Canaan and the Canaanites

CANAAN and CANAANITES — A people who in ancient times inhabited Palestine.
I. NAME — It is one of the names by which the Old Testament designates the territory occupied by the Israelites.

The name is found in the el-Amarna letters (ca. 1375 B.C.) in the form kinaḥḥi (kinaḥna, kinaḥni). The Egyptians of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Dynasties (fourteenth–twelfth centuries B.C.) prefix the article to it (p. ku'n), just as in Greek one finds ὁ γνᾶς. The etymology of the name is uncertain: many authors derive it from the Semitic root kana' “to be low”; others, however, think that it is a pre-Semitic word. In the el-Amarna letters, Kinaḥnaḥ is the name of part of the Asian province of the Egyptian kingdom, which at that time comprised present-day Palestine, Phoenicia, and Syria as far as the Euphrates. It cannot be proved that Palestine itself is called Kinaḥna in these letters, since the relevant texts concern rather Phoenician cities situated on the Mediterranean coast (Acco, Tyre, Byblos), and certain inland cities such as Ḥaṣor (v. ASOR), southwest of the shores of Ḥoleh. The name seems to have a similar meaning in the inscription of Merneptah (“Israel Stele”), in which the name of Israel is read for the first time: “Plundered is Canaan with all evil; deported is Ashkelon, seized is Gezer, annihilated is Jeno'am; Israel is destroyed, it has no more seed.”

The Old Testament too contains texts in which Canaan means rather the land of the Phoenicians; thus, for example, Iudc. 4, 2, 23; 5, 19; II Sam. 24, 7; Is. 23, 11; Prov. 31, 24; and likewise in the New Testament Mt. 15, 22 (the “Canaanite woman”). More commonly, however, the Old Testament uses the words Canaan and Canaanites in a broader sense, thereby designating the Palestine occupied by the Israelites and its pre-Israelite population, whatever its ethnic origin.

In the “table of the nations” (Gen. 10), it is said (v. 19) that “the territory of the Canaanites extended from Sidon in the direction of Gerar (that is, westward) as far as Gaza, and in the direction of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim (that is, eastward) as far as Lesha” (according to the Talmud and Jerome = Callirrhoe east of the Dead Sea; others identify it with Lajš [Dan], near the sources of the Jordan). The “sons of Canaan” (that is, members of the Canaanite family) are Sidon, the Hittites, the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites (Gen. 10, 15-18), that is, the non-Israelite peoples of Palestine and Syria. In this text, as in others, the originally geographical term Canaanites is used to signify the pre-Israelite population residing there, without regard to the ethnic affiliation of the individual groups. By tracing the Canaanites back to Ham (Gen. 10, 6), the “table of the nations” does not intend to speak of the ethnic origin of the “Canaanite” peoples, but of their political dependence upon the Hamitic Egyptians.

Ethnographically, the majority of the inhabitants of Canaan (that is, of Palestine-Phoenicia) appear to have been Semites, who immigrated in different periods; the oldest stratum probably dates from the fourth millennium, the most recent (the “Amorites,” v.) from around the year 2000. At times, however, the Old Testament distinguishes between Canaanites and Amorites, calling Amorites not only the pre-Israelite inhabitants of Transjordan (cf. Num. 21, 13, 31; Deut. 3, 8; 4, 47 sqq.; 31, 4; Ios. 2, 10; 9, 10; 12, 2; 13, 10; Iudc. 10, 8), but also a part of the inhabitants of Palestine proper, namely those dwelling in the hill country (Deut. 1, 7.19.20.44: the people dwelling in southern Palestine; Ios. 10, 5 sqq.), whereas the Canaanites are assigned the plain and the Jordan Valley (Num. 13, 29; Ios. 11, 3). The Bible not infrequently calls the entire pre-Israelite population Amorites (cf. Gen. 15, 16; Ios. 24, 15.18; Iudc. 6, 10); but in later times the Amorites, whether eradicated or assimilated by the Israelites who had occupied the hill country, no longer existed, whereas the “Canaanites” in the fortified cities of the plain had resisted the invaders and constituted a constant danger to the Israelites (cf. Iudc. 1, 27-33).

The name “Canaanites” thus came progressively to be used to designate all the pre-Israelite inhabitants of Palestine, all the more since the small peoples of the Perizzites, Rephaim, Girgashites, Jebusites, etc. (cf. Gen. 15, 19 sqq.) were no longer of any importance. The Canaanites of Phoenicia, geographically separated from Palestine and soon entering upon a historical and political development different from that of the Palestinian peoples, were called by the name of their principal city, as among Homer, Sidonians (cf. Deut. 3, 9; Iudc. 10, 6.12; 18, 7; I Reg. 5, 6 [20]; 11, 1. 5. 33; II Sam. 23, 13).

Here we use “Canaanites” to designate indiscriminately the population that inhabited Cisjordanian Palestine before the immigration of the Israelites and remained alongside them for several centuries.

II. HISTORY

1. The sources

The history of the Canaanites, as well as their language, religion, and civilization, is known to us above all from the excavations carried out in Palestine during the last few decades. In almost every major Israelite city, beneath the strata belonging to the Israelite period (“Iron Age”), there are more or less numerous strata representing pre-Israelite (“Canaanite”) culture in its various phases. Quite a few pre-Israelite necropolises have also been discovered, especially important because the gifts customarily offered to the dead attest, for the different periods, the level and character of the civilization of those peoples. Alongside these archaeological sources, however, there is no lack of literary documents relating to pre-Israelite Palestine. The principal ones are: the tale of the Egyptian Sinuhe, who dwelt for a long time in Palestine (the story refers to the times of Amenemhet I and Sesostris I, ca. 2000–1935, and seems to have been written in the second half of the twentieth century); the “execration texts,” now preserved in Berlin and Brussels (from the nineteenth century); the reports of the Egyptian pharaohs on campaigns conducted in Palestine and Syria, among which the foremost is that of Tuthmosis III (ca. 1501–1450), referring to the campaign of 1479 against the allied princes of Palestine and Syria; and, of the greatest importance, the letters of el-Amarna (v. AMARNA), correspondence in the Akkadian language and cuneiform script between the pharaohs Amenophis III (1411–1375) and Amenophis IV (1375–1358) and the kings and governors of Syria and Palestine. These and other literary documents, compared with the results of the excavations and incorporated into the general history of the ancient Near East in the third and second millennia B.C., now provide us with a fairly concrete picture of the Canaanite history of that age.

2. The course of history

In prehistoric and protohistoric times, Canaan seems to have been inhabited by non-Semitic peoples, whose ethnic affinity, however, cannot so far be determined. At Gezer (and perhaps also at Jerusalem), the remains of a “crematorium” (from the Neolithic Age) have been found, evidence of the cremation of corpses, which was not practiced among the Semites. The first Semitic immigration seems to have taken place ca. 3000; but the details of that ethnic movement still entirely elude us. The few Egyptian paintings of the third millennium that depict inhabitants of Palestine or Syria present them as distinctly Semitic types. Egypt at that time, engaged in commerce since 3000 B.C. Byblos (v.), was also interested in Palestine; Pharaoh Pepi I (ca. 2450 B.C.) undertook five military campaigns to secure its domination, and the imposing fortifications that arose in the third millennium in various parts of Palestine show that the struggle between powerful Egypt and the inhabitants of Canaan was fierce. Documents from the subsequent period show that Egypt had meanwhile succeeded in occupying southern Palestine or, at least, in establishing there a number of points of support, such as the fortified city of Gaza. Egypt’s cultural influence is confirmed by objects of Egyptian origin found in the excavations; on the other hand, there is also evidence that at that time Palestine supplied Egypt with its principal products, wine and grain.

Toward the end of the twentieth century, Palestine seems to have been invaded by another Semitic group coming from northern Mesopotamia. The invaders were apparently of the same stock as those who at that time were invading Babylonia, where they founded the first Babylonian dynasty, known as the “Amorite” dynasty. This new population, the “Amorites,” occupied Transjordan first, but also the mountains of Cisjordan, while the “Canaanites” resisted in the plains. Egyptian domination, which existed by right, seems in reality to have been rather weak, as is shown by the fact that the “execration texts,” especially those from Brussels, list no fewer than 63 territories that were “rebellious” or at least suspect in the eyes of the Egyptians. Egyptian hegemony was subsequently completely eliminated by new invaders who began to arrive in the middle of the eighteenth century, namely the “Hyksos,” who, after subduing Palestine, succeeded in occupying even Egypt (ca. 1730–1580). In Palestine, the Hyksos occupied the great cities—many of them display the fortification technique characteristic of the Hyksos—without, however, changing the cultural situation of the country, since the occupation was of a military rather than a political nature. The hegemony of the Hyksos, which extended over much of the ancient Near East, encouraged the influx into Palestine of cultural elements of the most diverse origins.

After the Hyksos were expelled from Egypt (ca. 1580), some of their groups seem to have remained in Palestine, but rather under Egyptian hegemony, which was fully reestablished under the Seventeenth Dynasty (1580–1450) and even more so under the Eighteenth (1450–1315). The list of cities conquered by Tuthmosis III (1501–1450) in the campaign of 1479 against a coalition of Palestinian and Syrian princes includes no fewer than 119 Palestinian cities, situated, however, more in the plain than in the mountains. During the fifteenth century, Egyptian supremacy remained firm, and the period of peace promoted the material prosperity of the country, as is shown by the excavations. A serious disturbance occurred in the fourteenth century as a result of the ever-increasing pressure of the Habiru, of which the letters of el-Amarna inform us. The Egyptians no longer had the strength to offer effective resistance, and not even the powerful Pharaoh Ramses II (1292–1226), who was forced to besiege even the city of Ascalon, succeeded in actually restoring Egyptian supremacy.

The Israelites, who entered Palestine sometime between the fifteenth and twelfth centuries—the date has not yet been established—had to deal not with the Egyptians, nor even with a united Canaanite people, but with the kings of individual cities independent of one another. Nevertheless, they did not succeed in overcoming the great Canaanite cities of the plains, for example, Gezer, Dor, Mageddo, Thanach, and Bethsan; indeed, being better equipped for war and supplied with iron chariots, these cities recovered so thoroughly that they were able to separate the northern tribes of Galilee from those of Samaria (Iudc. 5, 6 ff.) and, apparently, a Canaanite isthmus had also come between the tribe of Judah and those settled in the mountains of Ephraim. The situation became critical, but a joint action by five and a half tribes, led by Barac and assisted by Debora, decided the fate of the Canaanites forever in the battle at the “waters of Megiddo” (Iudc. 4, 24). From that time onward, there is no further mention of major wars against the Canaanites; their remnants were gradually absorbed and assimilated by the Israelite element. David captured their last stronghold, the Jebusite citadel of Jerusalem, and made it the capital of his kingdom. In Solomon’s administrative organization (I Reg. 4, 7–19), the ancient Canaanite cities became, for the most part, the seats of Israelite governors. The political importance of the Canaanites had come to an end, but their religious and cultural influence in Israel continued to be felt for centuries in a baneful manner, especially in the northern kingdom.

III. CANAANITE CIVILIZATION

1. Politically, the Canaanites were not a united nation; rather, each city (together with its surrounding territory) was subject to its own king. All the literary documents mentioned above agree on this point. In wartime, princes threatened by an aggressor joined in alliance, as, for example, in 1479 against Tuthmosis III, or during the el-Amarna period, when some cities formed an alliance under the leadership of ‘Abdilpipa, king of Jerusalem, or in the time of Joshua, against whom stood the southern league of the kings of Jerusalem, Hebron, Ierimoth, Lachis, and Eglon, and the northern league headed by Iabin, king of Asor.

2. The language of the pre-Israelite population of Canaan is preserved for us only in a few glosses and phrases in the el-Amarna letters and in pre-Israelite proper names. From these scant remains it appears that the Canaanites spoke a language little different from that of the Israelites, who seem to have adopted into their own language not a few elements of that pre-Israelite Canaanite tongue. Of Canaanite literature, if such a literature ever existed, nothing has been preserved for us.

3. Canaanite secular culture gradually reached a relatively high level, thanks to the influence of foreign cultures, to which Canaan was open in every direction: to the north, to Hittite and Hurrian culture; to the east, to that of Assyria and Babylonia; to the south-west, to Egyptian culture; and to the west, to Aegean culture (of Cyprus, Crete, and Mycenae). The cities were not large: in the Bronze Age they occupied from 2 to 10 hectares (for example, Canaanite Jericho approximately 2.50 hectares, the Jebusite Jerusalem approximately 5 hectares, and ancient Gezer 9 hectares). Since they were for the most part places of refuge in wartime for the population that cultivated the surrounding areas and lived there in its huts, the cities did not require much space, but rather strong means of protection: an inaccessible position (on hills or mountain spurs), high and massive walls 4–8 m. thick, often double, protected by glacis and ditches, fortified gates, sometimes constructed « like pincers », and underground galleries leading to water springs when these were situated outside the enclosure (as, for example, in Jerusalem, Gezer, Gabaon, Lachis, and Ieblaam). The art of fortification reached a high degree of perfection as early as the third millennium (for example, at et-Tell = Hai), but especially during the Hyksos period (18th–16th centuries), who seem to have introduced a fortification technique of their own. The fortified cities of the Canaanites therefore frightened the Israelites, who, coming from the desert, lacked the means suited to confronting such defensive works (cf. Num. 13, 29; Dent. 9,1).

The houses were mostly small and crowded together without order. In the houses of the wealthy and in the palaces of the princes, however, a certain degree of comfort is evident. Household utensils, whether of native manufacture or imported, often display good artistic taste, especially in the decoration of pottery and weapons. The art of writing was not unknown either. For international diplomatic correspondence, and sometimes also in private business, Akkadian cuneiform writing was used (as attested by the el-Amarna letters and the tablets found at Sichem, Tell el-Hesl, and Thanach); an alphabetic script was also known, which seems to stand midway between that found on the Sinai Peninsula (of the 19th or 16th centuries) and the Phoenician script, whose oldest monument known to date is an inscription from Byblos (ca. 1500 or 1400 B.C.). Remains of this Canaanite alphabetic script have been found at various sites in central and south-western Palestine, for example, at Sichem (an inscription attributed to the 17th century) and in the excavations at Lachis (several inscriptions on vessels and instruments, from the 17th–14th centuries); Bethsames (v.) even a tablet with Ugaritic script (alphabetic-cuneiform) has been found. It is clear that the Canaanites knew the art of writing at least by about the middle of the second millennium; but the discoveries made thus far are insufficient to reconstruct the origins of alphabetic writing.

4. Canaanite (pre-Israelite) religion was polytheistic. Originally, the supreme (or sole) deity seems to have been the god El, who, however, in very BA'ALBEK (v.) with his consort ʿĀtērāh or Astarte. « Baal » (the « lord ») was the common name denoting the deity; almost every major city had its own Baal. But the name was also used simply to designate the divinity, as appears from the el-Amarna letters and the Egyptian inscriptions of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Dynasties. Baal was the god of war and the god of heaven (baʿlu ina šamē); as such, he was also the god of vegetation, especially of the storm that brings rain. His symbol was the bull. In other cases, the deity seems to have been represented in the form of a serpent (Bejsān, Gezer, Bejt Mirsim); more commonly, however, a simple stone stele (maṣṣēbhāh) was used to represent the god. In addition to Baal, and partly confused with him, Hadad was worshipped, the god of the tempest, originally domiciled in northern Mesopotamia and probably imported into Palestine by the Amorites (ca. 1900 B.C.).

Baal’s consort was Astarte (Hebr. ʿĀtērāth), the Ištar of the Babylonians, goddess of fertility and also of war. In Palestine this goddess is often confused with ʿĀtērāh, likewise a goddess of animal fertility. Her symbol was the tree trunk or « sacred pole »; the Old Testament called these trunks ʿĀtērāth. The worship of ʿĀtērāh and ʿĀtērāth was highly sensual (sacred prostitution). Numerous statuettes (mostly of terracotta) found in Palestine represent the nude goddess with strongly accentuated sexual characteristics.

A third Canaanite deity was ʿAnat, likewise goddess of life and fertility, in the texts from Rās Samrah the sister and consort of Baal. Her worship in Palestine is attested by a statue of her found at Bejsān and by local names compounded with ʿAnat (cf., for example, Ios. 19, 38; Indo. 1, 33; Bethanat; Ios. 21, 18 etc.; Anathoth).

The Canaanites’ places of worship were temples and (more frequently, it seems) the so-called « high places » (bāmāth, « excelsa »). Thus far, very few genuinely Canaanite temples have been found (for example, at Hai and Sichem), but their existence can hardly be denied. Of the « high places », mentioned so often in the Old Testament, traces have understandably survived only at one sacred site excavated at Bethsan (from the time of Tuthmosis III, 1501–1450) and outside Palestine, on Zibb Aṭuf near Petra. The bāmāh (v.) was generally situated on a hill (although sanctuaries located on the plain were also called by this name; cf. Ier. 7, 31), and consisted of an altar, maṣṣēbhāth, and ʿĀtērāth (luci in the Vulgate). Proper idols do not seem to have been used on the « high places », but rather in the temples. The (12?) maṣṣēbhāth found at Gezer, probably belonging to the period 1800–1600 and regarded by many authors as the remains of that city’s sanctuary, may instead be nothing more than commemorative or funerary stelae for princes or other distinguished persons. Objects of worship in individual houses were statuettes of gods or goddesses, especially of the nude goddess, found in large numbers during the excavations.

The worship itself consisted principally of sacrifices, both bloody and bloodless. The animals sacrificed seem to have been, as is shown by the bones found in the excavated sanctuaries, those prescribed by the Bible, especially sheep and calves; so far, it has not been established with certainty that among the Canaanites (contrary to Hebrew practice) pigs were also sacrificed. The Old Testament attests that human sacrifice was likewise practiced among the Canaanites.

(cf. Lev. 20:1–5; Deut. 12:31; 19:9 ff.). Archaeology has so far provided no indisputable evidence of this, but there are indications. Nevertheless, the interpretation of archaeological discoveries must be cautious. The skeletons of children enclosed in amphorae, found in some excavated cities, perhaps do not derive from sacrificial offerings, but from burials carried out inside the houses themselves; the bodies show no traces of wounds or burning and are generally accompanied by the usual funerary gifts (vials with food, vessels with beverages, etc.). The so-called “foundation sacrifices” cannot be proved with certainty, but neither does the Old Testament provide unequivocal evidence of their existence (the exegesis of I Reg. 16:34 is controversial). It does, however, emerge from the Old Testament that human sacrifices were offered not only to Moloch (identical with the god Malik worshipped in Babylonia), but also to the Canaanite god Baal (Ier. 19:5; 32:35). The existence of this barbarous practice among Israel is a convincing argument for its existence among the Canaanites as well; from them it had passed to the Israelites, along with many other immoral and inhuman religious practices, for example, “sacred” prostitution (cf. I Sam. 14:24; 15:12; 22:47; II Sam. 23:7).

5. Abundant information is supplied by the excavations concerning care for the dead; in almost all the great Canaanite cities, either necropolises or at least a large number of tombs have been discovered. The dead were generally buried, as among the Israelites also, in natural caves or in underground chambers constructed in various forms, mostly intended for entire families. The dead person was laid in the tomb without a sarcophagus; where a sarcophagus was used, as at Bejsān and Tell Fara' (anthropoid sarcophagi), this occurred through foreign influence (cf., for example, the sarcophagi of Biblos). The dead were given abundant gifts, particularly objects of everyday life: dishes, brooches, amphorae, lamps, instruments and weapons, and various ornaments. This funerary furnishing attests to the belief that the deceased enjoyed, after death, a life similar to earthly life. The necropolises were generally located outside the cities; thus, for example, at Jericho, Tell Fara', Bejsān, Gezer, and et-Tell (Hai); but tombs of individuals or entire families were also made within inhabited areas (e.g., at Gezer and Mageddo). In any case, only the tombs of the more prosperous have been preserved; the common people buried their dead in simple graves dug in the ground, of which nothing has survived.

For Zeno, bishop of Verona (362–71), the pole supporting the cluster was a symbol of the wood of the Cross (PL 11, 469–70); immediately afterward St. Ambrose explains that

the cluster of C. prefigured Christ: «ille botrus peregrinus, qui sicut uva de vite, ita ille in carne crucis pependit in ligno» (De Fide, I, 20; IV, 12: PL 16, 559–60, 648–49). The same is taught by St. Augustine (Contra Faustum, XII, 42: PL 42, 276; Enarratio in Psalm., 55, 2 and 7: PL 36, 849, 653) and by a host of writers from the fifth to the thirteenth century, as C. Leonardi has recently highlighted (Ampelos, il simbolismo della vite nell'arte pagana e paleocristiana, Rome 1947, pp. 147–85). The scene of the bearers of C. in ancient Christian art appears on a sarcophagus lid discovered in S. Vittore at Marseille (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, I, p. 271, pl. 17, 2), on a gold-glass vessel in the museum of Pesaro (R. Garrucci, Storia dell'arte cristiana, III, Prato 1872, pp. 129–301, pl. 172, 10), and on another from the cemetery of Pamphilus (C. Leonardi, ibid., pl. XIV). It is also depicted on some Christian terracotta lamps, for example the one in the museum of Narbonne, published by E. Le Blant (De quelques sujets réprésentés sur des lampes en terre cuite de l'époque chrétienne, in Mélanges d'archéol. et d'histoire, 6 [1886], pp. 237–38), and another in the museum of the Campo Santo Teutonico in Rome (O. Marucchi, Medaille und Lampe aus der Sammlung Zurla, in Römische Quartalschrift, 1 [1887], p. 327). The representation is also found in later monuments, such as an illustrated French Bible in the National Library of Vienna, a biblia pauperum in Heidelberg, etc. (Leonardi, ibid., pls. XIV–XVI, 30–31). - Vedi Tav. XXXVI. Enrico Josi