Library / Commentary on Joshua, Volume I

Book III: De apparitione ipsi Iosuae facta (On the apparition made to Joshua himself)

Question XLVII. Where was Joshua then?

Where Joshua then was, verse 13 shows — the Hebrew, Chaldee, & Greek text. For they all say [he] was in Jericho. But in what way could [he] be there, since [Jericho] was the enemies’ first city, closed on every side by walls & gates, as is related in the following chapter, v. 1? Was it, as above (ch. 2) the spies [did], [that] he had secretly entered it? But Scripture would not have kept silent about such — & so marvelous & unusual — an exploration by the Commander himself, [Scripture] which so diligently set forth the earlier [exploration] made through the men sent by him. Then, where, so alone, in a hostile [city], & one already full of so many men & eyes, could [he] have seen an appearing Angel? How, when [he] had seen [it], [could he] doubt & inquire whether [it] were an enemy or not? Perhaps someone has imagined [that] he was carried thither by some Angel, as Habakkuk was carried to Babylon [Dan 14:35]. But neither would so great a miracle be passed over in silence; nor, as has already been said, could [he] there conveniently behold & address either a solitary Angel, or not suspect himself detected — & therefore [that] he was being attacked with a sword by some one of the enemies. [There] are, therefore, two other responses. One [is] that of Ralbag [Gersonides] & of Arias Montanus, [namely] that Joshua was in Jericho not in body, but in mind & thought — in that way, namely, which [Horace] shows, who says:

Meditating I-know-not-what of trifles, [I was] wholly in them. [Horace, Sat. 1.9.2]

and: … — I am wholly in this. [Horace, Epist. 1.1.11]

As even today we say [that] someone is always wholly in [his] homeland, in [his] books, in the dishes — which [the Comic poet, Terence] plainly professes, who says, Long since [my] mind is among the dishes [Terence, Eun. 816]. But in that way, as I think, since [Joshua] was still beyond the Jordan while sending the spies to Jericho, [he] would already have been “in Jericho”: & having now crossed the Jordan, Joshua

(col. 682 — right column; printed “689”)

[would have been] in the whole promised land, not only in Jericho. But the same texts describe [it] as though [it were] something new, & as it were now first done by Joshua: When [he] was, it says, in Jericho, [he] lifted [his] eyes & saw a man. They also describe him as [being] as it were alone, in a solitary place, where one might appear to one, all others being removed, so that by the one that [Angel] might be seen, [and] with the one [Joshua] here might speak. The other response, therefore, & the truer, is that Joshua was then in Jericho, that is, in the field of Jericho [in agro Hierichuntino], in a place near to Jericho, &, so to speak, alongside the veterans, — [that is,] near the city Jericho. For, first, [it] sometimes happens that some city, & its territory, are called by the same name, as Granada, & the like. Secondly, to the whole territory, & to the suburban fields of a city, the very name [of the city] is attributed — although, [in] the Digest [ff.] On the signification of words, law 2 & 239, Paul & Ulpian seem to define these more narrowly. Thirdly, Cicero, book 7 of the epistles to Atticus, epistle 3, indicates [that], with the names of cities, when In is prefixed, [it] signifies not the city or town, but the Place [locality]. Fourthly, the Hebrew particle בְּ [be] is often taken for at & near, as below ch. 10, v. 10, in Gibeon for near Gibeon; & Judith ch. 16, v. 28, as I explained there, q. 6. Fifthly, Blessed Augustine on this place, q. 7, says: Jesus [Joshua] was in Jericho, not indeed in the city itself, whose walls had not yet fallen (which was soon to be, that [they] might be able to enter into it), but in the field pertaining to it. For the interpretation which is in the Hebrew has [it] thus — namely, our [Latin], which [Augustine] often thus, by this periphrasis, distinguishes from that which was then the Vulgate [text] out of the 70 [LXX]; but for in the Hebrew, [one] would more fittingly read out of the Hebrew. To D. Augustine all subscribe, even the Novators. For Calvin renders [it] at Jericho; Tremellius & Junius, near Jericho. Nor yet is it necessary — [as] Radak wishes — that the camp had already been moved from Gilgal to Jericho, as will be said below.

To cite this page

Nicolaus Serarius, S.J., “Question XLVII. Where was Joshua then?,” in Commentary on Joshua, Volume I, English translation, Mind of the Church, https://mindofthechurch.com/works/serarius-joshua-1/359-question-xlvii-where-was-joshua-then/.

Receive the new translations

One email when a new work or note is published — nothing else, ever.