I. Cisii (.h)sephus Xovaor) "reigned over the Ethi- opians" [Afririin Cushites] ; Jerome (in Qiicest. Ilehr.in (itiii'.i.), " 15 )th the .1 rabid/i h'l/iiojna, wliich was the parent ci >unt ry, and the African, its colony" [Abyssinia = ( Uish in tlie Vnlg. and Syr.] ; but these gradations (con- lining Cush (irst to the western shore of the Red Sea, and then cxteniling the nation to the Arabian Peninsu- la) reipiirc further extension; modern discoveries tally with this most ancient ethnographical record in placing Cusli on the ]Mi])hrates and the Persian (Udf. When Kosenmidlcr (Scholia in Grs. ad loe.) claiins Josephns for an Asiiitic Cush as well as an African one, he ex- ceeds tlie testimony of the historian, who says no more tlian tliat "the Klhiopiana of liis day called Ihemselces Cushites, and not oidy they, but alfthe Asiatics also, ijarc ll„m that namg" (.1 «/. i, C, 2). But .Tosephus does UMt !<[)e<-ify what Ethiopians he means: the form of his sialcmcut leads to the opposite conclusion rather, that the IClliiopians were Africans viercly, excluded from all the Asiatics | I'.Tro iavrujv re Kai tmv tv Ty 'A<ri(f ttc'iv- Twi'), the iai'Tihi' referring to the Ai'.J.'oTfc just men- tioned. (For a l)etter interpretation of Joseph us here, see Vohiey, .S;/.-,/h,„c Ccr/r. ,1,., Il<-hrcn.r, in (Enrres, v, •11\.) The earlist empire, that of Nimrod, was Cushite, literally and properly, not per cakiclircsin, as Heercn, Hun.sen, and others woidil have it. Sir W. Jones {On Ihi' Ori;iin awl Fanillicx of Xa/ion.i, in Worh, iii, 202) sliows an ai)preciatioii of the wide extent of the Cns/iitc race in priinieval times, which is much more consistent with the discoveries of recent times than the specula- tions of the neociitical school prove to be: "The chil- dren of Ham," he says, " founded in Iran (the country ol the lower Euphrates) the monarchy of the first Chal"- dieaus, invented letters, etc." (compare HosenmUller. as above (pioted). AccorcUng to Vohiey. the term K/liio- jnan, coextensive with Cush, included even the Ilin- drts; lie seems, however, to mean the southern Arabians, who were, it is certain, sometimes called Indians (in
Menohf/io Graico, part ii, p. 197. " Felix Arabia TiKJln vocatur . . . ubi felix vocatur India Arabica, ul. ab .^thiopica et Gangetica distinguatur," Assemani, Bibl. Orien). Ill, ii, 569), especially the Yemenese; Jones, in- deed, on the grotnid of Sanscrit affinities (" Cus or Cush being among the sons of Brahma, i. e. among the pro- genitors of the Ilindiis, and at the head of an ancient pedigree preserved in the Eumai/an"), goes so far as to say, "We can hardly doubt that the Cush of Closes and Yalmic was an ancestor of tlie Indian race." Jones, however, might have relied too strongly on the forged Purana of A\'ilford (.4 slatic Researches, iii, 432) ; still, it is certain that Oriental tradition largely (though in its usual exaggerated tone) confirms the Mosaic statements about the sons of Noah and their settlements. " In the Rozif ul-Suff'ah it is written that God bestowed on Ham nine sons," the two which are mentioned at the head of the list {Hind, Sinil, with which comp. Abulfaragius as quoted in one of our notices above), expressly connected the Hindus with Ham, although not through Cash, who occurs as the sixth among the Hamite brethren. See the entire extract from the Khelussut itl-Akhhar of Khondemir in Eosenm tiller {Bill. (k'Ofjr. Append, to ch, iii, vol. i, p. 109 {Bihl. Cah?^. Bohlen {Genesis, ad loc), who has a long but indistinct notice of Cush, with his Sanscrit predilections, is for extending Cush " as far as the dark India," claiming for his view the sanction of Rosenm., Winer, and Schumann. When Job (xxviii, 19) speaks of "?/ie topaz of Ethiopia'' ("C^ST'lOS), Bohlen finds a Sanscrit Avord in HI- 2, and consequent- ly a link between India and Cush ("dl3, Ethinjna). He refers to the Syriac, Chalctean, and Saadias versions as having Imlia for Cush, and (after Braun, De Vest. Sa- cerd. i, 115) assigns Rabbinical authority for it. Asse- mani, who is by Bohlen referred to in a futile hope of extracting evidence for the identification of Cush and India (of the Hindus), has an admirable dissertation on the people of Arabia {Bibl. Or. Ill, ii, 552 sq.) ; one ele- ement of the Arab population he derives from Cush (see below). AVe thus conclude that the children of Ham, in the line of Cush, had very extensive settlements hi Asia, as far as the Euphrates and Persian Gulf at least, and probably including the district of the Indus ; while in Africa they both spread widely in Abyssinia, and had settlements apparently among their kinsmen, the Egyptians : this we feel warranted in assuming on the testimony of the Arabian geographers ; e. g. Abulfeda (in his section on Erji/pt, tables, p. 110 in the original, p. 151 trans, by Reiuaud) mentions a Cush, or rather Kus, as the most important city in Egypt aft«r the capital Fosthaht : its port on the Red Sea was Cossejr, and it was a place of great resort by the IMohammedans of the west on pilgrimage. " The sons of Cush, where they once got possession, were never totally' ejected. If they were at any time driven ^^vay, they returned after a time and recovered their ground, for which reason I make no doubt but many of them in process of time re- turned to Chaldrea, and mixed with those of their fam- ily who resided there. Hence arose the tradition that the Babylonians not only conquered Egypt, but that the learning of the Egyptians came originally from Chal- da?a; and the like account from the Eg>n>tians, that peojile from their country had coufpiered Babylon, and that the wisdom of the" Chakteans was derived from them" (Bryant, Ort Ancient E(/ijpt, m Works, vi, 250). See Cl'sh.