The Origins and Diversity of the Latin Versions

The Latin versions of the Bible represent one of the most significant channels through which the Greek New Testament was transmitted into Western Christendom. From the second century onward, Latin translations began appearing in Christian communities where Latin had replaced Greek as the vernacular. By the end of the second century, Old Latin translations—often called the Vetus Latina (VL)—were already circulating, especially in North Africa. These translations were not produced from the Hebrew Old Testament or even uniformly from the Greek New Testament, but primarily from the Greek Septuagint and available Greek manuscripts of the NT. The VL reflects a living and evolving translation tradition, not a fixed or formally sanctioned version.

The earliest citations of Latin Scriptures appear in the writings of Tertullian (ca. 150–220 C.E.) and Cyprian (ca. 200–258 C.E.). These Fathers quote both Testaments in Latin, demonstrating that Scripture in Latin was already in common ecclesiastical use. Tertullian’s quotations, however, are idiosyncratic and likely represent ad hoc translations from Greek, rather than citations from a unified Old Latin version. It is with Cyprian that we find identifiable textual patterns—such as consistent vocabulary and diction—marking the emergence of a recognizable African Old Latin text-type.

Old Latin Text-Types: African, European, and Italian

Old Latin versions are not monolithic. Rather, scholars have identified three primary geographical families: the African, European, and Italian (sometimes also called the “Itala”). These represent regional recensions or revisions of the Latin text based on different Greek Vorlagen and varying theological and linguistic priorities.

The African text, represented in Cyprian’s writings, is the oldest identifiable Latin text-type. It is marked by its unique vocabulary and sometimes archaic or overly literal renderings. The European text, which became more dominant in the fourth and fifth centuries, reflects revision towards smoother Latin and a more Alexandrian Greek base. The Italian (or “Itala”) version, as referred to by Augustine, seems to have been a more refined European recension, better suited to ecclesiastical reading.

Among the Old Latin Gospels, the order is often Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, consistent with manuscripts such as Codex Bezae (d), a, b, e, and ff. These codices include intriguing textual additions not found in the Greek New Testament—for example, in Matthew 3:16, an apocryphal gloss describes “a tremendous light” during Jesus’ baptism, and Codex k adds a visionary description to Mark 16:4. These variants, while not original, demonstrate the creative and expansive nature of the Old Latin tradition.

Jerome and the Vulgate: A Textual Revolution

The uncontrolled diversity of the Old Latin versions led to the most decisive intervention in the history of the Latin Bible. At the behest of Pope Damasus in 383 C.E., Jerome of Strido was tasked with producing a standard Latin text. Though reluctant, Jerome undertook the work, beginning with the Gospels. His approach was not to start afresh but to revise existing Latin translations against the Greek. For the Old Testament, however, Jerome adopted a different philosophy: he worked from the Hebrew texts wherever possible, in pursuit of what he called the Hebraica veritas.

Jerome’s revision of the Latin New Testament was more conservative than his Old Testament work. While his Gospels represent a true revision, his hand in the rest of the NT remains debated; some have proposed that Rufinus the Syrian may have contributed to or completed these portions. Nevertheless, Jerome’s influence prevailed, and his Latin version—later called the Vulgate—gradually supplanted all previous Latin forms.

The Vulgate did not instantly unify Latin texts. For centuries afterward, many manuscripts continued to preserve Old Latin readings, creating mixed texts. Even the Vulgate itself underwent periodic revisions. The Spanish Vulgate, Theodulfian, and Alcuinian revisions are examples of such efforts to maintain textual integrity within the Latin tradition.

The Role of the Vetus Latina Institute

Significant scholarly progress in the modern study of the Latin versions can be attributed to the Vetus Latina Institute at Beuron, Germany. Established in the 1950s, the institute’s purpose has been to compile and edit the Old Latin texts of the Bible in a comprehensive and critically responsible way.

This research has yielded detailed critical editions of Latin biblical books, each presenting multiple lines of text representing different Latin text-types. Instead of creating an eclectic or reconstructed text, the editions provide actual manuscript witnesses representative of distinct textual traditions, complete with patristic citations and a full apparatus of variants. The result is a historically grounded view of the Old Latin Bible, enabling textual critics to see not just isolated readings but whole textual trajectories.

The Vetus Latina series has already produced critical editions of several NT books, such as the Catholic Epistles, Hebrews, and most of the Pauline Epistles. Ongoing work includes Romans, 1 Corinthians, Revelation, and Acts. Each volume includes not only manuscript data but also patristic citations, commentary, and methodological analysis.

The Latin Versions as Witnesses to the Greek Text

From a textual-critical perspective, the value of the Latin versions lies not in their proximity to the autographs, but in their ability to reflect the Greek manuscript traditions that underlie them. Since Latin translators worked from Greek texts, often those in active ecclesiastical use, their translations preserve readings that may otherwise be lost or underrepresented in the extant Greek manuscript corpus.

The African text, especially in Acts, is associated with the Western Greek text-type, sharing many of the same expansions and paraphrastic tendencies. The European and Italian texts, however, reflect increasing influence from the Alexandrian tradition. Thus, the movement from African to European to Vulgate versions mirrors a transition from the Western to Alexandrian Greek traditions.

The Vulgate, in particular, aligns more closely with the Alexandrian text, although it retains some Western readings. This pattern suggests either a deliberate editorial preference for Alexandrian readings or access to Greek manuscripts that already lacked Western embellishments. The Vulgate thus provides a window into the Greek textual situation of the fourth century, especially in the West.

When used carefully, Latin versions—particularly when corroborated by Greek, Syriac, and Coptic witnesses—serve as documentary evidence for the Greek Vorlage. For example, when a rare reading appears in a VL manuscript and also in an early Greek witness such as Codex Bezae or P75, it gains credibility. However, the diversity and mixture of Latin texts caution against treating the Latin tradition as a monolith.

Methodology and Textual Criticism

The methodology employed by the Vetus Latina Institute highlights the importance of text-types over individual readings. Since Latin scribes and translators often created their own renderings or adopted familiar phraseology, isolated readings cannot always be traced to a Greek source. But identifiable text-types, such as the African (K), European (I and T), and others, represent concerted revisions or translations based on particular Greek sources.

Complicating this picture is the reality of mixture in almost all Latin manuscripts. Few, if any, manuscripts preserve a “pure” text-type. Instead, block mixture (where entire sections reflect different text-types), micro-level mixture (individual readings borrowed from different traditions), and patristic influence are common. Hence, patristic citations are critical for tracing textual trajectories, often predating extant manuscripts and shedding light on earlier forms of the text.

The Codex Bezae (D) deserves special mention. Its Latin text, especially in Acts, defies easy classification. It contains readings from nearly every Latin text-type, along with unique variants. Whether it represents a new translation, a revision of multiple Latin sources, or a Greek-Latin hybrid remains debated. Its peculiar character makes it both difficult and indispensable for understanding the Western text and its Latin transmission.

Areas of Ongoing Research

Despite considerable advancements, many questions remain. Chief among them is the origin of the first Latin translations—their date, location, and purpose remain unclear. Some evidence suggests early translations by the mid-second century, but no manuscripts survive from that time. Tertullian’s Latin citations do not align with later VL texts, raising the possibility that he made his own translations, or that he quoted from a now-lost, extremely early Latin version.

The Old Latin Gospels also remain under-studied. While Fischer’s classification of over 450 Gospel manuscripts marks major progress, a comprehensive Vetus Latina edition is still awaited. The massive volume of Gospel citations in Latin patristic literature further complicates this task, but it is critical for understanding harmonization tendencies, especially in comparison with the Diatessaron and Syriac Gospel harmonies.

Another major task is the analysis of the Vulgate’s post-Jerome development. The extent of Rufinus the Syrian’s role, the contribution of later revisions (e.g., Theodulfian or Spanish), and the incorporation of OL readings into later Vulgate manuscripts all warrant careful examination.

The Contribution of the Latin Versions to Textual Reconstruction

In sum, the Latin versions of the New Testament—particularly the Old Latin and Vulgate—have made significant contributions to the restoration of the original Greek text. Their importance lies in the following:

First, they preserve ancient readings that may not be extant in the surviving Greek manuscript tradition, either due to loss or textual corruption. In particular, African and early European Latin texts reflect Western Greek readings that, while sometimes expanded or paraphrastic, often preserve early theological and liturgical usage.

Second, the text-types themselves, not just individual readings, represent formal revisions based on actual Greek exemplars. They therefore constitute documentary evidence for the history of the Greek New Testament. When these Latin text-types are aligned with known Greek traditions (Alexandrian, Western), they serve as comparative sources to confirm or challenge existing Greek readings.

Third, the Latin versions help us trace the theological, linguistic, and ecclesiastical development of textual transmission in the West. This has ramifications not only for textual criticism but for doctrinal history and biblical interpretation.

Finally, as more critical editions of both the VL and Vulgate appear—complete with apparatus, patristic evidence, and manuscript classification—scholars will increasingly be able to reconstruct the Greek Vorlage behind the Latin, helping to recover the earliest attainable form of the Greek New Testament.

You May Also Enjoy

How Can We Defend the Authority and Trustworthiness of Scripture in a Skeptical World?

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS