LatineEnglish
SECOND DISPUTATION. When the closing of the fountains of the deep was made.
SECUNDA DISPUTATIO. Quando facta sit occlusio fontium abyssi.
ILLUD porro in hac Mosis narratione difficultatem habet, utrum quod Moses dixit de clausis fontibus abyssi et cataractis caeli, et de prohibitione pluviae, intelligere oporteat id esse factum post centum quinquaginta dies quibus stetit diluvium, an vero statim post quadraginta illos dies pluviae supra capite septimo memoratos a Mose. Vidit hanc difficultatem B. Augustinus: namque eandem quaestionem ponit ipse in Quaestionibus in Genesim, quaestione duodecima; quam licet ibi aperte non solvat, apparet tamen utram in partem propensior ipse fuerit. Sic enim ait: Quod scriptum est exaltatam esse aquam, legi opinor debet, imminutam esse aquam, vel cessasse aquam post centum quinquaginta dies, et adductum esse spiritum super terram, et desiisse aquam, et conclusos fontes abyssi et cataractas caeli, et detentam pluviam de caelo. Quaeritur utrum post centum quinquaginta dies haec facta sint, an per recapitulationem omnia commemorata sint quae post quadraginta dies pluviae fieri coeperunt: ut hoc solum ad centum quinquaginta dies pertineat, quod usque ad ipsos aqua exaltata est — aut de fontibus abyssi cessante iam pluvia, aut quia mansit in altitudine sua dum per illum spiritum siccaretur; cetera vero quae dicta sunt, non post centum quinquaginta dies omnia facta sint, sed commemorata sint omnia quae ex fine quadra[ginta dierum]…
Furthermore, this in the narrative of Moses has a difficulty: whether what Moses said about the closed fountains of the deep and the cataracts of heaven, and about the restraining of the rain, ought to be understood to have been done after the hundred and fifty days during which the flood stood, or rather immediately after those forty days of rain mentioned by Moses above in the seventh chapter. St. Augustine saw this difficulty: for he poses the same question in the Questions on Genesis, question twelve; which, although he does not openly solve it there, it nevertheless appears to which side he himself was more inclined. For he says thus: “What is written, that the water was raised up, ought, I think, to be read, that the water was diminished, or that the water ceased after a hundred and fifty days, and that a wind was brought upon the earth, and the water failed, and the fountains of the deep and the cataracts of heaven were closed, and the rain from heaven was held back. It is asked whether these things were done after the hundred and fifty days, or whether all the things which began to be done after the forty days of rain are recalled by recapitulation: so that this alone pertains to the hundred and fifty days, that up to them the water was raised up — either from the fountains of the deep, the rain now ceasing, or because it remained at its height while it was being dried by that wind; but the other things that were said were not all done after the hundred and fifty days, but all the things are recalled which from the end of the for[ty days]…”1
…quadraginta dierum fieri coeperunt. Sic Augustinus. Apparet igitur Augustinum propendisse in eam sententiam, ut illa facta sint post quadraginta dies pluviae, et posterius narrata sint a Mose per recapitulationem. Atque haec ipsa est Tostati sententia.
“…the forty days began to be done.” So Augustine. It appears, therefore, that Augustine inclined to that opinion: that those things were done after the forty days of rain, and were narrated later by Moses by recapitulation. And this is the very opinion of Tostatus.2
OLEASTER omni asseveratione dicit nec eruptionem fontium abyssi, nec pluviam de caelo, cessasse nisi post centum quinquaginta dies. Verum pro Tostato et contra Oleastrum multa faciunt. Primo, supra capite septimo dixit Moses factam esse pluviam quadraginta diebus et quadraginta noctibus: at si pluvia durasset centum quinquaginta diebus, hoc utique dixisset Moses, cum hoc tum ad declarandam veritatem historiae, tum ad indicandam diluvii magnitudinem magis accommodatum esset. Deinde, Moses eodem loco dixit diluvium esse factum quadraginta diebus, significans auctum et incrementum aquarum usque ad summum: si autem semper aquae diluvii per centum quinquaginta dies crevissent, verius dictu fuisset diluvium esse factum centum quinquaginta diebus, non tantum quadraginta diebus. Nam quod respondet Oleaster, illos quadraginta dies pluviae et diluvii tantum intelligi debere de diluvio priusquam sublevari posset Arca super terram, non autem quod per illos dies totum diluvii incrementum consummatum sit: quis non videt simile figmento esse, magisque dictum ne nihil diceretur quam quo aliquid vel in speciem probabile diceretur? Ad haec, postquam aquae diluvii operuerunt terram usque ad vertices montium, quomodo ex fontibus abyssi (hoc est, ex profundissimis terrae cavernis) poterat erumpere aqua, et supra vertices montium exsilire, ut reliquum diluvii incrementum (videlicet usque ad quindecim cubitos super vertices montium) adderet?
Oleaster says with all asseveration that neither the eruption of the fountains of the deep nor the rain from heaven ceased except after the hundred and fifty days. But many things tell for Tostatus and against Oleaster. First, above, in the seventh chapter, Moses said that the rain occurred for forty days and forty nights: but if the rain had lasted a hundred and fifty days, Moses would surely have said this, since it would have been more suited both to declaring the truth of the history and to indicating the magnitude of the flood. Next, Moses in the same place said that the flood occurred for forty days, signifying the growth and increase of the waters up to the highest [point]: but if the waters of the flood had always grown through the hundred and fifty days, it would have been truer to say that the flood occurred for a hundred and fifty days, not only for forty. For as to what Oleaster answers — that those forty days of rain and flood are to be understood only of the flood before the Ark could be lifted up over the earth, and not that during those days the whole increase of the flood was completed — who does not see that it is like a fiction, and said rather lest nothing be said, than in order that something even seemingly probable be said? Besides, after the waters of the flood had covered the earth up to the peaks of the mountains, how could water burst forth from the fountains of the deep (that is, from the deepest caverns of the earth), and leap up above the peaks of the mountains, so as to add the remaining increase of the flood (namely, up to fifteen cubits above the peaks of the mountains)?3
POSTREMO, si per totos illos centum quinquaginta dies perpetuo creverunt aquae, cum statim post illos dies Moses dicat diminutas esse aquas, sequeretur quo die aquae ad summum incrementum pervenerunt, eo ipso die continuo diminui ac deficere coepisse, nec aliquandiu in suo robore sive incremento mansisse: quod videtur contrarium divinae scripturae, quae sub finem septimi capitis dixit aquas obtinuisse terram (sive praevaluisse super terram, sive roboratas esse super terram — est enim varia eius loci lectio) centum quinquaginta diebus. Et hoc dixit scriptura, cum iam paulo ante dixisset aquas quindecim cubitis altissimos terrae montes excessisse.
Lastly, if through all those hundred and fifty days the waters grew continuously, then, since Moses says that immediately after those days the waters were diminished, it would follow that on the day on which the waters reached their highest increase, on that very day they continuously began to diminish and fail, and did not remain for any time at their strength or increase: which seems contrary to divine scripture, which, toward the end of the seventh chapter, said that the waters held the earth (or prevailed over the earth, or were strengthened over the earth — for the reading of that passage varies) for a hundred and fifty days. And scripture said this, when it had a little before said that the waters exceeded the highest mountains of the earth by fifteen cubits.4
Translator’s notes
- §18. The difficulty (when were the fountains closed?), and Augustine's leaning (Quaest. in Gen. q. 12). Margin: Augustine. Continues on p. 341. ↩
- Augustine (and Tostatus) lean toward the recapitulation reading. Margin: Tostatus on Gen. ch. 8. ↩
- §19. Pererius's arguments for Tostatus against Oleaster. Margins: Oleaster, ibid.; “The opinion of Oleaster is refuted.” ↩
- §20. A final argument: the 150 days denote the flood's standing at its peak, not its continued growth. ↩