GENEALOGY
409
GENEALOGY
U3 a comparison between the antediluvian Patriarchs
of the Bible and the antediluvian heroes of Chaldee
tradition (Origines de I'histoire, I, Paris, 1880, pp.
214-90), and Vigouroux has given us a study on the
mythological origin of the antediluvian Patriarchs
(Livres saints et critique ration., 1S91, IV, liv. I, c. vii,
pp. 191-217). All this goes to show that the names
actually found in the Biblical genealogies denote the
same subject, but do not present the same form as the
original names. (2) The names found in the Biblical
genealogies do not always denote persons, but may
signify a familj', a tribe or nation, or even the country
in which the bearers of the respective names dwelt.
For instance, Jos., vii, 1, speaks of " Achan the son of
Charmi. the son of Zabdi, the son of Zare of the tribe
of Juda", while the context (cf. IG sqq.) shows that
Zabdi stands for the " house of Zabdi" and Zare for the
"family of Zare". Again, throughout Gen., x, the
genealogy serves an ethnographic purpose, so that its
names represent nations or countries. The name of
the country can be identified with that of its inhabit^
ants, because the countr_v stands for its people by way
of a metaphor which has almost ceased to be so on
account of its frequent use. The same proper name
denotes an individual, a family, a house, a tribe, or a
nation, on account of the idea of solidarity of the
whole commimity in the merits and demerits of the
individual member. This width of meaning of the
genealogical names does not detract from their his-
toricity, since the obscurity of one's grandfather or
great-grandfather does not prevent one from being a
real offspring of his tribe or nation. (3) When the
names in the Biblical genealogies denote particular
persons, their connexion may be only a legal one. A
woman whose husband died without issue was bound
by law to be married to her husband's brother, and
the first-born son of such a so-called levirate marriage
was reckoned and registered as the son of the deceased
brother (Deut., xxv, 5 sqq.). The question pro-
posed to Christ by the Sadducees (Matt., xxii, 24;
Mark, xii, 19; Luke, xx, 28) shows that this law was
observed down to the time of Christ. Such a sub-
stitution of legal for physical parentage in the Bibli-
cal genealogies does not remove the offspring from
his proper family or tribe. (4) Finall)-, the strangers
incorporated into a tribe or a family are reckoned
among the descendants of the respective eponym.
This custom explains the words of Jacob spoken on
his death-bed (Gen., xlviii, 5-6) ; he ordains that the
sons of Joseph, excepting Ephraim and Manasses,
"shall be called by the name of their brethren in their
possessions ' '.
III. Sources of the Genealogies. — Generally speaking, the later genealogies were derived from written sources, either inspired or profane. For in- stance, the genealogy of Benjamin in I Par., vii, 6-12, is based on the data given in the Books of Genesis and Numbers; a more extensive genealogy of the same patriarch found in I Par., viii, 1-40, is based, no doubt, on written sources too, which are, however, unknown to us. As to the earlier genealogies, their veracity cannot be directly proved independently of inspira- tion. Written documents were used much earlier than the archaeologists of the first half of the eighteenth century believed. Moreover, very little writing was required to preserve the earliest genealogical lists, which are both rare and brief. We may grant freely that the art of writing was not known from Adam to the Flood, and for centuries after Noe. But keeping in mind the following facts, we find no difficulty in ad- mitting oral tradition and memory as sufficient sources for these periods. (1) It has been found that the power of memory is much greater among peoples who have not learnt the art of writing. (2) Each of the genealogical lists belonging to the two periods in ques- tion contains only ten generations, so that only twenty names required to be transmitted by tradition. (3)
Before the introduction of writing, two devices were
employed to aid the memory ; either history was versi-
fied, or the facts were reduced to certain standard
numbers. This second form was in use among the
Scriptural nations. There were ten antediluvian
Patriarchs, ten postdiluvian; seventy descendants of
Jacob are named on the occasion of Israel's going into
Egypt, though some of them were dead at that time,
others had not yet been born; the ethnographical list
of Genesis enumerates seventy nations, though it gives
some names of little importance and omits others of
great importance; I Par., ii, 3-55, gives seventy de-
scendants of Juda; I Par., viii, 1-28, seventy descend-
ants of Benjamin. This device guarded also against
arbitrary insertion or omission of any name, though
it did not fully exclude the substitution of one name
for another. A possible exception against such an
arrangement will be considered in the last section.
IV. Import.\n'ce of the Genealogies. — The Hebrews shared the predilection for genealogies which prevailed among all the Semitic races. Among the Arabs, for instance, no biography is complete without a long list of the hero's ancestors. They register even the Imeage of their horses, esteeming their nobility according to their extraction (Cf . " Revue des deux niondes", 15 May, 1855, pp. 1775-77 ; Caussin de Perce- val, "Essai sur I'histoire des Aralies avant I'lslam- israe", Paris, 1844-48). Among the Hebrews such genealogical lists were of still higher importance for the following reasons: (1) According to the Mosaic enact- ments, the Palestinian soil was given over to definite tribes and families. In order to recover, in the year of the jubilee, these family possessions, the claimant had to prove his legal descent. (2) The nearest kin- ship conferred among the Hebrews the rights of the so-called Goel. Lev., xxv, 25, and Ruth, iv, 1-6, show some of the advantages implied in this right. The term Goel is rendered m the Latin Vulgate propinqmis or proximus; in the English version it is translated by " kinsman". (3) Again, the priests and Levites had to prove their legal descent in order to fulfil the honour- able and remunerative functions of their respective offices. On returning from the Babylonian Captivity several were excluded from the priestly class because they could not prove their Levitical pedigree (I Esd., ii, 62; II Esd., vii, 64). Josephus (Vit., I) appeals to the priestly registers and is proud of the royal descent of his mother; he shows that even the priests residing in Egypt had their sons registered authentically in Jerusalem, so as to safeguard their priestly preroga- tives (C. Apion., I, vii). (4) Fmally, the prophecy that the Messias was to be born of the tribe of Juda and the house of David rendered the genealogy of this family most important. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., Ill, xix, 20) relates on the authority of Hegesippus that Domitian (a. d. 81-96) put to death all the descend- ants of David, excepting the relatives of Christ on account of their lowly condition.
V. Deficiencies of the Genealogies. — It can- not be denied that some of the genealogical links are omitted in the Biblical lists; even St. Matthew had to employ this device in order to arrange the ancestors of Christ in three series of fourteen each. At first sight such omissions may seem to be at variance with Biblical inerrancy, because the smgle members of the genealogical lists are connected by the noun son or the verb beget. But neither of these links creates a real difficulty: (1) The wide meaning of the noun son in the genealogies is shown in Matt., i, 1 : " Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham". This phrase prepares the reader for the view that the noun son may connect a penson with any one of his ancestors, how- ever remote. (2) As to the verb beget, some writers maintain that the Hiphil form of its Hebrew equivalent refers to the immediate offspring, while its Qal form may denote a more remote generation. But this con- tention does not rest on any solid foundation. It is
