Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/212

 is assumed that Yahwe's presence is confined to the cultivated land; in other words, that He is the God of settled life, agricultural and pastoral. To conclude, however, that He is the God of Canaan in particular (cf. 1 Sa. 26$19$), is perhaps an over-hasty inference. (2) The reign of right is coextensive with Yahwe's sphere of influence: the outer desert is the abode of lawlessness; justice does not exist, and human life is cheap. That Cain, the convicted murderer, should use this plea will not appear strange if we remember the conditions under which such narratives arose.

15. What follows must be understood as a divinely appointed amelioration of Cain's lot: although he is not restored to the amenities of civilised life, Yahwe grants him a special protection, suited to his vagrant existence, against indiscriminate homicide.—Whoso kills Ḳayin (or 'whenever any one kills Ḳ'), it (the murder) shall be avenged sevenfold] by the slaughter of seven members of the murderer's clan. See below.—appointed a sign for Ḳayin] or set a mark on Ḳ. The former is the more obvious rendering of the words; but the latter has analogies, and is demanded by the context.

The idea that the sign is a pledge given once for all of the truth of Yahwe's promise, after the analogy of the prophetic, is certainly consistent with the phrase  : cf. e.g. Ex. 15$25$, Jos. 24$25$ with Ex. 10$2$ etc. So some authorities in Ber. R., IEz. Tu. al. But Ex. 4$11a$ proves that it may also be something attached to the person of Cain (Calv. Ber. R., De. and most); and that may denote a mark appears from Ex. 13$9. 16$ etc. Since the sign is to serve as a warning to all and sundry who might attempt the life of Cain, it is obvious that the second view alone meets the requirements of the case: we must think of something about Cain, visible to all the world, marking him out as one whose death would be avenged sevenfold. Its purpose is protective and not penal: that it brands him as a murderer is a natural but mistaken idea.—It is to be observed that in this part of the narrative Ḳayin is no longer a personal but a collective name. The clause (not, or ) has frequentative force (exx. below), implying that the act might be repeated many times on members of the tribe Ḳayin: similarly the sevenfold vengeance assumes a kin-circle to which the murderer belongs. See, further, p. 112.

necessary to avoid confusion between subj. and obj.—15. ] (GΣΘ) implies : so SV; but this would require to be followed by .—] see G-K. § 116 w; cf. Ex. 12$15$, Nu. 35$30$, 1 Sa. 2$13$ 3$11$ etc.—] The subj. might be (as v.$24$) or (more probably) impers. (Ex. 21$21$), certainly not the murderer of Cain.—] = '7 times': G-K. § 134 r. Vns.: G ; Aq.