JEROME’S PREFACES. XX

...does not differ from the other interpreters. Knowing that I have done this both for you and for every studious person, I do not doubt that there will be many who, through either envy or haughtiness, would rather seem to despise these excellent things than learn them; they prefer to drink from a turbulent stream rather than from the purest fountain.

The same author’s preface to the books of Solomon.

Let this letter join those whom the priesthood joins; indeed, let the paper not divide those whom the love of Christ binds together. I would have written the commentaries on Hosea, Amos, Zechariah, and Malachi which you requested, had my health permitted. You send support for my expenses; you sustain our shorthand-writers and copyists so that our talent may labor most especially for you. And yet, from every side, a diverse crowd presses in, demanding things from me—as if it were fair that I should labor for others while you go hungry, or as if I were indebted to anyone more than you in the calculation of giving and receiving. Therefore, though broken by a long illness, lest I should be entirely silent this year and remain mute toward you, I have dedicated three days’ work to your name: namely, the translation of the three volumes of Solomon. These are משלי original: Mishlei, which the Hebrews call "Parables" and the common edition calls "Proverbs"; קהלת original: Kohelet, which in Greek we may call Ecclesiastes and in Latin the "Preacher"; and שיר השירים original: Shir HaShirim, which in our language is rendered as the "Song of Songs."

There is also the book Παναρετος original: Panaretos, meaning "All-virtuous" of Jesus, son of Sirach, and another falsely attributed work known as a pseudepigraphon called the "Wisdom of Solomon." I found the first of these in Hebrew—not titled Ecclesiasticus as it is among the Latins, but Parables—to which were joined Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, so that it might match the likeness of Solomon not only in the number of books but in the nature of its subjects. The second is nowhere to be found among the Hebrews; indeed, its very style reeks of Greek eloquence, and several ancient writers affirm this to be the work of Philo the Jew. Therefore, just as the Church reads the books of Judith, Tobit, and 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, but not to confirm the authority of Church dogmas.

If anyone is more pleased with the edition of the "Seventy Interpreters" The Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament, they may find our corrected version of it produced long ago. For we do not forge new things in such a way as to destroy the old. And yet, when one reads most diligently, let them know that our writings are better understood; they have not turned sour by being "poured into a third vessel" Jerome’s metaphor for the loss of quality that occurs when translating a translation (Hebrew to Greek to Latin) rather than the original, but have preserved their own flavor, having been committed to the parchment immediately from the "press" of the original language.

To Paula and Eustochium, the same author’s preface on the translation of Isaiah from the Hebrew truth.

Lest anyone, seeing the prophets described in verses, should think they are bound by meter among the Hebrews or have something similar to the Psalms or the works of Solomon, let them know it is as it is with Demosthenes or Cicero: they are written in cola and commata original: per cola et commata. This refers to a layout where lines are broken according to the rhythm of the sense and breath, rather than poetic meter, even though they wrote in prose and not in verse. We also, providing for the benefit of readers, have distinguished our new translation by this new type of writing.

First, it should be known about Isaiah that he is eloquent in his speech. As a man of noble birth and urban refinement, his language contains nothing of "rusticity." Because of this, it happens that a translation cannot preserve the full "flower" of his speech as it does with others. Furthermore, it must be added that he should be called an "Evangelist" rather than a "Prophet." For he so clearly pursued all the mysteries of Christ and the Church that you would not think he was prophesying the future, but weaving a history of the past. From this, I suspect the Seventy Interpreters at that time did not wish to reveal the sacred mysteries of their faith clearly to the Gentiles, lest they "give what is holy to dogs and pearls to swine." When you read this edition, you will notice that these things were hidden by them.

I am not ignorant of how much labor it is to understand the prophets; nor can anyone easily judge a translation unless they have understood it before they read it. We also lie open to the habits of the many who, driven by envy, despise what they cannot achieve. Therefore, knowing the risk, I "put my hand into the flame." Nevertheless, I beg this of fastidious readers: just as the Greeks read Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion Jewish and Christian scholars who produced Greek translations of the Old Testament to rival the Septuagint after the Seventy, either for the sake of their own learning or to better understand the Seventy by comparison, so let these people deign to have at least one translator after the earlier ones. Let them read first, and despise afterward, lest they seem to condemn things they do not know—not out of judgment, but out of a presumption of hatred.

Isaiah prophesied in Jerusalem and Judea before the ten tribes were led into captivity; he wove his oracles about both kingdoms, sometimes together and sometimes separately. And though he occasionally looks toward the history of his own time and signifies the return of the people to Judea after the Babylonian captivity, nevertheless all his care is for the calling of the Gentiles and the coming of Christ. The more you love Him, O Paula and Eustochium Two of Jerome's most devoted students and patrons, who followed him to Bethlehem to study the Bible, the more you should ask of Him that He might restore to me a reward in the future for the present detraction—by which my rivals ceaselessly tear me apart. He knows that I have sweated in the learning of a foreign language for this reason: so that the Jews might no longer insult the Churches regarding the "falsehood" of their Scriptures.

The same author’s preface to Jeremiah.

The prophet Jeremiah, for whom this prologue is written, seems to be more "rustic" in his speech among the Hebrews than Isaiah, Hosea, and certain other prophets, but he is equal in meaning, since he prophesied by the same Spirit. Furthermore, the simplicity of his eloquence comes from the place where he was born. He was a man of Anathoth, which is to this day a small village three miles from Jerusalem; he was a priest born of priests and sanctified in his mother's womb, dedicating a man of the Gospel to the Church of Christ by his virginity.

He began to prophesy as a boy; and he beheld the captivity of the city and of Judea not only in spirit but with the eyes of the flesh. Already the Assyrians had transferred the ten tribes of Israel to the Medes; already the colonies of the Gentiles possessed their lands. Therefore, he prophesied only in Judah and Benjamin, and he lamented the ruins of his city in a fourfold alphabet Jerome refers to the book of Lamentations, which contains acrostic poems where each verse begins with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet, which we have rendered in the measure of meter and verses. Furthermore, we have corrected the order of the visions, which was entirely confused among the Greeks and Latins, back to the original integrity. As for the book of Baruch, his secretary, which is neither read nor held among the Hebrews, we have [omitted] The text ends on the catchword fimus, likely part of praetermisimus or omisimus, meaning "we have passed over/omitted."