the prerogative of naming it? In Gen. x. 6, the very next place where the word is met, it denotes a person. "And the sons of Ham, Cush and Mizraim, Phut and Canaan." Cush a son of Ham. No other individual of the same name is mentioned in all the Scripture. Must we not conclude that if the land of Cash was named after an individual, as it most undoubtedly was, that individual was Cush, the son of Ham? Here then we have a first glimpse of the geographical position of that land. Ham was in Africa; the increase of his descendants made it necessary for them to spread abroad. Cush, the eldest, took up the march first, and penetrated the hot south country, and his grateful progeny called it Cush.
In Numb. xii. 1, where a compound of the word Cush is used, and which denotes a woman of the land, a Cushite, more and stronger light is afforded us to see the real position of the land. We read there, "And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman (or Cushite) whom he had married, for he had married an Ethiopian woman." Did this Cushite woman belong to that land of Cush which Moses had previously mentioned, and which was encom-
