After further analysis and consideration, I am forced to revise my previously positive review to a negative one.
The first major flaw, which I erroneously overlooked and did not discover initially, is that Mr. Handermann has subjected this modern critical version of the ancient Vulgate to “reformed” 16th century thinking by leaving out the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament. This is a serious error and a great tragedy. My purpose here is not to open a canon debate, but to point out that there is more evidence that the writers of the New Testament accepted these 7 books as inspired of God than evidence that they accepted strictly a Palestinian canon (consisting of only 39 books in Hebrew). Knowing this and other important historical information and Ecclesiastical Traditions, it would be more compelling to leave ancient texts in their entirety than to edit them to our own liking.
Secondly, no particular information has been given in this edition as to what version of the Vulgate was used. For those of you wondering, it is the Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem by R. Weber, otherwise known as the “Stuttgart Vulgate”. Nor was any information given about the source of the electronic text that was used to print this edition (assuming that Mr. Handermann did not type out the text himself.)