 CHAPTER XV Some one, then, will say, is it to be believed that a man who intended to beget children, and had no intention of continence, abstained from sexual intercourse a hundred years and more, or even, according to the Hebrew version, only a little less, say eighty, seventy or sixty years, or if he did not abstain, was unable to beget offspring? This question admits of two solutions. For either puberty was so much later as the whole life was longer, or, which seems to me more likely, it is not the first-born sons that are here mentioned, but those whose names were required to fill up the series until Noah was reached, from whom again we see that the succession has continued to Abraham, and after him down to that point of time until which it was needful to mark by pedigree the course of the most glorious city which sojourns as a stranger in this world and seeks the heavenly country. Not which is undeniable, as that Cain was the first who was born of man and woman. For had he not been the first who was added by birth to the two unborn persons, Adam could not have said what he is recorded to have said, I have gotten a man by the Lord. He was followed by Abel, whom the elder brother slew, and who was the first to show, by a kind of foreshadowing of the sojourning city of God, what iniquitous persecutions that city would suffer at the hands of wicked, and as it were earth-born men who loved their earthly origin and delight in the earthly happiness of the earthly city. But how old Adam was when he begat these sons, does not appear. After this the generations diverged, the one branch deriving from Cain, the other from him whom Adam begot in the room of Abel, slain by his brother, and whom he called Seth, saying, as it is written, for God hath raised me up another seed for Abel whom Cain slew. These two series of generations, accordingly, the one of Cain, the other of Seth, represent the two cities and their distinctive ranks, the one the heavenly city which sojourns on earth, the other the earthly which gapes after earthly joys, and grovels in them as if they were the only joys. Though eight generations, including Adam, are registered before the flood, no man of Cain's line has his age recorded at which the son who succeeded him was begotten. For the Spirit of God refused to mark the times before the flood in the generations of the earthly city, but preferred to do so in the heavenly line, as if it were more worthy of being remembered. Further, when Seth was born, the age of his father is mentioned, but already he had begotten the other sons, and who will presume to say that Cain and Abel were the only ones previously begotten? For it does not follow that they alone had been begotten of Adam, because they alone were named in order to continue the series of generations which it was desirable to mention. For though the names of all the rest are buried in silence, yet it is said that Adam begot sons and daughters, and who that cares to be free from the charge of temerity will dare to say how many his offspring numbered. It was possible enough that Adam was divinely prompted to say, after Seth was born, for God hath raised up to me another seed for Abel, because that son was to be capable of representing Abel's holiness, not because he was born first after him in point of time. Then because it is written, and Seth lived two hundred and five years, or according to the Hebrew reading, one hundred and five years, and begot Enos, who but a rash man could affirm that this was his first born? Will any man do so to excite our wonder and causes to inquire how for so many years he remained free from sexual intercourse, though without any purpose of continuing so, or how, if he did not abstain, he yet had no children? Will any man do so, when it is written of him, and he begot sons and daughters, and all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years, and he died? And similarly, regarding those whose years are afterwards mentioned, it is not disguised that they begot sons and daughters? Consequently, it does not at all appear whether he who is named as the son was himself the first begotten. Nay, since it is incredible that those fathers were either so long entertaining puberty, or could not get wives, or could not impregnate them, it is also incredible that those sons were their first born. But as the writer of the sacred history designed to descend by well-marked intervals through a series of generations to the birth and life of Noah, in whose time the flood occurred, he mentioned not those sons who were first begotten, but those by whom the succession was handed down. Let me make this clear by here inserting an example in regard to which no one can have any doubt that what I am asserting is true. The evangelist Matthew, where he designs to commit to our memories the generation of the Lord's flesh by a series of parents beginning from Abraham and intending to reach David, says Abraham begot Isaac. Why did he not say Ishmael whom he first begot? Then Isaac begot Jacob. Why did he not say Esau who was the first born? Simply because these sons would not have helped him to reach David. Then follows, and Jacob begot Judah and his brethren. Is Judah the first begotten? Judah, he says, begat Phaeres and Zara. Yet neither were these twins the first born of Judah, but before them he had begotten three other sons. And so in the order of the generations he retained those by whom he might reach David, so as to proceed onwards to the end he had in view. And from this we may understand that the antediluvians who are mentioned were not the first born, but those through whom the order of the succeeding generations might be carried on to the patriarch Noah. We need not therefore weary ourselves with discussing the needless and obscure question as to their lateness of reaching puberty. CHAPTER XVI As therefore the human race subsequently to the first marriage of the man who was made of dust, and his wife who was made out of his side, required the union of males and females an order that it might multiply, and as there were no human beings except those who had been born of these two, men took their sisters for wives, an act which was as certainly dictated by necessity in these ancient days as afterwards it was condemned by the prohibitions of religion. For it is very reasonable and just that men, among whom concord is honorable and useful, should be bound together by various relationships, and that one man should not himself sustain many relationships, but that the various relationships should be distributed among several, and should thus serve to bind together the greatest number in the same social interests. Father and father-in-law are the names of two relationships. When therefore a man has one person for his father, another for his father-in-law, friendship extends itself to a larger number. But Adam and his single person was obliged to hold both relations to his sons and daughters, for brothers and sisters were united in marriage. So too Eve his wife was both mother and mother-in-law to her children of both sexes, while had there been two women, one the mother, the other the mother-in-law, the family affection would have had a wider field. Then the sister herself, by becoming a wife, sustained in her single person two relationships, which, had they been distributed among individuals, one being sister and another being wife, the family tie would have embraced a greater number of persons. But there was then no material for affecting this, since there were no human beings but the brothers and sisters born of those first two parents. Therefore, when an abundant population made it possible, men ought to choose for wives women who were not already their sisters, for not only would there then be no necessity for marrying sisters, but were it done, it would be most abominable. For if the grandchildren of the first pair, being now able to choose their cousins for wives, married their sisters, then it would no longer be only two but three relationships that were held by one man, while each of these relationships ought to have been held by a separate individual, so as to bind together by family affection a larger number. For one man would in that case be both father, and father-in-law, and uncle to his own children, brother and sister, now man and wife, and his wife would be mother, aunt, and mother-in-law to them, and they themselves would be not only brother and sister and man and wife, but cousins also, being the children of brother and sister. Now all these relationships, which combined three men into one, would have embraced nine persons had each relationship been held by one individual, so that a man had one person for his sister, another his wife, another his cousin, another his father, another his uncle, another his father-in-law, another his mother, another his aunt, another his mother-in-law, and thus the social bond would not have been tightened to bind a few but loosen to embrace a larger number of relations. And we see that since the human race has increased and multiplied, this is so strictly observed even among the profane worshippers of many and false gods, that though their laws perversely allow a brother to marry his sister, yet custom, with a finer morality, prefers to forego this license. And though it was quite allowable in the earliest ages of the human race to marry one's sister, it is now abhorred as a thing which no circumstances could justify. For custom has very great power, either to attract or to shock human feeling. And in this matter, while it restrains concupiscence within due bounds, the man who neglects and disobeys it is justly branded as abominable. For if it is iniquitous to plow beyond our own boundaries through the greed of gain, is it not much more iniquitous to transgress the recognized boundaries of morals through sexual lust? And with regard to marriage and the next degree of consanguinity, marriage between cousins, we have observed that in our own time the customary morality has prevented this from being frequent, though the law allows it. It was not prohibited by divine law, nor as yet had human law prohibited it. Nevertheless, though legitimate, people shrank from it, because it lay so close to what was illegitimate, and in marrying a cousin seemed almost to marry a sister. For cousins are so closely related that they are called brothers and sisters, and are almost really so. But the ancient fathers, fearing that near relationship might gradually, in the course of generations, diverge, and to become distant relationship, or cease to be relationship at all, religiously endeavored to limit it by the bond of marriage before it became distant, and thus, as it were, to call it back when it was escaping them. And on this account, even when the world was full of people, though they did not choose wives from among their sisters or half-sisters, yet they preferred them to be of the same stock as themselves. But who doubts that the modern prohibition of the marriage even of cousins is the more-seemly regulation? Not merely on account of the reason we have been urging, the multiplying of relationships, so that one person might not absorb two, which might be distributed to two persons, and so increase the number of people bound together as a family. But also, because there is in human nature I know not what natural and praiseworthy shame-facedness which restrains us from desiring that connection which, though for propagation, is yet lustful, in which even conjugal modesty blushes over with anyone to whom consanguinity bids us render respect. The sexual intercourse of man and woman, then, is in the case of mortals a kind of seed-bed of the city. But while the earthly city needs for its population only generation, the heavenly needs also regeneration to rid it of the taint of generation. Whether before the deluge there was any bodily or visible sign of regeneration, such as was afterwards enjoined upon Abraham when he was circumcised, or what kind of sign it was, the sacred history does not inform us. But it does inform us that even these earliest of mankind sacrificed to God, as appeared also in the case of the two first brothers. Noah, too, is said to have offered sacrifices to God when he had come forth from the ark after the deluge. And concerning this subject we have already said in the foregoing books that the devils arrogate to themselves divinity and require sacrifice that they may be esteemed gods and delight in these honors on no other account than this, because they know the true sacrifice is due to the true God. CHAPTER 17 Since then Adam was the father of both lines, the father, that is to say, both of the line which belonged to the earthly and of that which belonged to the heavenly city. When Abel was slain and by his death exhibited a marvelous mystery, there were henceforth two lines proceeding from two fathers, Cain and Seth, and in those sons of theirs whom it behoove to register the tokens of these two cities began to appear more distinctly. For Cain begot Enoch in whose name he built a city, an earthly one, which was not from home in this world, but rested satisfied with its temporal peace and happiness. Cain too means possession, wherefore at his birth either his father or mother said, I have gotten a man through God. Then Enoch means dedication, for the earthly city is dedicated in this world in which it is built, for in this world it finds the end towards which it aims and aspires. Further, Seth signifies resurrection, and Enoch's son signifies man, not as Adam, which also signifies man, but is used in Hebrew indifferently for man and woman, as it is written, male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, leaving no room to doubt that though the woman was distinctly called Eve, yet the name Adam, meaning man, was common to both. But Enoch means man in so restricted a sense that Hebrew linguists tell us it cannot be applied to woman. It is the equivalent of the child of the resurrection when they neither marry nor are given in marriage, for there shall be no generation in that place to which regeneration shall have brought us. Wherefore I think it not immaterial to observe that in those generations which are propagated from him who is called Seth, although daughters as well as sons are said to have been begotten, no woman is expressly registered by name. But in those which sprang from Cain at the very termination to which the line runs the last person named as begotten is a woman. Before we read, Methusel begot Lamek, and Lamek took unto him two wives, the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other is Zilla, and Adah bear Jabal, he was the father of the shepherds that dwell in tents, and his brother's name was Jubal, he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ, and Zilla she also bear tubelcain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron, and the sister of tubelcain was Nema. Here terminate all the generations of Cain being eight in number, including Adam, to wit seven from Adam to Lamek who married two wives, and whose children, among whom a woman also is named, form the eighth generation, whereby it is elegantly signified that the earthly city shall to its termination have carnal generations preceding from the intercourse of males and females, and therefore the wives themselves of the man who was the last named father of Cain's line are registered in their own names, a practice nowhere followed before the deluge save in Eve's case. Now as Cain signifying possession, the founder of the earthly city, and his son Enoch, meaning dedication, in whose name it was founded, indicate that this city is earthly both in its beginning and in its end, a city in which nothing more is hoped for than can be seen in this world, so Seth, meaning resurrection, and being the father of generations registered apart from the others, we must consider what this sacred history says of his son. CHAPTER XVIII And to Seth it is said, there was born a son, and he called his name Enos, he hoped to call on the name of the Lord God. Here we have a loud testimony to the truth. Man then, the son of the resurrection, lives in hope. He lives in hope as long as the city of God, which is begotten by faith in the resurrection, sojourns in this world. For in these two men, Abel, signifying grief, and his brother Seth, signifying resurrection, the death of Christ and his life from the dead are prefigured. And by faith in these is begotten in this world, the city of God, that is to say, the man who is hoped to call on the name of the Lord. For by hope, says the apostle, we are saved, but hope that is seen is not hope. For what a man seeeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we wait with patience for it. Who can avoid referring this to a profound mystery? For did not Abel hope to call upon the name of the Lord God when his sacrifice is mentioned in Scripture as having been accepted by God? Did not Seth himself hope to call on the name of the Lord God, of whom it was said, for God hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel? Why then is this, which is found to be common to all the godly, especially attributed to Enos, unless because it was fit that in him who is mentioned as the first born of the father of those generations which were separated to the better part of the heavenly city, there should be a type of the man or society of men who live not according to man in contentment with earthly felicity, but according to God in hope of everlasting felicity. And it was not said, he hoped in the Lord God, nor he called on the name of the Lord God, but he hoped to call on the name of the Lord God. And what does this hope to call mean, unless it is a prophecy that a people should arise who according to the election of Grace would call on the name of the Lord God? It is this which has been said by another prophet in which the apostle interprets of the people who belong to the grace of God, and it shall be that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. For these two expressions, and he called his name Enos, which means man, and he hoped to call on the name of the Lord God, are sufficient proof that man ought not to rest his hopes in himself, as it is elsewhere written, cursed is the man that trusteth in man. Consequently no one ought to trust in himself that he shall become a citizen of that other city which is not dedicated in the name of Cain's son in this present time, that is to say in the fleeting course of this mortal world but in the immortality of perpetual blessedness. CHAPTER 19 For that line also of which Seth as the father has the name dedication in the seventh generation from Adam, counting Adam, for the seventh from him is Enoch, that is, dedication, but this is that man who is translated because he pleased God and who held in the order of the generations a remarkable place being the seventh from Adam, a number signalized by the consecration of the Sabbath. But counting from the diverging point of the two lines, or from Seth, he was the sixth. Now it was on the sixth day God made man and consummated his works, but the translation of Enoch prefigured our deferred dedication. For though it is indeed already accomplished in Christ our head, who so rose again that he shall die no more, and who was himself also translated, yet there remains another dedication of the whole house of which Christ himself is the foundation, and this dedication is deferred till the end when all shall rise again to die no more. And whether it is the house of God, or the temple of God, or the city of God, that is said to be dedicated, it is all the same and equally in accordance with the usage of the Latin language. For Virgil himself calls the city of widest empire the house of Asaricus, meaning the Romans who were descended through the Trojans from Asaricus. He also calls them the house of Aeneas, because Rome was built by those Trojans who had come to Italy under Aeneas. For that poet imitated the sacred writings in which the Hebrew nation, though so numerous, is called the house of Jacob. Someone will say, if the writer of this history intended in enumerating the generations from Adam through his son Seth to descend through them to Noah, in whose time the deluge occurred, and from him again to trace the connected generations down to Abraham, with whom Matthew begins the pedigree of Christ the eternal king of the city of God, what did he intend by enumerating the generations from Cain, and to what terminus did he mean to trace them? We reply to the deluge by which the whole stock of the earthly city was destroyed but repaired by the sons of Noah. For the earthly city and community of men who live after the flesh will never fail until the end of this world, of which our Lord says the children of this world generate and are generated. But the city of God, which sojourns in this world, is conducted by regeneration to the world to come, of which the children neither generate nor are generated. In this world generation is common to both cities, though even now the city of God has many thousand citizens who abstain from the act of generation, yet the other city also has some citizens who imitate these though erroneously. For to that city belong also those who have erred from the faith and introduced diverse heresies, for they live according to man, not according to God. And the Indian gymnosephists who are said to philosophize in the solitudes of India and a state of nudity are its citizens, and they abstain from marriage. For confidence is not a good thing except when it is practised in the faith of the highest good, that is God. Yet no one is found to have practised it before the deluge, for indeed even Enoch himself, the seventh from Adam, who is said to have been translated without dying, begat sons and daughters before he was translated, and among these was Methuselah by whom the succession of the recorded generations is maintained. Why then is so small a number of Cain's generations registered, if it was proper, to trace them to the deluge, and if there was no such delay of the date of puberty as to preclude the hope of offspring for a hundred or more years? For if the author of this book had not in view someone to whom he might rigidly trace the series of generations, as he designed in those which sprang from Seth's seed to descend to Noah, and thence to start again by a rigid order, what need was there of omitting the firstborn sons for the sake of descending to Lamech, in whose sons that line terminates? That is to say, in the eighth generation from Adam, or the seventh from Cain, as if from this point he had wished to pass on to another series by which he might reach either the Israelite-ish people, among whom the earthly Jerusalem presented a prophetic figure of the heavenly city, or to Jesus Christ, according to the flesh who is overall God blessed forever, the maker and ruler of the heavenly city. What I say was the need of this, seeing that the whole of Cain's posterity were destroyed in the deluge. From this it is manifest that they are the firstborn sons who were registered in this genealogy. Why then are there so few of them? The numbers in the period before the deluge must have been greater, if the date of puberty bore no proportion to their longevity, and they had children before they were a hundred years old. For supposing they were on an average thirty years old when they began to beget children, then as there are eight generations, including Adam and Lamech's children, eight times thirty gives two hundred and forty years, did they then produce no more children in all the rest of the time before the deluge? With what intention, then, did he who wrote this record make no mention of subsequent generations? For from Adam to the deluge there are reckoned, according to our copies of Scripture, two thousand two hundred and sixty-two years, and according to the Hebrew text, one thousand six hundred and fifty-six years. Supposing then the smaller number to be the true one, and subtracting from one thousand six hundred and fifty-six years, two hundred and forty, is it credible that during the remaining one thousand four hundred and odd years until the deluge the posterity of Cain beget no children? But let anyone who is moved by this call to mind that when I discuss the question how it is credible that those primitive men could abstain for so many years from begetting children, two modes of solution were found, either a puberty late in proportion to their longevity, or that the sons registered in the genealogies were not the first born, but those through whom the author of the book intended to reach the point aimed at, as he intended to reach Noah by the generations of Sath, so that if in the generations of Cain there occurs no one whom the writer could make it his object to reach by omitting the first born and inserting those who would serve such a purpose, then we must have recourse to the supposition of a late puberty and say that only at some age beyond a hundred years they became capable of begetting children, so that the order of the generations ran through the first born and filled up even the whole period before the Deluge, long though it was. It is, however, possible that for some more secret reason which escapes me, this city, which we say is earthly, is exhibited in all its generations down to Lamech and his sons, and that then the writer withholds from recording the rest which may have existed before the Deluge. And without supposing so late a puberty in these men, there might be another reason for tracing the generations by sons who were not first born, namely that the same city which Cain built and named after his son Enoch may have had a widely extended dominion in many kings, not reigning simultaneously but successively, the reigning king begetting always his successor. Cain himself would be the first of these kings, his son Enoch in whose name the city in which he reigned was built would be the second, the third Irad whom Enoch begat, the fourth Mahujael whom Irad begat, the fifth Methusel whom Mahujael begat, the sixth Lamech whom Methusel begat, and who was the seventh from Adam through Cain. But it was not necessary that the first born should succeed their fathers in the kingdom, but those would succeed who were recommended by the possession of some virtue useful to the earthly city, or who were chosen by Lot, or the son who was best liked by his father, would succeed by a kind of hereditary right to the throne. And the Deluge may have happened during the lifetime in reign of Lamech, and may have destroyed him, along with all other men, save those who were in the ark. For we cannot be surprised that during so long a period from Adam to the Deluge, and with the ages of individuals varying as they did, there should not be an equal number of generations in both lines, but seven in Cain's and ten in Seth's. For as I have already said, Lamech is the seventh from Adam, Noah the Tenth, and in Lamech's case not one son only is registered, as in the former instances, but more, because it was uncertain which of them would have succeeded when he died, if there had intervened any time to reign between his death and the Deluge. But in whatever manner the generations of Cain's line are traced downwards, whether it be by first born sons or by the heirs to the throne, it seems to me that I must by no means omit to notice that when Lamech had been set down as the seventh from Adam, there were named in addition as many of his children as made up this number to eleven, which is the number signifying sin, for three sons and one daughter are added. The wives of Lamech have another signification, different from that which I am now pressing. For at present I am speaking of the children and not of those by whom the children were begotten. Since then the law is symbolized by the number ten, whence that memorable decalogue, there is no doubt that the number eleven which goes beyond ten symbolizes the transgression of the law and consequently sin. For this reason eleven veils of goat's skin were ordered to be hung in the tabernacle of the testimony which served in the wanderings of God's people as an ambulatory temple, and in that hair-cloth there was a reminder of sins because the goats were to be set on the left hand of the judge, and therefore when we confess our sins we prostrate ourselves in hair-cloth as if we were saying what is written in the Psalm, my sin is ever before me. The progeny of Adam, then, by Cain the murderer, is completed in the number eleven which symbolizes sin, and this number itself is made up by a woman, as it was by the same sex that beginning was made of sin by which we all die. And it was committed that the pleasure of the flesh which resists the spirit might follow, and so Naema, the daughter of Lamech, means pleasure. But from Adam to Noah in the line of Seth there are ten generations, and to Noah three sons are added, of whom, while one fell into sin, two were blessed by their father, so that if you deduct the reprobate and add the gracious sons to the number you get twelve, a number signalized in the case of the patriarchs and of the apostles, and made up of the parts of the number seven multiplied into one another, for three times four or four times three give twelve. These things being so I see that I must consider and mention how these two lines, which by their separate genealogies depict the two cities, one of earth-born, the other of regenerated persons, became afterwards so mixed and confused that the whole human race, with the exception of eight persons, deserved to perish in the deluge. CHAPTER XXI We must first see why in the enumeration of Cain's posterity, after Enoch, in whose name the city was built, has been first of all mentioned, the rest are at once enumerated down to that terminus of which I have spoken, and at which that race and the whole line was destroyed in the deluge, while after Enoch's the son of Seth has been mentioned, the rest are not at once named down to the deluge, but a clause is inserted to the following effect. This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him, male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. This seems to me to be inserted for this purpose, that here again the reckoning of the times may start from Adam himself, a purpose which the writer had not in view speaking of the earthly city, as if God mentioned it, but did not take account of its duration. But why does he return to this recapitulation, after mentioning the son of Seth, the man who hoped to call in the name of the Lord God, unless because it was fit thus to present these two cities, the one beginning with a murderer, and ending in a murderer, for Lamek too acknowledges to his two wives that he had committed murder, the other built up by him who hoped to call upon the name of the Lord God. For the highest and complete terrestrial duty of the city of God, which is a stranger in this world, is that which was exemplified in the individual who was begotten by him who typified the resurrection of the murdered Abel. That one man is the unity of the whole heavenly city, not yet indeed complete, but to be completed as this prophetic figure foreshows. The son of Cain therefore, that is, the son of possession, and of what but an earthly possession, may have a name in the earthly city which was built in his name. It is of such the psalmist says, they call their lands after their own names. Wherefore they incur what is written in another psalm, Thou, O Lord, in thy city, wilt despise their image. But as for the son of Seth, the son of the resurrection, let him hope to call on the name of the Lord God. For he prefigures that society of men which says, But I am like a green olive tree in the house of God, I have trusted in the mercy of God. But let him not seek the empty honors of a famous name upon the earth, for blessed is the man that maketh the name of the Lord his trust, and respecteth not vanities nor lying follies. After having presented the two cities, the one founded in the material good of this world, the other in hope and God, but both starting from a common gate opened an atom into this mortal state, and both running on and running out to their proper and merited ends, Scripture begins to reckon the times, and in this reckoning includes other generations, making a recapitulation from Adam, out of whose condemned seed, as out of one mass handed over to merited damnation, God made some vessels of wrath the dishonor, and other vessels of mercy to honor, in punishment rendering to the former what is due, in grace giving to the latter what is not due, in order that by the very comparison of itself with the vessels of wrath the heavenly city which sojourns on earth may learn not to put confidence in the liberty of its own will, but may hope to call on the name of the Lord God. For will, being a nature which was made good by the good God, but mutable by the immutable, because it was made out of nothing, can both decline from good to do evil which takes place when it freely chooses, and can also escape the evil and do good which takes place only by divine assistance. End of Book 15, chapters 15 through 21. Recording by Darren L. Slider, Fort Worth, Texas, www.logoslibrary.org. Book 15, chapters 22 through 27 of the City of God. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Darren L. Slider, www.logoslibrary.org. The City of God by St. Augustine of Hippo, Book 15, Chapter 22. When the human race in the exercise of this freedom of will increased and advanced there arose a mixture and confusion of the two cities by their participation in a common iniquity, and this calamity as well as the first was occasioned by a woman, though not in the same way. For these women were not themselves betrayed, neither did they persuade the men to sin, but having belonged to the earthly city and society of the earthly, they had been of corrupt manners from the first, and were loved for their bodily beauty by the sons of God, or the citizens of the other city with sojourns in this world. Beauty is indeed a good gift of God, but that the good may not think at a great good, God dispenses it even to the wicked. And thus when the good that is great and proper to the good was abandoned by the sons of God, they fell to a paltry good which is not peculiar to the good, but common to the good and the evil, and when they were captivated by the daughters of men they adopted the manners of the earthly to win them as their brides, and forsook the godly ways they had followed in their own holy society. And thus beauty which is indeed God's handiwork, but only a temporal, carnal, and lower kind of good, is not fitly loved in preference to God, the eternal, spiritual, and unchangeable good. When the miser prefers his gold to justice it is through no fault of the gold but of the man, and so with every created thing. For though it be good it may be loved with an evil as well as with a good love. It is loved rightly when it is loved ordinately, evilly when inordinately. It is this which someone has briefly said in these verses in praise of the Creator. These are thine, they are good, because thou art good who didst create them. There is in them nothing of ours unless the sin we commit when we forget the order of things, and instead of thee love that which thou hast made. But if the Creator is truly loved, that is, if he himself is loved and not another thing in his stead, he cannot be evilly loved, for love itself is to be ordinately loved, because we do well to love that which, when we love it, makes us live well and virtuously. So that it seems to me that it is a brief but true definition of virtue to say it is the order of love, and on this account in the Canticles, the Bride of Christ, the City of God, sings, Order love within me. It was the order of this love, then, this charity, or attachment, which the sons of God disturbed when they foresook God and were enamored of the daughters of men. And by these two names, sons of God and daughters of men, the two cities are sufficiently distinguished, for though the former were by nature children of men, they had come into possession of another name by grace. For in the same scripture in which the sons of God are said to have loved the daughters of men, they are also called angels of God, whence many supposed that they were not men, but angels. CHAPTER XXIII In the third book of this work we made a passing reference to this question, but did not decide whether angels, in as much as they are spirits, could have bodily intercourse with women. For it is written, who maketh his angels spirits, that is, he makes those who are by nature spirits his angels by appointing them to the duty of bearing his messages. For the Greek word agelos, which in Latin appears as angelus, means a messenger. But whether the psalmist speaks of their bodies when he adds, and his minister is a flaming fire, or means that God's ministers ought to blaze with love as with a spiritual fire, is doubtful. However, the same trustworthy scripture testifies that angels have appeared to men in such bodies as could not only be seen, but also touched. There is, too, a very general rumor, which many have verified by their own experience, or which trustworthy persons who have heard the experience of others corroborate, that sylvans and fawns, who are commonly called incubi, had often made wicked assaults upon women and satisfied their lust upon them, and that certain devils, called deuces by the Gauls, are constantly attempting and affecting this impurity, is so generally affirmed that it were impudent to deny it. From these assertions indeed I dare not determine whether there be some spirits embodied in an aerial substance, for this element, even when annotated by a fan, is sensibly felt by the body, and who are capable of lust and of mingling sensibly with women. But certainly I could by no means believe that God's holy angels could at that time have so fallen, nor can I think that it is of them the apostle Peter said, for if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness to be reserved unto judgment. I think he rather speaks of those who first apostatized from God, along with their chief, the devil, who enviously deceived the first man under the form of a serpent. But the same holy scripture affords the most ample testimony that even godly men have been called angels, for of John it is written, Behold, I send my messenger, angel, before thy face, who shall prepare thy way. And the prophet Malachi, by a peculiar grace specially communicated to him, was called an angel. But some are moved by the fact that we have read that the fruit of the connection between those who are called angels of God and the women they loved were not men like our own breed, but giants, just as if they were not born even in our own time, as I have mentioned above, men of much greater size than the ordinary stature. Was there not at Rome a few years ago when the destruction of the city now accomplished by the gods was drawing near, a woman with her father and mother, who by her gigantic size overtopped all others. Surprising crowds from all quarters came to see her, and that which struck the most was the circumstance that neither of her parents were quite up to the tallest ordinary stature. Giants therefore might well be born even before the sons of God who are also called angels of God, formed a connection with the daughters of men, or of those living according to men, that is to say, before the sons of Seth formed a connection with the daughters of Cain. For thus speaks even the canonical scripture itself in the book in which we read of this. Its words are, and it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair, good, and they took them wives of all which they chose, and the Lord God said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh. Yet his days shall be, and hundred and twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bear children to them, the same became the giants, men of renown. These words of the Divine Book sufficiently indicate that already there were giants in the earth in those days in which the sons of God took wives of the children of men when they loved them because they were good, that is, fair. For it is the custom of this scripture to call those who are beautiful in appearance good. But after this connection had been formed, then two were giants born. For the words are, there were giants in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men. Therefore there were giants both before in those days and also after that. And the words they bear children to them show plainly enough that before the sons of God fell in this fashion they begat children to God, not to themselves. That is to say, not moved by the lust of sexual intercourse, but discharging the duty of propagation, intending to produce not a family to gratify their own pride, but citizens to people the city of God. And to these they as God's angels would bear the message that they should place their hope in God, like him who was born of Seth, the son of Resurrection, and who hoped to call on the name of the Lord God, in which hope they and their offspring would be co-heirs of eternal blessings, and brethren in the family of which God is the Father. But that those angels were not angels in the sense of not being men, as some suppose scripture itself decides which unambiguously declares that they were men. For when it had first been stated that the angels of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair, and they took them wives of all which they chose, it was immediately added, and the Lord God said, My spirit shall not always strive with these men, for that they also are flesh. For by the spirit of God they had been made angels of God and sons of God, but declining towards lower things they are called men, a name of nature, not of grace, and they are called flesh as deserters of the spirit, and by their desertion deserted by him. The Septuagint indeed calls them both angels of God and sons of God, though all the copies do not show this, some having only the name sons of God. And Aquila, whom the Jews prefer to the other interpreters, has translated neither angels of God nor sons of God, but sons of God's. But both are correct. For they were both sons of God, and thus brothers of their own fathers who were children of the same God, and they were sons of God's because begotten by God's, together with whom they themselves also were God's, according to that expression of the Psalm, I have said, Yer Gods, and all of you are children of the most high. For the Septuagint translators are justly believed to have received the spirit of prophecy, so that if they made any alterations under his authority, and did not adhere to a strict translation, we could not doubt that this was divinely dictated. However, the Hebrew word may be said to be ambiguous, and to be susceptible of either translation, sons of God, or sons of God's. Let us omit, then, the fables of those scriptures which are called apocryphal, because their obscure origin was unknown to the fathers from whom the authority of the true scriptures has been transmitted to us by a most certain and well-assertained succession. For though there is some truth in these apocryphal writings, yet they contain so many false statements that they have no canonical authority. We cannot deny that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine writings, for this is asserted by the apostle Jude in his canonical epistle. But it is not without reason that these writings have no place in that canon of scripture which was preserved in the temple of the Hebrew people by the diligence of successive priests, for their antiquity brought them under suspicion, and it was impossible to ascertain what of these were his genuine writings, and they were not brought forward as genuine by the persons who were found to have carefully preserved the canonical books by a successive transmission, so that the writings which are produced under his name, and which contain these fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were not men, are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine. Just as many writings are produced by heretics under the names both of other prophets, and more recently under the names of the apostles, all of which, after careful examination, have been set apart from canonical authority under the title of Apocrypha. There is therefore no doubt that according to the Hebrew and Christian canonical scriptures there were many giants before the deluge, and that these were citizens of the earthly society of men, and the sons of God, who were recording to the flesh the sons of Seth, sunk into this community when they foresook righteousness. Nor need we wonder that giants should be born even from these, for all of their children were not giants, but there were more then than in the remaining periods since the deluge, and it pleased the Creator to produce them that it might thus be demonstrated that neither beauty nor yet size and strength are of much moment to the wise man whose blessedness lies in spiritual and immortal blessings in far better and more enduring gifts in the good things that are the peculiar property of the good and are not shared by good and bad alike. It is this which another prophet confirms when he says, these were the giants famous from the beginning that were of so great stature and so expert in war. Those did not the Lord choose, neither gave he the way of knowledge unto them, but they were destroyed because they had no wisdom, and perished through their own foolishness. But that which God said, their days shall be in 120 years, is not to be understood as a prediction that henceforth men should not live longer than 120 years, for even after the deluge we find that they lived more than 500 years, but we are to understand that God said this when Noah had nearly completed his fifth century, that is, had lived 480 years, which Scripture, as it frequently uses the name of the whole of the largest part, calls 500 years. Now the deluge came in the six hundredth year of Noah's life the second month, and thus 120 years were predicted as being the remaining span of those who were doomed, which years being spent they should be destroyed by the deluge. And it is not unreasonably believed that the deluge came as it did because already there were not found upon earth any who were not worthy of sharing a death so manifestly judicial. Not that a good man who must die some time would be a jot the worse of such a death after it was passed. Nevertheless there died in the deluge none of those mentioned in the sacred Scripture as descended from Seth. But here is the divine account of the cause of the deluge. The Lord God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air, for I am angry that I have made them. Chapter 25 The anger of God is not a disturbing emotion of his mind, but a judgment by which punishment is inflicted upon sin. His thought and reconsideration also are the unchangeable reason which changes things. For he does not, like man, repent of anything he has done, because in all matters his decision is as inflexible as his prescience is certain. But if Scripture were not to use such expressions as the above, it would not familiarly insinuate itself into the minds of all classes of men whom it seeks access to for their good, that it may alarm the proud, arouse the careless, exercise the inquisitive, and satisfy the intelligent. In this it could not do that it not first stoop and in a manner descend to them where they lie. But it's denouncing death on all the animals of earth and air as a declaration of the vastness of the disaster that was approaching, not that it threatens destruction to the irrational animals as if they too had incurred it by sin. Chapter 26 Moreover, inasmuch as God commanded Noah a just man, and, as the truthful Scripture says, a man perfect in his generation, not indeed with the perfection of the citizens of the city of God in that immortal condition in which they equal the angels, but insofar as they can be perfect in their sojourn in this world. Inasmuch as God commanded him, I say, to make an ark in which he might be rescued from the destruction of the flood along with his family, that is, his wife, sons, and daughters-in-law, and along with the animals who, in obedience to God's command, came to him in the ark, this is certainly a figure of the city of God sojourning in this world, that is to say, of the church which is rescued by the wood on which hung the mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus. For even its very dimensions in length, breadth, and height represent the human body in which he came as it had been foretold. For the length of the human body from the crown of the head to the sole of the foot is six times its breadth from side to side and ten times its depth or thickness measuring from back to front. That is to say, if you measure a man as he lies on his back or on his face, he is six times as long from head to foot as he is broad from side to side and ten times as long as he is high from the ground. And therefore the ark was made three hundred cubits in length, fifty in breadth, and thirty in height. And its having a door made in the side of it certainly signified the wound which was made when the side of the crucified was pierced with a spear. For by this those who come to him enter. For thence flowed the sacraments by which those who believe are initiated, and the fact that it was ordered to be made of squared timbers signifies the immovable steadiness of the life of the saints. For however you turn a cube it still stands, and the other peculiarities of the ark's construction or signs of features of the church. But we have not now time to pursue this subject, and indeed we have already dwelt upon it in the work we wrote against Faustus the Manichean, who denies that there is anything prophesied of Christ in the Hebrew books. It may be that one man's exposition excels in others, and that ours is not the best, but all that is said must be referred to this city of God we speak of which sojourns in this wicked world as in a deluge at least if the expositor would not widely miss the meaning of the author. For example the interpretation I have given in the work against Faustus of the words with lower, second and third stories shalt thou make it, is that because the church is gathered out of all nations it is said to have two stories to represent the two kinds of men, the circumcision to it, and the uncircumcision, or as the apostle otherwise calls them Jews and Gentiles, and to have three stories because all the nations were replenished from the three sons of Noah. Now anyone may object to this interpretation and may give another which harmonizes with the rule of faith, for as the ark was to have rooms not only on the lower but also on the upper stories which were called third stories, that there might be a habitable space on the third floor from the basement, someone may interpret these to mean the three graces commended by the apostle, faith, hope, and charity. Or even more suitably they may be supposed to represent those three harvests in the gospel thirtyfold, sixtyfold, and hundredfold, chased marriage dwelling in the ground floor, chased widowhood in the upper, and chased virginity in the top story. Or any better interpretation may be given so long as the reference to this city is maintained, and the same statement I would make of all the remaining particulars in this passage which require exposition, that although different explanations are given, yet they must all agree with the one harmonious Catholic faith. CHAPTER 27 Yet no one ought to suppose, either that these things were written for no purpose, or that we should study only the historical truth apart from any allegorical meanings, or on the contrary, that they are only allegories, and that there were no such facts at all, or that whether it be so or no, there is here no prophecy of the church. For what right-minded man will contend that books so religiously preserved during thousands of years, and transmitted by so orderly a succession, were written without an object, or that only the bare historical facts are to be considered when we read them? For, not to mention other instances, if the number of the animals entailed the construction of an ark of great size, where was the necessity of sending into it two unclean and seven clean animals of each species when both could have been preserved in equal numbers? Or could not God, who ordered them to be preserved in order to replenish the race, restore them in the same way he had created them? But they who contend that these things never happened, but are only figures setting forth other things, in the first place suppose that there could not be a flood so great that the water should rise fifteen cubits above the highest mountains, because it is said that clouds cannot rise above the top of Mount Olympus because it reaches the sky where there is none of that thicker atmosphere in which winds, clouds, and rains have their origin? They do not reflect that the densest element of all earth can exist there, or perhaps they deny that the top of the mountain is earth. Why then did these measures and ways of the elements contend that earth can be raised to those aerial altitudes and that water cannot, while they admit that water is lighter and likeer to ascend than earth? What reason do they adduce why earth, the heavier and lower element, has for so many ages scaled to the tranquil ether while water, the lighter and more likely to ascend, is not suffered to do the same even for a brief space of time? They say too that the area of that earth could not contain so many kinds of animals of both sexes, two of the unclean and seven of the clean. But they seem to me to reckon only one area of three hundred cubits long and fifty broad, and not to remember that there was another similar in the story above, and yet another as large in the story above that again, and that there was consequently an area of nine hundred cubits by one hundred fifty. And if we accept what origin has with some appropriateness suggested that Moses, the man of God, being as it is written, learned it in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, who delighted in geometry, may have meant geometrical cubits, of which they say that one is equal to six of our cubits, then who does not see what a capacity these dimensions give to the ark? For as to their objection that an ark of such size could not be built, it is a very silly calumny. For they are aware that huge cities have been built, and they should remember that the ark was in a hundred years in building. Or perhaps those stone could adhere to stone when cemented with nothing but lime, so that a wall of several miles may be constructed, yet plank cannot be riveted to plank by mortices, bolts, nails, and pitch-glue, so as to construct an ark which was not made with curved ribs but straight timbers, which was not to be launched by its builders, but to be lifted by the natural pressure of the water when it reached it, and which was to be preserved from shipwreck as it floated about, rather by divine oversight than by human skill. As to another customary inquiry of the scrupulous about the very minute creatures, not only such as mice and lizards, but also locusts, beetles, flies, fleas, and so forth, whether there were not in the ark a larger number of them than was determined by God in his command, those persons who were moved by this difficulty are to be reminded that the words every creeping thing of the earth only indicate that it was not needful to preserve in the ark the animals that can live in the water, whether the fishes that live submerged in it were the sea birds that swim on its surface. Then when it is said male and female, no doubt reference is made to the repairing of the races, and consequently there was no need for those creatures being in the ark which are born without the union of the sexes from inanimate things or from their corruption, or if they were in the ark they might be there as they commonly are in houses not in any determinant numbers, or if it was necessary that there should be a definite number of all those animals that cannot naturally live in the water that so the most sacred mystery which was being enacted might be bodied forth and perfectly figured in the actual realities, still this was not the care of Noah or his sons but of God. For Noah did not catch the animals and put them into the ark, but gave them entrance as they came seeking it. For this is the force of the words, they shall come unto thee, not that is to say by man's efforts but by God's will. But certainly we are not required to believe that those which have no sex also came, for it is expressly and definitely said they shall be male and female. For there are some animals which are born out of corruption, but yet afterwards they themselves copulate and produce offspring as flies, but others which have no sex like bees. Then as to those animals which have sex but without ability to propagate their kind like mules and she-mules it is probable that they were not in the ark, but that it was counted sufficient to preserve their parents to wit the horse and the ass, and this applies to all hybrids. Yet if it was necessary for the completeness of the mystery they were there, for even this species has male and female. Another question is commonly raised regarding the food of the carnivorous animals, whether without transgressing the command which fixed the number to be preserved there were necessarily others included in the ark for their sustenance, or as is more probable there might be some food which was not flesh and which yet suit it all. For we know how many animals whose food is flesh eat also vegetable products and fruits, especially figs and chestnuts. What wonder is it therefore if that wise and just man was instructed by God what would suit each, so that without flesh he prepared and stored provision fit for every species? And what is there which hunger would not make animals eat? Or what could not be made sweet and wholesome by God, who, with a divine facility, might have enabled them to do without food at all, had it not been requisite to the completeness of so great a mystery that they should be fed? But none but a contentious man can suppose that there was no prefiguring of the church in so manifold and circumstantial a detail. For the nations have already so filled the church and are comprehended in the framework of its unity, the clean and unclean together, until the appointed end, that this one very manifest fulfillment leaves no doubt how we should interpret even those others which are somewhat more obscure in which cannot so readily be discerned. And since this is so, if not even the most audacious will presume to assert that these things were written without a purpose, or that though the events really happened they mean nothing, or that they did not really happen but are only allegory, or that at all events they are far from having any figurative reference to the church, if it has been made out that on the other hand we must rather believe that there was a wise purpose in there being committed to memory and to writing, and that they did happen and have a significance, and that this significance has a prophetic reference to the church, then this book, having served this purpose, may now be closed, that we may go on to trace in the history subsequent to the deluge the courses of the two cities, the earthly that lives according to men, and the heavenly that lives according to God. End of book 15, chapters 22 through 27. Recording by Darren L. Slider, Fort Worth, Texas, www.logoslibrary.org. Book 16, chapters 1 through 8 of The City of God. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Darren L. Slider, www.logoslibrary.org. The City of God by St. Augustine of Hippo. Book 16. Chapter 1 It is difficult to discover from scripture whether after the deluge traces of the holy city are continuous or are so interrupted by intervening seasons of godlessness that not a single worshipper of the one true God was found among men. Because from Noah, who with his wife, three sons, and as many daughters-in-law, achieved deliverance in the ark from the destruction of the deluge down to Abraham, we do not find in the canonical books that the piety of any one is celebrated by expressed divine testimony, unless it be in the case of Noah, who commends with a prophetic benediction his two sons, Shem and Japeth, while he beheld and foresaw what was long afterwards to happen. It was also by this prophetic spirit that when his middle son, that is, the son who was younger than the first and older than the last born, had sinned against him, he cursed him, not in his own person, but in his sons, his own grandsons, in the words, cursed be the lad, Canaan, a servant shall he be unto his brethren. Now Canaan was born of Ham, who, so far from covering his sleeping father's nakedness, had divulged it. For the same reason also he subjoins the blessing on his two other sons, the oldest and youngest, saying, blessed be the Lord, God of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall gladden Japeth, and he shall dwell in the houses of Shem. And so too the planting of the vine by Noah, and his intoxication by its fruit, and his nakedness while he slept, and the other things done at that time, and recorded, are all of them pregnant with prophetic meanings, and veiled in mysteries. CHAPTER 2 The things which then were hidden are now sufficiently revealed by the actual events which have followed. For who can carefully and intelligently consider these things without recognizing them accomplished in Christ? Shem, of whom Christ was born in the flesh, means named. And what is of greater name than Christ, the fragrance of whose name is now everywhere perceived, so that even prophecy sings of it beforehand, comparing it in the song of songs to ointment poured forth. Is it not also in the houses of Christ, that is, in the churches, that the enlargement of the nations dwells? For Japeth means enlargement, and Ham, that is, hot, who was the middle son of Noah, and, as it were, separated himself from both, and remained between them, neither belonging to the first fruits of Israel, nor to the fullness of the Gentiles, what does he signify but the tribe of heretics, hot with the spirit, not of patience, but of impatience, with which the breasts of heretics are want to blaze, and with which they disturb the peace of the saints? But even the heretics yield an advantage to those that make proficiency, according to the apostles saying, there must also be heresies that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. Wentz too, it is elsewhere said, the son that receives instruction will be wise, and he uses the foolish as his servant. For while the hot restlessness of heretics stirs questions about many articles of the Catholic faith, the necessity of defending them forces us both to investigate them more accurately, to understand them more clearly, and to proclaim them more earnestly, and the question mooted by an adversary becomes the occasion of instruction. However, not only those who are openly separated from the church, but also all who glory in the Christian name, and at the same time lead abandoned lives, may without absurdity seem to be figured by Noah's middle son. For the passion of Christ, which was signified by that man's nakedness, is at once proclaimed by their profession and dishonored by their wicked conduct. Of such, therefore, it has been said, by their fruits ye shall know them. And therefore was Ham cursed in his son, he being, as it were, his fruit. So, too, this son of his, Canaan, is fitly interpreted, their movement, which is nothing else than their work. But Shem and Japeth, that is to say, the circumcision and uncircumcision, or, as the apostle otherwise calls them, the Jews and Greeks, but cold and justified, having somehow discovered the nakedness of their father, which signifies the Saviour's passion, took a garment and laid it upon their backs, and entered backwards and covered their father's nakedness, without their seeing what their reverence hid. For we both honor the passion of Christ as accomplished for us, and we hate the crime of the Jews who crucified him. The garment signifies the sacrament, their backs the memory of things past. For the church celebrates the passion of Christ as already accomplished, and no longer to be looked forward to, now that Japeth already dwells in the habitations of Shem and their wicked brother between them. But the wicked brother is, in the person of his son, that is his work, the boy or slave of his good brothers, when good men make a skillful use of bad men, either for the exercise of their patience, or for their advancement in wisdom. For the apostle testifies that there are some who preach Christ from no pure motives, but, says he, whether in pretense or in truth Christ is preached, and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice. For it is Christ himself who planted the vine of which the prophet says, the vine of the Lord of Hosts is the house of Israel, and he drinks of its wine, whether we thus understand that cup of which he says, any drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and, Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me, by which he obviously means his passion. Or, as wine is the fruit of the vine, we may prefer to understand that from this vine, that is to say, from the race of Israel, he has assumed flesh and blood that he might suffer, and he was drunken, that is, he suffered, and was naked, that is, his weakness appeared in his suffering, as the apostle says, though he was crucified through weakness. Wherefore, the same apostle says, the weakness of God is stronger than men, and the foolishness of God is wiser than men. And when to the expression he was naked, Scripture adds, in his house, it elegantly intimates that Jesus was to suffer the cross and death at the hands of his own household, his own kith and kin, the Jews. This passion of Christ is only externally and verbally professed by the reprobate, for what they profess they do not understand. But the elect hold in the inner man this so great mystery, and honor inwardly in the heart this weakness and foolishness of God. And of this there is a figure and ham going out to proclaim his father's nakedness, while Shem and Japeth, to cover or honor it, went in, that is to say, did it inwardly. These secrets of divine Scripture we investigate as well as we can. All will not accept our interpretation with equal confidence, but all hold it certain that these things were neither done nor recorded without some foreshadowing of future events, and that they are to be referred only to Christ and his church, which is the city of God, proclaimed from the very beginning of human history by figures which we now see everywhere accomplished. From the blessing of the two sons of Noah, and the cursing of the middle son, down to Abraham, for more than a thousand years, there is, as I have said, no mention of any righteous persons who worshiped God. I do not therefore conclude that there were none, but it had been tedious to mention every one, and would have displayed historical accuracy rather than prophetic foresight. The object of the writer of these sacred books, or rather of the Spirit of God in him, is not only to record the past, but to depict the future so far as it regards the city of God, for whatever is said of those who are not its citizens is given either for her instruction, or as a foil to enhance her glory. Yet we are not to suppose that all that is recorded has some signification, but those things which have no signification of their own are interwoven for the sake of the things which are significant. It is only the plowshare that cleaves the soil, but to effect this other parts of the plow are requisite. It is only the strings and harps and other musical instruments which produce melodious sounds, but that they may do so there are other parts of the instrument which are not indeed struck by those who sing, but are connected with the strings which are struck and produced musical notes. So in this prophetic history some things are narrated which have no significance, but are, as it were, the framework to which the significant things are attached. Chapter 3 We must therefore introduce into this work an explanation of the generations of the three sons of Noah insofar as that may illustrate the progress and time of the two cities. Scripture first mentions that of the youngest son, who is called Japheth. He had eight sons, and by two of these sons, seven grandchildren, three by one son, four by the other, in all fifteen descendants. Ham, Noah's middle son, had four sons, and by one of them five grandsons, and by one of these two great grandsons, in all eleven. After enumerating these, Scripture returns to the first of the sons, and says, Cush, begat Nimrod, he began to be a giant on the earth. He was a giant hunter against the Lord God, wherefore they say, as Nimrod, the giant hunter against the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon, Erech, Akkad, and Kalne in the land of Shinar. Out of that land went forth a Sur, and built Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Kala, and Rezin between Nineveh and Kala. This was a great city. Now this Cush, father of the giant Nimrod, is the first named among the sons of Ham, to whom five sons and two grandsons are ascribed. But he either begat this giant after his grandsons were born, or, which is more credible, Scripture speaks of him separately on account of his eminence, for mention is also made of his kingdom, which began with that magnificent city Babylon, and the other places, whether cities or districts, mentioned along with it. But what is recorded of the land of Shinar, which belonged to Nimrod's kingdom, to wit that a Sur went forth from it and built Nineveh, and the other cities mentioned with it, happened long after. But he takes occasion to speak of it here on account of the grandeur of the Assyrian kingdom, which was wonderfully extended by Nenus, son of Belis, and founder of the great city Nineveh, which was named after him, Nineveh, from Nenus. But a Sur, father of the Assyrian, was not one of the sons of Ham, nor his middle son, but is found among the sons of Shem, his eldest son. Once it appears that among Shem's offspring there arose men who afterwards took possession of that giant's kingdom, and advancing from it, founded other cities, the first of which was called Nineveh, from Nenus. From him scripture returns to Ham's other son, Miserium, and his sons are enumerated, not as seven individuals, but as seven nations. And from the sixth, as if from the sixth son, the race called the Philistines are said to have sprung, so that there are in all eight. Then it returns again to Canaan, in whose person Ham was cursed, and his eleven sons are named. Then the territory is occupied, and some of the cities are named. And thus, if we count sons and grandsons, there are thirty-one of Ham's descendants registered. It remains to mention the sons of Shem know as eldest son, for to him this genealogical narrative gradually ascends from the youngest. But in the commencement of the record of Shem's sons there is an obscurity which calls for explanation, since it is closely connected with the object of our investigation. For we read, unto Shem also, the father of all the children of Heber, the brother of Japeth, the elder, were children born. This is the order of the words, and to Shem was born Heber, even to himself, that is, to Shem himself was born Heber, and Shem is the father of all his children. We are intended to understand that Shem is the patriarch of all his posterity, who were to be mentioned, whether sons, grandsons, great-grandsons, or descendants, at any remove. For Shem did not beget Heber, who was indeed in the fifth generation from him. For Shem begat, among other sons, Arvixad, Arvixad begat Canaan, Canaan begat Sala, Sala begat Heber. And it was with good reason that he was named first among Shem's offspring, taking precedence even of his sons, though only a grandchild of the fifth generation. For from him, as tradition says, the Hebrews derived their name, though the other etymology, which derives the name from Abraham, as if Abrahamus may possibly be correct. But there can be little doubt that the former is the right etymology, and that they were called after Heber Hebrews, and then, dropping a letter, Hebrews. And so was their language called Hebrew, which was spoken by none but the people of Israel, among whom was the city of God, mysteriously prefigured in all the people, and truly present in the saints. Six of Shem's sons, then, are first named, then four grandsons born to one of these sons, then it mentions another son of Shem, who begat a grandson, and his son, again, or Shem's great-grandson, was Heber. And Heber begat two sons, and called the one Peleg, which means dividing, and Scripture subjoins the reason of this name, saying, for in his days was the earth divided. What this means will afterwards appear. Heber's other son begat twelve sons, consequently all Shem's descendants are twenty-seven. The total number of the progeny of the three sons of Noah is seventy-three, fifteen by Japeth, thirty-one by Ham, twenty-seven by Shem. Then Scripture adds, these are the sons of Shem after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, after their nations. And so of the whole number, these are the families of the sons of Noah after their generations, in their nations, and by these were the aisles of the nations dispersed through the earth after the flood. From which we gather that the seventy-three, or rather, as I shall presently show, seventy-two were not individuals but nations. For in a former passage, when the sons of Japeth were enumerated, it is said in conclusion, by these were the aisles of the nations divided in their lands, every one after his language, in their tribes, and in their nations. The nations are expressly mentioned among the sons of Ham as I showed above. Misrium begat those who were called Ludhim, and so also of the other seven nations. And after enumerating all of them, it concludes, these are the sons of Ham in their families according to their languages, in their territories, and in their nations. The reason, then, why the children of several of them are not mentioned is that they belonged by birth to other nations, and did not themselves become nations. Why else is it that though eight sons are reckoned to Japeth, the sons of only two of these are mentioned, and though four are reckoned to Ham, only three are spoken of as having sons, and though six are reckoned to Shem, the descendants of only two of these are traced. Did the rest remain childless? We cannot suppose so, but they did not produce nations so great as to warrant their being mentioned, but were absorbed in the nations to which they belonged by birth. But though these nations are said to have been dispersed according to their languages, yet the narrator recurs to that time and all had but one language, and explains how it came to pass that a diversity of languages was introduced. The whole earth, he says, was of one lip, and all had one speech. And it came to pass as they journeyed from the east that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and dwelt there. And they said one to another, Come, and let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly. And they had bricks for stone, and slime for mortar. And they said, Come, and let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top shall reach the sky, and let us make us a name before we be scattered abroad on the face of all the earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the children of men builded. And the Lord God said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language, and this they begin to do, and now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do. Come, and let us go down and confound there their language that they may not understand one another's speech. And God scattered them dense on the face of all the earth, and they left off to build the city and the tower. Therefore the name of it is called Confusion, because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth, and the Lord God scattered them dense on the face of all the earth. This city, which was called Confusion, is the same as Babylon, whose wonderful construction, Gentile history also notices. For Babylon means Confusion. Once we conclude that the giant Nimrod was its founder, as had been hinted a little before, where scripture, in speaking of him, says that the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon, that is, Babylon had a supremacy over the other cities as the metropolis and royal residence, although it did not rise to the grand dimensions designed by its proud and impious founder. The plan was to make it so high that it should reach the sky, whether this was meant of one tower which they intended to build higher than the others, or of all the towers which might be signified by the singular number, as we speak of the soldier, meaning the army, and of the frog or the locust, when we refer to the whole multitude of frogs and locusts, in the plagues with which Moses smote the Egyptians. But what did these vain and presumptuous men intend? How did they expect to raise this lofty mass against God when they had built it above all the mountains and clouds of the earth's atmosphere? What injury could any spiritual or material elevation do to God? The safe and true way to heaven is made by humility which lifts up the heart to the Lord, not against him, as this giant has said to have been a hunter against the Lord. This has been misunderstood by some through the ambiguity of the Greek word, and they have translated it not against the Lord, but before the Lord, for in Antion means both before and against. In the Psalm this word is rendered, let us weep before the Lord our maker. The same word occurs in the Book of Job, where it is written, that has broken into fury against the Lord. And so this giant is to be recognized as a hunter against the Lord. And one is met by the term hunter, but deceiver, oppressor, and destroyer of the animals of the earth. He and his people therefore erected this tower against the Lord, and so gave expression to their impious pride, and justly was their wicked intention punished by God even though it was unsuccessful. But what was the nature of the punishment? As the tongue as the instrument of domination in it pride was punished, so that man who would not understand God when he issued his commands should be misunderstood when he himself gave orders. Thus was that conspiracy disbanded, for each man retired from those he could not understand, and associated with those whose speech was intelligible, and the nations were divided according to their languages, and scattered over the earth as seemed good to God, who accomplished this in ways hidden from and incomprehensible to us. We read, The Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men built. It was not the sons of God, but that society which lived in a merely human way, in which we call the earthly city. God, who is always wholly everywhere, does not move locally, but he is said to descend when he does anything on the earth out of the usual course which, as it were, makes his presence felt. And in the same way he does not by seeing learn some new thing, for he cannot ever be ignorant of anything, but he is said to see and recognize in time that which he causes others to see and recognize. And therefore that city was not previously being seen as God made it be seen when he showed how offensive it was to him. We might indeed interpret God descending to the city of the descent of his angels in whom he dwells, so that the following words, and the Lord God said, Behold, they are all one race, and of one language, and also what follows, come and let us go down and confound their speech, or a recapitulation explaining how the previously intimated descent of the Lord was accomplished. For if he had already gone down, why does he say, come and let us go down and confound, words which seem to be addressed to the angels and to intimate that he who was in the angels descended in their descent. And the words most appropriately are not go ye down and confound, but let us confound their speech, showing that he so works by his servants that they are themselves also fellow laborers with God, as the apostle says, for we are fellow laborers with God. CHAPTER 6 We might have supposed that the words uttered at the creation of man, let us, and not let me, make man, were addressed to the angels, had he not added in our image. But as we cannot believe that man was made in the image of angels, or that the image of God is the same as that of angels, it is proper to refer this expression to the plurality of the Trinity. And yet this Trinity being one God, even after saying, let us make, goes on to say, and God made man in his image, and not God's made, or in their image. And were there any difficulty in applying to the angels the words, come and let us go down and confound their speech, we might refer the plural to the Trinity, as if the Father were addressing the Son and the Holy Spirit. But it rather belongs to the angels to approach God by holy movements, that is by pious thoughts, and thereby to avail themselves of the unchangeable truth which rules in the court of heaven as their eternal law. For they are not themselves the truth, but partaking in the creative truth, they are moved towards it as the fountain of life, that what they have not in themselves they may obtain in it. And this movement of theirs is steady, for they never go back from what they have reached. And to these angels God does not speak, as we speak to one another, or to God, or to angels, or as the angels speak to us, or as God speaks to us through them. He speaks to them in an ineffable manner of his own, and that which he says is conveyed to us in a manner suited to our capacity. For the speaking of God antecedent and superior to all his works is the immutable reason of his work. It has no noisy and passing sound, but an energy eternally abiding and producing results in time. Thus he speaks to the holy angels, but to us who are far off he speaks otherwise. When however we hear with the inner ears some part of the speech of God we approximate to the angels. But in this work I need not labor to give an account of the ways in which God speaks, for either the unchangeable truth speaks directly to the mind of the rational creature in some indescribable way, or speaks through the changeable creature, either presenting spiritual images to our spirit, or bodily voices to our bodily sense. The words nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do are assuredly not meant as an affirmation, but as an interrogation, such as is used by persons threatening, as for example when Dido exclaims, they will not take arms and pursue? We are to understand the words, as if it had been said, shall nothing be restrained from them which they have imagined to do. From these three men, therefore, the three sons of Noah, we mean seventy-three, or rather as the catalogue will show, seventy- two nations, and as many languages, were dispersed over the earth, and as they increased they filled even the islands. But the nations multiplied much more than the languages. For even in Africa we know several barbarous nations which have but one language, and who can doubt that as the human race increased, men can thrive to pass to the islands in ships? CHAPTER VII There is a question raised about all those kinds of beasts which are not domesticated, nor are produced like frogs from the earth, but are propagated by male and female parents, such as wolves and animals of that kind. And it is asked how they could be found in the islands after the deluge in which all the animals not in the ark perished, as the breed was restored from those which were preserved in pairs in the ark. It might indeed be said that they crossed the islands by swimming, but this could only be true of those very near the mainland, whereas there are some so distant that we fancy no animal could swim to them. But if men caught them and took them across with themselves, and thus propagated these breeds and their newer bodes, this would not imply an incredible fondness for the chase. At the same time it cannot be denied that by the intervention of angels they might be transferred by God's order or permission. If, however, they were produced out of the earth, as at their first creation, when God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature, this makes it more evident that all kinds of animals were preserved in the ark, not so much for the sake of renewing the stock as of prefiguring the various nations which were to be saved in the church. This, I say, is more evident if the earth brought forth many animals and islands to which they could not cross over. CHAPTER VIII It is also asked whether we are to believe that certain monstrous races of men, spoken of in secular history, have sprung from Noah's sons, or rather I should say, from that one man from whom they themselves were descended. For it is reported that some have one eye in the middle of the forehead, some feet turned backwards from the heel, some a double sex, the right breast like a man, the left like a woman, and that they alternately be get and bring forth. Others are said to have no mouth and to breathe only through the nostrils, others are but a cubit high, and are therefore called by the Greeks pygmies. They say that in some places the women conceive in their fifth year and do not live beyond their eighth. So, too, they tell of a race who have two feet but only one leg, and are of marvelous swiftness, though they do not bend the knee. They are called skiopadies because in the hot weather they lie down in their backs and shade themselves with their feet. Others are said to have no head and their eyes and their shoulders, and other human or quasi-human races are depicted in Mosaic in the harbor esplanade of Carthage on the faith of histories of rarities. What shall I say of the Sinnocephali, whose dog-like head and barking proclaim them beasts rather than men? But we are not bound to believe all we hear of these monstrosities. But whoever is anywhere born a man, that is, a rational mortal animal, no matter what unusual appearance he presents in color, movement, sound, nor how peculiar he is in some power, part, or quality of his nature, no Christian can doubt that he springs from that one protoplast. We can distinguish the common human nature from that which is peculiar, and therefore wonderful. The same account which is given of monstrous birds in individual cases can be given of monstrous races. For God the Creator of all knows where and when each thing ought to be or to have been created because he sees the similarities and diversities which can contribute to the beauty of the whole. But he who cannot see the whole is offended by the deformity of the part because he is blind to that which balances it and to which it belongs. We know that men are born with more than four fingers on their hands or toes on their feet. This is a smaller matter. But far from us be the folly of supposing that the Creator mistook the number of a man's fingers, though we cannot account for the difference. And so in cases would that divergence from the rule is greater. He whose works no man justly finds fault with knows what he has done. At Hippodiarritus there is a man whose hands are crescent shaped, and have only two fingers each, and his feet similarly formed. If there were a race like him it would be added to the history of the curious and wonderful. Shall we therefore deny that this man is descended from that one man who was first created? As for the Androgeni, or hermaphrodites, as they are called, though they are rare, yet from time to time there appears persons of sex so doubtful that it remains uncertain from which sex they take their name, though it is customary to give them a masculine name as the more worthy, for no one ever called them hermaphrodituses. Some years ago, quite within my own memory, a man was born in the east, double in his upper but single in his lower half, having two heads, two chests, four hands, but one body and two feet like an ordinary man, and he lived so long that many had an opportunity of seeing him. But who could enumerate all the human births that have differed widely from their ascertained parents? As therefore no one will deny that these are all descended from that one man, so all the races which are reported to have diverged and bodily appearance from the usual course, which nature generally or almost universally preserves, if they are embraced in that definition of man as rational and mortal animals, unquestionably trace their pedigree to that one first father of all. We are supposing these stories about various races who differ from one another and from us to be true, but possibly they are not, for if we were not aware that apes and monkeys and sphinxes are not men but beasts, those historians would possibly describe them as races of men and flaunt with immunity their false and vanglorious discoveries. But supposing they are men of whom these marvels are recorded, what if God has seen fit to create some races in this way that we might not suppose that the monstrous births which appear among ourselves are the failures of that wisdom whereby he fashions the human nature as we speak of the failure of a less perfect workman. Accordingly it ought not to seem absurd to us that as in individual races there are monstrous births, so in the whole race there are monstrous races. Wherefore to conclude this question cautiously and guardedly, are there these things which have been told of some races have no existence at all, or if they do exist they are not human races, or if they are human they are descended from Adam? CHAPTERS 1 THROUGH 8