Such evidence as there may be that Ham did take to wife some particular
female of the race of Cain, will also be the most positive evidence that
their descendants are one and the same.
Let it be noticed that, immediately preceding the account of the flood,
and the causes which led to that judgment upon the earth, we are
presented with the genealogical tables of the families of Cain and Seth,
down to that period; and that these tables terminate with Ham, in that
of Seth, and in the female Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, in the
genealogy of Cain. Ham and Naamah are thus placed upon a parallel, so
far as it regards these tables.
It surely is not difficult to perceive the cause why, in the table of
Seth, the genealogical line ending in the family of Noah was selected;
but, if the entire race of Cain were to be destroyed by the flood, why
was the particular line ending in Naamah chosen? Why was any such table
of his race required? Beside Eve, the two wives of Lamech and this
Naamah are the only females whose names are given before the flood? If
the entire race of Cain was destroyed, how was the name of Naamah of
more importance for us to know than that of thousands of the same race?
Why has God sent these facts down to us? Has he ever revealed to us any
thing unnecessary for us to know? Is it consistent with his character to
do so? There have been, through all time since the deluge, traditions
and legends among the Arabians, and many other Asiatic tribes, that this
Naamah and her posterity continued upon the earth subsequent to that
period. We give in substance a tale of traditionary lore among the
Eastern nations, found in the Book Zohar, and referred to by Sale, page
87. They believe that at an extremely ancient time, there was an
inferior race of beings, whom they call “jin,” (query, a cognate of ינה
_yana_ or _jana_, to cast down, destroyed, used in a bad sense, to cast
away;) that this race was created from, by, or someway connected with
fire, heat, &c., either in their original state or in an acquired
condition; that they eat, drink, propagate, and die, and are subjects of
salvation or reprobation, like men; that they inhabited the world for
ages before Adam was created; that they fell at length into general
corruption; that, therefore, Eblis (one of the names of the devil) drove
them into a remote part of the earth, and confined them there; but,
however, some of their race remained; and that Tahmunah, (the Noah of
the Hebrew Scriptures,) one of the ancient kings of Persia, drove them
into the mountains of _Kâf_.
Another version of the same legend is, that this race of beings was
begotten by Aza with Naamah, the daughter of Lamech. (Let us here note,
אזא _aza_ is a Chaldaic word, meaning _heat, to grow hot_, &c., and as
such is used in _Dan._ iii. 22,—therefore a synonyme with Ham, as
applied to the son of Noah.) But some have it that the race is the joint
offspring, or from the double paternity, of Aza and Azael. (Let us also
notice, that this monstrosity of paternity is reduced to a single
personage by the fact, that the Hebrew suffix _el_ merely gives quality,
even by repetition, as thus,—Aza the mighty Aza.) But this version of
the legend denominates the race “_Shedim_,” the plural of _shed_, a word
sometimes used to express idols, but more often used to mean desolation,
destruction, &c.; and because the nursing breast is often exhausted, or
from the notion that such exhaustion is akin to a thing destroyed, this
word is applied to the female breast; and hence a posterity strongly
marked by natural peculiarities would very readily take some name
expressive of such fact. Even at this day, in reference to such
peculiarities, we say, they took it from the “breast.”
We deem it unnecessary to enter into a critical history of the word
_shed_ or _shedim_, as used by the Arabians, the “_sed_” of the Hebrews;
but we may be permitted to remark that, from its conveying the idea of
destruction, desolation, so strongly, the Hebrews applied it also to
mean a “field,” or country, in a destroyed or desolate or uncultivated
condition; and it is thus used in many places. See _Genesis_ iii. 1.;
and is thus the word we call _Sodom_. It always carries with it the idea
opposite to improvement; and, governed by the same leading idea, writers
have applied it, perhaps rather figuratively, to any living existence
found wandering over waste and solitary districts. We might pursue the
subject of this tradition, and from the analogy of language, as well as
from ancient associations, at least find some evidence that _Zahmurah_
was no other than Noah; that the affix “_el_” with _Aza_ arose from the
acknowledged superiority of the race of Seth to that of Cain, in
consequence of which they were sometimes described as “the sons of God,”
_Gen._ vi. 4; and that the tradition points to the race of Ham, and
their humble condition in the world.
Traces of this legend will not only be found as above, but also in
Gemara, in Hagiga, and Igrat Baale Hayyin, c. 15.
If it be a fact that the Negro race are the descendants of Ham and
Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, of the race of Cain, it might be thought
there would still be existing some traditions of such an extraordinary
fact. As such we present the legend: not that we attach to it any undue
importance, and especially not to be received as evidence at all, in
contradiction of one word found in the holy books. But if a legend of
ancient time shall be found, when sifted from the ignorance of fable or
the fraud of design, to coincide with facts as related in the holy
books, we may be permitted to consider the same as a circumstance not
altogether unworthy of consideration.
But, we repeat, unless Naamah was to survive the destruction of the
deluge, why was her name, why was her genealogy recorded and sent down
to future time?
We think it certain that if she did survive the flood, she must have
done so as the wife of one of Noah’s sons. Now, as it is evident that
the intermixture of the two races was regarded by Jehovah as a sin, it
is not probable that either Shem or Japheth took her to wife, since they
were both most honourably distinguished by a public blessing immediately
after the flood.
But again: Noah had been preaching the then impending ruin near a
hundred years. Lamech might well have had some glimpses of the
subdiluvian world, and certainly saw the consequential ruin to young
Ham, of the holy family of Noah, from such a connection with his
daughter, Naamah. It could not otherwise than operate as a moral death
to all the high hopes of him and his posterity. In case such connection
was formed, and Lamech was forward in aiding or influencing it, then
well might his troubled soul exclaim to his two wives as related.
But in case Ham did take to wife this daughter of Lamech, we might
expect her name also to be held in remembrance by her posterity, as we
have seen to some extent was that of Cain; and if we find such fact to
exist in regard to her, it will be to our mind strong additional proof,
that the descendants of Ham were in common the descendants of Cain. We
notice here the fact, which we may hereafter deem necessary to prove,
that, of the children of Ham, Cush originally settled in Arabia and the
southwestern parts of Asia generally, Misraim in Egypt, Phut in the
northern parts of Africa and southward indefinitely, and Canaan in
Palestine.
When this latter country came to be conquered by Joshua, he found a city
by the name of “Naamah,” situated in that portion which was given to the
tribe of Judah. See _Josh._ xv. 41. But we shall directly see that there
must have also been another city by the name of “Naamah,” situated
probably in the region originally occupied by Cush. The book of Job is
supposed to have been written as early as the days of Abraham. One of
the men named in it is Zophar the “Naamathite.” See _Job_ ii. 11; also
xi. 1.; also xlii. 9. He was an inhabitant of “Naamah,” at a much more
ancient period than the time of Joshua. Job is represented as of the
land of “Uz,” far distant from the land of Canaan, in the eastern parts
of Arabia. His intimate friends and acquaintances cannot be expected to
have been of so distant a country as was the land of Judea. The evidence
is then that there must have been a city in the land of Cush by the same
name. But in _Gen._ x. 7, one of the sons of Cush is called _Raamah_: we
think those who will examine the subject will find this term a mere
alteration or adulteration of _Naamah_, as there are many others, a
tedious explanation of which might not be excused at our hand. Suffice
it then to say that among the Cushites at a very early period one whole
tribe were called “_Naamathites_,” distinct from the _Naamathites_ that
lived in the city of _Naamah_ conquered by Joshua. Another variation of
this word will be found in the word “_Hamathites_,” _Gen._ xvi. 18. This
word is used, differently varied, in _Num._ xiii. 21, xxvi. 40; _Judges_
iii. 3; 1 _Kings_ x. 65, xiv. 21–31; 2 _Kings_ v. 1–27; 2 _Sam._ viii.
9; 1 _Chron._ viii. 4, 7; 2 _Chron._ viii. 3, xii. 13; _Isa._ x. 9, also
xi. 11, also xvii. 10; _Ezek._ xlvii. 16, 20, also xlviii. 1, and
perhaps many other places; and in all cases in reference to individuals,
the people and country of the Canaanites, and no doubt in memory of
their great female progenitor, Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, of the
race of Cain.
------------------