What do you think?
Rate this book
Quantum Books
The Mark of Cain
For few verses in the Bible is the relationship between scripture and the artistic imagination more intriguing than for the conclusion of Genesis 4:15: And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, that whosoever found him should not kill him. What was the mark of Cain? The answers set before us in this sensitive study by art historian Ruth Mellinkoff are sometimes poignant, frequently surprising. An early summary of rabbinic answers, for examples runs as follows: R. Judah said: He caused the orb of the sun to shine on his account. Said R. Nehemiah to him: For that wretch He would cause the orb of the sun to shine! Rather, he caused leprosy to break out on him.... Rab said: He gave him a dog. Abba Jose said: He made a horn grow out of him. Rab said: He made him an example to murderers. R. Hanin said: He made him an example to penitents. R. Levi said in the name of R. Simeon b. Lakish: He suspended judgment until the flood came and swept him away. After a review of such early Jewish and Christian exegesis, Mellinkoff divides physical interpretations on the mark into three groups: A Mark on Cain's Body, A Movement of Cain's Body, and A Blemish Associated with Cain's Body. Her discussion of these groups is the heart of her study and offers its richest examples of interplay among medieval art and imaginative literature, on the one hand, and biblical exegesis, on the other. Thus in one remarkable tour de force, she shows us how a poetic misprision of Genesis 4:24 - Sevenfold vengeance will be taken for Cain: but for Lamech seventy times sevenfold - made Lamech the murderer of Cain; how there then grew up the legend that Lamech, a hunter, had killed Cain when he mistook him for an animal; how from that, the notion that the mark of Cain was a horn or horns on Cain's head arose (in the poignant formulation of the Tanhuma Midrash: Oh father, you have killed something that resembles a man except it has a horn on its forehead!); and how from that, in the maturity of the legend, there flowered Cornish drama, Irish saga, and stunning reliefs of a dying, antlered Cain in the cathedrals of Vezelay and Autun. Like Genesis 4:15 itself, 'The Mark of Cain' is suggestive rather than comprehensive. Concluding chapters on Intentionally Distorted Interpretations of Cain's Mark and Cain's Mark and the Jews bring the history down to our own day, but Mellinkoff does not claim to have said the last word on the subject. Her achievement is neither documentary nor exegetical but rather demonstrative: she shows us with brilliant economy how the artistic imagination functioned in a world whose intellectual definition was a closed canonical text.
- GenresNonfiction
190 pages, Paperback
First published December 30, 1980
1 person is currently reading
28 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
April 29, 2012
The story of Cain found in Genesis 4 is very short and highly ambiguous. It brings up more questions than it answers. Why did God accept Abel's offering, but not Cain's? Did Cain repent of his murder of Abel? Why did God protect Cain from being murdered? Why did Cain fear being murdered when the only other humans were his parents? How did Cain eventually die? Or did he? What was the mark of Cain?
Numerous theologians from antiquity, the Middle Ages, and modern times have attempted to fill in the blanks with their own interpretations. According to Ambrose and other commentators, the mark (or sign) of Cain was a protective symbol to keep Cain alive so that he had an opportunity to repent. However, Jerome and others assert that the reason God kept Cain alive was to torment him further and Basil considered the mark of Cain as a kind of scarlet letter proclaiming his crime rather than a protective symbol.
The Genesis Rabbah (Bereshith 22:12) gives multiple theories as to what the sign of Cain was: An event such as the Lord causing the sun to shine or suspending judgement until the Flood, a disfigurement such as giving Cain leprosy or a horn growing out of his head, and making Cain himself a sign to other murderers or penitents. One rabbi even supposes the Lord gave Cain a dog as a bodyguard to prevent others from murdering him.
In Revelation, marks on the forehead are used both for protection of the righteous (7:3, 9:4), and as a mark to identify those who are evil (14:9-10). The mark on the forehead is also a protection in Ezekial 9:4-6, and Aaron, the brother of Moses is instructed to wear a mark on his forehead (Exodus 28:36-38). Along these same lines, followers of Yahweh are instructed to wear a mark in Deuteronomy 6:8, 11:18.
Psuedo-Jonathan Targum to Genesis 4:15 states the mark placed upon Cain was one of the letters of God's name YHWH placed on his face. The Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer tells us that the mark was one of the letters of the alphabet placed on Cain's arm. The Zohar also states that God put one of the letters of the alphabet on Cain.
The most popular interpretation of Cain's mark for most of Christian history, cited by some early Christian works, such as The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, and the writings of Bede, state that Cain's trembling and moaning is the sign.
Others say that the mark of Cain was a physical deformity. In the Irish Lebor Gabála Érenn, the mark of Cain was the inability to grow a beard. Whereas the Irish Saltair na Rann states that the mark was a lump on his forehead. In the Saltair na Rann, Cain later dies when a tree hits him on the lump in a freak accident. Another account of Cain's death is found in Jubilees 4:31 where he dies from his house falling down on top of him. One of the versions of The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Benjamin 7 states that Cain died in the Flood.
The most popular deformity to assign to Cain throughout the centuries is the growth of a horn, which makes his descent Lamech mistake him for a wild animal and shoot him with an arrow (Midrash Tanhuma, on Genesis 11, Jasher 2:26-31). In the Armenian book called The History of Cain and Abel, the horn or horns cry out with a loud voice that Cain murdered his brother wherever he went. A Cornish play Gwreans an Bys gives Cain horns, but also makes him hairy.
Although it's more common for black skin to be the sign of Ham's curse (for seeing the nakedness of his father Noah), black skin has also been thought to be the mark of Cain. Midrash Rabbah Genesis 22:6 says Cain's face was blackened when God rejected his sacrifice. The Armenian History of Cain and Abel says God was so mad at Cain He beat his face with hail that was blackened like coal, and thus Cain's face became black. This tradition continues in Mormonism today (Moses 7:8,22, Abraham 1:22-24, Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConkie, Mormonism and the Negro by John Stewart, The Church and the Negro by John Lund). (As this book was written in 1981, Mellinkoff does not mention the current Mormon folk belief that Cain is in fact Bigfoot, an idea derived from the description of Cain found in The Miracle of Forgiveness by Spencer W. Kimball.)
Mellinkoff also mentions a couple non-theological interpreations of Cain's sign. The medieval play, the Mactacio Abel, transforms the story of Cain into a satire on fifteenth-century legal practices with God's protection of Cain being compared to a King's pardon, which was much abused during the time. Demian by Hermann Hesse interprets the sign of Cain as being a certain expression on his face indicating intelligence and boldness and an unwillingness to go along with the herd.
Early Christians such as Ambrose, Augustine and Bede, associated Cain with the Jews and compared Cain's killing of Abel with the Jews killing Christ. The sign of Cain in this instance is that the Jewish race will never be killed, but forever be cursed to wander the earth. Isidore of Seville says that the sign of Cain is circumcision specifically, an idea several later Church figures adopted. In 1215, Pope Innocent III decreed that Jews wear clothing to distinguish them from Christians, making the sign of Cain literal, a practice that continued sporadically throughout the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and Nazi Germany.
Numerous theologians from antiquity, the Middle Ages, and modern times have attempted to fill in the blanks with their own interpretations. According to Ambrose and other commentators, the mark (or sign) of Cain was a protective symbol to keep Cain alive so that he had an opportunity to repent. However, Jerome and others assert that the reason God kept Cain alive was to torment him further and Basil considered the mark of Cain as a kind of scarlet letter proclaiming his crime rather than a protective symbol.
The Genesis Rabbah (Bereshith 22:12) gives multiple theories as to what the sign of Cain was: An event such as the Lord causing the sun to shine or suspending judgement until the Flood, a disfigurement such as giving Cain leprosy or a horn growing out of his head, and making Cain himself a sign to other murderers or penitents. One rabbi even supposes the Lord gave Cain a dog as a bodyguard to prevent others from murdering him.
In Revelation, marks on the forehead are used both for protection of the righteous (7:3, 9:4), and as a mark to identify those who are evil (14:9-10). The mark on the forehead is also a protection in Ezekial 9:4-6, and Aaron, the brother of Moses is instructed to wear a mark on his forehead (Exodus 28:36-38). Along these same lines, followers of Yahweh are instructed to wear a mark in Deuteronomy 6:8, 11:18.
Psuedo-Jonathan Targum to Genesis 4:15 states the mark placed upon Cain was one of the letters of God's name YHWH placed on his face. The Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer tells us that the mark was one of the letters of the alphabet placed on Cain's arm. The Zohar also states that God put one of the letters of the alphabet on Cain.
The most popular interpretation of Cain's mark for most of Christian history, cited by some early Christian works, such as The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, and the writings of Bede, state that Cain's trembling and moaning is the sign.
Others say that the mark of Cain was a physical deformity. In the Irish Lebor Gabála Érenn, the mark of Cain was the inability to grow a beard. Whereas the Irish Saltair na Rann states that the mark was a lump on his forehead. In the Saltair na Rann, Cain later dies when a tree hits him on the lump in a freak accident. Another account of Cain's death is found in Jubilees 4:31 where he dies from his house falling down on top of him. One of the versions of The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Benjamin 7 states that Cain died in the Flood.
The most popular deformity to assign to Cain throughout the centuries is the growth of a horn, which makes his descent Lamech mistake him for a wild animal and shoot him with an arrow (Midrash Tanhuma, on Genesis 11, Jasher 2:26-31). In the Armenian book called The History of Cain and Abel, the horn or horns cry out with a loud voice that Cain murdered his brother wherever he went. A Cornish play Gwreans an Bys gives Cain horns, but also makes him hairy.
Although it's more common for black skin to be the sign of Ham's curse (for seeing the nakedness of his father Noah), black skin has also been thought to be the mark of Cain. Midrash Rabbah Genesis 22:6 says Cain's face was blackened when God rejected his sacrifice. The Armenian History of Cain and Abel says God was so mad at Cain He beat his face with hail that was blackened like coal, and thus Cain's face became black. This tradition continues in Mormonism today (Moses 7:8,22, Abraham 1:22-24, Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConkie, Mormonism and the Negro by John Stewart, The Church and the Negro by John Lund). (As this book was written in 1981, Mellinkoff does not mention the current Mormon folk belief that Cain is in fact Bigfoot, an idea derived from the description of Cain found in The Miracle of Forgiveness by Spencer W. Kimball.)
Mellinkoff also mentions a couple non-theological interpreations of Cain's sign. The medieval play, the Mactacio Abel, transforms the story of Cain into a satire on fifteenth-century legal practices with God's protection of Cain being compared to a King's pardon, which was much abused during the time. Demian by Hermann Hesse interprets the sign of Cain as being a certain expression on his face indicating intelligence and boldness and an unwillingness to go along with the herd.
Early Christians such as Ambrose, Augustine and Bede, associated Cain with the Jews and compared Cain's killing of Abel with the Jews killing Christ. The sign of Cain in this instance is that the Jewish race will never be killed, but forever be cursed to wander the earth. Isidore of Seville says that the sign of Cain is circumcision specifically, an idea several later Church figures adopted. In 1215, Pope Innocent III decreed that Jews wear clothing to distinguish them from Christians, making the sign of Cain literal, a practice that continued sporadically throughout the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and Nazi Germany.
Read
April 7, 2024more of a laundry list of interpretations than a coherent book tbh
February 22, 2026
Interesting discussion on what was the mark of Cain
December 21, 2013
This book had appeal to me on more than one level. Having a tattoo (my favorite one!) which is based on the Cain & Abel story, read through Herman Hesse's Demian, I was really interested in a deeper understanding of the enigmatic "mark" in Genesis.
Well, I was a little disappointed, but by no fault of the author. I think it's become safe to say that in our time we are never going to know what that crazy "mark of Cain" really meant when it was written. What the book provides is a historical survey of how the story has been interpreted among various times, cultures and religious traditions. Sadly, there's not a whole lot else to the book.
Well, I was a little disappointed, but by no fault of the author. I think it's become safe to say that in our time we are never going to know what that crazy "mark of Cain" really meant when it was written. What the book provides is a historical survey of how the story has been interpreted among various times, cultures and religious traditions. Sadly, there's not a whole lot else to the book.
March 28, 2016
What an interesting historical survey of divergent interpretative traditions with opposing viewpoints. Who can explain the mark (is it a seal or a stain?) of Cain? Will it remain perpetually shrouded in dark mystery? Will art and faith flashlight the way?
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews