1903.] JASTROW — THE IIAMTTES AND SEMITES. 187 



in the case of the sons of Cush makes it difficult to reach any- 

 definite conclusion as to the point of view which guided the com- 

 piler of P's Volkertafel. Besides the contradictions already pointed 

 out in the case of Havilah and Sheba/ it is to be noted that Dedan, 

 who in P appears in the genealogy of Cush, is, according to Genesis 

 25, 3, included with Sheba in the genealogy of Abraham. That 

 in the mind of P, the sons of Cush represent certain nations of south- 

 ern and central Arabia, with perhaps an inclusion of some groups 

 lying along the eastern coast, is about all that can be said with any 

 degree of definiteness.^ That Put in P's list represents primarily 

 the western coast of Africa, from upper Egypt and southwards to 

 Somali (though also applied to the corresponding Arabian coast 

 land), has now been definitely shown. -^ We would thus obtain a 

 point of union for Cush and Put in the circumstance that they rep- 

 resent remote people in the mind of P, lying to the extreme south. 

 This might be extended to Mizraim, but certainly Canaan, which 

 has always been the stumbling block in attempts at recognizing 

 any system in the grouping of Hamites, cannot be placed among 

 the nations of the south without our having recourse to the most 



^ See above, p. 1 80, 



2 See Jeremias, A. T. im Lichte d. Alten Orients, p. 155, and Glaser, Skizze der 

 Geschichte und Geog-raphie Arabiens^ ii, pp. 387-404. It is unnecessary to pass 

 over to the African coast for the identification of any of the seven groups, though 

 it is certain that P as well as J, in accord with the general usage of the Old Testa- 

 ment, regards Cush also as a designation of Nubia. The term seems to be some- 

 what indefinitely used for the extreme south (or what appeared to be such to Hebrew 

 writers) without a sharp differentiation between sputhern Arabia and the corre- 

 sponding district on the African coast. On Cush as a designation of a part of 

 Arabia in the Old Testament, and in the Cuneiform Inscriptions, see Winckler, 

 Keilinschriften tmddas alte Testament,"^. 144-145, summarizing views expressed 

 in his essay, " Musri-Meluhha-Ma'in," i and ii {Mittheiliin^en d. Vorderasia- 

 tischen Geselhcka/i, Berlin, 1898, pp. 47 j-f^.), and the same author's Alttestamott- 

 Hche UnterstccJningen, p. 165. This double nomenclature of Cush may well 

 be supposed to 1 est on traditions of an ultimate close relationship between the 

 settlements in Africa and those of southern (and extending into central) Arabia ; 

 and if there is any value to be attached to the precise form given to the tradi- 

 tion in the Old Testament, the conclusion might be drawn that the "Arabic '* 

 settlements represent the offshoot, z>., " sons " of the African Cush — a view that 

 on the whole seems more plausible than the contrary hypothesis. 



3 See W. M. Miiller's Asien und Europa, chap. vii. That it designated pri- 

 marily Arabia is the view of Meyer, Gechichte des Altertums, i, p. 86, while 

 Glaser, Skizze, etc., ii, pp. 405, 406, proposes southern Arabia and the east coast 

 of Africa. 



