bestow upon his wonr'/ heritage ; or at most the younger son of Noah; (4) from eh. x. e. hope that the promise would be fulfilled in 2--31, in which tho order is reversed, bul his son's do.y (Bono.r), if not in his son him- not otherwise altered. But there is reason self (Ce.lovius). The fulfilment of that pro- to believe that J aphcth was the eldest and mise he connects with a recall of tho penal Ham the youngest of the patriarch's children curso which Johovo.h had pronounced upon (Michaelis, Cliuke, MurJjhy, Wordsworth, the soil. Because of the ground which the Quarry). According to eh. xi. 10 Shem was Lord-Jehovah, by whom the curse had born 97 years before the Flood, while (eh. vi. been pronounced (eh. iii. 17)- he.th cursed. 11) Noah was 600 years ol<l at the time of 'l'he clauso is not a Jchovistic interpola~ion the Floo<l. Hence, if Noah began to beget (Bleck, Davidson, Colcnso), but o. proof children in his 500th year, and Shem was born " that tho Elohistic theory is unfounded " in Noah's 503rd year, the probability is that (' Speaker's Commentary'), the firstborn son was Japhcth. In accord- Ver. 32.-And Noah was five hundred ance with this eh. x. 21 is understood by years old. Literally, a son of 600 :t~ars, LXX., Vulgate, Michaelis, Lange, Quarry, i. e. going in his 500th ytar (c,~· eh. vu. ~.; and others to assert the priority in respect xvii. 1). The "son of a year (Exod. xn. of atte of Japheth. In the narrative Shem 6) means "strictly within the first year of is pfaced. first as being spiritually, though the life" (Ainsworth). And Noah begat- not physically, the firstborn. Ranke per- i. e. began to begot (cf. eh. xi. 26)-Shem, ceives in the mention of the three sons an -name (Gesenius), fame (Filrst)-Ham, indication that each wa.a subsequently "to -cham; hot (Gesenius, Murphy), da!k• lay the foundation of a new beginning." coloured (Fiirst)-and Ja~heth-sp~eadmg (Gcsenius, Murphy) ; beautiful, denoting the THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN.-Thc chronology white-coloured race (Furst). That the sons of the present chapter represents man as al'e mentioned in the order of their ages having been in existence at the time of the (Knobel, Kalisch, Keil, Colenso) may seem Deluge exactly 1656 years. According to to be deducible (1) from the fact that they the Sepruagint, which Josephus follows ex- usually stand in this order (cf. eh. vi. 10 ; vii. 13 ; ix. 18; x. 1 ; 1 Chron. i. 4) ; (2) cept in one particnhr (the age of Lamech), from the circumstance that it is commonly and which proceeds, again with two excep- the eldest son's birth which is stated in the tions (the age of Jared, which it leaves un- preceding list, though this is open to doubt ; touched, and that of Lamech, which it in- (3) from eh. x. 21, which, according to Cal- creases by six), upon tho principle of adding vin, Knobel, Keil, and others, describes Shem as J apheth's elder brother ; and eh. ix. 24, 100 to the Hebrew numbers, the age of man which, according to Keil, affirms Ham to be at the date of that catastrophe was 2262 (vid"
HEDREW, SAMARITAN, SEPTUAGINT, JOSEPHUS. Age et Ago Age at Age Age et Age Age at Age son's at sou's at son's at son's at birth. death. birth. death. birth. death. birth. death.
ADAM 130 930 130 930 230 930 230 930 SETH 105 912 105 912 205 912 205 912 ENOS 90 905 90 905 190 905 190 905 CAINAN 70 910 70 910 170 910 170 910 MAil ALALE 111, 65 895 65 895 165 895 165 895 JARED 162 962 62 841 162 962 162 962 ENOCH 65 365 65 365 165 365 165 365 llfETilUSELAII 187 969 61 720 187 969 187 969 LAMECH 182 717 53 653 188 753 182 7i1 NOAll 600 950 600 950 500 950 600 950 SHEM DELUGE 100 1656 ~\' 1307 100 2262 100 2266 Chronological Tablo). The dates of the of Abram to the exodus Crom Egypt t430 Se.maritan Pcntatouch, being manifestly in- years according to one calculation, LXX. ; correct, need not be considered. .Adding to 730 according to another, K11lisch), from the above dates the subsequent chronological the exodus to the birth of Christ (1648, i:,e-riods from the Deluge to the cnll of Abram Hales; 1693, Jackson; 1491, Ussher; 1531, (Hebrew, 367; LXX., 1017), from the call PeLnvius; 1320, Bunsen), the antiquity d GENESIS, ll 'fHE BOOK OF GENESIS. [CH. V, 1-32
mRn, nccording to the Biblic.'\l Recount, is formntlon from the corresponding deposits of not less than 5652 nnd not more thnn 7536 otluir regions ; " consequently, " till theso years. The ooncl11Sion thus reached, how- other regions shall havo been oxami11cd-e.nd ever, is somewhat scornfully repudiated by especially Asfa, where nun flourished long modern science, as affording, on either alter- prior to his civilisation in Europe-it wore native, an altogether inadequate term of premature to hazard o.ny opinion ns to mnn'e existence for the human race. 1. The evi- first appearance on the globe." (3) ff It is dence of geology is supposed irrefragably to true that the antiquity of some of the con• nttest that man must have been upon the taining deposits, especially the ri:ver drirts, oarth at least 1000 centuries, and probably is open to question, and it is also quite ten times as long (Wallace on 'Natural possible that the remains of the extinct Selection,' p. 303). The data for this deduc- quadrupeds mayin some insta.ncos have been tion, as stated by Sir Charles Lyell, are reassorted from older accumulations." (4) chiefly the discovery, in recent and post- ff Historically we have no means of arriving