Patriarchs, Biblical

PATRIARCHS, BIBLICAL. - Descendants of Adam down to Noah (antediluvian) and of Shem down to Terah (postdiluvian). Also called P. are Abraham (v.), Isaac (v.), Jacob (v.), and other figures in the Septuagint (cf. 1 Chron. 24:31; 27:22; 2 Chron. 9:8; 23:20; 26:12), and in Acts 7:8, 9; 2:29 the sons of Jacob and David. Perhaps Danel too (cf. Ezek. 14:14-20; 28:3) lived in the time of the P. Of the antediluvians there are two genealogies: Gen. 4:17 ff. (line of Cain); ibid. 5:3-31 (line of Seth).

According to some authors (e.g., Taylor, Chaine) it would be a question of one and the same genealogy (Gen. 4:17 ff. from J or the Yahwist codex, and 5:3-31 from P or the priestly codex); but a confusion between Seth and Cain is altogether improbable; nor does the J list end with Noah as the P one does. The mere similarity of the names Enoch, Lamech, Irad, Methushael does not imply the identity of the lists. In the genealogy of the Sethites (Gen. 5:3-31) and Shemites (ibid. 11:10-32), for each P. a schema is filled in which notes: the age at which he begot his successor, how long he lived afterwards, the total sum of his life, that he had other sons and daughters, and then, for the antediluvians, death, with the exception of Enoch (v.) who "walked with God and was no more, because God took him"; Luke 3:34-36 enumerates the Sethite and Shemite P. among the ancestors of Christ (cf. also 1 Chron. 1:24-27). Of the Cainites, on the other hand, very important notices are given: Cain builds a city calling it Enoch (Iabushh = "to build") after the name of his son (a passage from nomadic to urban life?), Lamech (v.) introduces polygamy, and his three sons invent: pastoral life under tents (Jabal), musical instruments (Jubal), the art of using copper and iron (Tubal-cain).

The postdiluvian P. in the Masoretic text are 9; in the Septuagint and in Luke 3:36 they are 10 because of the addition of Cainan (cf. also 1 Chron. 24:27). In Gen. 11:10-26 they are presented as the genealogy of Shem; in Gen. 10:21 ff. there is another descent from Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, Aram. From Arphaxad: Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Joktan. It follows that in Gen. 11:10-26 the genealogy of Shem is given through Arphaxad.

As for chronology, by computing the years in which the P. begot their successor, it can be reconstructed from the creation of man down to Abraham. But the Masoretic, Samaritan and Septuagint texts do not agree among themselves (see Table a).

The Septuagint adds 100 years to the date of begetting, lengthening the period from Adam to the flood and adjusting the rest of the life, so that they agree in the total sum.

The Samaritan agrees with the Masoretic text except for Jared, Methuselah and Lamech. Methuselah according to the Masoretic text and the Samaritan died during the flood (in 1656 according to the Masoretic, in 1307 according to the Samaritan and in 2262 according to the Septuagint), and Lamech would have died 5 years after the flood, against Gen. 6:17; 7:4, 21-24; 1 Pet. 3:20; 2 Pet. 2:5 (see Table b).

The reworkings are more numerous than in the first list. The Samaritan and the Septuagint add 100 years to the begetting of the successors and 50 to Nahor. In the rest of the life the Masoretic text increases and the Samaritan decreases. The Septuagint tends here too to increase.

From the flood to Terah there passed 390 years according to the Masoretic text, 1040 according to the Samaritan, 1170 according to the Septuagint; between the birth of Abraham and the flood 290 years (Masoretic text). At that time almost all the descendants of Shem must still have been living. Shelah and Eber would have survived him.

The historical value of the chronology is partly undermined by the divergence of the texts. Even if one were to take into consideration the highest numbers, they cannot be reconciled with the figures assigned by modern paleontologists to the same period (from 50,000 to 200,000 years).

Another difficulty is the longevity of the biblical P., which reaches its peak with the 960 years of Methuselah, then descends to 962 (Jared), 950 (Noah), 930 (Adam), 912 (Seth), 910 (Cainan), 905 (Enosh), 895 (Mahalalel), 753 (Lamech), 365 (Enoch). In the postdiluvian P. from 600 to 565, 460, 504, 339, 330, 208, 205 according to the Septuagint.

From the two tables it appears unfounded that the author wishes to demonstrate the progressive decrease in the duration of human life, since Eber lived longer than Cainan and Shelah, Noah longer than Lamech, Mahalalel, etc. In the time of Abraham the duration of life was shorter. At 100 years for a man and 90 for a woman it was ridiculous to think of having

Tab. a) ANTEDILUVIAN PATRIARCHS

Tab. b) POSTDILUVIAN PATRIARCHS

children (Gen. 17:17) without a miracle (ibid. 18:14); they already consider themselves old and advanced in age (ibid. 18:10-13). Abraham at 175 is full of years (ibid. 27:7 ff.). Thus it is considered a portent that Moses at his death, at 120 years, had no dimming of sight, nor lost freshness (Deut. 34:7). It is moreover to be observed that Abraham, who cannot beget at 100 years, afterwards marries Keturah and has children by her. The manner of Ham's acting with his naked father would suggest a young man rather than a centenarian. So too one may say of Sarah, who at 65 years enamors the Pharaoh and Abimelech, while at 90 years she is a decrepit old woman. Shem, when the flood ended, must have been 101 years old (Gen. 5:31; 7:6). Instead, according to Gen. 11:10, two years after the flood he was only 100 years old. Another fact that impresses is the late age at which the biblical P. have their successor (cf. also Noah, who only at 500 years has Shem, Ham, Japheth). The current rationalistic theories on the "mythical" biblical P. are set out by R. Kittel, Gesch. d. Volkes Israel, I, 7th ed., Stuttgart 1932, pp. 249-90.

The lists of the biblical patriarchs have been compared with the Babylonian ones, preserved in the two cuneiform documents W. B. 444 and W. B. 62 and by Berossus. But it now appears that they are not parallel. They deal with kings, not with patriarchs, they have Sumerian names, they are compiled from various local catalogues and assign much longer periods (64,800; 28,800; 43,200; 108,000; 241,000; etc.): according to tablet W. B. 444, 241,200 years elapsed up to the flood; according to W. B. 62, 456,000; according to Berossus, 432,000. However, the list W. B. 444 has 8 kings, the other, W. B. 62, together with Berossus, has 10 (Aloros 36,000, Alaparos 10,800, Amelon 46,800, Amenon 43,200, Magalaros 64,800, Daos 36,000, Evedorachos 64,800, Amempsinos 36,000, Otiastes 28,000, Xisuthros 64,800). Ten kings are recalled by the Egyptians, ten patriarchs by the Persians, nine successors of Brahma by the Indians.

In the face of the difficulties caused by the longevity of the patriarchs asserted by the numbers of Gen. 5 and 10, various solutions have been proposed: it would not be a complete genealogical series, since many intermediate members are omitted, given that jāladh ("begot") and ben ("son") could indicate a generation that was not immediate; the years would not have the duration of ours: 10 years would correspond to one year, that is, to 36 days (cf. St. Augustine, De civ. Dei, XV, 12, 13; PL 41, 451, 453); the biblical chronology would be symbolic or artificial: the last of the various systems on the matter is the numerical symbolism of J. Schildenberger; the texts would have been intentionally corrupted (B. Kennicott, Dissert. gener. in Vet. Test. Hebr., Oxford 1780, p. 32, n. 75); the author would be citing the sources or popular legends from which he draws without guaranteeing their reliability; the dates would have been inserted into the Pentateuch at a later time; Moses would not have been explicit (P. Heinisch); the numbers would have a mnemonic function.

The longevity of the biblical patriarchs, although extraordinary, is not impossible. It can be justified by the vigor of the first men and by more favorable climatic and dietary factors. Nor is divine intervention to be excluded, in order to give the biblical patriarchs the opportunity to transmit the primitive Revelation orally, with greater authority. The ancient traditions of the extraordinary longevity of the first men, even outside Israel, may have a common foundation. The years, moreover, in Gen. 1-10, have the normal duration, as appears from the computation of the duration of the flood (ibid. 8, 4-14).

The purpose of the genealogies of the biblical patriarchs is not rigidly historical, nor chronological, but rather religious with a juridical-legal background, that is, to prove the legitimacy of Israel's descent from Adam, the line Seth-Noah-Shem-Terah-Abraham. The links of this descent represent the phases of the history of Revelation: the Adamitic line preserved until Noah; the Noachic until Terah; the Abrahamic until Jacob (Moses). Implicit, but evident, is the tendency to connect the "seed of the blessing" of Abraham with the seed of the woman (Gen. 3, 15), inasmuch as it will be born from Israel. The names of the biblical patriarchs do not indicate the firstborn, because Seth was not the firstborn of Adam, nor was Arphaxad of Shem, Shem son of Noah (cf. St. Augustine, De civ. Dei, XV, 15). The author knows of other sons and daughters had before and after these. It is evident therefore that he mentions only those names from which the right to the descent they represented derived. These names must have been historical; but one may suppose that the series is not complete despite its apparent completeness: the author says that Noah in one year, that is the 500th of his life, begot three sons: Shem, Ham, Japheth; if this is not a case of a triple birth, the notice is absurd. The Septuagint and Luke relate that Arphaxad begot Cainan, whereas the Masoretic text (and the Vulgate) attribute Shelah to him, omitting Cainan.

These cases suggest that there could have existed a special literary genre that might be called "genealogical," which followed particular rules, but which is not yet well understood. Perhaps it could involve gaps even in the form in which it is set out, for example, for the antediluvian patriarchs. Since the names of the biblical patriarchs are Hebrew, the author must have used Israelite sources preserved in the families of Shem-Terah-Abraham.

Bonaventura Mariani