Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
|
See also:GENEALOGY (from the Gr. yivos, See also:family, and Vryos, theory) , a See also:pedigree or See also:list of ancestors, or 'the study of See also:family See also:history . 1 . Biblical Genealogies.—The aims and methods of See also:ancient genealogists require to be carefully considered before the value of the numerous ancestral lists in the See also:Bible can be properly estimated . Many of the old " genealogies," like those of See also:Greece, have arisen from the See also:desire to explain the origin of the various See also:groups which they include . See also:Information See also:relating to the sub-See also:division of tribes, their relation to each other, the intermingling of populations and the like are thus frequently represented in the See also:form of genealogies . The " sons " of a " See also:father " often stand merely for the branches of a family as they existed at some one See also:period, and since in course of See also:time tribal relations would vary, lists which have originated at different periods will See also:present discrepancies . It is obvious that many of the Biblical names are nothing more than personifications of nations, tribes, towns, &c., which are grouped together to convey some See also:idea of. the See also:bond by which they were believed to be connected . For the personification of a See also:people or tribe, cp . Gen. xxxiv.30 (" See also:Jacob said . . . I am a few men "), Josh. xvii . 14 (" the See also:children of See also:Joseph said .
.
.
I am a numerous people "), Ex. xiv
.
25 (" See also:Egypt said, let me flee "), Jos. ix
.
7, I Sam. v. to, &c.; see G
.
B
.
See also: Num. xx . 14, Deut. ii . 4, Am. i . 1 t), and since See also:Esau (See also:Edom) was See also:born before Jacob (Israel) it would appear that the Edomites were held to be the older nation . The See also:union of two clans is expressed as a See also:marriage, or the wife is the territory which is dominated by the See also:husband (tribe) ; see See also:CALEB . If the woman is not of See also:noble See also:blood, but is a handmaiden or concubine, her children are naturally not upon the same footing as those of the wife; consequently the descendants of Ishmael, the son of Hagar Sarah's maid), are inferior to See also:Isaac and his descendants, whilst the children of Keturah (" See also:incense "), See also:Abraham's concubine, are still See also:lower—from the Israelite point of view . This application of the terms of relationship is characteristic of the Semites . The " father " of the See also:Rechabites is their See also:head or founder (cf . 1 Sam. x . 12: " who is their father?"), and a See also:common bond, which is not necessarily See also:physical, unites all " sons," whether they are " sons of the prophets (members of prophetic guilds) or " sons of Belial " (worthless men) . The interpretation of ethnological or statistical genealogies may easily be pushed too far . Every See also:case has to be judged upon 574 its own merits, and due See also:allowance must be made both for the ambition of the weaker to claim or to strengthen an See also:alliance with the stronger, and for the not unnatural desire of clans or individuals to magnify the greatness of their ancestry . The first step must always be the careful comparison of related lists in See also:order to test the consistency of the tradition . Next, these must be critically studied in the See also:light of all available See also:historical material, though indeed such See also:evidence is not necessarily conclusive . Finally, (a) See also:literary See also:criticism must be employed to determine if possible the See also:dates of such lists, since obviously a contemporary See also:register is more trustworthy than one which is centuries later; (b) a See also:critical estimate of the See also:character of the names and of their use in various periods of Old Testament history is of importance in estimating the antiquity of the list'—for examine, many of the names in See also:Chronicles attributed to the time of See also:David are indubitably exilic or See also:post-exilic; and (c) principles of See also:ordinary historical See also:probability are as necessary here as in dealing with the genealogies of other ancient peoples, and See also:attention must be paid to such features as fluctuation in the number of links, See also:representation of theories inconsistent with the growth of See also:national See also:life, schemes of relationship not in accordance with sociological conditions, &c . The Biblical genealogies commence with " the generations of the See also:heaven and See also:earth," and by a See also:process of elimination pass from See also:Adam and See also:Eve by successive steps to Jacob and to his sons (the tribes), and finally to the subdivisions of each tribe (cp . Chron. i.–ix . I) . According to this theory every Israelite could trace back his descent to Jacob, the common father of the whole nation (Josh. vii . 17 seq., i Sam. x . 21) . Such a See also:scheme, however, is full of See also:manifest improbabilities . It demands that every tribe and every See also:clan should have been a homogeneous See also:group which had preserved its unity from the earliest times, that family records extending back for several centuries were in existence, and that such a tribe as See also:Simeon was able to maintain its See also:independence in spite of the tradition that it lost its See also:autonomy in very See also:early times (Gen. xlix . '7) . The whole conception of the unity of the tribes cannot be referred to a date previous to the time of David, and in the older writings a David or a See also:Jeroboam was sufficiently described as the son of See also:Jesse or of Nebat . The genealogical zeal as represented in the Old Testament is chiefly of later growth, and the exceptions are due to See also:interpolation (Josh. vii . 118, contrast v . 24), or to the desire to modify or qualify an older See also:notice . This, in the case of See also:Saul (I Sam. ix . I), has led to textual corruption; a list of such a length as his should have reached back to one of the " sons " of See also:Benjamin (cf. e.g . Gen. xlvi . 21),-else it were purposeless . The genealogies, too, are often inconsistent amongst themselves and in See also:contradiction to their See also:object . They show, for example, that the See also:population of See also:southern See also:Judah, so far from being " Israelite " was See also:half-Edomite (see JUDAH), and several of the clans in this See also:district See also:bear names which indicate their See also:original See also:affinity with See also:Midian or Edom . Moreover, there was a See also:free intermixture of races, and many cities had a Canaanite (i.e. pre-Israelite) population which must have been gradually absorbed by the Israelites (cf . Judg. i.) . That spirit of religious exclusiveness which marked later Judaism did not become prominent before the Deuteronomic See also:reformation (see See also:DEUTERONOMY), and it is under its See also:influence that the writings begin to emphasize the importance of maintaining the purity of Israelite blood, although by this time the See also:fusion was See also:complete (see Judg. iii . 6) and for See also:practical purposes a distinction between Canaanites and Israelites within the See also:borders of See also:Palestine could scarcely be discerned . Many of the genealogical data are intricate . Thus, the' interpretation of Gen. xxxiv. is particularly obscure (see See also:LEVITES ad fin.; SIMEDN) . As regards the sons of Jacob, it is difficult to explain their division among the four wives of Jacob; viz . (a) the sons of . Leah are See also:Reuben, Simeon, See also:Levi and Judah (S . Palestine), See also:Issachar and See also:Zebulun (in the See also:north), and Dinah (associated with See also:Shechem) (b) of Leah's maid Zilpah, See also:Gad and See also:Asher (E. and N . Palestine); (c) of See also:Rachel, Joseph (See also:Manasseh and See also:Ephraim, i.e. central Palestine) and Benjamin; (d) of Rachel's maid Bilhah, See also:Dan and See also:Naphtali ' G . B . Gray's See also:Hebrew Proper Names (1896), with his See also:article in the . Expositor (See also:Sept . 1897), pp . 173-190, should be consulted for the application and range of Hebrew names in O.T. genealogies and lists.(N . Palestine) . It has been urged that (b) and (d) stood upon a lower footing than the See also:rest, or were of later origin; or that Bilhah points to an old clan associated with Reuben (Gen. See also:xxxv . 22) or Edom (Bilhan, Gen. See also:xxxvi . 27), whilst Zilpah represents an Aramaean See also:strain . Tradition may have combined distinct schemes, and the belief that the wives were Aramaean at least coincides with the circumstance that Aramaean elements predominated in certain of the twelve tribes . The number " twelve " is artificial and can be obtained only by counting Manasseh and Ephraim as one or by omitting Levi, and a careful study of Old Testament history makes it extremely difficult to recover the tribes as historical See also:units . See, on these points, the articles on the several tribes, B . See also:Luther, Zeit. d. See also:allies/ . Wissens . (1901), pp .
I sqq.; G
.
B
.
Gray, Expositor (See also: 1-3) . The desire to prove the continuity of the See also:race, gnforced by the experience of the See also:exile, gave the impetus to genealogical zeal, and many of the extant lists proceed from this See also:age when the true historical See also:succession of names was a memory of the past . This applies with See also:special force to the lists in Chronicles which present finished schemes of the Levitical divisions by the See also:side of earlier attempts, with consequent confusion and contradiction . Thus the immediate ancestors of Ethan appear in the time of See also:Hezekiah (2 Chron. See also:xxix . 12), but he with Asaiah and Heman are contemporaries of David, and their genealogies from Levi down-wards contain a very unequal number of links (I Chron. vi.) . By another application of genealogical method the See also:account of the institution of priests and Levites by David (I Chron. See also:xxiv.) presents many names which belong solely to post-exilic days, thus suggesting that the See also:scribes desired to show that the See also:honourable families of their time were not unknown centuries previously . Everywhere we find the results of much skill and labour, often in accordance with definite theories, but a thorough investigation reveals their weakness and often quite incidentally furnishes valuable evidence of another nature . The intricate Levitical genealogies betray the result of successive genealogists who sought to give effect to the development of the hierarchal See also:system (see LEvITEs) . The See also:climax is reached when all Levites are traced back to Gershon, Kehath and 1\ilerari, to which are ascribed respectively See also:Asaph, Heman and Ethan (or Jeduthun) . The last two were not originally I.evites in the later accepted sense of the See also:term (see I See also:Kings iv . 31) . To Kehath is reckoned an important subdivision descended from Korah, but in 2 Chron. xx . 19 the two are distinct groups, and Korah's name is that of an Edomite clan (Gen. xxxvi . 5, 14, 18) related to Caleb, and thus included among the descendants of Judah (1 Chron. ii . 43) . Cases of See also:adjustment, re-See also:distribution and " Levitizing " of individuals are frequent . There are traces of varying divisions both of the singers (Neh. xi . 17) and of the Levites (Num. See also:xxvi . 58; Ezr. ii . 40, iii . 9; I Chron. xv . 5-1o, xxiii.), and it is noteworthy that in the case of the latter we have mention of such families as Hebroni (Hebronite), Libni (from Libnah) —ethnics of See also:South Judaean towns . In fact, a significant number of Levitical names find their See also:analogy in the lists of names belonging to Judah, Simeon and even Edom, or are closely connected with the family of See also:Moses; e.g . Mushi (i.e . Mosaite),Gershon and Eleazar(cp . Gershom and Eliezer, sons of Moses) . The Levites bear a class-name, and the genealogies show that many of them were connected with the See also:minor clans and families of South Palestine which included among them Moses and his See also:kin . Hence, it is not unnatural that Obed-edom, for example, obviously a southerner, should have been reckoned later as a Levite, and the work ascribed by the chronicler's history to the closing years of David's life may be influenced by the tradition that it was through him these mixed populations first attained importance . See further DAVID; See also:JEWS; LEVITES . In the time of Joseph'us every See also:priest was supposed to be able to prove his descent, and perhaps from the time of Ezra down-wards lists were carefully kept . But when See also:Anna is called an Asherite (See also:Luke ii . 36), or See also:Paul a Benjamite (Rom. xi . 1), family tradition was probably the See also:sole support to the claim, although the tribal feeling had not become entirely See also:extinct . The genealogies of Jesus prefixed to two of the gospels are intended to prove that He was a son of David . But not that alone, for in Matt. i. he is traced back to Abraham the father of the Jews, whilst in Luke iii . He, as the second Adam, is traced back to the first See also:man .
The two lists are hopelessly inconsistent; not because one of them follows the See also:line of See also:Mary, but because they represent See also:independent attempts
.
That in See also:Matthew is characteristically arranged in
three See also:series of fourteen generations each through the kings of Judah, whilst Luke's passes through an almost unknown son of
David; in spite of this, however, both converge in the See also:person of Zerubbabel
.
See further, A
.
C
.
See also:Hervey, Genealogies of Our See also:Lord; H. von See also:Soden, Ency
.
Bib. ii. See also:col
.
1666 sqq.; B
.
W
.
See also:
F
.
M'Lennan's Studies (2nd see., ch. ix., " fabricated genealogies ") ; S
.
A
.
See also:Cook, Ency
.
Bib. ii. col
.
1657 sqq
.
(with references) ; W
.
R
.
See also: See also:Greek and See also:Roman Genealogies.—A passing reference only is needed to the intricate genealogies of gods and sons of gods which form so conspicuous a feature in classical literature.' In every one of the numerous states into which ancient Greece was divided there were aristocratic families, whose genealogies as a See also:rule went back to prehistoric times, their first ancestor being some See also:hero of divine descent, from whom, or from some distinguished younger ancestor, they derived their names . Many of these families were, as families, undoubtedly of See also:great antiquity even at the beginning of the historical period; and in several instances they continued to maintain a conspicuous and See also:separate existence for centuries . The See also:element of family See also:pride is prominent in the See also:poetry of the Megarian Theognis; and in an inscription belonging to the and See also:century B.C. the recipient of certain honours from the community of See also:Gythium is represented as the See also:thirty-ninth in See also:direct descent from the Dioscuri and the See also:forty-first from Heracles . Even in See also:Athens, See also:long after the constitution had become thoroughly democratic, some of the clans continued to be known as See also:Eupatridae (of noble family); and See also:Alcibiades, for example, as a member of the phratria of the Eurysacidae, traced his origin through many generations to Eurysaces, who was represented as having been the first of the Aeacidae to See also:settle in See also:Attica . The Corinthian Bacchiadae traced their descent back to Heracles, but took their name from Bacchis, a younger ancestor . It is very doubtful, however, whether such pedigrees as this were very seriously put forward by those who claimed them; and it is certain that, almost along the whole line, they were unsupported by evidence ? We have the authority of See also:Pollux (viii . 111) for stating that the Athenian 7EVrt, of which there were thirty in each Oparpia, were organized without any exclusive regard being had to blood-relationship; they were constantly receiving accessions from without; and the public written registers of births, adoptions and the like do not appear to have been pre-served with such care as would have made it possible to verify a pedigree for any considerable portion even of the strictly historical period.' The great antiquity of the early Roman (patrician) gentes, who universally traced themselves hack to illustrious ancestors, is indisputable; and the rigid exclusiveness with which each pre-served its hereditates gcntiliciae or sacra gentilicia is sufficiently illustrated by the fact that towards the See also:close of the See also:republic there were not more than fifty patrician families (See also:Dion . See also:Halle. i . 85) . Yet even in these it is obvious that, owing to the frequency of resort to the well-recognized practice of See also:adoption, while there was every See also:guarantee for the historical identity of the family, there was none (documents apart) for the See also:personal See also:genealogy of the individual . There is no evidence that sufficient records of ' On the subject generally see articles " Genos " and " Gens," by A . H . Greenidge, in Smith's See also:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (3rd ed., 1890), where the See also:chief authorities are given . 2 The fondness of See also:Euripides for genealogies is ridiculed by See also:Aristophanes (Acharnians, 47) . ' All the earlier Greek historians appear to have constructed their narratives on assumed genealogical bases . The four books of Hecataeus of See also:Miletus dealt respectively with the traditions about See also:Deucalion, about Heracles and the See also:Heraclidae, about the early settlements in See also:Peloponnesus, and about those in See also:Asia Minor; he further made a pedigree for himself, in which his sixteenth ancestor was a See also:god . The See also:works of See also:Hellanicus of See also:Lesbos See also:bore titles (Jevicaauovema and the like) which sufficiently explain their nature; his See also:disciple, Damastes of Sigeum, was the author of genealogical histories of Trojan heroes; See also:Apollodorus of Athens made use of three books of Peveaaoyuca by Acusilaus of See also:Argos; Pherecydes of Leros also wrote . -yeveaXo-ytac . See J . A . F . See also:Topffer, Attische Genealogic 8889); alo J . H .
See also:Schubart, Quaestt. geneal. historicae (1832);
.
Marcksoheffel, De genealogica Graecorum poesi (184o).pedigree were kept during the earlier centuries of the Roman See also:commonwealth, although the leading houses See also:drew up genealogical tables, and their family pedigree was painted on the walls of the entrance See also:
But the famous suit of See also:Scrope against
.
Grosvenor will illustrate the See also:late See also:appearance of private genealogies in See also:England
.
In 1385 See also:Sir See also:Richard Scrope, lord. of See also:Bolton, displaying his banner in the See also:host that invaded See also:Scotland, found that his arms of a See also:golden See also:bend in a See also:blue See also: (1887), p . 442 . ' At the funeral of |