WE have heretofore remarked that such names as are derived from _Cain_
or _Naamah_ are never found in the holy books, except among and applied
to the descendants of Ham. But there are some few instances of the
application of these terms in the family of the Benjamites. It is
therefore our design now to prove, so far as may be, that such
instances, in the family of Benjamin, are wholly confined to those cases
where the Benjamite was a mixed-blooded person, and a descendant of Ham,
as well as of the youngest son of Jacob. The holy books do give evidence
that individuals of the race of Shem did sometimes commingle with the
descendants of Ham.
From the proximity of the Israelite tribes to those of Ham; from their
co-habitation of Palestine itself, it was natural to expect among the
low and vulgar, as well as among those whose morals hung loosely about
them, that such intermixture should take place. “Now Sheshan had no
sons, but daughters. And Sheshan had a servant, (עֶבֶד _ebed_, a
_slave_,) an Egyptian, (מִצְרִ֖י _Mitsri_, a _Misraimite_, a descendant
of the second son of Ham,) whose name was Jarha. And Sheshan gave his
daughter to Jarha his servant, (עֶבֶד _ebed, slave_) to wife.” 1
_Chron._ ii. 34, 35. Proving the wisdom and truth of the saying of
Solomon, “He that delicately bringeth up his servant (עֶבֶד _ebed,
slave_) from a child, shall have him become his son at length.” _Prov._
xxix. 21.
“Rehoboam was forty-one years old when he began to reign; and he reigned
seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the Lord did choose out of
all the tribes of Israel to put his name there: and his mother’s name
was Naamah, an Ammonitess. And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was
buried with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother’s name was
_Naamah_, an _Ammonitess_.” 1 _Kings_ xiv. 21, 31.
“For Rehoboam was one-and-forty years old when he began to reign, and he
reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the Lord had chosen
out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there, and his mother’s
name was _Naamah_, an _Ammonitess_.” 2 _Chron._ xii. 13.
“But King Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter
of Pharaoh; women of the Moabites, _Ammonites_, Edomites, Zidonians, and
Hittites; of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the
children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come
in unto you.” 1 _Kings_ xi. 1, 2.
By thus personally amalgamating with the various nations over whom he
ruled, Solomon, no doubt, expected more firmly to establish his throne.
This led to the selection of the son of this woman for his successor.
A vast majority of the tribes over whom his reign extended were the
descendants of Ham.
But this very act, which he thought to be political wisdom, although
contrary to the laws of God, brought ruin to the permanency of his
dynasty. The great majority of his Jewish subjects, hunting up, as was
natural, plausible excuses, rejected with scorn the contamination of the
royal house.
And we see such manifestation of Divine providence even at the present
day: even among ourselves, men whose talents and patriotism might
authorize them to look to any station, are forced back by public
sentiment, degraded by a notorious amalgamation with the descendants of
Ham.
We shall hereafter see some proof that this “_Naamah_,” the mother of
Rehoboam, was the individual whose praises are celebrated in the book of
Canticles: at any rate, she was an Ammonitess, a descendant of Ham, and
the prophet Hanani includes the Ammonites among those whom he calls
Ethiopians. See 2 _Chron._ xvi. 8.
If then it be true that Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, was the great
female progenitor of the race of Ham, we should expect to find some
testimony of her remembrance even among her mingled offspring. And since
the unmixed race of Ham have generally, at all times of the world, been
too degraded to even leave behind them any written memorials, it is to
the mixed race, and their connection with the races of Shem and Japheth,
that we are principally to look for any particular fact concerning them;
and it is reasonable to conclude, as we find this kind of memorial among
the mixed race, that the same kind of memorial existed much more
frequently among the unmixed races of Ham.
“And the sons of Benjamin were Belah, and Becher, and Ashbel, Gera, and
_Naaman_, Ehi, and Rosh, Muppim, and Huppim, and Ard.” _Gen._ xlvi. 21.
“The sons of Benjamin after their families of Bela, the family of the
Belaites; of Ashbel, the family of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the family
of the Ahiramites; of Shupham, the family of the Shuphamites; of Hupham,
the family of the Huphamites. And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman;
of Ard, the family of Ardites, and of Naaman, the family of Naamanites.”
_Num._ xxvi. 38–40.
“Now Benjamin begat Bela his first-born, Ashbel the second, and Ahirah
the third, Nohah the fourth, and Rapha the fifth. And the sons of Bela
were Addar, and Gera, and Abihud, and Abishua, and _Naaman_, and Ahoah,
and Gera, and Shephuphan, and Huram. And these are the sons of Ehud:
these are the heads of the fathers of the inhabitants of Geba, and they
removed them to Manahath. And _Naaman_, and Ahiah, and Gera, he removed
them, and begat Uzra and Abihud. And _Shaharaim_ begat children in the
country of Moab, after he had sent them away.” 1 _Chron._ viii. 1–8.
The hurried reader might well apprehend these three different accounts
of the same matter to be somewhat contradictory. We think otherwise. We
had, in fact, prepared several sheets, elucidating these genealogies of
Benjamin, but upon a review we found much irrelevant to the subject of
our present inquiry: we deem only a few remarks necessary.
Our object is to show that these genealogies prove that some portion of
the family named were coloured people, descended from Ham, and that
_Naaman_ is distinguished most clearly to be of that class.
It will be readily perceived that _Muppim_ מִפֻּיִ֥ם, in Genesis, is
formed from מֹף _Moph_, and thus used in _Hos._ ix. 6: “_Memphis_ (מַֹף
_Moph_) shall bury them.” Our word is a Hebraism of the Coptic word נֹף
_Noph_, the _Nod_ of Genesis, the _No_ of the prophets Ezekiel and
Nahum, and finally confounded with _Memphis_.
It is here used after the form of a Hebrew masculine plural, and as a
caput, to aid in the classification of the descendants of Benjamin; and
clearly designates, whatever may have been their blood, that one class
were _Memphites_.
So the word _huppim_ הֻפִּים is formed from the quite ancient word הַף
_haph_, which means innocence, purity; whence also the word הָפָה
_haphah_, covered, shielded, protected; and hence, הֻפָּה _hupah_,
_bride-chamber_, _the marriage-bed_, and _marriage_ itself. In this
sense the word is used in _Joel_ ii. 16, and in several other places,
where the translator has so paraphrased the idea as to make it
imperceptible to the English reader.
Nor is it an unworthy consideration in the etymology of this word, that
from the idea _purity_, the Arabians borrowed from it their word جار
_hhar_, to mean _white_, which was quickly introduced into Hebrew in the
word הוּר _hur_, and הוֹר _hor_, to mean _white_ also. Hence, Mount הָור
_Hor_, “the white mountain;” and from which branch of the derivation the
corresponding words in Numbers and Chronicles have taken their origin.
Here, then, we have another word used in the same manner, to designate
another class of the descendants of Benjamin, as of the _pure stock_,
_legitimate_ and _white_.
The word וָאָֽרְּדְּ _va ard_ or _ared_ in Genesis, and אַ֣רְדְּ _ard_
or _ared_ in Numbers, is changed by _dagesh_ and transposition into
אַדָּר _addar_ in Chronicles. It is unnecessary to go into an
explanation of Hebrew peculiarities. It is probable that we never have
had the true pronunciation of any of these words. But however that may
be, the analogy of language seems to show that this word is a cognate of
the Arabic غَرَض _gharadh_, and the Syrian ܕܓܳܪܳܕ _dharadh_, and from
whence עֲרָד _harad_ or _arad_; yet there is nothing more common than
for _aleph_ and _ghain_ to interchange in one and the same word. They
are ever regarded as cognates. But again, the word is not of Hebrew
origin, and with the latter spelling, we find it in _Num._ xxi. 1,
xxxiii. 40, _Josh._ xii. 14, and _Judges_ i. 16, as the name of a
Canaanitish city. The Arabic is more guttural than Hebrew, and it has
two _ghains_, one more guttural than the other, distinguished by רְבִיעַ
_rĕviă_, a _resting upon_; thus, in translating Arabic into Hebrew, the
one will take the Hebrew _ghain_, but the Arabic _ghain_ with which this
word is spelled is at once converted into the Hebrew _aleph_; so that
while we thus find the very word, we find it with the evidence of a
Canaanitish admixture.
Its application in Hebrew seems to be mostly confined to the _wild ass_,
(see _Dan._ v. 21;) but the Syriac gives it _effrænatus_, _effrænis
fuit_, and the Arabic, _durus fuit_, _fugit_. Such, then, being its
signification in these languages, we may well perceive its adaptedness
to the _wild ass_. We all know that the wild Arabs are the descendants
of Ishmael; now a true synonyme in Hebrew of this word was applied to
him: “He shall be a _wild man_;” he was illegitimate, mixed-blooded. The
term can apply to no other than such a race as that of Ishmael,—_wild_,
_illegitimate_, and of _impure blood_.
In Numbers we find _Shupham_, and in Chronicles _Shephuphan_,
substituted for the _Muppim_ in Genesis; both being the same word in
different forms. The root is שֶׁפִי _shephi_, a high situation; hence
שָפַט _shaphat_, a judge, and its derivatives are applied to the person
or thing adjudged. Hence שִׁפְחָה _shiphehhahh_, a _female slave_; (See
_Gen._ xvi. 16; i. 2, 3; also xx. 14; also xxxii. 22;) and hence, also
the Syrian ܫܳܦܦܰ _shafefa_, a _serpent_, because the serpent had been
adjudged, condemned. Whence the Hebrew _shephiphim_, poetically used to
mean a serpent, as, “Dan shall judge his people; Dan shall be a serpent
by the way.” _Gen._ xlix. 16. In this passage in Hebrew, there is a
beautiful _paronomasia_ in the word _Dan_, which also means a judge,
_judge_ and the _serpent_. But the serpent is called שְׁפִיפ֖ןֹ
_shephiphon_, only as it had been adjudged; and it is to be noticed, as
here used, it has the same points and accents as in Chronicles, and is
substantially the same word,—not, as here, borrowed from the Syriac, to
mean a serpent, but used to mean the adjudged, condemned to some
condition or degradation. “And they removed them to _Manahath_.”
_Manahath_ was a district of country near the Dead Sea, near the ancient
city Zoar; and it is a little remarkable that Zoar was by the Canaanites
called _Bela_, the very name of the son of Benjamin. The whole country
was called by the general term Moab. The fact that it was a custom to
send persons of a certain description there, seems to be alluded to by
the prophet: “Let mine outcasts dwell with thee, O Moab!” _Isa._ xvi. 4.
But, who were sent there? “_Naaman_, _Ahia_, and _Gera_, he removed
them. * * * And _Shaharaim_ begat children in the land of Moab after he
had sent them away.” This explains the whole matter. _Shaharaim_ is a
plural formation of _Shihor_, and means _black_. “_And these blacks
begat children in the land of Moab after he had sent them away_,”—that
is, _Naaman_, _Ahia_, and _Gera_; further establishing the fact that the
word _Naamah_ is kept in remembrance only by the descendants of Ham. One
class of the race of Benjamin is described in Genesis as _Memphites_; in
fact, that whole genealogy substantially divides them into those who
were white, and of pure descent, and into those who were not white, and
of impure descent. Numbers and Chronicles confirm and warrant the same
distinction.
The seventh Psalm commences thus:—“Shiggaion of David, which he sang
unto the Lord, concerning the words of Cush, the Benjamite.” It would
have been more readily understood, and more decidedly a translation
thus: _A song of lamentation of David, which he sang unto the Lord,
concerning the words of an Ethiopian, a Benjamite_.
The word “Cush,” as often elsewhere, is here used to designate a
descendant of Ham by his colour. But it clearly proves an amalgamation,
to some extent, of the race of Ham, in the family of Benjamin.
Indeed, the race of Benjamin had become deeply intermixed with the
descendants of Ham; and this fact well accounts why they did, upon an
occasion, behave like as the Sodomites to Lot; and why the other tribes
of Israel so readily joined in league to utterly destroy and annihilate
this tribe, and did put to death fifty thousand warriors in one day, and
every man, woman, and child of the whole tribe, except a few hundred
men, who hid in the rock Rimmon. See _Judges_ xix. xx.
------------------