Mind of the Church

The mind of the Church, faithfully rendered into English

Library / Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume II

Book Sixteen — the tower of Babel and the division of tongues

TWELFTH DISPUTATION. On the discrepancy of reading which exists between the Hebrew and Latin books, and among the Codices of the Seventy Translators, concerning the computation of the years that elapsed from the flood to the birth of Abraham

LatineEnglish

TWELFTH DISPUTATION. On the discrepancy of reading which exists between the Hebrew and Latin books, and among the Codices of the Seventy Translators, concerning the computation of the years that elapsed from the flood to the birth of Abraham.1

DVODECIMA DISPVTATIO. De discrepantia lectionis quae est inter libros Hebraeos & Latinos, atque inter Codices Septuaginta Interpretum circa computationem annorum qui fluxerunt à diluvio usque ad ortum Abrahae.

EX quibus Hebraica scriptura & Latina vulgata editio in capite undecimo libri Geneseos tribuunt singulis generationibus eorum qui fuerunt à diluvio usque ad ortum Abrahae, evidenter colligitur inter utrumque qui interfluxit annorum descriptio. Siquidem Sem duobus annis post diluvium genuit Arphaxad: Arphaxad genuit Sale, cùm esset triginta quinque annorum: Sale triginta annos natus genuit Heber: Heber natus triginta quatuor annos genuit Phaleg: Phaleg triginta annos natus genuit Reu: Reu triginta & duos annos natus genuit Sarug: Sarug cùm annorum esset triginta genuit Nachor: Nachor cùm annorum esset viginti novem genuit Thare: Thare septuaginta annis praeditus genuit Abraham. His omnibus annis simul collectis efficitur summa annorum ducentorum nonaginta duorum qui à diluvio excurrerunt usque ad Abraham; ut apparet in subiecta descriptione. Sem 2. Arphaxad 35. Sale 30. Heber 34. Phaleg 30. Reu…
From the [years] which the Hebrew scripture and the Latin Vulgate edition assign, in the eleventh chapter of Genesis, to the several generations of those who lived from the flood to the birth of Abraham, there is plainly gathered the reckoning of years that elapsed between the two. For Sem, two years after the flood, begot Arphaxad; Arphaxad begot Sale when he was thirty-five years old; Sale, at thirty years, begot Heber; Heber, at thirty-four years, begot Phaleg; Phaleg, at thirty years, begot Reu; Reu, at thirty-two years, begot Sarug; Sarug, at thirty years, begot Nachor; Nachor, at twenty-nine years, begot Thare; Thare, endowed with seventy years, begot Abraham. With all these years gathered together there is made a sum of two hundred ninety-two years, which ran from the flood to Abraham — as appears in the table set below. Sem 2; Arphaxad 35; Sale 30; Heber 34; Phaleg 30; Reu…2
Reu 32. Sarug 30. Nachor 29. Thare 70. SVMMA CCXCII.
Reu 32; Sarug 30; Nachor 29; Thare 70. SUM: 292.3
ADDITA porrò generatione Cainan, de qua proxima disputatione explicatum est, excrescit supradicta summa annis triginta: siquidem annorum erat Cainan triginta cùm genuit Sale. Nam licet codices Graeci habeant fuisse eum tunc annorum centum triginta, illos tamen centum annos, qui & in aliis generationibus adiecti sunt annis quos habent Hebraei Latinique codices, mendosos & à Septuaginta Interpretibus positos non esse, in septimo libro (qui est ultimus primi tomi Commentariorum nostrorum in Genesim) diligenter à nobis copiosèque disputatum ac demonstratum est. Ergo supradictis ducentis nonaginta duobus annis adiecti triginta anni Cainan, efficiunt summam annorum trecentorum viginti duorum, qui à diluvio transacti sunt usque ad ortum Abrahae.
Furthermore, with the generation of Cainan added — about which it was explained in the last disputation — the aforesaid sum increases by thirty years; for Cainan was thirty years old when he begot Sale. For although the Greek codices have that he was then a hundred and thirty years old, those hundred years — which in the other generations too are added to the years that the Hebrew and Latin codices have — are corrupt and were not set down by the Seventy Translators, as we have diligently and at length disputed and demonstrated in the seventh book (which is the last of the first volume of our Commentaries on Genesis). Therefore, to the aforesaid two hundred ninety-two years the thirty years of Cainan being added make a sum of three hundred twenty-two years, which passed from the flood to the birth of Abraham.4
CETERVM triplex hoc loco discrepantia lectionis inter codices Graecos, atque inter Hebraeos simulque Latinos annotanda est. Prima discrepantia: Graeci codices, praeter Sem & Thare, in aliis omnibus generationibus, annis quos (secundum Hebraeos & Latinos codices) nati dicuntur patres priusquam genuerint filios, addunt alios centum: quinimò ipsi Nachor adiiciunt annos centum quinquaginta; ut videre licet in subiecta descriptione. Sem genuit Arphaxad post Diluvium annos 2. Arphaxad genuit Cainan cùm esset annorum 135. Cainan 130. Sale 130. Heber 134. Phaleg 130. Reu 132. Sarug 130. Nachor 179. Thare cùm genuit Abraham, erat annorum 70. SVMMA M.CLXXII.
Besides, a threefold discrepancy of reading must here be noted between the Greek codices on the one hand and the Hebrew together with the Latin on the other. The first discrepancy: the Greek codices, except for Sem and Thare, in all the other generations add another hundred to the years at which the fathers (according to the Hebrew and Latin codices) are said to have lived before they begot their sons; indeed to Nachor himself they add a hundred and fifty years — as may be seen in the table set below. Sem begot Arphaxad two years after the Flood; Arphaxad begot Cainan when he was 135 years old; Cainan 130; Sale 130; Heber 134; Phaleg 130; Reu 132; Sarug 130; Nachor 179; Thare, when he begot Abraham, was 70 years old. SUM: 1,172.5
Secuti autem sumus in hac computatione annorum emendatissimos codices Graecos qui nunc extant, praesertim verò Romanum codicem Graecum nuper editum. Verùm additionem illorum centum annorum ad annos quos habent Hebraei & Latini codices mendosam esse, nec verè à Septuaginta Interpretibus profectam, sed in eorum translationem ab aliquo insultam, docuimus in libro Commentariorum nostrorum in Genesim, in Disputatione de Chronologia quae est ab exordio Mundi usque ad Diluvium, quaestione tertia.
In this computation of years we have followed the most corrected Greek codices now extant, especially the Roman Greek codex lately published. But that addition of those hundred years to the years which the Hebrew and Latin codices have is corrupt, and did not truly proceed from the Seventy Translators, but was foisted into their translation by someone — as we taught in [the first volume] of our Commentaries on Genesis, in the Disputation on the Chronology from the beginning of the World to the Flood, the third question.6
ALTERA discrepantia quae est hoc loco inter Hebraeos & Latinos…
The second discrepancy that exists here between the Hebrew and Latin…7
…nos libros, atque inter codices Graecos, in eo est quod Graeci codices in singulis generationibus quae fuerunt post Diluvium addunt his verbis, Et mortuus est: & exempli causâ sic illi habent: Vixit Arphaxad postquam genuit Cainan trecentis annis, & genuit filios & filias, & mortuus est: itemque hoc, Et mortuus est, adiiciunt singulis sequentium generationum: quae tamen verba non habet scriptura Hebraica, nec Latina editio vulgata, neque paraphrasis Chaldaica. Quin hoc ipsum ponderans Beda in Annotationibus suis in Genesim super hunc locum: Nusquam, inquit, in tota hac serie generationum quae fuerunt à diluvio usque ad Abraham additur illud, Et mortuus est, sicut in aetate illa quae praecessit diluvium: quia nemo erat in tota hac complexione mortuorum de quo, tanquam mortuo & non vivente, dici posset quod tunc de Henoch dictum est, Ambulavit cum Deo, & non apparuit, quia tulit illum Deus. Videtur igitur ex eo quod Moses singulis generationibus quae praecesserunt diluvium apposuerit illud, Et mortuus est; deinde illud idem in caeteris generationibus quae diluvium subsecutae sunt, à Graecis translatum.
…books, and between them and the Greek codices, consists in this: that the Greek codices, in each of the generations after the Flood, add the words 'And he died'; and, for example, they have it thus: 'Arphaxad lived, after he begot Cainan, three hundred years, and begot sons and daughters, and he died'; and likewise this, 'And he died,' they attach to each of the following generations — words which, however, the Hebrew scripture does not have, nor the Latin Vulgate edition, nor the Chaldee paraphrase. Indeed, weighing this very thing, Bede in his Annotations on Genesis upon this place says: ‘Nowhere in this whole series of generations which were from the flood to Abraham is added that phrase {And he died}, as in the age that preceded the flood; because there was none in this whole company of the dead of whom, as of one dead and not living, it could be said what was then said of Henoch, {He walked with God, and was not seen, because God took him}.’ It seems therefore that, from the fact that Moses appended to each of the generations preceding the flood that phrase 'And he died,' it was then carried over by the Greeks into the other generations that followed the flood.8
TERTIA discrepantia in numero annorum quos patres qui fuerunt post diluvium usque ad Abraham (praeter Sem, Thare & Cainan) vixisse dicuntur. Namque secundum Hebraeos & Latinos codices Arphaxad vixit quadringentos triginta octo annos; secundum Graecos codices Arphaxad vixit quadringentos triginta quinque: Sale secundum illos quadringentos triginta tres, secundum hos quadringentos sexaginta: Heber secundum illos quadringentos sexaginta quatuor, secundum hos quadringentos quatuor: Phaleg secundum illos ducentos triginta novem, secundum hos trecentos triginta novem: Reu secundum illos ducentos triginta novem, secundum hos trecentos triginta septem: Sarug secundum illos ducentos triginta, secundum hos trecentos triginta: Nachor secundum illos centum quadraginta octo, secundum hos trecentos quatuor. Verùm in subiecta descriptione licet apertiùs hoc cernere. Secundum Hebraeos & Latinos libros — Secundum codices Graecos. Arphaxad 438 — 435. Sale 433 — 460. Heber 464 — 404. Phaleg 239 — 339. Reu 239 — 337. Sarug 230 — 330. Nachor 148 — 304.
The third discrepancy is in the number of years which the fathers who lived after the flood down to Abraham (except Sem, Thare, and Cainan) are said to have lived. For according to the Hebrew and Latin codices Arphaxad lived 438 years; according to the Greek codices Arphaxad lived 435. Sale, according to the former, 433; according to the latter, 460. Heber, according to the former, 464; according to the latter, 404. Phaleg, according to the former, 239; according to the latter, 339. Reu, according to the former, 239; according to the latter, 337. Sarug, according to the former, 230; according to the latter, 330. Nachor, according to the former, 148; according to the latter, 304. But in the table set below one may discern this more plainly. According to the Hebrew and Latin books — According to the Greek codices: Arphaxad 438 — 435; Sale 433 — 460; Heber 464 — 404; Phaleg 239 — 339; Reu 239 — 337; Sarug 230 — 330; Nachor 148 — 304.9

Translator’s notes

  1. Disp. 12 title (the second of the Second Part's three disputations). On the discrepancy in the year-count from the Flood to Abraham's birth — between the Hebrew and the Latin (Vulgate), and even among the LXX codices themselves. ↩
  2. §181 (begins Disp. 12). Per the Hebrew and Vulgate (Gen 11), the years from the flood to Abraham's birth: Sem begot Arphaxad 2 yrs after the flood; Arphaxad begot Sale at 35; Sale begot Heber at 30; Heber begot Phaleg at 34; Phaleg begot Reu at 30; Reu begot Sarug at 32; Sarug begot Nachor at 30; Nachor begot Thare at 29; Thare begot Abraham at 70 — total 292 years (2+35+30+34+30+32+30+29+70). A table follows (Sem 2, Arphaxad 35, Sale 30, Heber 34, Phaleg 30, Reu… continues next page). ↩
  3. §181 (table concl.). The Hebrew/Vulgate generation-table completed: Reu 32, Sarug 30, Nachor 29, Thare 70 — grand total 292 years from the flood to Abraham's birth. ↩
  4. §182. If Cainan (Disp. 11) is counted, the total rises by 30 (his age at begetting Sale), giving 322 years from flood to Abraham. The Greek codices' figure of 130 for Cainan includes a spurious extra 100 years — added in the other generations too — which Pererius showed (vol. 1, bk. 7 of his Genesis Commentary, the Disputation on chronology) are corrupt and not from the genuine LXX. ↩
  5. §183 (first discrepancy). The Greek (LXX) codices, except for Sem and Thare, add 100 years to each father's age-at-begetting (e.g. Arphaxad 35→135, Sale 30→130), and to Nachor 150 (29→179). The LXX age-at-begetting table: Sem 2, Arphaxad 135, Cainan 130, Sale 130, Heber 134, Phaleg 130, Reu 132, Sarug 130, Nachor 179, Thare 70 — total 1,172 years (vs. the Hebrew/Vulgate 292, or 322 with Cainan). ↩
  6. §183 (concl.). Pererius's tables follow the best current Greek codices, especially the recent Roman edition; but he reaffirms that the spurious +100 years per generation was not the genuine LXX but a later interpolation (cross-referencing his vol. 1 Disputation on chronology, question 3). ↩
  7. §184 (begins). The second discrepancy between the Hebrew/Latin books and the Greek codices (continues next page). ↩
  8. §184 (concl.). Second discrepancy: the Greek codices append 'And he died' (Et mortuus est) to each post-flood generation (e.g. Arphaxad lived 300 years after begetting Cainan… and he died), which the Hebrew, Vulgate, and Chaldee (Targum) lack. Bede's Annotations note that the phrase appears in the pre-flood generations (to distinguish the dead from Henoch, who 'walked with God and was not seen, for God took him'), so the Greeks apparently transferred it into the post-flood list. Margin: 'Bede.' ↩
  9. §185 (third discrepancy). The total lifespans differ (excepting Sem, Thare, Cainan). Hebrew/Latin vs. Greek: Arphaxad 438/435, Sale 433/460, Heber 464/404, Phaleg 239/339, Reu 239/337, Sarug 230/330, Nachor 148/304. This closes Disp. 12 (the discrepancy of the flood-to-Abraham reckoning across Hebrew, Latin, and Greek texts). ↩