CAINITES
143
CAIPHAS
spoken of in the Bible is the founding of a city, called
Henoch after a son of that name. A good many
authors find that this tradition, which makes of Cain
the lirsl city builder, is not compatible with the story
just related, which they say is best understood as a
popular account of tin 1 origin of the wandering desert
tribes. Ifwedonot put into the history of the author
of Genesis elements of which he seems to have been
altogether unconscious, there is no reason to suppose
he was wrong in regarding the words of the curse as
consistent with the "building" of a city by Cain.
Conservative commentators are probably right in
their judgment that this "city" of Cain was not
of notable extent or importance.
W. S. Reillt.
Cainites, a name used for (1) the descendants of Cain. (2) a sect of Gnostics and Antinomians.
(1) The Descendants of Cain. -The Bible (Gen., iv. 17—22) mentions nine of Cain's descendants in the di- rect line: Henoch, Irad, Maviael. Mathusael, and Lamech, who had four children: .label and Jubal by his wife Ada, anil Tubaleain with his sister Noemi by his second wife Sella. The etymology of several of these names is obscure because it is uncertain w nether they are Hebrew, Babylonian, or Sumerian. The de- rivation of Mathusael, however, is obvious, mutu- sha-ilii beina; the Babylonian for "vassal of God". Maviael, if the Septuagint reading is right, would mean "God is my life-giver"; but according to the Heb- rew text Mehujael i s n",it;0 would mean "wiped out by God". Most likely, however, the word is Babylonian and connected with amel ttu, "man of God". Lamech is perhaps connected with lamga, the Sumerian for "servant" (of God"). Cain "built a city and called the name thereof by the name of his son Henoch". To some scholars this has suggested "dedication" as the Hebrew derivation of Henoch; but others see in it the name of the famous Sumerian city, Unug (later t'ruk. Erech, Warka). For Irad no satisfactory ety- mology has been found: it means, perhaps, "scion" from arada, "to sprout". It is remarkable that amongst the Sethites four names occur similar to tle>-.' of Cainites: Tainan. Mahalael, Jared, and Mathusala, and two. Henoch and Lamech, are iden-
ticalii thpedi rees. Ada probably means "dawn",
Sella, "shade", Jabel, "shepherd", Jubal, "musi- cian". Noemi means "beautiful". The Septuagint omits Cain after Jubal. thereby suggesting connect Li in with a tribe of Asia Minor (Gen., x, 2, Ez., xxvii, 13) called Tabalu by Assyrians and Ti'/Sap^wM by Herod- otus. Hut the Massoretic Tubaleain (|"p ?3in) is cer- tainly correct if it be connected with Bulgin, the Sumer- ian Vulcan, as recently suggested. If we substitute English equivalents for proper names, Gen., iv, 19-22 would read: " God's servant took two wives, the name of the one was Dawn and the name of the other Shade. And Dawn brought forth Shepherd, the father of dwellers in tents and herdsmen and his brother's was Musician, the father of harp- and pipe- players. But Shade brought forth Blacksmith, the forger of brass and iron, and Blacksmith's sister's name was Beautiful." This has led some to believe that the inspired narrative merely records under a -if speech the introduction of polygamy and the spread of civilization.
A similar description existed amongst Phoenicians. As the most i jhown that iron was
used in Egypt 3500 B.C., no argument for lateness of nar- rative can he drawn from the mention of iron. As for the six lines of Hebrew poetry (verses L':i 24) put into the mouth of Lamech, though their origin and occa- sion will probably remain forever obscure, their gen- eral meaning is clear: < lain had committed deliberate murder, fratricide, yet he was not handed over to the. lawless private vengeance of man. How much less was Lamech, who had only committed manslaughter
in self-defence, i. e. slain a man for wounding him, or,
in Hebrew parallelism, for bruising him. In Num.,
xxiv, 22, Jud., iv, 11,1 Par., ii, 55, Cinites are men-
tioned as neighbours to Israel. The Hebrew conso-
nants would allow the reading Cainites, which some
scholars have adopted against the Massora and Sep-
tuagint; but this is at present mere conjecture.
(2) A Gnostic Sect of the second century was called Cainites, or Caianites. They regarded all characters held up to reprobation in the Old Testament as worthy of veneration, as having suffered at the hands of the cruel God of the Jews; hence Cain, as the first man cursed by Hystera, the Demiurg, claimed their special admiration. This sect of Antinomians never found many adherents, and Hippolytus at the begin- ning of the third century dismisses them with the bare mention of their name. (See Gnosticism.)
Driver. Genesis (London. 1906). 70-74; Haupt. Polychrome Bible: tirni'si^, notes on Hebrew text in loco; Bareille in Did. de thiol, catholique (Paris, 1904), s. v.
J. P. Arendzen.
Caiphas (Caiaphas), Joseph, according to Jose- phus (Antiquitates, XVIII, iv, 3) was appointed High- Priest of the Jews by the Roman procurator Valerius Gratus, the predecessor of Pontius Pilate, about A. D. 18 (Ant., XVIII, ii, 2), and removed from that office by the procurator Vitellius, shortly after he took charge of affairs in Palestine, a. d. 36 (Ant., XVIII, iv. .'i i. During this period the famous Annas, father- in-law of Caiphas (John, xviii, 13), w-ho had been high- priest from a. d. 6 to 15, continued to exercise a controlling influence over Jewish affairs, as he did when his own sons held the position. This explains the rather puzzling expression of Luke, iii, 2, iirl dpxieptws " kvva. ral Kaid0a (under the high-priest Annas and Caiphas; cf. Acts, iv, 6). Caiphas was certainly the only official high-priest at the time St. Luke refers to, at the beginning of the public life of Christ: but Annas still had his former title and a good deal of his former authority. The role assigned him in the trial of Christ, in John, xviii, points to the same continued influence. In the measures taken by the Jewish authorities to do away with Jesus, Caiphas certainly had the most discreditable part. After the raisme; of Lazarus, the priests and Pharisees held counsel to determine what was to be done in view of the manifest signs of the Prophet of Nazareth and what they were pleased to consider the danger result- ing to the country. The words of Caiphas, the high- priest of that year, are reported by St. John: "You know nothing. Neither do you consider that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not" (xi, 49-50). They show a disdain for others, and a deter- mination to get rid of this man who was displeasing to him, without any consideration of the justice of his cause. But while we may see in the declaration of Caiphas the manifestation of very unworthy senti- ments, we are warned by St. John that it was pro- phetical. The high-priest expressed in a striking way the meaning of the sufferings of the Man-God (John, xi, 51, 52), though he could not have realized the full import of those mysterious words. The death of Jesus being resolved upon, the most unscrupulous means were employed in order to bring it about, and Caiphas is chiefly to blame. The meeting determined upon by the princes of the priests and the elders of the people, "that by subtilty they might apprehend Jesus", was held in the house of Caiphas (Matt., xxvi, 3-5). The hill south of Jerusalem where this house is said by tradition to have stood is called the "Hill of Evil Counsel. As high-priest, Caiphas was the official head of the Sanhedrin, and consequently re- sponsible for the travesty of a trial to which Christ was submitted by the Jewish authorities, before they handed Him oxer to Pilate and stirred up the people to demand His death.
