In Hebrew, word for word, it is: “And Noah, a man of the earth, began, and planted a vineyard.” Where there is a double Hebraism: one, “man of the earth,” for “devoted to the cultivation of the earth” (and as the Latin interpreter renders, “husbandman”); the other, “began and planted,” for “began to plant.” But how is it true that Noah first of all began to till the earth and to be a husbandman? Was not Adam a husbandman immediately from the beginning of the world, and after him Cain? But one must understand that Noah was the first of all after the flood. Or perhaps Noah was the author [originator] of agriculture, having invented the method of working the earth by animals, that is, of plowing with the ploughshare: for before, men dug and tilled the earth with their own hands. There follows: “And he planted a vineyard.” It is not to be doubted that before the flood there were vines, and at the rising of the world were created by God among the other species of plants. But then they were not in use among men, except perhaps for eating grapes; but for the drinking of wine, not at all. And the chief inventor of pressing wine from grapes and adapting it for drinking was Noah, and he first composed vines (sown here and there) into one place and into the form of a vineyard; and therefore he is truly called the first planter of the vineyard.²

But whence could he have vines, all the things sown of the earth being corrupted by the flood? Ambrose answers that after the flood the roots of the corrupted vines sprouted again in springtime, the earth being fertilized by moderate moisture and heat, and that Noah used these vines for making his vineyard. Tostatus says that vines indeed sprang up of their own accord from the earth, but wild ones, more productive of wild grapes than of [true] grapes; but that Noah cut shoots from them and inserted them into the best earth, and by suitable cultivation, the wild force being tempered, brought them to the procreation of the best grapes.³

But why was Noah so eager to drink wine, of the drinking of which he had been deprived for six hundred years? Chrysostom answers that it was well known to Noah himself how great a power wine had of soothing grief and sadness of mind, of healing diseases, of strengthening the powers, and of adding vigor and alacrity to a languishing spirit. And because after the flood there were many things which brought sadness to man, and the very nature of man had been made weaker and more liable to diseases, he rightly was eager to have wine as soon as possible, as a solace, remedy, and sup[port] of human life…⁴

…support of human life. For most true is what Pliny said: “Just as nothing is more useful to the human body than a moderate use of wine, so nothing is equally pernicious both to the body and to the mind, if the measure of wine be absent.”⁵

Ambrose marvels why Noah did not seek the fruit of wheat sooner than wine, since the use of wheat is necessary for man, but of wine not at all, but rather superfluous and for pleasure. He himself answers that Noah, being a just man, wished the invention of necessary things to be attributed to God; but the invention of those things which are not necessary, but rather contribute to some convenience or pleasure, he thought not unfitting to be attributed to man. But this seems a more probable answer: that the use of wheat even before the flood was very well known to men, but not so that of wine. Nor is it incredible that Noah bestowed zeal and care before all on wheat and other necessary things: but that mention is made chiefly of the vine and of wine, because Noah's drunkenness followed the drinking of wine, his nakedness [followed] the drunkenness, the derision of Cham [followed] the nakedness, the curse on his son Chanaan and all his posterity [followed] the mockery — of which posterity (that is, of the nation of the Canaanites) Moses chiefly wished in this place to presignify the curse.⁶

Berosus also relates things similar to this history of Moses: whose writings, although I think them feigned and worthy of no credence, nevertheless (as I said at the beginning of the eighth book of these Commentaries), on account of many learned men of our age who are greatly delighted by those writings and cannot bring themselves not to believe them, wherever he wrote things similar to Moses or contrary, I have thought it good to record them in their places and to refute them. As regards this history, therefore, he writes thus in the third book: “Noah, before he departed from Armenia (where he first settled after the flood), taught them simple agriculture, and first of all invented and planted vines, and taught how to make wine. For which cause they say he was called by the Ancients Janus, that is, the Wine-bearer, which word drew its origin from the Hebrew word Iaiim, which signifies wine.” So he. Nor is this to be passed over, that those words, “He began to till the earth,” have emphasis: for it is signified that after the flood it was more laborious and toilsome to cultivate the earth than before; and this on account of the malignity of the earth (much corrupted by the flood), and also on account of the less benign aspect and influence of the stars, finally on account of the greater weakness of man and his need of more things.⁷