CHAPTER XI

Of the same.

A Second opinion there is, that this complexion was first a curse of God derived unto them from _Cham_, upon whom it was inflicted for discovering the nakedness of _Noah_. Which notwithstanding is sooner affirmed then proved, and carrieth with it sundry improbabilities. For first, if we derive the curse on _Cham_, or in general upon his posterity, we shall denigrate a greater part of the earth then was ever so conceived; and not only paint the Æthiopians and reputed sons of _Cush_, but the people also of _Egypt_, _Arabia_, _Assyria_ and _Chaldea_; for by this race were these Countries also peopled. And if concordantly unto _Berosus_, the fragment of _Cato de Originibus_, some things of _Halicarnasseus_, _Macrobius_, and out of them of _Leandro_ and _Annius_, we shall conceive of the travels of _Camese_ or _Cham_; we may introduce a generation of _Negroes_ as high as _Italy_; which part was never culpable of deformity, but hath produced the magnified examples of beauty.

Secondly, The curse mentioned in Scripture was not denounced upon _Cham_, but _Canaan_ his youngest son, and the reasons thereof are divers. The first, from the Jewish Tradition, whereby it is conceived that _Canaan_ made the discovery of the nakedness of _Noah_, and notified it unto _Cham_. Secondly, to have cursed _Cham_ had been to curse all his posterity, whereof but one was guilty of the fact. And lastly, he spared _Cham_, because he had blessed him before. [SN: Cap. 9.] Now if we confine this curse unto _Canaan_, and think the same fulfilled in his posterity; then do we induce this complexion on the Sidonians, then was the promised land a tract of Negroes; For from _Canaan_ were descended the _Canaanites_, _Jebusites_, _Amorites_, _Gergazites_ and _Hivites_, which were possessed of that land.

Thirdly, Although we should place the original of this curse upon one of the sons of _Cham_, yet were it not known from which of them to derive it. For the particularity of their descents is imperfectly set down by accountants, nor is it distinctly determinable from whom thereof the _Æthiopians_ are proceeded. For whereas these of _Africa_ are generally esteemed to be the Issue of _Chus_, the elder son of _Cham_, it is not so easily made out. For the land of _Chus_, which the Septuagint translates _Æthiopia_, makes no part of _Africa_, nor is it the habitation of Blackmores, but the Country of _Arabia_, especially the Happy and Stony possessions and Colonies of all the sons of _Chus_, excepting _Nimrod_ and _Havilah_: possessed and planted wholly by the children of _Chus_, that is, by _Sabtah_ and _Raamah_, _Sabtacha_, and the sons of _Raamah_, _Dedan_, and _Sheba_, according unto whose names the Nations of those parts have received their denominations, as may be collected from _Pliny_ and _Ptolemy_; and as we are informed by credible Authors, they hold a fair Analogy in their names, even unto our days. So the wife of _Moses_ translated in Scripture an _Æthiopian_, and so confirmed by the fabulous relation of _Josephus_, was none of the daughters of _Africa_, nor any Negroe of _Æthiopia_, but the daughter of _Jethro_, Prince and Priest of _Madian_, which was a part of _Arabia_ the stony, bordering upon the Red Sea. So the Queen of _Sheba_ came not unto _Solomon_ out of _Æthiopia_, but from _Arabia_, and that part thereof which bore the name of the first planter, the son of _Chus_. So whether the Eunuch which _Philip_ the Deacon baptised, were servant unto _Candace_ Queen of the _African Æthiopia_ (although _Damianus a Goes, Codignus_, and the Æthiopick relations averr) is yet by many, and with strong suspitions doubted. So that Army of a million, which _Zerah_ King of _Æthiopia_ is said to bring against _Asa_, was drawn out of _Arabia_, and the plantations of _Chus_; not out of _Æthiopia_, and the remote habitations of the Moors. For it is said that _Asa_ pursuing his victory, took from him the City _Gerar_; now _Gerar_ was no City in or near _Æthiopia_, but a place between _Cadesh_ and _Zur_, where _Abraham_ formerly sojourned. Since thereof these _African Æthiopians_ are not convinced by the common acception to be the sons of _Chus_, whether they be not the posterity of _Phut_ or _Mizraim_, or both, it is not assuredly determined. For _Mizraim_, he possessed _Egypt_, and the East parts of _Africa_. From _Lubym_ his son came the _Lybians_, and perhaps from them the _Æthiopians_. _Phut_ possessed _Mauritania_, and the Western parts of _Africa_, and from these perhaps descended the Moors of the West, of _Mandinga_, _Meleguette_ and _Guinie_. But from _Canaan_, upon whom the curse was pronounced, none of these had their originall; for he was restrained unto _Canaan_ and _Syria_; although in after Ages many Colonies dispersed, and some thereof upon the coasts of _Africa_, and prepossessions of his elder brothers.

Fourthly, To take away all doubt or any probable divarication, the curse is plainly specified in the Text, nor need we dispute it, like the mark of _Cain_; _Servus servorum erit fratribus suis_, Cursed be _Canaan_, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren; which was after fulfilled in the conquest of _Canaan_, subdued by the _Israelites_, the posterity of _Sem_. Which Prophecy _Abraham_ well understanding, took an oath of his servant not to take a wife for his son _Isaac_ out of the daughters of the _Canaanites_; and the like was performed by _Isaac_ in the behalf of his Son _Jacob_. As for _Cham_ and his other sons, this curse attained them not; for _Nimrod_ the son of _Chus_ set up his kingdom in _Babylon_, and erected the first great Empire; _Mizraim_ and his posterity grew mighty Monarchs in _Egypt_; and the Empire of the _Æthiopians_ hath been as large as either. Nor did the curse descend in generall upon the posterity of _Canaan_: for the _Sidonians_, _Arkites_, _Hamathites_, _Sinites_, _Arvadites_, and _Zemerites_ seem exempted. But why there being eleven Sons, five only were condemned and six escaped the malediction, is a secret beyond discovery.

Lastly, Whereas men affirm this colour was a Curse, I cannot make out the propriety of that name, it neither seeming so to them, nor reasonably unto us; for they take so much content therein, that they esteem deformity by other colours, describing the Devil, and terrible objects, white. And if we seriously consult the definitions of beauty, and exactly perpend what wise men determine thereof, we shall not apprehend a curse, or any deformity therein. For first, some place the essence thereof in the proportion of parts, conceiving it to consist in a comely commensurability of the whole unto the parts, and the parts between themselves: which is the determination of the best and learned Writers. Now hereby the Moors are not excluded from beauty: there being in this description no consideration of colours, but an apt connexion and frame of parts and the whole. Others there be, and those most in number, which place it not only in proportion of parts, but also in grace of colour. But to make Colour essential unto Beauty, there will arise no slender difficulty: For _Aristotle_ in two definitions of pulchritude, and _Galen_ in one, have made no mention of colour. Neither will it agree unto the Beauty of Animals: wherein notwithstanding there is an approved pulchritude. Thus horses are handsome under any colour, and the symmetry of parts obscures the consideration of complexions. Thus in concolour animals and such as are confined unto one colour, we measure not their Beauty thereby: For if a Crow or Black-bird grow white, we generally account it more pretty; and in almost a monstrosity descend not to opinion of deformity. By this way likewise the Moors escape the curse of deformity: there concurring no stationary colour, and sometimes not any unto Beauty.

The Platonick contemplators reject both these descriptions founded upon parts and colours, or either: as _M. Leo_ the Jew hath excellently discoursed in his Genealogy of Love, defining beauty a formal grace, which delights and moves them to love which comprehend it. This grace say they, discoverable outwardly, is the resplendor and Ray of some interiour and invisible Beauty, and proceedeth from the forms of compositions amiable. Whose faculties if they can aptly contrive their matter, they beget in the subject an agreeable and pleasing beauty; if over-ruled thereby, they evidence not their perfections, but run into deformity. For seeing that out of the same materials, _Thersites_ and _Paris_, Beauty and monstrosity may be contrived; the forms and operative faculties introduce and determine their perfections. Which in natural bodies receive exactness in every kind, according to the first _Idea_ of the Creator, and in contrived bodies the phancy of the Artificer. And by this consideration of Beauty, the Moors also are not excluded, but hold a common share therein with all mankind.

Lastly, In whatsoever its _Theory_ consisteth, or if in the general, we allow the common conceit of symmetry and of colour, yet to descend unto singularities, or determine in what symmetry or colour it consisted, were a slippery designation. For Beauty is determined by opinion, and seems to have no essence that holds one notion with all; that seeming beauteous unto one, which hath no favour with another; and that unto every one, according as custome hath made it natural, or sympathy and conformity of minds shall make it seem agreeable. Thus flat noses seem comely unto the Moor, an Aquiline or hawked one unto the _Persian_, a large and prominent nose unto the Romane; but none of all these are acceptable in our opinion. Thus some think it most ornamental to wear their Bracelets on their Wrests, others say it is better to have them about their Ancles; some think it most comely to wear their Rings and Jewels in the Ear, others will have them about their Privities; a third will not think they are compleat except they hang them in their lips, cheeks, or noses. Thus _Homer_ to set off _Minerva_, calleth her γλαυκῶπις, that is, gray or light-blew eyed: now this unto us seems far less amiable then the black. Thus we that are of contrary complexions accuse the blackness of the Moors as ugly: But the Spouse in the _Canticles_ excuseth this conceit, in that description of hers, I am black, but comely. And howsoever _Cerberus_, and the furies of hell be described by the Poets under this complexion, yet in the beauty of our Saviour blackness is commended, when it is said, his locks are bushie and black as a Raven. So that to inferr this as a curse, or to reason it as a deformity, is no way reasonable; the two foundations of beauty, Symmetry and complexion receiving such various apprehensions, that no deviation will be expounded so high as a curse or undeniable deformity, without a manifest and confessed degree of monstrosity.

Lastly, It is a very injurious method unto Philosophy, and a perpetual promotion of ignorance, in points of obscurity; nor open unto easie considerations, to fall upon a present refuge unto Miracles; or recurr unto immediate contrivance, from the insearchable hands of God. Thus in the conceit of the evil odor of the Jews, Christians without a further research into the verity of the thing, or inquiry into the cause, draw up a judgement upon them from the passion of their Saviour. Thus in the wondrous effects of the clime of _Ireland_, and the freedom from all venemous creatures, the credulity of common conceit imputes this immunity unto the benediction of S. _Patrick_, as _Beda_ and _Gyraldus_ have left recorded. Thus the Ass having a peculiar mark of a cross made by a black list down his back, and another athwart, or at right angles down his shoulders; common opinion ascribes this figure unto a peculiar signation; since that beast had the honour to bear our Saviour on his back. Certainly this is a course more desperate then Antipathies, Sympathies, or occult qualities; wherein by a final and satisfactive discernment of faith, we lay the last and particular effects upon the first and general cause of all things; whereas in the other, we do but palliate our determinations, untill our advanced endeavours do totally reject, or partially salve their evasions.