680).

II 'Orandem Latini serraonis in ista provincia notariorum patimur pcnuriam ; et idcirco pneceptin tuis parere non possu- genuine ; for there he complains that the greater jmrt of this work had been stolen from him. While engaged on this work, however, the bad state of the LXX text became more and more apparent to him, and he was convinced that for a satisfactory Latin version of the OT recourse must be had to the original Hebrew (Prcrf. in libr. Paralip. ex Uebr. vol. ix.

1405) ; the need of such a translation became additionally urgent in contro- versy with Jews, who, when confronted with texts from the LXX, would naturally refuse to acknow- ledge the accuracy of the quotation, and would assert that it did not represent the sen.se of the original,* while many of his friends, who felt the need of a new translation and knew that Jerome was the man best fitted for the task, urged him repeatedly to undertake it.

It was indeed, as we learn from his prefaces, in answer to their requests, that he translated this or that book and sent them copies ; and so the great work of his life was not prose- cuted as a whole and according to a fixed plan, but bit by bit, and for the satisfaction of single and in- dependent inquirers. About 15 years — from 390 to 405 1 — were spent on the new translation.

Jerome began his work ■(vith the books of Samuel and Kings, which he published with the famous Prologus Galeatus or 'preface with the helmet' — armed against opjio- nents ; this preface, however, is really an intro- duction to the whole OT, and shows that even thus early he must have conceived some idea of trans- lating all the books. Next came P.salms, the Prophets, and Job ; and in 394-3;)6 the books of Esdras and Chronicles; then his work was inter- rupted by a long illness.

In 398 he resumed hia labours, and translated Proverbs, Ecclesi.astes, and Song of Songs ; and the Octateuch (in which Esther was included) now alone remained of the Canonical books. First the Pentateuch was published, though the precise date is uncertain ; then soon after the death of Paula, in 404, Joshua, Judges, Kutli, and Esther ; later, the apocryplial parts of Daniel and Esther, and the books of Tobit and .

ludith, which were translated from the Chaldee : and so at length the work was completed. Wisdom, Eeclesiasticus, and probably Maccabees were left unrevised, and Daruch he passed over. Jerome's translation of the Psalms from the Hebrew never became popular, excellent thouj;h it is ; the hold on the publio mind of the more familiar version was too atrony to be loosened, and it is the Galilean l*8.alter which appears in an ordinary Vulgate Bible.

A convenient edition of the version from the Hebrew has been published by P. de Lajfarde, Pvatteriuin Jiixta Ilebroeog ilieronrjmi, Lipsia), 1S74. For the date at which Job and the Prophfts were completed, see Ep. xlix. 4 ad Pammacluuin ; this was written towards the end of 39;{ ; he writes, 'Libros sedecim Prophctarum, i)U08 in Latinum de Hebra'O sennone verti, si le^reris et delectari te hoc opere compercro, jirovocabis nos ctiam cu3tera clausa aruiario non tenere.

Transtuli nuper Job in linguani nostram. The ]ireface to the books of Ettdran was probably written about 304, as in it he refers to the discussion of several iioints quie latiori operi reservamus' ; this larger work which ho was about to publish is certainly the Kp. Ivii. ad Pamntachium (de Optimo getiL-n- interpretandi), whicli appeared in the latter part of 395.

The third and fourth hooks of t'sdras he refused to edit: nec queni<iuam moveat quod unus a nobis cditus liber mus, maxime in editione LXX, quae astoriscis verubusque difl- tincta est. IMeraquo enim prioris laboris fraude cujusdara amisimus'; but this postscript is omitted by one AIS and by several editors ; see Vail. i. 1043 44. Pra:f. in Pealterium ex Uebr. (Ix. 1155 f.)

, 'Quia igitur nuper cum Hebriuo disputans, (lUsMlam pro l><>niino Salva- tore de I'salmis testimonia protulisti volensque illc te iltudere, per sernioncs pcne singuloa asserebat, non ila haberi in ilebrajo'; see also /'rafjT. in libr. Paralip., in Iitaiam, etc.; yet when in Africa they were ajipcaled to as towhethcr .Icrome'a hcdera or the traditional cucurhila wos the right transluUon in Jon 41, they defended the translation of the LXX and Old Latin, SCO Kp. CIV. 6 {Awju^iini ad llicrvn.)

; later, the Jews bore witness to the accuracy of Jerome's work, see Aug. Dt Civ. Dei, lib. xviii. c. 43 ; van Ess, p. 117. t See Kuulen, p. 108 f. ; Westcott, art. 'Vulgate' in Sniitb't DB, p. 1700 f.; the tatter's dating of the appearance of the ■everal lx)oks seems preferable to Kauleo's.

876 VULGATE VULGATE est ; net* apocryphonim tertii et quarti somniiB delectetur ; quia et apud riebraos Ezrae Neemia:que sermonee in unum volumen coarctantur ; et qua) non habtiilur apud illos neo de vipinti quattuor senibus sunt, procul abjicienda' ; the 4tli book is found only in the Latin version.

In tliia same preface to Esdras, Jerome complains of his opponents for attackinu his work while they secretly make use of his translation, and he begs his friends Uoiiinio and Rojjatianus not to let his translation be publicly known ; they are to read it privately, or, at the most, only let a few friends see it. See vol. ix. 1624. Chronicles was probably finished in 396, for in the preface he remarks, ' Scripsi nuper librum de Optimo genere interpre- tondi.'

The I'rw/atio in Khroa Salomonu contains a reference to his illness : ' longa ajgrotatione fractus, ne penitus hoc anno reticerem et apud vos mutus essem, tridui opus nomini vestro coiisecravi." Cf. Epp. Ixxi. 6, Lvxiii. 10, both written in 396, in which he refers to the same illness apparently, and in almost the same terms— Mongo tentus incommode,' 'post longam ffitrrotationem.' The Oi-lateuch must have been in hand about the same time, for he refers to it in Kp. liod.

6, 'Canonem Hebraic® veritatis, exccpto Octateucho qucni nunc in nianibus habeo, pueris tuis et noUiriis dedi describendum.' Genesis at any rate was pub- lisheti before 402, as Jerome quotes the preface to it in his apolo"v against Ruftinus (ii. 25), which cannot be later than that dule. ■ The other four books of the Pentateuch probably app''.ired later, as when Jerome wrote his preface to Genesis he bad not finished them : ' nunc te precor, Desideri carissime, ut quia tantum opus (i.e.

Pentateuchuni) me subire fecisti, et a Genesi exordium capere, orationibus juves, quo possim eodem epirilu quo script! sunt libri, in latinum eos transferre ser- nioncm.' Joshua, Judges, and Ruth are numbered with Esther as books he was just publishing, 'post fflmcta Paulas dormitionem ' in the I'ra'/atio in Jobue.

For Tohit and Jttdith see the prefaces to those books ; Jerome was not himself acquainted with Chaldee, but he obtained the help of a scholar who translated the Chaldee into Hebrew, which Jerome in turn translated into Latin. For his refusal to translate afresh Wisdom and Ecclesiastims see the Pro/, in libr. Sal.

iuxta LXX : ' Porro in eo libro qui a plerisque Sapientia Salomonis inscribitur, et in Eoclesiastico, quem esse Jesu filii Sirach nullus ignorat, calamo teniperavi, tantummodo Canonicas Scripturas vobis emendaredesiderans ' ; though this was written before he be^ian the translation of the OT f"rom the Hebrew, he does not seem to have changed his mind afterwards. With regard to the Maccabees, however, the evidence is conflicting.

He nowhere mentions translating the books himself, and his languaM quoted above certainly suggests that he had no intention of doing so in 3S7 ; in the Prologtis tialeatxts (390-91) he passes them by with a short notice : ■ MachabEorum primuiu librum Hebraicum reperi ; secundus Grajcus est quod ex ipsa quoque phrasi pr.ibari potest.'

Yet, as M, Berger pointed out to the present writer, there are fairly numerous remains of an Old Latin version of the Mace, other than that which appears in the Vulgate Bible ; and these differ so much that the latter must be regarded as a new recension if not an independent translation ; see the parallel versions in Sabaticr(Ci(</. Sacr. Lat. versiones, vol. ii.) Sabatier himself (pp.

1013, 1014) allows that Jerome may have corrected the older version, though he hardly thinks he actually retranslated it. Forhistreatmentof CanicA seethe Pro;/', in Jerem.. : 'Librum Baruch . . qui apud Hebrasos nee legitur nee habetur prwter- misimus.' , . , , t- r,-i.i I It may be worth while to arrange the books of the Bible In the chronological order of their revision and retraDslation, as given us in the above investigation. New Testament. 3S3*.D. The four Gospels. 334-385.

Rest of the New Testament. Firit revision o/ Psalter. S83-384. Psaltcrium Romanum. Revision of Old Testament from the Septuagint. 3S7 (probably). Psalterium Gallicanum. 887 or somewhat later. Job, followed by Proverbf, Eocleel- astes, Song of Songs, Chronicles. 388-.391. Rest of the Canonical books (probably). Retranslation of Old Testament /ram the Hebreu. 390 or 391. Books of Samuel and Kings. 392 -393. Psalms, Prophets, Job. 394. Esdras. 399. Chronicles. 398.

Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Son^ 401? Genesis, followed by Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. 405. Joshua, J udges, Ruth, Esther. Tohit. Judith, and apocryphal parts of Daniel and Esther. We have said that it was at the wish of friends that most of the translations were undertaken ; • e.(j. the Pentateuch was translated at the wish of Desiderius : Chronicles for Chromatins, the books of Esdras for Domnio and itogatianus, fcjither for Iaula and Eustochium.

yet Jerome's friends, who could realize present needs and foresee future advantages, were a small circle ; the vast bodj of clergy and laity were satis- fied with the existing versions ; and the mutter ings of suspicion which were aroused by the emended version of the NT were as nothing com- pared with the storm of indignation and opposition which the translation of the OT from the Hebrew brought on Jerome's head.

* No doubt several causes had to do with tliis result; Jerome's own hot temper, and the terribly ready and powerful tongue he could use whenever duty seemed to urge him to speak, had gained him many enemies ; the fame of his learning may have made other scholars jealous and critical ; but the great stumbling- block was that he should have gone behind the Septuagint version, and made a translation which took no account of it, and even set itself up as an independent rival.

The popular legends as to the miraculous agreement of the seventy translators had no doubt surrounded the Greek version with a halo of sanctity, and its frequent use by the NT writers in quotation would help to place it, as regards inspiration, on a level with the original Hebrew ; and no charge seems to have been more constantly hurled at Jerome than that of presump- tion, unlawful innovation, sacrilege, in daring to put aside the LXX version.

Even Augustine held the LXX to he equally inspired with the original Hebrew, t and deprecated any new translation, though mainly from fear of the ofl'ence it would cause to the weaker brethren, t A i(tory became current that a certain African bishop had adopted the new version for public use in his Church ; in the book of Jonah, Jerome had employed tlie word hedera for the gourd under which the prophet rested, instead of the cucurbita of the earlier Latin versions ; the introduction of this new translation in a familiar passage of Scripture caused such e.

xcitement and tumult in the Church that the bishop was nearly left without a flock. § This incident, whether real or fictitious, would serve as a very fair specimen of the hostility which a new translation of Scripture was sure to encounter; and it would take several generations for such opposition to die out; and certainly Jeromes method of meeting it, as exemplified in his letters to Augustine, was the reverse of conciliatory.

In the prefaces to the various books of the OT Jerome defended himself with great warmth from the charges brought against him. Over and over again he nuiintained that he did not intend to cast a slur upon the LXX translation, II and that he was only endeavouring to render the Hebrew as faithfully as possible, and to make passages clear which in the LXX and the Old Latin were obscure.

The objection that the LXX must be inspired and perfect because the apostles and NT writers quoted the OT in that version, he met by bringing forward five quotations (Mt 2">-^, Jn 19", 1 Co 2» Jn 7^, which could not have been taken from the LXX, •Jerome's former friend Rufilnus was one of his fiercest °T Aug. iJe Civ. Dei, xviii. 43 : ' Spiritus enim qui in prophetis crat, quando ilia dixerunt. idem ipse erat in L.X.K vins, quaiido ilia inteniretati sunt' ; see also the pass:iges in van Ess, p.

HI 1. 1 Kit hi. (Aiigustini ad Uic-onifmum) written in 394 ; this letter, however, never reached Jerome ; Ep. civ. from Augustine, written 403 ; and Ep. cxvi. 35, written 405 : in the last letter Auk explains that he had refused to aUow Jerome s version to be publicly read in Church—' ne . , maguo scandalo per- turbemus plebes Christi.' „,,,,. 6 See Ep. civ. (Aiimuitini ad Hieron.) and c%iu iHHieronifim ad A w,.) ; Thierrv, Saint Jir(nne, livre xi. (4th ed.

PP- 447, 448) suggests that the incident never really occurred, but was nvented probably to throw ridicule on Jeromes work; yet inth Jfroine and Augustine speak of it as if it w.re a fact. obsecro te lector both Jerome and Augustine speak < II His apology in the J'roloijus Galeat-us- ne laliorem meum reprehensionem existimes antuiuorum . . Ouaniquam mihi omnino conscius non sim mutosse me quH plain de hebraica veritate'— is repeated in different words m «lmo»t every preface.

VULGATE VULGATE 877 as the reading varied in every case ; they must then have been taken direct from the Hebrew, and he was justified in giving this source of our Lord's, or the apostle's, words to the Church in an intelligible translation (Pra'f. in I. Paral. ix. 140S). Indued he maintained against Rullinus that the apostles nsed the LXX in quotation only where it agreed with the Hebrew, and that where the two varied they quoted from the original.

* But in spite of this he always professed the highest respect lor the Septua- gint version. (jradually the conflict calnie<l down ; the general acceptance of the new version could only be a matter of time ; it was a clear case of the littest surviving. Augustine was ultimately seen to praise it ; in the Gospels he apparently used it;t the Spanish Church adopted it for public use ; Sophronius, the friend and lellow-nionk of Jerome, retranslated the Psalms and Prophets from .

Jerome's version into Greek ; and when Jerome was ending his stormy life at Bethlehem in 420, tlie attacks or criticisms of his opjwnents were no longer heard, or, if heard, no longer attended to.; ii. HisTouY OF THE Translation after Jei'.o.me s Death.

— The reception of the new trans- lation was, however, vineven ; someCliurclies clung more than others to the old version, and sometimes Jerome's version would be adopted in one part of the Bible, while the Old Latin would be retained in another. Thus the proceedings recorded in the Acta contra Feliccm of .Xiigustine show that at Hippo in the year A.D. 404 tlie Gospels were quoted in Jerome's version, the Acts of the Apostles in the Uld Latin.

g Africa and Britain, both separated by the sea from the main body of the Western Church, clung more steadfastly to the older version, thougli even here the adhesion was a modilied one, and the later African texts, such as m, and h of the Acts and Epistles (see LATIN Vek.sion.s), show the influence or the Vulgate upon them.

In Italy and in other parts of the Western Church generations would soon arise to whom the Old Latin could not be bound by especial ties of use or allection, while by converts the best translation would naturally be that which was most welcomed and most vised. The clergy and educated Christians in Rome would be likely to prefer a revision which was begun at 'he instigation of a pope, and the Latin of which would be more congenial than the ruder dialect of the earlier versions.

Augustine's recommendation of the versio Itala (by which, Burkitt niaintain.s, he meant Jerome's revision ; see The Olil Latin and the Itala, pp. 54, 60 f., and art. Latin Vek.sions) — 'est verborum ten.acior cum perspicuitate sen- tential'— was quoted, apparently as a well-known formula, of the Vulgate ; Isidore of Seville ((ith cent.)

uses almost the exact words ; and Walafrid Strabus (let half of 9th) follows Isidore, and says, ' hac translatione nunc ubique utitur tota Konmna ecclesia, licet non in omnibus libris, et ipsius translatio nierito ceterb anteftrtur, quia e.st ver- borum tenacior, et perspicuitate sententiaj clarior' (see Body, p. 413). In the 5th cent, the Vulgate was adopted by Vin- cent of Lerins, Faustusof liiez.

and Prosper of Aqui- taine ; Eucherius of Lyons and Avitus of Vienne nscd it largely though not exclusively.il In the 6th cent, its use seems becoming almost universal amongst scholars, except in Africa, where Pacundus and Junilius still preserve many Old Latin read- • Contra Rttf. lib. II. (Vail. 11. 629) ; cf. Ep. lirli. 11. t «.!7. in the D« conaentu Soangeiitt. ; 8«e Burkitt, The Old Latin and the itala, p. &7 f. : Kaulcn, p. 188. S See Burkitt, Tht Old Latin and the Itala, p. 57 f.

■ See Westcott, p. 1702; Kaukii, p. 197 f.; Berucr, pp. 2-4 ; In the 6tti cent, in Uaul mcwt of the boolu of the OT arc quoted from Jerome, while (or the NT the Old Latin holds iu own. ings; and towards the end of the centurj- pope Gregory the Great (Prmf. in Job ad Lean(/rum = Migne, Pat. Lat. Ixxv. \,. 516) could say, ' Novam vero translatiunem dissero, sed cum probationis causa exigit nunc novam nunc veterem per te.

sti- nuiniaa-ssumo ; utquiasedes aposlolica,cui auctore Ueo j)ra;sideo, utraque utitur, mei quocjue labor studii ex utraque fulciatur' ; compare in Job, 1. xx. c. 32, where he declares his personal preference for the new translation. It does not, however, follnw from this that this version now became the official version in Home, but only that, in the judgment of the head of the Roman Church, it was raised to an equal rank with the old (see van Ess, p. 137).

Yet we should be mistaken if we measured the disappearance of the older versions simply by the quotations in ecclesiastical writers; the evidence of M.SS of the Sacred Books, of Lectionaries, quo- tations and lessons in service booka, etc.

, must also be taken into account ; and these show us that these versions died very hvrd ; (jometimes in entire books of the Bible, sometimes fn marginal notes, conllate readings, and ' mixed ' tc^ts, some- times in short lections, in antiphons and responses, they lasted far on into the Middle Ages. Thus the St. Germain MS (see p. 888) of tlio 'Jtli cent, has an Old Latin text in Tobit, Judith, and St.

Matthew ; in the other books of tJie Bible which survive it is Vulgate, though stronglj' mixed with Old Latin readings ; the Codex Colbertinus (c) of the New Testament (I2th or 13th cent, see p. 888) has the Gospels in an Old Latin text, the rest Vulgate; the interesting Perpignan MS (I3th cent., see p. SS8) has Ac I'-13' and 2S" adjin. in an Old Latin text, the rest Vulgate with a very slight amount of mixture from the Old Latin ; the North British and Irish MSS (such as those described p.

887) proserveagood Vulgate text interspersed with OKI Latin interpolations and conflations, which with a little jiractice can be easily eliminated from the main body of the text. Tlie NT sull'ercd from this mixture far more than the OT ; for, being a revision instead of a new translation, it resembled the earlier versions more closely ; and it was more familiar to the members of the Church. ' L'Ancieu Testament au contraire,' says M. Berger (p.

3), ' n'a rd-ellement 6t6 levt-l^ aux peuples latins que par Saint Jerome': yet even the text of the OT would suHer from the very natural con- fusion that would come between his translation from the Hebrew and his earlier version from the LXX.

In addition to this conscious preservation of the Old Latin in many Vulgate MSS, the text of Jerome's translation was exposed in after-years to the same dangers as existed in his own daj', and which are inseparable from the transmission and multiplication of books by hand. The careless- ness of copyists, their tendency to introduce matter from parallel p,is.

sage8, unconscious remin- iscence of older renderings, occasional alteration for dojjmatic purposes, — all these in the course of centuries ten<led to produce a style of text very far removed from the original purity in which it left its editor's hands. On this point the writer ventures to quote from the preface (p. viii) of the late M. Berber's UiMoirg de la Vut<intt, etc.

, a book to which he cannot HUtlicieiitly cxpreHu hid otilii^uliuns — Lcs (toclrines lea plus chil-reu aux thL^oluL'iens du uio\eufi^e exercenl toules lour intluence sur lo text (Ic la Bible. Id c'est le do((inc de la Trinit^i, que Ton veut trouver fonnulii en toutes leltrcs dans la Bible, et que Ton alllrine par la (ameuite inter- polation du pajiHu^'u " des trois ttinioins.

C'evt la foi en la divinite de Ji-aus-Christ qui s'exprinie en un strand nunibro de (alHiflrations de detail, toujoun au dt^trinient de son humanity. C'est, dans le troisit-nie chupitre de la Uentse, un chan^a'Uient d'une scule lettre qui ntet "la Feuinie" & la place de "la Iost*ril6 de la femnie."

Dans le second livre des Machabdes, une s6rie de m(xIillcalionfl successives transforment insensible- uietit le passage classique de la doctrine de la pri6re pour lei nmrts ; lou^e siniulcinent dans le t«xte original, la pnure pour les niorta arrive, dans les textes de basse i^po<iue, ft 6tre prCchOe 878 VULGATE VULGATE en temies expr^s.

Dans le quatri^me livre d'Esdras, un passage qui parait contraire i la pri^re pour les tK'pass^s est, sans plus, arraclii- de la Bible avec la page qui le porte, et cet exenipluire mutilu est, par une singuli6re rencontre, presque le seul qui ait Jamais eti copii5.' Tor the jxissagc in tlie Maccabees see the note top. 23 of M. Bergcr's book ; for the fourth book of Ksdriis see R. L. Bensly, The Mitsing Fragiiwnt of the Uh Book 0/ Ezra^ Oamb. 1875, or Speaker's Commentarv, Apocrypha^ in loc.

; or M. R. James, The Uh Book qf Ezra, Ciimb. 1895. Cassiodorius, indeed, is a witness that even by the middle of tlie Uth cent, tlie text of Jerome's ver-sion had become corrujjted, and tliat he did his best to revise it ; but as to the extent both of the corruption and of the revision we are in the darli. He speaks at some lengtli on the subject in the De institutione Dii-inaruin litterarum (Migne, Pat. Lat. Ixx. p. U05f.)

, whicli lie composed for the instruction of bis younger brethren in the mon- astery at Vivarium, apparently about the year A.D.

544 ; he expresses himself anxious that they should study their Bibles in codicibus emendatis, tells thera that liis nine codices, containing all the books of the Old and New Testaments, were revised by him ' sub collatione priscorum codicum,' that Jerome's arrangement of the Prophets into cola and commata had been adopted by him for the rest of the Bible, and tliat he left them a Greek pandect, or whole Bible, by which, accord- ing to Jerome's example, they might correct the errors in their Latin translation.

But he gives us no li.st of current errors or of Iiis own correc- tions ; and all trace of his carefully corrected codices has disappeared. AVith, however, perhaps one exception: the magnificent Codex Amiatinus of the Bible, though it is of the 8th cent., resem- bles Cassiodoriu.s' Bible not only in being divided into cola and commata throughout, but also in possessing a quaternion of introductory matter {possibly of earlier date than the rest of the MS) which strongly resembles chs. xii.-xiv.

of tlie De inMitutione ; three lists of the books of Holy Scrip- ture occur in each, and the resemblance is of that puzzling nature which stops well short of direct copying and yet suggests very close affinity ; all the closer because Cassiodorius tells us that his third division of the books was written ' inter alias (divisiones) in codice grandiore.'

It may be, therefore, that in the first eiglit leaves of the Codex Amiatinus we actually possess part of Cas- siodorius' codex grandior ; though it is more likely that we possess a not very faithful copy of it.

* Large numbers of Italian texts must have been brought to Britain in and after the mission of Augustine, if not earlier ; and in the late 7th and 8th cents, the monasteries of Weaimouth and Jarrow were, we know, enriched with copies of the Bible (Pandectes or BibliotJmcB as they were called) and other MSS obtained from Italy by the exer- tions of Benedict Biscop and Ceolfrid ; from them Buch MSS as the Codex Amiatinus and the Lindis- farne Gospels were copied.

The type of text thus obtained would soon penetrate to Ireland, though as it was perpetuated in the local scriptoria it would gradually become tinged with some of the peculiarities of the traditional Old Latin versions. But the Bible the Irish thus received from Rome their missionaries carried back in the following centuries to continental Europe, to Gaul, Switzer- land, and Germany. The Codex Amiatinus was itself sent to Rome by Ceolfrid as an offering to the shrine of St. Peter.

Irish and British monks again settled in foreiOTi monasteries and copied the Scriptures there (cf. Bede, Hist. Eccl. iii. 8) ; and thus the text which had been first modified by British characteristics, was further modified by * See P. Corssen, ' Die Bibeln des Oassiodorius und der Codex Amiatinus,' in the Jahrhiicher /. prot. Theologie, Leipz. 1883 ; and H. J. White, "The Codex Amiatinus and ita Birthplace," in Studia Biblica et Eccletiastica, vol. ii. p. 287 1.

the texts of the countries into which it was now brought. We owe to this cause the large number of MSS, mainly of the 9th cent., which were copied in Gaul and Switzerland by Irisli scribes, and present a strange mixture of Irish and Con- tinental types, both in text and handwriting. Meanwhile in Spain a different family of MSS wns growing up.

Separated off from the rest of Europe, Spain, like Ireland, clung to old traditions and habits ; and the Old Latin text preserved in the (juotations in Priscillian * lives on in the Spanish Vulgate Bibles.

But the Spanish scribes were fonder of interpolations, and of enriching their MSS with marginal notes, and even legendary additions, than the Irish ; with the consequence, that while the Irish scribes preserved on the whole a pure type of text — yet mainly in the Gospels, for they rarely copied whole Bibles — the Spanish perpetuated one which was corrupt, and of slight critical value.

And as from the north and west the Irish texts moved into France with the mis- sionaries, so from the south the Spanisli texts gradually crept in over the Pyrenees, and thus France became the meeting ground of the two opposed types. The close of the 8th cent, witnessed two recen- sions of the Vulgate, which, so far as we can see, were founded on these British and Spanish MSS respectively; and. as may be expected, France was the country in which these recensions were made.

Charles the Great took a keen interest in the sacred text and its purity ; he was anxious to obtain a uniform standard Bible for Church use, in simple and intelligible Latin, without sole- cisms.t He accordinglj% in the year 797, commis- sioned our own countryman Alcuin, who was then abbot of St. Martin at Tours, to prepare an emended edition of the Scriptures.

Alcuin was familiar with Northumbrian >ISS from his youth ; he himself was of Northumbrian parentage, and had been educated at York, and it was to that city that he sent for MSS to help him in tlie per- formance of his task.

J As this task was simply to correct the Biblical text by the aid of the best Latin MSS available, without regard to the Greek, we may regard it as fortunate indeed that Alcuin's birth and education should have made him natur- ally consult just the libraries where the purest texts were preserved. By Christmas A.D. 801 the task was completed, and Alcuin was enabled to present Charles with a cojiy of the emended Bible.

Of existing Vulgate MSS, the famous Codex Vallicellianus is supposed to most nearly repre- sent Alcuin's text (see p. SS9). Simultaneously with this, Theodulf, bishop of Orleans (787-821), was imdertaking a revision, though on difierent lines. Theodulf was a Visi- goth, and was born near Narbonne, and the Sjianish traditions would therefore be familiar and dear to him ; yet he did not simply collect and register Spanish readings.

He apparently knew and studied the MSS current in Languedoc and the south of France ; § and, collecting together all the texts he knew of, he worked with a consider- able amount of prudence, marking the passages he considered suspicious, and honestly endeavouring to arrive at a pure text. Yet his work was un- even ; and his habit of inscribing in the margin of his Bible the variant readings he had collected, had the unfortunate result of introducing into * Ed. Schepps, Corput Script, ecel. Lot.

xvlU., Vienna, 1889 ; Bee also Berger, p. 8. t See the Capitulariea in Pertz, Hon. Germ., torn. iii. Leget, torn i. pp. 44, 65. J See Kp. Ixxviii. in Jaffd, Bibliotheca rer. Germ., tom. vi. (t.e. ilonum. AtctUniana) p. 346 ; also Ep. Ixxil. p. 831 ; cf. Scrivener-Miller, Introduction (4th ed.), ii. p. 59. § Berger, pp. xiv and 145 f., to whom the present writel owes the greater part of this section. VULGATE- VULGATE 879 Frnnce a whole congeries of corrupt readings from Spain.

The best specimen of his revision is the exquisite Bible at Paris numbered Lat. 93S0 in the Bibliotliique Nationale. Theodulf's worlv had a dillerent late from Alcuin's ; it was tlie private enterprise of a scholar, not a public work under- taken for public utility at the instance of a monarch : and so its influence on the history of the lext was (fortunately) slight, whereas Alcuin's was great.

The very favour and reputation which the Alcuiniau recension enjoj-ed, proved indeed the cause of its speedy degeneracy. The demand for Bibles containing it became so large that the resources of the great writing school at Tours must have been severely strained ; and the rapidity with which the MSS were copied and multiplied proved fatal to purity of text.

They were trans- Bcribed hastily and from various exemplars, good and bad ; and the large imposing volumes of 'Caroline' Bibles, specimens of which are to be found in almost all our principal libraries, vary indefinitely, from a nearlj- pure Alcuinian text to one almost worthless. Verj' soon therefore after Alcuin's time com- plaints of the corruption of the text meet us again, the old cry is re-echoed, ' tot exeniplaria pa-ne quot codices.' Yet effort after eflort was made to arrest the decay.

Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, 1069-89, ia related by his biographer* to have worked at correcting all the books of the OT and NT, and also the writings of the Fathers, ' ad orthodoxam lidem'; and to have encouraged this study among his pupils : none of his corrected MSS, however, are known to survive. We are more fortunate in possessing the results of the labour of other critics. Stephen Harding, third abbot of Citeaux (about the middle of the 12th cent.)

, mtde a similar revision; and his correcteil Bible, in four volumes, is still preserved in the public lilirarj- at Dijon (MS No. Q""). He purged the text of a large number of interjiolations, partly by collatin<j' good Latin and Greek MSS, l)artly with the aid of some Jewish scliolars, whom he consulted as to the suspected passages in the OT ; it was in the books of Samuel and Kings that the ' major pars erroris iuveniebatur.'

t His example was very soon followed hy the Cardinal Nicolaus Maniacoria, whose criticisms are preserved in a MS at Venice, t With the latter part of the 12tli and the 13th cents., however, we are introduced to a new and more organized system of correction. The number of Bibles belonging to these centuries, especially the 13th, testifies to the very large scale on which they must liave been copied.

§ Almost every library possesses some of these small manuscript Bibles, written in double columns on thin vellum, generally with wonderful regiilarity and beautj'. raris, according to Koger Bacon (Hody, p. 420 f.)

, was the city where the greatest business in the copying and selling of these Bibles was carried on, the theologians and booksellers com- bining to produce a regular and lixed type of text, which he calls the Exemplar Pariiiense ; the de- mand was large in consequence of the fame of the Paris University in the 13th cent., and the numbers of students who Hocked to it.

The Exemplar Parisiense, however, being hastily and unscien- tifically prepared, furnished a degenerate type of Milo Crib-pinut, a monlc of Bcc ; see Migne, Pat, Lat. ol. pp. bb and 101 1 t See tIo<l> , ^. 418 ; van Ess, p. 162 f. ; Kaulen, p. 246 : and, for tbia section, a valuable article by Uenifle, Die lldsa. d. Bibel- correctoricn des 18 Jahrh.,' in the Ardiio/. Literar. u. Kirchen- gucfi. drs M.A. Iv., Freiburg, 1S«8. J Marciana, Lat. class, x. cod. \7ii, fol. 141 ; see Denlfle, p.

270. ( See KenyoD, The Bible and theAneimt JUSS, London, 1896, p. ISO. text, and Bacon com|)lain3 bitterly of it.* Etforts were now made to emend it by societies of scholars, who united tlieir labours and researches in the Currectoria Bihlivrum, as they were called.

Here the authority of Latin and Greek JISS was regis- tered in cases of doubtful reading, the testimony of Fatliers was quoted, even variants of punctuation were taken account of, and short critical notes were added stating which reading was to be pre- ferred. The principal corrfctoria are (1) The Correctorittm Parisiense, prepared probably about a.d. Vl.'

i> by the Paris Tiieolo^ians : t lliis was in the course of the next twenty years adopted and enlarged by the Dominicans residing at Sens, and jios-ibly authorized by the bishop of that diocese ; and it is sonu-liniea culled the Correctoriiim Senonense in consequence (possibly to be found in the Paris .MS, IJ.N. 17). Rot,'er Bacon had a poor opinion of the Paris correrlors and their work ; whether Franciscans or Dominicans, he spe.

iks of them with contempt ; the carelessness of the scribes at Paris was bad enough, but the ignorant ci irrectora made things worse ; ' quilibet lector in ordine minorum corrigit ut vult, et similiter apud prajdicatorcs, et eodem modo scolares (or seculares?), et quilibet mutat quod non intelligit."

(2) The Correctoriuin Sort/onicum, so called because it is pre- served in a Sorbonne MS, I varies little from the text of the Snwnense, and is a sort of collection of more important readings from the earlier correoforul. (3) The Correctorium of ths Dominicans, prepared under the auspices of Hugo of St. Caro, about 1240, the final corrected form of which is now preserved in the Bibl. Nat. at Puris (Lat.

19,719-16,722) : this, like the emendation of Stephen Harding, was an endeavour not so much to recover Jerome's actual te\t, as to obtain a good working text of the Bible, by the use of Greek or Hebrew MSS. § The Dominicans thought as little of the Correctorium Parisiense as did Poger Bacon, and they dis- couraged the members of their order from using it. D (4) The Correctoiium Vaticanum, a good MS of which is preserved in the Vatican Librarj' (Lat.

34(36) : this correct&rium was the work of the Franciscans, and its author has been very reasonably identified by Vercellone with a 'Sapienlissiraua homo,' praised by Bacon, who he says had spent nearly forty years in the correction and exposition of the text ; DeniHe con- cludes that he was Willermus de Mara.ll This is the best of the curri'ctoria, and has been cited by Bp. J. W'ordsworth in his edition of the Vulgate New Testament as cor. uat.

; the author is not only a good Greek and Hebrew scholar, but has seriously act himself to restore the Uieronymian text. These remedies were all that could be applied to the Vulgate text before the invention of printing ; and, by an unfortunate chance, it was the worst of these corrertoria, the Parisiense, that was made use of \>y Kobertus Stephanus. With the literary revival of the 15th cent.

, a natural desire was felt for a more satisfactory text of the Bible, as well as for a multiplication of copies of the sacred book ; the great humanist pope, Nicholas v., gave a commission to the scholar JIanetti, to translate the NT into Latin ; the same pope otlered a reward of 5000 crowns for a copy of St. Matthew's Gosjiel in its original Hebrew." Naturally, some of the first and principal pro- ductions of the ]irinting-i)ress were Latin Bibles.

But the Bibles that were taken into the printer's worksliops, and from which the early editions were printed, would be the small and handy medieval MSS described above, like the MSS from which Henricus Stephanus printed the Greek NT, and which are still preserved in the librarj' at Basel; tliere would be a larger supply of such texts, they would lie easier to print from, and if they were spoilt the loss was slight, while few peojile would have cared to entrust one of the great Alcuinian Bibles, or still earlier pandects like the Codex Amialinus, to the rough usage of the printing- • See Martin, ' Ijt Vulgate Latino au 13°" Bl6cle, d'apr6s R.

Bacon' in the i!fi(jt^on (Louvain), vol. vii. p. 88f. t See Hody, p. 418; It. Simon, tiistoire critique dc^ rersiont du A'Tj ch. "ix.; S. Berger, Quam mititiani Ujujucb Uetn-aica ha'jitennt Christiani inedix cevi temporihus in Gallia, Paria, 1S'.'3, p. 26 f. Now numbered 15,564 (fol. 147 fT.) in the Bibl. Nat. at ParU. \ See Denille, p. 205 ; Martcne, Thcsaurut nov. anecd., torn. Iv. 1076. n Berifcr, Quam notitiam, etc. p. 27. ^ Ilodv, p. 42yf. ; Berger, (jvam nolitiam, etc. pp. 32-86.

■" Paul F»br«, La Biiliolhtgw Valicane, pp. 89, 41 (Parl^ 1896). 880 VULGATE VULGATE office.

Thus the early printed editions of the Vulgate did little more than per[ietuate tliu current and corrupt form of text; though the copies printed l)y l''roben at Basel seem to have been made witli care, and to have enjoyed a European reputation for accuracy ; * the present writer has found his Bible of 1502, with the glossa orillnaria, preserve a number of good read- ings, against almost all other early editions.

Space forbids our enumerating the early editions of the Vul;;rate or examining their history ; the student who wisiies to do this, may be referred to the sections on the subject in van Ess, Kaulen, Westcott, to Mr. Copinger*8 work, to E. Nestle's ' Lateinische Bibeliibersetzungen ' in PRE^, to Le Long, Bihlio- theca Sacra (ed. Masch, 177S-90), vol. ii., to Vercellone, Var. Led. i. pp. xcvi-civ, ii. pp.

xxi-xxvi ; and, last, not least, to the llritish Museum Catalogue of printed books ; Bible, part i.' The following editions at any rate should be borne in mind : — 1. The Mazarin ' Bible, so called because the copy which first attracted the notice of Bibliographers was found in the library of Cardinal Mazarin ; otlierwise known as the ' 42 line ' Bible ; issued at Mentz between 1402 and 1456, in two vols. ; the printing is ascribed to Guten- berg, or to Peter Schoeffer, or to Johann Fust.

Its rarity and beauty combine to make it one of the most valuable books in the world. 2. The first Bible published at Rome is dated 1471, tnd was printed by Sweynheym and Pannartz, 2 vols. fol. ; reproduced b\ Andr. Frisner and Sensenschmit at Nuremberg, 1475, 3. The important Venice edition by Fr. de Hailbrun and Nic.de Frankfordia, 1475, fol. ; the text is ba-sed largely on the Mazarin Bible, while in turn many of the later editions are copied from this. 4.

The famous Complutensian Polyglot in six vols, fol., 1514 and following years ; undertaken by Cardinal Xjmenes, and printed at his expense.! A definite revision of the Vulgate text was undertaken in this edition, partly with the aid of ancient MSS, still more from the Greek ; but with only moderate success. 6. The Vulgate Bible of Robertus'Stephanus, Paris, 1528, the first genuine attempt at a critical edition : three good MSS were collated for it.

This was followed by a larger edition on the same lines, for which seventeen MSS were collated, four of which can be still identified ; printed 1538-40, reprinted 1.546. This editimi is prac- tically the foUTldation of the ojficial Roman Vu^ate; it is cited as 5" in Wordsworth's edition.

•, Parallel attempts at producing a critical text by the aid of MSS and earlier printed Bibles were being made by the Cathohc Theologians at Louvain ; and John Uenteuius in his fine folio edition (Louvain, 1547, and often reprinted) used about thirty-one MSS and two printed copies ; it is impossible to identify them now. This edition is cited as J^ by Wordsworth. 7.

The small and rare octavo edition of Robertus Stephanus, dated 1555, should be noticed, as it is the first Latin Bible with the modem verse divisions. The Sixtine and Clementine editions are noticed below. The output of printed Bibles was very large ; during the first half century of printing some 124 editions were published ; Ver- cellone enumerates 179 editions again between the years 1471 and 1599; and, in addition to these, numerous scholars, both Rora. Cath.

and Protestant, undertook independent translations of the Bible into Latin, as well as revisions of the Vulgate text. Remembering this, we may be able to realize what a bewildering amount of differing versions were now current, all or any of which might appear to the ordinan.- reader as the Editio Vulijata. Such new translations were made on the Rom. Cath. side by Erasmus, Johannes Rudelius, .\u^. Steuchus of Gubbio, Isidore Clarins, Sanctes Pagninus, Cardmal Caietan, and Job.

Bene- dictus ; on the Protestant side by Andr. Osiander, Conr. Pel- licanus, Sebastian Mtmster, Leo Judas (the Zurich version), and Seb. Castellio.t All these editions, however, even on the Catholic side, were the undertakings of private individuals ; and neither Church nor pope had given to any one the full sanction of their authority. Yet the Council of Trent, in its fourth sitting (8th April 1.

546), h>ad already taken care to pronounce on the Canon of Scripture, and to enumerate a list of the books it helii as canonical (see below, p. 885). Then, in the ' Decretum de editione et usu sacronim librorura,' pleading the advantage that would accrue to the Church if, out of the many current Latin editions, one should be held as 'authcntlca,' * See \V. A. Copinger, Incunabula Biblica, London, 1S92. t See Kaulen, p. 314 ; Scrivener-Miller, Introduction, ii. pp. 176-181. See Kaulen, pp.

31S-878 ; the Ziirich version of the Psalms w.a» used in the daily College Service at Christ Oburch, Oxford, *s long as that ser^'ice was said in Latin. it proceeded to declare and resolve, ' ut h;ec ipsa vetus et vulgata editio quoe longo tot steculorum us>i in ipsa ecclesia probata est, in publicis lecti- onibus, etc., pro atithcntica habeatur, et ut nemo illam rujicere quovis prtetextu audeat vel praesumat.'

It also ordered that ' hfec ipsa vetus et vulgata editio quam emendatisslme imprimatur.' Two questions naturally suggest themselves as to this decree : what is the real meaning of ' authentica ' ? and what was the exact tjpe of text, the ' vetus et vulgata editio,' which was thus designated ?

The word 'authentica' seems to have been used and understood not only in the sense of ojficial,* but also in the sense of accitrate — at any rate to the extent that there were no mistakes in it which might lead to false doctrine in faith or morals ; it was in this sense that scholars like Andreas Vega and Bellarmine understood the word.t No verbal inspiration or infallible accuracy was cl.aimcd for it.

Scholars might read their Bibles in the original tongues if they wished ; but for ordinary use it was advisable to have one standard edition (' auth- eiilicam hac mente ut cujus fas sit earn legere sine periculo ') instead of a number of independent and unauthorized translations.

In regard to the second question, it ia difficult to believe that the Fathers of the Council had in their minds any one particular printed or manu- script copy as the edition ' longo tot s;ECulorum usu in ecclesia probata ' ; J probably they were speaking quite generally, and meant by this ex- pression the Hleronymian text, which they believed to have been fairly transmitted through the Middle Ages, and to have been recognized by the Cliurch and used in her services^as against the bewilder- ing amount of new translations and arbitrarily corrected texts.

Though the Council thus ordered the preparation of an otHcial Vulgate, no immediate action was taken by the Church. John Hentenius, however, a professor at Louvain, undertook the preparation of an edition : this is the edition mentioned above (preced. col.. No. 6), and often reprinted. The various Hentenian editions remained for some years as the standard text of the Roman Church, but were still private publications.

Yet the task of preparing an official text occu- pied the minds of several popes, and under Plus IV. and Pius v. etl'orts were made at Kome to collect some of the oldest and most valuable MSS ob- tainable, and a commission was appointed to carry on the work. It was not, however, con- tinuou.sly pursued till the pontificate of Sixtus v. (1585-1590), who pushed forward the revision of the text with great zeal.

He summoned afresh the committee of cardinals and scholars under the presidency of Cardinal Caraffa, entrusted them with the task, but worked himself with unwearied diligence at examining the readings and correcting the proofs.§ Old MSS and printed editions were consulted, and, where the authorities were divided, those readings were favoured which agreed with the original Greek or Hebrew.

The result was the handsome Sixtine Edition of the Vulgate, which appeared in 1590, printed at the Vatican press, and bearing the following title — on the first page : Biblui I Sacra | Vulgatce | Editionis | tribiis tomis | distijtcta \ Romce \ ex Typugraphia Apostolica Vati- cana, \ M-D-XC | ; on the second page : Biblia Sacra ] Vulgatw editionis \ ad \ concihi Tridentini \ " So Paul Fabre, La Bibl. Vaticane, p. 56 ; see also Kaulen pp. 401, 402. t See the art.

on the Vulgate in Wetzer and Welte s Kirchen- lexicun ; van Ess, pp. 197 1., 245 n. 1, 408, 421 ; the same author's Pragmatica doct. Cath. Trid. circa Vulg. dtcreti tcnsum, Sull. bach, 1816, pp. 7, 24 ; Kaulen, p. 405 f. J See van Ess, p. 254 f. § His assistant, Angelo Rocca. was so overworked thai !♦ grew ill and nearly died ; see E. Nestle, £m JuiiUdum d. iattim, Bibel, Tubingen, 1S92, p. U. VULGATE VULGATE 8S1 prfescriptnm emendnta | e< | a Sixto •y-P-il- \ re- cogiiita et approbata.'

Tliis edition, though nominally tribus tomis dis- tinctn, is really in one volume, and the Jiaging is continuous throughout; it is cited by Wordsworth as ^. In text it resembles the Stei)hens edition of 1540 more than the Hentenian liibles ; but a new system of verse-enumeration was introduced. The inconvenience, however, of a system which dillercd from one which was almost universal in current Latin Bibles no doubt led to this being droiiped in the Clementine edition. 'i he .

Sixtine edition waa prefaced by the famous Bull bejitinning with the words: ' Aeternus ille.'

This Bull recounted the care with which the pope, and the scholars and divines assisting him, had worked at the preparation of the book — 'ita tamen ut Veterera multis in licclesia al)hinc seculis re- ceptam lectionem omnino retinuerimua ' ; it waa decreed, therefore, that this edition was to be considered as the actual Vulgate, prescribed and pronounced authentic by tlie Council of Trent, and was to be used in all the Churches of the Christian world, ' pro vera, legitima, authentica, et indulntata, in omnibus publicis privatisque disputationihus, lectionibus, pnedicationibus, et explanationibus' (here the Bull goes beyond the decree of Trent, wliieli only asserted that the Vulgate was to be considered authentic ' in jiublicia lectionibus, disputationihus, pnedicationibus et expositionibus').

No future edition was to be published without the express permission of the Apostolic See ; nor was anj' one to print a private or independent edition himself; nor was the .

Six- tine edition, for the next ten years, to be reprinted in any other place than the Vatican ; after that time editions might be printed elsewhere, but must always be carefully collated wiih the Sixtine edition, 'ne miuiiiia i^uidem particula mulata, addita, vel detracta,' and must be accomiianied with the otlicial attestation of the inquisitor of the province, or bishop of the diocese, that this was the case ; no variant readings, scholia, or glosses were to be printed in the njargin.

Persons di.si)beying these orders, whether editors, printers, or boolvsellers, were, besides the loss of all the books and other temporal puni>hments, to suller the pen.'ilty of the 'greater excommunication,' from which they could not be relieved, ' nisi in artieulo mortis,' save by the iJojie himself.

f Tlie Sixtine edition, however, met the fate of most revised versions, — unpopularity amongst the clergy and laity who were used to unrevised texts, — anil an order in the Bull that the missals, breviaries, et<!., were to be corrected from the Sixtine text, was especially dista.steful. Sixtus, too, had ollended tlie Jesuits by placing one of Bellarmine's booksj on the Index Liljroruin pruliUiUurum ; and Bellarmine, in a letter to Clement Vlll.

, spoke very strongly in condemna- tion of the Sixtine edition.§ The brief popularity, • So the Rritiah Museum and Bodleian copies. See van Eaa, pp. a).'i. ZOUn., also Nestle, p. 20 ; but the Oottingen cony ot the liiltle, dccordintf to van b^ (whose statement Prof. Nestle oonllnns), ha) : tiUdia • Sai:ra I Vuitjalx | editionU | Tribxis jomitt \ iiistin'ta] J<om<e ] ICx 'J j/ptxjrajihia Apustnlv-a Vali- cana | miix^; | . rn the seound p.

i^re: while the rtrst page has: ItUtlia I ^Sacra \ tnjUgut(K edilionU | Sixti t/uiiUi | J'wit. Max. \ JurmL TCJ:<iiuta ot<)i« edila. Tlicrc may then have been more than one edition ot the Sixtine Bible ; it, loolis, however, as it the tlmt title hail been lost, and then nilcd up by the hinder from the Clementine edition. A ret''iced facsimile of the Sixtine titlo-poge is given by P. Fabrc, La Bibt. Valicaiw, p. 69. ♦ This Bull is printed at length in Thos. James, Brtlum Papalr. I.ondon.

lUlK), and in van Kss, p. 2tm f. ; the most Im- portant parts of it are given in Kaulen, 1^). 44ft -4r)7. i Df dominin I'ajxe tlirfrlo, ii» which liL-!Iarinine main- tained not the direct, but only the indirect, dominion of ihe pope over the whole world ; sio Thf J'opt and the t'ouncU, nv 'Junus,'1869, p. at. i ' .Vovit beatitudo vestro, cui se totamque accleslftui dis- VOL. IV.— 56 therefore, that attended it is easily intelligible. Sixtus died in August 151)0.

A number of short- lived popes succeeded him; ami in January 15U2 Clement VIII. ascended the throne. In the same year all copies of the .Sixtine edition were called in, and another ollicial edition of the Vulgate was published from the Vatican press, which has ever since been known as the Clemen- tine edition (Wordsworth's C). This edition was accompanied by a preface, written by liellarniine,* which asserted that while the former edition was being printed Sixtus V.

had himself noticed many inaccuracies in the printing, and had consequently resolved to recall it and bring out a new edition : he had been prevented by death, but his design waa now at length carried out by his successor, Clement VIII. Vet this attempt to shift the blame from the editors to the printers cannot be justihed.

The number of misprints in the Sixtine edition is extraordinarily small for a book of such size, and many of them were conected, either with the i)en or by pasting a small slip of paper with the rij;ht reading over the misprint, before the book was publislied.t The real reasons for the recall of the edition must have been partly personal hostility to Sixtus, and partly a conviction that the book was not quite a worthy representative of the V^ulgate text.

The Clementine text, indeed, dill'ers from it in some 3000 places, and is a return to the type of text found in the Hentenian Bibles. In the critical notes to the Oxford Vulgate the reader will constantly see S ^ witnessing for one reading, while J5 C witness for another ; and on the whole we willingly admit that the Clementine text is critically an improvement upon the Sixtine.

The dilliculty of escaping the penalties, so freely denounced by Sixtus on any wlio should change the least particle in his text, was surmounted by the bold device of printing his name instead of Clement's on the title-page, and so presenting the edition to the world as a Sixtine edition. $ The title is— on the first page : liiltlia | Harra | Viil- (jittiK I Editiunis I Romm | Ex Tiipnrjrnphia Apus- tolica Vatirana | M.D.

XCII | ; on the second: Bihlia Unera | VulgatcB Editionii \ Sixti Qtiinti | Punt. Max. \jusnu I recofjnitaatqueedita | ; the engraved border in the second page is the same as in the Sixtine edit ion. § A Bull attached to the Clementine edition for- bade any copy of the Vulgati^ to be iirinted in future without being lirst collated with the Vatican copy, 'ciijus exeinjilaris forma, ne minima quidem particula de textu mutata, addita, vel ah eo de- tr.

icta, nisi aliquod occurrat, quod TyiiographicjB incuria' manifeste adscribendum sit, inviolabiliter observetur'; nor were even variant readings to be printed in the margin. A longer life has been granted to the Clementine Vulgate than was the fate of the Sixtine, and to crimini conuniserit Sixtus v., dum Juxta propric doctrinra sensus, sacrorum bibiiorum emendationem aj,'b'ressus est; neo satis srio, an gravius un<iuam periculum occurrerit'; see van Kss, p. 2IIII.

* Reprinted in James, Betlnm Papate, and in van Vms, p. 356 f. t The number of words thus pasted over is not at)0ve forty in the whole llible; see James, ticUum J'ajiatf, and van Kan, pp. ;^31-3aa. The present writer has discovered only two uncorrected misprints in the l'"our (Jospels ; ami, itideed, tiie Sixtine edition was much more carefully printed than the (^'lementine. I The regular form of title in a modern Vulgate Bible — ' Biblta Sacra Vulgatjo Edilionis Sixti v, I'ont. Max.

Jussu recognita et dementis viM. aucloritate e<lita' — cainiot be traced at present earlier than 1001 ; up to tliat time Sixtus seems to have appeared alone upon the titlo-page ; later, Clement occasionally figures l>y himself. g James (lieltuin PapaU) not unnaturally makes capital out of the differences between the t\vo papal 'editions; c(. sixtus .\mama, Anti, ttarhantfi liiblicut, lib. i. c. Ixx., Auistelod., 102s. Lists of the variations can be found in Janie«, Amuma.

Bukentop, Lux ds Lua^ p. 319 f., and Vercoltons. — f 882 VULGATE VULGATE the present day tlie edition of 1592 remains the standard edition of tlie KonKui Church.

* The stern prohibitions of the Pai>al Bull have succeeded in providing members of the Koman Church through- out the whole world with a fixed and unalterable text of the Sacred Scriptures, but at the cost of suppressing any attempts at a systematic revision in the light of fuller critical knowledge ; and by a strange paradox the attempts that have been made in later years to emend the Vulgate text have come mainly from students outside the communion of the Koman Church.

Vallarsi, indeed, in 1734, printed an emended text with such MS help as he was able to obtain, not, however, as the Bible, but as the Divina Bibliotheca in his edition of the works of St. Jerome. To Bentley's proposed critical •dition of the New Testament t the Latin Vulgate was to be a most important help ; it being his tirni conviction that the earliest MSS of the Vulgate would be found to agree so closel.

^j^ith the earliest Greek MSS that it would be poaoible 'to give an edition of the Greek Testament exactly as it was in the best exemplars at the time of the Council of Nice, so that there shall not be twenty words, nor even particles diHerence.' Bentley himself collated a number of English Vulgate MSS for this purpose j his friend John Walker collated still more at Paris in 1719 and the following years, and obtained collations of several Oxford MSS from David Casley.

The projected edition, however, came to nought, partly perhaps in consequence of Bentley's advancing years, partly because a more extended and thorough collation of Vulgate MSS did not show that exact agreement with the earliest Greek which he had expected. Bentley died in 1742, and John Walker in November 1741 ; their collations, however, were preserved, and have proved of con- siderable value to the Bishop of Salisbury (Dr. J. Vv'ordsworth) in his critical edition. The German scholar, Dr. P.

Corssen, of Berlin, has been for some time engaged in research with a view to a critical edition of the Vulgate NT, though hitherto only the Epistle to the Galatians has been pub- lislied.J The Bishop of Salisbury in conjunction with the present writer is also engaged on the same task, and has published the four Gospels with prolegomena; the work is still in progress. iii. The Natui;e and Method of Jerome's Revision.

— Tlie work before Jerome in his edition of the two Testaments varied so widely that we must treat them apart ; and, as the NT was pub- lished first, it may be advisable to consider it before the OT. In his letter to Daiiiasus, Jerome describes plainly enough the nature of his revision of the four Gospels. He revised the existing Latin ver- sions by the aid of tlie oldest Greek M3S he could have access to, making alterations only where the sense of the passage required it.

§ Such a revision was no new thing in the history of the Latin versions.

We may put aside the ques- tion whether what is called the European family of the Old Latin texts be an independent version from the African family, or an early revision of it * Naturally enough, the various modern editions do not all re- present the Clementine text with absolute or unth equal accuracy; the stiiilent who wishes to possess an accurate text is advised to obtnin ll:e very careful edition published by Vercellone at Rome in isol, and to note what the editor says in bis preface as to the few occa.

sion8 on which he haa deviated from the Clementine edition of 1592 : for the NT the edition of Hetzenauer (Oenipont 1899) is convenient and, so far aa we have tested it. accurate. t His letter to Abp. Wake is dated April 1710, the proposals for printing were issued in 1720 ; see A. A. Ellis, Bentleii critica lacra (Cambr. 18<J2), p. xii t. I Corssen, Bpistula ad GcUatag, Berlin, Weidmann, 1885. \ Ep. ad Damajtum, Hiec pnesens prsefatiuncula pollicctur quattuor tantura Evangelia . .

codicum Grsecorum emendata conlatione, Bed veterum. Qu» ne multum a lectionis Latinte consuetudine discreparent, ita calAmo temperavimus, ut his tantum qus sensum videbanAur mutars correctifl, reliqua maDer« pateremur ut fuerant.' [see L.\TIN Versions]. But there can be no doubt that the Italian family, represented in the Gospels by the Codices.

Brixianua (/) and Monacensis (j), though principally by the former, is a revision of the Eurupean family, partly in accordance with a dirt'erent and somewhat later type of Greek MSS, partly in order to give the Latiiuty a smoother and more even appearance (Westcott and Hort, Intro- duction, p. 79). There can be equally little doubt that Jerome knew of, and valued, this revision, and made it the ba.

se of his own : a short exaiuination of a few pages of the Vulgate with the main Old Latin MSS wOl convince any reader that Jertune's text is in Latinity much closer to the Codex Brixianus than to any other Old Latin MS ; Mr. Burkitt, indeed, maintains that / is really a Vulgate MS with Old Latin elements that have come in through the Gothic (see JThSt, i. 129 ; and Kaufmann in Ztschr. f. dcutsche Philologie, xxxiL 305-335).

If, however, we compare the Greek text under- lying the Vulgate with that represented hy f q, we shall see that for the Gospels at any rate it is a return to the older type of MS, especially N and B ; the tables of readings which, as the present writer believes, demonstrate this, may be studied in the EpHugus to the Oxford edition of the Vulgate ; * but if the student will examine the apparatus criticus of Tischendorf s Greek Testament the same fact will be disclosed to him ; time after time t the Vulgate follows the older Latin and older Greek MS.

S, while/ and q agree with the later. Jerome, indeed, twice in his commentaries quotes with re- spect the readings of the Greek MSS belonging to Origen ; t but the readings in one case agree w ith and in the other case ditl'er from NB, so that we cannot conclude much as to the nature of their . text. Other points have been noticed by scholars, connecting Jerome with the Sinaitic and Vatican texts ; in the OT, Mr.

Burkitt g says that Jerome ' in his translations from the LXX in the prophets is generally very faithful to the Vatican text ' ; and in the Acts the Codex Amiatinus has 70 capitula with corresponding section-numerals in the text, an enumeration which is marked in the margins of both N and B, but is otherwise, according to Hort, un- known in Greek MSS and literature ; || so that there is a cumulative argument of considerable weight on behalf of Jerome's having made use of manuscripts of this type.

At the same time it is clear that he must have consulted MSS of a type different from anything we now possess. There are instances in the Gos- pels, few but clear, where he has apparently cor- rected the reading against all known Greek authorities, as well as against the Old Latin ; 1 and in some of his commentaries he expressly mentions and discusses readings which are other- wise unknown to us. The most striking instances of these latter are, (1) the clause at the end of St.

Mark's Gospel (16") quoted in the contra Pelag. it • Novum trslammtum . . lecundum editimiem S. Bieromjnn . . recensuit J. Vi'ordvicorth, in operis gocktatem adsutnto ii, J. White. Oxonii, 1SS9, p. 600 f. t e.g. in one chapter of St. Matthew, 6>- *■ «■ "■ ''■ ». j In Mt 243' ' in GriBcis et maxinie Adamantii et PierU exemplaribus' ; in Gal 3' 'in exemplaribus Adamantii' (=Ori- genis). 5 Rules o/ Ti/conitu, Cambr. 1894, p. cviii. II Westcott and Hort, Introduction, p.

206 ; Robinson, Eutha- liana, p. 42 f., Cambr. 1895; Berger, i/w(. de la Vulgate, eK. p. 357. II e.g. Mt '27" omission of vidnta or ofpu^entet^niifti"" lifSroj SOU); jr. g, I, who Join in the omission, are mixed text» with a larire Vulgate element in them ; cf. Mk C" omission of oAiCTW («iriA8«.) with I ; 10« om. in vobitwith I ; Lk »" m eordibua vestrii against the Gr. lU rk Zrct vf^Siv and the Old Lat. ; 22S5 erat petrus against the Gr. ixilhr i x.

and the Old LaU tcdebat : Jn 72* KC hierosoUjmis with c ff, apaiiist the Gr. •» ri. iVwsXouiiTi. and the Old Lat. ; 837 fail against the Gr. rttflM and the Old Lat. semen ; 2116 aminos meoi against Oil Or. Ti »f<i^«ii I.UU and the Old. Lat. oves meat.

VULGATE VULGATE 883 15, ns occurring ' in quibusdam cxemplaribus et maxinie in gr;vcis codicibus' ;' (2) the discussion on Jn 10'" in the Commentary on Ezk 46, wliere Jerome says, ' ct Jiet unum atrium et U7ijis pastor: hoc enim graece aiSij signiticat, quod latina sim- plicitas in ovile transtulit ' ; all existing Greek MSS read not au\-n but irolfivr) here, and the Old Latin have un ua (or vna) grcx.

The careful student will detect other cases ; but enough has been given, we believe, to make it clear that Jerome's Greek MSS were partly of the tj-pe so highly esteemed by Hort, partly of a type which has since dis- appeared. The other books of the NT may be more sum- marily considered. In the Acts of the Apostles, the oldest MSS, such as .

Vniiatinus and (less fre- quently) Fuldensis, agree in text with NB and AC ;t in the Epistles, the revision was much more hasty, and very possibly was made with but sliglit, though with some, regard to the Greek ; X such is also the opinion of Dr. C. R.

Gregory, § who says of the work outside the Gospels, ' Ceteri vero Novi Testa- menti libri annis ut videtur proximis vel etiam proximo anno recensiti non tam diligenter emen- dati sunt; recensio horura textus nova vix pr;eliet novas lectiones e Graico ductas sed solas elocu- tiones politiores atque cultiores Latinas.' The textual criticism of the Vulgate NT is one of the most complicated problems facing modern schohvrs.

The reader will, liowever, have gained from the section above on the history of Jeromes translation after his own death, a fair amount of information as to the relative value of different groups of M.SS. The vast majority of 13th and 14th cent.

MSS may be put aside as comparatively worthless, and it would be easy enough for any student to compile — say from the Oxford edition of tlie Gospels — a list of readings the presence of which in a late MS would bo quite sutticicnt evidence that it was only reproducing the current and valueless mediajval type of text.

He will also have learnt the interest of the MSS con- taining the Theodullian recension, the very varied types of text presented by the Alcuinian Bibles, and the mixture of Frendi and Irish elements in the 8th anil 9tli cent. MSS, written in France by Irish or Nortliumbrian scribes.

It is not very hard, therefore, to arrange our MSS in groups, as has been done in the lists at the end or this article ; but to go further and apply to them a genealogical as well as a geograpiiical classifica- tion is what the present writer at any rate has not yet found himself able to do. Tlie grounds on which in the Gospels the early Northumbrian MSS sudi as AAS\, the (ith cent.

Fuldensis (F), and Ambrosianus (M), ami tlio lirst hand of the Hubertianus (H*), have been preferred to other MSS, have been set forth at some length in tlie Epiliiifus to the Oxford edition of the Gospels (pp. 7U8-T32). F and M are two of the earliest exist- ing Vulgate MSS ; and the whole group seems to oiler strong internal evidence of jireserving a pure type of text.

The 'MSS forming it show less trace than others of mixture from Old Latin sources ; they agree more closely with the Greek text of KBL, luid we have seen it to be probable that It runs : Postca quuno occubuisscnt unrlccira appnniit eifl icBus ct cxjirobravit incrudulitateni et duritiam ciinlis eoruin quia his qui vidcrant euni rcsur^'cntcin non crt-di. derunt. Kt ilti satisfociebant dicentet) 8<ec)iluin istud iniquiutia et incredulitatis subatantia {Cod.

Vat, aub satana) eat quuj lion sinil per imraundoa spiritus veram dei apprehendi virtutcin. Idcirco Jam nunc revela Justitiaiu tuaro' ; cf. Itcscb, Agrajtha, p. <r>0 (fu V. 4). \ See especially Blaga, Acta Ajiotlolamm, Gottingen, 1895, p. a. t I'or the Romans see Sanday-Ueadlam (Intemalional Critical CommerUarri), p. Ixvl } In the third volume (Prolegomena) to TiacheDdorr* Somun Tut. Gract, ed. 8, Leipz. 1804, p. u;i.

Jerome partly modelled his revision on MSS of this type ; tin y are free from the numerous small additions, amijlilications, conllations, etc. which are commonly found in Later MSS, and may fairly be regarded as the marks of a degenerate text even when they are found in an early MS, such as the Harley Gospels (Z). Yet all the MSS of the Vulgate NT are so spoiled by mixture, that it is impos-sible to select one MS or group and follow its readings throughout.

Thoie are cases both in the Gospels and in the Acts where one group must be clearly followed in one verse and as clearly rejected in the next, there are others where an obvious clerical error, or a conflate reading, has been perpetuated in every known Vulgate MS ; no MS or group seems to preserve a consistent type of text. Still there is here an excellent oppor- tunity for the student ; and it may be possible in time to do for the MSS of the Vulg.

ate something analogous to what Wcstcott and Hort have done for the MSS of the Greek text. Jerome's work on the OT stands on different ground from his work on the NT ; here it was not an emended translation in the light of better MS authority, but a completely new version made direct from the Ilelnew, where the text was, as he thought, in a fairly even and satisfactory con- dition, comjiaied with the confusion shown by the LXX.

Jerome tloes not seem to have imagined the possibilit}' of variation to any serious extent in the Hebrew MSS, though he tried to procure the best that were attainable (Ep. xxxvi. 1, ad Dnma- sum ; Fr(i:f. in Faralip. iuxta LXX). He talks in general terms of the ' Hebrew,' the ' Hebraica Veritas,' etc. ; nor does the text used by him seem to ditl'er largely from the Massoretic text which has been handed down to the present day.

* Yet it is not quite identical ; t and as it is practically certain that the copies he used diii not possess the vowel points, it is but natural that his interpreta- tion of the consonants should occasionally diller from that adopted by the Massoretes. Jerome's version, again, was not the first that had been made direct from the Hebrew ; he could con- sult not only the LXX, but also the indeiiendent translations of Acjuila, Symnuuluis, and Theodo- tion ; and indeed in the Bk.

of Daniel the version of Theodotion was that generally used in the Church. J His method of translating the OT he describes to us in the preface to his Comment, in Ecclcsi- nsten : though he is only referring to that book in his preface, there is no doubt that he is describing his general practice.

He worked with the Hebrew text, translating it directly, according to the best of his power and knowledge, with such help as he could obtain from the Jewish Kabbis and their traditional methods of interpretation ; he tried to be conservative, .and to keep to the lines marked out by the LXX ('de Hebr;eo transferens magis • Kaulen, p. 10(5 ; Wcstcott, p.

1714 ; the latter saj-a ot Jerome's work that it is ' a remarkable monument of the sub- stantial identity of the Hebrew text of the 4th cent, with the present Masoretic text*; and with rei^urd to the Bks. of bomucl, Wellhausen speaks even more stronjj^ty in the same direction, Der Text d. Bdctier SamuelU, Gottingen, 1872, p. 3, Anm. 2. t Nowack, Die Bcdeutung dea Uier. fiir die alttest.

Kritik, Gottingen, 1875, asserts that the identity is nut complete, and that in many aises Jerome follows the Greek tranylators, or Chaldee, or Syrinc, whilst in some variant readings he stands quite alone; similarly II. P. Smith.

'The Value of the Vulgate Old Test, for Textual Criticism,' in the Preebi/tcrian aiui He- /ontu'd Review, April 1801, notes that in a number of cases Jerome's text varies from that of the Massoretes, and even where it simply ihoW8 agreement with the Greek it is not always dependent nj>on It ; again, it has in a number of cases readings agreeing with the 8yriac where the derivation of one from the other is unlikely ; it shows besides a number of variants in whieh it stands alone.' 1 Prc^.

in Dan.: ' l>anielem i>rophe(am Juxta LXX inter prctes Domini Salvatoris ecclesiai nun legunt, utentes Tbeodo- tionis editione ; et cur hoc acciderit nescio.' 884 VULGATE VULGATE me LXX interpretum consuetudini coaptavi, in his dumtaxat qii;e non niultum ab Hebraicis dis- crepabant ') ; he did not disdain to incorporate parts of tlie Old Lat.

versions,* and he also made use of the translations of Aquila, Symmachus, and Tlieo- iotion, so as to observe the mean between excessive novelty and slavish adherence to ancient errors ;t and his aim in translating was to represent the sense of the original rather than strain after literal exactness (Ep. Ivii. ad Pammaihium ; cvi. ad Suniam et ]<retelam). Such, at least, was his general practice: 'non verbum e verbo, sed sensum exprimere de sensu.'

He professes to be more careful in the Holy Scriptures ' ubi et verboriim ordo mj'sterium est,' and where 'in verbis sin^;ulis multiplices latent intelligentiae' {£■/>. liii. ad Paul- inum) ; yet he shows with such obvious satisfaction that the apostles and evangelists in their inter- pretation of the OT sought after 'sensum . .

non verba, nee magnopere de ordine sermonibusque curasse diim intellectui res pateret,' that we may well imagine that in his own translation, even of the Bible, lie would be much less literal than he thought he was.J An examination of his transla- tion, such as has been made by Kaulen (p. 169 f.) and No«ack, verifies this expectation. It is the work of a good, though by no means immaculate or scientific Hebrew scholar, aiming at the sense rather than at the words of the original.

Occasion- ally in translating he shows traces of the influence of Kabbinical tradition ;§ occasionally, on the other hand, he inserts a Messianic meaning in the trans- lation « here the original does not bear it ; l| and he is fond of interpreting Hebrew proper names, there- by reversing the practice of the LXX translators, who frequently solve the difficulty of a hard Hebrew word by simply transliterating it in Greek characters ; a few amplifications are found where the verse seems to need them ;1I in other cases the pleonastic Hebrew is compressed in the Latin.

** The translation, too, varies in the ditterent books ; some were translated with the utmost care, some were finished in extraordinarily short tijue. In the Friiluqus Galeatus Jerome speaks of the dili- gence he iiad bestowed on the Bks. of Samuel and Kings, It and Kaulen ranks his translation of the historical books as his best work,Jt and after them Job and the prophetic books.

Proverbs, Ecclesi- astes, and Song of Songs are carefully rendered, notwithstanding the short time that was directly spent on them ; but Judith and Tobit, which were translated in great haste, show more dependence on the Old Latin version.

In spite of this occasional uneveuncss, then, we may confidently assert that the general standard of the translation is a very high one ; and we may gladly echo the words of the 'translators to the reailer' in our own AV, that Jerome performed his task ' with that evidence of great learning, judgment, industry, and faithful- • G. Hober^, De S. Hiennymi rations interpretandi. Bonn, 18S8, p. MU. t See Nowack's essav, quoted above, and Driver, Notes on the Ileh. T'-zt 0/ Ihe Bks. of Sam.

(Oxford, 1890), p. liv f., who notices that Jerome was especially prone to be guided by byinmachus, and that, where the Viiljfate exhibits a rendering which deviates alilte from the Hebrew text and from the LXX, tlie clue to its origin will generally be found in one or other of the Greek translations, especially in that of Symmachus. In the I*refaoe to the Comment, in Eccleviasten, Jerome frankly says, 'interdura Aquilu) quoque et S>-nimachi et Tbeodotionis recordatus sum.'

I See the passages collected in Hoberg, p. 4. § t.ij. On .iSS, Jos Hii, Nell 9' (Kaulen, p. 173). li e.q. Is lli» 101, Uab »i (Kaulen, p. 174). " On 313i « 4022, Lv 163, Jos Si", Jg 8" (p. 177) ; see Hoberg, 1 p. 21 "On 3513 39i» 400 4128, Ex 40»-23 ; aee also Nowack, pp. 18-21 ; Hoberg, p. 19. ft 'Lege ergo primum Samuel et Malacbim nieum ; meuni, inquam, meum. Quidquid enim crebrius vertendo et emen* dando sollicitius et didi<:iir.u9 et tenenius nostrum est.' t! Kaulen, p.

179; Uagen {Sprachliche ErtrterungemurYulg. p. 8) praisea also the I'eutateucb highly. ness, that he hath for ever bound the Church nnt« him in a debt of special remembrance and thank fulness.' It must be remembered that the Latinity of tha Vulgate is thus partly that of the Old Latin ; and, even where Jerome was translating anew, he prob- ably modelled his style, perhaps unconsciously, on that of the older versions.

The Latin of those versions was the Latin of ordinary popular con- versation, the old 'lingua rustica' with all ita archaic characteristics, spoken not simply by the lower classes, but generally, even in jftome and amongst the higher classes ; difi'erent, of course, from the classical Latin of literature, but at the same time not simply confined to Africa in its popular use, as some writers seem to imagine.

Nor, again, do we get this Latin in its natural form ; anxiety to reproduce the original as accur- ately as possible has led to the introduction and preservation of numerous Graecisms and Hebraisms in the translation ; and we hardly ought to deplore this when we reflect how this literalism has re- vealed to the Western world the matchless beauty and power of Hebrew.

The Latin of the Vulgate is therefore at once artificial and archaic, and yet forcible, clear, and majestic* The textual criticism of the Vulgate OT is, alas ! stUI in its infancy. Heyse and Tischendorf pub- lislied in 1873 a collation of the Codex Amiatinus throuohout the OT j t and Vercellone has fur- nishedf valuable material for the Pentateuch and historical books in the mass of variant readings collected and arranged in his two volumes of ' Varia; lectiones.'J H. P.

Smith § has devoted some attention to examining and classifying the MSS whose readings are there quoted, with the result of awarding a higher place to the Codex Amiatinus in the OT than even in the NT : he maintains that for a recovery of Jerome's original it is of the first importance, and that any critical edition would have to be constructed on the basis of the Amiatine MS and other MSS belonging to the same group; P.

Thielmann has collected a useful amount of material for Wisdom, Siiach, etc. (see Literature, p. 890), and is preparing a critical edition of those liooks. iv. History of the Name. II— For us, as to the Fathers at the Council of Trent, the term vulqnta — properly mtlgata bibliorum editio, vulgata bibli- oritm interpretatio, biblia vulgata — has one mean- ing, and one meaning only ; it means the common authorized Latin version of the Holy Scriptures, translated or edited by Jerome.

Yet the expres- sion is older than Jerome's time, and he himself frequently employs it of an edition already in use. It is used primarily in early Latin writers not of a Latin version at all, but of the Greek version of the Septuagint,ir and so is equivalent to the term (C01P7) lKSo<rti, by which th.

it translation was known ;** as, however, the LXX was already familiar to Western Europe in the various Old Latin trans- lations which had been made from it, the term editio mtlgatawoald naturally be applied to these; though, as Westcott says, there does not seem to • See Ilagen, Spr. Erorterunaen zur V\Ug. p. 6 ; Kaulen, pp. 137, also his llaudbuch zur Vuuj. p. 6. t Biblia Sacra Latina vet. Tentam^nti llieronymo interprets . . ed. Heyse et Tischendorf. Lipsite, 1373.

t Varia icctimies vnlgatce lat. Bibl. editUtnis^ torn. Wk Rom», 1800-1S04. 5 § 'The Value of the Vulg. Old Te.«t. for Textual Critfcism," in Fret, and lief. Hcc, April 1S9I, p. m t. II All that can be said on this question seems to be collected in van Ess, p. 24 f.; Kaulen, p. 17 f.; and Westcott, p. 1089. ^ See the passages in \an Ess, Kaulen, and Westcott; especially Jerome, Vomm. in Isa. Ixv. 20.

'Hoc juxta LXX inlerpretes diximus, quorum editio toto orbe vulgata est ' ; and, in any Vulgate Bible, the notes after Est 103 ni i25 ;4l9 ; also Augustine, De Civ. Dei, 1. xvi. c. 10, * Fiunt anni a diluvio usque ad Abraham mlxxii. secundum vulgatam editionem ho« est interpretum Septuaginta.

' See the quotations from Crigen and Basil in van Ess, p 26 VULGATE VULGATE 8S5 be any instance in the age of Jerome of the application of the term to the Latin version without regard to it8 derivation from tlie Greek.

* From being applied to the current version of the LXX, vidgata ediiio would be opposed to tlie emended text of Origin's Hexapla,\ and so the term acquires the meaning of a corrupt as ojjposed to an emended text ; and in this sense Jerome uses the term interchangeably with vcttts, antiqua editio,X the very term with which it is now so sharply contrasted.

\\'lien Jerome is referring to Latin versions of the Scriptures, he rather uses the terms in latino, iatinus interpres, apud latinos ; and, when speak- ing of his own, nos, nostra interprctntio. As his translation gradually superseded the earlier ver- sions made from the LXX, it was inevitable that the expression which had been applieil to them would ultimately pass over to him ; but the pro- cess was a slow one.

The instances given in van Ess, and more fully in Hody,§ show that even down to the Middle Ages vulgata editio was at any rate occasionally used to designate the LXX ; while the usual terms by which Jerome's translation was known were translatio emendatior [rercn.t, nova, posterior, Hcbraica], translatio quam tenet {nuam recipit], Itomana Ecclesia, etc., and most or all, from Bede's time onward, editio nostra, codices nostri.

Roger Bacon || seems to he the first scholar who uses the term Vulgata in its modem sense, though he also applies it frequently to the Septuagint. V. Main Differences between the Latin AND the Enollsh Bible.— It may be asked, in what way does the Vulgate Bible differ from our own Autliorized Version ?

Putting aside varia- tions of rendering and reading, the diflerences are in the number of books or portions of books received into the Canon, the order of books, and the numbering and division of the chapters. These diti'erences are entirely in the OT ; in the NT the order of books is the same (though the Council of Trent ^ in its list of books places the Ep. of James after those of .John), and the ' Ep.

to the Laodiceans,'* though found in many Vulgate MSS, is absent from the best, and from tlie official printed text. Many MSS indeed vary in the order of the books, and the Cath. Epp. often immedi- ately succeed the Acts ; but this order has not been adopted in the Clementine text. The books in the OT are : Genesis, Exodns, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomium, Josuae, Judi- cum, Ruth,Quatuor Kegum.Duo Paralipomenon ! i. c. Jerome, for instance, in quoting the text of the LX.

X, ocCMionally tranalatea ita reading into Latin instead of wrilin;? It down in the Greel(, and here too speakB of it a-s editio ru'- fata ; hut it is the Qreel£ reading, not the Latin translation of I, which he is referring to : Bee especially Comm. in Matt. xiii. S."), ' I^gl in nonnullis codicibus . . m eo loco ubi nos posuimus et vulgata habet editio ut impleretur miod dictum eit per praphetam dicentem, ibi scriptum, per Ittaiam prophetnm dicentem ; and Comm. in Gal. v.

24, * kt hoc ita ^monitunl sit, si vulgatam editioncm st-quimur legentes : Qui autcm trunt Chriiti eamem crucifixerttnt cum vitiiJi et concupiscent ii»,' but ■e« the whole passage. Van Kss (p. 41) seems to be quite right in maintaining that even here Jerome means the Greek by the editio vuigata. t Jerome, Ep. crl t. t Comm. in Otee ilil. 4, 'Qna ... In antlqns qaoqne editione LXX non leguntur'; Ep. xlix. (ad Pammaen.) 'Vet«rt'ra editionem (libri Job) nostn» translation! comparu' ; Comm. in J$a.

prirj, ad cap. Uv.; pro/, in Jotue, etc. I P. 402 t. II See Uody, pp. 420, 420, Texto eat pro majorl parte cor- ruptus horribihter in exemplari vulgato, hoc est Parititnn : by thb he seems to mean the type of text which waa produced and sold in Paris ; elsewhere (p. 425) he uses rulgata of the L.

XX, or its Latin representative, as opposed to Jerome's trans- lation, 'Quare cum translatio leronyml evacuavit trauHla- tionem vulgatam LXX et similiter Theodolionis, ut certuui est omnibus, oportct quod Uiblia qua utimur sit tianslatlo ler- onj-mi,' etc 11 Sesa. iv. Vecretum de Canonicit Scripturis. ** For this apocryphal letter sec Lightfoot, Colouiaiu, pp. t74- SOO ; also Westcott, Canon <(/ the XT, App. E, p. WO.

f, Chronicles), Esdroe primus et secundus, qui dicitni Neliemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalterium Davidicum centum quinquaginta Psalmonun, Parabolae, Ecclesiastes, Canttcum Canticorum, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticiis, Isaias, Jeremias cum B'track (Lamentations is included under Jere- miah in the Tridentine list, though printed separ- ately as ' Threni ' in tlie Bihle), Ezechiel, Daniel ; duodecim Prophetae minores, vd est : Osea, Joel, Amos, Abdias (i.e.

Obadiah), Jonas, Michaeas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sonhonias (i.e. Zephaniah), Aggiinis (i.e. Ilagg.ai), Zacliarias, Malachias ; Duo Mac/utbworum, primus et secundus.

The order of books, it will be seen, is the same as in an English Bible, except that the books which we count apocryphal (and which are printed in the above list in italics) are with us placed at the end ; the sequence of books, however, is the same in our ' Apocrypha,' save that we insert the two addi- tional books of Esdras and the Praj'er of Manasses, which are not mentioned in the Trent list, but form in the Clementine Vulgate an appendix to the Bible, lieaded by the note ' Oratio Manassse, necnon libri duo, qui sub libri tertii et quarti Esdrae nomine circumfcruntur hoc in loco, extra scilicet seriem canonicorura librorum, quos sancta Tridentina synodus suscepit, et pro canonicis suscipiendos decrevit, sepositi sunt, ne prorsus interirent, <^uippe gui a nonnullis Sanctis Patribus, et in aliquibus Bibliis latinis tam manuscriptis quam impressis reperiuntur.'

See also art. APOC- EVPHA in vol. i. esp. p. 115 f. With regard to differences of amount contained under the title of this or that book, or the arrange- ment of matter in it, tlie following should be noticed. In most of the books of the OT the only diH'erence found is an occasional variation in the versing, the last verse in a chapter being split up into two, and so on ; these are too unimportant to notice.

It should be remembered that in its numeration of the Commandments the Vulgate Bible includes our second commandment in the hrst, and divides up the tenth into two, thereby preserv- ing the full number of ten ; this division is also emploj-ed by the Lutherans: see DECALOGUE. '1 he Bk. of Esther in the Vulgate contains the additional chapters, which with us are printed separately in the Apocrypha after Judith.

The later chapters of Job are arranged difi'erently from the Authorized Version, though the amount con- tained is the same : eh. 39 contains 35 verses against 30 of AV, and consequently finishes at 40° of AV, and 40' = our 40' ; and as this contains 28 ver.ses against our 24, the chapter finishes at 41' of AV, and41' = our 41"'; but as 41 in the Vulgate has only 25 verses against our 34, the dili'erence ends there, and 42 begins in the Vulgate in the same place as in the AV.

The variation in the Psalms is perhaps the most puzzling. The Vulgate follows the Hebrew in counting the title, where there is one, as the first verse of the Psalms, so that the versing is in these Psalms one verse ahead of A V. Pss. 9 and 10 form one Psalm in Vulgate, so that AV is one Psalm in front of the Vulgate for ne.arly all the rest of the Psalter, e.g. 11 AV = 10 Vulg. etc.; Pss. 114 and 115 forming also one Psalm in Vulgate (i.e.

113), the AV is now two in front of the Vulgate ; but as 116 AV consists of two Psalms in Vulgate, 114 and 115 (which begins at v." ' I believed, therefore have I spoken '), it does not keep so for long ; finally, 147 AV also consists of two Vulgate Psalms, 146 and 147 (which begins at v." * Praise the Lord, O Jeru- salem'), so that 148, 149, 150 are the same in each. In Lamentations ch. 5 of AV appears in the Vulgate as a separate book, under the title of ' Oratio Jeremiae inonheta;.'

In Daniel at Z" follow the additions which are 886 VULGATE VULGATE printed in our Apocrypha after Baruch as ' the Song of the three Holy Children ' ; the versing is ditlercnt, being ^-^ instead of '■'^, so that 3- AV = 3" Vulgate, which numbers in all 100 verses to the chapter, and runs into 4', chapter 4' Vulgate beginning at 4 AV but liiiishing at the same verse {** Vulg. =" AV); the other apocryphal additions are found at the end of the book, the story of Susanna forming eh.

13, and Bel and the Dragon ch. 14. vi. Manuscripts of the Vulgate. — Anything like a complete enumeration of the Vulgate MISS in Europe would be out of the question ; there are tbon.sands, not only in the public libraries, but in private libraries and collections. Berger has e.\- auiined more than 800 in the libraries of Paris alone ; and it is estimated that the total number cannot be less than 8000.

Nor would a complete enumeration, even if possible, be of much use to the student ; the majority are late 13th and 14th cent. MSS, of very slight critical value, and prob- ably all presenting the corrupt type of text about which Roger Bacon used such strong language. The lists may be consulted which have been drawn up by Le Long, Bibliotheca Sacra, ed. 1723, vol. i. p. '234 f.; Vercellone, VaricB lectiones, Romfe, 1860, vol. i. p. Ixxxiii f., ii. p. xvii f.

; in the fourth edition of Scrivener's Introduction, vol. ii. p. 67 f., the present writer has drawn out a selected list of 181 manuscripts, mainly of the NT ; Berger {ITistoire de la Vulg. etc. pp. 374- 422) gives a good list of 253 MSS ; and the largest list yet published is that of Dr. Gregory in the third volume of Tischendorf 's iVoyu?» Testamentum Greece, ed. viii. pp. 983-1108, where some 2270 MSS are enumerated ; they are not, however, described with the detail that characterizes M.

Berger's list. We have endeavoured here to draw up a list of the more important Vulgate MSS, arranged, according to the type of their text, as sketched out in the history given above. The student can thus, if he wishes, test our theory of the transmission and niodilication of the text by his o«-n collations ; and if he examines other MSS not mentioned in the list, he can determine more easily in which class to place them. Our list is based mainly on the materials sup- plied by Berger.

The reader will bear in mind that the classification can be only approximate, and that there are MSS which it will be difficult to assign exclusively to this or that group ; and indeed the earliest MSS on the list are among those which it is ditticult to class, though we may venture to describe them as earhj Italian texts ; .after them we may place the early Spanish texts, and then the other families in due course.

The Roman numerals in square brackets signify the centuries to which the MSS are usually assigned. I. Earit Italian 'izxn.— Codex Fuldentit of the NT, at the Abbey of Fulila in Prussia [vi] ; written forBp. Victor of Capua, and corrected by him A.D. 541-5-16. The Gospels are arranged in one narrative, based on the order of Tiitian's Diatessaron, but the text has been altered to the Vulgate throughout ; in the Epp. Laodiceans follon's Colossians. Published by E. Kanke (Marburg, 186S).

Cited by Tischendorf as /utd, by Wordsworth as F. The Jlilan Gotpelt; Ambrosian Library, O. 89 Inf. [vi) ; uncials ; the sections and canons in the margin are written in Greek characters, while certain peculiarities of spelling and of reading also suggest that the scribe had a Grasco-Latin MS before him. Defective in parts. Wordsworth's .M in Gospels. Codex Fonjuliengis, at Cividale, Friuli : Gospels (vi or vii], Matt.

, Luke, and John are at Cividale in Friuli ; these were published bv Biaiichini, Evanqdiariwn QMadruplex,eic., torn, li. app. p. 473 f. (Koma), 1749). The latter part of Mark (1221-16ii') is at Prague, and was edited by J. Dobrowskv, Fragmfntum Pragemt (Praga, 1778) ; the earlier part is at Venice, but in a wretched conditioo, and illegible. Tischendorf '8 /or and prog, Wordsworth's J.

Codix Perusinug ; part of Lk (11-127, much mutilated), in a lurple MS, Chapter Librarv, Perugia [vi or more probably \ii]. 'ublished by Bianrhini, ^iwin. Quadr. torn. iL ftpp. p. 562 ; Tischendorf 's pe, Wordsworth's P. l\ The Harlty Goxpels, Brit. Mua. Harl. 1775 [vi or viij, in | small but beautiful uncial hand, written probably in Italy; the first hand omita the text Jn 5*. Tischendorf's harl \^"ord§. worth's and Bentley's Z. II. Eahuv Si-Axisn Texts.

— Leon, Cathedral Archives 15 [viij , a palimpsest MS, containing 40 leaves of a Dible in 7th cent, hand, i.e.. portions of Ch, Jer, Ezk, 1 Mac, Ac, 2 Co, Col. 1 Jn. The text is Vulgate at base, esnecially in Jer, Ac, and Pauline Epp. ; in other portions mingled with bid I,at. elcmenti and characteristic Spanish inten>oIations ; the * three heavenly witnesses ' occurs 1 Jn 67. See Berger, pp. 8f., 3S4. The Ashbumiiam Pentateuch, or, more strictly speaking, tht Pentateuch of St.

Gatien of Tours: now at Paris, Bibl. Nat., \ouv. acq. Lat. 2334. A splendid ilS, with interesting piutoriil illustrations [vii or beginning of viiij ; uncial writing; a good Vulgate text. The Palaeographical Soc. (i. pi. 234) ascribe the MS to Nortli Italy, but Berger (pp. 11, 12, 410) makes out a strong case, mainly from the nature of the illustrations, for Spaiji.

Codex CaucTWw; Bible [ix probably] written in Spain, prob- ably in Castile or Leon, iji small, round, and beautiful Viai- gothic minuscules, by a scribe Danila ; now in the Benedictine Abbey of Corpo di Cava, near Salerno : a copy of it was made early in this century by the Abbate de Uoss'i, and is in the Vatican (Lat. S4S4X The text is Spanish, and in the Gospels shows signs of being a revision ; occasionally it is mingled with Old Latin elements ; it contains 1 Jn 5" after V^.

Before the Pauline Epp. there is the 'Procemium sancti Pere;7rini (tpiacopi,' and the canons of Priscillian ; after the Apocal>'pije tliere is an incomplete Psalterium ez Hebneo ; the Psalter in the body of the MS is Galilean, but with numerous Old Latin marginal variants ; see Berger, pp. 14, 15, 379. Tischendorf's caVf Words- worth's C. Codex Toletanus ; Bible, Visigothic writing [probably viiiJ, in the Xat. Libr. at Mi^drid.

Characteristic Spanish text, with numerous interpolations ; has the text 1 Jn o"* in same place as CavensU, but in the Gospels does not present such a good text as that MS. Collated for the Sivtine revision by Chr. Palo- mares, whose work is preserved in the Vatican (Lat. 9r>08) ; the collation, however, was not used in that revision, as it reached Card. Caraffa too late. It has been published by Bianchini, Vindicix Can. Scr. pp. xlvii-ccxvi (Romae, 1740), and reprinted by Migne, Pat. Lat.

torn. xxix. p. 875 f. Tischendorf's (oi, Wordsworth's T ; see Berger, p. 12. Madrid, University Library, No. 32 ; second volume of a mag- nificent Bible, in Visigothic hand [ix or x], containing Proverbs- Apocalj-pse. The ornamentation occasionally resembles the Codex Cavensis\ the Pauline Epp. are headed by the Canons of Priscillian and the proitmium Vereyrini ; see Berger, p. 15. Codex ^-Emilianeus, at Madrid, Uoyal Academy of Histor>', F. 1S6.

Bible [x], incomplete, and commencing in the middle of the Psalter; in the NT Laod. is written bv the second hand, id the margin. The first hand resembles Caien^Sy though it is somewhat larger ; the writer's name is given as Quisius. The MS formerly belonged to the Abbey of St. -tlmilianus (St. Millan de laCogolla), between Burgos and Logroiio; see Berger, p. 16.

Leon, Catliedral Archives, 6; second volume of a Bible [x], beginning at Isaiah ; the NT has the Canons of Priscillian and the proa: mi um Per^^/n'niafterthe Acts, and containsLaod. The writing resembles Canensis, but is somewhat larger ; the names of two scribes — Vimara, a presbyter, and John, a deacon — are given ; see Berger, p. 17. Codex Gnthicus Legxonensis, presen-ed in the Church of San Isidro at Leon; Bible (x], folio, date-l a.d. 960, and written by the notarius Sanctio.

The MS has belonged to the Church of San Isidro since the 12th cent., and wascoUalefl for Cardinal Caraffa by Fr. Tmgillo, bp. of Leon, for the Sixtine revision, and by him called the Codex Gothicus. The collation is preserved in the Vatican (Lat. 4S59). There are a large number of Old Latin variants in the margin, especially in the OT ; and Tobit and Judith are in the Old Latin throughout ; see Berger, p. 18 ; he has printed the Old Latin variants in the Bk.

of Job in Notice* et ext raits des MS de la B. N. etc., tome xxxiv. 2«partie, p. 20 f. (Paris. 1S93). Codex Complutengis (i.e. belonging to Complutum = Alcal4), Madrid, University Library, 31. Bible [ix or x), interesting text ; Ruth is Old Latin, agreeing closely with quotations in Ambrose ; the 4th book of Esdras is also preser\'ed in an interest- ing text, with variant readings in the margin ; Esther, Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Mac, are also in an Old Latin version. In the NT the text is Vulg.

ite, but with Spanish characteristics; Laodiceans follows llebreirs. Ruth and parts of Maccabees have been published by Berger in the Sotiees et extraiUt mentioned above, pp. 8-12, 33-33 ; see also his Ui^toire, p. 22. Paris, Bibl. Nat., I^t. 6. Bible in four vols, folio [x.], from the Abbey of Rosas in Catalonia. Tobit and Judith are preserved not only in the Vulgate, but also in the Old Latin ; and there are interesting Old Latin and other variants in the margins of the Acts, while Ac 11M2!

^ is entirely Old Latin; see Berger, p. 24. Wordsworth's R in Acts. III. Italian Texts transcribed w Britapt. — (a) Northum' brian MSS. — Codex Ainiatinus of the whole Bible, in the Laurentian Library- at Florence (beginning of viU]. One of tha three Pandects written, either at VVearmouth or Jarrow, by order of the Abbot Ceolfrid. lie took it as a present to the pope on his last Journey to Rome in a.d.

715, but died before he reached the Holy City, and his followers carried on the volume and offered it to the chair of St. Peter. The date and origin of the MS have been thus fixed by the successful deciphering of an erased inscription on the first leaf; see the PalaBographiiral Society's Facsimiles, \L pis. 66, 66, and Studia Biiflica, it p. 2^1 VULGATE VULGATE 887 1 (Oxford, 1S90).

Later, the MS was placed In the Monastic Librar)' at Monte Amiata, whence it was sent to Rome for use in the Sixtine revision. Finally, it was placed in the Jlediceo- laurentian Library at Florence. The NT wa« published in full by Tischcndorf (Lcipzii;, ISaO ; second ed. with a few euu-nda- ^ions. I».^i4); and in 1S73 Heyse and Tischendort edited the BU/lia Hacra Lat. Vctfrin Text.

Uieronymo interprele, printing the CUmentiiie text of the OT, but dividing it accordin;,' to the ''X)la and comniftta' of am, giving a collation of its variant reading, and printing; in full tne capitula to the various books, which are found in Ainiatinus, hut not in the Clementine Vul- gTitc : Laij'arde has published Wisdom and Sirach, see vol. iti. The text of the MS in the NT, and especially in the Go.spcls, ia a verv pure Vulijato tvpe on the whole, though with the characte'ristic.

s of British >iSS in it; see the Oxford \'ii/:iate, i. pp. 7il», 71<y-~3i. In the OT it is also good, but in Ecclesi- astes and Ecclesiaaticus Old Latin elements have crept in ; see Berber, p. 3j. Tischendorf's om, Wordsworth's A. Durham Cathedral Library, A. ii. 18 ; Gospels [vii or viii), said to have been written by Bcde, and may very possibly have come from Jarrow. The text is very close to thatof AmKilitnis, but where it varies Aniiatinus is usually the better.

Bentlcy's K, Wordsworth's A (in St. John only ; in the other Gospels it is not cited). Do., A. ii. 17 ; St. John. St. Mark, and St. Luke, mcomplete [viii], with another fragment of St. Luke, 213S-23M; large uncial hand, and both text and handwriting closely resemble Amiatinus, though the orthography is occasionally different ; see Berger, p. 3ii. S(onvA urel Ht. John. The minute but exquisitely written MS of St.

John, now in the possession of the Jesuit College at Stonyhurst [vii or viii) ; originally, according to a legend as old as the 13th cent., the property of St. Cuthbert, in whose cotHn it was found. The text closely resembles Aniiatinus, but is on the whole not quite so goo<l. Wordsworth's S in St. John. British Museum, Cotton Nero D. iv. The superb Lindu,farni! GogprU |vii or viii], written by Eadfrith, bp. of Lindisfame, i.u. U9S-721, and other scribes.

The Latin is accompanied by an interlinear version in the Northumbrian dialect. The text verj' closelv resembles that of Amiatinus, agreeing with it sometimes "even in errors ; but, as with the MSS mentioned inimcdiatelv abo\e, where the two differ, Amiatinus usually has tlie better text The MS from which these Gospels were copied must have come from Naples ; Dom O. Morin {Jteime Bi'nMkiiM, 1891, t. viii. p.

481) has pointed out that at the beginning of the Gospels there are lists of festivals and saints' days, among which appear names peculiar to Naples ; and the book may well have been brought to Lindisfame by the Adrian who was abbot of a monaster)' near Naples, and who accom- panied Abp. Theodore on his journey to Kngland in COS; see Berger, p. 39 f. Bentley's and Wordsworth's Y^ Fragments of Matthcw(ll-3*)and John (I '21) bound up at the end ol the famous ■ Utrecht Psalter.'

The handwriting and text both strongly resemble the Codex Amiatinus, and are about the same dates (vii-viii). Wordsworth's U in Gospels. For the Psalter itself the reader should consult W. de Gray Birch, The llietory. Art, and I'alaoffraphy o/ the iWS, styled the Ctrecht Piaittr^ London, 1^7(i ; and the later treatise by Count P.

Durrieu, L'trigine du MS cdUhre dit ie I'sautier d'Utrcctd, Paris, 1895 (extrmlt des ' Melanges Julien llavet ') ; Count Durrieu supposes it to h«ve been written at or near Kheims in the eariier part of the 8th cent,. The text is the (itUlican Psalter. (b) Canterbury MSS (traditionally connected with Augustine and with Gregory the Great).— Oxford, liodley S-IT, and Auct. D. 2. 14 : Gospels fonncrly belonging to St. Augustine's Library at Canlerbury and generally known as 'St.

Augustine'sGosoels' (vii). From the i>oint of view of aye, the MS might well have been brought to Canterbury by some of the later followers of Augustine, but the text shows it to be of native origin ; it is fairly near to Amiatinus, but has a large number of charac- teristics partly Irish, partly early Anglo-Saxon ; as Berger says (p.

86), It may be placed at the base of the Anglo-Saxon tj'pe of text, and must owe its name not to being the personal property of Augustine, but to belonging to the abbey at Canterburv, which was consecrated to his memory- Tischendorf's boat, Wonlsworth'H O in Gospels. Cambridge, Corpus Christi OoU. cclxxxvl. Evan. ; Gospels (vii), fonneriy belonging to St. Augustine's at Canterbury, an.

l, according to tradition, sent by Pope Gregory to Augustine, hut the text does not bear out this supposition; it closely r-sembles that of the preceding .MS, and is really Anglo-Saxon, though it has been corrected throughout in accordance with a .M.'< of the Aniiatinus type. IJenllcy^ B, Wordsworth's X. British Museum, Cotton Vesp. A. 1. 'Roman' Psalter (ix), known as the ' I'aalter of St. Augustine' : Anglo-Saxon type of Brit. Mus., Reg. 1. E. vt.

; Gospels, Imperfect (end of viii); written in England, and formerly belonging to St. Augustine's, Canterbury ; in all probability the second volume of the famous 'Bililia Oregoriana,' mentioned bv Elniham ('Hist. Monasleril S. Aug. Canluar.,' ed. O. Hardwick, Rolls Series 8, London, 1868). Text somewhat similar to those obove ; Vulgate, mixed with Irish readings ; Bentley's P. (c) Irwh and Anglo-Saxon MSS.— Book tf Armagh ; Library. Trinity Coll., Dublin.

New Testament written in a small and beautiful Irish hand, by the scribe Ferdoinnach |ii) ; It has the nr,,lniiia I'ilaiiii in otnnfn irputolat, Laod. occurs after Col., and Ads after A|>oc The late Dr. Reeves, bp. of Down, intended to e>lit it. and his vork has been iliiiBhed and published by Drs. Gwynn and Bernard of Dublin.

The text of the MS is at bottom good and closely allied to Amiatinus ; it displays many cf the national characteristics, however, small interpolations, expli cative additions, and relics of Old Latin readings (thus its otnit:gif/n of Jn 5-* is all the more remarkable), etc., while the present writer cannot help thinking that it has been to a certain extent corrected from the Greek ; see the Oxford Vul-iate, pp. 714, 716 ; Berger, pp. 31-33. Wordsworth's D. The Book of Kellt: Trin. Coll.

, Dublin, A. 1. U ; Gospels (vii or viii), given to Trinity College by Abp. Ussher ; named from Kells or Kenanna, a iuona.ster)' in County Meath. It is famous for being perhaps the most perfect e-xisting specimen of Irish handwriting, as the Lindifj'arnf (Jnapcln are of English ; see ThonqKson, Greek and Lat. i'alttojrapht/, pp. 23!), 2i:>, 246. But the text is also valuable, much re-senihling the Book o/ Armagh, with the usual Irish characteristics, and a great fondness for conflate readings.

A collation has been given by Dr. Abbott in his edition of the Codex Usserianus (Dublin, 1884) ; see also Berger, p. 41. Wordsworth's Q. Book 0/ Durrotc : Trin. Coll., Dublin, A. 4. 6. Gospels (vi- vii) ; according to an inscription on what was the lost page, the lKX)k was written by St.

Columba in twelve days, but, as with the Echteriiach Gospels (see below in this column), this, witii the rest of the book, must have been copied from an earlier exemplar; Durrow or Dearmag was a monastery- in King's County, founded by Columba. Irish text, i.e. good Vulgate at bottom, but with some of the characteristic national interiiola- tions ; collation given by Dr. Abbott in his edition of the Codex Usserianus ; see also Berger, p. 41. Wordsworth's durmach.

The Book 0/ Moling or Mxdling ; Trin. Coll., Dublin. Gospels (viii or ix), apparently never bound, but preserved in a case. An inscription gives the name of the scribe as Mulling, i.e. probably St. Mulling, bp. of Ferns, at the end of the 7th cent. ; but, as with the Book of Durrow, the inscription must have been copied from an earlier MS. Characteristic Irish text, sometimes with interesting variant readings ; see Berger, p. 33, and H. J.

Lawlor, Chapti:rs on the Book of Mulling, Edinburgh, 1897. The MS is disfigured by damp, and is illegible in parts. Tlu Stotce St. John : bound up with the famous Stou}e Missal, Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. Written in pointed Irish minus- cules [viii or ix) ; portions of the Gospel only. Good Vulgate text with the usual traces of Old Latin mixture; see J. U. Bernard in Transactions o/ the Huijal Irish Academy, vol. xxx. pt. viii.

(Dublin, 1893), who gives a description and collation of the MS ; also Berger, p. 42. Goxpels of Macduman : Lambeth Palace Librarj*. Written by the scribe Maiielbrith Mac-Durnain [ix-x], delicate and rather cramped Irish writing ; Irish text. LichQeld, Chapter Library. Gospels (vii-viii], traditionally ascribed to St. Chad, bp. of Lichfield. The MS was perhaps written in Wales, but is in an Irish hand ; it belonged to the Church of St.

Teliaii at IJaiidaff, but was brought to Lichfield towards the end of the loth cent. The writing and ornamenta- tion are very beautiful, and resemble the Book of Kelts ; Irish text, possibly corrected occasionally from the Greek. Contains Mt li-Lk 39; collation of the MS, with introduction, etc., by Scrivener, Codex S. Veaddce Latinus, Cambridge, 18S7 ; see also Bradshaw, Collected Papers, pp. 468-461 (Cambr. 1SS9). Words- worth's L in Gospels. Cambridge, University Librarj-, Kk i.

24 ; Luke and John, nearly complete (vii-viii), half uncial Irish hand, somewhat resembling the Book of Kells or the Gospels of St. Chad In the first s chs. of St. Luke the text is a strange medley of Vulgate and Old Latin ; for the rest, the text is Vulgate with occasional Old Lat. readings. Scldcn Acts: Oxford, Bodl. 3418 (Seld. SO). Saxon MS [viii], valuable text. Wordsworth's O in Acts. Itushworth Gospels or Gospels of MacRegol : Oxford, Bodl. Auct. D. 2.

19 (ix), written by an Irish scribe, who died a.d. 82U ; has an interlinear Anglo-Saxon version. Irish text, with constant inversions of order in words, especially in St. JIatthew ; possibly, too, corrected from the Greek. Collation given by W. W. Skeat in The Uoxjiel of St. Matthew : A . *'. ond Northum- brian versions, Cambr. 1HS7. Wordsworth's U in Gospels. Brit. JIus., Egerton 609. Gospels (ix), formerly belonging to the monastery of .Mannoutier (Slajus Monasterium), near Tours.

It is an interesting siieciinen, however, of a MS, written abroad In ordinary Caroline minuscule, but with Jrish ornamentation, and with a regular Irish type of text ; see Berger, p. 47. It contains a number of variant rewliiigs which seem peculiar to the JIS. Tischendorf's mm ; Wordsworth's E. This MS serves as an introduction to our next class of MSS. IV. CONTISE.NTAI- MSS, WRirfKN BV iRlSU OH SaXON SCKIBIS, AND Hiiowm.t A Mixture ok tub two Tvpks ok TKXJ.—Gospelt of St. Gatien, Paris, Bibl.

Nat., Souv.acq. Lat. 1687 (viii), Anglo- Saxon band, but probably written on the Continent; boloiged to St. Gatien'8 at lours. The text contains a number of Old Lat. readings ; in other respects resembles the Egerton MS. Usually ciU'd as gat ; Berger, p. 46. The Kchlemach Gosjiels: Paris, Bibl. Nat. 9389 (probobly viii), vi-ritten in on Irish hand, and belonging formerly to the Benedictine Abbey of St.

Willibrord at Echternach ; yet an interesting inscription, obviously taken from the exemplar from which the -MS was copied, asserts that the scribe corrected the text from a MS, "de bibliothcca EuL'ipi pnespiteri quern ferunt fulsso sancti Ilieronimi.' The F^ugippius here referred to was almost certainly the Abbot of Lucullanum, near Naples, In the early part of the 6th cent.

The text, however, which has a series of variant readings noted in the margin, is (tlsappointing; neither the first hand nor the corrector seems to display a con. sistent text ; and we have a strange mixture of good Vulgate, 88S VULGATE VULGATE Continental, and Irish types ; see Berber, p. 62. Wordsworth quotes it regularly. Codex Bujotianus : Paris, Bibl. Nat.,Lat. 281 and 293. Gospels [viii], formerly a> Ftl-camp, just above Havre, and tbereiore directly facinfj the Enjjlish coast.

The text and the hand- writing are what mij^ht be expected from its position ; it is written in a line uncial hand, but the oruanientation shows traces of Briii^h iriHucnce ; and tlie text is a good example of the mixture of Continental and British types that would be produced by an Irish scribe writing; in a French monastery ; Bee Berber, p. 50. Wordsworth's B in Gospels. Brit. Mus., Add. Sitio. Gospels iroin che monastery of St.

Peter at Beneventum [viii or ix), written in a fine reWved uncial hand ; usually supposed, on the strcn^'th of an inscrip- tion, to have been written for Ato, abbot of St. Vincent de Volterno. near Beneventum. about the mifldle of the Sth cent. Berifer would, however, place it in the 9Lh cent. The text is a combination of British and Continental types ; see Berger, p. 92. SVordsworth quotes its reading^s. An^'ers: Public Library No. 20.

Gospels [ix or x], written in a French hand, but with traces of Irish influence in the orna- mentation ; and the text is Irish : see Berj^er, p. 4S. Brit. Mus., Rej;. I. A. xviii. Gospels [ix or x], known as the Gospels of iEthelstan, and accordiny to tradition presented by him to St. Au^stine s, Canterbury. Written on the Continent, but with ft good many Irish characteristics in the text ; see Berger, p. 49. Brit. Mus., Harley 1772. Epp. and Apoc.

(viii or ix), in a French hand, but with a good deal of Irish work in the initials and ornamentation ; written, therefore, apparently in France, but partly by an Irish scribe. The text has been carefully corrected, and the readings of the first hand are often quite illegible ; it contains a good many Old Latin and some Spanish readings; Col. is placed a/ter Thess., and .lude and Laod. are both wanting ; see Berger, p. 50. AVordsworth's Z... Paris, Bibl. Nat.. Lat. 93S2 : Prophets (Jerem.

-Oaniel), Saxon handwriting [ix], and a good text. Berger (p. 51) remarks that it is perhaps the onl3' MS of the Prophet* we possess that comes from the British Isles. Do., Lat. 11,553. The second half of a Bible [ixj, apparently written in the district round Lyons : the S, Germani exein}''ar latumof R. Steph&nus(not (Jermanum latum, as he is sometimes made to call it); it was a St. Germain MS.

The text is strangely mixed ; in the OT, Spanisli elements predominate, but the text is good, especially in Pr, Ec, Song of Songs ; in the NT, Mt is Old Lat., and cited among the OL MSS as f/i (see vol. iii. p. 51) ; in the other Gospels there are many OL readings, but the text at bottom is of the class copied in France by Irisli scribes ; Acts, good text, though showing Spanish influence ; Cath. Epp., poor Spanish text; Apoc., good; Pauline Epp., fairly good, but with aome OL readings.

See Berger, pp. 65-72. Wordsworth's g, in Mt, G in rest of NT. Wiirzburg University Library, Mp. th. f. 61. St. Matthew [viii], written in an Anglo-Saxon hand, with interlinear glosses ; mixed text. Do., Mp. th. f. 12. Epp. of St. Paul [ix], with Irish gl esses ; a well-known MS. The glosses have been often published, see Zimraer, (ilnnifce llibern., Berlin, ISSl ; Wliitley Stokes, Old Irish Glosses of Wiirzburg and Carlsrithe, Austin, Hertford, 1SS7 ; Olden, liolj/ Scr.

in Ireland a thousand years ago, Dublin, 1S6S. Do., Mp. th. f. 69. Epp. of St. Paul [viii], with Irish initials; Col. after Thess. Oxford, Bod. Laud. Jja,t. 102. Gospels, Saxon hand fearly x]; it formerly belonged to Wiirzburg, and is among the MSS which were bought there at the instance of Abp. Laud, after the sack of the city in 1031 ; mixed text. Other Wiirzburg MSS worthy of notice, though not possessing Irish characteristics, are: — Mp. th. q. 1 a.

Gospels (vii], fine uncial hand ; belonged, according to tradition, to St. Kilian, in whose tomb it is said to have been found. Mp. th. q. 1. Gosj>els [x] ; q. 4 Gospels [xi]; f. 65 Gospels [viii or ix] ; f, 66 Gos- pels (viii or ix]; f . 67 Gospels [vii or viii); eenii-uncial, and with a good many Old Lat. readings in the first hand ; f. 68 Gospels tvi or viij; good text in the first hand, resembling Amiatinus. And lastly, Mp. th. f. max. 1 Bible [xi]; the Pauline Epp.» Laod.

, and the book of Baruch have been ah- Btracted. For the Wiirzburg MSS see Schepjw, Die dlttsten Evang. Handschriften dtr Univ. bxbliothek, Wiirzburg, IsST.and Kober- lin, Eine Wiirzb. Evang. Handschr. (Program d. Studienanstalt bei S. Anna in Augsburg, 1891). V. Typk op Text cuRiiE.NT is LANOircnoc (Berger, pp. 7S-82). — Paris, Bibl. Nat., Lat. 4 and 42; Codex Aniciengist, Bible (ix or x]. The text of the first hand somewhat resembles that of the Vallicellian Bible (see below, p.

889), but a contemporary hand has added a number of corrections (amongst others the * three heavenly witnesses,' 1 Jn 5?), and these often show traces of Spanish influence in the Acts. Do., Lat. 7. Bible [xi], with fine illuminations ; text coloured by Spanish influence, and in the Acts resembling the corrector of the Cod. Anicitngi€. Do., Lat. 254 ; Codex Colbertinus of the New Testament [xii or xiii], written in S. of France.

The text is Old Latin in the Gospels, and is cited among Old Latin MSS as c (see vol. iii. p. 51); In the rest of the NT the text is Vulgate, and in a later hand, Viith all the characteristics of the S. of I->ance about it. Brit. Mus., Harlev 4772. 4773 : Bible in two fine volumes [early xiii], the second probably of later date than the first ; written In S. of France, and with text belonging to that region. Paris, Bibl. Nat., Lat. 321: New Testament [early xiii], be- longing to Perpignan.

Ordinary text in Gospels, but parts of the Acts (li-i:i' 28'^ ad jin.) are Old Latin and allied to the text of the Codex Laudianus (E e) and the Gigas (.'",7) ; Catholic Epp. have a Spanish text, resembling the Codex Toletanxit, The Old Latin portions of the Acts have been published by Berger, Un ancien texte Lat. des Actes des Ap6tre9 retrr^i^ dans un MS provenant de Perpignan ( S otices et extraitf d*» MSS de la liibl. 2iat. et autre^ Bibliothi'quei, tome xxxv. 1» partie), Paris, 1895.

Wordsworth's p in Acts. Cndex Demidovianus. Bible (xiii], but copied from an earlier exemplar; it belonged in the last century to a Paul Deuiidov Gregorovitch, but its present position is unknown. The text was published in Acts, Epp., and Apoc. by Mattbaei io his New Testament (1782-b); and Tischendorf has quoted it from his edition (under the sign demid). Wordsworth's dem. io Acts. VI. Other French Texts.— For other t.\-pes of French texts anterior to the Theodulfian and .

\lcuinian recensions the reader must study M. Berger's book, p. 83 ff. All that we can do here is to enumerate some of the MSS he quotes, and the centre* around which he has grouped them ; e.g. — MSS from Limoges : Paris, Bibl. Nat. 5 and 52 [ix] ; 8 and 8> [xi] ; 315 [xii or xiii] ; 2328 [\-iii or ix] ; 315 (xii-xiiij. from Tours: Paris. Bibl. Nat. 112 [x], 113. from Fleury : Orleans, PubUc Library 16, portions of 6 MSS of different dates, from Chartres : St. John, Paris, Bibl. Nat.

10,439 (viiij. Other MSS from the N. of France : Autun, Grand Seminairet [viii], Paris. Bibl. Nat. 17,226 [vii] ; 256 [vii] ; 14,407 [ixJ. Bibles from St. Riquier: Paris, Bibl. Nat. 11,504-5 [ix], the S. Genim7ii longum exemplar of R. Stephanus ; interesting text; Bibl. Nat. 45 and 93 [ix or x], the Codex l^egius; mixed text. Allied in text to these are the MSS Bibl. Nat 309 [xi] and 305 [xi], both New Test, without Gospels. The Melz .

MS (Public Library 7) preserves an interesting spet^-inien of the mixed texts current at the time [ix] ; see p. o40. MSS from Corbie on the Somme, near Amiens : — Amiens, Public Library 6, 7, 11, 12, portions of a Bible in several volumes [viii or ix]. IS, the famous Corbie Psalter [vuiAx]. 10. The four books of Esdras [ix] : one of the few MSS containing the whole book ; see R. L. Bensly, The Minting Frwpnent of the Uh Book of Ezra, Cambridge, 1875. Paris, Bibl. Nat., Lat. 13,174 ; Acts, Cath.

Epp., and Apoc. [ix]. Do., Lat. 11,532-3: Bible [ix]; contains the Psalteritun ex BebrcBo ; text interesting but mixed ; sUght Spanish elements in it. Bible from the Abbey of St. Vedast at Arras : Vienna, Im- perial Libran- 1190 fix]. VII. Swiss MSS (especially St. Gall).

— Irish monks and scribea penetrated through France, and right down into Switzerland and Italy ; it is thus that we get Vulgate MSS written often in Irish hands, and containing the same mixture of Irish and Continental tj-pes of text, not only in France, but in such centres of monastic Hfe as St. Gall, Reichenau, Einsiedeln.

Of these the Codices Saiujallenxis and Boemerianus (^i and Gg), which are really different parts of the same interlinear Grseco-Latin MS, belong rather to Old Latin than to Vulgate MSS, and are described above (see Latin Versions); though the base of h in the Gospels is perhaps more Vulgate than Old Latin : possibly the Grasco-Latin Psalter now preser\'ed in the Basle Librarv (A. vii. 3) may also be part of this same MS. The s;ime niav be said of the Codex Atujiensis, now at Trin. Coll., Cambr.

(B. 17. 1.) Earlv i>'pesof such mixed Irish and Continental texts are found in the St. Gall MSS No. 10. Job, Prov., Eccl.. Cantic'.es, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus [x], Irish hand ; No. 51, Gospels [viiiJ, Irish hand, mixed text ; No. 60, St. John [viii or ix], Irish hand, mixed text. Grandducal Library, Karlsruhe ; the Reichenau Codex Augiensit 211 ; Go.-^pels [late ix], with a number of Irish readings. Berne, Universitv Librarv 671 ; Gospels [ix or x], fine Irish hand, mixed text.

Milan, Am'brosian Library I. 61 sup. ; Gospels [viii?], in semi-uncial Irish hand ; formerly at Bobbio. The text has a good many Irish readings in it, and the readings of the correrlor or correctors are extremely interesting and valuable ; see Berger, pp. 55-59. We are able to fix some of the St. Gal! MSS to the middle of the Sth cent., and to one scribe, Winithar, who was a monk in the monastery- No. 2, Pentateuch, Acts, and Apoc. ; mixed text, m the Acta close to Br. Mus, Add. 11.

852 ; Wordsworth's S in Acts. No. 70, Epp. of St. Paul ; Pastoral Epp. placed after Heb. ; the text 18 very corrupt. No. 907, Catholic Epp, and Apoa with interesting pefatory matter; the text is very corrupt, resembling the Codex LeinorneeTurijt (Paris, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 232S, noted above). More important, perhaps, than the work of Winithar was that of a Bligbtlv later scribe, Hartmut, who was abbot of St. Gall, 872-88:1 ; the following MSS were written either by him or under his direction : Nos.

7, Chron. and Sapiential books ; 81, Sapien- tial books. Job, Tobit; 46. Ezek.. Minor Prophets, and Dan.; 45, the same ; 77, 78. 82, 79, 83, portions of a Bible ; 75, Bible. To them must be added— Brit. Mus., Add. 11,852, Pauline Epp. (including Laod.), Acts, Cath. Epp., Apoc, [ix], interesting text. See E. Nestle, Bfjujel aU Gelehrter, pp. 6S-60, Tubingen. 1892; Words- worth's U in Acts ; text agrees closely with the St Gall MS 2. St.

Gall, however, was connected with other main lines of MS transmission, such as those which ran through Chur, Milan, Bobbio, and VerceUi ; and these in turn were in oommunicauo* VULGATE VULGATE 88S through the S. of France with the X.E. frontier of Spain, so that we tin J the Southern type of text a'^'ain creeping up ami showing trac-eti 111 the iswiija and N. Italian MSS. Examples of this are — 'Xhe Bobbio MS uuw at Milan (Ambruisan Libr. E. '^ti inf.), containing Chron.- Pauline Epp.

[ix-x] ; mixed text, with Spanish, Old Latin, and Iribh elements Id it; Berg:&r. p. Via. Uonza. Collegiate Archives 1|: fragments of Bible [x], text ■oniewhat siniilar to the previous MS ; these two MSS agree with ihe Codd. Ii'"'rtiena7ui8 and Auf^ierms in omitting the Uet 3 verses of the Kp. to the Romans ; Berger, p. 139. VIll. Alcuinian RKCKNaioN. — Home, VallicuUian Library B. 6. Bible [ix], consitlcrt'd to be the best MS of the Alcuinian Recension ; Wordsworth's V ; see Berger, pp.

197-2i)3. The Toure Octateuch ; Tours, Public Library 10 (commence- neiit of ix], text related to the ValUcellian Bible, though not exactly the same. Bamberg, Itoyal Library A. I. 6. Bible (ixj. a handsome exami>le of this recension ; written atToura. Wordsworth's B tn Acts. etc. ; see Berger, p. 'iiMi, and Leitscbub, Fufirer durch d. k'jt. BibL zu Bamberg, 1889, p. 8'.;. Zurich, Cantonal Librarj- O. 1 ; text resembling the Bamberg MS on the whole, but ditfering in Pauline Epp. ; Bergt-r, p.

Ii07. Brit. Mus., Add. 10,546. Bible [ix] known as tlie Codex Carolinus, or the Bible of Qrandval (near Basle). Wordsworth's K ; see Berger, up. 209-212. Paris, Bibl. Nat., Lat. 250. New Testament [ixj, probably written at Tours ; text closely resembling the last MS ; Berger, p. 24a. Cologne, Chapter Library No. 1. Bible (ix] written at Tours with interesting niar^'inal corrections, made by a contemporary band also probably at Toura. Paris, Bibl, Nat., Lat. 1.

Bible [ix], a splendid MS, presented to Ciiarles llie Bald by Vivian, abbot of St. Martin of Tours. Do., Lat. 2. Biljle [ix] known as the Bible of St. Ut-ni-s or of Charles the Bald ; in the NT the Apoa is wanting. Used by B. Stephens in his Bible of 152S. Do., Lat. 3. Bible (ixJ, belonging originally to the monastery of Glanfeuil ; parts of the Apoc supplied by a later hand ; see Berger, p. 213. Monaa, Collegiate Archives, O. 1.

Bible [Ix], written at Tours by the scribe Amalrious, who was afterwards archbishoi) of Tours : valuable text ; Berger, p. 221. Paris, Bibl. Nat., U'lt. IT.iiii". Gospels written by Adalbaldus (early ix] at Tours; good Alcuinian text, closely reacmbliug the Bamberg and Ziirich Bibles ; Berger, pp. 243-247. Nancy, Cathedral Library. Gospels [early ix], written at T3urs ; a splendid copy. Text resembling the Mon^a Bible and the Brit. Mus. Gospels below (Add. Il,s-IS); Berger, p. 247. Brit. Mus.

, Add. 11,84S. Gospels [ix], probably written at Tburs. Paris, Bibl. Nat., iJkt, 266. Gospels [middle of ix], written at TTirs, and presented by the emperor Lothaire to the Church of St. Martin. Rome, Church of St. Paul without the walls. Fine Bible [ix], belonged to Charles the Bald, was written probably in the N. of France, and shows Saxon influence in its ornauientation.

Mixed Alcuinian text, with a good deal of resemblance to the CodfX ValtiMlianun, still more perhaps to the first Bible of Charles the Bald (Paris, liibt. Nat., Lat. 1); Berger. p. 292. iV.S'6 {of Candine school) written in (/old (see Berger, pp. 259- £77). In text these M.SS belong rather to the type of the continental Saxon MSS (above, p. 887) than to the somewhat later Tours school. The famous liamilton Gospel* [viii-ix], now In the library of Th. Irwin, Esq.

, of Oswego, New York; very early Caroline t«xt, with occasional Spanish and Anglo, Saxon elements ; Berger, p. 259. The t'odrx Ada, of Trier (Stadtbihliothek, No. xxii.), a tplendid MS. Gospels [end of viii], written by two hands, the scribe who has written the latter part of the ^IS having also added a large number of mar^^inal corrections to the former. The first hand shows connexion with the oldest Tours MS.

S, and especially the Codices aurei ; the second hand, with tlie more ordinary Toura type; Berger, pn. 202-2tl7; see also the monograph hie Triercr Ada-iiandgchrift, Leipzig, 1889; the article on the text of the Alcuinian Bibles by Dr. P. Corssen, is most valuable. Brit. Mus., Harl. 2788. Gospels [viii-ix], written in golden uncials; an extremely fine MS; llluminatious of the same •chool as those of the Codex Ada. Abbeville, Public Lib. No. 1.

Gospels [viii-lx] written in gold, and strongly resembling llorl. 2788 ; Berger, p. 267. Paris, Bibl. Nat., l>at. 8860. The GospeU of St. Medard (eariy ix] ; a fine MS : Berger, p. 2G8. Do., Lat. 11.955. Portions of Matt, and Mark [viii?] Do., Lat. 9383. Gospels [end of viii]. Tours, Public IJbrary 22; fonnerly at St. Martin's. Gospels (viii-ix], interesting text, on tlie whole belonging to Alcuinian revision, hut with Irish and Old Ijitin elemenla in it; Berger, pp.

47, 202, 272, and the Oxford Vuigate, Efriloijua, p. 720, Ti.-^chcndorf's mt ; Wordsworth quotes its readings. Vienna, Schatzkammer. The famous Ciosjtels (end of viii?), ■up])oscd to have been found in the tomb of Charles the Great ; written in gold on pnri'le vellum ; Berger, p. 275. l>o., Imperial I^tbrary, 652. Psalter (end of viii]. Munich, Royal Library, Lat. 14,000 ( = Cim. 55). The splendid Oowpels of St. Emmeron fix, dated 870].

Mlxe<l text, with An^lo-Saxon elements In it; probably written In the N. of France ; lierger, p. 295. UL Tubodcltiah Bbcbkbioh. — Paris, Bibl. Nat., LaU 9380. The famous Theodulflan Bible [ix], written in beautiful and minute hand. Wordsworth's ** ; see Berger, p. 149 f., and Dehsle, Le« liiblea de Tlu-udulj'e, Paris, 1879 ; sometimes known OS the Codex M'-muiiaiius. Puy, Cathiciral Library. Bible [ix], written under the direc- tion of Thcodulf.

and so closely resembling the Paris Bible that Delisle asseru that many pages look almost like proofs struck from the same type. Tlie text, however, is not so good : see Delisle, as above : also Berger, p. 171 ff. Brit. Mus., Ada. 24,142. Bible [ix], fonnerly belonging to the monastery of St. Hubert in the Ardennes ; written in a small minuscule hand, strongly resembling tiiat of tlie Theodultian Bible.

Tlie text is extremely interesting, the lirat hand allied to the Northuml)rian family, while the marginal corrections present a Theodultian type. Wordsworth's H. Orleans, Public Libr. 14. Book of the Prophets [ix], from Fleury. "Text shows traces of Theodulflan inlluence, tliough tlie order of the books differs from that of Theodulf. Berger, p. 177. Do., 11 and 13. Two volumes of a Bible [x], containing Kings, Proverbs, Song of Songs, Job, Mace., and Tobit ; from Fleury.

Theodullian Text, but following sometimes the first hand, sometimes the margin.il rea<iing8. Berger, p. 177. Paris, Bibl. Nat., Lat. 11,!);;7. Bible [ix-x], the St. Germani ex-einplar parmun of Koin-rtus Stephanus, for the MS was for- merly at St. Gertnain-dts-l'rea ; the hand resembles that of the Tiieodullian Bible, and the text also ; the latter follows some- times the first hand, sometimes the margin. Berger, p 178. Copenhagen, Uoyal Libr., nouv. fonds Royal 1. Parts of a Bilde, i.e.

Psalms-Daniel [ix] ; handwTiling resembles th.'it of the St. Germain MS above, and the text is Theodulflan. Delisle, Bibl. de I'Ecole de$ Vhartes, xlvi. p. 321 ; Berger, p. 181. X. MEDiiEVAL Texts.— Out of the thousands of such MSS we can but select three, which for various reasons are interesting. Brit. Mus., Reg. I. B. xii. Bible [xiii], written in 1254 by William of Hales for Thomas de la Wile, ' Magister Scolaruro Sarum ' ; fair specimen of ordinary mediieval text. Words- worth's W.

Dijon, Publ. Libr. 9 his. Bible, 4 vols, [xii], containing the corrections of Stephen Harding, abbot of Citeaux. Paris, Bibl. Nat., Lat. 10,719-16,722. Bible, 4 vols, [xiii], containing the corrections of the Doniinicans, under the auspices of Hugo de S. Caro. LiTBRATURB.— Full Hsts of works will be found In S. Berger, Uiatoire de la Vulg. pendant lee premiers si^cles du moyen dge^ Paris, 18'J3, pp. xxU-xxiv ; and in E.

Nestle (to whom the present writer owes many valuable suggestions), (frtext u. trebersetzuwien der Bibel, Leipzig. 1S97, pp. 96, 102 ( = PIiE^, Bd. iii. pp. 3(1, 42). We give here a somewhat compressed list of the works likely to be useful to the ordinary student. A. For the life of Jerome : — Tlie I'ita S. Bieronymi in Vallarsi's edition of his works, torn. xi. pp. 1-280.

For the works of Jerome the student should use by preference the edi- tions of Vallarsi, 11 vols, folio, Verona, 1734-1742, do. quarto, Venice, 1766-1772 ; tlie quarto edition is handier, and has been reprinted by iligne (but with different paging), Pat. Lat. x.xii.-xxx. ; von Ccilln, *Hieronynius' in Ersch and timber's Encyclopiidie (it. Section, 8 Theil, p. 72 f.), 1831 ; F. X. Collombct, Uistoire de Saint Jiir&me, 2 vols., Paris, 1S44 ; O.

Zockler, JJicronj/mits ; sein Leben und Wirfcen aits sntim Schri/ten danjcstellt, Gotha, 1865 ; A. Thierry, Saint J^rOme^ 2 vols., Paris, 1807 ; E. L. Cutts, Saint Jerome ' in the Fathers for English Headers (S.P.O.K.), 1877; Zockler, 'llieronymns in PliE^ (Bd. viii. p. 42 f.), 1900 ; Fremantle, ' Hieronyiuus in Smith and Wace's Diet, of Christian IHo'jraphy, vol. iii. p. 29 f., 1882 ; the same, 'Life of Jerome' in Wa^e and SchafT's Select Library of yicene and Fost-Xiceiw Fathers, vol.

vi. pp. xvi-xxv, 1893; G. Grutzmacher, Uieronymus ; et>w (no- graphiHchc Studie, etc., J. Leipz. 1901. B. For the history of the text, both manuscript and printed : — R. Simon, Uit^ttnre critique des yersions du A"/', Rotter- dam. 1G90; J. Mill, A'oDum Testamentum cum lectionibm varinntibns, etc., Prcemittitur diancrtatio, Oxonii, 1707 ; see especially p. Ixxxi f.; H. Hody, De Bibliorum Trxtihus, etc., Oxon., 170.'j, pp. 342-569; L. van Kss, Pragmatica doctt. Cath. Trid. circa Vulg.

decreti scn-smn, Sulzbach, 1816, Pragmatisch-Kritisclie Gesdi. der Vul</., Tiibingen, 1824; G. RJegler, Kritischc Gesch, der Vuli., Sulzbach, 1820; Bp. Westcott, 'Vulgate' in Smith's />/>. vol. liL, 1863; O. Vercellone, Varue lectiones vulg. LaHnce Bibli- orum editionis, 2 torn., Romaj, 18(Jl-18t'4 ; F. Kaulen, Qenchichte der Vulfj., Mainz, 1868; S. Berger, * Des Essais 3ul ont ^tA faits & Paris au xiii» sitcle pour corriger le texle e la Vulg.'<y(cp. de Th^ologie et de Philomphie, t.

xvL), LausanTie, 1883, De VHiathire de la Vulg. en France, Paris, 1887, Quam notitiam lingua hebraiea habut-riut christiani mfdii (Kvi temporibue in QalUa, Paris, 1893. Uistoire dela Vulg. pendant leg premiers riicles du moi/en dgc. Paris, 1893; G. B. de Rossi, 'La Bibbia offerta' da Ceolfrido' (from the Ommagio gixtbUare delta Bibl. Vat. al S. P. L'-one xrii.) Rome, 1888; U. Denifle, • Die Hand- schriflen der Bihel -Correctorien des 13 Jahrhun<lert.s {Arclviv f. Literatur- «. Kirchengeseh. t.

Iv. pp. 263, 471). 1888 ; P. Martin, Ia Vulg. latine au xiii st^cle d'apr6a R. Bacon' (in Le Urufon vli.. Louvain, 1888), Ma tcxtc Parisicn de la Vulg. Lat* (/y^ Musr'un viii., 1889); />»/ Trierer Ada-Uandschrijt . . von K. Mcnzel, P. Corssen, etc., Leipzig, 1889; 11. J. White, 'The Codex Amiatiuui 890 VULTUEE WALLS and its Birthplace,' in Sttidia Biblica et Ecclesiastica, vol. ii., Oxford, IS'JO ; W. A.

Copinger, Incunabida liiUica, or the first half-century of the Latin Bible, London, IMiii ; E. Nestle, Ein Julnluum der Lateinischen Bibel, Tuliingeu, 1892; H. J. AVhite, 'The Latin Versions,' in Ncrivener- Miller, Introduction to the Criticimn of the NT*, 1S94, vol. ii. pp. 56 90 ; E. von Dobschiitz, Stttdieii zur TeztkritiJc der Vvi-j., Leipzig, 1894; C. R. Gregory: Prolegomena to Tisfiliendorf s ^'oru7/i Te slant entum G rwce, etc., etl it iooctava eritica maior, vol. iii.. Lips. 1894, pp.

971-1108; F. G, Ken.von, Handb. to Text. Crit. of liT, 1901, pp. 184- 203 ; E. Nestle, Lateininche Bibeliibersetzuji'ten (revision of Fritzache) in PRE'^, Bd. iii., also publislied separ- ately in Urtext u. Uebersetzungen der Bibel, Leipzig, 1S97 ; P. Con>.sen, ' Bericht tiber die Iat*;in. liilieltibersetzungen ' (' Sonderabdnick,' from the Jahreshericht iiher die. Fort- schritte der classischen AUertuuiswisacnschdft, 1899); P. Tbielmann, ' Bericht d. d. gLsanimelte bandst^hr.

Material zu einer kr. Ausgabe,' etc. (from the Munich SUzungs- berichten, 1899). C. For the grammar, Latinity, etc., of the Vulgate :^-J. A. Hagen, Sprachliche Erurteniixjen zur Vulg., Freiburg in Br. 1SC3; F. Kaulen, Ilandbuch zur Vxilg.y Mainz, 1^70; P. Hake, Sprachdche Erhiuterangen zu dem Igt. Psabnen- texte, Arnsberg, ls72 ; W. Nowack, Die Be'deutung dcs Hieron. filr die aittest. Kritik, Gottingen, 1876 ; H. Roensch, Itala u. ViUg., Marburg, 1S76 ; H.

Goelzer, Latinity de Saint JirOme, Paris, 1S84 ; ii. P. Smith, 'The Value of the Vulg. OT for Textual Criticism' {Presbyterian and Bcfomied Mev., April 1891); A. Hartl, Sprachliche Eiijenthiimliehkeiten der Vulg., Ried, 1894. D. Critical Editions:— C. Vercellone, Biblia Sacra ViUgatce Editumit Sixti Y, et Clemcntit VIII, Fontt. Momc. jusni recognita atque edita. Roin^e, Typis S. Congregationig d4 propaganda fide, 1801.

This is the best reprint of th« Clementine \ulgate Bible, and Vercellone's preface should be carefully read; C. Tischendorf, A'oy. Test. Latine ; textum Ilieronymi . . restituit C. T., Lipsi», 1864 ; P. M. Ht'tzenauer, iVoy. Test, Vulgatm Editionis: ex Vaticani editionibtis eantmque correctono critiec edidit P. M. H.^ Oeniponte, 1899 ; Corssen, Epistula ad lialatag, Berlin, iSbf ; Bp. J. Wordsworth, ^orntm Tegtamentum . . Latine sec. edit. S. Ilieronymi . . receiuuit J. Wordsworth* S.T.P.

, in operis societatem adsuinto Ii. J. White^ Oxon , 1889-1898. (The four Gospels are published ; the rest ol the NT is in preparation). H. J. WHITE.