Commentaria in IV Regum
AND THE FOURTH PART OF A CABE OF PIGEONS’ DUNG FOR FIVE PIECES OF SILVER.—The cabe or choenix was a measure of daily food, containing four pounds and five ounces, as I said at the end of the Pentateuch: the fourth part of a cabe was therefore a pound with an ounce, namely thirteen ounces. Lyra, Hugo and Dionysius understand by dung the grains of corn which are found in the crop or stomach of pigeons. But others take simply dung as it sounds. Whence Josephus and Theodoret think that this pigeons’ dung was used for salt; for it has a sharp and caustic force, as Galen testifies. More plainly others think that the pigeon’s dung was used as food, both because it is made of grains and other purer foods, and because it is moister, and consists of more wholesome things; whence it is edible for man. Pliny adds, book XXIX, chapter vi, that pigeons’ dung with vinegar is of value for curing aegilopes, white specks and scars, and book XXX, chapter xiv, for soothing roughness and distillations of the throat. Moreover, it makes pearls, which are celebrated against heart and melancholic affections, and by whose innate dryness the redundancies of bodies are consumed, purer. So writes Franciscus Rueus, book On Gems, chapter xii. There is near Vogesus in Lorraine a mountain stream productive of pearls; but they are not so splendid: yet it is wonderful that what grace is wanting in them by their genesis is made good by pigeons; which, namely, having swallowed them, at length render them back purer with their dung, and restore them, says Serarius, himself a Lorrainer.
27. AND HE SAID: IF THE LORD DO NOT SAVE THEE, HOW CAN I SAVE THEE? OUT OF THE BARNFLOOR, OR OUT OF THE WINEPRESS?—that is, as Vatablus translates: Since the Lord does not bring thee help, whence could I bring thee help? from the barn or from the winepress? as if to say: Since the Lord has sent this famine on the whole city, unless He Himself succour thee in it, I cannot succour thee; because I have no corn in the barn, nor wine in the winepress; as if to say: I myself lack bread and wine for food. Whence the Chaldee translates, Let not the Lord save thee, whence shall I save thee? Hence the Royal [Polyglot] editions also in the Vulgate so read: Let not the Lord save thee, as if to say: Not I, but the Lord save and feed thee, for I have no food that I may give thee.
Otherwise Josephus, Abulensis and Sanchez: The king, they say, angered by the famine and the importunate appeal of the woman, answered indignantly: “May God not save thee,” as if to say: May God afflict thee. So the Gentiles in anger, imprecating evils, said: “May the gods destroy thee! May the gods do thee ill!” Whence Vatablus also translates thus: Perish, why dost thou seek food from me, when thou knowest that I am without all food?
29. SO WE BOILED MY SON, AND DID EAT HIM.—A barbarous feast it was, which extreme famine wrung from a mother, so that, forgetting herself as a mother, she became the slayer and devourer of her son. A like thing happened in the siege of Jerusalem under Titus, as Josephus testifies; and in these last years, when the Swede was ravaging Germany, many driven by hunger devoured human flesh. God permitted the Samaritans to be driven to these extremes, first, to punish their schism and idolatry; second, that His deliverance of them might be the more illustrious, and the prophecy of Eliseus promising it. So God permits men at times to come to the very threshold of death, that they may call upon God the more fervently, and that God, hearing them, may receive from them greater thanksgiving and praise. Wherefore in things naturally desperate we must hope most in God, who is wont to succour in them, according to the saying: “A god from the machine.” Hear St. Augustine, sermon 214 On the Seasons: “She turned her son into food, which God had created for solace. But after they had come to the deadly feast, one woman exhorts the other: Receive, she says, receive, wretched mother, into thy bowels the son lately begotten of thy bowels; be the sepulchre of thy child, be the lodging of his body; be, so to speak, his monument; let the infant, eaten, return a little way within thee, who could no longer live by famine; let the womb now receive eaten him whom the birth had brought forth alive; let him seek again the dwelling, dead, whence he lately came forth alive.”
30. AND ALL THE PEOPLE SAW THE HAIRCLOTH WHICH HE WORE WITHIN NEXT TO HIS FLESH (the king),—this king, though impious and an idolater, judged that God is to be appeased by penance and haircloth: he was therefore more reasonable than our heretics, who, caring for their skin, reject haircloths, and attribute them to superstition. See here how ancient is the use of haircloth in penance. So the king of Ninive with all the people clothed himself in sackcloth (haircloth) and sat in ashes, Jonas iii, 6. And so by penance he escaped the destruction threatened to him by God through Jonas. So an Arian king put on haircloth, and by these and prayers appeased God, as Salvian testifies, book VII. Moreover the use of haircloth is much more ancient: for the first we read of as using it is the Patriarch Jacob, hearing that his son Joseph had been devoured by a beast, Genesis xxxvii, 34, where I said much of the use of haircloth.
31. AND THE KING SAID: GOD DO SO AND SO TO ME, AND ADD MORE, IF THE HEAD OF ELISEUS THE SON OF SAPHAT SHALL STAND ON HIM THIS DAY,—as if to say: This day I will cut off the head of Eliseus, because he persuaded us to endure this siege in Samaria, promising the help of God in raising it, while we suffer extreme famine and are in despair: for without him we should have made terms in good time with the king of Syria who besieges us, and so should have escaped this famine, which Eliseus sees and dissembles, nor takes pains to avert by his prayers. So Theodoret.
32. DO YOU KNOW THAT THIS SON OF A MURDERER (namely Joram king of Israel, who is the “son” of Achab “the murderer,” for Achab killed Naboth) HATH SENT TO CUT OFF MY HEAD?—as if to say: Joram acts the father and imitates his father; for as Achab his father killed Naboth, so he wishes to kill me, as he himself killed his six brothers, as it is said.
LOOK THEREFORE WHEN THE MESSENGER SHALL COME, SHUT THE DOOR, AND SUFFER HIM NOT TO COME IN: FOR BEHOLD THE SOUND OF HIS MASTER’S FEET IS BEHIND HIM,—as if to say: The king himself immediately follows the messenger sent by him to kill me, repenting of his command, and recalling it. So Josephus; as if to say, Fear not to resist the king’s messenger, because the king will presently recall him; for he follows him so hastily that you may hear the sound of his hurrying feet. Hence it is plain that Eliseus had persuaded the king not to give Samaria to the Syrians, but to hope for help and succour from the Lord. This king was Joram the son of Achab, who succeeded him; for his acts are described here down to chapter vii, verse 26, where his death is related. Joram, therefore, hastily and in anger, had sent a messenger to kill Eliseus; but presently, the anger subsiding, he came to himself and repented; wherefore, fearing lest the messenger should kill Eliseus, as he had commanded, he at once ran after the messenger, to forbid the slaughter. For he knew that Eliseus was a prophet, a holy man and a benefactor of Samaria, and had often otherwise found his oracles faithful and most true: so that of this also, I mean of the raising of the siege, he could hardly doubt. So expressly Josephus, Theodoret and Abulensis.