FOR all that we know from the Scriptures concerning Cana — “where Jesus made the water wine” ―we are indebted to the Gospel according to John. Even the information which that evangelist gives is of the scantiest kind; his only geographical note—added each time he refers to the place―is, “of Galilee.” Intimation is indeed given that it was situate on higher ground than Capernaum, for Jesus “went down” to that place, and such expressions are admitted by all to be wonderfully accurate. We are therefore dependent for the identification of Cana―a place so interesting to us, because it was there that the Lord Jesus wrought the beginning of His miracles and manifested forth His glory, ―upon the traditions which have come down to us, supplemented or corrected by the discoveries and conjectures of modern Travelers. We have had occasion, in previous papers, to point out what an untrustworthy witness Tradition is; that unless she is supported by independent testimony, her word must be received with mistrust. In this instance she has attempted to identify two places with the scene of the miracle, and the Scripture testimony being so small, as has been pointed out, it is no wonder that the question is surrounded with some uncertainty.
About four miles to the north-east of Nazareth, twenty-five from Capernaum, and on the direct road from Nazareth to Tiberias, lies the village of Kefr Kenna. The gospel narrative seems to show that Can a, wherever it might be, was situated within a day’s journey from the city with which the Lord Jesus was so familiar―Capernaum. The miracle of healing the nobleman’s son will be recalled by many of our readers. The child was at the point of death at Capernaum; the father journeyed to Cana, where Jesus was, reaching that place, probably, at about seven o’clock in the evening―for we believe that John always uses what is called “Roman time,” that is, our ordinary reckoning from midnight as the beginning of a new day―and seeing the Lord, heard from Him the words, “Thy son liveth.” It would be too late for the return journey that day, and faith could rest; but on the following day, “as he was now going down,” his servants met him with the joyful tidings (unconsciously echoing the Saviour’s words), “Thy son liveth.” And, in answer to his question, he found that it was “yesterday, at the seventh hour, the fever left him.” From these circumstances it is evident that Cana was not more than a day’s journey from Capernaum. The village of Kefr Kenna meets this demand satisfactorily enough, and thus satisfies almost the only requirement suggested by the Gospel.
A long space of time elapsed between the writing of the fourth Gospel and any allusion to the place by Travelers, and others, which might help to identify it. The earliest known is that of one Willibald, who, in the latter half of the eighth century, while passing from Nazareth to Tabor, visited Kefr Kenna, and, in the account of his travels, referred to the tradition which identified that with Cana of Galilee. A twelfth-century allusion is also known: then another long gap of time occurs until the beginning of the seventeenth century, when Kefr Kenna was again claimed by Quaresmius as the. New Testament Cana, though this traveler admitted that there was a rival site. From that day until recent years this tradition has held sway, when its accuracy was questioned by Dr. Robinson, and the claims of the other site were urged with great force by him. Unmindful of the criticism and objections of modern Travelers, the Kefr Kennaites hold on their way, and not only do they point out the Greek Church, built “to mark the site of the house where the marriage was held, and the miracle wrought,” but “two large water pots of stone are standing in the church, which the priest, with much gravity, tells you are part of the six that had been used at the marriage, the other four being underground!” This last part of the story is the more remarkable, because when Dr. Thomson, at one time, visited the place the fragments of the six water pots were shown to him, while to go back still earlier, to the visit of Willibald in the eighth century, only one pot remained, though, during the Crusade, the six jars were taken to France!
The other claimant to the Honor of being the true Cana is Khurbet Kana, or Kanael-Jelil. It was once a village; it is now a mere ruin, lying a few miles nearer to Capernaum than its rival, situated on high ground, and so, like Kenna, meeting the demands made by the gospel narrative. It has no church and no monks to urge its claim; the tradition identifying the place with Cana can only be traced back to a more recent time than that which refers to Kefr Kenna, but if its name really be “Kana-el-Jelil,” that alone strongly appeals on its behalf, for it is an exact representation of the Hebrew original, and is moreover found in the Arabic version of the Scriptures as the equivalent of Cana. In fact, “Kana-el-Jelil” turned into English is literally “Cana of Galilee.” This identity of name is the strongest argument of those who place Cana on this site, and indeed it would be well-nigh convincing if we could be certain that the village does bear the name. But Dr. Thomson, while inclining to the belief that this is the true Cana, admits that only one of the many inhabitants of the neighborhood, to whom he directed his enquiries, “had ever heard of the word Jelil as a part of the name, and,” he adds, “from the hesitancy with which this one admitted it, I was left in doubt whether he did not merely acquiesce in it at my suggestion.”
Kana stands on a nearly isolated hill, which rises from the margin of the Plain of Buttauf―probably the great Plain of Zebulon―acing the south-east. Ancient cisterns and tombs are still to be traced on the hill-side, and a solitary fig tree recalls (on the supposition that Cana stood here) the story of the Israelite in whom was no guile, ―Nathaniel. As to the name itself, it is probably derived from the Hebrew, Kanah, “a reed.” At the end of the plain, above which the village stood, a marshy lake is sometimes formed, the waters stretching for some distance over the country, its “oozy, spongy end” lying across the traveler’s path, rendering the journey both difficult and dangerous. From the reeds which grow in such a soil, and which may still be seen close to the ruins of the village, the name would naturally come.
From a similar cause Kanah, in the tribe of Asher, took its name.
One explorer says that “the ruins cover the summit and sides of a small spur that runs out from the main ridge, and consist of rock-hewn cisterns, the walls of houses, a large building, perhaps a church, and several tombs; they are of far more importance than has generally been supposed, and cover a large area.” It is only right to add that Dr. Thomson (whose long residence in Palestine makes his evidence very valuable) says, in the latest edition of his work, that “a careful examination of the site led to the conclusion that there were never more than fifty houses in the place.” They are built of limestone, shaped after the common fashion of the country, and not one is now inhabited. The place is totally deserted.
In the present state of the evidence we must be content with uncertainty. And we can be truly thankful that this uncertainty in no wise touches the value to our souls of the incidents recorded in John’s Gospel, the scene of which was laid at Cana. If that place is lost to us, its blessed and happy memories abide; we can still see Jesus at the marriage feast, a Guest indeed, yet enriching those that were gathered together with “the good wine,” when all other had failed; we can still hear the nobleman’s importunate supplication and the Lord’s gracious answer. And these have their lessons for us: earthly joys will fail and pass away; have we tasted of those which Jesus gives― “the best”? Or has the sense of need, such as the nobleman had, and which the Lord only can meet, driven us to Him?
With reference to the miracle of turning the water into wine, the Scripture adds, “His disciples believed on Him”; and it says with reference to the nobleman,” himself believed, and his whole house.” Happy are we if we, too, have believed in Him, and have learned in any measure the fullness of the glory and the grace which Jesus displayed at Cana of Galilee!