The Douay Rheims Bible and Acts 1:16-19

[6glargento]

in Acts 1:16-19 in the Douay Rheims bible it reads

“Men, brethren, the scripture must needs be fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was the leader of them that apprehended Jesus: Who was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. And he indeed hath possessed a field of the reward of iniquity, and being hanged, burst asunder in the midst: and all his bowels gushed out.And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem: so that the same field was called in their tongue, Haceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.” (Acts 1:16-19, Douay Rheims)

in this it says that judas was killed by being hanged and then falling and having his bowls gushed out. however in other translations like the NAB it reads:

 *"My brothers, the scripture had to be fulfilled which the holy Spirit spoke beforehand through the mouth of David, concerning Judas, who was the guide for those who arrested Jesus.
He was numbered among us and was allotted a share in this ministry.
He bought a parcel of land with the wages of his iniquity, and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle, and all his insides spilled out. 
This became known to everyone who lived in Jerusalem, so that the parcel of land was called in their language 'Akeldama,' that is, Field of Blood." (Acts 1:16-19, NAB)*

so in the Douay Rheims it reads “and being hanged” but in the NAB it reads “and falling headlong.” the Douay version seems to be more consistent with the gospels which says that judas was hanged, where the NAB seems to suggest that judas dimply dropped dead and burst open. What do you think?

 

[Epistemes]

Interesting is what I think!

If you check any other translation, then you’ll see that the text is rendered as in the NAB translation: bible.cc/acts/1-18.htm

Here is v 18 from the original Vulgate, from which the Douay-Rheims was translated:

*et hic quidem possedit agrum de mercede iniquitatis et suspensus crepuit medius et diffusa sunt omnia viscera eius *

The words we are concerned with are “et suspensus crepuit” which the Douay-Rheims text does accurately translate as “being hanged” which is curious since the original Greek reads, και πρηνης γενομενος ελακησεν, which literally reads, “And befalling headlong, he burst asunder.”

Could it be that Jerome attempted synthesizing this account with the one found at the end of Matthew?

 

[lak611]

Maybe the noose broke and he fell to the ground afterwards.

 

[Epistemes]

Maybe the noose broke and he fell to the ground afterwards.

Well, yes. That’s the traditional synthesis between Matthew and Luke’s account of how Judas died; however, it definitely seems as if the Vulgate attempts to incorporate this synthesis within the text itself itstead of following the standard Greek text (unless, of course, Jerome was operating from a series of texts wholly unavailable to us now which specifically state that Judas hanged himself in Acts instead of just falling forward, which is traditionally maintained).

The Nova Vulgata definitely does not adhere to Jerome’s translation concerning v 18:

*18 Hic quidem possedit agrum de mercede iniquitatis; et pronus factus crepuit medius, et diffusa sunt omnia viscera eius. *

The Vulgate’s phrase “et suspensus crepuit” is here substituted and correctly rendered from the Greek as “et pronus factus crepuit,” where the Latin word “pronus” is a cognate of the original Greek **πρηνης ** (preineis), meaning to “fall forward.”

This is why I’m led to believe that Jerome made the executive decision to synthesize Judas’ death in Matthew and Acts since the two deaths appeared to be conflicting and contradictory.