292                        CHRISTIANITY AND SLAVERY.
under the dominion of the spns of Ham at Babylon ; that
the Assyrians, the children of Shem, subjugated the Medes,
the children of Japheth, and the Babylonians, the children
of Ham ; that Japheth (tbe Medes) in turn seized upon Shem
(Nineveh) ; that Shem (the Persians), united with Japheth
(the Medes), took Ham (Babylon).
But these were enslavements of nations by nations, and
this it was that was predicted by Noah, who had not in
view the slavery properly called of man to man. In fact,
he said that Canaan should be a servant of servants to his
brethren. Can any one be fhe slave of another slave? We
comprehend, on the contrary, that one nation may be en-
slaved by another, which in its turn is subjugated by a
third ; and, indeed, the children of Ham were enslaved by
the children of Shem, who feU under the dominion of the
children of Japheth, since the Jews were reduced to servi-
tude by the Persians, then with the latter by the Greeks
under Alexander. In this sense, but in this sense alone,
the prophecy of Noah has been realized.
Had it referred to a veritable slavery, is to predict slav-
ery to justify it ? In this case, adultery and war are justi-
fied, for they have been predicted. (Deuteronomy xxviii.
30, 68, 43 ; Jeremiah, Joel, etc.) Is to punish the wicked
by predicting that they will be enslaved, to grant an am-
mesty to other wicked who will enslave them ? In this
case, the Jews are absolved for having crucified Jesns
Christ, for it had been foretold.
Noah, Ham, and Canaan have nothing, therefore, to do
with the planters of South Carolina.
II. No more can I recognize in their habits an image of
the patriarchal life of Abraham or Laban.
It is true that there were slaves among the Israelites,
and this was almost inevitable ; for how, as Bergier remarks,
at this epoch, and under the régime of tribes, how could a
man quit his master without changing his country ?   How