A Drunken Sailor and the Curse of Canaan
There are many questions concerning the incident in Genesis 9 when Noah, after growing grapes, making wine, and becoming intoxicated lies naked in his tent only to have his nakedness ‘looked upon’ by his son Ham. In fact, there is a long list of the possible interpretations of Genesis 9: 20-29 (Baumgarten 1975: 55). This passage has been claimed as evidence for the theocratic approval of the American slave trade (Rae 2018). It has been used to condemn both incest and homosexuality (Bergsma and Hahn 2005: 28-30). It has also been used to suggest the castration of the father in an attempted coup d'etat by the son (Sanhedrin 70a).
As the passage describes, after being ‘looking upon,’ Noah awakens and realizes what Ham has done, and so he curses Ham’s son, Canaan—prophesying that Canaan will be a slave to his cousins. The obvious problem of why Canaan was cursed instead of Ham will be attempted to be solved, though only with a hypothesis—a possibility to add to the list of other possibilities.
Sins
Concerning the question of why Noah became drunk, there is no acute answer. It should be noted that the biblical text does not discuss if what Noah did was sinful. Genesis 9 simply states as fact the occurrence, and the author emphasizes that wrong committed against Noah rather than any wrong Noah may have performed. Because the text adds emphasis to the sin committed against Noah, this will be the emphasis here.
"saw his father’s nakedness"
The concept of Ham looking upon his father’s nakedness is troublesome for many, particularly those who live in western cultures where moral principles concerning the exposure of skin are minimal. Because the concept of looking upon the naked skin of one’s father as sin is problematic, several theories have developed in an attempt to correct the fogginess of the passage. Some of these include the following:
Noah had just had sex with his wife
Ham had sex with Noah's wife, Ham’s mother
Ham had sex with Noah
Ham simply saw his father's nakedness
Ham castrated Noah in an attempted coup d’etat
The concept of anything sexual within the text seems reaching, so it is difficult to accept any of those views. It is true that the "uncover nakedness” concept in Leviticus 18: 6-11, 15-19 is interpreted as a euphemism for sex, but in this case Noah uncovered himself. Even if that could be interpreted as Noah having sex with his own wife and Ham viewing this act, the issue is still viewing. Furthermore, in the very next verse, the other two brothers entered the tent backwards in order to cover their sleeping father without viewing his nakedness, something that would not occur if Noah’s nakedness included a sexual act.
The idea of the castration of the father has precedent in ancient Near Eastern literature, particularly in the overthrow of El by Ba’al (Oldenburg 1969: 112), but if this were the case here, surely the brothers would not simply walk backwards to cover their father but instead render first aid, which would likely demand cauterization of the wound and therefore direct attention rather than ‘not looking,’ therefore this, too, does not seem to fit the text.
Looking upon another's nakedness
In our modern culture, nakedness appears to be something to be proud of and exhibit, but in the ancient world, the viewing of another’s naked body when one has no right to do so was considered a shameful act. Herodotus, in The Histories, tells of one Candaules who believed his wife to be the most beautiful woman alive and wanted to prove such to his good friend and bodyguard, Gyges, by having his wife stand naked before the man. Gyges very adamantly argued against such an idea:
“Master,” he said, “what an unsound suggestion, that I should see my mistress naked! When a woman's clothes come off, she dispenses with her modesty, too. Men have long ago made wise rules from which one ought to learn; one of these is that one should mind one's own business. As for me, I believe that your queen is the most beautiful of all women, and I ask you not to ask of me what is lawless.” (Herodotus, The Histories 1.8.3-4)
Similarly, in the book of Esther, it is suggested that Queen Vashti was commanded to appear before the king and his men in the nude, but the queen refused to do so as the command was considered to be outrageous and outside of societal norms; in fact, there is no record at the time that this was anything but atypical (Aryeh and Wee 2021: 39).
It should be noted that nakedness, itself, is not considered shameful, but the public viewing of one's nakedness brings shame upon the naked individual. Several biblical passages mention the link between one’s nakedness and the shame of showing it:
Isaiah 47.3a "Your nakedness will be uncovered, Your shame also will be exposed." (NASB )
Nahum 3.5 “Behold, I am against you,” says the LORD of hosts; “I will lift your skirts over your face, I will show the nations your nakedness, And the kingdoms your shame.” (NKJ)
Revelation 3.18 "I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness will not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see." (NASB)
Revelation 16.15 "Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who stays awake and keeps his clothes, so that he will not walk about naked and men will not see his shame." (NASB)
It is important to notice that Noah was uncovered inside "his own" tent, which would be equivalent today to being naked inside one’s own bedroom. Noah is not said to have done anything wrong in sleeping naked. In fact, the quick viewing of his father would not be condemned, but rather what he did afterward, in this view, is what is condemned.
A West Semitic legend, the Aqhat Epic, most likely concerned with the annual summer drought, helps to alleviate some of the confusion. Although much later than the actual event, Aqhat dates to within a century of the writing of Genesis (Arnold and Beyer 2002: 82). In the story, Danel wants a son. For seven days, he makes offerings and lies before the gods. Finally, Ba‘al takes compassion on him, and helps to fulfill Danel's desires. Within the story, Danel explains why he wants a son:
to set up a stela for [Danel's] divine ancestor, a votive marker for [Danel's] clan in the sanctuary; to send [Danel's] incense up from the earth, the song of [Danel's] burial place from the dust; to shut the jaws of [Danel's] abusers, to drive off [Danel's] oppressors; to hold [Danel's] hand when [Danel] is drunk, to support [Danel] when he is full of wine; to eat [Danel's] grain-offering in the temple of Ba‘al, [Danel's] portion in the temple of El; to patch [Danel's] roof when it gets muddy, to wash [Danel's] clothes when they get dirty.
Having a son was considered a great blessing. The son would take care of the aging father, but he would also "shut the jaws" of abusers and "drive off" oppressors. A son's duty was to keep his father's honor in-tact at all costs. This included helping his father when he is drunk.
We are not told that Noah did anything wrong that night. He drank too much wine, became overheated, and decided to sleep. Ham enters, sees his father, and then rather than to keep his father’s dignity, we read the following:
"Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father’s nakedness and told his two brothers who were outside" (Gen 9:22).
It is not shameful to be naked in one's own tent, but there is a shame in a public display of one's nakedness. Ham dishonored his father, no doubt violating time-held customs concerning the carrying for one’s father’s reputation.
The Curse of Canaan
Important to the story is the cursing of Canaan rather than cursing Ham. As noted above, this is somewhat enigmatic as Canaan did not commit the sin as discussed above. Here, the text (Gen 9:25-27) reads:
“Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves he will be to his brothers.” He also said, “Worthy of praise is the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem! May God enlarge Japheth’s territory and numbers! May he live in the tents of Shem and may Canaan be his slave!”
One of the problems with reading these texts is that the passage of time eludes the reader. The reader is unaware of when Noah planted the vineyard or when he became drunk, and as such, the reader is unaware of what family members were also present.
One suggestion as to why Canaan was cursed instead of Ham involves the theory of castration, namely that Ham castrated his father and prevented his father from having a fourth child. Therefore, Noah cursed Ham’s fourth child (Baumgarten 1975: 69). As noted above, there is no evidence within the text that castration was implied, and a plain reading of the text suggests that the sin was one of dishonor rather than supplanting one’s father’s leadership.
Another suggestion is that Canaan was in fact the child of Ham and his own mother, a theory involving maternal incest. In this theory, Noah attempted to sleep with his wife, but being drunk, Ham instead slept with his mother, siring Canaan (Bergsma and Hahn 2005: 35). Again, the text no where suggests any sexual act, whether paternal or maternal incest, and therefore such an origin for Canaan is unlikely. Additionally, the biblical text does not shy away from explaining the origins of Moab and Ammon as paternal, father and daughters, incest (Genesis 19:37–38) nor of rape (cf. Genesis 34:2–3) in general. The idea that Ham had had sex with his mother and therefore sired an entire people group who were to be removed from the promise land would surely be a wonderful way for Moses to express contempt toward the Canaanites, but this does not appear in the text without attempting to add to the text clarifying events.
Curse Fulfilled
From the biblical text, we learn that Ham had children that established prominent nations: Cush, Mizraim, Put, and Canaan. Of particular interest, archaeologically, we learn that the Canaanites of Abraham's day were not aboriginal to the land; there was, in fact, a group before them. There is a material culture break between Chalcolithic Canaan and Early Bronze Canaan (Schoville 2004: 162), meaning that at some point the Canaanites of Abraham's day had moved into the land where others had already dwelt. One suggestion for this move is that the trade network between Egypt and Byblos at the time allowed Semites from Byblos to move southward closer to Egypt (Schoville 2004: 162-63). Additionally, cultural affinities with the Kura-Araxes tradition are seen in the land, suggesting a Caucasian presence as well (Agranat-Tamir et al. 2020: 1150). As often occurs, when two cultures collide, the dominant culture usually supplants the non-dominant culture. It is not known what happened to the aboriginal inhabitants of Canaan, but the later Semitic and Caucasian peoples who lived there appear to have kept the place name.
This means that the Canaanites that Joshua faced were not the Canaanites that were cursed. In fact, due to the harsh Ba'alism in the land, the Israelites were not supposed to subjugate the people of the land (as the curse requires), but to destroy or remove them.
So, when was the curse fulfilled? Long before Abraham even entered the land, the curse of Canaan becoming slaves to Shem (northern Levant) and Japheth (Caucasus) had already occurred when new peoples moved into the land whose material culture we know as the Early Bonze Age.
Cursed the Son
It is noteworthy to point out that the sin committed against Noah was that of a son against his father, and likewise, the curse of Canaan was against the son of the father who sinned. Although conjecture, it is possible that the father, Ham, was cursed to have a child just like himself. This did not carry over to all of Ham’s children but to his youngest, one who would establish a nation that would not survive long in the world, being supplanted by foreigners at the turn of the Early Bronze Age. The aboriginal, cursed Canaanites have been lost to history since long ago.
Check out the Bible Land Explorer!
[This is a lecture written for the course 'HIST 262: History of the Ancient Near East,' taught Fall 2024 at God's Bible School and College, a regionally accredited College in Cincinnati, Ohio. Bibliographical material will be posted under Research on this site.]
Kommentare