Why Is the Cain Genealogy (Gen. 4:17–24) Integrated Into the Book of Genesis? Nissim Amzallag
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
doi: 10.2143/ANES.55.0.3284682 ANES 55 (2018) 23-50 Why is the Cain Genealogy (Gen. 4:17–24) Integrated into the Book of Genesis? Nissim AMZALLAG Abstract The nature and function of the Cain genealogy (Gen. 4:17–24) are here reconsidered. Instead of a general overview of the fundaments of civilisation, it is shown, through a re-examination of Jabal’s specialty, that the Cain genealogy focuses on the society of Canaanite metalworkers and musicians/poets, the Qenites (= Kenites), and their status as YHWH’s earliest worshippers. This analysis also reveals that the genealogy of Cain preserved the memory of the most important events in the development of copper metallurgy in the southern Levant—the transition from an archaic to an advanced mode of smelting, in the early fourth millennium BCE, and the subsequent specialisation that differentiated producers of copper from producers of metallic implements. These observations suggest that the Cain genealogy constitutes, together with the story of Cain and Abel, a coherent myth of Qenite origin. Consequently, the exposition of the Cain genealogy before and independently of the lineage from Adam to Israel becomes an unexpected feature. It is concluded that this situation stems from the need to demonstrate the Qenites’ identity as the former people of YHWH and to separate them as far as possible from the emergence of YHWH’s new people, Israel.* Introduction Genealogies are of great importance in the literature of the ancient Near East. The monoto- nous lists of “begats” confer the impression of a rhythmic, immutable order of the world imme- diately after its creation.1 They give both temporal depth to the related events and legitimacy to leaders and kings. They are especially important for providing legitimacy to priests and religious practices.2 They provide support to the cult of common ancestors, this being of importance for the emergence of political and religious cohesion. More generally, genealogies condition kinship between groups, tribes and clans, and in the emergence of nations. This is why they may be a precious source of information for revealing social, political or even cultural events (ancient or contemporary) on which the narratives are silent.3 * Professor Shamir Yona, Patrick Jean-Baptiste, Abraham Abehsera and the two anonymous reviewers are here warmly acknowledged for their useful comments and contribution to the maturation of this work. 1 Robinson 1986, p. 596. 2 Wilson 1977, p. 45. 3 For example, Johnson 1969, pp. 77–82; Andriolo 1973; Wilson 1977, pp. 132–133; Bryan 1987. Lombaard (2006, p. 147) concludes: “Far from being mere lists of blood relations, genealogies in cultures ancient and modern served multiple purposes. These include matters of law, inheritance, politics and diplomacy, economics, ideology, administration, theology, 24 N. AMZALLAG The Book of Genesis relates the unbroken succession of generations from Adam to the sons of Jacob (hereinafter: the “long genealogy”). This is why many scholars interpret this entire book as a homogeneous opus organised as an extended genealogy of the tribes of Israel.4 This long genealogy focuses on Adam, the first man; Noah, the new founder of mankind, mentioned ten generations after the first man; Abraham, appearing ten generations after Noah; Isaac; and Jacob, the founder of Israel.5 The genealogies of Noah and Abraham are especially important for the Israelites, not only for their own identity but also for defining the nature of their relationship with their neighbours, who are also integrated into these lineages.6 This perspective, however, knows a notable exception. The first genealogy reported in Gen- esis is that of Cain (Gen. 4:17–24). It is not connected to the long genealogy, which runs immediately after, through Seth, the third son of Adam and ancestor of Noah, and the patri- archs. Thus, the story of Cain and his descendants contributes nothing, even indirectly, to our understanding of the succession of generations from Adam to the sons of Jacob and its socio- political implications, the central theme of Genesis. The separation of the Cain genealogy from the long genealogy is revealed by how the mention of the creation of mankind (male and female) in the likeness of god is couched in similar terms at the end of Genesis 1 and the begin- ning of Genesis 5. This similarity generates narrative continuity between the creation of man and woman in Gen. 1:27–30 and the beginning of the genealogy of Seth, which appears later (Gen. 5:1–3). This makes the genealogy of Cain, and Genesis 2–4 as well, look like a singular digression between the end of the creation of the universe and of mankind (Gen. 2:3) and the birth of Seth (Gen. 4:25), which marks the beginning of the long genealogy (Gen. 5).7 This is confirmed by biographical details in the genealogies. Three are given for each of the indi- viduals who participate in the linear succession of generations from Adam to the sons of Jacob: father’s age at birth, name of male firstborn, and lifespan.8 These confer unity and homogeneity to the long genealogy. We do not find any such biographical details in the genealogy of Cain (Gen. 4:1–24). These observations confirm that the genealogy of Cain (and probably the whole of Genesis 2–4) is not an integral part of the genealogical development from Adam to the sons of Jacob that organises the entire Book of Genesis. Questions then arise: why was the Cain genealogy introduced identity, cultural criticism, historical and societal (re)-presentation, association, power, status aetiology, tradition, the military – usually in one sense or another to provide legitimacy to some current state of affairs.” 4 See Fox 1989; Alexander 1993. This opinion is summarised by Mann (1991, p. 351): “The primary function of Genesis as a foreword is to place the stories of the family of Abraham and subsequently of the people of Israel within the framework of creation and world history. [...] The biblical redactors insist that the story of Israel begins in the beginning of the cosmos.” 5 According to Malamat (1968) and Hartman (1972), the prestige of the Abrahamic lineage is supported by the reference to an antediluvian affiliation, exactly as in the genealogy of Sumerian kings. 6 Steinberg 1989, p. 47; Alexander 1993. 7 See Wilson 1977, p. 164. Robinson (1986, p. 599) concludes: “The order of creation established in Genesis 1 finds a natural continuation in the genealogy of Adam’s third son, Seth, in Genesis 5.” Moye (1990, p. 590) concurs: “The sons of Adam from Seth are listed on the far side of the Cain story almost as if Cain and Abel had never been.” 8 Calculating the total lifespan of all the generations between Adam and Moses, Northcote (2007) attained a tally of 12,600 years, a number that appears extensively in eschatological traditions of the ancient Near East. This emphasises the importance of specifying each character’s lifespan, thus yielding a coherent genealogy that reaches its completion at the end of the list. WHY IS THE CAIN GENEALOGY INTEGRATED INTO THE BOOK OF GENESIS? 25 into Genesis and why is it positioned at the very beginning, even before the long genealogy? Three principal explanations have been proposed for this singular feature. • Cain as a civilising hero: Cain and Abel are the first individuals in Genesis whose occu pations—farmer and shepherd, respectively—are explicitly mentioned (Gen. 4:2). Cain is also the first individual who brings an offering to YHWH (Gen. 4:3) and the first city-founder mentioned (Gen. 4:17). Nothing is revealed in Genesis 4 about the four generations between Cain and Lamech (that is, Henoch, Irad, Mehujael, Metushael), but a ‘civilising impetus’ appears again with Lamech, the first composer of a song (Gen. 4:23–24). The sons of Lamech are also associated with two activities of importance in the development of societies: music (Gen. 4:21) and metallurgy (Gen. 4:22). For these reasons, scholars have concluded that Genesis 4, through the story of Cain and Abel and the Cain genealogy, carries the memory of the emergence of ancient Near Eastern societies.9 If this were so, we should wonder why these prestigious ancestors, or at least their activities, were not inte- grated into the long genealogy. This is especially intriguing in view of the similarities found in the names of various members of the Cain and Seth lineages.10 Cain and his lineage may indeed be regarded as the main early civilising heroes in Genesis, but this fact alone hardly justifies their inclusion in a genealogy independent of the long one. • Cain as an antihero: Scholars have argued that the Cain lineage may represent an antithesis of the Seth lineage that launches the long genealogy.11 This opinion is supported by the extensive development, in Genesis 4, of the story of Abel’s murder and its consequences (Gen. 4:2–16). The violence narrated in the song of Lamech (vv. 23–24) is also frequently considered an apotheosis of the sinfulness of Cain’s lineage, which is doomed to perdition in the Flood.12 From such a perspective, the mention of the Cain genealogy becomes a faire-valoir, a foil that emphasises the antithetical righteousness of the members of the long genealogy.13 This interpretation takes a negative view toward the civilising impetus consub- stantial to the Cain genealogy.14 This point, however, is challenged by the neutral way all the novelties introduced by Cain and his descendants are reported in Genesis 4. Furthermore, there is no trace of a curse attached to the descendants of Cain.15 Finally, the mark of Cain (Gen.