Canaan will tend to place this still more distinctly before us. In Gen. x. 15-18, we find the following statement: "And Canaan begat Sidon, his first-born, and Heth, and the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgasite, and the Hivite, and the Arkite," &c, &c. These names, most surely, are not African, nor do they indicate African localities. We recognize in Sidon the name of that city, celebrated in history for its commerce and luxury, which stood on the Mediterranean, at the north of Palestine. The Hittites were the descendants of Heth, and lived in nearly the same quarter. The Jebusites were the descendants of Jebus, and their locality was the spot on which Jerusalem was built. And the Amorites, Girgasites, &c, are frequently mentioned in the Old Testament as inhabitants of the land of Canaan.
The profane historical evidence is brief, but clear, weighty, and decisive: it is the evidence of Josephus, who says: "Canaan, the fourth son of Ham, inhabited the country now called Judea, and called it, from his own name, Canaan."[1]
It appears, then, from the evidence adduced, that this curse, in its significance and locality, is altogether Asiatic, and not African. Asia was the field on which the Canaanites moved, and whence their history is derived. The Canaanites of old were Asiatics, that is, so far as residence is concerned; and the mass of their descendants, if existing anywhere, are the modern Syrians.
Again, the above facts and arguments may be opposed by some, by the fact that some of the Canaanites
- ↑ Josephus, "Antiquities of the Jews," B. i. Ch. vi.
