Genesis 9:24 to 10:32

The Spread of Nations

Image Caption: Table of Nations (Genesis 10).Source: Satellite relief map of Middle East (Wikimedia) [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Satellite_relief_map_of_Middle_East.png]

Curse of Canaan⟡ Genesis 9:24-29

To understand the rhetorical purpose of any part of Genesis, one must discern the role it plays in the book's overall strategy for its intended readers. Because the book of Genesis bears indicators of having been periodically supplemented during its development, modern readers may need to grapple with subtle changes of perspective among the editorial strata of the book.

Genesis 9:24-29, which portrays Noah exposed in a drinken state and his son Ham as a wanton gauker, is a dismal denouement to the flood story, which thus ends as it began with a scene of human debauchery. When Noah sobers, he brings a curse on Ham's son, befitting Ham's contempt toward his father, which propels the story of final human judgment still further into the future.

The account of the curse of Canaan, in Genesis 9:24-29, seems intended to provide rationale for Israel's conquest of Canaan, when Israel was tasked with removing Canaanite peoples and cultural influence from the land God had promised Abram (see Genesis 12:7; 15:13-16; 17:8; Numbers 13:2; Deuteronomy 7:2; Joshua 1:6, 11; 23:7-13; Judges 1). Ostensibly, the story of the curse of Canaan supports Israel's conquest of Canaan by characterizing Canaan as an accursed people descended from one given to wanton impropriety. As elsewhere in Genesis, stories about tribal patriarchs come to characterize their descendents, as well:

Genesis 9:20-23

The following sin of Ham, the father of Canaan, is an act of disrespect and lewdness akin to that between the sons of God and the daughters of Man that had formerly moved YHWH to destroy the earth.

Because the sin of Ham had been to disrespect the sanctity of the father–son relation, Noah chooses to curse Ham not directly, but relationally, by cursing Ham's own son, Canaan. The curse is thus continuous, because it is leveled against Ham's lineage.

Genesis 9:24-27

With the sobering of Noah, the curse of Canaan follows. This prophetic passage will grant the tribes of Israel justification for YHWH's holy war against the Canaanites and his eventual edict commissioning Israel to exterminate Canaan from the promised land.

Genesis 9:28-29

The last two verses of the denouement are a resumption of the genealogy of Genesis 5.

Seventy Nations⟡ Genesis 10:1-32

It is no coincidence that the final form of the Table of Nations (Genesis 10:1-32) should be centered on the land of Canaan, the intersection of regions populated by descendants of Shem, Japheth, and Ham. The compiler who included the account of Noah's curse of Canaan (Genesis 9:24-29) was making a polemic point, but he was also transitioning to a worldwide vision that depicts the promised land at its center.

It is also not coincidental that the Table of Nations accounts for just 70 nations (excluding Nimrod in 10:8–12) since according to Deuteronomy 32:8,

When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
when he separated the sons of men,
he fixed the boundaries of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of Israel / God.

The Masoretic Hebrew text has 'sons of Israel' (bene yisraʾel); however, the LXX and Qumran text 4QDeut^j witness an original 'sons of God' (bene ʾelohim), saying that God divided world nations in accordance with the number of his 'sons' in the heavenly council. Seventy is a number often applied to administrative councils (e.g., Jacob's descendants in Egypt [Exodus 1:5], elders of Israel [Exodus 24:1-2; Numbers 11:16-17, 24-26], and it continued to be applied even until the Sanhedrin council [Sanhedrin 1:4]), so it should not surprise us that the author of Deuteronomy 32:8 expected God's heavenly assembly to comprise 70 'sons of God', as well.

The Nimrod section (Genesis 10:8-12) and the triangular border of Canaan (Genesis 10:19) are commonly regarded as supplements to an earlier version of the Table of Nations that had 70 nations.

Image Caption: Relief map of Israel showing the location of Canaan's border cities mentioned in Genesis 10:19. Source: Israel Relief Map (Open Bible) [https://a.openbible.info/labs/ai-maps/images/1024/classic-swiss-style-shaded-relief-map-1.jpg] According to Genesis 10:19, "the borders of Canaan reached from Sidon toward Gerar as far as Gaza, and then toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboyim, as far as Lasha." The identification of לָֽשַׁע Lasha ('Fissure') is disputed. Ancient and modern historical geographers (including Targum Jerusalem, Eusebius' Onomasticon, Jerome, M.G. Easton, 'Lasha' in Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 3d edn, 1897) identify it with a ravine, Kallirrhoë / Callirrhoe (Ayn al-Zara), on the east shore of the Dead Sea, though some contend this site may have become established too late (first century BC) to qualify as a Canaanite border waypoint. The city at Tell Dan (Tell el-Qadi) formerly called לַיִשׁ Laish (Judges 18:7, 14, 27–29), לֶשֶׁם Leshem (Joshua 19:47), or לַ֖יְשָׁה Laishah (Isaiah 10:30) seems lexically unrelated, since all forms lack the final `ayin of לָֽשַׁע; still, if a miscopying had mistakenly appended final `ayin to Canaanite Laish / Leshem / Laishah, a northern city known to have been allied with Sidon, this city could function as a waypoint that brings the Canaanite border loop back toward Sidon, from which the account of Genesis 10:19 began.

tôledôṯ of the Sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, Japheth

Rhetoric

This patronymic genealogical lineage shows the result of the dispersion of ethnic subgroups after the societal judgment account that follows (Gen. 11:1-9). It is in reverse order with the following passages, therefore, following the pattern: first the consequences, then the cause.

Allen P. Ross has noted the role of this ethnic genealogical table as outlining the relation of Israel to those nations most important to Israel's emergence and to their anthropological, linguistic, political, and geographical identity as a people of the world (Creation and Blessing: A Guide to the Study and Exposition of Genesis [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988], ch. 16/pp. 221-32).

Genre

The section is a mixture of horizontal and vertical genealogies. The role of the genealogy is mostly that of a horizontal genealogy (especially in regard to the lines of Japheth and Ham), though it finishes with a vertical concern with the elect line of Shem.

Structure

Symbolism

The genealogy is trifid, and the total number of foreign nations, seventy (70), continues the 3 x 7 patterning observed in Genesis 1 and 5.

Seventy is a multiple of primes 7 and 5 and 2:

The number 70 symbolizes administrative totality.

Seventy is the number of Jacob’s family that went to Egypt: ‘Seventy souls went down to Egypt to begin the Hebrews' Egyptian exile’ (Genesis 46:27).

Deuteronomy 32:8-9 says:

⁸ When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
when he divided all mankind,
he set up boundaries for the peoples
according to the number of the sons of Israel / God.
⁹ For YHWH’s portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted inheritance.

Seventy elders were assembled in the desert by Moses at God's command (Numbers 11:16-30).

The Greek Torah (Septuagint) was allegedly a translation by a college of 70 scholars (hence LXX).

The later Sanhedrin was made up of 70 ruling judges (Sanhedrin 1:4).

Genealogy of Noah: Nation Migrations

Image Caption: Genealogy of Noah in the Table of Nations (Genesis 10).Source: Satellite relief map of Middle East (Wikimedia) [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Satellite_relief_map_of_Middle_East.png]

Owing to the possiblity that the compiler of Noah's genealogy in Genesis 10 inherited distinct tribal traditions or to the possibility that Noah's genealogy conflates descendency with geographical or political proximity, three nations are listed twice, suggesting their peoples came from both Ham and Shem. They are Sheba (10:7, 28); Havilah (10:7, 29); and Ludim / Lud (10:13, 22) (cf. John Day, Table of Nations).

Image Caption: Map of the Table of Nations in Genesis 10. Source: Satellite relief map of Middle East (Wikimedia) [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Satellite_relief_map_of_Middle_East.png] Regarding Sheba and Havilah, it may be reasonable to infer that both Hamitic and Semitic tribal traditions claim them — socio-linguistic people groups were known to have migrated geographically or to have shifted linguistically or politically over time. As to Ludim / Lud, migration may account for at least subgroup relocation and their linguistic assimilation to that of their settlement region, whether Anatolian or Caucasian.

Recent Human Migrations by Cultural Era

Image Caption: Recent Human Migrations by Era. Sources: Early human migrations: Coastal migration (Wikipedia) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_human_migrations#/media/File:Early_migrations_mercator.svg] According to DNA research on indigenous peoples, the so-called "recent dispersal" of modern humans took place beginning 70,000 to 50,000 years ago. This migration led to the spread of modern humans throughout the world. In a broad view, this comports with the claims of Genesis 10, which maps the distribution of neighboring nations of Canaan as a result of descendency from three common-ancestor groups Shem, Ham, and Japeth.

Source: Early human migrations (Wikipedia) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_human_migrations]

Emiran culture emerged in the Levant (Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Jordan, Egypt and Arabia) between the Middle Paleolithic and the Upper Paleolithic periods. It is the oldest known of the Upper Paleolithic cultures and remains an enigma as it has no clear African progenitor. Some scholars conclude that the Emiran is indigenous to the Levant. However, others say it reflects technological trends observed previously in North Africa, at old sites such as Taramsa 1 in Egypt, "which contains modern human remains dating to 75,000 years ago".

Source: Emiran (Wikipedia) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emiran]

The Aurignacians were an early modern human culture in Europe, existing from about 43,000 to 26,000 years ago during the Upper Paleolithic period. They are known for advanced tool-making, cave art, and symbolic expressions, marking significant developments in human culture. An Aurignacian culture is also found in the Levant, having blade technology similar to that of European Aurignacians, succeeding the Emiran and Early Ahmarian in the same area of West Asia and likely related to them. The Levantine Aurignacian may have preceded the European Aurignacian culture.

Source: Aurignacian (Wikipedia) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurignacian]

Migrations Measured by Genetic Markers

Image Caption: Human genetic migration of female mtDNA versus male Y-chromosome. Sources: [https://brewminate.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Language18.jpg] and Mitochondrial DNA (Wikipedia) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_DNA] and Y chromosome (Wikipedia) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y_chromosome] There may be value in comparing the social groupings of Genesis 10 with the genetic groupings of modern research into the origins and spread of peoples on Earth. Through discoveries in genetic research, it is possible to map human migration patterns by sampling key genetic markers of indigenous people groups and remains of their ancestors. As key genetic markers mutate, they become trace markers that characterize only certain groups and the subgroups that descend from them.

In human reproduction, mitochondria are inherited almost exclusively from the mother. Mitochondria in sperm are usually destroyed by the egg cell after fertilization. So, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) with its trace variations proves to be a tell-tale marker of female inheritcance in the history of the human genome. The fact that mitochondrial DNA is maternally inherited enables genealogical researchers to trace maternal lineage far back in time.

Y-chromosomal DNA, on the other hand, is only paternally inherited, so it has been used by genetic historians to trace patrilineal history. It is here that we find opportunity for comparing the Genesis 10 genealogical record with genetic record of Y-chromosome migrations, because Genesis 5 and 10, as well as the distribution of Y-chromosomal DNA, tell a story of male decendency.

Biblical Adam versus Y-chromosomal Adam

Image Caption: Map of the distribution of Y-chromosome DNA haplogroups by trace markers. Sources: Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup (Wikipedia) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup] and [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/World_Map_of_Y-DNA_Haplogroups.png] The Y-chromosomal 'most recent common ancestor' (Y-MRCA), referred to as 'Y-chromosomal Adam', is the most recent common ancestor from whom all living humans are patrilineally descended. Y-chromosomal Adam is alleged to have lived around 236,000 years ago in Africa. If we follow the record of Genesis 5, 6–9, and 10, the Y-chromosomal most recent common ancestor ought be biblical Noah, not biblical Adam — that is, if biblical flood were universal and Noah were the sole patrilineal source of Y-chromosomal DNA among all survivors of the great flood.

It should be obvious that the human genetic history of patrilineage depicted by Y-chromosome DNA differs significantly from the patrilineal descendency traced in Genesis from Adam to the descendents of Noah. The Table of Nations was evidently not intended to account for the derivation of every people group on Earth at the time of its writing — instead, it features a representative 70 nations that shared geopolitical currency with the inhabitants of Canaan, particularly with the people of Israel who would come to possess it (cf. Richard P. Aschmann, "The Genesis 10 Table of Nations and Y-Chromosomal DNA" [February 17, 2022] [https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/Genesis10.pdf]).

Shem, Ham, Japheth Y-chromosomal Haplogroups

Image Caption: Standard Y-chromosome haplogroup alignment with Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Source: Richard P. Aschmann, "The Genesis 10 Table of Nations and Y-Chromosomal DNA" (February 17, 2022) [https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/Genesis10.pdf] as adapted from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup] Richard P. Aschmann ("The Genesis 10 Table of Nations and Y-Chromosomal DNA", 2022) plotted Noahic descendency on the standard Y-chromosome genogram to show Shem, Ham, Japheth as deriving indirectly from intermediary haplogroup mutations. This model requires interpreting biblical 'son of' in a broader sense: 'descendent of'.

Image Caption: Genogram of Y-chromosome haplogroups arranged to show Noahic descendency. Source: Richard P. Aschmann, "The Genesis 10 Table of Nations and Y-Chromosomal DNA" (February 17, 2022) [https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/Genesis10.pdf] Leif A. Boström ("Genetic Table of Nations", 2014) rearranged the standard Y-chromosome haplogroup genogram to show Noahic dispersion. To accomplish this, Boström proposes to reverse the standard model descendency of Y-chromosome haplogroups within the 'Ham' family tree.

Image Caption: Y-chromosome haplogroups rearranged to show Noahic descendency. Source: Richard P. Aschmann, "The Genesis 10 Table of Nations and Y-Chromosomal DNA" (February 17, 2022) [https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/Genesis10.pdf] Accordingly, Aschmann restructured his standard Y-chromosome flow diagram to show a new starting point for Noah's haplogroup ('IJK'), matching Boström's reversed structure for the Hamitic tree (reversed Y-chromosome mutations shown using red lines whose side branches are not reversed).

Noahic Tribal Distributions by Location

Image Caption: Map of Table of Nations locations for Shem, Ham, and Japheth by descendency. Source: Richard P. Aschmann, "The Genesis 10 Table of Nations and Y-Chromosomal DNA" (February 17, 2022) [https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/Genesis10.pdf] Plotting the descendency of families in Genesis 10 on a map of the ancient Near East shows a high correlation to relative geographical dispersion. This does not prove that Genesis 10 is either a record of genetic descendencies or of historical migrations alone, but it does suggest that the genealogist who compiled the list of nations was tracking people groups based on relative geographical distribution by clans, families, and groups.

Ancient Semitic Language Locations

Image Caption: Map of ancient Semitic language locations. Source: Richard P. Aschmann, "The Genesis 10 Table of Nations and Y-Chromosomal DNA" (February 17, 2022) [https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/Genesis10.pdf] Plotting ancient Semitic language groups on a map shows how ancient socio-linguistic groups disbursed. While Genesis 10 is not a record of language groups per se, it stands to reason that language groupings would correlate to genetic groupings by clans and families.

Opening Summary: Genesis 10:1

Genesis 10:1 — Sons of Noah Opening

Shem

The father of all the Semitic nations. (Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962) 4:321. New Bible Dictionary (1972) 1175. Josephus, Antiquities l.vi.4. Matthew Poole, Commentary on the Holy Bible (1685) 1:28)

Source: Bill Cooper, After the Flood [http://www.ldolphin.org/cooper/appen1.html]

Ham

'Yt is observed that Cham, and his famely, were the only far Travellers, and Straglers into diverse unknowne countries, searching; exploring and sitting downe in the same; as also yt is said of his famely that what country soever the children of Cham happened to possesse, there beganne both the Ignoraunce of true godliness...and that no inhabited countryes cast forth greater multytudes, to raunge and stray into diverse remote Regions.' Thus far the comments of one William Strachey, who added to these words in 1612 the following damning indictment, accusing Ham's posterity of instigating: the ignoraunce of the true worship of God...the inventions of Heathenisme, and [the] adoration of falce godes and the Devill...' cit. Hogden, p. 262. See Bibliography. (Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962) 2:515. New Bible Dictionary (1972) 500. Josephus, Antiquities 1.vi.2. Matthew Poole, Commentary on the Holy Bible (1685) 1:27)

Source: Bill Cooper, After the Flood [http://www.ldolphin.org/cooper/appen2.html]

Japheth

The father of all the Indo-European peoples, it would be surprising indeed if his name had gone unremembered among them. As it is, we find that the early Greeks worshipped him as Iapetos, or Iapetus, whom they regarded as the son of heaven and earth, the father of many nations. Likewise, in the ancient Sanskrit vedas of India he is remembered as Pra-Japati, the sun and ostensible Lord of Creation. As time went by, his name was further corrupted, being assimilated into the Roman pantheon as Iupater, and eventually Jupiter (see Appendix 11). None of these names are of Greek, Indian or Latin origin, but are merely corruptions of the original name of Japheth. Both the early Irish Celts and the early Britons traced the descent of their royal houses from Japheth, as did also the early Saxons who corrupted his name to Sceaf,--pr. 'sheaf' or 'shaif' (see chapter 7). (Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962) 2:802. New Bible Dictionary (1972) 599. Josephus, Antiquities 1.vi.1. Matthew Poole, Commentary on the Holy Bible (1685) 1:26)

Source: Bill Cooper, After the Flood [http://www.ldolphin.org/cooper/appen3.html]

Genesis 10:2 — Sons of Japheth Opening

Genesis 10:2 — Sons of Japheth Nations

Image Caption: Map of Japheth Nations. Source: Table of Nations: Japheth (Bible Mapper) [https://biblemapper.com/blog/images/hi-res/TableOfNationsJapheth_high.jpg] A conservative estimation of the locale of the people groups mentioned for Japheth would have them in the regions of Anatolia, extending from the Caucus Mountains in the east to the Aegean Islands in the west. Many of these people groups continued to migrate northward into Eurasia and westward into Europe.

Magog

Magogites were later known to the Greeks as Scythians, according to Josephus. However, in the subsequent history of the peoples of Ashchenaz, who are later identified as Scythians (Gk. Skythai, and Assyr. Askuza), it is more likely that Magogites had been assimilated into the peoples of Ashchenaz, forming only a part of the Scythian hordes. Irish Celts trace their lineage from Japheth through Magog. (Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962) 3:226. New Bible Dictionary (1972) 'Gog and Magog' 480-1 Josephus, Antiquities 1.vi.1. P 1:26)

Madai

The Madaeans are better known as the Medes. The Assyrians recorded the name as Amada; the Greeks as the Medai; and the Old Persian inscriptions speak of them as the Mada. The earliest surviving reference to the Medes is found in secular documents, such as the inscriptions of Shalmaneser III, king of Assyria from ca. 858–824 BC, which tell us that he invaded the land of the Medes to plunder their horses. Both Strabo and Herodotus confirm that the Medes were of Indo-European (Japhetic) origin, and that their language was of this group. After 631 BC, the Medes joined with the people of Askuza (or the Ashchenazim) and those of Gomer (the Cimmerians) in an attempt to throw off the Assyrian yoke. (Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962) 3:220. New Bible Dictionary (1972) 'Medes' 801-2. Josephus, Antiquities 1.vi.1. P 1:26)

Tubal

The descendants of Tubal are attested in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser I, king of Assyria ca. 1100 BC, who refers to them as the Tabali whose area of settlement (Tabal) was adjacent to that of Tegarama. Josephus recorded the name of Tubal's descendants as the Thobelites, who were later known as the Iberes. In Josephus' day, the Romans called their land Iberia. It covered what is now the state of Georgia, whose capital still bears the name Tbilisi. After crossing the Caucasus mountains, this people migrated north-east, giving their name to the river Tobol and to the city of Tobolsk. (Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962) 4:717. New Bible Dictionary (1972) 'Meshech' 811. Josephus, Antiquities 1.vi.1)

Meshech

The descendants of Meshech are often spoken of in association with those of Tubal. The Assyrians mention Tabal and Musku, while Herodotus writes of the Tiberanoi and Moschoi. An early reference to the peoples of Meshech is in an inscription of ca. 1200 BC that tells us how they overran the Hittite kingdom. An inscription of Tiglath-pileser I of Assyria from ca. 1100 BC says the Mus-ka-a-ia were able to put into the field an army of 20,000 men. The activities of this people are also reported by Tukulti-ninurta II, Ashurnasipal II, Sargon and Shalmaneserr III, the latter of whom refers to them as the Mushki. Josephus knew them as the Mosocheni (LXX Mosoch), also known as the Cappadocians. Later writers have pointed out that the name of Meshech is preserved in the tribal name of the Muscovites of Russia, after whom Moscow is named (Russian 'Moskva' is akin to Assyrian 'Musku'). (Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962) 3:357. New Bible Dictionary (1972) 811. Josephus, Antiquities 1.vi.l. P 1:26)

Tiras

Merenptah of Egypt, who reigned in the 13th century BC, provides the earliest reference to the people of Tiras, recording their name as Tursha (or Turusha) and describing them as invaders from the north. The Greeks knew them as the Tyrsenoi, a nation of marauding pirates. Josephus identifies them as a tribe known to the Romans as the Thirasians (that is, Thracians). Tiras was venerated by his descendants as Thuras (i.e., Thor), the god of war. The river Athyras is named after him, and it is not unlikely that the Etruscans owe to him their name and descent. The city of Troas (Troy) also appears to perpetuate his name, as does the Taurus mountain range. (Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962) 4:652. New Bible Dictionary (1972) 1283. Josephus, Antiquities 1.vi.1. P 1:26)

Source: Bill Cooper, After the Flood [http://www.ldolphin.org/cooper/appen3.html]

Genesis 10:3 — Sons of Japheth: Gomer

Genesis 10:4 — Sons of Japheth: Javan

TEXT

Genesis 10:5 — Sons of Japheth Closing

TEXT

Genesis 10:6 — Sons of Ham Opening

TEXT

Genesis 10:6 — Sons of Ham: Put

TEXT

Genesis 10:7 — Sons of Ham: Cush

TEXT

Genesis 10:8-12 — Sons of Ham: Nimrod Polemic

E.A. Speiser probably rightly identified Nimrod’s 'Cush' with the Iranian people called 'Kassites', originally from the Zagros Mountains, who came to rule Babylonia from the 16th to the 12th centuries BC.

Legend says that the man later known as Sargon of Akkad was born in the town of Azipiranu on the Euphrates. At birth, his priestess mother allegedly hid him in a basket of rushes, which she set afloat on the river. The basket floated to Kish, where he was adopted by Aqqi ('water-drawer'), who was a gardener and mentor for young Sargon. Eventually, Sargon became cup-bearer (prime minister) to Urzababa, king of Kish. Later, Sargon himself became king of Kish, then upon moving his capital to Akkad, he became 'King of Sumer and Akkad'. Sargon of Akkad adopted the throne-name Šarru-kîn (hence, Sargon), which in Eastern-Semitic (Akkadian) means “the true (or legitimate) King,” suggesting that some doubted his regal legitimacy (so Yigal Levin, Nimrod, Mighty Hunter and King).

Sargon is the first known Semitic-speaking Mesopotamian ruler. He adapted Sumerian cuneiform to extend the influence of his own Akkadian language. He ruled over a vast Mesopotamian region for 56 years. According to the Sumerian King List, after the flood, kingship came down from heaven and was granted to the city of Kish.

Because of parallel attributions, is tempting to identify biblical Nimrod with Sargon or his grandson Naram-Sin. Both traditions describe a reign in Sumer/Shinʿar, an empire builder extending rule from Akkad and Babylon north to Assyria. Both traditions depict a ruler of extraordinary prowess. Both traditions regard this king as the first postdiluvian to wield imperial power.

The Table of Nations depicts Nimrod as a descendant of Noah, though the eratic form of Nimrod's account marks it as a later polemic accretion. Shinʿar appears in both the Table of Nations 'Nimrod excursis' (Genesis 10:8-12) and in the Tower of Babel account (Genesis 11:1-9), which suggests that Nimrod, the builder of the tower, is the archetype of the rebel king — indeed, the verb from which נִמְרוֹד 'Nimrod' derives, מרד, means 'to rebel'. Nimrod is the archetypal 'Rebel' — the antithesis of the anointed kingship YHWH will establish in the course of salvation history.

Genesis 10:13-14 — Sons of Ham: Mitzraim

TEXT

Genesis 10:15-18 — Sons of Ham: Canaan

TEXT

Genesis 10:19 — Sons of Ham: Border of Canaan Excursis

TEXT

Genesis 10:20 — Sons of Ham Closing

TEXT

Genesis 10:21-22 — Sons of Shem Opening

TEXT

Genesis 10:23 — Sons of Shem: Aram

TEXT

Genesis 10:24 — Sons of Shem: Arpachshad

TEXT

Genesis 10:25 — Sons of Shem: Arpachshad: Eber

TEXT

Genesis 10:26-30 — Sons of Shem: Arpachshad: Eber: Joktan

TEXT

Genesis 10:31 — Sons of Shem Closing

TEXT

Genesis 10:32 — Sons of Noah Closing

TEXT

Sources