Professional Documents
Culture Documents
One racist myth is that the Hamites were black savages, natural slavesand Negroes. This identification of the Hamite with Negros served as a rationale for slavery, which relied on biblical misinterpretation to support its tenets. The image of the Negro deteriorated in direct proportion to the growth of the importance of slavery, and it became imperative for the white man to exclude the Negro from the brotherhood of races.1 Following some unseemly event, nebulously described in Genesis 9:19 9:23, in verse 24, Noah wakes from his drunkenness and is said to have known what his youngest son had done to him. The operative words here are youngest son. The racist tradition is that Noah was referring to his son Ham. But how is Ham Noahs youngest son given that the birth order is listed as Shem Ham and Japheth? The birth order of offspring in the Hebrew Scriptures (HS), commonly referred to as the Old Testament (OT) is typically given from eldest to youngest. In Genesis 5:32, the birth order of Noahs immediate offspring is given as Shem Ham and Japheth. Likewise, the first chapter of Chronicles presents genealogies in birth order sequence to include the same sequence as given in Genesis 5:32 for Noahs immediate offspring.2 Noah was referring to his grandson Canaan, not his son Ham. As a matter of custom, all of a mans male offspring, i.e. sons, grandsons, great grandsons, etc. were reckoned as his own sons. For example, in Genesis 48:5 Jacob declares that Josephs first born sons Ephraim and Manasseh are his sons just as Reuben and Simeon are his sons. It may be argued that if Noah were referring to Canaan the text would have used the words:
That is, He knew what his sons son had done to him.3 While this may appear to be plausible, the Hebrew expression , i.e. his youngest son identifies the culprit precisely. Recall that all of a mans male offspring may be referred to as his sons. Any of Noahs sons sons would qualify as his sons son; however, only Canaan qualifies as Noahs youngest son, as evidently he was at the time the youngest of all of Noahs male progeny. That Noah is referring to Canaan as his youngest son is certain. It is Canaan not Ham upon whom Noah pronounces the curse. Consider that it is in Genesis 9:18 and 9:23 that Canaan is introduced to us before Hams genealogy is given in Genesis 10:6 20. Canaan is mentioned here for no other purpose than to identify him as Noahs youngest son, i.e. the grandson that is the youngest of Noahs progeny. The account of Noahs drunkenness and the ultimate curse pronounced upon Canaan is that of cause and effect. Noahs drunkenness and whatever ensuing offense was perpetrated against him are the causes. The effect is the punishment of the perpetrator, i.e. Noahs curse against his youngest son Canaan. Would Noah who was a preacher of righteousness, who by faith, being warned of God, obediently prepared the ark, have condemned his innocent grandson Canaan if he knew his own son
Paraphrased from E. R. Sanders Hamites in Anthropology and History: A Preliminary Study, unpublished manuscript, Columbia University, 1965. 2 st 1 Chronicles 1:4 3 The Hebrew root is translated sons son in Genesis 21:23 and Job 18:19
Page 1 of 3
See 2d Peter 2:5 See also Genesis 18:18 33 regarding condemnation of the just with the unjust and John 9:1 - 3
Page 2 of 3
6 7
Page 3 of 3