Who developed the doctrine of Biblical Inerrancy first - Catholics or Protestants?

Question

This article on Christian Fundamentalism says that it is developed by Protestants at Princeton University.

This Catholic source on Biblical inerrancy says that it has always been with the Catholics. Even prior to the Second Vatican Council, it was believed by Catholics that the Bible was without error.

I even answered an earlier Christianity.SE question on the history of inerrancy here, using different sources.

Do Protestants and Catholics each have their own versions of "Biblical inerrancy"? Or could it be that one theological tradition was inspired by the other? If Protestants are descended from the Catholic church, then how did they "lose" their own doctrine of inerrancy, as the sources seem to imply? Basically, was the doctrine of inerrancy a Catholic doctrine first, or a Protestant doctrine that later got borrowed by Catholics, or a doctrine evolved twice independently during the course of Christian history?

Answer 1

This selected Aerarius' answer to What are the main differences between the Catholic and Protestant definitions of Biblical inerrancy? said:

There is not any real difference between the Catholic teaching on inerrancy of Scripture and the generic "Protestant" view [...].

If this be the case, we have from the article on the Catholic position:

The Traditional Understanding of the Doctrine of Biblical Inerrancy Prior to the Second Vatican Council

The traditional understanding of the doctrine of biblical inerrancy is perhaps most powerfully and clearly expressed by St. Augustine [354-430] in one of his letters to St. Jerome [340-2 to 420]:

For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error. And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either the [manuscript] is faulty or the translator has not caught the meaning of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it . . . I believe, my brother, that this is your own opinion as well as mine.¹

^{1. Letter 82, i, 3 in Philip Schaff (ed)., Letters of St. Augustine: The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, First Series, vol 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: WM. B. Eerdmans, 1994) 348.}

Therefore if by Biblical inerrancy is meant that the authors of the canonical books of Scripture were completely free from error, then from Catholic tradition, this Catholic understanding preceded the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy by over 1550 years. And the latter statement is:

Biblical inerrancy, as formulated in the "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy", is the doctrine that the Bible "is without error or fault in all its teaching"; or, at least, that "Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact". - Source: Biblical inerrancy | Wikipedia.

Answer 2

The Belgic Confession (1561) states (Art. 4): " They are canonical books with which there can be no quarrel at all." and (Art. 5) "And we believe without a doubt all things contained in them."

That's a long way before 1978, and you might find even older texts stating similar things. Catholic and Protestant churches share the same tradition here. During the Reformation this has never been an source of disagreement either. As such there is no such thing as 'different versions', it is the same doctrine. The assumption that something new was 'developed' at Princeton is wrong, what existed there was a counter movement in reaction to a (perceived) movement away from the doctrine of biblical inerrancy.