The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

KOPFSTEIN Jewish Traditions in the Writings of Jerome 423
Jews for elucidation of the Hebrew portion of the Bible, just as it was
necessary to consult a Greek-speaking person on the New Testament. 16
But there was more to it: Hebrew was the language of creation. God
gave light its name 'day', the firmament its name 'heaven', and called
each star by its name (cf. Isa. 13.10; 40.26; Amos 5.8ff.). 17 Consequently,
Hebrew was 'the progenitress of all the other languages'
(matrix omnium linguarum); 1 * no wonder that in comparison the
Greek and Latin languages seemed deficient (propter...ad comparationem
linguae Hebraeae tarn Graeci quam Latini sermonis
pauperiem). 19
I may be forgiven for adducing a somewhat amusing example of
Jerome's firm belief in Latin's indebtedness to Hebrew. In Zeph. 3.18
we find the difficult words IDIDQ ^i], which may refer to 'those who
are far removed (or: sorrowing away) from the appointed feasts'.
Jerome's Latin Vulgate reads nugas qui a lege recesserunt, that is,
'jesters who departed from the Law'. The second portion of the
phrase, namely qui...recesserunt, might be considered an acceptable
rendition; it also may echo Jewish exegesis: this verse is explained in
the Talmud (b. Ber. 28a) as a reference to those who do not keep
strictly to the prescribed timetable for prayer. But the intriguing
question is: why did Jerome add the word nugae, 'jesters, fools,
truants'? In his commentary he supplies the answer: Hebrew ^ai] and
Latin nugae are originally one and the same word. 20
What elements in Jerome's work may justifiably be called 'Jewish'
and how can they be detected? One has to admit from the start that
clear-cut answers to these questions cannot be offered. In the Christian
tenets so much of Judaism has been absorbed that many exegetical
statements of the early fathers of the church merely repeat older
Jewish tradition. Illustrative of this is the status of the Septuagint version:
although a work produced by Jews, by Jerome's times its acceptance
could no longer be considered a Jewish tradition. On the
contrary, Jerome's circumspect attitude towards this version is much
more in harmony with the contemporary Jewish view. He points to
16. Epistola CXII, 20 (adAugustinum); I, pp. 141 ff.
17. Commentarii in Isaiam, on Isa. 13.10; IV, p. 240; commentarii in Amos, on
Amos 5.8ff.; VI, p. 288.
18. Commentarii in Sophoniam, on Zeph. 3.18; VI, p. 730.
19. Commentarii in Isaiam, on Isa. 40.17; IV, p. 488.
20. Commentarii in Sophoniam, on Zeph. 3.18; VI, p. 730.