The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, vol. 1

II. Villanova’s Commentary on “De Semine”

About 1292 Villanova wrote a commentary on what he thought was a genuine work of Joachim. This short treatise bears the formidable title: Introduction in Librum [Joachim] De Semine Scrilbturarum, Quod Est de Prophetis Dormienti Save de Dormtentbusium Prophetus (Introduction to Joachim’s Book De Semine Scripturarum, Which Is Concerning the Sleeping Prophets or Concerning the Prophecies of the Sleeping Ones). ⁹ The argument of this little work seems involved enough to the modern reader, but as compared with De Semine it betrays the scientific mind of the author, die begins by describing De Semine in truly medieval terms: PFF1 747.4

“Therefore in the mysteries of numbers and the significations of letters of the alphabet, which the author touches in the course of this work, this wonderful net of divine wisdom is set forth for us .... For there will appear the wheels of Ezekiel, so that no doubt we see a meaning within a meaning and a mystery within a mystery.” ¹⁰ PFF1 748.1

But when he comes to the point of proving that the twenty-three letters of the alphabet mean twenty-three centuries, he lines up his arguments in a comparatively systematic way. PFF1 748.2

1. ARGUES FROM REASONS, SIGNS, AUTHORITY.

On the thesis that the unit—root or seed—of the Scripture is the letter, and that not one “iota” or “apex” (i or vowel point jot or tittle) is to pass from the law until all things are fulfilled, he contends that everything symbolized by the letters of the alphabet must be fulfilled, and then time will end. That each letter means a century is proved (1) by—reasoning, (2) by sign, and (3) by authority. It is reasonable, he proceeds, that as the roots of a tree contain, potentially, the complete number of the fruit, so the roots of the Scripture when multiplied agree with the fruits of the Scripture, which fruits are (1) the explanation of the works by which the elect are saved and (2) the manifestation of the coming of Christ incarnate. The works are contained as seed to the ten commandments, and ten multiplied by itself is one hundred. PFF1 748.3

As for the incarnation of Christ, it can be proved by three signs which he draws from De Semine: (1) that the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew language agree with the number of centuries from the origin of that language (the confusion of tongues) to the birth of Christ; (2) that the number of centuries from the origin of the Latins (the founding of Rome) agrees with the seven letters from a to g up to the time of Christ, whose letter is h (homo, man); (3) that the twenty-three letters of the Latin alphabet—the most efficacious sign—agree with the prophetic number revealed to Daniel: PFF1 748.4

“For to him, as an old man, was revealed in sum the number of time from his time up to the end of the world, when it was said to him as it is read in the 8th chapter of the same book, that up to the evening and the morning, two thousand three hundred days.” ¹¹ PFF1 749.1

He adds that Daniel’s age at the time of the vision is not precisely known, but that he is approximately placed by the Roman and Jewish historians and chronologists. PFF1 749.2

“Therefore that author [of De Semine] wishing to leave what was uncertain and to accept what was certain concerning the time of Daniel, in order to signify this, said that Daniel grew up under the first letter a and died under the second. As if he lead said that to Daniel, who certainly was contemporary in part with the first and second centuries of the Latins, it was revealed that from those times up to the evening anti the morning are two thousand three hundred days. It is established, moreover, that in this number there are so many centuries, and no more, as the Latins have in the alphabet, namely 23.” ¹² PFF1 749.3

2. TWENTY-THREE CENTURIES FROM DANIEL TO SECOND ADVENT

These letters of the alphabet, he d continues, were given to the Latins not only to foretell the first advent of Christ, but particularly the second advent, “when twenty-three centuries have been completed from the time of Daniel.” This is, of course, the central theme of the pseudo-Joachim De Semine. PFF1 749.4

Furthermore, the angel said to Daniel that tile vision of the evening and the morning is true, and again that “in the time of the end the vision will be fulfilled.” What are the evening and the morning? “Evening,” he says, “is the end of time or the consummation of temporal things” and”,the morning of perfect splendor and light is the beginning of eternal things.” ¹³ PFF1 749.5

Our commentator, having now finished his “reasons” and “signs,” turns to his “authority” for the reckoning of twenty centuries for twenty-three letters: “the authority of tile divine scripture, Luke 8.... `The seed fell upon good ground, and brought forth fruit a hundredfold,’” ¹⁴ so that each letter would mean a hundred days or months, as the case may be. PFF1 750.1

“But hundreds of days or months do not suffice for the completion or consummation of the mysteries of the Sacred Scripture, for already all things would have been fulfilled, which is clearly false even from the predictions, because according to this the second advent of the Lord would have passed, even time would be no more, neither of which is true. Therefore it is necessary that they are centuries of years.” ¹⁵ PFF1 750.2

3. A STEP BEYOND “DE SEMINE”-2300 YEAR-DAYS

Villanova goes on to state explicitly the year-day principle: PFF1 750.3

“When he says ‘two thousand three hundred days’ it must be said that by days he understands years. This is clear through the explanation of the angel when he says that in the end the vision will be fulfilled, from which he gives it to be understood by clear expression that in that vision by days are understood years.” ¹⁶ PFF1 750.4

It would be absurd, he continues, to reckon a period ex tending to the time of the end by 2300 ordinary days, which would not even total eight years. Then as additional Scripture authority, he quotes Ezekiel 4:6 : PFF1 750.5

“It is not unaccustomed, in the Scripture of God, for days to understand years. Nay, it is certainly usual and frequent. Whence also the Spirit in Ezekiel testifies: ‘A day for a year I have reckoned to you.’” ¹⁷ PFF1 750.6

So speaks the Joachim theologian. But in Villanova the scientist crops up characteristically. He wishes to clinch the year-day argument with what seems to him valid astronomical evidence. Like many moderns, he believes on Scriptural authority, but rejoices when he can find scientific evidence to add to his faith. The Spirit of God did not interpret a day as a year without solid reason, he says. PFF1 750.7

“For do not philosophers say that a day is a ‘bringing’ of the sun over the earth and that a natural day is one revolution of the sun from one part of the orbit to the same? Therefore according to these definitions a day can well and conveniently be called, in the absolute, that bringing of the sun over the earth or through the circuit of the earth in which the sun revolves perfectly in its own orbit from point to point .... There is not but one such perfect revolution of the sun, namely, the one which it completes in its own orbit in a year.” ¹⁸ PFF1 750.8

Consequently, a year more accurately fits the definition of a day: PFF1 751.1

Therefore, since a year is the measure of the time in which the sun revolves in its own orbit from point to point” according to this it could absolutely be called a day; that is, the only and perfect revolution of the sun from point to point in its orbit.” ¹⁹ PFF1 751.2

Thus Villanova, in his exposition of the twenty-three letters of De Semine as twenty-three centuries, goes a step beyond the original. He takes the 2300 as days, which he interprets as years by applying the day-for-a-year rule cited specifically from Ezekiel; and he proves by systematic arguments that the 2300 could not be taken for literal days, but rather for symbolic days, meaning solar years. PFF1 751.3

He does not in this booklet take up any other prophetic period. Much of the latter part of the work is devoted to a discussion of the number 1000 and the 7000-year theory based on the days of creation. Not until 1297-in the same year as Olivi, or two years after, according to the varied dating of the latter’s work ²⁰ did Villanova apply the year-day principle to the 1290 and 1335 days of Daniel 12. PFF1 751.4