No. CCCXXIX. CONSIDERATIONS ON THE GENEALOGY OF

JESUS CHRIST.

THE natural relations of life, Father, Son, Brother, Sister, &c. with all their "various charities," are so universally objects of attention, being objects of a desire implanted in mankind by Nature itself, for the most important purposes, that when Providence has denied them, or has removed them, we look around for substitutes, and are uneasy till we have obtained a connection which may in some degree answer the intention. As the principle of lineal descent, and of affection passing by descent, is the strongest in Nature, we are not surprized to find the custom of Adoption resorted to by those who, not having a primary object of affection, desire to possess the nearest resemblance to it which can be obtained.

Adoption, as it respects parents procuring adventitious children, is what I mean to consider: Now this is, first, when a man, or woman, having no issue of either sex, adopts a child-whether son, or daughter. Secondly, when a parent, having only a daughter, 1. marries her to a man, whom, in consequence of that marriage, he adopts as his son 2. when he adopts the children (or the eldest son), of his daughter, by such marriage. As an instance of the first kind of Adoption-Sarah, having no issue, procured a child by the intervention of Hagar; and Ishmael was her adopted son. In like manner Rachel and Leah obtained additional children by the intervention of their bandmaidens.

But Scripture affords instances of the other kind of Adoption-that of a father having a daughter only, and adopting her children. Thus, 1 Chron. ii. 21: Machir (grandson of Joseph) called "Father of Gilead" (that is, chief of that town), gave his daughter to Hezron, who took her; and he was a son of sixty years (sixty years of age), and she bare him Segub: and Segub begat Jair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead, which, no doubt, was the landed estate of Machir, who was so desirous of a male heir. Jair acquired a number of other cities, which made up his possessions to threescore cities: however, as well he, as his posterity, and their cities, instead of being reckoned to the family of Judah, as they ought to have been, by their paternal descent from Hezron, are reckoned as sons of Machir, the father of Gilead. Nay more, it appears, Numbers xxxii. 41: that this very Jair, who was, in fact, the son of Segub, the son of Hezron, the son of Judah, is expressly called "Jair, the son of Manasseh," because his maternal (rather his adopting) great-grandfather was Machir, the son of Manasseh; and Jair, inheriting his property, was his lineal representative. So that we should never have suspected his being other than a son of Manasseh, naturally, had only the passage in Numbers been extant.

In like manner, Sheshan, of the tribe of Judah, gives his daughter to Jarha, an Egyptian slave (whom he liberated, no doubt, on that occasion); but the posterity of this marriage, Attai, &c. are not reckoned to Jarha, as an Egyptian, but are reckoned to Sheshan, as an Israelite; and succeed to his estate and station in Israel. Vide verses 34, &c.

So we read, that Mordecai adopted Esther, his niece, he took her to himself to be a daughter (Heb. " to daughter," as we say, to take to wife). N. B. This being in the time of Israel's captivity, Mordecai had no landed estate; for if he had had any, he would not have adopted a daughter, but a son, Esther ii. 7.

So the daughter of Pharaoh adopted Moses; and he was to her to be a son (literally, to son-as before), Exod. ii. 10.

VOL. III.

4 L

So we read, Ruth iv. 17, that Naomi had a son: a son is born to Naomi; when indeed it was the son of Ruth; and only a distant relation, or none at all, to Naomi, who was merely the wife of Elimelech, to whom Boaz was a kinsman, but not the nearest by consanguinity.

So we read of Hiram, the artificer, that he was the son of a widow woman-herself of the tribe of Naphtali, 1 Kings vii. 14. but Hiram is described, 2 Chron. ii. 14. as the son of a woman, of the daughters of Dan.

And beside these instances, we have in Scripture a passage which includes no inconsiderable difficulty in regard to kindred; but which, perhaps, is allied to some of these principles. The reader will perceive it at once, by comparing the columns.

How is this? Zedekiah is called in Kings," the son of Josiah :" in Chronicles he is called "the son of Jehoiakim!"... By way of answer,

Observe, 1. the word (777 DODO) rendered "father's brother" that is, uncle, in Kings, bears also the sense of favourite, or one preferred, selected from among many; and this may be the import of the passage, "And the king of Babylon made Mattaniah his favourite--king."

Observe, 2. Zedekiah was son, by natural issue, of Jehoiakim, whereby he was grandson to Josiah; but, might not his grandfather adopt him as his son? We find Jacob doing this very thing, to Ephraim and Manasseh, the sons of Joseph; "as Reuben and Simeon they shall be mine:" and they, accordingly, are always reckoned among the SONS of Jacob. In like manner, if Josiah adopted Zedekiah, his grandson, to be his own son, then would this young prince be reckoned to him, and both places of Scripture are correct: as well that which calls him son of his real father, Jeloiachim, as that which calls him son of his adopted father, Josiah. That this might easily be the fact, appears by the dates: for Josiah was killed ante A. D. 606, at which time Zedekiah was eight or nine years old; he being made king ante A. D. 594, when he was twenty-one. By this statement the whole difficulty, which has greatly perplexed the learned, vanishes at once.

N. B. Amutal, the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah, was king's mother (vide No. XVI.); not natural, but official, mother to both Jehoahaz, and Zedekiah.

I believe other examples might be found in Scripture; but these are enough to establish the principle, for the purpose of our present argument, which has principally in view the double parentage of Joseph, the father of Jesus, as stated in the Genealogies of Matthew and Luke. After considering those Genealogies we shall return to the subject of Adoption.

It should seem, then, that in any of the instances above quoted the party might be described, very justly, yet very contradictorily:-as thus,

1. Jair was son of Manasseh .

2. Jair was begotten by Judah.

1. Attai was son of Sheshan ..

2. Attai was begotten by Jarha.

This kind of double parentage would be very perplexing to us, as we have no custom analogous to it; and possibly it might be somewhat intricate where it was practised: however, it occurs elsewhere, beside in Scripture.-We have a singularly striking instance of it, in a Palmyrene Inscription, copied by Mr. Wood, &c. who remarks, that it is much more difficult to understand than to translate: "This," says he, "will appear by rendering it literally, which is easiest done into Latin," thus:

"Senatus populusque Alialamenem, Pani filium, Mocimi nepotem, ranis pronepotem, Mathæ abnepotem; et Eranem patrem ejus, viros pios et patriæ amicos, et omnimodi placentes patriæ patriisque diis, honoris gratia: Anno 450, mense Aprili."

"Our difficulty is, that Eranes is called the FATHER of Alialamenes [whereas, Alialamenes is himself called] the SON of Panus." Wood's Account of Palmyra. The sense of this inscription may be thus rendered:

"Erected by the senate and the people to Alialamenes, the son of Panus, grandson of Mocimus, great grandson of Eranes, great great grandson of Matheus: and to Æranes his (that is, Alialamenes's) father; pious men, and friends of their country," &c. Now this is precisely the case of Joseph, the supposed father of Jesus; of whom Matthew says, "Jacob begat Joseph ;"-but Luke calls Joseph "the son of Heli."This contradiction is so very glaring, that we are persuaded it is no contradiction at all, but must be explained on principles not yet acknowledged by us; for, no man could possibly, under direction of the senate and people, in a PUBLIC monumental inscription, and in the compass of a few short lines, call Alialamenes the son of Panus; and call Eranes the FATHER of Alialamenes, without perceiving the gross error in which he involved as well himself as his country; the senate and people his employers, and ALL his readers!

This descent struck Dr. Halifax so much, who copied the same inscription (Phil. Trans. No. CCXVII. p. 83.) that he observes upon it, "This custom of theirs, of running up their Genealogies or Pedigrees, to the 4th or 5th generation, shews them to have borrowed some of their fashions from their neighbours the Jews, with whom it is not unlikely they had of old great commerce; and perhaps many of them were descended from that people, Zenobia herself being said to have been a Jewess: or else, this must have been the manner of all the Eastern nations."-The reader will recollect that Palmyra is usually thought to be the "Tadmor" of Solomon (1 Kings xix. 19; 2 Chron. viii. 6.), which is its present name.

"The date is that of the Greeks, from the death of Alexander the Great; as the

Syrians generally date. The very Christians, at this day, following the same usage. It is 450, or A. D. 126." So that it is near enough to the age of Joseph and Mary. But it is generally thought the date is from the æra of the Seleucidæ, some years later, that is, beginning ante A. D. 312.

As we think this yields a fair argument, and worthy the consideration of the learned among the Jews, who have objected to the Genealogies in the Evangelists, we shall only ask, What they would have thought of a Hebrew inscription to the following import?-which, it is clear, might have been erected to any one of the persons quoted from Scripture in the foregoing list:

"Erected by the senate and people of Israel :--To Jair, the son of Segub, the son of Hezron, the son of of the tribe of Judah and to his (Jair's) father, Machir, the son of of the tribe of Manasseh: pious men, and friends to their country," &c. Those who still think the difficulty in the Evangelists considerable, are farther requested to consider whether its difficulty does not consist merely in its simplicity : of which, in all probability, we should be convinced, did we but know the circumstances attending it. "Whoever clears up the Syrian difficulty will, we presume, at the same time clear up the sacred."

Query, Is the usage of the phrase determinate, that the adopting Father may be noted as having such a Son, but not as begetting such a Son? in which case it would read, "Jair the son of Machir," or, e contra, "Segub begat Jair."

So much, at present, in reference to the genealogical difficulties occasioned by Adoption!

1. PRACTICE of adoption, in the EAST.

That Adoption continues to be practised we are assured by Pitts, who himself was little other than an adopted son. Travels to Mecca, p. 217. "I was bought by an old bachelor; I wanted nothing with him; meat, drink, and clothes, and money, I had enough. After I had lived with him about a year, he made his pilgrimage to Mecca, and carried me with him; but before we came to Alexandria he was taken sick, and thinking verily he should die, having a woven girdle about his middle, under his sash (which they usually wear) in which was much gold, and also my letter of freedom (which he intended to give me, when at Mecca); he took it off, and [N. B.] bid me put it on about me, and took my girdle, and put it on himself.

66

My patron would speak, on occasion, in my behalf, saying my son will never run away. He seldom called me any thing but Son: and bought a Dutch boy to do the work of the house, who attended upon me and obeyed my orders as much as his. I often saw several bags of his money, a great part of which he said he would leave me. He would say to me, "Though I was never married myself, yet you shall be [married] in a little time, and then YOUR CHILDREN shall be MINE." p. 225.

We learn also that this custom is frequent in the East: not only among the Turks, but other Asiatics also. Lady Wortley Montague says (Letter XLII.)—

"Now I am speaking of their law, I do not know whether I have ever mentioned to you one custom peculiar to their country, I mean ADOPTION, very common among the Turks, and yet more among the Greeks and Armenians. Not having it in their power to give their estate to a friend, or distant relation, to avoid its falling into the grand Seignior's treasury, when they are not likely to have any children of their own, they choose some pretty child of either sex, amongst the meanest people, AND CARRY THE CHILD AND ITS PARENTS BEFORE THE CADI, and there declare they receive it for their heir. The parents at the same time renounce all future claim to it; a writing is

drawn and witnessed, and a child thus adopted CANNOT BE DISINHERITED. Yet I have seen some common beggars that have refused to part with their children in this manner to some of the richest among the Greeks (so powerful is the instinctive affection that is natural to parents); though the adopting fathers are generally very tender to those children of their souls, as they call them. I own this custom pleases me much better than our absurd one of following our name. Methinks it is much

more reasonable to make happy and rich an infant whom I educate after my own manner, brought up (in the Turkish phrase) upon my knees; and who has learned to look upon me with a filial respect, than to give an estate to a creature without merit or relation to me, other than that of a few letters. Yet this is an absurdity we see frequently practised."

66

We request the reader to note in this extract, 1. The publicity of the act and deed: signed, sealed, and delivered, before the Cadi. 2. The child cannot be disinherited; but becomes bona fide his new father's property. 3. The phrase child of the soul, because not, strictly speaking, " child of the body," that is, by natural descent.-This idea is applied by the apostolic writers to converts, &c. " spiritual fathers." 4. The phrase brought up upon the parents' knees." Will this give a determinate sense to the awkward expression (in our version, at least) of Rachel, "My maid Bilhah shall bear UPON my knees," what can we understand by this phrase? but may we take it"shall bear (children) FOR my knees," that is, to be nursed by me, to be reared by me, as if I were their natural mother: "an infant whom I educate after my own manner," as Lady Montague explains it. This seems a proper rendering of the passage, and the particle (by oL) is very frequently taken in this sense; vide Gen. xxvi. 7; Lev. iv. 3; Lam. v. 7; Amos i. 3, 6, where, "for"—for the sake of-on account of—is its natural import. We think also, the phrase, Gen. 1. 23: "the children of Machir, the son of Manasseh, were brought up on Joseph's knees," expresses a greater degree of fondness now, than it has done before;-was not this something like an Adoption? does it not imply Joseph's partiality for Manasseh? which is perfectly consistent with his behaviour to the dying Jacob (Gen. xlviii. 18.), when he wished his father to put his right hand on the head of Manasseh, the eldest-to whom, and to whose posterity, he still maintains his warmest affection, notwithstanding the prophetic notice of Ephraim's future precedence given him by the venerable patriarch.

2. RULES OF Adoption.

This Number concludes by extracting some of those Rules which, in the East, govern Adoption. We shall resume the subject after a few Numbers. [Vide Nos. CCCXXXVI. &c.]

"He who is desirous to adopt a child MUST INFORM THE MAGISTRATE THEREOF, and shall perform the Jugg (sacrifice) and shall give gold, and rice, to the father of the child, whom he would adopt; then, supposing the child not to have had his ears bored, nor to have received the Braminical thread, nor to have been married in his father's house, and not to be five years old, if the father will give up such a child, or if the mother gives him up, by order of the father, and there are other brothers of that child, that child may be adopted.”

"A woman may not adopt a child without her husband's order; if she has her husband's consent she may cause the Bramins to perform a jugg for her, and may adopt the child."

"He who has no son, or grandson, or grandson's son, or brother's son, shall adopt a son; and while he has one adopted son, he shall not adopt a second." Gentoo Laws, p. 263.

This kind of Adoption is evidently that of a son taken from among strangers, and