Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1882-05-26

AGES OF TnE PArRlARCns.
On q full examination of The
question of patriarchal Longevity
the disparity Of their ages te
those Of latter times disappears. A
very slight error in the translation
OF the Hebrew numbers had led
to oil this apparent disparity.
The age Of the antediluvians was
not to exceed 12O years. Genesis
VI, 3: And the Lord said, Nv
spirit shall not always strive with
man, for that he is also flesh, vet
his days shall be a hundred and
twenty years. This was the reg
ular good old age of man, with
special variations, both before and
for some time after the days of
Abraham.
In reading concrete numbers
the Hebrews gave the large num-
bers first, thus: Ninety and seven
for 81, forty and seven for AZ.
The reversal of this rule in the
translation Of Genesis v. SIS, as
an illustration, will show the error
in ali similar cases. Adam lived
hundred and thirty years, and
begat son, etc. This is correct,
according to the rule. Seth was
born when Adam was $50 years
old, and was his last child. But
If the rule were here reversed, as
1T is in the authorized version, in
the fifth verse, it would read thus:
Adam lived thirty hundred years,
and begat son! This shocked
the consciousness Of the Christian
translator, and be was driven to
the true rule of the Hebrew uses
in case Of coucrete numerals.
In the fifth verse We have the
force Of the violated rule, thus:
And all the days that Adam lived
were 630 years, and be died!' A..
V. The true reading of the rule
would be, and all the days Of
Adam, which he lived were a
hundred years, and thirty and
nine years, and he died, making
the entire age of Adam 100 years,
instead Of 939 years.
1t will be seen, on examination,
that concrete nnmeral adjectives
in Hebrew, as in other languages,
agree in number with their nouns.
In the case cited in the A. v.
the nine is made to agree with
hundred in the singular and not
with years in the plural. The
error is seen at glance, for the
difference between mine hundred
years is two great to be over
looked in any careful translation
Of q sacred book. The translator
assumed that nine here agreed
with hundred, when it had no
such arrangement; hundred in the
text is itself a concrete numeral,
and separately agrees with years.
At the date of this writing, mine
hundred or any number Of hun
dreds above one, without repeti
ton or circumlocution. There
were none of the masoretic points
in use. In the case of the age OF
Terrah, the father Of Abraham,
the translators have made the at.
tempt to make two hundred out
of one hundred in the word ma.
thin, used in the plural as it
might be to agree with years, thus
making Terah 205 instead of Jos
wears old at his death; holding
the theory that the word mae Cor
1907 would in the plural, mathim.
make 200. This 10 contrary to
all rule. The Hebrews could, by
pluralizing numeral less than
10, add tenfold to the unit, thus.
hemosh, 5; liemoshim, so. This
rule, applied to the cause Of
Terrah the historic record con
clusively contradicts the transla.
ton, aud hence demonstrates the
rale that pluralizing 100 does not
in the Hebrew toague, make 2tN
while as to the numerals between
| aud 10 the rule might apply
thus: Shelesh, 3; sheleshim, 50
and in like manner To 100. Will
these corrections, referring to thu
patriarchs before the Noachial
delnge, the article of M. de Sol
aville would show . wounderfu
uniformity in the age of mar
since the dawn of history
| From Adam to the flood tn
ages would read as in the tabl'
below, subject to a few uncer
tainties in the numbers below loo
as the numerals are sometime
Ipluralized tor the purpose o
agreement when thsy were in
creased tenfold. The cases ar
not always certain; The table ]
added, giving the ages Of each .
; the time of his death.
i /. Adam, 1879 years and nc
$50 years.
2. Seth, lSl years and nc
9l2 years.
3. Enos, la years and nc