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.