Mind of the Church

The mind of the Church, faithfully rendered into English

Library / Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume I

Book Seven — Cain and Abel

QUESTION II. How that computation of years which is in the Septuagint interpreters differs from this one

LatineEnglish

QUESTION II. How that computation of years which is in the Septuagint interpreters differs from this one.1

QUAESTIO II. Quomodo ab hac computatione annorum differat ea, quae est apud Septuaginta interpretes.

CAETERUM in supradicta supputatione annorum ab Adamo usque ad diluvium, quemadmodum & in altera, quae est post diluvium usque ad ortum Abrahae, Graeca translatio Septuaginta interpretum partim congruit cum Scriptura Hebraica, & partim ab ea differt. Convenit dupliciter: Primo quidem, quia eandem fere facit totam summam annorum, qui singulis generationibus adscribuntur. Nam licet Adamo tribuat ducentos triginta annos priusquam genuit Seth, & post eum genitum annos septingentos; omnes tamen annos vitae Adam, similiter ut Scriptura Hebraica, facit nongentos triginta. Idemque fere servat in reliquis, praeter Lamech, cuius annorum omnium summa in Hebraeo est septingentorum septuaginta septem annorum. Apud LXX. autem Septingentorum quinquaginta trium. Deinde, quia in duabus generationibus, una ante diluvium quae est ipsius Iared, & altera post diluvium quae est ipsius Thare, & in ipso quoque Sem nihil plane discrepat a Scriptura Hebraica, nec in annis ante generationem filiorum, nec post.
But in the aforesaid reckoning of years from Adam to the flood — just as also in the other, which is after the flood to the birth of Abraham — the Greek translation of the Seventy interpreters partly agrees with the Hebrew Scripture, and partly differs from it. It agrees in two ways: First indeed, because it makes nearly the same total sum of the years which are ascribed to each generation. For although it attributes to Adam 230 years before he begot Seth, and 700 years after begetting him, yet it makes all the years of Adam's life, similarly to the Hebrew Scripture, 930. And it keeps nearly the same in the rest, except Lamech, whose total sum of years in the Hebrew is 777 years, but in the LXX 753. Then, because in two generations — one before the flood, which is Jared's, and the other after the flood, which is Thare's [Terah's] — and in Shem too, it in no way differs from the Hebrew Scripture, neither in the years before the begetting of the sons, nor after.2
DIFFERT autem multis rebus a Scriptura Hebraica. Primo, quia in multis generationibus tam ante diluvium quam post diluvium, tribuit Patribus priusquam filios gignant, centum annos plures quam Scriptura Hebraica; nimirum ante diluvium quidem Adamo, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Malaleel, Enoch: post diluvium autem Arphaxad, Cainam, Sale, Heber, Reu, Saruch. Deinde, quia nonnullis addit plures quam centum annos: nam post diluvium, ipsi Phaleg prius quam gignat filium, addit plures annos quam Scriptura Hebraica, videlicet centum quatuor, ipsi autem Nachor centum quinquaginta. Postea, quia quibusdam aliis addit quidem plures annos quam Scriptura Hebraica, sed multo pauciores quam centum, nam cum codices Hebraei habeant, Lamech cum genuit Noe, fuisse centum octoginta duorum annorum, codices Septuaginta interpretum addentes his sex annos, aiunt tunc eum fuisse centum octogintaocto annorum. Postremo, quia ipsi Mathusalem, prius quam genuit Lamech, tribuit minus quam Scriptura Hebraica annos viginti: nam secundum Septuaginta interpretes tunc Mathusalem erat annorum centum sexaginta septem, secundum Hebraicam autem Scripturam, erat annorum centum octoginta septem. Anni igitur quos in singulis generationibus ante diluvium nati erant Patres prius quam gignerent filios, sic habent secundum Septuaginta interpretes.
But it differs from the Hebrew Scripture in many things. First, because in many generations, both before and after the flood, it attributes to the Fathers, before they beget sons, 100 years more than the Hebrew Scripture: namely, before the flood, to Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Malaleel, Enoch; but after the flood, to Arphaxad, Cainan, Sale, Heber, Reu, Saruch. Then, because to some it adds more than 100 years: for after the flood, to Phaleg [Peleg] before he begets a son it adds more years than the Hebrew Scripture, namely 104; but to Nachor [Nahor], 150. Afterward, because to certain others it adds indeed more years than the Hebrew Scripture, but much fewer than 100: for although the Hebrew codices have that Lamech, when he begot Noe, was 182 years old, the codices of the Seventy interpreters, adding six years to these, say that he was then 188 years old. Finally, because to Mathusalem himself, before he begot Lamech, it attributes 20 years fewer than the Hebrew Scripture: for according to the Seventy interpreters Mathusalem was then 167 years old, but according to the Hebrew Scripture he was 187 years old. The years, therefore, at which the Fathers in each generation before the flood were [when] they begot their sons, are thus according to the Seventy interpreters.3
Ante diluvium Adam genuit Seth, cum esset annorum 230. Seth 205. Enos 190. Cainan 170. Malaleel 165. Iared 162. Henoch 165. Mathusalem 167. Lamech 188. Noe cum incepit diluvium erat 600. Summa 2242.
Before the flood, Adam begot Seth when he was 230 years old. Seth, 205. Enos, 190. Cainan, 170. Malaleel, 165. Jared, 162. Henoch, 165. Mathusalem, 167. Lamech, 188. Noe, when the flood began, was 600. Sum: 2,242.4
Codices igitur Septuaginta Interpretum ab Adamo usque ad diluvium habent plures annos, quam sunt in Hebraeis, quingentos octogintasex. AC nos quidem in his annorum supputationibus, qui sunt apud LXX. interpretes, secuti sumus codices, qui nunc extant omnium emendatissimi: eum praesertim codicem Graecum, qui Romae nuper singulari cura Illustrissimi Cardinalis Carafae (cui omnes divinarum litterarum amatores cultoresque debent plurimum) editus est, egregiaque opera docti, ac mihi amicissimi viri Flaminii Nobilii Latine redditus, accuratisque notationibus illustratus. Olim namque codices Graecos LXX. Interpretum varios admodum & discrepantes fuisse, indicio est, quod, antiqui scriptores eos secuti, longe diversum annorum numerum tradiderunt.
The codices of the Seventy Interpreters, therefore, have from Adam to the flood 586 years more than there are in the Hebrew. And we indeed, in these reckonings of years which are in the LXX interpreters, have followed the codices which now exist as the most emended of all — especially that Greek codex which was recently published at Rome by the singular care of the most illustrious Cardinal Carafa (to whom all lovers and cultivators of the divine letters owe very much), and rendered into Latin by the excellent labor of the learned man most friendly to me, Flaminius Nobilius, and illustrated with accurate annotations. For that the Greek codices of the LXX Interpreters were formerly quite various and discrepant is proved by the fact that ancient writers who followed them handed down a far different number of years.5
ETENIM Iosephus primo libro Antiquitatum capit. 3. ab Adamo usque ad diluvium numerat annos bis mille sexcentos quinquaginta sex. Verum locus ille Iosephi (nisi me fallit animus) plane corruptus & depravatus est. Siquidem eo loci Iosephi computatio annorum discrepat tam a Scriptura Hebraica, quam a translatione Septuaginta interpretum: quinetiam ipsa se penitus destruit. Summam enim, annorum Iosephus facit bis mille sexcentos quinquaginta sex, at ex annis quos singulis generationibus assignat, longe minor existit summa, continens scilicet annos duntaxat bis mille centum nonaginta tres, ut ex iis quae subiiciam liquido perspicitur. Assignat Iosephus Adamo prius quam is genuit Seth ducentos triginta annos: ipsi autem Seth ducentosquinque: Enos centum nonaginta, Cainan centum septuaginta, Malaleel centum sexagintaduos, Iared centum sexagintaduos, Enoch centum quinque, Mathusale centum octogintaseptem, Lamech centum octoginta duos, denique Noe usque ad diluvium sexcentos. Ex his omnibus supradicta conficitur summa annorum bis mille centum nonagintatrium. Sine dubitatione igitur ulla putandum est illum Iosephi locum esse mendosum. Equidem crediderim Iosephum in hac computatione annorum, non transla
For Josephus, in the first book of the Antiquities, ch. 3, numbers from Adam to the flood 2,656 years. But that place of Josephus (unless my mind deceives me) is plainly corrupt and depraved. For there Josephus's computation of years differs both from the Hebrew Scripture and from the translation of the Seventy interpreters; indeed it utterly destroys itself. For Josephus makes the sum of years 2,656, but from the years which he assigns to each generation, a far smaller sum results — namely, containing only 2,193 years, as is clearly seen from those which I will subjoin. Josephus assigns to Adam, before he begot Seth, 230 years; to Seth 205; to Enos 190; to Cainan 170; to Malaleel 162; to Jared 162; to Enoch 105; to Mathusale 187; to Lamech 182; and finally to Noe, up to the flood, 600. From all these the aforesaid sum of 2,193 years is produced. Without any doubt, therefore, it must be thought that that place of Josephus is faulty. I for my part would believe that Josephus, in this computation of years, [followed] not the transla[tion of the LXX]...6
tionem LXX. Interpretum, sed Scripturam Hebaicam cum qua Latina consentit versio, secutum esse. Ducor ad id existimandum ea coniectura, quod paulo infra Iosephus enumerando annos, qui praeterierunt a diluvio usque ad ortum Abrahae, tam in ipsa summa, quam in annis, quos sigillatim cuique generationi attribuit, cum translatione LXX. interpretum nullo modo, cum Scriptura vero Hebraica omnino consentit. Fit igitur admodum credibile etiam in computatione annorum, quos illo loco recenset ab Adamo usque ad diluvium, secutum eum fuisse Chronologiam Scripturae Hebraicae. Ergo locum illum Iosephi mendosum, ad veritatem Scripturae Hebraicae, sic reor esse restituendum atque emendandum. Primo, ex ipsa summa detrahendum est illud bis, & ita legendum: Post annum ab Adamo millesimum sexcentesimum quinquagesimum sextum: hanc enim summam annorum habet Chronologia Scripturae Hebraicae ab Adamo usque ad diluvium. Deinde, ex singulis generationibus detrahere oportet centum annos prius quam pater genuit filium, quos nescio quis, imperitus nempe, ad formam & similitudinem translationis LXX. interpretum, temere adiecit. Excipio tamen duas generationes, unam Malaleel, alteram Iared quarum utrique Iosephus ascribit centum, sexaginta duos annos: ex utraque enim non tantum detrahere oportet centum annos, sed pro sexaginta duobus in utraque ponere oportet sexaginta quinque, sic enim est in Scriptura Hebraica. Atque hoc modo correctus ille locus veram reddet sententiam, & cum Scriptura Hebraica, nostraque translatione Latina omnino congruentem.
...the translation of the LXX Interpreters, but the Hebrew Scripture, with which the Latin version agrees. I am led to think this by this conjecture: that a little below, Josephus, in enumerating the years that passed from the flood to the birth of Abraham, both in the sum itself and in the years which he attributes to each generation individually, in no way agrees with the translation of the LXX interpreters, but wholly agrees with the Hebrew Scripture. It becomes therefore quite credible that also in the computation of the years which he there reviews from Adam to the flood, he followed the Chronology of the Hebrew Scripture. Therefore, that faulty place of Josephus I think must be restored and emended to the truth of the Hebrew Scripture thus. First, from the sum itself, that 'twice' must be subtracted, and it must be read thus: 'After the one-thousand-six-hundred-and-fifty-sixth year from Adam' — for the Chronology of the Hebrew Scripture has this sum of years from Adam to the flood. Then, from each generation, one must subtract the 100 years [added] before the father begot the son, which someone — an unskilled person, namely — rashly added, after the form and likeness of the translation of the LXX interpreters. But I except two generations, one Malaleel, the other Jared, to each of which Josephus ascribes 162 years: for from each one must not only subtract 100 years, but instead of 62 in each put 65, for so it is in the Hebrew Scripture. And in this way that place, corrected, will yield the true sense, wholly congruent with the Hebrew Scripture and our Latin translation.7
SED hoc, ne cui forte locus ille Iosephi mendosus, aut imponeret aut negotium facesseret, velut in transcursu indicato, revertamur ad id quod docere aggressi fueramus, olim codices LXX interpretum in hac computatione annorum variasse plurimum. Eusebius enim ab Adamo usque ad diluvium recenset in Chronicis annos bis mille ducentos quadraginta duos: quem numerum tradunt etiam Severus Sulpitius & Isidorus. Post diluvium autem usque ad Abraham sunt anni secundum Eusebium mille septingenti viginti: secundum Augustinum mille septuaginta duo: secundum Sulpitium mille septuaginta: secundum Isidorum nongenti quadraginta duo.
But this being indicated as if in passing — lest that faulty place of Josephus should perhaps impose on anyone or make trouble — let us return to what we had set out to teach: that formerly the codices of the LXX interpreters varied very much in this computation of years. For Eusebius, from Adam to the flood, reckons in the Chronicles 2,242 years — which number Severus Sulpicius and Isidore also hand down. But after the flood to Abraham there are, according to Eusebius, 1,720 years; according to Augustine, 1,072; according to Sulpicius, 1,070; according to Isidore, 942.8

Translator’s notes

  1. Quaestio II: the comparison of the Hebrew/Vulgate chronology with the Septuagint's. Verso running head 'COMMENTARIORVM' number '776'; true printed page 786. ↩
  2. The LXX partly agrees with the Hebrew: (1) it makes nearly the same TOTAL lifespan for each (Adam 930, though begetting Seth at 230 not 130) — except Lamech (Hebrew 777, LXX 753); (2) three generations (Jared before the flood, Terah after, and Shem) match the Hebrew exactly, both before and after their begetting. Marginal gloss: 'In computatione annorum, Septuaginta interpretum partim consonam, partim dissonam esse Scripturae Hebraicae.' ↩
  3. How the LXX differs: (1) it adds 100 years to the begetting-age of six pre-flood patriarchs (Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Malaleel, Enoch) and six post-flood (Arphaxad, Cainan, Sale, Heber, Reu, Serug); (2) it adds more than 100 to Peleg (104) and Nahor (150); (3) it adds fewer than 100 to some (Lamech +6, begetting Noah at 188 not 182); (4) it subtracts 20 from Methuselah (167 vs. 187). A table of the LXX begetting-ages follows. ↩
  4. The Septuagint begetting-age table (each father's age at begetting the next; Noah's age at the flood): Adam 230, Seth 205, Enos 190, Cainan 170, Malaleel 165, Jared 162, Henoch 165, Methuselah 167, Lamech 188, Noah 600 — summing to 2,242 (compared with the Hebrew's 1,656). Odd-side running head 'IN GENESIM, LIB. VII.' number '777'; true printed page 787. ↩
  5. So the LXX exceeds the Hebrew by 586 years (2,242 vs. 1,656) from Adam to the flood. Pererius follows the best current LXX — especially the recent Roman (Sixtine) edition sponsored by Cardinal Carafa and translated into Latin with notes by Flaminio Nobili. The old LXX codices were discrepant (shown by the divergent year-totals ancient writers drew from them). Marginal gloss: 'Codices 70. interpretum omnium emendatissimi Romani.' ↩
  6. Josephus (Antiq. 1.3) states 2,656 years from Adam to the flood, but his own figures (Adam 230, Seth 205, Enos 190, Cainan 170, Malaleel 162, Jared 162, Enoch 105, Methuselah 187, Lamech 182, Noah 600 — a mix of LXX-like and Hebrew-like numbers) sum to only 2,193 — so the text is self-contradictory and corrupt. Pererius will argue Josephus followed [the Hebrew, not the LXX — continued next page]. Marginal glosses: 'Varietas codicum 70. Interpretum'; 'Iosephus corruptus ostenditur.' Catchword 'transla' (translationem; continues on the next page). ↩
  7. Pererius argues Josephus really followed the HEBREW, not the LXX: for Josephus's post-flood-to-Abraham figures (sum and details) agree wholly with the Hebrew, not the LXX — so his Adam-to-flood figures should too. Hence he emends Josephus's corrupt text to the Hebrew: change the total 2,656 → 1,656 (deleting the 'twice'/2000); strip the 100-year additions (a rash accretion imitating the LXX); and fix Malaleel and Jared from 162 to 65. Corrected, it agrees with the Hebrew and Vulgate. Marginal glosses: 'Iosephus in annorum numero Hebraicam veritatem secutus est'; 'Iosephi locus ab auctore emendatus.' Verso running head 'COMMENTARIORVM' number '778'; true printed page 788. ↩
  8. Returning to the main point (that the LXX codices varied greatly): from Adam to the flood, Eusebius (in the Chronicle), Severus Sulpicius, and Isidore give 2,242 years. From the flood to Abraham, the totals diverge widely — Eusebius 1,720; Augustine 1,072; Sulpicius 1,070; Isidore 942. Marginal glosses: 'Severus Sulpitius libr. 1. Sacra Historia'; 'Isidorus lib. 5. Etymolog. ca. ultimo'; 'Augustinus li. 16. de Civit. Dei cap. 10.' ↩