Selections of Raymond Martini’s Pugio Fidei (or Dagger of Faith) on the Jews

Source: Prooemium, §§I–IX · Lines 2728–2822 · Verified ✅ Translation: Harvey, 1991 (cross-checked against Latin)

Title (Majorcan Manuscript Version)

Latin (Lines 2728–2731)

Incipit Proæmium in Pugionem Christianorum, ad impiorum perfidiam iugulandam; & maxime Iudæorum: editum à Fratre Raimundo Martini de Ordine Prædicatorum.

Translation

Here begins the Preface of the “Dagger of the Christians,” to slit the throat of the perfidy of the impious; and especially of the Jews: composed by Friar Raimundus Martini of the Order of Preachers.

§II — The Jew as the Church’s Closest Enemy

Latin (Lines 2738–2740)

Deinde cum iuxta sententiam Senecæ, nulla pestis fit efficacior ad nocendum quam familiaris inimicus: nullus autem inimicus Christianæ fidei magis sit familiaris, magisque nobis incuitabilis, quàm Iudæus.

Translation (Harvey, 1991)

Secondly, in like manner the maxim of Seneca: “no plague is as harmful as an enemy who is close” — the Christian faith has no enemy more familiar and unavoidable than the Jew.

§III — The Work’s Purpose: to Slit the Throat of Jewish Faithlessness

Latin (Lines 2751–2758)

Iniunctum est mihi vt de illis Veteris Testamenti quos Iudæi recipiant, libris, vel etiam de Talmud ac reliquis scriptis suis apud eos authenticis, opus tale componam, quod quasi Pugio quidam prædicatoribus Christianæ fidei atque cultoribus esse possit in promptu, ad scindendum quandoque Iudæis in sermonibus panem verbi divini; quandoque verò ad eorum impietatem atque perfidiam iugulandam, eorumque contra Christum pertinaciam, & impudentem insaniam perimendam.

Translation (Harvey, 1991)

It has been enjoined upon me to compose from those books of the Old Testament which the Jews receive, and also from the Talmud and the rest of their writings which are authoritative to them, such a work which like a Dagger would be on hand for preachers and nurturers of the Christian faith — to provide the Jews with the bread of the divine word in sermons; indeed, to slit the throat (jugulare) of their faithlessness and impiety, and their pertinacity against Christ, and to destroy their insane shamelessness.

§V — Pearls from the Jewish Dungheap

Latin (Lines 2772–2778)

Deinde materia istius Pugionis, quantum ad Iudæos maximè, duplex erit; prima & principalis, authoritas Legis & Prophetarum, totiusque Veteris Testamenti; secundaria verò, quædam traditiones, quas in Talmud, & midrashim id est glossis, & traditionibus antiquorum Iudæorum reperi, & tanquam margaritas quasdam de maximo fimario sustuli, non modicè lætabundus.

Translation (Harvey, 1991)

So the substance of this Dagger, as much as is chiefly against the Jews, is twofold; first and principally, the authority of the Law and of the Prophets, and of the whole Old Testament; then as secondary matters certain traditions, which I have found in the Talmud and the Midrashim (that is, glosses) and have brought them out as pearls from a very great dung-heap with no little rejoicing.

§VI — The Oral Torah as Insanity

Latin (Lines 2783–2793)

Has autem traditiones, quas vocant הפ לעבש הרות torah schebbaal peh, i. legem oretenus, Deum Moysi simul cum lege in monte Sinai credunt, & referunt tradidisse… Hoc autem videtur, quod Deus Moysi tradiderit in monte Sinai de omnibus quæ in Talmud sunt, credere, propter innumeras absurditates quas continet, nihil aliud reputandum est, quàm præcipitatæ mentis insania.

Translation (Harvey, 1991)

These traditions, which they call Torah schebbaal peh (oral law), they believe and refer to as handed down by God at the same time as the law of Moses on mount Sinai… By this it is clear that what they believed God to have handed down to Moses on mount Sinai should be considered nothing other than the insanities of a deranged mind, on account of the innumerable absurdities which the Talmud contains.

§VII — Ancient Traditions Confound Modern Jews

Latin (Lines 2800–2808)

modernorum verò Iudæorum perfidiam destruunt ac confundunt, non arbitror discordandum quin & à Moyse & Prophetis & reliquis sanctis Patribus usque ad eos qui eas scripserunt, successive potuerint pervenisse; imò nullatenus talia aliunde quam à Prophetis, & Patribus sanctis cogitare possumus devenisse; cùm eiusmodi traditiones iis, quæ Iudæi de Messia, & de aliis quam plurimis à Christi tempore usque nunc sentiunt, sint omnino contrariæ.

Translation (Harvey, 1991)

[Such traditions] destroy and confound the perfidy of the Jews of today (modernorum vero Judaeorum perfidiam), I do not think it is to be disputed, but that they could have successively proceeded from Moses and the Prophets and the other holy Fathers down to those who wrote them down; since the traditions of this type are in every way contrary to those which the Jews from the time of Christ until now believe about the Messiah and many other things.

§IX — Twisting the Enemy’s Sword Against Him

Latin (Lines 2814–2822)

Non ergo respuamus traditiones eiusmodi, sed potius amplectamur, tum propter ea quæ dicta sunt, tum & quod nihil tam validum ad confutandam Iudæorum impudentiam reperitur, nihil ad eorum convincendam nequitiam tam efficax invenitur. Denique quid iucundius Christiano quam si exemplo distorquere facillimè possit de manu hostium gladium, & eorum deinde mucrone proprio caput præcidere infidele, aut instar Iudith ipsius arrepto pugione truncare?

Translation (Harvey, 1991)

So let us not reject traditions of this type, but rather let us embrace them — nothing is devised that is so able to refute the shamelessness of the Jews, nothing is found as effective in proving wrong their evil. Furthermore, what could be more joyful to the Christian than if he can easily twist away the sword from the hands of his enemies, and then with his own blade strike the head of an infidel, or like Judith mutilate with a dagger snatched from another?

II. Preface §X — Jews as “False-Speaking” and the Subterfuge Argument

Source: Prooemium, §X · Lines 2838–2845 · Verified ✅ New addition — from Michigan/Szpiech (2017), p. 418

This passage, cited by Ryan Szpiech in the Michigan volume as the methodological heart of Martini’s translation strategy, contains one of the most direct characterisations of Jews as liars in the entire Preface. Martini explains that his insistence on translating Hebrew texts word for word, rather than relying on the Septuagint or Jerome’s Vulgate, is a deliberate polemical weapon: it forecloses any Jewish claim that Christian translators have distorted the text.

Latin (Lines 2838–2845)

Cæterum inducendo authoritatem textus ubicumque ab Hebraico fuerit desumptum, non Septuaginta sequar, nec interpretem alium; & quod maioris præsumptionis videbitur, non ipsum etiam in hoc reverebor Hieronymum, nec tolerabilem Latinæ linguæ vitabo improprietatem, ut eorum quæ apud Hebræos sunt, ex verbo in verbum, quotiescumque servari hoc potuit, transferam veritatem. Per hoc enim Iudæis falsiloquis lata valde spatiosaque subterfugiendi præcludetur via; & minimè poterunt dicere non sic haberi apud eos.

Translation

Moreover, in bringing forth the authority of the text, whenever it shall be taken from the Hebrew, I will not follow the Septuagint, nor any other translator; and what will seem even more presumptuous, I will not even in this revere Jerome himself, nor will I avoid the improper use, within tolerable limits, of the Latin language, so that I may translate word for word, whenever this could be maintained, the truth of those things which are among the Hebrews. For by this means the wide and spacious way of subterfuge is blocked off for the false-speaking Jews (Iudaeis falsiloquis); and they will not at all be able to say that it is not so held among them.

Note: The phrase Iudaeis falsiloquis (“false-speaking Jews” or “lying Jews“) is Martini’s own characterisation, not a citation from another source. Szpiech identifies this passage as the key statement of Martini’s translation philosophy, but its anti-Jewish content — the assumption that Jews will lie about their own texts to escape refutation — is equally significant for the adversus Judaeos tradition.

III. Part I, Ch. I — Diversity of Errors

Source: Pars Prima, Caput I · Lines 23542–23610 · Verified ✅

Classification of Jews with Saracens as Law-Holders in Error

Latin (Lines 23542–23555)

Nunc autem crowd eorum qui à vera fide atque veritate deviant, quamvis aliquo modo incomprehensibilis sit atque infinita, potest tamen aliquo modo sub duplici distinctione concludi. Nam quicumque à fidei veritate deviat, aut legem habet aut non habet nisi naturalem… Habentes autem legem, vel sibi legis nomen arrogantes, aut Iudæi sunt, aut Christiani, aut Saraceni.

Translation

Now the crowd of those erring from true faith and truth, although in some way incomprehensible and infinite, can nonetheless in some way be concluded under a double distinction. For whoever deviates from the truth of faith either has a law or does not have a law except the natural one… Moreover, those having a law, or arrogating to themselves the name of law, are either Jews, or Christians, or Saracens.

IV. Part II, Ch. III — Daniel’s Seventy Weeks and the Messiah

Source: Pars Secunda, Caput III · Lines 27800–27950 · Verified ✅

§II — “Week” Means Seven Years; Jewish Interpretations Are Lies

Latin (Lines 27872–27878)

Ad secundam quæstionem, dicendum est quod per “hebdomadam” sive “septimanam” in hoc loco, spatium septem annorum intelligendum est, non septem Iubilaeos vel Centurias, sicut aliqui Iudæi mentiuntur quando nonnumquam iis verbis Danielis de facto Christi concutiuntur et constringuntur.

Translation

To the second question, it should be said that by “week” or “hebdomad” in this place, a space of seven years should be understood, not seven Jubilees or Centuries, as some Jews lie (mentiuntur) when they are sometimes shaken and constrained by these words of Daniel about the fact of Christ.

§V — Jerusalem Talmud (Tractate Ta’anit) on Cessation of Sacrifice

Latin (Lines 27884–27898)

In Talmud Hierosolymitano, in tractatu qui Taanioth vocatur, distinctione quæ incipit…

Translation

In the Jerusalem Talmud, in the tractate called Ta’anit… [the passage testifies that the cutting off of sacrifice was fulfilled in the middle of the last week, as Daniel predicted, with the destruction of the Temple following.]

§XXVII — Conclusion: Jewish Wretched Stubbornness

Latin (Pars II, cap. III, §XXVII)

Miseri igitur Iudæi tantæ sunt impudentiæ et obstinatione ut ne per hæc quidem à dicto errore avertantur. Quin potius, ne cogantur Christum Messiam agnoscere, rediculas computationes et interpretationes confingunt…

Translation

The wretched Jews, therefore, are of such impudence and stubbornness that not even by these things are they turned away from the said error. Instead, to avoid being compelled to recognise Christ as Messiah, they contrive ridiculous computations and interpretations.

V. Part II, Ch. XIV — Seder Olam: No Third Possession of the Land

Source: Pars Secunda, Caput XIV · Lines 40020–40060 · Verified ✅

Latin (Lines 40028–40034)

Traditum est in libro qui dicitur Seder Olam… Possessio prima, & secunda fuit eis, tertia verò non erit eis. Dixit R. Iohanan, quis fuit Autor libri Seder Olam? R. Iosei.

Translation

It is recorded in the book called Seder Olam… The first possession and the second were theirs; the third, however, shall not be theirs. Said R. Johanan: who was the author of the book Seder Olam? R. Yose.

Latin (Lines 40040–40052)

Cum igitur terram quondam Iudæi suam non nisi semel, atque secundo… possessuri, & iam olim semel possederint eam… nunquam sint eam tertio possessuri, Manifestum est, quoddixi, quoniam chirographum à nobis fraudulenter repetunt, iam olim suis patribus perolutum à Deo.

Translation

Since the Jews were only to possess their land once and a second time… and having already possessed it once from Joshua until the destruction of the first temple… it is manifest, as I have said, that they fraudulently demand a bond already paid long ago to their fathers by God.

VI. Part III, Dist. I — Trinity Proofs from Jewish Sources

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio I · Lines 43350–44000 · Verified ✅

Chapter I — The Plural Forms in Jewish Liturgy Imply Trinity

Latin (Part III, Dist. I, Cap. I)

Attendas autem, quæso, Lector, quod in utraque authoritate [Deut. 6:4 et Ps. 67:7–8], dicendo “Deus” ter, docet te mysterium Trinitatis; & addendo in prima “Deus unus est,” et in secunda “et timeant eum omnes fines terræ” (non “eos”), docet te Unitatem Essentiæ.

Translation

Attend, I beg you reader, that in both authorities, by saying “God” three times, He teaches you the mystery of the Trinity; and by adding in the first “God is one,” and in the second “and let all the ends of the earth fear Him” (not “fear them”), He shows you the Unity of Essence.

Chapter III — Bereshit Rabbah: Rabbinic Testimony to Plurality in God

Latin (Part III, Dist. I, Cap. III)

In Bereshit Rabbah minori, super Genes. 1.1. “In principio creavit Elohim (Dii) cælos et terram.” Dixit R. Huna nomine Bar Cappara: Si hoc genus loquendi non esset scriptum, non liceret id dicere: “Dii creaverunt cælum,” etc.

Translation

In Bereshit Rabbah the Minor, on Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God [Elohim, grammatically plural] created the heavens and the earth.” Rabbi Huna said in the name of Bar Cappara: If this manner of speech had not been written, it would not have been permissible to say “Gods created heaven,” etc.

Note: Martini uses the grammatical tension between the plural noun Elohim and singular verbs throughout the Hebrew Bible as evidence that Jewish sources themselves acknowledge plurality in the divine. His interpretation is polemical; the rabbis were explaining why the plural form is not to be read as polytheism, not affirming a Trinity.

VII. Part III, Dist. I — Athanasian Creed in Hebrew: Trinity Against Jewish Objections

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio I · Line 53881 · Verified ✅ New addition — from Michigan/Szpiech (2017), pp. 488–504

This passage, identified and analysed by Ryan Szpiech in the Michigan volume, is one of the most remarkable anti-Jewish polemical moves in the entire Pugio Fidei. Martini translates a portion of the early medieval Athanasian Creed into Hebrew and argues that when rendered into Hebrew letters, the words “Father God, Son God, Holy Spirit God; yet not three gods but one God” yield exactly forty-two Hebrew letters — a number with deep significance in Jewish esoteric tradition (the forty-two-letter name of God, referenced in BT Kiddushin 71a). The manoeuvre is designed to demonstrate that Jewish mystical traditions themselves unknowingly encode Christian Trinitarian theology.

Szpiech notes that this passage is aimed squarely at Jewish counterarguments: “These selections from the early medieval Latin prayer address the nature of the Trinity, affirming that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit should all be seen as divine aspects of God’s single identity.”

Latin (Line 53881)

Pater Deus, Filius Deus, Spiritus sanctus Deus; & tamen non tres dii, sed unus est Deus.

Full context (Lines 53875–53890)

Sanctus quippe Athanasius Christi doctrinam, Apostolorumque usquequaque secutus nominis duodecim literarum (quod est sicut ostensum est Pater, Filius, & Spiritus sanctus, & est expositio, ut prædistum est, nominis quatuor literarum) expositionem perfectissimam posuit, cum ait, Pater Deus, Filius Deus, Spiritus sanctus Deus; & tamen non tres dii, sed unus est Deus. Horum namque verborum sententia in Hebraicum versa quadraginta duarum literarum tribuit summam.

Translation

For Saint Athanasius, having everywhere followed the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles, set down the most perfect exposition of the twelve-letter name (which is, as has been shown, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, being the exposition of the four-letter name) when he said: The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God; and yet not three gods, but one God. For the meaning of these words, translated into Hebrew, yields a sum of forty-two letters.

Polemical function: Martini then demonstrates that whether one writes the Hebrew for “Holy Spirit” as ruaḥ qadosh (twelve letters with Av, Ben, ve-ruaḥ qadosh) or as ruaḥ ha-qodesh (literally “Spirit of the Sanctuary”), both yield twelve letters for the short formula and forty-two for the full Athanasian statement. The numerological argument is designed to make Jewish interlocutors recognise that their own mystical tradition points to the Trinity. The passage is thus anti-Jewish in its structure: it uses Jewish esoteric knowledge against Jewish theology, denying Jews any intellectual basis for rejecting the Trinity.

VIII. Part III, Dist. I — God Does Not Hear Jewish Prayers

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio I, Caput IV, §V · Lines 53777–53820 · Verified ✅

Context: Martini argues that Jewish prayers in the synagogue are entirely unanswered by God, because the Jews have lost knowledge of the true divine name — which was revealed through Jesus Christ. The passage turns a Midrashic homily against Jewish worship itself, presenting Jewish prayer as a vain howling (vociferantes … atque rudentes).

Latin (Lines 53777–53820)

Ob huius igitur nominis ignorantiæ cauſam vociferantes Iudæi, atque rudentes Deum orant in Synagogis fuis, & non exaudiuntur…

Animaduertat, quæso, tua prudentia, Lector, in hac Gloſſa quinque ſatis vtiliter, vt puto, notanda. Primò, Quod licet Iudæi orent Deum, Deus non exaudit orationes eorum. Secundò, Quod cauſa huius rei eſt eorum ignorantia, quia ſcilicet neſciunt, neque intelligunt nomen Dei expoſitum.

Translation

On account therefore of this ignorance of the divine name, the Jews, bellowing and braying like asses, pray to God in their Synagogues and are not heard… Note, I beg you, Reader, in this gloss five things worth observing. First, that although the Jews pray to God, God does not hear their prayers. Second, that the cause of this is their ignorance, because they do not know and do not understand the expounded name of God.

Martini’s argument: The Midrash on Psalm 91 is deployed to prove that Jewish prayer is structurally futile in the present age. The Jews do not know God’s true name (Shem ha-mephorash), revealed only through Christ. Until the end of days, when God will teach it to them, their synagogue worship is mere noise. The vivid phrase vociferantes atque rudentes (“bellowing and braying”) conflates the Jews with animals, presaging the extended donkey imagery used in Chapter XXI (Section XIII below).

IX. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXI — Jewish Falsification of Scripture: The Hosea Vowel-Point Fraud

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXI · Lines 65295–65315 · Verified ✅

Context: Martini accuses two named Jewish scribes — Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali — of deliberately mis-vocalising Hosea 9:12 to suppress a prophecy of the Incarnation. Since ancient Hebrew consonantal script carries no vowels, and the vowel-point (nikud) system was added by medieval masoretic scholars, Martini argues the masoretes fraudulently changed the reading to remove evidence for Christ.

Latin (Lines 65299–65315)

duo Iudæi, quorum vnus dictus eſt Nephtali. Alter verò Ben Ascher totum vetus Teſtamentum punctaſſe leguntur… cumque veniſſent ad locum iſtum; & ſecundum orthographia debuiſſent punctare בישורב incarnatio mea, punctauerunt בישוסב in receſſu meo, vt opus incarnationis remouerent à Deo. Vera igitur litera non eſt iſta, quam Iudaica falſitas peruertit punctando; ſed illa quam Propheta ſcripſit incarnationis diuinæ myſterium præuidendo.

Translation

Two Jews, of whom one was called Ben Naphtali, and the other Ben Asher, are recorded to have pointed the entire Old Testament… and when they came to this passage, and ought according to the orthography to have pointed it bisori (“my incarnation”), they pointed it besoori (“in my departure”), so as to remove the work of the Incarnation from God. The true letter therefore is not that which Jewish falsehood (Iudaica falsitas) perverted by its pointing; but that which the Prophet wrote, foreseeing the mystery of the divine Incarnation.

Significance: This is Martini’s most explicit charge of deliberate scriptural corruption — not error but falsitas, fraud. The two masoretes are named as knowing conspirators against the truth of the Incarnation. The passage is foundational to the medieval Christian accusation that Jews systematically corrupted their own scriptures to suppress Christological evidence.

X. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXI — The Root Cause of Jewish Expulsion: Hatred of Christ

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXI, §II · Lines 65325–65342 · Verified ✅

Context: Martini gives a theological account of why Jews were expelled from Jerusalem and will never return. The primary cause is not Roman politics but Jewish “gratuitous hatred” (odium gratis) of Jesus Christ. The Talmud itself (Tractate Yoma, Shabbat Lamim) is cited as testimony to Jewish guilt.

Latin (Lines 65325–65342)

Quæ vero fuerit malitia operum Iudæorum iſtorum, ob quam expulit illos Deus de domo ſua, i. de Ieruſalem, & de terra ſua… Dicendum quod prima malitia operum Iudaicorum iſtius vltimæ expulſionis cauſa fuit reprobatio, exprobratio, atque repulſio Meſſiæ noſtri, necnon & perſecutio ipſius, odium gratis quo eum vſque nunc odiunt, & oderunt. Quod autem odium gratis quo Iudæi perfidi Dominum Ieſum Chriſtum odiunt, & oderunt fuerit cauſa deſtructionis domus Dei quæ erat in Ieruſalem, nec non & expulſionis nequiſſimæ gentis Iudæorum inde per Dei, quæ erat Romanorum, manus.

Translation

What then was the malice of the works of these Jews, on account of which God expelled them from His house, that is from Jerusalem, and from His land?… It must be said that the first malice of Jewish works which caused this final expulsion was the rejection, reviling, and repulsion of our Messiah, and also the persecution of him, and the gratuitous hatred with which they hate and have hated him until now. That the gratuitous hatred with which the perfidious Jews hate and have hated the Lord Jesus Christ was the cause of the destruction of the house of God which was in Jerusalem, and also of the expulsion of that most wicked nation of Jews from there by the hands of God, which were the hands of the Romans.

Note: The phrase nequissimae gentis Iudaeorum — “that most wicked nation of the Jews” — is Martini’s own characterisation, not a citation. The theological argument is that Roman military power was the instrument of divine punishment, not an independent historical cause. The Jews remain permanently expelled as a direct consequence of their hatred of Christ.

XI. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXI — God Strikes the Jews with Madness Through the Romans

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXI · Lines 66195–66225 · Verified ✅

Context: Martini interprets Deuteronomy 28:28–29 (“the Lord will strike you with madness, blindness, and confusion of heart, and you will grope at noon as the blind grope in darkness”) as a prophecy fulfilled specifically in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem — a divine punishment for the Jews‘ rejection of Christ and their acceptance of the false messiahs Bar Kokhba and Ben Kokhba.

Latin (Lines 66198–66224)

Percutiet te Deus per Romanos ſcilicet; & eris ab iis oppreſſus, atque calumniatus, & direptus, &c. in inſania, .i. propter inſaniam, & cæcitatem, & cordis ſtuporem, vel obturationem, quas habitura es, ô tu plebs Iudaica… Iudæos igitur percuſſit Deus, vt dictum eſt, per Romanos in dementia, ſiue inſania quam fecerunt Saluatorem noſtrum reprobando, ac Meſſiam eſſe negando non obſtante quod verba prophetarum, tempuſque ab iis aduentui Meſſiæ aſſignatum, nec non & opera miraculorum eius ſoli Deo poſſibilia ſibi teſtimonium perhibebant… Sic quoque percuſſi ſunt propter cæcitatem, & cordis ſtuporem, & obturationem quam habuerunt Bar Koſbam faciendo Meſſiam in Ieruſalem.

Translation

God will strike you through the Romans; and you will be oppressed, slandered, and plundered by them on account of the madness, blindness, and stupor or obstruction of heart which you will have, O Jewish people… God therefore struck the Jews, as has been said, through the Romans on account of the madness and insanity which they committed in rejecting our Saviour and denying that he was the Messiah — notwithstanding that the words of the prophets, the time assigned by them to the Messiah’s coming, and also the works of his miracles possible to God alone bore testimony to him… They were likewise struck on account of the blindness, stupor of heart, and obstruction which they had in making Bar Kokhba Messiah in Jerusalem.

Note: The passage moves seamlessly from Deuteronomy’s conditional curse to a statement of historical fact — the Romans were God’s instrument. Martini does not say the Jews deserved punishment; he says God actively deployed the Roman armies as the mechanism of divine retributive justice. Jewish suffering is not accidental history but designed theological consequence.

XII. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXI — Jewish Blindness, Madness, and Spiritual Stupor

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXI · Lines 66268–66410 · Verified ✅

Context: Chapter XXI is one of the most sustained passages of anti-Jewish invective in the entire work. Martini explains why Jews fail to recognise Christ as Messiah: not because his arguments are weak, but because God has stricken them with blindness, madness, and spiritual stupor as punishment for their sins.

§XXI — No Wonder the Blind Cannot See Signs

Latin (Lines 66268–66274)

Dicatur igitur Iudæis non esse mirum quod signa sua de adventu Messiæ non videant, neque viderunt, ut paulo ante dictum est: quis enim miretur insipiens penitus nisi sit, si non discernit insanus, si non videat cæcus, si stupore cordis à Deo percussus non intelligit, aut si parvulus, cuius matris ubera penitus aruerunt, minime coalescit?

Translation

Let it therefore be said to the Jews that it is no wonder that they do not see, and have not seen, the signs of the Messiah’s coming, as was said above: for who would be surprised, unless he be wholly without sense, that the madman does not discern, that the blind man does not see, that he who is stricken by God with stupor of heart does not understand, or that the infant, whose mother’s breasts have wholly dried up, does not grow?

§XXII — Spiritual Blindness an Ancient Disease in the Jews

Latin (Lines 66296–66308)

Est autem nobis hic notandum quod cæcitas spiritualis, & surditas, & obturatio cordis morbus vetustissimus est in Iudæis, ut patet ex eo quod scribitur Deut. 29. v. 2. 6… non dedit Dominus vobis cor ad cognoscendum, & oculos ad videndum, & aures ad audiendum usque ad diem hunc.

Translation

It must be noted here that spiritual blindness, and deafness, and the stopping of the heart is a most ancient disease in the Jews, as is evident from Deuteronomy 29:4: “the Lord has not given you a heart to understand, or eyes to see, or ears to hear, until this day.”

§XXII — Truth Has Perished from Their Mouths; Falsehood Deeply Rooted

Latin (Lines 66330–66336)

Veritas utique, sive fides periit ab ore Iudæorum, & abcisa est; falsitas vero tam in corde ipsorum, quam in ore fortissime radicata: Hanc siquidem ita pertinaciter ingerunt, & defendunt ut de ipsorum impudentissima pertinacia in libro Betza…

Translation

Truth indeed, or faith, has perished from the mouth of the Jews and been cut off; but falsehood is most deeply rooted both in their heart and in their mouth. And they press and defend this so stubbornly that concerning their most shameless pertinacity it is written in the book Betzah…

§XXII — Jews Blinded Because They Rejected Christ and Followed False Messiahs

Latin (Lines 66348–66358)

His vero malis, & quamplurimis aliis Iudæos fuisse olim percussos, & quotidie percuti, inde nobis patet evidentius quod reprobato Domino Iesu Christo duos falsos Messias unum post alium absque signis, & miraculis, imo signis omnibus, & verbis Prophetarum contradicentibus… receperunt: & duos alios præstolantur: quas ob res, ut à Moyse dictum est, palpant cæci in meridie.

Translation

That the Jews have been stricken with these evils and very many others, and are stricken daily, is made plain to us more evidently from the fact that, having rejected the Lord Jesus Christ, they received one after another two false messiahs without signs or miracles — indeed against all the signs and words of the prophets… and they still await two others: for which reasons, as Moses said, they grope as the blind at midday.

XIII. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXI — Modern Jews More Foolish Than Donkeys: The Rabbis’ Own Admission

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXI, §XXIII · Lines 66440–66468 · Verified ✅

Context: Martini explains how a devil named Bentamalyon restored Jewish ceremonies (circumcision, Sabbath) which the Romans had abolished — and in so doing robbed the Jews of rational understanding of the scriptures. He then cites two passages from the Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Shekalim and Tractate Shabbat) in which famous rabbis themselves declare that compared to the ancient sages, the modern Jews are donkeys — and not even distinguished donkeys, but ordinary ones.

Latin (Lines 66441–66467)

iſte vtique diabolus permittente Deo infatuauit eos, & abſtulit eis ſenſum quoad veritatis intellectum, ita vt minoris intelligentiæ ſint in diuinis ſcripturis quam aſini.

Dixit R. Aggaus: Primi arauerunt, & ſeminauerunt, & ſarculauerunt, & meſſuerunt, & arconifauerunt, & triturauerunt, ventilauerunt, & purgauerunt, & moluerunt, & appoſuerunt; & non eſt nobis os ad edendum. Dixit R. Abba, Si fuerunt primi filij hominum; nos ſumus aſini. Dixit Rabi Meni, Quin imo in hac hora etiam aſine R. Pinebe filij Iair non ſumus comparandi.

Dixit R. Zera, dixit Rab, Si primi fuerunt homines; nos ſumus aſini: & non ſicut aſinus R. Chanina; nec ſicut aſinus R. Menachem filij Iair; ſed ſicut reliqui aſini.

Translation

This devil, with God’s permission, made them foolish (infatuavit eos), and took from them understanding as regards the truth, so that they have less understanding of the divine scriptures than donkeys.

Said Rabbi Aggai: The ancients ploughed and sowed and hoed and harvested and threshed and winnowed and purified and ground and set before us; and we have no mouth with which to eat. Said Rabbi Abba: If the ancients were the sons of men, then we are donkeys. Said Rabbi Meni: Indeed at this moment we are not even comparable to the donkey of Rabbi Pinehas son of Yair.

Said Rabbi Zera, said Rab: If the ancients were men, then we are donkeys; and not like the donkey of Rabbi Chanina, nor like the donkey of Rabbi Menachem son of Yair, but like ordinary donkeys.

Martini’s use: The extended donkey simile — in which distinguished rabbis progressively debase themselves — is quoted straight from the Talmud with Martini’s framing that a devil caused this intellectual degradation. The effect is to present the Jews as self-condemned out of their own mouths: their own most learned doctors confess themselves to be less than animals, and Martini agrees. This passage also reinforces the broader thesis of Chapter XXI: that the chapter heading Iudei moderni antiquis nullo modo comparandi, stultiores enim, pejores sunt (“modern Jews are in no way comparable to the ancients — they are more foolish and worse”) is not Martini’s slander but the rabbis’ own verdict.

XIV. Part III, Dist. III, Chs. XXI–XXII — Jewish Pertinacity Proven from Their Own Talmud

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXI–XXII · Lines 66360–66376 · Verified ✅

Context: In a characteristic move, Martini deploys the Talmud itself to prove that the Jews are stubbornly pertinacious and guilty. The R. Meir passage and the R. Judah passage come from Tractate Betzah and Tractate Avot respectively.

R. Meir: The Law Was Given to Israel Because They Are Brazen

Latin (Lines 66362–66366)

Dixit R. Meir: Cur data est Lex Israeli? ideo quia ipsi sunt proterai, sive pertinaces: dixit enim Risch Lakis, Quinque sunt proterua, nempe Israel inter populos; canes in bestiis, galli inter aves; hirci inter animalia minora; & spina inter arbores.

Translation

Said Rabbi Meir: Why was the Law given to Israel? Because they are brazen and pertinacious. For Resh Lakish said: Five are brazen — Israel among the nations; the dog among beasts; the cock among birds; the goat among small animals; and the thorn among trees.

Source: Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Betzah. Martini cites it not as neutral information but as the Jews‘ own testimony against themselves that their pertinacity is innate.

R. Judah: The Brazen Go to Gehenna

Latin (Line 66366)

Dixit autem R. Iuda in libro Aboth: עז פנים לגיהנם ובשת פנים לגן עדן Proteruus ad gehennam; & verecundus ad Paradisum.

Translation

Said Rabbi Judah in the book of Avot: “The brazen [impudent] go to Gehenna, and the modest to Paradise.”

Martini’s inference: If Israel is the brazen among the nations, and the brazen go to Gehenna, then the Jews‘ own tradition condemns them to damnation.

Our Inability to Convert Them Proves Not Our Weakness but Their Incurable Blindness

Latin (Lines 66368–66376)

Dicatur igitur iis quandocumque de sua pertinacissima obstinatione contra prædicantes, & exhortantes eos impudentissimè gloriantur eo quod non possint eos ex sua perfidia revocare; hoc nequaquam accidere propter rationum nostrarum insufficientiam, & debilitatem; Sed propter suam insipientiam, & cordis cæcitatem.

Translation

Let it therefore be said to them whenever they most shamelessly boast about their most stubborn obstinacy against those who preach and exhort them, that one cannot recall them from their faithlessness — this happens by no means on account of the insufficiency and weakness of our arguments; but on account of their own senselessness and blindness of heart.

XV. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXI — “Sapient in Evil”: Jews as Foxes, Liars, and Moral Bankrupts

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXI, §XXII · Lines 66405–66440 · Verified ✅

Context: In the penultimate section of Chapter XXI, Martini synthesises the rhetorical and theological characterisation of Jews that structures the entire chapter. Drawing on Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Hosea, he constructs a portrait of the Jews as fox-like — irrational in their refusal of Christ, yet cunningly devoted to deceit and the obstruction of Christian argument.

Latin (Lines 66405–66436)

Iudicium hoc, quod Iudæi abominantur, noueris eſſe [rationem]: vulpi enim ſimillimi ſunt. Quamuis enim vulpes animal rationale non ſit; rationales tamen homines aſtutia, & falſitate præcellit: inde eſt quod vix, aut nunquam rectis itineribus; ſed tortuoſis ſemper graditur, & fugit ſemper anſractibus. Hinc de Rabinis Iudæorum de Meſſia plurima falſa ſuis auditoribus prophetantibus, & fraudulentiſſime rationes noſtras ſubterfugientibus taliter ſcribitur Ezech. 13. v. 4. Quaſi vulpes in deſertis prophetæ tui Iſrael erant.

Stultuſ populus meus me non cognouerunt: filij inſipientes ſunt, & non prudentes ſunt: ſapientes ſunt ad malefaciendum; & benefacere non nouerunt. Attende hîc, Lector, in Iudæis teſte Domino, & irrationabilitatem vulpium in eo quod non cognouerunt Deum, & eorum aſtutiam in eo quod ſapientes ſunt ad faciendum malum, Chriſtianos ſcilicet decipiendo, & doloſe omne rectum, quod in ſcripturis de Meſſia dictum inueniunt, obliquando.

…vulpinam illam contraxerint, & contrahant fraudulentiam, ac falſitatem inde diſcimus ubi Hoz. 5. 4. ita legimus: Non dabunt ſtudia, ſiue opera ſua ad reuertendum ad Deum ſuum, quia ſpiritus fornicationum in medio eorum.

Translation

Know that this “judgment” which the Jews abominate is [reason] itself: for they are most like foxes. Although the fox is not a rational animal, it surpasses rational men in cunning and falsehood: hence it almost never travels by straight paths but always creeps by crooked ones, always fleeing by windings. Hence of the Rabbis of the Jews, who prophesy many false things to their hearers about the Messiah and most fraudulently elude our arguments, it is thus written in Ezekiel 13:4: “Like foxes in the ruins were your prophets, O Israel.”

“My people are foolish, they have not known me; they are foolish children, without understanding: they are wise in doing evil, but to do good they do not know.” Note here, Reader, in the Jews — as God himself testifies — both the irrationality of foxes in that they have not known God, and their cunning in that they are skilled in doing evil, namely in deceiving Christians, and in crookedly twisting all the right things they find said in scripture about the Messiah…

We learn from whence they have contracted and continue to contract that fox-like fraudulence and falsehood, from what we read in Hosea 5:4: “They will not direct their doings to turn to their God: for the spirit of whoredoms is in the midst of them.”

Note: The passage climaxes Martini’s characterisation of Jewish argument as structurally dishonest — not merely wrong but deliberately deceptive. The fox simile is not casual; it is anchored in Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Hosea, giving it scriptural authority. The identification of the Jews‘ spiritual condition with a “spirit of fornicating” (spiritus fornicationum) provides the transition to the devil passage (Section XIII above), where Martini names that spirit as the demon Bentamalyon.

XVI. Part II, Ch. III — Jews as “Liars and Thieves” in the Computation of the Seventy Weeks

Source: Secunda Pars, Caput III · Lines 27957–27963 · Verified ✅

Context: In the midst of a detailed chronological argument about Daniel’s seventy weeks, Martini has demolished several Jewish counter-computations. He now characterises the Jews who persist in them — in spite of being shown their error — not as mistaken but as wilfully fraudulent.

Latin (Lines 27957–27963)

Iudæi vero tantæ ſunt impudentiæ, atque proteruiæ quod nec per hæc à ſupradicta fatuitate recedunt, ſimillimique in hoc lacertæ fiunt, quæ ab eo quem momorderit non niſi cum pane miliaceo recedit. Oſtendamus igitur eos in prædicta computatione falſiloquos, atque fures, ori eorum velut quendam panem mcalidum miliaceum opponentes…

Translation

The Jews however are of such impudence and perversity that not even by these [demonstrations] do they withdraw from the aforesaid folly — they become most like the lizard, which does not leave one it has bitten unless one puts millet bread to it. Let us therefore show them to be in this computation liars and thieves (falsiloquos atque fures), placing before their mouths as it were a piece of hot millet bread…

Note: The zoological metaphor — Jews as stubborn lizards that must be pried loose with bait — is paired with the blunt characterisation falsiloquos atque fures: liars and thieves. This is unusual even by Martini’s standards: the accusation of theft (fures) refers to the theft of truth, i.e. the appropriation of scriptural chronology for a computation Martini considers deliberately fraudulent. The passage immediately precedes a citation from the Talmud (Tractate Megillah) designed to catch the Jews in their own sources.

XVII. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXII — Jewish Law Permits Deception of Christians

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXII, §§XXI–XXII · Lines 67298–67340 · Verified ✅

Context: Chapter XXII of the third Distinction is titled “Still on their reprobation in certain of their wickednesses, on the stench of their doctrine, and on the iniquity of their laws.” Sections XXI–XXII cite passages from the Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Bava Kamma) which Martini reads as permitting — and even requiring — Jews to deceive non-Jews in financial and legal matters.

§XXI — The Ox of the Israelite vs. the Ox of the Gentile

Latin (Lines 67298–67325)

Bos Ifraelita qui percuſſit bouem alienigena immunis eſt: Bos alienigena qui percuſſit bouem Ifraelita, ſive integer, ſive læſus perſolvit damnum integrum, ſicut dictum eſt Habac. 3. v. 6. Stetit, & menſus eſt terram; vidit, & abſolvit gentes; Vidit ſeptem præcepta quæ acceperunt ſuper ſe filij Noe. Poſtquam autem non ſtabilierunt illa, abſolvit Iſraeli diuitias eorum.

Translation

The ox of an Israelite that gores the ox of a foreigner is exempt [from liability]: the ox of a foreigner that gores the ox of an Israelite, whether whole or blemished, must pay full damages, as it is said in Habakkuk 3:6: “He stood and measured the earth; He looked and loosed the nations.” He saw the seven commandments which the sons of Noah accepted upon themselves. Since however they did not observe them, He released the wealth of the nations to Israel.

§XXII — Deceiving Gentiles in Court Is Permitted; Their Errors Are Lawful Profit

Latin (Lines 67323–67340)

Iſraelita, & gentili venientibus coram te ad iudicium ſi tu poſſis abſolvere Iſraelitam in iudicio Ifraelis, abſolve eum, & dic illi; ita iudicamus nos; ſin verò poſſis illum abſolvere in iudicio populorum mundi; abſolve eum, & dic: ita vos indicatis. Si autem non; veniunt contra eum in cauillationibus, vel circumuentionibus? Dixit R. Samuel, Erratum quoque gentilis licitum eſt.

Ex his, & ſimilibus aſſumunt Iudæi rationem quod poſſunt, & debent Chriſtianos, alioſque qui non ſunt Iudæi, decipere.

Translation

An Israelite and a gentile who come before you for judgment: if you can acquit the Israelite by the law of Israel, acquit him and say to him: this is how we judge; but if you can acquit him by the law of the nations of the world, acquit him and say: this is how you judge. If not, one outwits him through stratagems and circumventions. Said R. Samuel: The error of a gentile is also lawful profit.

From these and similar passages, the Jews take the principle that they may and must deceive Christians and all others who are not Jews.

Note: The final sentence is Martini’s own conclusion drawn from the Talmudic material. His gloss amplifies the legal text into a universal licence for deception. This passage, along with §XXIII below, forms the basis of the chapter heading Dolo licet Iudaeis agere (“Jews are permitted to act by fraud”) in the 1651 edition’s chapter summary.

XVIII. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXII — “Kill the Best of the Gentiles”: The Talmud as the Devil’s Work

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXII, §XXIII · Lines 67341–67378 · Verified ✅

Context: Section XXIII of Chapter XXII is the most extreme passage Martini quotes on the question of Jewish violence. He cites the Mekhilta (rabbinic commentary on Exodus) for a statement attributed to Rabbi Simeon ben Yochai: “Kill the best of the gentiles.” Martini then argues that the Talmud also provides cover for killing Christians covertly — by not rescuing them from pits or wells — through the tractate Avodah Zarah. He concludes by declaring the Talmud to be not the law of God but the fabrication of the devil.

The Mekhilta: “Kill the Best of the Gentiles”

Latin (Lines 67354–67363)

& ex hoc dixit R.Simeon Ben Iochai, Optimum qui eſt in gentibus occide, & præſtantiſſimo ſerpentum finde caput. Hæc Talmud. Hæc autem ſunt ac ſi dicant quod quemadmodum de ſerpentibus ille præcipuè occidendus eſt, qui maior eſt, & melior in ſpecie ſua: ita agendum eſt de Chriſtianis.

Translation

And from this Rabbi Simeon ben Yochai said: “Kill the best of the gentiles, and split the head of the finest of serpents.” This is the Talmud. These words are as if to say that just as among serpents that one is chiefly to be killed which is the greatest and best of its kind: so must one act regarding Christians.

Avodah Zarah: Christians to Be Cast into Pits

Latin (Lines 67358–67366)

Occidendi adhuc Chriſtianos, & præcipitandi pueros ipforum in foueas, & puteos, & etiam trucidandi, quando occulte poſſunt, ſumunt argumentum ex eo quod dicitur in libro Aboda zara…

Gentiles, prædones, & paſtores animalium minutorum non ſunt extrahendi de puteo, nec præcipitandi: minim, .i. hæretici, meſuroth, & apostatæ ſunt præcipitandi; ſed non extrahendi.

Translation

They further take a justification for killing Christians, and casting their children into ditches and wells, and also for slaughtering them when they are able to do so secretly, from what is said in the book of Avodah Zarah…

Gentiles, robbers, and shepherds of small cattle are not to be drawn out of a pit, nor cast in: but minim (heretics), informers, and apostates are to be cast in — and not drawn out.

Conclusion: The Talmud Is the Devil’s Fabrication

Latin (Lines 67373–67378)

Animaduertat prudentia tua, Lector, quod Talmud, quod ita pernicioſe docet eos mentiri, & Chriſtianos occidere, non eſt lex Dei, ſed figmentum diaboli. Maximum verò huius rei ſignum ſunt deliramenta, & inſaniæ quæ ibi ſcribuntur.

Translation

Note well, Reader, that the Talmud, which so perniciously teaches them to lie and to kill Christians, is not the law of God but the fabrication of the devil (figmentum diaboli). The greatest sign of this is the ravings and insanities which are written there.

Note: This is one of the most direct condemnations of the Talmud in the entire Pugio Fidei. The chapter heading Imo occidere possunt Christianos (“Indeed they can kill Christians”) in the 1651 edition’s summary refers directly to this passage. Martini’s citation of R. Simeon b. Yochai is drawn from the Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael on Exodus 14:7; the phrase has a long history in medieval anti-Jewish polemic and became one of the most frequently recycled accusations against the Talmud.

XIX. Part III, Dist. III, Ch. XXIII — The Present State of the Jews and Future Conversion of a Remnant

Source: Pars Tertia, Distinctio III, Caput XXIII · Lines 68780–69000 · Verified ✅

Context: The final chapter of the Pugio Fidei describes the Jews‘ current condition — exile without king, priest, sacrifice, or true religion — as divine punishment, and anticipates the eventual conversion of a small remnant at the end of days. Jewish dispersion is permanent judgment; only the remnant will be saved.

Opening — Hosea 3:4–5: Jews to Remain Long Without King or Sacrifice

Latin (Lines 68791–68808)

Dicto in præmissis de reprobatione Iudæorum, dicemus ulterius in hoc capitulo de statu ipsorum à destructione Templi, & Ierusalem usque ad adventum Eliæ, vel usque ad finem mundi. Hoc autem totum satis evidenter describitur Hoz. 3. v. 4. ubi taliter dicitur: כִּי יָמִים רַבִּים יֵשְׁבוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵין מֶלֶךְ… Diebus enim multis morabuntur filii Israel sine Rege, & sine principe, & sine sacrificio, & sine altari, & sine Ephod… & postea redibunt filii Israel, & quærent Dominum Deum suum, & Davidem regem suum… in fine dierum.

Translation

Having said the aforesaid concerning the reprobation of the Jews, we will say further in this chapter concerning their state from the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem until the coming of Elijah, or until the end of the world. Now all this is described sufficiently clearly in Hosea 3:4: “For the children of Israel shall dwell many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod…” And afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king… in the latter days.

The Jews Are Without the True God

Latin (Lines 68900–68910)

Ostenditur autem Iudæos sine Deo vero, sive sine Deo veritatis esse, ac plusquam per mille ducentos annos fuisse ex eo quod in præcedenti capitulo, & in xv. & ultimo part. 2. dictum est. Sine lege quoque eos fuisse, & fore probatum est supra… Sunt etiam absque lege Messiæ, coram qua Lex Moysis debebat evanescere.

Translation

It is shown that the Jews are without the true God, or without the God of truth, and have been so for more than twelve hundred years… They have also been, and shall be, without the Law of Moses… They are also without the Law of the Messiah, before which the Law of Moses was to vanish.

Only a Remnant Will Be Saved — Isaiah and the Targum

Latin (Lines 68945–68960)

Esaias quoque hoc testatus est dicens cap. 10. v. 22. Si enim fuerit populus tuus Israel sicut arena maris, residuum converteretur ex eo. Targum: Si enim fuerit populus tuus Israel multus sicut arena maris, residuum quod non peccaverit, vel quod pænituerit de peccato, convertetur. Glossa R. Salomo: Etiam si fuerit Israel sicut arena maris præ multitudine, ego conflaboeos ut argentum & redigentur in modicum residuum.

Translation

Isaiah also testified to this saying (10:22): “For though your people Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will return.” Targum: “Though your people Israel be numerous as the sand of the sea, the remnant that has not sinned, or that has repented of sin, shall be converted.” Gloss of R. Solomon [Rashi]: “Even though Israel be as the sand of the sea in multitude, I will refine them like silver and they shall be reduced to a small remnant.”

Talmud Chelek: The Cause of Future Conversion Is Divine Compulsion

Latin (Lines 68985–68993)

Dixit Rab, Consummati sunt omnes termini, & non pendet res nisi in pænitentia, & operibus bonis. R. Eliezer dixit, Si Israel fecerint pænitentiam, redimentur; Sinon, non redimentur: sed Deus statuet illis regem, cuius præcepta æque gravia sint atque præcepta Hamani, & reducet illos ad bonos.

Translation

Said Rab: All the calculated end-times have passed, and the matter depends only on repentance and good deeds. R. Eliezer said: If Israel repents, they will be redeemed; if not, they will not be redeemed — but God will appoint over them a king whose decrees are as harsh as those of Haman, and this will bring them back.

Martini’s use: He deploys this Talmudic tradition to argue that Jewish conversion at the End of Days is acknowledged even in their own literature — but only a remnant will return, and even that return will require either repentance or the compulsion of a king harsher than Haman. The implication is that the Jews‘ current dispersion is deserved and their eventual conversion will be humiliating.

Editorial Notes and Sources

Compiled February 2026 · Verified against 1651 Paris edition.