LatineEnglish
THIRD DISPUTATION. In what month and on what day of the month the decrease of the flood began.
TERTIA DISPUTATIO. Quo mense et quoto die mensis coeperit fieri decrementum diluvii.
QUO autem mense, et quoto die mensis, diminutio aquarum diluvii coepta sit fieri, varie dicendum est, secundum varias sententias auctorum de illis centum quinquaginta diebus post quos ait Moses diminutas esse aquas diluvii. Namque Hugo Sancti Victoris in Annotationibus suis in Genesim (Hugonem autem secuti sunt Historia Scholastica et Lyranus, ut supra in libro duodecimo diximus) auspicatur istos centum quinquaginta dies ab ingressu Noë in Arcam, sive ab initio diluvii: et hac ratione, cum centum quinquaginta dies impleant quinque menses Solares (singulis mensibus assignando triginta dies), necesse est dicere diluvium coepisse diminui exactis quinque mensibus ab eius initio, et primo die sexti mensis. Quod si loquamur de mensibus non respectu diluvii inchoati sed respectu anni tunc currentis, vel anni sexcentesimi vitae Noë, dicendum est diluvium coepisse decrescere septimo anni illius mense et die decimo octavo eius mensis. Patet hoc: siquidem diluvium coeptum est die decima septima mensis secundi illius anni, id est, quadraginta septem diebus ab initio anni; quibus si addas centum quinquaginta dies diluvii usque ad eius decrementum, id est, quinque menses integros, verum esse quod dixi maxime facile intelliges.
But in what month, and on what day of the month, the diminution of the waters of the flood began, must be said variously, according to the various opinions of the authors about those hundred and fifty days, after which Moses says the waters of the flood were diminished. For Hugh of St. Victor, in his Annotations on Genesis (and Hugh was followed by the Scholastic History and Lyra, as we said above in the twelfth book), begins those hundred and fifty days from Noah's entry into the Ark, or from the beginning of the flood: and by this reasoning, since a hundred and fifty days fill five Solar months (assigning thirty days to each month), it is necessary to say that the flood began to diminish when five months from its beginning were completed, and on the first day of the sixth month. But if we speak of the months not with respect to the flood's beginning but with respect to the year then current, or the six hundredth year of Noah's life, it must be said that the flood began to decrease in the seventh month of that year, and on the eighteenth day of that month. This is plain: since the flood began on the seventeenth day of the second month of that year — that is, forty-seven days from the beginning of the year — to which, if you add the hundred and fifty days of the flood up to its decrease (that is, five whole months), you will most easily understand that what I said is true.1
AT vero secundum alteram sententiam eorum qui istos centum quinquaginta dies exordiuntur non ab initio diluvii, sed a fine quadragenariae pluviae (iam scilicet quadraginta diebus ab initio diluvii transactis — et haec est sententia Iosephi primo libro Antiquitatum, et B. Chrysostomi, Tostati quoque atque Caietani, ut supra diximus): secundum hanc, dico, sententiam multo secus dicendum est. Quippe si quaeratur quoto mense ab initio diluvii coeperint aquae eius diminui? Respondebimus coepisse diminui mense septimo et die undecimo eius mensis: id quod perspicue intelligitur, si ab initio diluvii computentur primo quadraginta dies pluviae, et post hos alii centum quinquaginta dies quibus stetit diluvium; ex utraque enim summa exsistunt centum nonaginta dies, qui efficiunt sex menses Solares integros, et praeterea decem dies septimi mensis. SIN autem quaeratur quoto mense respectu eius anni tunc currentis, vel respectu anni sexcentesimi vitae Noë, deficere coeperit diluvium: respondendum est coepisse deficere die vigesima septima mensis octavi. Nec dubium hoc esse potest, siquidem cum incepit diluvium, iam illius anni praeterierant primus mensis et sexdecim [dies]…
But according to the other opinion — of those who begin those hundred and fifty days not from the beginning of the flood, but from the end of the forty-day rain (forty days from the beginning of the flood having now elapsed — and this is the opinion of Josephus in the first book of the Antiquities, and of St. Chrysostom, and also of Tostatus and Cajetan, as we said above): according to this opinion, I say, it must be said far otherwise. For if it be asked in what month from the beginning of the flood its waters began to diminish, we shall answer that they began to diminish in the seventh month, and on the eleventh day of that month: which is clearly understood, if from the beginning of the flood there be computed first the forty days of rain, and after these the other hundred and fifty days during which the flood stood; for from both sums there arise a hundred and ninety days, which make six whole Solar months, and besides ten days of the seventh month. But if it be asked in what month — with respect to the year then current, or with respect to the six hundredth year of Noah's life — the flood began to fail: it must be answered that it began to fail on the twenty-seventh day of the eighth month. Nor can there be any doubt of this, since when the flood began, the first month of that year and sixteen [days]…2
…dies secundi mensis: coeptum enim est diluvium die decima septima mensis secundi. Deinde, usque ad decrementum diluvii, transierunt centum nonaginta dies, id est, quadraginta pluviae et centum quinquaginta status diluvii: centum autem nonaginta dies continent sex menses et insuper decem dies. Hinc necessario efficitur quod diximus, coepisse diminui aquas diluvii die vigesima septima mensis octavi illius anni.
…days of the second month had already passed: for the flood began on the seventeenth day of the second month. Then, up to the decrease of the flood, a hundred and ninety days passed — that is, forty of rain and a hundred and fifty of the flood's standing: and a hundred and ninety days contain six months and, besides, ten days. Hence it necessarily follows, as we said, that the waters of the flood began to diminish on the twenty-seventh day of the eighth month of that year.3
VERUM nescio equidem cur Iosephus, loco paulo superius memorato, scriptum reliquerit coepisse aquas sidere, id est, diminui ac deficere, mense septimo, vigesimo septimo die eius mensis. Nam cum ipse ab initio diluvii usque ad eius decrementum recenseat centum nonaginta dies, nullo modo sententia eius cohaerere potest. Nam si loquatur de mense respectu diluvii, dicere debuit coepisse deficere diluvium die undecimo mensis septimi; sin autem de mense respectu anni, dicendum ei fuit diminutionem diluvii fieri coepisse die vigesima septima mensis octavi. Itaque eius sententia nullum habet exitum. Aut igitur locus hic apud Iosephum mendosus est, ut pro mense octavo mendose scriptum sit mense septimo; vel ibi Iosephus per incuriam et incogitantiam lapsus est. Nam quod Moses dixit de Arca, ipsam quievisse super montes Armeniae mense septimo, die vigesimo septimo mensis, hoc ipse Iosephus applicuit ad id quod proxime antecesserat de initio decrementi diluvii post centum quinquaginta dies.
But I do not, for my part, know why Josephus, in the place mentioned a little above, left it written that the waters began “to settle” — that is, to diminish and fail — in the seventh month, on the twenty-seventh day of that month. For since he himself reckons a hundred and ninety days from the beginning of the flood up to its decrease, his statement can in no way cohere. For if he speaks of the month with respect to the flood, he ought to have said that the flood began to fail on the eleventh day of the seventh month; but if of the month with respect to the year, he should have said that the diminution of the flood began on the twenty-seventh day of the eighth month. And so his statement has no way out. Either, therefore, this passage in Josephus is corrupt — so that for “the eighth month” was erroneously written “the seventh month” — or there Josephus slipped through carelessness and inadvertence. For what Moses said about the Ark — that it rested upon the mountains of Armenia in the seventh month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month — this Josephus himself applied to that which had just preceded, about the beginning of the decrease of the flood after the hundred and fifty days.4
Translator’s notes
- §21. First reckoning (the 150 days from the flood's start, per Hugh/Hist. Schol./Lyra): decrease begins in the 6th month from the start, or the 7th month of the year, day 18. Margin: Hugh of St. Victor. ↩
- §22. Second reckoning (the 150 days from the rain's end, per Josephus/Chrysostom/Tostatus/Cajetan): decrease begins in the 7th month (day 11) from the start, or the 8th month of the year, day 27. Continues on p. 343. ↩
- Completes §22. ↩
- §23. A criticism of Josephus's inconsistent date (probably a textual corruption or a slip). Margin: “A remark on Josephus.” ↩