Cham
'''Cham''' ('''חָם''', [[Regollic Hebrēisc]] '''Ḥam''', [[Tiberisc Hebrēisc]] '''Ḥām''', '''Ḫām''', [[Ge'ez sprǣc|Ge'ez]] '''Kam'''), be þǣre [[Cynnreccnessa Cnēorisbōce]], wæs sunu [[Noe]]s and se fæder [[Chus]]es, [[Mizraim]]es, [[Phut]]es, and [[Chanan]]es. [[David Rohl]] gecnǣwþ þās þēode swā þā [[Pēne]] þæs [[Land Puntes|Punt]].

== Ham in þǣre Biblioþēcan ==
Þēawlīce is gecēpt þæt Cham wæs ān þāra [[suna Noes]], þe tēah sūþwest intō [[Affrica]] and dǣlas þæs nēan [[Middel Ēast|Middlan Ēastes]], and wæs se forefæder þāra þēoda þǣr. Sēo [[Biblioþēce]] belimpþ tō [[Egypte|Egyptan]] swā "þæt land Chames" in (''[[Saltere]]'' 78:51; 105:23,27; 106:22; 1Ch 4:40). Þǣt Hebrēisce word for Egyptan wæs [[Mizraim]] (gewēne bōclīce mǣnþ ''[[Ūfeweard and Neoðeweard Egypte|þā tū land]]''), and wæs se nama ānes suna Chames. Þæt Egiptisce word for Egyptan wæs ''[[Chem|Khem]]'', þe fægerlīce wæs se fruma þæs naman ''Cham'', oþþe þurh [[sōnhwierfun]]e betwēonan sprǣcum. Þā naman Chames ōðra cildra efenlǣcaþ þā dǣlas wiþinnan Egyptan rīcscunge - [[Kush]], [[Chanan]], and [[Phut]].

Be ''Cnēorisbēc'' 9:20–25, ongann Noe tō tilienne [[wīnberie|wīnberian]] æfter þǣm [[drencflōd (saga)|flōde]], and druncnode sume dæge. Þā hwīle þe hē druncen wæs, læg hē þā limnacod in his [[teld]]e. Cham seah his fæder limnacodne, and cȳþde his brōðrum [[Sem]]e and [[Iafeth]]e þǣrymbe. Sem and Iafeth ēodon in þæt teld mid hira andwlītan in bewrigenum, and hine þeahton. Hwonne Noe wōc, wiste hē hwæt ''him belamp'', and wiergde Chanan, sunu Chames, tō bēone þā þēowas Semes and Iafethes.[http://bible.cc/genesis/9-25.htm]
<!--
The extent of the significance of this passage is debated, but the simplest interpretation considers uncovering the [[nakedness]] of his father to be a great [[taboo]], and the inaction of Ham (who chose instead to publicize and perhaps make light of the situation) to be what led Noah to deem Ham's judgement inferior to that of his more modest brothers. The statement by Noah "Cursed be Canaan" is thus interpreted by some as presaging a fatefully undesirable trait of ''immodesty'' that destined Ham's heir Canaan to be held low in society. 

Taking into account other uses of the phrase "...the nakedness of..." in Hebrew writings, and the fact that Noah ''knew what had been done to him'' - apparently something highly noticeable-- suggests it to be euphemistic [[innuendo]], a reference to a sexual act. Thus the act of "uncovering the nakedness" of the patriarch, performed without consent, constituted a great crime. Some interpreters add to this that Canaan, not Ham, was the object of the curse, since the curse was a result of Ham's sexual activity that had also resulted in the birth of Canaan, his youngest son.

The [[Talmud]] deduces two possible explanations (attributed to Rab and Rabbi Samuel) for what Ham did to Noah to warrant the curse.  (B. Talmud Sanhedrin 70a.)  According to one explanation, Ham [[Castration|castrated]] Noah, while the other says that Ham sexually abused Noah.  The argument from the text for castration goes this way:  Since Noah cursed Ham by his fourth son Canaan, Ham must have injured Noah with respect to a fourth son, by emasculating him, thus depriving Noah of the possibility of a fourth son.  The argument for abuse from the text draws an analogy between “and he saw” written in two places in the Bible:  With regard to Ham and Noah, it is written, “And Ham the father of Canaan saw the nakedness of his father (Noah)”; while in Genesis 34:2, it is written, “And when Shechem the son of Hamor saw her ([[Dinah]]), he took her and lay with her and defiled her.”  Thus this explanation deduces that similar abuse must have happened each time that the Bible uses the same language.  (See also [[Genesis Rabba|Genesis Rabbah]] 36:7; Leviticus Rabbah 17:5.)

This [[curse of Canaan|curse]] was likely connected to the conquest of Canaan by [[Israel]]. From a [[Judaeo-Christian]] standpoint, the conquest of Canaan is an instance of fulfilled prophecy. From a secular point of view, it is considered an example of later Hebrew writers attempting to justify the conquest of Canaan by retroactively cursing their progenitor.

Some argue that the curse parallels the blessing God grants to [[Abraham]] and his descendants, in that the promised land to be delivered to the descendants of Abraham's grandson [[Jacob]], was to be taken away from the descendants of Ham's son Canaan.

The conquest of Canaan and the curse, according to the [[Jubilees|Book of Jubilees]], are attributed, rather, to Canaan's steadfast refusal to join his elder brothers in Ham's allotment beyond the [[Nile]], and instead "squatting" in the inheritance of Shem, on the eastern shores of the [[Mediterranean]], in the region later promised to Abraham.

A few have used the [[curse of Canaan]] to justify [[slavery]], and later [[discrimination]] against [[black (people)|blacks]], arguing that Ham was the one who actually committed the sin, and that since he is the father of the black race, all of his descendants (not just those of his son Canaan) were cursed.

It has also been argued that the curse of Ham from Gen. 9:22, the passage in which he sees the nakedness of his father, means that Ham had actually had sexual intercourse with Noah's wife. There is evidence for this in a parallel passage in Leviticus 20:11 ''The man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness''. This may explain, some argue, why Noah cursed Canaan, the yet to be offspring from Ham and Noah's wife before it was ever born.

== The existence of Ham ==
Creationist scholars of mythology hold that some early civilizations came to worship humans deified as gods in the generations after the flood, perhaps owing to the extraordinary longevity of the first few generations after leaving the ark. Minimalist scholarship holds a parallel view, that many (but not all) early gods (or deified humans, e.g. [[Herakles]]) are representative of personified [[archetype]]s of races, i.e., their family trees being codified descriptions of the inter-relatedness of each race and tribe (with some of the older/earlier generations being more speculative). Both of these distinct viewpoints agree that there is a connection between the family tree of the characters (whether gods or men) and that of tribes and races (although the extent of that connection varies, both amongst the characters in question, and amongst the scholars).

In the minimalist view, the early tribal name either became seen by later generations as the name of the "old ones", and thus gradually evolved into that of a god, or else was deliberately transformed into the name of a god, demi-god or hero, for the purpose of making it easier to tell the tale of a tribe representatively.  However, minimalists generally prefer to avoid giving any credence to accounts of tribes being named for eponymous ancestors.

Counter arguments are often put forward that the connection is only between the [[Egyptian language|Egyptian]] word and the typical [[Hebrew phonology|''modern'' pronunciation]] of Hebrew ח as /χ/ ("kh") rather than /ḥ/ (as was the case with [[Biblical Hebrew language|biblical Hebrew]], and suggest that the appearance is lessened with the original Hebrew חם ''Ḥam'' considered as Northwest [[Semitic languages|Semitic]] /ḥ/ (such as in Hebrew, [[Phoenician language|Phoenician]], and [[Syriac language|Syriac]]). Further, ''Kam'', the version of the name in [[Ge'ez language|Ge'ez]]—a South Semitic language—is seemingly borrowed from Biblical Hebrew ''via'' the [[Hebrew Bible]] and perhaps does not reflect a native derivation of the word. However, the conversion between ''Khem'' and ''Ham'' corresponds with the widely occurring [[phonology|phonological]] [[sound change]] of ''Kh'' into ''X'', the [[voiceless velar fricative]] (the ''ch'' in ''[[loch]]'' rather than the ''X'' in ''[[exam]]''), that often happens over time, or during transcription from one language into another (e.g. ''[[Xerxes]]'' is the ancient Greek attempt at spelling the name ''Khshayārsha'').

In the [[19th century]], there was an erroneous [[Transcription (linguistics)|transcription]] of the Egyptian for ''[[Min (god)|Min]]'' as ''ḫm'' ("khem"), purely by coincidence. Since this ''Khem'' was worshipped most significantly in [[Akhmim]], the separate identity of ''Khem'' was reinforced, ''Akhmim'' being understood as simply a corruption of ''Khem''. However, ''Akhmim'' is a corruption of ''ḫm-mnw'', meaning ''Shrine of Min'', via the [[demotic]] form ''šmn''. The existence of a god named ''Khem'' was later understood as a faulty reading, but unfortunately it had already been enshrined in books written by [[E. A. Wallis Budge]]—now out of [[copyright]] and widely reprinted. Thus this error still finds a home among some Egyptologists, who often use it to identify Ham with the god Khem or Chem, in addition to the identification of Ham by the Greeks as the [[Titan (mythology)|Titan]] [[Cronos]]. (''See the article'' '''[[Min (god)]]''' ''for more details.'')

Nethertheless, since Khem (meaning black) was normally used to described the fertile soils by the Nile, it was sometimes used as an epithet for Min, as the god of fertility. Since Khem was also an Egyptian name for Egypt (precisely because it described the soil of the Nile valley), there is also an association with Ham, who represented the forefather of the north-east African nations including Egypt. Ham could plausibly be a name derived from Khem (Egypt), or vice versa, via sound change, due to the change in language between Egyptian and Hebrew, corresponding to the well known phonological change of /k/ into /kh/ into /x/ (voiceless velar fricative) into /h/.
-->
== Sēo ēac ==
* [[Suna Noes]]
* [[Wiergþu Chames]]
* [[Wīf on borde þǣre Arce]]

[[Flocc:Unƿǣre lēode]]
[[Flocc:Tanakh lēode]]
[[Flocc:Torah lēode]]
Cham (חָם, Regollic Hebrēisc Ḥam, Tiberisc Hebrēisc Ḥām, Ḫām, Ge'ez Kam), be þǣre Cynnreccnessa Cnēorisbōce, wæs sunu Noes and se fæder Chuses, Mizraimes, Phutes, and Chananes. David Rohl gecnǣwþ þās þēode swā þā Pēne þæs Punt.

 Ham in þǣre Biblioþēcan 
Þēawlīce is gecēpt þæt Cham wæs ān þāra suna Noes, þe tēah sūþwest intō Affrica and dǣlas þæs nēan Middlan Ēastes, and wæs se forefæder þāra þēoda þǣr. Sēo Biblioþēce belimpþ tō Egyptan swā "þæt land Chames" in (Saltere 78:51; 105:23,27; 106:22; 1Ch 4:40). Þǣt Hebrēisce word for Egyptan wæs Mizraim (gewēne bōclīce mǣnþ þā tū land), and wæs se nama ānes suna Chames. Þæt Egiptisce word for Egyptan wæs Khem, þe fægerlīce wæs se fruma þæs naman Cham, oþþe þurh sōnhwierfune betwēonan sprǣcum. Þā naman Chames ōðra cildra efenlǣcaþ þā dǣlas wiþinnan Egyptan rīcscunge - Kush, Chanan, and Phut.

Be Cnēorisbēc 9:20–25, ongann Noe tō tilienne wīnberian æfter þǣm flōde, and druncnode sume dæge. Þā hwīle þe hē druncen wæs, læg hē þā limnacod in his telde. Cham seah his fæder limnacodne, and cȳþde his brōðrum Seme and Iafethe þǣrymbe. Sem and Iafeth ēodon in þæt teld mid hira andwlītan in bewrigenum, and hine þeahton. Hwonne Noe wōc, wiste hē hwæt him belamp, and wiergde Chanan, sunu Chames, tō bēone þā þēowas Semes and Iafethes.

 Sēo ēac 
 Suna Noes
 Wiergþu Chames
 Wīf on borde þǣre Arce

Flocc:Unƿǣre lēode
Flocc:Tanakh lēode
Flocc:Torah lēode