SOURCE: "The Attitude of Jerome towards Pagan Literature," Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 1919, pp. 150-67.

[In the essay that follows, Pease discusses the influence of pagan literature on Jerome's writings and concludes that Jerome realized that the "complete acceptance of the new faith did not necessarily involve total rejection of what was of value in the old literature. "]

The student of classical literature can hardly be indifferent to the question how his favorite authors have been in various ages regarded. While at present the attitude of individuals towards the classics may, in view of the wide distribution of printed texts, be a matter of less concern, it is obvious that, when manuscripts were few, not merely the accurate text tradition of an author but even the bare preservation of his works must often have depended upon the esteem in which they were held by the few persons who possessed them. Again, the pagan literature depended for its existence upon the sufferance of Christian transmitters, and it was thus a matter of no little moment whether their disposition towards it was apprehensive, contemptuous, indifferent, or friendly. It seems, therefore, worth while to reëxamine' the attitude in this regard of St. Jerome, a Christian of distinction and influence in a period of transition, during which the pagan culture was yielding to the Christian—himself a man thoroughly trained in the secular education and yet consistently devoted to the new faith. This combination will assure us that his feelings would not have been those of a narrow and unsympathetic bigot,² nor yet of a superficial rather than a sincere Christian.

Jerome's life extended from between 340 and 350³ to 420, and included the reign of Julian⁴ and the pagan revivals of the fourth century,⁵ as well as the period of such severe blows against paganism as the destruction of the temple of Sarapis at Alexandria and the prohibition of pagan worship in 392.⁶ But it is significant that Jerome wrote no works directed specifically against the old faith, and seldom mentions contemporary pagan opponents of Christianity.⁷ The absence of vigorous pagan opposition doubtless made it easier to consider the classical literature on its own intrinsic merits, rather than as the vehicle of religious propaganda.

It is now my intention to trace briefly some of the influences which determined Jerome's attitude towards the classics. And first, both in chronology and importance, was his education, a subject so fully treated by Grützmacher⁸ in his biography that I need merely summarize his results. Becoming in 354 a pupil of Donatus,⁹ he studied the classical writers, including Plautus and Terence, Sallust, Lucretius, Horace, Virgil, Persius, and Lucan, with commentaries upon them by Donatus and others,¹⁰ as well as many points on figures of speech and grammatical matters.¹¹ In addition he acquired a sense for literary style, which made him extremely sensitive to works of unrhetorical composition, and in his own writings, though by no means approaching the perfection of his classical models, he became a follower of Ciceronian traditions, and one of the better stylists of the Latin fathers.¹² His study of rhetoric, including the declaiming of controversiae,'¹³ left traces upon him which he later tried in vain to eradicate.¹⁴ In his philosophical studies he appears to have come into little first-hand contact with the great Greek philosophers, for though he mentions Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus, Carneades, and others,¹⁵ it is clear that nearly all quotations from them are through the medium of Cicero, Seneca, or other Latin writers.¹⁶ Indeed it appears that he did not learn Greek at all until he went to Antioch in 373.¹⁷

That the early rhetorical interests of Jerome should have influenced his later thought is not surprising. Despite aspersions upon the childish vanity and insincerity of rhetorical and philosophical studies¹⁸ as compared with the simple truth of the Scriptures,¹⁹ and occasional assertions of revolt from the established rules of the rhetoricians,²⁰ he remained very sensitive to criticisms against his style, and apologized for its defects on the grounds of absence from Latin associations,²¹ the corrupting influence of his Hebrew studies,"²² hasty composition, and frequent dictation.²³ Again, like the Italian humanists, with their fondness for classical models and antipathy to the barbarous diction of the theologians,²⁴ Jerome's tastes were offended by the stylistic rudeness of the early Christian writings. He tells of his original dislike for the Hebrew language and its sounds—the stridor lectionis Hebraicae,²⁵—and how, after reading Quintilian and Cicero, he passed to the study of the book of Daniel in the original, with which he was so much disgusted that had it not been for the encouragement of his teacher he would have abandoned the study altogether.²⁶ He was also acutely aware of the harshness of the Greek and Latin versions of the Old Testament,²⁷ and explained this as due to their being translations,²⁸ declaring that not even Homer or the authors translated by Cicero²⁹ sound well in Latin, and that Cicero himself, in a single work based on Greek sources, had coined more Latin terms than are found in all the Latin Scriptures.³⁰

We must now discuss Jerome's vision, perhaps the best known incident in his life. In his twenty-second letter, written in 384³¹ to the nun Eustochium and discussing the preservation of virginity, he warns against the enticements of secular interests and exclaims: "What agreement have Christ and Belial? What has Horace in common with the Psalter? Virgil with the Gospels? Cicero with the Apostle?"³² And he continues by relating his own experience.³³ Ten or eleven years before,³⁴ when on his way to the East, he could not bear to leave behind the library he had collected.³⁵ And so, after Lenten fasts and vigils, after reading Cicero and Plautus, he was seized by a fever and rapt in the spirit before the tribunal of the Judge; where there was such a flood of light, and such resplendence from the glory of the angel spectators, that, prostrate on the earth, he dared not uplift his eyes. Asked about his state, he answered that he was a Christian. "Thou liest," answered the Judge; "thou art a Ciceronian, not a Christian; for where thy treasure is, there is thy heart." After flogging and torture Jerome took solemn oaths never to possess or read secular manuscripts, and thereupon, with shoulders dark with weals, returned to consciousness. Thenceforth he read divine books more zealously than previously he had read secular writings.

In regard to this vision two points must be noted. First, it was but a dream, though vivid and highly colored, and no doubt with a great impression, as such nightmares often have, upon a mind overwrought by asceticism.³⁶ And secondly, Jerome tells it for a definite moralizing purpose, in a very rhetorical fashion.³⁷ Indeed, the dream might be found, could one study its antecedents, to be based upon rhetorical models. At any rate it is significant that later Christians were by dreams somewhat similarly diverted from secular reading.³⁸ Let us now observe how Jerome's vision was regarded. A few years after describing it he thus addresses Eustochium and Paula:³⁹ "You yourselves know that it is more than fifteen years since Tully or Maro or any of the secular authors has been taken into my hands, and if by chance any influence from them creeps into my citations, such cases are but misty recollections, as it were of a dream long past."⁴⁰ Fifteen years or more later⁴¹ he feels it necessary⁴² to defend himself against charges of Rufinus that he had had a monk at Bethlehem copy dialogues of Cicero, had taught the classics to young pupils, and had proved false to the promises made in his vision.⁴³ His defence is based upon several grounds: that Rufinus himself read Cicero;⁴⁴ that the promise was made in a dream,⁴⁵ and that dreams are notoriously unreliable;⁴⁶" also that Rufinus has probably himself not kept absolutely his baptismal and monastic vows.⁴⁷ This defence is long and sophistical,⁴⁸ and one feels that Jerome "doth protest too much," for the habits of Rufinus are irrelevant, since he had had no such vision, and the argument that dreams are not binding, though sound,⁴⁹ is here weakened by being coupled with that drawn from the lapses of Christians from other obligations.

So far as I am aware no definite attempt has been made to discover how far the dream affected Jerome's attitude toward literature. It has been observed⁵⁰ that he asks Paul of Concordia for a copy of Aurelius Victor, and that many classical quotations—in fact the bulk of those which he makes—fall in works subsequent to the vision.⁵¹ I have tried the experiment of dividing the letters into groups, following the chronological arrangement of Pronberger,⁵² making the first group include letters 1-4, dating from 370 to 374, and closing at about the probable date of the vision, and the second group letters 5-46, dating from 375 to 386 (the approximate date of the Commentary on Galatians).⁵³ The first group covers, in Hilberg's edition, 20 pages; the second, 324. In the first group Hilberg indicates at 12 places reminiscences of secular writers, or an average of once in 1.6 pages; in the second, following the vision, at 42 places, or once in 7.7 pages. But since the first group is so small as to vitiate comparisons, I have made a third, immediately following and equal in length to the second, that is, of 324 pages, containing 118 allusions or one in 2.7 pages. A subsequent group of 324 pages⁵⁴ contains 63 cases, or one in 5.1 pages, while the remaining 231 pages of Hilberg's second volume⁵⁵ show 49 cases, or one in 4.7 pages. These figures are subject to modifications here and there,⁵⁶ and the groups are of course somewhat arbitrary. Yet it is of interest to observe the diminished frequency of citation immediately following the vision, and again, the increase subsequent to the period of the Commentary on Galatians. Could we be more precise as to the dates of letters we might make these groups correspond more exactly to differing periods in his attitude.⁵⁷

Jerome, as I have said, explained to his lady friends that what classical quotations occurred in his works were due to reminiscence, not to renewed consultation of the originals, and this statement Lübeck⁵⁸ accepts, save as applied to the Greek historians, a necessary tool for Biblical studies. That the authors of his youthful training were those most frequently quoted—especially Cicero, Horace, and Virgil⁵⁹—need occasion little surprise, and that many passages, particularly of the poets, clung to his memory was but natural, and is indicated by the number of times some particular lines are repeated in his works.⁶⁰ Frequently a quotation is inexact in such a way as to suggest that Jerome was trusting to his memory.⁶¹ That he seldom cites exact references is hardly significant, for, despite his scholarly interests, he is commonly negligent about this even in the case of works of Christian scholarship, Q⁶² where a reader might desire to verify references, while Biblical texts are constantly quoted, even as proof-passages, without mention of their exact source. Important in this connection are Jerome's dictated works,⁶³ which show no marked reduction in the frequency of classical allusions.⁶⁴ How largely these reminiscences go back to his boyhood and to what extent they were refreshed by renewed reading⁶⁵ we shall never know.

In the light, then, of Jerome's statements and practice it is likely that the vision had some effect for fifteen years or so, but that after that he regarded it as in no way binding. One is tempted to suggest that the interruption in his ascetic life in the Orient caused by his stay in Rome in 382-385 might have been responsible for this backsliding, but his references in the Commentary on Galatians to the fifteen years during which he had not read pagan authors do not favor this theory. More likely is it that the change was gradual and that its full effects were not felt till after he was settled in 386 for his long stay at Bethlehem. Again, the unnatural ascetic exaltation in which he had been at the time of the dream, as a young man of twenty-five or thirty, had yielded to the maturer judgment of age,⁶⁶ which saw matters in truer proportions.

All his life, however, was passed with books, and they allowed little room for interest in contemporaneous events. Civil wars,⁶⁷ barbarian invasions in the East⁶⁸ and the West,⁶⁹ and the capture of Rome⁷⁰ by Alaric are, indeed, mentioned, and to defects in the social fabric of his time he often alludes,⁷¹ but economic, military, and political questions interested him but little.⁷² The slight degree of his feeling for the historic tradition of the Roman state is due to his non-Roman birth, his long residence in the Orient,⁷³ and a constant sense of the contrast between worldly and spiritual glory.⁷⁴

A second factor affecting Jerome's attitude towards the classics is, not unnaturally, the mental outlook of those for whom he wrote.⁷⁵ In his homilies and tractates for the "simpler brethren" of the monastery at Bethlehem, classical references are naturally infrequent.⁷⁶ On the contrary, in writing to a profligate deacon,⁷⁷ he scathingly assumes that, except for mental dulness, the man would be only too familiar with comedians, lyric writers, and mimes. But in addressing cultivated readers the pearls of classical allusion are more lavishly cast. In letters to Pope Damasus, himself an imitator of Virgil,⁷⁸ he quotes from the Aeneid to illustrate a principle of scansion,⁷⁹ and includes other reminiscences of Augustan poets.⁸⁰ Addressing Pammachius he uses many claśsical allusions and compares Pammachius to Aeneas,⁸¹ while in the epitaphia on distinguished Roman ladies,⁸² where the rhetorical element is prominent, such allusions are frequent.⁸³ In a letter to Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria,⁸⁴ Jerome commends him for not having, in a paschal letter, inserted phrases from secular writers, and elsewhere he considers it more proper to cite Christian than pagan views.⁸⁵ Yet he was, in general, greatly influenced by the character, and still more by the culture, of those to whom he wrote, and to the sophisticated he allowed himself a freedom from which he abstained when addressing the more easily scandalized simplicity of the monks at Bethlehem.⁸⁶

But apart from morals or propriety, there was another determining factor, namely, the theological one. Pagan literature (especially the epics)⁸⁷ was permeated by references to pagan gods, and to such unbecoming ethical examples he was, like Plato, opposed,⁸⁸ just as to those elements in the society of his time which he recognized as relics of paganism.⁸⁹ But as he saw matters, from the standpoint of a scholar rather than a preacher, the dangers were more those of wrong belief than of wrong conduct, of heresy rather than of worldliness. Now of Christian heresies the roots lay in pagan philosophy,⁹⁰ and heretics were regarded as natural successors of the philosophers.⁹¹ Consequently the passages in which philosophers, as sources of error, are mentioned with disparagement, are many, the objections against them being sometimes that they intentionally deceive,⁹² more often that they wander from the truth,⁹³ that they clothe their thoughts in difficult language,⁹⁴ or that their lives and teachings are inconsistent with Christian standards,⁹⁵ while the positive dogmas of all schools are frequently attacked.⁹⁶ Yet we must note a striking passage in the Commentary on Daniel, in which he says:⁹⁷ "If you read all the books of the philosophers you cannot help finding in them some part of the vessels of God. In Plato, for instance, God as the fashioner of the world; in Zeno, the chief of the Stoics, the departed and immortal souls, and virtue as the sole good," etc. And elsewhere he praises the Platonic view of philosophy as practice for death,⁹⁸ the cardinal virtues of the Stoics,⁹⁹ the philosophic doubt of Carneades, ¹⁰⁰ and the views of Cicero on friendship, similar in content to those of the Christians.¹⁰¹

It was, then, practical considerations which influenced Jerome's attitude, both towards philosophical literature and towards other types as well.¹⁰² In a letter to Magnus,¹⁰³ explaining why he so often quotes the classics, he cites the precedent of many ecclesiastical writers, beginning with St. Paul. His practical justifications were chiefly the following. First, the need of studying the classics in order to be educated at all,¹⁰⁴ and to have models upon which to found the gradually developing Christian literature.¹⁰⁵ Secondly, the desire to meet pagan adversaries on their own ground,¹⁰⁶ a method particularly employed in assertions to infidels that if miracles were performed and laudable works done by pagans, similar miracles and merits must be allowed to Christians;¹⁰⁷ and, per contra, to convince Christian readers that they must at least prove themselves equal in these virtues to the pagans whom they despise.¹⁰⁸ Thirdly, he finds it desirable to make much use of history, and this in two ways: (1) as necessary for interpreting allegories, particularly those in the prophets,¹⁰⁹ and (2) as containing examples of virtues and vices useful for study,"¹¹⁰ though this latter method was obviously in need of severe restriction.¹¹¹ Finally, almost all literature contains information of value. In the spirit of Pliny the Elder¹¹² and Quintilian¹¹³ he remarks¹¹⁴ that "almost all the books of all writers—except such as with Epicurus have not learned letters—are replete with learning." In scientific matters, accordingly, in so far as they do not conflict with ecclesiastical dogmas, he freely uses pagan writers.¹¹⁵ Great use is also made of proverbial expressions, some literary¹¹⁶ and some from everyday life, and the satirists, especially Persius, are favorites, doubtless because of their moral earnestness and their dissatisfaction with the social conditions of paganism."¹¹⁷

I have attempted, then, briefly to trace the influence upon Jerome of his education, the mental outlook of his correspondents, his theological beliefs, and the practical necessities arising in the life of a scholar and controversialist. In a long life, full of critical activity, it is but natural that the picturesque dream of his youthful asceticism should have lost its force, even had it had at first a greater effect than the rhetorical character and hortatory purpose of its description would indicate. "¹¹⁸ Indeed, we may say that the subsequent world, more deeply impressed by one dramatic incident than by many years passed in modification or contradiction of it, has ascribed to the vision of Jerome altogether too much importance. But, making all due allowance for the dream, his attitude, like that of others, appears, if not absolutely consistent, at least easily intelligible. It was that of a man classically trained, seeing the strong points but also the weaknesses of the secular literature; in his youthful enthusiasm led first to admiration and then to strong, though temporary, aversion to the classics; and, finally, with the sanity of maturer life and the influence of the culture of the Greek East, able to walk with a surer step, realizing that complete acceptance of the new faith did not necessarily involve total rejection of what was of value in the old literature. In other words, his progress was the familiar succession of narrowly conservative and unquestioning upbringing, radical disillusionment and revolt, and true and ripe liberalism.

Notes

¹ Cf. Zöckler, Hieronymus (1865), esp. pp. 325, ff.; Lübeck, Hieronymus quos noverit scriptores et ex quibus hauserit (1872)—a useful but very incomplete work (cf. Grützmacher, Hieronymus, I [1901], 114, n. 6; Traube, Vorlesungen und Abhandlungen, II [1911], 66, n. 2); Comparetti, Virgilio nel medio evo, 1², (1896), 109-111; Grüzmacher, I, 113 ff.

² Like Tertullian; cf. Farrar, Lives of the Fathers, I (1889), 120.

³ On the date of his birth see Grützmacher, I, 45-48.

⁴ Cf. in Abac. II, p. 660.

⁵ References to Q. Aurelius Symmachus are lacking in Jerome (Grützmacher, I, 276), but to Vettius Agorius Praetextatus he refers in Ep. 23, 2, 1; cf. Ep. 39, 3, 7; contra loann. Hieros. 8.

⁶ Cf. Ep. 107, 2, 3; in Is. VII, p. 279; Tract. de Ps. 96 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 142); also Ep. 92, 3, 2 (translated by Jerome). On the neglect of pagan worship cf. Ep. 107, 1-2, written in 401 (Grützmacher, I, 100) or 399-400 (Pronberger, Beiträge zur Chron. der Briefe des hl. Hier. [1913], 68-69). Cf. adv. Iovin. II, 38.

⁷ Cf. Grützmacher, I, 275 ff.

⁸ I, 113 ff.

⁹Chron. ann. Abr. 2370; in Eccl. p. 390; adv. Rufin. I, 16.

¹⁰Adv. Rufin. I, 16: cf. Grützmacher, I, 114, n. 6. These authors, at least, it seems fair to select from those quoted by him as probably having been studied in his school days (Lübeck, 5, to the contrary). To the list should be added some sententiae of Publilius Syrus—both genuine and spurious; cf. Wolfflin, Publilii Syri sententiae (1869), 14-15; Lübeck, 115; Ep. 107, 8, 1. To the few cases from Lucretius cited by Lübeck, 116-117, should be added that noted by Hilberg in Ep. 77, II, 2; cf. Grützmacher, I, 114, n. 6.

¹¹ Grützmacher, 114, and nn. 3-4; Lübeck, 175, n. 3. On the borrowings from Donatus to be detected in Jerome see Grützmacher, I, 115, n. 2, and especially Lammert, "De Hier. Donati discipulo" (1912), in the Comment. philol. Ienenses, IX, 2. In spite of his respect for Donatus Jerome could view the grammatici and their interests with a little humor, as may be seen from in Ionam, p. 426.

¹² Grützmacher, I, 117 classes him second only to Lactantius. Cf. Zöckler, 323: "So hat … erst Hieronymus die lateinische Sprache christlich und die christliche Theologie lateinisch gemacht," and he quotes Ozanam (Hist. de la civil. chret. au V'siècle, II, 100) as calling Jerome "le maître de la prose chrétienne pour tous les siècles suivants." Cf. Erasmus as quoted by Zöckler, 340, n. 1. On the stylistic peculiarities of Jerome cf. Goelzer, Étude lexicogr. et gram. de la latinité de S. Jérôme (1884), and the works of Paucker cited by him, op. cit. VII, n. 1; Schanz, Gesch. röm. Lit. IV, 1², (1914), 494-495; Pease in Journ. Bibl. Lit. XXVI (1907), 107 ff.

¹³Adv. Rufin. I, 30; in Galat. II, 2, p. 408.

¹⁴ Grützmacher, I, 121-122; adv. Rufin. I, 30.

¹⁵ Lübeck, 57 ff.; Grützmacher, I, 122-123.

¹⁶Adv. Rufin. III, 39, p. 565; cf. Lübeck, 58, n. 1. Also Praef in lib. Iob (quoted in adv. Rufin. II, 29); cf. Rufin. Apol. II, 29. Porphyry, however, Jerome cites at first hand (cf. Lübeck, 64-86; also the reproaches of Rufinus, Apol. II, 9, p. 362; II, 10 bis, p. 365; II, 29; II, 42), and other lesser philosophers, e.g. Alexander of Aphrodisias (Lübeck, 96, n. 1; Grützmacher, I, 124, n. 3).

¹⁷ Rufin. Apol. II, 9, p. 362; Hier. adv. Rufin. I, 30. Cf. Grützmacher, I, 151, and n. 1; adv. Rufin. II, 22; III, 6. On the dislike of Augustine and Ausonius for Greek see Lockwood in TA.P.A. XLIX (1918), 120.

¹⁸ Cf. the preface to his translation of Origen's homilies on Jeremiah (pp. 741-742); also Ep. 52, 4, 1; 66, 9, 1; 120, praef. 4; adv. Helvid. 2; in Ezech. IX, p. 360; contra Lucif 14.

¹⁹ Contrasts of worldly wisdom and Christian simplicity are frequent; e.g., Ep. 48, 4, 3; 57, 12, 4; 133, 12; in Is. VII, p. 311; in Galat. III, pp. 485-486; 487-488; Tract. de Ps. 132 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 245); Homil. in Ioann. I (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 388). Accordingly, as we learn in Tract. de Ps. 77 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 63), ecclesiastici … rustici sunt et simplices; omnes vero haeretici Aristotelici et Platonici sunt; cf. Tract, de Ps. 83 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 84). For Augustine's condemnation of rhetoric see Farrar, II, 304-305. But the other side of the story is seen in Comm. in Galat. III, pp. 487-488; with which cf. Tract. de Ps. 86 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 104). These passages suggest I Cor. 1, 23-28. Jerome's admiration for Demosthenes and Cicero was great, and their names often appear as types of oratory; e.g., Ep. 26, 14, 1; 29, 1, 3; 57, 13, 2; 84, 6, 1; 85, 1, 1; 99, 2, 1; 125, 12; 126, 2; 130, 6; 147, 5; conira Ioann. Hieros. 4 and 12; adv. Pelag. III, 16; de Vir. Ill. prol.; in Is. VIII, pp. 327-328; in Ionam, p. 419; in Naum, pp. 538-539; in Galat. III, pp. 485-486; Praef in lib. Is.; Praef in lib. Dan.

²⁰ Cf. Ep. 60, 8, 1.

²¹ Cf. Ep. 50, 1, 2; 50, 2, 3; 85, 1, 1.

²² Cf. in Galat. III, pp. 485-486.

²³ Cf. Ep. 117, 12; 118, 1; 119, 1; 128, 5; 129, 8; in Is. (in the different prologues); in Ezech. XIV, pp. 239-240; VIII, 283-284; in Mich. prol. pp. 431-432; in Agg. p. 774; in Zach. prol. pp. 777-778; II, p. 826; in Matt. prol. pp. 7-8. For the difficulties of dictation cf. in Galat. prol. pp. 369-370; III, pp. 485-486; in Abd. p. 386.

²⁴ Cf. Moore, Hist. of Relig. II (1919), 293.

²⁵In Galat. III, pp. 485-486; cf. Ep. 26, 14, 1; 125, 12.

²⁶ Cf. Praef in lib. Dan. (pp. 1291-1292 Migne).

²⁷In Is. praef. pp. 5-6.

²⁸Chron. praef.; Ep. 29, 1, 3.

²⁹Chron., 1. c.; Praef in Pentateuch.

³⁰In Galat. 1, p. 387.

³¹ Grützmacher, 1, 58; Pronberger, op. cit. 25-26.

³²Ep. 22, 29, 7; cf. Tert. de Praescr. adv. Haeret. 7.

³³Ep. 22, 30, 1-6; repeated by Rufin. A pol. 11, 6.

³⁴Annos plurimos; but the event fell in 373 or shortly thereafter; cf. Grützmacher, 1, 61.

³⁵ On his library see Ep. 5, 2, 2-4. It apparently included both ecclesiastical and secular books (cf. Grützmacher, 1, 128-129), and it is of interest to note that Jerome, with a scholar's natural instincts, later encouraged the writing of books, for he writes to a monk (Ep. 125, 11; dating, according to Grützmacher, 1, 88, after 410; according to Pronberger, op. cit. 77-78, about 409): Texantur et lina capiendis piscibus, scribantur libri, ut et manus operetur cibum et animus lectione saturetur. This advice, anticipating by more than a century a like provision in the Rule of St. Benedict, is probably the first instance of encouragement to monks to copy books; cf. Wattenbach, Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter³ (1896), 428; Norden in Die Kultur der Gegenwart, 1, 8² (1907), 409. For the carrying out of Jerome's principles by monks see Rufinus, A pol. 11,8 bis, p. 363.

³⁶ In Ep. 22, 7, 1-2 we have proof of the unwholesome condition into which Jerome's imagination had been brought as a result of prolonged fastings.

³⁷ Schöne, Die Weltchronik des Eusebius (1900), 240, calls the vision "eines der ärgerlichsten Musterstücke verlogener Rhetorik, mühsam ausgesonnener Begeisterung und unechter Frömmigkeit." But, as Grützmacher (1, 153) says, a real experience undoubtedly underlies the account.

³⁸ Cf. Sandys, Hist. of Class. Scholarship, F² (1906), 618; also Traube, 11 (1911), 66: "In ähnlicher Art durch eine Vision—auch das ist zum rhetorischen Kunstgriff geworden—wird unzählige Male nach Hieronymus die Stellung des Christentums zur Beschäftigung mit den Klassikern fixiert, der Unwert dieser Beschäftigung eingeschärft"; and ib. n. 4.

³⁹In Galat. III, pp. 485-486. For the date see Grützmacher (1, 60-62), who puts it in 386-387. This conflicts, however, as Grützmacher recognizes, with the "fifteen years" in the present passage, for 373 + 15= 388. Perhaps plus quam quindecim anni is not exact.

⁴⁰ Cf. Ep. 70, 3, 2.

⁴¹ Grützmacher, 1, 68, dates the book against Rufinus in 402.

⁴²Adv. Rufin. 1, 30-31.

⁴³ Rufin. A pol. 11, 7-8, pp. 359-360; 11,8 bis, p. 363.

⁴⁴Adv. Rufin. 1, 30.

⁴⁵Ib. 31.

⁴⁶Ib.

⁴⁷Ib.

⁴⁸ Cf. Zöckler, 325, n. 1.

⁴⁹ Farrar, 11, 185, n. 3, considers his account in this passage very unlike what he had previously written to Eustochium (cf. Ep. 22, 30, 6). But Farrar underestimates the rhetorical character of the twenty-second letter, and hence is over-concerned with Jerome's failure to live in accordance with it. Norden, op. cit. 408, thinks that Jerome's compromise did more honor to his "Wissensdrang und Formensinn" than to his "Wahrhaftigkeit und Gewissenstreue."

⁵⁰ Zöckler, 48, n. 2; Farrar, 11, 185. The passage is Ep. 10, 3, 2.

⁵¹ This had been noted by Magnus, to whom, in Ep. 70 (written between 399 and 403, according to Grützmacher, 1, 100; or in 398, according to Pronberger, op. cit. 56) he explains the reason for his many classical quotations. He appears to have suspected that Magnus had been instigated by Rufinus to make this inquiry; cf. Ep. 70, 6, 2, and Pronberger, l.c.

⁵² Cf. op. cit. pp. 95-96; the results according to Grützmacher's table (1, 99-100) differ in an almost negligible degree. Josephus I exclude from the list of secular authors because of his indispensability for ecclesiastical scholars.

⁵³ Either before or after Ep. 46 Grützmacher and Pronberger indicate a break of about seven years in the correspondence.

⁵⁴ Running into Hilberg's second volume.

⁵⁵ Through Ep. 120 (408-409 A.D.).

⁵⁶ Due to differences in dating the letters, in deciding what constitutes a classical reminiscence, and to unlikeness in the contents of the letters.

⁵⁷I have selected for comparison the letters rather than other works falling in these years, partly because the allusions in them have been more completely noted (though even to Hilberg's gatherings additions can be made), and partly because they are less specialized in contents and more truly representatives than either commentaries or controversial works. Grützmacher (1, 133) thinks that about the year 399 a change in Jerome's attitude set in, basing his belief on Ep. 70, but I doubt if the change was a sudden one, and the reason for the decisive tone of Ep. 70 is that Jerome's previous practice had been then called in question.

⁵⁸ P. 9. Traube, 11, 66, characterizes this view of Lübeck as "ganz kindisch." The truth probably lies between these extremes. Rufinus (A pol. 11, 8, p. 361) is contemptuous of Jerome's defence of himself on the ground of reminiscence. Noteworthy exceptions to Lübeck's view as stated are the lengthy quotation in Ep. 57, 5, 2-4 from Cic. Opt. Gen. 13-14 (cf. the reproaches of Rufinus in A pol. 11, 8, p. 360) and the rather long quoted passages in adv. Rufin. 111, 39. Cf. also n. 65 infra.

⁵⁹ Cf. Lübeck, 5; Zöckler, 326.

⁶⁰ Cf. in Lübeck's work such lines as Virg. Aen. IV, 298; VI, 625 ff., 724 ff., 733 ff.

⁶¹ Many cases are noted by Lübeck: e.g., misquotation of Cicero (in Is. XII, p. 504); of Aen. 1, 743 (adv. Rufin. 111, 28); of Aen. 11, 329 (Praef: in Esdram, p. 1525); of Aen. IV, 379 (in Ezech. 111, p. 99); of Aen. V, 89 (in Ezech. 1, p. 22); reversal of the order of lines of Hor. Epist. 1,1, 99-100 (in Eccl. p. 409). Augustine, who also does not always quote correctly (e.g., de Doctr. Christ. 11, 31), sometimes recognizes his fallibility by such phrases as si bene recolo (e.g., de Doctr. Christ. 111, 11). In some instances Jerome adapts the quotation to fit its new context; in others he doubtless bases his readings on different text traditions from those commonly employed to-day.

⁶² Of course many exceptions may be found; e.g., in Dan. prol. pp. 617 ff.

⁶³ Cf. n. 23 supra.

⁶⁴E.g., Ep. 117 and 118 (both dictated) contain, in 23 pages, 9 allusions, or one in 2.5 pages. Letters 119 and 129 (also dictated), despite unfavorable subject-matter, are not free from allusions.

⁶⁵ On Jerome's habits of reading compare the outside testimony of Sulpicius Severus, Dial. 1, 9, 5. The extent to which works studied in youth might affect one's later thought is recognized by Augustine, C. D. 1, 3; cf. Cassian, Collat. 14, 12; and n. 58 supra.

⁶⁶ Cf. Farrar, 11, 185. But see Mollweide in Wien. Stud. XXXIII (1912), 280-283. Perhaps his temporary desertion of classicism may have had the result, as Zöckler, 324, suggests, of making his later style less imitative.

⁶⁷ Cf. Ep. 60, 15, 1 ff.; 60, 17, 1; 77, 8, 4.

⁶⁸ Cf. Chron. praef.; Ep. 60, 16, 1-5; 66, 14, 1-2; 77, 8, 1-4; 114, 1-2; 118, 2, 2; 126, 2; in Ezech. VIII, pp. 283-284.

⁶⁹Ep. 123, 16.

⁷⁰Ep. 123, 17; 127, 12-13; 128, 5; 130, 4-7 (where Jerome's excitement leads him into frequent classical reminiscence); in Ep. 142, 1 Rome and Alaric are perhaps to be understood under the names of Jerusalem and Nebuchadnezzar.

⁷¹ Especially in hortatory letters. Sometimes his work approaches the field of Juvenalian satire; cf. Weston, Latin Satiric Writing Subsequent to Juvenal (1915), 82-100; also n. 117 infra.

⁷² Mention of emperors and civil officials is rare.

⁷³ There his outlook was largely Greek; cf. Ep. 50, 2, 3.

⁷⁴ He numbered, however, among his friends several of aristocratic lineage; e.g., Furia (Ep. 54, 1, 2; 54, 6, 3), Paula (Ep. 108, 1, 1; 108, 3, 1; 108, 33, 2), Marcella (Ep. 127, 1). But some of these references to ancestry would very likely not have been made had it not been for rhetorical usage; cf. Ep. 130, 3.

⁷⁵E.g. cf. Ep. 49, 1.

⁷⁶ Even there he twice quotes Persius, 1, 1 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 130; III, 3, 83). Plato and Aristotle are also several times vaguely disparaged, indicating that these were names of which his fellow-monks had heard; cf. adv. Pelag. 1, 19.

⁷⁷Ep. 147, 3.

⁷⁸ Cf. Schanz, Gesch, röm. Lit. IV, 1² (1914), 215 and 217.

⁷⁹Ep. 20, 5, 2. But Lübeck, 176, n. 1, points out that Jerome is perhaps here following Victorinus.

⁸⁰ With Ep. 21, 2, 5 cf. Virg. Ecl. 4, 61; with Ep. 21, 42 perhaps cf. Hor. Epist. 11, 1, 123.

⁸¹Ep. 66, 11, 1.

⁸² Cf n. 74 supra.

⁸³E.g. Ep. 108; 127; 130. Cf. also Ep. 107 to Laeta, on the education of her daughter.

⁸⁴Ep. 99, 2, 1. Is this perhaps an implication that in other letters of Theophilus quotations from classical sources were to be expected? A paschal letter of Theophilus, included in Jerome's letters because translated by him, contains (Ep. 100, 15, 2) reminiscences of Horace and Publilius Syrus!

⁸⁵ Cf. in Is. XVI, p. 665; Ep. 52, 2, 1; 60, 5, 3; 105, 3, 3. The view of Augustine is (de Doctr. Christ. II, 63) that pagan evidence is less valuable than scriptural.

⁸⁶ The tractates in the Anecdota Maredsolana, III, give most welcome glimpses into the society by which Jerome was there surrounded. His adaptation to his audience and correspondents was perhaps based upon I Cor. 9, 22.

⁸⁷ Cf. Ep. 21, 13, 4.

⁸⁸ Cf. Ep. 21, 13, 8; adv. Iovin. II, 38.

⁸⁹ With Ep. 21, 13, 3-9 cf. Paulinus in C. S. E. L. XVI, 506, 11. 76 ff. Of such intrusions of paganism Jerome (Ep. 27, 2, 1) asserts himself innocent.

⁹⁰ Cf. Ep. 133,2 (quoting Tert. adv. Hermog. 9). The characteristically Roman attitude of Tertullian (cf. Taylor, Classical Heritage of the Middle Ages [1901], 110) is in contrast to that of Justin, Clement, and Origen, who regarded philosophy as a guide to Christianity (cf. Taylor, op. cit. III; 116-117; also Clem. Strom. 1, 5, 28). The philosophical learning of Clement and Origen is noted by Jerome in Ep. 70, 4, 3; 120, 10, 2; 124, 6-7; adv. Pelag. 1,19; contra Ioann. Hieros. 19 and 32.

⁹¹ The literal meaning and pagan use of haeresis are discussed in Comm. in Titum, p. 737, and in Comm. in Is. V, p. 227, Zeno is called Stoicae sectae haeresiarches. Philosophers and heretics are combined in lists of those of mistaken views (in Eccl. p. 475; in Naum, pp. 538-539, 582; in Is. III, p. 105; VI, p. 272; in Hierem. IV, p. 994); Marcion is even worse than Epicurus (in Is. VII, p. 285). The heretics largely rely on Plato and Aristotle; Tract. de Ps. 77 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 63); 140 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 272); 143 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 284). In adv. Rufin. III, 39 Jerome excuses himself for having mistakenly in his youth taken over into Christianity certain beliefs from his training in pagan philosophy.

⁹² In Tract. de Ps. 115 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 215) he quotes Col. 2, 8, advising against the casuistry of philosophers; cf. in Ezech. IX, p. 360. To their contentiousness he applies a phrase of Tertullian (de Anima, 1), philosophus animal gloriae (quoted in Ep. 66, 8, 3; 118, 5, 2).

⁹³Ep. 53, 4, 2; 65, 21, 2; in Ezech. I, p. 10; in Is. XII, p. 530; Tract. de Ps. 83 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 84); de Ps. 106 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 177); Tract. in Marc. 8 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 350); Homil. in loannem, I (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 388).

⁹⁴ Cf. in Amos, II, p. 283; in Is. XII, p. 492; in Naum, p. 582; in Eccl. p. 475; adv. Helvid. 2.

⁹⁵E.g., Ep. 69, 3, 6; in Is. I, p. 35.

⁹⁶ Cases are too numerous to recount. Cf. the errors of the Epicurean cosmogony (Tract. in Is. 6, in Anecd. Mared. III, 3, 110) and doctrine of pleasure (in Is. XI, p. 473; cf. XIX, p. 788), though in adv. Iovin. I, 4 he asserts that Pythagoras, Plato, Aristides, Aristippus, Epicurus, and others preferred virtue to pleasure. In Comm. in Eccl. p. 461 he condemns the Epicurean and Cyrenaic denial of immortality. Other cases of disparagement of philosophers are Ep. 33, 3; 133, 2; contra Lucif. 14; adv. Iovin. II, 7; in Is. X, p. 425; in Ezech. VIII, p. 290; in Ionam, p. 419; in Eccl. p. 495.

⁹⁷ P. 624; cf. in Tit. p. 709. With Jerome's view compare Aug. de Doctr. Christ. II, 60.

⁹⁸Ep. 127, 6; but cf. Ep. 60, 14, 2, where this principle pales in comparison with that of I Cor. 15, 31.

⁹⁹Ep. 66, 3, 1.

¹⁰⁰Contra Ioann. Hieros. 35.

¹⁰¹In Mich. II, p. 517. In Ep. 79, 9, 4, pagan agreement with Christian views is noted.

¹⁰² Cf. the sensible words of Augustine, de Doctr. Christ. II, 28.

¹⁰³Ep. 70, 4, 1 ff.

¹⁰⁴ In Ep. 21, 13, 9, he admits that such study in pueris necessitatis est, though this may refer only to the compulsion applied to boys by their elders. Basil, ad Adulescentes, 2 (Migne, Patr. Gr. XXXI, 565-568), observes that in youth we are unprepared for the mysteries of the sacred writings and therefore practice ourselves on others, as soldiers drill first in athletics. On the impossibility of an education without study of pagan subjects cf. Grützmacher, 1,131 and 134; Taylor, op. cit. 108 ff. To refrain from such training would force the Christians to accept an intellectual equipment inferior to that of the pagans; cf. Ep. 70, 6, 2. Hence the objection of the Christians to the edict of Julian forbidding them to teach grammar and rhetoric; cf. Comparetti, 1² (1896), 106, and n. I; Aug. Conf VIII, 10.

¹⁰⁵ Thus he acknowledges imitation in his de Viris Ilustribus of the homonymous work by Suetonius (Ep. 47, 3, 2; 112, 3, 2; Vir. Ill. prolog.), and, in his translations, of Cicero and other translators (Ep. 57, 5, 2; 106, 3, 3; in Mich. II, p. 480; in Galat. I, p. 387); and Weston (op. cit. 98-99) would detect in Ep. 50, 5, 2 a similar recognition of kinship with Horace and Juvenal.

To express imitation of pagans by Christians Jerome often uses a form of epithet doubtless familiar at his time. Thus in Ep. 57, 12, 2 Pammachius is nostrorum temporum Aristarchus (cf. adv. Rufin. I, 17; III, 30); in Ep. 22, 35 Josephus is Graecus Livius; Virgil (in Mich. II, p. 518-519) is poeta sublimis (non Homerus alter, ut Lucilius (1189 Marx) de Ennio suspicatur, sedprimus Homerus apud Latinos); with which compare Ep. 121, 10, where Virgil is alter Homerus apud nos; David (in Ep. 53, 8, 17) is Simonides noster, Pindarus et Alcaeus, Flaccus quoque, Catullus et Serenus; Lactantius (Ep. 58, 10, 2) is quasi quidam fluvius eloquentiae Tullianae; Jovinian (adv. Iovin. I, 1) the Epicurus Christianorum; Vigilantius (Ep. 61, 3, 3; ironically) is the solus … Cato; cf. contra Ioann. Hieros. 39: Hippocrates Christianorum (and ib. 38); also in Is. XII, 492-493: noster Luscius Lanuvinus.

I might here note, in connection with this sophistical etiquette of indirect reference (cf. Wright's Julian [Loeb Classical Library], I, xi), that Jerome commonly employs such expressions as gentilium fabulae (Ep. 117, 6, 4; contra Ioann. Hieros. 19; in Is. VI, pp. 236 and 240; X, p. 444; in Galat. I, p. 418), fabulae poetarum (Ep. 130, 7; in Is. IV, p. 159; in Hierem. III, pp. 923-924; in Ezech. VI, p. 197; in Dan. pp. 652-653; in Osee, II, pp. 53-54; in Naum, p. 549), fabulae (contra Ioann. Hieros. 35; adv. Iovin. I, 7; in Amos, II, p. 289; in Galat. II, p. 619; in Ephes. III, p. 651), or in saeculari litteratura legimus (in Amos, III, p. 313). The following epithets are frequent: insignis poeta (Virgil, in Is. XVI, p. 680; Ovid, in Osee, I, p. 24); illustris poeta (Virgil, Ep. 140, 10, in Zach. I, p. 792); poeta gentilis (Virgil, Ep. 7, 4, 1, and 17, 2, 1, in Eccl. p. 448; Horace, Ep. 16, 2, 1); ethnicus poeta (Virgil, Ep. 79, 7, 8); poeta saecularis (Persius, Tract. de Ps. 93, in Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 130); ardens poeta (Lucan, Ep. 123, 17, in Is. XV, p. 657; called ardentissimus poeta in Comm. in Ezech. XIII, p. 545); poeta doctissimus (Oppian, in Ezech. XIV, p. 595); philosophus et poeta (Virgil, in Eccl. p. 469); poeta (Virgil, in Eccl. pp. 452 and 460, in Ezech. IX, p. 357); quidam poeta (Claudian, in Is. VIII, p. 361); lyricus (Horace, in Mich. II, p. 517); Latinus … historicus (Sallust, in Galat. I, p. 416; cf. III, p. 500); historicus (Sallust, adv. Iovin. II, 10); nobilis historicus (Sallust, in Eccl. p. 430).

¹⁰⁶ As St. Paul quoted from Aratus, Epimenides, and Menander; cf. Ep. 70, 2, 2 ff.; 70, 2, 4; 130, 18; in Tit. pp. 706-707; in Ephes. III, p. 648; in Galat. II, p. 471. Other examples are given in Ep. 70, 3, and Jerome says that Cyprian was criticized for failure thus to meet pagans on their own ground. An example of Jerome's own method will be found in Comm. in Osee, I, p. 5.

¹⁰⁷ Thus the incredible youth of Ahaz when he became, at what Jerome reckons as eleven years of age, the father of Hezekiah, is paralleled by Greek and Roman prodigies (Ep. 72, 2, 1-3); the story of Jonah and the whale is defended by the even more improbable tales which pagan readers of Ovid accept (in Ionam, p. 406); that of Nebuchadnezzar eating grass is more worthy of credence than many tales from mythology, such as Scylla, the Chimaera, the Hydra, the Centaurs, and ancient metamorphoses (in Dan. p. 645); if Apollonius of Tyana could mysteriously disappear, why could not Jesus?—quid magis licet hoc Domino non licet? (contra Ioann. Hieros. 34; cf. 35). But elsewhere (ib. 32) he condemns the use of pagan arguments by Christians and heretics; cf. ib. 19 and Ep. 133, 3.

¹⁰⁸ Cf. Ep. 66, 8, 3; adv. Iovin. II, 14. Similar a fortiori arguments are drawn from pagans who preferred virtue to pleasure (adv. Iovin. I, 4), respected virginity (ib. I, 41 ff.), avoided remarriage (Ep. 54, 1, 2; 79, 7, 8; 123, 8), and maintained peaceable dispositions (Ep. 17, 2, 1).

¹⁰⁹ A good example is found in Comm. in Dan. praef. pp. 621-622. Josephus is, of course, constantly employed as testimony for the truth of Scripture. On the importance of history cf. Aug. de Doctr. Christ. II, 44; and for philosophy as ancillary to scriptural exegesis, Taylor, 112. Jerome, in spite of fondness both for Virgil and for the detection of allegory, did not consider the fourth Eclogue as prophetic; cf. Ep. 53, 7, 3. In fact, though recognizing that the pagans themselves employed allegory in explaining secular writers (in Ezech. III, p. 89), he was not himself inclined to do so.

¹¹⁰ Instances will be found in Ep. 52, 3, 5-6; 57, 3, 2; 58, 5, 2; adv. Iovin. II, II; etc.

¹¹¹ In Ep. 77, 2, 3, however, he derives the greatness of Fabiola not from her Fabian ancestry, sed de ecclesiae humilitale. Augustine in the de Civitate Dci similarly belittles pagan exempla virtutis, for if it were too freely admitted that worthy characters might be produced outside Christianity, dangerous results might follow. Cf. Litchfield in Harv. Stud. XXV (1914), 67-70.

¹¹² Plin. Ep. III, 5, 10.

¹¹³ X, 1, 40; X, 1, 57.

¹¹⁴Ep. 70, 6, 1. So Gregory of Nazianzus favored gathering roses among the thorns of paganism (Carm. 1, 2, 10, 214 ff. in Migne, Patr. Gr. XXXVII, 695-696), and similar advice is found in Basil, ad Adulescentes, (Migne, Patr. Gr. XXXI, 563 ff.). The works of Gregory, a teacher of Jerome (cf. Grützmacher, 1, 177 ff.), abound in classical quotations for which he makes no apology (though he upbraids Gregory of Nyssa in Ep. II for abandoning Christian books for the trade of a rhetorician; cf. Ep. 235), and Basil takes for granted that the young will study secular writings. For the greater tolerance of the Eastern Church see Comparetti, 1², 105, n. 1.

¹¹⁵E.g. in explaining eclipses (in Is. VI, p. 240). In Ep. 121, 6 Xenophon's Oeconomicus is praised; elsewhere medical writers are employed (cf. Pease in Harv. Stud. XXV [1914], 81-82).

¹¹⁶ Here is probably one explanation of Jerome's fondness for comedy (another being the influence of Donatus), for the New Comedy is primarily description of life; cf. Ep. 54, 9, 5. He recognizes, like Amobius (adv. Gent. IV, 35) and others, the unbecoming nature of many comedies and mimes; e.g., Ep. 52, 5, 7 and 147, 3; in Ezech. X, p. 404; in Ephes. III, p. 666. But the New Comedy is also as free as any form of pagan literature from corrupting theological doctrines. For Jerome's quotations from comedy and mimes see Lübeck, 106-115, to which several additions might be made. Tragedy was nearly negligible; for a few references to Euripides—indirectly borrowed—cf. Lübeck, 17-18, and Zöckler, 328. The witnessing of tragedies and comedies is condemned (in Ezech. X, p. 404).

¹¹⁷ For Horace see Lübeck, 162-167; for Persius, id. 195-198; for Juvena', id. 198-199, to which add Vit. Hilar. 12 (cf. Juv. 10, 22) and Ep. 52, 5, 4 (perhaps cf. Juv. 13, 242). Persius even makes his way into Jerome's sermons: Tract. de Ps. 93 (Anecd. Mared. III, 2, 130; cf. III, 3, 83). Horace's contempt for gods that were the work of men's hands (Sat. 1, 8, 1 ff.) is welcomed (in Is. XII, p. 528). For the popularity of Persius and Juvenal cf. Sandys, Hist. of Class. Scholarship, 1² (1906), 644-645.

¹¹⁸ Traube well remarks (II, 66): "Trotz der Vision, trotz seine Schwüre blieb Hieronymus, was er war: Grammatiker, Philolog, Klassizist, Zitatenjäger, der christliche Aristarch, der es nie aufgegeben hat die Alten zu lesen und zu zitieren. Für die lateinische Literatur des Mittelalters, für die Entwicklung der Sprache ist das von dem gewaltigsten Einfluss gewesen. Er will die Bibel nicht nur fideli sermone, sondern puro sermone übersetzen."