the positions of forward and rear guard.—Num. 10:11-28.

“So they went marching from the mountain of Jehovah for a journey of three days . . . And Jehovah’s cloud was over them.” (Num. 10:33, 34) How long a line this cloud-led column of marchers formed is not disclosed; nor the speed or distance covered in a day. With their little children and flocks, they probably traveled slowly. While on this march, which took three days, there was probably no formal camp layout with a setting up of the tabernacle for the temporary overnight encampment; rather, just the adjustments necessary for eating and sleeping.

MILITARY CAMPS

In connection with warfare, use of the term “camp” varies. It may, for example, denote the headquarters or base of operations from which raiding parties sally forth; Gilgal and Shiloh are such examples. (Josh. 4:19; 5:10; 9:6; 10:6, 15, 43; 18:9; Judg. 21:12) Or “camp” sometimes means the army itself, rather than the place where they pitch their tents at night. (Josh. 10:5; 11:4, 5) “Camping against” a city had the meaning of warring against the city, just as “pitching camp” also indicated preparation for war.—Judg. 9:50; 1 Sam. 11:1; 28:4; 2 Ki. 25:1.

Several factors influenced the selection of a site for an army encampment. High ground with limited access afforded natural protection and required less guarding than open and vulnerable spots. (1 Sam. 26:3) The camp must also have access to water. (2 Ki. 3:9) Joshua defeated a federation of kings camped at the waters of Merom. (Josh. 11:5) Gideon’s forces camped at the well of Harod (Judg. 7:1) , and one-third of David’s army camped at the torrent valley of Besor until their companions returned from the victory.—1 Sam. 30:9, 10.

A protective enclosure, as around Saul’s camp, may have been made of baggage, wagons and animals. (1 Sam. 26:5, 7) Armies having chariots may have used them to encircle their camps. More permanent campsites were sometimes protected by trenches and dirt mounds round about. Battles were not usually fought at the campsite, except in cases of surprise attack. (Josh. 11:7) Hence extensive entrenchment and strong walled enclosures were not usually built.

Secular histories give glimpses of army camp life among the pagans as it was in Bible days. The Egyptian camp of Rameses II, for example, was fenced with shields, with Pharaoh’s tent further protected by its own heavily guarded enclosure. The Assyrian fortified camp, generally circular and strengthened with walls and towers, is described as a scene of activity, with soldiers caring for horses and doing the cooking. The tents in Persian camps all faced the E, and their encampments were protected by trenches and embankments. Greek military camps were also circular, with the commanding officer tented in the middle of the camp. When the Roman army pitched camp a sizable ditch was dug around the whole of the new campsite.

CANA

(Caʹna) [probably from Hebrew qa·nehʹ, meaning “reed,” hence, a place of reeds].

The hometown of Nathanael. (John 21:2) Evidently it was just the third day after Nathanael’s introduction to Jesus and his becoming a disciple that Jesus was in Cana and attended a marriage feast, at which his mother and brothers were also present. Here he performed his first miraculous sign, that of changing water into fine wine. From here he and his family and disciples “went down to Capernaum.” (John 1:43-49; 2:1-12) Later, when again in Cana, Jesus was approached by an attendant of the king, begging him to “come down” to Capernaum to heal his dying son. Without making the trip Jesus performed the cure.—John 4:46-54.

The town is called “Cana of Galilee” in each case, evidently to distinguish it from Kanah in Asher. (Josh. 19:28) Kefr Kenna, a town about four miles (6.4 kilometers) NE of Nazareth, is the traditional site of Cana. Springs provide an ample water supply there. However, lexicographers consider the form Kenna to be a very unlikely transition from Cana (or Qa·nahʹ in Hebrew), particularly due to the doubling of the “n.” Even though Kenna could be shown to be a possible derivation of Cana, the name would not be descriptive of the present site, as it is not a “place of reeds.” There is reason to believe that Kefr Kenna’s claim to being Cana stems largely from its being easily accessible to pilgrims from Nazareth, causing it to have the favor of church authorities.

Hence, the balance of opinion and the weight of evidence favor an identification with Khirbet Qana, about nine miles (14.5 kilometers) N of Nazareth. Here the ruins of an ancient village lie on a hill at the edge of the Plain of Asochis, modernly called el-Battuf. Reeds are abundant in a nearby marshy plain, making the name Cana very fitting. It is still known in Arabic as Qana el-Jelil, equivalent of Cana of Galilee. Josephus, the Jewish historian of the first century C.E., speaks of residing “in a city of Galilee, which is named Cana” and later makes mention of the “great plain, wherein I lived, the name of which was Asochis.” (The Life of Flavius Josephus, pars. 16, 41) This testimony would also favor the location of Cana of Galilee at the site of Khirbet Qana, rather than Kefr Kenna. Although no spring is found at Khirbet Qana. the ruins reveal the remains of ancient cisterns; potsherds (fragments of earthen vessels) and coins believed to date from the first century C.E. have also reportedly been found there.

In ancient times a road led past Khirbet Qana down to the shores of the Sea of Galilee and along the shoreline to Capernaum, which lay some 676 feet (206 meters) below sea level; hence the expression to “come down” to Capernaum. The distance by road was about twenty-five miles (40.2 kilometers).

CANAAN

(Caʹnaan), CANAANITE [likely from the Hebrew ka·naʽʹ, to ‘be humble’; hence, low, humbled].

1. The fourth-listed son of Ham and grandson of Noah. (Gen. 9:18; 10:6; 1 Chron. 1:8) He was the progenitor of eleven tribes who eventually inhabited the region along the eastern Mediterranean between Egypt and Syria, thereby giving it the name “the land of Canaan.”—Gen. 10:15-19; 1 Chron. 16:18; see No. 2 below.

Following the incident regarding Noah’s drunkenness, Canaan came under Noah’s prophetic curse foretelling that Canaan would become the slave of both Shem and Japheth. (Gen. 9:20-27) Since the record mentions only that “Ham the father of Canaan saw his father’s nakedness and went telling it to his two brothers outside,” the question arises as to why Canaan rather than Ham became the object of the curse. Commenting on verse 24, which states that when Noah awoke from his wine he “got to know what his youngest son had done to him,” a footnote in Rotherham’s translation says: “Undoubtedly Canaan, and not Ham: Shem and Japheth, for their piety, are blessed; Canaan, for some unnamed baseness, is cursed; Ham, for his neglect, is neglected.” Similarly, a Jewish publication, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, edited by J. B. Hertz, suggests that the brief narrative “refers to some abominable deed in which Canaan seems to have been implicated.” And, after noting that the Hebrew word translated “son” in verse 24 may mean “grandson,” this source states: “The reference is evidently to Canaan.” The Soncino Chumash, edited by A. Cohen, also points out that some believe Canaan “indulged a perverted lust upon [Noah],” and that the expression “youngest son” refers to Canaan, who was the youngest son of Ham.

These views, of necessity, are conjectural since the Biblical record does not give any details as to Canaan’s implication in the offense against Noah. Yet some implication seems definitely intended by the