192 JASTROW — TFIE HAMITES AND SEMITES. [April 4, 



we have seen, places these nations among the sons of Shem. If 

 Nimrod is a Hamite, it follows that Babylonians and Assyrians are 

 Hamites and the attitude towards Nimrod implied in thus placing 

 him among the Hamites is clearly indicated by the gloss (verse 9) 



" he was a mighty hunter before Jakw eh " 



where the words ''before Jahweh " indicate as is now generally 

 recognized by commentators^ '^ in defiance of Jahweh," implying 

 an opposition of some kind to Jahweh or if that is going too far, as, 

 at all events, carrying on a pursuit which was not pleasing in the eyes 

 of Jahweh. Whatever the original force of the phrase ** mighty 

 hunter" — concealing perhaps some reference to an ancient myth — 

 may have been, to the one who introduced the gloss in J's list of 

 nations Nimrod was a conqueror, a 'Miunter" of spoil, as it were, 

 fired by the ambition to extend his dominion. As a conqueror he, 

 therefore, appears in the following verses v/here the enlargement of 

 his kingdom is referred to and the extent of Babylonia and Assyria 

 is indicated by the mention of the chief cities of both districts. To 

 J, therefore, the chief if not the only interest attaching to Cush lies 

 in his being the ancestor through Nimrod of Babylonia and As- 

 syria and whatever other nations — if any — were included by him 

 under Cush. His motive for making Babylonia and Assyria descend- 

 ants of Cush was not geographical position, nor is it at all likely 

 that he had in mind a district by the name of Cush to the east of 

 Babylonia v/hence in his opinion Babylonians and Assyrians came - 

 — though it may be admitted that the notice rests ultimately on a 

 confusion between two Cushs^ — but he was actuated solely by 

 the desire to place Babylonians and Assyrians among the Hamites 



^ See, e.g., Budde, Utgeschichie, p. 393; Holzinger, Genesis, p. 99. Renan, 

 too, explained the phrase as indicating opposition to Jahweh. Compare also the 

 phrase " a great city to God " (Jonah, 3 3), equivalent to a " godless city." 



2 So e.g.., Winckler, Alttestaiiientliche Untersuchut7gen, p. 149. Cf. Gunkel, 

 Genesis, pp. 81-82. 



3 For our purposes it is immaterial whether Cush in the mind of the writer 

 who added the section about Nimrod meant the African or the Arabic Cush ; and 

 even though some faint tradition of a third *< Babylonian " Cush (?'.^.,the Cassites) 

 underlies the tale, it is certain that the writer has the same Cush in mind as in 

 P (verse 7). Delitzsch's view ( [Vo Lag das Parodies, p. 52 seq., and pp. 127- 

 129) of a close historical connection between the '< Babylonian " and " African " 

 Cush is untenable, though he correctly places the seven subdivisions of Cush 

 in Arabia and not in Africa. See above, p. 187. 



