Now whereas the Scripture affordeth the priority of order unto Sem, we cannot from thence infer his primogeniture. For in Sem the holy line was continued: and therefore however born, his genealogy was most remarkable. So is it not unusuall in holy Scripture to nominate the younger before the elder: so is it said, That Tarah begat Abraham,Gen. 11. Nachor and Haram: whereas Haram was the eldest. So Rebecca Gen. 28. is termed the mother of Jacob and Esau. Nor is it strange the younger should be first in nomination, who have commonly had the priority in the blessings of God, and been first in his benediction. In divine benedictions the younger often preferred. So Abel was accepted before Cain, Isaac the younger preferred before Ishmael the elder, Jacob before Esau, Joseph was the youngest of twelve, and David the eleventh son and minor cadet of Jesse.
Lastly, though Japhet were not elder then Sem, yet must we not affirm that he was younger then Cham, for it is plainly delivered, that after Sem and Japhet had covered Noah, he awaked, and knew what his youngest son had done unto him υἱὸς ὁ νεὡτερος, is the expression of the Septuagint, Filius minor of Jerom, and minimus of Tremelius. And upon these grounds perhaps Josephus doth vary from the Scripture enumeration, and nameth them Sem, Japhet and Cham; which is also observed by the Annian Berosus; Noah cum tribus filiis, Semo, Japeto, Cham. And therefore although in the priority of Sem and Japhet, there may be some difficulty, though Cyril, Epiphanius and Austin have accounted Sem the elder, and Salian the Annalist, and Petavius the Chronologist contend for the same, yet Cham is more plainly and confessedly named the youngest in the Text.
That Noah and Saturn were the same person.
And this is more conformable unto the Pagan history and Gentile account hereof, unto whom Noah was Saturn, whose symbol was a ship, as relating unto the Ark, and who is said to have divided the world between his three sons. Ham is conceived to be Jupiter, who was the youngest son: worshipped by the name of Hamon, which was the Egyptian and African name for Jupiter, who is said to have cut off the genitals of his father, derived from the history of HamGen. 9. 22. , who beheld the nakednes of his, and by no hard mistakeReading Veiaggod et abscidit, for Veiegged et nunciavit. might be confirmed from the Text, as Bochartus Bochartus de Geographia sacrâ. hath well observed.
CHAPTER VI
That the Tower of Babel was erected against a second Deluge
An opinion there is of some generality, that our fathers after the flood attempted the Tower of Babel to secure themselves against a second Deluge. Which however affirmed by Josephus and others, hath seemed improbable unto many who have discoursed hereon. For (beside that they could not be ignorant of the Promise of God never to drown the world again, and had the Rain-bow before their eyes to put them in mind thereof) it is improbable from the nature of the Deluge; which being not possibly causable from natural showers above, or watery eruptions below, but requiring a supernatural hand, and such as all acknowledg irresistible; must needs disparage their knowledg and judgment in so succesless attempts.
Again, They must probably hear, and some might know, that the waters of the flood ascended fifteen cubits above the highest mountains. Now, if as some define, the perpendicular altitude of the highest mountains be four miles; or as others, but fifteen furlongs, it is not easily conceived how such a structure could be effected. Although we allowed the description of Herodotus concerning the Tower of Belus; whose lowest story was in height and bredth one furlong, and seven more built upon it; abating that of the Annian Berosus, the traditional relation of Jerom, and fabulous account of the Jews. Probable it is that what they attempted was feasible, otherwise they had been amply fooled in fruitless success of their labours, nor needed God to have hindred them, saying, Nothing will be restrained from them, which they begin to do.
History of the world.
It was improbable from the place, that is a plain in the land of Shinar. And if the situation of Babylon were such at first as it was in the days of Herodotus, it was rather a feat of amenity and pleasure, than conducing unto this intention. It being in a very great plain, and so improper a place to provide against a general Deluge by Towers and eminent structures, that they were fain to make provisions against particular and annual inundations by ditches and trenches, after the manner of Egypt. And therefore Sir Walter Raleigh accordingly objecteth: If the Nations which followed Nimrod, still doubted the surprise of a second flood, according to the opinions of the ancient Hebrews, it soundeth ill to the ear of Reason, that they would have spent many years in that low and overflown valley of Mesopotamia. And therefore in this situation, they chose a place more likely to have secured them from the worlds destruction by fire, then another Deluge of water: and as Pierius observeth, some have conceived that this was their intention.
Lastly, The reason is delivered in the Text. Let us build us a City and a Tower, whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the whole earth; as we have already began to wander over a part. These were the open ends proposed unto the people; but the secret design of Nimrod was to settle unto himself a place of dominion, and rule over his Brethren, as it after succeeded, according to the delivery of the Text, the beginning of his kingdom was Babel.
CHAPTER VII
Of the Mandrakes of Leah
We shall not omit the Mandrakes of Leah, according to the History of Genesis. And Reuben went out in the daies of Wheat-harvest, and found Mandrakes in the field, and brought them unto his mother Leah; then Rachel said unto Leah, give me, I pray thee, of thy sons Mandrakes: and she said unto her, is it a small matter that thou hast taken my husband, and wouldest thou take my sons Mandrakes also? and Rachel said, Therefore he shall lie with thee this night for thy sons Mandrakes. From whence hath arisen a common conceit, that Rachel requested these plants as a medicine of fecundation, or whereby she might become fruitfull. Which notwithstanding is very questionable, and of incertain truth.
For first from the comparison of one Text with another, whether the Mandrakes here mentioned, be the same plant which holds that name with us, there is some cause to doubt. The word is used in another place of Scripture,Cant. 7. when the Church inviting her beloved into the fields, among the delightfull fruits of Grapes and Pomegranates, it is said, The Mandrakes give a smell, and at our gates are all manner of pleasant fruits. Now instead of a smell of Delight, our Mandrakes afford a papaverous and unpleasant odor, whether in the leaf or apple, as is discoverable in their simplicity or mixture. The same is also dubious from the different interpretations: for though the Septuagint and Josephus do render it the Apples of Mandrakes in this Text, yet in the other of the Canticles, the Chaldy Paraphrase termeth it Balsame. R. Solomon, as Drusius observeth, conceives it to be that plant the Arabians named Jesemin. Oleaster, and Georgius Venetus, the Lilly, and that the word Dudaim may comprehend any plant that hath a good smell, resembleth a womans breast, and flourisheth in wheat harvest. Tremelius interprets the same for any amiable flowers of a pleasant and delightfull odor: but the Geneva Translators have been more wary then any: for although they retain the word Mandrake in the Text, they in effect retract it in the Margin: wherein is set down the word in the original is Dudaim, which is a kind of fruit or Flower unknown.
The vegetables in H. Scripture how