From Adam to Abraham: Solving the Chronology Conundrum

The genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 confront the reader with a dilemma: Whether to approach the chronological data through the prism of history or rather as metaphor. The former raises a host of questions, not the least of which is the issue of contradictions with the historical record; while the latter option begs the question of what the message of these genealogical lists could possibly be.

The highly schematic genealogical tables of Genesis 5 and 11 and their two-dimensional characters stand out for their stark deviation from the rich character development that distinguishes the rest of Genesis. As such, they do not appear to furnish any obvious messages or lessons. This would seem to lend support to the supposition that the genealogies are meant to provide historical context. However, taken at face value, the chronologies’ suggested six millennia since the emergence of Adam, strains credulity.¹ To bring the point home, one need look no further than the city of Jericho. The ancient city is believed to have been occupied for over eleven millennia.² The story of civilization at Jericho alone spans twice the amount of time suggested by the Genesis genealogies for the development of civilization.³ Jericho is but one example of the apparent inconsistency between the Torah’s accounting of civilization since the emergence of Adam, and accepted history.⁴

A careful examination of the text leads to the conclusion that the genealogies in Genesis chapters 5 and 11 are intended as more than a mere historical-chronological framework. A close reading reveals that the genealogical tables of chapters 5 and 11, or toledot, as they are referred to by the text, are fundamental to the overall structure of Genesis. The book of Genesis may be internally subdivided into a series of ten carefully structured units, each introduced by the phrase eleh/zeh toledot.⁵ This observation would seem to have been behind Nahmanides’ conclusion that Genesis 5: 1, and its opening statement zeh sefer toledot Adam is the formal introduction to the book of the Torah.⁶ This article aims to respond to both the chronological and theological challenges by suggesting a perspective on the text that clarifies both its literary thrust and its relationship to the historical data.

The Broader Implications of Begetting

Aligning the biblical and historical record requires the presumption of gaps in the Genesis genealogical tables. Accordingly, Nahum Sarna explains the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 to be a compressed “schematization of history” in the spirit of standard ancient ten-generation chronologies.⁷ Abridgement may be further adduced from the glaring lack of any final tallying of the years such as that found at the conclusion of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.⁸ Telescoping is a well-documented phenomenon in biblical chronologies.⁹ In the Bible, “father” and “son” are interchangeable with “grandfather” and “grandson,” and “begetting” does not necessarily imply immediacy.¹⁰ That being said, the unique difficulty presented by Genesis 5 and 11, is its systematic interlocking of the generations resulting from the consistent reckoning of age at the time of each begetting.

However, there are already internal indications in the text suggesting that this apparent interlocking is illusory. When Abraham dies, we are told: Abraham lived a hundred and seventy-five years. Then Abraham breathed his last and died at a good old age, an old man and full of years; and he was gathered to his people (Gen. 25: 7-8). The proclamation that Abraham died at a good old age does not align with extant hoary great-grandparents (Eber and Shem) surviving him and living well into the lifetime of Jacob.¹¹ If Abraham’s surviving ancestors lived more than double and triple his lifespan, then Abraham’s lifespan can hardly be touted as exemplary. This internal textual dilemma renders the contiguous approach to the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 virtually untenable.

A more nuanced understanding of the word holid/begat is in order. Like the word’s reflexive form hityaled which indicates pedigree registration,¹² the causative form holid connotes the official establishment of an heir, the founding of an official line of descent, as reflected in the toledot of Yitzchak:¹³ This is the account (toledot) of Isaac son of Abraham, Abraham begat (holid) Isaac (Gen. 25: 19). Whereas the Bible consistently regards Yishmael as Abraham’s son, the Bible never uses the word holid to describe their relationship.¹⁴

Based on this understanding of the term holid, the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 are concerned with establishing lines of succession. This reading of the text is reinforced by the formulaic repetition of the phrase, and he had sons and daughters at every successive stage of the genealogical table. The clear implication of this refrain at every interval is that the line of succession delineated in the text is to the exclusion of other offspring. This reading eliminates the interlocking of each subsequent generation, as the references to transitions from one generation to another can be understood as demarcations of familial lineage rather than as direct parent-child successions.

The Genealogical Table and Chronicles

This approach to the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 as successive lines of lineage is supported by the manner in which the genealogical data of Genesis is reiterated in the hyper-laconic opening chapter of Chronicles. In I Chronicles 1: 1-4, 24-27 the names are listed in quick succession without any linguistic connectors. This is in sharp contrast to the rest of the chapter where father son relationships are indicated with the words yalad/holid and benei (sons).

The text in Chronicles proceeds with a record of Esau’s progeny, followed by the death of all successive Edomite kings. This is in turn followed by a list of the sons of Jacob and the rise of King David.¹⁵ The ascent of the Davidic monarchy already in the opening genealogy of Chronicles, juxtaposed with the systematic demise of all the Edomite kings, sets the stage for the ensuing book and its focus on the House of David.¹⁶ The implication of the presentation of the genealogical data in Chronicles is that the heir sequence already begins with the genealogy starting from Adam, and ultimately leads to King David and the Israelite monarchy. In Chronicles, the genealogies in Genesis are used to chart the development from Adam to the forebears of the House of David.

Ten-Generation Genealogies and the Ancient Near East

The approach to Genesis 5 and 11 as dynastic chronology aligns with a strikingly similar phenomenon in Ancient Near Eastern chronology, namely, ten-generation monarchic registries. Abraham Malamat discusses the common use of the ten-name pattern in ancient Babylonian and Assyrian king lists.¹⁷ He states that “the table of ancestors of the dynastic founders was based on a constant ten-generation depth.”¹⁸ Ten-generational monarchic genealogies are found in the Bible as well. Most notable is the compressed ten-generation ancestry of King David that concludes the book of Ruth.¹⁹ Malamut comments: “David’s table of ancestors is largely an artificial construction formed on an ideal, traditional model, as befitting a royal lineage.”²⁰ Confirmation of the ten-generation trope at work in the Book of Ruth may be adduced from Boaz’s position, ten-generations from Abraham. Another example is the ten-generation genealogy in I Chronicles 7:20-29, linking Joshua to Ephraim, a tribal chief and warrior,²¹²²²³ and so buttressing Joshua’s noble status.

Wilson stresses the monarchic nature of the ten-generation genre in the Mesopotamian world, “Outside of Israel, genealogies appear only rarely in ancient Near Eastern literature and are attested primarily in Mesopotamian king lists…”²⁴ Hess also addresses the monarchic nature of extra-biblical Ancient Near Eastern genealogies, “almost all the longer genealogies of the Ancient Near East are concerned with the succession of office holders, usually kings…”²⁵ Malamat similarly notes that “the king lists are particularly relevant to the study of only the vertical genealogies in the Bible,” and that the biblical lists are “the product of intentional harmonization and in imitation of the concrete [ANE] genealogical model.”²⁶ In addition, Hartman calls attention to the similarities between the Genesis genealogical tables of chapters 5 and 11 and the Sumerian King List: “Both are indeed listings, and both are divided into two smaller lists by a disruptive flood. The resultant subdivisions are broadly similar; the antediluvian section of each is characterized by incredibly lengthy constituents: reigns up to 43,200 years; human longevity of up to 969 years.”²⁷ Several Sumerian tablets dating to ca. 1800 BCE similarly record ten generations of kings prior to The Great Flood.²⁸

In light of all of the above, the monarchic ANE genealogies provide clear examples of non-linear, dynastic genealogies. The genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 resemble the Ancient Near Eastern genealogies both in terms of their ten-generational structure and the element of incredulous longevity. As such, one might utilize the ANE genealogies as a paradigm for understanding those of Genesis. They too might be understood as a series of points delineating a progression of dynastic development, rather than as a linear chronology.²⁹ Further support for this approach will now be adduced from each of the eleh/zeh toledot subdivisions of the text.

Eleh/Zeh Toledot

The careful subdivision of the entire book of Genesis into a series of ten units, each introduced by the phrase eleh/zeh toledot was noted above. The word toledot is associated with genealogies as well as stories, or histories. Its use has been explained in this sense when introducing narratives that are not genealogical in form.³⁰ The following survey revisits the ten subdivisions of Genesis introduced by the phrase eleh/zeh toledot, tracking the progression of the dynastic theme in each of those subunits.

1. Eleh Toledot Hashamaim Veha’aretz: The Story of Heaven and Earth (2:4-4:26)

God as singular creator of all is established in the opening verse: This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens. The essential theological message of toledot here is the introduction of the monarchic idea as a reflection of God’s sovereignty. The story of creation begins with God as creator and hence sovereign and continues by recounting how that sovereignty extends stage by stage from God to man who was created in his image, through repetition of the term toledot throughout Genesis.

2. Zeh Sefer Toledot Adam: The Genealogy of Adam (5:1-6:8)

Adam’s mandate to work and protect Eden (Gen. 2:15), microcosm of God’s handiwork, elevates his status within the hierarchal framework of creation. The subsequent parade of creatures before Adam who assigns a name to each (Gen. 2:19) confirms his sovereignty, first articulated in Genesis 1:28, God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.

Adam, however, is not granted unrestricted authority. This deceivingly simple story curtails the power that comes with sovereignty,³¹ and contrasts starkly with the Ancient Near East view of kingship, which elevated the king to divine status.³² Adam’s partaking of the forbidden fruit was an expression of his desire to be godlike and free from all constraint, as suggested by the snake’s remark, For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil (Gen. 3: 5).³³

A variety of elements in the Eden story lend support to the overall monarchic tone of the narrative. Majestic trees signifying monarchy are a well attested metaphor in biblical and extra-biblical sources.³⁴ Similarly, the guardian cherubim stationed along the path leading back to Eden, reminiscent of kuribi – divine beings with a human figure and wings – which stood at the gates of Ancient Near Eastern palaces, add to the monarchic texture of the text.³⁵ Finally, the installation of Adam in the Garden of Eden brings to mind the Ancient Near Eastern practice of monarchic investiture in the setting of the palace garden complex.³⁶ The correlation between the palace and the royal garden is also well attested in biblical literature.³⁷ Adam’s eviction from the royal precinct of Eden contrasts sharply with the Ancient Near Eastern doctrine of royal divine right. The message that God holds mankind accountable for their actions, regardless of their status is later conveyed through the Torah mandate that the Israelite king write a Torah scroll to be carried with him at all times.³⁸

3. Eleh Toledot Noah: The Genealogy of Noah (6:9-9:26)

The story of Noah and the Great Flood concludes with Noah’s installation as a sovereign in the sense that all of creation is given over to his stewardship. Noah’s role, like that of Adam before him, is curtailed by restrictions placed on him by God. Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything. “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being (Ge. 9: 1-5).

4. V’eleh Toledot Benei Noah: The Genealogy of the Sons of Noah (10:1-11:9)

The genealogy of Noah and its accounting of the emergence of seventy nations is interrupted by the story of Nimrod, the first figure to be described as having a kingdom (Gen. 10:10).³⁹ Rabbinic literature expands the role of Nimrod, interpreting the term before the LORD, used twice concerning Nimrod in Gen. 10:9 to mean that he “led the entire world in a rebellion against God,”⁴⁰ building on the theme of monarchy to cast him as a rebellious and evil king. Note that Nimrod is also singled out in the parallel list in I Chron. 1:10. It is possible that Nimrod reflects many periods in Mesopotamian history, beginning with the Sumerian period (Erech) and extending through the Neo-Assyrian Empire (Nineveh, Calah). Accordingly, Nimrod has been interpreted as the personification of early Mesopotamian monarchy.⁴¹ Based on this, the midrashic story in TB Pesachim 118a of Nimrod casting Abraham into a furnace is a metaphor for the conflict between the Mesopotamian and Israelite monarchies.

5. Eleh Toledot Shem: The Genealogy of Shem (11:10-26)

The line connecting Shem to Abraham is reinforced by Noah’s blessing to Shem, Praise be to the Lord, the God of Shem (Gen. 9: 26).

6. V’eleh Toledot Terah: The Genealogy of Terah (11:27-25:11)

The attribution of a distinct genealogy to Terah, as opposed to Abraham, is highly counterintuitive.⁴² Whereas Abraham is arguably Genesis’ central character, his father Terah is auxiliary. Furthermore, in Josh. 24:2 we are informed about Terah’s idolatrous practices. However, when we focus on the development of the dynastic idea, it becomes evident that Terah’s role is highly relevant, since Terah’s offspring played a foundational role in the ultimate emergence of the Israelite monarchy, as Rivka, Leah and Rachel are descendants of Terah’s son Nahor. Even Ruth the Moabite, the great-grandmother of King David is descended from Lot, the son of Haran. The emerging Israelite dynasty is foreshadowed by Abraham’s victory in the battle against four Mesopotamian kings (Gen. 15:15). Finally, Abraham’s role as forebear of a future monarchy is formally articulated in God’s promise to him: No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham, for I have made you a father of many nations. I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God (Gen. 17: 5-8).

7. V’eleh Toledot Yishmael: The Genealogy of Yishmael (25:12-18)

Yishmael’s genealogy features twelve Ishmaelite tribal princes/sheikhs and delineates the large swath of territory under his rule.⁴³ This genealogy expresses an alternative branch in the Abrahamic dynasty, comprised of twelve Ishmaelite rulers. The juxtaposition of the toledot of Yishmael with the toledot of Yitzchak accentuates the deliberate contrasting of the two Abrahamic lines.

8. V’eleh Toledot Yitzchak: The Genealogy of Yitzchak (25:19-35:29)

Genesis 25 describes the twins Esau and Jacob, even before their birth in terms that highlight their future role as the progenitors of warring nations, Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated (Gen.25:23). In Beth El, God reaffirms Jacob’s name change to Israel, the term that would represent the nation as well as kingdom, and his role as the father of future monarchs: After Jacob returned from Paddan Aram, God appeared to him again and blessed him. God said to him, “Your name is Jacob, but you will no longer be called Jacob; your name will be Israel. So he named him Israel. And God said to him, “I am El-Shadai; be fruitful and increase in number. A nation and a community of nations will come from you, and kings will be among your descendants (Gen. 35: 9-11).

9. V’eleh Toledot Esau: The Genealogy of Esau (36:1-8; 36:9-42)

The monarchic rivalry between Esau and Jacob is made abundantly clear in this genealogical table: These were the kings who reigned in Edom before any Israelite king reigned Gen. 36: 31. Eight kings and eleven chieftains are named, however the glaring lack of family cohesion at each and every point in the registry points to systematic failure to establish enduring dynasties.⁴⁴

10. Eleh Toledot Yaakov: The Genealogy of Yaakov (37:1-50:26)

The unfolding of the story of Joseph curiously follows the statement And these are the toledot of Jacob…(Gen. 37:2), indicating that Joseph was intended by his father to continue his dynasty. The special garment Joseph receives from his father in Gen. 37:3 is identified elsewhere as representing royalty (2 Sam. 13:18). Note also that within this narrative we see the leadership of Judah and the birth of Peretz, ancestor of King David.⁴⁵

Toldot: Pillars of Dynastic Succession

Through this brief survey of the ten-part division of Genesis we have seen that the evolution of the forebears of the future Israelite dynasty plays a role in each of the book’s eleh/zeh toledot sections.⁴⁶ The thematic development of dynastic evolution throughout Genesis supports the notion that the toledot tables of chapters 5 and 10 also are intended to chart broad lines of dynastic ascension as opposed to direct father-son relationships. The Sages were sensitive to the implicit connection between the development of the Israelite monarchy and the Genesis genealogies and made midrashic connections, such as explaining that Adam gave away seventy years his life to King David,⁴⁷ and that Rebecca dressed Jacob in Esau’s special garments that he got from Nimrod who had appropriated them from Adam.⁴⁸

Conclusion

Like the seven days of creation in Genesis’ opening chapter, the genealogies of ch.5 and 11 are not intended as absolute chronology. Rather, these opening chapters of Genesis serve a theological function. The highly schematic format of the Genesis chronologies promotes the theological point that just as the creation of the world in seven days culminates with the very telos of creation, holiness; the unfolding story of human history also follows a divine plan. The emergence of the Israelite monarchy from a dynastic chain stemming back to Adam is not an accident of time. This is reflected in midrashic literature with the notion of a divine master plan predating the creation and serving as its blueprint.⁴⁹ By presenting the genealogical data in condensed form, this message takes center stage.

There is a final narrative nuance that argues in favor of this suggested reading of the Genesis genealogies. Because of the focus of Genesis 5 and 11 on numerical data, a final tally would be expected, as in the case of the Exodus chronology. Yet this anticipated total is glaringly absent. The hyper focus on the passage of time and the formulaic summing up of lifespans before and after begetting draws attention to this lacuna. This carefully crafted unmet expectation guides the reader to seek a theological, rather than chronological, significance. As such, the text conveys the theological significance of the numerical information while simultaneously obscuring the historical data.⁵⁰

The lack of synchronization between the age of human civilization inferred from the Genesis chronology and the accepted scientific data need not pose a dilemma of cognitive dissonance for the intellectually honest reader. Like the seven-day creation story in chapter one which conveys the principle that creation follows a master plan, the genealogical chapters of Genesis help shape a theological narrative; one that charts the evolution of mankind from its very inception and follows the direction of the dynastic line from which the future Israelite monarchy would ultimately emerge.

The author would like to sincerely thank the editorial staff of JBQ for their careful editing and valuable guidance, which helped refine her writing and improve the overall presentation of this article.