| Ham, Son Of Noah |
Article Index for Ham |
Website Links For Ham |
Information AboutHam, Son Of Noah |
|
HAM IN THE BIBLE Traditionally, it is held that Ham was one of the (probably literally meaning '' The Two Lands ''), and was the name of one of Ham's sons. The Egyptian word for Egypt was '' Khem '', plausibly the origin of the name ''Ham'', or ''vice versa'', according to Sound Change between languages. The names of Ham's other children correspond to regions within Egyptian influence - Kush , Canaan , and Phut (probably identical with the ''Pitu'', a Libyan tribe, though often confused with Punt , an ancient name for Benadir ). According to ''Genesis'' 9:20–25, Noah began to raise Grapes after the Flood , and became drunk one day. While drunk, he lay naked in his Tent . Ham saw his father naked, and told his brothers Shem and Japheth about it. Shem and Japheth went into the tent with their faces away from him, and covered him. When Noah awoke, he realized what had had been done to him, and cursed Canaan, son of Ham, to be the servants of Shem and Japheth. {Link without Title} The extent of the significance of this passage is debated, but the simplest interpretation considers uncovering the Nakedness of his father to be a great Taboo , and the inaction of Ham (who chose instead to publicize and perhaps make light of the situation) to be what led Noah to deem Ham's judgement inferior to that of his more modest brothers. The statement by Noah "Cursed be Canaan" is thus interpreted by some as presaging a fatefully undesirable trait of ''immodesty'' that destined Ham's heir Canaan to be held low in society. Taking into account other uses of the phrase "...the nakedness of..." in Hebrew writings, and the fact that Noah ''knew what had been done to him'' - apparently something highly noticeable-- suggests it to be euphemistic Innuendo , a reference to a sexual act. Thus the act of "uncovering the nakedness" of the patriarch, performed without consent, constituted a great crime. Some interpreters add to this that Canaan, not Ham, was the object of the curse, since the curse was a result of Ham's sexual activity that had also resulted in the birth of Canaan, his youngest son. The ), he took her and lay with her and defiled her.” Thus this explanation deduces that similar abuse must have happened each time that the Bible uses the same language. (See also Genesis Rabbah 36:7; Leviticus Rabbah 17:5.) This Curse was likely connected to the conquest of Canaan by Israel . From a Judaeo-Christian standpoint, the conquest of Canaan is an instance of fulfilled prophecy. From a secular point of view, it is considered an example of later Hebrew writers attempting to justify the conquest of Canaan by retroactively cursing their progenitor. Some argue that the curse parallels the blessing God grants to Abraham and his descendants, in that the promised land to be delivered to the descendants of Abraham's grandson Jacob , was to be taken away from the descendants of Ham's son Canaan. The conquest of Canaan and the curse, according to the Book Of Jubilees , are attributed, rather, to Canaan's steadfast refusal to join his elder brothers in Ham's allotment beyond the Nile , and instead "squatting" in the inheritance of Shem, on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean , in the region later promised to Abraham. A few have used the Curse Of Canaan to justify Slavery , and later Discrimination against Blacks , arguing that Ham was the one who actually committed the sin, and that since he is the father of the black race, all of his descendants (not just those of his son Canaan) were cursed. It has also been argued that the curse of Ham from Gen. 9:22, the passage in which he sees the nakedness of his father, means that Ham had actually had sexual intercourse with Noah's wife. There is evidence for this in a parallel passage in Leviticus 20:11 ''The man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness''. This may explain, some argue, why Noah cursed Canaan, the yet to be offspring from Ham and Noah's wife before it was ever born. THE EXISTENCE OF HAM Creationist scholars of mythology hold that some early civilizations came to worship humans deified as gods in the generations after the flood, perhaps owing to the extraordinary longevity of the first few generations after leaving the ark. Minimalist scholarship holds a parallel view, that many (but not all) early gods (or deified humans, e.g. Herakles ) are representative of personified Archetype s of races, i.e., their family trees being codified descriptions of the inter-relatedness of each race and tribe (with some of the older/earlier generations being more speculative). Both of these distinct viewpoints agree that there is a connection between the family tree of the characters (whether gods or men) and that of tribes and races (although the extent of that connection varies, both amongst the characters in question, and amongst the scholars). In the minimalist view, the early tribal name either became seen by later generations as the name of the "old ones", and thus gradually evolved into that of a god, or else was deliberately transformed into the name of a god, demi-god or hero, for the purpose of making it easier to tell the tale of a tribe representatively. However, minimalists generally prefer to avoid giving any credence to accounts of tribes being named for eponymous ancestors. Counter arguments are often put forward that the connection is only between the Egyptian word and the typical ''modern'' Pronunciation of Hebrew ח as /χ/ ("kh") rather than /ḥ/ (as was the case with Biblical Hebrew , and suggest that the appearance is lessened with the original Hebrew חם ''Ḥam'' considered as Northwest Semitic /ḥ/ (such as in Hebrew, Phoenician , and Syriac ). Further, ''Kam'', the version of the name in Ge'ez —a South Semitic language—is seemingly borrowed from Biblical Hebrew ''via'' the Hebrew Bible and perhaps does not reflect a native derivation of the word. However, the conversion between ''Khem'' and ''Ham'' corresponds with the widely occurring Phonological Sound Change of ''Kh'' into ''X'', the Voiceless Velar Fricative (the ''ch'' in '' Loch '' rather than the ''X'' in '' Exam ''), that often happens over time, or during transcription from one language into another (e.g. '' Xerxes '' is the ancient Greek attempt at spelling the name ''Khshayārsha''). In the 19th Century , there was an erroneous Transcription of the Egyptian for '' Min '' as ''ḫm'' ("khem"), purely by coincidence. Since this ''Khem'' was worshipped most significantly in Akhmim , the separate identity of ''Khem'' was reinforced, ''Akhmim'' being understood as simply a corruption of ''Khem''. However, ''Akhmim'' is a corruption of ''ḫm-mnw'', meaning ''Shrine of Min'', via the Demotic form ''šmn''. The existence of a god named ''Khem'' was later understood as a faulty reading, but unfortunately it had already been enshrined in books written by E. A. Wallis Budge —now out of Copyright and widely reprinted. Thus this error still finds a home among some Egyptologists, who often use it to identify Ham with the god Khem or Chem, in addition to the identification of Ham by the Greeks as the Titan Cronos . (''See the article'' Min (god) ''for more details.'') Nethertheless, since Khem (meaning black) was normally used to described the fertile soils by the Nile, it was sometimes used as an epithet for Min, as the god of fertility. Since Khem was also an Egyptian name for Egypt (precisely because it described the soil of the Nile valley), there is also an association with Ham, who represented the forefather of the north-east African nations including Egypt. Ham could plausibly be a name derived from Khem (Egypt), or vice versa, via sound change, due to the change in language between Egyptian and Hebrew, corresponding to the well known phonological change of /k/ into /kh/ into /x/ (voiceless velar fricative) into /h/. SEE ALSO: |
|
|