466 HIERONYMUS. Vol. VII. 11. Commentarii in Matihaeum^ in four books. They belong to the year 398. (Ed. Bened. vol. iv. pt i. p. 1.) 12. HomUiae XXXIX. in Lucam ex Origene. A translation, executed about a. d. 389. 13. Commentarii in Pauli Epistolas. Those namely to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to Titus, and to Philemon. Written about A. d. 387. (Ed. Bened. vol iv. pt. i. p. 222—242.) Vol. VIII. Chronica Eusehii. The Chronicle of Eusebius, translated from the Greek, enlarged chiefly in the department of Roman history, and brought down to A. D. 378, that is, to the sixth consulship of Valens, the events of fifty-three years being thus added to the original. [Eusebius.] Vols. IX. X., and Vol. I., ed. Bened. BiBLiOTHECA DiviNA. The most important con- tribution by Jerome to the cause of religion was his Latin version of the Old and New Testament. A Latin translation, or perhaps several Latin transla- tions, existed in the second century, as we learn from the quotations of TertuUian, but in the course of two hundred years the text had fallen into lamentable confusion. A multitude of passages had been un- » scrupulously omitted or interpolated or altered by successive transcribers, to suit their own fancy or for the sake of supporting or of overturning par- ticular doctrines, so that scarcely two copies could be found exactly alike, and in many cases the dis- crepancies were of a most serious character. Such a state of things had reasonably excited the greatest alarm among all sincere believers, when Jerome, who was admirably qualified for the task, under- took, at the earnest solicitation of his friend and patron, Pope Damasus, to remedy the evil. He commenced his labours with the four Evan- gelists, comparing carefully the existing Latin trans- lations with each other and with the original Greek, his object being to retain the existing expressions as far as possible, and to introduce new phraseology in those places only where the true sense had en- tirely disappeared. Prefixed is an introduction ex- plaining the principle by which he had been guided, and ten synoptical tables, exhibiting a complete analysis and harmony of the whole. The remain- ing books of the New Testament were published subsequently upon the same plan, but from the ab- sence of any introduction it has been doubted by some critics whether the translation of .these was really executed by Jerome. His own words, how- ever, elsewhere, are so explicit as to leave no rational ground for hesitation upon this point. (See the catalogue given by himself of his own works de Viris III. c. 135, Epist. Ixxi., and Vallarsi, Praef. vol. x. p. xx.) The Latin version of the Old Testament, as it existed at that epoch, had not been derived di- rectly from the Hebrew, but from the Septuagint, and at first Jerome did not contemplate any thing more than a simple revision and correction of this version by comparing it with the Greek. Accord- ingly, he began with the book of Psalms, which he improved from an ordinary copy of the LXX, but here his work ended for the time. But when residing at Bethlehem in 390 — 391, he became acquainted with the Hexapla of Origen, in which HIERONYMUS. the Greek text had been carefully corrected from the original Hebrew, and with this in his hands he revised the whole of the Old Testament. But of this improved translation no portion has de- scended to us except the Psalms and Job, together with the Prologues to the Verba Dierum or Chro- nicles, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Solomon's Song. Indeed, the above-named were the only books ever published, the MS. of the remainder having been lost by the carelessness or abstracted by the treachery of some one who had gained possession of them. (See Epist. cxxxiv. " Pleraque enim pri- oris laboris fraude cujusdam amisiraus.") Nothing daunted by this misfortune, Jerome resolved to recommence his toil upon a different and far more satisfactory basis. Instead of trans- lating a translation, he determined to liave recourse at once to the original, and accordingly, after long and patient exertion, he finished in a. d. 405 an entirely new translation made directly from the Hebrew. This is in substance the Latin trans- lation of the Old Testament now in circulation, but it was not received into general use until formally sanctioned by Pope Gregory the Great, for a strong prejudice prevailed in favour of every thing con- nected with the ancient Septuagint, which at that period was universally believed to have been the result of a miracle. Jerome did not translate any part of the Apo- crypha, with the exception of Tobit and Judith, which he rendered, at the request of Chroraatius and Heliodorus, from the Chaldaean, not literalh as he himself informs us, but in such a manner aa to convey the general sense. Indeed, his know- ledge of Chaldaean could not have been very pro- found, since all he knew was obtained in the course of a single day from the instructions of one versed in that tongue. (See Pref. to Tobit.) The history of the Vulgate, therefore, as it now exists, is briefly this : — 1. The Old Testament is a translation made directly from the original Hebrew by Jerome. 2. The New Testament is a translation formed out of the old translations carefully compared and corrected from the original Greek of Jerome. 3. The Apocrypha consists of old translations with the exception of Tobit and Judith freely translated from the original Chaldaean by Jerome. In addition to the contents of the Vulgate, we find in the works of Jerome two translations of the Psalms, and a translation of Job, the origin of which we have already explained. The first trans- lation of the Psalms was adopted soon after its appearance by the Church in Rome, and hence is called Psalterium Romanum; the second by the Church in Gaul, and hence is called Psalterium Gallicanmn^ and these are still commonly employed, not having been superseded by the translation in the Vulgate, since the introduction of the latter would have involved a complete change of the sacred music established by long use. In conclusion, we may remark that the Vulgate in its present form is by no means the same as when it issued from the hands of its great editor. Numerous alterations and corruptions crept in during the middle ages, which have rendered the text uncertain. A striking proof of this fact has been adduced by bishop Marsh, who states that two editions published within two years of each other, in 1590 and 1592, both printed at Rome, both under papal authority, and both formally pro-
