The tower of Babel. The confusion of tongues. The genealogy of Sem down to Abram.
God hindereth the vaine purpose of building a hiegh towre, 7. by confounding mens tongues. 9. wherof it is called Babel. 10. The genealogie of Sem to Abram.
1And the earth was of one tongue, and of the same speech.Or la terra avea una sola favella, e uno stesso linguaggio.AND the earth was of one tongue, and al one speach.Erat autem terra labii unius, et sermonum eorumdem. 2And when they removed from the east, they found a plain in the land of Sennaar, and dwelt in it.E partendosi dall'oriente, gli uomini trovarono una campagna nella terra di Sennaar, e ivi abitarono.And when they remoued from the east, they found a plaine in the land of Sennaar, and dwelt in it.Cumque proficiscerentur de oriente, invenerunt campum in terra Senaar, et habitaverunt in eo. 3And each one said to his neighbour: Come let us make brick, and bake them with fire. And they had brick instead of stones, and slime instead of mortar:E dissero tra di loro: Andiamo, facciamo de' mattoni, e li cuociamo col fuoco. E si valsero di mattoni in cambio di sassi, e di bitume in vece di calcina:And eech one said to his neighboure: Come, let vs make bricke, and bake them with fire. And they had bricke in steed of stone, and bitume in steed of morter:Dixitque alter ad proximum suum: Venite, faciamus lateres, et coquamus eos igni. Habueruntque lateres pro saxis, et bitumen pro cæmento: 4And they said: Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven; and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands.E dissero: Venite, facciamoci una città, e una torre, di cui la cima arrivi fino al cielo; e illustriamo il nostro nome prima di andar divisi per tutta quanta la terra.and they said: Come, let vs make vs a citie and a towre, the toppe wherof may reach to heauen: and let vs renowne our name before we be dispersed into al lands.et dixerunt: Venite, faciamus nobis civitatem et turrim, cujus culmen pertingat ad cælum: et celebremus nomen nostrum antequam dividamur in universas terras. 5And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of Adam were building.Ma il Signore discese a vedere la città e la torre, che fabbricavano i figliuoli d'Adamo,And our Lord descended to see the citie and the towre, which the children of Adam builded,Descendit autem Dominus ut videret civitatem et turrim, quam ædificabant filii Adam, 6And he said: Behold, it is one people, and all have one tongue: and they have begun to do this, neither will they leave off from their designs, till they accomplish them in deed.E disse: Ecco che questo è un sol popolo, ed hanno tutti la stessa lingua: ed han principiato a fare tal cosa, e non desisteranno da' loro disegni, fino a che gli abbian di fatto condotti a termine.and he said: Behold, it is one people, and one tongue is to al: and they haue begunne to doe this, neyther wil they leaue of from their determinations, til they accomplish them indede.et dixit: Ecce, unus est populus, et unum labium omnibus: cœperuntque hoc facere, nec desistent a cogitationibus suis, donec eas opere compleant.
7Come ye, therefore, let us go down, and there confound their tongue, that they may not understand one another’s speech.Venite adunque, scendiamo, e confondiamo il loro linguaggio, sicché l'uno non capisca il parlare dell'altro.Come ye therfore, let vs goe downe, and there confound their tongue, that none may heare is neighbours voice.Venite igitur, descendamus, et confundamus ibi linguam eorum, ut non audiat unusquisque vocem proximi sui. 8And so the Lord scattered them from that place into all lands, and they ceased to build the city.E per tal modo gli disperse il Signore da quel luogo per tutti i paesi, e lasciarono da parte la fabbrica della città.And so our Lord dispersed them from that place into al lands, and they ceased to build the citie.Atque ita divisit eos Dominus ex illo loco in universas terras, et cessaverunt ædificare civitatem. 9And therefore the name thereof was called Babel, because there the language of the whole earth was confounded: and from thence the Lord scattered them abroad upon the face of all countries.E quindi a questa fu dato il nome di Babel, perché ivi fu confuso il linguaggio di tutta la terra, e di là il Signore li disperse per tutte quante le regioni.And therfore the name therof was called Babel, because there the tongue of the whole earth was confounded: and from thence our Lord dispersed them vpon the face of al countries.Et idcirco vocatum est nomen ejus Babel, quia ibi confusum est labium universæ terræ: et inde dispersit eos Dominus super faciem cunctarum regionum. 10These are the generations of Sem: Sem was a hundred years old when he begot Arphaxad, two years after the flood.Questa è la genealogia di Sem: Sem avea cento anni, quando generò Arphaxad, due anni dopo il diluvio.These are the generations of Sem: Sem was an hundred yeares old when he begat Arphaxad, two years after the floud.Hæ sunt generationes Sem: Sem erat centum annorum quando genuit Arphaxad, biennio post diluvium. 11And Sem lived after he begot Arphaxad, five hundred years, and begot sons and daughters.E visse Sem, dopo aver generato Arphaxad, cinquecento anni: e generò figliuoli e figliuole.And Sem liued after he begat Arphaxad, fiue hundred yeares: and begat sonnes and daughters.Vixitque Sem, postquam genuit Arphaxad, quingentis annis: et genuit filios et filias. 12And Arphaxad lived thirty-five years, and begot Sale.Arphaxad poi visse trentacinque anni, e generò Sale.Moreouer Arphaxad liued thirtie fiue yeares, and begat Sale.Porro Arphaxad vixit triginta quinque annis, et genuit Sale.
13And Arphaxad lived after he begot Sale, three hundred and three years, and begot sons and daughters.E visse Arphaxad, dopo aver generato Sale, trecento tre anni: e generò figliuoli e figliuole.And Arphaxad liued after he begat Sale, three hundred three yeares: and begat sonnes and daughters.Vixitque Arphaxad, postquam genuit Sale, trecentis tribus annis: et genuit filios et filias. 14Sale also lived thirty years, and begot Heber.Sale poi visse trent'anni, e generò Heber.Sale also liued thirtie yeares, and begat Heber.Sale quoque vixit triginta annis, et genuit Heber. 15And Sale lived after he begot Heber, four hundred and three years: and begot sons and daughters.E visse Sale, dopo aver generato Heber, trecento tre anni: e generò figliuoli e figliuole.And Sale liued after he begat Heber, foure hundred three yeares: and begat sonnes and daughters.Vixitque Sale, postquam genuit Heber, quadringentis tribus annis: et genuit filios et filias. 16And Heber lived thirty-four years, and begot Phaleg.E visse Heber trenta quattro anni, e generò Phaleg.And Heber liued thirtie foure yeares, and begat Phaleg.Vixit autem Heber triginta quatuor annis, et genuit Phaleg. 17And Heber lived after he begot Phaleg, four hundred and thirty years: and begot sons and daughters.E visse Heber, dopo aver generato Phaleg, quattrocento trent'anni, e generò figliuoli e figliuole.And Heber liued after he begat Phaleg, foure hundred thirtie yeares: and begat sonnes and daughters.Et vixit Heber postquam genuit Phaleg, quadringentis triginta annis: et genuit filios et filias. 18Phaleg also lived thirty years, and begot Reu.E visse Phaleg trent'anni, e generò Reu.Phaleg also liued thirtie yeares, and begat Reu.Vixit quoque Phaleg triginta annis, et genuit Reu. 19And Phaleg lived after he begot Reu, two hundred and nine years, and begot sons and daughters.E visse Phaleg, dopo aver generato Reu, dugento nove anni: e generò figliuoli e figliuole.And Phaleg liued after he begat Reu, two hundred nine yeares, and begat sonnes and daughters.Vixitque Phaleg, postquam genuit Reu, ducentis novem annis: et genuit filios et filias. 20And Reu lived thirty-two years, and begot Sarug.E visse Reu trentadue anni, e generò Sarug.And Reu liued thirtie two yeares, and begat Sarug.Vixit autem Reu triginta duobus annis, et genuit Sarug. 21And Reu lived after he begot Sarug, two hundred and seven years, and begot sons and daughters.E visse Reu, dopo aver generato Sarug, dugento sette anni: e generò figliuoli e figliuole.Reu liued also after he begat Sarug, two hundred seauen yeares: and begat sonnes & daughters.Vixit quoque Reu, postquam genuit Sarug, ducentis septem annis: et genuit filios et filias.
22And Sarug lived thirty years, and begot Nachor.E visse Sarug trent'anni, e generò Nachor.And Sarug liued thirtie yeares, and begat Nachor.Vixit vero Sarug triginta annis, et genuit Nachor. 23And Sarug lived after he begot Nachor, two hundred years, and begot sons and daughters.E visse Sarug, dopo aver generato Nachor, dugento anni: e generò figliuoli e figliuole.And Sarug liued after he begat Nachor, two hundred yeares: and begat sonnes and daughters.Vixitque Sarug, postquam genuit Nachor, ducentis annis: et genuit filios et filias. 24And Nachor lived nine and twenty years, and begot Thare.E visse Nachor ventinove anni, e generò Thare.And Nachor liued nine and twentie yeares, and begat Thare.Vixit autem Nachor viginti novem annis, et genuit Thare. 25And Nachor lived after he begot Thare, a hundred and nineteen years, and begot sons and daughters.E visse Nachor, dopo aver generato Thare, cento diciannove anni: e generò figliuoli e figliuole.And Nachor liued after he begot Thare, an hundred and nintene yeares: and begat sonnes and daughters.Vixitque Nachor, postquam genuit Thare, centum decem et novem annis: et genuit filios et filias. 26And Thare lived seventy years, and begot Abram, and Nachor, and Aran.E visse Thare settant'anni, e generò Abram, e Nachor, e Aran.And Thare liued seauentie yeares, and begat Abram and Nachor, and Aran.Vixitque Thare septuaginta annis, et genuit Abram, et Nachor, et Aran. 27And these are the generations of Thare: Thare begot Abram, Nachor, and Aran. And Aran begot Lot.E questa è la genealogia di Thare: Thare generò Abram, Nachor, e Aran. Aran poi generò Lot.And these are the generations of Thare: Thare begat Abram, Nachor, & Aran. Moreouer Aran begat Lot.Hæ sunt autem generationes Thare: Thare genuit Abram, Nachor et Aran. Porro Aran genuit Lot. 28And Aran died before Thare his father, in the land of his nativity in Ur of the Chaldees.E morì Aran prima di Thare suo padre nella terra, dov'era nato, in Ur de' Caldei.And Aran died before Thare his father, in the land of his natiuitie in Vr of the Chaldees.Mortuusque est Aran ante Thare patrem suum, in terra nativitatis suæ, in Ur Chaldæorum. 29And Abram and Nachor married wives: the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai: and the name of Nachor’s wife, Melcha, the daughter of Aran, father of Melcha and father of Jescha.E Abram, e Nachor si ammogliarono: la moglie di Abram avea nome Sarai: e la moglie di Nachor ebbe nome Melcha, figliuola di Aran, padre di Melcha, e padre di Jesca.And Abram & Nachor maried wiues: the name of Abram his wife was Sarai: and the name of Nachor his Wife, Melcha the daughter of Aran the father of Melcha, and the father of Iescha.Duxerunt autem Abram et Nachor uxores: nomen uxoris Abram, Sarai: et nomen uxoris Nachor, Melcha filia Aran, patris Melchæ, et patris Jeschæ.
30And Sarai was barren, and had no children.Ma Sarai era sterile, e non avea figliuoli.And Sarai was barren, neither had she children.Erat autem Sarai sterilis, nec habebat liberos. 31And Thare took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Aran, his son’s son, and Sarai his daughter in law, the wife of Abram his son, and brought them out of Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Chanaan: and they came as far as Haran, and dwelt there.Thare adunque prese seco Abram suo figliuolo, e Lot figliuolo di Aran, (cioè) figliuolo di un suo figliuolo, e Sarai sua nuora, moglie di Abram suo figliuolo, e li condusse via da Ur de' Caldei per andar nella terra di Chanaan, e andarono fino ad Haran, ed ivi abitarono.Thare therfore tooke Abram his sonne, and Lot the sonne of Aran, his sonne, & Sarai his daughter in law, the wife of Abram his sonne, and brought them out of Vr of the Chaldees, for to goe into the land of Chanaan: and they came as farre as Haran, and dwelled there.Tulit itaque Thare Abram filium suum, et Lot filium Aran, filium filii sui, et Sarai nurum suam, uxorem Abram filii sui, et eduxit eos de Ur Chaldæorum, ut irent in terram Chanaan: veneruntque usque Haran, et habitaverunt ibi. 32And the days of Thare were two hundred and five years, and he died in Haran.E visse Thare dugento cinque anni, e morì in Haran.And the dayes of Thare came to two hundred fiue yeares, and died in Haran. The end of the second age.Et facti sunt dies Thare ducentorum quinque annorum, et mortuus est in Haran.
11:1
Haydock
Speech. Probably Hebrew; in which language we have the most ancient book in the world, the work of Moses. This language has been preserved ever since, though with some alterations. Most of the oriental languages are but like dialects from it, as French, Italian, etc. are from Latin. The arguments which are brought to prove that other languages are more ancient, because the names of men, etc. have a proper significance in them as well as in Hebrew, do not invalidate the right of the latter. The most respectable authors have, therefore, always declared for it. (Haydock)
11:2
Menochius
The East: Armenia, which lies to the eastward of Babylonia, whither they directed their course in quest of provisions for themselves and cattle, being now grown pretty numerous. (Menochius)
11:3
Haydock
Each one: not that every individual joined in this undertaking, considered, at least, as a rash and presumptuous attempt to save themselves from a second deluge. Some might innocently give in to it, meaning only to leave a monument to their common origin and friendship, before they separated into distant countries. Slime: literally bitumen. (Haydock)
Calmet
The Hebrew, chomer, means also slime, or mortar. Stone is very scarce in that country, but the earth is fat, and very proper to make brick; it also abounds in naphtha, bitumen, etc.: hence the ancients notice the brick walls of Babylon. (Calmet)
11:4
Haydock
Famous before; Hebrew lest, etc.; as if they intended to prevent that event. (Haydock)
Menochius
Their motive appears to have been pride, which raised the indignation of God. Nemrod, the chief instigator, might have designed the tower for a retreat, whence he might sally out and maintain his tyranny. (Menochius)
11:6
Haydock
In deed. This seems to be spoken ironically; though the effects of weak mortals, the sons of Adam, when pursued with vigour and unanimity, will produce great effects. These builders had conceived an idea of raising the tower as high as possible, hyperbolically, to touch heaven. (Haydock)
11:7
Haydock
Come ye, etc. As men seemed bent on taking heaven by storm, like the ancient giants, God turns their expressions, as it were, against themselves, and shews them an example of humility, let us go down. He acts the part of a judge, and therefore will examine all with the utmost diligence, as he denotes by these expressions; being really incapable of moving from place to place, on account of his immensity. (Haydock)
Menochius
He seems nearer to men, by the effects or punishments which he inflicted. The address which he here makes is directed, not to the angels, but to the other co-equal powers of the Blessed Trinity. (Menochius)
11:8
Year of the World about 1800, and Year before Christ 2204.
11:9
Menochius
Babel, that is, confusion. This is one of the greatest miracles recorded in the Old Testament; men forgot, in a moment, the language which they had hitherto spoken, and found themselves enabled to speak another, known only to a few of the same family (Calmet); for we must not suppose, that there were as many new languages as there were men at Babel. (Menochius)
Haydock
The precise number of languages which were then heard, cannot be determined. The learned commonly acknowledge the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Teutonic, Sclavonian, Tartarian, and Chinese languages, to be original. The rest are only dialects from these. English is chiefly taken from the Teutonic, (Calmet) with many words borrowed from the Greek and other languages. (Haydock)
11:12
Haydock
Sale, or Cainan. See Genesis 10:24; Chronicles[1 Chronicles?] 1:18, in the Septuagint. The variation in the years of the Patriarchs, between this ancient version and the Hebrew, is here again very considerable, and perhaps unaccountable. (Haydock)
11:20
11:27
Calmet
Abram, the youngest of the three, being born only in the 130th year of Thare, ver. 32, and Genesis 12:4. He is placed first, on account of his superior dignity in the church of God, in like manner as Sem, Moses, etc. In his youth, he is supposed to have followed the idolatrous worship of his fathers. (St. Augustine, City of God X. Genesis ult.[last Genesis]; Genebrard, A.M. 1949[the year of the world 1949].) (Calmet)
Haydock
But being soon enlightened by God, he becomes a glorious witness of the truth, and, according to many, is preserved miraculously, when thrown into the fire by the Chaldees, ver. 31. (Haydock)
11:29
Haydock
Jescha, whom many confound with Sarai, as if both Nacher and Abram had married the daughters of their brother Aran. But why then does Moses mention Sarai before, and then call her Jescha in the same verse? It seems as if he intended to designate two different women. (Haydock)
Calmet
In effect, Abram himself says, Sarai was truly his sister, born of the same father, Genesis 12:13. See Genesis 20:12, where we shall give the reasons that seem to prove that she was the daughter of Thare, and not Aran. (Calmet)
Haydock
Jescha does not accompany her grandfather, preferring, perhaps, to stay with Nachor, or to marry in her own country; if she were not already dead when Thare departed from Ur, a city of the Chaldees. (Haydock)
Calmet
This city is probably Ura, in Mesopotamia, not far from Nisibis, which the Scripture often mentions as a part of Chaldea. (Acts 7:2, etc.) (Calmet)
11:9
Babel.... That is, confusion.
11:4
4. Let vs make] Here we may see in Nemrod the common causes of heresies, Pride is cause offchisme and heresie. False pretences deceiue the simple. and the maner of Hertikes ptoceding. For he hauing a sutle proud, and aspiring mind, first detracted from God, perswading men (as is noted before) not to depend vpon Gods prouidence, and finding some others of like humour, they conspired together, and drew more folowers, by bearing the simpler S. Chris. ho. 30. in Gen. Cassian. ⸢c⸣ollat. 4. c. 12. sorte in hand (for it was vnpossible wise men should beleue it) that they would make a towre of defence against a new floud, if God should thinck to Heretikes prosper for a time, but are confounded in the end. Ministrie of Angels. drowne the world againe. But their principal intention was to make themselues great and strong for the present, and famous to posteritie. Al which God ouerthrew neither suffering them to build vp their imagined castle of strength nor to be praised for their worke, but made them infamous to the worlds end.
11:7
7. Let v• confound] God in dissipating this vaine worke of men, would vse Li de t• fus. ling. ho. 11. in Numer. li. 16. c. 6 ciuit. li. 2. Moral. in. c 1. lob. the ministerie of Angels. As not only Philo Iudeus, and Origen, but also S. Augustin, S. Gregorie, and other fathers expound these wordes, Come, let vs descend, and confound their tongue. Where they also note Gods singular wisdome, God turneth the offence of men to good. Two miracles In priuation of one tongue and geuing a new. mercie, and iustice, so punishing the offence, that he turneth it to his owne glorie, and the profite of al men: shewing his powre and soueraigne Maiestie by two great miracles. First by so suddainly and vtterly depriuing al those builders, of their vsual tongue, that presently they could neither speake it, nor vnderstand it. Secondly, by geuing diuers distinct languages to seueral sortes or families, which they immediatly vnderstood, and spoke most promptly, as if they had long before lerned and vsed the same. But to no man was geuen more then one language. And so, to the more commoditie of al mankind, they were forced to part into sundrie coastes of the earth, which they inhabited and replenished Diuision among euil men is profitable. with distinct Nations, hauing the same Angels their spiritual Patrones and Protectors, which had seuerally changed their language. In particular, Li. 34. Moral. in. c. 41. Iob. ho. 11. in Gen. l. 16. c. 11 & li. 18. c. 39. ci. S. Aug. li. 6. c. 4. ciuit. it was profitable to the good who being before oppressed by the vnited powre of manie wicked, were releeued (as S. Gregorie teacheth) when their persecutors were diuided. These good were the familie of Heber, as S. Chtisostom, The member offending is punished. and S. Augustin proue. For seing the change of tongues was inflicted for punishment, it appeareth that Heber and his familie were innocent of the vaine attempt, whose tongue was not changed, but remained the same, and of Heber and his familie cōsented not to the building of Babel. him was called the Hebrew tongue for distinction sake after there were manie tongues, which before had no distinct name being the only tongue of al men. Againe touching the offenders (who were punished in their tongues, that they could not be vnderstood commanding one an other, because they would not vnderstand God iustly commanding them al) they also reaped this profite, that they were forced to leaue of that bad worke, and withal to seeke more ample habitations, who If they had there more increased in number and streingth, vvould vvithout doubt (saith S. Chrisostom) haue attempted vvorse things. And infinite Ho. 30. in Gen. S. Greg. ho 30 in ••an. manslaughter would haue benne committed, amongst so manie for possession of that one citie & towre. Finally the fathers note that as God wrought Gift of tōgues most profitable to the Church. here much good by diuision of tongues: so he wrought much more by communion of tongues, geuen to the Apostles, therby inabling them to gether one Church of al Tongues and Nations.
11:9
He that spea keth so confusedly that he is not vnderstood is said to bable.
11:10
Moyses here sheweth the succession of Patriarches, from Sem to Abraham, as he did before from Adam to Noe. S. Aug. li. 16. c. 10. ci.
11:12
12. Begat Sale] Here is an intricate difficultie. For the Hebrew and Latin text, both here and in Palalippomenon, saying Arphaxad begat Sale, the 72. Scriptures hard 1. Par. 1. Interpreters and S. Luke place Cainan betwen them, as sonne of Arphaxad, Iuc. 3. v. 36. Li. 16. c. 10. ciuit. and father of Sale. Eusebius also in his Chronicle, with most Greeke Doctors, and S. Augustin, count Cainan in this Genealogie of Sem. VVherupon manie do number him in this ranck, and suppose that Moyses omitted him for some Some think Moyses omitted Cainan for a mysterie. Mysterie, and yet writeth truly, that Arphaxad begat Sale, not his proper sonne, but his sonnes sonne: as S. Mathew sayth, Ioram begat Ozias, who Mat. 1. was his nephewes nephew. But against this solution it is replied, that then Arphaxad should haue bene a grandfather at 35. yeares of age: which were strange in those daies, how soeuer it is now. And a greatter difficultie, or rather absurditie must also be granted, that Arphaxad begat both Cainan Refutation. at the age of 35. yeares, according to the 72. Interpreters, and that Sale was also begotten the same yeare, according to the Hebrew, being both true. VVhich inconuenience is not in the Genealogie written by S. Matthew. Others therfore according to the Hebrew and Latin text, with most Latin Doctors, omit Cainan in this place, and Paralipomenon, namely with S. Hierom, Others coniecture Cainan should not be in the text of the 70. Quest. Hebra. who diligently examining and reconciling varieties, betwen the Hebrew and the Greeke, maketh no mention at al of this difference. VVhich maketh some to coniecture, that in S. Hieroms time Cainan was not in the Greeke copies, at least not in those that he had, and held for the best. And at this day some haue him not. VVhich may be admitted for a probable answere touching Editio quedam vaticana the Hebrew and Greeke of the old Testament. But for so much as al But neuer anie Catholique (nor heretike before Beza) put Cainan out of S. Lukes Gospel. copies, both Greeke & Latin, also S. Hieroms Edition of S. Lukes Gospel haue Cainan, the difficultie stil remaineth betwen Moyses and S. Luke. How then shal this doubt be solued. we can not solue it. And no maruel. For venerable Bede could not. VVhose wordes are these: S. Luke vseth rather the Greeke Prefat. cōment. in Acta. Apost. testimonies then the Hebrew: wherof hapeneth that I much maruel at, and for dulnes of wit, being striken with great admirrtion, I can not throughly scan, seeing in the Hebrew veritie are founed only tenne generations from the floud vnto Abraham, by what meanes S. Luke, who (the Holie Ghost gouerning A memorable sentence of S. Beda. his penne) could in no sorte write false, would rather set downe eleuen generations in the Gospel, Cainan adioyned according to the seuentie Interpreters. Thus writeth S. Beda, reuerently admiring that he could not vnderstand. For being assured that the Holie Ghost gouerned the pennes both of Moyses and S. Luke, and that he is not contrarie to him selfe, it must nedes be Beza sacrilegiously proud. true which ech of them writeth, though other learned men can not reach the profoundnes of some difficulties that occure. And therfore Beza was extreme saucie to dash Cainan out of S. Lukes Gospel, and that wittingly and most impudently saying, in his Annotations: Non dubitauimus expungere: VVe doubted The heretical English Editions differ in this point. not to put it out. The former English Editions, otherwise corrupt in manie 1552 1577. places, haue Cainan in the text of S. Lukes Gospel, but their latter translaters are in this point pure Bezites.
11:28
Vr a citie, or territorie of Chaldea. 70. Interpret. and Iosephus li. 1. Antiq.
11:31
Abram was commanded to goe forth of Chaldea, as appeareth Act. 7. v. 4. Though this iourney is here ascribed to Thare as the principal person.
11:1
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 5.29
… “And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech; and it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 1.22
… and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and I will magnify thy name; and thou shalt be blessed: and I will bless him that blesseth thee, and I will curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed.”
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 1.2.19
… now planning to fortify earth against heaven, and in the madness of ungoverned pride to prepare an attack upon the very God of all.
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 2.18.2
… and some others distinguished by different titles corresponding to the contents of each; for instance, Concerning the things which the Sober Mind desires and execrates, On the Confusion of Tongues,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 34
… (for had He willed it, He would not have placed there at all “the man whom He had formed,” but he that disobeyed was the cause;) so neither was it His will that men should have divers tongues; since otherwise He would have made it so from the beginning. But now “the whole earth was of one language, and all had one speech.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.4
… And God scattered them thence on the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city and the tower. Therefore the name of it is called Confusion; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and the Lord God scattered them thence on the face of all the earth.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.15
… just as above, when it had mentioned the grandsons of Noah, it said that they were in their nations and tongues; and yet afterwards, as if this also had followed in order of time, it says, “And the whole earth was of one lip, and one speech for all.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 6.10
… to abstain from iniquity they would not; they sought the height of a tower as a defense against a flood; they built a lofty tower. “God saw their pride, and frustrated their purpose by causing that they should not understand one another’s speech, and thus tongues became diverse through pride.”
11:2
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 46.2
… “Get thee out of thy country and from thy kindred unto a land that I will show thee.” The patriarch—the first to receive a promise of Christ—is here told to leave the Chaldees, to leave the city of confusion and its rehoboth or broad places; to leave also the plain of Shinar, where the tower of pride had been raised to heaven.
11:3
St Melito of Sardis † AD 180 Melito, the Philosopher 9
The descent of the Lord —His visitation of men. As in Micah: “Behold, the Lord shall come forth from His place; He shall come down trampling under foot the ends of the earth.” Likewise in a bad sense. In Genesis: “The Lord came down to see the tower.”
11:4
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 4.1
… And we need also thoughts which will pull down all edifices based on false opinions, and especially the edifice raised by Celsus in his work which resembles the building of those who said, “Come, let us build us a city, and a tower whose top shall reach to heaven.”
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 21.22
… whether we must call that council, which subverted and disturbed everything, a tower of Chalane,
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 43.67
… Whenever I take up his polemical works, I see the fire of Sodom, by which the wicked and rebellious tongues are reduced to ashes, or the tower of Chalane, impiously built,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 57
… Since had they been entirely separated from them, they would soon have known the truth. For it is possible to do well in separating. Wherefore also Himself hath said, “I am come not to bring peace upon the earth but a sword.” ( Matt. x. 34 .) For there is an evil concord, and there is a good disagreement. Thus they who built the tower (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 55.10
… “Sink, O Lord, and divide the tongues of them.” Wherefore “sink”? Because themselves they have lifted up. Wherefore “divide”? Because for an evil thing they have united. Recollect that tower of proud men made after the deluge: what said the proud men? Lest we perish in a deluge, let us make a lofty tower.
11:5
St Justin Martyr † AD 165 Dialogue with Trypho 127
“These and other such sayings are recorded by the lawgiver and by the prophets; and I suppose that I have stated sufficiently, that wherever God says, ‘God went up from Abraham,’ or, ‘The Lord spake to Moses,’ and ‘The Lord came down to behold the tower which the sons of men had built,’
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 5.29
… And the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city and the tower. Therefore is the name of it called Confusion; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.”
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 3.28
… However, since Christ’s enemies do not yield even to these considerations, I wish, though knowing that they have a heart harder than Pharaoh, to ask them again concerning this. In Paradise God asks, ‘Adam, where art Thou ’ and He inquires of Cain also, ‘Where is Abel thy brother
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.17
… I too will ask you why God says in Genesis: “I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry that is come unto Me. And if not, that I may know.” Why does Scripture also say of God: “And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the sons of men builded.”
11:6
St Justin Martyr † AD 165 Dialogue with Trypho 102
… each one’s freedom of will, however, being guarded. Hence Scripture says the following, at the destruction of the tower, and division and alteration of tongues: ‘And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they have begun to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them of all which they have attempted to do.’
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Three Homilies Concerning the Power of Demons 1
… All which things God foresaw, and since they did not use their oneness of speech rightly, he rightly divided them by difference of speech. And see with me, his lovingkindness. “Behold,” saith he “they all have one speech, and this they have begun to do.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.6
The words, “Nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do,”
11:7
Novatian † AD 258 A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity 17
… with reason He can neither descend nor ascend, because He Himself both contains and fills all things, and yet nevertheless introduces God descending to consider the tower which the sons of men were building, asking and saying, “Come;” and then, “Let us go down and there confound their tongues, that each one may not understand the words of his neighbour.”
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 41
XVI. But as the old Confusion of tongues was laudable, when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety, even as some now venture to be, were building the Tower;
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Answer to Eunomius' Second Book 1
And if any one cites the confusion of tongues that took place at the building of the tower, as contradicting what I have said, not even there is God spoken of as creating men’s languages, but as confounding the existing one
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 1.11
… To us He seems to come down, not that He does come down, but that our mind ascends to Him. Of which we would speak more fully did we not remember that in the former treatise there was set forth that the Father said: “Let us go down and confound their language,”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.7
… “I will dwell in them.” Elsewhere also it stands that God said: “Go to, let us go down and confound their language.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 35
… For thus it is possible for Heaven to be united to earth. Since the physician too in this way preserves the rest of the body, when he amputates the incurable part; and the general, when he has brought to a separation them that were agreed in mischief. Thus it came to pass also in the case of that famous tower; for their evil peace
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 3
… So also God, speaking after the manner of men, saith, “Now I know,” intending only to mark the exceeding greatness of the exploit; not that He “then” came to know either his fear or the greatness of it. For when He saith, “Come, let Us go down and see,” (
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 3.1
… But He first trained him in many ways and called him back, by groans and trembling, by the deluge of water, and the utter destruction of almost the whole race , by confusion and diversity of tongues
Pseudo-Clement The Recognitions of Clement 2.39
… Also, whereas at the first God said to the other gods, ‘Let us make man after our image and likeness;’ also His saying, ‘Let us drive him out;’ and again, ‘Come, let us go down, and confound their language;’
11:8
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 9
… Do you see how clear of all ambition he is, and how he repels the honor paid to him? In the same manner also did the ancient fathers; for instance, Daniel said, “Not for any wisdom that is in me.” ( Dan. ii. 30 .) And again Joseph, “Do not interpretations belong to God?” (
Socrates Scholasticus † AD 440 The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus 5.10
… so that all being variously affected towards the writings of the ancients, they could no longer agree among themselves, dissenting not only from other sects, but those of the same sect differing from one another. Accordant malice therefore, like the tongue of the giants of old, was confounded, and their tower of mischief overturned.
11:9
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Funeral Oration on Meletius 1
… I know, too, of another utterance of Jeremiah, which is reckoned among the books of the Psalms ; it is that which he made over the captivity of Israel. The words run thus: “We hung our harps upon the willows, and condemned ourselves as well as our harps to silence.” I make this song my own. For when I see the confusion of heresy, this confusion is Babylon
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 46.2
What are God’s first words to Abraham? “Get thee out of thy country and from thy kindred unto a land that I will show thee.” The patriarch—the first to receive a promise of Christ—is here told to leave the Chaldees, to leave the city of confusion
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 55.11
11. “For I have seen iniquity and contradiction in the city.” With reason this man was seeking the desert, for he saw iniquity and contradiction in the city. There is a certain city turbulent: the same it was that was building a tower, the same was confounded and called Babylon, the same through innumerable nations dispersed:
11:10
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 51.6
… “Flesh…with the blood thereof shall ye not eat. And surely your blood will I require at the hand of every man that sheddeth it; for in the image of God have I made man.” From Noah to Abraham ten generations passed away,
11:16
St Hippolytus † AD 235 The Refutation of All Heresies 10.26
… But the father of this Abraham is Thare, and of this Thare the father is Nachor, and of this Nachor the father is Serag, and of this Serag the father is Reu, and of this Reu the father is Peleg, and of this Peleg
11:26
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Pallium 2
… Transmigrations were made by the swarms of redundant races. The exuberance of the Scythians fertilizes the Persians; the Phœnicians gush out into Africa; the Phrygians give birth to the Romans; the seed of the Chaldeans is led out into Egypt; subsequently, when transferred thence, it becomes the Jewish race.
Tertullian † AD 220 A Strain of Sodom 1
The race Chaldæan, and the righteous house
St Hippolytus † AD 235 The Refutation of All Heresies 10.26
… and Levi, at 40 years of age, begat Caath; and Caath was four years of age when he went down with Jacob into Egypt. Therefore the entire period during which Abraham sojourned, and the entire family descended from him by Isaac, in the country then called Canaanitis, was 215 years. But the father of this Abraham is Thare,
11:27
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.12
… Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat Lot. And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees. And Abram and Nahor took them wives: the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai; and the name of Nahor’s wife Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 28.3
… For who would call an uncle or a sister’s son “brother”? Yet the Scripture calls relatives of this kind “brothers.” For Abraham and Lot are called brothers, while Abraham was Lot’s uncle.
11:28
Pseudo-Clement The Recognitions of Clement 1.31
… In the twentieth generation a son for the first time died before his father,
11:31
Tertullian † AD 220 An Answer to the Jews 2
… who did not first taste death, in order that, being a candidate for eternal life, he might by this time show us that we also may, without the burden of the law of Moses, please God. Melchizedek also, “the priest of the most high God,” uncircumcised and inobservant of the Sabbath, was chosen to the priesthood of God. Lot, withal, the brother
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 15
… for Himself is the Fountain thereof. Think not, he would say, in this way to glorify Him. “And from thy kindred.” How then saith the Scripture, that Abraham’s father was willing to go out? Hence we learn, that it was in consequence of Abraham’s vision, that his father was moved to join in the migration. (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.1
1. “Hear, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people and thy father’s house, and the king shall desire thy beauty.” In this forty-fourth psalm God speaks to the human soul that, following the example of Abraham,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.13
… For the narrative runs thus: “And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran, his son’s son, and Sarah his daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife, and led them forth out of the region of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Canaan; and he came into Haran, and dwelt there.”
11:32
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.14
On Terah’s death in Mesopotamia, where he is said to have lived 205 years, the promises of God made to Abraham now begin to be pointed out; for thus it is written: “And the days of Terah in Haran were two hundred and five years, and he died in Haran.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.24
… Not that this people was to be in that servitude under the oppressive Egyptians for 400 years, but it is foretold that this should take place in the course of those 400 years. For as it is written of Terah the father of Abraham, “And the days of Terah in Haran were 205 years,”
11:11
The speech of one, namely Hebrew; is a metonymy. For it is evident from the etymologies and the meaning of the names Adam, Eve, Cain, Seth, Babel, Phaleg, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and others, which Scripture itself delivers in Genesis, that Hebrew was the first and common language of all men, both before the flood and after until the building of the tower of Babel; for the origin and meaning of these names cannot be derived from any language other than Hebrew. And this is the opinion of St. Augustine, book XVI of the City of God, chapter XI, of Origen, Chrysostom, Diodore, Jerome and others, except for one Theodoret, who falsely thinks that the first language was his own Syriac (for Theodoret was Syrian, being born in Antioch in Syria, and later Bishop of Cyrus in Syria); but that Hebrew began afterwards, and was first delivered to Moses by God: for it is established among the learned that Syriac is a dialect of the Hebrew language and was born from its corruption: just as Gallic, Italian, and Spanish descended from corrupted Latin. Goropius Becanus wishes the first language of the world to have been Cimbric, or Flemish, and from it he derives all the names of Holy Scripture, such as Adam, Eve, Cain, Methuselah, etc. Adam, he says, is called as if had dam, that is, hatred of a rampart. Adam therefore is the same as a rampart of envy cast against the waves. Eve is called as if eu vat, that is, a vessel of the world, because in Eve the beginning of all ages was conceived. Abel is called as if hat belg, that is, hatred of war, namely that inflicted upon him by his brother Cain. Cain is called as if kaet ende, that is, evil end. Methuselah is called maet u salich, that is, save yourself, namely from the impending flood. Enoch is called as if eet noch, that is, the oath (of God with men) still, namely endures, etc. But these do not correspond to the etymologies which Scripture gives; for those bring in an entirely different sense and a different origin. Wherefore in these etymologies so laboriously drawn from the Flemish language, Goropius shows nothing other than the acuteness of his own wit, which would that he had applied to more solid and useful matters. Whence a learned man judged of this work that it was merely a game and sport of wit.
From Armenia, which is to the east of Babylon, where the ark rested when the flood ceased: there therefore Noah with his people seems to have remained immediately after the flood. Thus Epiphanius, at the beginning of his book On Heresies, Pererius and others. Noah was followed by his grandsons and descendants: and this is noted by Josephus and Plato, book III of the Laws, dwelling first in the mountains from fear of the flood, then gradually, as the fear departed, descending into valleys and plains. They found a Plain in the Land of Shinar. Note: All (although Cajetan denies this) who were then men, seem to have gone forth from Armenia into Shinar, that is, into Babylon, in hope of greater and better soil, and on account of its more convenient situation, inasmuch as from it they could more easily disperse in all directions, so that they might be and remain contiguous and neighboring to one another. Whence the man of Avila rightly opines that Noah, who was still living at that time, was present at the building of the tower of Babel, and perhaps helped it; for some built it for a good end, others, and far more, for an evil end: for all men were then in Babel; whence also the languages of all were confused and divided there: thus also Pererius, Delrio and others think. Note: This place was not called Shinar at that time, but afterwards by the inhabitants, as also Babel, from the event. For Shinar in Hebrew is the same as the knocking out of teeth; because the toothed, that is, the proud, men building Babel, were deprived there of their teeth, that is, their language, says Rupert and St. Gregory writing on Psalm IV of penance, at the penultimate verse: "Do good, O Lord, in thy good will to Sion;" who also adds a tropological sense: "In Shinar, he says, dwell the toothed, who lacerate their neighbors with the bites of detraction: God knocks out their teeth, when he confuses both their deeds and their words together. For of him it is written: Thou hast broken the teeth of sinners; and again: The Lord shall break the teeth of them in their mouth."
Because, as Theodoret relates, there was a great scarcity of stones in Babylon. Some add that they did this from fear of a flood of fire, by which they understood that the world would sometime be consumed again by fire: for bricks, when they are baked, resist fire most powerfully; but stones are dissolved into lime by fire. If they thought this, they thought unwisely; for just as nothing can resist the flood of water, so nothing can resist the flood of fire at the end of the world, which will be far more powerful.
A tower which is the highest: this is hyperbole. Concerning the height of this tower, St. Jerome has remarkable things in chapter XIV of Isaiah, namely that it had a height of four thousand paces, which make up a great mile, or a German mile. Josephus adds that the Nimrodians thought to build this tower to such a height that if the flood should return, it could not reach it. See the foolishness of men. Remnants of this tower remained until the times of St. Jerome and Theodoret, as they themselves testify. Note that this tower was in the city of Babel itself, as the Hebrew verse 9 indicates: although others think it was not in Babel, but in the nearby city of Chalanne. Secondly, the author of this structure was not Noah, who was still living, but Nimrod. Thus Josephus, Augustine and others. Let Us Celebrate Our Name. Abulensis excuses these builders of Babel from sin, not only mortal but even venial, first, because they built this tower only so that it would be a watchtower, both active and passive, that is, so that it could be seen from afar by all those dwelling round about, so that at fixed times each one in Babel, about to do things both private and public and common, could return and gather together: for which reason towers are still built; secondly, even if they wished to celebrate their name by this tower, this was not evil; for it is permitted to seek fame and glory, provided the thing from which glory is sought is not evil, but good, nor detracts from divine honor. Add that among these builders was Noah, a holy man, prince and father of all, who would not have permitted this tower to be built for an evil end: thus Abulensis. But more truly St. Augustine, Chrysostom, Josephus and others everywhere judge that these builders sinned through vanity and pride; for what else does such a high and insane tower reaching to heaven signify, and this structure, lest they be prevented by death or dispersion from it? Secondly, when they say: "Let us celebrate our name," what else do they indicate than that the end and purpose of their wicked effort and labor is an ambitious desire to eternalize their name? Thirdly, that this work was displeasing and hateful to God is evident from the fact that He Himself impeded it and punished the builders with discord and diversity of tongues, so that they could no longer understand one another. St. Augustine adds fourthly, in book XVI of The City of God, chapter IV, that Nimrod built Babel so that it would be the fortress of his tyranny and impiety. Whence from this structure was born the fable of giants waging war against heaven, concerning which I spoke at chapter VI, verse 4, as Alcimus Avitus teaches, and the Sibyl indicates in book III. Noah took part in this structure, but did not preside over it, because he could not impede it: for Nimrod with his followers prevailed; if Noah helped in it, for a good end and to avoid a greater evil, he helped in it. Yet note here that God permitted this sin and this tower structure for a time and to a certain height, because by this occasion He intended to bring about a great good, namely to disperse men through all provinces, so that the whole world would be filled and cultivated by men, which was a great ornament of the whole world, as well as an advantage. Morally St. Chrysostom here in homily 30 says that those who build splendid houses, baths, porticoes for this end, that they might eternalize their name in them, are similar to these builders of Babel. And he adds: "But if you truly love eternal memory, I will show you the way, namely, if you distribute this money into the hands of the poor, leaving behind stones and splendid buildings, villas and baths. This is immortal memory, this memory produces for you countless treasures, this memory relieves you of the burden of sins, this memory brings you much confidence before God." He proves this from Psalm CXI: "He hath dispersed, he hath given to the poor; his justice (that is, his almsgiving) remaineth for ever and ever. Hast thou seen the memory which extendeth itself into all ages?" Before We Are Divided. Thus also the Septuagint. Whence what in Hebrew is pen naphuts, "lest we be scattered," understand, not yet having left any monument of the memory and glory of our name. For they knew that they would soon be scattered, and so they anticipate and hasten this monument of theirs and this structure, lest they be prevented by death or dispersion from it.
Not by changing place (for He is everywhere), but by inspecting closely, impeding and avenging, says Cajetan. For Scripture speaks of God anthropopathically, that is to say, God examined exactly, seriously, slowly and carefully this tower and this insane and intolerable pride of the men building it, so that He might impede and punish it, just as if He had descended from heaven to the land of Shinar, as a man or an avenging angel would do. Thus St. Augustine. Whence Delrio rightly notes from Philo and St. Chrysostom that Holy Scripture, when it wishes to indicate that God proceeds with slow steps to judgment and vengeance, says that He descends, that is, approaches us, so that He might know the whole matter more clearly, and afterwards punish the guilty with mature deliberation. Thus He descended into Sodom, Genesis XVIII, 21, and into Judaea, Micah I, 3. Which the Sons of Adam Were Building — who, born from adama, that is, earth, since they are earth-born, now proudly attempt to ascend to heaven with their structure.
Speech and tongue, as I said at verse 1.
These are the words of God, as it were taking counsel, and detesting the insane machination and pride of men. Some think that God speaks here to the angels; for the angels assisted in this confusion of languages. Thus St. Augustine, book XVI of the City of God, chapter IX, Philo, Cajetan and Pererius. But it is more true that God the Father speaks here, not indeed to some other God, as Julian the Apostate objected, but to his Son and the Holy Spirit. As he also did in chapter I, verse 26, and chapter III, verse 18. For just as there the creation was the work not of angels, but of God alone: so likewise here this confusion of languages was; for not an angel, the ruler of each people, gave to it its own language (as Origen wishes in chapter XI of Numbers), but God. For just as God alone can enter the mind through his omnipotence, so also God alone can impart to the mind the habit of knowledge and of languages. Thus St. Chrysostom, Procopius, Rabanus, Rupertus and others everywhere. Whence the knowledge of Holy Scripture, or even of the Hebrew or Greek language, which the devil suggests to certain Anabaptists, formerly rude and ignorant, having drunk the cup and symbol of Anabaptism, is not habitual or permanent, but only actual, as it were a suggestion and inspiration: for a demon attends them and suggests all these things, just as we, declaiming publicly, secretly suggest verses or those things which are to be declaimed; indeed sometimes not they themselves, but the demon speaks through them, as in the possessed or those obsessed by a demon, so that they seem not so much to speak as really to be possessed. That this is so is evident from the fact that as soon as they return from heresy to sound faith and mind, abandoned by the demon, they immediately lose all such knowledge. Confound. To confound does not signify here to put to shame, but to mix together: as wine is confounded when water is mixed with it; and the voice of the nightingale is confounded when the shrill voices of magpies and jackdaws are mixed with it; for this is what the Hebrew balal signifies, from which by crasis becomes bal; hence with the doubled letter beth for onomatopoeia it becomes babel. Whence our Germans seem to have taken their babbelen; and the French, babiller. Thus God here mixed together the languages, so that in place of the one Hebrew language which all knew, he gave to each his own proper and different language: so that when men conversed, one spoke Greek, another Latin, a third German, a fourth Slavonic, etc.: which was indeed a great mixture and confusion of languages and voices, of which I shall speak again in verse 9. Note first: In this confusion, God created only the mother languages alone, and gave them to men: for from these the others were afterwards born. Thus Hebrew is the mother and source of Syriac, Chaldaic, Arabic; and Latin of Italian, Wallachian, French, Spanish; Greek of Doric, Ionic, Aeolic, Attic; Slavonic of Polish, Bohemian, Muscovite; Germanic of Helvetic, Saxon, English, Scottish; Tartaric of Turkish, Sarcamanic; Abyssinian of Ethiopic, Sabaean, etc., says Genebrardus. Note secondly, how vain are the thoughts of men before God; these builders thought that no one could hinder them: God laughs at this foolish presumption of theirs, and in fact says: With a light breath I will scatter this work, I will use no machines; I will only confound the languages of the builders, so that when one asks for bricks, another brings mortar; when this one asks for a trowel, another hands him a basket; and thus I will fill all with confusion, so that mocking one another and mutually angry they will separate, and just as their language, so also their mind confused and ashamed they will go away and scatter each into his own region. Which Marius Victor beautifully describes in book XXX on Genesis. That They May Not Hear — that they may not understand one another, not indeed individual men (for thus there would have been no human society), but individual families or kindreds. For there were as many languages as families or kindreds, namely 55, as I said in chapter X, verse 32; for God wished to separate these thus and scatter them throughout the world. Note, how the pride of the builders merited the division of languages, whose union in Pentecost the humility of the Apostles merited, says St. Gregory, homily 30 on the Gospel. Let Us Go Down. You will say: Already in verse 5 God had descended; therefore why does he descend again here in vain. St. Augustine and Pererius answer that this verse is a recapitulation, and this verse should be placed before verse 6. But the word therefore does not favor this exposition, which is a word not of recapitulation, but of inference and continuation. I answer therefore that in verse 5 God had descended, but only in the beginning and to a certain extent, so that from afar from heaven he might look upon this tower. Whence Moses says: "And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower;" but here God descends further into the land of Shinar, so that namely by a new operation of his, he might confound the languages there; for he says: "Come, let us go down," not that we may see (for we have already seen the tower), but, "that we may confound their language."
For when they saw that they could not understand one another mutually, they withdrew, and were scattered each into their own regions, as I have already explained. This punishment of sin was therefore useful to the human race, "so that by dwelling in the circle of the earth it would give inhabitants to the world, the opportune dispersal of an evil congregation," says Prosper, book II On the Calling of the Gentiles, chapter IV; "and so that we might remember that pride was rightly condemned," says Cassianus, Collation IV, chapter XII, "by which it came to pass that man commanding man was not understood, who was unwilling to understand so as to obey God commanding," says St. Augustine, book XVI On the City of God, chapter IV.
Namely, the tongue of all men. Tropologically St. Augustine in Sentences, sentence 221: "Two," he says, "in the whole world make two cities: the love of God makes Jerusalem, the love of the world makes Babylon; let each one therefore ask himself, and he will find of which he is a citizen." Its—namely, not of the tower, but of the city, as is evident from the Hebrew and the Septuagint. From the tower, therefore, in the building of which the builders were confused by the division of languages, the entire city was called Babel, and from the city the whole region was called Babylonia, that is, confusion. Babel therefore received its name not from Belus, who was the first king and god in Babel, but from the root balal, that is, he confused. Whence the Septuagint translates, and its name was called σύγχυσις, that is, confusion. This city (as I said above) after 400 years Semiramis restored with incredible magnitude and magnificence; the tower, however, she did not raise higher, but enclosed it in the temple of Belus, wonderfully adorned. Because There the Language Was Confused—that is, because there the builders of Babel were confused with shame, when they no longer understood one another, says Pererius. But the Hebrew Balal, that is, to confound, does not mean to put to shame, but to mix together. Secondly, Philo, in the book On the Confusion of Languages, explains it thus, as if to say: The society of vices and impious men was confused by God in Babel, when namely it was torn apart by schism, lest, being packed together, it should overturn virtue and good morals; for languages cannot be said to be confused, but altogether divided. For thus Philo says: "Moses teaches mystically that, just as the harmony of virtues is fostered by God, so to confound languages, that is, to divide the packed wedge of vices and impious men, to make all vices mute and deaf, so that neither by speaking nor by mutual agreement do they bring harm." But this sense is mystical, by which Philo seems to overturn the literal sense. Thirdly, Philastrius, in the book On Heresies, chapter CVI, thinks that in Babel not languages, but the understanding of languages was confused and divided; for he thinks that before the building of Babel the languages of men were already divided, as I said in chapter X, 31. But I answer: "God confused," Hebrew Balal, that is, mixed, the language of men, that is, the one language of all men he dispersed into various parts, and mixed them among themselves and among men, so that when many spoke at the same time, not one voice and language, but diverse and confused voices and languages of many would be heard, in the manner which I said in verse 7. To this add: The elements of the primeval language, namely letters, remained the same among all peoples and languages, but were combined and transposed in different ways: which is to confuse and mix together. Thus also many syllables, and indeed the same words remained, but signify one thing in this language and another in that language, as sus signifies a pig to the Latins, a horse to the Hebrews, silence to the Flemish. Whence Moses, explaining this, adds in verse 7: "That he might not hear," that is, understand, "the voice of his neighbor." Finally, many Hebrew words and phrases mixed with other languages have been retained, for example sac, that is saccus, and keren, that is cornu, accepted from the Hebrews, which most peoples and languages still retain and use. Postel and Avenarius collected many such things, who in their Hebrew lexicon derive almost all Greek words from the Hebrews, through a certain transposition, change, and mixing of letters. Thus from the Celtic or Belgian language, many things are deduced to be from the Hebrews; and Adrian Scrieckius in his Origins, and in Europa Rediviva, endeavors to show skillfully and ingeniously that they agree in the foundation, or in the radical letters, and contends to prove from Belgian etymologies of almost all the proper names of peoples which are in Europe that the Celtic or Belgian language is merely a dialect of the Hebrew language, and that it was first given to the descendants of Japheth at Babel, which the ancient Greeks, Italians, Spaniards (who are called, he says, Celtiberians from this), Gauls, Britons and all Europeans consequently used. But this is difficult to believe, more difficult to demonstrate, especially since the Greek and Latin languages are exceedingly excellent, polished and artificial, as ancient as any, as is evident from the writings of the Greeks and Latins, and therefore seem themselves to have been given by God at the confusion of languages, equally as the Celtic, to some descendants of Japheth. But to which ones, if not to those who inhabited Greece and Latium? They therefore spoke Greek and Latin, not Celtic. I would believe that the Belgian language is most ancient, and one of the first given by God at Babel. Moreover, it has not a few words derived from the Hebrew, or similar and related to them. But who would persuade himself that it differs from the Hebrew only as a dialect, who has examined the disagreement and diversity of each? For the Belgian differs from the Hebrew as much or more as the Latin differs from the Greek or Hebrew. St. Augustine notes, in book XVIII of the City of God, chapter XXXIX, Origen, Jerome, Tostatus, Cajetan, Oleaster, Genebrardus and others in various places, that the primeval Hebrew language remained with true faith, religion and piety only in Heber and his descendants. In the others therefore God destroyed the habit of the Hebrew language (so that men seemed to themselves not so much to have forgotten it, as to have lost all memory of the Hebrew language as if they had never known or heard anything of it), and inserted a new and most ready habit of a new language, different and proper to each people, namely of another and proper language. Thus Abulensis, Pererius and others. Hence secondly, Epiphanius, at the beginning of the book Against Heresies, and Suidas in the word Serug, think that these builders of Babel were called in Greek μέροπες, as it were divided in voice: for μερίζω means the same as to divide, ὤψ means the same as voice: whence also one of the giants, who attempted to hurl Jupiter from heaven, was called Merops by the poets, from whom the island of Cos is thought to have been called Meropis: although Homer's interpreter wishes men to be called meropes, because they use distinct and articulate voice; or, as others say, because each one has a voice different from any other, just as he has a face, which two things Pliny admires in man. Finally, these things happened in the year 170 after the flood, as I said in chapter X, 25. Epiphanius and the Sibyl add, and Abydenus in Josephus and Eusebius, book IX of the Preparation for the Gospel, last chapter, that God cast down this tower with storms and winds, and buried the builders themselves with it.
Moses traced out the genealogy of Sem alone, and that in the direct line of Abraham only, because the other descendants of Noah, though he resisted, turned away to idols by God; and because from Abraham were born the Jews (to whom Moses writes this) and Christ. Sem Was a Hundred Years Old. Therefore Sem was born, not in the year 500, but in the year 502 of Noah, as I said in chapter X, verse 21; for because this number is expressed in detail here, namely that Sem was 100 years old two years after the flood, which is not expressed in chapter V, verse 32: hence Moses here rather than in chapter V seems to record precisely the years of Sem.
Thus the Hebrew and Chaldean texts have it both here and in 1 Paralipomenon 1, 18 and 24. But the Septuagint both here and there insert Cainan; for they have: "Arphaxad begot Cainan, and Cainan begot Sale." The Septuagint is followed by St. Luke, cap. III of the Gospel, vers. 36, whence Lipomanus, Melchior Cano, Delrio and others think this Cainan ought to be entirely inserted, and to him as well as to others thirty years ought to be given before he begot Sale, and consequently these thirty years ought to be inserted into the chronology. You will ask, which ought to be followed here, Moses omitting Cainan, or the Septuagint version inserting Cainan. I answer, Moses ought rather to be followed as the first autograph. For Moses here wove together both the chronology and the history of the world: therefore he did not omit thirty years, which according to the Septuagint are to be given to Cainan; for this would be a great defect and error in chronology, indeed in history. And so it is scarcely less dangerous to say that Moses here is mutilated, than to say that Luke is superfluous; or to say that the text of Holy Scripture here is truncated, than to say that in Luke it is redundant in Cainan: for in the same manner both history and chronology are corrupted and made false. Secondly, because the Hebrew, Chaldean and Latin Bibles constantly, both here and in 1 Paralipomenon 1, omit Cainan; thirdly, because the Hebrews, Philo, Josephus and other ancients omit Cainan; fourthly, because the rule of St. Augustine, lib. XV De Civitate III is: "If a translation dissents from the original, the language from which the translation was made by interpretation ought rather to be believed;" therefore the Hebrew Moses ought rather to be believed than the Septuagint version. Fifthly, because it is plain that an error has crept into the Septuagint version here, first, because a manifest error in numbers has crept into them here, and thus in this very Cainan: for they have Cainan to have been 130 years old when he begot Sale, yet no one even of those who receive Cainan would assign him more than 30 years; secondly, because the edition of the Septuagint corrected by the Romans, and published by the authority of Pope Sixtus V, expunges Cainan, 1 Paral. 1. For the reviewer, running through the series of generations from Arphaxad to Abraham, thus completed it: "Arphaxad, Sale, Heber, Phaleg, Ragau, Serug, Nachor, Thare, Abraham;" where they plainly agree with the edition of the common Latin version vers. 24. If in the book of Paralipomenon, in the series of genealogies, Cainan is to be expunged in the Septuagint according to the Roman correction, therefore he is to be expunged in the same in Genesis xi. For the same series of generations is written down in both places. This indeed is a valid conjecture, and raises great suspicion that Cainan was thrust in in Genesis in the Septuagint. Suspicion is increased by the fact that in the Septuagint in Genesis, the very same numbers of generation and age are given to Cainan which are given to Sale, whereas in others they always vary. Whence those numbers given to Sale alone by the Septuagint appear to be, and by someone introducing Cainan, to be repeated in him. Thirdly, because Epiphanius, hær. 53, reciting the series of generations from Abraham to Sem, according to the Septuagint version, omits Cainan; therefore Cainan was not then in the Septuagint, but crept in later. The same is plain from St. Jerome, Quæst. in Gen., where he absolutely omits Cainan; for thus he read: "Arphaxad begot Sale, Sale begot Heber." But if the Septuagint had then had Cainan, surely St. Jerome would not have concealed it; for there and elsewhere he carefully notes the Septuagint wherever it dissents from the Hebrew. Therefore in the time of St. Jerome and Epiphanius, Cainan had not yet crept into at least the more correct codices of the Septuagint. You will ask, who then inserted Cainan into the Septuagint and into Luke? I answer: It is probable that some Greek reader of the Septuagint, reading Cainan in St. Luke (whom Luke appears to have taken from the archives of the Hebrew people), when he did not find him in Genesis, wrote Cainan into Genesis; thence other scribes did the same; thus Pererius and others. These things are probable and common. St. Augustine, lib. XV De Civit., and Jerome, Tostatus, Cajetan, Oleaster, Genebrardus, and others teach that it is doubtful whether Cainan in Luke also is genuine, and not rather written in by someone, when he had found him in Genesis. Briefly, I judge that the Chronology here ought to be established in conformity with the Hebrew text. For although it is most probable that some errors have crept here and there into the Septuagint version, yet the constant and ancient practice of the Church is such that the authority of the Septuagint interpreters is not held of small account in historical and chronological matters. Especially since a greater reason compels this here, and almost necessitates it. For first, Moses expressly and precisely asserts here that Arphaxad, in the thirty-fifth year of his age, begat Sale. But this is absolutely false, if we interpose Cainan from the Septuagint: for according to them Cainan was born of Arphaxad in that very thirty-fifth year of his. But Sale was born thirty years later of Cainan, not of Arphaxad. For it seems harsh and violent, and a falsehood in chronology, what some respond, that Sale was born in the thirty-fifth year of Arphaxad, not in himself, but in his father Cainan. Second, Moses exactly and on purpose, and he alone, writes here the history, genealogy and chronology of the world: therefore it is incredible that he himself omitted thirty years of the life of Cainan. For these thirty years disturb and vitiate the entire chronology. Who would dare to say that Moses truncated, and consequently vitiated the chronology by thirty years? Third, no probable reason can be given why Moses omitted Cainan; for that which is brought forward by some, namely that he wished to reduce the generations which were before and after the flood to two decades, so that just as there are ten generations from Adam to Noah, so he would assign ten from Noah to Abraham, that, I say, as Pererius rightly says, cannot be thus proved, and is light and futile, nor is it of such magnitude that on account of it Moses ought to have disturbed and confused the chronology. Wherefore if we wish to preserve the faith, integrity and chronology of Moses, equally as of the book of Paralipomenon, and of the Vulgate edition in both places, we are compelled, even unwillingly, to assert that Cainan crept into the Septuagint. For it is better, and of less note and danger, to impute this error to scribes and copyists, than to the Septuagint themselves as men of the greatest wisdom; just as St. Augustine imputes to those same scribes the error which is found here in the numbers in the Septuagint, in book XV of the City of God, chapter XIII, where he also asserts this to be an ancient defect, as having been committed by the first and earliest copyists, which therefore crept into all subsequent copies of the Septuagint, and from them immediately into all of St. Luke. Pererius above all others inclines to this opinion. So also Bede (though timidly), Ado likewise, Isidore, the Abulensian, Lucidus, Eugubinus, Genebrardus, Jansenius and Cajetan omit Cainan. Indeed, very many interpreters of Luke III, 36, actually agree. For expounding that passage about Sale: "Who was Cainan," they expound thus: "Who was," namely not a natural son, as the others in Luke, but either a brother, or a legal son, or even that same "Cainan;" which expositions, because they are forced, validate our opinion, inasmuch as no other exposition or reconciliation solid, which would satisfy a prudent man, can be given; and they actually remove Cainan from the series of genealogy and chronology, which is the one thing we here do and demand. For it suffices us that the history of Moses, as a sacred and divine historian and chronologist, and the series of the years of the world remain whole and untouched, since we have no other besides that. You will say, therefore Cainan should be erased from the text of the Septuagint and St. Luke, as heretics erase him, saying he was fabricated by the Septuagint. I answer: I deny the consequence, both because Greek and Latin manuscripts everywhere have Cainan: whence his erasure would offend many. For which reason the Romans, who by the command of Sixtus V and Clement VIII corrected the Vulgate edition, say thus in the preface: "In this however widely-read reading, just as some things were deliberately changed, so also other things which seemed to need changing were deliberately left unchanged, because this ought to be done to avoid offense to peoples, St. Jerome admonished more than once," etc. For which reason it is better and sufficient for learned men to note this in their Commentaries. Then because perhaps some other secret and divine mystery lies hidden here, which God wished men to be ignorant of, as Bede hinted. Note: As I said in chapter V in the genealogy from Adam to Noah, the numbers in the Septuagint are corrupted, so also here they are corrupted: for here the Septuagint adds one hundred years to both Arphaxad and others, which the Hebrew does not have, nor ours; whence according to the Septuagint thus corrupted, it follows that from the flood to Abram there elapsed 1172 years, whereas according to the Hebrew truth only 292 years elapsed.
Thus read the Latin Bible, the Roman and Royal editions, and the Greek Septuagint from the edition of Carafa. But the Hebrew, Chaldean and Septuagint both from the Complutensian edition and the Royal edition, and also many ancient Latin Bibles, read 403, and this agrees more with the age of that time: for Sale and Heber, who were descendants of Arphaxad, lived 400 years and more. Note: Before the flood men lived 900 years, soon after the flood only 400, and soon 300; whence it is evident that the life of the ancients was so long, namely up to 900 years, not from the force of nature and natural causes, but rather from the gift of God; for neither in the first or second generation could the life of men naturally decrease to 500 or 600 years.
Epiphanius and Suidas make him the inventor of idols, namely of forming pictures and statues, in which princes and other illustrious men were represented, honored and adored, as if idolatry began then. But I have said above that Nemrod, or Belus, was the author of idolatry. Sarug therefore was not its author, but its propagator through his plastic art and painting. Suidas errs again here, when he places Sarug among the descendants of Japhet.
Note: Thare begot his first son Aran, his second Nachor, his third Abram; therefore Abram was the youngest. This is evident: for Abram had as wife Sara, who was the daughter of Aran, and she was only ten years older than Abram. But when Aran begot Sara, he was at least twenty years old: therefore Aran was at least ten years older than Abram. But Abram is placed before his brothers here, although younger, because Moses intends thereafter to pursue the lineage, faith and deeds of him alone. The sense therefore is: Thare lived 70 years, and by that time had already begotten Aran and Nachor; but Abram himself he begot precisely in the 70th year. Thus Pererius and others. Therefore some wrongly think that Abram was born not in the 70th year of Thare, but in the 130th; I shall resolve their argument in chapter XII, verse 4. For it is said here in express words that Thare begot Abram when he was 70 years old: and thus through this 70th year Moses continues his chronology, which otherwise would be uncertain and doubtful, indeed false, if Abram had been born not in the 70th but in the 130th year of Thare. Note secondly: Abram was born in the year 292 from the flood; and since Noe lived 350 years after the flood, it follows from this that Noe died in the 58th year of Abram. Abram therefore saw all his ancestors in number nine, down to Noe: namely he saw Thare, Nachor, Sarug, Reu, Phaleg, Heber, Sale, Arphaxad, Sem, Noe.
And He Led Them Out of Ur of the Chaldees. "Ur" was a city of Chaldea which by another name was called Cameene, as testified by Eusebius in Eupolemus, lib. IX Praep. Evang. IV. Moreover the Chaldeans are so called from the Hebrew and Chaldean Chasdim, with the letter "s" changed to "l," just as from Ὀδυσσεύς came Ulysses. Now Chasdim in the plural has in the singular Chassad, which some Hebrews think is a shortened form of Arphaxad: for the last three letters in both names are the same; for the Hebrews do not count vowels. Wherefore they judge that the Chaldeans were descended from and named after Arphaxad, the son of Shem. Others think the Chaldeans were descended from and named after Cased, the son of Nahor, the brother of Abram, concerning whom see cap. XXII, 21. But this latter was later. Note: Ur here signifies fire; whence it appears that this city was called Ur because sacred fire was preserved and worshipped in it. For thus the Persians worshipped sacred fire as a kind of deity in places, which Procopius the historian calls πυρεῖα in his Persian history. In like manner St. Jerome reports that the Chaldeans worshipped fire. Thus therefore Ur appears to have been named from the worship of fire, just as Heliopolis was named from the worship of the sun. Perhaps Ur is the same as Uram, which Pliny in lib. VII, cap. XXIV, places near the Euphrates. Hence also our Interpreter in lib. II Esdras, cap. IX, 7, for Ur, which is in the Hebrew, translated fire; for he translated: "God, who didst choose Abraham, and didst lead him out of the fire (Hebr. out of Ur) of the Chaldees." Where note that Esdras appears altogether to allude to this place in Genesis, as if to say: God, who didst lead Abram out of the city of the Chaldeans, which in Hebrew is called Ur, that is, fire. Whence secondly, fire in Esdras can be taken appellatively, so as to signify tribulation; for fire is the symbol of this in Scripture, as is clear from Ps. XVI, 3; Ps. LXV, 12. For that Abraham suffered many afflictions from the Chaldeans, because he would not worship fire, is taught by Josephus, St. Augustine in lib. XVI De Civit. XIII, and others. Secondly, fire in Esdras can be taken properly; for it is a tradition of the Hebrews that Abraham for this very reason was properly cast into fire, as Esdras has it, by the Chaldeans, but was freed from it by a miracle of God: which tradition, although St. Jerome at first ridicules it, he afterwards approves, and, as it appears, the Church approves it, which prays for the dying, that God may free them from the straits of death and from the fire of hell, just as He freed Abraham from Ur, that is, from the fire of the Chaldeans. The same is indicated by Holy Scripture, when it celebrates this leading out and liberation of Abram from Ur of the Chaldees as a great and wonderful deed. Nor is it surprising that Josephus, Philo and Paul, Hebr. XI, make no mention of it, as Pererius objects, because they relate almost only those things which are contained in Holy Scripture, as Josephus often professes of himself. Moses also passed over it in silence, because he touches upon all things briefly, both the deeds of Adam and of others down to the calling of Abram in the space of 1656 years before the flood. For what do you have in Genesis concerning the deeds of Adam, Seth, Enos, Methuselah, and others before the flood? Yet note that in this tradition certain fabulous circumstances are mixed in by the Hebrews, such as that Aran, the brother of Abraham, was cast into the same fire and consumed by it, because he was not of such faith as Abraham; for Moses sufficiently indicates that Aran died a natural death, vers. 28. Again, that Nemrod, at the urging of Thare, the father of Abraham, being an idolater, cast Abraham into the fire. For Nemrod, or Belus, died before Abram: for Abram was born in the 43rd year of Ninus, who succeeded his father Belus upon his death, as I said cap. X. Thirdly, it can be translated from Ur, that is, from the doctrine (of error and idolatry) of the Chaldeans; for thus our Interpreter translated Urim as doctrine, Exod. XXVIII, 31, and elsewhere.
That Jescha is Sara, the Abulensis and very many others think. For just as the first daughter of Aran, namely Melcha, was married to Nahor her uncle, so also the second, namely Jescha or Sara, was married to Abram her uncle, as Moses hints in this verse, and more clearly in cap. XX, vers. 12, where Abram calls Sara his sister, that is, the granddaughter of his brother Aran. For that Sara was not the granddaughter of Abraham through his brother Nahor, Moses sufficiently indicates here, when he mentions that Abram and Nahor took wives together. From this chapter the chronology of the world is gathered, namely that from the end of the flood to Abram there elapsed 292 years: this is evident, for two years after the flood Shem begat Arphaxad, Arphaxad when he was 35 years old begat Shelah, Shelah 30 begat Eber, Eber 34 begat Peleg, Peleg 30 begat Reu, Reu 32 begat Serug, Serug 30 begat Nahor, Nahor 29 begat Thare, Thare 70 begat Abram. The sum is 292 years. Therefore Abram was born in the year 292 from the flood, which was the year of the world 1949.
Namely, after Abram was called forth by God from Ur of the Chaldees, in the following chapter, verse 1. This is therefore a prolepsis or anticipation: for Moses wished here to weave together at once the life and death of Thare, before he would begin the deeds of Abram, even those which he performed while his father Thare was still living. Note: Some think with St. Chrysostom that Thare in Chaldea at first worshipped idols, but was converted by his son Abram and abandoned them and worshipped the true God. They prove this from Judith, chapter V, 8; but that passage rather asserts the contrary, namely that he was unwilling to worship the idols of his country. The same again they prove from Joshua XXIV, 2. From which passage also Philo in his book On Abraham, the Hebrews, Genebrardus and Andreas Masius writing on Joshua XXIV, conclude that Abram at first, before he was called by God, worshipped idols. But it is more true in the first place that Abram never worshipped idols. First, because in Joshua XXIV, verse 2, not Abram, but only Thare and Nachor are said to have served strange gods. Second, because Abram is set before us in Scripture as the father of believers and an exemplar of faith; therefore he was never unfaithful. Third, because thus think Josephus, Suidas, Pererius, Delrio and many others. Second, it is more true that Thare in Chaldea did not worship idols, but with Abram worshipped the true God, and therefore when he was harassed by the Chaldeans, being warned and called forth by Abram, he departed thence and migrated to Canaan: but when Thare was already worn out by fatigue and old age, weary he stopped in his journey, namely in the city of Haran in Mesopotamia, which is commonly called Carrhae, where Marcus Crassus the Roman general was defeated by the Parthians. Third, it is more true that Thare in Mesopotamia, namely in Haran, fell into idolatry, either from the custom of that nation, or from the arrival of his son Nachor an idolater from Chaldea, or from the departure and absence of Abram himself, when he went forth from Haran into Canaan. This is evident from Joshua chapter XXIV, 2, where it is thus said: "Your fathers dwelt beyond the river from the beginning, Thare the father of Abraham and Nachor, and they served strange gods." Beyond the river, namely the Euphrates in Mesopotamia, not however in Chaldea. Thus from St. Augustine and Tostatus according to Pererius.
Machine translation from the Latin, not reviewed.
11:1
v. 1 « Erat autem terra », 1i. e. incolae (CArys.), Hebr. omnis terra, « [abit untus et sermonum eorumdem ». Singula supra exposuimus p. 301 sqq. — v. 2« Cumque proficitscerentur de oriente, invenerunt campum 2n terra Sennaar et habitaverunt in eo ». Defendit DZIm., yozh. l. non significare proficisci, sed migrare : iamen quos comparat textus 12,9; 20,1; 35,21; 46,1 significationem proficisc omnino admittunt. Hac autem admissa ap non potest cum D2/Im., Del. verli zn oriente, ut dicantur Noachidae in regionibus ad orientem Palaestinae sitis, ubi supponatur esse s. scriptor, migrationes instituisse ; sed denotat profectionis terminum et vertendum est cum versionibus (excepto Chald.) de oriente. At quomodo scribuntur de oriente immigrasse, qui de Ararat descendere in Babyloniam. Respondeas primum, minime asseri de Ararat immediate, recto itinere et perabrupta montium in Mesopotamiam descendisse. Facilior de Ararat in Araxis vallem et in Mediam patebat accessus, inde per montium Gordyaenorum fauces et ab oriente in Babyloniam descensus. Bochart. (Phaleg I. 6) coniicit, totum tum ad orientem Tigris fluminis regionum tractum nomen habuisse Dp seu oriens, hincque etiam Ararat ad orientem pertinuisse, licet a septentrione esset Mesopotamiae. Simili ratione aliquis e Moscovia in Palaestinam proficiscens dici potest proficisci in orientem. Sed praeterea cf., quae ad 8,& dicebamus de nominis Ararat ambitu. De Sennaar vide 10,10; vocatur nyp2 vallis, uti vallis Iordanis Deut. 35,3 etc. , Coelesyria Am. 1,5. Notat Kaulen, verba esse hominum, qui ex montanis primum in planitiem figendis sedibus egregie utilem descenderint. Certe, quod habitaverint 10i, suggerit eam planitiem visam esse commodiorem iis, quos ante ad orientem tractus peragrassent; non erat ita nemoribus obsita, agrorum colendorum praebebat facultatem ; ne ulterius progrederentur desertum prohibebat. Simul rariores arbores instigabant, ut aliam struendarum aedium materiam circumspicerent.
11:3
v. 8 « Dixitque alter ad proximum suum : Venite , faciamus lateres et coquamus eos igni. Habueruntque lateres pro saxis et butumen pro caemento ». Nota assonantiam in singulis membris studiose quaesitam : maa35 n3353 — ne0v5 newwz — qais muabn — won onm. Haec non sunt mera eventuum narratio a scriptore 11,1-9 primum enuntiata, sed sunt tetrastichon sua origine ipsa, quo haec agebantur, tempora attingens, quodque fortasse postmodum ab hominibus lateres coquentibus decantabatur. Similes perantiquos versus vide apud Homme! p. 31^ sq. (sed cf. Fr. Kaulen : Assyrien u. Babylonien, Freiburgi. B. 1889, p. 175), quoad Aegyptios apud Erman p. 515 sq.; de alliteratione cf. ib. p. 598 sq. Tetrastichon exprimit utique gaudium de re aliqua nova reperta (Kaulen, Babel p. 1554) : quaeritur, quaesit ea res. Àn erat ipsa tum laterum confectio novum quid et inauditum? Cui fere contradicit Berosus narrans homines vel ante diluvium usos esse lateribus pro inscriptionibus; neque id tamen multum ponderis habet, cum potuerit iraditio babylonica, quam refert Berosus, aevo antediluviano genus inscriptionum attribuere, quod nonnisi post diluvium usuvenit. Aut novum erat laterum coctio? Sufficiet eam asserere novitatem , ut ars quidem compingendorum et coquendorum laterum fuerit nota, fortasse inde a temporibus ante diluvium, sed nunc primum post diluvium peregrinantibus se obtulerit in terra Sennaar praestantis ad id genus operis materiae copia. — Etiam hoc suggerit tetrastichon, homines pridem, aut ante aut post diluvium, calluisse artem aedificandi e lapidibus adhibito caemento, non meras quas dieunt cyclopicas structuras, e saxis sine caemento. 125 h. 1. est verbum denominativum derivatum a nomine n325 later : utraque vox apud Assyros eodem sensu usurpabatur (Schrader), apud quos radix non videtur habuisse sensum album esse, sed firmum esse (Del. Par. p. 144sq.). Vel antiquissima, quae novimus, Babyloniae aedificia, v. g. recentissime reperta Sirburlae (Hommel p. 215), habent lateres coctos bitumine illitos. « Quisquis vel semel Babylonium laterem manu tenuit, oppido novit, quam vere s. textus rem describat » (Schrader). Utique plerumque lateres cocti et bitumine illiti murorum superficiei adhiberi consueverant, intervalla lateribus non coctis et caemento opplebantur. an est bitumen, cf. 14, 10; Ex. 2, 3. Assyrice kupur, quod correspondet hebraeo 422 pis, cf. 6,14. "2n est argilla Is. 45, 9; Iob 38, 14. Vox h. 1. seligitur ob alliterationem cum
11:4
v. & « Et dixerunt : Venite, faciamus nobis civitatem et turrim », — non est singularis collectivus (Aug.), civitatem turres habentem; certe non plures in una civitate tam ingentis molis turres aedificandae erant; praeterea dicendum esset, etiam czvitatem esse pluralem collectivum , quod admitti nequit, cum de una Babylone agatur — « cutus culmen pertingat ad coelum ». « Secundum hyperbolen dictum est » (Aug.); et cf. Deut. 1,28; 9,1. Hinc tamen nata videtur fabula de Titanibus montibus montes imponentibus atque coelum conscendere nisis. « Et celebremus nomen nostrum , antequam dividamur £n universas terras ». Sed pro antequam, LXX x25, omnino corrigendum ne. Expressio Qv *5 nvy semper significat facere sibi nomen, nunquam vero erigere sibi monumentum (Del.), nam 2 Reg. 8,13 textus est corruptus, quod ibidem ostendimus. Conferri autem h. 1. omnino oportet Gen. 6,4, ubi sermo erat de « gigantibus antiquis, veris nominis » seu « viris famosis ». Sc. eorum iam famosa facta aemulabantur gigantes nostri (cf. 10,8 sq.) postdiluviani. Adverte porro in eorum verbis consilium et consilii finem. Est autem finis negativus : ne dividamur etc. Quem ignorat Ca?. dicens aedificandae turris rationem fuisse, quo se ab inimicis defenderent; et los. , quo a futuri cuiuslibet diluvii aquis viverent securi, cum promisisset Deus (Ephr.), nullum iam diluvium esse futurum. Consilium duobus membris enuntiatur, aedificandae turris et celebrandi nominis. Quaeritur iam, quomodo haec duo media esse possint, quibus praepediatur dispersio. Absurde coniicit Budde p. 315 putasse illos homines, quod coelum ubique terrarum conspiciatur, turrim quoque, quae coelum attingeret, ubique terrarum fore adspectabilem atque indicis instar homines ex maxime dissitis regionibus ad commune centrum fore revocaturam. Cum tota antiquitate Babylonii floruerint laude scientiae astronomicae, quam documenta nuper cuneiformia egregie confirmarunt, quomodo supponemus eosdem rei opticae ita fuisse imperitos, ut unam aliquam turrim existimaverint, per totum orbem conspici posse? An forte Avarat mons in terra Sennaar oculis cernebatur? Veram solutionem habet Awg., aedificatam esse urbem, « ubi esset tamquam in metropoli habitaculum regni ». « Cupiebant illi simul esse omnes unamque velut rempublicam et societatem constituere » (Per.). Quos Calm. inducit loquentes : « Donec certa sede carebimus, difficile sociam vivendi rationem servabimus et nullo negotio dispergemur : communem igitur urbem pro communi sede aedificemus ». Igitur civitas futura erat centrum imperii ; fama nominis, opum, aedificiorum inductura erat nationes etiam remotiores, ut auctoritatem agnoscerent penderentque tributum. Lege annales regum Assyriorum proclamantium, terrore 20mnis sul et reverentia deorum suorum adductos esse aliarum gentium regulos, ut arma deponerent, proni adorarent, tributa solverent. Turris quoque praealta, cuius similis in universo orbe haud cerneretur, ad gloriam urbis et imperii plurimum erat collatura. Praeterea adverte, pyramidas Babyloniorum per gradus assurgentes, qualis certe fuit nostra turris, omnes fuisse templa : ergo illa turris futura erat orbis centrum tam religiosum quam politicum, ipsa religio adhibebatur ut medium efficiendae unitatis et gloriae imperii. Iam facile perspicies, cur eius turris aedificationem Deus improbaverit atque perverterit. Perquam probabile est, turrem Babylonicam alterutro loco fuisse, ubi nunc duorum sacrorum aedificiorum Babil et Birs Nimrud cernuntur ruinae. Babil Babylone erat crediturque esse ipsum celeberrimum Beli templum, cui nomen Isaggila i. e. « domus alti verticis ». Birs Nimrud antiquitus vocabatur « templum septem luminum coeli et terrae » eratque Borsippae, in litore Euphratis civitati Babylon obiecto : non tamen inde inferas non posse esse nostram turrim, cum haec non affirmetur Gen. 11 fuisse intra civitatem. Igitur hanc structuram, « quam prior aliquis rex erexerat produxeratque ad altitudinem 42 cubitorum, summitatem tamen non absolverat, quaeque inde a remotis diebus in ruinam abierat », Nabuchodonosor rex se restaurasse gloriatur. Putaverat I. Oppert aliquando, eundem regem diluvii quoque explicitam facere mentionem; id tamen textus ille non habet. Cf. Schrader.
11:5
v. 5 « Descendit autem Dominus, ut videret civitatem et turrim, quam aedificabant filii Adam ». an *33, eadem expressio atque 6,9.5 neque multum refert, vertasne fili: Adam an filii hominum (LXX Chald. Syr.) : « non filii Dei » (Beda). Nunc, ubi maior Noachidarum pars ob superbiam est repudianda, inuritur illis nomen illud, quod Cainitarum reproborum fuerat proprium. Monet Rup., Deum item 18,21 de Sodoma vindictam sumpturum dicere : « Descendam et videbo ». Est locutio anthropomorphica : « Non loco movetur Deus, qui semper ubique totus, sed descendere dicitur, cum aliquid facit in terra, quod praeter usitatum naturae cursum mirabiliter factum praesentiam quodammodo eius ostendat; nec videndo discit ad tempus, qui nunquam potest aliquid ignorare, sed ad tempus videre et cognoscere dicitur, quod videri et cognosci facit » (Aug.).
11:6
v. 6 « Et dizit » Dominus: « Ecce unus est populus et unum labium omnibus » , quae duplex unitas ratio est potissima, cur magna aggredi possint perficienda. « Coeperuntque hoc facere , nec desistent a cogitationibus suis , donec eas opere compleant ». Hebr. Neque cohibebuntur a quoquam , quod cogitaverint perficere , nihil eis erit impossibile, non erunt limites audaciae (Kaulen p. 159). Cf. 3,92, ubi similiter Deus vereri se profitetur, ne ad ulteriora Adam lapsus progrediatur (CArys.). Ex eo, quod homines illi dicantur ab ea aedificatione initium sumpsisse audaciae supponanturque eam aedificationem, ni impediantur, revera esse completuri, merito infert Per., illos non intendisse turrim producere revera usque « ad coelum », quod nulla humana ars valuisset efficere.
11:7
v. 7 « Venite igitur, descendamus et confundamus ibi linguam eorum, ut non audiat unusquisque vocem prorzimi sui». nan, uti v. 3.4 : pluralitati aedificantium opponitur pluralitas descendentium. Pluralem explicat Ephr. de SS. Trinitate; item Rup. : « Non angelorum multitudines ad auxilium cohortatur, sed ad feriendam superbiam se adesse testatur Trinitas et unus Deus ». Aug. aliique verba censent dirigi ad angelos. Neque singularis Domnus v. 8 utrivis explicationi obstat. At quomodo v. 7 dicit descendamus, qui v. 5 iam descendit? Dillm. putat, Deum post visum v. 5 turris aedificium rediisse in coelum ibique consilium v. 6 sq. mente agitasse. Calm. turbatum suggerit sermonis contextum. Menoch. : « descenderat », inquit, « ut videret, nunc descendit, ut nova operatione sua linguas confundat ». Nota in descriptione anthropomorphica non oportere singula tam stricte ex ordine proferri, quam in narratione historica. Effectus confusarum linguarum ne commemoratur quidem , sed solus ultimus et praecipuus eventus dispersionis.
11:8
v. 8 « A/que ?ta divisit eos Dominus ez illo loco in universas terras , et cessaverunt aedificare civitatem ». Addunt Sam. LXX et turrim.
11:9
v. 9 « Et idcirco vocatum est nomen eius Babel, quia ibi confusum est » — Hebr. confudit Dominus — « labium unzversae terrae; et inde dispersit eos Dominus super faciem cunctarum regionum ». Ultimum membrum additur tamquam ulterior et praecipuus effectus, non (Kn.) ad suggerendam alteram vocis Babel significationem. " Antiquissimum et protochaldaicum urbis nomen est Tíntir, quod sonat non « lucum vitae » sed « sedem vitae » (Hommel p. 414). Id non contradicit textui : potuit enim €o loco, antequam immanis illa civitas aedificaretur, vicus aliquis esse aut etiam Certum est huius genealogiae numeros primitus, quocunque tandem sensu ab auctore sacro intelligebantur, fuisse veros et erroris expertes neque mythos solum expressisse, qui apud Hebraeos tunc temporis circeumferrentur. Certum item est, hos numeros ad nos devenisse ex parte utique corruptos, cum diversi iam legantur apud Hebr. Sam. LXX. Unde primum interpretis officium illud est, ut lectiones cr?tice comparet inter se et, qui numeri primitus fuerint scripti, probabili saltem coniectura definiat. Potesí quidem nunc interpres, quae ex chronologia profana petuntur, obiectiones declinare demonstrata duhia biblicorum, quae nunc legantur, numerorum fide. Simul tamen meminerit, hos numeros novis aliquando accedentibus momentis posse evadere minus dubios vel etiam certos; et perpendat iam nunc , quaenam contra textum probabiliter emendatum opponi forte possint. souuv *4qnuos3 souug *4muoa * gmnuos ouue ouug . ouueg uenb3sod ouus 4jmuop urgnb3sod oUuuv 4muo5 | uenbjsod| ouus9 43quo» 489 Sunj310J[ 4189 gnn310W j89 8unj10Jgq *91XIA * 3IXTA *3TXIA O a Y o a8 Oo a v "X X'I 'SnowIqoH *snuejrreures . Difficilior de Generationum Sem numeris disputatio et intricatior ea, quae de Sethitarum numeris cap. 5 habebatur : maior quippe, quae obiter inspicienti cuique patet, numerorum corruptio. Quoad Se» quidem omnes concordant. Quoad TAÀare ea habetur divergentia, ut Sam. ei post genitum Abraham solos 75 vitae annos (1&5 — 70 — 15) concedat, Hebr. LXX 135 (205-70 — 135). Ergo secundum Sam. Abraham (cf. 12, A) eo ipso, quo mortuus est pater, anno atque sane post eius mortem egressus est de Haran, quod melius quadrat contextui. Cum enim 11, 31 narretur Thare consilio petendae Chanaanitidis Chaldaea excessisse, 12,5 sq. autem referatur Abraham "5 annos natus sine patre de Haran in Chanaanitiden esse progressus, obvia sane est conclusio, Tharen reapse tum in Haran fuisse demortuum, nisi mavis gratuito penitus supponere, Tharen pii petendae Chanaanitidis consilii immemorem multos in Haran annos perseverasse, et quidem solum, filio sc. et nepote cum universa substantia in Chanaanitiden progressis. Cum igitur in Semo omnes consentiant, in Thare vero contextus suadeat numerum Sam. praeferre numero Hebr. LXX, cumque praeterea cap. 5 numeros Sam. prae Hebr. LXX genuinos deprehenderimus, suggeret fortasse quis, ob has solas rationes omnes cap. 11, quales a Sam. traduntur, numeros retineri oportere prae iis, quos ib. scribunt Hebr. LXX. Tamen cautius in hac re procedendum : potuit enim fieri, uf Sam. , qui cap. 5 genuinum textum servavit, cap. 11 corruptionibus dederit locum, utque aut Hebr. aut LXX, quam cap. 5 passus sit, cap. 11 evaserit iniuriam. Singula igitur inspiciamus. Igitur solus Sam. , praeter annos ante et post genitum filium elapsos, eorum annorum etiam summam tradit, quam nos columna C descripsimus et pro Hebr. LXX parenthesi supplevimus. Aut haec summa primitus in textu erat, postmodum in quibusdam codicibus excidit; aut a Sam. ad instar cap. 5 fuit suppleta. Item soli Sam. LXX ad instar cap. 5 addunt ef mortuus est. — Columnam A lustrantem illico istud percellit, numeros in tribus textibus esse eosdem, sed apud Sam. LXX centenariis auctos, apud Heór. iisdem carentes. Aut Hebr. detractis centenariis numeros diminuit, aut iisdem additis Sam. LXX numeros auxere. Minuendi ratio esse potuit, ne patriarchae postdiluviani viderentur provectiori plerique aetate genuisse atque antediluviani, qui vix non omnes centenariis in columna A carebant. Futilis certe ea ratio erat, cum numeri non tempus exprimant, quo singuli primum genuerint, sed illud quo filios Abrahae progenitores futuros genuerint. Non dicuntur antediluviani ad annos fere sexaginta usque omni prole caruisse, postdiluviani fere ad annos usque centum triginta. Ut autem viri, qui ad annos plus ducentos vitam produxerint, anno circiter vitae centesimo írigesimo filios ediderint, ita mirum. non est. Sed est alia ratio, quae demonstrat, numeros ab Hebr. diminutos, non vero a Sam. esse auctos, sc. anni Nachor, quos Sam. scribit 79, Hebr. 99. Iamvero si Sam. augendis numeris supponatur indulsisse , nulla assignari potest ratio, cur non h. 1l. pro 29 scripserit 199. At facile res explicatur, si supponatur Hebr. centenos a singulis numeris subiraxisse : sc. 100 a 79 subtrahi non poterat, quod 79 sit numerus centenario minor. Subtraxit igitur Hebr. 50, nam 79 — 50 — 29; ut vero summam totius vitae (148) intactam servaret, annis vitae post genitum filium rursus 50 addidit : 69 -- 50 — 119. Nam hoc Hebr. semper agebat, ut diminutis columnae A numeris tamen immutata maneret totius vitae summa (columna C); quare deiractos in columna A 100 (vel 50) annos religiose in columna B restituebat. Cf. Sale, ubi pro Sam. 130 -- 303 — 433 Hebr. habet 30 -- 403 — 433; cf. item Phaleg, Reu, Sarug, Nachor. Ob quam legem constanter servatam etiam crediderim, apud Arphaxad Masor. 403 prae Vulg. 303 repraesentare primaevam Hebraei artificiose recusi lectionem. Duas vero haec lex patitur exceptiones et eas quidem, quae clare demonstrent Hebraeum numeros artificiose mutasse, Sam. servasse intactos. Hebero sc., a quo Hebraeorum derivatum credebatur nomen, ad viri dignitatem amplificandam adiecti anni 60 seu sossus - unus, ut is iam aetate post Semum maximus in tota serie deprehendatur (500, 430 et hinc 600,464). Neque ferendum videbatur, ut Thare Abrahae pater reliquis omnibus iunior (145) e vivis cesserit : quare et illi gratiose concessus est sossus unus seu anni 60, quo saltem Nachorem aetate superaret (158,205). Sane non invenietur quisquam , qui asserat Sam. tantis viris, Hebero et Thare, sexagenos annos detrazxisse! Comparabamus Sam. et Hebr. inter se, aliqua supersunt addenda de LXX, ubi et plures lectiones sunt incertae et, dum geniti filii anni cum Sam. concordant, anni post genitum filium aliquoties (Phaleg 209, Reu 207, Sarug 200, Thare 135) idem, quod Hebr., augmentum habent, quo annorum summa in columna C augetur. Thare sossum additum habet, non Heber. Textus generatim cum Sam. concordat, aliquoties tamen ex Hebr. apparet emendatus. Summam totius vitae (C) cum Hebr. non exprimit, sed cum Sam. ad instar cap. 5 addit et mortuus est. 79, quos Syr. Tharae attribuit annos. — In columna B pro Arphaxad cum LXX recepta 400 cf. Lagarde et Chald. 430, Hebr. et Syr. 403, contra Sam. Vulg. 303 et aliam Vulg. lectionem (ap. Verc.) 330 : quae prima facie efficiunt maiorem probabilitatem , fuisse in illo numero quadringentos potius quam trecentos. Quae tamen opinio iis - convellitur, quae supra ostendebamus, numeros Hebr. columnae B (ergo etiam Arphaxad 403) ortum duxisse e numeris Sam. additis 100 : ergo 303 praeferendum prae 403. Potest porro de eodem numero ambigi, legendumne sit cum Sam. Hebr. Vulg. Syr. 03, an cum Chald. Lagarde et lectione Vulg. 30 : sane illud longe probabilius. — Pro Sale Sam. habet 303, quod quoad priorem partem confirmatur LXX 330, quoad alteram partem Hebr. Vulg. Chald. Syr. 403 : quare ne hic quidem a Sam. recedere cogimur. Et nota, LXX tam pro Sale quam pro Arphaxad a numeris non rotundis delabi ad rotundos. — Pro Heber habet Lagarde 370; ergo iam hic, uti in sqq., LXX 100 ab Hebr. additos transsumpsisset; at non sossum, quem idem Hebero concedit. Verum rem attende mirandam : si pro Nachor sequaris lectionem, cuius meminit Téschendorf, sc. 129 loco 125, reperitur sossus huic patriarchae adiectus, nam 129 — 69 -1- 60. Duos igitur sossos tam Hebr. quam LXX computo inserunt, quorum alterum unanimes Thare, alterum diversis, Hebero sc. vel Nachoro, tribuunt. In hoe autem potissimum a reliquis textibus dissonat LXX, quod inter Arphaxad et Sale inserat Caznan. Quem esse eliminandum critica ratio omnino suadet : quod is a reliquis textibus omnibus ignoretur, speciatim a Sam. , quem in hac genealogia maioris quam LXX auctoritatis esse demonstravimus; quod illi Cainan anni à LXX adscribantur iidem cum Sale, 130 et 330, quique videantur repetitione eorum numerorum esse suborti; quod addito Cainan decem habeantur a Sem ad Thare patriarchae, quot sc. ab Adam ad Noe numerabantur. Porro, cum sciamus e Matth. 1,17 ter quaternas denas ab Abraham ad Christum recensente generationes, Iudaeos posteriores generationibus biblicis certis numeris distribuendis indulsisse, neque illud mirabimur, LXX patriarchas bis denos ante Abraham numerasse. Neque tamen eadem est LXX et S. Matthaei ratio : aliud quippe est, nomina aliqua, quae ex V. T. facile quisque supplere poterat, supprimere, aliud nomen unum gratuito affingere. Cainan etiam ignoratur a 7os. et PAilone, et 1 Par. 1,24 a plerisque codicibus LXX; quod autem legatur in ed. compl. Ald. et in codicibus III, 19,414,52,56,60,64,943 parum valet, cum generatim ob codicum LXX in his genealogiis describendis licentiam, tum speciatim quod item Gen. 10,94 et 1 Par. 1,18, et quidem certe falso, LXX legant : « Arphaxad autem genuit Cainan, et Cainan genuitSale, et Sale genuit Heber. Porro Heber nati sunt etc. ». Cf. apud Caím. (ad Gen. 10,24) nomina antiquorum, qui cum LXX prae manibus haberent, tamen Cainanum ignoravere. Difficultatem facit Luc. 3,36 hunc Cainan progenitoribus messiae adnumerans; neque, quod unus codex D nomen ignoret, ob id solum fas erit critico nomen e Lucae textu tamquam spurium expungere. At quomodo solvenda difficultas? Alii, uti Per. , Lamy Cainan e textu quidem Genesis exsulare iubent, at difficultatis solutionem fatentur se habere nullam. Ca. evangelistam ab errore excusat, quod is sequi voluerit, quod apud LXX scriptum repererit. Accedit Petavius S. T. (De doctrina temporum IX, 17), H. Colombier S, I. (Études etc., 1872 I. p. 213 sq.) aliique. Lucas « evangelium scribens », ait Colombier, « non criticum agebat antiquarum historiarum, neque aliud probat nomen Cainan eius textui insertum , nisi hoc nomen infuisse codicibus LXX eius aevi ». Lap. , Calm., L. Cl. Fillion (La Sainte Bible, Paris 1889) censent, nomen Cainan a S. Luca non esse scriptum, sed scribae errore in eius textum mature irrepsisse, idque tanto facilius, quod eius temporis christiani textus LXX gnari persuasum haberent, illud nomen reapse ad genealogiam pertinere. Quod vero praeter codicem D nullus codex nomen ignoret, non efficit absolutam probationem nomen ab ipso S. Luca scriptum esse, cum quorumdam in s. textu mendorum nos omnia iam vestigia latere possint. Illud non ita facile dirimitur, irrepseritne in textum Geneseos primum momen Cainan, cui dein tributi sint anni a Sale mutuati, an annis primum iteratis affixum postmodum sit «omen. Quaestio cum altera connectitur, unde nomen Cainan depromptum sit. In tres hoc nomen textus irrepsit. Brevissime commemoratur 10,22 : « et Aram et Cainan. Filii Aram ctc. ». Dreviter item 10,24 : « Arphaxad genuit Cainan, Cainau autem genuit Sale ». Fuse 11,12, ubi anni vitae, filii et filiae, , tandem mors recensentur. Hoc tertium mendum crediderim secundo esse recentius. Postquam sc. 10,24 ille Cainan inter Arphaxad et Sale comparuit, censuit emendator aliquis eum aequo iure 11, 12 inter eosdem inseri oportere : nomen igitur introduxit iis formulis, quae in Generationibus Sem solemnes sunt, veluti vestitum adscriptisque iisdem, quos Sale habebat annis. Difficilius explicatur, quomodo error 10, 24 irrepserit, et utrum nexus aliquis sit inter errores 10,24 et 22. Et prima quidem íronte videntur duo illi Cainan, quorum alter Arphaxadi frater, alter filius scribitur, prorsus esse ab invicem diversi. Potuit tamen vox zatvav primum margini semel inscripta, inde in duos versos 22 et 24 irrepsisse. At unde ea vox? Recurrunt fere auctores ad formam Mp: cur vero corrector noster ad hoc prae aliis cap. 5 nominibus recurrerit, nulla ratione explicatur. Verius fortasse in graeca forma xatvav sistemus. Silentibus interpretibus ceteris, liceat coniecturam suggerere. Potuit 10, 22 x«t &pxp. in aliquo manuscripto corrumpi in zatvav, quod deinde margini alterius codicis adscriptum, e margine ab alio scriba translatum est in v. 22 : xat apap. (at) xatvav. zat ot utot *.T.À. Alius vero scriba in suo manuscripto illud zetw«v transtulit non in v. 22 sed in v. 24, supplens paucas voces : xat apoataó eyevvros tov xawav, xatvay 86 eyevvmos *. t. 4. Mox utrumque simul mendum describi coeptum est. Rursum alius quidam scriba e corrupto v. 24 emendavit 11, 12. Tandem omnia haec simul menda in codicibus LXX sat multis conspiciebantur. Nomen Cainan tanto facilius recipiebatur. quod e cap. 5 tamquam alicuius patriarchae nomen iam esset notum. Commenta quaedam recentiorem recensuisse sufficiat. Wellh. Prol. p. 330 et Budde p. 411 sq. censent exstitisse primitus genealogiam aliquam jahvistae antiquioris, qui ad instar septem patriarcharum Cainitarum noverit septem tantummodo patriarchas Semitas : secundum ipsum sc. Heber (10, 21 !) est Semi non abnepos, sed filius, ignorabantur Arphaxad et Sale. Quibus insertis ac praeterea Noe, qui ultimus antediluvianorum numerabatur, simul iterum postdiluvianis accensito, iahvista posterior numerum patriarcharum denarium complevit. Iidem auctores Nachor, patrem Thare, et Nachor (11, 26), fratrem Abrahae, confundunt, priorem illum eliminant, ut primitus hi tantum numerarentur patriarchae septem : Noe, Sem, Heber, Phaleg, Reu, Sarug, Tharc. | Pro conclusione describimus numeros Sam., quos genuinos esse demonstravimus, adscriptis non diluvii sed mundi annis. Annos autem a creatione ad diluvium cum Sam. statuimus 1307. Auctores antiquiores, secuti vel Hebr. vel LXX, varia excogitaverunt systemata chronologica. Quorum in opere « L'art de vérifier les dates, avant l'ére chrétienne » (ed. 1820 p. IX-XII) iam recensebantur centum et octo; sed numerus ab eo tempore non parum crevit. Verum inter recentiores illa maxime quaestio agitatur, quatenus possit ex illis numeris omnino computus chronologicus legitime confici. Et primum quidem auctor Geneseos inspiratus has Generationes inseruit tamquam documentum vere chronologicum et genealogicum, i. e. quod et Abrahae ex Noe originem et temporum inter illos rationem, sive complete sive incomplete, at certe vere describeret. Etenim Generationes Sem annulus veluti sunt in catena illa, quae per Generationes Adam (5,1 sqq.), Noe (6,9 sqq.), Thare (11,27 sqq.), Isaac (25,19 sqq.), Iacob (37,1 sqq.), originem gentis electae demonstrat, itemque ut documentum genealogicum tam ab auctore 1 Par., quam a S. Luca recipiuntur. ÀÁnni vero patriarcharum Semitarum eiusdem profecto sunt indolis atque anni patriarcharum Sethitarum et speciatim annus ille sexcentesimus Noe (7,11; 8,5. 13. 14), qui utique fuit annus lunaris 3554 dierum. Dicebamus p. 207 de opinione quorumdam antiquorum, qui ad longaevitatem patriarcharum eliminandam amnos adstruebant annis vulgaribus multo breviores, Quod systema resuscitavere Chevallier : L'année religieuse dans la famille d'Abraham ou Chronologie antique, Paris 1873; et post ipsum V. Dumaz : Róvision et reconstruction de la Chronologie biblique et profane, Epoque antédiluvienne, Paris 1886, p. 184 sqq. Hi viri illam opinionem ita reconciliandis Hebr. Sam. LXX numeris discordantibus applicuere, ut a creatione ad diluvium reapse effluxerint, quos habet Hebr., anni 1656 iique anni solares, aut secundum textum emendatum LXX anni 2256 novenorum mensium, aut secundum Sam. 1307 anni septenorum mensium , et illi tres numeri re unam eandemque durationem exprimant. Imo vel lectiones variantes, sc. 2242 anni textus LXX non emendati et lectio quaedam 1356 Samaritani haud fide digna, similiter ex computo aliquo explicantur. At aliter res habet quoad patriarchas postdiluvianos. Ibi Dumaz (2e Epoque p. 15) non aliam numerorum Sam. LXX ab Hebr. discordantium explicationem affert, nisi voluisse illos epochae istius durationem augere; omnium igitur textuum annos solares intelligi agnoscit. E contra Gen. 12,4 annos 75 Abrahae interpretatur annos septenorum mensium, qui aequivaleant 43 annis solaribus. Ad haec respondeas: 1) tempora diluvii certe describuntur secundum menses et dies anni lunaris : ergo non est verum, textum Hebr. intelligere annos solares. Postquam stabilivimus, genealogiam et vere esse documentum chronologicum et veris annis lunaribus coalescere, illud venit examinandum, sitne eadem contenua. Nostratum quippe plures affirmavere definiri haud posse, annon eius genealogiae plura membra aut a s. auctore €onsilio fuerint omissa aut librariorum negligentia interciderint. Cf. inter alios H. Valroger : L'àge du monde et de l'homme d'aprés la Bible etl'Église, Paris 1869, p. 70; I. Knabenbauer S. I. : Bibel u. Chronologie, in : Stimmen aus Maria Laach VI. 164 sqq. 358 sqq., Freiburg i. B. 1874; F. Vigourour, Manuel I. 443 sqq.; I. Brucker S. I. : La chronologie des premiers áges de l'humanité, Lyon 1886 (Extrait de la Controverse et du Contemporain); E. A. Pannier : Genealogiae biblicae p. 251 sqq., Insulis 1886. | Ubi primum illud concedendum est genealogias biblicas haud raro tradi incompletas, neque solum librariorum incuria sed auctorum inspiratorum consilio : exemplum habes notissimum Matth. 1,17. Reapse voces fitus et genuit apud Hebraeos de generatione adhibentur tam mediata quam immediata. Imo neque numeri annorum adscripti per se efficiunt , genealogiam esse completam et continuam. Cf. Ex. 6,16sqq. : « Et haec nomina filiorum Levi per cognationes suas : TENA et Caath et Merari. Anni autem vitae Levi fuerunt 137. — Filii Caath : Amram et Isaar et Hebron et Oziel. Anni quoque vitae Caath 133. — Fueruntque anni vitae Amram 137 ». Quibus numeris non obstantibus fas sibi esse censent exegetae, defendere Ex. 12,40 Israelitarum in Aegypto commorationem 430 annorum. Reapse his numeris non voluit auctor continuam tradere chronologiam , quae ex illis confici minime potest, quamdiu quo vitae parentis anno natus sit eorum virorum quisque ignoramus ; voluit autem auctor vel longaevitatis in ea familia aliqua tradere specimina, vel eorum virorum quas norat aetates describere, aliorum et nominibus et aetatibus suppressis. At quaestio est, patianturne formulae Gen. 11 adhiberi solitae eam genealogiam dici non continuam. Et hic quidem cernere est quandoque aliquid haud dissimile eius, quod in disputatione de Hexaemero observatur. Ubi exinde, quod vox dies indeterminatum quandoque tempus designet, inferunt Periodistae posse de infinitis periodis explicari formulam : « Et factum est vespere et mane, dies x ». Similiter h. 1. facilius supponunt aliqui, quod vox genu?t quandoque de mediata generatione usurpetur, de eadem exponi posse formulam : Vixit A annis x et genuit B; et vixit A, postquam genuit B, annis y, et genuit filios et filias. Et vixit B etc. ». Quae sunt res toto Dualo diversae. Igitur ut de mediata generatione ea formula exponatur, necesse est ut in ea formula aut nom:na patriarcharum aut verbum genuit accipiantur indeterminate. Illud suggerit Brucker p. 19 sq., nomina eorum, qui geniti esse recensentur, interpretatus indeterminate, ut vel ipsos viros, qui iis appellati sint nominibus, vel eorum virorum patres aut avos etc. no- mina designent. Accipe exemplum : « Phaleg vixit 30 annis et genuit patrem aut alium aliquem antecessorem Reu. Vixitque Phaleg, postquam genuit patrem aut alium aliquem antecessorem Reu, 209 annis et genuit filios et filias ». « Age », exclamat auctor, « cernisne vel minimam in hac interpretatione impossibilitatem aut contradictionem?. » Absurdam equidem censeo. Primum adverte, eam utique admitti non posse 11,26 : ille enim, quem Thare genuit Abraham et postea v. 31 « tulit » secum in Haran, non est veri et historici Abrahae pater aut antecessor aliquis, sed ipsissimus Abraham, cuius deinceps acta narrantur. Item nomine Sem v. 11 ipse Sem designatur, cum inter Sem et Noe nulli antecessores intercesserint. Si autem genealogiae nomina primum et ultimum sensu unice obvio accipiantur, cur non item et reliqua? Praesertim, cum illud interpretamenti genus quaestionem tandem chronologicam linquat plane intactam : sc. Sem anno 0 genuit A, qui A anno 135 genuit B, qui B anno 130 genuit C, qui C anno 134 genuit D, ct ita porro, ut a diluvio ad natum Abraham effluxerint anni omnino 940. Dicat fortasse aliquis : Sem, cum centum esset annorum, genuit Arphaxad, quo nomine h. l]. supponamus intelligi veri Arphaxad avum; dein Arphaxad, hac vice non avus sed ipse Arphaxad, cum 135 esset annorum, genuit Sale. Verum istud admitti nullo pacto potest. Nomen Arphaxad, sive determinate sive indeterminatius accipiatur, in eodem contextu eodem sensu est intelligendum : ille Arphaxad, quem genuit Sem, elapsis a nativitate 135 annis genuit Sale. Alio modo interpretatur patriarcharum nomina Dumaz, 2* Époque p. 136 sqq., secutus Hebraei numeros. « Sem genuit Arphaxad, futurum haeredem promissionum , biennio post diluvium. St;rps Arphaxad post natum Arphaxad perseveravit 500 annis successione directa. Qua exstincta perseveravit eadem stirps in ramo aliquo secundario 35 annos usque ad genitum Sale. Qui ramus evasit stirps Sale et successione directa perseveravit 303 annis. Qua exstincta stirps Sale perseveravit in ramo aliquo secundario 30 annis usque ad genitum Heber etc. ». Respondeas, textum sacrum non permittere, ut anni ante genitum filium et anni a genito filio hoc modo permisceantur ; id speciatim repugnat Sam., qui ex utraque numerorum serie summas annorum vitae conflat, neque ita brevi manu confici potest; idipsum repugnat analogiae cap. 5, quam nefas est ignorare. Tota haec explanatio non alio fine excogitata est, quam ut maior annorum numerus a diluvio ad nativitatem Abrahae obtineatur, sc. 2709 (ib. p. 207) loco 290 : magnum utique augmentum , sed pretio interpreti haud ferendo comparatum. Missis igitur his et similibus nominum interpretamentis videamus, num in formula, quae in genealogia usurpatur, liceat verbum genuit, similiter atque aliis quibusdam locis, de mediata exponere generatione. Sensus tum erit fere hic : « Sem anno 0 genuit Arphaxad, vel immediate vel mediate, aut ipsum aut aliquem eius antecessorem. Quo facto Sem superstes fuit annis 500. Quandonam genitus sit ipse Arphaxad , ignoramus; illud vero compertum habemus, eum 135 annos natum genuisse filium aliquem, qui fuit aut ipse Sale aut certe aliquis Sale antecessor. Quo facto superstes fuit Arphaxad 303 annis etc. ». Henoch Iud. 14 vocari « septimum ab Adam », quae expressio non est omnino stringens; sed Noe dicendus erit immediate esse genitus a Lamech, nisi forte lubeat verba 5,29 adstruere a Lamech esse dicta non immediate seu proprio ore, sed mediate, labiis sc. nepotis cuiusdam. Quod interpretandi genus si semel admiseris, aequo iure, quod mihi videtur, defendes, factum cap. 3 narratum non fuisse ab Adamo et Eva immediate actum, sed mediate ab aliquo eorum nepote et nepte. Sem immediate genitus est à Noe; item Arphaxad a Sem, brevissimo post diluvium tempore; item Abraham a Tharec. Negamus igitur ob allatas rationes genealogiam dici posse consilio s. auctoris esse incompletam ; sed neque /brariorum incuria aut consilio decurtata esse sufficienti ratione a quibusdam affirmatur. pertem et plane accuratam. Erat accurata, quatenus continua; non numeris constabat rotundis; tamen auctor non chronologum agit sed interpretem traditionis : uni eidemque anno natos attribuit hic Sem, Cham et Iaphet, illic Abram, Nachor et Aran. Patet audacius asseri a Brucker p. 23, « numeris genealogiae nullum certum limitem praefigi seriis chronologis ». Praefigeretur limes sat certus, si in illis numeris consentirent Hebr. Sam. LXX. Patet merito cum plurimis defendere Meignan (Le monde et l'homme primitif, Paris 1869, p. 166), « ne ut probabilia quidem nos posse admittere geologorum quorumdam alioqui illustrium figmenta, hominem .affirmantium ducentis vel trecentis saeculis in terra exstitisse ». Et nota, hos numeros et alios etiam immaniores tum tantum efficaciter te posse repudiare, si genealogiam continuam esse defendas. Ubi quippe semel concesseris excidisse nomina aliqua, quo duo vel tria annorum millia fas sit adiicere chronologiae receptae, quomodo efficaciter prohibebis tot omissos dici patriarchas, quot annorum millionibus sufficiant? Pauca pro commentario supersunt dicenda.
11:10
v. 10 « Hae sunt generationes Sem : Sem erat centum annorum, quando genuit Arphaxad, biennio post dzluvium ». Ex 5,31 et 1,6 habes annum centesimum Sem non esse secundum post diluvium, sed ipsum diluvii annum : contradictionis explanandae causa variae tentatae sunt viae. Mar. censet non uno anno quingentesimo vitae genuisse Noe tres filios, sed tum coepisse illos gignere: natu maximum utique diluvii anno fuisse centenarium, sed Semum nonnisi biennio post. Similiter neque Thare dicendus.est uno vitae septuagesimo anno genuisse Abram, Nachor et Aran ,.sed tum coepisse gignere. Perquam probabile utique est non trinos filios uno anno tres illos patriarchas genuisse : at omnino evidens est unico anno genitos a s. textu attribui. Semum fuisse natu maximum effici videtur ex 9,24 ; 10,21. — Neque iuvat cum. Ca. ita sententiam construere : Sem erat filius centum annorum, — sc. tempore diluvii; et biennio post diluvium genuit Arphaxad. At quorsum, immediate post Generationum titulum , inseritur ea de Semi tempore diluvii aetate animadversio? Quis eius h. 1. usus? Nonne eam aetatem lector ex ante narratis iam novit? Praeterea adverte uniformem genealogiarum cap. 5 et 11 structuram : ex qua sequitur idem omnino esse sensus sententiae « Sem erat filius centum annorum et genuit etc. », ac sententiae « Vixit vero Enos nonaginta annis et genuit Cainan », aut sententiae « Arphaxad vixit triginta quinque annis et genuit Sale ». Quare merito v. 10 Vulg. LXX vertunt quando. — Aliam explicationem suggerit idem Ca?., Arphaxadum conceptum quidem esse anno diluvii, genztum autem sequente seu secundo anno. Etiam haec explicatio a simplicitate genealogiae recedit et versui 10 sensum assignat ab aliis versibus, qui eundem atque ille indubie sensum exprimunt, diversum. Kn. Arphaxadum scribit natum secundo post coeptum diluvium anno, ergo revera anno post absolutum diluvium. Respondeo, anno post diluvium fuisse Sem proprie virum centum et unius anni. Praeterea merito monet Di/Im., expressionem post diluvium necessario hic significare idipsum, quod 10,1. 32, sc. postfinitum diluvium. Cf. Budde p. 108 sq. | Reapse difficultas non est in vocibus 515 »nx, quarum sensus planus est; sed in una voce a'na3v, quae a structura genealogiae dissonat, seriori manu adiecta dignoscitur, tempore utique perantiquo, cum in omnibus legatur textibus. Ubi duplex se offert hypothesis. Prima est, vocem additam esse ab auctore non inspirato (Budde p. 109) , qui illud censuerit admitti nullo pacto posse, Arphaxadum in arca aut conceptum esse aut natum : alterutrum autem vel utrumque erit concedendum, si vere centesimo Semi i. e. diluvii anno genitus sit Arphaxad. Reapse apud Iudaeos (cf. Lib. Adam:) invaluisse videtur opinio, maris et feminae commercium in arca fuisse a Deo prohibitum, et scriptura Noe filios cum uxoribus, non vero filiorum filios ex arca narrat esse egressos. Altera hypothesis vocem additam censet ab auctore aliquo inspirato. Ubi cogeris fere cum Bon/fr. admittere, in hac genealogia scripturam non exprimere praecisum numerum annorum.
11:11
v. 11 « Vizitque Sem, postquam genuit. Arphazad , quingentis annis , et genuit filios et. filias ».
11:12
v. 19 « Porro Arphazad vixit triginta quinque annis , et genuit Sale ».
11:13
v. 18 « Vizitque Arphaxad, postquam genuit Sale, trecentis tribus annis, et genuit filios et filias ». Mortuus est sexaginta duos annos ante patrem Sem.
11:14
v. 1& « Sale quoque vizi. trigintla annis, et genuit Heber ».
11:15
v. 15 « Vixitque Sale, postquam genuit , Heber, quadringentis tribus annis, et genuit. filios et filias ».
11:16
v. 16 « Vixit autem Heber triginta quatuor annis , et genuit Phaleg ».
11:17
v. 41 « Et vixit Heber, postquam genuit Phaleg, quadringentis triginta annis, et genuit filios et filias ».
11:18
v. 18 « Vizit quoque Phaleg trigznta annis, et genuit Reu ».
11:19
v. 19 « Vixitque Phaleg , postquam genuit Reu , ducentis novem annis , et genuit filtos et ftlas ». Phaleg mortuus est (sec. Sam.)triginta etunumannos ante patrem Heber. Sem vita functus est, quando Phaleg numerabat annos vitae centum et unum : an forte Semo demortuo, ergo fere anno mundi 1808, divisae sunt gentes, quod 10,95 narrabatur esse factum « in diebus Produximus biblicam chronologiam usque ad Abraham secundum numeros sacri textus critice discussos : ea nobis iam producenda est ad finem Geneseos. Quoad annos commorationis Iacob in Haran an- . nosque Ioseph cf., quae dicemus initio cap. 27 et ad 29,27. Lectio genuina 37,2 est 17 loco 16. Adstruimus primum fertilitatis annum fuisse eundem atque illum, quo Ioseph stetit ante Pharaonem, et Iacobum in Aegyptum descendisse eodem, quo loseph a fratribus agnitus sit, anno. Quibus concessis concordant numeri. Porro in hac simul aetate offertur primum opportunitas chronologiae biblieae cum profana comparandae. Regis Chodorlahomor expeditio secundum ea, quae ad cap. 15 dicturi sumus, videtur collocanda anno a. C. 2250-2000. Hinc iam possumus nostram chronologiam biblicam cum profana conferre. Ingressus igitur sit Aegyptum Iosephus, si annos biblicos consulas, anno a. C. 2065-1815, quo tempore reapse Pastores in ea regione regnasse creduntur. Item collatis annis biblicis diluvium erit collocandum a. C. 3300-3000, creatio primi hominis 4600-4300. - Quaestio h. 1l. unice examinanda haec est, an quidquam habeant monumeníta, quo cogamur longius tempus concedere ante Abraham vel ante diluvium effluxisse. Pro dynastiis tam aegyptiis Manethonis quam babylonicis Berosi , exclusis dynastiis mythicis, censent viri docti plures haud multo plus quam annorum tria millia requiri. Sed omnia hic sunt perquam incerta et incompleta. Exstat textus cuneiformis, secundum quem Naram Sin filius Sargon I a. C. circiter 3750 urbi Accad imperaverit. Verum cum ipsi assyrologi plures ob rationes nullatenus e s. scriptura petitas ei textui fidem denegent, res dubia manet. Inter omnes quaestiones Genesin attingentes vix alia tantum, quantum quaestio chronologica incerta est atque confusa. Nos annorum numeros, quos textus sacer nunc habet, critice definire atque inter se componere studuimus. Antequam vero definiamus, hi numeri sintne integri, truncati an corrupti, plura ex antiquissima chronologia, Babyloniorum imprimis atque Aegyptiorum , illustrentur oportet. Quae cum ita sint, maluimus rem in medio relinquere, quam novo systemate infinitum paene systematum agmen augere. Tot profecto controversiis, ex lis quae de Genesi sunt, nostro hoc aevo novum et insperatum lumen affusum conspeximus, ut merito confidamus disputationem item chronologicam tandem , imo fortasse brevi, expeditum iri. In Introd. p. 41 sq. statuebamus, trium magnorum patriarcharum vitas primitus unam fuisse continuam narrationem, quae intextis postmodum Generationibus Ismael et Esau fuerit in partes distincta. Ib. p. 98 sqq. idem Abrahae actorum tres demonstrabamus esse partes; eius in terram promissam ingressum 11,97-15,94; eius fidem 15,1- 22,19; supplementum 22,20-25,11. Ceterum sequentibus, gravioribus iam de Cosmogonia, Diluvio etc. expeditis controversiis, capita introductoria non adscribimus, sed solum tradimus commentarium. Arg. — Cum Thare duce stirps electa Chaldaea excesserit, apte narratio inscribitur Generationes Thare, non Abrahae. Qui tamen simul titulus antiquissimam: prodit originem : cui auctor Iudaeus utique sub-. stituisset titulum « Generationes Abraham ». Narratur porro Thare cum Abram, Lot et Sarai profectio de Ur iterque in Haran, ubi supremum diem obiit Thare. |
11:27
v. 91 « Hae sunt autem generationes Thare : Thare genuit Abram, Nachor ei Aran ». Repetitur his v. 26, uti 6,10 repetebatur 5,31, et 5,1 sq. repetebatur 1,27. Filii non utique ordine aetatis recensentur, cum Aran, qui filiam Melcham Nachori concessit uxorem, sane Nachore fuerit aetate maior; et, cum veri simillimum sit etiam Saram fuisse Arani filiam, ea autem Gen. 17,17 fuerit decem annis iunior quam Abram, sane Aran pluribus ante Abram annis natus sit oportet. Ergo annus septuagesimus Thare v. 26 ille est annus, quo Abram, non vero quo praeter ipsum etiam Nachor et Aran nati sunt. Similiter neque uno anno nati fuere Sem, Cham et Iaphet. Dices, scripturam affirmare, illo septuagesimo anno tres illos filios natos esse. Respondeo, scripturam supponere sapientem lectorem, qui perspiciat non bis, decursu undecim generationum, tres filios uno partu editos affirmari. Scriptura non vult nobis annos dare nisi patriarcharum. « Porro Aran genuit Lot ».
11:28
v. 98 « Mortuusque est Aran ante Thare patrem suum in terra nativitatis suae, àn Ur Chaldaeorum ». Soli LXX (non Ios.) pro Ur habent 4690«, pro "M sc. repetentes praecedens y^X (etiam Gen. 15,7 et 2 Esdr. 9,7). Bene vero LXX Syr. a"iv5 reddunt ;2z33alov. Mát Kaldi apud Assyrios nomen erat Chaldaeae, 1. e. regionis ad meridiem Babylonis sitae; Sinus Persicus audiebat tedmtuv sa mat Kaldi, mare Chaldaeum. Sed Chaldaei apud Babylonios vocabantur K4sd4, quo patet vocem hebraeam immediate e Babylonia fuisse acceptam. Quodsi vero Ur in Chaldaea sit quaerendum, tum alia non est nisi celebris illa urbs Uru, nunc Mughair, sita haud procul ab occidentali Euphratis ripa ad Pallacopam , habens antiquissimum Lunae templum. Ibi regnabat viginti quinque circiter a. C. saeculis Urbagas, qui toti videtur Chaldaeae imperasse et in pluribus urbibus templa exstruxit ; eius inscriptiones lingua quam dicunt accadica sunt exaratae. Sed filii eius Dungi reperta est inscriptio assyriaca in Ninive. Cf. Schrader et Tiele. Cum "5 etiam sonet ignem, hinc nata est fabula rabbinica de Abram apud Chaldaeos in fornacem misso (Ps. Ion., Targ. Hier.), quam etiam Hier. (cf. Rahmer) expressit 2 Esdr. 9, 7 vertens « eduxit eum de igne Chaldaeorum ». In eodem igne fingitur Aran periisse. Mirum est, hac in re Iac. Edess. rursum afferre nomen illud VP nunc quidem tamquam nomen idoli Chaldaeorum, quod tamen h. 1l. corruptum crediderim ex nm Am. 5,26, quod apud Arabes nomen traditur fuisse Saturni. Nomen Zeschae secus non recurrit. Zos. Sarai et Melcham dicit sorores, suppresso leschae nomine. Ps. Jon. et Targ. Hier. ei nomini adscribunt verba « haec est Sarai ». Consentiunt Ephr., Jac. Edess., Hier. (cf. Rahmer). Gen. 20, 12 dicit Abram de Sarai : « Vere soror mea est, filia patris mei est et non filia matris meae ». « Filia patris » sensu Hebraeorum vere erat, si erat ex eodem avo progenita, avus quippe est pater mediatus ; « filia matris » vere non erat, sive matrem intelligas genitricem aut aviam. Ex 24, 4; 98, 2 patet, patriarchas consuevisse uxores accipere e proximis cognatis. Hinc duo sunt, quae in textu nostro admirationem faciunt, et Sarai cognatae genus taceri et Ieschae inutile nomen recenseri. Communiter igitur iam sentiunt auctores, eandem esse Iescham quae Sarai. Alii binominem fuisse aiunt : sed, inquit Per., « non est credibile voluisse Moysen eo loco ludere ambiguitate verbi ». Aaschi ait nzb' a "o1 idem sonare quod "qv, sc. « dominam ». Si nominis * initiale supponas e praecedente voce reduplicatione ortum, literae 120 et *nv in antiqua scriptura ita sunt similes inter se, ut facile potuerint permutari.
11:31
- Ur Chaldaeorum , ut irent zn terram Chanaan ». Facti rationem accuratius docemur Ios. 24,2 sq. : « Trans fluvium habitaverunt patres vestri ab initio, Thare pater Abraham et Nachor, servieruntque diis alienis. Tuli ergo patrem vestrum Abraham de Mesopotamiae finibus ». Item Iudith 5,6 sqq. ait Achior : « Populus iste ex progenie Chaldaeorum est. Hic primum in Mesopotamia habitavit, quoniam noluerunt sequi deos patrum suorum, qui erant in terra Chaldaeorum. Deserentes igitur ceremonias patrum suorum, quae in multitudine deorum erant, unum. Deum coeli coluerunt, qui et praecepit eis, ut exirent inde et habitarent in Charan ». Ex his habes, maiores Abraham et nominatim Thare inter Chaldaeos « serviisse diis alienis », i. e. utique non vero Deo soli. Venerati sunt sane lunam et solem et stellas, quorum in Chaldaeis urbibus tot inclita visebantur templa. Quatenus hac in re veri nominis idololatriae notam incurrerint, nostrum non est definire : censent enim antiquitatum babyloniarum peritissimi, habuisse illas gentes primitus supremi numinis ideam, quod supra reliquos deos plurimum emineret. Fortasse superstitionis potius naevum fuit. Habes ex iisdem textibus, non solam ex Haran, sed ipsam ex Ur profectionem Deum praecepisse, quod confirmatur Gen. 12,1 verbis : « Egredere de terra tua et de loco nativitatis tuae »; locus siquidem nativitatis non erat Haran, neque apte dicebatur « terra sua » locus, in quo brevi tantummodo Abram substitit. Ex iisdem textibus cum 19,1 sqq. collatis etiam illud fit probabile, Deum per Abram Tharen iussisse emigrare; neque enim est in textibus, quo iure merito adstruamus, praeter revelationem immediate factam Abrahae, alteram immediate factam esse Thare. Hebr. Chald. Targ. DIN "NY!, « et exierunt cum eis ». Verius, uti videtur, Sam. Vdlg. LXX Syr. DN NYY!, « et eduxit eos ». Egressus de Chaldaea dux est Thare. — Gen. 24, 10 Nachor iam non Chaldaeam incolit, sed Aram Naharaim et quidem, quod ex 27, 43; 28, 10; 29, 4 colligo, ipsam Haran. Ex hoc non sequitur necessario illuc cum parente Thare commigrasse : quando migraverit, nescimus. Sam. quidem sequentem textum habet, cuius additamenta uncinis includimus : nN'"] "v nN" 132 [mna] a»aw new "m2 [n255. Igitur pro sing. 353 et 13. scribit pluralia. Ceterum textus corruptus esse dignoscitur. Oportebat Nachor aeque recenseri atque Melcham. Praeterea, licet semel Ez. 23, 44 legatur stat. absol. plur. TUN, at stat. con$tr. plur. DN nullibi legitur neque grammaticae satisfacit. ' « Veneruntque usque Haran et habitaverunt 1b: ». 39* non necessario diuturnam edicit moram, quam affirmat Schrader KAT; subsistendum saltem fuit eo in loco, quoad Thare extremum traheret spiritum. Quo aetatis anno Abram Chaldaea excesserit, non docemur, sed solum 12,4 qua aetate excesserit Haran. Erat haec nobilis urbs ad Beliam flumen, recto fere itinere inter Nisibin et Gargamis, saepius in textibus assyris appellata , eadem atque KZ5bar, ubi victus est Crassus.
11:32
v. 32 « Et facti sunt dies Thare ducentorum quinque annorum , et mortuus est in. Haran ». Diximus in Generationibus Sem praeferendum esse Sam. '15. 9. Iter ab Haran usque Sichem Gen. 12,1-7. Arg. — Abrahamum ,, itineris defuncto patre ducem , comitatura narratio primum totius itineris supplet causam, divinum sc. mandatum iam in Chaldaea acceptum, relicta nativitatis terra petendae regionis a Deo monstrandae v. 1-4. Cui mandato si Abram obsequatur, insignem plane in semine suo nanciscetur benedictionem. Dein iter ab Haran Sichimam narratur, obsequio eiusdem divini mandati (Bonfr.) susceptum , quo procedere iubebatur, donec veniret ad terram , quam monsíraret ei Deus. Hic vero hanc esse terram patriarchae promissam declarat, et ab eo vicissim sacrificio oblato honoratur. | Cap. XII
11:1
… It was rebuilt by N.; it belongs to a type of construction known in Babylon from time immemorial, so as to be the historical foundation of the pericope of Gen. 11:1-11 (v. BABELE, Torre di). Almost all the temples were the object of N.'s solicitous care, not only in Babylon, but also in Borsippa, Kuta, Sippar, Akkad, Kif, Dilbad, Larsa, Ur, Uruk and other cities. …
… The ancients, still followed by several recent scholars (Hetzenauer, Vaccari), hold that it alludes to the division that occurred after the confusion of tongues (Gen. 11:1-9): "the Lord confused the languages of the whole world and from there scattered them over all the earth." This took place in the fifth generation after the flood, according to the data known today. …
SENNAAR (Heb. Šin'ār). - A geographical term that in certain biblical passages means the land of Babylonia, e.g., Gen. 10:10 ff. (even in opposition to Assyria); ibid. 11:1-9 (Tower of Babel [v.]); Dan. 1:2; Zech. 5:11. In others, however, it would seem
BABEL, TOWER of. « A construction erected at Babylon (Babel) for a politico-religious purpose, and left unfinished (Gen. 11:1-9). The fragmentation of humanity into discordant peoples derives from a collective "original sin" (cf. Ps. 2:4): it is a punishment from Yahweh, because the union of men was fomenting …
In the Old Testament, Gen. 11:1-9, the account of the tower, mighdál, and of the confusion of tongues refers to a z., and precisely to that of the temple Esagila of Marduk (v.) in the city of Babel. …
11:3
… Abraham (v.), having come from Ur, lived there for many years before setting out for Canaan (Gen. 11, 3 ff.; 12, 4 ff.); there took place the idyllic episodes of Rebecca and Rachel at the well of H., and the flight of Jacob (Gen. 24, 10; 27, 43; 28, 10; 29, 4).
11:4
M. was the first to discover and to evaluate the law of Hebrew parallelism, which he called "epesegesi" (I, pp. 44 f., 67, 168, 224 ff.; notes to Gen. 4, 23 f.; 11, 4; 49, 10 f.; II, pp. 102 f., 268; notes to Num. 23, 7; Is. 63, 1) already in the unpublished opuscule De poesi Hebraeorum of 1740; whereas the book of R. Lowth, to whom this discovery …
11:10
1. A. (Heb. 'Arpahšad), son of Shem, born 2 years after the flood (Gen. 10:22; 11:10), grandfather or great-grandfather of Heber (v.). …
… From the genealogies of the Sethites (Gen. 5:3-31) and of the Noachites (Gen. 11:10-26) there result 1656 years (in the Samaritan codex 1307, in the Septuagint 2242 [2262]) from the creation of man to the flood, 920 years (Samaritan codex 940, Septuagint 1170) from the …
The postdiluvian P. in the Masoretic text are 9; in the Septuagint and in Luke 3:36 they are 10 because of the addition of Cainan (cf. also 1 Chron. 24:27). In Gen. 11:10-26 they are presented as the genealogy of Shem; in Gen. 10:21 ff. there is another descent from Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, Aram. …
11:12
… In the corresponding passage of Gen. 10:24; 11:12 (cf. 1 Chron. 1:18) he is named in the Septuagint, but not in the Hebrew (and the Vulgate), in which the line of descent passes directly from Arphaxad to Salah.
11:14
… Grandson of Arphaxad, son of Shem, forefather of Abram hā-'ibhrī (Gen. 14:13): Gen. 10:21, 24f.; 11:14-17; 1 Chron. 1:18f., 25. Also the head of a priestly family, in the time of Jehoiakim (Neh. 13:20); one of the tribe of Gad (1 Chron. 5:13, 5-6); two of the tribe of Benjamin (1 Chron. …
11:18
… P. begot Reu at the age of 30, and "died at 230 years, leaving sons and daughters" (Gen. 11:18 ff.). …
11:20
SARUG (Heb. Šērāgh). - A descendant of Shem, presented as the son of Reu and the father of Nahor; he would therefore have been the great-grandfather of Abraham (Gen. 11:20-23; 1 Chron. 1:26). He is also remembered in the genealogy of Jesus found in Luke 3:35.
11:26
… His story, rich in detail, is narrated in Gen. 11:26-25:11.
Haran (Vulgate Aram; Septuagint Ἀρράν, Hebrew Hārān "Mountaineer")
HARAN (Vulgate Aram; Septuagint Ἀρράν, Hebrew Hārān "Mountaineer"). - Son of Thare and brother of Abraham and of Nachor. Gen. 11:26-29 names him in third place, on account of the lesser importance that he holds in the history of the Hebrew people compared with the other two. He was the father of Lot. He died before …
NACHOR (Hebrew: Nāhōr). - Son of Terah and brother of Abraham (Gen. 11:26). He was the father of 12 sons, of whom 8 were born to Milcah, the daughter of his brother Haran and sister of Lot, and 4 to another wife named Reumah: these were the ancestors or …
Thare (Heb. Térah, Septuagint Θάξα, Θάξα)
… With Abraham, Sarai and Lot (v.) he emigrated from Ur in Chaldea to Haran (v.), where he died (Gen. 11:26-27, 31; Lk. 3:34).
11:27
SARA (Heb. Šārah = Princess). - 1. Wife of Abraham; she was his sister on his father's side, but the daughter of another mother (Gen. 20:12): she is probably to be identified with Iescha (v.), daughter of Haran and sister of Lot (ibid. 11:27-31), as Flavius Josephus (Antiq. …
11:28
In the Bible too there is the same uncertainty in fixing its boundaries. Gen. 11:28, 31 seems to intend this region in the restricted sense. …
UR. - A very ancient Mesopotamian city (Sumerian URIM⁴⁰, later URI⁴¹, Akkadian URG⁴²), named in the Bible in Gen. 11:28-31; 15:7; Neh. 9:7 (Hebrew 'Ur Kaidim, "Ur of the Chaldees"). …
11:29
JESCHA. — Under this name, which does not occur elsewhere in the Bible, Gen. 11:29 mentions a daughter of Haran, brother of Abraham, and sister of Lot and of Milcah.
11:31
… He lived with his family of Thareite descent in Haran (v.), in Mesopotamia, where Abraham too had stopped for some time (Gen. 11:31). He received kindly Abraham's servant Eliezer, who had come to seek a wife for Isaac among the members of the same Thareite family, and willingly gave his consent, together with Bathuel …
11:32
This region had as its center Harrān (v.), the city in which Thare (Terah), the father of Abraham, settled after his migration from Ur of the Chaldees with his family (Gen. 11:32). Harrān remained the residence of Nahor, Abraham's brother; relations were maintained between the descendants of Abraham, who had moved to Canaan, and the descendants of Nahor, who …
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · original Douay-Rheims (Douay 1609-10), transcription by EEBO-TCP (CC0) · La Sacra Bibbia, tradotta dalla Volgata da Antonio Martini (1769-1781) (LaParola (laparola.net), Martini OSIS text, Public domain (LaParola's electronic edition marks it 'Dominio pubblico')). Public domain.