Biblia Sacra: Prologi Sancti Hieroynymi in Biblia Sacra

Desiderii mei desideratas accepi epistulas, qui quodam praesagio futurorum cum Danihele sortitus est nomen, obsecrantis ut translatum in latinam linguam de hebraeo sermone Pentateuchum nostrorum auribus traderem. Periculosum opus certe, obtrectatorum latratibus patens, qui me adserunt in Septuaginta interpretum suggillationem nova pro veteribus cudere, ita ingenium quasi vinum probantes, cum ego saepissime testatus sim me pro virili portione in tabernaculum Dei offerre quae possim, nec opes alterius aliorum paupertate foedari. Quod ut auderem, Origenis me studium provocavit, qui editioni antiquae translationem Theodotionis miscuit, asterisco et obelo, id est stella et veru, opus omne distinguens, dum aut inlucescere facit quae minus ante fuerant aut superflua quaeque iugulat et confodit, maximeque Evangelistarum et Apostolorum auctoritas, in quibus multa de Veteri Testamento legimus quae in nostris codicibus non habentur, ut est illud: "Ex Aegypto vocavi filium meum", et: "Quoniam Nazareus vocabitur", et: "Videbunt in quem conpunxerunt", et: "Flumina de ventre eius fluent aquae vivae", et: "Quae nec oculus vidit, nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascenderunt quae praeparavit Deus diligentibus se", et multa alia quae proprium συνταγμα desiderant.

I have received the desired letters of my Desiderius—who, by a certain presage of things to come, has obtained the name together with Daniel—imploring that I should deliver to the ears of our people the Pentateuch translated into the Latin tongue from the Hebrew speech. A perilous work, surely, lying open to the barkings of detractors, who assert that I, to the stigmatizing of the Seventy interpreters, am coining new things in place of old, thus approving talent as though it were wine; whereas I have very often borne witness that, to the best of my manly portion, I offer what I can to the tabernacle of God, and that the wealth of one is not to be befouled by the poverty of others. That I should dare this, the zeal of Origen provoked me, who blended Theodotion’s translation with the ancient edition, distinguishing the whole work by asterisk and obelus—that is, star and spear—while he either makes to shine what was previously lacking, or hews down and pierces whatever is superfluous; and most of all the authority of the Evangelists and Apostles, in whom we read many things from the Old Testament which are not contained in our codices, as is this: "Out of Egypt I called my son", and: "For he shall be called a Nazorean", and: "They shall look upon him whom they pierced", and: "Rivers of living water shall flow from his belly", and: "Things which eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man, which God has prepared for those who love him", and many others which demand their own proper syntagma.

Interrogemus ergo eos ubi haec scripta sint, et cum dicere non potuerint, de libris hebraicis proferamus. Primum testimonium est in Osee, secundum in Isaia, tertium in Zaccharia, quartum in Proverbiis, quintum aeque in Isaia; quod multi ignorantes apocriforum deliramenta sectantur et hiberas nenias libris authenticis praeferunt. Causas erroris non est meum exponere.

Let us therefore interrogate them where these things are written; and when they will not be able to say, let us produce them from the Hebrew books. The first testimony is in Hosea, the second in Isaiah, the third in Zechariah, the fourth in Proverbs, the fifth likewise in Isaiah; because many, being ignorant, follow the deliraments of the apocrypha and prefer Iberian trifles to authentic books. It is not mine to set forth the causes of the error.

Iudaei prudenti factum dicunt esse consilio, ne Ptolomeus, unius dei cultor, etiam apud Hebraeos duplicem divinitatem deprehenderet, quos maximi idcirco faciebat, quia in Platonis dogma cadere videbantur. Denique ubicumque sacratum aliquid Scriptura testatur de Patre et Filio et Spiritu Sancto, aut aliter interpretati sunt aut omnino tacuerunt, ut et regi satisfacerent et arcanum fidei non vulgarent. Et nescio quis primus auctor septuaginta cellulas Alexandriae mendacio suo extruxerit, quibus divisi eadem scriptitarint, cum Aristheus eiusdem Ptolomei υπερασπιστης et multo post tempore Iosepphus nihil tale rettulerint, sed in una basilica congregatos contulisse scribant, non prophetasse.

The Jews say it was done by prudent counsel, lest Ptolemy, a worshiper of one god, should discover a double divinity even among the Hebrews, whom he therefore valued most highly, because they seemed to fall into the dogma of Plato. Finally, wherever Scripture bears witness to something sacred about the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, they either interpreted it otherwise or were altogether silent, so as both to satisfy the king and not to make common the mystery of the faith. And I do not know who first, as the author, by his falsehood built up the seventy little cells at Alexandria, in which, divided, they are said to have written the same things, since Aristeus, the same Ptolemy’s
υπερασπιστης
and, much later, Josephus, reported nothing of the sort, but write that, gathered in one basilica, they conferred, not prophesied.

Aliud est enim vatem, aliud esse interpretem: ibi spiritus ventura praedicit, hic eruditio et verborum copia ea quae intellegit transfert; nisi forte putandus est Tullius Oeconomicum Xenofontis et Platonis Protagoram et Demosthenis Pro Ctesifonte afflatus rethorico spiritu transtulisse, aut aliter de hisdem libris per Septuaginta interpretes, aliter per Apostolos Spiritus Sanctus testimonia texuit, ut quod illi tacuerunt, hii scriptum esse mentiti sint. Quid igitur? Damnamus veteres?

For it is one thing to be a vates, another to be an interpreter: there the Spirit predicts things to come; here erudition and a copiousness of words translates what he understands; unless perchance we are to suppose that Tullius translated Xenophon’s Oeconomicus and Plato’s Protagoras and Demosthenes’ On the Crown under the afflatus of a rhetorical spirit, or that the Holy Spirit wove testimonies from these same books one way through the Seventy interpreters, another way through the Apostles, so that what those kept silent, these pretended to have been written. What then? Do we condemn the ancients?

Minime; sed post priorum studia in domo Domini quod possumus laboramus. Illi interpretati sunt ante adventum Christi et quod nesciebant dubiis protulere sententiis, nos post passionem et resurrectionem eius non tam prophetiam quam historiam scribimus; aliter enim audita, aliter visa narrantur: quod melius intellegimus, melius et proferimus. Audi igitur, aemule, obtrectator ausculta: non damno, non reprehendo Septuaginta, sed confidenter cunctis illis Apostolos praefero.

By no means; but after the labors of our predecessors we toil in the house of the Lord as we are able. Those men translated before the advent of Christ, and what they did not know they brought forth with doubtful opinions; we, after his passion and resurrection, write not so much prophecy as history; for things heard are recounted one way, things seen another: what we understand better, we also set forth better. Listen, then, rival; give ear, detractor: I do not condemn, I do not reprove the Seventy, but I confidently prefer the Apostles to them all.

Per istorum os mihi Christus sonat, quos ante prophetas inter spiritalia charismata positos lego, in quibus ultimum paene gradum interpretes tenent. Quid livore torqueris? Quid inperitorum animos contra me concitas?

Through the mouth of these men Christ sounds forth for me, whom I read as placed before the prophets among the spiritual charismata, in which the interpreters hold almost the last rank. Why do you writhe with envy? Why do you stir up the minds of the unskilled against me?

Sicubi tibi in translatione videor errare, interroga Hebraeos, diversarum urbium magistros consule: quod illi habent de Christo, tui codices non habent. Aliud est, si contra se postea ab Apostolis usurpata testimonia probaverunt, et emendatiora sunt exemplaria latina quam graeca, graeca quam hebraea! Verum haec contra invidos.

SIf anywhere I seem to you to err in the translation, interrogate the Hebrews, consult the masters of diverse cities: what they have concerning Christ, your codices do not have. It is another matter, if afterwards they approved the testimonies appropriated by the Apostles against themselves, and if the Latin exemplars are more emended than the Greek, the Greek than the Hebrew! But these things are against the envious.

Nunc te precor, Desideri carissime, ut qui tantum opus me subire fecisti et a Genesi exordium capere, orationibus iuves, quo possim eodem spiritu quo scripti sunt libri, in latinum eos transferre sermonem. explicit prologus

Now I beseech you, dearest Desiderius, you who have made me undertake so great a work and to take my beginning from Genesis, help with prayers, that I may be able, in the same spirit in which the books were written, to translate them into the Latin tongue. here ends the prologue

INCIPIT PRAEFATIO SANCTI HIERONYMI IN LIBRO IOSUE

HERE BEGINS THE PREFACE OF SAINT JEROME IN THE BOOK OF JOSHUA

Tandem finita Pentateucho Mosi, velut grandi fenore liberati, ad Iesum filium Nave manum mittimus, quem Hebraei Iosue Bennun id est Iosue filium Nun vocant, et ad Iudicum librum, quem Sopthim appellant, ad Ruth quoque et Hester, quos hisdem nominibus efferunt. Monemusque lectorem, ut silvam hebraicorum nominum et distinctiones per membra divisas diligens scriptura conservet, ne et noster labor et illius studium pereat; et ut in primis, quod saepe testatus sum, sciat me non in reprehensionem veterum nova cudere, sicut amici mei criminantur, sed pro virili parte offerre linguae meae hominibus, quos tamen nostra delectant, ut pro Graecorum εξαπλοις, quae et sumptu et labore maximo indigent, editionem nostram habeant et, sicubi in antiquorum voluminum lectione dubitarint, haec illis conferentes inveniant quod requirunt, maxime cum apud Latinos tot sint exemplaria quot codices, et unusquisque pro arbitrio suo vel addiderit vel subtraxerit quod ei visum est, et utique non possit verum esse quod dissonet. Unde cesset arcuato vulnere contra nos insurgere scorpius et sanctum opus venenata carpere lingua desistat, vel suscipiens si placet vel contemnens si displicet, memineritque illorum versuum: "Os tuum abundavit malitia et lingua tua concinnabat dolos; sedens adversus fratrem tuum loquebaris et adversus filium matris tuae ponebas scandalum.

At length, the Pentateuch of Moses being finished, as though released from a heavy usury-debt, we set our hand to Joshua son of Nave, whom the Hebrews call Iosue ben-Nun, that is, Joshua son of Nun, and to the book of Judges, which they call Shophtim, to Ruth also and Esther, whom they bring forth under the same names. And we warn the reader to preserve by diligent writing the forest of Hebrew names and the distinctions divided by sections, lest both our labor and his zeal perish; and, first of all, as I have often attested, let him know that I do not mint new things to the reproach of the ancients, as my friends accuse, but offer, so far as lies in my power, to men of my language—whom nevertheless our things delight—that, in place of the Greeks’ Hexaplae, which require very great expense and toil, they may have our edition, and, if anywhere they should doubt in the reading of ancient volumes, by comparing these, may find what they seek, especially since among Latins there are as many exemplars as codices, and each person, at his own discretion, has either added or subtracted what seemed good to him, and assuredly that which is dissonant cannot be true. Hence let the scorpion cease to rise against us with its arched wound, and let it desist from nibbling at the holy work with a venomous tongue, either receiving it if it pleases, or despising it if it displeases; and let it remember those verses: “Your mouth abounded in malice and your tongue was contriving deceits; sitting, you were speaking against your brother, and against the son of your mother you were placing a scandal.”

Haec fecisti et tacui; existimasti inique quod ero tui similis; arguam te et statuam contra faciem tuam". Quae enim audientis utilitas est nos labore sudare et alios detrahendo laborare, dolere Iudaeos quod calumniandi eis et inridendi Christianos sit ablata occasio, et Ecclesiae homines id despicere, immo lacerare, unde adversarii torqueantur? Quod si vetus eis tantum interpretatio placet, quae et mihi non displicet, et nihil extra recipiendum putant, cur ea quae sub asteriscis et obelis vel addita sunt vel amputata, legunt et non legunt? Quare Danihelem iuxta Theodotionis translationem ecclesiae susceperunt?

“These things you did and I was silent; you unjustly supposed that I would be like you; I will arraign you and set them in order before your face.” For what utility is there to the hearer, that we should sweat with toil and others labor by detraction, that the Jews should be pained because the occasion of calumniating them and of deriding Christians has been taken away, and that men of the Church despise—nay, lacerate—that by which our adversaries are tormented? But if only the old translation pleases them—which does not displease me either—and they think nothing beyond is to be received, why do they both read and not read those things which under asterisks and obeli are either added or amputated? Why have the churches received Daniel according to Theodotion’s translation?

Cur Origenem mirantur et Eusebium Pamphili cunctas editiones similiter disserentes? Aut quae fuit stultitia, postquam vera dixerint, proferre quae falsa sunt? Unde autem in Novo Testamento probare poterunt adsumpta testimonia, quae in libris veteribus non habentur?

Why do they marvel at Origen and Eusebius Pamphilus, expounding all the editions similarly? Or what folly was it, after they have spoken true things, to bring forth things that are false? And whence, moreover, in the New Testament will they be able to prove the assumed testimonies which are not contained in the ancient books?

Haec dicimus, ne omnino calumniantibus tacere videamur. Ceterum, post sanctae Paulae dormitionem, cuius vita virtutis exemplum est, et hos libros, quos Eustochiae virgini Christi negare non potui, decrevimus "dum spiritus hos regit artus" Prophetarum explanationi incumbere, et omissum iam diu opus quodam postliminio repetere, praesertim cum et admirabilis sanctusque vir Pammachius hoc idem litteris flagitet, et nos ad patriam festinantes mortiferos sirenarum cantus surda debeamus aure transire. explicit praefatio

We say these things, lest we seem altogether to keep silence before the calumniators. Moreover, after the dormition of Saint Paula, whose life is an example of virtue, and as for these books, which I could not refuse to Eustochium, a virgin of Christ, we have resolved "while spirit governs these limbs" to apply ourselves to the explication of the Prophets, and to resume, by a kind of postliminy, the work long since laid aside, especially since the admirable and holy man Pammachius also urges this same thing by letter, and we, hastening to our fatherland, ought to pass the deadly songs of the Sirens with a deaf ear. here ends the preface

INCIPIT PROLOGUS SANCTI HIERONYMI IN LIBRO REGUM

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF SAINT JEROME TO THE BOOK OF KINGS

Viginti et duas esse litteras apud Hebraeos, Syrorum quoque et Chaldeorum lingua testatur, quae hebraeae magna ex parte confinis est; nam et ipsi viginti duo elementa habent eodem sono, sed diversis caracteribus. Samaritani etiam Pentateuchum Mosi totidem litteris scriptitant, figuris tantum et apicibus discrepantes. Certumque est Ezram scribam legisque doctorem post captam Hierosolymam et instaurationem templi sub Zorobabel alias litteras repperisse, quibus nunc utimur, cum ad illud usque tempus idem Samaritanorum et Hebraeorum caracteres fuerint.

That there are twenty-two letters among the Hebrews, the language of the Syrians and of the Chaldeans likewise bears witness, which is for the most part contiguous to Hebrew; for they too have twenty-two elements with the same sound, but with different characters. The Samaritans also are accustomed to write the Pentateuch of Moses with just as many letters, differing only in figures and apices. And it is certain that Ezra, the scribe and doctor of the Law, after Jerusalem was taken and the restoration of the temple under Zerubbabel, discovered other letters, which we now use, whereas up to that time the same characters had been those of the Samaritans and the Hebrews.

In libro quoque Numerorum haec eadem supputatio sub Levitarum ac sacerdotum censu mystice ostenditur. Et nomen Domini tetragrammaton in quibusdam graecis voluminibus usque hodie antiquis expressum litteris invenimus. Sed et psalmi tricesimus sextus, et centesimus decimus, et centesimus undecimus, et centesimus octavus decimus, et centesimus quadragesimus quartus, quamquam diverso scribantur metro, tamen eiusdem numeri texuntur alfabeto.

In the Book of Numbers likewise this same computation is mystically shown under the census of the Levites and priests. And we have found the Name of the Lord, the Tetragrammaton, in certain Greek volumes, even to this day, expressed in ancient letters. But also Psalm 36, and 110, and 111, and 118, and 144, although they are written in diverse meter, nevertheless are woven with an alphabet of the same number of letters.

Et Hieremiae Lamentationes et oratio eius, Salomonis quoque in fine Proverbia ab eo loco in quo ait: "Mulierem fortem quis inveniet", hisdem alfabetis vel incisionibus supputantur. Porro quinque litterae duplices apud eos sunt: chaph, mem, nun, phe, sade; aliter enim per has scribunt principia medietatesque verborum, aliter fines. Unde et quinque a plerisque libri duplices aestimantur: Samuhel, Malachim, Dabreiamin, Ezras, Hieremias cum Cinoth, id est Lamentationibus suis.

And the Lamentations of Jeremiah and his prayer, and likewise at the end of Solomon the Proverbs from that place where he says: "Who can find a strong woman," are reckoned by these same alphabets or incisions. Moreover, five letters are double among them: chaph, mem, nun, phe, sade; for by these they write the beginnings and middles of words in one way, the ends in another. Whence also five books by most are esteemed double: Samuhel, Malachim, Dabreiamin, Ezras, Jeremiah with Cinoth, that is, with his Lamentations.

Quomodo igitur viginti duo elementa sunt, per quae scribimus hebraice omne quod loquimur, et eorum initiis vox humana conprehenditur, ita viginti duo volumina supputantur, quibus quasi litteris et exordiis, in Dei doctrina, tenera adhuc et lactans viri iusti eruditur infantia.

Just as, therefore, there are twenty-two elements, by which we write in Hebrew everything that we speak, and by their initials the human voice is comprehended, so twenty-two volumes are reckoned, by which, as by letters and exordia, in the doctrine of God, the infancy of the just man, still tender and suckling, is educated.

Primus apud eos liber vocatur Bresith, quem nos Genesim dicimus; secundus Hellesmoth, qui Exodus appellatur; tertius Vaiecra, id est Leviticus; quartus Vaiedabber, quem Numeros vocamus; quintus Addabarim, qui Deuteronomium praenotatur. Hii sunt quinque libri Mosi, quos proprie Thorath, id est Legem appellant.

The first book among them is called Bresith, which we call Genesis; the second Hellesmoth, which is entitled Exodus; the third Vaiecra, that is, Leviticus; the fourth Vaiedabber, which we call Numbers; the fifth Addabarim, which is designated Deuteronomy. These are the five books of Moses, which they properly call Thorath, that is, the Law.

Secundum Prophetarum ordinem faciunt, et incipiunt ab Iesu filio Nave, qui apud eos Iosue Bennum dicitur. Deinde subtexunt Sopthim, id est Iudicum librum; et in eundem conpingunt Ruth, quia in diebus Iudicum facta narratur historia. Tertius sequitur Samuhel, quem nos Regnorum primum et secundum dicimus.

According to the order of the Prophets they arrange it, and they begin from Jesus son of Nave, who among them is called Josue Ben‑Nun. Then they subjoin Sopthim, that is, the book of Judges; and into the same they stitch Ruth, because the history is narrated as having been done in the days of the Judges. The third follows, Samuel, which we call the First and Second of the Kingdoms.

Quartus Malachim, id est Regum, qui tertio et quarto Regnorum volumine continetur; meliusque multo est Malachim, id est Regum, quam Malachoth, id est Regnorum dicere, non enim multarum gentium regna describit, sed unius israhelitici populi qui tribubus duodecim continetur. Quintus est Esaias, sextus Hieremias, septimus Hiezecihel, octavus liber duodecim Prophetarum, qui apud illos vocatur Thareasra.

Fourth is Malachim, that is, Of Kings, which is contained in the third and fourth volume of the Kingdoms; and it is much better to say Malachim, that is, Of Kings, than Malachoth, that is, Of Kingdoms, for it does not describe the kingdoms of many nations, but of one israelitic people, which is contained in twelve tribes. The fifth is Isaiah, the sixth Jeremiah, the seventh Ezekiel, the eighth the book of the twelve Prophets, which among them is called Thareasra.

Tertius ordo αγιογραφα possidet, et primus liber incipit ab Iob, secundus a David, quem quinque incisionibus et uno Psalmorum volumine conprehendunt. Tertius est Salomon, tres libros habens: Proverbia, quae illi Parabolas, id est Masaloth appellant, et Ecclesiasten, id est Accoeleth, et Canticum canticorum, quem titulo Sirassirim praenotant. Sextus est Danihel, septimus Dabreiamin, id est Verba dierum, quod significantius χρονικον totius divinae historiae possumus appellare, qui liber apud nos Paralipomenon primus et secundus scribitur; octavus Ezras, qui et ipse similiter apud Graecos et Latinos in duos libros divisus est, nonus Hester.

The third order possesses the hagiographa, and the first book begins with Job; the second with David, whom they comprise with five incisions and a single volume of Psalms. The third is Solomon, having three books: Proverbs, which they call Parabolas, that is Masaloth, and Ecclesiastes, that is Accoeleth, and the Song of songs, which they mark beforehand with the title Sirassirim. The sixth is Daniel, the seventh Dabreiamin, that is Words of the Days, which more significantly we can call the chronicon of the whole divine history,
which book among us is written as Paralipomenon, first and second; the eighth is Ezra, which likewise itself among the Greeks and Latins is divided into two books, the ninth Esther.

Atque ita fiunt pariter veteris legis libri viginti duo, id est Mosi quinque, Prophetarum octo, Agiograforum novem. Quamquam nonnulli Ruth et Cinoth inter Agiografa scriptitent et libros hos in suo putent numero supputandos, ac per hoc esse priscae legis libros viginti quattuor, quos sub numero viginti quattuor seniorum Apocalypsis Iohannis inducit adorantes Agnum et coronas suas prostratis vultibus offerentes, stantibus coram quattuor animalibus oculatis retro et ante, id est et in praeteritum et in futurum, et indefessa voce clamantibus: "Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus Dominus Deus omnipotens, qui erat et qui est et qui futurus est".

And thus there are alike twenty-two books of the old law, that is, five of Moses, eight of the Prophets, nine of the Hagiographa. Although some write Ruth and Cinoth among the Hagiographa and think that these books are to be reckoned in their own number, and through this that the books of the ancient law are twenty-four, which the Apocalypse of John presents under the number of the twenty-four elders, adoring the Lamb and offering their crowns with faces prostrate, standing before the four living creatures full of eyes behind and before, that is both into the past and into the future, and crying with an unwearied voice: "Holy, holy, holy Lord God almighty, who was and who is and who is to come".

Hic prologus Scripturarum quasi galeatum principium omnibus libris, quos de hebraeo vertimus in latinum, convenire potest, ut scire valeamus, quicquid extra hos est, inter apocrifa seponendum. Igitur Sapientia, quae vulgo Salomonis inscribitur, et Iesu filii Sirach liber et Iudith et Tobias et Pastor non sunt in canone. Macchabeorum primum librum hebraicum repperi, secundus graecus est, quod et ex ipsa frasin probari potest.

This prologue of the Scriptures, as a kind of helmeted beginning, can be suitable for all the books which we have translated from Hebrew into Latin, so that we may be able to know that whatever is outside these is to be set apart among the Apocrypha. Therefore Wisdom, which is commonly entitled “of Solomon,” and the book of Jesus son of Sirach, and Judith and Tobias and the Shepherd are not in the canon. Of the Maccabees I found the first book in Hebrew; the second is Greek, which can be proved even from its very phraseology.

Quae cum ita se habeant, obsecro te lector, ne laborem meum reprehensionem aestimes antiquorum. In tabernaculum Dei offert unusquisque quod polest: alii aurum et argentum et lapides pretiosos, alii byssum et purpuram, coccum offerunt et hyacinthum; nobiscum bene agetur, si obtulerimus pelles et caprarum pilos. Et tamen Apostolus contemptibiliora nostra magis necessaria iudicat.

Since these things stand thus, I beseech you, reader, not to esteem my labor a reprehension of the ancients. Into the tabernacle of God each one offers what he can: some gold and silver and precious stones, others offer byssus and purple, scarlet, and hyacinth; it will go well with us if we have offered skins and goats’ hair. And yet the Apostle judges our more contemptible things to be more necessary.

Unde et tota illa tabernaculi pulchritudo et per singulas species Ecclesiae praesentis futuraeque distinctio pellibus tegitur et cUiciis, ardoremque solis et iniuriam imbrium ea quae viliora sunt prohibent. Lege ergo primum Samuhel et Malachim meum; meum, inquam, meum: quicquid enim crebrius vertendo et emendando sollicitius et didicimus et tenemus, nostrum est. Et cum intellexeris quod antea nesciebas, vel interpretem me aestimato, si gratus es, vel παραφραστην, si ingratus, quamquam mihi omnino conscius non sim mutasse me quippiam de hebraica veritate.

Whence also the whole beauty of the tabernacle, and through its several species the distinction of the present and the future Church, is covered with skins and with cilicia, and those things which are more base ward off the heat of the sun and the injury of the rains. Read therefore first my Samuhel and Malachim; mine, I say, mine: for whatever by translating more frequently and by more solicitous emending we have both learned and hold more firmly is ours. And when you have understood what before you did not know, reckon me either an interpreter, if you are grateful, or παραφραστην, if ungrateful, although I am altogether conscious to myself that I have not changed anything of the Hebrew truth.

Certe si incredulus es, lege graecos codices et latinos et confer cum his opusculis, et ubicumque inter se videris discrepare, interroga quemlibet Hebraeorum cui magis accomodare debeas fidem, et si nostra firmaverit, puto quod eum non aestimes coniectorem, ut in eodem loco mecum similiter divinarit.

Certainly, if you are incredulous, read the Greek codices and the Latin ones and compare them with these opuscules, and wherever you shall see them disagree among themselves, ask any one of the Hebrews to whom you ought rather to accommodate your faith; and if he shall have confirmed ours, I suppose that you will not esteem him a conjecturer, seeing that in the same place he has divined similarly with me.

Sed et vos famulas Christi rogo, quae Domini discumbentis pretiosissimo fidei myro unguitis caput, quae nequaquam Salvatorem quaeritis in sepulchro, quibus iam ad Patrem Christus ascendit, ut contra latrantes canes, qui adversum me rabido ore desaeviunt et circumeunt civitatem atque in eo se doctos arbitrantur, si aliis detrahant, orationum vestrarum clypeos opponatis. Ego sciens humilitatem meam, illius semper sententiae recordabor: "Custodiam vias meas, ut non delinquam in lingua mea; posui ori meo custodiam, cum consisteret peccator adversum me; obmutui et humiliatus sum, et silui a bonis". explicit prologus

But I also beg you, handmaids of Christ, who anoint the head of the Lord as he reclines with the most precious myrrh of faith, who by no means seek the Savior in the sepulchre, for whom Christ has now ascended to the Father, that you set the shields of your prayers against the barking dogs, who rage against me with a rabid mouth and go around the city and suppose themselves learned in this, if they detract from others. I, knowing my humility, will always remember that sentence: "I will guard my ways, that I may not sin with my tongue; I have set a guard to my mouth, when the sinner stood against me; I was struck dumb and was humbled, and I kept silence even from good things." here ends the prologue

INCIPIT PROLOGUS SANCTI HIERONYMI IN LIBRO PARALIPOMENON

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF SAINT JEROME ON THE BOOK OF PARALIPOMENON

Si Septuaginta interpretum pura et ut ab eis in graecum versa est editio permaneret, superflue me, mi Cromati, episcoporum sanctissime atque doctissime, inpelleres, ut hebraea volumina latino sermone transferrem. Quod enim semel aures hominum occupaverat et nascentis Ecclesiae roboraverat fidem, iustum erat etiam nostro silentio conprobari. Nunc vero cum pro varietate regionum diversa ferantur exemplaria et germana illa antiquaque translatio corrupta sit atque violata, nostri arbitrii putas, aut e pluribus iudicare quid verum sit, aut novum opus in veteri opere condere, inludentibusque Iudaeis "cornicum", ut dicitur, "oculos configere". Alexandria et Aegyptus in Septuaginta suis Hesychium laudat auctorem, Constantinopolis usque Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat, mediae inter has provinciae palestinos codices legunt, quos ab Origene elaboratos Eusebius et Pamphilius vulgaverunt, totusque orbis hac inter se trifaria varietate conpugnat.

If the pure edition of the Seventy interpreters, and as it was turned into Greek by them, had remained, you would be urging me superfluously, my Cromatius, most holy and most learned of bishops, to translate the Hebrew volumes into the Latin tongue. For that which had once occupied the ears of men and had strengthened the faith of the nascent Church, it was just that it be approved even by our silence. Now indeed, since different exemplars circulate according to the variety of regions, and that genuine and ancient translation has been corrupted and violated, do you think it is our prerogative either to judge from among many what is true, or to found a new work upon an old work, and, with the Jews mocking, "to pierce, as it is said, the eyes of crows"? Alexandria and Egypt, in their Seventy, praise Hesychius as author; Constantinople as far as Antioch approves the copies of the martyr Lucian; the provinces lying between these read the Palestinian codices, which, worked over by Origen, Eusebius and Pamphilus published; and the whole world clashes among itself with this threefold variety.

Et certe Origenes non solum exempla conposuit quattuor editionum e regione singula verba describens, ut unus dissentiens statim ceteris inter se consentientibus arguatur, sed, quod maioris audaciae est, in editione Septuaginta Theodotionis editionem miscuit, asteriscis designans quae minus fuerint, et virgulis quae ex superfluo videantur adposita. Si igitur aliis licuit non tenere quod semel susceperant, et post septuaginta cellulas, quae vulgo sine auctore iactantur, singulas cellulas aperuere, hocque in ecclesiis legitur quod Septuaginta nescierunt, cur me non suscipiant Latini mei, qui inviolata editione veteri ita novam condidi, ut laborem meum Hebraeis et, quod his maius est, Apostolis auctoribus probem? Scripsi nuper librum De optimo genere interpretandi, ostendens illa de Evangelio: "Ex Aegypto vocavi filium meum" et: "Quoniam Nazareus vocabitur" et: "Videbunt in quem conpunxerunt" et illud Apostoli: "Quae oculus non vidit, nec auris audivit, et in cor hominis non ascenderunt, quae praeparavit Deus diligentibus se" ceteraque his similia in Hebraeorum libris inveniri.

And certainly Origen not only composed exemplars of the four editions, writing out single words of each in parallel, so that if one dissents it is at once convicted by the others agreeing among themselves, but—what is greater audacity—he mixed Theodotion’s edition into the edition of the Seventy, marking with asterisks the things that had been lacking, and with little virgules those which seem to have been added superfluously. If therefore it was permitted to others not to hold what they had once undertaken, and, after the seventy cells which are commonly bruited about without an author, they opened single cells, and that is read in the churches which the Seventy did not know, why should not my Latins receive me, who, with the old edition kept inviolate, have so established a new one that I prove my labor by Hebrew authors and—what is greater than these—by the Apostles as authorities? I have lately written a book On the Best Kind of Translating, showing that those things from the Gospel: "Out of Egypt I called my son" and: "For he shall be called a Nazarene" and: "They shall see him whom they pierced" and that saying of the Apostle: "Which eye has not seen, nor ear heard, and have not ascended into the heart of man, which God has prepared for those who love him" and the rest like these are found in the books of the Hebrews.

Certe Apostoli et Evangelistae Septuaginta interpretes noverant, et unde eis haec dicere quae in Septuaginta non habentur? Christus Deus noster utriusque Testamenti conditor in Evangelio secundum Iohannem, "Qui credit", inquit, "in me, sicut dixit Scriptura, flumina de ventre eius fluent aquae vivae". Utique scriptum est quod Salvator scriptum esse testatur.

Certainly the Apostles and the Evangelists knew the Septuagint interpreters, and whence had they these things to say which are not contained in the Septuagint? Christ our God, the founder of both Testaments, in the Gospel according to John, "‘He who believes,’ he says, ‘in me, as the Scripture has said, rivers of living water shall flow from his belly.’" Surely that is written which the Savior attests to be written.

Ubi scriptum est? Septuaginta non habent, apocrifa nescit Ecclesia; ad Hebraeos igitur revertendum est, unde et Dominus loquitur et discipuli exempla praesumunt. Haec pace veterum loquar et obtrectatoribus meis tantum respondeo, qui canino dente me rodunt, in publico detrahentes, legentes in angulis, idem et accusatores et defensores, cum in aliis probent quod in me reprobant, quasi virtus et vitium non in rebus sit, sed cum auctore mutetur.

Where is it written? The Seventy do not have it, the Church does not know the apocrypha; therefore it must be reverted to the Hebrew, whence both the Lord speaks and the disciples take their exemplars. These things I will speak with the peace of the ancients, and I make only this reply to my detractors, who gnaw me with a canine tooth, detracting in public, reading in corners, the same both accusers and defenders, since in others they approve what they disapprove in me, as if virtue and vice were not in the things, but were changed with their author.

Ceterum memini editionem Septuaginta translatorum olim de graeco emendatam tribuisse me nostris, nec inimicum debere aestimari eorum quos in conventu fratrum semper edissero. Et quod nunc Dabreiamin, id est Verba dierum, interpretatus sum, idcirco feci, ut inextricabiles moras et silvam nominum, quae scriptorum confusa sunt vitio, sensuumque barbariem apertius et per versuum cola digererem, "mihimet ipsi et meis" iuxta Hismenium "canens", si aures surdae sunt ceterorum. explicit prologus

Moreover, I remember that I once bestowed upon our people an edition of the Seventy translators emended from the Greek, and that I ought not to be reckoned an enemy of those whom I always expound in the convent of the brethren. And the fact that now I have interpreted Dabreiamin, that is, the Words of the Days, I did for this reason: that I might digest more openly, and by the cola of the verses, the inextricable delays and the forest of names, which are confused by the fault of the scribes, and the barbarism of senses—“singing to myself and to mine,” according to Hismenium, if the ears of the rest are deaf. the prologue ends

INCIPIT PROLOGUS EUSEBII HIERONYMI IN LIBRO EZRAE

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF EUSEBIUS HIERONYMUS IN THE BOOK OF EZRA

Utrum difficilius sit facere quod poscitis an negare necdum statui; nam neque vobis aliquid imperantibus abnuere sententiae est, et magnitudo oneris inpositi ita cervices premit, ut ante sub fasce ruendum sit quam levandum. Accedunt ad hoc invidorum studia, qui omne quod scribimus reprehendendum putant et, interdum contra se conscientia repugnante, publice lacerant quae occulte legunt, in tantum ut clamare conpellar et dicere: "Domine, libera animam meam a labiis iniquis et a lingua dolosa." Tertius annus est quod semper scribitis atque rescribitis, ut Ezrae librum vobis de hebraeo transferam, quasi non habeatis graeca et latina volumina, aut quicquid illud est quod a nobis vertitur, non statim ab omnibus conspuendum sit. "Frustra autem," ut ait quidam, "niti neque aliud fatigando nisi odium quaerere, extremae dementiae est." Itaque obsecro vos, mi Domnion et Rogatiane carissime, ut privata lectione contenti librum non efferatis in publicum nec fastidiosis ingeratis cibos vitetisque eorum supercilium qui iudicare tantum de aliis et ipsi facere nil noverunt.

Whether it is more difficult to do what you ask or to refuse I have not yet determined; for it is not my principle to deny anything when you give commands, and the magnitude of the burden imposed so presses upon the neck that one must be about to collapse beneath the load before one can lift it. To this there are added the zeal of the envious, who think everything we write ought to be reprehended and, sometimes with their conscience resisting against themselves, publicly lacerate what they read in secret, to such an extent that I am compelled to cry out and say: "Lord, deliver my soul from wicked lips and from a deceitful tongue." It is the third year that you are always writing and writing again, that I should translate for you the book of Ezra from the Hebrew, as though you did not have Greek and Latin volumes, or that whatever it is which is translated by me were not at once to be spat upon by all. "To strive in vain, moreover," as someone says, "and by wearying to seek nothing other than hatred, is the extremity of madness." Therefore I beseech you, my Domnion and dearest Rogatianus, that, content with private reading, you do not carry the book out into public nor thrust food upon the fastidious, and that you avoid the supercilious brow of those who know only how to judge others and know nothing themselves how to do.

Si qui autem fratrum sunt quibus nostra non displicent, his tribuatis exemplar, admonentes ut hebraea nomina, quorum grandis in hoc volumine copia est, distincte et per intervalla transcribant. Nihil enim proderit emendasse librum, nisi emendatio librariorum diligentia conservetur.

But if there are any of the brethren to whom our work is not displeasing, grant an exemplar to these, admonishing them to transcribe the Hebrew names—of which there is a grand abundance in this volume—distinctly and with intervals. For it will profit nothing to have emended the book, unless the emendation be conserved by the diligence of the copyists.

Nec quemquam moveat, quod unus a nobis editus liber est, nec apocriforum tertii et quarti libri somniis delectetur; quia et apud Hebraeos Ezrae Neemiaeque sermones in unum volumen coartantur, et quae non habentur apud illos nec de viginti quattuor senibus sunt, procul abicienda. Si quis autem Septuaginta vobis opposuerit interpretes, quorum exemplaria varietas ipsa lacerata et eversa demonstrat, nec potest utique verum adseri quod diversum est, mittite eum ad Evangelia, in quibus multa ponuntur quasi de Veteri Testamento, quae apud Septuaginta interpretes non habentur, velut illud: "Quoniam Nazareus vocabitur", et: "Ex Aegypto vocavi filium meum", et: "Videbunt quem conpunxerunt", multaque alia quae latiori operi reservamus; et quaerite ab eo ubi scripta sint, cumque proferre non potuerit, vos legite de his exemplaribus quae nuper a nobis edita maledicorum cotidie linguis confodiuntur.

Nor let anyone be moved that one book has been issued by us, nor let him be delighted by the dreams of the third and fourth books of the apocrypha; because both among the Hebrews the discourses of Ezra and Nehemiah are compressed into one volume, and the things which are not held among them nor are from the twenty-four elders are to be cast far away. But if anyone should oppose to you the Seventy interpreters, whose exemplars their very diversity shows to be torn and overturned, nor indeed can that be asserted as true which is divergent, send him to the Gospels, in which many things are set as if from the Old Testament which are not found among the Seventy interpreters, for example this: "Because he shall be called a Nazarene", and: "Out of Egypt I called my son", and: "They will see him whom they pierced", and many other things which we reserve for a broader work; and ask of him where they have been written, and when he will not be able to produce them, you read from those exemplars which, newly published by us, are every day stabbed by the tongues of slanderers.

Sed, ut ad conpendium veniam, certe quod inlaturus sum aequissimum est. Edidi aliquid quod non habetur in graeco vel aliter habetur quam a me versum ,est. Quid interpretem laniant?

But, that I may come to a compendium, assuredly what I am about to bring forward is most equitable. I have issued something which is not contained in Greek, or is contained otherwise than as translated by me. Why do they lacerate the interpreter?

Interrogent Hebraeos et ipsis auctoribus translationi meae vel adrogent vel derogent fidem. Porro aliud est, si clausis, quod dicitur, oculis mihi volunt maledicere et non imitantur Graecorum studium et benivolentiam, qui post Septuaginta translatores iam Christi Evangelio coruscante Iudaeos et Hebionitas legis veteris interpretes, Aquilam videlicet, Symmachum et Theodotionem, et curiose legunt et per Origenis laborem in εξαπλοις ecclesiis dedicarunt. Quanto magis Latini grati esse deberent, quod exultantem cernerent Graeciam a se aliquid mutuari.

Let them question the Hebrews, and, with the very authors themselves as authorities, either accredit or derogate faith to my translation. Moreover, it is another matter if, with, as they say, their eyes shut, they wish to speak ill of me and do not imitate the zeal and benevolence of the Greeks, who after
the Seventy translators, with the Gospel of Christ now coruscating, both carefully read the interpreters of the old Law among the Jews and Ebionites—namely Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion—and through the labor of Origen in
the Hexapla dedicated them to the churches. How much more ought the Latins to be grateful, that they would see exultant Greece borrowing something from themselves.

Primum enim magnorum sumptuum est et infinitae difficultatis exemplaria posse habere omnia, deinde etiam qui habuerint et hebraei sermonis ignari sunt, magis errabunt ignorantes quis e multis verius dixerit. Quod etiam sapientissimo cuidam nuper apud Graecos accidit, ut interdum Scripturae sensum relinquens uniuscuiuslibet interpretis sequeretur errorem. Nos autem, qui hebraeae linguae saltim parvam habemus scientiam et latinus nobis utcumque sermo non deest, et de aliis magis possumus iudicare et ea quae ipsi intellegimus in nostra lingua expromere.

First, indeed, it is of great expenses and of infinite difficulty to be able to have all the exemplars; then even those who may have them, and are ignorant of the Hebrew speech, will err the more, not knowing who among the many has spoken more truly. This also recently befell a certain most wise man among the Greeks, such that, sometimes leaving the sense of Scripture, he followed the error of any single interpreter. But we, who have at least a small knowledge of the Hebrew language, and to whom the Latin speech is not altogether lacking, can both judge more concerning others and express in our own language the things which we ourselves understand.

Itaque licet excetra sibilet "victorque Sinon incendia iactet", numquam meum iuvante Christo silebit eloquium, etiam praecisa lingua balbuttiet. Legant qui volunt, qui nolunt abiciant. Eventilent apices, litteras calumnientur, magis vestra caritate provocabor ad studium, quam illorum detractione et odio deterrebor.

Therefore, though the viper hiss and “victorious Sinon should cast fires,” never, with Christ helping me, will my eloquence be silent; even with the tongue cut off, it will stammer. Let those who wish read; those who do not, cast it aside. Let them scrape away the apices, let them calumniate the letters; I shall be more provoked to zeal by your charity than deterred by their detraction and hatred.

explicit prologus

here ends the prologue

INCIPIT PROLOGUS TOBIAE

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF TOBIAS

Cromatio et Heliodoro episcopis Hieronymus in Domino salutem. Mirari non desino exactionis vestrae instantiam. Exigitis enim, ut librum chaldeo sermone conscriptum ad latinum stilum traham, librum utique Tobiae, quem Hebraei de catalogo divinarum Scripturarum secantes, his quae Agiografa memorant manciparunt.

To Cromatius and Heliodorus, bishops, Jerome, greeting in the Lord. I do not cease to marvel at the urgency of your exaction. For you demand that I draw into Latin style a book composed in the Chaldean tongue—the book, namely, of Tobias—which the Hebrews, cutting it off from the catalogue of the divine Scriptures, have consigned to those writings which the Hagiographa commemorate.

Feci satis desiderio vestro, non tamen meo studio. Arguunt enim nos Hebraeorum studia et inputant nobis, contra suum canonem latinis auribus ista transferre. Sed melius esse iudicans Pharisaeorum displicere iudicio et episcoporum iussionibus deservire, institi ut potui, et quia vicina est Chaldeorum lingua serrnoni hebraico, utriusque linguae peritissimum loquacem repperiens, unius diei laborem arripui et quicquid ille mihi hebraicis verbis expressit, haec ego accito notario, sermonibus latinis exposui.

I have satisfied your desire, yet not my own zeal. For the zeal of the Hebrews arraigns us and imputes to us that we are translating these things for Latin ears against their canon. But judging it better to displease the judgment of the Pharisees and to serve the commands of the bishops, I pressed on as I could; and because the tongue of the Chaldeans is near to the Hebrew speech, finding a most expert and loquacious man in both languages, I undertook the labor of a single day, and whatever he expressed to me in Hebrew words, I, with a notary summoned, set forth in Latin discourse.

Orationibus vestris mercedem huius operis conpensabo, cum gratum vobis didicero me quod iubere estis dignati conplesse. explicit prologus

I will compensate the reward of this work with your prayers, when I shall have learned that I have fulfilled, to your satisfaction, what you have deigned to order. here ends the prologue

INCIPIT PROLOGUS IUDITH

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF JUDITH

Apud Hebraeos liber Iudith inter Agiografa legitur; cuius auctoritas ad roboranda illa quae in contentione veniunt, minus idonea iudicatur. Chaldeo tamen sermone conscriptus inter historias conputatur. Sed quia hunc librum sinodus nicena in numero Sanctarum Scripturarum legitur conputasse, adquievi postulationi vestrae, immo exactioni, et sepositis occupationibus quibus vehementer artabar, huic unam lucubratiunculam dedi, magis sensum e sensu quam ex verbo verbum transferens.

Among the Hebrews the book of Judith is read among the Hagiographa; whose authority for strengthening those things which come into contention is judged less suitable. Yet, written in the Chaldean tongue, it is reckoned among histories. But because the nicene synod is read to have reckoned this book in the number of the Sacred Scriptures, I acquiesced to your request—nay rather to your exaction—and, with the occupations by which I was strongly constrained set aside, I devoted to this one little lucubration, translating rather sense out of sense than word from word.

Multorum codicum varietatem vitiosissiraam amputavi; sola ea quae intellegentia integra in verbis chaldeis invenire potui, latinis expressi.

I have amputated the most faulty variety of many codices; only those things which, with intact understanding, I was able to find in the Chaldean words, I have expressed in Latin.

Accipite Iudith viduam, castitatis exemplum, et triumphali laude perpetuis eam praeconiis declarate. Hanc enim non solum feminis, sed et viris imitabilem dedit, qui, castitatis eius remunerator, virtutem talem tribuit, ut invictum omnibus hominibus vinceret, insuperabilem superaret. explicit prologus

Receive Judith the widow, an example of chastity, and declare her with triumphal praise by perpetual proclamations. For he gave her as imitable not only to women but also to men, who, the rewarder of her chastity, granted such virtue that she might vanquish the one unconquered by all men, and surmount the insuperable. here ends the prologue

INCIPIT PROLOGUS HESTER

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF ESTHER

Librum Hester variis translatoribus constat esse vitiatum. Quem ego de archivis Hebraeorum elevans verbum e verbo pressius transtuli. Quem librum editio vulgata laciniosis hinc inde verborum funibus trahit, addens ea quae ex tempore dici poterant et audiri, sicut solitum est scolaribus disciplinis sumpto themate excogitare, quibus verbis uti potuit qui iniuriam passus est vel ille qui iniuriam fecit.

The Book of Esther is agreed to have been vitiated by various translators. Which I, lifting it from the archives of the Hebrews, translated more closely, word for word. Which book the common edition drags with ragged, tattered ropes of words here and there, adding those things that could be said and heard ex tempore, just as it is customary in scholastic disciplines, once the theme has been taken up, to think up—that is, words which could be used by the one who has suffered an injury or by the one who has done the injury.

Vos autem, o Paula et Eustochium, quoniam et bibliothecas Hebraeorum studuistis intrare et interpretum certamina conprobastis, tenentes Hester hebraicum librum, per singula verba nostram translalionem aspicite, ut possitis agnoscere me nihil etiam augmentasse addendo, sed fideli testimonio simpliciter, sicut in hebraeo habetur, historiam hebraicam latinae linguae tradidisse. Nec affectamur laudes hominum nec vituperationes expavescimus. Deo enim placere curantes minas hominum penitus non timemus,quoniam"dissipat Deus ossa eorum qui hominibus placere desiderant" et secundum Apostolum qui huiusmodi sunt "servi Christi esse non possunt". explicit prologus

But you, O Paula and Eustochium, since you have also been eager to enter the libraries of the Hebrews and have approved the contests of translators, holding the Hebrew book of Esther, look upon our translation word by word, so that you may be able to recognize that I have not even augmented anything by adding, but with faithful testimony, simply, just as it is in Hebrew, have handed down the Hebrew history to the Latin tongue. Nor do we court the praises of men, nor do we quake at censures. For, caring to please God, we do not at all fear the threats of men,because"God scatters the bones of those who desire to please men" and, according to the Apostle, those of this sort "cannot be servants of Christ". here ends the prologue

INCIPIT PROLOGUS SANCTI HIERONYMI IN LIBRO IOB

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF SAINT JEROME ON THE BOOK OF JOB

Cogor per singulos Scripturae divinae libros adversariorum respondere maledictis, qui interpretationem meam reprehensionem Septuaginta interpretum criminantur, quasi non et apud Graecos Aquila, Symmachus et Theodotion vel verbum e verbo, vel sensum de sensu, vel ex utroque commixtum et medie temperatum genus translationis expresserint, et omnia Veteris Instrumenti volumina Origenes obelis asteriscisque distinxerit, quos vel additos vel de Theodotione sumptos translationi antiquae inseruit, probans defuisse quod additum est. Discant igitur obtrectatores mei recipere in toto quod in partibus susceperunt aut interpretationem meam cum asteriscis suis radere. Neque enim fieri potest, ut quos plura intermisisse susceperint, non eosdem etiam in quibusdam errasse fateantur, praecipue in Iob, cui si ea quae sub asteriscis addita sunt subtraxeris, pars maxima detruncabitur.

I am compelled, through the several books of divine Scripture, to answer the insults of adversaries, who allege that my translation is a reproach of the Seventy translators, as though not even among the Greeks Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion had exhibited a kind of translation either word-from-word, or sense-from-sense, or mixed from both and tempered in the middle; and as though Origen had not distinguished all the volumes of the Old Testament with obeli and asterisks, which, whether added or taken from Theodotion, he inserted into the ancient translation, proving that what was added had been lacking. Let my detractors, therefore, learn to receive in whole what they have received in parts, or to scrape off my translation together with its asterisks. For it cannot be that those whom they have acknowledged to have omitted more things they do not also confess to have erred in certain points—especially in Job, from which, if you subtract the things that have been added under asterisks, the greatest part will be lopped off.

Et hoc dumtaxat apud Graecos. Ceterum apud Latinos ante eam translationem quam sub asteriscis et obelis nuper edidimus, septingenti ferme aut octingenti versus sunt, ut decurtatus et laceratus conrosusque liber foeditatem sui publice legentibus praebeat. Haec autem translatio nullum de veteribus sequitur interpretem, sed ex ipso hebraico arabicoque sermone et interdum syro, nunc verba, nunc sensus, nunc simul utrumque resonabit.

And this only among the Greeks. But among the Latins, before that translation which under asterisks and obeli we have recently published, there are roughly seven hundred or eight hundred verses, so that the book, curtailed and lacerated and gnawed, offers its foulness to those reading publicly. Moreover, this translation follows none of the old interpreters, but from the Hebrew itself and the Arabic tongue, and sometimes the Syriac, now the words, now the sense, now both together it will resound.

Obliquus enim etiam apud Hebraeos totus liber fertur et lubricus et quod graece rethores vocant εσχηματισμενος dumque aliud loquitur aliud agit, ut si velis anguillam aut murenulam strictis tenere manibus, quanto fortius presseris, tanto citius elabitur. Memini me ob intellegentiam huius voluminis lyddeum quemdam praeceptorem qui apud Hebraeos primas habere putabatur, non parvis redemisse nummis, cuius doctrina an aliquid profecerim nescio, hoc unum scio non potuisse me interpretari nisi quod ante intellexeram.

For even among the Hebrews the whole book is reported as oblique and slippery, and what the rhetors in Greek call
schematized
and while it says one thing it does another, as if you wished to hold an eel or a little moray in tightly clenched hands—the harder you press, the more quickly it slips away. I remember that, for the understanding of this volume, I engaged for no small sums a certain Lyddaean teacher, who was thought to hold first rank among the Hebrews; whether by his doctrine I profited anything I do not know—this one thing I know: that I could not interpret anything except what I had understood beforehand.

A principio itaque voluminis usque ad verba Iob apud Hebraeos prosa oratio est. Porro a verbis Iob in quibus ait: "Pereat dies in qua natus sum et nox in qua dictum est: Conceptus est homo" usque ad eum locum, ubi ante finem voluminis scriptum est: "Idcirco ipse me reprehendo et ago paenitentiam in favilla et cinere", exametri versus sunt, dactilo spondeoque currentes et propter linguae idioma crebro recipientes et alios pedes non earundem syllabarum, sed eorundem temporum. Interdum quoque rithmus ipse dulcis et tinnulus fertur numeris lege solutis, quod metrici magis quam simplex lector intellegunt.

From the beginning of the volume up to the words of Job, among the Hebrews it is prose oration. Moreover, from the words of Job in which he says:
"Let the day perish on which I was born, and the night in which it was said: A man is conceived"
up to that place where, before the end of the volume, it is written:
"Therefore I reprehend myself and do penance in dust and ashes", there are hexameter verses, running with dactyl and spondee, and, on account of the idiom of the language, often admitting also other feet, not of the same syllables, but of the same times. Sometimes too the rhythm itself, sweet and tinkling, is borne along in measures with the law loosened, which the metrical poets understand more than the simple reader.

A supradicto autem versu usque ad finem libri parvum comma quod remanet prosa oratione contexitur. Quod si cui videtur incredulum, metra scilicet esse apud Hebraeos et in morem nostri Flacci graecique Pindari et Alchei et Saffo vel Psalterium vel Lamentationes Hieremiae vel omnia ferme Scripturarum cantica conprehendi, legat Filonem, Iosepphum, Origenem, caesariensem Eusebium, et eorum testimonio me verum dicere conprobabit.

But from the above-mentioned verse up to the end of the book the small clause that remains is woven together in prose speech. If this seems unbelievable to anyone, namely that there are meters among the Hebrews and that, in the manner of our Flaccus and the Greek Pindar and Alcaeus and Sappho, either the Psalter or the Lamentations of Jeremiah or almost all the songs of the Scriptures are comprehended, let him read Philo, Josephus, Origen, the Caesarean Eusebius, and by their testimony he will prove that I speak the truth.

Audiant quapropter canes mei idcirco me in hoc volumine laborasse, non ut interpretationem antiquam reprehenderem, sed ut ea quae in illa aut obscura sunt aut omissa aut certe scriptorum vitio depravata, manifestiora nostra interpretatione fierent, qui et hebraeum sermonem ex parte didicimus et in latino paene ab ipsis incunabulis inter grammaticos et rethores et philosophos detriti sumus. Quod si apud Graecos, post Septuaginta editionem, iam Christi Evangelio coruscante, iudaeus Aquila, et Symmachus ac Theodotion iudaizantes heretici sunt recepti, qui multa mysteria Salvatoris subdola interpretatione celarunt et tamen in εξαπλοις habentur apud ecclesias et explanantur ab ecclesiasticis viris, quanto magis ego christianus, de parentibus christianis et vexillum crucis in mea fronte portans, cuius studium fuit omissa repetere, depravata corrigere et sacramenta Ecclesiae puro et fideli aperire sermone, vel a fastidiosis vel a malignis lectoribus non debeo reprobari? Habeant qui volunt veteres libros vel in membranis purpureis auro argentoque descriptos, vel uncialibus, ut vulgo aiunt, litteris onera magis exarata quam codices, dum mihi meisque permittant pauperes habere scidulas et non tam pulchros codices quam emendatos.

Let my dogs therefore hear that I have for this reason labored in this volume, not in order to reprehend the ancient translation, but so that those things in it which are either obscure or omitted or certainly depraved by the fault of scribes might be made more manifest by our translation—we who have learned the Hebrew speech in part and in Latin have been worn down almost from our very cradle among grammarians and rhetors and philosophers. And if among the Greeks, after the edition of the Seventy, with the Gospel of Christ now coruscating, the Jew Aquila, and Symmachus and Theodotion, Judaizing heretics, have been received, who hid many mysteries of the Savior by a crafty translation, and yet in the Hexapla they are held among the churches and are explained by ecclesiastical men, how much more should I, a Christian, from Christian parents and bearing the standard of the cross on my forehead—whose zeal has been to recover what was omitted, to correct what was depraved, and to open the sacraments of the Church with pure and faithful speech—not be rejected by fastidious or by malicious readers? Let those who will have ancient books, either written on purple parchments in gold and silver, or in uncial letters, as they commonly say—burdens rather incised than codices—so long as they permit me and mine to have poor little slips and codices not so beautiful as emended.

Utraque editio, et Septuaginta iuxta Graecos et mea iuxta Hebraeos, in latinum meo labore translata est. Eligat unusquisque quod vult et studiosum se magis quam malivolum probet. explicit prologus

Both editions, both the Seventy according to the Greeks and mine according to the Hebrews, have been translated into Latin by my labor. Let each person choose what he wishes and prove himself studious rather than malevolent. here ends the prologue

INCIPIT PRAEFATIO EUSEBII HIERONYMI IN LIBRO PSALMORUM

HERE BEGINS THE PREFACE OF EUSEBIUS HIERONYMUS IN THE BOOK OF PSALMS

Psalterium Romae dudum positus emendaram et iuxta Septuaginta interpretes, licet cursim, magna illud ex parte correxeram. Quod quia rursum videtis, o Paula et Eustochium, scriptorum vitio depravatum plusque antiquum errorem quam novam emendationem valere, cogitis ut veluti quodam novali scissum iam arvum exerceam et obliquis sulcis renascentes spinas eradicem, aequum esse dicentes, ut quod crebro male pullulat, crebrius succidatur. Unde consueta praefatione commoneo tam vos quibus forte labor iste desudat, quam eos qui exemplaria istiusmodi habere voluerint, ut quae diligenter emendavi, cum cura et diligentia transcribantur.

I had emended the Psalter, when long ago stationed at Rome, and according to the Seventy interpreters, though cursorily, I had corrected it for the most part. And because you see it again, O Paula and Eustochium, corrupted by the fault of the copyists, and that the ancient error prevails more than the new emendation, you compel me, as though on a certain new fallow, to work a field already cleft, and with oblique furrows to uproot the re-sprouting thorns, saying it is equitable that what often ill-sprouts be more often cut down. Whence, with the customary preface, I admonish both you, for whom perhaps this labor sweats itself out, and those who may have wished to have exemplars of this sort, that the things which I have diligently emended be transcribed with care and diligence.

Notet sibi unusquisque vel iacentem lineam vel signa radiantia, id est vel obelos vel asteriscos, et ubicumque virgulam viderit praecedentem, ab ea usque ad duo puncta quae inpressimus sciat in Septuaginta translatoribus plus haberi; ubi autem stellae similitudinem perspexerit, de hebraeis voluminibus additum noverit, aeque usque ad duo puncta, iuxta Theodotionis dumtaxat editionem qui simplicitate sermonis a Septuaginta interpretibus non discordat. Haec ego et vobis et studioso cuique fecisse me sciens, non ambigo multos fore qui vel invidia vel supercilio "malint contemnere videri praeclara quam discere", et e turbulento magis rivo quam de purissimo fonte potare. explicit praefatio

Let each person note for himself either the horizontal line or the radiant signs, that is, either obeli or asterisks; and wherever he shall see a preceding virgule, let him know that from it up to the two points which we have imprinted, more is contained in the translators of the Seventy; but when he shall have perceived the likeness of a star, let him know that it has been added from the Hebrew volumes, likewise up to the two points, according only to the edition of Theodotion, who in the simplicity of diction does not disagree with the interpreters of the Seventy. This, knowing that I have done both for you and for every studious person, I do not doubt there will be many who, either from envy or from superciliousness, “would rather seem to despise notable things than to learn,” and who would drink rather from a turbulent rill than from the most pure fountain. the preface ends

INCIPIT ALIA EIUSDEM PRAEFATIO

HERE BEGINS ANOTHER PREFACE OF THE SAME

Eusebius Hieronymus Sofronio suo salutem. Scio quosdam putare Psalterium in quinque libros esse divisum, ut ubicumque apud Septuaginta interpretes scriptum est γενοιτο γενοιτο, id est fiat fiat, finis librorum sit, pro quo in hebraeo legitur amen amen. Nos autem Hebraeorum auctoritatem secuti et maxime Apostolorum qui semper in Novo Testamento Psalmorum librum nominant, unum volumen adserimus.

Eusebius Hieronymus sends greeting to his Sophronius. I know that some think the Psalter is divided into five books, so that wherever in the Seventy interpreters it is written γενοιτο γενοιτο, that is, let it be, let it be, there is the end of the books; for which in the Hebrew it is read amen, amen. We, however, following the authority of the Hebrews and especially of the Apostles, who always in the New Testament name the book of Psalms, assert one volume.

Psalmos quoque omnes eorum testamur auctorum qui ponuntur in titulis, David scilicet et Asaph et Idithun, filiorum Core, Eman Ezraitae, Mosi et Salomonis et reliquorum, quos Ezras uno volumine conprehendit. Si enim amen, pro quo Aquila transtulit πεπιστωμενως, in fine tantum librorum ponitur et non interdum aut in exordio aut in calce sermonis sive sententiae, numquam et Salvator in Evangelio loqueretur: "Amen amen dico vobis", et Pauli epistulae in medio illud opere continerent, Moses quoque et Hieremias et ceteri in hunc modum multos haberent libros, qui in mediis voluminibus suis amen frequenter interserunt, sed et numerus viginti duorum hebraicorum librorum et mysterium eiusdem numeri commutabitur. Nam et titulus ipse hebraicus Sephar Thallim, quod interpretatur Volumen hymnorum, apostolicae auctoritati congruens, non plures libros, sed unum volumen ostendit.

We also attest all the Psalms to be of those authors who are set in the titles—namely David and Asaph and Idithun, the sons of Korah, Heman the Ezrahite, Moses and Solomon, and the rest—whom Ezra comprised in one volume. For if “amen,” for which Aquila translated “assuredly” (pepištōménōs), is set only at the end of books and not sometimes either at the beginning or at the close of a discourse or sentence, never would the Savior in the Gospel speak: “Amen, amen I say to you,” and the epistles of Paul would contain that in the middle of the work; Moses too and Jeremiah and the others would have many books in this fashion, who frequently insert “amen” in the middles of their volumes; and the number of the twenty-two Hebrew books and the mystery of the same number would be altered. For even the Hebrew title itself, Sephar Thallim, which is interpreted “Volume of Hymns,” congruent with apostolic authority, shows not many books but one volume.

Quia igitur nuper cum Hebraeo disputans quaedam pro Domino Salvatore de Psalmis testimonia protulisti, volensque ille te eludere, per sermones paene singulos adserebat non ita haberi in hebraeo ut tu de Septuaginta interpretibus opponebas, studiosissime postulasti ut post Aquilam, Symmachum et Theodotionem novam editionem latino sermone transferrem. Aiebas enim te magis interpretum varietate turbari et amore quo laberis vel translatione vel iudicio meo esse contentum. Unde inpulsus a te, cui et quae non possum negare non possum, rursum me obtrectatorum latratibus tradidi, maluique te vires potius meas quam voluntatem in amicitia quaerere.

Since therefore, recently disputing with a Hebrew, you brought forward certain testimonies from the Psalms on behalf of the Lord Savior, and he, wishing to elude you, kept asserting in almost every discourse that it is not so in the Hebrew as you were opposing from the Seventy interpreters, you most studiously requested that, after Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, I translate a new edition in the Latin tongue. For you said that you are more disturbed by the variety of the interpreters, and that, by the affection into which you slip, you would be content either with my translation or my judgment. Wherefore, impelled by you—to whom, and what you ask, I cannot refuse—I have once more delivered myself over to the barkings of detractors, and I have preferred that, in friendship, you seek my strengths rather than my willingness.

Certe confidenter dicam et multos huius operis testes citabo, me nihil dumtaxat scientem de hebraica veritate mutasse. Sicubi ergo editio mea a veteribus discreparit, interroga quemlibet Hebraeorum et liquido pervidebis me ab aemulis frustra lacerari, qui "malunt contemnere videri praeclara quam discere", perversissimi homines. Nam cum semper novas expetant voluptates, et gulae eorum vicina maria non sufficiant, cur in solo studio Scripturarum veteri sapore contenti sunt?

Surely I will speak confidently, and I will cite many witnesses of this work, that I, at least to my knowledge, have changed nothing of the Hebraic truth. If therefore anywhere my edition has differed from the old versions, ask any one of the Hebrews and you will clearly perceive that I am torn to pieces in vain by rivals, who
"prefer to seem to despise brilliant things rather than to learn," most perverse men. For whereas they are always eagerly seeking new pleasures, and the neighboring seas do not suffice for their gluttony, why are they content with an old savor in the study alone of the Scriptures?

Nec hoc dico, quo praecessores meos mordeam, aut quicquam de his arbitrer detrahendum quorum translationem diligentissime emendatam olim meae linguae hominibus dederim; sed quod aliud sit in ecclesiis Christo credentium Psalmos legere, aliud Iudaeis singula verba calumniantibus respondere.

Nor do I say this in order to bite my predecessors, or think that anything should be detracted from those whose translation, most diligently emended, I once gave to the people of my tongue; but because it is one thing in the churches of those believing in Christ to read the Psalms, another to answer the Jews as they calumniate each single word.

Quod opusculum meum si in graecum ut polliceris transtuleris, αντιφιλονεικων τοις διασυρουσιν, et inperitiae meae doctissimos quoque viros testes facere volueris, dicam tibi illud Oratianum: "In silvam ne ligna feras". Nisi quod hoc habebo solamen, si in labore communi intellegam mihi et laudem et vituperationem tecum esse communem. Valere te in Domino Iesu cupio et meminisse mei. explicit praefatio

If, as you promise, you translate this little work of mine into Greek, counter-contending against those who drag me about in derision, and you will have wished to make even most learned men witnesses of my inexperience, I will say to you that Horatian line: "Do not carry wood into the forest". Unless that I shall have this solace, if in our common labor I understand that both praise and vituperation are common to me with you. I desire you to be well in the Lord Jesus and to remember me. here ends the preface

INCIPIT PROLOGUS HIERONYMI IN LIBRIS SALOMONIS

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF JEROME ON THE BOOKS OF SOLOMON

Cromatio et Heliodoro episcopis Hieronymus. Iungat epistula quos iungit sacerdotium, immo carta non dividat quos Christi nectit amor. Commentarios in Osee Amos Zacchariam Malachiamque poscitis; scripsissem, si licuisset per valitudinem.

Jerome to the bishops Cromatius and Heliodorus. Let the epistle join those whom the priesthood joins; nay rather, let not the paper divide those whom the love of Christ binds. You ask for commentaries on Hosea, Amos, Zechariah, and Malachi; I would have written them, if my health had permitted.

Mittitis solacia sumptuum, notarios nostros et librarios sustentatis, ut vobis potissimum nostrum sudet ingenium. Et ecce ex latere frequens turba diversa poscentium, quasi aut aequum sit me vobis esurientibus aliis laborare, aut in ratione dati et accepti cuiquam praeter vobis obnoxius sim. Itaque longa aegrotatione fractus, ne penitus hoc anno reticerem et apud vos mutus essem, tridui opus vestro nomini consecravi, interpretationem videlicet trium Salomonis voluminum, Masloth, quas Hebraei Parabolas, vulgata editio Proverbia vocat, Coeleth, quem graece Ecclesiasten, latine Contionatorem possumus dicere, Sirassirim, quod in nostram linguam vertitur Canticum canticorum.

You send alleviations of expenses, you support our notaries and copyists, so that our talent may sweat chiefly for you. And behold, on the side, a frequent throng of people asking for different things, as if it were either fair that I labor for others while you are hungry, or that in the account of things given and received I were beholden to anyone besides you. Therefore, broken by a long sickness, lest I keep entirely silent this year and be mute with you, I consecrated a three-days’ work to your name—namely, the interpretation of three volumes of Solomon: Masloth, which the Hebrews call Parabolas, the Vulgate edition calls Proverbs; Coeleth, which in Greek we can call Ecclesiastes, in Latin the Concionator; Sirassirim, which in our language is rendered the Song of Songs.

Fertur et παναρετος Iesu filii Sirach liber, et alius ψευδεπιγραφος qui Sapientia Salomonis inscribitur. Quorum priorem et hebraicum repperi, non Ecclesiasticum ut apud Latinos, sed Parabolas praenotatum; cui iuncti erant Ecclesiastes et Canticum canticorum, ut similitudinem Salomonis non solum librorum numero, sed et materiarum genere coaequaret. Secundus apud Hebraeos nusquam est, quin et ipse stilus graecam eloquentiam redolet; et nonnulli scriptorum veterum hunc Iudaei Filonis adfirmant.

It is reported also that there is the “Panaretos” (All‑Virtuous) book of Jesus, son of Sirach, and another
pseudepigraphal
which is entitled the Wisdom of Solomon. Of which the former too I found in Hebrew, not “Ecclesiasticus” as among the Latins, but marked “Parables”; to which were joined Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, so that the likeness to Solomon might be matched not only in the number of books but also in the kind of subject‑matters. The second is nowhere among the Hebrews; indeed its very style exhales Greek eloquence; and some of the ancient writers affirm this to be by Philo the Jew.

Sicut ergo Iudith et Tobi et Macchabeorum libros legit quidem Ecclesia, sed inter canonicas scripturas non recipit, sic et haec duo volumina legat ad aedificationem plebis, non ad auctoritatem ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam.

As therefore the Church indeed reads the books of Judith and Tobit and of the Maccabees, but does not receive them among the Canonical Scriptures, so also let it read these two volumes for the edification of the people, not for confirming the authority of ecclesiastical dogmas.

Si cui sane Septuaginta interpretum magis editio placet, habet eam a nobis olim emendatam; neque enim sic nova condimus ut vetera destruamus. Et tamen, cum diligentissime legerit, sciat magis nostra intellegi, quae non in tertium vas transfusa coacuerint, sed statim de praelo purissimae commendata testae suum saporem servaverint. explicit prologus.

If indeed the edition of the Seventy interpreters pleases someone more, he has it as emended by us long ago; for neither do we thus put forth new things as to destroy the old. And yet, when he has read most diligently, let him know that ours is rather to be understood, which, not having been poured into a third vessel, has not coagulated, but straight from the press, having been committed to a most pure earthen jar, has kept its own flavor. the prologue ends.

INCIPIT PROLOGUS IN LIBRO IESU FILII SIRACH

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE IN THE BOOK OF JESUS SON OF SIRACH

Multorum nobis et magnorum per Legem et Prophetas aliosque qui secuti sunt illos sapientiam demonstratam, in quibus oportet laudare Israhel doctrinae et sapientiae causa; quia non solum ipsos loquentes necesse est peritos, sed etiam extraneos posse et dicentes et scribentes doctissimos fieri.

The wisdom of many and great men has been demonstrated to us through the Law and the Prophets and the others who followed them, among whom it is proper to praise Israel for the sake of doctrine and wisdom; for it is necessary that not only those who themselves speak be experienced, but that even outsiders can become most learned both in speaking and in writing.

Avus meus Iesus postquam se amplius dedit ad diligentiam lectionis Legis et Prophetarum et aliorum librorum qui nobis a parentibus nostris traditi sunt, volui et ipse scribere aliquid horum quae ad doctrinam et sapientiam pertinent, ut desiderantes discere et illorum periti facti magis magisque adtendant animo et confirmentur ad legitimam vitam.

After my grandfather Jesus devoted himself more to the diligence of the reading of the Law and the Prophets and the other books which have been handed down to us by our parents, I too wished to write something of those things which pertain to doctrine and wisdom, so that those desiring to learn and having been made expert in them may attend more and more with mind, and be confirmed unto a legitimate life.

Hortor itaque venire vos cum benevolentia et adtentiore studio lectionem facere, et veniam habere in illis in quibus videmur sequentes imaginem sapientiae et deficere in verborum conpositione. Nam deficiunt verba hebraica quando translata fuerint ad alteram linguam; non solum autem haec, sed et ipsa Lex et Prophetae ceteraque librorum non parvam habent differentiam quando inter se dicuntur.

I exhort you therefore to come with benevolence and to make the reading with more attentive zeal, and to have indulgence in those matters in which we seem, following the image of wisdom, to fail in the composition of words. For Hebrew words fail when they have been translated into another language; not only these, moreover, but the Law itself and the Prophets and the rest of the
books have no small difference when they are spoken among themselves.

Nam in octavo et tricesimo anno temporibus Ptolomei Euergetis regis, postquam perveni in Aegyptum et cum multum temporis ibi fecissem, inveni libros relictos non parvae neque contemnendae doctrinae.

For in the 38th year, in the times of King Ptolemy Euergetes, after I arrived in Egypt and when I had spent much time there, I found books left behind of no small nor contemptible doctrine.

Itaque bonum et necessarium putavi et ipse aliquam addere diligentiam et laborem interpretandi istum librum; et multa vigilia adtuli doctrinam in spatio temporis, ad illa quae ad finem ducunt librum dare, et illis qui volunt animum intendere et discere quemadmodum oporteat instituere mores qui secundum legem Domini proposuerunt vitam agere. explicit prologus

Therefore I myself judged it good and necessary to add some diligence and labor to the interpreting of this book; and through many vigils I brought doctrine within a span of time, to set forth the book on those things that lead to its end, and for those who wish to apply their mind and to learn in what manner it is proper to institute mores, who have proposed to live life according to the law of the Lord. the prologue ends

INCIPIT PROLOGUS HIERONYMI IN ISAIA PROPHETA

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF JEROME ON ISAIAH THE PROPHET

Nemo cum Prophetas versibus viderit esse descriptos, metro eos aestimet apud Hebraeos ligari et aliquid simile habere de Psalmis vel operibus Salomonis; sed quod in Demosthene et Tullio solet fieri, ut per cola scribantur et commata, qui utique prosa et non versibus conscripserunt, nos quoque utilitati legentium providentes interpretationem novam novo scribendi genere distinximus. Ac primum de Isaia sciendum quod in sermone suo disertus sit, quippe ut vir nobilis et urbanae elegantiae nec habens quicquam in eloquio rusticitatis admixtum. Unde accidit, ut prae ceteris florem sermonis eius translatio non potuerit conservare.

Let no one, when he has seen the Prophets set out in verses, judge that they are bound by meter among the Hebrews and have something similar to the Psalms or the works of Solomon; but, as is wont to be done in Demosthenes and Tullius, that they are written by cola and commata—who certainly composed in prose and not in verses—we too, providing for the utility of readers, have marked off the new translation by a new genus of writing. And first it must be known concerning Isaiah that he is eloquent in his discourse, indeed as a noble man and of urban elegance, having nothing of rusticity mixed into his eloquence. Whence it has happened that, beyond the rest, the translation has not been able to preserve the flower of his speech.

Deinde etiam hoc adiciendum, quod non tam propheta dicendus sit quam evangelista. Ua enim universa Christi Ecclesiaeque mysteria ad liquidum persecutus est, ut non eum putes de futuro vaticinari, sed de praeteritis historiam texere. Unde conicio noluisse tunc temporis Septuaginta interpretes fidei suae sacramenta perspicue ethnicis prodere, ne sanctum canibus et margaritas porcis darent, quae, cum hanc editionem legeritis, ab illis animadvertetis abscondita.

Then this too must be added: that he should be called not so much a prophet as an evangelist. For he has pursued to full clarity all the mysteries of Christ and of the Church, so that you would not think him to vaticinate about the future, but to weave a history of things past. Whence I conjecture that at that time the Seventy interpreters (the Septuagint) did not wish to disclose clearly to the Gentiles the sacraments (mysteries) of their faith, lest they give the holy to dogs and pearls to swine, which, when you shall have read this edition, you will notice to have been hidden by them.

Nec ignoro quanti laboris sit Prophetas intellegere nec facile quempiam posse iudicare de interpretatione, nisi intellexerit ante quae legerit, nosque patere morsibus plurimorum, qui stimulante invidia quod consequi non valent despiciunt. Sciens ergo et prudens in flammam mitto manum et nihilominus hoc a fastidiosis lectoribus precor, ut quomodo Graeci post Septuaginta translatores Aquilam et Symmachum et Theodotionem legunt vel ob studium doctrinae suae vel ut Septuaginta magis ex conlatione eorum intellegant, sic et isti saltem unum post priores habere dignentur interpretem. Legant prius, et postea despiciant, ne videantur non ex iudicio, sed ex odii praesumptione ignorata damnare.

Nor am I unaware how great a labor it is to understand the Prophets, nor that anyone can easily judge concerning a translation unless he shall first have understood what he has read; and that we lie open to the bites of many, who, envy goading them, despise what they are not able to attain. Knowing therefore and being prudent, I put my hand into the flame; and nonetheless I beg this from fastidious readers: that just as the Greeks, after the Seventy translators, read Aquila and Symmachus and Theodotion, either out of zeal for their doctrine or so that they may understand the Seventy more by collation with them, so also these men would deign to have at least one interpreter after the former. Let them read first, and afterwards despise, lest they seem to condemn unknown things not from judgment, but from a presumption of hatred.

Prophetavit autem Isaias in Hierusalem et in Iudaea, necdum decem tribubus in captivitatem ductis, ac de utroque regno nunc commixtim, nunc separatim texit oraculum. Et cum interdum ad praesentem respiciat historiam et post babyloniam captivitatem reditum populi significet in Iudaeam, tamen omnis ei cura de vocatione gentium et de adventu Christi est. Quem quanto plus amatis, o Paula et Eustochium, tanto magis ab eo petite, ut pro obtrectatione praesenti, qua me indesinenter aemuli laniant, ipse mihi mercedem restituat in futurum, qui scit me ob hoc in peregrinae linguae eruditione sudasse, ne Iudaei de falsitate scripturarum ecclesiis eius diutius insultarent. explicit prologus

Moreover Isaiah prophesied in Jerusalem and in Judea, before the ten tribes had been led into captivity; and concerning both kingdoms, now commixed, now separately, he weaves an oracle. And although he sometimes looks to present history and signifies the return of the people into Judea after the Babylonian captivity, nevertheless his whole care is for the vocation of the nations and the advent of Christ. The more you love him, O Paula and Eustochium, by so much the more ask from him that, in return for the present detraction by which rivals unceasingly tear me, he himself may restore to me a reward in the future—he who knows that on this account I have sweated in the erudition of a foreign tongue, lest the Jews should any longer insult his churches about the falsity of the Scriptures. explicit prologue

INCIPIT PROLOGUS HIERONYMI IN LIBRO HIEREMIAE PROPHETAE

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF JEROME IN THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH

Hieremias propheta, cui hic prologus scribitur, sermone quidem apud Hebraeos Esaia et Osee et quibusdam aliis prophetis videtur esse rusticior, sed sensibus par est, quippe qui eodem spiritu prophetaverit. Porro simplicitas eloquii de loco ei in quo natus est accidit. Fuit enim Anathothites, qui est usque hodie viculus tribus ab Hierosolymis distans milibus, sacerdos ex sacerdotibus et in matris utero sanctificatus, virginitate sua evangelicum virum Christi Ecclesiae dedicans.

Jeremiah the prophet, for whom this prologue is written, in speech indeed among the Hebrews seems to be more rustic than Isaiah and Hosea and certain other prophets, but in senses he is equal, since he prophesied by the same Spirit. Moreover, the simplicity of his eloquence befell him from the place in which he was born. For he was an Anathothite, which is to this day a small village three miles distant from Jerusalem, a priest from priests, and sanctified in his mother’s womb, by his virginity dedicating an evangelical man to the Church of Christ.

Hic vaticinari exorsus est puer et captivitatem urbis atque Iudaeae non solum spiritu, sed et oculis carnis intuitus est. Iam decem tribus Israhel Assyrii in Medos transtulerant, iam terras earum coloniae gentium possidebant. Unde in Iuda tantum et Beniamin prophetavit et civitatis suae ruinas quadruplici planxit alfabeto, quod nos mensurae metri versibusque reddidimus.

Here he began to vaticinate as a boy, and he beheld the captivity of the city and of Judaea not only in spirit, but also with the eyes of flesh. Already the Assyrians had transferred the ten tribes of Israel into the Medes; already their lands were possessed by colonies of the nations. Whence he prophesied only in Judah and Benjamin, and he lamented the ruins of his city with a quadruple alphabet, which we have rendered in the measure of meter and in verses.

Praeterea ordinem visionum, qui apud Graecos et Latinos omnino confusus est, ad pristinam fidem correximus. Librum autem Baruch, notarii eius, qui apud Hebraeos nec Iegitur nec habetur, praetermisimus, pro his omnibus maledicta ab aemulis praestolantes, quibus me necesse est per singula opuscula respondere. Et hoc patior, quia vos cogitis.

Moreover, we have corrected the order of the visions, which among the Greeks and Latins is altogether confused, to its pristine fidelity. But the Book of Baruch, his notary, which among the Hebrews is neither read nor regarded, we have passed over, awaiting, for all these things, the curses from rivals, to whom it is necessary for me to respond in each several opuscule. And this too I endure, because you compel me.

Ceterum ad conpendium mali rectius fuerat modum furori eorum silentio meo ponere, quam cotidie novi aliquid scriptitantem invidorum insaniam provocare. explicit prologus

However, for the curtailment of the evil, it would have been more correct to set a limit to their fury by my silence than, by daily scribbling something new, to provoke the insanity of the envious. the prologue ends

INCIPIT PROLOGUS HIEZECHIELIS PROPHETAE

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL

Hiezechiel propheta cum Ioachim rege Iudae captivus ductus est in Babylonem ibique his qui cum eo capti fuerant prophetavit, paenitentibus quod ad Hieremiae vaticinium se ultro adversariis tradidissent et viderent adhuc urbem Hierosolymam stare, quam ille casuram esse praedixerat. Tricesimo autem aetatis suae anno et captivitatis quinto exorsus est ad concaptivos loqui. Et eodem tempore, licet posterior, hic in Chaldea, Hieremias in Iudaea prophetaverunt.

Ezekiel the prophet was led captive with King Jehoiachin of Judah into Babylon, and there he prophesied to those who had been taken captive with him, repenting that, in accordance with Jeremiah’s vaticination, they had of their own accord delivered themselves over to their adversaries, and seeing the city Jerusalem still standing, which he had foretold would fall. In the 30th year of his age, and in the 5th of the captivity, he began to speak to his fellow-captives. And at the same time—although the later—this one in Chaldea and Jeremiah in Judea prophesied.

Sermo eius nec satis disertus nec admodum rusticus est, sed ex utroque medie temperatus. Sacerdos et ipse sicut et Hieremias, principia voluminis et finem magnis habens obscuritatibus involuta. Sed et vulgata eius editio non multum distat ab hebraico.

His discourse is neither sufficiently disert nor overly rustic, but tempered midway between the two. He himself is a priest, just as Jeremiah, having the beginnings of the volume and its end wrapped in great obscurities. But even his vulgate edition does not differ much from the Hebrew.

Unde satis miror quid causae extiterit, ut si eosdem in universis libris habemus interpretes, in aliis eadem, in aliis diversa transtulerint. Legite igitur et hunc iuxta translationem nostram quia, per cola scriptus et commata, manifestiorem sensum legentibus tribuit. Si autem amici mei et hunc subsannaverint, dicite eis quod nemo eos conpellat ut scribant.

Whence I greatly marvel what cause there has been, that, if we have the same interpreters in all the books, they have translated the same things in some, in others differently. Read, therefore, this one also according to our translation, because, written by cola and commata, it grants a more manifest sense to readers. But if my friends shall sneer at this one too, tell them that no one compels them to write.

Sed vereor ne illud eis eveniat, quod graece significantius dicitur, ut vocentur φαγολοιδοροι. explicit prologus

But I fear lest that befall them which is said more expressively in Greek: that they be called “slander-eaters.” here ends the prologue

INCIPIT PROLOGUS HIERONYMI IN DANIHELE PROPHETA

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF JEROME ON THE PROPHET DANIEL

Danihelem prophetam iuxta Septuaginta interpretes Domini Salvatoris ecclesiae non legunt, utentes Theodotionis editione, et hoc cur acciderit nescio. Sive enim, quia sermo chaldaicus est et quibusdam proprietatibus a nostro eloquio discrepat, noluerunt Septuaginta interpretes easdem lineas in translatione servare, sive sub nomine eorum ab alio nescio quo non satis chaldeam linguam sciente editus liber est, sive aliud quid causae extiterit ignorans, hoc unum adfirmare possum, quod multum a veritate discordet et recto iudicio repudiatus sit. Sciendum quippe Danihelem maxime et Ezram hebraicis quidem litteris, sed chaldaico sermone conscriptos, et unam Hieremiae pericopen, Iob quoque cum arabica lingua habere plurimam societatem.

Daniel the prophet, according to the Seventy interpreters, the churches of the Lord Savior do not read, using the edition of Theodotion; and why this has happened I do not know. For whether, because the discourse is Chaldaic and differs from our eloquence by certain properties, the Seventy interpreters were unwilling to preserve the same lines in translation; or whether under their name the book was published by some other I know not who, not sufficiently knowing the Chaldaean tongue; or whether some other cause existed—being ignorant—I can affirm this one thing: that it is much at variance with the truth and has been repudiated by right judgment. For it must be known that Daniel especially, and Ezra, are written indeed in Hebrew letters but in the Chaldaic speech, and one pericope of Jeremiah; Job also has very great fellowship with the Arabic language.

Denique et ego adulescentulus, post Quintiliani et Tullii lectionem ac flores rethoricos, cum me in linguae huius pistrinum reclusissem et multo sudore multoque tempore vix coepissem halantia stridentiaque verba resonare et quasi per cryptam ambulans rarum desuper lumen aspicere, inpegi novissime in Danihelem et tanto taedio affectus sum, ut desperatione subita omnem veterem laborem voluerim contemnere. Verum, adhortante me Hebraeo et illud mihi sua lingua crebrius ingerente: "labor omnia vicit inprobus", qui mihi videbar sciolus inter eos, coepi rursum discipulus esse chaldaicus. Et ut vere fatear, usque ad praesentem diem magis possum sermonem chaldeum legere et intellegere quam sonare.

Finally, even I, a young adolescent, after the reading of Quintilian and Tullius and the rhetorical flowers, when I had shut myself up in the mill of this language and with much sweat and much time had scarcely begun to make the panting and hissing words resound and, as if walking through a crypt, to behold from above a scant light, I at last stumbled upon Daniel and was affected with such tedium that, at sudden despair, I wished to contemn all my old labor. But, with a Hebrew exhorting me and more frequently impressing upon me in his own tongue that line:
“relentless labor conquered all,” I—who seemed to myself a sciolist among them—began again to be a Chaldaic disciple. And, to confess truly, down to the present day I can more read and understand the Chaldean speech than sound it.

Haec idcirco, ut difficultatem vobis Danihelis ostenderem, qui apud Hebraeos nec Susannae habet historiam nec hymnum trium puerorum nec Belis draconisque fabulas, quas nos, quia in tote orbe dispersae sunt, veru ante posito easque iugulante subiecimus, ne videremur apud inperitos magnam partem voluminis detruncasse. Audivi ego quendam de praeceptoribus Judaeorum, cum Susannae derideret historiam et a Graeco nescio quo diceret esse confictam, illud opponere quod Origeni quoque Africanus opposuit, ετυμολογιας has απο του σχινου σχισαι και απο του πρινου πρισαι de graeco sermone descendere. Cuius rei nos intellegentiam nostris hanc possumus dare, ut verbi gratia dicamus ab arbore ilice dixisse eum "ilico pereas" et a lentisco "in lentem te comminuat angelus" vel "non lente pereas" aut "lentus, id est flexibilis, ducaris ad mortem" sive aliud quid ad arboris nomen conveniens.

These things for this reason, that I might show you the difficulty of Daniel, who among the Hebrews has neither the history of Susanna nor the hymn of the three youths nor the fables of Bel and the dragon, which we, because they are dispersed through the whole world, have appended, with the spit set before and throttling them, lest we seem to the unskilled to have lopped off a great part of the volume. I myself heard a certain one of the preceptors of the Jews, when he was mocking the history of Susanna and was saying that it had been fabricated by some Greek, bring forward that which Africanus also opposed to Origen, namely that the etymologies—these, “to split from the schinos” and “to saw from the prinos”—descend from the Greek tongue. For the understanding of which matter we can give this in our own language, that, for example, we might say that from the tree ilex he said, “may you perish on the spot,” and from the lentisk, “may an angel grind you into a lentil,” or, “may you not perish slowly,” or, “pliant—that is, flexible—may you be led to death,” or anything else fitting to the name of the tree.

Deinde tantum fuisse otii tribus pueris cavillabatur, ut in camino aestuantis incendii metro luderent et per ordinem ad laudem Dei elementa omnia provocarent, aut quod miraculum divinaeque adspirationis indicium, vel draconem interfectum offa picis vel sacerdotum Belis machinas deprehensas, quae magis prudentia sollertis viri quam prophetali essent spiritu perpetrata. Cum vero ad Abacuc venerat et de Iudaea ad Chaldeam raptum discoforum lectitabat, quaerebat exemplum, ubi legissemus in toto Veteri Testamento quemquam sanctorum gravi volasse corpore et in puncto horae tanta terrarum spatia transisse. Cui cum quidam e nostris satis promptulus ad loquendum Hiezecihel adduxisset in medium et diceret eum de Chaldea in Iudeam fuisse translatum, derisit hominem et ex ipso volumine demonstravit Hiezecihelem in spiritu se vidisse transpositum.

Then he was jeering that the three youths had had so much leisure, that in the furnace of a seething conflagration they played with meter and, in order, summoned all the elements to the praise of God; or that a miracle and an indication of divine inspiration—either the dragon slain by a lump of pitch or the contrivances of the priests of Bel detected—were things accomplished rather by the prudence of a skillful man than by a prophetic spirit. But when he had come to Habakkuk and kept reading in the discourse about his being snatched from Judea to Chaldea, he sought an example where we had read in the whole Old Testament that any of the saints had flown with a heavy body and, in the puncto of an hour, had traversed such expanses of lands. When one of ours, quite prompt to speak, had brought Ezekiel into the midst and said that he had been translated from Chaldea into Judea, he mocked the man and from the very volume demonstrated that Ezekiel had seen himself transported in spirit.

Denique et Apostolum nostrum, videlicet ut eruditum virum et qui Legem ab Hebraeis didicisset, non fuisse ausum adfirmare se raptum in corpore, sed dixisse: "Sive in corpore sive extra corpus, nescio, Deus scit". His et talibus argumentis apocryfas in libro Ecclesiae fabulas arguebat.

Finally, he also maintained about our Apostle—namely, as a learned man and one who had learned the Law from the Hebrews—that he had not dared to affirm that he was caught up in the body, but had said: "Whether in the body or outside the body, I do not know, God knows." By these and such arguments he was arguing as apocryphal the fables in the Church’s book.

Super qua re lectoris arbitrio iudicium derelinquens, illud admoneo non haberi Danihelem apud Hebraeos inter Prophetas, sed inter eos qui Agiografa conscripserunt. In tres siquidem partes omnis ab eis Scriptura dividitur, in Legem, in Prophetas, in Agiografa, id est, in quinque et octo et undecim libros; de quo non est huius temporis disserere. Quae autem ex hoc propheta, immo contra hunc librum, Porphyrius obiciat, testes sunt Methodius, Eusebius, Apollinaris, qui multis versuum milibus eius vesaniae respondentes, nescio an curioso lectori satisfecerint.

On which matter, leaving the judgment to the reader’s discretion, I give this admonition: that Daniel is not held among the Hebrews among the Prophets, but among those who composed the Hagiographa. For indeed all Scripture is divided by them into three parts: into the Law, into the Prophets, into the Hagiographa, that is, into five and eight and eleven books; of which it is not the time now to discourse. But what Porphyry objects from this prophet—nay, rather against this book—witnesses are Methodius, Eusebius, Apollinaris, who, answering his madness with many thousands of verses, I know not whether they have satisfied the curious reader.

Unde obsecro vos, o Paula et Eustochium, fundatis pro me ad Dominum preces, ut quamdiu in hoc corpusculo sum, scribam aliquid gratum vobis, utile Ecclesiae, dignum posteris. Praesentium quippe iudiciis non satis moveor, qui in utramque partem aut amore labuntur aut odio. explicit prologus

Whence I beseech you, O Paula and Eustochium, pour forth prayers to the Lord on my behalf, that as long as I am in this little body, I may write something pleasing to you, useful to the Church, worthy for posterity. For I am not sufficiently swayed by the judgments of those present, who to either side slip either through love or through hate. the prologue ends

INCIPIT PROLOGUS DUODECIM PROPHETARUM

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE OF THE TWELVE PROPHETS

Non idem ordo est duodecim Prophetarum apud Hebraeos, qui et apud nos. Unde secundum id quod ibi legitur, hic quoque dispositi sunt. Osee commaticus est et quasi per sententias loquens.

The order of the Twelve Prophets is not the same among the Hebrews as among us. Hence, according to that which is read there, here too they are arranged. Hosea is commatic and, as it were, speaks by sentences.

Iohel planus in principiis, in fine obscurior. Et usque ad Malachiam habent singuli proprietates suas, quem Ezram scribam legisque doctorem Hebraei autumant. Et quia longum est nunc de omnibus dicere, hoc tantum vos, o Paula et Eustochium, admonitas volo, unum librum esse duodecim Prophetarum, et Osee συνχρονον Esaiae, Malachiam vero Aggei et Zacchariae fuisse temporibus.

Joel is plain in the beginnings, in the end more obscure. And up to Malachi each has his own properties, whom the Hebrews assert to be Ezra, the scribe and doctor of the law. And because it is too long now to speak about all, this only I wish you, O Paula and Eustochium, to be admonished: that the Twelve Prophets are one book, and that Hosea was synchronous with Isaiah, but that Malachi was in the times of Haggai and Zechariah.

In quibus autem tempus non praefertur in titulo, sub illis eos regibus prophetasse sub quibus et hii qui ante eos habent titulos prophetaverunt. explicit prologus

But in those in which the time is not set forth in the title, they are understood to have prophesied under those kings under whom also those before them—who have titles—prophesied. the prologue ends

INCIPIT PRAEFATIO SANCTI HIERONYMI PRESBYTERI IN EVANGELIO

HERE BEGINS THE PREFACE OF SAINT JEROME THE PRESBYTER ON THE GOSPEL

Beato papae Damaso Hieronymus. Novum opus facere me cogis ex veteri, ut post exemplaria Scripturarum toto orbe dispersa quasi quidam arbiter sedeam et, quia inter se variant, quae sint illa quae cum graeca consentiant veritate decernam. Pius labor, sed periculosa praesumptio, iudicare de ceteris ipsum ab omnibus iudicandum, senis mutare linguam et canescentem mundum ad initia retrahere parvulorum.

Jerome to the blessed Pope Damasus. You compel me to make a new work from the old, so that, amid the exemplars of the Scriptures scattered through the whole world, I should sit as a kind of arbiter and, since they vary among themselves, determine which are those that consent with the Greek verity. A pious labor, but a perilous presumption: for one who is himself to be judged by all to judge the rest, to change the tongue of an old man, and to draw back the graying world to the beginnings of little children.

Quis enim doctus pariter vel indoctus, cum in manus volumen adsumpserit et a saliva quam semel inbibit viderit discrepare quod lectitat, non statim erumpat in vocem, me falsarium me clamans esse sacrilegum, qui audeam aliquid in veteribus libris addere, mutare, corrigere? Adversum quam invidiam duplex causa me consolatur: quod et tu qui summus sacerdos es fieri iubes, et verum non esse quod variat etiam maledicorum testimonio conprobatur. Si enim latinis exemplaribus fides est adhibenda, respondeant quibus; tot sunt paene quot codices.

For what man, learned and unlearned alike, when he has taken a volume into his hands and sees to differ from the taste which he once imbibed what he keeps reading, does not straightway burst into outcry, shouting that I am a forger, that I am a sacrilegious man, because I dare to add, to change, to correct something in ancient books? Against which ill-will a twofold cause consoles me: both that you, who are the highest priest, order it to be done, and that what varies is shown, even by the testimony of the slanderers, not to be true. For if trust is to be given to the Latin exemplars, let them answer to which; they are almost as many as there are codices.

Sin autem veritas est quaerenda de pluribus, cur non ad graecam originem revertentes ea quae vel a vitiosis interpretibus male edita vel a praesumptoribus inperitis emendata perversius vel a librariis dormitantibus aut addita sunt aut mutata corrigimus? Neque vero ego de Veteri disputo Testamento, quod a septuaginta senioribus in graecam linguam versum tertio gradu ad nos usque pervenit. Non quaero quid Aquila quid Symmachus sapiant, quare Theodotion inter novos et veteres medius incedat; sit illa vera interpretatio quam Apostoli probaverunt.

But if, however, truth is to be sought from the many, why do we not, returning to the Greek origin, correct those things which either have been badly published by corrupt interpreters, or more perversely emended by presumptuous incompetents, or by dozing scribes have either been added or altered? Nor indeed am I disputing about the Old Testament, which, translated into the Greek tongue by seventy elders, has come down to us at the third remove. I do not inquire what Aquila, what Symmachus, opine, or why Theodotion goes midway between the new and the old; let that be the true interpretation which the Apostles approved.

De Novo nunc loquor Testamento, quod graecum esse non dubium est, excepto Apostolo Mattheo qui primus in Iudaea evangelium Christi hebraeis litteris edidit. Hoc certe cum in nostro sermone discordat et diversos rivulorum tramites ducit unio, de fonte quaerendum est. Praetermitto eos codices quos a Luciano et Hesychio nuncupatos paucorum hominum adserit perversa contentio, quibus utique nec in Veteri instrumento post septuaginta interpretes emendare quid licuit nec in Novo profuit emendasse, cum multarum gentium linguis Scriptura ante translata doceat falsa esse quae addita sunt.

Now I speak of the New Testament, which is not in doubt to be Greek, except for the Apostle Matthew, who first in Judea published the Evangel of Christ in Hebrew letters. Whenever this, in our tongue, is at variance, and unity leads off into diverse pathways of rivulets, the fountain must be sought. I pass over those codices which the perverse contention of a few men asserts to be named from Lucian and Hesychius, on which assuredly it was permitted neither in the Old Testament, after the Seventy interpreters, to amend anything, nor has it profited to have amended them in the New, since Scripture, translated beforehand into the tongues of many nations, teaches that the things which have been added are false.

Igitur haec praesens praefatiuncula pollicetur quattuor tantum evangelia, quorum ordo iste est Mattheus Marcus Lucas Iohannes, codicum graecorum emendata conlatione sed veterum. Quae ne multum a lectionis latinae consuetudine discreparent, ita calamo imperavimus ut, his tantum quae sensum videbantur mutare correctis, reliqua manere pateremur ut fuerant.

Therefore this present little preface promises only four Gospels, whose order is this: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, emended by collation of Greek codices, but ancient ones. Lest these differ too much from the custom of Latin reading, thus we commanded the pen that, with only those things corrected which seemed to change the sense, we allowed the rest to remain as they had been.

Canones quoque, quos Eusebius caesariensis episcopus alexandrinum secutus Ammonium in decem numeros ordinavit, sicut in graeco habentur expressimus, quo si quis de curiosis voluerit nosse quae in evangeliis vel eadem vel vicina vel sola sint, eorum distinctione cognoscat. Magnus siquidem hic in nostris codicibus error inolevit, dum quod in eadem re alius evangelista plus dixit, in alio quia minus putaverint addiderunt; vel dum eundem sensum alius aliter expressit, ille qui unum e quattuor primum legerat, ad eius exemplum ceteros quoque aestimaverit emendandos. Unde accidit ut apud nos mixta sint omnia, et in Marco plura Lucae atque Matthei, rursum in Mattheo Iohannis et Marci, et in ceteris reliquorum quae aliis propria sunt inveniantur.

We have also set forth the Canons which Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, following the Alexandrian Ammonius, arranged into 10 numbers, just as they are in Greek, so that if anyone of the curious should wish to know what in the Gospels is either the same, or neighboring, or solitary, he may learn it by their distinction. For indeed a great error has grown up in our codices, while, where on the same matter one evangelist said more, in another, because they thought there was less, they added; or while another expressed the same sense otherwise, the man who had first read one of the four judged that the others also should be emended according to its example. Whence it has happened that among us all things are mixed: and in Mark there are many things of Luke and of Matthew; in turn in Matthew things of John and of Mark; and in the others of the remainder are found things which are proper to others.

Cum itaque canones legeris qui subiecti sunt, confusionis errore sublato, et similia omnium scies et singulis sua quaeque restitues. In canone primo concordant quattuor, Mattheus Marcus Lucas Iohannes; in secundo tres, Mattheus Marcus Lucas; in tertio tres, Mattheus Lucas Iohannes; in quarto tres, Mattheus Marcus Iohannes; in quinto duo, Mattheus Lucas; in sexto duo, Mattheus Marcus; in septimo duo, Mattheus Iohannes; in octavo duo, Lucas Marcus; in nono duo, Lucas Iohannes; in decimo propria unusquisque, quae non habentur in aliis, ediderunt. Singulis evangeliis ab uno incipiens usque ad finem librorum dispar numerus increscit.

When therefore you have read the canons which are subjoined, with the error of confusion removed, you will know the similar passages of all and you will restore to each its own. In the first canon the four concord, Matthew Mark Luke John; in the second three, Matthew Mark Luke; in the third three, Matthew Luke John; in the fourth three, Matthew Mark John; in the fifth two, Matthew Luke; in the sixth two, Matthew Mark; in the seventh two, Matthew John; in the eighth two, Luke Mark; in the ninth two, Luke John; in the tenth each published his proper things, which are not contained in the others. For the individual gospels, beginning from 1 up to the end of the books, the numbering increases unevenly.

Hic nigro colore praescriptus sub se habet alium ex minio numerum discolorem, qui ad decem usque procedens indicat, prior numerus in quo sit canone requirendus. Cum igitur aperto codice verbi gratia illud sive illud capitulum scire volueris cuius canonis sit, statim ex subiecto numero doceberis, et recurrens ad principia in quibus canonum est distincta congeries, eodemque statim canone ex titulo frontis invento, illum quem quaerebas numerum eiusdem evangelistae qui et ipse ex inscriptione signatur invenies, atque e vicinia ceterorum tramitibus inspectis, quos numeros e regione habeant adnotabis; et cum scieris, recurres ad volumina singulorum et sine mora, reppertis numeris quos ante signaveras, repperies et loca in quibus vel eadem vel vicina dixerunt.

This heading, written in black color, has beneath itself another number in minium (red pigment), of a different color, which, proceeding up to ten, indicates in which canon the prior number is to be sought. Therefore, when, the codex being opened, you should wish, for example, to know of this or that chapter to which canon it belongs, straightway from the number set below you will be taught, and, reverting to the beginnings in which the assemblage of the canons is distinguished, and the same canon at once found from the title of the front, you will find that number which you were seeking of the same evangelist—who is himself marked by the inscription—and, the byways of the others in the vicinity having been inspected, you will note what numbers they have opposite; and when you have learned this, you will return to the volumes of each, and without delay, the numbers having been found which you had previously marked, you will also find the places in which they have said either the same things or things adjacent.

Opto ut in Christo valeas et memineris mei, papa beatissime. explicit praefatio

I wish that you may be well in Christ and that you remember me, most blessed pope. here ends the preface

INCIPIT PROLOGUS IN EPISTULIS PAULI APOSTOLI

HERE BEGINS THE PROLOGUE TO THE EPISTLES OF THE APOSTLE PAUL

Primum quaeritur quare post Evangelia, quae supplementum Legis sunt et in quibus nobis exempla et praecepta vivendi plenissime digesta sunt, voluerit Apostolus has epistulas ad singulas ecclesias destinare. Hac autem causa factum videtur, ut scilicet initia nascentis Ecclesiae novis causis existentibus praemuniret, ut et praesentia atque orientia resecaret vitia et post futuras excluderet quaestiones, exemplo prophetarum qui post editam legem Mosi, in qua omnia Dei mandata legebantur, nihilominus tamen doctrina sua rediviva semper populi conpressere peccata et propter exemplum libris ad nostram etiam memoriam transmiserunt. Deinde quaeritur cur non amplius quam decem epistulas ad ecclesias scripserit; decem sunt enim cum illa quae dicitur ad Hebraeos, nam reliquae quattuor ad discipulos specialiter sunt porrectae.

First it is asked why, after the Gospels—which are the supplement of the Law and in which for us the examples and precepts of living have been most fully digested—the Apostle wished to destine these epistles to individual churches. But it seems to have been done for this cause: namely, that he might pre-armor the beginnings of the nascent Church, new cases existing, so that he might resect both present and rising vices and thereafter exclude future questions, after the example of the prophets who, after the Law of Moses had been issued—in which all the commandments of God were read—nonetheless by their ever-revived doctrine always suppressed the sins of the people, and for the sake of example transmitted them in books even to our memory. Next it is asked why he wrote not more than ten epistles to the churches; for they are ten with that one which is called “to the Hebrews,” since the remaining four were proffered specifically to disciples.

Ut ostenderet Novum non discrepare a Veteri Testamento et se contra legem non facere Mosi, ad numerum primorum decalogi mandatorum suas epistulas ordinavit et, quot ille praeceptis a Pharaone instituit liberatos, totidem hic epistulis a diaboli et idolatriae servitute edocet adquisitos. Nam et duas tabulas lapideas duorum Testamentorum figuram habuisse viri eruditissimi tradiderunt.

In order to show that the New does not disagree with the Old Testament and that he was not acting against the law of Moses, he arranged his epistles to the number of the first commandments of the Decalogue; and as many as that one by precepts established as freed from Pharaoh, so many here he by epistles teaches as acquired from the servitude of the devil and of idolatry. For the most erudite men have also handed down that the two stone tablets had the figure of the two Testaments.

Epistulam sane quae ad Hebraeos scribitur quidam Pauli non esse contendunt, eo quod non sit eius nomine titulata, et propter sermonis stilique distantiam, sed aut Barnabae iuxta Tertullianum aut Lucae iuxta quosdam vel eerte Clementis discipuli apostolorum et episcopi romanae ecclesiae post apostolos ordinati. Quibus respondendum est: si propterea Pauli non erit quia eius non habet nomen, ergo nec alicuius erit quia nullius nomine titulatur; quod si absurdum est, ipsius magis esse credenda est quae tanto doctrinae suae fulget eloquio. Sed quoniam apud Hebraeorum ecclesias quasi destructor Legis falsa suspicione habebatur, voluit tacito nomine de figuris Legis et veritate Christi reddere rationem, ne odium nominis fronte praelati utilitatem excluderet lectionis.

Indeed, the epistle which is written to the Hebrews some contend not to be Paul’s, because it is not titled with his name, and on account of the distance of speech and style; but either of Barnabas, according to Tertullian, or of Luke, according to some, or certainly of Clement, a disciple of the apostles and a bishop of the Roman Church ordained after the apostles. To whom it must be responded: if for that reason it will not be Paul’s because it does not have his name, then neither will it be anyone’s because it is titled with the name of no one; but if that is absurd, it is rather to be believed to be his, which shines with such eloquence of his doctrine. But since among the churches of the Hebrews he was held, by a false suspicion, as a destroyer of the Law, he wished, with his name kept silent, to render an account concerning the figures of the Law and the verity of Christ, lest the hatred of the name, displayed on the front, should exclude the utility of the reading.

Non est sane mirum, si eloquentior videatur in proprio id est hebraeo quam in peregrino id est graeco, quo ceterae epistulae sunt scriptae sermone. Movet etiam quosdam quare Romanorum epistula in primo sit posita, cum eam non primam scriptam ratio manifestet. Nam hanc se proficiscentem Hierosolymam scripsisse testatur, cum Corinthios et alios ante iam, ut ministerium quod secum portaturus erat colligerent, litteris adhortatus sit.

It is not, to be sure, a wonder if he seems more eloquent in his own—that is, Hebrew—than in a foreign—that is, Greek—tongue, in which the other epistles are written. It also moves some to ask why the Epistle to the Romans is set in the first place, since reason makes clear that it was not written first. For he testifies that he wrote this one as he was setting out for Jerusalem, whereas earlier already he had exhorted the Corinthians and others by letters to collect the ministry which he was going to carry with him.

Unde intellegi quidam volunt ita omnes epistulas ordinatas, ut prima poneretur quae posterior fuerat destinata, ut per singulas epistulas gradibus ad perfectiora veniretur. Romanorum namque plerique tam rudes erant, ut non intellegerent Dei se gratia et non suis meritis esse salvatos, et ob hoc duo inter se populi conflictarent. Idcirco illos indigere adserit confirmari, vitia gentilitatis priora commemorans.

Whence some wish it to be understood that all the epistles were ordered in such a way that the one which had been destined later was placed first, so that through the several epistles one might come by steps to the more perfect things. For most of the Romans were so untutored that they did not understand that they were saved by the grace of God and not by their own merits, and on this account two peoples were clashing with one another. Therefore he asserts that they need to be confirmed, recalling the former vices of paganism.

Corinthiis autem iam dicit scientiae gratiam esse concessam, et non tam omnes increpat quam cur peccantes non increpaverint reprehendit, sicut ait: "Auditur inter vos fornicatio", et iterum: "Congregatis vobis cum meo spiritu tradere huiusmodi Satanae". In secunda vero laudantur et ut magis ac magis proficiant admonentur. Galatae iam nullius criminis arguuntur, nisi quod callidissimis pseudoapostolis crediderunt. Ephesii sane nulla reprehensione sed multa laude sunt digni, quia fidem apostolicam servaverunt.

But to the Corinthians he already says that the grace of knowledge has been granted, and he not so much reproves all as he blames them for not having rebuked those sinning, just as he says: "Fornication is heard of among you", and again: "You being gathered together with my spirit to deliver such a one to Satan". In the second, however, they are praised and are admonished that they may make progress more and more. The Galatians now are charged with no crime, except that they believed the most crafty pseudo-apostles. The Ephesians indeed are worthy of no reprehension but of much praise, because they preserved the apostolic faith.

Philippenses etiam multo magis conlaudantur, qui nec audire quidem falsos apostolos voluerunt. Colosenses autem tales erant ut, cum ab Apostolo visi corporaliter non fuissent, hac laude digni haberentur: "Et si corpore absens sum, sed spiritu vobiscum sum gaudens et videns ordinem vestrum". Thessalonicenses nihilotninus in duabus epistulis omni laude prosequitur, eo quod non solum fidem inconcussam servaverint veritatis, sed etiam in persecutione civium fuerint constantes inventi. De Hebraeis vero quid dicendum est, quorum Thessalonicenses qui plurimum laudati sunt imitatores facti esse dicuntur, sicut ipse ait: "Et vos fratres imitatores facti estis ecclesiarum Dei quae sunt in Iudaea, eodem enim passi estis et vos a contribulibus vestris quae et illi a Iudaeis". Apud ipsos quoque Hebraeos eadem commemorat dicens: "Nam et vinctis conpassi estis et rapinam bonorum vestrorum cum gaudio suscepistis cognoscentes vos habere meliorem et manentem substantiam". explicit prologus

The Philippians also are praised much more, who did not even wish to hear false apostles. The Colossians, however, were such that, although they had not been seen by the Apostle bodily, they were held worthy of this praise: "And even if I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing and seeing your order." The Thessalonians nonetheless he pursues with every praise in two epistles, for the reason that they not only kept the faith of truth unshaken, but also were found steadfast in the persecution of their fellow-citizens. But what is to be said about the Hebrews, whom the Thessalonians—who were most highly praised—are said to have become imitators of, as he himself says: "And you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God which are in Judea, for you too suffered the same things from your compatriots as they did from the Jews." Among the Hebrews themselves he likewise recalls the same, saying: "For you showed sympathy with the imprisoned and accepted with joy the plundering of your goods, knowing that you have a better and abiding possession." here ends the prologue