feated and continually harassing the Israelites, were at last totally destroyed by the tribe of Simeon (1 Chron. iv, 43). Even after the return of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity there were survivors of five of the Canaanitish nations, with whom alliances had beed made by the Jews, contrary to the commands which had been given them. Some of the Canaanites, according to ancient tradition (see D'Herbelot, Bib" Uoth, Orient, s. v. Falasthin), left the land of Canaan on the approach of Joshua, and emigrated to the coast of Africa (to Armenia, according to Ritter, Erdk, vii, 586). Prooopius (Z>e BeUo Vandalico, ii, 10) relates that there were in Numidia, at Tigisis (TVn^), two columns, on which were inscribed, in Phoenician char- acters, ** We are those who fled from the face of Joshua, the robber, the son of Naue." (See Bochart, PhaUg, i, 24 ; Michaelis, Lowe of Mote^ art 81, voL i, p. 176, Smith's transl. ; Bachiene, I, ii, 1 sq. ; Michaelis, Sfid-^ leg. i, 166 sq. ; Hamelsveld, iii, 81 sq.)— Kitto, Cgdop. s. V. See Phonicia.
lY. Ckaracterietice. — Beyond their chariots (see above) we have no clew to any manners or custonu of the Canaanites. Like the Phoenicians, they were probably given to com- merce, and thus the name doubtiess became in later times an occasional syno- nym for a merchant (Job xli, 6; Ppdv. xxxi, 24; comp. Isa. xxiii, 8, 11; Hos. xii,2; Zeph. 1,11. See Kenrick, Pkcmiciay p. 232). Under the name Kanana they appear on the Egyptian monuments, distinguished by a coat of mail and helmet, and the use of spears, javelins, and a battie-axe similar to that of Egypt (Wilkinson, i, 403, abridgm.).
Of the language of the Canaanites littie can be said. On the one hand, being — if the genealogy of Gen. x be rightly understood — Hamites, there could be no af- finity between their language and that of the Israelites who were descendants of Shem. On the other is the fact that Abram and Jacob, shortiy after their entrance to the country, seem able to hold converse with them, and also that the names of Canaanite persons and places which we possess are translatable into Hebrew. Such are Melchizedek, Hamor, Shechem, Sisera, Eph- rath, and also a great number of the names of places. (For an examination of this interesting but obscure subject, see Gesenius, Hebr. Spr. p. 223-225.) See Canaan, Lanouage or.
The '* Nethinim," or servants of the Temple, seem to have originated in the dedication of captives taken in war from the petty states surrounding the Israel- ites. See Nethikim. If this was the case, and if they were maintained in number fh>m similar sources, there must be many non-Israelite names in the lists of their families which we possess in Ezra ii, 43-54; Neh. vii, 46-56. Several of the names in these cata- logues, such as Sisera, Mehunim, Nephushim, are the same as those which we know to be foreign, and doubt- less others would be found on examination. The Gib- eonites especially were native Canaanites, who, al- though reduced to a state of serfdom, were allowed to exist among the Israelites. See Gibeonitb.
V. Conquest of Conoan.—The arbitrary and forci- ble invasion of the land of Canaan by the Israelites, the violent and absolute dispossession of its inhabit- ants by them, and- the appropriation of their property — above all, the avowed purpose and actual warfare of utter extermination on their part respecting those who had never misused them, against whom they.
Canaanitish Enemies of the Ancient Egyptians.
CANAANTTE
66
CANAANTTE
eoold neitlier exhibit nor pretend to any raeh dalm as is acknowledged as a cause of hostility or right to the soil among civilized nations, has given grave of- fenoe to modem rationalists, and occasioned no little difficolty to pions believers in the economy of the Old Testament. The example has even been pleaded in Justification of the shameftil outrages committed by Christians upon the North^American Indians, as it 'was by the Spaniards in their savage campaigns against the peaoefol and highly cultivated Mexicans and Peruvians ; nor can it b^ doubted that the relent- less spirit evinced in the sanguinary history of the Sxode was largely reflected in the stem and martial seal of Cromwell and the Puritans. Without at- tempting to vindicate all the details of the war under Joshua, which in some instences (e. g. in the circum- stances attending the punishment of Achan [q.v.], who, by reason of his complicity with the Canaanites in respect to the ban against them, was regarded as a tiaitor, and dealt with summarily, as by a court-mar- tial, or rather by **lynch-law") appears to have tran- scended even the rigorous programme contemplated in ite inception, although it probably went no farther in severity than the rode judgment of Uioee charged with or engaged in the execution of the scheme deem- ed needful for the ends in view, we are yet called upon to investigate the grounds upon which the meas- ure, as a whole, has been defended or may be justi- fied ; and this is the more imperative, inasmuch as the warflure and occupation themselves were not simply iuffered while in progress, or passed over as unavoid- able after their occurrence, but positively, repeatedly, and strictly enjoined, with all Uieir essential features of so-called atrocity or injustice, by special divine command, accompanied by the most awfUl sanctions direct from heaven itself. The question properly re- lates to two somewhat distinct pointe : 1. The right ofthe Israelites to tiie territory itself; and, 2. The mo- rality of wsrfkre in which no quarter was to be given, and no property of the enemy to be spared ; the con- sideration of these, however, is so connected, both in the similarity ofthe ol^ections and the common ground of vindication, that we may most conveniently treat them together.