Mind of the Church

The mind of the Church, faithfully rendered into English

Library / Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume II

Book Ten — the ark of Noah

And the door of the Ark thou shalt set in the side

LatineEnglish

And the door of the Ark thou shalt set in the side.1

Vers. 17. Ostium autem Arcae pones ex latere.

Illud Ex latere idem est quod in latere arcae, vel a latere; Graece est ek plagiōn, quod Ambrosius de Arca et Noë capite octavo vertit Ex adverso. S. Augustinus in Locutionibus in Genesim monet plerosque codices habere a latere...
That ‘in the side’ (ex latere) is the same as ‘in the side of the ark,’ or ‘from the side’; in Greek it is ek plagiōn, which Ambrose, in On the Ark and Noah, ch. 8, renders ‘from the front’ (ex adverso). St. Augustine, in the Locutions on Genesis, notes that very many codices have ‘from the side’…2
...a latere; nonnulli tamen habere Ex transverso. Significatur autem perspicue his verbis ostium non fuisse aut in tecto aut in angulis Arcae, sed in aliquo quatuor laterum Arcae; quorum duo erant latera longitudinis Arcae, scilicet longiora, altera duo latitudinis, quae breviora erant. Ac licet in lateribus longitudinis potuerit esse ostium, fere tamen Doctores putant fuisse in alterutro latere latitudinis, quod ibi commodius fuerit ad ingressum animalium in Arcam; inde enim incipiebant sex illi ordines mansionum in quibus habitabant animalia, ut illa, ingressa, in suas quaeque mansiones facile deducerentur.
…‘from the side’; but some have ‘from across’ (ex transverso). It is plainly signified by these words that the door was not either in the roof or at the corners of the Ark, but in one of the four sides of the Ark — of which two were the sides of the Ark’s length, namely the longer, the other two of the breadth, which were shorter. And although the door could have been in the sides of the length, yet the Doctors mostly think it was in one of the breadth-sides, because there it was more convenient for the entry of the animals into the Ark; for there began those six rows of lodgings in which the animals dwelt, so that they, having entered, might easily be led each to their own lodgings.3
Sed videndum est in quo cenaculo arcae fuerit ostium. Hugo libro primo De Arca morali capite tertio sententiam Doctorum et suam de ostio Arcae breviter his verbis exposuit: Cum enim dicitur, Pones ostium in latere deorsum, per latus deorsum videtur significare parietem lateralem, ad differentiam lateris quod sursum erat in tecto, in quo fortassis fenestra posita fuit. Affirmant autem Doctores ostium arcae inter secundam et tertiam mansionem locatum fuisse, ita ut limen eius fundo tertiae mansionis esset contiguum, introitus autem eius sursum in latere eiusdem mansionis excisus erat; ita ut ab ostio duae quidem mansiones deorsum essent, tres autem sursum. Et unam dicunt ad fimum animalium recipiendum ordinatam, secundam ad cibaria eorum; in tertia fuisse indomita animalia, in quarta mitia animalia, in quinta quae suprema erat homines et volatilia. Et verisimile est duas illas inferiores mansiones natante arca deorsum aquis fuisse demersas; tertia vero, in qua animalia erant quae spiramento aperti aëris egebant, prima supra aquas eminebat, ita ut foris per aquam ad arcam ascendentibus ostium fere per planum occurreret. Et secundum hunc modum fortassis dictum est, Pones ostium deorsum; vel deorsum ideo, quia in quacunque mansione poneretur, deorsum erat, ut arcam intrantium pedes exciperet. Sic Hugo.
But it must be seen in which deck of the ark the door was. Hugh, in the first book On the Moral Ark, ch. 3, set forth the opinion of the Doctors and his own about the door of the Ark briefly in these words: ‘For when it is said, “Thou shalt set the door in the side, below,” by “the side below” he seems to signify the lateral wall, in distinction from the side which was above in the roof, in which perhaps the window was placed. And the Doctors affirm that the door of the ark was placed between the second and third lodging, so that its threshold was contiguous to the floor of the third lodging, but its entrance was cut out above, in the side of that same lodging; so that from the door two lodgings were below, but three above. And one, they say, was ordained for receiving the dung of the animals; the second, for their food; in the third were the untamed animals; in the fourth, the gentle animals; in the fifth, which was the highest, men and birds. And it is likely that those two lower lodgings, as the ark floated, were sunk below the waters; but the third, in which were the animals that needed a breath of open air, projected first above the waters, so that to those approaching the ark from without through the water, the door met them almost on a level. And according to this manner perhaps it was said, “Thou shalt set the door below”; or “below” because, in whatever lodging it were placed, it was below, so that it might receive the feet of those entering the ark.’ Thus Hugh.4
Verum Hugoni ego quidem dupliciter non assentior: tum quod illud deorsum iungit cum ostio (debere autem iungi cum sequentibus, ex Hebraica scriptura et paraphrasi Chaldaica ac translatione Septuaginta Interpretum, supra ostensum a nobis est); tum quod existimat, iam incoepto diluvio terrisque aqua opertis, animalia natando ingressa esse in arcam; at Moses capite septimo aperte indicat ante diluvii principium et homines et animalia ingressa esse in arcam, ita scribens: Ingressus est Noë et filii eius, uxor eius et uxores filiorum eius cum eo in arcam, et de cunctis animantibus duo et duo ingressa sunt ad Noë in arcam; cumque transissent septem dies, aquae diluvii inundaverunt super terram. Idemque paulo infra repetens subiungit: Et inclusit eum Dominus de foris. Factumque est diluvium quadraginta diebus, et multiplicatae sunt aquae et elevaverunt arcam in sublime a terra. Buteo arbitratur ostium arcae fuisse super sentinam, ita ut in eo cenaculo ubi fuerunt animalia limen haberet, et in ipso limine cardines, unde fores versatae proclinarentur in terram scalarumque vicem supplerent quatuor cubitorum ascensu.
But I disagree with Hugh on two counts: both because he joins that ‘below’ with the door (whereas that it ought to be joined with what follows we showed above, from the Hebrew Scripture, the Chaldee paraphrase, and the translation of the Septuagint); and because he supposes that, the Flood having already begun and the lands covered with water, the animals entered the ark by swimming — whereas Moses, in chapter seven, plainly indicates that before the beginning of the Flood both men and animals entered the ark, writing thus: ‘Noah went in, and his sons, his wife and the wives of his sons with him, into the ark; and of all living things, two and two went in to Noah into the ark; and when seven days had passed, the waters of the Flood overflowed upon the earth.’ And repeating the same a little below, he subjoins: ‘And the Lord shut him in from without. And the Flood came for forty days, and the waters were multiplied and lifted up the ark on high from the earth.’ Buteo thinks the door of the ark was above the bilge, so that it had its threshold in that deck where the animals were, and in the threshold itself hinges, whence the leaf, turned, would lean down to the ground and serve in place of a stairway, by an ascent of four cubits.5
Ego sic sentio, ostium fuisse (ut ait Scriptura) in alterutro latere latitudinis arcae; nam et in animali homineque atque in aliis corporibus figurae quadrangularis sed non aequilaterae, proprie dicuntur latera quae continent latitudinem. Sed quanta fuerit altitudine ostium a basi Arcae sublatum, licet incertum sit ex ipsa Scriptura, verisimile tamen admodum est fuisse in cenaculo habitationis animalium quinque ferme cubitis elatum e basi Arcae. Nec difficile fuit mollem et facilem struere ascensum animalibus in Arcam ingressuris.
I think thus: that the door was (as Scripture says) in one of the breadth-sides of the ark; for in an animal and a man, and in other bodies of a quadrangular but not equilateral figure, those are properly called the ‘sides’ which bound the breadth. But how high the door was raised from the base of the Ark, although it is uncertain from Scripture itself, yet it is quite likely that it was in the deck of the animals’ habitation, raised about five cubits from the base of the Ark. Nor was it difficult to build a gentle and easy ascent for the animals about to enter the Ark.6
Necesse autem fuit optime clausum et usquequaque munitum fuisse ostium, commissuris omnibus firmissime compactis; et ad hoc significandum dixit Moses Deum foris clausisse ostium; futurum enim erat toto diluvii tempore aquis demersum, siquidem verum est quod Lyranus et Tostatus ex sententia et traditionibus Hebraeorum prodiderunt, arcam diluvii tempore duodecim circiter cubitis fuisse aquis demersam, ita ut totum ferme cenaculum animalium intra aquas fuerit. Sed hoc verum sit nec ne, disputabitur postea libro duodecimo qui erit de Diluvio.
It was necessary that the door be very well closed and everywhere fortified, all the joints most firmly compacted; and to signify this Moses said that God shut the door from without; for it was to be submerged in the waters throughout the whole time of the Flood — if indeed it is true what Lyra and Tostatus set forth, from the opinion and traditions of the Hebrews, that the ark, in the time of the Flood, was submerged in the waters about twelve cubits, so that nearly the whole deck of the animals was within the waters. But whether this be true or not, will be disputed later in the twelfth book, which will be on the Flood.7
Sequitur apud Mosen de fenestra Arcae. Fenestram in Arca facies. Hoc de fenestra Arcae quod habet Latina translatio, necnon et scriptura Hebraica atque paraphrasis Chaldaica, omiserunt Septuaginta Interpretes; namque pro hoc ipsi habent: Colligens facies arcam, quod ad fenestram arcae nihil plane pertinet; cur autem id omiserint, ne divinando quidem causam aliquam probabilem dicere possum. Pro vocabulo fenestram est hoc loco vox Hebraea Sohar, proprie significans lucem, praesertim vero meridianam; quapropter Hieronymus ait in Hebraeo haberi, Meridianum facies arcae, sed manifestius esse interpretatum a Symmacho dicente diaphanes, hoc est, Dilucidum facies arcae, volente fenestram intelligi. Significat etiam vox illa Sohar id quod lucem praebet; hoc autem dupliciter fieri contingit: aut quia lucem in se habens diffundit eam ad alia, ut lucerna sive lapis aliquis pretiosus igneo fulgore splendens; aut quia lucem transmittit, ut est fenestra per quam lux intrat in domum.
There follows in Moses about the window of the Ark. ‘Thou shalt make a window in the Ark.’ This about the window of the Ark, which the Latin translation has — as also the Hebrew Scripture and the Chaldee paraphrase — the Septuagint translators omitted; for in place of it they have ‘Gathering, thou shalt make the ark,’ which pertains plainly nothing to the window of the ark; and why they omitted it, I cannot, even by divining, say any probable cause. For the word ‘window’ there is in this place the Hebrew word Sohar, properly signifying ‘light,’ especially midday light; wherefore Jerome says that in the Hebrew it is, ‘A noon-light thou shalt make for the ark,’ but that it was more clearly translated by Symmachus, saying diaphanes, that is, ‘A transparency thou shalt make for the ark,’ meaning a window to be understood. That word Sohar also signifies that which gives light; and this happens in two ways: either because, having light in itself, it diffuses it to other things, as a lamp, or some precious stone shining with a fiery brilliance; or because it transmits light, as is a window through which light enters a house.8
Hebraei arbitrantur eo vocabulo significatam esse a Mose hoc loco lucernam ex grandiori quapiam gemma, ut Lychnite vel Carbunculo, tanta luce fulgentibus ut ubi fuerint tenebras inde aliquatenus discutiant. Huiusmodi ergo lucernae radiantis fulgore putant isti arcam, praesertim autem cenationem ubi erant homines, fuisse illuminatam. Sed enim negari non potest in arca fuisse fenestram quae aperiri et claudi potuerit; nam infra capite octavo dicitur, cessante diluvio, Noë aperuisse fenestram quam fecerat et per eam emisisse corvum atque columbam.
The Hebrews think that by that word Moses here signified a lamp made of some larger gem, such as a lychnites or carbuncle, shining with so great a light that, wherever they are, they dispel the darkness from thence to some degree. By the brilliance of such a radiant lamp, then, these men think the ark — especially the dining-room where the men were — was lighted. But it cannot be denied that there was in the ark a window that could be opened and closed; for below, in the eighth chapter, it is said that, when the Flood ceased, Noah opened the window which he had made, and through it sent out the raven and the dove.9
Alii opinantur in suprema parte cenaculi hominum per circuitum eius complures factas esse fenestras speculari lapide vel ex vitro crystallove, sic fabricatas et aptatas ut arcerent aquam, lucem vero admitterent; quocirca Moses nominans singulari numero fenestram...
Others suppose that in the upper part of the men’s deck, around its circuit, many windows were made of specular stone or of glass or crystal, so fashioned and fitted that they kept off the water but admitted the light; wherefore Moses, naming the window in the singular…10
...aut singulare posuit pro plurali, ut frequenter fit in sacris litteris, aut eam tantum fenestram quae praecipua erat in arca et cuius infra facturus erat mentionem hic nominare voluit. Tostatus putat fuisse veram fenestram, toto diluvii tempore clausam et bituminatam, nec pellucidam nec apertam nisi finito diluvio.
…either put the singular for the plural (as frequently happens in the sacred writings), or wished to name here only that window which was the chief one in the ark and of which he was to make mention below. Tostatus thinks it was a real window, closed and bitumened throughout the whole time of the Flood, neither transparent nor opened until the Flood was over.11
Buteo unam tantum facit fenestram, sed perlucidam, quae scilicet extrinsecus lucem accipiens transmitteret in arcam, eamque unam satis fuisse ad usum hominum. Namque animalia non desiderant lucem, nisi pastus et ea quibus eget acquirendi causa; naturaliter enim vel in foveis vel in cavernis et specubus, vel in densissimorum nemorum atque fruticum latibulis, vel in cavis arborum recessibus delitescere gaudent, et quasi lucem oderint totos dies latitant, noctibus tantum praedae et pastus causa prodeuntia. Videntur quoque praeter hominem animalium cetera etiam in tenebris aliquatenus cernere.
Buteo makes only one window, but a transparent one — which, receiving light from without, would transmit it into the ark; and that one was enough for the use of the men. For animals do not desire light, except for the sake of feeding and of acquiring the things they need; for by nature they delight to lurk in pits, or in caverns and dens, or in the lairs of the densest woods and thickets, or in the hollow recesses of trees, and, as if they hated the light, they lie hidden all day, coming forth only by night for prey and pasture. And the other animals, besides man, seem also to see somewhat in the dark.12
De fenestrae magnitudine nihil dixit Moses; sed Vatablus et Franciscus Oleaster hoc loco putant fuisse altitudinis unius cubiti, idque significatum esse a Mose cum subiunxit, Et in cubito summitatem eius consummabis, vel ut ipsi vertunt ex Hebraeo, in cubito sive ad cubitum consummabis eam superne; illud enim pronomen eius sive eam tam Graece quam Latine ambiguum est, cum et ad arcam et ad fenestram referri queat; isti autem referunt ad fenestram, tanquam Deus praeceperit fenestram fieri longam sive altam uno cubito, vel eam in uno illo supremo et trigesimo cubito altitudinis Arcae fieri debere. Latitudinem autem fenestrae aiunt non describi a Mose; quosdam tamen eam colligere ex longitudine, ut fenestrae latitudo fuerit sextae partis unius cubiti. Veruntamen et talis fenestra nimis parva proportione arcae et nullius fere usus fuisset, illudque verbum consummabis sive perficies denotat aliquid iam inchoatum nec dum tamen completum; qualis erat arca, quae quoad non habuit operculum seu tectum imperfecta fuit. Quid quod, si hic non agitur de ultimo tecto arcae, alibi nusquam eius fit mentio, cum tamen infra capite octavo scriptum sit Noë finito diluvio aperuisse tectum arcae. Ego, ut postremam sententiam minime improbo, ita secundam maxime probo.
About the window’s size Moses said nothing; but Vatablus and Francis Oleaster here think it was one cubit high, and that this was signified by Moses when he subjoined, ‘And in a cubit shalt thou finish the top of it,’ or, as they translate from the Hebrew, ‘in a cubit, or to a cubit, shalt thou finish it above’; for that pronoun ‘it,’ both in Greek and in Latin, is ambiguous, since it can be referred both to the ark and to the window; but these men refer it to the window, as though God commanded the window to be made one cubit long or high, or that it should be made in that one highest, thirtieth cubit of the Ark’s height. And the breadth of the window, they say, is not described by Moses; yet some gather it from the length, so that the window’s breadth was a sixth part of one cubit. But even such a window would have been too small in proportion to the ark, and of almost no use; and that word ‘thou shalt finish,’ or ‘complete,’ denotes something already begun but not yet completed — such as was the ark, which, until it had its covering or roof, was unfinished. And what of the fact that, if this is not about the final roof of the ark, no mention of it is made anywhere else — whereas below, in the eighth chapter, it is written that Noah, when the Flood was over, opened the roof of the ark? I, as I by no means disapprove the last view, so I most approve the second.13

Translator’s notes

  1. Genesis 6:16 (the door clause; the original prints it as ‘Vers. 17’). ↩
  2. §(start; continues on p. 214): ‘in the side’ — the Greek ek plagiōn; Ambrose ‘from the front,’ Augustine notes many codices read ‘from the side.’ Margins: Ambrose; Augustine. ↩
  3. §(continued from p. 213): the door was in one of the four sides (not roof or corners) — likely in one of the short (breadth) sides, convenient for the animals’ entry. ↩
  4. §55: in which deck was the door? — Hugh reports the Doctors placing it between the second and third lodgings, and supposing the animals swam up to it. Margin: Hugh of St. Victor. ↩
  5. §56: Pererius disagrees with Hugh on two counts — ‘below’ should join what follows, and Moses (Gen 7) shows men and animals entered before the Flood began. Buteo placed the door above the bilge, with hinges letting the leaf swing down as a ramp. Margin: Buteo. ↩
  6. §57: Pererius — the door was in one breadth-side, likely about five cubits up in the animals’ deck, with an easy ramp. ↩
  7. §58: the door was sealed shut (God shut it from without) — the Ark sank perhaps 12 cubits, almost submerging the animals’ deck (Lyra, Tostatus, per Hebrew traditions; to be discussed in book 12). Margins: Lyra; Tostatus. ↩
  8. §59: the window — omitted by the Septuagint (which has ‘gathering, thou shalt make the ark’); the Hebrew Sohar (‘light,’ esp. midday), rendered by Jerome ‘a noon-light,’ by Symmachus ‘something transparent.’ Margin: Jerome, Hebrew Traditions. ↩
  9. §60: the Hebrews think it means a lamp made of a great gem (carbuncle); but there was certainly a window that could be opened (Gen 8 — Noah opened it to send the raven and dove). ↩
  10. §61 (continues on p. 216): others suppose many crystal/glass windows around the top deck (water-tight but light-admitting); ‘window’ (singular) for the plural, or naming only the chief window. Margin: (Tostatus). ↩
  11. §61 (continued from p. 215): the singular for the plural, or only the chief window; Tostatus thought it a real window, sealed shut all through the Flood. Margin: Tostatus. ↩
  12. §62: Buteo makes a single transparent window — enough for the men, since animals shun light and see in the dark. Margin: John Buteo. ↩
  13. §63: the window’s size — Vatablus and Oleaster make it one cubit high (the ‘in a cubit thou shalt finish it’ referred to the window), with a width of a sixth of a cubit; Pererius prefers the second view (the ‘cubit’ refers to the roof). Margins: Vatablus; Oleaster. ↩