Genesis 9:26–10:20

Here see, 1. How God prolonged the life of Noah; he lived 950 years, twenty more than Adam and but nineteen less than Methuselah: this long life was a further reward of his signal piety, and a great blessing to the world, to which no doubt he continued a preacher of righteousness, with this advantage, that now all he preached to were his own children. 2. How God put a period to his life at last. Though he lived long, yet he died, having probably first seen many that descended from him dead before him. Noah lived to see two worlds, but, being an heir of the righteousness which is by faith, when he died he went to see a better than either.

Blessed be the Lord God of Shem. Noah blesses his other children, but in a different manner. For he places Shem in the highest post of honor. And this is the reason why Noah, in blessing him, breaks forth in the praise of God, without adhering to the person of man. For the Hebrews, when they are speaking of any rare and transcendent excellence, raise their thoughts to God. Therefore the holy man, when he perceived that the most abundant grace of God was destined for his son Shem, rises to thanksgiving. Whence we infer, that he spoke, not from carnal reason, but rather treated of the secret favors of God, the result of which was to be deferred to a remote period. Finally, by these words it is declared, that the benediction of Shem would be divine or heavenly.

God shall enlarge Japheth. In the Hebrew words ypht (japhte) and ypht (japheth,) there is an elegant allusion. For the root of the word is phth (pathah,) which, among the Hebrews, signifies to entice with smooth words, or to allure in one direction or another. Here, however, nearly all commentators take it as signifying to enlarge. [301] If this exposition be received, the meaning will be, that the posterity of Japheth, which for a time would be scattered, and removed far from the tents of Shem, would at length be increased, so that it should more nearly approach them, and should dwell together with them, as in a common home. But I rather approve the other version, God shall gently bring back, or incline Japheth.' [302] Moreover, whichever interpretation we follow, Noah predicts that there will be a temporary dissension between Shem and Japheth, although he retains both in his family and calls both his lawful heirs; and that afterwards the time will come, in which they shall again coalesce in one body, and have a common home. It is, however, most absolutely certain, that a prophecy is here put forth concerning things unknown to man, of which, as the event, at length, shows God alone was the Author. Two thousand years and some centuries more, elapsed before the Gentiles and the Jews were gathered together in one faith. Then the sons of Shem, of whom the greater part had revolted and cut themselves off from the holy family of God, were collected together, and dwelt under one tabernacle. [303] Also the Gentiles, the progeny of Japheth, who had long been wanderers and fugitives were received into the same tabernacle. For God, by a new adoption, has formed a people out of those who were separated, and has confirmed a fraternal union between alienated parties. This is done by the sweet and gentle voice of God, which he has uttered in the gospel; and this prophecy is still daily receiving its fulfillment, since God invites the scattered sheep to join his flock, and collects, on every side, those who shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. It is truly no common support of our faith, that the calling of the Gentiles is not only decreed in the eternal counsel of God, but is openly declared by the mouth of the Patriarch; lest we should think it to have happened suddenly or by chance, that the inheritance of eternal life was offered generally to all. But the form of the expression, Japheth shall dwell in the tabernacles of Shem,' [304] commends to us that mutual society which ought to exist, and to be cherished among the faithful. For whereas God had chosen to himself a Church from the progeny of Shem, he afterwards chose the Gentiles together with them, on this condition, that they should join themselves to that people, who were in possession of the covenant of life.

And Noah lived. Although Moses briefly states the age of the holy man, and does not record his annals and the memorable events of his life, yet those things which are certain, and which Scripture elsewhere commemorates, ought to recur to our minds. Within one hundred and fifty years, the offspring of his three sons became so numerous, that he had sufficient and even abundant proof of the efficacy of the Divine benediction Increase and multiply. He sees, not one city only, filled with his grandchildren, nor his seed expanded barely to three hundred families; but many nations springing from one of his sons who should inhabit extensive regions. This astonishing increase, since it was a visible representation of the divine favor towards him, would doubtless fill him with unbounded joy. For Abraham was nearly fifty years old when his ancestor Noah died. [305] In the meantime, he was compelled to behold many things, which would afflict his holy breast with incredible grief. To omit other things; he saw in the family of Shem, the sanctuary of God, -- into which the sons of Japheth were to be received, -- destroyed, or, at least, dilapidated and rent. For whereas the father of Abraham himself, having deserted his proper station, had erected for himself a profane tabernacle; a very small portion indeed remained of those who worshipped God in the harmonious consent of a pure faith. With what tormenting pains this terrible confusion affected him cannot be sufficiently expressed in words. Hence we may know, that his eyes of faith must have been exceedingly penetrating, which did not fail to behold afar of, the grace of God, in preserving the Church, at that time overwhelmed by the wickedness of men. Footnotes: [286] The question which Calvin here dismisses as one of little importance has, in modern controversy, assumed a very different position; and most commentators have come to a decision, the reverse of that to which he inclines. His arguments appears chargeable with the want of firmness, which he imputes to others. The inference that the flesh of sacrifices was eaten, since otherwise it must have been wasted, is of no force, if we suppose the first sacrifices to have been all holocausts, or whole burnt offering unto the Lord. The garments or tents referred to as made from the skins of animals were, in all probability, those of the very animals which were thus sacrificed; so that there is no reason hence to conclude, that flesh was eaten before the deluge. But let the reader refer to Magee on the Atonement, Dissertation, No.li2 -- Ed. [287] By external prohibition, is probably meant such as might be enjoined by the magistrate during a time of scarcity, or for any purely civil purpose. -- Ed. [288] This is apparent in the English version, where the words, "which is," are added in Italics, showing that in the judgment of the translators, the word following was explanatory of that which preceded. -- Ed. [289] "Partem fuisse veteris paedagogiae." [290] Thus agreeing with the English version. [291] "Qui effuderit sanguinem hominis in homine." He who shall have shed the blood of man in man. [292] This is the interpretation of the English version. [293] "Ut secundo loco in societatem accedant." [294] "Precipuas esse verbi partes, et inde aestimanda signa." -- "Queleprincipal gist en la parole, et que d'icelle il faut estimer les sacramens." That the principal force is in the word, and that from it we must estimate the sacraments. -- French Tr. [295] Reference is here made to the ark, as the type of the Church. -- Ed. [296] That is, legitimate fathers. [297] This is an objection, to which the answer immediately follows. [298] It has been remarked by Bishop Lowth, that nearly all the indications of future events in the Holy Scriptures are announced in verse and in numbers. -- Prael. 2 We have here a remarkable instance of this peculiarity. The following is a translation of Bishop Lowth's version of Noah's prediction: -- Cursed be Canaan! A servant of servants he shall be to his brethren. Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem! And let Canaan be their servant. May God enlarge Japheth, And may he dwell in the tents of Shem; And let Canaan be their servant. -- Prael. 4 The adoption of some differences of reading has been suggested by later critics. It has been especially observed, that the first hemistich is a broken or short line, and does not correspond with the next in length or rhyme. And on the authority of the Arabic version, (see Walton's Polyglott,) many learned men would thus fill up the line -- "Cursed be Ham, the father of Canaan." They would also, on the same authority, alter the fourth and sixth lines, by inserting the word "father," thus -- "And let the father of Canaan be their servant." Yet such alterations are not lightly to be made in the sacred text; and it seems highly probable, that the addition in the Arabic version was intended for nothing more originally than a paraphrase to explain the translator's view of the passage. The reader is referred to Caunter on the Poetry of the Pentateuch, for further information respecting the poetical character of these verses; and to Bishop Newton's Dissertations, No. I., for its prophetical application. Some excellent remarks, of a practical kind, will be found in Bishop Hall's contemplations. -- Ed. [299] Namely, that of having preserved him in the ark. -- Ed. [300] Vide Ainsworth in loco, Bishop Newton's Dissertation i. [301] "Dilatet Deus Japheth." -- Vulg. "platunai ho Theos" -- Sept [302] See marginal reading of English version, "God will persuade Japheth." -- See also Schindler's Lexicon, sub voce phth, and Ainsworth in loco. It is however objected, and not without reason, that the word here rendered persuade is rarely, if ever, used in a good sense, that it generally means to entice, or allure to evil; and, therefore, the most judicious critics seem rather inclined to fall back upon the version given in the text of our translation, than to accept the marginal reading, with which Calvin agrees. See Professor Bush's note on this place. Dathe gives the preference to the Arabic version, which signifies that God will prosper Japheth; but for this there is no sufficient authority. -- Ed [303] Allusion here seems to be made to the words quoted by James from the prophecy of Amos: "I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof and I will set it up." -- Acts 15:16. -- Ed. [304] It is not clear whether the original really means that "Japheth," or that "God," "shall dwell in the tents of Shem." If the former, then this is a plain prediction of events which have been in a remarkable manner fulfilled, by the conversion of the Gentiles, and by the diffusion of a vast European population over those regions which were originally occupied by the descendants of Shem. If the original really means the latter, then it has been fulfilled by the manifestation of God's glory among the Israelites, first through the Shechinah which appeared in the tabernacle and temple, and then more especially through the advent of the Messiah, of whom St. John says, "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us; and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth," (John 1:14.) -- Ed. [305] Lightfoot places the death of Noah two years before the birth of Abraham; Dr. A. Clarke two years after it. These chronological differences, however, do not materially affect the general conclusions drawn by Calvin. -- Ed.

Blessed be the Lord God of Shem--rather, "Blessed of Jehovah, my God, be Shem,"--an intimation that the descendants of Shem should be peculiarly honored in the service of the true God, His Church being for ages established among them (the Jews), and of them, concerning the flesh, Christ came. They got possession of Canaan, the people of that land being made their "servants" either by conquest, or, like the Gibeonites, by submission [Jos 9:25].

God shall enlarge Japheth--pointing to a vast increase in posterity and possessions. Accordingly his descendants have been the most active and enterprising, spread over the best and largest portion of the world, all Europe and a considerable part of Asia. he shall dwell in the tents of Shem--a prophecy being fulfilled at the present day, as in India British Government is established and the Anglo-Saxons being in the ascendancy from Europe to India, from India over the American continent. What a wonderful prophecy in a few verses (Isa 46:10; Pe1 1:25)! Next: Genesis Chapter 10

V. 26. And he said, Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant. These are two sublime prophecies, worthy of close attention. They have significance in our time, though they were grossly garbled by the Jews. The Jews observe that Ham is cursed thrice; this fact they wrest to the glory of their own nation, promising themselves worldly dominion. V. HAM CURSED; SHEM AND JAPHETH BLESSED. A. THE CURSE PRONOUNCED UPON HAM 174-188. 1. Why Ham was thrice cursed 174. * Disrespect of parents, pastors and authority signs of approaching misfortune 175. 2. Way Ham disregarded the curse 176. 3. Why Ham disregarded the curse 177-178. 4. Ham's temporal prosperity continued with his curse 179-181. * Faith alone grasps God's threatenings and promises 180-181. * Reason God postpones punishment and reward 181-182. * The Papal Church is not the true Church 183. * Believers have comfort in their tribulations 184-185. * The pious have their kingdom here in faith 186. 5. From this curse it is clear Noah was enlightened by the Holy Spirit 187. * Were all Ham's descendents cursed? 188. B. BLESSING PRONOUNCED UPON SHEM 189-191. 1. This is an exceedingly great blessing 189. 2. Why is it clothed in praise to God 190. 3. This blessing proves that Noah possessed a precious light 191. C. BLESSING PRONOUNCED UPON JAPHETH 192-224. 1. Why the form of Japheth's blessing differed from that of Shem's 192. 2. Herein lies a special secret 193. 3. The Jews' false interpretation of this blessing 194. 4. Relation of these two blessings to each other 195. * The Jews' false notion about Shem's blessing 196. 5. The order in which these blessings are enjoyed 197-198. * The form God's Church takes in this world 199. * Divine promises and threatenings to be understood in a spiritual sense 199-200. * Ham and Cain resemble one another in their positions and works 201. * The Turk and the Pope. a. What strengthens them in their opposition to the true Church 202. * How a Christian should conduct himself in times of misfortunes 203. b. The power and advantages of the Turk and Pope of no avail 204. c. Attitude of Church members to their pride 205-206. * Why Ham's name was not mentioned when he was cursed 207-208. 6. The word dilatet the Latins use in explaining Japheth's blessing 209-210. a. It is not in harmony with the Hebrew 209-210. b. Why all Latin interpreters use it 211. c. It does not fully express the sense of the Holy Spirit 212.

d. What explanation should be given here 213-215. 7. All descendents of Japheth partake of this blessing through the Gospel 216-217. 8. Translations of Latin interpreters of this blessing are to be harmonized with the original text 218-219. * Ham's name 220-221. a. Its meaning and reason his parents gave it to him 220. b. The hope of his parents in this name disappointed 221. 9. It is ascribed to this promise that Germany in these last days received the light of the Gospel 222. * Abraham had Noah as his teacher 223. * The temporal prosperity of Ham's family, and their wickedness 224. V. HAM CURSED; SHEM AND JAPHETH BLESSED. A. The Curse Pronounced Upon Ham. 174. But there is another reason for this repeatedly uttered curse. God cannot forget such great irreverence toward parents, nor does he suffer it to go unpunished. He requires that parents and rulers be regarded with reverence. He requires that elders be honored, commanding that one shall rise up before a hoary head (Lev 19, 32). And, speaking of ministers of the Word, he says, "He that despiseth you, despiseth me" (Mt 10, 40; Lk 10, 16). 175. Hence disobedience of parents is a sure indication that curse and disaster are close at hand. Likewise is contempt of ministers and of rulers punished. When the people of the primitive world began to deride the patriarchs and to hold their authority in contempt, the flood followed. When, among the people of Judah, the child began to behave himself proudly against the old man, as Isaiah has it (ch 3, 5), Jerusalem was laid waste and Judah went down. Such corruption of morals is a certain sign of impending evil. We justly fear for Germany a like fate when we look upon the prevailing disrespect for authority. 176. Let us, however, bear witness of a practice to which both Holy Writ and our experience testify. Because God delays the threatened punishment he is mocked and considered a liar. In this practice we should see the seal, as it were, to every prophecy. Ham hears that he is accursed; but inasmuch as the curse does not go into immediate effect, he securely despises and derides the same.

177. Thus did the first world hold Noah's prophecy in ridicule when he spoke of the flood. Had they believed that such a punishment was close at hand, would they have gone on in a feeling of security? Would they not rather have repented and begun a better life? If Ham had believed that to be true which he heard from his father, he would have sought refuge in mercy and, confessing his crime, craved forgiveness. But he did neither; rather did he haughtily leave his father, to go to Babylon. There, with his posterity, he gave himself up to the building of a city and of a tower, and made himself lord of all Greater Asia. 178. What is the reason for this feeling of security? It lies in the fact that divine prophecies must be believed; they cannot be perceived by our senses, or by experience. This is true both of divine promises and of divine threats. Therefore the opposite always seems to the flesh to be true. 179. Ham is cursed by his father; but he lays hold upon the greater portion of the earth and establishes vast kingdoms. On the other hand, Shem and Japheth are blessed, but in comparison with Ham, they and their posterity are beggarly. Where then are we to seek the truth of this prophecy? I answer: This prophecy and all others, whether they be promises or threats, cannot be understood by reason, but by faith alone. God delays both punishments and rewards; hence there is need of endurance. For "He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved," as Christ says (Mt 24, 13). 180. The life of all pious people is wholly of faith and hope. The evidence of our senses, history, and the way of the world, would teach us the opposite. Ham is cursed, yet he alone obtains dominion. Shem and Japheth are blessed, yet they alone bear reproach and affliction. Since both the promises and the threats of God reach out into the future, the issue must be awaited in faith. Habakkuk says (ch 2, 3), "It will surely come, it will not delay." 181. Great is the wrath of the Holy Spirit which here prompts him to say of Ham, "A servant of servants shall he be;" that is, the lowest and vilest of slaves. But if you let history speak, you will see Ham rule in Canaan, whereas Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and others who followed, and had the blessing, lived like servants among the Canaanites. The Egyptians are Ham's offspring, and how cruel was the servitude Israel suffered there!

182. How, then, was it true that Ham was cursed and Shem was blessed? In this way: The fulfillment of the promise and of the threat was in the future. This delay is ordained in order that the wicked may fill their measure of sin and may not be able to accuse God of having given them no room for repentance. On the other hand, when the righteous suffer at the hands of the unrighteous and become the servants of servants, they undergo such trial and discipline for the purpose of increasing in faith and in love toward God; so that, trained in manifold vexations and tribulations, they may attain the promise. When the time was fulfilled, the might of Ham's posterity was not great enough to withstand the posterity of Shem. Then, indeed, was fulfilled that curse which Ham and his posterity had so long despised and disbelieved. 183. It is much the same with us today. We have the true doctrine and the true worship. Hence we can boast that we are the true Church, having the promise of spiritual blessings in Christ. As the pope's church condemns our doctrine, we know her to be not the Church of Christ but of Satan, and truly, like Ham, a "servant of servants." And yet anyone may see that the pope rules, while we are servants and the off-scouring, as Paul says (1 Cor 4, 12). 184. What, then, shall we poor, oppressed people do? We are to comfort our souls meanwhile with our spiritual dominion. We know we have forgiveness of sins and a gracious God, through Christ, until also temporal freedom shall be vouchsafed on the last day. And we are not without traces of temporal freedom even in this life; for while tyrants stubbornly oppose the Gospel, they are cut off from the earth, root and branch. 185. So was the Roman empire destroyed after all the other world-powers perished; but God's Word and Church remain forever. Likewise, Christ weakens the Pope's power, little by little; but that he may be utterly removed and become a servant of servants with wicked Ham is a matter for faith to await. Ham is shut out from the kingdom of God and possesses the kingdoms of the world for a time, just as the pope is shut out from the Church of God and holds temporal dominion for a time. But his dominion shall vanish.

186. The divine law and order is that the righteous have dominion, but by faith, being satisfied with such spiritual blessing as a gracious God and the certain hope of the heavenly kingdom. Meanwhile, we leave possession of the kingdoms of the world to the wicked until God shall scatter also their worldly power, and, through Christ, make us heirs of all things. 187. Furthermore, we learn from this prophecy that Noah, by a special illumination of the Holy Spirit, was enabled to see, in the first place, that his posterity would remain forever, and in the second place, that the family of Ham, though they were to be rulers for a time, would perish at last and above all would lose the spiritual blessing. 188. However, the explanation given above (ch 4, para 182) with reference to the descendants of Cain, applies also here. I do not entertain the opinion that the offspring of Ham were doomed, without exception. Some found salvation by being converted to faith, but such salvation was not due to a definite promise but to uncovenanted grace, so to speak. Likewise the Gibeonites and others were saved when the children of Israel occupied the land of Canaan. Job, Naaman the Syrian, the people of Nineveh, the widow of Zarephath, and others from the heathen were saved, not by virtue of a promise, but by uncovenanted grace. B. Blessing Pronounced Upon Shem. 189. But why does Noah not say, "Blessed be Shem," instead of, "Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem"? I answer that it is because of the magnitude of the blessing. The reference here is not to a temporal blessing, but to the future blessing through the promised seed. He sees this blessing to be so great that he cannot express it; hence, he turns to thanksgiving. It seems that Zacharias was thinking of this very passage when he said, for a similar reason, "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel" (Lk 1, 68). 190. Noah's blessing takes the form of thanksgiving unto God. God, he says, is blessed, who is the God of Shem. In other words: It is needless for me to extend my blessing over Shem, who has been blessed before with spiritual blessing; he already is a child of God, and from him the Church will be continued, as it was continued from Seth before the flood. Full of wonderful meaning is the fact that Noah joins God with Shem, his son, and, as it were, unites them.

191. Noah's heart must have been divinely illumined since he makes such a distinction between his sons, rejecting Ham with his posterity and placing Shem in line with the saints and the Church because the spiritual blessing, given in paradise concerning the seed, would rest upon him. Therefore, this holy man blesses God and gives thanks unto him. C. Blessing Pronounced Upon Japheth.

V. 27. God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant. 192. This prophecy is wonderful for the aptness of each single word. Noah did not bless Shem, but the God of Shem, by way of giving thanks to God for having embraced Shem and having adorned him with a spiritual promise, or the blessing of the woman's seed. But when he mentions Japheth he does not employ the same manner of speaking as in the case of Shem. His words are chosen for the purpose of showing the mystery of which Paul speaks (Rom 11, 11) and Christ (Jn 4, 22), that salvation is from the Jews and yet the gentiles also became partakers of this salvation. Shem alone is the true root and stem, yet the heathen are grafted upon this stem, as a foreign branch, and become partakers of the fatness and the sap which are in the chosen tree. 193. Noah, seeing this through the Holy Spirit, predicts, in dim allusions but correctly, that Christ's kingdom is to spread in the world from the root of Shem, and not from that of Japheth. 194. The Jews prate that Japheth stands for the neighboring nations around Jerusalem which were admitted to the temple and its worship. But Noah makes little ado about the temple of Jerusalem, or the tabernacle of Moses; his words refer to greater matters. He treats of the three patriarchs who are to replenish the earth. While he affirms of Japheth that he does not belong to the root of the people of God which possesses the promise of the Christ, he declares that he shall be incorporated through the call of the Gospel into the fellowship of that people which has God and the promises. 195. Here, then, we have a picture of the Church of the Gentiles and of the Jews. Ham, being wicked, is not admitted to the spiritual blessing of the seed, except as it happens by uncovenanted grace. To Japheth, however, though he has not the promise of the seed, like Shem, the hope is nevertheless given that he will, at some future time, be taken into the fellowship of the Church. Thus we Gentiles, being sons of Japheth, have no direct promise, indeed, and yet we are included in the promise given to the Jews, since we are predestined to the fellowship of the holy people of God. These matters are here recorded, not for Shem and Japheth so much as for their posterity.

196. We learn why the Jews are so haughty and boastful. They see that Shem, their father, alone has the promise of eternal blessing, which is given through Christ. So far, so good. But when they believe that the promise pertains not to faith but rather to the carnal descent, they are in error. This subject has been splendidly treated by Paul (Rom 9, 6). There he establishes the fact that the children of Abraham are not his carnal descendants but those who have his faith (Gal 3, 7). 197. The same thought is suggested here by Moses, who says in so many words, "Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem." This shows that there is no blessing except by the God of Shem. Hence, no Jew will share this blessing unless he have the God of Shem; that is, unless he believes. Nor will Japheth share the blessing unless he dwells in the tents of Shem, that is, unless he associates himself with him in faith. 198. This is a grand promise, valid unto the end of the world. But just as it is limited to those who have the God of Shem, that is, who believe, so the curse also is limited to those who abide in the wickedness of Ham. Noah spoke these words, not on the strength of human authority and feeling, but by the Spirit of God. His words then refer not to a temporal, but to a spiritual and eternal curse. Nor must we understand him to speak of a curse that is a curse only in the sight of the world, but rather of one in the sight of God. 199. The same statement has been made heretofore (ch 4 para 182) regarding the curse of Cain. Judged by outward appearances, Cain obtained a greater earthly blessing than Seth. God desires that his Church in this world shall apparently suffer the curse pronounced upon the wicked and that, on the other hand, the wicked shall seem to be blessed. Cain was the first man to build a city, calling it Enoch; while Seth dwelt in tents. 200. Thus did Ham build the city and tower of Babel and ruled far and wide, while Shem and Japheth were poor, living in lowly tents. The facts of history, then, teach that both the promises and the curses of God are not to be understood carnally, or of the present life, but spiritually. Although oppressed in the world, the righteous are surely heirs and sons of God, while the wicked, though flourishing for a season, shall ultimately be cut down and wither; a warning often uttered in the Psalms.

201. There is a striking similarity in the conduct and the lot of Cain and Ham. Cain killed his brother, which shows plainly enough the lack of reverence for his father in his heart. Having been put in the ban by his father, he leaves the Church of the true God and the true worship, builds the city of Enoch, giving himself up altogether to worldly things. Just so does Ham sin by dishonoring his father. When also he subsequently receives as sentence the curse whereby he is excluded from the promised seed and the Church, he parts with God and the Church without misgivings, since the curse rests not upon his person but upon that of his son, and migrates to Babylon, where he establishes a kingdom. 202. These are very illustrious examples and needed by the Church, Turk and Pope today; allow us to boast of the heavenly and everlasting promise in that we have the Gospel doctrine, and are the Church. They know, however, our judgment of them, that we consider and condemn both Pope and Turk as very Antichrist. How securely they ignore our judgment, confidently because of the wealth and power they possess, and also because of our weakness in character and numbers. The very same spirit we plainly see in Cain and Ham, in the condemned and excommunicated. 203. These truths enforce the lesson that we must not seek an abiding city or country in this bodily existence, but in its varying changes and fortunes look to the hope of eternal life, promised through Christ. This is the final haven; and we must strive for it with sail and oar, as eager and earnest sailors while the tempest rages. 204. What if the Turk should obtain sway over the whole world, which he never will? Michael, as Daniel says, will bring aid to the holy people, the Church (ch 10, 13). What matter if the Pope should gain possession of the wealth of all the world, as he has tried to do for many centuries with all the wealth at his command? Will Turk and Pope thereby escape death, or even secure permanence of temporal power? Why, then, should we be misled by the temporal blessings which they enjoy, or by our misfortunes and dangers, since we know that they are banished from the fellowship of the saints, while we enjoy everlasting blessings through the Son of God?

205. If Cain and Ham, and Pope and Turk, who are as father and son to each other, can afford to despise the judgment of the true Church on the strength of fleeting and meager successes in this life, why can not we afford in turn to despise their power and censure, on the strength of the everlasting blessings which we possess? Ham was not moved by his father's curse. Full of anger against him, and despising him as a crazy old man, he goes away and arms himself with the power of the world, esteeming this more highly than to be blessed with Shem by his father. 206. This story should give us strength for the similar experiences of today. The priests and bishops heap contempt upon us, saying, What can those poverty stricken heretics do? Priest and bishop are puffed up with their wealth and power. But let us bear this insolence of the wicked with undisturbed mind, as Noah bore that of his son. Let us take consolation in the hope and faith of the eternal benediction, of which, we know, they are deprived. 207. I said above (para 172) that the Holy Spirit was so greatly angered by the sin of Ham that he could not bear even to speak his name in the curse. And it is true, as the punishment shows, that Ham sinned grievously. The other reason mentioned above as not at all unlikely, I will here repeat: Ham had been called and received into the ark by the divine Word, and had been saved with the others, and Noah wanted to spare him whom God had spared in the flood. Therefore, he transferred the curse which Ham merited, to Canaan, his son, whom Ham doubtless desired to keep with him. 208. The Jews offer a different explanation: Canaan, the son, having been the first to see his grandfather Noah lying naked, announced it to his father, who then saw for himself; hence, Canaan gave his father cause to commit the sin. Let the reader judge what value there is in this exposition. 209. But there is also a philological question which must be discussed in connection. Scholars call translators to account for the rendering, "God enlarge Japheth," when the Hebrew words do not permit it, though not only the Hebrews but also the Chaldeans, are mostly agreed that the word jepheth means "to enlarge." Technical discussions of this kind, however, are sometimes very useful to clear up the precise meaning of a passage.

210. Some scholars derive the name Japheth from the verb jephah, which signifies to be beautiful, as in Ps 45, 2: japhjaphita mibene Adam, "Thou art fairer than the children of men." But this may easily be shown to be an error; for the true origin of the word is the verb phatah, which means "to persuade," "to deceive with fair words" as in Ex 22 16: ki jephateh isch betulah, "If a man entice a virgin, he shall surely pay a dowry for her." And in Jer 20, 7: pethithani jehovah va-epath, "O Jehovah, thou hast persuaded me and I was persuaded;" Prov 1, 10: Im-jephatukah, "If sinners entice thee." There is no need of more examples, for the word occurs frequently, and I have no doubt that it is derived from the Greek word peitho, for it has the same meaning. 211. But let us turn to the question: Why have all translators made it read, "God enlarge Japheth," while it is not the word pathach, which means "to enlarge" or "to open", but rather the word pathah? I have no doubt that the translators were influenced by the harsh expression. Since this is a promise, it seemed too harsh to state that Noah had said, "God deceive Japheth." This would appear to be a word of cursing, not of blessing. Hence they chose a milder term, though it violated the rules of language. And since there is but a slight difference between pathach, and pathah, they used one for the other. They meant to preserve the important fact that this is a promise. 212. But there is no need for us to alter the text in this manner, and to violate its grammatical construction, since the word pathah, offers a most suitable meaning. Being a word of double meaning, as the word suadere in Latin, it may be accepted either in a bad or in a good sense. Hence, it is not irreverent to apply this word to God. We find it clearly so used in Hosea 2, 14, where the Lord says: "Therefore, behold, I will (mephateha) allure her (or, entice her by coaxing), and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably unto her." I will suckle her, speak sweetly unto her, and thus will I deceive her, as it were, so that she may agree with me, so that the Church will join herself to me, etc. In this sense the word may here rightly be taken to mean "allure," "persuade," "coax by means of friendly words and flattery." God suckle, persuade, deceive Japheth by persuasion, so that Japheth himself, being allured, as his name signifies, may be invited in a friendly way and thus be beguiled.

213. But you say, what will be the meaning of this? or why should there be need for Japheth to be beguiled or persuaded, and that by God himself? I answer: Noah makes the names to serve his purpose in this prophecy. He gives thanks to God that he establishes them to stand like a firm root from which Christ was to spring. For the verb sum, signifies "to place," "to put in position," "to establish." 214. For Japheth, however, he prays that he may become a true Japheth. Since he was the oldest son, who ordinarily should have been given the right of the first-born, he prays that God would persuade him in a friendly manner, first, not to envy his brother this honor, nor to be dissatisfied that this privilege was taken from him and given to his brother. Furthermore, because this matter touches the person of Japheth only, God includes his entire offspring in the blessing. Though the promise was given to Shem alone, yet God does not shut out from it the offspring of Japheth, but speaks to them lovingly through the Gospel, that they may also become jepheth, being persuaded by the Word of the Gospel. This is a divine persuasion, coming from the Holy Spirit; not from the flesh, nor from the world, nor from Satan, but holy and quickening. This expression is used by Paul in Gal 1, 10, where he says, "Am I now persuading men or God?" And Gal 3, 1, "Who did bewitch you that ye should not obey the truth?"--that ye do not agree to the truth, that ye do not permit yourselves to be persuaded by that which is true? 215. Viewing the name Japheth in this case, it signifies a person of the kind which we call guileless, who believes readily, permitting himself to be easily persuaded of a matter, who does not dispute or cling to his own ideas but submits his mind to the Lord and rests upon his Word, remaining a learner, not desiring to be master over the words and works of God. Hence it is a touching prayer which is here recorded, that God might persuade Japheth; that is, that he might speak fondly with him. Noah prays that, though God does not speak to Japheth on the basis of a promise, as he does with Shem, yet he would speak with him on the basis of grace and divine goodness.

216. This prayer of Noah foresees the spread of the Gospel throughout the whole world. Shem is the stem. From his posterity Christ was born. The Church is of the Jews, who had patriarchs, prophets, and kings. And yet God here shows Noah that also the wretched Gentiles were to dwell in the tents of Shem; that is, they were to come into that heritage of the saints which the Son of God brought into this world--forgiveness of sins, the Holy Spirit, and everlasting life. He prophesies clearly that also Japheth will hear the sweet message of the Gospel as his name suggests; so that, though he have not the same title as Shem, who was set to be the stem from which Christ was to spring, yet he should have the persuader, namely the Gospel. 217. It was Paul through whom this prophecy was fulfilled. He almost unaided taught the Gospel doctrine to the posterity of Japheth. He says: "From Jerusalem, and round about even unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ" (Rom 15, 19). Almost all of Asia, with the exception of the oriental peoples, together with Europe, belongs to the posterity of Japheth. The Gentiles, therefore, did not, as the Jews did, receive the kingdom and the priesthood from God. They had neither the law nor the promise. Yet by the mercy of God they have heard that sweet voice of the Gospel, the persuader, which is indicated by the very name of Japheth. 218. The interpreters failed to recognize this as the true meaning, and God permitted them to make this mistake. Still they did not miss the true meaning altogether. For the verb hirchib, which means "to enlarge," means also "to give consolation," just as conversely in Latin the word angustiae (narrow place) signifies also "pains," or "perils," or "disaster." Thus we read in Psalms 4, 1: "Thou hast set me at large when I was in distress." The only real enlargement, or consolation, is the Word of the Gospel.

219. Thus the several expositions are harmonized by proper interpretation. But the primary meaning of enlarge, which conveys the idea of persuasion, is the native and proper one. It sheds a bright light upon the fact that we Gentiles, although the promise was not given to us, have nevertheless been called by the providence of God to the Gospel. The promise pertains to Shem alone, but Japheth, as Paul has it in Romans 11, 17, was grafted into the olive tree, like a wild olive, and became a partaker of the original fatness, or the sap, of the olive. The older portions of the Bible agree with the newer, and what God promised in the days of Noah, he now carries out. 220. "Ham" signifies "the hot and burning one." This name was given to him by his father, I believe, because of the great things he hoped for his youngest son. To Noah the other two were cold men in comparison. Eve rejoiced greatly when Cain was born (Gen 4, 1). She believed that he would restore whatever had been wrought amiss. Yet he was the first to harm mankind in a new way, in that he killed his brother. 221. Thus God, according to his unsearchable counsel, changes the expectations even of the saints. Ham, whom his father, at his birth, had expected to be inflamed with greater zeal for the support of the Church than his brothers, was hot and burning, indeed, when he grew older, but in a different sense. He burned against his parent and his God, as his deed shows. Hence, his name was one of evil prophecy, unsuspected of Noah when he gave it. 222. This is Noah's prophecy concerning his sons, who have filled the earth with their offspring. The fact, therefore, that God has permitted the light of the Gospel to shine upon Germany, is due to the prophecy anent Japheth. We see today the fulfillment of that which Noah foretold. Though we are not of the seed of Abraham, yet we dwell in the tents of Shem and enjoy the fulfilment of the prophecies concerning Christ. Vs. 28-29. And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died. 223. History shows that Noah died fifty years after the birth of Abraham. Abraham, therefore, enjoying the instruction of so able and renowned a teacher until his fiftieth year, had an opportunity to learn something of religion. And there is no doubt that Noah, being filled with the Holy Spirit, cared for this grandchild of his with special care and love, as the only heir of Shem's promises.

224. At that time the offspring of Ham flourished, spreading idolatry throughout the regions of the East. Abraham was in touch with it, and not without danger to himself. He was saved, however, by Noah, being almost alone in recognizing the greatness of a man who was the only survivor of the early world. The others, forgetful of the wrath which had raged in the flood, taunted the pious, old man; particularly Ham's progeny, puffed up by wealth and power. They heaped insults upon Father Noah, and--frenzied by success--they divided the curse of servitude pronounced upon them as a sign of his dotage. Amen. End of Project Gutenberg's Commentary on Genesis, Vol. II, by Martin Luther

And he said, blessed be the Lord God of Shem,.... Shem was blessed before Japheth, because he was the first and principal in advising and conducting the affair before ascribed to them, as Jarchi on Genesis 9:23 suggests; and though the words are in the form of an ascription of blessedness to God, the fountain of all good, and by whose grace Shem was influenced and enabled to do the good he did, for which the Lord's name was to be praised and blessed; yet it includes the blessing of Shem, and indeed the greatest blessing he could possibly enjoy; for what greater blessing is there, than for a man to have God to be his God? this includes everything, all blessings temporal and spiritual; see Psalm 144:15 some interpret the God of Shem of Christ, who, according to the human nature, was a descendant of Shem; and according to the divine nature the God of Shem, God over all, blessed for ever, Romans 9:4. And Canaan shall be his servant; the posterity of Canaan be servants to the posterity of Shem: this was fulfilled in the times of Joshua, when the Israelites, who sprung from Shem, conquered the land of Canaan, slew thirty of their kings, and took their cities and possessed them, and made the Gibeonites, one of the states of Canaan, hewers of wood and drawers of water to them, or the most mean and abject servants.

God shall enlarge Japheth,.... Or give him a large part of the earth, and large dominions in it, as his posterity have had; for, as Bochart (r) observes, to them belonged all Europe, and lesser Asia, Media, Iberia, Albania, part of Armenia, and all those vast countries to the north, which formerly the Scythians, and now the Tartars inhabit; not to say anything of the new world (America), into which the Scythians might pass through the straights of Anian: and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; inhabit the countries belonging to the posterity of Shem: this was verified by the Medes, who were the descendants of Japheth, together with the Babylonians seizing upon the Assyrian empire and overthrowing that, for Ashur was of Shem; and in the Greeks and Romans, who sprung from Japheth, when they made conquests in Asia, in which were the tents of Shem's posterity; and who, according to the prophecy in Numbers 24:24 that ships from the coast of Chittim, Greece, or Italy, or both, should afflict Ashur and Eber, the Assyrians and the Hebrews, or those beyond the river Euphrates, who all belonged to Shem; and particularly this was fulfilled when the Romans, who are of Japheth, seized Judea, which had long been the seat of the children of Shem, the Jews; and at this day the Turks (s), who are also Japheth's sons, literally dwell in the tents of Shem, or inhabit Judea: the Targums understand this in a mystical sense. Onkelos thus:"God shall cause his Shechinah or glorious Majesty to dwell in the tents of Shem;''which was remarkably true, when Christ, the brightness of his Father's glory, the Word, was made flesh, and tabernacled in Judea: Jonathan Ben Uzziel thus;"and his children shall be proselytes, and dwell in the school of Shem;''and many Christian writers interpret them of the conversion of the Gentiles, and of their union and communion with the believing Jews in one Gospel church state, which was very evidently fulfilled in the first times of the Gospel: and they read these words in connection with the former clause thus, "God shall persuade Japheth (t), and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem"; that is, God shall persuade the Gentiles, the posterity of Japheth, by the sweet alluring voice of his Gospel, and through the power of his grace accompanying it, to embrace and profess Christ and his Gospel, and join with his churches, and walk with them in all the commandments and ordinances of Christ; and at this day all the posterity of Japheth, excepting Magog, or the Turks, bear the name of Christians: the Talmudists (u) interpret the passage of the language of Japheth being spoken in the tents of Shem; which had its accomplishment when the apostles of Christ spoke and wrote in Greek, one of the languages of Japheth's sons. Some understand this of God himself, he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, or in Israel, as Jarchi, and was verified remarkably in the incarnation of the Son of God: and Canaan shall be his servant; the posterity of Canaan servants to the posterity of Japheth; as they were when Tyre, which was built by the Sidonians, and Sidon, which had its name from the eldest son of Canaan, fell into the hands of Alexander the Grecian, who sprung from Japheth; and when Carthage, a colony of the Phoenicians of Canaan's race, was taken and demolished by the Romans of the line of Japheth, which made Hannibal, a child of Canaan, say, "agnoscere se fortunam Carthaginis" (w), that he owned the fate of Carthage; and in which some have thought that he refers to this prophecy. (r) Phaleg. l. 3. c. 1. col. 149. (s) This was written about 1750. Ed. (t) "alliciet", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator; "persuadebit", Cocceius; so Ainsworth. (u) T. Hieros. Megillah, fol. 71. 2. T. Bab. Megillah, fol. 9. 2. Bereshit Rabba, sect. 36. fol. 32. 1.((w) Liv. Hist. l. 27. c. 51.

And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. So that he not only saw the old world, and the wickedness of that, and the destruction of it for it, but an increase of wickedness again, the building of the tower of Babel, the confusion of languages, the dispersion of his offspring, and the wars among them in the times of Nimrod, and others: however, it was a blessing to mankind that he lived so long after the flood in the new world, to transmit to posterity, by tradition, the affairs of the old world; and to give a particular account of the destruction of it, and to instruct them in the doctrines and duties of religion. By this it appears, that he lived within thirty two years of the birth of Abraham. The Jews conclude from hence, that he lived to the fifty eighth year of Abraham's life: it may be remarked, that it is not added here as usual to the account of the years of the patriarchs, "and he begat sons and daughters"; from whence it may be concluded, that he had no more children than the three before mentioned, as well as from the silence of the Scriptures elsewhere, and from the old age of himself and his wife, and especially from what is said; see Gill on Genesis 9:19.

And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years,.... He lived twenty years more than Adam did, and within nineteen of Methuselah, and his age must be called a good old age; but what is said of all the patriarchs is also said or him: and he died: the Arabic writers say (w), when the time of his death drew nigh, he ordered his son Shem by his will to take the body of Adam, and lay it in the middle of the earth, and appoint Melchizedek, the son of Peleg, minister at his grave; and one of them is very particular as to the time of his death; they say (x) he died on the second day of the month Ijar, on the fourth day (of the week), at two o'clock in the morning. (w) Elmacinus, p. 12. Patricides, p. 11. apud Hottinger. Smegma, p. 254. (x) Patricides, ib. p. 256.

Here, I. Noah comes to himself: He awoke from his wine. Sleep cured him, and, we may suppose, so cured him that he never relapsed into that sin afterwards. Those that sleep as Noah did should awake as he did, and not as that drunkard (Pro 23:35) who says when he awakes, I will seek it yet again. II. The spirit of prophecy comes upon him, and, like dying Jacob, he tells his sons what shall befal them, Gen 49:1. 1. He pronounces a curse on Canaan the son of Ham (Gen 9:25), in whom Ham is himself cursed, either because this son of his was now more guilty than the rest, or because the posterity of this son was afterwards to be rooted out of their land, to make room for Israel. And Moses here records it for the animating of Israel in the wars of Canaan; though the Canaanites were a formidable people, yet they were of old an accursed people, and doomed to ruin. The particular curse is, A servant of servants (that is, the meanest and most despicable servant) shall he be, even to his brethren. Those who by birth were his equals shall by conquest be his lords. This certainly points at the victories obtained by Israel over the Canaanites, by which they were all either put to the sword or put under tribute (Jos 9:23; Jdg 1:28, Jdg 1:30, Jdg 1:33, Jdg 1:35), which happened not till about 800 years after this. Note, (1.) God often visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, especially when the children inherit the fathers' wicked dispositions, and imitate the fathers' wicked practices, and do nothing to cut off the entail of the curse. (2.) Disgrace is justly put upon those that put disgrace upon others, especially that dishonour and grieve their own parents. An undutiful child that mocks at his parents is no more worthy to be called a son, but deserves to be made as a hired servant, nay, as a servant of servants, among his brethren. (3.) Though divine curses operate slowly, yet, first or last, they will take effect. The Canaanites were under a curse of slavery, and yet, for a great while, had the dominion; for a family, a people, a person, may lie under the curse of God, and yet may long prosper in the world, till the measure of their iniquity, like that of the Canaanites, be full. Many are marked for ruin that are not yet ripe for ruin. Therefore, Let not thy heart envy sinners. 2. He entails a blessing upon Shem and Japheth. (1.) He blesses Shem, or rather blesses God for him, yet so that it entitles him to the greatest honour and happiness imaginable, Gen 9:26. Observe, [1.] He calls the Lord the god of Shem; and happy, thrice happy, is that people whose God is the Lord, Psa 144:15. All blessings are included in this. This was the blessing conferred on Abraham and his seed; the God of heaven was not ashamed to be called their God, Heb 11:16. Shem is sufficiently recompensed for his respect to his father by this, that the Lord himself puts this honour upon him, to be his God, which is a sufficient recompence for all our services and all our sufferings for his name. [2.] He gives to God the glory of that good work which Shem had done, and, instead of blessing and praising him that was the instrument, he blesses and praises God that was the author. Note, The glory of all that is at any time well done, by ourselves or others, must be humbly and thankfully transmitted to God, who works all our good works in us and for us. When we see men's good works we should glorify, not them, but our Father, Mat 5:16. Thus David, in effect, blessed Abigail, when he blessed God that sent her (Sa1 25:32, Sa1 25:33), for it is an honour and a favour to be employed for God and used by him in doing good. [3.] He foresees and foretels that God's gracious dealings with Shem and his family would be such as would evidence to all the world that he was the God of Shem, on which behalf thanksgivings would by many be rendered to him: Blessed be the Lord God of Shem. [4.] It is intimated that the church should be built up and continued in the posterity of Shem; for of him came the Jews, who were, for a great while, the only professing people God had in the world. [5.] Some think reference is here had to Christ, who was the Lord God that, in his human nature, should descend from the loins of Shem; for of him, as concerning the flesh, Christ came. [6.] Canaan is particularly enslaved to him: He shall be his servant. Note, Those that have the Lord for their God shall have as much of the honour and power of this world as he sees good for them. (2.) He blesses Japheth, and, in him, the isles of the Gentiles, which were peopled by his seed: God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, Gen 9:27. Now, [1.] Some make this to belong wholly to Japheth, and to denote either, First, His outward prosperity, that his seed should be so numerous and so victorious that they should be masters of the tents of Shem, which was fulfilled when the people of the Jews, the most eminent of Shem's race, were tributaries to the Grecians first and afterwards to the Romans, both of Japheth's seed. Note, Outward prosperity is no infallible mark of the true church: the tents of Shem are not always the tents of the conqueror. Or, Secondly, It denotes the conversion of the Gentiles, and the bringing of them into the church; and then we should read it, God shall persuade Japheth (for so the word signifies), and then, being so persuaded, he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, that is, Jews and Gentiles shall be united together in the gospel fold. After many of the Gentiles shall have been proselyted to the Jewish religion, both shall be one in Christ (Eph 2:14, Eph 2:15), and the Christian church, mostly made up of the Gentiles, shall succeed the Jews in the privileges of church-membership; the latter having first cast themselves out by their unbelief, the Gentiles shall dwell in their tents, Rom 11:11, etc. Note, It is God only that can bring those again into the church who have separated themselves from it. It is the power of God that makes the gospel of Christ effectual to salvation, Rom 1:16. And again, Souls are brought into the church, not by force, but by persuasion, Psa 110:3. They are drawn by the cords of a man, and persuaded by reason to be religious. [2.] Others divide this between Japheth and Shem, Shem having not been directly blessed, Gen 9:26. First, Japheth has the blessing of the earth beneath: God shall enlarge Japheth, enlarge his seed, enlarge his border. Japheth's prosperity peopled all Europe, a great part of Asia, and perhaps America. Note, God is to be acknowledged in all our enlargements. It is he that enlarges the coast and enlarges the heart. And again, many dwell in large tents that do not dwell in God's tents, as Japheth did. Secondly, Shem has the blessing of heaven above: He shall (that is, God shall) dwell in the tents of Shem, that is "From his loins Christ shall come, and in his seed the church shall be continued." The birth-right was now to be divided between Shem and Japheth, Ham being utterly discarded. In the principality which they equally share Canaan shall be servant to both. The double portion is given to Japheth, whom God shall enlarge; but the priesthood is given to Shem, for God shall dwell in the tents of Shem: and certainly we are more happy if we have God dwelling in our tents than if we had there all the silver and gold in the world. It is better to dwell in tents with God than in palaces without him. In Salem, where is God's tabernacle, there is more satisfaction than in all the isles of the Gentiles. Thirdly, They both have dominion over Canaan: Canaan shall be servant to them; so some read it. When Japheth joins with Shem, Canaan falls before them both. When strangers become friends, enemies become servants.

These are the generations. If any one pleases more accurately to examine the genealogies related by Moses in this and the following chapter, I do not condemn his industry. [306] And some interpreters have not unsuccessfully applied their diligence and study to this point. Let them enjoy, as far as I am concerned the reward of their labors. It shall, however, suffice for me briefly to allude to those things which I deem more useful to be noticed, and for the sake of which I suppose these genealogies to have been written by Moses. First, in these bare names we have still some fragment of the history of the world; and the next chapter will show how many years intervened between the date of the deluge and the time when God made his covenant with Abraham. This second commencement of mankind is especially worthy to be known; and detestable is the ingratitude of those, who, when they had heard, from their fathers and grandfathers of the wonderful restoration of the world in so short a time, yet voluntarily became forgetful of the grace and the salvation of God. Even the memory of the deluge was by the greater part entirely lost. Very few cared by what means or for what end they had been preserved. Many ages afterwards, seeing that the wicked forgetfulness of men had rendered them callous to the judgment and mercy of God, the door was opened to the lies of Satan by whose artifice it came to pass, that heathen poets scattered abroad futile and even noxious fables, by which the truth respecting God's works was adulterated. The goodness of God, therefore, wonderfully triumphed over the wickedness of men, in having granted a prolongation of life to beings so ungrateful, brutal, and barbarous. Now, to captious men, (who yet do not think it absurd to refuse to acknowledge a Creator of the world,) such a sudden increase of mankind seems incredible, and therefore they ridicule it as fabulous. I grant, indeed, that if we choose to estimate what Moses relates by our own reason, it may be regarded as a fable; but they act very perversely who do not attend to the design of the Holy Spirit. For what else, I ask, did the Spirit intend, than that the offspring of three men should be increased, not by natural means, or in a common manner, but by the unwonted exercise of the power of God, for the purpose of replenishing the earth far and wide? They who regard this miracle of God as fabulous on account of its magnitude, should much less believe that Noah and his sons, with their wives, breathed in the waters, and that animals lived nearly a whole year without sun and air. This then, is a gigantic madness, [307] to hold up to ridicule what is said respecting the restoration of the human race: for there the admirable power of God is displayed. How much better would it be, in the history of these events, -- which Noah saw with his own eyes, and not without great admiration, -- to behold God, to admire his power, to celebrate his goodness, and to acknowledge his hand, not less filled with mysteries in restoring, than in creating the world? We must, however, observe, that in the three catalogues which Moses furnishes, [308] all the heads of the families are not enumerated; but those only, among the grandsons of Noah, are recorded, who were the princes of nations. For as any one excelled among his brethren, in talent, valor, industry, or other endowments, he obtained for himself a name and power, so that others, resting under his shadow, freely conceded to him the priority. Therefore, among the sons of Japheth, of Ham, and of Shem, Moses enumerates those only who had been celebrated, and by whose names the people were called. Moreover, although no certain cause appears why Moses begins at Japheth, and descends in the second place to Ham, yet it is probable that the first place is given to the sons of Japheth, because they, having wandered over many regions, and having even crossed the sea, had receded farther from their country: and since these nations were less known to the Jews, therefore he alludes to them briefly. He assigns the second place to the sons of Ham, the knowledge of whom, on account of their vicinity, was more familiar to the Jews. But since he had determined to weave the history of the Church in one continuous narrative, he postpones the progeny of Shem, from which the church flowed, to the last place. Wherefore, the order in which they are mentioned is not that of dignity; since Moses puts those first, whom he wished slightly to pass over, as obscure. Besides, we must observe, that the children of this world are exalted for a time, so that the whole earth seems as if it were made for their benefit, but their glory being transient vanishes away; while the Church, in an ignoble and despised condition, as if creeping on the ground, is yet divinely preserved, until at length, in his own time, God shall lift up her head. I have already declared that I leave to others the scrupulous investigation of the names here mentioned. The reason of certain of them is manifest from the Scripture, such as Cush, Mizraim, Madai, Canaan, and the like: in respect to some others there are probable conjectures; in others, the obscurity is too great to allow of any certain conclusion; and those figments which interpreters adduce are, in part, very much distorted and forced; in part, vapid, and without any fair pretext. Undoubtedly it seems to be the part of a frivolous curiosity to seek for certain and distinct nations in each of these names. [309] When Moses says, that the islands of the Gentiles were divided by the sons of Japheth, we understand that the regions beyond the sea were parted among them. For Greece and Italy, and other continental lands, -- as well as Rhodes and Cyprus, -- are called islands by the Hebrews, because the sea interposed. Whence we infer that we are sprung from those nations.

Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah,.... The genealogy of them, and which is of great use to show the original of the several nations of the world, from whence they sprung, and by whom they were founded; and to confute the pretended antiquity of some nations, as the Egyptians, Chaldeans, Chinese, and others; and to point out the particular people, which were to be the seat of the church of God for many ages, and from whom the Messiah was to spring; which seems to be the principal view of the history of Moses, and of this genealogy, with which should be compared 1 Chronicles 1:1 Shem, Ham, and Japheth; see Genesis 5:32. and unto them were sons born after the flood; for they had none born to them either before the flood or in it; they were married before the flood, for their wives went into the ark with them; but it does not appear they had any children before, though they then were near an hundred years old; and if they had, they were not in the ark, and therefore must perish with the rest, which is not likely: Shem's son Arphaxad was born two years after the flood, Genesis 11:10 when the rest were born, either his or his brethren's, is not said; however they were all born after the flood; though some pretend that Canaan was born in the ark (y), during the flood, for which there is no authority; yea, it is confuted in this chapter, where Canaan stands among the sons of Ham, born to him after the flood. (y) See Bayle's Dictionary, vol. 10. art. "Ham", p. 587.

[405] Gen. x. 1, 2. Concerning Japhet, the son of Noah. Neptune is the same with Japhet, who is called the god of the sea, because mountains, places, islands, and the great peninsulas of Asia Minor, Greece, Italy, and Spain, were peopled by his posterity. The name Neptune is derived from the same radix that Japhet is, even from Greek or Hebrew, to enlarge, whence Greek or Hebrew, Japhet, and Greek or Hebrew, Nephta, in niphal, according to the allusion of Noah, Japht Elohim Japhet, Gen. ix. 27.“God shall enlarge Japhet:” proportionably whereunto Neptune was called by the Greek Greek or Hebrew, which grammarians in vain attempt to deduce from the Greek tongue, seeing, as Herodotus in Euterpe asserts, the name Poseidon was at first used by none but the Libyans or Africans, who always honoured this god. Poseidon is the same with the Punic word Greek or Hebrew, Pesitan, which signifies expanse, or broad, from Greek or Hebrew, Pasat, to dilate or expand. Japhet’s name, and what is said of him, God shall enlarge Japhet, well suits with Neptune’s character among the heathen, who is styled, Late imperans and Late-sonans, as also one that has a large breast. The genealogy of Neptune confirms that he is Japhet: he is the son of Saturn, i. e. Noah. See note on Gen. i. 27. Gale’s Court of the Gen. p. 1. b. 2. c. 6. p. 73, 74.

Moses begins with Japheth's family, either because he was the eldest, or because his family lay remotest from Israel and had least concern with them at the time when Moses wrote, and therefore he mentions that race very briefly, hastening to give an account of the posterity of Ham, who were Israel's enemies and of Shem, who were Israel's ancestors; for it is the church that the scripture is designed to be the history of, and of the nations of the world only as they were some way or other related to Israel and interested in the affairs of Israel. Observe, 1. Notice is taken that the sons of Noah had sons born to them after the flood, to repair and rebuild the world of mankind which the flood had ruined. He that had killed now makes alive. 2. The posterity of Japheth were allotted to the isles of the Gentiles (Gen 10:5), which were solemnly, by lot, after a survey, divided among them, and probably this island of ours among the rest; all places beyond the sea from Judea are called isles (Jer 25:22), and this directs us to understand that promise (Isa 42:4), the isles shall wait for his law, of the conversion of the Gentiles to the faith of Christ.

the isles of the Gentiles--a phrase by which the Hebrews described all countries which were accessible by sea (Isa 11:11; Isa 20:6; Jer 25:22). Such in relation to them were the countries of Europe, the peninsula of Lesser Asia, and the region lying on the east of the Euxine. Accordingly, it was in these quarters the early descendants of Japheth had their settlements.

The sons of Japheth,.... Who though mentioned last, the genealogy begins with him, by a figure which rhetoricians call a "chiasm". The posterity of Japheth are those whom Hesiod (z) often calls "Iapetionides", and him "Iapetus". According to Josephus (a), the sons of Japheth inhabited the earth, beginning from the mountains Taurus and Amanus, and then went on in Asia unto the river Tanais, and in Europe unto Gadira. Seven of his sons are mentioned, and the first is Gomer; from whom, according to the same writer (b), came the Gomareans or Gomerites, in his time called by the Greeks Galatians, that is, the Gauls of Asia minor, who inhabited Phrygia; both Gomer and Phrygia signifying the same, as Bochart (c) observes, and the country looking as if it was torrified or burnt; and Pliny (d) makes mention of a town in Phrygia, called Cimmeris; and the Cimmerians and Cimbri are derived by some from this Gomer, whom Herodotus (e) makes mention of as in Asia and Scythia, and speaks of a country called Cimmerius, and of the Cimmerian Bosphorus; and these seem to be the Gauls before mentioned, under a different name; and it is to be observed, that the Welsh, who sprung from the Gauls, call themselves to this day Cumero, or Cymro and Cumeri. It is plain from Ezekiel 38:6 that Gomer and his people lay to the north of Judea, and the posterity of Japheth went first into the northern parts of Asia, and then spread themselves into Europe: six more of his sons follow, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras; the first of these, Magog, was the father of a northern people which bore his name, see Ezekiel 38:2 and according to Josephus (f), who is generally followed, are the same that were called Scythians; from Madai came the Medes, often spoken of in Scripture, along with the Persians; so Josephus (g) says, from him came the nation of Madaeans, whom the Greeks call Medes; and very frequently in Scripture the Medes go by the name of Madai, their original ancestor; see Daniel 5:28 but Mr. Mede (h) is of opinion, that Macedonia was the seat of this Madai, which was formerly called Aemathia; that is, as he gives the etymology of it, "Madai", the country of Madai; but the former sense is generally received. Javan is by all agreed to be the father of the Grecians; hence Alexander, king of Grecia, is in Daniel 8:21 called king of Javan; and one part of Greece bore the name of Ionia; and the sea that washed it is called the Ionian sea. And his posterity are "Iaonians", in Homer (i) and Aristophanes (k); and the scholiast of the latter says, that the Barbarians call all Greeks Iaonians. The next son of Japheth is Tubal or Thobel, as Josephus calls him, who says (l) the Thobelians in his time were called Iberians, a people in Asia, that dwelt near the Euxine sea; and in Albania was a place called Thabilaca, as may be seen in Ptolemy (m), and another called Thilbis, from whom might spring the Iberians in Europe, now called Spaniards; but Bochart (n) thinks that the Tibarenes are the descendants of Tubal, a people that dwelt between the Trapezuntii and Armenia the less; and he wonders that this never was thought of by any; but in that he is mistaken, for our countryman Mr. Broughton (o) makes the Tibarenes to spring from Tubal; and Epiphanius (p) many hundreds of years before him. Meshech, his next son, is mentioned along with Tubal in Ezekiel 27:13 from him came the Mosocheni, as Josephus (q), who in his time were called Cappadocians, with whom there was a city then named Mazaca, since Caesarea (r); and these seem to be the same that Pliny (s) calls Moscheni, who inhabited the mountains Moschici, which were at the north east of Cappadocia. Some derive the Muscovites from them, which is not improbable: the last of Japheth's sons is Tiras or Thiras, which Jarchi interprets very wrongly by Paras, or Persia; much better the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem, and so a Jewish chronologer (t), by Thracia; for the descendants of Thiras, as Josephus (u) observes, the Greeks call Thracians; and in Thrace was a river called Atyras (w), which has in it a trace of this man's name; and Odrysus, whom the Thracians worshipped, is the same with Tiras, which god sometimes goes by the name of Thuras; and is one of the names of Mars, the god of the Thracians. (z) In Theogonia. (a) Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.((b) Ib. (c) Phaleg. l. 3. c. 8. col. 171, 172. (d) Nat. Hist. l. 5. c. 30. (e) Clio sive, l. 1. c. 16, 103. & Melpomene sive, l. 4. c. 11, 12, 13. (f) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (g) Ib. (h) Dissert. 48. (i) Iliad. 13. ver. 685. (k) Acharneus. Acts 1. scen. 3. p. 376. (l) Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.((m) Geograph. l. 5. c. 12. (n) Phaleg. l. 3. c. 12. col. 180. (o) See his Works, p. 2, 58. (p) Ancorat. p. 546. (q) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (r) Vid. Ammian. Marcellin. l. 20. p. 170. Ed. Vales. (s) Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 9, 10. (t) Sepher Juchasin, fol. 145. 1. Vid. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 10. 1.((u) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (w) Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 4. c. 11.

And the sons of Gomer,.... Who was the first of the sons of Japheth, three of whose sons are mentioned, and they are as follow: Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah; the first of these seated himself in the lesser Asia, in Pontus and Bithynia, where were some traces of his name in the river Ascanius, and in the Ascanian lake or bay; and also in the lesser Phrygia or Troas, where was a city called Ascania, and where were the Ascanian isles (x), and the Euxine Pontus, or Axeine (y), as it was first called, which is the sea that separates Asia and Europe, and is no other than a corruption of the sea of Ashkenaz. It seems to have been near Armenia, by its being mentioned along with Minni or Armenia, in Jeremiah 51:27. Germany is by the Jews commonly called Ashkenaz; perhaps some of the posterity of Ashkenaz in Asia might pass into Europe, and Germany might be a colony of them; so Mr. Broughton (z) observes of the sons of Gomer, that they first took their seat in Asia, and then came north and west into Muscovy and Germany. The next son of Gomer was Riphath. Josephus (a) says, that the Riphathaeans which came from him are the Paphlagonians, a people of Asia Minor, near Pontus, so that he settled near his brother Ashkenaz; perhaps his posterity are the Arimphaei of Pliny (b), and the Riphaeans of Mela (c), who inhabited near the Riphaean mountains, which might have their name from this son of Gomer, who in 1 Chronicles 1:6 is called Diphath, the letters and being very similar. His third son is called Togarmah, who had his seat in the north of Judea, see Ezekiel 38:6 his posterity are the Phrygians, according to Josephus (d); but some place them in Galatia and Cappadocia; and Strabo (e) makes mention of a people called Trocmi, on the borders of Pontus and Cappadocia; and Cicero (f) of the Trogmi or Trogini, who may have their name from hence; for the Greek interpreters always call him Torgama or Thorgana. The Jews make the Turks to be the posterity of Togarmah. Elias Levita says (g), there are some that say that Togarmah is the land of Turkey; and Benjamin of Tudela (h) calls a Turkish sultan king of the Togarmans, that is, the Turks; and among the ten families of Togarmah, which Josephus ben Gorion (i) speaks of, the Turks are one; and perhaps this notion may not be amiss, since the company of Togarmah is mentioned with Gog, or the Turk; see Gill on Ezekiel 38:6. The Armenians pretend to be the descendants of Togarmah, who, with them, is the son of Tiras, the son of Gomer, by his son Haik, from whom they and their country, from all antiquity, have bore the name of Haik (k). (x) Strabo Geograph. l. 12. p. 387, 388. & l. 14. p. 468. Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 4. 12. & 5. 30, 31, 32. (y) Vid. Orphei Argonautic, ver. 84. (z) See his Works, p. 2, 58. (a) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (b) Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 2.((c) De Situ Orbis, l. 1. c. 2.((d) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (e) Geograph. l. 4. p. 130. & l. 12. p. 390. (f) De Divinatione, l. 2.((g) In Tishbi, p. 259. (h) ltinerarium, p. 27, 54. (i) Hist. Heb. l. 1. c. 1. p. 3.((k) See the Universal History, vol. 1. p. 377.

And the sons of Javan,.... Another son of Japheth; four sons of Javan are mentioned, which gave names to countries, and are as follow: Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim; the first of these, Elishah, gave name to the Elysaeans, now called Aeoles, as Josephus (l) says; hence the country Aeolia, and the Aeolic dialect, all from this name; and there are many traces of it in the several parts of Greece. Hellas, a large country in it, has its name from him; so the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem interpret Elishah by Allas. Elis in Peloponnesus, Eleusis in Attica, the river Elissus, or Ilissus, and the Elysian fields, are so called from him. Tarshish, second son of Javan, gave name to Tarsus, by which Cilicia was formerly called, as Josephus says (m), of which the city named Tarsus was the metropolis, the birth place of the Apostle Paul, Acts 22:3. Hence the Mediterranean sea is called Tarshish, because the Cicilians were masters of it; and Tartessus in Spain might be a colony from them, as Broughton observes; and so Eusebius says, from the Tarsinns are the Iberians, or Spaniards; and which Bochart (n) approves of, and confirms by various evidences; and Hillerus, (o) makes Tarshish to be the author of the Celtae, that is, of the Spanish, French, and German nations. The third son of Javan is Kittim, whom Josephus (p) places in the island of Cyprus, a city there being called Citium, from whence was Zeno the Citian: but rather the people that sprung from him are those whom Homer (q) calls Cetii; and are placed by Strabo (r) to the west of Cilicia, in the western parts of which are two provinces, mentioned by Ptolemy (s), the one called Cetis, the other Citis: likewise this Kittim seems to be the father both of the Macedonians and the Latines; for Alexander the great is said to come from Cittim, and Perseus king of Macedon is called king of Cittim,"And it happened, after that Alexander son of Philip, the Macedonian, who came out of the land of Chettiim, had smitten Darius king of the Persians and Medes, that he reigned in his stead, the first over Greece,'' (1 Maccabees 1:1)"Beside this, how they had discomfited in battle Philip, and Perseus, king of the Citims, with others that lifted up themselves against them, and had overcome them:'' (1 Maccabees 8:5)and Macedonia is sometimes called Macetia, as it is in Gellius (t), which has something of the name of Cittim or Cetim in it; and also the Latines or Romans seem to spring from hence, who may be thought to be meant by Cittim in Numbers 24:24 Daniel 11:30 and Eusebius says the Citians are a people from whom came the Sabines, who also are Romans; and in Latium was a city called Cetia, as says Halicarnassensis (u); and Bochart (w) has shown, that Latium and Cethem signify the same, and both have their names from words that signify to hide; "latium a latendo", and "celhem", from "to hide", see Jeremiah 2:22 in which sense the word is frequently used in the Arabic language; and Cittim in the Jerusalem Targum is here called Italy. The last son of Javan mentioned is Dodanim; he is omitted by Josephus: his country is by the Targum of Jonathan called Dordania; and by the Jerusalem Targum Dodonia; and he and his posterity are placed by Mr. Mede in part of Peloponnessus and Epirus, in which was the city of Dodona, where were the famous temple and oracle of Jupiter Dodonaeus, under which name this man was worshipped. In 1 Chronicles 1:7 he is called Rodanim, and in the Samaritan version here; and the word is by the Septuagint translated Rodians; which have led some to think of the island of Rhodes as the seat, and the inhabitants of it as the posterity of this man; but Bochart (x) is of opinion, that they settled in the country now called France, gave the name to the river Rhodanus, and called the adjacent country Rhodanusia, and where formerly was a city of that name, much about the same tract where now stands Marseilles; but this seems too remote for a son of Javan. (l) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (m) Ib. (n) Phaleg. l. 3. c. 7. (o) Onomastic. Saer. p. 944. (p) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (q) Odyss. 11. ver. 520. (r) Geograph. l. 13. p. 423. (s) Ibid. l. 5. c. 8. (t) Attic. Noct. l. 9. c. 3.((u) Hist. l. 8. p. 376. (w) Phaleg. l. 3. c. 5. col. 159, 160. (x) Phaleg. l. 3. c. 6. col. 163, 164.

By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands,.... That is, by those sons of Japheth before mentioned; and by "isles" are meant, not countries surrounded with water, for the isles in this sense would not have been sufficient for the posterity of Japheth; nor can it be thought they would leave the continent, where there was room enough for them, and go into islands; and besides must have found it difficult to get there, when shipping and navigation were little known: but it is usual with the Hebrews, of whom Moses, the writer of this history, was, to call all places beyond the Mediterranean sea, or whatsoever they went to by sea, or that were upon the sea coasts, islands, as Greece, Italy, &c. Moreover, the word sometimes signifies countries, as it does in Job 22:30 and so should be rendered here, as it is by some (y), "the countries of the Gentiles"; so called, because in the times of Moses, and at the writing of this history, those countries were inhabited by Heathens and idolaters, strangers to the true religion: and this division was not made at random, and at the pleasure of a rude company of men, but in an orderly regular manner, with the consent, and by the advice and direction of the principal men of those times; and especially it was directed by the wise providence of the most High, who divided to the nations their inheritance, and set the bounds of the people, Deuteronomy 32:8. everyone after his tongue, after their families, in their nations; this shows, that what is said concerning the division of countries to the sons of Japheth is by way of anticipation; and that, though thus related, was not done till after the confusion of languages, since the partition was made according to the different languages of men; those that were of the same language went and dwelt together, the several nations of them, and the several families in those nations; by which it appears that this was done by consultation, with great care and wisdom, ranging the people according to their tongues; of which nations were formed, and with them were taken the several families they consisted of. (y) "regiones gentium", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Patrick.

That which is observable and improvable in these verses is the account here given of Nimrod, Gen 10:8-10. He is here represented as a great man in his day: He began to be a mighty one in the earth, that is, whereas those that went before him were content to stand upon the same level with their neighbours, and though every man bore rule in his own house yet no man pretended any further, Nimrod's aspiring mind could not rest here; he was resolved to tower above his neighbours, not only to be eminent among them, but to lord it over them. The same spirit that actuated the giants before the flood (who became mighty men, and men of renown, Gen 6:4), now revived in him, so soon was that tremendous judgment which the pride and tyranny of those mighty men brought upon the world forgotten. Note, There are some in whom ambition and affectation of dominion seem to be bred in the bone; such there have been and will be, notwithstanding the wrath of God often revealed from heaven against them. Nothing on this side hell will humble and break the proud spirits of some men, in this like Lucifer, Isa 14:14, Isa 14:15. Now, I. Nimrod was a great hunter; with this he began, and for this became famous to a proverb. Every great hunter is, in remembrance of him, called a Nimrod. 1. Some think he did good with his hunting, served his country by ridding it of the wild beasts which infested it, and so insinuated himself into the affections of his neighbours, and got to be their prince. Those that exercise authority either are, or at least would be called, benefactors, Luk 22:25. 2. Others think that under pretence of hunting he gathered men under his command, in pursuit of another game he had to play, which was to make himself master of the country and to bring them into subjection. He was a mighty hunter, that is, he was a violent invader of his neighbours' rights and properties, and a persecutor of innocent men, carrying all before him, and endeavouring to make all his own by force and violence. He thought himself a mighty prince, but before the Lord (that is, in God's account) he was but a mighty hunter. Note, Great conquerors are but great hunters. Alexander and Caesar would not make such a figure in scripture-history as they do in common history; the former is represented in prophecy but as a he-goat pushing, Dan 8:5. Nimrod was a mighty hunter against the Lord, so the Septuagint; that is, (1.) He set up idolatry, as Jeroboam did, for the confirming of his usurped dominion. That he might set up a new government, he set up a new religion upon the ruin of the primitive constitution of both. Babel was the mother of harlots. Or, (2.) He carried on his oppression and violence in defiance of God himself, daring Heaven with his impieties, as if he and his huntsmen could out-brave the Almighty, and were a match for the Lord of hosts and all his armies. As if it were a small thing to weary men, he thinks to weary my God also, Isa 7:13. II. Nimrod was a great ruler: The beginning of his kingdom was Babel, Gen 10:10. Some way or other, by arts or arms, he got into power, either being chosen to it or forcing his way to it; and so laid the foundations of a monarchy, which was afterwards a head of gold, and the terror of the mighty, and bade fair to be universal. It does not appear that he had any right to rule by birth; but either his fitness for government recommended him, as some think, to an election, or by power and policy he advanced gradually, and perhaps insensibly, into the throne. See the antiquity of civil government, and particularly that form of it which lodges the sovereignty in a single person. If Nimrod and his neighbours began, other nations soon learned to incorporate under one head for their common safety and welfare, which, however it began, proved so great a blessing to the world that things were reckoned to go ill indeed when there was no king in Israel. III. Nimrod was a great builder. Probably he was architect in the building of Babel, and there he began his kingdom; but, when his project to rule all the sons of Noah was baffled by the confusion of tongues, out of that land he went forth into Assyria (so the margin reads it, Gen 10:11) and built Nineveh, etc., that, having built these cities, he might command them and rule over them. Observe, in Nimrod, the nature of ambition. 1. It is boundless. Much would have more, and still cries, Give, give. 2. It is restless. Nimrod, when he had four cities under his command, could not be content till he had four more. 3. It is expensive. Nimrod will rather be at the charge of rearing cities than not have the honour of ruling them. The spirit of building is the common effect of a spirit of pride. 4. It is daring, and will stick at nothing. Nimrod's name signifies rebellion, which (if indeed he did abuse his power to the oppression of his neighbours) teaches us that tyrants to men are rebels to God, and their rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.

And Cush begat Nimrod. It is certain that Cush was the prince of the Ethiopians. Moses relates the singular history of his son Nimrod, because he began to be eminent in an unusual degree. Moreover, I thus interpret the passage, that the condition of men was at that time moderate; so that if some excelled others, they yet did not on that account domineer, nor assume to themselves royal power; but being content with a degree of dignity, governed others by civil laws and had more of authority than power. For Justin, from Trogus Pompeius, declares this to have been the most ancient condition of the world. Now Moses says, that Nimrod, as if forgetting that he was a man, took possession of a higher post of honor. Noah was at that time yet living, and was certainly great and venerable in the eyes of all. There were also other excellent men; but such was their moderation, that they cultivated equality with their inferiors, who yielded them a spontaneous rather than a forced reverence. The ambition of Nimrod disturbed and broke through the boundaries of this reverence. Moreover, since it sufficiently appears that, in this sentence of Moses, the tyrant is branded with an eternal mark of infamy, we may hence conclude, how highly pleasing to God is a mild administration of affairs among men. And truly, whosoever remembers that he is a man, will gladly cultivate the society of others. With respect to the meaning of the terms, tsyd (tsaid,) properly signifies hunting, as the Hebrew grammarians state; yet it is often taken for food [310] But whether Moses says that he was robust in hunting, or in violently seizing upon prey; he metaphorically intimates that he was a furious man, and approximated to beasts rather than to men. The expression, "Before the Lord," [311] seems to me to declare that Nimrod attempted to raise himself above the order of men; just as proud men become transported by a vain self-confidence, that they may look down as from the clouds upon others. Wherefore it is said [312] Since the verb is in the future tense, it may be thus explained, Nimrod was so mighty and imperious that it would be proper to say of any powerful tyrant, that he is another Nimrod. Yet the version of Jerome is satisfactory, that thence it became a proverb concerning the powerful and the violent, that they were like Nimrod. [313] Nor do I doubt that God intended the first author of tyranny to be transmitted to odium by every tongue.

Observe here, 1. The account of the posterity of Canaan, of the families and nations that descended from him, and of the land they possessed, is more particular than of any other in this chapter, because these were the nations that were to be subdued before Israel, and their land was in process of time to become the holy land, Immanuel's land; and this God had an eye to when, in the mean time, he cast the lot of that accursed devoted race in that spot of ground which he had selected for his own people; this Moses takes notice of, Deu 32:8, When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. 2. By this account it appears that the posterity of Canaan were numerous, and rich, and very pleasantly situated; and yet Canaan was under a curse, a divine curse, and not a curse causeless. Note, Those that are under the curse of God may yet perhaps thrive and prosper greatly in this world; for we cannot know love or hatred, the blessing or the curse, by what is before us, but by what is within us, Ecc 9:1. The curse of God always works really and always terribly: but perhaps it is a secret curse, a curse to the soul, and does not work visibly, or a slow curse, and does not work immediately; but sinners are by it reserved for, and bound over to, a day of wrath. Canaan here has a better land than either Shem or Japheth, and yet they have a better lot, for they inherit the blessing.

And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel. Moses here designates the seat of Nimrod's empire. He also declares that four cities were subject to him; it is however uncertain whether he was the founder of them, or had thence expelled their rightful lords. And although mention is elsewhere made of Calneh, [314] yet Babylon was the most celebrated of all. I do not however think that it was of such wide extent, or of such magnificent structure, as the profane historians relate. But since the region was among the first and most fruitful, it is possible that the convenience of the situation would afterwards invite others to enlarge the city. Wherefore Aristotle, in his Politics, taking it out of the rank of cities, compares it to a province. Hence it has arisen, that many declare it to have been the work of Semiramis, by whom others say that it was not built but only adorned and joined together by bridges. The land of Shinar is added as a note of discrimination, because there was also another Babylon in Egypt, which is now called Cairo. [315] But it is asked, how was Nimrod the tyrant of Babylon, when Moses in the following chapter, Genesis 11:1 subjoins, that a tower was begun there, which obtained this name from the confusion of tongues? Some suppose that a hysteron proteron [316] is here employed, and that what Moses is afterwards about to relate concerning the building of the tower was prior in the order of time. Moreover, they add, that because the building of the tower was disastrously obstructed, their design was changed to that of building a city. But I rather think there is a prolepsis ; and that Moses called the city by the same name, which afterwards was imposed by a more recent event. The reason of the conjecture is that probably, at this time, the inhabitants of that place, who had engaged in so vast a work, were numerous. It might also happen, that Nimrod, solicitous about his own fame and power, inflamed their insane desire by this pretext, that some famous monument should be erected in which their everlasting memory might remain. Still, since it is the custom of the Hebrews to prosecute more diffusely, afterwards, what they had touched upon briefly, I do not entirely reject the former opinion. [317]

Out of that land went forth Asshur. It is credible that Asshur was one of the posterity of Shem. And the opinion has been commonly received, that he is here mentioned, because, when he was dwelling, in the neighborhood of Nimrod, he was violently expelled thence. In this manner, Moses would mark the barbarous ferocity of Nimrod. And truly these are the accustomed fruits of a greatness which does not keep within bounds; whence has arisen the old proverb, Great kingdoms are great robberies.' It is indeed necessary that some should preside over others; but where ambition, and the desire of rising higher than is right, are rampant, they not only draw with them the greatest and most numerous injuries, but also verge closely upon the dissolution of human society. Yet I rather adopt the opinion of those who say that Asshur is not, in this place, the name of a man, but of a country which derived its appellation from him; and thus the sense will be, that Nimrod, not content with his large and opulent kingdom, gave the reins to his cupidity, and pushed the boundaries of his empire even into Assyria, where he also built new cities. [318] The passage in Isaiah (Isaiah 23:13) is alone opposed to this opinion, where he says, Behold the land of the Chaldeans, the people was not, Asshur founded it when they inhabited the deserts, and he reduced it to ruin.' [319] For the prophet seems to say, that cities were built by the Assyrians in Chaldea, whereas previously, its inhabitants were wandering and scattered as in a desert. But it may be, that the prophet speaks of other changes of these kingdoms, which occurred afterwards. For, at the time in which the Assyrians maintained the sovereignty, seeing that they flourished in unbounded wealth, it is credible that Chaldea, which they had subjected to themselves was so adorned and increased by a long peace, that it might seem to have been founded by them. And we know, that when the Chaldeans, in their turn, seized on the empire, Babylon was exalted on the ruins of Nineveh.

sons of Ham--emigrated southward, and their settlements were: Cush in Arabia, Canaan in the country known by his name, and Mizraim in Egypt, Upper and Lower. It is generally thought that his father accompanied him and personally superintended the formation of the settlement, whence Egypt was called "the land of Ham" [Psa 105:23, Psa 105:27; Psa 106:22].

Nimrod--mentioned as eclipsing all his family in renown. He early distinguished himself by his daring and successful prowess in hunting wild beasts. By those useful services he earned a title to public gratitude; and, having established a permanent ascendancy over the people, he founded the first kingdom in the world [Gen 10:10].

the beginning of his kingdom--This kingdom, of course, though then considered great, would be comparatively limited in extent, and the towns but small forts.

Out of that land went forth Asshur--or, as the Margin has it, "He [Nimrod] at the head of his army went forth into Assyria," that is, he pushed his conquests into that country. and builded Nineveh--opposite the town of Mosul, on the Tigris, and the other towns near it. This raid into Assyria was an invasion of the territories of Shem, and hence the name "Nimrod," signifying "rebel," is supposed to have been conferred on him from his daring revolt against the divine distribution.

[400] Gen. x. 6. Now what the heathen said of Jupiter is evidently taken from Ham, the son of Noah. Noah is the Saturn of the heathen, as is evident by note on Gen. i. 27. It is fabled that Saturn had three sons, Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto, who divided the world between them. Sanchoniathon says, “The son of Saturn was Zeus Belus, or Baal, the chief god among the Phœnicians. It was a name assumed by Jehovah, the God of Israel, before abused to superstition, as appears by Hosea ii. 16. It is elsewhere written Greek or Hebrew Beel, or Greek or Hebrew which answers to the Hebrew Baal Shamaiim, the Lord of heaven. Greek or Hebrew is derived from Greek or Hebrew, which signifies to be hot, and answereth exactly to the Hebrew Cham, from the radix Chamam, to wax hot. Herodotus tells us that the Egyptians called Jupiter, Ammon, from their progenitor Ham; whence Egypt is called Ps. cv. 23, 27the land of Ham,” Ps. cv. 23, 27. Also Plutarch testifies that Egypt in the Sacreds of Isis, was termed Greek or Hebrew whence this, but from Cham? And Africa of old was called Hammonia. The Africans were wont to worship Ham under the name of Hanmon. These things are more largely treated of by Cudworth, p. 337, 338, 339.

Again: Sanchoniathon terms Jupiter, Sydyk, or as Damascius in Photius, Sadyk. Now this name is evidently taken from the Hebrew Saddik, the just, which is a name given to God, as also to the first patriarchs, whence Melchizedek. The name Jupiter is evidently the same with la Pater, or Greek or Hebrew, that is, Father Jah, or Jeu. That God’s name, Jah, was well known to the Phœnicians, who communicated the same to the Grecians, is evident by what Porphyry says of Sanchoniathon’s deriving the materials of his history from Jerombatus, the priest of the god Greek or Hebrew. So Diodorus tells us that Moses inscribed his law to the god called Jao. So the oblique cases of Jupiter are from God’s name, Jehovah, as Jovi, Jove, &c. The same name, Jai, in the oracle of Clarius Apollo, is given to Bacchus again. Jupiter was Sabasius, from that title of God, Jehovah, Sabaoth. (This Cudworth also notices, p. 259, 260.) The fable of Jupiter’s cutting off his fathers genitalia, seems to arise from Ham’s seeing his father’s nakedness. Again, in the metamorphosis of the gods of Egypt, it is said that Jupiter was turned into a ram; which fable Bochart supposes to have had its rise from the cognation between the Hebrew words Greek or Hebrew or Greek or Hebrew, and Greek or Hebrew a ram, the plural number of both which is the same, Elim. The tradition of Bacchus being produced out of Jupiter’s thigh, seems to come from that known expression to signify the natural proceeding of posterity from a father, their coming out of his loins. Gale’s Court of the Gen. p. 1. b. ii. l. 1. p. 10, 11, 12, 13.

And the sons of Ham,.... Next to the sons of Japheth, the sons of Ham are reckoned; these, Josephus (z) says, possessed the land from Syria, and the mountains of Amanus and Lebanon; laying hold on whatever was towards the sea, claiming to themselves the countries unto the ocean, whose names, some of them, are entirely lost, and others so greatly changed and deflected into other tongues, that they can scarcely be known, and few whose names are preserved entire; and the same observation will hold good of others. Four of the sons of Ham are mentioned: Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan; the first of these, Cush, Josephus (a) says, has suffered no loss by time; for the Ethiopians, whose prince he was, are to this day by themselves, and all in Asia, called Chusaeans: but though this word Cush, as used in Scripture, is generally rendered by us Ethiopia, this must not be understood of Ethiopia in Africa, but in Arabia; and indeed is always to be understood of one part of Arabia, and which was near to the land of Judea; so Moses's wife is called an Ethiopian, when she was an Arabian, or of Midian, Numbers 12:1 and Chusan and Midian are mentioned together, Habakkuk 3:7 see 2 Kings 19:9, 2 Chronicles 14:9 and Bochart (b) has shown, by various arguments, that the land of Cush was Arabia; and so the Targum of Jonathan interprets it here Arabia. There was a city called Cutha in Erac, a province in the country of Babylon (c), where Nimrod the son of Cush settled, which probably was called so from his father's name. Here the eastern writers say (d) Abraham was born, and is the same place mentioned in 2 Kings 17:24. The second son of Ham was Mizraim, the same with the Misor of Sanchoniatho (e), and the Menes of Herodotus (f), the first king of Egypt, and the builder of the city of Memphis in Egypt, called by the Turks to this day Mitzir (g). Mitzraim is a name by which Egypt is frequently called in Scripture, and this man was the father of the Egyptians; and because Egypt was inhabited by a son of Ham, it is sometimes called the land of Ham, Psalm 105:23. The word is of the dual number, and serves to express Egypt by, which was divided into two parts, lower and upper Egypt. Josephus says (h), we call Egypt, Mestres, and all the Egyptians that inhabit it, Mestraeans; so the country is called by Cedrenus (i), Mestre; and Kairo, a principal city in it, is to this day by the Arabians called Al-messer, as Dr. Shaw (k) relates. The third son of Ham is Phut; of whom Josephus (l) says, that he founded Libya, calling the inhabitants of it after his name, Phuteans; and observes, that there is a river in the country of the Moors of his name; and that many of the Greek historians, who make mention of this river, also make mention of a country adjacent to it, called Phute: mention is made of this river as in Mauritania, both by Pliny (m) and Ptolemy (n) and by the latter of a city called Putea: this Phut is the Apollo Pythius of the Heathens, as some think. The last son of Ham is Canaan, the father of the Canaanites, a people well known in Scripture. Concerning these sons of Ham, there is a famous fragment of Eupolemus preserved in Eusebius (o); and is this;"the Babylonians say, that the first was Belus, called Cronus or Saturn (that is, Noah), and of him was begotten another Belus and Chanaan (it should be read Cham), and he (i.e. Ham) begat Chanaan, the father of the Phoenicians; and of him another son, Chus, was begotten, whom the Greeks call Asbolos, the father of the Ethiopians, and the brother of Mestraim, the father of the Egyptians.'' (z) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect 1.) (a) Ibid. (b) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 2.((c) Vid. Hyde Hist. Relig. Pers. c. 2. p. 39, 40. (d) Vid. Hyde Hist. Relig. Pers. c. 2. p. 72. (e) Apud Euseb. Evangel. Praepar. l. 1. p. 36. (f) Enterpe sive, l. 2. c. 4. 99. (g) See Cumberland's Sanchoniatho, p. 59. (h) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect 1.) (i) Apud Grotium de vera Christ. Relig. l. 1. p. 8. & Ainsworth in loc. (k) Travels, ch. 3. p. 294. Ed. 2.((l) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect 1.) (m) Nat. Hist. l. 5. c. 1.((n) Geograph. l. 4. c. 1, 3.((o) Praepar. Evangel. l. 9. c. 17. p. 419.

And the sons of Cush,.... The first born of Ham, who had five sons, next mentioned, besides Nimrod, spoken of afterwards by himself: Seba, and Havilah, and Sabtah, and Raamah, and Sabtecha; the first of these is Seba, the founder of the Sabaeans, according to Josephus (p), a people seated in Arabia Deserta, which seem to be the Sabaeans brought from the wilderness, Ezekiel 23:42 and very probably the same that plundered Job of his cattle, Job 1:14. The second son is Havilah, who, as Josephus (q) says, was the father of the Evilaeans, now called Getuli; but the posterity of Havilah seem to be the same whom Strabo (r) calls Chaulotaeans, and whom he speaks of along with the Nabataeans and Agraeans, a people near Arabia Felix; and by Pliny (s) they are called Chavelaeans, and whom he speaks of as Arabians, and places them to the east of the Arabian Scenites. The third son is Sabtah; from him, Josephus (t) says, came the Sabathenes, who, by the Greeks, are called Astabari; the posterity of this man seemed to have settled in some part of Arabia Felix, since Ptolemy (u) makes mention of Sabbatha as the metropolis of that country, called by Pliny (w) Sabotale, or rather Sabota, as it should be read; Ptolemy places another city in this country he calls Saphtha, which seems to have its name from this man. The fourth son is Raamah or Ragmas, as Josephus calls (x) him, from whom sprung the Ragmaeans he says; and most of the ancients call him Rhegmah, the letter being pronounced as a "G", as in Gaza and Gomorrah: his posterity were also seated in Arabia Felix, near the Persian Gulf, where Ptolemy (y) places the city Rhegama, or as it is in the Greek text, Regma. The fifth son is Sabtecha, whom some make to be the father of a people in the same country, Arabia Felix, near the Persian Gulf, called Sachalitae; but Dr. Wells (z) thinks, that the descendants of this man might be from him regularly enough styled at first by the Greeks, Sabtaceni, which name might be afterwards softened into Saraceni, by which name it is well known the people of the northern parts of Arabia, where he places the descendants of this man, were formerly denominated; though Bochart (a) carries them into Carmania in Persia, there being a short cut over the straits of the Persian Gulf, out of Arabia thither, where he finds a city called Samydace, and a river, Samydachus, which he thinks may come from Sabtecha, the letters "B" and "M" being frequently changed, as Berodach is called Merodach, and Abana, Amana, and so in other names. And the sons of Raamah; Sheba, and Dedan; no account is given of any of the posterity of the other sons of Cush, only of this his fourth son Raamah, who is said to have two sons; the first is called Sheba, from whom came the Sabaeans, according to Josephus (b); not the Sabaeans before mentioned in Arabia Deserta, but those in Arabia Felix, where Pomponius Mela (c) and Strabo (d) seat a people called Sabaeans, and whose country abounded with frankincense, myrrh, and cinnamon; the latter makes mention of a city of theirs called Mariaba, and seems to be the same that is now called Mareb, and formerly Saba (e), very likely from this man. The other son, Dedan, is called by Josephus (f) Judadas, whom he makes to be founder of the Judadaeans, a nation of the western Ethiopians; but the posterity of this man most probably settled in Arabia, and yet are to be distinguished from the Dedanim in Isaiah 21:13 who were Arabians also, but descended from Dedan the son of Jokshan, a son of Abraham by Keturah, Genesis 25:3 as well as from the inhabitants of Dedan in Edom, Jeremiah 25:23 it is observed, that near the city Regma before mentioned, on the same coast eastward, was another city called Dedan; and to this day Daden, from which the neighbouring country also takes its name, as Bochart (g) has observed, from Barboza, an Italian writer, in his description of the kingdom of Ormus: so that we need not doubt, says Dr. Wells (h), but that here was the settlement of Dedan the son of Raamah or Rhegma, and brother of Sheba. (p) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (q) Ibid. (r) Geograph. l. 16. p. 528. (s) Nat. Hist. l. 5. c. 11. (t) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (u) Geograph. l. 6. c. 7. (w) Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 28. (x) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (y) Ut supra. (Geograph. l. 6. c. 7.) (z) Geography of the Old Testament, vol. 1. p. 198. (a) Phaleg l. 4. c. 4. col. 218. (b) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (c) De Situ Orbis, l. 3. c. 8. (d) Geograph. l. 16. p. 536. (e) Via. Pocock. Specimen Arab. Hist p. 57. (f) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 1.) (g) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 6. col. 219. (h) Ut supra, (Geography of the Old Testament, vol. 1.) p. 197.

And Cush begat Nimrod,.... Besides the other five sons before mentioned; and probably this was his youngest son, being mentioned last; or however he is reserved to this place, because more was to be spoken of him than of any of the rest. Sir Walter Raleigh (i) thinks that Nimrod was begotten by Cush after his other children were become fathers, and of a later time than some of his grandchildren and nephews: and indeed the sons of Raamah, the fourth son of Cush, are taken notice of before him: however, the Arabic writers (k) must be wrong, who make him to be the son of Canaan, whereas it is so clear and express from hence that he was the son of Cush. In the Greek version he is called Nebrod, and by Josephus, Nebrodes, which is a name of Bacchus; and indeed Nimrod is the same with the Bacchus of the Heathens, for Bacchus is no other than Barchus, the son of Cush; and Jacchus, which is another of his names in Jah of Cush, or the god the son of Cush; and it is with respect to his original name Nebrod, or Nebrodes, that Bacchus is represented as clothed with the skin of "nebris", or a young hind, as were also his priests; and so in his name Nimrod there may be an allusion to "Nimra", which, in the Chaldee language, signifies a tiger, and which kind of creatures, with others, he might hunt; tigers drew in the chariot of Bacchus, and he was sometimes clothed with the skin of one; though the name of Nimrod is usually derived from "to rebel", because he was a rebel against God, as is generally said; and because, as Jarchi observes, he caused all the world to rebel against God, by the advice he gave to the generation of the division, or confusion of languages, the builders of Babel: he seems to be the same with Belus, the founder of Babel and of the Babylonian empire, whom Diodorus Siculus (l) confounds with Ninus his son: he began to be a mighty man in the earth: that is, he was the first that formed a plan of government, and brought men into subjection to it; and so the Jews (m) make him to be the first king after God; for of the ten kings they speak of in the world, God is the first, and Nimrod the second; and so the Arabic writers (n) say, he was the first of the kings that were in the land of Babylon; and that, seeing the figure of a crown in the heaven, he got a golden one made like it, and put it on his head; hence it was commonly reported, that the crown descended to him from heaven; for this refers not to his gigantic stature, as if he was a giant, as the Septuagint render it; or a strong robust man, as Onkelos; nor to his moral character, as the Targum of Jonathan, which is,"he began to be mighty in sin, and to rebel before the Lord in the earth;''but to his civil character, as a ruler and governor: he was the first that reduced bodies of people and various cities into one form of government, and became the head of them; either by force and usurpation, or it may be with the consent of the people, through his persuasion of them, and on account of the mighty and heroic actions done by him. (i) History of the World, B. 1. ch. 10. sect. 1. p. 109. (k) Elmacinus, p. 29. apud Hottinger. Smegma, p. 270. See the Universal History, vol. 1. p. 276. (l) Bibliothec. l. 2. p. 90. (m) Pirke Eliezer, c. 11. (n) Elmacinus, p. 29. Patricides, p. 16. apud Hottinger. Smegma, p. 271, 272. Abulpharag. Hist. Dynast. p. 18.

He was a mighty hunter before the Lord,.... Which might be literally true; for, from the time of the flood to his days, wild beasts might increase very much, and greatly annoy men who dwelt very likely for the most part in tents scattered up and down in divers places: so that he did a good office in hunting and destroying them. An Arabic writer (o), of some authority in the eastern parts, says, that by hunting he got food sufficient for the builders of Babel, while they were employed therein; and Aben Ezra interprets it in his favour, that he built altars, and the creatures he took in hunting he offered them on them a burnt offering to God. But neither of these is probable; however, it may be observed, that in this way by hunting he arrived to the power and dominion over men he afterwards had; for not only he ingratiated himself into their favour by hunting down and destroying the wild beasts which molested them, but by these means he might gather together a large number of young men, strong and robust, to join him in hunting; whereby they were inured to hardships, and trained up to military exercises, and were taught the way of destroying men as well as beasts; and by whose help and assistance he might arrive to the government he had over men; and hunting, according to Aristotle (p), is a part of the military art, which is to be used both on beasts, and on such men who are made to be ruled, but are not willing; and it appears, from Xenophon (q), that the kings of Persia were fitted for war and government by hunting, and which is still reckoned in many countries a part of royal education. And it may be remarked, that, as Nimrod and Bacchus are the same, as before observed, one of the titles of Bacchus is "an hunter". Cedrenus (r) says, that the Assyrians deified Nebrod, or Nimrod, and placed him among the constellations of heaven, and called him Orion; the same first discovered the art of hunting, therefore they joined to Orion the star called the dog star. However, besides his being in a literal sense an hunter, he was in a figurative sense one, a tyrannical ruler and governor of men. The Targum of Jonathan is;"he was a powerful rebel before the Lord;''and that of Jerusalem,"he was powerful in hunting in sin before the Lord,''and another Jewish writer (s) says, he was called a mighty hunter, because he was all his days taking provinces by force, and spoiling others of their substance; and that he was "before the Lord", truly so, and he seeing and taking notice of it, openly and publicly, and without fear of him, and in a bold and impudent manner, in despite of him, see Genesis 6:11. The Septuagint render it, "against the Lord"; he intended, as Jarchi's note is, to provoke him to his face: wherefore it is said; in a proverbial way, when any man is grown mighty and powerful, or is notoriously wicked, or is become a tyrant and an oppressor of the people, that he is even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord. This was a proverb used in the times of Moses, as it is common now with us to call a hunter Nimrod. (o) Abulpharag. Hist. Dynast. p. 18. (p) Politic. l. 1. c. 8. (q) Cyropaed. l. 1. c. 5. (r) Apud Abrami Pharum, l. 5. sect. 6. p. 128. (s) R. Gedaliah, Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 76. 2.

And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel,.... The city of Babel, or Babylon, which was built by his direction; for though Babylon is by some writers said to be built by Semiramis, the wife of Ninus, and others by Ninus himself, yet the truest account is, that it was built by Belus, the same with Nimrod. Curtius (t) says, Semiramis built it; or, as most believe, adds he, Belus, whose royal palace is shown: and Berosus (u), the Chaldean, blames the Greek writers for ascribing it to Semiramis; and Abydenus (w), out of Megasthenes, affirms, that Belus surrounded Babylon with a wall: however, this was the head of the kingdom of Nimrod, as Onkelos renders it, or his chief city, or where he first began to reign. Here he set up his kingdom, which he enlarged and extended afterwards to other places; and from hence it appears, that what is related in this context, concerning Nimrod, is by way of anticipation; for it was not a fact that he was a mighty man, or a powerful prince possessed of a kingdom, until after the building of Babel, and the confusion of languages there; when those that continued on the spot either chose him for their ruler, or he, by power or policy, got the dominion over them. Artapanus (x), an Heathen writer, relates, that the giants which inhabited Babylon being taken away by the gods for their impiety, one of them, Belus, escaped death and dwelt in Babylon, and took up his abode in the tower which he had raised up, and which, from him the founder of it, was called Belus; so that this, as Moses says, was the beginning of his kingdom, together with Erech, and Accad, and Calneh in the land of Shinar, where the city and tower of Babel were built: for of these four cities, which were all in the same country, did the kingdom of Nimrod consist; they all, either by force or by consent, were brought into subjection to him, and were under one form of government, and is the first kingdom known to be set up in the world. Erech, according to the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem, is Hades, or Edessa, a city in Mesopotamia; but it is rather thought to be the name with the Aracca of Ptolemy (y), and the Arecha of Marcellinus (z), placed by them both in Susiana; though one would think it should be that city in Chaldea which took its present Arabic name of Erak from Erech: the Arabic writers say (a), when Irac or Erac is absolutely put, it denotes Babylonia, or Chaldea, in the land of Shinar; and they say that Shinar is in Al-Erac. The next city, Accad, according to the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem, is Netzibin, or Nisibis, a city in Mesopotamia; in the Septuagint version it is called Archad; and Ctesias (b) relates, that at the Persian Sittace was a river called Argad, which Bochart (c) thinks carries in it a manifest trace of this name; and observes, from Strabo (d), that that part of Babylon nearest to Susa was called Sitacena. And the other city, Calneh, according to the above Targums, is Ctesiphon, and is generally thought to be the place intended, and was a town upon the Tigris, near to Seleucia in Babylon; it was first called Chalone, and its name was changed to Ctesiphon by Pacorus, king of the Persians. It is in Isaiah 10:9 called Calno, and by the Septuagint version there the Chalane, which adds,"where the tower was built;''and from whence the country called the Chalonitis by Pliny (e) had its name, the chief city of which was Ctesiphon; and who says (f) Chalonitis is joined with Ctesiphon. Thus far goes the account of Nimrod; and, though no mention is made of his death, yet some writers are not silent about it. Abulpharagius (g), an Arabic writer, says he died in the tower of Babel, it being blown down by stormy winds; the Jewish writers say (h) he was killed by Esau for the sake of his coat, which was Adam's, and came to Noah, and from him to Ham, and so to Nimrod. When he began his reign, and how long he reigned, is not certain; we have only some fabulous accounts: according to Berosus (i), he began to reign one hundred and thirty one years after the flood, and reigned fifty six years, and then disappeared, being translated by the gods: and, indeed, the authors of the Universal History place the beginning of his reign in the year of the flood one hundred and thirty one, and thirty years after the dispersion at Babylon (k); and who relate, that the eastern writers speak of his reign as very long: a Persian writer gives his name a Persian derivation, as if it was Nemurd, that is, "immortal", on account of his long reign of above one hundred and fifty years: and some of the Mahometan historians say he reigned in Al-Sowad, that is, the "black country", four hundred years (l). (t) Hist. l. 5. c. 1.((u) Apud Joseph. contra Apion. l. 1. c. 20. (w) Apud. Euseb. Evangel. Praepar. l. 9. c. 41. p. 457. (x) Apud. Euseb. Evangel. Praepar. l. 9. c. 18. p. 420. (y) Geograph. l. 6. c. 3.((z) Lib. 23. (a) Vid. Hyde in notis ad Peritsol. Itinera Mundi, p. 65. (b) Apud Aelian. Hist. Animal. l. 16. c. 42. (c) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 17. (d) Geograph. l. 15. p. 503. (e) Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 26. (f) Ibid. c. 27. (g) Hist. Dynast. p. 12. (h) In Pirke Eliezer, c. 24. (i) Antiqu. l. 4. p. 28, 29. (k) Vol. 1. p. 282. and vol. 21. p. 2.((l) Apud Hyde's Hist. Relig. Pers. c. 2. p. 43.

Out of that land went forth Ashur,.... It is a question whether Ashur is the name of a man or of a country; some take it in the latter sense, and render the words, "and out of that land he went forth into Assyria"; so Onkelos; and in this way go Junius and Tremellius, Piscator, Bochart, Cocceius, and others, and the margin of our Bible, and interpret it of Nimrod; and the Targum of Jonathan is express for him, which is this:"out of that land went forth Nimrod, and reigned in Assyria, because he would not be in the council of the generation of the division, and he left four cities; and the Lord gave him therefore a place (or Assyria), and he built four other cities, Nineveh, &c.''so Theophilus of Antioch says (m), that Nebroth (Nimrod) built the same; but then the generality of interpreters which take this way give another and better reason for Nimrod's going out of Shinar or Babylon into Assyria than the Targumist gives; which is, that not content with his own dominions, and willing to enlarge them, he went out and made war upon Assyria, and seized upon it, and built cities in it, and added them to his former ones; in favour of this sense it is urged, that Moses is speaking of what Nimrod the son of Cush did, of the line of Ham, and not of the sons of Shem, among whom Ashur was; and that it is not probable he should introduce a passage relating to a branch of Shem, when he is professedly writing about that of Ham; nor is it agreeable to the history to speak of what Ashur did, before any mention of his birth, which is in Genesis 10:22 nor was it peculiar to him to go out of the land of Shinar, since almost all were dispersed from thence; add to which, that Assyria is called the land of Nimrod, Micah 5:6 to which it may be replied, that parentheses of this sort are frequent in Scripture, see 2 Samuel 4:4 besides, it seems appropriate enough, when treating of Nimrod's dominion and power, in order to show his intolerable tyranny, to remark, that it was such, that Ashur, a son of Shem, could not bear it, and therefore went out from a country he had a right unto; and as for the text in Micah 5:6 the land of Nimrod and the land of Assyria are manifestly distinguished from one another: add to this, that, if Nimrod so early made a conquest of Assyria, it would rather have been called by his own name than his uncle's; and it is allowed by all that the country of Assyria had its name from Ashur, the son of Shem; and who so likely to have founded Nineveh, and other cities, as himself? Besides these, interpreters are obliged to force the text, and insert the particle "into", which is not in it; and the order and construction of the words are more natural and agreeable to the original, as in our version and others, which make Ashur the name of a man, than this, which makes it a country: but then it is not agreed on who this Ashur was; some will have him to be of the posterity of Ham, and a son of Nimrod, as Epiphanius (n) and Chrysostom (o); but this is not probable, nor can any proof be given of it; Josephus (p) is express for it, that Ashur, the son of Shem, built Nineveh, and gave the name of Assyrians to those that were subject to him. The reason of his going out from Shinar, as given by Jarchi, is, when he saw his sons hearkening to Nimrod, and rebelling against the Lord, by building a tower, he went out from them; or it may be, he was drove out by Nimrod by force, or he could not bear his tyrannical government, or live where such a wicked man ruled: and as Nimrod built cities and set up an empire, Ashur did the same in his own defence and that of his posterity: and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah. The first of these cities, Nineveh, the Greeks commonly call Ninus, is placed by Strabo (q) in Atyria, the Chaldee name of Assyria, who generally suppose it had its name from Ninus, whom Diodorus Siculus (r) makes the first king of the Assyrians, and to whom he ascribes the building of this city; and who, one would think, should be Ashur, and that Ninus was another name of him, or however by which he went among the Greeks; and so this city was called after him; or rather it had its name from the beauty of it, the word signifying a beautiful habitation, as Cocceius (s) and Hillerus (t) give the etymology of it; or perhaps, when it was first built by him, it had another name, but afterwards was called Nineveh, from Ninus, who lived many years after him, who might repair, adorn, and beautify it. It was destroyed by the Medes and Babylonians, as foretold by Nahum, and it is difficult now to say where it stood; the place where it is supposed to have been is now called Mosul; of which place Rauwolff (u) says, who was there in 1574, that"there are some very good buildings and streets in it, and it is pretty large, but very ill provided with walls and ditches;--besides this, I also saw, (says he,) just without the town, a little hill, that was almost quite dug through, and inhabited by poor people, where I saw them several times creep in and out as pismires in ant hills: in this place, or thereabouts, stood formerly the potent town of Nineveh, built by Ashur, which was the metropolis of Assyria;--at this time there is nothing of antiquities to be seen in it, save only the fort that lieth upon the hill, and some few villages, which the inhabitants say did also belong to it in former days. This town lieth on the confines of Armenia, in a large plain:''See Gill on Jonah 1:2, Jonah 3:1, Jonah 3:2, Jonah 3:3, Nahum 1:8 The next city, Rehoboth, signifies "streets", and so it is rendered in the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem; and, because in the Chaldee language streets are called "Beritha", Bochart (w) thinks that this Rehoboth is the city which Ptolemy (x) calls Birtha, on the west of Tigris, at the mouth of the river Lycus, though he places it by Euphrates; wherefore it should rather be Oroba, he places at the river Tigris (y), near to Nineveh also. The last city, Calah, or Calach, was a principal city in the country, by Ptolemy (z) called Calacine, and by Strabo (a) Calachene, and mentioned by both along with Adiabene, a country in Assyria. (m) Ad Autolycum, l. 2. p. 106. (n) Contra Haeres. l. 1. p. 3.((o) In Genes. Homil. 29. (p) Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 4. (q) Geograph. l. 16. p. 507. (r) Bibliothec. l. 2. p. 90, 91. (s) In Jonam, 1, 2.((t) Onomast. Sacr. p. 304, 431. (u) Travels, part 2. c. 9. p. 166. (w) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 21. col. 256. (x) Geograph. l. 5. c. 19. (y) Ibid. l. 6. c. 1.((z) Ibid. (a) Geograph. l. 11. p. 347, 365. & l. 16. p. 507.

And Resen, between Nineveh and Calah,.... This was another city built by Ashur, situated between those two cities mentioned: the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem call it Talsar, or Thalassar, see Isaiah 37:12 The conjecture of Bochart (b) is more probable, that it is the Larissa of Xenophon, situated on the Tigris; though Junius thinks it is either Bassora, or Belcina, which Ptolemy (c) places on the Tigris, near Nineveh: the same is a great city: which Jarchi interprets of Nineveh, called a great city, and was indeed one, being sixty miles in circumference, Jonah 1:2 but the construction of the words carries it to Resen, which might be the greatest city when first built; and, if understood of Larissa, was a great city, the walls of it being one hundred feet high, and the breadth twenty five, and the compass of it eight miles. Benjamin of Tudela says (d), that in his time Resen was called Gehidagan, and was a great city, in which were 5000 Israelites; but according to Schmidt, this refers to all the cities in a coalition, Nineveh, Rehoboth, Calah, and Resen, which all made that great city Nineveh; or were a Tetrapolis, as Tripoli was anciently three cities, built by the joint interest of the Aradians, Sidonians, and Tyrians, as Diodorus Siculus (e) relates. (b) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 23. (c) Ut supra. (Geograph. l. 5. c. 19.) (d) Itinerarium, p. 75. (e) Bibliothec. l. 16. p. 439.

And Mizraim begat Ludim,.... Mizraim was the second son of Ham, of whom See Gill on Genesis 10:6. Ludim he is said to beget, the word being plural, is not the name of a man, but of his posterity; and the sense is, that Mizraim begat the father of the Ludim, whose name very probably was Lud, which name is preserved in Isaiah 66:19. These Ludim are the same with the Lydians, Jeremiah 46:9 and whose country is called Lydia, Ezekiel 30:5 but to be distinguished from Lydia in Asia Minor, and the Lydians there who sprung from Lud, a son of Shem, Genesis 10:22 for, as these sprung from Mizraim, the founder of Egypt, they must be somewhere thereabout; and Bochart (f) has proved, by various arguments, that they are the Ethiopians in Africa, now called Abyssines, whose country lies to the south of Egypt, a people formerly famous for archery, as Lud and the Lydians are said to be, Isaiah 66:19 and whoever reads the accounts Diodorus Siculus (g) gives of the Egyptians and Ethiopians, will easily discern a likeness between them, and that the one sprung from the other; both deifying their kings; showing a like carefulness about their funerals; both using hieroglyphics; having the like order of priests, who used shaving; and circumcision was common to them both, as Herodotus observes (h): and Ananzim, and Lehabim, and Naphtuhim: the name of the father of the Anamim very probably was Anam, though we have no account of him elsewhere: according to Hillerus (i), the Anamim were called so from the pastoral life they led; and, by a transposition of letters, were the same with the Maeonians, who inhabited that tract of land in Asia which was washed by the river Maeonia, or Maeander, and bordered on Lydia; but, as these were the descendants of Mizraim, they must be sought for somewhere about Egypt: much better therefore does Mr. Broughton (k) take them to be the Nubians and Numidians, which were near both Egypt and Ethiopia; though Bochart (l) seems to be most correct, in making them to be the Ammonians, who, Herodotus says, were a colony of the Egyptians and Ethiopians; these lived about Ammon and Nasamonitis, and in that part of Lybia in which the temple of Jupiter Ammon stood, and are the Nomades, that lived a pastoral life; and Bochart (m) thinks they are called Anamim, from Anam, which, in the Arabic language, signifies a "sheep", because they fed sheep, and lived upon them, and clothed themselves with their skins. The word Lehabim, the name of another people from Mizraim, signifies "flames"; and were so called, as Jarchi observes, because their faces were like flames, see Isaiah 13:8 burnt with the heat of the sun, living near the torrid zone; and therefore could not be the Lycians, as Hillerus (n) thinks, the inhabitants of a country in Asia, between Caria and Pamphylia, formerly called Lycia, now Aidimelli, which he observes abounds with places that have their names from fire and flames, as Mount Chimaera, the cities Hephaestium, Myra, Lemyra, Habessus, Telmessus, Balbura, and Sirbis; but these were too far from Egypt, near which it is more probable the Lehabim were, and seem to be the same with the Lubim, which came with Shishak out of Egypt to invade Judea, 2 Chronicles 12:3 and who were called Lybians, Jeremiah 46:9 and their country Lybia, Ezekiel 30:5 of which Leo Africanus (a) says, that it is a desert, dry and sandy, having neither fountains nor springs; which was near Egypt as well as Ethiopia, with which it is joined in the above place, see Acts 2:10. The word Naphtuhim, the name of another people that sprung from Mizraim, according to Hillerus (o), signifies "open"; and he thinks they are the Pamphylians, who used to admit promiscuously all into their ports and towns, which were open to all strangers, and even robbers, for the sake of commerce; but, as these were a people in lesser Asia, they cannot be the people here meant. Bochart (p) observes, from Plutarch, that the Egyptians used to call the extreme parts of a country, and abrupt places and mountains adjoining to the sea, Nepthys, the same with Nephthuah; and therefore he is of opinion, that these Naphtuhim dwelt on the shores of the Mediterranean sea, near Egypt, in Marmorica; not far from whence was the temple of Aptuchus, mentioned by Ptolemy (q), and placed by him in Cyrene, which carries in it some trace of the name of Naphtuhim; and he suspects that Neptune had his name from hence; he being a Lybian god, as Herodotus (r) says; for none ever used his name before the Lybians, who always honoured him as a god: and it may be observed, from Strabo (s), that many of the temples of Neptune were on the sea shore. Some place these people about Memphis, the name of which was Noph, Isaiah 19:13 but perhaps it may be much better to place them in the country of Nepate, between Syene and Meroc, where Candace, queen of Ethiopia, had her royal palace in the times of Strabo (t). (f) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 26. (g) Bibliothec. l. 2. p. 143, &c. (h) Euterpe sive, l. 2. c. 104. (i) Onomastic. Sacr. p. 283. (k) See his Works, p. 4, 60. (l) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 30. col. 284. (m) Ib. c. 42. (n) Onomastic. Sacr. p. 281, 583. (a) Descriptio Africae, l. 1. p. 74. (o) Onomastic Sacr. p. 161, 178, 283, 421. (p) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 26. (q) Geograph. l. 4. c. 4. (r) Herodot. Thalia, sive, l. 3. c. 21. Euterpe sive, l. 2. c. 50. (s) Geograph, l. 8. p. 237. (t) Geograph. l. 17. p. 564.

And Pathrusim,.... These are other descendants of Mizraim, the name of whose father very probably was Pathros, from whom the country of Pathros was called, and which is not only spoken of in Scripture along with Egypt, but as a part of it, Isaiah 11:11 and these Pathrusim were doubtless the inhabitants of it; which, as Bochart (u) has shown, is no other than Thebais, or the upper Egypt. Hillerus (w) takes the word to be compounded of and and renders it the corner of the Rosians, and makes it to be the same with the bay of Issus, where was a colony of Egypt, called Cilicians; but the former is more probable. And Casluhim; these also were the posterity of Mizraim, by another son of his, from whence they had their name: according to Hillerus (x), they are the Solymi, a people near the Lycians and Pisidians, that came out of Egypt, and settled in those parts; but it is much more likely that they were, as Junius (y) observes, the inhabitants of Casiotis, a country mentioned by Ptolemy (z) in lower Egypt, at the entrance of it, where stood Mount Casius: but Bochart (a) is of opinion that they are the Colchi, the inhabitants of the country now called Mingrelia, and which, though at a distance from Egypt, the ancient inhabitants came from thence, as appears from several ancient authors of good credit, as the above learned writer shows. Out of whom came Philistim, or the Philistines, a people often spoken of in Scripture: these sprung from the Casluhim, or were a branch of that people; according to Ben Melech they sprung both from them and from the Pathrusim; for Jarchi says they changed wives with one another, and so the Philistines sprung from them both; or these were a colony that departed from them, and settled elsewhere, as the Philistines did in the land of Canaan, from whence that part of it which they inhabited was called Palestine: and, if the Casluhim dwelt in Casiotis, at the entrance of Egypt, as before observed, they lay near the land of Canaan, and could easily pass into it. Some think this clause refers not to what goes before, but to what follows after: and Caphtorim, and read the whole verse thus: "and Pathrusim, and Casluhim, and Caphtorim, out of whom came Philistim"; that is, they came out of the Caphtorim. What has led to such a transposition of the words in the text is Amos 9:7 "and the Philistines from Caphtor": but though they are said to he brought from a place called Caphtor, yet did not spring from the Caphtorim: to me it rather seems, that the two latter were brothers, and both sprung from the Casluhim; since the words may be rendered without a parenthesis: "and Caluhim, out of whom came Philistim and Caphtorim"; though perhaps it may be best of all to consider the two last as the same, and the words may be read, "out of whom came Philistim, even", or that is, "the Caphtorim"; for the Philistines, in the times of Jeremiah, are said to be the remnant of the country of Caphtor, Jeremiah 47:4 and as in Amos the Philistines are said to come out of Caphtor, in Deuteronomy 2:23 they are called Caphtorim, that came out of Caphtor, who destroyed the Avim, which dwelt in Hazerim, even unto Azzah, or Gaza, afterwards a principal city of the Philistines: for then, and not before their settlement in the land of Canaan, were they so called; for the word Philistim signifies strangers, people of another country; and the Septuagint version always so renders the word: their true original name seems to be Caphtorim. Bochart (b) indeed will have the Caphtorim to be the Cappadocians, that dwelt near Colchis, about Trapezunt, where he finds a place called Side, which in Greek signifies a pomegranate, as Caphtor does in Hebrew; and so Hillerus (c) takes it for a name of the Cappadocians, who inhabited "Cappath Hor", or the side of Mount Hor, or , the side of Mount Taurus; and in this they both follow the Jewish Targumists, who everywhere render Caphtorim by Cappadocians, as the three Targums do here, and Caphtor by Cappadocia, and as Jonathan on Deuteronomy 2:23 but then thereby they understood a people and place in Egypt, even Damietta, the same they suppose with Pelusium; for other Jewish writers say (d), Caphutkia, or Cappadocia, is Caphtor, and in the Arabic language Damietta: so Benjamin of Tudela says (e), in two days I came to Damietta, this is Caphtor; and it seems pretty plain that Caphtor must be some place in Egypt, as Coptus, or some other, and that the Caphtorim, or Philistines, were originally Egyptians, since they descended from Mizraim. (u) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 31. (w) Onomastic. Sacr. p. 161, 585. (x) Ibid. p. 161, 583, 777. (y) In loc. (z) Geograph. l. 4. c. 5. (a) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 31. (b) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 32. (c) Onamastic. Sacr. p. 160, 282. (d) Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Cetubot, c. 13, p. 11. (e) ltinerarium, p. 125.

And Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn,.... Canaan is the fourth son of Ham; the posterity of Phut, his third son, are omitted: the firstborn of Canaan was Sidon, from whom the city of Sidon had its name, being either built by himself, who called it after his own name, or by some of his posterity, who called it so in memory of their ancestor: it was a very ancient city, more ancient than Tyre, for that was built by the Sidonians; Homer makes mention of it, but not of Tyre: it is now called Said, as it was in the times of Benjamin of Tudela (f). Justin (g) says it had its name from the plenty of fish on its coasts; but, since Canaan had a son of this name, it was no doubt so called from him. And Heth; the father of the Hittites, who dwelt about Hebron, on the south of the land of Canaan; for when Sarah died, the sons of Heth were in possession of it, Genesis 23:2 of this race were the Anakim, or giants, drove out from hence by Caleb, Numbers 13:22 and these Hittites became terrible to men in later times, as appears from 2 Kings 7:6 hence signifies to terrify, affright, and throw into a consternation. (f) Itinerarium. p. 34. (g) E. Trogo, l. 18. c. 3.

And the Jebusite,.... Who had their name from Jebus, a third son of Canaan, and from whom Jerusalem was called Jebus, Judges 19:10 and where his posterity continued to dwell when the land of Canaan was possessed by the Israelites; for they were so strong and powerful, that the men of Judah could not drive them out from thence, and here they remained until the times of David, who dispossessed them of it, Joshua 15:63. There is an island near Spain, formerly called Ebusus, now Ibissa, where was one of the colonies of the Phoenicians, in which, Bochart (g) observes, the name of the Jebusites is thought to remain. And the Emorite; so called from Emor, the fourth son of Canaan, commonly called the Amorite, a people so strong and mighty, that they are compared to cedars for height, and to oaks for strength, Amos 2:9 they dwelt both on this and the other side Jordan: Sihon, one of their kings, made war on the king of Moab, and took all his country from him unto Arnon, Numbers 21:26 and in the times of Joshua there were several kings of the Amorites, which dwelt on the side of Jordan westward, Joshua 5:1 hence it may be Amor, in the Arabic tongue signifying to command, and Emir, a commander. And the Girgasite; the same with the Gergesene in Matthew 8:28 who, in the times of Christ, lived about Gerasa, or Gadara: a Jewish writer (h) says, that when they left their country to Israel, being forced to it by Joshua, they went into a country which to this day is called Gurgestan. (g) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 36. fol. 304. (h) R. Zacuth. Sepher. Jachasin, fol. 135. 2.

And the Hivite,.... These dwelt in Hermon, a part of Mount Lebanon from Mount Baal Hermon unto the entering in of Hamath, Joshua 11:3 to the east of the land of Canaan; hence they were sometimes called Kadmonites, or Easterlings, Genesis 15:19 and are thought to have their name from dwelling in holes and caves like serpents; hence Cadmus the Phoenician, and his wife Hermonia, who seem to have their names from hence, are reported to be turned into serpents, they being Hivites, which this word signifies, as Bochart (i) observes. And the Arkite; the same with the Aruceans, or Arcaeans, Josephus (k) speaks of in Phoenicia about Sidon, and from whom the city Arce had its name, which he places in Lebanon; and is mentioned by Menander (l) as revolting to the king of Assyria, with Sidon and old Tyre; and which is reckoned by Ptolemy (m) a city of Phoenicia, and placed by him near old Byblus; and hence Bothart (n) thinks Venus had the name of Venus Architis, said by Macrobius (o) to be worshipped by the Assyrians and Phoenicians. And the Sinite: either the inhabitants of the wilderness of Sin, who dwelt in the northern part of the desert of Arabia, or the Pelusiotae, as Bochart (p) thinks, the inhabitants of Pelusium, which was called Sin, Ezekiel 30:15 the former being its Greek name, the latter its Chaldee or Syriac name, and both signify "clay", it being a clayey place; but Canaan or Phoenicia seems not to have reached so far; Jerom speaks of a city not far from Arca called Sin, where rather these people may be thought to dwell. (i) Ut supra. (Phaleg. l. 4. c. 36. fol. 304.) (k) Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 2. & l. 5. c. 1. sect. 23. (l) Apud Joseph. Antiqu. l. 9. c. 14. sect. 2.((m) Geograph. l. 5. c. 15. (n) Ut supra. (Phaleg. l. 4. c. 36. fol. 304.) (o) Saturnal. l. 1. c. 21. (p) Ut supra. (Phaleg. l. 4. c. 36. fol. 304.)

And the Arvadite,.... The inhabitants of Arvad, or Aradus, an island in the Phoenician sea; it is mentioned with Sidon, Ezekiel 27:8 so Josephus says (q), the Arudaeans possessed the island Aradus: it is about a league distant from the shore; Strabo (r) says it is twenty furlongs from land, and about seven in circumference, and is said to be built by the Sidonians; it is now, as Mr. Maundrel (s) says, by the Turks called Ru-ad, or, as Dr. Shaw says (t), Rou-wadde; See Gill on Ezekiel 27:8. And the Zemarite; who perhaps built and inhabited Simyra, a place mentioned by Pliny (u), not far from Lebanon, and along with Marathos, and Antarados, which lay on the continent, right against the island Aradus, or Arvad, and near the country of the Aradians. Strabo (w) makes mention of a place called Taxymira, which Casaubon observes should be Ximyra, or Simyra; and Mela (x) speaks of the castle of Simyra as in Phoenicia. There was a city called Zemaraim in the tribe of Benjamin, Joshua 18:22 which Bishop Patrick suggests, and Ainsworth before him, that Zemarus, the son of Canaan, might be the founder of; and there is also a mountain of the same name in Mount Ephraim, 2 Chronicles 13:4. And the Hamathite: who dwelt in Amathine, as Josephus (y), and was in his time called by the inhabitants Amathe; but the Macedonians called it, from one of their race, Epiphania, which seems to have been the country called Amathite,He removed from Jerusalem, and met them in the land of Amathis: for he gave them no respite to enter his country. (1 Maccabees 12:25)there was another Hamath, called Antiochia, but cannot be meant, since Hamath was the northern border of the land of Israel, then called the entrance of Hamath, which border was pretty near to Epiphania, but not so far as Antioch; this is the Amathus of Syria, twice mentioned by Herodotus, as Hillerus (z) observes: but both Reland (a) and Vitringa (b) are of opinion, that the Hamath so often mentioned in Scripture, which doubtless had its name from the Hamathite, is neither Antiochia nor Epiphania, but the city Emesa, or Emissa, which lay below Epiphania, upon the Orontes, nearer Damascus and the land of Canaan; and Hamath is mentioned with Damascus and Arpad, or Arvad, Isaiah 10:9 and, according to Ezekiel 47:16. Hamath must lie between Damascus and the Mediterranean sea. And afterwards were the families of the Canaanites spread abroad; not only these eleven, but two more which are not mentioned, the Canaanites properly so called, and the Perizzites; these families at first dwelt in one place, or within narrow limits; but, as they increased, they spread themselves further every way, and in process of time possessed all the country from Idumea and Palestine to the mouth of the Orontes, and which they held about seven hundred years, when five of these families, with the two other above mentioned, were cast out of the land for their sins, and to make way for the people of Israel. (q) Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 2.((r) Geograph. l. 16. p. 518. (s) Journey from Aleppo, &c. p. 19. Ed. 7. (t) Travels, p. 267. Ed. 2.((u) Nat. Hist. l. 5. c. 20. (w) Geograph. l. 16. p. 518. (x) De situ orbis, l. 1. c. 12. (y) Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 2.) (z) Onomastic. Sacr. p. 780. (a) Palestina Illustrata, tom. 1. l. 1. p. 121, 123, 317. (b) Comment. in Jesaiam, c. 10, 9.

And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon,.... This is to be understood, not of the Canaanites, properly so called, but of them in general; and is a description of the bounds of the land of Canaan, as possessed by the people of Israel: the northern or north west border of it was Sidon, see Genesis 10:15 and is to be understood of the country which reached from that city towards the east almost as far as Jordan: as thou comest from Gerar unto Gaza; two cities of the Philistines, well known in Scripture, the former for being the place where Abraham and Isaac sometimes sojourned, and the latter for Samson's exploits in it; these were the southern or south west border of the land of Canaan: as thou goest unto Sodom and Gomorrah, and Admah and Zeboim; four cities destroyed by fire from heaven, as is after related in this book; these lay to the south or south east part of the land: even unto Lashah; which, according to the Targum of Jonathan, is Callirrhoe, a place famous for hot waters, which run into the Dead sea, and who in this is followed by Jerom; but since it was not in the southern part of Judea, as Lashah was, Bochart proposes (a) Lusa, as being more likely to be the place, a city of the Arabs, which Ptolemy (b) puts in the midway between the Mediterranean and the Red sea; but this is objected to by Reland (c), since the southern borders of the land of Canaan were from the extremity of the Dead sea unto the Mediterranean sea, from which Lusa was at a great distance: the Samaritan version of this verse is very different from the Hebrew, and is this,"and the border of the Canaanites was from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates, and unto the hinder sea:''i.e. the western or Mediterranean. (a) Phaleg. l. 4. c. 37. col. 309. (b) Geograph. l. 5. c. 17. (c) Palestina Illustrata, tom. 2. p. 871.

These are the sons of Ham,.... His sons and grandsons, which some reckon to be thirty, others thirty one, if the Philistines are taken in: after their families, after their tongues, in their countries, and in their nations: families of the same language joined together and dwelt in the same country; see Gill on Genesis 10:5 all Africa and a considerable part of Asia were possessed by the four sons of Ham and their posterity; Mizraim had Egypt, and Phut all the rest of Africa; and Cush and Canaan had a large portion in Asia.