592
CHAPTERS
FROM
THE
BIBLICAL
LAW.
THE MURDER OF ABEL. BY DAVID WERNER AMRAM. A LTHOUGH, according to the traditions [ of the Book of Genesis, the death penalty for murder—"He who sheddeth the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed" (Gen. IX, 6)—was not formally enunciated until the postdiluvian period, yet it seems that this was the penalty inflicted in the antediluvian period: for Cain, after having slain his brother, Abel, feared that someone would put him to death (Gen. IV, 14). In considering the ancient Biblical tra ditions no great stress is to be placed upon their historical accuracy. The terms ante diluvian and postdiluvian literally refer to Noah's flood, which is supposed to have covered the earth, but which was, in all probability, only a local inundation. The i eference to persons who might kill Cain for the murder of his brother Abel implies the existence of others beside the family of Adam and Eve; and yet the latter are supposed to be the parents of all the human race. As has been stated in these articles the primitive traditions of the Hebrews are of value, not as historical records, but because they reflect ancient thought and life. In the fourth chapter of Genesis we have recorded the first murder case. In the char acteristic terse manner of the Hebrew nar rators the facts of the crime, the motive, the trial, and the sentence are all given in a few phrases, but given with such clearness as to enable us, with little effort, to reconstruct the entire incident. Cain and Abel were brothers, children of the first man and woman. Abel was a shepherd and Cain was an agriculturist. It is well known that sheep herding and agricul ture were the first occupations of civilized men. In the early and ruder state hunting
was the only source of livelihood. The fact that Cain and Abel are known as herdsman and farmer in this story reflects ancient views concerning the antiquity of these occupa tions. There is something suggestive, also, in the fact that Cain killed Abel. This veils a great sociological truth, and translated into modern language, may be taken to mean that the farmer supplanted the shepherd. "And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord : and Abel he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof; and the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering, but unto Cain and his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell." Here appears the motive for the crime that followed. Cain's offering, although apparently brought in good faith, was not received with favor; the offering of his brother Abel was so received, and the anger that was thereupon kindled in the breast of Cain eventually led to the crime. The gradual perfection of the plan of revenge in the mind of Cain is indicated in the two phrases wherein the Lord says to Cain, "Why art thou wroth; why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted, and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door, and unto thee shall be its desire; but thou shalt rule over it" The feeling of anger is dramatically com pared to a wild beast lying at the door, and, as the wild beast at the door, having once gained a partial entrance, can hardly be restrained, so anger turns into hatred, and hatred suggests revenge, which gradually overpowers the man's better nature and prompts him to crime. It is only when the door is kept shut that "thou shalt rule over
