For who, unless of perverse mind, would contend that the books were written to no purpose which were preserved with such great religion and with such observance of orderly succession over thousands of years, or that only the deeds done are to be regarded there—where surely, to omit other matters, if the number of the animals compelled the ark to be made so great, what compelled that unclean animals should be admitted by twos and clean by sevens, since both could have been preserved in equal number? Or could God, who commanded creatures to be preserved for the sake of renewing the kind, not have restored them in the same manner in which He had established them?
But those who contend that these were not deeds done, but only figures of things to be signified, first suppose that so great a flood could not have occurred as to rise by growth fifteen cubits above the highest mountains—on account of the summit of Mount Olympus, above which clouds are said not to be able to gather, because the sky there is already so lofty that there is not present that denser air in which winds, mists, and rains are generated; and they do not consider that the densest of all the elements, earth, could have been there. Or do they perhaps deny that the summit of a mountain is earth?
Why then do they contend that it was permissible for lands to be raised up to those spaces of the sky, but not permissible for waters to be so raised—seeing that these very measurers and weighers of the elements declare that the waters are higher and lighter than the lands? What reason therefore do they bring forward, why earth, heavier and lower, should have invaded the place of the more tranquil sky through cycles of so many years, while water, lighter and higher, was not permitted to do this even for a very brief time? They also say that the capacity of that ark could not hold so many kinds of animals in both sexes, two of the unclean and seven of the clean.
These men seem to me to reckon only three hundred cubits of length and fifty of breadth, and not to consider that there was just as much again in the upper stories, and likewise just as much again in the upper parts of the upper, and that on this account those cubits, multiplied threefold, came to nine hundred over and above one hundred and fifty. But if we consider what Origen has not inelegantly maintained—namely that Moses, the man of God, learned, as it is written, in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, who loved geometry, could have signified geometrical cubits, where one is asserted to be worth as much as six of ours—who does not see how great a quantity of things that magnitude could have held?
For as to what they argue, that an ark of such great size could not have been put together, they cavil most ineptly, since they know that immense cities were constructed, and they do not consider the hundred years during which that ark was built. Or is it perhaps that stone can adhere to stone joined only by lime, so that a wall may be carried round for so many miles, while wood cannot adhere to wood by mortise-joints, dowels, nails, and the binding of bitumen, so that an ark might be built—stretched far and wide not in curved but in straight lines—which no human effort might launch into the sea, but which the wave, when it comes, might lift up by the natural order of weights, and which divine providence rather than human prudence might steer as it floats, lest it suffer shipwreck anywhere?
As for what is wont to be inquired most scrupulously concerning the tiniest little creatures—not only such as mice and lizards, but even such as locusts, beetles, flies, and finally fleas—whether there were not in that ark a greater number than was determined when God commanded this: those whom these matters trouble must first be admonished that what is said, 'which creep upon the earth,' is to be taken in such a way that it was not necessary to preserve in the ark those which can live in the waters, not only those submerged like fish, but also those floating on the surface like many winged creatures. Then, when it is said, 'They shall be male and female,' it is assuredly understood to be said with a view to renewing the kind;
and on this account there was no need that those creatures should be there which can be born without coition from various things or from the corruptions of things; or, if they were there—as they are wont to be in houses—they could have been there without any determined number. Or if the most sacred mystery which was being enacted, and the figure of so great a matter, could not otherwise be fulfilled even by the truth of the deed, except that all should be there in that fixed number, that could not even live in the waters by the prohibition of nature: this was not the concern of that man or of those men, but a divine concern. For Noah did not catch and bring them in, but permitted them to come and enter. For to this purpose applies what was said, 'They shall enter in unto you'—not, that is, by the act of man, but by the nod of God;
in such a way, to be sure, that those which lack sex are not to be believed to have been there. For it is prescribed and determined, 'They shall be male and female.' For there are indeed some things which are so born from various things without coition that they afterward couple and generate, like flies; but others in which there is nothing of male and female, like bees. Furthermore, those which have sex in such a way that they have no offspring, like mules, it would be a wonder if they were there; rather it would suffice that their parents had been there, namely the equine and asinine kind—and if there are any others which by the intermingling of a different kind beget some kind. But if this too pertained to the mystery, they were there. For this kind also has male and female.
It is also wont to trouble some about the kinds of food which the animals could have had there—those which are thought to feed on nothing but flesh—whether they were there beyond the number, without transgression of the command, because the necessity of feeding others had compelled them to be enclosed there; or rather, what is more to be believed, whether besides flesh there could have been some nourishments suitable to all. For we know how many animals whose food is flesh feed upon grains and fruits, and especially upon figs and chestnuts. What wonder, then, if that wise and just man, also divinely admonished as to what was fitting for each, prepared and stored up for each kind a fitting nourishment without flesh? And what is there that hunger would not compel one to feed upon?
Or what sweet and wholesome thing could God not do—who could even grant, by divine ease, that they should live without food—unless it were fitting that they should also be fed for this purpose, to fulfill the figure of so great a mystery? But that such manifold signs of things done do not pertain to the prefiguring of the Church, no one is permitted to suppose, unless he be contentious. For already the nations have so filled the Church—both clean and unclean, until the certain end be reached—are so contained by a certain framework of its unity, that from this one most manifest case it is not lawful to doubt even concerning the rest, which are said somewhat more obscurely and can be recognized with more difficulty.
Since these things are so, no one, however hard, will dare to think either that these things were written in vain, or that they signify nothing although they were done, or that they were only spoken as significative and not done, or that they can plausibly be said to be foreign to the signifying of the Church; rather it is to be believed both that they were wisely committed to memory and to writing, and that they were done, and that they signify something, and that this very something pertains to the prefiguring of the Church. Now that this book has been brought to this point, it must be closed, so that the course of both cities—the earthly, namely, living according to man, and the heavenly, living according to God—may be traced after the flood and onward in the things that follow.
Whether after the flood the traces of the holy city as it ran its course were continuous, or were interrupted by intervening times of impiety, so that there existed no man who was a worshipper of the one true God, it is difficult to find out clearly from the speaking of the Scriptures; for this reason, because in the canonical books after Noah—who with his wife and three sons and as many daughters-in-law deserved to be delivered through the ark from the devastation of the flood—we do not find, down to Abraham, the piety of anyone proclaimed by manifest divine utterance, except that Noah commends his two sons, Shem and Japheth, with a prophetic blessing, beholding and foreseeing what was far in the future.
Whence it came about also that he cursed his middle son—that is, the one younger than the firstborn and older than the last—who had sinned against his father, not in him himself, but in his son, his own grandson, with these words: 'Cursed be Canaan the boy; he shall be a servant to his brothers.' Now Canaan had been born of Ham, who had not covered, but rather had betrayed, his sleeping father's nakedness. Whence also is the blessing which he added next, of his two sons, the greatest and the least, saying: 'Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan shall be his boy';
'May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem'—just as the very planting of the vineyard by this same Noah, and the inebriation from its fruit, and the uncovering of him as he slept, and the other things which were there done and written, are pregnant with prophetic senses and veiled with coverings. CHAPTER II. What was prophetically prefigured in the sons of Noah. But now that the outcome of the events has followed in posterity, the things that had been covered are sufficiently laid open. For who, attending to these things diligently and intelligently, would not recognize them in Christ? For Shem, from whose seed Christ was born in the flesh, is interpreted 'named.'
And what is more 'named' than Christ, whose name now everywhere gives forth its fragrance, so that in the Song of Songs, by a prophecy that goes before, it is even compared to ointment poured out? In whose tents, that is, churches, dwells the breadth of the nations. For Japheth is interpreted 'breadth.' Ham, moreover—which is interpreted 'hot'—the middle son of Noah, as if separating himself from both and remaining between the two, neither in the firstfruits of the Israelites nor in the fullness of the nations, what does he signify but the kind of heretics, hot, not with the spirit of wisdom, but of impatience, with which the hearts of heretics are wont to boil and to disturb the peace of the saints? But these things turn to the use of those who make progress, according to that saying of the Apostle:
'There must also be heresies, that those who are approved may be made manifest among you.' Whence also it is written: 'A learned son will be wise, but he will make use of the imprudent as a minister.' For many things pertaining to the catholic faith, while they are stirred up by the hot restlessness of heretics, in order that they may be defended against them, are both considered more diligently and understood more clearly and preached more urgently; and a question moved by an adversary becomes an occasion for learning. Although not only those who are most openly separated, but all who glory in the Christian name and live in ruin, can not absurdly be seen to be figured 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 dishonor by acting wickedly. Of such, therefore, it was said: 'By their fruits you shall know them.' Therefore Ham was cursed in his son, as it were in his fruit, that is, in his work. Whence fittingly his son himself, Canaan, is interpreted 'their motion'—which is what else than their work?
But Shem and Japheth, as it were the circumcision and the uncircumcision, or, as the Apostle in another manner calls them, Jews and Greeks—but called and justified—having in some way come to know the nakedness of their father, by which the Passion of the Saviour was signified, took a garment and laid it upon their backs and entered backward and covered the nakedness of their father, and did not see what they reverently covered. For in some manner, in the Passion of Christ, we both honor what was done for us and turn away from the crime of the Jews.
The garment signifies the sacrament; the backs signify the memory of things past, because the Church now celebrates the Passion of Christ as already accomplished—at that very time, namely, in which Japheth dwells in the tents of Shem, and the evil brother is in the midst of them—and does not still look forward to it as future. 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, for the exercise of patience or for the advancement of wisdom, knowingly make use of the evil. For there are, as the Apostle witnesses, those who announce Christ not chastely; 'but whether in pretense,' he says, 'or in truth, Christ is announced'—'in this I rejoice, yes, and I will rejoice.' For He Himself planted the vineyard, of which the prophet says:
'The vineyard of the Lord of Sabaoth is the house of Israel,' and He drank of its wine (whether that cup be here understood, of which He says: 'Can you drink the cup which I am about to drink?' and: 'Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass'—by which He without doubt signifies His Passion; or, because wine is the fruit of the vine, this is rather signified by that, namely that from that very vine, that is, from the race of the Israelites, He took flesh and blood for us, that He might be able to suffer), and He was made drunk, that is, He suffered, and He was made naked; for there His infirmity was made naked, that is, appeared, of which the Apostle says: 'Although He was crucified out of weakness.' Whence the same says: 'The weak thing of God is stronger than men, and the foolish thing of God is wiser than men.'
But as to the fact that, when it had been said, 'And He was made naked,' the Scripture added, 'in His own house,' it elegantly shows that He was to suffer the cross and death from the people of His own flesh and from the household members of His own blood, namely the Jews. This Passion of Christ the reprobate announce outwardly, in the mere sound of the voice; for they do not understand what they announce. But the upright have in the inner man so great a mystery, and honor inwardly in the heart the weak and foolish thing of God, because it is stronger and wiser than men. The figure of this matter is that Ham, going out, announced this outside; but Shem and Japheth, in order to veil this—that is, to honor it—entered in, that is, did this inwardly.
These secrets of divine Scripture we investigate as we can, one person more, another less fittingly, yet nevertheless faithfully holding it for certain that these things were not done and written without some prefiguring of things to come, and are to be referred to nothing but Christ and His Church, which is the city of God—the preaching of which has not been lacking from the beginning of the human race, which we see being fulfilled in all things. The two sons of Noah, therefore, having been blessed, and the one in their midst cursed, thenceforward down to Abraham there is silence concerning the commemoration of any righteous men who might piously worship God, for more than a thousand years.
I would not believe that such men were lacking; but if all were commemorated, it would become too long, and this would be historical diligence rather than prophetic foresight. The writer of these sacred letters therefore pursues—or rather the Spirit of God through him—those things by which not only past events are narrated, but future events also are foretold, which nevertheless pertain to the city of God; for whatever is here said even concerning men who are not its citizens is said to this end, that by comparison its contrary may either profit or stand out. Indeed, not all the deeds that are narrated are to be thought to signify something also; but for the sake of those which do signify something, even those which signify nothing are woven in.
For the earth is broken up by the ploughshare alone; but in order that this may be able to be done, the other members of the plough are also necessary; and the strings alone in lyres and musical instruments of this kind are fitted for song; but in order that they may be able to be fitted, there are present also the other parts in the framework of the instruments, which are not struck by the players, but to these are connected those parts which, being struck, resound. So in the prophetic history there are spoken also some things which signify nothing, but to which the things that do signify may adhere and be in some manner bound. CHAPTER III. On the generations of the three sons of Noah.
The generations, therefore, of the sons of Noah are next to be considered, and what seems fit to be said concerning them must be woven into this work, by which the course through the ages of both cities—the earthly, namely, and the heavenly—is shown. They began to be commemorated from the youngest son, who was called Japheth, whose sons are named as eight, but the grandsons seven from two of his sons, three from one, four from the other; thus they all come to fifteen. The sons, moreover, of Ham, that is, of the middle son of Noah, are four, and the grandsons five from one of his sons, the great-grandsons two from one grandson; their sum comes to eleven. When these have been enumerated, a return is made as if to the head, and it is said: 'And Cush begot Nimrod; he began to be a giant upon the earth.'
'This man was a giant, a hunter against the Lord God. On account of this they say: Like Nimrod the giant, a hunter against the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon, Erech, Accad, and Calneh in the land of Shinar. Out of that land went forth Asshur and built Nineveh and the city Rehoboth and Calah and Resen between the midst of Nineveh and Calah: this is the great city.' This Cush, moreover, the father of the giant Nimrod, was named first among the sons of Ham, whose five sons had already been reckoned and two grandsons. But this giant he either begot after his own grandsons were born, or, what is more credible, the Scripture spoke of him separately on account of his eminence;
since indeed his kingdom too is mentioned, whose beginning was that most noble city Babylon, and those which are mentioned alongside it, whether cities or regions. As for what was said, that out of that land—that is, out of the land of Shinar, which pertained to the kingdom of Nimrod—Asshur went forth and built Nineveh and the other cities which it joined together, this was done long afterward; and the Scripture touched upon it on this occasion on account of the nobility of the kingdom of the Assyrians, which Ninus, the son of Belus, the founder of the great city Nineveh, marvelously enlarged—the name of which city was derived from his name, so that from Ninus it was called Nineveh.
But Asshur, from whom 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. Whence it appears that there sprang from the progeny of Shem those who afterward obtained the kingdom of that giant and proceeded thence and founded other cities, the first of which, named from Ninus, is Nineveh. From here a return is made to another son of Ham, who was called Mizraim, and those whom he begot are commemorated, not as individual men, but as seven nations. And from the sixth, as from a sixth son, a people is commemorated to have gone forth, which is called Philistim; whence they come to eight. Thence again a return is made to Canaan, in which son Ham was cursed, and those whom he begot are named as eleven.
Then it is told, with certain cities mentioned, to what borders they reached. And by this, when the sons and grandsons of the progeny of Ham have been reckoned, thirty-one are reported to have been begotten. It remains to commemorate the sons of Shem, the eldest son of Noah; for to him the narrative of these generations, beginning from the youngest, has gradually come. But the point from which the sons of Shem begin to be commemorated has a certain obscurity, which must be illumined by exposition, because it pertains much to the matter which we are seeking. For thus it is read: 'And to Shem also was born, even to the father of all the sons, Heber, the elder brother of Japheth.' The order of the words is: 'And to Shem was born Heber, even to him,' that is, to Shem himself, 'was born Heber,' who, namely Shem, is the father of all the sons.
He wished, therefore, Shem to be understood as the patriarch of all who sprang from his stock, whom he is about to commemorate, whether they be sons, or grandsons, and great-grandsons, and so forth, sprung from that same source. Not indeed that Shem begot this Heber directly, but he is found fifth in the series of progenitors from him. For Shem, among his other sons, begot Arphaxad, Arphaxad begot Cainan, Cainan begot Salah, Salah begot Heber. Not in vain, therefore, was he himself named first in the progeny coming from Shem, and even preferred to the sons, although he is the fifth descendant, unless because it is true, as is handed down, that from him the Hebrews were named, as if 'Heberews'; although there could also be another opinion, that they seem to have been called from Abraham, as it were 'Abrahaeans';
But assuredly this is true, that it was from Heber that the Hebrews were named, and afterwards, by the wearing away of one letter, they were called Hebraei (Hebrews); and this language the people of Israel alone were able to retain, among whom the City of God sojourned in the saints and was foreshadowed in a sacrament in all things. Therefore the sons of Shem are first named, six of them; then from one of them were born four of his grandsons, and likewise another of the sons of Shem begot a grandson of his, and from him in turn a great-grandson was born, and from him a great-great-grandson, who is Heber. Now Heber begot two sons, one of whom he named Peleg, which is interpreted 'dividing.' Then the Scripture, adding and giving the reason for this name, says: 'For in his days the earth was divided.' But what this means will appear later.
And another, who was born of Heber, begot twelve sons; and thus all those descended from Shem amount to twenty-seven. In sum, therefore, all the offspring of the three sons of Noah—that is, fifteen from Japheth, thirty-one from Ham, and twenty-seven from Shem—make seventy-three. Then the Scripture goes on, saying: 'These are the sons of Shem in their tribes, according to their tongues, in their regions and in their nations'; and likewise of them all it says: 'These are the tribes of the sons of Noah according to their generations, according to their nations. From these the islands of the nations were dispersed over the earth after the flood.' From this we gather that there were then seventy-three, or rather (as will afterwards be shown) seventy-two nations, not individual men.
For even earlier, when the sons of Japheth had been recounted, the conclusion ran thus: 'From these were separated the islands of the nations in their land, each one according to his tongue, in their tribes and in their nations.' Now indeed in the case of the sons of Ham the nations are in one place mentioned more openly, as I showed above: 'Mizraim begot those who are called the Ludim'; and in the same manner the rest, up to seven nations. And after all had been enumerated, concluding afterwards he says: 'These are the sons of Ham in their tribes, according to their tongues, in their regions and in their nations.' For this reason, then, the sons of many are not mentioned, because by being born they were added to other nations, while they themselves were unable to form nations.
For what other reason is there that, although eight sons of Japheth are enumerated, only the sons born of two of them are mentioned; and although four sons of Ham are named, only those born of three are added; and although six sons of Shem are named, the posterity of only two is appended? Did the rest remain without sons? Far be it to believe this; but they did not in fact form nations on whose account they would be worthy to be mentioned, because, as they were born, they were added to other nations. CHAPTER 4. Of the diversity of languages and the beginning of Babylon. Therefore, although these nations are reported to have existed in their own languages, the narrator nevertheless returns to that time when there was one language of all, and then sets forth what happened, so that the diversity of languages arose.
'And the whole earth,' it says, 'had one lip and one speech for all. And it came to pass, when they moved from the East, they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and dwelt there. And a man said to his neighbour: Come, let us make bricks and bake them with fire. And the bricks became for them as stone, and bitumen was for them as mortar. And they said: Come, let us build for ourselves a city and a tower whose top shall reach to heaven, and let us make our name before we are scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. And the Lord God said: Behold, there is one race and one lip of all;'
'and this they have begun to do; and now nothing will be wanting to them of all that they have attempted to do. Come, and let us go down and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.' And the Lord scattered them thence over the face of the whole earth, and they ceased to build the city and the tower. For this reason its name was called Confusion, because there the Lord confounded the lips of the whole earth; and thence the Lord God scattered them over the face of the whole earth. This city, which was called Confusion, is Babylon itself, whose marvellous construction even the history of the nations commends. For Babylon is interpreted 'confusion.'
From this we gather that the giant Nimrod was its founder, as had been briefly indicated above, where, when the Scripture spoke of him, it said that the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon—that is, the city which held the sovereignty over the other cities, where there was, as it were in a metropolis, the dwelling-place of the kingdom; although it was not completed to the full extent which proud impiety planned. For an excessive height was being laid out, said to reach 'unto heaven'—whether of one tower of it, which they were striving to make pre-eminent among the others, or of all the towers, which are signified by a single number, as one says 'soldier' and thousands of soldiers are understood; as 'the frog,' as 'the locust';
for thus the multitude of frogs and locusts in the plagues with which the Egyptians were smitten through Moses was so named. But what would human and vain presumption have accomplished, if it had raised up a mass of however great a height into heaven against God? When could it pass beyond all the mountains; when could it escape the expanse of this cloudy air? Finally, what harm could any elevation, whether spiritual or corporeal, do to God? A safe and true way into heaven is built by humility, lifting up the heart to the Lord, not against the Lord, as that giant is said to have been a hunter 'against the Lord.' Not understanding this, some have been misled by the ambiguity of the Greek, so as to interpret it not 'against the Lord' but 'before the Lord';