Hmm, nice find Nebsen. And the thing about the African roots-
and the church folk Anansi is that the Bible credits Egypt as
an African civilization- after all Egypt is Mizraim, descendants
of "black" Ham, brother of "black" Cush/Kush. I argued
once with a guy over this once who claimed black folk only show up
as history because of Haile Selassie's Ethiopia. But important as
today's Ethiopia is as a symbol for black people, it is a LATECOMER as
far as Christian religion or indeed as far as civilization in Africa.
Cush in the Sudan, is the location most often referenced in the Bible
as far as black folk, not today;s Ethiopia- Selassie or no Selassie.
It is true that Nimrod's Cushite dominion extended across MEsopotamia,
so "Cush" takes in that area as well, but "Cushite" in the Bible is
usually referring to black folk from the Sudan. The Bible shows this.
A few points recapped below for the new readers.
1) Cush/Kush brother of Mizraim which means Egypt. We know from studies
that the closest people to the Egyptians are Nubians/Sudanics, not Yemenis,
or today's Ethiopians. 'Cush" also refers to people south of Egypt.
2) Cush/Kush means "black" in Hebrew- used sometimes in clear reference
to dark skin- "Can the Cushite or Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard
his spots?" asks Jeremiah. The use of "Cushite" is linked closer to Egypt
and Kush in the Bible generally refers to the Sudan, close to Egypt not today's
Ethiopia.
3) Genesis 10: Nimrod, son of Cush founded the first large scale empires after the
Biblical flood beginning with Nineveh- so the lineage of "Cush" extends into
Yemen, Mesopotamia with perhaps some overlap into East/NE Africa. So there are
2 aspects of "Cush" in the Bible
4) Numbers 12 where they get upset at Moses wife- specifically references the
word Cushite, pointing to the Sudan again, not simply Ethiopians who might
be near Yemen
"And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian
woman whom he had taken; for he had taken a Cushite as wife."--Numbers 12:1
5) Acts 8- the Ethiopian chariot rider that was converted by the Apostle
Phillip was called a Cushite or "Ethiopian" who served as administrator of
the treasure of his queen- Candace. The Candaces are located in the Sudan
not the Horn- again near Egypt. It was these same Candace that won some
victories against Rome and negotiated a successfull and advantageous
peace treaty that exempted the Cushites from paying the Romans tribute
6) Zerah the Ethiopian came out against Asa king of Judah in 2 Chronicles.
The Jewish Encyclopedia places Zerah near Egypt, indeed holding that he was
an Egyptian pharaoh (Osorkon II). The Biblical narrative says he was an Ethiopian,
literally "Cushite" as footnotes to the good, detailed translations show.
This again shows that Cush, in this context, is identified with the region
of Egypt/Nubia/Sudan. I wonder though why Zerah had to be Orsokon II. Why not
a commander from Kush/Cush itself who came up with a thousand chariots?
7) The Sons of Mizraim are those renowned for handling the bow and shield- Cush, Lud etc
Jeremiah 46:9-
"let the mighty men go forth: Cush and Phut that handle the shield,
and the Ludim that handle the bow." Isa 66:19 also refers to Pul or Put and Lud "that draw the bow."
8) Per scholar David Goldenberg 2003 The Curse of Ham:
"In a description of the foreign contingents in the Egyptian
army at the battle of Carchemish in 605 B.C.E, Jer 46:9 says:
"Let the warriors go forth, Kush and Put who grasp the shield.
And the Ludim who grasp and draw the bow.".. However because Lud
is grouped with Kush in Jer 46:9 and Ezek 30:5 and because Put,
whether it is to be identified with modern Somalia or Libya is in
Africa, most scholars today agree that Lud too is in Africa. And
just as the bows, so too the shields of the Kushites must have made
an impression. Apparently their striking feature was also their
size. Similarly Strabo (17.1.54) mentions the Ethiopians' long oblong shields."--David M. Goldenberg. The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
9) As Goldenberg shows the Biblical text often groups Cush, Put, Lud etc together.
They are all related- sons of Ham or sons of Mizraim (Egypt). This again leans
the weight towards the Egyptian-Sudanic side not the Horn.
10) The Pharaoh who came to help his Hebrew ally against the Assyrians was Shebitku,
who came from Kush (or Nubia), located in what it today northern Sudan.
He sent an expeditionary army to Jerusalem headed by his 21-year-old cousin,
Taharqa, ((2 Kings 19:9; Isaiah 37:9) Again this shows the weight of things
towards the Sudanic-Nubian-Egyptian area or zone in the Bible text..
11) Alleged "black curse" is bogus- Moses says nothing of
the sort. There is no "curse of Ham" in the Bible- that is
a later distortion invented by later Jewish, Christian and Arab
writers. There is a curse on the advanced nations of Caanan in that
the Hebrews would take them over, but this says nothing about
Africa, Egypt or the Sudan, or Ethiopia. "Caanan" is Palestine.
"Cursed be Caanan" is a prediction of the future, not a
slam of the Caananites per se. The prediction said
"servant of servants shall he be." Well this prediction
of Moses came through when the Hebrew ex-servants from Egypt
conquered Caanaan and made the Caanites tributary servants.
Hence people like to Gibeonites had to pay tribute to the Israelites
or perform labor. That is all it meant basically.
It is true that Moses had issues with Caanaanite religion,
like their multiple gods or child sacrifices, but
it is also clear that he freely finds their culture
advanced and superior in some ways to the Hebrew
migrants.
The "cursed be Caanaan" does not cancel out this
acknowledged superiority, only PREDICTS that
parts of Caanan would be conquered by the Hebrew
ex-servants or slaves outta Egypt.
Jewish, Arab, and European Christian theologians
later transformed this into a non-existent 'Curse of Ham'
but as the books show, no such "curse of Ham" by Moses exists.
And in fact as others have pointed out elsewhere
Moses freely credits the Canaanites with superior
technology and material culture, noting that the
Hebrews received a windfall of already constructed
cities and thriving agriculture as part of the
Israelite conquest. Moses mentions opponents with
superior iron and chariot technology as well. So
it is clear that the "Hamitic" peoples, except in matters
of religious belief, get their due from Moses, as the
pacesetters in civilization. Note how he refers to
Nimrod, son of Cush for example.
In Genesis 10, Moses notes the sons of Ham as composing Mizraim
(Egypt), Cush, Punt, Caanan and Libya. Ironically, assorted Jewish,
Arab and European writers at certain times did not hesitate to pile
on and say Ham was black, because some tinge of inferiority could
be placed on his descendants. Weirdly enough though, that tune changes
when their logic is followed through consistently. Egypt, Cush, Punt,
etc suddenly became "non-black" when the realization struck that the
Nile Valley civilizations and those of the Horn and Sahara would have
to be credited to these "inferior" sons of Ham. Suddenly and curiously,
the "Hamites" became "white" or "Middle Eastern", 'Eurasian" or a
mysterious "Mediterranean brown race".
Moses at least was consistent. He assigned no racial characteristics to the tribal
groupings he wrote about in Genesis 10, nor did he cast any badges of inferiority.
Caanan (the Lebanon/Sinai region peoples) would be conquered by the Semitic
Hebrews, but there is no "curse of Ham". It is entirely bogus.
Ironically, Moses also writes up Nimrod, son of Cush, in commendable material
terms, noting his descendants as among those most advanced culturally,
materially and militarily. Since Moses' conception of Ham includes
peoples with a wide range of physical variation, his "anthropology model,"
or concept so to speak, is much closer to modern researchers like Keita et al,
than Aryanists who posit the artificial "Mediterranean" or "Eurasian" model
where the only "Africans" are those located somewhere far south of the Sahara.
And even more ironically, the Hebrew prophet himself married a Cushite, as
documented in Numbers 12. If he was around a few years ago, he certainly would
not be welcome on the campus of Bob Jones University with his wife, although
the denizens thereon quote his writings frequently.
Moses it could be said, at least gave the brothers credit where it was due.
