[Those] who pursue [carry on] the science of waging wars by letters and theory place a great moment [importance] toward victory in this: [that] the enemies’ camps, fortifications, forces, counsels, and minds [intentions] be explored [scouted]. And therefore that a great zeal was devoted to this matter by the ancient Commanders, Frontinus shows by the examples of Scipio Africanus, Q. Fabius Maximus, M. Cato, and the Carthaginians, bk. 1 of the Stratagems, ch. 21. Of Agamemnon and Hector, Homer, Iliad χ [Greek book-letter as printed]. And in [our] fathers’ memory, [he] who expelled the Moors from the kingdom of Granada, and subjected the whole Neapolitan kingdom to Ferdinand the King of Spain — Ferdinand Gonsalvo [Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba, “the Great Captain”] — did he not profess [that] he himself carried out such great affairs by the work of spies, when in the conduct of those wars he expended so much gold upon them? [There] was published, a few years ago, at Herbipolis [Würzburg], the Commentariolus of Count Johannes Tarnowski on the Turkish war. In it, that man most preeminent in warlike praise advises that leaders should spare no money and expenses so long as [there is] something that must be given to spies. From these [scouts] a great part of well-conducted affairs depends. For human prudence persuades [us] that [things] which are accommodated and useful to some good undertaken end should all be applied [adhibeantur] — provided they be not forbidden by God. But the end of those who lead armies is victory. To this [end] it is necessary to proceed at a fixed both manner and place and time, to press on, to draw up the battle-line, and to see to all the other military [matters], so that the enemy, namely, may be resisted as directly as possible, and be broken and subdued. But these [things], unless either openly [and] clearly you see what that one is doing, or secretly, [being] skilful [solerte], you investigate and dig out — how will you accomplish [them]? For just as a prudent Judge broadly tracks out hidden and occult misdeeds by [various] ways and conjectures — Job 29:16 — so too [the] enemy [designs], the war-Leader [tracks out]; as also the Latin master of soldiery teaches, Vegetius bk. 3 ch. 6. When, therefore, Joshua was now on the very point of entering into hostile [territory], he wished, out of military discipline, to know what was the mind of the enemies, and what the apparatus [preparation] of war. Yet someone might suspect that he himself is to be blamed on a fourfold head. First, in that hostile land the Leader was God, and [His] assiduous helper. What need, then, of exploration? Secondly, he had already once explored the land [through] Moses—
(col. 320 [printed 321])
—Moses, and among the very spies had been Joshua himself; and he had surveyed [lustrarat] all [things] with his own eyes. To what [purpose], then, is this exploration iterated [repeated]? Thirdly, that [former exploration] indeed had an outcome little happy, full of murmuring, full of punishment and mourning. Ought not Joshua, therefore, to have made himself more cautious by [others’] alien perils? Fourthly, he himself would at least have done what Moses had done — [namely] to consult God about this [expedition].
To the first the response is [in] the preceding ch. 1, part 2, in the preparation, quest. 2. “It is better,” says D. Jerome on Isaiah ch. 66, “to leave [things] written than to repeat [things] said.” Yet I add two notable rules of Abulensis, q. 3. The prior: to act according to human prudence — where God has not defined a certain manner of acting, nor forbidden the act of human prudence — is just; nay, not to act, in such a case, according to human prudence is imprudence. The posterior: if God shall have defined for us a certain manner of acting in some matter, or shall have forbidden the manner of human providence, it is [a mark] of little faith [modicae fidei] to recur to human providence. He subjoins an example about the Apostles, whose act of human prudence he esteems [to have been] prohibited by the Lord, saying (Matt. 10:19): “When they shall deliver you [up], be not anxious how or what you shall speak.” But of this elsewhere. Now [it is] enough [that], from either rule, here our Joshua acted [rightly] — since [it] was both [a matter] of prudence to explore the enemy, and that [act] was not forbidden, nor [was] another manner predetermined by God. And hence Rupert, ch. 10, bk. 1 on Joshua: “With whom [Joshua] the Lord was — to whom also he had said, ‘None shall be able to resist you all the days of thy life’ — [yet] he himself sends spies to consider the land, and the city [of] Jericho. Not therefore should anyone, in any business, so presume upon celestial garrisons [helps], as [that] he should not himself also be first present to himself [assist himself] — watching by the faculty of [his] talent [ingenium], laboring in manly proportion [doing his own share]. For just as [it] is of the least faith to doubt about divine promises, so [it] is of excessive temerity or presumption to await celestial help through miracles, [while] sitting idle with hands folded. For it is man’s [part] to begin, but God’s to perfect [accomplish].”
To the second responds quest. 6, Abulensis: [that] not to explore the same [things] are the spies now sent. For by Moses they were sent to [explore] the nature of the land itself, the natural strength of the nation, and [its] multitude, [and] the part of the region into which first—
(col. 321)
—first the way was to be entered upon, [and] to be known. But now, since all these [things] have been seen by Joshua and narrated, [and] heard by most, and known and perceived by the minds of all, Joshua desires to understand certain other [things] — namely, what [is] the fortification of the nearest city, what [the] apparatus of war, what force and ardor of minds [is directed] to that [defense], what [is] the number of the hostile forces, and the like, which the reason [circumstance] of this time persuaded [required]. For those first spies were sent in the second year of the Egyptian exodus; these [are sent] either at the end of the 40th [year] or the beginning of the 41st, as [will be] said more below.
To the third. From the lying and wickedness of the returning spies came forth that [outcome], whatever it was, [which was] evil. But Joshua then spoke the truth, and sought only that [truth] — from which [there was] nothing of danger, but he certainly trusted [there would be] very much of good. But if from the outcome the whole matter is to be weighed [judged], then also Moses, who instituted that exploration, and God, who assented [to it], would be called into fault. But —
“…may he lack [good] successes, I wish [it], / whoever thinks that deeds are to be judged from the event [outcome].”
Neither, if anything has sometimes turned out badly by the fault of some, is that ever [therefore] not to be repeated [iterandum], but the flaw which there was [is] to be corrected, and from flight [one must] return into battle. καὶ γὰρ οἱ ῥίψασπιδες μάχονται [kai gar hoi rhipsaspides machontai, “for even those who have thrown away their shields [in flight] fight [again]”].
To the fourth, Masius thinks Joshua himself was excited [stirred] to this, of his own accord, by God — [namely] that after the preceding [things] which we have heard promised, the most benign Father might animate His own Commander [Emperor], as [being] a man, and over and above [insuper] by the good news of the scouts. Others say [that] Joshua consulted [inquired of] God’s oracle through the Urim & Thummim [וְרִים וְתֻמִּים]. And each [view] indeed is probable; but because neither is hinted in the text, and because that which Joshua did was customary to all leaders skilled in warfare, I reckon that this was done by him rather by prudence [as] mistress [magistra] — with Abulensis, q. 3.