Let’s talk about letter 149 of Jerome, de solemnitatibus paschae – or rather, about CPL 2278, Pseudo-Jerome on Easter

Among the letters of Saint Jerome in the Patrologia Latina (= PL) edition, vol. 22, columns 1220-1224, there is a curious text with the title “de solemnitatibus paschae”, “On the Easter ceremonies”.  In the CPL it has the number 2278. The heading in the PL reads: “He discusses the feast days of the Hebrews, and teaches that they should not be observed at all after the Gospel”.  The work is addressed to an unnamed “venerabilis papa”.

The PL edition is a reprint of the Domenico Vallarsi edition (1734), vol. 1, col. 1103-1108, who divided it into six chapters.  The PL heading above is taken from Vallarsi, who adds this curious footnote:

“This appears for the first time from MS Vatican 642, folio 89, where it is attributed to Jerome, but falsely, as would appear from simply reading it if we said nothing.  It seems that whoever falsely attributed it to Jerome, also falsely dedicated it to Pope Damasus, as we see in the colophon, since no name is given in the epigraph.  We published it for other reasons, mainly because it was new, with notes about the innumerable errors that we have removed from it, some of which we will only mention as examples in case it is thought that we are marketing our work.”

Perhaps Vallarsi included it mainly in order to get the number of “letters” up to a round 150.  It certainly has nothing whatever to do with St Jerome or his letters, and Vallarsi certainly knew that.

The Latin text was printed again by J.-B. Pitra in 1853 in Spicilegium Solesmense vol. 1, xi-xii, 9-13, this time in 14 chapters, with an additional note on p.565.  Pitra gives the author as “Anonymus”, with an  introductory “argumentum.”  He tells us that he edited the text from manuscripts in Oxford, London and Paris.¹.

Unfortunately an over-enthusiastic German scholar named Bruno Krusch published it yet again in 1885 from a manuscript in Paris, this time claiming that it was a letter of St. Columbanus to Pope Gregory the Great.  (Columbanus was indeed interested in Easter material, as his genuine letter 5 indicates.)  The attribution was always entirely speculative, but the subsequent controversy led to Krusch’s text being reprinted in the Monumenta Germaniae Historica edition (1892) as “epistula VI” of Columbanus.  Finally the text was edited critically against a wider set of manuscripts by G. S. M. Walker, Sancti Columbani Opera, Dublin (1957).

The text was printed again in I. Hilberg’s edition of the letters of Jerome (CSEL 56, pp.357-363). [But see the note below]

A German translation exists in A. Strobel, Texte zur Geschichte des frühchristlichen Osterkalenders (1984), pp.69-73.  An English translation may be found in Walker, pp.198-206. [And see note below]

The most useful article on the subject is D. O’Croinin, “The Computistical Works of Columbanus”, in: M. Lapidge (ed.), Columbanus. Studies on the Latin Writings, Woodbridge: Boydell (1977)  p. 264-270, which tells us that there are 7 manuscripts, all containing Irish computistical texts, and inferring (probably rightly) that this is the most likely origin for this work, although in fact the text promotes the Roman, not the Celtic dating of Easter.

Pitra summarised the content as follows:²

I. A few introductory words from the author, why he has set to work, II. He teaches that the feasts and sabbaths of the Law were made obsolete by the Lord, speaking through the prophets, III. and by Christ himself in the gospel.  VI. But some of the paschal feasts are kept, others are changed.  V, VI. For this reason there are many things contrary to the letter of the Law in the true passover of the New Law, namely the living sacrifice of the body and blood of the Lord. VII. For the same reason again those who still observe the fourteenth day of the moon according to the letter have been condemned justly by the church, that is, by the apostolic see; VIII. For spiritually, in the evening of the world, the Lamb must be eaten; IX. And on the seventh day one must abstain from every servile work of sin; X. And the other things must likewise be observed spiritually; namely, at Pentecost, charity; XI. at the feast of Tabernacles, the fear of God’s judgement, with the imminent end of the world at hand; XII and XIII. Various virtues in the various rites and victims of the sacrifices. XIV. The author recommends the little he has written to a certain venerable pope as fair and good.

Vallarsi’s Vatican manuscript lat. 642 is online these days, and it is easy enough to find folio 89r (although I wish there was a way to link directly to the page).  Here’s the start of the text.  Instead of writing the heading in red, a red line is drawn through it.

On the right is a modern hand:

Vallarsi edited it from this codex as epistle number 149…. and is that perhaps the signature of Angelo Mai himself?!

Update (19/1/26, later):  I’ve just been looking at Strobel’s German translation of the work.  On p.68 he declares:

G. S. M. WALKER has also included an English translation, which differs from ours in places because we are using the text by Hilberg.

O’Cronin also stated that the volume contained an English translation, so it seems clear that it does, and – therefore – that I do not need to make one!  I have updated the post accordingly.

But looking at Strobel’s translation, especially chapters 4, 5 and 6, I can see that each chapter begins with an embedded short title such as “On the Sabbath,” “Concerning Pentecost,” and so on.  These are features of the Vallarsi/PL edition, and are not found in the Latin text printed in the MGH (although they were actually present as rubrics – red headings – in the Cologne manuscript on which it is based!)  So the Hilberg text in the CSEL is not critical, and merely reprints the old Vallarsi/PL text, itself based solely on the Vatican manuscript, and substantially corrected by Vallarsi.  I would suggest that future workers rely on Walker.

Walker’s edition was clearly a critical text, which Strobel describes in the following terms:

He favored C (= I), the source of S (= Y), V (=Ri), and X (= L), together with Pi, an independent tradition, while simultaneously adhering to the edition by W. Gundlach (in M.G.H. Epistolae, Vol. II, 1892, pp. 154ff.) and, through him, in turn, that of Br. Krusch (in: Neues Archiv X, 1884, pp. 84ff.).

It’s not clear to me how he could adhere to the Gundlach/Krusch MGH edition while favouring C.  C is the Cologne manuscript, while the MGH was based on MS P1, MS Paris BNF lat. 16361, p.288 (12th c.).  But then I have not seen Walker’s book.

C, the Cologne manuscript, is formally MS Köln, Dombibl. 83-ii (ca. 805 AD), fol. 201r-203r.  This manuscript, it turns out, is online here!  Fortunately it is only a few pages.

Here’s the top of the final page, complete with rubrics.

Nice to see the source manuscripts!

1. Online: https://archive.org/details/spicilegiumsoles01pitr/page/n5/mode/2up[↩]
2. I. Auctor, quam ob rem ad opus se accinxerit paucis praefatus, II. Docet legalia festa ac sabbata a Domino, per prophetas praeloquente, III. Et ab ipsomet Christo in Evangelio antiquari. VI. Paschalia vero, alia custodiri, alia commutari. V, VI. Hinc contra Legis litteram esse plura in vero Nove Legis paschate, vivo utique corporis et sanguinis Domini sacrificio. VII. Hinc iterum ab Ecclesia, id est, a Sede Apostolica, jure damnatos fuisse qui xiv lunam adhucdum ad litteram observant; VIII. Spiritaliter enim, in vespere mundi, Agnum esse comedendum, IX. Et abstinendum in die septimo ab omni peccati opere servili; X. Caeteraque item spiritaliter observanda; scilicet in Pentecoste, charitatem; XI. In festo Tabernaculorum , timorem judicis Dei , instante saeculi consummatione; XII et XIII. Virtutes varias variis in sacrificiorum ritibus et victimis. XIV. Quae pauca scripsit auctor, ea venerabili cuidam pape aequi bonique habenda commendat.[↩]