JEROME AND ROME: Hieronymus Romanus. Studies on Jerome and Rome on the Occasion of the 1600th Anniversary of his Death. (Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia 87.) Pp. 609, colour pls. Turnhout: Brepols, 2021. Cased, €150. ISBN: 978-2-503-59259-6

On the one hand, Rome was the city in which he was highly criticised and which he was forced to leave; on the other hand, Rome was the city in which his career as an ascetic teacher was formed, and he continued to keep in close contact with his patrons in the city (see e.g. J.N.D. Kelly, Jerome [1975]; S. Rebenich, Hieronymus [1992]; A. Cain, The Letters of Jerome [2009]). Revellio applies methods from digital humanities in order to trace Jerome's verbal references to Rome in his letters, arguing that, rather than having a fluctuating way of relating to the city, a pattern can be seen that may be explained by reference to rhetorical strategies on Jerome's part: for example, it is shown that Jerome did not begin to name Rome in his writings until his second stay in the city (382–385 ce). Adding to the contextualisation of Jerome's role as an ascetic teacher and an organiser of monastic life, Alciati argues that, while Damasus had an interest in asceticism and tolerated its many different forms, his successor was more interested in monasticism, that is, the regulation and conformity of the ascetic life. Alciati makes the important point that the concepts of asceticism and monasticism should not – as is often done – be used interchangeably.