24-10-2018, 02:12 PM
Yes, St.Gerome commented upon Ezekiel, as Banjes informs us in the 1591 book. I think that this should be consulted in some manuscript though (preferably in a number of them), and the earlier it is, the better. In the matter such as this I find it extremely unreliable to consult later printed texts which not only build upon scribal errors of many centuries of manuscripting, but also introduce all kind of mess by themselves.
We already see that in the earliest (or at least one of) preserved MS of De Tabernaculo, the matter is called amiton, and not amianton. The interesting side of this is that neither the Hebrew Old Testament nor the Septuagint suggest any idea of the wood not consumed by fire, so I wonder whence Bede took it. Since St.Gerome also talks of this, it's unlikely that St Bede invented it altogether. So it makes sense to consult St. Gerome next (btw, he was criticized for introducing much voluntary distortion into his Vulgate).
We already see that in the earliest (or at least one of) preserved MS of De Tabernaculo, the matter is called amiton, and not amianton. The interesting side of this is that neither the Hebrew Old Testament nor the Septuagint suggest any idea of the wood not consumed by fire, so I wonder whence Bede took it. Since St.Gerome also talks of this, it's unlikely that St Bede invented it altogether. So it makes sense to consult St. Gerome next (btw, he was criticized for introducing much voluntary distortion into his Vulgate).


![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)