(2) Patriarchal Government. it is impossi ble to speak with any decision respecting the form or forms of government which prevailed before the Deluge. The slight intimations to be found on the subject seem to favor the notion that the particular governments were patriarchal, sub ject to a general theocratical control—God him self manifestly interfering to uphold the good and check the wicked. The right of property was recognized, for Abel and Jabal possessed flocks, and Cain built a city. As ordinances of religion sacrifices certainly existed (Gen, iv:4), and some think that the Sabbath was observed; while some interpret the words, 'Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord' (Gen. iv:26), to signify that public worship then began to be practiced. From Noah's familiarity with the distinction of clean and unclean beasts (Gen. vii:2), it would seem that the Levitical rules on this subject were by no means new when laid down in the code of Moses.
(3) Marriage. Marriage, and all the relations springing from it, existed from the beginning (Gen. ii:23-25) ; and although polygamy was known among the antediluvians (Gen. iv :19), it was most probably unlawful ; for it must have been obvious that, if more than one wife had been necessary for a man, the Lord would not have confined the first man to one woman. The marriage of the sons of Seth with the daughters of Cain appears to have been prohibited, since the consequence of it was that universal depravity in the family of Seth so forcibly expressed in this short passage, flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth' (Gen. vi:12). This sin, described Orientally as an intermarriage of 'the sons of God' with 'the daughters of men' (Gen. vi :2), appears to have been in its results one of the grand causes of the Deluge; for if the family of Seth had remained pure and obedient to God, he would doubtless have spared the world for their sake, as he would have spared Sodom and Gomorrah had ten righteous men been found there. and as he would have spared his own
people, the Jews, had they not corrupted them selves by intermarriages with the heathen.
Light is thrown upon the above statement made by Kitto, in Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments, by Prof. Sayce, pp. 26. 27. He says: "Like cherub, Adam also was a Babylonian word. It has the general sense of 'man,' and is used in this sense both in Hebrew and in Assy rian. But, as in Hebrew it has come to be the proper name of the first man, so, ton, in the old Babylonian legends, the 'Adatnites' were 'the white race' of Semitic descent, who stood in marked contrast to 'the black heads' or Accadians of primitive Babylonia. Originally, however, it was this dark race itself that claimed to have been 'the men' whom the god Merodach created; and it was not until after the Semitic conquest of Chaldea that the children of Adamu or Adam were supposed to denote the white Semitic pop ulation. I fence it is that the dark race contin ued to the last to be called the Adamatu or 'red skins.' which a popular etymology connected with Adam/ 'man.' Sir II. Rawlinson has suggested a parallel between the dark and white races of Babylonia and the 'sons of God' and 'daughters of men' of Genesis. Adam, we are told, was 'the son of God' (Luke iii :38). But nothing similar to what we read in the sixth chapter of Genesis has as yet been met with among the cuneiform records, and though these speak of giant heroes, like Ncr and Ftanna, who lived be fore the Flood, we know nothing as yet as to their parentage."