'sons' of Kush include Arabian peoples is quite naturally explained by the assumption that the writer believed these Arabs to be of African descent. As a matter of fact, intercourse, involving intermixture of blood, has at all times been common between the two shores of the Red Sea; and indeed the opinion that Africa was the original cradle of the Semites has still a measure of scientific support (see Barton, OS1, 6 ff., 24).—See, further, on v.8 (p. 207 f.).
(2) (
Hebrew characters) ((Greek characters))] the Heb. form of the common Semitic name of
Egypt (TA, Miṣṣari, Miṣri, Mašri, Mizirri; Ass. [from 8th and 7th
cent.] Muṣur; Bab. Miṣir; Syr. (Syriac characters); Ar. Miṣr). Etymology and
meaning are uncertain: Hommel's suggestion (Gesch. 530; cf. Wi. AOF,
i. 25) that it is an Ass. appellative = 'frontier,' is little probable. The
dual form of Heb. is usually explained by the constant distinction in
the native inscrs. between Upper and Lower Egypt, though (Hebrew characters) is
found in connexions (Is. 1111, Jer. 4415) which limit it to Lower Eg.; and
many scholars now deny that the termination is a real dual (Mey.
GA, i. § 42, An.; Jen. ZDMG, xlviii. 439).—On the vexed question of a
N Arabian Muṣri, it is unnecessary to enter here. There may be
passages of OT where that view is plausible, but this is not one of
them; and the idea of a wholesale confusion between Eg. and Arabia
on the part of OT writers is a nightmare which it is high time to be
quit of.
(3) (Hebrew characters) ((Greek characters), but elsewhere (Greek characters))] mentioned 6 times (incl. G of
Is. 6619) in OT, as a warlike people furnishing auxiliaries to Egypt
(Nah. 39, Jer. 469, Ezk. 305) or Tyre (Ezk. 2710) or the host of Gog (385),
and frequently associated with (Hebrew characters) and (Hebrew characters). The prevalent view has been
that the Lybians, on the N coast of Africa W of Egypt, are meant (G,
Jos. al.), although Nah. 39 and probably Ezk. 305 (G) show that the
two peoples were distinguished. Another identification, first proposed
by Ebers, has recently been strongly advocated: viz. with the Pwnt of
Eg. monuments, comprising 'the whole African coast of the Red Sea'
(W. M. Müller, AE, 114 ff., and DB, iv. 176 f.; Je. 263 f.). The only serious
objection to this theory is the order in which the name occurs, which
suggests a place further north than Egypt (Jen. ZA, x. 325 ff.).
(4) (Hebrew characters) ((Greek characters))] the eponym of the pre-Israelitish inhabitants of
Palestine, is primarily a geographical designation. The etymology is
doubtful; but the sense 'lowland' has still the best claim to acceptance
(see, however, Moore, PAOS, 1890, lxvii ff.). In Eg. monuments the
name, in the form pa-Ka-n-'-na (pa is the art.), is applied to the strip
of coast from Phœnicia to the neighbourhood of Gaza; but the ethnographic
derivative extends to the inhabitants of all Western Syria
(Müller, AE, 205 ff.). Similarly in TA Tablets Kinaḫḫi, Kinaḫna, etc.,
stand for Palestine proper (KAT3, 181), or (according to Jast. EB, 641)
the northern part of the seacoast.—The fact that Canaan, in spite of its
geographical situation and the close affinity of its language with Heb.,
is reckoned to the Hamites is not to be explained by the tradition (Her. i.
1, vii. 89, etc.) that the Phœnicians came originally from the Red Sea;
for that probably implies no more than that they were connected with
