CHAPTER 10
Commentary Thus he could make the converted Gentiles, mostly under the sway of Rome's imperial power, 'dwell in the tents of Shem'. All this was made easier because his Christian predecessors had come to regard
Japheth as a type of the Church: see, for example, Justin, Dial. 139.
2-3; Irenaeus, Demonstratio 21, Adv. Haer. 3. 5. 3, 5. 34. 2.° verse 29 See Jerome's comment on 6: 3.
CHAPTER 10 The following studies are particularly valuable for proper appreciation of Jerome's opinions here: A. Neubauer, La Géographie du
Talmud (Paris, 1868); P.
S. Alexander, 'The Toponymy of the Targumim, with Special reference to the Table of Nations and the Boundaries of the land of Israel', D. Phil. thesis (Oxford, 1974); M.
McNamara, Targum and Testament (Shannon, 1972), 190-205; Kamesar, 'Thesis', 88-95; le Déaut, Targum du Pentateuque, i.
134-41, and the literature cited there. It should be noted that although Jerome depends on Josephus, Ant. 1. 122-47, throughout his commentary on this chapter, he does not slavishly copy this author. He rather modifies the material which Josephus supplied, adds to it, and takes from it, moulding it to his own concerns. verse 2.
Jerome seems to have translated the Hebrew text of this verse: LXX place Elisa between Javan and Thubal. He begins by circumscribing the boundaries of Japheth's sons, for they are Gentiles (see above, 9: 27): he largely follows Josephus, Ant. 1. 122.
The latter speaks of Taurus and Amanus as mountains: according to some traditions (e.g. ¢. Hall. 2: 11), Taurus Amanus formed the extreme northern boundary of the land of Israel. Jerome will refer to them below, in his comments on verses 4-5, given their importance in establishing the boundaries of the Holy Land.' Josephus also names the river Don and Gadira as their other boundaries, and notes that the sons of Japheth gave their names to the various lands.
The individual identifications of national groups follow Josephus, Ant. 1. 123-5. Specifically, Gomer is equated with the Galatians: so Josephus, Ant. 1. 123, and those Rabbinic sources which describe the first eparchy of Gomer as pryqy, which is to be
® Cf. Harl, Bible d'Alexandrie, i. 143.
1 See McNamara, Targum and Testament, 201-2; Alexander, 'Toponymy of the Targumim', 104-6; le Déaut, Targum du Pentateuque, iti (Nombres), 321. understood as Phrygia, the home of the Galatians.? For Magog identified with the Scythians, see Josephus, ibid.; but Jerome here stands aside from Rabbinic identifications of this nation as either
Germania, Kandya, or the Goths, on whom he has something to say later. For Madai as the Medes, we may add to Josephus' evidence in Ant. 1. 124 all extant Targums, Gen. Rab. 37: 1, and jer. Meg.
1: 9. But b. Yoma toa understands the place as Macedonia.
Javan is referred to Ionia and its Greeks, as also in b. Yoma 10a; but other Rabbinic sources suggest Macedonia or Ephesus.* Jerome's identification of Thubal with the Iberian Spaniards follows Josephus, and in no way corresponds to Rabbinic sources.* He uses it also in In Esa. 18. 66: 18-19, quoting Lucan, Pharsalia 4. to. He is dependent again on Josephus for information about the Cappadocians and their city, pausing to note the LXX reading here: the Rabbinic tradition is quite different.' See also In Esa. 18. 66:
18-19. But for Thiras as Thrace, Jerome once more has the support of Josephus, jer. Meg. 1: 9, and all the extant Targums.'
It was Ambrose, De Fide 2. 16, who interpreted Magog here, and Gog and Magog in Ezek. 38—9, as meaning the Goths, and Jerome takes issue with it: see also his commentary on the relevant parts of Ezekiel (Book 11, preface). Josephus has none of this material.
Jerome argues that the general equation of Goths with Getae is decisive; so they are not Gog or Magog. The Goths presented Rome with major threats in Thrace and the Balkans in 379 and 381, and on both occasions Theodosius I] had managed to keep them at bay. But Jerome's comment seems to have in mind the battle of ? On this point, see McNamara, Targum and Testament, 198: it is the reading of PJ, TN, FTV, Gen. Rab. 37: 1 (R. Samuel ben Ammi). By contrast, b. Yoma roa and jer. Meg. 1: 9 have Germania. For further information on Rabbinic identification of the names in this and the following verse, see M. Goshen-Gottstein, Fragments of Lost Targumim, ii (Ramat-Gan, 1989), 99-102 (in Hebrew).
3 For Magog as Germania, see PJ, TN, FTV, Gen. Rab. 37: 1; as Kandya, see b.
Yoma 10a; and as Gothia, see jer. Meg. 1: 9; Goshen-Gottstein, Fragments, ii. 100.
* Macedonia: Gen. Rab. 37: 1, and all extant Targums. Ephesus: jer. Meg. 1: 9; see Goshen-Gottstein, Fragments, ii. 100.
5 The extant Targums, b. Yoma 10a, and one tradition in jer. Meg. 1: 9 identify it with Bithynia; Gen. Rab. 37: x has 'Isinya, unless this refers to the next item: see
Goshen-Gottstein, Fragments, ii. 100.
6 It is regarded as Mysia by jer. Meg. 1: 9 and TN; PJ reads asya, which should probably be corrected into Mysia, according to le Déaut, Targum du Pentateuque, i. 135. FTV has Moskia, and b. Yoma toa Susya.
7 Among Jewish authorities, there was debate whether this last son of Japheth should be identified with Thrace or with Persia: see b. Yoma 10a; Gen. Rab. 37: 1
(R. Simon); Goshen-Gottstein, Fragments, ii. 100-1.
Commentary Adrianople (378), whose definitive character may be marked by the fact that it is the last event which he records in his translation of Eusebius's Chronicon.® He was, however, familiar with the Jewish identification of Magog with the Goths, attested in the Jerusalem
Talmud: in In Esa. 10. 30: 27-9 and In Hiez. 11. 38: 1-23 he notes that they think Gog and Magog come from Scythia, the very region which he and Josephus identify with Magog in this verse! verse 3.
Jerome has taken over these identifications directly from Josephus, Ant. 1. 126; but he omits certain details, including the statement that Aschanaxes, Josephus' version of Aschenez, founded the Aschanaxians.? verses 4-5 This information also is largely derived from Josephus,
Ant. 1. 128, who, however, omits mention of Dodanim in common with some MSS of LXX. Most witnesses of LXX, however, represent Hebrew Dodanim as Rhodoi, the Rhodians: Jerome's translation of the verse in QHG follows the Hebrew at this point. The Aeolian Greeks spoke their own dialect, and in classical times inhabited the coast of Asia Minor opposite Lesbos, that island itself, Thessaly, and Boeotia. Their speech was distinct from the Dorian spoken in most of the Peloponnese and southern Aegean islands; from Ionian, the dialect of Attica, Euboea, and adjacent islands; from Attic, a distinct form of Ionian; and from Arcadian, spoken in that district and in Cyprus and parts of Pamphylia. Most of the Targums and other Rabbinic sources identified Elisa simply with Hellas, i.e. Greece in general.'° Tarsus is also equated with Tharsis by the Rabbinic texts we have considered.'! Jerome effectively quotes Josephus, adding that the city was the Apostle
Paul's home (Acts 9: 11; 21: 393 22: 3). Cethim is variously understood by Jewish tradition as Italy or Achaia. For Dodanim, Jerome
8 See Kamesar, 'Thesis', 90 n. 26. Augustine, De Civ. Dei 20. 11-12, was unhappy with this neat geographical identification, since these peoples symbolize the universal realm of the devil outside the city of God. On Jerome's criticism of Ambrose, see further G.
Nauroy, 'Jéréme, lecteur et censeur de lexégése d'Ambroise', in Y.-M. Duval (ed.), Jér6me entre l'Occident et l'Orient (Paris, 1988),
187-92, who argues that Jerome in QHG wrongly supposed that Ambrose had written the De Fide before Adrianople, rather than after that battle.
° Vallarsi, PL 23 ad loc., believes that Jerome's text should properly include this note from Josephus. The Rabbinic traditions differ greatly from Jerome and Josephus: jer. Meg.
1: 9 has Asia Minor, Adiabene, and Germanicia; FTV Asia, Parkevi, and Barbaria. See further Goshen-Gottstein, Fragments, ii. 101.
10 See all extant Targums except FTP; Gen. Rab. 37: 1; jer. Meg. 1: 9; GoshenGottstein, Fragments, ii. 101.
"1 That is, the Targums, Gen. Rab. 37: 1, and jer. Meg. 1: 9. follows LXX in equating it with Rhodes; but most Jewish authorities knew it as Dardania, a region of Mysia in Asia Minor.!2
Jerome then refers to Greek and Latin authors as proving his point, naming Marcus Terentius Varro (c. 116-27 BC), author of forty-one Books of Antiquities Human and Divine;
Sisinnius Capito, an author of the Augustan age; and Phlegon of Tralles, who lived in the time of the Emperor Hadrian and wrote Olympiades, a history dealing with the period from the first Olympiad up to ap
140. It is not certain that Jerome had read these authors; he may, indeed, have used their names simply to convince his audience of his great learning and wide range of knowledge." verse 6 This section abridges Josephus Amt.
1. 130-3. Jerome discusses the question of how Africa got its name in his comment on 25: I~6. verse 7 Josephus, Ant. 1. 134 equates Saba with the Sabaeans, to which Jerome has added quotations from Virgil, Georgics 2. 117 and Aeneid 1. 416-17. He also knows Aevila as the Gaetuli, and Sabatha as the Astabari: Astaboras he names later (Ant. 2. 249) as a river joining the Nile at Meroe, capital of Ethiopian Sheba.'* But Jerome parts company with Josephus and Rabbinic tradition in claiming ignorance of Regma and Sabathaca. His commentary In Ioelem 3: 7-8 speaks of Saba, and he quotes the same lines from the Aeneid as he does here, adding that certain Sabeans are really
This point he pursues in his next comment.!5 For Jerome's Regma, Hebrew ra'mab, LXX also have Regma. verse 7b Jerome's observation, based on Ps. 72: 10 (LXX 71: 10), is entirely correct: in the preceding section, he had been dealing with the name S*ba', whereas here we have S¢ba'. For the identification of the two peoples, he is again indebted to Josephus, Azt. 1.
135. See also In Hiez. 8. 27: 22 and In Esa. 13. 45: 14. It is possible, as Kamesar argues, that his use of the Psalm text to illustrate his point depends on Eusebius of Emesa.'¢ 2 For Cethim as Italy, see Gen. Rab. 37: 1, TN, FTV, FIP, Targum 1 Chron. 1:
7; as Achaia, see jer. Meg. 1: 9 and PJ. All these sources identify Dodanim with Dardania; but some authorities took it as Rhodes: see Gen. Rab.
1, and McNamara, Targum and Testament, 193.
13 See P. Courcelle, Late Latin Writers, 78-86.
14 So H. St J. Thackeray, Josephus (Loeb Classical Library), iv (Cambridge, Mass. and London, 1967), 66.
15 See Kamesar, 'Thesis', 88-9 for the whole of this section.
6 See Kamesar, 'Thesis', 89. Jerome differs toto caelo from the Targums of this verse: see le Déaut, Targum du Pentateuque, i. 136-7.
Commentary verses 8,10 LXX of verses 8 and 9 call Nimroda giant, gigas, for Hebrew gibboér: Vg has 'powerful' (v. 8) and 'strong' (v. 9). LXX may imply that he was the first of giants on earth, thus contradicting their own translation which had already referred to giants in Gen. 6: 4. This was a problem confronted by Augustine, OG 18; but for Jerome, following the Hebrew, it does not arise. Josephus,
113 had already named Nimrod as the first universal tyrant, and had made him responsible for the plan to build the tower of Babel (Gen. 11: 1-9). Jerome certainly implies that Nimrod was wicked: he must have known this generally held Jewish assessment of his character, for it features in Philo, De Gig. 66, to say nothing of Rabbinic sources (e.g. b. Erub. 53a; b. Hag. 13a; b. Meg. 11a).
Symmachus translated Hebrew gibbér as 'violent'. It is less clear whether Jerome also implies that Nimrod planned the tower; but this, too, was the opinion of Philo, OG 2. 82, of the Rabbis (e.g. b.
Hullin 89b, b. Pes. 94b, PRE 11: 3), and of Augustine, De Civ. Dei 16. 4. Kamesar lists other Christian authors who may have influenced Jerome's comments here.'"
That Babel signifies 'confusion' is a biblical notion: Gen. 11: 9 seems to derive the word from root bil, 'confuse'. The identification of Arach with Edissa is found also in PJ, TN, and Gen. Rab. 37: 4.
The name was given to it by Seleucus I (312—280 Bc).'8 Achad is named as Nisibis also by PJ, TN, FTP, FTV, and Gen. Rab. 37: 4.
Chalanne, Hebrew Kalneh, is also identified as Ctesiphon on the east bank of the Tigris by all the Targums and Gen. Rab." verse 1x Jerome makes this comment again in In Osee 1. 2: 16—
17. It is an opportunity for him to introduce the story of Ninus son of Bel (related also by Augustine De Civ. Dei 16. 3) about the foundation of the Assyrian Empire. It was very popular: Augustine
(De Civ. Dei 4. 6) states his sources for the story as Justin and Pompeius Trogus. The Hebrew word rhobdt can mean 'broad places, streets': see further his comment on 26: 22. His understanding of the word is found also in Vg, where, as here, he uses the word platea. This is a Greek word; and it is significant that the Aramaic
Targums use the identical Greek loan-word to translate rhobot, 17 See Kamesar, 'Thesis', 124, quoting Origen, Epiphanius, Adv. Haer. 3. 1-2, and Clementine Homilies 9. 4.
18 See McNamara, Targum and Testament, 194.
19 See ibid. 193, and Goshen-Gottstein, Fragments, ii. 104. rendering it as plytyt (PJ), plty't (TN), pltyywwt (gloss of TN), and pltyyt (FTV). verses 13-14 The forms of the names in LXX are rather different, being Loudieim, Enemetieim, Labieim, Nephthalieim, Patrosdnieim, Chaslénieim, Phulistieim, and Chaphthorieim.
Jerome's source here is once more Josephus, Ant. t. 137; but he has made alterations. Thus he adds to the information about the Laabim, which Josephus provides, the note that the Libyans were first called Phuthaei: this he has derived from ro: 6. He also adds that Chasloim were later called Philistines. He possibly derived this from a Jewish source, which he may have misunderstood; for PJ interprets Chasloim (Hebrew Kasluhim) as 'the people of Pentapolis', and this notion of 'five cities' may have suggested to Jerome the five Philistine cities with their five overlords (1 Sam. 6:
5).2° The Ethiopian war is recounted by Josephus, Ant. 2. 238-53, and refers to an Ethiopian invasion of Egypt in the days of Moses, who was appointed leader of the Egyptian armies by Pharaoh, and successfully repelled and punished the attackers. The story is found also in surviving fragments of the second-century Bc HellenisticJewish writer Artapanus."! verse 15 On Sidon, Jerome follows Josephus, Ant. 1. 138. Thereafter, however, Josephus (Ant. 1. 138-9) does not follow the order of the biblical text, and Jerome himself once more modifies some of Josephus' remarks. They both agree on Aracaeus and the situation of his town. Josephus lists Sinus along with all the others, except
Aradius and Amathaeus, as having no record in Scripture but their names, since they were destroyed by the Hebrews; but Jerome singles out its location as near Tripolis. Gen. Rab. 37: 6 likewise places it near Mount Lebanon; possibly Jerome knew this, and its corresponding identification in the Targums." He also speaks of Sinus alone as overthrown in war: he entirely omits the rest. The 20 PJ probably refers to the Pentapolis of Cyrenaica; so le Déaut, Targum du
Pentateuque, i. 139. Note also that in Ngl and FTV the Kasluhim are dubbed Pentesekinites, the notion of five occurring again.
21 Ap. Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 9. 7-10. For a translation of Artapanus' account, and discussion of its relationship to Josephus' work, see J. J. Collins, 'Artapanus', in J. H. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ii (London, 1985),
98 BOP her Grossfeld, Targum Ongelos to Genesis, 61; Orthosia may be meant, as in PJ and TN.
Commentary war he speaks of is probably identical with the Hebrew conquest of their cities which Josephus relates. He says that they number seven, the traditional number of the Canaanite peoples conquered by Israel when she took possession of her land under Joshua; and he relates their destruction to the cursing of their forefather Canaan
The island of Aradus features in Josephus, jer. Meg. 1: 9, and Gen. Rab. 37: 6. Samaraeus, Hebrew Zemarites, is identified as Emissa also in Gen. Rab. 37: 4, jer. Meg. 1: 9, PJ, and FTV. Finally
Amathaeus, Hebrew 'the Hamathites', stands for the famous city of Hamath, as Josephus points out: so also jer. Meg.
1: 9. Jerome's remark about the Macedonians naming it Epiphania derives from Josephus: it is so named in Gen. Rab. 37: 6. Its identification with Antiochia is the view of PJ, TN, FTV. On Emath, see further Im Esa.
4. 10: §-I1. verse 19 LXX of this verse read 'and Seboim, as far as Lasa': this last is Hebrew Lasha', and its identification with Callirhoe is attested also by Gen. Rab. 37: 6, Sifre Deut. 6, jer. Meg. 1: 9, PJ of this verse and Deut. 1: 7.74 The form Lise is represented variously as Lece, Leshe, and Leset in the MSS. verse 22 To the end of this list of sons LXX add Kainan. Jerome has reproduced the Hebrew text; cf. LAB 4: 9. The comment is an abridged version of Josephus, Ant. 1. 143-4. Josephus, however, says that Elam was ancestor of the Persians, while Jerome speaks of the Elamite princes of Persia. The latter has no doubt recalled that Cyrus I, founder of the Persian Empire (ruled 553-528 Bc), made the Elamite city of Susa one of his principal seats, and took as one of his titles King of Anshan, a district of Elam. On Assur and Ninus, see above, ro: 11. verse 23 The sons of Aram are spelled here as in Vg: the last two are closer to the Hebrew Gether and Mash than LXX, which have
Gather and Mosoch. Josephus, Amt. 1. 145, records the material about Us, to which Jerome has added LXX's interpretation of the beginning of Job; elsewhere (15: 2-3), Jerome records a different tradition about the founder of Damascus. The note about Ul and the Armenians also derives from Josephus. The latter, however, says that the Bactrians derive from Gether: they lived in the north3 It is at this point that Josephus gives his version of Noah's drunkenness and the cursing of Canaan and his offspring recorded in Gen. 9: 20-7.
24 See also Goshen-Gottstein, Fragments, ii. 105-6. ern part of Afghanistan, whereas the Carians, whom Jerome places here, were settled in south-west Asia Minor. The identification of Mes-Mosoch with the Maeones, inhabitants of Lydia (?), is made also in In Esa. 18. 66: 18-19. verses 24-5 LXX here read: 'And Arphaxad begot Kainan, and Kainan begot Sala, and Sala begot Eber ...'. Jerome follows the Hebrew in omitting Kainan; cf. LAB 4: 9. Jerome has expanded
Josephus' account of Heber and Phaleg (Ant. x. 146), which includes both the statement that the Hebrews descend from Heber, and the meaning of Phaleg as 'division', from root pig, 'divide'. He has added a reference to prophecy lacking in Josephus, but found in Gen. Rab. 37: 7 and Seder 'Olam Rabbah 1 in the name of R.
Halafta.2'> While recording the biblical explanation of Phaleg's name as referring to the division of the earth, his comment specifies also the division of the languages at the time of the tower of Babel.
What precisely was divided in Phaleg's time is not entirely clear.
Was it peoples before Babel as TN and, it would seem, LAB 6: 1 understand? or was it simply the territories to which they belonged, as suggested by Jub. 8: 8-9, Josephus, Ant. 1. 146, and LAB 4: 9226
Jerome's specific statement that it was the languages agrees with Rashi and with PJ of Deut. 32: 8, which reads: 'When the Most
High set the world as an inheritance for the nations who had come forth from Noah's sons, when he separated writings and languages for the sons of men at the generation of the division, b¢dard dpalguta'...' The generation of the division refers to Phaleg's days, as PJ of Gen. to: 11; 22: 9 make plain. The tradition is not common in Judaism, and Jerome may be indebted to a Targumic source for his knowledge. Augustine, QG 19, seems to approve
Jerome's interpretation. verses 26-9 In verse 28, LXX have omitted Ebal, Hebrew "%bdl, which Jerome has supplied: so also the VL. The forms of these
25 Cf. Rahmer, Die bebriischen Traditionen, 27. See also Rashi and MHG on this verse. Jerome's word for prophecy here is vaticinium, which he mostly uses in the quite general sense of 'prediction' or 'foretelling of future events': for the background of the word in pagan thought, and the various nuances in Jerome's use of it, see Jay, L'Exégése de saint Jérome, 342~3.
26 LAB seems to envisage two divisions of humanity, the first in the time of Phaleg (4: 9) which includes the division of the earth and, by implication, the people on it: see further 6: 1. This last says of the period before Babel: 'Then those inhabiting the earth, who had been divided, afterwards gathered together and lived as one.' This initial division must surely refer to Phaleg's days, for 6: 1 then goes on to tell of the divisions following the Tower of Babel's collapse.