You are hereHome › College of Arts, Social Sciences & Humanities (CASSH) › Department of History › Champagne, Marie Thérèse › Christian Hebraism in twelfth-century Rome Style APAChicagoHarvardIEEEMLATurabian Choose the citation style. Champagne, M. T. (2017). Christian Hebraism in twelfth-century Rome: A philologist’s correction of the Latin Bible through dialogue with Jewish scholars and their Hebrew texts. Translating Christianity, 53, 71-87. doi:10.1017/stc.2016.6 Christian Hebraism in twelfth-century Rome Details Title Christian Hebraism in twelfth-century Rome: A philologist's correction of the Latin Bible through dialogue with Jewish scholars and their Hebrew texts Contributor(s) Champagne, Marie Thérèse (author)Ditchfield, Simon (editor)Methuen, Charlotte (editor)Spicer, Andrew (editor) Located In Translating Christianity ISSN 0424-2084 Date 2017 DOI 10.1017/stc.2016.6 Use/Reproduction Ecclesiastical History Society 2017 Abstract In mid-twelfth-century Rome, one clerical scholar, Nicolaus Maniacutius, honed his philological skills as he endeavoured to return the text of the Psalter to the original. Maniacutius met the challenge of editing Scripture in an unusual manner as a Christian Hebraist, consulting with Jewish scholars to compare the Vulgate Book of Psalms with the Jews’ Hebrew text. In doing so, he followed the example set by his scholarly predecessor, St Jerome, centuries earlier, as well as his contemporary, Hugh of St Victor. While scholars have acknowledged that Maniacutius consulted with Jews and learned Hebrew, the identity of the one or more Jewish scholar(s) remains obscure. The Sephardic scholar Abraham ibn Ezra lived in Rome c.1140-1143, and while there wrote a commentary on the Psalms. Nicolaus also revised the Psalter and wrote of a ‘learned Spanish Jew’. This article explores the phenomenon of Christian Hebraism in mid-twelfth-century Rome through the life and work of Maniacutius, and presents evidence that supports Cornelia Linde’s suggestion that Abraham ibn Ezra was the ‘learned Spanish Jew’ with whom Maniacutius worked. In addition, textual evidence supports Maniacutius’s work within an informal, cross-confessional discourse community of Jewish and Christian scholars.