Adam’s Genderless Lineage—Until Noah, Who Was the First Son

The list of ten antediluvian ancestors (Gen 5) begins with Adam and ends with Noah—with Seth, Enosh, Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, and Lamech in between.^[1]

Among the ancestors, only Noah is described as a begotten son:

‏^{בראשׁית ה:כח} וַיְחִי לֶמֶךְ שְׁתַּיִם וּשְׁמֹנִים שָׁנָה וּמְאַת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בֵּן. ^ה:כט וַיִּקְרָא אֶת שְׁמוֹ נֹחַ...

^{Gen 5:28} And Lamech lived 182 years and begat a son ^5:29 and named him Noah...^[2]

The others are all simply begotten. Thus, for example, the birth notice for Lamech reads:

^{בראשׁית ה:כה} וַיְחִי מְתוּשֶׁלַח שֶׁבַע וּשְׁמֹנִים שָׁנָה וּמְאַת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד אֶת לָמֶךְ.

^{Gen 5:25} When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he begot Lamech.

Why is Noah different?

Anomalies in the Genealogy

The genealogy overall uses formulaic language in a three-part scheme:

I: a lived x years, and begat b;

II: a lived after he begat b y years, and he begot sons and daughters;

III: all the days of a were z years; then he died.^[3]

At three points, however—in the entries for Adam, Enoch, and Lamech (who begets Noah)—this regular structure is disturbed.

Adam begets Seth

The entry for Adam begins with him begetting “in his own likeness,” a grammatically awkward expression, since it lacks a direct object indicating who or what Adam begat:

^{בראשׁית ה׃ג} וַֽיְחִי אָדָם שְׁלֹשִׁים וּמְאַת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בִּדְמוּתוֹ כְּצַלְמוֹ וַיִּקְרָא אֶת שְׁמוֹ שֵׁת.

^{Gen 5:3} And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begat in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth.

Some scholars argue that the verb ילד implies the direct object בן, “son.”^[4] However, in 35 occurrences found in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11:10–26, the direct object to the hiphil verb ילד, “to beget, procreate,” is always included—either the name of the descendent or the expression בנים ובנות, “sons and daughters.”^[5] Nevertheless, many commentators insert the word “son” in their translations—“he begat a son in his own likeness”—without justifying this change.^[6]

Another proposed solution is that the direct object was accidentally omitted by a copyist, who skipped over the word בן the presumed original phrase, בן בדמותו, “a son in his own likeness,” due to the initial ב in both words.^[7] The omission, however, appears in all important text witnesses.^[8] Only one unimportant Greek minuscule manuscript (l/59) contains the reading υἱός “son,” and it is best explained not as representing the original text, but as having been corrected to align with the usual formulation.^[9]

Since the difficult reading is remarkably well attested, the author probably intentionally omitted the word “son”^[10] to indicate that Adam did not procreate a male but gender-neutral being. Further observation gives support to this interpretation.

Adam Created in God’s Image

The author of Genesis 5 may have interpreted God in the Priestly creation account as a gender-neutral being.^[11] On the sixth day, God creates humans in God’s image, male and female:

^{בראשׁית א:כו} וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ.... ^א:כז וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם.

^{Gen 1:26} And God said, “Let us make humanity in our image, after our likeness…” ^1:27 And God created man in His image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

Gender-neutral or androgynous deities are attested in the ancient Near East. In Egypt certain ancestral (creator) gods were conceived of as being androgynous.^[12] In Mesopotamian tradition, Ishtar could have been considered feminine and masculine.^[13]

If God is gender-neutral, then so would Adam be, as he is created in the image of God, and likewise Seth, as he is procreated in the image of Adam.

Adam Begets without a Female Partner

Moreover, a closer look at the genealogy (ch. 5) suggests that in its original form, woman does not yet exist at the time of Adam’s first procreation, meaning that he begets Seth alone, as a “self-procreation,” i.e. without a female partner.^[14] The original genealogy simply followed verse 1a with Adam’s begetting of Seth (v. 3), consistent with the three-part pattern used in the rest of the list:

‏^{בראשׁית ה:א} זֶה סֵפֶר תּוֹלְדֹת אָדָם

^{Gen 5:1a} This is the record of Adam’s line.—

^ה:א בְּיוֹם בְּרֹא אֱלֹהִים אָדָם בִּדְמוּת אֱלֹהִים עָשָׂה אֹתוֹ. ^ה:ב זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בְּרָאָם וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם וַיִּקְרָא אֶת שְׁמָם אָדָם בְּיוֹם הִבָּרְאָם.

^5:1b When God created man, He made him in the likeness of God; ^5:2 male and female He created them. And when they were created, He blessed them and called them Man.—

^ה׃ג וַֽיְחִי אָדָם שְׁלֹשִׁים וּמְאַת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בִּדְמוּתוֹ כְּצַלְמוֹ וַיִּקְרָא אֶת שְׁמוֹ שֵׁת.

^5:3 And Adam lived 130 years, and begat in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth.

In verses 1a and 3, אָדָם is used as a personal name. The announcement about the creation of humanity (vv. 1b–2, indented above) uses אָדָם as a generic term for humanity and refers to a plurality of individuals, male and female, indicating that it is a later insertion into the text.^[15] The addition (vv. 1b–2), which quotes the Priestly creation account (Gen 1:26–28), was likely an attempt to align these two accounts of antediluvian humanity.^[16]

In fact, the author of Genesis 5 already linked his genealogy to the creation account by using the words בִּדְמוּתוֹ כְּצַלְמוֹ, “in his own likeness, after his image” (5:3), in reverse order from the Priestly creation account:

^{בראשׁית א:כו} וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ....

^{Gen 1:26} And God said, “Let us make humanity (ʾadam) in our image, after our likeness…”

This is an example of the ancient Near Eastern scribal technique of quoting earlier sources by inverting the source’s word order (called Seidel’s Law).^[17]

Noah, the First Gendered Ancestor

The fact that Noah is the first and only patriarch to be described as begotten as a son suggests that the patriarchs before him are begotten as gender-neutral beings. Thus, with Noah, a new era of gendered ancestors begins. This transition is emphasized in the parallel structures of the procreation reports at the beginning and end of the list:

Moreover, the subsequent section on Noah includes a second reference to Noah’s male gender:

^{בראשׁית ה׃לב} וַיְהִי נֹחַ בֶּן חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד נֹחַ אֶת שֵׁם אֶת חָם וְאֶת יָפֶת.

^{Gen 5:32} And Noah was “a son” of five hundred years: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

This indication of age with the expression “son” is never used in the preceding verses, which simply state that the ancestor lived (וַיְחִי) x years.^[18] To be sure, within the genealogy, “sons” and “daughters” are born already from the age of Seth:

^{בראשׁית ה:ד} וַיִּהְיוּ יְמֵי אָדָם אַחֲרֵי הוֹלִידוֹ אֶת שֵׁת שְׁמֹנֶה מֵאֹת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת.

^{Gen 5:4} After the birth of Seth, Adam lived 800 years and begot sons and daughters.^[19]

Yet obviously the author sets apart the line of named ancestors—who have neither a male nor a female gender (and should therefore not be labelled “patriarchs”!)—from the ordinary sons and daughters.

This particular gender concept for antediluvian humanity is reminiscent of the Platonic theory set out in Symposium (ca. 385–370 B.C.E.), where Plato also distinguishes three genders for the era of humanity’s beginning (male, female, and androgynous).

^{Plato, Symposium 189d-190a} Once upon a time our anatomy was quite different from what it is now. In the first place there were not merely two sexes as there are now, male and female, but three, and the third was a combination of the other two. This sex itself has disappeared but its name, androgynous, survives.

At that time the androgynous sex was distinct in form and name, having physical features from both the male and the female, but only the name now exists, and that as a term of insult.

Secondly, the form of every person was completely round, with back and sides making a circle, and with four arms, the same number of legs, and two faces exactly alike set on a round neck. There was one head for the two faces (which looked in opposite ways), four ears, two sets of genitals and everything else as you might guess from these particulars.^[20]

In contrast to Plato, however, the biblical author does not use the term “androgynous,” and he refrains from providing any specifics in his description of the particular gender (or: non-gender) of the primordial ancestors. Thus, it is unlikely that the author of Genesis 5 was influenced by Plato. Rather, the biblical author appears to have been inspired by similar conceptions of the antediluvian humans in the ancient Near Eastern traditions.

The Sumerian King List as Vorlage of Genesis 5

The list of ancestors in Genesis is built on a Sumerian text type: the King List, which includes either eight, nine, or ten antediluvian kings. This tradition of antediluvian kings is well attested on clay tablets dating from various periods spanning nearly two thousand years, from the beginning of the 2nd millennium B.C.E. until 165 B.C.E.^[21] Parallels between the King List and Genesis 5 include:

1. Long Reigns and Long Lives

The Sumerian tradition presents the antediluvian kings as having extremely long reigns. For example:

^{Manuscript WB 444} When kingsh[ip] had come down from heaven, kingship (was) at [Eri]du. At Eridu, Alulim <was> king; he reigned 28,800 years; Alalgar reigned 36,000 years; two kings reigned 64,800 years.^[22]

The lives of the biblical antediluvian ancestors are not nearly as long, but are still impossible. Seth, for example, lives 912 years (Gen 5:8), and his son and grandson, Enosh and Kenan, live 905 and 910 years, respectively (vv. 11, 14).

2. The 7^th Ancestor Was Close to His God(s)

Listed in seventh place in some manuscripts of the Sumerian King List is Enmeduranki, who has a close relationship with the gods. A 2^nd millennium B.C.E. Mesopotamian text, depicts the gods Shamash and Adad introducing Enmeduranki to the divine assembly and initiating him in the secrets of divination.^[23]

The entry for the seventh ancestor in Genesis, Enoch, similarly emphasizes his close relationship with God. Deviating from the formulaic language of the list, it twice notes that “Enoch walked with God”:

‏^{בראשׁית ה:כב} וַיִּתְהַלֵּךְ חֲנוֹךְ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים אַחֲרֵי הוֹלִידוֹ אֶת מְתוּשֶׁלַח שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת. ^ה:כג וַיְהִי כָּל יְמֵי חֲנוֹךְ חָמֵשׁ וְשִׁשִּׁים שָׁנָה וּשְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה. ^ה:כד וַיִּתְהַלֵּךְ חֲנוֹךְ אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים וְאֵינֶנּוּ כִּי לָקַח אֹתוֹ אֱלֹהִים.

^{Gen 5:22} Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah 300 years; and he begot sons and daughters. ^5:23 All the days of Enoch came to 365 years. ^5:24 Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, for God took him.

His death notice also differs from the standard וַיָּמֹת, “and he died,” stating instead that לָקַח אֹתוֹ אֱלֹהִים, “God took him.” Finally, Enmeduranki was a king of Sippar,^[24] which was the city of the sun god Shamash.^[25] Enoch is also connected to the sun, through is life span of 365 years, corresponding to the number of days in a year.^[26]

3. Ziusudra and Noah, Sons Who Survived the Flood

In most antediluvian king lists where the last part is preserved, the individual mentioned last is the surviving hero of the flood, Ziusudra.^[27] Ziusudra is also the first member in the King List to stand in a biological relation with his predecessor king; he is presented as “son” of Ubar-Tutu, his forerunner:^[28]

^{Babylonian Royal Chronicle, WB 62} At Šuruppak, Ubar-Tutu, the king reigned 28,600 years; Ziusudra, son of Ubar-Tutu, reigned 36,000 years. Two kings, the dynastic cycle of Šuruppak; they reigned 64,600 years.^[29]

In all existing versions of the list, the members who precede Ziusudra lack an affiliation-related term (similar to “son”). Ziusudra may be specified as “son” of Ubar-Tutu to indicate that he is the first of a gendered line of humans.^[30]

This interpretation corresponds to the creation accounts in the Mesopotamian epics Enuma Elish and Atrahasis, where the first created human, lullû, has no female counterpart. He might have been conceived and understood as a gender-neutral being,^[31] who was formed to free the gods from their labor.

In addition, the foundation figurines of King Ur-Nammu (founder of the Neo-Sumerian 3rd dynasty of Ur, 2112–2095 B.C.E.), may also be associated with lullû. Cast as the image of the reigning king, famous for his building activity, they depict a figure with a smooth face and swollen breasts carrying a basket of earth.^[32] The king’s image may hark back to that of the first human being, who was tasked with taking over the gods’ labor basket.^[33]

In any case, it seems clear that the biblical author of Genesis 5 understood the King List as presenting the antediluvian kings as gender neutral, but depicting the flood survivor as the first ancestor begotten as a son. He adopted this idea, which may indeed underlie the King list, for his own composition and reinforced it by avoiding the grammatically expected word “son” when describing Seth’s begetting.