Augustine: DE CIVITATE DEI

[I] Post diluuium procurrentis sanctae uestigia ciuitatis utrum continuata sint an intercurrentibus impietatis interrupta temporibus, ita ut nullus hominum ueri unius Dei cultor existeret, ad liquidum scripturis loquentibus inuenire difficile est, propterea quia in canonicis libris post Noe, qui cum coniuge ac tribus filiis totidemque nuribus suis meruit per arcam uastatione diluuii liberari, non inuenimus usque Abraham cuiusquam pietatem euidenti diuino eloquio praedicatam, nisi quod Noe duos filios suos Sem et Iapheth prophetica benedictione commendat, intuens et praeuidens quod longe fuerat post futurum. Vnde factum est etiam illud, et filium suum medium, hoc est primogenito iuniorem ultimoque maiorem, qui peccauerat in patrem, non in ipso, sed in filio eius suo nepote malediceret his uerbis: Maledictus Chanaan puer, famulus erit fratribus suis. Chanaan porro natus fuerat ex Cham, qui patris dormientis nec texerat, sed potius prodiderat nuditatem.

[1] After the deluge, whether the vestiges of the advancing holy city were continuous or, with intervening times of impiety, were interrupted, such that no worshiper among men of the true one God existed, to ascertain with clarity, with the Scriptures speaking, is difficult, because in the canonical books after Noah—who with his wife and his three sons and their three daughters-in-law deserved to be liberated through the ark from the devastation of the deluge—we do not find, up to Abraham, anyone’s piety proclaimed by manifest divine utterance, except that Noah commends his two sons, Shem and Japheth, with a prophetic blessing, looking and foreseeing what was going to be long afterward in the future. Whence there also came about this: that his middle son—namely, younger than the firstborn and older than the last—who had sinned against his father, he cursed not in him himself, but in his son, his own grandson, with these words: “Cursed be Canaan the boy, a servant he shall be to his brothers.” Now Canaan had been born from Ham, who had not covered but rather had betrayed the nakedness of his sleeping father.

Vnde etiam quod secutus adiunxit benedictionem duorum maximi et minimi filiorum dicens: Benedictus Dominus Deus Sem, et erit Chanaan puer illius; latificet Deus Iapheth, et habitet in domibus Sem, sicut ipsa eiusdem Noe et uineae plantatio et ex eius fructu inebriatio et dormientis enudatio, et quae ibi cetera facta atque conscripta sunt, propheticis sunt grauidata sensibus et uelata tegminibus.

Whence also that which he added in sequence, the benediction of the two sons, the greatest and the least, saying: “Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant; may God make Japheth glad, and let him dwell in the houses of Shem,” just as the very plantation of the vine of that same Noah and the inebriation from its fruit and the denudation of the sleeper, and the other things there done and inscribed, are pregnant with prophetic senses and veiled with coverings.

[II] Sed nunc rerum effectu iam in posteris consecuto, quae operta fuerant, satis aperta sunt. Quis enim haec diligenter et intellegenter aduertens non agnoscat in Christo? Sem quippe, de cuius semine in carne natus est Christus, interpretatur nominatus.

[2] But now, with the outcome of things already attained in posterity, what had been hidden has become sufficiently open. For who, carefully and intelligently attending to these things, does not recognize them in Christ? For Sem, from whose seed Christ was born in the flesh, is interpreted “Named.”

Quid autem nominatius Christo, cuius nomen ubique iam fragrat, ita ut in cantico canticorum etiam ipsa praecedente prophetia unguento conparetur effuso; in cuius domibus, id est ecclesiis, habitat gentium latitudo? Nam Iapheth latitudo interpretatur. Cham porro, quod interpretatur calidus, medius Noe filius, tamquam se ab utroque discernens et inter utrumque remanens, nec in primitiis Israelitarum nec in plenitudine gentium, quid significat nisi haereticorum genus calidum, non spiritu sapientiae, sed inpatientiae, quo solent haereticorum feruere praecordia et pacem perturbare sanctorum?

What, however, is more named than Christ, whose name already is fragrant everywhere, so that in the Canticle of Canticles, with the very prophecy going before, he is even compared to an unguent poured forth; in whose houses, that is, churches, the breadth of the nations dwells? For Iapheth is interpreted breadth. But Cham, which is interpreted hot, the middle son of Noe, as if distinguishing himself from both and remaining between both, neither in the firstfruits of the Israelites nor in the fullness of the nations—what does he signify if not the hot-blooded kind of heretics, not with the spirit of wisdom, but of impatience, by which the hearts of heretics are wont to seethe and to disturb the peace of the saints?

Sed haec in usum cedunt proficientium, iuxta illud apostoli: Oportet et haereses esse, ut probati manifesti fiant in uobis. Vnde etiam scriptum est: Filius eruditus sapiens erit, inprudente autem ministro utetur. Multa quippe ad fidem catholicam pertinentia, dum haereticorum calida inquietudine exagitantur, ut aduersus eos defendi possint, et considerantur diligentius et intelleguntur clarius et instantius praedicantur, et ab aduersario mota quaestio discendi existit occasio.

But these things turn to the use of those advancing, according to that word of the Apostle: “There must also be heresies, that the approved may become manifest among you.” Whence also it is written: “An erudite son will be wise, but he will make use of an imprudent minister.” For many things pertaining to the catholic faith, while they are agitated by the hot restlessness of heretics, in order that they may be able to be defended against them, are both considered more diligently and understood more clearly and preached more insistently; and a question stirred by the adversary becomes an occasion for learning.

Quamuis non solum qui sunt apertissime separati, uerum omnes, qui Christiano uocabulo gloriantur et perdite uiuunt, non absurde possunt uideri medio Noe filio figurati; passionem quippe Christi, quae illius hominis nuditate significata est, et adnuntiant profitendo, et male agendo exhonorant. De talibus ergo dictum est: Ex fructibus eorum cognoscetis eos. Ideo Cham in filio suo maledictus est, tamquam in fructu suo, id est in opere suo.

Although not only those who are most openly separated, but indeed all who glory in the Christian appellation and live profligately, can not absurdly be seen to be prefigured by the middle son of Noah; for the Passion of Christ, which was signified by that man’s nakedness, they both announce by professing it, and by acting wickedly they dishonor it. Of such, therefore, it was said: By their fruits you shall know them. Therefore Ham was cursed in his son, as in his fruit, that is, in his work.

Vnde conuenienter et ipse filius eius Chanaan interpretatur motus eorum; quod aliud quid est quam opus eorum? Sem uero et Iapheth tamquam circumcisio et praeputium, uel sicut alio modo eos appellat apostolus, Iudaei et Graeci, sed uocati et iustificati, cognita quoquo modo nuditate patris, qua significabatur passio Saluatoris, sumentes uestimentum posuerunt supra dorsa sua et intrauerunt auersi et operuerunt nuditatem patris sui, nec uiderunt quod reuerendo texerunt. Quodam enim modo in passione Christi et quod pro nobis factum est honoramus et Iudaeorum facinus auersamur.

Whence fittingly his son himself, Canaan, is interpreted “their motions”; which—what else is it than their work? But Shem and Japheth, as circumcision and prepuce, or, as the apostle calls them in another way, Jews and Greeks—yet called and justified—having in some way come to know the father’s nakedness, by which the Passion of the Savior was signified, taking a garment laid it upon their backs and went in turned away, and covered their father’s nakedness, nor did they see what they covered in reverence. For in a certain way, in the Passion of Christ we both honor what was done for us and turn away from the deed of the Jews.

Vestimentum significat sacramentum, dorsa memoriam praeteritorum, quia passionem Christi eo scilicet iam tempore, quo habitat Iapheth in domibus Sem et malus frater in medio eorum, transactam celebrat ecclesia, non adhuc prospectat futuram.

The vestment signifies the sacrament, the backs the memory of things past, because the Passion of Christ—namely at that now time in which Japheth dwells in the houses of Shem and the evil brother is in their midst—the Church celebrates as having been accomplished, and does not as yet look forward to it as future.

Sed malus frater in filio suo, hoc est, in opere suo, puer, id est seruus est fratrum bonorum, cum ad exercitationem patientiae uel ad prouectum sapientiae scienter utantur malis boni. Sunt enim teste apostolo, qui Christum adnuntiant non caste; sed siue occasione, inquit, siue ueritate Christus adnuntietur. Ipse quippe plantauit uineam, de qua dicit propheta: Vinea Domini Sabaoth domus Israel est, et bibit de uino eius (siue ille calix hic intellegatur, de quo dicit: Potestis bibere calicem, quem ego bibiturus sum?

But the evil brother, in his son, that is, in his work, is a boy, that is, a servant of the good brothers, when the good knowingly make use of evils for the exercise of patience or for the advancement of wisdom. For there are, the apostle being witness, those who proclaim Christ not chastely; but, he says, whether by occasion or by truth, let Christ be proclaimed. He himself indeed planted a vineyard, of which the prophet says: The vineyard of the Lord of Hosts is the house of Israel, and he drank of its wine (whether that chalice is here to be understood, of which he says: Can you drink the chalice which I am about to drink?

et: Pater, si fieri potest, transeat calix iste, quo suam sine dubio significat passionem; siue, quia uinum fructus est uineae, hoc potius illo significatum est, quod ex ipsa uinea, hoc est ex genere Israelitarum, carnem pro nobis et sanguinem, ut pati posset, adsumpsit), et inebriatus est, id est passus est, et nudatus est: ibi namque nudata est, id est apparuit, eius infirmitas, de qua dicit apostolus: Etsi crucifixus est ex infirmitate. Vnde idem dicit: Infirmum Dei fortius est hominibus, et stultum Dei sapientius est hominibus. Quod uero cum dictum esset: Et nudatus est, addidit scriptura: In domo sua, eleganter ostendit, quod a suae carnis gente et domesticis sanguinis sui, utique Iudaeis, fuerat crucem mortemque passurus.

and: Father, if it can be done, let this chalice pass, by which without doubt he signifies his Passion; or else, since wine is the fruit of the vineyard, this rather than that is signified, that from the vineyard itself, that is, from the race of the Israelites, he took on flesh and blood for us, so that he might be able to suffer), and he was inebriated, that is, he suffered, and he was stripped: for there his infirmity was stripped bare, that is, appeared, of which the apostle says: Although he was crucified out of infirmity. Whence the same says: The infirm thing of God is stronger than men, and the foolish thing of God is wiser than men. Moreover, when it had been said: And he was stripped, Scripture added: In his own house, elegantly shows that by the people of his own flesh and the domestics of his own blood, namely the Jews, he was going to suffer the cross and death.

Hanc passionem Christi foris in sono tantum uocis reprobi adnuntiant; non enim quod adnuntiant intellegunt. Probi autem in interiore homine habent tam grande mysterium atque honorant intus in corde infirmum et stultum Dei, quia fortius et sapientius est hominibus. Huius rei figura est, quod Cham exiens hoc nuntiauit foris; Sem uero et Iapheth, ut hoc uelarent, id est honorarent, ingressi sunt, hoc est interius id egerunt.

This Passion of Christ the reprobate announce outside in the mere sound of the voice; for they do not understand what they announce. But the upright, in the inner man, hold so great a mystery and honor inwardly in the heart the infirmity and the foolishness of God, because it is stronger and wiser than men. The figure of this is that Ham, going out, announced this outside; but Shem and Japheth, so that they might veil this—that is, honor it—entered in, that is, they did it inwardly.

Haec scripturae secreta diuinae indagamus, ut possumus, alius alio magis minusue congruenter, uerum tamen fideliter certum tenentes non ea sine aliqua praefiguratione futurorum gesta atque conscripta neque nisi ad Christum et eius ecclesiam, quae ciuitas Dei est, esse referenda; cuius ab initio generis humani non defuit praedicatio, quam per omnia uidemus impleri. Benedictis igitur duobus filiis Noe atque uno in medio eorum maledicto deinceps usque ad Abraham de iustorum aliquorum, qui pie Deum colerent, commemoratione silentium est per annos amplius quam mille. Nec eos defuisse crediderim, sed si omnes commemorarentur, nimis longum fieret, et esset haec historica magis diligentia quam prophetica prouidentia.

We investigate these secrets of divine Scripture, as we are able, one more or less congruently than another, yet truly holding faithfully as certain that these things were not done and written without some prefiguration of future things and that they are to be referred only to Christ and his church, which is the City of God; whose preaching from the beginning of the human race has not been lacking, which we see being fulfilled through all things. With the two sons of Noah, then, blessed, and the one in their midst cursed, thereafter up to Abraham there is a silence of commemoration concerning certain just men who piously worshiped God, for more than a thousand years. Nor would I believe that they were lacking; but if all were commemorated, it would become too long, and this would be a historical diligence rather than a prophetic providence.

Illa itaque exequitur litterarum sacrarum scriptor istarum uel potius per eum Dei Spiritus, quibus non solum narrentur praeterita, uerum etiam praenuntientur futura, quae tamen pertinent ad ciuitatem Dei; quia et de hominibus, qui non sunt ciues eius, quidquid hic dicitur, ad hoc dicitur, ut illa ex comparatione contraria uel proficiat uel emineat. Non sane omnia, quae gesta narrantur, aliquid etiam significare putanda sunt; sed propter illa, quae aliquid significant, etiam ea, quae nihil significant, adtexuntur. Solo enim uomere terra proscinditur; sed ut hoc fieri possit, etiam cetera aratri membra sunt necessaria; et soli nerui in citharis atque huius modi uasis musicis aptantur ad cantum; sed ut aptari possint, insunt et cetera in compagibus organorum, quae non percutiuntur a canentibus, sed ea, quae percussa resonant, his conectuntur.

Accordingly this is carried out by the writer of these sacred letters, or rather by the Spirit of God through him, by whom not only are past things narrated, but future things also foretold, yet such as pertain to the City of God; for even concerning human beings who are not its citizens, whatever is said here is said to this end: that that city, by a contrary comparison, may either be advanced or made to stand out. Not, to be sure, are all the things that are reported to have been done to be thought also to signify something; but on account of those which do signify something, even those which signify nothing are interwoven. For by the plowshare alone the earth is furrowed; but in order that this can be done, the other members of the plow are also necessary; and only the strings in citharas and musical vessels of this sort are fitted for song; but that they may be fitted, there are also other parts in the frameworks of the instruments, which are not struck by the singers, but those which, when struck, resound are connected to them.

Ita in prophetica historia dicuntur et aliqua, quae nihil significant, sed quibus adhaereant quae significant et quodam modo religentur.

Thus in prophetic history some things are also said which signify nothing, but by which the things that do signify may adhere and be, in a certain way, bound together.

[III] Generationes ergo filiorum Noe deinceps intuendae, et quod de his dicendum uidetur, adtexendum est huic operi, quo ciuitatis utriusque, terrenae scilicet et caelestis, per tempora procursus ostenditur. Coeptae sunt enim commemorari a minimo filio, qui uocatus est Iapheth, cuius filii octo nominati sunt, nepotes autem septem de duobus filiis eius, tres ex uno, quattuor ex altero; fiunt itaque omnes quindecim. Filii autem Cham, hoc est medii filii Noe, quattuor et nepotes quinque ex uno eius filio, pronepotes duo ex nepote uno; fit eorum summa undecim.

[3] Therefore the generations of the sons of Noah are next to be considered, and what seems to be said about them must be woven into this work, wherein the progress of each city, earthly to wit and heavenly, through the times is shown. For they began to be recounted from the youngest son, who was called Japheth, of whom eight sons are named, but grandsons seven from his two sons—three from the one, four from the other; thus they are all fifteen. But the sons of Ham, that is, the middle son of Noah, are four, and grandsons five from one of his sons, and great-grandsons two from one grandson; their sum comes to eleven.

Quibus enumeratis reditur tamquam ad caput et dicitur: Chus autem genuit Nebroth; hic coepit esse gigans super terram. Hic erat gigans uenator contra Dominum Deum. Propter hoc dicunt: Sicut Nebroth gignas uenator contra Dominum.

With these having been enumerated, it returns as it were to the head and it is said: But Chus begot Nebroth; he began to be a giant upon the earth. He was a giant hunter against the Lord God. Because of this they say: As Nebroth, a giant hunter against the Lord.

Et factum est initium regni eius Babylon, Orech, Archad et Chalanne in terra Sennaar. De terra illa exiuit Assur et aedificauit Nineuen et Roboth ciuitatem et Chalach et Dasem inter medium Niueuae et Chalach: haec ciuitas magna. Iste porro Chus, pater gigantis Nebroth, primus nominatus est in filiis Cham, cuius quinque filii iam fuerant computati et nepotes duo.

And the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon, Orech, Archad, and Chalanne in the land of Sennaar. From that land Assur went out and built Nineveh and the city Roboth and Chalach and Dasem between Nineveh and Chalach: this is the great city. This Chus moreover, the father of the giant Nebroth, was named first among the sons of Cham, of whom five sons had already been counted and two grandsons.

Sed istum gigantem aut post nepotes suos natos genuit, aut, quod est credibilius, seorsum de illo propter eius eminentiam scriptura locuta est; quando quidem et regnum eius commemoratum est, cuius initium erat illa nobilissima Babylon ciuitas, et quae iuxta commemoratae sunt siue ciuitates siue regiones. Quod uero dictum est de terra illa, id est de terra Sennaar, quae pertinebat ad regnum Nebroth, exisse Assur et aedificasse Nineuen et alias quas contexuit ciuitates, longe postea factum est, quod ex hac occasione perstrinxit propter nobilitatem regni Assyriorum, quod mirabiliter dilatauit Ninus, Beli filius, conditor Nineuae ciuitatis magnae; cuius ciuitatis nomen ex illius nomine deriuatum est, ut a Nino Nineue uocaretur. Assur autem, unde Assyrii, non fuit in filiis Cham, medii filii Noe, sed in filiis Sem reperitur, qui fuit Noe maximus filius.

But this giant either he begot after his grandsons were born, or, what is more credible, Scripture spoke separately about him on account of his eminence; since indeed even his kingdom was commemorated, whose beginning was that most noble city Babylon, and those which were mentioned next to it, whether cities or regions. But as to what was said about that land—that is, the land of Shinar—which pertained to the kingdom of Nebroth, that Asshur went out from it and built Nineveh and the other cities which he connected, this was done long afterward; which he touched upon on this occasion because of the renown of the kingdom of the Assyrians, which Ninus, the son of Belus, wondrously enlarged, the founder of the great city Nineveh; whose city’s name was derived from his name, so that from Ninus it was called Nineveh. But Asshur, whence the Assyrians, was not among the sons of Ham, the middle son of Noah, but is found among the sons of Shem, who was Noah’s eldest son.

Vnde apparet de progenie Sem exortos fuisse, qui postea regnum gigantis illius obtinerent et inde procederent atque alias conderent ciuitates, quarum prima est a Nino appellata Nineue. Hinc reditur ad alium filium Cham, qui uocabatur Mesraim, et commemorantur quos genuit, non tamquam singuli homines, sed nationes septem. Et de sexta, uelut de sexto filio, gens commemoratur exisse, quae appellatur Philistiim; unde fiunt octo.

Whence it appears that from the progeny of Shem there arose those who later would obtain the kingdom of that giant, and from there proceed and found other cities, the first of which was called Nineveh by Ninus. Hence the account returns to another son of Ham, who was called Mesraim, and those whom he begot are commemorated, not as individual men, but as seven nations. And from the sixth, as it were from a sixth son, a nation is mentioned to have gone forth, which is called the Philistiim; whence they become eight.

Inde iterum ad Chanaan reditur, in quo filio maledictus est Cham, et quos genuit undecim nominantur. Deinde usque ad quos fines peruenerint commemoratis quibusdam ciuitatibus dicitur. Ac per hoc filiis nepotibusque computatis de progenie Cham triginta unus geniti referuntur.

Thence again it returns to Canaan, the son in whom Ham was accursed, and the eleven whom he begot are named. Then it is said how far they reached, certain cities being commemorated. And thus, with sons and grandsons computed, from the progeny of Ham thirty-one born are recorded.

Restat commemorare filios Sem, maximi filii Noe; ad eum quippe gradatim generationum istarum pe ruenit a minirfio exorta narratio. Sed unde incipiunt commemorari filii Sem, habet quiddam obscuritatis, quod expositione inlustrandum est, quia et multum ad rem pertinet, quam requirimus. Sic enim legitur: Et Sem natus est, et ipsi patri omnium filiorum, Heber, fratri Iapheth maiori.

Rest it remains to commemorate the sons of Shem, the greatest son of Noah; for to him, stepwise, the narration of these generations, arisen from the younger, comes. But the point where the sons of Shem begin to be commemorated has a certain obscurity which must be illustrated by an exposition, because it also very much pertains to the matter we require. For thus it is read: And Shem was born, and he himself the father of all the sons of Heber, the brother of Japheth the elder.

Ordo uerborum est: Et Sem natus est Heber, etiam ipsi, id est ipsi Sem, natus est Heber, qui Sem pater est omnium filiorum. Sem ergo patriarcham intellegi uoluit omnium, qui de stirpe eius exorti sunt, quos commemoraturus est, siue sint filii, siue nepotes et pronepotes et deinceps indidem exorti. Non sane istum Heber genuit Sem, sed ab illo quintus in progenitorum serie reperitur.

The order of the words is: And to Shem was born Heber, even to him, that is, to Shem himself, was born Heber, who is the father of all the sons. Therefore he wished Shem to be understood as the patriarch of all who have sprung from his stock, whom he is going to recount, whether they be sons, or grandsons and great-grandsons, and thereafter those sprung from the same source. Not, to be sure, did Shem beget this Heber, but from him he is found as the fifth in the series of progenitors.

Sem quippe inter alios filios genuit Arphaxat, Arphaxat genuit Cainan, Cainan genuit Sala, Sala genuit Heber. Non itaque frustra ipse primus est nominatus in progenie ueniente de Sem et praelatus etiam filiis, cum sit quintus nepos, nisi quia uerum est, quod traditur, ex illo Hebraeos esse cognominatos, tamquam Heberaeos; cum et alia possit esse opinio, ut ex Abraham tamquam Abrahaei dicti esse uideantur; sed nimirum hoc uerum est, quod ex Heber Heberaei appellati sunt, ac deinde una detrita littera Hebraei, quam linguam solus Israel populus potuit obtinere, in quo Dei ciuitas et in sanctis peregrinata est et in omnibus sacramento adumbrata. Igitur filii Sem prius sex nominantur, deinde ex uno eorum nati sunt quattuor nepotes eius, itemque alter filiorum Sem genuit eius nepotem, atque ex illo itidem pronepos natus est atque inde abnepos, qui est Heber.

For Sem, among his other sons, begot Arphaxat; Arphaxat begot Cainan; Cainan begot Sala; Sala begot Heber. Therefore it is not without reason that he himself is first named in the progeny coming from Sem and is preferred even to the sons, though he is the fifth great-grandson, unless because it is true, as is handed down, that from him the Hebrews were cognominated, as it were Heberaeans; although another opinion can be, that they seem to have been called from Abraham, as it were Abrahaeans; but assuredly this is true, that from Heber they were called Heberaeans, and then, with one letter worn away, Hebraeans—that language which the people Israel alone was able to hold, in which the City of God both sojourned among the saints and was in all things adumbrated by sacrament. Accordingly, the sons of Sem are first named as six; then from one of them four grandsons of his were born; likewise another of the sons of Sem begot his grandson; and from that one likewise a great-grandson was born, and thence a great-great-grandson, who is Heber.

Genuit autem Heber duos filios, quorum unum appellauit Phalech, quod interpretatur diuidens. Deinde scriptura subiungens rationemque huius nominis reddens: Quia in diebus, inquit, eius diuisa est terra. Hoc autem quid sit, post apparebit.

Heber moreover begot two sons, of whom he named one Phalech, which is interpreted “dividing.” Then Scripture, subjoining and rendering the rationale of this name: “Because, he says, in his days the earth was divided.” What this is, however, will appear afterward.

Alius uero, qui natus est ex Heber, genuit duodecim filios; ac per hoc fiunt omnes progeniti de Sem uiginti septem. In summa igitur omnes progeniti de tribus filiis Noe, id est quindecim de Iapheth, triginta unus de Cham, uiginti septem de Sem fiunt septuaginta tres. Deinde sequitur scriptura dicens: Hi filii Sem in tribubus suis secundum linguas suas in regionibus suis et in gentibus suis; itemque de omnibus: Haec, inquit, tribus filiorum Noe secundum generationes eorum, secundum gentes eorum.

Another indeed, who was born from Heber, begot twelve sons; and through this all the progeny from Shem come to twenty-seven. In sum, therefore, all the progeny from the three sons of Noah, that is fifteen from Japheth, thirty-one from Ham, twenty-seven from Shem, come to seventy-three. Then the Scripture follows, saying: These are the sons of Shem in their tribes according to their languages, in their regions and in their nations; and likewise concerning all: These, it says, are the tribes of the sons of Noah according to their generations, according to their nations.

Ab his dispersae sunt insulae gentium super terram post diluuium. Vnde colligitur septuaginta tres uel potius (quod postea demonstrabitur) septuaginta duas gentes tunc fuisse, non homines. Nam et prius, cum fuissent commemorati filii Iapheth, ita conclusum est: Ex his segregatae sunt insulae gentium in terra sua, unus quosque secundum linguam in tribubus suis et in gentibus suis.

From these the islands of the nations were dispersed over the earth after the Deluge. Whence it is gathered that seventy-three—or rather (which will be demonstrated later) seventy-two—nations then existed, not men. For also earlier, when the sons of Japheth had been commemorated, it was thus concluded: From these the islands of the nations were segregated in their own land, each one according to his language, in their tribes and in their nations.

Iam uero in filiis Cham quodam loco apertius gentes commemoratae sunt, sicut superius ostendi. Mesraim genuit eos, qui dicuntur Ludiim; et eodem modo ceterae usque ad septem gentes. Et enumeratis omnibus postea concludens: Hi filii Cham, inquit, in tribubus suis secundum linguas suas in regionibus suis et in gentibus suis.

Now indeed in the sons of Ham the gentes have in a certain place been mentioned more openly, as I showed above. Mizraim begot those who are called the Ludim; and in the same manner the others, up to seven nations. And, all having been enumerated, he afterwards concludes: "These are the sons of Ham," he says, "in their tribes according to their languages, in their regions and in their nations."

Propterea ergo multorum filii non sunt commemorati, quia gentibus aliis nascendo accesserunt, ipsi autem gentes facere neqmuerunt. Nam qua alia causa, cum filii Iapheth octo enumerentur, ex duobus eorum tantum filii nati commemorantur, et cum filii Cham quattuor nominentur, ex tribus tantum qui nati sunt adiciuntur, et cum filii Sem nominentur sex, duorum tantum posteritas adtexitur? Numquid ceteri sine filiis remanserunt?

Therefore, then, the sons of many are not commemorated, because by being born they were added to other nations, but they themselves were not able to make nations. For what other cause is there, when the sons of Japheth are enumerated as eight, that only of two of them are sons born commemorated; and when the sons of Ham are named as four, only of three are those who were born added; and when the sons of Shem are named as six, only the posterity of two is adjoined? Did the rest remain without sons?

Absit hoc credere; sed gentes, propter quas commemorari digni essent, non utique fecerunt, quia, sicut nascebantur, aliis gentibus addebantur.

Far be it to believe this; but they certainly did not form nations, on account of which they would be worthy to be commemorated, because, as they were being born, they were being added to other nations.

[IV] Cum ergo in suis linguis istae gentes fuisse referantur, redit tamen narrator ad illud tempus, quando una lingua omnium fuit, et inde iam exponit, quid acciderit, ut linguarum diuersitas nasceretur. Et erat, inquit, omnis terra labium unum et uox una omnibus. Et factum est, cum mouerent ipsi ab Oriente, inuenerunt campum in terra Sennaar, et habitauerunt ibi.

[4] Since therefore these nations are reported to have been in their own tongues, nevertheless the narrator returns to that time when there was one language of all, and from there already he expounds what had happened, so that a diversity of tongues might be born. “And the whole earth,” he says, “was one lip and one voice for all.” And it came to pass, when they themselves were moving from the East, they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there.

Et dixit homo proximo: Venite, faciamus lateres et coquamus illos igni. Et facti sunt illis lateres in lapidem, et bitumen erat illis lutum, et dixerunt: Venite, aedificemus nobismetipsis ciuitatem et turrem, cuius caput erit usque ad caelum, et faciamus nostrum nomen antequam dispergamur in faciem omnis terrae. Et descendit Dominus uidere ciuitatem et turrem, quam aedificauerunt filii hominum.

And a man said to his neighbor: Come, let us make bricks and bake them with fire. And the bricks were for them in place of stone, and bitumen was for them as mortar; and they said: Come, let us build for ourselves a city and a tower, whose head shall be up to heaven, and let us make a name for ourselves before we are scattered over the face of all the earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built.

Et dixit Dominus Deus: Ecce genus unum et labium unum omnium; et hoc inchoauerunt facere, et nunc non deficient ex illis omnia quae conati fuerint facere; uenite, et descendentes confundamus ibi linguam eorum, ut non audiant unusquisque uocem proximi. Et dispersit eos Dominus inde super faciem omnis terrae, et cessauerunt aedificantes ciuitatem et turrem. Propter hoc appellatum est nomen illius confusio, quia ibi confudit Dominus labia omnis terrae; et inde dispersit illos Dominus Deus super faciem omnis terrae.

And the Lord God said: Behold, one race and one lip of all; and this they have begun to do, and now there will not be deficient to them anything of all the things which they shall have attempted to do; come, and descending let us confound there their tongue, so that each may not hear the voice of his neighbor. And the Lord scattered them from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city and the tower. For this reason its name was appellated Confusion, because there the Lord confounded the lips of all the earth; and from there the Lord God scattered them over the face of all the earth.

Ista ciuitas, quae appellata est confusio, ipsa est Babylon, cuius mirabilem constructionem etiam gentium commendat historia. Babylon quippe interpretatur confusio. Vnde colligitur, gigantem illum Nebroth fuisse illius conditorem, quod superius breuiter fuerat intimatum, ubi, cum de illo scriptura loqueretur, ait initium regni eius fuisse Babylonem, id est quae ciuitatum ceterarum gereret principatum, ubi esset tamquam in metropoli habitaculum regni; quamuis perfecta non fuerit usque in tantum modum, quantum superba cogitabat impietas.

That city, which was called Confusion, is Babylon itself, whose marvelous construction even the history of the nations commends. For Babylon is interpreted “confusion.” Whence it is gathered that that giant Nebroth (Nimrod) was its founder, which above had been briefly intimated, where, when Scripture was speaking about him, it says the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon, that is, the one which would bear the principate of the other cities, where there would be, as it were, in a metropolis, the dwelling-place of the kingdom; although it was not perfected to such a degree as haughty impiety was imagining.

Nam nimia disponebatur altitudo, quae dicta est usque in caelum, siue unius turris eius, quam praecipuam moliebantur inter alias, siue omnium turrium; quae per numerum singularem ita significatae sunt, ut dicitur miles et intelleguntur milla militum; ut rana et lucusta; sic enim appellata est multitudo ranarum ac lucustarum in plagis, quibus Aegyptii percussi sunt per Moysen. Quid autem factura fuerat humana et uana praesumptio, cuiuslibet et quantumlibet in caelum aduersus Deum altitudinem molis extolleret, quando montes transcenderet uniuersos, quando spatium nebulosi aeris huius euaderet? Quid denique noceret Deo quantacumque uel spiritalis uel corporalis elatio?

For an excessive altitude was being planned, which is said to be up to heaven, whether of its one tower, which they were laboring to make the principal among the others, or of all the towers; which were thus signified through the singular number, as one says soldier and thousands of soldiers are understood; as frog and locust; for thus was the multitude of frogs and locusts named in the plagues by which the Egyptians were smitten through Moses. But what would human and vain presumption have accomplished, even if it should raise a mass’s height of whatever sort and however great into heaven against God—when would it overpass all the mountains, when would it escape the space of this nebulous air? What, finally, would harm God, by however great an exaltation, whether spiritual or corporeal?

Tutam ueramque in caelum uiam molitur humilitas, sursum leuans cor ad Dominum, non contra Dominum, sicut dictus est gigans iste uenator contra Dominum. Quod non intellegentes nonnulli ambiguo Graeco falsi sunt, ut non interpretarentur contra Dominum, sed ante Dominum; *e)nanti/on quippe et contra et ante significat. Hoc enim uerbum est in psalmo: Et ploremus ante Dominum quo nos fecit; et hoc uerbum est etiam in libro Iob, ubi scriptum est: In furorem erupisti contra Dominum.

Humility constructs a safe and true way into heaven, lifting the heart upward to the Lord, not against the Lord, just as this giant is said to be a hunter against the Lord. Not understanding this, certain persons have been deceived by an ambiguous Greek, so that they interpreted not “against the Lord,” but “before the Lord”; for *e)nanti/on signifies both against and before. For this is the word in the psalm: And let us weep before the Lord who made us; and this is the word also in the book of Job, where it is written: You have burst into fury against the Lord.

Sic ergo intellegendus est gigans iste uenator contra Dominum. Quid autem hic significatur hoc nomine, quod est uenator, nisi animalium terrigenarum deceptor oppressor extinctor? Erigebat ergo cum suis populis turrem contra Deum, qua est impia significata superbia.

Thus, therefore, this giant, a hunter against the Lord, is to be understood. But what is signified here by this name, which is “hunter,” if not a deceiver, oppressor, extinguisher of earth-born animals? He was therefore erecting with his peoples a tower against God, whereby impious pride is signified.

Merito autem malus punitur affectus, etiam cui non succedit effectus. Genus uero ipsum poenae quale fuit? Quoniam dominatio imperantis in lingua est, ibi est damnata superbia, ut non intellegeretur iubens homini, qui noluit intellegere ut oboediret Deo iubenti.

Rightly, moreover, an evil affect/disposition is punished, even when the effect does not succeed to it. But what was the very kind of the penalty? Since the domination of the commander is in the tongue, there pride was condemned, so that the one giving orders to man would not be understood, he who had been unwilling to understand in order to obey God giving orders.

Sic illa conspiratio dissoluta est, cum quisque ab eo, quem non intellegebat, abscederet nec se nisi ei, cum quo loqui poterat, adgregaret; et per linguas diuisae sunt gentes dispersaeque per terras, sicut Deo placuit, qui hoc modis occultis nobisque inconprehensibilibus fecit.

Thus that conspiracy was dissolved, when each withdrew from him whom he did not understand and joined himself only to him with whom he could speak; and through languages the nations were divided and scattered over the lands, as it pleased God, who did this by hidden modes and incomprehensible to us.

[V] Quod enim scriptum est: Et descendit Dominus uidere ciuitatem et turrem, quam aedificauerunt filii hominum, hoc est non filii Dei, sed illa societas secundum hominem uiuens, quam terrenam dicimus ciuitatem: non loco mouetur Deus, qui semper est ubique totus, sed descendere dicitur, cum aliquid facit in terra, quod praeter usitatum naturae cursum mirabiliter factum praesentiam quodam modo eius ostendat; nec uidendo discit ad tempus, qui numquam potest aliquid ignorare, sed ad tempus uidere et cognoscere dicitur, quod uideri et cognosci facit. Non sic ergo uidebatur illa ciuitas, quo modo eam Deus uideri fecit, quando sibi quantum displiceret ostendit. Quamuis possit intellegi Deus ad illam ciuitatem descendisse, quia descenderunt angeli eius in quibus habitat; ut, quod adiunctum est: Et dixit Dominus Deus: Ecce genus unum et labium unum omnium, et cetera, ac deinde additum: Venite et descendentes confundamus ibi linguam eorum, recapitulatio sit, demonstrans quem ad modum factum sit, quod dictum fuerat: Descendit Dominus.

[5] For what is written: “And the Lord descended to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built,” that is, not sons of God, but that society living according to man, which we call the earthly city: God is not moved by place, who is always wholly everywhere; but he is said to descend when he does something on earth which, beyond the usual course of nature, being done miraculously, in some way shows his presence; nor does he learn by seeing for a time, he who can never be ignorant of anything, but he is said to see and to know for a time that which he causes to be seen and to be known. Therefore that city was not being seen in the manner in which God made it to be seen, when he showed how greatly it displeased him. Although it can be understood that God descended to that city, because his angels, in whom he dwells, descended; so that what is appended: “And the Lord God said: Behold, one race and one tongue of all,” and the rest, and then added: “Come, and let us, descending, confound there their language,” may be a recapitulation, showing in what manner it was done which had been said: “The Lord descended.”

Si enim iam descenderat, quid sibi uult: Venite et descendentes confundamus <quod intellegitur angelis dictum>, nisi quia per angelos descendebat, qui in angelis descendentibus erat? Et bene non ait: "Venite et descendentes confundite", sed: Confundamus ibi linguam eorum; ostendens ita se operari per ministros suos, ut sint etiam ipsi cooperatores Dei, sicut apostolus dicit: Dei enim sumus cooperarii.

For if He had already descended, what does “Come and, in descending, let us confound” mean <which is understood to have been said to the angels>, unless that He was descending through the angels, who was in the angels as they descended? And rightly He does not say: “Come and, in descending, confound,” but: Let us confound their language there; showing that He thus works through His ministers, so that they too are cooperators of God, as the apostle says: For we are cooperators of God.

[VI] Poterat et illud, quando factus est homo, de angelis intellegi quod dictum est: Faciamus hominem, quia non dixit: "Faciam"; sed quia sequitur ad imaginem nostram, nec fas est credere ad imaginem angelorum hominem factum, aut eandem esse imaginem angelorum et Dei: recte illic intellegitur pluralitas trinitatis. Quae tamen trinitas quia unus Deus est, etiam cum dixisset: "Faciamus": "Et fecit, inquit, Deus hominem ad imaginem Dei", non dixit "fecerunt dii" aut "ad imaginem deorum". Poterat et hic eadem intellegi trinitas, tamquam Pater dixerit ad Filium et Spiritum sanctum: Venite, et descendentes confundamus ibi linguam eorum, si aliquid esset, quod angelos prohiberet intellegi, quibus potius conuenit uenire ad Deum motibus sanctis, hoc est cogitationibus piis, quibus ab eis consulitur incommutabilis Veritas, tamquam lex aeterna in illa eorum curia superna. Neque enim sibi ipsi sunt ueritas, sed creatricis participes Veritatis ad illam mouentur, tamquam ad fontem uitae, ut, quod non habent ex se ipsis, capiant ex ipsa.

[6] It could also be, when man was made, that what was said be understood of the angels: Let us make man, because he did not say: "I will make"; but because there follows in our image, nor is it lawful to believe that man was made in the image of angels, or that the image of the angels and of God is the same: rightly there is understood there the plurality of the Trinity. Which Trinity, however, since it is one God, even when he had said: "Let us make": "And God made, he says, man in the image of God," he did not say "the gods made" or "in the image of the gods." The same Trinity could also be understood here, as though the Father had said to the Son and the Holy Spirit: Come, and, descending, let us confound their language there, if there were anything that would forbid the angels to be understood—angels to whom it rather befits to come to God with holy motions, that is, with pious thoughts, by which the Immutable Truth is consulted by them, as the eternal law in that their supernal curia. For they are not Truth to themselves, but, as participants of the Creator Truth, they are moved toward her, as toward the fount of life, that what they do not have from themselves they may take from her.

Et eorum stabilis est iste motus, quo ueniunt, qui non recedunt. Nec sic loquitur angelis Deus, quo modo nos in uicem nobis uel Deo uel angelis uel ipsi angeli nobis siue per illos Deus nobis, sed ineffabili suo modo; nobis autem hic indicatur nostro modo. Dei quippe sublimior ante suum factum locutio ipsius sui facti est inmutabilis ratio, quae non habet sonum strepentem atque transeuntem, sed uim sempiterne manentem et temporaliter operantem.

And this motion of theirs is stable, by which they come, who do not withdraw. Nor does God speak to the angels in such a way as we in turn to one another or to God or to the angels, or the angels themselves to us, or God to us through them, but in his ineffable mode; to us, however, it is here indicated in our own mode. For indeed the more sublime speech of God, prior to his act, is the immutable reason of his very act, which does not have a clattering and passing sound, but a power abiding sempiternally and operating temporally.

Hac loquitur angelis sanctis, nobis autem aliter longe positis. Quando autem etiam nos aliquid talis locutionis interioribus auribus capimus, angelis propinquamus. Non itaque mihi adsidue reddenda ratio est in hoc opere de locutionibus Dei.

By this he speaks to the holy angels; to us, however, placed far away, otherwise. And when we too grasp with the inner ears something of such a locution, we draw near to the angels. Therefore, an account is not to be assiduously rendered by me in this work concerning the locutions of God.

Aut enim Veritas incommutabilis per se ipsam ineffabiliter loquitur rationalis creaturae mentibus, aut per mutabilem creaturam loquitur, siue spiritalibus imaginibus nostro spiritui siue corporalibus uocibus corporis sensui.

For either Unchangeable Truth speaks ineffably by itself to the minds of the rational creature, or it speaks through a changeable creature—whether by spiritual images to our spirit, or by bodily voices to the sense of the body.

Illud sane quod dictum est: Et nunc non deficient ex illis omnia, quae conati fuerint facere, non dictum est confirmando, sed tamquam interrogando, sicut solet a comminantibus dici, quem ad modum ait quidam:

That, to be sure, which was said: “And now none of all the things which they shall have tried to do will be lacking to them,” was not said by confirming, but as it were by questioning, as it is wont to be said by those who threaten, in the way that a certain one says:

Non arma expedient totaque ex urbe sequentur?

Will they not ready arms, and will all from the city follow?

Sic ergo accipiendum est, tamquam dixerit: "Nonne omnia deficient ex illis, quae conati fuerint facere?" Sed si ita dicatur, non exprimit comminantem. Verum propter tardiusculos addidimus particulam, id est "ne", ut diceremus "nonne", quoniam uocem pronuntiantis non possumus scribere.

Thus, therefore, it is to be taken, as if he had said: "Will not all things fail them, which they shall have endeavored to do?" But if it be said thus, it does not express one threatening. But indeed, on account of the rather slow, we have added a particle, that is "ne", so that we might say "nonne", since we cannot write the voice of the one pronouncing.

Ex illis igitur tribus hominibus, Noe filiis, septuaginta tres, uel potius, ut ratio declaratura est, septuaginta duae gentes totidemque linguae per terras esse coeperunt, quae crescendo et insulas impleuerunt. Auctus est autem numerus gentium multo amplius quam linguarum. Nam et in Africa barbaras gentes in una lingua plurimas nouimus.

Out of those three men, the sons of Noah, seventy-three—or rather, as reason is about to declare, seventy-two—nations and just as many languages began to be throughout the lands, which by growing even filled the islands. But the number of nations has been increased much more than that of languages. For even in Africa we have known very many barbarian nations within one language.

[VII] Et homines quidem multiplicatio genere humano ad insulas inhabitandas nauigio transire potuisse, quis ambigat? Sed quaestio est de omni genere bestiarum, quae sub cura hominum non sunt neque sicuti ranae nascuntur ex terra, sed sola commixtione maris et feminae propagantur, sicut lupi atque huius modi cetera, quo modo post diluuium, quo ea, quae in arca non erant, cuncta deleta sunt, etiam in insulis esse potuerint, si reparata non sunt nisi ex his, quorum genera in utroque sexu arca seruauit. Possunt quidem credi ad insulas natando transisse, sed proximas.

[7] And indeed, as for human beings, who would doubt that the multiplication of the human race could have crossed by ship to inhabit the islands? But the question is about every kind of beasts that are not under the care of men and are not born from the earth as frogs are, but are propagated only by the commixture of male and female—like wolves and the rest of this sort—how, after the deluge, by which all things that were not in the ark were destroyed, they could even have been on the islands, if they were restored only from those whose kinds (genera) in both sexes the ark preserved. They can indeed be believed to have crossed to the islands by swimming, but only the nearest.

Sunt autem quaedam tam longe positae a continentibus terris, ut ad eas nulla uideatur natare potuisse bestiarum. Quod si homines eas captas secum aduexerunt et eo modo ubi habitabant earum genera instituerunt uenandi studio, fieri potuisse incredibile non est; quamuis iussu Dei siue permissu etiam opere angelorum negandum non sit potuisse transferri. Si uero terra exortae sunt secundum originem primam, quando dixit Deus: Producat terra animam uiuam, multo clarius apparet non tam reparandorum animalium causa quam figurandarum uariarum gentium propter ecclesiae sacramentum in arca fuisse omnia genera, si in insulis, quo transire non possent, multa animalia terra produxit.

There are, however, certain places set so far from the continental lands that no beasts seem to have been able to swim to them. But if men conveyed them, captured, with themselves, and in that way, where they dwelt, established their kinds out of zeal for hunting, it is not unbelievable that this could have happened; although, by the command of God or by permission, even by the work of angels, it is not to be denied that they could have been transferred. But if they sprang from the earth according to the primal origin, when God said: Let the earth bring forth a living soul, it appears much more clearly that all kinds were in the ark not so much for the sake of restoring animals as for the prefiguring of various nations on account of the Church’s sacrament, if on islands, to which they could not cross, the earth produced many animals.

[VIII] Quaeritur etiam, utrum ex filiis Noe uel potius ex illo uno homine, unde etiam ipsi extiterunt, propagata esse credendum sit quaedam monstrosa hominum genera, quae gentium narrat historia, sicut perhibentur quidam unum habere oculum in fronte media, quibusdam plantas uersas esse post crura, quibusdam utriusque sexus esse naturam et dextram mammam uirilem, sinistram muliebrem, uicibusque inter se coeundo et gignere et parere; aliis ora non esse eosque per nares tantummodo halitu uiuere, alios statura esse cubitales, quos Pygmaeos a cubito Graeci uocant, alibi quinquennes concipere feminas et octauum uitae annum non excedere. Item ferunt esse gentem, ubi singula crura in pedibus habent nec poplitem flectunt, et sunt mirabilis celeritatis; qu os Sciopodas uocant, quod per aestum in terra iacentes resupini umbra se pedum protegant; quosdam sine ceruice oculos habentes in umeris, et cetera hominum uel quasi hominum genera, quae in maritima platea Carthaginis musiuo picta sunt, ex libris deprompta uelut curiosioris historiae. Quid dicam de Cynocephalis, quorum canina capita atque ipse latratus magis bestias quam homines confitetur?

[8] It is also asked whether from the sons of Noah, or rather from that one man whence even they themselves came forth, it is to be believed that certain monstrous genera of humans were propagated, which the history of the nations relates: as some are said to have one eye in the middle of the forehead; for some the soles are turned behind the legs; for some the nature of both sexes, the right breast male, the left female, and by turns, by coming together with one another, both to beget and to bear; for others that they have no mouths and live by breath only through the nostrils; others are of cubit stature, whom the Greeks call Pygmies from the cubit; elsewhere that women conceive at five years old and do not exceed the eighth year of life. Likewise they report there is a people where each has a single leg and foot, nor do they bend the knee, and they are of wondrous swiftness; whom they call Sciopods, because in the heat, lying on the ground face-up, they protect themselves with the shadow of their feet; some without a neck, having eyes in their shoulders; and the other genera of humans or as-it-were-humans, which on the seaside plaza of Carthage are depicted in mosaic, drawn from books as if of a more curious history. What shall I say of the Cynocephali, whose canine heads and the very barking confess them to be beasts rather than humans?

Sed omnia genera hominum, quae dicuntur esse, credere non est necesse. Verum quisquis uspiam nascitur homo, id est animal rationale mortale, quamlibet nostris inusitatam sensibus gerat corporis formam seu colorem siue motum siue sonum siue qualibet ui, qualibet parte, qualibet qualitate naturam: ex illo uno protoplasto originem ducere nullus fidelium dubitauerit. Apparet tamen quid in pluribus natura obtinuerit et quid sit ipsa raritate mirabile.

But it is not necessary to believe all the kinds of human beings that are said to exist. Yet whoever anywhere is born a human, that is, a rational mortal animal, no matter how unusual to our senses he bears a form of body or a color or a motion or a sound or a nature—by whatever power, in whatever part, in whatever quality—none of the faithful would doubt that he draws his origin from that one Protoplast. It is apparent, however, what nature has established in the majority, and what is wondrous by that very rarity.

Qualis autem ratio redditur de monstrosis apud nos hominum partubus, talis de monstrosis quibusdam gentibus reddi potest. Deus enim creator est omnium, qui ubi et quando creari quid oporteat uel oportuerit, ipse nouit, sciens uniuersitatis pulchritudinem quarum partium uel similitudine uel diuersitate contexat. Sed qui totum inspicere non potest, tamquam deformitate partis offenditur, quoniam cui congruat et quo referatur ignorat.

As the account is rendered about monstrous births of men among us, so an account can be rendered about certain monstrous peoples. For God is the creator of all, who himself knows where and when what ought to be created or ought to have been created, knowing with which parts, whether by similarity or by diversity, he interweaves the beauty of the universe. But he who cannot behold the whole is offended as if by the deformity of a part, since he is ignorant to what it is congruent and to what it is referred.

Pluribus quam quinis digitis in manibus et pedibus nasci homines nouimus; et haec leuior est quam ulla distantia; sed tamen absit, ut quis ita desipiat, ut existimet in numero humanorum digitorum errasse Creatorem, quamuis nesciens cur hoc fecerit. Ita etsi maior diuersitas oriatur, scit ille quid egerit, cuius opera iuste nemo reprehendit. Apud Hipponem Zaritum est homo quasi lunatas habens plantas et in eis binos tantummodo digitos, similes et manus.

We know that humans are born with more than five digits on hands and feet; and this is a lighter difference than any; but still, far be it that anyone should be so foolish as to suppose that the Creator erred in the number of human digits, although not knowing why he did this. Thus even if a greater diversity should arise, he knows what he has done, whose works no one justly reprehends. At Hippo Zaritus there is a man having soles as if lunate, and in them only two digits; and the hands similar.

Si aliqua gens talis esset, illi curiosae atque mirabili adderetur historiae. Num igitur istum propter hoc negabimus ex illo uno, qui primus creatus est, esse propagatum? Androgyni, quos etiam Hermaphroditos nuncupant, quamuis ad modum rari sint, difficile est tamen ut temporibus desint, in quibus sic uterque sexus apparet, ut, ex quo potius debeant accipere nomen, incertum sit; a meliore tamen, hoc est a masculino, ut appellarentur, loquendi consuetudo praeualuit.

If there were any such race, it would be added to that curious and marvelous history. Shall we then, on account of this, deny that this man has been propagated from that one who was first created? The androgynes, whom they also call Hermaphrodites, although exceedingly rare, yet it is scarcely the case that there are not times in which both sexes appear in such a way that it is uncertain from which they ought rather to receive their name; yet from the better, that is, the masculine, the custom of speech has prevailed for them to be called.

Nam nemo umquam Androgynaecas aut Hermaphroditas nuncupauit. Ante annos aliquot, nostra certe memoria, in Oriente duplex homo natus est superioribus membris, inferioribus simplex. Nam duo erant capita, duo pectora, quattuor manus, uenter autem unus, et pedes duo, sicut uni homini; et tamdiu uixit, ut multos ad eum uidendum fama contraheret.

For no one has ever named them Androgynaecae or Hermaphroditae. A few years ago, certainly within our memory, in the East a double man was born—double in the upper members, simple in the lower. For there were two heads, two chests, four hands, but one belly and two feet, as in one man; and he lived so long that fame drew many to see him.

Quis autem omnes commemorare possit humanos fetus longe dissimiles his, ex quibus eos natos esse certissimum est? Sicut ergo haec ex illo uno negari non possunt originem ducere, ita quaecumque gentes in diuersitatibus corporum ab usitato naturae cursu, quem plures et prope omnes tenent, uelut exorbitasse traduntur, si definitione illa includuntur, ut rationalia animalia sint atque mortalia, ab eodem ipso uno primo patre omnium stirpem trahere confitendum est, si tamen uera sunt quae de illarum nationum uarietate et tanta inter se atque nobiscum diuersitate traduntur. Nam et simias et cercopithecos et sphingas si nesciremus non homines esse, sed bestias, possent illi historici de sua curiositate gloriantes uelut gentes aliquas hominum nobis inpunita uanitate mentiri.

Who, moreover, could recount all the human offspring far dissimilar to those from whom it is most certain that they were born? Therefore, just as these cannot be denied to draw their origin from that one, so whatever peoples are reported, in diversities of bodies, to have, as it were, deviated from the accustomed course of nature, which the many and well-nigh all hold, if they are included by that definition, that they are rational animals and mortal, it must be acknowledged that they draw their stock from that very same one first father of all—if, however, the things handed down about the variety of those nations and the so great diversity among themselves and with us are true. For even apes and cercopitheci and sphinxes, if we did not know them to be not humans but beasts, those historians, glorying in their curiosity, could with unpunished vanity lie to us as though they were certain peoples of men.

Sed si homines sunt, de quibus illa mira conscripta sunt: quid, si propterea Deus uoluit etiam nonnullas gentes ita creare, ne in his monstris, quae apud nos oportet ex hominibus nasci, eius sapientiam, qua naturam fingit humanam, uelut artem cuiuspiam minus perfecti opificis, putaremus errasse? Non itaque nobis uideri debet absurdum, ut, quem ad modum in singulis qu ibus que gentibus quaedam monstra sunt hominum, ita in uniuerso genere humano quaedam monstra sint gentium. Quapropter ut istam quaestionem pedetemtim cauteque concludam: aut illa, quae talia de quibusdam gentibus scripta sunt, omnino nulla sunt; aut si sunt, homines non sunt; aut ex Adam sunt, si homines sunt.

But if they are men about whom those marvels have been written: what if for this reason God also willed to create certain nations thus, lest, in the case of those monsters which among us it is proper to be born from men, we should think that his wisdom, by which he fashions human nature, had erred, as though it were the art of some less perfect artificer? Therefore it ought not to seem absurd to us that, just as in individual peoples there are certain monstrosities of men, so in the universal human genus there are certain monstrosities of nations. Wherefore, that I may conclude this question step by step and cautiously: either those things which have been written of certain nations as such are altogether nothing; or, if they exist, they are not men; or they are from Adam, if they are men.

[IX] Quod uero et antipodas esse fabulantur, id est homines a contraria parte terrae, ubi sol oritur, quando occidit nobis, aduersa pedibus nostris calcare uestigia: nulla ratione credendum est. Neque hoc ulla historica cognitione didicisse se adfirmant, sed quasi ratiocinando coniectant, eo quod intra conuexa caeli terra suspensa sit, eundemque locum mundus habeat et infimum et medium; et ex hoc opinantur alteram terrae partem, quae infra est, habitatione hominum care re non posse. Nec adtendunt, etiamsi figura conglobata et rutunda mundus esse credatur siue aliqua ratione monstretur, non tamen esse consequens, ut etiam ex illa parte ab aquarum congerie nuda sit terra; deinde etiamsi nuda sit, neque hoc statim necesse esse, ut homines habeat.

[9] But as for their telling as a fable that there are antipodes—that is, humans on the contrary side of the earth, where the sun rises when it sets for us, treading footprints with their feet opposed to ours—by no reasoning is it to be believed. Nor do they affirm that they have learned this by any historical cognition, but, as it were, conjecture by ratiocination, on the ground that the earth is suspended within the convexities of the heaven, and that the world holds the same place as both the lowest and the middle; and from this they opine that the other part of the earth, which is below, cannot be without the habitation of humans. They do not attend to the fact that, even if the world be believed—or in some way be shown—to be of a conglobated and round figure, it does not follow that on that side too the earth is bare of the congeries of waters; and then, even if it be bare, neither is it forthwith necessary that it should have humans.

Quoniam nullo modo scriptura ista mentitur, quae narratis praeteritis facit fidem eo, quod eius praedicta conplentur, nimisque absurdum est, ut dicatur aliquos homines ex hac in illam partem, Oceani inmensitate traiecta, nauigare ac peruenire potuisse, ut etiam illic ex uno illo primo homine genus institueretur humanum. Quapropter inter illos tunc hominum populos, qui per septuaginta duas gentes et totidem linguas colliguntur fuisse diuisi, quaeramus, si possumus inuenire, illam in terris peregrinantem ciuitatem Dei, quae usque ad diluuium arcamque perducta est atque in filiis Noe per eorum benedictiones perseuerasse monstratur, maxime in maximo, qui est appellatus Sem, quando quidem Iapheth ita benedictus est, ut in eius, fratris sui, domibus habitaret.

Since in no way does that scripture lie, which gives credence to narrated past events by the fact that its predictions are fulfilled, and it is exceedingly absurd to say that certain men, with the immensity of the Ocean crossed, could have sailed and come from this side to that, so that even there the human race might be instituted from that one first man; wherefore among those peoples of men at that time, who are gathered as having been divided into seventy-two nations and just so many tongues, let us seek, if we can find, that City of God peregrinating upon earth, which was conducted through as far as the deluge and the ark, and is shown to have persevered in the sons of Noah through their benedictions, especially in the greatest, who was called Shem, since indeed Japheth was so blessed that he should dwell in the houses of him, his brother.

[X] Tenenda est igitur series generationum ab ipso Sem, ut ipsa ostendat post diluuium ciuitatem Dei, sicut eam series generationum ab illo, qui est appellatus Seth, ostendebat ante diluuium. Propter hoc ergo scriptura diuina cum terrenam ciuitatem in Babylone, hoc est in confusione, monstrasset, ad patriarcham Sem recapitulando reuertitur et orditur inde generationes usque ad Abraham, commemorato etiam numero annorum, quanto quisque ad hanc seriem pertinentem filium genuisset quantoque uixisset. Vbi certe agnoscendum est, quod ante promiseram, ut appareat quare sit dictum de filiis Heber: Nomen unius Phalech, quia in diebus eius diuisa est terra.

[10] Therefore the series of generations must be held from Shem himself, so that it may itself show after the deluge the City of God, just as the series of generations from him who was called Seth showed it before the deluge. For this reason, then, when the divine Scripture had shown the earthly city in Babylon, that is, in confusion, it returns by recapitulating to the patriarch Shem and from there begins the generations as far as Abraham, with the number of years also recorded—how many years each one pertaining to this series had when he begot a son, and how long he lived. Where certainly it must be acknowledged, what I had promised before, so that it may appear why it was said about the sons of Eber: “The name of one is Peleg, because in his days the earth was divided.”

Quid enim aliud intellegendum est terram esse diuisam nisi diuergitate linguarum? Omissis igitur ceteris filiis Sem ad hanc rem non pertinentibus illi conectuntur in ordine generationum, per quos possit ad Abraham perueniri; sicut illi conectebantur ante diluuium, per quos perueniretur ad Noe generationibus, quae propagatae sunt ex illo Adam filio, qui est appellatus Seth. Sic ergo incipit generationum ista contextio: Et hae generationes Sem.

For what else is to be understood by the earth’s being divided, if not a divergence of tongues? Therefore, with the other sons of Shem, who do not pertain to this matter, omitted, those are connected in the order of generations through whom one can arrive at Abraham; just as before the deluge those were connected through whom one might arrive at Noah, by the generations propagated from that son of Adam who is called Seth. Thus, then, this contexture of generations begins: And these are the generations of Shem.

Sem filius centum annorum, cum genuit Arphaxat, secundo anno post diluuium. Et uixit Sem, postquam genuit Arphaxat, quingentos annos et genuit filios et filias et mortuus est. Sic exsequitur ceteros dicens, quoto quisque anno uitae suae filium genuerit ad istum generationum ordinem pertinentem, qui pertendit ad Abrabam, et quot annos postmodum uixerit, intimans eum filios filiasque genuisse; ut intellegamus unde potuerint populi adcrescere, ne in paucis qui commemorantur hominibus occupati pueriliter haesitemus, unde tanta spatia terrarum atque regnorum repleri potuerint de genere Sem, maxime propter Assyriorum regnum, unde Ninus ille Orientalium domitor usquequaque populorum ingenti prosperitate regnauit et latissimum ac fundatissimum regnum, quod diuturno tempore duceretur, suis posteris propagauit.

Shem, one hundred years old, when he begot Arphaxad, in the second year after the deluge. And Shem lived, after he begot Arphaxad, five hundred years, and he begot sons and daughters, and he died. Thus he follows out the rest, saying in what year of his life each one begot a son pertaining to this order of generations which extends to Abraham, and how many years thereafter he lived, intimating that he begot sons and daughters; so that we may understand whence peoples could have grown, lest, being occupied with the few men who are mentioned, we childishly hesitate as to how such great expanses of lands and of kingdoms could have been filled from the stock of Shem—especially on account of the Assyrian kingdom, whence that Ninus, tamer of the Orientals, ruled everywhere over peoples with vast prosperity and propagated to his posterity a very broad and most well-founded kingdom, which might be carried on for a long time.

Sed nos, ne diutius quam opus est inmoremur, non quot annos quisque in ista generationum serie uixerit, sed quoto anno uitae suae genuerit filium, hoc ordine memorandum tantummodo ponimus, ut et numerum annorum a transacto diluuio usque ad Abrabam colligamus et praeter illa, in quibus nos cogit necessitas inmorari, breuiter alia cursimque tangamus. Secundo igitur anno post diluuium Sem genuit Arphaxat; Arphaxat autem, cum esset centum triginta quinque <annorum>, genuit Cainan; qui cum esset centum triginta, genuit Sala; porro etiam ipse Sala totidem annorum erat, quando genuit Heber; centum uero et triginta et quattuor agebat annos Heber, cum genuit Phalech, in cuius diebus diuisa est terra; ipse autem Phalech uixit centum triginta, et genuit Ragau; et Ragau centum triginta duo, et genuit Seruch; et Seruch centum triginta, et genuit Nachor; et Nachor septuaginta nouem, et genuit Thara; Thara autem septuaginta, et genuit Abram; quem postea Deus mutato uocabulo nominauit Abraham. Fiunt itaque anni a diluuio usque ad Abraham mille septuaginta et duo secundum uulgatam editionem, hoc est interpretum septuaginta.

But we, lest we linger longer than is needful, set down not how many years each lived in this series of generations, but in which year of his life he begot a son, placing to be remembered only this in such order, so that we may both gather the number of years from the passing of the flood up to Abraham and, apart from those matters in which necessity compels us to linger, may briefly and cursorily touch upon the others. In the second year, therefore, after the flood, Sem begot Arphaxat; but Arphaxat, when he was one hundred thirty-five <annorum>, begot Cainan; who, when he was one hundred thirty, begot Sala; moreover that same Sala was of just so many years when he begot Heber; and Heber was one hundred and thirty-four years old when he begot Phalech, in whose days the earth was divided; but Phalech himself lived one hundred thirty, and begot Ragau; and Ragau one hundred thirty-two, and begot Seruch; and Seruch one hundred thirty, and begot Nachor; and Nachor seventy-nine, and begot Thara; but Thara seventy, and begot Abram; whom afterward God, the appellation having been changed, named Abraham. Thus the years from the flood up to Abraham amount to one thousand seventy-two, according to the vulgate edition, that is, of the Seventy interpreters.

In Hebraeis autem codicibus longe pauciores annos perhibent inueniri, de quibus rationem aut nullam aut difficillimam reddunt.

But in the Hebrew codices they assert that far fewer years are found, for which they render either no reason at all or a most difficult one.

Cum ergo quaerimus in illis septuaginta duabus gentibus ciuitatem Dei, non possumus adfirmare illo tempore, quo erat eis labium unum, id est loquella una, tunc iam genus humanum alienatum fuisse a cultu ueri Dei, ita ut in solis istis generationibus pietas uera remaneret, quae descendunt de semine Sem per Arphaxat et tendunt ad Abraham; sed ab illa superbia aedificandae turris usque in caelum, qua impia significatur elatio, apparuit ciuitas, hoc est societas, impiorum. Vtrum itaque ante non fuerit an latuerit, an potius utraque permanserit, pia scilicet in duobus filiis Noe, qui benedicti sunt, eorumque posteris; impia uero in eo, qui maledictus est, atque eius progenie, ubi etiam exortus est gigans uenator contra Dominum, non est diiudicatio facilis. Fortassis enim, quod profecto est credibilius, et in filiis duorum illorum iam tunc, antequam Babylonia coepisset institui, fuerunt contemptores Dei, et in filiis Cham cultores Dei; utrumque tamen hominum genus terris numquam defuisse credendum est.

When therefore we seek, among those seventy-two nations, the City of God, we cannot affirm that at that time, when there was for them one lip, that is, one speech, the human race had already been alienated from the cult of the true God, such that true piety remained only in those lineages which descend from the seed of Shem through Arphaxad and tend toward Abraham; but from that superbia of building a tower up to heaven, by which impious elation is signified, there appeared a city, that is, a society, of the impious. Whether therefore it had not existed before, or had lain hidden, or rather both had persisted—the pious, to wit, in the two sons of Noah who are blessed, and their posterity; but the impious in him who is cursed, and his progeny, where there also arose a giant hunter against the Lord—is not an easy adjudication. For perhaps (which indeed is more credible) both among the sons of those two even then, before Babylon had begun to be instituted, there were contemners of God, and among the sons of Ham worshipers of God; nevertheless it is to be believed that both kinds of men have never been lacking on the earth.

Si quidem et quando dictum est: Omnes declinauerunt, simul inutiles facti sunt; non est qui faciat bonum, non est usque ad unum, in utroque psalmo, ubi haec uerba sunt, et hoc legitur: Nonne cognoscent omnes, qui operantur iniquitatem, qui deuorant populum meum in cibo panis? Erat ergo etiam tunc populus Dei. Vnde illud, quod dictum est: Non est qui faciat bonum, non est usque ad unum, de filiis hominum dictum est, non de filiis Dei.

Since indeed even when it was said: All have turned aside, together they have become inutile; there is none who does good, there is not up to one, in both psalms where these words are, this also is read: Will not all come to know, who work iniquity, who devour my people as they eat bread? Therefore there was even then a people of God. Whence that which was said: There is none who does good, there is not up to one, was said of the sons of men, not of the sons of God.

Nam praemissum est: Deus de caelo prospexit super filios hominum, ut uideret si est intellegens aut requirens Deum, ac deinde illa subiuncta, quae omnes filios hominum, id est, ad ciuitatem pertinentes, quae uiuit secundum hominem, non secundum Deum, reprobos esse demonstrant.

For it has been premised: God looked forth from heaven upon the sons of men, to see if there is one understanding or seeking God; and then those things were subjoined, which demonstrate all the sons of men, that is, those pertaining to the city which lives according to man, not according to God, to be reprobate.

[XI] Quam ob rem sicut lingua una cum esset omnium, non ideo filii pestilentiae defuerunt (nam et ante diluuium una erat lingua, et tamen omnes praeter unam Noe iusti domum deleri diluuio meruerunt): ita, quando merito elatioris impietatis gentes linguarum diuersitate punitae atque diuisae sunt et ciuitas impiorum confusionis nomen accepit, hoc est, appellata est Babylon, non defuit domus Heber, ubi ea quae antea fuit omnium lingua remaneret. Vnde, sicut supra memoraui, cum coepissent enumerari filii Sem, qui singuli gentes singulas procrearunt, primus est commendatus Heber, cum sit abnepos ipsius, hoc est ab illo quintus inueniatur exortus. Quia ergo in eius familia remansit haec lingua, diuisis per alias linguas ceteris gentibus, quae lingua prius humano generi non inmerito creditur fuisse communis, ideo deinceps Hebraea est nuncupata.

[11] Wherefore, just as, although there was one tongue of all, the sons of pestilence were not on that account lacking (for even before the Deluge there was one tongue, and yet all, except the one just house of Noah, deserved to be destroyed by the Deluge): so also, when for the desert of loftier impiety the nations were punished and divided by the diversity of tongues, and the city of the impious received the name of confusion—that is, was called Babylon—the house of Heber was not lacking, where that tongue which before had been of all remained. Whence, as I recalled above, when the sons of Shem began to be enumerated, who each begot single nations, Heber is first commended, although he is his great‑grandson—that is, he is found to have sprung as the fifth from him. Since therefore in his family this tongue remained, with the other nations divided through other tongues—the tongue which previously is not undeservedly believed to have been common to the human race—therefore thereafter it was named Hebrew.

Tunc enim opus erat eam distingui ab aliis linguis nomine proprio, sicut aliae quoque uocatae sunt nominibus propriis. Quando autem erat una, nihil aliud quam humana lingua uel humana locutio uocabatur, qua sola uniuersum genus humanum loquebatur.

Then indeed there was need that it be distinguished from the other languages by a proper name, just as the others also were called by proper names. But when it was one, it was called nothing else than the human language or human locution, by which alone the universal human race spoke.

Dixerit aliquis: Si in diebus Phalech filii Heber diuisa est terra per linguas, id est homines, qui tunc erant in terra, ex eius nomine potius debuit appellari lingua illa, quae fuit omnibus ante communis. Sed intellegendum est ipsum Heber propterea tale nomen inposuisse filio suo, ut uocaretur Phalech, quod interpretatur diuisio, quia tunc ei natus est, quando per linguas terra diuisa est, id est ipso tempore, ut hoc sit quod dictum est: In diebus eius diuisa est terra. Nam nisi adhuc Heber uiueret quando linguarum facta est multitudo, non ex eius nomine nomen acciperet lingua, quae apud illum potuit permanere.

Someone might say: If in the days of Phalech, the son of Heber, the earth was divided by tongues, that is, by the human beings who were then upon the earth, from his name rather that tongue which had before been common to all ought to have been called. But it is to be understood that Heber himself for that reason imposed such a name upon his son, that he should be called Phalech, which is interpreted division, because he was born to him then, when through tongues the earth was divided, that is, at that very time, so that this is what was said: In his days the earth was divided. For unless Heber were still living when the multiplicity of tongues came to be, the tongue which was able to remain with him would not receive a name from his name.

Et ideo credenda est ipsa fuisse prima illa communis, quoniam de poena uenit illa multiplicatio mutatioque linguarum et utique praeter hanc poenam esse debuit populus Dei. Nec frustra lingua haec est, quam tenuit Abraham, nec in omnes suos filios transmittere potuit, sed in eos tantum, qui propagati per Iacob et insignius atque eminentius in Dei populum coalescentes Dei testamenta et stirpem Christi habere potuerunt. Nec Heber ipse eandem linguam in uniuersam progeniem suam refudit, sed in eam tantum, cuius generationes perducantur ad Abrabam.

And therefore it is to be believed that this very one was that first common tongue, since from punishment came that multiplication and mutation of languages, and assuredly the people of God ought to have been apart from this punishment. Nor is it without purpose that this is the language which Abraham held, nor could he transmit it to all his sons, but only to those who, propagated through Jacob and, more signally and more eminently, coalescing into the people of God, were able to have the testaments of God and the stock of Christ. Nor did Heber himself pour back the same language into his whole progeny, but only into that line whose generations are traced down to Abraham.

Quapropter etiamsi non euidenter expressum est fuisse aliquod pium genus hominum, quando ab impiis Babylonia condebatur, non ad hoc ualuit haec obscuritas, ut quaerentis fraudaretur, sed potius ut exerceretur intentio. Cum enim legitur unam fuisse linguam primitus omnium et ante omnes filios Sem commendatur Heber, quamuis ex illo quintus oriatur, et Hebraea uocatur lingua, quam patriarcharum et prophetarum non solum in sermonibus suis, uerum etiam in litteris sacris custodiuit auctoritas: profecto, cum quaeritur in diuisione linguarum, ubi lingua illa remanere potuerit, quae fuit ante communis (quae sine ulla dubitatione ubi remansit, non ibi fuit illa poena, quae facta est mutatione linguarum), quid aliud occurrit, nisi quod in huius gente remanserit, a cuius nomine nomen accepit, et hoc iustitiae gentis huius non paruum apparuisse uestigium, quod, cum aliae gentes plecterentur mutatione linguarum, ad istam non peruenit tale supplicium?

Wherefore, even if it is not evidently expressed that there was some pious race of men when Babylon was being founded by the impious, this obscurity did not avail to defraud the one seeking, but rather that intention might be exercised. For when it is read that there was one language at first for all, and before all the sons of Shem Heber is commended—although from him the fifth arises—and the language is called Hebrew, which the authority of the patriarchs and prophets preserved not only in their discourses but also in the sacred letters: assuredly, when it is inquired, in the division of languages, where that language could have remained which was formerly common (which, without any dubitation, wherever it remained, there was not there that penalty which was effected by the mutation of languages), what else occurs, except that it remained in the people of this man, from whose name the language took its name, and that this appeared as no small vestige of the justice of this people: that, whereas other nations were punished by the mutation of languages, such a punishment did not come upon this one?

Sed adhuc illud mouet, quo modo potuerunt singulas gentes facere Heber et filius eius Phalech, si una lingua permansit ambobus. Et certe una est Hebraea gens ex Heber propagata usque ad Abraham, et per eum deinceps, donec magnus fieret populus Israel. Quo modo igitur omnes filii, qui commemorati sunt trium filiorum Noe, fecerunt singulas gentes, si Heber et Phalech singulas non fecerunt?

Sed still that point moves me: how could Heber and his son Phalech make individual nations, if one language remained to both? And certainly the Hebrew nation is one, propagated from Heber down to Abraham, and through him thereafter, until the people of Israel became great. How, then, did all the sons who are recounted of the three sons of Noah make individual nations, if Heber and Phalech did not make individual ones?

Nimirum illud est probabilius, quod gigans ille Nebroth fecerit etiam ipse gentem suam, sed propter excellentiam dominationis et corporis seorsum eminentius nominatus est, ut maneat numerus septuaginta duarum gentium atque linguarum. Phalech autem propterea commemoratus est, non quod gentem fecerit (nam eadem ipsa est eius gens Hebraea eademque lingua), sed propter tempus insigne, quod in diebus eius terra diuisa sit. Nec mouere nos debet, quo modo potuerit gigans Nebroth ad illud aetatis occurrere, quo Babylon condita est et confusio facta linguarum atque ex hoc diuisio gentium.

Surely this is more probable: that that giant Nebroth also made his own nation, but on account of the excellence of his domination and of his body he was named apart more eminently, so that the number of 72 nations and tongues might remain. Phalech, however, was on that account commemorated, not because he made a nation (for his nation is the same Hebrew one and the same tongue), but on account of the notable time, that in his days the earth was divided. Nor ought it to move us, how the giant Nebroth could have attained to that age at which Babylon was founded and the confusion of tongues was made, and from this the division of nations.

Non enim quia Heber sextus est a Noe, ille autem quartus, ideo non potuerunt ad idem tempus conuenire uiuendo. Hoc enim contigit, cum plus uiuerent ubi pauciores sunt generationes, minus ubi plures; aut serius nati essent ubi pauciores, maturius ubi plures. Sane intellegendum est, quando terra diuisa est, non solum iam natos ceteros filios filiorum Noe, qui commemorantur patres gentium, sed etiam eius aetatis fuisse, ut numerosas familias haberent, quae dignae fuissent nominibus gentium.

For it is not the case that, because Heber is sixth from Noah and he, however, fourth, therefore they could not meet at the same time while living. For this has happened, since they lived more where the generations are fewer, less where they are more; or were born later where they are fewer, earlier where they are more. Surely it must be understood that, when the earth was divided, not only had the other sons of the sons of Noah already been born—who are mentioned as the fathers of the nations—but also that they were of such an age as to have numerous families, which would have been worthy of the names of nations.

Vnde nequaquam putandum, quod eo fuerint ordine geniti, quo commemorati leguntur. Alioquin duodecim filii Iectan, qui erat alius filius Heber, frater Phalech, quo modo potuerunt iam gentes facere, si post Phalech fratrem suum Iectan natus est, sicut post eum commemoratus est; quando quidem tempore, quo natus est Phalech, diuisa est terra. Proinde intellegendum est priorem quidem nominatum, sed longe post fratrem suum Iectan fuisse natum, cuius Iectan duodecim filii tam grandes iam familias haberent, ut in linguas proprias diuidi possent.

Whence it must by no means be thought that they were begotten in the order in which they are read as being commemorated. Otherwise, how could the twelve sons of Iectan, who was another son of Heber, the brother of Phalech, already have made nations, if Iectan was born after his brother Phalech, just as he is mentioned after him—since, indeed, at the time when Phalech was born, the earth was divided? Accordingly, it is to be understood that the one named earlier was indeed so named, but was born long after his brother Iectan, whose twelve sons already had families so great that they could be divided into their own languages.

Sic enim potuit prior commemorari, qui erat aetate posterior, quem ad modum prius commemorati sunt ex tribus filiis Noe procreati filii Iapheth, qui erat minimus eorum; deinde filii Cham, qui erat medius; postremo filii Sem, qui erat primus et maximus. Illarum autem gentium uocabula partim manserunt, ita ut hodieque appareat unde fuerint deriuata, sicut ex Assur Assyrii <et> ex Heber Hebraei; partim temporis uetustate mutata sunt, ita ut uix homines doctissimi antiquissimas historias perscrutantes, nec omnium, sed aliquarum ex istis origines gentium potuerint reperire. Nam quod ex filio Cham, qui uocabatur Mesraim, Aegyptii perhibentur exorti, nulla hic resonat origo uocabuli; sicut nec Aethiopum, qui dicuntur ad eum filium Cham pertinere, qui Chus appellatus est.

For thus one who was later in age could be mentioned earlier, just as, of the three sons of Noah, the sons procreated from Japheth, who was the youngest of them, are mentioned first; then the sons of Ham, who was the middle; lastly the sons of Shem, who was the first and greatest. But the names of those nations have in part remained, so that even today it appears whence they were derived, as from Assur the Assyrians <and> from Heber the Hebrews; in part they have been changed by the antiquity of time, so that scarcely have the most learned men, scrutinizing the most ancient histories, been able to find the origins not of all, but of some of these nations. For as to the Egyptians being held to have sprung from the son of Ham who was called Mesraim, no origin of the name resonates here; nor of the Ethiopians, who are said to pertain to that son of Ham who was called Chus.

Et si omnia considerentur, plura mutata quam manentia nomina apparent.

And if all things are considered, more names appear changed than remaining.

[XII] Nunc iam uideamus procursum ciuitatis Dei etiam ab illo articulo temporis, qui factus est in patre Abraham, unde incipit esse notitia eius euidentior, et ubi clariora leguntur promissa diuina, quae nunc in Christo uidemus impleri. Sicut ergo scriptura sancta indicante didicimus, in regione Chaldaeorum natus est Abraham, quae terra ad regnum Assyrium pertinebat. Apud Chaldaeos autem iam etiam tunc superstitiones impiae praeualebant, quem ad modum per ceteras gentes.

[12] Now let us see the progression of the City of God even from that juncture of time which is made in the father Abraham, whence the knowledge of it begins to be more evident, and where the divine promises are read more clearly, which we now see fulfilled in Christ. Thus, with Holy Scripture indicating, we have learned that Abraham was born in the region of the Chaldaeans, which land pertained to the Assyrian kingdom. But among the Chaldaeans, even already then impious superstitions prevailed, just as through the other nations.

Vna igitur Tharae domus erat, de quo natus est Abraham, in qua unius ueri Dei cultus et, quantum credibile est, in qua iam sola etiam Hebraea lingua remanserat (quamuis et ipse, sicut iam manifestior Dei populus in Aegypto, ita in Mesopotamia seruisse diis alienis Iesu Naue narrante referatur) ceteris ex progenie illius Heber in linguas paulatim alias et in nationes alias defluentibus. Proinde sicut per aquarum diluuium una domus Noe remanserat ad reparandum genus humanum, sic in diluuio multarum superstitionum per uniuersum mundum una remanserat domus Tharae, in qua custodita est plantatio ciuitatis Dei. Denique sicut illic enumeratis supra generationibus usque ad Noe simul cum annorum numeris et exposita diluuii causa, priusquam Deus inciperet de arca fabricanda loqui ad Noe, dicitur: Hae autem generationes Noe: ita et hic enumeratis generationibus ab illo, qui est appellatus Sem, filio Noe, usque ad Abraham, deinde insignis articulus similiter ponitur ut dicatur: Hae sunt generationes Tharae.

Therefore there was one house of Thara, from whom Abraham was born, in which the cult of the one true God was, and, as is credible, in which alone even the Hebrew tongue had remained (although he himself, just as the now more manifest people of God in Egypt, thus in Mesopotamia is reported, with Joshua narrating, to have served alien gods), as the rest from the progeny of that Heber were by degrees flowing off into other tongues and into other nations. Accordingly, just as through the watery deluge one house of Noah had remained for the repairing of the human race, so in the deluge of many superstitions throughout the whole world one house of Thara had remained, in which the planting of the city of God was kept. Finally, just as there, the generations up above having been enumerated as far as Noah together with the numbers of years and the cause of the deluge set forth, before God began to speak to Noah about the fashioning of the ark, it is said: These, however, are the generations of Noah: so also here, the generations having been enumerated from him who is called Sem, son of Noah, as far as Abraham, then a notable article is likewise set down, so that it is said: These are the generations of Thara.

Thara genuit Abram et Nachor et Arran, et Arran genuit Loth. Et mortuus est Arran coram Thara patre suo in terra in qua natus est, in regione Chaldaeorum. Et sumpsit Abram et Nachor sibi uxores; nomen mulieris Abram Sara et nomen mulieris Nachor Melcha, filia Arran.

Thara begot Abram and Nachor and Arran, and Arran begot Loth. And Arran died before Thara his father in the land in which he was born, in the region of the Chaldeans. And Abram and Nachor took wives for themselves; the name of Abram’s wife was Sara and the name of Nachor’s wife Melcha, daughter of Arran.

Iste Arran pater Melchae fuit et pater Iescae, quae Iesca creditur ipsa esse etiam Sarra uxor Abrahae.

This Arran was the father of Melcha and the father of Iesca, who is believed herself to be also Sarra, the wife of Abraham.

[XIII] Deinde narratur quem ad modum Thara cum suis regionem reliquerit Chaldaeorum et uenerit in Mesopotamiam et habitauerit in Charra. Tacetur autem de uno eius filio, qui uocabatur Nachor, tamquam eum non duxerit secum. Nam ita narratur: Et sumpsit Thara Abram filium suum et Loth filium Arran, filium filii sui, et Saram nurum suam, uxorem Abram filii sui, et eduxit illos de regione Chaldaeorum ire in terram Chanaan: et uenit in Charran et habitauit ibi.

[13] Then it is narrated in what manner Thara with his own left the region of the Chaldeans and came into Mesopotamia and dwelt in Charra. But one of his sons, who was called Nachor, is passed over, as though he had not taken him with him. For thus it is narrated: And Thara took Abram his son and Loth the son of Arran, the son of his son, and Saram his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and led them out of the region of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Chanaan: and he came to Charran and dwelt there.

Nusquam hic nominatus est Nachor et uxor eius Melcha. Sed inuenimus postea, cum seruum suum mitteret Abraham ad accipiendam uxorem filio suo Isaac, ita scriptum: Et accepit puer decem camelos de camelis domini sui et de omnibus bonis domini sui secum, et exsurgens profectus est in Mesopotamiam in ciuitatem Nachor. Isto et aliis sacrae huius historiae testimoniis ostenditur etiam Nachor frater Abrahae exisse de regione Chaldaeorum sedesque constituisse in Mesopotamia, ubi cum patre suo habitauerat Abraham.

Nowhere here are Nachor and his wife Melcha named. But we find later, when Abraham was sending his servant to take a wife for his son Isaac, it is written thus: “And the servant took ten camels from the camels of his lord, and of all the goods of his lord with him, and rising up he set out into Mesopotamia, into the city of Nachor.” By this and other testimonies of this sacred history it is shown that Nachor, the brother of Abraham, likewise went out from the region of the Chaldeans and constituted a settlement in Mesopotamia, where Abraham had dwelt with his father.

Cur ergo eum scriptura non commemorauit, quando ex gente Chaldaea cum suis profectus est Thara et habitauit in Mesopotamia; ubi non solum Abraham filius eius, uerum etiam Sarra nurus et Loth nepos eius commemorantur, quod eos duxerit secum? Cur, putamus, nisi forte quod a paterna et fraterna pietate desciuerat et superstitioni adhaeserat Chaldaeorum et postea inde siue paenitendo siue persecutionem passus, quod suspectus haberetur, et ipse emigrauit? In libro enim qui inscribitur Iudith, cum quaereret Holofernes, hostis Israelitarum, quaenam illa gens esset, utrum aduersus eam bellandum fuisset, sic ei respondit Achior dux Ammanitarum: Audiat dominus noster uerbum de ore pueri sui, et referam tibi ueritatem de populo, qui habitat iuxta te montanam hanc, et non exibit mendacium de ore serui tui.

Why, then, did Scripture not commemorate him, when Terah set out from the Chaldaean people with his own and dwelt in Mesopotamia; where not only Abraham his son, but also Sarah his daughter-in-law and Lot his grandson are mentioned, in that he took them with him? Why, we suppose, unless perhaps because he had defected from paternal and fraternal piety and had adhered to the superstition of the Chaldaeans, and afterward from there, either by repenting or having suffered persecution, because he was held under suspicion, he too emigrated? For in the book which is entitled Judith, when Holofernes, the enemy of the Israelites, was inquiring what that nation was, whether he ought to make war against it, Achior, leader of the Ammonites, thus answered him: Let our lord hear a word from the mouth of his servant, and I will relate to you the truth about the people that dwells beside you in this hill-country, and no lie shall go forth from the mouth of your servant.

Haec enim progenies populi est Chaldaeorum, et antea habitauerunt Mesopotamiam, quia noluerunt sequi deos patrum suorum, qui fuerunt in terra Chaldaeorum gloriosi, sed declinauerunt de uia parentum suorum et adorauerunt Deum caeli, quem cognouerunt, et proiecerunt eos a facie deorum suorum et fugerunt Mesopotamiam et habitauerunt ibi dies multos. Dixitque illis Deus eorum, ut exirent de habitatione sua et irent in terram Chanaan, et illic habitauerunt, et cetera, quae narrat Achior Ammanites. Vnde manifestum est domum Tharae persecutionem passam fuisse a Chaldaeis pro uera pietate, qua unus et uerus ab eis colebatur Deus.

For this is the progeny of the people of the Chaldaeans, and formerly they dwelt in Mesopotamia, because they did not wish to follow the gods of their fathers, who were glorious in the land of the Chaldaeans, but turned aside from the way of their parents and adored the God of heaven, whom they had come to know, and they were cast forth from before their gods and fled to Mesopotamia and lived there many days. And their God told them to go out from their habitation and to go into the land of Canaan, and there they dwelt, and the rest which Achior the Ammonite relates. Whence it is manifest that the house of Terah suffered persecution from the Chaldaeans for the true piety, whereby the one and true God was worshiped by them.

[XIV] Defuncto autem Thara in Mesopotamia, ubi uixisse perhibetur ducentos et quinque annos, iam incipiunt indicari ad Abraham factae promissiones Dei, quod ita scriptum est: Et fuerunt dies Tharae in Charra quinque et ducenti anni, et mortuus est Thara in Charra. Non sic autem accipiendum est, quasi omnes hos dies ibi egerit, sed quia omnes dies uitae suae, qui fuerunt anni ducenti quinque, ibi conpleuerit; alioquin nescietur quot annos uixerit Thara, quoniam non legitur quoto anno uitae suae in Charran uenerit; et absurdum est existimare in ista serie generationum, ubi diligenter commemoratur quot annos quisque uixerit, huius solius numerum annorum uitae non commendatum esse memoriae. Quod enim quorundam, quos eadem scriptura commemorat, tacentur anni, non sunt in hoc ordine, in quo temporum dinumeratio decessione gignentium et genitorum successione contexitur.

[14] But with Thara deceased in Mesopotamia, where he is reported to have lived two hundred and five years, already the promises of God made to Abraham begin to be indicated, for thus it is written: And the days of Thara in Charra were two hundred and five years, and Thara died in Charra. It is not to be taken thus, however, as though he spent all these days there, but that he completed there all the days of his life, which were two hundred and five years; otherwise it would not be known how many years Thara lived, since it is not read in what year of his life he came into Charran; and it is absurd to suppose that in this series of generations, where it is carefully commemorated how many years each one lived, the number alone of this man’s years of life was not committed to memory. For as to the fact that, for certain persons whom the same scripture commemorates, the years are left unspoken, they are not in this order, in which the enumeration of times is woven together by the decease of those begetting and the succession of those begotten.

Iste autem ordo, qui dirigitur ab Adam usque ad Noe et inde usque ad Abrabam, sine numero annorum uitae suae neminem continet.

This order, moreover, which is directed from Adam unto Noah and thence unto Abraham, contains no one without the number of his years of life.

[XV] Quod uero commemorata morte Tharae, patris Abraham, deinde legitur: Et dixit Dominus ad Abram: Exi de terra tua et de cognatione tua et de domo patris tui et cetera, non, quia hoc sequitur in sermone libri, hoc etiam in rerum gestarum tempore sequi existimandum est. Erit quippe, si ita est, insolubilis quaestio. Post haec enim uerba Dei, quae ad Abraham facta sunt, scriptura sic loquitur: Et exiit Abram, quem ad modum locutus est ei Dominus, et abiit cum eo Luth.

[15] But as to the fact that, the death of Terah, the father of Abraham, having been commemorated, there is then read: “And the Lord said to Abram: Go out from your land and from your kin and from your father’s house,” and so on, it is not to be thought that, because this follows in the discourse of the book, this also is to follow in the time-order of the things done. For there will be, if this is so, an insoluble question. For after these words of God, which were addressed to Abraham, Scripture speaks thus: “And Abram went out, just as the Lord had spoken to him, and Lot went with him.”

Abram autem erat quinque et septuaginta annorum, cum exiit ex Charra. Quo modo potest hoc esse uerum, si post mortem patris sui exiit de Charra? Cum enim esset Thara septuaginta annorum, sicut supra intimatum est, genuit Abraham; cui numero additis septuaginta quinque annis, quos agebat Abraham, quando egressus est de Charra, fiunt anni centum quadraginta quinque.

But Abram was 75 years old when he went out from Charra. How can this be true if he went out from Charra after his father’s death? For when Thara was 70 years old, as was intimated above, he begot Abraham; to which number, adding the 75 years that Abraham was living when he departed from Charra, there result 145 years.

Tot igitur annorum erat Thara, quando exiit Abraham de illa Mesopotamiae ciuitate; agebat enim annum aetatis suae septuagensimum quintum, ac per hoc pater eius, qui eum septuagensimo anno suo genuerat, agebat, ut dictum est, centensimum quadragensimum et quintum. Non ergo inde post mortem patris, id est post ducentos quinque annos, quibus pater eius uixit, egressus est; sed annus de illo loco profectionis eius, quoniam ipsius septuagensimus quintus erat, procul dubio patris eius, qui eum septuagensimo suo anno genuerat, centensimus quadragensimus quintus fuisse colligitur. Ac per hoc intellegendum est more suo scripturam redisse ad tempus, quod iam narratio illa transierat; sicut superius, cum filios filiorum Noe commemorasset, dixit illos fuisse in linguis et gentibus suis, et tamen postea, quasi hoc etiam in ordine temporum sequeretur: Et erat, inquit, omnis terra labium unum et uox una omnibus.

Therefore Terah was of just so many years when Abraham went out from that city of Mesopotamia; for he was in the seventy-fifth year of his age, and thus his father, who had begotten him in his seventieth year, was, as has been said, in his one hundred forty-fifth. He did not, therefore, go out from there after his father’s death—that is, after the two hundred and five years which his father lived—but the year of his departure from that place, since it was his seventy-fifth, is gathered, without doubt, to have been his father’s one hundred forty-fifth, who had begotten him in his seventieth year. And hence it is to be understood that Scripture, in its own manner, returned to a time which that narrative had already passed; just as above, when it had commemorated the sons of the sons of Noah, it said that they were in their own languages and nations, and yet afterward, as if this also followed in the order of times: “And,” it says, “all the earth was one lip and one voice to all.”

Quo modo ergo secundum suas gentes et secundum suas linguas erant, si una erat omnibus, nisi quia ad illud quod iam transierat recapitulando est reuersa narratio? Sic ergo et hic cum dictum esset: Et fuerunt dies Tharae in Charra quinque et ducenti anni, et mortuus est Thara in Charra, deinde scriptura redeundo ad id, quod ideo praetermiserat, ut prius de Thara id quod incohatum fuerat compleretur: Et dixit, inquit, Dominus ad Abram: Exi de terra tua et cetera. Post quae Dei uerba subiungitur: Et exiit Abram, quem ad modum locutus est illi Dominus, et abiit cum eo Loth.

How, then, were they according to their nations and according to their languages, if there was one for all, unless because the narration, by recapitulating, has returned to that which had already passed? Thus, then, also here, when it had been said: “And the days of Thara in Charra were 205 years, and Thara died in Charra,” then the Scripture, by returning to that which it had for that reason passed over, in order that what had been begun about Thara might first be completed: “And, it says, the Lord said to Abram: Go out from your land, and the rest.” After which words of God there is subjoined: “And Abram went out, just as the Lord had spoken to him, and Lot went with him.”

Abram autem erat quinque et septuaginta annorum, cum exiit ex Charra. Tunc itaque factum est, quando pater eius centensimum quadragensimum et quintum annum agebat aetatis; tunc enim fuit huius septuagensimus quintus. Soluta est autem ista quaestio et aliter, ut septuaginta quinque anni Abrahae, quando egressus est de Charra, ex illo computarentur, ex quo de igne Chaldaeorum liberatus, non ex quo natus est, tamquam tunc potius natus habendus sit.

But Abram was seventy-five years of age when he went out from Charra. Accordingly it then came to pass, when his father was passing the one hundred forty-fifth year of his age; for then was this man’s seventy-fifth. However, this question has also been solved otherwise: that the seventy-five years of Abraham, when he went forth from Charra, be computed from that point when he was liberated from the fire of the Chaldaeans, not from when he was born, as though he ought rather to be held as born at that time.

Sed beatus Stephanus in actibus apostolorum cum ista narraret: Deus, inquit, gloriae apparuit Abrahae patri nostro, cum esset in Mesopotamia, priusquam habitaret in Charra, et ait ad illum: Exi de terra tua et de cognatione tua et de domo patris tui, et ueni in terram, quam tibi demonstrabo. Secundum haec uerba Stephani non post mortem patris eius locutus est Deus Abrahae, qui utique in Charra mortuus est, ubi cum illo et ipse filius habitauit, sed priusquam habitaret in eadem ciuitate, iam tamen cum esset in Mesopotamia. Iam ergo exierat a Chaldaeis.

But blessed Stephen, in the Acts of the Apostles, when he was relating these things: “The God of glory,” he says, “appeared to Abraham our father, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charra, and said to him: Go out from your land and from your cognation and from your father’s house, and come into the land which I will show you.” According to these words of Stephen, God did not speak to Abraham after the death of his father—who assuredly died in Charra, where the son himself also dwelt with him—but before he dwelt in that same city, already, however, when he was in Mesopotamia. Therefore he had already gone out from the Chaldeans.

Quod itaque adiungit Stephanus: Tunc Abraham egressus est de terra Chaldaeorum et habitauit in Charra, non quid sit factum, postea quam locutus est illi Deus meque enim post illa Dei uerba egressus est de terra Chaldaeorum, cum dicat ei locutum Deum cum esset in Mesopotamia>, sed ad totum illud tempus pertinet quod ait: "Tunc, id est ex quo, egressus est a Chaldaeis et habitauit in Charra." Item quod sequitur: Et inde postquam mortuus est pater eius, conlocauit illum in terra hac, in qua uos nunc habitatis et patres uestri, non ait: "Postquam mortuus est pater eius, exiit de Charra"; sed: "Inde hic eum conlocauit, postquam mortuus est pater eius." Intellegendum est igitur locutum Deum fuisse ad Abraham, cum esset in Mesopotamia, priusquam habitaret in Charra; sed eum in Charram peruenisse cum patre, retento apud se praecepto Dei, et inde exisse septuagensimo et quinto suo, patris autem sui centensimo quadragensimo et quinto anno. Conlocationem uero eius in terra Chanaan, non profectionem de Charra post mortem patris eius factam esse dicit, quia iam mortuus erat pater eius, quando emit terram, cuius ibi iam suae rei coepit esse possessor. Quod autem iam in Mesopotamia constituto, hoc est iam egresso de terra Chaldaeorum, dicit Deus: Exi de terra tua et de cognatione tua et de domo patris tui, non ut corpus inde eiceret, quod iam fecerat, sed ut animum auelleret, dicitur.

Therefore, what Stephen adds: Then Abraham went out from the land of the Chaldaeans and dwelt in Charra, does not mean what happened after God had spoken to him—for indeed after those words of God he went out from the land of the Chaldaeans, since he says that God spoke to him when he was in Mesopotamia>—but it pertains to that whole span which he expresses by saying: "Then, that is, from the time when, he went out from the Chaldaeans and dwelt in Charra." Likewise, what follows: And from there, after his father had died, he settled him in this land in which you now dwell, and your fathers, he does not say: "After his father had died, he went out from Charra"; but: "From there he settled him here, after his father had died." It must therefore be understood that God spoke to Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charra; but that he arrived in Charra with his father, keeping with himself the precept of God, and from there went out in his own seventy-fifth year, but in the one hundred forty-fifth year of his father. But he says that his settlement in the land of Canaan, not his departure from Charra, was done after his father’s death, because his father was already dead when he bought the land, of which there he already began to be the possessor of his own property. But that God says to him, already positioned in Mesopotamia—that is, already gone out from the land of the Chaldaeans—Go out from your land and from your kin and from your father’s house, is said not that he should cast his body out from there, which he had already done, but that he should tear his mind away.

Non enim exierat inde animo, si spe redeundi et desiderio tenebatur, quae spes et desiderium Deo iubente ac iuuante et illo oboediente fuerat amputandum. Non sane incredibiliter existimatur, cum postea secutus esset Nachor patrum suum, tunc Abraham praeceptum Domini implesse, ut cum Sarra coniuge sua et Loth filio fratris sui exiret de Charra.

For he had not gone out from there in mind, if he was held by the hope of returning and by desire— which hope and desire, with God bidding and helping and he obeying, had to be amputated. Nor is it indeed thought unbelievable, since afterwards Nachor had followed his paternal uncle, that then Abraham fulfilled the Lord’s precept, to go out from Charra with Sarra his spouse and Loth his brother’s son.

[XVI] Iam considerandae sunt promissiones Dei factae ad Abraham. In his enim apertiora Dei nostri, hoc est Dei ueri, oracula apparere coeperunt de populo piorum, quem prophetica praenuntiauit auctoritas. Harum prima ita legitur: Et dixit Dominus ad Abram: Exi de terra tua et de cognatione tua et de domo patris tui in terram, quam tibi demonstrauero; et faciam te in gentem magnam et benedicam te et magnificabo nomen tuum, et eris benedictus, et benedicam benedicentes te et maledicentes te maledicam, et benedicentur in te omnes tribus terrae.

[16] Now the promises of God made to Abraham are to be considered. For in these the oracles of our God, that is, of the true God, began to appear more open concerning the people of the pious, which prophetic authority fore-announced. The first of these is read thus: And the Lord said to Abram: Go out from your land and from your kindred and from your father’s house into the land that I shall show you; and I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will magnify your name, and you shall be blessed; and I will bless those blessing you, and those cursing you I will curse, and in you all the tribes of the earth shall be blessed.

Aduertendum est igitur duas res promissas Abrahae; unam scilicet, quod terram Chanaan possessurum fuerat semen eius, quod significatur, ubi dictum est: Vade in terram, quam tibi demonstrauero, et faciam te in gentem magnam; aliam uero longe praestantiorem non de carnali, sed de spiritali semine, per quod pater est non unius gentis Israeliticae, sed omnium gentium, quae fidei eius uestigia consequuntur, quod promitti coepit his uerbis: Et benedicentur in te omnes tribus terrae. Hanc promissionem factam arbitratur Eusebius septuagensimo quinto anno aetatis Abrahae, tamquam mox ut facta est de Charra exierit Abraham; quoniam scripturae contradici non potest, ubi legitur: Abram erat quinque et septuaginta annorum, cum exiit ex Charra. Sed si eo anno facta est ista promissio, iam utique in Charra cum patre suo demorabatur Abraham.

It must therefore be noticed that two things were promised to Abraham: one, namely, that his seed would possess the land of Canaan, which is signified where it was said: “Go into the land which I shall show you, and I will make you into a great nation”; the other, however, far more excellent, not of the carnal but of the spiritual seed, through which he is the father not of one Israelite nation, but of all the nations that follow the footprints of his faith, which began to be promised by these words: “And in you all the tribes of the earth shall be blessed.” Eusebius judges that this promise was made in the seventy-fifth year of Abraham’s age, as though immediately when it was made Abraham went out from Haran; since Scripture cannot be contradicted, where it is read: “Abram was seventy-five years old when he went out from Haran.” But if in that year this promise was made, assuredly by then Abraham was staying in Haran with his father.

Neque enim exire inde posset, nisi prius ibi habitasset. Numquidnam ergo contradicitur Stephano dicenti: Deus gloriae apparuit Abrahae patri nostro, cum esset in Mesopotamia, priusquam habitaret in Charra? Sed intellegendum est, quod eodem anno facta sint omnia, et Dei promissio, antequam in Charra habitaret Abraham, et in Charra habitatio eius et inde profectio; non solum quia Eusebius in chronicis ab anno huius promissionis computat et ostendit post quadringentos et triginta annos exitum esse de Aegypto, quando lex data est, uerum etiam quia id commemorat apostolus Paulus.

For he could not go out from there unless he had first dwelt there. Is Stephen, then, contradicted when he says: The God of glory appeared to Abraham our father, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charra? But it must be understood that in the same year all these things were done: both the promise of God, before Abraham dwelt in Charra, and his habitation in Charra, and his departure from there; not only because Eusebius in the Chronicles computes from the year of this promise and shows that after 430 years there was the Exodus from Egypt, when the Law was given, but also because the apostle Paul commemorates this.

[XVII] Per idem tempus eminentia regna erant gentium, in quibus terrigenarum ciuitas, hoc est societas hominum secundum hominem uiuentium, sub dominatu angelorum desertorum insignius excellebat, regna uidelicet tria, Sicyoniorum, Aegyptiorum, Assyriorum. Sed Assyriorum multo erat potentius atque sublimius. Nam rex ille Ninus Beli filius excepta India uniuersae Asiae populos subiugauerat.

[17] At the same time there were eminent kingdoms of the nations, in which the city of the earth-born, that is, the society of men living according to man, under the dominion of the deserter angels, stood out more conspicuously, namely three kingdoms: of the Sicyonians, the Egyptians, the Assyrians. But that of the Assyrians was much more powerful and more exalted. For that king Ninus, the son of Belus, with India excepted, had subjugated the peoples of all Asia.

Asiam nunc dico non illam partem quae huius maioris Asiae una prouincia est, sed eam quae uniuersa Asia nuncupatur, quam quidam in altera duarum, plerique autem in tertia totius orbis parte posuerunt, ut sint omnes Asia, Europa et Africa; quod non aequali diuisione fecerunt. Namque ista, quae Asia nuncupatur, a meridie per orientem usque ad septentrionem peruenit; Europa uero a septentrione usque ad occidentem, atque inde Africa ab occidente usque ad meridiem. Vnde uidentur orbem dimidium duae tenere, Europa et Africa, alium uero dimidium sola Asia.

By Asia I now mean not that part which is one province of this greater Asia, but that which is called the entire Asia, which some have placed as the second of two parts, but most as the third part of the whole orb, so that all are Asia, Europe and Africa; which they have not made by an equal division. For that which is called Asia reaches from the south through the Orient to the north; but Europe from the north to the Occident, and then Africa from the Occident to the south. Whence it seems that two hold half the orb, Europe and Africa, but the other half Asia alone.

Sed ideo illae duae partes factae sunt, quia inter utramque ab Oceano ingreditur, quidquid aquarum terras interluit; et hoc mare magnum nobis facit. Quapropter si in duas partes orbem diuidas, Orientis et Occidentis, Asia erit in una, in altera uero Europa et Africa. Quam ob rem trium regnorum, quae tunc praecellebant, Sicyoniorum non erat sub Assyriis, quia in Europa sunt; Aegyptiorum autem quo modo eis non subiacebat, a quibus tota Asia tenebatur, solis Indis, ut perbibetur, exceptis?

But for this reason those two parts were made, because between each of the two the Ocean enters, whatever waters wash between the lands; and this makes for us the great sea. Wherefore, if you divide the orb into two parts, of the Orient and of the Occident, Asia will be in the one, but in the other Europe and Africa. On which account, of the three kingdoms which then excelled, that of the Sicyonians was not under the Assyrians, because they are in Europe; but how was that of the Egyptians not lying subject to them, by whom all Asia was held, the Indians alone, as is reported, excepted?

In Assyria igitur praeualuerat dominatus impiae ciuitatis; huius caput erat illa Babylon, cuius terrigenae ciuitatis nomen aptissimum est, id est confusio. Ibi iam Ninus regnabat post mortem patris sui Beli, qui primus illic regnauerat sexaginta quinque annos. Filius uero eius Ninus, qui defuncto patri successit in regnum, quinquaginta duo regnauit annos, et habebat in regno quadraginta tres, quando natus est Abraham, qui erat annus circiter millensimus ducentensimus ante conditam mam, ueluti alteram in occidente Babyloniam.

In Assyria, therefore, the dominion of the impious city had prevailed; its head was that Babylon, whose name is most apt for the city of earth-born men, that is, Confusion. There already Ninus was reigning after the death of his father Belus, who first had reigned there for sixty-five years. But his son Ninus, who succeeded to the kingdom upon his father’s decease, reigned fifty-two years, and he had been in his reign forty-three when Abraham was born, which was about the one thousand two hundredth year before the founding of Rome, as it were another Babylon in the West.

[XVIII] Egressus ergo Abrabam de Charra septuagensimo quinto anno aetatis suae, centensimo autem quadragensimo et quinto patris sui, cum Loth filio fratris et Sarra coniuge perrexit in terram Chanaan et peruenit usque ad Sichem, ubi rursus diuinum accepit oraculum, de quo ita scriptum est: Et apparuit Dominus Abrae, et dixit illi: Semini tuo dabo terram hanc. Nihil hic de illo semine dictum est, in quo pater factus est omnium gentium, sed de illo solo, de quo pater est unius Israeliticae gentis; ab hoc enim semine terra illa possessa est.

[18] Therefore Abram, having gone out from Haran in the seventy-fifth year of his age, and in the one hundred forty-fifth of his father, set out with Lot, the son of his brother, and with Sarah his spouse, into the land of Canaan, and came as far as Shechem, where again he received a divine oracle, of which it is written thus: And the Lord appeared to Abram, and said to him: To your seed I will give this land. Nothing is said here about that seed in which he was made father of all nations, but only about that one of which he is father of the one Israelite nation; for by this seed that land was possessed.

[XIX] Deinde aedificato ibi altari et inuocato Deo Abraham profectus est inde et habitauit in heremo atque inde ire in Aegyptum famis necessitate conpulsus est. Vbi uxorem suam dixit sororem, nihil mentitus; erat enim et hoc, quia propinqua erat sanguine; sicut etiam Loth eadem propinquitate, cum fratris eius esset filius, frater eius est dictus. Itaque uxorem tacuit, non negauit, coniugis tuendam pudicitiam committens Deo et humanas insidias cauens ut homo; quoniam, si periculum quantum caueri poterat non caueret, magis temptaret Deum, quam speraret in Deum.

[19] Then, an altar having been built there and God invoked, Abraham set out from there and dwelt in the wilderness, and from there he was compelled by the necessity of famine to go into Egypt. There he said that his wife was his sister, saying nothing mendacious; for this too was true, because she was near in blood; just as also Lot, by the same kinship—since he was his brother’s son—was called his brother. And so he kept silent about “wife,” he did not deny it, committing to God the safeguarding of his spouse’s pudicity, and, as a man, being wary of human snares; since, if he were not to avoid a danger as far as it could be avoided, he would be tempting God rather than hoping in God.

De qua re contra calumniantem Faustum Manichaeum satis diximus. Denique factum est, quod de Domino praesumpsit Abraham. Nam Pharao rex Aegypti, qui eam sibi uxorem acceperat, grauiter adflictus marito reddidit.

About which matter we have said enough against Faustus the Manichaean who was calumniating. Finally, what Abraham presumed of the Lord came to pass. For Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, who had taken her to himself as a wife, being grievously afflicted, returned her to her husband.

Vbi absit ut credamus alieno concubitu fuisse pollutam, quia multo est credibilius, hoc Pharaonem facere adflictionibus magnis non fuisse permissum.

Far be it that we should believe that she was polluted by intercourse with another, since it is much more credible that Pharaoh was not permitted to do this by great afflictions.

[XX] Reuerso igitur Abraham ex Aegypto in locum unde uenerat, tunc Loth fratris filius ab illo in terram Sodomorum salua caritate discessit. Diuites quippe facti erant pastoresque multos pecorum habere coeperant, quibus inter se rixantibus eo modo familiarum suarum pugnacem discordiam uitauerunt. Poterat quippe hinc, ut sunt humana, etiam inter ipsos aliqua rixa consurgere.

[20] Therefore, with Abraham having returned from Egypt to the place whence he had come, then Lot, his brother’s son, with charity safe, departed from him into the land of Sodom. For they had become wealthy and had begun to have many herdsmen for their herds; and, as these quarreled among themselves, in that way they avoided the pugnacious discord of their households. For indeed from this, as human affairs are, even some quarrel could arise between themselves.

Proinde hoc malum praecauentis Abrabae uerba ista sunt ad Loth: Non sit rixa inter me et te, et inter pastores meos et inter pastores tuos, quia homines fratres nos sumus. Nonne ecce tota terra ante te est? Discede a me; si tu in sinistram, ego in dextram: uel si tu in dextram, ego in sinistram.

Therefore these are the words of Abraham, preempting this evil, to Lot: “Let there not be a quarrel between me and you, and between my herdsmen and your herdsmen, because we are men, brothers. Behold, is not the whole land before you? Depart from me; if you to the left, I to the right; or if you to the right, I to the left.”

Hinc fortassis effecta est inter homines pacifica consuetudo, ut, quando terrenorum aliquid partiendum est, maior diuidat, minor eligat.

Hence perhaps there has been effected among men a pacific custom, that, whenever something of earthly goods is to be partitioned, the greater divides, the lesser chooses.

[XXI] Cum ergo digressi essent separatimque habitarent Abraham et Loth necessitate sustentandae familiae, non foeditate discordiae, et Abraham in terra Chanaan, Loth autem esset in Sodomis, oraculo tertio dixit Dominus ad Abraham: Respiciens oculis tuis uide a loco, in quo nunc tu es, ad aquilonem et Africum et orientem et mare, quia omnem terram, quam tu uides, tibi dabo eam et semini tuo usque in saeculum, et faciam semen tuum tamquam harenam terrae. Si potest aliquis dinumerare harenam terrae, et semen tuum dinumerabitur. Surgens perambula terram in longitudinem eius et in latitudinem, quia tibi dabo eam.

[21] When therefore Abraham and Lot had departed and were dwelling separately, by the necessity of sustaining the household, not by the foulness of discord, and Abraham was in the land of Canaan, but Lot was in Sodom, by a third oracle the Lord said to Abraham: Looking with your eyes, see from the place where you now are, to the north and to Afric and to the east and to the sea, for all the land that you see, I will give it to you and to your seed forever, and I will make your seed like the sand of the earth. If anyone can enumerate the sand of the earth, your seed also will be enumerated. Arising, perambulate the land in its length and in its breadth, for I will give it to you.

In hac promissione utrum sit etiam illa, qua pater factus est omnium gentium, non euidenter apparet. Potest enim uideri ad hoc pertinere: Et faciam semen tuum tamquam harenam terrae, quod ea locutione dictum est, quam Graeci uocant hyperbolen; quae utique tropica est, non propria. Quo tamen modo, ut ceteris tropis, uti solere scripturam, nullus qui eam didicit ambigit.

In this promise whether that too is included, whereby he was made the father of all nations, does not plainly appear. For it can seem to pertain to this: “And I will make your seed like the sand of the earth,” which was said in that locution that the Greeks call hyperbole; which is, to be sure, tropic (figurative), not proper (literal). In this way, however—that Scripture is accustomed to use it, as it does the other tropes—no one who has learned it is in doubt.

Iste autem tropus, id est modus locutionis, fit, quando id quod dicitur longe est amplius, quam quod eo dicto significatur. Quis enim non uideat, quam sit incomparabiliter amplior harenae numerus, quam potest esse hominum omnium ab ipso Adam usque ad terminum saeculi? Quanto ergo magis quam semen Abrahae, non solum quod pertinet ad Israeliticam gentem, uerum etiam quod est et futurum est secundum imitationem fidei toto orbe terrarum in omnibus gentibus!

This trope, that is, a mode of locution, happens when what is said is far more ample than what is signified by that saying. For who does not see how incomparably more ample the number of the sand is than the total of all human beings from Adam himself to the end of the age? How much more, then, than the seed of Abraham—not only that which pertains to the Israelite nation, but also that which is and will be according to the imitation of faith in the whole orb of the lands among all nations!

Quod semen in comparatione multitudinis impiorum profecto in paucis est; quamuis et ipsi pauci faciant innumerabilem multitudinem suam, quae significata est secundum hyperbolen per harenam terrae. Sane ista multitudo, quae promittitur Abrabae, non Deo est innumerabilis, sed hominibus; Deo autem nec harena terrae. Proinde quia non tantum gens Israelitica, sed uniuersum semen Abrahae, ubi est et promissio non secundum carnem, sed secundum spiritum plurium fiorum, congruentius harenae multitudini comparatur: potest hic intellegi utriusque rei facta promissio.

Which seed in comparison with the multitude of the impious is assuredly among the few; although those very few also make their multitude innumerable, which was signified, according to hyperbole, by the sand of the earth. Truly this multitude, which is promised to Abraham, is not innumerable to God, but to men; to God, moreover, not even the sand of the earth is. Accordingly, because not only the Israelitic nation, but the universal seed of Abraham—where there is also the promise not according to the flesh, but according to the spirit of many sons—is more congruently compared to the multitude of the sand: it can here be understood that a promise of both things was made.

Sed ideo diximus, quod non euidenter appareat, quia et illius gentis unius multitudo, quae secundum carnem nata est ex Abraham per eius nepotem Iacob, in tantum creuit, ut paene omnes partes orbis impleuerit. Et ideo potuit et ipsa secundum hyperbolen harenae multitudini comparari, quia et haec sola innumera est homini. Terram certe illam solam significatam, quae appellata est Chanaan, ambigit nemo.

But for that reason we said that it does not appear evident, because even the multitude of that one nation, which according to the flesh was born from Abraham through his grandson Jacob, grew to such an extent that it has filled almost all parts of the world. And therefore it too could, according to hyperbole, be compared to the multitude of the sand, since even this alone is innumerable to man. Certainly that land alone was signified which was called Canaan—no one disputes this.

Sed quod dictum est: Tibi dabo eam et semini tuo usque in saeculum, potest mouere nonnullos, si usque in saeculum intellegant "in aeternum". Si autem saeculum hoc loco sic accipiant, quem ad modum fideliter tenemus initium futuri saeculi a fine praesentis ordiri, nihil eos mouebit; quia, etsi expulsi sunt Israelitae de Hierosolymis, manent tamen in aliis ciuitatibus terrae Chanaan, et usque in finem manebunt; et uniuersa terra illa cum a Christianis inhabitatur, etiam ipsum semen est Abrahae.

But as to what was said: I will give it to you and to your seed unto the age, it can move some, if they understand “unto the age” as “into eternity.” But if they take “age” in this place thus, as we faithfully hold that the beginning of the future age takes its origin from the end of the present, nothing will trouble them; for although the Israelites have been expelled from Jerusalem, yet they remain in other cities of the land of Canaan, and will remain until the end; and since that whole land is inhabited by Christians, this too is itself the seed of Abraham.

[XXII] Hoc responso promissionis accepto migrauit Abraham et mansit in alio eiusdem terrae loco, iuxta quercum Mambre, quae erat Chebron. Deinde ab hostibus, qui Sodomis inruerant, cum quinque reges aduersus quattuor bellum gererent et uictis Sodomitis etiam Loth captus esset, liberauit eum Abraham adductis secum in proelium trecentis decem et octo uernaculis suis et uictoriam fecit regibus Sodomorum nihilque spoliorum auferre uoluit, cum rex cui uicerat obtulisset. Sed plane tunc benedictus est a Melchisedech, qui erat sacerdos Dei excelsi; de quo in epistula, quae inscribitur ad Hebraeos, quam plures Pauli apostoli esse dicunt, quidam uero negant, multa et magna conscripta sunt.

[22] With this answer of the promise received, Abraham migrated and remained in another place of that same land, near the oak of Mamre, which was at Hebron. Then, from the enemies who had rushed upon Sodom, when five kings were waging war against four and, the Sodomites having been defeated, even Lot had been captured, Abraham freed him, bringing with him into battle his 318 homeborn servants, and he wrought victory for the kings of the Sodomites, and wished to take nothing of the spoils, though the king to whom he had given victory had offered. But plainly then he was blessed by Melchizedek, who was priest of God Most High; about whom in the epistle entitled To the Hebrews, which many say is by the Apostle Paul, but some deny, many and great things have been written.

Ibi quippe primum apparuit sacrificium, quod nunc a Christianis offertur Deo toto orbe terrarum, impleturque illud, quod longe post hoc factum per prophetiam dicitur ad Christum, qui fuerat adhuc uenturus in carne: Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech; non scilicet secundum ordinem Aaron, qui ordo fuerat auferendus inlucescentibus rebus, quae illis umbris praenotabantur.

There, indeed, the sacrifice first appeared which now is offered by Christians to God throughout the whole world, and that is fulfilled which, long after this had been done, is said by prophecy to Christ, who was still to come in the flesh: “You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech;” not, to be sure, according to the order of Aaron, which order was to be taken away as the realities dawned, which were prefigured by those shadows.

[XXIII] Etiam tunc factum est uerbum Domini ad Abraham in uisu. Qui cum ei protectionem mercedemque promitteret ualde multam, ille de posteritate sollicitus quandam Eliezer uernaculum suum futurum sibi dixit heredem, continuoque illi promissus est heres, non ille uernaculus, sed qui de ipso Abraham fuerat exiturus, rursusque semen innumerabile, non sicut harena terrae, sed stellae caeli; ubi mihi magis uidetur promissa posteritas caelesti felicitate sublimis. Nam quantum ad multitudinem pertinet, quid sunt stellae caeli ad harenam terrae?

[23] Then too the word of the Lord was made to Abraham in a vision. And when He was promising him protection and a very great reward, he, anxious about his posterity, said that a certain Eliezer, his homeborn servant, would be his heir; and forthwith there was promised to him an heir—not that homeborn one, but one who would go forth from Abraham himself; and again an innumerable seed, not like the sand of the earth, but the stars of heaven; wherein it seems to me rather that the promised posterity is exalted with celestial felicity. For, as far as multitude is concerned, what are the stars of heaven compared to the sand of the earth?

nisi quis et istam comparationem in tantum esse similem dicat, in quantum etiam stellae dinumerari non ualent, quia nec omnes eas uideri posse credendum est. Nam quanto quisque acutius intuetur, tanto plures uidet. Vnde et acerrime cernentibus aliquas occultas esse merito existimatur, exceptis eis sideribus, quae in alia parte orbis a nobis remotissima oriri et occidere perhibentur.

unless someone should also say that even this comparison is similar to this extent, insofar as even the stars are unable to be enumerated, since it is to be believed that not all of them can be seen. For the more keenly each person looks, the more he sees. Whence it is rightly supposed that some are occult even to those who discern most acutely, with the exception of those sidereal bodies which are reported to rise and set in another part of the orb farthest removed from us.

Postremo quicumque uniuersum stellarum numerum conprehendisse et conscripsisse iactantur, sicut Aratus uel Eudoxus uel si qui alii sunt, eos libri huius contemnit auctoritas. Hic sane illa sententia ponitur, cuius apostolus meminit propter Dei gratiam commendandam: Credidit Abraham Deo, et deputatum est illi ad iustitiam; ne circumcisio gloriaretur gentesque incircumcisas ad fidem Christi nollet admitti. Hoc enim quando factum est, ut credenti Abrabae deputaretur fides ad iustitiam, nondum fuerat circumcisus.

Finally, whoever are bruited as having comprehended and conscribed the entire number of the stars—such as Aratus or Eudoxus or whatever others there are—the authority of this book holds them in contempt. Here indeed that sententia is set down, of which the apostle makes mention for the sake of commending the grace of God: Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness; lest circumcision should glory and should be unwilling that the uncircumcised gentes be admitted to the faith of Christ. For this was done—that faith was reckoned to the believing Abraham for righteousness—when he had not yet been circumcised.

[XXIV] In eodem uisu cum loqueretur ei Deus, etiam hoc ait ad illum: Ego Deus, qui eduxi te de regione Chaldaeorum, ut dem tibi terram hanc, ut heres sis eius. Vbi cum interrogasset Abraham secundum quid sciret, quod heres eius erit, dixit illi Deus: Accipe mihi iuuencam trimam et capram trimam et arietem trimum et turturem et columbam. Accepit autem illi haec omnia et diuisit illa media et posuit ea contra faciem alterum alteri; aues autem non diuisit.

[24] In the same vision, when God was speaking to him, He also said this to him: I am God, who led you out from the region of the Chaldaeans, to give you this land, that you may be heir of it. And when Abraham had asked by what he would know that he will be its heir, God said to him: Take for me a three-year-old heifer and a three-year-old she-goat and a three-year-old ram and a turtledove and a dove. And he took for Him all these things and divided them down the middle and placed them opposite, one to the other; but the birds he did not divide.

Et descenderunt, sicut scriptum est, aues supra corpora quae diuisa erant, et consedit illis Abram. Circa solis autem occasum pauor inruit super Abram, et ecce timor tenebrosus magnus incidit ei; et dictum est ad Abram: Sciendo scies, quia peregrinum erit semen tuum in terra non propria, et in seruitutem redigent eos et adfligent eos quadringentis annis; gentem autem, cui seruierint, iudicabo ego. Post haec uero exibunt hoc cum supellectili multa.

And the birds, as it is written, came down upon the bodies that had been divided, and Abram sat by them. But around the setting of the sun a dread rushed upon Abram, and behold, a great tenebrous fear fell upon him; and it was said to Abram: Knowing you shall know, that your seed will be a stranger in a land not its own, and they will reduce them into servitude and afflict them for 400 years; but the nation which they shall have served, I myself will judge. After these things, moreover, they will go out from there with much property.

Tu autem ibis ad patres tuos cum pace nutritus in senecta bona. Quarta uero generatione conuertent se hoc. Nondum enim impleta sunt peccata Amorrhaeorum usque adhuc.

But you, however, will go to your fathers in peace, nurtured in good old age. Yet in the 4th generation they will turn themselves back here. For the sins of the Amorites are not yet fulfilled up to now.

Cum autem iam sol erat ad occasum, flamma facta est, et ecce fornax fumabunda et lampades ignis, quae pertransierunt per media diuisa illa. In die illa disposuit Dominus Deus testamentum ad Abram, dicens: Semini tuo dabo terram hanc, a flumine Aegypti usque ad flumen magnum flumen Euphraten, Cenaeos et Cenezaeos et Celmonaeos et Chettaeos et Pherezaeos et Raphaim et Amorrhaeos et Chananaeos et Euaeos et Gergesaeos et Iebusaeos.

But when now the sun was at its setting, a flame came to be, and behold, a smoking furnace and torches of fire, which passed between those divided pieces. On that day the Lord God established a covenant with Abram, saying: To your seed I will give this land, from the river of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates: the Kenites and the Kenizzites and the Kadmonites and the Hittites and the Perizzites and the Rephaim and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Hivites and the Girgashites and the Jebusites.

Haec omnia in uisu facta diuinitus atque dicta sunt, de quibus singulis enucleate disserere longum est et intentionem operis huius excedit. Quod ergo satis est nosse debemus. Postea quam dictum est credidisse Abraham Deo et deputatum illi ad iustitiam, non eum in fide defecisse, ut diceret: Dominator Domine, secundum quid sciam, quia heres eius ero?

These things all were divinely done and spoken in a vision, about each of which to discuss in detail would be long and exceeds the intention of this work. Therefore we ought to know what is sufficient. After it was said that Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for justice, he did not fail in faith, so as to say: Sovereign Lord, according to what shall I know that I will be its heir?

(terrae quippe illius promissa erat hereditas) —- non enim ait: "Vnde sciam?" quasi adhuc non crederet; sed ait: Secundum quid sciam? ut ei rei, quam crediderat, aliqua similitudo adhiberetur, qua eius modus agnosceretur; sicut non est uirginis Mariae diffidentia quod ait: Quo modo fiet istud, quoniam uirum non cognosco? quod enim futurum esset, certa erat; modum quo fieret inquirebat, et hoc cum quaesisset, audiuit -: denique et hic similitudo data est de animalibus, iuuenca et capra et ariete et duabus uolucribus, turture et columba, ut secundum haec futurum sciret, quod futurum esse iam non ambigeret.

(for the inheritance of that land had been promised) —- for he did not say: "Whence shall I know?" as if he still did not believe; but he said: "According to what shall I know?" so that to that matter which he had believed some similitude might be applied, by which its mode might be recognized; just as it is not the Virgin Mary’s diffidence that she says: "How shall this be, since I do not know a man?" for she was certain that it would come to pass; she was inquiring the mode by which it would be done, and when she had asked this, she heard -: finally, even here a similitude was given of the animals, a heifer and a she-goat and a ram and two birds, a turtledove and a dove, so that according to these he might know what would come to pass, which he no longer doubted would come to pass.

Siue ergo per iuuencam significata sit plebs posita sub iugo legis, per capram eadem plebs peccatrix futura, per arietem eadem plebs etiam regnatura (quae animalia propterea trima dicuntur, quia, cum sint insignes afficuli temporum ab Adam usque ad Noe et inde usque ad Abraham et inde usque ad Dauid, qui reprobato Saule primus in regno gentis Israeliticae Domini est uoluntate fundatus, in hoc ordine tertio, qui tenditur ex Abraham usque ad Dauid, tamquam tertiam aetatem gerens ille populus adoleuit), siue aliquid aliud conuenientius ista significent: nullo modo tamen dubitauerim spiritales in ea praefiguratos additamento turturis et columbae. Et ideo dictum est: Aues autem non diuisit, quoniam carnales inter se diuiduntur, spiritales autem nullo modo, siue a negotiosis conuersationibus hominum se remoueant, sicut turtur, siue inter illas degant, sicut columba; utraque tamen auis est simplex et innoxia, significans et in ipso Israelitico populo, cui terra illa danda erat, futuros indiuiduos filios promssionis et heredes regni in aeterna felicitate mansuri. Aues autem descendentes supra corpora, quae diuisa erant, non boni aliquid, sed spiritus indicant aeris huius, pastum quendam suum de carnalium diuisione quaerentes.

Whether therefore by the heifer the plebs placed under the yoke of the law was signified, by the she-goat the same plebs destined to be sinful, by the ram the same plebs also destined to reign (which animals are for that reason called three-year-old, because, since there are notable sections of times from Adam to Noah and from there to Abraham and from there to David—who, Saul having been rejected, was first, by the Lord’s will, established in the kingdom of the Israelitic nation—in this third order, which is stretched from Abraham to David, that people, as though bearing the third age, came to maturity), or whether these signify something else more fitting: in no way, however, would I doubt that the spiritual were prefigured in it by the addition of the turtledove and the dove. And therefore it was said: But the birds he did not divide, since the carnal are divided among themselves, but the spiritual by no means, whether they withdraw from the busy dealings of men, like the turtledove, or live among them, like the dove; yet each bird is simple and harmless, signifying that even in the Israelitic people itself, to whom that land was to be given, there would be undivided sons of the promise and heirs of the kingdom, destined to remain in eternal felicity. But the birds descending upon the bodies which had been divided indicate not anything good, but the spirits of this air, seeking a certain nourishment of their own from the division of the carnal.

Quod autem illis consedit Abraham, significat etiam inter illas carnalium diuisiones ueros usque in finem perseueraturos fideles. Et circa solis occasum quod pauor inruit in Abraham et timor tenebrosus magnus significat circa huius saeculi finem magnam perturbationem ac tribulationem futuram fidelium, de qua Dominus dicit in euangelio: Erit enim tunc tribulatio magna, qualis non fuit ab initio.

But that Abraham sat down beside them signifies that even amid those divisions of the carnal, the true faithful will persevere unto the end. And that, around the setting of the sun, dread rushed upon Abraham and a great tenebrous fear signifies that around the end of this age there will be a great perturbation and tribulation of the faithful, about which the Lord says in the Gospel: For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning.

Quod uero dictum est ad Abraham: Sciendo scies, quia peregrinum erit semen tuum in terra non propria, et in seruitutem redigent eos et adfligent eos quadringentis annis, de populo Israel, qui fuerat in Aegypto seruiturus, apertissime prophetatum est; non quod in eadem seruitute sub Aegyptiis adfligentibus quadringentos annos ille populus fuerat peracturus, sed in ipsis quadringentis annis praenuntiatum est hoc futurum. Quem ad modum enim scriptum est de Thara patre Abrahae: Et fuerunt dies Tharae in Charra quinque et ducenti anno, non quia ibi omnes acti sunt, sed quia ibi completi sunt: ita et hic propterea interpositum est: Et in seruitutem redigent eos et adfligent eos quadringentis annis, quoniam iste numerus in eadem adflictione completus est, non quia ibi uniuersus peractus est. Quadringenti sane dicuntur anni propter numeri plenitudinem, quamuis aliquanto amplius sint, siue ex hoc tempore computentur, quo ista promittebantur Abrahae, siue ex quo natus est Isaac, propter semen Abrahae, de quo ista praedicuntur.

But as for what was said to Abraham: You shall surely know that your seed will be a peregrine in a land not its own, and they will reduce them into servitude and afflict them for four hundred years, it was most openly prophesied about the people of Israel, who were to serve in Egypt; not that that people was going to spend four hundred years in the same servitude under the Egyptians afflicting them, but that within those very four hundred years this was preannounced as going to happen. For just as it is written about Thara, the father of Abraham: And the days of Thara in Charra were two hundred and five years, not because all were spent there, but because they were completed there; so too here for that reason it was inserted: And they will reduce them into servitude and afflict them for four hundred years, since this number was completed in that same affliction, not because the whole was passed there. Four hundred years, to be sure, are said on account of the fullness of the number, although they are somewhat more, whether they are computed from the time when these things were being promised to Abraham, or from when Isaac was born, on account of the seed of Abraham, about which these things are being predicated.

Computantur enim, sicut superius iam diximus, ab anno septuagensimo et quinto Abrahae, quando ad eum facta est prima promissio, usque ad exitum Israel ex Aegypto quadringenti et triginta anni; quorum apostolus ita meminit: Hoc autem dico, inquit: testamentum confirmatum a Deo post quadringentos triginta annos facta lex non infirmat ad euacuandam promissionem. Iam ergo isti quadringenti et triginta <anni> quadringenti poterant nuncupari, quia non sunt multo amplius: quanto magis cum aliquot iam ex isto numero praeterissent, quando illa in uisu demonstrata et dicta sunt Abrahae, uel qu ando Isaac natus est centenario patri suo, a prima promissione post uiginti quinque annos, cum iam ex istis quadringentis triginta quadringenti et quinque remanerent, quos Deus quadringentos uoluit nominare. Et cetera, quae sequuntur in uerbis praenuntiantis Dei, nullus dubitauerit ad Israeliticum populum pertinere.

For they are computed, as we have already said above, from the seventy-fifth year (75th) of Abraham, when the first promise was made to him, up to the departure of Israel from Egypt, as four hundred and thirty years (430); of which the Apostle thus makes mention: But this I say, he says: a law made after four hundred and thirty years (430) does not invalidate a testament confirmed by God so as to evacuate the promise. Therefore already these four hundred and thirty <years> could be called four hundred (400), because they are not much more: how much more when some already of this number had passed, when those things were shown and spoken to Abraham in a vision, or when Isaac was born to his hundred-year-old father, twenty-five years (25) after the first promise, when already out of those four hundred and thirty (430) there remained four hundred and five (405), which God willed to name four hundred (400). And as for the rest which follow in the words of God who fore-announces, let no one doubt that they pertain to the Israelitish people.

Quod uero adiungitur: Cum autem iam sol erat ad occasum, flamma facta est, et ecce fornax fumabunda et lampades ignis, quae pertransierunt per media diuisa illa, significat iam in fine saeculi per ignem iudicandos esse carnales. Sicut enim adflictio ciuitatis Dei, qualis antea numquam fuit, quae sub Antichristo futura speratur, significatur tenebroso timore Abrahae circa solis occasum, id est propinquante iam fine saeculi: sic ad solis occasum, id est ad ipsum iam finem, significatur isto igne dies iudicii dirimens carnales per ignem saluandos et in igne damnandos. Deinde testamentum factum ad Abraham terram Chanaan proprie manifestat et nominat in ea undecim gentes a flumine Aegypti usque ad flumen magnum Euphraten.

What is added, moreover: But when now the sun was toward setting, a flame came to be, and behold a fuming furnace and lamps of fire, which passed through the midst of those divided things, signifies that already at the end of the age the carnal are to be judged by fire. For just as the affliction of the City of God—such as never was before—which is expected to be under Antichrist, is signified by the murky fear of Abraham about the sun’s setting, that is, with the end of the age now drawing near: so at the sun’s setting, that is, at the very end itself, by this fire is signified the day of judgment, separating the carnal—those to be saved through fire and those to be condemned in fire. Then the testament made to Abraham expressly manifests the land of Canaan and names within it eleven nations from the river of Egypt as far as the great river Euphrates.

Non ergo a flumine magno Aegypti, hoc est Nilo, sed a paruo, quod diuidit inter Aegyptum et Palae stinam, ubi est ciuitas Rhinocorura.

Therefore not from the great river of Egypt, that is, the Nile, but from the small one, which divides between Egypt and Palestine, where the city Rhinocorura is.

[XXV] Iam hinc tempora consequuntur filiorum Abrahae, unius de Agar ancilla, alterius de Sarra libera, de quibus in libro superiore iam diximus. Quod autem adtinet ad rem gestam, nullo modo est inurendum de hac concubina crimen Abrabae. Vsus est ea quippe ad generandam prolem, non ad explendam libidinem, nec insultans, sed potius obediens coniugi, quae suae sterilitatis credidit esse solacium, si fecundum ancillae uterum, quoniam natura non poterat, uoluntate faceret sum, et eo iure, quo dicit apostolus: Similiter et uir non habet potestatem corporis sui, sed mulier, uteretur mulier ad pariendum ex altera, quod non poterat ex se ipsa.

[25] From here the times of the sons of Abraham now follow, the one from Hagar the handmaid, the other from Sarah the freewoman, about whom we have already spoken in the former book. But as pertains to the deed, by no means is a charge to be branded upon Abraham on account of this concubine. He made use of her, indeed, for the begetting of progeny, not for the satisfying of libido, and not with insult, but rather in obedience to his spouse, who believed there would be a solace of her sterility, if—since by nature she could not—she would by her will make the handmaid’s fruitful womb her own; and by that right of which the apostle says: “Likewise also the man does not have authority over his body, but the woman,” the woman would make use, for bearing, of another, which she could not from herself.

Nulla est hic cupido lasciuiae, nulla nequitiae turpitudo. Ab uxore causa prolis ancilla marito traditur, a marito causa prolis accipitur; ab utroque non culpae luxus, sed naturae fructus exquiritur. Denique cum ancilla grauida dominae sterili superbiret et hoc Sarra suspicione muliebri uiro potius inputaret, etiam ibi demonstrauit Abraham non se amatorem seruum, sed liberum fuisse genitorem et in Agar Sarrae coniugi pudicitiam custodisse nec uoluptatem suam, sed uoluntatem illius impleuisse; accepisse nec petisse, accessisse nec haesisse, seminasse nec amasse.

There is here no desire of lasciviousness, no turpitude of iniquity. By the wife, for the sake of offspring, the handmaid is handed over to the husband; by the husband, for the sake of offspring, she is received; by both there is sought not the luxury of guilt, but the fruit of nature. Finally, when the handmaid, being pregnant, was haughty toward her barren mistress, and Sarah, with womanly suspicion, imputed this rather to her husband, even there Abraham showed that he had been not a servile lover, but a free begetter, and that, with Hagar, he had kept chastity toward Sarah his wife, and had fulfilled not his own pleasure, but her will: to have received and not sought, to have gone in and not clung, to have sown and not loved.

Ait enim: Ecce ancilla tua in manibus tuis, utere ea quo modo tibi placuerit. O uirum uiriliter utentem feminis, coniuge temperanter, ancilla obtemperanter, nulla intemperanter!

For he says: Behold, your handmaid is in your hands; use her in whatever way shall please you. O man using women in a manly way, with his spouse temperately, with the handmaid obediently, with none intemperately!

[XXVI] Post haec natus est Ismael ex Agar, in quo putare posset impletum, quod ei promissum fuerat, cum sibi uernaculum suum adoptare uoluisset, Deo dicente: Non erit heres tuus hic; sed qui exiet de te, ille erit heres tuus. Hoc ergo promissum ne in ancillae filio putaret impletum, iam cum esset annorum nonaginta et nouem, apparuit ei Dominus et dixit illi; Ego sum Deus, place in conspectu meo et esto sine querella, et ponam testamentum meum inter me et inter te et implebo te ualde. Et procidit Abram in faciem suam.

[26] After these things Ishmael was born from Hagar, in whom he might think had been fulfilled what had been promised to him, when he had wished to adopt his homeborn servant for himself, God saying: This one will not be your heir; but he who will go forth from you, he shall be your heir. Therefore, lest he should think this promise fulfilled in the handmaid’s son, when he was already ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said to him: I am God; be pleasing in my sight and be without reproach, and I will set my testament between me and you and I will multiply you exceedingly. And Abram fell upon his face.

Et locutus est illi Deus dicens: Et ego, ecce testamentum meum tecum, et eris pater multitudinis gentium; et non appellabitur adhuc nomen tuum Abram, sed erit nomen tuum Abraham, quia patrem multarum gentium posui te; et augeam te ualde ualde et ponam te in gentes, et reges ex te exibunt; et statuam testamentum meum inter me et <inter> te et inter semen tuum post te in generationes eorum in testamentum aeternum, ut sim tibi Deus et semini tuo post te. Et dabo tibi et semini tuo post te terram, in qua incola es, omnem terram Chanaan in pussessionem aeternam, et ero illis Deus. Et dixit Deus ad Abraham: Tu autem testamentum meum conseruabis, tu et semen tuum post te in progenies suas. Et hoc est testamentum, quod conseruabis inter me et uos et inter semen tuum post te in generationes suas: Circumcidetur uestrum omne masculinum,, et circumcidemini carnem praeputii uestri, et erit in signo testamenti inter me et uos.

And God spoke to him, saying: And I—behold my testament with you—and you shall be father of a multitude of nations; and your name shall no longer be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, because I have set you as father of many nations; and I will increase you very, very much and I will make you into nations, and kings shall go forth from you; and I will establish my testament between me and <inter> you and between your seed after you, in their generations, as an eternal testament, that I may be God to you and to your seed after you. And I will give to you and to your seed after you the land in which you are a sojourner, all the land of Canaan, for an eternal possession, and I will be God to them. And God said to Abraham: But you shall keep my testament, you and your seed after you, in their progenies. And this is the testament which you shall keep between me and you and between your seed after you in their generations: Every male of yours shall be circumcised, and you shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be for a sign of the testament between me and you.

Et puer octo dierum circumcidetur, uestrum omne masculinum in progenies uestras. Vernaculus et empticius ab omni filio alieno, qui non est de semine tuo, circumcisione circumcidetur uernaculus domus tuae et empticius. Et erit testamentum meum in carne uestra in testamento aeterno.

And an eight-day-old boy shall be circumcised, every male of yours throughout your generations. The homeborn and the purchased, from any alien who is not of your seed, shall by circumcision be circumcised—the homeborn of your house and the purchased. And my covenant shall be in your flesh for an eternal covenant.

Et qui non fuerit circumcisus masculus, qui non circumcidetur carnem praeputii sui octaua die, interibit anima illa de genere eius, quia testamentum meum dissipauit. Et dixit Deus ad Abraham: Sara uxor tua, non appellabitur nomen eius Sara, sed Sarra erit nomen eius. Benedicam autem illam et dabo tibi ex ea filium, et benedicam illum, et erit in nationes, et reges gentium ex eo erunt.

And the male who shall not have been circumcised, who will not circumcise the flesh of his foreskin on the eighth day, that soul shall perish from his kindred, because he has broken my testament. And God said to Abraham: Your wife Sara—her name shall not be called Sara, but Sarra shall be her name. Moreover I will bless her and I will give to you from her a son, and I will bless him, and he will become for nations, and kings of peoples shall be from him.

Et procidit Abraham super faciem suam et risit et dixit in animo suo dicens: Si mihi centum annos habenti nascetur <filius>, et si Sarra annorum nonaginta pariet? Dixit autem Abraham ad Deum: Ismael hic uiuat in conspectu tuo. Dixit autem Deus ad Abraham: Ita, ecce Sarra uxor tua pariet tibi filium, et uocabis nomen eius Isaac; et statuam testamentum meum ad illum in testamentum aeternum, esse illi Deus et semini eius post illum.

And Abraham fell upon his face and laughed and said in his mind, saying: Shall a <son> be born to me, who am a hundred years old, and shall Sarah at ninety years bear? And Abraham said to God: May Ishmael live here in your sight. But God said to Abraham: Yes; behold, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish my testament with him as an eternal testament, to be God to him and to his seed after him.

De Ismael autem ecce exaudiui te; ecce benedixi eum et ampliabo illum et multiplicabo eum ualde. Duodecim gentes generabit, et dabo illum in magnam gentem. Testamentum autem meum statuam ad Isaac, quem pariet tibi Sarra in tempore hoc ad annum sequentem.

But concerning Ishmael, behold, I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him and I will amplify him and I will multiply him greatly. He will beget twelve nations, and I will make him into a great nation. But my testament I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this time in the following year.

Hic apertiora promissa sunt de uocatione gentium in Isaac, id est in filio promissionis, quo significatur gratia, non natura, quia de sene et anu sterili promittitur filius. Quamuis enim et naturalem procreationis excursum Deus operetur: ubi tamen euidens opus Dei est uitiata et cessante natura, ibi euidentius intellegitur gratia. Et quia hoc non per generationem, sed per regenerationem futurum erat, ideo nunc imperata est circumcisio, quando de Sarra promissus est filius.

Here the promises about the vocation of the nations are clearer in Isaac, that is, in the son of promise, by which is signified grace, not nature, because a son is promised from an old man and a barren old woman. Although indeed God also operates the natural course of procreation: yet where the evident work of God is, with nature vitiated and ceasing, there grace is understood more evidently. And because this was going to be not through generation but through regeneration, therefore circumcision was now commanded, when a son was promised from Sarah.

Et quod omnes non solum filios, uerum etiam seruos uernaculos et empticios circumcidi iubet, ad omnes istam gratiam pertinere testatur. Quid enim aliud circumcisio significat quam naturam exuta uetustate renouatam? Et quid aliud quam Christum octauus dies, qui hebdomade completa, hoc est post sabbatum, resurrexit?

And the fact that he commands that all, not only sons but also homeborn and purchased slaves, be circumcised attests that this grace pertains to all. For what else does circumcision signify than nature renewed, having put off its oldness? And what else does the eighth day signify than Christ, who, the hebdomad completed—that is, after the sabbath—was resurrected?

Parentum mutantur et nomina: omnia resonant nouitatem, et in testamento uetere obumbratur nouum. Quid est enim quod dicitur testamentum uetus nisi noui occultatio? Et quid est aliud quod dicitur nouum nisi ueteris reuelatio?

The parents’ names too are changed: all things resound with novelty, and in the Old Testament the New is foreshadowed. For what is that which is called the Old Testament if not the occultation of the New? And what else is that which is called New if not the revelation of the Old?

Risus Abrahae exultatio est gratulantis, non inrisio diffidentis. Verba quoque eius illa in animo suo: Si mihi centum annos habenti nascetur <filius> et si Sarra annorum nonaginta pariet, non,sunt dubitantis, sed admirantis. Si quem uero mouet quod dictum est: Et dabo tibi et semini tuo post te terram, in qua tu incola es, omnem terram Chanaan in possessionem aeternam, quo modo accipiatur impletum siue adhuc expectetur implendum, cum possessio quaecumque terrena aeterna cuilibet genti esse non possit: sciat aeternum a nostris interpretari, quod Graeci appellant *ai)w/nion, quod a saeculo deriuatum est; *ai)w\n quippe Graece saeculum nuncupatur.

The laughter of Abraham is the exultation of one offering gratulation, not the mockery of a distrustful man. Also those words of his in his mind: “If to me, being one hundred years old, there will be born <son>, and if Sarah, ninety years of age, will give birth,” are not of one doubting, but of one marveling. But if anyone is moved by what is said: “And I will give to you and to your seed after you the land in which you are a sojourner, all the land of Canaan, for an eternal possession,” as to how it is to be taken as fulfilled or is still expected to be fulfilled, since any earthly possession cannot be eternal for any nation: let him know that “eternal” is interpreted by our people as what the Greeks call *ai)w/nion, which is derived from saeculum (that is, an age); for *ai)w\n in Greek is called saeculum.

Sed non sunt ausi Latini hoc dicere saeculare, ne longe in aliud mitterent sensum. Saecularia quippe dicuntur multa, quae in hoc saeculo sic aguntur, ut breui etiam tempore transeant; *ai)w/nion autem quod dicitur, aut non habet finem aut usque in huius saeculi tenditur finem.

But the Latins did not dare to say “secular,” lest they send the sense far off into something else. For many things are called “secular,” which in this age are so done as to pass away even in a short time; but what is called *ai)w/nion* either has no end, or is extended up to the end of this age.

[XXVII] Item potest mouere, quo modo intellegi oporteat quod hic dictum est: Masculus, qui non circumcidetur carnem praeputii sui octaua die, interibit anima illa de genere eius, quia testamentum meum dissipauit, cum haec nulla culpa sit paruuli, cuius dixit animam perituram, nec ipse dissipauerit testamentum Dei, sed maiores, qui eum circumcidere non curarunt; nisi quia etiam paruuli, non secundum suae uitae proprietatem, sed secundum communem generis humani originem omnes in illo uno testamentum Dei dissipauerunt, in quo omnes peccauerunt. Multa quippe appellantur testamenta Dei exceptis illis duobus magnis, uetere et nouo, quod licet cuique legendo cognoscere. Testamentum autem primum, quod factum est ad hominem primum, profecto illud est: Qua die ederitis, morte moriemini.

[27] Likewise the question may arise how what is said here ought to be understood: A male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin on the eighth day, that soul shall perish—shall be cut off—from his lineage, because he has dissipated—made void—my testament (covenant), since this is no fault of the infant, whose soul he said would perish, nor has he himself dissipated the testament of God, but his elders, who did not take care to circumcise him; unless it be because even infants, not according to the propriety of their own life, but according to the common origin of the human race, all in that one dissipated the testament of God, in whom all sinned. Many things, in fact, are called testaments of God, besides those two great ones, the Old and the New, which anyone may learn by reading. But the first testament, which was made to the first man, is assuredly this: On the day you eat, you shall surely die.

Vnde scriptum est in libro, qui ecclesiasticus appellatur: Omnis caro sicut uestis ueterescit. Testamentum enim a saeculo: Morte morieris. Cum enim lex euidentior postea data sit, et dicat apostolus: Vbi autem non est lex, nec praeuaricatio, quo pacto in psalmo quod legitur uerum est: Praeuaricatores aestimaui omnes peccatores terrae, nisi quia omnes legis alicuius praeuaricatae sunt rei, qui aliquo peccato tenentur obstricti?

Whence it is written in the book which is called Ecclesiasticus: “All flesh grows old like a garment.” For the testament from the age: “By death you shall die.” Since indeed a more evident law was afterwards given, and the Apostle says: “But where there is no law, neither is there transgression,” how is true what is read in the psalm: “I have reckoned as transgressors all the sinners of the earth,” unless because all are guilty of some law transgressed, who are held bound by some sin?

Quam ob rem si etiam paruuli, quod uera fides habet, nascuntur non proprie, sed originaliter peccatores, unde illis gratiam remissionis peccatorum necessariam confitemur: profecto eo modo, quo sunt peccatores, etiam praeuaricatores legis illius, quae in paradiso data est, agnoscuntur; ut uerum sit utrumque, quod scriptum est, et: Praeuaricatores aestimaui omnes peccatores terrae, et: Vbi lex non est, nec praeuaricatio. Ac per hoc, quia circumcisio signum regenerationis fuit et non inmerito paruulum propter originale peccatum, quo primum Dei dissipatum est testamentum, generatio disperdet, nisi regeneratio liberet: sic intellegenda sunt haec uerba diuina, tamquam dictum sit: "Qui non fuerit regeneratus, interibit anima illa de genere eius", quia testamentum Dei dissipauit, quando in Adam cum omnibus etiam ipse peccauit. Si enim dixisset: "Quia hoc testamentum meum dissipauit", non nisi de ista circumcisione intellegi cogeret; nunc uero, quoniam non expressit cuius modi testamentum paruulus dissipauerit, liberum est intellegere de illo testamento dictum, cuius dissipatio pertinere posset ad paruulum.

Wherefore, if even little ones, as true faith holds, are born not properly, but originally, sinners—on account of which we confess for them the grace of the remission of sins to be necessary—assuredly in that very way in which they are sinners they are also recognized as prevaricators of that law which was given in Paradise; so that both are true which are written, both: "I have esteemed all the sinners of the earth prevaricators," and: "Where there is no law, neither prevarication." And therefore, because circumcision was a sign of regeneration, and not without reason birth will destroy the little one on account of original sin, by which first the testament of God was dissipated, unless regeneration should free: thus these divine words are to be understood, as though it were said: "Whoever shall not have been regenerated, that soul shall perish from his race," because he has dissipated the testament of God, when in Adam, along with all, he too sinned. For if he had said: "Because he has dissipated this my testament," he would compel it to be understood only of this circumcision; but as it is, since he did not express of what sort the testament is which the little one has dissipated, it is free to understand it as said of that testament whose dissipation could pertain to the little one.

Si autem hoc quisquam non nisi de ista circumcisione dictum esse contendit, quod in ea testamentum Dei, quoniam non est circumcisus, dissipauerit paruulus: quaerat locutionis aliquem modum, quo non absurde possit intellegi, ideo dissipasse testamentum, quia licet non ab illo, tamen in illo est dissipatum. Verum sic quoque animaduertendum est nulla in se neglegentia sua iniuste interire incircumcisi animam paruuli nisi originalis obligatione peccati.

If, however, anyone contends that this was said only of that circumcision, namely that in it the Testament of God has been dissipated by the little one, because he is not circumcised: let him seek some mode of locution by which it can be understood not absurdly that he has therefore dissipated the testament, because, although not by him, yet in him it has been dissipated. But even so it must be observed that, with no negligence of his own in himself, the soul of an uncircumcised infant would perish unjustly, were it not by the original obligation of sin.

[XXVIII] Facta igitur promissione tam magna tamque dilucida ad Abraham, cui euidentissime dictum est: Patrem multarum gentium posui te; et augeam te ualde ualde et ponam te in gentes, et reges ex te exibunt. Et dabo tibi ex Sarra filium, et benedicam illum, et erit in nationes, et reges gentium ex eo erunt (quam promissionem nunc in Christo cernimus reddi), ex illo deinceps illi coniuges non uocantur in scripturis, sicut antea uocabuntur, Abram et Sara, sed sicut eos nos ab initio uocauimus, quoniam sic iam uocantur ab omnibus, Abrabam et Sarra. Cur autem mutatum sit nomen Abrahae, reddita est ratio: Quia patrem, inquit, multarum gentium posui te. Hoc ergo significare intellegendum est Abraham; Abram uero, quod ante uocabatur, interpretatur pater excelsus.

[28] Therefore, once so great and so clear a promise had been made to Abraham, to whom it was said most evidently: “I have set you as father of many nations; and I will increase you very, very much and I will set you among the nations, and kings shall come forth from you. And I will give you a son from Sarra, and I will bless him, and he shall be for nations, and kings of the nations shall be from him” (which promise we now behold rendered in Christ), from that point onward those spouses are not called in the Scriptures, as previously they were called, Abram and Sara, but, as we have called them from the beginning, since thus they are now called by all, Abraham and Sarra. And as to why the name of Abraham was changed, the reason is given: “Because,” he says, “I have set you as father of many nations.” Therefore this is to be understood as what “Abraham” signifies; but “Abram,” which he was previously called, is interpreted “exalted father.”

De nomine autem mutato Sarrae non est reddita ratio; sed, sicut aiunt, qui scripserunt interpretationes nominum Hebraeorum, quae his sacris litteris continentur, Sara interpretatur princeps mea, Sarra autem uirtus. Vnde scriptum est in epistula ad Hebraeos: Fide et ipsa Sarra uirtutem accepit ad emissionem seminis. Ambo enim seniores erant, sicut scriptura testatur; sed illa etiam sterilis et cruore menstruo iam destituta, propter quod iam parere non posset, etiam si sterilis non fuisset.

But as to the changed name of Sarra, no reason was given; but, as those say who wrote the interpretations of Hebrew names which are contained in these sacred letters, Sara is interpreted “my princess,” but Sarra “virtue.” Whence it is written in the Epistle to the Hebrews: By faith even Sarra herself received virtue for the emission of seed. For both were elderly, as Scripture attests; but she was also barren and now destitute of menstrual blood, because of which she could no longer bear, even if she had not been barren.

Porro si femina ita sit prouectioris aetatis, ut ei solita mulierum adhuc fluant, de iuuene parere potest, de seniore non potest; quamuis adhuc possit ille senior, sed de adulescentula gignere, sicut Abraham post mortem Sarrae de Cettura potuit, quia uiuidam eius inuenit aetatem. Hoc ergo est, quod mirum commendat apostolus, et ad hoc dicit Abrahae iam fuisse corpus emortuum, quoniam non ex omni femina, cui adhuc esset aliquod pariendi tempus extremum, generare ipse in illa aetate adhuc posset. Ad aliquid enim emortuum corpus intellegere debemus, non ad omnia.

Moreover, if a woman be of such more-advanced age that her customary courses of women still flow, she can bear by a young man, by a senior she cannot; although that senior may still be able, yet to beget from an adolescent girl — as Abraham, after the death of Sarah, was able from Keturah, because he found her age in its vigor. This, then, is what the Apostle commends as wondrous, and to this he says that Abraham’s body was already moribund, since he could not at that age still beget from just any woman in whom there yet remained some extreme term of childbearing. For we ought to understand the body as dead with respect to something, not to all things.

Nam si ad omnia non iam senectus uiui, sed cadauer est mortui. Quamuis etiam sic solui soleat ista quaestio, quod de Cettura postea genuit Abraham, quia donum gignendi, quod a Domino accepit, etiam post obitum mansit uxoris. Sed propterea mihi uidetur illa, quam secuti sumus, huius quaestionis solutio praeferenda, quia centenarius quidem senex, sed temporis nostri, de nulla potest femina gignere; non tunc, quando adhuc tamdiu uiuebant, ut centum anni nondum facerent hominem decrepitae senectutis.

For if in all respects old age is now no longer of the living, but a cadaver of the dead. Although this question is also wont thus to be solved: that Abraham afterwards begot from Keturah, because the gift of generating, which he received from the Lord, remained even after the death of his wife. But for that reason the solution of this question which we have followed seems to me preferable, because a centenarian—indeed an old man—of our time can beget from no woman; not then, when they still lived so long that one hundred years did not yet make a man of decrepit old age.

[XXIX] Item Deus apparuit Abrahae ad quercum Mambre in tribus uiris, quos dubitandum non est angelos fuisse; quamuis quidam existiment unum in eis fuisse Dominum Christum, adserentes eum etiam ante indumentum carnis fuisse uisibilem. Est quidem diuinae potestatis et inuisibilis, incorporalis inmutabilisque naturae, sine ulla sui mutatione etiam mortalibus aspectibus apparere, non per id quod est, sed per aliquid quod sibi subditum est; quid autem illi subditum non est? Verum tamen si propterea confirmant horum trium aliquem fuisse Christum, quia, cum tres uidisset, ad Dominum singulariter est locutus (sic enim scriptum est: Et ecce tres uiri stabant super eum, et uidens procucurrit in obuiam illis ab ostio tabernaculi sui, et adorauit super terram et dixit: Domine, si inueni gratiam ante te, et cetera): cur non et illud aduertunt, duos ex eis uenisse, ut Sodomitae delerentur, cum adhuc Abrabam ad unum loqueretur, Dominum appellans et intercedens, ne simul iustum cum impio in Sodomis perderet?

[29] Likewise, God appeared to Abraham at the oak of Mamre in three men, whom it is not to be doubted were angels; although some think that one among them was the Lord Christ, asserting that He was visible even before the garment of flesh. It is indeed of the divine power and of the invisible, incorporeal, and immutable nature to appear, without any change of Himself, even to mortal gazes—not by that which He is, but by something that is subject to Himself; and what, moreover, is not subject to Him? Yet, nevertheless, if for this reason they affirm that some one of these three was Christ, because, when he had seen three, he spoke to the Lord in the singular (for thus it is written: And behold, three men were standing over him, and seeing, he ran forth to meet them from the door of his tabernacle, and he adored upon the earth and said: Lord, if I have found grace before you, and the rest): why do they not also note this, that two of them came so that the Sodomites might be destroyed, while Abraham was still speaking to the one, addressing Him as Lord and interceding that he not destroy the just together with the impious in Sodom?

Illos autem duos sic suscepit Loth, ut etiam ipse in conloquio cum illis suo singulariter Dominum appellet. Nam cum eis pluraliter dixisset: Ecce, domini, declinate in domum pueri uestri, et cetera quae ibi dicuntur, postea tamen ita legitur: Et tenuerunt angeli manum eius et manum uxoris eius et manus duarum filiarum eius, in eo quod parceret Dominus ipsi. Et factum est, mox ut eduxerunt illum foras, et dixerunt: Saluam fac animam tuam, ne respexeris retro, nec steteris in tota regione; in monte saluum te fac, ne quando conprehendaris.

But Lot received those two in such a way that he too, in conversation with them, calls the Lord in the singular. For when he had said to them in the plural: Behold, lords, turn aside into the house of your servant, and the rest that is said there, afterward, however, it is read thus: And the angels took hold of his hand and the hand of his wife and the hands of his two daughters, in that the Lord was sparing him. And it came to pass, as soon as they had led him forth outside, they said: Save your soul; do not look back, nor stand in the whole region; in the mountain make yourself safe, lest at some time you be apprehended.

Dixit autem Loth ad illos: Oro, Domine, quia inuenit puer tuus misericordiam ante te, et quae sequuntur. Deinde post haec uerba singulariter illi respondet et Dominus, cum in duobus angelis esset, dicens: Ecce miratus sum faciem tuam, et cetera. Vnde multo est credibilius, quod et Abraham in tribus et Loth in duobus uiris Dominum agnoscebant, cui per singularem numerum loquebantur, etiam cum eos homines esse arbitrarentur; neque enim aliam ob causam sic eos susceperunt, ut tamquam mortalibus et humana refectione indigentibus ministrarent; sed erat profecto aliquid, quo ita excellebant, licet tamquam homines, ut in eis esse Dominum, sicut adsolet in prophetis, hi, qui hospitalitatem illis exhibebant, dubitare non possent; atque ideo et ipsos aliquando pluraliter et in eis Dominum aliquando singulariter appellabant.

But Loth said to them: I beg, Lord, since your servant has found mercy before you, and what follows. Then after these words he answers to him in the singular, and the Lord too, though he was in the two angels, saying: Behold, I have regarded your face, and so on. Whence it is far more credible that both Abraham in the three men and Loth in the two men were recognizing the Lord, to whom they spoke in the singular number, even when they were supposing them to be men; for neither for any other cause did they so receive them, as to minister to them as mortals and needing human refection; but there was assuredly something by which they so excelled, although as men, that those who were showing hospitality to them could not doubt that the Lord was in them, as is wont in the prophets; and therefore they at times addressed them in the plural, and at times the Lord in them in the singular.

Angelos autem fuisse scriptura testatur, non solum in hoc genesis libro, ubi haec gesta narrantur, uerum etiam in epistula ad Hebraeos, ubi, cum hospitalitas laudaretur: Per hanc, inquit, etiam quidam nescientes hospitio receperunt angelos. Per illos igitur tres uiros, cum rursus filius Isaac de Sarra promitteretur Abrahae, diuinum datum est etiam tale responsum, ut diceretur: Abraham erit in magnam gentem et multam, et benedicentur in eo omnes gentes terrae. Et hic duo illa breuissime plenissimeque promissa sunt, gens Israel secundum carnem et omnes gentes secundum fidem.

But that they were angels Scripture attests, not only in this book of genesis, where these deeds are narrated, but also in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where, when hospitality was being praised: “By this,” he says, “some, not knowing it, received angels as guests.” Through those three men, therefore, when again the son Isaac was promised from Sarah to Abraham, there was given even such a divine response, that it was said: “Abraham shall become a great and numerous nation, and in him all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.” And here those two things were most briefly and most fully promised: the nation Israel according to the flesh and all the nations according to faith.

[XXX] Post hanc promissionem liberato de Sodomis Loth et ueniente igneo imbre de caelo tota illa regio impiae ciuitatis in cinerem uersa est, ubi stupra in masculos in tantam consuetudinem conualuerant, quantam leges solent aliorum factorum praebere licentiam. Verum et hoc eorum supplicium specimen futuri iudicii diuini fuit. Nam quo pertinet quod prohibiti sunt qui liberabantur ab angelis retro respicere, nisi quia non est animo redeundum ad ueterem uitam, qua per gratiam regeneratus exuitur, si ultimum euadere iudicium cogitamus?

[30] After this promise, when Lot had been freed from Sodom and a fiery shower came from heaven, that whole region of the impious city was turned into ash, where defilements upon males had grown into so great a custom as laws are wont to provide license for other deeds. Yet even this punishment of theirs was a specimen of the future divine judgment. For to what does it tend that those who were being delivered were forbidden by the angels to look back, except that one must not in mind return to the former life, which the man regenerated by grace puts off, if we intend to escape the final judgment?

Denique uxor Loth, ubi respexit, remansit et in salem conuersa hominibus fidelibus quoddam praestitit condimentum, quo sapiant aliquid, unde illud caueatur exemplum.

Finally, the wife of Lot, when she looked back, remained and, turned into salt, furnished for faithful men a kind of condiment, whereby they may have some savor, whence that example may be guarded against.

Inde rursus Abraham fecit in Geraris apud regem ciuitatis illius Abimelech, quod in Aegypto de coniuge fecerat, eique intacta similiter reddita est. Vbi sane Abraham obiurganti regi, cur tacuisset uxorem sororemque dixisset, aperiens quid timuerit etiam hoc addidit: Etenim uere soror mea est de patre, sed non de matre, quia de patre suo soror erat Abrahae, de quo propinqua eius erat. Tantae autem pulchritudinis fuit, ut etiam in illa aetate posset adamari.

Thence again Abraham did in Gerar, with the king of that city Abimelech, what he had done in Egypt concerning his consort, and she was similarly returned to him intact. Where indeed, as the king was reproaching Abraham—why he had kept silent and had said that his wife was his sister—revealing what he had feared he also added this: “For truly she is my sister by father, but not by mother, since by his father she was a sister of Abraham; for which cause she was his kinswoman.” And she was of so great beauty that even in that age she could be enamored of.

[XXXI] Post haec natus est Abrahae secundum promissionem Dei de Sarra filius, eumque nominauit Isaac, quod interpretatur risus. Riserat enim et pater, quando ei promissus est, admirans in gaudio; riserat et mater, quando per illos tres uiros iterum promissus est, dubitans in gaudio; quamuis exprobrante angelo, quod risus ille, etiamsi gaudii fuit, tamen plenae fidei non fuit, post ab eodem angelo in fide etiam confirmata est. Ex hoc ergo puer nomen accepit.

[31] After these things a son was born to Abraham according to the promise of God from Sarah, and he named him Isaac, which is interpreted laughter. For the father too had laughed when he was promised to him, marveling in joy; and the mother too had laughed when through those three men he was again promised, doubting in joy; although, with the angel reproaching that that laughter, even if it was of joy, nevertheless was not of full faith, afterwards by the same angel she was also confirmed in faith. From this, then, the boy received his name.

Nam quod risus ille non ad inridendum opprobrium,sed ad celebrandum gaudium pertinebat, nato Isaac et eo nomine uocato Sarra monstrauit; ait quippe: Risum mihi fecit Dominus; quicumque enim audierit, congaudebit mihi. Sed post aliquantulum tempus ancilla de domo eicitur cum filio suo, et duo illa secundum apostolum testamenta significantur, uetus et nouum, ubi Sarra illa supernae Hierusalem, hoc est ciuitatis Dei, figuram gerit.

Now that that laughter pertained not to derisive opprobrium but to the celebration of joy, Sarah showed when Isaac was born and called by that name; for she said, ‘The Lord has made laughter for me; for whoever shall hear will rejoice with me.’ But after a little time the handmaid is cast out from the house with her son, and those two, according to the apostle, are signified as the testaments, the Old and the New, wherein Sarah bears the figure of the supernal Jerusalem, that is, of the City of God.

[XXXII] Inter haec, quae omnia commemorare nimis longum est, temptatur Abraham de immolando dilectissimo filio ipso Isaac, ut pia eius oboedientia probaretur, saeclis in notitiam proferenda, non Deo. Neque enim omnis est culpanda temptatio, quia et gratulanda est, qua fit probatio. Et plerumque aliter animus humanus sibi ipsi innotescere non potest, nisi uires suas sibi non uerbo, sedexperimento temptatione quodam modo interrogante respondeat; ubi si Dei munus agnouerit, tunc pius est, tunc solidatur firmitate gratiae, non inflatur inanitate iactantiae.

[32] Amid these things, all of which to commemorate would be too long, Abraham is tempted about the immolating of his most-beloved son Isaac himself, in order that his pious obedience might be proved—brought forth into the knowledge of the ages, not of God. For not every temptation is to be blamed, since that by which probation is made is even to be congratulated. And for the most part the human mind cannot make itself known to itself otherwise, unless it answer concerning its own powers, not by word but by experiment, temptation in a certain manner putting the question; wherein, if it has recognized the gift of God, then it is pious, then it is made solid by the firmness of grace, not inflated by the emptiness of vainglory.

Numquam sane crederet Abraham, quod uictimis Deus delectaretur humanis; quamuis diuino intonante praecepto oboediendum sit, non disputandum. Verum tamen Abrabam confestim filium, cum fuisset immolatus, resurrecturum credidisse laudandus est. Dixerat namque illi Deus, cum de ancilla et filio eius foras eiciendis uoluntatem coniugis nollet implere: In Isaac uocabitur tibi semen.

Abraham would certainly never have believed that God was delighted by human victims; although, when a divine precept is thundering, one must obey, not dispute. Nevertheless Abraham is to be praised for having believed forthwith that his son, when he had been immolated, would resurrect. For God had said to him, when he was unwilling to fulfill his wife’s will about casting out the handmaid and her son: In Isaac shall your seed be called.

Et certe ibi sequitur ac dicitur: Et filium autem ancillae huius in magnam gentem faciam illum, quia semen tuum est. Quo modo ergo dictum est: In Isaac uocabitur tibi semen, cum et Ismaelem Deus semen eius uocauerit? Exponens autem apostolus quid sit: In Isaac uocabitur tibi semen: Id est, inquit, non qui filii carnis, hi filii Dei, sed filii promissionis deputantur in semen.

And certainly there it follows and it is said: “But also the son of this handmaid I will make him into a great nation, because he is your seed.” How then was it said: “In Isaac your seed shall be called,” since God also called Ishmael his seed? But the apostle, expounding what “In Isaac your seed shall be called” is: That is, he says, not those who are sons of the flesh—these are not sons of God—but the sons of the promise are reckoned as seed.

Ac per hoc filii promissionis, ut sint semen Abrahae, in Isaac uocantur, hoc est in Christo uocante gratia congregantur. Hanc ergo promissionem pater pius fideliter tenens, quia per hunc oportebat impleri, quem Deus iubebat occidi non haesitauit quod sibi reddi poterat immolatus, qui dari potuit non speratus. Sic intellectum est et in epistula ad Hebraeos, et sic expositum.

And through this the sons of the promise, in order to be the seed of Abraham, are called in Isaac; that is, as Christ calls, they are congregated by grace. Therefore the pious father, faithfully holding this promise—because through this one it had to be fulfilled, whom God was commanding to be slain—did not hesitate concerning that which could be restored to him once immolated, he who could be given though unhoped-for. Thus it has been understood also in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and thus expounded.

Fide, inquit, praecessit. Abraham Isaac temptatus et unicum obtulit, qui promissiones suscepit, ad quem dictum est: In Isaac uocabitur tibi semen, cogitans quia et ex mortuis suscitare potest Deus. Proinde addidit: Pro hoc etiam eum et in similitudinem adduxit; cuius similitudinem, nisi illius unde dicit apostolus: Qui proprio filio non pepercit, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit eum?

By faith, he says, it came first. Abraham, tested with respect to Isaac, also offered up his only-begotten, he who had received the promises, to whom it was said: “In Isaac shall seed be called to you,” reckoning that God is able even to raise from the dead. Accordingly he added: For this reason he also brought him back in a likeness; the likeness of whom, if not of him of whom the apostle says: “He who did not spare his own Son, but delivered him up for us all”?

Propterea et Isaac, sicut Dominus crucem suam, ita sibi ligna ad uictimae locum, quibus fuerat et inponendus, ipse portauit. Postremo quia Isaac occidi non oportebat, postea quam est pater ferire prohibitus, quis erat ille aries, quo immolato impletum est significatiuo sanguine sacrificium? Nempe quando eum uidit Abrabam, cornibus in frutice tenebatur.

Therefore Isaac too, just as the Lord his own cross, thus himself carried the wood to the place of the victim, upon which he also was to be laid. Finally, because it was not fitting for Isaac to be killed, after his father was forbidden to strike, who was that ram, by whose being immolated the sacrifice was fulfilled with signifying blood? Surely when Abraham saw him, he was being held by the horns in a thicket.

Quis ergo illo figurabatur, nisi Iesus, antequam immolaretur, spinis Iudaicis coronatus?

Who therefore was being figured in that one, if not Jesus, before he was immolated, crowned with Judaic thorns?

Sed diuina per angelum uerba potius audiamus. Ait quippe scriptura: Et extendit Abraham manum suam sumere machaeram, ut occideret filium suum. Et uocauit illum angelus Domini de caelo et dixit: Abraham!

But let us rather hear the divine words through the angel. For scripture says: And Abraham stretched out his hand to take the sword, that he might slay his son. And the angel of the Lord called him from heaven and said: Abraham!

Ille autem dixit: Ecce ego. Et dixit: Non inicias manum tuam super puerum, neque facias illi quicquam; nunc enim sciui quia times Deum tuum, et non pepercisti filio tuo dilecto propter me. Nunc sciui dictum est "nunc sciri feci"; neque enim hoc nondum sciebat Deus. Deinde ariete illo immolato pro Isaac filio suo uocauit, ut legitur, Abraham nomen loci illius: Dominus uidit; ut dicant hodie: In monte Dominus apparuit.

But he said: Behold, I. And he said: Do not put forth your hand upon the boy, nor do anything to him; for now I have known that you fear your God, and you have not spared your beloved son on account of me. “Now I have known” is said as “now I have caused it to be known”; for God did already know this. Then, that ram having been immolated in place of his son Isaac, Abraham, as it is read, called the name of that place: The Lord has seen; so that they say today: On the mountain the Lord appeared.

Sicut dictum est: Nunc sciui, pro eo quod est nunc sciri feci: ita hic Dominus uidit, pro eo quod est Dominus apparuit, hoc est uideri se fecit. Et uocauit angelus Domini Abraham secundo de caelo dicens: Per me ipsum iuraui, dicit Dominus, propter quod fecisti uerbum hoc et non pepercisti filio tuo dilecto propter me, nisi benedicens benedicam te, et multiplicans multiplicabo semen tuum tamquam stellas caeli et tamquam harenam, quae iuxta labium maris. Et hereditate possidebit semen tuum ciuitates aduersariorum, et benedicentur in semine tuo omnes gentes terrae, quia obaudisti uocem meam.

As it has been said: “Now I knew,” in place of “now I have made it to be known”: so here “the Lord saw,” in place of “the Lord appeared,” that is, “he made himself to be seen.” And the angel of the Lord called Abraham a second time from heaven, saying: “By myself I have sworn, says the Lord, because you have done this thing and have not spared your beloved son on account of me, surely, blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your seed like the stars of heaven and like the sand which is beside the lip of the sea. And your seed will possess by inheritance the cities of adversaries, and in your seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed, because you obeyed my voice.”

Hoc modo est illa de uocatione gentium in semine Abrahae post holocaustum, quo significatus est Christus, etiam iuratione Dei firmata promissio. Saepe enim promiserat, sed numquam iurauerat. Quid est autem Dei ueri ueracisque iuratio nisi promissi confirmatio et infidelium quaedam increpatio?

In this way, that promise concerning the calling (vocation) of the nations in the seed of Abraham—after the holocaust, by which Christ was signified—was also made firm by the oath of God. For he had often promised, but had never sworn. But what is the oath of the true and veracious God except a confirmation of the promise and a certain rebuke of unbelievers?

Post haec Sarra mortua est, centensimo uicensimo septimo anno uitae suae, centensimo autem et tricensimo septimo uiri sui. Decem quippe annis eam praecedebat aetate; sicut ipse, quando sibi ex illa promissus est filius, ait: Si mihi annorum centum nascetur <filius>, et si Sarra annorum nonaginta pariet. Tunc emit agrum Abraham, in quo sepeliuit uxorem.

After these things Sarah died, in the one hundred twenty-seventh year of her life, and in the one hundred thirty-seventh of her husband. For by ten years she was preceding him in age; just as he, when a son was promised to him from her, said: If to me at one hundred years a <son> will be born, and if Sarah at ninety years will give birth. Then Abraham bought a field, in which he buried his wife.

Tunc ergo secundum narrationem Stephani in terra illa est conlocatus, quoniam coepit ibi esse possessor; post mortem scilicet patris sui, qui colligitur ante biennium fuisse defunctus.

Then therefore, according to the narration of Stephen, he was settled in that land, since he began to be a possessor there; after the death, to wit, of his father, who is gathered to have been deceased two years earlier.

[XXXIII] Deinde Rebeccam neptem Nachor patrui sui, cum annorum quadraginta esset Isaac, duxit uxorem, centensimo scilicet et quadragensimo anno uitae patris sui, triennio post mortem matris suae. Vt autem illam duceret, quando ab eius patre in Mesopotamiam seruus missus est, quid aliud demonstratum est, cum eidem seruo dixit Abraham: Pone manum tuam sub femore meo, et adiurabo te Dominum Deum caeli et Dominum terrae, ut non sumas uxorem filio meo Isaac a filiabus Chananaeorum, nisi Dominum Deum caeli et Dominum terrae in carne, quae ex illo femore trahebatur, fuisse uenturum? Numquid haec parua sunt praenuntiatae indicia ueritatis, quam conpleri uidemus in Christo?

[33] Then Rebecca, the granddaughter of Nahor, his paternal uncle, when Isaac was forty years of age, he took as wife, namely in the one hundred fortieth year of his father’s life, three years after the death of his mother. But that he might take her, when a servant was sent by his father to Mesopotamia, what else was shown, when Abraham said to that same servant: Put your hand under my thigh, and I will adjure you by the Lord God of heaven and the Lord of earth, that you not take a wife for my son Isaac from the daughters of the Canaanites—unless it was that the Lord God of heaven and the Lord of earth was going to come in the flesh which was being derived from that thigh? Are these slight indications of the preannounced truth, which we see fulfilled in Christ?

[XXXIV] Quid autem sibi uult, quod Abraham post mortem Sarrae Cetturam duxit uxorem? Vbi absit ut incontinentiam suspicemur, praesertim in illa iam aetate et in illa fidei sanctitate. An adhuc procreandi filii quaerebantur, cum iam Deo promittente tanta multiplicatio filiorum ex Isaac per stellas caeli et harenam terrae fide probatissima teneretur?

[34] What moreover does it signify that Abraham, after Sarah’s death, took Keturah as wife? Far be it that we suspect incontinence, especially at that advanced age and in that sanctity of faith. Or were sons still being sought for procreation, when already, with God promising, so great a multiplication of sons from Isaac—by the stars of heaven and the sand of the earth—was held as most thoroughly proven by faith?

Sed profecto si Agar et Ismael, doctore apostolo, significauerunt carnales ueteris testamenti, cur non etiam Cettura et filii eius significent carnales, qui se ad testamentum nouum existimant pertinere? Ambae quippe et uxores Abrahae et concubinae sunt appellatae; Sarra uero numquam dicta est concubina. Nam et quando data est Agar Abrahae, ita scriptum est: Et adprehendit Sara uxor Abram Agar Aegyptiam ancillam suam post decem annos, quam habitauerat Abram in terra Chanaan, et dedit eam Abram uiro suo ipsi uxorem.

But assuredly, if Hagar and Ishmael, with the Apostle as teacher, signified the carnal of the Old Testament, why should not Keturah and her sons also signify the carnal who think themselves to pertain to the New Testament? For both are called both wives of Abraham and concubines; but Sarah has never been called a concubine. For even when Hagar was given to Abraham, thus it is written: And Sarah, the wife of Abram, took Hagar the Egyptian, her handmaid, after ten years that Abram had dwelt in the land of Canaan, and gave her to Abram her husband as wife to himself.

De Cettura autem, quam post obitum Sarrae accepit, sic legitur: Adiciens autem Abraham sumpsit uxorem, cui nomen Cettura. Ecce ambae dicuntur uxores; ambae porro concubinae fuisse reperiuntur, postea dicente scriptura: Dedit autem Abraham omnem censum suum Isaac filio suo, et filiis concubinarum suarum dedit Abraham dationes et dimisit eos ab Isaac filio suo adhuc se uiuo ad orientem, in terram orientis. Habent ergo nonnulla munera filii concubinarum, sed non perueniunt ad regnum promissum, nec haeretici, nec Iudaei carnales, quia praeter Isaac nullus est heres, et non qui filii carnis, hi filii Dei, sed filii promissionis deputantur in semine, de quo dictum est: In Isaac uocabitur tibi semen.

But about Keturah, whom he took after the death of Sarah, thus it is read: “And adding, Abraham took a wife, whose name was Keturah.” Behold, both are called wives; yet both are further found to have been concubines, Scripture later saying: “But Abraham gave all his estate to Isaac his son; and to the sons of his concubines Abraham gave gifts and sent them away from Isaac his son, while he was still living, eastward, to the land of the east.” Therefore the sons of the concubines have certain gifts, but they do not arrive at the promised kingdom—nor do the heretics, nor the carnal Jews—because apart from Isaac no one is an heir; and it is not those who are sons of the flesh who are sons of God, but the sons of the promise are reckoned in the seed, of which it was said: “In Isaac shall your seed be called.”

Neque enim uideo, cur etiam Cettura post uxoris mortem ducta, nisi propter hoc mysterium, dicta sit concubina. Sed quisquis haec non uult in istis significationibus accipere, non calumnietur Abrahae. Quid si enim et hoc prouisum est contra haereticos futuros secundarum aduersarios nuptiarum, ut in ipso patre multarum gentium post obitum coniugis iterum coniugari demonstraretur non esse peccatum?

For I do not see why even Cettura, taken after the death of his wife, should be called a concubine, unless on account of this mystery. But whoever does not wish to receive these things in these significations, let him not calumniate Abraham. For what if even this was provided against the future heretics, adversaries of second marriages, so that in the very father of many nations, after the death of his spouse, to be married again might be demonstrated not to be a sin?

Et mortuus est Abraham, cum esset annorum centum septuaginta <quinque>. Annorum ergo septuaginta <quinque> Isaac filium dereliquit, quem centenarius genuit.

And Abraham died when he was 175 years old. Therefore at the age of 75 he left his son Isaac, whom he, a centenarian, had begotten.

[XXXV] Iam ex hoc, quem ad modum per posteros Abrahae ciuitatis Dei procurrant tempora, uideamus. A primo igitur anno uitae Isaac usque ad sexagensimum, quo ei nati sunt filii, illud memorabile est, quod, cum illi Deum roganti ut pareret uxor eius, quae sterilis erat, concessisset Dominus quod petebat, atque haberet illa conceptum, gestiebant gemini adhuc in utero eius inclusi. Qua molestia cum angeretur, Dominum interrogauit accepitque responsum: Duae gentes in utero tuo sunt et duo populi de uentre tuo separabuntur et populus populum superabit et maior seruiet minori.

[35] Now from this point, let us see in what manner through the descendants of Abraham the times of the City of God run forward. From the first year of Isaac’s life up to the sixtieth, in which sons were born to him, this is memorable: that when, as he was asking God that his wife, who was sterile, might bear, the Lord granted what he sought; and when she had conceived, the twins, still enclosed in her womb, were struggling. Vexed by this trouble, she questioned the Lord and received an answer: “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from your belly shall be separated, and people shall overcome people, and the greater shall serve the lesser.”

Quod Paulus apostolus magnum uult intellegi gratiae documentum, quia nondum illis natis nec aliquid agentibus boni seu mali sine ullis bonis meritis eligitur minor maiore reprobato; quando procul dubio, quantum adtinet ad originale peccatum, ambo pares erant; quantum autem ad proprium, ullius eorum nullum erat. Sed nunc de hac re dicere aliquid latius instituti operis ratio non sinit, unde in aliis multa iam diximus. Quod autem dictum est: Maior seruiet minori, nemo fere nostrorum aliter intellexit, quam maiorem populum Iudaeorum minori Christiano populo seruiturum.

Which Paul the apostle wishes to be understood as a great document of grace, because, with them not yet born nor doing anything good or evil, without any good merits, the younger is chosen, the elder being reprobated; since, beyond doubt, so far as it pertains to original sin, both were equal; but as to what is proper, neither of them had any. But now the plan of the work undertaken does not allow us to say anything more at length on this matter, about which in other places we have already said many things. But as for what has been said: The greater shall serve the lesser, scarcely any of our people have understood it otherwise than that the greater people of the Jews would serve the lesser Christian people.

Et re uera quamuis in gente Idumaeorum, quae nata est de maiore, cui duo nomina erant (nam et Esau uocabatur et Edom, unde Idumaei), hoc uideri possit impletum, quia postea superanda fuerat a populo, qui ortus est ex minore, id est Israelitico, eique fuerat futura subiecta: tamen in aliquid maius intentam fuisse istam prophetiam, qua dictum est: Populus populum superabit et maior seruiet minori, conuenientius creditur. Et quid est hoc, nisi quod in Iudaeis et Christianis euidenter impletur?

And in truth, although in the nation of the Idumaeans, which was born from the greater—who had two names (for he was called both Esau and Edom, whence the Idumaeans)—this may seem to have been fulfilled, because afterward it was to be overcome by the people that arose from the lesser, that is, the Israelitic people, and was to be made subject to it; nevertheless, it is more fittingly believed that this prophecy, in which it was said, A people shall overcome a people, and the greater shall serve the lesser, was aimed at something greater. And what is this, if not what is clearly fulfilled in the Jews and the Christians?

[XXXVI] Accepit etiam Isaac tale oraculum, quale aliquotiens pater eius acceperat. De quo oraculo sic scriptum est: Facta est autem fames super terram praeter famem, quae prius facta est in tempore Abrahae. Abiit autem Isaac ad Abimelech regem Philistinorum in Gerara.

[36] Isaac also received such an oracle as his father had several times received. Concerning which oracle it is written thus: Now a famine came to be upon the land, besides the famine which had previously occurred in the time of Abraham. And Isaac went to Abimelech, king of the Philistines, in Gerar.

Apparuit autem illi Dominus et dixit: Noli descendere in Aegyptum; habita autem in terra, quam tibi dixero, et incole in terra hac; et ero tecum et benedicam te. Tibi enim et semini tuo dabo omnem terram hanc, et statuam iuramentum meum, quod iuraui Abrahae patri tuo; et multiplicabo semen tuum tamquam stellas caeli, et dabo semini tuo omnem terram hanc, et benedicentur in semine toto omnes gentes terrae, pro eo quod obaudiuit Abraham pater tuus uocem meam et custodiuit praecepta mea et mandata mea et iustificationes meas et legitima mea. Iste patriarcha nec uxorem habuit aliam nec aliquam concubinam, sed posteritate duorum geminorum ex uno concubitu procreatorum contentus fuit. (Timuit sane etiam ipse periculum de pulchritudine coniugis, cum habitaret inter alienos, fecitque quod pater, ut eam sororem diceret, taceret uxorem; erat enim ei propinqua et paterno et materno sanguine; sed etiam ipsa ab alienis, cognito quod uxor esset, mansit intacta.) Nec ideo tamen istum patri eius praeferre debemus, quia iste nullam feminam praeter unam coniugem nouerat.

But the Lord appeared to him and said: Do not descend into Egypt; rather dwell in the land that I shall tell you, and sojourn in this land; and I will be with you and will bless you. For to you and to your seed I will give all this land, and I will establish my oath, which I swore to Abraham your father; and I will multiply your seed like the stars of the heaven, and I will give to your seed all this land, and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because Abraham your father obeyed my voice and kept my precepts and my mandates and my justifications and my statutes. This patriarch had neither another wife nor any concubine, but was content with offspring of a pair of twins begotten from a single intercourse. (Indeed he too feared danger on account of the beauty of his spouse, when he was dwelling among foreigners, and he did what his father did, that he should call her his sister, keeping silent that she was his wife; for she was near to him by both paternal and maternal blood; yet she also, by the foreigners, once it was known that she was a wife, remained untouched.) Yet not on that account ought we to prefer him to his father, because he had known no woman besides his one spouse.

Erant enim procul dubio paternae fidei et oboedientiae merita potiora, in tantum, ut propter illum dicat

For beyond doubt the merits of the fatherly faith and obedience were weightier, to such an extent that on account of him he says

Deus huic se facere bona quae facit. Benedicentur, inquit, in semine tuo omnes gentes terrae, pro eo quod obaudiuit Abraham pater tuus uocem meam et custodiuit praecepta mea et mandata mea et iustificationes meas et legitima mea; et alio rursus oraculo: Ego sum, inquit, Deus Abraham patris tui, noli timere; tecum enim sum et benedixi te et multiplicabo semen tuum propter Abraham patrem tuum; ut intellegamus quam caste Abrabam fecerit, quod hominibus inpudicis et nequitiae suae de scripturis sanctis patrocinia requirentibus uidetur fecisse libidine; deinde ut etiam hoc nouerimus, non ex bonis singulis inter se homines conparare, sed in uno quoque consideremus uniuersa. Fieri enim potest, ut habeat aliquid in uita et moribus quispiam, quo superat alium, idque sit longe praestabilius, quam est illud, unde ab alio superatur.

God shows himself to do to this man the good things that he does. “They shall be blessed,” he says, “in your seed all the nations of the earth, because Abraham your father obeyed my voice and kept my precepts and my mandates and my justifications and my legal enactments”; and again by another oracle: “I am,” he says, “the God of Abraham your father; do not fear; for I am with you, and I have blessed you, and I will multiply your seed on account of Abraham your father”; so that we may understand how chastely Abraham acted in that which to impudent men, seeking patronages for their own wickedness from the holy scriptures, seems to have been done by libido; and then that we may also know this: not to compare men with one another on the basis of single good things, but in each one to consider the whole. For it can happen that someone has something in life and morals by which he surpasses another, and that this is far more preferable than that thing in respect of which he is surpassed by another.

Ac per hoc sano ueroque iudicio, cum continentia coniugio praeferatur, melior est tamen homo fidelis coniugatus quam continens infidelis. Sed infidelis homo non solum minus laudandus, uerum etiam maxime detestandus est. Constituamus ambos bonos; etiam sic profecto melior est coniugatus fidelissimus et oboedientissimus Deo quam continens minoris fidei minorisque oboedientiae.

And through this, by a sound and true judgment, although continence is preferred to conjugal union, nevertheless a faithful married man is better than a continent infidel. But an infidel man is not only less to be praised, but even most detestable. Let us suppose both to be good; even so, assuredly, a married man most faithful and most obedient to God is better than a continent man of lesser faith and lesser obedience.

Si uero paria sint cetera, continentem coniugato praeferre quis ambigat?

But if the rest be equal, who would hesitate to prefer the continent man to the married man?

[XXXVII] Duo igitur Isaac filii Esau et Iacob pariter crescunt. Primatus maioris transfunditur in minorem ex pacto et placito inter illos, eo quod lenticulam, quem cibum minor parauerat, maior inmoderatius concupiuit, eoque pretio primogenita sua fratri iuratione interposita uendidit. Vbi discimus in uescendo non cibi genere, sed auiditate inmodesta quemque culpandum.

[37] Therefore the two sons of Isaac, Esau and Jacob, grow up together. The primacy of the elder is transferred to the younger by a pact and a compact between them, because a lentil pottage, which food the younger had prepared, the elder desired immoderately; and for that price he sold his rights of primogeniture to his brother, with an oath interposed. Where we learn that, in eating, one is to be blamed not for the kind of food, but for immoderate avidity.

Senescit Isaac eiusque oculis per senectam uisus aufertur. Vult benedicere filium maiorem et pro illo nesciens benedicit minorem, pro fratre maiore, qui erat pilosus, se paternis manibus supponentem, haedinis sibi pelliculis coaptatis uelut aliena peccata portantem. Iste dolus Iacob ne putaretur fraudulentus dolus et non in eo magnae rei mysterium quaereretur, superius praedixit scriptura: Et erat Esau homo sciens uenari, agrestis.

Isaac grows old, and through senescence the sight is taken from his eyes. He wishes to bless the elder son, and, not knowing it, he blesses the younger instead—who, in place of his elder brother, who was hairy, placed himself under his father’s hands, with kidskins fitted to himself, as though bearing alien sins. Lest this trick of Jacob be thought a fraudulent trick, and the mystery of a great matter not be sought in it, Scripture foretold above: And Esau was a man skilled in hunting, a man of the field.

Iacob autem homo simplex, habitans domum. Hoc nostri quidam interpretati sunt "sine dolo". Siue autem "sine dolo" siue "simplex" siue potius "sine fictione" dicatur, quod est Graece *a)/plastos: quis est in ista percipienda benedictione dolus hominis sine dolo? Quis est dolus simplicis, quae fictio non mentientis, nisi profundum mysterium ueritatis?

Jacob, however, was a simple man, dwelling at home. Some of our people have interpreted this as “without guile.” Whether, however, it be said “without guile” or “simple” or rather “without fiction,” which is in Greek *a)/plastos*: what guile is there, in this benediction to be received, of a man without guile? What is the guile of the simple man, what the fiction of one not lying, unless it be the profound mystery of verity?

Ipsa autem benedictio qualis est? Ecce, inquit, odor filii mei tamquam odor agri pleni, quem benedixit Dominus. Et det tibi Deus de rore caeli et de ubertate terrae et multitudinem frumenti et uini, et seruiant tibi gentes et adorent te principes et fiere dominus fratris tui et adorabunt te filii patris tui.

But what sort is the blessing itself? Behold, he says, the odor of my son is like the odor of a full field, which the Lord has blessed. And may God give to you from the dew of heaven and from the fertility of the earth, and a multitude of grain and of wine; and let nations serve you and let princes adore you, and become lord of your brother, and the sons of your father will adore you.

Qui maledixerit te, maledictus; et qui benedixerit te, benedictus. Benedictio igitur Iacob praedicatio est Christi in omnibus gentibus. Hoc fit, hoc agitur.

Whoever curses you, accursed; and whoever blesses you, blessed. The benediction of Jacob, therefore, is the proclamation of Christ in all the nations. This is happening, this is being done.

Lex et prophetia est Isaac; etiam per os Iudaeorum Christus ab illa benedicitur uelut a nesciente, quia ipsa nescitur. Odore nominis Christi, sicut ager, mundus impletur; eius est benedictio de rore caeli, hoc est de uerborum pluuia diuinorum, et de ubertate terrae, hoc est congregatione populorum; eius est multitudo frumenti et uini, hoc est multitudo quam colligit frumentum et uinum in sacramento corporis eius et sanguinis. Ei seruiunt gentes, ipsum adorant principes.

Isaac is law and prophecy; even through the mouth of the Jews Christ is blessed by it as by one unknowing, because it itself is not known. By the odor of the name of Christ, like a field, the world is filled; his is the blessing from the dew of heaven, that is, from the rainfall of divine words; and from the fertility of the earth, that is, the congregation of peoples; his is the multitude of grain and of wine, that is, the multitude which grain and wine gather in the sacrament of his body and blood. Nations serve him, princes adore him.

Ipse est dominus fratris sui, quia populus eius dominatur Iudaeis. Ipsum adorant filii patris eius, hoc est filii Abrabae secundum fidem; quia et ipse filius est Abrahae secundum carnem. Ipsum qui maledixerit, maledictus, et qui benedixerit, benedictus est.

He himself is lord of his brother, because his people dominates the Jews. Him the sons of his father adore, that is, the sons of Abraham according to faith; for he too is a son of Abraham according to the flesh. Whoever has cursed him is accursed, and whoever has blessed him is blessed.

Christus, inquam, noster etiam ex ore Iudaeorum quamuis errantium, sed tamen legem prophetasque cantantium benedicitur, id est ueraciter dicitur; et alius benedici putatur, qui ab eis errantibus expectatur. Ecce benedictionem promissam repetente maiore expauescit Isaac et alium se pro alio benedixisse cognoscit; miratur et quisnam ille sit percontatur; nec tamen se deceptum esse conqueritur; immo confestim reuelato sibi intus in corde magno sacramento deuitat indignationem, confirmat benedictionem. Quis ergo, inquit, uenatus est mihi uenationem et intulit mihi, et manducaui ab omnibus, antequam tu uenires?

Christ, I say, our Christ, even from the mouth of the Jews, although erring yet chanting the Law and the Prophets, is blessed—that is, is said veraciously; and another is thought to be blessed, who is expected by them in their error. Behold, as the elder repeats the promised benediction, Isaac is struck with fear and recognizes that he has blessed one in place of another; he marvels and inquires who that may be; nor, however, does he complain that he has been deceived; nay rather, with a great sacrament straightway revealed to him within in his heart, he avoids indignation and confirms the benediction. “Who then,” he says, “has hunted me a hunting and brought it in to me, and I have eaten of all, before you came?”

et benedixi eum, et benedictus sit. Quis non hic maledictionem potius expectaret irati, si haec non superna inspiratione, sed terreno more gererentur? O res gestas, sed prophetice gestas; in terra, sed caelitus; per homines, sed diuinitus!

and I blessed him, and let him be blessed. Who would not here rather expect a malediction of one enraged, if these things were not conducted by supernal inspiration, but in an earthly manner? O deeds done, but done prophetically; on earth, but celestially; through men, but divinely!

Si excutiantur singula tantis fecunda mysteriis, multa sunt implenda uolumina; sed huic operi modus moderate inponendus nos in alia festinare conpellit.

If the individual points be examined, so fecund with such great mysteries, many volumes must be filled; but a moderate measure must be imposed upon this work, which compels us to hasten to other matters.

[XXXVIII] Mittitur Iacob a parentibus in Mesopotamiam, ut ibi ducat uxorem. Patris mittentis uerba haec sunt: Non accipies uxorem ex filiabus Chananaeorum; surgens fuge in Mesopotamiam in domum Bathuel, patris matris tuae, et sume tibi inde uxorem de filiabus Laban, fratris matris tuae? Deus autem meus benedicat te et augeat te et multiplicet te; et eris in congregationes gentium; et det tibi benedictionem Abraham patris tui, tibi et semini tuo postte, ut heres fias terrae incolatus tui, quam dedit Deus Abraham.

[38] Jacob is sent by his parents into Mesopotamia, that there he may take a wife. The words of the father sending him are these: You shall not take a wife from the daughters of the Canaanites; rising, flee into Mesopotamia to the house of Bathuel, the father of your mother, and take for yourself from there a wife from the daughters of Laban, your mother’s brother? But my God bless you and increase you and multiply you; and you will be in congregations of nations; and may he give to you the blessing of Abraham your father, to you and to your seed after you, that you may become heir of the land of your sojourning, which God gave to Abraham.

Hic iam intellegimus segregatum semen Iacob ab alio semine Isaac, quod factum est per Esau. Quando enim dictum est: In Isaac uocabitur tibi semen, pertinens utique semen ad ciuitatem Dei, separatum est inde aliud semen Abrahae, quod erat in ancillae filio, et quod futurum erat in filiis Cetturae. Sed adhuc erat ambiguum de duobus geminis filiis Isaac, ad utrumque an ad unum eorum illa benedictio pertineret; et si ad unum, quisnam esset illorum.

Here now we understand that the seed of Jacob was segregated from the other seed of Isaac, which was effected through Esau. For when it was said, “In Isaac shall seed be called to you,” the seed, assuredly, pertaining to the City of God, there was separated from it another seed of Abraham, which was in the handmaid’s son, and which was to be in the sons of Keturah. But it was still ambiguous, concerning the two twin sons of Isaac, whether that blessing pertained to both or to one of them; and if to one, which of them it was.

Quod nunc declaratum est, cum prophetice a patre benedicitur Iacob et dicitur ei: Et eris in congregationes gentium, et det tibi benedictionem Abraham patris tui.

Which has now been declared, when Jacob is blessed prophetically by his father and it is said to him: And you shall be in congregations of nations, and may he give to you the blessing of Abraham, your father.

Pergens itaque in Mesopotamiam Iacob in somnis accepit oraculum, de quo sic scriptum est: Et exiit Iacob a puteo iurationis et profectus est in Charran et deuenit in locum et dormiuit ibi; occiderat enim sol; et sumpsit ex lapidibus loci et posuit ad caput suum et dormiuit in loco illo et somniauit. Et ecce scala stabilita super terram, cuius caput pertingebat ad caelum; et angeli Dei ascendebant et descendebant per illam, et Dominus incumbebat super illam et dixit: Ego sum Deus Abraham patris tui et Deus Isaac, noli timere; terram, in qua tu dormis super eam, tibi dabo illam et semini tuo; et erit semen tuum sicut harena terrae, et dilatabitur supra mare et in Africum et in aquilonem et ad orientem; et benedicentur in te omnes tribus terrae et in semine tuo. Et ecce ego sum tecum, custodiens te in omni uia quacumque ibis, et reducam te in terram hanc, quia non te derelinquam, donec faciam omnia, quae tecum locutus sum.

Going forth therefore into Mesopotamia, Jacob received an oracle in a dream, about which it is written thus: And Jacob went out from the Well of Oath and set out to Charran and came to a place and slept there; for the sun had set; and he took from the stones of the place and put them at his head and slept in that place and dreamed. And behold, a ladder set up upon the earth, whose top reached to heaven; and the angels of God were ascending and descending by it, and the Lord was leaning over it and said: I am the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac, do not fear; the land on which you are sleeping upon it, I will give it to you and to your seed; and your seed shall be like the sand of the earth, and it shall be spread toward the Sea and to the Afric (the south), and to the north and toward the east; and in you shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed, and in your seed. And behold, I am with you, guarding you in every way wherever you go, and I will bring you back into this land, for I will not forsake you, until I do all the things that I have spoken with you.

Et surrexit Iacob de somno suo et dixit: Quia est Dominus in loco hoc, ego autem nesciebam. Et timuit et dixit: Quam terribilis locus hic; non est hoc nisi domus Dei et haec porta est caeli. Et surrexit Iacob et sumpsit lapidem, quem supposuit ibi sub caput suum, et statuit illum titulum et superfudit oleum in cacumen eius; et uocauit Iacob nomen loci illius: domus Dei.

And Jacob rose from his sleep and said: Surely the Lord is in this place, but I did not know. And he was afraid and said: How terrible is this place; this is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven. And Jacob rose and took the stone which he had put there beneath his head, and set it up as a pillar, and poured oil upon its summit; and Jacob called the name of that place: House of God.

Hoc ad prophetiam pertinet; nec more idololatriae lapidem perfudit oleo Iacob, uelut faciens illum Deum; neque enim adorauit eundem lapidem uel ei sacrificauit; sed quoniam Christi nomen a chrismate est, id est ab unctione, profecto figuratum est hic aliquid, quod ad magnum pertineat sacramentum. Scalam uero istam intellegitur ipse Saluator nobis in memoriam reuocare in euangelio, ubi, cum dixisset de Nathanael: Ecce uere Israelita, in quo dolus non est, quia Israel uiderat istam uisionem (ipse est enim Iacob), eodem loco ait: Amen, amen, dico uobis, uidebitis caelum apertum et angelos Dei ascendentes et descendentes super filium hominis.

This pertains to prophecy; nor did Jacob, in the manner of idolatry, pour the stone over with oil, as though making it a god; for he neither adored that same stone nor sacrificed to it; but since the name of Christ is from the chrism, that is, from unction, assuredly something is here prefigured which pertains to a great sacrament. Moreover, it is understood that the Savior himself recalls this ladder to our memory in the Gospel, where, when he had said about Nathanael, “Behold truly an Israelite in whom deceit is not,” because Israel had seen this vision (for he himself is Jacob), in the same place he says: “Amen, amen, I say to you, you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.”

Perrexit ergo Iacob in Mesopotamiam, ut inde acciperet uxorem. Vnde autem illi acciderit quattuor habere feminas, de quibus duodecim filios et unam filiam procreauit, cum earum nullam concupisset inlicite, indicat scriptura diuina. Ad unam quippe accipiendam uenerat; sed cum illi altera <pro altera> supposita fuisset, nec ipsam dimisit, qua nesciens usus fuerat in nocte, ne ludibrio eam uideretur habuisse, et eo tempore, quando multiplicandae posteritatis causa plures uxores lex nulla prohibebat, accepit etiam illam, cui uni iam futuri coniugii fidem fecerat.

Therefore Jacob proceeded into Mesopotamia, in order from there to receive a wife. But how it befell him to have four women, from whom he begot twelve sons and one daughter, although he had concupisced none of them illicitly, the divine scripture indicates. For he had come to take one; but when another had been put to him <in place of the other>, he did not dismiss her either, whom, unwitting, he had used in the night, lest he seem to have had her to her mockery; and at that time, when for the sake of multiplying posterity no law prohibited multiple wives, he also took that one to whom alone he had already made the pledge of a future marriage.

Quae cum esset sterilis, ancillam suam, de qua filios ipsa susciperet, marito dedit; quod etiam maior soror eius, quamuis peperisset, imitata, quoniam multiplicare prolem cupiebat, effecit. Nullam Iacob legitur petisse praeter unam, nec usus plurimis nisi gignendae prolis officio, coniugali iure seruato, ut neque hoc faceret, nisi uxores eius id fieri flagitassent, quae corporis uiri sui habebant legitimam potestatem. Genuit ergo duodecim filios et unam filiam ex quattuor mulieribus.

As she was barren, she gave her handmaid to her husband, from whom she herself might raise up sons; which also her elder sister, although she had borne children, imitating—since she desired to multiply the progeny—accomplished. Jacob is read to have asked for none except one, nor did he use many except for the office of begetting offspring, conjugal right being preserved, such that he would not do this either unless his wives had demanded that it be done, who held the legitimate power over their husband’s body. Therefore he begot twelve sons and one daughter from four women.

Deinde ingressus est in Aegyptum per filium suum Ioseph, qui uenditus ab inuidentibus fratribus eo perductus fuit atque ibidem sublimatus.

Then he entered into Egypt through his son Joseph, who, sold by envious brothers, had been brought thither and there exalted.

[XXXIX] Iacob autem etiam Israel, sicut paulo ante dixi, uocabatur, quod nomen magis populus ex illo procreatus obtinuit. Hoc autem nomen illi ab angelo inpositum est, qui cum illo fuerat in itinere de Mesopotamia redeunte luctatus, typum Christi euidentissime gerens. Nam quod ei praeualuit Iacob, utique uolenti, ut mysterium figuraret, significat passionem Christi, ubi uisi sunt ei praeualere Iudaei.

[39] Jacob, moreover, was also called Israel, as I said a little before, which name the people begotten from him more commonly obtained. This name, however, was imposed on him by an angel, who had wrestled with him on the journey as he was returning from Mesopotamia, most evidently bearing a type of Christ. For the fact that Jacob prevailed over him—surely over one willing, in order to figure the mystery—signifies the Passion of Christ, where the Jews were seen to prevail over him.

Et tamen benedictionem ab eodem angelo, quem superauerat, impetrauit; ac sic huius nominis inpositio benedictio fuit. Interpretatur autem Israel "uidens Deum", quod erit in fine praemium sanctorum omnium. Tetigit porro illi idem angelus ueluti praeualenti latitudinem femoris eumque isto modo claudum reddidit.

And yet he obtained a benediction from the same angel whom he had overcome; and thus the imposition of this name was a benediction. Moreover, “Israel” is interpreted “seeing God,” which will be in the end the reward of all the saints. Furthermore, the same angel, as if to one prevailing, touched the breadth of his thigh and in this way rendered him lame.

Erat itaque unus atque idem Iacob et benedictus et claudus; benedictus in eis, qui in Christum ex eodem populo crediderunt, atque in infidelibus claudus. Nam femoris latitudo generis multitudo est. Plures quippe sunt in ea stirpe, de quibus prophetice praedictum est: Et claudicauerunt a semitis suis.

Thus Jacob was one and the same, both blessed and lame; blessed among those who from that same people believed in Christ, and lame among the infidels. For the breadth of the thigh is the multitude of the race. Indeed, there are more in that stock of whom it was prophetically foretold: “And they have limped from their paths.”

[XL] Ingressi itaque referuntur in Aegyptum simul cum ipso Iacob septuaginta quinque homines, adnumerato ipso filiis suis. In quo numero duae tantum feminae commemorantur, una filia, neptis altera. Sed res diligenter consiederata non indicat, quod tantus numerus fuerit in progenie Iacob die uel anno quo ingressus est Aegyptum.

[40] Thus they are reported to have entered into Egypt together with Jacob himself, seventy-five persons, with himself counted along with his sons. In which number only two females are commemorated, one a daughter, the other a granddaughter. But the matter, diligently considered, does not indicate that so great a number was in the progeny of Jacob on the day or in the year in which he entered Egypt.

Commemorati sunt quippe in eis etiam pronepotes Ioseph, qui nullo modo iam tunc esse potuerunt, quoniam tunc centum triginta annorum erat Iacob, filius uero eius Ioseph triginta nouem; quem cum accepisse tricensimo anno suo uel amplius constet uxorem, quo modo potuit per nouem annos habere pronepotes de filiis, quos ex eadem uxore suscepit? Cum igitur nec filios haberent Ephraem et Manasses, filii Ioseph, sed eos pueros infra quam nouennes Iacob Aegyptum ingressus inuenerit, quo pacto eorum non solum filii, sed etiam nepotes in illis septuaginta quinque numerantur, qui tunc Aegyptum ingressi sunt cum Iacob? Nam commemoratur ibi Machir, filius Manasse, nepos Ioseph, et eiusdem Machir filius, id est Galaad, nepos Manasse, pronepos Ioseph; ibi est et quem genuit Ephraem, alter filius Ioseph, id est Vtalaam, nepos Ioseph, et filius ipsius Vtalaae Edem, nepos Ephraem, pronepos Ioseph; qui nullo modo esse potuerunt, quando Iacob in Aegyptum uenit et filios Ioseph, nepotes suos, auos istorum, minores quam nouem annorum pueros inuenit.

For indeed among them there are mentioned even the great-grandsons of Joseph, who by no means could already have existed at that time, since then Jacob was one hundred thirty years old, and his son Joseph thirty-nine; and since it is established that he took a wife in his thirtieth year or later, how could he within nine years have great-grandsons from the sons whom he received from that same wife? Since therefore Ephraim and Manasseh, the sons of Joseph, did not have sons, but Jacob, upon entering Egypt, found them boys less than nine years old, in what way are not only their sons but even their grandsons counted among those seventy-five who then entered Egypt with Jacob? For there is mentioned there Machir, the son of Manasseh, the grandson of Joseph, and the son of the same Machir, that is, Gilead, the grandson of Manasseh, the great-grandson of Joseph; there too is the one whom Ephraim, the other son of Joseph, begot, that is, Utalaam, the grandson of Joseph, and the son of Utalaam himself, Edem, the grandson of Ephraim, the great-grandson of Joseph; who could in no wise have existed when Jacob came into Egypt and found Joseph’s sons, his grandsons, the grandfathers of these, as boys less than nine years old.

Sed nimirum introitus Iacob in Aegyptum, quando eum in septuaginta quinque hominibus scriptura commemorat, non unus dies uel unus annus, sed totum illud est tempus, quamdiu uixit Ioseph, per quem factum est ut intrarent. Nam de ipso Ioseph eadem scriptura sic loquitur: Et habitauit Ioseph in Aegypto, ipse et fratres eius et omnis cohabitatio patris eius, et uixit annos centum decem, et uidit Ioseph Ephraem filios usque in tertiam generationem. Ipse est ille pronepos eius ab Ephraem tertius.

But assuredly the entry of Jacob into Egypt, when Scripture commemorates him among seventy-five persons, is not one day or one year, but is the whole span of time, as long as Joseph lived, through whom it came about that they entered. For concerning Joseph himself the same Scripture speaks thus: 'And Joseph dwelt in Egypt, he and his brothers and all the cohabitation of his father, and he lived 110 years, and Joseph saw Ephraim’s sons unto the third generation.' He is that great-grandson of his, third from Ephraim.

Generationem quippe tertiam dicit filium, nepotem, pronepotem. Deinde sequitur: Et filii Machir, filii Manasse, nati sunt supra femora Ioseph. Et hic ille ipse est nepos Manasse, pronepos Ioseph.

Indeed he calls the third generation: son, grandson, great-grandson. Then it follows: And the sons of Machir, the son of Manasseh, were born upon the thighs of Joseph. And here this very one is the grandson of Manasseh, the great-grandson of Joseph.

Sed pluraliter appellati sunt, sicut scriptura consueuit, quae unam quoque filiam Iacob filias nuncupauit; sicut in Latinae linguae consuetudine liberi dicuntur pluraliter filii, etiamsi non sint uno amplius. Cum ergo ipsius Ioseph praedicetur felicitas, quia potuit uidere pronepotes, nullo modo putandi sunt iam fuisse tricensimo nono anno proaui sui Ioseph, quando ad eum in Aegyptum Iacob pater eius aduenit. Illud autem est, quod fallit minus ista diligenter intuentes, quoniam scriptum est: Haec autem nomina filiorum Israel, qui intrauerunt in Aegyptum simul cum Iacob patre suo.

But they were called in the plural, as Scripture is accustomed, which even a single daughter of Jacob denominated “daughters”; just as in the custom of the Latin language the offspring are called in the plural “sons,” even if they are not more than one. Therefore, when the felicity of Joseph himself is proclaimed, because he was able to see great-grandsons, by no means are they to be thought to have already existed in the thirty-ninth year of their great-grandfather Joseph, when Jacob, his father, came to him into Egypt. But this is what deceives those who look at these matters less diligently, because it is written: “Now these are the names of the sons of Israel who entered into Egypt together with Jacob their father.”

Hoc enim dictum est, quia simul cum illo conputantur septuaginta quinque, non quia simul iam erant omnes, quando Aegyptum ingressus est ipse; sed, ut dixi, totum tempus habetur eius ingressus, quo uixit Ioseph, per quem uidetur ingressus.

For this was said because seventy-five are computed together with him, not because already all were together when he himself entered Egypt; but, as I said, the whole time is held as his ingress, during which Joseph lived, through whom he is seen to have entered.

[XLI] Igitur propter populum Christianum, in quo Dei ciuitas peregrinatur in terris, si carnem Christi in Abrahae semine requiramus, remotis concubinarum filiis occurrit Isaac; si in semine Isaac, remoto Esau, qui est et iam Edom, occurrit Iacob, qui est et Israel; si in semine ipsius Israel, remotis ceteris occurrit ludas, quia de tribu Iuda exortus est Christus. Ac per hoc cum in Aegypto moriturus Israel suos filios benediceret, quem ad modum Iudam prophetice benedixerit, audiamus: Iuda, inquit, te laudabunt fratres tui. Manus tuae super dorsum inimicorum tuorum; adorabunt te filii patris tui.

[41] Therefore, on account of the Christian people, in which the City of God sojourns upon earth, if we seek the flesh of Christ in the seed of Abraham, with the sons of the concubines removed, Isaac presents himself; if in the seed of Isaac, with Esau removed (who is also now Edom), Jacob presents himself, who is also Israel; if in the seed of Israel himself, with the others removed, Judah presents himself, because from the tribe of Judah Christ arose. And thus, when in Egypt Israel, about to die, was blessing his sons, let us hear in what manner he prophetically blessed Judah: “Judah,” he says, “your brothers shall praise you. Your hands upon the back of your enemies; the sons of your father shall bow down to you.”

Catulus leonis Iuda; ex germinatione, fili mi, ascendisti; recumbens dormisti ut leo et ut catulus leonis; quis suscitabit eum? Non deficiet princeps ex Iuda et dux de femoribus eius, donec ueniant quae reposita sunt ei; et ipse expectatio gentium; alligans ad uitem pullum suum et cilicio pullum asinae suae lauabit in uino stolam suam et in sanguine uuae amictum suum. Fului oculi eius a uino et dentes candidiores lacte.

Judah, a lion’s whelp; from germination, my son, you have ascended; reclining you slept like a lion and like a lion’s whelp; who will rouse him? A prince will not fail from Judah and a leader from his loins, until there come the things which are laid in store for him; and he is the expectation of the nations; binding to the vine his colt and to the cilice the foal of his she-ass, he will wash in wine his stole and in the blood of the grape his mantle. Tawny are his eyes from wine and his teeth whiter than milk.

Exposui haec aduersus Manichaeum Faustum disputans et satis esse arbitror, quantum ueritas prophetiae huius elucet; ubi et mors Christi praedicta est uerbo dormitionis et non necessitas, sed potestas in morte nomine leonis. Quam potestatem in euangelio ipse praedicat dicens: Potestatem habeo ponendi animam meam et potestatem habeo iterum sumendi eam. Nemo eam tollit a me; sed ego eam pono a me, et iterum sumo eam.

I have set forth these things disputing against the Manichaean Faustus, and I judge it to be enough, inasmuch as the truth of this prophecy shines forth; where also the death of Christ is foretold by the word “sleep,” and not necessity but power in death, by the name of the lion. Which power he himself proclaims in the Gospel, saying: I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again. No one takes it from me; but I lay it down from myself, and again I take it.

Sic leo fremuit, sic quod dixit impleuit. Ad eam namque pertinet potestatem, quod de resurrectione eius adiunctum est: Q uis suscitabit eum? hoc est, quia nullus hominum, nisi se ipse, qui etiam de corpore suo dixit: Soluite templum hoc, et in triduo resussitabo illud.

Thus the lion roared, thus he fulfilled what he said. For to that power pertains what is adjoined about his resurrection: Q uis suscitabit eum? that is, because no one of men—unless he himself—who also said about his body: Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

Ipsum autem genus mortis, hoc est sublimitas crucis, in uno uerbo intellegitur, quod ait: Ascendisti. Quod uero addidit: Recumbens dormisti, euangelista exponit, ubi dicit: Et inclinato capite tradidit spiritum; aut certe sepultura eius agnoscitur, in qua recubuit dormiens, et unde illum nullus hominum, sicut prophetae aliquos uel sicut ipse alios, suscitauit, sed sicut a somno ipse surrexit. Stola porro eius, quam lauat in uino, id est mundat a peccatis in sanguine suo, cuius sanguinis sacramentum baptizati sciunt, unde et adiungit: Et in sanguine uuae amictum suum, quid est nisi ecclesia?

But the very kind of death itself, that is, the sublimity of the cross, is understood in the one word which he says: “You ascended.” And what he added, “Reclining you slept,” the Evangelist expounds, where he says: “And, his head inclined, he handed over the spirit”; or certainly his sepulture is recognized, in which he reclined sleeping, and whence none of men raised him, as prophets did some or as he himself did others, but, as from sleep, he himself rose. Moreover, his stole, which he washes in wine, that is, he cleanses from sins in his own blood (the sacrament of which blood the baptized know), whence too he adds: “And in the blood of the grape his garment”—what is it if not the Church?

Et fului oculi eius a uino spiritales eius inebriati poculo eius, de quo canit psalmus: Et calix tuus inebrians quam praeclarus est; Et dentes eius candidiores lacte, quod potant apud apostolum paruuli, uerba scilicet nutrientia, nondum idonei solido cibo. Ipse igitur est, in quo reposita erant promissa Iudae, quae donec uenirent numquam principes, hoc est reges Israel, ab illa stirpe defuerunt. Et ipse expectatio gentium; quod clarius est uidendo quam fit exponendo.

And his tawny eyes from wine, his spiritual ones inebriated by his cup, of which the psalm sings: And your chalice inebriating, how illustrious it is; And his teeth whiter than milk, which the little ones drink with the Apostle, namely nourishing words, not yet fit for solid food. He therefore is the one in whom the promises to Judah had been laid up, which, until they should come, princes, that is, the kings of Israel, never failed from that stock. And he himself is the Expectation of the nations; which is clearer by seeing than it becomes by expounding.

[XLII] Sicut autem duo Isaac filii, Esau et Iacob, figuram praebuerunt duorum populorum in Iudaeis et Christianis (quamuis, quod ad carnis propaginem pertinet, nec Iudaei uenerint de semine Esau, sed Idumaei; nec Christianae gentes de Iacob, sed potius Iudaei; ad hoc enim tantum figura ualuit, quod dictum est: Maior seruiet minori): ita factum est etiam in duobus filiis Ioseph; nam maior gessit typum Iudaeorum, Christianorum autem minor. Quos cum benediceret Iacob, manum dextram ponens super minorem quem habebat ad sinistram, sinistram super maiorem quem habebat ad dextram: graue uisum est patri eorum, et admonuit patrem uelut corrigens eius errorem et quisnam eorum esset maior ostendens. At ille mutare manus noluit, sed dixit: Scio, fili, scio.

[42] Just as the two sons of Isaac, Esau and Jacob, furnished a figure of two peoples in the Jews and the Christians (although, as far as the propagation of the flesh pertains, neither did the Jews come from the seed of Esau, but the Idumaeans; nor the Christian peoples from Jacob, but rather the Jews; for to this only did the figure avail, that which was said: The greater shall serve the lesser), so it was done also in the two sons of Joseph; for the elder bore the type of the Jews, but the younger that of the Christians. When Jacob blessed them, placing his right hand upon the younger, whom he held at his left, and his left upon the elder, whom he held at his right, it seemed grievous to their father, and he admonished the patriarch, as though correcting his error and showing which of them was the elder. But he was unwilling to change his hands, and said: I know, my son, I know.

Et hic erit in populum, et hic exaltabitur; sed frater eius iunior maior illo erit, et semen eius erit in multitudinem gentium. Etiam hic duo illa promissa demonstrat. Nam ille in populum, iste in multitudinem gentium.

And this one will become a people, and this one will be exalted; but his younger brother will be greater than he, and his seed will become a multitude of nations. Here too he shows those two promises. For that one into a people, this one into a multitude of nations.

Quid euidentius quam his duabus promissionibus contineri populum Israelitarum orbemque terrarum in semine Abrahae, illum secundum carnem, istum secundum fidem?

What more evident than that by these two promises the people of the Israelites and the orb of the earth are contained in the seed of Abraham, the former according to the flesh, the latter according to faith?

[XLIII] Defuncto Iacob, defuncto etiam Ioseph per reliquos centum quadraginta quattuor annos, donec exiretur de terra Aegypti, in modum incredibilem illa gens creuit, etiam tantis adtrita persecutionibus, ut quodam tempore nati masculi necarentur, cum mirantes Aegyptios nimia populi illius incrementa terrerent. Tunc Moyses subtractus furto trucidatoribus paruulorum ad domum regiam, ingentia per eum Deo praeparante, peruenit nutritusque et adoptatus a filia Pharaonis (quod nomen in Aegypto omnium regum fuit) in tantum prouenit uirum, ut ipse illam gentem mirabiliter multiplicatam ex durissimo et grauissimo, quod ibi ferebat, iugo seruitutis extraheret, immo per eum Deus, qui hoc promiserat Abrahae. Prius quippe exinde fugiens, quod, cum Israelitam defenderet, Aegyptium occiderat et territus fuerat, postea diuinitus missus in potestate spiritus Dei superauit Pharaonis resistentes magos.

[43] With Jacob deceased, and Joseph also deceased, through the remaining 144 years, until there was a going out from the land of Egypt, in an incredible manner that nation grew, even though worn down by such great persecutions that at a certain time the male newborns were slain, as the Egyptians, marveling, were terrified by the excessive increases of that people. Then Moses, stolen away by stealth from the slaughterers of the little ones, came to the royal house—God preparing mighty things through him—and, reared and adopted by the daughter of Pharaoh (which name in Egypt belonged to all kings), he advanced so far as a man that he himself drew out that nation, wondrously multiplied, from the most harsh and most grievous yoke of servitude which it was bearing there—rather, through him God did so, who had promised this to Abraham. For previously, fleeing from there because, when he was defending an Israelite, he had killed an Egyptian and had become afraid, afterward, divinely sent, in the power of the Spirit of God he overcame the magi who were resisting Pharaoh.

Tunc per eum Aegyptiis inlatae sunt decem memorabiles plagae, cum dimittere populum Dei nollent, aqua in sanguinem uersa, rana et sciniphes, cynomyia, mors pecorum, ulcera, grando, lucusta, tenebrae, mors primogenitorum. Ad extremum Israelitas, quos plagis tot tantisque perfracti tandem aliquando dimiserant, Aegyptii in mari Rubro dum persequuntur extincti sunt. Illis quippe abeuntibus diuisum mare uiam fecit; hos autem insequentes in se rediens unda submersit.

Then through him ten memorable plagues were brought upon the Egyptians, when they were unwilling to release the people of God: water turned into blood, frogs and gnats, swarms of flies, death of livestock, ulcers, hail, locusts, darkness, the death of the firstborn. At the end, the Egyptians, while they were pursuing the Israelites—whom, broken by so many and such great plagues, they had at long last let go—were destroyed in the Red Sea. For as those were departing, the divided sea made a way; but the wave, returning upon itself, drowned these who were following.

Deinde per annos quadraginta duce Moyse Dei populus in deserto actus est, quando tabernaculum testimonii nuncupatum est, ubi Deus sacrificiis futura praenuntiantibus colebatur, cum scilicet iam data lex fuisset in monte multum terribiliter; adtestabatur enim euidentissima mirabilibus signis uocibusque diuinitas. Quod factum est, mox ut exitum est de Aegypto et in deserto populus esse coepit, quinquagensimo die post celebratum Pascha per ouis immolationem; qui usque adeo typus Christi est praenuntians eum per uictimam passionis de hoc mundo transiturum ad Patrem (Pascha quippe Hebraea lingua transitus interpretatur), ut iam cum reuelaretur testamentum nouum, postea quam Pascha nostrum immolatus est Christus, quinquagensimo die ueniret de caelo Spiritus sanctus, qui dictus est in euangelio digitus Dei, ut recordationem nostram in primi praefigurati facti memoriam reuocaret, quia et legis illae tabulae digito Dei scriptae referuntur.

Then for forty years, under Moses as leader, the people of God were conducted in the desert, when the tabernacle of testimony was so named, where God was worshiped by sacrifices fore-announcing the things to come, since indeed by that time the law had been given on the mountain most terribly; for the divinity bore witness by most evident marvelous signs and voices. This was done as soon as they went out of Egypt and the people began to be in the desert, on the fiftieth day after the Pascha had been celebrated through the immolation of a sheep; which is so much a type of Christ, fore-announcing him as about to pass from this world to the Father by the victim of his passion (for Pascha in the Hebrew tongue is interpreted “Passage”), that when the New Testament was now being revealed, after our Pascha, Christ, had been immolated, on the fiftieth day the Holy Spirit came from heaven, who is called in the Gospel the finger of God, to call our recollection back into the memory of the first prefigured deed, because the tablets of that law also are reported to have been written by the finger of God.

Defuncto Moyse populum rexit Iesus Naue et in terram promissionis introduxit eamque populo diuisit. Ab his duobus mirabilibus ducibus bella etiam prosperrime ac mirabiliter gesta sunt, Deo contestante non tam propter merita Hebraei populi quam propter peccata earum, quae debellabantur, gentium illas eius prouenisse uictorias. Post istos duces iudices fuerunt, iam in terra promissionis populo conlocato, ut inciperet interim reddi Abrahae prima promissio de gente una, id est Hebraea, et terra Chanaan, nondum de omnibus gentibus et toto orbe terrarum; quod Christi aduentus in carne et non ueteris legis obseruationes, sed euangelii fides fuerat impletura.

With Moses deceased, Joshua son of Nun ruled the people and led them into the land of promise and divided it to the people. Under these two marvelous leaders wars too were conducted most prosperously and wondrously, God attesting that those victories had come from him not so much on account of the merits of the Hebrew people as on account of the sins of those nations which were being subdued. After these leaders there were judges, the people now settled in the land of promise, so that in the meantime the first promise to Abraham might begin to be rendered concerning one nation, that is, the Hebrew, and the land of Canaan, not yet concerning all the nations and the whole orb of the lands; which the Advent of Christ in the flesh, and not the observances of the old Law, but the faith of the Gospel, was to fulfill.

Cuius rei praefiguratio facta est, quod non Moyses, qui legem populo acceperat in monte Sina, sed Iesus, cui etiam nomen Deo praecipiente mutatum fuerat ut Iesus uocaretur, populum in terram promissionis induxit. Temporibus autem iudicum, sicut se habebant et peccata populi et misericordia Dei, alternauerunt prospera et aduersa bellorum.

The prefiguration of this was made, in that not Moses, who had received the Law for the people on Mount Sinai, but Joshua—whose name also, at God’s bidding, had been changed so that he was called Jesus—led the people into the land of promise. But in the times of the judges, as both the sins of the people and the mercy of God stood, the prosperous and the adverse fortunes of wars alternated.

Inde uentum est ad regum tempora, quorum primus regnauit Saul; cui reprobato et bellica clade prostrato eiusque stirpe reiecta, ne inde reges orerentur, Dauid successit in regnum, cuius maxime Christus dictus est filius. In quo articulus quidam factus est et exordium quodam modo iuuentutis populi Dei; cuius generis quaedam uelut adulescentia ducebatur ab ipso Abraham usque ad hunc Dauid. Neque enim frustra Matthaeus euangelista sic generationes commemorauit, ut hoc primum interuallum quattuordecim generationibus commendaret, ab Abraham scilicet usque ad Dauid.

Thence it came to the times of the kings, of whom Saul reigned first; and when he had been rejected and laid low by a military disaster, and his stock cast off, lest kings should arise from there, David succeeded to the kingdom, of whom above all Christ was said to be the son. In him a certain critical juncture was made and, in a certain manner, a beginning of the youth of the people of God; of which kind a sort of adolescence was, as it were, deduced from Abraham himself up to this David. For not in vain did Matthew the evangelist thus commemorate the generations, so that he might commend this first interval by fourteen generations, namely from Abraham up to David.

Ab adulescentia quippe incipit homo posse generare; propterea generationum ex Abraham sumpsit exordium; qui etiam pater gentium constitutus est, quando mutatum nomen accepit. Ante hunc ergo uelut pueritia fuit huius generis populi Dei a Noe usque ad ipsum Abraham; et ideo in lingua inuenta est, id est Hebraea. A pueritia namque homo incipit loqui post infantiam, quae hinc appellata est, quod fari non potest.

From adolescence, indeed, a human being begins to be able to generate; for this reason the generations took their beginning from Abraham; who also was constituted the father of the nations when he received the changed name. Before him, then, there was, as it were, the childhood of this stock of the people of God from Noah up to Abraham himself; and for that reason a language was found, that is, Hebrew. For from childhood a human being begins to speak after infancy, which is so called from this, because it cannot speak.

Quam profecto aetatem primam demergit obliuio, sicut aetas prima generis humani est deleta diluuio. Quotus enim quisque est, qui suam recordetur infantiam? Quam ob rem in isto procursu ciuitatis Dei, sicut superior unam eandemque primam, ita duas aetates secundam et tertiam liber iste contineat, in qua tertia propter uaccam trimam, capram trimam, arietem trimum et inpositum est legis iugum et apparuit abundantia peccatorum et regni terreni surrexit exordium, ubi non defuerunt spiritales, quorum in turture et columba figuratum est sacramentum.

Which first age oblivion indeed submerges, just as the first age of the human race was effaced by the deluge. For how few, after all, are there who remember their own infancy? Wherefore, in this onward course of the City of God, as the previous [book] embraced the one and the same first age, so let this book contain two ages, the second and the third; in which third, on account of the three-year-old cow, the three-year-old she-goat, and the three-year-old ram, the yoke of the Law was imposed, and the abundance of sins appeared, and the beginning of the earthly kingdom arose—where the spiritual ones were not lacking, whose sacrament was prefigured in the turtledove and the dove.