Canaan, Canaanites
Canaan, Canaanites
(Canaan, Canaanites).
The Hebrew word Kenaan, denoting a person, occurs: in the Old Testament as the name of one of Ham’s sons; in a lengthened form, Kenaanah (D.V., Chanana, Canaana) as the name of two other people (1 Chronicles 7:10; 2 Chronicles 18:10); denoting a country, as the name of the region of the Canaanites or descendants of Canaan. In the days when the trading Phoenicians held a prominent place, especially among the Canaanites, this word (Kena’ani), and even Canaan (e.g. Isaiah 23:8), got the signification of “merchant, trader.” As the name of the country it occurs under the forms Kinahhi, Kinahni, and Kinahna, as early as two centuries before Moses in the cuneiform letters of Syrian and Palestinian princes to Egyptian Pharaos, found at Tell el-Amarna; and earlier still in Egyptian inscriptions, in the form Ka-n-‘-na. The Phoenician town of Laodicea calls itself on coins from the second century B.C. “a mother in Kena’an”. In Grecian literature too, evidence remains that the Phoenicians called one of their ancestors, as well as their country, Chna, and even at the time of St. Augustine the Punic country people near Hippo called themselves Chanani, i.e. Canaanites. If the word be of Semitic origin, it should be derived from the root Kana, and mean originally, low, or, in a figurative sense, small, humble, despicable, subjected. Following this derivation in its original sense, “the land of Canaan” has been explained by various scholars as “the low land” — whether the name may have originally denoted only the flat seashore, or the mountainous country of Western Palestine as well, in opposition to the still higher mountains of the Lebanon and the Hermon. But Biblical tradition rather seems to derive the name of the country from that of the person. It takes the “land of Canaan” as “the border of the Canaanites” (A. V., Genesis 10:19) i.e. of the race of Canaan, Ham’s son, and it does not seem advisable to put against this so uncertain a conjecture as the etymology given above. The less so, as the figurative meaning of the word as a synonym of slave or servant, fits in very well with the little we know of Noah’s grandson.
CANAAN, THE SON OF HAM
In Genesis 9:18 and 9:22, Ham appears as the father of Canaan and in Noah’s prediction (9:25-27) Canaan stands side by side with his “brothers” (in the larger sense of the Hebrew word) Shem and Japheth: “He said: Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. “And he said: Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, be Canaan his servant. “May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Shem, and Canaan be his servant.” The curse called down on Canaan is undoubtedly connected with the sin of his father, Ham (verse 22). But it is rather hard to indicate the precise nature of this connection. Had Canaan in some way a share in his father’s sin, and is it for this reason that what was said in verse 18 is repeated in the story of the sin, viz.: that Ham was the father of Canaan? Or is the latter struck by Noah’s prophetic curse for the sins of his posterity, who were to imitate Ham’s wickedness? Certain it is, that this curse, as well as the blessing invoked upon Shem and Japheth, was especially fulfilled in their posterity. The descendants of Canaan were partly rooted out, partly subjected by the Israelites and all the Canaanite races, as such, disappeared from the scene of history. Others have tried to solve the problem by critical methods. It was supposed that Gen., x, 20-27 was derived from a source in which Canaan had taken the place of his father, Ham, and so was passed off as Noah’s third son. It is as conceivable that in the original prophecy the name of Ham occurred, and that the Israelites, seeing the prophecy fulfilled, especially in the posterity of Canaan might have changed it to that of the son. But none of these critical conjectures has any solid foundation.
Quite uncertain, too, is the opinion which represents Canaan as the youngest of Ham’s four sons. It is based on Gen., x, 6: “And the sons of Ham: Chus, and Mesram and Phuth, and Canaan”. But this whole list of the descendants of Noah’s sons is, at least in substance, ethnographical, and the order of succession geographical, hence an enumeration of tribes beginning with the most distant and ending in Palestine. In verses 16-20, therefore, there is question only of Canaanite tribes, and they occupy the Iast place because they dwell in or near, Palestine. Consequently it cannot be concluded from this that Canaan was the youngest son of Ham.
THE LAND OF CANAAN With a few exceptions the Biblical writers seem to indicate by this name at the least, the whole of Western or cis-Jordanic Palestine. It extends from the desert of Sin in the south to near Rohob and the entrance to Emath in the north (Numbers 13:3, 18; cf. 22). A more accurate demarcation of the land of Canaan is in Num., xxxiv, 3-12, and Ezech., xlvii, 15-20. For though the name does not occur in Ezechiel, the identity of the boundary lines is drawn there is not to be doubted. In either text the western boundary is formed by the Mediterranean, and the greater part of the eastern by the Dead sea and the lower course of the Jordan.
The southern frontier coincides with that of the territory of Juda (Joshua 15:1-4), whilst Cadesbarne (Ain Kedis), 30°33′ N. latitude, may be taken as the most southern point. From this of St. Jerome time (In Ezech, Migne, XXV, 476-478) the northern frontier was placed in Middle or even Northern Syria. From this passage of St. Jerome even a fons Daphnis (Daphne near Antioch) found its way into Vulgate (Numbers 34:11) instead of the town of Ain. But though some of the border towns are not yet known with absolute certainty, we may take for granted nowadays that this northern boundary-line of Canaan must be drawn to the south of the Lebanon and Hermon, at about 33°18′ N. lat., and that it completely coincides with the northern frontier of the country conquered and inhabited by the Israelites, which, according to numerous quotations, stretched “from Dan to Bershabee” or “from the entering in of Emath unto the brook of Egypt.” The northern part of the eastern boundary, however, seems to follow, not the upper course of the Jordan but the course of the Rukkad from Hasar-Enan (El-Hadr) to Ain (Ayun), so that here the whole of Western Jaulan still seems to be included in the land Canaan — not, however, the land of Galaad or the country in general beyond the Jordan to the south of the Jarmuk. All the places quoted above agree with this conception, and only twice does the name of the country Canaan occur in a more limited sense: first for the Phoenician coast (Isaiah 23:11), and secondly for the low land of the Philistines (Soph., ii, 5) — both in a time when only these regions along the coast were still inhabited by Canaanites. We have already seen how the name was honoured even later still in Phoenicia itself. In Egypt name of the country seems to be used especially for the sea-coast; at the same time the name Canaanites is also applied to the inhabitants of the mountainous country behind it. In the Tell el-Amarna letters the country of Kinahhi seems to include both the Phoenician coast and the mountains of Upper Galilee, and probably, farther to the north, the country of Amurri (Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon). cf. H. Clauss Zeitschrift des Deutschell Palastinavereins (1907), XXX, 17, 29, 30, 35, 36, 64, 67.
Gen., x, 15-18 enumerates as the descendants of Canaan a series of tribes, most of which, and originally perhaps all, were settled outside Palestine proper and up to Northern Syria: “And Canaan begot Sidon, his firstborn, the Hethite, and the Jebusite, and the Amorrhite, and the Gergesite, the Hevite and the Aracite: the Sinite, and the Aradian, the Samarite, and the Hamathite: and afterwards the families of the Canaanites were spread abroad.” These latter are the tribes peopling Biblical Canaan or wastern Palestine: “And the limits of Canaan were from Sidon as one comes to Gerara even Gaza, until thou enter Sodom and Gomorrha, and Adama, and Seboim even to Lesa.” If we may identify Lesa (A.V. Lasha) with Lesem (Joshua 19:47) or Lais (Judges 18:14, etc), the Dan of later days, the coast from Sidon to Gaza and Gerara is here indicated as the western boundary of Canaan, and the valley of the Jordan from the Pentapolis to Lais-Dan as the eastern boundary. But the “Codex Samaritanus” has in verse 19 quite another statement: “And the border of the Canaanite was from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, and [from the Euphrates] to the hindmost [or Western] Sea.” Apparently by “the Canaanite” are here meant all the descendants of Canaan, mentioned in verses 15-18, of whom the Hethites, at least, lived close to the Euphrates. It is hard to decide which reading is the original one. Both show the descendants of Canaan settled in the Biblical “land of Canaan”, i.e. the later “land of Israel”. As a rule it is the pre-Israelite inhabitants of this “land of Canaan”, taken collectively, who are indicated by this common name of Canaanites. Thus in the Pentateuch, especially in parts attributed to a Jahvistic source, as e.g. Gen., xii, 6, xxiv, 37, xxxviii, 2, 1, 11. Elsewhere, however, chiefly in so-called Elohistic parts, the name of Amorrhites is used in the same general sense. And very often as many as six or seven or even eleven, different tribes or peoples are distinguished, one of which in particular bears the name of Canaanites. Thus e.g. Exod., iii, 8: “The Canaanite, and Hethite, and Amorrhite and Pherezite, and Hevite, and Jebusite.” Repeatedly (e.g. Joshua 3:l0), the Gergesites, mentioned above (Genesis 10:16), are added; and in Gen., xv, 19-21, we find “the Cineans and Cenezites, Cedmonites . . . the Raphaim also”; whilst in Num., xiv, 25, the Amelectite; in A.V. Deut, ii, 23 and Jos., xiii, 3, the Avims; and in Jos., xi, 21 (and elsewhere), the Enacims are named, leaving out other older, and probably trans-Jordanic, tribes like the Zuzim, the Emim, and the Chorreans (Genesis 14:5, 6).
Of most of these tribes little or nothing is known. For Amorrhites see article under that title. The Hethites founded a mighty kingdom in Northern Syria, but it is uncertain whether their namesakes in the south of Palestine (Genesis 23:3, 26:34, etc.) had anything in common with them besides the name. About the Canaanites in a more limited sense we learn that they had their dwelling-place to the east and west of the mountains, i.e. along the coast of the Mediterranean and in the valley of the Jordan and the Araba to the south of the Dead Sea (Numbers 13:30, 14:25; Deuteronomy 1:7, 11:29 sq.; Joshua 5:1, 11:3, 13:3). So it is by this name that the Phoenicians are still called in Abd., 20; and the “Syrophenician” woman of Mark, vii, 26, is a Canaanite woman in Matth., xv, 22. It is not likely that all the various pre-Israelite tribes remained sharply distinguished from one another. “There are good reasons for believing that at a very early period the population of Palestine already presented a mixture of races, and that through intermariage the dividing lines between these races became fainter in the course of time, until all sharp distinctions were obliterated. The problem of distinguishing between these various groups whom the Hebrews encountered upon setting in Palestine is at present incapable of solution.” (Morris, Jastrow, Jr. Encyclop. Bibl., I, 642.) Still it does not seem too great a venture to distinguish (with Hughes Vincent, “Canaan”, p. 455) two principal groups of tribes: the Amorrhites in the mountains and the Canaanites along the sea-coast and in the valley of the Jordan, and perhaps in the plain of Esdrelon (Joshua 17:12-18). On the other hand, when the Israelites under Josue penetrated into Canaan they found this mixed “Canaanite” or “Amorrhite” population, not bound together politically under one govenment but divided into more than thirty petty kingdoms (Joshua 12:7-14), a state of things which must have made the conquest considerably easier for them. This same system of cutting up the country into small parts obtained two or three centuries earlier, in the time of the Tell el-Amarna letters, which were for the greater part written by, or to a number of these city-kings — and apparently even earlier still in the days of Abraham (Genesis 14:2, 8, 18, 20:2). In this respect these letters contain a striking corroboration of the Biblical story. After the campaigns of Tothmes III in the sixteenth century B.C. all these small states acknowledged the supremacy of the Egyptian Pharaos and paid them tribute. After a time, however, this sovereignty must have gradually become more and more nominal, and in spite of the later campaigns of Seti I and Rames II against Hethites, it left no traces after the conquest by Josue.
The further particulars given by the Bible about the Canaanites are rather scanty. We read occasionally of their cities “great and walled up to the sky” (Deuteronomy 1:28; cf. Numbers 13:29); of their “chariots of iron” (Joshua 17:16): and repeatedly of their gods Baal and Moloch and their goddesses Astarte and Ashera; of their altars and their stone pillars (masseboth) and wooden posts (asherim), in connection with these altars, of their sacrifices of children and manifold forms of moral perversity; the abominations on account of which “the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants” (A.V. Leviticus 18:25), and which, in spite of the severe prohibition of the Law and the admonitions of the Prophets, found but too much imitation in Israel itself. Most of these particulars have of late received a splendid corroboration and explanation in archaeological discoveries, principally in consequence of the systematic excavations conducted in Palestine by W.H. Flinders Petrie and F.J. Bliss at Tell el-Hesy; by Bliss and M.R.A. Stewart Macalister at Tell Zakariya, Tell es-Safy, and Tell Jedeide; by Macalister at Teil Jezer; by E. Sellin at Thenac; by G. Schumacher at Tell el-Mutesallim — to all of which Sellin added in 1907 his labours at old Jericho.
Even before the tribes who are introduced to us as Canaanites in the Bible penetrated into Palestine (between 3000 and 2500 B.C.) there must have lived for many centuries an older population, dwelling there partly in caves, but also possessing their primitive “towns” surrounded by earthen walls. This period is characterized especially by stone instruments and very primitive earthenware. The Canaanite tribes who gradually took their place came from the north and were for a long time, if not under the supremacy, without a doubt under the manifold influence of Babylon. which Sellin added in 1907 his labours at old Jericho. In the fifteenth century B.C., when the country was already politically subject to Egypt, the kings of the Canaanite towns used in their correspondence, not only with the Pharaos but also between themselves, the Babylonian cuneiform characters, and — with the addition of a number of Canaanite words — the language of Babylon as well. Macalister (Pal. Expl. fund Quart. Stat. 1905, 323 sq.) and, quite lately, Sellin (Mitth.und Nach. des Deutschen Palastinavereins, 1907, 70) found some scanty evidence that the Old Hebrew or Phoenician characters were also known in those days. Civilization meanwhile, had made immense progress, as is evident from the rise of bronze and other metals — soon, too, of iron; from the building of dwelling-places, city stalls, towers, and strongholds; from the increasing number and value of objects of domestic and religious use; from the designs and fitting up of sanctuaries and burial caves; and from the richer variety of form, ornamentation, and painting in the products of the potter’s art — though art does not appear to have enjoyed a continuous and even development.
When the Israelites (Numbers 13:29; Deuteronomy 1:28) speak in awe of “great cities”, the hyperbole is nearly as great as in the expression “walled up to the sky”, those explored have covered, at most, seven or eight hectares (about 19 acres), but the fortifications have been excellent. The walls of Jericho, built of burnt bricks, had a width of from three to twelve metres, i.e. from about 9 to 39 feet (Sellin. op. cit., p. 69). If the ancient inhabitants offered their sacrifices in dish-like cups cut in the surface of the rocky ground, the Canaanites had their open-air temples, or Bamoth (high places), with altar, sacrificial pit, and stone pillars from about seven to nine feet high. At Gazer eight pillars were found, still standing, the smallest of which (about 51/2 feet high) seems to the oldest, and is perhaps the real emblem of the deity. Of the asherim, or wooden posts, only the stone bases seem to be left. Two large grottos situated under the sanctuary must also have played a part in this worship. But the most disgusting traces of this idolatry are the skeletons of infants — mostly new-born babes — sacrificed to the deity, which at Gazer were found buried in jars beneath the floor of the sanctuary, and elsewhere, especially at Mageddo, in its immediate neighbourhood. Several times the remains of these human victims, among which have been adults, were found beneath or in the foundations of houses and other buildings; a striking illustrations of the words of Jos., vi, 26: “Cursed be the man before the Lord that shall raise up and build the city of Jericho. In [or with] his firstborn may be lay the foundation thereof, and in [or with] the last of his children set up its gates.” The naturalistic character of this religion becomes especially evident in the numerous Astarte plaques, or statuettes, of divergent types, and likewise in the often occurring phallic emblems. Among these latter some class part of the baetylic stone pillars, and find in a few bulls’ heads representations of Baal or Moloch. Some representations of Babylonian deities also occur, and, still more frequently, images from Egyptian mythology. The Astarte plaques likewise show Egyptian inspiration. In short, the Canaanite civilization seems continually to have felt the influence of both these nations. In pottery, moreover, Aegean-Phoenician art produced marked results from the beginning of the fourteenth century B.C. On the other hand, the settlement of the Israelites in Canaan, judging from the explorations made, opened no new period in so far as archaeology is concerned, so that the “Canaanite” period (i.e. the various “Semitic” periods of Macalister, Palestine exploration Fund Quarterly Statements, 1907, p. 203) has been extended to about the ninth or eighth century B.C.
Indeed, the submission of the Canaanite was not made effectual nearby so soon as some chapters of the Book of Josue might lead us to expect. Particularly the places that have become best known to us through the excavations. Thenac, Mageddo, and Gazer, are among those that submitted to Israel only after a lapse of time (Joshua 17:11-13; Judges 1:27-29). Gazer even in the days of Solomon was still inhabited by Canaanites (1 Kings 9:16). And in the same context (verses 20-21) we learn that Solomon, through forced statute laborer, subjugated “unto this day”, the whole of the Canaanite population of his realm. Thus Canaan had become once and for all the servant of Shem. Afterwards Phoenicia with its colonies was subjugated by the Romans, sons of Japheth, and soon vanished altogether from the roll of nations.
———————————–
JOHN P. VAN KASTEREN Transcribed by Joseph P. Thomas
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IIICopyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia
Canaan, Canaanites
kanan, kanan-ts (, kenaan; , Chanaan):
1.Geography
2.Meaning of the Name
3.The Results of Recent Excavations
4.History
(1)Stone Age
(2)Bronze Age
(3)A Babylonian Province
(4)Jerusalem Founded
(5)The Hyksos
(6)Egyptian Conquest
(7)Tell el-Amarna Tablets
5.The Israelitsh Invasion
6.Culture
7.Art
8.Commerce
9.Art of Writing
Literature
Canaan is stated in Gen 10:6 to have been a son of Ham and brother of Mizraim, or Egypt. This indicates the Mosaic period when the conquerors of the 18th and 19th Egyptian Dynasties made Canaan for a time a province of the Egyptian empire. Under the Pharaoh Meneptah, at the time of the Exodus, it ceased to be connected with Egypt, and the Egyptian garrisons in the South of the country were expelled by the Philistines, who probably made themselves masters of the larger portion of it, Thus causing the name of Philistia or Palestine to become synonymous with that of Canaan (see Zep 2:5). In the Tell el-Amarna Letters, Canaan is written Kinakhna and Kinakhkhi. The latter form corresponds with the Greek (, Chna), a name given to Phoenicia (Hecat. Fragments 254; Eusebius, Praep. Ev., i.10; ix.17).
1. Geography
In Num 13:29 the Canaanites are described as dwelling by the sea, and along by the side of the Jordan, i.e. in the lowlands of Palestine. The name was confined to the country West of the Jordan (Num 33:51; Jos 22:9), and was especially applied to Phoenicia (Isa 23:11; compare Mat 15:22). Hence, Sidon is called the firstborn of Canaan (Gen 10:15, though compare Jdg 3:3), and the Septuagint translates Canaanites by Phoenicians and Canaan by the land of the Phoenicians (Exo 16:35; Jos 5:12). Kinakhkhi is used in the same restricted sense in the Tell el-Amarna Letters, but it is also extended so as to include Palestine generally. On the other hand, on the Egyptian monuments Seti I calls a town in the extreme South of Palestine the city of Pa-Kana’na or the Canaan, which Conder identifies with the modern Khurbet Kenan near Hebron.
As in the Tell el-Amarna Letters, so in the Old Testament, Canaan is used in an extended sense to denote the whole of Palestine West of the Jordan (Gen 12:5; Gen 23:2, Gen 23:19; Gen 28:1; Gen 31:18; Gen 35:6; Gen 36:2; Gen 37:1; Gen 48:7; Exo 15:15; Num 13:2; Jos 14:1; Jos 21:2; Psa 135:11). Thus, Jerusalem which had Amorite and Hittite founders is stated to be of the land of the Canaanite (Eze 16:3), and Isa (Num 19:18) terms Hebrew, which was shared by the Israelites with the Phoenicians and, apparently, also the Amorites, the language of Caaan. Jabin is called the king of Canaan in Jdg 4:2, Jdg 4:23, Jdg 4:24; but whether the name is employed here in a restricted or extended sense is uncertain.
2. Meaning of the Name
As the Phoenicians were famous as traders, it has been supposed that the name Canaanite is a synonym of merchant in certain passages of the Old Testament. The pursuit of trade, however, was characteristic only of the maritime cities of Phoenicia, not of the Canaanitish towns conquered the Israelites. In Isa 23:11 we should translate Canaan (as the Septuagint) instead of merchant city (the King James Version); in Hos 12:7 (8), as, for Canaan (Septuagint), instead of he is a merchant (the King James Version); in Zep 1:11, people of Canaan (Septuagint), instead of merchant people (the King James Version); on the other hand, Canaanite seems to have acquired the sense of merchant, as Chaldean did of astrologer, in Isa 23:8, and Pro 3:1 :24, though probably not in Zec 14:21, and Job 41:6 (Hebrew 40:30).
3. The Results of Recent Excavation
Much light has been thrown upon the history of Canaan prior to the Israelite occupation by recent excavation, supplemented by the monuments of Babylonia and Egypt. The Palestine Exploration led the way by its excavations in 1890-92 at Tell el-Hesy, which turned out to be the site of Lachish, first under Professor Flinders Petrie and then under Dr. Bliss. Professor Petrie laid the foundations of Palestine archaeology by fixing the chronological sequence of the Lachish pottery, and tracing the remains of six successive cities, the fourth of which was that founded by the Israelites. Between it and the preceding city was a layer of ashes, marking the period when the town lay desolate and uninhabited. The excavations at Lachish were followed by others at Tell es-Safi, the supposed site of Gath; at Tell Sandahanna, the ancient Marissa, a mile South of Bet Jibrn, where interesting relics of the Greek period were found, and at Jerusalem, where an attempt was made to trace the city walls. Next to Lachish, the most fruitful excavations have been at Gezer, which has been explored by Mr. Macalister with scientific thoroughness and skill, and where a large necropolis has been discovered as well as the remains of seven successive settlements, the last of which comes down to the Seleucid era, the third corresponding with the first settlement at Lachish. The two first settlements go back to the neolithic age. With the third the Semitic or Amorite period of Canaan begins; bronze makes its appearance; high-places formed of monoliths are erected, and inhumation of the dead is introduced, while the cities are surrounded with great walls of stone. While Mr. Macalister has been working at Gezer, German and Austrian expeditions under Dr. Schumacher have been excavating at Tell em-Mutesellim, the site of Megiddo, and under Dr. Sellin first at Tell Taanak, the ancient Taanach, and then at Jericho. At Taanach cuneiform tablets of the Mosaic age were found in the house of the governor of the town; at Samaria and Gezer cuneiform tablets have also been found, but they belong to the late Assyrian and Babylonian periods. At Jericho, on the fiat roof of a house adjoining the wall of the Canaanitish city, destroyed by the Israelites, a number of clay tablets were discovered laid out to dry before being inscribed with cuneiform characters. Before the letters were written and dispatched, however, the town, it seems, was captured and burnt. An American expedition, under Dr. Reisner, is now exploring Sebastiyeh (Samaria), where the ruins of Ahab’s palace, with early Hebrew inscriptions, have been brought to light, as well as a great city wall built in the age of Nebuchadrezzar.
4. History
(1) Stone Age
The history of Canaan begins with the paleolithic age, paleolithic implements having been found in the lowlands. Our first knowledge of its population dates from the neolithic period. The neolithic inhabitants of Gezer were of short stature (about 5 ft. 4 inches in height), and lived in caves – at least in the time of the first prehistoric settlement – and burned their dead. Their sacred place was a double cave with which cup-marks in the rock were connected, and their pottery was rude; some of it was ornamented with streaks of red or black on a yellow or red wash. In the time of the second settlement a rude stone wall was built around the town. The dbris of the two neolithic settlements is as much as 12 ft. in depth, implying a long period of accumulation.
(2) Bronze Age
The neolithic population was succeeded by one of Semitic type, which introduced the use of metal, and buried its dead. The name of Amorite has been given to it, this being the name under which the Semitic population of Canaan was known to the Babylonians. Gezer was surrounded by a great wall of stone intersected by brick towers; at Lachish the Amorite wall was of crude brick, nearly 29 ft. in thickness (compare Deu 1:28). A high-place was erected at Gezer consisting of 9 monoliths, running from North to South, and surrounded by a platform of large stones. The second monolith has been polished by the kisses of the worshippers; the seventh was brought from a distance. Under the pavement of the sanctuary lay the bones of children, more rarely of adults, who had been sacrificed and sometimes burnt, and the remains deposited in jars. Similar evidences of human sacrifice were met with under the walls of houses both here and at Taanach and Megiddo. In the Israelite strata the food-bowl and lamp for lighting the dead in the other world are retained, but all trace of human sacrifice is gone. At Lachish in Israelite times the bowl and lamp were filled with sand. The second Amorite city at Gezer had a long existence. The high-place was enlarged, and an Egyptian of the age of the 12th Dynasty was buried within its precincts. Egyptian scarabs of the 12th and XIIIth Dynasties are now met with; these give place to scarabs of the Hyksos period, and finally to those of the 18th Dynasty (1600 bc). Hittite painted pottery of Cappadocian type is also found in the later dbris of the city as well as seal-cylinders of the Babylonian pattern.
(3) A Babylonian Province
Meanwhile Canaan had for a time formed part of the Babylonian empire. Gudea, viceroy of Lagas under the kings of the Dynasty of Ur (2500 bc), had brought limestone from the land of the Amorites, alabaster from Mt. Lebanon, cedar-beams from Amanus, and golddust from the desert between Palestine and Egypt. A cadastral survey was drawn up about the same time by Uru-malik, the governor of the land of the Amorites, the name by which Syria and Canaan were known to the Babylonians, and colonies of Amorites engaged in trade were settled in the cities of Babylonia. After the fall of the Dynasty of Ur, Babylonia was itself conquered by the Amorites who founded the dynasty to which KHammurabi, the Amraphel of Gen 14:1, belonged (see HAMMURABI). In an inscription found near Diarbekir the only title given to Khammu-rabi is king of the land of the Amorites. Babylonian now became the official, literary and commercial language of Canaan, and schools were established there in which the cuneiform script was taught. Canaanitish culture became wholly Babylonian; even its theology and gods were derived from Babylonia. The famous legal code of Khammu-rabi (see HAMMURABI, CODE OF) was enforced in Canaan as in other parts of the empire, and traces of its provisions are found in Gen. Abram’s adoption of his slave Eliezer, Sarai’s conduct to Hagar, and Rebekah’s receipt of a dowry from the father of the bridegroom are examples of this. So, too, the sale of the cave of Machpelah was in accordance with the Babylonian legal forms of the Khammu-rabi age. The petty kings of Canaan paid tribute to their Babylonian suzerain, and Babylonian officials and commerical travelers (damgari) frequented the country.
(4) Jerusalem Founded
We must ascribe to this period the foundation of Jerusalem, which bears a Babylonian name (Uru-Salim, the city of Salim), and commanded the road to the naphtha springs of the Dead-Sea. Bitumen was one of the most important articles of Babylonian trade on account of its employment for building and lighting purposes, and seems to have been a government monopoly. Hence, the rebellion of the Canaanitish princes in the naphtha district (Gen 14) was sufficiently serious to require a considerable force for its suppression.
(5) The Hyksos
The Amorite dynasty in Babylonia was overthrown by a Hittite invasion, and Babylonian authority in Canaan came to an end, though the influence of Babylonian culture continued undiminished. In the North the Hittites were dominant; in the South, where Egyptian influence had been powerful since the age of the 12th Dynasty, the Hyksos conquest of Egypt united Palestine with the Delta. The Hyksos kings bear Canaanitish names, and their invasion of Egypt probably formed part of that general movement which led to the establishment of an Amorite dynasty in Babylonia. Egypt now became an appanage of Canaan, with its capital, accordingly, near its Asiatic frontier. One of the Hyksos kings bears the characteristically Canaanitish name of Jacob-el, written in the same way as on Babylonian tablets of the age of Khammu-rabi, and a place of the same name is mentioned by Thothmes III as existing in southern Palestine
(6) Egyptian Conquest
The Pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty expelled the Hyksos and conquered Palestine and Syria. For about 200 years Canaan was an Egyptian province. With the Egyptian conquest the history of the second Amorite city at Gezer comes to an end. The old wall was partially destroyed, doubtless by Thothmes III (about 1480 bc). A third Amorite city now grew up, with a larger and stronger wall, 14 ft. thick. The houses built on the site of the towers of the first wall were filled with scarabs and other relics of the reign of Amon-hotep III (1440 bc). At Lachish the ruins of the third city were full of similar remains, and among them was a cuneiform tablet referring to a governor of Lachish mentioned in the Tell el-Amarna Letters. At Taanach cuneiform tablets of the same age have been discovered, written by Canaanites to one another but all in the Babylonian script and language.
(7) Tell El-Amarna Tablets
In the Tell el-Amarna Letters we have a picture of Canaan at the moment when the Asiatic empire of Egypt was breaking up through the religious and social troubles that marked the reign of Amon-hotep IV. The Hittites were attacking it in the North; in the South of Canaan the Khabiri or confederate bands of free-lances were acquiring principalities for themselves. The petty kings and governors had foreign troops in their pay with which they fought one against the other; and their mercenaries readily transferred their allegiance from one paymaster to another, or seized the city they were engaged to defend. Hittites, Mitannians from Mesopotamia, and other foreigners appear as governors of the towns; the Egyptian government was too weak to depose them and was content if they professed themselves loyal. At times the Canaanitish princes intrigued with the Assyrians against their Egyptian masters; at other times with the Mitannians of Aram-Naharaim or the Hittites of Cappadocia. The troops sent by the Egyptian Pharaoh were insufficient to suppress the rebellion, and the authority of the Egyptian commissioners grew less and less. Eventually the king of the Amorites was compelled to pass openly over to the Hittite king, and Canaan was lost to the Pharaohs.
5. The Israelite Invasion
Gaza and the neighboring towns, however, still remained in their hands, and with the recovery of Egyptian power under the 19th Dynasty allowed Seti I to march once more into Canaan and reduce it again to subjection. In spite of Hittite attacks the country on both sides of the Jordan acknowledged the rule of Seti and his son Ramses II, and in the 21st year of the latter Pharaoh the long war with the Hittites came to an end, a treaty being made which fixed the Egyptian frontier pretty much where the Israelite frontier afterward ran. A work, known as The Travels of the Mohar, which satirizes the misadventures of a tourist in Canaan, gives a picture of Canaan in the days of Ramses II. With the death of Ramses II Egyptian rule in Palestine came finally to an end. The Philistines drove the Egyptian garrisons from the cities which commanded the military road through Canaan, and the long war with the Hittites exhausted the inland towns, so that they made but a feeble resistance to the Israelites who assailed them shortly afterward. The Egyptians, however, never relinquished their claim to be masters of Canaan, and when the Philistines power had been overthrown by David we find the Egyptian king again marching northward and capturing Gezer (1Ki 9:16). Meanwhile the counry had become to a large extent Israelite. In the earlier days of the Israelite invasion the Canaanitish towns had been destroyed and the people massacred; later the two peoples intermarried, and a mixed race was the result. The portraits accompanying the names of the places taken by Shishak in southern Palestine have Amorite features, and the modern fellahin of Palestine are Canaanite rather than Jewish in type.
6. Culture
Canaanitish culture was based on that of Babylonia, and begins with the introduction of the use of copper and bronze. When Canaan became a Babylonian province, it naturally shared in the civilization of the ruling power. The religious beliefs and deities of Babylonia were superimposed upon those of the primitive Canaanite. The local Baal or lord of the soil made way for the lord of heaven, the Sun-god of the Babylonians. The high-place gradually became a temple built after a Babylonian fashion. The sacred stone, once the supreme object of Canaanitish worship, was transformed into a Beth-el or shrine of an indwelling god. The gods and goddesses of Babylonia migrated to Canaan; places received their names from Nebo or Nin-ip; Hadad became Amurru the Amorite god; Ishtar passed into Ashtoreth, and Asirtu, the female counterpart of Asir, the national god of Assyria, became Asherah, while her sanctuary, which in Assyria was a temple, was identified in Canaan with the old fetish of an upright stone or log. But human sacrifice, and more especially the sacrifice of the firstborn son, of which we find few traces in Babylonia, continued to be practiced with undiminished frequency until, as we learn from the excavations, the Israelite conquest brought about its suppression. The human victim is also absent from the later sacrificial tariffs of Carthage and Marseilles, its place being taken in them by the ram. According to these tariffs the sacrifices and offerings were of two kinds, the zauat or sin offering and the shelem or thank-offering. The sin offering was given wholly to the god; part of the thank-offering would be taken by the offerer. Birds which were not allowed as a sin offering might constitute a thank-offering. Besides the sacrifices, there were also offerings of corn, wine, fruit and oil.
7. Art
What primitive Canaanitish art was like may be seen from the rude sculptures in the Wadi el-Kana near Tyre. Under Babylonian influence it rapidly developed. Among the Canaanite spoil captured by Thothmes III were tables, chairs and staves of cedar and ebony inlaid with gold or simply gilded, richly embroidered robes, chariots chased with silver, iron tent poles studded with precious stones, bowls with goats’ heads on them, and one with a lion’s head, the workmanship of the land of Zahi (the Phoenician coast), iron armor with gold inlay, and rings of gold and silver that were used as money. At Taanach, gold and silver ornaments have been found of high artistic merit. To the Israelites, fresh from the desert, the life of the wealthy Canaanite would have appeared luxurious in the extreme.
8. Commerce
The position of Canaan made it the meeting-place of the commercial routes of the ancient world. The fleets of the Phoenician cities are celebrated in the Tell el-Amarna Letters, and it is probable that they were already engaged in the purple trade. The inland towns of Canaan depended not only on agriculture but also on a carrying trade: caravans as well as commercial travelers (damgari) came to them from Cappadocia, Babylonia and Egypt. Bronze, silver, lead, and painted ware were brought from Asia Minor, together with horses; naphtha was exported to Babylonia in return for embroidered stuffs; copper came from Cyprus, richly chased vessels of the precious metals from Crete and corn from Egypt. Baltic amber has been found at Lachish, where a furnace with iron slag, discovered in the third Amorite city, shows that the native iron was worked before the age of the Israelite conquest. The manufacture of glass goes back to the same epoch. As far back as 2500 bc, alabaster and limestone had been sent to Babylonia from the quarries of the Lebanon.
9. Art of Writing
Long before the age of Abraham the Babylonian seal-cylinder had become known and been imitated in Syria and Canaan. But it was not until Canaan had been made a Babylonian province under the Khammu-rabi dynasty that the cuneiform system of writing was introduced together with the Babylonian language and literature. Henceforward, schools were established and libraries or archive-chambers formed where the foreign language and its complicated syllabary could be taught and stored. In the Mosaic age the Taanach tablets show that the inhabitants of a small country town could correspond with one another on local matters in the foreign language and script, and two of the Tell el-Amarna letters are from a Canaanitish lady. The official notices of the name by which each year was known in Babylonia were sent to Canaan as to other provinces of the Babylonian empire in the cuneiform script; one of these, dated in the reign of KHammurabi’s successor, has been found in the Lebanon.
Literature
H. Vincent, Canaan d’aprs l’exploration rcente, 1907; G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, 1894; Publications of the Palestine Exploration Fund; E. Sellin, Tell Ta’annek and Eine Nachlese auf dem Tell Ta’annek, 1904-5; Schumacher, Tell Mutesellim, 1909; Thiersch, Die neueren Ausgrabungen in Palestina, 1908. See, further, ARKITE; ARVADITE; BAAL; GIRGASHITE; HITTITES; HIVITE; JEBUSITE; KADMONITE; KENIZZITE; PALESTINE; PERIZZITE; REPHAIM; SINITES; TEMANITE.