CANA OF GALILEE (Kava rcis PetAtitas), a village only mentioned by the Evangelist John. It was the native place of Nathanael ; but it was chiefly celebrated as the scene of Jesus' first miracle, in turning the water into wine (John xxi. 2 ; ii. 1-11). It appears from the Bible that it was not far from Nazareth ; and an incidental remark of Josephus chews that it was a night's march dis tant from Tiberias ( Vit. 16. 17). Eusebius and Jerome represent Cana as identical with Kanah, a town of Asher (Josh. xix. 28 ; Onomast. s. v.); but the latter was much farther north. [KANAHI.
The true site of Cana of Galilee now forms a sub ject of keen dispute. Some affirm that it is at the village of Zefr Kenna, three miles north-east of Nazareth ; others at Kana, eight miles north of Nazareth. The arguments in favour of each may be thus summed up, taking the latter first.
t. Kayla. Cana of Galilee is uniformly rendered in the Arabic version Kana-el-yelil and this is the proper name of Kana as known to the people of the district. Saewulf, who visited Palestine in A. D. 1102, says, ' Six miles to the N.E. of Nazareth, on a hill, is Cana of Galilee' (Early T7n7/. in Pal., p. 47). This can only refer to Kana. Marinus Sanutus, in the fourteenth century. describes Cana as lying north of Sepphoris, on the side of a high hill, with a broad fertile plain in front (Gesta Dei, p. 253). Quaresmius states that in his time (A. D. 1620) two Canas were pointed out, one of which is Kana-el-Jelil (E/ucd. ii. 852).
2. Kefr Kenna. The name of this place (t.6") bears no analogy to the Cana (U, ti) of the Gospel ; yet the monks at Nazareth, and most modern travellers attempt to identify them. The tradition
attached to Kenna cannot be traced farther back than the seventeenth century. De Saulcy says St. Willibald alludes to it ; but he gives no indication of the position of Cana (Early Tray. in Pal., p. 16). Phocas is also indefinite. Quaresmius is the first who mentions it. He speaks of both Kana and Kenna ; but he gives his opinion in favour of the latter. From his time until within the last few years, Kefr Kenna has been almost universally regarded as Cana. The arguments in favour of its claims are fully given by De Saulcy (Yourng, 376, sq.); while those of its rival are stated by Robinson (B. R., ii. 346).
On reviewing the arguments, there can be little difficulty in deciding that Kana-el-Jeli] is the true site of Cana of Galilee. The ruins occupy a fine position on the declivity of a hill, looking out over the rich plain of Battauf. It is about five miles from Sepphoris, and seventeen from Capernaum and Tiberias. When visited by the writer in the spring of 1857 it was uninhabited, and had the appearance of having been so for many years, though a few of the houses were standing. There are no traces of antiquity except a few cisterns ; and the probability is it was always an obscure village. In former times, the house in which the marriage-feast was held, and the water-pots themselves, were shewn to travellers at ; but now the monks shew them at Kefr Kenna! (Robinson, B. B., ii. 346, sq. ; iii. tog ; Thomson's Land and Me Book, 426, sq.; Van de Velde ii. 405). J. L. P.