As to their numliers, we have for our guide the enu- meration of ten males in one direct line from Adam, through Seth, to Noah, and of eight through Cain to Jabal. There is, of course, nothing to forbid us sup- posing that many other children were born besides those enumerated. This indeed is taken for granted in the case of women. The names of the wives are not mentioned, until the case of Lamech, who appears to have been the first polvgamist, brings them into un- VIL— C c c
enviable notice ; and Cain found a wife, though we have no notice of any woman having been born into the world (see also Gen. v, 4).
One of the main questions raised as to the antedilu- vian period turns on the longevity assigned to the pa- triarchs. With the single exception of Enoch (whose departure from the earth at 365 years of age is excep- tional in every sense), their ages vary from 777 (La- mech) to 9G9 (Methuselah). It is to be observed that this longevity disappears gradually after the flood. To Shem are assigned 600 j'ears ; and thence the ages diminish down to Terah (205 j'ears), Abraham (175), Isaac (180), Jacob (147), and Joseph (110). This state- ment of ages is clear and definite. To suppose, with some, that the name of each patriarch denotes a clan or family, and his age its duration, or, with others, that the word HDd (because it properly signifies "it- eration") may, in spite of its known and invariable usage for " year," denote a lunar revolution instead of a solar one (i. e. a month instead of a j'ear) in this passage, appears to be a mere evasion of the difficult}'. It must either be accepted as a plain statement of fact or regarded as purely fabulous, like the legendary assign- ment of immense ages to the early Indian, or Babylo- nian, or Egyptian kings. The latter alternative is adopted without scruple by many of the German com- mentators, some of whom attempt to find such signifi- cance in the patriarchal names as to make them per- sonify natural powers or human qualities, like the gods and demigods of mythology. This belongs, of course, to the mythical view of Scripture, destroying its claim, in any sense, to authority and special inspi- ration. In the acceptance of the literal meaning, it is not easy to say how much difficulty is involved. With our scanty knowledge of what is really meant by " dying of old age," with the certainty that very great effects are produced on the duration of life, both of men and animals, by even slight changes of habits and circumstances, it is impossible to say what might a priori be probable in this respect in the antediluvian period, or to determine under what conditions the process of continual decay and reconstruction, which sustains animal life, might be indefinitely prolonged. The constant attribution in all legends of great age to primeval men is at least as likely to be a distortion of fact as a mere invention of fancy. But even if the difficult}' were greater than it is, it seems impossible to conceive that a book, given by inspiration of God to be a treasure for all ages, could be permitted to con- tain a statement of plain facts, given undoubtingly, and with an elaborate show of accuracy, and yet purely and gratuitously fabulous, in no sense bearing on its great religious subject. If the divine origin of Scrip- ture be believed, its authority must be accepted in this, as in other cases ; and the list of tiie ages of the patri- archs be held to be (what it certainly claims to be) a statement of real facts. See Longevity.
When we endeavor to picture to ourselves the sort of life which these first patriarchs led, we seem invited to think of them as wearing at first coats of skins (Gen. iii, 21), and at a later time probably some woven garment (ix, 23), tilling the ground (iv, 2), keeping sheep (ibid.'), building cities (iv, 17), and in later times handling the harp and organ, and working in brass and iron (iv, 21, 22). But the great proof of the ac- quaintance of the primeval patriarchs with mechan- ical arts is to be found in the construction of the ark itself, which, from its enormous dimensions, must have made huge demands both upon the architect himself and the numerous workmen employed by him. See Ark.
As regards their spiritual condition, there is enough to prove that their knowledge of God was intimate, and their trust in God eminently real. But by the knowledge of God must not be understood such knowl- edge as consists in accurate theological definition.
PATRIARCH
(0
PATRIARCH
The Reformer Bullinger saj's: " Out of all this it is easy to uiulerstand what faith and knowledge Adam had of our Lord Christ; nameh', that he knew in him verv Godhead and manhood, and that he saw in faith his passion and cross afar off." He even attributes to the " hoh' fathers" the teaching of the doctrine " that the Father, tlie Son, and the Holy Ghost are one God in the most reverend Trinity." Doubtless the first intimations of a Mediator were such as to include within them all subsequent revelation, but there is nothing to show that thev were so understood bj^ those who then received them. At the same time God did reveal himself to Adam, to Enoch, and to Noah, as well as to Abraham afterwards, and perhaps to manj- others. " The traditionary knowledge concerning a promised Mediator w-as no doubt carefull}^ cherished, and served to enlighten much which in the law, and even in the prophets, might otherwise have been un- intelligible. Hence the Mediator, though but faintly shadowed out, was yet firmly believed in. We have our Lord's assurance that 'Abraham rejoiced to see his day ; he saw it, and was glad' (John viii, 56). We have Paul's assurance that the same Abraham, having received the promise of the Redeemer, believed in it, and was justified by faith (Rom. iv, 1-20; Gal. iii, 6- 9. 14r-19). And we may well suppose that the faith which guided Abraham guided others, both before and after him" (Bp. Browne, On Art. vii). Then, as to their knowledge of a future state, we have (Gen. v, 24) a statement concerning Enoch which seems to show that the antediluvian patriarchs were familiar with the idea of a better life than the present. It has been argued that the very brevity and obscurity of the phrase "God took him" prove this familiarity. His being "taken" was a reward for his piety, a still greater blessing than the long life vouchsafed to so many of his contemporaries. " Now people who knew of the translation of Enoch must have known some- thing of that state of bliss to which he was removed" (Bp. Browne). But, besides, in the first 930 years of the world, Adam still lived, and the communion which he had enjoyed with God could by him never have been forgotten. Is it possible that Adam was not well acquainted with a future life? This communion of God with man is again noticeable in tlie case of Noah (Gen. vi, 13; vii, 1; viii, 16; ix), as with Abraham and others afterwards. In a general way the earliest patriarchs appear therefore to have lived the simple lives of a pastoral and also agricultural people, fur- nished with clothing, provided with houses, using herbs and grain and fruits, and probably also, by suf- ferance, animals for food, offering to God both of the produce of the earth and also slain beasts in sacrifice, able to distinguish the clean from the unclean, speak- ing one language, holding firmly to the promise of a great blessing to come, familiar with the idea of God's presence in the world, and looking for some better life when this should be ended.