_Variae lectiones Vulgatae Bibliorum Editionis, quas Carolus Vercellone
sodalis Barnabites digessit._ Tom. II. Romae, apud Josephim Spithoever,
anno 1864, 4^o, pagg. 561.
The minute attention which Biblical students have paid to the original
Hebrew and to the Septuagint version, with a view to fix the genuine
readings of the text, has hitherto not been given to the Vulgate. Not to
speak of the labours of Mill, Kennicott, and others, the Italian priest,
John Bernard De Rossi collated more than seven hundred MSS. of the
Hebrew text; and in his private library at Parma, 712 such codices were
brought together by his industry. Walton's Polyglot, the publications of
Tischendorf, and the collections made by Cardinal Mai, have contributed
much to establish with accuracy the text of the Septuagint. It remained
for Father Vercellone to undertake, in our day, a similar task in favour
of the Vulgate. His master, the learned Father Ungarelli, had already
commenced the work, and between 1830 and 1845, had amassed a
considerable amount of materials for a book on the _variae lectiones_ of
the Vulgate. In 1845, shortly before his death, he confided these
materials to his disciple, Father Vercellone, of whose erudition and
critical judgment he had had so many proofs. To the old riches his
master had brought forth from his storehouse, the scholar added new
treasures of his own; and the result of his labours upon and among both,
is to be found in the work under notice.
We shall now briefly state the method which the author has followed. As
the basis of his researches, he has taken the Clementine edition of
1592, purified from typographical errors, according to the other Vatican
editions of 1595 and 1598. The editors of the Clementine of 1592, did
but correct the text of the Sixtine edition of 1590. From the documents
belonging to the congregation appointed by Sixtus V. to edit the Vulgate
in that year, it appears that the editors took as the foundation of
their corrections the text of the folio edition published by the
Dominican Father, John Hunter, in 1583. But as the Hunterian edition of
1583 is identical with the Louvain folio edition published by Hunter in
1547, it follows that the Louvain text of 1547 may be considered as the
basis upon which all the subsequent Vatican corrections have been made.
To correct this text, Father Vercellone has directed his studies, and
in the volumes before us the fruit of his labours has been given to the
world. How arduous these labours have been, and what confidence we may
feel in his selection of readings, will best be learned from an
enumeration of the sources whence, with incredible pains, he has drawn
the information required for the execution of his design. These sources
may be classed under three heads: Vatican papers, MSS. codices, and
printed books. As to the first class, Pius IX. has assisted Father
Vercellone by placing at his disposal the treasures stored up in the
Vatican archives. Hence, our author has been enabled to examine, 1^o,
the documents of the corrections proposed and adopted by the
congregation appointed to edit the Vulgate under Saint Pius V. in 1569,
which documents he has compared with the writings of Cardinal Serleto,
who had a great share in making those corrections; 2^o, the documents
concerning the corrections proposed or adopted in a similar
congregation, under Sixtus V. in 1588 and 1589; 3^o, the Sixtine edition
of 1590; 4, notes of the corrections discussed in the congregations
appointed under Gregory XIV. and Clement VIII. to free the Sixtine
edition, from its many mistakes of the press; 5^o, the readings proposed
by the learned Angelo Rocca; 6^o, the annotations of Cardinal Toleto,
preserved in the Vatican; and 7^o, the Clementine edition of 1592.
As to the MSS., our author has confined himself to a few, but these few
are of the highest authority. Of the twenty consulted by him, the
remarkable Florentine Codex of Monte Amiata is deservedly placed first.
Saint Pius V. had caused the Benedictines of Florence to collate 12
codices, and the archivist of Monte Cassino to examine 24 others. The
notes of both these undertakings are still in the Vatican, and have been
of great assistance to Father Vercellone.
Of printed editions prior to the Clementine of 1590, the author has
consulted more than 80, many of them the work of excellent critical
scholars. To these are to be added liturgical books, for example, the
works of the B. Cardinal Thomasi, the Mozarabic liturgy, edited by
Cardinal Lorenzana, and the Roman liturgy. To these again we must add,
the Latin Fathers, whose works give much valuable assistance in
determining the text of the Vulgate. Finally, F. Vercellone has
carefully studied the commentaries of Hesychius, Rodolphus, Bruno of
Asti, and the publications of Cardinals Mai and Pitra. This is the
labour of a life, and few indeed could be found with the qualities
required to undertake it and bring it to a happy termination.
We shall now set before our readers a few specimens of the practical
results of F. Vercellone's researches. The first volume treats of the
various readings that occur in the Pentateuch; the second volume of
those in the books of Josue, Judges, Ruth, and the four books of Kings.
It is a well known fact that there are to be found in the Vulgate some
additions (_additamenta_) which are wanting in the Hebrew text, and even
in the best codices of St Jerome's version. These additions have been
distributed by F. Vercellone in four classes: 1^o, those found only in
codices of no great antiquity; 2^o, those found in old and accurate
editions of the Vulgate; 3^o, those allowed to stand in the Sixtine
edition; 4^o, those allowed to stand even in the Clementine. It must not
be believed that the Vatican editors were ignorant of the character of
these additions, or that they admitted them through carelessness; for,
in their preface, they distinctly say, "Nonnulla quae mutanda
videbantur, consulto immutata relicta sunt, ad offensionem populorum
vitandam".... These additions found their way into the text, according
to our author, from four sources; 1. most of them from the Greek
version, or the Vetus Itala; 2. not a few from a double version made of
a verse, and transcribed as if the translation of two distinct verses;
3. from marginal glosses; and, 4. lastly, from parallel passages in the
Scripture.
In the first two books of Kings, the author discovers sixty-nine such
additions. Of these, thirty have been allowed to remain in the
Clementine, fifteen more in the Sixtine, and nine more in the early
editions, making in all fifty-four, fifteen others being found in MSS.
of no great antiquity. The fifteen in the Clementine which we daily use,
are as follows:--I. _Reg._, iv. 1; v. 6, v. 9; viii. 18; ix. 25; x. i;
xi. 1; xiii. 15; xiv. 22; xiv. 41; xv. 3; xv. 12-13; xvii. 36; xix. 21;
xx. 15; xxi. 11; xxiii. 13-14; xxx. 15. II. _Reg._, i. 18; i. 26; iv. 5;
v. 23; vi. 12; x. 19; xiii. 21; xiii. 27; xiv. 30; xv. 18; xv. 20.
A few of these examples will show the author's method of dealing with
such additions. I. _Reg._, iv. 1, we read, _Et factum est in diebus
illis, convenerunt Philisthiim in pugnam_, et egressus est Israel obviam
Philisthiim in praelium et castrametatus est, etc. Now, the words _et
factum est_, etc., are additions; and upon an examination of MSS. and
editions, the author traces them to the LXX. version (vol. ii. page
194).
In II. _Reg._, i. 26, we read: "Doleo super te frater mi Jonatha decore
nimis et amabilis super amorem mulierum. _Sicut mater unicum amat filium
suum ita ego te diligebam._" The words _sicut mater unicum_, etc., are
wanting both in the Hebrew and in the Greek, and are probably a marginal
gloss, inserted in the text through the ignorance of copyists. They are
an explanation of the phrase, super amorem mulierum, as our author shows
at page 322.
We need not say any more to show how important is the addition to our
Catholic Biblical literature made by F. Vercellone.