Difference between revisions of "Genealogy"

<p> <strong> GENEALOGY </strong> . The genealogies of the OT fall into two classes, national and individual, though the two are sometimes combined, the genealogy of the [[Individual]] passing into that of the nation. </p> <p> <strong> 1. National genealogies </strong> . These belong to a well-recognized type, by which the relationship of nations, tribes, and families is explained as due to descent from a common ancestor, who is often an ‘eponymous hero,’ invented to account for the name of the nation. The principle was prevalent in [[Greece]] (see Grote, <em> Hist </em> . vol. i. ch. iv. etc. and p. 416); <em> e.g. </em> Hellen is the <strong> ‘father’ </strong> of Dorus, Æolus, and Xuthus, who is in turn the <strong> ‘father’ </strong> of [[Ion]] and Achæus, the existence of the various branches of the Greek races being thus explained. M‘Lennan ( <em> Studies in [[Ancient]] History </em> , 2nd series, ix.) gives further examples from Rome (genealogies traced to Numa), Scotland, India, Arabia, and Africa; the [[Berbers]] (‘barbarians’) of N. Africa invented an ancestor Berr, and connected him with Noah. The Arabs derived all their subdivisions from [[Nebaioth]] or Joktan. The genealogies of [[Genesis]] are of the same type. The groundwork of the Priestly narrative (P [Note: Priestly Narrative.] ) is a series of inter-connected genealogies, each beginning with the formula, ‘These are the generations ( <em> toledôth </em> ) of …’ ( Genesis 2:4; Genesis 5:1; Genesis 6:9 etc.). The gap between [[Adam]] and [[Noah]] is filled by a genealogy of 10 generations ( Genesis 5:1-32 ), and in Genesis 10:1-32 the nations of the world, as known to the writer, are traced in a genealogical tree to Noah’s three sons. We find in the list plural or dual names ( <em> e.g. </em> Mizraim, Ludim, Anamim), names of places (Tarshish, Zidon, Ophir) or of nations (the Jebusite, Amorite, etc.). An ‘Eber’ appears as the eponymous ancestor of the Hebrews. Sometimes the names might in form represent either individuals or nations (Asshur, Moab, Edom), but there can in most cases be little doubt that the ancestor has been invented to account for the nation. In later chapters the same method is followed with regard to tribes more or less closely related to Israel; the connexion is explained by deriving them from an ancestor related to Abraham. In Genesis 22:20 the twelve Aramæan tribes are derived from [[Nahor]] his brother; in Genesis 25:12 twelve N. [[Arabian]] tribes, nearer akin, are traced to [[Ishmael]] and Hagar; six others, a step farther removed, to Keturah, his second wife, or concubine ( Genesis 25:1 ). The Edomites, as most nearly related, are derived from [[Esau]] (36). The frequent recurrence of the number 12 in these lists is a sign of artificiality. The same principle is applied to [[Israel]] itself. The existence of all the twelve sons of [[Jacob]] as individuals is on various grounds improbable; they represent tribes, and in many cases their ‘descendants’ are simply individual names coined to account for cities, clans, and subdivisions of the tribes ( Genesis 46:8 , Numbers 26:1-65 ). A good illustration is found in the case of Gilead. In Deuteronomy 3:15 we are told that [[Moses]] gave [[Gilead]] to Machir, son of Manasseh. In Numbers 26:29 etc. Gilead has become the ‘son’ of Manasseh, and in Judges 11:1 ‘begets’ Jephthah. So among the ‘sons’ of [[Caleb]] we find cities of [[Judah]] (Hebron, Tappuah, Ziph, Gibea, etc., 1 Chronicles 2:42 ff.), and Kiriath-jearim and [[Bethlehem]] are descendants of [[Hur]] ( 1 Chronicles 2:51 ). It is indeed obvious that, whether consciously or not, terms of relationship are used in an artificial sense. <strong> ‘Father’ </strong> often means founder of a city; in Genesis 4:20 it stands for the originator of occupations and professions; members of a guild or clan are its ‘sons.’ The towns of a district are its ‘daughters’ ( Judges 1:27 RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] ). </p> <p> With regard to the <em> historical value </em> of these genealogies, two remarks may be made. ( <em> a </em> ) The records, though in most cases worthless if regarded as referring to individuals, are of the highest importance as evidence of the movements and history of peoples and clans, and of the beliefs entertained about them. Genesis 10:1-32 gives geographical and ethnographical information of great value. A good example is found in what we learn of Caleb and the Calebites. In the earliest tradition ( Numbers 32:12 , Joshua 14:6; Joshua 14:14 ) he is descended from Kenaz, a tribe of Edom, and ‘grandson’ of Esau ( Genesis 36:11; Genesis 36:42 ); in 1 Samuel 25:3; 1 Samuel 30:14 the Calebite territory is still distinct from Judah. But in 1 Chronicles 2:4 ff. Caleb has become a descendant of Judah. We gather that the Calebites (‘dog-tribe’) were a related but alien clan, which entered into friendly relations with Judah at the time of the conquest of Canaan, and perhaps took the lead in the invasion. Ultimately they coalesced with Judah, and were regarded as pure Israelites. So generally, though no uniform interpretation of the genealogies is possible, a marriage will often point to the incorporation of new elements into the tribe, a birth to a fresh subdivision or migration, or an unfruitful marriage to the disappearance of a clan. Contradictory accounts of an individual in documents of different date may tell us of the history of a tribe at successive periods, as in the case of the Calebites. </p> <p> ( <em> b </em> ) Though the genealogical names usually represent nations, there is, no doubt, in certain cases a personal element as well. The patriarchs and more prominent figures, such as Ishmael and Esau and Caleb, were no doubt individuals, and their history is not entirely figurative. On this point see Driver, <em> Genesis </em> , pp. liv. ff.; also artt. Abraham, and Tribes. We should note that the distinctive feature of the Greek genealogies, which traced national descent from the gods, is absent from the OT. A trace remains in Genesis 6:4 (cf. Luke 3:38 ). </p> <p> <strong> 2. [[Genealogies]] of individuals </strong> . Whatever view be taken of the genealogies of our Lord (see next article), their incorporation in the [[Gospels]] proves the importance attached to descent in the NT period; they also show that at that time records were kept which made the construction of such tables a possibility. St. Paul was conscious of his pure pedigree ( Philippians 3:5 ), and in several cases in the NT the name of a person’s tribe is preserved. The hope of being the ancestor of the Messiah, and the natural pride of royal descent, probably caused the records of the house of David to be preserved with great care. In the same way Josephus, in the opening chapter of his <em> Life </em> , sets out his genealogy as vouched for by the public records, though only as far hack as his grandfather Simon. In <em> c. [[Apion]] </em> . i. 7, he speaks of the careful preservation of the Priestly genealogies; and the story of Africanus ( <em> ap </em> . Eus. <em> HE </em> i. 7, 13), that [[Herod]] the Great destroyed the genealogical records of the [[Jews]] in order to conceal his own origin, is at least an indication of the existence of such records and of the value attached to them. The [[Talmud]] speaks of professional genealogists, and in the present day many Jews, especially among the priests, treasure long and detailed family trees, showing their pure descent (cf., for an earlier period, Malachi 2:1 Malachi 2:1 , Bar 1:1 , [[Tob]] 1:1 ). </p> <p> There can be no doubt that this careful recording of genealogies received its main impetus in the time of Ezra. It was then that the line between the Jews and other nations became sharply drawn, and stress was laid on purity of descent, whether real or fictitious. After the return from Babylon, it was more important to be able to trace descent from the exiles than to be a native of Judah (Ezra 9:1-15 ). [[Certain]] families were excluded from the priesthood for lack of the requisite genealogical records ( Ezra 2:61 , Nehemiah 7:63 ). And in fact practically all the detailed genealogies of individuals as preserved in P [Note: Priestly Narrative.] , Chronicles, and kindred writings, date from this or a later period. No doubt the injunctions of Deuteronomy 23:3 and the arrangements for a census ( 2 Samuel 24:1-25 ) imply that there was some sort of registration of families before this, and the stage of civilization reached under the monarchy makes it probable that records were kept of royal and important houses. But the genealogical notes which really date from the earlier period rarely go further back than two or three generations, and the later genealogies bear many traces of their artificiality. The names are in many cases late and post-exilic, and there is no evidence outside the genealogies that they were in use at an earlier period. Of the twenty-four courses of the sons of [[Aaron]] in 1 Chronicles 24:1 ff., sixteen names are post-exilic. [[Names]] of places and clans appear as individuals ( 1 Chronicles 2:18-24 , 1 Chronicles 7:30-40 ). Gaps are filled up by the repetition of the same name in several generations ( <em> e.g. </em> 1 Chronicles 6:4-14 ). At a later time it was usual for a child to be named after his father or kinsman ( Luke 1:59; Luke 1:61 ), but there are probably no cases where this is recorded for the pre-exilic period, except in the Chronicler’s lists (see Gray, <em> HPN </em> <em> [Note: PN [[Hebrew]] [[Proper]] Names.] </em> ). There are numerous discrepancies in the various lists, and there is a strongly marked tendency to ascribe a [[Levitical]] descent to all engaged in the service of the sanctuary, <em> e.g. </em> the guilds of singers and porters. So Samuel is made a [[Levite]] by the Chronicler ( Luke 6:22; Luke 6:33 ), almost certainly wrongly, as his story shows. In the same way the position of clans, such as Caleb and Jerahmeel, which in the early history appear as alien, is legitimized by artificial genealogies ( 1 Chronicles 2:1-55 ). In 1 Chronicles 25:4 the names of the sons of [[Heman]] seem to be simply fragments of a hymn or psalm. In 1 Chronicles 6:4 there are, including Aaron, 23 priests from the Exodus to the [[Captivity]] an evidently artificial reconstruction; forty years is a generation, and 40×12 = 480 years to the building of the [[Temple]] ( 1 Kings 6:1 ), the other 11 priests filling up the period till the Exile, which took place in the eleventh generation after Solomon. Such marks of artificiality, combined with lateness of date, forbid us to regard the lists as entirely historical. No doubt in certain cases the genealogist had family records to work upon, but the form in which our material has reached us makes it almost impossible to disentangle these with any degree of certainty. W. R. Smith ( <em> Kinship and Marriage in Early [[Arabia]] </em> , p. 6) gives an interesting parallel to this development of genealogizing activity at a particular period. The Arabian genealogies all date from the reign of [[Caliph]] Omar, when circumstances made purity of descent of great importance. </p> <p> C. W. Emmet. </p>

<p> Hebrew "the book of the GENERATIONS," ceepher toledowt (See ADOPTION; GENERATION). [[Fuller]] (Pisgah [[Sight]] of Palestine, 1650) says on Acts 17:26; "we may see Divinity, the queen, Waited on by three of her principal ladies of honor, namely: </p> <p> (1) skill in GENEALOGIES, 'of one blood all nations,' </p> <p> (2) CHRONOLOGY, in the exact computation of 'the times appointed,' </p> <p> (3) GEOGRAPHY, measuring out to the nations 'the bounds of their habitation.'" History, in ancient times, being based on genealogies, the phrase became a title for a history; so Genesis 2:4, "these are the generations of the heavens and of the earth"; as the history of a man's family is "the book of his generations," so that of the world's productions is "the generations (not the creation, which had been previously described) of the heavens and the earth." "Generations" is the heading of every chief section of Genesis (probably they were original family memoirs preserved and used by Moses under inspiration in writing Genesis). </p> <p> So Genesis 5:1, "the book of the generations of Adam," wherein his descendants are traced down to Noah; Genesis 6:9, "the generations of Noah," the history of Noah and his sons; Genesis 10:1, "the generations of the sons of Noah," Shem, Ham, and Japhet, the oldest and most precious existing ethnological record; Genesis 11:10-26 "the generations of Shem," Genesis 11:27 "the generations of Terah," Abram's father; Genesis 25:12 "the generations of Ishmael," Genesis 25:19 "the generations of Isaac"; Genesis 36:1, "the generations of Esau"; Genesis 37:2, "the generations of Jacob"; Genesis 35:22-26, "the sons of Jacob," etc., repeated Exodus 1:1-5; also Exodus 46:8, a genealogical census of Israel when Jacob came down to Egypt; repeated in Exodus 6:16, etc., probably transcribed from a document, for the first part concerning [[Reuben]] and [[Simeon]] is quoted though [[Levi]] is the only tribe in question. </p> <p> The promise of Canaan, Israel's separation from the Gentiles, the prophecy of Messiah's descent from Judah, the hereditary priesthood in Aaron's family, and the limitation of ministerial offices to Levi, the promises to David's seed, and the division of [[Canaan]] by tribes and families, all combined to make Israel more careful of genealogies than: any other nation. Israel's census was taken early in the wilderness 40 years sojourn, the second month of the second year, "by their generations, after their families, by the house of their fathers" (Numbers 1:2; Numbers 1:20, etc., Numbers 2-3). Again, 38 years later, in the plains of Moab, the names of the families being added (Numbers 26). According to their genealogical divisions they encamped, marched, made offerings, and selected the spies; hereby [[Achan]] was detected, and [[Saul]] chosen as king; hereby Canaan was allotted. </p> <p> At the same time we must remember many became incorporated in a tribe or family by marriage, service, or friendship, besides those belonging to it by birth. See BECHER; CALEB, and 1 Chronicles 3:21, for instances. The genealogies refer often to political and territorial divisions, and not strictly to natural descent, so that "sons" of a patriarch are not necessarily restricted to those so by birth. So [[Manasseh]] and [[Ephraim]] were numbered among Jacob's "sons," though only grandsons (Genesis 48:5). [[Bela]] (whose two sons [[Naaman]] and [[Ard]] are called "sons of Benjamin," Numbers 26:40-41) and [[Benjamin]] respecting Genesis 46; Numbers 26; Exodus 6:24 enumerates Assir's son and grandson as heads, with their father, of the Korhites. (See BENJAMIN; BELA.) </p> <p> In the list (Genesis 46) grandsons (e.g. all Benjamin's ten sons) and great grandson's of Jacob (Hezron and Hamul, grandsons of Judah) are named, born afterward in [[Egypt]] and who came into that country in the loins of their fathers, and who there became founders of mishpachowt , i.e. independent families, and were therefore counted grandsons of Jacob as regards the national organization. By comprising Jacob himself with all the founders of tribes and families, the significant number 70 results; seven (expressing God's covenant relation to Israel, made up of three the divine number and four the worldwide extension number) multiplied by ten the seal of completeness; implying that these 70 comprised the whole nation of God (Exodus 1:5; Deuteronomy 10:22). Levi alone was free front foreign admixture. [[Iddo]] the seer wrote a book "concerning genealogies" (2 Chronicles 12:15). </p> <p> [[Hezekiah]] took a census of priests and [[Levites]] according to genealogies, and apparently from 1 Chronicles 4:41; 1 Chronicles 9:1, a census also of the nation by genealogies; he had a staff of scribes for such purposes (Proverbs 25:1). Genealogies were need in reckoning Reuben and Gad, "in the days of [[Jotham]] king of: Judah (perhaps in connection with his wars against Ammon, 2 Chronicles 27:5), and of [[Jeroboam]] king of Israel" (1 Chronicles 5:17). Zerubbabel, on the return from Babylon, made it a first care to settle the people according to genealogy. Nehemiah did the same as an essential to his great work, the restoration of the national polity (1 Chronicles 3:19; 1 Chronicles 3:21-24; 1 Chronicles 3:9; compare Nehemiah 7:5; Nehemiah 7:11; Nehemiah 12:1-26), which shows that the genealogical system was continued afterward. </p> <p> Ezra 2 contains an abstract of the post-captivity census. In New [[Testament]] times, when [[Augustus]] ordered the registration for taxing, the Jews went severally to the town of their tribe, family, and father; and so [[Joseph]] and [[Mary]] to Bethlehem, the town of their forefather David (Luke 2). Further traces of genealogies being preserved still appear in the mention of [[Zacharias]] as of "the course of Abra," [[Elizabeth]] as "of the daughters of Aaron," Anna, daughter of Phanuel, as "of the tribe of Aser." [[Josephus]] traces his own descent to the first of the 24 courses of priests, adding "as I have found it recorded in the public tables." He says (c. Apion, 1:7) the priests had to verify the descent of their intended wives from the archives at Jerusalem, and to make new genealogical tables after every war, in order to ascertain what women had been made captives, as such were excluded from marrying priests; the list of high priests for 2,000 years backward was preserved in the archives in his day. </p> <p> The destruction of [[Jerusalem]] by Rome must have involved the loss of these registers, except such partial records of genealogy as remained in a few of the priestly families after the last dispersion. Benjamin of [[Tudela]] says that the princes still professed to trace their descent up to David. The present impossibility of verifying the genealogies of the Jews' tribes and families is a divine indication that Christ the antitypical High [[Priest]] and the [[Heir]] of David's throne having come supersedes the polity of typical priests and kings, which, in ancient times, required the careful preservation of pedigrees. Paul therefore condemns the study of "endless genealogies" (1 Timothy 1:4), though probably he aims also at [[Gnostic]] genealogies of spirits. </p> <p> In interpreting a genealogy it is to be remembered that the list may represent the succession to an inheritance or headship of tribe or family, rather than natural descent. In an [[Assyrian]] inscription similarly "Jehu," successor of Omri's race, is called "son of Omri." Again pedigrees are abbreviated so as to specify the generations alone which show from what leading houses the person sprang. The register of Levi in Exodus 6:16-20 gives only two links between Levi and Moses, namely, [[Kohath]] and Amram; which has been made an argument for Israel's sojourn in Egypt only half the 430 years specified (Exodus 12:40). But the [[Kohathites]] (Numbers 3:27) in Moses' time were divided into four families, Amramites, Jehezarites, Hebronites, and Ussielites, 8,600 men and boys independent of women; the fourth would be Amramites. </p> <p> Now Moses had only two sons; therefore if [[Amram]] his father were the Amram Kohath's father, Moses must have had 2,147 brothers and brothers' sons, which is impossible; therefore between the two Amrams a number of generations must have dropped out. So in Ezra's genealogy (Ezra 7:1-5, compare 1 Chronicles 6:4-15) five descents are omitted between [[Azariah]] Meraloth's son and Azariah Johanan's son; and several between Ezra himself and Seraiah, put to death 150 years before Ezra by Nebuchadnezzar. In Exodus 6 the sons of three of Kohath's sons are given, but not of [[Hebron]] (though in 2 Chronicles 23 four sons are assigned to him), probably because no family sprang from him as the head. </p> <p> The object of genealogies was not chronology, but to mark ramifications of tribal and family relationship. Thus, the genealogy of Ruth 4:18-22 makes but four intervening links between [[Nahshon]] at the Exodus (Numbers 1:7) and David, namely, Salmon, Boaz, Obed, Jesse; whereas the genealogy of Levi has double that number in the same period, seven between [[Phinehas]] and Zadok, and more in Gershon's line (1 Chronicles 6). Therefore some names must have been omitted of David's genealogy. Genealogies are clear measures of time only when complete; and the marks of completeness are, when the mother as well as the father is named, or when historical facts define the relationship, or when a genealogy is confirmed by one or more besides, giving the same number of generations within the same bounds. </p> <p> Early marriage will in the case of some, as princes, make 30 years too long for a generation. In the descending form of genealogy, when direct heirs failed collateral ones were inserted, and the heir would put his name next after his predecessor though not his father (Ruth 4:18; Ruth 4:1 Chronicles 3). The ascending form appears 1 Chronicles 6:33-43; Ezra 7:1-5. Females were reckoned when rights or possessions were transmitted through them. Corruptions of the text are frequent in genealogies. Christ's descent through David, from [[Abraham]] and Adam, is given in an unbroken line of genealogy. </p>

<div> A — 1: Γενεαλογία (Strong'S #1076 — Noun [[Feminine]] — genealogia — ghen-eh-al-og-ee'-ah ) </div> <p> is used in 1 Timothy 1:4; Titus 3:9 , with reference to such "genealogies" as are found in Philo, Josephus and the book of Jubilees, by which Jews traced their descent from the patriarchs and their families, and perhaps also to Gnostic "genealogies" and orders of aeons and spirits. [[Amongst]] the Greeks, as well as other nations, mythological stories gathered round the birth and "genealogy" of their heroes. Probably [[Jewish]] "genealogical" tales crept into [[Christian]] communities. Hence the warnings to Timothy and Titus. </p> <div> B — 1: Γενεαλογέω (Strong'S #1075 — Verb — genealogeo — ghen-eh-al-og-eh'-o ) </div> <p> "to reckon or trace a genealogy" (from genea, "a race," and lego, "to choose, pick out"), is used, in the Passive Voice, of [[Melchizedek]] in Hebrews 7:6 , RV, "whose genealogy (AV, 'descent') is not counted." </p> <div> C — 1: Ἀγενεαλόγητος (Strong'S #35 — Adjective — agenealogetos — ag-en-eh-al-og'-ay-tos ) </div> <p> denoting "without recorded pedigree" (a, negative, and an adjectival form from B), is rendered "without genealogy" in Hebrews 7:3 . The narrative in Genesis 14 is so framed in facts and omissions as to foreshadow the person of Christ. </p>

<p> A record of one's ancestors, either the line of natural descent from father to son, or the line in which, by the laws, the inheritance descended, or that preserved in the public records. Never was a nation more careful to preserve their genealogies than the Hebrews, for on them rested the distinction of tribes, the ownership of lands, and the right to the highest offices and privileges, 1 Chronicles 5:1,17 9:1 2 Chronicles 12:15 Ezra 2:62 . Hence their public tables of genealogies were kept secure amid all vicissitudes. We find in the [[Bible]] a record carried on for more than 3,500 years, 1 Chronicles 1:1-54 3:1-24 6:1-81; and thus were guarded the proofs that Christ was born according to prophecy of the seed of Abraham, and heir to the throne of his father David, Luke 1:32 2 Timothy 2:8 Hebrews 7:14 . In the evangelists we have the genealogy of Christ for 4,000 years. The two accounts in Matthew 1.1-25 and Luke 3:1-38 , differ from each other; one giving probably the genealogy of Christ's reputed father Joseph, and the other that of his mother Mary. The two lines descend from [[Solomon]] and Nathan, David's sons; they unite in Salathiel, and again in Christ. Joseph was the legal father of Christ, and of the same family connections with Mary; so that the [[Messiah]] was a descendant of David both by law and "according to the flesh." The discrepancies between the various genealogies may be reconciled in accordance with peculiar Jewish laws. The public records, which Josephus says were scrupulously kept down to his day, perished with the ruin of the Jews as a nation. It is now, therefore, impossible for any pretended Messiah to prove his descent from David. </p> <p> Melchizedek was "without descent," Hebrews 7:3 , as regards the Jewish race. No sacred records proved his right to be numbered among that people of God. His priesthood was of a different kind from that of Aaron and his sons. Compare Ezra 2:62 . </p>

<p> Genealogy. Genealogical lists are found all through the historical books of the Old Testament. One great object in the preservation of these genealogical lists was to note Christ's descent. The first biblical genealogy is that of Cain's descendants, Genesis 4:16-24; then that of Seth. The tenth and eleventh chapters of Genesis are regarded by ethnologists as invaluable, since they contain a history of the dispersion of the nations in prehistoric times. The first eight chapters of 1 Chronicles are devoted to genealogical accounts, beginning with Adam, because, as it is stated, "all Israel were reckoned by genealogies." 1 Chronicles 9:1. </p> <p> [[Genealogy]] of Jesus Christ.—Matthew 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38. This is the only genealogy given us in the New Testament We have two lists of the human ancestors of Christ: Matthew, writing for Jewish Christians, begins with Abraham; Luke, writing for [[Gentile]] Christians, goes back to Adam, the father of all men. John 1:1-18, begins his gospel by setting forth Christ's divine genealogy. The explanation of the differences in these two lists is, 1. One, or perhaps two, levirate marriages in the family of Joseph—i.e., a marriage of a man to the childless widow of his elder brother, the children of the second marriage being reckoned as the legal descendants of the first husband. 2. That Matthew gives the legal or royal genealogy of Joseph, Luke the private line of Joseph. 3. That Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, Luke the genealogy of Mary. The Davidic descent of Jesus is a mark of the Messiah, and is clearly taught in the prophecy, and also in Romans 1:3; 2 Timothy 2:8; Hebrews 7:14; John 7:42; Acts 13:23. </p>

<p> γενεολογια , signifies a list of a person's ancestors. The common Hebrew expression for it is <em> Sepher-Toledoth, </em> "the Book of Generations." No nation was ever more careful to preserve their genealogies than the Jews. The sacred writings contain genealogies extended three thousand five hundred years backward. The genealogy of our [[Saviour]] is deduced by the evangelists from Adam to Joseph and Mary, through a space of four thousand years and upward. The Jewish priests were obliged to produce an exact genealogy of their families, before they were admitted to exercise their function. Wherever placed, the Jews were particularly careful not to marry below themselves; and to prevent this, they kept tables of genealogy in their several families, the originals of which were lodged at Jerusalem, to be occasionally consulted. These authentic monuments, during all their wars and persecutions, were taken great care of, and from time to time renewed. But, since the last destruction of their city, and the dispersion of the people, their ancient genealogies are lost. But to this the Jews reply, that either Elias, or some other inspired priest or prophet, shall come, and restore their genealogical tables before the Messiah's appearance; a tradition, which they ground on a passage in Nehemiah 7:64-65 , to this effect: the genealogical register of the families of certain priests being lost, they were not able to make out their lineal descent from Aaron; and therefore, "as polluted, were put from the priesthood;" the "Tirshatha said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things till there stood up a priest with [[Urim]] and Thummim." From hence the Jews conclude, that such a priest will stand up, and restore and complete the genealogies of their families: though others suppose these words to import, that they should never exercise their priesthood any more; and that, "till there shall stand up a priest with Urim and Thummim," amounts to the same as the [[Roman]] proverb, <em> ad Graecas calendas, </em> [never,] since the Urim and [[Thummim]] were now absolutely and for ever lost. </p>

<p> Genealogy signifies a list of ancestors set down both in their direct and collateral order. </p> <p> We read of no nation which was more careful to frame and preserve its genealogical tables than Israel. Their sacred writings contain genealogies which extend through a period of more than 3500 years, from the creation of Adam to the captivity of Judah. Indeed, we find from the books of Ezra and Nehemiah that the same carefulness in this matter was observed after the captivity; for in it is expressly stated that some who had come up from [[Babylon]] had sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but were not found; therefore were they, as polluted, removed from the priesthood. The division of the whole Hebrew nation into tribes, and the allotment to each tribe of a specified portion of the land of Canaan as an inalienable possession, rendered it indispensable that they should keep genealogical tables. God had, however, a still higher object than that of giving stability to property in Israel, in leading successive generations of His people thus to keep an accurate list of their ancestry. That they should do this was especially required from the moment that the voice of prophecy declared that the promised Messiah should be of the seed of Abraham, of the posterity of Isaac, of the sons of Jacob, of the tribe of Judah, and of the family of David. </p> <p> The Rabbins affirm that after the Captivity the Jews were most careful in keeping their pedigrees (Babyl. Gemar. Gloss, fol. xiv. 2). Josephus (De Vita sua, p. 998, D) states that he traced his own descent from the tribe of Levi by public registers. And he informs us that, however dispersed and depressed his nation were, they never neglected to have exact genealogical tables prepared from the authentic documents which were kept at Jerusalem; and that in all their sufferings they were particularly careful to preserve those tables, and to have them renewed from time to time. Since, however, the period of their destruction as a nation by the Romans, all their tables of descent seem to be lost, and now they are utterly unable to trace the pedigree of any one [[Israelite]] who might lay claim to be their promised, and still expected, Messiah. Hence [[Christians]] assert, with a force that no reasonable and candid Jew can resist, that [[Shiloh]] must have come. </p> <p> We find traces of the existence of the public tables of descent, to which Josephus refers, in the New Testament: the taxation spoken of by St. Luke would clearly indicate this; for how could each one be able to go to his own city, unless he knew the specific tribe to which he belonged? Hence it was, we think, that St. Paul was able with confidence to appeal to the Hebrews concerning the lineage of Christ; 'for it is evident,' says he, 'that our Lord sprung out of Judah' . To evince this beyond reasonable doubt, it pleased God to give us by his inspired servants, St. Matthew and St. Luke, the following genealogies:— </p> <table> <tr> <td> <p> 1. </p> </td> <td> <p> Abraham </p> </td> <td> <p> Solomon </p> </td> <td> <p> Jechonias, i.e. [[Jehoiachin]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 1. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 2. </p> </td> <td> <p> Isaac </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Roboam]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Salathiel]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 2. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 3. </p> </td> <td> <p> Jacob </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Abia]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Zorobabel]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 3. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 4. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Judas]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Asa </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Abiud]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 4. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 5. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Phares]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Josaphat]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Eliakim]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 5. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 6. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Esrom]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Joram]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Azor]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 6. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 7. </p> </td> <td> <p> Aram </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Ozias]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Sadoc]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 7. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 8. </p> </td> <td> <p> Amindab </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Joatham]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Achim]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 8. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 9. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Naasson]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Achaz]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Eliud]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 9. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 10. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Salmon]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Ezekias]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Eleazar]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 10. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 11. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Booz]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Manasses]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Matthan]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 11. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 12. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Obed]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Amon]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Jacob </p> </td> <td> <p> 12. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 13. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Jesse]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Josias]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Joseph </p> </td> <td> <p> 13. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 14. </p> </td> <td> <p> David </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Jechonias]] i.e. [[Jehoiakim]] or Eliakim </p> </td> <td> <p> Jesus </p> </td> <td> <p> 14. </p> </td> </tr> </table> <p> God </p> <table> <tr> <td> <p> 1. </p> </td> <td> <p> Adam </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Thara]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Eliakim </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Joanna]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 1. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 2. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Seth]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Abraham </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Jonan]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Juda]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 2. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 3. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Enos]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Isaac </p> </td> <td> <p> Joseph </p> </td> <td> <p> Joseph </p> </td> <td> <p> 3. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 4. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Cainan]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Jacob </p> </td> <td> <p> Juda </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Semei]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 4. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 5. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Maleleel]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Juda </p> </td> <td> <p> Phares </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Mattathias]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 5. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 6. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Jared]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Phares </p> </td> <td> <p> Esrom </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Maath]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 6. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 7. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Enoch]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Esrom </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Matthat]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Nagge]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 7. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 8. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Mathusala]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Aram </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Jorim]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Esli]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 8. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 9. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Lamech]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Aminadab]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Eliezer]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Naum]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 9. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 10. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Noe]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Naasson </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Jose]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Amos </p> </td> <td> <p> 10. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 11. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Sem]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Salmon </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Er]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Mattathias </p> </td> <td> <p> 11. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 12. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Arphaxad]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Booz </p> </td> <td> <p> Elmodan </p> </td> <td> <p> Joseph </p> </td> <td> <p> 12. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 13. </p> </td> <td> <p> Cainan </p> </td> <td> <p> Obed </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Cosam]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Janna]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 13. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 14. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Sala]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Jesse </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Addi]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Melchi]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 14. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 15. </p> </td> <td> <p> Heber </p> </td> <td> <p> David </p> </td> <td> <p> Melchi </p> </td> <td> <p> Levi </p> </td> <td> <p> 15. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 16. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Phalec]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Nathan </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Neri]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Matthat </p> </td> <td> <p> 16. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 17. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Ragau]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Mattatha]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Salathiel </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Heli]] </p> </td> <td> <p> 17. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 18. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Saruch]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Menan]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Zorobabel </p> </td> <td> <p> Joseph </p> </td> <td> <p> 18. </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p> 19. </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Nachor]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Melea]] </p> </td> <td> <p> [[Rhesa]] </p> </td> <td> <p> Jesus </p> </td> <td> <p> 19. </p> </td> </tr> </table> <p> We do not find that there was any objection made to these genealogies, either by Jew or Gentile, during the first century. Had any difficulty on this head existed, we may reasonably suppose that the Jews, of all others, would have been but too ready to detect and expose it. We may therefore fairly conclude that, whatever difficulty meets us now in harmonizing our Lord's pedigree as given by the two Evangelists, it could have had no place in the first age of the Christian church. In subsequent ages, however, objections were and still are made to the genealogies of Matthew and Luke. </p> <p> The chief ground of objection is the alleged inconsistency of the [[Evangelists]] with each other. The first solution of their apparent discrepancies is that of Africanus, which, he informs us, he received from the relatives of our Lord. It is to the effect that Matthan, the third in the list from Joseph, in Matthew's genealogy, and Melchi, the third in Luke's list, married successively the same woman, by whom the former begat Jacob, and the latter Heli, Heli dying without issue, his maternal brother took his widow to wife, by whom he had Joseph, who, according to law , was registered by Luke as the son of Heli, though naturally the son of Jacob, as Matthew records him. This is the explanation which was generally admitted by Eusebius, Nazianzen, and others for ages. </p> <p> Grotius, however, availing himself of the tradition that Heli and Jacob were both sons of the same mother, but of different fathers (Matthan and Melchi), supposes that Luke traces the natural pedigree of Christ, and Matthew the legal. This he argues on two grounds. First, that Salathiel could not have been the natural son of Jechonias, who was childless—according to the declaration of God by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 22)—and was, therefore, as Luke states, the son, properly so called, of Neri, of Nathan's line; and, secondly, that the [[Levirate]] law imposed no necessity on Jacob to marry Heli's widow, they being only uterine brothers. But both the reasons assigned by [[Grotius]] for differing from the solution of Africanus would seem to be founded on a petitio principii. It does not appear an ascertained fact that Salathiel was not the natural son of Jechonias, nor yet that the law which obliged a man to marry the widow of his deceased brother might be departed from when they were only maternal brethren; for even in cases of distant relationship the law seemed obligatory, as we see in the case of [[Boaz]] marrying Ruth, the widow of his distant kinsman. </p> <p> Dr. Barrett objects to the above theory as given by Africanus and altered by Grotius, on the ground principally, that it refers entirely to the descent of Joseph from David, without attempting to prove that the son of Mary was the son of David. Dr. Barrett then states his own hypothesis, viz., that Matthew relates the genealogy of Joseph, and Luke that of Mary. He supposes a sufficient reason, that after Matthew had given his genealogical table another should be added by St. Luke, fully to prove that Christ, according to the flesh, derived his descent from David, not only by his supposed father Joseph, but also by his real mother Mary. </p> <p> In constructing their genealogical tables, it is well known that the Jews reckoned wholly by males, rejecting, where the blood of the grandfather passed to the grandson through a daughter, the name of the daughter herself, and counting that daughter's husband for the son of the maternal grandfather . On this principle Joseph, begotten by Jacob, marries Mary, the daughter of Heli; and in the genealogical register of his wife's family, is counted for Heli's son. Salathiel, begotten by Jeconiah, marries the daughter of Neri, and, in like manner, is accounted his son: in Zorobabel, the offspring of Salathiel and Neri's daughter, the lines of Solomon and Nathan coalesce; Joseph and Mary are of the same tribe and family; they are both descendants of David in the line of Solomon; they have in them both the blood of Nathan, David's son. Joseph deduces his descent from Abiud , Mary from Rhesa , sons of Zorobabel. The genealogies of Matthew and Luke are parts of one perfect whole, and each of them is essential to the explanation of the other. By Matthew's table we prove the descent of Mary, as well as Joseph, from Solomon; by Luke's we see the descent of Joseph, as well as Mary, from Nathan. </p>

<p> (Γενεαλογία ), literally the act or art of the γενεαλογός , i.e., of him who treats of birth and family, and reckons descents and generations. Hence, by an easy transition, it is often (like ἱστορία ) used of the document itself in which such series of generations is set down. In Hebrew the term for a genealogy or pedigree is סֵפֶר הִיִּחִשׂ, or סֵפֶר תּוֹלְדוֹת "the book of the generations;" and because the oldest histories were usually drawn up on a genealogical basis, the expression is often extended to the whole history, as in the case of the [[Gospel]] of Matthew, where "the book of the generations of Jesus Christ" includes the whole history contained in that gospel. So Genesis 2:4, "These are the generoatiens of the heavens and of the earth," seams to be the title of the history which follows. Genesis 5:1; Genesis 6:9; Genesis 10:1; Genesis 11:10; Genesis 11:27; Genesis 25:12; Genesis 25:19; Genesis 36:1; Genesis 36:9; Genesis 37:2, are other examples of the same usage, and these passages seem to mark the existence of separate histories from which the book of Genesis was compiled. Nor is this genealogical form of history peculiar to the Hebrews or the Shemitic races. The earliest Greek histories were also genealogies. Thus the histories of Acusilaus of Argos and of Hecataeus of [[Miletus]] were entitled Γενεαλογίαι, and the fragments remaining of Xalsithus, [[Charon]] of [[Lampsacus]] and Hellanicus are strongly tinged with the same genealogical element (comp. Josephus, Apion, 1:3), which is not lost even in the pages of Herodotus. The frequent use of the patronymic in Greek, the stories of particular races, as Heraslides, Alemasonidse, etc., the lists of priests, and kings, and conquerors at the games, preserced at Ellis, Spaita, Olympia, and elsewhere; the hereditary monarchies and priesthoods, as of the Branchidae, Eumolpidae, etc., in so many cities in Greece and Greek Asia; the division, as old as Homer, into tribes, fratriae, ane γένη and the existence of the tribe, the gens, and the familia among the Romans; the Celtic clans, the Saxon families using a common patranymic, and their royal genealogies running back to the Teutonic gods, these are among the many instances that may be cited to prove the strong family and genealogical instinct of the ancient world. Coming nearer to the Israelites, it will be enough to allude to the hereditary principle, and the vast genealogical records of the Egyptians, as regards their kings and priests, and to the passion for genealogies among the Arabs, mentioned by Layard and others, in order to show that the attention paid by the Jews to genealogies is in entire accordance with the manners are tendencies of their contemporaries. In their case, however, it was heightened by several peculiar circumnstances. The promise of the land of Canaan to the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob successively, and the separation of the [[Israelites]] from the Gentile world; the expectation of the Messiah as to spring from the tribe of Judah; the exclusively hereditary priesthood of Aaron with its dignity and emoluments; the long succession of kings in the line of David; and the whole division and occupation of the land upon genealogical principles by the tribes, families, and houses of fathers, gave a deeper importance to the science of genealogy among the Jews than perhaps in any other nation. We have already noted the evidence of the existence of family memoirs even before the flood, to which wee are probably indebted for the genealogies in Genesis 4, 5; and Genesis 10, 11, etc., indicate the continsuance of the same system in the times between the flood and Abraham. But with Jacob, the founder of the nation, the system of reckoning by genealogies הַתְיִחֵשׂ or in the languase of Moses, Numbers 1:18, הַתְיִלֵּד was much further developed. In Genesis 35:22-26, we have a formal account of the sons of Jacob, the patriarchs of the nation, repeated in Exodus 1:1-5. In Genesis 46 we have an exact genealogical census of the house of Israel about the time of Jacob's demise in Egypt. The way in which the former part of this census, relating to Reuben and Simeon, is quoted in Exodus 6, where the census of the tribe of Levi is all that was wanted, seems to show that it was transcribed from an existing document. When the Israelites were in the wilderness of Sinai, in the second month of the second year of the Exoadms, their number was taken by divine command, "after their families, by the house of their fathers," tribe by tribe, and the number of each tribe is given "by their generations, after their families, by the house of their fathers, according to the number of the names, by their polls" (Numbers 1, 3). This census was repeated 38 years afterwards, and the names of the families added, as we find in Numbers 26. According to these genealogical divisions they pitched their tents, and marched, and offered their gifts and offerings, and chose the spies. According to the same they cast the lots by which the troubler of Israel, Achan, was discovered, as later those by which Saul was called to the throne. Above all, according to these divisions, the whole land of Canaan was parceled out amongst them. But now of necessity that took place which always has taken place with respect to such genealogical arrangements, viz. that by marriage, or servitude, or incorporation as friends and allies, persons not strictly belonging by birth to such or such a family or tribe, were yet reckoned in the census as belonging to them, when they had acquired property within their borders and were liable to the various services in peace or war which were performed under the heads of such tribes and families. Nobody supposes that all the Cornelbi, or all the Campbells, sprang from one ancestor, and it is in the teeth of direct evidence from Scripture, as well as of probability, to suppose that the Jewish tribes contained absolutely none but such as were descended from the twelve patriarchs. (Jul. Africanus, in his Ep. to Aristides, expressly mentions that the ancient genealogical records at Jerusalem included those who were descended from proselytes and γειώραι, as well as those who sprang from the patriarchs. The registers in Ezra and Nehemiah include the Nethinim, and the children of Solomon's servants.) The tribe of Levite as probably the only one which had no admixture of foreign blood. In many of the Scripture genealogies, as e.g. those of Caleb, Joala, Segub, and the sons of Rephaiah, etc., in (1 Chronicles 3:21, it is quite clear that birth was not the ground of their incorporation into their respective tribes. (See [[Becher]]); (See [[Caleb]]). </p> <p> However, birth was, and continued to be throughout their cehole national course, the foundation of all the Jewish organization, and the reigns of the more active and able kings and rulers were marked by attention to genealogical operations. When David established the Temple services on the footing which continued till the time of Christ, he divided the priests and Levites into courses and companies, each under the family chief. The singers, the porters, the trumpeters, the players on instruments, were all thus genealogically distributed. Ins the active stirring reign of Rehoboam, we have the work of Iddo concerning genealogies (2 Chronicles 12:15). When Hezekiah reopened the Temple, and restored the Temple services which had fallen into disuse, he reckoned the whole nation by genealogies. This appears from the fact of many of the genealogies in Chronicles terminating in Hezekiah's reign, from the expression, "So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies" (1 Chronicles 9:1), immediately following genealogies which do so terminate, and from the narrative in 2 Chronicles 31:16-19, proving that, as regards the priests and Levites, such a complete census was taken by Hezekiah. It is indicated also in 1 Chronicles 4:41. We learn, too, incidentally from Proverbs 25, that Hezekiah had a staff of scribes, who would be equally useful in transcribing genealogical registers as in copying out Proverbs. So also in the reign of Jotham, king of Judah, who, among other great works, built the higher gate of the house of the Lord (2 Kings 15:3-5), and was an energetic as well as a good king, we find a genealogical reckoning of the Reubenites (1 Chronicles 5:17), probably in connection with Jotham's wars against the [[Ammonites]] (2 Chronicles 27:5). When Zerubbabel brought back the captivity from Babylon, one of his first cares seems to have been to take a census of those that returned, and to settle them according to their genealogies. The evidence of this is found in 1 Chronicles 9, and the duplicate passage Nahum 11; in 1 Chronicles 3:19; and yet more distinctly in Nehemiah 7:5; Nehemiah 7:12. In like manner, Nehemiah, as an essential part of that national restoration which he labored so zealously to promote, gathered "together the nobles, and the rulers, and the people, that they might be reckoned by genealogy" (Nehemiah 7:5; Nehemiah 12:26). The abstract of this census is preserved in Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7, and a partion of it in 1 Chronicles 3:21-24. That this system was continued after their times, as far at least as the priests and Levites were concerned, we learn from Nehemiah 12:22; and we have incidental evidence of the continued care of the Jews still later to preserve their genealogies in such passages of the apocryphal books as 1 [[Maccabees]] 2:1-5; 1 Maccabees 8:17; 1 Maccabees 14:29, and perhaps Judith 8:1; [[Tobit]] 1:1, etc. Passing on to the time of the birth of Christ, we have a striking incidental proof of the continuance of the Jewish genealogical economy in the fact that when Augustus ordered the census of the empire to be taken, thee Jews in the province of [[Syria]] immediately went each one to his own city, i.e., (as is clear from Joseph going to Bethlehem, the city of David), to the city to which his tribe, family, and father's house belonged. Thus the return, if completed, doubtless exhibited the form of the old censuses taken by the kings of Israel and Judah. </p> <p> Another proof is the existence of our Lord's genealogy in two forms, as given by Matthew and Luke. (See below.) The mention of Zacharias as "of the course of Abia," of Elizabeth as "of the daughters of Aaron," and of Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, as "of the tribe of Aser," are further indications of the same thing (Luke 1:51; Luke 2:36). This conclusion is also expressly confirmed by the testimony of Josephus in the opening of his Life, § 1. There, after deducing his own descent, "not only from that race which is considered the noblest among the Jews, that of the priests, but from the first of the twenty-four courses" (the course of Jehoiarib), and on the mother's side from the [[Asmonaean]] sovereigns, he adds, "I have thus traced my genealogy as I have found it recorded in the public sables" (ἐν ταῖς δημοσίαις δέλτοις άναγεγραμμένην ); and again, contr. Apion, 1:7, he states that the priests were obliged to verify the descent of their intended wives lay' reference to the archives kept at Jerusalem; adding that it was the duty of the priests, after every war (and he specifies the wars of [[Antiochus]] Epiph., Pompea, and Q. Varus), to make new genealogical tables from the old ones, and to ascertain what women among the priestly families had been made prisoners, as all such were deemed improper to be wives of priests. As a proof of the care of the Jews in such matters, he further mentions that in his day the list of successive high-priests preserved in the public records extended through a period of 2000 years. From all this it is abundantly manifest that the Jewish genealogical records continued to be kept till near the destruction of Jerusalem. Hence we are constrained to disbelieve the story told by Africanus concerning the destruction of all the Jewish genealogies by Herod the Great, in order to conceal the ignobleness of his own origin. His statement isn, theat up to that time the Hebrew genealogies had been preserved entire, and the different families were traced up either to the patriarchs, or the γειώραι or mixed people; but that on Herod's causing these genealogies to be burnt, only a few of the more illustrious Jews who had private pedigrees of their owne, or who could supply the lost genealogies fronc memory, or from the books of chronicles, were able to retain any account of their own lineage — among whom, he says, were the Desposyni, or brethren of our Lord, froes whom was said to be derived the scheme (given by Africanus) for reconciling the two genealogies of Christ. But there can be little doubt that the registers of the Jewish tribes and families perished at the destruction of Jerusalems, and not before. Some partial records may, however, have survived that event, as it is probable, and indeed seems to be implied in Josephus's statement, that at least the priestly families of the dispersion had records of their own genealogy. We learn, too, from Benjamin of Tudela, that in his day the princes of the captivity professed to trace their descent to David, and he also names others, e.g. R. Calonymos, "a descendant of the house of David, as proved by his pedigree" (Itin. ed. Asher, 1:32), and R. Eleazar ben-Tsemach, "who possesses a pedigree of his descent from the prophet Samuel, and knows the melodies which were sung in the Temple during its existence" (ib. page 100, etc.). He also mentions descendants of the tribes of Dans, Zabulon, and Napthali, among the mnountains of Khasamin, whose prince was of the tribe of Levi. The patriarchsi of Jerusalemn, so called from the Hebrew ראֹשׁ ָֹאבוֹת, claimed descent fromn Hillel, the Babylonian, of whom it is said that a genealogy, found at Jerusalem, declared his descent from David and Abital. Others, however, taraced his descent from Benjamin, and from David only through a daughter of [[Shephatiah]] (Wolf, B. H. 4:380). B </p> <p> ut, however tradition may have preserved for a while true genealogies, or imagination and pride have coined fibtitious ones after the destruction of Jerusalem, it may be safely affirmed that the Jewish genealogical system then came to an end. Essentially connected as it was with the tenure of the land on the one hand, and with the peculiar privileges of the houses of David and Levi on the other, it naturally failed when the land was takers away from the Jewish race, and when the promise to David was fulfilled, and the priesthood of Aaron superseded by the exaltation of Christ to the right hand of God. The remains of the genealogical spirit among the later Jews (which might, of course, be much more fully illustrated from Rabbinical literature) has only been glanced at to show how deeply it had penetrated into the Jewish national mind. It remains to be said that just notions of the nature of the Jeemish genealogical records are of great importance with a view to the right interpretation of Scripture. Let it only be remembered that these records have respect to political and territorial divisions, as much as to strictly genealogical descent, and it will at once be seen how erroneous a conclusion it may be, that all who are called "sons" of such or such a patriarch, or chief father, must necessarily be his very children. Just as in the very first division into tribes Maanasseh and Ephraim were numbered with their uncles, as if they had been sons instead of grandsons (Genesis 48:5) of Jacob, so afterwards the names of persons belonging to different generations would often stand side by side as heads of families or houses, and be called the sons of their common ancestor. For example, Genesis 46:21 contains grandsons as well as sons of Benjamin (See [[Belah]]), and Exodus 6:24 probably enumerates the son and grandson of [[Assir]] as heads, with their father, of the families of the Korhites; and so in innumerable other instances. If any one family or house became extinct, some other would succeed to its place, called after its own chief father. Hence, of course, a census of any tribe drawn up at a later period would exhibit different divisions from one drawn cup at an earlier. Compare, e.g., the list of courses of priests in Zerubbabel's time (Nehemiah 12) with that of those in David's time (1 Chronicles 24). The same principle must he borne in mind in interpreting any particular genealogy. The sequence of generations may represent the succession to such or such an inheritance or headship of tribe or family rather than the relationship of father and son. Again, where a pedigree was abbreviated, it would naturally specify such generations as would indicate from what chief houses the person descended. Im cases where a name was common the father's name would be added for distinction only. These reasons would be well unsderstood at the time, though it masy be difficult now to ascertain them positively. Thus, in the pedigree of Ezra, (Ezra 7:1-5), it would seem that both [[Seraiah]] and Azariah were heads of houses (Nehemiah 10:2); them are both therefore named. [[Hilkiah]] is named as having been high-priest, and his identity is established by the addition "the son of Shallum" (1 Chronicles 10:13); the next named is Zadok, the priest in David's time, who was chief of the sixteen courses sprung froes Eleazar, and then follows a complete pedigree from this [[Zadok]] to Aaron. But then, as regards the chronological use of the Scripture genealogies, it follows from the above view that great caution is necessary in using them as measures of time, though they are invaluable for this purpose whenever we can be sure that they are complete. What seems necessary to make them trustworthy measures of time is, either that they should have special internal marks of being complete, such as where the mother as well as the father is named, or some historical circumstance defines the several relationships, or that there should be several genealogies, all giving the same number of generations within the same termini. When these conditions are found, it is difficult to overrate the value of genealogies for chronology. In determining, however, the relation of generatieons to time, some allowance must be made for the station in life of the persons in question. From the early marriages of the princes, the average of even thirty years to a generation will probably be found too bong for the kings. </p> <p> Another feature in the Scripture genealogies which it is worth while to notice is the recurrence of the s.ine name, or modification of the same name, such as Tobias, Tobit, Nathan, Mattatha, and even of names of the same signification, in the same family. This is an indication of the carefulness with which the Jews kept their pedigrees (as otherwise they could not have known the names of their remote ancestors); it also gives a clew by which to judge of obscure or doubtful genealogies. In some cases, however, this repetition seems to have resulted from erroneous transcription. </p> <p> The Jewish genealogies have two forms, one giving the generations in an ascending, the other in an ascending scale. Examples of the descending form may be seen in Ruth 4:18-22, or 1 Chronicles 3. Of the ascending, 1 Chronicles 6:33-43; Ezra 7:1-5. The descending form is expressed by the formula A begat B, and B begat C, etc.; or, the sons of A, B his son, C his son, etc.; or, the sons of A, B, C, D; and the sons of B, C, D, E; and the sons of C, E, F, G, etc. The ascending is always expressed in the same way. Of the two, it is obvious that the descending scale is the one in which we are most likely to find collateral descents, inasmuch as it implies that the object is to enumerate the heirs of the person at the head of the stem; and if direct heirs failed at any point, collateral ones would have to be inserted. In all cases, too, where the original document was preserved, when the direct line failed, the heir would naturally place his own name next to his predecessor, though that predecessor was not his father, but only his kinsman; whereas in the ascending scale there can be no failure in the nature of things. But neither form is in itself more or less fit than the other to express either proper or imputed filiation. </p> <p> Females are named in genealogies when there is anything remarkable about them, or when any right or property is transmitted through them. See Genesis 11:29; Genesis 22:23; Genesis 25:1-4; Genesis 35:22-26; Exodus vii 23; Numbers 26:33; 1 Chronicles 2:4; 1 Chronicles 2:19; 1 Chronicles 2:35; 1 Chronicles 2:50, etc. </p> <p> The genealogical lists of names are peculiarly liable to corruptions of the text, and there are many such in the books of Chronicles, Ezra, etc. [[Jerome]] speaks of these corruptions having risen to a fearful height in the Septuagint (Praefat. in Paraleip.). In like manner, the lists of high-priests in Josephus are so corrupt, that the names are scarcely recognizable. This must be borne in mind in dealing with the genealogies. </p> <p> The Bible genealogies give an unbroken descent of the house of David from the creation to the time of Christ. The registers at Jerusalem must have supplied the same to the priestly and many other families. They also inform us of the origin of most of the nations of the earth, and carry the genealogy of the Edomitish sovereigns down to about the time of Saul. [[Viewed]] as a whole, it is a genealogical collection of surpassing interest and accuracy (Rawlinson, Herodot. volume 1, chapter 2; Burrington, General. [[Tables]] of the Old and New Testaments, London, 1836; Selden's Works, passim). </p>