Then follows the blessing of God (Elohini) upon Noah and his sons. They are to be fruitful and multi- ply; they are to have lordship over the inferior ani- mals ; not, however, as at the first, by native right, but by terror is their rule to be established, AU living creatures are now given to man for food ; but express provision is made that the blood (in which is the life) should not be eaten. This does not seem necessarily to imply that animal food was not eaten before the flood, but only that now the use of it was sanctioned by di- vine permission. The prohibition with regard to blood reappears with fresh force in the Jewish ritual (Lev. iii, 17; vii, 26, 27; xvii, 10-14; Deut. xii, 16, 23, 24; xv, 23), and seemed to the apostles so essentially human as well as Jewish that they thought it ought to be enforced upon Gentile converts. In later times the Greek Church urged it as a reproach against the Latin that they did not hesitate to eat things strangled (suff'ocatu in quibus sanguis teneiur'). See DhX'KEES.
Next, God makes provision for the security of hu- man life. The blood of man, in which is his life, is yet more precious than the blood of beasts. When it has been shed God will require it, whether of beast or of man: and man himself is to be the appointed channel of divine justice upon the homicide : " Whoso sheddeth
NOAH
145
XOAH
man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed ; for in the image of God made he man." Here is laid the first foundation of the civil power. Just as the priesthood is declared to be the privilege of all Israel before it is made representative in certain individuals, so here the civil authority is declared to be a right of human nat- ure itself, before it is delivered over into the hands of a particular executive. See Man-slayer.
Thus with the beginning of a new world God gives, on the one hand, a promise which secures the stability of the natural order of the universe, and, on the other hand, consecrates human life with a special sanctity as resting upon these two pillars — the brotherhood of men, and man's likeness to God.
Of tlie seven precepts of Noah, as they are called, the observance of -which was required of all .lewish prose- lytes, three only are here expressly mentioned : the ab- stinence from blood, the prohibition of murder, and the recognition of the civil authority. The remaining four — the prohibition of idolatry, of blasphemy, of incest, and of theft — rested aiiparentlj^ on the general sense of mankind. See Noaciiian Precepts.
3. Noah for the rest of his life betook himself to agricultural pursuits, following in this the tradition of his family. It is particulary noticed that he planted a vine}'ard, and some of tlie older .Jewish writers, Avith a touch of poetic beaut\', tell us that he took the shoots of a vine wluch had wandered out of Paradise where- with to plant his vineyard. Armenia, it has been ob- served, is still favorable to the growth of the vine. Xenophon (.1 nah. iv, 4, 9) speaks of the excellent wines of the country, and his account has been confirmed in more recent times (Ritter, Enlk. x, 554, 319, etc.). The Greek myth referred the discovery and cultivation of the vine to Dionysus, v/ho, according to one version, brought it from India (Diod. Sic. iii, 32) : according to another, from Phrygia (Strabo, x, 4G9). See Bacchus. Asia, at all events, is the acknowledged home of the vine. See Grape. Whether in ignorance of its prop- erties or otherwise we are not informed, but he drank of the juice of the grape till he became intoxicated, and shamefully exposed himself in his own tent. One of his sons. Ham, mocked openly at his father's disgrace. The others, with dutiful care and reverence, endeavored to hide it. Noah was not so drunk as to be unconscious of the indignity which his youngest son had put upon him ; and when he recovered from the effects of his in- toxication, lie declared that in requital for this act of brutal, unfeeling mockery a curse should rest upon the sons of Ham, that he who knew not the dutj' of a child should see his own son degraded to the condition of a slave. With the curse on his youngest son was joined a blessing on the other two. It ran thus, in the old poetic or rather rhythmical and alliterative form into which the more solemn utterances of antiquity com- monly fell :
Cursed be Canaan,
A slave of slaves shall he be to his brethren.
On the other hand :
Blessed be Jehovah, God of Shem,
And let Canaan be their slave.
May God enlarge -Japhet,
And let him dwell in the tents of Shem,
And let Canaan be their slave.
Of old a father's solemn curse or blessing was held to have a mysterious power of fulfilling itself. And in this case the words of the righteous man, though strictly the expression of a wish (Dr. Pye Smith is quite wrong in translating all the verbs as futures; they are opta- tives), did in fact amount to a prophecy. It has been asked why Noah did not curse Ham instead of cursing Canaan. It might be suflicient to reply that at such times men are not left to themselves, and that a divine purpose as truly guided Noah's lips then as it did the hands of Jacob afterwards. But, moreover, it was sure- ly by a righteous retribution that he, who as j^oungest son had dishonored his father, should see the curse light VH.— K