Mind of the Church

The mind of the Church, faithfully rendered into English

Library / Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume II

Book Fifteen — the multiplication of mankind after the flood

{And the sons of Gomer: Ascenez and Riphath and Thogorma.}

LatineEnglish

{And the sons of Gomer: Ascenez and Riphath and Thogorma.}1

Porro filii Gomer: Ascenez et Riphath et Thogorma.

E septem filiis Iaphet duorum tantum posteri memorantur, Gomeri tres et Iavan quatuor: nam reliqui, parentum suorum nominibus contenti, nullas sibi adoptaverunt gentiles appellationes; vel eos scriptura uno communi nomine comprehensos commemoravit, quod apud eos nihil fuerit nobilius atque illustrius capite ipsius familiae et primogeneris auctore. Primus filiorum Gomer nominatur a Latino interprete Ascenez, Graece Ascanaz, sed Hebraice Aschenaz: Aschenazaeos autem Iosephus putat esse Rheginos; alii, Gothos; Iudaei nostri temporis, Germanos, nempe secuti Thargum Hierosolymitanum, in quo vocabulum Gomer exponitur Africa, Aschenas autem Germania. Sed id falsum esse arguitur ex Hieremia, apud quem capite 51 (ubi agitur de excidio Babylonis et de variis gentibus quibus sociis et auxiliantibus Medi Babylonicum imperium eversuri erant) inter eas gentes commemorantur Ascenez, qui socia[e]…
Of the seven sons of Iaphet the posterity of only two are mentioned, Gomer's three and Iavan's four: for the rest, content with the names of their parents, adopted for themselves no national appellations; or scripture mentioned them comprehended under one common name, because among them there was nothing more noble and illustrious than the head of the family itself and the author of the first stock. The first of the sons of Gomer is named by the Latin interpreter Ascenez, in Greek Ascanaz, but in Hebrew Aschenaz: and the Aschenazaei Josephus thinks to be the Rhegini; others, the Goths; the Jews of our time, the Germans — namely, following the Jerusalem Targum, in which the word Gomer is expounded ‘Africa,’ but Aschenas ‘Germany.’ But that this is false is argued from Jeremiah, in whom, chapter 51 (where it is treated of the destruction of Babylon and of the various nations by whose alliance and aid the Medes were to overthrow the Babylonian empire), among those nations the Ascenez are mentioned, who as allie[s]…2
…socia arma cum Medis laturi erant adversus Babylonios. Ex quo non vana fit coniectura, eos fuisse de populis Asiaticis ad imperium Medorum pertinentibus; et hoc similius vero videtur, quam fuisse eos vel Rheginos vel Gothos.
…[the Ascenez] who were to bear allied arms with the Medes against the Babylonians. Whence it is no vain conjecture that they were of the Asiatic peoples belonging to the empire of the Medes; and this seems more like the truth than that they were either the Rhegini or the Goths.3
ALTER filius Gomer nominatur Riphat, cuius nusquam alibi (secundum divinam scripturam) quam 1 Paralipomenon cap. 1 mentionem facit, fortasse quod, longius a ceteris fratribus recedens, longinquas occupaverit oras; quo fit ut, quasi sub alio degens caelo, praetereatur in sacris literis. An Riphei vel Riphataei sint, quos postea Graeci dixere Paphlagones, nec improbare habeo, nec (praeter auctoritatem ita sentientium) approbare.
The second son of Gomer is named Riphat, of whom, according to the divine scripture, mention is made nowhere else than in 1 Chronicles ch. 1 — perhaps because, withdrawing farther from the rest of the brothers, he occupied distant coasts; whence it comes that, as one living under another sky, he is passed over in the sacred letters. Whether they are the Riphaei or Riphataei, whom the Greeks afterward called Paphlagonians, I have neither [reason] to disprove, nor (beyond the authority of those who think so) to approve.4
TERTIUS filius appellatur Thogorma, qui non tantum 1 Paralipomenon cap. 1, sed etiam apud Ezechielem (nec semel quidem) nominatur. Sed qui fuerunt Thogormaei? Iosephus quidem putat fuisse Phryges; Iudaei, Turcas (namque Turcarum Imperatorem nominant Thogar); aliqui, Cappadoces; multi, Germanos — cui opinationi suffragatur Chaldaeus interpres, qui apud Ezechielem cap. 27 pro Thogorma exposuit Germaniam, ubi Propheta, loquens de mercatu Tyriorum, dixit: De domo Thogorma equos et equites et mulos adduxerunt ad forum tuum. Sed ex eo ipso loco licet convincere vocabulo Thogorma non posse intelligi Germaniam; nullum enim commercium Germanis esse potuit cum Tyriis, immenso prope terrarum spatio inter se dissitis. Thargum Hierosolymitanum hoc loco pro Thogorma posuit Barbariam. At enim vero, cum apud Ezechielem cap. 38, inter varias gentes quas princeps Gog (id est, reges Syriae et Asiae) secum ad bellum Hebraeis inferendum trahunt, commemorarentur etiam Thogormaei, non temere quis putaverit eos fuisse populos Syriacos vel Asianos, eorum regum ditioni et dominationi subiectos.
The third son is called Thogorma, who is named not only in 1 Chronicles ch. 1, but also in Ezekiel (and not once only). But who were the Thogormaei? Josephus thinks they were the Phrygians; the Jews, the Turks (for they name the Emperor of the Turks Thogar); some, the Cappadocians; many, the Germans — which opinion the Chaldaic interpreter favors, who in Ezekiel ch. 27 rendered Germany for Thogorma, where the Prophet, speaking of the commerce of the Tyrians, said: “From the house of Thogorma they brought horses and horsemen and mules to thy market.” But from that very place one may prove that by the word Thogorma Germany cannot be understood; for the Germans could have had no commerce with the Tyrians, set so far apart from one another by almost an immense space of lands. The Jerusalem Targum in this place put Barbary for Thogorma. But indeed, since in Ezekiel ch. 38, among the various nations which the prince Gog (that is, the kings of Syria and Asia) draw with him to wage war on the Hebrews, the Thogormaei too are mentioned, one would not rashly think them to have been Syrian or Asian peoples, subject to the dominion of those kings.5

Translator’s notes

  1. Gen 10:3 (lemma). Margin: v. 3. ↩
  2. §20. Only Gomer's (3) and Iavan's (4) sons have named posterity. Gomer's first son Ascenez — Josephus: the Rhegini; others: the Goths; modern Jews: the Germans (the Jerusalem Targum: Gomer = Africa, Aschenas = Germany) — refuted from Jeremiah 51 (the Ascenez allied with the Medes against Babylon). Margins: “Whether the posterity of Ascenez were the Rhegini or Goths or Germans”; Josephus. Continues on p. 405. ↩
  3. §19 (cont., printed §-numbering offset by one from prior batch). Ascenez probably an Asiatic people under the Medes (not the Rhegini or Goths), per Jer 51. ↩
  4. §20. Riphat (named only in 1 Chron. 1, his line dwelling far off); perhaps the Paphlagonians (Josephus). Margin: “The Riphathaei, according to Josephus, were afterward called Paphlagonians.” ↩
  5. §21. Thogorma — Phrygians (Josephus), Turks (the Jews), Cappadocians, or Germans (the Chaldee on Ezek 27); but ‘Germany’ fails (no Tyrian trade with Germans); probably a Syrian/Asian people under Gog (Ezek 38). Margins: “Whether the Thogormaei were afterward the Phrygians, or the Turks, or Cappadocians, or Germans”; the passage Ezekiel ch. 27 & 38. ↩