Mizra: North Africa & Arabia

Chapter XIV

Ham’s second son is Mizra, translated correctly, though a little misleadingly as Egypt. There is always it seems, an exception to the rule and in this case regarding point number two in the Introduction, this is it. To a degree, that is. A number of the descendants of Mizra have paradoxically, migrated very far afield; yet they also live in their original historic homeland. 

In Genesis 10:13-14 NET, we are introduced to Mizra’s seven sons. Taking our cue from especially Canaan and partially Cush, we would expect to find a handful of descended nations, rather than just one or seven. We are also met with a slight conundrum, though easily resolved. Mizra identifies with the people known as Arabs; as well as those related peoples principally located in North Africa and in the Middle East.

‘Mizraim [Mizra] was the father of the Ludites, Anamites, Lehabites, Naphtuhites, Pathrusites Casluhites (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorites.’

Some versions list instead as: Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim or Lubim, Naphtuhim, Pathrusim, Casluhim and Caphtorim.

‘Footnotes: The Casluhites lived in Crete and eventually settled east of the Egyptian Delta, between Egypt and Canaan [on the coast]. Several commentators prefer to reverse the order of the words to put this clause after the next word, since the Philistines came from Crete (where the Caphtorites lived). But the table may suggest migration rather than lineage…’ [refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America].

We will focus on the Casluhim and Caphtorim in the following chapter and address the migration versus linage interpretation of the verse. 

An accurate map [excepting Spain] of Mizra’s five eldest sons in North Africa and the Middle East [green] and his two youngest sons in the New World [red].

The plural Mizraim is principally translated as Egypt in the Bible. Outside of the genealogy listings of Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One, the word Mizraim is used once in Genesis 50:11 ESV, on the occasion of Jacob’s death, the father of Joseph. 

‘When the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning on the threshing floor of Atad, they said, “This is a grievous mourning by the Egyptians.” Therefore the place was named Abelmizraim [mourning (or meadow) of Egypt]; it is beyond the Jordan.’

Egypt is mentioned some seven hundred times in the Bible. The context usually implies all the sons of Mizra, or occasionally the principal son, Pathros. A couple of chapters address Mizra specifically, such as in Ezekiel 29:9-10 ESV:

‘… and the land of Egypt shall be a desolation and a waste. Then they will know that I am the Lord. “Because you said, ‘The Nile is mine, and I made it,’ therefore, behold, I am against you and against your streams, and I will make the land of Egypt an utter waste and desolation, from Migdol to Syene, as far as the border of Cush‘ [refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut].

We will see that their descendants do live ‘as far as the border of Cush, in India today. In Isaiah 19:22-25 ESV we read of a future time, when three great peoples are at peace:

’22 And the Lord will strike Egypt, striking and healing, and they will return to the Lord, and he will listen to their pleas for mercy and heal them. 23 In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria, and Assyria will come into Egypt, and Egypt into Assyria, and the Egyptians [Arabs] will worship with the Assyrians [refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia]. 24 In that day Israel will be the third with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth, 25 whom the Lord of hosts has blessed, saying, “Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel my inheritance.”

The widespread assumption or belief – held by many people within and without Islam – is that the Arab people descend from Ishmael, the eldest son of Abraham. 

This has been supported largely because the Prophet Mohammad in the Quran was seen as being a spiritual successor to Abraham… thus in time, a physical descent was gradually assumed to be true. In the Bible, Ishmael – with the other sons of Abraham, from his second wife Keturah – are described as living in Arabia or the ‘wilderness.’ This was in the Arabian Peninsula – mainly including Saudi Arabia today. It is not calling Ishmael an Arab, but stating where he originally lived. The sons of Mizra though, have in turn become known as Arabs, due to their dwelling in Arabia, before fanning out, migrating both northeast and westwards into north Africa.

An article by Mark Durie, 2019, entitled, Ishamel is not the Father of the Arabs addresses this important question – emphasis & bold his:

The commonly held view that Ishmael was the father of the Arab nations is not supported by the Bible, nor by other historical evidence. For centuries, many Muslims, Christians and Jews have taken it for granted that the Arabs descended from Abraham through Ishmael. As Gerald Hawting put it:

“The idea that the Arabs are the physical descendants of Abraham through Ishmael is indeed taken by many, non-Muslims as well as Muslims, as a genealogical and historical fact.”

‘Authors and teachers often treat the word Ishmael as a kind of code for Islam or Muslims. According to Sir Fergus Millar, Professor Emeritus of Ancient History at Oxford University, it was Josephus, a Jewish historian writing in the first century CE, who first advanced the idea that Ishmael was the ancestor of the Arabs. In The Antiquities of the Jews Josephus stated that Ishmael was “the founder” of the Arabian nation, and Abraham was “their father”. From Josephus, this assumed connection between the Arabs and Abraham, through Ishmael, passed into the historical consciousness of Christians, and then made its way into early Islam.

The Qur’an does not speak of Ishmael or Abraham as ancestors of the Arabs – although it does have Abraham and Ishmael praying for Allah to make their descendants a Muslim people – but the link is established in the hadith literature, in traditions about Muhammad’s own genealogy. In this way Abraham and Ishmael came to be considered, in Islamic tradition, not only a spiritual antecedent of Muhammad as an Islamic prophet, but also the physical ancestor of (at least some of) the Arabs.

What does the Bible say? It speaks both of Ishmaelites, the descendants of Ishmael, and of Arabs, but does not join them together. I. Ephʿal has pointed out that the references to Ishmaelites are earlier in the Bible, and the references to Arabs later. Both refer to non-sedentary, nomadic peoples, but they are separated by centuries. Ephʿal concludes that references to “Ishmaelites” cease by the mid 10th century BCE, and the references to “Arabs” only commence in the mid-8th century BCE, so “there is no historical basis to the tradition of associating Ishmaelites with the Arabs”. The Bible does link the Ishmaelites with the Midianites, using these names as synonyms in two places. 

Genesis describes Joseph as being sold to a caravan of camel-riding Ishmaelites who are also called Midianites (Genesis 37:25–28, 36; 39:1; see also Judges 8:22-24).

The evidence indicates that Ishmael was not the father of the Arabs, and neither was Abraham. The Ishmaelites were probably Canaanites, speaking, not an early form of Arabic, but a dialect similar to Hebrew. In time they disappeared or were absorbed into other groups, like so many other ancient peoples. Much later Josephus invoked Ishmael’s name to conjure up a genealogy for the Arabs. He has a lot to answer for. The rest, as they say, is history.’

We will look into this further when we study Ishmael. The author states they were probably Canaanites. Not to be confused with the sons of Ham; but rather, they were part of the later ‘Canaanites’ [refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa]. Far from being assimilated into other peoples or disappearing, the Ishmaelites due to their numbers, have always been an influential people to the degree of Empire status more than once on the world stage [refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar].

Dr Hoeh says the following regarding Mizra – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Mizraim is commonly applied to Egypt. In fact, “Mizr” is the name which the natives still apply to Egypt today. The Greeks called the land Aegyptus [Aiguptos] – hence our Egypt. First, notice that… Mizraim first settled on the northeast corner of the Mediterranean Sea. From there they spread through the Eastern Mediterranean isles and into Africa. The Philistines, who came from Mizraim [in part], inhabited Southern Palestine even in the days of Abraham (Genesis 21:34). They are still there today – in the Gaza strip in Palestine – causing no end of trouble (Zechariah 9:6-7). 

The Philistines (a branch of the family of Casluhim) settled originally on the Island of Crete in the Mediterranean. Crete is called, in the Bible, Caphtor (Jeremiah 47:4 and Amos 9:7). The Island of Caphtor was originally settled by the Caphtorim, a tribe of Mizraim (Genesis 10:14). Both the Philistines and the Caphtorim destroyed the Canaanites in South Palestine and lived in their place (Deuteronomy 2:23). No wonder there are so few Canaanites left! The main body of non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine today are not Canaanites, but Philistines! [they are neither]

The Pathrusim of Genesis 10:14 migrated from Asia Minor to central Egypt. Every prophecy shows Pathros to be a part of Egypt along the Nile (Jeremiah 44:1,5 and Ezekiel 29:14). The Naphtuhim probably settled in the extreme south of Egypt, founding the capital city of Napata among the black people of Africa.

The Lehabim – the word “Lehabim” means a people of reddish color – settled Libya originally. Libya is in North Africa. Today they are found scattered throughout the savanahs of the Western Sudan in Africa. 

In this region today we find a people “of reddish brown or light chestnut color… with smooth hair, never woolly, straight and even aquiline noses… differentiating them from the [Black] type”. The original word “Lehabim” was shortened in Bible times to “Lubim” (II Chronicles 12:3; 16:8). The [Africans] call these people “fulbe”, meaning, probably, Lubim dwelling in the ancient land of Phut. In the central reaches of the Sahara (the great desert in North Africa) live the Ludim (Gen.10:14) – the lightest of the Egyptians.

For example the Arabs acknowledge that they are descendants of Ishmael, the son of Abraham. In Bible prophecy they are often [never] mentioned by the name “Ishmael.”‘

We will learn that the Philistines are not the non-Jewish peoples or Palestinians of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, for they have travelled considerably farther afield. The final sentence is a good example of how the first thing heard, is the one that lingers the longest whether correct or incorrect. How easy it is to be indoctrinated without even realising. Just because a people claim to be someone does not make it necessarily so…

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – emphasis & bold mine: 

Mizraim is derived from a Hebrew term, and is a plural word with the meaning double straits (SHD 4714, mitsrayim – dual of matsor (4693). This duality may refer to the distinction between the original kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt. The Egyptians referred to their land as Kmt in the hieroglyphs. In Assyrian and Babylonian inscriptions Egypt was known as Musur and Musri, probably from the word Misr meaning simply, land. The Ugaritic inscriptions refer to Egypt as Msrm, while in the Amarna tablets it is called Misri. The term Misr is still seen in the modern Arabic name for the nation, Jumhuriyah Misr al-‘Arabiyah (the Arabic Republic of Egypt).’

An online Encylopaedia –  emphasis & bold mine:

‘Mizraim is the dual form of matzor, meaning a “mound” or “fortress”… Some Ancient Egyptian inscriptions at the time of Pharoah Amenhotep IV refer to Egypt as Masara and to Egyptians as Masrawi.

According to Eusebius’ Chronicon, Manetho had suggested that the great age of antiquity of which the later Egyptians boasted had actually preceded the Flood and that they were really descended from Mizraim, who settled there anew. A similar story is related by medieval Islamic historians… and the Persians… stating that the pyramids etc. had been built by the wicked races [the Nephilim and the line of Cain] before the Deluge, but that Noah’s descendant Mizraim (Masar or Mesr) was entrusted with reoccupying the region afterwards. The Islamic accounts also make Masar the son of a Bansar or Beisar and grandson of Ham, rather than a direct son of Ham… Some scholars think it likely that Mizraim is a dual form of the word Misr meaning “land”, and was translated literally into Ancient Egyptian as Ta-Wy (the Two Lands) by early pharaohs at Thebes who later founded the Middle Kingdom.

… according to George Syncellus the Book of Sothis, attributed to Manetho, [incorrectly] identified Mizraim with the legendary first Pharaoh Menes, said to have unified the Old Kingdom and built Memphis. Mizraim also seems to correspond to Misor, said in Phoenician mythology to have been the father of Taautus who was given Egypt, and later scholars noticed that this also recalls Menes, whose son or successor was said to be Athothis.

… the author David Rohl has suggested a different interpretation: Amongst the followers of Meshkiagkash-er (Sumerian ruler) was his younger ‘brother’ – in his own right a strong and charismatic leader of men. He is the head of the falcon tribe – the descendants of Horus the ‘Far Distant’. The Bible calls this new Horus-king ‘Mizraim’ but this name is, in reality, no more than an epithet. It means ‘follower of Asr’ or ‘Asar’ (Egyptian Arabic m-asr with the Egyptian preposition m ‘from’). Mizraim is merely m-Izra with the majestic plural ending ‘im’. Likewise, that other great Semitic-speaking people the Assyrians – called the country of the pharaohs ‘Musri’ (m-Usri).’

Mizra denotes duality. In Hebrew it means: ‘double siege’ or ‘double distress’ from masor, ‘siege’ or ‘entrenchment’ and the verb sur, ‘to bind, besige’. Also mesar, ‘distress’ and the verb sarar, ‘to bind.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:  

‘Egypt was known by the names Musuru, Musru, Misir or Masri in other languages, and Mizraim is probably simply a phonetic transliteration into Hebrew of any of them. The verb from which the noun derives, is part of a group of five different roots: 

Sur I: to lean or incline

Sur II: to confine, secure or besiege

Sur III: to be an adversary 

Sur IV: to form or fashion

Sur V: to be sharp

The word (mesar), meaning straights or distress, written in a dual form would yield the name Mizraim. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names assumes that this is what Mizraim would have meant to a Hebrew audience and reads Double Distress. But it should be noted that the name Mizraim means also Double Stronghold…’

An identifying clue to who and where the sons of Mizra are is the fact that the Arabic nations are invariably in a condition of strife and war – either against the state of Israel, Black Africans, minorities in their own countries, or most noticeably, their own people. This is a defining characteristic of the Arabic nations, foretold centuries ago.

Isaiah 19:2-3

Young’s Literal Translation

‘And I armed Egyptians against Egyptians, And they fought, each against his brother, And each against his neighbour, City against city, kingdom against kingdom. And emptied out hath been in its midst the spirit of Egypt. And its counsel I swallow up, And they have sought unto the idols, And unto the charmers, And unto those having familiar spirits, And unto the wizards.’

The NET translates verse two as:

I will provoke civil strife in Egypt: brothers will fight with one another, as will neighbors, cities, and kingdoms.

In Hebrew, Pathros means: ‘South Land’ from the Egyptian pe-te-res or ‘place of interpretation’ from the verb patar, ‘to interpret dreams.’ 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Pathros is the name [for] Mizraim’s South Region. Mizraim is the Hebrew name for Egypt, and southern Egypt was known as Upper Egypt. The name Pathros occurs half a dozen times in the Bible, always in clear association with Mizraim (Ezekiel 29:14, Isaiah 11:11). The writers of the Septuagint transliterated the name Pathros with Pa-athyris, meaning Belonging to Athor, but who Athor is remains a mystery.

Some words of interest: (pata), meaning to entice, deceive, persuade. Derivation (peti) means simple, foolish… (pat) means fragment, bit. The verb (rasas) means moisten. Derivation (rasis) means drop of dew. The identical but unused and not translatable root (rss) yields identical derivation (rasis), meaning fragment. Hence to the Hebrews the name Pathros may have sounded like Bits And Pieces, or even Wet Lands [the Nile], and Entreaty For A Drop, or any combination of the above.’

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim continues on Mizra’s fifth son Pathros – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Pathrusim (SHD 6625, meaning southerners) were a tribe located at Pathros near Thebes in Upper Egypt. The name Pathros means region of the south (6624), possibly from the Egyptian Pa-To-Ris. The LXX refers to the people as the Patrosoniim.

In the apocryphal Book of Jasher, both the Pathrusim and Casluhim were recorded as the progenitors of the Pelishtim, Azathim, Gerarim, Githim, and Ekronim, who were associated with several prominent Philistine cities, such as Gerar, Gath and Ekron. The conclusions must be that if they did conjoin it was by branches. The main branch went south to Thebes while the cadet branch joined the Cashluhim and formed the five Philistine cities and hence also the five names in Jasher.

The Hebrew Pathros and the gentilic Pathrusim are derived from the Egyptian p’-t’-rsy, which is a term used to designate the whole of Egypt above Memphis. In the Assyrian material Esarhaddon refers to himself as the king of Musur [Mizra], Paturisi [Pathros or Phut], and Kusi [Cush], meaning, from Isaiah 11:11, that Musur and the Hebrew Misrayim was restricted to Middle and LowerEgypt, thus leaving Pathros for the Thebaid. Jeremiah 44:1,15, Ezekiel 29:14 and 30:14 refer to Pathros as the original home of the Egyptians. The gentilic Pathrusim occurs only in Genesis 10:14 and 1 Chronicles 1:12.’

The prominence of Pathros in the Bible and its central position in Egypt and the Nile  points to its identity actually being, the modern nation of Egypt.  

Egyptian men

Isaiah 11:11

English Standard Version

In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people, from Assyria [Russia], from Egypt [Mizra – Middle East and North Africa], from Pathros [Egypt], from Cush [India], from Elam [Turkey], from Shinar [Europe], from Hamath [Nigeria], and from the coastlands of the sea [East Asia and South East Asia].

Jeremiah 44:1, 15

English Standard Version

The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the Judeans who lived in the land of Egypt, at Migdol, at Tahpanhes, at Memphis, and in the land of Pathros… Then all the men who knew that their wives had made offerings to other gods, and all the women who stood by, a great assembly, all the people who lived in Pathros in the land of Egypt, answered Jeremiah:

Ezekiel 29:14

English Standard Version

and I will restore the fortunes of Egypt and bring them back to the land of Pathros, the land of their origin, and there they shall be a lowly kingdom.

Ezekiel 30:14

English Standard Version

I will make Pathros a desolation and will set fire to Zoan and will execute judgments on Thebes.

These verses reveal Pathros is very much the heart of Mizra, though a separate, prominent people or nation, who uniquely dwell in their original ancient homeland.  

The flag of Egypt – with the pan Arab colours of Red, White and Black. Flags of the Arab nations either use these core colours and or incorporate green, representing Islam.

Egypt has one of the longest histories of any country on the Earth and is an early cradle of civilisation. Modern Egypt dates back to 1922, when it gained independence from the British Empire. Egypt declared itself a republic after a revolution deposing the monarchy in 1952. Egypt has endured decades of social and religious strife, with political instability. It has fought armed conflicts with Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973; occupying the Gaza Strip intermittently until 1967. In 1978, Egypt signed the Camp David Accords officially withdrawing from the Gaza Strip and recognising the state of Israel.  

Egyptian women

Islam is the official religion of Egypt and Arabic the official language. With a population of over 110,853,873 people, Egypt is the most populous country in North Africa, the Middle East and the Arab world and second in Africa after Nigeria. The great majority of its people live near the banks of the Nile River where the only arable land is found. The large regions of the Sahara desert which constitute most of Egypt’s territory, are sparsely populated.

Egypt is a regional power in North Africa, the Middle East and the Muslim World – a middle power worldwide. With a large and diversified economy, Egypt is projected to become one of the largest in the world in the 21st century. Egypt has the third largest economy in Africa after Nigeria and South Africa. Egypt has the strongest military in Africa; while South Africa is 4th and Nigeria 5th. The other Arab nations in the top ten, after Egypt are Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia and Libya.

The ancient Egyptian name of the country km.t, means ‘black land’, referring to the fertile black soils of the Nile flood plains, as distinct from the deshret or ‘red land’ of the desert.

An online Encyclopaedia confirms – emphasis mine: 

‘The English name “Egypt” is derived from the Ancient Greek “Aigyptos”, via Middle French “Egypte” and Latin “Aegyptus”. “Misr”… is the Classical Quranic Arabic and modern official name of Egypt, while “Masr”… is the local pronunciation in Egyptian Arabic. 

The name is of Semitic origin, directly cognate with other Semitic words for Egypt such as the Hebrew (“Mitzrayim”). The oldest attestation of this name for Egypt is the Akkadian “mi-is-ru” (“misru”) related to misru/misirru/misaru, meaning “border” or “frontier”. The Neo-Assyrian Empire used the derived term, Mu-sur.’ 

The Arab world inherited vast tracts of land constituting mainly desert. The current inhabitants live primarily, as shown, near water. This area of the world has been actively dwelt in without rest by countless civilisations comprising millions of people so that the soil has undertsandably become barren.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Egyptian global shipments during 2021. 

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$13.2 billion
  2. Plastics, plastic articles: $2.7 billion
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $2.4 billion
  4. Iron, steel: $1.72 billion
  5. Fruits, nuts: $1.66 billion
  6. Fertilizers: $1.5 billion 
  7. Clothing, accessories (not knit or crochet): $1.3 billion 
  8. Gems, precious metals: $1.2 billion 
  9. Vegetables: $1.1 billion
  10. Aluminum: $780.4 million 

Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 178.7% from 2020 to 2021. The most powerful gains were for Egyptian shipments of petroleum gases, crude oil and processed petroleum oils. The sole decliner among Egypt’s top 10 export categories was gems precious metals, thanks to a -61% drop. The biggest loser year over year was exported gold.’

In Ezekiel 27:7 NKJV it says: 

‘Fine embroidered [H7553 – riqmah: from H7551 ‘to be skilfully wrought or woven’] linen [H8336 – shesh: ‘bleached white’] from Egypt was what you spread for your sail…’ 

King of Cotton, describes Egyptian cotton:

‘Egyptian cotton has not gained such a reputation without reason. Egyptian cotton “is” the world’s finest cotton and the following characteristics are what sets Egyptian cotton apart from other natural fibres: 

The length of the fibre makes it possible to make the finest of yarns without sacrificing the strength of the yarn… [The thread count is the number of threads in each square inch and generally speaking, the higher the thread count, the more luxurious, dense and soft the material will feel]. The strength of the fibre makes fabrics more solid and more resistant to stress. Its ability to absorb liquids gives fabrics made of Egyptian cotton deeper, brighter and more resistant colours. Its softness feels like nothing else in the world. Egyptian cotton is hand picked which guarantees the highest levels of purity. In addition, hand picking puts no stress on the fibres – as opposed to mechanical picking – leaving the fibres straight and intact.

All these factors have resulted in Egyptian cotton being by far the best cotton in the world. Fabrics made of Egyptian Cotton are softer, finer and last longer than any other cotton in the world.’

The first born son of Mizra is Lud, translated in the plural as Ludim in the Bible. There is another Lud in the Bible, who is the fourth son of Shem. Sometimes translated as Lydia or the Lydians, after the people who dwelt in Western Asia Minor. They have intermingled and become synonymous. We will give more attention to both the descendants of Lud later; though to highlight the confusion researchers have experienced in trying to keep them separate we will refer to Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – Emphasis & bold mine :

‘Although there is a Semite of the same name, we find that Lud, grandson of Ham, was father of the Ludim. He was also the first-born of Mizraim. 

The entry in the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (ISBE) is as follows:

“In Genesis 10:13 Ludim appears as the firstborn of Mizraim (Egypt), and in 10:22 Lud is the fourth son of Shem. We have therefore to do with two different nationalities bearing the same name, and not always easy to distinguish…” 

‘Everything points, therefore, to the Semitic Lud and Ludim being Lydia, and the identification may be regarded as satisfactory. It is altogether otherwise with the Egyptian Lud and Ludim, however, about which little can be said at present. Mellink (ibid.) considers the Lydians of Asia Minor to be neither Hamitic nor Semitic. We dealt with the probable movement of the Semite Ludim to the Hindu Kush at the border of India and beyond into the Punjab in the papers Sons of Shem…’

Trying to split these two identities causes difficulty; once their mergence is understood, it becomes clear. We have an identical situation with Mizra’s third son Lehab. The Lubim have merged with Phut [refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut] and both can be identified as ‘Libya’ in the Bible and together, comprise the modern nation of Pakistan. 

Recall the verses we recently read in the preceding chapter: 2 Chronicles 12:3, 16:8, Nahum 3.9 and Ezekiel 30.5. All four verses translate Lubim or Lehab as Libya, the same as Phut. Libya refers to Phut, as does Lehab or Lubim; two identities, yet together they form a single nation. In Daniel 11.43 YLT, we see a fifth and final example of this:

and he hath ruled over treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the desirable things of Egypt [Mizra – the Arabs], and Lubim [Pakistan] and Cushim [India] [are] at his steps.’

In Ezekiel 29:10 we read that Mizra’s people or ‘border’ would reach to Cush and so it does as Pakistan’s eastern border adjoins India.

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – Emphasis & bold mine:

‘The term Lehabim (SHD 3853; sing. 3851) means flames or blades. It has been suggested that these people ought to be identified with the Lubim, arising from the proposal that “the one word may be a corruption of the other” (ISBE). The name Lubim is possibly the same as that of the country, Libya, to the northwest of Egypt. It is probably that the term Lybios as a son of Mizraim refers to the Ludim and the Lehabim who were conjoined, as were two other sons of Mizraim in North Africa, thereby forming the Philistines and also the Thebans.’

An astute point, particularly regarding the Philistines, which we will address in the next chapter; though I would suggest that the correct conjoining has been between Mizra’s son Lud-im and Shem’s son Lud and between Mizra’s son Lehab or Lubim and Ham’s son Phut or Libya.

Mizra’s second and fourth sons respectively are Anam and Naphtuh. I am placing them together as they account for the Arab peoples laying eastwards of Pathros. They are only mentioned in the Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One genealogies and are therefore included in the general scriptures and prophecies pertaining to Mizra-im. 

Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The second son of Mizraim has a name meaning affliction of the waters (anamiym, SHD 6047), and apparently derives from an Egyptian word. The Septuagint uses the term Enemetiim. An Assyrian text from the time of Sargon II refers to certain people as Anami, although they were apparently located in Cyrene, Libya as Albright suggests and… equates them with the cuneiform A-na-mi found in a geographical text from the time of Sargon II and parallel to Kapara, who were the Caphtorim. Little else is known of this tribe.

As the fourth of the tribes descended from Mizraim, the Naphtuhim have a name which means openings (SHD 5320, naphtuchiym), and is considered a word of foreign origin. The Septuagint gives their name as Nephthalim. The ISBE entry for this group reads:

“A son of Mizraim… but, according to most modern authorities, a district or a dependency of Egypt. Brown-Driver-Briggs… suggests that the Naphtuhim were located in Lower Egypt, and a connection has been made with Na-Ptah, the Egyptian word for Memphis.” 

Lambdin in his article… places the Naphtuhim between the Lehabim [Pakistan] (which are identified with the Libyans) and the Pathrusim [Egypt ] as inhabitants of Upper Egypt, and hence they are inhabitants of the Delta.’

The nations to the east of Egypt in the Near East, lean towards an identification with Naphtuh and the nations further south in the Arabian Peninsula identify with Anam. Anam in Hebrew also means: ‘responding waters’ from the verb ana, ‘to answer’ and the noun mayim, ‘waters.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘There are four verbs of the form (‘nh), or perhaps one verb with four distinct usages: Verb (‘ana I) means to answer, respond or correspond, and… means time… (‘ana III) means to afflict, oppress or humble, Noun (‘anaw) refers to the poor, afflicted or needy.

It’s not immediately obvious where the name Naphtuhim comes from, or that it is Hebrew to start with. But as it is, the name Naphtuhim may have reminded a Hebrew audience of the root-group (patah), conveying meaning of to open or to engrave… and since the opening of the lips precedes speaking , and the opening of ears precedes hearing, our verb may also mean to speak and to hear… to the opening of constricting things… to loosen or release. Noun (petiha) denotes a drawn sword (the edge of a sword was known as the “mouth” of it).’

The most prominent nation in the Arab world aside from Egypt is Saudi Arabia, with a population of 37,978,657 people. Of the top ten nations with the most natural resources it is a formidable number two, behind China. Saudi Arabia by Arabic standards is a small country in the Middle East, slightly larger than Mexico. Saudi Arabia has some $34.4 trillion worth of natural resources – notably oil. Saudi Arabia has been the world’s leading exporter of oil since its discovery in 1938. Possessing 22.4% of the world’s reserves, the country’s economy relies heavily on its oil exports. It has the fourth largest natural gas reserves and other major natural resources include ‘copper, feldspar, phosphate, silver, sulfur, tungsten, and zinc.’

Saudi Arabia had a GDP of $792.97 billion in 2019, being the 18th largest economy in the world. The Saudi government owns and operates much of the country’s major industry through its oil company Aramco. Global environmental concerns drive an increased interest in developing non-fossil fuel energy sources, thus the Saudis look to diversify their economy, including encouraging private investment in healthcare and other service industries. The script on the Saudi Arabian flag is the shahada, the Islamic creed: ‘There is no god but Allah; Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.’

The combined populations of the twenty-four Arabic nations and territories is some four hundred and fifty million people. A united confederacy of Arabic nations led by Egypt would certainly be a formidable force and could well participate with the leadership and primary allies of the King of the South – Turkey, Iran and Pakistan.  

Man from Dubai and Saudi Arabian woman

Mitochondrial DNA structure in the Arabian Peninsula, multiple authors, 2008 – emphasis & bold mine:

The results showed that the Arabian Peninsula has received substantial gene flow from Africa* (20%), detected by the presence of L, M1 and U6 lineages; that an 18% of the Arabian Peninsula lineages have a clear eastern provenance, mainly represented by U lineages; but also by Indian M lineages and rare M links with Central Asia, Indonesia and even Australia. However, the bulk (62%) of the Arabian lineages has a Northern source. However, when attending to the relative contribution of the different L haplogroups, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Yemen are highly similar for their L3 (34%), L2 (36%) and L0 (21%) frequencies whereas in Oman and UAE the bulk of L lineages belongs to L3 (72%).’ 

The maternal Haplogroups L of the peninsula Arabs are shared with the Black Africans [Chapter XII Canaan & Africa]. Nearly all the main western Asia Haplogroups are detected in the Saudi Arabian Peninsula, including the rare U9 clade. Saudi Arabs have only a minority sub-Saharan Africa* component of 7%, similar to the specific Haplogroup contribution of North Africa of 5% and a small Indian influence at 3%. The majority of the Saudi Arab mitochondrial DNA lineages have a western Asia provenance of up to 85%.

The majority (12) of the 19 M lineages found in the Arabian Peninsula that do not belong to M1 have matches or are related to Indian clades, which confirm previous results. Five undefined M lineages were genome sequenced. 

It is confirmed that 5 of the 6 Saudi lineages analyzed have also Indian roots. All these Indian M sequences have been found in Arabia as isolated lineages that belong to clusters with deep roots and high diversity in India. Therefore, its presence in Arabia is better explained by recent backflow from India than by supposing that these lineages are footsteps of an M ancestral migration across Arabia.’

A third option available which explains the link between the Indian peoples of Cush and the Arabs of Mizra is simply, that they are brothers. The theories on who migrated from where to where are based on an evolutionary view of history and therefore the issue remains perplexing for geneticists and ethnologists alike.

‘The high diversity of N1a in the Arabian Peninsula, Ethiopia and Egypt raises the possibility that this area was a secondary center of expansion for this haplogroup. However, the highest diversity for N1b and N1c are in Turkey, and Kurds and Iranians, respectively. Macrohaplogroup R is the main branch of N and their major subclades (H, J-T, K-U) embraced the majority of the West Eurasian mtDNA lineages. The Western Asia haplogroup H is the most abundant haplogroup in Europe and the Near East. However in the Arabian Peninsula its mean frequency is moderate…’

Haplogroups N, R and H are associated primarily with the descendants of Shem and Europe. There is some crossover into Ham’s descendants through intermarriage and mixing. The mtDNA N Haplogroup which is higher in the Turks and Persians, reflects their lineal descent from Shem and not from Ham [refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran and XVIII Elam & Turkey].

‘Haplogroup T shows regional heterogeneity in Saudi Arabia and has significantly lower frequencies in Southern Yemen and Oman countries. 

Haplogroup U comprises numerous branches (U1 to U9 and K) that have different geographic distributions. In Saudi Arabia all of them have representatives albeit in minor frequencies, K (4%) and U3 (2.3%) being the most abundant clades. There is no geographical heterogeneity for the total U distribution in Saudi Arabia. Nevertheless, it is significantly different among the Arabian Peninsula countries, with Southern countries showing higher frequencies than the others.

As a whole, haplogroup J reaches its highest frequency in Saudi Arabia, where its regional distribution is also significantly heterogeneous but opposite to that found for (preHV)1. For the J, the West (37.5%) and Southeast (25.7%) regions have higher frequencies than the Central (17.6%) and North (16.3%) regions. Heterogeneity in the whole Peninsula is also significant being Saudi Arabia (21%) and Qatar (17.8%) the two countries with the highest J frequencies. However, the subclade distribution is different in each country. Subclade J1b is the main contributor (9.4%) in Saudi Arabia while other J subclades account for 14.5% in Qatar. With the Qatar exception, J1b is the most frequent subclade in the Arabian Peninsula. 

Nevertheless, whereas the J1b branch TMRCA (11,099 ± 8,381 years ago) was contemporary to that of the northern J1b1a1, the recalculated age of the (preHV)1b branch (by adding all the new HVSI sequences found in the present survey to the ones previously used, was of only 4,036 ± 2,211 years ago which situates this expansion in the Bronze Age. These results could be satisfactorily explained if we admit an older Paleolithic implantation in Saudi Arabia of the J1b clade that, perhaps, with some other N and L clades would form the primitive population.’ 

‘Graphical relationships among the studied populations. MDS plot based on FST haplogroup distances. Codes are: Ce = Central Saudi Arab, Dz = Druze, Et = Ethiopian, Ke = Kenyan, No = Northern Saudi Arab, Nu = Nubian, SE = Southeastern Saudi Arab, Su = Sudan, We = Western Saudi Arab. Bd = Bedouin Arab, Eg = Egyptian, In = Iranian, Iq = Iraqi, Jo = Jordanian, Ku = Kurd, Om = Omani, Pa = Palestinian, Qa = Qatar, Sy = Syrian, Tu = Turk, UA = United Arab Emirates, Ye = Yemeni.’

Carriers of Mitochondrial DNA Macrohaplogroup N Lineages Reached Australia around 50,000 Years Ago following a Northern Asian Route, multiple authors, 2015 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Although the bulk of the Arabian sequences (70%) belong to different clades of macrohaplogroup R, 13% percent of Arabian samples belong to haplogroup L, with a clear sub-Saharan African origin. One of the two L Arabian completely sequenced samples was a typical L2a1 lineage with a reversion at the 16309 position. The second is a derived L3i1a sequence, with its closest counterpart observed in Ethiopia pointing to a recent importation from northeastern Africa. Seven per cent of the Arabian samples were assigned to macro-haplogroup M, of which 4% are members of the North African haplogroup M1, and the remaining 3% conform a miscellaneous group of sequences from South, Southeast and Eastern Asian origins and sole representatives of Melanesia (Q1), Madagascar (M32c) or Australia (M42). In particular, the rare Arabian M sample completely sequenced in this study belongs to the Indian M42b1 clade, sharing only transversion 95C with a Munda sequence (MUN22) at the same clade. A sister branch of the Indian M42b, with a coalescence time estimation around 55 kya [estimated date more accurate if quartered at the very least], has spread in Australia.’ 

Confirming the genetic link between the Melanesians and Indians of Cush and the Black Africans of Canaan with the Arabs of Mizra.

Mitochondrial DNA Haplogroups Observed in Iraqi Population, multiple authors, 2015:

‘Mitochondrial DNA hypervariable regions I and II of [the] control region were sequenced from 100 random healthy unrelated individuals of three sequential generations [belonging] to the Arab [ethnicity of the] Iraqi population. The aim of this study was to [detect] the mtDNA haplotypes and [classify them] into mtDNA haplogroups [thereby] useful in forensic genetics applications and determining the Iraqi population history. The sequence variation within [the] D-loop control region were analyzed [and] the composition of haplogroups… showed [a] high frequency of haplogroups U, H, J, M, D[?], T and N[?] (18%, 14%, 10%, 9%, 7%, 7% and 7%, respectively), [a] moderate frequency of haplogroups L and I was (4%) [found] and B[?], A[?], R and K (2%), and [a] low frequency of haplogroup pre-HV (1%). This study [also indicated a] lack of V, P, Y, X[?], O, Z, Q, G, E and C haplogroups.’

A comparison of mtDNA Haplogroups from the aforementioned paper, consisting of Arab populations and others from West Asia and Europe. It throws light on the simplicity, yet subtle complexity of the Haplogroup sequencing which dictates the similarities, yet differences between ethnicities and races.

                     Pre-HV  HV    H      U      J    M    T      I     K     L1     L3    W      X     V    

Iraq                               6     17      15     8     8     3      2   12                4      9     

Syria                  4         4     25      16    10    1   10             4       3               3               3 

Palestinian       2         2     31        8     9     2   13             7    0.9               3      3  

Arabia               4         4     13       11    21            5   0.8    4               11     2       2  

Iran                   6         6     17      22   14            8      2     8                2      2       3  

Turkey              4         4     25      19   11     4   12      2      6            0.3      4       4  

Slav                                      41       19   11  0.9   12      3     4                     0.9   0.6      3

Italy                   2         2     33      22    7             9      4     8                        2       3      5 

German                               50      14    8             9      3     7                         1    0.5      3 

American          7         7     31      23    9            12      2    8                         1        2  

Notice the lack of Haplogroups M and L in the Europeans and West Asians – apart from admixture – which are indicative of Indians and sub-Saharan Africans respectively. The mtDNA Haplogroups H, V, J, T, U and K are typically associated with Europeans, the descendants of Shem. Though they are also exhibited by the descendants of Mizra. This reveals intermixing between descendants of Shem and Mizra, just as we discovered between Cush and Shem with mtDNA Haplogroup U [refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut].

Another set of figures from a different study though not identical, still highlights the relative percentage shift from an eastern Arab population in Saudi Arabia, towards the far westerly location in Morocco of the near related Berbers. The Arabs have sprung from five different sons of Mizra and thus exhibit a broad range within the maternal mtDNA Haplogroups. The Haplogroup N percentage is comprised of the totals for Haplogroups I, W and X. The Haplogroup U total is made of sub-Haplogroups of U, with U2, U3, U4 and U5. Haplogroup T includes the sum of T1 and T2 and Haplogroup HV includes the percentage for HV0+V.

                            L      H    H1+H3   HV      J      T       U      K       N

Lebanon            2     34         7           6        8     10      15      8       6       

Syria                   6     26                      5        9     12      20     6       4

Iraq                     8     17          2         11      13      9       17      5       4

Saudi Arabia   10       9                       1      19      7       10      4      5   

Palestine           11     27                      3      10      8        9      7       3      

Jordan              14     25         2           6       6      7       23      4       4   

Morocco           21     28        16          9       5       5      16      5       3

Egypt                22     16                      4       9      11        9      5       4

Algeria              25     31        12          9       4       5      10      3       2

Libya                 28     17                      9     10       6      12      5       3

Tunisia             28    28        12          7        5       8      14     10      3

Using the ancient mtDNA Haplogroup L – the defining marker Haplogroup for the related sub-Saharan Africans – Lebanon is one bookend, with the least and Tunisia is the other bookend with the highest level of L. Lebanon, like its neighbouring nations, possess far less Haplogroup L than their cousins in North Africa who carry higher percentages. In contrast, the Arab nations of the Near East tend to have higher levels of Haplogroups J, T and U. Aside from Haplogroup L, Haplogroup H is also dominant amongst the Arabs, yet does not follow any geographical dispersion pattern as Haplogroup L portrays. 

The Lebanese while possessing the least of Haplogroup L, have the most overall of Haplogroup H at 33.8%. Jordan has the highest level of overall Haplogroup U, with close to 23% and Saudi Arabia has the highest percentage of Haplogroup J at 19.4%. Tunisia with 28.2%, edges Libya’s 27.5% for Haplogroup L.

Saudi Arabia: J [19.4%] – L [10.3%] – H [9%] – T2 [4.2%] – K [4.2%] –

T1 [2.3%] – HV [0.8%] 

Lebanon: H [33.8%] – K [8.3%] – J [7.9%] – T1 [5.7%] – T2 [4.6%] –

HV [3.1%] – L [1.8%] 

Egypt: L [21.8%] – H [15.7%] – J [8.8%] – T2 [6.1%] – T1 [5.3%] –

K [4.5%] – HV [4%]

Morocco: L [28.2%] – H [28.2% – K [4.8%] – J [4.7%] – T2 [4.2%] –

HV [2%] – T1 [0.7%]

Note that the dominant maternal Haplogroup for combined Berbers and Arabs of North Africa is primarily L, followed by H and then J. Whereas in Arabia and the Near East, the dominant Haplogroups are H or J, as in the case for Saudi Arabia. Overall, the dominant and defining marker mtDNA Haplogroups for the Arabic peoples is primarily H through admixture, followed by the naturally indicative L.

A considerable number of genetic disorders which are specific to Arabs, are located on a HLA segment on their chromosome 6. These segment mutations are then also markers for Arabs in genealogical and forensic profiling tests and studies, indicating they are a separate ethnic or racial family; not a mixture of European and South Asian or African peoples and certainly not a hybrid people.

Four principal West Eurasian autosomal DNA components characterise the populations in the Arab world: the Arabian, Levantine, Coptic and Maghrebi. The Arabian component is the prime autosomal element in the Gulf region, though it is also found at significant frequencies in parts of the Levant and Northeast Africa. Its presence is also found in Lebanese Christians, Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews, Cypriots and Armenians which shows historical admixture. 

The Levantine component is the principal autosomal element in the Near East and the Caucasus area. The Coptic component is the main autosomal element throughout Northeast Africa. It peaks amongst the Egyptian Copts in the Sudan and is found at high frequencies in the both the Nile Valley and the Horn of Africa. The Maghrebi component is the main autosomal element in Northwest Africa and includes the Berber populations. 

These four divisions broadly equate to Mizra’s sons as: Pathros, Coptic; Casluh and Caphtor, Maghrebi; Naphtuh, Levantine; and Anam, Arabian. While the remaining two sons, Ludim and Lehab, are geographically located further east in West Asia. Amplification on the Ludim will be covered in a separate chapter discussing Shem’s son Lud. Clarification will be covered in a separate chapter discussing Shem’s son Lud.

A genetic study published in the European Journal of Human Genetics in 2019, stated that West Asians, that is Arabs, are closely related to Europeans, Northern Africans and to Southwest Asians. I would concur with the latter two; though the first group is a little misleading. Arabs share certain Haplogroups at a higher frequency with Europeans from Southeastern Europe, though this does not hold to be true with the majority of Europeans. Northeastern and especially Northwestern Europeans, are genetically far removed from an Arab. Arab Haplogroups link them more closely with Indian, Pakistani and Black African peoples and a lesser degree to peoples of the Caucasus and Southeast Europe. The same cannot be said for the remainder of Europe. This scenario is reminiscent of the Indian-Aryan misnomer addressed in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush and Phut.

Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomal stratification in Iran: relationship between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula, multiple authors, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The Somalis and Ethiopians are sequestered to the right extreme of the plot, whereas the other North African group from Egypt is adjacent to a closely intertwined Levant/Peninsular Arab grouping. The Yemenis are the only population from the Arabian Peninsula that deviates from this spatial pattern, likely due to their… geographical isolation from the rest of the Peninsular Arabs.

When all branches of haplogroup U are considered together, there are no well-defined frequency clines observed except for the obvious lack of the haplogroup within the African continent. Upon sub-dividing the branches of the aforementioned haplogroup (only the most highly represented branches within the Iranian domain were further explored), clear region-specific gradients are detected. 

For example, sub-haplogroups U2 and U7 are widely distributed throughout Asia and the Arabian Peninsula, exhibiting their highest frequencies in the southwest Asian collections and displaying east-to-west frequency clines. It is noteworthy that both haplogroups are found in the Arabian Peninsula. Y-chromosomal haplogroup J is present in high frequencies throughout the Arabian Peninsula and the Levant, dissipating considerably in all directions. Haplogroup R, on the other hand, presents very high frequencies in the central Asian/southwest Asian regions, with levels decreasing immediately beyond the Indus Valley area. A slight increase in frequencies is observed in the Balkan Peninsula.’ 

  1. MDS plot based on observed frequency of mtDNA haplogroup distributions (stress=0.28852). (b) MDS plot based on observed frequency of Y-chromosome haplogroup distributions (stress=0.12492). 

Analysing the Haplogroup family trees of the world, it is evident, that mtDNA which is passed from mothers to all their children, includes the main East Asian and American Indian Haplogroups [alphabetically] of: A, B, C, D. The key Haplogroups for Ham are: H, L and U and we will learn the main Haplogroups for Shem are: H, J and U. 

Whereas, the Y-DNA Haplogroups passed from fathers only to their sons, includes the main Haplogroups for Japheth [alphabetically] of: C, D, K, N, O1, O2 and Q. The key Shem Y-DNA Haplogroups we will learn, are G, I1, I2, R1a and R1b and the prime Haplogroups for Ham are E, H, J1 and J2. 

The key Black African Y-DNA Haplogroups are in order of frequency, E, A and B. The E Haplogroup splits into the clades of E1a, E1b1a, E1b1b and E2. The primary mtDNA Haplogroups for the Africans include Haplogroups L0 through to L6. The main Indian and Pakistani Y-DNA Haplogroups – excepting R1a from admixture – are for India: H, L, R2 and for Pakistan: J, L, R2. The principal mtDNA Haplogroups for Cush and Phut are M, R and U. 

An intersting split occurs in the Arab world. Those nations to the west in North Africa, with a Berber majority have a Y-DNA descending sequence of E1b1b, J1, J2, T/G, [R1b/R1a]. 

Those Arab nations eastwards in the Arabian Peninsula, Levantine and the Gulf, include countries who possess the same paternal Haplogroups, though the majority in a markedly reversed and different order of J1, J2, E1b1b, G/T, [R1a/R1b].  

The overview table supports three suppositions.

Firstly, there is a clear difference between specific Arab Y-DNA Haplogroups and those of Europe – as we shall discover – with very high levels of E and J and far lower levels of R1a and R1b.

Secondly, there is a marked visible difference between the Arabic peoples from North Africa and those of the Middle East because they are from different sons of Mizra, whether Casluh and Caphtor, or from Anam, Naphtuh and Ludim; varying in their type and frequency levels of defining marker Haplogroup J1 and lesser related Haplogroups J2 and E1b1b.

Thirdly and related to the previous point, is the fact that Egypt though superficially looking as if it could belong to either group, is unique, aside from the Sudan because it descends from another son of Mizra, Pathros.

‘(a) mtDNA haplogroup distributions (b) Y-chromosomal haplogroup distributions.’

The prime mtDNA Haplogroups for Mizra are L, H and U. The Berber peoples possess a Y-DNA paternal Haplogroup related to Black africans, of E1b1b. Arabs similarly share in small quantities with India, Haplogroups L and H; while with Pakistan, they share small quantities of L and H and proportionate levels of Haplogroup J2.

To the south of Egypt, there are nations which include Arabs though they are not necessarily the majority. Black Africans are a substantial part of these populations – countries such as Eritrea, Djibouti, Somalia, Chad and the Sudan.

The spread of Haplogroup E1b1b, M215, is shown below. 

Egypt: E1b1b – J1 – J2 – T1 – R1b – G – E1b1a – R1a – A/B –

F [M89] – L – I – Q – K [M9]

Egypt: E1b1b [46%] – J1 [21%] – J2 [6.5%] – T1 [6%] – R1b [6%] –

G [5.5%] – E1b1a [3%] – R1a [2%] – A/B [1.3%] – F [1%] –

L [1%] – I [0.5%] – Q – [0.5%] – K [0.2%] 

Egyptian men possess a variety of Haplogroups, though fundamentally their core marker Haplogroup is J1, with E1b1b and J2 a result of intermixing. Haplogroup E1b1b links them to their sub-Saharan African cousins and the Berbers in North Africa; J1 to their brothers in the Mid-East and J2 with their cousins in West Asia. Paternal Haplogroups E1b1a, A and B represent Black African admixture.

The approximate six percent of Haplogroup R1b in Egyptians is comprised of R1b-V88 at 2.97% and R1b-M269 also at 2.97%. R1b-V88 is a mutation of R1b found specifically in Arab peoples within Africa and the result of historical contact amongst migrating peoples. Whereas, R-M269 is the main R1b Haplogroup spread across Europe. It is found in lesser percentages in the Middle East as evidence of more recent intermixing and intermarriage.

The nations descended from Anam, lay to the west of Pathros Egypt.

Libya: E1b1b – J1 – J2 – R1b – T1 – F – I – R1a – L – G – K – A/B

Libya: E1b1b [44.5%] – J1 [27.4%] – J2 [6.9%] – R1b [5%] – T [5%] – 

F [4.6%] – I [2%] – R1a [1.7%] – L [1.5%] – G [1.1%] – K [0.6%] –

A/B [0.6%] 

The breakdown of Libya’s R1b is R-V88 at 5.02%, with no R-M269. Thus recent admixture is virtually non-existent compared with historical contact. Libya’s maternal Haplogroups differed from Egypt, though the paternal Haplogroups align. Perhaps the Libyans are composed of a female lineage from Anam and a male line from Pathros.

Tunisia: E1b1b – J1 – J2 – F – R1b – E1b1a – T1 – G – R1a – K – A/B – I 

Tunisia: E1b1b [72%] – J1 [16.5%] – J2 [3%] – F [2.6%] – R1b [2.1%] – 

E1b1a [1.4%] – T1 [1%] – G [0.5%] – R1a [0.5%] – K [0.3%] –

A/B [0.1%] – I [0.1%] 

The breakdown of Tunisia’s R1b is R-V88 at 1.83% and R-M269 at 0.33%.

Algeria: E1b1b – J1 – R1b – J2 – F – K – R1a – Q – G – I

Algeria: E1b1b [59%] – J1 [22%] – R1b [9.5%] – J2 [5%] – F [3.8%] –

K [0.6%] – R1a [0.5%] –  Q [0.5%] – G [0.5%] – I [0.1%] 

The breakdown of Algeria’s R1b is R-V88 at 2.56% and R-M269 at 7.04%. Algeria is the opposite to Libya in that it shows more recent admixture. 

Morocco: E1b1b – J1 – R1b – J2 – G – A/B – F – I

Morocco: E1b1b [83%] – J1 [6.5%] – R1b [4.5%] – J2 [1.5%] – 

G [0.5%] – A/B [0.9%] – F [0.2%] – I [0.1%] 

The breakdown of Morocco’s R1b is R-V88 at 0.92% and R-M269 at 3.55%, similar to Algeria. The Berbers also live in Tunisia, the Western Sahara and Mauritania. 

According to Reguig in a 2014 study, the Berbers in southern Morocco possess 98.5% E1b1b. An earlier study by Fadhlaoui-Zid in 2011 reported results for Berbers in northern and southern Tunisia of an incredible 100% for Haplogroup E1b1b. 

On our journey so far, we have only come across two other peoples untouched by admixture, with a 100% Y-DNA Haplogroup: the Amerindian Mixe males of Mexico with 100% of Haplogroup Q; and in part, the Taiwanese Aborigines with men carrying 7% O1b, 9% O2a1 and 84% O1a [or 91% O1], adding up to 100% overall for Haplogroup O.

A comparison of the North African nations shows that Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco carry a Y-DNA Haplogroup sequence which differs from that of Egypt; notably in Haplogroups E1b1b, T1 and G – which is a paternal line from admixture with Shem. Libya appears to align with Egypt, apart from Haplogroup G. The Libyan population is considerably smaller than the other four nations of North Africa and they live primarily in the west of their nation, close to the Tunisian and Algerian populations. They are included as Casluh, though a likely paternal link with Egypt means they are a mixed people with Pathros. As one heads west, E1b1b increases and Haplogroups J1, J2, T and G in turn, decrease.

                    E1b1b     J1       J2      T      G

Libya             45        27        7       5       1

Egypt             46        21        7       6      6     

Algeria          59        22        5            0.5

Tunisia          72        17        3       1    0.5

Morocco       83          7     1.5             0.5

Now comparing the nations to the northeast of Egypt:

Syria: J1 – J2 – R1b – E1b1b – R1a – T – G – L – I 

Syria: J1 [30%] – J2 [17%] – R1b [13.5%] – E1b1b [11.5%] – 

R1a [10%] – T [5%] – G [3%] – I [5%] – L [3%] 

Iraq: J1 – J2 – E1b1b – R1b – R1a – I – T1a – G2a – E1b1a – L – N – Q 

Iraq: J1 [43%] – J2 [19.5%] – E1b1b [9.5%] – R1b [9.5%] – R1a [5.5%] – 

I [4%] – T1a [3.5%] – G2a [2.5%] – E1b1a [0.9%] – L [0.5%] –

Q [0.5%] – N [0.5%] 

Iraq’s R1b is R-M269 at 9.8%, with no R-V88, hence admixture with Europeans has been more recent and due to Iraq’s location this is logical. 

Kuwait:     J1/J2 – R1a – E1b1b – G2a – R1b – T1a – I – H – K – L

Kuwait: J [84%] – R1a [6.7%] – E1b1b [6%] – G [3.4%] – R1b [1.3%] 

Kuwait’s Haplogroups are represented by the Bedouin Arab; exhibiting a very high percentage of Haplogroup J.

Lebanon: J2 – J1 – E1b1b – R1b – G – L – T1 – I – L – R1a – Q – N 

Lebanon: J2 [26%] – J1 [20%] – E1b1b [17.5%] – R1b [8%] – G [6.5%] – 

L [5%] – T [5%] – I [5%] – R1a [2.5%] – Q [2%] – N [0.1]

Jordan: J1 – E1b1b – R1b – J2 – G – I – R1a – T

Jordan: J1 [31%] – E1b1b [26%] – R1b [18%] – J2 [13%] – G [3.5%] – 

I [3.5%] – R1a [1.5%] – T [0.5%]

Palestinian Arab: J1 – E1b1b – J2 – R1b – T – G – R1a 

Palestinian Arab: J1 [38.5%] – E1b1b [19.5%] – J2 [17%] – R1b [8.5%] – 

T [7%] – G [3%] – R1a [1.5%] 

This grouping is clearly different from those nations lying to the west of Egypt. A number of the nations have a higher percentage of Haplogroup G from Shem, similar to Egypt, though unlike the rest of North Africa. Levels of E1b1b are far lower, with Haplogroup J1 being far more prominent than in North Africa. Lebanon stands out as the only nation with more J2 than J1. Haplogroup J2 being associated with West Asian and via admixture, related southern European men.

                            J1       J2     E1b1b      G       T   

Lebanon           20       26        18          7       5 

Syria                  30       17        12           3       5

Jordan               31       13        26          4    0.5

Palestine           39       17        20          3        7

Iraq                    43       20       10          3        4

Egypt                 21         7        44          6       6

Egypt is even more distinct from this northeast group of Arabic nations. It is similar to some only in the lesser G and T Haplogroups. Aside from Lebanon, the other four peoples are linked with a discernible family alignment. 

Comparing the nations to the east of Egypt in the Arabian Peninsula.

Saudi Arabia: J1 -J2 – E1b1a – E1b1b – T – R1a – G – Q – R1b – L

Saudia Arabia: J1 [40%] – J2 [17%] – E1b1a [8%] – E1b1b [7.5%] – 

T [5%] – R1a [5%] – G [3%] – Q [2.5%] – R1b [2%] – L [2%] 

The United Arab Emirates

UAE: J1 – E1b1b – J2 – R1a – E1b1a – T – G – R1b – L – Q 

UAE: J1 [35%] – E1b1b [11.5%] – J2 [10%] – R1a [7.5%] – E1b1a [5%] – 

T [5%] – G [4%] – R1b [4%] – L [3%] – Q [2%] 

Bahrain: J – E1b1b – R1a – R2a – H – G – K – L – B

Qatar: J – R1a – E1b1b – G – E1b1a [3%] – L – R1b – [R2a] – [B] – [I] – [T]

Qatar: J [67%] – R1a [6.9%] – E1b1b [5.6%] – G [2.8%] – E1b1a [3%] – 

L [2.8%] – R1b [1.4%]

Qatar like Kuwait, exhibits a high percentage of Haplogroup J.

Oman: J – E1b1b – R1a – T – G – R1b – L – H

Oman: J [47.9%] – E1b1b [15.7%] – R1a [ 9.1%] – T [8.3%] – 

G [1.7%] – R1b [1.7%] – L [0.8%] 

Yemen: J1 – E1b1b – J2 – E1b1a – G – R1a – T

Yemen: J1 [72.5%] – E1b1b [13%] – J2 [8.5%] – E1b1a [3%] – G [1.5%] 

This grouping is more closely related to the nations northeast of Egypt, though with the subtle difference of the third Haplogroup percentage shifting from R1b to R1a. The nations of North Africa are clearly more closely related as are the nations of the Middle East, as well as the Arabian Peninsula to each other; while Egypt straddles the three regions.

                              J1      J2      E1b1b        G        T    

UAE                     35      10         12            4        5    

Saudi Arabia      40      17           8            3        5

Yemen                 73        9         13          1.5

Egypt                   21        7         44            6        6

Yemen like Morocco is on the fringes of the Arab sphere and as Morocco has the highest levels of E1b1b, Yemen has the highest percentage of J1. Egypt, clearly is not like the others; yet is still palpably related. The lesser defining marker Haplogroups for Arabs are J2 and T. The prime defining marker Haplogroups for Berbers and Arabs are respectively E1b1b and J1, specifically Haplogroup J-M267 – see map below .

                              E1b1b       J1       J2        T        G        J

Kuwait                      6                                             3       84

Qatar                         6                                             3       67

Saudi Arabia            8         40       17         5         3       57

Iraq                          10         43       20        4         3       63

Syria                         12         30       17         5         3      47

UAE                         12          35       10        5         4       45

Yemen                     13          73         9                 1.5      82

Oman                      16                                  8         2       48

Lebanon                 18          20       26        5         7       46

Palestine                20          39       17         7         3       56

Jordan                    26          31       13      0.5        4       44

Libya                       45          27         7         5         1       34

Egypt                      46          21          7        6         6       28

Algeria                    59          22         5                 0.5      27

Tunisia                    72          17         3         1       0.5     20

Morocco                 83            7         2                  0.5       9   

The comparison table shows that as Morocco and Yemen would each bookend the table for Haplogroup J1; it is Kuwait and Morocco who would bookend Haplogroup E1b1b. A combination of J1 and J2 though, highlights Kuwait as one bookend with Morocco for both Haplogroups of J and E. Again, Kuwait is at an extremity of the Arab region like Morocco and Yemen. 

Morocco possesses the highest percentage of Haplogroup E1b1b at 83% and Kuwait the lowest with 6%. Yemen has the highest level of J1, at 73% and Morocco the least at 7%. Lebanon has the highest percentage of J2 at 26% and Morocco the least at 2%. For Haplogroup J overall, Kuwait has 84% compared to Morocco with the lowest, at 9%. 

The dividing line between North Africa and the Mid-East is clear when observing mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroups, with Egypt exactly in the centre. Libya as discussed, sits with North Africa regarding its mtDNA inheritance and with Egypt when comparing its Y-DNA sequence. 

Comparing two sets of peoples each from: Canaan’s descendants, Nigeria and Ethiopia; Cush, India and Pakistan; and Mizra, Egypt and Saudi Arabia; is revealing, for it displays their uniqueness and relatedness in equal measure.

                               A/B   E1b1a   E1b1b    J1     J2      H      L       

Nigeria                    13       68          4             

Ethiopia                  11                    63     

Egypt                      1.3         3        46       21       7                 1      

Saudi Arabia                       8          8       40    17                 2       

Pakistan                                                             20       6      12    

India                                                                     9      23     18    

Unlike the seven sons of Japheth as studied in chapters II to X, who have very little variation in their Y-DNA paternal Haplogroup spread. For nearly all his sons carry Haplogroup O as a common denominator, and if not O; then Haplogroup C unifies the majority, with Haplogroups K, D, Q and N playing lesser roles. Not so, with the four sons of Ham. The variation amongst Ham’s sons is the broadest of Noah’s three sons; more so than Shem’s five sons, as we will discover. In fact, it is hard to credit that Ham’s sons, Cush, Phut, Canaan and Mizra all came from him and that they are all brothers; until we put their primary Haplogroups together as in the above table. For recall, we have considered more than once, if Canaan’s descendants are in fact a distinct line from Noah rather than from Ham [Chapter XI Ham Aequator].

Taking the African core Haplogroups A, B and E, these are the defining Canaanite Haplogroups – particularly E. The Arab related core Haplogroup is J1 and to a lesser extent E1b1b and J2. The Berbers are clearly related to the sub-Saharan Africans as they share E1b1b, which is a bridge Haplogroup for the two peoples. The core Haplogroups for the South Asians are H, L and J2. These are the defining Haplogroups for Cush and Phut. Their bridge Haplogroup, which Canaan and Mizra do not exhibit in quantity, is H. India and Pakistan share the bridge Haplogroup J2 with Arab related peoples, and therefore all these equatorial peoples are linked or bonded through the key Haplogroups of either: E1b1b, J2, H1a or L.

It is the Arabs, who non-coincidentally lie between the three, who have genetic material in common with Africans as much as they do with South Asians. Nigeria and India are polar opposites, though Egypt bridges the gap. This bears out the second point in the introduction regarding nations living adjacent to peoples who they are more closely related to – a concentric geography. All are brother nations as the sons of Ham: Cush, Mizra, Phut and Canaan.

Fools are rewarded with nothing but more foolishness, but the wise are rewarded with knowledge.

Proverbs 14:18 New Century Version

“I don’t imagine you will dispute the fact that at present the stupid people are in an absolutely overwhelming majority all the world over.” 

Henrik Ibsen

“In the end truth always wins.”

George F Jowett

© Orion Gold 2020 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Ham Aequator

Chapter XI

Noah’s second and middle son is Ham. We will discover that his descendants have spanned across the globe, principally throughout the hottest regions of the earth relative to the equator. Ham’s children have dispersed widely and comprise the darker skinned peoples of the world, ranging from black to olive skin and all the shades of brown in between. They are located in Central and South America, Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, the Indian Sub-Continent, South East Asia and Oceania.

A H Sayce, page 50 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘It is true that although Semites, Aryans, and Alaro-dians represent different races of mankind, they nevertheless all alike belong to the white stock, and may thus be said to be but varieties of one and the same original race… even granting it to be probable that the various white races are all descended from a common ancestry… it is possible that they may have developed out of more than one dark race [refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis].’ 

Abarim Publications, emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name that occurs in the English Bible as Ham is really two completely different Hebrew names; one which is pronounced Cham, and the other Ham. They have two completely different meanings, but since English readers are so used to the name Ham… call them Ham I and Ham II:

The name Ham I – Meaning: Hot, or Protective Wall from the verb (ham), to be hot, or the verb (hmh), to protect or surround.

This name [C]Ham is identical to the adjective (ham), meaning warm, and also to the noun (ham), meaning father in law… The verb (hamam) means to be hot and is sometimes used to describe mental agitation. The noun (hamman) denotes [a] kind of mysterious small pillar (perhaps a device). The verb (yaham) also means hot, but mostly in a mental sense: to be excited or angered. The noun (hema) mostly refers to a severe mental “burning”: anger or rage.

For the meaning of this name [C]Ham, Alfred Jones (Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names) confidently derives it from the verb (hamam), meaning to be hot, and renders it Heat, Black. Then he… connects blackness with sin. What escapes the… scholar is that:

  • This version of the name Ham is also identical to (ham), father-in-law, from the unused root (hmh) of which the cognates mean to protect or surround.
  • In the Bible not blackness but whiteness is associated with sin. Miriam turned white [2 Kings 5:27] because of her aggression against Moses’ second [3rd] wife, who was a Cushite and thus quite likely very black. And the bride of the Song of Solomon, often regarded as a type of the Church, was black as well (Song of Solomon 1:5). 
  • NOBSE Study Bible Name List simply reads Hot for Ham, but in view of the above, a closer rendering would be Passion or Intensity.

The name Ham II – Meaning: Noisy from the verb(hama), to be noisy.

Ham II, which is spelled and pronounced as Ham, denotes a once-mentioned town where kings Amraphel, Arioch, Chedorlaomer and Tidal defeated the Zuzim during the war of four against five kings (Genesis 14:5).

Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names derives this Ham from the verb (hama), meaning cry aloud… The… verb (hama) means to be noisy… derived masculine noun (hamon) denotes a noisy multitude.

The Zuzim or Zuzites from Zuz, in Ham, are one of six clans of the Nephilim descended  giants mentioned in the Old Testament who lived on the earth after the flood. They are also called Zamzummim or Zamzummites [Deuteronomy 2:21]. We will study Genesis chapter fourteen in more detail in a later chapter. Nephilim are associated with at least two of the four sons of Ham. The definition of the word Ham infers that his descendants would be intense, passionate and at times hot headed – each accurate and applicable.

Psalm 105:23, 26-27

New English Translation

‘Israel moved to [entered] Egypt; Jacob lived for a time [lived as a resident foreigner] in the land of Ham [Africa]… He sent his servant Moses, and Aaron, whom he had chosen. They executed his miraculous signs among them, and his amazing deeds in the land of Ham.’

Egypt is translated from the Hebrew and Aramaic: Mizraim, for Mizra is a son of Ham. He was located in Northern Africa with two of his three brothers and later all three [Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia].

Psalm 78:50-52 and 106:21-22

English Standard Version

‘… he did not spare them from death, but gave their lives over to the plague. He struck down every firstborn in Egypt, the firstfruits of their strength in the tents of Ham. Then he led out his people [the sons of Jacob] like sheep and guided them in the wilderness like a flock… They forgot God, their Saviour, who had done great things in Egypt, wondrous works in the land of Ham, and awesome deeds by the Red Sea [refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or fact?].’

The Book of Jubilees provides additional geographic information on the land inheritance of the sons of Ham. It is referenced against the location of the Garden of Eden. We will return to this passage when we investigate Eden [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. The lands of Ham were to the south and west of Shem, as opposed to the north for Japheth [refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium]. Ham was located principally, in the continent of Africa. 

Book of Jubilees 8:10-11, 22-24

10 And it came to pass… that they divided the earth into three parts, for Shem and Ham and Japheth, according to the inheritance of each… 11 And [Noah] called his sons, and they drew nigh to him, they and their children, and he divided the earth into the lots, which his three sons were to take in possession, and they reached forth their hands, and took the writing out of the bosom of Noah, their father. 

22 And for Ham came forth the second portion, beyond the Gihon [the River Nile] towards the south to the right [facing East] of the Garden, and it extends towards the south [Ethiopia and Kenya] and it extends to all the mountains of fire [the African Rift Valley], and it extends towards the west to the sea of ‘Atel [Red Sea] and it extends towards the west till it reaches the sea of Ma’uk – that (sea) [Atlantic Ocean] into which everything which is not destroyed descends. 

Notice the line of active volcanoes in modern day Ethiopia and Kenya; the ancient lands of Ham’s son Cush. It is called the Rift Valley as the Nubian and Somalian plates are causing the continent of Africa to split into two land masses.  

23 And it goes forth towards the north to the limits of Gadir [Gibraltar, Spain], and it goes forth to the coast of the waters of the sea to the waters of the great sea [Mediterranean Sea] till it draws near to the river Gihon, and goes along the river Gihon till it reaches the right of the Garden of Eden. 

24 And this is the land which came forth for Ham as the portion which he was to occupy forever for himself and his sons unto their generations forever.

We now arrive at an enigmatic passage of scripture in Genesis chapter nine. A comprehensive or definitive answer to the account is elusive. It is as mysterious as Noah’s role as Ancestor Zero [Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla]. The early chapters of Genesis are a very abbreviated, amalgamated version of events. The Bible stereotypically understates rather than overstates, and Genesis nine exhibits deliberate editing and censorship. Moses, who is credited with compiling the early books of the Bible may not have glossed over events as they stand and thus, subsequent scribes and translators are likely culpable. 

The subject matter is unsavoury, unsettling and altruistically, it is lightly trusted that the editing was intended for our sensibilities rather than a deliberate desire to cover over the truth. 

Recall, we learned earlier that Noah planted a vineyard and made wine after the Flood, very likely in the region of Kashmir [refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla]. Further details are added in the Book of Jubilees.

Book of Jubilees 7:1-7

‘1 … Noah planted vines on the mountain on which the ark had rested, named Lubar, one of the Ararat Mountains, and they produced fruit [it typically takes newly planted vines up to three years to grow grapes] in the fourth year [circa 10,833 BCE] and he guarded their fruit, and gathered it in this year in the seventh month [Tishri: September/October]. 

2 And he made wine… and put it into a vessel, and kept it until the fifth year, until the first day, on the new month [new Moon] of the first month [Abib/Nisan: March/April]. 3 And he celebrated with joy the day of this feast [due to the use of the word feast, the Full Moon of the 14/15 day, equating to the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread*], and he made a burnt sacrifice unto Yahweh, one young ox and one ram, and seven sheep, each a year old, and a kid of the goats, that he might make atonement thereby for himself and his sons [similar to a later Patriarch named Job – article: The Magnificent Man]. 

4 And he prepared the kid first [young goat], and placed some of its blood* on the flesh that was on the altar which he had made, and all the fat he laid on the altar where he made the burnt sacrifice, and the ox and the ram and the sheep, and he laid all their flesh upon the altar. 5 And he placed all their offerings mingled with [olive] oil upon it, and afterwards he sprinkled [red] wine on the fire which he had previously made on the altar, and he placed incense on the altar and caused a sweet savoir to ascend acceptable before Yahweh his Sovereign Ruler.’ 

The system of worshipping and obeying the Eternal One, through animal sacrifices was not inaugurated by Moses and Aaron during the time of the Israelites, but rather, re-activated. Abel and Noah in the antediluvian age and Abraham, Isaac and Jacob after the flood, all offered sacrifices to the Creator; for either the purpose of thanksgiving or atonement and forgiveness [refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy]. 

6 And he rejoiced and drank of this wine, he and his children with joy. 7 And it was evening, and he went into his tent, and being drunken he lay down and slept, and was uncovered in his tent as he slept.

A number of scenarios are possible and it is remarkably similar to an ancient crime scene and a re-opening of an investigation into a very cold case. The protagonists appear to include Noah, his son Ham and or, his son Canaan. As we read, it is not ostensibly clear who the perpetrator is, nor entirely the identity of the victim.

Genesis 9:18-26 

New Century Version

18 The sons of Noah who came out of the boat with him were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan.) 

The Voice: “… (Ham, by the way, was the father of Canaan.)” Emphasis theirs.

Amplified: “… Ham was the father of Canaan [born later].” Brackets theirs. 

We are first alerted to misadventure by the concluding disjunctive clause, the parenthetical, Ham was the father of Canaan

The interlinear states:

And sons Noah that went forth ark were Shem Ham Japheth Ham [H2526 – Cham] father [H1 – ‘ab] Canaan [H3667 – Kenaan].

We are told who the sons of Noah are; why delineate Canaan as Ham’s son, in a context about Noah’s sons. Could Canaan actually be Noah’s son?

19 These three men were Noah’s sons, and all the people on earth came from these three sons.

20 Noah became a farmer [H376 – ‘iyesh: husbandman] and planted a vineyard. 

NET: ‘The epithet a man of the soil indicates that Noah was a farmer. “Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard”; Hebrew “and Noah, a man of the ground, began and he planted a vineyard.”’

21 When he drank wine made from his grapes, he became drunk and lay naked in his tent. 

NET: ‘The Hebrew verb (galah) in the Hitpael verbal stem (vayyitgal) means “to uncover oneself” or “to be uncovered.” Noah became overheated because of the wine and uncovered himself in the tent.’

22 Ham, the father of Canaan, looked at his naked father and told his brothers outside. 

The interlinear states:

‘And Ham father Canaan saw* [H7200 – Ra’ah] nakedness** [H6172 – ‘ervah] his father told his two brethren outside’

We are told that Ham is the father of Canaan. Why not just state Ham. The writer or editor desperately wants the reader to believe Canaan is Ham’s son. 

Is this because he is, though not legally. Or is it because Canaan isn’t Ham’s son at all. By including Canaan; the implication is that Ham is looking upon something that may have involved Canaan. Looked at his naked father implies that there had been a sexual act; but, by whom?

‘NET: some would translate “had sexual relations with,” arguing that Ham committed a homosexual act with his drunken father for which he was cursed. However, the expression “see nakedness” usually refers to observation of another’s nakedness, not a sexual act (see Genesis 42:9, 12 where “nakedness” is used metaphorically to convey the idea of “weakness” or “vulnerability”; Deuteronomy 23:14 where “nakedness” refers to excrement; Isaiah 47:3; Ezekiel 16:37; Lamentations 1:8. The following verse (v.23) clearly indicates that visual observation, not a homosexual act, is in view here. In Leviticus 20:17 the expression “see nakedness” does appear to be a euphemism for sexual intercourse, but the context there, unlike that of Genesis 9:22, clearly indicates that in that passage sexual contact is in view. The expression “see nakedness” does not in itself suggest a sexual connotation. Some relate Genesis 9:22 to Leviticus 18:6-11, 15-19, where the expression “uncover [another’s] nakedness” (the Piel form of galah) refers euphemistically to sexual intercourse. 

However, Genesis 9:22 does not say Ham “uncovered” the nakedness of his father. According to the text, Noah uncovered himself; Ham merely saw his father naked. The point of the text is that Ham had no respect for his father. Rather than covering his father up, he told his brothers. Noah then gave an oracle that Ham’s [Canaan’s] descendants, who would be characterized by the same moral abandonment [for looking at a naked sleeping person and then cursing his son instead?], would be cursed. 

It is hard for modern people to appreciate why seeing another’s nakedness was such an abomination, because nakedness is so prevalent today. In the ancient world, especially in a patriarchal society, seeing another’s nakedness was a major [offence]. (See the account in Herodotus, Histories 1.8-13, where a general saw the nakedness of his master’s wife, and one of the two had to be put to death.) Besides, Ham was not a little boy wandering into his father’s bedroom…’

The thrust of the verse is that Ham is complicit. If he is momentarily discounted from an actual act against Noah directly, he is not absolved from witnessing a possible aftermath of an episode involving his father and not responding accordingly. Rather, he flippantly abrogates responsibility and chooses to alert his brothers instead.

In verse 22, the Hebrew word for saw* is translated by the KJV as see 879 times and look [104], but also as enjoy [4]. It can mean to ‘look intently at, behold, to gaze at.’ The circumstances hint that Ham did more than spot his naked father and then quickly leave to go and tell his brothers. There are two possibilities, in that Ham lingered, while observing the situation before him for longer than was appropriate; or more tellingly, somehow re-arranged or manipulated the [crime] scene he discovered. Did he try to extricate himself, or was it Canaan he sought to protect?

As plausible as it may be that Ham or perhaps Canaan just looked, this verse has to be connected with verse 24, where it says: ‘when [Noah] woke up and learned what his youngest son had done to him.’ Support for this line of reasoning is in the meaning for the Hebrew word nakedness** in verse 22. The KJV translates it as nakedness 50 times, though also as shame [1], unclean [1] and uncleanness [1]. 

The nakedness in question is implying that the nudity on display was a shameful exposure of indecency or improper behaviour; as in ‘exposed, undefended, disgrace, blemish.’ The latin term pudenda would apply, in that in the very least, the genitalia of Noah were visible. Interestingly, pudendum while signifying human external genital organs, is especially applied to those of a female.^

23 Then Shem and Japheth got a coat [H8071 – simlah] and, carrying it on both their shoulders, they walked backwards into the tent and covered their father. They turned their faces away so that they did not see their father’s nakedness.

NET: ‘The word translated “garment” has the Hebrew definite article on it. The article may simply indicate that the garment is definite and vivid in the mind of the narrator, but it could refer instead to Noah’s garment. Did Ham bring it out when he told his brothers?’

Why would Ham go to the trouble of telling his brothers and not cover his father himself if it was simple exposure? Why would Shem and Japheth cover their father simply because he was naked, unless they were actually reacting to something more serious. The Hebrew word for coat is translated in the KJV as raiment [11], clothes [6], garment [6] and apparel [2]. It signifies a wrapper or mantle – sleeveless cloak or cape – as a covering garment. 

It does contain the ‘permutation for the feminine (through the idea of a cover assuming the shape of the object beneath); [for instance] a dress,^ especially a mantle.’ There may be significance in this, or it may have simply been a unisex dressing gown suitable for someone who is sleeping lying down.

24 Noah was sleeping because of the wine [H3196 – Yayin]. When he woke up and learned  [H3045 – Yada’] what his youngest [H6996 – Qatan] son [H1121 – ben], Ham, had done [H6213 – asah] to him…

NET: ‘Hebrew “his wine,” used here by metonymy for the drunken stupor it produced. The Hebrew verb (ʿasah, “to do”) carries too general a sense to draw the conclusion that Ham had to have done more than look on his father’s nakedness and tell his brothers [though it does imply more than just looking was undertook by someone other than Ham].’

The Interlinear states:

‘And Noah awoke from his wine knew what his younger son had done’

The Hebrew word for knew, yada’ is translated by the KJV as know [645], knowledge [19], perceive [18], understand [7]. It can mean to ‘know a person carnally’ and ‘to be revealed.’

Surprisingly, Ham is not specifically mentioned. We now find two clues in the Hebrew words for younger and son. The KJV translates younger from Qatan as small [33], little [19], youngest [15], younger [14], least [10] and lesser [2]. It signifies one who is ‘insignificant or unimportant.’ This may be a reference to Ham, though this is hard to credit realistically, considering his position in the family hierarchy. Shem and Japheth vary in the order they are positioned in the Old Testament, between first and last, eldest or youngest, though Ham is always placed in the middle of his brothers [refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla]. 

This one instance, where the Bible editors have decided to imply Ham is the youngest cannot be used in support of Ham actually being the youngest, as it contradicts all other verses. Whereas, Canaan was Ham’s youngest son of four. Alternatively, was Canaan Noah’s youngest son of four?

The Hebrew word for son ben, is translated by the KJV as son [2978], children [1568], old [135], first [51], man [20] and young [18]. A variety of meanings, though the one of considerable interest sandwiched between son and child – a member of a family group – is… grandson. The use of this word, would suddenly shift focus to someone other than Ham, who is not even stated in verse 24. Canaan on the other hand is mentioned in verse 22, when Ham looked on his father. Canaan in comparison to Ham, would be less significant in importance and ‘smaller’ than Ham literally in age and figuratively in stature. 

The Hebrew word for ‘had done’ is translated in the KJV as do [1333], make [653], wrought [52], commit [49], perform [18] and dress^ [13]. It signifies, ‘to fashion, to be used, to press, squeeze.’ Strong’s adds: ‘bruise’ and ‘dress(ed).’ These last definitions may be of tell tale sexual significance, when we investigate two different theories next. 

Noah knew something had happened. Just being looked at doesn’t warrant cursing an innocent grandson. It only makes any kind of sense, if either Ham or Canaan were guilty of more than just prurient observation. How would Noah have known he was stared at, especially while inebriated? If an act of some kind had been committed against him, or affecting him, there must have been evidence for Noah to know.

25 he said, “May there be a curse [H779 – ‘arar] on Canaan! May he be the lowest slave [H5650 – ‘ebed] to his brothers.”

The Hebrew word for curse is translated 62 times and once as bitterly. It is a severe curse, that from the primitive root means to ‘bitterly curse, execrate.’ Execrate means ‘to detest utterly, abhor, abominate, imprecate evil upon, damn’ and ‘denounce.’ This is no simple curse but one with enormous repercussions. If it is a punishment to fit the crime, then the crime must be one of great consequence for Noah to invoke a malediction of this degree.

The Hebrew word for servant is translated by the KJV as servant [744], manservant [23], bondman [21] and bondage [10]. It means to be a slave and the interlinear says a ‘servants of servants.’ Not a servant to other servants, but the lowest of all servants. This is an enormous clue later, in identifying Canaan’s descendants.

The people of Canaan are accused of sins in the scriptures, the man Canaan is apparently guilty of nothing. Why does Noah curse Canaan and not Ham?

NET: ‘Cursed be Canaan. The curse is pronounced on Canaan, not Ham. Noah sees a problem in Ham’s character, and on the basis of that he delivers a prophecy about the future descendants who will live in slavery to such things and then be controlled by others. In a similar way Jacob pronounced oracles about his sons based on their revealed character… Wenham points out that “Ham’s indiscretion towards his father may easily be seen as a type of the later behavior of the Egyptians and Canaanites. Noah’s curse on Canaan thus represents God’s sentence on the sins of the Canaanites, which their forefather Ham had exemplified.” He points out that the Canaanites are seen as sexually aberrant and Leviticus 18:3 describes Egypt [Mizra] and Canaan, both descendants of Ham, as having abominable practices. Hebrew “a servant of servants” (’eved ’avadim), an example of the superlative genitive. It means Canaan will become the most abject of slaves.’

The New English Translation footnote supports the mildest interpretation of Genesis nine and adopts the view that Ham saw his father in a compromising position of nakedness. Noah thus disrespected, then felt compelled to curse Ham’s youngest son’s descendants to perpetual slavery and impoverishment. An honest appraisal of this line of enquiry would have to admit there are gaping plot holes. Strikingly, nor does the punishment have equivalency for the crime.

Looking closely at the story, the scenario includes Ham and Canaan as perpetrators, with Noah or, as strange as it may sound, a further second unknown person as a victim. Reader beware, the next segment is unsettling.

Dr Rabbi Tzemah Yoreh in his article Noah’s Four Sons, puts forward a case of a combination of two texts from two editors in the scriptural account – emphasis & bold mine:

‘A Supplementary-Hypothesis Solution

Viewed through the conceptual tool-kit of the supplementary paradigm of biblical criticism, one form of source criticism, it is likely that in an earlier version of the story (the J source), Noah had four sons, not three: Shem, Ham, Japheth, and Canaan. The later Priestly source had a different tradition, however, that Noah had only three sons (5:31, 6:10, 7:13, 9:19, 10:1, all P texts). P was by nature a conservative supplementer/editor – he finds a way to assert his view that does minimal violence to the biblical text. 

(According to the supplementary paradigm of biblical criticism, erasure or deletion was rarely if ever employed.) Accordingly, I would argue that P was not comfortable erasing Canaan entirely from the text in [favour] of his own view – and adds the clause “and Ham was the father of” to verse 18 to make it seem as though Canaan were Noah’s grandson rather than his son. P adds these same words again in verse 22, thereby making Ham the assailant instead of Canaan. Finally, he adds 9:19 to re-emphasize his view that Noah had only three sons. By doing so he brings J’s text in line with his own tradition of three sons, but at the expense of the coherence of the story.

Here is the original text: [Note: // represents where the seams are.] The J Text 9:18 The sons of Noah who went out from the ship were Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and //Canaan // 9:20 Noah started out as a farmer, and planted a vineyard. 9:21 He drank of the wine and got drunk. He lay naked within his tent. 9:22 // Canaan [Ham] saw the nakedness of his father, and told two of his brothers outside. 9:23 Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, walked backwards, and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were averted, and they didn’t see their father’s nakedness. 9:24 Noah awoke from his wine (-induced stupor), and knew what his youngest son had done to him. 9:25 He said, “Canaan is cursed. He will be a servant of servants (serving) his brothers.” 9:26 He said, “Blessed be YHWH, the God of Shem. Let Canaan be his servant. 9:27 May God make Japheth mighty. Let him dwell in the tents of Shem. Let Canaan be his servant.”

Here a [colour & italicised]-coded version of the original J text with the P supplements: J + P (Canon)’

9:18 The sons of Noah who went out from the ship were Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and Ham was the father of Canaan. 9:19 These three were the sons of Noah, and from these, the whole earth was populated. 9:20 Noah started out as a farmer, and planted a vineyard. 9:21 He drank of the wine and got drunk. He lay naked within his tent. 9:22 Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside…’

‘An Unexpected Corroboration?

Some intriguing corroboration to this enumeration is found in the midrash (late first millennium C.E.) – Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer, 23, which also saw Canaan as one of Noah’s sons and solves the text-critical problem similarly. It goes without saying that Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer had no knowledge of J’s base text, though his harmonistic reading may be suggestive of a similar thought pattern:

‘Noah found a vine… the vine still had grapes upon it…he planted a vineyard from this vine…and on that very day fruit grew…he drank wine from it (the vine) and he revealed himself in his tent. Canaan came in, saw his father’s nakedness, tied a string to his penis and castrated him, then he went out to tell his brothers… Ham came in, saw his father’s nakedness and neglecting the commandment to honor one’s father, reported it to his two brothers as though he were in the market and laughing at his father. His brothers rebuked him, they took a cover, and walking backwards covered their father’s nakedness… Noah arose from his stupor, discovered what his youngest son had done to him, and cursed him, as it says, “Cursed is Canaan”.’

‘The author of Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer not only solves the problem of Canaan, but that of Ham as well. In J, it is unclear where Ham appears in the story; he plays no part and goes unmentioned. In Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer, Canaan is the son who castrates his father, thereby receiving a curse, and Ham laughs at his father instead of helping him, thus he does not get the blessing his brothers, Shem and Japhet receive, nor the curses Canaan receives. It is unclear how the author of this midrash understood the biblical text that says that Canaan was Noah’s grandson and not his son.

Similarly, and perhaps even stranger, the Quran notes that Noah had four sons (Sura 11, Hud v. 42-43). This unnamed fourth son refuses to come aboard the Ark, and instead climbs a mountain and is drowned. Some later Islamic commentators give his name as either Yam or Kan’an, the latter the Arabic version of Canaan. It is difficult to determine the relationship between Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer and the Quran, though they may have shared the same source. In any case, it is striking that an ancient tradition that was erased by P hundreds of years before the first millennium C.E. found its way back into texts over a thousand years later in such disparate sources as Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer and the Quran.’

The irony is not lost of a Rabbi quoting the Quran. Conjecture and assumptions of the author aside, the explanation of an older text stating Canaan as a son of Noah possibly answers the parenthetical conundrum of Genesis 9.18. It may add meaning to why Canaan as a son of Noah was cursed directly by his father and yet still allows for the involvement of Ham and his tantamount condoning of Canaan’s actions. In a similar incident in Genesis 21:8-10, Sarah the wife of Abraham, sees Ishmael mocking Isaac. She takes a dim view and Ishmael’s banishment with his mother Hagar stems in part, from this incident. Though Ishmael is punished by being banished, he still receives a future blessing and inheritance.

NB: In subsequent chapters for the ease of the established paradigm, it is accepted that Noah had three sons and Canaan was Ham’s fourth and youngest son. Even so, it has to be entertained that Canaan may well have been Noah’s fourth and youngest son. In support of this recognition is the fact that an investigation of the autosomal DNA, Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups of Canaan’s descendants, indicate the plausibility that they are a fourth racial line in their own right – with Ham, Japheth and Shem.

Castration as an explanation would certainly answer the reason for the severity of the curse inflicted; as opposed to death. This was not a great option, when considering Canaan was to be the ancestor of at least six sons and lineages of descent. Though, we are left scratching our heads as to what would be the motive? Stop Noah siring more sons, who would receive blessings and allotments of land, thus decreasing Canaan’s share? Genesis 9:24 and Noah saying he knew what his youngest [grand]son had done to him, leaves no doubt that something tangible had been done to Noah by a ‘younger son.’ Canaan was the youngest, whether his father was Ham or Noah. This is convincingly ruling out Ham and casting Canaan in the spotlight as the chief person of interest. 

Dr Rabbi David Frankel in his article, Noah, Ham and the Curse of Canaan: Who Did What to Whom in the Tent? A new solution to why Canaan (not Ham) was cursed, presents alternative solutions – bold his, italics mine:

‘What Did Noah’s Youngest Son Do?

As already anticipated by the Rabbis, and suggested by some modern scholars, an earlier version of our story probably related a much more severe crime – the homosexual rape of his father when he was inebriated. This indeed is the kind of [offence] that would most naturally provoke the severe reaction depicted in the text. This assumption also accounts for the formulation of verse 24,

Noah awoke from his drunken stupor and knew what his youngest son had done to him. If his son had only looked at him, how would Noah have “known” when he awoke that this had occurred? Further, the final words “had done to him” imply a much more concrete and physical act than mere gazing. The statement that Noah knew what was done to him after waking from his drunken stupor contrasts with Lot who was similarly abused sexually by his daughters while drunk, and concerning whom we read (Genesis 19:35), and he did not know when she lay down or when she arose.

Leviticus 20:17 shows that “seeing nakedness” is a euphemism for sex: Leviticus 20:17 If a man has sexual intercourse with his sister, whether the daughter of his father or his mother, so that he sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace. They must be cut off in the sight of the children of their people. He has exposed his sister’s nakedness; he will bear his punishment for iniquity.

Most likely, the phrase describing Noah’s nakedness, “and he became revealed inside his tent” was meant to evoke the theme of incest, as “revealing of nakedness” serves as the euphemism for incest in the prohibitions of Leviticus: Leviticus 18:6 None of you shall come near anyone of his own flesh to uncover nakedness… Thus, the sin, in the original narrative, is not homosexual sex itself, but forced incest of a [grand]son with his [grand]father in a situation in which the father has no ability to defend himself; this would explain the harshness of the father’s curse.

How then do we explain the part of the story in which Noah’s other sons enter the tent and cover their father without looking at him: Genesis 9:23 Shem and Japheth took the garment and placed it on their shoulders. Then they walked in backwards and covered up their father’s nakedness. Their faces were turned the other way so they did not see their father’s nakedness.

This clearly implies that [the] sin was gazing and nothing more. Nevertheless, I believe that the evidence in [favour] of the sexual interpretation is too strong to simply dismiss. I suggest that the text was revised by an editor who took the euphemism “seeing nakedness” literally, as if the sin was really visual alone. 

Whether out of deference to Noah or in the name of modesty more generally, this editor sought to temper the severe [offence] of forced incest with an incapacitated father. This reinterpretation was accomplished by adding a report about the two brothers’ contrasting act of covering their father without looking.

The same editor also added the report of the perpetrator mockingly (?) relating to his brothers that he saw their father’s nakedness (verse 22b: “He told his two brothers who were outside”) so as to facilitate the subsequent presentation of the brothers’ contrasting act; the same editor then added the blessings of Shem and Japhet, the two “good” brothers/sons, at the end of the story.

In short, according to this reconstruction, the blessings of Shem and Japhet (beginning with “he also said”) and the subordination of Canaan to both of them are secondary (verses 26-27) additions. Thus, the original story told simply of the sin of the youngest son against his father, and the cursing of Canaan to be subservient to his unnamed brothers. Admittedly, this story is disappointingly brief in comparison with the one we are used to. On the other hand, it seems only fitting that a story as unseemly as this one would lack narrative embellishment and be as concise and to the point as possible.’ 

A similar scenario occurred when Jacob’s eldest son Reuben, commits adultery – incest of sorts – with his fathers wife’s handmaiden Bilhah. Reuben disqualifies himself and his descendants from the birthright blessings – which are then given to Joseph and Judah. 

Frankel: ‘The original story about forced rape of a father would explain why Noah would curse his youngest son so harshly, but Canaan is not Noah’s youngest son; Japhet is! In fact, Canaan isn’t Noah’s son at all! For this reason, many scholars suggest that in an earlier form of the story, Canaan must have been Noah’s youngest son, not Japhet. Without the redaction supplement of “Ham the father of,” v. 22 would have originally read “[Ham, father of] Canaan saw his father’s nakedness.” It indeed makes perfect sense to accept this reconstruction of v. 22, and to assume that if the story concludes with the cursing of Canaan, Canaan must have been the original youngest-[grand]son-culprit of the story.

On the other hand, the idea that Canaan was Noah’s youngest son is difficult. Verses 18-19, which introduce the non-Priestly account here, state that Noah’s three sons are Shem, Ham, and Japhet, and that they are the progenitors of the world. Moreover, the nation lists in chapter 10 (Priestly and non-Priestly alike) treat Ham as the father of Canaan and the progenitor of nations; Canaan and his offspring are only a subgroup under Ham.

The most important thing to note about the edited story is the strange preservation of the curse as directed at Canaan (three times!), in spite of the identification of the sinner of the story as Ham and the brothers as Shem and Japhet. Wouldn’t it have been more consistent to change the curse of Canaan into the curse of Ham?’

In this case scenario, Noah may have disowned his son Canaan. As Ishmael was banished, Canaan would have been relegated in status by Noah, not just by the curse. Ham was not blameless, even so, Canaan’s posterity could have been included with Ham – to save face – rather than shown as a separate fourth line of people from Noah as originally intended. There is no other reason why the subsequent Bible texts included an adjusted table of nations to accommodate the change in Canaan’s status.

Considering the data thus far, it is very problematic in subscribing to Ham the role of perpetrator – rather than as an accomplice – and somewhat problematic in subscribing Canaan as Noah’s son, rather than his being Ham’s youngest son and by extension, Noah’s youngest grandson. Yet, consideration should be given to this second hypothesis, as Canaan’s descendant’s lines listed in Genesis Ten are numerous and more genetically divergent than for Japheth, for Shem or for Ham’s other sons. Eleven lines are listed for Canaan. Canaan stands out, for his sons descendants, exhibit a wider spectrum of skin tones, more racial characteristics and the most variations in their genome than all the other peoples in the world put together.

Dr Rabbi Tzemah Yoreh has presented the case for Genesis 9:19 ‘These three were the sons of Noah, and from these, the whole earth was populated’, as being part of the supplemented text P edit. I would offer that the whole sentence may not be additional but just the quick change from four to three sons, though the seam would indicate the whole sentence.

Dr Rabbi David Frankel concludes his article with a theory that the Genesis nine account is in fact about Ham and Canaan. Ham the actual victim. I have considered this theory and have concluded that considerable editing is required in proving it. Whereas, I can accept additions or deletions to Biblical text, the wholesale change of names and shifting verses into other chapters seems a stretch too far. 

The same author is eager to down grade Canaan’s curse to a limited curse – subservient only to Ham or Mizraim Egypt – rather than encompassing Shem and Japheth; thus throwing doubt on the Biblical account as it stands, saying it is an editorial agenda in text P to strengthen the future family status of Jacob’s sons.

It is curious that no matter how strenuously editing tries to transfer blame to Ham, it is Canaan who reemerges as the accused. One commentator has suggested that Canaan was Ham’s son though not by Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk, but by Noah’s wife Emzara. Whether there is incest in Genesis nine or not, it may have followed a previous undisclosed act of incest between Ham and a relation of Noah, but not his wife; as a peculiar anomaly links Canaan to the family of Arphaxad, one of the five sons of Shem.

The Creator has much to say on the matter of incest and it was considered a grievous transgression, punishable by death under the Mosaic Law during Israelite times. We saw in the line of Seth that it was the fifth generation which began marrying their cousins [refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla]. Prior to this, the second through to the fourth generation had little choice but to marry their sisters. 

If such an act was committed to a relation of Noah and or to Noah, it would seem that Ham or Canaan were fortunate to retain their lives; yet death would have been an impossible stumbling block to Ham or Canaan’s lines continuing after the flood. Ultimately, the curse placed on Canaan’s descendants is unarguably, the most serious action Noah could have taken. Death would have been kinder, but would have eliminated a whole racial line of people before it had even begun. 

The most well known incident of incest in the Bible involved the daughters of Lot, which we will address when we study their sons, Moab and Ammon in Chapter XXVI. 

The Book of Leviticus chapter 18, verses 6-18 are dedicated to every possible situation of incest – of which a few are quoted and statements associated with the incident in Genesis chapter nine are in bold: 

English Standard Version

6 “None of you shall approach any one of his close relatives to uncover nakedness. I am the Lord. 7 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, which is the nakedness of your mother; she is your mother, you shall not uncover her nakedness… 9 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your sister, your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether brought up in the family or in another home

As might of happened with Ham [verse 21] and Canaan [verse 13].

10 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your son’s daughter [granddaughter] or of your daughter’s daughter, for their nakedness is your own nakedness. 11 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, brought up in your father’s family, since she is your sister [step sister]… 14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother, that is, you shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt. 15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she is your son’s wife, you shall not uncover her nakedness… 17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and of her daughter, and you shall not take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter to uncover her nakedness; they are relatives; it is depravity. 18 And you shall not take a woman as a rival wife to her sister, uncovering her nakedness while her sister is still alive.

The Patriarch Jacob married two sisters, though not by choice, but rather a shrewd play by his father-in-law Laban. We will also address this incident. Leviticus chapter 20:11-21 continues with punishment for incest:

English Standard Version

11 If a man lies with his father’s wife, he has uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. 12 If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death; they have committed perversion; their blood is upon them. 

13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. If a man takes a woman and her mother also, it is depravity; he and they shall be burned with fire, that there may be no depravity among you… 17 “If a man takes his sister, a daughter of his father or a daughter of his mother, and sees her nakedness, and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace, and they shall be cut off in the sight of the children of their people… 21 If a man takes his brother’s wife, it is impurity. He has uncovered his brother’s nakedness; they shall be childless.

The last verse applies to the time of the Israelites but not necessarily to the epoch that preceded it after the flood.

In Genesis 5:6-14 ESV ‘… Seth… he fathered Enosh… Enosh… fathered Kenan…’ 

Kenan derives from H7018 Qeynan, also spelt as Cainan. It is similar to Canaan, though not etymologically derived from, for Canaan is H3667 kna’an, also spelt Kenaan. The name Kenan, is in Noah’s family line. The name Cain is derived from H7014 Qayin. All three are similar: Cain in Cain’s line; Cainan or Kenan in Seth’s; and Canaan or Kenaan ostensibly in Ham’s family. One could say, this is a family name.

We read in the Book of Jubilees 8:1-6

… in the beginning thereof Arpachshad took to himself a wife and her name was Rasu’eja, the daughter of Susan, the daughter of Elam [Arphaxad’s older brother], and she bare him a son… and [Arphaxad] called his name Kainam. And the son grew, and his father taught him writing, and he went to seek for himself a place where he might seize for himself a city. 

And he found a writing which former (generations) had carved on the rock, and he read what was thereon, and he transcribed it and sinned owing to it; for it contained the teaching of the Watchers in accordance with which they used to observe the omens of the sun and moon and stars in all the signs of heaven [Astrology and Black Magic]. And he wrote it down and said nothing regarding it; for he was afraid to speak to Noah about it lest he should be angry with him on account of it

And… he took to himself a wife, and her name was Melka, the daughter of Madai [refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes], the son of Japheth, and… he begat a son, and called his name Shelah; for he said: ‘Truly I have been sent’… and Shelah grew up and took to himself a wife, and her name was Mu’ak, the daughter of Kesed [a later Chesed was a son of Nahor, Abraham’s brother – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans], his father’s brother…

In Genesis 10:24-25 ESV we read: ‘Arpachshad fathered Shelah; and Shelah fathered Eber. To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided, and his brother’s name was Joktan.’ 

In the Masoretic text of the Bible Kainam is left out of the genealogy as we see here, yet in the Septuagint [LXX] Cainan is included, as in the Book of Jubilees. In the New Testament book of Luke, we read the genealogy of Christ through his adoptive father, Joseph.

Luke 3:35-38

New English Translation

35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan [G2536 – Kainan from H7018], the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel, the son of Kenan [G2536 – Kainan], 38 the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

Footnote: ‘It is possible that the name Καϊνάμ (Kainam) should be omitted, since two key mss, P75vid and D, lack it. But the omission may be a motivated reading: This name is not found in the editions of the Hebrew OT, though it is in the LXX, at Genesis 11.12 and 10:24. But the witnesses with this reading (or a variation of it) are substantial: א B L ƒ1 33 (Καϊνάμ), A Θ Ψ 0102 ƒ13 M (Καϊνάν, Kainan). The translation above has adopted the more common spelling “Cainan,” although it is based on the reading Καϊνάμ. The Greek text has Kainam here. Some modern English translations follow the Greek spelling more closely (NASB, NRSV Cainan) while others (NIV) use the OT form of the name (Kenan in Genesis 5:9, 12).’

Thus the names Cainan, Kainan, Kainam and Kenan are all related; with the Septuagint reading supporting Luke 3:36. The fact that Kenan has been inserted in enough manuscripts to draw attention and not be discounted, is a significant red flag. Though it is not the exact name of Kenaan, it is difficult to explain who else it could be? The insertion of Kenan’s name leads to one viable conclusion if Canaan were the biological son of Ham. That he was the adoptive son of Arphaxad, who became his legal father. The Hebrew word fathered includes more than just a biological, blood-line parent. It can mean a father-in-law, a grandfather and even a distant relative; or in this case, a male, non-blood-line parent who raises the child.

Why would Arphaxad adopt Canaan or make him his ward? As Canaan is shown as being between Arphaxad and his blood-line son Shelah, Canaan must have been born before Shelah. Arphaxad would be Ham’s nephew and Canaan’s cousin. As he was considerably older, Arphaxad may have taken Noah’s youngest grandson Canaan under his wing. The relationship is noteworthy because in the Septuagint version of Genesis 10:22 it says: ‘Sons of Sem, Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad, and Lud, and Aram, and Cainan…’ Canaan was ethnically Hamitic lineage, but he is also listed in the lineage of Shem.

The Book of Jubilees reveals that Rasueja, Arphaxad’s wife, gave birth to Cainan. The  ambiguous origin of Canaan as Ham’s son and his subsequent upbringing in Arphaxad’s household would be understandable, if Ham conducted a sexual liaison with Rasueja. This would have been incest and all the ramifications that went with it; for she was Noah’s great, great granddaughter. Canaan was Ham’s fourth son and as such, one of the sixteen blood-lines which re-populated the earth. Did Arphaxad retain Canaan in his family to spite Ham or perhaps, to maintain a close grip and control over Canaan, who with his descendants were ordained to be slaves. Or, was it an act of compassion towards his wife Rasueja and her bastard child.

From everything we have discussed, the key questions are: a. Are Ham and Canaan father and son or brothers? b. Was Noah violated and if so, was it by Ham or Canaan? c. Was there a previous event that culminated with the incident in Noah’s tent?

It can be argued that there has been concerted effort in the scriptures to lessen Canaan’s role and heighten Ham’s. To take the spotlight off Canaan and portray him as a victim of Ham’s transgression[s]. Ham did something unspeakable and Canaan’s children have paid an exacting price. At face value and with behind the scenes editing, the Bible appears to present this scenario. Previously, I have accepted this interpretation from those teachers who expounded the tenant that Ham is the prime subject of Genesis chapter nine and consequently the guilty party. A closer inspection of the Genesis nine passage as we have discovered, has convinced me that this interpretation is not correct.

The parenthetical addition of Canaan as the son of Ham is an important clue. So is Noah waking up to know what [Ham’s] youngest had done to him. And, it is Canaan who is cursed by Noah – not Ham. The inclusion of a ‘Canaan’ in Arphaxad’s household and family line, with the naming of Canaan’s mother as Rasueja; yet his still remaining in Ham’s genealogical family tree in the table of nations as a Hamite not as one from Shem, underpins the likelihood that Ham is his real father by incest.

Ham transgressed twice then. Once with the incestuous act against Arphaxad with his wife Rasueja and again when he disrespectfully handled his father’s predicament and sided with his own son. He observed Noah and the aftermath of an encounter, sexual or not. The phrase, looked upon his nakedness is categorically more than just seeing a naked body, though in Ham’s case, does not mean he is culpable of more himself – as the Hebrew infers. For the Bible in connection with Ham, does not use the euphemism for a sexual act: uncovered the nakedness of Noah. 

Whereas later, Noah was very much aware of what had been done and by whom – his grandson – hence the profound proclamation against Canaan.

Book of Jubilees 7:13 

And Ham knew that his father had cursed his younger son, and he was displeased that he had cursed his son and he parted from his father, he and his sons with him, Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan.

One wonders if part of the predicament Canaan found himself in, was compounded by his earlier decision to practice the occult secrets of the Watchers; communicating with dark spirits. An interesting verse is found in the Old Testament.

Habakkuk 2:15-16

New English Translation

“Woe to you who force your neighbour to drink wine – you who make others intoxicated by forcing them to drink from the bowl of your furious anger so you can look at their naked bodies. But you will become drunk with shame, not majesty. Now it is your turn to drink and expose your uncircumcised foreskin! The cup of wine in the Lord’s right hand is coming to you, and disgrace will replace your majestic glory!”

The severity of the sin committed, resulted with Canaan becoming only the second person recorded in the Bible to receive an imprecation of this magnitude, following the infamous Cain.

Genesis 4:10-11

English Standard Version

And the Lord said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to me from the ground. And now you are cursed…”

In verse one of Genesis nine, the Creator blesses Noah and his sons, which includes Ham. Later in chapter nine after the incident, Ham is left out of a specific blessing and does not receive one with Japheth and Shem. It does say, Canaan was to be a slave to all his brothers. We will discover that Canaan has tragically been a slave to some of Ham’s own descendants. Whether castration or incest by rape, both acts are extremely burdensome accusations. Castration is difficult to accept without further evidence and motive. From the context and his response, a sexual act or trick of some kind, was undeniably inflicted on Noah [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. 

Sadly, this is the only explanation that would warrant such a devastating curse as the one put upon Canaan. If Canaan was conceived in incest, it is a peculiar parallelism indeed to then have possibly committed a similar transgression himself.

The principal mtDNA maternal Haplogroups associated with Ham’s descendants include:

Haplogroup L0 – oldest and original Haplogroup on the human mtDNA phylogenetic tree. L0 supposedly arose ‘one hundred and fifty thousand years ago in eastern Africa’ where the alleged oldest fossils of anatomically modern humans have been found. These facts are open to debate, for the oldest fossils discovered are no where near that age. L0a arose later, associated with the southeastern part of the African continent. L0 equates to the original Homo sapiens, a mitochondrial Eve of science, also known as the biblical Eve [refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega].

Haplogroup L1 – one of the oldest branches of the maternal family tree is a daughter of mitochondrial Eve and sister to L0. Frequently found in western and central sub-Saharan Africa, though seldom appears in eastern or southern Africa. L1 gave rise to the branches L2 to L6.

L2 – direct descendant of mitochondrial Eve. It is currently found in a third of sub-Saharan Africans and its subgroup L2a is the most common mtDNA Haplogroup among African Americans.

Haplogroup L3 – not associated just with Ham’s descendants, another daughter of mitochondrial Eve; it is the ancestor of all the non-African Haplogroups in the world today.

Haplogroup M – Subgroup M1 ‘intrigues scientists with its presence in East Africa’ and another subgroup, M3, is native to India.

Haplogroup N – from L3, is one of the two major lineages with M, from which non-African Haplogroups descend. Today, members of this Haplogroup are found in  most continents around the world.

Haplogroup R – both ancient and complex. Its carriers are found all over the world. Hamitic members of super Haplogroup R are located in Africa and the Middle East.

Haplogroup X – located globally, as well as North Africa, and the Near East. 

The global distribution of Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups associated with Ham’s descendants are summarised in Retina, Fifth Edition, 2013:

‘Y DNA haplogroup A represents the oldest branch of the Y-chromosome phylogeny. Like haplogroup B, it only appears in Africa, with the highest frequency among… groups in Ethiopia and Sudan.

Haplogroup E [M96] is one of the most branched, with many subhaplogroups described. E1 [P147] and E2 [M75] were described in… Africa, and [E1b1 (P2), formerly E3] shows a wide geographic distribution, with two main [sub-]clades: [E1b1a V38], present all around Africa and among African-Americans; and [E1b1b M215], present in Western Europe [derived from admixture*], North Africa, and the Near East.’

The African dominated V38 clade divides again into E1b1a1 M2 and E1b1a2 M329. The M215 clade shared with Europeans* and Berbers divides into E1b1b1a V68 and E1b1b1b Z827. We will encounter these sub-Haplogroups frequently in the following chapters concerning Ham’s descendants. 

‘Haplogroup F is the parent of haplogroups from G to R; however excluding these common haplogroups, the minor clades F, F1, and F2, seem to appear in the Indian continent. Until now, haplogroup H has not been well studied, members of this haplogroup were mainly found in the Indian continent.’

‘It is generally agreed that haplogroup J was dispersed by the westward movement of people from the Middle East to North Africa, Europe, Central Asia, Pakistan, and India.

Haplogroup K is the ancestral haplogroup of major groups L to R, but, in addition, also includes the minor K and K1 to K5 [K2] haplogroups, which are present at low frequencies in dispersed geographic regions all around the world.’

‘Haplogroup L is found mainly in India and Pakistan, as well as in the Middle East and, very occasionally, in Europe, particularly in Mediterranean countries.

The highest frequencies of haplogroup M are shown in Melanesia, being restricted to the geographical distribution of Papuan languages [refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia].

The P clade is the parent of haplogroups Q and R, and is rarely found. It has been detected at low frequencies in the Caucasus and India.

Haplogroup R1a [mutations from admixture are] currently found in central and western Asia [and in] India… [while R1a in] Slavic populations of Eastern Europe [is a specific and original defining marker Haplogroup].’

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved,  a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2:15 English Standard Version

“A man may imagine things that are false, but he can only understand things that are true.” 

“I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.” 

Isaac Newton [1643-1727]

© Orion Gold 2020 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com